Mon 20th Oct 2014 | Last updated: Mon 20th Oct 2014 at 12:38pm

Facebook Logo Twitter Logo RSS Logo
Hot Topics

Latest News

Weaker appreciation of marriage is harming society, says Pope

By on Friday, 9 March 2012

Permissive attitudes toward sex, cohabitation before marriage and acceptance of same-sex marriage can damage individuals and are harmful for society, Pope Benedict XVI has told a group of US bishops at the Vatican.

“It is in fact increasingly evident that a weakened appreciation of the indissolubility of the marriage covenant, and the widespread rejection of a responsible, mature sexual ethic grounded in the practice of chastity, have led to grave societal problems bearing an immense human and economic cost,” the Pope said.

Meeting the bishops of Minnesota, North Dakota and South Dakota, who were making their ad limina visits to report on the status of their dioceses, the Pope said ignorance of or challenges to Church teaching on marriage and sexuality were part of the “intellectual and ethical challenges” to evangelisation in the United States today.

The Pope did not focus on current tensions between the US bishops and the Obama administration, particularly over health care coverage of contraception and other practices that violate Church teaching. But at the beginning of his speech, Pope Benedict reiterated his concern about “threats to freedom of conscience, religion and worship which need to be addressed urgently so that all men and women of faith, and the institutions they inspire, can act in accordance with their deepest moral convictions”.

Concentrating his remarks on the need to promote and explain Church teaching on sexuality, the Pope said the Church’s key concern is “the good of children, who have a fundamental right to grow up with a healthy understanding of sexuality and its proper place in human relationships”.

Acknowledging the clerical sexual abuse scandal, the Pope said: “It is my hope that the Church in the United States, however chastened by the events of the past decade, will persevere in its historic mission of educating the young and thus contribute to the consolidation of that sound family life, which is the surest guarantee of intergenerational solidarity and the health of society as a whole.”

The moral virtues espoused in the Church’s teaching on sexuality are “the key to human fulfilment,” he said, because they promote sexuality as “a source of genuine freedom, happiness and the fulfilment of our fundamental and innate human vocation to love”.

“The richness of this vision is more sound and appealing than the permissive ideologies exalted in some quarters,” which are “powerful and destructive,” he said.

One of the first steps, he said, must be to help Catholics “recover an appreciation of the virtue of chastity,” which forms the human heart to love in the most authentic way.

Pope Benedict told the bishops he was aware of “the powerful political and cultural currents seeking to alter the legal definition of marriage” so that it would include same-sex couples.

“The Church’s conscientious effort to resist this pressure calls for a reasoned defence of marriage as a natural institution,” which is “rooted in the complementarity of the sexes and oriented to procreation,” he said.

“Sexual differences cannot be dismissed as irrelevant to the definition of marriage,” the pope said.

Defending traditional marriage is not simply a matter of Church teaching, he said; it is a matter of “justice, since it entails safeguarding the good of the entire human community and the rights of parents and children alike”.

Pope Benedict praised the US bishops’ 2009 letter, “Marriage: Love and Life in the Divine Plan,” and he asked them to continue reviewing and strengthening both religious education materials and marriage preparation programsme.

In conversations with the bishops during the ad limina visits, he said, some of the bishops have expressed concern about how difficult it is to communicate the Church’s teaching effectively and some have told the Pope there are decreasing numbers of young people in their dioceses asking to be married in the church.

“We cannot overlook the serious pastoral problem presented by the widespread practice of cohabitation, often by couples who seem unaware that it is gravely sinful, not to mention damaging to the stability of society,” Pope Benedict said.

The Pope said that in responding to situations in which many engaged couples already are living together, there must be “clear pastoral and liturgical norms for the worthy celebration of matrimony which embody an unambiguous witness to the objective demands of Christian morality, while showing sensitivity and concern for young couples”.

Pope Benedict did not suggest specific norms or provide guidance on how insistent priests should be that cohabitating couples live separately before a Church wedding.

The Church itself “must acknowledge deficiencies in the catechesis of recent decades, which failed at times to communicate the rich heritage of Catholic teaching on marriage as a natural institution elevated by Christ to the dignity of a sacrament, the vocation of Christian spouses in society and in the Church, and the practice of marital chastity,” he said.

The speech was the Pope’s third address to groups of US bishops making their ad limina visits in 2011 and 2012. Because the Pope is not delivering a formal talk to each of the 15 groups of visiting U.S. bishops, the Vatican said the March 9 speech also was addressed to bishops from Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin, Iowa, Missouri, Nebraska and Kansas.

