Is it time we welcome the gay community to ours?

[Prodigal_Son]

Are you being serious? You are a university teacher and you are struggling with where to find young people to evangelize. I’m sure you probably want to keep your job so you may be limited in class but I do want to point out that people used to lose more than their jobs to spread the gospel. But you do not have to be a martyr, You could get involved with local Catholic college groups. But really what I have found working with the youth is that later in life they do not know why the Church teaches what it teaches or even what the Church teaches. And this is a simple thing that you can do. Go to your parish or a local parish and volunteer in the youth program. I can guarantee that if you are a small group leader and ask the question “what do you not understand about Catholic Teaching?” That you will get homosexual themed questions which you could use to clarify and state correct Church teaching to not only strait kids but gay ones and ones that might “come out in their 20s” And at the very least you can educate future Catholics on how to correctly state Church teaching when a relative or friend is gay later in their lives. Every single time I have asked the question in a group of more than 5 of “What do you want to understand about Catholic Teaching” Every single time. Every time. Homosexuals or homosexual marraige comes up. Kids are talking about this. And ESPECIALLY university kids are talking about this. It is one of the hottest issues of our day and it really should be like shooting fish in a barrell.

I’ve thought about this before, and I would like to do it. However, it’s a bit of a huge deal to be taking a leadership role in a religious group on campus when I am teaching classes at a public university. I’m not even sure it’s legal. And I’m just a teacher’s assistant, technically, even though I’m teaching my own classes. My department could sanction me in a number of ways, if they found out – not least of them simply making snide comments.

I think I’m ready to deal with ridicule, but I’m not ready to put the future welfare of my family on the line for this. Not yet. I teach large lecture classes (150-200 students) and somebody would be bound to be part of the Newman center. So I’m not sure how I could keep it quiet.

 

[Tarpeian]

I’m a definite believer yes they should. Lets be honest the popularity of the church is declining at an alarming rate. And we need to get people excited about coming again and not chastise any walk of life we deem unfit.

Ps. I’m straight and catholic

So what is your view?

No The Church is clear on this sinful behavior or any other sinful behavior, that one openly, and proudly participates in and refuses to repent. Matthew 18:17 "And if he will not hear them: tell the church. And if he will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the heathen and publican.

We are not Roman Catholic’s because we want to win a popularity contest or need to add numbers to the flock The only reason to be in Holy Mother Church is because of the Truth. Period. And the Church will continue to get smaller. She will get stronger because the wheat will be separated from the chaff.

Pax,
Tarpeian

 

[Prodigal_Son]

We are not Roman Catholic’s because we want to win a popularity contest or need to add numbers to the flock

“Go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.”

Did you ever notice that funny quotation in the Bible?

Look, we aren’t supposed to distort the gospel for the sake of popularity. But we are supposed to be the “aroma of Christ” to those who are falling away. We are specifically told to make the gospel attractive.

 

[ishii]

“Go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.”

Did you ever notice that funny quotation in the Bible?

Look, we aren’t supposed to distort the gospel for the sake of popularity. But we are supposed to be the “aroma of Christ” to those who are falling away. We are specifically told to make the gospel attractive.

I can’t believe what I’m hearing. Making the gospel attractive (whatever that means), does not mean that we should abandon Catholic teachings for the sake of being popular with the modern crowd.

Ishii

 

[Prodigal_Son]

I can’t believe what I’m hearing. Making the gospel attractive (whatever that means), does not mean that we should abandon Catholic teachings for the sake of being popular with the modern crowd.

Ishii

You “can’t believe what you’re hearing” because you’re hearing whatever you want to hear. Read the words I wrote.

 

[JB_Dugan]

You “can’t believe what you’re hearing” because you’re hearing whatever you want to hear. Read the words I wrote.

I have to say that I was also a bit shocked by your statement about “make the gospel attractive.”

I cannot seem to put my finger on any directive to catechists about being “specifically told to make the gospel attractive.”

Anyone who teaches or evangelizes the Catholic faith is REQUIRED to teach Church Doctrine…nothing more and nothing less. If you are “making the gospel attractive” by changing the Church’s interpretation that is a grave sin and could be heresy.

Allow me to suggest that in your evangelization to gays you make sure they understand that the Church says…

"The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. 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.

I think that is very accepting and very pastoral. If we, as Catholics, DO NOT accept them
with respect, compassion, and sensitivity and/or discriminate against them…then WE are violating Church teachings.

