Odd question -

[khashka]

My ex asked me to ask you guys what you think.

He was raised Catholic. His entire extended family is Catholic. He works for a Catholic university. He's very upset about the Church's approach to homosexuality. He wants to know if he is morally right in opposing it.

I told him "yes" and that no one else can own your conscience. But he never listens to me. He did agree to let you guys decide.....


Khash.

[proud2BlibKansan]

1. One word:

PEDOPHILIA

That will keep me from EVER being practicing Catholic again.

[Rabrrrrrr]

2. Is he morally right? I think that he is. But there is no way to "prove"

whether he is or not. It's up to his own conscience.

I, too, think the Catholic Church approach is theologically unsound, lacking in compassion, and not a loving approach to take.

[merh]

3. Being a recovering Catholic

In my heart, I know he is morally right to oppose it.

The guiding teachings of Christ that justify the opposition of the Church's tenet comes from Jesus. When asked, "Lord, what is the greatest commandment" he simply replied, "To love thy god with thy whole heart and thy whole soul and second unto that, to love thy brother/neighbor as thy self."

To condemn any human and not love them as we love ourselves seems in total conflict with the teachings of Christ.

And because the church has taken this hard stance (and many others) I find myself a recovering Catholic. The faith is a part of me, but I cannot be a part of the Church.

May your ex find peace in his heart. You are a good friend, khashka.

[khashka]

6. That's beautiful, merh

When you say "the faith is a part of me" that's very wise. To make the distinction between your relationship to God and man made religion. I wish more people understood that.


Have you seen tjwmason's sigline? "You can not worship Jesus in the temple if you do not care for Him in the slum".


Khash.

[merh]

11. That is a great sig line.

Do you want a rather odd, but my own interpretation of the trilogy?

IMHO, the quest for love is why formal religions were formed. My view of the trilogy -- the father, the son and the holy ghost of the christian teachings is rather simple. God is love - whosever God, all Gods - love is the goal in life, love is the ultimate, love is our purpose. The goal in life is not how many people can we make love us, it is how deeply and unconditionally we can love others without losing sight of our worth, our self love, the importance of our needs.

To know love, you have to have self love, with self love, you can love others. So the triology is love of love, love of self, love of others, love so deep and unconditional that our lifes are enriched and that enrichment magnifies our love of self. We are to love for the sake of love, not for the sake of finding self love in another's view of us, not to love for the sake of being able to say "this is how many people love me so therefore I am special and worthy of love". I don't love you to feel better about myself, but loving you makes me feel better about myself. Love for the sake of love, unconditional love, makes me a better person.

It is when the balance is out of whack, when the sides of the triangle fail to meet, that we have problems in our lives and in our relationships. When we have trouble being all we can be as we are meant to be.

When you love someone without self-love, when you love them just to see their love of you in their eyes, when you love them only with a view of perfection you need to exist for your completion and not for who they are, faults and failings accepted right along with their virtues and positives -- when loving them makes you lose sight of your worth and the depth of that love poses risks to who you are, then the triangle (triology) is not properly formed -- love fails. The triangle is not complete, there are gapping holes and the sides of the triangle cannot meet. Love, like the different types of triangles, has different configurations during the course of our lives, our years, our months, our weeks, even our days. The angles and the lines alter, some times you have an acute triangle, some times it is a scalean triangle and at times it can be an equilateral triangle. The angles can be obtuse or acute, but the main thing is the meeting of the lines, that they do meet to make the triangle, the triology.

Sometimes you love another more than you love yourself, you give them more than they are giving you and sometimes you need to love yourself more than you can give. For the sake of who you are and your place on this earth, that is your triangle, that is your love and your purpose. To know perfect love as a person is to love yourself and to love others for who they are and to maintain the delicate balance between the two, thus forming the triangle. It is to be godlike, to be truly loving.

Which is greater, the love of self, the love of others or the love of love? If you don't have self love, how can you love others, without love of others, how can you have self love?

We have problems with relationships when the other's person triangle is out of whack, when their lines don't meet or when their needs do not match the needs of our own triangle. It is hard enough to maintain the delicate balance required to keep the sides of our triangle touching. To try to manage our triangle and to control the other's triangle is impossible.

The greatest achievement of man is unconditional love, it is the hardest thing to achieve yet once achieved it is the most satisfying experience on this earth. Love is ever evoling, constantly changing, but it is real and it is glorious. It takes work and effort, to maintain the balance, to keep the sides of the triangle touching, not just to know it with another, but to have it for ourselves.

True love exists and our purpose in life is to try to achieve it daily, to try to achieve it at all times.

How can a Church profess anything but unconditional, perfect love? In shunning others because of their love, the Catholic Church mocks the teachings of Christ, IMHO. They violate the 1st and most important commandment -- To love God (love) with thy whole heart and soul - they take the Lord's name in vain when they make this hateful and unloving stance a tenet of the religion and demand that their members toe the line.

[RevCheesehead]

16. Beautifully said, Ms. M!

Sounds like the Golden Rule to me! :hug::loveya:

[merh]

17. Thank you, Your Cheezieness.

Your compliment means a lot, given the subject and your expertise. :blush:

:hug: :loveya:

[Deja Q]

19. Well said.

But what if a person does not understand love?

[supernova]

4. Yes, he is right to oppose it

I'm a theologically liberal protestant, so I can't say what would ultimately be best for him.

But I can tell you that the Catholic Church is, on one level, just like every other institution. And only with the strong will of individuals who speak out with love, can it ever hope to change. So I would support him speaking out.

