Jump to content

Menu

Painful Parent- Adult Child Religious Conflict more widespread today?


TranquilMind
 Share

Recommended Posts

I don't think I did those quotes correctly. Sorry about that.

 

Anyway, in reference to the first, who can answer that? It's an impossibility. Your husband isn't magically and without his consent turning into the opposite gender. If he did ever do such a thing, it is because he pursued it, and then you have an entirely different scenario.

 

The second, well...ok. If one doesn't start from the same authority, it is really easy to argue that there is nothing wrong with the proscribed behavior.

It would be like me launching an argument that women need not wear a hijab to members of that group that believe that God requires that they do. Easy for me to say, but they aren't at liberty to simply reject it.

 

As to the final point, I think you are correct. There is not only the concern about what other surprises are going to arise but there is a whole lot of unexpected (by mom) rage leveled at mom and dad for not immediately receiving this with joy, as if it is their fault they don't get it and as if they did something wrong by adhering to their lifelong faith that far predates the child. They didn't change; the child did. The anger seems out of proportion and inexplicable.

The first three are just me talking about how I came up with the fourth point. I could have left them out, but when I write posts, I generally try to give people some idea of how I arrived at my conclusion (in this case the 4th bit you quoted). Otherwise, people can't tell me where in my thinking they think I am going wrong and I don,t learn and grow. I'm sorry the post was confusing. Of course wand waving is different. It was just a hypothetical situation to help me sort through how I feel about gender. : )

 

Nan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tranquilmind, you're being unfair. You said that same-sex relationships are bad and lead to pain, etc. She provided a counter example. She did NOT say "and therefore, these relationships are superior" or anything of the sort. That's you putting words in her mouth.

 

The onus is on you to show that your original assertion is correct (n), not for her to prove a point that she wasn't trying to prove in the first place.

 

 

I don't know. There's some evidence that in the early church, there may have been some acceptance for same-sex relationships. But that's highly controversial.

 

 

Many people assert that beating children is, in fact, "God's plan" - and they can cite the verses to prove it. Now, I find those verses pretty darn dubious (if you beat a child, they may well die depending on how hard you do it, thank you very much) but I'm not the one claiming the Bible is easy to read literally and get it all right.

 

I merely objected to this statement as a clear misunderstanding.  This is on its face NOT following God's Plan:  "My neighbor's children's birth parents followed what you believe to be God's plan for a family and it resulted in unimagineable pain and suffering for their children."

 

That erroneous statement, combined with praise for the neighbors, clearly suggested "God's Plan" (as misunderstood) was inferior. 

 

No one says that "beating a child" the way we understand it today is God's plan.  In fact, it is a criminal offense.   There is a clear distinction between spanking a child with a couple of swats and "beating" one, that those who disapprove of spanking like to equate as one.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

False dichotomy to suggest that enthusiastic approval is required or the kid will die.

That is so far removed from what was written that it passes incredulity, moves through incivility, and lands somewhere in the vicinity of personal insult

  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as acting or faking. I admit I will expect it of my mom and siblings if dd ever feels comfortable coming out to them. They don't have to actually agree or accept her lifestyle but they can't be rude to her. They can't tell her she's choosing to live a sinful life and start treating her differently. They don't have to be positive about it but they can't be negative either. Dh, both dds, and I would start seriously limiting our time with them if that happened.

 

I'm interested in this.  It sounds like your daughter might be close to adulthood, so are you seriously saying that your mom is forbidden to even state to her granddaughter that it upsets her that your daughter chooses to not live in accordance with scriptural views (if that is her issue, just making the argument here)?   She can't even SAY so.  How is she supposed to respond, if that indeed is her view (assuming, from what you said, but don't know for sure)?

 

What is she allowed to do?  Smile and nod.  Say she is surprised?  Act shocked?  State that she thought your daughter believed (however you have raised her)?    I'm interested in what is the "acceptable" response, assuming her views are vastly different from your daughter's. 

 

I find this very interesting that you seem to think that you can control your mother's thoughts and words, especially when your daughter reaches adulthood. 

 

(Caveat - Not talking in any way about if your mom yelled or punched her or something, of course, which would be way out of line and a criminal action in the latter case, so let's take that off the table and assume verbal response.)

 

Edited by TranquilMind
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is so far removed from what was written that it passes incredulity, moves through incivility, and lands somewhere in the vicinity of personal insult

 

Are you kidding?  It states at the bottom that she wants a LIVE child, suggesting that failure to do what she states above will lead to a dead one.  No personal insult, merely analysis of words.    I'm only interested in the implications of what she said.  (I don't know anything about that poster, so your charge of personal insult is unsupportable)

 

?? 

 

Here is her statement in its entirety (just picked it up where I first saw it in the large thread, but TrixieB wrote it, not Lulu - sorry about that). 

 

No objection to what she says one should do, as I believe most of these things are things most parents would do though some are going to be more difficult for some parents (I bolded those), but the clear implication is that failure to this, some of which goes beyond just acquiescence well toward approval(  like filing paperwork to change a minor child's name!) leads to a dead child.  

