Is it morally wrong to judge someone else's faith? One example might be how many liberal people support abortion, ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ rights, etc. so would it be ok to view them as non-believers for this?

If you are in the New Order(not church) you are going to find people who are for contraception, abortion, ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity and euthansia and divorce and more!  You will even here from who you call family or even so-called priest.

My mother told me that ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs are children of God.  Holy Cow!!  I told my mom, "Who told you that?"  Was it from the pulpit.  My own mother and get this!, her daughter, my sister, had a husband who hid from her that he was a homo for 15 years.  I said, to my mom, so if he is a child of God according to you, how do you feel towards your very own daughter who got her sons out of the situation,  Was she wrong for that?!  My gosh, I am thankful that our family is miles from them.  They have no valid priest.  The New Order is no religion whatsoever.  It take in money and gives to the federal gov't in their agendas.  They use the word "Catholic" and keep the people thinking that they are of a religion.  All a hoax>

Is it morally wrong to judge someone else's faith? One example might be how many liberal people support abortion, ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ rights, etc. so would it be ok to view them as non-believers for this?

Objectively, such people are certainly heretics, if not apostates, and I don't think it is a sin against charity to say so.  Only God can judge the heart however.  No matter how things look in the external forum, and no mater how clearly we see and condemn sin or heresy, we cannot know for sure where anyone stands before God.  

Does one cease being a Catholic as soon as they believe the state should not prohibit abortion legally?

Yes, they do.  Does one stop being Catholic when someone thinks infanticide should not be punished?  Yes.

What is the definition of "a Catholic?" This is a problem I keep running into during discussions.

What if a pro-choice Novus Ordite came up to you and said, "so you are saying I'm not a Catholic?"

What is the proper response? What if they are baptized Catholic?

Does one cease being a Catholic as soon as they believe the state should not prohibit abortion legally?

What dogma have they denied if they hold this position? Can they properly be called heretics? Apostates? But they have not denied the Faith have they?

Interested to hear a logical analysis on this. How to decide who is and is not a Catholic.

Thanks.

The Church teaching that life begins at conception and that abortion is wrong is about as clear as Church teaching can be.  If, knowing what the Church teaches, you deny it willfully, then yes, you are a heretic.  Does that mean you are a non-Catholic?  Maybe.   I will leave that to God.  At the very least you are a bad Catholic and in grave spiritual danger.  

Quote from: InfiniteFaith

Is it morally wrong to judge someone else's faith? One example might be how many liberal people support abortion, ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ rights, etc. so would it be ok to view them as non-believers for this?

Yes, it would be okay to consider them outside the Church.

I certainly hope that people will not reverence ecclesiastics as authorities if they openly support such flagrant outrages.

Yeah I think if someone expresses that ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity is genetic, and upon being rebuked, still holds that view then they should be excommunicated.

Is it morally wrong to judge someone else's faith? One example might be how many liberal people support abortion, ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ rights, etc. so would it be ok to view them as non-believers for this?

Years ago, I was chatting on Yahoo about religious beliefs and practices.  I was wondering, honestly, as to why people who believe in God would have an abortion.  The person chatting with me said this was because they do not believe in God.  I rebutted by saying, but 90+% of the population says they believe in God yet with all these abortion numbers, there have to be believers having abortions.

The response was a simple one but it is one that I haven't forgotten in all these years.  The response was that lots of people say they believe in God because that's a popular thing to say but if you really believed in God, you wouldn't ever have an abortion.

I've never forgotten that comment.  It's so simple yet so spot on right.  A person who really believed in god would not have an abortion.  

People who support abortion are atheists.  Plain and simple.  They may say, for public approval or some other gain that they are believers but their actions say otherwise.  

If you really believed in God, you wouldn't deliberately have a prong inserted into an unborn child's head for the singular purpose of killing this child for the sole purpose of you being relieved of responsibilities.  Disposing of an unborn child in the name of convenience...  ...truly sickening.  

As for ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs and ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ rights, they are depraved and disordered.  A sɛҳuąƖly disordered person is a slave to their own sensuality.  They are to be pitied.    
 

Quote from: InfiniteFaith

Quote from: Telesphorus

Quote from: InfiniteFaith

Is it morally wrong to judge someone else's faith? One example might be how many liberal people support abortion, ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ rights, etc. so would it be ok to view them as non-believers for this?

Yes, it would be okay to consider them outside the Church.

I certainly hope that people will not reverence ecclesiastics as authorities if they openly support such flagrant outrages.

Yeah I think if someone expresses that ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity is genetic, and upon being rebuked, still holds that view then they should be excommunicated.

Believing that ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity is genetic is okay with me insofar that many of our physical and material wants and desires are based on genetics.  Engaging in ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity is a mortal sin.  If someone feels these disordered affections and lusts, then they have a real cross to bear.  

ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity is a mortal sin when these disordered desires are acted upon.  However, even having these desires is a sign of a serious sɛҳuąƖ disorder.  

Someone with ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ desires is to be truly pitied.  What a pitiful lot their life must be to focus your entire soul to sɛҳuąƖ gratification.

However, saying it's genetics isn't really that big of a deal.  Am I wrong?  I don't think so but perhaps others have more knowledge in this area.

The evidence suggests that it is not genetic. People who support the genetics of it are doing so because they want to progress the idea that there is nothing they can do with their ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity, and that people should accept their lifestyle. The problem with supporting the idea of it being genetic is a bad thing because that suggests to people that there is nothing they can do about it.