10 to 0

[VeritasLuxMea]

Observation: at the time this thread is being posted, there are 10 threads on page 1 of the “social justice” section discussing homosexuality/homosexual marriage.

Meanwhile, by my count, there are 0 threads on page 1 covering anything remotely reminiscent of Matthew 25:35-40:

"For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’

37“Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’

40“The King will reply, ‘I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.’"

What do you make of this 10-0 split?

 

[10gr8kids]

Towards the bottom of the page is a thread titled Is Catholic Social Teaching Inheritantly Liberal. It addresses helping the poor.

 

[User124]

Interesting.

 

[TheDoors]

The doctorine of charity isn’t under an obvious attack by the government.

 

[Corki]

Observation: at the time this thread is being posted, there are 10 threads on page 1 of the “social justice” section discussing homosexuality/homosexual marriage.

Meanwhile, by my count, there are 0 threads on page 1 covering anything remotely reminiscent of Matthew 25:35-40:

What do you make of this 10-0 split?

It’s a Catholic forum. It’s a discussion forum. The Catholic Church is currently under attack for her stance on same sex marriage and for being against the normalization of homosexual activity. I haven’t seen anyone attacking the Church lately for her world wide efforts at caring for the poor, the hungry and the disenfrancised.

Discussion forums exist to discuss, and the more confusing or controversial the issue, the more discussion will occur.

What is the confusing or controversial aspect of Matthew 25:35-40 that you want to see discussed?

 

[Swiss_Guy]

Perhaps you should start one about the poor.

 

[atassina]

I think what the OP is getting at is that social justice has too often been used to promote political agendas or disordered sexuality. Homosexuality is disordered sexuality.

My sense of the faithful is that the faithful have been burned too many times by people with agendas other than the orthodox promotion of the faith. Too many social justice people are promoting the spirit of the age rather than the Holy Spirit.

 

[Allegra]

Observation: at the time this thread is being posted, there are 10 threads on page 1 of the “social justice” section discussing homosexuality/homosexual marriage.

Meanwhile, by my count, there are 0 threads on page 1 covering anything remotely reminiscent of Matthew 25:35-40:

What do you make of this 10-0 split?

I would say that helping the poor is an uncontended issue. We all agree on it. There isn’t a whole lot to discuss.

 

[RSD]

The doctorine of charity isn’t under an obvious attack by the government.

Actually it is. Part of the reason Obama says that it is all right to require Catholic hospitals, schools, or soup kitchens to provide immoral forms of health insurance is because caring for the sick, feeding the hungry and educating the ignorant are not church functions.

 

[Marc_Anthony]

I would say that helping the poor is an uncontended issue. We all agree on it. There isn’t a whole lot to discuss.

That is one of several reasons. Others:

-Because of the Chick-fil-A controversy, it’s in the news a lot. When the HHS mandate was big news, there were lots of threads on that

-Homosexual marriage is a more important discussion at present because it’s becoming more and more accepted by society. Catholics actually have a ton of charities dedicated to helping the poor. Currently a group of friends and I are working on starting a local theater group to raise money to help teens suffering from depression, suicidal thoughts, and self-harm (sadly I know far too many people who are suffering or have suffered from these things).

They’re not poor in a literal sense of having little money but they are poor in other very real ways.

I think that’s about it. If something happens soon that makes helping the poor front page news again, then that’ll start becoming the hot-button issue here again.

 

[Petersmate]

Maybe the moderators should move the Homosexuality threads to Moral Theology forum?

 

[JimG]

The doctorine of charity isn’t under an obvious attack by the government.

Actually, I think it is. The government seems intent on forcing religious institutions out of the corporal works of mercy. It wishes to make those functions entirely the work of the government. Churches, meanwhile, take the corporal works of mercy seriously. That’s why they operate food kitchens, homeless shelters, women’s shelters, and a host of charitable organizations, schools, hospitals, universities. It’s just those sort of religious institutions which relate directly to the charitable work of the Church that the government will force out of business with the HHS mandate.

 

[Deo_Volente]

Grace & Peace!

-Homosexual marriage is a more important discussion at present because it’s becoming more and more accepted by society.

Of course Veritas can speak for him/herself, but the question I feel him/her asking in the OP is this: how does all this arguing about SSM feed the poor, clothe the naked, etc.? Regardless of what the state does in the end about SSM, will arguing about it put food in the mouth of a hungry person?

