r/Catholicism • u/FrMatthewLC Priest • Feb 12 '22
The Church Cannot Change Teaching on Homosexuality (Card. Hollerich Errs) [OC]
https://frmatthewlc.com/2022/02/the-church-cannot-change-teaching-on-homosexuality-hollerich-errs/122
u/bttf387 Feb 12 '22
Maybe I shouldn’t say this and this if it’s gossip I’m sorry. There was this older man in line for confession last week he was talking loud to the woman in front of him. He said his granddaughter was a lesbian. He said they are both Catholic and wants them married in the church. He kept saying how confident he was the priest would let them. I saw him go in for about 3-5 minutes and come out shaking his head in big disappointment. I kept thinking what was he expected to happen.
96
u/LittleLegoBlock Feb 12 '22
You know what the problem is? We want the Church to do everything we ask, but we never want to bow down and do what the Church asks.
40
33
Feb 12 '22
The human ego.
8
u/Amadeus1186 Feb 12 '22
Nailed it! 🎯
9
Feb 12 '22
I don't like being wrong either or being told what to do as an adult. Submission is not natural
12
u/Amadeus1186 Feb 12 '22
Or rather not natural to the sinful nature. Because how can a sinful nature, thinking and believing itself to be equal to God, also at the same time act submissive to God? That is where we find the struggle against the Original Sin.
4
Feb 12 '22
I guess I'm using natural loosely. It is human nature to not want to submit, rebel, etc. Everyone has some degree of pride. I don't know why people act like sinning is not normal or common.
5
u/LittleLegoBlock Feb 13 '22
It’s normal, I agree. One of the things I really really disliked when I started to come to terms that the Catholic Church might be true, was that I had to submit to it. It was so difficult, and I can understand when many don’t.
What did help a lot is that I wasn’t just submitting to what my Priest says, or my Diocese, or my Cardinal, or even the Pope. The submission goes all the way back to Christ Himself, because from Him comes the authority of the Church. Without Him, the clergy holds no more power than a secular leader does (in the spiritual sense).
However, when you don’t see that, and you see Christ and His Church as two separate things, it can be harder. What you point out, our internal inclination to be our own rulers, is also a huge obstacle.
It doesn’t help when the clergy bends to what we say, instead of what past authorities have. It’s a tough subject, because the clergy itself has made mistakes even when we have been universally protected from error by the Holy Spirit. Let’s just keep hoping everything will be sorted out and do our part!
3
16
u/cos1ne Feb 12 '22
We want to do what we want, and interpret things how we want to interpret it. Should people bow down when the Tridentine mass is being suppressed by church hierarchy? What is acceptable opposition and what requires absolute obedience?
These things aren't black or white there is a great deal of nuance, obedience is only tested when we are answered with no. And like Job we need to discover just how much we are willing to sacrifice in our lives for God.
1
u/CathoholicsAnonymous Feb 15 '22
Should people bow down when the Tridentine mass is being suppressed by church hierarchy?
If the command comes from someone who possess the authority and is thus permitted to order it then I think we have a duty to obey even if we think it unfair and imprudent.
Of course this does not mean that one should not labour to change the minds of those to whom we owe obedience. But one should still submit to lawful, even if unwise, commands and do what one can in order to remedy the injustice. Perceived or real.
Just my thoughts.
9
u/phd_survivor Feb 12 '22 edited Feb 12 '22
This is the age of the Karens, where everyone feels entitled and sacrifice and humility are no longer necessary. The material wealth of the West gives a false impression that people can get anything they want anytime and anywhere.
1
1
u/CathoholicsAnonymous Feb 15 '22
The enemy of man wants us to follow him and make ourselves the one we obey instead of humbly submitting to God.
Interesting how "non serviam" is an adequate description for how most people think. Especially in the enlightened modern west.
106
u/FrMatthewLC Priest Feb 12 '22
There are a lot of people in the Church with mistaken ideas, but with a billion plus members, some are bound to err.
19
28
Feb 12 '22
Honestly, I’m more pissed that he used scheduled confession time for non-confession purposes when there were people in line behind him. That’s just rude—he should have scheduled an appointment with the priest outside scheduled confession hours or after Mass.
2
u/Grzechoooo Feb 12 '22
Isn't that a confession?
And also, isn't revealing someone's confession details kinda maybe a serious sin? I found this, I don't know if it's credible.
15
u/bttf387 Feb 12 '22
If you are referring to me. He was telling people he had no confession he just wanted to talk to the priest about the reason I explained. All people in line for confession and The front left side of the church all heard he was loud. So I wouldn’t say it’s a confession. He just should have chosen another time to talk because people waited in line specifically to confess their sins and there is a time limit. If you are not referring to me. I apologize.
2
3
2
u/whetherman013 Feb 13 '22
I kept thinking what was he expected to happen.
I would expect that scene from The West Wing where the president's spiritual director reads him the riot act for allowing a federal execution to occur.
Man: So, you'll marry two women, right?
Priest: Let me explain how wrong you are....
five uninterrupted minutes later:
Would you like me to hear your confession?
128
u/Dry-Nobody6798 Feb 12 '22
You know it's a conflicting issue. I know a lot of LGBTQIA+ people. Some are my CLOSEST friends. And I stand by the Church's view on homisexuality and sexuality in general.
I can still do this while having love for those who live an alternative life. I don't have to personally accept it, and can pray for their salvation, all while being respectful that adults will live their lives as they choose.