Archbishop John Nienstedt of St Paul and Minneapolis, speaking on behalf of the bishops, thanked Pope Benedict for announcing a special Year of Faith, which will begin in October.

“There is a profound crisis of faith affecting large numbers of people in today’s society,” the archbishop said. “Secular values have taken hold in many minds and hearts, causing a rejection of the very notion that true human happiness is found in conforming our lives to the will of God.”

He thanked Pope Benedict for “the extraordinary leadership that you are providing in these turbulent times”.

  • Paul Halsall

    Surely, if taken to its logical conclusion, the major organisation opposing *actual* marriages in the UK today is the Roman Catholic Church.

    In 2010 there were 180,000 first marriages in the UK.

    In the same year there were 126,000 second marriages (mostly marriages of divorcees).

    By its own teaching the RC Church would seem to teach that, at least for all those who were baptised Christians, most of these marriages are simply fallacious, and that the people in them are living in sin. (I gather this includes at least one ex-editor of the Catholic Herald).

    I wonder if Cardinal O’Brien will have the guts to write an article in the Daily Telegraph telling 40% of married couples that their marriages are not real, and that they should separate?

  • JRMartyn

    I think Paul Halsall may be overlooking the fact that annulment may be available. It is only those who do not get an annulment of their previous marriage from a  RC Marriage Tribunal who are not really married (according to RC teaching). I believe the great majority of applications for annulment are successful.
    John Ross Martyn  

  • Paul Halsall

    @403b7b40114fd367e11343ffd8c179c7:disqus First, consider the fact that annulment is often simply a pastoral provision based upon a lie – i.e. it denies as real marriages that have indeed been “real”.  [How would you feel if a church court decided the marriage of your mother and father had never existed? ]

    Second, consider that this procedure is made available in some countries (eg the US) more than others, and is based to some degree on ho wealthy you are.

    Third, consider that, in most cases the divorced and remarried baptised Christians are not Roman Catholics.  As baptised Christians they are able to and in fact do, as per RC Canon Law, contract sacramental marriages. But (except in very rare circumstances) cannot seek annulments from the RC courts. 

    Fourth, consider that as a result *if it wants to be consistent*, the RC Church must hold as true the proposition that the marriages of a certain proportion (50-60% perhaps – since around 60-70% of people in the UK are baptised) of the population of those entering second marriages are invalid and that the people in them are living in sin and endangering their souls.

    Fifth, consider that this is in fact, numerically a much larger number than even same-sex civil partnerships (running at about 6,000 a year).

    Why, oh why, is Cardinal O’Brien not speaking out about all the illicit sex being had by those in the UK who mistakenly think they are married?

  • Anonymous

    He speaks true words

  • Roisin

    The Pope has his point of view and that is good for him. However on a pragmatic note. If anyone lived in “The Liberties” in Dublin in the 1950’s or in the predominantly catholic “Quarry Hill Flats” in Leeds in the 1960’s, I would love to hear your point of view about the sanctity of marriage. I have live in both, and in each case it was hell on earth. There was perpetual drunkenness, lechery, child abuse, wife beating, and even murder. So Holy Father, do not be so ready to preach about the sanctity of marriage. Marriage is an ecclesiastical trap for men, women and children and I will take no lessons from privileged and profligate clergy about the purity and sanctity of marriage or holy wedlock. The parish priest paid young girls two shillings for sex favours and he sexually abused the altar boys. I understand very well why priests do not get married, that is because it is a life of thankless drudgery. Roisin

  • S Morris76

     Weaker appreciation of marriage is harming society, says Pope
    - abuse of children and its cover up removes any right of the Pope to assume any moral authority.

  • Anon

    When Pope Benedict asked for “prayers for the victims of intense bad weather”, and elsewhere reference is made to marriage in “fog” and “cloud”, I am now on Supernatural alert.
    I do not know the physics of it,nor the extent, but I do know that certain families and individuals ( especially opinion formers ) are targeted. Libera nos a malo.

  • daclamat

    Sitting up there in his ivoray tower, or driving around in his aquarium like mercedes  surrounded by geriatric admirers who force feed him what he wants to hear, he obviously knows what he’s talking about, and if he doesn’t, they do Like most people of his age who have seen it all and heard it all he is infallble.  Aren’t we lucky, God help us!

  • AidanCoyle

    Now, now, daclamat: even though your post made me grin broadly, let’s not resort to the emotive and entertaining invective that is more usually offered by arch-’traditionalist’ contributors here, however tempting that might be.

