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

[AnnArbor]

Jesus in the Gospel account posted, was not talking about genuine righteousness, but those who thought they were, but were not in God’s eyes.

Hence, self-righteous.

Jim

We must be talking about a different passage. I was referring to the parable of the sheep and goats in Matthew 25. In which Jesus refers to the righteous on his right, who inherit eternal life. Which passage are you discussing?

 

[Pronger1]

Jesus ate with tax collectors and prostitutes, both who were living lives in mortal sin.

He was condemned by the Pharisees who saw this as an abomination.

How will we respond to those living in sin, like Jesus or the Pharisees ?

Jim

Depends. Do they profess to be of the same faith as you? If so, the direction is clear in the Bible.

1 Corinthians 5:11

But now I am writing you that you must not associate with anyone who calls himself a brother but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or a slanderer, a drunkard or a swindler. With such a man do not even eat.

If they don’t profess to be the same faith, it is also clear.

1 Corinthians 5:12-13

What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? 13 God will judge those outside. “Expel the wicked man from among you.”

 

[Sy_Noe]

I would not have included that because it has nothing to do with this topic. The statement by Cardinal Burke had nothing to do with eminent threat to the children, as in exposure to a pedophile. No one has suggested this. The threat that they would need protected from is being led to accept homosexual behavior as just an alternative to moral sexual activity, or celibacy. Parents have to determine when a child is able to understand that people can be loved without endorsing behavior.

I also think it good to point out that the parent or the son can adapt to meet for the Holidays. In my opinion, a parent wanting to protect their child has a better reason than a person not wanting to have one dinner away from their lover.

In addition to “all gays are not pedophiles” straw man, another is that the son in question is being excluded. He is not. It is only his homosexual lover in a situation that a child might be morally misled that is being excluded. In reality, most situations could be resolved with compromise and a loving parent, as well as the loving son, can find that compromise.

Excuse me it was the pederast uncle that someone brought up.

But we’re never going to see eye to eye on this. The bottom line for me is I just don’t see shunning family and his partner at Christmas dinner as valuing family when you can’t even sit down on Christmas Day of all times and share a meal together.

If Jesus and the apostles or His mother Mary and stepfather Joseph were sitting around eating a meal together and little children were in His midst, and approaching was a hungry gay couple holding hands, I don’t believe He would refuse to feed them.

All I can gather from this conversation is those agreeing with Cardinal Burke either would only eat Christmas dinner with fellow practicing faithful Catholics or private sinners. Maybe if the gay couple were hungry you would. But in that case they would still be at the table with children.

 

[Emily2014]

If Jesus and the apostles or His mother Mary and stepfather Joseph were sitting around eating a meal together and little children were in His midst, and approaching was a hungry gay couple holding hands, I don’t believe He would refuse to feed them. .

Of course He would feed them and welcome them into His home. Who could possibly think that He would ever turn them away? What about the Beatitudes?

 

[EIF5A]

Of course He would feed them and welcome them into His home. Who could possibly think that He would ever turn them away? What about the Beatitudes?

Hmm…perhaps…but couldn’t He also have said, “Go and sin no more”?

 

[JimG]

In our neighborhood, there were two kids—brothers–whom other parents would not allow their own children to associate with. It wasn’t because they hated these kids, they just thought that they would be a bad influence on their own children. The brothers in question seemed to believe that stealing was normal behavior and had no moral qualms against it. Other parents did not agree so they did not allow their children to associate with them. Was that a hateful thing to do? I don’t think so; it was just parents exercising discretion over their children’s moral influences. Parents have to exercise such discretion even when it comes to their own relatives, but they usually know what’s best for their children.

 

[ILIKECEREAL]

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.
.

So lieing to the child is better the explaining life to her? Lies add up.

 

[RGCheek]

Of course He would feed them and welcome them into His home. Who could possibly think that He would ever turn them away? What about the Beatitudes?

Of course He would have told them to stop living in sin and repent.

I find it amazing that some people think He would have pretended that nothing was amiss and just welcomed them in.

Let’s use a different sin that still holds some moral revulsion in our degenerate society today like say a racist; If the top Grand Wizard of the KKK came to Jesus and asked to sit and break bread with Him, what would Jesus have done?

I see no difference; He would have told those men to repent of their racism and hatred of their fellow human beings.

 

[JimG]

So lieing to the child is better the explaining life to her? Lies add up.

I don’t know how old the child is, but I would surely hesitate to tell a child “your aunt is shacking up with her boyfriend.” And maybe by now the relationship has the status of a common law marriage.

 

[RGCheek]

Is the progression of the people in question relevant?

IF a gay man came to dinner at my house as he was say a co-worker and I invited all my co-workers to dinner, would it matter that he was never a Catholic?

I think that is very different than a case where a gay man is a fallen Catholic and his new live in lover was a similar fallen Catholic who was in good standing with the church prior to meeting his partner.

The first case I would honor the invitation but speak the Truth if the subject came up. The second case would never happen if I knew before hand, and it would never happen again if it happened the first time.

 

[Sy_Noe]

Hmm…perhaps…but couldn’t He also have said, “Go and sin no more”?

