Switch Theme:

Vatican proposes shift on Catholic view of homosexuality  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
  • No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
  • Times and dates in your local timezone.
  • Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
  • Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
  • Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.




Made in us
[MOD]
Solahma






RVA

 jasper76 wrote:
You are suggesting that I don't know much about it.
I am saying that your claim to understand it is unsupported by any evidence. By all means, post your understanding of the Catholic concept of sin.

   
Made in us
Thane of Dol Guldur




 Manchu wrote:
 jasper76 wrote:
You are suggesting that I don't know much about it.
I am saying that your claim to understand it is unsupported by any evidence. By all means, post your understanding of the Catholic concept of sin.


http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s1c1a8.htm

   
Made in us
[MOD]
Solahma






RVA

 jasper76 wrote:
 Manchu wrote:
 jasper76 wrote:
You are suggesting that I don't know much about it.
I am saying that your claim to understand it is unsupported by any evidence. By all means, post your understanding of the Catholic concept of sin.
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s1c1a8.htm
That is a new record for the most absurd post I have ever seen on Dakka.

   
Made in us
Thane of Dol Guldur




??? My understanding of the Catholic concept of sin is what the Catholic Church says it is.

I am not sure why that is absurd.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/10/15 17:58:08


 
   
Made in us
[MOD]
Solahma






RVA

 jasper76 wrote:
My understanding of the Catholic concept of sin is what the Catholic Church says it is.
In school, did you just write "my answers are the correct ones" on tests? If so, what kind of grades did that get you?

   
Made in us
Thane of Dol Guldur




No, I did not write 'my answers are the correct ones' on tests in school. I didn't realize I was in a test-type environment at present.

When it comes to Catholic teaching, I take the Catholic Church at its word. Since the Catecism of the Catholic Church is the clearest, most definitive compilation of core Catholic teachings, I use it as my source of figuring out what Catholic teachings actually are. I opened it up, read it, and there is nothing in there, besides some of the source references, with which I am unfamiliar.
   
Made in us
[MOD]
Solahma






RVA

Posting a link does not demonstrate anything beyond the ability to use the internet.

Let me try this from a different angle: what specifically do you think is immoral about the Catholic understanding of sin and why?

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/10/15 18:19:53


   
Made in us
Thane of Dol Guldur




It's quite simple, and I know this is a fundamental disagreement at core that you and I will not overcome. Sin is said to be an offense against God. There is no good evidence that a God exists. If we assume there is a God, there is no good evidence that a human being has ever been on the face of the planet that has commincated with that God, so all we have is hearsay from questionable source material, along with the testimony of believers.

And on this basis, children (and receptive adults) are taught that there is an omniscient, omnipotent overseer completety aware of and taking into account everything they do right or wrong, for which they will ultimately be accountable at the risk of eternal damnation. I beleive this has the potential to cause a state of psychological terror in a child, or an adult who believes it, because they are led to believe they are under constant surveillance, and if they do something wrong, they could suffer eternal damnation (probably the cruelest punishment imagined by humanity) for it.

If I have stated anything incorrect about Catholic teaching here, break it down for me. I am completely open to the idea that I may be incorrect about things.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/10/15 18:41:46


 
   
Made in us
[MOD]
Solahma






RVA

So really you believe the Christian concept of God is immoral?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 jasper76 wrote:
eternal damnation (probably the cruelest punishment imagined by humanity)
And how would you define that?

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/10/15 18:51:26


   
Made in us
Sniping Reverend Moira





Cincinnati, Ohio

 jasper76 wrote:
It's quite simple, and I know this is a fundamental disagreement at core that you and I will not overcome. Sin is said to be an offense against God. There is no good evidence that a God exists. If we assume there is a God, there is no good evidence that a human being has ever been on the face of the planet that has commincated with that God, so all we have is hearsay from questionable source material, along with the testimony of believers.


And there is no good evidence that says otherwise.


