Dolan: Catholic Church needs better outreach to gays

  • Thread starter Thread starter rossum
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The problem with secularists and the debate over contraception is the vast majority of people think of sex as nothing more than a pleasurable pursuit. This is nothing new though. A majority of people have thought this way since biblical times. What has magnified this belief has been the rise of secularism since the Age of the Enlightenment. How many people turn to the Church for advice on morals anymore? Very few. But how can we change that? I am just as guilty as these secularists because I have also engaged in sexual relations outside of marriage with contraception. But I was able to find my way back to Christ and the Church just recently. How many others are as fortunate as I am in this regard?
This is a very good point. To the extent that the rest of us are defending heterosexual only marriages, with a shallow understanding of what sex means for that marriage, then we end up defending from a shallow point.

We need to regain a proper understanding of what marital chastity is all about.
 
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 do you assume that you have to start talking about “objective disorder” in any such “conversation?” Let alone, that you should talk about it. Let alone, that sexuality of any kind must be a conversation-starter or -sustainer between and among people of goodwill and charity?

It isn’t “a subject” in my conversations, at least not one that I ever bring up. I also wouldn’t bring it up with single heterosexuals, as that is gauche, and therefore also uncharitable.

If you can’t receive and love people without examining their sins and disordered attractions, then you aren’t worthy of being a follower of Christ – unless such people demand that you affirm their sins and disorders as a condition of any kind of conversation, let alone a sustained relationship. The whole premise is frankly absurd.

If the premise were applied to me, I would have zero friends, quite simply.
 
This is a very good point. To the extent that the rest of us are defending heterosexual only marriages, with a shallow understanding of what sex means for that marriage, then we end up defending from a shallow point.

We need to regain a proper understanding of what marital chastity is all about.
I agree. One of the reasons—indeed, I think the MAIN reason–that arguments for same-sex marriage appeal to heterosexual persons is that these people don’t understand human sexuality or marriage, period.

Richard Weaver, a professor of literature, wrote a book nearly 60 years ago called “Ideas Have Consequences” in which he argued that the worst calamity to befall the Western world since ancient times was the victory of nominalists over realists (-those who believed in ‘universals’ and ‘essences’. We see this writ large in the re-definition of marriage. (And also the separation of ‘human being’ from the definition of ‘person’ so that society alone determines which human beings have rights and what those rights are, but that’s another thread.)
 
Go back and re-read the post I was quoting. It’s not about acts, its about orientation and the label put on them.
Marie, please re-read the CCC. The fact of someone “being” homosexual is not disordered / intrinsically wrong, but the ACT of sodomy (etc) or other homosexual acts between two men or two women is.
 
If your message of love does not get through the first time, simply repeat it. Repeat it every day. Repeat it every day with a smile on your face. Do not feel like you need to defend, defend, defend. Go on the offense. Go on the attack with love. Love will defeat the secular virtue of “tolerance” and indifference any day.
I like you sooo much! :blushing:

The thing the chafes my hide about this issue is that hate is wielded *in the name of righteousness *- in the name of God. I can’t think of anything more offensive.

I suppose my feathers get ruffled in most cases when a majority gangs up on a minority. My grandmother (my favorite Catholic) despised bullies and gossip. She taught me that whenever I find myself pointing out the faults in someone else, one finger points at them, and three more point back at me.

We are all guilty of some kind of sin. I would not want my sins broadcasted to the world and be subjected to taunts and ridicule. Therefor, I will persist in shielding others from hatefulness - regardless of the source: the KKK or -]the church/-] - rather, people who use religion as a reason to be hateful. :idea: That’s a great idea! If you find you have something in common with the KKK - you are doing something wrong.
 
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
I wish him luck, too. No matter how much the Church reaches out to those with same sex attractions, many (like you), will still consider it “hate”, or conflate sexual behavior with race, religion, etc…

Only full embrace of same sex “marriage” will satisy most anti-Catholics.

