Fr. James Martin On Same Sex Sexual Behavior And Slavery In The Bible

[Guest]

Thoughts?

 

Edited October 24, 2019 by Guest

[Lilllabettt]

19 hours ago, Josh said:

Thoughts?

 

Wow. So I know this isn't your point. But I always thought the "hes an under the radar snake" stuff about James Martin was overblown trad hysteria. Maybe not.

[Guest]

33 minutes ago, Lilllabettt said:

Wow. So I know this isn't your point. But I always thought the "hes an under the radar snake" stuff about James Martin was overblown trad hysteria. Maybe not.

I'm not sure what my point is tbh lol I'm not sure how to view it or process it. I've wondered the same things he has but then stopped myself from going down that rabbit hole.

[Ice_nine]

someone else said something along the lines of "the bible makes no qualitative judgement on slavery, it merely gives parameters on how slaves should be treated."

anyway, this dude seems pretty, I don't want to say subversive, but, I don't know he needs something

[Guest]

14 minutes ago, Ice_nine said:

someone else said something along the lines of "the bible makes no qualitative judgement on slavery, it merely gives parameters on how slaves should be treated."

 

In the Old Testament the Israelites weren't practicing slavery and God instructed them on how to take slaves and treat them ect.

[Guest]

Leviticus 25:44-46 

As for your male and female slaves whom you may have—you may acquire male and female slaves from the pagan nations that are around you. Then, too, it is out of the sons of the sojourners who live as aliens among you that you may gain acquisition, and out of their families who are with you, whom they will have produced in your land; they also may become your possession. You may even bequeath them to your sons after you, to receive as a possession; you can use them as permanent slaves. But in respect to your countrymen, the sons of Israel, you shall not rule with severity over one another.

 

Exodus 21:4

If his master gives him a wife, and she bears him sons or daughters, the wife and her children shall belong to her master, and he shall go out alone.

 

Exodus 21:20-21 If a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod and he dies at his hand, he shall be punished.If however he survives a day or two, no vengeance shall be taken; for he is his property.

 

Exodus 21:26-27 If a man strikes the eye of his male or female slave, and destroys it, he shall let him go free on account of his eye. And if he knocks out a tooth of his male or female slave, he shall let him go free on account of his tooth.

 

1 Timothy 6:1-2 All who are under the yoke as slaves are to regard their own masters as worthy of all honor so that the name of God and our doctrine will not be spoken against. Those who have believers as their masters must not be disrespectful to them because they are brethren, but must serve them all the more, because those who partake of the benefit are believers and beloved. Teach and preach these principles.

 

Luke 12:47 

The servant who knows the master's will and does not get ready or does not do what the master wants will be beaten with many blows.

 

 

Edited October 25, 2019 by Guest

[Guest]

58 minutes ago, Josh said:

In the Old Testament the Israelites weren't practicing slavery and God instructed them on how to take slaves and treat them ect.

 

32 minutes ago, Josh said:

Leviticus 25:44-46 

As for your male and female slaves whom you may have—you may acquire male and female slaves from the pagan nations that are around you. Then, too, it is out of the sons of the sojourners who live as aliens among you that you may gain acquisition, and out of their families who are with you, whom they will have produced in your land; they also may become your possession. You may even bequeath them to your sons after you, to receive as a possession; you can use them as permanent slaves. But in respect to your countrymen, the sons of Israel, you shall not rule with severity over one another.

 

Exodus 21:4

If his master gives him a wife, and she bears him sons or daughters, the wife and her children shall belong to her master, and he shall go out alone.

 

Exodus 21:20-21 If a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod and he dies at his hand, he shall be punished.If however he survives a day or two, no vengeance shall be taken; for he is his property.

 

Exodus 21:26-27 If a man strikes the eye of his male or female slave, and destroys it, he shall let him go free on account of his eye. And if he knocks out a tooth of his male or female slave, he shall let him go free on account of his tooth.

 

1 Timothy 6:1-2 All who are under the yoke as slaves are to regard their own masters as worthy of all honor so that the name of God and our doctrine will not be spoken against. Those who have believers as their masters must not be disrespectful to them because they are brethren, but must serve them all the more, because those who partake of the benefit are believers and beloved. Teach and preach these principles.

 

Luke 12:47 

The servant who knows the master's will and does not get ready or does not do what the master wants will be beaten with many blows.

