Monday, February 10, 2020

The proposed Federal "Equality Act"


The "Equality Act "reads (in part)
  • (1) Discrimination can occur on the basis of the sex, sexual orientation, gender identity...
  • (2) discrimination against a married same-sex couple could be based on the sex stereotype that marriage should only be between heterosexual couples, the sexual orientation of the two individuals in the couple, or both....
  • (3) Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (referred to as “LGBTQ”) people commonly experience discrimination in securing access to public accommodations...providers including adoption and foster care providers...Forms of discrimination include...unequal or unfair treatment...
  • (7) The discredited practice known as “conversion therapy” is a form of discrimination that harms LGBTQ people by undermining individuals sense of self worth, increasing suicide ideation and substance abuse, exacerbating family conflict, and contributing to second class status.
  • (8) Both LGBTQ people and women face widespread discrimination in employment and various services, including by entities that receive Federal financial assistance.
  • (9) Federal courts have widely recognized that, in enacting the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Congress validly invoked its powers under the Fourteenth Amendment to provide a full range of remedies in response to persistent, widespread, and pervasive discrimination by both private and government actors.
  • (11) An explicit and comprehensive national solution is needed to address such discrimination, which has sometimes resulted in violence or death, including the full range of remedies available under the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
  • (14) LGBTQ people often face discrimination..LGBTQ people in same-sex relationships are often discriminated against...transgender people often encounter discrimination.,.
  • (15) transgender people have half the homeownership rate of non-transgender people and about 1 in 5 transgender people experience homelessness.
  • (16) LGBTQ people can experience being denied a mortgage, credit card, student loan, or many other types of credit simply because of their sexual orientation or gender identity.
  • (17) Numerous studies demonstrate that LGBTQ people, especially transgender people and women, are economically disadvantaged and at a higher risk for poverty compared with other groups of people.
  • (18) attorneys discriminating against LGBTQ individuals, or those perceived to be LGBTQ, in jury selection.
  • (19) Although same-sex couples are 7 times more likely to foster or adopt than their different-sex counterparts, many child placing agencies refuse to serve same-sex couples and LGBTQ individuals.
  • (20) LGBTQ youth are overrepresented in the foster care system by at least a factor of two and report twice the rate of poor treatment while in care compared to their non-LGBTQ counterparts. LGBTQ youth in foster care have a higher average number of placements, higher likelihood of living in a group home, and higher rates of hospitalization for emotional reasons and juvenile justice involvement than their non-LGBTQ peers...
  • SEC. 3. Public accommodations. (a) Prohibition on discrimination or segregation in public accommodations.—Section 201 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000a) is amended—... (4) any establishment that provides a good, service, or program...
  • SEC. 208. Rule of construction. (2) shall not be construed to be limited to a physical facility or place.”.
  • SEC. 701A. Section 703 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000e–2) is amended— (1) in the section header, by striking “sex,” and inserting “sex (including sexual orientation and gender identity) ["sex is likewise expanded to sexual orientation and gender identity in all other sections where the code had simply sai "sex"]. (3) in a situation in which sex is a bona fide occupational qualification, individuals are recognized as qualified in accordance with their gender identity.”
  • SEC. 1101. Definitions and Rules. (2) GENDER IDENTITY.—The term ‘gender identity’ means the gender-related identity, appearance, mannerisms, or other gender-related characteristics of an individual, regardless of the individual’s designated sex at birth.
  • “(2) (with respect to gender identity) an individual shall not be denied access to a shared facility, including a restroom, a locker room, and a dressing room, that is in accordance with the individual's gender identity."
  • SEC. 1107. Claims. “The Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (42 U.S.C. 2000bb et seq.) shall not provide a claim concerning, or a defense to a claim under, a covered title, or provide a basis for challenging the application or enforcement of a covered title.”.
  • SEC. 12. Juries. (a) In general.—Chapter 121 of title 28, United States Code, is amended—... "(2) a perception or belief, even if inaccurate, concerning the race, color, religion, sex (including sexual orientation and gender identity), economic status, or national origin, respectively, of the individual.”
  • Passed the House of Representatives May 17, 2019. ____________ Rep. Cicilline, David N. [D-RI-1] (Introduced 3/13/2019) Committees: House - Judiciary; Education and Labor; Financial Services; Oversight and Reform; House Administration | Senate - Judiciary Committee Reports: H. Rept. 116-56 Passed the House of Representatives May 17, 2019. Latest Action: Senate - 05/20/2019 Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. (All Actions) Roll Call Votes: There have been 2 roll call votes
    _______________________________________________
Commentary

Justification for the The Act is largely based upon a number of non-referenced specious claims, including allegations of discrimination in they are actually favored over a conservative and to fulfill PC quotas, or in which the cause may be not established but is simply alleged (how many housing applicants are told the real reason for denial), or that of alleged effects of discrimination which can be explained as having a different cause (such the disorder that is behind their gender confusion and suicidal tendencies), or in which there is sound medical or moral reasons for discrimination and in which the solution itself would foster discrimination

(2) discrimination against a married same-sex couple could be based on the sex stereotype that marriage should only be between heterosexual couples...

That is us and the likes of Jack Phillips (Masterpiece bakery)

(3) Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (referred to as “LGBTQ”) people commonly experience discrimination in securing access to public accommodations.

Based upon who? Rather, most places of employment, especially higher paying jobs, LGBTQ they are given favored treatment due to homophobia (fear of the homosexual political powers that be) or desire to be politically correct. And "The Act" will nuke the The Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (see under SEC. 1107. Claims).

Forms of discrimination include...unequal or unfair treatment..

Sometimes even if contrived. Yet it is not unfair to vehemently and deeply financially persecute (including requiring censorship and a form of "re-education") men such as Jack Phillips who would not be complicit in celebrating a illegal (even according the state constitution at the time) marriage by consenting to contract a special cake for that express purpose. Which means that The Act would broadly sanction such.

And under government health care, this could lead to the removal of children (such as might profess Biblical non-PC morality) from conservative parents under the premise of concern for their psychological health, which the State is responsible for.

(7) The discredited practice known as “conversion therapy” is a form of discrimination that harms LGBTQ people

Meaning it is not permitted to show and say it is harmful to not convert, while this outlawing of conversion therapy (yet funding the murder of children without their consent) would discriminate against those who want it.

people by undermining individuals sense of self worth, increasing suicide ideation and substance abuse, exacerbating family conflict, and contributing to second class status.

Which is exactly what sodomy abundantly results in , via this being the means of HIV transmission in over 80% of men who are infected with it. And with Medicaid (for those enrolled in it) paying for treatment for it or PReP prevention of it (about 2,000 a day).

(8) Both LGBTQ people and women face widespread discrimination in employment and various services, including by entities that receive Federal financial assistance.

Again, it is safe to say that places of employment fear being accused of such, and this may even be the reason for hiring them (esp. if combined with race), versus their qualifications.

(9) Federal courts have widely recognized that, in enacting the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Congress validly invoked its powers under the Fourteenth Amendment to provide a full range of remedies in response to persistent, widespread, and pervasive discrimination by both private and government actors.

Which seems to be a can of worms I am not qualified to deal with. Yet the The Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 is to be stripped.

(11) An explicit and comprehensive national solution is needed to address such discrimination, which has sometimes resulted in violence or death,

Rather, if a consensual integral religious practice such as the Lord's supper was the cause of HIV transmission in over 80% of cases among men, and or a greatly incidence of infectious diseases, at significant cost to taxpayers for treatment or prevention, then "an explicit and comprehensive national solution" would be called for to deal with it, versus preventing discrimination against those who insist on it being affirmed as well as those who promote it.

