Bishop Schneider: "obvious Manipulation" At Synod

[veritasluxmea]

That is how I took what you said. I don't see what I've said, and what you've quoted, as being outside church teaching. That accusation is thrown around a lot. I didn't praise the authors or their books. But if a book is relevant, even one by Martin Luther himself, then I'd quote it. 
 

 Look, I'll quote myself again: 

 

 

 

The way the books were presented, to an average reader (at least to me) it sounds as though you were recommending the books as examples of how to think about transgender issues. Instead of saying, "here are some books that present a worldview contrary to Church Teaching, let's study them to understand it" the post read as "You're not going to find the affirmation to live as you want from the Catholic Church, read these books to find it instead." Obviously, that's wrong. 

the way you presented the books as good sources on the subject, and then declared that he wouldn't be able to find the "affirmation" he needed from the Catholic Church sounds very out of line with Church Teaching. If you seriously just meant hey, let's read about these books to see how they line up with Truth, you wrote a serious oversight that's caused a lot of scandal on here towards yourself, and it was also seriously off topic. (Funny how later in that thread you thought my post on gender/sexuality/theology was off topic.)

 

 

The issue is whether people can debate theology and be honest of where they are at, or not. Some people don't like it or disagree, which is fair enough. But some people seem to want to control and silence through negative tactics when they can't get their own way. What they say should stand on its own feet if it's worthy of consideration. 
 

I don't think anyone is silencing anyone? The fact that we're talking about this, in a different thread no less, seems pretty open to me. 

 

Maybe if a meh, or the person who messaged you so gladly about that other thread, tried sending a message to me (maybe even a chat or clarification in charity) it would be more productive than a page of snipping comments or threats of forum labels.  :wacko:
 

Funnily enough, I did think about messaging you at the time because I was confused by your post and statement that I was off topic, but I decided against it. The thread was dead and I decided to let it stay that way. I'm only bringing this up again because I saw FP and you discussing it. This goes beyond clarification for myself to openly discussing where you stand on these issues.

[Benedictus]

The way the books were presented, to an average reader (me) it sounds as though you were recommending the books as examples of how to think about transgender issues. Instead of saying, "here are some books that present a worldview contrary to Church Teaching, let's study them to understand it" the post read as "You're not going to find the affirmation to live as you want from the Catholic Church, read these books to find it instead." Obviously, that's wrong. 

I don't think I even recommended any books. I mentioned two people who are leading theorists in that area. They are studied at undergraduate level, sometimes in relation to theology. They don't just deal with transgender issues, but it's a part.

I know what you're saying but I don't want to influence people in that way about information. They can make up their own mind about it. If other people wanted to reply in other terms then they could.  I was fairly neutral in that thread because people had already expressed views from different sides, which was clear from the OP.

My view and experience is that it's better to study all sides of an issue because it helps to process, understand and resolve what to do, and why. It makes people stronger in their choices. It could be the case that somone reads a book and thinks this doesn't add up. They may come to the view that the church is offering a more credible viewpoint. There is a risk they'll say the opposite too, but people have to have that freedom.

I also wouldn't make those claims about the authors as I've not read all their stuff either way to say that assertion is true. It maybe true, or a bit more nuanced than all that.

Sometimes more is read into things. It can lead to inferred and mistaken conclusions sometimes.

 

[Benedictus]

 

 the way you presented the books as good sources on the subject, and then declared that he wouldn't be able to find the "affirmation" he needed from the Catholic Church sounds very out of line with Church Teaching. If you seriously just meant hey, let's read about these books to see how they line up with Truth, you wrote a serious oversight that's caused a lot of scandal on here towards yourself, and it was also seriously off topic. (Funny how later in that thread you thought my post on gender/sexuality/theology was off topic.)