But, as a Catholic teacher, catechist, or evangelist, we are REQUIRED to not sugarcoat the Church’s teachings. Therefore it should also be made abundantly clear that the Church
says this about homosexuality:

“Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that **“homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.” They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.” **

And lastly, if you are dealing with a couple in a same sex relationship who expect to be married in the Church or expect the Church to recognize their civil “marriage” as valid…

The Pontifical Council for the Family, Family, Marriage and De Facto Unions, explains it this way: “We can also see how incongruous is the demand to grant ‘marital’ status to unions between persons of the same sex. It is opposed, first of all, by the objective impossibility of making the partnership fruitful through the transmission of life according to the plan inscribed by God … Marriage cannot be reduced to a condition similar to that of a homosexual relationship: this is contrary to common sense.”

“…the transmission of life…” = CHILDREN. For a marriage to be valid it must be consummated.

Please make sure people understand these teachings and avoid disappointment and misunderstandings of the Catholic Church.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

I have to say that I was also a bit shocked by your statement about “make the gospel attractive.”

You shouldn’t be. The Scripture clearly teaches two things: (1) That we should not distort the gospel, by lying about the teaching of the Church, and (2) That we should do everything in our power to make the gospel beautiful.

The good news is that – if we do not distort the gospel – it will automatically be beautiful. The gospel is not fundamentally a teaching about sin. It is a teaching about the love of Christ that conquers sin. We do not obtain God’s love by freeing ourselves from sin. We FIRST receive God’s love, and then we have the power to cease sinning.

As for making the Gospel attractive, see Titus 2:

Teach slaves to be subject to their masters in everything, to try to please them, not to talk back to them, and not to steal from them, but to show that they can be fully trusted, so that in every way they will make the teaching about God our Savior attractive

Or 1 Cor 9:

Though I am free and belong to no one, I have made myself a slave to everyone, to win as many as possible.

Or Romans 10:

14How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them? 15And how can anyone preach unless they are sent? As it is written: “How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news!”

Returning to your comments, though…

I cannot seem to put my finger on any directive to catechists about being “specifically told to make the gospel attractive.”

Read the Church Fathers. Read Augustine. Read Saint Francis. There is an almost unbroken tradition of translating the gospel into a language that people can connect with, a language that people feel loved by. If modern catechists don’t get that, I suppose it explains why the Church in America is in such bad shape.

Anyone who teaches or evangelizes the Catholic faith is REQUIRED to teach Church Doctrine…nothing more and nothing less. If you are “making the gospel attractive” by changing the Church’s interpretation that is a grave sin and could be heresy.

When did I ever suggest I would teach something that isn’t doctrine? You can make something appealing without changing its nature.

Allow me to suggest that in your evangelization to gays you make sure they understand that the Church says…

Well, I wasn’t planning on telling them the Church said gay sex was OK.

I think that is very accepting and very pastoral. If we, as Catholics, DO NOT accept them
with respect, compassion, and sensitivity and/or discriminate against them…then WE are violating Church teachings.

Agreed.

 

[esieffe]

At which point they would no longer be practicing homosexuals. I would still say that even a non sexual romantic relationship is disordered if not exactly sinful.

If that was a part of Catholic doctrine, then the Holy Father would not have uttered a word about Gay people in evangelistic terms. Neither would Pope Paul VI who closed Vatican II but they have. It is pretty clear where the line is, chastity.

 

[esieffe]

You shouldn’t be. The Scripture clearly teaches two things: (1) That we should not distort the gospel, by lying about the teaching of the Church, and (2) That we should do everything in our power to make the gospel beautiful.

The good news is that – if we do not distort the gospel – it will automatically be beautiful. The gospel is not fundamentally a teaching about sin. It is a teaching about the love of Christ that conquers sin. We do not obtain God’s love by freeing ourselves from sin. We FIRST receive God’s love, and then we have the power to cease sinning.

As for making the Gospel attractive, see Titus 2:

Or 1 Cor 9:

Or Romans 10:

Returning to your comments, though…

Read the Church Fathers. Read Augustine. Read Saint Francis. There is an almost unbroken tradition of translating the gospel into a language that people can connect with, a language that people feel loved by. If modern catechists don’t get that, I suppose it explains why the Church in America is in such bad shape.

When did I ever suggest I would teach something that isn’t doctrine? You can make something appealing without changing its nature.

.

