Cardinal Burke questions couple's suggestion to Synod on welcoming gay son and lover [CC]

[frobert]

Another compromise would be that (s)he would refer to the other partner simply as a “friend”. My son, who is not gay, often has one or more of his male friends over for dinner. He’ll have his girlfriend over too when he’s dating someone. Whether he is sleeping with her or not is not relevant to coming to dinner because he keeps it to himself and doesn’t talk about his sex life at the table and nor does his girlfriend.

I would expect the same degree of decorum from a gay family member coming to dinner with a “friend”.

Thank you! It is certainly the obvious or should I say the “elusive obvious” that seems to escape some of us.

Let me add, I would expect any family member and any guest in my home to be appropriate in actions and in conversation.

 

[FollowChrist34]

thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/tcmassie/breaking_pope_ousts_top_vatican_judge_after_incendiary_anti_gay_comments

“Breaking: Pope Ousts Top Vatican Judge Known For Incendiary Anti-Gay Comments”

Well this is looked upon as a demotion of Card. Burke and people on secular web sites are dancing about it as Pope Francis agreeing with gays, etc.

Yes, this article confirms my earlier point - you are “anti-gay” if you defend Catholic doctrine about homosexuality - common social perception these days. We need to be aware of this trend, and I would argue use extreme caution here. “Who am I to judge?” goes BOTH ways.

 

[FollowChrist34]

Another compromise would be that (s)he would refer to the other partner simply as a “friend”. My son, who is not gay, often has one or more of his male friends over for dinner. He’ll have his girlfriend over too when he’s dating someone. Whether he is sleeping with her or not is not relevant to coming to dinner because he keeps it to himself and doesn’t talk about his sex life at the table and nor does his girlfriend.

I would expect the same degree of decorum from a gay family member coming to dinner with a “friend”.

I am all for charity and love, especially at Christmas in family situations. I will say this: coming from a home with very liberal parents with a decidedly countercultural modus operandi, don’t expect your kids to grow up in openness and then pop into a traditional marriage setting with the necessary tools and self-discipline to handle it (or even to desire it). While of course there are exceptions, generally children will take their cues from you and what you do not what you would like them to do. Give the child time to mature and develop a conscience - in charity and discipline. It’s ok to protect them when they are young. Girls start wearing make up now at what, like 8, 9? Worrying about their figures. Yes, they will learn about sexuality but if you can counterbalance that a little bit, why not do it?

I stand by my suggestion to do separate meetings. Meet the son and lover for dinner, concert, something to show your love for him at this time, but have a separate Christmas with the kids - I would even tell the son why. If you had a good, honest enough relationship, my guess is that would be ok, especially if you expend genuine effort to do something else meaningful with him so he knows you are really there for him. Bottom line is if you have real love for both, it will come through. And you haven’t sacrificed your principles or set a questionable example for the child at such a young age. Just my opinion.

 

[oneofmany]

One of my friends has a gay son. He and his partner come over for holidays, etc but there isn’t any other children in the family.

When he went to a family wedding they had a dance. He told his mother he and his partner could dance that way but my friend told him she would rather not have them dance. They didn’t out of respect for her. That is the kind of thing parents run up against though.

Most of the extended relatives know he is gay and living with a guy, plus some of the relatives went to his so called gay wedding but his parents did not attend. My friend and her husband are in the group encourage. That helps them.

 

[Joie_de_Vivre]

If you had a son who you raised Catholic wanted to bring a woman who he was civilly married (not ecclesiastically married) to and referred to as his wife would you prevent him from coming?

One of my uncles was married and divorced more than just a couple times yet my siblings and I still managed to learn that divorce was wrong.

Comparing a same sex couple to a guy who has a sexual relationship with his dog because both are sinful is like comparing a 15 year old boy who masturbates with Felix Dzerzhinsky.

 

[RGCheek]

One of my friends has a gay son. He and his partner come over for holidays, etc but there isn’t any other children in the family.

When he went to a family wedding they had a dance. He told his mother he and his partner could dance that way but my friend told him she would rather not have them dance. They didn’t out of respect for her. That is the kind of thing parents run up against though.

Most of the extended relatives know he is gay and living with a guy, plus some of the relatives went to his so called gay wedding but his parents did not attend. My friend and her husband are in the group encourage. That helps them.

That gay son did the right thing and showed respect for the wishes of his parents, but that is less typical these days of militant homosexual normalization.

To a great many people to even suggest that there is qualitative dfiferences between men and women or gays and straights is akin to espousing racism.

 

[Elizium23]

If you had a son who you raised Catholic wanted to bring a woman who he was civilly married (not ecclesiastically married) to and referred to as his wife would you prevent him from coming?

