Gay engagement party

[InSearchofGrace]

Sure, I understand that the church “teaches” certain doctrines. Although, it does seem that even priests have different opinions of what those doctrines say, as we’ve seen here on this forum when someone asks an important question and has gotten different answers from different priests…so I guess many priests don’t even know the doctrines well themselves, which is odd. You’d think they would, of all people.
I guess they should have to “renew” their priesthood in the same way that we have to renew our driver’s licenses every few years.
Or it means there is still room in the wording of the doctrines that leaves room for nuances in interpretation.

But having said all that…the doctrines were debated and voted upon and decided by groups of men over many centuries at those councils, were they not? They themselves debated for years before they settled on many points. So while they did make decisions, and then ended up saying “these decisions cannot be changed–EVER!”…it doesn’t mean all the decisions they made 2000 years ago were the *right *ones.

As per what you said, then, I assume the Catholics who debate a topic like this while knowing full well what the church teaches…who think the person should still go to the party…are expressing that they do not agree with the settled upon teachings?
That they think the doctrine, then, is wrong?

Catholics priests understand that the Magisterium holds the teaching authority of the Church, which is the aggregation of bishops in union with the Pope, who has authority over the bishops, individually and as a body, as well as over each and every Catholic directly. Priests do not have magisterial authority and are expected to transmit as called for during the course of their pastoral duties the interpretation / translation by the Magisterium on doctrinal matters.

There may be disobedient priests or those who just do not understand what has already been interpreted for them on issues of faith and morals. I doubt, however, that there has been a thread or issue in this forum where as you say

even priests have different opinions of what those doctrines say, as we’ve seen here on this forum when someone asks an important question and has gotten different answers from different priests…so I guess many priests don’t even know the doctrines well themselves

If I am wrong, please point to the thread and issue, which should be easy. You have only recently joined CAF and your total posts are no more than 50 as of the time of your posting.

Further, if/when posters state in this forum that they were told this and that by priests they claim to have approached on a Church teaching or doctrine, such representations are not usually subject to scrutiny that establishes veracity or full understanding with use of common terms and salient points.

If you are not Catholic, entertaining the thought that a settled doctrine could be wrong is understandable. If you are a former Catholic, one would expect that you at least would have absorbed during instruction of the faith of the work of the Holy Spirit in guiding the Church, the Bride of Christ, in compiling teachings on matters of faith and morals.

A gay engagement party is a celebration of a commitment to be a couple, with the intention to ‘marry.’ Attending the event is not the same as same as attending a birthday party. To a faithful Catholic, even if one of the gay couple is a close family member or a dear friend, attendance of said event as in the scenario in the OP can only be taken as celebration with or of immorality, of evil. Same sex relationships are immoral and can never have God’s blessing or the Church’s. Excusing oneself from attendance is not uncharitable and is actually an act of courage.

In his Summa theologiae, St. Thomas mentioned that

Each one is under obligation to show forth his faith, either to instruct and encourage others of the faithful, or to repel the attacks of unbelievers.

Pope Leo XIII admonished the bishops back in 1890 that

*To recoil before an enemy, or to keep silence when from all sides such clamors are raised against truth, is the part of a man either devoid of character or who entertains doubt as to the truth of what he professes to believe. In both cases such mode of behaving is base and is insulting to God, and both are incompatible with the salvation of mankind. This kind of conduct is profitable only to the enemies of the faith, for nothing emboldens the wicked so greatly as the lack of courage on the part of the good. *

 

[Elizabeth502]

As per what you said, then, I assume the Catholics who debate a topic like this while knowing full well what the church teaches…who think the person should still go to the party…are expressing that they do not agree with the settled upon teachings? That they think the doctrine, then, is wrong?

[bolding mine]

It’s important to define & understand terms. A practicing Catholic who “thinks that [a] doctrine is wrong” is a Catholic outside of the requirements of assent. A basic (and dogmatic – higher than doctrinal) teaching of the Church is that, since the Holy Spirit guides the Church (per Jesus), the Church does not err in matters of doctrine. Indiividual clergy sin, as do all of us, and even commit grave sins & crimes in some instances, even a series or habit of such evil. However, that does not affect doctrine. Doctrine, like Scripture, is in-Spirited. We Catholics are required to assent to that, even when we do not understand particular teachings or do not like them because they make us (or our lives) uncomfortable.

