Another Anti Gay Republican Reveals He is Gay
I can't remember how many Republicans voted against gay rights and turned out to lament having done so because they are gay. Now we have a new one. I recall at least one Republican who was loudly anti abortion but a former girlfriend side he had driven her to a clinic for an abortion.
The best one was Senator Larry Craig of Idaho. He voted for every anti gay piece of legislation. Then he played foot touch under the stall in the Minneapolis airport with an under cover agent. He said no he was not trying to make a gay overture. His foot came into contact with the agent's foot because he had a "wide stance." He went on to say he did not condone gay sex. He did not run for reelection.
None of these would matter where it not Republican's obsession with religion and sin. The Party Platform is full of it.
There remains some anti gay politics in our country. Candidate Pete Buttigieg certainly encountered it, though he was reelected Mayor after outing himself.
Big institutions that cannot confront reality are not unusual. The Republican Party should recognize thousands of its supporters and some of its elected member are gay and stop the religious preaching about it.
I admit support for gay people is not universal in the Democratic Party or even among atheists. But it is the Republicans who talk the most against equal rights for gay Americans and have gay people stumbling out into the open regularly.
Yes, the; "me think thou protesteth too much". Could Jon be a crypto Christian? Juss sayin.
ReplyDeletelittle helper: I'm pretty sure Jon is not dogging us all. If he is Christian, however, he would fit in with the rest of us sinners. Even Nancy Pelosi claims to be Catholic and she isn't the only such Catholic (in name only) in Congress.
ReplyDeleteThere's always hope.
DeleteLittle, Matt--A crypto Christian!! When I was a farm boy I read Superman comics. Now I realize the power of kryptonite is identical to the power of God. I've heard anything is possible with God, and, prayer works. If I just believed in kryptonite and/or God I could leap the tallest buildings. So, in that way I am a crypto Christian. :)
ReplyDeletecrypto==hidden, disguised
Deletecryptonite--an imaginary, made up term.
Oh, I forgot. I could be faster than a speeding bullet.
ReplyDeleteMatt or little helper; reference Matts March 6, 2020, 8:02 AM:
ReplyDeleteDoes the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) and the The Book of Concord of the Lutheran Church share a similar function and relationship to scripture, each for their respective faiths, such that Matt holds to a "quia" (because) subscription to the CCC and Pelosi hold to a "quatenus" (in so far as) subscription to the same?
Pelosi is a heretic imo whereas i at least try to be orthodox.
DeleteActually, the new catechism of the Catholic Church goes beyond the classical definition of a catechism. It is in part a catechism, and in large part a dogmatic polemic.
DeleteIn the Lutheran church, the small Catechism is a stand alone item, containing three chief parts. 1. The ten commandments, with explanation, (what does this mean?) 2. The Apostles Creed with explanation, (what does this mean) and 3. The Lord's Prayer, with explanation. (What does this mean). All three contain supporting Bible verses. Also included is a brief explanation of the Sacrament of Baptism, The Sacrament of Alter, and the office of the keys and Confession, all with supporting bible verses. The Large Catechism (contained in the Book of Concord), was created for clergy who were ill prepared for the office, of pastor / priest from before the Reformation. The Catechism has a completely different purpose than The Book of Concord.
To answer your question, the Catechism of the Lutheran Church cannot be compared to the Book of Concord, or the "New Catechism of the RCC.
The Baltimore Catechism would be a more fair comparison the the Lutheran Catechism.
The Book of Concord contains all three ecumenical creeds, the Augsburg confession contains items in dispute with the Catholic Church. The Apology, (not an I'm sorry"),but a more thorough polemical response to the Catholic reaction to the Augsburg Confession. . and other housekeeping issues contained in the Smalcald articles, The Treatise on the power and primacy of the Pope, and The Formula of Concord, which is also polemical, and a clarification of terms. Following all that, the Catechisms are included.
So, no one could not say objectively there is no similar function between the two.
