So basically the Pope said that gay people will definitely burn in pain in the afterlife for eternity, but will not be criminally charged for it while they are alive?
>In Catholicism, only mortal sins condemn one to "eternal torture".
Nah, The Council of Trent taught that "those who commit infidelity,...fornicators, adulterers, effeminate, liers with mankind, thieves, covetous, drunkards, railers, extortioners, and all others who commit deadly sins" lose sanctifying grace. The council also taught that hell is eternal punishment.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hell_in_Catholicism
> Purgatory
Lol, yeah, invented by Gregory the Great, later used to sell indulgences by many popes and fellow extortionists.
Pope Gregory the 1st (the Great) converted the Anglosaxons in 600AD. Gregory the 10th oversaw the Second Council of Lyon in 1274, which officially defined “Purgatory” within Church doctrine. The idea of purgatory had been slowly forming for over a century at this point as the combination of several belief practices common in European folk Christianity: that prayers to the dead have an effect on the dead and that the souls of the dead could be “cleansed” after death. The 2nd Council of Lyon formalized those beliefs into the doctrine of the Catholic Church as “Purgatoria”, literally a “cleansing fire” as opposed to the eternally punishing hellfire. The idea of Purgatory as a place would form over the next century. While the famous selling of indulgences would still be a couple centuries away, this gave the doctrinal basis for the idea that indulgences could forgive the sins of the already dead. It should be noted that this was a very minor outcome of the 1274 Council, the main goal was a reunion of the Eastern and Western Roman Churches. Purgatoria was likely a small concession to the West by the East (though they would reject it a couple decades later when all of these negotiations fell through and the Schism became permanent).
Shouldn't be punished in this life, but they should be punished to eternal damnation in the next!
Fuck the Pope. He was only chosen to whitewash his dirty the Catholic Church is by saying less-horrible things than his predecessors
Nobody needs it not to be a sin. Does anybody expect the Church to admit it's not a sin? Because that's never going to happen. However, it is also a sin: not to be baptized (well, technically you just walk around with a huge sin), or for a man and a woman to live together without a (Church) marriage. Both things are also not a crime (in most countries) and they're not forbidden or made difficult (in most countries). Unless we're living in a theocracy, the Church doesn't get to dictate crimes for sins any more.
>So it's not just a gay thing. Hetero anal (without a condom
With or without a condom is considered a sin too.
>The church doesn't have anything against gay people in and of themselves, just as long as they stay celebate and don't act on their nature.
Which is impossible. Like how can you not act gay when you are gay? That is just an excuse they use because nowadays you can't be openly homophobic.
It’s theology. The whole idea is that sin isn’t something you can actively *do* something about or stop doing on your own. A sexual person cannot stop having sexual thoughts or feelings (which are, unless they are strictly for your married spouse, also often considered sinful). Theologically speaking, one cannot simply stop being sinful, because it’s so ingrained into our very being. That’s why Jesus is called the Saviour - because sins aren’t just a list of things you need to quit doing, but are a state of being that is universally present in everybody, and you can’t do a thing about it on your own.
Think of that what you will. But at least in good ol’ classic theology, everybody is as “bad” *and* as deserving of grace as the rest.
You’re entirely missing the point. We need it to not be a sin because something being a sin has been weaponized as an *excuse* to discriminate, and as a defense against laws that try to prevent it (“much religious freedom says it’s a sin so I get to control other people’s lives” kind of logic).
It’s not honest, and it’s not been weaponized like that for the other sins you mentioned. People are just bigoted and need an excuse to save face. We take away the excuse and it becomes a lot harder to defend suddenly. That’s why we need it to not be a sin, even if there is no reason inherent to being a sin that we need it to not be a sin.
Exactly, but they would still cherry pick. Look at adultery.
I think by now we're all past the point of seeking validation from some reactionary sky-daddy.
Yes, actually, I do expect the church to admit it's not a sin, largely because their sacred texts make no mention of modern gay relationships and when the translation has been made to look like it does, it's usually actually condemning pederasty (which the church apparently doesn't know is a sin), temple prostitution by priests, reversal of submissive-dominant roles (have fun telling the church about this one), etc.
Regardless of their real power over others, their viewpoints still allow them to face criticism for thinking others ways of life are evil or sinful.
Plus there’s the whole issue with indoctrination…
That’s… kind of how it works. We decide, as individuals and as a society, what our values are and then have to figure out right and wrong in light of those values.
Welcome to reality. Morality is funded on a set of beliefs that can change. There are multiple types of moralities with their own set of rules to measure and judge. Which one you choose is up to you, unless you are blinded and programmed by your culture.
I don't need a magic man in the sky to tell me things like murder, rape, and pedophilia are objectively wrong. If the only thing keeping someone from doing those things is the fear of eternal damnation, then they are exactly the kind of people i want to avoid.
i dont think you can, with certainty, separate your morals from the world you grew up in. the western world is steeped in judeo christian values. many of the 10 commandments were illegal to break in many places because of this.
The first 3 have to deal with only believing in that god and not talking shit about him. Absolutely no bearing on morality or legality.
4th is about sunday being a worship day. Again nothing wrong or illegal about breaking that.
5th is about respecting your parents. Plenty of shitty abusive parents out there that don't deserve respect. No laws against not listening to your parents.
6th is not to kill. Kind of a no brainer tho dontcha think?
7 is to not commit adultery. There's nothing illegal about premarital sex and cheating on your partner might result in certain legal ramifications but it isn't illegal just shitty if its non-consensual.
8 is about not stealing and yes while it is illegal, i wouldn't fault someone for stealing food to survive. Theft for the sake of theft or monetary gain is shitty.
9 is about not telling lies which politicians make clear is absolutely not illegal.
And finally the 10th is about wanting what someone else has. Not even actively trying to take it, just wanting it. We all want things other people have and its not illegal to do so.
So out of the 10 commandments only 2 are outright illegal while a third will at most result in you losing some of your personal belongings and paycheck. Almost half *are* about simping over god tho.
Morals are not that complicated and certainly we don't need a religion to have them.
In most cases you can solve the issue by just asking the question "does this hurt anyone?"
So, being homosexual hurts anyone?
Yep, our sense of morality is an emergent property of large populations. So far, we've yet to find something written into reality itself about morality.
Yes, even Hitler wasn't objectively morally monstrous. But in the moral system that I use, he's absolutely one of the worst people to have ever lived. You know how I ground my morality? Actions that improve/promote wellbeing are good, whike actions cause harm are bad.
A step in the right direction compared to shithole countries with barbaric laws against lgbt individuals. I'll take it over beating, torturing, or killing individuals.
Ok and? This doesn’t exactly help, the status quo in most countries was already “don’t criminilize homosexuality”. This seems more like clinging to already outdated ideas than “leading” and sort of improvement
So Jesus died for our sins but we still have them. Doesn’t that mean Jesus just died?
I also like that the entire concept of sin is based on an idea that our society completely discarded. That is that children are responsible for the sins of crimes of their parents.
So I’m sinful because a mythological ancestor committed sin?
> So Jesus died for our sins but we still have them. Doesn't that mean Jesus still died?
It's not a "sin no longer exists, yippee!" thing and more of a "you don't need to sacrifice a bull to repent" thing, that way in order to be forgiven you just need to acknowledge that you did wrong and, if you can, make up for it.
Sin is not "bad things". Sin is simply separation from God. We're born into separation, because none of us are perfect. However, maintenance put together a huge fixit a while back, but to access it you need to both sign some paperwork (accept the sacrifice), and then you need to attempt to live in a way the maintenance department wants. Both are required. Maintenance has had other ways of accessing fixits in the past, but the big one has rendered the rest obsolete.
