C
catholic1seeks
Guest
Was it a book interview or a pastoral session?
The former.
There is a time and place for everything.
Nice bit of info! Not related to this thread…
Last edited:
What are your ideas for the LGBT person's vocation in the Church?
- Status
The former.
There is a time and place for everything.
I
Ima_Dufus
Guest
I have never experienced SSA, but I am having a bit of a spiritual/psychological struggle that is detrimental to finding my vocation as Catholic woman (btw, I’m 20 years old), and I would appreciated if someone who is theologically sound can offer me some advice. I’ve never talked to anyone about these things before, because I have no one who I trust enough to confide in, and I am generally not one to vent my problems on other people, but this issue has been driving me nuts for years and I’ve realized that I need to swallow my pride and get help. I am struggling with themes related to Ephesians 5:22-24, the creation and fall of Adam and Eve, authority, and the nature of God. It’s going to take a few paragraphs to summarize my questions.
I’ll begin with Adam and Eve. After they disobeyed God, they fell from grace, and thus caused all of humanity yet to be born to have disordered passions causing them to sin and suffer the effects of sin. God said to Adam that he would have to work “by the sweat of his brow,” and to Eve: “yet your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you” (Gen 3:16b). In this fallen world, women are at a disadvantage in terms of vulnerability given their lesser physical size and strength. I thought this apparent unfairness was because of sin. But, I heard a priest explain (in accordance with the Church fathers) that in the Bible, when someone names someone or something else, it is a sign of their authority over it. God named the various components of creation, and then Adam. However, he gave Adam the authority to name the animals, and to name Eve. Therefore, a man’s authority over his wife is by God’s design. I understand that authority the way God intended is meant to protect and serve those under it. I understand that the suffering resulting from abused authority is the result of sin, not God’s plan.
That point brings us to Ephesians 5:22-24, the passage where St. Paul tells wives to be submissive to their husbands and husbands to love their wives as Christ loves his Church. I understand that he is putting a heavy demand on the man, not just the woman. The husband’s role is a role of great servitude, as Christ serves his Church.
Now I am about to explain my stumbling block. Jesus deliberately chose men to be priests, the authority figures of the Church, which makes sense given that men naturally possess the type of strength and authority that both men and women naturally respect and obey. Priests are the representatives of Christ, and they represent Him in a way that a woman cannot. They are sons of God that represent the Father in a way a daughter cannot. As a female, this concept makes me feel as though women are made in a lesser image of God with inferior attributes of God. I know that I must not be seeing this right, and that this anguished feeling of being short-changed by God must be the result of my own pride and envy and the ploys of the devil. But I can’t help but perceive being excluded and deemed inferior. I try hard to love God, but I feel bitter at Him for making women weaker on purpose, and then putting men in charge.
I have more to say, but I need to continue on another thread…
I’ll begin with Adam and Eve. After they disobeyed God, they fell from grace, and thus caused all of humanity yet to be born to have disordered passions causing them to sin and suffer the effects of sin. God said to Adam that he would have to work “by the sweat of his brow,” and to Eve: “yet your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you” (Gen 3:16b). In this fallen world, women are at a disadvantage in terms of vulnerability given their lesser physical size and strength. I thought this apparent unfairness was because of sin. But, I heard a priest explain (in accordance with the Church fathers) that in the Bible, when someone names someone or something else, it is a sign of their authority over it. God named the various components of creation, and then Adam. However, he gave Adam the authority to name the animals, and to name Eve. Therefore, a man’s authority over his wife is by God’s design. I understand that authority the way God intended is meant to protect and serve those under it. I understand that the suffering resulting from abused authority is the result of sin, not God’s plan.
That point brings us to Ephesians 5:22-24, the passage where St. Paul tells wives to be submissive to their husbands and husbands to love their wives as Christ loves his Church. I understand that he is putting a heavy demand on the man, not just the woman. The husband’s role is a role of great servitude, as Christ serves his Church.
