J
JMJSHJ
Guest
One of the links that Centurion Guard showed had a link to the Boston Globe. Hardly blogger material:
articles.boston.com/2011-07-11/news/29761860_1_lesbian-gay-pride-month-gay-rights-movement
- Status
articles.boston.com/2011-07-11/news/29761860_1_lesbian-gay-pride-month-gay-rights-movement
S
Sirach2
Guest
I did not find this link in CG’s posts. The following are the only linksl I noticed, four of which are blogs, the last belongs to Voris.
The link you “requoted” allegedly posted by CG is not an active link. What is your point?
D
DemonHunter
Guest
Yes, Definitely yes. The priest is supposed to announce before Eucharist that non catholics and people in mortal sin are not supposed to receive the communion.
E
Elizabeth502
Guest
I think there are two issues here (are though it seems that only one is being discussed): 
(1) Whether the Parish is contributing to scandal
(2) Whether there should be Masses, separately, for those in the believing, practicing community that acknowledge their SSA and want to celebrate together.
In my opinion, the second – believe it or not – is more problematic. Several of us discussed this a full year ago with regard to archdiocese of Westminster in the UK.
I want to explain why I have slightly come around to be guardedly supportive of these Masses.
With regard to (1), my opinion is that the burden is on Church leadership and parish leadership (clerical) to use language which clarifies what such a celebration is and is not, what its purpose is and is not. The reason is that – the timing of parades or not – there remains considerable confusion about approaching the Eucharist by those who embrace the title of homosexual,“gay,” etc. In the secular understanding, SSA means living the lifestyle, or certainly with the assumption/permission of that. Many Catholics (those with SSA and those who befriend them) support an actively homosexual lifestyle as long as those “couples” are “committed and monogamous” (i.e., the language of the secular media), language which no faithful, believing Catholic should be adopting, let alone repeating.
Therefore, it is up to any pastor, both orally and in writing, to distinguish that “a gay Mass” is not like “a gay parade.” He should explain that whatever supportive ministry exists in his parish, the mission of that ministry is chastity for those who participate, mutual support and resources for that chastity, and that participating in a dedicated Mass is one such chastity resource.
There is such a ministry in one parish near me. The people approaching Communion are those, just like the rest of those who approach, who are presumed to be in a state of grace. I can reasonably assume this because they informally discuss their struggles and efforts with me and others in the parish. There are also members of that ministry who are not ready to Approach the Table, and they do not do so. They acknowledge that. However, the ministry provides a function in giving them a supportive spiritual community and in encouraging their possible eventual return to communion with those approaching eucharist.
On # (2), I remain ambivalent. The Church is One. Jesus Himself prayed, during his earthly ministry, that his members be united. We’ve had so much division signaled by ‘special-interest group’ politics in the secular media, that I do not think it necessarily helps to borrow that pattern for Christ’s Church. Nowhere are we more one than when celebrating the sacraments together – not just symbolically but actually.
Second, as has been discussed on several threads, some of which are still active, labeling oneself can encourage a distinct ‘identity’ apart from our common and united identity as children of God. In fact, that common identity calls us to accept our brethren within our midst who are suffering with any disordered or troubling attraction of any kind, and to unite their efforts toward holiness along with everybody else’s. Having a separate Mass reinforces a ‘separate identity’ which has more in common with the ‘identity politics’ of the secular realm than the spiritual identity of the sacred realm. It does not promote a mental transformation of that individual to self-identify as something other than a member of this larger community/parish which has the indistinguishable goal of union with Christ.
For example, there is someone who attends one of the standard Masses at the above parish near me. He describes himself to others as a recovering alcoholic. I.m.o. he is a powerful witness. He often mentions his struggles to several of us, adds his gratitude to God, for his successes, during the Prayers of the Faithful, and is open to several of us about how helpful it is for him to attend this Mass! We learn from him, or at least I do. He has expressed no interest in attending a Mass for Alcoholics, nor should he. His struggles and pain, along with our struggles and pain, are united to the central suffering of Christ our head, recalled at every Mass.
Now, there are retreats in many locations, many parishes & retreat centers, for those who suffer from substance abuse. Many retreats, of all kinds, conclude with a Mass. The Mass is thus an integral part of a conscious effort to ‘collect’ oneself with others sharing similar challenges. I.m.o. this is the best occasion also for a “gay Mass.” In the parish above there are sometimes retreats for the LGBT ministry, which conclude with a Mass. I think that is a better context for it than as a regular, separate liturgy in the parish.
