Gay and Lesbian "inclusive" mission at Local Roman Cathoic Parish?

  • Thread starter Thread starter PasionCatechist
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
P

PasionCatechist

Guest
First, I would like to say hello and good day to all. Thanks to all who respond both positively or negatively with possibly opposing views to this thread question. With that said I would like to get to the root of the matter.

This thread question address a personal occurrence. I’ve been attending a local roman Catholic St. Mary’s parish for mass and discovered that they have a Gay and Lesbian mission. I wasn’t quite sure what the Gay and Lesbian mission was. I mistakenly thought the mission was there to help support those struggling with homosexuality. Today I wanted to gain a deeper understanding of the Gay and Lesbian mission at this parish. Hence, I decided to ask the St. Mary’s parish RCIA director about the Gay and Lesbian Mission.

The RCIA director proceeded to inform me that as a Franciscan missionary parish “all” are welcome and they openly practice an all “inclusive” mission to the community in which they serve. She mentioned Jesus would welcome all into his company who seek him. Hence, Gay’s and Lesbians are welcome to participate in assisting in Parish run bazaar’s and food pantries. She concluded by adding that the Gay and Lesbian group also meets and runs a bible study.

WOW! I was in shock. I was speechless. It felt like a rug got ripped out from under me and the only thing that kept me on my feet was my faith. Even though I agree with welcoming others in love, I am deeply in disagreement with the practice of homosexuality. I just don’t understand how open homosexuality can be accepted in such a passive way in the Church. Is this an acceptable practice of the inclusion of Gay’s and Lesbian’s in the Roman Catholic church?

To me its just like having an adulteries mission in the church in which they are permitted to run church activities and conduct a privately run bible study group too. I’m just confused. On my ride home from the Church office I really began to question continuing to be apart of the Catholic Church. I don’t know what I should do at this point. I may be wrong but I’m just uncomfortable with being passive about homosexual behavior within the Church. I don’t fully understand the parish’s concept of being “inclusive” Maybe I am not understanding there objective in allowing this Mission.

When I arrived home I began to reflect on the information in which I learned about the Gay and Lesbian Mission at the parish. I realized that maybe I shouldn’t leave the entire universal church based on a mission practice of one parish. I do agree with welcoming homosexuals with love but I would have to proclaim in love also that I strongly disagree with the practice of homosexual behavior.

I just don’t know what to do at this point. (name removed by moderator)ut on this post I would greatly appreciate it. I’ve also included some scripture verses that guided me to be against the practice of homosexuality.

Leviticus 18:22 reads, “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.” That is stated as plainly and clearly as you can get. The Bible commands us that we are not to have intercourse with people of our same sex.

Romans 1:24-28, “Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonor their own bodies between themselves, who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: and likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the women, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly (shameful), and receiving in themselves the recompense of their error which was meet. And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient.”
 
Hi PasionCatechist

I’ll just take a quick stab at some of the issues you raise.

First, a ministry to GLBT people which does not clearly and explicitly teach that homogenital acts are intrinsically evil is not kosher. The ideal ministry teaches what the Church teaches, and goes on to lay down positive coping strategies for dealing with the facts of moral theology. More concretely, an GLBT ministry should call gay people to chastity and encourage them by helping them to live the kind of life that makes celibacy a blessing. (GLBT in mixed orientation marriages are a special case which need not be considered here.)

Second, for the particular case at hand, I can’t say if this ministry is good or bad because you haven’t told us what it teaches. If you put out of your mind the idea that GLBT people are always sexually active (cf “Always Our Children” in the section on pastoral recommendations), you would probably be able to construe this ministry in a more positive light. Wouldn’t it be great if every Catholic actively participated in his or her parish? Isn’t it good to study the Bible? I realize it’s problematic for unrepentant sinners to take an active role in the Church, but what evidence (aside from an uncertain presumption) is there that the GLBT people in question are unrepentant?

So my advice is to do a bit more investigation on this ministry to see if it is teaching what it should. If it isn’t, that needs to be changed, and there are appropriate ways of doing that. If it is, then praise God for doing great things in your parish.
 
I’d agree.

There may be a valid reason for having a mission directed toward homosexuals, LGBTs, those with SSA, however you want to phrase it. Such folks may have a difficult time reconciling their cross to bear with the inclusiveness of the Church.

On the other hand, if such a mission is a “support group” in the secular sense i.e. helping to support and encourage such folks in their homosexual relationships, that is not consistant with the mission of the Church.
 
