Archdiocese Of Boston Open Mass To Be Held

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='franciscanheart' timestamp='1308609735' post='2256524']
I think you can find a better example and I would encourage you to do so! For a guy that talks about drinking whiskey all the time, you'd think you'd find something less ridiculous to compare than drunkenness and prison rape.


I don't want to argue with you about who is wasting whose time. To the point of specifics: it now appears you're just trying to engage in a debate. This isn't a debate nor do I wish it to be; I've asked you to supply a source. You have refused to do so (claiming to be too busy to find sources (but apparently not busy enough to let me know I'm wasting your time)) and I have accepted your unwillingness. No big deal. Have a nice day!
[/quote]
I drink whisky frequently (ETA: frequently for me implies once every two weeks, give or take) because I think it is lovely stuff. However, I've never been drunk. Not once, and I never intend to be.

I told you at least twice that if you want to hear Apo's explanation, I will send him a message. I can't guarantee that he'll respond, but I will do my part.
I simply do not have the hours necessary to dig through hundreds of threads he's been involved with both here and elsewhere to find a handful of posts on the subject. If you want to do so, then go for it. It's neither necessary nor relevant to the thread though.

Edited June 20, 2011 by Nihil Obstat

[katholikkid]

[quote name='TeresaBenedicta' timestamp='1308610042' post='2256529']
Same sex attraction is inherently disordered- but not sinful. Same sex acts are both inherently disordered AND sinful.

SSA is disordered in the same way that any other genetic defect is a disorder. It is a physical manifestation of original sin.
[/quote]

That sounds a lot better, more precise, and is really close on Church teaching as close as Church teaching gets to talking about the attraction itself. Mostly the Church is concerned about the act but the discussion which we're all having is still pretty ambiguous in the documents mainly cause not much has been written. Now if you read my @Cam post on this page I address that disordered bit. My thing is can an attraction be disordered if it can't be helped and even if it is does the person feeling the attraction have any responsibility since they cannot help it? What makes an attraction disordered or ordered? It's really interesting if and what the church will have to say on the attraction part, i bet we'll get something in the next decade on it.

[Santa Cruz]

[quote name='TeresaBenedicta' timestamp='1308605624' post='2256474']
These are all very poignant points to consider.

I still think, however, that we must be aware of scandal- intentional or unintentional. Which means that the way in which this sort of thing is worded and put into action must be done extremely carefully.
[/quote]

TB, yes, we must always be careful not to cause scandal. Perhaps I am not reading the ad properly but I do not see how it is actually promoting or celebrating homosexuality? It mentions welcoming the wider community and it names gays and lesbians specifically. I read it as extending a welcome to persons who usually for whatever reason, either real or imagined, do not feel welcome to attend Mass. I personally do not know the parish and from what I see in the website, there is nothing at all promoting homosexuality.

I am familiar with a parish on the west coast that had a gay and lesbian support group but the intent was not to bring these suffering people into the state of grace, but rather, to welcome them as they are and provide support for their current way of life. To me, that is scandalous and wrong.

I wonder why the event was postponed? I also wonder what the history of their outreach is to persons with same sex attraction? It seems that this may be their first effort? Yes, they have to be very careful and especially given that they are in an Archdiocese that is heavily populated with persons who believe that homosexuality is a viable way of life. Really, it is a mess there. Perhaps I am being naive, but I do not think there is any promotion or celebration of a gay life-style going on. I see it as going out in search of the lost sheep.

How would you change the wording? I know a person who is a ghost writer for the Cardinal's blog and he is young. Perhaps you could write the person working on the webpage at the Archdiocese and suggest how they may change the words so that it is clear that homosexuality is not being celebrated? They may appreciate your feedback?

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='katholikkid' timestamp='1308610401' post='2256532']
That sounds a lot better, more precise, and is really close on Church teaching as close as Church teaching gets to talking about the attraction itself. Mostly the Church is concerned about the act but the discussion which we're all having is still pretty ambiguous in the documents mainly cause not much has been written. Now if you read my @Cam post on this page I address that disordered bit. My thing is can an attraction be disordered if it can't be helped and even if it is does the person feeling the attraction have any responsibility since they cannot help it? What makes an attraction disordered or ordered? It's really interesting if and what the church will have to say on the attraction part, i bet we'll get something in the next decade on it.
[/quote]
I wouldn't hold my breath. The Church will say the same things in the next decade that She has said for the last 2000 years. Yes, the attraction itself is objectively disordered. Not sinful: disordered.
We actually don't need any more Vatican documents on the subject. We probably will get them, because people never seem to learn from what we already have, but all those new documents will do is emphasize teachings that have been held since Pentecost.