Doctrine develops over time (in some cases), but that does not equal change per se. And most of that development is a refinement of understanding and an explication of language about doctrine, as opposed to something changed in the kernel of the teaching itself. Modernists are fond of pointing to “new” theology, but anything that is considered both “new” and authentic is merely a different way of understanding a settled doctrine or digma. “New” authentic theology is generally a new “system” of theological understanding (different categories) within the authoritative principles and truths which have been taught in the established Church since the death of Jesus.

Are there “gray areas” in doctrine, or in scriptural interpretation? Sure, but those gray areas are authentically interpreted or explained by those trained to do so (typically clergy – for example, in the confessional, or well-educated ordained or lay apologists & scripture scholars in communion with the magisterium). And you can take it to the bank that homosexuality, and the support of homosexual behavior and “marriage” is absolutely not a gray area. Ditto for the concept of cooperation with evil, and what constitutes the same.

I’m speaking of principles here, not judgment of individual behavior, if that individual is ignorant. A Catholic who is not ignorant of doctrine, and chooses to oppose doctrine in a serious matter, has decided to engage in sin and/or to cooperate in another person’s sin. That is not excused by “having a different opinion.”

 

[NeedImprovement]

My . . . sister who is 55 now was raised in a very devout Catholic family with myself and two other siblings. She has been a faithful Cathoic at times, others times not so much. Same with our relationship, sometimes close, sometimes not so close. She knows what the teaching of the Catholic Church is, she doesn’t agree with it, but she knows exactly what it is, and she knows where I stand as a practicing faithful Catholic. She is severely mentally ill, paranoid schizophrenic diagnosed at age 20, in and out of hospitals, suicidal. She has lots of difficulty maintaining relationships with family or anyone for that matter. People come in and out of her life. In her 40’s she had a civil union with a woman who had come in to her life and actually added stability. ( I can hear the howls of outrage now…I am not touting the benefits of gayness). . . .

No howls of outrage here … Yet, you may wish to consider how presumtuous it would be to assume that none of us have any similar/identical situations in our own families . If you’d been a member here for a period longer than a week and a half . . . say, maybe a year and a half, it would probably be more apparent to you. And there are regular posters here who interact with homosexuals on a daily basis.

Some of us have let things/personal predicaments like this slip out from time to time when we’re posting , but it is usually in response to someone else (and you would be utterly amazed how often this happens with new members) who has brought a sad personal situation to a moral theology or social justice thread and weilds it as a type of leverage , hoping to convince people of their argument ; or, as often happens predominantly on threads dealing with homosexual activism and abortion, to confuse others. One almost gets the impression that you think the rest of us are somehow immune to these things. It’s as if practically all the Catholics posting here have been painted with the same brush. That isn’t very realistic at all.

I can empathize from personal experience with everything said in the entire post referred to above . . . and with a whole lot more that hasn’t been adressed.:sad_yes:

From the moment someone mentions something like this :

. . .
I have a set of built in ideas about what goes on at these celebrations as I have a gay sister. She knows where i’m at, and we love each other. What I object to, and this is not aimed at you personally,is some of the outright rigid and incorrect ideas you read here. We can’t make it up as we go.

… they probably already have some members here praying for them . But this isn’t a prayer thread ; it’s moral theology. As far as debating goes , I must admit to losing the larger portion of my respect for the actual argument itself (when there is an argument - hi fix ] ) , when someone insists on hanging their emotional laundry out all over a thread , because (whether inadvertently or not) it serves to gain an advantage by playing on peoples’ emotions. Objective review of the militant homosexual lobby’s tactics , find this same strategy (playing on peoples’ emotions) right at the top of their list.

While it is commendable that we always consider the circumstances individually when dealing with moral situations , the truth is never relative. And the truth is the primary focus for us as Catholics - no matter how painful it may be. The truth is paramount. It’s the “True North” on our moral compasses.

There have been a lot of subtle accusations levelled against Catholic members on this thread … a few ,in my opinion , deftly worded accusations to say the least. It has always seemed rather odd to me that someone would try to defend their own action or the action of someone else they know by accusing others of some other fault. It tends to foster relativism.

Then, of course there was this less subtle . . .

. . . Some of you are throwing out blanket assertions using scripture and the catechism for justification. The moral dilemma some of you may face is as follows:
Intentionally misprepresentiing Catholic Church teaching is a grave sin against Truth, morally unacceptable in itself, and also leading others astray of the truth…scandal.

