How many years until Catholicism performs homosexual "marriages"?

[SDET]

See the poll and feel free to state why.

 

[chuckiechan]

1000 years? Maybe?

It's pretty basic to the faith.

 

[Captain Adverse]

Probably wait until the Second Coming when they are finally instructed AGAIN by the Source about judging thy neighbor and that Love means Love, Period.

 

[Gathomas88]

Not going to happen. It'd fly in the face of almost two thousand years of established dogma.

Changing something so fundamental to the belief system would be as good as basically admitting that the whole religion is invalid.

Probably wait until the Second Coming when they are finally instructed AGAIN by the Source about judging thy neighbor and that Love means Love, Period.

Instructing sinners of the error of their ways is a form of "love," actually.

 

[Your Star]

10-20 years. Every religion changes with the ever improving moral norms of the times.

 

[TheGoverness]

Not going to happen.



Instructing sinners of the error of their ways is a form of "love," actually.

It's a very odd way of showing "love", IMO.

 

[Captain Adverse]

Instructing sinners of the error of their ways is a form of "love," actually.

Perhaps, but IMO the Source would not consider either same-sex relationships or marriage a "sin." As long as the union was truly based on Love, where is the sin? :shrug:

 

[Gathomas88]

It's a very odd way of showing "love", IMO.

Leading people to Christ is the greatest form of love there is, if one accepts the notion that he is God and the ultimate source of human salvation. :shrug:

Granted, some people correct others for the wrong reasons, and with the wrong feelings in their heart. However, even then, just because some love is "tough," does not mean it is necessarily wrong.

 

[Your Star]

Leading people to Christ is the greatest form of love there is, if one accepts the notion that he is God and the ultimate source of human salvation. :shrug:

Granted, some people correct others for the wrong reasons, and with the wrong feelings in their heart. However, even then, just because some love is "tough," does not mean it is necessarily wrong.

The love is telling the religious that they're wrong, and you should stop basing your moral beliefs on a 2,000 year old book written by people from the bronze age. rof

 

[Gathomas88]

Perhaps, but IMO the Source would not consider either same-sex relationships or marriage a "sin." As long as the union was truly based on Love, where is the sin? :shrug:

There are degrees of sin. Human "love" is also imperfect, and can be twisted and perverted in various ways. Even if the intentions of an act are good, the end result of the act, and its long term impacts - on both the individual and those around them - can often be negative.

In any case, Christianity in general, and the Church in particular, holds that even monogamous heterosexual pairings outside of marriage are "sinful" in their own way. It has done so since the very beginning of the religion, and it does so regardless of considerations of "love" between the two persons involved. The argument that homosexuals may also feel legitimate "love" for one another really isn't compelling enough to reconsider a two thousand year old stance on that issue either.

 

[Gathomas88]

The love is telling the religious that they're wrong, and you should stop basing your moral beliefs on a 2,000 year old book written by people from the bronze age. rof

A book (and religion built around it) written to lay out the will and revelations of the immortal and all powerful entity responsible for creating us all and dictating our lives' purposes, you mean.

Tomato, to-mat-o. :shrug:

 

[Captain Adverse]

There are degrees of sin. Human "love" is also imperfect, and can be twisted and perverted in various ways. Even if the intentions are good, the end result, and the long term impacts on both the individual and those around them can often be negative.

In any case, Christianity in general, and the Church in particular, holds that even monogamous heterosexual pairings outside of marriage are "sinful" in their own way. It has done so since the very beginning, and it does so regardless of considerations of "love" between the two persons involved. The argument that homosexuals feel legitimate "love" for one another really isn't compelling enough to reconsider a two thousand year old stance on that issue either.

The "Church" is neither God nor the Son. It is merely a group of fallible human beings who constantly allow their personal prejudices to interfere with the basic teachings of Christ. To cherry pick from the Bible in order to support their view of "sin."

My view as a historian is that the Old Testament is a mixture of Jewish fables and history...which is which only God truly knows. As for the New Testament? Only those three books written by the Disciples who witnessed Jesus during his lifetime carry any weight with me. The rest is a confabulation of Paul of Tarsus and the political church that followed Constantine's state establishment.

Like I said above...the Catholic Church will probably wait until the Second Coming to find out how wrong they have been all along. :shrug:

 

[coldjoint]

10-20 years. Every religion changes with the ever improving moral norms of the times.

