Quantcast
Faith

Pope's remarks about homosexuals prompts reports of change

Comments

Return To Article
  • Uncle Rico Sandy, UT
    July 29, 2013 3:35 p.m.

    Hmmm... Lots of people take shots at LDS doctrine, will they be upset if I take a legitimate stance against Pope Francis?

    Without revelation, the Catholic Church is like a ship without a rudder. Changing views, opinions and even doctrine. As that may be, popularism is on the rise as well...

  • Church member North Salt Lake, UT
    July 29, 2013 4:11 p.m.

    Uncle Rico:

    So the LDS church can change doctrine (polygamy, blacks and the priesthood, etc..) but when the Catholic Church changes doctrine it is proof that they are a "ship without a rudder"?

    We need to try the best we can to be consistent.

  • Uncle Rico Sandy, UT
    July 29, 2013 5:25 p.m.

    @ Church Member

    Wow that was predictably fast to make this about the LDS Church once again...

    Let me address your wild statements as you have basically invited me to do so.

    1.The LDS church has not changed it's policy or doctrine on polygamy. It was practiced (less you forget) by Abraham, David, Solomon and others in the bible. It is NOT new doctrine. neither is it exclusive doctrine to the LDS Church. The doctrine is still there, its not practiced today. If you disagree with Polygamy, then please get on your knees and petition God on why he allowed it, not LDS Church members.

    2. Blacks have never been officially banned from the priesthood, there is zero doctrine on the topic, however many LDS leaders were predjudiced with Blacks and tis became a cultural acceptance (for a time) not doctrine.

    Hope this helps you understand things :)

  • washcomom Beaverton, OR
    July 29, 2013 6:18 p.m.

    Personally - I don't care if a priest is gay or heterosexual. I do, however, care if the priest dismisses his vow of celibacy and chooses to cause sexual harm to another. He will need to be brought to the church court as well as the court of the land to answer to charges. He should not be transferred to or hidden in another parish.

  • spring street SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    July 29, 2013 7:08 p.m.

    @ Uncle Rico: For the record - the way you feel about the Pope and his revelation (or lack thereof) and the Catholic Church's position on, well, anything really, is exactly how non-Mormons feel about the LDS Prophet, his revelation (or lack thereof) and the Mormon Church.

    As for the Pope not judging, don't really need modern revelation for that one - Matthew 7:1-5 kind of covers it.

    And the LDS Church has changed its position on polygamy - it was practiced, and members were told it was necessary to get into the Celestial Kingdom - and now it is not practiced, and members still have access to the Celestial Kingdom.

    And my father fell down on his knees and cried when it was announced that revelation had been received allowing Blacks to have the Priesthood.

    And whether there has been a change in practice but not in doctrine or whether there was a misunderstanding or however you and the Mormon Church choose to explain things, I refer you back to Matthew.

  • Midvaliean MIDVALE, UT
    July 29, 2013 9:24 p.m.

    @Uncle Rico

    Your stance is what? the LDS church has never changed it doctrine? Preposterous. A statement you need to defend rather than have us fire ammo at you. There is plenty of evidence to the contrary. I'm sure you will have a zinger for everyone of them so you can rest assured its not the case.

    I for one am glad to see the Catholics changing their hard tone. Its what Jesus would do, right?

  • Twin Lights Louisville, KY
    July 29, 2013 9:36 p.m.

    This reflects other analyses on the Pope's statement. That it was much warmer in tone but that the basic doctrine has not changed.

  • justme001 Salt Lake, UT
    July 29, 2013 9:47 p.m.

    Pope Francis is touted as the peoples pope. I have to agree yes he is and the flock should follow.

  • cjb Bountiful, UT
    July 30, 2013 5:13 a.m.

    If two popes disagree is not one infallible? Every church has had leaders who have disagreed therefore no church has leaders who are infallible.

  • Albert Maslar CPA (Retired) Absecon, NJ
    July 30, 2013 7:58 a.m.

