Bishop Schneider: "obvious Manipulation" At Synod

[Benedictus]

I'm going to one-up you and light a candle at church, saying a Rosary in Latin. The only way it could possibly get more pre-Vatican II is if Pope Saint Pius X himself said it with me.

 

What a candle set like this?

Can't say I've ever used or seen one, but they seem to exist. I guess you insert the coin and the LED light comes on.

[PhuturePriest]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IbNXqjwh8is

 

My old diocese exclusively sings songs like this. You will never hear a hymn from before 1972 there. If they could only use a missal from ten years before that, things would be vastly improved...

[Socrates]

There's a spectrum where people find themselves. But people don't really bounce all over the place from where they are. There's no support for that. It isn't that fluid. But maybe you, KnightofChrist and Socrates need to meet for a coffee. You seem to disagree

 

Not really sure why you brought me up here, other than name-dropping to impress your friends. But I'm not sure I really disagree with with Lillabett, insofar as I think it most likely that sexual inclinations and behavior, like all other human behavior, can be influenced and changed over time - for either better or worse..

The idea that sexuality is irrevocably set at birth seems more an item of liberal dogma than scientific fact.

 

Coffee (or better yet, a good beer) with KoC and Lilla sounds awesome, but I'm sure we could find something more interesting to discuss.

 

 

Why are you so compelled to go on and on all the time on here about homo-sex?

Why don't you go and share God's love, or whatever it is you're about?

[Socrates]

It's amazing in this society of tolerance and scientific advance that something like claiming your sexual attraction has changed is not allowed and will get you shut down and turned away immediately, but if you claim that you are in fact a woman and change your name to Rosetta, everyone takes it as Gospel truth.

 

For some reason, I just can't help but think that these scientific experts don't have agenda of some sort and will reject everything that disagrees with it.

 

I find it ironic and interesting how the same people who think trying to change one's disordered sexual inclinations is an unforgivable sin, usually also have absolutely no problem with people mutilating their bodies and being flooded with artificial hormones in an attempt to "change" the sex one was born - and will even declare it a fundamental right.

[veritasluxmea]

I find it ironic and interesting how the same people who think trying to change one's disordered sexual inclinations is an unforgivable sin, 

More like they think it's impossible for anyone to change their orientation (and I agree not everyone can), but sex/gender? that's always fluid, don't you know. 

[Socrates]

More like they think it's impossible for anyone to change their orientation (and I agree not everyone can), but sex/gender? that's always fluid, don't you know. 

 

Words have gender.  People have sex.

 

Motor oil is fluid.

[Ice_nine]

I've found sexuality to be pretty fluid in my experience, but my experience is probably wrong :shrug:

 

 

[Aragon]

It's stuff like this that makes me want to jump ship to the Lutherans or Episcopalians. It's not this kind of pseudo-science and offensive language that wins souls; as long as the Church continues down this path it'll continue to become increasingly irrelevant to people. 

Edited November 7, 2014 by Aragon

[Aragon]

Can I also point out it'd be great if bishops would limit themselves to speaking on issues of faith and morals and leave the psychiatry to the psychiatrists, the overwhelming majority of whom do not regard homosexuality as a mental illness that needs to be cured. 

[Guest]

My opinion on this has been flipped upside down in the last two years. I used to think it was a choice and a person could choose not to be gay anymore. Now I realize that's not the case. Also I've come to get to know two separate gay dudes. One of them is married and one of the nicest guys you will meet. He doesn't throw it in your face and it took me awhile before I even knew. I doubt he would ever ask me what I thought about him being gay. He's not out for anyone's approval. But if he did I would tell him what my faith teaches (sure he's aware of it) but would do it in the least confrontational way. A few years ago when I thought it was a choice my reaction and response would be a lot different towards him. I still think it's gross and can't even start to understand it. But now I realize how many gay people are out there and it's more common then I thought. My old self likes perfectly a Church teaching that is very blunt and straight to the point on this topic. But now actually being in the real world and getting to know a couple gay people I find it tough to still want the truth shoved down their throat. Not that they are interested in hearing it from me anyways.

Edited November 7, 2014 by Guest

[beatitude]

Yes, because all rational, literate, and wise people stop reading something because they disagree with something in it. How dare the author have ideas that differ from your own, right? The gall of some people these days knows no bounds.

 

Until very recently, the ideas that the bishop holds were the norm. In many places they still are the norm. He's not some bold lonely radical voice of truth. He's got company.

 

I have a friend who walked away from the Church after falling in with a crowd who called themselves traditionalist, who told her that her homosexuality was caused by the devil, and who recommended praying the rosary to 'cure' it. All this to a seventeen-year-old who had been badly bullied for being gay and was already depressed due to that bullying. She tried and tried, became very distressed, got convinced she was hellbound, and ended up attempting suicide four times and nearly succeeding the fourth. (The people who did this to her are now championing this bishop on their blogs and Facebook pages.) There are a lot of people like her out there, who have been very badly hurt by people who wanted to 'cure' them of their feelings.

