Friday, September 20, 2013

Half a Quick Takes!





Wedding on the brain here, so sorry if there is not a lot of thought or meat to these Quick Takes! Of which there will only be four. Yep, half-baked Quick Takes. 


1) Just a week after my last post about the media distortion of Pope Francis' words and just a day after JoAnna Wahlund wrote her excellent piece about journalistic opportunism ("Pope Francis has single-handedly destroyed Catholicism"), the press did it again. They distorted and spun a very long Pope Francis interview, highlighting only the parts that serve their secular agenda. (What? You didn't see any news reports about the Pope's discussion of confession or his criticism of lax priests who denied sin? That was in there, too.)

This Catholic Vote piece is an excellent response for you to link to your facebook pages and email to your Aunt Martha:




I've said it before and I'll say it again: Christianity is not a philosophy. It's not a list of rules nor is it a moral code. It's rooted in a Divine Person named Jesus Christ, who is the Alpha and the Omega, and who came to save us poor sinners. As Pope Francis says: 

"God is in every person’s life. God is in everyone’s life. Even if the life of a person has been a disaster, even if it is destroyed by vices, drugs or anything else—God is in this person’s life. You can, you must try to seek God in every human life. Although the life of a person is a land full of thorns and weeds, there is always a space in which the good seed can grow. You have to trust God.”

Trust God, not the media.


2) One of my most poignant real-life experiences with a stranger was reprinted at Catholic Stand this week. Remember my conversation with the air conditioner man who got "fixed"?


A friendly young air conditioner tech came over to check the system at our home.


Small talk led to him asking, “So how many kids do you have, anyway?”


“We have eight.”


Shocked, laughing, “Oh, are you crazy?!”


I was not offended; I could sense a good heart. ”Ha ha, well, two are in college, and so only six are in the house right now.”


Then he went and said it: “We had three, and then I got fixed.”


I didn’t even hesitate, and said with a smile:


“Oh, were you broken?”


Nervous laughter, hesitation. He really was not expecting that….



Read the rest, here.




3) Made me cry!! (Well, I didn't actually cry because I am not a crier, but if I were, I would have been in a puddle!) Sweetest thing ever. Nearly a hundred years old, and his spirit has not aged, nor his undying love for his bride:








4) Please, someone, go save Janna…. She is so precious, and so in need.




From someone who met her at the orphanage:


What touched me the most was every time I would rub her head or hands she looked at me like it was the most soothing thing that had ever happened to her – I will never forget that look.   It was as if years of horrible memories were released and she soaked up the gentle attention.

May God grant a family to this little princess.



+++++++


Quick note: I have gotten incredible feedback from my "Women: Save your marriage. In five minutes" post. If you have read the book(s), please let me know if your marriage was helped; I will be reprinting your stories for a follow-up post designed to help and encourage others. I will keep all responses anonymous. My email is littlecatholicbubble@gmail.com

Have a great weekend, everyone! And thanks to Jen for hosting!








345 comments:

  1. where can one read the full article (secular sources please, we know that a religious source might distort and spin the article) so we can see exactly how the media "distorted and spun a very long Pope Francis interview, highlighting only the parts that serve their secular agenda."

    ReplyDelete
  2. Alan, I have it linked right up there in the article where it says "They distorted and spun a very long Pope Francis interview". If you missed it, it's here (and in about five other Jesuit publications including America:

    http://www.thinkingfaith.org/articles/20130919_1.htm

    That one is from the British Jesuits. And no worries, the Jesuits are very well-respected by liberals, secularists, etc. ;) I doubt that a 100% secular group would take the time to translate and post a complete interview by the pope. They only like the stuff about gays and abortion that the can spin to their agenda. Please make sure you read JoAnna's post (which was picked up by many sources) and also the Catholic Vote article as well. All morality, all truth, all of what Catholics do, say and are, flows from Jesus Christ, True God and True Man. Without Him? There is nothing, and we are still in our sin.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Comments by Cardinal George Pell, Archbishop of Sydney, on Pope Francis' recent 12,000 word interview, (just a couple of paragraphs from which have sparked sensationalized/misleading headlines around the world):

    "Two paragraphs in Pope Francis' important 12,000 word interview have been the focus of particular attention. He also emphasised the importance of not taking issues out of context.

    The Holy Father is describing how many priests and bishops, including myself, carry out their ministry as teachers and healers.

    Questions like abortion and homosexual practice involve very important human and scriptural values, and they need to be articulated clearly, sensitively and with a compassionate understanding of our weaknesses and struggles.

    Essential Christian moral teachings need to be defended and explained when they are attacked. But we do not seek to harangue people about them every day. After Jesus saved the adulterous woman from stoning, he gently urged her to sin no more (John:8).

    Important moral issues as they are, they are not central issues of faith, like the resurrection of Jesus or the love and mercy of God.

    The Holy Father is calling our attention to the way truth is something lived in a relationship, first and foremost in a relationship with God.

    Faith is foundational. With this great truth to rely on, God calls us to live a better life, helps us in our struggles, and through His forgiveness enables us to start again when we fail.

    This is the message that we work to bring to people every day. I hope the Holy Father's interview helps to make this clearer to everyone."

    (Cardinal Pell is one of a group of eight cardinals selected from around the world to advise the Pope on the reform of the Roman Curia and governance of the worldwide Church.)

    ReplyDelete
  4. Alan- the interview was conducted and published by religious sources. If you read below it clearly states that apart from a few quotes you'd need to secure permission to republish. So many secular sources are only quoting portions and "paraphrasing" (reinterpreting) the rest.

    Leila linked the actual interview. The media as I said isnt publishing it. Their commentary is third source. Thus its poor and inaccurate to begin with.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I just added this link to the OP. It's excellent. Alan, I hope you will read it:

    http://gerardnadal.com/2013/09/20/what-pope-francis-really-thinks-about-abortion-and-homosexuality/

    ReplyDelete
  6. "According to the illiterati..."

    Touché! :)

    ReplyDelete
  7. And just a day after the interview published, here we have Pope Francis boldly decrying abortion and defending all unborn human life!

    http://bigstory.ap.org/article/pope-blasts-abortion-after-decrying-focus-rules

    ReplyDelete
  8. Good one, Leila!

    This entire infantile drama has been succinctly quashed by Bishop Thomas Tobin of Providence, Rhode Island:

    "Being a Catholic doesn't mean having to choose between doctrine and charity, between truth and love. It includes both. We are grateful to Pope Francis for reminding us of that vision."

    End of story. Move along now. Nothing exploitable here for either desperate news spinners or for "gay" or "pro-choice" activists...

    ReplyDelete
  9. There were several quotes from his lengthy interview that I found resonated with me:
    “If one has the answers to all the questions — that is the proof that God is not with him. It means that he is a false prophet using religion for himself. The great leaders of the people of God, like Moses, have always left room for doubt. You must leave room for the Lord, not for our certainties; we must be humble. … Our life is not given to us like an opera libretto, in which all is written down; but it means going, walking, doing, searching, seeing. … We must enter into the adventure of the quest for meeting God; we must let God search and encounter us. … If the Christian is a restorationist, a legalist, if he wants everything clear and safe, then he will find nothing. Tradition and memory of the past must help us to have the courage to open up new areas to God. Those who today always look for disciplinarian solutions, those who long for an exaggerated doctrinal “security,” those who stubbornly try to recover a past that no longer exists — they have a static and inward-directed view of things. In this way, faith becomes an ideology among other ideologies. I have a dogmatic certainty: God is in every person’s life. God is in everyone’s life. Even if the life of a person has been a disaster, even if it is destroyed by vices, drugs or anything else — God is in this person’s life. You can, you must try to seek God in every human life. Although the life of a person is a land full of thorns and weeds, there is always a space in which the good seed can grow. You have to trust God.”
    And another quote:
    “We cannot insist only on issues related to abortion, gay marriage and the use of contraceptive methods. This is not possible. I have not spoken much about these things, and I was reprimanded for that. But when we speak about these issues, we have to talk about them in a context. The teaching of the church, for that matter, is clear and I am a son of the church, but it is not necessary to talk about these issues all the time.
    The dogmatic and moral teachings of the church are not all equivalent. The church’s pastoral ministry cannot be obsessed with the transmission of a disjointed multitude of doctrines to be imposed insistently …
    We have to find a new balance; otherwise even the moral edifice of the church is likely to fall like a house of cards, losing the freshness and fragrance of the Gospel. The proposal of the Gospel must be more simple, profound, radiant. It is from this proposition that the moral consequences then flow. I say this also thinking about the preaching and content of our preaching.”
    All of this is so very true. Even with his comments on homosexualtiy, there was no departure from the Church’s teachings, but the focus of Pope Francis is on the person, and on mercy and love. He certainly had the opportunity when discussing the issue to remind the faithful that homosexual conduct is disordered and an abomination – but he chose not to. He chose instead to say that “[r]eligion has the right to express its opinion in the service of the people, but God in creation has set us free: it is not possible to interfere spiritually in the life of the person.” Again, his focus – even as to the conduct of the person – is on mercy and love, and not condemnation. I welcome his message. I – and many Catholics like me – have grown weary of the punitive tone set by the U.S. Catholic Bishops on this and other issues. I do not expect Church teaching to change. I do expect, however, that my church leaders embrace and articulate the redemptive and loving side of Church teaching as well. I hope the Holy Father’s words will inspire our pastors and bishops to turn the focus to mercy and love, and challenge the faithful to turn their hearts in the same direction. I will indeed be examining my own.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I hope the Holy Father’s words will inspire our pastors and bishops to turn the focus to mercy and love, and challenge the faithful to turn their hearts in the same direction. I will indeed be examining my own.

    Agreed! But here is my question: Isn't mercy and love the basic things we have heard for the last forty years (and not really any emphasis on sin) from the pulpits? That is the thing: It's got to be a balance, and it all has to be rooted in Jesus Christ. First, we preach salvation (as the Pope says), then we catechize (that is the part that has been missing). So, we need to figure that part out. Our people are not well-catechized. Lack of catechesis is a huge reason why we lose members.

    ReplyDelete
  11. My own parish's experience in loss of members is the exact opposite. It has not been because the members are not well-catechized. Our pastor has seen to that. He preaches and teaches in such a way that there can be no doubt as to the Church's teaching. Our loss of members is because of the lack of charity and understanding of our pastor and the leadership of our archdiocese. Our Archbishop and our Pastor do not exhibit exactly what Pope Francis is speaking to - a focus on mercy and "all are welcome." Our pastor makes us feel unworthy to attend Mass or call ourselves Catholic, and people have tired of it and have left. The tone is set by our Archbishop, who is extremely punitive in his preaching and his public statements. His primary focus is opposing gay marriage. Many pastors after directed to address certain issues tend to downplay the negativity, but my pastor has not and this has led to people leaving. I, too, would love to leave but my children attend public school (by our choice) and need religious education and I refuse to let my pastor run me out of my parish. I am hoping Pope Francis' words will be taken to heart by my Archbishop and my Pastor. I have written to my Pastor about this and he seems receptive, stating "we all have so much still to learn from Pope Francis." Amen to that.

    ReplyDelete
  12. "Our pastor has seen to that. He preaches and teaches in such a way that there can be no doubt as to the Church's teaching."

    Yes, but do they accept Church teaching and live by it?

    I, too, would love to leave but my children attend public school (by our choice) and need religious education and I refuse to let my pastor run me out of my parish.

    I can absolutely see wanting to leave a parish with a harsh pastor, but you don't mean you'd want to leave the Church because of her moral teachings (which are fixed and unchanging), correct? Leaving the Eucharist… I can't imagine it.

    I'm curious if you have read my reversion story (at the top of the blog) and what your thoughts are?

    Thanks!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sorry for the combination of quotations and italics in repeating your words. My brain is obviously dull today!

      Delete
  13. Leila,
    You are well versed in doctrine and expressing your opinion when Catholics want to leave the church and the Eucharist.....it isn't because of a proper catholic understanding, it is because love and mercy have bee secondary to doctrine. You may not think you fall into this category, but you do. Not to long ago I read your blog about gay marriage. One of your readers brought up the suicide rate of young gay teens and I believe your reply was that is isn't the fault of our societies treatment of gays, homosexuals commit suicide because of the immoral behavior. Like it or not there isn't any love or mercy in statements such as those. You can argue a point like no other Leila, but by your rigid defense of Catholicism, you have lost love. And only by love and mercy do we bring people to Christ.I believe that is what the Pope is trying to convey.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Hi nik kiss,

    Could you give me a context, please? I'm guessing you are referring to this article that I have used before, in which a gay activist himself admits that the "gay bullying leads to suicide" is used wrongly:

    http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/gay-activist-admits-bullying-hysteria-may-cause-suicides-not-prevent-them/

    I've written many tens of thousands of words on this blog, with each post carefully worded (not so much the comments, which are copious, over three years), and that is what you determined makes me "lose love"? One comment deep underneath a post?

    I'm going to challenge you: Go back and read my blog. Read my discussions about love, and about sin vs. sinners. Quote something directly if you don't mine (so that we can see the words and check the context). I doubt I will change your mind about my "unlovingness", but I know that many of the secular folks on this blog (including gay folks) will not agree with you. I will not make your privy to my many private email conversations, but boy do I wish you could see them. But for starters, if you are really upset about my (supposed) lack of love re: gay people, start reading here:

    http://littlecatholicbubble.blogspot.com/2010/10/catholic-mother-beloved-son-who-is-gay.html

    http://littlecatholicbubble.blogspot.com/2011/07/gay-catholic-and-doing-fine.html

    http://littlecatholicbubble.blogspot.com/2011/07/from-awesome-gay-lifestyle-to-catholic.html

    By the way, I recently gave a speech to the catechists in my diocese, and the theme was Lumen Fidei. I discussed love at length. There is not one soul on earth that the Church doesn't want to see in Heaven. Love is the beginning and the end, and I concur. But Love can never (as the Pope said several times in the encyclical) be divorced from Truth. I hope you would agree.

    One last thought. My interactions here are about ideas and doctrine and debate. My private interactions with people are not something I put out here. Please never assume that you know me, or how I feel about anyone, or how much I love them. Thanks. :)

    ReplyDelete
  15. I fear we might soon see an explosion on this blog like on the comboxes of every other Catholic site at the moment - with people seeing affirmation from Pope Francis for a range of different and even contradictory personal philosophies and opinions.

    Which is why I wish the Pope had said all that he wanted to say in a couple of clear and simple sentences, instead of going to the length and depth which he did (and so ambiguously in parts). IMHO all he needed to say was: "We must proclaim the Good News and preach the Gospel of life with compassion and understanding always. Women should know that their dignity and worth in the eyes of God are the same as those of men, and that their vocations in life and their ministry in the Church are an indispensible part of our mission."

    So much of the reaction, comments and the controversy that are arising each time Pope Francis opens his mouth to teach are scandalous and shocking. There are as many takes on what he means to say on various matters as there are commenters, "experts" and pundits. How a house so divided unto itself can stand one can only wonder.

    Speaking for myself, I wholeheartedly agree with Leila that it is precisely the lack of meaningful catechesis that has led to the debility of the Body of Christ in the world today. Our answer to the relativism and godlessness in the world can't be less doctrinal Catholicism but more. Our truths have been revealed to us by Christ Himself, followed by 2000 years of doctrinal development, magisterial teaching, theological debate, scriptural exegesis and inspiration from the Holy Spirit. Anyone who doesn't like hearing any part of the resulting priceless wisdom that defines our collective path to eternal life needs to review the seriousness of their commitment to Truth. As for relating to those who've fallen away, it is useful to recall that "admonishing the sinner" is actually a Spiritual Act of Mercy. We can and must rely always on God's mercy, but we must never ever fall into the trap of presumption nor the dangers of relativism when it comes to the hard realities of the last things. Woe to us if, like so many Protestant denominations, we adopt a philosophy of "I'm OK, you're OK and just about anything we deem good is OK."

    ReplyDelete
  16. Nil Kiss- I'm sure Leila can defend herself but...

    1) The purpose of the Bubble as I understand it is two-fold: to catechize and to dialogue or evangelize. This is not to say mercy doesn't come into play. But this is a public forum for discussion. Sometimes the Truth about catechisis hurts. Mercy is trying to push a person gently to the correct path. Pope Francis spoke out against confessors who are too harsh AND too lax. It's a fine line which Leila walks astonishing well.

    2) Many people speak to Leila privately. You are only seeing the public discussions.

    Pope Francis is not as "kumbaya" as you may think. His remarks talk about coming along side sinners to guide them where they are at. This means to mercifully show and teach them that they are sinning. Leila doesnt wield the power to refuse baptism that some pastors do. But neither should she pretend that society is trying to normalize all sorts of perverse practices.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Also thought people like to know that one of the spiritual acts of mercy is to admonish the sinner.

    http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10198d.htm

    ReplyDelete
  18. Deltaflute, thank you for explaining that so well!

    Francis, you are right… Pope Francis is a talker! He is obviously an extrovert (as opposed to Benedict's introvert), and he loves being around people and really having lots of dialogue. That has good points, and bad. Everything he says in his long interviews and discussions (unlike his predecessors) can be exploited. I see that happening with the latest interview, and how!

    Makes me wish I could require the reading of Lumen Fidei, which, unlike a sit-down (or impromptu) interview, was carefully, painstakingly crafted, weighing each word. The discussion of love and truth in that encyclical would be the jumping off point for discussions with folks like nik kiss.

    nik kiss, did you read the encyclical?