Now I am about to explain my stumbling block. Jesus deliberately chose men to be priests, the authority figures of the Church, which makes sense given that men naturally possess the type of strength and authority that both men and women naturally respect and obey. Priests are the representatives of Christ, and they represent Him in a way that a woman cannot. They are sons of God that represent the Father in a way a daughter cannot. As a female, this concept makes me feel as though women are made in a lesser image of God with inferior attributes of God. I know that I must not be seeing this right, and that this anguished feeling of being short-changed by God must be the result of my own pride and envy and the ploys of the devil. But I can’t help but perceive being excluded and deemed inferior. I try hard to love God, but I feel bitter at Him for making women weaker on purpose, and then putting men in charge.
I have more to say, but I need to continue on another thread…
I
Ima_Dufus
Guest
I have never approved of the feminists because of their immoral stances on abortion and contraception that lead to the death of children and enable men to treat women as objects. I have also been repulsed by their whiny, irate, accusatory, and selfish attitudes. I have also never been partial to “girl-power” fiction because I find that it often does not reflect reality. I understand that the feminist ideology ultimately leads to death, and it is self-loathing in its very nature. It rejects what it means to be a woman, which leads women to act in ways that are not true to themselves, which makes them unhappy. Feminism also enables fallen men to shirk their responsibilities and act in the immoral ways that I detest. Militant feminists do not possess the admirable qualities of either gender. Feminism has also served as a gateway for a variety of absurd and profane gender identity ideologies that have caused great suffering, loss of life, and loss of souls.
Although I do not agree with the feminists, I can empathize with them. We live in a world where personal achievements bring us earthly glory. It just seems as though men are privileged with the qualities that are necessary to lead nations, fight battles, advance technology, and pioneer every field of academic study, and all sorts of cool stuff that fascinate and inspire both men and women alike. The role of the woman, the mother, although vital for the formation of every person and the preservation of every culture, seems to be held in lesser esteem. Although widely appreciated, the feminine role seems to be less revered and glorified. In the spheres of both the worldly and the spiritual, it seems as though men get to do all the spectacular stuff. I am a competitive person and have my self-worth tied up with my achievements, so it’s hard for me not to feel inadequate.
I am a devout Catholic. I want to live and die for the truth, to do the will of God, to go to Heaven and help bring as many souls with me as possible. I know these things can only be done through the grace of God, through the intercession of Mary, and through the authority of the Church. Yet I am afflicted with a temptation to be resentful of the designs of God that are ingrained in the Faith that I love. The Church is led by men, and the heroes in the Bible are overwhelming male, serving as a typological representation of God, who is understood to be masculine. Men have the same pronouns as God, and I don’t; this bothers me for some reason. But I want to be who God wants me to be.
I know that the teachings of the Church are true, and that the precepts and designs of God are perfect. They are what allow humanity to flourish. Satan hates us and wants us to reject truth, and therefore deceives us to annihilate us. We are many parts in the Mystical Body of Christ, and we must do our part. I want to do my part, to be a part of it.
But how do I overcome these feelings of resentment, this perception of unfairness, this sense of self-loathing, and my lack of understanding and trust?
Although I do not agree with the feminists, I can empathize with them. We live in a world where personal achievements bring us earthly glory. It just seems as though men are privileged with the qualities that are necessary to lead nations, fight battles, advance technology, and pioneer every field of academic study, and all sorts of cool stuff that fascinate and inspire both men and women alike. The role of the woman, the mother, although vital for the formation of every person and the preservation of every culture, seems to be held in lesser esteem. Although widely appreciated, the feminine role seems to be less revered and glorified. In the spheres of both the worldly and the spiritual, it seems as though men get to do all the spectacular stuff. I am a competitive person and have my self-worth tied up with my achievements, so it’s hard for me not to feel inadequate.
I am a devout Catholic. I want to live and die for the truth, to do the will of God, to go to Heaven and help bring as many souls with me as possible. I know these things can only be done through the grace of God, through the intercession of Mary, and through the authority of the Church. Yet I am afflicted with a temptation to be resentful of the designs of God that are ingrained in the Faith that I love. The Church is led by men, and the heroes in the Bible are overwhelming male, serving as a typological representation of God, who is understood to be masculine. Men have the same pronouns as God, and I don’t; this bothers me for some reason. But I want to be who God wants me to be.
