Dolan: Catholic Church needs better outreach to gays

[rossum]

Cardinal Timothy Dolan acknowledged on Sunday that there was still much to do to make the church welcoming to gay and lesbian Catholics.

“We gotta do better to see that our defense of marriage is not reduced to an attack on gay people. And I admit, we haven’t been too good at that. We try our darndest to make sure we’re not an anti-anybody,” he said in an interview to be aired Sunday on ABC’s “This Week.”.

Source: politico.com/blogs/politico-live/2013/03/dolan-catholic-church-needs-better-outreach-to-gays-160555.html

I wish him luck with that.

rossum

 

[_Abyssinia]

Stephanopoulos also asked Dolan what the Catholic Church can say to gays and lesbians, who feel unwelcomed by the Church, which does not support same-sex marriage.

“Well, the first thing I’d say to them is, ‘I love you, too. And God loves you. And you are made in God’s image and likeness. And – and we – we want your happiness. But – and you’re entitled to friendship.’ But we also know that God has told us that the way to happiness, that – especially when it comes to sexual love – that is intended only for a man and woman in marriage, where children can come about naturally,” Dolan said. “We got to be – we got to do better to see that our defense of marriage is not reduced to an attack on gay people. And I admit, we haven’t been too good at that. We try our darndest to make sure we’re not an anti-anybody.”

Video of interview:

abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/03/cardinal-timothy-dolan-catholic-churchs-nature-means-it-will-be-out-of-touch-sometimes

 

[DexUK]

While there are Catholics who believe that a person’s simple identification of themselves as a homosexual is a sin, he’s not going to get very far.

He needs to do some preaching to the choir first. The things I’ve read even on this forum have sometimes made my hair stand on end in their judgementalism. I think a lot of people need to learn humility - from the top down. Following the example of our Holy Father in his simple and loving humility would be an excellent start.

 

[Marie5890]

While there are Catholics who believe that a person’s simple identification of themselves as a homosexual is a sin, he’s not going to get very far.

He needs to do some preaching to the choir first. The things I’ve read even on this forum have sometimes made my hair stand on end in their judgementalism. I think a lot of people need to learn humility - from the top down. Following the example of our Holy Father in his simple and loving humility would be an excellent start.

I will add to, about the comment on happiness that the only way to happiness is thru marriage between one man and one woman.

I know plenty of gay couples, and they are happy. So not sure how that thought reflects the reality many gay couples experience in all honesty.

 

[Allegra]

I agree with Cardinal Dolan.

 

[Offdoodykcrn]

While there are Catholics who believe that a person’s simple identification of themselves as a homosexual is a sin, he’s not going to get very far.

He needs to do some preaching to the choir first. The things I’ve read even on this forum have sometimes made my hair stand on end in their judgementalism. I think a lot of people need to learn humility - from the top down. Following the example of our Holy Father in his simple and loving humility would be an excellent start.

Thank you!

“Hate the sin, but love the sinner.”

 

[_Abyssinia]

Stephanopoulos also asked Dolan what the Catholic Church can say to gays and lesbians, who feel unwelcomed by the Church, which does not support same-sex marriage.

“Well, the first thing I’d say to them is, ‘I love you, too. And God loves you. And you are made in God’s image and likeness. And – and we – we want your happiness. But – and you’re entitled to friendship.’ But we also know that God has told us that the way to happiness, that – especially when it comes to sexual love – that is intended only for a man and woman in marriage, where children can come about naturally,” Dolan said. “We got to be – we got to do better to see that our defense of marriage is not reduced to an attack on gay people. And I admit, we haven’t been too good at that. We try our darndest to make sure we’re not an anti-anybody.”

Video of interview:

abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/03/cardinal-timothy-dolan-catholic-churchs-nature-means-it-will-be-out-of-touch-sometimes

 

[Nandarani]

Here is my comment which will possibly be confusing, as I tend to meld together several issues. Bishop Dolan heads the largest area, and financial heavy-weight of the state at the top of the list of the UNFREE states in the US - this recently came out - New York holds the honor.

I too know one seemingly happy long-term homosexual couple and it’s ok with me that outreach go forward more surely - but it will certainly have to include the hard to hear. It’s not going to be possible to get beyond a certain point and keep everything soft and fluffy.

