Debating Sexuality with Non-Catholics

[nickybr38]

I am on a popular forum where non-Catholics and atheists hang out. It is primarily for debating the existence of God. I am one of the FEW Catholics there. The only thing the non-Catholics and Atheists seem to agree on is that the Catholic Church is evil.

Whenever I get into a discussion about sexuality all I hear from them (whether Christian or Atheist) is how evil the Church is because it covered up predator priests and etc. etc. etc.

How do I continue to advocate the Church’s teaching on sexuality when all people see when they hear sexuality now is the evils that have been done?

My tactic at this point has been to point out that:

A: The Church did NOT endorse or support sexual abuse. Ever.
B: Some Bishops acted terribly, this does not mean the entire Church acted terribly.
C: Even if some members of the Church acted terribly that does not negate the arguments the Church makes. So please respond to the argument presented.

I’m not sure if this method is working or not but I’m getting increasingly frustrated because it seems like I have to stress these points every single time a discussion on sexuality comes up.

I don’t know how Apologists do it… answering the same objection over and over gets old fast.

Anyway. I’m just wondering if there is a better way I can respond to those who bring up predator priests every time this subject comes up.

Any advice? Please keep in mind I’m no Apologist. Not aspiring and not currently. I just like discussing things and when I see them bashing the Church I have to jump in. I can’t just scroll by. ): It’s like this weird defect in me that I have to defend my Church.

 

[bobballen_18]

The only thing the non-Catholics and Atheists seem to agree on is that the Catholic Church is evil.

Whenever I get into a discussion about sexuality all I hear from them (whether Christian or Atheist) is how evil the Church is because it covered up predator priests and etc. etc. etc.

How do I continue to advocate the Church’s teaching on sexuality when all people see when they hear sexuality now is the evils that have been done?

Yeah, I know what you’re feeling here. I can’t help…I guess I just wanted to sympathize with you. My only response to non-Catholics, relating specifically to the cover-ups, would not satisfy them, but oh well. I think that when you are part of a church that you really care about and truly love, you want to do anything you can do to protect its reputation. Perhaps this isn’t the case with every cover-up that happened, but I’m pretty sure that many of the cases were covered up because the bishops, or whoever it was that covered them up, cared so much about the Catholic Church. And when you look at how people are viewing the Catholic Church now due to the abuse scandal, I don’t think it’s just because of the cover-ups, but it’s also just because of the fact that the abuses happened at all. As a result, it gives ammunition for “haters” to say, “oh look at the Catholic Church, they abused kids, they’re evil.” So that’s what I mean when I say I think that protecting the Church’s reputation was a big part of the coverups.

Now, this isn’t to say that covering the case up was the right thing to do. After all, we’re all human, and humans make mistakes. But, even though it wasn’t right to cover them up and let the abusers run around abusing more children, if anyone understands loyalty and/or love of something they truly believe in, they should be able to understand WHY the coverups happened.

That being said, just because of mistakes, this doesn’t invalidate the truths the Church teaches, as you said.

Does that make sense? I hope I didn’t just babble on and on.

 

[bobballen_18]

when I see them bashing the Church I have to jump in. I can’t just scroll by. ): It’s like this weird defect in me that I have to defend my Church.

Oh, and I know (at least I hope that) you were being sarcastic…but I’d say that is a great thing! I have that “problem” too, except that I am really bad at defending because I’m not extremely knowledgeable on many matters.

If only all Catholics had this “weird defect”!

 

[SaintPatrick333]

To be honest, I’m the same way. Just minutes ago I got done “ranting” about the evils of abortions at a pro choice woman (via facebook of course). While I tried to remain charitable and didn’t debase my arguments into assumptions on her lifestyle, I kept to the core material of my argument being that abortion is murder (obviously). But then everyone following the post teamed up on me gang mentality style and reinforced what one another was saying suggesting I was “sick” and “needed help” because by echoing the Church’s stance on sexual immorality I was somehow “needing permission from people so they can have sex” or something stupid.

