The Synod And Our Approach To Gay People

[CatherineM]

Just to be clear, my issue with Burke was him saying that the Pope was long overdue in publishing something. To me, and me alone apparently, that sounded like he was implying the Pope wasn't doing his job properly.

[Luigi]

Interestingly, the angriest are those accusing others of anger. Pots and pans, and whatnot. 

 

Also, angry arguments aren't very convincing, fwiw. 

 

To quote Jane Austen: "Angry people are not always wise."

[Nihil Obstat]

Just to be clear, my issue with Burke was him saying that the Pope was long overdue in publishing something. To me, and me alone apparently, that sounded like he was implying the Pope wasn't doing his job properly.

Tell that to St. Paul.

 

Good men can correct a pope. Saintly men can even correct saintly popes.

Whether or not Burke's Burke's current activities will bear fruit remains to be seen.

[BarbTherese]

Catholics it seems to me (and I am a Catholic) are often rather good at discriminating against those 'not in their household' of beliefs and practises and overtly discriminating with the excuse that to do otherwise is somehow condoning the sin.  I think that the Synod is all about pastoral care or how we treat those that traditionally we have in some way discriminated against.  This does not mean I don't think that any of the laws of God and His Church are changed because in the matter of Faith and Morals, we cannot change unless The Church challenges the rule of infallibility in Faith and Morals - and I very much truly doubt this for sure. In fact, I don't think it would ever happen as it would be clear rebellion against God.

 

Matthew Ch5 "…44"But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven; for He causes His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46"For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same?…".........

 

God does not treat in the perceivable world persons differently (as quoted above), according to their morals, for example, or lack of them.  We are called to do likewise.  What does this mean in the day to day running of The Church and our own behaviour and treatment of, love of, neighbour, is what the Synod is all about and it could, might, possibly mean deeper insight into Scripture.

 

Certainly, Jesus Himself treated all who approached Him honestly in the same way without discriminations - even though He did perceive His personal call as being to the House of Israel, while warning them of the consequences of refusal.  It is late in His short life that He instructs His apostles to go into the whole world and preach The Gospel to all without discriminating.  And this does reflect a recent Sunday Gospel.

[Lilllabettt]

Like the God Botherers who want to take away the children of gay couples on the basis of their beliefs.  
 
If you're going to be so eager to use the state to push around less powerful organizations then you better be wary.  Because maybe that less powerful group will have an uptick in their fortunes.  Maybe it would behoove you all to be a little less eager to push around people minding their own business. Because maybe the end result will be that same controlling, censoring impulse being directed back at you guys as your Church's power continues to decline.  
 
Glass houses.  Not throwing stones.  Et cetera.

 

My guest list for Thanksgiving dinner: a state matter since 1985.
 

 

nvm. Had a post but its pointless.
 
Yall have fun.
Dont know why I bother trying to talk to the sheep.

 

Love all these non-Catholics who want to chime in on how Catholics should live their faith in their private lives.
Your input is really germane.
Of course you don't understand why people struggle with this type of thing - you don't share our religion do you???
maybe you should myob?
I don't pontificate to Muslim girls on the ethical implications of wearing the hijab ... cuz you know, me not being Muslim that would be arrogant and ridiculous

[BarbTherese]

Glass houses.  Not throwing stones.  Et cetera.

 

 

Much truth in what Hasan wrote above.  What makes my sin less serious than another's and why should I as a sinner be included and welcomed into the community of believers, while some other sinner is somehow excluded and unwelcome?  "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone".  Well, that cuts me out as I drop my stone.

 

Story apparently from the desert fathers:  A monk is accused of a quite serious offence and in punishment is excluded from choir for a month and cannot attend same.  Over the next few days, the abbot is missing from choir too. His council become concerned and decide to approach him in his cell where he has confined himself.  On asking if he is ill, the abbot simply replies "I too am a sinner".

 

[Cherie]

I'll be honest, my inclination in these matters is to be kind, charitable, and inviting. I remember reading somewhere that Mother Teresa once said we should "err on the side of charity," or something like that.

But then I second guess myself; am I being complacent? Cowardly? Am I really just being a coward, afraid of conflict and what other people would think of me, which is so unlike the courageous faith of the martyrs who died horrible deaths for the sake of their Faith? Am I hiding my lukewarmness behind a facade of a false sense of "charity"? Because that's a very real possibility. Am I going to reach the pearly gates and hear God tell me that I should have "instructed the ignorant" better among my family members, that if I had said more in defense of the Church's teaching in regard to their situations, it may have prevented them from complacency in their own sin? Am I complicit in their sin because I didn't do more to correct their errors? I don't know. I pray I'm doing the best thing whenever an issue comes up; they do know how I feel about their situations. I always pray to the Holy Spirit and sometimes even seek counsel in these matters, but no matter what, I always end up feeling like I'm doing it wrong.

