03-12-2013, 04:39 PM
(03-12-2013, 04:31 PM)Anastasia Wrote: [ -> ](03-12-2013, 04:10 PM)traditionalmom Wrote: [ -> ]Anyone reading this thread can read your posts, where you did not distinguish between the Catholics who agreed with you and those who did not,condemning them all equally. Specifically , posts 255 and 259. The fact that you can only reference the nutty Dimond brothers, who also condemn theRoman Catholic Church, only further supports this. You're constantly making false statements about what the Church teaches, and ignoring anything the actual Catholics here post with Church sources. And when you're called on it, you play the victim more than anyone homosexual could.(03-12-2013, 03:44 PM)Anastasia Wrote: [ -> ](03-12-2013, 03:18 PM)traditionalmom Wrote: [ -> ]You attacked when you said theChurch doesn't call sin sin, if it says that a man wanting to have sex with another man and the inclination to want to isn't sinful I'd agreeand that they're so infiltrated that they can't teach truth. WHERE did I say that?Further, you have been claiming that lust equals desire, so a man "desiring" to have sex with another man isn't lust...ok :eyeroll:and that the Church teaches falsely on this issue.it didn't used to teach what it does now on the issue just check out the MHFM on the issue they prove it pretty well You also accused ALL Catholics of pride actually I never said any such thing I was telling you that your church has so many issues and is in full on crisis right now that you have no place to tell me your church is betterbecause some have called you out on your attitude of moral superiority attitude.You mean like Impy and Papist who just happen to be SSA and have already pulled the "victim" card? That seems backward. No, you cannot backpedal and say you've only been saying homosexuals cannot be priests, mostly because no one here actually disagrees with that statement.actually you obviously haven't read Papist's comments and snarky comment about how a priest should have to have sex with women to prove he's not gay. He seems to think that someone who quietly stuggles with SSA should be allowed to be priests which is where the homo lobby/mafia came from I don't appreciate being accused of lying when your own words are there for anyone to read. yes my words are there for anyone to read and I have said no such thing you are lyingSpeaking of sin, calumny is most definitely considered a sin. so is bearing false witness(03-12-2013, 03:04 PM)Anastasia Wrote: [ -> ](03-12-2013, 02:56 PM)traditionalmom Wrote: [ -> ]But you're not allowed to attack the Church, as you have been doing.(03-12-2013, 02:47 PM)ImpyTerwilliger Wrote: [ -> ]Madam, this is a Catholic forum.
yes it is. see also...
"Though the forum has traditional Catholicism as its focus, there are all types of people who post there -- Catholics of all varieties, non-Catholic Christians, atheists, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, and pagans. Posters can run the gamut of the political spectrum, too."
I'm stating an opinion and would like someone to tell me how I'm wrong. I don't just want some comments from Aquinas because he's not infallible to you all and I'd like some ex cathedra comments from pre-vatican II sources that say the attraction isnt' sinful. If it's been around since Sodom (homosexuality) I'd like to see some ex cathedra comments.
Also, ex cathedra statements are not often made, and certainly not about one fine point about one particular sin. That is why Catholics DO use St Thomas, other respected theologians, and plain old common sense about these things. After all, if any sexual attraction equals lust, why are married couples allowed and encouraged to desire each other? The Bible doesn't say lust is evil, except if you're married.
Where have I attacked the Catholic church. I've attacked the idea that SSA isn't sinful. I've attacked the idea that it's ok to have SSA priests. You are making false statements. I said that get rid of the homo lobby you must purge the priesthood of SSA people not just practicing homosexuals. That's what I have been attacking not the Church itself. Careful with the snootiness (our Catholic poo don't stink) attitude..."he who exalts himself shall be abased and he who humbles himself shall be exalted" the church is in crisis just as Voris or MHFM. You are in no position to try saying your poo don't stink.
my comments in red-for everyone to see BTW here's the MHFM link I told you about...
http://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/d...exuals.php
of course please ignore the "vatican II sect" comments and such but you'll get the gist of the article. It's pretty clear and I totally agree with them even though they think I'm a heretic whose going to be damned. This is my exact position to a tee.
Honestly, when you are so gratuitously nasty while at the same time being so arrogant about your own sanctity, even to Catholics who largely agree with you, I'm beginning to see your husbands side of things.
Anastasia you are off some emotional lark. I never condemned anyone. Again another lie. I did say that unless the Catholic Church gets rid of all the clergy with SSA the problem of the homo lobby/mafia won't go away. When have I ever played the "I'm so good and sinless" game? Again another lie. I've never said anything about the Catholics that agree with me. I think they are right except SSA being sin. They think it isn't I think it is. Wanting to be sexual with someone of the same sex is sinful not just acting on it. "gratuitiously nasty"? more emotionalism not based in reality. Again another lie. My husband and I are in complete agreement on SSA and homosexual acts. :P