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

[RGCheek]

Well it’s like I tell my kids, my advice is free and you get what you pay for

Fortunately rather than be sarcastic they usually just ignore me…

yes, kids are wonderful for the from-one-ear-out-the-other effect.

But I was only being mildly sarcastic in an effort to return the focus to my question.

 

[phil19034]

Sorry – I misquoted. You said,

"It is inappropriate to have a family member engaged in.blatant mortal sin at family functions "

I also doubt the family member will be engaging in blatant mortal sin at family functions.
If what you mean is that someone who commits mortal sin should be excluded from all family functions – how are you going to determine that? Do you know who around your dinner table is engaging in sex without being open to life? Who abused his/her spouse or child? Who missed Mass without a serious reason?

We never really know the state of another’s soul. It’s enough to try to work on our own souls.

It’s the sin of scandal, which lots of people do not understand in today’s culture.

Scandal is when someone sets a bad example by publicly endorsing sin, acting if something isn’t sinful, or even proud of their sinning.

While scandal can have a negative impact on anyone, it has a major impact on children and young adults.

Scandal sets the impression that the grave sin(s) the person commits/endorses must be ok (or just a venial sin), especially if that person is otherwise a good person. My siblings and I were scandalized by our dad because he rarely went to Mass. So we used to say, “why do we need to go if dad doesn’t go?”

I later scandalized my siblings and parents by living with my wife for several years before we were married. My two of my siblings later did the same thing and one of them is still not married after two kids and living together for almost seven years. We scandalized my parents and in-laws by presenting that living in sin is ok. Now my mother-in-law is doing it, and the first thin that came out of my MIL’s mouth when my wife tried to talk some sense into her was “you did it!”

Scandal is very real. It’s bad enough when the culture is setting a bad example, but when loved ones do it… There are damaging affects.

Personally, I want to do everything in my power to prevent my children from learning about my trial marriage, and I have no idea how to address my mother-in-law’s (as she has no plans to ever get married).

 

[RGCheek]

Though I don’t equate eating family Christmas dinner with the Eucharist, I only know who Catholics believe is the current successor to Peter, has said it is medicine and nourishment, not a prize for the perfect. Peace.

I thought the church doctrine is that we have to be without mortal sin before taking communion?

I really don’t care if you call that a prize or not, but is the church doctrine that we must be without mortal sin or not?

 

[RGCheek]

False charity plays pretend in front of family and friends, gives scandal to others and*** ‘loves’ the intrinsically disordered son right into Hell***.

Yes, it is astonishing that so many lose sight of that ultimate cruelty.

We should always remember to take the eternal perspective as opposed to merely considering problems and effects of this world.

 

[RGCheek]

No it doesn’t, you are not going to change them by not having them to join you.It is not for us to judge and say they will go to hell. Its upvto god to jydge NOT us.

It is up to us to keep the Truth of Gods Love and Laws before us and our friends and family.

Would you be as forgiving and inclusive if your brother that came over for dinner was a neoNazi covered in swastika tattoos? Would you want your kids to think those swastikas were just a different normal?

 

[ProVobis]

Why would there be fear or anger?

I might ask you the same in your tone.

 

[AnnArbor]

It’s the sin of scandal, which lots of people do not understand in today’s culture.

Scandal is when someone sets a bad example by publicly endorsing sin, acting if something isn’t sinful, or even proud of their sinning.

While scandal can have a negative impact on anyone, it has a major impact on children and young adults.

Scandal sets the impression that the grave sin(s) the person commits/endorses must be ok (or just a venial sin), especially if that person is otherwise a good person. My siblings and I were scandalized by our dad because he rarely went to Mass. So we used to say, “why do we need to go if dad doesn’t go?”

I later scandalized my siblings and parents by living with my wife for several years before we were married. My two of my siblings later did the same thing and one of them is still not married after two kids and living together for almost seven years. We scandalized my parents and in-laws by presenting that living in sin is ok. Now my mother-in-law is doing it, and the first thin that came out of my MIL’s mouth when my wife tried to talk some sense into her was “you did it!”

