ADDED: The linked article above goes to Rod Dreher's analysis in The American Conservative. And here's Andrew Sullivan's take: "Yes, This Is A Pastoral Revolution."
I never thought I would live to read these words in a Vatican document. Gone are the cruel and wounding words of Benedict XVI to stigmatize us; instead we have the authentic witness of someone following Christ who came to minister to the broken and the hurt, and the strong, the people who had long been excluded from the feast – but now invited to join it as brothers and sisters – “a fraternal space” in the church. Notice too that the church is now emphasizing a pastoral “accepting and valuing” of homosexual orientation, yes, “valuing” the divine gift of our nature and our loves. Yes, the doctrine does not change. The sacrament of matrimony is intrinsically heterosexual – a position, by the way, I have long held as well...
Instead of defining us as living in sexual sin, the church is suddenly seeing all aspects of our relationships – the care for one another, the sacrifices of daily life, the mutual responsibilities for children, the love of our families, the dignity of our work, and all that makes up a commitment to one another. We are actually being seen as fully human, instead of uniquely crippled humans directed always and everywhere toward sin. And, yes, there is concern for our children as well – and their need for care and love and support.
पोस्ट्स
७१ टिप्पण्या:
A schism will take care of it.
Some disagreement over matters of doctrine leads to two sects, and they go their own ways.
No more same sect marriage.
I have prepared by eating some bug eggs, and possibly larvae, in a box of crackers that I found in the cupboard.
This preparation was not deliberate, but I feel prepared.
It's beginning.
It's not an earthquake. It's a simple reminder.
If they let priests marry, they'll have gay marriage.
The catholic ministry is Jesus's drama club.
Catholic legalism is being threatened by old fashioned Christianity. I blame Paul. He couldn't keep his mouth shut. And after 1,000 years of suppression, Gutenberg empowered Tyndale and those words of Paul are causing trouble again.
They are just restating the same thing.
There is no earth quake.
Direct link...
http://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/en/bollettino/pubblico/2014/10/13/0751/03037.html
"Many children are born outside marriage, especially in certain countries, and there are many who subsequently grow up with just one of their parents or in an enlarged or reconstituted family context. The number of divorces is growing and it is not rare to encounter cases in which decisions are taken solely on the basis of economic factors. The condition of women still needs to be defended and promoted, as situations of violence within the family are not rare. Children are frequently the object of contention between parents, and are the true victims of family breakdown. Societies riven by violence due to war, terrorism or the presence of organized crime experience deteriorating family situations. Furthermore, migration is another sign of the times, to be faced and understood in terms of the burden of consequences for family life.
The relevance of emotional life
9. Faced with the social framework outlined above, a greater need is encountered among individuals to take care of themselves, to know their inner being, and to live in greater harmony with their emotions and sentiments, seeking a relational quality in emotional life. In the same way, it is possible to encounter a widespread desire for family accompanied by the search for oneself. But how can this attention to the care for oneself be cultivated and maintained, alongside this desire for family? This is a great challenge for the Church too. The danger of individualism and the risk of living selfishly are significant."
More of a shaking.
Commenter Irving says of the "arch-heretics": "They won’t succeed immediately, of course, but they will be persistent, and eventually they will get what they want. These “reformers” know very well that all they have to do is wait, and they will get what they want. Only a matter of time."
I agree.
Theses tactics are the norm today for a variety of causes.
In this case and and all those of conscience, God prevails. He is the earthquake in the quiet of every individual's life, often in the quiet pre-dawn hours.
Francis can do what he wants. He too is the clay.
"Earthquake" isn't my word.
Saying it's not an earthquake and this is where the earth basically already was could be regarded as the answer to the question "How are you prepping…?"
That is the mental adjustment, coming to see that what seems new is really what was old.
I see that phenomenon in legal cases all the time. Something new presented as if it had always been there. Just look at it more accurately and understand it more subtly, etc.
Umm no.
A few years ago a Massachusetts Catholic Church proclaimed that two men are to be friends, not spouses and the parish was a target of promoting bigotry by local gay activists.
This document restates that two men are friends, not spouses and the HRC goes bananas in the change 'of tone'.
