Earn cash as you plan. Get a $20 gift card for every 200 points. Learn more
Catholic Weddings
Some thoughts...
In reading posts that turn into arguments all over FB, I've seen a lot of things I don't like. Obviously, I am deeply offended by the amount of disrespect and bitter hatred against the Church. But one thing that has caught me off guard is how upset I've become over the way some Catholics have responded. There seems to be as much venom in their comments!
I think it's REALLY hard to maintain a good balance between being firm on Church teachings, not waivering or watering down, while still treating EVERYONE with great dignity, respect, and love. This is something I'm personally trying to find a balance in right now. I think this is a very important time in which to be super balanced on this.
What are all your thoughts? This is seriously something I've been thinking about a lot and I could sure use some more insight into the issue!
I think it's REALLY hard to maintain a good balance between being firm on Church teachings, not waivering or watering down, while still treating EVERYONE with great dignity, respect, and love. This is something I'm personally trying to find a balance in right now. I think this is a very important time in which to be super balanced on this.
What are all your thoughts? This is seriously something I've been thinking about a lot and I could sure use some more insight into the issue!
This discussion has been closed.
Re: Some thoughts...
Sometimes, representing the faith means we need to defend it and engage people who are criticizing it. We may need to give them arguments in favor of the Church's position and show them evidence and logic supporting our faith.
But eventually we have to step back and consider whether we're continuing to argue with this person to "win" the argument, or whether more words are needed to properly represent the faith. If we've laid out all our arguments, given all of our evidence (all in a loving manner), and the other person(s) still rejects and argues back, then us continuing to argue is not going to help. We've stated our case, and continuing to banter with them will propbably only lead to increased tempers and harsher language.
It is not in my nature to back down from an argument, but sometimes I've had to just swallow my pride and realize that I'm not helping my cause by continuing to argue over and over.
Also, while we state our case and present our reasoning, I think it is so important to constantly consider the other side and point out the validity of their reasoning or feelings. Obviously we may not agree with the other side on certain presumptions or principles, but we can still sympathize with their feelings and recognize that they may make some good points, while their overall line of reasoning is flawed. When we do this, we are showing the other person that we are open to other reasonable arguments and not just rejecting their viewpoint outright.
SaveSave
I was appalled by the hatred I saw coming from a Catholic. It really made me stop and think about how although she saying some things that are in line with our teachings, she was wording everything in such a hurtful and angry way, and therefore wasn't actually representing Christ's Church. I so wanted to post something like "Let's all remember: the Lord is kind and merciful. Let's try to be that way, too!"
I guess because I have had so many gay people in my life, I just can't tolerate that kind of hatred toward them. I think being homosexual, especially in today's society where it's neither okay to be openly gay, nor to be a closeted homosexual, has got to be the hardest thing to deal with.
I agree with what you said - that what the paragraph says is correct and does not show hatred. However, I feel that so much of what the church teaches - especially regarding same sex attraction, contraception, and other "hot topics" - is completely misunderstood by non-Catholics (and many Catholics, for that matter). I think there is a certain tone to the paragraph Resa gave and, though it is absolutely correct, the way it was written (to me it came off as shaming and condescending) I think does more to hurt the mission of helping others understand the Catholic church. There is a lot to unpack in these teachings, even for Catholics who understand it. I think things almost need to be stated in a more simple and "user-friendly" way to help spread understanding of teachings. This does NOT mean lying about teaching, but just giving a basic overview rather than getting into things which would require more theology to understand.
I guess, as a preschool teacher, I think of it this way. If I was teaching a high schooler about types of clouds, I can start out using terms like precipitation, condensation, air pressure, weather patterns, etc. because they already have a basic knowledge of what this is. If I'm teaching the same thing to a preschooler, I have to be far more basic about what we learn. We're still learning the same concept, but it's just easier for someone who is lacking in a lot of basic science knowledge. Does this make any sense? You definitely do not have to agree, just my thoughts.
[QUOTE]Carrie, I agree with what you said - that what the paragraph says is correct and does not show hatred. However, I feel that so much of what the church teaches - especially regarding same sex attraction, contraception, and other "hot topics" - is completely misunderstood by non-Catholics (and many Catholics, for that matter). I think there is a certain tone to the paragraph Resa gave and, though it is absolutely correct, the way it was written (to me it came off as shaming and condescending) I think does more to hurt the mission of helping others understand the Catholic church. There is a lot to unpack in these teachings, even for Catholics who understand it. I think things almost need to be stated in a more simple and "user-friendly" way to help spread understanding of teachings. This does NOT mean lying about teaching, but just giving a basic overview rather than getting into things which would require more theology to understand. I guess, as a preschool teacher, I think of it this way. If I was teaching a high schooler about types of clouds, I can start out using terms like precipitation, condensation, air pressure, weather patterns, etc. because they already have a basic knowledge of what this is. If I'm teaching the same thing to a preschooler, I have to be far more basic about what we learn. We're still learning the same concept, but it's just easier for someone who is lacking in a lot of basic science knowledge. Does this make any sense? You definitely do not have to agree, just my thoughts.