The larger concern is this: just as some churches and Christian communities have become known for their stance on pet liberal issues (I’m thinking of the Episcopal Church, my own home, here) to an extent which would be laughable were it not actually scandalous, other churches are becoming more and more known for becoming entrenched in conservative social positions to an extent that id equally absurd (this is how Roman Catholicism is being perceived). Collectively, we are all becoming known for our various stands on typical “culture war” hot-button issues. The world is identifying us and knowing us (and we are identifying and knowing each other) by our polemic, our rhetoric, our demagoguery. What we are all decidedly not being known for and by is our love. What’s being lost in all this culture warfare is the Gospel.

One can argue that it’s for the sake of the Gospel that we take these various positions (and both liberal and conservative Christian culture warriors would make this claim). But I think that claim is imbecilic and self-serving. We are called to witness to the Gospel by the conduct of our lives: by irrepressibly loving God and our neighbor and witnessing to others the reality of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ. That witness is not, and I repeat, *is not *demonstrated to the world by a bunch of delegates and bishops voting on a self-congratulatory and practically useless resolution in support of Palestine or the health care law at the Episcopal Church’s General Convention; nor is it in evidence when a bunch of prelates prefer to sue the state over the healthcare mandate rather than follow the examples of the martyrs and be willing to suffer imprisonment or worse for what they believe. The martyrs, by their patient and loving witness, toppled an Empire and conquered the world, but apparently kowtowing to the Goddess of Liberty, the patron of the modern liberal state, is what’s called for these days.

“We must fight for liberal tolerance!” “We must pay obeisance at the State Altar of religious liberty!” So practiced, Christianity is a joke, and not a very good one. We’ve become so focused on being good Christians that we’ve forgotten that we’re called to be Christ in this world. And all around, from every side, it’s scandalous. And the deleterious effect of our failure to actually live the Gospel is in evidence around the world.

That’s how I read the OP.

Under the Mercy,
Mark

All is Grace and Mercy! Deo Gratias!

 

[Corki]

Grace & Peace!

Of course Veritas can speak for him/herself, but the question I feel him/her asking in the OP is this: how does all this arguing about SSM feed the poor, clothe the naked, etc.? Regardless of what the state does in the end about SSM, will arguing about it put food in the mouth of a hungry person?

Well, for that matter, speding time on your PC having virtual discussions about ANY topic, even Matthew 25:35-40, is not going to feed the poor, clothe the naked, etc.

 

[atassina]

How many more Catholic adoption agencies like to one in Massachusetts will be forced to close because they will not allow an adoption by a homosexual couple? Therefore, this is a social justice issue.

 

[atassina]

. . . how does all this arguing about SSM feed the poor, clothe the naked, etc.? Regardless of what the state does in the end about SSM, will arguing about it put food in the mouth of a hungry person?

The arguing won’t do anything in itself, but the result of the arguing will help feed the poor. That is why the Apostles discussed (argued about) creating deacons. The Catholic Church runs Aids hospices. We just won’t facilitate and perpetuate the sin.

Also

Closing down adoption agencies because they will not allow Homosexuals to adopt children is a social justice issue.

 

[Marc_Anthony]

Grace & Peace!

Of course Veritas can speak for him/herself, but the question I feel him/her asking in the OP is this: how does all this arguing about SSM feed the poor, clothe the naked, etc.? Regardless of what the state does in the end about SSM, will arguing about it put food in the mouth of a hungry person?

The larger concern is this: just as some churches and Christian communities have become known for their stance on pet liberal issues (I’m thinking of the Episcopal Church, my own home, here) to an extent which would be laughable were it not actually scandalous, other churches are becoming more and more known for becoming entrenched in conservative social positions to an extent that id equally absurd (this is how Roman Catholicism is being perceived). Collectively, we are all becoming known for our various stands on typical “culture war” hot-button issues. The world is identifying us and knowing us (and we are identifying and knowing each other) by our polemic, our rhetoric, our demagoguery. What we are all decidedly not being known for and by is our love. What’s being lost in all this culture warfare is the Gospel.

One can argue that it’s for the sake of the Gospel that we take these various positions (and both liberal and conservative Christian culture warriors would make this claim). But I think that claim is imbecilic and self-serving. We are called to witness to the Gospel by the conduct of our lives: by irrepressibly loving God and our neighbor and witnessing to others the reality of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ. That witness is not, and I repeat, *is not *demonstrated to the world by a bunch of delegates and bishops voting on a self-congratulatory and practically useless resolution in support of Palestine or the health care law at the Episcopal Church’s General Convention; nor is it in evidence when a bunch of prelates prefer to sue the state over the healthcare mandate rather than follow the examples of the martyrs and be willing to suffer imprisonment or worse for what they believe. The martyrs, by their patient and loving witness, toppled an Empire and conquered the world, but apparently kowtowing to the Goddess of Liberty, the patron of the modern liberal state, is what’s called for these days.

“We must fight for liberal tolerance!” “We must pay obeisance at the State Altar of religious liberty!” So practiced, Christianity is a joke, and not a very good one. We’ve become so focused on being good Christians that we’ve forgotten that we’re called to be Christ in this world. And all around, from every side, it’s scandalous. And the deleterious effect of our failure to actually live the Gospel is in evidence around the world.

That’s how I read the OP.

Under the Mercy,
Mark

All is Grace and Mercy! Deo Gratias!

All this arguing ISN’T helping feed the hungry, clothe the naked, etc. But it IS about standing up for an important issue. The only reason, IMO, that there are more threads about it right now is because it’s a hot button issue at the moment.

As I said earlier, a group of friends and I are attempting to start a charity. My (non-Catholic but Christian) Aunt HAS started a charity that gives toys to needy children around Christmas.

SSM is an important issue, and while arguing about it here won’t do all of the things the OP said, that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be discussing it. It’s a problem.

I think the only reason there are MORE threads on this than on charity right now is because it’s a hot button issue.

I mean, if we’re going to use that logic, for that matter nobody should ever post unless they’re asking for help or donations to a charity meant to feed the poor

 

[InSearchofGrace]

Grace & Peace!

Of course Veritas can speak for him/herself, but the question I feel him/her asking in the OP is this: **how does all this arguing about SSM feed the poor, clothe the naked, etc.? ** Regardless of what the state does in the end about SSM, will arguing about it put food in the mouth of a hungry person?

The larger concern is this: just as some churches and Christian communities have become known for their stance on pet liberal issues (I’m thinking of the Episcopal Church, my own home, here) to an extent which would be laughable were it not actually scandalous, other churches are becoming more and more known for becoming entrenched in conservative social positions to an extent that id equally absurd (this is how Roman Catholicism is being perceived). Collectively, we are all becoming known for our various stands on typical “culture war” hot-button issues. The world is identifying us and knowing us (and we are identifying and knowing each other) by our polemic, our rhetoric, our demagoguery. What we are all decidedly not being known for and by is our love. What’s being lost in all this culture warfare is the Gospel.

One can argue that it’s for the sake of the Gospel that we take these various positions (and both liberal and conservative Christian culture warriors would make this claim). But I think that claim is imbecilic and self-serving. We are called to witness to the Gospel by the conduct of our lives: by irrepressibly loving God and our neighbor and witnessing to others the reality of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ. That witness is not, and I repeat, *is not *demonstrated to the world by a bunch of delegates and bishops voting on a self-congratulatory and practically useless resolution in support of Palestine or the health care law at the Episcopal Church’s General Convention; nor is it in evidence when a bunch of prelates prefer to sue the state over the healthcare mandate rather than follow the examples of the martyrs and be willing to suffer imprisonment or worse for what they believe. The martyrs, by their patient and loving witness, toppled an Empire and conquered the world, but apparently kowtowing to the Goddess of Liberty, the patron of the modern liberal state, is what’s called for these days.

“We must fight for liberal tolerance!” “We must pay obeisance at the State Altar of religious liberty!” So practiced, Christianity is a joke, and not a very good one. We’ve become so focused on being good Christians that we’ve forgotten that we’re called to be Christ in this world. And all around, from every side, it’s scandalous. And the deleterious effect of our failure to actually live the Gospel is in evidence around the world.

That’s how I read the OP.

Under the Mercy,
Mark

All is Grace and Mercy! Deo Gratias!

In response to the OP and you:

I don’t see that arguing (against) SS’M’ precludes one in doing charitable work, fighting poverty, or engaging in some corporal work of mercy. It seems that the question is posed to downplay or to change the subject as it is being recognized that a counter gay movement is gathering steam. People are waking up, beginning to understand what is at stake, from this Chik-fil-A and HHS controversies. They do not want SS’M’ to be legalized across the nation.

My view on the subject is known to regulars here. I am unapologetically on the side of defending traditional marriage, opposed to SS’M’ and gay adoption. Have been contributing to arguments for two+ years in this forum. It has not taken away, not an ounce, from the work I and a core group of 12 men and women do to house 40 homeless families and help with livelihood programs in the village, under an organization not unlike Habitat for Humanity. Through fundraising projects in the last three years, 40 families now have and moved into permanent modest homes instead of makeshift shelters. I did not deem it necessary or pertinent to bring it up until now, in response to the OP.

I am not putting it out that this pet charity of mine takes all of my time, or that I am a saint. Far from it.
,

 

[Deo_Volente]

Grace & Peace!

I don’t see that arguing (against) SS’M’ precludes one in doing charitable work, fighting poverty, or engaging in some corporal work of mercy.

Of course it doesn’t preclude charitable work or various acts of mercy–your own work is not only praiseworthy (soli Deo gloria, of course), but is witness to that fact. There’s a larger issue, though, and I’ll get to it in a moment.

It seems that the question is posed to downplay or to change the subject as it is being recognized that a counter gay movement is gathering steam.

Nothing’s being posed to downplay anything. Gay movements and counter gay movements will inevitably come and go, gather steam and lose steam as is the way of the world.

The bigger issue, though, is the Gospel. I see how the Church (broadly speaking and including, but not limited to, Roman Catholicism) is depicted and understood in the world outside these fora–it’s either a toothless liberal caricature of itself or a vicious conservative monstrosity. And my larger point is this: as Christians, we are becoming known for belonging to one polemical movement/counter movement or another. We are not becoming known for living the Gospel.

As I stated in my earlier post, both liberal and conservative Christian culture warriors would claim that they’re doing what they’re doing for the sake of the Gospel. But again, I find that to be so much self-serving bunk. A binary liberal/conservative mindset has infected the Church, and these fora provide an ample catalogue of its symptoms. All sides are finding “Christian” ways to justify themselves, and everyone winds up looking like they’re more interested in being a certain kind of Christian than being Christ in the world. I’m guilty of this too. And I see it as a major personal failing, as well as a larger communal failing. Christianity has become liberal or conservative Christianism, and we’ve all decided one way or another that they will know we are Christian either by our liberal tolerance or our correct moral rigorism. In the meantime, we’ve forgotten that they should know we are Christians by our love.

Under the Mercy,
Mark

All is Grace and Mercy! Deo Gratias!

 

[Marc_Anthony]

Grace & Peace!

Of course it doesn’t preclude charitable work or various acts of mercy–your own work is not only praiseworthy (soli Deo gloria, of course), but is witness to that fact. There’s a larger issue, though, and I’ll get to it in a moment.

Nothing’s being posed to downplay anything. Gay movements and counter gay movements will inevitably come and go, gather steam and lose steam as is the way of the world.

The bigger issue, though, is the Gospel. I see how the Church (broadly speaking and including, but not limited to, Roman Catholicism) is depicted and understood in the world outside these fora–it’s either a toothless liberal caricature of itself or a vicious conservative monstrosity. And my larger point is this: as Christians, we are becoming known for belonging to one polemical movement/counter movement or another. We are not becoming known for living the Gospel.

As I stated in my earlier post, both liberal and conservative Christian culture warriors would claim that they’re doing what they’re doing for the sake of the Gospel. But again, I find that to be so much self-serving bunk. A binary liberal/conservative mindset has infected the Church, and these fora provide an ample catalogue of its symptoms. All sides are finding “Christian” ways to justify themselves, and everyone winds up looking like they’re more interested in being a certain kind of Christian than being Christ in the world. I’m guilty of this too. And I see it as a major personal failing, as well as a larger communal failing. Christianity has become liberal or conservative Christianism, and we’ve all decided one way or another that they will know we are Christian either by our liberal tolerance or our correct moral rigorism. In the meantime, we’ve forgotten that they should know we are Christians by our love.

Under the Mercy,
Mark

All is Grace and Mercy! Deo Gratias!

Interesting post (and I mean that sincerely, not sarcastically).

So what are you saying? We should simply stay out of public policy altogether and focus on only charitable works? You believe that doing BOTH is harmful?

I agree-they should know we are Christians by our love. But I’m not sure why this precludes Christians from being very concerned with things such as same-sex marriage. It’s a very important issue. Are you saying we shouldn’t speak out about it but instead focus ONLY on charitable works? Or that we shouldn’t speak as loudly on the issue? Why can’t we make our voices heard on these issues but STILL show our Christian love through charitable works and living out the Gospel?