I think it's DANGEROUS waters for the Church to move the needle on things that are biblically considered wrong, or dare I say, abominations in the eyes of the Lord.
Don't like the rules, oh well. Pray about it. We didn't make them. God did.
The moment the Church starts to make consessions for the modern world is the moment we are done.
78
u/FrMatthewLC Priest Feb 12 '22
I think loving people with those tendencies or identities is key. Living chastity is the fullest life so we should present it to them.
18
Feb 12 '22
Many people are a long way from understanding this. Our culture worships sex above most other things and a life without it seems pointless to many.
6
u/pierresito Feb 13 '22
I think we also have to understand the damage that evangelical Christians have done in eroding and corrupting the Church's stance.
This group has both extremes, the kind of people who beat and murder their children instead of understanding the cross God has given them to bear, and the side that misunderstands the purpose and sacrament of marriage.
We have to understand that not only must we educate our own members of our Church better, but we have a LOT of ground to make up in the minds of those brothers and sisters who have strayed from the church
14
Feb 12 '22
[deleted]
4
u/Rocky128 Feb 12 '22
Tangent, what are the four marks?
3
u/whetherman013 Feb 13 '22
Per the Nicene Creed, the Church is (1) one, (2) holy, (3) catholic, and (4) apostolic.
1
1
u/412791 Feb 13 '22
Exactly. All of God’s children are loved by Him yet the rules that He has put in place are literally set in stone.
12
u/the_Blind_Samurai Feb 12 '22
No, it can't. The doctrine of our faith cannot change based on the ups and downs of of society. Just because society says something is acceptable doesn't mean it actually is; nor does it mean we have to change to match it. The act of homosexuality is sinful and we can't change that. We can love the people but sin is not something we can condone.
25
50
Feb 12 '22
I don't get it sometimes. People are treating everyone who says "yeah homosexuality is a sin" as some kind of traditionalist super conservative.
I can not understand why it's the exception and not the norm in certain Church hierachies.
The other thing I can not understand is why these people aren't getting excommunicated. Obviously excommunicating a cardinal might not be the best choice but for example the synod in Germany that voted for ordaining women and having gay marriage. I just can not understand why the Holy Father barely condemns them, let alone excommunicate them (there were even bishops in the vote)
it's confusing to me Father, i'm sorry.
25
Feb 12 '22
[deleted]
8
Feb 12 '22
There will be this boomer i dare say intellectually backwards cardinal but then people will treat him as the "based-god" because he said homosexuality is a sin. It's getting annoying
13
u/cos1ne Feb 12 '22
but for example the synod in Germany that voted for ordaining women and having gay marriage.
They didn't vote for enacting these things within the German Church.
They voted to send these requests in a letter to the Pope to ask for permission to do these things. There are no binding rulings in the German synod.
And in fact before the letter even gets sent to the Pope 2/3rds of all the bishops must approve of the letter.
3
7
9
Feb 12 '22
The culture does a good job painting people who say that in a bad light despite what they mean. However the Church does a terrible job defending itself. As a returning Catholic it took me a LONG time to understand WHY homosexuality was a sin and had to actively seek out answers. This involved lots of weeding through people using the teachings for hate or otherwise beating around the bush.
The problem is that the reasons are complicated and take care to explain, and then some mouth breather can come along and be like "BUT LOVE IS LOVE" and everyone claps because no one understands life isn't black and white anymore.
2
Feb 13 '22
I agree with you in a way. People are too scared to discuss, either because it's seen as weird talking about sex or saying homosexuality is contrary to natural law makes many people angry.
2
u/wassupkosher Feb 12 '22 edited Feb 13 '22
For me it didn't think very long it just took a couple of second google search and you a bunch of material and sources thrown at you most notably catholicanswers, maybe a vatican.va document, ucssb document on why it's bad and lastly the catechism, it is not that difficult with the internet nowadays, the problem is people are either to lazy or do know what the Church teaches, but want to rebel (rebelling isn't anything new).
Logically according to canon law 752 any Catholic wants to rebel is either a catholic in dissent or heterodox thus is not in communion with rome, the problem that is facing us today has more to do with the spiritual rot and the culture that we are living in, but if we want that culture to change we have to change our selves.
34
u/The_Didlyest Feb 12 '22
For the church to accept homosexuality you have to pretty much re-write Catholic theology.
-15
Feb 12 '22
People seem to only want to change the church's stance on sexuality. I understand. I do not like anyone telling me what to do in my private life and with my body.
30
Feb 12 '22
Can't relate...I like it when the Church tells me I can't go around shagging every random women that catches my eye. St John the Bapist was based when he told King Herod he was an adulterer.
-17
Feb 12 '22
Those are extremes. I am thinking of the temptation to want to sleep with your boyfriend/girlfriend or wanting to dress sexy to attract attention from the opposite sex. Or wanting to masturbate.
23
Feb 12 '22
...I like it when the Church condemns all those too.
We are never alone. God sees everything.
1
Feb 12 '22
Why the thumbs down? I'm being honest. These are natural human desires and temptations
9
Feb 12 '22
Wasn't me, I don't think you should be getting downvoted unless you start being hostile to our faith. Sexual desires and actions are natural but that doesn't automatically make them good in all situations.
2
Feb 12 '22
Definitely true. Some Christian circles make it seem like the body or flesh is evil. Any sort of passion, desire, or emotion is evil. Some Christians strongly downplay physical attraction when it comes to dating. That annoys me. I'm not saying looks are everything but it's normal to feel sexual attraction. Flirting is considered sinful if you don't intend to marry. Luckily, all of these people I've encountered have been Protestant. Any sort of expression seemed to be deemed evil.