Posted by TeaForMe[/QUOTE]<div>
</div><div>I completely 100% agree with you. In fact, I said I don't think saying that would do any good.</div><div>
</div><div>But I DO NOT think its actual hatred, which is what it was categorized as, which is what I was getting at.
</div>
Carrie (and others) - I guess for me, if someone is being condescending, shaming, and disrespectful, I translate that as hateful. I'm a pretty sensitive person, so maybe that's why I see it that way? I guess maybe hurtful or mean would be better words, but to me it just seems full of hate.
I don't think the truthfulness of a statement has anything to do with the hatefulness/meanness/whatever of the statement. I can be like "hey fat girl with acne and warts all over your face, you're ugly" and then claim it's not mean because it's true. It's still a pretty mean thing to say. Does that make sense?
What if someone said something really racist? Something about a race being naturally inferior to another; that they're subhuman. Would you think that's hateful? I know I would.
I'm not trying to say you're wrong...I'm truly trying to wrap my head around this whole situation. I seriously "argue" with myself like this in my head lol.
[QUOTE]That's a good point, TeaForMe. Carrie (and others) - I guess for me, if someone is being condescending, shaming, and disrespectful, I translate that as hateful. I'm a pretty sensitive person, so maybe that's why I see it that way? I guess maybe hurtful or mean would be better words, but to me it just seems full of hate. I don't think the truthfulness of a statement has anything to do with the hatefulness/meanness/whatever of the statement. I can be like "hey fat girl with acne and warts all over your face, you're ugly" and then claim it's not mean because it's true. It's still a pretty mean thing to say. Does that make sense?
Posted by Resa77[/QUOTE]
You're making sense to me.
The two major things that God asks of us are in the commandments. haha, yes, I know there are ten but when Jesus was asked which were the most important, He replied "Love God with your whole heart, honor and serve him" and "Love thy neighbor as thyself" (written by Mark to start, I'd have to go back to get the exact verse)
If you look at the rest of the commandments, they are really only extensions of these two.
In my personal life, I don't seem to have a problem with the first but sometimes fall short on the second.
I abhor rudeness and stupidity. ( Ignorance is totally separate as we are all ignorant of something). When someone is stupid and/or rude, my usual good manners go out the window! Yes, I do attack these two faults because they can be controlled, unlike ordinary ignorance of a situation or custom.
I feel that most of the situations within the Church recently may not have come up if the individual involved had thought about those two commandments that are most important to God.
It seems like a lot of Catholics (and again, christians in general) hold homosexual acts up as the absolute worst, unforgiveable sin. We all sin--and homosexual acts are one of many grave sins. If we're going to say things like that about homosexual acts, then we should say them about all grave sins.
SaveSave
Posted by ootmother2[/QUOTE]
Please don't delude yourself. By doing so, you put your soul in danger. I'm quite sure that the only person (well, besides Christ,) who could have accurately made that statement would have been the Blessed Virgin Mary.
[QUOTE]I think one of the problems is that Catholics (and christians in general) don't run around saying things like "____ is unnatural" "___is to be hated" "____ is a degredation" etc. about other sins, like pre-martial sex, greed, stealing, lying, disrespecting parents, taking then Lord's name in vain, etc. It seems like a lot of Catholics (and again, christians in general) hold homosexual acts up as the absolute worst, unforgiveable sin. We all sin--and homosexual acts are one of many grave sins. If we're going to say things like that about homosexual acts, then we should say them about all grave sins.
Posted by monkeysip[/QUOTE]
I agree, 100%.
It's one of the 10 Commandments, and yet we ignore it and focus on things that are mentioned elsewhere in the Bible but not as one of the laws sent down directly from God.
Funny and weird. Okay, maybe not funny.
[QUOTE]Please don't delude yourself. By doing so, you put your soul in danger. I'm quite sure that the only person (well, besides Christ,) who could have accurately made that statement would have been the Blessed Virgin Mary.
Posted by lalaith50[/QUOTE]
I think I'm missing something here. Maybe I should explain.
I have no problem with loving God with my whole heart and sout. (first commandment)
"love thy neighbor as thyself" is the one that I find I sometimes fall short on. Perhaps it's a lack of patience with stupidity (not ignorance as I said). When someone is being stupid or rude, I sometimes just lose my patience with them.
I do work on this, I am aware that it is a failing. I need to learn when to just walk awayl
I do what I can for others, charity works, helping the homeless, being kind to strangers as well as friendsand family.
