Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Elizabeth Scalia: Church is wrong about homosexuality being incompatible with priesthood
La Salette Journey ^ | July 12, 2012 | Paul Melanson

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 ...


TOPICS: Education; Miscellaneous; Religion; Society
KEYWORDS: church; homosexuality; priesthood; scalia
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-65 next last

1 posted on 07/12/2012 8:01:00 AM PDT by cleghornboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: cleghornboy
You are free to join a church that conforms to your every whim or form your own church, lady.
2 posted on 07/12/2012 8:04:30 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum (Government is the religion of the sociopath.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cleghornboy

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.


3 posted on 07/12/2012 8:05:16 AM PDT by circlecity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cleghornboy

“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.


4 posted on 07/12/2012 8:09:41 AM PDT by PetroniusMaximus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: circlecity

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?


5 posted on 07/12/2012 8:12:49 AM PDT by FiddlePig
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: cleghornboy

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.


6 posted on 07/12/2012 8:15:21 AM PDT by blueunicorn6 ("A crack shot and a good dancer")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PetroniusMaximus

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.


7 posted on 07/12/2012 8:16:06 AM PDT by MNDude ( Victimhood is the Holy Grail of liberalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: cleghornboy
Elizabeth Scalia, a writer/blogger ...
Sooooo, some totally unknown blogger disagrees with the Pope ... THE Pope ... and this is news? A feckin' blogger? WTF gives a rat's @ss?
8 posted on 07/12/2012 8:17:09 AM PDT by oh8eleven (RVN '67-'68)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PetroniusMaximus
What the hell for?

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

9 posted on 07/12/2012 8:19:12 AM PDT by newheart (At what point does policy become treason?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: cleghornboy

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.


10 posted on 07/12/2012 8:20:08 AM PDT by RIghtwardHo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cleghornboy

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.


11 posted on 07/12/2012 8:20:19 AM PDT by OrangeHoof (Our economy won't heal until one particular black man is unemployed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: newheart
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

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.

12 posted on 07/12/2012 8:28:31 AM PDT by Sans-Culotte ( Pray for Obama- Psalm 109:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: circlecity; E. Pluribus Unum; FiddlePig
Circlecity: I think you need re-read what Scalia actually wrote. She was not talking about sodomote ((men who practice perverse sex acts with men). She specified "faithful and celibate." That would mean, sexually, beyond reproach.

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.

13 posted on 07/12/2012 8:28:50 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o ("You can observe a lot just by watchin'." - Yogi Berra)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: oh8eleven

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.


14 posted on 07/12/2012 8:34:59 AM PDT by sockmonkey (She could never be a saint, but she thought she could be a martyr if they killed her quick)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o
The problem is, it appears from statistics that homosexual priests are much less likely to remain "faithful and celibate" than heterosexual priests (unless we assume that the vast majority of priests are homosexuals).

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.

15 posted on 07/12/2012 8:36:39 AM PDT by PapaBear3625 (If I can't be persuasive, I at least hope to be fun.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: cleghornboy

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.


16 posted on 07/12/2012 8:38:10 AM PDT by ScottinVA (Buying Drain-O requires photo I.D... yet voting doesn't???)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o; circlecity; FiddlePig
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.

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.

17 posted on 07/12/2012 8:38:18 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum (Government is the religion of the sociopath.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: cleghornboy

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.


18 posted on 07/12/2012 8:40:45 AM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cleghornboy
"If Christians have any interest in reaching out to the gay community..."

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.

19 posted on 07/12/2012 8:44:29 AM PDT by MarineBrat (Better dead than red!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cleghornboy

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.


20 posted on 07/12/2012 8:49:07 AM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o; E. Pluribus Unum; FiddlePig
"She specified "faithful and celibate." That would mean, sexually, beyond reproach. She is not proposing that men who lie with men (to use the Biblical term) are fit candidates for the priesthood."

I don't think I agree. Paul described even the attraction as "vile affections" ("to use the biblical term") and I don't believe one who has been given over to such "vile affections" can be considered beyond reproach. I'm not saying that doesn't make them regenerate or beyond salvation but I don't think they are a proper candidate for Pastorship. E. Pluribus pointed out an excellent reason why.

