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

  • Thread starter Thread starter Catholic_Press
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sy_Noe said:
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.
Click to expand...
I am very traditional in my Catholic values and teaching, and NOT ONE to condone sin of any kind, having already made my case with family members, but of course with all charity and love. But, I think it would be highly divisive and not a help in ‘getting the message across’ if you would refuse your son or daughter and their significant other for Christmas Dinner. Somehow, you need to keep the channels of communication open. That much Cardinal Burke is right on about. But I don’t think a refusal to admit them for Christmas Dinner is the way to do it. That said, I have refused a relative with her heterosexual significant other (not yet married) same sleeping quarters when visiting, (you set up different beds in different rooms) but I think that’s a little different from not allowing them to visit at all… To me, it’s going a little too far to get the message across and does more harm than good. To me, this rule applies to either heterosexual or homosexual people. Either way, you must have a heart to heart with these people and somehow convey to them how this is dangerous for their spiritual welfare, and damaging to their very soul. You also cannot keep up a constant mantra of ‘correction’ the same way you can’t harp on a child that has fallen away from the Church…it drives them further away if you badger. Same rule seems to apply. Oh and don’t forget to fast and pray for these people! Probably the most effective conversion tool.👍
 
TMC said:
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?
Click to expand...
I don’t think Jesus would have done that. But He probably would have found a way to lovingly correct them in their sin…therein lies our challenge, I do believe, and a challenge it is! How to confront without them becoming defensive, and therefore not hearing you, or becoming ‘self righteous’ in their sin and attacking you. It’s an age old problem. Easy to say…hard to do.
 
Sy_Noe said:
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?
Click to expand...
OraLabora said:
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.
Click to expand...
The Poles et al have an easy solution for this. It’s called the opłatek. Everyone participates in this communion.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christmas_wafer
 
RosslynV said:
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.
Click to expand...
My family Christmas dinners are hosted by a couple “shacking up”. We can have rather large gatherings and they have the largest table, the biggest kitchen and dining area. So I’m not supposed to celebrate Christmas with my family? If not sharing a Christmas meal and celebrating the birth of Christ with those I love, even if they live in sin, is what Burke and the CC proposes, sorry I can’t subscribe to that. Life is short. There may be a family member not with us next yr. And I can’t be that righteous. Different strokes though for different folks I suppose.
 
RosslynV said:
There’s a Church teaching that one has to be worthy to receive the Eucharist otherwise you commit a mortal sin.
Click to expand...
Yes you are correct but as hard as I try I just can’t bring myself to believe others should be deciding who is worthy enough. I believe that should be left between God and the person, between God and what is inside each of our hearts. He knows. Take even someone who discerns the body and blood and Christ giving up His for us all on the cross. I can’t think of one reason why an omnipotent, loving, merciful God would be incapable of saying the word at any given moment, and one hearing and feeling in his or her heart a healing, and a call to approach Jesus and receive more medicine. And Jesus then turning them away. I can’t limit God’s power that way. And to me it goes against what Jesus said in Jn 6 about how He would turn no one away who His Father brings.
 
Years ago, my wife’s grandmother shunned her daughter, because she had divorced and remarried. The mother never allowed her daughter and husband into her home right through to her own death. The daughter’s 2nd marriage lasted over 45 years before she died.

The grandmother lost all those years with her daughter, because the parish priests at that time told her it would be sinful to condone the second marriage by allowing them into her home.

What a cruel way to have treated such couples, but back in the 50’s and 60’s, this was the way it was for many Catholics.

I see a similar situation by Cardinal Burke saying the parents should shun their son and his partner at family gatherings.

As I see it, allowing them into their home for family gatherings isn’t necessarily condoning their lifestyle, but rather, it’s not excluding them from the love that exist between parents and child.

Jim
 
JimR-OCDS said:
Years ago, my wife’s grandmother shunned her daughter, because she had divorced and remarried. The mother never allowed her daughter and husband into her home right through to her own death. The daughter’s 2nd marriage lasted over 45 years before she died.

The grandmother lost all those years with her daughter, because the parish priests at that time told her it would be sinful to condone the second marriage by allowing them into her home.

