Baltimore Catholic Church Celebrates Homosexual "Pride" Month

The Archdiocese Of Baltimore ^ | 6-16-14

[redleghunter]

It would seem Baltimore was not the only dioscese supporting homosexual pride events.

Gay-friendly Parishes and Faith Communities

Gay-friendly Catholic Colleges and Universities

Then there is this report:

Report | Catholic Attitudes on Gay and Lesbian Issues: A Comprehensive Portrait from Recent Research

From the link above:

•When same-sex marriage is defined explicitly as a civil marriage, support is dramatically higher among Catholics. If marriage for gay couples is defined as a civil marriage “like you get at city hall,” Catholic support for allowing gay couples to marry increases by 28 points, from 43% to 71%. A similar pattern exists in the general population, but the Catholic increase is more pronounced.

•Beyond the issue of same-sex marriage, Catholic support for rights for gays and lesbian people is strong and slightly higher than the general public. Nearly three-quarters (73%) of Catholics favor laws that would protect gay and lesbian people against discrimination in the workplace; 63% of Catholics favor allowing gay and lesbian people to serve openly in the military; and 6-in-10 (60%) Catholics favor allowing gay and lesbian couples to adopt children.

•Compared to the general church-going public, Catholics are significantly less likely to hear about the issue of homosexuality from their clergy, but those who do are much more likely to hear negative messages. Only about 1-in-4 (27%) Catholics who attend church services regularly say their clergy speak about the issue of homosexuality, but nearly two-thirds (63%) of this group say the messages they hear are negative.

•Compared to other religious groups, Catholics are significantly more likely to give their church poor marks for how it is handling the issue of homosexuality. Less than 4-in-10 (39%) Catholics give their own church top marks (a grade of either an A or a B) on its handling of the issue of homosexuality.

•Seven-in-ten Catholics say that messages from America’s places of worship contribute a lot (33%) or a little (37%) to higher rates of suicide among gay and lesbian youth.

•Catholics overwhelmingly reject the idea that sexual orientation can be changed. Nearly 7-in-10 (69%) Catholics disagree that homosexual orientation can be changed; less than 1-in-4 (23%) believe that it can be changed.

•A majority of Catholics (56%) believe that sexual relations between two adults of the same gender is not a sin. Among the general population, less than half (46%) believe it is not a sin (PRRI, Religion & Politics Tracking Survey, October 2010).

[Steelfish]

Just called ‘em and gave ‘em hell! Of course, they have all this anodyne stuff as “God’s family” etc. etc., that provides cover.

[redleghunter]

Just called ‘em and gave ‘em hell! Of course, they have all this anodyne stuff as “God’s family” etc. etc., that provides cover.

Evangelicals have a saying: "love the sinner, hate the sin." Trying to find the right balance of engagement with the sinner (presenting the Gospel of Jesus Christ) and not endorsing or even giving the impression of 'accepting' or 'tolerating' it is difficult. But supporting an event that celebrates the sin, IMO, is not a good idea. As you will see from one of the links I left, it gives gay pride groups the impression the Catholic church is 'coming around' to what secular society condones.

Put another way, Jesus Christ went into sinners homes, but we see in the Gospels these were repentant sinners or those seeking release from the power of sin. Jesus Christ did NOT go into a home proudly practicing or boasting a sin and proud of it. Jesus approached sinners homes with the mission of bringing back in the fold the lost sheep of Israel. He did not pat the lost sheep on the rump and tell them it is ok to be out of the pen.

If I were to advise the Archdiocese of Baltimore I would tell them to have the church doors open on the 'gay' pride day and invite those who wanted to repent and put on Christ to come in. Or go out to them and preach the Gospel. Not this double speak.

[Steelfish]

No disagreement here. It’s Catholic teaching of forgiveness, the Sacrament of Reconciliation, to love the sinner and hate the sin followed with the injunction “Go and sin no more.” The injunction emphasizes the deadly aspect of the sin.

[dsc]

“It is unfair to blame Luther’s movement for the fights that broke out between factions”

Funny, it doesn’t seem to be unfair to blame any Catholic for anything that any other Catholic did, or, more often, allegedly did.

