A Catholic Church Says No

[CalicoPenn]

Yeah, maybe he'll be the person who files a lawsuit - one is going to be filed eventually and none of us are going to know just how the religious exemptions portion of the policy is going to hold up until it is challenged in court.  It's a bit ironic though that folks who scoff at the BSA's risk managers for all those silly rules because of risk folks fear of lawsuits seem to be so fearful that someone will file suit over this. 

[Stosh]

This is why this issue will never end.  This will be tied up for years leaving CO"s clueless as to what to do and will eventually find the wait a hassle they no longer wish to deal with.

 

The point of the game being, BSA is going to be punished out of existence because of their stand and now that they have defaulted admission to it, they no longer have a leg to stand on.

[fred johnson]

It would also be to the Church's advantage if they were consistent in their rulings (i.e. none of the other Leaders should be "living in sin" outside of (1st) Marriage, etc.).  I do not know if they are are aren't, but it would strengthen their case if any lawsuit did result.

 

It is not about the sin.  We all sin.  None of us are perfect.  ...  You can be divorced an Catholic.  You can be living together outside marriage.  You can be a drug addict or alcoholic.  ... It is not about sinning.  We all sin.  None of us are perfect.  

 

It is about saying it is not a sin and the church teachings are wrong.  

Edited August 6, 2015 by fred johnson

[fred johnson]

I applaud the actions in this case.  It is how it is supposed to work.

 

IMHO, the church should have said he's not welcome because he has not supported the church for years and he's been a thorn in our side.  As such, we don't trust him to reflect the values of our church.  Beyond that, we didn't talk about any other issues. 

[Stosh]

God seeks the repentant sinner, the one who turns from their sinful ways.

 

He is not looking for those who embrace sin and teach others such sin is acceptable to God.

 

There are those who have homosexual tendencies who never act on them.  We are all tempted in many different and diverse ways.  But with each person's struggle of faith, those who walk in the ways of the Lord are blessed and those that don't aren't.  I have known some very caring excellent pastors (non-Catholic) who maintained a celibate lifestyle who may have been struggling with this.  It made no difference to me.  But I have also met others who have given into their temptations and now want me to validate their choice.  Sorry, but my faith doesn't allow me to do that.  So, now the question is, does anyone respect my choice or unlike them, I don't get one? 

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

So, you aren't "allowed" to validate their choice, but you're whining that they might not validate your choice?  I'll get my tiniest violin.

[gumbymaster]

It is not about the sin.  We all sin.  None of us are perfect.  ...  You can be divorced an Catholic.  You can be living together outside marriage.  You can be a drug addict or alcoholic.  ... It is not about sinning.  We all sin.  None of us are perfect.  

 

It is about saying it is not a sin and the church teachings are wrong.  

My intent really wasn't to make a case against any of the Catholic, or anyone else's teachings, if you took it as such, my apology.

It was simply to say that the Church's position in court would be strengthened, if the rules of disqualification are consistently applied, and not just to GLBT individuals.

 

As for your later comment, about disqualification because he's not a member of the Church, again, fine if consistent; but disqualification because he was a "thorn in their side" would probably be viewed by the Court as reitaliation, which would hurt the Church's position, and open the case to actual damages.

[fred johnson]

My intent really wasn't to make a case against any of the Catholic, or anyone else's teachings, if you took it as such, my apology.

It was simply to say that the Church's position in court would be strengthened, if the rules of disqualification are consistently applied, and not just to GLBT individuals.

 

The consistency is on the interpretation and teaching of what is sin.  

 

 

As for your later comment, about disqualification because he's not a member of the Church, again, fine if consistent; but disqualification because he was a "thorn in their side" would probably be viewed by the Court as reitaliation, which would hurt the Church's position, and open the case to actual damages.

 

For a normal business, I'd agree.  But for a religious organization, I'm not so sure the rule applies.

