Bishop responds to Boy Scouts' decision on admission of homosexual members [CWN]

  • Thread starter Thread starter CWN_News
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
FAB said:
The scout policiy applies to children, who are looking for their identity.
Click to expand...
Their identity is that they are children of the light - IF we let them be and not deliberately expose them to societal norms that accept immorality.
Even with the adult, we are still called by Christ to love them as he does.
Click to expand...
Not surprising that under the false assumption of progressing toward tolerance and love of man this BSA policy sells its goods wrapped in a package of deceit. Who are they fooling (besides Christians?) So clever of the activists to have figured it all out. What possible purpose does the policy have otherwise? As always, when one objectionable tactic is accepted, there will be more to come. “If you are openly gay, you are welcome – when you turn 19, you may no longer associate with us.” Illogic to the core! Let’s see how this holds in a year or so when they will then argue how the policy is age discriminatory to male adults! Deception is the greatest weapon in the hands of the enemy. How can we be so duped?
 
fix said:
Again, my specific question is which bishops said the policy was unjust?
Click to expand...
I never said that the bishop’s policy was unjust, just the way you seem to be using it.
It has to to with the care and placement of children with homosexuals. It does not trump the catechism.
 
fix said:
Not to go off the rails but st Thomas does not agree with you here. Where does the Church teach every violation of the sixth commandment is of the exact same gravity?
Click to expand...
St. Thomas was not correct on everything and his writings also have to taken through the lens of time of which he was alive.

From the sixth commandmend we have developed our teaching that single persons are to remain celibate. So yes there is an equivalancy between a heterosexual and a homosexual engaging in sexual activity.

Just being homosexual by one’s nature is not a sin, the physical acts are.

A person by thier nature who is not attracked to to opposite sex, and who wants to live according to Church teaching, does bear a great burden. It is a cross to bear. We cannot hope to lead them to the love of Christ if the first thing we do is to reject them.

Deacon Frank
 
shocktrooper said:
I am more than comfortable with the idea that homosexuality is a choice and the idea that one may be born with this cross. I have never advocated that people with any sin be barred from the Church. However, I think we would both agree that we are called to holiness and not remain in our sinful ways.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Their identity is that they are children of the light - IF we let them be and not deliberately expose them to societal norms that accept immorality.
Click to expand...
A person who has homosexual tendecies because of thier nature is not immoral. If they act on that nature, we say that the act is then immoral.
 
I received this via e-mail.

What Does It Mean Being An “Openly Gay” Boy Scout….
June 8, 2013 By The Crescat

Several people have approached and written to me wanting to know my opinion on the Boy Scout scandal. And yes, it is a scandal. Why haven’t I addressed here? Because I don’t know what to think. I, like most of you, are still plagued with tons of questions. I’m struggling to understand it all myself and the impact it will have on the scouting organization. Mostly, my concern is for my own boy scout and his well being. I’m honestly trying to determine how we’ll proceed from here. Now that the Boy Scouts have done this… this thing…
…
…
What I hear from other parents is “so what if the kid is gay?”. Yes. And so what? It’s not like there haven’t been boys struggling with same sex attraction involved in the Boy Scouts before. They were never excluded from the scouts in the past, similar to the old “Don’t ask, don’t tell” policy of the military, unless they behaved in a way contradictory to their oaths. Like, say, making suggestive advances to other scouts. But you know what? Any scout trying to hit on another was reprimanded and removed from the organization. You think the co-ed Venturing Scouts would put up with that ****? No. Absolutely not. Yet now we find ourselves in a conundrum. Scouts can be openly gay now.

Blue excerpt taken from entire blog entry here: patheos.com/blogs/thecrescat/2013/06/what-does-it-mean-being-an-openly-gay-boy-scout.html

DISCLAIMER and WARNING:
Some of the language in the rest of the entry is blunt and “colorful,” so some may find it offensive.
 
I posted the link before in this thread, but perhaps I should post an excerpt so if one is interested, they have an idea of content.

"The Boy Scouts’ Doomed Compromise
by Carson Holloway on June 4, 2013

On May 23, delegates representing the Boy Scouts of America voted to adopt a change in their membership policies. For many years, the Scouts held that homosexual activity was inconsistent with the spirit of scouting and that therefore openly gay people could not be admitted to the organization. This will no longer be the case.

The change the delegates voted for is a compromise of sorts. For the last decade and a half, liberal activists have sought a complete repudiation of the ban. During the same period traditionalists have sought to retain it. The new policy appears to split the difference: It permits openly homosexual boys to be members of the Scouts, but it does not allow openly homosexual men to be Scout leaders.

Whatever else one thinks about the new policy, this much is certain: It can’t last. No doubt many of the delegates thought they would be buying peace and quiet by enacting this compromise, but they are bound to be disappointed.

The compromise policy’s short life is predictable, in the first place, in light of the kind of people it is meant to placate, people that the Scout delegates have seriously misjudged. Socially liberal political activists don’t believe in compromise. They believe in winning.

