Posted on 09/30/2005 11:20:25 AM PDT by NormB
Estimates of the numbers of gays in the priesthood vary from 25 percent to 50 percent. About one-third of the 42,500 U.S. priests are members of religious orders.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
No! As the old saying goes, "A Priest without a hell, isn't worth a damn!
The answer is the latter and the bible tells us when one sins it effects all of us. There is a connectivity in the church and the weight of what is going on is having grave effects
So then we can talk about the Chruch Greek Ek-klesia the out called of the called and their being an earthly carnal church the Klesia (The called) and that the true heavenly church is made up of the Ekklesia (the out called of the called) and say we can say: well this is not my arm or my foot (They are not my denomination, not part of the ministry I belong to or not my pastor) so I'm free and this has nothing to do with me.
But the ek-klesia is indeed a part of the the Klesia and is called to be light and salt to them -- so can we walk away and ignore this rising demonstratible tide of sin in the church that will wax worse and worse?
No one has postulated that there is a small, slightly larger than normal distribution population of gays in the clergy who have repeated a higher percentage so many times that it has been accepted as fact by the press, but more importantly, by the hetero clerics as well.
This should at least be considered. That there has been a concerted effort to portray clerics as substantially gay for the purpose of developing tolerance for them.
> So, "some homosexual activity could be compatible with celibacy", makes no sense. Activity is the verb here. Homosexual is an adverb describing the activity. It says in general essence, "some sex may be compatible with no sex."
Of course, you and I agree on what homosexuality means. My point was that, in the Catholic seminaries, they are apparently getting quite Clintonian on what the meaning of "celibacy" is, in order to justify their perversions.
So all I intended is that it is important not just for you to know what "is", but how the opposition defines "is."
+
Indeed, Paul said that. But, you are taking it out of its context. Paul was expressing his desire that all Christians (saints) not have the burden of raising a family, during the stressful times in which he lived.
But, under qualifications for leadership, he made it clear that the test of a man was how well he managed his own household. No man was to be elevated to leadership, unless he had proven himself able to lead his own family.
The limit to one wife, was not necessarily about divorce, so much as the steadfastness required to maintain that familial relationship.
IN Christ's economy, we are all saints, and need no intercessory priesthood. We are priests, and heirs to the Kingdom. The local church ministry is necessary for the proper nurturing of the new converts, and for maintaining doctrinal purity, among the fellowship. Paul never spoke of a special priesthood (as in the man-made RC hierarchy), but he only that restated that all Christian believers are priests, able to approach the Throne of God, without any need for another intercessor. Jesus is our intercessor......
Paul said it, not me...
Titus 1:5-9
5The reason I left you in Crete was that you might straighten out what was left unfinished and appoint[a] elders in every town, as I directed you. 6An elder must be blameless, the husband of but one wife, a man whose children believe and are not open to the charge of being wild and disobedient. 7Since an overseer[b] is entrusted with God's work, he must be blameless—not overbearing, not quick-tempered, not given to drunkenness, not violent, not pursuing dishonest gain. 8Rather he must be hospitable, one who loves what is good, who is self-controlled, upright, holy and disciplined. 9He must hold firmly to the trustworthy message as it has been taught, so that he can encourage others by sound doctrine and refute those who oppose it.
Homosexuality was classified as a mental disease prior to DSM IV (might be three. I've had some tragedies in my life recently and I'm still not up to speed again) When it was dropped due to political, NOT MEDICAL, reasons. This is highly documented and you'll find the details in the Homsexual Agenda list of links on Scripters profile page. I believe little jeremiah also posted a link to the list n this thread.
Let the church without sin, cast the first stone.
Already happening
And imagine this is also coming to a fundementalist or pentecostal church near you
Doubtful, since those churches are populated precisely by that set of people that resists homosexuality the most. Let an "evangelical" preacher claim to be gay, and the next day he has no congregation.
LOL -you have no point!!! Your argument is completely a moral relative argument -hence, without basis!
On what basis -upon what authority, do YOU attempt to disparage others as Wahabbists -on what basis do you declare that Opus Dei, or the good Sisters of Charity make the rules for the "club" -regardless YOU even mentioning specifically what rules YOU have problem with -what rules you implicate ambiguously with the certainty of moral relative conviction...
Other than hot air -what are you communicating specifically? The Church teaches clearly YET you reference no Church teaching? Should any chance putting their faith in the message of another simply because he bellows loudly?
You sound an awful lot like luther -a protestant...
Yeah what's wrong with you rollo? Only certain Protestants are allowed to do that. You know...those who claim Scripture as their only guide.
Paul was expressing his desire that all Christians (saints) not have the burden of raising a family, during the stressful times in which he lived.
Name a time and place in human history when there was no stress.
Damn Protestants. They think Scripture might be inspired, or something.... /s
Name a time and place in human history when there was no stress.
Don't know much about the Bible, huh? I guess you think the church is the authority, and God isn't speaking directly to the believers, through the Scriptures?
2 Timothy 3:10-17-
10You, however, know all about my teaching, my way of life, my purpose, faith, patience, love, endurance, 11persecutions, sufferings—what kinds of things happened to me in Antioch, Iconium and Lystra, the persecutions I endured. Yet the Lord rescued me from all of them. 12In fact, everyone who wants to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted, 13while evil men and impostors will go from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived. 14But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have become convinced of, because you know those from whom you learned it, 15and how from infancy you have known the holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. 16All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.