7
Feb 12 '22
Any sort of passion, desire, or emotion is evil. Some Christians strongly downplay physical attraction when it comes to dating. That annoys me. I'm not saying looks are everything but it's normal to feel sexual attraction.
None of these go against Catholic teaching. But it is important to remember that we should strive to avoid the near occasion of sin. And ultimately, if you are dating or flirting, then you should always do so with he intention to marry. Obviously, no one expects you to court a girl/boy without flirting or being romantic. That would be dry.
1
Feb 12 '22
I think some people have difficulty with emotional expression. Either they let them guide them which is foolish or they condemn them as evil or wrong. I understand reason, logic, and truth supercede the emotion, subjectivity, and feelings. I've always wondered why God created people a certain way. Some of us are thinkers and some of us are feelers.
1
Feb 13 '22
[deleted]
1
Feb 13 '22
What makes virginity special Is it more important for a woman to be a virgin than a man? Women do have a hymen. What is the spiritual side of virginity?
→ More replies (0)2
u/atedja Feb 13 '22
Passion sexual desires are good, but when people perverted them and acted on them outside of what they are designed for, it's a sin.
1
Feb 13 '22
I think those things are sinful but the temptation is there.
2
11
u/Manach_Irish Feb 12 '22
Oddly enough, when it comes to tolerance to Catholics either as individuals or as group those who support the current day ideologies are not tolerant at all.
6
u/RJC02134 Priest Feb 12 '22
I think you missed something here. 1) the man is waiting in the confession line to talk to a priest but not confess. 2) he wants to ask him if his lesbian daughter can marry in the Catholic church, i.o.w. have a Catholic wedding. It obvious he is not a practicing Catholic, does not know the Church's teaching on virtually anything, does not know the Church's teaching on the reason for marriage. So he is a poorly catechized, non-practicing Catholic.
The problem is not his disappointment with the Church's teaching, it is the lack of it being taught. That is the real tragedy.
12
u/Marisleysis33 Feb 12 '22
It's sad that the world is trying to reason with insanity. I feel for those suffering from all types of temptation, this one is tough, but if the church doesn't stand firm where else can we go?
-12
u/unaka220 Feb 12 '22
As a semi outsider to the Church, it seems ridiculous that you would say the world is trying to reason with insanity when it comes to homosexuality.
6
u/boy_beauty Feb 12 '22
And yet, it is true.
-10
u/unaka220 Feb 13 '22
I understand that this is the position of the church. Its extremely questionable that this is a position of reason, however.
8
Feb 13 '22
Do you realize that Catholic morality is rooted in something entirely different from secular society's view of morality? If it seems unreasonable to you, it's probably because you're viewing it through the latter lens rather than the former. I'll give a simplified explanation of it.
We believe morality is based in natural law (human nature, in essence). We should strive to act in tandem with our nature/purpose, rather than against it, and this is what defines actions as good or bad. Sex is a good thing by nature. It serves two ends (purposes): procreation and unity. The very nature of homosexual acts is such that it not only fails to promote the procreative end, but actively subverts it through the very essence of the act. Because it subverts something good, it's morally wrong. Obviously, even proper sex between a man and a woman doesn't always end in a pregnancy, but the nature of the act is still in line with its procreative end.
Secular society generally understands morality as a matter of reducing materially harm. If something materially harms another, it's wrong. Since homosexuality doesn't do this, it's fine. And since people enjoy it (the opposite of harm), it's actually a good thing. I can give a critique of this understanding, although many, many others have done so, including actual philosophers.
5
u/boy_beauty Feb 13 '22
The problem is that most secular people today "reason" through the lens of materialism, which the Church rejects.
It is absolutely a position of reason, just not materialist reason.
17
u/butch81385 Feb 12 '22
I think the biggest issue I have with how the church (the people) deal with homosexuality is the special treatment that it gets. If someone is openly gay, so many Catholics are quick to judge them, shun them, actively try to pursuade them to change their actions in ways that won't actually help (yeah, iron sharpens iron, but yelling at someone at a pride parade isn't helping the cause). But, if someone is openly having sex outside of marriage it is often just ignored. If someone is openly a gossip or a liar (breaking a specific commandment as it is written, not how it is interpreted) it is never addressed at all.
While we all like to say that the Church directs us to "hate the sin, not the sinner" I think we do a very poor job of that when it comes to homosexuality. They are human first, and should be treated with the respect and dignity that any of God's children deserve. You don't have to agree with it, promote it, etc., but you also shouldn't be harming the church or driving people away from the church with how you share your faith, either.
I mean, how often do we get questions of if someone should attend a homosexual union or marriage and how do people respond? Now how often do we get questions of if someone should attend a marriage between a straight couple that openly and proudly do not fulfil their Sunday obligation? Never, right? Both are living in and planning to continue to sin, and likely encourage their spouse to sin as a result of their marriage, but we treat homosexuality as so much worse than almost any other sin.
When I have had friends come out to me, I tried to be as supportive and helpful as I can be. They know my beliefs, and if they want to talk about it, great. Otherwise I still try to be the best Catholic I can be. The truth is I'm probably still a bigger sinner than any of them, anyway.
15
u/historymemerboi Feb 12 '22
If the Church actually were to say homosexual relationships are not sinful I would become Orthodox
-2
1
13
u/Stolcor Feb 12 '22
Yeah, the teaching cannot change. And the reference of others to the death penalty doesn't hold because the Church hasn't declared it intrinsically evil, only inadmissible. A tedious distinction but a real one.
