how do i deal with gay cousin/his boyfriend during Thanksgiving dinner?

[Bruised_Reed]

Criticizing their behavior.And no, very few heterosexuals identify themselves by their sexual behavior

We do it all the time, actually. Getting married, having babies, unmarried couples kissing and holding hands, all with a person of the opposite sex. It pretty much screams “I’m heterosexual!”

 

[EasterJoy]

Have you ever seen this happen? Has anyone attacked the sin that you were committing? Because when I have seen this done, it definitely seems like the person who is attacking the sin is also attacking the person who’s sinning. Usually yelling and frustration happen and it does no good. I don’t think there is a tactful way to attack anything at a dinner party that you are just a guest at.

Now, at this said dinner party someone asks your opinion, you can politely say that you don’t agree, but again, I don’t think there is a tactful way to attack anything at a dinner party that you are a guest at.

I think it is reasonable (and only fair) to treat this like any of the other serious moral faults likely to be sitting at the same table…yes, unless you are essentially driven into a corner, you say, “C’mon. This is a conversation for another time.” If you are driven into a corner, out of deference to the host you probably have to give your apologies and leave. (If you are the host and someone is rude enough to try to shove you into a conversational corner, you can ask them to leave–not for their opinion, but for their disruptive rudeness.)

But what about when it is time to confront these things? That a person gets defensive and feels unfairly singled out when their friends and family stage an intervention does not mean that this person is not in fact in need of serous moral correction. There is a time for this, and it is not a sign of a lack of charity when someone hears what you have to say and gets angry. Not that you have carte blanche to butt in every time you’re right, I am not saying that. I’m saying that “I am mad and think you are looking down on me” does not mean that “I am actually being persecuted instead of corrected.” We often do not like to hear what some select others have a duty to say to us.

Thanksgiving dinner is an awful time to “stage an intervention”. Don’t do it.

 

[Joseph73]

newadvent.org/cathen/04394a.htm

I think that this link will be valuable to you. You seem to see yourself as a vigilante out to denounce sin publicly at every opportunity. I think that you are acting more on your own ego than on the actual teachings of your church.

The two big ones that I want you to think about are the notion that fraternal correction should be done privately and only when there is a reasonable hope that the sinner will listen or care. The way that you are talking about behaving over Thanksgiving dinner is not charitable, it’s self-righteous.

I’m afraid you are incorrect in thinking that I denounce sin out of an attempt to reform anyone. I denounce sin because it is the right thing to do. Satan wants us to keep our mouths shut. I refuse.

I am not self-righteous but righteous in the name of God.

 

[EasterJoy]

I’m afraid you are incorrect in thinking that I denounce sin out of an attempt to reform anyone. I denounce sin because it is the right thing to do. Satan wants us to keep our mouths shut. I refuse.

I am not self-righteous but righteous in the name of God.

Satan is a big fan of strife, as well. We must not lose sight of that.

It is better to consider when correction might actually result in someone’s reform, because it is turning a sinner from his sin that is the right thing to do. The Lord did not die for principles. The Lord told his disciples not to throw pearls before swine, to shake the dust of towns that would not listen from their feet and keep going. The Lord did not send the 72 out to pick a fight or make a stand, but to spread the Good News to those who had ears to hear it.

The Lord died to save souls, and He thirsts for every one. That needs to be our thirst, too. That is the center of this ballgame.

 

[Joseph73]

Satan is a big fan of strife, as well. We must not lose sight of that.

It is better to consider when correction might actually result in someone’s reform, because it is turning a sinner from his sin that is the right thing to do. The Lord did not die for principles. The Lord told his disciples not to throw pearls before swine, to shake the dust of towns that would not listen from their feet and keep going. The Lord did not send the 72 out to pick a fight or make a stand, but to spread the Good News to those who had ears to hear it.

The Lord died to save souls, and He thirsts for every one. That needs to be our thirst, too. That is the center of this ballgame.

I guess you guys are really misunderstanding where I’m coming from. I’m not talking about making a fight or a scene, I’m talking about being consistent on the outside with what you believe on the inside due to a lack of fear. When I make blunt statements like that, from my experience, it ends conversations, not starts them. God=strength and fearlessness. We should all strive to be the same.

