Sister and fiance cohabiting and rejecting the faith--how to help?

[cmhgirod]

My youngest sister has been living with her boyfriend for two years now and they just became engaged. Both of them were raised Catholic but both have completely rejected the faith–in fact reject Christianity in any form. I would say they resemble the secular humanist. I myself just recently rejuvenated my faith and have been in pursuit of truth which has led me back to the Catholic Church. My sister sometimes questions me why I would want to do this! She thinks no self respecting intelligent person would embrace Christianity. When I try to defend the faith, she immediately jumps to the issue of homosexuality. I tell her that God loves homosexuals, just not the homosexual act. She thinks that Christians judge homosexuals for something they cannot help. I know this view is very mucy influenced by a group of people she used to work with during her college years. She is very good friends with several openly homosexual people, and her former boss is in a longterm relationship. She cannot see how this person–who is in every other way a good person, who provides charity for the community, is generous to his employees, is kind and fair–can be condemned for living a homosexual lifestyle. She simply won’t accept what I have to say–about natural law and the Church’s teachings, etc. I guess I would like some advice as to how others have handled such a situation with a loved one. I am praying that she and her fiance return to the faith before they are married (date is not for 17 months still) so that they will embrace the vocation of marriage as a sacrament, and not just as an expression of their emotional committment to each other. To make matters more complicated she wants her former boss to marry them (I am not certain what he is ordained in, but apparently holds legal authority to marry). I love my sister and wish she could see the truth. If nothing else please pray for her and her finance. Thank you.

 

[Exalt]

She cannot see how this person–who is in every other way a good person, who provides charity for the community, is generous to his employees, is kind and fair–can be condemned for living a homosexual lifestyle. She simply won’t accept what I have to say–about natural law and the Church’s teachings, etc. I guess I would like some advice as to how others have handled such a situation with a loved one. I am praying that she and her fiance return to the faith before they are married (date is not for 17 months still) so that they will embrace the vocation of marriage as a sacrament, and not just as an expression of their emotional committment to each other. To make matters more complicated she wants her former boss to marry them (I am not certain what he is ordained in, but apparently holds legal authority to marry). I love my sister and wish she could see the truth. If nothing else please pray for her and her finance. Thank you.

Why not just accept the difference of opinion? =/

 

[childofmary1143]

Why not just accept the difference of opinion? =/

probably because he has so much respect for love and truth that he TRULY CARES more than just agree.

 

[childofmary1143]

My youngest sister has been living with her boyfriend for two years now and they just became engaged. Both of them were raised Catholic but both have completely rejected the faith–in fact reject Christianity in any form. I would say they resemble the secular humanist. I myself just recently rejuvenated my faith and have been in pursuit of truth which has led me back to the Catholic Church. My sister sometimes questions me why I would want to do this! She thinks no self respecting intelligent person would embrace Christianity. When I try to defend the faith, she immediately jumps to the issue of homosexuality. I tell her that God loves homosexuals, just not the homosexual act. She thinks that Christians judge homosexuals for something they cannot help. I know this view is very mucy influenced by a group of people she used to work with during her college years. She is very good friends with several openly homosexual people, and her former boss is in a longterm relationship. She cannot see how this person–who is in every other way a good person, who provides charity for the community, is generous to his employees, is kind and fair–can be condemned for living a homosexual lifestyle. She simply won’t accept what I have to say–about natural law and the Church’s teachings, etc. I guess I would like some advice as to how others have handled such a situation with a loved one. I am praying that she and her fiance return to the faith before they are married (date is not for 17 months still) so that they will embrace the vocation of marriage as a sacrament, and not just as an expression of their emotional committment to each other. To make matters more complicated she wants her former boss to marry them (I am not certain what he is ordained in, but apparently holds legal authority to marry). I love my sister and wish she could see the truth. If nothing else please pray for her and her finance. Thank you.

My heart and prayers go out to you. Re. the homosexuality issue is something that a lot of secular people don’t understand. Just a suggestion though, the next time she brings homosexuality up ask her for her opinion on polygamy. All the people that I have heard that argue for same sex marriage are INTOLERANT of polygamy and that can be an effective way to show that they are just as INTOLERANT as us.

 

[StCsDavid]

I will pray for your sister, and as hard as it seems, that’s really the best thing that you can do. This is a job for the Holy Spirit. She’s physically bonded to her boyfriend; they’ve been shacking up for two years; and she’s openly rejected the faith. Any epiphany she has won’t come from logic, but rather from grace. Continue to love her, and when she has kids, be the cool Catholic Aunt/Uncle, and maybe the example you set will be a positive influence for the kids. And if your sister does decide to return to the faith, welcome her home as the father did in the parable of the prodigal son.

As to the gay issue, people with anorexia will say they can’t help being who they are, yet we try to help them from destroying their lives? People with severe depression say the can’t help feeling the way they feel, yet we try to help them?