(14) LGBTQ people often face discrimination..LGBTQ people in same-sex relationships are often discriminated against...transgender people often encounter discrimination..

Which undocumented mantra is simply repeated, while in 2019 the New Your Times reported that same-sex couples earn significantly more money than their straight counterparts, although a LGBTQ compiler states (undocumented) that low income people are more likely to identify as LGBT than higher income people, yet people of color are more likely than whites to identify as LGBT, and which has as a prime cause the typical dysfunction of the black family (over 72% of kids born out of wedlock), which has been fostered by liberalism.

(15) transgender people have half the homeownership rate of non-transgender people and about 1 in 5 transgender people experience homelessness.

Which claim can only be based upon a presumption that discrimination is the cause, rather than the tragic disorder that is behind gender dysphoria and transgenderism also leaves such as less qualified for employment. Likewise that the increased suicide rate among lesbians is due to discrimination, versus issues that are behind being a lesbian.

(16) LGBTQ people can experience being denied a mortgage, credit card, student loan, or many other types of credit simply because of their sexual orientation or gender identity.

Which undocumented claim is again specious, and based upon a presumption that discrimination is the cause, rather than what most likely is the cause, which is the same reason straight people are denied the same. Credit card companies care about the color of money and whether they will make a profit off those they lend it to.

(17) Numerous studies demonstrate that LGBTQ people, especially transgender people and women, are economically disadvantaged and at a higher risk for poverty compared with other groups of people.

Likewise many straights are economically disadvantaged and at a higher risk for poverty compared with other groups of people, such as those from the South, and typically evangelicals. And percentage-wise, more blacks I.D. as LGBTQ than whites. But again, the claim is based upon a presumption that the cause of the problem is not related to the cause being the condition of the those it presents as victims.

(18) attorneys discriminating against LGBTQ individuals, or those perceived to be LGBTQ, in jury selection.

Which is a fallacious argument, since there are two sides choosing, and while one lawyer can reject those perceived to be LGBTQ, the other can choose such, and may indeed if that was the reason for the rejection by the opposition. Thus the issue is whether peremptory challenges should be allowed.

(19) Although same-sex couples are 7 times more likely to foster or adopt than their different-sex counterparts, many child placing agencies refuse to serve same-sex couples and LGBTQ individuals.

And again, many child placing agencies may choose to serve same-sex couples and LGBTQ individuals (in MA the government official boasted of this), especially over conservative Christians. Yet if same-sex couples are not favored, their is certainly a valid reasons for this in the light of the negative moral and medical consequences of it.

(20) LGBTQ youth are overrepresented in the foster care system by at least a factor of two and report twice the rate of poor treatment while in care compared to their non-LGBTQ counterparts. LGBTQ youth in foster care have a higher average number of placements, higher likelihood of living in a group home, and higher rates of hospitalization for emotional reasons and juvenile justice involvement than their non-LGBTQ peers...

Once again this claim can only be based upon a presumption that discrimination is the problem, rather than being due to psychological issues that are behind and concomitant with gender dysphoria and transgenderism and LGBTQ orientation and often very manifest. And requiring the adoption of such by those desirous of adopting is not the answer. And is inconsistent with the liberal argument that mothers should be able to abort children that are undesirable to her.

SEC. 3. Public accommodations....(4) any establishment that provides a good, service, or program... (2) shall not be construed to be limited to a physical facility or place.”.

Sounds broad enough to include churches. Even meeting outside, and thus requiring the hiring of LGBTQ ministers.

"individuals are recognized as qualified in accordance with their gender identity..". "appearance, mannerisms,”

That is so plastic that it does not even include a permanent status. So Sunday school teacher Mr. Morphis decides he is a women and tells his class to address him as her cannot be disfellowshipped, while those to call him by his bioID are fined.

“(2) (with respect to gender identity) an individual shall not be denied access to a shared facility, including a restroom, a locker room, and a dressing room, that is in accordance with the individual's gender identity."

There is it. Now Mr. Morphis can use the ladies room, and those who object will be the criminals.

SEC. 1107. Claims. “The Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (42 U.S.C. 2000bb et seq.) shall not provide a claim concerning, or a defense to a claim under, a covered title, or provide a basis for challenging the application or enforcement of a covered title.”.

This is BIG. "Covered title" apparently refers to the above codes, and which apparently means that RFRA must bow to the image of The Act.

"(2) a perception or belief, even if inaccurate, concerning the race, color, religion, sex (including sexual orientation and gender identity), economic status, or national origin, respectively, of the individual

"A perception or belief, even if inaccurate," means that the gov., equates what one professes his sexual I.D. to be as if it were a religious belief, except the "sincerely held" need not be established.

Passed the House of Representatives May 17, 2019.

Meaning that our elected leaders have sadly acted like the house of Baal, and want to require all to effectively salute the flag of Sodom.


Thomas F. Farr of "Real Clear Religion warns ,
 

Supporters of the Equality Act claim it will increase equality in America, but it will actually harm one of the most fundamental rights we all share as Americans – religious freedom. It purports to ban discrimination, but it actually bans disagreement...The Act..would add sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) to classes protected under the Civil Rights Act, such as race and sex...Race is an immutable characteristic unconnected to distinctive behaviors or expressions. By contrast, behaviors and expressions are part of SOGI identities...Can the rejection of SOGI behaviors and expressions be tolerated in America?

The law would devastate institutions built on those convictions, such as schools, charities, small businesses, hospitals, and houses of worship. The Act will expose persons or groups holding these beliefs to lawsuits and financial ruin. The law will mark them – like racists – as “hateful” and “bigoted...”

A sampling of likely harms foreshadows an America of increasing government coercion, some of which is already happening. Schools with traditional policies on sex and marriage will lose their tax exemptions and be forced to change or close. Adoption agencies seeking to place children with married mothers and fathers will be forced to shut down. Females will have to compete in sports and share locker rooms with biological males. Small businesses that cannot in good conscience participate in same-sex weddings will be driven out of business. (Thomas F. Farr (May 16, 2019) The Equality Act Will Harm Religious Freedom, RealClearReligion.org). 

 
Even the moderate "Institutional Religious Freedom Alliance, Inc."  (IRFA warns,

the Equality Act explicitly undermines the main federal law that protects religious freedom, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (RFRA)...

 The Equality Act, by contrast, would prohibit appeals to RFRA when a religious person or organization is charged with violating a nondiscrimination rule.... By preventing the application of RFRA, the Equality Act would make the LGBT claim always win, by definition...

The Equality Act simply labels as illegal discrimination any differential treatment related to SOGI. It posits that all necessary religious protections are already present in the civil rights laws. Then it strips away the religious freedom protections that Congress has said should apply to all federal laws and actions. By dramatically narrowing the scope of application of RFRA, which is the premier federal statutory protection for religious freedom, the Equality Act seeks to declare that, by definition, religious exercise claims can never outweigh claims of SOGI discrimination...

Under the Equality Act, will churches, synagogues, and mosques [and religious schools and colleges] be declared to be public accommodations and thus be subject to strict SOGI nondiscrimination requirements in everything they do, including if they ever invite into worship non-members as well as members, if they ever rent out their facilities... 

 The Equality Act proposes to dramatically expand the definition of public accommodations in federal law...

Employment by religious organizations. Title VII, the fundamental federal employment law, includes an exemption that protects the ability of religious schools, charities, and houses of worship to consider religion when hiring and firing...the Equality Act offers no assurances at all to religious employers about this vital matter...

