tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-876502085465766394.post2888057855044223269..comments2024-01-17T03:08:25.317-06:00Comments on The Progressive Catholic Voice: Dueling WorldviewsPCV Editorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12519134580470262558noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-876502085465766394.post-42533237601273264772013-08-31T11:11:19.351-05:002013-08-31T11:11:19.351-05:00This is now the fourth comment that you have delet...This is now the fourth comment that you have deleted.<br /><br />I will restate my argument once again. The article above asserts that there is a discontinuity between the Gospel and current Church teaching. I am asserting that on at least one issue there is continuity. The repudiation of artificial contraception.<br /><br />The Gospel teaches: "4 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25 They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.<br />26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error." Romans 1:24-27.<br /><br />The Catechism teaches: "Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity,141 tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered."142 They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved." CCC 2357.Johnnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-876502085465766394.post-67134007393918191962013-08-26T00:07:44.249-05:002013-08-26T00:07:44.249-05:00Please note our comment procedure: You MUST use a ...Please note our comment procedure: You MUST use a REAL NAME when you comment. "Anonymous" is no longer acceptable, nor are monikers. We don't need your last name or your email address, but we do require a FIRST NAME at the very least. Plan on having your comment deleted if it isn't a real name.PCV Editorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12519134580470262558noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-876502085465766394.post-52635338213997166782013-08-22T20:33:47.716-05:002013-08-22T20:33:47.716-05:00Thanks, Anonymous. Taking the subject of homosexua...Thanks, Anonymous. Taking the subject of homosexuality off the table for the time being, do you think it is possible to refrain from asking questions about things you are being asked to believe? I find that hard to do.Paulahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00135199120788030871noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-876502085465766394.post-76010376575217238852013-08-21T15:57:56.933-05:002013-08-21T15:57:56.933-05:00William Lindsey, you have put into words exactly w...William Lindsey, you have put into words exactly what I believe too. Now I am seeing things from Weigel's point of view, I think he would say you and I are infected with "subjectivism" and the "imperial autonomous Self." What I think he means is there is objective truth, and when our rational computer-like mind hears it, we have to act on it whether our personal humanity is acknowledged or not, whether we count or not. He complains about too much psychology. Is it that his view discounts so much of what we have learned in the last 80 years or so about human cognition? I'd be interested to know what you think. Would dialogue with a person in that frame of reference require an "objective" approach? Paulahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00135199120788030871noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-876502085465766394.post-44147917768732197952013-08-21T08:11:40.029-05:002013-08-21T08:11:40.029-05:00"Let us know what reforms you think are neede..."Let us know what reforms you think are needed."<br /><br />Thank you for inviting contributions, Paula.<br /><br />In my view, a very simple, but critically necessary, reform our church needs is the following: if you ask me a question and I respond to you, you acknowledge my response--because your acknowledgment of my response is an acknowledgment that I count in the human community and the Catholic conversation.<br /><br />I find far too many Catholic dialogues flawed from the ground up, because of the inability or unwillingness of those engaged in these dialogues to acknowledge the existence of everyone within the dialogical community. To do so by responding in a human way, back and forth, to questions and answers . . . .<br /><br />Creating such simply human but really holy dialogic spaces would go a long way towards bringing our notions of holiness out of the realm of the impossibly ethereal into the realm of incarnation, in my view.William D. Lindseyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07246026074693891965noreply@blogger.com