It can be a hard balance to strike. And I agree; I don't even know why non-Catholics feel they would need to weigh in on a matter that is specifically dealing with how Catholics are supposed to live out their own Catholic morality.

[4588686]

I'll be honest, my inclination in these matters is to be kind, charitable, and inviting. I remember reading somewhere that Mother Teresa once said we should "err on the side of charity," or something like that.

But then I second guess myself; am I being complacent? Cowardly? Am I really just being a coward, afraid of conflict and what other people would think of me, which is so unlike the courageous faith of the martyrs who died horrible deaths for the sake of their Faith? Am I hiding my lukewarmness behind a facade of a false sense of "charity"? Because that's a very real possibility. Am I going to reach the pearly gates and hear God tell me that I should have "instructed the ignorant" better among my family members, that if I had said more in defense of the Church's teaching in regard to their situations, it may have prevented them from complacency in their own sin? Am I complicit in their sin because I didn't do more to correct their errors? I don't know. I pray I'm doing the best thing whenever an issue comes up; they do know how I feel about their situations. I always pray to the Holy Spirit and sometimes even seek counsel in these matters, but no matter what, I always end up feeling like I'm doing it wrong.

It can be a hard balance to strike. And I agree; I don't even know why non-Catholics feel they would need to weigh in on a matter that is specifically dealing with how Catholics are supposed to live out their own Catholic morality.

 

 

I've referred to individuals trying to use the state to enforce their beliefs on these matters.  Fighting against giving members of the LGBT community marriage rights or opposing members of the trans community from being to basic legal protections.

[Cherie]

Oops, I meant to edit my response; I didn't mean I didn't know why non-Catholics would want to *weigh in* on it (because, duh, anyone can offer their opinions), I meant I don't know why non-Catholics would get their panties in a twist, errr, I mean, get so emotionally invested in this discussion. It's kind of an "in-house" sort of a discussion that way. Or at least it seems that way to me.

[veritasluxmea]

I actually thought no one would care about the synod... ha ha. 

Edited October 15, 2014 by veritasluxmea

[BarbTherese]

Jesus in His times introduces something really remarkable where attitude to others are concerned - and this is summed up in the Parable of the Good Samaritan - but also in the actual behaviour of Jesus.............and ideally gives much food for thought for translating into our own times.  Jesus (see quote box below re Samaritans) very obviously was not in the least concerned that His treatment of Samaritans was somehow condoning their quite contrary particular beliefs to mainstream Judaism and His own religion.  He even treated pagans extremely well even outstandingly complimenting one of them (curing of the centurion's servant) - and if you would like to read what paganism was all about in the times of Jesus : http://www.roman-empire.net/religion/religion.html  and of the centurion and a pagan, Jesus says of him "Faith like this I have not found, not even in Israel".  The man was a pagan fer goodness sake :think:

 

These things to my mind, should give us pause to reflect and think, even scratch the head in some confusion, and in terms of our own here and now - our journey.  And such things and pastoral matters is what I am hoping the Synod is all about.
 

http://www.catholic.com/quickquestions/who-were-the-samaritans-and-why-were-they-important

Catholic Answers Quick Questions

Rather than contaminate themselves by passing through Samaritan territory, Jews who were traveling from Judea to Galilee or vice versa would cross over the river Jordan, bypass Samaria by going through Transjordan, and cross over the river again as they neared their destination. The Samaritans also harbored antipathy toward the Jews (Lk 9:52-53).

That the Samaritans were separated from and looked down upon by the Jews makes them important in the New Testament. Jesus indicated a new attitude must be taken toward the Samaritans when he passed through their towns instead of crossing the Jordan to avoid them (Jn 4:4-5), when he spoke with a Samaritan woman, contrary to Jewish custom (Jn 4:9), and when he said a time would come when worshiping in Jerusalem or on Mount Gerazim would not be important (Jn 4:21-24). When asked whom to regard as our neighbor, Jesus told the story of the Good Samaritan precisely because Samaritans were despised."

 

 

[Norseman82]

Yes you can, because the personal choices of a couple who have nothing to do with your personal choices dont affect you at all. 

 

Also, none of your business.

 

 

 

If the sin of others is now public concern, I think your children should be taken away because I believe your views are harmful to them...and guess what, its totally ok for me to think that and push those views on you. Cause apparently your personal life is now public business. 

 

Your glorying is not good. Know you not that a little leaven corrupteth the whole lump?

Purge out the old leaven, that you may be a new paste, as you are unleavened. For Christ our pasch is sacrificed.
Therefore, let us feast, not with the old leaven, nor with the leaven of malice and wickedness: but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

I wrote to you in an epistle not to keep company with fornicators.

I mean not with the fornicators of this world or with the covetous or the extortioners or the servers of idols: otherwise you must needs go out of this world.
But now I have written to you, not to keep company, if any man that is named a brother be a fornicator or covetous or a server of idols or a railer or a drunkard or an extortioner: with such a one, not so much as to eat.
For what have I to do to judge them that are without? Do not you judge them that are within?

For them that are without, God will judge. Put away the evil one from among yourselves.

 

(1 Cor. 5:6-13 DR)

[BarbTherese]

To put your quotation from 1 Corinthians into its context which is a matter of scandalous behaviour by leadership and the same boasting of the matter and spreading it as something to be accepted as sound moral behaviour, creating a terrible indeed schism within the community in Corinth and one that evolved from within that community and by religious leadership.  It seems to be (Haydock's Catholic Commentary) about a leader of the community of believers in Corinth who was involved in a matter of incest and boasting about it.  He was a strong orator and so the matter (and a matter WITHIN the community of believers) took hold as acceptable moral behaviour and it spread and became a schism within the Corinth community.

 

A little bit of common sense I think can put the quotation into a correct context for today.  I doubt any faithful to the Magisterium Catholic is proposing homosexual acts as something to be spread within The Church and proposed as sound moral behaviour, as was happening in Corinth re incestuous behaviour.

This is not confined to homosexual acts, rather homosexual acts fall under the umbrella of fornication in general. 

 

Haydock's Commentary:

Notes & Commentary:

Ver. 1. As the like is not among the heathens. This seems to have been the crime of incest, that he took the wife of his father yet living. See 2 Corinthians vii. 12. (Witham) --- St. Chrysostom, Theod.[Theodoret?], &c., think, that this incestuous person was one of the chiefs of the schism which then reigned in Corinth. This man, say they, was a great orator, with whose eloquence the Corinthians were enchanted, and therefore dissembled a knowledge of his crime, public as it was. The apostle having proved to them the vanity of all human learning, in the preceding chapter, now attacks the incestuous man, and exposes to their view the enormity of his crime. (Calmet)  Read on here http://haydock1859.tripod.com/id166.html

 

 

Letter of James Ch 2 "    "  [13] For judgment without mercy to him that hath not done mercy. And mercy exalteth itself above judgment." "
 

 

Haydock's Catholic Commentary

http://haydock1859.tripod.com/id260.html

Ver. 13. For judgment without mercy, &c. It is an admonition to them to fulfil, as he said before, the royal precepts of the love of God and of our neighbour, which cannot be without being merciful to others. Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy. (Matthew v. 7.) --- And mercy exalteth itself above judgment. Some understand this as a confirmation of God's infinite mercies, out of Psalm cxliv. 9. where it is said that his "mercies are over all his works;" that is, though all his perfections be equally infinite, yet he is pleased to deal with sinners rather according to the multitude of his mercies than according to the rigour of his justice. Others expound these words of the mercy which men shew to one another, and that he exhorts them to mercy, as a most powerful means to find mercy; and the merciful works done to others will be beneficial to them, and make them escape when they come to judgment. (Witham) --- Similar to this are the words of old Tobias to his son: "Alms deliver from all sin, and from death, and will not suffer the soul to go into darkness. Alms shall be a great confidence before the most high God, to all them that give it." (Tobias iv. 11, 12.) "Blessed are the merciful," says our divine Judge, "for they shall obtain mercy." (Matthew v. 7.) (Calmet) --- And the definitive sentence of Christians, at the day of judgment will be favourable or not, as they have complied in life with the calls of charity. [Matthew xxv. 31-46.]

 

Edited October 15, 2014 by BarbaraTherese

[EmilyAnn]

 

It's a statement under the title Welcoming Homosexuals, paragraph 50. 

 

Homosexuals have gifts and qualities to offer to the Christian community: are we capable of welcoming these people, guaranteeing to them a fraternal space in our communities? Often they wish to encounter a Church that offers them a welcoming home. Are our communities capable of providing that, accepting and valuing their sexual orientation, without compromising Catholic doctrine on the family and matrimony?

 

 

I do think it poses an interesting question. There's a very widespread attitude amongst Catholics that it's okay to be gay if you're celibate but I don't want to hear about it. It's okay to have that orientation, but you shouldn't tell anyone about it. In theory we're very accepting of gay Catholics, but the failure to practice of that acceptance leads to people feeling alienated. We're struggling to support gay people in the Church, and something clearly needs to be done - and it can be done without compromising doctrine.

[BarbTherese]

Well said, I thought, Emilyann!

It boggles the mind when as a Church community we ever hold that striving to practise the fruits of the Holy Spirit (charity, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, generosity, gentleness, faithfulness, modesty, self-control, chastity) and live in the spirit of the Beatitudes - and in all situations - is going to lead to compromising of doctrine!!!  We start believing that and we really can pack up and go home wherever that might be.

 

A similar thing often has happened where mental illness is concerned.  The Church as a human institution has all the right words in all the right places, dotted all the i's and crossed all the t's..............but it is not being translated into day to day practise on the ordinary and everyday level ............  on all levels.