Your church is a criminal organisation, you can have your faith without being a part of it.

The US government is a criminal organization. You can be an American without being a part of it. Convenient no?

Dan, that may be for Protestants, but Catholicism is a very specific thing.  If you try to live your faith without the Church, you’re not living the Catholic faith.

If the atheist friend thinks there is no women-bashing or sexual abuse problems within atheism, he should try Googling “Elevatorgate” and, seeing as he brought up the Reason Rally, if he checks out Herman Mehta’s (the Friendly Atheist) blog,  he’ll see some discussion on there regarding the Reason Rally (warning: post contains one word very offensive towards women) which covers that ground.

This is not intended to be a ‘gotcha!’ comment, just to show that fallen human nature is, well, fallen and even the enlightened freethinking rationalists don’t have everything rosy in the garden (and they also have their share of guys willing to explain away, justify, and say ‘you’re exaggerating’ when it comes to giving scandal and working for the cause).

There are bad doctors.  I still see one when I’m sick.  There are bad mothers.  I still think motherhood is awesome.  There are bad cops, but they are still who I’d call if I was in trouble. 

The Church, as someone I can’t remember once said, is not a pedestal for saints but a sanctuary for sinners. 

Has it occurred to your friend that these priests are enemies of the Church?  If not consciously, then subconsciously? 

Perhaps your friend is struggling…given all your good arguments over the years…with finally facing the Truth.  Maybe this is his last hurrah before the walls come tumbling down.  I would say this is the time to step up the prayers and get out of God’s way.  Sounds like your friend is losing (from his perspective anyway. From ours he’d be winning)his own personal spiritual battle and is giving it all he has…which is no longer very much. 

Thanks for this post Shea.

Dan,

Do the actual criminals in the Church deserve to be punished - and by secular courts - yes.

But when I read Scripture, I see, again and again in both Testaments, an organization of very sinful human beings held together only by the grace of God. Noah got drunk. Moses disobeyed. David got another man’s wife pregnant and then had him killed! Judas stole and turned Christ over. Peter lied.

Individual churches fall apart when the pastor is caught in some scandal. The Church established by Christ through the apostles has stood for 2000 years despite that it should have collapsed time and again.

When things are difficult - and, historically, things have often been difficult due to one sin or another - do we get up and leave, like Judas, or like Peter do we say “where will we go?”

Kudos Mark.  We should respect our friends, that meams respecting what they believe.  That is not to say we need to agree with them.  It is good to discuss our differences.  A blatant attack on what you believe is a lack of respect for you.  Sometimes we go over board and do not realize it, talk to him on how you feel and that he is putting your friendship in danger.  If he is a true friend he will stop what he is doing.

Hey! Check this out!

There is perhaps another possibility. People who are confident that they are winning an argument don’t often lash out in anger.  People who have unconfronted doubts sometimes do.  Maybe your friend isn’t as convinced as he would like to believe he is.

Once again Shea mistakes his opinion as “fact.”

I have a relative like this. Here’s what I did: don’t analyze him; don’t take it personally, he’s got other issues besides you and the church. Don’t blame yourself. Next time he writes, tell him you want no further emails of this nature. Tell him you’ll always be there when he’s in trouble, you’ll always love him and pray for him. Then block his emails. Fast and pray daily for his conversion. That’s all any of us are expected to do. Realize that Satan is using him to knock on your soul’s door, saying “I won’t stop until I bring my friend and his church down.” This is toxic. Stay away from it. Bottom line is, you are not Judas. Jesus comes first.

There are both saints & sinners in our Church, and all are welcome there.  Maybe Dan’s friend is trying to justify his own sinfulness.

Brian, I find myself diagreeing with Mark on a number of points, but to be fair and just, you are going to have to be alot more specific on what in his piece here is opinion mistaken as fact. Otherwise it is just a cowardly hit and run.

Jesus included Judas in his inner circle. He could have been betrayed from an outsider but His plan allowed for an insider. Christians see from the beginning that the sin of an insider does not negate the teachings of Jesus. 

Your friend likes to point fingers at sinners. The Church does not teach that the sinful behavior is okay. IF it did, we’d have a different situation on our hands. The fact that it is a scandal is because it is a diversion from what should happen if one is truly following the Church. The teachings are not the problem; the behavior disobeying the teachings are.

