Catholics are ceding too much ground to the homosexual agenda

[Faithdancer]

How does that sentiment fit with the mission of Jesus to “go out into all the world” and to reach all nations with the Gospel?

It fits in perfectly, as Christ never said to water the Gospel down, subject it to wholesale changes or discard it entirely so that those who don’t happen to like a particular teaching can feel better about joining His Church. Church teachings about the Holy Sacrament of Marriage are founded in Sacred Scripture and are dogma. The Gospel and Catholic dogma are united in the teachings of the Catholic Church, as set forth in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Expressing support for same sex “marriage” inside or outside the Catholic Church contradicts Catholic dogma. Roman Catholics cannot reject, delete, alter or contradict any Catholic dogma.

 

[markeverett49]

It fits in perfectly, as Christ never said to water the Gospel down, subject it to wholesale changes or discard it entirely so that those who don’t happen to like a particular teaching can feel better about joining His Church. .

I agree. The Church arose in a world in which infanticide was common but always opposed it. Abortion too. Sex outside of marriage, ditto. The faith has always carried a heavy moral obligation. (This was more apparent to the ancients than it is to us, as a reading of exchanges between the early apologists and pagan philosophers makes clear.)

 

[Faithdancer]

The Gospel carries enormous appeal and Christian churches span the globe. Ironically, the faith of many nations has been hollowed out by Christian churches that water down the gospel to make it “contemporary” and “relevant.” The Episcopal Church is the most “tolerant” I know of, and what they have lately come to tolerate is the fact that most of the people they assiduously affirm feel no need to go to church while many of the long-time faithful have joined other churches.

Amen, Mark- “watered down” teachings lead to lukewarmness. And Christ’s message to the lukewarm: “So, because you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spew you out of my mouth.” (Rev. 3:16) [1]

1. Hahn, Scott; Mitch, Curtis; Scott Hahn; Curtis Mitch (2010-06-14). The Ignatius Catholic Study Bible New Testament (Kindle Locations 27556-27557). Ignatius Press. Kindle Edition.

 

[Seeker1961]

It fits in perfectly, as Christ never said to water the Gospel down, subject it to wholesale changes or discard it entirely so that those who don’t happen to like a particular teaching can feel better about joining His Church. Church teachings about the Holy Sacrament of Marriage are founded in Sacred Scripture and are dogma. The Gospel and Catholic dogma are united in the teachings of the Catholic Church, as set forth in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Expressing support for same sex “marriage” inside or outside the Catholic Church contradicts Catholic dogma. Roman Catholics cannot reject, delete, alter or contradict any Catholic dogma.

It seems to me that there are different goals and different conversations going on here. There is the conversation that people imagine is going on, about changing the teaching of the Church, and the is the conversation going on about how the Church will continue the goal of reaching souls for Christ in a society that accepts gay marriage. (And DOMA was just declared unconstitutional again, so change is already here and more is coming)

I approach everything with that goal in mind. How will this lead other people to Jesus? My life has been irrevocably changed, and for the better since I made a commitment to turn it over to Christ and returned to His Church. Because of that, I look at everything through the lens of leading others down that path.

Maybe it’s because I know the kind of power it takes to turn your back on sharing your life with another person that you love only comes from God. Maybe it’s because I had people in my life who knew that leading with their superior knowledge of Church doctrine wasn’t going to achieve their desired goal of bringing me back to the Church. We got there, but it wasn’t the first thing or the loudest thing that was said. I was led to the understanding of how much God loved me and that was what made me WANT to change my life to attempt to conform to His will as expressed by the Church.

If the Church, or more properly Her people are “ceding ground”, my thought is that it may be how we are approaching the homosexual people that hear or read our words. If we want to gain ground, we don’t change the teachings, we change the way we help people understand the basis for those teachings.

As always, your mileage may vary…but that’s what I see.

 

[Bradski]

I’m certainly fine with making it illegal at least until a student has graduated from high school.

So you’d agree with the laws in places like Iran and Saudi Arabia. And you realise that if gay marriage was not to be allowed, then homosexual sex would be illegal.

Do you think it should be?

 

[Faithdancer]

And you realise that if gay marriage was not to be allowed, then homosexual sex would be illegal.

Do you think it should be?

Gay “marriage” is not legal in most states, yet homosexual sex is not illegal.

I don’t favor re-criminalizing homosexual activity.

 

[Faithdancer]

If we want to gain ground, we don’t change the teachings, we change the way we help people understand the basis for those teachings.

There is certainly nothing wrong with changing how the teachings are taught. The current state of catechetical training for Catholic youth, for example, leaves a lot to be desired.