If they believed in compromise, there would be no constitutional “right” to abortion, but a variety of more or less permissive abortion regimes across the states. If they believed in compromise, there would be no legal crusade for same-sex marriage, but a willingness to accept same-sex civil unions."…

Blue excerpt above taken from:
The Boy Scouts’ Doomed Compromise
catholicexchange.com/the-boy-scouts-doomed-compromise/
 
Cat Herder,
You said, responding to my rude post stating “PROVE IT”,
Tactic No. 1 used by CU and their supporters is to misrepresent and personally attack anyone…
Click to expand...
I’m sorry.

I did not think it was an attack at the time; but this morning I can see that it was. Again, I’m sorry. It arose out of frustration – but that’s an explanation, not an excuse. I should have phrased it more gently, with humility.
I have NEVER, never, ever, said that persons with same-sex attraction should be banned from receiving any service or ministry from any Church-sponsored group. What I have said is someone who is openly promoting SSA as normal and not disordered should be so banned from the BSA for the reasons stated by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
Click to expand...
Adding to my lesson in humility, it turns out that we actually agree! Now, not only am I sorry, I am also embarrassed. And I thought I was so good at “reading comprehension”… (And, guess what I was praying for this morning? For the Lord to teach me humility. Yup! He did! Please, Guardian Angel dear, put down that Holy Clue-by-four?)

Please forgive me.

Onward. On the matter of discrimination… (Thanks, Baelor, for quoting the CDF document.)
As a rule, the majority of homosexually oriented persons who seek to lead chaste lives do not publicize their sexual orientation. Hence the problem of discrimination in terms of employment, housing, etc., does not usually arise.
Click to expand...
Not usually. But sometimes… The reason I approve of the BSA policy is that young men like Mitex will not have to fear being “outed” by someone and consequently being thrown out of their Troops.
Homosexual persons who assert their homosexuality tend to be precisely those who judge homosexual behavior or lifestyle to be “either completely harmless, if not an entirely good thing” (cf. no. 3), and hence worthy of public approval.
Click to expand...
And that is why we need our celibate homosexual friends to feel safe coming out. We need to counter the homosexualists. We heteros can’t say, “I know how you feel,” because we don’t. Mitex and others like him can.

The enforcement of the policy will depend on the Scoutmasters. There will be some - especially the Catholic ones - who will teach the morality that is the Scouts’ official policy. Yes, there are bad Scoutmasters – just as there have been bad priests. So let’s pray for the good ones, and for conversion for the bad ones. And strength for Mitex and others like him.

:crossrc:
 
CEO of Boy Scouts of America Palmetto Council Resigns due to "certain religious beliefs"
goupstate.com/article/20130603/ARTICLES/130609952/1083/ARTICLES?p=3&tc=pg

Here is some of what he says in his resignation letter:

The Bible (in Romans 1:18-32 and 1 Corinthians 6:9-11, among other passages) clearly states that homosexual behavior is sin–but that it can be overcome through Jesus Christ. The Romans passage says that homosexuality is a result of turning against God–and becomes a “gateway” to many other forms of depravity–leading to an erosion of societal virtues.
The BSA is a pawn in a larger cultural struggle. The powerful pro-gay message (representing only 2-3% of the adult population in the U.S.) already controls print and television news media, Hollywood actors, much of politics, and the resulting judicial appointments made by those politicians. Corporate America (their CEOs’ influence, plus their potentially huge corporate donations) have also pressured BSA to change. Then a few large Councils threatened not to comply with the old policy. So the national Key-3, with no warning to the rest of us, began promoting this agenda . All 286 Scout Executives were called to gather in Dallas on March 1 for policy change indoctrination–what we were to say, and how we were to communicate it to our local constituents. That began a PR blitz–millions of dollars spent to force this on local Councils. However, Councils across America would soon rise up against it!
After every Council was instructed to survey their Charter Partners, donors and Scouters, 3 out of 4 Regions recommended no policy change (only the Northeast Region was pro-change). This was made clear to the National Executive Committee before their resolution was announced–yet they pushed ahead! … BSA’s nationwide “Voice of the Scout” survey discovered that respondents supported the current policy 61% to 34%… I am resigning as Scout Executive effective June 30. I cannot in good conscience endorse the BSA’s new direction. I cannot send my annual membership fee to the National office, or pay for Boys’ Life magazine, knowing that the money will be used to further an agenda I wholeheartedly oppose.

So now you’ve heard it from the inside. It wasn’t a vote; it was a set-up.
 
Cat_Herder said:
CEO of Boy Scouts of America Palmetto Council Resigns due to "certain religious beliefs"
goupstate.com/article/20130603/ARTICLES/130609952/1083/ARTICLES?p=3&tc=pg
Here is some of what he says in his resignation letter

So now you’ve heard it from the inside. It wasn’t a vote; it was a set-up.
Click to expand...
This is a great find! Read this also in black and white:
There is no doubt that Scouters at every level did not want this policy to pass, especially if it would allow gay leaders in. So a youth-centered resolution was crafted, inserting the phrase “No youth may be denied membership in the Boy Scouts of America on the basis of sexual orientation or preference alone.”
Click to expand...
This is designed to play on an emotional reaction: “Don’t discriminate against children”. But deeper inspection reveals that this is just a smoke screen: I have never kicked out (or denied) a kid for being gay. That’s out of over 100,000+ youth members through my 20 years of serving in two Councils. Nor have I ever known a Scout Executive in any Council–representing millions of youth–who has! So if this is not the issue, what is?
Click to expand...
First, did you know that BSA’s long-standing policy did not prohibit gay members, or even gay leaders? It simply did not embrace homosexuality. The topic has no place in our programs; boys want to explore the outdoors, hiking and fishing and building campfires. The ban was on “open and avowed homosexuals”–that means participating in and promoting that lifestyle, pushing others to accept it. BSA’s policy was “We won’t ask–just don’t flaunt it”, making it such an issue that it disrupts the program! The passage of this initial policy is an obvious attempt of the homosexual lobby to “get a foot in the door”, appeasing some factions for a short time. Both sides admit that this is just the first step-embracing openly homosexual/transgender leaders, Camp Staff, employees, and so on, comes next. It took less than a day after the vote for newspapers across the country to call for inclusion of gay leaders!
Click to expand...
 
That is proof of what we have argued. The gay apologists demanded this. There was no reason for it. The propaganda played on emotions and even some Catholics bought into it. The old policy was morally correct and consistent with the faith.
 
FAB said:
I never said that the bishop’s policy was unjust, just the way you seem to be using it.
It has to to with the care and placement of children with homosexuals. It does not trump the catechism.
Click to expand...
What does this mean?
 
FAB said:
St. Thomas was not correct on everything and his writings also have to taken through the lens of time of which he was alive.

From the sixth commandmend we have developed our teaching that single persons are to remain celibate. So yes there is an equivalancy between a heterosexual and a homosexual engaging in sexual activity.

Just being homosexual by one’s nature is not a sin, the physical acts are.

A person by thier nature who is not attracked to to opposite sex, and who wants to live according to Church teaching, does bear a great burden. It is a cross to bear. We cannot hope to lead them to the love of Christ if the first thing we do is to reject them.

Deacon Frank
Click to expand...
So you have no proof every sin against the sixth commandment is equally grave.
 
FAB said:
St. Thomas was not correct on everything and his writings also have to taken through the lens of time of which he was alive. Deacon Frank
Click to expand...
Is that why Pope John Paul II devoted a substantial part of “Fides et Ratio” to promoting and encouraging the study of the Angelic Doctor. (paras 44 and 45)
In him, the Church’s Magisterium has seen and recognized the passion for truth; and, precisely because it stays consistently within the horizon of universal, objective and transcendent truth, his thought scales “heights unthinkable to human intelligence”.(51) Rightly, then, he may be called an “apostle of the truth”.(52) Looking unreservedly to truth, the realism of Thomas could recognize the objectivity of truth and produce not merely a philosophy of “what seems to be” but a philosophy of “what is”.
Click to expand...
I fail to see how Pope John Paul II’s words “precisely because it stays consistently within the horizon of universal, objective and transcendent truth, his thought scales “heights unthinkable to human intelligence” matches with your assessment that it must be take through the lens of time.

That seems contradictory, either it is universal and objective, or it is relative to time.

Do you have a source that advocates your view of St. Thomas, that his method and conclusions are subject to the 'lens of time"
 
SwizzleStick said:
"The Boy Scouts’ Doomed Compromise
by Carson Holloway on June 4, 2013
…
Whatever else one thinks about the new policy, this much is certain: It can’t last. No doubt many of the delegates thought they would be buying peace and quiet by enacting this compromise, but they are bound to be disappointed.

The compromise policy’s short life is predictable, in the first place, in light of the kind of people it is meant to placate, people that the Scout delegates have seriously misjudged. Socially liberal political activists don’t believe in compromise. They believe in winning.
Click to expand...
Case in point:
**Caterpillar pressures Boy Scouts to end policy on gay adult leaders
**
While Caterpillar is not the first company to disassociate from Boy Scouts of America over this issue – Intel Corp. (NASDAQ: INTC) and United Parcel Service (NYSE: UPS) withdrew support last year – but one activist quoted by the AP said that Caterpillar represents a major change in attitudes because it is not from a liberal, coastal culture, yet still chose to publicly support gay rights. …

bizjournals.com/chicago/news/2013/06/14/caterpillar-puts-pressure-on-boy-scouts.html
 
Cat_Herder said:
Case in point:
**Caterpillar pressures Boy Scouts to end policy on gay adult leaders
**
While Caterpillar is not the first company to disassociate from Boy Scouts of America over this issue – Intel Corp. (NASDAQ: INTC) and United Parcel Service (NYSE: UPS) withdrew support last year – but one activist quoted by the AP said that Caterpillar represents a major change in attitudes because it is not from a liberal, coastal culture, yet still chose to publicly support gay rights. …

bizjournals.com/chicago/news/2013/06/14/caterpillar-puts-pressure-on-boy-scouts.html
Click to expand...
Yes. The way the agenda has been pushed, the only thing that will satisfy is not merely tolerance of the lifestyle, but a total embrace and celebration of the lifestyle. Those who will not comply will be punished.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top