    ReplyDelete
  19. Discussing love and loving are 2 separate actions. Yes love cannot be divorced from Truth, but when you are just beginning and searching for Truth the action of love the " feeling " of love is vital. Always lead with love. I know your blog is for Catholics and you discuss and defend. I believe as Christians we need to be very very careful with our words. We can turn someone from Truth with the our keyboard. With all our wonderful arguments, and our very clever debate we are here to bring the good news. That one statement you made about suicide was vile. I don't know your work and discussions about love and your private emails . I do know the statement you made. and it hurt my soul. I carry it with me.

    ReplyDelete
  20. nik kiss, I'm really still waiting for you to show me the "vile" comment. If it was that awful, I need to see it. Please, I'm asking.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Nit kiss - are you catholic?

    Love is an action not a feeling. Its a decision to sacrafice oneself for the good of another not a feeling. If I saw my child steal I think his reactions should be taken into account (remorse or abstinancy) but he still needs to be called on it. Whether he becomes angry or not matters little. I wouldnt be doing my Christian duty to teach him if I say nothing.

    ReplyDelete
  22. I did a search. Was this the comment:

    Mary, I have to take issue with the idea that telling someone that sin is sin (and yes, homosexual acts -- which are really only mutual masturbation and/or sodomy) is driving people to suicide. Then you are saying that telling the truth is harmful to people. What if adulterers were committing suicide because a society was very much against adultery? Would we have to stop saying adultery was sinful and start saying it was good simply because our saying it's sin would possibly be the cause of the suicides? Of course not.

    Some say it's the "unacceptance" that has led to homosexuals committing suicide. However, I always think of the Jews, marginalized and vilified in so many nations, and yet you didn't see them distraught and committing suicide for being Jews and being ostracized. I remember one young man on a blog saying that he had never been happy, not one day in his life, even though his family accepted him as a gay man. He was still blaming society for that, but really? Never happy? That may be because being same-sex attracted is not a "good" and gay thing (in the true sense of that once-noble word). The Church believes we must speak the truth, that people are more that their disordered inclinations (and that there is more to life than sexual pleasure however one wants to get it). Have you considered that many (most) homosexuals are not at peace because there is something in their human nature that knows this is simply not right. That we are not made to perform those acts with people of the same sex. We do them no favors by saying, Hey, as long as you feel good… it must be right!

    I just don't get it. I really don't.


    I'm guessing that was the "vile" and "unloving" comment, that something in our nature knows when we are not acting in accordance with our nature? I think that Steve Gershom (a gay man) speaks to that in this post (check especially the last paragraph):

    http://www.stevegershom.com/2013/09/what-is-sex-part-ii-i-only-do-one-thing/

    ReplyDelete
  23. and it hurt my soul

    And forgive me, but in truth I have to say that a lot of things may hurt our emotions, but the only thing that can hurt a soul is sin. If what I said was a sin, then I would be wrong. But I don't see the sin in what I wrote. Sorry, I just don't see it.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Leila - hurt my soul or spoke to my soul are common evangelical phrases. I'm assuming that nit is not Catholic which is why I asked. I hope she/he clarifies that part because as you point out those phrases have always been well odd if not wrong. Didnt know if you knew or not.

    ReplyDelete
  25. I am a mother of a gay child and also a Christian. That surely doesn't make me an expert on anything and you knowing a gay man doesn't make you one either. I read your blog ( in the last few months ) where you argued that homosexual suicide had more to do with not living morally than how they have been treated by society. So to pin point the exact blog I am sorry I cannot. It was a response to a comment not an entire blog. I am saying in that statement, that response was the opposite of love. I am not defending gay lifestyles or adultery. I am saying these debates do not bring anyone to Christ. And your response to that comment was the opposite of love. I would assume your goal is to bring people to Christ.We cannot bring people to Christ without love and kindness. In your response
    , you lacked compassion and love.I think that is what the Pope is trying to bring to us. These debates don't really help. They don't help someone seeking. The just don't. When someone you love is gay, you have to just love them . That's it. I love her because she is my child. It is pretty powerful stuff. Loving my gay child has been a blessing. It is her journey, her life to live. Be careful what you blog, because it can be very hurtful and ya might have a gay youth reading.

    ReplyDelete
  26. nik kiss, I think I found (and then reposted) the comment you were talking about (look above).

    A question (sorry if I sound rushed, but usually I am). Loving our children is a given (of course!), but do you also warn of spiritual danger when it comes to your children? Isn't our ultimate goal for our children to be in Heaven? And when they sin, do we not have an obligation to do more than just "love them. That's it"? If your child was committing adultery, or cutting, or stealing, would you just "love them" or would you also, gently, lovingly, speak?

    ReplyDelete
  27. Nit- are you catholic? What type of Christian are you? It would help with the discussion if we knew more about your background

    ReplyDelete
  28. Apparently my migraine has affected me more than i thought. Sorry for thinking it said nit as in nit picky when it should read nik as in small cut.

    ReplyDelete
  29. I am a Catholic mother of 6 children. My gay child is 21. I haven't been silent ever on my views. My child informed us of her lifestyle this January. Weighty . This isn't black and white to me anymore. My gentle speak on my views pushed my child away. She felt outside the family. I went to counseling ( tried my priest, but that is a different story) . My Christian counselor advised me to just love her. Love her because she is a child of God, she is my child. My love or gentle speak may never change her lifestyle. And really it isn't my motivation anymore. I trust in God and His wisdom. My job? Love. This is her life to live....my gay child has taught me love. What love really truly means. I look at everyone differently. I look at the world with a different set of eyes. I am more compassionate to suffering. When the Pope's interview became public I was filled with hope. He didn't condone abortion, homosexuality, contraception, but I felt love from him.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Yes, agreed, it is very weighty. I know women in the same position. Crushing is how they might put it. It's one of the hardest crosses there is. The Church gives hope and love to everyone, no matter how dark the sin. The sin, as the Pope has said, is a symptom of something bigger -- a bigger wound. I have always felt the most profound hope and love from all the popes (JPII is a saint… that man knew how to love! And Benedict, that shy, humble, gentle soul; he was never the hardened autocrat that the press libelously portrayed). We are so blessed.

    Yes, we love all of our children. And we pray for them to become holy, to navigate a world so full of snares and obstacles to the virtues (which are scoffed at today). And yes, we trust God, because He loves our children more than we ever could. As mothers, we keep our eyes on the Cross, as that is what true love looks like. That is the gateway to Heaven. Our children must take up their own crosses, too, to follow Christ to His glory. Everyone's cross is different, but the one thing that cannot be denied is that it must be taken up.

    ReplyDelete
  31. I did read the entire interview. And I also read the AP article, which stated that the Pope's comments "contained no change in church teaching, but they represented a radical shift in tone." I think that's accurate. There is no change in doctrine, but there is a shift in tone and, yes, priorities and emphasis in the public sphere. I think that's significant and I agree with him.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Jessica, What is the shift in tone for us in the secular west (seriously asking)? I know that in America, the tone has been for forty years that God is Love (but we don't concern ourselves with sin or doctrine). Can anyone say that the Catholic parishes in America have been preaching on sin only, and not love of God? Most Catholics have never heard a word preached on contraception, for example, and I very seriously doubt that they have any fear of going to hell. I think Fr. Longenecker might have a handle on what is so confusing about this speech for some, and it may well be cultural, that Pope Francis comes from a very Catholic culture, and the understandings there are very different than in the post-Christian west:

    http://www.patheos.com/blogs/standingonmyhead/2013/09/poking-the-pope.html

    Makes sense to me.

    Also, I am wondering if there really is there a difference in emphasis in the public square when after the interview he said this about abortion:

    http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/pope-francis-asks-doctors-to-spread-the-gospel-of-life/

    It seems that he is as adamant as his predecessors about the evils of abortion and our duty to protect all innocent life (the face of Christ, each of them unjustly condemned). That is "public square" stuff. Even HuffPo seemed confused…

    I await whatever Pope Francis says next! One thing is sure: Everyone is talking about the Catholic Church. :)

    ReplyDelete
  33. Hi nik kiss,

    I'm a gay man, and I've been in and out of these comboxs for...2.5 years now? It's been a long time. I'm married, happy, and I consider myself a theist/humanist.

    Leila's belief that homosexuality is disorder is not founded in bigotry or being uncomfortable with people who are in same-sex relationships, but rather, it is a derivation of Natural Law, which states that there are such things are "ordered" and "disordered" states. For a person of the sex to pair with a person of the opposite sex, under this theology, is to be ordered. And you know, there's biblical backing. Natural Law doesn't rest solely on the Bible though.

    Now, I don't think Leila's analogy between the Jewish and the gay communities is the best. Jews are typically born into communities, they have one another. Those who discover same-sex attraction are alone at first, and I think this makes them more susceptible to the harsh climate our society can be. I'm not going to sit and say one community has had it worse, but rather their trials have been unique.

    If you're interested in seeing biblical interpretations that support the other side/negate the Catholic interpretation, for "diversity", I've found this one particular page to be a good starting point. The "letter" itself is just a primer, the Appendix is when he digs in.

    Don't call Leila unloving. Unlike others in our society who throws countless slurs and insults at those in same-sex relationships, Leila is simply using theological language to describe her belief, and she doesn't use the word disordered out of context. And honestly, I've never had an online friend, that I've never met before, whom I've felt has cared so much for me.

    And really, I do NOT understand this media blitz about the pope. Everything he says is just like, normal Catholic stuff. He certainly does have a way with getting compassionate words out there though.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sorry, I did not copy the link of the "letter"! Here it is:

      http://godmademegay.blogspot.com/p/letter-to-louise.html

      **I'm not sharing this as a proxy for my own beliefs or interpretation.

      Delete
  34. The first thing that the Holy Father said, when asked who he thought Jorge Mario Bergoglio was, was that he was a sinner. It came across as very sincere. That stopped me right in my tracks, and gave me huge confidence in him. He later said he spends an hour daily in front of the Blessed Sacrament. That further boosted my joy. It is said (not sure how they know) that in the 2005 conclave then-Cardinal Ratzinger voted for him, and that he was elated when he heard the news of the election of Pope Francis this spring.

    And let us not forget Who ultimately chooses our Pope. That choice is always the best, no matter how our small minds may interpret any one thing said by or about the Holy Father. In the big picture, this is all good for God's Church.

    I'll be thrilled if more people pay attention to what the Holy Father has to say. If he gets their attention by saying something true, even if they misunderstand him at first, so be it. I hope they keep listening.

    One more thing. In my parish, I've been hearing a variation of "God is love" in almost every homily. Not once a word about abortion, married priests, chastity, admittance of remarried Catholics to the Eucharist, homosexuality, women's ordination, or even sin (a bit to my chagrin, I admit). In my experience here in Europe, it is only the liberal media who speak about nothing but the Church's teaching on these issues. I always felt that is not what Jesus spent most of His time talking about, and while they are important (and extremely well-reasoned parts of Church teaching), this is not the heart of our Faith. It is the media which have tried to make it into what the Church is all about, while distorting the teaching and never bothering to explain the Church's real position.

    We live in interesting times. The next few years with Pope Francis will be exciting, and I for one very much look forward to them. We desperately needed JP II, and we were extremely blessed with Benedict XVI. Pope Francis is just what the Doctor ordered for us now, and I trust this doctor more than any other.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Sebastian, what a great reflection, thank you!

    ReplyDelete
  36. Nik, I might have missed someone else doing this here, but thank you for showing us what unconditional love towards you child truly is. I would give you a giant hug for this.

    Zachary, I can see how one could see Leila as being unloving, although I 100% agree with you that she is not, nor is that her intention. However her wording, used appropriately or not ( lets be honest that using a word to it true definition can still carry a negative connotation, whether that was the intent or not. And I would say that most here are smart enough to know that, yet still continue to use the words) is not always the loving thing to do.

    But I have to be honest, in my debates with Leila she has often told me how homosexuality is dangerous and deadly, and one of her points is the suicide rate. But then, and I will not be able to find it I am sure, but I remember it to be true, that Leila downplayed the role of anti gay rhetoric (I wont use bullying here) in the suicide of young gays. I think we should all be able to agree that it plays a role in some (many, most? who knows, I am not qualified to make that statement) of those suicides. And even if it is only one then we should work as hard as we can to avoid it.

    I have seen homosexuality called disordered (can we procreate with each other? Nope. But to me that doesn't make our actions disordered.)
    Deviant. Are we the majority, nope, but I think we can all agree that the word deviant has a definite negative meaning. And yes so we differ from the majority, so what?
    Evil. Umm yeah, really? Evil. Yup you say all sin is evil. Don't make it right to tell someone their actions are evil. Especially if they don't believe in your church. Not your god, but your church.
    And of course the ever popular, you're going to hell. Now that's usually followed by "I'm not saying you're going to hell, I don't decide that, god does". Sorry kids if the words exit your mouth you are saying them.

    So now your a young kid, confused about your sexuality and it seems like so many are against you. How that make you feel?

    I hope that all makes sense. I know I have been told many many many times here that my logic cannot be followed. I think what I have said here is perfectly logical.

    As for what the pope said. I don't recall seeing any news cast say that he was changing catholicism in any way. And I do think his words are a change in tone. Sorry if y'all cant see that, but maybe open your eyes a little and you will. If you can't I can't help you.

    I have not yet read the links or the whole article, but my wicked lifestyle (still have yet to see a good definition of the "gay lifestyle" (or death style as I have seen mentioned by folks) has gotten in the way of me having an abundance of spare time, but I will try to read the links when time allows.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Thank you Alanl64. You articulated what I could not. God Bless you and your partner. http://justbecausehebreathes.com/

    ReplyDelete
  38. Nik kiss, no comment on what Zach said? I guess I didn't expect it. Have a great day!

    ReplyDelete
  39. I was planning on responding, but got called away. Many things to do and little time. You seem a little passive aggressive Leila. Please remember being kind brings us closer to God. I will not be responding or visiting here again.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Alan, I want to distill down your comments to get to the heart, philosophically, of what you are saying. First, let's get on the same page. We don't agree on a lot of things, sexually speaking, but let's go to something that we can both agree on. These folks experience disordered sexual desires (I hope you would agree):

    http://www.browardpalmbeach.com/2009-08-20/news/those-who-practice-bestiality-say-they-re-part-of-the-next-gay-rights-movement/

    There are kids who would be bullied for this (Note: The Church teaches and so do I as a mother that it is WRONG to bully or be unkind to people, even people who are doing wrong, or tempted to do wrong). There are kids who might be so distraught because society says "this is wrong!" that they might feel like ending their lives. They might have families that reject them, and they might be ostracized (none of which you or I would condone, I hope!). Some adult folks with this inclination might make the case (and they do) that there is NO harm, no problem with this particular desire or acting out on them. (They would be wrong, of course.)

    Now, given all that, would it still be right to say "Hey, that is harmful, that is wrong, we do not condone it, it is never good for you" and then for Christians to go the step further and say, "In fact, it's so against your nature and the way God designed human beings that it's harmful for your soul; it's a sin, and it can ultimately separate you from God if you choose to walk that path."

    Please, very specifically tell me if we can still say that is wrong, even if folks make fun of kids with that inclination, even if kids or adults even commit suicide (a tragedy of immense proportions) because of it?

    Or do you instead hold that we must always affirm every action as long as it keeps people from potential suicide?

    Please don't take the topic back to homosexuality. Please just answer this specific line of thought, and tell me where you stand on that. Then we can go from there. But I need to establish your philosophical basis for what you believe about when we are or are not allowed to say that an act is wrong.

    Thanks!

    ReplyDelete
  41. nik kiss, you came on my blog and made a personal judgement on me, that I was an unloving person: A very serious charge. I refuted that as did another wonderful young man who has been a friend now for years. Yes, I had hoped for an apology for that unjust action on your part. I understand that you don't feel it necessary to apologize for your rude comments and judgement, but that you instead found it to be the "kind" thing to tell me (on top of your other judgements) that I am passive aggressive. That is sad to me, but what can I do? Take care.

    ReplyDelete
  42. I made a personal judgment on a response. I found it insensitive and reckless. I apologize if this hurt you. I also felt I would apologize for implying you were an unloving person. The statement was unloving in my opinion. I understand you feeling upset I hadn't addressed what Zach had written, and articulating that would have been great without the snarky comment in your response to me. So yes you were as rude as you thought I was being. Better to just say what ya mean without being a smartass to be blunt

    ReplyDelete
  43. Let's be clear here. Typing does not give proper tone. It's better to give a person the benefit of doubt.

    I guess my question is than. Nik kiss, what are you looking to accomplish by your comments? Are you expecting Leila to appologize for a previous statement that you FELT aka perceived as mean? Or are you looking to have Leila not broach the subject? I'm not exactly sure where you are going. I get the feeling that you are very conflicted about gay sex and gay marriage because you're daughter is gay.

    ReplyDelete
  44. nik kiss, when you come on to someone else's blog, it's like you are a guest in someone's home. This is my "living room", in a sense, and I am happy to have guests of all stripes and opinions. On this blog, I am the hostess, you are the guest. Unfortunately, you came into my house insulting me from the get-go, and to this moment you continue to be rude in my house, under the guise of correcting me. Talk about passive aggressive. If you dislike the way we speak here in my "house", you are free to be a guest at about a million other blog "homes". But don't barge in here, insult your host continually, all the while pretending that you are kind and loving. Here's a hint for the next time you comment on a blog for the first time: Get to know people first. Establish a relationship and some good will before you start making rude comments and personal judgments.