“The further a Society drifts from the Truth , the more it will hate those that speak it.” George Orwell
 
And that’s where liberals get those who are not in favor of gay marriage. I’m sorry if there are those of liberal leanings on this message board as I do not mean to lump all of you together, but I have seen this tactic play out time and time again. If you do not support gay marriage then you are automatically intolerant and bigoted. As for me? I’m guilty as sin of trying to avoid homosexuals because I sometimes have a hard time separating the person from the sin. But there are many Catholics and other Christians out there who do not do this and I need to strive to better live by their example.

Bottom line…we need to somehow better communicate just what we believe. Jesus said to love all people, including sinners. We saw this in his ministry. He didn’t hang out with the righteous. He spent his time on earth hanging out with some of the biggest sinners in all of Judea. With this example in mind we need to love homosexuals just as we love all other people. But, at the same time, we need to point out the sinfulness of their lifestyle. It’s not a sin to be gay. It’s just a sin to act on those tendencies.
And yet I have managed to have perfectly civil conversations about gay marriage with gay people where many often concede I have some valid points.
How often do we have to ring that bell though? The world is quite aware that the Church teaches that homosexual acts are sinful. Most people know that the Church teaches that contraception is sinful as well. How often do we have to hit people over the head with it?

More effective perhaps that we do what John the Baptist did and Christ did as well. Teach about repentance. Deep down we all know we have things to repent about. Declare the need for repentance and if you are called to account for yourself, declared that you are among the wicked as well. Announce God’s mercy, love and healing power.

Self-delusion only runs so far. Try as we might to convince ourselves that we’re generally good people, most of us are aware that we need forgiveness. I think Pope Francis follows the saint’s example quite well. You didn’t see St. Francis giving scathing denunciations of the extravagance around him. Instead he preached the virtue of poverty by living it.
For them to be delusional they’d have to actually know on some level.
Excellent clarification.

However, I have a bone to pick your comment
.The suggestion made is
It is, therefore, probably wise to avoid wherever possible using the words “homosexual” and “heterosexual” as nouns since such usage implies a fixed state and an equivalence between the natural state of man and woman as created by God and persons experiencing same sex attractions or behaviors.

Cardinal Ratzinger used “homosexual persons” with “homosexual” as a descriptive, an adjective, to the noun, which is “persons”. He was therefore putting into focus the person, his/her dignity as a human, and not his sexual inclination or attraction to a member of the same sex.

Our Pope Emeritus is not only a linguist but a master in conjugation of sentences.
,
Do remember that the only reason I actually use the term “homosexual” is because people on this forum complain about me using the word “gay” to refer to homosexuality in any form because people had the sense not to use the term in that manner around children when those posters were children. I don’t really use the word gay as a noun.
This is a very good point. To the extent that the rest of us are defending heterosexual only marriages, with a shallow understanding of what sex means for that marriage, then we end up defending from a shallow point.

We need to regain a proper understanding of what marital chastity is all about.
True, most heterosexuals have a very shallow understanding of marriage
 
Yes, reading the comments in the link, I can almost FEEL the love flowing from my monitor. Phrases like “pedophile”, “misogynist”, “crusades”, “inquisition” lead me to believe that outreach will be greatly appreciated.

:rolleyes:

Thanks for the link, though, rossum. The persecution and horrible war against our Church is more evident every day.
 
We need to speak the Truth even if many do not want to hear it or find it offensive.

My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me
 
I like you sooo much! :blushing:

The thing the chafes my hide about this issue is that hate is wielded *in the name of righteousness *- in the name of God. I can’t think of anything more offensive.

I suppose my feathers get ruffled in most cases when a majority gangs up on a minority. My grandmother (my favorite Catholic) despised bullies and gossip. She taught me that whenever I find myself pointing out the faults in someone else, one finger points at them, and three more point back at me.

