“Although the Church says ‘No’ to Gay Marriage, It Still Says ‘Yes’ to You.”

A powerful new video from Fr. Pontifex and Spirit Juice Studios. This is precisely what those struggling with same-sex attraction need to hear from the Church:

 
  • anglicanboyrichard

    PS--Let me add clearly this is not directed at Brandon, who is one of the least judging-hearted persons I have been privileged to know. But not all seem able, on either side of the issue, to separate strongly different convictions, honestly held, from condemning the persons instead. A visit to Romans 14: 1-10 might just help. The topic there is regarding meat, but the principle is not to judge the souls of those who differ from you. Note I said souls, not actions. Thanks for reading my thoughts here.

  • anglicanboyrichard

    I appreciate the many within the Roman Catholic Church who, such as Brandon, genuinely care deeply about others. That, however is not always the case, and it should be at least understandable why those of us who are same-sex attracted/LGBT feel mixed messages from the Church due to this. Add to this the hot-button election concerns regarding this, and it is pretty hard to sometimes mistake "tough love" for hatred. This summer a priest who I had deeply respected made the comment on his Facebook page that "seeing two men making out would make him want to spiritually vomit." He was writing this in reference to the Chic-Fil-A protests. I had been in contact with him for years, and politely, and I do mean politely, wrote on his page that we all must be careful not to be unkind during the protests, no matter what side we might be on. For that comment I was deleted from his page and blocked. I then wrote him privately to explain my comment and even apologize, and he never responded. Without giving names I will just say this particular priest has been very involved with the promotion of the Divine Mercy movement. I will just say I was heartbroken--and awakened to the deep, and yes I will use the word, homophobia that exists on some high levels within Catholicism. And I moved on to a parish which accepts LGBT persons, which happens to be Episcopal. I tried to be very careful not to make that move based solely on this priest's actions, but I will not deny that it influenced me.

    My point is just that the Catholic Church, as do all Christian communities, has a long ways to go in this area. The jingle from Youtube, while well-intentioned, is not likely do make a person such as me say "wow--I guess I AM welcomed after all." Real kindness and dialogue might.

  • The Truth

    You guys are unreal. If you don't want to have gay sex, then don't. Who are you to judge others? Surely you have better things to worry about than whether two men choose to have sex with each other? How about the paedophile priests who have abused children around the world? Perhaps you could worry more about child rapists within the church, and less about consenting adults outside the church.

    • http://www.brandonvogt.com/ Brandon Vogt

      I'm not sure what your gripe is with the above video, which I assume you didn't watch. The whole video was about welcoming, respecting, and loving those with same-sex attractions.

      • The Truth

        No, it was about respecting those with same-sex attractions as long as they don't actually have sex or want to live in loving partnership with a member of the same sex. You're judging others, accepting into the church those who are prepared to live in denial of their true feelings but rejecting those who want to celebrate their love. A love which does you absolutely no harm whatsoever. Personally, I'm not gay, but I don't feel morally superior to those who are and I certainly don't judge them.

        • http://www.brandonvogt.com/ Brandon Vogt

          First, the Church has no problem with "loving partnerships". But "loving partnerships" is radically different than "genital sex."

          Second, you seem to insinuate that if one has "true feelings" they should be able to act on those, regardless of moral or natural laws. What would you say to someone who has "true (sexual) feelings" for a young child? Or their sibling? Or their mother? Should they too "celebrate their love" (which I assume is a euphemism for "have sex")?

          Third, you say the Church "rejects those who want to celebrate their love", but the Church doesn't reject anyone. She welcomes all with equal love and mercy like any good mother, regardless of one's unique temptations or failings.

          Fourth, you claim this "love" does no harm whatsoever, but that implies three assumptions: homosexual activity does not violate the natural end of the human person, homosexual sexuality is not a sin which damages one's soul, and that two people can commit acts in isolation from society. All three assumptions are untrue and therefore so is your claim.