My response would simply be, “Yes, I’m well aware of he fact that 100% Catholics sin. So?”
.
And then I’d send him here: http://www.religioustolerance.org/clergy_sex8.htm

As a policeman’s daughter, I grew up very aware of the tendency of people to lump all police into either the Cops On The Take group, or the Violent Towards Minorities group, or the Lazy Donut Eaters group. My father was an honest, merciful hard-working man who was greatly loved, and I felt I had to defend him all my childhood.

I detect the same attack and response about Catholic priests (and Catholic sisters who taught school).

It’s human nature and won’t change. The difference is the glee the media displays when pouncing on the stories, without a balancing objective report of the tiny percentage in comparison to other professions. Also, people are more likely to know a police officer and find them honorable and brave and kind, than they are to know a Catholic priest.

I’ve had several email exchanges with various atheists. When they begin, you can tell they have a set script they want to follow. From what I have found after the fact in google searches, it involves mostly a lot of CTRL+C/CTRL+V, and that’s basically all they know how to do.

The script never works because they confuse the Church with Protestantism. This means that very quickly, the conversation veers off of their planned script and demands that they do actual reasoning and thinking about broad ideas, and questions are raised about their worldview that don’t fit neatly into their highly refined copy/paste technique. It is EXACTLY at this point that one of two things happens:

1. They become combative, verbally abusive and resort to nothing but ad hominem insults, unsubstantiated claims and ignore all further questions.

AND/OR

2. They stop responding.

But as Mark has said, that is what comes from worshiping your brain instead of using it.

“Brian, I find myself diagreeing with Mark on a number of points, but to be fair and just, you are going to have to be a lot more specific on what in his piece here is opinion mistaken as fact.”

Sure; it’s the link at “There are, in the final analysis, only two good arguments for atheism.  I discuss this fact here.”

Magically, his opinion becomes a fact.

Nothing magical about it. When you condense they arguments down, they fall into one of those categories. Seems to me you haven’t exercised much thought on it.

Maybe the “friend” is a crypto porn addict and, for that, he has a keen eye to spot colleagues, and, consequently, hates himself. How else to explain his psychotic “fixation.”
Be aware that there’s an absolute incompatibility between atheism and reason. The former is the denial of the latter. Atheism is, my friends, a religion, a religion of the supreme “I.” Christ, Our Lord and Savior, on the contrary, is the sublime and eternal expression of the “you” (“I will lay my life for many”). The pagans of old—those whom the Church Fathers mightily defeated through their blood and teachings—lay low in every era to make a come back when the ground is apt. Make no mistake, the “friend’s” pledge, his real target, is Our Lord: it was the evil spirits in the Gospel narratives the ones who first recognized “the holy one of God.”
And then, a message to Mark’s reader: “treat your ‘friend’ with kindness, but don’t give him an inch: this is about the salvation of your soul. There is no middle ground: stand firm with Our Lord: ‘cause only one of you will fall.”

Dante:

You baseless speculation about my reader’s friend does nothing but poison the well.  There’s no point in acting as uncharitable as the friend is.

Unfortunately, Mark Shea missed some VERY critical points in the abuse of children by Priests, namely:
(1) 85% of the sexually abused children were BOYS !!! The scandal mostly involved Priests who were HOMOSEXUALS !!! (2) Homosexuality was declared NORMAL by the professional organizations of Psychologists and Psychiatrists in the 1970’s. Influential Liberal American Catholics (mostly priests and psychiatrists and psychologists) convinced Catholic seminaries to admit HOMOSEXUALS to study for the Priesthood in the 1980’s because HOMOSEXUALITY had been declared NORMAL by the “experts” and HOMOSEXUALS could, no doubt, handle celibacy just as well as heterosexuals. (3) The sh*t hit the fan in the early 2000’s when many Priests were accused of sexually abusing BOYS. In about 2006, the Pope ordered seminaries to NO LONGER admit HOMOSEXUALS because HOMOSEXUALS were obviously NOT able to handle celibacy as well as heterosexuals.

