 |
|
|
|
 Mitt Romney's VP pick, Paul Ryan, means there will be Catholics on both party tickets. Vice President Joe Biden is also a Catholic.
August 14th, 2012
10:41 AM ET
My Take: Paul Ryan will provoke a debate on Catholic politics
By Stephen Prothero, Special to CNN A lot has been written about the “Mormon moment” in American politics. But the election of 2012 is starting to shape up as a “Catholic moment,” too. Now that Mitt Romney has tapped the former altar boy (and Rep.) Paul Ryan as his vice-presidential running mate, there will be a Catholic on both major party tickets for the first time in U.S. history. So as Ryan and Vice President Joe Biden articulate their views, we will be tuning into an intra-Catholic conversation pitting “social justice” Christians on the left versus “family values” Christians on the right. Because this election will doubtless focus on the economy, and because Ryan is known primarily as the author of a budget passed this year in the Republican-controlled House, this debate will not focus primarily on social questions such as abortion and same-sex marriage but on economic concerns such as tax policy and the safety net. What would Jesus do about our debt and the deficit? In a preview of the debates to come, Catholic bishops wrote four letters to Congress in April attacking the Ryan budget as unjust and calling for “a circle of protection ... around essential programs that serve poor and vulnerable people.” These letters, signed by leaders of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, articulated general principles of Catholic social teaching. “A central moral measure of any budget proposal is how it affects ‘the least of these’ (Matthew 25),” wrote Bishop Stephen Blaire of Stockton, California. “The needs of those who are hungry and homeless, without work or in poverty should come first.” Another letter, co-signed by Blaire and Bishop Richard Pates of Des Moines, Iowa, argued that “the needs of those who are hungry, poor and vulnerable should come before assistance to those who are relatively well off and powerful” and spoke of drawing a “circle of protection” around the “poor and vulnerable.” But America's bishops also took aim at specific policy proposals, including cuts to affordable housing programs, cuts in food stamps and changes to the Child Tax Credit. Blaire insisted that “just solutions” to our budget problems “must require shared sacrifice by all, including raising adequate revenues, eliminating unnecessary military and other spending, and fairly addressing the long-term costs of health insurance and retirement programs,” before concluding that the Ryan budget “fails to meet these moral criteria.” To his credit, Ryan responded to these letters not just with canned talking points but with a fairly detailed defense of his understanding of Catholic social thought. In an April interview with David Brody, Ryan admitted that the “preferential option for the poor” was “one of the primary tenets of Catholic social teaching.” But he insisted this idea “means don’t keep people poor, don’t make people dependent on government so that they stay stuck at their station in life; help people get out of poverty, out into a life of independence.” A year earlier, in a letter to Archbishop Timothy Dolan of New York, Ryan said his budget was informed by the Catholic principle of "subsidiarity,” which he equated with “federalism,” and more particularly with the practice of addressing social problems with local rather than national solutions. Lots of things changed when Romney tapped Ryan as his vice-presidential pick. Among those things is the religious dynamic of the 2012 election. We have in Romney/Ryan what is arguably the first non-Protestant ticket in U.S. history. And in the vice-presidential tussle between Ryan and Biden we have the promise of a civil and informed debate about Christian values and economic policy. For far too long, politicians have been able to name check God or point vaguely to the Bible to gain the imprimatur of heaven for their particular policies or their political party. That sort of "God on our side" politics has been bad for both our religious and our public life. But substantive debates about Christianity and politics are potentially healthy for both. A century and a half ago, Americans engaged in a collective conversation about the Bible and slavery that was both civil and informed. Is it too much to hope that an intelligent debate about Christianity and the economy is now in the offing? If so, we will likely have Ryan (and Romney) to thank. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Stephen Prothero.
Next entry »Romney-Ryan ticket makes U.S. religious history
« Previous entryBelief Blog's Morning Speed Read for Tuesday, August 14
|
  About this blog
The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.  |
|
|
|
Editor's note: Stephen Prothero, a Boston University religion scholar and author of "
Ronald Reagen let the "genie"(Faith) out of the bottle in 1980 when he courted the "Moral Majority" Vote. There's no putting the genie back in the bottle. Now that we are having these Faith/Political Debates, some people are reassessing their Faith & how it squares with their polotical beliefs. Some are actually READING the Four Gospels of Jesus & coming up with different views that they previously held. This is GOOD !!
Do you have any statistics or evidence for this claim?
Agreed.
We need to kill the genie.
We can not let a dying Bronze Age ponzi scheme determine the destiny of our nation.
Tax the church!
Sorry – You can't "redefine" the Word of God. It cannot be redefined. Those who give the Word of God their own interpretation without the help of the church or according to what best fits them are dead wrong.
@Vik
So you r saying it is okay to redefine it with the help of the Church, which protects Ped.ophiles and punishes the butler?
Simran – Nobody is redefining it. Peds have existed forever and probably will always exist. They have infiltrated themselves at all levels of society just like thieves, killers, adulterers and the like.. Civil authorities have to do their job and the church cannot prevent them from doing so. Not everyone that calls himself a man of God is one either. This is what my church has always taught me, not to put my eyes on mere men.. but put on ONLY on that who can save me. I don't follow men, or priests or pastors or nothing.. I follow Jesus. My priests have always made it very clear.
@ Vik,
So you think the scripture as it stands today hasnot been redefined to suit the needs of the Church from time to time?
@Simran – The Word has never been redefined. Practices have been so that we may accomodate our lives to live according to the Word as God intended. in other words for the good of the people. You can tell when something comes from God and when it doesn't.. Abortion, contraception, gay marriage.. YOU KNOW they cannot come from God.
How can you be so certain that God wanted a women whose child has a birth defect (who is going to die at birth anyways) to live through the hell of 9 months and wait for the D-day, especially when she can do something about it? For example, anencephaly.
God creates life, but he also creates disease. Then why fight it? Why not just call it the curse of God, like they called it in the times of Black death???
The Word is in the Book. Were you there for all the 2000 yrs to witness that no one ever changed the Word??? And yes you can argue that neither was I, to witness it was?
@Simran – The interpretation of the Word is given by the Church. Those who want to give it their own interpretation have gone to open up a bunch of garage "churches" to adhere to the Word as they please. Absolutely not God's intention. Jesus never said, Go and separate and eveyone can give the Word their own interpretation as they please.. "Whatever makes you happy"
Vik, you seem pretty offended by a simple question.
"The interpretation of the Word is given by the Church"- well that is exactly my point. Given the history of the Church and the current state of Vatican, how can I be sure that the Church did not alter it in 2000 yrs?
"The interpretation of the Word is given by the Church"
There is more than 1 church and more than 1 interpretation.
Jen – What does "being more like Jesus" mean to you?? Being tolerant of sinners or being tolerant of sin??
@Simran – Offended by that question?? not at all. The church is not asking me to do what the church wants me to do. They are helping me interpret the word of God and in my heart, my spirit, my soul, it makes sense. It is not easy to follow Jesus yet the rewards I obtain in my everyday life are huge. The Catholic church has a history of over 2,000 years from Peter to Benedict XVI – has the church made mistakes in the past? YOU BET! Yet the teachings of my church as it stands today are not wrong. We are all sinners, we are all imperfect, and the devil is there setting traps everywhere all the time. If you can't recongnize those traps you fall prey easily.
The division of the Church started because the church had become corrupt.
@J.W – corrupt or not, that is an issue that is resolved from within not from outside by going and creating a bunch of garage churches. We're all supposed to be one. Division ONLY comes from the devil.
Where does corruption come from if division come from the devil?
Vik
Please read: A Dark History: The Popes: Vice, Murder, and Corruption in the Vatican, by Brenda Ralph Lewis
And yes, about interpreting the Bible, why should I not interpret it on my own without the help of a wicked Church? And yes, then the interpretation will be different from person to person, depending on the intellect of an individual. While you are so hell bent on believing that god didnot want contraception, I am still wondering how did they practice contraception at that time to even comment on it? Oh yes, u r thinking bcoz he was god, he knew we will invent contraceptives in the 20th century! Fair enough.
"the devil is there setting traps everywhere all the time. If you can't recongnize those traps you fall prey easily"
Do you really believe in an invisible power called devil also? You have to coz only then u can believe in the anti-devil. These are concepts, which Jesus used to make people understand the value of morality, fables and stories only. They give a message, they are not the truth. Just like earth is round, not flat. Just like earth is not the centre of the universe. Just like Sun existed even before earth arrived.
Vik,
Give this a thought.
Those against birth control say that since the bearing of children is the only God give purpose for marital relations, it is a sin to have such se.xual relations while purposely avoiding the possibility of bearing children by using birth control. God plainly teaches, in the passages mentioned, that husband and wife should fulfill one another's se.xual needs. This necessitates regular marital relations. God has-given us the good sense to know how to accomplish this without necessarily having children.
