Bishop Schneider: "obvious Manipulation" At Synod

[Credo in Deum]

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.

If this post is an indication of the type of love you hope to spread then I would recommend re-evaluating your actions. You have just been disrespectful toward a good and orthodox Bishop of the Church who neither called for forced psychological treatment for those with same sex attraction, nor has he called for us to hate Pope Francis. You have also been disrespectful toward a group of Catholics who you have grossly stereotyped as being mean hateful people who slander clergy and hate their neighbor -which ironically you have done both of these things in your post. Maybe you should take a break from this thread?

[Aragon]

: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. 

 

When you are telling gay people that they suffer from a disorder and need to undergo therapy which has proven to be either useless or very psychologically harmful for the majority of participants then you are not loving them. When you, someone without any medical or psychological training, takes it upon themselves to diagnose gay people and say they need to be "discreetly cured" then you're not being loving.

 

When leaders in the Church promote such pseudo-science and talk about gay people as if they're suffering from an illness they are detracting from the dignity of homosexual persons. That is not loving, and that is not what the Gospel is about.

Edited November 9, 2014 by Aragon

[Aragon]

http://76crimes.com/ex-gay-therapy-what-reputable-experts-have-to-say/

I know that many people think that the APA's removal of homosexuality as a mental illness is some kind of gay conspiracy and the APA cracked under pressure from the 'gay lobby', but this is simply not the case. Take note that the removal of homosexuality as a mental disorder has been happening in the psychiatric field of many different countries, including societies where homosexuality is still a taboo topic. India and China are examples on this list. 

[veritasluxmea]

 

When you are telling gay people that they suffer from a disorder and need to undergo therapy which has proven to be either useless or very psychologically harmful for the majority of participants then you are not loving them. 

I know people who accept and live in harmony with their sexuality within Church teaching, and I didn't think homosexuality was a mental issue for anyone. Until I realized some people did feel that way about it, treated it as such, and where successful, in their own words. I don't think they are liars or brainwashed. So who was right and who was wrong? Can homosexuality be "cured" or is it more of a natural expression of just the way someone is? I think both sides are right and wrong, respectively. 

 

On one hand, some people do feel they are helped by "gay" therapy and do live as heretos.

 

On the other hand, some people accept their attractions differently. They don't feel they suffer from it and feel it is a natural expression of who they are, and therapy isn't really necessary. In my experiences, both are correct. Just because some really can change their orientation doesn't mean everyone can, or should try. Just because for someone homosexuality is a integrated part of their soul doesn't mean everyone it is for everyone else. I think the causes of homosexuality can vary between people. Some people made need healing from past traumas which may "cure" them, and other's don't have those traumas, and it would be offensive to suggest to them that's why they're gay. 

 

The main thing, the only thing the Church can truly promote and defend, is it live within her teachings of virtue, sex, and marriage. How individuals choose to deal with homosexuality and attractions is up to them. I respect both people who feel their homosexuality stems from past traumas and choose therapy, and others who feel it is a more complex part of themselves and do not pursue therapy. As long as one believes and lives Church teachings, that's the important thing. There is room to decide how you deal with it.

 

When you, someone without any medical or psychological training, takes it upon themselves to diagnose gay people and say they need to be "discreetly cured" then you're not being loving.

 

When leaders in the Church promote such pseudo-science and talk about gay people as if they're suffering from an illness they are detracting from the dignity of homosexual persons. 

The Catholic Church can't say it is or isn't hateful for someone to believe that homosexuality is a mental disorder, because the Church can't make a call on whether or not it's a mental disorder. (I think we can agree on that.) All she can say on the matter is that "They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided." Whether you believe it's a mental disorder or not, is up to you (after some critical thinking and research into science, I hope). 

 

I don't think it's detracting from their dignity to say the inclination is disordered. I agree it would be detracting from their dignity to say they are disordered. Whether what the bishop said detracted from their dignity or not, eh, I wouldn't have said it that way but the idea that people can provide support and help for gay people isn't wrong. 

 

That is not loving, and that is not what the Gospel is about.

You're right, that's not what the gospel is about. 

