WHO do you blame more for the post-Vatican II issues - John XXIII or Paul VI?
#61
(02-01-2012, 12:47 PM)SaintAndrew Wrote: So there's no such thing as a "homosexual"?
There is but a homosexual is a person who actually commits homosexual acts.
Reply
#62
(02-01-2012, 01:06 PM)Adam Wayne Wrote: The idea that 98 percent of homosexuals are not pedophiles is laughable.

The distinction between pedophilia and pedestry, or whatever word you used, Mith, is irrelevant. Who comes up with these classifications? Might it be those who by degree want to make society stink? That is the slippery slope at work. Because an older youth, or younger man is involved, I suppose it is not as bad. Well, it is as bad, and maybe even worse, in that it may actually be more able to recruit or produce another homosexual.

I think any kind of sexual acts against children, be it a pedophile priest who abuses an altar boy or a sicko criminal who rapes a 16-year old girl is the most evil act I can think of.

(02-01-2012, 01:06 PM)Adam Wayne Wrote: As far as the "Pauline" statement that the "smoke of Satan has entered the Sanctuary", that could in fact be interpreted as "Mission Accomplished" to whomever needed to hear the message. And if he meant it in the right order of thinking, why did he not get a bellows to clear it out?
You're correct here as well. Pope Paul VI and John Paul II did absolutely NOTHING to stop the wave of heresy seeping into the Church. The Church still awaits an Athanasius. I was just pointing out that Pope John XXIII was the one who wanted to 'open the windows' of the Church.

(02-01-2012, 01:06 PM)Adam Wayne Wrote: Dr. Bombay is right in these last posts. And I too, have made mention of the fact that those who participated in the TLM exclusively were among the worse offenders.

But, that seems hard to grasp for the folks who think everything is the Mass. They choose to never understand this minor detail.

Oh, and Communion under both species for the laity is a joke. The Sacrificial nature of the Mass is over when the priest drinks the Precious Blood.
No you're right Adam. As I mentioned before even in the 1950's America was full of sexual immorality.
Reply
#63
to answer the OP
JPII
Reply
#64
(02-01-2012, 03:45 PM)Traditional Guy Wrote:
(02-01-2012, 12:47 PM)SaintAndrew Wrote: So there's no such thing as a "homosexual"?
There is but a homosexual is a person who actually commits homosexual acts.

No, no, I don't think that will do at all.  You would seem to be redefining the term.  A homosexual (per se) is a person who is sexually attracted to people of the same sex.  A man who is sexually attracted to a man, a woman who is sexually attracted to a woman.  For the purpose of clarity and differentiating between the sin and the sinner, we must make that point. 

More Catholic Discussion: http://thetradforum.com/

Go thy ways, old Jack;
die when thou wilt, if manhood, good manhood, be
not forgot upon the face of the earth, then am I a
shotten herring. There live not three good men
unhanged in England; and one of them is fat and
grows old: God help the while! a bad world, I say.
I would I were a weaver; I could sing psalms or any
thing. A plague of all cowards, I say still.
Reply
#65
(02-01-2012, 05:00 PM)Mithrandylan Wrote:
(02-01-2012, 03:45 PM)Traditional Guy Wrote:
(02-01-2012, 12:47 PM)SaintAndrew Wrote: So there's no such thing as a "homosexual"?
There is but a homosexual is a person who actually commits homosexual acts.

No, no, I don't think that will do at all.  You would seem to be redefining the term.  A homosexual (per se) is a person who is sexually attracted to people of the same sex.  A man who is sexually attracted to a man, a woman who is sexually attracted to a woman.  For the purpose of clarity and differentiating between the sin and the sinner, we must make that point. 
Andy Warhol was a homosexual. Who was never known to have had relations with another man. It's crazy that such a pop culture icon could be dead for over 20 years now and nobody has ever come forward to claim that they and Warhol had a relationship. And all of his friends say they believed he was gay, but never knew of him to have a male (or female) partner.
Wikipedia, as liberal-slanted as they can be at times, has no answers when it comes to Warhol's sexual partner list.
It is worth noting that Warhol - a seemingly devout Catholic who attended mass regularly - did pay for a nephew of his to enter the seminary.
Reply
#66
(02-01-2012, 05:55 PM)SaintAndrew Wrote:
(02-01-2012, 05:00 PM)Mithrandylan Wrote:
(02-01-2012, 03:45 PM)Traditional Guy Wrote:
(02-01-2012, 12:47 PM)SaintAndrew Wrote: So there's no such thing as a "homosexual"?
There is but a homosexual is a person who actually commits homosexual acts.

No, no, I don't think that will do at all.  You would seem to be redefining the term.  A homosexual (per se) is a person who is sexually attracted to people of the same sex.  A man who is sexually attracted to a man, a woman who is sexually attracted to a woman.  For the purpose of clarity and differentiating between the sin and the sinner, we must make that point. 
Andy Warhol was a homosexual. Who was never known to have had relations with another man. It's crazy that such a pop culture icon could be dead for over 20 years now and nobody has ever come forward to claim that they and Warhol had a relationship. And all of his friends say they believed he was gay, but never knew of him to have a male (or female) partner.
Wikipedia, as liberal-slanted as they can be at times, has no answers when it comes to Warhol's sexual partner list.
It is worth noting that Warhol - a seemingly devout Catholic who attended mass regularly - did pay for a nephew of his to enter the seminary.
I visited a byzantine Church near pittsburg PA, turned out it was his parish. It was a Beautiful Church
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)