Posted on 03/04/2014 5:05:38 PM PST by ebb tide
The responses to the Vatican questionnaire on the family are a clear signal that certain changes concerning the churchs teaching on sexual morality are imperative, according to Bishop Stephan Ackermann of Trier, Germany.
Interviewed by the Allgemeine Zeitung Mainz, Ackermann, 50, said the responses showed quite clearly that for the majority of the faithful the churchs teaching on moral sexuality was repressive and remote from life. Declaring a second marriage after a divorce a perpetual mortal sin, and under no circumstances allowing remarried divorced people ever to receive the Sacraments, was not helpful, he said and added, We bishops will have to make suggestions here. We must strengthen peoples sense of responsibility and then respect their decisions of conscience.
It was also no longer tenable to declare that every kind of cohabitation before marriage was a grievous sin, and the difference between natural and artificial birth control is somehow artificial. No one understands it I fear, Ackermann said.
As far as homosexual relationships were concerned, the church would have to appeal to peoples sense of responsibility, he continued. The Christian concept of the human being emanates from the polarity of the sexes but we cannot simply say homosexuality is unnatural, he explained. While the church must hold fast to the uniqueness of marriage between a man and a woman, it could not just ignore registered same-sex unions where the couples had promised to be faithful to and responsible for one another.
Ackermann was sharply criticized by Bishops Heinz Josef Algermissen of Fulda and Konrad Zdarsa of Augsburg.
For an individual bishop to react to the responses of the questionnaire on his own was counterproductive, Algermissen, 71, said. I dont hold with the normative strength of facts. Truth is not something that can be adjusted, he insisted but went on to admit, We bishops obviously have a problem. We have clearly not succeeded in putting across Catholic sexual ethics and its positive concept of the human being. Decisions on such matters were, however, the world churchs concern and not the concern of an individual bishop or bishops conference, Algermissen emphasized.
Zdarsa, 70, recalled that the Catholic world catechism was the yardstick for valid Catholic teaching. As a diocesan bishop, I see no reason to go against this World Church consensus. I never thought, however, that Id have to explain this publicly to a brother bishop one day, he said.
But the Bishop of Magdeburg in former Eastern Germany, Gerhard Feige, 63, came out in defense of Ackermann and sharply criticized the bishops critics. He agreed with Ackermanns views on the responses, Feige told KNA, the German Catholic news agency. The time has finally come to face naked reality. We must struggle to find fair, responsible and life-serving solutions in the spirit of Jesus Christ. It is not helpful to keep on repeating prohibitions or reservations, Feige underlined.
Fr. Eberhard Schockenhoff, 62, professor of moral theology at Freiburg University, a member of the German National Ethics Council and one Germanys best-known moral theologians, said he and 19 other theologians had responded to the questionnaire together and their responses were congruent with the responses of the majority of the faithful in Germany. The responses showed that there was a huge discrepancy between the churchs teaching on sexual morality and what Catholics actually practiced. The responses moreover confirmed what he and many other priests had long since experienced in their daily practice as priests.
Schockenhoff recalled that Pope Francis himself had initiated the questionnaire as he wanted as broad a spectrum of world opinion as possible. I now expect a clear signal from the Pope that the bishops will be able to discuss these concerns freely and openly at the Synod. Up to now, Episcopal Synods have always been centrally steered. Francis must make it clear that he wants the bishops to help him formulate the Churchs teaching on the family, marriage and sexuality in such a way that the faithful will find it helpful, Schockenhoff said.
[Christa Pongratz-Lippitt is the Austrian correspondent for the London Catholic weekly The Tablet.]
It must NOT change. The Bishop should be changed instead
Good grief, it is the WORD OF GOD, Bishop. Is that not good enough for you?
For crying out loud, there’s an all out revolt. His statements on homos is point blank heresy. Defrock him!
That’s not how my Bible reads...
Homosexuality is unnatural.
Typical yuppie drivel. If you "strengthen people's sense of responsibility" then you won't have to whore yourself out by "respecting their decisions of conscience."
IB4TNRC
***The responses to the Vatican questionnaire on the family are a clear signal that certain changes concerning the churchs teaching***
When did Roman Catholic Church government become semi-Congregational?