Bishop Dolan is *also *against the second amendment, at least, his recent comments seem solidly in that camp. THough I’m originally from NYC, grew up just outside it, I’ve come to take on Texas’ point of view, because I understand second amendment rights do primarily have to do with being ready to defend against… heaven forbid, the government. Our government is seriously interested in disempowering us, in advance of serious financial problems, the stock market notwithstanding. It is ONLY going up because of Bernanke’s massive money printing - it’s rise is his central goal and agenda and he has admitted this. Volume is nonexistent - there is very little participation, and trading is largely algorithmic (massive automated split second trades going through).

So… in my view, it may be that Bishop Dolan has a responsibility, he feels on some level, to meld into the general New York and especially New York City mindset.

 

[tbcrawford]

While there are Catholics who believe that a person’s simple identification of themselves as a homosexual is a sin, he’s not going to get very far.

He needs to do some preaching to the choir first. The things I’ve read even on this forum have sometimes made my hair stand on end in their judgementalism. I think a lot of people need to learn humility - from the top down. Following the example of our Holy Father in his simple and loving humility would be an excellent start.

 

[markeverett49]

While there are Catholics who believe that a person’s simple identification of themselves as a homosexual is a sin, he’s not going to get very far.

He needs to do some preaching to the choir first. The things I’ve read even on this forum have sometimes made my hair stand on end in their judgementalism. I think a lot of people need to learn humility - from the top down. Following the example of our Holy Father in his simple and loving humility would be an excellent start.

Two things, the Church teaches that homosexual acts are grave sins. A homosexual orientation is an objective disorder. I understand that many homosexuals do not like to hear this, but it is wrong to suggest that the Church should stop preaching this truth, ESPECIALLY when it is denied by droves of people daily.

As for judgmentalism, two things. One, to claim that a homosexual orientation is an objective disorder is NOT an example of being judgmental. A great example of being judgmental would be for someone who supports same-sex “marriage” to call anyone who opposes it a bigot. THAT is being judgmental.

The Church has a clear, consistent, and compassionate teaching on homosexuality. It could do a better job of countering distortions of that teaching.

The rub is that unlike other sinners, homosexuals want reconciliation without confessing their sins! This will never do.

 

[Stylteralmaldo]

Two things, the Church teaches that homosexual acts are grave sins. A homosexual orientation is an objective disorder. I understand that many homosexuals do not like to hear this, but it is wrong to suggest that the Church should stop preaching this truth, ESPECIALLY when it is denied by droves of people daily…

Yep. The tough part is having a conversation that says. ‘Hi. I love you and God loves. By the way, you’re objectively disordered.’

 

[Marie5890]

Yep. The tough part is having a conversation that says. ‘Hi. I love you and God loves. By the way, you’re objectively disordered.’

Why would someone want to worship and trust a God that has labeled them objectively disordered?

 

[jay29]

I am sick and tired of it. I’m sick of the sugar coating and denials.

Any sex outside of a marriage between one man and one woman is a mortal sin. PERIOD. It can never be condoned nor accepted. These acts ARE NOT part of God’s Plan and are damnable offenses, unless Confessed before death, nor matter how many feelings are hurt proclaiming the truth and no matter how many people flee the pews. If you are not in a marriage designed by God, you are called to chastity.

God destroyed a city over homosexuality/acts. What doesn’t anyone understand?

Rant over.

 

[jay29]

Why would someone want to worship and trust a God that has labeled them objectively disordered?

Maybe they need to view their homosexual acts as the problem and not God?

 

[Marie5890]

Maybe they need to view their homosexual acts as the problem and not God?

Go back and re-read the post I was quoting. It’s not about acts, its about orientation and the label put on them.

 

[Stylteralmaldo]

Why would someone want to worship and trust a God that has labeled them objectively disordered?

The thing is, we are ALL objectively disordered. None of us is without sin. I think the problem in this debate is that we are calling out the sin of homosexual acts while ignoring our own sin (at the very least this is the perception if not the reality). It’s a dilemma we face as a Church. There is truth in the statement that we ought to pluck out the plank in our own eye before trying to remove the splinter from our neighbor’s. Yet we are also called to admonish our brother when he is in sin. Balancing these two Biblical Truths can be a challenge.

