Dramatic move as Synod Fathers set out new pastoral care for gays, cohabiting couples and divorcees

[FollowChrist34]

The Devil seeks to destroy the Church from within and from without. I believe this is one of his attempts to destroy it from within. The Pope bears the brunt of the attack. We should pray for our Holy Father.

Catherine of Siena pray for us.

Not one to mince words, Catherine’s letters moved popes and politicians to action. In urging Gregory XI to leave Avignon and re-establish the Papacy in Rome she wrote:

“Since [Christ] has given you authority and you have accepted it, you ought to be using the power and strength that is yours. If you don’t intend to use it, it would be better and more to God’s honor and the good of your soul to resign….If I were in your place, I would be afraid of incurring divine judgment.” Later in her letter she continued, “Cursed be you, for time and power were entrusted to you and you did not use them!”

 

[Good_Tidings]

A doctor who tells the overweight alcoholic patient that he cannot treat him until he stops drinking and loses weight, will likely face a hefty malpractice suit if something happens to the patient afterwards.

On the other hand a doctor who meets him where he is, is likely to help. First step would be to take a good medical history/tests to figure out how treat the immediate and possibly urgent health issues that might include, for sake of argument, Type II diabetes (sacrament of reconciliation), and offer him medicine like metformin or insulin to deal with the immediate problems (Eucharist), then working with him and the nursing/social care team, encourage lifestyle changes that will improve his outlook, like weight loss and AA (spiritual direction, catechesis, all supported by continued graces from the sacraments).

A hospital, or doctor, above all is required to “do no harm”. A soul that the clergy turns away or discourages by raising the bar for admission too high, is like the doctor who refuses to treat a patient as in the example above. He may just kill the patient, and the clergy may just irretrievably lose that soul.

I’ve read it many times on this forum that the person who fails to “charitably” correct the sinful is guilty of sin himself, but I rarely read that the person who fails to act with love and charity, and thus turns away a soul in need of healing, is also guilty of sin. I think St. Paul says it best in 1 Corinthians 13:

Yes, love rejoices in the Truth, especially when someone else discovers that Truth as well. But to bring that person to Truth requires much more than a clanging cymbal… it requires love and patience.

What a beautiful and thoughtful analogy!

 

[robertmidwest]

Everyone is called to chastity, but homosexuals have no choice other than life-long celibacy.

This is not true. I am sure that there have been many, many, men and women who have had same sex attractions and still had functional marriages.

 

[lakotak]

There’s no point in redefining a word. Orientation does not equal Action.

**It would be good to ruminate on this before you tell someone that such and such is Church teaching (“Homosexual orientation is sin”) when it is not, **causing someone to be unnecessarily at odds with the Church and possibly driving them away even further.

Never have and have no plans to do. I am aware that the orientation of itself is not sinful.

 

[RGCheek]

A soul that the clergy turns away or discourages by raising the bar for admission too high, is like the doctor who refuses to treat a patient as in the example above. He may just kill the patient, and the clergy may just irretrievably lose that soul.

The church still teaches Free Will, right?

So how does my behavior or anyone elses replace responsibility for moral choices and lifestyles?

Is this something the church teaches now, that I can make someone reject Christ?

I thought that to not be true.

Is this how the church treats pedophile priests or racist politicians? Or are they more stern?

 

[EIF5A]

This is not true. I am sure that there have been many, many, men and women who have had same sex attractions and still had functional marriages.

Functional is an ambiguous term. Being able to have physical relations with the opposite gender while not being able to love the person as fully as possible if the orientation were not an issue does a disservice to the other person, especially if that other person is not aware of the orientation and same-sex attraction.

Also, bisexuality is not the same as deep-seated homosexual inclination.

 

[livingwordunity]

A person is not their sexual orientation. What this could mean (just my speculation) is that we should not cudgel a gay person into becoming straight (God does not make mistakes; I highly doubt He would make someone gay and then blame them). Their same-sex attraction can be used as a witness to a life of chastity. Same-sex attraction, in and of itself, is not sinful. Acting upon it is.

Man struggles with sin and with inclinations to sin not because of God but because of the Fall.

 

[PeopleB4Things]

I don’t think anyone is trying to get rid of the reality of sin. But I think the idea is that you need to minister to the person from where they are, not where you wish they would be. Another way to say it is that pastors and teachers need to be facilitators and mentors not gate keepers. We will never be able to save some souls if we present so many obstacles to them that they never want to walk into a church. Also before anyone can mentor anyone, they need to listen to them to understand where they are; find the good in what they do, and build upon that. I could be wrong, but the document, to me, conveys the tone that we need to find the good even in imperfect relationships and reinforce that while gently leading a person to the full faith. Or something like that.

