Gay Catholic group gets VIP treatment at Vatican for first time

[estesbob]

So a group of lay Catholics gets nice seats at a papal audience and that indicates that the Church is all of a sudden going accept homosexual behavior as being okay? I guess it could’ve been worse. They could have sung morning has broken rather than all are welcome

 

[_Abyssinia]

Deacon Greg Kandra updated his post:

UPDATE: An alert reader pointed me to a story that helps answer my questions. Religion News Service a few days ago had this item:

Archbishop Georg Ganswein, head of the papal household and the top aide to Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI, responded to New Ways’ request for a papal meet-and-greet by reserving tickets for the group at Francis’ weekly public audience in St. Peter’s Square. It’s not a private meeting — which is tough for anyone to get — but it’s not nothing.

The pope’s ambassador to Washington forwarded a similar request to Rome. Even San Francisco Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone — point man for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ battle against gay marriage — had written a letter to the Vatican on their behalf.

Last December, Cordileone had a constructive meeting with Frank DeBernardo, executive director of New Ways, and Sister Jeannine Gramick, a co-founder of New Ways and a longtime advocate for LGBT inclusion in the church. But they were still surprised by the archbishop’s willingness to write a letter for them.

patheos.com/blogs/deaconsbench/2015/02/did-a-gay-rights-group-actually-get-vip-treatment-at-the-vatican/

Associated press focuses a little more than the Reuters article about what New Ways ministry did not get:

But in a sign that the welcome wasn’t all it could have been, the New Ways Ministry pilgrims were only identified on the Vatican’s list of attendees as a “group of lay people accompanied by a Sister of Loreto.”

And not even that got announced: When a Vatican monsignor read out the list of the different groups of pilgrims in attendance in St. Peter’s Square, he skipped over the group altogether. Francis didn’t mention them, either.

hosted2.ap.org/COGRA/f29d8dad34bd498da777a4fb9802979d/Article_2015-02-18-EU-REL–Vatican-Gay%20Catholics/id-1f06c47609ad4b998415765530fb1613

 

[Hans_W]

I support them. I believe they must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. I believe that every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

Agreed. The problem is that it won’t stop there. Next thing is they will ask for blessings for themselves, then their partner, then their relationship. Finally, why don’t you want to marry us?

 

[graciew]

Um…what?

Correct me if I’m wrong, Catholics…but if a Catholic disagrees with official church teaching and tries to teach otherwise, does that not make them *a heretic?/

.*

It could also be " mistaken". Kind of gives one a " second chance" to try…

 

[ProVobis]

LOL. Too right.
That would have really ruffled feathers, since it was written by that Yusuf Islam dude.

Actually, Morning Has Broken was a Christian song/melody written back in 1931. Cat Stevens popularized it though back in the 70’s.

 

[Joie_de_Vivre]

Let’s not read too much into this. Pope Francis isn’t to force the Church to accept homosexuality. The last sentence quoted is wrong. The Church does not teach that homosexuality is not sinful. The catechism says that the homosexual inclination is objectively disordered,and scripture and traditional Catholic theology regards it as a moral evil.
*

catechism.cc/articles/homosexuality-sin.htm

< 3. The claim that the homosexual orientation is not, in and of itself, a moral evil, or worse, that it is part of God’s plan, as if it were in some way good.

The Bible teaches that God created Adam and Eve, before the fall from grace to sin, and that all those things which God created, including Adam and Eve, are good. The Bible also condemns not only homosexual acts, but the orientation itself:

[1 Corinthians 6]
{6:9} Can it be you do not know that the iniquitous shall not possess the kingdom of God? Do not be led astray: neither fornicators, nor those serving idols, nor adulterers,
{6:10} nor the effeminate, nor males who sleep with males, nor thieves, nor the avaricious, nor the inebriated, nor those who speak evil, nor the rapacious shall possess the kingdom of God.

Now the expression ‘males who sleep with males’ (masculorum concubitores) refers to homosexuals who commit homosexual acts. Although the verse only mentions males, it is certain that female homosexual acts are also condemned because female homosexuality has the same contradictions of the moral order as male homosexuality. The former is not mentioned because the verse only cites certain examples from which one may derive other examples; it is not an exhaustive list of all possible mortal sins. Also, in Romans 1:26-27, Scripture condemns both male and female homosexuality.

Even though this list is not a comprehensive list of the evils found among human persons, it still includes the term ‘the effeminate’ (molles), which refers, not to homosexual acts themselves, but to the homosexual orientation. Certainly, if an act is evil, then the tendency toward that act cannot be good. The Bible condemns both evil and the tendency toward evil. Therefore, it is a heresy to believe that the homosexual orientation itself is good, or that it is approved or blessed by God, for the homosexual orientation is inherently directed toward acts that are intrinsically evil and always gravely immoral. The Bible clearly condemns the orientation (molles) as well as the act (masculorum concubitores).