[TeresaBenedicta]

[quote name='katholikkid' timestamp='1308610401' post='2256532']
That sounds a lot better, more precise, and is really close on Church teaching as close as Church teaching gets to talking about the attraction itself. Mostly the Church is concerned about the act but the discussion which we're all having is still pretty ambiguous in the documents mainly cause not much has been written. Now if you read my @Cam post on this page I address that disordered bit. My thing is can an attraction be disordered if it can't be helped and even if it is does the person feeling the attraction have any responsibility since they cannot help it? What makes an attraction disordered or ordered? It's really interesting if and what the church will have to say on the attraction part, i bet we'll get something in the next decade on it.
[/quote]

Yes, an attraction can be disordered even if it can't be helped.

I think part of what you're struggling with is the term "nature/natural". There are two different senses of this word- one is colloquial and one, particularly in natural law & moral theology/philosophy discussions, is very specific. Colloquially nature or natural is meant as something that occurs without specific interference. In the case of current discussion, same sex attraction might be said to occur naturally in so far as it is genetically rooted. The more proper sense of nature/natural, and the one which I and Nihil and others have been using, is meant as inherent to the object essentially. Human nature, properly speaking.

Because of original sin, our human nature is deformed. We have a tendency to sin. And this happens on the physical as well. Disease is because of original sin. Birth defects are because of original sin. Same sex attraction is a defect that is ultimately because of original sin.

Original sin caused a disruption to God's order. It disordered the natural world from its original state. It disordered our desires and it disordered our physical world.

Same sex attraction is a disorder because it is not in line with God's order nature.

Does that mean those who suffer from same sex attraction are less human? No- we all suffer from the disorder that original sin caused. We have our struggles that are individual to us. And we have the universal one- death.

[katholikkid]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1308610600' post='2256536']
I wouldn't hold my breath. The Church will say the same things in the next decade that She has said for the last 2000 years. Yes, the attraction itself is objectively disordered. Not sinful: disordered.
We actually don't need any more Vatican documents on the subject. We probably will get them, because people never seem to learn from what we already have, but all those new documents will do is emphasize teachings that have been held since Pentecost.
[/quote]


But you've got to admit for such a large issue it isn't discussed much. but the church in wisdom does not go off emotion so what is written on this subject has to wait for scientific solutions to some things. Even since 'Always Our Children' new discoveries have been made. But I think the next document which will probably be a letter not an encyclical from the pope or cdf will be very precise, long, and not be a brief mention. Basically the Vatican has never given this issue its own document like it has to birth control, or social justice. I am sure it will say some new things along with the old. Perhaps it will let gays and lesbians be more open about their chastity and their role in religious life, lay ministry, and prayer which will be a plus for the church i feel.

[TeresaBenedicta]

[quote name='Santa Cruz' timestamp='1308610519' post='2256534']
TB, yes, we must always be careful not to cause scandal. Perhaps I am not reading the ad properly but I do not see how it is actually promoting or celebrating homosexuality? It mentions welcoming the wider community and it names gays and lesbians specifically. I read it as extending a welcome to persons who usually for whatever reason, either real or imagined, do not feel welcome to attend Mass. I personally do not know the parish and from what I see in the website, there is nothing at all promoting homosexuality.

I am familiar with a parish on the west coast that had a gay and lesbian support group but the intent was not to bring these suffering people into the state of grace, but rather, to welcome them as they are and provide support for their current way of life. To me, that is scandalous and wrong.

I wonder why the event was postponed? I also wonder what the history of their outreach is to persons with same sex attraction? It seems that this may be their first effort? Yes, they have to be very careful and especially given that they are in an Archdiocese that is heavily populated with persons who believe that homosexuality is a viable way of life. Really, it is a mess there. Perhaps I am being naive, but I do not think there is any promotion or celebration of a gay life-style going on. I see it as going out in search of the lost sheep.

