Youth Catechism

[Brother Adam]

[size=4]There is no man on earth who is not descended from a union of a mother and father. Therefore it is a painful experience for many homosexually oriented people that they do not feel erotically attracted to the opposite sex and necessarily miss out on the physical fruitfulness of the union between man and woman according to human nature and the divine order of creation. Nevertheless, God often leads souls to himself along unusual paths: A lack, a loss, or a wound—if accepted and affirmed—can become a springboard for throwing oneself into the arms of God. - YouCat 65[/size]

[Groo the Wanderer]

It is not a complete answer to the problem of SSA, but then again it isn't meant to be. That's why the whole book is there instead of just one question.

[homeschoolmom]

I think it's poorly written. I don't see that it's heretical, though.

[Byzantine]

I agree with homeschoolmom. I can easily see the usual suspects tearing us apart for the second sentence, regardless of its truth.

[Brother Adam]

Thank you for sharing your perceptions. Hoping for more votes before I add anything.

[Lil Red]

[quote name='Groo the Wanderer' timestamp='1313688637' post='2290580']
It is not a complete answer to the problem of SSA, but then again it isn't meant to be. That's why the whole book is there instead of just one question.
[/quote]
yup.

[Brother Adam]

[quote name='Groo the Wanderer' timestamp='1313688637' post='2290580']
It is not a complete answer to the problem of SSA, but then again it isn't meant to be. That's why the whole book is there instead of just one question.
[/quote]

That's kind of a non sequitur. I can say the Trinity is four Persons, not intending to give a full answer and it is still wrong. I can even say somewhere else that the Trinity is 3 persons, but it doesn't validate my original statement. Also, a catechism isn't meant to be read cover to cover, and teens won't do that any more than adults will, nor is it meant to give a full answer (which takes volumes) anyway, but a quick easy to understand answer, which leads to my question - it is either accurate and clear, ambiguous, or wrong. And I will take it from the lack of votes that many people aren't sure.

[Amppax]

the only thing that I see that could possibly be wrong (sidenote, i voted refuse to speculate) is the phrase "affirmed and accepted". This could definitely be taken as approval of homosexuality, and that obviously isn't right. The rest is really ambiguous, but I don't necessarily think its wrong. So overall I would say that its ambiguous, and not a very good answer. I'd change my vote, but I think the answer isn't THAT bad, if taken properly.

Edited August 18, 2011 by Amppax

[Brother Adam]

What does the phrase "unusual paths" mean to you?

I am just curious to know how others perceive the text, because I want to know how most teens will interpret it who have little or knowledge of the faith.

[AudreyGrace]

[quote name='Amppax' timestamp='1313700256' post='2290773']
the only thing that I see that could possibly be wrong (sidenote, i voted refuse to speculate) is the phrase "affirmed and accepted". This could definitely be taken as approval of homosexuality, and that obviously isn't right. The rest is really ambiguous, but I don't necessarily think its wrong. So overall I would say that its ambiguous, and not a very good answer. I'd change my vote, but I think the answer isn't THAT bad, if taken properly.
[/quote]

IAWTC

[AudreyGrace]

Knowing what the church teaches about homosexuality, I understand what they are trying to say. But as Amp said, other teens who do not know what the church teaches on homosexuality might take "accepted and affirmed" the wrong way. If they thought enough about it though, I think they'd understand what the Youcat is trying to say.

[Amppax]

[quote name='Brother Adam' timestamp='1313700761' post='2290784']
What does the phrase "unusual paths" mean to you?

I am just curious to know how others perceive the text, because I want to know how most teens will interpret it who have little or knowledge of the faith.
[/quote]

Barely noticed this the first time through. I'm actually having a little bit of trouble phrasing exactly how I interpret it, it is a little hard to see what they are actually saying. But basically, I would say that entire sentence (I know you only asked about the phrase, I'll try and address it specifically after this) is saying that limitations (physical or psychological problems, or any problems) are not of themselves a barrier to God, indeed God can draw a person closer through hardship. However, I do think that this is written so vaguely, that it is bound to be taken out of context, I hope a new addition could use clearer language in addressing this.

The phrase "unusual paths" itself, like "accepted and affirmed" tends to make me think that the writers don't want directly confront the issue, and that is a shame. It is possible to be charitable and firm at the same time.

Edited August 18, 2011 by Amppax

[Vincent Vega]

[quote name='AudreyGrace' timestamp='1313701050' post='2290790']
Knowing what the church teaches about homosexuality, I understand what they are trying to say. But as Amp said, other teens who do not know what the church teaches on homosexuality might take "accepted and affirmed" the wrong way. If they thought enough about it though, I think they'd understand what the Youcat is trying to say.
[/quote]

At first glance, I was going to say that I thought this was well written and even an eloquent explanation of the Church's stance on homosexuality, then I read Aud's post and realized that I was reading it with the glasses of a slightly older person than the target demographic of this catechism (probably?) who has a (likely) more completely and better informed faith than those who would be using this.
With this in mind, yes, it could probably use some clarification or expansion, but I find nothing wrong with the content that is currently there (I think we all know people that - or perhaps even we ourselves - have taken unusual paths to or back to God, and I think that indeed the only way to live a holy life as a person with SSA is to "affirm" their particular cross as a "lack, a loss, or a wound" so that they may begin learning to embrace it and control it).

[MissyP89]

I also hesitate on "affirming" the would. It comes off as if we're supposed to encourage the person to not do anything [i]about[/i] said wound.

Let's take it literally: "Oh, there is a gaping, infecting wound on your side. But that's OK. Let it bleed." I hope that makes sense.

I also find a problem with the second sentence, mentioning the "pain" many homosexuals feel. While I understand the intent, I think it's going to make young people balk. "But my cousin is a lesbian, and she and her partner have been together for ages. They're not in pain."

To me, unusual paths refer to those who have had to fall down before realizing their need for God -- people that have struggled in life and with faith.

[Papist]

Seems that the authors went much too far to be delicate in order to not offend certain readers that the teaching is lost in the ambiguity. By doing so, there are multiple interpretations for this with some in conflict with each other.