I know that the teachings of the Church are true, and that the precepts and designs of God are perfect. They are what allow humanity to flourish. Satan hates us and wants us to reject truth, and therefore deceives us to annihilate us. We are many parts in the Mystical Body of Christ, and we must do our part. I want to do my part, to be a part of it.
But how do I overcome these feelings of resentment, this perception of unfairness, this sense of self-loathing, and my lack of understanding and trust?
I
Ima_Dufus
Guest
I remember when I was younger I thought, “I never want to get married because all men are porn-addicted losers or they’re like my dad.” Maybe I’m just hypersensitive to the disrespect and licentiousness that I perceive in my male peers, but I find that they are so derogatory that they make me feel uncomfortable and undignified in my own skin. (I was never able to understand how other women could dress immodestly and not feel wretched about it.) My dad on the other hand, although not licentious, seems to have a condescending attitude towards women. (It appears that my brothers have adopted this attitude as well, which is annoying because I think my brothers are quite spineless.) He stereotypes them as being fickle, irrational, and weak. Ironically, he is the most emotionally immature person in the house. He often rants about the women in his politically-correct work environment. Although he has many valid complaints, he speaks very disrespectfully about them while praising his male co-workers.
I guess the bottom line is, I feel like the archetype of secondary-ness. God is our “father” who is the one we worship. The Church is our “mother,” and although it is great beyond my understanding, it is still a created thing. I feel intense guilt about this sentiment, because Christ himself “did not regard equality with God as something to be grasped, but rather humbled himself.” I guess that the desire for independence from God and desire for equality with God is the crux of the human condition.
But this conflict has been bothering me for years. Why did God become a man? (I know – if he became a woman, that would be really weird.) Why did he make them physically faster, stronger, and sturdier? Why did he make their brains more adept in math and science? Why did he reserve the priesthood for them only and give them the ability to forgive sins, and cast out demons, and celebrate the Mass? I feel like women are existentially short-changed. I feel like I have nothing to offer. I feel like I am nothing of value, that I have nothing but my sins. I feel like all my struggles and sufferings are insignificant. I feel like this bitterness that I feel is disgusting in the eyes of God. I feel like I have no purpose. I feel so far away from God, and that this division is all my fault.
I have always felt like a total misfit. As a child, I didn’t really relate to the other girls – we just weren’t interested in the same things. I got along much better with the boys, until middle school. Then I really didn’t fit in with any of the kids. Although I do not question my identity as a woman, I am not stereotypical. And, as you now know, I feel discontented about being a woman. But I will keep fighting, and I have faith that God will deliver me from these problems. I won’t go into my whole life story, but life has been very hard for me. Now, I am intensely thirsting for a purpose in my life. I have prayed and prayed, but do not have any sense of what to do.
I guess the bottom line is, I feel like the archetype of secondary-ness. God is our “father” who is the one we worship. The Church is our “mother,” and although it is great beyond my understanding, it is still a created thing. I feel intense guilt about this sentiment, because Christ himself “did not regard equality with God as something to be grasped, but rather humbled himself.” I guess that the desire for independence from God and desire for equality with God is the crux of the human condition.
But this conflict has been bothering me for years. Why did God become a man? (I know – if he became a woman, that would be really weird.) Why did he make them physically faster, stronger, and sturdier? Why did he make their brains more adept in math and science? Why did he reserve the priesthood for them only and give them the ability to forgive sins, and cast out demons, and celebrate the Mass? I feel like women are existentially short-changed. I feel like I have nothing to offer. I feel like I am nothing of value, that I have nothing but my sins. I feel like all my struggles and sufferings are insignificant. I feel like this bitterness that I feel is disgusting in the eyes of God. I feel like I have no purpose. I feel so far away from God, and that this division is all my fault.