If some precautions are not taken, a couple will normally produce about one child a year. Too many children creates other problems about which the Bible speaks. The Apostle Paul says in I Timothy 5:8, "If a man provide not for those of his own house, he has denied the faith and is worse than an infid.el." There are two ways a man could fail to provide for his own. One would be not to work. The other would be to generate so many children that he could not provide for their needs. If we insist that couples neither deny themselves se.xually nor take precautions against conception, but simultaneously insist that the children be supported, we are (for most couples) insisting both on an impossibility and upon a contradiction of plain Bible teaching. The only alternatives the opponents of birth control give mankind is either abstinence, with its pressures toward forni.cation, or 20 to 25 children for the average couple. The Bible denies both of these.
It is sad that many people have been caused to suffer because of an arbitrary religious conclusion that does not reflect the teaching of the Word of God. This should be an encouragement to each of us to study the Bible for ourselves; this is how God has always intended that His word be studied.
get rid of religious tax exemptions and get religion out of politics....
enough with the faerie tales
Simran-you are obviously a Catholic hater with all this pedophilia stuff. However, if you talk to people in other countries they will usually emphasize that this is mostly a problem with the American Catholic Church, the emphasis being on the American part, not the Catholic part.
"Please read: A Dark History: The Popes: Vice, Murder, and Corruption in the Vatican, by Brenda Ralph Lewis "
I have to admit thats a real fun read, although I suspect that the fact that you can buy it in Barnes and Noble for $3.50 in a large pile at the door probably tells you a bit the the peer review quality!
If you want something with a bit more substance and still reasonablt juicy try "From Dawn to Decadence" by Jacques Barzun.
There are hundreds of religions and thousand of sects. Whatever religious tool is used by each religion to promote their agenda is not the only word of God. One thing is for sure. We will all die painful deaths. We will all be left with only the memories of how we lived. All of this will be true for most middle age people in the next 20-30 years.
The word bigotted comes to mind every time I see such words as 'Catholic' or 'woman', liberal, 'gay' or any other label we apply to each other. It is ironic that we do understand that we each have a unique perspective of the world caused by our very personal life experience that is duplicated by no other- even an identical twin, yet we group people and talk of them as it they are cookie cut outs of one another. Every time I see a group reference of a behavior or belief, images of those who are part of the group come to mind for the variation of behaviors exhibited by individuasls within that group. So, the one thing I can pronounce is that the idea of tolerance and the idea that any of us is free of intolerance, discrimination, bigotry is simply an idea we hold anout ourselves that does not exist. We are humans- bigotted, intolerant, discriminatory and excessively selfish and ...I have no problem with that. In fact, it is humorous to think we are anything but that and that those who procalim special knowledge or understanding, such as the author of this article, demonstrates my point exactly. The sda thing is we read such things and gleam meaning from the meaningless.
Wow Dawn, you have discovered Anarchy!
It is the favorite past time of lots of people who don't have jobs!
ViK, why do you find it necessary to second-guess god? If anyone is worshipping in a way that works for him, why do you think you need to question it and intervene? If your god can get your wife pregnant, why does he need your help to police the joint? Why does your puny god require your defense? Why does he need you to run others' lives for them? Why does he need you to question their beliefs when said beliefs don't have even an iota of effect on you or yours?
What part of "butt out" is unclear to you?
Don't call yourself a Christian if you support abortion, contracetpion and marriage other than one between men and women. When these values get distorted, society as a whole loses. Just look at our current society. America keeps getting worse and worse and it's because it's core moral values are so degraded.
That's not the test that the founder of Christianity, Jesus Christ, used to define his Faith. John 13,35.
What does contraception have to do with Christianity?
Topher – what is contraception used for? God is the one who creates and ends life. NOT us.
Just a funny thought, why did they worry about not allowing contraception back in the days when they wrote this book? How did they practice contraception???
True. But my point was that only the Catholics don't like contraception. And using some types of contraception doesn't end a life (though I would argue that the pill does.)
Topher...the pill does not end life. The pill simulates pregnancy by messing w/ hormone levels, preventing the egg from being released from the ovary. No life is destroyed, even by the strict Catholic definition
Topher – Where do you get your information from AND are you a Christian? Any true Christian doesn't like nor accept any methods of contraception. Christians know who creates life and when contraception is used We are telling God that he is wrong in creating life. Any Christian knows this.
@nmmell08
And when YOU are messing with your body to prevent it from procreating life AS GOD created it – What are you doing? Aren't you telling God that he is wrong in creating life??
nmmell08
I beg to differ. All oral contraceptives have an abortafaciant in it. Meaning, if the chemicals fail to prevent a pregnancy that life will die (I think it has more to do with not attaching to the wall.) Now I agree that this isn't what happens every time, but it does happen.
ViK100
I'm Baptist. You? I admit I could be wrong on this issue, but I've never heard any Protestant denomination say not to use any contraception.
We are telling God that he is wrong in creating life.
So why is cutting or shaving of hair approved? Aren't we telling God the same thing again that he is wrong in growing them?
A) I'm a guy, so don't have to worry about me messing with hormones. B) I think that is plan B that has that way of working (not implanting into the wall), I have looked into Oral Contraceptives chemicals b/c as a biochemistry major and the active ingrediants are hormonal analogs. C) What freaking right do you have Vik of telling me or anyway what I can do with my body.
Oral contraception does not cause abortion, Topher. It is not an abortifascient.
Not all Christians are opposed to artificial contraception at all, and for someone to make this statement shows an astounding depth of ignorance.
How is using "natural family planning" any less 'wrong' in the minds of fundies than using any other kind? You're still preventing a pregnancy from occurring by doing something yourself instead of just "letting go and letting God" you silly sheep.
And my last post could of not been more incoherent. Lets try that one again A) I'm a guy, don't use the pill. b) my female friends have asked me to look into what is in the pill since I'm a biochemistry major, its hormone analogs. Plan B works with the preventing implant thing. C) Vik...what right do you have to tell me or my female friends, or ANYONE what they can do with there body. Take the plank out of your eye before you try to remove the splinter in mine (Jesus)
Vik, just blow. You don't get to define belief, god, christianity, right and wrong, or anything else for anyone else but yourself. There are millions of christians who believe differently than you do, and you hardly appear to be in any position of authority.
Ummm....no....regular oral contraceptives keep a woman from ovulating (releasing an egg) each month. No egg – no fertilized egg. They don't keep a fertilized egg from attaching to the wall. Those are emergency oral contraceptives. Get your facts straight.
@Topher – I'm a Catholic and I know for a fact that other Christian denominations like Babtists have it clear as well. You can ask your Pastor or other Pastors but the undelining truth remains regardless of whom you ask. ONLY and ONLY GOD can create life. He knows when to give it and when to take it. When we accept the will of GOD that's when our lives change and we can see how GOD works, when we prevent him form doing his work, what could we expect to see?
Educate yourselves:
Normally a woman becomes pregnant when an egg released from her ovary (the organ that holds her eggs) is fertilized by a man's s perm. The fertilized egg attaches to the inside of a woman's womb (uterus), where it receives nourishment and develops into a baby. Hormones in the woman's body control the release of the egg from the ovary - called ovulation - and prepare the body to accept the fertilized egg.
Hormonal contraceptives (the pill, the patch, and the va ginal ring) all contain a small amount of man-made estrogen and progestin hormones. These hormones work to inhibit the body's natural cyclical hormones to prevent pregnancy. Pregnancy is prevented by a combination of factors. The hormonal contraceptive usually stops the body from ovulating. Hormonal contraceptives also change the cervical mucus to make it difficult for the sperm to find an egg. Hormonal contraceptives can also prevent pregnancy by making the lining of the womb inhospitable for implantation.
How is our country getting worse?
ViK, you don't know anything for a fact.
@Simran – I'm a Catholic, not muslim nor Jewish. So the hair thing does not apply after Jesus came and taught us what we know today.
@nmmell08
Brother – I'm not telling you nor forcing you to do what I want with your body. Your body and soul were not created by you, were they?. If what you do with your body pleases your creator, then go ahead.
Ridiculous thinking. So I guess we should all have twenty or so kids. And each couple should ensure that we are doing it during ovulation so that we don't interfere with life (after all – isn't avoiding s-x during fertile periods also not keeping life from happening – ie an abortion?). That poor egg is just going to die if it doesn't get fertilized.
My husband is Catholic but luckily is not insane.
Vik, just out of curiosity, are you male or female? And how old are you?
