Gay and Transgender Catholics Urge Pope Francis to Take a Stand

In today’s New York Times:

Lui Akira Francesco Matsuo said he was standing in line for communion one Sunday at his Roman Catholic church in Detroit when a fellow parishioner pulled him aside: Didn’t he know that the archbishop had just urged supporters of same-sex marriage not to take communion?

Mr. Matsuo, who is transgender, left and never returned to his parish. Now, two years later, he is among a large group of gay and transgender Catholics who are seeking a meeting with the pope during his first visit to the United States, in September, pushing him to take a stand on the issues of sexuality and gender that are increasingly dividing Catholics and causing rancor in the church.

“I want him to extend his hand openly, especially to the transgender community,” said Mr. Matsuo, who is 28 and said he has identified as male ever since he was a toddler. “I am a practicing Catholic. I just don’t have a parish I can call home.”

The pressure from gay Catholics and their families poses a unique challenge for Pope Francis as he tries to connect with an American church in flux. The hallmark of his papacy has been his pastoral approach to those living in the margins — especially the poor, immigrants and prisoners. But it is unclear whether he includes sexual minorities in his lineup of people in need of justice, and Catholic groups of all kinds are demanding answers, and discussion.

nytimes.com/2015/07/29/us/gay-and-transgender-catholics-urge-pope-francis-to-take-a-stand.html?_r=0

gay and transgender Catholics

:banghead::banghead::banghead:

he has taken a stand. its just not the stand they want him to take

Allow me to join you:

:banghead::banghead::banghead:

:thumbsup:

I really don’t understand how these people think the Church is going to suddenly change its policies on these issues. The fact that society has decided to abandon its human dignity and debase themselves doesn’t change the fact that doing to is wrong.

20
Ever since the creation of the world, his invisible attributes of eternal power and divinity have been able to be understood and perceived in what he has made. As a result, they have no excuse;
21
for although they knew God they did not accord him glory as God or give him thanks. Instead, they became vain in their reasoning, and their senseless minds were darkened.s
22
While claiming to be wise,t they became fools
23
and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for the likeness of an image of mortal man or of birds or of four-legged animals or of snakes.
24
Therefore, God handed them over to impurity through the lusts of their hearts* for the mutual degradation of their bodies.
25
They exchanged the truth of God for a lie and revered and worshiped the creature rather than the creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
26
Therefore, God handed them over to degrading passions. Their females exchanged natural relations for unnatural,
27
and the males likewise gave up natural relations with females and burned with lust for one another. Males did shameful things with males and thus received in their own persons the due penalty for their perversity.
28
And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God handed them over to their undiscerning mind to do what is improper.
29
They are filled with every form of wickedness, evil, greed, and malice; full of envy, murder, rivalry, treachery, and spite. They are gossips
30
and scandalmongers and they hate God. They are insolent, haughty, boastful, ingenious in their wickedness, and rebellious toward their parents.
31
They are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless.
32
Although they know the just decree of God that all who practice such things deserve death, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.

Sodomy is one of the sins that cry out to heaven for justice. I believe the cup of God’s wrath is not only full but running over.

The homosexual agenda is not so much about society accepting perverted sexual behavior as “love”, but to actually destroy religion and morality in favor of “freethinkng”.

New York Times religion writer Laurie Goodstein is notorious for anti-Catholic writing, has been criticized by Cardinal Dolan.

In all fairness Thorolfr, the person interviewed in the article is able to obey the Church’s teaching regarding gay marriage. A chaste homosexual is not unable to go up for communion unless they’re in a state of mortal sin. Likewise, a chaste transgender person is not barred from communion either.

The Pope, without a doubt, will take a stand on the issue. If a divorced and remarried person wishes to go up to communion, they must receive an annulment. If a divorced but not remarried person wishes to go up to communion, they may, supposing they are in a state of grace and fasted an hour before communion. A homosexual person who is not sexually active is able to go up to communion as well, under the same conditions.

A heterosexual cis white male is unable to go up to communion if they ate something an hour before communion takes place. A heterosexual cis white male is unable to go up to communion if they have committed a mortal sin, for example, missing mass on purpose in order to catch a football game, if they have not been to confession between then and now. They are still expected to attend mass. A sexually active bisexual person is still expected to attend mass if they’re a baptized Catholic, they just aren’t able to go up to communion until they go to confession.

Ah the NYT, that pinnacle of Catholic Theology! I’m sure the Holy Father will get right on their concern.

