Gay patient says Catholic chaplain refused him last rites

[LisaA]

Yes, that’s true. We don’t have the priest’s side of the story, and, as I said, priests have a tough row to hoe when they are, in effect, ambushed by someone with a long-held problem with the Church.

Lisa, I am not telling you what *I *think, I am explaining what I believe that gay people think.

I agree with most of what you said. However, I think that we need to understand what the “other side” thinks, so that we can tailor our counter arguments to them. Just spouting our party line will not win any converts.

This may be what some gay people think but that neither means all of them (or even a majority) or that their thinking is correct. “Spouting the party line” in the act of explaining Catholic teaching about same sex attraction is about all we can do in the face of so much false teaching from pop culture, the media and opportunistic politicians. Do you think it mere coincidence that Obama was for gay marriage before he was against it (in 08) to get elected, after which he returned to being for gay marriage? Opportunistic and moral relativism thy name is the Secular Left.

The Church’s teaching on same sex attraction is rational, measured, and compassionate. Few Catholics are waving a crucifix at a gay person and saying they’ll burn in hell. However that doesn’t mean we ignore the truth. Same sex attraction is a disordered state where a person rejects his DNA and biologically designed gender. While two men or two women can have deep and lifelong love for each other, it is not the same, not equivalent to a man and a woman’s love. Engaging in gay sex is physically and emotionally self destructive. By ignoring reality we are, as a priest recently wrote, like a physician who refuses to tell his patient his diagnosis. We cannot compel the gay/Lesbian to change but we can offer them salvation through a relationship with Jesus Christ.

Lisa

 

[pnewton]

I found this particular statement revealing of the intolerance of the world today:

In its statement, Washington Hospital Center said officials there have “taken our patient’s concerns very seriously. While the priest is not an employee but rather is assigned by the Archdiocese to provide spiritual care at our hospital, it is our expectation that all who support our patients adhere to our values. This includes offering pastoral and spiritual support to all patients, regardless of their faith traditions.

By what right does a hospital tell clergy what their beliefs should be?

This whole incident is based on a decision made by the priest that cannot by its very nature be known. Perhaps there was unrepentance. Perhaps he did not think the situation warranted the Anointing of the Sick. Maybe he was going to give this right but didn’t jump right into it. Then we he got cussed out thought it best to leave rather than upset the man further.

 

[LisaA]

I found this particular statement revealing of the intolerance of the world today:

By what right does a hospital tell clergy what their beliefs should be?

This whole incident is based on a decision made by the priest that cannot by its very nature be known. Perhaps there was unrepentance. Perhaps he did not think the situation warranted the Anointing of the Sick. Maybe he was going to give this right but didn’t jump right into it. Then we he got cussed out thought it best to leave rather than upset the man further.

The hospital hangs itself with its own words. The priest offered spiritual and pastoral support. As you said how does this hospital get to define what constitutes spiritual support? They are ignorant of Catholic teaching and cannot differentiate between spiritual counsel and compassion with giving the man Holy Communion.

An educational opportunity but of course the media believes ignorance is bliss.

Lisa

 

[VanSensei]

Sigh. The only one to judge should be God, however I’m starting to feel as if this man was unrepentant in part due to his brazen nature among all things. He should know that Our Lord said no man can serve two masters. In this case, it is the Lord versus this man’s grievous sin.

 

[PaulinVA]

The Church’s teaching on same sex attraction is rational, measured, and compassionate.

i agree with the Church’s position, but I would never characterize it as compassionate. It is a sentence to loneliness, childlessness, and marginalization.

Gay people have the same imperatives written on their hearts that we all do. They want to love and be loved, they want that love to overflow into the creation of children. They want to grow old with someone they love.

Because something went wrong somewhere, one inclination is not ordered correctly - the inclination as to the gender of the person they want to live out the imperatives God has written on all our hearts. They have all of these other correctly-ordered desires, but they can not act on them. Because of the fall, they have been dealt a really bad hand.