    Leaders must be careful in their pronouncements in that, as in this case of the pope in nearly whitewashing perpetrator clergy of their horrific sexual serial crimes against young boys, in a sense relieves culprits of guilt and consequences. Clergy sexual abuse of young boys is a civil crime, and it is not in the province of the pope to convey the appearance that all is fine in that kingdom, that he absolves the civil crime, something that is not in his province. As chief arbitrator it is his duty to judge. If not the pope, who? If not now, when? Confession is one thing but the church still teaches that though there is forgiveness for the truly repentant, that does not relieve the guilty of consequences, that there is penance attached, so where is the appropriate penance, like removal from the the attraction to sin? Sexually abusive clergy damaged the church, and there is provision in penance for restitution. It might be akin to the owner of the bar, telling the alcoholic bartender that has gotten drunk on the job many times, that the owner forgives him and lets him keep on tending bar. This is mystifying.

  • Contrarius mid-state, TN
    July 30, 2013 8:41 a.m.

    @Albert Maslar CPA (Retired) --

    "...horrific sexual serial crimes against young boys,... "

    Don't equate homosexuality with pedophilia.

    Statistics from the Child Advocacy Center show that 75% of all male child molesters are "married or have consenting sexual relationships (with women)" and that "only about 4 percent of same-sex abuse involves homosexual perpetrators". 



    A classic study in the Archives of Sexual Behavior from 1978 demonstrated that "sexual orientation was not related to the sex of the victim targeted" and that "men who molested boys often had adult relationships with women".

    Freund (1989), Jenny (1994), other studies, and other studies concur that homosexual men are NOT more likely to abuse boys than heterosexual men.

    The APA, the National Association of Social Workers, the American Academy of Child Psychiatrists and the Child Welfare League of America all acknowledge that gay men are NOT more likely to molest children than heterosexual men.

    AN Groth, former director of the Sex Offender Program at the Connecticut Department of Corrections, has said: "my studies have indicated that homosexual males pose LESS risk of sexual harm to children (both male and female)--from both an absolute and a percentage incidence rate--than heterosexual males."

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    July 30, 2013 10:57 a.m.

    @Uncle Rico
    "Wow that was predictably fast to make this about the LDS Church once again..."

    You're the one who brought up the LDS church and proceeded to basically say "since people attack my church, I'm going to criticize another church". You really think that's not a recipe for someone to then return your revelation criticism back at you?

    Anyway, this really isn't any sort of change for the Catholic church in doctrine. What he said roughly translates to "as long as they're celibate, like all priests are supposed to be anyway, who cares what kind of sex they're choosing not to have?".

  • m.g. scott clearfield, UT
    July 30, 2013 11:26 a.m.

    This is about the Catholic Church and the Pope, not the LDS Church. The Pope merely stated that he would not be the judge of ones homosexuality, implying that it will be left up to God. As far as I can tell, the Pope did not change Catholic Church doctrine with that statement. He just reaffirmed what most all Christians believe about any persons behavior or sins, namely, that the ultimate judgement of a persons life will rest with God.

  • RedWings CLEARFIELD, UT
    July 30, 2013 12:56 p.m.

    Having "same sex attraction" is not the same as "being homosexual". Having an attraction is one thing; acting on it and having relations with someone of the same sex is sin. That will not change no matter how many people want it to. You can disagree with God and live your life as you see fit. Remember, though, there is no "free" agency; we are free to act, but not free from the consequences of our actions.

    Matthew 16:24: "Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me."

    If SSA is your cross, deny yourself and follow Christ. Not a popular position in this age of selfish luxury and demands, but still true. Thousands and thousands of men have, even though the media intentionally ignores these stories.

  • RFLASH Salt Lake City, UT
    July 30, 2013 12:59 p.m.