I have always felt like a total misfit. As a child, I didn’t really relate to the other girls – we just weren’t interested in the same things. I got along much better with the boys, until middle school. Then I really didn’t fit in with any of the kids. Although I do not question my identity as a woman, I am not stereotypical. And, as you now know, I feel discontented about being a woman. But I will keep fighting, and I have faith that God will deliver me from these problems. I won’t go into my whole life story, but life has been very hard for me. Now, I am intensely thirsting for a purpose in my life. I have prayed and prayed, but do not have any sense of what to do.
U
una_ecclesia
Guest
This looks like a post of its own. It’s worthy of discussion, but you might want to start a new thread on it rather than discussing it here. Otherwise this thread will get out of hand.
U
una_ecclesia
Guest
Back on topic,
I wonder to what extent LGB people would be served, not so much by programs catering specifically to them, but rather a sort of new approach to relationships and ways of life that extend beyond the usual avenues of marriage/orders. Marriage to someone should be seen as a calling, but it shouldn’t be a sort of “default”, especially given the fact of the objectively higher state of celibacy. The other day I met a guy at my parish who was approaching his 70s, but never married. I had no reason to assume he was gay or not, but he did not speak of it as some sort of charism, but rather a sort of unfortunate happening, but I can assure you that a compelled celibacy is something that is not limited to LGB people. My guess though would be that LGB people would form a good subset of those who would benefit from this change in outlook.
What would a greater practical openness to celibates in general look like (other than singles groups, which seem to defeat the purpose of celibacy anyway?)
I wonder to what extent LGB people would be served, not so much by programs catering specifically to them, but rather a sort of new approach to relationships and ways of life that extend beyond the usual avenues of marriage/orders. Marriage to someone should be seen as a calling, but it shouldn’t be a sort of “default”, especially given the fact of the objectively higher state of celibacy. The other day I met a guy at my parish who was approaching his 70s, but never married. I had no reason to assume he was gay or not, but he did not speak of it as some sort of charism, but rather a sort of unfortunate happening, but I can assure you that a compelled celibacy is something that is not limited to LGB people. My guess though would be that LGB people would form a good subset of those who would benefit from this change in outlook.
What would a greater practical openness to celibates in general look like (other than singles groups, which seem to defeat the purpose of celibacy anyway?)
Last edited:
O
OsculeturMeOsculo
Guest
The thing is that there are other things that the Church doesn’t cater to like this.
G
Gab123
Guest
Realize that this teaching is rooted in Sacred a Scripture. It sounds like you’ve been listening to those who rationalize away Church teaching…
…starting to sound like the g r a d u a l b a b y s t e p s …
Realize that the priest is not there to judge anyone or to discern culpability, but to forgive and absolve sins for those who are truly sorry and to give advice for one to make amends, reparation and how to correct one’s self; not to change the teaching on masturbation. The point is to differentiate between the sinner and the sin; not to downplay sin or confirm someone in their sin. For a Catholic priest to tell a catholic man that he should celebrate his gayness, to marry his boyfriend and to be a witness for change inside the Church in order to take a stand against a “homophobic” hierarchy and bring “change”, is not doing the work of God and has no business being a Catholic priest…
G
Gab123
Guest
It’s not me saying it, it is God who says it in the Scriptures. Yes, infinite mercy and compassion for repentant sinners; it was Jesus who said he was disgusted with the lukewarm and spoke about millstones and everlasting fire for those who teach and confirm others in their sin. Pastoral care is wonderful; the problem is when priests mask their intentions behind terms like “pastoral care” and false compassion in order to further their real intentions, namely, to challenge the Church on its moral teachings. It’s exactly what happened in the Anglican church, where the leadership and much of the flock have embraced actively gay bishops and support gay marriage. The Anglican Church is an example of very loving, very tolerant, very merciful, very inclusive, very approving pastoral care for leading people away from God. God wants you to change, not feel comfortable…
—
When I say to a wicked person, ‘You will surely die,’ and you do not warn them or speak out to dissuade them from their evil ways in order to save their life, that wicked person will die for their sin, and I will hold you accountable for their blood. But if you do warn the wicked person and they do not turn from their wickedness or from their evil ways, they will die for their sin; but you will have saved yourself. Again, when a righteous person turns from their righteousness and does evil, and I put a stumbling block before them, they will die. Since you did not warn them, they will die for their sin. The righteous things that person did will not be remembered, and I will hold you accountable for their blood. But if you do warn the righteous person not to sin and they do not sin, they will surely live because they took warning, and you will have saved yourself.” —Ezekiel 3:18-20
T
Thorolfr
Guest
In the course of this thread, your posts have become increasingly vitriolic and it’s easy to see the hatred and lack of compassion that lies behind them, equating homosexuality with murder, perversion, mental illness, wickedness, pedophilia, abomination, depravity, something that “cries out for vengeance”:
And the ways that you talk about homosexuality and gay people encourages violence against them. Some people who read the kinds of things you post which equate homosexuality with murder and wickedness and perversion, something which “cries out for vengeance,” probably feel justified in their violence, perhaps like the man who beat a gay man in my local community to death with a tire iron a few years ago.