Mark:
I stand corrected on my speculation (I can’t avoid recalling these words though: “e pur si muove”).
Thank you for spreading the True Faith.
D

Good advice Mark…he can explain his beliefs to the friend(ONCE!),acknowledge that friend will not agree most likely, and
then “shake the dust from his sandals” and go no further with
the discussions. The final resort is prayer and example!
If one would like to understand the whole clergy sex scandal and
its causes and effects on the Church I would suggest Father Bernard
Groeshel’s book FROM SCANDAL TO HOPE. It is both enlightening and
at the same time encouraging!

Thirst:

The problem with your suggestion is that they are *friends* and the goal here is to try to save the relationship, not simply lay out a few apologetics arguments for a stranger on the internet and then quickly blow them off.

Joseph:

This particular entry is not about the details of the scandal.  There’s a lot I didn’t talk about because it was not germane to the discussion I was trying to have.

Joseph- I’m not sure those facts were relative.  My FIL has this same issue, and it doesn’t matter who the abuser is or who the victim is. It is simply the fact of the abuse itself.  We just made a new house rule.  Anybody can argue anything, but they CANNOT bring up 1- the abuse scandal (all abuse of any person by any person is bad. Do we really need discuss this like there’s a grey area?); 2- that Borgia guy is dead, and has been for hundreds of years. (He was not the only leader of any part of western civilization to have mistress. Get over it); and 3- the Crusades have also been over for hundreds of years. War sucks. Most people try to avoid it. How about we talk about how our vets were treated after they came home from Vietnam. Or even Iraq and Afghanistan? That usually slows him down and we have real conversations.

After reading the Mr. Shea’s advice and the comments, I went back and read the excerpt from the reader’s letter.

I realized I had mentally overlaid the facts as related by the reader with the assumption that the atheist had become angry and hostile toward his friend. Perhaps in part of the letter Mr. Shea didn’t post there was a description of hostile behavior. The part posted made me wonder if the reader has made it clear to the atheist that the onslaught of emails and argument about sexual abuse perpetrated by clergy is making him upset and sad.  The atheist may think this is argument as usual, where he scorns and ridicules the church, not his friend. To the reader, this is like having some sordid incident involving his mother repeatedly rubbed in his face. It may be true, but he still loves his mother. An atheist will not necessarily get this unless the reader shares his feelings.

It might be helpful if the reader explained his feelings about this before asking his friend why he is pursuing the argument.  If his friend does not respect his feelings, then he is no longer a friend.

I am an atheist, and I rarely discuss religion with family or friends who are believers because I do not want to cause them pain. Not all atheists understand how emotionally vulnerable a believer can be about their beliefs.  In blogs people don’t have to maintain a relationship with the people they argue with, so it’s easy to walk away, no damage done. If I find you out there arguing about religion on the internet, I’m assuming you enjoy it. If I find you out there citing religion as the basis for making or repealing a law, I will attack that position. In our personal lives I’m not going to introduce the subject and try to force you to respond.

Ask your atheist friend if he is comfortable with comments from Dawkins that Christian beliefs (and, apparently Christians) should be mocked - ask him if he is comfortable, and does he agree with, attitudes like the one manifested by the woman wearing the t-shirt that said, “Too many Christians, not enough lions.” Ask him if he’s comfortable with the incredible foul language of some expressions in the crowd. Ask him why it is that violence by Christians is supposedly an argument against Christianity, but violence by atheists doesn’t turn him against atheism—the worst violence the world ever saw was committed by atheist regimes, as a result of their atheism and not be accident. It’s self-justifying bunk that makes people use Christian bad behavior to deny Christ, but give atheist bad behavior—gulags, concentration camps, massacres—a pass.

Dan, your comment is ridiculous.  And without merit or evidence.
You prove Mark’s comments true.

From my experience, atheism is a religion of its own and its members (atheists) are consistently trying to covert others, especially Catholics, to their religion. They become more hostile when they realize that they are not getting anywhere with you.  The common denominator among atheists is that they are “in-hate” with God as opposed to not believing in him.  There is no such thing as a “Nice Atheist”.

Those men who molested children are not Catholic nor are they priests. They are pedophiles who looked for the perfect opportunity to feed their perversion. What better opportunity than to pretend to be a Catholic priest, thus tarnishing the reputation of Catholicism and burdening the true man of God. Other positions of opportunity for molesting children include teachers, boy scout leaders and athletic coaches. Yet all teachers, all boy scout leaders and all athletic coaches are not discredited, ridiculed and insulted like Catholic priests.