Few Catholics are waving a crucifix at a gay person and saying they’ll burn in hell. However that doesn’t mean we ignore the truth. Same sex attraction is a disordered state where a person **rejects his DNA and biologically designed gender. **While two men or two women can have deep and lifelong love for each other, it is not the same, not equivalent to a man and a woman’s love. Engaging in gay sex is physically and emotionally self destructive. By ignoring reality we are, as a priest recently wrote, like a physician who refuses to tell his patient his diagnosis. We cannot compel the gay/Lesbian to change but we can offer them salvation through a relationship with Jesus Christ.

I don’t believe gay people are actively rejecting their DNA and biologically-designed gender. Few people seek out this burden to take on. It finds them. The reason that gay people and transgendered people have a higher suicide rate is not only because of acceptance by society, but also because they just want to be straight. They are so conflicted by the state they find themselves in.

So, the way the Church approaches gay people with this heavy burden is very important. To just call them disordered tell them they are self destructive doesn’t really help, doesn’t covert anyone.

That’s was my point in posting this article. It’s another battle in the culture wars, but it’s also another opportunity to discuss how to deal with gay people in a charitable, compassionate way and still hold true to Catholic teaching

 

[pnewton]

i agree with the Church’s position, but I would never characterize it as compassionate. It is a sentence to loneliness, childlessness, and marginalization.

Gay people have the same imperatives written on their hearts that we all do. They want to love and be loved, they want that love to overflow into the creation of children. They want to grow old with someone they love.

It is not the Church’s position that makes life difficult. The Church only makes truth know. She does not create it. I still think the opportunity for lifelong relationships exist and it is possible, though difficult to achieve this. We are not slaves to our passions. Our propensity for sexual gratification can be curbed. It is curbed in every celibate priest. One could say that they live an unnatural life.

 

[LisaA]

i agree with the Church’s position, but I would never characterize it as compassionate. It is a sentence to loneliness, childlessness, and marginalization.

Gay people have the same imperatives written on their hearts that we all do. They want to love and be loved, they want that love to overflow into the creation of children. They want to grow old with someone they love.

We all desire to love and be loved. But to claim because gays cannot “marry” or should not be breeding children for their own self satisfaction they are relegated to a life of misery and lonliness is quite absurd. You basically demean every Priest or Religious or single person as having a life not worth living because they are not married or do not have children. I think that’s ridiculous. I know single people, widows/widowers, celibate clergy who live very fulfilling and joyful lives…don’t you?

Because something went wrong somewhere, one inclination is not ordered correctly - the inclination as to the gender of the person they want to live out the imperatives God has written on all our hearts. They have all of these other correctly-ordered desires, but they can not act on them. Because of the fall, they have been dealt a really bad hand.

Oh please…in the scheme of things, that one’s sexual urges are disordered seems like a pretty minimal challenge, a rather light cross to bear. Look around your community and if it’s anything like mine, there are people who are suffering from addictions, homelessness, hunger, physical abuse, and illness. One of my co-workers was just diagnosed with pancreatic cancer. He has about four months to live. THAT is a bad hand. Not being able to engage in sodomy with the blessing of the Church seems like a minimal burden. Sex is NOT the most important element of human life, despite homosexualists claims to the contrary.

I don’t believe gay people are actively rejecting their DNA and biologically-designed gender. Few people seek out this burden to take on. It finds them. The reason that gay people and transgendered people have a higher suicide rate is not only because of acceptance by society, but also because they just want to be straight. They are so conflicted by the state they find themselves in.

A canard. Do you think the state, the media, the culture is so oppressive to gays that this is causing the myriad of health problems, psychological issues, addictions and suicides? Are you kidding? The President and First Lady call gay athletes who “come out.” We have numerous popular TV shows featuring gays in a very positive light, schools are forced to include curricula extolling the virtues of non-traditional lifestyles. If anything wrapping oneself up in a rainbow flag is a ticket to getting whatever you want.