    Better yet, don't make rude comments and personal judgments at all.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Nothing is more cold than a Christian who is not dedicated to saving others.

    In this respect there can be no pretense of poverty: the widow who gave her two tiny coins would rise up and call you to account (Luke 21:2).

    Peter too, who said: “Silver and gold have I none” (Acts 3:6).

    And Paul, who was so poor that he often went hungry and lacked the necessary means to live on (1Cor 4:11).

    Neither can you protest your humble birth: they too were of modest degree.

    Ignorance won't give you any better excuse: they were uneducated as well...

    It's no good claiming sickness: Timothy was subject to frequent illnesses (1Tim 5:23)...

    Anybody at all can be of service to his neighbor if he would do what he can...

    Don't say that it's impossible for you to draw others because, if you are a Christian, it's impossible that you shouldn't. Every tree bears its own fruit (Matt 17:17f) and, since there is no contradiction in nature, what we are saying is likewise true since it follows from the very nature of a Christian...

    It is easier for light to be darkness than that the Christian should not shine!

    - Saint John Chrysostom (c.345-407)
    Priest at Antioch, then Bishop of Constantinople, Doctor of the Church
    Homilies on the Acts of the Apostles, n°20, 3-4; PG 60, 162

    ReplyDelete
  46. @leila

    I don't think Alan will respond to your question about bestial "marriages", or at least not along the lines you want.

    Support for gay marriage does not go hand-in-hand with some theoretical idea that the concept of "marriage" should be expanded to include animals or inanimate objects. It is based on the actual gay people we know (or in Alan's case, are), and their relationships that we are familiar with. Those relationships, as we've seen who have lived alongside them, like the better het marriages, are deep, stable, loving, and life-long. There is no closer, richer relationship in a person's life than with his/her life partner, whether the law allows that person to be called a "spouse" or not.

    If you set aside any mentions of putting penis into vagina, there is nothing in all the emotional, practical, loving, and childrearing teachings of pre-Cana -- teachings on how to live a loving, stable, prayerful, lifelong partnership -- which does not apply equally well to gay marriages.

    ReplyDelete
  47. "Support for gay marriage does not go hand-in-hand with some theoretical idea that the concept of "marriage" should be expanded to include animals or inanimate objects.

    Perhaps I'm misinformed, but my understanding is that a "married" lesbian "couple" precisely use inanimate objects (lacking the "natural objects" necessary) to "consummate" their "marriage".

    ReplyDelete
  48. Francis:

    Such is the freedom we give to two consenting adults in America, huh? But, you know, I don't think any lesbians would swear they need inanimate objects for marriage, so I'm not sure your comment is sincere or is supposed to be some sort of backhanded humor?
    ----

    For what it matters, when it comes to actions we agree/disagree with, I wholeheartedly agree with Leila's/Jesus' approach of loving the person wholly. I don't approve of the way many of my friends live their lives in regards to relationships, alcohol/drugs, etc. But I don't need to bully or criticize them directly and explicitly to communicate to them that I disapprove. Many of them know it quite clearly without me ever having to have said it explicitly. That's the power of love and living by example. Gay teenagers don't kill themselves because of a few clauses in Catholic catechism--they do so because other souls have tortured and made them feel wholly unwelcome in the community such that they felt that life was actually unbearable. Pope Francis' approach--to lay off the damning, and to lay on the loving--is exactly what, frankly, the entire world needs.

    Now, Leila has both the gusto and the nuance to tell me explicitly when she thinks what types of behaviors/decisions I make are morally wrong, but I don't think most of us have the type of social nuance Leila has. So, loving people and being compassionate instead is much easier.

    ReplyDelete
  49. "Those relationships, as we've seen who have lived alongside them, like the better het marriages, are deep, stable, loving, and life-long. There is no closer, richer relationship in a person's life than with his/her life partner.."

    Holy Scriptures (The Word of God) define homosexual acts as seriously sinful. I person CAN NOT be truly happy if they are living in sin. Our Lord says that the person who sins is a slave to sin. And Satan is a very cruel master. It is not very popular to talk about sin nowadays.

    If a person loves another person, they want the highest and greatest good for that person. What is the greatest good? Eternal Life! Heaven! If I love my spouse (and I do), I want Heaven for her, and nothing less! Do most same-sex partners desire Heaven for each other? If they did, would they continue living in sin?

    ReplyDelete
  50. A brief follow up to my previous post --

    I am a poor, sinful human being myself. I have struggled with temptations and sexual sins in the past and I greatly sympathize with those who experience same-sex attraction. I love them and pray for them.

    But sometimes you have to call a spade, a spade. It isn't compassion to pat someone else on the back in their sins. Love demands something better than that. You love the person, but you hate the sin that is separating their soul from God. And you pray for their conversion of heart.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Captcrisis,

    You zoomed by my point at a million miles an hour. I was not talking about bestial marriage. I was talking about sexual sin in general, and what we can and cannot say, and when. I used the example I did precisely and only because it's common ground (I assume) for all of us here. We all agree that the inclination of zoophiles is disordered, and Alan would agree. I am sure he would say it was wrong, even if there were zoophiles who were committing suicide because society did not accept them. Or, maybe not? That is what I was trying to get at. So, please, refer specifically to my question if you want to step in and answer.

    Zach, I would be proud to call you my son. And you know I mean that, even as I would not condone your life choices. ;) Thank you for being the clear thinker here, and making logical, thoughtful points about this very sensitive issue. I appreciate it more than you know.

    Mike, thank you. Agreed. You know, if we hated gay people (or even ourselves, sinners that we are), we would stay in silence (and we ourselves would not change) -- we would not wish Heaven for them/ourselves, but the opposite. Atheist Penn Jillette gets this point where most atheists/secularists don't.

    ReplyDelete
  52. If you set aside any mentions of putting penis into vagina…

    You mean if we set aside the very definition of marriage as a conjugal, one flesh union? Right… that's the point. We are putting aside what is unique and essential to the very thing we call "marriage", as we've known it from the beginning. Therein lies the problem.

    ReplyDelete
  53. "emotional, practical, loving, and childrearing… stable, prayerful, lifelong partnership"

    Two single, chaste sisters can have this. So, what makes marriage different than what the sisters could have?

    ReplyDelete
  54. Holy Scriptures (The Word of God) define homosexual acts as seriously sinful. A person CAN NOT be truly happy if they are living in sin. Our Lord says that the person who sins is a slave to sin. And Satan is a very cruel master. It is not very popular to talk about sin nowadays.

    I feel sorry for gays when I see them having to put up with worldviews such as the one stated by you, Mike. That's all I've got to say.

    ReplyDelete
  55. 5he internet ate my comment.

    Bill- Mike is right on. I have a relative who came out with his drug addiction. Essentially he claimed that he had it under control. He still doesnt. Hes been in and out of jail.

    Sin all sin can delude you. You think it affects noone. You believe that you have control. And you do it because it feels good. Happiness is not found in things or people. True happiness comes from God. If we look to ourselves as the source of morality we can be duped just like my drug addict relative. Its why I fling myself on Christ's mercy. Otherwise I can easily be duped or lie to myself or believe everyone else that whatever my sin is I can handle it or worse its not really sin.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Deltaflute,

    All I am saying is that the Catholic worldview (which is only one of many), as Mike has accurately described it in the statement that I cited, presents unreasonable obstacles to a segment of society. Basically, it is my opinion that the worldview stated by Mike is " incorrect " for lack of a better word, and defers to an authority that does not truly exist which includes the notions of the inerrancy of the Bible and the authority of the Roman Catholic Church to hold people accountable for what it defines as "sin".

    Obviously, that makes me a heretic and this is not a blog for sharing and discussing heresies. So, carry on.

    ReplyDelete
  57. "I feel sorry for gays when I see them having to put up with worldviews such as the one stated by you, Mike. That's all I've got to say."

    Bill, my worldview is the same as the Catholic Church's worldview. It is one that cares for the whole person - body, mind, and soul! It is the worldview that is the most loving and compassionate view, embracing the dignatity of the whole human person.

    Think of it this way. A mom sadly tells her son, "Son, I love you, but what you are doing is wrong. It is harmful to you and to others." The son angrily says, "I can do what I want. You don't want me to be happy! You don't really love me!"

    But the mom really does love the child. She loves him enough to be bold and to tell her child what is best for him, even if he doesn't want to hear it. That is what he Church does. And many complain and call the Church "unloving".

    No one is as compassionate to gays as the Catholic Church is. (There may be those in the Church that sometimes haven't acted as kind and compassionate as they should, but the Church's worldview toward all poor sinners is compassionate.)

    ReplyDelete
  58. Bill, do you think that the Catholic Church (or Christianity) is the only world religion or philosophy which frowns upon homosexual acts, or calls them sinful?

    And, would anyone please address my question to Alan? Thanks!

    Mike, exactly… Why would we be endorsing something that is not good for our children? The "Church as Mother" analogy is an apt one.

    ReplyDelete
  59. No one is as compassionate to gays as the Catholic Church is.

    Mike,

    I can name two right off the top of my head : my state legislature which legalized gay marriage nine years ago and the Supreme Court of the United States which shot down the Defense of Marriage Act this summer. There are many more who treat gays with more compassion than the Catholic Church. They are only sinners by the narrowest and most bigoted of worldviews.

    ReplyDelete
  60. Bill- If the government legalized heron would you view them as being compassionate to my relative? More compassionate than his family? The Church? I mean it does make him feel good. Arent we his family bigots for not supporting his addiction? I mean prior to being an addict he wasnt a person right? His addiction is the sum of who he is right?

    ReplyDelete
  61. Deltaflute, exactly. I just read this from a wonderful Nigerian priest, about sin (paraphrase): If we do not mention sin, we cannot proclaim Christ. If calling sin by its name and wanting to deliver folks from it is uncompassionate, then Christ's entire life and ministry is uncompassionate.

    Bill, will you answer my questions?

    ReplyDelete
  62. Ellen Degeneris is married to a woman. I'm not sure, but let's assume Charlie Sheen is a drug addict. Are both their behaviors equally socially unacceptable?

    What kind of people call Ellen a sinner because she is married to a woman. My answer is: screwed up people.

    ReplyDelete
  63. Bill, what is marriage? What makes it different from other relationships?

    Most of the world still cannot fathom "two wives" as a marriage. That is not a marriage. It is being labeled as such, but it's not a marriage. Marriage requires a bride and a groom, and an ability to consummate. Just like we may call women men (transgendered law), but women are not really men. Cats are not really dogs, either. Even if the law were to declare that cats were dogs.

    I was thinking last night (as my daughter prepares to marry), what is the highest form of bodily union? What is the ultimate sexual union for two people? What unites them as "one flesh", which even has the potential to bring forth new human life? Everyone gets this… but I'd like to hear someone try to deny it….

    ReplyDelete
  64. Bill, do you think that the Catholic Church (or Christianity) is the only world religion or philosophy which frowns upon homosexual acts, or calls them sinful?

    I'm not as familiar with other religions whose influence is stronger in other countries. As far as I am concerned, any discussion of sin that applies to the Catholic Church applies to all religions that find pleasures of the flesh to be less noble than spiritual bliss in this world or the next.

    As Governor Chris Christie said: it's not a sin to be a homosexual. And he didn't mean a celibate one. People have a say over how they choose to live their lives. Those who hand that say over to a religion do so at their own peril.

    ReplyDelete
  65. No change in tone from Pope Francis? Are you serious? I am surprised that some orthodox Catholics conclude that he is articulating the identical language toward homosexuality as his two predecessors. I am fairly certain that Pope Benedict and JP II did NOT say anything like the following:

    "In Buenos Aires I used to receive letters from homosexual persons who are 'socially wounded' because they tell me that they feel like the church has always condemned them. But the church does not want to do this. During the return flight from Rio de Janeiro, I said that if a homosexual person is of good will and is in search of God, I am no one to judge. By saying this, I said what the catechism says. Religion has the right to express its opinion in the service of the people, but God in creation has set us free: it is not possible to interfere spiritually in the life of a person.
    A person once asked me, in a provocative manner, if I approved of homosexuality. I replied with another question: `Tell me: when God looks at a gay person, does he endorse the existence of this person with love, or reject and condemn this person?' We must always consider the person."

    Let me reiterate yet again, I do not dispute that there is no change in Church teaching. Totally get that . . . times ten. But when there is an opportunity here to remind everyone, along with the idea of loving the sinner that he articulated, why homosexuality is a sin and why we should "hate the sin," he chose not to. He is focused on mercy. I think that is relevant and it matters. It matters. And the phrase "Religion has the right to express its opinion in the service of the people?" Its opinion? Can't imagine JPII or Benedict using the word "opinion" when discussing Church teaching on homosexual acts.

    And the idea that many who post here say that their parishes and pastors and bishops do not discuss these issues, I am flabbergasted! Where do you worship? Gay marriage has been the number one issue in my archdiocese since 2010. Letters read at Mass. Lawn signs. Campaigns to vote in favor of a constitutional amendment to define marriage as between one man and one woman. $650,000 in archdiocesan funds put to lobbying efforts against gay marriage. My archbishop will hopefully read Pope Francis' comments and see there is another side to how he should minister to his flock, and it has been sorely missing.

    ReplyDelete
  66. Agreed that an atheist worldview would put physical pleasure as the highest value. You think that leads to good societies? Should sexual orgasm be the highest value? Some have said we have stopped worshipping God and now worship the Almighty Orgasm, and I think that may well be true. You're good with that hierarchy of values?

    Of course people have a say in how they live their lives. It's called free will. But you don't really mean that all people should just do whatever they want, sexually or otherwise, do you?

    And, you really are not familiar with the fact that the orthodox of every world religion consider homosexual acts sinful? You keep making this a "Catholic issue" when it's a universal issue, an issue of natural law (heck, atheist regimes don't allow gay "marriage" -- why not?).

    ReplyDelete
  67. PS: I didn't know Mr. Christie was the arbiter of what is and is not sin...

    ReplyDelete
  68. Bill- Actually both are socially acceptable. Ellen has a talk show. Sheen has a new sitcom. His latest drug binge didnt do much to his career.

    As for government the Netherlands has legalized the use of certain drugs for recreation purposes. Do you think this is a good thing? I mean socially its cool over there to hire a prostitute and smoke pot. You can also use heron drugs if you are an addict. Its to try and curb the addiction through weaning.

    Also same people who call Ellen a sinner call themselves sinners. Pope Francis was asked who he is. He replied "I'm a sinner".

    ReplyDelete
  69. consummate
    Verb
    Make (a marriage or relationship) complete by having sexual intercourse.
    Synonyms
    verb
    accomplish - complete - fulfill - finish
    adjective.
    perfect - complete - thorough - utter - absolute

    simulate
    to have or take on the appearance, form, or sound of; imitate.
    to make in imitation of or as a substitute for.
    to make a pretense of; feign

    ReplyDelete
  70. Francis Catholic, a few thoughts:

    1) Yes, Francis is very much a talker. He likes to speak, to do interviews, to engage casually, not "formally" when he talks about the Faith. He (like every human being) is unique, with a unique temperament and personality. When people talk more "loosely" (for lack of a better word) and more often, it's different than when people speak in more measured, precise and formal tones. We can argue the merits of each, of course.

    2) You are right that the teaching has not changed, but folks who wish there would be a change are using his words to say, "See? Gay people can go about there business!" When of course this is an untruth. Totally.

    3) Can you find me a quote or passage or understanding by either previous pope which contradicts what Pope Francis said in your quote? The hallmark of all three popes is a radical turning to the Person of Christ. If by "tone" difference you mean "style" difference, then yes, they all three have different styles. But the message is not a departure as everyone secular seems to claim. That is SO disingenuous, I hope you agree.

    4) You are in a rare diocese that spent that amount of time on marriage, probably because there was a state issue/law/referendum involved (which makes sense). But aside from being a local issue of great import to your diocese (you know that dioceses have had to close charities when these gay "marriage" and civil union laws pass?), there is still not a lot of preaching on sexual sin (or any sin) and the need for repentance in many/most of the parishes in America (have you ever been to church in California, for example? Oy, vey). Pope Francis called out lax confessors who refuse to call things sin (did the reporters mention that)? And, he may not realize that folks in America don't generally go to confession at all, ha ha.

    5) Since 2010, we've been talking about gay "marriage"? Yes, very recent. We fell down on things for about 40+ years before that here in the west. That's the problem. We never talked about any of this till recently, and even now, it's the press doing the obsessing. They can talk of nothing else, to the point that I want earplugs and blinders. It's nuts how out-of-proportion it is.

    6) I hope you agree that mercy means includes "Go and sin no more". Sanctity is the only option for any of us. The alternative is not loving, not kind, not good at all. We are all called to be saints! Yes, homosexuals included! That is our faith. We want the best (Heaven) for all. Yes, that means loving the person, but it does not mean ignoring sin and building a false sense of security in any of us, but especially in those who are engaged in grave sin. Meet people where they are, love them, yes. Don't talk "at" them -- introduce them to Christ Jesus, and then they will say as St. Joan of Arc did, that they would rather die than commit even one sin against Our Lord. This is true love. I think that's what Francis is getting at, not "hey, lighten up folks; live and let live!"

    Unfortunately, the press and the populace is acting like it's the latter.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I hate "their"/"there" typos. Forgive! And, sorry if that was disjointed; I am in a rush….

      Delete
  71. I inserted myself onto this site again just to say that it is unfortunate for gays that they are up against Christians in general, or even religious in general, and the Catholic Church in particular. Religious people trip all over themselves defending their religion. Homosexuality is accepted by society in this country. It is the religious right and the Catholics who must follow their "inerrant" Bible and "infallible" Church teaching. Otherwise, gays would find very little opposition to their right to marry.