Mike in KC: I’d be up for an exchange with you, if you’d like? I’ve had similar experiences from the flip side of the coin, and would be up for something more refreshing :p

Many crusading atheists flip their empathy switch to “off” when in combat mode. They find it hard to get out of combat mode, too. If he hasn’t been provoked, it’s probably the case that he’s being a total a-hole without realizing it. Add to the fact that modern social graces have swirled down the drain, and you’ll get these scenarios often.

I have a similar problem with a friend who feels the need to tell me to get “fixed” every once in a while, going so far as to post said advice on my FB wall two months ago. His intent is not malicious (even though another friend of no particular religiosity recommended a de-friending), but he has no filter. Many people don’t, or it’s not particularly effective. And it has nothing to do with religious belief or a lack thereof. We simply live in times that breed such behavior.

I’d have a heart to heart with him, and ask him how he’d feel if you’d sent a link to the recent footage of atheist China’s forced abortion policy, featuring the murder of an unborn baby of 9 months development.

Of course he wouldn’t, because he’d be appalled by you associating his beliefs with such horrors worked by other atheists. A reality check, in other words.

“There is no such thing as a “Nice Atheist”.

Those men who molested children are not Catholic nor are they priests.

Proof that it isn’t just atheists who make ridiculous and false statement in order to win an argument.

Dear Catholic,
You’re friend obviously knows that you have much more power than you think you do.
He’s right.
Catholics who, with respect, offer advice to clergy are doing their job as the People of God.
Clergy need our advice and re-direction as required. 
I belong to Catholic Listening Circles in Canada and both clergy and Laity appreciate our presence.  I tell your friend that he is a loyal buddy who recognizes the power to transform, within you.
Blessings.

Extremely helpful approach Mark and makes a good point without going high octane on the friend.  Could usefully apply to many scenarios.

God has given us one, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church that He promised would be free of error.  How is it that anyone dares to blame His Church for those who openly violate its doctrines and teachings.  Does that not seem to deny God’s promise?  How about placing blame on the perpetrators of abuse and scandal and those who protected them.  The Catholic Church per se should never have been forced to pay for those who violate its doctrines.

Atheists try to have it both ways.  They claim there is no God, no natural law, and that we all define our own personal experiental reality.  “Do whatever feels good.” / “Whatever you believe is true is true for you.”  Fun.  Then they ALSO claim the protections of God and the predictability of God’s Natural Law in an ordered universe against chosen violators of this internalized code of conduct. 

The atheist cannot have it both ways.  If he is offended at the Priestly violations, then he MUST acknowledge there is a God and a higher, unchangeable Law that has been violated.

If there IS a God, then the atheist is correct to be outraged and angry at the gravest of all violations of God’s natural law, that of God’s Priest using his Office to kill the soul of a child. 

If there is NOT a God, as the atheist asserts, then what possible difference does it make if a dude in a cassock molests an underage homo sapien?  Upon what possible basis can he be offended or angry?  This homo sapien in black garb and a collar is just following his joy as he sees it.  There is no such thing as sin, eternity or a soul and we are a mere collection of meat and bone with a mechanical consciousness produced by a chemical stew in our craniums.  Isn’t that the reality the atheist asserts is true?  No God, no Law, no evil or virtue except the law of the powerful over the weak (majority rule / natural selection / the strong survive the weak perish).

The PROPER RESPONSE of the atheist’s friend, is that “God is proven by the atheist’s offense and anger”.  If he was truly an atheist, he wouldn’t care less about an offense against children.

God help us all when atheists finally arrive at that terrible moment of clarity.  At that moment God is very far away indeed.

Mark…My response I thought was given for exactly the reason you object
to it…to give the relationship some “boundaries” would perhaps be a
good direction to go in order to save the friendship. The writer admits
to being made uncomfortable and tired of the endless assault. By saying
he should “shake the dust from his sandals” was only meant as I said to
put the topic out of bounds in the best interest of the friendship.
Even very good friends sometimes have to agree to disagree!

Also the writer expressed he was “at a loss” on how to respond. Thus my
suggestion to Father Groeschel’s book FROM SCANDAL TO HOPE was made with
the hope he could find some “answers” there. It is an excellent source
for anyone interested in the truth about this crisis to read!

I find it difficult to understand your objections, but hey, it’s your blog! I have already stated it was well written and an interesting and
timely topic many here admit to encountering.