@Jen – Are you saying that God is crazy in how he creates everything?? The only thing that separate us from God is "Will" you have the will to do right and to do wrong. If you think that God is wrong in procreating life with you and your husband, then I will stop right there. I'm a male, 40 yrs old, 5 beatiful children, and extremely happy to know and have a relationship with my creator. I know those children don't belong to me, they belong to God and I know very clearly that he would not have sent them to me if I couldn't care for them. Many couples want to have kids, not everyone can and you wonder why?
@vik: i don't know about you but i was "created" by my parents. they both supplied equal portions of DNA from two opposite mytosed cells (egg and sperm) the egg just happen to be fertilized by a "Y" chromozone sperm making me a male.
thus no god required as a "creator" for humans to procreate, otherwise atheists wouldn't have offspring; which is more proof god is fake.
You're 40 years old, and you believe this crap? You're a man. You don't get pregnant. You have no say in what a woman does with her body and your god is irrelevant.
ViK says that many people want children and can't have them–wonder why?
No, I don't 'wonder why'. I wonder why a nut like you thinks he does "know why".
@Wasp – God allows it for a reason.
Translation of Vik's post: ViK hasn't got a clue.
Exactly Tom tom!! Vik – only people that can get pregnant get a say. I am currently pregnant with my third child and the only person that gets a say in what happens to it is me (even my husband knows this – he knows how hard it is for me to be pregnant and he would NEVER say otherwise). No one created my children except for me and my husband – not God – nope! My children will be raised to be tolerant and loving human beings; so unfortunate that your children are being raised to be hateful bigots.
And you have NO RIGHT to tell other people if they are Christians or not. My husband is Catholic and is very pro-choice and pro gay marriage. Where people like you have the right to tell him he's not what he is is beyond me. You say God is in control of everything but then you want to judge and control everyone on the planet. It's hilarious and pathetic.
Tom – unfortunately I have been a lot like St. Thomas. I don't believe until I see.. AND I have seen a lot of what God has done in my life and also in the lives of many of my brothers and sisters in our community. I have seen it with my own eyes. To deny it would be like lying and I won't do that.
But you are lying, ViK. You are lying when you claim to know that contraception is a sin. You are lying when you say anyone who supports gay marriage or the right to choose or uses contraception isn't a christian. You don't get to define christianity for anyone but yourself. Mind your own damn business.
Jen – When have I told you what to do?? am I right there twisting your arm or your husbands?? In our marriage WE PRAY when we want children and we also pray when we think we can't have them. We have gone years without having them ONLY God knows when to send them to us. If you're an atheist you can live that way, I do not care. You have free will. If you're husband calls himself a Catholic, I don't know what Catholic church he attends or whom his pastor is but this is engraved in the cathesism of the Catholic church and I know for a fact that is absolutely NOT a teaching of the Catholic church.
I'm a Catholic, not muslim nor Jewish. So the hair thing does not apply after Jesus came and taught us what we know today.
And what exactly did Jesus tell you about the hair???
Guess what the hair follicles are pretty much alive, you shave them, they grow right back.
Maybe, he told you that since Muslims, Sikhs etc are going to keep them, you need to remove them – bcoz u are different, you are the followers of the only true God.
How can a born-again Christian who reads and knows the words of God support gay marriage or abortion?
You don't have any business proclaiming that someone else is not a Catholic, Baptist, Lutheran, or anything else, ViK.
When did your god tell you to do this?
I don't need to be born again. I was born correctly the first time.
"How can a born-again Christian who reads and knows the words of God support gay marriage"
Some argue that since homosexual behavior is "unnatural" it is contrary to the order of creation. Behind this pronouncement are stereotypical definitions of masculinity and femininity that reflect rigid gender categories of patriarchal society. There is nothing unnatural about any shared love, even between two of the same gender, if that experience calls both partners to a fuller state of being. Contemporary research is uncovering new facts that are producing a rising conviction that homosexuality, far from being a sickness, sin, perversion or unnatural act, is a healthy, natural and affirming form of human sexuality for some people. Findings indicate that homosexuality is a given fact in the nature of a significant portion of people, and that it is unchangeable.
Our prejudice rejects people or things outside our understanding. But the God of creation speaks and declares, "I have looked out on everything I have made and `behold it (is) very good'." . The word (Genesis 1:31) of God in Christ says that we are loved, valued, redeemed, and counted as precious no matter how we might be valued by a prejudiced world.
There are few biblical references to homosexuality. The first, the story of Sodom and Gomorrah, is often quoted to prove that the Bible condemns homosexuality. But the real sin of Sodom was the unwillingness of the city's men to observe the laws of hospitality. The intention was to insult the stranger by forcing him to take the female role in the sex act. The biblical narrative approves Lot's offer of his virgin daughters to satisfy the sexual demands of the mob. How many would say, "This is the word of the Lord"? When the Bible is quoted literally, it might be well for the one quoting to read the text in its entirety.
Leviticus, in the Hebrew Scriptures, condemns homosexual behaviour, at least for males. Yet, "abomination", the word Leviticus uses to describe homosexuality, is the same word used to describe a menstruating woman. Paul is the most quoted source in the battle to condemn homosexuality ( 1 Corinthians 6: 9-11 and Romans 1: 26-27). But homosexual activity was regarded by Paul as a punishment visited upon idolaters by God because of their unfaithfulness. Homosexuality was not the sin but the punishment.
1 Corinthians 6:9-11, Paul gave a list of those who would not inherit the Kingdom of God. That list included the immoral, idolaters, adulterers, sexual perverts, thieves, the greedy, drunkards, revilers, and robbers. Sexual perverts is a translation of two words; it is possible that the juxtaposition of malakos, the soft, effeminate word, with arsenokoitus, or male prostitute, was meant to refer to the passive and active males in a homosexual liaison.
Thus, it appears that Paul would not approve of homosexual behavior. But was Paul's opinion about homosexuality accurate, or was it limited by the lack of scientific knowledge in his day and infected by prejudice born of ignorance? An examination of some of Paul's other assumptions and conclusions will help answer this question. Who today would share Paul's anti-Semitic attitude, his belief that the authority of the state was not to be challenged, or that all women ought to be veiled? In these attitudes Paul's thinking has been challenged and transcended even by the church! Is Paul's commentary on homosexuality more absolute than some of his other antiquated, culturally conditioned ideas?
Three other references in the New Testament (in Timothy, Jude and 2 Peter) appear to be limited to condemnation of male sex slaves in the first instance, and to showing examples (Sodom and Gomorrah) of God's destruction of unbelievers and heretics (in Jude and 2 Peter respectively).
That is all that Scripture has to say about homosexuality. Even if one is a biblical literalist, these references do not build an ironclad case for condemnation. If one is not a biblical literalist there is no case at all, nothing but prejudice born of ignorance, that attacks people whose only crime is to be born with an unchangeable sexual predisposition toward those of their own sex.
You specifically said that someone can not call themselves a Christian if they are pro gay marriage or pro choice. My husband is very aware of the Church's teachings. Last we noticed none of those people are god, so they have no authority on anything. They have no right to judge others (neither do you), and by doing so are directly going against the bible (unlike abortion or gay marriage, neither of which is even mentioned in the bible).
My husband and I did not pray at all and got pregnant every time we tried on the first try. Proves god had nothing to do with it. So if I didn't use contraception I would have at least 10 kids by now – no thanks! I feel badly for any couple that has problems conceiving but any rational person would tell them to go to a fertility clinic, not pray on it.
"knows the words of God support gay marriage'
The most beautiful word in the Gospel of Jesus Christ is "whosoever." All of God's promises are intended for every human being. This includes gay men and lesbians. How tragic it is that the Christian Church has excluded and persecuted people who are homosexual! We are all created with powerful needs for personal relationships. Our quality of life depends upon the love we share with others, whether family or friends, partners or peers. Yet, lesbians and gay men facing hostile attitudes in society often are denied access to healthy relationships. Jesus Christ calls us to find ultimate meaning in life through a personal relationship with our Creator. This important spiritual union can bring healing and strength to all of our human relationships
Biblical Interpretation and Theology also change from time to time. Approximately 150 years ago in the United States, some Christian teaching held that there was a two-fold moral order: black and white. Whites were thought to be superior to blacks, therefore blacks were to be subservient and slavery was an institution ordained by God. Clergy who supported such an abhorrent idea claimed the authority of the Bible. The conflict over slavery led to divisions which gave birth to some major Christian denominations. These same denominations, of course, do not support slavery today. Did the Bible change? No, their interpretation of the Bible did!