Hospitals and medical practices. The Equality Act proposes to treat any “establishment that provides health care” to be a public accommodation and thus subject to its SOGI nondiscrimination requirements. It offers no protection for religious hospitals or medical facilities staffed by doctors and nurses who for reasons of religion or conscience are unable to perform sex-change operations or gender identity transition treatments...

Adoption and foster care... under the Equality Act...a faith-based adoption or foster care provider, exercising its professional judgment about the best environment for children needing new homes, declines to place a child with a same-sex couple or LGBT person, it may well lose vital government funding or even the ability to operate at all. (Institutional Religious Freedom Alliance, Inc. http://www.irfalliance.org/a-better-way-than-the-equality-act/)

Sunday, January 12, 2020

Step-by-Step Refutation of Dave Armstrong vs. Sola Scriptura

 A Step-by-Step Refutation of Dave Armstrong vs. Sola Scriptura 

This was to be a reply to a Catholic who posted Armstrong's apologetic on a forum, but which was pulled before I could post it. It takes me a long time to type with my arthritic fingers, and  rather than let my work go to waste I thought I would post it here.  

Note that (as i suspected and later found out) Armstrong's work is from many years ago (2003), and he has posted a reply to a challenger that I have not read, and most likely will not be dealing with, but which has the the link to the original  and is here: https://www.patheos.com/blogs/davearmstrong/2016/01/defense-of-my-ten-step-refutation-of-sola-scriptura.html 

I tried to notify Armstrong of my response here but received this when I tried: "We are unable to post your comment because you have been banned by Biblical Evidence for Catholicism"
 
1. Catholics agree with Protestants that Scripture is a “standard of truth”—even the preeminent one

Actually papal teaching is that.

Catholic doctrine, as authoritatively proposed by the Church, should be held as the supreme law; for, seeing that the same God is the author both of the Sacred Books and of the doctrine committed to the Church... (Providentissimus Deus; http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_18111893_providentissimus-deus_en.html) 

but not in a sense that rules out the binding authority of authentic apostolic Tradition and the Church. The Bible doesn’t teach that. 

Which means that Armstrong is teaching sola Roma, that she, "The Church" alone is the sure supreme and sufficient standard for faith and morals, infallibly providing all the essential oral and written express revelation of God.

However, while men such as the apostles could speak as wholly inspired of God and provide new public revelation thereby, yet even Rome does not presume its popes and ecumenical councils do either in declaring what they "infallibly" assert is the word of God.

Infallibility must be carefully distinguished both from Inspiration and from Revelation... God Himself is the principal author of the inspired utterance; but infallibility merely implies exemption from liability to error....God is not the author of a merely infallible, as He is of an inspired, utterance; the former remains a merely human document. - Catholic Encyclopedia>Infallibility; http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07790a.htm 

Catholics agree that Scripture is materially sufficient. In other words, on this view, every true doctrine can be found in the Bible, if only implicitly and indirectly by deduction. But no biblical passage teaches that Scripture is the formal authority or rule of faith in isolation from the Church and Tradition. Sola scriptura can’t even be deduced from implicit passages. 

Actually, SS does not need to mean that sufficiency refers to only what is formally provides (such as by clear statements), but that,

The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for His own glory, man's salvation, faith and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture:...

those things which are necessary to be known, believed, and observed for salvation are so clearly propounded, and opened in some place of Scripture or other, that not only the learned, but the unlearned, in a due use of the ordinary means , may attain unto a sufficient understanding of them...

and that there are some circumstances concerning the worship of God, and government of the Church, common to human actions and societies, which are to be ordered by the light of nature, and Christian prudence, according to the general rules of the Word, which are always to be observed. The Westminster Confession of Faith (1646), CHAPTER I (emp. mine).

And actually Catholics can and do disagree on whether every true doctrine can be found in the Bible, if only implicitly and indirectly.

As James White states,

"Rome's official statements do not explicitly define whether Tradition is the second of a two-part revelation (known as partim-partim), or if both forms of revelation contain the entirety of God's revealed truth." http://www.aomin.org/aoblog/index.php?itemid=3319

2. “Word” in Holy Scripture often refers to a proclaimed, oral teaching of prophets or apostles. What the prophets spoke was the word of God regardless of whether or not their utterances were recorded later as written Scripture. So for example, we read in Jeremiah: “For twenty-three years . . . the word of the Lord has come to me and I have spoken to you again and again . . . ‘But you did not listen to me,’ declares the Lord. . . . Therefore the Lord Almighty says this: ‘Because you have not listened to my words. . . .’” (Jer. 25:3, 7-8 [NIV]). This was the word of God even though some of it was not recorded in writing. It had equal authority as writing or proclamation-never-reduced-to-writing. This was true also of apostolic preaching. When the phrases “word of God” or “word of the Lord” appear in Acts and the epistles, they almost always refer to oral preaching, not to Scripture. 

SS holds that men such as the prophets and apostles could speak as wholly inspired of God and provide new public revelation thereby, yet this does not validate the "infallible" claim of Rome to infallibly do so, (see under for as pointed under #2, yet even Rome does not presume its popes and ecumenical councils do either in declaring what they say is the word of God.

Moreover Armstrong's polemic "proves too much," for the only reason Armstrong can cite this is because it was written.

For God manifestly made writing His most-reliable means of authoritative preservation. (Exodus 17:14; 34:1,27; Deuteronomy 10:4; 17:18; 27:3,8; 31:24; Joshua 1:8; 2 Chronicles 34:15,18-19, 30-31; Psalm 19:7-11; 102:18; 119; Isaiah 30:8; Jeremiah 30:2; Matthew 4:5-7; 22:29; Luke 24:44,45; John 5:46,47; John 20:31; Acts 17:2,11; 18:28; Revelation 1:1; 20:12, 15;

And that as written, Scripture became the transcendent supreme standard for obedience and testing and establishing truth claims as the wholly Divinely inspired and assured, Word of God. As is abundantly evidenced 

3. Tradition Is Not a Dirty Word Protestants often quote the verses in the Bible where corrupt traditions of men are condemned (e.g., Matt. 15:2–6; Mark 7:8–13; Col. 2:8). Of course, Catholics agree with this. But it’s not the whole truth. True, apostolic Tradition also is endorsed positively. This Tradition is in total harmony with and consistent with Scripture. 

Which polemic presumes what it cannot prove, that, "This Tradition is in total harmony with and consistent with Scripture." And what is the basis for this assertion is True? Because Rome has presumed to infallibly declare she is and will be perpetually infallible whenever she speaks in accordance with her infallibly defined (scope and subject-based) formula, which renders her declaration that she is infallible, to be infallible, as well as all else she accordingly declares.

(Consistent with this, in Catholic theology it is taught than man cannot now what Scripture consists of apart from her, and thus Scripture is to be appealed to as a merely historical document. By which the potential convert is supposed to see that the RCC is of God even  though the poor soul cannot discern wholly inspired Scripture as being of God. Which is consistent Rome's exalted view of herself.) 

Thus as Keating said regarding (the assumption of) the Assumption,

The mere fact that the Church teaches the doctrine of the Assumption as definitely true is a guarantee that it is true.” — Karl Keating, Catholicism and Fundamentalism (San Francisco: Ignatius, 1988), p. 275. 

Which is circular, and is to be remembered when Armstrong later tries to argue the SS position is.

4. Jesus and Paul Accepted Non-Biblical Oral and Written Traditions Protestants defending sola scriptura will claim that Jesus and Paul accepted the authority of the Old Testament. This is true, but they also appealed to other authority outside of written revelation. 

This is true, as we know. And Paul also quoted a pagan, (Acts 17:28) and Jude quoted from Enoch.

