Gay Men's Chorus to perform in Catholic parish in San Francisco

[theCardinalbird]

Are they singing Christian songs?

From the Article:

The chorus would perform its 40th anniversary concert at St. Ignatius. The men, joined by soprano Ellie Dehn and a chamber orchestra, would sing “When We No Longer Touch,” the first requiem dedicated to people who died of AIDS.

But then I wonder what’s the point. Is the church just a physical location for the event?

This Church has a past history with this Chorus group

From the Article:

“This concert offers us an opportunity to repair the relationship after all these years,” Bonfiglio said. “That’s what the Christian community is all about.”

 

[RealisticCatholic]

Hmmm. Well, hopefully the people nearest to the situation know what’s what.

I don’t know the specifics, so I can’t form a strong opinion. But I will say that I believe the church to be a bridge-builder and peacemaker, and I think it’s called to be so even when the other party does not 100% aspire to the church’s standards.

 

[theCardinalbird]

Hmmm. Well, hopefully the people nearest to the situation know what’s what.

I agree

. But I will say that I believe the church to be a bridge-builder and peacemaker,

Same here

even when the other party does not 100% aspire to the church’s standards.

But surely they could try? If the idea of bridge building holds, then people who want to live in the Church should make an effort to build in part, that bridge, and aspire for what the Church teaches, which is living a lifestyle that is holy and pleasing to God.

 

[Asonglaw]

Ok, but I don’t think the Church strives to build bridges between every idea or ideology. I don’t think to welcome brethren into one’s home, means to welcome their every practice.

 

[theCardinalbird]

Ok, but I don’t think the Church strives to build bridges between every idea or ideology. I don’t think to welcome brethren into one’s home, means to welcome their every practice.

Exactly. We build bridges with people, not ideologies

 

[LisaB]

What exactly does it mean to build a bridge? I’m afraid this phrase is a euphemism for compromising on some teachings of the Church and meeting in the middle. Is this what the proponents of “bridge building” really mean? I’ve heard the phrase a lot but it’s never really defined, with actual examples.

If we are going to build a bridge between the Catholic Church and gay people, or any group for that matter, it should mean that we welcome them but not their sins. They are welcome in the church like anyone else, and are held to the same standard as everyone else. They should change their lives to conform to the Church; the Church should not change any of her teachings to accommodate anyone.

 

[theCardinalbird]

If we are going to build a bridge between the Catholic Church and gay people, or any group for that matter, it should mean that we welcome them but not their sins. They are welcome in the church like anyone else, and are held to the same standard as everyone else. They should change their lives to conform to the Church; the Church should not change any of her teachings to accommodate anyone.

I wish I could like this 10 times more. You hit the nail on the head

 

[JimG]

The purpose of the Church is to build a bridge to heaven which everyone can cross. It builds a bridge to truth, not falsehood, to Jesus, not Satan, to doctrinal clarity, not ambiguity, to heaven, not hell. Don’t build a bridge to someplace that you don’t want to go and that will harm you when you get there.

 

[ZMystiCat]

Of course, if you’re building a bridge to heaven, one side has to be where the sinners are.

 

[Start]

This sort of thing doesn’t have a spiritual aspect.

 

[dshix]

With something like this, I always have to ask - what in the world does someone’s sexual activity have to do with singing? Why must they dub themselves the “Gay Men’s Chorus”? Are they solely defined by that aspect of their lives?

Would it make sense to also have a “Vegan Women’s Chorus”? Or a “Daily-Exercise Chorus”? Or an “Early-Risers Chorus”?

 

[Asonglaw]

That may be true, though, no sin would enter heaven. A repented sinner, definitely would, by God’s grace, though.

 

[ZMystiCat]

This sort of thing doesn’t have a spiritual aspect.

They are performing in a very beautiful church because the priest was loving enough to show an appreciation for non-sinful talents that they have. Beyond the act of love itself, there is absolutely potential for a spiritual experience in such beauty.

That may be true, though, no sin would enter heaven. A repented sinner, definitely would, by God’s grace, though.

Sure, but bridges aren’t crossed in an instant.

 

[JimG]

Of course, if you’re building a bridge to heaven, one side has to be where the sinners are.

Of course. It’s the Church which puts us on the bridge to heaven, not a bridge to nowhere or a bridge going the other direction.

 

[Asonglaw]

They are performing in a very beautiful church because the priest was loving enough to show an appreciation for non-sinful talents that they have. Beyond the act of love itself, there is absolutely potential for a spiritual experience in such beauty

One may welcome say “x-LGBT choir” into a gathering where these things are considered sinful, but isn’t that different from welcoming an active “LGBT choir” into such a gathering?.

 

[Asonglaw]

Sure, but bridges aren’t crossed in an instant

This is true. Yet this process must surely only commence when one the sinner admits to their fault and strives to repent, I think.

 

[QwertyGirl]

What exactly does it mean to build a bridge? I’m afraid this phrase is a euphemism for compromising on some teachings of the Church and meeting in the middle. Is this what the proponents of “bridge building” really mean? I’ve heard the phrase a lot but it’s never really defined, with actual examples.

To me, “building a bridge” (in any scenario) means building a connection. It doesn’t even have to mean accepting differences in each other, although that is realy nice. It means being connected in some way. It certainly doesn’t mean one side or the other giving up their beliefs or changing themselves for the other side.

Human beings, connecting with each other, is a wonderful thing. All different kinds of people are capable of building bridges with each other in a positive manner. Once the connection is made, it opens the door to all kinds of possibilities.

 

[QwertyGirl]

Why must they dub themselves the “Gay Men’s Chorus”? Are they solely defined by that aspect of their lives?

Unfortunately, it is likely that many of them have lived portions of their life in a living hell for no reason other than the mean-spiritedness dished out by others to them. So in answer to your question, it has a lot to do with how they define themselves.

Remember, we don’t live each other’s experiences. You don’t know what it is like to be in their shoes.

 

[Asonglaw]

that is realy nice.

What is truth, what the Church stands for, may not be always nice or appealing

 

[ZMystiCat]

Of course. It’s the Church which puts us on the bridge to heaven, not a bridge to nowhere or a bridge going the other direction.

How is this a bridge to nowhere or the wrong direction? They just brought a whole choir of men, those performing with them, and those interested in their music into a church to experience the beauty it has to offer. Sure, many may never come back, but it’s little things like that that may bear fruit this year or next year or ten years from now.

One may welcome say “x-LGBT choir” into a gathering where these things are considered sinful, but isn’t that different from welcoming an active “LGBT choir” into such a gathering?

This is true. Yet this process must surely only commence when one the sinner admits to their fault and strives to repent, I think.

Using that logic, we should never evangelize.