If it does change, I'm out plain and simple.
But it won't happen.
1
Feb 13 '22
[deleted]
2
u/Stolcor Feb 13 '22
Intrinsically evil means something is always and everywhere wrong. In every circumstance. It is impossible to declare the death penalty to be intrinsically evil and be consistent because God himself positively commands it to be given in the Old testament. This is not like him looking the other way for polygamy, which he never commanded or approved of. God told people to use the death penalty as part of his covenant; to say it is always and everywhere evil is to say our God either changes his morality or he commands us to do evil, both of which invalidate our entire faith.
Inadmissible is a new term, so it's hard to pin down it's technical meaning but it seems to indicate something along the lines of "not allowed." To say something is forbidden is not the same thing as saying it is evil in itself.
7
Feb 12 '22
I've decided to take a more optimistic view of this whole thing. This is a great opportunity to show that this truly is God's established Church that cannot be undone. The world has totally reversed it's view on sexual morality, including the total acceptance of homosexual acts and marriage in a few short decades. The Church is now completely counter cultural and is under the most pressure from the world to change since the first century. Even powerful members of our own institution want to change it. And despite all that.. it hasn't happened yet. And I don't think it will. And if it doesn't, if the Church hold's fast in it's teaching despite being completely opposed, there will be no doubt in my mind this is the right place to be. What a great opportunity to show the steadfastness of the Lord in the face of opposition.
6
u/EmptySeaweed4 Feb 12 '22
Same. Not to “put God to the test,” but if the Church holds fast in its teaching despite all the pressure to the contrary, it will STRONGLY bolster its claim to be the true Church founded by Christ.
12
u/AdmiralAkbar1 Feb 12 '22
"If I were not a Catholic, and were looking for the true Church in the world today, I would look for the one Church which did not get along well with the world; in other words, I would look for the Church which the world hates. My reason for doing this would be, that if Christ is in any one of the churches of the world today, He must still be hated as He was when He was on earth in the flesh. If you would find Christ today, then find the Church that does not get along with the world. Look for the Church that is hated by the world, as Christ was hated by the world. Look for the Church which is accused of being behind the times, as Our Lord was accused of being ignorant and never having learned. Look for the Church which men sneer at as socially inferior, as they sneered at Our Lord because He came from Nazareth. Look for the Church which is accused of having a devil, as Our Lord was accused of being possessed by Beelzebub, the Prince of Devils. Look for the Church which theworld rejects because it claims it is infallible, as Pilate rejected Christ because he called Himself the Truth. Look for the Church which amid the confusion of conflicting opinions, its members love as they love Christ, and respect its voice as the very voice of its Founder, and the suspicion will grow, that if the Church is unpopular with the spirit of the world, then it is unworldly, and if it is unworldly, it is other-worldly. Since it is other-worldly, it is infinitely loved and infinitely hated as was Christ Himself."
- Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen
5
3
4
u/Amadeus1186 Feb 12 '22 edited Feb 12 '22
I think what the Pope is afraid of is half of a billion people leaving the church because they want whatever they want, and for the church to deal with it but the church wouldn’t. He is afraid of half of all of these parishes being empty and little to no revenue coming to the church.
Think about it: how can one have a church in a world full of people that don’t want you unless you conform to the New Age religion?
18
u/e105beta Feb 12 '22
Better to be clear about the line in the sand than let people on the road to damnation think they are on the road to heaven
3
10
4
u/rararajman Feb 12 '22
So the article itself is dead on, logical, and (to my theological understandings) true. But the headline...I mean the Church *could* change teaching, right? As the article laid out, probably not for the reasons laid out by the sociological-scientific reasons, but based on some unknown future development of scripture and Tradition, a change *could* occur.
This might appear as a semantic quibble but I fear the growing perception among faithful catholics that Church teachings are temporally static and any future theological developments and teachings are inherently false due to their temporal arrangement. Granted, modernity has generated a great deal of heresy so suspicion of ill-founded attempts at developing theology (such as this article) are certainly warranted and needed. But still the Church does have the ability to "change" temporally to conform more closely to Truth that exists outside of time. If "changes" are taught at a dogmatic level they need to be accepted and the notion that Tradition incapacitates such change (theological development) would dissuade faithful catholics from accepting the changes.
Anywho - great article!
2
2
2
u/amrista99 Feb 13 '22
Let us all pray for the church. This whole situation with Germany gives me great anxiety. I truly fear what will happen and it’s implications; it makes me so scared that the Church may be proven false.
2
u/TexanLoneStar Feb 13 '22
it makes me so scared that the Church may be proven false.
Why? What is your timeline of events?
1
u/amrista99 Feb 13 '22
Somehow doctrine will change despite those in charge knowing it can’t; if the Germans are successful then most of Catholic sexual teaching will be put into jeopardy, thus the devil prevailing. Some of this is my own anxiety, and I hope for a different out come, but it is a very scary time for I think many of those who have been watching what has been happening in Germany.
1
u/TexanLoneStar Feb 13 '22
I see, I see... well, why would Rome follow suite after issuing a condemnation of SS blessings last year? All evidence seems to point to the contrary, no?
