Is it time we welcome the gay community to ours?

[Brendan_64]

And of course the church does accept homosexuals with compassion, respect, and sensitivit.And BTW The catechism is neither libereal or conservative.It of the Truth

Yes, the Church does teach that we should accept homosexuals with compassion, respect and sensitivity, but do we really? We all make up the Church. How we, as individuals, act, is how the Church acts. There has already been suggestions on here that they should be shunned. There really does seem to be a widespread notion in many congregations of, “They’re disgusting, we really don’t want their sort in our church.”

 

[estesbob]

Yes, the Church does teach that we should accept homosexuals with compassion, respect and sensitivity, but do we really? We all make up the Church. How we, as individuals, act, is how the Church acts. There has already been suggestions on here that they should be shunned. There really does seem to be a widespread notion in many congregations of, “They’re disgusting, we really don’t want their sort in our church.”

I’ve never run across a congregation like that.And how would anyone know someone was a homosexual unless they choose to make it one

 

[triumphguy]

Yes to Gay people, No to the Gay community.

We have many men in the pews who “consume”, but I wouldn’t advocating welcoming the porn community.

We have many people in the pews who gamble, but I wouldn’t advocate welcoming the gambling community.

We come to church to BE community - to be one with all the diverse sinners and saints in our midst.

***ἐκκλησία ***ekklesia /ek, “out from and to” and /kaléō, “to call”

ecclesia means to be called out from

It means we don’t bring our baggage, our affiliations, our associations, our business with us to the Church community.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

No, there isn’t a difference. How is an unrepentent homosexual any different from an unrepentent fornicator, or a person who lies and cheats regularly during the course of his working life, only to turn up on Sunday for Mass? Not all homosexuals parade it around. Not all are unrepentant.

Homosexuals are just sinners, like the rest of us. Nothing more, nothing less. The Church exists for sinners, all are welcome.

You are typing past me. I don’t think you understood what I said.

An unrepentant sinner does not have a home in the Church. Homosexual, murderous, or anything. That is why we have rules, confession and forgiveness. IF they are outside of salvation then they are outside of the church. The difference is there are no threads asking how we can be more welcoming to masturbators.

 

[CrossBro]

You are typing past me. I don’t think you understood what I said.

An unrepentant sinner does not have a home in the Church. Homosexual, murderous, or anything. That is why we have rules, confession and forgiveness. IF they are outside of salvation then they are outside of the church. The difference is there are no threads asking how we can be more welcoming to masturbators.

That is what confession is for. They say they are sorry, continue their struggle and do they best they can.

What we are talking about here is people who are involved sexually with members of the same sex, have no intention of stopping, and demand acceptance.

Okay I don’t know about you, but I have never seen a single person in 45+ years as a Catholic wearing a mast-pride tee shirt.

 

[esieffe]

I did not say that, look at my previous post where I responded to someone that the Church makes a distinction between the homosexual orientation and a gay lifestyle.

A homosexual orientation in and of itself may not be sinful unless it is acted upon.

The gay lifestyle is one in which a person leads of lifestyle in which they do not intend to admit it is wrong or change. That is called perpetual sin and scandal.

Hope that answers your question.

And also note that my comments are speaking on what the Church teaches, not on what I am trying to claim.

The only thing that troubles me about your posts is that you keep referring to the “gay lifestyle” or the “gay community.” This implies, at least in my mind, some sort of club or organization with a defined code, of some sort. As far as I know, there is no gay “dogma.” They are as diverse as anyone else. I simply am suggesting that the “brush” that you are using to paint this group, may be a bit broad.

If I sound judgmental in any way towards you, I deeply apologize. Goodness knows that is certainly not my intent. I am simply trying to interject a sense of fairness to the debate.

 

[shelby_sun]

You are typing past me. I don’t think you understood what I said.

An unrepentant sinner does not have a home in the Church. Homosexual, murderous, or anything. That is why we have rules, confession and forgiveness. IF they are outside of salvation then they are outside of the church. The difference is there are no threads asking how we can be more welcoming to masturbators.