How would you change the wording? I know a person who is a ghost writer for the Cardinal's blog and he is young. Perhaps you could write the person working on the webpage at the Archdiocese and suggest how they may change the words so that it is clear that homosexuality is not being celebrated? They may appreciate your feedback?
[/quote]

I'll come to this more concretely when I get home from work. I admit that I haven't read the new wording, but the event was previously put on hold precisely because it was causing scandal. I'll get that article when I get home. But I remember reading the comments from the pastor, and he was awfully ambiguous to the real reason for this Mass. His remarks bordered supporting homosexuality in such a way that the Church cannot.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='katholikkid' timestamp='1308611031' post='2256539']
But you've got to admit for such a large issue it isn't discussed much. but the church in wisdom does not go off emotion so what is written on this subject has to wait for scientific solutions to some things. Even since 'Always Our Children' new discoveries have been made. But I think the next document which will probably be a letter not an encyclical from the pope or cdf will be very precise, long, and not be a brief mention. Basically the Vatican has never given this issue its own document like it has to birth control, or social justice. I am sure it will say some new things along with the old. Perhaps it will let gays and lesbians be more open about their chastity and their role in religious life, lay ministry, and prayer which will be a plus for the church i feel.
[/quote]
It's discussed fairly frequently, as far as I can tell. Much more often than, for instance, the concept of Mary as Mediatrix of all Graces.
It's quite obvious what the official Catholic position on homosexuality is. There is zero ambiguity. None whatsoever. There are no new developments to be made. The only possible area for study is how precisely to best support those Catholics who faithfully struggle with SSA, and on the flip side, how to bring about a change of heart and moral awakening in those who do not abide by Church teaching.

[katholikkid]

[quote name='TeresaBenedicta' timestamp='1308611004' post='2256538']
Yes, an attraction can be disordered even if it can't be helped.

I think part of what you're struggling with is the term "nature/natural". There are two different senses of this word- one is colloquial and one, particularly in natural law & moral theology/philosophy discussions, is very specific. Colloquially nature or natural is meant as something that occurs without specific interference. In the case of current discussion, same sex attraction might be said to occur naturally in so far as it is genetically rooted. The more proper sense of nature/natural, and the one which I and Nihil and others have been using, is meant as inherent to the object essentially. Human nature, properly speaking.

Because of original sin, our human nature is deformed. We have a tendency to sin. And this happens on the physical as well. Disease is because of original sin. Birth defects are because of original sin. Same sex attraction is a defect that is ultimately because of original sin.

Original sin caused a disruption to God's order. It disordered the natural world from its original state. It disordered our desires and it disordered our physical world.

Same sex attraction is a disorder because it is not in line with God's order nature.

Does that mean those who suffer from same sex attraction are less human? No- we all suffer from the disorder that original sin caused. We have our struggles that are individual to us. And we have the universal one- death.
[/quote]

I know about the two nature argument but that is where it gets sticky logically and ontologically. How do we know to distinguish between 'divine nature' and 'nature nature' ya know? Divine nature is hidden to us unless it is revealed ie God's nature is trinitarian revealed by Christ. But otherwise how we experience creation is nature and sometimes the gospel calls us to do the opposite. So it is 'natural' to go by "an eye for an eye" that is a natural form of justice you took this from me you owe me that which you took. but the gospel says to offer the other cheek which again is an act of divinity not 'nature nature'. now when it comes to attraction how is one to know the 'divine nature' of attraction? I say it is impossible so we go to a biological paradigm where we say that there is no procreative result to the act of the attraction. but neither is there for someone's grandparents so that is why i don't like the argument that the desire is unnatural and why i feel the church does not talk much about the desire. It is a slippery slope in logic to make that statement. but that is my opinion.

[franciscanheart]

[quote name='katholikkid' timestamp='1308610401' post='2256532']
My thing is can an attraction be disordered if it can't be helped and even if it is does the person feeling the attraction have any responsibility since they cannot help it? What makes an attraction disordered or ordered? It's really interesting if and what the church will have to say on the attraction part, i bet we'll get something in the next decade on it.
[/quote]
kk, what's important - though sometimes difficult - to keep in mind in this particular discussion is this:

When one says that the desire or thought is [b]dis[/b]ordered, it simply implies that it is contrary to that which the Church teaches to be God's intended natural order. For example, when a child is born with Down Syndrome, we understand that this is not the norm, but rather a genetic abnormality. God did not create all humans to have Down Syndrome, but some do. God did not create humans to have depression, but some do. God did not create humans to suffer with schizophrenia, but some do. It's my belief that God did not create men and women to suffer with gender-identity issues (different than homosexuality), but some do. It's not the rule, it's the exception.