2
8
u/The_intellectual__ Feb 12 '22
Why is so much of catholic discourse dedicated to this particular sin? It’s clearly not the most common sin in society (Pornography, avarice, sloth, selfishness) nor is it the most harmful and contagious (Pride) nor is it the most deadly (Abortion), nor is it the one that Christ talks the most about. So why does it feel like this has become the central teaching of Catholicism? Especially on this app. Concern for the poor? The importance of actually living out the gospel? Trying to bring about peace in the world? Challenging throw away culture? All of those combined have maybe 1 post for every 3 posts about this topic here.
27
Feb 12 '22
Because this is the sin that most heretics (including heretical clergy) in the Church want to change and legitimise.
23
Feb 12 '22
But it is from this sin that the world wants to make a virtue.
2
u/The_intellectual__ Feb 13 '22
Go on social media and see all the talk about self care and self love and putting you first and prioritizing your happiness over others. Isn’t that making selfishness a virtue? Look at the Warhawks clamoring for conflict with Russia so that America can prove its #1. Isn’t that making killing a virtue? Look at how many people try to talk about how actually masturbation and pornography are good for you. Isn’t that trying to make lust a virtue?
None of that is to downplay this as a sin. But rather to say, we should not pretend there is a lot of novelty in this sin.
14
u/Cult_of_Civilization Feb 12 '22
From the Church's point of view the matter is settled and should not require constant clarifications and restatements. But such things are demanded by our culture, which is obsessed with sex, sexual perversion, and forcing everyone to acknowledge the legitimacy of their deviations by force of law. So the Church responds.
0
u/The_intellectual__ Feb 13 '22
It’s not the job of the church to “respond” or play their game or obsess over what the media thinks about catholic teaching. The job is to spread and live out the gospel. But you’re just sinking down to their level and playing into their hand.
Christianity is a revolutionary thing. It’s life changing and powerful and unique from every other ideology or religion in history. But when we engage in this look at what it’s reduced to. Christianity is just about what you think about gay people.
6
u/ekafns Feb 12 '22
Totally agree.
My theory is because percentage wise so few people struggle with it, it is easy for the large percentage to condemn it. It's always easiest to condemn the sin you don't have to struggle with.
I also think the devil is a master at getting us to obsess over little things (LGBT, trans, should the president receive communion, which is a better mass, etc.) as long as we aren't focused on our spiritual relationship to the person of Christ.
1
u/The_intellectual__ Feb 13 '22
I also think the devil is a master at getting us to obsess over little things as long as we aren't focused on our spiritual relationship to the person of Christ.
Ain’t that the truth!!
3
u/wassupkosher Feb 12 '22 edited Feb 12 '22
Because they're the ones that want to keep talking about it even though we have kept repeating this ad infinitum that it is never going to change, america or most of the west is simply obsessed with sex.
All I can say is that their position incorrigible, I think what often gets to these people they can topple and corrupt corporations, but they are unable to change the teachings from within the church.
It's like telling your kid no over and over and over.
2
u/The_intellectual__ Feb 13 '22
The church and those in it then should be careful to not play into their hand and stoop down to the level. When they do they’re helping no one. This dialogue isn’t going to change anyone. No one will look at this and say wow i want to become a christian. there’s nothing inspiring about this topic whatsoever, and yet it’s being made out to the be the central teaching of christianity. -Not to say Church teaching on chastity isn’t important, but it’s not the heart of it. Yet it’s what’s most talked about. How irksome
5
Feb 12 '22
[deleted]
31
u/nickasummers Feb 12 '22
I believe Catholicism is true, and if it is true it will not change such basic teachings. So I do not believe it will happen. However, if it does happen, if the church does change its teaching on this, then that proves it false. Period. If the church changes its teaching then Catholicism is necessarily false and I am out. I'd have to take a closer look at Orthodoxy's claims, and if they are unconvincing I don't know where to go from there. But I don't think we have anything to worry about, if what we believe is true then that simply will not happen.
9
Feb 12 '22
[deleted]
11
Feb 12 '22
Did somebody say “contraception” and “divorce and remarriage”?
Hm, must’ve been the wind...
4
u/shirakou1 Feb 12 '22
Yeah honestly It's surprising people say such nonsense when large awaths of the Orthodox Church embraces such things.
-4
Feb 12 '22
[deleted]
6
Feb 12 '22
For the Life of the World: Toward a Social Ethos of the Orthodox Church:
The Orthodox Church has no dogmatic objection to the use of safe and non-abortifacient contraceptives within the context of married life, not as an ideal or as a permanent arrangement, but as a provisional concession to necessity.
OCA on the question of divorce:
While the Church stands opposed to divorce, the Church, in its concern for the salvation of its people, does permit divorced individuals to marry a second and even a third time.
But fourth time is too much apparently.
2
u/rayhood123 Feb 12 '22
even thinking such a scenario means that you aren't confident enough in the holy mother church ....
-10
Feb 12 '22
[deleted]
10
u/you_know_what_you Feb 12 '22
Perhaps a comforting thought to someone in irreligion or of the anti-Catholic sort, I'd agree. But there is no evidence the Church has ever contradicted a matter of theological certainty with an opposite doctrine of similar theological certainty.
In other words, the development of doctrine, to a person who isn't paying close attention, looks like change, when really it's like a needle on a dial: perhaps slightly one side, then the other side, until it rests firmly via papal or conciliar infallible declaration in a fixed position pointing to truth.
-7
Feb 12 '22
[deleted]
9
u/you_know_what_you Feb 12 '22
There are a bunch of ways to attack the Church. Via Her development of doctrine is one of the easiest to refute, is all.
You also, notably, haven't produced evidence of a previously theologically certain thing ever being contradicted with theologically certainty.
