Replies

Clearly neither you, nor Gamecock, has been to a Protestant church in my neck of the woods. Sure, there are those Protestant churches that deemphasize sin in favor of comfort — there are also Catholic churches that ordain Preists with certain sexual proclivities that would preclude a true understanding of sin.

I don’t paint with a broad brush by presuming that Catholic theology condones homosexuality (or worse) simply because of the behavior of a few Priests, and neither should you presume that the existence of a few more lighthearted Protestant churchgoing experiences dictates the theology of the Protestant Church at large.

Teaching and actions are two different things. Yes, there were homosexuals ordained. That was wrong. The Church has never taught it was correct. You just admitted that some Protestants TEACH what I called "me-and-Jesus" theology (you claim it is deemphasising sin and emphasising comfort). And what the heck is the "Protestant Church at large"? Is that Anglicans, Lutherans, Calvinists, Methodists, Shakers, Baptists, etc. all coming together?

>> Yes, there were homosexuals ordained. That was wrong. The Church has never taught it was correct.

Not according to the President of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops —

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/29/AR2005112901852.html

“If that [pastoral charity] becomes paramount in his ministry, even though he might have a homosexual orientation, then he can minister and he can minister celibately and chastely.”

Thus, according to Bishop William Skylstad, Priests with homosexual proclivities are absolutely acceptable, so long as they’re celibate.

>> You just admitted that some Protestants TEACH what I called “me-and-Jesus” theology (you claim it is deemphasising sin and emphasising comfort).

I admitted to the existence of more lighthearted services. I never admitted the existence of a shallow Protestant theology.

>> And what the heck is the “Protestant Church at large”? Is that Anglicans, Lutherans, Calvinists, Methodists, Shakers, Baptists, etc. all coming together?

I wasn’t the one who made the sweeping generalization to a shallow Protestant theology. I wasn’t the one who initially lumped Baptists, Methodists, Lutherans, etc. together into one shallow bunch. I simply accepted your premise that Protestants could be viewed as a single unit.