I am sorry if this seems crude but the reason people don’t focus on boys or men who masturbate is because if they were all truly honest probably 90% do it and another 8% would lie about doing it. The other 2% have emotionally issue because they were brought up that it is a sin. If you are right that sinner who do not repent have no place in the church.

There is another thread which is discussing the Pope’s view on a ideological epidemic in the church which is causing a distance between people and God. You might look into that.

 

[esieffe]

Prayer for the group:

Dear Lord,

Thank you for this and other forums which better help us understand your will and our role in following your example.

Thank you for your sacrifice, and please forgive me for any sins I commit while trying to understand your will and laws.

Amen.

 

[saveusfromhell]

I am sorry if this seems crude but the reason people don’t focus on boys or men who masturbate is because if they were all truly honest probably 90% do it and another 8% would lie about doing it. **The other 2% have emotionally issue because **they were brought up that it is a sin. If you are right that sinner who do ****not repent have no place in the church.There is another thread which is discussing the Pope’s view on a ideological epidemic in the church which is causing a distance between people and God. You might look into that.

Shelby the church/Vatican have very recently decided not to bury a man who appeared he was unrepentant of his sins, are you saying masturbation is not a sin, there may be a small typing error in your post that makes it hard to identify what your saying. maybe you could clarify please. as it appears to say those that believe masturbating is a sin have mental issues

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

I am sorry if this seems crude but the reason people don’t focus on boys or men who masturbate is because if they were all truly honest probably 90% do it and another 8% would lie about doing it. The other 2% have emotionally issue because they were brought up that it is a sin. If you are right that sinner who do not repent have no place in the church.

There is another thread which is discussing the Pope’s view on a ideological epidemic in the church which is causing a distance between people and God. You might look into that.

Your stats are misleading.

And they buy into a false premise.

Can you cite how many mastubators are in the pews on Sunday?

As a guy who has battled this I can assure you that it is not as hard to stop as some would have you believe. This idea that men are animals and have to release or die is perpetuated by a society that buys into this sexuality and this morality. I choose to be more charitable than you and assume that all the men I see receiving the sacrament are chaste or repentant.
Perhaps a more charitable view by yourself would be appropriate. Rather than assuming those who are receiving our Lord are doing so with dirty hands and hearts.

The difference is here, and since you painted all men with a broad judgemental brush I guess you will have no objection over me doing the same with the homosexual community, that homosexuality is a public sin. But not because of us. Not because Catholics just need to be more understanding open or welcoming, but rather because homosexuals define themselves by their sin. Insisting it is equivalent to race or birth. The define themselves by their sin. Not many others do that. No one says I was born to be an adulterer or porn participator. No one says that they do not feel welcome in the church because of our judgemental stand on cheating on your wife…

But yet we buy into this idea that a whole group of people is defined by their sin, by the very thing that will damn them.

But ok. Fine. how about adulterers then.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

I’ve never run across a congregation like that.And how would anyone know someone was a homosexual unless they choose to make it one

Yes. That is the real issue here. It isn’t that the Church is not welcoming to homosexuals it is that we should not know.

Sorry if this is graphic.

When I sit in the pew on Sunday. I do not question if the mom in the family of 8 kids in front of me is faithful to her husband because all the kids do not look alike. I don’t question if the priest who consecrates the host has a masturbation problem or the guy next to me is having “sex” with another guy.

Bottom line is I don’t know what parishes these people are going too but it is not the Church that is pushing the issue. It is the homosexuals that feel unwelcome that are pushing the issue.

Homosexuality and homosexual acts are not new, it is not worse or better than any other mortal sin in that it’s unrepentant doers go to hell. It is not a huge mystery or race, or incurable disease. It is sin. And like all sin it can be dealt with in the Church. The question the OP should have is: What can we do to welcome more sinners into the Church to help them battle their sin? But the real question common on these threads is “Why doesn’t the Church just say gays can do whatever they want and not make them feel bad?”