Another question to ask is why a person’s sexual proclivity should be a quality that warrants some kind of defined benefit status in a society? Would your sister extend her tolerance to a pedophile or even a philanderer? What if her soon to be husband decides he wants to have an affair? He’s only acting upon his sexual desire. Shouldn’t she be tolerant of that? He can’t help “feeling” the way he feels towards other women.

 

[Exalt]

As to the gay issue, people with anorexia will say they can’t help being who they are, yet we try to help them from destroying their lives? People with severe depression say the can’t help feeling the way they feel, yet we try to help them?

=(

Just because you believe homosexuality to be a “disorder” doesn’t mean it’s the same as anorexia or clinical depression. That’s like saying I ought to try and save you from Catholicism while pointing to the Heaven’s Gate Cult as evidence of what religion causes. It’s just… a bad arguement =/

 

[GregoryPalamas]

=(

Just because you believe homosexuality to be a “disorder” doesn’t mean it’s the same as anorexia or clinical depression. That’s like saying I ought to try and save you from Catholicism while pointing to the Heaven’s Gate Cult as evidence of what religion causes. It’s just… a bad arguement =/

Let me get this clear. You believe that the homosexual life style is a gift from God or at least quite natural. Is that correct?

CDL

 

[Riley259]

I will pray for your sister, and as hard as it seems, that’s really the best thing that you can do. This is a job for the Holy Spirit. She’s physically bonded to her boyfriend; they’ve been shacking up for two years; and she’s openly rejected the faith. Any epiphany she has won’t come from logic, but rather from grace. Continue to love her, and when she has kids, be the cool Catholic Aunt/Uncle, and maybe the example you set will be a positive influence for the kids. And if your sister does decide to return to the faith, welcome her home as the father did in the parable of the prodigal son.

As to the gay issue, people with anorexia will say they can’t help being who they are, yet we try to help them from destroying their lives? People with severe depression say the can’t help feeling the way they feel, yet we try to help them?

Another question to ask is why a person’s sexual proclivity should be a quality that warrants some kind of defined benefit status in a society? Would your sister extend her tolerance to a pedophile or even a philanderer? What if her soon to be husband decides he wants to have an affair? He’s only acting upon his sexual desire. Shouldn’t she be tolerant of that? He can’t help “feeling” the way he feels towards other women.

All very good points. You could try to explain the Church’s position on sexuality and JPII’s Theology of the Body but my sense is that that would fall on deaf ears. The point about comparing polygamy to same-sex marriage is a “quick and dirty” way of stopping gay marriage proponents in their tracks, though. From there, you might be able to open a wider discussion on natural law, complementarity of the sexes, etc.

 

[Rebecca_New]

Just continue to love your sister, and set an example of that love. For some reason this is happening all over. There is one person in a “dysfunctional” family that finds their way home, and only Our Dear Lord knows why. I am in a similiar situation, so when I heard Marcus’ guest on Journey Home I said ‘a-hah’ maybe this is God’s plan. Let’s pray for each other and our family’s unity in God.

 

[StCsDavid]

=(

Just because you believe homosexuality to be a “disorder” doesn’t mean it’s the same as anorexia or clinical depression. That’s like saying I ought to try and save you from Catholicism while pointing to the Heaven’s Gate Cult as evidence of what religion causes. It’s just… a bad arguement =/

Admittedly the analogy is imperfect; however, it’s not just my belief. The Church has some very good reasons for considering homosexual sex to be a disordered behavior based in scripture; as a violation of the natural law; and even a good amount of scientific study. Anorexia is a psychological disorder with physical manifestations…severe depression is often a pathological disorder with behavior manifestations. Either analogy works for explaining same sex attraction. It could be pathological or psychological or a combination of the two. It should be treated with compassion and respect. That doesn’t mean one has to accept it as normal, moral, or accepted behavior.

As to the Heaven’s Gate analogy, I believe that argument steps onto the slippery slope of relativism versus looking at absolute truth.

 

[Mirdath]

Admittedly the analogy is imperfect; however, it’s not just my belief. The Church has some very good reasons for considering homosexual sex to be a disordered behavior based in scripture; as a violation of the natural law; and even a good amount of scientific study. Anorexia is a psychological disorder with physical manifestations…severe depression is often a pathological disorder with behavior manifestations. Either analogy works for explaining same sex attraction. It could be pathological or psychological or a combination of the two. It should be treated with compassion and respect. That doesn’t mean one has to accept it as normal, moral, or accepted behavior.

There is still a difference even if you regard homosexuality as disordered. Anorexia and depression are both immediately physically and psychologically harmful by nature. Homosexual behavior isn’t – at least, no more or less than heterosexual behavior. All you can really say about damage caused by homosexuality is in the soul, which doesn’t hold much water with anyone whose beliefs about religion or morality differ from yours.

