Masculinity is universal and is innate? hmmm Like Jesus saying let the children come, or talking to women, kissing another man, or having another man lay his head on his chest being referred to as the beloved disciple. Well I guess that means you should be perfectly OK with a man lying on your priest’s chest. No wait I guess concepts of masculinity have changed and are not innate.
You are straying into the absurd extreme in an attempt to invalidate my common sense point of the masses of faithful Catholics who occupy the pews each Sunday. Of course, masculine expressions are culturally defined within acceptable norms. If I went to an after Mass donuts and coffee gathering and fellow parishioners observed an adult man laying his head of the chest of the reclined priest involved in intimate conversation …tell me and convince the rest of us that the parishoners would not be raising an eye brow in varying degrees of shock and dismay. Again, you atempt to introduce the absurb to prove your point and dismiss common sense perception and experience.
They have no problem listening to him at all because they have seen their Almighty in the form of a lowly creature that grew up in poverty and was humiliated to the point of death to save a bunch of worms and still they followed him. I don’t think they have a problem listening to an effeminate man who serves the same master, and whom that master died for.
You minimize and deny the experience of all the balanced and masculince defined men that I know who accept the overly effeminate priests we know, but who recognize the limitation to connect with the person serving in the ministerial capacity.
You seem to be in denial that Jesus was not an overly effeminate man. If he was, do you really think that the manly men of his day (Peter, James, Matthew, …) would respond to his invite to leave all behind them to follow him? I highly suspect that some/most would have had to work through some affrontedness before seriously considering following an overly effeminate savior.
Yes, the messenger adds to the credibility of the message. Men will more readily respond to a messenger whom they can relate to and whom they feel can relate to them. Overly effeminate priests are limited in this repect. This common sense experience.
Don’t feel sorry for me. I do believe in balance, Yet I think my subtlety was lost on you. I gave you two extremes in the hand motions and in the speech patterns, the limp wrist and the fist, the lisp and the grunt. A balance would be an open hand held high and clear speech spoken with compassion. You seem to gravitate to the opposite extreme of masculinity, which is also false manliness and was discussed in that article. Im just saying, that both extremes are equally capable of delivering the message of Truth, which is true strength in its self and makes up for the weakness of the messenger.
You attempt to falsely portray me as presenting an “opposite extreme of masculinity”. Hogwash. If you cannot defend your argument on the merit of it’s substance, then please do not digress to purposely distorting my point of view. This seems to be a common tactic on this thread.
Staying on topic, what I have been referring to is that a well-adjusted (psychological/socially) and balanced man who is secure in his masculinity who will appropriately not feel readily able to connect with an overly effeminate priest. This limits the the overly effeminate priests to connect with the flock entrusted to his care; and has the added negative effect of not being an attractive role model for males to consider the priesthood as a viable vocation.
You may not be gratefull to that man on the alter because of his mannerisms but I am grateful to any man who heeds the call of God and serves Him to the best of his ability.
I am grateful, bot I also recognize that the limitations posed by this priest to connect with the not overly effeminate men in the parish. Simple as that.
I wish you the best Setter and hope we may eventual come to mutual understanding of our viewpoints.
I fully understand your view points, however, I cannot agree as they defy my and other’s common sense expererience.
BTW – Do you not find it interesting and tell tale that the only other poster who has most vociferous in support of your position is an established and unabashed homosexual apologist? …