 

[shelby_sun]

Your stats are misleading.

And they buy into a false premise.

Can you cite how many mastubators are in the pews on Sunday?

As a guy who has battled this I can assure you that it is not as hard to stop as some would have you believe. This idea that men are animals and have to release or die is perpetuated by a society that buys into this sexuality and this morality. I choose to be more charitable than you and assume that all the men I see receiving the sacrament are chaste or repentant.
Perhaps a more charitable view by yourself would be appropriate. Rather than assuming those who are receiving our Lord are doing so with dirty hands and hearts.

The difference is here, and since you painted all men with a broad judgemental brush I guess you will have no objection over me doing the same with the homosexual community, that homosexuality is a public sin. But not because of us. Not because Catholics just need to be more understanding open or welcoming, but rather because homosexuals define themselves by their sin. Insisting it is equivalent to race or birth. The define themselves by their sin. Not many others do that. No one says I was born to be an adulterer or porn participator. No one says that they do not feel welcome in the church because of our judgemental stand on cheating on your wife…

But yet we buy into this idea that a whole group of people is defined by their sin, by the very thing that will damn them.

But ok. Fine. how about adulterers then.

Maybe your stats are the ones that are misleading, but Oh no that couldn’t be possible right.

I brought up that point because you have not be so charitable to the homosexual topic. I guess you missed that didn’t you.

There is no doubt in my mind that many of those receiving our Lord are doing so with “dirty heart”. Get real! There are people who are divorced and remarried without annulments, there are those who are having sex out of marriage, their are adulterers taking our Lord every Sunday. You however want to focus on the homosexuals.

They are telling people who they are, something adulterer won’t do. That is why they stand out. Not many people will stand up and say they are having sex outside marriage even if they believe it is OK because people like you will tell them they are damned to hell. Your way only drives people further away from the church and God. Our way at least keeps people coming back to church where they can find God again. Your views and judgement do nothing to better the Church or to help people find God again. Nothing!

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

Maybe your stats are the ones that are misleading, but Oh no that couldn’t be possible right.

I brought up that point because you have not be so charitable to the homosexual topic. I guess you missed that didn’t you.

There is no doubt in my mind that many of those receiving our Lord are doing so with “dirty heart”. Get real! There are people who are divorced and remarried without annulments, there are those who are having sex out of marriage, their are adulterers taking our Lord every Sunday. You however want to focus on the homosexuals.

They are telling people who they are, something adulterer won’t do. That is why they stand out. Not many people will stand up and say they are having sex outside marriage even if they believe it is OK because people like you will tell them they are damned to hell. Your way only drives people further away from the church and God. Our way at least keeps people coming back to church where they can find God again. Your views and judgement do nothing to better the Church or to help people find God again. Nothing!

I had no stats. You did.

What is my view that is keeping people away from the Church? Can you articulate for me, or are you just uncomfortable with the Truth?

I am absolutely baffled by what you think I have said.

Your views and judgement do nothing to better the Church or to help people find God again. Nothing

What views and judgements are you talking about? I have no idea what you could be referring too. In fact I am the one NOT judging as you are about people’s state of sin while receiving the Eucharist. Man on man sex is a sin. Woman on woman sex is a sin. Adulteration is a sin, blasphemy is a sin, stealing is a sin etc? Is this what you are talking about? Is this what you think is judgemental? All I am stating is what Christ, and His Church states. You are the one making rash judgements about others. Not I.

 

[esieffe]

This is why, a mastubator, adulterer, etc. Must go to confession and repent and not sin again, or they are outside of grace and outside of communion and therefore outside of the Church.

And not sin again? Am I splitting hairs here? I think you mean do their very best not to repeat the sin. If they do, they can then confess their sins and receive forgiveness correct? I am talking about mortal sins in general, not just this topic.

There is a saying that if you hang out in a barber shop long enough, you will get a haircut. Even though this may be an oversimplification the thinking here is that if a sinner hangs around God long enough, he or she will begin to turn away from sin. Does that make sense?