Can you explain what you said about the Virgin Mary?
I think she was expressing doubt that you (or ANY of us) always love God with all of our hearts. Honestly, I must agree with her.
This isn't a judgment of you, but just a theological point that I think no one is capable of loving God 100% all the time because we are sinful creatures. While we may always go to mass, not take God's name in vain, always pray to God, etc. there are certainly moments in which God doesn't have first place in our hearts.
Like I said, this isn't about you--just theological speculation that all of us fall short at least some of the time.
SaveSave
It's true that some are more grave than others. But my point was that all sins are still rephrensible, and we should flee from all sin. When talking about these things with others, there's no point in distinguishing between the bad sins, the really bad sins, and the really really bad sins, KWIM? It just makes people feel like you're judging them more than others.
Maybe homosexual acts are marginally worse than pre-marital heterosexual acts, but either way, both are very grave sins and both can be forgiven as long as the person goes to confession.
SaveSave
[QUOTE]@ Ooot I think she was expressing doubt that you (or ANY of us) always love God with all of our hearts. Honestly, I must agree with her. This isn't a judgment of you, but just a theological point that I think no one is capable of loving God 100% all the time because we are sinful creatures. While we may always go to mass, not take God's name in vain, always pray to God, etc. there are certainly moments in which God doesn't have first place in our hearts. Like I said, this isn't about you--just theological speculation that all of us fall short at least some of the time.
Posted by monkeysip[/QUOTE]
hmm
I guess I would have to edit that to "I try with my whole heart". I do see that trying isn't always complete. I am certainly not perfect so my love can't be perfect, I see the point.
and Ihave to add that its much easier to love God than others. I doubt I am alone on that one.
SaveSave
[QUOTE]Also, I wasn't trying to suggest that all sins are equal. It's true that some are more grave than others. But my point was that all sins are still rephrensible, and we should flee from all sin. When talking about these things with others, there's no point in distinguishing between the bad sins, the really bad sins, and the really really bad sins, KWIM? It just makes people feel like you're judging them more than others. Maybe homosexual acts are marginally worse than pre-marital heterosexual acts, but either way, both are very grave sins and both can be forgiven as long as the person goes to confession.
Posted by monkeysip[/QUOTE]
<div>Late on the discussion... sorry! The homosexuality thing is tough. While the Church teaches that the homosexual act is a sin and that we should love the sinner... it also asks a lot of those with persistent homosexual inclinations. For those who don't willingly choose celibacy as part of their vocation (priests, nuns, brothers, consecrated, etc)... it can be a heavy cross to bear if you don't have pastoral support and especially support from friends and family to live out that celibacy. While the Catholic Church and Evangelicals have support groups for those who choose to fight their homosexual inclinations, I think Resa is right that this still puts them in a difficult place if the only options they see demonstrated in society is remaining "closeted" or being "out" and living out the lifestyle. That doesn't mean that living their lives according to God's law shouldn't be asked of them... but we also owe them our prayers and support if they choose to do so... especially since it goes against the grain of what our culture tells them.</div><div>
</div><div>Two good books that I've been recommended are "Washed and Waiting" (finished) and "Sexual Authenticity" (started reading). WaW is by an Evangelical Christian, Wesley Hill, about his struggles that persist and living out celibacy. I have started reading SA, which is by a catholic convert, Melinda Selmys... phenomenal so far! Both have cleared up a lot of assumptions for me and have given me a better understanding of what the struggle is like for those who choose to not live out a homosexual lifestyle.</div>
[QUOTE]I think one of the problems is that Catholics (and christians in general) don't run around saying things like "____ is unnatural" "___is to be hated" "____ is a degredation" etc. about other sins, like pre-martial sex, greed, stealing, lying, disrespecting parents, taking then Lord's name in vain, etc. It seems like a lot of Catholics (and again, christians in general) hold homosexual acts up as the absolute worst, unforgiveable sin. We all sin--and homosexual acts are one of many grave sins. If we're going to say things like that about homosexual acts, then we should say them about all grave sins.
Posted by monkeysip[/QUOTE]
I think part of this is because of the current political push for societal approval of homosexual acts and relationships, it has put many on the defensive....watching Christians be persecuted for upholding the truth about marriage, etc and fearing that the worst is yet to come will naturally lead people to speak more vociferously about this issue if they feel attacked.
ETA not saying this negates the need for charity, and in fact probably makes it even more necessary but I think this explains some of that perception.
SaveSave
Here's something that confuses me: I know people say homosexuals should not be in a homosexual relationship, even if it's a chaste one. People make the argument that it's wrong because they can't even marry. But what about heterosexuals who date but dont want to marry? Is that wrong? I just don't see what would be so wrong about having a chaste homosexual relationship.