Yes, justice demands it.

 

[Brother_Andre]

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.

You lived a sheltered life.

 

[Brother_Andre]

Cardinal Burke’s hard line on same-sex issues, coupled with his well known fetish for ecclesiastical fashions and medieval forms of elaborate and theatrical liturgical costume, raise many questions in the minds of skeptical Catholics. Does he see himself as some kind of last bulwark defending the Church from dangers that he alone is qualified to define? He is the very definition of clericalism. He isn’t Pope and never will be. He needs to cause less trouble.

 

[Elizium23]

Cardinal Burke’s hard line on same-sex issues, coupled with his well known fetish for ecclesiastical fashions and medieval forms of elaborate and theatrical liturgical costume, raise many questions in the minds of skeptical Catholics. Does he see himself as some kind of last bulwark defending the Church from dangers that he alone is qualified to define? He is the very definition of clericalism. He isn’t Pope and never will be. He needs to cause less trouble.

“Skeptical Catholics” is really kind of an oxymoron. Be one or the other, you can’t be both!

 

[Path_Finder]

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.

I think that is an excellent observation.

Though, I do need to reread the story, sometimes, I don’t always get all of the details correct.

 

[PaulinVA]

I would hope that siblings, children and grandchildren would learn from having a gay couple at the dinner table that no matter what they do, mom and dad will still love them and they still have a family to come home to.

I think THAT is important to know.

 

[Elizium23]

I would hope that siblings, children and grandchildren would learn from having a gay couple at the dinner table that no matter what they do, mom and dad will still love them and they still have a family to come home to.

I think THAT is important to know.

I was estranged from my family for several years. The details are not important, but let me make myself clear: I deserved every minute of exile. I had been asking for it a long time. It was only by the grace of God that we did reconcile, and for my parents, my past is forgiven and forgotten. My brother-in-law has grudgingly accepted me, but he can’t easily forget. The same with my niece. I did permanent damage to my relations with family and I will have to live with that.

But during that time I did not have a family to come home to. I was alone and I was quite down-and-out. It was a pit of my own digging. Sometimes we make choices in life at the point of no return. Our parents can warn us off, and teach us not to test the boundaries, but sometimes parents need to practice “Tough Love”. Remember the teen drama in the 80s by that name? If your child has real, unfixable problems, such as active homosexuality, then sometimes the only solution is to put distance between their influence and the family.

This is a medicinal penalty. The family always prays for reunification. And sometimes it happens. I am living proof that it can.

 

[RGCheek]

I was estranged from my family for several years. The details are not important, but let me make myself clear: I deserved every minute of exile. I had been asking for it a long time. It was only by the grace of God that we did reconcile, and for my parents, my past is forgiven and forgotten. My brother-in-law has grudgingly accepted me, but he can’t easily forget. The same with my niece. I did permanent damage to my relations with family and I will have to live with that.

But during that time I did not have a family to come home to. I was alone and I was quite down-and-out. It was a pit of my own digging. Sometimes we make choices in life at the point of no return. Our parents can warn us off, and teach us not to test the boundaries, but sometimes parents need to practice “Tough Love”. Remember the teen drama in the 80s by that name? If your child has real, unfixable problems, such as active homosexuality, then sometimes the only solution is to put distance between their influence and the family.

This is a medicinal penalty. The family always prays for reunification. And sometimes it happens. I am living proof that it can.

We should all remember that the golden moment in the story of the Prodigal Son was when the young man goes home in desperation, having wasted his inheritance, and his father welcomes him back as his son, and not the common laborer that the son thought he might be received as.

We should also remember that it was the older brother who still had his inheritance and ran the place when the Dad finally did die.

 

[FollowChrist34]

I was estranged from my family for several years. The details are not important, but let me make myself clear: I deserved every minute of exile. I had been asking for it a long time. It was only by the grace of God that we did reconcile, and for my parents, my past is forgiven and forgotten. My brother-in-law has grudgingly accepted me, but he can’t easily forget. The same with my niece. I did permanent damage to my relations with family and I will have to live with that.

But during that time I did not have a family to come home to. I was alone and I was quite down-and-out. It was a pit of my own digging. Sometimes we make choices in life at the point of no return. Our parents can warn us off, and teach us not to test the boundaries, but sometimes parents need to practice “Tough Love”. Remember the teen drama in the 80s by that name? If your child has real, unfixable problems, such as active homosexuality, then sometimes the only solution is to put distance between their influence and the family.

This is a medicinal penalty. The family always prays for reunification. And sometimes it happens. I am living proof that it can.

