Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Daniel2

Bishops: Gay Partnerships "have Merit"

Recommended Posts

Catholic Bishops, that is.

I wonder if concern over this type of sentiment is what drove the LDS church to clarify and tighten the reigns on regulations for LDS bishops about marriage...

Bishops say gays have gifts to offer church

http://m.omaha.com/news/world/bishops-say-gays-have-gifts-to-offer-church/article_5cffbc13-0838-5955-bc8b-5cd856e946e5.html?mode=jqm

By NICOLE WINFIELD | Updated 3 minutes ago

VATICAN CITY (AP) — Catholic bishops are showing unprecedented openness to accepting the real lives of many Catholics today, saying gays have gifts to offer the church and should be accepted and that there are "positive" aspects to a couple living together without being married.

A two-week meeting of bishops on family issues arrived at its halfway point Monday with a document summarizing the closed-door debate so far. No decisions were announced, but the tone of the preliminary document was one of almost-revolutionary acceptance, rather than condemnation, with the aim of guiding Catholics toward the ideal of a lasting marriage.

The bishops said gays had "gifts and qualities" to offer and asked rhetorically if the church was ready to provide them a welcoming place, "accepting and valuing their sexual orientation without compromising Catholic doctrine on the family and matrimony."

For a 2,000-year-old institution that believes gay sex is "intrinsically disordered," even posing the question is significant.

"This is a stunning change in the way the Catholic church speaks of gay people," said the Rev. James Martin, a Jesuit author. "The Synod is clearly listening to the complex, real-life experiences of Catholics around the world, and seeking to address them with mercy, as Jesus did."

The bishops repeated that gay marriage was off the table. But it acknowledged that gay partnerships had merit.

"Without denying the moral problems connected to homosexual unions, it has to be noted that there are cases in which mutual aid to the point of sacrifice constitutes a precious support in the life of the partners," they said.

For heterosexuals, the bishops said they must grasp the "positive reality of civil weddings" and even cohabitation, with the aim of helping the couple commit eventually to a church wedding.

The bishops also called for a re-reading of the 1968 encyclical Humanae Vitae that outlined the church's opposition to artificial birth control. The bishops said couples should be unconditionally open to having children, but that the message of Humanae Vitae "underlines the need to respect the dignity of the person in the moral evaluation of the methods of birth control."

There has been much talk inside the synod about applying the theological concept of the "law of gradualness" in difficult family situations. The concept encourages the faithful to take one step at a time in the search for holiness.

Applying the concept to matters of birth control would be an acknowledgement that most Catholics already use artificial contraception in violation of church teaching. But it would encourage pastors to meet them where they are, and then help them come to understand the full reasoning behind the ban.

Bishops also called for "courageous" new ways to minister to families, especially those "damaged" by divorce. The document didn't take sides in the most divisive issue at the synod, whether Catholics who divorce and remarry without an annulment can receive Communion.

The document said these Catholics deserve respect and should not be discriminated against, and then laid out the positions of both sides: those who want to maintain the status quo barring them from the sacraments, and those who favor a case-by-case approach, in which the couple undertake a path of penance.

Pope Francis has called for a more merciful approach to these couples, but conservatives have insisted there is no getting around Jesus' words that marriage is indissoluble.

How long until the LDS apostles have a similar meeting behind closed doors, I wonder...?

Share this post


Link to post

Catholic Bishops, that is.

I wonder if concern over this type of sentiment is what drove the LDS church to clarify and tighten the reigns on regulations for LDS bishops about marriage...

How long until the LDS apostles have a similar meeting behind closed doors, I wonder...?

 

Keep wondering.

Share this post


Link to post

I don't know that there's anyone in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints who contends that gays don't have "gifts to offer the church."  If gays are willing to live the standards, they have plenty of gifts to offer the church; and even if they're not (as regrettable as that would be on several levels), that doesn't preclude them from offering such gifts elsewhere, nor would (or should) anyone in the Church of Jesus Christ discourage them from doing so.

 

But "(1) Intimacy outside of marriage is wrong" and "(2) Marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God" are fundamental doctrines of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in ways that, e.g., blacks "[were] not entitled to the Priesthood at the [then] present time" are not.

Share this post


Link to post

How long until the LDS apostles have a similar meeting behind closed doors, I wonder...?

 

My guess is that, as with Catholics, LDS bishops will be having those meetings first. 

Share this post


Link to post

I don't know that there's anyone in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints who contends that gays don't have "gifts to offer the church."  If gays are willing to live the standards, they have plenty of gifts to offer the church; and even if they're not (as regrettable as that would be on several levels), that doesn't preclude them from offering such gifts elsewhere, nor would (or should) anyone in the Church of Jesus Christ discourage them from doing so.

 

But "(1) Intimacy outside of marriage is wrong" and "(2) Marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God" are fundamental doctrines of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in ways that, e.g., blacks "[were] not entitled to the Priesthood at the [then] present time" are not.