  • Chris Morley

    The Pope is wrong to claim Christ elevated marriage to a sacrament    [The Church itself “failed at times to communicate the rich heritage
    of Catholic teaching on marriage as a natural institution elevated by
    Christ to the dignity of a sacrament,"] This is an attempt to rewrite Church history.

    There’s no Gospel passage saying Christ did this. It makes no sense if you think about it for even a few moments: during his lifetime people in different parts of the Roman world would have married according to their own local traditions – for his (Jewish) disciples when Christ was alive in that Roman Province, this would have been according to contemporary Jewish marriage rituals and traditions.

    Christ only attended one marriage that we know about – the wedding at Cana. He did little more than ‘turn water into wine’ and talk with his mother.

    Christian marriage was not made a sacrament until the 12th-13th Century. “The Roman Catholic tradition of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries defined marriage as a sacrament ordained by God, [35] signifying the mystical marriage of Christ to his Church.

    35 Witte Jr., John (1997). From Sacrament to Contract: Marriage, Religion, and Law in the Western Tradition. Westminster John Knox Press pp. 39-40. ISBN 0664255434.

  • Jane Brady

    I feel very sorry for the priests on one hand, but I deplore the message that are sending out that marriage is a “sugar and spice”, escapade in Technicolor It is nothing of the sort. I do accept the concept of a happy marriage and I know people who adore each other and the chemistry is right between them, but that is not the norm as the church would have us believe. My father and mother (whom I loved dearly) lived with each other for over 50 years because they were Catholics there was no other choice for them. They were incompatible, and my poor dad kept his mouth shut and my mother decided policy unilaterally. My dad was not a weak man, but he realised that the fight to be equal would never have ended. Many of my close friends tell a similar story. Sometimes it is the father who is domineering, but in any case many marriages are just hell on earth. I appreciate that there are a few bloggers who are “Gods Chosen Few”, who lay down the law by which we are all expected to adhere, but leaving those “Holy Rollers” aside, many “hand on heart” people will attest to the truth that marriage is not the answer to life’s social problems regardless of what the church teaches.

  • Anonymous

    ….yes, and of course the people being married at Cana would not have been baptised.

    The Pope seems to muddy the waters when he speaks of “Christ”, as opposed to Jesus.

    Hair-splitting, angels on a pinhead are operating here (perhaps?).

  • Anonymous

    How can the doctrine of infallibility be (infallibly) true?
    Before, and when, this doctrine was first declared, the Pope was not considered to be infallible.

  • Anonymous

    Most Catholic couples live together, sometimes for many years, before they marry.
    Virtually all Catholic couples, married and unmarried, use (chemical) contraception.
    There are some very rich people who (when visiting some palace or other) NORMALLY (but not always) take their thermometers with them.

    Thermometers, you see, are “natural”. Pills are “unnatural”.

  • Bill Wilkinsin

    I lived in the Liberties in the 1950’s and it was ten times worse than Roisin describes. There was Tuberculosis, Ricketts, fleas, lice and rats. There was rape and child sexual abuse perpetrated by the priests and the Christian Brothers I went to the Christian Brothers school dressed in rags and covered in fleabites. The Christian Brothers segregated us to protect the children of the well to do from being contaminated. People like myself were the source of parody and mockery and provided entertainment for the children of the rich and the Christian Brothers. They beat us to pulp for the least infraction of the rules and there was not an ounce of charity from the Catholic Church . The local Catholic Church had a special mass called the ‘dirty mass’ where the poor souls of the liberties would attend and not be an eyesore for the decent and dignified citizens of Dublin. That is real Catholicism regardless of what it preaches. Ref: “Bridge Across my Sorrows” by Christina Noble, A Corgi Book (1995)ISBN 978-0-552-14288-5.

  • Chris Morley

    Thanks Little Nose

    Since the Pope has spent most of his working life as a very senior Church theologian where accuracy is all important, and was specifically guiding US bishops on the detail of Catholic teaching on marriage and also talked about how ‘ignorance of or challenges to Church teaching on marriage and
    sexuality were part of the “intellectual and ethical challenges” to
    evangelisation in the United States’, I thought it rather significant that he himself showed some ‘ignorance’.

    He also told the US Bishops ‘The Church itself “must acknowledge deficiencies in the catechesis of
    recent decades, which failed at times to communicate the rich heritage
    of Catholic teaching on marriage’.
    This seems to me to be an example of a deficiency in the Pope’s own catechesis on marriage.