The working document also reaffirms that contraception is contrary to Church teachings.
The Roman Catholic Church, slowly and inexorably being absorbed into The Vagina as Fascist State: Thee of Little Faith.
" That is the mental adjustment, coming to see that what seems new is really what was old.
I see that phenomenon in legal cases all the time. Something new presented as if it had always been there. Just look at it more accurately and understand it more subtly, etc.
10/14/14, 10:26 AM "
Pretty apt description of the legal decisions with respects to gay marriage.
That is the mental adjustment, coming to see that what seems new is really what was old.
But some of us already saw the old thing in the way it's now being articulated, so we see no emergent phenomenon.
We do see that there are many people, many outside the Church but some within as well, who would like it to be an earthquake and will try to instigate the tremors.
Totally freaking out!!!
"In the West as well there is an increasingly large number of those who, having lived together for a long period of time, ask to be married in the Church. Simple cohabitation is often a choice inspired by a general attitude, which is opposed to institutions and definitive undertakings, but also while waiting for a secure existence (a steady job and income). In other countries common-law marriages are very numerous, not because of a rejection of Christian values as regards the family and matrimony, but, above all, because getting married is a luxury, so that material poverty encourages people to live in common-law marriages. Furthermore in such unions it is possible to grasp authentic family values or at least the wish for them. Pastoral accompaniment should always start from these positive aspects."
Oh yeah, they know what is going on in my parish. This is so stressed by our pastor, it's a Sacrament and you don't need a 20k wedding to be married in the Church.
Marriage is a foundation, not a capstone.
"The sacrament of matrimony is intrinsically heterosexual – a position, by the way, I have long held as well..."
LOL well that's great Andrew. A little bit like Marx saying "I really was a fan of private ownership of capital all along." Whether it's TRUE or not no one can say -- who knows what's in that dumb little head. But he is, as Orwell said in another context, objectively on the other side.
The sex scandal involving Catholic priests was the beginning of the end. This Pope is obfuscating moral clarity-- something that my Episcopalian father most admired when he was introduced to the practice of the Catholic religion when he married a Roman Catholic and raised five Catholic children.
We might as well be Episcopalians now.
This only seems new to people who bought into a caricature of what the Catholic Church was teaching. It's one media narrative overtaking another.
It basically comes down to repeating old doctrine, which has often been obscured by bad pastoral care. People with a homosexual temptation are not essentially defined by it any more than people with other proclivities to sin. The Church is trying to find a way to recognize the positive aspects of individuals with a homosexual orientation, instead of the blanket disapproval that has sometimes occurred. Two men in a homosexual relationship are only sinning when they commit homosexual sexual acts. It is no sin to live with someone of the same gender fraternally, to care for someone in their illness, to raise children together. It should be possible to recognize all these good things in someone's life, while maintaining that marriage between two men or two women is an impossibility, and that homosexual sex is sin.
This is a report of the Synod of the Media and not the Bishops. There is a lot of push back on this.
http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2014/10/magister-pitched-battle-on-mad-monday.html
Key Graph: "What appears clear from the sarcastic dismissal of rapporteur Erdo himself, the strong word used by Magister ("precaricante", that is, a malicious abuse of one's position), and the immediate furious response from the Synod Fathers (15 just during the morning and just on this matter, according to several reports, including many from the most vibrant region in the Church, Africa), is that Abp. Bruno Forte, known as an extreme liberal in theological matters, abused his position and the trust of Cardinal Erdo and included something that had not really been discussed in that way at the Synod but that was his own pet personal view on homosexuality and homosexual couples, and made it look as if it had been a Synodal view. That is why Erdo was so adamant to make clear that he, Erdo, was not responsible for this outrage, and why the response from the Synod Fathers was furious and explosive. Forte acted like a Bugnini for "Gayness", making things up to achieve his own end."
Steven, You know what rorate caiei is?
Reactionary Catholics who get their catechism from the media.