    ReplyDelete
  72. Bill- If its only the religious right why is gay marriage not legal in China? Or Cuba? Its completely false to say gay marriage is something only religious people or conservatives care about. It may be in the US conservatives care but gay marriage is a recent thing. Even Canada only legaized it back in 2003.

    Its disingenuous to assume that gay marriage would happen if there werent road blocks. As I said the whole concept is really new and something that the US left had pushed for. Prior to DADT was fine with all parties. Now its like gay is a label like female is. I'm waiting for forms to start including that language. Its dumb.

    ReplyDelete
  73. Deltaflute,

    I'm only talking about this country and not countries whose leaders stay up nights trying to think of ways to oppress people.

    Opposition to gay marriage is almost entirely driven by religion. If people would just live their own lives by their worldview and let others do the same everyone would be happy, except maybe those who derive pleasure from denying others theirs.

    ReplyDelete
  74. Bill, marriage is a "right"? Since when?

    And, don't be so sure that everyone in America accepts homosexual acts or marriage. That is not true. I know very few who do.

    ReplyDelete
  75. Bill- Cuba doesnt oppress people for fun. They only care about those who oppose them. In fact most of their vitriol is directed to capitalism which they view as greed. If you knew anything about gay marriage in Cuba you would know that its been on the referandum before. If it ever passes Cuba would be the 1st carribean country and communist country to pass it.

    So again where is the religious drive?

    As for living their own lives...I'll ask again. Do you think the government should legalize heroin? Is the government denying drug users their right to be happy and do drugs?

    ReplyDelete
  76. Deltaflute,

    I can argue for gay marriage to be legal and for the distribution and possession of heroin to be illegal because they are independent of one another. I don't buy people saying that if gay marriage is legal, it should follow that some other thing that is presently illegal should also be legal. Everything stands or fails on its own merit.

    ReplyDelete
  77. Most of the world still cannot fathom "two wives" as a marriage. That is not a marriage. It is being labeled as such, but it's not a marriage. Marriage requires a bride and a groom, and an ability to consummate.

    All you are really doing is justifying the Catholic Church's opposition to gay marriage. Nothing you are saying gives cause for the government to make it illegal. We get it. Devout Catholics have to oppose gay marriage. You don't have to justify it anymore.

    ReplyDelete
  78. Everything stands or fails on its own merit.

    And who decides the merits? Again, we come back to, who determines morality? In not a society or an individual (which makes right and wrong completely subjective), then who?

    Also, since when is marriage a "right"?

    If people would just live their own lives by their worldview and let others do the same everyone would be happy, except maybe those who derive pleasure from denying others theirs.

    a) Tell that to Christian florists and bakers and photographers, and to Catholic foster/adopt charities.

    b) Do you believe that the Church exists to "deny pleasure" to people? Why would that be? To what end? And, why are the saints the most joyful and sublimely happy of all people, with the greatest peace (the peace that surpasses all understanding), while those who are hedonistic pleasure-seekers are among the most unhappy?

    ReplyDelete
  79. Nothing you are saying gives cause for the government to make it illegal.

    Um, Bill… no one ever had to "make it illegal", since no one every thought that it could ontologically exist. The idea of gay "marriage" was simply made up recently and then imposed. So, no government initially "made it illegal", since it never existed (and ontologically cannot exist). You get that point, right? It never crossed anyone's mind that two men could get "married". That's not marriage.

    ReplyDelete
  80. Too many typos!! Sorry. Should read "since no one ever thought that it could ontologically exist". And above, "If not a society or an individual (which makes right and wrong completely subjective), then who?

    ReplyDelete
  81. Sure they different sins. The thing is that you are using the argument that gay marriage should be legal because 1) its socially acceptable 2) it makes them happy and 3) its a right.

    All of these arguments can be applied to a whole host of sins including addiction.

    Just because something is legal doesnt mean it should. Just because something is socially acceptable doesnt mean it should be either. Gay marriage and recreational drug use in the Netherlands are legal. Just like gay marriage and recreational drug use in the US or China are illegal. Polygamy is legal in India among Muslims and so is chikd marriage. The UK recognizes plural marriages in other countries. Why doesnt the US?

    At some point you are going to have to decide that social mores are meaningless when it comes to moral matters.

    ReplyDelete
  82. "Everything stands of fails on its own merit."

    What do you use to measure if each thing stands or fails? If it is popular? If it is good for society? Or good for some people in society? Is there some kind of universal measuring device? (Hint, Hint: Natural Law) Or are you arbitrarily deciding what stands and what fails? And if so, by what authority?

    ReplyDelete
  83. Leila,
    "I used the example I did precisely and only because it's common ground (I assume) for all of us here. We all agree that the inclination of zoophiles is disordered, and Alan would agree"

    Umm no I would 100% not agree. It is nowhere near common ground, and you saying this makes me realize two things.
    1. You cannot follow my logic because you do not read what I write nor do you have any particular interest in understanding.
    2. I shouldn't waste my time because of number 1, but I do.

    First we disagree on ordered and disordered. You are assuming that the brain can and is only ordered in one way. I think that is an incorrect assumption. Look around at all the different ways attraction manifest, think about what you find attractive and what you don't. Do you think everyone is attracted to the same thing? If not are their attractions disordered and yours ordered?

    I understand you think attraction is only ordered towards procreation. I'm not sure that is true.

    Now I don't think anyone should ever be bullied. EVER! I'm glad on this we agree.

    But I think you missed my point, or maybe on this I was not clear. I do not know, nor will I ever disagree that you are allowed to find homosexuality to be wrong. I think you have the right to say so loudly and as often as you want.

    However there is a fine line, which is often crossed. The words I used to show this, most of those are crossing a line. They are judgment calls, and are not necessarily truth. You want to say your religion considers it a sin fine. But anything beyond there, especially using words (and you know words have tremendous power) that have negative connotations help no one. So you should accept that many of the suicides by homosexuals are due to these (your) actions and words.

    Now for attractions to animals. I don't understand it. To me it appears that we are not built to be attracted to animals. I can't understand it at all. I also don't understand the attraction to the catholic church. But they both exist.

    My issue exists largely on the fact that an animal cannot consent to a sexual act with a human. So for that purpose alone marriage between a human and an animal can never exist.

    I'm not sure I am answering what it was you wanted answered.

    Do I think it is wrong to have sex with an animal? Yes.
    Do I think it is ok to tell these people you think it is wrong? Yes.
    Do I think it is ok to continually tell people what they think is wrong using negative words (even if said words are used to their definitions)? No.
    Do I think we need laws restricting some actions? Yes.
    Do I think having sex with animals should be against the law? Yes (animals who cannot speak for themselves are due our protection)

    Did I even come close to an answer you can understand?

    ReplyDelete
  84. Alan- do you think underage marriage should be legal? Do you think someone who is say 11 years old can consent to marry someone who is 19?

    What words would you use to describe something as wrong? I mean the word "wrong" by its very definition is negative? Please enlighten me of what terms I should use that describes something bad in a positive way. I dont really know of any. Because positive words describe good things and negative words describe bad things.

    ReplyDelete
  85. Leila,
    A couple of other things.

    Gay marriage has been legal in Massachusetts since 2003. You mentions "we" have been talking about it since 2010. Who is we and where were they for the at least ten years before?

    A blog is not like your living room in the least. You don't invite people in. Best as I can tell this blog is open to all to respond.

    You wrote "Agreed that an atheist worldview would put physical pleasure as the highest value."
    Not true.

    Finally I will again point out the hypocrisy of you wanting an apology from Nik. It's not necessary that she apologize to you. I applaud her for doing so though. If you think that I have not been directly or indirectly insulted here then you are delusional. Yet you have never once demanded that I be apologized to. You have never (as far as I can see) never insisted that a catholic, or someone who agrees with you, apologize to anyone who has said they have been insulted or offended here. I have seen you insist on apologies to catholics from those opposing views thought. Yes it's your blog, you can make the rules, but one would hope you would insist on equality.

    And really was it necessary to snidely comment about Nik not responding to someone's postings? How many postings have you, or anyone else, not responded to. Looks like your feelings got hurt so you maybe were lashing out a little at Nik?


    ReplyDelete
  86. Deltaflute are you catholic? If so at what age will the catholic church allow one to get married?

    For the record, no I don't think and 11 year old should get married. What's your point on this? Do you think 11 year olds should get married?

    I think you have missed my point delta. Is that intentional?

    You can use whatever words you want to define something that is wrong. But don't go claiming innocence of the power of those words.

    I think we all know the meaning of the word deviant. But while the word is not necessarily negative (it doesn't mention that to deviate is bad) it is used to be a negative. Do you disagree with that?

    Evil. I have heard that word used to describe homosexuality. I think someone also once said all sin is evil, so homosexual acts are evil. But if you don't believe in sin is the word still appropriate?

    So why on earth do you need to say anything more than my religion says it's a sin? Is that not powerful enough?

    ReplyDelete
  87. Alan- you are aware that bloggers can ban people? To me it makes it your living room. You can also refuse anon comments. It can be invite only. Leila makes hers an open house but not everyone does.

    What is the highest value to an atheist? What do they care about?

    ReplyDelete
  88. Deltaflute of course I am aware bloggers can ban people. It's been offered.
    Are you aware that a blog is nothing at all like a living room? It's not ontologically possible.

    I would imagine that different atheist would have different highest values. It's not really organized like your church. Do you think they are incapable of putting things before pleasure in their hierarchy?

    ReplyDelete
  89. Yes. I asked that question because when asked about beastiality you said they couldn't consent. Why do think consenting young adults/teens cant get married? They want to so why not?

    Alan people understand your points but they dont make any logical sense. If you say in one breath that beastiality is something you are not 100% against and then later say you think it shouldnt be legal because of consent....well that's confusing. Are you intentionally skating past questions?

    Honey, at some point we have to act like grown ups. If every unkin untrue thing said about me caused me to kill myself well I'd have died numerous times. Gays are not the only people who are mistreated. Religious people are as well. Life is unkind. To die without salvation or knowledge of it is crueler. I care about saving souls. If it means that people get angry or hurt so be it. Love does not equal earthly happiness.

    ReplyDelete
  90. Alan- first you accuse Leila with being mean and than make snaky comments about metaphors? Hi pot!

    Atheist base their morals on either natural law written on their hearts by God and pleasure if that conflicts with natural law. Abortion, drug addiction, gay sex all conflict with natural law yet atheists choose them because pleasure trumps. It is up to the individual but again if they find something more pleasurable well why not?

    ReplyDelete
  91. Delta,
    I'm not sure I ever said I was not 100% opposed to beastiality. Can you show me where I said that so I can correct it.

    We understand that there are ages of consent right? I mean we know that children need guidance. They need knowledge. I've been told by catholics that your church says girls can marry at 14. Once a catholic told me that once a girl starts menstruating she is able to marry. If we follow science we know that the frontal lobe, important in decision making process, does not fully form until the early 20's. So yes children can technically consent. Their consent doesn't mean they understand, which is why the adults need to protect them.

    Yes we all need to act as adults. Adults understand the repercussions of their actions and their words. They take ownership of them and the results they get. Think about it. Think really hard about what I just wrote.

    "Life is unkind." Yes it is.

    "To die without salvation or knowledge of it is crueler." So I lack knowledge? I'm confused. I need salvation? From who and why?

    " I care about saving souls. If it means that people get angry or hurt so be it. Love does not equal earthly happiness."

    Here is where we have the problem. "if it means that people get angry or hurt so be it". Look to your comment about us being adults. You are not being an adult here, but you are being a petulant child. You don't care if you anger or hurt another? Really?

    Where did I call Leila mean? Where was my snarky comment about metaphors? Sure I've been rude and possibly insulting here. Always responding in kind (look above at my petulant child comment, I myself am not above it).
    I stand by my comment about the hypocrisy. Show me how I am wrong about it.

    Atheist don't believe in god, so they don't believe in natural law. That being said, many atheist put others needs and wants ahead of their own. It's not about pleasure.
    Have you ever been an atheist? Do you want me to explain Catholicism to you? If not then please refrain from explaining atheist to me.

    ReplyDelete
  92. Honey, at some point we have to act like grown ups. If every unkin untrue thing said about me caused me to kill myself well I'd have died numerous times. Gays are not the only people who are mistreated. Religious people are as well. Life is unkind. To die without salvation or knowledge of it is crueler. I care about saving souls. If it means that people get angry or hurt so be it. Love does not equal earthly happiness.

    Delta
    Yes we all have had to deal with unkind and untrue things being said, so I guess we can just let it fly. We all just need a stiff upper lip. Who cares about the souls we could save with kindness and a different tone. Love is an action not a feeling, right? Mercy shmercy, you gays are just wimpy, and to sensitive. It's not that bad.

    ReplyDelete
  93. 11:38 you said "um no I would not agree 100%". So you either think its wrong which would be a starting point or you dont. Which is it?

    Yes. I understand that as an adult if I do not actively seek to save your soul but rather let life go on then my soul is also in jepardy. And I've caused scandal.

    To die without knowing the love and grace of God is cruel. Do you know that God lovez you? Do you know that you sins are what separates you from God? If you dont know that than you lack knowledge. Salvation is a gift given by God to fully loved by God forever. If there is saving needed its from temptation and sin.

    A petulant child? Really? Someone who wants you to experience love for eternity is petulant? I'm sorry but I cant control peoples reactions to hearing the Truth. If it makes them sad or angry then they need to figure out why telling someone about eternal love and how to work toward it makes them feel that way.

    You said she directly and indirectly insulted you. You said a comment about a metaphor is ontologically wrong. Either you are being snarky or you dont understand reality from a metaphor.

    Perhaps if you wish Leila to be above hypocrisy than you should behave above it yourself. Im not calling out Leilas behavior Im calling out yours. You flaunt it and dont care. She does.

    Natural law is applicable to everyone. Why else would an atheist put the needs of others another above their own? If not than it is just for pleasure. Atheists are like Muslims it all depends on what camp you follow. You can certainly explain Catholicism to me. There are documents. Am I now not allowed to explain what some atheists believe? Or are you going to tell me where some document that all atheists univerally follow? Otherwise please refrain from speaking for all atheists.

    ReplyDelete
  94. Nik kiss- feelings are perceptions. If I spent all day worrying over peoples perceptions my focus would be wrong. My focus is ever on Christ. He tells me to admonish the sinner so I do. My salvation and the salvation of others holds mor value than few tears. Christ calls everyone to carry a cross. I'm not going to sugar coat it. I tell the Truth.

    ReplyDelete
  95. It is always so weird that I get no email notifications that alan has written, so I only know when he's commented when I read someone else's response to him, first. It's an odd way to get to the comments! Anyway, thanks for fielding the comments, Deltaflute. I never can quite follow alan, as I've mentioned before. It's not because he's gay, of course. I follow Zach's arguments perfectly, and he's gay. So, I don't know.

    But I will try this:

    You mentions "we" have been talking about it since 2010. Who is we and where were they for the at least ten years before?

    Alan, if you look further above, that was in response to "Francis Catholic" (as opposed to the other Francis!) who said that his diocese has been actively fighting gay "marriage" since 2010. I was responding to that.

    As for metaphors. Yes, a blog is like someone's living room. It's "my turf", and I am happy to have people over for a chat, until they cross a line and then they don't get to stay in my "living room". A metaphor. Nothing ontological implied.

    As for consent: Animals can't consent to getting slaughtered by a butcher and eaten, so why would we need consent for them to be pleasured by a human "spouse"? Remember, the zoophiles say that the animals do consent, by the way, and that they love each other.

    Now, before someone accuses me of saying that homosexuality is the same as zoophilia, please read the whole thread. I am trying to find common ground, folks, and in the realm of sexual sin, there is very little that the left finds to be "wrong" or sinful (except non-consent). So, I'm trying to find something, anything!

    As for "evil" -- it's a theological term. I am Catholic, this is a Catholic blog. So, sin is moral evil, and things like earthquakes, diseases, birth defects are physical evils. All of it is a result of the Fall.

    Nik kiss, can we clear up something foundational? Do you believe that homosexual acts are objectively sinful?

    Thanks!

    ReplyDelete
  96. Delta, I think you need to read what I write.
    I don't 100% agree that bestiality is our common ground. Leila mentions it often in comparison to homosexuality. I think that is wrong. I also don't 100% agree with the use of the word disordered.
    I do agree that bestiality is wrong. But I do not believe that I have the right to belittle others for their attractions. I merely say I don't get it, or understand it.

    And sorry, but your attempting to spin being an adult into trying to save my soul or yours is in peril is just foolish. Be more concerned with your soul and less with others. Be more concerned with your actions and less theirs. Again these are your religious rights, and our rights to not have to be held accountable to your religious beliefs are just as strong as yours.

    Yes petulant child. And your response to that continues to prove my point to me.

    And again, reread. I never said Leila insulted me. I have stated I have been insulted directly and indirectly (as have many other none catholics) and Leila has never once asked (let alone demanded) an apology for it. But she has for a few catholics. That is the very definition of hypocrisy.

    How can I be hypocritical here? How have I been? I'm intrigued.

    If natural law is written in our hearts by god then it is not applicable to everyone. Nor is it natural. Atheist don't believe in god. It's that simple.

    Yes I have no doubt that god loves me. I have every doubt that the catholic church loves me. See I see the difference between god and the catholic church.
    As for your truth and knowledge statement, well those are opinions. Your opinions. I don't ever have to live like they are truth.




