Tuesday, 27 February 2007

Comments

Re obsession with sex. What did the Catholic church do over humanae vitae and describing homosexual acts as intinsically disordered, and under no circumstances to be approved? Wisely the bishops knew the church said one thing but people believed and did another. The primary duty to follow (informed) conscience was deemed to have the upper hand. Cardinal Hume managed to diffuse what might have been a very difficult reception of the Catechism by highlighting many beautiful things in it, and reminding people of the requirements of conscience. Is there some mileage in this kind of approach re the gay debate? And if there is, the flip side is how do you accommodate the conscience of those who believe it proper to discriminate againts homosexuals?

Posted by: Neil on Tuesday, 27 February 2007 at 10:03am GMT

The issue about caring for siblings (e.g. a disabled sibling who has been cared for by life by a health sibling) has come up before on this forum. At the time, the point was made that if they hadn't been so busy trying to hamper gay civil unions, they would have looked at these familial structure needs. Now, as then, the issue has been that in grinding their axe against one "unpalatable" group, they have impaired another group with which they have no "legitimate" grievance.

The moral of this story is that if you don't have a moral underpinning on why justice matters and why it should be applied consistently, you find yourself missing a nose that you cut off to spite your face.

The other headlines amused me. I would not call Anglicans sex obsessed. I would call them sex phobic.

And while I am stirring the pot. What hope do they have against a soul that was created for a pre-ordained purpose? If a soul was created by God with a specific purpose in mind, do you think that anything less than fulfilling that purpose will make that soul happy? Then the next question is does God want that soul fulfilling that purpose? If it is God's Will that the purpose be fulfilled, all other strategies are merely roadblocks to the inevitable...

Posted by: Cheryl Clough on Tuesday, 27 February 2007 at 11:22am GMT

Perhaps people think that the church is obsessed with sex because it is.

Posted by: JPM on Tuesday, 27 February 2007 at 12:22pm GMT

Civil partnerships, and indeed, civil marriage, has absolutely nothing to do with the Church. I think it should keep its nose out.

Posted by: Merseymike on Tuesday, 27 February 2007 at 4:23pm GMT

Neil wrote vis a vis the Catholic Church "Wisely the bishops knew the church said one thing but people believed and did another."

The same applies to the use of contraceptions and a number of other areas.

I think the Catholic Church should be duly thanked for their contribution to modelling using orphans as hostages and ensuring theological "correctness" irregardless of the sociopathic political and economic dynamics with escalating consequences for future generations.

They should give thanks that a pope had prayed for forgiveness at for what Christians had done to Jews and others at Austwitzch. It's a pity while that their pope and/or church seems to have forgotten to take that prayer to its logical conclusion and denounce the theological constructs that enable such deteriorations that misuse the name of God.

Posted by: Cheryl Clough on Tuesday, 27 February 2007 at 7:53pm GMT
Post a comment









Remember personal info?

Please note that comments are limited to 400 words. Comments that are longer than 400 words will not be approved.

Cookies are used to remember your personal information between visits to the site. This information is stored on your computer and used to refill the text boxes on your next visit. Any cookie is deleted if you select 'No'. By ticking 'Yes' you agree to this use of a cookie by this site. No third-party cookies are used, and cookies are not used for analytical, advertising, or other purposes.