Pope Calls for Fresh Church Approach to Children of Gay Parents

[lutheran_farmer]

He’s right. How do you talk to a child about sin and tell them both that they should obey and respect their parents AND that their parents are sinning. It’s complicated. Yes, they should obey their parents. No, they shouldn’t try to judge their parents. How awkward is it for a child to go home and ask their parents if they are sinning and have their parents laugh and say “No, we are married, see?”. Awkward.

 

[Marie5890]

Sometimes being authentically Christ-like flies in the face of being authentically “Christian” as it’d own definition has evoloved over 2000 years…

An examination of Conscience, before Our Lord, in that context, can reveal different insights.

May I always be an authentic and credible Disciple of Christ. Always and with not exception or admendment.

 

[_Abyssinia]

(Reuters) - The Vatican on Sunday denied Italian media reports that recent comments by Pope Francis signaled his openness to the legal recognition of same-sex unions in Italy.

reuters.com/article/2014/01/05/us-pope-homosexuals-idUSBREA040BX20140105

 

[tm30]

The Pope has called homosexual adoption “child abuse,” So it would follow that we are to approach the abused with kindness and caution. All I see here is the Pope making a statement about how to help abused people. Sounds pretty Catholic to me!

I don’t understand the priorities of the Holy Father. This is such an incredibly small percentage of the population, who most of us will never come into contact with in an “evangelic” setting.

How about we come up with a fresh approach to the epidemic spiritual abuse of parents defiantly breaking the baptismal vow of raising their children in the Catholic faith?

 

[SuperLuigi]

He’s right. How do you talk to a child about sin and tell them both that they should obey and respect their parents AND that their parents are sinning. It’s complicated. Yes, they should obey their parents. No, they shouldn’t try to judge their parents. How awkward is it for a child to go home and ask their parents if they are sinning and have their parents laugh and say “No, we are married, see?”. Awkward.

A great point!

 

[SuperLuigi]

I don’t understand the priorities of the Holy Father. This is such an incredibly small percentage of the population, who most of us will never come into contact with in an “evangelic” setting.

How about we come up with a fresh approach to the epidemic spiritual abuse of parents defiantly breaking the baptismal vow of raising their children in the Catholic faith?

We can walk and chew gum at the same time.

 

[RPRPsych]

We can walk and chew gum at the same time.

That’s a very nice way of putting things.

 

[JimG]

This sounds like a wonderful way to approach evangelism. If Sally has two mommies, just tell Sally that she doesn’t really have two mommies; the other woman is just a live-in sinner. That’ll be pretty effective.

Our Holy Father is always concerned with bringing people to the Church. This means he is also concerned with calling people by the names they call themselves, so as not to alienate them.

If a crazy person believes he is John Lennon, then by all means address him as John Lennon – but show him the gospel!

No need to pass judgment on anyone. But of course Sally is going to find out in Freshman Biology that she can’t possibly have two mothers.

 

[_Abyssinia]

Fr. Lombardi: current debate over Papal comments on education “forced” and “manipulated”

(Vatican Radio) The Director of the Holy See’s Press Office, Fr. Federico Lombardi has issued an explanatory note following extensive debate in the Italian media after the publication by the Jesuit journal Civiltà Cattolica of a conversation between Pope Francis and religious superiors on November 29th. Many comments focused on gay unions.

In his note, Fr. Lombardi says in his conversation with the religious superiors, the Pope took up the consideration that the situation in which young people and children today are educated is very different from the past because they live in many difficult family situations: with separated parents, new “anomalous” unions, and “sometimes even homosexual unions and so on.”

“Education and the proclamation of faith,” notes Lombardi, “of course cannot ignore this reality and must be attentive to the welfare of future generations, affectionately accompanying them in their current context,” so that they will not react negatively to the faith.

Several Italian media reported on this very “general conversation on the educational role of the Church November 29th,” comments Lombardi, who notes that only “in recent days” has the question has been raised in the debate regarding the recognition of civil unions of same-sex couples .

The topic was quite obviously “forced” Fr. Lombardi observes, “so as to appear in some cases as a manipulation.” Speaking of an "openness to gay couples " is paradoxical, Fr. Lombardi states, “because the Pope’s speech is overall general (in nature) and because even the small concrete example made by the Pope about (a girl who is sad because her mother’s girlfriend does not love her ) alludes to the suffering of children …”

The Pope had “absolutely not expressed” his opinions on a debate that was ignited in Italy one month later, Fr. Lombardi says, and “those who remember the positions he expressed earlier in Argentina during similar debates know that they were completely different from what some people are now trying surreptitiously to attribute to him.”

 

[JimG]

I don’t understand the priorities of the Holy Father. This is such an incredibly small percentage of the population, who most of us will never come into contact with in an “evangelic” setting.

How about we come up with a fresh approach to the epidemic spiritual abuse of parents defiantly breaking the baptismal vow of raising their children in the Catholic faith?

This is the key problem for Catholic educators. At Baptism, Catholics promise to raise their children in the Catholic faith. Then they send them to a Catholic school expecting that every moral deviation of the family will be viewed with equanimity by the teachers and administration. A school must be faithful to its mission of handing on the Faith. It’s hard to do that if parents are actively undermining the Faith.

