Posted on 08/03/2018 9:55:47 PM PDT by unlearner
LEXINGTON, Kentucky, Pro-homosexual dissident 'Catholic' groups see in Pope Francis' ‘changing’ of the Church’s teaching on the death penalty the hope that the Church will one day also change its teaching against homosexuality.
New Ways Ministry called the change in the Catechism proof that "Church teaching can change."
"It's important for Catholic advocates for LGBT equality to take note of this change because for decades Catholic opponents of LGBT equality argued that it is impossible to change church teaching. They often pointed to the fact that condemnations of same-sex relationships were inscribed in the Catechism, and so were not open for discussion or change. Yet, the teaching on the death penalty is in the Catechism, too, and, in fact, to make this change in teaching, it was the text of the Catechism that Francis changed," the group stated on its website.
New Ways Ministry, which works to "promote the acceptance of LGBT people," said that Pope Francis' move will help advance "LGBT equality" in a number of ways.
"First, we now have a clear, explicit contemporary example of church teaching changing, and also a look into how it can be done: with a papal change to the Catechism," it stated.
"Second, we can see that the process that brought about this change has been decades of theological debate and discussion, and not just a papal whim. That means the theological and even ecclesial discussions and debates right now about LGBT people have great potential to shape future changes in church teaching in regard to those topics," it added.
The pro-gay group was not the only one to see the significance of Pope Francis' rewrite of the Catechism.
In a post that appeared yesterday on Twitter, Lexington-based “Fortunate Families” wrote:
The church cannot change its teaching. That is what so many others say about other topics, for example regarding LGBTQ persons. But doctrine develops. Today’s news is a sterling example.
"The idea first floated by [the] Pope on Catechism’s 25th anniversary last fall to signify development of doctrine,” the tweet continued, “rescript issued today sees Francis issue edit of the 1994 official text, now deeming capital punishment ‘inadmissible’-- the new formulation.”
“Development of doctrine”, legitimately used to describe how the Catholic Church refines and expands, but never undermines or rejects, what was taught earlier, has now been interpreted by some to mean the erasure of settled Church teaching.
Critics say Pope Francis attempted to do that yesterday when he promulgated a new teaching concerning the death penalty in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, saying that it was “inadmissible.” The perennial teaching of the Church, based on Scripture and unanimously accepted by the Church Fathers and every pope until Francis, is that legitimate civil authority may impose the death penalty on a malefactor. Although both Saint John Paul II and Benedict XVI were strongly opposed to capital punishment--and John Paul’s Catechism strongly circumscribed it--neither pope denied this principle.
Pope Francis’ innovation has already become a club for American liberals to beat conservatives with. Jane Fleming Kleeb, Chair of the Democratic Party in Nebraska, has tweeted “Let's be clear Nebraskans, @GovRicketts is going against the teachings of the church. We can change leaders by voting different on Nov. 6--Democrats are against the death penalty.”
Fortunate Families, founded in 1992 by Mary Ellen and Casey Lopata, the Catholic parents of a same-sex attracted man, is a group of Catholic religious and laypeople who dissent on authentic Church teaching regarding sexuality and marriage. From 2010 until this July Fortunate Families was part of a coalition with Call to Action, the banned Dignity, and the censured New Ways ministry.
Astonishingly, since November 2017 Bishop John Stowe, OFM of Lexington has served as the dissident group’s “ecclesial advisor”. Stowe is one of the five bishops who have endorsed Fr. James Martin’s pro-LGBT book Building a Bridge. The bishop was appointed to the Lexington diocese by Pope Francis in 2015.
Fortunate Families was last in the news when a Lexington Catholic church stretched an LGBT flag across its front lawn. The first executive director of the group, Stan “JR” Zerkowski, is a parishioner at St. Paul’s parish, and told media that he hoped the banner got wide publicity.
“This is a church that is open to all people and I hope this sign gets that across,” he said in the TV report. “I don’t think a Catholic Church has ever had a sign like this before in front of it during Pride Week or any other time. However, in other parts of the country we see this regularly.”
The banner read “LBGTQ+ Catholic /Family, Friends & Allies/all are welcome”, insinuating that at other Catholic churches Catholics who experience same-sex desires or suffer from gender dysphoria are barred from the worship of God.
Former homosexual Joseph Sciambra retweeted the group’s Twitter message, saying “Bishop Stowe’s ‘Fortunate Families’ believe that the [Catechism of the Catholic Church] will also ‘change’ in terms of homosexuality. FF operatives are embedded within several dioceses around the US.”
Sciambra, a survivor of the San Francisco 1990s “gay scene”, is dedicated to helping people with same-sex attractions avoid being trapped in what he says is a dangerous way of life.
I would like to know what the official (or unofficial) position of Catholics is with regard to changing established Church doctrine.
