Dominican Sister of St. Cecilia under fire by students for talk on homosexuality

[Prodigal_Son]

Also, PS isn’t gay; he has * a quite lovely wife. *

She’s a keeper! :aok::kiss4you:

 

[SMGS127]

You forgot child molester, actually in many places “homosexual” and “gay” are connected strongly to child molester.

While there are an unfortunately high number of people who falsely link being gay with a higher risk of molestation, I haven’t heard that ever connected to the phrase “homosexual lifestyle.” That would not be a discussion about vernacular but rather one about false statistics in general.

The vernacular of “homosexual lifestyle” usually references drugs, alcohol, and high #s of sexual partners, which is why the usual lesbian couple drinking coffee in the morning while doing their taxes isn’t exactly too thrilled to be referred to as “living a homosexual lifestyle.”

 

[Prodigal_Son]

Why would you identify as gay if you have zero intent on having gay sex?

I wonder why that matters. Presumably, a person with SSA has spent a lot more time discerning how to describe themselves than you have for them, and has gotten advice from people on how to describe themselves. If their prayerful conclusion is that they call themselves a “celibate gay person”, then must we judge them?

Is calling oneself “gay” a sin too? I’m sorry, I must have missed that part of my Catechism class – and apparently Pope Francis did too.

(Mind you, I am not myself sure that people should call themselves gay or lesbian. But I defer to their judgment for their decisions, especially considering that the Church has continually used the term “homosexual persons”, a term which surely is prone to all the same objections you used to object to calling oneself “gay”.)

That would be like me, a married man, identifying as as adulterer because I am attracted to women other than my wife. No one should identify themselves by the sinful or disordered things they are attracted to. I don’t want to beat myself up over those unwanted attractions and those who deal with homosexual attractions but live a chaste life shouldn’t beat themselves up, either. But that doesnt mean that it should be a foundational piece of one’s personal identity.

It is a foundational piece of a person with SSA’s struggle. And this makes it very important in terms of identity too. And not in a negative sense. Can you imagine a blind person who refused to call themselves blind? Now THAT would be unhealthy!

If you are living a chaste life, no matter what you are attracted to, you are living like a real man in Christ, and that us how you should see yourself.

Now that just throws me for a complete loop!

Are you saying that gay men can’t be “real men in Christ”? That simply calling oneself gay makes a person less than a real man or woman?

I don’t know what to say. I’m sorry you feel that way.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

While there are an unfortunately high number of people who falsely link being gay with a higher risk of molestation, I haven’t heard that ever connected to the phrase “homosexual lifestyle.” That would not be a discussion about vernacular but rather one about false statistics in general.

The vernacular of “homosexual lifestyle” usually references drugs, alcohol, and high #s of sexual partners, which is why the usual lesbian couple drinking coffee in the morning while doing their taxes isn’t exactly too thrilled to be referred to as “living a homosexual lifestyle.”

Ahhh, yes. Drinking coffee, eh? We all know that they need that coffee because they’ve been up all night having sex with multiple partners while using crack and enacting sadomasochistic fantasies, all the while videotaping it and broadcasting it live for a for-profit internet video outfit they run which is in serious financial trouble due to mismanagement…

Which explains why they were doing their taxes, eh?

There is a terribly evil explanation for everything, you see.

 

[Tony_Micelli]

Unfortunately, the church can’t preach the truth in a way that may offend people with sensitivities concerning homosexuality. God always meets people where they are, and not where they should be. If God were to show us the truth about ourselves, most of us would fall into complete despair seeing our sins and what miserable creatures we are.

Just like God tolerating polygamy with Abraham and St. Paul tolerating slavery as necessary evils, we in our post Christian society have to tolerate homosexuality while focusing on bringing people to Christ and his mercy. Obsessing on homosexuality or abortion will not evangelize our secular culture.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

Unfortunately, the church can’t preach the truth in a way that may offend people with sensitivities concerning homosexuality.

Or perhaps we should say, that shouldn’t *unnecessarily *offend people.

If a person who is 600 pounds is entering an elevator you are on, which can only safely bear 700 pounds, it is not unnecessarily offensive to say that one of you must get off. But surely this could emotionally hurt the 600-pound person.

Prudence is the art of knowing what sorts of offense are necessary. There are no hard and fast rules here. But some people are NEVER willing to offend, which is a fault; and some people are ALWAYS willing to offend, which is a fault.