We are responsible for the unintended consequences of our actions as well as for our intent. He intended this, but his actions produced that. It is in no way wrongful to take note of what actually happened.

[metmom]

It’s not churches that save us.

It’s hypocritical of some to lump all Protestants together when they want to smear them, and then when they want to condemn anything non-Catholic, accuse Protestantism of being fractured into somewhere between 20,000 and 85,000 differing denominations, depending on which FRoman Catholic is trying to do the slamming.

I never for one second claimed that Protestant churches were perfect or did not have their share of scandals.

But the very same things that Catholics accuse non-Catholics of can be said of Catholicism, and yet Catholics constantly present the RCC as somehow morally superior to others. It isn’t either.

[dsc]

“Says the Irrelevant Fact Poster.”

You may discuss issues, but do not make it personal.

That’s what the moderators tell me, anyway. Guess it doesn’t apply to you.

Anyway, some people should start being more careful to make sure the charges they level are true.

You know, justice.

[dsc]

“Matthew 18:1-4...Luke 18:9-14”

You know, there are some people who are just not smart enough to interpret and apply Scripture on their own.

The ones that might be, know better.

The Holy Scriptures you quoted are utterly inapplicable to this discussion. I would explain, but it would be just too frustrating when you failed, once again, to understand.

Does anybody know what the Latin is for “dumbass?”

[dsc]

“Taunting is useless without a citation to back up your claims.”

1. We have all seen the citations. Intelligent adults should not require them to be repeated constantly.

2. That wasn’t a taunt. It was a paraphrase of “Let he who is without sin...”

“God doesn’t call me to be successful. God calls me to be faithful.”
—Mother Teresa

Great quotation.

[dsc]

“He did say so; I read his remarks in the original Italian. His statements were deliberately mistranslated and the mistranslation widely promulgated by the leftist media, which, by leaving a word out here and there, seized upon what they wanted to hear instead of what he actually said.”

I was hoping that was the case. Sadly, I do not speak Italian.

Could you post the portion of the Italian to which you refer, or in some other way let me know what they were?

[dsc]

“I said, “Die, heretic scum”, and pushed him off.”

First time I ever heard anyone tell that story in the first person.

[dsc]

“I never for one second claimed that Protestant churches were perfect or did not have their share of scandals.”

Your posting history suggests that your beliefs might not match what you have not “claimed.” It suggests that you are here primarily, if not exclusively, to make false accusations against the Church, and to harm her in all other ways that might come to your hand.

“But the very same things that Catholics accuse non-Catholics of can be said of Catholicism”

Only some of them. If you’re talking about a bitter, spiteful, malicious, long-term effort to detract and slander, by all means honest and dishonest, then no: that can be said of some Protestants, but Catholics just aren’t interested enough in the fruits of the Protestant heresy to bother.

The Catholics who are morally corrupt enough to engage in such things are theological leftists who direct their efforts at the Catholic Church, not Protestants.

“and yet Catholics constantly present the RCC as somehow morally superior to others.”

The Catholic Church has the totality of Revelation, including much that the Protestants throw back in God’s Face with a snotty, “That’s not necessary for Salvation.”

I think God decides what we should have, and to reject His gifts is unbelievably arrogant.

“It isn’t either.”

Yeah? Well...well...so is your dad’s face. (Just to get into the spirit of the post to which I reply.)

[daniel1212]

If I were to advise the Archdiocese of Baltimore I would tell them to have the church doors open on the 'gay' pride day and invite those who wanted to repent and put on Christ to come in. Or go out to them and preach the Gospel. Not this double speak.

But you have to have it in order to preach it.

[dsc]

“I need to re-supply...”

Instead of that, I would recommend that you get a lot smarter.

[Albion Wilde]

“It is unfair to blame Luther’s movement for the fights that broke out between factions”
Funny, it doesn’t seem to be unfair to blame any Catholic for anything that any other Catholic did, or, more often, allegedly did.