From all of the Protestant / Catholic debates I've seen here, it seems that it is a given that Catholics consider the continuity of unchanging doctrine since the founding of the Church to be a major argument for Catholicism versus Protestantism and the Reformation.
But lately there is a lot of discussion over false doctrine being introduced in the Catholic Church at the highest levels.
Do Catholics consider this even possible?
Do Catholics consider this to be a legitimate cause for a "Reformation"?
What do Catholics see as the remedy to false doctrine being embraced at this level?
I'm not trying to start a debate over Catholic versus Protestant. I think we all agree on the Church's teaching and the Biblical record with regard to abortion and homosexuality, in general. I'm trying to wrap my head around the idea of the Pope changing basic Church doctrine from a Catholic perspective.
Sorry again for disrupting your original posting. Thanks for directing me to the FR policies on this.
If you would like to add anything to this discussion please feel free.
Please consider it an opportunity to clarify what may be some misconceptions on the part of Protestants, such as myself.
Perhaps he will announce that he has "evolved."
How about if we combine the two and bring back the death penalty for homosexuality?
Sure. Jesus is whoever that Jesuit Communist says he is, right?
Isn’t it so that doctrine can change, but dogma cannot? And the catechism is an abbreviated guide, not the source of all truth. Doctrine may evolve over gradual long periods as man gains insight and wisdom thru time. Dogma is from God, his teaching not ours, such as definition of marriage (which rules out homo marriage, an actual conflict with the teachings in old and new testaments). Dogma will also be compatible with natural law, again no human may define that, it exists!
p.s.
Contrary to what many believe, the Christian faith is not a long list of rules for the pope to toy with. The 7 sacraments were created by God and are one of the main functions of the Church. They bring grace to humanity. Communion, Penance, Marriage, Baptusm, not ours to modify. The death penalty is a man made penal action for justice and protection of society, no comparison to REVEALED TRUTH.
Proverbs 30:5-6
Do not add to His words Or He will reprove you, and you will be proved a liar. Every word of God is tested; He is a shield to those who take refuge in Him.
Sorry to add, but I see why some people might be confused. It’s the slipshod way this pope has, making everything a “mess” or conundrum. This change should have come out in a nice explanatory motu proprio or a document from Ladaria (CDF) with details of the reasoning behind the change. Also, capital punishment is not a doctrine... the doctrines involved would be related to justice, power of state, social security, etc.
“How about if we combine the two and bring back the death penalty for homosexuality?”
There was a very brief period in this country in which homosexual acts were capital crimes.
Both the Old and New Testaments affirm that this merits death. However, there are many other things that do as well. And probably most of us would be guilty of at least one of them, under God’s moral code.
And that’s not to mention that the “wages of sin is death” (Rom. 6:23), which is even broader.
But I think the severity of the consequences of tolerating homosexuality as normative behavior in society is incalculable. God already demonstrated with Sodom how He will deal with this. And His judgment of fire in that case is merely foreshadowing what is going to come upon the whole world.
“How about if we combine the two and bring back the death penalty for homosexuality?”
There was a very brief period in this country in which homosexual acts were capital crimes.
Both the Old and New Testaments affirm that this merits death. However, there are many other things that do as well. And probably most of us would be guilty of at least one of them, under God’s moral code.
And that’s not to mention that the “wages of sin is death” (Rom. 6:23), which is even broader.
But I think the severity of the consequences of tolerating homosexuality as normative behavior in society is incalculable. God already demonstrated with Sodom how He will deal with this. And His judgment of fire in that case is merely foreshadowing what is going to come upon the whole world.
“Jesus is whoever that Jesuit Communist says he is, right?”
Jesus Himself, as well as the apostles, warned us of people who would come in Jesus’ name but promote a false Christ.
I posted this article though because I’m trying to understand how Catholics view obvious apostasy and how they reconcile this with their system of belief.
I’m not very familiar with the terminology used in Catholic teaching. I know that it tends to be very precise.
So, apparently, there have always been areas which are not necessarily “articles of faith” that are essential to not being labeled a heretic. But I am wondering how faithful Catholics view a Pope who is also a heretic, assuming that this is a possibility from the perspective of Catholics.
I’m not very familiar with the terminology used in Catholic teaching. I know that it tends to be very precise.
So, apparently, there have always been areas which are not necessarily “articles of faith” that are essential to not being labeled a heretic. But I am wondering how faithful Catholics view a Pope who is also a heretic, assuming that this is a possibility from the perspective of Catholics.
“Communion, Penance, Marriage, Baptusm, not ours to modify. The death penalty is a man made penal action for justice and protection of society, no comparison to REVEALED TRUTH.”
Interesting take.
I think that the death penalty is derived from God’s instructions to Noah:
Genesis 9:6
Whoever sheds man’s blood,
By man his blood shall be shed;
For in the image of God
He made man.