The best suggestion which I need to train myself on is simply taking a step back. Talking doesn’t work. If they want to walk straight into the fires of hell that’s on them. All we can do is step back and pray for them that the Holy Spirit will force His way through their incredibly thick skulls and maybe shine some reason down on them before they destroy themselves. Trying to stop them is only going to make them run further and faster. My biggest struggle is the fact I’m Irish and hot tempered. I see someone bashing the Church or Christ in general, I tend to flare up and rage a bit. But hey, everybody’s got something they gotta work on about themselves. I never said I was perfect lol

 

[nickybr38]

Yeah, I know what you’re feeling here. I can’t help…I guess I just wanted to sympathize with you. My only response to non-Catholics, relating specifically to the cover-ups, would not satisfy them, but oh well. I think that when you are part of a church that you really care about and truly love, you want to do anything you can do to protect its reputation. Perhaps this isn’t the case with every cover-up that happened, but I’m pretty sure that many of the cases were covered up because the bishops, or whoever it was that covered them up, cared so much about the Catholic Church. And when you look at how people are viewing the Catholic Church now due to the abuse scandal, I don’t think it’s just because of the cover-ups, but it’s also just because of the fact that the abuses happened at all. As a result, it gives ammunition for “haters” to say, “oh look at the Catholic Church, they abused kids, they’re evil.” So that’s what I mean when I say I think that protecting the Church’s reputation was a big part of the coverups.

Now, this isn’t to say that covering the case up was the right thing to do. After all, we’re all human, and humans make mistakes. But, even though it wasn’t right to cover them up and let the abusers run around abusing more children, if anyone understands loyalty and/or love of something they truly believe in, they should be able to understand WHY the coverups happened.

That being said, just because of mistakes, this doesn’t invalidate the truths the Church teaches, as you said.

Does that make sense? I hope I didn’t just babble on and on.

Makes total sense and is essentially what I try to stress. Mind you I don’t know as much about the sex abuse scandal as I probably should but I know I don’t think it’s a valid response to arguments about sexuality.

Thanks for weighing in.

Also, my weird defect? It gets me into lots of trouble which is why I call it that. Haha. I often jump into debates I shouldn’t because I can’t stand hearing the Church being maligned.

 

[Rence]

Whenever I get into a discussion about sexuality all I hear from them (whether Christian or Atheist) is how evil the Church is because it covered up predator priests and etc. etc. etc.

First of all, I would acknowledge their concerns. They’re right to have high expectations of the leaders and teachers of the Church. The Church has high expectation of Catholics, and therefore outsiders (and insiders) will hold Catholics to a higher standard. We’re supposed to be ‘the Truth’, and we’re supposed to be ‘the Best’, and therefore we are expected to act that way. Jesus said they would know us by our deeds, and that’s true. But the actions of individuals cannot be a reflection on the Church as a whole. Only a few actually represent the Church, and even they makes mistakes and have poor judgement at times. But the rules of the Church have not changed, despite the leaders making mistakes. The dogma and doctrines remain the same.

The Church’s expectations are so high that even its followers and leaders find them a challenge to meet.

Unfortunately, the bad behavior of the leadership of the Church does reflect back on the Church and we Catholics have to live with that. Unlike Catholics who know that the actions of the human element of the Church are not a reflection on the Church itself, those who are not Catholic (and even those who are Catholic) do NOT understand that. They believe that those actions reflect back on the Church, and that if the Church’s expectations are too high for the leaders and teachers to follow, then maybe they’re not good expectations to begin with. They believe that if the leaders and teachers of the Church are not following the teachings of the Church, that no one should be compelled to do so either.

You have to explain to them that the rule of the Church have been consistent since the beginning, and that the fact that the human element of the Church falls into temptation, that doesn’t make the Church evil. It means that the Church is a hospital for sick souls and doctors all people. If everyone was ‘good’, there would be no need for the Church.

How do I continue to advocate the Church’s teaching on sexuality when all people see when they hear sexuality now is the evils that have been done?

My tactic at this point has been to point out that:

A: The Church did NOT endorse or support sexual abuse. Ever.
B: Some Bishops acted terribly, this does not mean the entire Church acted terribly.
C: Even if some members of the Church acted terribly that does not negate the arguments the Church makes. So please respond to the argument presented.

Your tactics are good even if people don’t accept them. Times have changed and the horse has been out of the barn for quite some time. People are enjoying their freedom to have sex without consequences and it’s not going to be easy to convince them that adult consentual sex is wrong. They enjoy their lifestyle and won’t give it up easily. Like I said, if the leaders and teachers can’t follow the rules, the trickle effect will go down to the followers and to the non-followers alike. And if the Church can’t clean up its own house, it’s effort to clean up the world will be seen (and is seen) as oppressive and hyprocritical at that.