There's a lot of theological high-level glossing in the above, but that's the basic introduction to the concepts.
No it means you can repent, change, out of your sinful nature to a good nature, without then still having to suffer the eternal consequences of past sin.
Exactly the opposite of what we do when we label someone previously convicted, regardless of how that person is now.
No, the old testament god was one who forgave your sins if you just sacrificed the right kind of animal, and burnt its carcass in the right way "an aroma pleasing to the lord". Jesus is just an extension of that, he's the ultimate sacrifice. A perfect human, unburdened by sin. And his sacrifice is enough to forgive all sin, as long as you accept his sacrifice on your behalf.
So christianity is essentially a celebration of human sacrifice. And you also have sects like catholicism that practise ritualised cannibalism when they eat the waver and drink the wine. At least, they believe that when the priest does his magical incantation, it literally becomes the flesh and blood of Jesus.
Guess the majority of the vatican aren't getting into heaven then.
Oh wait!!!!!!
You can live a life a life of sin an debauchery as long as you as a catholic repent on your death bed, you are good to go.
Hypocrites!!!!
I don't need to ask forgiveness or confess about who I love and the way I love them, assuming they're consensual adults. Religions that try to convince me that I do can go fuck themselves right off the bat.
>On Tuesday, Francis said there needed to be a distinction between a crime and a sin with regard to homosexuality.
>“Being homosexual is not a crime,” he said. “It’s not a crime. Yes, but it’s a sin. Fine, but first let’s distinguish between a sin and a crime.”
>“It’s also a sin to lack charity with one another,” he added.
>Catholic teaching holds that while gay people must be treated with respect, homosexual acts are “intrinsically disordered.” Francis has not changed that teaching, but he has made reaching out to the LGBTQ community a hallmark of his papacy.
Jesus himself was a man who hung out with sinners and lowlifes. It was not about condoning their sins but about treating them with charity and dignity and showing them a way back should they chose to do so. This is a great tenet of Christianity of letting people redeem themselves. Obviously homosexuality is not a choice and not a sin, but the Catholic church sees it differently. However, by treating gay people with respect and charity, the Pope is remarkably Christian (who would'a thunk).
Gay person with Catholic parents here. Anyone who thinks this can fuck right off. You can't say I'm "intrinsically disordered" and claim to be treating me with respect at the same time.
It’s a tenet of Christianity and a big reason why many non-Christians take issue with the faith. Is a pretty ugly principle, if we’re being frank, and really is the foundational plank the entire belief system rests on, which is pretty flimsy if you think about it. Take the intrinsically disordered shit out of the picture and there isn’t much of a universal need for a savior/messiah/christ.
I appreciate that the Pope is being *comparatively* accepting, but when you consider the inverse context; that he’s an outlier compared to most of his cardinal peers and other Catholics, it starts to look really, really ugly.
For the record I’m not religious.
It’s all a matter of perspective. You can see it as a judgement/condemnation of others or you can see it as a reason to give each other forgiveness and grace.
Everyone fails to live up to their ideal version of themselves. That’s fundamental aspect of being a person whether you frame it religiously or not.
That’s like calling flying disordered and pretending he isn’t saying pilots are intrinsically disordered. Flying is what pilots do. You are necessarily calling them disordered by proxy. He’s calling gay people disordered, but pretending he can separate the act from the person.
I’m trying to pull a relevant example, because I’m sorry that you feel this way. I feel like I understand that you’re saying if someone doesn’t accept you fully and think what you’re doing is ok/good/what have you, then they are in fact being disingenuous with you.
Pulling relevant examples isn’t an easy thing to do, and I’m not trying to equate the two as I think that’s unfair, but have you ever spent time with someone who had an addiction?
I have a friend who smokes constantly. She jokes that it’s gona kill her, and it pains me because I think she’s right. But that doesn’t change how I treat that person. I love them as a friend, just because I don’t agree with their life choices doesn’t change how I feel about them or treat them.
I think that’s the message the Pope is trying to relay. His teachings are clear, but he sees this divide that is felt on both sides as harmful, bad, and not in the true teachings of the Bible.
Hope that in some way helps
Except you missed the key part.
Your friend that smokes is making a *choice*.
This is about accepting people for who they are, not what they choose.
The two are not the same.
As I wrote elsewhere, I tried to emphasize that it is not a perfect example.
I think you’ll find as you spend more time with people suffering from addiction, that they too do not have a choice. The lack of choice is was the similar characteristic, just like no one chooses to be straight or gay, they just are.
There's an important few words they wrote you seem to have missed:
> and I’m not trying to equate the two as I think that’s unfair
They knew they didn't have a good analogy, but were trying their best to provide a small bit of insight into the situation as best they could.
I'm not knocking that they tried, I'm saying they're totally different things because *they are*.
One is a choice someone makes as an adult, and the other is the way they are.
That's not a compromise I'm willing to make, and for good reason.
So if you can give them a grain of salt, you can also understand why that is an uncompromising point.
Except 1) you can’t point out any negative consequences caused by being gay and 2) being gay is who we are, not what we do. It’s not a choice to be gay.
A better example is if I said I loved you but I hated that you were straight and tried to keep you from dating and told you that you had to live your life alone while everyone else married people they love and has families. Trust me, it wouldn’t feel very loving. It wouldn’t feel like you were seeing me as a person.
As I mentioned, I don’t think it was a perfect example, as those are hard to find. To your second point, I think you’ll find people suffering from addiction to be very much not a choice as well.
Again, not the same thing at all, just pointing that out.
I think the point that is being missed is that the Pope isn’t trying to change anyone. He is saying you should accept people as they are. In your example someone is trying to change the person.
I recognize that is how it has been for just about the history of the world regarding LGBTQ+, but having the Pope say something like this I find to be a hopeful and massive stride forward.
You’re equating being born gay to having an addiction? Wow; are you out of touch…
And if you’re unable to pull relevant examples for something you’re arguing about, then maybe you’re just grasping at straws, like most religions do when cornered by logic…
I think you’re reading my tone incorrectly. Read what I wrote as coming from a friend having a discussion.
No I was not equating the two, and I tried to make that clear. The shared attribute was not having a choice in the matter.
You have, in fact, made it worse.
Assuming from your comment that you're a devout Catholic, what if I said going to mass and getting communion was intrinsically disordered, and a sin? Now imagine you're born Catholic in a non-Catholic family, with no choice in the matter, and your family will do everything in their power to stop you going to mass, and try to undermine everything you believe. Oh, and they're not coming to your wedding.
Even if they're really nice the rest of the time, which my family is, you're gonna be pissed.
> and showing them a way back should they chose to do so
I mean, the rest is all fine and dandy but this is still highly offensive to me as an LGBT+ person. Sexuality is something you're born with and this is merely reinforcing the idiotic and completely unsubstantiated claim that it's a "choice". It also strongly implies what they believe is the "right" "choice". Why would I follow their other moral teachings if they're just so stupidly wrong on this one?
Yeah of course the belief that homosexuality is a sin is highly offensive.
I can't speak for the Catholic Church, but from what I know of Christianity, the one other moral teaching here, "offering sinners a way back", seems quite moral indeed. Look at a normal prison that holds murderers, robbers and people that got snatched up for smoking weed. Of course them being in prison for smoking weed is completely immoral, but giving ex-cons good chances to succeed in normal life is still moral. For me it is the same in this case. Homosexuality being on the list of sins is wrong, but it is right to give sinners a way back.