Genesis 19:1-25
Some "televangelists" carelessly proclaim that God destroyed the ancient cities of Sodom and Gomorrah because of "homosexuality." Although some theologians have equated the sin of Sodom with homosexuality, a careful look at Scripture corrects such ignorance. Announcing judgment on these cities in Genesis 18, God sends two angels to Sodom, where Abraham's nephew, Lot, persuades them to stay in his home. Genesis 19 records that "all the people from every quarter" surround Lot's house demanding the release of his visitors so "we might know them." The Hebrew word for "know" in this case, yadha, usually means "have thorough knowledge of." It could also express intent to examine the visitors' credentials, or on rare occasions the term implies sexual intercourse. If the latter was the author's intended meaning, it would have been a clear case of attempted gang rape. Several observations are important.
First, the judgment on these cities for their wickedness had been announced prior to the alleged homosexual incident. Second, all of Sodom's people participated in the assault on Lot's house; in no culture has more than a small minority of the population been homosexual. Third, Lot's offer to release his daughters suggests he knew his neighbors to have heterosexual interests. Fourth, if the issue was sexual, why did God spare Lot, who immediately commits incest with his daughters? Most importantly, why do all the other passages of Scripture referring to this account fail to raise the issue of homosexuality?
Romans 1:24-27
Most New Testament books, including the four Gospels, are silent on same-sex acts, and Paul is the only author who makes any reference to the subject. The most negative statement by Paul regarding same-sex acts occurs in Romans 1:24-27 where, in the context of a larger argument on the need of all people for the gospel of Jesus Christ, certain homosexual behavior is given as an example of the "uncleanness" of idolatrous Gentiles.
This raises the question: Does this passage refer to all homosexual acts, or to certain homosexual behavior known to Paul's readers? The book of Romans was written to Jewish and Gentile Christians in Rome, who would have been familiar with the infamous sexual excesses of their contemporaries, especially Roman emperors. They would also have been aware of tensions in the early Church regarding Gentiles and observance of the Jewish laws, as noted in Acts 15 and Paul's letter to the Galatians. Jewish laws in Leviticus mentioned male same-sex acts in the context of idolatry.
The homosexual practices cited in Romans 1:24-27 were believed to result from idolatry and are associated with some very serious offenses as noted in Romans 1. Taken in this larger context, it should be obvious that such acts are significantly different from loving, responsible lesbian and gay relationships seen today.
What is "Natural"?
Significant to Paul's discussion is the fact that these "unclean" Gentiles exchanged that which
was "natural" for them, physin, in the Greek text, for something "unnatural," para physin. In
Romans 11:24, God acts in an "unnatural" way, para physin, to accept the Gentiles. "Unnatural" in
these passages does not refer to violation of so-called laws of nature, but rather implies action
contradicting one's own nature. In view of this, we should observe that it is "unnatural," para
physin, for a person today with a lesbian or gay sexual orientation to attempt living a heterosexual
lifestyle.
I Corinthians 6:9
Any consideration of New Testament statements on same-sex acts must carefully view the social
context of the Greco-Roman culture in which Paul ministered. Prostitution and pederasty (sexual relationships of adult men with boys) were the most commonly known male same-sex acts. In I Corinthians 6:9, Paul condemns those who are "effeminate" and "abusers of themselves with mankind," as translated in the King James version. Unfortunately, some new translations are worse, rendering these words "homosexuals." Recent scholarship unmasks the homophobia behind such mistranslations.
The first word – malakos, in the Greek text-which has been translated "effeminate" or "soft," most likely refers to someone who lacks discipline or moral control. The word is used elsewhere in the New Testament but never with reference to sexuality.
The second word, Arsenokoitai, occurs once each in I Corinthians and I Timothy (1:10), but nowhere else in other literature of the period. It is derived from two Greek words, one meaning, "males" and the other "beds", a euphemism for sexual intercourse. Other Greek words were commonly used to describe homosexual behavior but do not appear here. The larger context of I Corinthians 6 shows Paul extremely concerned with prostitution, so it is very possible he was referring to male prostitutes. But many experts now attempting to translate these words have reached a simple conclusion: their precise meaning is uncertain. Scripture Study Conclusion…No Law Against Love
The rarity with which Paul discusses any form of same-sex behavior and the ambiguity in references attributed to him make it extremely unsound to conclude any sure position in the New Testament on homosexuality, especially in the context of loving, responsible relationships. Since any arguments must be made from silence, it is much more reliable to turn to great principles of the Gospel taught by Jesus Christ and the Apostles. Love God with all your heart, and love your neighbor as yourself. Do not judge others, lest you be judged. The fruit of the Holy Spirit is love . . . against such there is no law. One thing is abundantly clear, as Paul stated in Galatians 5:14: "...the whole Law is fulfilled in one statement, 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself".
@Simran – what does the hair have to do with being a Christian?
Jen – what is your husband doing in the Catholic church if he's not following the teachings of the Catholic Church?? I don't get it. Unless he's a new catholic and wants to learn the church's teachings but you don't go to church and follow Jesus they way YOU think you should.. Jesus was very clear.. Mathew 16:24 "Then Jesus said to his disciples, "If any of you wants to be my follower, you must turn from your selfish ways, take up your cross, and follow me"
vik,
Well my question was very simple, why should we not respect everything in God's creation, including our hair? Why does our hair have to be any different than any other body part?
I am just thinking why would he first put hair on our bodies and then be okay if we cut them???
I never said Christian! I am just talking about respecting God in his entirety.
No, of course you dont understand the concept bcoz you follow the Bible for its word. And this is not written there.
Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son
ViK, why do you find it necessary to second-guess god? If anyone is worshipping in a way that works for him, why do you think you need to question it and intervene? If your god can get your wife pregnant, why does he need your help to police the joint? Why does your puny god require your defense? Why does he need you to run others' lives for them? Why does he need you to question their beliefs when said beliefs don't have even an iota of effect on you or yours?
What part of "butt out" is unclear to you?
Vik, what are you doing in the Catholic church when you are intolerant, judgmental and clearly an extremely unkind person?
Try to worm your way around ho.mos.ex.uality being a sin all you want. But when you do you show you do not understand the Gospel or the Bible. That is that none of us are good, "no, not one." We all deserve to go to Hell. Not only ho.mo.se.xuals, but he.te.ro.se.xuals who commit their own sins. But God did not wish any to perish, so he came to be a "ransom for many." He died on the cross taking the punishment you and I deserve so that when we die we can be seen as clean. In order to receive this gift, we must repent (not just say you are sorry but turn from those sins) and trust in the Savior. So if you have told lies, you should repent and trust. If you have stolen anything, you should repent and trust. If you have committed ANY se.xual sin, you must repent and trust. Let me give you a quote from Luke 13 that might help support this ...
"There were some present at that very time who told him about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices. And he (Jesus) answered them, 'Do you think that these Galileans were worse sinners than all the other Galileans, because they suffered in this way? No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish. Or those eighteen on whom the tower in Siloam fell and killed them: do you think that they were worse offenders than all the others who lived in Jerusalem? No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish."
So while ho.mo.se.xuality is blatantly a sin in the Bible, so is lying, stealing, looking with lust, getting drunk, etc., etc., we must all repent of what we've done.
"So while ho.mo.se.xuality is blatantly a sin in the Bible"
As Christian clergy we proclaim the Good News concerning Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) persons and publicly apologize where we have been silent. As disciples of Jesus, who assures us that the truth sets us free, we recognize that the debate is over. The verdict is in. Homosexuality is not a sickness, not a choice, and not a sin. We find no rational biblical or theological basis to condemn or deny the rights of any person based on sexual orientation. Silence by many has allowed political and religious rhetoric to monopolize public perception, creating the impression that there is only one Christian perspective on this issue. Yet we recognize and celebrate that we are far from alone, as Christians, in affirming that LGBT persons are distinctive, holy, and precious gifts to all who struggle to become the family of God.
In repentance and obedience to the Holy Spirit, we stand in solidarity as those who are committed to work and pray for full acceptance and inclusion of LGBT persons in our churches and in our world. We lament that LGBT persons are condemned and excluded by individuals and institutions, political and religious, who claim to be speaking the truth of Christian teaching. This leads directly and indirectly to intolerance, discrimination, suffering, and even death. The Holy Spirit compels us:
-to affirm that the essence of Christian life is not focused on sexual orientation, but how one lives by grace in relationship with God, with compassion toward humanity;
–to embrace the full inclusion of our LGBT brothers and sisters in all areas of church life, including leadership;
–to declare that the violence must stop. Christ’s love moves us to work for the healing of wounded souls who are victims of abuse often propagated in the name of Christ;
–to celebrate the prophetic witness of all people who have refused to let the voice of intolerance and violence speak for Christianity, especially LGBT persons, who have met hatred with love;
Therefore we call for an end to all religious and civil discrimination against any person based on sexual orientation and gender identity and expression. All laws must include and protect the freedoms, rights, and equal legal standing of all persons, in and outside the church.