(1) Whether the Parish is contributing to scandal
(2) Whether there should be Masses, separately, for those in the believing, practicing community that acknowledge their SSA and want to celebrate together.
In my opinion, the second – believe it or not – is more problematic. Several of us discussed this a full year ago with regard to archdiocese of Westminster in the UK.
I want to explain why I have slightly come around to be guardedly supportive of these Masses.
With regard to (1), my opinion is that the burden is on Church leadership and parish leadership (clerical) to use language which clarifies what such a celebration is and is not, what its purpose is and is not. The reason is that – the timing of parades or not – there remains considerable confusion about approaching the Eucharist by those who embrace the title of homosexual,“gay,” etc. In the secular understanding, SSA means living the lifestyle, or certainly with the assumption/permission of that. Many Catholics (those with SSA and those who befriend them) support an actively homosexual lifestyle as long as those “couples” are “committed and monogamous” (i.e., the language of the secular media), language which no faithful, believing Catholic should be adopting, let alone repeating.
Therefore, it is up to any pastor, both orally and in writing, to distinguish that “a gay Mass” is not like “a gay parade.” He should explain that whatever supportive ministry exists in his parish, the mission of that ministry is chastity for those who participate, mutual support and resources for that chastity, and that participating in a dedicated Mass is one such chastity resource.
There is such a ministry in one parish near me. The people approaching Communion are those, just like the rest of those who approach, who are presumed to be in a state of grace. I can reasonably assume this because they informally discuss their struggles and efforts with me and others in the parish. There are also members of that ministry who are not ready to Approach the Table, and they do not do so. They acknowledge that. However, the ministry provides a function in giving them a supportive spiritual community and in encouraging their possible eventual return to communion with those approaching eucharist.
On # (2), I remain ambivalent. The Church is One. Jesus Himself prayed, during his earthly ministry, that his members be united. We’ve had so much division signaled by ‘special-interest group’ politics in the secular media, that I do not think it necessarily helps to borrow that pattern for Christ’s Church. Nowhere are we more one than when celebrating the sacraments together – not just symbolically but actually.
Second, as has been discussed on several threads, some of which are still active, labeling oneself can encourage a distinct ‘identity’ apart from our common and united identity as children of God. In fact, that common identity calls us to accept our brethren within our midst who are suffering with any disordered or troubling attraction of any kind, and to unite their efforts toward holiness along with everybody else’s. Having a separate Mass reinforces a ‘separate identity’ which has more in common with the ‘identity politics’ of the secular realm than the spiritual identity of the sacred realm. It does not promote a mental transformation of that individual to self-identify as something other than a member of this larger community/parish which has the indistinguishable goal of union with Christ.
For example, there is someone who attends one of the standard Masses at the above parish near me. He describes himself to others as a recovering alcoholic. I.m.o. he is a powerful witness. He often mentions his struggles to several of us, adds his gratitude to God, for his successes, during the Prayers of the Faithful, and is open to several of us about how helpful it is for him to attend this Mass! We learn from him, or at least I do. He has expressed no interest in attending a Mass for Alcoholics, nor should he. His struggles and pain, along with our struggles and pain, are united to the central suffering of Christ our head, recalled at every Mass.
Now, there are retreats in many locations, many parishes & retreat centers, for those who suffer from substance abuse. Many retreats, of all kinds, conclude with a Mass. The Mass is thus an integral part of a conscious effort to ‘collect’ oneself with others sharing similar challenges. I.m.o. this is the best occasion also for a “gay Mass.” In the parish above there are sometimes retreats for the LGBT ministry, which conclude with a Mass. I think that is a better context for it than as a regular, separate liturgy in the parish.
B
bkovacs
Guest
This goes to show that this priest really doesn’t understand the Roman Catholic faith at all. It’s an altar, not a table. Heck even the SSPX knows that!. Hint!!.In the youtube video, the priest of the parish said that the Mass was held with everyone welcome in the door and everyone welcome at the “table”. That seems to me to be supporting of many different activities that would ordinarily not be acceptable.
B
bkovacs
Guest
And do you really think they are all being celibate. Give me a break!!!. The scandals all started over homosexual tendencies amongst certain clergy with little boys. And now the Church is welcoming those same people with the same tendencies, except big boys, or vice versa women with big women. Give me a break!!. Don’t be so deceived!. It’s evil plain and simple.I think there are two issues here (are though it seems that only one is being discussed):
(1) Whether the Parish is contributing to scandal
(2) Whether there should be Masses, separately, for those in the believing, practicing community that acknowledge their SSA and want to celebrate together.
In my opinion, the second – believe it or not – is more problematic. Several of us discussed this a full year ago with regard to archdiocese of Westminster in the UK.
I want to explain why I have slightly come around to be guardedly supportive of these Masses.
With regard to (1), my opinion is that the burden is on Church leadership and parish leadership (clerical) to use language which clarifies what such a celebration is and is not, what its purpose is and is not. The reason is that – the timing of parades or not – there remains considerable confusion about approaching the Eucharist by those who embrace the title of homosexual,“gay,” etc. In the secular understanding, SSA means living the lifestyle, or certainly with the assumption/permission of that. Many Catholics (those with SSA and those who befriend them) support an actively homosexual lifestyle as long as those “couples” are “committed and monogamous” (i.e., the language of the secular media), language which no faithful, believing Catholic should be adopting, let alone repeating.
Therefore, it is up to any pastor, both orally and in writing, to distinguish that “a gay Mass” is not like “a gay parade.” He should explain that whatever supportive ministry exists in his parish, the mission of that ministry is chastity for those who participate, mutual support and resources for that chastity, and that participating in a dedicated Mass is one such chastity resource.
There is such a ministry in one parish near me. The people approaching Communion are those, just like the rest of those who approach, who are presumed to be in a state of grace. I can reasonably assume this because they informally discuss their struggles and efforts with me and others in the parish. There are also members of that ministry who are not ready to Approach the Table, and they do not do so. They acknowledge that. However, the ministry provides a function in giving them a supportive spiritual community and in encouraging their possible eventual return to communion with those approaching eucharist.
On # (2), I remain ambivalent. The Church is One. Jesus Himself prayed, during his earthly ministry, that his members be united. We’ve had so much division signaled by ‘special-interest group’ politics in the secular media, that I do not think it necessarily helps to borrow that pattern for Christ’s Church. Nowhere are we more one than when celebrating the sacraments together – not just symbolically but actually.
Second, as has been discussed on several threads, some of which are still active, labeling oneself can encourage a distinct ‘identity’ apart from our common and united identity as children of God. In fact, that common identity calls us to accept our brethren within our midst who are suffering with any disordered or troubling attraction of any kind, and to unite their efforts toward holiness along with everybody else’s. Having a separate Mass reinforces a ‘separate identity’ which has more in common with the ‘identity politics’ of the secular realm than the spiritual identity of the sacred realm. It does not promote a mental transformation of that individual to self-identify as something other than a member of this larger community/parish which has the indistinguishable goal of union with Christ.
For example, there is someone who attends one of the standard Masses at the above parish near me. He describes himself to others as a recovering alcoholic. I.m.o. he is a powerful witness. He often mentions his struggles to several of us, adds his gratitude to God, for his successes, during the Prayers of the Faithful, and is open to several of us about how helpful it is for him to attend this Mass! We learn from him, or at least I do. He has expressed no interest in attending a Mass for Alcoholics, nor should he. His struggles and pain, along with our struggles and pain, are united to the central suffering of Christ our head, recalled at every Mass.
Now, there are retreats in many locations, many parishes & retreat centers, for those who suffer from substance abuse. Many retreats, of all kinds, conclude with a Mass. The Mass is thus an integral part of a conscious effort to ‘collect’ oneself with others sharing similar challenges. I.m.o. this is the best occasion also for a “gay Mass.” In the parish above there are sometimes retreats for the LGBT ministry, which conclude with a Mass. I think that is a better context for it than as a regular, separate liturgy in the parish.
L
lizaanne
Guest
S
Sirach2
Guest
You’re understanding is flawed. The scriptures clearly state “table of the Lord” - not only in the USCCB’s New American Bible, but in the older version of Duoay Rheims. The priest is speaking accurately, and in accord with the Scriptures themselves. You may want to quibble with that.
E
Elizabeth502
Guest
I don’t know that they are “all being celibate.” Nor do I know that believers without SSA in the community, who partake of the Eucharist, are in a state of grace either. That’s why I clarified, above. Again, if the communication from the leadership of the Church is clear, as to intent and as to expectations, then I think that people struggling with temptation should not be treated differently, respective to the temptation. I’m not “deceived,” and that’s why I posted as I did. Many years ago, in fact not that long ago (as recently as the '90’s, certainly) there were lots of actively homosexual couples (by their own admission) receiving communion in lots of urban parishes. I thought that was quite scandalous, and quite negligent of church leadership to pretend not to notice this. That’s why I reiterated above that a distinction needs to be made and language needs to be clear.
And it is still happening in at least one urban parish that I am aware of, near me. (Not the parish I discussed.) It’s just that where the local bishop has been clear on definitions and expectations, it is no longer happening. That’s a big change for the better, obviously.
S
Sirach2
Guest
I’m always willing to give credit where it is due. This last video by Voris was one of the very first times I have not had a problem listening to him.
I will note, however, that at 1:20, he quotes from a letter that “MOST LIKELY, the priest did not mention the need for the sacrament of confession.” Those who were not in attendance, including Voris, have no verifiable way of knowing that to be true, since the secular media has done a good job in failing to report all the facts. This was simply an assumption.
May I ask that people refrain from judging this priest and listening only to the flagrant tabloid journalism of the media, which is customarily biased against Catholicism.
I will note, however, that at 1:20, he quotes from a letter that “MOST LIKELY, the priest did not mention the need for the sacrament of confession.” Those who were not in attendance, including Voris, have no verifiable way of knowing that to be true, since the secular media has done a good job in failing to report all the facts. This was simply an assumption.
May I ask that people refrain from judging this priest and listening only to the flagrant tabloid journalism of the media, which is customarily biased against Catholicism.
C
centurionguard
Guest
Commendable video by Micheal Voris and I don’t say that lightly.
Perhaps its men like these with homosexual tendencies who also have great courage but fear speaking about their heavy cross because there is presently no avenue of help widely known in the Church for such people. Add even the additional scrutiny of Catholics who are more liable to judge homosexuals first rather than welcome with opening compassionate arms. Similar to God loving the sinner but hating the sin.
Somewhat strange though I’m trying to figure out how this video is seen in contrast to Voris’s original reactionary video on St. Cecilia’s Parish Mass last Sunday youtube.com/user/RealCath…/1/2lKF0Fz4nZQ
I did however take note of one of Voris’s comments I’ve heard long time before that
(“to those whom God gives a heavy Cross to in life is also in accordance to greater love God has for that individual”).
B
bkovacs
Guest
No it’s not!.
[16] The chalice of benediction, which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? And the bread, which we break, is it not the partaking of the body of the Lord? [17] For we, being many, are one bread, one body, all that partake of one bread. [18] Behold Israel according to the flesh: are not they, that eat of the sacrifices, partakers of the altar?
S
Sirach2
Guest
BKovacs, you stopped short of verse 21 that I quoted verbatim. For your reference:
drbo.org/cgi-bin/s?q=table+of+the+lord&b=drb&t=2
You cannot drink the chalice of the Lord, and the chalice of devils: you cannot be partakers of the table of the Lord, and of the table of devils.
Table is the word used in this older version of a Catholic Bible. It is the same in New American Bible at the USCCB website. Look it up.
drbo.org/cgi-bin/s?q=table+of+the+lord&b=drb&t=2
You cannot drink the chalice of the Lord, and the chalice of devils: you cannot be partakers of the table of the Lord, and of the table of devils.
Table is the word used in this older version of a Catholic Bible. It is the same in New American Bible at the USCCB website. Look it up.
W
waterbrook
Guest
mmm…I seem to recall Jesus saying ‘let him who is without sin cast the first stone’ as awell as something about logs, motes and eyes
I was once taken to a service in a Gay Church by a colleague. I found the experience seriously sad…that these people had to gather out side a main stream church to worship because they felt rejected and sidelined…I’m certain that that isnt what God wants. Yes, we are called to grow into the likeness of Christ but I truely believe that Christ finds us and accepts us as we are as he did people in the Gospels. None of us are perfect, we all have our crosses to bear and our short comings, including judging others. If I am Worthy to receive the Eucharist than so is my neighbour. However, I cannot receive in the catholic church and I understand why, I respect that even if I dont like it. Ultimately whether someone receives is between them and God. Sound pastoral teaching and practice are required.
I was once taken to a service in a Gay Church by a colleague. I found the experience seriously sad…that these people had to gather out side a main stream church to worship because they felt rejected and sidelined…I’m certain that that isnt what God wants. Yes, we are called to grow into the likeness of Christ but I truely believe that Christ finds us and accepts us as we are as he did people in the Gospels. None of us are perfect, we all have our crosses to bear and our short comings, including judging others. If I am Worthy to receive the Eucharist than so is my neighbour. However, I cannot receive in the catholic church and I understand why, I respect that even if I dont like it. Ultimately whether someone receives is between them and God. Sound pastoral teaching and practice are required.
E
Elizabeth502
Guest
Be careful, waterbrook. While I agree with part of what you’re saying (marginalization being unacceptable in the Christian Church – see my earlier post), not everyone with SSA who attends a “Gay Church” is there because of exclusion from mainstream churches. The practice is most prevalent for members of churches where borders have been clearly drawn between acceptable and unacceptable behavior. Many people with SSA who were baptized into traditions with clear teachings on sexual limits have chosen to affiliate with churches where their behavior is approved and does not prevent them from from participating in whatever ‘communion services’ are offered in those churches.
The Catholic Church considers it important not to perpetuate scandal of any kind, and pastors do often preach (probably not enough) on other forbidden practices as well, such as heterosexuals or divorced/remarried couples cohabitating, and yet receiving eucharist.
W
wisdomseeker
Guest
youtube.com/user/RealCatholicTV?feature=mhee#p/u/0/jgnfpEY59XU
someone send this video to that so called Catholic parish which I doubt it is.
someone send this video to that so called Catholic parish which I doubt it is.
T
Tigg
Guest
I am unable to verbally communicate my distress over the wholesale deception being allowed that promotes sin by and through acceptance and so distorts true charity of the marginalized. Why a “gay” Mass that would appear to do nothing but advance an immoral solidarity and encourage further disobedience against the Church through an unholy commonality that affirms a disorder that one needs to fight against?
Will individual conscience be further assuaged through the feelings of camaraderie that must have been present by so large a number of gays celebrating in tandem? Will the “I’m okay, you’re okay” message further obliterate the divine and natural law so that no one need be concerned about individual repentance and true sorrow for sin anymore? Is the message being clearly given that one no longer need struggle against an intrinsic disorder or fight against sinful inclinations in order to attain a life of holiness on this earth and eternal life in the next?
Someone please help me here - what is it that I am not understanding?
W
wisdomseeker
Guest
Unfortunately ideology of opinions has taking over the minds of many Catholics who can no longer discern the Truth. This happens when they mingle with those whoare not Catholics and the wicked. Many Catholics have been influenced by those who rule with their opinions and can no longer accet God’s Law over their opiinions.
Let’s remind them that they are supposed to only report what God says not more not less. Their opinions mean nothing when it comes to what God says.
J
JimR-OCDS
Guest
Well there seems to be some misinformation going around the internet on this issue. Being I live in the Boston area, let me provide you with what actually took place.
It is true that St Cecilia’s planned to have a Gay Pride Mass, to kick off Gay Pride week.
However, when the Archdioceses learned of it, they had it cancelled.
The Mass that is being misreported as being a Gay Mass, was actually a regularly scheduled Mass on Sunday, with a social for all, afterwards.
The focus of the Mass was respect for all, including those who are different.
Cardinal Sean O’Malley is a holy and humble man, but one who upholds the teachings of the Catholic Church.
There was nothing scandalous with the Mass held on Sunday at St. Cecilia’s and Cardinal O’Malley made sure of it.
Jim
It is true that St Cecilia’s planned to have a Gay Pride Mass, to kick off Gay Pride week.
However, when the Archdioceses learned of it, they had it cancelled.
The Mass that is being misreported as being a Gay Mass, was actually a regularly scheduled Mass on Sunday, with a social for all, afterwards.
The focus of the Mass was respect for all, including those who are different.
Cardinal Sean O’Malley is a holy and humble man, but one who upholds the teachings of the Catholic Church.
There was nothing scandalous with the Mass held on Sunday at St. Cecilia’s and Cardinal O’Malley made sure of it.
Jim
W
wisdomseeker
Guest
A regular Mass? humm…with a social for all…those who are different…hummm. what does that mean?
- Status