Before or after He fed them? I don’t believe parents sharing Christmas dinner at their family table with their son and his partner along with others in their family, necessarily means they condone his lifestyle or what the CC calls sin. There is no physical threat to the children. And the children are eventually going to see homosexuals. So it might even be better for them to learn of their existence in the family setting.

 

[Sy_Noe]

This is all getting a bit tiresome now

Yes but I’m just reminded I haven’t ate today and it’s a dinner time.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

In fact, the scholars of the law in Jesus’ day were so wrapped up in doctrine as an end in itself, they were unable to see that Jesus was leading people down a new and surprising path toward his glory, the pope said Oct. 13 during his morning Mass in the Domus Sanctae Marthae, where he lives.

Jesus did “strange things,” like “walk with sinners, eat with tax collectors” – things the scholars of the law “did not like; doctrine was in danger, that doctrine of the law” that they and the “theologians had created over the centuries,” Pope Francis statement at the Synod

Jim

 

[ProVobis]

So it might even be better for them to learn of their existence in the family setting.

I might want to prepare them first privately. Nothing like stirring up anger or fear in front of a crowd. There is bound to be severe repercussions later with that.

 

[RGCheek]

"In fact, the scholars of the law in Jesus’ day were so wrapped up in doctrine as an end in itself, they were unable to see that Jesus was leading people down a new and surprising path toward his glory, the pope said Oct. 13 during his morning Mass in the Domus Sanctae Marthae, where he lives.

Jesus did “strange things,” like “walk with sinners, eat with tax collectors” – things the scholars of the law “did not like; doctrine was in danger, that doctrine of the law” that they and the “theologians had created over the centuries,” Pope Francis statement at the Synod."

Jim

Jesus was introducing a New Testament.

IS this what the bishops are doing here?

 

[JimR-OCDS]

"In fact, the scholars of the law in Jesus’ day were so wrapped up in doctrine as an end in itself, they were unable to see that Jesus was leading people down a new and surprising path toward his glory, the pope said Oct. 13 during his morning Mass in the Domus Sanctae Marthae, where he lives.

Jesus did “strange things,” like “walk with sinners, eat with tax collectors” – things the scholars of the law “did not like; doctrine was in danger, that doctrine of the law” that they and the “theologians had created over the centuries,” Pope Francis statement at the Synod."

Jesus was introducing a New Testament.

IS this what the bishops are doing here?

Is that what you think the Bishops are doing ?

Jim

 

[OraLabora]

Is the progression of the people in question relevant?

IF a gay man came to dinner at my house as he was say a co-worker and I invited all my co-workers to dinner, would it matter that he was never a Catholic?

I think that is very different than a case where a gay man is a fallen Catholic and his new live in lover was a similar fallen Catholic who was in good standing with the church prior to meeting his partner.

The first case I would honor the invitation but speak the Truth if the subject came up. The second case would never happen if I knew before hand, and it would never happen again if it happened the first time.

In today’s work environment, if you withdrew the invitation in the second case you could find yourself at worst with a discrimination lawsuit on your hands and at best some very uncomfortable moments with the HR director. It’s either all of your co-workers, or none of them. Their private lives, in the professional context, are in fact none of anyone’s business.

 

[ProVobis]

In today’s work environment, if you withdrew the invitation in the second case you could find yourself at worst with a discrimination lawsuit on your hands and at best some very uncomfortable moments with the HR director. It’s either all of your co-workers, or none of them. Their private lives, in the professional context, are in fact none of anyone’s business.

Perhaps but if it’s so private why do some of them keep pictures on their desks and/or spread them all over Facebook. Personally I never had a grudge against them, many of them good people, but let’s be frank about the private part.

 

[Sy_Noe]

"In fact, the scholars of the law in Jesus’ day were so wrapped up in doctrine as an end in itself, they were unable to see that Jesus was leading people down a new and surprising path toward his glory, the pope said Oct. 13 during his morning Mass in the Domus Sanctae Marthae, where he lives.

Jesus did “strange things,” like “walk with sinners, eat with tax collectors” – things the scholars of the law “did not like; doctrine was in danger, that doctrine of the law” that they and the “theologians had created over the centuries,” Pope Francis statement at the Synod."

Jesus was introducing a New Testament.

IS this what the bishops are doing here?

No I just was watching EWTN News and a couple of interviews. My impression was what some are trying to introduce is simply a new, compassionate, gentler tone. What the Holy Father since the start of his papacy has seemed to be trying to get Catholics to do. I think the idea may be you can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar.

Has anyone who is on the side of a more strident tone considered that the tone may have become too harsh in Catholic circles in recent times and Christ called this Pope for this time and these bishops to develop a message in this synod and the one a year from now, that a more compassionate tone and example is needed?

To meet people where they are. To welcome them. To surely be able to invite your gay son and his loving partner to eat Christmas dinner with your family.

 

[Emily2014]

I might want to prepare them first privately. Nothing like stirring up anger or fear in front of a crowd. There is bound to be severe repercussions later with that.

Why would there be fear or anger? From what source do young children learn to react in such a negative way? Surely it would be better for them to respect the privacy of others? Why should the personal relationships of adults concern them if they are brought up in an atmosphere of acceptance and a respect for personal privacy.