    If the Church’s leading theologian appears to mislead Bishops, reporters and readers about basic details of what’s in the Gospels, it creates reasonable doubt in people’s (at least my) mind and makes people who apply their intelligence to what their teachers tell them wonder if some of the rest of what he says about marriage and sexuality is also mistaken.

    We are taught to use our intelligence and the Catechism requires us to follow our Informed Conscience. So these details matter to me but I accept that for you it may be angels dancing on the head of a pin.

    Marriage did not become a Sacrament until the 12th-13th century. I’m not sure whether it was Christ, the Pope, a Council or what other Church mechanism raised it to a sacramental state then. Are you able to throw any light on this? Thanks.

  • Kyriakos

    “Most Catholic couples live together, sometimes for many years, before they marry”

    Maybe true in the part of the world you come from,but not true from a global perspective.Widen your perspective,it will make you wise.

  • Ospite

    he Pope did not cover anything, it’s obvious that gay lobby is using the story of paedophiles to obtain gay marriages. But the Pope did not say to legalize paedophiles..

  • Ospite

    The Bible is very clear in this regard:
    18 “Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery, and the man who marries a divorced woman commits adultery.  Luke 16-18

  • savia


    The early church held to the indissolubility of marriage. A sacrament is simply a sacred bond or covenant.

  • savia

    The question is what makes something a marriage.  Jesus tells us, for this reason, a man will leave his father and his mother and be united with his wife and the two shall become one flesh.

    Wrestling with another human being or simply entangling one’s flesh does not make a union one flesh.

    It’s the coming together of two complimentary persons that does.

    If you take an embodied stance, then it’s through our bodies that we interact with the world around us.

    Unless you want to argue that we are all disembodied people now.

  • savia

    Marriage is a vocation for those who are called to it. Just like being single is a vocation.

  • Fiona-aldridge

    I am ashamed to say that I  am a Catholic. what a load of rubish this is discrimination My son Is Gay and his family are all Catholic and all support my son in his life and with his loving partner
    Get a grip the catholic church is so far from perfect and I am not suprised more people are not going to church if this is there belief

  • A Humble Catholic

    I fully support the Pope and the Catholic faith that he proclaims.  The Pope would be failing in his duty if he did support traditional marriage and oppose so-called ‘gay marriage.’  

    I also support Keith Cardinal O’Brien.  I pray that more Church officials will have the courage to stand up and loudly proclaim the immorality of homosexuality.  

  • Paul Halsall

    So, you agree that, in fact, the RC Church hold that around 40% of heterosexual marriages that take place in the UK are simply invalid?

    It’s a bit odd more of a fuss is not made about this, no?

  • EndTimes101

     With your statement you have just confirmed you are in fact an ex Catholic. The Bible, Church teaching, natural law and common sense dictates that homosexuality is and will always be a grave sin in Gods eyes. It is very sad you and so many others reject any prospect of an eternal life with God in heaven for a few short years on earth in the ‘go along to get along’ crowd. The road to Heaven has never been easy but it is about to get a lot harder with our current Government openly paving the way for the arrival of the Anti Christ.

  • Anthony Hodgetts

    Welcome as this intervention is by the Catholic Church into our political and social debate; remind me again…. how much tax does this religion contribute?

  • Paul Halsall

    Do you realise how ludicrous you are – thinking that God would condemn a woman to hell for loving and respecting her own son?

    What a pathetic and unloving person you must be.

  • Jane Brady

    You have denounced Fiona because her son is gay. And you have pronounced that she is no longer a catholic. Jesus Christ would not have done that. It is a wonderful thing that people like Fiona and her son exist. It does not matter what you and the ‘saintly few: pronounce or pontificate about anything any more, because reason and logic have caught up with the majority of people and your point of view is meaningless. All you can do is give yourself a good flogging to make up for all the sins in the world. I am about to have a double “Glenlivit”.

  • Jack McFall

    Very soon there will be no such thing as the classification of homosexual and the term will become defunct as there is now sufficient knowledge to accept that same sex relations are acceptable and it does not matter any more what the church teaches….Human beings in many countries, Catholic countries included, have used anal penetration as a means of birth control for time in memoriam. Because of the close proximity of the rectum and the vagina and the arrangements of nerves therein, women report sexual gratification and orgasm from this activity…..Many books on sexuality, sociology, psychology, clinical medicine and anthropology, particularly Margaret Mead report that anal penetration was a common sexual practice in many parts of the world. References are easy to find that will substantiate this proposition for open minded, lateral thinkers.