Yeah, my family has its share of black sheep too. And I agree you don’t really meaningfully reconcile until there is contrition. Up to that point, it’s just tension, often accompanied by an incredible amount of pain and anger on both sides. Bad influences are just that. Our black sheep (not me!) would agree with this assessment - I am happy to say these days they are back in the fold.

 

[Arandur]

Question: Apart from the family gathering (particularly for** Elizium23**, given that experience), do you find that it is best to still have only minimal contact with family members who are living in serious sin?

Or is there a way (and what is it) to still try as much as possible to maintain regular and loving contact?

My parents struggled with my Dad’s brothers, particularly one who was an alcoholic.

 

[FollowChrist34]

Question: Apart from the family gathering (particularly for** Elizium23**, given that experience), do you find that it is best to still have only minimal contact with family members who are living in serious sin?

Or is there a way (and what is it) to still try as much as possible to maintain regular and loving contact?

My parents struggled with my Dad’s brothers, particularly one who was an alcoholic.

Here’s my take. I’ve seen this played out in my family and in others for years. I think you should try to maintain as regular contact as you can - often you are at the “not speaking” stage where contact is completely lost (no current address, email, etc.), so obviously you do what you can. I have seen these things go on for years - problems with alcoholism, drugs, relationships that parents/family don’t approve of, prostitution, run-ins with the law, kids falling away from the Church. A lot of times the estranged person is young; I will say that as I have gotten older I have watched most of these estrangements heal. But to say it doesn’t involve contrition on the part of the offender is just plain wrong. I agree the family has to relent too. But frankly when people are messed up they cause a lot of harm not just to themselves but others. I had a stepsister who used to break into our house and steal stuff when I was in junior high then run off with her boyfriend to California, even Mexico once. My stepmom would go get her time and again - lots of drama. That didn’t get resolved for about 15 years when my stepsister settled down - every time you were nice to her you paid a very high price and accomplished absolutely nothing other than to enable her - she just used people. I was the one who told her where we kept the spare key so she could use the shower. (I see her now at family gatherings but honestly don’t really trust her.) Really helping people like that is complicated. Sometimes setting boundaries is a good thing.

 

[PaulinVA]

We should all remember that the golden moment in the story of the Prodigal Son was when the young man goes home in desperation, having wasted his inheritance, and his father welcomes him back as his son, and not the common laborer that the son thought he might be received as.

We should also remember that it was the older brother who still had his inheritance and ran the place when the Dad finally did die.

People in the gay community tell us that suicide is a big problem for gay people. I think it has to do with the lack of acceptance by family and friends.

So, you have to keep them living long enough to convert/reconcile/whatever. I think unconditional love from a family goes a long way towards that.

I hear what others have posted, and I understand firmness in relation to these situations. But, as they used to say, if the operation is successful but the patient dies, what have you gained?

 

[manualman]

You think maybe I haven’t heard that teaching?

There’s also a parable in the Bible about the Pharisee and the Tax Collector.

So which one are you? The Tax collector saying that grave sinners aren’t worthy of the Eucharist or the Pharisee thanking God that you aren’t insufferably self-righteous like those FoxNews viewers?

The trick, I think, is in being on guard against vanity in both cases. Scripture really DOES tell us that receiving the Eucharist while in a state of mortal sin causes more harm than good. We either believe that or we don’t. Saint Paul even anticipates your logical next argument which might be to assert that certain sinners are better off not even hearing the gospel so that at judgment they cannot be accused by what they have not heard preached. He refutes that too.

In the end, catholics must be ruthlessly on guard against our own self-righteousness and the temptation to classify OTHER people’s favored sins are worse than ours (scapegoating). But we must also resist the temptation to be embarrassed of the gospel and unwilling to suffer the scorn of those who seek to redefine sins as virtues.

How that plays out in the scenario of the OP, I think depends more on the actual people and situation than the objective facts. We do the best we can to love the sinner, really love them and to make sure they know it while refusing to accept their assertion that their favorite sins are actually virtues. Somehow we have to convey to them that we love them AND that we’re convinced that their choices and actions are destroying them. This is possible. We do it for addicts all the time. We can do it for those trapped in other forms of sinful prisons.

 

[OraLabora]

So which one are you? The Tax collector saying that grave sinners aren’t worthy of the Eucharist or the Pharisee thanking God that you aren’t insufferably self-righteous like those FoxNews viewers?

For sure the tax collector. When we beat our chests and say “Lord, I am not worthy to receive you…”, I always profoundly feel it.

When I hear the words “but only say the word and I shall be healed”, I am profoundly reassured. All the pity that we deny that healing to those who are seeking but aren’t quite there yet…