21 posted on 07/12/2012 8:50:03 AM PDT by circlecity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o; E. Pluribus Unum; FiddlePig
"She specified "faithful and celibate." That would mean, sexually, beyond reproach. She is not proposing that men who lie with men (to use the Biblical term) are fit candidates for the priesthood."

I don't think I agree. Paul described even the attraction as "vile affections" ("to use the biblical term") and I don't believe one who has been given over to such "vile affections" can be considered beyond reproach. I'm not saying that doesn't make them regenerate or beyond salvation but I don't think they are a proper candidate for Pastorship. E. Pluribus pointed out an excellent reason why.

22 posted on 07/12/2012 8:50:03 AM PDT by circlecity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

OK, I hadn’t read your comment when I posted. Celebate homosexuals can remain in the priesthood if they are really celebate. But I would agree with Church policy not to admit them INTO the seminaries in most cases, if their preferences are known, because that is asking for trouble.


23 posted on 07/12/2012 8:51:49 AM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Sans-Culotte
It's impossible to save someone who does not think they need saving.

Seems to me that it is precisely that moment when someone comes to understand that they need saving that they are most receptive to the gospel. So, as long as we continue to call them names and tell them to go to Hell, we are increasing the chances that they will become receptive?

But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us. Romans 5:8

24 posted on 07/12/2012 8:53:36 AM PDT by newheart (At what point does policy become treason?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: cleghornboy

“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.
...........................................................
I don’t have any intention of reaching out to them or touching their hearts or any other part of them that they may wish me to touch.

God Almighty reached out to them in Sodom.

Keep screwing around with them and he may reach out again.

You wouldn’t like that Ms. Scalia.

If you believe in God you should listen to his words and see his actions.

PS: Maybe you should lose a few pounds too.Gluttony is another sin.


25 posted on 07/12/2012 8:53:49 AM PDT by Venturer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cleghornboy
Homosex is a pattern of human behavior...
It is a chosen "orientation"... a "preference" by design or default.

It is NOT an inherited trait or legacy such as one's ethnicity or physical characteristics.

HEAD'S UP-- THERE NOT A "GAY GENE"!

These moral/relational choices and acted-out behavior patterns are nothing more...

The homosex and LGBT "community" has decided/defaulted into the philosophical commitment, and affirmed among themselves (circular logic)... that...
"WHAT THEY DO" ...is indeed "WHO THEY ARE".

They have confused their actual identity with & by their (social/sexual) behavior patterns.

When any person declares themselves a member of the opposite sex "trapped" in the wrong body....
They are calling God a liar...

--AND--
By taking extreme steps through medical science for gender "reassignment"...
They are declaring that God didn't know what he was doing when he made them.

The Bible tells us in the OT Law and the explanation of NT Grace that these unnatural behaviors are an abomination before God, contrary to nature, and ultimately, worthy of divine judgment and eternal condemnation.

Even some traditional streams of faith have defaulted, and/or embraced this intentional confusion: "Behavior?? or Identity??"

My point is summed up simply --
Regardless of human passions, affections, and original tendencies...
GOD IS NOT CONFUSED!

Redemption through Christ's ransom remains God's loving offer to all mankind.

And to deny that in Christ alone...
Forgiveness, cleansing, transformation, and healing of the sin-damaged soul, the power of God delivers a sinner from these behavior/identity sin-traps--
...And all the others under the sun...

Such denial is unbelief -- pure and simple.
Denial of God's word, refusing God's offer of salvation, and avoiding God's own power to save...

The moment opinion, commentary and analysis fails to defend this most basic point: that homosex is a chosen behavior pattern-- In truth -- it's NOT a biological identity--
...alas, the argument is lost.

Speak truth to deception...
Shine light into darkness...

Sing a hymn...
Pass the plate....

May God bless those who know Him and all who seek Him.

26 posted on 07/12/2012 8:56:01 AM PDT by Wings-n-Wind (The main things are the plain things!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #27 Removed by Moderator

To: newheart; PetroniusMaximus
What the hell for?

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

_____________________________________________

This verse speaks to repentant sinners, those who wish to learn and live the righteous way.