    ReplyDelete
  97. Leila,
    I don't know why my comments don't go into your inbox. I'd check on your end. Not anything I'm knowingly doing.

    As far as not being able to follow me I think it's because you choose not to. Delta has said people understand my points you just can't follow my logic. Mostly because you will never think what I say is logical. I'm not sure why you understand Zach.

    As for the 2010 comment thanks for clearing that up. I don't read any of Francis post. That's for personal reasons so I apologize that I misunderstood that.

    I disagree on you about a blog is like your living room. No surprise there. It's on the world wide web. Everyone has access unless you deny them. Does everyone have access to your living room? Not a point worth arguing though. You want to ban me go ahead. It would probably be better for all.

    "As for consent: Animals can't consent to getting slaughtered by a butcher and eaten, so why would we need consent for them to be pleasured by a human "spouse"? Remember, the zoophiles say that the animals do consent, by the way, and that they love each other."

    You are correct, animals cannot consent to be eaten. But they do offer benefits via their flesh. And of course eating animal flesh (ok maybe not eating them, but killing them like deer) is a way to keep their populations in check, which can be beneficial for them.
    How do they say the animal consents? Verbally? In writing? How? I think we all know they cannot consent.

    "Now, before someone accuses me of saying that homosexuality is the same as zoophilia, please read the whole thread. I am trying to find common ground, folks, and in the realm of sexual sin, there is very little that the left finds to be "wrong" or sinful (except non-consent). So, I'm trying to find something, anything!"

    You keep saying you are not saying they are the same, but you do consider them to be the same. But in fairness you single out all sexual sins as being the same. The problem here is in the definition of sexual sins. That is very much a religious argument, which should be left out of arguments ( yes I get this is a catholic blog, but the world is not). I don't follow your religion, you can't make me, so you can't make me think that what you call a sin is a sin.

    "As for "evil" -- it's a theological term. I am Catholic, this is a Catholic blog. So, sin is moral evil, and things like earthquakes, diseases, birth defects are physical evils. All of it is a result of the Fall."

    Evil is not necessarily a theological word. Again not in the real world. I don't think it's acceptable to tell someone their actions are evil. There really just is no point to it.



    ReplyDelete
  98. I do agree that bestiality is wrong. But I do not believe that I have the right to belittle others for their attractions. I merely say I don't get it, or understand it.

    But then you don't "merely" say that, you also say it's wrong, correct?

    No, I never said that all sexual sins are the same. No way. Never have. Are all sexual sins serious sins? Can they be mortal sin if done with full knowledge and consent of the will? Yes. But some are more serious than others, by degree. Contraception is not as grave as abortion, for example. And fornication is not the same as adultery, homosexual acts are not the same as bestial acts, etc…

    Please do not put words into my mouth.

    What else can I use as something we agree is a sexual sin (i.e., using the sexual faculty in a wrong or disordered manner), if not bestiality? What else do you consider "wrong"? I'll use whatever it is.

    Read the article about the zoophiles. They say they know their animals better than anyone, and they know they love them and that they consent (one guy even says his horse initiates or something).

    Actually if there is a God, then natural law applies to everyone, even atheists (who are simply in denial of what is real, i.e., God; but they are still made by Him). Natural because it can be known by exercise of our natural reason. No supernatural knowledge is needed to know, for example, that it's wrong to kill innocent people, or to steal something that rightfully belongs to another. We all "get" that… even if we work to justify or ignore that knowledge (conscience).

    Yes, there is a point to using theological words on a blog that deals with Catholic theology. In the real world, I don't go around telling gay people that they are doing evil. Not even close. I have normal conversations, in the colloquial, out in the "real world".

    I am glad you know that God loves you. What is your obligation to Him? To me, I owe Him everything, especially my love and my will.

    By the way, I have chastised an over-harsh Catholic here on the blog, about a year or more ago. She was classifying relativists as "insane" (meaning out of touch with what is real) and it didn't come off as productive at all. I was offended the way she came in guns blazing and I let her have it. She was pretty upset by what I said, felt I attacked her unjustly, and she has not been back. Not that I have to prove myself to you, but there's that.

    ReplyDelete
  99. Alan- You say bestiality is wrong. We say bestiality is wrong. Isnt that common ground? How are we "belittling it"? Its aweful. Its ugly. To belittle something is to make it small. We simply see the grotesqueness of it. Not the same thing.

    I cant. It is my great love of Christ that calls me to be concerned for your soul. If you do not wish to hear that than why engage Catholics on a Catholic blog? You cant compel me to stop because that is my right and duty. Its an adult duty because it takes great knowledge and courage to minister to those who dont wish it.

    Alan you are reading way too much tone into what I type. Theres only concern here not whinnying.

    If Leila didnt insult you than why do you demand an appolgy from her? She's never told Catholics to apologize to gays or gays to apologize to Catholics. I figure that its fair as she's only speaking of herself.

    Its hypocritical to demand an apology from Leila when you offer none yourself. But since you say she didnt insult her the point is moot. You are a bit insulting yourself but than again I ignore it because I know this is over a computer. Body language holds a lot of weight.

    Doesnt matter if you dont believe in God. If you dont kill people than its because of natural law. In other words whatever compels you to respect others is called Natural Law.

    The fullness of God comes from His Church. If you fully love God and wish to know him than its through the Church that you grow. Its not my opinion like I just came up with it on my own. Its God's and shared by his many followers.

    ReplyDelete
  100. Leila,
    I hope you can understand why I don't want to answer that question. See my faith has become so simple, so basic. I am a mother of a gay child. I love her so profoundly and so completely. This is all so new. I do not cling to the beliefs of the Church, it kept her from me and the rest of our family. I think I called it weighty and you suggested to some it was crushing. When my daughter " came out " we lost many friends. My youngest bullied so badly ( in a catholic school ) by some of his closest friends, that his friends were expelled from school. My sweet boy carried that experience from us for 2 months. We didn't even know it was happening until our principal called. My oldest son teased by football team . See I am circling the wagons here. I have been hurt, my family has been hurt by our community and church. My point? I don't know if I have one. My faith is all about love and mercy, because we have been in desperate need of it. I don't worry about the rest. I leave that up to God.

    ReplyDelete
  101. Well, if you lost friends because your daughter is gay and "came out," they really weren't your friends. There are times during our lives that the real friends and fake friends sort themselves out. I'm sorry, nik kiss, that your children have been hurt and bullied. I imagine this is a lonely and difficult time for your family.

    ReplyDelete
  102. Nik Kiss- My sincere sympathies. And concerns too. I can understand that you want to defend your family from the hate. My concern though is that you have to answer to God. If God were to ask you the question Leila asked, how would you respond? (I'm not asking you. It's a question to ponder yourself.)

    Yes, God is about love and mercy. I'm not asking you to hate your daughter. I'm just worried that you are growing to accept certain aspects of the gay lifestyle that aren't right with God.

    I go back to my drug addicted relative. I don't hate him. I don't call him nasty names or anything like that. I wouldn't let his drugs in my house either. I wouldn't allow my children to see him binging out. I pray that he gets it together and carries his cross of addiction. But right now he isn't. Fortunately he's not looking for us to accept his addiction. Because I wouldn't. I don't accept also that his addiction is the sum total of who he is.

    It would be unloving of me to either ignore his sin of addiction or to encourage it as acceptable. Rather it's loving to pray for him and to remind him that he needs to quit and seek help. Yes, it makes him mad. Yes, he lashes out. I can't help his feelings. But what's wrong is wrong. He's doing his brain and those he encounters while driving no favors.

    Being an addict, contrary to what some may say, is something that is lifelong. You combat the sin of addiction constantly. But you avoid giving into it.

    I can't understand why being gay automatically means you must have sex. I don't understand that. It's a big fat lie. You can be straight and never have sex. Never. Why does being gay automatically mean you must have sex and be married to someone of the same gender?

    If being loving means that I have to accept my drug addict relative's addictions or a co-worker's gay sex life, than I simply want no part of it. There is a difference between as Pope Francis said "coming along side a person" and helping them through their sin and flat out accepting it.

    So you should ask yourself where your struggle lies. Do you want to help your daughter if she struggles with sin even if it at times you anger her? or Do you want to accept that the gay lifestyle is fine and wrestle with God?

    I don't mean to say this harshly. I'm truly sorry that people have been so nasty. The Catechism clearly says it's wrong. But it also says that gay sex is wrong. And I can't ignore the conflict that I see in you without reminding you of that.

    Matthew 10:35-40 Think not that I come to send peace on earth; I came not to send peace but a sword. For I come to set a man at variance against his father, and daughter against her mother and daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law. And a man's foes shall be those of his own household. He that loves his mother or father more than me is not worthy of me. And he that loves his son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. And he that takes not his cross and follows after me is not worthy of me. He that finds his life shall lose it. He that loses his life for my sake shall find it.

    ReplyDelete
  103. An Atheist Identifies The Central Problem With The “Gay Marriage” Agenda

    "The central problem with the gay marriage agenda is not that at some point in the future an unwilling man of the cloth might be strongarmed into giving his blessing to a gay union, but rather that it allows the state to do something that was traditionally considered beyond its purview: to redefine the meaning of marriage and, by extension, the meaning of the marital home, the family, and our most intimate relationships. Some have sought to depict the drive for gay marriage as a continuation of the struggle for civil rights that exploded in the mid-twentieth century; it’s better understood as a continuation, and intensification, of the modern state’s desire to get a foot in the door of our private lives and to assume sovereignty over our relationships."

    ...

    "From the get-go, the depiction of the campaign for gay marriage as a liberty-tinged movement for greater equality was questionable to say the least. For a start, grassroots public protesting for the right of homosexuals to marry was notable by its absence. Instead, this has been a movement led by lawyers and professional activists, backed by the CEOs of hedge-fund corporations and newspapers of record such as The Times, and it has actively sought to insulate itself from engagement with the prejudicial public.

    ...

    "The brilliance of the strategy is hard to deny: instead of getting trapped in a debate they simply cannot win on facts, merit, or logic, the supporters of "gay marriage" simply say, "Hey, everyone cool loves and supports it!" It's just like being in junior high all over again, when the super cool and clueless kids tell the uncool kids and confused kids what to do and when to do it — just because."

    ReplyDelete
  104. Sorry Leila if I put words in your mouth. All sexual sins are not the same.
    So there is no need to bring up bestiality when the topic is gay marriage. You do this. Often.

    I can't speak to sexual sin. Remember I don't agree with your word sin. That is a theological word.

    I think what two consenting adults do is their own business. Plain and simple. Two adults. They can consent. An animal cannot.
    Is bestiality a sin? As I don't agree with sin I would say no. Is it wrong? In my opinion yes, for the reasons I have mentioned.

    "Actually if there is a God, then natural law applies to everyone, even atheists (who are simply in denial of what is real, i.e., God; but they are still made by Him)"

    I am so tired of this line of reasoning. Atheist are in denial of what is real. Delta says they lack knowledge. We don't know truth. This is why I should not waste time here discussing with you all. It explains why you can't follow my reasons.

    It's pointless. In my opinion you don't want common ground.

    So there we stand, at our usual impasse.

    ReplyDelete
  105. Delta, are you reading what I am writing? I don't think so.

    My original point, which you seem to have missed, or ignored is this. Words have power. It is easy enough for you to simply say your religion says whatever sin you want to insert is wrong. It can end there that simply. No need for saying they are disordered, evil, deviant or anything else. Honestly the people whom you would be talking to don't care. Anything more is belittling, badgering and yes bullying them.

    You are clearly not concerned with their souls but rather with yours (you have said if you don't your soul is imperil, so that to me says you are more concerned with your soul than theirs). If someone tells you they are not interested in hearing what you have to say what do you do?

    I am talking about the real world, not Leila's blog. They are different places. When here you can say whatever you want, I can handle it as I am a big boy and I understand it is a catholic blog. However this all started out of commenting about people accepting their adult responsibilities towards gay teens suicides. My mom taught me that you can catch more flies with honey than you can with vinegar. People don't need (nor do most want) to hear anything more than your religion says it is wrong. And usually they don't want to hear that. There would be no reason for you ever to approach someone to tell them their actions are sinful. It's none of your business. But it happens all the time.

    Now to address the gays need to have sex. You are correct, no one needs to have sex. But the gay marriage fight is about more than sex. I am still not certain why that is so hard to understand.

    Can I ask how many people here have had sex outside of marriage? How many have always followed the catholic rules about sex? I don't really want the answers as they are none of my business. But the point is that it is none of your either.

    And what exactly is god's church? I mean I assume you will say catholic. I don't see it that way. You do. What do we do with all those other religions that follow the same god?

    But I'll ask, I don't agree with your church and I don't agree with natural law, so why should you think that you can save my soul?
    FYI my soul is just fine and needs no assistance from you. I know god, and guess what, god loves me. And god loves my husband ( even though my husband is an atheist). God led me to my husband. God led me to accept being gay. And yes god has no issues with me being married to a man.
    Yeah god doesn't like some of the things I have done, but god knows my heart is good, that I am a good person and I live this life well, that I treat others well, not for a reward in the end, but because it is the right thing to do.

    It's late and time for bed.
    Have a wonderful night all

    ReplyDelete
  106. Actual I didn't say atheists lack knowledge about God. I said "To die without knowing the love and grace of God is cruel. Do you know that God lovez you? Do you know that you sins are what separates you from God? If you dont know that than you lack knowledge."

    I asked it specifically of you. And there are many theists who do not know the love and grace of God. My comment had little to do with atheists in general or whether an atheist knows God or not.

    Leila and I are trying to find common moral ground with you. You acknowledge that things are wrong, but you don't explain how you arrive at that answer.

    You say bestiality is wrong because animals can't consent, but as Leila pointed out slaughtering animals for food without their consent is not (unless your a PETA person).

    Where do you derive your morality from? What makes you understand or know that murder is wrong? If not God, than where? Is it some brain chemical that prevents you from shooting people in theatres? Bill says it's social mores. But clearly that can't be because India allows undeage marriage and you said you thought that was wrong.

    I'm not trying to be snarky. I sincerely want to know. Because people who think that other people or government or society or themselves are their moral compass, find that in hindsight their moral behavior was wrong. Slavery, the Holocaust, Rowanda, Segregation and so on and so forth are prime examples when people follow a wonky moral compass that doesn't point to the True North (ie Christ).

    So where do you draw the line for yourself? What determines morality for you?

    ReplyDelete
  107. Lena- thank you and of course I know they weren't true friends.
    Delta- My daughter is 21 and living and supporting herself, quite frankly this is her life. She grew up in a very conservative home. Quite frankly, I am amazed how honest she was in telling my husband and me about her feelings. Apparently feelings she has has since adolescents. I handled it horribly. It felt like a death. I am so ashamed of myself. I could elaborate, but I just cant. I prayed from sun up to sun down. I cried so many tears. I was so so afraid. Deeply afraid. I rejected that part of her, she felt completely rejected. I have to accept all of her, every part of her. We were estranged for many months. It tore the whole family apart. This isn't some hypothetical, this is my child. God's child. Simple. I don't get into doctrine to deeply, I can't. I know you don't agree, but your opinion doesn't really mean that much to me.
    I don't want you to elaborate on this, but to compare her to someone battling drug addiction seems like apples and oranges.
    As for sex and relationships , that truly is her road. I will accept her and her companion in my home. I will love them both.


    ReplyDelete
  108. Even (fair minded and honest) homosexuals can see the ridiculousness and indeed, the criminal injustice, of so-called "gay marriage". Hopefully, one day, the children who involuntarily suffer its consequences will sue the pants off the corrupt governments and selfish "couples" who are salaciously birthing this monstrosity to throw their innocent lives into confusion, deprivation and disarray.

    French Homosexuals Join Demonstration Against Gay Marriage

    Outraged by the bill, 66-year old Jean-Dominique Bunel, a specialist in humanitarian law who has done relief work in war-torn areas, told Le Figaro he “was raised by two women” and that he “suffered from the lack of a father, a daily presence, a character and a properly masculine example, some counterweight to the relationship of my mother to her lover. I was aware of it at a very early age. I lived that absence of a father, experienced it, as an amputation."

    "As soon as I learned that the government was going to officialize marriage between two people of the same sex, I was thrown into disarray,” he explained. It would be “institutionalizing a situation that had scarred me considerably. In that there is an injustice that I can in no way allow." If the women who raised him had been married, “I would have jumped into the fray and would have brought a complaint before the French state and before the European Court of Human Rights, for the violation of my right to a mom and a dad."

    ReplyDelete
  109. I think there are to many "quite franklys " sorry

    ReplyDelete
  110. Alan- Sure I talk differently on the internet than I do in real life. I never said that I did. You seem to be conflating the two.

    I'm sorry but last I checked you weren't in my head. If I tell you that I'm interested in the salvation of souls, than you will just have to believe me. Otherwise it matters little what I say. You will never believe me no matter what. And I can never convince you of anything otherwise. You have to take a leap of faith that what I say is sincere just as I much as I do you. Relationships and friendships are based on trust. I'm sorry that you can't trust me enough to believe that I am not lying to you.

    It is my duty to speak the truth. Do I automatically assume a person is committing sin in real life? No. But it does come up. I live in Canada. And yes, I tell them my religious beliefs. And yes, I say it's sin. They can roll their eyes. It's perfectly legal here to evangelize and to speak your mind. I find it strange that you wish me to be silent when it's perfectly okay for you not to be. My faith is a part of who I am; just as much as being gay is to you. I'm sorry that you don't understand that.

