S
StudentMI
Guest
Don’t be surprised if people consider you ignorant for such assumptions, my friend. I’ll stick with my priest, thanks.
Father Martin’s ‘LGBT’ Approach Sparks Concerns Critics say it fails to communicate Catholic truths
- Status
G
Gertabelle
Guest
You can absolutely call yourself what you want. And you’re right that those on the outside, as it were, cannot understand what it is to be Catholic, gay, and living in 2017.
I think you do a very good thing by speaking as someone on the inside of the experience to help others understand.
AND, I think it is essential to choose your battles – when to come out, when to speak up, when to sit back and let people have their thoughts, even let them continue in their ignorance.
People have told me that I was never actually a lesbian, or that I’m a bisexual in denial, or that I’m still a lesbian and pretending. And there are some who say that I’m not allowed to use the words “lesbian” or “same-sex attraction.” Blah, blah, blah.
What I mean is, take care of yourself, dear, and your mental and spiritual health.
And let’s keep one another in prayer.
1
10gr8kids
Guest
I’m sorry you are offended. May I ask, did your priest tell you you had to tell everyone you meet about your temptations?
I really don’t know what assumptions you are talking about.
J
Joe_5859
Guest
If they have preconceived ideas, though, isn’t that more on them?
I have an uncle who is an alcoholic, but I’d feel just fine driving with him anywhere because he doesn’t drink.
As Catholics, I think we are making our mission of evangelization more difficult than it needs to be when we effectively tell people they are better off staying in the closet. Whether and to how many people someone admits to being gay is not the issue. Whether or not they strive to follow Catholic teaching is the issue (as it is with all of us).
I know of all sorts of people who share their struggles on all sorts of different issues (from eating disorders, porn addictions, etc.) for a variety of reasons. Do some people share too much with too many? Sure. But I don’t generally take it upon myself to tell them that. What I consider TMI, the person next to me might find helpful in order to relate to the person and/or be consoled by the fact that someone else struggles as they do. A great many can be edified when they see someone make themselves vulnerable and open themselves up to criticism and misunderstanding by sharing their own weaknesses and struggles. I won’t be the one to discourage that.
S
StudentMI
Guest
I already addressed what the priests I know told me about telling people.
The assumptions are basically what you stated in regards to an alcoholic and driving. It hinted at the well worn cliche that gay men are pedophiles. If you didn’t mean that I’m sorry but you should have worded it better.
1
10gr8kids
Guest
I absolutely did not intend that. Who is making assumptions now.
ETA: I realize now that was not your post about the uncle who is the alcoholic. This is what I mean though about knowing a person well before you tell them all your struggles. Joe knows his uncle well and knows he no longer drinks. Therefore he does not worry about children riding in a vehicle with him. Would he feel the same about a stranger who was driving the school bus? Maybe, maybe not
I do not mean you or anyone else who is homosexual should not share it with others. What I believe is that they should talk about it with those they are close to and those that can help them. It isn’t something I’d feel the need to share with every person I met. There are things I struggle with that I don’t tell anyone but my priest about. There are things I share with my family and no one else. Then there are the things I’ll share with just about anyone.
Of course, as your priest said, you can share all your thoughts, emotions, struggles with anyone. It is not sinful. I just don’t believe it is wise. Just like you, people make assumptions.
B
Brendan
Guest
Where does he say that he never met any?
A
at9009
Guest
To offer an analogy that is imperfect but I think can be helpful. For a person who is blind, being blind encompasses far more than just not being able to see. It affects how they relate to the world and interact with the world. They have different skills and perspective. Being aware of this helps others to better interact with that person.
Sexuality is far more complicated than just who one is tempted to sleep with. It affects how one relates to another, sees the world, and has a unique perspective. It also means that one has a particular set of temptations but it isn’t quite reducible to that set of temptation. Being open about one’s sexuality (within reason and not necessarily it being the first thing one revelals) allows one to be vulnerable to further develop friendship, helps eat away the shame and self-loathing that comes with secrecy, and can offer a radical testimony of one’s committment to Christ in a culture that is seemingly focused on one’s desires over Gods. All of these as well help the gay/ssa person in carrying their cross.
I can tell you this, when I was trying to be silent and struggle on my own keeping everything secret, I struggled a lot more, become clinically depressed, and got to a point where I would say if I didn’t wake up tomorrow it wouldn’t be a bad thing. Since I have found support albeit online (not here but somewhere else) things are far more managable. Wiithout that support, I’m not sure where I would be and there is a chance I could have headed down a path of self-harm. Being open (I’m not at this moment really) allows me to share my testimony and reach someone who has a similar cross like me, actually helps me with my accountability, destroys the shame and self-loathing of secrecy, makes making friendship and connection easier (I no longer feel like I’m always trying to make sure i hide this part of myself and watch how I talk), and allows me to be a person that someone can talk to a reach out to if dealing with similar issues (which has happened before and to be the person to encourage someone with this difficult journey is both an incredible blessing and a privilege.
P
polki
Guest
In spite of all the “bridge building” he is doing, whenever people post things on Fr. Martin’s FB page encouraging the Church to change her teaching regarding homosexuality and gay relationships, he never corrects them in their error. Ever.
P
Peter_J
Guest
Hi ToeInWater.
Those are the first two sentences of the article you referred to. Which is as far as I’ve gotten so far, and I’m already thinking “Huh? ‘why he felt it important to write at all’?”
I’ll hope it gets better after that.
But I digress. Wrt your point, I never quite know what to say about that. I guess in principle I prefer to say “homosexual person” rather than “gay”, but in practice I’ve warmed up to using “gay” – excepting occasionally if a situation arises where greater formality of language seems important. (Or, sometimes, if the word “gay” might be used to muddy the waters, especially with regard to “ex-gay” claims.)
V
Vic_Taltrees_UK
Guest
I agree with this absolutely, which Father Martin (like some of the earlier posters) wasn’t keeping to.You can absolutely call yourself what you want. …
And let’s keep one another in prayer.
(I had a glitch so couldn’t post earlier.)
I knew of people attending Courage and equivalent groups (supporting chastity) who had never been “gay” or “homosexual” to their knowledge. Attractions are attractions, as “inexperienced” teenagers and older people are aware. It is not the job of Christians to make false promises to other Christians about the direction or intensity of their emotions - Jesus didn’t and the Apostles didn’t. Church “leaders” like Chaput etc are misquoting Rom 1 and I Cor 6.
Whoever wrote that section of the CCC, I think at one point (just a couple of sentences) they thought they were writing an old fashioned recruitment manual for seminaries, rather than a catechism. Old-fashioned, because until recently one couldn’t rely on candidates having a prior grounding in faith.
Paul was only lampooning pagan lust breaching what the Romans themselves thought was natural. Once we are in Christ all unchastity is unnatural. The Churches aren’t teaching enough about Holy Spirit-powered virtues and works.
Some members of some of the equivalent groups to Courage called themselves, apart from the group, “chaste gays” or “abstaining homosexuals” because they found this attracted positive interest from other gays / homosexuals. They weren’t disturbing the group by doing so. Leaders of such groups should make clear that the only thing they are against is members expecting Jesus to recognise some sort of caste system for them to belong to, with attendant obligations to impose on others’ consciences.
What did worry me a bit about what I knew that was affiliated to Courage was that they explicitly described members as “homosexual Christians” whilst some members weren’t, but I didn’t get to tackle them about that at the time and decided to humour them. I expect a lot of people are humouring a lot of other people, which is often useful to begin with.
The main thing is that when the term SSA is used - which is the only objective, neutral and inclusive one for what this thread is about - we have all got to remember that there are many layers to our identity and we choose which to highlight in any specific milieu. E.g I am a Catholic (sort of) among Catholics and a Christian among Protestants.
S
StudentMI
Guest
I respectfully disagree. And my experience of Courage was vastly different than your acquaintances. The one I went to, every man was a homosexual. No getting around that.
P
Peter_J
Guest
I don’t know any statistics on that, but my close friend who has been my “link to Courage” so to speak, is bisexual.
I’m not big on saying LGBT, but I guess it does serve a useful purposes at times, in terms of inclusion.
P
Peter_J
Guest
Tonight I finally got around to reading that. Very good interview, thank you for posting it.
I’ve read very little of Father’s writings, but after reading the interview I think I might be interested in reading a bit more from him.
J
Joe_5859
Guest
I thought this was an interesting take on just one aspect of Fr. Martin’s book:
Fr. Martin’s Grammar Problem
His main point is to criticize Fr. Martin’s call to change the language of the Catechism from “intrinsically disordered” to “differently ordered.” I think the author of this piece raises a very good point. Too often, we want to play fast and loose with our language based mainly on emotional considerations.
Fr. Martin wants to use the phrase “differently ordered” because is just feels less offensive. And it’s a point that is easy to grasp. It’s easy to understand how “differently ordered” feels less offensive that “intrinsically disordered.” The issue is that we need to think through the full repercussions of such a change in terminology as it can bring with it more change than we intend. In this case, changing the language invites people to think of homosexual acts as simply different rather than inferior. Once you have admitted that, you’ve basically agreed that there is nothing wrong with it at all.
Fr. Martin’s Grammar Problem
His main point is to criticize Fr. Martin’s call to change the language of the Catechism from “intrinsically disordered” to “differently ordered.” I think the author of this piece raises a very good point. Too often, we want to play fast and loose with our language based mainly on emotional considerations.
Fr. Martin wants to use the phrase “differently ordered” because is just feels less offensive. And it’s a point that is easy to grasp. It’s easy to understand how “differently ordered” feels less offensive that “intrinsically disordered.” The issue is that we need to think through the full repercussions of such a change in terminology as it can bring with it more change than we intend. In this case, changing the language invites people to think of homosexual acts as simply different rather than inferior. Once you have admitted that, you’ve basically agreed that there is nothing wrong with it at all.
- Status