Now it is true that the homosexual orientation, if it is not willed, is not itself a sin, but it is nevertheless heretical to claim that it is not a severe moral disorder or that it is not fittingly referred to as a kind of evil. >

Distinguishing Inclinations from Actions
6. In her teaching, however, the Church never condemns persons with same-sex attraction. She
carefully distinguishes between an individual’s inclinations or feelings – some of which are transitory and/or situational and others which are deep-seated or permanent – and one’s actions. While homosexual acts are always objectively wrong, same-sex inclinations are not in themselves sinful or a moral failing. To the extent that a same-sex attraction is not freely chosen, there is no personal culpability in having such an inclination. Nonetheless, when oriented toward genital activity, this inclination is “objectively disordered.” This does not mean that the person as a whole is somehow defective or “badly made,” or that he or she has in some way been rejected by God. Inclinations to homosexual acts in no way diminish the full human dignity or intrinsic worth of the person. For many people, same-sex attraction constitutes a trial. They therefore deserve to be approached by pastors with charity and prudence.

cccb.ca/site/images/stories/pdf/ministry-ssa_en.pdf

The Bible actually condemns top and bottom gay sex because for the Greeks you had to be that specific.

The Bible and Catechism say nothing about homosexuality being a mental disorder.

 

[anthony022071]

I just cut out that last sentence of your post.

If homosexual orientation is “not itself a sin”, then how can it be a “severe moral disorder” and “a kind of evil”?

I have met people who are simply born that way. There are sincere Christians including members of this forum who are born this way. They are desperate because they feel that way. How can that be “evil” if God made you like that.

Biologically it is very complex to trace, but the effect it simply an imbalance in your hormone production. If a female body produces more male sex hormones, she will look more masculine and behave more male-like. She has a “homosexual orientation”.

How can that be evil? I would think that we humans must do something bad to have attributes we call evil. Otherwise a tsunami would be evil, or a young child dying of cancer would also have some evil affliction.

The catechetical article I quoted from says that if homosexual orientation is not willed,it is not itself a sin. Human will is what makes for the sin. But the inclination itself is a moral disorder because it is contrary to natural law and it can lead to a

God doesn’t make people to have sinful inclinations. Those come from original sin and corruption of the heart. Homosexuality does not originate from biological factors. It is a spiritual malady.

 

[anthony022071]

The Church teaches that homosexual orientation is not sinful, but that ACTING on homosexual impulses IS sinful. Just like it is sinful for a single person to act on heterosexual impulses.

The Church does not teach that homosexual orientation is not sinful. That is an opinion that only became current among some Catholic teachers in recent years. Sin originates in the heart,not in the act of sin. Homosexual desire is contrary to natural law and the order of creation.

 

[anthony022071]

How do you resolve the two? The Bible condemns it, but yet it is not a sin.

And if it’s not a sin, how can it rightly be an evil?

As for whether or not the Vatican administration was aware of who was at the event–seriously? The people running the event probably had dossiers on everyone present long before anyone walked in the door.

I think a lot of people are uncomfortable with the Supreme Pontiff and are splitting finer and finer hairs.

The catechetical article I quoted says that homosexual orientation is not itself a sin if it is not willed,not that it is never a sin.

 

[anthony022071]

You should have just stopped there. Period. You cannot sin without an act of will. Sin isn’t something that happens to you, it’s something you cause to happen. I pray that no individual that is resisting same sex attraction will read this thread.

I didn’t write those words. They are from a catechetical article. I gave the link to it.

Sin is not just something a person causes to happen,it comes from the heart. Sinful acts are preceded by sinful desires.

Where did they say that?

Who? I didn’t say anyone did say it. But the news article does say that the Church teaches that homosexuality is not a sin,so I quoted the catechetical article in response to that false claim.

 

[anthony022071]

Um…what?

The Pope doesn’t have to “force” the church to “accept” homosexuality…the church already does accept people with same-sex attraction into the church and it seems it has since the church began.

There is a difference between accepting people and accepting a sinful inclination as if it is not sinful. The Church did not,until recently in some places,accept homosexuals if they did not intend on overcoming their inclination.

And of course…the church teaches that homosexuality is not a sin.

No,that is a recent opinion of some Catholic teachers.

The line you quote, above–and all the rest that you quote–is not from the Catholic catechism, as I assume you know. It is from a blog written on a website called Catholicplanet.com.