Thanks for that. I just posted back from your other message. I think I was right about the issue of affirmation. What I meant is that it is fair to say that if someone does have a gender reassignment then they'd find it very difficult to gain affirmation from the Catholic church. Many would also not accept a person who broke gender roles, especially in dress and presentation. That was something I was offering caution on. A person thinking of doing such things has to be realistic -  they won't really be accepted. That's what I was saying. I was saying how it is, what they need to think about. Not to make rash decisions etc.

Would a person be able to gain support and affirmation for struggling with these issues -  yes, I believe so. I wasn't meaning it like they wouldn't on this level. I think that forum thread was very supportive and I think most clergy would help and or refer the person to outside help if they desired it, although I believe they said they already had a therapist.

In terms of being off topic - I think you raised valid questions but, at the time, I thought the thread was aiming to focus on OP totally, to be supportive etc. It seems they are working it out and feel more positive about their place in the church, which is all well and good.

 

 

I don't think anyone is silencing anyone? The fact that we're talking about this, in a different thread no less, seems pretty open to me. 

 

 

Yes, although FuturePacker made it clear he'd prefer it not be discussed and outlined what should happen to me. I see that as a tactic to tell me to be silent because I'm breaking convention and or hurting sentiments, even if not any teachings. Well, that's how I felt about it anyway.

 

 

Funnily enough, I did think about messaging you at the time because I was confused by your post and statement that I was off topic, but I decided against it. The thread was dead and I decided to let it stay that way. I'm only bringing this up again because I saw FP and you discussing it. This goes beyond clarification for myself to openly discussing where you stand on these issues.
 

 

Sure, to be honest I'd prefer if people did sometimes. Sometimes I go back and think, yeah that was a bit lame of me, oops. I even change my own mind at times after a good thread as I go off and read. People wouldn't know that though, obviously. Above all though, I should lay off the beer when posting. :paperbag:

 

Edited November 7, 2014 by Benedictus

[Nihil Obstat]

Lutherans would fall under the same boat as well, because neither side during their ordination make any reference to sacrifice, correct?

Correct.

[PhuturePriest]

Thanks for that. I just posted back from your other message. I think I was right about the issue of affirmation. What I meant is that it is fair to say that if someone does have a gender reassignment then they'd find it very difficult to gain affirmation from the Catholic church. Many would also not accept a person who broke gender roles, especially in dress and presentation. That was something I was offering caution on. A person thinking of doing such things has to be realistic -  they won't really be accepted. That's what I was saying. I was saying how it is, what they need to think about. Not to make rash decisions etc.

Would a person be able to gain support and affirmation for struggling with these issues -  yes, I believe so. I wasn't meaning it like they wouldn't on this level. I think that forum thread was very supportive and I think most clergy would help and or refer the person to outside help if they desired it, although I believe they said they already had a therapist.

In terms of being off topic - I think you raised valid questions but, at the time, I thought the thread was aiming to focus on OP totally, to be supportive etc. It seems they are working it out and feel more positive about their place in the church, which is all well and good.

 

 

Yes, although FuturePacker made it clear he'd prefer it not be discussed and outlined what should happen to me. I see that as a tactic to tell me to be silent because I'm breaking convention and or hurting sentiments, even if not any teachings. Well, that's how I felt about it anyway.

 

 

Sure, to be honest I'd prefer if people did sometimes. Sometimes I go back and think, yeah that was a bit lame of me, oops. I even change my own mind at times after a good thread as I go off and read. People wouldn't know that though, obviously. Above all though, I should lay off the beer when posting. :paperbag:

 

 

Please, call me Remus.

 

Could you clarify what you mean by not being able to find affirmation in the Church when it comes to those who struggle with transgenderism? What is it do you mean by "affirmation"? I'm not meaning to be aggressive or go after you, I'm merely trying to understand what it is that you are asserting. Perhaps that could shed light on this whole issue and clear the air for everyone.

[Benedictus]

Please, call me Remus.

 

Could you clarify what you mean by not being able to find affirmation in the Church when it comes to those who struggle with transgenderism? What is it do you mean by "affirmation"? I'm not meaning to be aggressive or go after you, I'm merely trying to understand what it is that you are asserting. Perhaps that could shed light on this whole issue and clear the air for everyone.