AND ALREADY, THE MEDIA FREAKOUT FROM MONDAY IS BEING WALKED BACK BY OTHER BISHOPS AT SYNOD:
http://ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/bishops-critique-synod-document-saying-it-may-cause-confusion
Of course the media pressure will be relentless. Praise and favorable coddling for any bishop who shows "progress," and critical attacks for any who adhere to traditional teaching. Same as with Supreme Court Justices.
This is a big deal in part. Though not one that will make either entrenched side happy.
The current discussions are framed around sexuality as identity. So, everything must be packaged together. If you are who you do, then sin is deeply ingrained, entirely corrupt. Which is closer to the Reformed view.
However, if sexuality is behavior, then behaviors can be assessed separately in light of qualities. Sin is a distortion but not an independent reality. It takes what is good and disorients it, leaving much that is still commendable. So, we can affirm life and love and friendship and community.
By implementing a ontological view of sin onto people, the Church (in all its various parts) led society to the crisis where people who were identified as gay in being, threw off the negative judgment and defined gay as being in positive terms. But good theology never limits our being to one element, especially our sexual behavior.
Which the statement can be read as accepting in part (and not the fundamental change to actual pastoral response as Freeman notes), but pushing back against a fundamental assumption that pretty much drives this whole present debate on both sides.
Sexuality is behavior not identity. Even though it's very, very deeply ingrained behavior, we're still fundamentally more than our sexuality.
Two men in a homosexual relationship are only sinning when they commit homosexual sexual acts.
Thats not my understanding of Christianity. If I commit adultery, its a sin. If I relive the experience fondly through memory, thats another sin. If I dream and lust over my next hookup with my mistress, thats yet another sin.
The religious & secular media will play this for all it's worth, because, short of the installation of a new pope, this story is click-bait (Is there a Latin phrase for "click-bait"?).
For me, this story doesn't pass the smell test. Synods move at glacial pace in order to avoid releasing "brain-storming" sessions that either do or give the appearance of running contrary to previous Church teaching. I think what we've got here is a preliminary "working paper" from the liberal wing that got released, accidentally on purpose, as a synodal document.
Well, it isn't. Expect major, major, pushback against this document, especially from the African bishops. Aspects of this document will make the final cut, but which ones & how they will be nuanced is anyone's guess. The synod ain't over until the fat castrato sings, so wait until then & see what comes of it.
@Fen yes of course you are right, but those are all tied back to the original sin of adultery. It is a sin to commit homosexual sex, to lust after persons of the same gender, or to relish and relive the sin memory are also sins. But experiencing homosexual temptation is not in itself a sin.
Moral absolutes need no pastoral accommodation for society's changing social mores.
The pace and the scope of the decline of western civilization concerns me more than individual manifestations of its decline.
It is these rules, these individual 'bricks' in the foundation of our institutions that make up the "thin veneer" of civilization. Remove one too many and the entire edifice collapses.
What took millennia to construct falls at light speed, not to be replaced by a vacumn, but by brute force, tyranny, destruction and widespread unfairness.
Remorse then will be the only thing in abundance.
The Catholic Church will fully embrace loving, committed, married homosexual relationships…
1. Within 10 years.
2. Within 30 years.
3. Within 200 years.
4. Never!!!!
Sexuality is behavior not identity. Even though it's very, very deeply ingrained behavior, we're still fundamentally more than our sexuality.
Exactly.
4. Never.
Not out of hate, but 'matrimony' is Latin for act of a mother. Why would we call two men that?
We could probably give same-sex relationships their own proper name, though.
Amazing how everything gay dominates the media. This issue was front page on the local librul fishwrap which gets absolutely ecstatic when Catholics might ignore the rules of the Church. Otherwise, they despise organized religion.
Imagine the Cadaver Synod of 898 with today's social media?
Althouse:
5. When the current generation of folks raised to give a shit about religion like Renee and Andrew die out, and the next generation raised to despise religion replace them, no one anywhere in the West will care.
6. No one anywhere in the West cares now; Andrew only bleats about Catholicism for the same reason the Brits bleat about their Queen -- a vestigial interest in pretty rituals.
7. When Islamic law is enforced in the West, we'll all have a good quiet laugh to ourselves about how people like Andrew and Renee used to have a voice in the matter.