Is that so?

 

[Gathomas88]

The "Church" is neither God nor the Son. It is merely a group of fallible human beings who constantly allow their personal prejudices to interfere with the basic teachings of Christ. To cherry pick from the Bible in order to support their view of "sin."

My view as a historian is that the Old Testament is a mixture of Jewish fables and history...which is which only God truly knows. As for the New Testament? Only those three books written by the Disciples who witnessed Jesus during his lifetime carry any weight with me. The rest is a confabulation of Paul of Tarsus and the political church that followed Constantine's state establishment.

Like I said above...the Catholic Church will probably wait until the Second Coming to find out how wrong they have been all along. :shrug:

Well... You are certainly entitled to your opinion. Make no mistake, however, an opinion is all it is.

Again, the fact of the matter remains that roughly two thousand years worth of philosophers, theologians, and historians - some of whom actually broke bread with Christ himself - would appear to rather adamantly disagree with your analysis. I see no reason not to trust their insight.

Evidently... Neither does the Church.

 

[beefheart]

See the poll and feel free to state why.

Well, if the church would first address the overwhelming number of homosexuals who are priests to begin with...

 

[coldjoint]

Well, if the church would first address the overwhelming number of homosexuals who are priests to begin with...

Why don't you give us some numbers on that. Broadbrushing, at least in my case, is unacceptable.

 

[Your Star]

A book (and religion built around it) written to lay out the will and revelations of the immortal and all powerful entity responsible for creating us all and dictating our lives' purposes, you mean.

Tomato, to-mat-o. :shrug:

Who's only evidence of divinity is claims from said book. Circular logic, FTW, apparently.

 

[TheGoverness]

Re: How many years until Catholicism performs homosexual "marriages"?

Who's only evidence of divinity is claims from said book. Circular logic, FTW, apparently.

The Bible is true because the Bible said it's true. And how do I know it's true? Because the Bible says it's true!

Circular logic at it's best.

 

[Captain Adverse]

Well... You are certainly entitled to your opinion. Make no mistake, however, an opinion is all it is.

Again, the fact of the matter remains that roughly two thousand years worth of philosophers, theologians, and historians - some of whom actually broke bread with Christ himself - would appear to rather adamantly disagree with your analysis. I see no reason not to trust their insight.

Evidently... Neither does the Church.

I think you are stretching things a bit here. To the best of my knowledge no member of Christ's circle, either of the 12 Disciples or the women (who should be but are not considered by the "philosophers, theologians, and historians" of the Catholic Church as worthy to be his disciples due to their sex) have said a single thing on the subject.

The only "apostle" who did was Paul of Tarsus, and he did not "break bread" with Jesus...did he?

 

[beefheart]

Why don't you give us some numbers on that. Broadbrushing, at least in my case, is unacceptable.

You have the internet, look it up.

Meanwhile, have a gander at over 60 years of investigations in one diocese.....hundreds of priests..

Clergy Files - Archdiocese of Los Angeles

How lazy of you not to actually do any investigation.

 

[beefheart]

Who's only evidence of divinity is claims from said book. Circular logic, FTW, apparently.

"The bible is true...because it says so in the bible"

What a cult of nonsense.

 

[coldjoint]

You have the internet, look it up.

Meanwhile, have a gander at over 60 years of investigations in one diocese.....hundreds of priests..

Clergy Files - Archdiocese of Los Angeles

How lazy of you not to actually do any investigation.

That is overwhelming? Hardly. Overwhelming would be 90%.

 

[AGENT J]

See the poll and feel free to state why.

This hasnt happned yet . . .thats very surprising . . .

Wait do you mean ALL of Catholicism or just any catholic church in america doing so?

if you mean just any, id be shocked if it didnt happen yet and ill go with 5 or less years.

If you mean ALL, the answer is never, there are still churches that wont marry blacks to eachother let alone interracial or gay marriage. And thats their right. churches dont have to marry anybody and their religion has nothing to do with legal marriage.

 

[DA60]

No idea.

 

[Dragonfly]

It's gonna take about 3 or 4 more generations of adults to die and perhaps at least 3 or 4 more Popes to come and go before they do something of that nature.

I'm 52 years old, so for sure not in my lifetime.

I'd think looooooong before they'd accept SSM, they'd change their stance on birth control, and we all know that hasn't happened yet.