T
TheLittleLady
Guest
For me, this article reads as the frustration of a disgruntled individual. It should not be take as condemnation of what seems to be a flourishing evangelization program.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
M
mrsdizzyd
Guest
I think disgruntled is putting too fine a point on it. I’d characterize him as frustrated. I can understand his frustration.
As I said, the OSP website is very light on information, so I can’t determine whether or not his characterization of them is fair. However, as someone who has been to several gay bars/clubs I can understand why he would feel such a venue/environment was wholly inappropriate for a church function. To borrow your AA analogy, I think we would all be shocked to find out that the AA outing was occurring in a bar.
As I said, the OSP website is very light on information, so I can’t determine whether or not his characterization of them is fair. However, as someone who has been to several gay bars/clubs I can understand why he would feel such a venue/environment was wholly inappropriate for a church function. To borrow your AA analogy, I think we would all be shocked to find out that the AA outing was occurring in a bar.
Last edited:
T
TheLittleLady
Guest
While I take a more of the “meet people where they are” approach. Men and women who would feel uncomfortable going to a parish hall might come to a meeting at a bar.
Look at “Theology on Tap”, it is wildly successful.
Look at “Theology on Tap”, it is wildly successful.
M
mrsdizzyd
Guest
Now, I think that if the stated purpose of the event at the gay bar was to go out and evangelize, I think the author would have no problem with that at all. There are many evangelization ministries that go into these kinds of environments to win souls for Christ. Likewise, if they were meeting at this bar for the purpose of discussing Catholic theology on sexual morality, I think the author would be fine with that too.
In this instance with OSP, we are just talking about a social gathering. No mention of evangelization or theology.
In this instance with OSP, we are just talking about a social gathering. No mention of evangelization or theology.
Last edited:
T
TheLittleLady
Guest
Back to every topic of discussion needs to be advertised as “Catholic Teaching on Sexual Morality”?
We are going in circles so I will end the dance.
We are going in circles so I will end the dance.
M
mrsdizzyd
Guest
Doesn’t Theology on Tap discuss theology over drinks at bars and restaurants? You brought it up!Back to every topic of discussion needs to be advertised as “Catholic Teaching on Sexual Morality”?
We are going in circles so I will end the dance.
Last edited:
J
JimG
Guest
I suppose that the question here is: who is being evangelized? Is the LGBT community being evangelized to accept Christ and Catholicism? Or is the parish being evangelized to accept the tenets of the LGBT community?
Z
ZMystiCat
Guest
I think that when you create a formation group for those struggling with a particular sin, the implication is that much of it will focus on overcoming that sin. Sure, they may choose to spend time doing other things, but when it turns into celebrating or embracing that sin, then it starts deviating from a reasonable church group. That’s what the author takes issue with with this group.Should every meeting of every group be a sermon on sin?
AA isn’t going to spend a night dedicated to getting drunk. That’s foolish given the known struggle its members have. I don’t see why we shouldn’t be holding church groups to the same standard.
I don’t get the impression that this is an evangelization group. It sounds more like a formation group.For me, this article reads as the frustration of a disgruntled individual. It should not be take as condemnation of what seems to be a flourishing evangelization program.
T
theCardinalbird
Guest
This is from the article.
The idea of a liberal parish that openly rejects catholic moral teaching, is a dangerous idea. The question I think we should be asking ourselves, is are they acting as shepherds who will guide their flock through their struggles and help them achieve Christian perfection, or are they trying to survive in a community where it is clear that the Church’s teachings are not welcome and therefore they must “get with the times” to survive.
My thoughts on this way of evangelization from OSP (if the person in the article is correct) is that it is a danger to ones soul. I know some here may be rolling their eyes at me for saying that, but believe me, if I, as a man who experiences SSA, were at that parish, I would be putting my soul in danger should I have been a part of OSP, considering that they are not professing Church teaching and go against my struggle for purity.The problem with OSP is not that it welcomes LGBT parishioners, but rather that its mission and events imply that having gay sex is morally acceptable and that the Church should recognize the sacramentality of same-sex “marriages.”