#1 Within 10 yrs
As a straight RC, I think these changes are about time. The disenfranchisement of divorced couples was never good either.
Thanks Dave for a more honest assessment.
4.
This is a reminder of the first part of "Love the sinner, hate the sin."
From an African point of view...
"We say, "No we have come of age." Most countries in Africa are independent for 50, 60, 100 years. We should be allowed to think for ourselves. We should be able to define: What is marriage? What makes the family? When does life begin? We should have answers to those [questions].
We are wooed by economic things. We are told, "If you limit your population, we're going to give you so much." And we tell them, "Who tells you that our population is overgrown?" In the first place, children die -- infant mortality -- we die in inter-tribal wars, and diseases of all kinds. And yet, you come with money to say, "Decrease your population; we will give you economic help."
Now you come to tell us about reproductive rights, and you give us condoms and artificial contraceptives. Those are not the things we want. We want food, we want education, we want good roads, regular light, and so on. Good health care."
Africans are not as easily fooled as American women.
http://ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/synod-africa-archbishop-frankly-criticizes-western-attitudes
Renee -- a less charitable read of that is "we want these material goods without strings attached, and our own societies do not provide them."
Is there someone somewhere who denies that these nations are sovereign and can have whatever social policies they like? Not even the person quoted claims anyone denies that. She makes the situation explicit: they are being offered stuff in exchange for certain policies. They want the stuff without the policies.
That's precious.
@Renee,
Imagine the Cadaver Synod of 898 with today's social media?
Hey, but at least the Cadaver Synod led to the invention of air freshener!
Identifying sin has some value. That leads some to a Savior who gives His blood to make those IDed sinners into saints by faith in His resurrection.
We will always have most of men bowing down before the Hierarchies that their money from offering semi-indulgences for a long list of old, new, and newer sins. It has no value except for social reputation.
@Dave
That's what charity should be, to give without strings attached.
What the west offers is not charity.
@Renee -- indeed. That's not Catholic charity. Neither are Catholic charities the ones offering these strings.
Some of us who can read believe that charity is corrosive. There seems to be clear evidence of that in your quotation: offered something in exchange for something, the person in question demands it for absolutely free.
Were we supposed to admire that kind of attitude? Personally, I'd admire an attitude of, "screw your birth control; we will grow our population and use it to build roads, plumbing, and good health care." The attitude of "screw your birth control; now give us things" is not admirable except to a certain kind of mindset that sees dependency as a divinely blessed state.
If the virtue of charity is giving things without strings, what do we call the behavior of demanding material things? Greed?
What do we call the behavior of criticizing someone else for not giving you what's theirs? Envy?
Oh I'm sorry, are we not supposed to think these things about African nations because the poor are blessed?
My point is that the west isnt offering charity, but 'wooing' African countries.
When I give to charity, I know it is charity. It is done out of free will, not taxation/fines.
Africans didn't demand anything, just calling the West on it's trap.
They have the Church to help build schools and infrastructure.
I love the way so many people preface homosexual relationships with "loving, committed". And now "married" is legitimate thanks to the courts.
Do they actually believe there are those relationships that are not?
"Loving, committed" makes it all right. Try it on Jihad.
Africa is becoming a fount of Christianity, real Christianity, with all the supernatural essence.
The West should pay attention.
http://www.christianity.com/church/church-history/timeline/2001-now/the-explosion-of-christianity-in-africa-11630859.html
If the Church is supposed to be in favor of "loving, committed" homosexual relationships, does that mean it's still okay for it to be all mean & pissy towards "non-committed" relationships? Does that mean that gay guys have to be in a strictly monogamous relationship before their relationships are "committed"?
If so, I'm sure that'll go over like a lead balloon with gay men. If not, can I, as a straight man in a "loving, committed" relationship, please get some synodal dispensation to get some pussy on the side? And, could the bishop please come by the house & explain said dispensation to my Jewish wife, preferably in full body armor? Thanks!
I know a trial balloon when I see it.
Religion collides with reality, but without the ability to completely control the message.
One course is a retrenchment, though it would cost a lot of members and likely create a schism as would liberalizing.