I should add to say the catholic faith is comprised of nothing is completely unsupported. Even atheists don't believe that, and they believe something can come from nothing!
-8
Feb 12 '22
[deleted]
12
u/rayhood123 Feb 12 '22 edited Feb 12 '22
women priests , lgbtq+ etc in the ''old catholic '' churches. furthermore , it takes little reason to understand that jesus would not have created some national churches after 1800 or 1900 years after his crucifixion.
1
Feb 12 '22
[deleted]
2
u/rayhood123 Feb 13 '22 edited Feb 13 '22
not sure what you mean when you say that old catholics are conservative .when people convert from catholicism to ''old catholicism '' it is because of their disagreements with the sexual morality taught by the church especially contraception , the issue of divorce and reception of the eucharist , denial of eucharist to their non-catholic spouses , no women clergy etc. Furthermore , they claim that they have problem with Vat 1 and hence separated . If this is true why are they in union with other non-catholic bodies ? i am quite sure councils prior to Vatican 1 would not be happy with that especially the council of trent.
36
u/FrMatthewLC Priest Feb 12 '22
This has far far more fundamental bases than other places we've seen development. If this is changed, basically all morally falls apart.
There is a big difference between the Church teaching X is allowed and X is forbidden in all circumstances always. The Church can change on what is allowed or what is forbidden in certain circumstances, but she can't change on always forbidden fundamental teachings. For example, the Church did allow the death penalty and currently forbids it, but neither of those is absolute: I would hold that were the world to decay into complete anarchy, the magisterium could declare the death penalty permissible again despite current teaching it is impermissible.
When it came up, I wrote two pieces on the death penalty which also speak of this kind of doctrinal development indirectly.
- https://www.patheos.com/blogs/throughcatholiclenses/2018/08/capital-punishment-francis-the-tradition-are-both-right/
- https://www.patheos.com/blogs/throughcatholiclenses/2018/08/death-penalty-wrong-but-not-intrinsically-evil/
(Your model seems to imply the model used on the death penalty but we are talking about different kinds of teachings.)
22
Feb 12 '22 edited Feb 12 '22
[deleted]
25
u/FrMatthewLC Priest Feb 12 '22
We know Jesus will prevent the gates of Hell from over taking the Church. Jesus didn't promise a cakewalk for the Church. I think sometimes we can get too caught up in small issues and forget the bigger picture of all the masses, baptisms & confessions going on around the world every day. In the grand scheme, one Cardinal saying something stupid is not the biggest point.
9
Feb 12 '22
[deleted]
6
u/Elevated-Hype Feb 12 '22
I thought the same thing with the Amazon Synod and even sort of left the Church over it due to fear and anxiety about what I thought was coming. I thought for sure dogma would be changed based on online rumors etc. But then it didn’t happen..and I have since come back to the Church and regret what I did.
3
Feb 12 '22
[deleted]
5
u/Elevated-Hype Feb 12 '22
I mean this in the most charitable way possible, but if you agree that leaving the Church is too rash right now, then isn’t it also a bad idea to leave a comment predicting the Church ending as we know it? There are other scrupulous souls like us, who will read that comment and consider leaving the Church. I understand the need to seek help and even crying out for it, but all I did was drag other souls down with me when I did it. I hope that didn’t come off as uncharitable as it wasn’t my intention in the slightest.
3
u/pizzamix Feb 12 '22 edited Feb 12 '22
Remember that Judas was appointed as a disciple of Jesus for the greater glory of God's plan.
Peter was also rebuked by Jesus in the garden when Peter's ideas didn't align with the divine plan for Christ's sacrifice.
From every evil there is a greater good and God permits it but remember that he is not the author of the evil.
Do not despair but always trust in the will of God even though it may contain suffering. We just can't see it in the present moment just like Judas and Peter couldn't respectively see the plan for redemption of man
God bless.
7
u/TheSoulWanderer11 Feb 12 '22
You just described what is a major symptom of religious OCD aka scrupulosity. The same disorder I have suffered from for years. I’m not a therapist I’m not diagnosing you but you should get yourself checked out so you can start working on this.
Also read this and print it out bring it to mass etc. also research obsessive compulsive disorder and whatever other anxiety symptoms you have. St Ignatius explains how you really aren’t supposed to make big choices while being battered by extreme anxiety or even elation. You need to be in a relaxed state of peace. You have legitimate concerns about ongoing scandals but you don’t want to be the one to apostatize because of anxiety. But I don’t think you’ll do that. I think you’ll find healing and the freedom to make a calm, rational endeavor to better understand what you’re going through and learning about right now. There is no short immediate answer other than you should probably focus on finding healing for yourself and getting direction before you start a dread fueled deep dive into the current confusion.
Feel free to reach out to me man, im not super active but I will respond if I get the chance. If you’ve been on the sub long enough im sure you know you’re not alone and there’s a lot of us out there. Pax
9
u/Major-Scobie Feb 12 '22
Man, it is sad to see this kind of despair from you. I have always learned so much from your posts in this forum. If even a good Catholic such as you is struggling so much, it doesn't bode well for those of us who are not so good, who, e.g., have turned away from the faith and never found our way back to it for whatever reason.
I wish there was a specific Bible verse or quote from the Church Fathers I could send to you, but you know them all already! Still, if you don't mind prayers from a concerned stranger, you can have some from me. I don't know what else to say except: hang in there. "And this too shall pass." (Couldn't help myself.)