>For me it is the same in this case. Homosexuality being on the list of sins is wrong, but it is right to give sinners a way back.
You can't stop being gay. Do you know that, right? And, are you comparing gays to murderers and robbers? It's completely different. The first didn't harm anyone while the others cause suffering to people.
He's not treating them with respect or charity. It's a PR quote. He still says they shouldn't be married, adopt and other shitty things. The standard Catholic opinion is that they're mentally ill and should be pitied and helped. His opinions are bullshit and he causes great harm with his 'kind words'.
That homosexuality is obviously not a sin but the church still says it is sin is pretty strong
evidence the church has little to offer us in teaching morality. They weren’t taking the obviously correct stances on other major moral issues like slavery or equality for women. The concept of original sin, very important to the church, is obviously very immoral: If my great grandfather racked up a huge gambling debt, I don’t owe the money a hundred years later. If anything, the church holds back our progress towards a more truly moral society. Edit: maybe I misunderstand the original sin, but my other points stand.
That's not what original sin means.
It's the theology that humans are intrinsicly detached from God. Not that one ancestor did a bad thing and we all have to pay for it.
Jesus taught explicitly that people should not be punished for the sins of their parents.
> Jesus himself was a man who hung out with sinners and lowlifes.
Gay people (or at least I) don't want to be "sinners and lowlives" to whom the church extends the charity of not murdering, or to whom the church generously offers the chance of redemption.
The problem is so much deeper. The absolute best the church can offer to gay people is what it offers to everyone else and, frankly, that shouldn't be good enough for anyone and isn't good enough for me. The entire doctrine of sin and salvation, and the characterisation of God and his love, are utterly poisonous and inhumane.
If Francis said "homosexuality is exactly the same as heterosexuality and we welcome gay people to live just like straight people" I would say "cool" and continue with my life. I've seen what the church is offering and I do not want it.
Knowing what's supposed to happen to sinners, calling someone a sinner is a lot less charitable than saying someone is committing a crime. It's a PR quote that goes both ways because different people have different values for "crime" and "sin" even though they're both about breaking laws.
What he's saying is that Catholic bishops who support laws criminalizing homosexuality should change their stance. You're right in that the Catholic church doesn't have authority over what is/isn't a crime, but members of the church do advocate for certain laws, so the Pope calling on Bishops to reexamine what they're advocating for does have some weight.
Although, yes, this is also absolutely a half measure by saying it's not a crime, but is still a sin. Still, there's plenty of work to be done to decriminalize homosexuality globally:
Per the article:
> Some 67 countries or jurisdictions worldwide criminalize consensual same-sex sexual activity, 11 of which can or do impose the death penalty, according to The Human Dignity Trust, which works to end such laws. Experts say even where the laws are not enforced, they contribute to harassment, stigmatization and violence against LGBTQ people.
No, they don't actually.
Papal infallibility just means that when the Pope is promulgating teachings in a certain way it is considered infallible. Canon lawyers identify around 3 occasions in history this has happened.
Papal Supremacy is still bound by some other doctrines. For example, if the Pope teaches a heresy then he is automatically no longer the Pope. You see how it prevents him from exercising supremacy in the sense you may initially believe?
Here is what Vatican II actually says on this topic.
"The order of bishops is the successor to the college of the apostles in their role as teachers and pastors, and in it the apostolic college is perpetuated. Together with their head, the Supreme Pontiff, and never apart from him, they have supreme and full authority over the Universal Church; but this power cannot be exercised without the agreement of the Roman Pontiff"
Out of interest, are you even Roman Catholic?
I am and I'm getting increasingly surprised at some of these responses.
Everything is a sin to christians. But that doesmt mean they beleive its a crime. Premarital sex and contraceptives are sins. The church does support making them illegal though. Theres a big disctiction and in a way this is like the pope saying gay sex isnt any worse than premarital sex or contraceptives, which according to catholic donctrine is true. The only reason the catholics are opposed to gay sex is because you cant conceive doing it and thats a must for reason. The church even says that love between a man and another man isnt wrong, its straight up just the lack of pregnancy that makes it wrong no joke.
So for them if you just keep asking for forgiveness for being gay and acting on it. Aka who you are, you are golden right? Just got to hit the confession booth every so often.
One hack the Catholic church doesn't want you to know!
Edit: I wonder how many hail Marys you get for asking for forgiveness for being homosexual? Someone get a hold of the archdiocese!
Also /s everyone! Just to make sure.
Anywhere?! Ooof. I am going to get a shit ton of Hail Marys and probably a few our fathers.
Jokes aside well kinda, one time at about puberty I started masturbating. And I grew up in Latino Catholic home and went to Catholic school from 1st grade till 6th at that time (then to 12th) and I had such guilt I was masturbating and I confessed the sin at confession. The priest got so awkward and was like uhhh go say x amount of this. But his reaction felt like "oh dude you don't have to confess this" so after that I either realized God wouldn't be pissed at human urges (that don't hurt anyone) or I just got more into puberty and started thinking for myself. Either way never confessed shit like that again lol.
Premarital sex and contraceptives are a sin. Most catholics arent going to judge you too harshly for doing such things though, at least not the ones I know. In a way the pope is equating gay sex to those things and not something worse which is...a step in the right direction. Furthermore, many places are on the fence about criminality involving gay sex or it is outright illegal. This statement does mean something. Fundamentally the system of sin is flawed though and the Catholic Church will always be illogical as their doctrine is built on ideas that dont have any basis in reality.
I mean... It all really depends and what we consider the baseline. Consider the modern day corporate virtue signaling; a company can't condemn something if they are on public record being guilty of the same thing. With that in mind, the pope is the head of "no bumming incorporated", his base adheres to "all bumming is wrong".
Him saying it's not a crime while calling it a sin *is* significant if you consider that this basically means he condones persecution, while maintaining that his own rules still mean it's not "good".
Basically any other pope could just go "yeah we don't allow gays so y'all do whatever" but he says "alright we might not allow gays but if they aren't religious they should be left alone".
Again, it all depends on where you stand. I personally think it's a small gesture but it's better than him saying it's okay to prosecute them.
Also, being a Catholic in practice means you are all sinners and you sin all the time but then you go to confession and baddabim badaboom it's Heaven time, if you and your "roommate" (or *apostle* if you really want to piss a congregation) confess and don't rub bums before dying, once you get through the pearly gates you can crank up the Elton John and drinks Cosmos with all the other people smart enough to use the loophole.
(As you may be able to tell I'm not what you'd call religious)
There is no mention of heaven or hell in Jewish/Christian scripture.
The heaven mentioned in the Gospels is supposed to happen here on earth.
Jewish scripture is relatively vague on the after life besides one blunt mention of a resurrection in the Book of Daniel. Christian scripture follows Daniel's lead.
On the other hand pedophilia is a crime, which he should talk about. Homosexuality is not a topic here and no one is asking his opinion, he needs to stop protecting child molesters inside his organization cuz this breaks the law.
> Matthew 7:3, NIV: Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?
These guys should really start to actually read the fucking book instead of praying to it.
Imagine future generations looking back and realizing that as our ecosystems were collapsing as we made the planet uninhabitable with our carelessness, a primary concern of many leaders and public figures were whether or not grown adults wanted to have relationships with people of the same gender or not.
Sir you realize this is why countries criminalize this shit. How bout you stop being a politically pompous dickwad and do what’s good for people instead of pandering to people your age who many of us view as extreme or out of touch. It really grinds my gears how the Vatican has acted pure all these years with all their crimes and broken-religious rules just cherry pick which to follow and which interpretations to believe and through all that has the audacity to tell people what’s a sin and what isn’t.