I'm another one who feels that Christ's commandment to love all is paramount. It doesn't matter to God what our lives are like or whom we chose to love, as long as we live in love and respect for all.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

5. About this time last year a Catholic priest in Laguna Beach

told me the same thing. Your friend should realize that being a practicing Catholic does not mean he cannot think for himself. One thing Catholics believe is that God gave us intellect and free will. It is right for him to use his intellect and realize when the Church is making an error in judgment. Throughout the years, many good Catholics have done the same. They will be the ones to save their Church from those exercising that "free will" in a very damaging way...by that I mean the Catholic church is very WILLFULLY taking an immoral and political position on homosexuality.

[evlbstrd]

7. He's right.

The Church is wrong.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

8. I believe that he is morally right....

And the Church is wrong on this one.

And I too am a recovering Catholic, FWIW.

[johnnie]

9. He probably should leave the Catholic church

I have nothing against Catholics (raised as one myself), but it is just a religion. Too many people mindfuck themselves by thinking the Catholic church, or any religion for that matter, is more than it is. They are just a belief system that has their doctrine and dogmas that they live by. No one is forced to stay in a religion they don't believe in.

If you friend feels that he doesn't believe in what they believe in then he should look elsewhere for spiritual comfort. I wouldn't say he is morally wrong, it's just that he probably would like to have the Catholic church change for his personal beliefs, and they won't do that. They are who they are and it isn't up to us to change that.

[LeftyMom]

10. I think he's got every right to oppose the Church on this issue

but I'm not a practicing Catholic anymore so I'm probably not the best person to ask.

Actually, the more I think about it, a good Catholic is morally obligated to stand up for the powerless and the victimized. I would argue that that obligation extends to standing up for those victimized by the Church, but again I'm probably not the best person to ask.

[Shine]

12. I agree with you.: "No one else can own your conscience."

OF COURSE he can oppose the church's position on homosexuality! As proven by history, the church has no absolute claim to Morality, anyway.

As an aside, however, why on earth would your ex let the consensus of a message board "decide" FOR HIM whether he is "right" or not??? :shrug: Sorry, I just don't get that.

My two cents....
:hi:

[khashka]

14. I don't think you guys were going to make the decision

But he and I have often disagreed on religious matters. (I think his Catholic hang ups are ridiculous and his nascent atheism is a huge mistake, he thinks my Paganism borders on evil.) Since he won't listen to me on religious matters, I think he just wanted to know what other people thought. He just wanted some input, really, from someone other than me.


Khash.

[Shine]

15. Gotcha.

I certainly didn't mean to come off as judgmental as I probably sounded.
I wish him Peace as he finds whatever works for him.

and Peace to you Khash, as well, from one pagan, to another..

Happy New Year!

Bright blessings,
Shine
:hi:

[Dangerously Amused]

13. Recovering Catholic here.

It sounds like your friend is uncomfortable in questioning the Catholic church's self-proclaimed divinely inspired doctrinal infallibility. Show your friend these articles. These are some of the reasons I left the Catholic church - because I didn't like being told to believe in Limbo one day, and that Limbo didn't exist the next. I didn't like being taught all about St. Christoper and praying to him one day, and then having him demoted and stripped of his feast day the next.

Likewise, your friend is well justified in questioning the legitimacy of the Church's position on homosexuality.


***

The Times November 30, 2005

Limbo Consigned to History Books
from Richard Owen in Rome


THE Pope is set to abolish the concept of Limbo, overturning a belief held by Roman Catholics since the Middle Ages. ...

Limbo has long been held to be the place where the souls of children go if they die before they can be baptised. ...

Vatican sources said yesterday that the commission would recommend that Limbo be replaced by the more “compassionate” doctrine that all children who die do so “in the hope of eternal salvation”. ...

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,13509-1897480,00.html

***

Also, St. Christopher has been demoted, and stripped of his feast day:


Among Roman Catholics, the most popular St. Christopher legend is preserved in Jacobus de Voragine's 13th century Golden Legend. ...
...

The veneration of this improbable figure was sharply criticised by Erasmus in his Praise of Folly. Christopher's feast day formerly was July 25; it was downgraded by the Vatican to a purely local commemoration in 1969. Christopher was formerly one of the Fourteen Holy Helpers, and the patron saint of travelers. Despite his demotion, devotion to St. Christopher remains popular among Roman Catholics, as evidenced by the medallions issued in his name, which are worn to show devotion to a certain saint and ask for that saint's prayers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Christopher

[GoddessOfGuinness]

18. Galileo Galilei said,

"I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use."

It took the Catholic Church the better part of 4 centuries to acknowledge that Galileo was right, and the earth revolves around the sun.

It will probably take at least as long for them to acknowledge that homosexuality is no more sinful than eating pork. Your ex has a long fight ahead of him; but I believe it is a battle that should be fought.

[KitchenWitch]

20. Personally, I believe it is morally wrong and inhumane

for a church, which supposedly follows Christ's example, to exclude entire groups of people, whether it be based on gender, orientation, race, or any other differentiating characteristic.

[kmla]

21. You're right. No one else can own your conscience.

But sadly, many people's are for rent.

And it's sad how little they actually get in return spiritually for their conscience.

(Sorry for the muddy analogy.)

[tigereye]

22. the church of late seems to honor dogma above all

as one poster here said, and very well.

"It sounds like your friend is uncomfortable in questioning the Catholic church's self-proclaimed divinely inspired doctrinal infallibility."

I think that moving further back into doctrinal justifications for highly conservative and intolerant practices, and the Middle Ages, is a very poor choice, regardless of how many encyclicals and rules are quoted in Latin. It's very sad.

However, John the 23rd had a lot of questions and dragged many Catholics into the 20th century. That time will come again. The old guard will not always run things. I admire any Catholics who continue to ask questions, no matter the cost.