And on this basis, children (and receptive adults) are taught that there is an omniscient, omnipotent overseer completety aware of and taking into account everything they do right or wrong, for which they will ultimately be accountable at the risk of eternal damnation. I beleive this has the potential to cause a state of psychological terror in a child, or an adult who believes it, because they are led to believe they are under constant surveillance, and if they do something wrong, they could suffer eternal damnation (probably the cruelest punishment imagined by humanity) for it.


This misses the pretty important part about Jesus dying for the sins of mankind, the fact that all of humankind are sinners, and the whole forgiveness of sins part. But those are little things...

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/10/15 18:52:30


 
   
Made in us
Thane of Dol Guldur




In some respects, yes, in other respects, no. I believe deities are canvasses on which humans or groups of humans project themselves. And since humans are not entirely immoral or moral, its no surprise that their concept of deities reflect that.

Does that make any sense? Perhaps I am not answering your question.
   
Made in us
Last Remaining Whole C'Tan






Pleasant Valley, Iowa

 Ouze wrote:
This thread has strongly reinforced my belief that threads with religious discussion are dangerous to your ability to post on DakkaDakka if you're not on the right team.


To revisit this, after sleeping on it and reading the subsequent pages, this thread has clearly revealed that I showed poor judgement when I posted this. While religious threads often get acrimonious pretty quickly (and in this Dakka is no special case of course) I think this thread's evolution has shown that the specific concern I expressed was untrue, and I apologize for the insinuation.




 lord_blackfang wrote:
Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.

 Flinty wrote:
The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock
 
   
Made in us
Thane of Dol Guldur




 cincydooley wrote:
 jasper76 wrote:
It's quite simple, and I know this is a fundamental disagreement at core that you and I will not overcome. Sin is said to be an offense against God. There is no good evidence that a God exists. If we assume there is a God, there is no good evidence that a human being has ever been on the face of the planet that has commincated with that God, so all we have is hearsay from questionable source material, along with the testimony of believers.


And there is no good evidence that says otherwise.


I unrepentantly fall on the 'extraoridanty claims require extraoridnary evidence' side of the fence (no pun intended).
   
Made in us
[MOD]
Solahma






RVA

 jasper76 wrote:
Does that make any sense? Perhaps I am not answering your question.
In sum, it appears that you don't know much about Catholicism (frex, the Catechism is actually a tool designed for bishops not Intro to Catholicism for non-Catholics) and you think Catholicism should change to be more like what you, a non-Catholic, find personally acceptable.
 Ouze wrote:
I think this thread's evolution has shown that the specific concern I expressed was untrue, and I apologize for the insinuation.
I honestly appreciate that a lot.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/10/15 19:08:44


   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





 Manchu wrote:
So really you believe the Christian concept of God is immoral?



To trot out the "standard" atheists argument... yes. How many people give "thanks" to god for their food on Thanksgiving, but bitch and moan about the gakky parking spot they get at work the next day? or when they are late for work/school? How many times do they pray for a promotion, which would make them more prosperous, and yet there are literally millions of starving children in Africa?

How is one individuals prosperity morally right, and yet the destitution of children halfway around the world is, ignored or waved away as "they're sinners, and god is punishing them" ?? From the atheist perspective, having a deity who "sees" this level of inequality, and yet supposedly "loves" everyone can't help but scoff. You claim that God IS justice and truth, and everything is good, and yet, if he has so much power, why does he/she allow so much "evil" and "bad" things to happen?

Christians claim that their holidays are "holy" and yet, if you ask almost any one of them where that holiday really, truly comes from (and I mean the traditions, why it's on the day it is on, etc) they are completely ignorant.


I don't say all this to bash on Catholics, as even though I don't follow it, or any Christian religion, I do respect him and the things that he has done since taking the mantle of Pope. These are just the most common things that I see from atheists and those who are vehemently anti-Christian. The holidays though, I've come across in my time studying the Norse peoples and other Pagan peoples histories and traditions, which I personally find amusing when people like my grandparents say junk like "Christ is the reason for Christmas" which is actually quite false.
   
Made in us
Thane of Dol Guldur




@Manchu: So the Catechism of the Catholic Church cannot be understood by non-bishops?