You even mention suicide in the gay community and I know people who came from conservative religious traditions and attempted to commit suicide when they were young and were struggling to reconcile their faith with their sexuality. And some gay people succeed in taking their own lives, and in my opinion, it is words like yours that drive them to it.
And the ways that you talk about homosexuality and gay people encourages violence against them. Some people who read the kinds of things you post which equate homosexuality with murder and wickedness and perversion, something which “cries out for vengeance,” probably feel justified in their violence, perhaps like the man who beat a gay man in my local community to death with a tire iron a few years ago.
C
catholic1seeks
Guest
@Ima_Dufus
Tip: In future, try to space out the text more. It’s hard to read large chunks of paragraph on an online forum, and many people who see such posts will just pass them.
Tip: In future, try to space out the text more. It’s hard to read large chunks of paragraph on an online forum, and many people who see such posts will just pass them.
C
catholic1seeks
Guest
No, it’s a reference to scripture.
C
catholic1seeks
Guest
Yes and as of now, I am intent on not continuing dialogue with @Gab123 on this thread. He’s not being productive. He’s somewhat of a troll. He knows he’s not contributing to the topic.
Best to just ignore him.
He will find that in time, more and more people will become compassionate and more understanding towards LGBT people. It just takes time – and knowing real life LGBT people.
Last edited:
C
catholic1seeks
Guest
But hey! What do you know!
Eve Tushnet has some new posts up::
www.patheos.com
Some relevant quotes from these two articles:
Eve Tushnet has some new posts up::
There's A Place For Us Part II: More On Revoice & Gay Christian Homemaking
Part One was all about how straight people are wonderful and we would like to be your friends! Part Two is... not about that. Sometimes when I talk about
www.patheos.com
Some relevant quotes from these two articles:
U
una_ecclesia
Guest
I read and enjoyed both of those the other day. I also think that Tushnet is becoming much better at explaining exactly what is being proposed by the Spiritual Friendship people, and what is not, in terms of the practical measures that one might take in forming communities with other people.
I’ve seen a rift between LGB faithful Catholics over this, particularly the option of vowed friendships with a single other person (compare Tushnet with Joe Sciambra for example), and think that a lot of that has to do with people’s backgrounds. The Spiritual Friendship people all seem to have come from stable family backgrounds, but Sciambra and others like him came from the “underbelly” of the gay porn world and witnessed a lot of his friends dying from AIDS. Tushnet seems to be more aware that some proposed options might not work for some people, but is rather (rightly) focusing on friendship as a whole.
I’ve seen a rift between LGB faithful Catholics over this, particularly the option of vowed friendships with a single other person (compare Tushnet with Joe Sciambra for example), and think that a lot of that has to do with people’s backgrounds. The Spiritual Friendship people all seem to have come from stable family backgrounds, but Sciambra and others like him came from the “underbelly” of the gay porn world and witnessed a lot of his friends dying from AIDS. Tushnet seems to be more aware that some proposed options might not work for some people, but is rather (rightly) focusing on friendship as a whole.