IMO, here’s what I felt the reader was simply trying to say:

(( For 28 years, I didn’t mind having back-and-forth discussions/arguments with my close friend when I felt *comfortable* defending my faith and the Church… but now I just don’t know how to defend the Church when it comes to all these awful abuse scandals.  I really don’t know what to say.  This whole *sordid* mess makes me feel uncomfortable and I don’t want my friend to keep bringing it up.  Any suggestions? ))

Well, if that interpretation is somewhat accurate… then I would simply tell the reader this:

Stop feeling the need to defend the Church in this matter.  It was a few people… not the Church.  You can’t (and you shouldn’t ever) defend evil.

Take Mark’s advice and simply say:

[“It’s disgusting and evil.”]

Don’t be afraid or embarrassed to admit to your friend that some people in the Church commit evil deeds.  It happens.  It’s what sinners do.

And, BTW, if your friend has detected your uneasiness with this whole topic, it’s very possible that your friend may be *testing* you to see if this has negatively affected your faith in the Church.  If that’s the case, then you MUST show your friend (if you can) that it hasn’t weakened your faith in the Church at all.  If you do, it’s quite possible that your friend will just lose the incentive to keep constantly hounding you about it.  It won’t be worth the time.

As you have written, Mark, child sexual abuse is disgusting and evil wherever it takes place. But - 28% of such cases occur within the children’s own families. After that, in public schools, sport clubs, youth organizations, etc. Religious groups - not only Christian but also Jewish and Mormon - are close to the bottom of this statistics. Here’s an answer to your friend. On the other hand, I have lost a good friend of close to 40 years over the Church’s attitude toward homosexuals (which I fully support)...

Been there, done that. Time to find a new set of friends. It gets old rather quickly.

To Helen McCarthy,

I couldn’t find anything on the Internet about Catholic Listening Circles in Canada, could you please post more info (with links, if possible)?

Thank you & God Bless.

Although even one case of child abuse is revolting, the Catholic Church actually has the lowest frequency of offenders in this area, so true opponents of child abuse should be going after the most frequent offenders as well as the Catholic offenders.  But they don’t.  So what is their real motivation?  Obviously an attempt to cut down the Church, so they would not feel bound by the Church’s difficult teachings. Not easy to follow Christ, and many who don’t follow Christ have an irritated conscience about it.
More details at http://sytereitz.com/2010/04/if-you’re-looking-for-child-abuse-the-catholic-church-is-the-last-place-to-look/

When “Catholic” complains about his friend trying to convert him, one cannot help but wonder whether he is engaged in the same activity. He mentions they have argued in the past, and one has to consider the possibility that his friend’s hostility is simply a response to endless conversion attempts.

Why is the atheist friend perceived as being hostile?  Maybe he is hostile. Or maybe he is reacting to some other event. Or maybe the Catholic friend is misperceiving or mischararacterizing the sentiment. Who knows? We are hearing one side of the argument which makes discussion pretty useless, but it does give Mark another opportunity to speak on the priest scandal, so we have that.

Thank you for this.  You shed alot of light on this for me.

As a Catholic who faces this kind of question regularly, a book by Philip Jenkins called “Pedophiles and Priests” examines the facts around the recent crisis and specifically addresses the accusations that (on the one hand) celibacy is to blame, and (on the other) that the liberal media or values is to blame. It is a balanced view of the crisis which neither lets Church officials off the hook nor swallows the blame game entirely. I recommend it as a must read for anyone worried about this matter or talking the matter through with concerned friends.

Another good book on the subject is “Sacrilege. Sexual abuse in the Catholic Church” by Leon J. Podles.

Goodness, what a cesspool of moral blindness in these comments.

Priests raped kids.  Very bad.

The Catholic Church hid the crimes and gave the rapists more kids to abuse.  Much, much worse.

Joseph Ratzinger himself ordered every bishop worldwide to conceal every single potential case of priests sexually abusing children from the police—under penalty of excommunication.  Pure evil.

Everyone who contributes so much as a dime to the Catholic Church is contributing to the defense of rapists of children.

Have a nice day.