You didn't answer my question.
He was specifically referring to the persecution befalling the early Christians. He didn't think it was a good idea for a man to marry, then be crucified, or stoned. Jesus wasn't the only person every hung on a cross.
I recommend finding some good readings on the background of the early fathers, and their world.
I believe that there is salvation, only in the name of Jesus, not some church structure. Church is for fellowship. It is a gathering, of the saints, to worship corporately. But, God makes it clear, that you are responsible to Him, directly! You are the priest, as a believer. Any man, or theological scholar, who tells you that you need another intercessor, is speaking against the Word of God! There is no "special" liturgical priesthood. All those believers we call Christians, are priests. There are no Christians who are not priests. There is no pope, in Scripture. There is God on His throne, to be worshipped. Jesus is our only intercessor.
God created us. I believe it.
God made us in His image. I believe it.
God set apart a special people, the Jews. I believe it.
God instituted the Law, to reveal sin. I believe it.
God chose Abraham, as the forefather to Jesus, for his faith. I believe it.
God proved the benefit of faith to Job. I believe it.
God promised a Messiah, and described Him in prophecy. I believe it.
Jesus actually lived on the earth, was crucified, and was resurrected. I believe it.
His life fulfilled every prophecy, and every promise, from the Old Testament (Scripture of His times), concerning His power and testimony. I believe it.
He did it for me, and for you. I believe it.
Jesus set us free from the old law. By keeping it, He fulfilled it. I believe it.
By fulfilling the law, He grafted us, into the promise made to Abraham. I believe it.
"By faith are you saved..." I believe it.
A man (or woman) of faith walks with God. But, he is still human, a sinner. When man stumbles, God picks him up and brushes off his backside. (There are lots of rocks in the road!) I believe it.
We are brothers and sisters in Christ. Christ is the church...
Paul tells us that the law is meant to point us to Jesus. The law has convicted us. But, He has lots of "get out of jail free" cards!
Have a good day...
-
Romans 3:21- But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. 22This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference, 23for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. 25God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement,[i] through faith in his blood. He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished— 26he did it to demonstrate his justice at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus.
27Where, then, is boasting? It is excluded. On what principle? On that of observing the law? No, but on that of faith. 28For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from observing the law. 29Is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles too? Yes, of Gentiles too, 30since there is only one God, who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through that same faith. 31Do we, then, nullify the law by this faith? Not at all! Rather, we uphold the law.
The law is valid. If you live by it, you will be judged by it. You've already been found guilty. There is no double jeaopardy... "by faith, you WILL BE SAVED!", not seen as perfect, but being perfected. Let the process begin...
I have a problem with both numbers. First, I believe it was the homosexual community that came up with the 10% of the general population is homosexual. I suspect that that number is grossly inflated (to make it seem they are a larger group then they really are). Think about, blacks (and I am not comparing blacks with homosexual, only using the percentages as a comparison), represent about 12% of the population of the United States. Are we to believe that a similar number of people around us are homosexuals?
I suspect the number is more like 1-2% of the overall population.
Now on the first percentage, since it is a self selecting category, it could be that high (but again I suspect it is also inflated).
Since there are few flamboyant homosexuals (think street fair in San Francisco) most homosexuals pass for heterosexuals, and I have often wondered how many closet gays are lawyers and judges, and elected officials and have a conflict of interest .
Certainly the Psychiatric Board that changed homosexually from a sickness to normal had some homosexual influence, and the Judges that ruled in favor of homosexuals may have been gay themselves.
My point is that I do not believe homosexuals exist in the numbers represented, but they are in position of influence (certainly Hollywood, the media, the courts, and legislatures) within this nation. Not all gays are hair dressers.
The American people by and large are a tolerant group, but this constant in your face by the visible homosexual community is getting tiring. I wish they would all just shut up and leave the rest of us alone.
In the 10,000 years of human history that I am aware of, homosexuality has been shunned and punished (with a few notable exceptions). If homosexual behavior is normal human behavior I would have expected it to be welcomed and celebrated after 10,000 years of civilization, but it is not.
Currently homosexuals have managed to silent most criticism of them and their community, but by silencing those disagree with you is not the same as winning the argument. The resentment is repressed, and is only whispered between close friends and families, but does not go away.
This nation watched an epidemic sweep this nation, and the world, because the homosexual community fought the methods that would have stopped the spread of it. The HIV virus became the only virus to ever achieve civil rights to exist. It is only the grace of God that the HIV virus did not spread to the general population. The homosexuals should thank God for that as well, as the backlash against them for not allowing this disease to be fought when only a handful were infected would have been a disaster for their community.
As is, we now know HIV (with a few exceptions) is transmitted by either dirty needles, or anal sex. Don’t do either, and your chances of getting the disease is reduced to almost zero.
It is funny, but if I, a heterosexual male know this, why is HIV still a killer within the homosexual community. It has been what, 20 years now. The disease should have been exterminated years ago. Oh, I forgot for a moment, the homosexual community refused to allow the methods that would have contained and eventually stopped the spread of the disease.
This I believe is the golden age for homosexuals, I hope they enjoy it while it last. If history is any guide, it will not last for long. One thing liberals never seem to understand, when they rely on the courts to give them something the rest of the population is not in favor of it means the courts can take it away later.
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.