I firmly agree with the implication that all the above posters are making, that terms have to be defined. And while I surely agree with the second poster that we cannot assume that a Gay & Lesbian Group is all sexually active, or if even one person is sexually active, I equally understand the dismay of the OP in naming the group as an approved group and a “ministry.”

Define your terms, parish. Is “ministry” an activity toward, for a particular need (liturgical ministry, ministry to the homeless), or is it a ministry defined by identfication (a group of homeless people in the parish – doing what, btw?) If it is a ministry of identification, I wouldn’t call it a ministry, but a group: The LGBT group (or a subset of that). Let the group that wants to associate do so. I would definitely, however, question the wisdom of a separate bible group, because that invites heterodoxy and private or controversial interpretation. It invites scandal because it overlaps into a teaching ministry, which should be properly overseen by someone in the parish with catechetical knowledge & authority, like the pastor or someone whom the pastor trusts, such as a seminarian or some other theology graduate whose training the pastor is familiar with.

The whole idea of an LGBT Bible group is suspect to me, because (as a scripture scholar who has run bible groups in parishes myself) I am well aware that this group largely rejects a Catholic interpretation of any passage in scripture that questions or condemns an active homosexual lifestyle. An “inclusive” parish should be one that tolerates and teaches tolerance, and approves Bible study leaders prepared to be sensitive to the possibility that there may be closeted or uncloseted homosexuals in the study group. (Given that there are more LGBT parishioners attending parishes who announce “inclusivity” as part of their own mission statement, such parishes should be sensitive about whom they appoint as leaders of such groups. To repeat myself, anything that overlaps into catechesis of any kind (and bible study does) should be overseen by the pastor, as to who is teaching and what the leader is teaching.

We discussed on another thread (OP, :)) the overbroad, overused term “ministry,” which is thrown around in parishes to an absurd level. (Soon there will be a “donut ministry.” Krispy Kreme, please? ;)) It is really inappropriate to allow lay people to invent ministerial groups separate from the pastor’s approval & direction. And if the pastor supports such loose, autonomous developments, then he is not being a good leader. (He is failing in his own ministry by overdelegating or neglect, or worse – supporting moral controversy, if confusing terms lead to such impressions.)

Bottom line, I agree with the OP that in the least, no group such as LGBT should be given the title “ministry.” It’s way too ambiguous. I would call them a group, and the pastor has abandoned his responsibility if he is allowing them to form on parish grounds and with his blessing, a ‘Bible Study Group.’ This is America. Nothing prevents them from starting a truly private Bible Study in private homes, but it should not be officially a parish effort, on parish grounds. Such a group has no biblical authority, no moral authority.

I understand the OP’s dismay. Even if there were a group of abortionists in the parish who, it could be verified, were not currently practicing that, and who had mended their ways, so to speak, I can virtually promise you that there would be no “ministry” in a parish called The Abortionists Ministry (so that they could feel “included” as a separate entity), or The Adulterers’ Ministry. And when gay and lesbian couples come into a church holding hands and state they are a “couple” and state that they “have a relationship” and share the same address, it stretches belief not to assume something else as well. I’m not saying we should judge them to be in a state of sin, even if all the above is very public. I’m saying that to asume that an LGBT “ministry” is entirely a celibate group stretches credibility and invites scandal, and opens up for speculation why there shouldn’t be other groups with morally questionable titles.
 
Hmmm… do you think that a parish should have a ministry to alcoholics? Do people who have been sober for a long time still call themselves alcoholics?

We should be careful not to be too quick to judge. And we should be particularly careful if such quick judgements make us question if we can remain in the church.

I don’t know you, but perhaps something else is going on in your life. I would urge you to spend some time with your spiritual director. Whether one parish or another has a gay/lesbian ministry or hosts an alcoholics anonymous meeting should not be enough to make you want to leave the Catholic church.
 
In response to Post #5, this is what the OP actually said (vs. how you spun her words):
I realized that maybe I shouldn’t leave the entire universal church based on a mission practice of one parish. **I do agree with welcoming homosexuals with love **but I would have to proclaim in love also that I strongly disagree with the practice of homosexual behavior.
Click to expand...
I think your reply to her dismisses her genuine and thoughtful sentiments. And we’re not in a position to know whether someone else needs a spiritual director. We can only look inside our own hearts and discern that.

I’ve never heard of an AA “ministry.” Again, it’s important to distinguish ministry from group from effort from single event. I’ve heard of parishes hosting meetings and workshops and support groups about chemical dependencies, plural (not limited to alcohol). That is not an isolated “ministry.” I’ve also heard of an RCIA leader (and I thought it was an inspired idea) mentioning at gatherings, Masses, other events, an opportunity to celebrate a milestone (6 yrs. sober, other related celebrations of achievement); she does this regularly.