 

Hi Remus  :)
Let me ask you a question: Would a person who decides to have a gender reassignment, or dress in a way that breaks gender roles, get affirmation from the church? I'm saying they won't. That was basically it.  It wouldn't matter if a person wanted to be affirmed and accepted in this way, they wouldn't. I was saying this, in the orginal thread, as something that the person would need to accept as a reality, regardless of whether they feel differently. That's why I'm confused it's such a big deal now, but OK.

Would a person who struggles with these thoughts and feelings, but doesn't act on them, get support if they wanted to follow church teaching? I said, in short, yes.

Feel free to PM me if you're still unsure :cool:
 

[PhuturePriest]

Hi Remus  :)
Let me ask you a question: Would a person who decides to have a gender reassignment, or dress in a way that breaks gender roles, get affirmation from the church? I'm saying they won't. That was basically it.  It wouldn't matter if a person wanted to be affirmed and accepted in this way, they wouldn't. I was saying this, in the orginal thread, as something that the person would need to accept as a reality, regardless of whether they feel differently. That's why I'm confused it's such a big deal now, but OK.

Would a person who struggles with these thoughts and feelings, but doesn't act on them, get support if they wanted to follow church teaching? I said, in short, yes.

Feel free to PM me if you're still unsure :cool:
 

 

That makes more sense. But, of course, the Church does not approve of gender reassignment or cross-dressing, so obviously people in the Church wouldn't affirm the person in question. But I'm unsure as to the context you wrote this in, so you might have been answering a person's questions about cross-dressing and gender reassignment surgery rather than saying "The Church wouldn't approve, and that's wrong", which is the impression I was given at the time. I apologize for any confusion on my part.

Edited November 8, 2014 by FuturePacker

[Credo in Deum]

How is my assessment wrong ? I didn't say I didn't agree with the teachings ? Confused with your statement.

Hello Josh,

Sorry I missed this post. I didn't get a notification since you didn't quote me. I apologize for misunderstanding your post earlier and for the confusion. I have edited my previous post and removed my response. Thank you for pointing out my mistake.

[Starets]

I liked what the bishop had to say, and that is all I am going to say on the subject

[Benedictus]

[mod]meh--budge[/mod]

 

 

[Aragon]

Let's just thank God he's some auxiliary from a backwater in Kazakhstan and he has no real influence. I'm fine for the crazies to be kept together in trad-dom to harp on about how horrible Pope Francis is and curing those disordered gay people while the rest of us get on with the business of loving people and drawing them to Christ.

Edited November 8, 2014 by Aragon

[Vincent Vega]

Camel wides and some Mad Dog 20/20.

This guy speaks my language.

[Nihil Obstat]

Let's just thank God he's some auxiliary from a backwater in Kazakhstan and he has no real influence. I'm fine for the crazies to be kept together in trad-dom to harp on about how horrible Pope Francis is and curing those disordered gay people while the rest of us get on with the business of loving people and drawing them to Christ.

Nice. Real nice.

[veritasluxmea]

Let's just thank God he's some auxiliary from a backwater in Kazakhstan and he has no real influence. I'm fine for the crazies to be kept together in trad-dom to harp on about how horrible Pope Francis is and curing those disordered gay people while the rest of us get on with the business of loving people and drawing them to Christ.

[CountrySteve21]

Let's just thank God he's some auxiliary from a backwater in Kazakhstan and he has no real influence. I'm fine for the crazies to be kept together in trad-dom to harp on about how horrible Pope Francis is and curing those disordered gay people while the rest of us get on with the business of loving people and drawing them to Christ.

:stubborn:

 

 

I find this very out of place, since when have 'trads' not loved people?

 

 

Since when is opposing sin not loving people? Since even Christ Himself condemned  the sins of men. 

 

 

TO truly draw a soul to Christ and to His love is also to encourage them to change there sins as we all need to change our sins.