 

[Book_Worm]

I’m afraid that’s just not true. Heterosexuality activity is natural; homosexual activity is unnatural and contrary to natural law.

God did not will them to be disordered. Acting on their disorder in a sinful way is sin.

I am not smug about anything. I criticize sin.

That may be what you and I believe and what the Church teaches, but I doubt that’ll is what homosexuals believe. Most will tell you that their nature is to be attracted to people of the same sex. Being told they are “disordered” because they act on the impulses they feel God gave them (if they believe in God) won’t make any sense to them.

 

[Bruised_Reed]

I’m afraid you are incorrect in thinking that I denounce sin out of an attempt to reform anyone. I denounce sin because it is the right thing to do. Satan wants us to keep our mouths shut. I refuse.

I am not self-righteous but righteous in the name of God.

But it is self-righteous when it serves no one but you. Remember that the context is a holiday or family dinner. You are a guest and you do not have the right to ruin it for everyone else. You will not win souls for Christ that way and don’t be surprised if you become the reason your family dreads family get togethers. There is a right way of doing this and several examples have been given.

 

[blaskoman]

As you can see, I was not the person who introduced the term to the thread.

Homophobia is defined as an irrational fear of and aversion to homosexuals or homosexuality. An irrational aversion to any group of people, based on parts of their nature over which they have no control, is pretty much the anthesis of what Jesus taught.

Catholics do not have to accept homosexuality (those that engage in the sex acts) because it is contrary to Church teaching plain and simple. Nothing irrational about believing what the church teaches

 

[Joseph73]

That may be what you and I believe and what the Church teaches, but I doubt that’ll is what homosexuals believe. Most will tell you that their nature is to be attracted to people of the same sex. Being told they are “disordered” because they act on the impulses they feel God gave them (if they believe in God) won’t make any sense to them.

They may not believe it or make sense of it, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t worth saying.

 

[Joseph73]

But it is self-righteous when it serves no one but you. Remember that the context is a holiday or family dinner. You are a guest and you do not have the right to ruin it for everyone else. You will not win souls for Christ that way and don’t be surprised if you become the reason your family dreads family get togethers. There is a right way of doing this and several examples have been given.

Context is completely irrelevant. That is your fear of confrontation talking. It doesn’t serve me one iota to denounce sin. It serves God and that’s the only reason to do anything.

 

[Gary_Sheldrake]

Do I remain silent if they show some degree of affection (is, hand holding, kiss at the table)? After all kids will be present. What if they begin to discuss their relationship, plans of a gay wedding, etc? If such topics are brought up, someone will have to engage in conversation. Silence could be seen by them as a type of approval for their behavior…I agree that Thanksgiving is not the type of venue to cause a scene, since I know a heated argument could easily ensue. There can be a way to express disapproval on my part without causing a scene. Perhaps I can privately talk with my cousin b4 the gathering.

Why do you have to show your disapproval? What will happen to you if you just act like you do when you eat with anyone else? What is the desired or anticipated outcome of telling them what you think? Do you think they will break up and become heterosexual, and perhaps join the French Foreign Legion never to be seen again in polite society because of what you tell them?

Just curious where all this is coming from. Sounds like self-righteous indignation to me. Why not make a list of how you might be able to clean your own house instead. I’m sure there may be a thing or two God would like you to work on in your own life that are under your control, rather than worry about what is not. I would hate to run my ship up on a reef while I was shouting at another ship about how their deck chairs are arranged. Just my opinion, but in truth, I’m really nobody.

 

[Joseph73]

Why do you have to show your disapproval?

Because showing disapproval of sin is the right thing to do. Nothing self-righteous about that.

 

[Bruised_Reed]

Context is completely irrelevant. That is your fear of confrontation talking. It doesn’t serve me one iota to denounce sin. It serves God and that’s the only reason to do anything.

Context is relevant. You will not win souls by calling out sin publicly like that. As BlueEyedLady said:

The two big ones that I want you to think about are the notion that fraternal correction should be done privately and only when there is a reasonable hope that the sinner will listen or care. The way that you are talking about behaving over Thanksgiving dinner is not charitable, it’s self-righteous.