But only texts from  the Hebrew's canonical books are referred to as Scripture. Meanwhile again, men such as the apostles could speak as wholly inspired of God and provide new public revelation thereby, yet even Rome does not presumes its popes and ecumenical councils do either in declaring what they say is the word of God.

5. The Apostles Exercised Authority at the Council of Jerusalem In the Council of Jerusalem (Acts 15:6–30), we see Peter and James speaking with authority. This Council makes an authoritative pronouncement (citing the Holy Spirit) that was binding on all Christians: 

Indeed they did, with James providing the final judgment. And which is not contrary to SS, for as Westminster states again,

It belongs to synods and councils, ministerially to determine controversies of faith, and cases of conscience; to set down rules and directions for the better ordering of the public worship of God, and government of his Church; to receive complaints in cases of maladministration, and authoritatively to determine the same; which decrees and determinations, if consonant to the Word of God, are to be received with reverence and submission; not only for their agreement with the Word, but also for the power whereby they are made, as being an ordinance of God appointed thereunto in His Word. ( CHAPTER XXXI.)

The distinction Armstrong misses is between being the sure and supreme sufficient standard on Truth, versus judicial authority for church on earth. The OT version of the supreme court certainly had authority, (Dt. 17:8-13) - dissent was a capital offense - but it was not infallible. And the ensured perpetual magisterial infallibility as per Rome is nowhere promised or necessary in Scripture.

6. Pharisees, Sadducees, and Oral, Extrabiblical Tradition.. The Pharisees, despite their corruptions and excesses, were the mainstream Jewish tradition, and both Jesus and Paul acknowledge this. So neither the orthodox Old Testament Jews nor the early Church was guided by the principle of sola scriptura. 

This again "proves too much," for those who sat in the seat of Moses were no more infallible than Rome is, and taught traditions of men that the Lord reproved from Scripture as being supreme. And even the veracity of the apostles was subject to testing by the Scriptures by noble men. (Acts 17:11)

Yet Rome effectively presumes she is above such, even declaring belief in the Assumption of Mary to be dogma, which was so lacking even in early testimony of Tradition (where it would be found) that chief scholars of Rome opposed it being declared apostolic doctrine . But for Rome, history, tradition and Scripture only authoritatively consist of and mean what she says

Thus we see distinctive Catholic teachings that are not manifest in the only wholly inspired substantive authoritative record of what the NT church believed (which is Scripture, especially Acts thru Revelation. and which best shows how the NT church understood the OT and gospels).

7. Old Testament Jews Did Not Believe in Sola Scriptura To give two examples from the Old Testament itself: a. Ezra, a priest and scribe, studied the Jewish law and taught it to Israel, and his authority was binding under pain of imprisonment, banishment, loss of goods, and even death (cf. Ezra 7:26). 

This also fails to make distinction between being the sure and supreme sufficient standard on Truth, versus earthly judicial authority. Meanwhile Ezra could also speak and write as wholly inspired of God, unlike popes and councils.

b. In Nehemiah 8:3, Ezra reads the Law of Moses to the people in Jerusalem. In verse 7 we find thirteen Levites who assisted Ezra and helped the people to understand the law. Much earlier, we find Levites exercising the same function (cf. 2 Chr. 17:8–9). So the people did indeed understand the law (cf. Neh. 8:8, 12), but not without much assistance—not merely upon hearing. Likewise, the Bible is not altogether clear in and of itself but requires the aid of teachers who are more familiar with biblical styles and Hebrew idiom, background, context, exegesis and cross-reference, hermeneutical principles, original languages, etc. The Old Testament, then, teaches about a binding Tradition and need for authoritative interpreters, as does the New Testament (cf. Mark 4:33–34; Acts 8:30–31; 2 Pet. 1:20; 3:16). 

Which is not an argument against SS, seeing as it affirms the magisterial office, and thus Armstrong is arguing against a strawman. For what Armstrong is not stating is that of his novel and unScriptural premise, that of ensured perpetual magisterial infallibility as per Rome
 
8. Ephesians 4 Refutes the Protestant “Proof Text” “All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work” (2 Tim. 3:16–17). This passage doesn’t teach formal sufficiency, which excludes a binding, authoritative role for Tradition and Church. Protestants extrapolate onto the text what isn’t there. If we look at the overall context of this passage, we can see that Paul makes reference to oral Tradition three times (cf. 2 Tim. 1:13–14; 2:2; 3:14). “And his gifts were that some should be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ; so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the cunning of men, by their craftiness in deceitful wiles. Rather, speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ” (Eph. 4:11–15).

Which argument is again invalid since Rome does not speak as wholly inspired apostles, prophets and writers, and what Scripture materially provides is part of SS sufficiency, and thus it affirms teachers, and evangelicalism abounds with teaching aids. What  we  lack  is a central magisterium, which is Scriptural, but which concept Rome has poisoned by presuming too much of herself and by her corruption.

If 2 Timothy 3 proves the sole sufficiency of Scripture, then, by analogy, Ephesians 4 would likewise prove the sufficiency of pastors and teachers for the attainment of Christian perfection. In Ephesians 4, the Christian believer is equipped, built up, brought into unity and mature manhood, and even preserved from doctrinal confusion by means of the teaching function of the Church. This is a far stronger statement of the perfecting of the saints than 2 Timothy 3, yet it does not even mention Scripture. 

This logical fallacy is akin to Armstrong's failure to differentiate between the only infallible source/authority on Truth, and earthly judicial authority. Here the difference is between pastors and teachers etc. and what materially equips them to be part of the church and for it to grow in grace.

For the church itself was manifestly prophetically and doctrinally built upon Scripture, and by which use in doctrine, reproof, correction, instruction in righteousness, "the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works." (2 Timothy 3:16-17)

9. Paul Casually Assumes That His Passed-Down Tradition Is Infallible and Binding If Paul wasn’t assuming that, he would have been commanding his followers to adhere to a mistaken doctrine. He writes: “If any one refuses to obey what we say in this letter, note that man, and have nothing to do with him, that he may be ashamed” (2 Thess. 3:14). “Take note of those who create dissensions and difficulties, in opposition to the doctrine which you have been taught; avoid them” (Rom. 16:17). He didn’t write about “the pretty-much, mostly, largely true but not infallible doctrine which you have been taught.” 

Which again both proves too much, since we only know of this reference because God manifestly made writing His most-reliable means of authoritative preservation. And that once again, popes and councils do not speak as wholly inspired of God, though councils can be the supreme judicial authority in the church on earth.

Nor can Rome prove she is teaching what the apostles orally did, as instead faithful Catholics are supposed to take her word for it.

10. Sola Scriptura Is a Circular Position When all is said and done, Protestants who accept sola scriptura as their rule of faith appeal to the Bible. If they are asked why one should believe in their particular denominational teaching rather than another, each will appeal to “the Bible’s clear teaching.” Often they act as if they have no tradition that guides their own interpretation. This is similar to people on two sides of a constitutional debate both saying, “Well, we go by what the Constitution says, whereas you guys don’t.” 

Asserting that the Constitution (or Bible) is true because it says so is circular, but once that is settled, arguing about what the Constitution teaches and says about itself is not circular.

The U.S. Constitution, like the Bible, is not sufficient in and of itself to resolve differing interpretations. Judges and courts are necessary, and their decrees are legally binding. Supreme Court rulings cannot be overturned except by a future ruling or constitutional amendment. In any event, there is always a final appeal that settles the matter. 

Again, SS affirms the judicial office, but not as possessing ensured infallibility, which is the real argument Armstrong does not make.