  • Dave Corrigan

    All this may be relevant to a few Catholics, but in the great scheme of things it does not matter, because most people have never heard of a sacrament, and even those who have couldn’t give a fig for what the Catholic Church thinks or teaches.

  • Bill Wilkinsin

    Not for me old dear, it was the Catholic church’s interference in my family that did more harm than good. In the end we all saw through them especially when the pseudo-pious priest who was lecturing us on our morals was caught in a lewd act in a public place (engaged in fellatio) with an under aged protestant teenager. He had to go to court and the newspapers graciously provided us with his photo. We never saw him again. That is the depth of sanctity within the Roman Catholic Church. Vocation indeed, Jesus!

  • John Byrne

    What utter simple-minded nonsense — and, in addition, what a truly wicked comment.

  • Jane Brady

    re.   EndTimes101…..This is a serious matter insofar that this sanctimonies ass writes under several names and is one of “God’s Chosen Few”. These people issue made up dogma as they see fit and they would not recognise Jesus Christ if he was standing their midst….. This vitriolic bigot has given great offence to Fiona and her son, but he/she is so self-righteous and insensitive that they would not offer an apology…. It would not be unreasonable to surmise that all six of them have about six working neurones between the lot and are a bloody nuisance. 

  • Maccabeus

    You have missed the point. Man and woman are capable of performing any kind of sexual activity, with fellow humans, apes, dogs, sheep, even – I daresay – porcupines, if they really set their mind to it. But what man can do and what man ought to do are two entirely different questions. The first is factual-empirical, the second belongs to the sphere of morality. And Christian morality in this area has been consistent since Jesus first stood up to speak: Sex is something to be engaged in by men and women, and in marriage only. This is the Christian position. You don’t like  it? That is your privilege. But what you cannot do – and what no government can do – is arbitrarily redefine the terms of the argument. This is not about public opinion polls, majority rule, or mass media brainwashing. It is about fundamental eternal truths. Atheists do not believe there are any such truths. We catholics do. So again, if you do not accept Christian truths as set out clearly in the bible and in church tradition, you are perfectly at liberty to do so. But what you cannot do is enter our Golf Club, insist that our golf rules are so much tosh  and demand the right to play rugby on the 18th green while insisting that Rugby is really Golf and anyone who thinks differently is an antiquated moron.

  • Jane Brady

    This is one of “God’s Chosen Few”.Dogma is revealed as they sleep!

  • Jack McFall

    I accept that you are a Catholic and you believe in catholic doctrine, and that is good for you and other Catholics. The government do have the right and the power to redefine whatever it likes. In the great scheme of things, very few people really care too much what the Roman Catholic Church says or feels about anything. Your metaphors about rugby and golf have lost me, because I do not play either game.

  • Gerry Walsh

    The last person that I knew who could see things through God’s Eyes drilled a hole in the wall to watch a young couple next door fornicate. He was taken away in the dark of night by the police and Social services under the an emergency section Mental Health Act. He claimed to have the Eyes of God. Just who the hell do you think you are, to call people sinners? You and your sort are doing more harm to the Catholic Church that Martin Luther, Henry VIII, Elizabeth I, John Knox, Oliver Cromwell could ever have done. You just drive people away with you psychotic ramblings. Even David Icke makes more sense than you.

  • EndTimes101

     The most loving and compassionate thing i could possibly do is tell people the truths of Christianity. That means speaking the truth about homosexuality in and out of season. If you want to call me names for stating an obvious and rock solid teaching throughout the Bible and Church History then knock yourself out. By condemning me for simply repeating Church teaching down through numerous Church Fathers, Popes and Saints on the grave sin that is homosexuality you are not really mocking/rejecting me, you are rejecting God and his Holy Church because i am merely repeating a well known teaching.

  • EndTimes101

     Is it wicked now to state that homosexuality is a sin? I would say that qualifies as an end time sign…..

  • EndTimes101

     If someone does not except Church teaching that homosexuality is a sin then they are no longer Catholic in any meaningful sense of the word. The Catholic religion is a gift to be received gratefully in its entirety, not a tin of pick and mix where you only swallow the contents you happen to find palatable at the time.