What a cruel way to have treated such couples, but back in the 50’s and 60’s, this was the way it was for many Catholics.
Click to expand...
Back then, I believe they would have been excommunicated.

In 1970, Paul VI lifted such excommunications. That gesture seemed to be pastoral enough IMO, without changing doctrine.
 
RosslynV said:
There’s a Church teaching that one has to be worthy to receive the Eucharist otherwise you commit a mortal sin.
Click to expand...
You think maybe I haven’t heard that teaching?

There’s also a parable in the Bible about the Pharisee and the Tax Collector.
 
OraLabora said:
We do worse, in fact.
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”.
Click to expand...
👍 Yes!
 
Sy_Noe said:
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.
Click to expand...
👍:clapping:
 
RosslynV said:
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.
Click to expand...
How could you possibly justify such an action? :nope:
 
Emily2014 said:
How could you possibly justify such an action? :nope:
Click to expand...
I think Cardinal Burke mentions something about a possible scandal?

Didn’t Christ say…?
It would be better for them to be thrown into the sea with a millstone tied around their neck than to cause one of these little ones to stumble.
Click to expand...
Luke 17:2 and Mark 9:42
 
Emily2014 said:
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”.
Click to expand...
That’s the problem… They are sinners (we all are). If you pretend that homosexual marriage / coupling is ok, then you teach the kids that it’s not a mortal sin.

The same thing with divorced & remarried, and trial marriage. However, with divorced & remarried, you can his that from the children. You can sometimes hide trial marriage too. But gay relationships are almost impossible to hide.

To me, if I had a brother or sister who was in a same-sex relationship, it would be like having a sibling who was a convicted felon. I would still love my sibling, but not want him/her to influence my children.

Note: my sister’s situation gravely concerns me. She’s been in a trial marriage for 7 years and has two kids. Still not married. If my daughter ever asked, she’s married. And if my sister ever does finally get married, I don’t know if I would let my daughter know or maybe tell her that her Aunt is renewing her vows.

Also my mother-in-law is in a trial marriage. And while I would prefer never bringing my kids to her home, my wife won’t go along with that. So I want my daughter to think my MIL is married, and preferably with an annulment.

These sinful situations hurt the whole family because they bring scandal or cause family members to lie to children .
 
Considering how some alcoholics behave, I think it would be unChristian to subject other family members to people who show up drunk and within an hour or so are looking for a verbal or physical altercation with someone. Now if a person with a drinking problem is capable of civil behaviour, then I’d have no problem with them being present at a family gathering, but if it’s a case (and I guarantee you there are many) where an individual will cause trouble 10 times out of 10, then I would not feel unChristian in not inviting them.
 
Reading over some comments from other Catholics on these forums is rather discouraging.

In this example I would ask other Catholics if they’d be welcoming of a family member and their ‘partner’ if they were openly engaged in an adulterous relationship. Both instances the person is publicly involved in mortal sin.

The correct answer in both cases is the parent should state to the child that they are welcome to visit only when they cease with their mortal sin. Otherwise they are not welcome. This avoids the problem of scandalizing other family members and friends.
 
SJMink said:
Reading over some comments from other Catholics on these forums is rather discouraging.

In this example I would ask other Catholics if they’d be welcoming of a family member and their ‘partner’ if they were openly engaged in an adulterous relationship. Both instances the person is publicly involved in mortal sin.

The correct answer in both cases is the parent should state to the child that they are welcome to visit only when they cease with their mortal sin. Otherwise they are not welcome. This avoids the problem of scandalizing other family members and friends.
Click to expand...
And this likely means you will cease to see your child any longer, and will no longer be an influence in his life.

As a parent, I would say the correct answer is “we love you anyway even if we believe you shouldn’t be doing what you’re doing. Would you like some more roast beef?”
 
I’ve been down this road with a lesbian step sister in law who had one of those gay marriages in the States and my daughter thinking it was okay because well it was step grandmas’s daughter after all and grandma associated with the lesbian and her partner so that must make it right mum so what’s your problem?

So if ever I am expected to invite homosexuals couples to Christmas Dinner then dinner is cancelled.
 
I am surprised that a Cardinal would do an interview with LifeSiteNews.

Maybe he doesn’t know the tone of their reporting- at least I hope he doesn’t
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top