Posted on 10/06/2014 4:48:11 PM PDT by marshmallow
“...welcoming their son and partner to the family” is, in the contemporary use of the word “welcome”, acceptance of the relationship.
Acceptance of an ongoing homosexual relationship is de facto approval, and the grandkids will notice the approval.
Acceptance of the son and his partner as sinners? Definitely, for as sinners we all need acceptance, but we must be repentant sinners. The grace is given to us sinners so that we repent.
Acceptance of the son and his partner as ongoing homosexual lovers?
I CORINTHIANS 6:9-11:
9 Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, 10 nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.
In Corinth, the Apostle Paul had to deal directly with a church that thought it was just fine for a member to marry his mother in law. He castigated the church for approving of sin and instructed the church to put the member out of the body, and back into the world, until he repented.
That event can be found in 1 Corinthians chapter 5.
How is the abomination in this article any different?
If their son brought home his little 7 year old boyfriend, would they feel the same way that homosexuality is normal?
"But he that shall scandalize one of these little ones that believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone should be hanged about his neck, and that he should be drowned in the depth of the sea."
If children weren’t involved I could go along with you. I would say that either man should be welcomed individually but not together as long as children are present.
Of course, people involved in destructive behavior should always be treated with dignity. This is a tough situation with some hard choices with serious pitfalls for the parents who face it.
Leviticus 20:13
It’s the Oxford English spelling of the following (definition from an online dictionary).
http://www.dict.org/bin/Dict?Form=Dict2&Database=gcide&Query=Evangelization
And a look at the definition for evangelize follows that.
http://www.dict.org/bin/Dict?Form=Dict2&Database=gcide&Query=Evangelize
Such violations of family are simply products of idolatrous empires.
Yes, children present are an issue. That is why absolute rules of no flaunting etc. Of course, the problem is that at some point the parents will have to explain the problem and the reasons that they handled it the way they did.
What makes the “gay” issue so difficult is that children who are old enough to be made aware of the issue should be told that any homosexual acts are wrong, destructive and sinful. Then explaining why you allow sinful people in your home is really difficult.
The problem is that we should start saying as a culture that we will not accept any celebratory acceptance of gayness. We will tolerate only those who don’t flaunt or tell in our homes with our children.
What a mess. Whatever happened to self control?
That quote from Corinthians reminds us how difficult the demands of charity are.
Perhaps welcome them both to dinner and then lead them to their separate bedrooms.
How about telling the son he is welcome in your house but not his “boyfriend” because because you do not condone that type of behavior. I mean don’t let him in the front door. If the son can’t handle the truth, kick his ass out too. The truth is the truth.
Yes, that is the ultimate goal of evangelizing—to convert sinners to the practice of not sinning. Jesus set the example for how to accomplish that by his association with known sinners.
I’m still trying to wrap my head around the fact that the lay folk are permitted to take part in a Synod. The Vatican II Church is more democratic than Catholic.
Well said. We all know how Jesus dealt with the money changers.
"And he saith to them: It is written, My house shall be called the house of prayer; but you have made it a den of thieves."
---------------------------
Catechism of the Catholic Church:
VI. THE DOMESTIC CHURCH
1655 Christ chose to be born and grow up in the bosom of the holy family of Joseph and Mary. The Church is nothing other than "the family of God." From the beginning, the core of the Church was often constituted by those who had become believers "together with all [their] household."166 When they were converted, they desired that "their whole household" should also be saved.167 These families who became believers were islands of Christian life in an unbelieving world.
1656 In our own time, in a world often alien and even hostile to faith, believing families are of primary importance as centers of living, radiant faith. For this reason the Second Vatican Council, using an ancient expression, calls the family the Ecclesia domestica.168 It is in the bosom of the family that parents are "by word and example . . . the first heralds of the faith with regard to their children. They should encourage them in the vocation which is proper to each child, fostering with special care any religious vocation."169
And didn't Baldisseri say that inside information regarding the synod would be "limited"? Yet this particular story (which promotes a false notion of "mercy") has been "leaked".
If they're welcoming a "partner nto the family," they are conbtributing toi moral corruption.
If they are welcoming thier erring son and his friend for the purpose of maintaining a trust-relationship -- needed in order to make truth-tellng possible ("we love you, but what you're doing is way wrong, you're sabotaging your own lives and offending God")--- then they're doing exactly the right thing.
But we don't know from the article.
Let's pray for them.
I certainly agree that if they are "welcoming" this sex-themed relationship, this is cooperation with evil --- cooperation with the ruin of their son.
That would of course be wrong. But the article --- brief and ambiguous as it is --- doesn't say they are bestowing approval on the relationship.
It would be like welcoming a divorced/remarried son and his "new" wife, when his first wife is still living. He is, as Jesus Christ Himself said, living in adultery. But that doesn't mean that he and the second woman are not to come to your house.
That's a tough one.
But if they are "welcoming" in the sense of saying "this sex-themed relationship is acceptable," they are in the wrong.
I think we agree on that.
If they were offering them a bed for overnight, now that would be sin-sponsoring and shockingly wrong. Just as if their son were a divorced/remarried man accompanied by his "new" wife. No decent person should do that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.