This question was directed at the OP earlier but I ask you: What is your intent and what do you expect the outcome to be, if one takes your approach?

 

[blaskoman]

It would not be my style to begin a dinner conversation to discuss immorality. My main concern entails that I doubt I could remain silent if my cousin announced to his happiness regarding his lifestyle or something to that effect. If he decides to open the discussion, I have a right to proclaim the truth. I agree that a big scene at Thanksgiving dinner should be avoided. Moreover the fact that I was my cousins sponsor for his confirmation requires me to never give up on him – to somehow get him back to the faith

 

[Joseph73]

Context is relevant.

Nope. 2+2=4 no matter what day of the week it is. Truth is always truth.

You will not win souls by calling out sin publicly like that.?

I don’t know if I’ve ever won any souls (hard to tell!) but how can you make a statement like that? Have you ever been direct and honest with someone and then experienced failure to convert them? Anyway, why did I just say "I’ won souls? Nobody wins souls but God. We are just instruments of God.

This question was directed at the OP earlier but I ask you: What is your intent and what do you expect the outcome to be, if one takes your approach

To answer your question, my intent is to combat sin. I don’t expect or care about the outcome.

Gotta go to bed now, guys. It’s been real! Talk to you more some other time.
-Joe

 

[Bruised_Reed]

Nope. 2+2=4 no matter what day of the week it is. Truth is always truth.

I don’t know if I’ve ever won any souls (hard to tell!) but how can you make a statement like that? Have you ever been direct and honest with someone and then experienced failure to convert them? Anyway, why did I just say "I’ won souls? Nobody wins souls but God. We are just instruments of God.

Yes, I do know that I have turned people off from God, church, Catholicism because my words or deeds and set a bad example to other Catholics. I thought proclaiming the Truth was my obligation no matter what. I don’t think I was ever rude but in my zeal I overstepped bounds.

Sorry if my phrase isn’t to your liking but I do want to win souls for God. For God. I would rather be a reflection of his mercy and compassion.

To answer your question, my intent is to combat sin. I don’t expect or care about the outcome.

Gotta go to bed now, guys. It’s been real! Talk to you more some other time.
-Joe

You don’t care about the outcome. That sounds very self-serving to me.

 

[Bruised_Reed]

It would not be my style to begin a dinner conversation to discuss immorality. My main concern entails that I doubt I could remain silent if my cousin announced to his happiness regarding his lifestyle or something to that effect. If he decides to open the discussion, I have a right to proclaim the truth. I agree that a big scene at Thanksgiving dinner should be avoided. Moreover the fact that I was my cousins sponsor for his confirmation requires me to never give up on him – to somehow get him back to the faith

Do you have a relationship with him beyond your sponsorship? Do you regularly talk, text, email? If so, you may have a “right” that someone without that friendship doesn’t have. Would you give him the time of day, otherwise? Something to think about.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Why are we so easily offended? Why should we be “offended”? Perhaps I don’t understand what it means to be offended as others use the word. But it seems to me rather than be offended we should be concerned with his salvation–not with our own sensibilities. We should be concerned with our own example, with our own lives and witness–with making others want the joy and peace that we have no matter what tribulations come our way. That is what will provide us with the opportunity to witness to Christ and the truth of his Church. Being polite and civil to someone at a family holiday gathering–doesn’t imply acceptance–as say attending their “wedding” or inviting them to spend the night at your house might.

I have experience with this–my sister knows how I feel. We have discussed it it the past. I can’t see how shunning her would help–with her it would actually just drive her further away–I don’t want that on my soul. I’m not worried that my kid’s see her and her friend at family gatherings–my younger children have no idea and my older children know what I believe and think and what the Church teaches and why–I don’t feel this in anyway puts them in danger. I think shunning my sister, acting like this isn’t a part of the world, like she shouldn’t be treated with respect would be more damaging. They know we don’t accept the lifestyle and why and that is the important thing. They will come across gay couples in their daily life–at college, at work, everywhere now–that is the society we now live in whether we like it or not. Our children need to be equipped to deal with this reality–they will have to interact with them to get along in the world–they need to be prepared. Teaching them to shun and avoid–is not going to help them and may actually end up driving them away from the Church–the very thing we seek to avoid. We interact with sinners everyday. I doubt that those suggesting not going to the dinner don’t inquire whether this or that unmarried couple are fornicating–at least I don’t see a lot threads worrying about how to approach the situation.