Having said that, If a priest is a homosexual, he must be the sort that acknowledges the burden of his SIN, stay in prayer and not practice deviancy clearly shown as against G-d and nature.

Being human, we all sin in many ways. We also may have the propensity towards particular sins due to heredity and/or environment. It is in confession and a willingness to follow Christ that forgives the sin.

28 posted on 07/12/2012 8:57:12 AM PDT by KittenClaws (A closed mouth gathers no foot.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: cleghornboy

Gays have to change THEIR ways and come to the CHURCH, not the CHURCH changing IT”S ways.......Lizzie is dancing on the TRAPDOOR of HELL.


29 posted on 07/12/2012 8:58:07 AM PDT by Ann Archy ( ABORTION...the HUMAN Sacrifice to the god of Convenience.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cleghornboy
"If Christians have any interest in reaching out to the gay community" Heh. Boy is she stupid. Guess what? We don't. Go join the United church or something.
30 posted on 07/12/2012 9:01:01 AM PDT by Catholic Canadian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: newheart

You entirely missed the point. The very term, “reaching out the the gay community” validates the “gay community” as something substantial and authentic - which it is not.

Can you imagine the phrase “reaching out the the pedophile community”??? Do you see how that term validates their existence?

There is no “community” of pedophiles! There is no “community” of gays to reach out to!!!

There is just a group of people enslaved to and ravaged by a horrible sin.


31 posted on 07/12/2012 9:01:01 AM PDT by PetroniusMaximus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: cleghornboy

You “reach out to the gay community” the same way you reach out to all sinners - by preaching Christ and him crucified. If someone is of the elect they will be regenerated in God’s time and circumstance after hearing the Gospel. If they are not elect then no amount of “reaching out” will ever convert them.


32 posted on 07/12/2012 9:01:46 AM PDT by circlecity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

While I agree with what you’re saying, I would still worry about going down the same road that I see Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams traveling.

First homosexual Priests are OK as long as they’re celibate.

Then it’s OK if a homosexual Priest chooses to live with another man because, you know, they aren’t necessarily having sex.

I think we all know what the next step will be.


33 posted on 07/12/2012 9:06:18 AM PDT by JoeDetweiler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: KittenClaws
This verse speaks to repentant sinners, those who wish to learn and live the righteous way.

Unless I am mistaken Jesus was speaking to his disciples and answering a question raised by the Pharisees.

16 When the scribes of the Pharisees saw that He was eating with the sinners and tax collectors, they said to His disciples, “Why is He eating and drinking with tax collectors and sinners?” 17 And hearing this, Jesus said to them, “It is not those who are healthy who need a physician, but those who are sick; I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners.” Mark 2:16-17

I am not diminishing the importance of confession and repentance. I am merely trying to point out that as long as Christians find insulting homosexuals to be some kind of sport, there will not be much much opportunity to share the Gospel with them. (For the record, the unclear reference in the previous sentence is intentional.)

34 posted on 07/12/2012 9:08:16 AM PDT by newheart (At what point does policy become treason?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: cleghornboy

My pastor had a brief aside in his sermon this last week regarding homosexuals. He said he is often asked if being homosexual is natural. He said there are a lot of things that are natural, that are not good. You could be born with a genetic problem, or acquire a disease like cancer, and maybe even be born homosexual ... but none of that matters. With Christ you can become a NEW creation, and be born again. The arguement is not whether one is born homosexual, it is whether they choose to put aside the old and live a life ordained by God, which would mean ceasing all homosexual activity.


35 posted on 07/12/2012 9:11:29 AM PDT by RainMan (Jesus, please return soon.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
"What planet are you from?"

I think you directed this to the wrong person. I agreed with your conclusion, but not, perhaps, for the same reason.

36 posted on 07/12/2012 9:17:23 AM PDT by circlecity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: circlecity

Sorry. It gets confusing when multiple recipients are posted to.


37 posted on 07/12/2012 9:18:39 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum (Government is the religion of the sociopath.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: PetroniusMaximus
“reaching out the the gay community” validates the “gay community”

So your criticism of Scalia is simply a matter of semantics? But you have no problem with actually reaching out to the, uh, how should we put it, the group of people who self-identify with the totally specious name "gay community"?