Any advice? Please keep in mind I’m no Apologist. Not aspiring and not currently. I just like discussing things and when I see them bashing the Church I have to jump in. I can’t just scroll by. ): It’s like this weird defect in me that I have to defend my Church.

Can you give examples of the dialog you are having?

 

[nickybr38]

Can you give examples of the dialog you are having?

Sure.

It started with an article about a Bishop who was asking MPs to stand up against same-sex marriage. Followed by this comment:

“The RC Church, as always, viewing sexual relationships as only appropriate between a husband and wife, or a priest and a child.”

To which I responded:

"You know… just because members of the Church have acted deplorably does not mean the entire Church supports sex abuse nor does it mean all leaders within the Church should be painted with that brush.

The teachings of the Church regarding sexuality should not be judged based on the actions of it’s human members but on the merits of its arguments.

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/p...ts/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae_en.html"

Things have escalated from there.

 

[Rence]

Sure.

It started with an article about a Bishop who was asking MPs to stand up against same-sex marriage. Followed by this comment:

“The RC Church, as always, viewing sexual relationships as only appropriate between a husband and wife, or a priest and a child.”

To which I responded.

I would have explained that the rules of the Church regarding sexual relationships is the same across the board, not just for gay people. The fact is, the same rules apply to heterosexual unmarried people AND married people. Two conditions have to be present in order for sexuality to be licit: 1) the unitive property (which is not present in gay people, and not even spiritually in unmarried hetero couples, and not present in married couples who contracept), and the 2) procreative property (which isn’t present in gay couples). This foundation is also what backs up the Church’s rules against the usage of ABCs even for married couple. It must be unitive and procreative each time. The fact that teachers and leaders of the Church are breaking the rules only means that they are not only human, but humans who have fallen into temptation and need the careful instruction and encouragement of the Church, like everyone else.

 

[nickybr38]

I would have explained that the rules of the Church regarding sexual relationships is the same across the board, not just for gay people. The fact is, the same rules apply to heterosexual unmarried people AND married people. Two conditions have to be present in order for sexuality to be licit: 1) the unitive property (which is not present in gay people, and not even spiritually in unmarried hetero couples, and not present in married couples who contracept), and the 2) procreative property (which isn’t present in gay couples). This foundation is also what backs up the Church’s rules against the usage of ABCs even for married couple. It must be unitive and procreative each time. The fact that teachers and leaders of the Church are breaking the rules only means that they are not only human, but humans who have fallen into temptation and need the careful instruction and encouragement of the Church, like everyone else.

Very cool. It’s hard to keep these guys on topic. They seem less interested in discussing the issues and more interested in just poking fun. Honestly they advertise themselves as a Protestant apostolate but I have my doubts as when Catholic opinions pop up all they seem interested in doing is making fun.

I think in future I will take the approach of ignoring their barbs and just speaking to the issue…

 

[St_Francis]

Having been involved in debates, I have learned it is truly impossible to “debate” with the idea of changing someone’s mind. It’s just impossible, because you and they come from completely different points of view and a priori ideas.

So I am willing to explain, even to answer questions, but not try to convince, because rhat always requires going back to one’s basic premises: Does God exist? If He does, in what form (The Trinity, Allah, etc)? Do we have to pay attention to Him? Etc.

Wrt the second point, I just say that you can’t judge the teachings of the Church by people who didn’t follow those teachings; one has to judge the teachings by those who do follow them, like Mother Teresa, St Francis of Assisi, etc.

Just as one would not judge atheism by Anthony Flew who has come to believe in a Creator.

 

[BlueEyedLady]

It sounds like you’re on Reddit.

The best advice that I can give is stop trying to defend such a large and complex organization. Stick to specific issues. Debate abortion, contraception, homosexuality, or premarital sex. Don’t try to debate why the Catholic church’s stance on every sexual issue is correct. That’s too broad and it will cause you to become disorganized and they will have a lot of things to pull from when trying to make you look bad. Just keep it narrow and defend one issue at a time.