What the actual, real, catechism says is:

2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. They do not choose their homosexual condition; for most of them it is a trial.] This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God_s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

The homosexual tendency is objectively disordered because it is contrary to natural law and the order of creation. It is a sinful tendency.

 

[Joie_de_Vivre]

There is a difference between accepting people and accepting a sinful inclination as if it is not sinful. The Church did not,until recently in some places,accept homosexuals if they did not intend on overcoming their inclination.

No,that is a recent opinion of some Catholic teachers.

The homosexual tendency is objectively disordered because it is contrary to natural law and the order of creation.** It is a sinful tendency.**

By the Council of Trent thou art a heretic for you believe that temptation can be sin belief in such idea was anathematized in the First Decree of the Fifth Session. Repent of your heretical belief and be rejoined with the body of Christ I beseech thee for the sake of thy immortal soul.

 

[on_the_hill]

Actually, Morning Has Broken was a Christian song/melody written back in 1931. Cat Stevens popularized it though back in the 70’s.

When my wife’s parents got married, my future mother-in-law requested that “Ava Maria” be played during the Mass, but the priest would not allow it because it had been written by a Protestant. I don’t know which rendition of the song that was.

 

[Robert_Bay]

MODERATOR NOTICE

Please charitably discuss the issues, not each other

 

[on_the_hill]

Agreed. The problem is that it won’t stop there. Next thing is they will ask for blessings for themselves, then their partner, then their relationship. Finally, why don’t you want to marry us?

Certainly they can be blessed, and there’s no reason a partner can’t be blessed. A relationship and marriage are different, of course.

I think we ought not worry too much about slippery slopes. When we worry too much about sliding down a slippery slope we risk sliding down the back side.

 

[zz912]

When my wife’s parents got married, my future mother-in-law requested that “Ava Maria” be played during the Mass, but the priest would not allow it because it had been written by a Protestant. I don’t know which rendition of the song that was.

The melody was Schubert, right? But the words??? We’re talking about singing the Hail Mary prayer, correct?

 

[ARSpade]

Certainly they can be blessed, and there’s no reason a partner can’t be blessed. A relationship and marriage are different, of course.

I think we ought not worry too much about slippery slopes. When we worry too much about sliding down a slippery slope we risk sliding down the back side.

The slippery slope should be worried about it.

We all got to watch the mainline Protestants happily slide right down it after all.

 

[LoveMorrissey]

This is great news. Pope Francis is highly likely to attract more members

 

[Tigg]

So a group of lay Catholics gets nice seats at a papal audience and that indicates that the Church is all of a sudden going accept homosexual behavior as being okay? I guess it could’ve been worse. They could have sung morning has broken rather than all are welcome

It’s rather a mixed message wouldn’t you say, especially since the USCCB condemned New Ways Ministry back in 2010. For further claification, see link for Cardinal George’s text regarding this:

New Ways Ministry has recently criticized efforts by the Church to defend the traditional definition of marriage as between one man and one woman and has urged Catholics to support electoral initiatives to establish same-sex “marriage.” No one should be misled by the claim that New Ways Ministry provides an authentic interpretation of Catholic teaching and an authentic Catholic pastoral practice.

americamagazine.org/content/all-things/usccb-condemns-new-ways-ministry-gay-ministry-responds

catholicexchange.com/cardinal-george-denounces-new-ways-ministry-as-pseudo-catholic-organization

 

[Tigg]

I have met people who are simply born that way. There are sincere Christians including members of this forum who are born this way. They are desperate because they feel that way. How can that be “evil” if God made you like that.

Biologically it is very complex to trace, but the effect it simply an imbalance in your hormone production. If a female body produces more male sex hormones, she will look more masculine and behave more male-like. She has a “homosexual orientation”.

How can that be evil? I would think that we humans must do something bad to have attributes we call evil. Otherwise a tsunami would be evil, or a young child dying of cancer would also have some evil affliction.

The problem is that the CDF has said (Declaration on Certain Questions Concerning Sexual Ethics) that “an overly benign interpretation was given to the homosexual condition itself, some going so far as to call it neutral or even good. Although the particular inclination of the homosexual person is not a sin, it is a more or less strong tendency ordered towards an intrinsic moral evil; and thus the inclination itself must be seen as an objective disorder.”

Do not ever doubt that a strong movement is actively engaged in promoting the gay culture as normative behavior. The document also states that as a rule, the majority of homosexually oriented persons who seek to lead chaste lives do not publicize their sexual orientation. What does this say about New Ways Ministry who define themselves as a gay advocates group.