          Fifth, you repeatedly try to paint me and, assumedly, the overwhelming majority of human history which has rejected homosexual activity, as "judgmental" and promoters of a smug, moral superiority. But just the opposite is true. Nothing in this video or in my own comments is condemnatory. It's you who are in fact judging me and others by accusing us, unjustly, of judgmentalism.

          • The Truth

            Homosexuality "damages one's soul". And you claim not be judgemental.

          • http://www.brandonvogt.com/ Brandon Vogt

            Friend, I'm curious what you think the word "judgmental" means. I think we're operating out of two different definitions.

          • The Truth

            Interesting too that you conflate homosexuality with child rape and incest. That's the Catholic Church for you I guess.

          • http://www.brandonvogt.com/ Brandon Vogt

            Conflate? Do you understand the difference between conflating and analogizing?

            I guess I need to ask you to define "conflate" as well as "judgmental" since it seems you're confused about both.

          • The Truth

            Hmm, I think the definitions are pretty clear. And so it comes down to semantics...

  • Christian Schmemann

    Flankus7, I think that it would be assumed that an interdict on gay marriage implies an interdict on gay sex. I'm glad that Father Pontifex (who I have the honor of knowing for a few years now) didn't explicitly mention gay sex.

    The fact is that many gay are going to get weak and copulate, just as many unmarried young straights do. The gays know the morality of this well enough, and they suffer enough judgement as it is. So why make them feel even worse?

  • Flankus7

    the only problem i have is that he says in the end the church says no to gay marriage. i wish he also said the church says no to gay sex

    • Pfex

      The "no" to gay sex permeates throughout the poem. You have to keep in mind that poetry is different than a theological dissertation. It exists to make an impact which generates discussion and further exploration. Blessings. Pfex

  • ponerology

    Contraception and sodomy are moral equivalents. It's simply that they are no longer seen as such after 65 years of "I'm ok, you're ok" feel-good moral relativism.
    Contracepting (and permanently sterilized) heterosexuals as well as sodomites are both impeding life. Heterosexuals have the potentiality to procreate in a natural relationship and choose to deny the possibility. Sodomites have the potentiality to procreate with the opposite sex and choose to deny that possibility in an unnatural relationship.

  • Crazylikeknoxes

    Fr. Jon has some interesting points. The stigma associated with homosexuality is quite different from the stigma attached to contraception. I'm not sure if I'd consider contraception and sodomy moral equivalents. Also, contracepting couples do not feel the compunction to "come out" or otherwise advertise the fact - people can think what they will. Personally, I think hypocrisy is more of a scandal than contraception or homosexuality. Jesus said nothing express about either, but he spoke much about "you hypocites."

  • Dplunkt

    I disagree with Fr Jon's perception in many ways. I have not seen the Church act hatefully toward children of god who have same sex attraction. As a GK of the Knights of Columbus I've never been told that a person, with same sex attraction, living a chaste life is to be rejected from the order. I've been to men's retreats where men have stood up and admitted battling same sex attraction and where supported, considered brave, and were not restricted from serving where there was a need.

    Having said that, those who would accuse me of "hate speech" because I oppose gay marriage are slanderous. Those who would accuse me of "hate speech" because I point out the 80% of the abuse cases where boys 13 to 17 years old and suggest it is as much a homosexual problem as a pediphile problem are wrong as well. It is my experience that any criticism what so ever of the gay lifestyle is treated as if I used the "N" word to an African American. Our church is not mistreating gays.

    Dan

  • Fr. Jon

    Hi, Brandon. Thanks for that good question, and I should probably apologize and clarify. I don't have an issue with the video itself; nothing in it rankles me. I was trying to reflect on the long journey the Church has in order to truly "say yes" as the video asks us to do. I don't think we're "there" yet, by any means. You're probably right to hear some "rankling" in my voice as to that situation...perhaps I need to work on that!

