Attending Get-Together for Homosexual Couple

[Eddie18]

You obviously need to read up on scandal in some traditional Catholic books. Each situation must be taken case-by-case, considering the sin involved, and who may be watching.

For example, if a neighbor of mine is a known drug addict, and I have teenaged son, I’m not going to invite the neighbor over to a picnic as it may scandalize my son, making him think it’s okay to keep company with drug addicts, or leading him to think people who take drugs are not so bad after all. Many other problems can pop up as well and it is a Catholic’s duty to avoid such a situation.

If that same neighbor were a gay man, I would have to assess the situation first. If the man is overly effeminate, with an over exaggerated lisp, really flaunting his lifestyle, then there is no way I’m inviting him over for a picnic for fear of scandal. However, if the man is clean-cut and doesn’t flaunt his lifestyle, and doesn’t speak of it, then the risk of scandal is low and I may decide to have him over

Each case must be weighed. Looking at the quotes are ready posted on scandal, this is not a situation to be taken lightly.

 

[Eddie18]

Well said. And I will add that most everyone should consider themselves weak…Scripture says few are saved, which means the average person is weak and prone to falling into sin. That’s why the Church teaches to avoid the occasions of sin as much as possible.

 

[guanophore]

I don’t see attending a reception as accepting or endorsing their relationship.

How does a reception for a same sex union accomplish any other purpose?

1868 Sin is a personal act. Moreover, we have a responsibility for the sins committed by others when we cooperate in them:

• by participating directly and voluntarily in them;
• by ordering, advising, praising, or approving them;
• by not disclosing or not hindering them when we have an obligation to do so;
• by protecting evil-doers.

1869

Thus sin makes men accomplices of one another and causes concupiscence, violence, and injustice to reign among them. Sins give rise to social situations and institutions that are contrary to the divine goodness. “Structures of sin” are the expression and effect of personal sins. They lead their victims to do evil in their turn. In an analogous sense, they constitute a "social sin."144

we attend “social gatherings” all the time

Yes, and the manifest purpose and intention of such gatherings has moral implications.

 

[Eddie18]

@exnihilo has clearly refuted your entire argument.

 

[PetraG]

This is reasonable.

 

[PetraG]

Not the same. I sin too, but I don’t boast about it.

When we are attached to a sin and want to re-write moral law to accommodate that, it is a spiritual work of mercy for someone to admonish us.

I think the hosts would agree that their reception is not the place where their hearts are going to be softened by such an admonishment. Correction at an event like that is more likely to harden them in their position. Being surrounded by approval could also harden them in the position; that is a judgment call. The father, for instance, could tell his friend, “I can’t approve of what you’re doing, but I still love you.” The father may know, for instance, that his friend would simply write him off and refuse to speak to him ever again, if he doesn’t go.

 

[Mtatum1958]

• by participating directly and voluntarily in them;
  I am not
• by ordering, advising, praising, or approving them;
  I am not
• by not disclosing or not hindering them when we have an obligation to do so;
  Perhaps I could have went to the “wedding”, and public ally objected
• by protecting evil-doers.
  How does this apply

 

[SeriousQuestion]

The purpose is to not celebrate gay marriage, not to alienate people. Nobody is saying to cut off ties.

 

[TheLittleLady]

While I understand that shunning gay people is “in” for some folks, I will err on the side of the Catechism and on the side of charity for everyone. I don’t call people “gross sinners”.

 

[Limoncello4021]

It has been said on this thread many many times. Choosing not to go to a celebration of homosexual activity because it is a sin is NOT “shunning gay people.” Your continual equating of the two things is disingenuous.

 

[SeriousQuestion]

While I understand that shunning gay people is “in” for some folks

Again nobody is saying to shun them, just not to attend an event that celebrates what is clearly sinful to them. I don’t know whether you equate the two intentionally or not, but its intellectually dishonest.

 

[TheLittleLady]

If that is how you show love, that is your prerogative. I choose another way:

If I speak in human and angelic tongues but do not have love, I am a resounding gong or a clashing cymbal.

And if I have the gift of prophecy and comprehend all mysteries and all knowledge; if I have all faith so as to move mountains but do not have love, I am nothing.

If I give away everything I own, and if I hand my body over so that I may boast but do not have love, I gain nothing.

 

[SeriousQuestion]

I can show love by earnestly praying for their salvation. If I know I can do some good for their soul by being with them I will do so, but in a different and more appropriate setting. I will not go and attend a celebration of something that I know is a sin.

If that is how you show love, that is your prerogative.

I hope you aren’t talking about shunning people after being repeatedly told that it is not the case.

 

[guanophore]

by participating directly and voluntarily in them;
I am not

How is attending a reception for a “gay wedding” not voluntarily participating? Is someone forcing you to celebrate the occasion?

by ordering, advising, praising, or approving them;
I am not

A wedding reception is an occasion of approval and praise. It is a celebration of the commitment that was made.

by not disclosing or not hindering them when we have an obligation to do so;
Perhaps I could have went to the “wedding”, and public ally objected

You could, but if you are invited and don’t attend, it is a way of not supporting a wrong act.

by protecting evil-doers.
How does this apply

In this case, I don’t see how it would.

 

[anon65111186]

Your Dad doesn’t realize he is showing support for their sin by going. Try to convince him with love and reason, and pray for him.

 

[Mtatum1958]

Thank you for your your opinion.

 

[Thorolfr]

If that same neighbor were a gay man, I would have to assess the situation first. If the man is overly effeminate, with an over exaggerated lisp, really flaunting his lifestyle, then there is no way I’m inviting him over for a picnic for fear of scandal. However, if the man is clean-cut and doesn’t flaunt his lifestyle, and doesn’t speak of it, then the risk of scandal is low and I may decide to have him over

You forgot the limp wrist.

In almost 40 years, I don’t think I’ve ever met another gay man who has an “over exaggerated lisp.” You should try meeting some real gay people so that when you talk about them, you don’t have to resort to using silly stereotypes.

 

[angel12]

In almost 40 years, I don’t think I’ve ever met another gay man who has an “over exaggerated lisp.” You should try meeting some real gay people so that when you talk about them, you don’t have to resort to using silly stereotypes.

I find it amazing, but there seem to be some who think they don’t know any gay people. And there often seems to be a correlation with their attitudes toward gay people. Really, if I were gay, and knew this poster personally, I don’t think I’d be anxious to make sure he knew. Nobody likes being stereotyped like that.

 

[exnihilo]

So I’m silly for recognizing a stereotype but when you have shows like ‘Queer Eye’ that make use of them they aren’t being silly? I think we all know not everyone would display these exaggerated affectations. But they are used by many. That is obvious.

 

[TheLittleLady]

“Reality” television is about as silly as it comes. It exploits.