Conservative Kathryn Jean Lopez from National Review Online states, “strikes me as a loving conversation with both mercy and truth”

We have a pretty intelligent group here at CAF and I await other reactions.

I agree with you 100%.

I’d like to add that none of us are in perfect communion with Christ. That includes the pope, gay people, divorced people and all the people in this forum. We are the same. We are sinners. For sinners to label other people sinners is counter productive to our mission. We need to stop pointing fingers and show compassion and love to all humans. How can we fulfill the word of Christ otherwise?

 

[MaryAgnes]

A doctor who tells the overweight alcoholic patient that he cannot treat him until he stops drinking and loses weight, will likely face a hefty malpractice suit if something happens to the patient afterwards.

On the other hand a doctor who meets him where he is, is likely to help. First step would be to take a good medical history/tests to figure out how treat the immediate and possibly urgent health issues that might include, for sake of argument, Type II diabetes (sacrament of reconciliation), and offer him medicine like metformin or insulin to deal with the immediate problems (Eucharist), then working with him and the nursing/social care team, encourage lifestyle changes that will improve his outlook, like weight loss and AA (spiritual direction, catechesis, all supported by continued graces from the sacraments).

A hospital, or doctor, above all is required to “do no harm”. A soul that the clergy turns away or discourages by raising the bar for admission too high, is like the doctor who refuses to treat a patient as in the example above. He may just kill the patient, and the clergy may just irretrievably lose that soul.

I’ve read it many times on this forum that the person who fails to “charitably” correct the sinful is guilty of sin himself, but I rarely read that the person who fails to act with love and charity, and thus turns away a soul in need of healing, is also guilty of sin. I think St. Paul says it best in 1 Corinthians 13:

Yes, love rejoices in the Truth, especially when someone else discovers that Truth as well. But to bring that person to Truth requires much more than a clanging cymbal… it requires love and patience.

VERY well said!

 

[OraLabora]

The church still teaches Free Will, right?

So how does my behavior or anyone elses replace responsibility for moral choices and lifestyles?

Is this something the church teaches now, that I can make someone reject Christ?

I thought that to not be true.

Is this how the church treats pedophile priests or racist politicians? Or are they more stern?

It still teaches free will.

We are not trying to minister to the stubbornly sinful who refuse to change their ways.

We are talking about those trying to find their way back, and finding the door slammed shut because they’re not yet holy enough, or finding nearly impossible hurdles to jump with long and complex processes that may or may not result in full participation in the sacramental life of the Church.

I suggest we let them in and work with them to grow in holiness, at their own pace, as long as they show will and effort. Starting with where they are now.

 

[alwaysthinkin]

Without naming screennames, I have gathered from many posters that today’s press releases merely indicated the Church’s somehow newfangled willingness to welcome those living sinful lifestyles for the purposes of helping to gradually and eventually save them.

This is is hogwash, people. The Church has ALWAYS welcomed the sinner. ANY kind of sinner. Why this change in tone and language now?? It is much more than welcoming. I believe it is about to be condoned in some Protestant-esque hair splitting babble and that is very unfortunate.

The Church has been reaching out to the gay community, treating them the same as the rest of us sinners, for years. Somehow now saying that there is value to their “orientation” (huh?!?) is nearly unbearable and I can only hope they fix this quickly.

This entire days’ events has baffled me utterly.

 

[OraLabora]

Without naming screennames, I have gathered from many posters that today’s press releases merely indicated the Church’s somehow newfangled willingness to welcome those living sinful lifestyles for the purposes of helping to gradually and eventually save them.

This is is hogwash, people. The Church has ALWAYS welcomed the sinner. ANY kind of sinner. Why this change in tone and language now?? It is much more than welcoming. I believe it is about to be condoned in some Protestant-esque hair splitting babble and that is very unfortunate.

The Church has been reaching out to the gay community, treating them the same as the rest of us sinners, for years. Somehow now saying that there is value to their “orientation” (huh?!?) is nearly unbearable and I can only hope they fix this quickly.

This entire days’ events has baffled me utterly.

We’re talking about being allowed to participate in the sacramental life of the Church. This is not currently the case, nor is it the case at the parish level that gays, divorced+remarried, etc, are always made to feel welcome.

 

[Seamus_L]

I think it got a little easier today to feel that we’re in the End Times.

 

[FollowChrist34]

Without naming screennames, I have gathered from many posters that today’s press releases merely indicated the Church’s somehow newfangled willingness to welcome those living sinful lifestyles for the purposes of helping to gradually and eventually save them.

This is is hogwash, people. The Church has ALWAYS welcomed the sinner. ANY kind of sinner. Why this change in tone and language now?? It is much more than welcoming. I believe it is about to be condoned in some Protestant-esque hair splitting babble and that is very unfortunate.

The Church has been reaching out to the gay community, treating them the same as the rest of us sinners, for years. Somehow now saying that there is value to their “orientation” (huh?!?) is nearly unbearable and I can only hope they fix this quickly.

This entire days’ events has baffled me utterly.

It’s called a sell-out.

 

[JustaSinner]

Here is how St. Paul speaking by the Holy Spirit describes the sin in question:

Romans 1:24 Wherefore God gave them up to the desires of their heart, unto uncleanness, to dishonour their own bodies among themselves.

1:25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie; and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

1:26 For this cause God delivered them up to shameful affections. For their women have changed the natural use into that use which is against nature.

1:27 And, in like manner, the men also, leaving the natural use of the women, have burned in their lusts one towards another, men with men working that which is filthy, and receiving in themselves the recompense which was due to their error. (Douay-Rheims)

Needless to say, I don’t think it’s unreasonable to wish the document from the Synod was a little clearer on how serious of sin homosexuality is.

Of course, we’re all guilty of serious sins (for instance, unforgiveness is spoken of frequently as a damnable sin by our Lord)–but you hate to see something that leads to hell being spoken of in such a positive manner.

 

[alwaysthinkin]

We’re talking about being allowed to participate in the sacramental life of the Church. This is not currently the case, nor is it the case at the parish level that gays, divorced+remarried, etc, are always made to feel welcome.

Depends on what you mean by being allowed to participate.
So soon gays will be able to participate fully without repentance or acknowledgement of guilt and wrongdoing because …why? Because they’re special? Too powerful? Organized?

Are our sins so much worse that we are told to seek confession, etc first?

They are tiptoeing around the gay community so as not to offend them. They will have to carve out some kind of Canonical legal loophole that allows them to participate fully, as you suggested, without being told they’re wrong.

Am I missing something? This is beyond disappointing, to put it mildly.

 

[PeopleB4Things]

The Church has been reaching out to the gay community, treating them the same as the rest of us sinners, for years. Somehow now saying that there is value to their “orientation” (huh?!?) is nearly unbearable and I can only hope they fix this quickly.

This entire days’ events has baffled me utterly.

I know we are both Catholics but I think we must attend different churches. Divorced people have a very difficult time in the Church as has gay people. They were made to feel dirty, unwanted and broken by members of their parishes and by their priests. I’m glad the Vatican has listened to testimonies from people who have been hurt by members of the church. I think our Pope is trying to find a way to eradicate these awful actions by making sure that every Catholic knows it’s not right to judge others. We are not the gatekeepers of Heaven. That’s God’s job. Every time we sinners chastise others for their sins, we are hypocrites.

 

[BostonBarrister]

Our job as Christian lay people is not to pass judgment; however our job is to welcome all as brothers and sisters to Christ. Remember, Jesus sat with those who at His time were considered the worst of sinners. We can do no less. Let our clergy give them spiritual advice and forgive their sins.

Hear! Hear!

I was driving south from Maine today when I heard of this event, and my first thought was that the forums would sure light up today.

The self-styled lawyers and Pharisees were bound to have their knickers in a knot over this.

 

[Darrel_Slugoski]

This document is only considered a working document and no real decisions will be made for 2 years in which a final version will be decided. We need to trust that the Holy Spirit will lead the Church ‘to all truth.’ .This final document will not change the Churches teaching but may focus on emphesis.

 

[FollowChrist34]

Here is how St. Paul speaking by the Holy Spirit describes the sin in question:

Romans 1:24 Wherefore God gave them up to the desires of their heart, unto uncleanness, to dishonour their own bodies among themselves.

1:25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie; and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

1:26 For this cause God delivered them up to shameful affections. For their women have changed the natural use into that use which is against nature.

1:27 And, in like manner, the men also, leaving the natural use of the women, have burned in their lusts one towards another, men with men working that which is filthy, and receiving in themselves the recompense which was due to their error. (Douay-Rheims)

Needless to say, I don’t think it’s unreasonable to wish the document from the Synod was a little clearer on how serious of sin homosexuality is.

Of course, we’re all guilty of serious sins (for instance, unforgiveness is spoken of frequently as a damnable sin by our Lord)–but you hate to see something that leads to hell being spoken of in such a positive manner.

Not sure Paul is pulling them in the way he used to. He’s obsolete.