As to the Heaven’s Gate analogy, I believe that argument steps onto the slippery slope of relativism versus looking at absolute truth.

Slippery slope, yes – much like childofmary1143’s suggestion of bringing up polyamory (and by the way, hardly every supporter of homosexuality is against that). However, it doesn’t have anything to do with relativism at all – it’s about religions and cults.

cmhgirod, I can’t offer much advice from a Catholic perspective, but I’d like to offer this from my point of view: leave the issue(s) alone unless and until she brings it up. You’ve made your stance known to her; if you keep trying to push her ‘in line’, all it’s likely to do is drive a wedge further between you.

 

[Exalt]

Admittedly the analogy is imperfect; however, it’s not just my belief. The Church has some very good reasons for considering homosexual sex to be a disordered behavior based in scripture; as a violation of the natural law; and even a good amount of scientific study.

Believing in the truth of scripture is based on faith. Natural Law, as it’s understood in the recent millenium, is a concept of Christianity. It’s based on faith too.

The only real arguement here is from a scientific perspective. Can you prove that homosexuality, in of itself, without external reasons, *causes *problems similiar to, say, anorexia? I’d like to see the evidence. (You’ll find studies that will say that homosexuality is correlated with elevated levels of depression, suicide, and substance abuse in certian segments of the populations - but the deviation isn’t anywhere *near *significant enough for any reputable scientist to say that it is homosexuality *itself *that causes these problems. You won’t find a single study that says that homosexuality *itself *is the cause of a bunch of problems. **In fact, most studies suggest that it is the conservative position itself that causes these problems - and that the solution is to increase social acceptance of monogamous homosexuality. But don’t take my word for it, go look them up yourself. Please make sure they are scholarly, first, though, please.)

And, furthermore, what about the countless personal examples out there of happy, successful, loving, healthy homosexual couples?

As to the Heaven’s Gate analogy, I believe that argument steps onto the slippery slope of relativism versus looking at absolute truth.

The Heaven’s Gate Cult weren’t relativists. I get really, really annoyed when people throw out “relativism,” without understanding what it really means. Just because you aren’t Catholic doesn’t make you a relativist. Those members of the Heaven’s Gate actually believed that their faith was absolutely true. If they didn’t, they wouldn’t have killed themselves, right?

 

[DanteAlighieri]

The only real arguement here is from a scientific perspective…But don’t take my word for it, go look them up yourself. Please make sure they are scholarly, first, though, please.)

Nice try.

If you are going to claim this is a purely scientific debate, the burden of proof is on you, my friend. Feel free to provide sources that back up your claims that the homosexual lifestyle causes no problems, that “no reputable scientist” would agree that homosexuality causes problems, and that the “conservative position” causes problems.

But make sure they’re scholarly, first.

Peace,
Dante

 

[Mirdath]

Nice try.

If you are going to claim this is a purely scientific debate, the burden of proof is on you, my friend. Feel free to provide sources that back up your claims that the homosexual lifestyle causes no problems, that “no reputable scientist” would agree that homosexuality causes problems, and that the “conservative position” causes problems.

But make sure they’re scholarly, first.

Peace,
Dante

Nice try yourself. Exalt asserts there are no such problems as one finds with a disorder such as depression or anorexia with a causal relationship to homosexuality. You assert that there are – Exalt’s position cannot be proven, only proven wrong. And that job’s on you.

Good luck. And remember, correlation does not make causation.

 

[Riley259]

There is still a difference even if you regard homosexuality as disordered. Anorexia and depression are both immediately physically and psychologically harmful by nature. Homosexual behavior isn’t – at least, no more or less than heterosexual behavior. All you can really say about damage caused by homosexuality is in the soul, which doesn’t hold much water with anyone whose beliefs about religion or morality differ from yours.

Slippery slope, yes – much like childofmary1143’s suggestion of bringing up polyamory (and by the way, hardly every supporter of homosexuality is against that). However, it doesn’t have anything to do with relativism at all – it’s about religions and cults.

cmhgirod, I can’t offer much advice from a Catholic perspective, but I’d like to offer this from my point of view: leave the issue(s) alone unless and until she brings it up. You’ve made your stance known to her; if you keep trying to push her ‘in line’, all it’s likely to do is drive a wedge further between you.

Homosexual behavior is harmful and studies point that out clearly…shorter life expectancy, more likely to contract sexually transmitted disease (including HIV), increased depression, etc. So, it’s damaging to both the soul and body.

 

[StCsDavid]

Believing in the truth of scripture is based on faith. Natural Law, as it’s understood in the recent millenium, is a concept of Christianity. It’s based on faith too.

The only real arguement here is from a scientific perspective.

