Posted on 07/12/2012 8:00:48 AM PDT by cleghornboy
Pope Benedict XVI has stated it clearly: homosexuality is incompatible with the priesthood. But Elizabeth Scalia, a writer/blogger for First Things and The Anchoress on Patheos, disagrees. In a blog post which may be found here, Ms. Scalia writes, "If Christians have any interest in reaching out to the gay community, if we have any hope to speak a message which can touch their hearts as well, we absolutely must be willing to live as their family. Behind his blundering obscenity, behind his facile attempts to explain Scripture away, behind the blatant hypocrisy of his behavior toward those who disagree with him, what Dan Savage means to tell us is, 'The church has far too often, and for the most wrong-headed reasons, failed to be family to gay people.'
I completely agree. And I really believe that the way to begin to do that is for our bishops and the curia to stop turning a blind eye to a simple truth, that numbered among our priests are faithful, celibate, joyful priests who are homosexual...
(Excerpt) Read more at lasalettejourney.blogspot.com ...
I think Ms. Scalia needs to read 1 Timothy and Titus to brush up on what the Apostle Paul says about the requirements for Priests/Pastors. The words “Beyond reproach” should jump out at her.
“If Christians have any interest in reaching out to the gay community...”
What the hell for????
Fags need to forsake the “gay community” and reach out to the church.
Correction: the Church is not wrong, God is! (Thank you Elizabeth Scalia through your omnipotence for correcting Almighty God’s “error”).
Lev. 18:22, “You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination.”
Lev. 20:13, “If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltness is upon them”
1 Cor. 6:9-10, “Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God.”
Rom. 1:26-28, “For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error. And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper.”
Could it be possibly God knows something about this lifestyle that we don’t?
A man trying to mate with another man’s anal canal is insane. A female trying to mate with another female with a rubber appliance is insane. An adult trying to mate with a child is insane. A human trying to mate with a dog is insane. It’s like Uncle Joe sitting at your dinner table trying to eat by shoving a carrot in his ear and telling you that’s just his lifestyle. It may be, it may even be his religion, but it’s still an insane behavior.
What’s the need for the church to reach out to the gay community since they are clearly already living very godly upstanding lives according to this woman.
On hearing this, Jesus said to them, "It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners." Mark 2:17
Like this Prosecutor TOLD you SCOTUS was going to uphold ObamaCare. I tell you now . . they will uphold gay marriage. They will uphold Roe v. Wade (with maybe some minor limits). We are consistently being sold a bill of goods. Even now, they are trying to push Romney upon us as being some real choice.
It is time to think. It is time to rise up. It is time to ignore the pundits. It is time to be real conservatives and not lemmings.
Just curious. Didn’t the Catholic Church recently have a major scandal that cost them a great deal of money and prestige because supposedly celibate priests turned out to be homosexual pedophiles? I seem to recall something like this happening. Maybe the Church is more gay-friendly than you think.
I have no problem with *repentant* homosexuals in the church. It’s the unrepentant ones that would upset me, much like unrepentant adulterers or unrepentant rapists.
Yeah, we get that. But if the sick do not know they are sick, and are continually told they are not sick, then they will eschew the doctor and his services. It's impossible to save someone who does not think they need saving.
She is not proposing that men who lie with men (to use the Biblical term) are fit candidates for the priesthood. By their "i>behavior --- acting on their sexuality via sinful sexual acts --- unchaste men would be proving themselves unfaithful, in violation of celibacy, and unfit to be priests.
You, I, and Scalia would all agree on that.
What the Pope said:
http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/1004842.htm
The pope answered: “No. It is one thing to say that they are human beings with their problems and their joys, that as human beings they deserve respect, even though they have this inclination, and must not be discriminated against because of it.”
“At the same time, though, sexuality has an intrinsic meaning and direction, which is not homosexual,” he said. “The meaning and direction of sexuality is to bring about the union of man and woman and, in this way, to give humanity posterity, children, a future.”
The pope said the church needs to hold firm on this point, “even if it is not pleasing to our age.”
“Homosexuality is incompatible with the priestly vocation. Otherwise, celibacy itself would lose its meaning as a renunciation. It would be extremely dangerous if celibacy became a sort of pretext for bringing people into the priesthood who don’t want to get married anyway,” the pope said.
The vast majority of sex scandals involving priests involve homosexual pedophile priests. If the objective is to preserve the repute of the Church, then that objective requires the exclusion of homosexuals from the priesthood.
Ah. So instead of subscribing to a set moral standard, we’ll just give the “buffet” treatment to the issue, i.e., pick and choose those morals we find suitable.
Doesn’t quite work that way.
Actually, the Catholic Church already tried that, and we wound up with a bunch of homosexual pedophile priests for which the Church is now infamous.
This makes no logic for orthodox faiths which have married priests.
By logical extension her arguments would apply to any fetish no matter how weird, pervers, OR ILLEGAL.
I'll reach out to help pull them out of their crap-hole, but just as sure as forked-tongued demons lie, I'm not jumping in with them.
First Things was founded for two purposes, apart from “religion in the public square”:
1. To try to bring together real Christians—Protestants and Catholics—and believing Jews, to work together against the modernists and atheists on those issues they agree on.
2. To support orthodox Catholicism.
I was a subscriber from the start, but I dropped out about a year after Fr. Neuhaus died, since it no longer seemed to have his unique touch. I hope they have enough sense to drop this idiot from their “blogger” list. They do not want to be associated with this kind of stupid heresy.
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.