Catholic Listening Circles is in Peterborough Ontario, Canada

We don’t fight the Church, we don’t run away.  We represent a “third way”

of listening to Catholics as they tell their stories.  It’s a place for

the Sensus Fidelium to be heard and for Catholics to affirm their own

authority in the Church. It has become a great healing process and offers

hope for transformation of the Church.

Thanks for the info, Helen. Do you have branches in other provinces or any Internet sites? Do you circulate petitions? In short, how can I join? 8)

Joseph Ratzinger himself ordered every bishop worldwide to conceal every single potential case of priests sexually abusing children from the police—under penalty of excommunication. 

Liar.

True or false, people can judge for themselves. In his letter to the Bishops, Ratzinger and the CDF (formerly known as the Inquisition) don’t exactly ooze concern for the abuse victims or the secular legal process.

http://www.bishop-accountability.org/resources/resource-files/churchdocs/EpistulaEnglish.htm

I was raised Catholic and attended Catholic schools up until university, received all the sacraments, married in the church, etc. When the kids were young, my wife and I still brought them to church and enrolled them in Catholic school, despite that I could no longer ignore the fact that I could no longer believe in God. It’s painful to break away, emotionally, from the wonderful traditions and people that were part of my life for 30+ years. Too many sunk costs, as they say. But the child abuse was too much for me, and I’ve never gone back except for the occasional wedding, funeral, or sacramental celebration.

I find it interesting to discuss faith and religion with friends who are believers, I find that we can respectfully argue about the existence of God, but I no longer have the heart to ridicule the Catholic hierarchy with them any longer. It pains me that they have no other options than to accept the evil at the core of something that they cherish and live by. There is no excuse or “agree to disagree” position to fall back to, and I feel genuinely bad them, and it just seems mean. Perhaps it’s pity, if that’s the right word, but mostly because as you note, there is no rational response other than to acknowledge that it is simply awful. Comparisons to similar abuse in secular institutions are just plain hollow; we’re not talking about Penn State, we’re talking about the holiest institution on the planet for crying out loud.

I think the writer’s friend should back off the “hostility” if that is truly the case. Who knows what kind of hostile statements the writer made to his atheist friend to provoke him, we only hear one side of the story. Not all atheists are militant anti-religion crusaders, some of us still admire much of the Catholic church for all the wonderful things it has done, and we’re not all evil monsters to be shunned.

Isn’t it fair to say that the worst form of child abuse is abortion? Can we then not claim that the Catholic church is in fact the best friend that children have one this earth?

Ditto from me for Zeke’s comment, altho I have no kids, I share his sentiments exactly. The Catholic Church deserves admiration for many things. I would add that Ratzinger had the mission to pursue ecclesiastical justice and not civil justice, therefore it is unfair to hold the Church responsible for the failings of local law enforcement agencies that gave deference to priests and many policemen and prosecutors ignored complaints by citizens. Having said that, Church members (of any denomination) should be aware of the legal structure of their religious organization and use their own judgement when supporting these institutions with their money and time.  Be careful, the goals of the church are not always in line with secular society.

Hi Hieronymus,
Catholic Listening Circles grew out of the American Catholic Council’s Listening Assemblies.
They are a great comfort to us locally.  Each person is an equal contributor to the"Centre” represented by a candle and symbols that help tell our stories ex. a rosary, prayer card, map… whatever is a token of our story.
We’re going to build a website triggered by your request and the interest of others…Catholic and non-Catholic alike.
Hope to keep in touch.
Blessings,
Helen

Your friend should know that the percentage of clergy involved in sex abuse is much less than one. There are more than 425000 priests now working.  Does he know the percentage of people involved in adultery, infidelity and other sex offences ? Why there is steady increase in such offences ? The main reasons are the hyper media that advocates permissiveness, the porn culture, the attitude towards sex as a kind of permitted entertainment. What is the outcome?  The broken families, the trauma of divorce and the helpless forelon position of childrenincrease in the number of !@#$%, increase in sexual diseases, etc etc So if there is normal family life with love and concern for members, if sex is not taken as for entertainment but as a part of faith in family values, general deterioration will be less among all and among priests . Human weakness must be admitted, but it should not be encouraged

Thank you, Helen, I’ll watch out for your website. Hopefully this concept will spread throughout Canada. It is much needed.

