Posted on 07/30/2013 11:25:09 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o
It's hardly surprising that the world, especially Roman Catholics like myself, is breathlessly decoding what Pope Francis told reporters on his flight back to Rome from Brazil on Monday regarding homosexuality: “If someone is gay and he searches for the Lord and has good will, who am I to judge?”
The Pope’s remarks... hardly represent a break with Catholic church doctrine, which still condemns homosexuality. The Vatican’s catechismal stance regarding the LGBTs in our midst remains the same: The church may love the sinner, but it hates the sin. And since Francis was referring specifically to gay priests—who like other Catholic clerics take a vow of celibacy and so don’t commit the “sin”— His Holiness wasn’t exactly going out on a theological limb.
But at a time when the world is increasingly accepting gay rights and even gay marriage, here ‘s what’s really significant about the Pope’s statement: The love-the-sinner-but-hate-the-sin trope no longer carries much if any moral credibility.
How—given our awareness today that homosexuality is as biological as heterosexuality, and that homosexual relationships have proven as valid and socially enriching as straight ones— can we take any religious leader seriously when he claims to love gay people but at the same time demonizes the consummation of their love for each other?
How, for example, can the Catholic church declare homosexuals “disordered” and their lifestyle an “intrinsic moral evil,” yet expect us to applaud its “love” for gays somewhere beneath all that homophobic bigotry?
My mother was born in Mississippi and has often told me of Southern whites in the mid-20th century insisting they could love a black person even if they hated the black race. No, you can’t .... When he was Archbishop of Buenos Aires he called Argentina’s legalization of gay marriage a “grave anthropological regression.”
(Excerpt) Read more at ideas.time.com ...
Amen ... even so come quickly, Lord Jesus!
“Pope Francis and Gays: “Loving the Sinner” Is Still Intolerance” - Time Magazine
‘Tolerance And Apathy Are The Last Virtues Of A Dying Society’ - Aristotle
And...
“Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions.”
- G. K. Chesterton
It’s pretty biblically clear that homosexuality is hugely offensive to God,
and that’s why the left picks this issue to promote in our society.
Darwin would call homosexuality an unsuccessful mutation since it does not provide for procreation.
Not that there is anything wrong with that...
Silence on the matter will be construed as intolerance.
Her “Fruits”, apparently are Sean Lennon and Kyoko Chan Cox.
I’m not sure what (if anything) they tell us about her.
No vice however squalid and nasty is without defenders as Padgett proves.
Loving the sinner, really isn't even tolerance. It is calling to repentance. Loving the sinner is actually INtolerance of the sin.
I’m in a time warp ... this is the first I’ve ever heard of Kyoko.
This sodomite Padgett does not understand love. We love those involved in homosexuality (in the same way that God so loved the whole world) ... therefore we point out to them that homosexual conduct is depraved, and evil, and sinful ... and we call them to repentance and conversion to Christ.
The sin comes when you indulge your homosexual proclivities.
I was thinking of her movies, books, audio recordings and general willingness to trade on her deceased husband’s fame and notoriety. Sean is nothing special as far as I know, but I wouldn’t quite categorize him as a fruit.
Sorry ... don't mean to imply that he's a sodomite.
According to wiki he's an occutard.
Completely different. Can you not love a person who is an alcoholic? Would you still love one of your children who is a murderer?
Maranatha!
That is true in the same sense that cancer is as biological as other cells. It doesn't mean what Tim was trying to twist the words to mean. Biological is not the same as positive. I don't encourage my friend with stage three cancer to celebrate the growth of that part of his biology, any more than I would encourage men who are attracted to men to turn an exit into an entrance.
homosexual relationships have proven as valid and socially enriching as straight ones
I missed that proof. What I have seen is relationships among friends and co-workers that have never in my experience included fidelity and that have never in my experience lasted more than a few years. The best homosexual relationships I have seen have lacked the stability and commitment of the worst heterosexual relationships I have seen.
can we take any religious leader seriously when he claims to love gay people but at the same time demonizes the consummation of their love for each other? How, for example, can the Catholic church declare homosexuals “disordered” and their lifestyle an “intrinsic moral evil,” yet expect us to applaud its “love” for gays somewhere beneath all that homophobic bigotry?
I missed the alleged demonization. Those who commit adultery (another group whose sex lives violate scripture) are not demonized; it's just that their actions violate God's Word. The same is true of homosexuals. This moron does not understand either "demonizing" or love. Which is hateful and which is loving: (a) telling people to do whatever makes them happy sexually (b) advising people to act prudently and in a manner that will allow them to avoid a fatal disease such as AIDS? I don't see a phobia in either approach, but one has an outcome that is hard to describe as anything short of hateful.
If animal behavior is normative for humans, we should be living naked in the trees, pooping on the ground, establishing social hierarchies by brawling, flirting by displaying our swollen rumps, eating placentas, and --- if our offspring seem subpar --- eating the babies, too.
Every disease, disability, disorder, abnormality, malformation and malfunction known to man or beast, is biological. Duh: What else would it be? CGI?
That doesn't mean we have to define ourselves by our disorders.
Even nature doesn't favor behaviors that lead to the specimen's genetic extinction.
“given our awareness today that homosexuality is as biological as heterosexuality”
HUH? Sorry Charlie,
“Studies by Johns Hopkins University, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, a prohomosexual
scientist, Evelyn Hooker, and Masters and Johnson all deny that there’s any genetic link. They agree that the connection between genetics and homosexuality is a myth.
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.