You get an “A+” for that one Prodigal Son!

 

[esieffe]

She will get stronger because the wheat will be separated from the chaff.

Pax,
Tarpeian

And that is happening thanks to the Holy Father.

 

[James82]

Does anyone else feel a sense of ‘dread’ as more of this comes down the pipe at us? Surely others can see the salami slice approach that is going on here regarding the lgbtuxae or whatever they call themselves?

I find it so depressing I don’t even want to engage in the apologetic’s of it.

The only thing that gives me solace under the weight of this is Matthew 16:18.

It is such a tragedy what is happening to the West.

 

[Tarpeian]

“Go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.”

Did you ever notice that funny quotation in the Bible?

Look, we aren’t supposed to distort the gospel for the sake of popularity. But we are supposed to be the “aroma of Christ” to those who are falling away. We are specifically told to make the gospel attractive.

Yes as a matter of fact I have noticed that verse. So someone who openly and proudly practices sodomy is a disciple? Enlighten me please.

Pax

 

[Gabriel7Kane]

NO. it will never be okay to be homosexual. it is a mortal sin for a reason.
if being a rapest was popular would people in the church say “we should invite the rapests to the church”… i don’t think so. but hey just my opinion

 

[ishii]

NO. it will never be okay to be homosexual. it is a mortal sin for a reason.
if being a rapest was popular would people in the church say “we should invite the rapests to the church”… i don’t think so. but hey just my opinion

No, its not a mortal sin to be a homosexual. It might be a mortal sin to be a practicing homosexual - if knowledge and consent are present.

Ishii

 

[Gabriel7Kane]

yes your right. thank you.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

Yes as a matter of fact I have noticed that verse. So someone who openly and proudly practices sodomy is a disciple? Enlighten me please.

You implied that Catholics didn’t care about adding numbers to the flock. That is, frankly, heretical.

The Great Commission tells us to make disciples of all men. It doesn’t tell us that all men are already disciplines. So, no, a person who is living in sin is not already a discipline. But it is our duty to witness to them, to make them disciples (if we can).

And, no, telling someone they are sinning is not witnessing to them. The Gospel tells us how to witness. If we do not care about witnessing to others, we are not truly Catholic.

 

[esieffe]

NO. it will never be okay to be homosexual. it is a mortal sin for a reason.
if being a rapest was popular would people in the church say “we should invite the rapests to the church”… i don’t think so. but hey just my opinion

Not really a practical comparison, rapists are violent criminals. Being gay doesn’t violate secular law, and is not violent.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

NO. it will never be okay to be homosexual. it is a mortal sin for a reason.
if being a rapest was popular would people in the church say “we should invite the rapests to the church”… i don’t think so. but hey just my opinion

Imagine rape was legal. Then it would most definitely be true that we should invite rapists into the Church. Why? Because we want to protect people from rape. We also want to protect people from homosexual sins, and that’s the leading reason to be welcoming to homosexuals.

(As it is, we should invite rapists to the Church anyway. What do you suggest – we say that God loves you unless you’re a rapist?)

 

[ishii]

Imagine rape was legal. Then it would most definitely be true that we should invite rapists into the Church. Why? Because we want to protect people from rape. We also want to protect people from homosexual sins, and that’s the leading reason to be welcoming to homosexuals.

(As it is, we should invite rapists to the Church anyway. What do you suggest – we say that God loves you unless you’re a rapist?)

You might be right, but what about the unrepentant rapist? Or public sinner? We are all sinners and in need of mercy. Lucky for us catholics, we have the sacrament of penance. But don’t you think we should make a distinction between embracing the sin vs. embracing the sinner? The problem with most of the gay lobby is that they want to be welcomed into the Church and have their lifestyle embraced.

For the record, a homosexual who understands that the gay lifestyle is wrong and is trying to work that out, but occasionally falls, is much more admirable that the pharisaical type. I definitely identify with the former. But it probably is not good to be either.

Ishii

 

[Corki]

Imagine rape was legal. Then it would most definitely be true that we should invite rapists into the Church. Why? Because we want to protect people from rape. We also want to protect people from homosexual sins, and that’s the leading reason to be welcoming to homosexuals.

(As it is, we should invite rapists to the Church anyway. What do you suggest – we say that God loves you unless you’re a rapist?)

But we welcome a rapist in the Church in spite of his/her sins, not because of them. We wouldn’t have an active evangelization program to invite unrepentant rapists to Mass.