Posted on 06/01/2016 6:35:28 PM PDT by marshmallow
On 25 May 2015, the official website of the German bishops, katholisch.de, reported on an interview given by the notable German Jesuit, Father Klaus Mertes. In his interview, originally given to the German newspaper, taz, Mertes claims that it took the Catholic Church in the West 200 years to get “where we are now” with regard to the question of homosexuality. He continues: “In Africa or South East Asia, people are still at a very different point. The fight for the rights of the homosexuals is a world-wide project for which it is thus worth remaining in the Church.” In order to make the way free to a new assessment of homosexuality, Mertes proposes that the Magisterium “reflect upon sexual morality in light of charity, and not in light of a notion of nature which considers the marital act in an isolated way, without taking into account the different [sic] contexts.” In his eyes, Catholic sexual morality “is stuck in a fixation.”
This is an argument that was to be found repeatedly, if less explicitly, during the recent discussions surrounding the synods on marriage and the family, namely: to separate the marital act from its procreative aspect. If the marital act is not morally bound to the procreation of new life, homosexuality, so some think, could more easily come to be considered not really sinful. For example, the well-known German theologian Stephan Goertz proposed in 2015:
In biblical times, says the theologian [Goertz], “procreation was the first God-given purpose of sexuality.” At that time, “sexuality had as its first purpose to secure the survival of the people”; however, “that is obviously not any more our situation, and that, since the [Second Vatican] Council, it has also not been any more our own moral teaching on sexuality.”
Returning to......
(Excerpt) Read more at onepeterfive.com ...
Using the Church purely as an anti-Church organizing tool. Asked why, although she comprehensively rejected Catholic teachings, she stayed in the Catholic Church, Rosemary Ruether answered, "That's where the copying machines are."
Bingo.
This Jesuit is pure EVIL.
Like I always say to these types.. If you don’t want to follow the rules, don’t be Catholic.
That too!
Note that international celebrity Charles Curran instantly became “Charles Who?” when he was booted out of Catholic University and went to teach in a Protestant school—in Alabama, IIRC.
The Post-Vatican II Popes—ALL of them—will live in infamy for the chaos they tolerated, while they wrung their hands and appointed a never-ending torrent of heretical, unchaste bishops. And JPII was as bad on this score as Paul VI.
didn’t the Catholic Church invent it ?
Please report back and ping me to your post when you do ( if you don’t mind).
The empty churches in those countries show how little the folks listen to the Church. The clergy can blow bubbles through their bottoms, that won't get the Belgians, Swiss, Germans or Austrians to go back to the "faith of their forefathers."
Just an opinion.
Yes, I think it may even merit a rare “vanity” post for me. Will see. Since I am in the Middle East right now working some aerospace stuff and working in a Sharia land already, I may have some interesting observations.
*** her attitude toward them fast enough: “I have respect for that, when homosexual persons say that and, therefore, come to leave the Church,”***
He needs to take his own advice and take his queer self and leave!
So he wants the church to look at an abomination to God in the light of charity.
Did God show charity to Sodom and Gomorrah? I didn’t think so.
If the church did change its doctrine, say the Pope spoke ex cathedra on the subject, could it be changed back with a new Pope.
Assuming an orthodox one was elected.
Is there anywhere where the Church isn’t in a dreadful state?
If the pope was not a Catholic, then in no way could he be the vicar of Christ, standing in for Christ as earthly head of Christ's Church, because it is impossible to be head of a body of which one is not a member himself.
The Vatican Council of 1870 in defining infallibility was firm that the charism adhered to the OFFICE of the Papacy. If an individual was to sin against the Faith as a private person, then BY HIS OWN ACT, he would fall from the Office of the papacy.
As for all the bozos since 1958, they have all been formal heretics BEFORE being elected so their elections were null and void from the start and they never possessed the Office. In the history of the Church there has never been a valid pope who became a formal heretic after being elected but if that were to happen they would fall from the Office by their own act of sin against the Faith.
Roman Catholic Church citations affirming this from another thread
Thank you. that was very informative and interesting to me.:)
Here is a good resource for following the daily travails out of the 'occupied Vatican', plus it has sound background material as well on the site. If you are interested in any other resources, just ask.
Thanks very much
As a Baptist, I share an aversion to ecumenicism, although from the other side, and perhaps for different reasons. Still, food for thought.
Their sole intent is on purposely destroying the Church, just as Zero's is on destroying the USA, and in the religious sphere, the best way to do that is to pretend to embrace ecumenism in a Rodney King style: "can't we all just get along". It is nothing but a tool to achieve their goal. In reality, they believe in nothing.
As a result, web sites tend to report on and counterpunch to the daily opening jab. That and attempt to bolster their followers to hang in there.
Here is one with more of a general devotional slant and also one with a fairly complete list of papal writings by author for the last couple centuries. One has to know what one is looking for however. After these recent blathering raving imbeciles I would at least like to show that they are aberrations and not indicative of the whole.
As an example, one by Pope Pius XII in 1956 on Devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus
...as opposed to the heretical writings of Ratzinger who attempted to cast doubts on Christ's bodily Resurrection from the dead.
Another by Pope Pius XI in 1937 condemning Atheistic Communism
...as opposed to the current daily utterances by non-pope Marx.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.