    As to the video itself, I appreciate its message, and I agree with it, and as I indicated, I take it to be a good start. I don't see any drastic revision of the historic sexual teachings of the Church in our future, but I do see the need for a stronger emphasis on "saying yes" to individuals who are loved deeply by God. The simplest things are the hardest sometimes, aren't they? God's peace to you, and thanks again.

    • http://www.brandonvogt.com/ Brandon Vogt

      Fr. Jon, thanks for the follow-up. I just finished a book by a brilliant theologian in the Archdiocese of Chicago named Fr. Lou Cameli. The book is called "Catholic Teaching on Homosexuality: New Paths to Understanding" and just came out through Ave Maria press. I highly recommend it to you; it leads further down the "long journey" you mention.

      Amazon Link - http://bvogt.us/S9bAB2

      In the coming week or two I'll be posting a review of the book and a video interview I did with Fr. Cameli while in Chicago. Stay tuned!

    • JM

      This seems either emotionally blinkered or manipulative. "The long journey" the Church is taking ... to do what? Admit gay sex is fine? When it has already said it is a mortal sin? WHy would you even mention a "drastic revision of the historic sexual teachings of the Church in our future"? The reaosn positions are denied "gay" men may be that the Church does not regard "gay" as a proper self-identification for people with an orientation. How many straight, celibate men go around thinking of themselves as "heterosexual"? If celibacy is the option, homo/hetero becomes a non distinctive. Regardless of atractions, sex is not happening, right? An oversimplification? Perhaps, but not based on the Austria situation you mention, since that gay man found the Churh's teaching "unrealistic." What I think is unrealistic is acting like the Church's teaching is limiting or a straightjacket. It's not: it is life-saving. Your problem may not be so much with the Church as with God, who has allowed you to suffer your affliction. Follow Job's advice and take it up with Him. Don't blame the messenger.

  • Fr. Jon

    An interesting video from a production standpoint, and the message is indeed helpful, if only a good start. There are still problems, however. A long-married Catholic couple with two children is not under a cloud of suspicion for using birth control, and either can serve the church in many ways; but a man who acknowledges he's gay can't effectively serve on a parish council, or as an usher, or teach CCD, or direct the choir, or be in the Knights of Columbus...much less serve as a permanent deacon or priest. A gay man recently was "caught" serving a parish council in Austria, and it became an international scandal.

    And yet many of these men have been called to these positions, and served very well indeed in them.

    And what if a man is living with another man? Does that prove that the sin mentioned in Leviticus is being committed? No more than a childless couple is "proven" to use contraception, yet there's a difference in perception and in practical outcome.

    The Catechism points out that sexual orientation is inborn, yet denies the comforts of the cenobium to those who have the wrong one. An alcoholic can become a monk, but not a homosexual? Something is still ugly, wrong, and abusive here. Perhaps it's panic induced by the sex-abuse scandal. I'm not sure. I am sure that it is a fault of the human heart, not of the heart's Creator.

    More souls may be lost on the playground than are saved before the altar. How shall we explain this to our God?

    • http://www.brandonvogt.com/ Brandon Vogt

      Fr. Jon, thanks for the comment! I've read it twice now and I'm still confused what problem you have with the message in the video. Which particular line rankles you?

    • anglicanboyrichard

      I added some comments at the bottom of the thread, which for whatever reason do not seem to have been acknowledged--and I think that they are important and salient to this narrative. Father Jon I think you are correct in your assessment here. And if that scandalizes some I am nevertheless no longer willijng to be apologetic about it.

  • Craig

    Truth. Christus.

  • Sct8481

    This is a great video. As someone struggling with SSA, I know it's a message that needs to be heard more. The silence is breaking, there is hope. Thanks for posting this. :)

  • Mjr Oram

    Awesome vid - super powerful.

  • "There is only one tragedy in the end, not to have been a saint." - Léon Bloy