And rather than an infallible magisterium being required  for writings to be established as being from God, Scripture attests that a body of authoritative wholly inspired writings had been manifestly established by the time of Christ, as being "Scripture, ("in all the Scriptures") " even the tripartite canon of the Law, the Prophets and The Writings, by which the Lord Jesus established His messiahship and ministry and opened the minds of the disciples to, who did the same . (Luke 24:27.44,45; Acts 17:2; 18:28, etc.)

But Protestantism lacks this because it appeals to a logically self-defeating principle and a book that must be interpreted by human beings. Obviously, given the divisions in Protestantism, simply “going to the Bible” hasn’t worked. In the end, a person has no assurance or certainty in the Protestant system. 

This also is a logically self-defeating since Rome herself has neither defined all the issues that RCS can disagree on, nor what magisterial level each belongs to, and what she has taught is subject to varying degrees of variant interpretations.

And as what we really believe is shown by what we do, Rome shows her interpretation of what constitutes a member by manifestly considering liberal proabortion, prohomosexual souls as members in life and in death.

In addition, considering what is broadly classed as Protestantism then comparing one church, albeit existing in schisms and sects, with such a broad class is invalid.

'But the Bible doesn’t teach that whole categories of doctrines are “minor” 

Actually, once again Armstrong needs to be schooled:
In Catholic doctrine there exists an order or hierarchy of truths, since they vary in their relation to the foundation of the Christian faith." (CCC 90) 

and that Christians freely and joyfully can disagree in such a fashion." 

Armstrong here in engaging in sophistry by blaming SS for division, a problem which his alternative has no solved, while most what he describes is among those who do not take Scripture seriously, and mischaracterizes such.

Meanwhile Catholics attest to being far less unified in core beliefs/values than those who most strongly esteem Scripture as the accurate and wholly inspired word of God, which Catholics attack as a basis for unity.

And under his alternative to SS then submission to Rome is the answer, and Rome shows her interpretation of what constitutes a member by manifestly considering liberal proabortion, prohomosexual souls as members in life and in death, while officially teaching false doctrine even on salvation , then hers is a unity that leads to Hell.

And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues. (Revelation 18:4) 

Supplemental: questions for those who argue for the alternative of SS, sola ecclesia. 

1. What is God's manifest most reliable permanent means of preserving what He told man as well as what man does: oral transmission or writing?

2. What became the established supreme authoritative source for testing Truth claims: oral transmission or "it is written/Scripture?"


3. Which came first: the written word of God and an authoritative body of it, or the NT church?


4. Did the establishment of a body of wholly inspired authoritative writings require an infallible magisterium?


5. Which transcendent sure source was so abundantly invoked by the Lord Jesus and NT church in substantiating her claims to the nation that was the historical instruments and stewards of express Divine revelation: oral transmission or writing?


6. Was the veracity of Scripture subject to testing by the oral words of men or vice versa?


7. Do Catholic popes and councils speak or write as wholly inspired of God in giving His word like as men such as 

apostles did, and also provide new public revelation thereby?

8. In the light of the above, do you deny that only Scripture is the supreme, wholly inspired-of-God substantive and authoritative word of God, and the most reliable record and supreme source on what the NT church believed?


9. Do you think sola scripture must mean that only the Bible is to be used in understanding what God says?


10. Do you think the sufficiency aspect of sola scripture must mean that the Bible formally provides everything needed for salvation and growth in grace, including reason, writing, ability to discern, teachers, synods, etc. or that this sufficiency refers to Scripture as regards it being express Divine revelation, and which formally and materially provides for what is necessary for salvation and growth in grace?


11. What oral source has spoken to man as wholly inspired the public express word of God outside Scripture since the last book was penned?


12. Where in Scripture is a magisterium of men promised ensured perpetual infallibility of office whenever it defines as a body a matter of faith or morals for the whole church?


13. Does being the historical instruments, discerners and stewards of express Divine revelation mean that such possess that magisterial infallibility?


14. What is the basis for your assurance that your church is the one true apostolic church? The weight of evidence for it or because the church who declared it asserts she it cannot err in such a matter?

Thursday, December 12, 2019

Is "Roman Catholic" a Protestant slur?

In addition to their objections to virtually anything that impugns their self-proclaimed elitist "one true church,"  whose  distinctives are not what is manifest in the only wholly inspired record of what the NT church believed, Roman Catholics also object to the very use of "Roman Catholic"  as being an invented Protestant slur to make Catholics foreigners in their English-speaking countries. " 

However, if this is true than then their church is guilty of making that distinction, even if usually, but not always, adding commas and "apostolic:"
 
Ubi Primum, Pope Leo XII, May 5, 1824: "“By heart we believe and by mouth confess the one Church, not of heretics but the Holy Roman, Catholic , and Apostolic Church outside which we believe that no one is saved.”
Vatican Council I (1870): "The holy, Catholic, Apostolic, Roman Church ..." 
 
Pope Pius XII Mystici Corporis Christi (June 29, 1943): "this true Church of Jesus Christ - which is the One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic and Roman Church ..." 
 
Pope Pius XII, Humani Generis (12 August 1950): "the Mystical Body of Christ and the Roman Catholic Church are one and the same thing" 
 
The "Roman" distinction even preceded the Reformation, and continued after it began: 
 
Dictatus Papae (1075): "That the Roman church has never erred; nor will it err to all eternity, the Scripture bearing witness.”

Pope Innocent III profession required of the Waldensians: “With our hearts we believe and with our lips we confess but one Church, not that of the heretics, but the Holy Roman Catholic and Apostolic Church, outside which we believe that no one is saved.” (Denzinger 423) 
 
Bull Cantate Domino, by Pope Eugene IV, 1441: "The most Holy Roman Church..." 
 
Exsurge Domine1 promulgated by Pope Leo X against Martin Luther: "the eminent cardinals of the holy Roman Church ."

QUO PRIMUM TEMPORE, 4 July 1570 "the Holy Roman Church .." Pope Paul IV, Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio of 1559: "the Holy Roman Church ..." 

However, contrary to what the deformation  called Catholicism asserts, the church which the Lord promised to overcome the gates of Hell was not one organic organization outside of which no believers were to be found, but the one true church was and is the body of Christ that the Spirit baptizes every believer into, (1Co. 12:13) and to which He is married. (Eph. 5:25)   "the household of faith."  (Galatians 6:10)

For it uniquely only and always consists 100% of true believers, while organic fellowships in which they express their faith inevitably become admixtures of wheat and tares, with Catholicism and liberal Protestantism being mostly the latter.