Another Modernist liberal pig speaking against the constant teaching of the Magisterium. Another damnable homosexualist Marxist rump swab from the homosexual mafia that has taken over the Catholic Church - If any of them were a caqndidate to be burned at the stake, this bugger of a “bishop” should fry on slow broil ... But he will get his in the next life. It is stated somewhere that the floor of Hell is paved with the skulls of [evil worldly, [compromising] “Bishops” ...
What an absolute twit.
Declaring a second marriage after a divorce a perpetual mortal sin, and under no circumstances allowing remarried divorced people ever to receive the Sacraments, was not helpful,
You might want to have sermons based on Matthew just a bit more often.
Its not a question of helpful or not. Its a matter of right and wrong. The Church teaches that no one, not a priest, bishop, or the pope himself, can dissolve a valid marriage. What God has joined together simply cannot be separated.
So if you are married once, then married a second time while your first spouse still lives, you are living in a state of adultery with your second spouse because NOTHING can dissolve the marriage to your first spouse. Simple as that.
You either follow God’s Word or you do not. If you do not want to follow then do something else but you are not a Christian..
I wish the sharp criticism came at the end of a pointy stake.
Absolute liberal progressive TRASH that needs to be forcibly removed by the church and defrocked.
Always the same with the lib progressives...Tell God how He should be. Vicious subversives of every Christian sect.
I wish the criticism came from the Pope; but it won’t.
Maybe the Bishop should consult the Boss first (and I don’t mean the libtard musician).
The responses to the Vatican questionnaire on the family are a clear signal . . . for the majority of the faithful the churchs teaching on moral sexuality was repressive and remote from life . . . second marriage after a divorce . . . allowing remarried divorced people ever to receive the Sacraments . . . It was also no longer tenable to declare that every kind of cohabitation before marriage was a grievous sin, and the difference between natural and artificial birth control is somehow artificial. No one understands it I fear
He is right that it is not enough to say "God says 'no' - end of discussion". With today's organized and carefully polished and packaged attacks on God's Word, the Church needs to provide reasons. They cannot suggest that scripture is open to debate. Rather, this should be a case of reminding followers that God's Word is still relevant and meaningful in today's world.
The number of people who divorce out of boredom shocks me, as does the number that put time and effort into courting the other woman (or man) when that effort would have been more than enough to save their marriage and make it worth saving. Discouraging divorce provides an added incentive to build a better marriage, and religious leaders should emphasize that priority often enough that Christian couples open their minds and their hearts well before the point of divorce is reached.
I'm not in a position to comment on artificial birth control in detail, but I think any Church that restricts birth control should discuss that issue from a secular perspective (side effects of the hormones, for example, failure rates, the adverse effects of casual sex on future relationships, and other issues) along with the religious proscription. Their rules would make more sense with non-religious justifications to show that the rules are relevant and guided by divine wisdom and not just a residual comment quoted from "Genesis 38 - Sin of Onan - end of story."
As far as homosexual relationships were concerned, the church would have to appeal to peoples sense of responsibility, he continued. The Christian concept of the human being emanates from the polarity of the sexes but we cannot simply say homosexuality is unnatural
Again, the Church should put more into the discussion. Homosexuality is unnatural, but they need to go beyond "no" and include the adverse consequences. It is more loving to guide people to God's Word than to turn a blind eye to their actions. It is more loving to help someone who is attracted to both men and women (as most gays are) see the broad range of positives in a heterosexual relationship, which could well be the reason why God told us to follow one path and not the other, than to blindly endorse the destructive choices that are now receiving widespread support as if it was merely a question of equality. Adulterous lust, a high school crush, a workplace fling, a liberal movie producer and drugged 13 y/o girl, or a gay relationship are not the "same love" as heterosexual marriage "therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife, and they shall be one flesh" and should not be celebrated as comparable to the special relationship that brings children into the stable family essential for the health of that child and of our culture.
I believe that the church needs to put all of these issues into both a spiritual and a worldly context. Just as God's command to avoid pork makes medical sense in a culture where meats were not cooked thoroughly and Trichinosis was untreatable, we need to teach that God's commands are what is best for us rather than arbitrary restrictions. I trust God, even (especially?) when His choices are different from mine, to choose more wisely than I would.
That's because you were afraid to preach it, Your Excellency. Cowardly bishops and priests who were afraid their congregation would leave if they told the truth have damaged the Church immensely.
Not that I envy bishops. As has been said, Hell is paved with the skulls of bishops.
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.