I do the same thing though. I have so many thoughts going in my head at once that I feel like I must type them all out right now at once. I have to work on slowing down and making one point at a time too.

 

[nickybr38]

It sounds like you’re on Reddit.

The best advice that I can give is stop trying to defend such a large and complex organization. Stick to specific issues. Debate abortion, contraception, homosexuality, or premarital sex. Don’t try to debate why the Catholic church’s stance on every sexual issue is correct. That’s too broad and it will cause you to become disorganized and they will have a lot of things to pull from when trying to make you look bad. Just keep it narrow and defend one issue at a time.

I do the same thing though. I have so many thoughts going in my head at once that I feel like I must type them all out right now at once. I have to work on slowing down and making one point at a time too.

All good advice. Thank you. And no, that’s not Reddit. I would link to the site I’ve been frequenting but I know that’s not allowed. As I said it is primarily a Protestant Apostolate that is attempting to reach atheists. So it is frequented by both Atheists and Protestants… and then like three of us Catholics.

RIGHT! Focus… not easy to do. I want to defend everything all at once. Haha.

 

[nickybr38]

Well, I got into it again today and I wanted to say thanks to you guys again. You had great advice and I feel like I’m handling my own a bit better today as a result.



It’s not going to be easy to defend the Church’s position on sexuality due to the ‘predator priest’ persona we now have but I am determined to stand for and with my Church.

 

[Bev17243]

Well, I got into it again today and I wanted to say thanks to you guys again. You had great advice and I feel like I’m handling my own a bit better today as a result.



It’s not going to be easy to defend the Church’s position on sexuality due to the ‘predator priest’ persona we now have but I am determined to stand for and with my Church.

if I may add, you doing the right thing by defending your faith and the church. I have actually been unfriended by several people on the FB because I spoke up about immorality/gay marriage and all that good stuff. I was also banned forever from one Christian forum when I had a temerity to ask some “why catholics are so bad?” question. Yeaah…Defending the church is the not an easy road but its a righteous one:thumbsup:

 

[nickybr38]

if I may add, you doing the right thing by defending your faith and the church. I have actually been unfriended by several people on the FB because I spoke up about immorality/gay marriage and all that good stuff. I was also banned forever from one Christian forum when I had a temerity to ask some “why catholics are so bad?” question. Yeaah…Defending the church is the not an easy road but its a righteous one:thumbsup:

Thank you for saying that. Sometimes I feel like I’m being obnoxiously Catholic. Haha. But I love this Church too much to be quiet.

I too have been unfriended - by family!!! for being too ‘religious’. I kind of think it’s a small price to pay.

 

[Erich]

How do I continue to advocate the Church’s teaching on sexuality when all people see when they hear sexuality now is the evils that have been done?

To discuss the incidence of sexual abuse committed by Catholic priests without reference to the level of offense found among the clergy of other religions, or to that of other professionals, is grossly unfair.

The National Child Abuse and Neglect Data Systems was developed by the Children’s Bureau of the U.S. Department of Human Services in partnership with the States to collect annual statistics on child maltreatment from State child protective services agencies. For the year 2001, it was found that approximately 903,000 children were victims of child maltreatment, 10 percent of whom (or 90,000) were sexually abused. It also found that 59 percent of the perpetrators of child abuse or neglect were women and 41 percent were men.

   In 2001, clinical child psychologist Wade F. Horn       reported on the work of researchers at Johns Hopkins University School of       Public Health. Horn summarized the researchers’ findings as follows: “Family friends and acquaintances compose the largest       group of perpetrators (28 percent), followed by such relatives as uncles       and cousins (18 percent), stepfathers (12 percent), male siblings (10       percent), biological fathers (10 percent), boyfriends of the child’s       mother (9 percent), grandfathers and stepgrandfathers (7 percent), and       strangers (4 percent).”  Horn       was struck by the fact that 10 percent were biological fathers and only 4       percent were strangers.  “Which       means,” he said, “86 percent of the perpetrators were known to the       family, but were someone other than the child’s father.”

It is obvious that children are much more likely to be sexually abused by family members and friends than by anyone else. This suggests that if preventative measures are to work, they must begin in the home, and not someplace else.