Has it occurred to you that the disordered desires also manisfest themselves in addictions, sexual perversion, promiscuity and mental illnesses? These things do not occur in a vacuum. If you abuse your body through any sort of disordered desire there will be consequences. I work in a medical clinic and every day I see the impact of overeating, smoking, and substance abuse. Use your fist for a hammer and it hurts. Use your sexual organs in the digestive system…head to tail as it were…and there will be unfortunate consequences.

So, the way the Church approaches gay people with this heavy burden is very important. To just call them disordered tell them they are self destructive doesn’t really help, doesn’t covert anyone.

That’s was my point in posting this article. It’s another battle in the culture wars, but it’s also another opportunity to discuss how to deal with gay people in a charitable, compassionate way and still hold true to Catholic teaching

I do not call them disordeed. This is the definition of the Church and it’s rational and logical as well as BIOLOGICAL. We are created from the moment of conception to live our lives as a member of one sex or the other. Whatever “goes wrong” or inspires any sort of disordered desire is part of the human condition. We all have our cross PaulinVA. You seem to believe the cross of same sex attraction is far more significant than most other burdens. I suspect those dealing with other problems beg to differ. We seem to scream louder when our own ox is being gored but when we look around, the ox looks pretty good in comparison to what other people face every day.

Lisa

 

[Corki]

So, the way the Church approaches gay people with this heavy burden is very important. To just call them disordered tell them they are self destructive doesn’t really help, doesn’t covert anyone.

That’s not the way the Church approaches homosexual people. It doesn’t “just” call them disordered. It recognizes the disorder as the starting point.

You don’t start a dialogue with a blind person by giving him a book to read. You recognize the disorder (blindness), identifies the consequences (can’t see the printing in the book) and then chart a course to move forward.

The reason this gets heated is that a blind person will not usually get mad and insist on getting the information off the printed page. He recognizes the disorder. He may not be happy about it and may even hate the cross he has been given but he knows he can’t see.

Many “gay” “rights” advocates don’t recognize the disorder. So, we (the Church and other parts of society) keep having to go back to that starting place. But if we didn’t, if we just went on as if it wasn’t a disorder, we would never go anywhere. We would have the equivalent of just waving at a blind person. It might look good but it doesn’t have any results.

 

[PaulinVA]

We all desire to love and be loved. But to claim because gays cannot “marry” or should not be breeding children for their own self satisfaction they are relegated to a life of misery and loneliness is quite absurd. You basically demean every Priest or Religious or single person as having a life not worth living because they are not married or do not have children. I think that’s ridiculous. I know single people, widows/widowers, celibate clergy who live very fulfilling and joyful lives…don’t you?

Lisa, I am not demeaning anyone. Priests and religious and single people take up their lives voluntarily. Yes, they can have very fulfilling lives. If I had written about priests, religious, or single, people, I could understand your comment. But, I did not. You seem to either be unable or unwilling to respond to what I actual write.

Yes, we all have crosses to bear. My oldest son was born with a severe birth defect and lived for three years in a vegetative state before he died. People contract cancers and other diseases. People are maimed and injured in traffic accidents. They have to pick up their lives and move forward.

Gay people are in a similar situation. A difference is that they have a choice of sorts. They can take up their cross and walk with us, or they can lay down their cross and walk with the gay activists. The point I’m making, and you are reinforcing, is that the Church at times is a very unwelcoming place for gay people. What do we do to make them want to pick up their cross and walk with us? Not dilute our teaching, but how do we come up with a vibrant counter to the gay life?

 

[LisaA]

Lisa, I am not demeaning anyone. Priests and religious and single people take up their lives voluntarily. Yes, they can have very fulfilling lives. If I had written about priests, religious, or single, people, I could understand your comment. But, I did not. You seem to either be unable or unwilling to respond to what I actual write.