 

[triumphguy]

There is a HUGE thing you are missing. Our Church is inclusive to all sinners. Yes. All repentant sinners and all sinners that mend their ways. This is why, a mastubator, adulterer, etc. Must go to confession and repent** and not sin again**, or they are outside of grace and outside of communion and therefore outside of the Church. What people do not understand about the homosexuality issue is that what we as Christians are being asked to do by the liberal types is to go against our faith. You see, I have no idea if the man sitting ahead of me is a masturbator, an adulterer, or a bank robber. I have no idea if he is gay, and just got out of some sort of orgie. I am to charitably assume that those around me, those in line for communion, are in a state of grace.

Oddly there are no threads asking why adulterers are not more welcome. Or why masturbators are not made to feel like they belong. Why do you think that is?

make a firm purpose of amendment

 

[Tantum_ergo]

I think maybe we’re talking past each other because we’re defining some words or concepts differently, and then we’re confused because people are saying, "Yes, I believe gay people should be treated with compassion’ (which is what most of us are saying) and then later say, “No, I don’t believe in gay marriage”.

The person who believes that what it means to treat gay people with compassion is to allow them to marry is shocked and stunned that another person who says he wants to treat them with compassion does not support gay marriage, because to the first person, ‘gay marriage’ is the litmus test for compassion, and so if you don’t support it, you don’t treat a gay person with compassion.

And the person who believes that treating a person with compassion means that you love a person enough to insist that they hear the truth, even if truth FEELSs harsh and hateful, is shocked and stunned that another person’s idea of compassion is to ‘ignore the truth’ and just focus on a kind of ‘love’ that solely relies on changeable, relative ‘feeling’. . .IOW, that they would rather actively do wrong and allow others to do wrong because stopping the wrong would ‘hurt feelings’ and that the litmus test of compassion is that one does not hurt feelings.

I think that almost everybody here, even the one who said ‘shun’ (and probably meant it only as a last resort, and only if the person were a danger and a scandal who might lead others astray, and who had been given hundreds and hundreds of chances already), wants to treat gays (and any other sinner) with compassion.

The problem is that due to a host of factors, we have a huge and absolutely oppositional view and concept of what compassion is.

And because we’re all using the word ‘compassion’, we obviously assume that our definition of compassion is the correct one (whichever it might be).

Blame the people who have in the last decades managed to hijack thousands of words and concepts in the English language. For those of us who read 1984, today’s world looks an awful lot (linguistically speaking) like that of Winston and ‘freedom means slavery’ etc.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

And not sin again? Am I splitting hairs here? I think you mean do their very best not to repeat the sin. If they do, they can then confess their sins and receive forgiveness correct? I am talking about mortal sins in general, not just this topic.

There is a saying that if you hang out in a barber shop long enough, you will get a haircut. Even though this may be an oversimplification the thinking here is that if a sinner hangs around God long enough, he or she will begin to turn away from sin. Does that make sense?

Really? Well, lets take a look at what Jesus and His Church has to say.

You are probably familiar with the woman caught in adultery in John 8 right? I assume you are because this is a favorite of the “don’t Judge” crowd. But in recap, there was a woman they brought Jesus a woman caught in adultery. (a sexual sin) and they were about to stone her. Jesus did not condemn her. BUT and everyone forgets this part, He tells her something.

John 8:11

She replied," No one sir." Then Jesus said, “Neither do I condemn you. Go, and from now on** do not sin anymore**.”

Now, I do not believe that God asks us the impossible. I don’t think a compassionate loving merciful God would give directives He thought impossible. He commands and we are to assume she can follow.

When an adulterer, murderer or person that has an abortion confesses, they do not receive the advice to TRY to not do it again. You must intend to not do it again. Could it happen again? Yes. and they would have to confess it again. You cannot go to heaven or even be in communion with the Church, the Body of Christ, if you are in mortal sin.