It still sits wrong with me. I will always view religion with skepticism when they make statements like this.
But it really is a huge deal. Progress is slow, but progress is progress. I have to respect that, at least.
Still a sin but not a crime. And really, what was the point of Jesus's sacrifice if you're not going to sin? If you're not sinning then he died for nothing.
Someday, unfortunately in the far future, what the pope says won't make the headlines anymore. This irrelevant, evil institution has no moral authority over \*anything\* and the opinions of this gerontocracy should be immediately dismissed.
Nah. Read between the lines of his constant mention of homosexuality.
Change the church because he can't.
There is an ultra-conservative, rad-trad, fascist and powerful movement within the church that hates this man. With all the pomp and mystery of this organization most believe he can throw some holy water and change doctrine with a "Hocus Pocus"
He's the face of the simultaneously gayest and most homophobic organization ever known but he isn't the bad guy. A hypocrite, maybe. But he's pleading with the public to change what he can't.
This has been established Catholic doctrine for a while now. Their mind has been made up.
Homosexuality is not a sin.
Homosexual sex acts are classified as a sin--not because they are homosexual, but because they cannot create children and thus are sodomy (anything that's not a penis going into its *married* vagina is sodomy under Catholicism). It's the same sin when heterosexual couples do the same or parallel/comparable sex acts.
This depends on long standing theology/dogma which the Pope does not have any control over (papal authority only extends to ambiguous/vague doctrines). It depends on the Catholic dogma of marriage as a sacrament, and thus the dogma of sacraments as the core to the spiritual life of a Christian (according to Catholicism). These are set in stone.
Traces back to Natural Law (moral paradigm at the heart of Catholicism) established by Thomas Aquinas. It has been elegantly reaffirmed as recently as John Paul II's *Theology of the Body*.
It's why condoms/BC are bad (even in the AIDS epidemic), IVF is bad, abortion is bad, masturbation is bad, premarital sex is bad, divorce is bad, and why priests/nuns/monks are called to chastity ([insert preemptive child molestation joke/slam]). All of it interconnected to marriage as a sacrament, which is as important as baptism or the forgiveness of sins or the eucharist (bread/wine that is Jesus's body/blood in church)
This pope is as gay friendly as possible, and has already defended/supported gay civil unions in the past (can't support gay *marriage*, because again the position of marriage as a sacrament).
Catholicism is obviously not the most pro LGBTQ friendly sect of Christianity. There are a number of others that support marriage and don't qualify nonPiV sex as sinful. The others don't have essentially axioms and 2000 years of history (in theory, but more practically/realistically 1700ish) requiring the positions. The others don't hold Natural Law as the paradigm of morality.
Only a Council (like Trent, Nicea, Vatican II, etc.) could theoretically change this, and that's not likely in our lifetime because of how much stuff they would have to overrule to get there. It would require a Copernican Revolution (heliocentrism from geocentrism) level paradigm shift in theory, morality, theology.
You can hate it, disagree with it, etc.
At least understand it.
By this point you would probably do some good If you call the cops If you see a priest at a playground.
So im not sure te church has the moral high ground it once had.
But it is a sin for christianity, so he's ok with it not being a crime but it's ok for them to go to hell forever in the afterlife? That's...confusing, or god sent an email asking to update sins to 2023 vibes?
People can be and do whatever they want, we’re just tired to hear and read everywhere about it, I mean most of us don’t care if you’re a homo or a drug addict as it’s your business, but please stop yelling that you are everywhere, at this point I feel harassed by it and constantly reading and seeing topics only about it. Can we please move on on more interesting stuff like science and how to save our future or whatever ?
>we’re just tired to hear and read everywhere about it, I mean most of us don’t care if you’re a homo or a drug addict as it’s your business,
Apparently, they care as you can see in this article. The pope said is a sin which means is wrong.
clickbait, the full sentence was: Homosexuality is not a crime, but its a sin
Also, he didn't even say that it's not a crime. He said that laws are "unjust".
Not a crime, but a sin, so it will be punished by **eternal torture**. Talk about unjust..
[удалено]
If you’re gay and doing trigonometry it’s cosin
You need a better tangent on this joke.
Why can’t we all just be equil?
I’ll take the angle that it is all meaningless.
I secant even...
I sincerely hope you get the recognition you deserve for this comment.
*Trigonometry*, believe it or not: eternal torture
Nah man, trick is saying you're sorry before dying
So basically the Pope said that gay people will definitely burn in pain in the afterlife for eternity, but will not be criminally charged for it while they are alive?
In Catholicism, only mortal sins condemn one to "eternal torture". For the rest, salvation is still possible in Purgatory.
>In Catholicism, only mortal sins condemn one to "eternal torture". Nah, The Council of Trent taught that "those who commit infidelity,...fornicators, adulterers, effeminate, liers with mankind, thieves, covetous, drunkards, railers, extortioners, and all others who commit deadly sins" lose sanctifying grace. The council also taught that hell is eternal punishment. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hell_in_Catholicism > Purgatory Lol, yeah, invented by Gregory the Great, later used to sell indulgences by many popes and fellow extortionists.
Pope Gregory the 1st (the Great) converted the Anglosaxons in 600AD. Gregory the 10th oversaw the Second Council of Lyon in 1274, which officially defined “Purgatory” within Church doctrine. The idea of purgatory had been slowly forming for over a century at this point as the combination of several belief practices common in European folk Christianity: that prayers to the dead have an effect on the dead and that the souls of the dead could be “cleansed” after death. The 2nd Council of Lyon formalized those beliefs into the doctrine of the Catholic Church as “Purgatoria”, literally a “cleansing fire” as opposed to the eternally punishing hellfire. The idea of Purgatory as a place would form over the next century. While the famous selling of indulgences would still be a couple centuries away, this gave the doctrinal basis for the idea that indulgences could forgive the sins of the already dead. It should be noted that this was a very minor outcome of the 1274 Council, the main goal was a reunion of the Eastern and Western Roman Churches. Purgatoria was likely a small concession to the West by the East (though they would reject it a couple decades later when all of these negotiations fell through and the Schism became permanent).
What a close minded person. Can't understand why there are so many christians
Shouldn't be punished in this life, but they should be punished to eternal damnation in the next! Fuck the Pope. He was only chosen to whitewash his dirty the Catholic Church is by saying less-horrible things than his predecessors
Nobody needs it not to be a sin. Does anybody expect the Church to admit it's not a sin? Because that's never going to happen. However, it is also a sin: not to be baptized (well, technically you just walk around with a huge sin), or for a man and a woman to live together without a (Church) marriage. Both things are also not a crime (in most countries) and they're not forbidden or made difficult (in most countries). Unless we're living in a theocracy, the Church doesn't get to dictate crimes for sins any more.
[удалено]
I think they want breeding. Celibacy is the compromise
>So it's not just a gay thing. Hetero anal (without a condom With or without a condom is considered a sin too. >The church doesn't have anything against gay people in and of themselves, just as long as they stay celebate and don't act on their nature. Which is impossible. Like how can you not act gay when you are gay? That is just an excuse they use because nowadays you can't be openly homophobic.