It would be fair to say the RCC uses not only a relationship to scripture alone, but also rely on the decrees of the Magisterium, via Trent, and later declarations ex- cathedra. That is why they are so violently against sola scriptura.
The Lutheran Church has no "subscription" (your word) or litmus test as to membership or belonging beyond that which is contained in the Creeds, the Lord's prayer, and the ten C's.
We do have a large amount of dogmatics available to substantiate our positions, both on theology and on Trent if the issues come up, including large volumes on the examination of the Council of Trent.
As you can see, there is not a simple answer to your complex question. but in a word, No
Glad you asked.
In addition, our basic Catechism contains no more than 20 small pages. The more comprehensive one has 200 pages.
DeleteThe Current RCC New Catechism has 844 pages. It is very difficult and convoluted for anyone to follow without the assistance of a priest. I have studied it without problem, but for a student, or someone new to the faith, it would be a huge challenge.
PS. I forgot to mention, the RCC also relies heavily on Aquinas's Suma, and is refered to along with Trent in it's New Catechism, and other documents not "from the chair".
DeleteThat should get Matt's juices flowing.
Deletere. my 1;46; 2nd paragraph from last; "We do have a large amount of dogmatics available to substantiate our position, both in theology;"...I meant to add ecclesiology.(the how, who, why and what). There is a substantial difference between Lutheranism and the RCC.
DeleteAs I recall from my journeys through this world that there were quite a number of Lutheran scholastics who fell back to the old methods of disputation with the Calvinists and the Catholics. what of them?
Deletelittle helper March 7 @ 1:46 PM “As you can see, there is not a simple answer to your complex question. but in a word, No, Glad you asked.”
DeleteThank you for taking the time to reply in such detail. Your mention of “The Conservative Reformation" in a March 5 post led me to find a copy of the volume at https://archive.org/details/conservativerefo00krau/page/n6/mode/2up . Eight hundred sixty six pages was much more than what I expected. So on I moved on to “Confessional Lutheranism” in Wikipedia https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confessional_Lutheranism . There is where I found; “Lutheran church bodies and Lutheran individuals that identify themselves as confessional hold to a "quia" (Latin for "because") rather than a "quatenus" (Latin for "insofar as") subscription to the Book of Concord ...”. Matt made the distinction between his Catholic faith and Nancy Pelosi’s describing herself as a devout Catholic. Her views on abortion and LGBT rights according to Matt qualify her as a heretic. I am in no position to deny Matt’s or Nancy’s level of devotion to Catholic doctrine. My limited understanding of “quia” and “quatenus” in Lutheranism, from the Wikipedia article, was that it had to do with the level of correspondence of The Book of Concord with biblical scripture. Quia, no contradiction with scripture verses “quatenus” if a variance occurs, scripture is the final authority. From discussions on this blog I read that biblical scripture has little if anything to say definitively about abortion and homosexuality. It occurred to me that Matt’s view of the infallibility of the doctrinal content of the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) would have some similarity to a quia subscription to The Book of Concord which I assume is doctrinal in nature, and Nancy because of her views on abortion and LGBT rights would find more support for her Catholic faith from scripture and its purportedly inconclusive teaching on those topics. That to my mind would not qualify her as a heretic. I was barking up the wrong tree or better trying to put a square peg in a round hole. My journey was informative, if nothing else, thanks in no small part to your detailed reply.
Matt Is this fake news? https://abcnews.go.com/International/pope-francis-donald-trump-christian/story?id=37024966?
DeleteUnknown @ 6;07; Define "scholastics," and old methods of disputation.
DeleteUnknown @ 6;07; Define "scholastics," and old methods of disputation. Is not a disputation/ dispute an argument/ discussion with supporting polemics?
DeleteArdy; Oh Darn. I just finished a through response to your 6;10, hit the wrong button and lost it.