Yes, we all have crosses to bear. My oldest son was born with a severe birth defect and lived for three years in a vegetative state before he died. People contract cancers and other diseases. People are maimed and injured in traffic accidents. They have to pick up their lives and move forward.

Gay people are in a similar situation. A difference is that they have a choice of sorts. They can take up their cross and walk with us, or they can lay down their cross and walk with the gay activists. The point I’m making, and you are reinforcing, is that the Church at times is a very unwelcoming place for gay people. What do we do to make them want to pick up their cross and walk with us? Not dilute our teaching, but how do we come up with a vibrant counter to the gay life?

No I read what you write, it just doesn’t seem to be consistent. The Church is not “welcoming” because it doesn’t accept homosexuals engaging in homosexual activity (publicly since one would not know about another’s sex life unless told by the person would they?) If that’s your standard I assure you the Church is no more “welcoming” to other public sinners. Do you think your Priest would welcome an unrepentant adulterous couple and say “Oh go ahead, if it makes you happy…”? For some reason people seem to elevate homosexuality above all other sexual sins. Honestly Paul, it’s just another sexual sin…there are plenty to choose from and none of them are life affirming or recognize human dignity.

Further I ASSURE you that many single people and certainly the vast majority of widows/widowers did NOT choose their state in life. One of the most beautiful elements of our faith is its understanding and honoring of our vocations, whether chosen or not. A single woman who wants nothing more than to have a husband and children is not relegated to a miserable life of isolation any more than is a widow or widower. That being said, the single woman or widow/widower is in effect in the same situation as the gay person with respect to a sex life. Why do you assume it’s any greater sacrifice for the gay or Lesbian to abstain from non-marital sexual relations than it is for singles or divorced/widowed? You seem to think there is something so special, so essential about having SSA that they cannot possibly be expected to remain chaste.

No one is saying that people with SSA cannot have friendships or relationships or must live alone and isolated. As to their sexual expression, it’s not my business or concern. It’s between them and God and if they’ve rejected God’s teaching regarding sexual expression, then they are the ones who bear the consequences. You seem to conflate the idea that if gays can’t get the Church to capitulate on her teaching or society doesn’t accept gay “marriage” as equivalent to traditional marriage then the Church and society is banishing these folks to a miserable lonely life. No it is not.

Of course a militant gay will “walk with the gay activists” because they are saying go ahead, indulge your passions and lust. You deserve “happiness.” Just as those who wish to co-habitate or commit adultery or engage in other sexual sins leave the Church rather than accept the teaching. We are going to have a difficult time competing with hedonism and pleasure seeking which seems to be ever increasing in our society.

The issue at hand isn’t a gay person being persecuted or harassed or demeaned but being treated like every other sinner who enters the Sacrament of Reconciliation and expects absolution. God is very forgiving but cannot forgive someone who is not sorry. I don’t see how you reconcile your seeming demand that the Church capitulate to pop culture and still maintain its standards and consistently apply its teaching.

 

[Orogeny]

That’s not the way the Church approaches homosexual people. It doesn’t “just” call them disordered. It recognizes the disorder as the starting point.

You don’t start a dialogue with a blind person by giving him a book to read. You recognize the disorder (blindness), identifies the consequences (can’t see the printing in the book) and then chart a course to move forward.

The reason this gets heated is that a blind person will not usually get mad and insist on getting the information off the printed page. He recognizes the disorder. He may not be happy about it and may even hate the cross he has been given but he knows he can’t see.

Many “gay” “rights” advocates don’t recognize the disorder. So, we (the Church and other parts of society) keep having to go back to that starting place. But if we didn’t, if we just went on as if it wasn’t a disorder, we would never go anywhere. We would have the equivalent of just waving at a blind person. It might look good but it doesn’t have any results.

Very well said, Corki!