Scandal is very real. It’s bad enough when the culture is setting a bad example, but when loved ones do it… There are damaging affects.

Personally, I want to do everything in my power to prevent my children from learning about my trial marriage, and I have no idea how to address my mother-in-law’s (as she has no plans to ever get married).

I guess I don’t see Christmas dinner as scandal. I think we can explain to our children that we think a family member is engaged in something we believe is wrong, but that even though they are not perfect, they are still part of our family and we love them.

Our children are going to live in a world where they cannot isolate themselves from everyone who lives in sin – they might want to learn a charitable response within their families instead of having to figure it out later.

 

[ProVobis]

In that case if it’s so important for you to know ahead of time, you might have to inquire then as to else is invited to the family’s Christmas dinner when your invitation is extended.

It’s just a suggestion. I’m no psychologist. If you want to “surprise” them, who am I to stop you? Besides, I thought most people want to know “who else” is coming before they accept an invitation. Maybe not.

 

[AnnArbor]

It’s just a suggestion. I’m no psychologist. If you want to “surprise” them, who am I to stop you? Besides, I thought most people want to know “who else” is coming before they accept an invitation. Maybe not.

Really? We go to a large family gathering at Christmas. Unless I am hosting, I have no idea who else is going to be there. Nor would I have thought to get a guest list ahead of time.

 

[ProVobis]

It’s the sin of scandal, which lots of people do not understand in today’s culture.

Scandal is when someone sets a bad example by publicly endorsing sin, acting if something isn’t sinful, or even proud of their sinning.

While scandal can have a negative impact on anyone, it has a major impact on children and young adults.

Scandal sets the impression that the grave sin(s) the person commits/endorses must be ok (or just a venial sin), especially if that person is otherwise a good person. My siblings and I were scandalized by our dad because he rarely went to Mass. So we used to say, “why do we need to go if dad doesn’t go?”

I later scandalized my siblings and parents by living with my wife for several years before we were married. My two of my siblings later did the same thing and one of them is still not married after two kids and living together for almost seven years. We scandalized my parents and in-laws by presenting that living in sin is ok. Now my mother-in-law is doing it, and the first thin that came out of my MIL’s mouth when my wife tried to talk some sense into her was “you did it!”

Scandal is very real. It’s bad enough when the culture is setting a bad example, but when loved ones do it… There are damaging affects.

Personally, I want to do everything in my power to prevent my children from learning about my trial marriage, and I have no idea how to address my mother-in-law’s (as she has no plans to ever get married).

I’d give you 8 thumbs up but I have committed scandal myself a few times. I think each priest was surprised when I mentioned it in confession.

I guess I don’t see Christmas dinner as scandal. I think we can explain to our children that we think a family member is engaged in something we believe is wrong, but that even though they are not perfect, they are still part of our family and we love them.

Our children are going to live in a world where they cannot isolate themselves from everyone who lives in sin – they might want to learn a charitable response within their families instead of having to figure it out later.

That demonstrates phil’s point. Very few of us are aware that our actions (or even the way we dress among other things) can lead others to sin. But since moral theology is barely thought in schools, that’s understandable.

 

[JimG]

It’s just a suggestion. I’m no psychologist. If you want to “surprise” them, who am I to stop you? Besides, I thought most people want to know “who else” is coming before they accept an invitation. Maybe not.

This might especially be the case, for example, if a brother and his new girlfriend were invited, as well as the brother’s ex-wife whom he abandoned for the newer model.

 

[AnnArbor]

I’d give you 8 thumbs up but I have committed scandal myself a few times. I think each priest was surprised when I mentioned it in confession.

That demonstrates phil’s point. Very few of us are aware that our actions (or even the way we dress among other things) can lead others to sin. But since moral theology is barely thought in schools, that’s understandable.

I am beginning to understand the reason for the talk about graduality coming out of this synod.

 

[ProVobis]

Really? We go to a large family gathering at Christmas. Unless I am hosting, I have no idea who else is going to be there. Nor would I have thought to get a guest list ahead of time.