 

But your point stands.  It is easier to defend on the close held faith element.  And the approach I took is more spiteful.  I'd have a hard time hiring someone who viewed their job in the past was to defeat my position.   Because it is a matter of trust.  

[moosetracker]

As for the Catholic church they have the right to refuse to accept him as a leader in their troop, just as they have the right to not accept anyone for any reason.. I half believe the comment "When WLKY asked the Archdiocese of Louisville, if homosexuals will be allowed as scout leaders, a spokesperson said "it depends."..   I could see more conservative Catholic Churches simply not accepting any homosexuals as an adult leader..  It is really unclear what the Catholic position will be, but I expect it will be fine with some guidelines on how their Catholic Churches can conduct themselves..  It may be not accepting any in volunteer positions, it might be allowing homosexuals into committee positions but not direct contact, I would be surprised if they allowed churches the freedom of their own decision.   All would be fine decisions for them, that is the local option..

 

This guy looks like he would not be welcomed if the argument had been on something else other then homosexuality, because this guy now has the opportunity to go to another unit (if his personality was one another unit would welcome, "cheerful service" rather then "chip on the shoulder"..) Yet he would prefer to fight the same old battle..

 

Some have predicted that public opinion will side with him and see the Catholic church as wrong.. My prediction is that you will find only a few beating that drum, while the majority of people will not see this as a major problem worth their time to get involved with..  The article itself only has 4 comments, not hundreds, which already shows a waning interest in who thinks you need to try to pressure churches to accept what is against their religious beliefs..

 

Now as for people comparing this to divorce and trying to say that divorced people are welcome because they are repentant, or those who live out of wedlock are welcome because they are repentant, but gays should not be because they are not repentant...  PHOOOEYYY!!!   Couple divorcing is the buzz for the week, when they introduce you to their new love interest, it may or may not create a buzz for a week, when they remarry probably no buzz at all..  Same with people who live together, maybe some buzz if they break up, and either move to new love interest or get back together.. But no more then a week..  Thing is, todays society accepts this, and even with some gossip  very few,  very few units would ask their scout leaders to step down because of it.. The divorced people / unmarried couple  just go about living their life and few would see their lives sinful..  Many would probably be insulted if you started preaching to them about their sinful ways.

[walk in the woods]

Now as for people comparing this to divorce and trying to say that divorced people are welcome because they are repentant, or those who live out of wedlock are welcome because they are repentant, but gays should not be because they are not repentant...  PHOOOEYYY!!!   Couple divorcing is the buzz for the week, when they introduce you to their new love interest, it may or may not create a buzz for a week, when they remarry probably no buzz at all..  Same with people who live together, maybe some buzz if they break up, and either move to new love interest or get back together.. But no more then a week..  Thing is, todays society accepts this, and even with some gossip  very few,  very few units would ask their scout leaders to step down because of it.. The divorced people / unmarried couple  just go about living their life and few would see their lives sinful..  Many would probably be insulted if you started preaching to them about their sinful ways.

 I'm not Catholic, I just know what I hear and read, so take this for what it's worth.  Pope Francis spoke on this very issue yesterday.  He basically said divorced and remarried people, absent an annulment are absolutely welcome in the church but that their behavior still prevents them from the sacraments. Here's a paragraph on it from a WaPo story:

 

"The pope, speaking at his weekly general audience at the Vatican, underscored Catholic teaching on divorced Catholics who remarry without an annulment, saying, “the church knows well that such a situation contradicts the Christian sacrament.†But he emphasized, “these people are not at all excommunicated.â€

 

I don't know if it would affect leadership of a scout unit but it seems like the Catholic church is engaged on the issue with consistency to biblical teaching rather than today's society.

[Scouter Matt]

The Church holds that any ministry role in the Church is a sort of vocation. Vocations (callings) must be heard not only by the individual but also by the Church. It ideally should be a process of mutual discernment, carried out both through practical measures and through prayer.

 

Chastity remains a virtue, one which every single person is called to live in accordance with their particular circumstances in life.