"Try to worm your way around ho.mos.ex.uality being a sin all you want."
The scriptures actually say nothing about homosexuality as a psychosexual orientation. Our understandings of sexual orientation are distinctly modern ones that were not present in the minds of Scripture writers. A few passages of Scripture (seven at the most) object to certain types of same-sex expressions or acts. The particular acts in question, however, are sexual expressions which are exploitative, oppressive, commercialized, or offensive to ancient purity rituals. There is no Scriptural guidance for same-sex relationships which are loving and mutually respecting. Guidelines for these relationships should come from the same general Scriptural norms that apply to heterosexual relationships.
Jen – Was Jesus intolerant when he kicked the money changers out of the temple?
"As Christian clergy ..."
Who are these people? Who signed that docu.ment? Are any of them considered orthodox and not heretics?
"100 Ministers Proclamation"
It's actually up to 259 ministers that have signed it. The word is getting around.
Jesus hung out with sinners. Even he wasn't judgmental and he was the only one who was allowed to! You should consider trying to be more like that. Treat people like they want to be treated. My husband lives like that and he is the nicest, most wonderful guy you could meet. You can call him non-Xtian all you want, but he's a much nicer person then you could ever hope to be.
James
"The scriptures actually say nothing about hom.ose.x.uality as a psy.chos.exu.al orientation."
I don't even know what that means, and I don't care. The Bible is clear that the act is a sin. Now, can you be a person who has those inclinations and feelings and still repent, trust in the Savior and be a Christian? Yes, I believe so. But you can't live in sin and be a Christian.
It's a sin. Just like a loving, het.ero.se.xu.al relationship before marriage is a sin. The Bible is very clear that two of the same gender together is wrong but also clearly marks that opposing genders is right.
Jen
Yes, Jesus hung out with sinners, but he wasn't tolerant of sin. If you've sinned, you will be cast away. Have you read the Gospels? Do you remember what Jesus said about the people who will come to Him on Judgment Day and say "Lord, Lord, Have we not done many works in your name?" What did Jesus say to them? "I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness."
You and your husband could be the nicest people on the planet for all I know. But that would be in comparison to other men. We need to compare ourselves with God and His standards, of which we all fall short.
"The Bible is very clear that two of the same gender together is wrong but also clearly marks that opposing genders is right"
Only prejudice people read that into the bible. What your bible condemns is rape, worshiping a pagan god using sex and idolatry, there is NOTHING in the bible that condemns the saved loving long term relationship of a gay couple as we know and understand it today. The experts have proven that being gay is normal, it's not a mental illness and it can't be voluntarily changed. Oh...that's right you don't care about the REAL facts.
Heterosexual behavior and homosexual behavior are normal aspects of human sexuality. Despite the persistence of stereotypes that portray lesbian, gay, and bisexual people as disturbed, several decades of research and clinical experience have led all mainstream medical and mental health organizations in this country to conclude that these orientations represent normal forms of human experience. The American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Counseling Association, the American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association, the American School Counselor Association, the National Association of School Psychologists, and the National Association of SocialWorkers, together representing more than 480,000 mental health professionals, have all taken the position that homosexuality is not a mental disorder and thus is not something that needs to or can be “cured."
Social science has shown that the concerns often raised about children of lesbian and gay parents—concerns that are generally grounded in prejudice against and stereotypes about gay people—are unfounded. Overall, the research indicates that the children of lesbian and gay parents do not differ from the children of heterosexual parents in their development, adjustment, or overall well-being.
Topher, you have some screwed up views of the world if you think that being a miserable, mean, intolerant hateful person will get you somewhere nice and pretty when you die. But go ahead and continue judging, and feeling superior to others to make you feel better about your terrible and pathetic little life. Good luck with that.
What are you going to do if one of your children turns out to be gay, Topher? Tell him/her to be celibate forever? Never to have a committed relationship with a person he/she loves? Tell him/her to 'change' orientation? Do some research and find out how well that works.
Jen
"Topher, you have some screwed up views of the world if you think that being a miserable, mean, intolerant hateful person will get you somewhere nice and pretty when you die."
What have I said that was mean, intolerant and hateful? And I don't think those things will get me to Heaven. Only by the grace of God through Jesus Christ will get me to Heaven. There is no good works or deeds I can do to get me there. That's what the Bible says.
"But go ahead and continue judging, and feeling superior to others to make you feel better about your terrible and pathetic little life. Good luck with that."
Wait, didn't you just judge me and call me "miserable, mean, intolerant hateful person"? I don't feel superior at all. In fact, I basically feel like a worm ... a wretched, disgusting sinner. I'd only feel better if you repent and trust the Savior.
Topher I don't feel superior at all. In fact, I basically feel like a worm ... a wretched, disgusting sinner. I'd only feel better if you repent and trust the Savior.
What unmitigated bullsh!t.
Why don't you worry about yourself Topher and let me worry about myself okay? I don't need to repent for anything. I'm perfectly fine with all my decisions. If you think me, my husband, my two kids under four and my unborn baby are headed for a pit of fire, go ahead and continue believing it. Please believe me when I say I REALLY DON'T CARE what you think...got it?
When will people understand that I don't have to live by your stupid beliefs????
"Please believe me when I say I REALLY DON'T CARE what you think...got it?
When will people understand that I don't have to live by your stupid beliefs????"
You should it's uneducated bozos like Topher that vote to block the civil rights of others because they don't really understand the constitution.
Jen
But I do worry about you because you clearly do not know the Gospel. You can reject it if you want, but I think you owe it to yourself to at least find out what it says. Have you ever told a lie? Stolen anything regardless of how small, worthless or long ago it was? Have you ever taken the Lord's name in vain? Did you know that Jesus said looking with lust is adultery in the heart? When you stand before God on Judgment Day, will He find you innocent or guilty? I don't talk with you about these things because I want to insult you or make you mad. I'm just trying to warn you against the wrath to come and tell you there is a way to be forgiven. I care about you whether you believe it or not. Please think about these things. None of us are promised another day. And consider my motives. I don't want your money and I'm not trying to get you to come to my church. I only care where you spend eternity. That's all.
Jen – Are you more like Jesus than me or others?
OMG Topher has turned into Ray Comfort. Next he'll be talking about bananas!
And those bananas won't be in pajamas.
Unfortunately you're right Steve, but slowly but surely the Tophers are becoming a minority whether the like it or not.
Top her, you're one of those people that goes door to door aren't you? I've encountered people like you before. I am a highly educated, happily married mother with a great career. I'm intelligent enough to make my own decisions. I don't believe in ANYTHING you're saying. I'm agnostic. My husband is Catholic and he doesn't believe most of the crap you're saying (again go ahead and call him non-Christian- I'm sure that even though god is the only judge he really means 'me and Topher'). You can preach all you want. You can believe in whatever you want to. You will NEVER CONVINCE ME or anyone as educated as me. Just won't happen.....
Vik – I live by the rule of treating others like I want to be treated. You don't. I guess it depends on how important you think that rule is. I'm not trying to be like Jesus. I'm agnostic. I also believe in live and let live. I totally stand by your right to be pro life and therefore opting not to abort (not that you can anyway), or to marry a woman. That's your right. But you don't get to infringe on my rights. I'm having a tubal libation when I have this baby. The fact that you think I'm going to go to h-ll for that is laughable.
Jen
Whether Christians are a minority or not has nothing to do with whether Jesus Christ is Lord.
"Top her, you're one of those people that goes door to door aren't you?"
I have, yes. 🙂
"You can preach all you want. You can believe in whatever you want to. You will NEVER CONVINCE ME or anyone as educated as me. Just won't happen....."
I don't think that's true. It sounds like you're saying no one with an education is a Christian. I can tell you I have had a very good education (and that was before I became a Christian.) You say you are an agnostic, which means you don't know whether there is a god or not. So there may be some hope you will change your mind.
Let me ask you this ... For you personally, what keeps you from thinking God is real?
'ligation' – and a typo in the post before – whoops
I find Jen to be more Christlike that Vik from what I can see.
Yikes – I would never try to convert someone (my husband is Catholic and I respect his beliefs even though I don't agree with a lot of them). I realize there are educated Christians Topher. My husband is one of them (whether you call him one or not). I'm saying that at my level of education (as someone who has considered all of the information), you will not change my belief system. Anyone that can change their entire belief system from someone showing up at their door is simply not intelligent.