DeleteIn short, what the RCC, Pelosi and Matt do is up to them. We have no interest in their activity or spats.
re. our position on abortion or the LGBT matters as it appears in the public and political realm is; We do not participate. Remember the separation of church and state, ie. "The two realms. (sacred and secular) What we believe and practice is our business only. This separation has been stated clearly at the time of the German Reformation, and has not changed. The Non confessional Lutherans have not been as "remembering" of the separation, or the totality of Concord, for that matter, in spite of it being included in their constitutions.
It would be foolish to compare Concord with the Catechism of the RCC. They are two entirely different genres. I refer you to my 1;46.
It would be more accurate to consider Concord a correction of the dogma of the RCC, which the German Reformation was all about.
Ardy; In the post I accidentally deleted, re. the relationship between the Concordia and the Bible; I believe I included the terms ; "The ruled rule, (Concord) and the ruling rule".(the Bible). That should answer your question. I believe I also indicated the absence of infallibility, so if a more accurate reading should be discovered, that should be adjusted. The bugs were pretty much removed 500 yr ago, and haven't seen the need to change yet.
DeleteI also believe where the Bible is silent, we should be also be silent. but when there is more than one or two verses in agreement, it should be considered .
crypto, not krypto ....
ReplyDeletehelper:741 7 mar: several years back I took a philosophy course from a Lutheran prof who talked quite a bit about Lutheran scholastics, mostly from the 17th century (as I recall). meaning, I think, that they had taken up the Aristotelian - Thomistic approach to philosophy as a way of disputing the Calvinists and the Catholics.
ReplyDeleteSure. They were speaking the words the Calvinists and Catholics could understand. When in Norway, speak Norwegian.
DeleteScholasticism, AKA School men, in the 17th and 18th century gave rise to Pietism, to combat scholastism, which in the end proved to be worse than what it intended to cure., and has spread into just about every "ism". (Because I do this, or believe that, I am better than you.
I have talked about this in length in the past.
The problem with scholasticism in matters of church and faith, was that it was mechanics lacking, or short of soul, or spirituality.
Did I say the Lutheran scholastics spoke in words the Calvinists and Catholics could understand ?. In fact it did infiltrate Lutheranism, in the State Churches of Europe, until the early 1800's when confessionalism, (Concord) of the Reformation was re-discovered, and brought over to the USA. Where it thrived. During WW2, in Germany, there was "The Confessing Church," of Dietrich Bonhoeffer fame.
The Scholastic approach I suppose would serve the Lutherans well in their debates with Catholics. With the Calvinists I am not so sure: aren't they notably Augustinians. BTW the Lutheran prof, again as I recall, favored the scholastics.
Deletere. "aren't they notably Augustinians". No. Luther was a
DeleteCatholic Augustinian monk. Augustine was correct on many things, but wrong on others. If memory serves, Augustine had leanings (but not absolute) toward double election, which Calvin espoused, and more strongly with his successor Beza. We reject double election. There were three stages in the development of the mature Augustine. 1. playboy, 2. Gnostic, 3. orthodox with a few errors. We respect his contributions, but not all .
Unknown; You must remember Armenius opposed Calvin on double election. Which morphed into the Holyness groups, most notably the Methodists. Most Baptists are Calvinistic to some degree.
Deleteyes, I'm familiar with all that. and that Luther was tutored in Augustine by a famous teacher (right off I forget his name, I'm an old man). I remember another prof who claimed that reading portions of Calvin is pretty much the same as reading portions of Augustine. as to the Methodists, I recall that Wesley at all were considered to be proto Anglo-Catholics.
DeleteUnknown; re 1;07; "The Lutheran prof, again as I recall, favored the scholastics."
ReplyDeleteI am not surprised. He would be from the branch that espouses syncretism, and ALL that it contains. A form of thesis / antithesis producing synthesis from at least 20 different thesis, run amuck. In reality, communion could consist of Oreos and milk, beer and pretzels, cola and club crackers. The orthodox version would use Town House crackers?
I think that he was LCMS. I don't think that he would go for oreos and milk. tho'
DeleteYou think. Find out, and get back to me. The LCMS is strongly against syncretism, and Oreos and milk.
Delete