 

The gospel is about finding healing for the wounds in all areas in our life caused by traumas, additions, and sin and finding reconciliation with God, through Christ, by being transformed into His image. We start the process in this life, and finish it here or in the next. The gospel is proclaiming this message to all peoples, to help everyone being the process of transformation into Christ so so he can bring them "life, and life in abundance." Frankly, I'm a little offended by the suggestion that the gospel is all about "loving," and that's it. No, it's so much more than that. I don't believe that's what you meant, however. 

 

http://76crimes.com/ex-gay-therapy-what-reputable-experts-have-to-say/

I know that many people think that the APA's removal of homosexuality as a mental illness is some kind of gay conspiracy and the APA cracked under pressure from the 'gay lobby', but this is simply not the case. Take note that the removal of homosexuality as a mental disorder has been happening in the psychiatric field of many different countries, including societies where homosexuality is still a taboo topic. India and China are examples on this list. 

Ok, so it's not a mental illness or disorder. The whole "pressure from gay lobby" thing may or may not be true, but again, I'm not going to shun or discredit people who have found "healing" from homosexual inclinations by healing past traumas. I think it would be wrong to deny them therapy, because some people do need it and it helps. Denying them help or their right to pursue therapy because many people do not suffer from homosexuality is wrong. 

 

[Credo in Deum]

http://76crimes.com/ex-gay-therapy-what-reputable-experts-have-to-say/

I know that many people think that the APA's removal of homosexuality as a mental illness is some kind of gay conspiracy and the APA cracked under pressure from the 'gay lobby', but this is simply not the case. Take note that the removal of homosexuality as a mental disorder has been happening in the psychiatric field of many different countries, including societies where homosexuality is still a taboo topic. India and China are examples on this list.

"Gay activism was clearly the force that propelled the APA to declassify homosexuality" --Simon LeVay a neuroscientist and gay activist. At least he has the decency not to lie to people.

There is a clear agenda behind the "science" society is pushing on us regarding human sexuality.

Also there are plenty of stories where therapy has helped people with unwanted same sex attraction, but you automatically dismiss and write off such people for no logical or justifiable reason. You would advocate incorrectly that no one has been helped and therefore would have therapeutic help removed and taken away from those people who of their OWN choice want it! And why? My guess is because their actions and beliefs and results do not jive with your 100% immutable sexuality theory and propaganda!

Grow up Aragon, no one is advocating that same sex Catholics or anyone for that matter should be forced to undergo such therapy. No they should be allowed to make that choice themselves. Likewise no one here should discourage those same people from getting such help if they want it!

[Aragon]

Veritasluxmea,

 

I don't have a problem with homosexual people who want to receive counselling to "cure" their sexuality. I think it's unscientific and harmful, but that's up to them. What I'm angry about is that a bishop in an interview said that this is what the Church should be doing for gay people. The issue isn't SSA people choosing to go to therapy (however harmful, that's their right), the problem is with a leader of the Church promoting reparative therapy. Especially when, as you said, the Church should not be in the business of handing out psychiatric diagnosis (despite calling homosexuality disordered) because both on a theological level (not a matter of faith or morals) and on a human level (bishops aren't psychologists) they're simply not qualified to do so.

[veritasluxmea]

(despite calling homosexuality disordered) because both on a theological level (not a matter of faith or morals) and on a human level (bishops aren't psychologists) they're simply not qualified to do so.

Are you saying that the teaching of homosexuality to be disordered is not a teaching on faith or morals, and therefore is not infallible? Just because it's described as disordered theologically does not mean it is discorded psychologically. 

Edited November 9, 2014 by veritasluxmea

[Aragon]

Are you saying that the teaching of homosexuality to be disordered is not a teaching on faith or morals, and therefore is not infallible? Just because it's described as disordered theologically does not mean it is discorded psychologically. 