I'm agnostic in the sense that I am not sure if there is any greater force in the universe. I'm pretty positive that there is nothing after death but I can't say for 100 percent certainty. I certainly don't believe in the Christian god. That was made up by people. The bible was made up. Jesus was just another mortal man. There was no flood, no Adam and Eve, there is no one reading the thoughts of seven billion people, there's no one looking at who is in my bedroom, etc etc. Those things
I'm sure of. Never going to change my mind on those things. Never.
"For you personally, what keeps you from thinking God is real?"
For the same reasons that Zeus isn't real.
If there is a creator do you think he would have the ability to read the thoughts of 7 billion people?
J.W – I see you don't believe in God.
How did I give the slightest indication that I don't believe in God?
Jen
Thanks for your honesty. You understand why I'm trying to convert you, right?
I have no idea if your husband has been born again or not.
"Anyone that can change their entire belief system from someone showing up at their door is simply not intelligent."
I wouldn't say they aren't intelligent, but I would say it isn't a wise move. Even if I showed up at your door and made such a compelling argument that you considered changing your mind, I'd tell you this ... don't just believe me. Look at the Bible and see what it says. Judge my words based on that. Look at the evidence. Even though all the atheists on this board will tell you there is none, there is if you are willing to look at it.
"I'm agnostic in the sense that I am not sure if there is any greater force in the universe. I'm pretty positive that there is nothing after death but I can't say for 100 percent certainty."
That's exactly why I ask you to look into it. If the Bible is right and you die without a Savior and remission of sins, you'll be in big trouble. That goes for anyone reading this message board. We can't just compare ourselves to other people. We must see what God's standards are and what is expected of us. Think about how loving a story the cross is. Read what God received before and during the crucifiction. He was falsely accused, spit on, punched, slapped, had his beard ripped out, beaten to within an inch of His life, had thorns pierce his scalp, they put a robe on Him and then ripped it off when His blood had dried it to his skin ... in this state they forced Him to carry his own heavy cross, whipped Him along the way, drove huge nails through his hands and feet and hung Him on the cross. Ever look into how you died on a cross? Your own body weight basically crushed the breath out of you. And when that wasn't good enough, they pierced His side, probably going through His heart and lungs, to make sure He was dead. That was Him taking the punishment you and I deserve for sinning against a holy God. He did that for you and me because He LOVES us. Three days later, He proved not only that He was God by rising from the dead and defeating death, but it also proved His sacrifice was acceptable. What an incredibly kind God to do all that for us despite the fact we continually sin against Him.
And I just want to say one more thing about the Bible. It is a reliable collection of historical docu.ments written by eyewitnesses during the lives of other eyewitnesses that reported supernatural events. Do you realize what that means? If a writer told a lie, the other eyewitnesses would call them on it. The Gospels are not very kind to the apostles. They were made to look quite foolish. When someone nitpicks the Bible and say 'yes, historically it is very accurate, but you can't believe those miracles' that person is only fooling himself. There isn't one singlle reason why someone shouldn't believe the Bible in its entirety. Again, you can reject it, but you must reject the whole thing.
Please give these things some thought. I wish I had more time to talk with you, but I have to get to work. Have a good afternoon and God bless.
Topher asked: "Let me ask you this ... For you personally, what keeps you from thinking God is real?"
The same thing that keeps me from thinking Joseph Smith was "visited".
@J.W – "How did I give the slightest indication that I don't believe in God?"
"If there is a creator...."
Let me tell you, God who created everything has the power to do that, create the earth, man, planets, animals.. yet he wouldn't have the power to know what's in your heart or your mind? So you believe in a "limited" God? is that what you're saying?
That was a response to a post by Jen. Sorry I should have clarified that.
Dont call yourself a christian if u think this "Don't call yourself a Christian if you support abortion, contracetpion and marriage other than one between men and women."
cuz u NEVER read this in ANY bible... bigotry was not taught to your ancestors by Mr Jesus man created this. faerie tales dont have hate in them why does yours?
The Nuns and surprisingly the Bishops as well, came out against Paul Ryan and his budget. Thats good enough for me.
Wow! So the gays AND the lesbians both agree!
Ryans defends his economic philosophy by saying that it employs " the practice of addressing social problems with local rather than national solutions". That's the entire problem with his budget ideas. Local economies are frequently not equipped to handle "social problems" adequately because not all localities are equal. A small town in Connecticut is going to have more resources to deal with its problems than a town of equal size in rural Mississippi or Alabama. Ryan eschews the concept pooling the entire nation's resources to deal with each issue on a national level because he is an anti-government ideologue. His entire philosophy, which was inspired by his reading of Ayn Rand, is built on the religious-like belief that the federal government is evil. In doing so, he ignores the obvious fact that by shifting responsibilities to the local level in order to weaken the federal government, he will create monstrous increases in state and local taxes and foment numerous state bankruptcies. Ryan is not a pragmatic man and his philosophy objectifies human beings.
Thereby becoming part of the problem, NOT the solution.
That's right. And if you want to Catholicize Ayn Rand, just turn to the principle of subsidiarity for support. Just say you don't trust the Federal government to get the job done effectively and prefer that the local government achieve social justice. But because the local government lacks the ability often to get the job done, just as you have described, social justice will die on the vine, which I suspect is the intention all along.
I'm starting to like the Romney/Ryan ticket more and more... Adios Obama!!
Let's look at the REAL aftermath and carnage left by the last Repuglican president! Evaporation of $1/2 trillion surplus, -8.9 GDP, $11 TRILLION national debt, $1.47 TRILLION deficit, $2.8 TRILLION in tax cuts (unpaid for), TWO Wars (unpaid for), Medicare prescription plan (unpaid for), $3 TRILLION borrowed from China, BILLION dollar no-bid contracts award to the military-industrial complex, a Wall Street, Banking, Auto, Mortgage crisis, losing over 700,000 jobs monthly and a economy heading into Depression when President Obama took office and yet the right wing sheeple want to go BACK to this??? Pls examine the definition of insanity, then look in the mirror !!
So sorry Vicky, you're gonna lose big time this coming election.
By the way artificial contraception does not = murdering a fetus. Sorry but nice try!!
What are you attempting to say? First off, abortion isn't murder. Secondly, aren't both abortion and artificial contraception forbidden by the Church? Or has something changed in the last 24 hours?
Tom, Tom, sometimes when clear logic and sense seem to be the wrong tool in discussions with a slow-thinking religious person, I wonder if it might help if slow my mind down a bit – to put myself a bit on the same level as the wall I am speaking to. Maybe if I could breathe in some dust and block my sinuses, that would do the trick. Well, I can't try it now as I had a decongestant a short while ago. But I do wonder . . .
I have no problem with people havin all opinions but Biden nothing but a hypocrite everytime he opens his mouth in support of Abortion and everytime he opens his mouth to recieve Holy Communion!!
Do you see that little "Reply" at the lower left of my comment? Click on it, then type your response.
Keith
His rank in the church is higher than yours.
Thus he knows Gods will far better than you.
Be a good Christian and be subservient. It is after all what you do best!
Or rather, at the lower right of your own comment if you want to respond to my reply to you.
God bless you all. Please read our story and help if you can. I have a medically needy daughter and I don't know where else to turn.
http://www.myfamilyneedsamiracle.wordpress.com
Asking for donations on a blog means that you are either a scam artist, though not a creative one, an ident.ity thief, or both.
My story is 100% true. I have faith in people. I'm sorry you don't. It is terrible of you to question someone in a bad situation. I live in a very small town and there is no where else for me to turn except the internet. How else am I supposed to ask for help? I made a free blog- what other option do I have?
Besides, asking for miracles in a blog dominated by Non Believers is like asking the Church to tell the truth.
I suspect you will be waiting a long time!
Even if you don't have faith I would like to hope you still show kindness to other people. Christians would say that is the problem with people who turn their backs on God.
myfamilyneedsamiracle
Well Jesus owes me a twenty, so if you can collect it from him, you are welcome to it!
Good Luck, God Bless, and Adios!
William,
That was a nicer reply and I'll take it! I know most people aren't in a position to help me. I'm not crazy but I really don't know where else to turn. If I could help others I would, and I hope you would do the same. I'll take your blessing! We're keeping our heads up 🙂
Why isn't your own church helping? Your community?
If your story is factual, I am sorry. But posting for donations is unlikely to gain you anything. I would not send money to a person posting on the internet. I doubt many others will, either.
I talk about that in my story. We live in a very small town and no one has much. We do get help with food from local farms. Medical bills are far beyond what anyone here can do. I don't know where else to ask for help and I understand people not trusting the internet. I appreciate anyone who does help. God bless!
I guess you'll just have to pray harder. Someone keeps saying that, 'prayer changes things.Proven.' I guess you get to prove that it does indeed change your circ-umstance. Tell us how that works out.
