Subject:
|
Re: Sex Scandal: U.S. President had sex with Intern!
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 13 May 2003 16:28:04 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
274 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Koudys writes:
> > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal writes:
> > > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Richard Marchetti writes:
> > > > Sorry to burst your bubble, John; but I know gay men that attend a Catholic
> > > > church regularly.
> > >
> > > Sorry to burst yours, but they aren't married (by the Catholic church).
> >
> > And why is that? Why should the "church" tell two people, who want to live
> > in the institution of marriage, that they can't just because those two folks
> > are of the same sex?
>
> They can do whatever they want. It's just that the Church doesn't sanction it.
And how does the church come to making such decisions? What process does
the church use to come to the conclusion that this over here can be
sanctioned, but that over there cannot?
>
> > Where in the teachings of Jesus does it say, "Marriage
> > is good for these people over here, but not for those people over there"?
>
>
> Read Matthew 19:3-12
So the Catholic church is obeying the "letter" of the law, whereas all these
"Christian" churches, who say divorce and remarrying is fine, are
contemptable? Who's right? Who's wrong? Clarify.
I also like the little footnote in the NSRV--
"Other ancient authorities read [except on the ground of unchastity, causes
her to commit adultery]; others add at the end of the verse [and he who
marries a divorced woman commits adultery] "
So even in the various translations, there is much debate as to what was
actually said.
>
> > It's akin to my co-worker (who isn't gay, mind you--this is a tangent) who
> > is Catholic, but is "separated" from his first wife. Since you can't get
> > married after a divorce in the Catholic church, basically the church is
> > "forcing" my co-worker to 'live in sin' with his new partner in life.
>
> Shoot the messenger, uh?
Remember that little game that we played when we were kids--we'd all sit in
a circle, and someone would whisper a phrase to the first person, and that
person would whisper what they thought they heard to the next person, and so
on, around the circle, until the last person spoke out loud what he/ she
heard, and note how much it changed from the original phrase.
Get what I'm saying? Don't shoot the messanger, but understand that the
messanger today has gotten to us through many different people and
worldviews. There is truth in the Bible, but it isn't as easy as pointing
to a specific text and saying, "There is the Truth!".
> If it is too intolerable for him to be a Catholic and
> abide by its teachings, he should be honest and leave the church. He wants his
> cake and to eat it, too. Choices.
Mayhaps it's "Mother Church" who has to re-read her Bible. The "sanctity of
Mary"? She was fully human. That's the point.
The church has choices as well--adhere to outdated and
ill-conceived/understood ideas about what the Bible says, or revisit these
'institutions' and see if they need reformulating.
What? The church is perfect? Doesn't need any scrutiny? Or would it be
better to say that the church, as it is today, is people's interpretation
thereof, and is subject to the same 'flawed/fallen' issues that people have.
>
> > I mean, they are living together but the "church" won't marry them.
> >
> > Nicely done.
>
> *He* has made a mess of his life, not the Church.
He doesn't hink his life is a mess. On the contary, both he and his first
wife are separated quite amicably. There were no issues at all, except for
the church. His new pseudo-wife and his ex-wife are best of friends, and
everyone gets along swimmingly. And yet, somehow, the church has the issue.
If he were Christian, and went to the local Gospel/United/CRC/whatever
church, there would be no issue. But he's Catholic, so an issue. Should he
switch? Cease to be Catholic?
> >
> > > What's this "world" stuff? We are talking about marriage in the Christian
> > > context. I don't know what you are talking about.
> >
> > Marriage in the bigoted, limited, wrong interpretation of what the Bible to
> > say.
>
> That is wrong and any Christian who believes it is a heretic. Period.
No, it isn't wrong. Marriage is a great institution. I'm probably going to
partake in this institution in a few months, and when I get that ring on my
finger, it'll be for life. But that's just me. And that's just her. But
disallowing marriage for same sex couples is wrong. That's the heretical part.
Sure the "letter" says "A man shall leave his home and become one with his
wife". It's all cutsy and schmarmmy and true, but it doesn't say that it
means that same sex is excluded from the same rights.
>
> > The Bible shouldn't conform to *us*, we should conform to it. And I
> > believe, (and my biblical scholarship isn't as thorough as it should be, but
> > I did minor in Religion at university a *long* time ago, so my memory's a
> > little dusty), that the Bible actually mentions that polygamy is as viable a
> > lifestyle as any other. And yet todays chruch won't let me have my little
> > harem.
>
> Dude, you are suffering from full-blown amnesia!
Go read the book. Where in the Bible aren't harems mentioned? I saw no
admonishment thereof, either, btw. Abram, et al, had a few wives. So who
did their reading? Who remembers better?
>
> >
> > We should all have a way of having our worldview, but also allow the
> > discussion of ideas that might not necessarily 'jive' with it, and the
> > ability to adapt the worldview or reject the premise as necessary.
> > Stubbornly adhering to a disjointed WV or a bad premise are equally "The
> > plank in your eye".
>
>
> If you are a Christian, you are buying into a *particular* world view. You
> cannot adhere to certain ideals that are in direct conflict with it (and still
> call yourself a Christian). I cannot profess to be a Christian and believe
> that Jesus wasn't the Messiah. Put it this way: "It's possible, to fit a
> Cadillac up your nose, it's just impossible...."
My Christianity stems from believing in God the father, Christ the son, and
hte holy spirit. It stems from the idea that I believe that Christ died for
my sins. It does not stem from outmoded and "flwed/fallen" humanly
constructed institutions that conflict with these ideas.
I also believe that *my* belief doesn't have to encompass *everyone*. It
just has to encompass me--"As for me and my house, we'll follow the Lord."
>
> JOHN
Dave K
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
37 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