    Why would a person get married and than not have sex? They kinda go together don't they? So if one opposes gay sex than one would naturally oppose gay marriage too, yes? I mean I'm not going to ask a single gay person, do you have sex? But it's sorta implied that sex follows marriage so if a person announces they are getting married to the same gender than yeah, it's a bit obvious.

    As for other churches, I take it you've never read the Catechism. It actually talks about that in great detail or which I think Leila would appreciate if I didn't start quoting.

    I actually can't save your soul. That's up to Christ. I can only help you. God is very clear and unchanging on what is wrong (since you hate the word sin) and right. And God says that it's not right for a man to be married to another man. It's not my rules. It's not my opinion. It's all God's. It's not about your "goodness" or how you treat others. It's about your relationship with God. You separate yourself from God and the fullness of God's love by refusing to see that being married to a man is wrong. You may not believe me or it. That doesn't matter. Only God's opinion counts and he's said that a man shall not lie with another man. Now if you can quote in the Bible where it says otherwise, than I'll be happy to read it.

    ReplyDelete
  111. Nik Pick- Doctrine isn't my opinion. I don't know why people keep saying that it is. It's not. Doctrine is unchanging. It's God's law. To ignore it is to ignore a piece of God.

    You may not have a drug addict in your family. I don't know of any gay persons in mine. I use my own experiences to empathize with people; to explain that I understand that is at times hard. Nonetheless drug addiction is a sin. A very grave one that affects the family. Gay sex is a sin and leading a gay lifestyle affects the family. The comparison I think is sufficient. Families with drug addicts don't often talk about it. I have been asked not to speak about it on my blog. It's not any different from what I've read when a teenager comes out of the closet. The shame. The tears being shed. The frustration. My relatives own parents have given him money and shelter. They are feeding his addiction because they struggle to find a balance between loving him and knowing his addiction is wrong. This too is a struggle you seem to be dealing with. If they are apples and oranges, than so be it. But they are still fruit.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. nik kiss- sorry. i'll get it right one day.

      Delete
  112. Delta,
    First of all I know Doctrine isn't your opinion. Sorry for not being clear on that.

    ReplyDelete
  113. Nik,

    I can only imagine your pain/dilemma at being challenged by your daughter's (disordered) sexual inclinations. I sincerely feel for you and all people who have to face such issues, be it in their own lives, or in the lives of their loved ones. Of course our love for them can never and must never stop, nor manifest itself in harsh interactions of any sort. No question about that at all.

    Is it possible, though, just possible, that because you initially reacted so "horribly" (by your own account) to the first intimation of your daughter's sexuality, you are now over-compensating by unquestioningly accepting any and all things she might choose to do, without any prudent qualification? Is there really no way for you, by continuing prayer and gentle counseling, for example, to gradually draw your beloved child away from what you must know can never bring her true fulfillment and peace? What was it that made you react so horribly to your daughter's predicament in the first place? (You don't need to answer that here, just seriously consider the question by yourself perhaps.) And what has changed since then about the truth of the situation? Isn't it ultimately truth that sets all of us (including your most precious child) free? Without ever facing up to the things that are wrong (or patently unproductive) with our thoughts, actions or inclinations (and we all suffer from these one way or another), can any of us ever really find joy and peace in this life?

    St Monica prayed for years and years for her (pagan) husband who suffered from a violent temper, and he changed and converted to Christianity only a year before he died. She prayed for a score of years for her son Augustine, before he abandoned his wanton ways and became a saint and a great Doctor of the Church. God has a special place in His heart for the tears and pleadings of a mother, and St Monica, for one, is shining proof of that for all mothers.

    God bless you and your precious daughter and keep your entire family safe from all harm, I pray. May the Blessed Mother of God, Virgin Most Pure, obtain for all of you the graces to make your burdens light, and to help you live ever chastely, in such manner as truly delights our Creator and Giver of Life.

    ReplyDelete
  114. So there is no need to bring up bestiality when the topic is gay marriage. You do this. Often.

    Aaaand, this is where Leila throws up her hands and gives up on a dialogue with Alan yet again. You missed my point by a thousand miles.

    Take care for now.

    nik kiss, I feel your pain as a mother. I have a beloved 21-year-old daughter, too. I think Deltaflute and Francis have spoken more eloquently than I ever could. Many prayers for your family and your beloved daughter.

    ReplyDelete
  115. nik kiss, I feel your pain as a mother. I have a beloved 21-year-old daughter, too. I think Deltaflute and Francis have spoken more eloquently than I ever could.many prayers for your family and your beloved daughter.

    Nik kiss. The people on this site are not your friends. They are pushing an agenda as they accuse gays of doing. If you can't see that your daughter is more important than a religion that preaches peace and love but is anything but then I truly feel sorry for you.

    ReplyDelete
  116. I typed the last comment hastily because I was heading out and my OCD wouldn't let me wait till I got to my destination. The responses to nik kiss were so counterproductive that I couldn't wait to put in my two cents.

    We have a real problem here. The religious condemnation of homosexuality is as wrong as it is unchangeable. People have to stop and question this supposed authority that their religion has in regard to this matter. Secular professional psychologists now almost unanimously agree that homosexuality is not the product of a mental disorder. It just happens to be the way some people are, including my own son. It is wrong to label it as a "sin". And please don't say that being gay is not a sin and it only is if one acts on that tendency. The act should not be labeled as such either.

    ReplyDelete
  117. "Nik kiss. The people on this site are not your friends. They are pushing an agenda as they accuse gays of doing. If you can't see that your daughter is more important than a religion that preaches peace and love but is anything but then I truly feel sorry for you."

    Bill S,

    For days you've been making ignorant and infantile comments on this blog and we've all been responding to you with consistent courtesy and patience. But there's a line you've crossed with this latest comment of yours. I'd advise you to watch that loose mouth of yours and refrain from making any further unwarranted and offensive remarks here about the sincerity or motivations of any contributors to this conversation. If you have a single respectable bone in your body, I will expect an apology from you over this.

    ReplyDelete
  118. Francis,

    As I said in my follow-up post, I typed hastily having only scanned the comments while waiting for my wife to get ready for work. I should have waited to respond till I got to my destination. Sorry.

    ReplyDelete
  119. Bill- Smh. This is a Catholic blog. We're here to evangelize. Our concerns are for souls. There is no hidden agenda. If the topic was about abortion we'd still be saying what we say. And that message is sin is a struggle and we must fight it. It is God's grace that helps us overcome it. If we cave to our sin than we separate ourselves from God's infinite love. The good news is we can overcome sin. Jesus made that happen when he died on the cross.

    It doesnt matter what people think about gay sex or gay people. It only matters what God thinks. And he's been clear on the subject. SSA is disordered like depression is or struggles with drug addiction or ocd. Its not ordered to the love of Christ. To act upon those compulsions is to sin. To sin is to separate onself from the love of God.

    I dont understand why people dont throw themselves upon the mercy of Christ but rather desire to separate themselves from his love. To me THAT'S the act of a petulant child. Desiring the good of another and wishing them tp remain in Gods loving embrace is not.

    ReplyDelete
  120. It doesnt matter what people think about gay sex or gay people. It only matters what God thinks. And he's been clear on the subject.

    You think you have more clarity on this subject from what you perceive as being "what God thinks" than from professional psychologists who study and devote their lives to this very specific field of expertise?

    Because a Bronze Age scribe writes on a scroll that a man shall not lie with another man as with a woman, you think you know the mind of a diety? You take that over years of education and experience of experts in assessing and treating mental disorders? Good luck to you.

    ReplyDelete
  121. Bill, fighting straw men doesn't work too well around here. Science never contradicts God, as evidenced by legions of highly accomplished Catholic scientists. God made everything, including the mind of men which pursue science. You know that very well, as a baptized, and I assume at least somewhat catechized, Catholic. Let's try and treat each other as adults around here. I think it is evident that the intelligence of my fellow commenters does not need to be questioned. Are you seeking truth, or just venting your anger against the Church? The truth is completely accessible, if we open ourselves to it.

    ReplyDelete
  122. Bill- Actually I have 2000 years of apologetics on the mind of God. That's not including the "Bronze Age" document. Psychology is only a recent development. But hey go ahead. Insult me. That Bronze Age document said that would happen.

    John 15:18- 19 If the world hates you be aware that it hated me first. If you belong to the world it would love you as its own. Because you do not belong to the world I have chosrn you out of this world therefore the world hates you.

    ReplyDelete
  123. Leila, I think yet again you didn't read what I wrote. You missed it by a thousand miles as you say. I already threw my hands up at you. Maybe someday you will read what I write with an open mind and heart.
    Until then what can we do?

    ReplyDelete
  124. May I get one more thing off my chest.

    I actually regret most of my postings here on the Bubble (impulse posts is what I'd call them!), because re-reading them after they've been published, most strike me as more or less incoherent and not stringently argued. The typos and grammar errors that escape me even after reading my drafts just add to my despondency.

    My point is - I hope some snippet of a valuable thought still comes through some comments. I would therefore really like to encourage more of the readers who comment irregularly to chip in anyway - it doesn't get much worse than my comments, and I so often cherish comments from you! So please, be less scrupulous than me and let us have your insights or questions, they are such a key ingredient to Leila's great blog!

    ReplyDelete
  125. Sebastian wrote:

    Are you seeking truth, or just venting your anger against the Church?

    I'm kind of venting my anger at Deltaflute. She told me I was living a lie so I finally told my wife I am an atheist, which I think maybe I shouldn't have. I didn't sleep well and was in a rotten mood this morning. Sorry, Deltaflute.

    ReplyDelete
  126. Bill- As a wife myself I can assure you that keeping the truth from you wife is more painful than the truth itself. Women start questioning everything wondering if there is more you are lying about. It's better to be truthful always. Its always better to be honest and to keep lines of communication open.

    Leila recommended a book by Dr.Laura. Its for women but there are other books shes written as well including 10 stupid things couples do and another 10 stupid things men do. They arent condescending self help books. They just point out stuff that we habitually do wrong. You may want to look them over.

    ReplyDelete
  127. Btw St. Monica and I are best buds. I pray for her intercession on behalf of my confused husband all the time. I remain hopeful. If he had lied to me from the beginning about his beliefs we would not be married. In our relationship we demand honesty and trust from each other. Without that foundation our relationship would be a house of sand. Not to say we're perfect. Because we're not. And not to say relationships built on sand cant recover. You just have to work much harder at them to fortify the foundation.

    ReplyDelete
  128. Francis,
    My daughter is gay. How am I to guide her out of her sexual identity? I am fortunate that I have connected with many parents of gay children. I was lead to Linda Robertson, who is a mother of a gay son. she gave me the inspiration to just love my child and accept her. Her story is powerful and her ministry is life saving.
    The reason I acted so horribly ? Because I was so wrongly taught that my daughter was in mortal danger if she acted on her sexual desires. Goodness me, I put God and His love and Mercy in this tiny box. I don't think I am sinning by loving her and accepting her. I don't want to push her away from the family that loves her, nor do I think God is asking me to do that.
    There is a boy I grew up with, he was my brothers best friend. Beautiful, smart, talented. By all stereotypical appearances he was The All American Boy. Football, basketball, track, you name it he did it and did it well. This boy spent many days with our family and we loved him. After hs graduation he went off to college to pursue a career in engineering. During this time our friend experienced ( what was told to us ) a nervous break down. His parents were very guarded in telling my brother any real details. All we knew from that day and the 25 years that followed was that he wasn't the same and had become a recluse. He moved thousands of miles away. My brother had occasional correspondence.My brother and I were home just recently to care for our elderly parents when my brother was called by this young man"s ( well now 50 year old man ) parents. His mother told my brother that her son's partner of 25 years had just passed and she needed him to reach out to his long lost friend. My brother told me about the conversation and we both wept. We wept for all the years he separated himself from the people who loved him. We wept because to protect him, his parents would rather have us think he was mentally ill than gay . Almost 30 years of missing him. It didn't matter to us he was gay, we loved him. This happened in the middle of my own struggle. I believe God was giving me all the answers I needed. Clarity.
    I know this is against Catholic doctrine. I do. I am not here to try and change anyone. I came here because I believe you here at the bubble can be better. ( we all can ) Your tone, your statements, really do not minister to anyone but to each other. Statements about gay suicide and the like should be shelved. You don't have to agree with gay sex, of course not. But I pray you know your words have weight and there might be a gay youth that needs you. And without love and mercy your knowledge is wasted. That's it. I think you have forgotten that and I think it is important for you to open your hearts to be softer.

    ReplyDelete
  129. The reason I acted so horribly ? Because I was so wrongly taught that my daughter was in mortal danger if she acted on her sexual desires.

    Exactly. People have got to cease and desist on the mortal sin bs.

    ReplyDelete
  130. nik kiss, if the tone were "softer" and if our hearts were more "open" on homosexual acts, would you or your daughter (or anyone else) be more likely to embrace the Church's actual teaching about the grave sinfulness of homosexual acts? I am guessing not. So, the point of us sort of letting it all go is… what? Forgive me, I am not speaking to you in a pastoral way right now, because I am trying to get to the issue of 'what is the point' to change from "yes it's sin" to "na, don't worry". Would it help you or your daughter or anyone get closer to Christ (from the Catholic perspective), or would it just confirm that sin is no big deal? I would think the latter. Help me understand.

    Also, the link I provide the most about gay suicides is from a gay rights activist. Now I can't use his words, either? I have to shelve what he says, as well? Again, I am confused.

    Bill, I am sad for your wife, and I will pray that her spirit is resilient. She may well be crushed, but I hope it opens up a good discussion.

    ReplyDelete
  131. I know the comment was directed to Francis but..

    Nik kiss- loving your daughter is not a sin. But saying gay sex is not sin is to cause scandal. That puts your salvation in jeopardy. Having gay sex puts your daughter's soul in jeopardy. You were not wrongly taught. It may be painful to hear that but that is the truth.

    Teenagers overall have higher rated of suicide. There is a hyper focus on gay teens. What of teens who are bullied by adults acting as crushes? Or sexting? Or the young woman who wss raped by her teacher? He didnt get the punishment he deserved but to have a judge say she seduced him. Wow. The outcry should be for those who mistreat and cause suffering in general. Not those who speak out against the dangers of binge drinking, sexting, or gay sex. Do we punish those who warn their children about getting hammered at parties? Why isnt it the same to warn about the danger that having gay sex is to your immortal soul?

    ReplyDelete
  132. Exactly. People have got to cease and desist on the mortal sin bs.

    Refrain from telling people the truth about sin? Never. Look at a crucifix. That is what sin does. It killed God. It kills innocence, truth, goodness. If there were no sin, there would have been no need for a Savior. What was His sacrifice for? What did He save us from? Bill, you may be an atheist, but nik kiss is not. You are tempting her to atheism, to reject the idea that there is sin that must be repented of.

    I didn't say this the first time you wrote today, but honestly, my thoughts were, "This is like the serpent in the Garden, whispering in Adam and Eve's ear: 'You can name good and evil for yourself. You can be like God. You surely will not die.'"

    Gave me a bit of a shiver.

    ReplyDelete
  133. nik kiss, Deltaflute is right. You can love your daughter dearly and yet not accept her sin. Many, many, many mothers have done this and do this (I know them). It is possible, and it's common.

    ReplyDelete
  134. Bill- Its not bs. At some point I expect you'll realize that.

    ReplyDelete
  135. Leila,
    I am asking you to not comment so recklessly on gay suicide and why it occurs. I said softer not open to homosexual acts. When in the heck did I say that? I never said to not believe what you believe ever. I am saying there maybe someone searching, and all this banter and quip may turn them from a relationship with Christ. In the first interaction there was a comment about something I said sounding odd and that I didn't sound Catholic. I am grown and I can take it as much of a waste of time it was on your part. Your tone is harsh, sorry it just is. If I was defensive I was. Your expertise on gay suicide was infuriating. I take the young lives of gay people very very seriously....and I don't think you want to understand anything I am saying!

    ReplyDelete
  136. It may be that I don't understand, it's true. I don't think I have been "reckless" on gay suicide. It's a TRAGEDY any time anyone commits suicide -- and when teens do? The worst. Makes my maternal heart stop at the very thought of it. That said, I don't believe I spoke recklessly (I even reprinted what I think you were referring to, though you never confirmed it). Sorry, maybe we just don't agree on what reckless it.

    I think Bill is being reckless (understatement) by denying sin. Honestly, that is the most reckless thing I can imagine. The devil exists, and he is prowling about the world seeking the ruin of souls. Bill is not the devil (don't mean to imply that), but at this moment, Bill is working on the devil's side, whether he understands that or not. This is not a game, this is serious and deadly so.

    ReplyDelete
  137. I use this quote from Venerable Fulton J. Sheen often, and I hope no one minds that I use it again here today. It seems so apropos:

    The lesson that emerges from Easter is that the world was wrong and Christ was right; that there is a world of difference between an authority on which you rely when it pleases you, and one which you trust absolutely whether it pleases you or not; for what the world needs is a voice that is right not when the world is right, but right when the world is wrong.