We are all guilty of some kind of sin. I would not want my sins broadcasted to the world and be subjected to taunts and ridicule. Therefor, I will persist in shielding others from hatefulness - regardless of the source: the KKK or -]the church/-] - rather, people who use religion as a reason to be hateful. :idea: That’s a great idea! If you find you have something in common with the KKK - you are doing something wrong.
Of course. None of us want to have our sins broadcast to the world and be subjected to taunts and ridicule. Neither do we wish to broadcast our own sins to the world as a matter of principle and demand that everyone accept them with equanimity as a good thing.
 
We need to speak the Truth even if many do not want to hear it or find it offensive.

My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me
They sure do. But recall that Christ saved His condemnations for those who should have known better and didn’t. The Pharisees and Saducees took the brunt of His harsh rhetoric for they had been entrusted with the law and they abused the heck out of it. Your average Joe Hebrew who was struggling was given a message of love.

We should mimic this. We are privileged with the knowledge of the fullness of the Truth. To whom much is given, much will be required. The world is ignorant of the Truth.
 
I wish him luck, too. No matter how much the Church reaches out to those with same sex attractions, many (like you), will still consider it “hate”, or conflate sexual behavior with race, religion, etc…

Only full embrace of same sex “marriage” will satisy most anti-Catholics.

“The further a Society drifts from the Truth , the more it will hate those that speak it.” George Orwell
👍
 
Of course. None of us want to have our sins broadcast to the world and be subjected to taunts and ridicule. Neither do we wish to broadcast our own sins to the world as a matter of principle and demand that everyone accept them with equanimity as a good thing.
Exactly. I don’t know if someone I meet is, say, a fornicator or adulterer, but if they tell me they are, that they are active, that they think it’s great and that eventually the Church will “catch up” and recognize that “whatever gets you through the night is alright,” I disagree.

The reason this subject is controversial is NOT that some people engage in homosexual acts—which has always happened–but because many such people DENY this is a sin, and further millions of people who are not in the grip of this sin ALSO deny it is a sin. That’s deep moral confusion.
 
I am wondering if there has been a call for a special outreach to blasphemers? Adulterers? Liars? Those who dishonor their parents?

I am so tired of this act getting “most favored sin” status. sigh
 
The following is a note from the president of a Catholic High School, Father Edward Salmon. In his all boys High School two boys want to attend the prom as a couple. Obviously this has caused a stirr. I think his approach to the problem is one that shows compassion (remember that is something all Christians are suppose to show.) The letter is kinda long, but worth the read:

Dear Sisters and Brothers of our McQuaid Jesuit Community:

Our new Holy Father, Pope Francis, in the homily for his Inaugural Mass, had encouraging and inviting words: “Today amid so much darkness we need to see the light of hope and to be men and women who bring hope to others. To protect creation and to protect every man and every woman, to look upon them with tenderness and love, is to open up a horizon of hope, it is to let a ray of light break through heavy clouds.”

Darkness and heavy clouds have gathered here at McQuaid recently because of misinformation, fear, misunderstanding, and even anger. That misinformation, fear, misunderstanding, and even anger came about after two of our brothers asked whether they could attend the Junior Ball together. Into the darkness of misinformation, fear, misunderstanding and anger, together with Pope Francis, I invite and encourage each and every one of us in the McQuaid family to be men and women who bring hope to one another. I invite and encourage each and every one of us in the McQuaid family to be men and women who look upon one another with tenderness and love. I invite and encourage each and every one of us in the McQuaid family to open up a horizon of hope, to let a ray of light break through heavy clouds.

I myself would like to let a ray of light break through by correcting some misinformation. It is simply not true, as was reported and as many seem to have assumed, that a decision had been made by McQuaid authorities not to allow the young men in question to attend the Junior Ball. No decision had been made.

I would like to let a ray of light enter into the darkness of fear. I, together with the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, who in their Pastoral Message, “Always Our Children,” “. . . call on all Christians and citizens of good will to confront their own fears about homosexuality and to curb the humor and discrimination that offend homosexual persons. We understand that having a homosexual orientation brings with it enough anxiety, pain and issues related to self-acceptance without society bringing additional prejudicial treatment.”

I would like to let a ray of light enter into possible misunderstanding of the Church’s teaching. In that same message, Always Our Children, the Bishops are clear --“Nothing in the Bible or in Catholic teaching can be used to justify prejudicial or discriminatory attitudes and behaviors.” The Bishops continue: “It is also important to recognize that neither a homosexual orientation, nor a heterosexual one, leads inevitably to sexual activity. One’s total personhood is not reducible to sexual orientation or behavior.” In that same message, the Bishops refer to a 1986 Letter from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith which emphasizes that “Respect for the God-given dignity of all persons means the recognition of human rights and responsibilities. The teachings of the Church make it clear that the fundamental human rights of homosexual persons must be defended and that all of us must strive to eliminate any forms of injustice, oppression, or violence against them.”

The Bishops continue, “It is not sufficient only to avoid unjust discrimination. Homosexual persons ‘must be accepted with respect, compassion and sensitivity’ (Catechism of the Catholic Church, no. 2358). They, as is true of every human being, need to be nourished at many different levels simultaneously. This includes friendship, [brotherhood] which is a way of loving and is essential to healthy human development. It is one of the richest possible human experiences. Friendship can and does thrive outside of sexual involvement.”

Lastly, I would like to let a ray of light into the darkness that anger can bring. Based on the misinformation circulating and a certain misunderstanding of Church teaching, some people began posting prejudicial and humiliating comments in the social media. Speaking or writing or acting out of anger is not usually helpful. Others, however, deeply concerned for the dignity and respect of all persons, wrote thoughtful and encouraging e-mail messages to McQuaid officials.

In conclusion and in the hope that I and all of us at McQuaid Jesuit will let a ray of light break through the darkness and the heavy clouds that have surrounded us, I have made the decision that, if our two brothers who have asked to attend the Junior Ball together wish to do so, they will be welcomed.

With this decision I am not contradicting the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church with regard to human sexuality; I am not encouraging nor am I condoning homosexual activity just as I do not encourage or condone heterosexual activity at a dance. I am not contradicting the Church’s opposition to the redefinition of marriage. With this decision I invite and encourage us all, as Pope Francis does, to exercise care, protection, goodness which calls for a certain tenderness “which is not a virtue of the weak but rather a sign of strength of spirit and a capacity for concern, for compassion, for genuine openness to others, for love. We must not be afraid of goodness, of tenderness.”

Sincerely in the Lord,

Edward F. Salmon, S.J.
President
 
I agree with Cardinal Dolan, our outreach needs to improve. Our church was never meant to be an insular one.
 
The following is a note from the president of a Catholic High School, Father Edward Salmon. In his all boys High School two boys want to attend the prom as a couple. Obviously this has caused a stirr. I think his approach to the problem is one that shows compassion (remember that is something all Christians are suppose to show.) The letter is kinda long, but worth the read:

I myself would like to let a ray of light break through by correcting some misinformation…

I would like to let a ray of light enter into the darkness of fear…

I would like to let a ray of light enter into possible misunderstanding of the Church’s…

I would like to let a ray of light into the darkness that anger can bring…
Frankly, it’s a prideful, flowery piece, as if our good father has all the “light”, and the rest of the community are bigoted knuckle dragging uncaring dolts.
 
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.
This is not correct. When a man has sexual desires toward a woman that is objectively rightly ordered. It only becomes disordered if the desire is for a woman who is not his wife or if other conditions are met such as lust, objectification, etc.

When a man has sexual desires for another man, that is objectively disordered. There is **no condition **that would make it ordered rightly to the faculty of human sexuality.

BTW, to you and to Marie, the Church takes great pains to **never **refer to a person as disordered. A person suffering from homosexual desires is bearing the burden of a disorder in much the same way that a person who cannot see is bearing the disorder of blindness.
 
I am wondering if there has been a call for a special outreach to blasphemers? Adulterers? Liars? Those who dishonor their parents?

I am so tired of this act getting “most favored sin” status. sigh
You know, I think you hit my feelings on the head.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top