 

Being a bishop doesn't make you an expert on psychology and psychiatry and it's not the Church's role to dispense 'psychological cures' for anything, 'discreet' or otherwise. (Why are we being discreet about this cure we're eventually supposed to be offering? The condition is that shameful?) The Church's role is moral guidance and that should not include pathologising people. If the bishop wants to believe that being gay is a psychological disorder that needs a psychological cure, then no one can stop him, but he has no right to try and present a belief that has done a lot of people very great harm as though it's a tenet of Catholic faith.

Edited November 7, 2014 by beatitude

[Credo in Deum]

JMJ

It's stuff like this that makes me want to jump ship to the Lutherans or Episcopalians. It's not this kind of pseudo-science and offensive language that wins souls; as long as the Church continues down this path it'll continue to become increasingly irrelevant to people.

If this makes you want to "jump ship" to the Lutherans or Episcopalians, then that in itself is a crisis of faith you need to address. IMO, anyone who would leave the Eucharist because of the actions of a mortal man shows a crisis of faith or lack thereof which runs deeper than this issue. Where was the bishops offensive language? Are you saying his language is offensive because he believes that we should allow the possibility of a psychological cure? You find that offensive even though there have been people with unwanted SSA who have been helped by such therapy?

Can I also point out it'd be great if bishops would limit themselves to speaking on issues of faith and morals and leave the psychiatry to the psychiatrists, the overwhelming majority of whom do not regard homosexuality as a mental illness that needs to be cured.

The Bishop has limited himself to the salvation of souls and he has noticed that there have been people with unwanted SSA who have claimed they have been helped with the help of therapy. He takes his pastoral mission seriously and does not want to limit such people from getting this help. He knows he has to be discreet though because society and the majority of Catholic's have gulped down the kool-aid that sexuality is innate and immutable and that in the name of their pseudo-science they will go so far as to make a therapeutic option unavailable for even those who have ssa and believe of their own volition that they can change their sexuality!

Until very recently, the ideas that the bishop holds were the norm. In many places they still are the norm. He's not some bold lonely radical voice of truth. He's got company.

I have a friend who walked away from the Church after falling in with a crowd who called themselves traditionalist, who told her that her homosexuality was caused by the devil, and who recommended praying the rosary to 'cure' it. All this to a seventeen-year-old who had been badly bullied for being gay and was already depressed due to that bullying. She tried and tried, became very distressed, got convinced she was hellbound, and ended up attempting suicide four times and nearly succeeding the fourth. (The people who did this to her are now championing this bishop on their blogs and Facebook pages.) There are a lot of people like her out there, who have been very badly hurt by people who wanted to 'cure' them of their feelings.

Being a bishop doesn't make you an expert on psychology and psychiatry and it's not the Church's role to dispense 'psychological cures' for anything, 'discreet' or otherwise. (Why are we being discreet about this cure we're eventually supposed to be offering? The condition is that shameful?) The Church's role is moral guidance and that should not include pathologising people. If the bishop wants to believe that being gay is a psychological disorder that needs a psychological cure, then no one can stop him, but he has no right to try and present a belief that has done a lot of people very great harm as though it's a tenet of Catholic faith.

These beliefs that therapy can help are still held because they have seen results in those who have had unwanted same sex attractions. The Bishop does not want to limit or discourage those with unwanted same sex attraction from getting the help they want. The Bishop never advocated that we force people to undergo such therapy, but rather stated that we should start groups to make such therapy available for those who do want it and believe they can change. Your view wants to make such help impossible and are using horror stories to discourage people from getting legitimate help. Also no scientific data has come out that support this theory that someone is born gay. Those in the scientific community have come to the conclusion that there is no one cause but rather that homosexuality is caused by biological, psychological, and social factors. All three of those play a role in the forming of a persons homosexuality. There is an agenda to hide the true science and to keep people from getting legitimate professional help.

[media]http://youtu.be/y4qmXpoqR_Y[/media]

[Benedictus]

It's stuff like this that makes me want to jump ship to the Lutherans or Episcopalians. It's not this kind of pseudo-science and offensive language that wins souls; as long as the Church continues down this path it'll continue to become increasingly irrelevant to people. 

 

I totally get the point you're making. When I read this, and before I scrolled down, I wondered if it would be taken as a 'there's something wrong with you then' then. (faith, morals, doctrine etc blah). Yep, seems so.
 

Edited November 7, 2014 by Benedictus

[Benedictus]

Not really sure why you brought me up here, other than name-dropping to impress your friends. But I'm not sure I really disagree with with Lillabett, insofar as I think it most likely that sexual inclinations and behavior, like all other human behavior, can be influenced and changed over time - for either better or worse..

The idea that sexuality is irrevocably set at birth seems more an item of liberal dogma than scientific fact.

 

Coffee (or better yet, a good beer) with KoC and Lilla sounds amesome, but I'm sure we could find something more interesting to discuss.

 

 

Why are you so compelled to go on and on all the time on here about homo-sex?

Why don't you go and share God's love, or whatever it is you're about?

 

The boat has sailed. I'm waving to you. I'm eating an ice cream.

[Credo in Deum]

I totally get the point you're making. When I read this, and before I scrolled down, I wondered if it would be taken as a 'there's something wrong with you then' then. (faith, morals, doctrine etc blah). Yep, seems so.
 

 

Oh look someone who believes Aragon's sentiments do not indicate a crisis of faith.  I wonder if such a person also holds anti-Catholic sentiments?  Yep, seems so.