Since I'm not the one lobbing attacks at Catholics on this thread, and frequently defend on FR the idea of reconciling the Catholic Church with other branches of Christianity in meaningful ways, there's no reason to respond to me, or anyone else for that matter, by claiming that non-Catholic Christians deserve tit for tat. The Reformation was a long process involving many, many actors. Luther played a role, but so did many others. The fundamental dispute was theological, and in no way did Luther storm the Vatican with an army. He tacked his thesis on a church door in Germany. Sort of like posting on FR. The storms had been brewing in many quarters for many years in many nations, and took half a century even to stop the open warfare, which the reigning political system, the Holy Roman Empire, did not or could not quell. There's lots of accountability to go around; but the time for blame is long past -- unless you need to blame others in order to believe what you believe about Jesus Christ. I really don't think you need to. Your Church is valid and consistent. Isn't that enough?

We are responsible for the unintended consequences of our actions as well as for our intent. He intended this, but his actions produced that. It is in no way wrongful to take note of what actually happened.

That's like saying that Dwight Eisenhower intended the breakdown of the family when he instituted the interstate road system we now all take for granted, since it enabled teenagers to travel or go to college far from home and had an increasing rate of sex in the back of cars, resulting in more teen pregnancies. Yep, all Ike's fault.

Or how about Ronald Reagan, who signed into law the "no-fault" divorce legislation in an attempt to help seriously broken families to separate without going broke and impoverishing their children. Is he solely to blame for the breakdown of the family? What about all the other forces in society that were operating at the same time, like the hippie back-to-nature movement, feminism, the Sexual Revolution driven in no small part by the eugenics and birth control movements of the 30s and the industrial production of the Pill in the 60s, whose manufacturers lobbied DC extensively? Was that all Reagan's fault?

Historic events happen in context, and those contexts are very complex. It is useless to try to continue to blame Luther for theological differences that have stood the test of time for 400 years. There are as many people growing up in one tradition who switch to the other as there are in the other direction, if the many deathbed conversions in my multi-generational mixed family of Catholics and Protestants is any example. Why carry forward old blames and hatreds? It's like saying Obamacare all Bush's fault.

[dsc]

“Why carry forward old blames and hatreds?”

The only blame I assess is for the conduct I’ve seen right here, and the hatred is solely for the dishonesty I see right here.

Speaking of which, you ask, “...eugenics and birth control movements of the 30s and the industrial production of the Pill in the 60s, whose manufacturers lobbied DC extensively? Was that all Reagan’s fault?”

Wow, how insulting.

I began posting to you courteously. What a waste of effort.

Here’s a clue: in this discussion, the simple-minded are all on your side of the aisle.

[CynicalBear]

>>You miss the point.<<

I don’t think we “missed to point” at all. Trying to compare the evil popes to Paul was ridiculous. Paul did those things before he was saved and put in a leadership position. Those popes did it “after” supposedly being saved but surely were in leadership positions. If you can’t see the difference there it’s truly sad.

[Albion Wilde]

I see you are determined to sneer and lob insults at a group, rather than seriously consider what I took the time to point out. I made a factual discussion of the unintended consequences of many historic events to point out the inevitablity of human sin and how difficult it is for even the best-intended persons to avoid negative consequences. It’s why we need a Savior; and again, I appeal to you as a Christian to take joy in your salvation, and avoid trying to use any church of Christ Jesus as a point of determining moral superiority over others whose faith is a conscientious choice. I’m not your enemy here.

[Elsie]

 

 

 

  You may discuss issues, but do not make it personal.

 #34 In this current minuet through the gates of Hell, the Protestants are well ahead of the Church.

#184 It doesn’t surprise me that you fail to understand the core concept of that saying.

#185 Only when the level of theological sophistication hovers around that of a six-year-old.

#288 You know, there are some people who are just not smart enough to interpret and apply Scripture on their own.

#292 Yeah? Well...well...so is your dad’s face. (Just to get into the spirit of the post to which I reply.)

#294 Instead of that, I would recommend that you get a lot smarter.

#296 Here’s a clue: in this discussion, the simple-minded are all on your side of the aisle.

 

Grasshopper: you are learning well.

[Elsie]

Does anybody know what the Latin is for “dumbass?”