According to a survey by the Washington Post, over the last four decades, less than 1.5 percent of the estimated 60,000 or more men who have served in the Catholic clergy have been accused of child sexual abuse. According to a survey by the New York Times, 1.8 percent of all priests ordained from 1950 to 2001 have been accused of child sexual abuse.

In a 1984 survey, 38.6 percent of ministers reported sexual contact with a church member, and 76 percent knew of another minister who had had sexual intercourse with a parishioner. In the same year, a Fuller Seminary survey of 1,200 ministers found that 20 percent of theologically “conservative” pastors admitted to some sexual contact outside of marriage with a church member. The figure jumped to over 40 percent for “moderates”; 50 percent of “liberal” pastors confessed to similar behavior.

In 1990, in a study by the Park Ridge Center for the Study of Health, Faith and Ethics in Chicago, it was learned that 10 percent of ministers said they had had an affair with a parishioner and about 25 percent admitted some sexual contact with a parishioner. Two years later, a survey by *Leadership *magazine found that 37 percent of ministers confessed to having been involved in “inappropriate sexual behavior” with a parishioner.

In a 1993 survey by the Journal of Pastoral Care, 14 percent of Southern Baptist ministers said they had engaged in “inappropriate sexual behavior,” and 70 percent said they knew a minister who had had such contact with a parishioner. Joe E. Trull is co-author of the 1993 book, Ministerial Ethics, and he found that “from 30 to 35 percent of ministers of all denominations admit to having sexual relationships—from inappropriate touching to sexual intercourse—outside of marriage.”

According to a 2000 report to the Baptist General Convention in Texas, “The incidence of sexual abuse by clergy has reached ‘horrific proportions.’” It noted that in studies done in the 1980s, 12 percent of ministers had “engaged in sexual intercourse with members” and nearly 40 percent had “acknowledged sexually inappropriate behavior.” The report concluded that “The disturbing aspect of all research is that the rate of incidence for clergy exceeds the client-professional rate for physicians and psychologists.” Regarding pornography and sexual addiction, a national survey disclosed that about 20 percent of all ministers are involved in the behavior.

 

[Erich]

(cont’d)

In the spring of 2002, when the sexual abuse scandal in the Catholic Church was receiving unprecedented attention, the *Christian Science Monitor *reported on the results of national surveys by Christian Ministry Resources. The conclusion: “Despite headlines focusing on the priest pedophile problem in the Roman Catholic Church, most American churches being hit with child sexual-abuse allegations are Protestant, and most of the alleged abusers are not clergy or staff, but church volunteers.”

Finally, in the authoritative work by Penn State professor Philip Jenkins, Pedophiles and Priests, it was determined that between 0.2 and 1.7 percent of priests are pedophiles. The figure among the Protestant clergy ranges between 2 and 3 percent.

The American Medical Association found in 1986 that one in four girls, and one in eight boys, are sexually abused in or out of school before the age of 18. Two years later, a study included in The Handbook on Sexual Abuse of Children, reported that one in four girls, and one in six boys, is sexually abused by age 18. It was reported in 1991 that 17.7 percent of males who graduated from high school, and 82.2 percent of females, reported sexual harassment by faculty or staff during their years in school. Fully 13.5 percent said they had sexual intercourse with their teacher.

In New York City alone, at least one child is sexually abused by a school employee every day. One study concluded that more than 60 percent of employees accused of sexual abuse in the New York City schools were transferred to desk jobs at district offices located inside the schools. Most of these teachers are tenured and 40 percent of those transferred are repeat offenders. They call it “passing the garbage” in the schools. One reason why this exists is due to efforts by the United Federation of Teachers to protect teachers at the expense of children. Another is the fact that teachers accused of sexual misconduct cannot be fired under New York State law.

 

[Erich]

I just like discussing things and when I see them bashing the Church I have to jump in. I can’t just scroll by. ): It’s like this weird defect in me that I have to defend my Church.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[nickybr38]

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/duty_calls.png

 

[VeritasLuxMea]

I am on a popular forum where non-Catholics and atheists hang out. It is primarily for debating the existence of God. I am one of the FEW Catholics there. The only thing the non-Catholics and Atheists seem to agree on is that the Catholic Church is evil.

Not saying you’re doing this, but please don’t stereotype ALL non-Catholics and Atheists in the way that SOME non-Catholics and Atheists you mention are doing.