 

[Elizabeth502]

So you’d agree with the laws in places like Iran and Saudi Arabia. And you realise that if gay marriage was not to be allowed, then homosexual sex would be illegal.

Do you think it should be?

That is off-topic relative to my response. I responded to a comment about (heterosexual)fornication being illegal. I limited my response to agreement with the sentiment to those still in high school (or obviously younger). The State has no business encouraging recreational sex among the very young unmarried, for a whole variety of reasons. Making it illegal – given that there is no societal benefit for unmarried young sex to be made legal – also eliminates the “need” (excuse) to contribute to STD’s and all the associated societal ills (early pregnancies, teen marriages, etc.) which accompany irresponsible unwed sex among the very young.

Once a person comes of age I see no reason to restrict sexual activity by legal measures (homosexual or heterosexual). There would be no constitutional grounding for restricting private activity among adults. It’s just that there is no justification for promoting early sexuality of any kind, and partnering with public schools in that promotion as well. That was the context of my response, and still is.

My reasoning continues through adulthood, when it comes to State sanctioning (benefiting) of any kind of sexual lifestyle between any two people not of different genders and not legally wed. The State should not be in the business of benefiting live-in lovers. They can draw up their own darn contract if they want to Play House.

 

[Seeker1961]

There is certainly nothing wrong with changing how the teachings are taught. The current state of catechetical training for Catholic youth, for example, leaves a lot to be desired.

Yes…that’s my point. Our parish is doing Theology of the Body right now, and they are using a version designed for High School students. Good, but I think they are waiting too long. The foundational concepts of Theology of the Body need to be taught from day 1, as soon as religious education begins.

But we also need to look at how we are presenting teachings to everyone else. We don’t want to lose yet another generation because we only concentrate on today’s children. I’ll be honest, I’m sure that there are friends of mine who believe I have some sort of masochistic streak that I’m satisfying with my return to the Church, because despite my insistence that I’m happier and life is better, and despite my best efforts in describing why the Church teaching makes sense-the cacophony of other sounds around Christianity when it comes to gay people outshouts me every time.

I read and listen to comments about gay people with a different set of ears than most, and the accusation has been made that I’m overly sensitive about it-and there is some truth to that. However, I’m not just listening to other Christian voices, I’m also listening to voices of people that I would love to see become Christian and hearing how they perceive the comments directed at them. I see how that language pushes them away instead of drawing them close and I see that as a failure to serve others and to serve God.

There IS a way to hold onto Church teaching AND reach out to those who are outside the Church and draw them in. It’s not an either/or proposition. If it was, I wouldn’t be here. And yes, there are always going to be those who reflexively throw the “homophobe” word or “hater” at you no matter how you approach them-but as Mother Theresa famously said we are to “do it anyway”. You never know, God can soften anyone’s heart and even if you don’t see it yourself, a change could come. Maybe someone else around you might be affected without you even knowing.

As it is often said here-we are all going to have to answer for our lives someday-when we are asked how we treated those that lived outside our belief system, how will we answer?

 

[Faithdancer]

Yes…that’s my point. Our parish is doing Theology of the Body right now, and they are using a version designed for High School students. Good, but I think they are waiting too long. The foundational concepts of Theology of the Body need to be taught from day 1, as soon as religious education begins.

The Theology of the Body program, as adapted for youth, is a good educational tool. In addition to teaching chastity in a positive, healthy way, it also teaches young people about love and respect for those to whom they feel physically and emotionally attracted. I would say it also sets forth Church teaching on homosexual activity in a way which does not demonize homosexuals.

 

[crenfro]

Father Serpa has answered the question about fornication being against the natural law according to St. Thomas Aquinas. Do a search and you can see the answer for yourself. It IS against the natural law, by the way.

Also, but do keep in mind that this is just me who’s talking and I generally and particularly am a goofball. Anyway it’d really help me in the future if you’d present one item of concern at a time. To me, and please, please, please keep in mind this is just my opinion–> I could be wrong and often am → there were so many different things being discussed that I got confused (but, as I said, that may well only be me and my very limited capacity).

Looking forward to more of your posts, and please pray for me.

Hold off on that if possible. I admit my wording was quite inadequate and flawed, but I stand by the larger point. My revised statement of that point is forthcoming.

 

[BTNYC]

Father Serpa has answered the question about fornication being against the natural law according to St. Thomas Aquinas. Do a search and you can see the answer for yourself. It IS against the natural law, by the way.