Peace

Tim

 

[punisherthunder]

1. The more homosexuals are accepted, then the more problems our society will have.
2. It sounds like the homosexual just wanted the Last Rites without feeling repentant. Is this not the Unforgivable Sin?
3. Vote out your politicians that continue to support homosexual rights. That sort of nonsense leads to things like this. Think I’m crazy? Read the Book of Revelations.
4. Things like this are an invasion of the Church. Liberal media will carry and continue to destroy whatever the Church has.

 

[DAML72]

1. The more homosexuals are accepted, then the more problems our society will have.
2. It sounds like the homosexual just wanted the Last Rites without feeling repentant. Is this not the Unforgivable Sin?
3. Vote out your politicians that continue to support homosexual rights. That sort of nonsense leads to things like this. Think I’m crazy? Read the Book of Revelations.
4. Things like this are an invasion of the Church. Liberal media will carry and continue to destroy whatever the Church has.

There is no unforgivable sin.

 

[DAML72]

No I read what you write, it just doesn’t seem to be consistent. The Church is not “welcoming” because it doesn’t accept homosexuals engaging in homosexual activity (publicly since one would not know about another’s sex life unless told by the person would they?) If that’s your standard I assure you the Church is no more “welcoming” to other public sinners. Do you think your Priest would welcome an unrepentant adulterous couple and say “Oh go ahead, if it makes you happy…”? For some reason people seem to elevate homosexuality above all other sexual sins. Honestly Paul, it’s just another sexual sin…there are plenty to choose from and none of them are life affirming or recognize human dignity.

Further I ASSURE you that many single people and certainly the vast majority of widows/widowers did NOT choose their state in life. One of the most beautiful elements of our faith is its understanding and honoring of our vocations, whether chosen or not. A single woman who wants nothing more than to have a husband and children is not relegated to a miserable life of isolation any more than is a widow or widower. That being said, the single woman or widow/widower is in effect in the same situation as the gay person with respect to a sex life. Why do you assume it’s any greater sacrifice for the gay or Lesbian to abstain from non-marital sexual relations than it is for singles or divorced/widowed? You seem to think there is something so special, so essential about having SSA that they cannot possibly be expected to remain chaste.

No one is saying that people with SSA cannot have friendships or relationships or must live alone and isolated. As to their sexual expression, it’s not my business or concern. It’s between them and God and if they’ve rejected God’s teaching regarding sexual expression, then they are the ones who bear the consequences. You seem to conflate the idea that if gays can’t get the Church to capitulate on her teaching or society doesn’t accept gay “marriage” as equivalent to traditional marriage then the Church and society is banishing these folks to a miserable lonely life. No it is not.

Of course a militant gay will “walk with the gay activists” because they are saying go ahead, indulge your passions and lust. You deserve “happiness.” Just as those who wish to co-habitate or commit adultery or engage in other sexual sins leave the Church rather than accept the teaching. We are going to have a difficult time competing with hedonism and pleasure seeking which seems to be ever increasing in our society.

The issue at hand isn’t a gay person being persecuted or harassed or demeaned but being treated like every other sinner who enters the Sacrament of Reconciliation and expects absolution. God is very forgiving but cannot forgive someone who is not sorry. I don’t see how you reconcile your seeming demand that the Church capitulate to pop culture and still maintain its standards and consistently apply its teaching.

AMEN!

If I might add just one thing - the idea that we are fulfilled only through sexual expression does not only reject God, but it has created a society full of people who are alone, not by choice, but because committed relationships become more and more rare as people seek gratification through sexual relationships that end once there is nothing left to take from them.

 

[zab]

1. The more homosexuals are accepted, then the more problems our society will have.
2. It sounds like the homosexual just wanted the Last Rites without feeling repentant. Is this not the Unforgivable Sin?
3. Vote out your politicians that continue to support homosexual rights. That sort of nonsense leads to things like this. Think I’m crazy? Read the Book of Revelations.
4. Things like this are an invasion of the Church. Liberal media will carry and continue to destroy whatever the Church has.