If they are baptized Catholics, then they are correctly termed Catholics.

They may be in a state of sin, but so are remarried or contracepting Catholics. They are still Catholics.

As in past cases, I suspect the Pope will reach out in compassion to the people involved without acceding to any request to “change the rules” (as if he could).

Usagi

He has: Laudato Si 155 - “[V]aluing one’s own body in its femininity or masculinity is necessary if I am going to be able to recognize myself in an encounter with someone who is different. In this way we can joyfully accept the specific gifts of another man or woman, the work of God the Creator, and find mutual enrichment. It is not a healthy attitude which would seek to cancel out sexual difference because it no longer knows how to confront it.” source

This is all true, but that’s not the ‘stand’ that was implied by the author, which is why we are reacting so negatively to the article.

I wasn’t necessarily talking about the aim of the article, merely reasserting the position of the Church on communion. I can’t speak for the attitude of individual Catholics outside of myself, but doctrinally, the Church does not discriminate based on homosexuality as was implied by the article. One quote I noticed in particular mentioned the Holy Father supposedly changing the language used to address homosexuality from “an objective disorder” to the infamous “who am I to judge?” remark. Which is intentionally misleading.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church has never considered someone with SSA to have “an objective disorder.” It has only ever said that homosexual acts are objectively disordered. To claim that Pope Francis even changed anything in that regard is unfounded and disingenuous.

That said, parishioners who find themselves face to face with someone who is homosexual, bisexual, transgender etc. are called to treat them with the same compassion and respect we are expected to have towards anyone else, and to encourage them to continue in their journey towards unity with God in Heaven. If their failure to do this results in someone leaving the Church, I do believe they will be held accountable.

Mr. Matsuo never says in the article that he’s not chaste. Nor does Mr. Matsuo say whether he supports same-sex marriage. So I don’t know why his fellow parishioner thought that it was their place to pull him aside and tell him what the archbishop said about supporters of same-sex marriage not taking communion. Maybe this fellow parishioner was just being a busy body and made assumptions about Mr. Matsuo without knowing anything about him. :shrug:

While they are at it, why not also urge the pope to take a stand in favor of contraception, cohabitation, fornication, divorce, IVF, and surrogacy? There’s no reason for LGBT community to take up all his attention.

Or maybe Mr. Matsuo has a great story that makes it not to be the victim and what he said never happened . At any is not the place of any parishioner to tell anybody that they can or cannot receive communion which is why to me this story stretches credibility

Spot on. My only family members tried to get us to drink the Kool Aid. Guess what resulted? My son is discerning the priesthood!

My blood is boiling because I swear they are the biggest narcacists around. When will this madness end?

Several points in response. For starters, if Mr. Matsuo is chaste, and is not in a state of mortal sin, he *is *allowed to go to communion.

Secondly, if this parishioner has the audacity to pull others aside to tell them that they are not to go up to communion, they ought to be challenged as they have no authority to do this whatsoever. They are not the priest and have no grounds upon which to challenge Mr. Matsuo in this case.

However, I do find this story to be rather hard to believe. I cannot speak for Mr. Matsuo, but I personally do not base my faith life on the actions and dispositions of my fellow parishioners. I could not care less whether parish busybodies approve of my actions or my life choices, and their approval has no value to me. I live my faith as a Catholic for love of God and for the sake of my soul. If I have struggles, they are mine to work out with the priest in the confessional, not parishioners to work out for me in the pew. If Mr. Matsuo does not support same-sex marriage, as you posit, there is no rational reason for the words of this parishioner to stop his going up for communion. How welcome you feel in reference to your parish should not affect whether you live your Catholic faith.

I imagine if Pope Francis were to speak to Mr. Matsuo, he would encourage him to return to his church and receive the Eucharist after making a sacramental confession, and would then encourage Mr. Matsuo’s parishioners to treat each other with compassion as brothers and sisters in Christ and not to presume to have knowledge of the state of grace of their peers’ souls.

I would agree a parishioner has no business advising anyone about their taking communion. This is wrong.

However, the article says Mr. Matsuo is among a group of gay and transgender Catholics who wish to meet with Pope Francis to push him “to take a stand on the issues of sexuality and gender that are increasingly dividing Catholics and causing rancor in the Church.”

Really? And who might be creating this division and rancor? What “stand” is it that this group wants Pope Francis to take on the issues of “sexuality and gender” that are not already Catholic belief and teaching well known to every Catholic?

I identify as a man living in a deranged twilight zone.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.