The idea of a liberal parish that openly rejects catholic moral teaching, is a dangerous idea. The question I think we should be asking ourselves, is are they acting as shepherds who will guide their flock through their struggles and help them achieve Christian perfection, or are they trying to survive in a community where it is clear that the Church’s teachings are not welcome and therefore they must “get with the times” to survive.
Last edited:
O
otrrl
Guest
Whatever else is said here, perhaps it’s time to question/discuss what the Catechism means when it says that homosexual actions are intrinsically disordered. Save your fingers, i know the first 5 things you’re going to write.
Is anything else intrinsically disordered? I would imagine that all sin is intrinsically disordered, in one way or another.
Is anything else intrinsically disordered? I would imagine that all sin is intrinsically disordered, in one way or another.
M
mrsdizzyd
Guest
What do you mean when you say “homosexual actions”?Whatever else is said here, perhaps it’s time to question/discuss what the Catechism means when it says that homosexual actions are intrinsically disordered.
These discussions are rarely fruitful because people are often using the same words while meaning completely different things.
Last edited:
C
ChristMyLife
Guest
Wow @TheLittleLady…Guess my parish is equally scandalous, we are “every sin” friendly as in we welcome sinners. We do not require anyone to pass a test that proves they have attained perfection in this life before they can be a part of our parish family.
We regularly offer the Sacrament of Confession that gives second as well as 5,812,341st chances
IMO, your comment here wasn’t authored by you…
This comment was in fact written by the Holy Spirit Himself.
That’s just my opinion - but when reading your words I felt like it was Jesus speaking by his Spirit.
O
otrrl
Guest
if we kick out LGBT types from our parish, should we kick out people who have divorced, people who have lived together before marriage, people who have coveted, people who have taken the Lord’s name in vain, women who have used contraception or had an abortion, etc. ? Please state the theological reasoning.
S
Start
Guest
Name one person on this thread that said anything close to that.
M
mrsdizzyd
Guest
No one has suggested kicking people who are gay out of parishes, so I’m not sure who is going to be able to provide you with a theological reasoning…
Can we please move on from this straw man argument?
Can we please move on from this straw man argument?
T
theCardinalbird
Guest
No one is saying that we shouldn’t welcome sinners into parishes, absolutely no one. What this person in the article is saying is a first hand account of what happens in that parish. What it seems to him and probably to others in that Courage group (which cannot go public with its message despite being an apostolate approved by the Vatican) is that there is the unspoken idea that homosexual acts are ok, in fact morally ok.Guess my parish is equally scandalous, we are “every sin” friendly as in we welcome sinners. We do not require anyone to pass a test that proves they have attained perfection in this life before they can be a part of our parish family.
I cannot verify his testimony but I cannot dismiss this persons testimony so easily.
Is it not at least concerning that Courage is lacking permission to invite parishioners at Mass or through the Church bulletin?
In the words of the author of the article:
Would you say he is wrong in his understanding despite the fact that he was actually at the Church?The problem with OSP is not that it welcomes LGBT parishioners, but rather that its mission and events imply that having gay sex is morally acceptable and that the Church should recognize the sacramentality of same-sex “marriages.”
T
theCardinalbird
Guest
I have no problem with men or women who experience same sex attraction to be a part of that Church, after all I am one of those who experience this attraction. What I do have a problem is when we compromise doctrine to bring people in. Why should we compromise it? Why cant we be pastoral to people like me yet not shy away from the fact that as people of God we are all called to chastity and that marriage is a sacrament instituted by God between man and woman?
This Church is unique and if it turns out that I am wrong about my assertions (that they think gay marriage or same sex acts are ok) and that they really are evangelizing the people in accordance with Church teaching, then good for them. I support it.
This Church is unique and if it turns out that I am wrong about my assertions (that they think gay marriage or same sex acts are ok) and that they really are evangelizing the people in accordance with Church teaching, then good for them. I support it.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.