    To avoid another Calvary and its colossal error that the majority is always right, the world needs a standard of virtue, truth, and goodness, other than the will of the masses. In those moments when the popular will coincides with God's will there is no need of an external authority outside the mass; but there is need of one when there is a conflict between the two, as there was on Calvary.
    ...
    The millions of the world who keep their fingers on the pulse of public opinion and follow every theory, every vogue, every panacea, every popular immorality, and who approve the appointment of every anti-moral educator, have no standard of right and wrong. A thing cannot measure itself: A tape measure must be outside the cloth; a speedometer must not be a brick in the roadway; a judge must not be a shareholder in the corporation whose cause he judges. In like manner the judgment of the world must be from outside the world. Such a standard is the need of the hour -- an authority that does not, like some politician, find out what the people want and then give it to them, but which gives them what is true and good whether it is popular or not. We need someone to be healthy when the world is sick; someone to be a stretcher-bearer when the battlefields are freighted with wounded; someone to be calm when the house is burning; someone to be right when the world is wrong, as on Easter when they who slew the Foe lost the day.

    Where is that authority except in the Church of the Risen Christ which in each new generation is condemned by the world and then rises to a new and glorious Easter? At least a thousand times the bells have tolled in history for the death of the Church, but the execution never took place; the coffin is ordered by the corpse never appears; the mourners assist at her burial but she sings a requiem over her mourners; still doomed to death, but fated not to die, she survives a thousand crucifixions and a thousand deaths, and alone has survived the crash of all civilizations, because not involved in their ruin.

    There is often an hour when the world cannot understand the reason the Church gives for her position, but there is never a time when men do not live to see that her judgment was reasonable.

    ReplyDelete
  138. Nik kiss- I'm sure Leila agrees when I say this. We care and take very seriously both the physical wellbeing and spiritual well being of EVERY SOUL.

    Leila did not say anything perceived as mean. She brought up SOMEONE ELSE'S words that she agreed with. Bullying is only one cause of suicide in teens. Depression is another example. Suicide is not limited to gay teens. Leila is concerned about the root causes of sucide. Why arent you?

    You misdirect your anger. As I asked before...why blame those who speak of the dangers? Do we blame the parent who teaches the consequences of binge drinking? It doesnt make sense.

    ReplyDelete
  139. Leila,
    Did you really read what I wrote? When did I ever say you didn't take the suicide of a gay youth seriously? You put the blame of gay suicide on the gay person, it discounts there experience. It isn't in any way a pursuit of understanding their suffering, and in doing so leaves that young person at real risk.

    ReplyDelete
  140. You put the blame on their desires in other words

    ReplyDelete
  141. "My daughter is gay. How am I to guide her out of her sexual identity?"

    Firstly, Nik, our sexual identity is not our primary identity. Our primary identity is that of sons and daughters of a most loving, compassionate AND holy God. And that should principally dictate our life choices, decisions and actions.

    Following from who we are as sons and daughters of the Most High, the human body is literally the living temple of His Holy Spirit. It is thus truly sacred, and not to be defiled by any act (not just sexual) that dishonors it, neglects it, abuses it - or exploits it for mere erotic pleasure.

    I don't know of any way you can get your daughter out of her sexual identity, nor do I believe that that is of paramount importance. Her attraction towards her own sex could well persist for her entire life. But what you can surely do is try to impart to her (gently, over time, and with patently obvious love and concern), some sense of her priceless worth as a child of God, called (yes, clearly called, like every single one of us) to be perfect (in holiness and chastity) as her heavenly Father is perfect. Regardless of whether you succeed or not in such an endeavor, I'd submit that that is your God given obligation as a Catholic mother - to, at least, try. With incessant prayer and sacrifice accompanying your effort.

    God forbid it, Nik, but what if you had to see your daughter progressively carried away by the spirit of homosexuality/lesbianism which we know is far from big on monogamy? Would you be delighted to see "partners" appearing and disappearing periodically from her life - each using her for a period of (mutual) sexual pleasure before moving on to their next object of titillation? Given the known facts (not fabricated Christian fear mongering) of that type of lifestyle (I recall reading somewhere that homosexuals have an average of five sexual partners in their lifetime - somebody on this blog will surely correct me if I'm way off the mark) would you be content for your little girl to be embroiled in such phenomena?

    I repeat, I do understand your angst about the issue, and it is undoubtedly a difficult one, but it's still wrong of you to deny that sin (any grievous and persistent sin) places our souls in mortal danger. You weren't "wrongly taught" when you were taught that.

    God's mercy is real and, indeed, infinite, but it is actually a sin - and a most dangerous one at that - to ever assure oneself of it with blithe presumption while persisting in anything that He Himself tells us is wrong/harmful to us and to be avoided.

    That's about all I have to say in this matter, Nik, so I won't be addressing you further on this topic unless you require me to respond to something specific. God bless.

    ReplyDelete
  142. When did I ever say you didn't take the suicide of a gay youth seriously?

    When you called me "reckless".

    Okay, so both of us thinks that the other person is not reading what the other wrote, and is not understanding the other. So, let me ask: How should I speak of homosexuality and homosexual acts without driving teens to suicide, but still teaching the fullness of the Faith on this issue of grave sin? Give me something practical, since my one comment (in zillions of words here) has been "reckless" in that area.

    ReplyDelete
  143. Delltaflute

    "Alan- Sure I talk differently on the internet than I do in real life. I never said that I did. You seem to be conflating the two."

    Well that certainly is good to know. Does this mean you are bothered if you anger or hurt those to whom speak on these issue? Or is it still if they get upset or angry so be it?

    "I'm sorry but last I checked you weren't in my head. If I tell you that I'm interested in the salvation of souls, than you will just have to believe me. Otherwise it matters little what I say. You will never believe me no matter what. And I can never convince you of anything otherwise."

    I don't doubt you are trying to save their (our) souls. But you have said you must do it to save your soul? Did I not read that?

    " You have to take a leap of faith that what I say is sincere just as I much as I do you. Relationships and friendships are based on trust. I'm sorry that you can't trust me enough to believe that I am not lying to you."

    Again, don't think I'm not trusting you to tell me the truth. I am just using your words to understand what you are saying. I trust people until they show me I shouldn't.



    ReplyDelete
  144. delta part 2

    "It is my duty to speak the truth."

    Assuming you know the truth. There is the beginning of the debate.

    " Do I automatically assume a person is committing sin in real life? No. But it does come up. I live in Canada. And yes, I tell them my religious beliefs. And yes, I say it's sin"

    As I have said I have no problem with that, here on Leila's blog or out in the real world

    "They can roll their eyes. It's perfectly legal here to evangelize and to speak your mind."

    And it's perfectly legal for them to roll their eyes. And gay marriage is perfectly legal there.

    " I find it strange that you wish me to be silent when it's perfectly okay for you not to be."

    Again I have never said this. I don't expect you (or anyone to be silent. What I have said, what I continue to say is that people do not have a right to harrass, belittle, bully or what ever word you want to use. Too many young gay children have killed themselves because of bullying. Some who are attempting to save souls take it too far. Look at what Nik is going through here? Not one catholics has taken her side. She is talking about loving her child and all most of you can focus on is the sins of her daughter. And that is not loving. Sorry, in my opinion it just isn't. That is a nice example of what I am talking about when I say taking things too far.

    " My faith is a part of who I am; just as much as being gay is to you. I'm sorry that you don't understand that."

    A few things here. I understand that your faith is as much a part of you as being gay is too me. But you chose your faith. I don't choose to be gay (and you can argue all you want about that, until you or anyone else responding to this blog can tell me the date they chose to be heterosexual, you will be wrong.)

    And you are telling me now that a part of me wrong (thats as much a part of me as your faith is you). Deviant, evil. See the point?

    "Why would a person get married and than not have sex?"

    A plethora of reasons. Marriage is about so much more than sex. I'm sorry you don't see that.

    " They kinda go together don't they?"

    Well for me they do. And apparently for you they do too.

    " So if one opposes gay sex than one would naturally oppose gay marriage too, yes?"

    Yes.
    But why should one oppose gay sex? I mean yeah you don't want to have it, I get that. You aren't gay. But really I need a reason why something that is a part of me (homosexuality) cannot be expressed in a sexual nature? Merely because we cannot procreate? I mean if that is the case then do catholics only have sex when they know or assume they can procreate? Ive read about nfp here enough to know that is not the case.

    " I mean I'm not going to ask a single gay person, do you have sex? But it's sorta implied that sex follows marriage so if a person announces they are getting married to the same gender than yeah, it's a bit obvious."

    Yes it is obvious. And I ask, so? It's ok for you to be against gay sex. But why is it required of me to be against it? Because you think church says it is a sin?

    "As for other churches, I take it you've never read the Catechism. It actually talks about that in great detail or which I think Leila would appreciate if I didn't start quoting."

    Raised catholic Delta, can actually stand next to you and take communion. I'll let that stand on it's own.

    "I actually can't save your soul. That's up to Christ. I can only help you.'

    And if I tell you you aren't helping?

    ReplyDelete
  145. Bill is working on the devil's side, whether he understands that or not.

    Not so. I am stating my opinion as the father of a gay child. The notion that homosexual acts (which by the way aren't anymore condemned by the Church than the sex I had with my future wife or the 40 years that she was on the pill ) put a person at risk of eternal damnation is nothing more than the silliness of Catholicism. My wife rejects it and so do I.

    ReplyDelete
  146. delta part 3

    " God is very clear and unchanging on what is wrong (since you hate the word sin) and right."

    Actually this is not a truthful statement. And I don't mean that you are lying, I just mean that different people believe god in different ways. How many religions worship the same god but believe different things. So, and you don't have to do this, but I would appreciate if you said catholicism, not god.

    " And God says that it's not right for a man to be married to another man."

    Can you quote exactly where god mentions same sex marriage.

    " It's not my rules."

    Fair enough. It's the rules you choose to follow.

    " It's not my opinion."

    Fair enough, it's the opinion of your church which you choose to follow.

    " It's all God's."

    Again, not necessarily a truthful statement


    " It's not about your "goodness" or how you treat others."

    That you say this just makes me sad.

    " It's about your relationship with God. You separate yourself from God and the fullness of God's love by refusing to see that being married to a man is wrong."

    No, god is right here with me. It's not wrong. It's amazing.

    " You may not believe me or it. That doesn't matter."

    True, it doesn't matter. But it also doesn't matter that you don't believe me.

    " Only God's opinion counts and he's said that a man shall not lie with another man. Now if you can quote in the Bible where it says otherwise, than I'll be happy to read it."

    Nope, it does say that. Can't argue that at all. So you follow the bible intact?

    Sorry I know this is long, but I didn't want to miss anything.

    I did see your other post to me about where my morals come from etc and I'd be happy to respond if you would like me to.

    ReplyDelete
  147. Nik, I think you are wonderful. Your daughter is lucky to have you, and you are lucky to have her.
    If my mom was alive I would hope she would be just like you. And I think she would be.
    She doesn't need you to speak to her about sin. I don't believe your soul is in danger. I think come time god will give you the biggest of hugs for loving and accepting her.

    ReplyDelete
  148. You can table the comments to anyone about why you think gay people commit suicide. Love them and tell them the ways of salvation. Invite them without the hell and damn nation to the table. Let God do the rest. He knows their heart, He knows what they need. God is for them and putting the blame of their sadness and hopelessness back on them is reckless. Even if you believe it. Even if it is the complete truth. If they don't feel love, they will never take the next step. I know you think telling them what you know to be true is loving them. I do get that. And you are a bad Catholic if you don't proclaim the truth.I get all that.....but with out "FEELING" love, the other stuff is just words.

    ReplyDelete
  149. As for my reluctance to say bestiality is common ground I have done this dance with y'all enough to know it's a trap.
    Find other common ground. Maybe something that involves two humans? I'm happy to find common ground if it's comparable.
    Or get a dog, cat or horse here to comment that they like sex with humans.

    ReplyDelete
  150. You put the blame of gay suicide on the gay person, it discounts there experience. It isn't in any way a pursuit of understanding their suffering, and in doing so leaves that young person at real risk.

    And, I'm calling bs on this. I understand the suffering of others. Do you suggest that I am not human? And when did I say that I "blame" gay teens for their suicides? I never said it. Psychology is very complex, as is depression, and the role that society plays. And feeling disordered attractions at a tender age is no small thing. We could go into it further, but it would not be productive, as you believe (I think?) that having homosexual attractions is perfectly fine and good. I would say that innately, we all know that it is not fine and good. That is a far cry from "blaming" a teen for his own suicide!

    This may be meaningless to you, but just yesterday, my 13-year-old son had his hair cut by a very young (maybe 20?) stylist. The stylist was quite obviously a gay man. Quite obvious. My son had had his hair cut by him before and felt very uncomfortable (my son was confused and put off as to why the young man was so very effeminate -- in my opinion, a natural reaction to seeing a man appear incredibly womanish, from voice down to shoes). My son came home and complained about it to me and my oldest daughter (both of us very faithful to Church teaching). He was, quite honestly, grossed out. He never said a mean or nasty word to the young man, and he was polite (and got a fabulous haircut by the way!). But at home, he spoke his feelings. My daughter and I told him in no uncertain terms that he was not to judge the young man (we don't know anything about him, and we cannot assume that he sins, or that he is doing anything unvirtuous). We both told him that that young man could be a saint for all he knows, and he could get to heaven before all of us! And to be kind and think the best of folks no matter what someone looks like or even if they are a great sinner (which we have no way of knowing…. we didn't know a thing about this man besides appearances and affect).

    And, I also mentioned that the young man has a great talent for hair styling and he needs to be working at a fine salon. I intend to write a letter to his boss, lauding his work. He has a gift.

    Anyway, I was able to teach my child that we are kind to all, and we assume nothing, while he still full well knows that sexual sins (including homosexual sins) are gravely sinful. This is the Catholic way. You may not like it, but that's how it is, and it has always worked for me in the raising of my children.

    ReplyDelete
  151. My wife rejects it and so do I.

    Why is she Catholic and not Protestant? Also, if there is no real sexual sin (aside from things that lack "consent", I'm guessing), then (I guess I would ask your wife) what is the Christian virtue of chastity all about? Is that a virtue that never should have been spoken? Just a big mistake? 20 centuries in, we should just jettison that whole part of the moral law because it doesn't fit in with today's "psychology" and the spirit of the age?

    ReplyDelete
  152. but with out "FEELING" love, the other stuff is just words,

    I agree. I love my son just the way he is and it is laughable to hear people saying that his soul is in danger. Totally laughable.

    ReplyDelete
  153. I think we might have exhausted this subject. I also raised my brood the Catholic way, and God gave me a beautiful, kind, loving, precious gay child. I thank HIM everyday.

    ReplyDelete
  154. What is the Catholic way if it does place the salvation of one's soul as the utmost importance? What is more important than helping your children get to Heaven? We're supposed to cooperate with God and His grace.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. *if it does NOT place the salvation as utmost importance

      Delete
  155. Nik, thank you for loving your daughter and accepting her, just like Pope Francis would want you to. He said "we must focus on the person," and that is what you are doing. He focused on mercy, and that is what you are doing. God bless you and her!

    ReplyDelete
  156. Nik, what do you make of Jesus repeatedly telling people to "go and sin no more"? Are we allowed to do whatever we want or should we be striving for holiness, embracing every virtue?

    ReplyDelete
  157. I love my son just the way he is and it is laughable to hear people saying that his soul is in danger. Totally laughable.

    Bill. You are an atheist. Of course the whole idea of sin and hell is laughable to you. That doesn't make it less true.

    ReplyDelete
  158. He didn't give you a "gay child", he gave you a precious daughter. Our identity comes from Christ, not any particular inclination, disorder or sin. Perhaps if we stress that, rather than insisting that "gay" is part of one's identity, there would be more understanding of one's own dignity as a child of God. That would be half (or maybe the whole) battle.

    ReplyDelete
  159. He focused on mercy, and that is what you are doing.

    Would Pope Francis say that it's okay for folks to stay in sin? Or would he, after preaching Christ, turn to "catechesis and the moral consequences" next?

    ReplyDelete
  160. This is the Catholic way. You may not like it, but that's how it is, and it has always worked for me in the raising of my children.

    I respect that, Leila, I truly do. There are worse things you can do to your children than raise them Catholic. My mother did until she died at 39. \

    I just think people have to realize that Catholicism gives us a lifestyle that works. But that doesn't make it the sole correct worldview. There are others that work just as well, if not better.

    ReplyDelete
  161. Francis,
    Thank you so much for understanding. She is a grown person, with her own decisions. My job right now, is love. I give her to God.
    Margo,
    What sin am I committing? And how am I failing as a Catholic mother? I have lived my faith. I am married for 25 years to the same man, I have given birth 6 times. I have shared and taught my children the way God has asked me to. Margo my daughter has chosen something else. I love her.

    ReplyDelete
  162. And what is love? Is it approving of everything our sons and daughters do? Or does love go beyond affection and emotion, loving someone enough to get them to Heaven no matter what?

    I suggest you read more about the virtue of chastity, a virtue that all men and women are called by God to live: http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P85.HTM

    ReplyDelete
  163. With Sebastian's encouragement, I'll pipe up again. :-)

    I'm in a different phase of life than many of you -- my oldest is only 5, but I've been contemplating quite a bit lately (prompted not in small part by the last few comment threads here!) what it is I want most for my girls. The conclusion I've arrived as it that I want them to know and love God and spend eternity with him! I want them to treat every one they meet in a way that recognizes the full dignity and worth of each individual, and I want them to stand uncompromisingly for Truth. Those are not contradictory goals!

    One thing about Catholic teaching is that it is completely internally consistent. All the bits and pieces flow from each other logically. Of course there's other stuff, but I think the most basic premises are that God exists, God loves *me*, and I'm not God. Now, I know alanl64 and some others here don't accept that as a starting spot, but for those who do accept those as a start, I'd say before jettisoning whole swaths of teaching because they are hard, uncomfortable, or confusing or simply don't seem to make sense, it's worth really diving into where those teachings come from and why they exist. The answers are there! and they are worth learning about before setting yourself up to be God.