My measly 2 cents on this topic. I don't believe the all loving creator and source of existence is okay with slavery. I don't think he ever was or ever will be. I don't believe Jesus spoke in parables that showed him to be in approval/ uninvolved/ unattached on slavery and the beating of slaves. Yeah the Bible records text's such as these but I don't believe them. That's where I'm at. I'm not going to pretend I do just because you're supposed to.

Now does that therefore invalidate all the other teachings in the Bible? For me it doesn't. Does it mean the Bible is wrong on sexual sins? For me it doesn't. Does it raise the possibility it could be wrong or that these rules don't really exist in reality/existence? Yeah I would say so. But I'm not going down that rabbit hole because I think it's very dangerous and if you're wrong you could end up in hell.

But I'm not here to show any hate towards people over sexual sin. Or use sexual sin to put people down or bash them with the Bible. I struggle myself with sins of the flesh. And God Bless the Bible and all the good stuff in it. But the fact is topics like this lead people to ponder well if it said this about slavery I wonder if it's correct on this other stuff. 

Prayers for Father Martin because he's obviously struggling big time. Perhaps he's same sex attracted himself. I do think he is being sincere. So prayers. And the whole slavery issue in the Bible has caused me the most confusion/doubt over the Christian faith since I became aware of it and realized it was there.

Edited October 25, 2019 by Guest

[KnightofChrist]

Sicut Dudum

Against the Enslaving of Black Natives from the Canary Islands

Pope Eugene IV - 1435

Pope Eugene IV Against the Enslaving of Black Natives from the Canary Islands

Eugene, Bishop, Servant of the Servants of God,

To our venerable brothers, peace and apostolic benediction, etcetera.

1. Not long ago, we learned from our brother Ferdinand, bishop at Rubicon and representative of the faithful who are residents of the Canary Islands, and from messengers sent by them to the Apostolic See, and from other trustworthy informers, the following facts: in the said islands—some called Lanzarote—and other nearby islands, the inhabitants, imitating the natural law alone, and not having known previously any sect of apostates or heretics, have a short time since been led into the Orthodox Catholic Faith with the aid of God’s mercy. Nevertheless, with the passage of time, it has happened that in some of the said islands, because of a lack of suitable governors and defenders to direct those who live there to a proper observance of the Faith in things spiritual and temporal, and to protect valiantly their property and goods, some Christians (we speak of this with sorrow), with fictitious reasoning and seizing and opportunity, have approached said islands by ship, and with armed forces taken captive and even carried off to lands overseas very many persons of both sexes, taking advantage of their simplicity.

2. Some of these people were already baptized; others were even at times tricked and deceived by the promise of Baptism, having been made a promise of safety that was not kept. They have deprived the natives of the property, or turned it to their own use, and have subjected some of the inhabitants of said islands to perpetual slavery, sold them to other persons, and committed other various illicit and evil deeds against them, because of which very many of those remaining on said islands, and condemning such slavery, have remained involved in their former errors, having drawn back their intention to receive Baptism, thus offending the majesty of God, putting their souls in danger, and causing no little harm to the Christian religion

3. Therefore, We, to whom it pertains, especially in respect to the aforesaid matters, to rebuke each sinner about his sin, and not wishing to pass by dissimulating, and desiring—as is expected from the pastoral office we hold—as far as possible, to provide salutarily, with a holy and fatherly concern, for the sufferings of the inhabitants, beseech the Lord, and exhort, through the sprinkling of the Blood of Jesus Christ shed for their sins, one and all, temporal princes, lords, captains, armed men, barons, soldiers, nobles, communities, and all others of every kind among the Christian faithful of whatever state, grade, or condition, that they themselves desist from the aforementioned deeds, cause those subject to them to desist from them, and restrain them rigorously.

4. And no less do We order and command all and each of the faithful of each sex, within the space of fifteen days of the publication of these letters in the place where they live, that they restore to their earlier liberty all and each person of either sex who were once residents of said Canary Islands, and made captives since the time of their capture, and who have been made subject to slavery. These people are to be totally and perpetually free, and are to be let go without the exaction or reception of money. If this is not done when the fifteen days have passed, they incur the sentence of excommunication by the act itself, from which they cannot be absolved, except at the point of death, even by the Holy See, or by any Spanish bishop, or by the aforementioned Ferdinand, unless they have first given freedom to these captive persons and restored their goods. We will that like sentence of excommunication be incurred by one and all who attempt to capture, sell, or subject to slavery, baptized residents of the Canary Islands, or those who are freely seeking Baptism, from which excommunication cannot be absolved except as was stated above.

