Vatican Publishes New Book Reducing ‘Sin of Sodom’ to ‘Lack of Hospitality’

ROME, December 19, 2019 (LifeSiteNews) — In what many see as an effort to normalize homosexuality in the Catholic Church, the Vatican has released a new book that reduces the “sin of Sodom” (Genesis 19:1–29) to “a lack of hospitality.”

“The story about the city of Sodom … illustrates a sin that consists in the lack of hospitality, with hostility and violence towards the stranger, a behavior judged to be very serious and therefore deserving to be sanctioned with the utmost severity,” the new book asserts.

Sources consulted by LifeSite described the book as “utter banality” and “obviously ridiculous.” One theologian exclaimed, “Thank God this stuff isn’t magisterial.”

The new volume, titled What Is Man? An Itinerary of Biblical Anthropology (Che cosa è l’uomo? Un itinerario di antropologia biblica), was released on December 16 by the Pontifical Biblical Commission (PBC) and endeavors to examine the scriptural understanding of the human person. Jesuit Father Pietro Bovati, secretary for the Pontifical Biblical Commission, said the work was carried out at the express wish of Pope Francis.

With a preface by Cardinal Luis Ladaria, S.J., prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and president of the Pontifical Biblical Commission, the volume is composed of four chapters: The human being created by God (ch. 1); The human being in the garden (ch. 2); The human family (ch. 3); and the human being in history (ch. 4).

Its 10-page treatment of homosexuality comes in chapter three, in a section entitled “transgressive ways” that also includes incest, adultery, and prostitution.

Scripture does indeed say *all* the disciples fled. It doesn't say where or why.

Mrs. D....are you reading the passages I'm posting?

These are correcting your speculations as to the why.

Behold, the hour cometh, yea, is now come, that ye shall be scattered, every man to his own, and shall leave me alone: and yet I am not alone, because the Father is with me. John 16:32

They had to leave Him to fulfill Scripture.

I'm entitled to that opinion-- just a supposal--- because it does not contradict the known facts, and the text itself does not go into further detail.

Yes you are....but it never ceases to amaze me how much the Roman Catholic turns to Mary.

Though I did see a similar line of "reasoning" on catholicanswers.

Again: here's what we know from the text: after Jesus' arrest, the disciples all scattered and each went "to his own" -- some translations say "each to his own home" or "each to his own place."

But... that's not quite right, because Scripture also says, (John 18:15,16) "And Simon Peter followed Jesus, and so did another disciple: that disciple was known to the high priest, and went in with Jesus into the palace of the high priest."

So you've got Peter and John (the other disciple) NOT scattering each to his own place or home, but present at the trial of Jesus which took place in front of the High Priest: they "went in with Jesus into the palace,"(John 18:16) and we know that Peter wound up later in the courtyard with the officers and servants.

Matthew's Gospel says (26:58) "But Peter followed him from a distance, to the court of the high priest, and entered in and sat with the officers, to see the end." Mark says the same: Luke even says that they (Jesus and Peter) saw each other there in the High Priest's palace: that was after Peter denied knowing Him.

OK, skip to the Crucifixion, and we know John was STILL with Jesus. There's nothing about him leaving. Peter is apparently not there.

But: once more, Peter is found in John's company again early on the morning of the Resurrection. It looks like they were more or less sticking together. You've got Peter and John running to the tomb. Peter, the elder of the two, was slower; but John, though he arrived first, waited for Peter, and Peter entered the tomb first.

So what you've got here is not a "total" entire abandonment of the Lord, but one (John) or sometimes two (with Peter) being with or near Him on Thursday (at the arrest); on Thurs night/Friday morning (at His trial); Friday afternoon (John at His crucifixion) and early Sunday morning (both John and Peter) at the time of His rising from the dead.

Not "scattering" and "each one going to his own place."

The other nine (minus Judas, John, and Peter) did scatter. But they evidently regathered quickly: because the morning of the Resurrection, after the faithful myrrh-bearing women encountered the two angels, "they returned from the tomb and announced these things to the Eleven and to all the others." So they were not scattered, but all staying in the same place again.

It must have been an amazing, frightening, confused, wonderful, doubtful, hopeful and puzzling time. All the Gospel accounts can't be completely harmonized with each other, but that's to be expected. The witnesses were mind-boggled.

All this is True. They were destroyed because of their total and complete iniquity.
Paraphrasing, if there are 100 who are Godly will You spare them. God, yes. If there are 50 will you spare them? God, yes. etc...
However, this is not the point.
The current Pope is attempting to provide Cover for the Homo’s who now dominate the Catholic Church by emphasizing those issues you cite and de-emphasizing the rampant homosexuality which was prevalent.
The Pope and the Homo Mafia are working overtime to deflect.
Notice they never ever reference the Lord God’s CLEAR and UNAMBIGUOUS declaration that Man laying with Man and, Women laying with Women is an ABOMINATION in HIS eyes.
This CLEAR Declaration is never referenced. Indeed, it is COMPLETELY IGNORED.
What the current Pope is complicit in, is the attempt to NORMALIZE that which the Lord God has unambiguously condemned as an ABOMINATION in HIS eyes.
To not recognize this fact is to be WILLFULLY BLIND to reality.

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.