I don't completely disagree with you. We reach out to individuals, not so much groups, but those individuals see themselves as part of a group and if we deny that before establishing any kind of relationship, we put up a pretty big wall.

38 posted on 07/12/2012 9:18:59 AM PDT by newheart (At what point does policy become treason?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: cleghornboy

The Catholic Church isn’t a politician running for President; it has no mandate to “reach out” to special interest groups. In current terms, “reaching out” merely means adopting the beliefs and mores of the special interest group whose support is being sought, for purely political gain.

The Church’s tenets are immutable and have no need of being massaged to give the Church broader appeal. People - all people - are welcome to join the Catholic Church and embrace its beliefs and teachings, but on the Church’s terms, not their own. The gay mafia finds this intolerable, an organization that actually has clearly articulated standards, ones that don’t bend with the winds of personal desire. Right and wrong are clearly delineated, and personal - or sexual - convenience are not taken into account.

Time for the gays to grow up.


39 posted on 07/12/2012 9:22:10 AM PDT by DPMD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cleghornboy

This woman is just an angry dyke. Who cares what she thinks?


40 posted on 07/12/2012 9:25:41 AM PDT by bmwcyle (Corollary - Electing the same person over and over and expecting a different outcome is insanity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bmwcyle

I hope she is no relation to Antonin.


41 posted on 07/12/2012 9:26:42 AM PDT by dfwgator (FUJR (not you, Jim))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Wings-n-Wind
HEAD'S UP-- THERE NOT A "GAY GENE"!

While agree with you, you cannot use facts or reason when arguing with some people.

When people argue that it's genetics, I ask them one question: Then explain vegans to me?

It is so out of left field that it derails their talking points, and they usually ask me to clarify. So I tell them.

Humans are genetically omnivores. We are predisposed to eat meat and vegetables, yet some folks make the conscious decision to override their genetics and forsake all meats and animal products.

If genetics are so powerful that they take away a persons choice not to be a homosexual, then why are genetics not powerful enough to take away a persons choice to not eat meat.

42 posted on 07/12/2012 9:32:00 AM PDT by Sergio (An object at rest cannot be stopped! - The Evil Midnight Bomber What Bombs at Midnight)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: cleghornboy
Church: Elizabeth Scalia is wrong about homosexuality being compatible with priesthood

Just google 'sex abuse scandal in Boston'; 'John Jay report on sex abuse scandal'; or simply John Geoghan. Nuff said.

43 posted on 07/12/2012 9:35:57 AM PDT by Servant of the Cross (the Truth will set you free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cleghornboy

I did not even get into the(Excerpt) if in fact the gays were gay because they had never heard the Gospel, what would you do? lie to them and tell them it was alright?

In fact the whole thing is a big lie, the gay people do know about the gospel and they hate it, for what reason i don,t know, but the gospel is not about gay people it is about the truth.

A lot of people in the past never heard the Gospel until they were in their 30s and acquired a television set but they were not gay.

It is so easy to see that it is not misled people who are joining the gay movement but an organized move by satan and his creeps who do know the concepts of the gospel and hate its author

If you want to destroy something it is much easier if you can become part of it rather than to fight against it from the out side ( the Trojan horse ) Socialism, satanism, the gay movement is all together.

And it is so plain that God is going to allow the organized Churches to be destroyed which is taking place at this time and people will have to depend on the word of God.

You will not get the word of God from a gay church.

We will no longer be able to say to this mountain, fall on us and hide us from the face of God , we will have to show our faith to god personally.


rev 6
14
And the heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled together; and every mountain and island were moved out of their places.

15
And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains;

16
And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb:

17
For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?


I think we can see if we look verse 14 that literal rocks and mountains most likely are not the meaning, verse 14 shows that to be a very dangerous place to hide.

But hiding in a big organized Church would seem a pretty safe haven would,nt it?

The churches for many years have preached the gospel in which they were not willing to do freely as Jesus said but have gotten many millions of tithe payers in, people who may have believed just enough not to want to take any chances.