I read that you refuse to accept welfare and food stamps, so I have very little sympathy for you. This is exactly what those programs were intended to do: help people who are in financial trouble. If you won't accept government support, why ask for donations from people you don't know?
There are many agencies, both private and public, that can help you, but it doesn't sound as though you've thoroughly investigated them. Have you spoken to the hospital social worker? Have you talked to an attorney?
To get cash assistance I would have to drive to a job center 30 miles away three times a week to keep up with their requirements. We do get food help from our church and everyone else just tells me to file bankruptcy. That may be the solution but we are young and I really don't want to carry that forever.
It isn't 'forever'. It is temporary, and if you are young, you will have plenty of time to recover from it. It is one possible solution and far better than begging for money on the internet. Again, have you talked to an attorney about it?
@miracle: here is something i've noticed, where are the droves of chirstians offering you help? they are always shouting about how "the godless don't help people" and how great they are for helping others..................so where are they now? lmfao
I'm not amused by my situation. Christian or not, you shouldn't laugh at someone with a medically needy child and medical debt. This isn't funny.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't we have a civil war about slavery a century and a half ago? I mean, I guess technically that's "civil," but I wouldn't call it much of a conversation!
Some people have really long memories.
Ryan's catholicism will not help him or Romney in this election. Most catholics listen to the church and heed the gospels but decide for themselves what is right and just. The issue here will not be what the leadership of the church wants or expects from the elections but rather what the people want and expect based on their experience at the hands of our government.
The people, who were given free will by God, will decide for themselves what is right, practical and just. It does not bode well for Ryan or Romney.
President Obama is more in line with the thinking of the American Catholic majority, although not with the hierarchy. He will get the majority of catholic people's votes. Ryan and Romney will get the votes of the hierarchy and we should all thank God for the fact that we do not live in a theocracy.
What about all those "Christians" who HATE Obama ? "If the world hates you, remember that it hated me first". John 15,18.Who is a "Christian" anyway ? "This is how all will know that you are my followers, if you have love for one another". John 13,35. "We had to destroy the village in order to save it"-US Military logic during Vietnam.
At long last............an INTELLIGENT conversation. What a novel concept... Thanx
Plain and simple; Biden is not a Catholic and any politician that supports Abortion is not Catholic and I wish they would stop posing as one. Catholicism is a dictatorship, if you do not like the rules then go join an of the other million churches or no church at all. Please stop sitting in a church and contradicting its leader at every turn. Rules in the church can and are broken all the time by politicians and lay people and that is reconcilable BUT people in power that support and activerly perform abortions (that church considers MURDER) without repenting are not able to receive communion and therefore are NOT Catholics. I'm sure this blog will be slammed for being archaic and stupid but that is the Faith and if Biden thinks that it is Archaic and stupid he should have the balls to say so!!!
He has said so.
He claims it as his church, and intends to drag his brothers into modernity for their own good.
He also says the 6000 year old earth thing is the height of ignorance!
It is YOU that are not with the program. He was elected, you were not.
keith, over 90% of Catholics in the US have used artificial contraception during some periods of their lives, yet the Church forbids it. What does that tell you about American Catholics?
@keith,
last I checked Joe Biden hadn't taken holy orders and sworn the oath of obedience.
Most Catholics I know act according to their own conscience, not necessarily in lock step with "The Church".
I'd rather try to be be a Follower of Jesus Christ than a follower of a High Priest in Rome.
@Sonny,
didn't you just quote John 13:35 two minutes ago? By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.” and now you're slamming the faith of Catholics!! (I really get a kick out of you so called "Christians". You funny.)
As a bonus, here's Matthew 7:5 You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye.
William Demuth
The Church does not teach that the Earth is 6000 years old. That is a fundamentalist belief, not a Catholic one. The Catholic faith (being truth itself) is compatible with science which is also truth.
Truth cannot contradict truth.
KEEF said . . .Catholicism is a dictatorship . .
LMAO! Too bad they couldn't have had Jesus be the dictator or at least try to stick with his simple teachings (regardless of how super-human you think he was). No, they had to go build in all kinds of wacky tenets based on people that were smoking weed in the desert and claiming that Jesus talked to them. (Oh, and his secretary was the witness – give me a royal break. If we should believe Catholic doctrine, we may as well buy into everything from Joseph Smith as well. Ridiculous!) And of course abortion is just one issue, but let's see: contraception, women's roles in the church, priests not being able to marry, acceptance of other natural forms of se*xuality besides a man and a woman, etc. etc. etc. And of course we must not forget the ability to hide your grave misdeeds within the church, circ'umventing civil law. The bible, is one of the most dangerous, most misleading, most misunderstood, most conflicted and most ear-marked bills any political ent'ity has ever foisted onto civilization. We have the catholics to thank for that. If Catholicism is a dictatorship, then it is a dictator of itself.
Yeah, makes sense! Transubstantiation is completly based in science and rational thought.
Them yahoos in the Vatican stoped burning heretics and spouting nonesense at least a weel ago right?
Please stop sitting in a church and contradicting its leader at every turn.
PLEASE STOP SITTING IN THE CHURCH AND SUPPORTING CHILD MOLESTE.RS.
Observation
Of course, the Bible doesn’t say explicitly anywhere, “the earth is 6,000 years old.” Good thing it doesn’t; otherwise it would be out of date the following year. But we wouldn’t expect an all-knowing God to make that kind of a mistake.
God gave us something better. In essence, He gave us a “birth certificate.” For example, using my personal birth certificate, I can calculate how old I am at any point. It is similar with the earth. Genesis 1 says that the earth was created on the first day of creation (Genesis 1:1–5). From there, we can begin calculations of the age of the earth.
Let’s do a rough calculation to show how this works. The age of the earth can be estimated by taking the first 5 days of creation (from earth’s creation to Adam), then following the genealogies from Adam to Abraham in Genesis 5 and 11, then adding in the time from Abraham to today.
Adam was created on Day 6, so there were 5 days before him. If we add up the dates from Adam to Abraham, we get about 2,000 years, using the Masoretic Hebrew text of Genesis 5 and 11.3 Whether Christian or secular, most scholars would agree that Abraham lived about 2,000 B.C. (4,000 years ago).
So a simple calculation is:
5 days
+ ~2000 years
+ ~4000 years
______________
~6000 years
Simran,
You are welcome to your beliefs. My correction was to William Demuth, who I thought implied this as a teaching of the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church has never taught on the age of Earth or the universe as we believe that the Bible is misunderstood when used in this way.
If folks like William Demuth wish to hate us because of the teaching on the eucharist, he is welcome to. Just so long as he hates us for what we are and not what we're not.
You use a literalist interpretation with Genesis, but not with the much clearer Bible text on the eucharist. God is powerful enough to do one and not the other?
Why use the first creation account and not the second, would the math not work out?
William Demuth
Re: Transubstantiation
Not everything that can be known can be scientifically verified. When your wife tells you she love you, do you apply the scientific method on her statement?
Regarding your second statement on burning heretics, has the secular world stopped killing there inconvenient unborn? No, they have convinced themselves that their "Freedom to Chose" is worth more than human life itself.
Now while were on the subject of science and religion, science says that what is in the womb is a life, the disposability of that life is a philosophical issue. The ease of the one life is worth more than the life that has not yet been born. The claim that it is a blob of tissue is not supported by science. A dog gets pregnant and everyone knows what will happen in a few months, puppies. A woman gets pregnant and we await her scheduled abortion of her "tissue." If it wasn't really alive, there would be nothing to abort and kill.
In world war II Germany, by law, no humans were killed in concentrations camps, because the Jews had been declared to be non-humans. That made killing them easy for those involved, almost as easy as unborn (non-human "tissue") are killed today.
@ Observation
Well, as you suggest, I did look up the Second Creation Account, and that confuses me even further.
In the second creation story, things are a little different. First of all, individual days are not specified. And the sequence is very different:
•earth and heavens; no rain yet but a spring would well up and water the ground
•from dust, man was created (not woman yet)
•garden of Eden - man is put here; garden includes the tree of life and the tree of knowledge of good and evil
•God tells man to till and keep the garden of Eden, but not to eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil (note that Woman has not entered the scene yet! Man is alone).
•God notices that Man is alone and wants to find him a helper and partner, so He first creates animals and birds and Man names them. But still there was no helper as partner.
•God makes Man fall asleep, pulls out a rib, and makes Woman.
•
The story of original sin then ensues.
Please correct me if there is a yet another second creation account. This is even more twisted to my brain which has not grown up reading the Bible (but I did read another scripture which doesnot talk of god creating the earth).
