Pope Francis and LGBT people

sun rise said:

This is why I like Pope Francis. I don't have to agree with all of his theology to appreciate his attitude in some key areas:

Pope to LGBT Catholics: 'God is Father who does not disown any of his children' - Vatican News

Outreach: What would you say is the most important thing for LGBT people to know about God?


Pope Francis: God is Father and he does not disown any of his children. And “the style” of God is “closeness, mercy and tenderness.” Along this path you will find God.
...
Outreach: What do you say to an LGBT Catholic who has experienced rejection from the Church?


Pope Francis: I would have them recognize it not as “the rejection of the church,” but instead of “people in the church.” The church is a mother and calls together all her children. Take for example the parable of those invited to the feast: “the just, the sinners, the rich and the poor, etc.” [Matthew 22:1-15; Luke 14:15-24]. A “selective” church, one of “pure blood,” is not Holy Mother Church, but rather a sect.

Click to expand...

Good evening Sun rise. The Roman Catholic Church has been guilty of atrocities, persecution of righteous people, martyring and torture. How anyone can be a Roman Catholic I do not know. If we don't use the Law of Yahweh we will become weak spiritually. According to the Bible, homosexuality is an abomination. But instead of saying this, he wants to pander to the mainstream. It is a shame.

9-10ths_Penguin said:

Another way of looking at the issue through the lens of Romans 14:4:

Who are you to judge someone else's servant? To his own master he stands or falls. And he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand.

You've told us that LGBTQ "servants of God", if they don't repent to your satisfaction, have "fallen" in the eyes of God. It seems to me that you need to choose between two options:

Click to expand...

I have not referred to any Alphabet People as "servants of God" - I have not once spoken about my "satisfaction" - and all people are Fallen.

- I understand why you want to refer to the Alphabet People - or all people - as "servants of God" - but you fail to understand that Paul's epistle to the Romans was addressed to all that had been "called to be saints" in Rome.

Even the first verse in chapter 14 is a direction on who to "receive" into the faith.

Therefore - the "servants of God" - are those who have accepted His commission and are trying to live up to His standards.

- It is not I - but God - who has claimed that homosexual behavior is sinful.

I have made no claim as to how much repentance is required to be forgiven of a sin - but my personal belief is that as long as we are doing our best to avoid sin and change our behavior - we will be accepted.

I said as much in past posts.

- All human beings are Fallen creatures due to the Fall of Adam and Eve - but we have already been redeemed from the conditions of the Fall through the Atoning Sacrifice of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Now all we need to do is overcome our own personal sins.

9-10ths_Penguin said:

The Bible is wrong. God will leave the people whose actions you disapprove of to "fall." God is either unwilling or unable to make them "stand."

Click to expand...

I don't know where you got this whole "fall" thing from - you make it seem like I said it - when I didn't.

According to the Bible all of Mankind have already been redeemed from the Fall due to the Atoning Sacrifice of the Lord Jesus Christ.

All human beings are "standing" - in the sense that they have free will and the ability to overcome their sins through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ.

9-10ths_Penguin said:

You are wrong. LGBTQ people are "standing" in the eyes of God even if you can't understand how this could be so.

Click to expand...

If anyone has decided to take the stance to not only engage in sin but to never repent of it - then they will not be forgiven of those sins in this life.

This is especially for those who decide to base their identity on sinful behavior.

There will be a time set aside for them after they leave this life and before their Resurrection to suffer the penalties of those sins.

9-10ths_Penguin said:

You don't need to say which option you choose; this is just something for you to think about.

Click to expand...

Both of your options were absurd because you don't know what you are talking about.

Messianic Israelite said:

Good evening Sun rise. The Roman Catholic Church has been guilty of atrocities, persecution of righteous people, martyring and torture. How anyone can be a Roman Catholic I do not know.

Click to expand...

As was most other denominations as well if you knew their history. No, "two wrongs don't make a right", so I simply do not absolve the Church from occasional guilt.

But for the vast majority of us Catholics, what we experience at every mass is our local parish and the prayers that we have, including asking God for forgiveness for our faults and those of the Church as well. We admit our faults.

I grew up in a fundamentalist Protestant church, and let me tell ya there were scandals both within the denomination and also in our local church, which is why I left it in my mid-20's. Have you ever studied the history of Protestantism? If not, I highly recommend you do.