The question, as you posed it to Fr Serpa, is extremely blunt, and contains no reference to homosexual acts, against which I was contrasting fornication, relative to natural law. It doesn’t really speak to my original point, even in the very (as I have admitted repeatedly) flawed, badly worded, insufficient manner in which I originally presented it. The properly worded form of the point I was trying to make, for those interested, can be found in the last paragraph of Post #282.

I assume there was not sufficient time for you to hold off on presenting my flawed assertion to Fr Serpa as I had requested, nor to state it in the context of the discussion at hand in this thread. Thank you anyway, though.

 

[edwest2]

Speaking for myself, I have never said that the Church should or will change.

What I do know is that secular society changes all the time. When I was a kid, divorce was something people talked about in whispers, now there are greeting cards. Living together outside of marriage was something “nice people” didn’t do.

The Church isn’t going to change and we know that-so in light of that how do we continue the mission that Jesus gave us to reach that world as it changes?

First, we must tell people that God loves them. That God so loved the world that He sent His only Son to die as a sacrifice for sin, and that He is the way, and the truth and the life. He is our Lord who loves us and who guides us through Scripture, Tradition and the teaching authority given to His bride, the Catholic Church,

The question we need to ask ourselves is: Why does secular and Catholic people change? Over the last 40 years, I observed the reasons why people, Christians in particular, changed.

The “nice” people went to Church, were mostly good neighbors, and among those good neighbors, a lot were good role models. Something we no longer have. The media respected and reflected our values. Something we no longer have. Young men and young women dated, and had relationships, and the planning behind getting engaged was no trivial thing. That now occurs a lot less than before. No, life was not perfect 40 years ago - we had crime and all the rest. We had a lot of “good” girls and guys in high school but there were a few who did sleep around. We were told to be polite to those girls but to not get into a relationship with them. Marriage was “until death do us part.” Cohabitation without marriage was called “living in sin.”

So, if there were “nice” people who lived functional lives in a society that respected their values, then there were “bad” people who wanted the exact opposite and that is what we have today.

Late 1960s - The Sex without love Revolution. No strings attached sex with anybody - married, single, it didn’t matter. Christians were able to continue their traditions for the most part, but these other people had a plan. They told us to reject all authority. Mom, dad? Forget them! We want to give you a freer life. I actually heard the following at the time: “You want to have sex with your girlfriend, right?” They told us that we needed freedom and that all authority was wrong and oppressive. “Don’t trust anyone over 30!”

In short - have sex with whoever, use lots of illegal drugs, like marijuana (which as you may have noticed, is regularly promoted as OK, and should be legal). So, it was about losing control of the desires of your flesh for pleasure.

The birth control pill would give women the freedom to have sex and pursue a career, which young women were taught they needed to do. After all, women were being oppressed by men.

In the late 1960s, in my Catholic school, we were taught, illegal drugs are harmful - all of them. By my last year in school, one of the people who did not want to follow Church teaching, began to sell illegal drugs in our high school. One day, he came up to me with an envelope and asked me to “hold it” for him. I asked what was in it and he said, “Crystal T,” which was the pill form of THC, the active ingredient in marijuana. I said, no. Later, I found out he was living with his girlfriend. When I politely reminded him that we were taught that was wrong, he angrily said, “But we love each other!” I then said they should get married.

And there were “intellectuals” inside and outside the Church who convinced some that we had no right to tell them how to live. They wanted to openly, not privately, live sinful and harmful lifestyles AND BE ACCEPTED by the community as being just like us, but they obviously were not.

They were shameless, rude in public, liked to cuss and swear, smoke dope and live with their “old lady” cause they didn’t need “no piece of paper ta live with my old lady.”

They wanted their openly sinful lifestyle to be accepted and open scandal to cease to exist.

“Hey man. If it feels good, do it.” That was their guiding philosophy. Porn? We love it. Divorce? Two or three divorces? We should stop caring.

And the traditional family, it had to be destroyed. So that any mix and match combination of sex partners could be called a "family.’

But to answer your question about reaching people:

catholicvu.com/inactive%20catholics.htm

focus.org/on-campus/campus-impact.html

cultivationministries.com/home/resources/ministry-products/engaging-a-new-generation-description/

Remember, each one of us is the sower of the seed. By others observing our own good (by the grace of God) behavior, we sow a seed. Whenever we tell someone, “I’ll say a prayer for you.” plants a seed. When others in our family don’t see us drinking in excess, having multiple kids with multiple women, living with our girlfriend with no plans to get married, using illegal drugs, and controlling our tongues by not cussing and swearing - we are planting a seed. When we remind people that there are clean and worthy ways to enjoy life - as opposed to going to see the next immoral movie - we are planting a seed.