Judging a particualr action outside the context of truth is to judge before you “arrive”, to pre- judge. We commonly call this prejudice. Prejudice can be an assault on the dignity of the human person.

"Intentionally misrepresenting" …

How ironic is it that “judging outside the context of the truth” should be the accusation here ? It would appear that the author of those words , has allowed their lamentable (let’s pray for them) family situation to become the new objective reference point for judging a moral act … repeatedly implying that anyone who doesn’t agree is wrong …condemned … a hypocrite (bigot homophobe - whatever).

It could be well expressed summarily (in my own limited opinion) if we were to return once more to that analogy of the Truth being the “True North” of our *Moral Compass *:

The author of those words (quoted above) has allowed the “magnetic north” of their own personal experience to replace the “True North” of their moral compass . . . and is vigorously asserting that any of us who don’t agree that his/her “magnetic north” is “True North”, are ,by extension, headed due “South” ( … " where ‘their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched.’ " [Mark 9:48] ) .

Happy Easter guys.

He is risen as He said ! Alleluia ! !

(Check your bearings -).

 

[heaintheavy]

Your just looking for an excuse to dissent against church teaching. Like a poster said above, the Church is not a democracy. And if you are a true Catholic, you should trust that the councils were under the guidance of the holy spirit.

I myself am not looking for an excuse to dissent against Church teaching.

But the Catholics here who think it’s okay for the father–and perhaps the son, too–to go to this party…does that mean they are dissenting? Does that mean they are not “true Catholics”?

 

[heaintheavy]

There may be disobedient priests or those who just do not understand what has already been interpreted for them on issues of faith and morals. I doubt, however, that there has been a thread or issue in this forum where as you say

If I am wrong, please point to the thread and issue, which should be easy. You have only recently joined CAF and your total posts are no more than 50 as of the time of your posting.

Further, if/when posters state in this forum that they were told this and that by priests they claim to have approached on a Church teaching or doctrine, such representations are not usually subject to scrutiny that establishes veracity or full understanding with use of common terms and salient points.

Yes, I will find this thread. It was very recent…it was one where a woman had health issues and was told by a doctor she could not, under any circumstance, get pregnant or it would kill her. She and her husband had asked several priests on what they could do about this…many told her it was okay in their case to use “artificial” birth control, but the Catholics on this forum told her that was in no way correct, and that she and her husband–both in their twenties–had to remain celibate for the rest of their lives.
They were verrrry confused because so many priests had told them otherwise.
I didn’t comment on the thread, but I was following it…very worried and sympathetic toward this couple.
I’m going to find it and post it here.

But that would, indeed, be a good example of the priests either not knowing the doctrine properly…or finding and teaching different interpretations of the doctrine…yes?

The abc birth control issue is meant to be unchangeable?

 

[PatriceA]

I myself am not looking for an excuse to dissent against Church teaching.

But the Catholics here who think it’s okay for the father–and perhaps the son, too–to go to this party…does that mean they are dissenting? Does that mean they are not “true Catholics”?

If they have made a statement that they “don’t see anything wrong with attending” or advise the father and son to just go and have fun and forget what anybody else thinks, including all the teachings of the Catholic Church on this subject, then yes, IMO, they are dissenting. The link I provided earlier in this thread says one “must or must not” attend a party such as this, BUT, goes on to explain the teachings that should be considered and discerned when making the decision about the party.

Parties such as this, anytime a Catholic is invited to an occasion that marks an invalid marriage, one has to take into account ALL the teachings of the Church on this subject. And seek the advice of their own priest and/or spiritual advisor. Any Catholic that advises another Catholic to disregard that process, is dissenting, IMO.

To me its no different than one Catholic telling another Catholic to totally disregard examining their own conscience before receiving the Eucharist, that it doesn’t really matter. No one can make that call for another Catholic.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

But the Catholics here who think it’s okay for the father–and perhaps the son, too–to go to this party…does that mean they are dissenting? Does that mean they are not “true Catholics”?

Some Catholics might not be aware that attending such events is improper for a Catholic. It amounts to dancing with the devil. There are many unthinking Catholics out there, and some that have even catechized themselves rather than been properly catechized. To say they are no longer “true Catholics” if they attend such an event would be a stretch. But to say that they are not behaving the way true Catholics should behave is not a stretch. True Catholics should have the courage to do the right thing. The right thing is not to dance with the devil, even if your friends are going to the dance.