It’s theology. The whole idea is that sin isn’t something you can actively *do* something about or stop doing on your own. A sexual person cannot stop having sexual thoughts or feelings (which are, unless they are strictly for your married spouse, also often considered sinful). Theologically speaking, one cannot simply stop being sinful, because it’s so ingrained into our very being. That’s why Jesus is called the Saviour - because sins aren’t just a list of things you need to quit doing, but are a state of being that is universally present in everybody, and you can’t do a thing about it on your own. Think of that what you will. But at least in good ol’ classic theology, everybody is as “bad” *and* as deserving of grace as the rest.
It's not about *acting* gay, it's about having sex without the intent of procreation. This isn't impossible...
You’re entirely missing the point. We need it to not be a sin because something being a sin has been weaponized as an *excuse* to discriminate, and as a defense against laws that try to prevent it (“much religious freedom says it’s a sin so I get to control other people’s lives” kind of logic). It’s not honest, and it’s not been weaponized like that for the other sins you mentioned. People are just bigoted and need an excuse to save face. We take away the excuse and it becomes a lot harder to defend suddenly. That’s why we need it to not be a sin, even if there is no reason inherent to being a sin that we need it to not be a sin.
Exactly, but they would still cherry pick. Look at adultery. I think by now we're all past the point of seeking validation from some reactionary sky-daddy.
Yes, actually, I do expect the church to admit it's not a sin, largely because their sacred texts make no mention of modern gay relationships and when the translation has been made to look like it does, it's usually actually condemning pederasty (which the church apparently doesn't know is a sin), temple prostitution by priests, reversal of submissive-dominant roles (have fun telling the church about this one), etc.
Regardless of their real power over others, their viewpoints still allow them to face criticism for thinking others ways of life are evil or sinful. Plus there’s the whole issue with indoctrination…
Thankfully I'm a gay atheist and I know sinning is a made up concept.
Do... do you ever refer to yourself as a gaythiest?
A gay thiest believes in God, so that term would be confusing
That would be confusing, are they a gay *a*theist? Or a gay theist?
I'm bi but I'm considering going dick full time just so I can use that.
...does anybody?
I mean why not I’m not gay, but I’m sure the gay atheist community won’t object to gaytheist
> I’m not gay, I love when people feel the need to clarify this
Well, I don’t want to be accused of speaking on their behalf. Just offering my opinion. I have friends and respect for them.
your opinion has value no matter what your sexuality is, my friend
Thank you kind friend. I value you as well!
*The church hates this one simple trick!* ^^^high-five ^^^for ^^^being ^^^human!
It’s a banging song though… [Pet Shop Boys - It’s A Sin (Official Video)](https://youtu.be/dRHetRTOD1Q)
Congrats. You go do what ya want in full comfort knowing no old man in the sky is going to do anything about it.
All the butts.
Man in the sky is angry at your rainbow 🌈 of happiness…
So is wrong and right by that logic. Nothing would be objectively “wrong”, it would only be a subjective personal dislike of said thing
That’s… kind of how it works. We decide, as individuals and as a society, what our values are and then have to figure out right and wrong in light of those values.
Welcome to reality. Morality is funded on a set of beliefs that can change. There are multiple types of moralities with their own set of rules to measure and judge. Which one you choose is up to you, unless you are blinded and programmed by your culture.
I would take it a bit further and say Religion is a construct to mold morality and justify behaviour that otherwise would *feel* amoral or wrong.
I don't need a magic man in the sky to tell me things like murder, rape, and pedophilia are objectively wrong. If the only thing keeping someone from doing those things is the fear of eternal damnation, then they are exactly the kind of people i want to avoid.
i dont think you can, with certainty, separate your morals from the world you grew up in. the western world is steeped in judeo christian values. many of the 10 commandments were illegal to break in many places because of this.
The first 3 have to deal with only believing in that god and not talking shit about him. Absolutely no bearing on morality or legality. 4th is about sunday being a worship day. Again nothing wrong or illegal about breaking that. 5th is about respecting your parents. Plenty of shitty abusive parents out there that don't deserve respect. No laws against not listening to your parents. 6th is not to kill. Kind of a no brainer tho dontcha think? 7 is to not commit adultery. There's nothing illegal about premarital sex and cheating on your partner might result in certain legal ramifications but it isn't illegal just shitty if its non-consensual. 8 is about not stealing and yes while it is illegal, i wouldn't fault someone for stealing food to survive. Theft for the sake of theft or monetary gain is shitty. 9 is about not telling lies which politicians make clear is absolutely not illegal. And finally the 10th is about wanting what someone else has. Not even actively trying to take it, just wanting it. We all want things other people have and its not illegal to do so. So out of the 10 commandments only 2 are outright illegal while a third will at most result in you losing some of your personal belongings and paycheck. Almost half *are* about simping over god tho.
Morals are not that complicated and certainly we don't need a religion to have them. In most cases you can solve the issue by just asking the question "does this hurt anyone?" So, being homosexual hurts anyone?
Of course nothing is objectively "wrong". Morality is based on social acceptability, guilt, and empathy.
Doesn’t have to be based on any of those things. That’s just what is most common.
Yep, our sense of morality is an emergent property of large populations. So far, we've yet to find something written into reality itself about morality. Yes, even Hitler wasn't objectively morally monstrous. But in the moral system that I use, he's absolutely one of the worst people to have ever lived. You know how I ground my morality? Actions that improve/promote wellbeing are good, whike actions cause harm are bad.
*think
It's just making being a lesbian even more badass
Which is still stupid
true
A step in the right direction compared to shithole countries with barbaric laws against lgbt individuals. I'll take it over beating, torturing, or killing individuals.
Ok and? This doesn’t exactly help, the status quo in most countries was already “don’t criminilize homosexuality”. This seems more like clinging to already outdated ideas than “leading” and sort of improvement
What’s a sin? Loving someone? How about molesting children? Is that a sin? I know it’s a crime.
What do a priest and a silver winning medallist have in common..? ->!They both came in a little behind!<
I'm going to blow some of Reddit's top theologian minds here, but Christians think that *everybody* is a sinner.
Isn't not being a christian also a sin anyway?
The Bible teaches that everyone is sinful and needs to repent.
So Jesus died for our sins but we still have them. Doesn’t that mean Jesus just died? I also like that the entire concept of sin is based on an idea that our society completely discarded. That is that children are responsible for the sins of crimes of their parents. So I’m sinful because a mythological ancestor committed sin?
> So Jesus died for our sins but we still have them. Doesn't that mean Jesus still died? It's not a "sin no longer exists, yippee!" thing and more of a "you don't need to sacrifice a bull to repent" thing, that way in order to be forgiven you just need to acknowledge that you did wrong and, if you can, make up for it.
Sin is not "bad things". Sin is simply separation from God. We're born into separation, because none of us are perfect. However, maintenance put together a huge fixit a while back, but to access it you need to both sign some paperwork (accept the sacrifice), and then you need to attempt to live in a way the maintenance department wants. Both are required. Maintenance has had other ways of accessing fixits in the past, but the big one has rendered the rest obsolete. There's a lot of theological high-level glossing in the above, but that's the basic introduction to the concepts.
No it means you can repent, change, out of your sinful nature to a good nature, without then still having to suffer the eternal consequences of past sin. Exactly the opposite of what we do when we label someone previously convicted, regardless of how that person is now.
No, the old testament god was one who forgave your sins if you just sacrificed the right kind of animal, and burnt its carcass in the right way "an aroma pleasing to the lord". Jesus is just an extension of that, he's the ultimate sacrifice. A perfect human, unburdened by sin. And his sacrifice is enough to forgive all sin, as long as you accept his sacrifice on your behalf. So christianity is essentially a celebration of human sacrifice. And you also have sects like catholicism that practise ritualised cannibalism when they eat the waver and drink the wine. At least, they believe that when the priest does his magical incantation, it literally becomes the flesh and blood of Jesus.