Answer to Question #2. Yes, it is not

There is no unforgivable sin.

There is one unforgivable sin and that is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.
From the Catechism of the Catholic Church
[1864](javascriptpenWindow(‘cr/1864.htm’) "Therefore I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven."136 There are no limits to the mercy of God, but anyone who deliberately refuses to accept his mercy by repenting, rejects the forgiveness of his sins and the salvation offered by the Holy Spirit.137 Such hardness of heart can lead to final impenitence and eternal loss.

 

[LisaA]

AMEN!

If I might add just one thing - the idea that we are fulfilled only through sexual expression does not only reject God, but it has created a society full of people who are alone, not by choice, but because committed relationships become more and more rare as people seek gratification through sexual relationships that end once there is nothing left to take from them.

Again another great beauty of our Catholic faith is the understanding that sexual expression within marriage is a self giving act where nothing is to be withheld in the marital embrace. Unfortunately sexual activity in our society today has become focused on “taking” rather than giving. In this people are used for sexual gratification and as you said, cast aside when the thrill is gone. Homosexual sex cannot be a complete self giving as it does not have the complimentary nature of men and women. In effect it becomes self gratification using another’s body. Particularly within the gay male cohort, monogamy is rare even those in committed partnerships of some sort.

One of my first gay friends said something that stuck with me all these years later. When he and his partner were young everything was wonderful, life was one big party with lots of “sex, drugs, rock n roll” every night. Both men were very successful professionals, had money to burn and indulged their every whim. Fast forward John’s partner died of AIDS, the business bankrupted with medical bills, John too old and frail to continue working and all those “friends” who loved to party on John and Ted’s nickel found another Sugar Daddy. As John said “No one wants an old ____ of ___.” As I watched my other gay friends and co workers get older, in a culture where sexual activity was paramount, where a young and lithe body was a ticket to fun, dismissed them as they got older, less attractive, less tight and toned.

In our faith people are treasured as children of God no matter what their state in life. This is the love that lasts, that looks inside not outside. I look at those militant young gays marching for their “rights” and I know where they will end up…just like my friend John.

Lisa

 

[Cider]

There is no unforgivable sin.

If you aren’t repentant then you can not receive absolution. That is what he meant.

 

[gracepoole]

1. The more homosexuals are accepted, then the more problems our society will have.

Catholics are actually supposed to accept homosexuals. It’s homosexual acts you’re supposed to have problems with. Funny how often that distinction gets lost.

 

[FreciaMarie]

That’s not the way the Church approaches homosexual people. It doesn’t “just” call them disordered. It recognizes the disorder as the starting point.

You don’t start a dialogue with a blind person by giving him a book to read. You recognize the disorder (blindness), identifies the consequences (can’t see the printing in the book) and then chart a course to move forward.

The reason this gets heated is that a blind person will not usually get mad and insist on getting the information off the printed page. He recognizes the disorder. He may not be happy about it and may even hate the cross he has been given but he knows he can’t see.

Many “gay” “rights” advocates don’t recognize the disorder. So, we (the Church and other parts of society) keep having to go back to that starting place. But if we didn’t, if we just went on as if it wasn’t a disorder, we would never go anywhere. We would have the equivalent of just waving at a blind person. It might look good but it doesn’t have any results.

Wonderful analogy!

 

[Country_Gal]

I think, if someone has a big problem with something about the Catholic Church, there are plenty of good churches out there to choose from. I’m considering the Lutheran Church, until some things change at my local Catholic one. I don’t have an issue with the whole homosexual stance, but if I did, I would seek out a church that I agreed with. There are plenty of gay friendly churches. The Episcopal Church, for example, has a rich heritage, beautiful liturgy, and is head over heels gay friendly.

But, instead this patient has to make a huge stink that the Catholic Church doesn’t bow to his wishes.