However, some debate about whether Christians should support the enforcement of this moral principle when Christ extended mercy to some who, under the Law, were worthy of death.
Personally, I believe that killing is justified in war, when defending yourself or what is under your care, and when capital crimes have been committed (and then only by those who are authorized by the legal code in force to do so). I think that even though the death penalty can often be a tragic outcome, it is generally better than the alternative in which severe crimes increase due to the lack of punishment for such crimes. In other words, capital punishment can be by itself a merciful act.
I am more interested though in trying to understand the Catholic view on the possibility of the Church changing essential doctrine. I have been under the impression that it is considered impossible for this to happen from the Catholic perspective. So I am less concerned about settling the specific debate over the death penalty than how such disputes among professing Christians are resolved.
The ongoing debate between Catholics and Protestants seems to always come down to whether the Bible is the final authority or the “Church” when it comes to settling such issues. The idea that the Pope could possibly change a major doctrine seems to be inconsistent with what I thought was the ultimate point of disagreement. But I may be misunderstanding the Catholic perspective on this—not trying to put words in their mouths.
As a Protestant I consider the Bible to be the final authority for settling matters of doctrine.
What I am having trouble understanding is how Catholics consider the “Church” the final authority (if I understand their arguments correctly) and yet there is the possibility of a Pope changing a doctrine or being a heretic. That does not seem consistent with their doctrine of “apostolic succession”.
It’s been bothering me ever since I’ve seen these types of articles in which traditional Catholics are frustrated by statements by the current Pope. Previously I’ve seen many complaints over phony Catholic leaders who advocate or at least tolerate homosexuality and even abortion. But I’ve never seen anything quite like the situation with the current Pope. I’m just trying to get where they’re coming from.
For me, if I had ever been a Catholic, this would make me question the arguments against the need for a Reformation and the claims of the Church being a higher authority than the Bible. As I’ve said earlier, I don’t mean to put words in the mouths of Catholics. I would prefer to hear their own explanations for how they reconcile what appears contradictory to me.
I do not agree with a lot of Catholic teaching and practices based on my understanding of them as an outsider. However, I do agree with their traditionally conservative opposition to the homosexual agenda and legalized abortion. This is a common ground that allows us to support good candidates for federal office as well as potential judges. We can all support the first amendment without agreeing on what religion we practice. And freedom of the press and speech allow for at least the possibility to persuade others to our point of view (or be persuaded as the case may be).
Catholics (generalizing here, as there is every view and attitude across the board) do not care if the pope is a heretic or apostate. They are passive and non-intellectual. The spirituality is felt, not analyzed. Sure those on blogs like to discuss issues, but the typical Catholic is happy to go to mass, get an amusing homily, and maybe join a club or group. They have no idea what the pope said, and if it’s controversial they figure somehow everything will be ok. this is opposite of protestants who are active and focused. This has developed over centuries. Catholics are medievalists, protestants are dynamic. Clearly with a billion Catholics all this could be wrong in certain people. Both the lack of progress in the church, and the receptive beauty and peace, flow from an overall attitude of acceptance.
From a Catholic perspective, is it even possible for a Pope to be a heretic?
Protestants generally consider a lot of Catholic views and customs (whether called doctrines or some other label) as heretical when measured by the views that the Protestants hold. Of course the Protestant doctrines vary from one Church to another, which is one the main arguments Catholics use to say that there is error in Protestant beliefs because they do not agree together.
I think this is a reasonable point to bring up. But I also think, in order for it to be a valid point, traditional Catholic teachings can not change.
For Protestants, if the preacher of a Church teaches heresies, such as Jesus not being fully God or fully man (for example, calling Him a demigod or merely a prophet but not God) then this would require either removing such a preacher or leaving that particular Church. To me I would not be able to continue being part of such a group.
But for Catholics, other than driving to another Parish, if false doctrine is being promulgated, what is the choice? It’s not like it is considered acceptable to leave and go to a Protestant Church. And if the visible head of the Catholic Church does so, what is the remedy?
To me, having a Pope become heretical would be like a Protestant discovering some irrefutable evidence that some of the books in his Bible were complete forgeries. I can’t quite imagine how that conclusion could be reached, but if it was then it would shatter the foundation of his beliefs.
So, without rehashing the endless Protestant / Catholic debates I am trying to make sense of the Catholic perspective on this subject. I may not agree but I would at least like to understand the logical premise.
“Catholics (generalizing here, as there is every view and attitude across the board) do not care if the pope is a heretic or apostate.”
You generally answered my last post before I posted it. Very interesting perspective.
>> I’m trying to understand how Catholics view obvious apostasy and how they reconcile this with their system of belief.
It’s not clear to me what you’re trying to understand. But I’ll give it a try if you clarify.
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.