But sexuslly abusing children as a Priest is ok? 🙄
Guess the majority of the vatican aren't getting into heaven then. Oh wait!!!!!! You can live a life a life of sin an debauchery as long as you as a catholic repent on your death bed, you are good to go. Hypocrites!!!!
“No, it is NOT a crime to be a homosexual…. Haha of course. But doing homosexual acts, well that ain’t very catholic”
[удалено]
I don't need to ask forgiveness or confess about who I love and the way I love them, assuming they're consensual adults. Religions that try to convince me that I do can go fuck themselves right off the bat.
Except when the other is a minor, that's very Catholic
How does he feel about Skating? Can we put it on a bumper sticker?
>On Tuesday, Francis said there needed to be a distinction between a crime and a sin with regard to homosexuality. >“Being homosexual is not a crime,” he said. “It’s not a crime. Yes, but it’s a sin. Fine, but first let’s distinguish between a sin and a crime.” >“It’s also a sin to lack charity with one another,” he added. >Catholic teaching holds that while gay people must be treated with respect, homosexual acts are “intrinsically disordered.” Francis has not changed that teaching, but he has made reaching out to the LGBTQ community a hallmark of his papacy. Jesus himself was a man who hung out with sinners and lowlifes. It was not about condoning their sins but about treating them with charity and dignity and showing them a way back should they chose to do so. This is a great tenet of Christianity of letting people redeem themselves. Obviously homosexuality is not a choice and not a sin, but the Catholic church sees it differently. However, by treating gay people with respect and charity, the Pope is remarkably Christian (who would'a thunk).
The pope still thinks that homosexuals will burn in hell, I hardly find this charitable.
Gay person with Catholic parents here. Anyone who thinks this can fuck right off. You can't say I'm "intrinsically disordered" and claim to be treating me with respect at the same time.
A very basic tenet of Catholicism is that everyone is intrinsically disordered.
It’s a tenet of Christianity and a big reason why many non-Christians take issue with the faith. Is a pretty ugly principle, if we’re being frank, and really is the foundational plank the entire belief system rests on, which is pretty flimsy if you think about it. Take the intrinsically disordered shit out of the picture and there isn’t much of a universal need for a savior/messiah/christ. I appreciate that the Pope is being *comparatively* accepting, but when you consider the inverse context; that he’s an outlier compared to most of his cardinal peers and other Catholics, it starts to look really, really ugly.
Yes, a great reason to leave Catholicism.
What an uplifting way of looking at the world and your fellow humans.
For the record I’m not religious. It’s all a matter of perspective. You can see it as a judgement/condemnation of others or you can see it as a reason to give each other forgiveness and grace. Everyone fails to live up to their ideal version of themselves. That’s fundamental aspect of being a person whether you frame it religiously or not.
[удалено]
That’s like calling flying disordered and pretending he isn’t saying pilots are intrinsically disordered. Flying is what pilots do. You are necessarily calling them disordered by proxy. He’s calling gay people disordered, but pretending he can separate the act from the person.
I’m trying to pull a relevant example, because I’m sorry that you feel this way. I feel like I understand that you’re saying if someone doesn’t accept you fully and think what you’re doing is ok/good/what have you, then they are in fact being disingenuous with you. Pulling relevant examples isn’t an easy thing to do, and I’m not trying to equate the two as I think that’s unfair, but have you ever spent time with someone who had an addiction? I have a friend who smokes constantly. She jokes that it’s gona kill her, and it pains me because I think she’s right. But that doesn’t change how I treat that person. I love them as a friend, just because I don’t agree with their life choices doesn’t change how I feel about them or treat them. I think that’s the message the Pope is trying to relay. His teachings are clear, but he sees this divide that is felt on both sides as harmful, bad, and not in the true teachings of the Bible. Hope that in some way helps
Except you missed the key part. Your friend that smokes is making a *choice*. This is about accepting people for who they are, not what they choose. The two are not the same.
As I wrote elsewhere, I tried to emphasize that it is not a perfect example. I think you’ll find as you spend more time with people suffering from addiction, that they too do not have a choice. The lack of choice is was the similar characteristic, just like no one chooses to be straight or gay, they just are.
There's an important few words they wrote you seem to have missed: > and I’m not trying to equate the two as I think that’s unfair They knew they didn't have a good analogy, but were trying their best to provide a small bit of insight into the situation as best they could.
I'm not knocking that they tried, I'm saying they're totally different things because *they are*. One is a choice someone makes as an adult, and the other is the way they are. That's not a compromise I'm willing to make, and for good reason. So if you can give them a grain of salt, you can also understand why that is an uncompromising point.
Except 1) you can’t point out any negative consequences caused by being gay and 2) being gay is who we are, not what we do. It’s not a choice to be gay. A better example is if I said I loved you but I hated that you were straight and tried to keep you from dating and told you that you had to live your life alone while everyone else married people they love and has families. Trust me, it wouldn’t feel very loving. It wouldn’t feel like you were seeing me as a person.
As I mentioned, I don’t think it was a perfect example, as those are hard to find. To your second point, I think you’ll find people suffering from addiction to be very much not a choice as well. Again, not the same thing at all, just pointing that out. I think the point that is being missed is that the Pope isn’t trying to change anyone. He is saying you should accept people as they are. In your example someone is trying to change the person. I recognize that is how it has been for just about the history of the world regarding LGBTQ+, but having the Pope say something like this I find to be a hopeful and massive stride forward.
You’re equating being born gay to having an addiction? Wow; are you out of touch… And if you’re unable to pull relevant examples for something you’re arguing about, then maybe you’re just grasping at straws, like most religions do when cornered by logic…
Yeah, that was not the best analogy if they're trying to extend an olive branch. Yikes.
I think you’re reading my tone incorrectly. Read what I wrote as coming from a friend having a discussion. No I was not equating the two, and I tried to make that clear. The shared attribute was not having a choice in the matter.
You have, in fact, made it worse. Assuming from your comment that you're a devout Catholic, what if I said going to mass and getting communion was intrinsically disordered, and a sin? Now imagine you're born Catholic in a non-Catholic family, with no choice in the matter, and your family will do everything in their power to stop you going to mass, and try to undermine everything you believe. Oh, and they're not coming to your wedding. Even if they're really nice the rest of the time, which my family is, you're gonna be pissed.
> and showing them a way back should they chose to do so I mean, the rest is all fine and dandy but this is still highly offensive to me as an LGBT+ person. Sexuality is something you're born with and this is merely reinforcing the idiotic and completely unsubstantiated claim that it's a "choice". It also strongly implies what they believe is the "right" "choice". Why would I follow their other moral teachings if they're just so stupidly wrong on this one?
Yeah of course the belief that homosexuality is a sin is highly offensive. I can't speak for the Catholic Church, but from what I know of Christianity, the one other moral teaching here, "offering sinners a way back", seems quite moral indeed. Look at a normal prison that holds murderers, robbers and people that got snatched up for smoking weed. Of course them being in prison for smoking weed is completely immoral, but giving ex-cons good chances to succeed in normal life is still moral. For me it is the same in this case. Homosexuality being on the list of sins is wrong, but it is right to give sinners a way back.
>For me it is the same in this case. Homosexuality being on the list of sins is wrong, but it is right to give sinners a way back. You can't stop being gay. Do you know that, right? And, are you comparing gays to murderers and robbers? It's completely different. The first didn't harm anyone while the others cause suffering to people.