There is a moral dimension to homosexuality, for devout Catholics, that greatly exceeds the moral dimension of alcoholism.
 
chrysostim83 said:
Hi PasionCatechist

I’ll just take a quick stab at some of the issues you raise.

First, a ministry to GLBT people which does not clearly and explicitly teach that homogenital acts are intrinsically evil is not kosher. The ideal ministry teaches what the Church teaches, and goes on to lay down positive coping strategies for dealing with the facts of moral theology. More concretely, an GLBT ministry should call gay people to chastity and encourage them by helping them to live the kind of life that makes celibacy a blessing. (GLBT in mixed orientation marriages are a special case which need not be considered here.)

Second, for the particular case at hand, I can’t say if this ministry is good or bad because you haven’t told us what it teaches. If you put out of your mind the idea that GLBT people are always sexually active (cf “Always Our Children” in the section on pastoral recommendations), you would probably be able to construe this ministry in a more positive light. Wouldn’t it be great if every Catholic actively participated in his or her parish? Isn’t it good to study the Bible? I realize it’s problematic for unrepentant sinners to take an active role in the Church, but what evidence (aside from an uncertain presumption) is there that the GLBT people in question are unrepentant?

So my advice is to do a bit more investigation on this ministry to see if it is teaching what it should. If it isn’t, that needs to be changed, and there are appropriate ways of doing that. If it is, then praise God for doing great things in your parish.
Click to expand...
Thank you so much for the post. It’s really informative!
 
for the particular case at hand, I can’t say if this ministry is good or bad because you haven’t told us what it teaches.
Click to expand...
She has told us that there’s a separate LGBT Bible Study group. First of all, that’s divisive, not unifying. The pastor is not promoting a spirit of unity and whole community if he is condoning this. {The most important symbolic act of an “inclusive” “ministry” is to include everyone and exclude no one.) Second, if it’s in the parish, not a private home, any person of good will not outside that group can legitimately wonder, (1) what are they “teaching” or “studying,” (2) why is there a bible group titled for a group of a specific persuasion or orientation? It absolutely gives the appearance, when held on parish grounds, of a stamp of approval on private interpretation.

Now everybody, including practicing Catholics, is entitled to private appreciation of scripture, and private prayer with scripture (alone or in small group). And in fact such a thing is encouraged and should be encouraged. But “studying” the Bible implies something entirely different.

So if I were the OP, I would approach the pastor and inquire about who leads the LGBT Bible Study Group, who approves the conclusions drawn from such “study”? Which theologically trained person is overseeing the group, or at least present in the group (if not facilitating it)? Because if there are not canonically satisfying answers to such questions, such a group does give scandal and the OP is responding entirely properly to be concerned. Enough with informal and misleading “catechesis” in the RCC. I am not being reactionary or intolerant. I’m being practical and realistic. We have a huge catechesis problem in the RCC – a problem both originating in the recent past and remaining in the present. This has been discussed on many other threads. It refers to content, to sufficient knowledge and sufficient training – not to any particular teaching, but just the confusion and partial knowledge & incorrect teaching often being imparted, especially to new converts.
 
jimcintosh said:
Hmmm… do you think that a parish should have a ministry to alcoholics? Do people who have been sober for a long time still call themselves alcoholics?

We should be careful not to be too quick to judge. .
Click to expand...
I don’t think they should have a ministry to alcoholics that would say it’s perfectly alright for the alcoholic to go on drinking and being an alcoholic.

That was the OP’s point I think. The sense she got is that the ministry accepts them and their lifestyle as okay; no attempt is made to minister in a way that points out the truth - that such a lifestyle is contrary to God’s revealed will. There is no concern for their immortal soul, only for not interfering with disordered physical desires. (I am not using the expression “disordered physical desires” in a prejudiced way – we all have disordered physical desires, just not the same ones.)
 
Elizabeth502 said:
She has told us that there’s a separate LGBT Bible Study group. First of all, that’s divisive, not unifying. The pastor is not promoting a spirit of unity and whole community if he is condoning this.

(The most important symbolic act of an “inclusive” “ministry” is to include everyone and exclude no one.)

Second, if it’s in the parish, not a private home, any person of good will not outside that group can legitimately wonder, (1) what are they “teaching” or “studying,” (2) why is there a bible group titled for a group of a specific persuasion or orientation? It absolutely gives the appearance, when held on parish grounds, of a stamp of approval on private interpretation.
Click to expand...
Newbie2 gave a perfectly good reason why it can be legitimate to have a separate church group for LGBT people. Having such a group, or having a separate Bible study for them, is not necessarily divisive. After all, the Vatican approved ministry Courage is designed to help gay people live chastely, and it systematically excludes straight people from joining. This just represents the fact that fellowship comes more easily to people who are like each other.

In context, the word “inclusive” contrasts with “marginalization:” the LGBT group is supposed to draw people out of the margin into the heart of the Church. (This is how the word is used, for example, when we talk about “inclusive language.”)

I think you’ve given the OP good questions to ask about this ministry. I would just like to encourage the OP to proceed from the presumption of innocence and to be sensitive to the assumptions she (?) may be making. For example, LGB refers exclusively to sexual orientation, and T refers to gender identity. None of those words, or rather letters, should be taken to imply anything about behavior.

Finally, the OP should definitely not lose her faith over this issue. Even if it turns out that the ministry promotes evil, it should be remembered that Our Lord’s parable in Matthew 13:24-30 illustrates a consistent pattern through Christian history. It is not shocking that this pattern is still visible today.
 
First, I think it is extremely important that you TALK TO THE PRIEST and ask him about the group. If you feel up to it attend some of the meetings of the group. While I think the Church needs to be welcoming it is important that it not condone homosexual behavior. It also does no favors to the members if the meeting place becomes a spot to meet new partners. Is the group lead by someone who supports the Church’s understanding of homosexual behavior? What is the Bible study focusing on? Good luck as you explore this issue at your parish. I encourage you though to not lose heart and to maintain your faith. And remember that there is also your bishop to consult with if necessary. Does your diocese have a Family Life office that you could contact with your concerns?
 
Regarding Post 10:

The Courage group is not a parallel to Bible Study. Not even close. And I don’t happen to agree with any of the arguments promulgated about how a separate Bible study group could be justified. It can’t. A social group, with also a prayer component? That’s a different thing.
 
Elizabeth502 said:
The whole idea of an LGBT Bible group is suspect to me, because (as a scripture scholar who has run bible groups in parishes myself) I am well aware that this group largely rejects a Catholic interpretation of any passage in scripture that questions or condemns an active homosexual lifestyle.
Click to expand...
As a gay Catholic I am honestly saddened that a generalization like this could be made about all gay Catholics. It’s rather hurtful.

You caught us. We’re out to deceive and dispossess the Body of Christ of which we are just as equal members as you. We might as well be thrown in with those perfidious Jews since we’re just up to no good anyway.

Nobody here unless they’re gay and Catholic can understand our cross. The fact that a group like this would be at any parish would have made me feel a lot more welcome in the Catholic Church during my coming out as opposed to my situation where I thought about taking my own life. It’s not as clinical as everyone’s making this out to be, we all have needs :rolleyes:
 
There is a distinction required that is missing when a mission of leadership is given to a group named for a particular vise or disorder. For a group to have their particular vice named in their missionary role it would require a qualifyer word. A ‘mission’ in the Church headed by alcoholics would require the word ‘recovering’ or something similar.

It is required because the role it wishes to serve within it’s mission field is not introduced . If that is so neither is it’s mission.

Without this qualifyer it is confusing for homosexuals too. What if a homosexual expects a group teaching that homosexual acts are not sin only to attend and find out it is a group of people who wish to teach and learn an authentic teaching of the Church amongst others who would offer a safe environment?

The lack of a qualifying word in this case betrays either a lack of understanding or a deliberate ambiguity with expected results.
 
Perhaps more investigation is needed, but I would consider a few things:

For one, a ministry that accepts homosexual acts as legitimate may not tell the truth to everyone who asks right away - they may feel as though they’re “underground” and that if their true mission is discovered, they’ll be disbanded (which could be true). So you may not get the most honest answers by asking straightforward questions.

Two, here is an old list of “gay friendly” Catholic parishes. May not be up to date, but if your church is listed, you will likely have your answer. lifesitenews.com/ldn/2004/mar/040330a.html

Three, while it is prudent to not jump to conclusions and assume the ministry is bad, it also wouldn’t be prudent to assume the opposite. The OP’s description sends up red flags for me. That’s not proof, but it would be wishful thinking to accept it as “kosher” without seeing real evidence that it is. The sad reality is that our secular culture has accepted the “homosexual lifestyle” as equal to the heterosexual life, and a large many Catholics, especially leaders od ministry, do too. Definitely investigate this further.

Last, if it turns out the ministry is propagating falsehoods, then you can either go to the bishop with this, or leave the parish (I’d probably do both). But for you to leave the Catholic Church altogether would be just as bad as the ministry leading people astray. The Catholic Church teaches very clearly that homosexual acts are wrong. A couple (or sadly, even quite a few) rogue parishes does not change that teaching. Stay away from them, and find the ones that support the church’s teaching.
 
scapularkid8 said:
As a gay Catholic I am honestly saddened that a generalization like this could be made about all gay Catholics. It’s rather hurtful.
Click to expand...
Apparently you don’t see how hurtful the following is, to me.
You caught us. We’re out to deceive and dispossess the Body of Christ of which we are just as equal members as you. We might as well be thrown in with those perfidious Jews since we’re just up to no good anyway.
Click to expand...
Nothing in my posts can be construed this way. I don’t and didn’t preach rejection. In fact, had you bothered to read my posts in anything except a reactionary and stereotyped way, you would have noticed that I highlighted in color one of the phrases the OP used.

Your post did not state what would be the purpose behind a “gay Bible study,” which is precisely what I and several other posters are legitimately concerned about, primarily. There are some secondary concerns well elucidated by Benadam (as usual :))

And I would never respect an LGBT group that categorizes those who disagree with them, or those who raise concerns about that phrase and “ministry” in the same breath, as being hateful, prejudiced, and the like. We’re sinful but faithful Catholics, and we give a darn about the operations of our parishes, and the raising of our children, and the catechesis of converts. I have no knowledge whether you or any other gay person is also faithful; you may be; the group the OP discusses may be 100% faithful in their membership – and chaste, and observant, and all those things, not to mention less sinful than myself. It is not the worthiness, the acceptability, the membership of such a group within the Church. Catholic teaching is clear on this. The gospel message is clear on tolerance.

The issues remain two: the naming of the group as a “ministry.”
The co-existence of an LGBT “bible study group” along with non-LGBT bible study groups. I won’t repeat my previous points; I’ve elaborated sufficiently.
 
And further, regarding Post 13:

If you belong to a group, including any study group, that does not re-interpret the teachings about sexuality to suit their own lifestyle, then you are frankly the first person advocating a “gay Bible Study group” with that viewpoint that I have ever encountered. If I am generalizing in your mind, it is with years of experience knowing such groups. Every single “gay interpretation” of biblical passages that I have ever heard – originating from a “separate” Bible study group – has been 100% at odds with Catholic Church teaching, not to mention with honest scriptural analysis.
 
Thank you also to ThyKingdomCome for what I consider a lucid and thoughtful reply.
 
there are many bible studies out there geared to specifc groups(men,woman,teens,for people suffering from addictions,for people with varying issues) these are specialized and are not geared to general public.Does anyone know what is being said or studied in this group?Could they actually be helping folks on their spiritual journey?Or giving them hope that God still loves them despite their failings?
 
Thanks for your (name removed by moderator)ut, Julia.

I am sure that there are Catholic bible study groups in non-controversial, mainstream subsets such as a teen group at a parish. Ditto for groups such as women’s spirituality gatherings, etc. (Although one has to be careful here, as well, because I have been in many groups where the women present engage in “a feminist interpretation of scripture,” which is very different from a legitimate understanding of female presence and influence, biblically. ) I’ve never heard of one for addicts specifically, at a parish – as opposed to in some other venue, or in a non-Cathoic environment. There are support groups for such people in parishes sometimes, but not Bible Study groups, that I have seen.

The Roman Catholic Church has experienced a fair amount of disunity and division, most especially in its teaching, over the last 30+ years. I think it’s very important to be united in a message, while we are diverse in membership and local culture. I don’t believe in oppression or witch-hunts, when it comes to alleged heterodoxy, but I do think it’s important that the faithful have confidence in not only what we call the magisterium in Rome, but how this local teaching authority is being witnessed in our parishes.

There are threads after threads on various forums, expressing rational anxiety about off-the-wall statements and practices in parishes, whether they be directly from the pastor, or ignored by an indulgent pastor. All I’m suggesting is that all groups at any parish that directly relate to teaching (as opposed to prayer or spirituality of scripture, or gathering together for social reasons, for moral & spiritual support, etc.) be overseen by those with the teaching authority to do so.

However, in a larger vein, I do not think it promotes the concept of inclusiveness to separate one group (any group, but especially a group that feels marginalized) and give them a ‘parallel reality’ in the parish when it comes to what we all believe and how we all worship. I feel especially strongly about the latter, because if any group feels that they have to have a separate Mass – in other words, to welcome each other because nobody else will welcome them – something is deeply wrong at that parish.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top