 

Generally speaking the Church is going to take the position that it is actions, choices, behavior, and public witness that will be the deciding factors in admitting members to Scout units or any other ministry (not just regarding the homosexual issue, bu others as well). Youth ministry is a particularly sensitive area, because it is such a formative period in the lives of those involved. The Church does not have a strong objection to those with same-sex attraction being in ministry positions (those it does raise some questions and concerns). The Church does, however, strongly object to someone acting on those attractions (grave sin, even if it remains private), and more still making such actions public (which is a cause for grave public scandal for the faithful, itself another sin), and even far more so teaching that such actions are normal or right (which is heresy, another grave sin).

 

Thus the chaste single man with same-sex attractions that he only discloses to his closest friends and family and spiritual director, might well be welcomed into a ministry position (even if those selecting know of his condition), because he agrees with and at least attempts to live the teachings of the Church. The more difficult case would be someone who was widely known as being of the "out and proud" type who had an experience of conversion and repentance.

 

In my area we actually had a cub scout pack fold over a scandalous relationship within the pack (it was a heterosexual relationship). The cubmaster and committee chair began an adulterous extramarital affair. When it become publicly known it destroyed the pack and soured the parish's view of scouting for many years.

 

Ultimately, the Catholic Church never had a moral problem with youth or adults who experience same-sex attraction, per se. The Catholic Church has always objected to homosexual actions, or any sort of endorsement of homosexual actions, or with unhealthy over identification with particular sexual attractions (even over identification with "heterosexuality" is problematic). The Church has also been concerned that people should avoid putting themselves unnecessarily into positions that would be a near occasion for sin for themselves.

 

The only terrible inconsistency in this situation is the fact that some parishes have chosen to dissent from the clear teaching of the Church and thus not apply the moral precepts of the church when selecting people for leadership and ministry positions. (Worse still that bishops have known and been afraid to correct these situations, often for fear of losing money or gaining bad press, much like BSA.) That is the deeper hypocrisy, for a parish or institution to call itself Catholic while quietly carrying out a protest of the teachings of the Church (which is part of the background to the origins of this present story).

Edited August 6, 2015 by Scouter Matt

[moosetracker]

Still say no comparison between Divorced, unwed cohabitation and homosexuals..    Divorced/unwed can just live their lives and so if Catholic they may not get communion, if not Catholic they don't even get that to tell them someone thinks it's a sin..   Most divorced/unwed even if religious will not consider their lifestyle sinful..   So, no, the reason they were accepted as scout leaders is not because they are sorry for their sins and have repented..    Currently homosexuals can not "just live their lives", and just be denied communion.

 

I am not saying the Catholic church can not have these double standards, or any religion can not have them..  But, just thankfully with local option we all do not have to follow someone else's belief.. Also since I do not have to follow some others religious groups belief system, I have no problem with them exercising it in the local option..

 

All I am saying is again..  "No" the difference between homosexuals and divorced/unwed cohabitators is that the latter groups understand and are so repentant of the some sin that someone else religious group (perhaps their own) has labeled them with.

[RememberSchiff]

Well considered response to Bishop Kagan from a Catholic Scouter

http://ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/throwing-out-boy-scouts-nd-bishop-hurts-not-protects-youth

[Peregrinator]

This part doesn't seem particularly well-considered:

 

What was the reason for punishing all the Boy Scouts and Cub Scouts in his diocese? He was angry at the national Boy Scouts of America for altering their policy regarding the exclusion of leaders with a same-gender attraction.

And the rest of the response seems to be a variation on the old evil-bishop-not-following-the-Pope meme which liberals have discovered in the past two years.

[RememberSchiff]

This part doesn't seem particularly well-considered:

 

 

And the rest of the response seems to be a variation on the old evil-bishop-not-following-the-Pope meme which liberals have discovered in the past two years.

 

Pope Francis has removed bishops. We will see if Bishop Kagan is reassigned in the coming year.