Mark:
I have a topic for you to throw out into the websphere, for readers that can THINK for themselves to answer:

My nephew made his first Holy Communion on Sunday.  A friend of the family told us he did not know how Pres. Obama would fare, with so many Catholics being at Mass this season for Communions/Confirmation, after news that he (and Joe Biden) support same sex marriage.  Another friend said, “Well, I’m Catholic, and I support same sex marriage.”

So maybe we can have a discussion on another blog (please, just among fellow Catholics that can THINK for themselves, not those that cut and paste miles of Catholic Answers web links, or that parrot Rome) about how to reply to people like that.  I need help!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

My nephew is 9.  He was intently listening to this discussion.  I’m disgusted.  I’m pro-traditional marriage.  All I could say was “God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve” - which got a laugh, even though it’s an old statement, then I asked them all what was better for a child, two fathers, two mothers, or the balance of a mother AND a father?

The same sex marriage supporter just said, “A loving couple.”  When I pointed out Ellen Degenerous was “in love” with Anne Heche, who later dumped her, and now Ellen is with someone named “Portia”, the same sex marriage supporter said, “Well, that’s Hollywood.”

Really, I need help!!!  I need to know how to answer these people.  Clergy are NOT teaching this.  *Thinking Catholics* need to group together, and learn to interact with the public, even with fellow Catholics.  Please: rosary toters, novena copying, Vatican parrots, that can’t use their own words, please do not reply.  I intend to educate myself, and you frustrate me.  I am already disgusted.

By the way, the same sex marriage supporter is a CATECHIST in her church, for children.

@Disgusted RC,

Sorry to barge in but I would like to comment on your comment. I believe that the best reaction to such heretical statements is to challenge them head on. Ask your friend whether she is familiar with the teachings of the Church about homosexuality, and after she’s finished with her convoluted reply (probably something about “the bunch of old men in the Vatican”) ask her again whether she realizes that she cannot call herself a Catholic if she does not support the said teachings. If I were you, I would also have a word with the parish priest re her false beliefs (unless he is of the same pseudo-Catholic mold, which wouldn’t surprise me.) Oh, Lord, sometimes I miss the Holy Inquisition!

It’s not barging in, Hieronymus.  I appreciate your kindness.  This woman is very aware of church teachings.  The reason I’d not be able to do as you suggest is because last Fall, she told me she went to Mass with my brother and his wife, and for some reason the pastor at that church chose that day to give a list of his gripes in his homily, one of which was people that leave right after Communion, not staying until Mass is over.  She told me while my sister-in-law, a convert, felt badly leaving early (as they often do, when the children are not with them), she and my brother just laughed about it, calling the priest a “whiner”.  It was almost as if they were being dared to leave early, and they did.

Now while I do feel it inappropriate for any priest to have used that time to mention people ought not leave early, the man may have been on his last nerve, and I think we must always, and I mean always be POLITE.
Laughing at someone’s obvious pain is not charitable.  I don’t mean that anyone should cave, or give him undue consideration.  But just common courtesy that one would show to anyone.

In the end, this person is not “teachable”.  Thus, I really need help with dealing with not only her, but also with other non-practicing Catholics that also think redefining marriage is a good thing.  There are some whole Catholic parishes that do not object to same sex marriage, seeing it like the civil rights movement, and wanting to be non-discriminatory.

These people do not know Scripture.  I couldn’t even use Romans Chapter One with this woman, because the Bible would not be good enough for her. It’s just an old book that is ancient history, and since men wrote it, she’d think it was in error.  This is why we need to think of ways to persuade people on their own terms. 

Like - I know there is a lot of divorce in society.  But we still need to have the IDEAL in terms of marriage legislation.  Using the analogy of opening up marriage to everyone, because of the high divorce rate would be like not having stop signs because many people either run them, or don’t stop completely.  Do you see where I’m going?

We average Catholic lay people need to be able to formulate positions to reach people that are not thinking as much about this important topic, and they outright reject what the old boys club at the Vatican (and even here in the US) say.  If you have any other suggestions - arguments, etc. I’d be grateful for the input.  I remember the confused (but interested) look on my 9 year old nephews face.  Ugh. 

@Disgusted RC,

Well, if these people as you say are unteachable, there is not much you can do except praying for them. Let’s hope they eventually receive the grace of understanding. As for yourself, I would like to suggest that you join a traditional parish, with the Tridentine Mass, etc. This will give you at least some peace. God bless!