Therefore the people are safe because they are paying their tithes and their leaders or at least many of them and some of the Churches are getting filthy rich.

They are living off of the Gospel, not of the gospel.


rev 18
4
And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.

5
For her sins have reached unto heaven, and God hath remembered her iniquities.


We need to realize here that at least for the most part God is talking to his people, the people who believe his Gospel.

So what would he be telling us to come out of? what else besides a religion that made us feel comfortable would we have to be told to come out of?

Organized religion is now paying the price for their love of money rather than love of God.


44 posted on 07/12/2012 9:42:29 AM PDT by ravenwolf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cleghornboy

She must be a complete idiot. In just about every case of abuse, it is some old homosexual taking advantage of young boys. It is like saying there is no tie between smoking and lung cancer. She’s a fool!


45 posted on 07/12/2012 9:49:45 AM PDT by maxwellsmart_agent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cleghornboy

Neither the LaSallette blog nor the Scalia blog has its facts straight. Why not go directly to primary source, The Vatican:

“Instruction Concerning the Criteria for the Discernment of Vocations with regard to Persons with Homosexual Tendencies
in view of their Admission to the Seminary and to Holy Oders”

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccatheduc/documents/rc_con_ccatheduc_doc_20051104_istruzione_en.html


46 posted on 07/12/2012 9:56:25 AM PDT by Ge0ffrey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cleghornboy

The writer includes the qualifier, “celibate” which changes the premise completely. No rejects celibate homosexuals, not even the Catholic church.

Hate the sin, love the sinner!


47 posted on 07/12/2012 9:59:57 AM PDT by Eva
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: newheart

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


Jesus was talking about the sin of unbelief. even some of the most moral people do not believe.

Many of the religious leaders were preaching a God that was nothing more to them than a tradition.


48 posted on 07/12/2012 10:01:37 AM PDT by ravenwolf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: newheart
So, as long as we continue to call them names and tell them to go to Hell, we are increasing the chances that they will become receptive?
But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us. Romans 5:8

I think you are repeating the gay mantra that churches single homosexuals out for some sort of special condemnation. This is not the case. Your quote from Romans says: "While we were still sinners"; and Paul also says "there is none righteous"; "all have sinned", etc. You know as well as I do (well, you should know) that homosexuals demand to be accepted by the church as non-sinners. For a homosexual to "feel" accepted, the church must accept their homosexuality as a non-sin. So, in the mind of the homosexual, those quotes of Paul's are for somebody else.

Once homosexuals gain "acceptance", gay marriage and openly gay clergy are soon to follow. AFAIK, homosexuals are the only sinners who do not regard their sinful lifestyle as sinful. I really do not care whether they feel accepted or not, and I do not think they should be singled out for any sort of outreach. The rest of us sinners can go to church and rejoice that "while we were still sinners, Christ died for us". The homosexual who considers himself to be not a sinner, need not attend.

49 posted on 07/12/2012 10:01:41 AM PDT by Sans-Culotte ( Pray for Obama- Psalm 109:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: newheart
Unless I am mistaken Jesus was speaking to his disciples and answering a question raised by the Pharisees.

16 When the scribes of the Pharisees saw that He was eating with the sinners and tax collectors, they said to His disciples, “Why is He eating and drinking with tax collectors and sinners?” 17 And hearing this, Jesus said to them, “It is not those who are healthy who need a physician, but those who are sick; I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners.” Mark 2:16-17

I am not diminishing the importance of confession and repentance. I am merely trying to point out that as long as Christians find insulting homosexuals to be some kind of sport, there will not be much much opportunity to share the Gospel with them. (For the record, the unclear reference in the previous sentence is intentional.)

____________________________

My interpretation is still correct, it is a matter of semantics: Jesus is saying he is calling sinners to righteousness.

Jesus was not eating and drinking with them to condone gluttony and drunkenness, He was Savior among them, not of them.

IMO, homosexuals seem to believe that a Christian condemning a sin is an insult. While not thinking their in your face, unrepentant, "accept me no matter what G-d says" attitude is not.

50 posted on 07/12/2012 10:37:59 AM PDT by KittenClaws (A closed mouth gathers no foot.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-65 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson