As Church Shifts, a Cardinal Welcomes Gays; They Embrace a ‘Miracle’

[reggieM]

I would add that the number of gay people (including those in the closet) who would actually want to attend a traditionalist Catholic or fundamentalist Protestant church is probably extremely small.

Yes. It’s a minority within a minority within a minority. Gay people, a minority. Celibate gay, a small part of the gay community. Celibate gay that want to attend a conservative church even smaller.
However, in the traditional Catholic community I have met several SSA men. Most are embarrassed about the designation gay and live without reference to it. Most people have no idea about their past. But the point here is that some gay men seek traditional Catholicism for reasons that make sense (it took me a while to figure it out).
1, They made a commitment to follow the Church - they want a parish that upholds that
2. Traditional Catholicism supports traditional gender-roles, traditional family - some men recovering from (fighting) SSA find support in that.
3. I know several gay men who are anti-feminist and traditional Catholic parishes are the same in that. Male roles are not denigrated. Women are not permitted on the altar at all.
4. Some men moving away from a gay-culture take a hard-line stance against liberalism which they see as contributing to lax morals, gender confusion and tolerance for sin (gay-sex behavior) which caused them much suffering.

(And I’m guessing that not too many traditionalists or fundamentalists are saddened by that fact.)

Sigh.

No, I don’t think you’re right about that. If I made it seem like traditional Catholics or traditional Catholic parishes are uncharitable - that was a mistake on my part.

Where there are standards of behavior, there are also social standards. I think these need to be respected. As I wondered above, why should people be comfortable with the idea of gay-sex behavior? It’s a sinful activity.

 

[Peter_J]

But when it comes to “gay celibate” - that’s where it gets confusing.

Thanks for the reply. I won’t lie to you, I was reluctant to have a conversation with someone who is openly traditionalist, but here goes.

Yes, I think “gay celibate” can be a bit confusing, and likewise “straight celibate”. But I think it’s important that we try to work through that confusion because many gay people are given the impression that celibacy isn’t an option (or, at least, that it isn’t much of an option), even if that is never stated explicitly.

I think that when someone says “gay and celibate”, some people might hear “gay but celibate”. Kind of like that Youtube video “I’m Christian, but I’m not closed-minded”, “I’m Christian, but I’m not uneducated” etc. which many of us thought was a bit off.

youtube.com/watch?v=5bWHSpmXEJs

 

[Peter_J]

(And I’m guessing that not too many traditionalists or fundamentalists are saddened by that fact.)

No, I don’t think you’re right about that. If I made it seem like traditional Catholics or traditional Catholic parishes are uncharitable - that was a mistake on my part.

Not at all. My view of traditionalist Catholics has hardly anything to do with you, I just met you. But even if I had known you for years, you’re just one traditionalist Catholic out of tons on this forum.

 

[Peter_J]

But at the same time, I can’t ask Dave what makes him think about other men that way and want to have sex with them?

I’m not so sure that you can’t.

“Out of the closet” means a person is saying something about themself and usually it’s “I’m gay”.

See Coming out as straight.

 

[Peter_J]

I think that when someone says “gay and celibate”, some people might hear “gay but celibate”. Kind of like that Youtube video “I’m Christian, but I’m not closed-minded”, “I’m Christian, but I’m not uneducated” etc. which many of us thought was a bit off.

youtube.com/watch?v=5bWHSpmXEJs

P.S. The video I’m a Christian But I’m Totally Not is a parody that illustrates pretty nicely what I meant by "many of us thought [the *I’m a Christian But I’m Not video] was a bit off … plus might offer a good laugh depending on your sense of humor.

Interestingly enough, I think that bisexual people have less reason to be bothered by the I’m Bisexual, But I’m Not video.

See Coming out as straight.

That probably won’t contribute much value to this conversation. I just wanted to plug it.

 

[reggieM]

Thanks for sharing your thoughts, Peter.
Of course, in America we have gay marriage and (most?) people don’t think anything about it. What percentage of Catholics think it is fine? I’m pessimistic but I’d guess around 50% or so.
As for coming out of the closet, where I work for example - coming out has some huge benefits and some small drawbacks. The ‘out’ person is a cultural hero, a hero of diversity (for the company an important selling point - LGTB friendly) and even in work groups or social settings, the gay guys or gals will get an unusual amount of attention, laughter at jokes, smiles, friendliness.
The drawback here is that some or much of that friendliness is fake. It’s done for political reasons or to show that we’re enlightened, educated, sophisticated. Nobody can afford to be even slightly seen as homophobic (that word isn’t used as much).
So, it’s interesting.
For the gay celibate, we’re not just talking about coming-out within a parish or Catholic environment but in society itself.
Perhaps this is a point that at9009 and others should stress.
For example, coming-out as gay in my workplace grants hero status. However … following the coming-out day with a statement “but I’m celibate because I believe gay sex is a sin” – wow. That just dumped a bucket of ice-water on the party.
And what an amazingly courageous thing to do!

 

[Rau]

There’s no one answer to that, but I would just say that in many cases when a gay person comes out of the closet it might be a “dropping the bomb” experience. But if the parents embrace the mind of the Church (I’m thinking particularly of the same document I mentioned in the other thread, Always Our Children – see for example the section “Accepting your child”) that shouldn’t be the case.

You’ve missed the point of my post #314 which asks who must be be told in order to qualify as “exiting the closet”. I was not addressing how, or the consequences.

 

[Rau]

However, in the traditional Catholic community I have met several SSA men… But the point here is that some gay men seek traditional Catholicism for reasons that make sense (it took me a while to figure it out).
1, They made a commitment to follow the Church - they want a parish that upholds that
2. Traditional Catholicism supports traditional gender-roles, traditional family - some men recovering from (fighting) SSA find support in that.
3. I know several gay men who are anti-feminist and traditional Catholic parishes are the same in that. Male roles are not denigrated. Women are not permitted on the altar at all.

… If I made it seem like traditional Catholics or traditional Catholic parishes are uncharitable - that was a mistake on my part.

Seems to me you over emphasize “Traditional” Catholic. Surely the “gap” between the secular position and Catholic position on sexual morality (or anything else relevant here) is far greater than the differences you have in mind between “Catholics” and “Traditional Catholics”. After all there in only one Catholic faith. What are the distinguishing features of “traditional” Catholics that you have in mind?

 

[Rau]

Not at all. My view of traditionalist Catholics has hardly anything to do with you, I just met you. But even if I had known you [reggieM] for years, you’re just one traditionalist Catholic out of tons on this forum.

What aspects of his Catholicism or views causes you to describe his as a “traditionalist” Catholic?

 

[reggieM]

Seems to me you over emphasize “Traditional” Catholic. Surely the “gap” between the secular position and Catholic position on sexual morality (or anything else relevant here) is far greater than the differences you have in mind between “Catholics” and “Traditional Catholics”. After all there in only one Catholic faith. What are the distinguishing features of “traditional” Catholics that you have in mind?

There is only one Catholic Faith, yes. But that is an abstract notion. The Catholic Faith must be lived by people and found in actual parishes. We have a lot of people who are Catholic who simply never, or only very rarely go to Mass. We have a large percentage of Catholics who think gay marriage is something good, or at least they are indifferent to it.
Some of those people are in parishes. Some are actually in leadership positions.
I don’t know your background or where you’re from or what your parish is like - or how much experience you have in the diversity of Catholic life - so I can’t explain all of that.
But I’ll just say that Traditional Catholicism is based, essentially, on the idea that we have to look at the Whole of Catholic tradition. We look at the Early Church, the saints and doctors through the ages, the papal statements and spiritual teachings over all time – and we tend to put an emphasis on what is time-honored and persistent, rather than what is novel and short-lived. So, just because a Catholic teacher says something recently, doesn’t mean it is more true than something that was said centuries ago. It’s a process of weighting the teachings and gaining understanding. It’s using time-honored spiritual practices and disciplines – and taking a more open opposition to the heresy of modernism.

A Traditional Catholic parish will generally have different standards, different emphasis and a different consensus from the people in the pews.
I mentioned some of that in the post you quoted.

 

[reggieM]

What aspects of his Catholicism or views causes you to describe his as a “traditionalist” Catholic?

That is a good question because I don’t think I ever said that I was ??

I mentioned that CAF was traditional Catholic - my views are similar to what the founders and owners of CA are, call it traditional or not.

 

[Rau]

There is only one Catholic Faith, yes. But that is an abstract notion. The Catholic Faith must be lived by people and found in actual parishes. We have a lot of people who are Catholic who simply never, or only very rarely go to Mass. We have a large percentage of Catholics who think gay marriage is something good, or at least they are indifferent to it.

To omit these people, you should be referring to “faithful Catholics”, not “traditional”.

But I’ll just say that Traditional Catholicism is based, essentially, on the idea that we have to look at the Whole of Catholic tradition. We look at the Early Church, the saints and doctors through the ages, the papal statements and spiritual teachings over all time – and we tend to put an emphasis on what is time-honored and persistent, rather than what is novel and short-lived. So, just because a Catholic teacher says something recently, doesn’t mean it is more true than something that was said centuries ago. It’s a process of weighting the teachings and gaining understanding.

The Magisterium does this, does it not?

A Traditional Catholic parish will generally have different standards, different emphasis and a different consensus from the people in the pews.

Specifics? Are those “standards, emphasis and consensus” relevant to the subject matter at hand? How?

 

[Rau]

…I mentioned that CAF was traditional Catholic - my views are similar to what the founders and owners of CA are, call it traditional or not.

What of those views are relevant to the topic at hand? Must one be “traditional” to hold them, or is it enough to be a faithful Catholic?

 

[reggieM]

What of those views are relevant to the topic at hand? Must one be “traditional” to hold them, or is it enough to be a faithful Catholic?

No, there’s nothing we should say is “traditional Catholic” about that – we’re called by God to be faithful Catholics, that’s all.

I was just talking about a certain culture within a parish – my own, for example. We are conservative in approach. A faithful Catholic can have differing attitudes towards various things, like liturgy or social standards or things like that.

 

[Rau]

No, there’s nothing we should say is “traditional Catholic” about that – we’re called by God to be faithful Catholics, that’s all.

I was just talking about a certain culture within a parish – my own, for example. We are conservative in approach. A faithful Catholic can have differing attitudes towards various things, like liturgy or social standards or things like that.

OK, then I think we agree that all references to “traditional Catholics” - in the context of this thread - would have been better expressed as a reference to “faithful Catholics”.

 

[reggieM]

To omit these people, you should be referring to “faithful Catholics”, not “traditional”.

That seems reasonable. “Traditional” would refer then to an optional practice that some adopt and others do not.

The Magisterium does this, does it not?

The Magisterium infallibly teaches and affirms all the essential truths needed for salvation, yes. The Magisterium extends through time - magisterial teachings can be found in the Deposit of Faith, the Sacred Tradition of the Church from the beginning. But the Magisterium also offers non-infallible interpretations and pastoral guidance that is subject to change over time. The pastors of the Church interpret these teachings and discern how to apply them. That is why some bishops do things one way and others another way. That is true at the parish level also.
When it comes to spiritual or devotional practices, the magisterium does not usually give formal guidance on what to do - only what to avoid.
So a “traditional” view may adopt ancient practices in preference to modern - and that is permitted.

Specifics? Are those “standards, emphasis and consensus” relevant to the subject matter at hand? How?

’
The reason we got into this topic of “traditional Catholic” was that I mentioned two gay friends I have who joined, what I called, a traditional Catholic parish. They encountered some friction from the people. I said this would not have happened in a more liberal parish.
Some of the standards would be, for example, there is a high-degree of focus in our parish on family life with children. We have 10 times the percentage of families, per capita, as other parishes with family-size of at least 7 children. So, there’s a greater focus on innocence. It’s not a worldly parish. It’s conservative. There is less exposure to things like heroin addiction, homosexuality and promiscuity.

Another example- women, for example, dress in a traditional style (we would say with modesty). Women are told not to wear sleeveless dresses. No tight pants are permitted. There’s actually a list of what women are not to wear. I mentioned also, women are not permitted to serve on the altar at all.
The reason this is relevant is twofold:

1. When there is a social standard like that on how people must dress, this is a serious atmosphere and it is easy to spot violations of that (two men holding hands sitting together at Mass for example).
2. We have an environment that upholds the traditional role of man as leader, father, and having headship under God.

That’s a traditional-Catholic environment and that is why I said my friends should expect some friction and conflict if they’re going to exhibit behavior that is not within the norm.

 

[reggieM]

OK, then I think we agree that all references to “traditional Catholics” - in the context of this thread - would have been better expressed as a reference to “faithful Catholics”.

I’m not sure where you are going with this, why you are taking this line of questioning, and what it would mean if I agreed or disagreed?
Is this terminology important in some way?

 

[Rau]

…The Magisterium infallibly teaches and affirms all the essential truths needed for salvation, yes. The Magisterium extends through time - magisterial teachings can be found in the Deposit of Faith, the Sacred Tradition of the Church from the beginning. But the Magisterium also offers non-infallible interpretations and pastoral guidance that is subject to change over time. The pastors of the Church interpret these teachings and discern how to apply them. That is why some bishops do things one way and others another way. That is true at the parish level also.
When it comes to spiritual or devotional practices, the magisterium does not usually give formal guidance on what to do - only what to avoid.
So a “traditional” view may adopt ancient practices in preference to modern - and that is permitted.

OK, but these local variations and practices are not relevant to the subject matter of this thread.

The reason we got into this topic of “traditional Catholic” was that I mentioned two gay friends I have who joined, what I called, a traditional Catholic parish. They encountered some friction from the people. I said this would not have happened in a more liberal parish.

Some of the standards would be, for example, there is a high-degree of focus in our parish on family life with children. We have 10 times the percentage of families, per capita, as other parishes with family-size of at least 7 children. So, there’s a greater focus on innocence. It’s not a worldly parish. It’s conservative. There is less exposure to things like heroin addiction, homosexuality and promiscuity.

That’s a traditional-Catholic environment and that is why I said my friends should expect some friction and conflict if they’re going to exhibit behavior that is not within the norm.

The reason I’ve reacted to the repeated references to “traditional Catholics” (not just by you) is they give the appearance that it’s only a certain kind of Catholicism that holds to the relevant moral teachings of the Church. That’s wrong. Some (many) people may pick and choose elements of Catholicism, but that is essentially an issue of faithfulness, not traditionalism. I agree that some of what you’ve identified as “traditional” may well add to the difficulty that a “gay couple” would face in fitting into a particular community.

 

[Rau]

I’m not sure where you are going with this, why you are taking this line of questioning, and what it would mean if I agreed or disagreed?
Is this terminology important in some way?

Yes, it is important - see post #338. Accepting catholic teaching on homosexuality, contraception, abortion etc. does not place someone in a “traditional” (as opposed to mainstream?) category - just “faithful”.

 

[Peter_J]

How does one exit the closet? Does it require telling everyone one meets or at least a preparedness to do so? Perhaps that is the current day meaning, though previously we’d say one “comes out” to specific people.

Note: Last night I only responded to the first question. But as for the second, yes I’ve heard the usage “come out to so and so”.

I’m no expert about such terminology mind you.