Wednesday, December 11, 2019

14 questions as regards sola scriptura versus sola ecclesia

14 questions as regards sola scriptura versus sola ecclesia   
Some think that sola scriptura (SS) means we must dispense with the teaching office of the church, and conclusions of synods and commentaries, etc. but which opinion means that such are misled as to what SS reasonable means. But if instead they mean how can Scripture alone be the wholly inspired, sure, supreme and sufficient (in its formal and materiel senses) standard on faith and morals, when Paul referred to keeping oral tradition 2 Thessalonians 2:15, and the church as being the foundation of the Truth, then it is because,
1. Scripture was the standard by which even the veracity of of apostles was subject to testing by:
These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so. (Acts 17:11)
2. Men such as the apostles could speak as wholly inspired of God and provide new public revelation thereby, neither which even Rome presumes its popes ans ecumenical councils do.
3. Under the alternative of sola ecclesia, one can only assume that what their church teaches as oral tradition includes the teachings Paul referred to in 2 Thessalonians 2:15, and which assurance is being based upon the novel and unScriptural premise of ensured perpetual magisterial infallibility, which itself comes from so-called tradition.
4. We can assume that what Paul referred to as tradition was subsequently written down, since God manifestly made writing His most-reliable means of authoritative preservation. (Exodus 17:14; 34:1,27; Deuteronomy 10:4; 17:18; 27:3,8; 31:24; Joshua 1:8; 2 Chronicles 34:15,18-19, 30-31; Psalm 19:7-11; 102:18; 119; Isaiah 30:8; Jeremiah 30:2; Matthew 4:5-7; 22:29; Luke 24:44,45; John 5:46,47; John 20:31; Acts 17:2,11; 18:28; Revelation 1:1; 20:12, 15;
5. And it is abundantly evidenced that as written, Scripture became the transcendent supreme standard for obedience and testing and establishing truth claims as the wholly Divinely inspired and assured, Word of God. Thus the veracity of even apostolic oral preaching could be subject to testing by Scripture, (Acts 17:11) and not vice versa.
6. Rather than an infallible magisterium being required to for writings to be established as being from God, a body of authoritative wholly inspired writings had been manifestly established by the time of Christ, as being "Scripture, ("in all the Scriptures") " even the tripartite canon of the Law, the Prophets and The Writings, by which the Lord Jesus established His messiahship and ministry and opened the minds of the disciples to, who did the same . (Luke 24:27.44,45; Acts 17:2; 1828, etc.)
7. None of the few Greek words in 1 Timothy 3:15 ("church living God pillar and ground the truth" teach that the magisterial office of the church is supreme over Scripture, and both words for “pillar” and “ground” of the truth denote support (apostles were called “pillar”). And Scripture itself and most of it came before the church, and was built upon its prophetic and doctrinal foundation. And thus the appeal to it in establishing the authority of teaching by the church.
Questions for those who argue for the alternative of sola scriptura, which is that of sola ecclesia:
1. What is God's manifest most reliable permanent means of preserving the word of God: oral transmission or writing?
2. What became the established supreme authoritative source for testing Truth claims: oral transmission or  Scripture?
3. Which came first: an authoritative body of
the written word of God, or the NT church, and that provided the prophetic and doctrinal and moral foundation for the NT church?
4. Did the establishment of a body of wholly inspired authoritative writings by the first century require an infallible magisterium?
5. Which transcendent sure source was so abundantly invoked by the Lord Jesus and NT church in substantiating Truth claims to a nation which was the historical instruments and stewards of express Divine revelation: oral transmission or writing?
6. Was the veracity of Scripture subject to testing by the oral words of men or vice versa?
7. Do Catholic popes and councils speak or write as wholly inspired of God in giving His word like as men such as apostles did, and also provide new public revelation thereby?
8. In the light of the above, do you deny that only Scripture is the supreme, wholly inspired-of-God substantive and authoritative word of God, and the most reliable record and supreme source on what the NT church believed?
9. Do you think sola scripture must mean that only the Bible is to be used in understanding what God says, and
means that all believers will correctly understand what is necessary, and that it replaces the magisterial office as a judicial earthly authority on matters of dispute?
10. Do you think the sufficiency aspect of sola scripture must mean that the Bible formally provides everything needed for salvation and growth in grace, including reason, writing, ability to discern, teachers, synods, etc. or that this sufficiency refers to Scripture as regards it being express Divine revelation, and which formally and materially (combined) provides what is necessary for salvation and growth in grace?
11. What infallible oral magisterial source has spoken to man as the wholly God-inspired express and public word of God outside Scripture since the last book was penned?
12. Where in Scripture is a magisterium of men promised ensured perpetual infallibility of office whenever it defines as a body a matter of faith or morals for the whole church?
13. Does being the historical instruments, discerners and stewards of express Divine revelation mean that such possess that magisterial infallibility?
14. What is the basis for your assurance that your church is the one true apostolic church? The weight of evidence for it or because the church who declared it asserts she it cannot err in such a matter?

Sunday, October 27, 2019

Required Catholic submission

Rom,an Catholics (RCs) have been basically telling us for centuries that relying on our judgment of what valid teaching is and what it means is wrong, and that we need a pope and magisterium to submit to in order to avoid division, and not only in solemn ex cathedra teachings. However, then Traditionalist RCs declare their own pope as wrong and leadership (including Vatican 2) as liberal based upon their judgment of what valid teaching is and means, including on what requires assent.


* Epistola Tua: To the shepherds alone was given all power to teach, to judge, to direct; on the faithful was imposed the duty of following their teaching, of submitting with docility to their judgment , and of allowing themselves to be governed, corrected, and guided by them in the way of salvation.

Thus, it is an absolute necessity for the simple faithful to submit in mind and heart to their own pastors, and for the latter to submit with them to the Head and Supreme Pastor.... Similarly, it is to give proof of a submission which is far from sincere to set up some kind of opposition between one Pontiff and another. Those who, faced with two differing directives, reject the present one to hold to the past, are not giving proof of obedience to the authority which has the right and duty to guide them; and in some ways they resemble those who, on receiving a condemnation, would wish to appeal to a future council, or to a Pope who is better informed.

On this point what must be remembered is that in the government of the Church, except for the essential duties imposed on all Pontiffs by their apostolic office, each of them can adopt the attitude which he judges best according to times and circumstances. Of this he alone is the judge. It is true that for this he has not only special lights, but still more the knowledge of the needs and conditions of the whole of Christendom, for which, it is fitting, his apostolic care must provide. - Epistola Tua (1885), Apostolic Letter of Pope Leo XIII; http://www.ewtn.com/vexperts/showmessage_print.asp?number=403215&language=en

"It follows that the Church is essentially an unequal society, that is, a society comprising two categories of per sons, the Pastors and the flock...the one duty of the multitude is to allow themselves to be led, and, like a docile flock, to follow the Pastors ." - VEHEMENTER NOS, an Encyclical of Pope Pius X promulgated on February 11, 1906.

Nor can we pass over in silence the audacity of those who, not enduring sound doctrine, contend that "without sin and without any sacrifice of the Catholic profession assent and obedience may be refused to those judgments and decrees of the Apostolic See, whose object is declared to [only] concern the Church's general good and her rights and discipline, so only it does not touch the dogmata of faith and morals." But no one can be found not clearly and distinctly to see and understand how grievously this is opposed to the Catholic dogma of the full power given from God by Christ our Lord Himself to the Roman Pontiff of feeding, ruling and guiding the Universal Church. (Quanta Cura. Encyclical of Pope Pius IX promulgated on December 8, 1864; http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius09/p9quanta.htm)

20. Nor must it be thought that what is expounded in Encyclical Letters does not of itself demand consent... if the Supreme Pontiffs in their official documents purposely pass judgment on a matter up to that time under dispute, it is obvious that that matter, according to the mind and will of the Pontiffs, cannot be any longer considered a question open to discussion among theologians. - PIUS XII, HUMANI GENERI, August 1950; http://w2.vatican.va/content/pius-xii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_12081950_humani-generis.html

The authority (of papal encyclicals) is undoubtedly great". It is, in a sense, sovereign. It is the teaching of the supreme pastor and teacher of the Church. Hence the faithful have a strict obligation to receive this teaching with an infinite respect. A man must not be content simply not to contradict it openly and in a more or less scandalous fashion. An internal mental assent is demanded. It should be received as the teaching sovereignly authorized within the Church." - Msgr. Joseph Clifford Fenton, esteemed Catholic theologian and professor of fundamental dogmatic theology at the Catholic University of America, who served as a peritus for Cardinal Ottaviani at the Second Vatican Council. Extract from the American Ecclesiastical Review, Vol. CXXI, August, 1949; http://www.catholicapologetics.info/thechurch/encyclicals/docauthority.htm

For it is quite foreign to everyone bearing the name of a Christian to trust his own mental powers with such pride as to agree only with those things which he can examine from their inner nature, and to imagine that the Church, sent by God to teach and guide all nations, is not conversant with present affairs and circumstances; or even that they must obey only in those matters which she has decreed by solemn definition as though her other decisions might be presumed to be false or putting forward insufficient motive for truth and honesty.