    Can you imagine if they only listened to non LDS people when describing who Mormons are? Lets go out there and find out who Mormons really are and what their beliefs are and lets find out if they are even christian, but don't speak to them, because they don't count. They can't be trusted and have no say about anything unless it comes from outside their community. No way! That isn't going to happen!
    So, when do gay people have a voice about who they are, how they fit into God's plan.Does anyone take into consideration the faith of a gay person? There is no way it could be right! No way! There is nothing wrong with being gay. What is wrong is the way in which we are treated and it truly is an insult for people to expect us to accept their degrading ideas and beliefs about who we are! It is amazing how much arrogance people have when it comes to God!

  • RanchHand Huntsville, UT
    July 30, 2013 1:02 p.m.

    @RedWings;

    Sin is relative. What one group considers "sin" another considers as "not sin". Your own bible tells you to "judge not"; by judging others as "sinful" you are yourself "sinning" by failing to adhere to that commandment.

    If you believe something is "sinful", don't engage in it. How much more simple could it possibly be?

    Follow Christ? Since god doesn't exist, he clearly could not have any children and Jesus is therefore not the "son of god". Why follow a lie?

  • Third try screen name Mapleton, UT
    July 30, 2013 1:41 p.m.

    The problem is not what the Pope says; the problem is everything that people read into it. And this issue is pushed all day, every day.
    Pope Francis is trying to be open and candid. He is reaching out. But a candid comment to reporters is far from a Papal encyclical.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    July 30, 2013 3:24 p.m.

    @RedWings
    "Having "same sex attraction" is not the same as "being homosexual"."

    Actually it is. Having the attractions is what makes someone homosexual or heterosexual. Not having sex doesn't make you asexual, not having the attractions is what makes someone asexual.

    "Thousands and thousands of men have, even though the media intentionally ignores these stories."

    Why men? Women can be gay too but I swear it's almost always men that are talked about. I wonder why.

  • matc8s Bethel Island/CC, CA
    July 30, 2013 5:17 p.m.

    I'm a practicing Catholic (and will keep practicing 'til I get it right, lol), and I can truthfully say that Pope Francis said absolutely nothing new. Church doctrine has not changed, and we are still called to love the sinner while hating the sin. This is a secular-media-generated brouhaha, nothing more.

  • scwoz gambier, oh
    July 31, 2013 5:28 a.m.

    Yes it is admitted, people in the LDS church have not always treated homosexuals with the Love they should have, but then why isn't the LDS church allowed to change? People learn and grow and when they do, they progress. Members of the LDS church are taught to Love every man woman and child as a Child of God and as such, it does not matter if they are gay or if they have tattoos, or smoke or are past drug abusers, pornographers, drunks, or any of the million other types of sin. The Church is open to all of those who wish to worship Jesus Christ and follow his commandments. Christ is about Love not hate.

  • Born that Way Layton, UT
    July 31, 2013 6:13 a.m.

    Interesting to me is that the Catholic policy is remarkably similar to the LDS perspective of the issue, though both religions vary on their doctrinal understanding of sexuality/sex, gender and family. The Catholic view of the original sin being sexual in nature causes them to dismiss all sexual activity as unholy. Whereas LDS don't believe in "original sin" as sexual (almost the opposite), but LDS believe procreation to be a sacred act between husband and wife thus one of utmost import and the cause for maintaining a strictly chaste life.

    In many respects the dogmatic Catholic viewpoint that all sex is bad, levels the playing field and makes the concept of homosexuality "just another sin", whereas LDS struggle more with the idea that by embracing homosexuality in its most open and practical forms one runs the risk of missing the opportunity to use the sacred gift of procreation in life to progress and grow a family (again LDS viewpoint varies), and therefore compounds self-depravation and damnation, at least in terms of this mortal life (for LDS belief in continuing spiritual progression still inspires hope).

  • RedWings CLEARFIELD, UT
    July 31, 2013 11:45 a.m.

    RanchHand: Why is it that, for you, the definition odf "sin" is relative and based on a given group's definition, but the existence of God is not? I believe that is called hypocrisy. You believe that God does not exist. You cannot prove it.

    atl134: Having an attraction to the same sex is not the same as acting on that attraction. I had desires at times toward the same sex when I was younger. I did not act on them, and now, with help, I rarely have those desires. That is not "denying who I am"; that is fulfilling who I am and denying the temptations and lusts of the flesh.

