Christianity in the Queer World

[Ozio]

Originally Posted by Ol' Jet

No, its based engaging outside of marriage according to the catechesis.
The church does not condemn, which is really a medieval statement. The Church embraces homosexuals as children of God, but not the act outside of marriage. Secondly, the Church always concedes to God. But how that happens gets into heavy theologies that I don't need to concern myself. As a Catholic I love and respect my religion, regardless of my sexual orientation, and I know without illusions, that God loves me no matter the Church says or doesn't say. I choose to remain a Catholic.
And really, the bottom line in life or death, is between God and me.

Last, I would recommend anyone to read A Letter to Louise which can be downloaded at http://www.godmademegay.com/

Then you do not see the threat to cease humanitarian aid by the church in regions that enact same sex marriage laws as condemnation?
I'm not trying to change anyones religion of choice, I just was curious as to Christian queers views on same sex partnering in regions that have no same sex marriage/partnering laws.
The Catholic church requires all it's clergy to be celibate.

note: It is according to the Catholic churches doctrine, which I have read on theological sites, that their views on homosexuality are based on the tale of Sodom and Gomorrah, but I won't argue the point.

[Jet]

Originally Posted by Ozio

Then you do not see the threat to cease humanitarian aid by the church in regions that enact same sex marriage laws as condemnation?
I'm not trying to change anyones religion of choice, I just was curious as to Christian queers views on same sex partnering in regions that have no same sex marriage/partnering laws.
The Catholic church requires all it's clergy to be celibate.

note: It is according to the Catholic churches doctrine, which I have read on theological sites, that their views on homosexuality are based on the tale of Sodom and Gomorrah, but I won't argue the point.

Views differ widely, even from one diocese to the next, and the reason for this is because of dissention in the Catholic Church in this century. It's been going on a long time as prophesized. I don't consider it "condemnation" I prefer "not condoning" because of Church doctrine. To condemn someone is right out of hell in my book...that's not from God. It's enough for us to understand that we are oved by God, and to always do the right thing. I can't help who I am or what i feel. These inside things are "God given" for reasons that are mysteries. Anyway didn't mean to get off track here. Hope you'll read A Letter to Louise which is scripture reinterpreted around the subject of homosexuality.

[Darth Denkay]

Absolutely not. I believe in the separation of Church and State, which means whether or not a city/county/state what-have-you legalizes same-sex marriage should have no bearing on a church's position. Plain and simple.

Originally Posted by Ozio

Then you do not see the threat to cease humanitarian aid by the church in regions that enact same sex marriage laws as condemnation?

[Ozio]

Originally Posted by WicketWWarrick

Absolutely not. I believe in the separation of Church and State, which means whether or not a city/county/state what-have-you legalizes same-sex marriage should have no bearing on a church's position. Plain and simple.

I agree that it should not have a bearing on a churches stance, however the cessation of humanitarian aid by a church due to the enactment of same sex marriage laws certainly does constitute condemnation of homosexuality by that church. I see no way that it could be construed as tolerance or acceptance.

[Hudson]

Originally Posted by Ozio

I agree that it should not have a bearing on a churches stance, however the cessation of humanitarian aid by a church due to the enactment of same sex marriage laws certainly does constitute condemnation of homosexuality by that church. I see no way that it could be construed as tolerance or acceptance.

Agreed. And I agree with apretty, revoke tax-exempt status from churches engaging in political (and I feel your example is/can be) action.

[Ozio]

Originally Posted by Ben-Her

Agreed. And I agree with apretty, revoke tax-exempt status from churches engaging in political (and I feel your example is/can be) action.

I agree with that whole heartedly. I would further state that NO church should withold humanitarian aid in any region for any reason, political or theological in nature. That changes the nature of the aid from humanitarian
to extortionary.

I will attempt, once again, to bring the discussion back to the original subject matter. Should a denomintion tolerant/accepting of homosexuality in a region with no same sex partnering/marriage law disallow it's homosexual clergy to cohabitate with their partners while allowing it's congregates to do so?
Would you lose faith in a pastor's ability to minister if they did so?

[Hudson]

Originally Posted by Ozio

I agree with that whole heartedly. I would further state that NO church should withold humanitarian in any region for any reason, political or theological in nature. That changes the nature of the aid from humanitarian
to extortionary.

I will attempt, once again, to bring the discussion back to the original subject matter. Should a denomintion tolerant/accepting of homosexuality in a region with no same sex partnering/marriage law disallow it's homosexual clergy to cohabitate with their partners while allowing it's congregates to do so?
Would you lose faith in a pastor's ability to minister if they did so?

I'm not a Christian nor religious but I will say yes, they should. In fact, if they truly are tolerant/accepting of homosexuality perhaps they could provide some 'humanitarian aid' to promote legislation that would allow their clergy to marry in their regions.

[Diva]

Originally Posted by Ozio

I agree with that whole heartedly. I would further state that NO church should withold humanitarian aid in any region for any reason, political or theological in nature. That changes the nature of the aid from humanitarian
to extortionary.

I will attempt, once again, to bring the discussion back to the original subject matter. Should a denomintion tolerant/accepting of homosexuality in a region with no same sex partnering/marriage law disallow it's homosexual clergy to cohabitate with their partners while allowing it's congregates to do so?
Would you lose faith in a pastor's ability to minister if they did so?

Paragraph I. No church SHOULD withhold humanitarian aid, but they WILL and DO. At this point, a church ~ or body of congregants ~ ceases to be humanitarian, and become hypocrites.

Paragraph II. I believe tolerance should be equal or both congregants and clergy in the areas of marriage.

And no, I would not lose faith in my pastor's ability to minister were he/she to marry.

Additionally ~ and perhaps this is a "whole 'nother can o' worms" ~ perhaps if a certain Pope~led religion were to allow said marriages, there would not be such a high incident of sexually inappropriate behavior within its ranks.'


~Diva

[Bob]

Originally Posted by Diva

Additionally ~ and perhaps this is a "whole 'nother can o' worms" ~ perhaps if a certain Pope~led religion were to allow said marriages, there would not be such a high incident of sexually inappropriate behavior within its ranks.

The incidence of pedophilia among clergy in the Catholic Church has nothing to do with their inability to marry.

And absolutely, churches should be taxed. It's positively obscene, the amount of wealth 'churches' (and not just the Catholics) are able to amass, primarily because of their tax-exempt status. Want to make money fast? Start your own quasi-Christian feel-good Joyce Meyer-esque 'church'.
Considering the amount of politicking going on from the pulpit, they should be viewed as political organizations with a thin veneer of questionable Christian theology.