Quite to the contrary, a characteristic of all true followers of Christ, lettered or unlettered, is to suffer themselves to be guided and led in all things that touch upon faith or morals by the Holy Church of God through its Supreme Pastor the Roman Pontiff, who is himself guided by Jesus Christ Our Lord. - CASTI CONNUBII, ENCYCLICAL OF POPE PIUS XI; https://w2.vatican.va/content/pius-xi/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xi_enc_19301231_casti-connubii.html

...when we love the Pope, there are no discussions regarding what he orders or demands, or up to what point obedience must go, and in what things he is to be obeyed ; when we love the Pope, we do not say that he has not spoken clearly enough, almost as if he were forced to repeat to the ear of each one the will clearly expressed so many times not only in person, but with letters and other public documents ; we do not place his orders in doubt, adding the facile pretext of those unwilling to obey – that it is not the Pope who commands, but those who surround him; we do not limit the field in which he might and must exercise his authority ; we do not set above the authority of the Pope that of other persons, however learned, who dissent from the Pope, who, even though learned, are not holy, because whoever is holy cannot dissent from the Pope.

The Bishops form the most sacred part of the Church, that which instructs and governs men by divine right; and so he who resists them and stubbornly refuses to obey their word places himself outside the Church [cf. Matt. 18:18]. But obedience must not limit itself to matters which touch the faith: its sphere is much more vast: it extends to all matters which the episcopal power embraces. - (Pope Saint Pius X, Allocution Vi ringrazio to priests on the 50th anniversary of the Apostolic Union, November 18, 1912, as found at http://www.christorchaos.com/?q=content/choosing-ignore-pope-leo-xiii-and-pope-saint-pius-x

to scrutinize the actions of a bishop, to criticize them, does not belong to individual Catholics, but concerns only those who, in the sacred hierarchy, have a superior power; above all, it concerns the Supreme Pontiff, for it is to him that Christ confided the care of feeding not only all the lambs, but even the sheep [cf. John 21:17]. - Est Sane Molestum (1888) Apostolic Letter of Pope Leo XIII; http://www.novusordowatch.org/est-sane-molestum-leo-xiii.htm 

In addition, as concerns social teaching, The "Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church" (2005) states: 

80. In the Church’s social doctrine the Magisterium is at work in all its various components and expressions. … Insofar as it is part of the Church’s moral teaching, the Church’s social doctrine has the same dignity and authority as her moral teaching. It is authentic Magisterium, which obligates the faithful to adhere to it . - http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/justpeace/documents/rc_pc_justpeace_doc_20060526_compendio-dott-soc_en.html 

And it is quite well evidenced that the pope's  encyclical Laudato si'  (http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/encyclicals/documents/papa-francesco_20150524_enciclica-laudato-si.html) is intended to teach what the Church's moral teaching demands as regards ecology and economy. (172 references in this encyclical cite church teaching and prelates for support). 

Thus we either have Trad. RCs contradicting past papal teaching in dissenting from modern papal and magisterial teaching, and that Rome's interpretation of herself is to be trusted. They also disagree on whether a pope can be deposed. 

But  the real problem is that  RC distinctive Catholic teachings are not manifest in the only wholly inspired substantive authoritative record of what the NT church believed (which is Scripture, especially Acts thru Revelation. which best shows the NT church understood the OT and gospels).

Saturday, October 5, 2019

Negative effects of homosexual relations (though not restricted to this class)

Negative effects of homosexual relations (though not restricted to this class). 

In 2018, men who have sexual relations with other men (MSM) accounted for 69% of all new HIV diagnoses in the United States and 6 dependent areas. Young gay and bisexual men accounted for 83% of all new HIV diagnoses in people aged 13 to 24 in 2018. 

Also according to the CDC (chart), in 2017  male to male sexual contact was the mode of transmission in 93% of new HIV cases among male youth aged 13 to 24, and  MSM  accounted for 82% of diagnoses among males  and 70%  of all new HIV diagnoses, and 2 out of every 3 diagnoses in the United States. Which is despite only representing approximately 4% of the male population). 

And which practice (historically)  has resulted in a greatly increased incidence of other infectious diseases   and premature death. And which practice is primarily responsible for more than 700,000 people with AIDS having died since the beginning of the epidemic - despite decades of attempting to tame it into being "safe."  (Worldwide, 77.3 million people have contracted HIV and 35.4 million have died of AIDS-related illnesses since the beginning of the pandemic in 1981: https://health.usnews.com/conditions/hiv-aids/articles/hiv-statistics.)

The South has the highest number of people living with HIV, but if population size is taken into account, the Northeast has the highest rate of people living with HIV.

One of the diseases that is far more prevalent among MSM than other population groups is that of anal cancer, which is diagnosed in about 2 people out of every 100,000 people in the general population. In contrast, it is estimated that MSMs that are not infected with HIV are 20 times more likely to be diagnosed with anal cancer. HPV is present in approximately 65% of HIV negative MSMs and 95% of MSMs who are HIV positive. Anal cancer is caused by the same strains of HPV (Human Papillomavirus)  that cause cervical cancer in women. (https://cancer-network.org/cancer-information/gay-men-and-cancer/anal-cancer-hiv-and-gaybisexual-men)

Also, 

"Transgender women are 49 times more likely to have HIV than other adults of reproductive age." "STIs and their complications amount to about $16 billion annually in direct medical costs. HIV imposes the largest financial burden, costing $12.6 billion in direct medical costs, followed by HPV at $1.7 billion, chlamydia at $156.7 million, gonorrhea at $162.1 million, and syphilis at $39.9 million." - Ensuring Access to SexuallyTransmitted Infection Care for All - Center for American Progress 

Men who have sex with men accounted for  54% of all syphilis cases. (CDC FACT SHEET  Reported STDs in the United States, 2018)

Then there is the problem of Suicide and Suicidal Behavior among Transgender Persons

Fifty percent of transgender persons in Australia have attempted suicide at least once in their lives.[12] In England, 48% of the transgender young people had attempted suicide at least once in their lives.[13] The prevalence of suicide remains high among transgender persons irrespective of disclosing their transgender status to others and undergoing sex reassignment surgery.[8] - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5178031/

In addition are 2018 CDC stats that also include heterosexual fornication:

The incidence of many STDs in gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (MSM)—including primary and secondary (P&S) syphilis and antimicrobial-resistant gonorrhea—is greater than that reported in women and men who have sex with women only (MSW).

Since 2000, rates of P&S syphilis have increased among men, primarily attributable to increases in cases among MSM. Similar to past years, in 2018, MSM accounted for the majority (53.5%) of all reported cases of P&S syphilis and, of these, 41.6% were known to be living with diagnosed HIV. Although rates of P&S syphilis are lower among women, rates have increased substantially in recent years, increasing 30.4% during 2017–2018 and 172.7% during 2014–2018, suggesting a rapidly growing heterosexual epidemic.

In 2000 and 2001, the national rate of reported primary and secondary (P&S) syphilis cases was 2.1 cases per 100,000 population, the lowest rate since reporting began in 1941 (Figure 35, Table 1). 