    You can never sin your way to happiness. There is only one Way there, and His name is Jesus Christ.....

  • Church member North Salt Lake, UT
    July 31, 2013 11:47 a.m.

    Uncle Rico:

    Do you really believe that the LDS church has not changed its doctrine? Ever?

  • Lagomorph Salt Lake City, UT
    July 31, 2013 6:39 p.m.

    RedWings:
    "Having 'same sex attraction' is not the same as 'being homosexual'."
    "Having an attraction to the same sex is not the same as acting on that attraction."

    As atl134 correctly pointed out, your first statement is false. Having same sex attraction is the very definition of being homosexual. It is irrelevant to the definition whether one acts on those attractions or not. Your second statement above is correct-- having an attraction is not the same as acting on it. If one may venture to read between the lines of your second post, perhaps your reluctance to accept that "SSA = homosexuality" is due to a personal desire not to self-identify as homosexual despite having had those inclinations at times, since you consider the condition of homosexuality (and not just homosexual behavior) sinful. Fine, that's your choice. But it doesn't alter the accepted definition of the word.

  • John Pack Lambert of Michigan Ypsilanti, MI
    July 31, 2013 8:27 p.m.

    There is no evidence the Catholic Church has changed doctrine, so talking about it at all makes no sense. Policy is not doctrine. Although in this case the Catholic Church has changed nothing. Pope Francis made a comment, that the media is trying to spin as contradicting the policies developed by Pope Benedict XVI. However Francis has done nothing to actually change those policies.

    The Catholic Church still has the same policies on the formation of the priesthood. This no more contradicts those policies, than Boyd K. Packer's bold declarations of the ability to repent in his much maligned fall 2010 talk were an attack on the raise the bar policies for missionaries.

  • DSB Cedar Hills, UT
    Aug. 1, 2013 9:02 a.m.

    @RanchHand - there is no God? Prove it.

  • What in Tucket? Provo, UT
    Aug. 2, 2013 4:16 p.m.

    Whether a priest can be a homosexual depends on whatever the Catholic Church wants. Until celibacy is not a requirement for priests there will be many, in fact thousands of homosexual priests. That does not mean they are all bad people, but preying on altar boys and pedophilia has cost the Roman Catholic Church billions. Celibacy was not a requirement in the early Catholic Church prior to the 5th century or so.

  • Contrarius mid-state, TN
    Aug. 3, 2013 8:22 a.m.

    @What in Tucket? --

    "That does not mean they are all bad people, but preying on altar boys and pedophilia has cost the Roman Catholic Church billions. "

    Again -- homosexuality and pedophilia are NOT related.

    Statistics from the Child Advocacy Center show that "only about 4 percent of same-sex abuse involves homosexual perpetrators". 



    A classic study in the Archives of Sexual Behavior from 1978 demonstrated that "sexual orientation was not related to the sex of the victim targeted" and that "men who molested boys often had adult relationships with women".

    Freund (1989), Jenny (1994), other studies, and other studies concur that homosexual men are NOT more likely to abuse boys than heterosexual men.

    The APA, the National Association of Social Workers, the American Academy of Child Psychiatrists and the Child Welfare League of America all acknowledge that gay men are NOT more likely to molest children than heterosexual men.

    AN Groth, former director of the Sex Offender Program at the Connecticut Department of Corrections, has said: "my studies have indicated that homosexual males pose LESS risk of sexual harm to children (both male and female)--from both an absolute and a percentage incidence rate--than heterosexual males."

  • cjb Bountiful, UT
    Aug. 5, 2013 1:05 p.m.

    Pope Francis the one thing you could do to increase the happiness of those who serve the Catholic Church the most is to do away with the celibacy requirement.

    Many other churches who do not have this requirement serve their people very well.