Paul was willing to offend slave owners. But he didn’t think it wise to do so, in many cases.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

As an afterthought, it would be interesting to read the book of Philemon as if it were written to a modern active homosexual who calls him or herself a Christian…

 

[Tony_Micelli]

Prudence is the art of knowing what sorts of offense are necessary.

Im not saying this Dominican lacks prudence–I’m unqualified for judging her, but that we shouldn’t rend our garments in disgust that this happened at a catholic school and cry that all is lost. Unfortunately, this is the new norm.

 

[HappyCatholic01]

Im not saying this Dominican lacks prudence–I’m unqualified for judging her, but that we shouldn’t rend our garments in disgust that this happened at a catholic school and cry that all is lost. Unfortunately, this is the new norm.

We certainly should not believe all is lost.

We should not however accept this as a new norm and simply say “oh well.”

We must not despair, but to accept anything less than what Christ wants as acceptable for us is to doubt the power of God Himself, frankly.

Nothing shocks me about our poorly educated, practically lifeless Church any more, but that doesn’t imply that we should be content with that as the norm.

Also, in regards to the comment about obsessing over abortion and homosexuality, the only ones who make it an obsessive issue are the Church’s enemies. When it is discussed or comes up, it is usually because someone has made it an issue outside the Church.

Rarely is a homily heard that address either, yet I hear about serving the poor and using our talents and whatnot all the time. If anything, one could argue that the Church is obsessed with the poor. But if one did, one would sound crazy, wouldn’t they?

You cannot obsess things that serve the Lord. I do not think anyone is obsessing over abortion or homosexuality in our Church. Her opponents certainly are, but when you have poor boxes in every Church and collections for the needy in every Mass, it is hard to say with a straight face that the Church is too focused on anything but the less fortunate.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

Lifestyle is a neutral, objective term, and homosexual lifestyle is a phrase in use by regular compassionate people without malice including the religious like Sr Jane Dominic and those in the physical / mental healing profession towards gays and lesbians.

The term causes offense. You may either say that the offense is necessary or unnecessary. We do not have permission to cause unnecessary offense. That would be like going to a Jewish household with freshly cooked bacon.

So you tell me: why is the offense necessary? What does this term accomplish, that another term would not accomplish equally well?

 

[Prodigal_Son]

Still to InSearchofGrace…

An example: I have decided, myself, that using the term “sodomy” in conversations about homosexuality is defensible. I know for a fact that the term “sodomy” causes offense. But I think that that offense is necessary, in order to communicate exactly what is wrong about homosexual actions, and exactly what isn’t wrong about being a homosexual. Moreover, the term “sodomy” clarifies that straight people are capable of committing exactly the same sin as homosexuals – and that straight people commit this sin all the time.

 

[Dawnia]

While there are an unfortunately high number of people who falsely link being gay with a higher risk of molestation, I haven’t heard that ever connected to the phrase “homosexual lifestyle.” That would not be a discussion about vernacular but rather one about false statistics in general.

The vernacular of “homosexual lifestyle” usually references drugs, alcohol, and high #s of sexual partners, which is why the usual lesbian couple drinking coffee in the morning while doing their taxes isn’t exactly too thrilled to be referred to as “living a homosexual lifestyle.”

Interesting. “Homosexual lifestyle” is ambiguous enough to mean all sorts of things. I have never heard the reference to drugs being part of it. Making assumptions about what a speaker means makes for poor communication.

I recall a college professor who used the term niggardly in a speech. There was all sorts of offense taken because people were making assumptions rather than getting clarification. The op-ed where the professor educating on the entomology and definition of the word was rather entertaining.

 

[Elizium23]

Entomology of a word? Interesting, which insect did it evolve from?

 

[Dawnia]

Entomology of a word? Interesting, which insect did it evolve from?

Should be etymology not entomology.

 

[Path_Finder]

Interesting. “Homosexual lifestyle” is ambiguous enough to mean all sorts of things. I have never heard the reference to drugs being part of it. Making assumptions about what a speaker means makes for poor communication.

I recall a college professor who used the term niggardly in a speech. There was all sorts of offense taken because people were making assumptions rather than getting clarification. The op-ed where the professor educating on the entomology and definition of the word was rather entertaining.