However, the P&S syphilis rate has increased almost every year since 2001. This rise in the rate of reported P&S syphilis has been primarily attributable to increased cases among men and, specifically, among gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (MSM). MSM account for the majority of P&S syphilis cases and estimated rates are substantially higher among MSM compared with women or men who have sex with women only (MSW). 5 The number of cases among MSM has continued to increase, but within the last five years, cases among MSW and women have increased substantially as well. The increase in syphilis among women is of particular concern because it is associated with a striking and concurrent increase in congenital syphilis.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: STD Surveillance 2018 National Profile 27 West, and 7.2% in the Northeast (Table 29). Among women, the largest increases were observed in the West (41.2%), followed by the Northeast (40.0%), the South (30.8%) and the Midwest (30.8%) (Table 28). MSM continued to account for the majority of P&S syphilis cases in 2018 (Figures 39 and 41). 

Of 35,063 reported P&S syphilis cases in 2018, 18,760 (53.5%) were among MSM, including 16,905 (48.2%) cases among men who had sex with men only and 1,855 (5.3%) cases among men who had sex with both men and women (Figure 39)....

Among the 24,176 male cases with information on sex of sex partners, 77.6% occurred among MSM. A total of 36 states were able to classify at least 70.0% of reported P&S syphilis cases as MSM, MSW, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: STD Surveillance 2018 National Profile 27 West, and 7.2% in the Northeast (Table 29).

 Among women, the largest increases were observed in the West (41.2%), followed by the Northeast (40.0%), the South (30.8%) and the Midwest (30.8%) (Table 28). MSM continued to account for the majority of P&S syphilis cases in 2018 (Figures 39 and 41). Of 35,063 reported P&S syphilis cases in 2018, 18,760 (53.5%) were among MSM, including 16,905 (48.2%) cases among men who had sex with men only and 1,855 (5.3%) cases among men who had sex with both men and women (Figure 39). 

Overall, 5,416 (15.4%) cases were among MSW, 4,995 (14.2%) were among women, 5,858 (16.7%) were among men without information about sex of sex partners, and 34 (0.1%) were cases reported with unknown sex. Among the 24,176 male cases with information on sex of sex partners, 77.6% occurred among MSM. A total of 36 states were able to classify at least 70.0% of reported P&S syphilis cases as MSM, MSW, or women each year during 2014– 2018 (Figure 41). In these states, during 2017–2018, the number of cases increased 5.3% among MSM, 16.3% among MSW, and 32.9% among women.

Among 2018 P&S syphilis cases with known HIV status, 41.6% of cases among MSM were HIV-positive, compared with 7.9% of cases among MSW, and 4.0% of cases among women. 

When examining reported P&S syphilis cases over time, 36 states were able to classify at least 70% of reported P&S syphilis cases as MSM, MSW, or women each year during 2014–2018. In these states, cases among MSM increased 5.3% during 2017–2018 and 51.5% during 2014– 2018 (Figure 41). 

Among males, 610,447 cases of chlamydia were reported in 2018 for a rate of 380.6 cases per 100,000 males (Table 5). The rate of reported cases among males increased each year during 2000–2018, with the exception of 2012–2013, when rates remained stable (Figure 1). During 2017–2018 alone, the rate among males increased 5.7%; during 2014–2018, rates of reported cases among males increased 37.8% (Tables 4 and 5). This pronounced increase among males could be attributed to either increased transmission or improved case identification (e.g., through intensified extra-genital screening efforts) among gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (MSM). 

Despite this considerable increase in males, the rate of reported chlamydia cases among females was still about two times the rate among males in 2018, likely reflecting a larger number of females screened for this infection
Gonorrhea...San Francisco had the highest proportion of cases estimated to be MSM (86.4%), while Baltimore had the lowest proportion of MSM cases (20.1%). In total, across all SSuN sites, 42.5% of gonorrhea cases were estimated to be among MSM, 25.1% among MSW, and 32.4% among women. 

Among six jurisdictions participating in SSuN [ STD Surveillance Network] continuously from 2010 to 2018,..The estimated gonorrhea case rate among MSM increased 375.5% during 2010–2018 from 1,368.6 cases per 100,000 MSM in 2010 to 6,508.0 cases per 100,000 MSM in 2018. Over the same time period, case rates among MSW and women also increased by 69.3% and 95.2%, respectively.
 
[Overall,] Rates of chlamydia have gone up by 19 percent since 2014. For gonorrhea, there are 583,405 cases in the U.S., and rates have gone up 63 percent since 2014. Rates of syphilis have increased 71 percent since 2014, and are highest in men and women 25-29 years old. congenital syphilis — when an infected mother passes syphilis to her baby during pregnancy — which have shot up by 185 percent since 2014, (https://www.cdc.gov/std/stats18/STDSurveillance2018-full-report.pdf)

Older stats on Adultery, Fornication, and Sodomy can be seen here.

In addition to which is the financial cost which has been going for decades: 

"The estimated discounted lifetime cost for persons who become HIV infected at age 35 is $326,500 (60% for antiretroviral medications, 15% for other medications, 25% non-drug costs). [Undiscounted "mean lifetime costs are $597,300 ($4,200)" "Discounted costs are highlighted throughout because they represent economic costs that take into account time preferences of individuals and society and the opportunity cost of funds"] The Lifetime Medical Cost Savings from Preventing HIV in the United States

Costs also can include those for pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) at more than $1,700 for 30 tablets (https://mosaicscience.com/story/hiv-prep-truvada-prevention-sti-std-lgbtqi-gay-condom-pride/).

The cost for  PrEP medication is about  2,000 a month, and which "Most health insurance plans, including Medicaid, cover." (https://www.plannedparenthood.org/learn/stds-hiv-safer-sex/hiv-aids/prep) For any Medicaid insured HIV-negative adult 18 years of age or older patients, lab testing and prescription medication costs are 100% covered. (https://www.louisianahealthhub.org/teleprep/) 


In 2017, around 61,300 people were actively taking PrEP. (https://www.avert.org/professionals/hiv-around-world/western-central-europe-north-america/usa)

The Ready, Set, PrEP program makes PrEP medication available at no cost for qualifying recipients who lack prescription drug coverage, and  are tested for HIV with a negative result, and have a prescription for PrEP. (https://www.getyourprep.com/)


Which raises  raises private insurance rates and or taxes for all who pay them.  


In addition to which is the tactical, indiscriminate psychological use of the term “homophobic” as part of the overall strategy to represent any  all who object to homosexuality and its homoeroticism as being motivated by an irrational fear, and as hate-mongering KKK Neanderthals.   
Which was just the strategy and psychological tactics advocated by Harvard-trained graduates Marshall Kirk (1957–2005) and Hunter Madsen (pen name Erastes Pill) in their book “After the Ball.”

The idea that we can be caring, charitable, and friendly with practicing homosexuals (as I seek to be) while considering the orientation as a disorder, and opposing those who demand we affirm it, is not be allowed.

In addition, since the  practice of homosexual relations is unnatural, it usually requires greater attempts at rationalizing away the guilt that sin normally should result in, and  many even engage in strenuous attempts to insist all must affirm it. 

Which effects mean rejection of the Lord Jesus, leaving the sinner with no forgiveness and more repressed guilt, or worse, a seared conscience that will not repent and which finally may no longer be able to. Which state is to be avoided at all costs.

For God made man and women distinctively different yet
uniquely compatible and complementary, and only joined them together in  marriage - as the Lord Jesus Himself specified (Mt. 19:4-6; cf. Gn. 2:24) - and only condemned homosexual relations wherever they are manifestly dealt with.

Yet there is still room at the cross for all who will come to God in repentance and faith, and trust in the Divine Son of God  sent by the Father, the risen Lord Jesus, to save them on His account, by His sinless shed blood, and thus be baptized and live for Him. Acts 10:36-47

Thanks be to God, for we are all (including me) sinners in nature and by choice.