What would you consider to be a better source of info for non-Catholics on the subject of modern Catholic teachings?

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2014/10/15 19:27:54


 
   
Made in us
[MOD]
Solahma






RVA

 jasper76 wrote:
So the Catechism of the Catholic Church cannot be understood by non-bishops?
The text was prepared for use by people with doctoral degrees in theology and/or canon law. I'm sure there are people who are not bishops who can properly use the Catechism, just as there are people who are not university professors who can properly use advanced texts on theoretical physics.
 jasper76 wrote:
What would you consider to be a better source of info for non-Catholics on the subject of modern Catholic teachings?
Well, it depends on what you want to do. If you want to reaffirm your prexisting disagreement with the notion of Catholicism, then anything will do. If you actually want to learn about the Church, however, your best bet is to consult a wide array of sources including geographical diversity. For example, my experiences as an American Catholic are not the same as Da Boss's experiences as an Irish Catholic.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2014/10/15 19:40:48


   
Made in us
Thane of Dol Guldur




 Manchu wrote:
 jasper76 wrote:
So the Catechism of the Catholic Church cannot be understood by non-bishops?
The text was prepared for use by people with doctoral degrees in theology and/or canon law. I'm sure there are people who are not bishops who can properly use the Catechism, just as there are people who are not university professors who can properly use advanced texts on theoretical physics.
 jasper76 wrote:
What would you consider to be a better source of info for non-Catholics on the subject of modern Catholic teachings?
Well, it depends on what you want to do. If you want to reaffirm your prexisting disagreement with the notion of Catholicism, then anything will do. If you actually want to learn about the Church, however, your best bet is to consult a wide array of sources including geographical diversity. For example, my experience as an American Catholic are not the same as Da Boss's experiences as an Irish Catholic.


Nothing about the CCC seems advanced or doctorate-level to me, despite its intention. Pretty straight forward and easy to understand. I actually commend the author and translator on their clarity.

If I wanted to find out what the 'official Church position' is on this issue or that isseu, where would the best place to go to find out? I had assumed it is the CCC, but if there is something better out there, I'm certainly interested.
   
Made in us
[MOD]
Solahma






RVA

 jasper76 wrote:
Nothing about the CCC seems advanced or doctorate-level to me, despite its intention.
I would posit this is because you already do not respect Catholicism as a valid intellectual tradition and you pretty clearly are not aware of your own biases and how much you take for granted about the subject you are judging immoral.

The Catholic Church is not a corporation that hands down policy from the HR department. Every bishop is a successor to the apostles and is responsible for teaching the faith. But the faith is not just a set of rules or principles. It is a living world view. Magisterium, the authority to teach the faith, is only one part of how Catholicism is preserved and passed on; the faith is not just taught (much less "legislated") but is also received and lived.

The best you're going to get as far as some "official" stance is an understanding that has persisted from era to era over the millenia, promulgated and reiterated by councils and popes in a succession of formal documents of various character. The Catechism tries to be a kind of bibliography for that, it is a tool for bishops to use as they consider how best to teach the faith in their own place and time.

   
Made in us
Thane of Dol Guldur




OK, so I take it there is not a better book at laying out modern Catholic teachings to a non-Catholic than the CCC?

That's all I'm after here. You have suggested that the CCC is not intended for me, and brought its reliability for non-Catholics, non-bishops, and non-theologians into question, so I just want to know if there's a more authoritative book I can buy to add to my library.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/10/15 20:08:37


 
   
Made in us
[MOD]
Solahma






RVA

The question is not of reliability but of intended audience.

As I already explained, there is no authoritative "rule book" of Catholicism.

If you want to understand something about Catholicism, try asking a few Catholics about that thing.

   
Made in us
Sniping Reverend Moira





Cincinnati, Ohio

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:


To trot out the "standard" atheists argument... yes. How many people give "thanks" to god for their food on Thanksgiving, but bitch and moan about the gakky parking spot they get at work the next day? or when they are late for work/school? How many times do they pray for a promotion, which would make them more prosperous, and yet there are literally millions of starving children in Africa?

