Catholic homosexuals

This is a discussion on Catholic homosexuals within the General Discussions forums, part of the Community Boards category; Originally Posted by MK27 From a psychological standpoint, this is pretty interesting, since the Church is in no way shape ...

  1. #121
    and the hat of sweating
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Toronto, ON
    Posts
    3,545
    Quote Originally Posted by MK27 View Post
    From a psychological standpoint, this is pretty interesting, since the Church is in no way shape or form democratic.* It's almost like the message is that they want an authoritarian ruler (God? ).
    LOL! I think it's time to elect a new God. Vote for me this year.
    "I am probably the laziest programmer on the planet, a fact with which anyone who has ever seen my code will agree." - esbo, 11/15/2008

    "the internet is a scary place to be thats why i dont use it much." - billet, 03/17/2010

  2. #122
    Registered User C_ntua's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,853
    Quote Originally Posted by Mario F. View Post
    As an example take the recent events in Haiti. This weekend we learned that people would congregate and, convinced that the earthquake was actually their fault as a punishment for their country's and their own faults, asked for mercy from God. Do you think the Catholic church tried to tell them their god is not a vengeful one that mass murders children and innocent? No. Instead you got silence and consented prayer for the people in Haiti. It's the church that spreads by action or inaction their dogma. And a good part of that doctrine resides on Fear.
    So now you are connected with the whole church? Or you information are the ones we all hear from the media? Or do you think that if the local priests there said otherwise we would find out?
    Let me make a clarification here. The catholic church is everybody that believes in catholicism and accepts the church. That is how it is defined. It is not only the Pope or any other "supposingly" representive speaks.
    I personally don't think of them as representatives. They haven't been elected from the people, they don't transfer the general opinion of the church. It is like telling me that Obama's opinions represents the opinion of America. Yes, it can be considered so, but practically it is not. And he was elected from the people directly. It is one thing to orgranize, to manage the church and another think to speak for it. As I don't judge americans from Obama I don't judge christians from a bishop that spoke on TV.
    I would accept if you told me that the majority of the priests, even the bishops didn't say anything about the fact you are saying. But is that so or is it just that the media didn't mention anything?*

    As for fear, isn't having Hell implying fear? If you are miserable then Heaven and Hell is mostly hope for you. Because you are unhappy. If you are happy and satisfied with your life then most likely Heaven and Hell is fear for you. That is the human psychology. It is not the church's fault. They didn't invent Hell.
    Every moral has fear in the sense you are describing it." Don't do this" because it is bad. Making you feel guilty. Thus you fear doing so, since it will make you feel guilty. But the alternative is worse. For example, if the church believes that by sinning you are going to Hell, it is worse not telling you rather than telling you and make you fear for it.

    And in the end, if the people think that god sent the earthquake you want the Pope to go out and tell them that god didn't? How would the Pope know? He could say "I don't think so because the people were as bas as everybody else, so why didn't God sent everyone one?" or any other comforting speech. God is presented as vengeful and have killed inoccent considering the Bible. So even though I agree that someone from the church could have comforted them on the matter, I wouldn't go accusing them either.

    As for "spreading their dogma with fear": that is a stupid thing to say. The church is against using such a method for spreading its belief. Everone inside the church that does so goes against the churches believes. So at least he shouldn't be consider representing the church at all. Even if all the christians in the world are trying to spread their belief with fear then none of them should be consider to be representing the church.

    As for the actual "leadership" of the Church: sometimes I agree with them, sometimes not. My general feeling is disappointment since they could have done much better. And they go against their own believes (for me), which is bad. I don't mind using the term "church" for the people that supposingly represent it, but in this case your accusations are just against a bunch of people or just points out that leaderships are not good (what else is new).

    *The Pope could be an exception on what I am saying. The Pope for some people is believed to be always right (I think). Don't know if that applies to everything he says. But in any case I don't believe in the Pope in general.

    A lot believe that every sin described in the Scripture has a reason. Meaning that no matter if you are a christian or not you shouldn't do it. Personally I disagree. But if somebody feels so, you can understand that he would try to prevent the rest from doing something bad for them. He would feel that he helps society when he tries to "ban homosexuality". He bases his belief on the words of God, making him quite sure. What are you accusing such a person for?

  3. #123
    (?<!re)tired Mario F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    7,412
    Quote Originally Posted by C_ntua View Post
    So now you are connected with the whole church? Or you information are the ones we all hear from the media? Or do you think that if the local priests there said otherwise we would find out?
    Being someone who was deeply connected to the catholic church for the most of my life, I'm pretty sure they didn't say anything. Otherwise a lot of uncomfortable questions could arise, like how such a dramatic event as this is outside the sphere of control of their omnipotent God? (and they do have an answer for this. It's even worst than admitting God planned the earthquake)

    But in any case you missed the point. It is not so much about whether some lone voices in the church may try to tell their followers this event wasn't caused by God. The point is that while the church makes a tremendous effort to battle homosexuality social awareness, a much more important aspect which is the general lack of understanding of the principles of the doctrine by their own followers isn't meet with the same commitment.

