Posted on 08/03/2018 9:55:47 PM PDT by unlearner
LEXINGTON, Kentucky, Pro-homosexual dissident 'Catholic' groups see in Pope Francis' ‘changing’ of the Church’s teaching on the death penalty the hope that the Church will one day also change its teaching against homosexuality.
New Ways Ministry called the change in the Catechism proof that "Church teaching can change."
"It's important for Catholic advocates for LGBT equality to take note of this change because for decades Catholic opponents of LGBT equality argued that it is impossible to change church teaching. They often pointed to the fact that condemnations of same-sex relationships were inscribed in the Catechism, and so were not open for discussion or change. Yet, the teaching on the death penalty is in the Catechism, too, and, in fact, to make this change in teaching, it was the text of the Catechism that Francis changed," the group stated on its website.
New Ways Ministry, which works to "promote the acceptance of LGBT people," said that Pope Francis' move will help advance "LGBT equality" in a number of ways.
"First, we now have a clear, explicit contemporary example of church teaching changing, and also a look into how it can be done: with a papal change to the Catechism," it stated.
"Second, we can see that the process that brought about this change has been decades of theological debate and discussion, and not just a papal whim. That means the theological and even ecclesial discussions and debates right now about LGBT people have great potential to shape future changes in church teaching in regard to those topics," it added.
The pro-gay group was not the only one to see the significance of Pope Francis' rewrite of the Catechism.
In a post that appeared yesterday on Twitter, Lexington-based “Fortunate Families” wrote:
The church cannot change its teaching. That is what so many others say about other topics, for example regarding LGBTQ persons. But doctrine develops. Today’s news is a sterling example.
"The idea first floated by [the] Pope on Catechism’s 25th anniversary last fall to signify development of doctrine,” the tweet continued, “rescript issued today sees Francis issue edit of the 1994 official text, now deeming capital punishment ‘inadmissible’-- the new formulation.”
“Development of doctrine”, legitimately used to describe how the Catholic Church refines and expands, but never undermines or rejects, what was taught earlier, has now been interpreted by some to mean the erasure of settled Church teaching.
Critics say Pope Francis attempted to do that yesterday when he promulgated a new teaching concerning the death penalty in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, saying that it was “inadmissible.” The perennial teaching of the Church, based on Scripture and unanimously accepted by the Church Fathers and every pope until Francis, is that legitimate civil authority may impose the death penalty on a malefactor. Although both Saint John Paul II and Benedict XVI were strongly opposed to capital punishment--and John Paul’s Catechism strongly circumscribed it--neither pope denied this principle.
Pope Francis’ innovation has already become a club for American liberals to beat conservatives with. Jane Fleming Kleeb, Chair of the Democratic Party in Nebraska, has tweeted “Let's be clear Nebraskans, @GovRicketts is going against the teachings of the church. We can change leaders by voting different on Nov. 6--Democrats are against the death penalty.”
Fortunate Families, founded in 1992 by Mary Ellen and Casey Lopata, the Catholic parents of a same-sex attracted man, is a group of Catholic religious and laypeople who dissent on authentic Church teaching regarding sexuality and marriage. From 2010 until this July Fortunate Families was part of a coalition with Call to Action, the banned Dignity, and the censured New Ways ministry.
Astonishingly, since November 2017 Bishop John Stowe, OFM of Lexington has served as the dissident group’s “ecclesial advisor”. Stowe is one of the five bishops who have endorsed Fr. James Martin’s pro-LGBT book Building a Bridge. The bishop was appointed to the Lexington diocese by Pope Francis in 2015.
Fortunate Families was last in the news when a Lexington Catholic church stretched an LGBT flag across its front lawn. The first executive director of the group, Stan “JR” Zerkowski, is a parishioner at St. Paul’s parish, and told media that he hoped the banner got wide publicity.
“This is a church that is open to all people and I hope this sign gets that across,” he said in the TV report. “I don’t think a Catholic Church has ever had a sign like this before in front of it during Pride Week or any other time. However, in other parts of the country we see this regularly.”
The banner read “LBGTQ+ Catholic /Family, Friends & Allies/all are welcome”, insinuating that at other Catholic churches Catholics who experience same-sex desires or suffer from gender dysphoria are barred from the worship of God.
Former homosexual Joseph Sciambra retweeted the group’s Twitter message, saying “Bishop Stowe’s ‘Fortunate Families’ believe that the [Catechism of the Catholic Church] will also ‘change’ in terms of homosexuality. FF operatives are embedded within several dioceses around the US.”
Sciambra, a survivor of the San Francisco 1990s “gay scene”, is dedicated to helping people with same-sex attractions avoid being trapped in what he says is a dangerous way of life.
See http://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3563504/posts?page=419#419 for the answer to your question.
It’s very hard not to be suspicious.
All the hair splitting over the meanings of words and what is doctrine and what is dogma, and what can *change* and what *develops* makes it impossible to pin down any Catholic on what the church teaches or believes.
And the catechism is an ABBREVIATED guide? Seriously?
Catholicism has made the simple message of the gospel WAY too complicated.
