 |
| Lisa Fullam |
But our own teaching on marriage is richer than that–marriage has value that includes procreation (or not), but also reaches beyond that important but ultimately merely biological category to encompass all the richness of living in committed relationships.Perhaps this is a moment when Catholics voting for marriage equality are showing that they have indeed learned the lessons of Catholic teaching, both the social teaching of the equal dignity of all people and our own rich heritage on marriage.
Link (here) to dotcommonwheel to the full piece by University of Santa Clara professor Lisa Fullam
18 comments:
FACT: you have OCD.
That professor is not in full communion with the Church, and she should be fired because her views place her at odds with her professional responsibility to teach Catholic theology in a Catholic university. Bishop McGrath, has the professor sought or been granted a mandatum to teach the sacred sciences in accord with Ex Corde Ecclesiae? No surprise that it's a Jesuit school. No surprise that it's in the Bay Area. No surprise that it's a woman who looks butch.
Same-sex pairings are not and can never be equal to opposite-sex pairings; simple biology demonstrates as much. The professor and Anonymous @ 12:39 have difficulty accepting reality, for surely they grasp the natural inequality that they feign not to believe or acknowledge.
Funny thing, most homosexuals believe in the theory of evolution.
The "survival of the fittest" and only the genetic best shall go on to reproduce and evolve. However, they do not believe this theory of evolution applies to themselves!
Lotmeets Darwin: I'm not at all sure that there's ever been a study or poll done on the position of LGBT folks regarding evolution. If you have a link to one, however, please share!
Giving your comment the benefit of the doubt, though, I must ask whether you are assuming that all gays want EVERYONE to be gay.
That's an assumption too far, I think. Homosexuality appears to pop up in a small % of the population. Consistently.
Your logic is exactly the same as saying we shouldn't let people be Catholic priests because they are not adding to the human population.
Just because I am brunette or gay or female or a music fan in NO way obligates everyone to be any of those things.
Ever hear of artificial insemination?
There is a fine line between encouraging a life style and accepting a life style.
The CDF is correct in pointing out that marriage "was established by the Creator with its own nature, essential properties, and purpose". But it goes too far. (http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20030731_homosexual-unions_en.html)
(Lisa Fullam's argument is equally misguided.)
“When giving the spiritual exercises, portray symbolically the Holy Trinity looking down upon the earth. And seeing such wickedness, cruelty, lechery, debauchery, hatred that Father, Son and Holy Spirit enter into council and decide that the Second Person should come down among wicked men. So that having rejected the prophets and put them to death the world might listen to God in human form telling His creatures to repent.”
St Ignatius to his sons....
Why the heck is Maria including this quote?
Lotmeets: I think that perhaps you misunderstood my analogy. My point was not that homosexuality is LIKE being in the priesthood, but rather, that not every decision to live a childless life is contributing to some sort of mass extinction.
You would agree that if EVERYONE became a Catholic priest or nun that the race would die off, right?
(I must admit that I question the value of responding to a person who compares such a complex sphere of our personhood to nose-picking. I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you want a constructive discussion to talk and learn.)
What's complex about same-sex attraction being obviously disordered? No need to attempt to dress it up or dignify it by saying it is a "complex sphere of personhood". It's contrary to nature and disordered, and people who suffer from the affliction need sympathy and support to try and overcome it, which might not be possible in every case. Call a spade a spade. The only possible motivation for considering SSA to be a complex phenomena is to attempt to justify homosexual acts, which is not possible to do.
Anonymous, I don't feel I am going out on a limb by calling human sexuality complex.
It is something that everyone from our greatest saints to our dimmest bulbs have struggled with.
The immorality of homosexuality is quite simple, and no saint has ever struggled with that judgment. Let's be clear what is at issue instead of clouding the issue.
Speaking of clouding the issue, it seems that you are wandering farther and farther from the points I was making.
I wasn't debating the morality of homosexual conduct. I was, rather, addressing two points made in the comments:
1) Is there anyone in the homosexual community actually expecting or hoping that EVERYONE will become homosexual (as was alleged above)? I compared homosexuality to the celibate clergy ONLY in that I don't think anyone in the clergy expects that suddenly EVERYONE will become celibate? Do you?
2) There was a spurious statement made that homosexuality is like picking one's nose. I think we can agree that this is an exceedingly silly analogy. If nothing else, we can agree that it is not because the Bible speaks against it, whereas there are no consequences laid out for picking one's nose or washing one's hands a lot. Surely no one believes the two things are in the same category.
Being gay and in a loving relationship is not "disordered."
If "marriage" is defined as a union between a man and a woman then all we need is a different word. Call it "civil union" - between two PEOPLE - and the argument will move along a solid track. We don't try to hassle about the words "boy/man" or "girl/woman" if one tthe above prefers mates of their own sex for persoanl relationships. Why argue when all we need is to chceck Webtser's dictionary (or the Oxford dictionary, etc.) to GET OUR WORDS 'STRAIGHT'?
"The immorality of homosexuality is quite simple, and no saint has ever struggled with that judgment. Let's be clear what is at issue instead of clouding the issue"
Really ? what facts other than those provided by the vatican do you have that to back up?
dare i sat st francis asissi was a bit fruity ignacio was quite fond of xavier
Lotmeets Darwin ----
most priests are GAY wether practicing or not GAY GAY GAY GAY GAY
do you think repressing your sexuality is normal?
Ever hear of artificial insemination? amen
and adopting many unwanted children
Post a Comment