 

[Trueca]

“No need to pass judgment on anyone. But of course Sally is going to find out in Freshman Biology that she can’t possibly have two mothers”
You forget they are re-doing all courses (Common Core). I am sure they will have in Biology class: “Ways to have children”
I am concerned many Dioceses and catholic teachers will use this to excuse the behavior and not address what the Catholic Church teaches, so as not to “offend” the children. Does that mean the rest of the class will not learn what a family is, what marriage is? not to alienate the 1 child?

 

[LisaA]

This is the key problem for Catholic educators. At Baptism, Catholics promise to raise their children in the Catholic faith. Then they send them to a Catholic school expecting that every moral deviation of the family will be viewed with equanimity by the teachers and administration. A school must be faithful to its mission of handing on the Faith. It’s hard to do that if parents are actively undermining the Faith.

Good point. Look at the many brouhahas when a gay/Lesbian teacher comes out or gets “married.” Instead of supporting the Church’s teaching, kids, parents and sometimes fellow teachers march in the street because hey “Ms Smith soooo nice…” Too often loving the sinner means you are supposed to embrace the sin too. If not you’re a homophobe or a H8r

I believe most children attending Catholic schools have religion classes and the Church’s teaching on marriage, the family, and sexuality is very compassionate and rational. I hope it can be taught in a way that does not water down the faith but also not as Pope Francis, innoculate children against it.

Lisa

 

[JimG]

“No need to pass judgment on anyone. But of course Sally is going to find out in Freshman Biology that she can’t possibly have two mothers”
You forget they are re-doing all courses (Common Core). I am sure they will have in Biology class: “Ways to have children”
I am concerned many Dioceses and catholic teachers will use this to excuse the behavior and not address what the Catholic Church teaches, so as not to “offend” the children. Does that mean the rest of the class will not learn what a family is, what marriage is? not to alienate the 1 child?

Yes, I’d forgotten that even biology may be subject to revisionism!

Come to think of it, that seems to be at the base of the deconstruction of marriage. When one argues against gay marriage, for example, on the basis of the nature of man and woman, the response is something like “what’s sex got to do with it? It’s all about love.”

 

[LisaA]

Yes, I’d forgotten that even biology may be subject to revisionism!

Come to think of it, that seems to be at the base of the deconstruction of marriage. When one argues against gay marriage, for example, on the basis of the nature of man and woman, the response is something like “what’s sex got to do with it? It’s all about love.”

Jim, truer words have not been spoken! As we all know the subject of gay marriage has been ginned up to a bloody froth repeatedly. Those advocating for gay “marriage” become annoyed when it’s pointed out their sexual activity is not biologically equivalent to male/female sexual relationships which can and mostly do result in children. They claim it’s all about “love” but civil marriage has never required a declaration of love to be eligible for marriage.

Basically the benefit to society is nil, the benefits inure only to the individuals who take advantage of yet another chink in the marriage armor. The desire is to normalize if not celebrate a non-procreative sexual activity, reaping a myriad of destructive forces from children who are denied one parent or the other to the schools which must choose between compromising Church teaching else face devastating lawsuits and public harassment, to forcing “education” on gay/Lesbian sexuality from kindergarten on.

What a mess and all so a tiny minority of a tiny minority can openly proclaim their sexual practices and pretend they have the equivalent to male female traditional marriage
Lisa

 

[VivienneJ]

I don’t understand the priorities of the Holy Father. This is such an incredibly small percentage of the population, who most of us will never come into contact with in an “evangelic” setting.

If you’re a school teacher the chance of you coming into contact with this “incredibly small percentage of the population” is high. I think it was to us that Pope Francis was directing this particular comment.

How about we come up with a fresh approach to the epidemic spiritual abuse of parents defiantly breaking the baptismal vow of raising their children in the Catholic faith?

Very necessary, but not something that most school teachers will come up against.

 

[Trueca]

Yes, I’d forgotten that even biology may be subject to revisionism!

Come to think of it, that seems to be at the base of the deconstruction of marriage. When one argues against gay marriage, for example, on the basis of the nature of man and woman, the response is something like “what’s sex got to do with it? It’s all about love.”

Not only deconstruction of Marriage, but society as we know it, which is based on Christian principles, that is why they are at war with the Catholic Church. See this video nomblog.com/34798/#sthash.a0bnFXcw.dpbs

 

[JimG]

Not only deconstruction of Marriage, but society as we know it, which is based on Christian principles, that is why they are at war with the Catholic Church. See this video nomblog.com/34798/#sthash.a0bnFXcw.dpbs

Yes, I’ve seen the Masha Gessen quote previously. She says “The institution of marriage should not exist.”

And this is exactly where the proponents of gay marriage wish to take us. Eliminate the institution of marriage.
Begin by making it meaningless.

She also says: “Fighting for gay marriage generally involves lying about what we are going to do with marriage when we get there."

What they are going to do with it is change it into something unrecognizable. Real marriage will cease to exist.

In deconstructing marriage, we also deconstruct families. In deconstructing families, we deconstruct civilization. Hardcore proponents may be fine with that. But do all the feel-good hangers on know that is where we are headed?