    Nik Kiss, have you come across Steve Gershom/Joey Prever's blog? That might offer a perspective on how faithful Catholic and SSA can fit together. http://www.stevegershom.com

    ReplyDelete
  164. Alan- If I speak the Truth than how people react to it, is just that. It's the Truth and sometimes it hurts. If you're asking me to lie, than I can't do that. I have sympathy as I am a sinner myself. I think what you're looking for me is pretend that things don't happen or never say the Truth or to present it only partially. I can't do that. I have no control over how people react to that Truth either. They can accept it with gentle patience or with anger. Truth is stable and ever fixed.

    Let's be clear. I CANNOT save a person's soul. You're using a Protestant phrase when you say I'm here to save a person's soul. It's not a good phrase. Only Christ can save souls. It's the mission of Catholics to go forth and spread the good news. We're to offer counsel and assistance. We can't save anyone and forcing a person on a path of salvation is in violation of the person's free will.

    That said, I find it odd that you made the comment that I care more about my salvation than those of others. Why is my salvation not important? Do you want me to go to hell?

    If you're asking for my motivations for helping others on the path toward salvation there are many. Do you want a list? It may take a while. What's the biggest one? Because Christ told me to and it is with great love of Him that I comply. My husband asks me to do many things out of great love for him, and yet no one questions why. I love Christ more than my husband.

    ReplyDelete
  165. nik kiss, of course you should love your daughter! Absolutely!! No one has ever said otherwise. Just curious: Do you teach your children about sin? Even now? Do you teach your (other) children that homosexual acts are sins against chastity? How do you handle the question of sin now? Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  166. are you asking, how do I address my daughter being a lesbian in the context of sin to my other children?

    ReplyDelete
  167. Bill, thanks. What is the better system? Is there a better system than the one which teaches virtue and the fullness of love? That we are all called to be saints? That we can rise above ourselves, our desires, our selfish wants, and live lives of heroic virtue?

    ReplyDelete
  168. are you asking, how do I address my daughter being a lesbian in the context of sin to my other children?

    ReplyDelete
  169. I know I have been vague about addressing sin and where I stand and what I have taught my children. Yes I have given my children a Catholic up bringing. I was the few women in my circle that lived my Catholic faith. I taught my children about sin and chastity.I believe my husband and I have discussed everything with them. No subject was or is off the table.

    ReplyDelete
  170. Alan- I speak the Truth. It doesn't come from me. I'm merely a servant, not the Master.

    I don't know if you and I are reading the same comments. Nik Kiss spoke about the struggle her family is dealing with. Everyone was sympathetic and condemned the bullying. Not one person said otherwise. We did, however, say she was wrong for thinking that gay sex is not a sin. Because that is Truth. I'm sorry if that Truth hurts you or her, but that is the Truth. To say otherwise or not say anything does her and you a disservice. We are here to serve.

    I didn't exactly choose my faith. It chose me. Of all the people in my family, I have been the most motivated to go to Mass and learning about the teachings of Christ. Having faith is of course a process so it's not a direct comparison to being gay. And no where have I said that being gay is something that you choose. That said having gay sex is something that you do choose. Just like when I choose to have heterosexual sex. Yes?

    You're also very confusing. I said why would people get married and then not have sex. And you proceeded to ignore that by saying marriage is more than sex. Then later you said it's safe to assume that if you are married you are also having sex. I'm opposed to gay sex and therefore gay marriage in large part because it involves gay sex. Gay sex is a sin. So does gay marriage not involve sex? Are there virginal gay marriages?

    And Alan if you are indeed taking communion with mortal sin, you are blasphemous and disrespectful. I think you need to read my post about excommunication. http://deltaflute.blogspot.ca/2013/06/respect-my-athoritah.html



    ReplyDelete
  171. Leila,

    All you need to do is look at the worldviews held by so many heroic and successful people in the world and through history to understand that Catholicism, even with its supposed keys to the kingdom, is but one of many valid worldviews. I commended you for raising your kids by a worldview that works relatively well. Don't push it.

    ReplyDelete
  172. After everything we have been through. I think the greatest gift I have given my kids is the green light to love their sister. This is an emotional process for them. Do we discuss heaven and hell? Yup! Do we discuss what that means for their sister? Yup! Has our faith changed? Ohh yes, it has alot. Deeper, wider, simpler, more compassion and much much more love. Ohh and forgiveness and grace. Who lead the charge on grace in our family of 8? My gay daughter, she has grace in spades.

    ReplyDelete
  173. Alan- Not every religion has the full deposit of faith. God's Church, the Catholic Church, has the full deposit. It has the entire truth. Why settle for half-truths?

    No this world matters little. What you do for others counts for nothing if you haven't a relationship with Christ first. Christ is love. We are vessels. If we stop Christ from pouring his love into us by being sinful, how can we pour out that love to others? We can't. Apart from Christ we can do nothing. Christ first. Always.

    As for the verses of gay marriage. Such a thing did not exist. So naturally Christ doesn't speak directly about something that doesn't exist. He does speak about marriage. Frequently. He discusses divorce. He discusses the marriage to the woman at the well. And when he discusses sex he says one man and one woman. Gay sex was around. St. Paul actually addresses gay sex so does the Torah of which Christ was an adherent. So no, God, does not acknowledge the existance of gay marriage and furthermore he speaks out against gay sex. And as you said, gay marriage contains sex. So why can't one conclude that it stands to reason that if gay marriage doesn't exist and gay sex is immoral that gay marriage in the modern sense is immoral? There are many things like this in the Bible. Murder is spoken out against, but abortion is not mentioned. Why? It existed. Because the Torah already addressed that with Onen and with the several accounts of infertile women and in Genesis. Does Jesus really need to address that all in great detail or can we think for ourselves? Or better yet how about relying on the Church He established for guidance on these matters?

    Shall I quote all the versus dealing with gay sex or marriage? That also may take a while. Leila may not appreciate that.

    ReplyDelete
  174. "Nik, thank you for loving your daughter and accepting her, just like Pope Francis would want you to.

    Francis Catholic,

    Firstly, how odd for someone to be thanking a mother for loving her child! Firstly, that'd be the task of the child, would it not? Secondly, it's not like Nik's doing something heroic or extraordinary for her daughter - it's the most natural and to-be-expected thing in the world, for parents to love their children - regardless of their behavior - no? So why this third party "thank you"? Just wondering.

    Secondly, what do you mean by "accepting her"? Nik accepting that her daughter is her precious and love-worthy child with/despite all her personal life choices? Or Nik accepting every last one of her daughter's choices as okay? Pope Francis certainly advocates the former, as has every Pope in history. Indeed Catholic doctrine (and God's own command) is to love (if that is what you mean by "accept") everyone, including one's enemy or a sinner (which we all are). That's common knowledge by now surely?

    What Pope Francis certainly does not advocate is accepting (approving of) gay "marriage". He certainly doesn't accept it himself. In fact he reckons it's demonic. To quote him directly, it's "a move of the father of lies who seeks to confuse and deceive the children of God."

    Cardinal Bergoglio Hits Out at Same-Sex Marriage

    Just thought I'd point this out so we're all clear in our conversations what the Church and Pope Francis (a "son of the Church") advocates or doesn't advocate as acceptable. There's a veritable cacophony of "Pope Francis says" cries going up at the moment, and not always without disingenuous motivations.

    ReplyDelete
  175. Sarah- So glad you commented! My oldest is 3 (okay almost 4). It's something I think about all the time. How do I convey Christ's love for my children and the dangers of sin?

    I like how someone mentioned on another blog that the Montessouri program for preschoolers only addresses Christ's love. They don't even mention sin until the age of reason. And it makes sense. Young children don't understand everything they do wrong. They also should know that Christ loves them first and foremost and wants a relationship with them. So I don't even talk about sin with my children. We talk about other facets of the faith in as much as they can understand.

    My priest is awesome. He loves children a lot and doesn't mind that they are noisy. I've never seen a priest take such a special interest in showing them God's love as much as he does. But does that mean my priest is lax to the adults? Heck no. He talks about sin almost every Sunday (one Sunday the deacon spoke). He tells us to turn back to God. And that's what I want my children to also learn but later when it makes sense to them.

    Small steps, right?

    ReplyDelete
  176. Are you asking, how do I address my daughter being a lesbian in the context of sin to my other children?

    I can't believe the scrutiny you people have put this poor woman through. She has been way more polite to you than I could ever imagine being. Thank God that my wife doesn't read this garbage. You'd have her scared out of her wits. You really should stop.

    ReplyDelete
  177. You all are nuts......Francis C was just throwing out some love for a mother. How any one could take someone to task for that? well I just don't know. You are to quick to want to argue and you don't seem to care about anything else but getting doctrine out there. I think Pope Francis guarded against that as well. But hey it has been educational.

    ReplyDelete
  178. Why do you think we care so much about doctrine? If we did NOT love you, we would simply ignore you and leave you alone.

    ReplyDelete
  179. nik kiss, you had me up until this line: Who lead the charge on grace in our family of 8? My gay daughter, she has grace in spades.

    Wait. Who determines who has grace (and what it is)? That's not for me or you to determine. Being in a state of grace means having confessed and repented of mortal sin. We may be speaking of grace differently.

    Bill, what other worldview? You didn't mention one specifically. Can you name just one?

    ReplyDelete
  180. "Francis C was just throwing out some love for a mother.

    Nik, Francis C made that comment against a backdrop of charges that we on this blog have no love for you or for anyone. Bill S actually spelled that out in so many words. Now put two and two together, will you?

    ReplyDelete
  181. You all are nuts

    Uh…. wow?
    Okay. We are all nuts. That says it all, I guess.

    Have a nice day, nik kiss.

    ReplyDelete
  182. Delta at 11:36 on 9/23 you wrote this:

    "Yes. I understand that as an adult if I do not actively seek to save your soul but rather let life go on then my soul is also in jepardy. And I've caused scandal."


    What did you mean by this? I am just using your words.

    And please go back and reread what I have written. I'll paraphrase. People get married for many different reasons. Not all of them have to do with sex. I didn't marry my husband so I could have sex with him. I married him because I love him and want to build a life with him. Can I do that without marriage, yup sure can. As can you. So I am not confusing, you asked why one would get married if not for sex. Marriage offers a unity, a binding that just plain sex doesn't.

    Please understand that what you call truth I don't. And you can say it is truth all you want. As others have pointed out there are other views and they are just as valid.

    And you are correct I choose to have homosexual sex. You think it's wrong, I don't. So I'd say you shouldn't have homosexual sex. But feel free to have all the heterosexual sex you want. My question continues to be this. I don't believe in your religion. Why can't I have sex with whom I want? (of course with the confines that they be human, of age and consenting?) I get you think it's a sin. I don't.

    As for Nik, sorry, look at the way people are treating her. I don't say bullying, but each catholic is telling her to love her daughter but (and this may just be my understanding of it) she must continue to tell her daughter she is sinning and in danger of not going to heaven. And Nik is saying she will love her daughter. All parts of her daughter. Do you see this? Do you see why I don't see it as helpful?

    And rest assured, I do not take communion.

    ReplyDelete
  183. Bill, what other worldview? You didn't mention one specifically. Can you name just one?

    Ghandi had a worldview that worked. The Dahli Lama has one. George Washington, Ben Franklin and other founding fathers were Masons. Bill and Melinda Gates are atheists. I don't understand why you would ask for examples. There's millions of them.

    ReplyDelete
  184. Francis, yes, exactly. We were pegged as "unloving" (for what exactly, I am still not sure), but there is some line of delineation that the others are "loving". This conversation is nuts, that's what's nuts (not any of the people in it).

    Nik kiss, you can read the top link called, "Please read first" if you don't understand the point of this blog. I have no qualms with anyone who doesn't like the purpose of the blog (mainly it's catechetical, so that we can have clarity on doctrinal teaching, which was sorely lacking in my own youth). If you want pastoral support, etc., there is Courage, which you probably already know about (and which I'm guessing you don't like?). They stress love for one's gay children, but they never "accept" the sin.

    ReplyDelete
  185. Ghandi's worldview was anti-contraception, anti-homosexual acts, anti-abortion, etc. The same natural law precepts as Catholics. So, you are saying that moral law is a good one? I am thrilled if so!! I thought you were claiming the opposite.

    ReplyDelete
  186. Bill- so asking questions is scrutiny? She can and has refused to answer some. Nobody has forced her to. Strange. But maybe you mean in a scientific sense which requires a level of scrutiny to assess data. I'm just not sure how asking would bother a person. People do this all the time in college classrooms and debate. Maybe you think we're not expressing enough sympathy? Not sure about that because at some point its over the top. Please elaborate.

    ReplyDelete
  187. And actually, Melinda Gates touts her Catholicism. She is not an atheist, but I can't fault you for thinking she is. She is single-handedly working, with her billions, to undo and bring down the child-cherishing values of an entire continent. Many Africans are sick about it, beyond heartache:

    http://littlecatholicbubble.blogspot.com/2012/08/an-african-womans-open-letter-to.html

    That imperialistic, secular western worldview "works"? For whom? It does tend to get rid of the "unwanted" little brown and black poor people. Sickening.

    ReplyDelete
  188. We are about to hit 200 comments. Please either hit the "notify" button, or hit the "load more" (if that still applies; looks like they have changed the format on comments).

    ReplyDelete
  189. approaching 200 comments, so more than likely I won't post often as I only have one computer that loads after 200

    So Delta if you respond I'm not ignoring you and I will try to get back to respond.

    Understand though I think how you live your life is wonderful. For you. Just not for me. I'm not saying I am right and you are wrong. We won't know that until we are dead, and then we more than likely wont be able to warn each other.

    Nik, you are amazing. I applaud you (and the gentleman that has the gay son, sorry I can't remember who you are). You really do show what unconditional love is about.

    ReplyDelete
  190. In recent weeks I’ve been researching a topic perhaps not (yet) too familiar to many: the steady development, in academia, in recent years, of an unbelievably radical philosophy, dubbed the “Queer Theory”.

    The construction, adoption and aggressive (albeit still largely hidden) pursuit of this incredibly insidious idea, which involves an unprecedentedly revolutionary reengineering of the very foundational elements of society, puts into perspective much of what we’re witnessing in the arena of sexual politics today, including, but not limited to, militant homosexuality (or, as the new terminology would have it, “homosexualism”). Indeed, an understanding of the “queer” agenda makes it abundantly clear that homosexuals (“gays”) themselves are but mere pawns in this patently diabolic game to completely uproot our current social structures and, indeed, utterly confuse our very understanding of our own identities as human beings. “Homosexualism” itself is considered merely as one logical step in a systematic programme of completely deconstructing society as we currently know it.

    The “queer” theory was first conceived by French philosopher Michel Focault in the early 1970s, but became a serious project among academics only in the 1990s. While it is difficult to summarize what the theory is about in a few sentences or even a few paragraphs, what it essentially seeks to achieve is do away with (among other things) all our current values/concepts of morality, monogamy, family, biology, sexuality, gender identity, reproductive norms, and all religious freedoms and theological concepts regarding the nature of a human being. Indeed, it even rejects the notion of any particular action or thing being “natural” in the human order of things. It specifically rejects the proposition that gender and sexuality are in any way fixed in any person, or that they are intrinsic parts of our identities as men, women… or… whatever.

    To this end the project seeks to actively and deliberately harness the philosophies and energies of the LGBT community, Marxists, anarchists, hippies, leftwingers, feminists, liberals and counter-culturalists (ingeniously exploiting both the legitimate and fabricated issues and grievances which exist within all these groups) to bring about “a revolution in consciousness”.

    Note that the Gay Liberation Front Manifesto which I’ve linked to above is quite blunt about identifying the main enemy to defeat: “the most basic unit of society, the family” which consists of “the man in charge, a slave as his wife, and their children on whom they force themselves as the ideal models.” This is based on the rationale that “the very form of the family works against homosexuality.”

    The agenda of the queer project is so radical that it even proposes extending sexual rights (including “sexual and reproductive health services”) to 10 year old children! (So much for the strident denials from homosexual activists today that “marriage equality” will never open the door to legalization of polygamy or bestiality, let alone incest or underage sex!)

    What we’re seeing today is just the tip of an unbelievably evil iceberg. The current debates about “gay marriage” and the like will soon be passé, overtaken by proposals unthinkable at this point to any sane mind. Watch this space! And keep those seatbelts tightly fastened!

    ReplyDelete
  191. I think I have said everything I have to say except: YOU ARE ALL NUTS.

    ReplyDelete
  192. Alan, Catholic (and countless others) are against homosexual acts because they are sinful. But no one is trying to forcibly looking into your bedroom. Gays have been free to have gay sex since… well, before I was born at least! As for marriage: We are against that because it's not possible. The thing does not exist. It's like calling a woman a man. It doesn't make it so. And, it harms society, especially children. Here is a preview, but of course, it will take generations for the real damage to be assessed. This social experiment is still in its infancy:

    http://littlecatholicbubble.blogspot.com/2013/06/should-children-sit-down-and-shut-up.html

    ReplyDelete

PLEASE, when commenting, do not hit "reply" (which is the thread option). Instead, please put your comment at the bottom of the others.

To ensure that you don't miss any comments, click the "subscribe by email" link, above. If you do not subscribe and a post exceeds 200 comments, you must hit "load more" to get to the rest. We often have meaty and long discussions -- trust me, they're worth following!