Jesus, and good priests in the confessional do not say “try to not sin again” they say do not sin again.

No matter how many times we fall we can be forgiven. This is true! But the Church is a hospital for sinners, and a hospital treats and heals.

The Church realizes that we need forgiveness and that we sin. In fact we are to go to confession at the very least once a year. You, me, priests, future saints, Popes, everyone!

Now if Pope Francis and father so and so have to go to confession, then I’m sure I have to go not only once a year but even more often. And Everytime I do, I firmly resolve to not sin anymore.

If I were to confess adultery, I would have to not commit it again. If I did, I would be outside of salvation, and communion until I used the vehicle (confession) that God has instituted to reconcile ourselves with our maker.
I dont care what the sin is. Masturbation, murder, blasphemy, missing Mass, idolatry, or homosexual “sex”
The rules are the same for everyone. The Church welcomes all, and all are able to receive the Mercy of God. But it can come with a price. The price of reform, of sacrifice, and of repentance.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

make a firm purpose of amendment

Ok, lets take this out of the realm of sexual sin and stick with good old fashioned murder.

If a murderer murders, and then goes to confession, he fulfill the obligations of the sacrament to be forgiven. He must admit the wrong, be sorry, and make amends. He must also as you put it “make a firm purpose of amendment” Which is really just semantics about what I am trying to say. but ok.

Now if that purpose of amendment fails, if he murders again, he is in mortal sin. It is a new state of sin. The "firm purpose of amendment "does nothing to keep us in grace and forgiven if we commit the sin again.

I think we would all agree that one must repent and INTEND to not sin again.

This all applies to any sin, even the sin of gay “sex”

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

I think maybe we’re talking past each other because we’re defining some words or concepts differently, and then we’re confused because people are saying, "Yes, I believe gay people should be treated with compassion’ (which is what most of us are saying) and then later say, “No, I don’t believe in gay marriage”.

The person who believes that what it means to treat gay people with compassion is to allow them to marry is shocked and stunned that another person who says he wants to treat them with compassion does not support gay marriage, because to the first person, ‘gay marriage’ is the litmus test for compassion, and so if you don’t support it, you don’t treat a gay person with compassion.

And the person who believes that treating a person with compassion means that you love a person enough to insist that they hear the truth, even if truth FEELSs harsh and hateful, is shocked and stunned that another person’s idea of compassion is to ‘ignore the truth’ and just focus on a kind of ‘love’ that solely relies on changeable, relative ‘feeling’. . .IOW, that they would rather actively do wrong and allow others to do wrong because stopping the wrong would ‘hurt feelings’ and that the litmus test of compassion is that one does not hurt feelings.

I think that almost everybody here, even the one who said ‘shun’ (and probably meant it only as a last resort, and only if the person were a danger and a scandal who might lead others astray, and who had been given hundreds and hundreds of chances already), wants to treat gays (and any other sinner) with compassion.

The problem is that due to a host of factors, we have a huge and absolutely oppositional view and concept of what compassion is.

And because we’re all using the word ‘compassion’, we obviously assume that our definition of compassion is the correct one (whichever it might be).

Blame the people who have in the last decades managed to hijack thousands of words and concepts in the English language. For those of us who read 1984, today’s world looks an awful lot (linguistically speaking) like that of Winston and ‘freedom means slavery’ etc.

I hope we are all talking past each other because I would love to hear the answer from shelby and some others on 2 main questions.

1. Is homosexual “sex” a sin?
2. Should an unrepentant sinner receive the Eucharist?

 

[Brendan_64]

You are typing past me. I don’t think you understood what I said.

An unrepentant sinner does not have a home in the Church. Homosexual, murderous, or anything. That is why we have rules, confession and forgiveness.

That is correct.

But there seems to be a special case being made for homosexuals as if they are generally unrepentent, particularly sinful, and as such not welcome. Many sins are committed by members of our Church, homosexuals are simply sinners like the rest of us, and are ought to be welcomed as much as anyone else.