 

No, that's my point. The Church doesn't (and can't) teach that homosexuality is a mental disorder, yet Bp Schneider says that it is and that it can be cured. He needs to be quiet and limit himself to things he has a modicum of education in, ie. theology. The fact that people commenting on this thread cannot see the difference between a SSA Catholic making the choice to undergo reparative therapy and a bishop publicly advocating it is astounding. It is not appropriate for a bishop to be advocating this kind of pseudo-science, both because he's wrong and it's embarrassing for the Church and because it falls outside his areas of expertise as a bishop. This is why I say thank God he's from a backwater in Kazakstan. The only people who will ever take notice of him are internet trads, if a more prominent cleric had said this it would be incredibly damaging for the Church's public image and incredibly alienating for our gay brothers and sisters. 

 

As to the word disorder, well, the use of the word "disorder" in and of itself is problematic, given that in the English language it has strong connotations of mental illness and 99% of people understand it as a psychiatric term rather than a teleological term. Combine this with the fact that in the English speaking world there has been a historical legacy of treating gay people as diseased and mentally ill (an attitude reflected in Bp Schneider's comments here) and you've got a recipe for grave misunderstanding, ie. people think the Church's teaching supports the idea that homosexuals are mentally ill.

 

You'd think the bishops would have picked up on that when translating 'inordinata' and used a more appropriate term like "misdirected" or "not ordered towards", but apparently not.

Edited November 9, 2014 by Aragon

[An Historian]

Aragorn, you've used rather vehement language in this thread. I ask you, what's wrong with viewing homosexuality as a mental illness? Why isn't it?

[Aragon]

Aragorn, you've used rather vehement language in this thread. I ask you, what's wrong with viewing homosexuality as a mental illness? Why isn't it?

 

It's not a mental illness because no reputable psychiatric organisation classifies it as such, and more specifically because it doesn't prevent the person from living a healthy and happy life. Bipolar, depression, alcoholism, eating disorders, etc, are all disorders which detract from the person's quality of life and stop them from properly functioning. Homosexuality doesn't in itself do that. It's incredibly disconcerting to see how much credence Catholics on this forum are giving this pseudo-science. I'm sorry, but quite frankly it makes us look like idiots.

 

Why do you consider it a mental illness? Are you trained in this kind of thing, or do you consider it a mental illness because of moral and religious convictions? Needless to say having a religious belief that homosexual acts are sinful doesn't then enable you or anyone else to start handing out psychiatric diagnoses. 


As to what's wrong with considering homosexuality a mental illness I don't even know where to begin. It's degrading, insulting, and offensive to homosexual people and their loved ones. It pathologises them and is unnecessarily hurtful. Do you think that calling people disordered, mentally ill, and telling them they need to be cured is the way to bring people to Christ?

Edited November 9, 2014 by Aragon

[Credo in Deum]

It's not a mental illness because no reputable psychiatric organisation classifies it as such, and more specifically because it doesn't prevent the person from living a healthy and happy life. Bipolar, depression, alcoholism, eating disorders, etc, are all disorders which detract from the person's quality of life and stop them from properly functioning. Homosexuality doesn't in itself do that. It's incredibly disconcerting to see how much credence Catholics on this forum are giving this pseudo-science. I'm sorry, but quite frankly it makes us look like idiots.

Why do you consider it a mental illness? Are you trained in this kind of thing, or do you consider it a mental illness because of moral and religious convictions? Needless to say having a religious belief that homosexual acts are sinful doesn't then enable you or anyone else to start handing out psychiatric diagnoses.


As to what's wrong with considering homosexuality a mental illness I don't even know where to begin. It's degrading, insulting, and offensive to homosexual people and their loved ones. It pathologises them and is unnecessarily hurtful.

http://www.narth.org/docs/innate.html

Do you think that calling people disordered, mentally ill, and telling them they need to be cured is the way to bring people to Christ?

Wasn't it Christ Himself who claimed that He came for us disordered human beings when He said, "They that are well have no need of a physician, but they that are sick. For I came not to call the just, but sinners." Heterosexuals, homosexuals, bisexuals, mentally ill, physically ill, and spiritually ill; all of fallen mankind is called to acknowledge their disorders and accept the healing power which is Christ Himself. That's the beauty of our God is we do not need to be perfect or normal in order to come to Him since it is our fallen nature which makes Him come to us! He is not sitting afar-off waiting for us to be perfect before we can approach Him. On the contrary it is our fallen disordered natures which should prompt us to have the greatest hope and confidence that He is closer to us than He would be if we had no disorders at all!