Maybe it’s a cultural thing but my Christmases were always served with opłatki, so I know all about what it means to share communion with all others, regardless of their state of grace.

In case you never heard of it,

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christmas_wafer

 

[AnnArbor]

I’d give you 8 thumbs up but I have committed scandal myself a few times. I think each priest was surprised when I mentioned it in confession.

That demonstrates phil’s point. Very few of us are aware that our actions (or even the way we dress among other things) can lead others to sin. But since moral theology is barely thought in schools, that’s understandable.

Or perhaps it is not that we are unaware of the moral theology concept, but that we disagree as to approach. I think the lack of charity in excluding someone from Christmas dinner is a worse thing than the possibility someone might be scandalized to find out that a dinner guest is not living in a sanctioned relationship.

 

[OraLabora]

Inviting a gay partner into your home for a meal gives the public impression you agree with the disordered relationship—JUST what the good Cardinal said. Why are the non-Catholics and the cafeteria Catholics trying to convince those that are strict Catholics to have a lax conscience? Blur the lines, confuse boundaries? Not follow the magisterium? Receiving the Eucharist worthily is church doctrine. If you don’t agree with that, we have a word for it: PROTESTANT.

Why are you trying to convince people to be disobedient to the church on THIS forum? This creeps me out.

Why the need to label those who disagree with Cardinal Burke “cafeteria Catholics” or morally lax or Protestant? Can we not have a reasonable discussion under the same rules established for the Synod, i.e. able to speak our minds freely without recrimination? We’re all adults here and such labelling is very much unnecessary.

Moreover since when is a private dinner in a private home making a public impression to any other than busybodies who have no business spying and commenting on who I invite to dinner?

 

[ProVobis]

Or perhaps it is not that we are unaware of the moral theology concept, but that we disagree as to approach. I think the lack of charity in excluding someone from Christmas dinner is a worse thing than the possibility someone might be scandalized to find out that a dinner guest is not living in a sanctioned relationship.

That’s using the “lesser of two evils” approach and I imagine some moral theologians differ with that. Perhaps we need to look at what Cicero (whom JPII loved to quote) said, Primum, minima de malis, roughly translated as “Of evils choose the least.” But that’s a course by itself.

 

[Sy_Noe]

I thought the church doctrine is that we have to be without mortal sin before taking communion?

I really don’t care if you call that a prize or not, but is the church doctrine that we must be without mortal sin or not?

I was only referring to what the Holy Father has said about the Eucharist. I guess you’ll have to wait and see if any changes are made or not in regard to who can receive Jesus. From my understanding there is a continuation of this synod a yr from now. Peace.

 

[Sy_Noe]

Why the need to label those who disagree with Cardinal Burke “cafeteria Catholics” or morally lax or Protestant? Can we not have a reasonable discussion under the same rules established for the Synod, i.e. able to speak our minds freely without recrimination? We’re all adults here and such labelling is very much unnecessary.

Moreover since when is a private dinner in a private home making a public impression to any other than busybodies who have no business spying and commenting on who I invite to dinner?

I said the same thing but I can’t find it now.

 

[pnewton]

False charity plays pretend in front of family and friends, gives scandal to others and ‘loves’ the intrinsically disordered son right into Hell.

As opposed to hating them into Hell? Do you really see name-calling as a legitimate tool to evangelism?

Oh, and never, never, never think you know when someone’s charity is false. You lack the divinity for such a determination.

 

[pnewton]

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.

I do not see insisting on taking a homosexual lover with you as valuing family. Why not simply attend alone? In any case, while I may not agree with you, I would like to return to what was actually said, namely, that

The cardinal said that the parents in this case could mislead their grandchildren, doing them a disservice “by seeming to condone gravely sinful acts on the part of a family member.”

Anyone who knows children know that this is a possibility, especially at younger ages. Quite frankly, explaining the situation is only marginally useful, as most kids learn more by modeling behavior than being taught behavior.

Now the flips side of this is that we must also teach them that all people have dignity and deserve to be loved. I hope we can at least agree that some of the language here would not be appropriate for children.