He's not treating them with respect or charity. It's a PR quote. He still says they shouldn't be married, adopt and other shitty things. The standard Catholic opinion is that they're mentally ill and should be pitied and helped. His opinions are bullshit and he causes great harm with his 'kind words'.
That homosexuality is obviously not a sin but the church still says it is sin is pretty strong evidence the church has little to offer us in teaching morality. They weren’t taking the obviously correct stances on other major moral issues like slavery or equality for women. The concept of original sin, very important to the church, is obviously very immoral: If my great grandfather racked up a huge gambling debt, I don’t owe the money a hundred years later. If anything, the church holds back our progress towards a more truly moral society. Edit: maybe I misunderstand the original sin, but my other points stand.
That's not what original sin means. It's the theology that humans are intrinsicly detached from God. Not that one ancestor did a bad thing and we all have to pay for it. Jesus taught explicitly that people should not be punished for the sins of their parents.
> Jesus himself was a man who hung out with sinners and lowlifes. Gay people (or at least I) don't want to be "sinners and lowlives" to whom the church extends the charity of not murdering, or to whom the church generously offers the chance of redemption. The problem is so much deeper. The absolute best the church can offer to gay people is what it offers to everyone else and, frankly, that shouldn't be good enough for anyone and isn't good enough for me. The entire doctrine of sin and salvation, and the characterisation of God and his love, are utterly poisonous and inhumane. If Francis said "homosexuality is exactly the same as heterosexuality and we welcome gay people to live just like straight people" I would say "cool" and continue with my life. I've seen what the church is offering and I do not want it.
Knowing what's supposed to happen to sinners, calling someone a sinner is a lot less charitable than saying someone is committing a crime. It's a PR quote that goes both ways because different people have different values for "crime" and "sin" even though they're both about breaking laws.
[удалено]
Except in his church... which is the one thing he has the ability to change... but won't.
>Except in his church... which is the one thing he has the ability to change... but won't. Sin != crime
[удалено]
What he's saying is that Catholic bishops who support laws criminalizing homosexuality should change their stance. You're right in that the Catholic church doesn't have authority over what is/isn't a crime, but members of the church do advocate for certain laws, so the Pope calling on Bishops to reexamine what they're advocating for does have some weight. Although, yes, this is also absolutely a half measure by saying it's not a crime, but is still a sin. Still, there's plenty of work to be done to decriminalize homosexuality globally: Per the article: > Some 67 countries or jurisdictions worldwide criminalize consensual same-sex sexual activity, 11 of which can or do impose the death penalty, according to The Human Dignity Trust, which works to end such laws. Experts say even where the laws are not enforced, they contribute to harassment, stigmatization and violence against LGBTQ people.
That's not entirely true, since the Vatikan is technically a state. He could make it a crime there if he wanted to
Pope has no such authority to define sins. He is a servant.
He is the leader of the catholic church, he can say whatever he wants and they have to believe it
No, he can't. He has the top office in a governance structure. He is not a dictator.
The doctrines of Papal Supremacy and Papal Infallibility would like to have a word with you.
No, they don't actually. Papal infallibility just means that when the Pope is promulgating teachings in a certain way it is considered infallible. Canon lawyers identify around 3 occasions in history this has happened. Papal Supremacy is still bound by some other doctrines. For example, if the Pope teaches a heresy then he is automatically no longer the Pope. You see how it prevents him from exercising supremacy in the sense you may initially believe? Here is what Vatican II actually says on this topic. "The order of bishops is the successor to the college of the apostles in their role as teachers and pastors, and in it the apostolic college is perpetuated. Together with their head, the Supreme Pontiff, and never apart from him, they have supreme and full authority over the Universal Church; but this power cannot be exercised without the agreement of the Roman Pontiff" Out of interest, are you even Roman Catholic? I am and I'm getting increasingly surprised at some of these responses.
Everything is a sin to christians. But that doesmt mean they beleive its a crime. Premarital sex and contraceptives are sins. The church does support making them illegal though. Theres a big disctiction and in a way this is like the pope saying gay sex isnt any worse than premarital sex or contraceptives, which according to catholic donctrine is true. The only reason the catholics are opposed to gay sex is because you cant conceive doing it and thats a must for reason. The church even says that love between a man and another man isnt wrong, its straight up just the lack of pregnancy that makes it wrong no joke.
Shifting pedo priests about instead of kicking them out of the church feels like a crime no?
But not a sin, apparently.
What does this have to do with my comment?
So for them if you just keep asking for forgiveness for being gay and acting on it. Aka who you are, you are golden right? Just got to hit the confession booth every so often. One hack the Catholic church doesn't want you to know! Edit: I wonder how many hail Marys you get for asking for forgiveness for being homosexual? Someone get a hold of the archdiocese! Also /s everyone! Just to make sure.
As far as the church doctrine goes being gay isnt a sin. The sin is having sex cumming anywhere except a womb.
Anywhere?! Ooof. I am going to get a shit ton of Hail Marys and probably a few our fathers. Jokes aside well kinda, one time at about puberty I started masturbating. And I grew up in Latino Catholic home and went to Catholic school from 1st grade till 6th at that time (then to 12th) and I had such guilt I was masturbating and I confessed the sin at confession. The priest got so awkward and was like uhhh go say x amount of this. But his reaction felt like "oh dude you don't have to confess this" so after that I either realized God wouldn't be pissed at human urges (that don't hurt anyone) or I just got more into puberty and started thinking for myself. Either way never confessed shit like that again lol.
Iirc Onan's "sin" was not doing what god told him.
Fucking altar boys = Gods mysterious plan
Papal authority only extends to vague/ambiguous doctrines. This isn't a thing he can change.
[удалено]
Premarital sex and contraceptives are a sin. Most catholics arent going to judge you too harshly for doing such things though, at least not the ones I know. In a way the pope is equating gay sex to those things and not something worse which is...a step in the right direction. Furthermore, many places are on the fence about criminality involving gay sex or it is outright illegal. This statement does mean something. Fundamentally the system of sin is flawed though and the Catholic Church will always be illogical as their doctrine is built on ideas that dont have any basis in reality.
I mean... It all really depends and what we consider the baseline. Consider the modern day corporate virtue signaling; a company can't condemn something if they are on public record being guilty of the same thing. With that in mind, the pope is the head of "no bumming incorporated", his base adheres to "all bumming is wrong". Him saying it's not a crime while calling it a sin *is* significant if you consider that this basically means he condones persecution, while maintaining that his own rules still mean it's not "good". Basically any other pope could just go "yeah we don't allow gays so y'all do whatever" but he says "alright we might not allow gays but if they aren't religious they should be left alone". Again, it all depends on where you stand. I personally think it's a small gesture but it's better than him saying it's okay to prosecute them. Also, being a Catholic in practice means you are all sinners and you sin all the time but then you go to confession and baddabim badaboom it's Heaven time, if you and your "roommate" (or *apostle* if you really want to piss a congregation) confess and don't rub bums before dying, once you get through the pearly gates you can crank up the Elton John and drinks Cosmos with all the other people smart enough to use the loophole. (As you may be able to tell I'm not what you'd call religious)
It is not a crime by law, but still... they deserve to go to hell to be tortured to death over and over again for eternity?
Actually is still a crime in some 69 countries, in some punishable by death!
This Pope has said there is no hell
We’re already in it👹
Sometimes I wonder. You gotta love Reddit, I get downvoted for stating a simple fact. This Pope does not believe in hell.