And let me just add that even though I didn't covert until years later, I've been attending mass with my wife for over 50 years now, and never once did I ever hear a priest or decan badmouth another church or denomination, so we are in compliance with Paul's message to not cause divisiveness within the flock, and if your church cannot obey Paul and/or Jesus' message to "love one another", then let me recommend you find a denomination that does take them seriously.

Messianic Israelite said:

According to the Bible, homosexuality is an abomination. But instead of saying this, he wants to pander to the mainstream. It is a shame.

Click to expand...

Pope Francis knows the science on this, and the science on this is not bias nor wrong. The ancient Israelites and the early Church would not know about hormones and how they affect our actions, thus not adjusting to new information doesn't make one iota of sense to me. I also prefer to let God do the judging on matters whereas there are no real victims.

Fallen Prophet said:

I have not referred to any Alphabet People as "servants of God" - I have not once spoken about my "satisfaction" - and all people are Fallen.

- I understand why you want to refer to the Alphabet People - or all people - as "servants of God" - but you fail to understand that Paul's epistle to the Romans was addressed to all that had been "called to be saints" in Rome.

Even the first verse in chapter 14 is a direction on who to "receive" into the faith.

Therefore - the "servants of God" - are those who have accepted His commission and are trying to live up to His standards.

- It is not I - but God - who has claimed that homosexual behavior is sinful.

I have made no claim as to how much repentance is required to be forgiven of a sin - but my personal belief is that as long as we are doing our best to avoid sin and change our behavior - we will be accepted.

I said as much in past posts.

- All human beings are Fallen creatures due to the Fall of Adam and Eve - but we have already been redeemed from the conditions of the Fall through the Atoning Sacrifice of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Now all we need to do is overcome our own personal sins.

I don't know where you got this whole "fall" thing from - you make it seem like I said it - when I didn't.

According to the Bible all of Mankind have already been redeemed from the Fall due to the Atoning Sacrifice of the Lord Jesus Christ.

All human beings are "standing" - in the sense that they have free will and the ability to overcome their sins through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ.

If anyone has decided to take the stance to not only engage in sin but to never repent of it - then they will not be forgiven of those sins in this life.

This is especially for those who decide to base their identity on sinful behavior.

There will be a time set aside for them after they leave this life and before their Resurrection to suffer the penalties of those sins.

Both of your options were absurd because you don't know what you are talking about.

Click to expand...

Why are you using a book to insinuate that heterosexuality is somehow less sinful than homosexuality? Both are mere proclivities.

Veyl said:

Why are you using a book to insinuate that heterosexuality is somehow less sinful than homosexuality? Both are mere proclivities.

Click to expand...

Well - that book is the same book that defines what "sin" is.

So - why would I not rely on it to determine what "proclivities" are sinful?

Fallen Prophet said:

Well - that book is the same book that defines what "sin" is.

So - why would I not rely on it to determine what "proclivities" are sinful?

Click to expand...

How can one be sure that the tome provides the correct definition? Discernment and judgement are inseparable parts of determining what constitutes ethics.

And on a second point, why use scare quotes in regards to proclivities?

Veyl said:

How can one be sure that the tome provides the correct definition?

Click to expand...

Discern that for yourself through study and by relying on the impressions of the Holy Spirit.

Also - that is not really relevant considering who and what we are talking about.

My claim was that Pope Francie believes that homosexual behavior is sinful and that he bases this belief on the Bible.

No one said that you or anyone else had to agree with it - but that is what he believes and one of the reasons why he believes it.

Veyl said:

Discernment and judgement are inseparable parts of determining what constitutes ethics.

Click to expand...

Sure.

Veyl said:

And on a second point, why use scare quotes in regards to proclivities?

Click to expand...

Proclivities is such a vague term and I wanted to quote your use of "proclivities".

Not really a "scare quote" - more of a "I'm quoting your post" quote.

Fallen Prophet said:

Discern that for yourself through study and by relying on the impressions of the Holy Spirit.

Also - that is not really relevant considering who and what we are talking about.

My claim was that Pope Francie believes that homosexual behavior is sinful and that he bases this belief on the Bible.

No one said that you or anyone else had to agree with it - but that is what he believes and one of the reasons why he believes it.

Sure.

Proclivities is such a vague term and I wanted to quote your use of "proclivities".

Not really a "scare quote" - more of a "I'm quoting your post" quote.

Click to expand...

I had assumed that the basis for his belief was already established and that we were now discussing the legitimacy for such a position, but I was mistaken. Along with misinterpreting your use of quotes, sorry about that.