This is too much for me. I am going to bury myself in the sand. :beatdeadhorse:

Share this post


Link to post

 

But "(1) Intimacy outside of marriage is wrong" and "(2) Marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God" are fundamental doctrines of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

The synod is discussing the very thing that we are discussing.   How to welcome those who sin in this particular way, while preaching the doctrines that remain God's commands.   Catholics believe both of those things too (though apparently it plays out differently as sexual sins require confession but don't require abstinence from Holy Communion, and Catholic tradition about resolving sins is a little thin compared to LDS expectation).

Share this post


Link to post

This quote from the article seems entirely consistent with the overall message of the church's MormonsandGays.org website:

"The bishops said gays had "gifts and qualities" to offer and asked rhetorically if the church was ready to provide them a welcoming place, "accepting and valuing their sexual orientation without compromising Catholic* doctrine on the family and matrimony.""

 

*Replace with "Mormon"

Share this post


Link to post

My guess is that, as with Catholics, LDS bishops will be having those meetings first. 

 

And said Bishops will be released shortly thereafter.

Share this post


Link to post

This quote from the article seems entirely consistent with the overall message of the church's MormonsandGays.org website:

"The bishops said gays had "gifts and qualities" to offer and asked rhetorically if the church was ready to provide them a welcoming place, "accepting and valuing their sexual orientation without compromising Catholic* doctrine on the family and matrimony.""

 

*Replace with "Mormon"

 

I agree. But the doctrine on family and matrimony is that sex is ordained only within the bonds of marriage and marriage is defined exclusively between man and woman.

Share this post


Link to post

This quote from the article seems entirely consistent with the overall message of the church's MormonsandGays.org website:"The bishops said gays had "gifts and qualities" to offer and asked rhetorically if the church was ready to provide them a welcoming place, "accepting and valuing their sexual orientation without compromising Catholic* doctrine on the family and matrimony.""

 

*Replace with "Mormon"

  

I agree. But the doctrine on family and matrimony is that sex is ordained only within the bonds of marriage and marriage is defined exclusively between man and woman.

The Catholic Bishops seem to agree on that as well.

Share this post


Link to post

Huh, and here I was thinking homosexuals were depraved moral monsters bereft of,the Light of Christ with no redeeming values whatsoever. I would like to thank the Catholics for their enlightenment on that point. Are they going to tell us next that exercise is good for us?

Share this post


Link to post

How does one accept and value homosexual orientation while maintaining that acting on that orientation is sinful?

 

I understand accepting people, but this doesn't sound like that.

Share this post


Link to post

How does one accept and value homosexual orientation while maintaining that acting on that orientation is sinful?

 

I understand accepting people, but this doesn't sound like that.

I agree, it's an odd dichotomy. I consider it a baby step.

But if you haven't read the church's official website on the subject: MormonsandGays.org, I'd highly recommend spending some time there.

Share this post


Link to post

I agree, it's an odd dichotomy. I consider it a baby step.

But if you haven't read the church's official website on the subject: MormonsandGays.org, I'd highly recommend spending some time there.

The Church website doesn't say anything about accepting and valuing homosexuality.  It talks about accepting people.

 

If the Catholic bishops claim to accept and value a homosexual orientation, that is going way more than just a baby step.  What does it even mean though?

Share this post


Link to post

The Church website doesn't say anything about accepting and valuing homosexuality.  It talks about accepting people.

 

If the Catholic bishops claim to accept and value a homosexual orientation, that is going way more than just a baby step.  What does it even mean though?

A baby step towards acceptance of gay marriage.

Share this post


Link to post

A baby step towards acceptance of gay marriage.

 

Which is not going to happen.

Share this post


Link to post

Which is not going to happen.

In the Catholic Church?

Share this post


Link to post

In the Catholic Church?

 

In the LDS Church. Hopefully the Catholic Church as well.

Share this post


Link to post

In the LDS Church. Hopefully the Catholic Church as well.

It seemed like a toss up once Pope Francis was ordained. But now with this latest Synod, I think the Catholics may be first.

Share this post


Link to post

Huh, and here I was thinking homosexuals were depraved moral monsters bereft of,the Light of Christ with no redeeming values whatsoever. I would like to thank the Catholics for their enlightenment on that point. Are they going to tell us next that exercise is good for us?

 

Nobody is wrong about everything.

Share this post


Link to post

It seemed like a toss up once Pope Francis was ordained. But now with this latest Synod, I think the Catholics may be first.

 

Its looking that way. Of course the Mormons will be never, so....

Share this post


Link to post

Its looking that way. Of course the Mormons will be never, so....

Only time will tell.

Share this post


Link to post

Nobody is wrong about everything.

 

It just seems so puerile. If I was in favor of gay marriage I would be kind of insulted by this. It is basically saying you are sinning but we recognize that you are not total moral reprobates and that there may be some genuine affection and love in your relationships.

 

It's the kind of thing you find in Duh magazine:

 

1994_12_10_k.jpg

Share this post


Link to post

It just seems so puerile. If I was in favor of gay marriage I would be kind of insulted by this. It is basically saying you are sinning but we recognize that you are not total moral reprobates and that there may be some genuine affection and love in your relationships.

It's the kind of thing you find in Duh magazine:

1994_12_10_k.jpg

I'm not offended by people/institutions learning, growing, and overcoming prejudices.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...