What are your ideas for the LGBT person's vocation in the Church?

  • Thread starter Thread starter catholic1seeks
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
catholic1seeks said:
But then I wonder what their true fear is?

Are they truly concerned for souls? For the well-being of LGBT folk?
Click to expand...
So now who is being judgmental? If someone tells me they are concerned with souls I tend to give them the benefit of the doubt. The same way I give you the benefit of the doubt that you want to be apart of the Church without any agenda. I truly believe you and have no reason to doubt you. I believe that is what is best for your soul.
 
I form judgments of the posts I read, and I can usually tell if they have a compassionate tone or not.

But I appreciate your attempt to understand my viewpoint as well!
 
SacredHeartBassist said:
But it is disordered. It’s against nature and natural law. Saying the opposite wouldn’t just be wrong but it would be a lie. Marriage is between a man and a woman and homosexual relations go against Gods plan for sexuality and romantic love
Click to expand...
My point is that you can convey the same message but use different language to do so. I never said anything about changing the teaching or saying the opposite.
 
QwertyGirl said:
My point is that you can convey the same message but use different language to do so. I never said anything about changing the teaching or saying the opposite.
Click to expand...
The irony is the “disordered” language was originally meant to be kinder. I think what the church is trying to communicate is that some people feel attractions that aren’t aimed correctly, and that’s because we live in a fallen world and our nature as people (all of us) isn’t quite right. It’s not something that people just decide to be.
 
QwertyGirl said:
40.png
SacredHeartBassist:
But it is disordered. It’s against nature and natural law. Saying the opposite wouldn’t just be wrong but it would be a lie. Marriage is between a man and a woman and homosexual relations go against Gods plan for sexuality and romantic love
Click to expand...
My point is that you can convey the same message but use different language to do so. I never said anything about changing the teaching or saying the opposite.
Click to expand...
What language could possibly be used that would be more considerate while at the same time covey to the reader as to the meaning of the idea in the text.
 
Imdaman said:
What language could possibly be used that would be more considerate while at the same time covey to the reader as to the meaning of the idea in the text.
Click to expand...
How about this?
“Homosexual attractions are fully human sexual attractions that are not oriented in a life-giving direction. Homosexual individuals ordinarily do not choose to experience these attractions; they are, however, capable of choosing how they respond to them.”
Click to expand...
Hey writers of the Catechism! I’ve got your phrasing for you! 🙂
 
There are a lot of smart people up at the Vatican who could figure this out. It isn’t that complicated. “Disordered” has become a derogatory label that so many people use, intentionally, to discuss this issue. There are ways you can discuss it without creating an environment which waves the green flag at labeling people in an unkind manner. And before anyone posts to tell me it is the activity that is disordered, not the person…I realize that is what the Church teaches. However, it is not what a good deal of the flock believe. Therein lies a big part of the problem.

The Church may not have intended for this to be the outcome. I will presume not. But it is now the reality. As I have stated, it has allienated an entire sub-category of catholics and have caused them to feel unwelcome in their church. The Church has the means to correct this problem. It is a big one.

I am not suggesting here that the Church change or modify its teaching. However, the fact that so many here seem clueless as to even the existence of a problem…it shows how big the problem really is.
 
Last edited:
If we’re talking about the Vatican, we also have to realize that different terms have different connotations in different languages. It’s going to be a real pain to figure out language that would work well for everyone, especially in an internet age where anything you put out is going to be translated anyway by multiple people.
 
QwertyGirl said:
The Church may not have intended for this to be the outcome. I will presume not. But it is now the reality.
Click to expand...
Words tend to acquire negative connotations when people have negative attitudes. Consider “negro”, which was once considered the more respectful term.
 
Prodigal_Son said:
40.png
Imdaman:
What language could possibly be used that would be more considerate while at the same time covey to the reader as to the meaning of the idea in the text.
Click to expand...
How about this?
“Homosexual attractions are fully human sexual attractions that are not oriented in a life-giving direction. Homosexual individuals ordinarily do not choose to experience these attractions; they are, however, capable of choosing how they respond to them.”
Click to expand...
Hey writers of the Catechism! I’ve got your phrasing for you! 🙂
Click to expand...
I don’t think it conveys the complete Idea of the subject matter.
 
OP, I understand your concern about vocations. I think before the Church will be ready to address it, the more immediate problem of being welcoming of all, at the parish level, will need to be addressed. Actions speak louder than words. And my gay friends who are Catholic tell me the words can be quite loud (and not in a good way) at their local Church. The actions…not so much.
 
Last edited:
Which is something the local bishop should probably interpret in the light of the individual seminarian.
 
  1. Deny yourself
  2. Take up your cross
  3. Follow me.
Vocations are not realized in a vacuum, and those whose concupiscence expresses itself in a particular way need not - ARE NOT - excluded from the Kingdom of God! They are called out of love.

Discerning a vocation is often a drawn-out, agonizing process. If we stop looking for reward in this life and focus on the reward of the next life, our petty problems fade - if not into insignificance, at least to an acceptable level.

A reward which comes without cost is not a reward.
 
QwertyGirl said:
There are a lot of smart people up at the Vatican who could figure this out. It isn’t that complicated. “Disordered” has become a derogatory label that so many people use, intentionally, to discuss this issue. There are ways you can discuss it without creating an environment which waves the green flag at labeling people in an unkind manner. And before anyone posts to tell me it is the activity that is disordered, not the person…I realize that is what the Church teaches. However, it is not what a good deal of the flock believe. Therein lies a big part of the problem.

The Church may not have intended for this to be the outcome. I will presume not. But it is now the reality. As I have stated, it has allienated an entire sub-category of catholics and have caused them to feel unwelcome in their church. The Church has the means to correct this problem. It is a big one.

I am not suggesting here that the Church change or modify its teaching. However, the fact that so many here seem clueless as to even the existence of a problem…it shows how big the problem really is.
Click to expand...
I do not think this bolded statement is true. I know of no one that believes that Gays are intrinsically evil or disordered. I have never had a discussion with a Catholic that doesn’t understand the difference between the person and the Sin.
 
QwertyGirl said:
OP, I understand your concern about vocations. I think before the Church will be ready to address it, the more immediate problem of being welcoming of all, at the parish level, will need to be addressed. Actions speak louder than words. And my gay friends who are Catholic tell me the words can be quite loud (and not in a good way) at their local Church. The actions…not so much.
Click to expand...
But please tell me what do your friends need from the laity to feel welcome at the Church at a parish level? Can you please explain this maybe give an example. I mean I’m relatively well known at my parish. I feel neither welcome nor unwelcome upon entering the church. I struggle to find someone to visit with other than family during an event outside of the Mass. What does welcoming mean?
 
QwertyGirl said:
What does “My vocation is the single life” mean?
Click to expand...
A vocation, in the Catholic sense, is the way in which God calls you to achieve salvation.
For some, this could be through clerical or religious life, for others it would be through marriage and the raising of children.

It is simply the route that will result in the most Grace in their lives.

For a person who is called to the single life, it would NOT include dating or looking for marriage. Nor more so that a person who is in religious life to seek dating or marriage. Dating or seeking marriage would be part of the discernment process ( figuring out what your vocation truly is).

What they are called to do is to live their lives as unmarried, lay persons in accord with the Gospel. No more, no less.

It does not mean having a particular role in a parish, nor really anything more than living their lives as a faithful Catholic.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top