In any case I feel like these discussions really miss the elephant in the room. Romantic or sexual relationships should really not be discussed in the public sphere, let alone preferences enshrined as sanctified. Claims for certain orientations being better than others or even people being concerned about their children coupling is like bringing up masturbation in a serious setting; it is completely bizarre and worldly. It is quite unfortunate that the utility of heterosexuality in reproduction is likely what has allowed it to spread so far in our society unquestioned. It really commodifies and denigrates human life, especially among those who mistakenly believe that people are "created," whether religious or secular. I think it was better when people accepted reproduction and intercourse as a "necessary evil" rather than something that was hallowed outright. It's insane to me that people would denigrate homosexuals when they're engaging in the same worldly behavior themselves, and openly advocating it to children.

Sex and the pleasure it brings, is like a carrot on the string, that was designed by nature to help lead us to procreation. The need for abortion often happens because the carrot on the string is so compulsive; in the immediate now, that it narrows our vision and results in unintended pregnancy. Procreation is the real primary directive. However, too many people get stuck at the front end of this instinct, or at the carrot on the string, and unknowingly chose to become partially unnatural; dealing with unintended consequences.

Eating is designed the same way. Eating is designed by nature to feed the needs of the body; energy, vitamins and minerals. However, many people get overly fixated at the joy of eating; the carrot on the string, and not the primary needs of the body. This can lead to a wide range of health issues.

Drug and alcohol addiction is based on people trying to create positive feelings, which are useful for a happy life. But too many people get stuck at the level of the carrot on the string, trying to feel good, by any means, even those that harm the body with addictive behavior. This falls short of the natural primary directive. This is shallow behavior that does not go deep enough to be natural.

When it comes to heterosexual people, placing the carrot on the string as the primary directive; playboy and prostitute, is also frown upon. The Church is more about marriage and procreation which connects the flock and the Church to the primary directives of nature. Eating is good, but gluttony is not, since the latter is based on people getting stuck in the shallows of the carrot and the string.

The LGBTQ community is often too shallow; superficial, as though the carrot on the string is the primary directive no matter what combination of holes. The Pope tries to point out that people are more than the surface or facade of their natural instincts. But some communities of people can't see beyond the surface of their instincts. This makes deeper people less than receptive.

The less then receptive people are consistent in that they will not condone eating just for pleasure or a lifestyle of addictive behavior in terms of drugs and alcohol to get positive feelings. Then know that denying the primary directives of instincts can and will lead to other problems. It is a form of consistent tough love needed by those who cannot see very far and risk losing themselves. But the Pope also says all people still have a natural potential for wholeness, so look at the bigger picture, so they too can find it.

Veyl said:

I had assumed that the basis for his belief was already established and that we were now discussing the legitimacy for such a position, but I was mistaken. Along with misinterpreting your use of quotes, sorry about that.

In any case I feel like these discussions really miss the elephant in the room. Romantic or sexual relationships should really not be discussed in the public sphere, let alone preferences enshrined as sanctified. Claims for certain orientations being better than others or even people being concerned about their children coupling is like bringing up masturbation in a serious setting; it is completely bizarre and worldly. It is quite unfortunate that the utility of heterosexuality in reproduction is likely what has allowed it to spread so far in our society unquestioned. It really commodifies and denigrates human life, especially among those who mistakenly believe that people are "created," whether religious or secular. I think it was better when people accepted reproduction and intercourse as a "necessary evil" rather than something that was hallowed outright. It's insane to me that people would denigrate homosexuals when they're engaging in the same worldly behavior themselves, and openly advocating it to children.

Click to expand...

I disagree with everything you have said and find it disgusting - to be frank.

My children are not an "evil" of any kind.

You can believe what you want - but I hope you never become a parent.

Here is an interesting take on this subject that was pointed out by Liberal comedian, Bill Maher on his HBO Show. The content can be found below.

Maher says 'trendiness' to be 'anything other than straight' partly explains LGBT spike

Citing a Gallup poll, Maher pointed out a sharp rise between generations in those identifying as LGBTQ+.

Only about 2.6% of Baby Boomers identified as LGBTQ+ in the poll, while 20.8% of Gen Z identified as LGBTQ+. Maher questioned how this could be.