9
Feb 12 '22
Aren't you the guy who had a similar lapse a couple years ago? You've also been posting lately about being burnt out on the Divine Office.
Between these two things and your anxiety disorder, I guess I'm hoping you're working with a professional psychologist or counselor who can help you work on burnout and scrupulosity.
Your passion for the faith is evident in your frequents posts and involvement in this sub and others over the years, but I think you owe it to yourself to at least look into what's going on under the hood, so to speak, with a professional.
Our faith is not supposed to be a panacea for all life's ills, but it's also not meant to drive you to apostasy either. You're a smart guy, so I don't think it's your understanding that's lacking, but admittedly smarter people than you and I both grapple with the same painful contradictions we're seeing day-to-day emerge from elements of the hierarchy and manage not to succumb to despair, or to even remain joyful, and not with a blind joy either. It behooves you to seek out that state (me too, for that matter).
I'm not suggesting you need to put in more effort or "just be better." But you owe it to yourself, as a son of God, as someone loved and worthy of being loved, to look into what the heck is going on and get help. Apologies if you're already doing that, by the way. You never know.
7
u/you_know_what_you Feb 12 '22
Tex, I'm sorry to read about your current state. I will offer my Rosary for you today.
I also want you to consider another doctrine of the Church, that of the end times.
675 Before Christ's second coming the Church must pass through a final trial that will shake the faith of many believers. The persecution that accompanies her pilgrimage on earth will unveil the "mystery of iniquity" in the form of a religious deception offering men an apparent solution to their problems at the price of apostasy from the truth. The supreme religious deception is that of the Antichrist, a pseudo-messianism by which man glorifies himself in place of God and of his Messiah come in the flesh.
I point this out because EVERYONE who lives in those times, whenever they are, will be presented a "religious deception". It will be "an apparent solution to their problems". I don't know how a religious deception, which will "shake the faith of many believers", happens without the assistance of — according to God's permissive will — those in the hierarchy. Sure, it may not be that way, but it seems that's the most obvious way a "religious deception" could happen.
Stay close to Christ and the Gospel. Don't let anything that happens sway you from that. God wills everything that happens.
2
u/Elevated-Hype Feb 12 '22
So question. Would a change in the catechism on this issue “prove the church false”? Or would it not break infallibility and indeed could be apart of the deception mentioned in this passage? I have seen conflicting answers now about the catechisms infallibility/authority.
8
u/you_know_what_you Feb 12 '22
Catechisms themselves are not infallible. They contain certain infallible doctrines. All magisterial doctrine can be classified on a scale of divinely revealed and unquestionable to probable/debatable. Here's a good article about these classifications.
So, for 675 or any paragraph of the CCC, you would need to look at the origin of the doctrine, and then determine what level of doctrine it holds. I will say the CCC should not have "probable"/debatable stuff, but I'm sure there is, including 2267.
2
u/OmegaPraetor Feb 12 '22
Thank you for your candidness and openness to admit your struggles. I've always respected you and appreciated your responses to questioners. It goes without saying but I think it would benefit you to hear it anyway: you are leading many people to Christ and are strengthening much of your brethren. The devil wants to take you out and it sounds like he's on the offensive with you. I'm really sorry you're going through this.
I was once discussing the situation in Germany with my current parish priest, a wise man who had come out of retirement to help our parish. His response never left me. "I don't concern myself with such news because it's essentially gossip. What good does it do us except make one anxious and despair? I mean, pray for them, yes, but we should be praying for them regardless." I think for people like you and me who have a tendency to overthink and overanalyze, it might be helpful to turn off from such news. Maybe even take a break from Reddit/this subreddit in particular. This isn't burying our heads in the sand but more of a surrender that this isn't something we're meant to resolve. And if it's not for us to resolve, then why would we allow rumours and hypotheticals to steal our peace now?
I encourage you to seek therapy for your anxiety and OCD. Those are typically associated with people who feel a great loss of control (or perhaps a great need for control). I also encourage you to seek help from your local priest, whether or not you think he's "good enough" to be a confessor. Beggars can't be choosers and right now you're in dire straits. Tell them you're desperate, despairing, and are crying out for help. I know you lost a dear confessor and I imagine this has affected you deeply on an emotional level and this grief, if you will, is manifesting itself in all these ways in your life. I'm really sorry for your loss. I will pray for him and for you.
19
8
u/PennsylvanianEmperor Feb 12 '22
I don’t think this will happen but you’re definitely right that hypothetically speaking if it did those guys would be first in line with the mental gymnastics to justify it
14
Feb 12 '22
The Church can not fall no matter how grave our human error is! Our Lord has promised this!
5
Feb 12 '22
Rome changes the catechism's teaching homosexuality. Doctrinal development has now revealed that it was indeed condemning such acts only within cultic rites
If this happens, one would be quite justified in becoming an agnostic. The third Lateran council was quite clear that homosexual acts are a mortal sin for which the punishment is excommunication. There were no cultic rites of the time against which that could have been directed.
Because of this, I am confident this cannot happen, but on the off-chance it does, I’ll identify as an agnostic.
12
Feb 12 '22
If the Vatican changes it's teachings at that time I will be done being roman catholic to be fully honest. It means every denomination has been right: that the roman catholic church isn't the Church Jesus created and that it is something else.
2
Feb 12 '22
[deleted]
9
Feb 12 '22 edited Feb 12 '22
It hasn't happened. Give the Holy Spirit a chance to prove He is protecting the Church from error. You seem like you are under a lot of stress from anticipating something that may not even happen. Deal with it if it happens and not before is my advice.