There is no need to bring yourself to Christ since He is already here and constantly with us. We need only to accept Him into our Hearts (primarily by the way of the Sacraments).

[Benedictus]

There are many Bishops who'd want those with SSA to be supported, through therapy or other means, and they listen to scientific advice from those in the related fields. Many Bishops know about the history, damage and hurt around the curative field and would use caution so as not to mislead or hurt. Most dioceses have advisors to Bishops from professional fields, to keep the Bishops abreast of issues and to enable them to respond to questions, people and situations without ignorance. That includes those of us who conduct psychological assessments, or provide ongoing counselling, to those applying, or already within, a seminary or religious order.

These same issues was exchanged in a thread some time ago. The ideas around curative therapy are a bit like how people used to treat left handed children. It was thought to be bad. People devised ways to change that undesirable behaviour. The culture encouraged change as necessary. Children were raised thinking it was bad, so they were eager to want to change. The tactics employed encouraged them to use their right hand instead. They were accepted and rewarded when they did so. Once this become the 'norm' reaction they were, and claimed, to be cured. But, in truth, they were still left handed! They had learnt to operate in a world that expected them to be a right handed person. It was naive to say they were cured and were no longer left handed. That's, in part, my objection to this whole way of thinking.

Could, in theory, a plan around SSA do the same thing? Yes. That isn't disputed. But curative therapy, especially extreme behavioural therapy, is damaging because of the tactics it needs to use most of the time. The damage outweighs the benefits, it's unethical and unncessary. Most professional orgs would see such practice as abusive and outside their professional guidelines. It isn't mandated. Most Christian ministeries that once supported this idea have recanted and closed.

Bishops haven't always listened to professional advice, we know that. But the church needs to learn and do better. The mistakes made in the past are long and deep. Let's not forget the eagarness Bishops had to believe abusive priests, who claimed they were cured, to continue in ministry. They ignored nearly all professional advice. There were also past issues where people should not have been accepted to seminary at that time, based on their own admissions and psychologcial profiles.
There is still a culture, at least in some places, of encouraging people to follow religious vocations as a means to cure or aviod problems, be it around sex, abuse or personality. It's all tied up with perceptions of cure, repression or aviodance. So, as an example, a woman who may have a history of childhood abuse maybe avioding relationships by attempting to join a convent. They wouldn't necessarily have been held back in the past. Would a professional give caution? yes, if consulted. Would Bishops and superiors have to listen? sadly, no. There's obviously more work to be done in the work between professionals and the church, on many levels, to aviod harm being done in the future.
 

[Benedictus]

[Mediator of Meh]meh--budge[/Mediator of Meh]

 

that smells of elderberries

[Ice_nine]

I guess homosexuals, like just about everyone else, don't like other people telling them that they're broken/sick/in need of healing. But they are, like just about everyone else, indeed broken and sick. The Gospel is for those who acknowledge this, not for those who can prop themselves up and say "I'm just fine with who I am."

 

Gay people suffer the affliction of original sin, but they do tend to get harped on more for it than other sinners, which is too bad. As if it is a defect of their fundamental personality rather than a simple flaw in behavior or thought.

 

It's a mess, but I'm glad there are more and more gay people who are reconciling themselves with the church even though there's still a lot of hostility between the warring parties.

[veritasluxmea]

I think at this point the issue isn't "gays need help and healing from Original Sin like every human" which we can all agree on as Christians, but "gays don't need specific help and healing for being gay and it's inappropriate for a bishop to promote that." 

 

I think people who start to experience homosexuality as a direct result from a traumatic event, such as being abused as a child or teen, are not naturally gay like some other gay people and do need help, not for being gay but for learning how to appropriately deal with and heal from their bad experience. In that sense, they would be "cured" (although that's a terrible term to use). Never would homosexuality fall under the category of a mental illness in either situation. In those situations, I think the bishop's comment applies. However, I get the sense he believes every single situation of homosexuality is like that, which I disagree with. So it's not the best comment. I agree that "pray the gay away" and therapies that simply focus on being gay are inadequate and do more harm than good. 

Edited November 9, 2014 by veritasluxmea