How is one individuals prosperity morally right, and yet the destitution of children halfway around the world is, ignored or waved away as "they're sinners, and god is punishing them" ?? From the atheist perspective, having a deity who "sees" this level of inequality, and yet supposedly "loves" everyone can't help but scoff. You claim that God IS justice and truth, and everything is good, and yet, if he has so much power, why does he/she allow so much "evil" and "bad" things to happen?


~~~Semi Antagonistic, but meant in a playful way, reply incoming:~~~

Do you mean all those starting people in Africa that Catholics, more than anyone else, are trying to help through mission work and charity

 
   
Made in us
[MOD]
Solahma






RVA

In Africa and in every other continent ... well, I don't know of any missions in Antarctica TBH.

   
Made in gb
Stealthy Warhound Titan Princeps





South Wales

 cincydooley wrote:
 Ensis Ferrae wrote:


To trot out the "standard" atheists argument... yes. How many people give "thanks" to god for their food on Thanksgiving, but bitch and moan about the gakky parking spot they get at work the next day? or when they are late for work/school? How many times do they pray for a promotion, which would make them more prosperous, and yet there are literally millions of starving children in Africa?

How is one individuals prosperity morally right, and yet the destitution of children halfway around the world is, ignored or waved away as "they're sinners, and god is punishing them" ?? From the atheist perspective, having a deity who "sees" this level of inequality, and yet supposedly "loves" everyone can't help but scoff. You claim that God IS justice and truth, and everything is good, and yet, if he has so much power, why does he/she allow so much "evil" and "bad" things to happen?


~~~Semi Antagonistic, but meant in a playful way, reply incoming:~~~

Do you mean all those starting people in Africa that Catholics, more than anyone else, are trying to help through mission work and charity


I thought they* were too busy lobbying for anti-homosexual legislation now it's starting to fail in the homeland?

*This in no way means "all catholics"

Prestor Jon wrote:
Because children don't have any legal rights until they're adults. A minor is the responsiblity of the parent and has no legal rights except through his/her legal guardian or parent.
 
   
Made in us
Thane of Dol Guldur




 Manchu wrote:
The question is not of reliability but of intended audience.

As I already explained, there is no authoritative "rule book" of Catholicism.

If you want to understand something about Catholicism, try asking a few Catholics about that thing.


Actually, when reading the front material to the CCC, I find it suits my needs, such as they are, jusy fine.

VIII. The Aim and Intended Readership of the Catechism

11 This catechism aims at presenting an organic synthesis of the essential and fundamental contents of Catholic doctrine, as regards both faith and morals, in the light of the Second Vatican Council and the whole of the Church's Tradition. Its principal sources are the Sacred Scriptures, the Fathers of the Church, the liturgy, and the Church's Magisterium. It is intended to serve "as a point of reference for the catechisms or compendia that are composed in the various countries".15

12 This work is intended primarily for those responsible for catechesis: first of all the bishops, as teachers of the faith and pastors of the Church. It is offered to them as an instrument in fulfilling their responsibility of teaching the People of God. Through the bishops, it is addressed to redactors of catechisms, to priests, and to catechists. It will also be useful reading for all other Christian faithful.


Odd that this book would only be useful to 'Christian faithful'. There is nothing about being non-Christian that forces me to forget the English language, and I don't care much that I wasn't in mind when this book was put together.

I have considered what you have stated about the CCC, but I don't agree, and I think its a very useful book at determining what the Catholic Church's position on various issues is. I would trust what this book says more than what a Catholic person says, because it is well known that Catholics do not agree with the Churches teachings on many issues (birth control comes to mind immediately). If a better book ever comes out aimed at 'non-Christians', I'll happily take a look. But I don't think there's anything magical in the CCC that would prevent a non-faithful reader from understanding what it says.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/10/15 20:50:10


 
   
Made in us
[MOD]
Solahma






RVA

 jasper76 wrote:
Odd that this book would only be useful to 'Christian faithful'.
What is odd about that? Do you know what the word catechesis means? Failing that, did you bother to read (for comprehension) the statement you posted:
This work is intended primarily for those responsible for catechesis: first of all the bishops, as teachers of the faith and pastors of the Church. It is offered to them as an instrument in fulfilling their responsibility of teaching the People of God. Through the bishops, it is addressed to redactors of catechisms, to priests, and to catechists. It will also be useful reading for all other Christian faithful.
Which is to say, this book is to support bishops as they teach the faith to the faithful.