A
anon10271182
Guest
G
Gab123
Guest
I don’t mean to be vitriolic; it’s just that I find it annoying that many Catholics are not aware of the extent of organized activism by LGBT activists within the Catholic Church to subvert and divide the flock, and do what they did in the Anglican Church. They target regular Catholic folks in order to normalize being “gay” claiming that God made people gay, transexuals, pansexuals, and if only the Church would change its attitudes, a better understanding of homosexuality would change Church teaching from something that is condemned as an abomination, to something that should be embraced and celebrated.
As for the sins that cry for vengeance from heaven, that is what Scripture says. Catholic Answers does a good job of explaining it:
Most Catholics are familiar with the term mortal sin. Mortal sins deprive the soul of grace. They are serious transgressions of God’s law, done freely and deliberately with a clear understanding of what they are. Their result is to deny a soul entrance to heaven
There are particular mortal sins that are so evil that they are said to be sins that cry to heaven for vengeance: murder (Gn 4:10), sodomy (Gn 17:20-21), oppression of the poor (Ex 2:23), and defrauding workers of their just wages (Jas 5:4).
Sins against the Holy Spirit are mortal sins that harden a soul by its rejection of the Holy Spirit. Six sins are in this category. They are despair, presumption, envy, obstinacy in sin, final impenitence, and deliberate resistance to the known truth.
Last edited:
C
catholic1seeks
Guest
I find this critique altogether unhelpful.
Fundamentally, Eve embraces Catholic sexual teaching. She does not promote same-sex sexual behavior.
I find this kind of critique just an attempt at forging something to argue over, for the sake of being nit-picky.
Fundamentally, Eve embraces Catholic sexual teaching. She does not promote same-sex sexual behavior.
I find this kind of critique just an attempt at forging something to argue over, for the sake of being nit-picky.
Last edited:
U
una_ecclesia
Guest
See the above. Sciambra and Tushnet have two completely different experiences when it comes to how they were involved in the “gay scene”.
I don’t know how much Sciambra realizes this. Because of his past with gay porn, he has to deal with his same-sex attractions in a way that even other SSA/LGB people do not. His gay life was literally all about sex. This was not Tushnet’s experience at all She came from an upper class secular Jewish family and went to Yale. She was an LGBT activist in her early years while she went to a private schools in relative comfort. It wasn’t the sex she was addicted to in the long run, and so she is probably able to channel desires towards lustless friendships in ways that Sciambra probably cannot, something like how a person can drink moderately, but an alcoholic has to refrain from any drink to remain sober. This is not to say his approach for himself is wrong. He probably has to be very strong with respect to his own desires. But neither is his experience universal. Furthermore, and this may be painfully obvious, Sciambra is a dude, Tushnet is not. Gay relationships already tend to be pretty different than Lesbian ones.
At the very least, Tushnet recognizes (or is starting to recognize), that her experiences are not universal either.
I don’t know how much Sciambra realizes this. Because of his past with gay porn, he has to deal with his same-sex attractions in a way that even other SSA/LGB people do not. His gay life was literally all about sex. This was not Tushnet’s experience at all She came from an upper class secular Jewish family and went to Yale. She was an LGBT activist in her early years while she went to a private schools in relative comfort. It wasn’t the sex she was addicted to in the long run, and so she is probably able to channel desires towards lustless friendships in ways that Sciambra probably cannot, something like how a person can drink moderately, but an alcoholic has to refrain from any drink to remain sober. This is not to say his approach for himself is wrong. He probably has to be very strong with respect to his own desires. But neither is his experience universal. Furthermore, and this may be painfully obvious, Sciambra is a dude, Tushnet is not. Gay relationships already tend to be pretty different than Lesbian ones.
At the very least, Tushnet recognizes (or is starting to recognize), that her experiences are not universal either.
C
catholic1seeks
Guest
I’m not very aware of Sciambra or his writings, but when you put it like that, I understand better. Still, he himself is kind of acting like his experience and solution is universal. At least, that’s what I got from that critique. He essentially calls being gay/SSA the “homosexual spirit.”
I think Eve gets it right. She’s not promoting just ONE way to be faithful to the church. She’s not saying everyone must pair of with another celibate SSA person. But that is one way she talks about, as well as communal living, godparenthood and extended family, service, committed friendship, and so on.
Last edited:
- Status