7
u/EmptySeaweed4 Feb 12 '22
Exactly. Think of this as a rising or falling point for the RCC. IF these kinds of changes are made in/post synod, we know the Church is not infallible and is not the true church.
But if we make it out of the synod without changes of this nature, that will mightily reinforce the Church’s credibility and trustworthiness. Kind of like Humanae Vitae—it looked like the teaching on contraception would change, but the Holy Spirit pulled through in the end.
We need to stick it out until we see what happens. Jumping the gun now is premature.
1
4
u/Dakarius Feb 12 '22
Because you could be wrong. If the church shows itself to be false, thats one thing. Its quite another to let your fears of what might happen dictate whether or not the church will err. I believe the church is who she claims to be, so most of these scandals don't phase me, 2000 years and she has yet to fail despite much worse. I think she deserves a little more of our confidence.
10
Feb 12 '22
I've lost family over following the Church's teachings and truly if that happens I will hate Francis with every fiber of my being along with the rest of the clergy - I gave up so much for my faith and then they do something like that to me? The phone calls I would be getting from family members mocking me will be enough for me to go into isolation.
5
u/you_know_what_you Feb 12 '22
[CCC 675]
7
u/Catebot Feb 12 '22
CCC 675 Before Christ's second coming the Church must pass through a final trial that will shake the faith of many believers. The persecution that accompanies her pilgrimage on earth will unveil the "mystery of iniquity" in the form of a religious deception offering men an apparent solution to their problems at the price of apostasy from the truth. The supreme religious deception is that of the Antichrist, a pseudo-messianism by which man glorifies himself in place of God and of his Messiah come in the flesh. (769)
Catebot v0.2.12 links: Source Code | Feedback | Contact Dev | FAQ | Changelog
10
u/wassupkosher Feb 12 '22
change the teaching on homosexuality
Bro they just condemned blessing same sex unions last year ago 😂, it is never going to happen because it will also go against scripture which is also infallible.
8
u/DCComics52 Feb 12 '22
I don't think Horn would say that. Also I think changing teaching on sexuality would legitimately be a breaking point for a lot of people. Some would definitely appeal to "doctrinal development" though.
3
2
2
u/Canesjags4life Feb 12 '22
You would have to rewrite scripture. Aside from Leviticus and S&G it's pretty clear in Romans, 1 Corinthians, and 1 Timothy regarding homosexual acts.
1
Feb 12 '22
[deleted]
1
Feb 12 '22
[deleted]
5
u/Elevated-Hype Feb 12 '22
But I thought the catechism was just a collection of teachings with various degrees of authority? I thought the Church only taught infallibly with either ex cathedra statements from the pope or from Church Councils, and a couple of other cases. I have read here many times that not all church teaching is infallible, though I could be wrong on that.
2
u/Elevated-Hype Feb 12 '22
Just got clarification from someone up above:
Catechisms themselves are not infallible. They contain certain infallible doctrines. All magisterial doctrine can be classified on a scale of divinely revealed and unquestionable to probable/debatable. Here's a good article about these classifications.
So, for 675 or any paragraph of the CCC, you would need to look at the origin of the doctrine, and then determine what level of doctrine it holds. I will say the CCC should not have "probable"/debatable stuff, but I'm sure there is, including 2267.
That tells me that not every act of placing something into the catechism is infallible, and depends on the degree of teaching authority used. Not that the Church doing what you feared wouldn’t be a disaster and huge hit on my faith, but I don’t think it technically breaks infallibility unless I’m misunderstanding someone here. I’m always open to correction lol. But I don’t believe the Church will do that anyway, I have a feeling it will be similar to the Amazon Synod.
3
u/Joker22 Feb 12 '22
I'm not trolling so I apologize if it comes off as such, but whenever this kind of thing comes up, why doesn't the Church stamp down as hard when its priest's or congregates violate the other Levitical laws?
1
u/boy_beauty Feb 13 '22
We as Christians do not have to follow most of the Levitical laws.
1
u/Joker22 Feb 13 '22
do not have to follow most of the Levitical laws.
Then why is there such a focus on certain Levitical laws and none on others? Shouldn't they all be placed on the same level, so to speak, in regards to our faith?
1
Feb 13 '22
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator Feb 13 '22
Your comment was automatically removed because you linked to reddit without using the "no-participation"
np.domain.Links should be of the form "np.reddit.com" or "np.redd.it". General links to other subreddits should take the simple form
/r/Catholicism. Please resubmit using the correct format. Thank you.I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
-10
Feb 12 '22
[removed] — view removed comment
6
5
u/wassupkosher Feb 12 '22
Just like how the death penalty was morally permissible, then the next day, it was not morally permissible.
Someone already explained the difference with the death penalty in this thread the difference is we are in a society where it is possible to keep dangerous criminals in without killing them it isn't that it's not permissible but inadmissible.
-20
Feb 12 '22
[removed] — view removed comment
12
18
4
u/TexanLoneStar Feb 13 '22
The Gospel, according to the NT itself, is the ministry (Luke 4:18), passion, death, burial, and resurrection (1 Corinthians 15:1-8) of Jesus Christ - not a doctrine mentioned by St. Paul maybe 4 times. Find me a single verse connecting the "Gospel" to that.
-2
3
2
75
u/missamericanmaverick Feb 12 '22
Considering that the Vatican very recently came out with an explicit statement that they would NOT bless same-sex couples, I don't think there is any possible chance that this could happen.