Do these men have no fear of God?
http://magister.blogautore.espresso.repubblica.it/
Synod and homosexuality. The word of St. Paul, uncensored
Since the synod fathers have begun to discuss the third part of the basic document, the one with the most controversial points, the weekday Mass is being read every day a passage of the Letter to the Romans, the Apostle Paul's theological masterpiece.Also here, that coincidence. Just like the Sunday opening of the Synod, on October 4, when in all Catholic churches in the world sounded during Mass the words of Jesus in Mark's Gospel: "Let no man separate what God has joined together."
Now, however, the coincidence of the synod and missal has to do with the indissolubility of marriage, but with another of the hot issues: homosexuality.
Tuesday, 12 October in the missal has read the passage in chapter 1 of Romans running from verse 16 to verse 25.
There Paul, stating that "the world's creation onward, the invisible things [God] can be understood and perceived in the things that are made, even his eternal power and divinity", calls "inexcusable" those who "while knowing God, did not give him glory nor were thankful as God, but they became futile in their thinking and their senseless minds is obscured. "
And it continues:
"Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and creeping things. Wherefore God also gave them up in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their own bodies between themselves ".
At the Mass on Tuesday 12 reading and you stop at this point. And the next day is taken up with Chapter 2 of Romans.
But the chapter 1 of the Pauline letter did not end there, and if the missal omits modestly that piece, the synod fathers can not not know what it contains.
Paul goes on to explaining why word for word what he meant by that first reference to '"impurities" of those who "dishonor their own bodies between themselves".
That's because the terrifying final chapter 1 of Romans
"Therefore God gave them over to degrading passions; their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, committing acts shameless men with men and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which s'addiceva. And since they did not acknowledge God, God gave them at the mercy of a depraved mind, to do those things that are unworthy, heaped like are all manner of wickedness, evil, covetousness, malice; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; defamatory, slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil , disobedient to parents, foolish, faithless, heartless, without mercy. And despite knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do them but approve those who practice them. "
If this St Paul says, it is evident that the synod fathers predisposed to changing paradigms doctrinal and pastoral of the Church on homosexuality have some difficulty to harmonize their proposals with which this is still the "Word of God", as proclaimed in placed at the end of every reading.
But it is also becoming increasingly clear that in large sectors of the Church's perception of homosexual practice as sin be slipping away as a relic of the past. Pace of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, not that of a time but the "new" in 1997, which still includes "sin of Sodom" among the four sins that "cry out to Heaven", together with voluntary homicide, all 'oppression of the poor and the fraud of the workers' wages.
Of course, who proposes that homosexual practice, someone can always be argued that such approval is "praeter Scripturam" outside except against the Holy Scriptures, as he said in 2011 the Waldensian pastor and theologian Paolo Ricca standing up against his brother Protestants who had just given the green light to "marriages" between same sex.
But also no shortage in the Catholic theologians and bishops who are quick to explain how St. Paul should not be taken literally, but interpreted as "context" of his time, influenced by prejudices of "patriarchal" and "contempt ethnic-religious" today unacceptable.
The "shadow synod" Franco-German kept at the Gregorian University last May, in which the protagonists sit now in the synod true, argued precisely this modern re-reading of Sacred Scripture, in the light of contemporary thought
2 comments:
Both amazing and wonderful, and a good catch by Magister. Thank you, Vox, for posting this.
It is possible that celibate participants of the Synod on the family miss a crucial point of the sex obsession we all suffer under? Old people today are told by medical professionals that a lack of sex-drive in old age needs to be treated as a medical condition. It puts pressure on aged men and women to be like fools. The UN asks the Kinsey Institute (the pervert-paedophile Kinsey, of course) to be their advisor on sexual health, and they impose on the entire world their diabolical claim that we are sexual from birth. Kinsey should have been thrown in jail for his sexual exploitation of babies and children, but instead, posthumously, he continues to abuse and corrupt morally the most vulnerable - from the very top of the pyramid, the Lucifer Trust-inspired UN.
The celibates may not know how humiliating, and exploitative the so called love can become even in a normal (yes, there is such a word and we all know what it means) marriage, when sex is divorced from the goal of procreation. Women and men don't talk about it, because as in the case of pointing out the perverse nature of homosexuality, so here, they are worried about ridicule and ostracism which may ensue. Who talks about women and men who feel pressured to perform sexually (because the spouse takes hints from porn they have seen or from a sex-therapist, not from the other spouse), or women pressured by their husbands to abort their babies, or men deprived of the right to keep their babies? Is there any talk at the synod about these issues, I wonder?
I have the impression that it is taken for granted that everyone wants sex, as much as possible, and that humans have a right to have sex from birth to deathbed (or longer).
Yet to me the evolution of humanity is in expanding one's understanding of who we are, not in having unrestricted sex. We have the capacity to think rationally (rather than act on instinct, like animals) and to make choices (despite the many scientific proclamations that free will is an illusion). This evolution is not a collective shift in attitudes (totalitarianism), but the fruit of an individual effort. Unfortunately, pope Francis seems to be a globalist-collectivist. He seems to care more about trends (often stemming from a concerted effort of a few "elites") than about individual salvation. He seems to have a very low expectations from people, as though we must see ourselves as victims of own instincts and outside forces, not as children of God.
If I believe that Jesus is the Son of God, I make decisions every moment of my life to follow Him to the best of my ability and understanding. How can someone call themselves a follower of Jesus Christ, and keep obsessing about ways to reach orgasms? What does it have to do with loving one's neighbour? Or God?
Post a Comment