I mean, I explained this to you above, before you even bothered to take a look at what the catechism itself says. But you have already decided you don't actually care what Catholics think about Catholicism and now you've even gone so far as to explicitly affirm that. This is a practical example of invincible ignorance.
 jasper76 wrote:
But I don't think there's anything magical in the CCC that would prevent a non-faithful reader from understanding what it says.
Agreed. There is nothing at all magical about assuming you can understand a complex document with no background in the material and outside of its intended context. That is the most mundane kind of arrogance.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2014/10/15 21:35:47


   
Made in us
Thane of Dol Guldur




Just so you know, because I can tell you don't know, I was born and raised Catholic up to Confirmation, and my family remains largely Catholic.

I don't mention this to claim expertise on the subject, but I do regularly interact and have these types of conversations with Catholics. And I had CCD or whatever all that time. I am not coming from a 'zero background' position

I reject the idea that (a) the CCC is a complex dodocument, because it's actually not very complex, and (b) that I don't have knowledge or background sufficient to make sense of it.

Anyway, enough about the CCC. Have the last word!

I still don't think the churches recent deliberations have changed much if anything in real terms for the status of homosexuals in the Catholic Church. It appears they are catching up to what my priest taught us in CCD in1982

This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2014/10/15 21:58:36


 
   
Made in us
[MOD]
Solahma






RVA

 jasper76 wrote:
reject the idea that (a) the CCC is a complex dodocument, because it's actually not very complex
First - this is merely an opinion, not an argument. Second, it is evidence against your second assertion.
 jasper76 wrote:
and (b) that I don't have knowledge or background sufficient to make sense of it
A lot of what you posted, including your take on the catechism and your summary of sin and hell, argue directly against the notion that you have sufficient knowledge or background.
 jasper76 wrote:
I do regularly interact and have these types of conversations with Catholics
You mean, where you tell Catholics what they believe/should believe instead because you read (or will read or kinda skimmed once because of an argument on the internet) a book that wasn't intended to be used as a rule book of Catholicism but you think that it should be because ... reasons? That kind of conversation? Because that is the conversation we are having here.
 jasper76 wrote:
It appears they are catching up to what my priest taught us in CCD in 1982
Are you saying you weren't taught the faith in CCD? or that what you learned in CCD was the real faith and what came out of Rome in the 80s was inauthentic?

Or perhaps we are coming to a point I made a while back about how learning about Catholicism requires consulting diverse source including across various areas.

This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2014/10/15 22:02:52


   
Made in us
Thane of Dol Guldur




Right, but you wont tell me exactly what assertions I've made that are iincorrect, except that the Catethism was intended for bishops...in other words, pure trivia.

I don't have any reason to believe you know more about Catholic teaching than I do, beyond your blanket assertions that it is so.

(Sorry for the unfortunate typo)

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/10/15 22:07:12


 
   
Made in us
[MOD]
Solahma






RVA

 jasper76 wrote:
you wont tell me exactly what assertions I've made that are iincorrect, except that the Catethism was intended for bishops...in other words, pure trivia
The intended use of the catechism is not "pure trivia" especially when you claim it should be used in an unintended way. And you're not even using it. You just posted a link to it. Then you said a bunch of stuff about God damning people to hell but (as cincy pointed out) completely without reference the idea of God forgiving sinners even to the point of becoming man and being tortured and murdered.

This is called the goal post game. It's where you keep moving the goal posts. I don't really want to play.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/10/15 22:07:41


   
 
Forum Index » Off-Topic Forum
Go to: