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

[chrysostim83]

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.

Then you should be against Courage. Chastity is required of all, it has close and essential connections with faith and charity so that it plays an important role in what we believe and how we worship. Thus, how is it not divisive to have a separate group for helping gay people to live chastely? Shouldn’t we all be clambering for an “inclusive” group that helps everyone to be chaste?

I can’t help feeling that you’re starting to shift your ground. It seemed like you weren’t prepared to contemplate a separate Bible study group for any reason—you wanted parishes only to have at most one Bible study group period. That’s a perfectly respectable position. But now it seems you’ll tolerate a teen’s group, a men’s group, a non-feminist women’s group… but for some reason the list stops at an LGBT group! You’ve already said you don’t exclude such a group from the list for being composed of sinners (you’ve admitted they might not be). So exactly what is the issue?

Imagine an LGBT Bible study group led by a qualified catechist/scholar which does not play fast and loose with the proof texts against homogenital acts. Would you be OK with that, or would you still have concerns about the alleged divisiveness of the project?

 

[Elizabeth502]

Then you should be against Courage. Chastity is required of all, it has close and essential connections with faith and charity so that it plays an important role in what we believe and how we worship. Thus, how is it not divisive to have a separate group for helping gay people to live chastely? Shouldn’t we all be clambering for an “inclusive” group that helps everyone to be chaste?

That is not Bible study. Two different animals.

I can’t help feeling that you’re starting to shift your ground. It seemed like you weren’t prepared to contemplate a separate Bible study group for any reason—you wanted parishes only to have at most one Bible study group period. That’s a perfectly respectable position. But now it seems you’ll tolerate a teen’s group, a men’s group, a non-feminist women’s group… but for some reason the list stops at an LGBT group! You’ve already said you don’t exclude such a group from the list for being composed of sinners (you’ve admitted they might not be). So exactly what is the issue?

Please re-read my previous posts and don’t ask me to restate my thrice-restated position. In fact, my last post two posts were extremely clear. There is no shifting of positions whatsoever. The teaching authority or authorities plural, in the parish, should oversee any and all Bible study groups, but in general, it is my feeling that separate, distinct Bible Study groups do not promote inclusiveness but continue marginalization.

IOW, the separate teen’s group, men’s groups, women’s groups, yadayada, can legitimately include bible study if they feel for some reason that it’s so essential to have a separate one – as long as the facilitation, moderation, leadership of such groups is orthodox and approved by the pastor. It is still less desirable, i.m.o., to have “faction” study-groups, – not faction spirituality groups, but faction groups to learn and study the faith. It’s the same faith. That’s why it’s called One, Holy, Catholic (universal) and Apostolic.

Imagine an LGBT Bible study group led by a qualified catechist/scholar which does not play fast and loose with the proof texts against homogenital acts. Would you be OK with that, or would you still have concerns about the alleged divisiveness of the project?

I would be OK with that, but I think the more important question should be, Is Rome OK with that, and are the bishop and the pastor following the unified message from Rome? As I have said before, I have never once seen that: All previous “gay study groups” have been private, non-canonical interpretation without proper scriptural background with which to make such interpretation. They’ve been political agendas. I’m not gay, but I’ve been in study groups which have ‘feminist-inclusive,’ ‘gay-inclusive,’ and they’re shams. There’s no other way to state it. They have existed for propaganda and self-validation purposes and no other purpose.

 

[chrysostim83]

All right. Your last post makes it seem like I could assent to the fundamental parts of your position. At the risk, however, of hijacking this thread, there’s just one point that remains to be cleared.

Obviously, I don’t agree about the divisive nature of having separate Bible studies for separate groups, and from my POV, our conversation about it has gone something like this:
E: Having separate Bible study groups is divisive.
C: Then why isn’t having separate chastity groups divisive?
E: Because having separate Bible study groups is divisive.
C: Wait. What?
E: Chastity groups and Bible study groups are two different animals.

The trouble is a difference need not make all the difference. What I really wanted to know was what is the difference between separate chastity groups and separate Bible study groups that makes the one good and the other bad? In particular, my last post argued for the conclusion that there is no relevant difference between them, so that they are either both good or both bad. Can you show me my conclusion is wrong (by pointing to a clear and compelling difference), and explain how my argument failed (was it from faulty premises or invalid logic)?

Thanks

 

[PeterK]

Is the Sacred Scripture forum the best place for a parish policy discussion?
Others may have something to contribute to this discussion, but they may not suspect such a conversation in this forum - maybe the Catholic Living forum?

Oh, and I am not trying to exclude.

Peter K

 

[Elizabeth502]

I appreciate your last post, chrysostim. Fair question, and I guess my short answer is, Listen to Fr. Corapi…because even he acknowledges that spirituality is different, for example, between the genders. I do think that men and women conceive, imagine, approach, petition, toward God differently. In a way, same for teens. Adolescents have different priorities, different language, different ways of expressing themselves and their needs than adults do. That all falls under the realm of spirituality, not liturgical worship. (I can see an occasional “teen Mass”; they do have youth Masses which can be a very positive experience for young people, but we also need to re-unite as one family in Christ, our head.)

It is conceivable to me that there is a legitimate place of LGBT spirituality, or at least a support group, if not both. A place that enhances their participation and inclusion into the community.

Biblical truths in scripture are part of the Catholic belief system which is not open to variant interpretations. It is only open to variant lectio divina, which is part of spirituality & prayer, not “Bible Study.”

I agree with Peter. The thread is misplaced. I was surprised to find it in this subforum.

 

[John_Parisi]

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?

I agree with you. Don’t do anything unless you first talk to the pastor.

 

[Cashue]

I respectfully suggest you misunderstood the nature of their work. It is not a matter of condoning homosexual behaviour but accepting to associate in love with those that are homosexual with the aim of showing them what the church expects of them.

Only by happily co-existing, working and associating with those that have lifestyles not in line with the bible can we hope to help them. Look at the ministry of Jesus, did he not associate with prostitutes and tax collectors? The church does not condemn the person but the sin, thus just as you would work with alchoholics, thieves or prostitutes, welcoming them to run bizzars, church activities and charity shops, this ministry encourages association with the people without condoning their lifestyle.

 

[John_Parisi]

It is very important that when a group forms, it identify itself, and state why the group is forming. In this case if a G@L want to form a group, talk it over with the pastor and the parish council. It is important to use the parish council to help Father make the proper decisions and in any other way they can help. The group forming should write up the reason for forming and a set of bylaws. Also have a monotor head the group who is not G@L. The Catholic Hiearchy wants that people with this habit should be celebate to further the Kingdom of God. If that is what the groups aim is, then Father or his designee who does not have the habit, monotor the group and help them achieve their goal. The Catechism of the Catholic Church states that it is sinful to engage is such activity. Groups like Alcholics Annoyomous meet to stop drinking alchohol. And many succed because they want to.