 

[Marie5890]

The thing is, we are ALL objectively disordered. None of us is without sin. I think the problem in this debate is that we are calling out the sin of homosexual acts while ignoring our own sin (at the very least this is the perception if not the reality). It’s a dilemma we face as a Church. There is truth in the statement that we ought to pluck out the plank in our own eye before trying to remove the splinter from our neighbor’s. Yet we are also called to admonish our brother when he is in sin. Balancing these two Biblical Truths can be a challenge.

So if a gay person never acted on their orientation, action wise, their being gay is not considered objectively disordered because they are not acting upon it?

 

[Stylteralmaldo]

So if a gay person never acted on their orientation, action wise, their being gay is not considered objectively disordered because they are not acting upon it?

If a gay person never acted on his/her orientation, he/she hasn’t sinned. If he/she is attracted to someone of the same sex, he/she is still objectively disordered. That’s the difficult conversation to have.

Let me put it this way. A married man, objectively speaking should only desire sexual relations with his wife. To desire sexual relations with a woman that is not his wife is objectively disordered. God intended man to be with one woman, not multiple women. With that said, if the man does not act on that objectively disordered condition, he does not sin.

The objectively disordered condition applies to both homosexual and heterosexual persons.

 

[Marie5890]

If a gay person never acted on his/her orientation, he/she hasn’t sinned. If he/she is attracted to someone of the same sex, he/she is still objectively disordered. That’s the difficult conversation to have.

Let me put it this way. A married man, objectively speaking should only desire sexual relations with his wife. To desire sexual relations with a woman that is not his wife is objectively disordered. God intended man to be with one woman, not multiple women. With that said, if the man does not act on that objectively disordered condition, he does not sin.

The objectively disordered condition applies to both homosexual and heterosexual persons.

Ok I think better understand you.

Being homosexual is no more, or less, objectively disorder than a heterosexual, , because of concupencense (sp?) we are all objectively disorder somehow, someway.

It’s just that the label is put on homosexuality and tends to marginalize them

(Not sure if I mirrored that back clearly? But I think I do get what you are saying. )

 

[meltzerboy]

Here is my comment which will possibly be confusing, as I tend to meld together several issues. Bishop Dolan heads the largest area, and financial heavy-weight of the state at the top of the list of the UNFREE states in the US - this recently came out - New York holds the honor.

I too know one seemingly happy long-term homosexual couple and it’s ok with me that outreach go forward more surely - but it will certainly have to include the hard to hear. It’s not going to be possible to get beyond a certain point and keep everything soft and fluffy.

Bishop Dolan is *also *against the second amendment, at least, his recent comments seem solidly in that camp. THough I’m originally from NYC, grew up just outside it, I’ve come to take on Texas’ point of view, because I understand second amendment rights do primarily have to do with being ready to defend against… heaven forbid, the government. Our government is seriously interested in disempowering us, in advance of serious financial problems, the stock market notwithstanding. It is ONLY going up because of Bernanke’s massive money printing - it’s rise is his central goal and agenda and he has admitted this. Volume is nonexistent - there is very little participation, and trading is largely algorithmic (massive automated split second trades going through).

So… in my view, it may be that Bishop Dolan has a responsibility, he feels on some level, to meld into the general New York and especially New York City mindset.

Nandarani, you’re certainly entitled to your view. However, I think if Cardinal Dolan wished “to meld into the general New York and especially New York City mindset,” he would not have openly protested in writing the HHS mandate concerning contraception, even after revisions were made. And he would not have stated publicly that he is neither conservative nor liberal and that his primary focus is on abiding by the teachings of the Catholic Church. In every area, Cardinal Dolan reflects the interests of the Church rather than taking sides based on political expediency. I don’t see him as opposed to second-amendment rights but reflecting the bishops’ concern regarding the violence in our society perpetuated by the proliferation of guns that get into the wrong hands. Cardinal Dolan is attentive to the social issues of the day that affect people in general and New Yorkers in particular. Such concern is not in contradiction to Church teaching.