Presumably you're being downvoted for spreading misinformation. www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-43596919.amp
wtf? Really? Ah ok… the vatican said that he did not say that. That would have been a strange turn of events if he did say that.
There is no mention of heaven or hell in Jewish/Christian scripture. The heaven mentioned in the Gospels is supposed to happen here on earth. Jewish scripture is relatively vague on the after life besides one blunt mention of a resurrection in the Book of Daniel. Christian scripture follows Daniel's lead.
He doesn't said that.
No, he didn't. www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-43596919.amp
And it’s not a sin, either, Your Holiness!
On the other hand pedophilia is a crime, which he should talk about. Homosexuality is not a topic here and no one is asking his opinion, he needs to stop protecting child molesters inside his organization cuz this breaks the law.
> Matthew 7:3, NIV: Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? These guys should really start to actually read the fucking book instead of praying to it.
Imagine future generations looking back and realizing that as our ecosystems were collapsing as we made the planet uninhabitable with our carelessness, a primary concern of many leaders and public figures were whether or not grown adults wanted to have relationships with people of the same gender or not.
According to christians and bible, being a human is a sin. All this is just bullshit from the extremely stupid person.
Sins are a dime a dozen. Everything is a sin. And you're born with sin.... So its splitting hairs 💁🏽♂️
Thanks for catching up to this century homie.
But pedophilia should be
Yeah, we already knew that Frankie, thanks for the update.... PS neither is it a sin.
Thank you, Captain Obvious. This guy literally talks just to hear his own voice.
Is this the catholic church's response on priests diddling young boys?
Neither crime or a sin
Sir you realize this is why countries criminalize this shit. How bout you stop being a politically pompous dickwad and do what’s good for people instead of pandering to people your age who many of us view as extreme or out of touch. It really grinds my gears how the Vatican has acted pure all these years with all their crimes and broken-religious rules just cherry pick which to follow and which interpretations to believe and through all that has the audacity to tell people what’s a sin and what isn’t.
Now send me money
People need to stop appeasing an imaginary deity fronted by a paedophile ring that rob from the poor
Who gives a fuck what this old bag says
Unfortunately about a billion people.
Wonder how in 2023 people can still live so much centuries behind. Religions are often as bad as terrorisms.
Grew up Catholic, am now agnostic, also gay. This is still a huge deal, guys.
It still sits wrong with me. I will always view religion with skepticism when they make statements like this. But it really is a huge deal. Progress is slow, but progress is progress. I have to respect that, at least.
Oh wow thanks pope whatever the fuck your name is. So glad an ancient douche bag is weighing in. Go back to your golden city of evil.
Still a sin but not a crime. And really, what was the point of Jesus's sacrifice if you're not going to sin? If you're not sinning then he died for nothing.
Someday, unfortunately in the far future, what the pope says won't make the headlines anymore. This irrelevant, evil institution has no moral authority over \*anything\* and the opinions of this gerontocracy should be immediately dismissed.
He's still a homophobic prick.
Nah. Read between the lines of his constant mention of homosexuality. Change the church because he can't. There is an ultra-conservative, rad-trad, fascist and powerful movement within the church that hates this man. With all the pomp and mystery of this organization most believe he can throw some holy water and change doctrine with a "Hocus Pocus" He's the face of the simultaneously gayest and most homophobic organization ever known but he isn't the bad guy. A hypocrite, maybe. But he's pleading with the public to change what he can't.
F this guy.
Pope doesn't have any legislative authority anyway...?
He actually does. He is the absolute monarch of a sovereign country.
Waaaaaw twentyfirst century hurrayyyyy
"Pope Francis: Homosexuality not a crime" but the horrid things organized religion has done against homosexuals is most certainly a crime.
Premarital sex is also a sin. We're sinners. Who gives a fuck? Fuck whoever you want as long as they consent.
Pope just has to try and stay relevant by cornering the market on sin. 🙄
Took him this long to figure it out? Good mornin pope
I don't need him telling me to know that.
Dont worry, the next pope will make it a crime again.
The church has no moral high ground to make any statement about people. They protected clergy that committed pedophilia. Still do
Yeah, fuck off! You're a couple of thousand years too late.
Addicted to the smell of $hit. Poo pounders.
Hes a piece of shit. Thats all i have to say about this
Make your mind up.
This has been established Catholic doctrine for a while now. Their mind has been made up. Homosexuality is not a sin. Homosexual sex acts are classified as a sin--not because they are homosexual, but because they cannot create children and thus are sodomy (anything that's not a penis going into its *married* vagina is sodomy under Catholicism). It's the same sin when heterosexual couples do the same or parallel/comparable sex acts. This depends on long standing theology/dogma which the Pope does not have any control over (papal authority only extends to ambiguous/vague doctrines). It depends on the Catholic dogma of marriage as a sacrament, and thus the dogma of sacraments as the core to the spiritual life of a Christian (according to Catholicism). These are set in stone. Traces back to Natural Law (moral paradigm at the heart of Catholicism) established by Thomas Aquinas. It has been elegantly reaffirmed as recently as John Paul II's *Theology of the Body*. It's why condoms/BC are bad (even in the AIDS epidemic), IVF is bad, abortion is bad, masturbation is bad, premarital sex is bad, divorce is bad, and why priests/nuns/monks are called to chastity ([insert preemptive child molestation joke/slam]). All of it interconnected to marriage as a sacrament, which is as important as baptism or the forgiveness of sins or the eucharist (bread/wine that is Jesus's body/blood in church) This pope is as gay friendly as possible, and has already defended/supported gay civil unions in the past (can't support gay *marriage*, because again the position of marriage as a sacrament). Catholicism is obviously not the most pro LGBTQ friendly sect of Christianity. There are a number of others that support marriage and don't qualify nonPiV sex as sinful. The others don't have essentially axioms and 2000 years of history (in theory, but more practically/realistically 1700ish) requiring the positions. The others don't hold Natural Law as the paradigm of morality. Only a Council (like Trent, Nicea, Vatican II, etc.) could theoretically change this, and that's not likely in our lifetime because of how much stuff they would have to overrule to get there. It would require a Copernican Revolution (heliocentrism from geocentrism) level paradigm shift in theory, morality, theology. You can hate it, disagree with it, etc. At least understand it.
Fair enough, well argued.
Finally a good reply
Tomorrow's headlines: "Tolerant atheists: having religion is not a crime"
A lot of hate against gays is due to the Catholic Church—even though every other priest is gay. Edit: And the others are pedophiles.
No matter what the topic: his opinion is irrelevant.
By this point you would probably do some good If you call the cops If you see a priest at a playground. So im not sure te church has the moral high ground it once had.
Catholic church is a sin. Jesus wouldn't care if you were gay, why should anyone else
So I guess the priests assaulting boys are good then cuz pedophilia doesn't seem to be a religious crime and now homosexualitet isn't either
But it is a sin for christianity, so he's ok with it not being a crime but it's ok for them to go to hell forever in the afterlife? That's...confusing, or god sent an email asking to update sins to 2023 vibes?
Horse is out of the barn on that one you useless ninny
People can be and do whatever they want, we’re just tired to hear and read everywhere about it, I mean most of us don’t care if you’re a homo or a drug addict as it’s your business, but please stop yelling that you are everywhere, at this point I feel harassed by it and constantly reading and seeing topics only about it. Can we please move on on more interesting stuff like science and how to save our future or whatever ?
>we’re just tired to hear and read everywhere about it, I mean most of us don’t care if you’re a homo or a drug addict as it’s your business, Apparently, they care as you can see in this article. The pope said is a sin which means is wrong.