If we follow this trajectory, we will all be gay in 2054,” Maher joked on his show. I’m just saying, when things change this much this fast, people are allowed to ask, ‘What’s up with that? All the babies are in the wrong bodies? Is there a mix-up at the plant with Cap’n Crunch’s Oops All Berries?’" Maher continued on his show. "It wasn’t that long ago when adults asked a kid, ‘What do you want to be when you grow up?’ They meant, ‘What profession?’

“If we can’t admit that in certain enclaves, there is some level of trendiness to the idea of being anything other than straight, then this is not a serious, science-based discussion. It’s a blow being struck in the culture wars using children as cannon fodder," Maher mused on his show.

Below is another link directly to the relevant 9 minute video from his show.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1527887977845649408

Fallen Prophet said:

I disagree with everything you have said and find it disgusting - to be frank.

My children are not an "evil" of any kind.

You can believe what you want - but I hope you never become a parent.

Click to expand...

I never claimed that your children are evil, in fact innately they are Good in the platonic sense. It's just that attachment to the biology of man - even labeling them as children - is something that binds one to the world. In fact, in that whole passage I was attempting to defend the dignity of the human race against the sexual assault that is present in society, even from those who consider themselves "traditional." I am not sure I will ever become a parent, in any case, as I don't feel a strong desire yet and parenthood is a service given rather than something engaged in to satisfy one's passing wants.

Also, I am confused as to whether or not you are condoning heterosexuality, or romance and marriage in general. If one actually did support such a worldly thing, they would be hard-pressed to form a coherent position against homosexuality, fetishism, and the like. I for one would not want children to be exposed to such things so much by culture; if they really were to involve themselves with such things when they were older, they could do it on their own time.

I think you are a good man in practice, but I tend to come down hard on unexamined positions that are quite prevalent in our culture.

Veyl said:

I never claimed that your children are evil, in fact innately they are Good in the platonic sense. It's just that attachment to the biology of man - even labeling them as children - is something that binds one to the world. In fact, in that whole passage I was attempting to defend the dignity of the human race against the sexual assault that is present in society, even from those who consider themselves "traditional." I am not sure I will ever become a parent, in any case, as I don't feel a strong desire yet and parenthood is a service given rather than something engaged in to satisfy one's passing wants.

Also, I am confused as to whether or not you are condoning heterosexuality, or romance and marriage in general. If one actually did support such a worldly thing, they would be hard-pressed to form a coherent position against homosexuality, fetishism, and the like. I for one would not want children to be exposed to such things so much by culture; if they really were to involve themselves with such things when they were older, they could do it on their own time.

I think you are a good man in practice, but I tend to come down hard on unexamined positions that are quite prevalent in our culture.

Click to expand...

You claimed that reproduction was a "necessary evil" - meaning that my children - the product of reproduction - are a "necessary evil".

I understand that you may be someone who worships the self - therefore it is inconceivable to think about doing anything that does not satisfy your "passing wants".

I cannot comprehend such a mentality.

I am an advocate for sexual relationships existing only between a man and a woman who have been legally and lawfully wedded as husband and wife - because marriage has been proven to be the best indicator of stable family life for children, civilizes men and protects the interests of women.

I believe that any other form of sexual activity is sinful and should be avoided.

Fallen Prophet said:

You claimed that reproduction was a "necessary evil" - meaning that my children - the product of reproduction - are a "necessary evil".

I understand that you may be someone who worships the self - therefore it is inconceivable to think about doing anything that does not satisfy your "passing wants".

I cannot comprehend such a mentality.

I am an advocate for sexual relationships existing only between a man and a woman who have been legally and lawfully wedded as husband and wife - because marriage has been proven to be the best indicator of stable family life for children, civilizes men and protects the interests of women.

I believe that any other form of sexual activity is sinful and should be avoided.

Click to expand...

I am rather surprised that you somehow interpreted my post as selfish. I made it quite clear that I would be hesitant to raise a child due to the responsibility it requires. You have to be willing to put aside your own concerns for another person, and not just do it because you want to be a parent. A child isn't a toy for one to play with; they are their own person (unfortunately, parenthood often gives the illusion of ownership). If one is not sure that they are up to the task, it would be immoral to take on the responsibility. It is also difficult for single individuals to become parents, but I digress.

I find marriage to be an institution inappropriate for our society, and frankly somewhat injurious to children. It is essentially a civilly-sanctioned sexual or fetishistic relationship, which is unnecessary for the law to recognize.

All sexual activity is worldly and deluding. That includes relations between men and women. If you have the desire and not the strength to abstain, I cannot exactly stop you, but you have to realize that you are giving in to your weaknesses.