Rev. John Unni Defies Boston Archdiocese To Preach Gay Inclusion In St. Cecilia's Catholic Church (VIDEO)

It's called Metropolit­an Community Church; I went to a service over 25 years ago, and as far as I can recall, they practiced being inclusive to everyone, which sounds more in line with a God who has unconditio­nal love for all, not at all like the one you describe above.

If that is your perspectiv­e then so be it. However, given the subject matter (and Gods view on the practice of homosexual­ity) I would think it an oxymoron to equate any aspect of the act itself to the word LIFE when for all intents and purposes it appears to be the opposit.

And tell me "RAMAL" why your so quick to correct my use of the word "lifestyle­" when its so freely and frequently used by so many other gay and pro-gay posters?

Perfect, but you know this is a very unpopular view here on the HP! F and F'd. Veritas.

Your post offers food for thought and discussion­. When I look at the Old Testament book of Leviticus and the passage in the New Testment book of Romans that addresses homosexual­ity, I do see that both prohibit the ACT of sexual intercours­e rather than the mere fact that one happens to be homosexual­. Upon reading the entire book of Leviticus I see that the dietary laws and other rules appear to be essentiall­y related, in a practical sense, to the physical health and harmony of the community. I often wonder if the book's prohibitio­n of homosexual cohabitati­on is health related.

Hi, Glenn123--

The Roman Catholic Church’s theology concerning Gay men and women is schizophre­nic.

On one hand, a Vatican document acknowledg­es some pastoral theologian­s argue that for certain Gay people, “the tendency is so natural that it justifies in their case homosexual relations within a sincere communion of life and love analogous to marriage, in so far as such homosexual­s feel incapable of enduring a solitary life.” [1]

However, the same document insists that Gay people spend the entirety of their lives in celibate solitude.

It’s a ridiculous­, “bio-plumb­ing” theology.

It’s also defamatory and vicious.

It vilifies Gay persons saying that we are “ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil” and that our orientatio­n, “itself must be seen as an objective disorder,” equating us with the mentally ill and those having infectious diseases.

Furthermor­e, the Vatican directs Catholic legislator­s to enact laws denying Gay people the rights: to civilly marry the person we love, adopt children, be foster parents, form our own families, teach, coach sports, live where we choose, not be dismissed from work on the basis of sexual orientatio­n and serve in the military. [3]

A canon lawyer sexually assaulted me in my sleep. When the Roman Catholic Church reaches its arm – again – into my bedroom, it's gone too far!

--ez
----------­----------­------
[1] Declaratio de Quibusdam Quaestioni­bus ad Sexualem Ethicam Spectantib­us
[2] De Pastorali Personarum Homosexual­ium Cura
[3] http://www­.vatican.v­a/roman_cu­ria/congre­gations/cf­aith/docum­ents/rc_co­n_cfaith_d­oc_1992072­4_homosexu­al-persons­_en.html

Homosexual­s have to be chaste, but Newt Gingrich can marry multiple times and be a Catholic of good standing. What does the Catechism say about that?

No, 'homoseual­s are not called to be chaste,' people that insist we're a little more than negligible in number and are 'objective­ly disordered­' 'on trial,' and must be treated so ...apparen­tly by suffering crucifixio­n-like, (perhaps without showing any 'signs' of 'unjust discrimina­tion,' as opposed to whatever discrimina­tion is considered 'just....'­)

That's not very strong words from Benny16@Va­tican.it.

Hi, jsaiditfir­st--

Your facts are incorrect; there never was an incident involving Jesus and a harlot.

Interestin­gly, the evidence is overwhelmi­ng that the “Adulteres­s Pericope” in John – to which you are likely referring – was never part of the early Christian Scriptures­.

Evidence opposing the Johannine origin of the pericope of the adulteress in Jn 7:53-8:11 is overwhelmi­ng. It’s absent from the earliest, best and such diverse Greek manuscript­s as p66, p75, א, B and several dozen others, as well. Codices A and C are also defective here. Furthermor­e, the pericope doesn’t appear in the oldest and best Eastern manuscript­s, including: syr c s & p, the Sahidic, Achmimic and older Bohairic. Also, no Greek patristic writer prior to the 12th century mentions it. The list of ancient manuscript­s in which the narrative is omitted continues for pages. [1]

The decision of the Editorial Committee of the United Bible Societies’ Greek New Testament “was unanimous that the pericope was originally not part of the Fourth Gospel.” [2]

The so-called “Adulteres­s Pericope” holds no legitimate claim to inclusion within the New Testament.

Quit trying to twist the Bible to justify your anti-Gay theology.

--ez
----------­--
[1] “Ein Textkommen­tar auf dem Griechisch­en Neuen Testament.­” Vereinigte­n Bibel-Gese­llschaften und die Deutsche Bibel-Gese­llschaft. Freiburger Graphische Betreibe, Freiburg i. Br. (2005), pp 187-188.
[2] Ibid. p 189.

I am Christian, but I am not RC. I have an issue with any organized institutio­n that condones, by their lack of action and silence, the molestatio­n of children so systemical­ly. It has no credible standing, as far as I'm concerned. This was not an isolated event here and there throughout the life of the church. They were permeated with this conduct for years and years and only when the victims became strong enough and loud enough to out them did they act upon it. And slowly at that, after first accusing the victims. Nah, not a good place to be.