    Let me make a clarification here. The catholic church is everybody that believes in catholicism and accepts the church. That is how it is defined. It is not only the Pope or any other "supposingly" representive speaks.
    I personally don't think of them as representatives. They haven't been elected from the people, they don't transfer the general opinion of the church. It is like telling me that Obama's opinions represents the opinion of America. Yes, it can be considered so, but practically it is not. And he was elected from the people directly. It is one thing to orgranize, to manage the church and another think to speak for it.
    You call this a clarification? You just made a gross mistake if you believe in that. And this is not even a matter worth of debate. The church doctrine is established by the church elites and passed down to the followers as Dogma. And this is true of about any church in the world based on theistic principles.

    You are truly naive or unknowledgeable if you think you can speak for the church in case you are its follower. You cannot. The only people with authority to speak for the catholic church are its ordained ministers and only in certain circumstances. Ultimately there's only one person that can do that without any earthly reservations. That's the Pope by intersection of the Holy Spirit.

    As I don't judge americans from Obama I don't judge christians from a bishop that spoke on TV.
    I'm not sure what you mean. Nobody's judging christians.

    As for fear, isn't having Hell implying fear? If you are miserable then Heaven and Hell is mostly hope for you. Because you are unhappy. If you are happy and satisfied with your life then most likely Heaven and Hell is fear for you.
    I don't think you understand what Hell or Heaven is in the Catholic doctrine. Neither you strike me as a catholic, or at least someone who have studied the Catholicism, or you would understand how wrong you are.

    It is not the church's fault. They didn't invent Hell.
    And then you complain I get angry. You are so full of BS, it's not fun anymore. I could acept you tried to debate without fully understand the issue. It's ok.
    But you try to use arguments that are absurdly wrong and try to pass them as absolute truths.

    You just don't know what you are talking about. And this is becoming tiring.
    The programmer’s wife tells him: “Run to the store and pick up a loaf of bread. If they have eggs, get a dozen.”
    The programmer comes home with 12 loaves of bread.


    Originally Posted by brewbuck:
    Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.

  4. #124
    Registered User C_ntua's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,853
    Quote Originally Posted by Mario F. View Post
    Otherwise a lot of uncomfortable questions could arise, like how such a dramatic event as this is outside the sphere of control of their omnipotent God? (and they do have an answer for this. It's even worst than admitting God planned the earthquake)
    That's too classic a question to even be considered uncomfortable. A lot of people have already asked them and answers have been given.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mario F. View Post
    The point is that while the church makes a tremendous effort to battle homosexuality social awareness, a much more important aspect which is the general lack of understanding of the principles of the doctrine by their own followers isn't meet with the same commitment.
    The church does far more things to provide an understanding of its principles. It is just much a bigger a subject and requires far more work to do which makes your comparison pointless. You are comparing something very specific with something very general. Bad example to begin with.
    In any case, I don't disagree with your point just because I find it a bad example.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mario F. View Post
    The church doctrine is established by the church elites and passed down to the followers as Dogma. And this is true of about any church in the world based on theistic principles.
    Completely wrong. It was established. Lets not get into unecessary details. Lets talk about today, when the catholicism as a belief is already established. There is nothing new added. Nothing fundemental, nothing that all catholics should believe in.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mario F. View Post
    The only people with authority to speak for the catholic church are its ordained ministers and only in certain circumstances. Ultimately there's only one person that can do that without any earthly reservations. That's the Pope by intersection of the Holy Spirit.
    Why should anybody be able to speak for the whole church? Again, you are forgetting the fundemendal things about the church. It is not like a democracy when the laws its based on strictly say that there is going to be a president. The "laws" the church is based on say nothing about it. Which is something you seem to ignore.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mario F. View Post
    It is not so much about whether some lone voices
    The lones voices are the few people that they get to talk through the media to the world.

    As for the Pope I already said he is an exception. When you talk about him, we agree since "by intersection of the Holy Spirit"

    Quote Originally Posted by Mario F. View Post
    I don't think you understand what Hell or Heaven is in the Catholic doctrine. Neither you strike me as a catholic, or at least someone who have studied the Catholicism, or you would understand how wrong you are.

    And then you complain I get angry. You are so full of BS, it's not fun anymore. I could acept you tried to debate without fully understand the issue. It's ok.
    But you try to use arguments that are absurdly wrong and try to pass them as absolute truths.

    You just don't know what you are talking about. And this is becoming tiring.
    OK, you can simply state that and don't discuss those points (or any points) further on. I still stand on what I said. Don't find any reason at all not to.

  5. #125
    (?<!re)tired Mario F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    7,412
    Quote Originally Posted by C_ntua View Post
    Completely wrong. It was established. Lets not get into unecessary details. Lets talk about today, when the catholicism as a belief is already established. There is nothing new added. Nothing fundemental, nothing that all catholics should believe in.
    Dammit! You are stubborn. It's the way you make your opinion so authoritative when in fact it reveals how unknowledgeable on this matters you are that is getting into my nerves, C_ntua. I'm trying my best to refrain from becoming offensive, but you sure are pushing it.