The basic facts are:
Romans 10:9-13 because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved. For the Scripture says, “Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame.” For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, bestowing his riches on all who call on him. For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”
and
Acts 15:19-29 Therefore my [James} judgment is that we should not trouble those of the Gentiles who turn to God, but should write to them to abstain from the things polluted by idols, and from sexual immorality, and from what has been strangled, and from blood. For from ancient generations Moses has had in every city those who proclaim him, for he is read every Sabbath in the synagogues.”
Then it seemed good to the apostles and the elders, with the whole church, to choose men from among them and send them to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas. They sent Judas called Barsabbas, and Silas, leading men among the brothers, with the following letter:
“The brothers, both the apostles and the elders, to the brothers who are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia, greetings. Since we have heard that some persons have gone out from us and troubled you with words, unsettling your minds, although we gave them no instructions, it has seemed good to us, having come to one accord, to choose men and send them to you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. We have therefore sent Judas and Silas, who themselves will tell you the same things by word of mouth. For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay on you no greater burden than these requirements: that you abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from what has been strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell.”
This problem is endemic to Catholicism.
The homosexual issues have been going on for over 1,000 years.
This is hardly a little foible,crisis, or scandal.
And it has not passed as before because it has never passed based on history.
How long are Catholics willing to wait for things to self-correct?
It's not breaking a caucus.
Nobody is going on the caucus thread and the topic is not what is caucused.
This is FREE republic, not a Catholic echo chamber that is Catholics only allowed.
The mods don't have an issue with it. Why do you?
Thank you.
There have also been times in Catholic history where there has been no pope or dispute over who is pope.
There was one time where three different men at the same time claimed to be pope.
That is not apostolic succession, much less unbroken.
Because of that, it cannot be used as evidence or *proof* of the Catholic church being the one true church.
Not to mention that the EO make the same claim, that they are the original church founded by Jesus and that Rome is in schism.
There is much confusion within Catholicism. Even Catholics on this forum cannot agree over what is doctrine, what is dogma, how much latitude the laity have to obligation to believe what the church teaches, etc.
That’s a lot of intent suggested in that post, which you cannot know.
If you didn’t have an issue with it, why are you suspicious and why did you challenge the validity of the post?
FWIW, it’s not caucus because it’s posted from a Catholic source. There’s no RF rule that says that only Catholics can post something from a Catholic source and that’s not what makes it caucus.
What are you counting and why?
Under the RM's homepage under Linking to Previous Posts on the Religion Forum[emphasis mine]
:If however he is linking to an article posted by someone else - and that article was a "caucus" of which he was not a member - then I might pull the post anyway if I think it would have the affect of defeating the caucus label. Besides, he can always quote the source article directly without seemingly trying to work around the caucus protection.
That's all I can find on the RM's page.
Linking to Previous Posts on the Religion Forum:
If however he is linking to an article posted by someone else
- and that article was a “caucus” of which he was not a member - then I might pull the post anyway if I think it would have the affect of defeating the caucus label.
******************
Post the whole thing, ebb....not just the part that favors you.
From the RM's homepage [I bolded the part you left out]:
If however he is linking to an article posted by someone else - and that article was a "caucus" of which he was not a member - then I might pull the post anyway if I think it would have the affect of defeating the caucus label. Besides, he can always quote the source article directly without seemingly trying to work around the caucus protection.
It looks like everything I predicted has come true. Deliberate or accidental? I wonder.
I did not link to your post. I invited you to participate in this one if you care to. The article I am reposting is from a pro-life, pro-family, non-Catholic source. It is of general interest.
My purpose for posting is not to be “malicious” or start a debate but to understand what the general and / or official belief of Catholics is on the matter of whether the current Pope or any Pope can lead the Church into error. I have never really had clarity on this subject. I am particularly interested in how this affects the future of the role of the Catholic Church in American politics, and conservatism in general.
As a conservative, pro-life, and pro-family Protestant I appreciate the many Catholics who are also conservative and pro-life. I do believe that many Catholics have preserved and defended traditional Church teachings in these areas when many Protestant denominations have abandoned sound doctrine. I find it very disconcerting that high-ranking leaders, in what I would describe as the world’s largest Christian denomination, appear to be backpedaling on issues which committed Catholics have always been at the forefront of defending.
You know, if you don’t like it, you don’t have to read the comments or respond to them.
“It looks like everything I predicted has come true. Deliberate or accidental? I wonder.”
Well, at least you are not outright accusing me of malice. I’ll give you that much.
It is a shame that civil conversations between Catholic and Protestants are hard to come by. I do not believe it has to be this way.
Personally I do not have the desire, time, or energy to get into a Catholic versus Protestant debate. I’ve yet to see anyone have their minds changed on this forum in any fundamental way on this subject.
However, I would like to understand where Catholics are coming from when it comes to concerns of the Pope because what I’m reading tells me that I have some misconceptions of what Catholics believe on this subject.
It is very concerning to me that politicians like Nancy Pelosi and other radical abortion promoters can get away with claiming to be Catholic. It is even more concerning when it looks like the highest-ranking leaders of the Catholic Church may be moving toward a “compromise” on issues of abortion and homosexuality. I hope this is not the case.
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.