5. Those who humbly and efficaciously obey these, our exhortations and commands deserve, in addition to our favor, and that of the Apostolic See, and the blessings which follow there from, but are to be possessors of eternal happiness and to be placed at the right hand of God, etcetera

Given at Florence, January 13th, in the Year of Our Lord, 1435

Source: Appendix B of Fr. Joel S. Panzer’s book, “The Popes and Slavery” (Society of St. Paul, 1996) on page 75 from Baronius’ Annales Ecclesiastici, ed. O. Raynaldus (Luca, 1752) vol. 28, pp. 226-227. (Webmaster note: A special thanks to catholicweb.com for this document)

https://www.papalencyclicals.net/eugene04/eugene04sicut.htm

Edited October 25, 2019 by KnightofChrist

[Guest]

[KnightofChrist]

Father Martin seems like he's trying to weasel out of his original and "interesting" point, while still trying to justify it. A bit cowardly and deceitful. His purpose in posting the quote was clear. If the Bible could be wrong about slavery it could be wrong about homosexuality.

 

And @Josh , Pope Eugene IV in 1435, 1 4 3 5, who I am sure was fully aware of the passages you've quoted condemned slavery without rejecting any part of Holy Scripture. 

 

 

[Guest]

Thanks for the quote by Pope Eugene IV. God Bless.

Edited October 26, 2019 by Guest

[Guest]

49 minutes ago, KnightofChrist said:

His purpose in posting the quote was clear. If the Bible could be wrong about slavery it could be wrong about homosexuality.

It's a good question. He probably shouldn't be asking it publicily and vaguely since he's a priest with a large following. But in the real world it's a 100% legit question. One that I have wondered myself. And I personally think homosexual acts are a sin. Although as I've said in previous post's recently I'm no longer homophobic. And ridding myself of the hate that was once there I will admit I've become more confused on the topic. I still accept the Catholic teaching on it. But I get how when real questions are asked in the real world it becomes a complex question that isn't blatantly obvious. Especially when the Bible read Sola Scripturally got the the topic on slavery wrong. That's a major topic to be wrong on when the Bible is claimed to be what it is. And because it was wrong a lot of people were gravely harmed and mistreated as a result.

Edited October 26, 2019 by Guest

[chrysostom]

Where the Bible mentions [sacrificing children to idols], it clearly condemns it. The question is whether the biblical judgement is correct.

So if people agree with his quote, he's cool. But if they disagree, then he never said that! Someone else did! Don't shoot the retweeter!

Of course, if I assume Fr Martin used "interesting" in a negative way, the way English people do, then that's a different story, but I, er, sort of doubt that...

Edited October 26, 2019 by chrysostom

[KnightofChrist]

9 hours ago, Josh said:

It's a good question. He probably shouldn't be asking it publicily and vaguely since he's a priest with a large following. But in the real world it's a 100% legit question. One that I have wondered myself. And I personally think homosexual acts are a sin. Although as I've said in previous post's recently I'm no longer homophobic. And ridding myself of the hate that was once there I will admit I've become more confused on the topic. I still accept the Catholic teaching on it. But I get how when real questions are asked in the real world it becomes a complex question that isn't blatantly obvious. Especially when the Bible read Sola Scripturally got the the topic on slavery wrong. That's a major topic to be wrong on when the Bible is claimed to be what it is. And because it was wrong a lot of people were gravely harmed and mistreated as a result.

What if though the biblical understanding of servanthood and it's tolerance of it is not the same as your understanding of slavery? 

[Peace]

On 10/23/2019 at 10:50 PM, Josh said:

Thoughts?

 

Well at a high level there are all sorts of things in Sacred Scripture that the Church does not yet seem to know what to do with them. Especially with the OT there all many things we see that offend our basic sense of right and wrong, and that appear to be encouraged or condoned. Like blessed is the man who dashes your babies heads against the rock? Come on now.

I don't think it is a matter of Sacred Scripture being "right" or "wrong". We know that Scripture is without error, but we do not yet know how to properly interpret everything. Just because certain things are condoned or prohibited at certain points in time does not necessarily mean that they are good or intrinsically evil. We need the Church to guide us into the proper use of Scripture, and that is an ongoing process.