This isn’t about acceptance of this or that–it’s about how to behave in a Christian manner that might attract others and make them rethink their lifestyle and beliefs. That is what needs to be discerned and the best way to do that will be different for different people.

The peace of Christ,
Mark

That’s your position, and I expect it will remain so.

Mine is different. I believe we are to avoid the appearance of approving sinful behavior. When a person brings his/her own same sex “partner”, whom he/she identifies as such, into a social setting that is not mandatory on us, our participation implies acceptance of overt, flagrant and persistent sinfulness, as does our silence in the face of it.

When it comes to children, I believe we are to protect them from scandal by not exposing them to overt sinfulness and our apparent acquiescence in it. At some point in their lives, we or other moral teachers, will tell them about the disordered nature of homosexuality and the profound sinfulness of unrepentent homosexual activity. But accepting a homosexual “couple” in a family setting, particularly if one forces children to witness it and our acceptance of it (however feigned) is the wrong lesson entirely.

Cousin, in this case, knows exactly what he’s doing. He is inserting his very open perverse and sinful lifestyle into a family setting in order to force others to accept it or at least pretend they do by keeping their mouths shut about it; treating “boyfriend” and the relationship as “normal” in every way, and (perhaps) in front of impressionable children.
No doubt cousin believes in his relationship’s “rightness” and “normalcy”. The Church does not view it that way, and we, as Catholics, have a moral obligation to avoid the appearance of our acquiescence in that view, and particularly in front of children. Jesus Himself had a cautionary statement about scandalizing the “little ones”.

Would you accept someone’s invitation of a known Mafia hit man into your family circle, and in front of children when his “occupation” was made obvious? No you wouldn’t. There might be a difference of degree with cousin’s inserting his homosexuality into the family milieu, but not of kind.

As Catholics, we are presented with moral choices. We often fail in making those choices. When we do, we should be forthright in admitting it, in seeking forgiveness and resolving amendment. Tacitly accepting, not a person afflicted by homosexuality, which is a different thing, but overt homosexual activity into our own family is the wrong moral choice.

 

[MarkInOregon]

I’m afraid you are incorrect in thinking that I denounce sin out of an attempt to reform anyone. I denounce sin because it is the right thing to do. Satan wants us to keep our mouths shut. I refuse.

I am not self-righteous but righteous in the name of God.

I think what Satan wants is for people to be alienated from the truth, from Christ and his Church–that’s how Satan wins souls. If your denuciation of a sin in a certain situation drives someone further from Christ and his Church I’m guessing that Satan is o.k. with you opening your mouth, and that the kingdom of God has not been furthered.

You keep accusing people of being afraid but it is not about fear–it is about what will draw people to Christ and his Church. Do you think this cousin doesn’t know that many of his relatives think this relationship is sinful? Telling him it is a sin–doesn’t give him any new information, doesn’t help him to see why the activity is a sin, and it certainly doesn’t help draw him to Christ and his Church and it probably drives him further away. You have to get the cousin to fall in love with Christ and until that happens he will have no desire to live as we are called to live.

The peace of Christ,
Mark

 

[Gary_Sheldrake]

Because showing disapproval of sin is the right thing to do. Nothing self-righteous about that.

Good evening Joseph: I see. Help me understand, because I can be a bit annoying with my inquisitiveness sometimes, but I think that’s usually because I’m trying to understand people’s reasoning better. The idea of calling these two people out at Thanksgiving dinner is one of the more intriguing ideas I have heard in a long time, so forgive my curiosity. That said, does this mean that you have run out of sins of your own to disapprove of, or do we need to take some time off from minding the log in our own eye to tell others about the speck in theirs?

If so, do you think that maybe you and I should list some of our sins here on the thread so that we can express our disapproval or disappointment with one another, or are our sins different? If they are, how are they different? Or do you think that Old Satan is distracting people from their own peril with the spectacle of someone else’s affairs?

Very curious about all of this. Thanks for your patience, and I very much look forward to discussing this politely and in detail.