Isn't this the life cycle of religion?
#4 It'll never happen.
They are just restating the same thing.
Very true. The temper tantrums begin after they find that the loving space in the sanctuary has a God who says "I love you, and I bless you, and I forgive your sins if you repent of them."
Any moves that churches make to be more loving, more kind, more caring and compassionate, more forgiving, more inclusive, more helpful, more beautiful in their ideas and philosophy, more of service to individuals and humanity are good moves, imo.
Renee: Africans are not as easily fooled as American women.
American women are often easily fooled by Africans.
If anything the working paper upholds the writings of Pope Leo XIII, who warned us on family breakdown.
The West ignored it, and now the Synod is trying to deal with a mess.
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_10021880_arcanum_en.html
Pope Francis Awaiting Final Approval Of Internet Troll Before Promulgating Encyclical
4.Never.
Does anyone know how many times Francis voted "present" when he was a cardinal?
This is exactly like what happened before Humanae Vitae was issued, over 40 years ago. The dissenters and liberals around the world went nuts -- "The Church will say contraception is OK!! She's listening to reason! She finally will admit what *we all* know to be true!!"
And then? Humane Vitae was published and the Church said artificial contraception is wrong, was always wrong, is still wrong, and will always be wrong. The Pope also predicted the negative consequences to women (who, he said, will be used as objects), and to marriage and the family. Check, and double check.
So just relax, everybody. The Church is not going to say, ever, that homosexual behavior is OK.
The correct answer is: #4.
An institution with an unjaundiced, two-thousand-year eye on human evolution ain't gonna be stampeded into anything by the latest postmodern preening and posturing. It's already discounted all that ephemeral nonsense in its understanding of human nature. Thank God there's at least one powerful international organization still grounded in something more fundamental to human spiritual health than the latest breathless proclamations of victimhood vamped up on Twitter.
I apologize for repeating what at least a couple of the Catholic commenters here have probably already mentioned, but I don't have time to read all the comments.
Benedict's position on this was no different than Francis'. None of this is new. The only new thing about it is the amount of emphasis it's being given and, especially, the amount of attention it's getting in the press. I mean, it's nice that we finally have a good guy Pope according to the media, I guess, but he's not saying anything new or different, and Sullivan's either a dimwit or a liar to suggest otherwise.
@John Lynch
It was a trial balloon.
A list of the Church's concerns in a document, and see how people will react/interpret those concerns.
...it's nice that we finally have a good guy Pope according to the media, I guess, but he's not saying anything new or different, and Sullivan's either a dimwit or a liar to suggest otherwise.
Exactly. I learned a long time ago not to trust Andrew Sullivan regarding Catholic matters. I still can't figure out why he just doesn't become Anglican.
4. Never.
The fluttering of leaves in a breeze is not a sign of an earthquake, however much people who hate the tree may wish it to be.
Look, St. Thomas Aquinas, in the Summa Theologica itself, wrote in favor of the civil authorities allowing legal prostitution, for all sorts of reasons. Did that presage the Catholic Church declaring prostitution normal and morally acceptable as a career, and visiting prostitutes normal and morally acceptable act? And yet the Church has never renounced St. Thomas Aquinas, either.
Let us be serious. The Catholic Church is not a rootless Protestant sect, which must either adhere inflexibly to nuance-free absolutism or dissolve into relativist mush. It is the oldest continuous institution in the world and one of the largest, with more man-years of accumulated thought and debate on moral law than any other. This is no earthquake; this is not even a strong wind.
I see the synod as a last attack on the Church by those who worship the "Spirit of Vatican II".
Of course, Pope Francis being one those makes the thing tricky.
If you would make a count of practicing Catholics, or the number of priest ordinated in the dioceses you would notice that the "liberal" members of the synod (like my very own Cardinal piece of **** Danneels) essentially represent only themselves.
My prediction, no changes in doctrine but a lot of waffle so the liberals can keep on undermining the church in peace (like on abortion, of course we are against it but, wink wink, nudge nudge, there are more IMPORTANT things).
I'm holding my fingers crossed.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा