10 Rules for Talking to Gays

[Catholicpotato]

Okay, I see what you’re saying. I guess I just don’t see Melinda or anyone else advocating for making people comfortable in their sin.

But I don’t see them advocating leading people away from sin either. While you may catch more flies with honey than vinegar, you still need a flytrap. Otherwise, you just have a house full of flies…

 

[michelleds]

Okay, I see what you’re saying. I guess I just don’t see Melinda or anyone else advocating for making people comfortable in their sin.

I was trying, obviously with very little success, to anticipate a question about the phrase “comfort to the wicked” contained in the Sirach verses I quoted.

 

[Kolbe300]

I was trying, obviously with very little success, to anticipate a question about the phrase “comfort to the wicked” contained in the Sirach verses I quoted.

Oh, trust me, I feel your pain when it comes to having very little success getting your point across here.

 

[michelleds]

Oh, trust me, I feel your pain when it comes to having very little success getting your point across here.

Well, if everyone could see my arms and hands waving around, they would surely know what I’m saying!

 

[Catholicpotato]

Well, if everyone could see my arms and hands waving around, they would surely know what I’m saying!

LOL yup. And if everyone only knew how smart I was they would understand too!

 

[Melinda_Selmys]

You lose credibility with this assertion. If your faith in the Church is not in Jesus and the Eucharist but rather in it’s forum posters then yes, you are in the wrong Church. I’m sure you were trying to make a point and it is a valid point about someone who is “looking” at the Catholic Church, but for one who is already “in” her it is counter productive to suggest your faith is weak because of other members of your Church.

Allow me to clarify. There are two aspects to scandal (the word comes from the Greek “scandalon,” which basically means “stumbling block”): active, and passive. A person gives active scandal when they cause another person to be tempted, and a person takes passive scandal when they allow active scandal to lead them into sin. What I’m saying is that the lack of charity in John’s posts is scandalous – the fact that I can feel myself stumbling on account of it should not lessen my credibility. I don’t personally take passive scandal in what he says, but I happen to know that there are others who do – and St. Paul is quite clear that we are to take care with the weakness of other people’s consciences.

The problem with this statement is the ego of it. Saying that because you found a document that you interpret to fit your view and somehow asserting that you are right in your worldview. It logically follow that you view people like John and myself as somehow “less” Catholic than you.

I think you’re misunderstanding what I’m saying. I haven’t found “a document” that I can interpret to fit my worldview. I’ve read, and reread the Vatican documents on homosexuality upwards of half a dozen times, I’ve talked extensively with numerous chaste same-sex attracted people in the Church, I’ve talked with priests and leaders involved with Courage, I’ve read literally dozens of books on homosexuality, and I live this day to day in my own life. I’ve been steadily developing my own views on this subject for many years, trying to bring them into full conformity with the truth, and to gain a deep understanding of the Church’s wisdom, and of how we can more effectively bring that wisdom into the lives of those who need it. This doesn’t mean I’m “more” Catholic, it just means that I happen to know more about this one, very small part of Catholicism.

 

[Melinda_Selmys]

Oh, btw, because this seems to be unclear to some folks: none of my rules are rules for failing to tell the truth. They’re rules for telling the truth with love and understanding. This is one of the things that I feel Paul VI does wonderfully in Humanae Vitae (several of my rules are actually derived from an analysis of that document): he acknowledges the difficulties that people are going to have in carrying out the Church’s teachings, he expresses the truth lovingly and manifests a deep compassion, he reveals that he’s listened carefully to the views of those who disagree with him and he attempts to answer them in terms that they will understand. I honestly believe that if more Catholics had read this encyclical, rather than reading the mass-media misreporting of it, the sexual crisis would have been averted. In any case, I’ve found it tremendously comforting every time that I’ve been really struggling with Catholic sexual teaching in my own life – but I don’t think that anyone could accuse Paul VI of being unduly tolerant, of failing to stand up for the truth, or of failing to call sinners to repentance.

 

[Catholicpotato]

Allow me to clarify. There are two aspects to scandal (the word comes from the Greek “scandalon,” which basically means “stumbling block”): active, and passive. A person gives active scandal when they cause another person to be tempted, and a person takes passive scandal when they allow active scandal to lead them into sin. What I’m saying is that the lack of charity in John’s posts is scandalous Perhaps I have missed something, perhaps it goes beyond this thread but I have not seen any lack of charity from anyone on this thread yet. In fact I have been quite pleased with the tone of the conversation. It is refreshing. Could you cite an example?- the fact that I can fehttp://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/editor/smilie.gifel myself stumbling on account of it should not lessen my credibility. I don’t personally take passive scandal in what he says, but I happen to know that there are others who do – and St. Paul is quite clear that we are to take care with the weakness of other people’s consciences.
This is what you said:

There have been several times, reading the kind of stuff that gets posted here, where I started to think I was in the wrong Church.

 

[Kolbe300]

I’m confused. Is it your contention that to love and comfort someone with aids is to confirm them in their sin? Or is it more biblical to comfort the sick AND show them a better way?

I think we should do both. I don’t see Melinda, in any way shape or form, suggesting otherwise. She was trying to show a way to approach the issue better. People get on her case, make jokes and such about these suggestions of hers and I don’t get that. Love should come first, and people should be treated no differently before a “conversion,” if you will, than they are after. There are websites dedicated to hating Mother Teresa because she didn’t bang a Bible over people’s heads and preach to them all the things they were doing wrong. Mother Teresa didn’t have to preach to everyone she met because she was able to show them a better way by living that better way. A lot of people don’t see that. We can show people a better way in both words and action, and we can do it in a way that embraces the human being or in a way that pushes them away. I see Melinda’s suggestions as a way for Catholics to be more embracing. NOT of sin, but of the human being. If Christians were truly able to “hate the sin and love the sinner” (the way Mother Teresa actually could), this wouldn’t even be a discussion.

But I don’t see them advocating leading people away from sin either.

I honestly don’t know why you don’t see that.

 

[Catholicpotato]

I think we should do both. I don’t see Melinda, in any way shape or form, suggesting otherwise. She was trying to show a way to approach the issue better. People get on her case, make jokes and such about these suggestions of hers and I don’t get that. Love should come first, and people should be treated no differently before a “conversion,” if you will, than they are after. There are websites dedicated to hating Mother Teresa because she didn’t bang a Bible over people’s heads and preach to them all the things they were doing wrong. Mother Teresa didn’t have to preach to everyone she met because she was able to show them a better way by living that better way. A lot of people don’t see that. We can show people a better way in both words and action, and we can do it in a way that embraces the human being or in a way that pushes them away. I see Melinda’s suggestions as a way for Catholics to be more embracing. NOT of sin, but of the human being. If Christians were truly able to “hate the sin and love the sinner” (the way Mother Teresa actually could), this wouldn’t even be a discussion.

I honestly don’t know why you don’t see that.

I see it like this:
A person is passed out on the floor, not breathing. Someone goes up to this person to preform CPR, then another person critiques the harshness of which the person is pounding on the chest. We are talking about sin here. If we die in it we go to hell for all eternity. Gays and Catholics are bound by the wages of sin. Just like in the example, we save a life, then we worry about any broken ribs… Each and every one of us is dead in our own sin. We have the sacraments, others may not… invincible ignorance? I think not, but rather laziness on the part of Catholics and homosexuals…
Who is rewriting the rules of CPR in this situation and who is actually DOING something?

 

[Kolbe300]

Who is rewriting the rules of CPR in this situation and who is actually DOING something?

I don’t think anyone is rewriting the rules of CPR. Jesus wrote the rules. Bang on the chest of the sinner as hard as you’d like, but don’t be surprised when doing something that way is actually DOING nothing.

 

[Catholicpotato]

I don’t think anyone is rewriting the rules of CPR. Jesus wrote the rules. Bang on the chest of the sinner as hard as you’d like, but don’t be surprised when doing something that way is actually DOING nothing.

Doing nothing is offering the dying person a rainbow of fluffy unicorns and flowers…

 

[Melinda_Selmys]

CatholicPotato,

Beautiful analogy – thank you. The problem here is that you’ve got a guy on the floor. You have people with basic first aid training who think that he needs CPR, but in fact he has a broken rib-cage. It’s perfectly reasonable for someone with EMS training to show up and say, “Uh, don’t pound on that guy’s chest. You’re puncturing his lungs.”

 

[Melinda_Selmys]

How do you know what I know at all. I am not doubting your education on the subject but I am shocked at the absolute elitism of this statement. Pride goeth before the fall… We may actually have our first “lack of charity” attitude on this thread afterall

Okay, baby, I’m all anted up, I’ve laid down my cards, and I want to see what you’ve got in your hand You know what my credentials are, and if yours can top them, I will happily cede the point.

More seriously, I don’t think it’s a lack of charity for someone to say “I know more about this than you do.” Sometimes some people know more about some things than others do. It’s sort of a silly kind of false humility to pretend that it’s otherwise. I’m sure there are lots of subjects where you know way more than I do – and you’d probably be able to tell that pretty quickly if we got into a debate about one of those things.

 

[LemonAndLime]

Lemon and Lime,

Hilarious. And I agree, that nothing like this should be necessary at all – it should be just obvious that LGBTQ people are normal people, just like anyone else, and that we should be treated like normal people. Unfortunately, dahling, if you review most of the threads on the forum about homosexuality you’ll find that John21652 is not alone in believing that gay folks are the equivalent of lepers in the Old Testament, and that any show of kindness or sympathy is a failure to Stand Up For the Truth!

 

[Catholicpotato]

Okay, baby, I’m all anted up, I’ve laid down my cards, and I want to see what you’ve got in your hand You know what my credentials are, and if yours can top them, I will happily cede the point.

More seriously, I don’t think it’s a lack of charity for someone to say “I know more about this than you do.” Sometimes some people know more about some things than others do. It’s sort of a silly kind of false humility to pretend that it’s otherwise. I’m sure there are lots of subjects where you know way more than I do – and you’d probably be able to tell that pretty quickly if we got into a debate about one of those things.

Oh man, see, if it gets into a war of credentials then we truly have lost. What we are talking about here is INDIVIDUAL experience. Your ace is that you are gay… That is a great hand. But ultimately converting, leading others to Christ, and witnessing do not come down to “first hand knowledge of a sin” It comes down to: I do not have to kill to tell someone it is wrong to do so. I also do not need to “watch” how I tell people not to kill.

Lack of Charity was wrong, I agree. But it is arrogant and ignorant to assert that you know more of a subject than anyone else ESPECIALLY on the internet! It is a worthless argument. I could say anything from I am a priest, to I am gay, to I am the Pope.
I do not claim to know more than you on this subject. But I do not concede that the extent of your knowledge is equal to the Truth on this or ANY subject. For what it is worth and since it is very important to you: I have a Masters of Theology from a Jesuit University. I also have a biology degree. I was a Convert from a protestant faith. I have a brother and many friends who are gay. Before my conversion I lived a party life with almost exclusively gay friends. I would love to elaborate on my brother’s inner struggle between his hunger for God and his identity as a homosexual. My brother and I are very close and we speak frankly, as I speak with all his gay friends and other family members about ANY subject. Perhaps I will post his story on your blog. I am well acquainted on Church teaching on the matter and on and on. Anyone can justify their viewpoint. You can dismiss mine, you can shrug it off and we can war about who has the bigger bookshelf on homosexuality.
But as St Thomas More said:

One of the greatest problems of our time is that many are schooled but few are educated

.

Ultimately it doesnt even matter what credential top what… It isnt an issue of education but rather it is an issue of experience and like I said, you have a nice ace showing. But yoru experience can also be a stumbling block as well…
humility is not my strong point, perhaps it isnt yours as well
I’ll leave with with another More Quote that may apply here for both of us…

My only books were woman’s looks, and folly’s all they’ve taught me.

 

[LemonAndLime]

Rule number 7 - You do not talk about the 10 rules. [Fight club reference]

Rule number 8 - They can be recognised easily. They will be listening to Celion Dion, and wearing flip flops - but unlike you gentleman, they will actually pull these off and wear them well. They will also be drinking funny-named brightly coloured cocktails. If anyone gets this reference I will be impressed.

Note, I’m not trying to be insulting to homosexuals - just trying to point out how silly this is. If I was a better comedian this would be comedy gold, but instead, I shall amuse myself.

 

[Catholicpotato]

Rule number 7 - You do not talk about the 10 rules. [Fight club reference]

Rule number 8 - They can be recognised easily. They will be listening to Celion Dion, and wearing flip flops - but unlike you gentleman, they will actually pull these off and wear them well. They will also be drinking funny-named brightly coloured cocktails. [If anyone gets this reference I will be impressed.

Note, I’m not trying to be insulting to homosexuals - just trying to point out how silly this is. If I was a better comedian this would be comedy gold, but instead, I shall amuse myself.

I forgot to put on my list of credentials that I cry at hallmark commercials," touched by an angel" re-runs, Have seen celiene deon in Vegas, love TLC shows about weddings, own a pink shirt and tie…
[/quote]

 

[Melinda_Selmys]

LemonAndLime,

I’m feeling deeply offended and excluded All of the gay guys in your images are getting to have such fun, attacking people with sparkles and chorus lines, wandering around in flip-flips and sipping pomtinis… But what are the gals supposed to do?

 

[LemonAndLime]

LemonAndLime,

I’m feeling deeply offended and excluded All of the gay guys in your images are getting to have such fun, attacking people with sparkles and chorus lines, wandering around in flip-flips and sipping pomtinis… But what are the gals supposed to do?

Alas, male homosexual culture is more different when compared to its heterosexual counterpart, than female homosexual culture compared to hetero. This makes it easier to form characatures.

Although, I must add - the easiest way to identify a female homosexual? THEY’RE WEARING TROUSERS!