Though I would not say per se: “drugs”, I think it is easy to see a sort of “partying” lifestyle I would say, in the bars, look at that band who was so big “The Village People” though not all of them were gay I understand and look at those parades. And look where a lot of the growth of the movement seemed to take place? Out in SF in the Castro district.

Yes, one can look at Oktoberfest or whatever and say, that’s about partying too and I guess it is.

Of course, the partying lifestyle does NOT apply to everyone, is just a generalization but surely there are exceptions.

 

[Joie_de_Vivre]

While there are an unfortunately high number of people who falsely link being gay with a higher risk of molestation, I haven’t heard that ever connected to the phrase “homosexual lifestyle.” That would not be a discussion about vernacular but rather one about false statistics in general.

The vernacular of “homosexual lifestyle” usually references drugs, alcohol, and high #s of sexual partners, which is why the usual lesbian couple drinking coffee in the morning while doing their taxes isn’t exactly too thrilled to be referred to as “living a homosexual lifestyle.”

I have meet people who think most gay men molest children and therefore homosexual lifestyle involves soliciting children. I’ve actually seen “informational” video warning not to get a lift from men because he has an invisible sickness of “homosexuality” and he might hurt them.

Ahhh, yes. Drinking coffee, eh? We all know that they need that coffee because they’ve been up all night having sex with multiple partners while using crack and enacting sadomasochistic fantasies, all the while videotaping it and broadcasting it live for a for-profit internet video outfit they run which is in serious financial trouble due to mismanagement…

Which explains why they were doing their taxes, eh?

There is a terribly evil explanation for everything, you see.

Or if one does most of the typically woman’s job stuff then they are imitating a heterosexual relationship because they know what they are doing is wrong. I’ve actually met people who think like that, because apparently if they aren’t exactly the same with regards to masculinity and femininity they are engaging in the butch/femme split.

Unfortunately, the church can’t preach the truth in a way that may offend people with sensitivities concerning homosexuality. God always meets people where they are, and not where they should be. If God were to show us the truth about ourselves, most of us would fall into complete despair seeing our sins and what miserable creatures we are.

Just like God tolerating polygamy with Abraham and St. Paul tolerating slavery as necessary evils, we in our post Christian society have to tolerate homosexuality while focusing on bringing people to Christ and his mercy. Obsessing on homosexuality or abortion will not evangelize our secular culture.

Actually it is possible to have meaningful discussions about the Church’s position with LGBT people without them crying bigotry.

The term causes offense. You may either say that the offense is necessary or unnecessary. We do not have permission to cause unnecessary offense. That would be like going to a Jewish household with freshly cooked bacon.

So you tell me: why is the offense necessary? What does this term accomplish, that another term would not accomplish equally well?

You claim to be an orthodox Catholic wanting only to be effective with evangelization. It seems you are too close to the trees that you miss looking at the forest as a whole.

Why do I say this? You believe that to win gays over, the rest of the world will have to use politically correct words, watered down concepts, that lead actually to insistence by LGBTs of the opposite of truth.

Gay, not same sex attracted

Actively gay, not living the homosexual lifestyle

Natural instead of unnatural

Okay with God, not sinful

It does not end, does it?

In fact, there is no let up, as shown with this tactic by LGBTs to force their definition of terms, to promote an agenda you are in effect helping but deny supporting. And you know, as a Catholic, even if this malevolent movement succeeds in every state in this great country of ours in legalizing gay “marriage,” the truth is that marriage between two men or two women will never be okay with God.

That was part of a post directed at SMGS127, but it might as well have been directed at you.

Still to InSearchofGrace…

An example: I have decided, myself, that using the term “sodomy” in conversations about homosexuality is defensible. I know for a fact that the term “sodomy” causes offense. But I think that that offense is necessary, in order to communicate exactly what is wrong about homosexual actions, and exactly what isn’t wrong about being a homosexual. Moreover, the term “sodomy” clarifies that straight people are capable of committing exactly the same sin as homosexuals – and that straight people commit this sin all the time.

Heterosexuals don’t realize the term applies to stuff they do because apparently if a couple engages in anal sex and the man always orgasms during it if he “doesn’t mean to” then “its perfectly okay because Christopher West said so”.

Though I would not say per se: “drugs”, I think it is easy to see a sort of “partying” lifestyle I would say, in the bars, look at that band who was so big “The Village People” though not all of them were gay I understand and look at those parades. And look where a lot of the growth of the movement seemed to take place? Out in SF in the Castro district.

Yes, one can look at Oktoberfest or whatever and say, that’s about partying too and I guess it is.

Of course, the partying lifestyle does NOT apply to everyone, is just a generalization but surely there are exceptions.

When there are far more exceptions than cases that follow the rule it’s just an ugly stereotype.

 

[Path_Finder]

When there are far more exceptions than cases that follow the rule it’s just an ugly stereotype.

If that is the case but what does the public see in cities like Toronto, San Francisco, Seattle, New York and Boston?? They see wild celebrations. Wild celebrations not suitable for everyone.

 

[SMGS127]

If that is the case but what does the public see in cities like Toronto, San Francisco, Seattle, New York and Boston?? They see wild celebrations. Wild celebrations not suitable for everyone.

You actually see the worst of the worst of the celebrations. Media is sensationalist. Reporting on a civil LGBT Pride festival that had a few local bands play and where vendors sold various artistic wares is super-boring. Reporting on the person willing to pose [almost entirely] naked for the media channel? Definitely will generate views.

However, this is only a very small fraction of the LGBT community. Most of the active LGBT community lives quietly with their partner and just asks for respect from others. And in my experience, the percentage of LGBT high school/college youth who party is the same as the percentage of straight high school/college youth who party. It’s just that watching a guy do jello shots off a girl’s stomach at a party or club isn’t going to get the media attention that a guy walking half-naked down a huge street will. But neither of them truly represent their orientation or gender well.

What we need to understand as Catholics is that most LGBT people try to be moral. Yes, it is definitely by a false standard, but they genuinely try to be moral, just from a humanistic outlook of looking out for your fellow human beings and protecting each other from physical harms. Anyone who attempts to unfairly demonize them will immediately lose respect from not only the community, but everyone who is friends with or in any way knows any person in the community.

 

[Path_Finder]

You actually see the worst of the worst of the celebrations. Media is sensationalist. Reporting on a civil LGBT Pride festival that had a few local bands play and where vendors sold various artistic wares is super-boring. Reporting on the person willing to pose [almost entirely] naked for the media channel? Definitely will generate views.

However, this is only a very small fraction of the LGBT community. Most of the active LGBT community lives quietly with their partner and just asks for respect from others. And in my experience, the percentage of LGBT high school/college youth who party is the same as the percentage of straight high school/college youth who party. It’s just that watching a guy do jello shots off a girl’s stomach at a party or club isn’t going to get the media attention that a guy walking half-naked down a huge street will. But neither of them truly represent their orientation or gender well.

What we need to understand as Catholics is that most LGBT people try to be moral. Yes, it is definitely by a false standard, but they genuinely try to be moral, just from a humanistic outlook of looking out for your fellow human beings and protecting each other from physical harms. Anyone who attempts to unfairly demonize them will immediately lose respect from not only the community, but everyone who is friends with or in any way knows any person in the community.

Your reasoning is if the CDC reports 1 in 5 gay/bisexual men have HIV, to turn this around and say that means 80% don’t have HIV. Sorry, 20%-wise shows this is a dangerous lifestyle as well.

webmd.com/hiv-aids/news/20100923/1-in-5-gay-bi-men-have-hiv-nearly-half-dont-know

Spare me your graphic descriptions please, if a group of people are going to schedule PUBLIC PARADES, that certainly is the way the PUBLIC is going to see them. These people you speak of partying in some sundry way are doing nothing of that, thus, I’d question how relevant it is to bring up such things.

 

[signit]

What we need to understand as Catholics is that most LGBT people try to be moral. Yes, it is definitely by a false standard, but they genuinely try to be moral, just from a humanistic outlook of looking out for your fellow human beings and protecting each other from physical harms. Anyone who attempts to unfairly demonize them will immediately lose respect from not only the community, but everyone who is friends with or in any way knows any person in the community.

This whole debate reminds me of the police officer coming to our middle school telling us not to do drugs.

I agree, we shouldn’t do drugs; but the police officer (and, for that matter, our teachers and parents) were so clueless (e.g., marijuana causes “permanent brain damage”) that some of us were turned off from respecting them as sources of information.

So, I agree about “unfairly demonizing” them.