  • EndTimes101

     I have not denounced Fiona because her son is gay, that was not her choice. I merely stated the obvious, that anyone that rejects Church teaching on ANY dogma (in this case  the sinfulness of homosexuality) effectively and wilfully  ex communicates themselves. She does not have to be ashamed to be Catholic because by rejecting Church teaching on what is intrinsic evil she is no longer a Catholic in any meaningful sense of the term. If you think it is wonderful that Fiona’s son is in a ‘loving’ homosexual relationship then you are rejecting Church teaching too and as for Jesus Christ not condemning such a relationship??? What have you been drinking again? Ever heard of Sodom and Gomorrah?

  • Anonymous

    Points very well made, Paul.  The RC Church’s attitude and behaviour towards second marriages lacks compassion and, given the statistics you cite, is out of sync with modern life which includes Catholics as much as anyone else.

    I don’t think annulments are largely successful, JTMartyn.  And, in any case, the grounds upon which an annulment might succeed may be entirely irrelevant in the circumstances.  And yet a marriage has broken down and cannot be sustained.   The Church’s dogmatic position is much to be regretted.

  • EndTimes101

    I have simply re-stated Church teaching that homosexuality is a sin. Always has been, always will be. Misunderstanding or misquoting me followed by a stream of abuse only demonstrates you own gross hypocrisy….

  • Harry McCracken

    There is sufficient objective sociological, psychological, anthropological and clinical evidence to prove that same sex relationships have been widely practiced throughout the ages and throughout the world and are now totally socially acceptable. ….It was the Roman Catholic Church who first introduced the idea that homosexuality was abnormal. They did this in order to cover up their own history of perverted child abuse history and their other sexual proclivities…. There is a plethora of evidence available to prove that The Roman Catholic Church is the main protagonist in homosexual activity. They have tried to suppress free thinking and possibility that opinions other than theirs were acceptable. They engage gullible and susceptible fools (like you) to fight their fight. The Roman Catholic Church ideology of human sexuality and morality is finished.

  • Lee

    Government is there for the masses and not the masses there for the people. What we see here is a concerted plan by the ruling elite to make the economic superstructure open to all with few restrictions so as to bring the ‘state’ into the realm of ‘civil society’ more (the fact that government is turning our negative freedoms into ‘positive freedoms-Isaiah Berlin). When this happens, then the so called do-gooders and ‘emancipated’ sinners will realise what a ‘matrix’ like hoax that the tyranny of the ‘state’ has being pulling off but unless you refused to be apart of such a grand scheme of dialetical marxism, you will be strung and hit hard because with marriage comes taxation and with taxation (obsessive amount thereof) comes deprivation then families split and kids become prey for the state and then get ‘re-orientated’ to become subjects of ‘the state’. To better explain what I’m saying, Aldous Huxley’s ‘Brave New World’ and Robert Hurlford’s ‘The New Totalitarians’ are superb in describing what is an evil power grab of a person’s individuality but orientation towards doing the will of God by emasculating them and changing them into subjects of the state.

  • Jane Brady

    But what if no sensible person cares one way or another what the Catholic Church teaches and cares little about angels and saints and other outrageous gobbledygook? I respect your right to stand on a soapbox (literally and metaphorically) and talk profound nonsense. It is entertaining stuff but, what you have to say is totally worthless

  • Lee

    Habeas Corpus then ? And it was the RCC that introduced that Homosexuality was abnormal. I would like to laugh if it were not so serious. I think that by taking a look at Christianity  since the time of Jesus and the Jewish faith, thou shalt see just what an idiotic comment that is what thou hast made ! Also, the RCC has tried to stifle ‘free thinking’. Again, what a laughable statement. Need I quote the lists of thinkers who have come forth from the Catholic faith and have built up Western society as we know it?

  • EndTimes101

     It was not the Roman Catholic Church that first introduced the idea that Homosexuality was wrong and immoral, it would have always been written in the hearts of men. But it was first written down by the Jews and of course the Catholic Church followed on in a new and eternal covenant.
    Yes we know homosexuality (and paedophilia) was rampant at times in the ancient world. Just look at what the Greeks used to get up to with young boys. That is why the Gospel of Jesus Christ is such good news. Man has been given the opportunity to be liberated of such degrading vices. Christianity enlightened and empowered mankind and built the West from the ruins of the Roman Empire and barbarian tribes. Unfortunately the new barbarians are at the door, attempting to bring us back to a new dark age of child sacrifice (Abortion) and self worship and sexual gratification. The End Times are here and the page are turning faster and faster…..

  • EndTimes101

     If you believe that then why are you wasting your time reading and posting on a Catholic website? Could it be there is a void in your heart that the “Glenlivit” can’t fill?