    I strongly suggest you rethink your attitude on this debate. I'm this close to put you on my ignore list.

    As for the above nonsense (one of many you have already made) please read about Ecumenical Councils and learn something new today.
    The programmer’s wife tells him: “Run to the store and pick up a loaf of bread. If they have eggs, get a dozen.”
    The programmer comes home with 12 loaves of bread.


    Originally Posted by brewbuck:
    Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.

  6. #126
    Registered User C_ntua's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,853
    You are continuing comparing unequal things. An Ecumenical council is one thing a revalation of God is another. Compared to the second the first is insignificant.
    You give me details, the point is not to say that I am "technically wrong". Will you be happy if I said that the most important things of the religion were established, but some minor things continue to be established?

    All this doesn't matter. Is what you said in the OP from an Ecumenical Council. No.

    Does it really matter how what I am saying sound, or the what I am saying?

    I am talking about a religion that is based on stories which talks nothing about the church structure or anybody having certain authorities or roles.
    For me religion is like society. You can function in it without agreeing with the current President. For you it is like a political group, in which you might be inclined to follow the political line the group has set.
    If the leader of a political group speaks, you can assume that he/she talks for the whole group.
    If the President talks though, it is not assumed that he talks for all the people in his country. At least he is practically not.

    The church can be held responsible for its believes against homosexuality. Cannot be held responsible, as a whole, on whatever the "elites" say. If somebody decides to add that homosexuality is "dangerous for heterosexuals" then you are over exaggerrating blaming the whole church about its stance. Way over exaggerating.

  7. #127
    (?<!re)tired Mario F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    7,412
    Quote Originally Posted by C_ntua View Post
    All this doesn't matter. Is what you said in the OP from an Ecumenical Council. No.
    Yes. It is.

    The cardinal in question is José Policarpo, Cardinal of Lisbon, a member of the college of Cardinals and one of the papabile. He said nothing more, nothing less than what is established by the Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith, which you can read here on the official website of the Vatican. And one of the most relevant points is point 5.

    ...

    C_Ntua this conversation is exhausted. You stance grew from an interesting position worth of debate to a constant hammering down of absolutely ignorant statements revealing your complete lack of knowledge on the matters of church organization and structure and even the doctrine. It could have been ok; we all commit that "sin" once and a while, convinced that we are right on things we know nothing about. But you refuted any attempt at instructing you on these matters. It's really your loss and reveals a level of immaturity and ignorance that doesn't give me any desire to indulge.

    In any case, my participation on this thread is coming to an end. After all, all I felt the need to say, was said.
    Last edited by Mario F.; 01-28-2010 at 03:55 AM.
    The programmer’s wife tells him: “Run to the store and pick up a loaf of bread. If they have eggs, get a dozen.”
    The programmer comes home with 12 loaves of bread.


    Originally Posted by brewbuck:
    Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.

  8. #128
    C++ Witch laserlight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    21,409
    Quote Originally Posted by Mario F.
    The cardinal in question is José Policarpo, Cardinal of Lisbon, a member of the college of Cardinals and one of the papabile.
    Yes, I guessed correctly! The same guy who made some poorly worded public recommendation that Catholic girls should avoid marriage with Muslim men. By the way, he is not the "Cardinal of Lisbon", but rather the "Patriarch of Lisbon", holding the ecclesiastical rank of cardinal.

    EDIT:
    Quote Originally Posted by C_ntua
    If the President talks though, it is not assumed that he talks for all the people in his country. At least he is practically not.
    It does depend on what precisely this position of president entails, but generally when such a person speaks in his/her official capacity, he/she is speaking for all the people in his/her country.
    Last edited by laserlight; 01-28-2010 at 09:58 AM.
    C + C++ Compiler: MinGW port of GCC
    Version Control System: Bazaar

    Look up a C++ Reference and learn How To Ask Questions The Smart Way

  9. #129
    (?<!re)tired Mario F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    7,412
    Quote Originally Posted by laserlight View Post
    Yes, I guessed correctly! The same guy who made some poorly worded public recommendation that Catholic girls should avoid marriage with Muslim men. By the way, he is not the "Cardinal of Lisbon", but rather the "Patriarch of Lisbon", holding the ecclesiastical rank of cardinal.
    Yes. Thanks for the correction.

    Good to know you are well informed. And I can understand the exclamation. He's been quite a figure. But some of his positions are in fact interesting. In any case, on the matter of homosexuality his words weren't anything that isn't written already and do reflect the church position. And he was joined by the pope two days later.
    The programmer’s wife tells him: “Run to the store and pick up a loaf of bread. If they have eggs, get a dozen.”
    The programmer comes home with 12 loaves of bread.


    Originally Posted by brewbuck:
    Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.

Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst 123456789
Popular pages Recent additions subscribe to a feed

Similar Threads

  1. The pope
    By RoD in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 72
    Last Post: 04-06-2005, 02:06 AM
  2. Religion
    By gnu-ehacks in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 239
    Last Post: 01-26-2002, 09:44 AM

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21