Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: SkyPilot

Exactly as I thought: The press is misrepresenting this *document* as some sort of statement by the Church that is a document of doctrinal truth. It is not. It is merely a summary of what was discussed at what is supposed to be an open discussion.

Here is what the relatio actually stated:

50. Homosexuals have gifts and qualities to offer to the Christian community: are we capable of welcoming these people, guaranteeing to them a fraternal space in our communities? Often they wish to encounter a Church that offers them a welcoming home. Are our communities capable of providing that, accepting and valuing their sexual orientation, without compromising Catholic doctrine on the family and matrimony?

As one can see, it is somewhat different than the impression given by the secular press.

Source: http://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/en/bollettino/pubblico/2014/10/13/0751/03037.html


36 posted on 10/13/2014 12:01:44 PM PDT by SumProVita (Cogito, ergo....Sum Pro Vita - Modified Descartes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: SumProVita

As one can see, it is somewhat different than the impression given by the secular press.

...yes it is...but the troubling clause in the passage relates to ‘accepting and valuing their sexual orientation’, which is obviously a loaded phrase...what is your interpretation of what that means, relative to its compromising Catholic doctrine...?


64 posted on 10/13/2014 5:05:48 PM PDT by IrishBrigade
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies ]

To: SumProVita

[[It is merely a summary of what was discussed at what is supposed to be an open discussion]]

‘Merely’? The fact that the church is even discussing the issue shows that they have strayed

[[Often they wish to encounter a Church that offers them a welcoming home.]]

I’m sure they do- they want to sin AND have a church pat htem on the back and tell them everything is a-ok and that God forgives them and so does the church

[[accepting and valuing their sexual orientation,]]

Really? Shall we ‘accept’ rapists and pedophile’s perversions and ‘value’ them as well because they might have some ‘value’ to offer people of God and the church? Or are we now picking and choosing which BLATANT sinners and enemies of God we ‘value’
and which ones we don’t?

[[As one can see, it is somewhat different than the impression given by the secular press.]]

No- not really!


141 posted on 10/14/2014 10:07:49 AM PDT by Bob434
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson