Cardinal Burke questions couple's suggestion to Synod on welcoming gay son and lover [CC]
- Status
po18guy
Well-known member
I note that, in the cases of nearly all moral issues, it is individual choices to indulge the self (against Church teaching - whether known or not) that are then thrust upon the Church to accommodate or accept, making the Church the “heavy.”
Marriage: It all began just fine, but then became challenging. Some had no foundation, but many others did. Well, with divorce allowed by civil law and by all Christian faiths outside of the Catholic Church, it seems normal enough to pull the pin. Is there injustice in failed marriages? Every time. A chaste life ever after (before and during, as well) is all that the Church asks for.
The problem is introduced by individuals who may honestly (but mistakenly) seek another “marriage” - thus, in effect, re-defining marriage from indissoluble to dissoluble.
What has it lead to? A further re-definition of marriage, to be gender-inclusive. Once the devil has his nose under the tent, it is only a matter of time.
Within my lifetime, none of Church teaching was controversial.
Marriage: It all began just fine, but then became challenging. Some had no foundation, but many others did. Well, with divorce allowed by civil law and by all Christian faiths outside of the Catholic Church, it seems normal enough to pull the pin. Is there injustice in failed marriages? Every time. A chaste life ever after (before and during, as well) is all that the Church asks for.
The problem is introduced by individuals who may honestly (but mistakenly) seek another “marriage” - thus, in effect, re-defining marriage from indissoluble to dissoluble.
What has it lead to? A further re-definition of marriage, to be gender-inclusive. Once the devil has his nose under the tent, it is only a matter of time.
Within my lifetime, none of Church teaching was controversial.
L
loz87
Guest
I am pleased that the synod has a compassionate attitude towards homosexuals but I am concerned about this couple being at the synod approving of their son’s homosexual behavior. I hope they are not condoning homosexuality.
M
MichaelTDoyle
Guest
At his judgement will a person who lived that lifestyle, also condoned by the world, argue with Jesus to condone his behavior? What logically follows?
This is why if you love a homosexual person, give them the truth in charity for their sake.
This is why if you love a homosexual person, give them the truth in charity for their sake.
po18guy
Well-known member
Their actions do seem to speak louder than their words. In such moral dilemmas, it is so much easier to prevent than to cure…
po18guy
Well-known member
Our culture’s problem is that it refuses to deny the self. This was a noted problem 2,000 years ago. It is a matter of the human will, which seems to have far less resolve in it these days.
The Church does have a massive job to do, and I do not envy them one bit.
E
Emily2014
Guest
Can see no reason why the whole family should not celebrate Christmas together.
Doubt if grandchildren would even question the situation, but if they did, it would be an ideal opportunity to demonstrate loving acceptance. They would surely not wish their children to regard beloved family members as “sinners”.
J
JimG
Guest
Not wish their children to view family members as sinners? If the kids are above the age of reason they will have no doubt that the family consists of sinners. And they will know who is married, who is shacking up, and who is sleeping around. They will hear the adults talk even when the adults think no one is listening.
P
ProVobis
Guest
I think the full interview mentioned on the site is quite interesting.
lifesitenews.com/news/exclusive-cardinal-burke-responds-to-australian-couples-synod-presentation
lifesitenews.com/news/exclusive-cardinal-burke-responds-to-australian-couples-synod-presentation
S
Sy_Noe
Guest
Me neither. My family is a wide spectrum and runs the gamut. We have practicing Catholics, non practicing, family members who attend other faith communities, others who haven’t set foot in a church in yrs. Some are married. Some single. Some “shack up”. Of family currently nearby me, I’m actually the only one who attends Christmas services. To date it’s always been a Christmas Eve vigil Mass. But we all gather together afterwards for our family Christmas Eve dinner. I can’t imagine why Burke or anyone would question family celebrating Christmas together be the family members straight or gay or regardless of their living arrangements. Part of Christmas is about family. The Holy Family celebrated the first Christmas together in a manger. None of us in our families may be as perfect. But we are all God’s children. Created by Him. And we only have one family and life is too short to shun someone in it, especially at Christmas, a special time of love, just because they may not live up to a certain standard. If Catholics are going to exclude homosexuals and their partners at the family Christmas dinner table, then might as well exclude all who are perceived to sin. And not much food will be needed at the dinner table.
S
SuperLuigi
Guest
I don’t think they are. On some level, the conversation needs to be had.
Truth and logic are on our side, so we have nothing to fear as long as we stick to that.
M
Megan7
Guest
Thanks.
S
Sy_Noe
Guest
Just as the parents know their son and partner would be going home together after dinner, Jesus welcomed Judas and Peter at the table even though He knew they would pretty much right after, be betraying and denying Him.
R
RosslynV
Guest
the Church needs more Burkes
T
TMC
Guest
It is bizarre to me that any Christian would suggest barring a gay family member from family functions. Who else is unwelcome at dinner? Should we ban the divorced aunt? The alcoholic uncle? The atheist cousin?
S
Seamus_L
Guest
Lot’s of people keep alcoholic relatives away from family gatherings, and with good reason.
S
Sy_Noe
Guest
Exactly. Or the brother who missed Mass and hasn’t been to the confessional yet and has a mortal sin on his soul? And so on and so on. The kids ask where’s Uncle Bob? We love him. Oh he missed Mass last wk and he has a mortal sin on his soul so we are forbidding him to join us for our Christmas family dinner. If the table needs to be filled only by perfect people, we might as well cancel dinner altogether. Or just set one place setting for Jesus and He will have to eat and celebrate His birthday alone. Bizarre is one way to put it. I just can’t wrap my head around it. And some wonder why more aren’t interested in the faith?
O
OraLabora
Guest
We do worse, in fact.
We tell them that they can “come to dinner”, but they have to sit over in the corner, not at the table, where they can hear us talk (and maybe even hear condemn them while we do), and watch us eat, but they’re not allowed to eat themselves.
Is that not the case when we tell the imperfect “you can come, listen to the Liturgy of the Word, hear a homily that may just condemn you, and watch us receive communion but you can’t”.
I think it’s what the Holy Father meant when he said “The Eucharist is medicine for the soul, not a prize for the perfect”.
R
RosslynV
Guest
The gay couple that comes to a family gathering is openly proclaiming their sinful lifestyle to all and proud of it by their presence, whereas other hypothetical sinners at the dinner table can easily keep their sin “quiet”. There’s a big difference. The host of the dinner can easily say to a gay family member to come but not bring his or her partner, and just as easily tell a straight family member not to bring along the person he’s shacking up with.
R
RosslynV
Guest
There’s a Church teaching that one has to be worthy to receive the Eucharist otherwise you commit a mortal sin.
- Status