Hope this helps,
Ed

 

[edwest2]

John XXII held the faith and assumed others would too if they became aware of it. I think he would be shocked to see how many Catholics have seen Vatican II as a green light to abandon parts of the faith.

No. Catholics, like me, who were there before and after Vatican II, did not seek to abandon parts of the faith. What did happen was that dissidents inside the Church, supported by some outside the Church, spread the lie that Vatican II did something wrong.

online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704586504574654282563939764.html

I would encourage Catholics to avoid any negative references to Vatican II. It was made a scapegoat. Learn the truth about the planned confusion that was caused in the time period.

catholicnewsagency.com/column.php?n=1145

Peace,
Ed

 

[crenfro]

Hello again.

Perhaps it would have been better if you had asked Fr. Serpa your question in your own words if you think his answer didn’t speak to what you’re thinking about. I asked him the question the way I did because I didn’t know if fornication obeyed the natural law or not and it seemed to me to be an important thing to know → and because he’s an expert. This course of action made sense to me.

The question, as you posed it to Fr Serpa, is extremely blunt, and contains no reference to homosexual acts, against which I was contrasting fornication, relative to natural law. It doesn’t really speak to my original point, even in the very (as I have admitted repeatedly) flawed, badly worded, insufficient manner in which I originally presented it. The properly worded form of the point I was trying to make, for those interested, can be found in the last paragraph of Post #282.

Again, another reason to present your question to him in your own way. I know you’d get a great answer and in short order. As for having a “context” in presenting an intrinsically evil act, sounds like the impossible to me. Intrinsically evil is intrinsically evil no matter what, as I understand it. That’s part of its definition. It’s bad no matter how one dresses it up or how much one obfuscates it. I’m sorry. I guess I just don’t understand.

I assume there was not sufficient time for you to hold off on presenting my flawed assertion to Fr Serpa as I had requested, nor to state it in the context of the discussion at hand in this thread. Thank you anyway, though.

 

[Faithdancer]

I would encourage Catholics to avoid any negative references to Vatican II. It was made a scapegoat. Learn the truth about the planned confusion that was caused in the time period. catholicnewsagency.com/column.php?n=1145
Peace,
Ed

It is interesting how Vatican II has been unfairly blamed for all of the abuses since its inception.

If there is one group I could name which consistently lives the true spirit of Vatican II, it is Opus Dei.

 

[markeverett49]

It is interesting how Vatican II has been unfairly blamed for all of the abuses since its inception…

It helps to read the major conciliar documents and to always be alert to the phrase “the spirit of Vatican II.”

 

[mitex]

All i know is that I dropped out of RCIA twice because I wasn’t loved and supported by Catholics. I’m gay, i’m abstinent, and I support traditional marriage.

Love has to be the defining principle. You’ll never get people to be abstinent and support traditional marriage like I do (or “chaste” as you call it) if you degrade them, call them names, use degrading speech (EX: You’re a pedophile!), and hate to get your point across.

That’s what I experienced in my time. I’m sure most Catholics are loving, and compassionate people, but the people I met ruined the experience.

I agree marriage, and family must be defended. And there is a an agenda knocking at your door that threatens religious liberty and traditional values. But the Church’s response to it all has been all wrong.

 

[Faithdancer]

the spirit of Vatican II

Yessss indeed, such a phrase can justify almost anything…

 

[Seeker1961]

All i know is that I dropped out of RCIA twice because I wasn’t loved and supported by Catholics. I’m gay, i’m abstinent, and I support traditional marriage.

Love has to be the defining principle. You’ll never get people to be abstinent and support traditional marriage like I do (or “chaste” as you call it) if you degrade them, call them names, use degrading speech (EX: You’re a pedophile!), and hate to get your point across.

That’s what I experienced in my time. I’m sure most Catholics are loving, and compassionate people, but the people I met ruined the experience.

I agree marriage, and family must be defended. And there is a an agenda knocking at your door that threatens religious liberty and traditional values. But the Church’s response to it all has been all wrong.

I’m so sorry that happened to you, and I applaud your strength to hold to Church teaching despite that experience.

All I can tell you is that there ARE Catholics out there who will be loving and supportive-I’ve been lucky enough to find a few. I had Priests and Sisters when I was growing up in NJ who helped me deal with the more negative reactions that I received from others. I’ve found Priests and other Catholics here in FL that have been really helpful. I won’t lie, it took some doing, because it seems the “go to” reaction to any gay person, even a chaste one, is rejection, or lecturing for some people. Please don’t let the reactions of those who need to fulfill some need in themselves to push you away from Christ and His Church.