We know from the Church's teachings on human sexuality and it's God-given purpose that homosexual acts are contrary to God's intent. Homosexual thoughts or feelings (which are not intended by the person who has them) are contrary to God's plan for sex and thus are disordered. Not in order. Not in line. Not kosher.

I don't believe God calls us to misery and depression, but some of us are prey to it. It's disordered thinking and feeling that occurs. We know this, too, is contrary to God's will for our lives.

Am I making sense?

I see where you are coming from with all that you're saying; I think semantics are standing in our way.

[mortify]

[quote name='katholikkid' timestamp='1308590130' post='2256343']
I think every Mass should be welcoming the wider community of Catholics. Any thoughts?[/quote]

I think we need more division than hormony these days. We're living in a time where the title "Catholic" is an ambiguous term. All sorts of people with various mutually contradicting beliefs hold on to that name (It's rather reminiscent to first century Judea, where Christians and anti-Messiah Jews were simply called, "Jews.") The problem is it's causing a lot of confusion. Back in the day if you didn't like what the Catholic Church had to say you'd leave. Nowadays the enemies of the Church are getting smarter, they realized they're more effective staying in the Church.

So should we be more welcoming? Sure, let 'em in. But give it to them how it really is. The Church, and no decent society, has ever condoned the disordered behavior of practicing homosexuals.

[katholikkid]

@fransiscan heart

Total sense. its just that it poses a logical fallacy for me that's all simply because attraction is unconscionable i don't see how you can try to define it. It's like saying a thought is disordered. That is why i think the church chose inclination in its wording which relates more to a tendency which is not as concrete as desire. I hope that makes sense. It's just that inclination is a really flexible word and i think because of lack of scientific and psychological evidence the CDF chose it on purpose. but that's just me. i read inclination and desire/attraction/feeling to represent two differing things. not unrelated though.

Edited June 20, 2011 by katholikkid

[Santa Cruz]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1308605885' post='2256477']

As to the second part of your post, since it is both incorrect and cannot be substantiated [i]I will ask you to retract it[/i]. I hope and pray for everybody to be saved; I believe that to hope someone damned is among the most evil thoughts a Christian can have.
[/quote]


Thank you for clarifying. Honestly, I was not sure based upon what I read in your first response to this thread (pasted below). Yes, ultimately, a person who commits the sin of engaging in same sex relations may be damned to hell. But, we must remember there are many factors involved: 1. Are they aware that it is a sin? 2. Are they free to make a decision? 3. What have we done as a Church to reach out to them and lead them into the fullness of Truth? Most of all, as in today's Gospel message, we are not to make any rash judgments of any person. Yes, we can judge an action but never a person, we are obligated to offer fraternal correction, not condemn. You seem to me to be judging that they will go to hell? Why is not this pastor attempting to charitably lead the strayed back to the fullness of Truth? Why is he condoning same sex relations?


[quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1308590935' post='2256349']
That priest should probably be removed from public ministry. It's pretty obvious that he intends specifically to welcome people whose lifestyle is diametrically opposed to the Catholic faith.
Everyone is welcome, but not exactly the way they are. That's a modern fallacy that we've all been taught: "you're perfect just the way you are". No. You are not. People who live a homosexual lifestyle are expected to change that lifestyle before they're actually welcome in the Church. If they continue to live in that way, it's not us who cast them out; it is they who cast out themselves.
[/quote]

[Vincent Vega]

[quote name='katholikkid' timestamp='1308601941' post='2256427']An old traditional church way of finding the truth is [i]in media est virtus. [/i]
[/quote]
The only way to get closer to the middle with the NCR is to put it down.

[franciscanheart]

[quote name='katholikkid' timestamp='1308612226' post='2256550']
@fransiscan heart

Total sense. its just that it poses a logical fallacy for me that's all simply because attraction is unconscionable i don't see how you can try to define it. It's like saying a thought is disordered. That is why i think the church chose inclination in its wording which relates more to a tendency which is not as concrete as desire. I hope that makes sense. It's just that inclination is a really flexible word and i think because of lack of scientific and psychological evidence the CDF chose it on purpose. but that's just me. i read inclination and desire/attraction/feeling to represent two differing things. not unrelated though.
[/quote]
I hear you; again, I think semantics are standing in our way. I can roll with "inclination" since that's the word I tend to use anyway.

It's interesting to me, you bring up thought. I've never really considered the idea of a disordered thought. Perhaps a misguided thought, a delusion, etc. Oh semantics!