That presumes that one considers science as the highest discipline. For a person of faith, theology and philosophy bear far more value in discerning truth.

Can you prove that homosexuality, in of itself, without external reasons, *causes *problems similiar to, say, anorexia?

My friend, I could use that statement for any condition. Being a sociopath doesn’t cause any problems until one acts upon the tendencies associated with that disorder. Being anorexic doesn’t cause problems until one acts upon those tendencies. Being sexual doesn’t cause problems until one uses those tendencies inappropriately.

And, furthermore, what about the countless personal examples out there of happy, successful, loving, healthy homosexual couples?

Two of my best friends are a lesbian couple that have been together for forty years. It’s certainly possible for gay people to have happy relationships. It’s equally as possible for heterosexuals to shack up outside of marriage and have happy relationships. That doesn’t mean the behavior is for the moral good. I meet my friends where they’re at. It’s not my job to judge them; however, that doesn’t mean I have to accept their behavior as what God intended.

The Heaven’s Gate Cult weren’t relativists. I get really, really annoyed when people throw out “relativism,” without understanding what it really means. Just because you aren’t Catholic doesn’t make you a relativist. Those members of the Heaven’s Gate actually believed that their faith was absolutely true. If they didn’t, they wouldn’t have killed themselves, right?

So there is no absolute truth. Is that true?

 

[Mirdath]

Homosexual behavior is harmful and studies point that out clearly…shorter life expectancy, more likely to contract sexually transmitted disease (including HIV), increased depression, etc. So, it’s damaging to both the soul and body.

All disadvantages that can be realized through heterosexual relationships as well. Additionally, some heterosexual couples practice anal sex, and plenty of active homosexuals do not.

As for depression, ever thought that that might just be because gays and lesbians are constantly regarded as ‘dirty’ or even subhuman?

]QUOTE=StCsDavid]So there is no absolute truth. Is that true?

You’re reading a little too much into that statement, I think. Exalt was simply (and correctly) pointing out that the comparative virtues of organized religion and Heaven’s Gate had nothing at all to do with moral relativism.

 

[DanteAlighieri]

Nice try yourself. Exalt asserts there are no such problems as one finds with a disorder such as depression or anorexia with a causal relationship to homosexuality. You assert that there are – Exalt’s position cannot be proven, only proven wrong. And that job’s on you.

Good luck. And remember, correlation does not make causation.

No, Exalt says the following:

1. Only the scientific argument is valid.
2. All real science points to homosexuality being harmless, and “conservatism” being harmful.

In other words, Exalt is claiming that logic and morals are invalid because science contradicts them. Therefore, unless he is willing to back up his claims with some evidence (for what is science without proof?) he is making baseless claims.

Thus, as I said, the burden of proof is on Exalt at this stage in the debate.

Peace,
Dante

 

[StCsDavid]

StCsDavid:

So there is no absolute truth. Is that true?

You’re reading a little too much into that statement, I think. Exalt was simply (and correctly) pointing out that the comparative virtues of organized religion and Heaven’s Gate had nothing at all to do with moral relativism.

I stand corrected. Heaven’s Gate were absolutist in their own distorted perception of truth with very tragic consequences.

 

[Joe_Stong]

Go back and read the APA’s OWN description of why they removed same sex attraction from the DSM and the only “scientific” study they’ll point to is a white paper submitted by Dr Spitzer; one study and a vote taken by less than 50% of their members wherein those in favor of removing it from the DSM won by a bare majority.

That’s it. That’s their “scientific backing”. But it’s become policy ever since to censor and hound ANY scientist who wishes to study homosexuals as ‘people with disorders’. So the only extant peer reviewed studies allowed to be published are those that only obliquely touch on homosexuality.

But even there the documentation is increasingly pointing to a non-genetic factor being the primary cause of same sex attraction: twin studies - of children with identical DNA, have shown that homosexual attraction (to say nothing of acting out) is NOT 100% across the board. Some identical twins are both homosexual, some pairs only have one twin with the attraction.

If it were 100% a genetic driven attraction then there would be no difference and yet the is.

Now the APA is pretty open about their belief that it’s all OK and the only cause for concern is “society”: but go to their website and search high and low for any study prior to 1972 that was peer reviewed and exhaustive pointing to SSA being OK and you’ll find none.

Nor will you find many in the 1970’s proving their point… Those scientists who lost the vote have continued their research and therapy - not that they’ve been taken on ad argumentum because their works aren’t argued against. Their motives are.

But even if their motives were the worst… if their studies are wrong, fine, lets’ get the mature point by point rebuttal. That’s not how the APA handles it though. It’s immature name throwing and censorship. Much like the global warming craze … unbelievers are not argued with on the evidence, they’re shouted down - just as the gay community shouted down and stormed the annual APA meetings held in 1970-1972 until the APA surrendered and “gave them a place at the table” - which they were soon running.