The majority of Catholic women in North America practice contraception. What's your advice for them? Should they all leave the Church? I don't think the Church could sustain itself. The bosses in the boys' club called the Vatican don't speak for many Catholics, who see no reason, for example, to not allow women to be priests. These people follow their own consciences bescuse they feel that these old Italian men are out of touch. Sorry about your luck, Keith, but that's the way it is.
Where is Joe Biden. The Obama team has kept him locked out of the campaign for fear of his foot and mouth disease.
Wouldn't you?
Biden is racking up the base in big numbers.
He is playing to sold out crowds.
I thought the focus was the economy ..
Why in the world he needs to talk about religion?
Because if he talks about his social engineering plan (not my words), people will see they have same plan as G.W. Bush did for the economy that did nto work.
Through in the "red-hearing" : religion.
I guess Ryan (or Biden) are elected to tell us how to morally live our lives, based on their religious standards.
"KEEP GOVERMENT OUT OF MY LIFE!" – Where are all the Republicans/Libertarians/Tea-Parties when it comes to keeping gvmt out of rulling/judging our moral values.
I have never met a Tea Party member who wasn't Christian
Are any leading members any other faith?
Does anyone know of any who aren't? Any Muslims or Wiccans or Buddists or Zoroastrian in the mix?
I agree religion has no place in the discussion of candidates. The religion professed by a candidate is not a useful determinate of how they will behave as president.
But so what? Most Americans seem to think it matters. They want to identify with the candidate as "thinking like me". The GOP party faithful will all kumbaya around Ryan.
The damage that Karl Rove did to the GOP to get Bush almost elected is now really hurting Republicans. Mixing religion and politics is always playing with fire.
They have a moderate conservative, ex-hedge fund manager and a fiscal conservative on the ticket. The debate should be about economics but Karl's legacy is that the Evangelical Protestants on one hand and alienated Catholics on the other could make this a really hard ticket for conservative voters to get behind. As ye sow, so shall ye reap.
GOP'er
At some point peoples beliefs do diqualify them. While I don't find Mormonisim that much more absurd than Christianity, they do engage in practices that I believe are sufficiently close to the traditional definition of a cult to exclude them from serious consideration.
I doubt many would disagree that some religious communities are dangerously indoctrinated, and this cast a pall on all of its members. We would not elect a Moonie, or a member of Aum Shinrikyo, or a former resident in Jonestown to office because most would consider their expression of faith akin to a mental illness.
The question at hand is do Mormons qualify as being members of that "Lunatic Fringe"?
I believe they clearly do.
Sure, I don't think too many open Satanists or Jonestown survivors have much shot at the highest office in the land.
It's funny (in the curious/interesting/odd sense) that so many Protestants have such a viceral reaction to Mormon theology. I personally think the tenets of Mormonism are wacky, but once you remove yourself from the blinders of faith, so are the tenets of many more mainstream Christian traditions.
Once you cross that line, does it matter how far you color outside the lines?
Adolf Hitler was an altar boy too.
Hardly relevant, don'tchthink?
I do like Prothero's description of the two sides of teh Church. One as the "social justice" set and the other as the "family values" side. In Catholic teaching, all social thought begins with the family so my continual question to the social justice camp is: How can there be social justice without the right to life?
My take: Ryan has the high ground.
You could just as easily ask "How can their be social justice without the freedom of choice?"
Social justice and the right to life platatudes coming from the death penalty, we never met a war we didn't like, and let the poor starve party?
For reals?
@Bill Deacon,
the pro-choice/right to life debate (along with gun control) is not on the table this year. Republicans are losing the female vote by a large margin and they're not going to poison the well further by taking on abortion.
The question of social justice is easily discussed in the absence of a disucssion on abortion, particularly in the economic times that we find ourselves in: rising unemployment, increasing gap between the haves and have nots. The election is going to revolve on this issue more than any other.
Catholics have traditionally been stalwarts of liberal politics because of the Catholic Church's position on socical justice. I suspect Ryan's Ayn Rand mindset will make this a devisive topic for Catholics this year.
The rest of us will watch with interest.
The 'right to life' issue is the whole coin – not just one side of it. On one side of the coin is abortion and euthanasia. On the other side is poverty, hunger, access to healthcare, opposing war, care of creation (including climate change), opposition to capital punishment, and gun control. These are all 'right to life' issues. It is tragic how many Catholics and Evangelicals have such a narrow and impoverished definition of 'pro-life'. I believe it shows that their true guide is not the Bible or Christian thinking but party political allegiance.
Actually Duke, you make my point quite succinctly. I believe and I understand the Church's teaching that it is not either/or. It is both and only. My point is not that we scrap food program, medical help and old age security in favor of pro-life laws but that justice to all of mankind requires ministry to these along with the recognition of the dignity of life which begins at conception.
So now Prothero likes the Catholic Bishops because they denounced Ryan's budget? What happened to the article where he proclaimed the bishops were not acting in the "best interest" of people? What an azz
The bishops are just trying to recover from the buggery scandal by promising a better life for the poor.
Well the poor have heard those lies before, and wonder why the church dosen't have to pay taxes and they do?
The spell of the men with the big hats is wearing thin.
You might have a point if it were not that the Bishops have been consistent for decades on these issues. In fact that is one complaint in secular society that the Church never changes. I believe we are now going to begin to understand the depth of Catholic teaching and why it is largely immutable. It's because it's right. Your focus on the acctrements of the clergy are merely ignorant and bigoted.
Bill
Your church is an organized crime ring, trading in the anuses of little boys that defrauds little old ladies and fools.
It deserves nothing more than to be destroyed as the disease it is.
Have at it big boy. Bring your lunch.
It's neither a Mormon nor Catholic moment in politics.
What it is can best be defined as an Anti Protestant movement.
Romney / Ryan is the FIRST presidential ticket in the history of the united States that does NOT include a Protestant in it.
After decades of Fallwell's flunkies controling large parts of the debate, they have suddenly been disenfranchised.
America has rejected Protestant value on the left for many years, but now even the right has rejected them and expressed a preference for two cult members to carry the torch of American Monotheisim.
You might be right. And a question I would ask is Can a Christian vote for either of these candidates?
Well Topher, there you have it.
Is Obama more of a Christian than Romney?
Is Biden more Christian than Ryan?
Either way you lose, either the Mormon magic underwear replaces the de-facto flavor of Christianity in the White House or it dosen't
At a minimum, you claim he is Christian and thus let a Mormon become the DEFINITION of an American Christian, or you support a "Black Guy In The White House"!
Sounds like a lose lose for the Good Old Boy Network.
Whats next? A Wiccan on the Supreme Court? A Muslim as Secretary of Defense? A Gay Admiral as Secretary of the Navy (Seems an appropriate tribute to The Village People!).
Toph, voting for or against a candidate based on YOUR religion is not making a rational choice. You should instead look at how closely the values of the candidate align with your personal values – not what Church the individual does or does not attend. I know many "Christians" do not believe that either Mormons or Catholics are "Christian" by their definition. That should not disqualify your voting for them. How would you feel had Mr. Romney selected a Jewish running mate? Would that make him more worthy of your vote?
Joe from CT, not Lieberman
But Romney needs the Palestinian vote!!
He just caters to the Jews so he can get them killed off. It's on his Armagedeon checklist!
William Demuth
"Is Obama more of a Christian than Romney?"
I wouldn't say either are a Christian.
"Is Biden more Christian than Ryan?"
To be honest, I haven't heard either of their faith statements, so I don't really know where they stand other than they are Catholics.
"Either way you lose, either the Mormon magic underwear replaces the de-facto flavor of Christianity in the White House or it dosen't"
You're right.
"At a minimum, you claim he is Christian and thus let a Mormon become the DEFINITION of an American Christian, or you support a "Black Guy In The White House"!"
Mormons are NOT Christians. But I don't see how the president's skin color has anything to do with this.
Topher
Because Southerners want Christianity to be reserved for rural whites. They have rejected, beaten, murdered, enslaved and demonized blacks for over two centuries.
Do you really believe the bigotry of many of the churches down there has just disapeared? A significant percentage of those parishes don't even believe that blacks are even actual human beings!
William Demuth
"Because Southerners want Christianity to be reserved for rural whites. They have rejected, beaten, murdered, enslaved and demonized blacks for over two centuries."
I'm sure that is true for some, but I doubt it is the majority. Besides, I'm not a Southerner so I can't speak for them. I can only speak for Christianity in general and Christians hold that there is only one race ... humans. (Or at least they should hold to that.)
Topher
Ask a thousand rural blacks if they believe equality has been achieved in rural America.
You will be STUNNED by the uniformity of their response.
I doubt I'd be stunned. But I think we're getting off topic here.
@William Demth,
yes, no Protestants on the GOP ticket. I wonder what Karl Rove makes of this?
Hi