 

So, clearly we are talking about blaming the parents if they have trouble doing every one of these things.  I don't like blame-the-parent scenarios.  I assume all parents really love their kids more than life itself (except for a few whack jobs, murderers, abusers, etc)  but do not think we can demand exactly the same reactions from all of them, disregarding their backgrounds. 

 

You tell them you love them.

 

You listen when they tell you about their feelings, their understanding of themselves, what they want to do.

 

You call them by their new name and preferred gender pronouns.

 

You find a local support group for yourself and your child (should you be so fortunate to have such a thing in your community).

 

You find the local doctor who is most experienced in working with the trans* community. 

 

You, your child, and your child's doctor discuss and decide upon a path of treatment appropriate for your child's age/stage of development.

 

You go to court for the name change, fill out the documents for gender marker change, etc.

 

You tell extended family, friends, school... all of which may be supportive or not.  And then you deal with the unsupportive ones.

 

The child will continue to wear the clothing they want, because they've been doing this for a long time anyway.

 

The child already knows their anatomy does not match their gender identity.  There is no reason to point this out to the child; to do so is hurtful.

 

And most of all, you love your child, and you make sure they know you love them, because statistics say trans* people have a 41% suicide attempt rate and HAVING A LIVE CHILD IS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING TO ME.

 

 

 

Edited by TranquilMind
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as acting or faking. I admit I will expect it of my mom and siblings if dd ever feels comfortable coming out to them. They don't have to actually agree or accept her lifestyle but they can't be rude to her. They can't tell her she's choosing to live a sinful life and start treating her differently. They don't have to be positive about it but they can't be negative either. Dh, both dds, and I would start seriously limiting our time with them if that happened.

 

I think that is a fair expectation.  I would have no qualms about cutting family or anyone else out of my life if they treated me like crap because they didn't agree with me on something (that does not affect them in any way).

 

I might give family more time to "come around" than just anyone, but nope if they can't at least remain civil, then bye.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I mentioned before, I grew up Jehovah's Witness, same religion that Scarlett is. I know someone who was "disfellowshipped" (shunned) for being gay even though he was a virgin and had never acted on his feelings, and get this:

 

 

I know VICTIMS of rape and sexual abuse who were disfellowshipped to keep them quiet and protect the perpetrators. JW's have faced multiple law suits in multiple countries around the word for allowing pedophiles to keep abusing kids while telling the victims it was their Christian duty to forgive and to NOT go to the police. They have zero tolerance for homosexuality, but raping and molesting little kids is treated entirely differently. They see pedophiles as good guys who made a mistake, but gays as fundamentally and irrevocably flawed. It's really sick.

This is not true. Not one time ever have I ever heard anything like this except from on line haters. Attraction to the same sex is not a disfellowshipping offense. So no matter what you friend told you that is not true. And no one is protecting pedophiles or other sexual abuse. I personally know of three situations....in all cases the authorities were contacted, they were dealt with in the legal system and within the congregation. The consequences will affect them for the rest of their life. In one case an actual pedophile was allowed to attend our meetings but every family was notified and various brothers were assigned to keep their eyes on him at all times.

 

No one has ever ever even hinted to me that pedophiles are good guys who made a mistake. That kind of truth twisting is just crazy.

 

Yes what goes on in congregation discipline is private and confidential UNLESS it breaks the law.....thankfully. No one would want their mistakes broadcast. But believe me I have had conversations with df'd people for one reason or another and yet no one has ever said to me,'hey I was df'd for being a victim or having same sex attraction.'

 

I know there are law suits. I can't speak to every one of them or especially what took place 30 or 40 years ago when society in general had less understanding of how to cope with all sorts of these issues. But there is no wide spread abuse of the process going on.

 

And no one is df'd for questioning anything. Really without revealing TMI I can tell you for a fact there is definite effort to error on the side of mercy than harshness.

 

I have no intention of trying to convince you of anything, but you might just reconsider if you are listening to people who are not being totally honest with themselves and you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that is a fair expectation.  I would have no qualms about cutting family or anyone else out of my life if they treated me like crap because they didn't agree with me on something (that does not affect them in any way).

 

I might give family more time to "come around" than just anyone, but nope if they can't at least remain civil, then bye.

 

What does "treating me like crap" mean?  I think cutting someone out of your family is deadly serious, so I'm wondering what rises to justifiable support for that decision, which I also asked another poster who said something similar.

 

What is the family permitted and not permitted to do and say if you are doing something that violates your mutual faith (of course with that caveat in this situation). 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What does "treating me like crap" mean?  I think cutting someone out of your family is deadly serious, so I'm wondering what rises to justifiable support for that decision, which I also asked another poster who said something similar.

 

What is the family permitted and not permitted to do and say if you are doing something that violates your mutual faith (of course with that caveat in this situation). 

 

 

My mother's parents were abusive towards her.  My poor mother died being upset that she never felt like she could please her parents well enough.  I think she would have been better off cutting them out of her life.  I won't let someone have that kind of power over me.  I don't care what their relationship is to me.  Of course that is serious, but serious or not I hardly think it matters who they are.  If they are cruel people then I see nothing wrong with getting away from them.

 

They aren't permitted to ask about it nor make negative comments.  Why should they need to do that?  What circumstance would this be ok?  I mean maybe there is some sort of scenario I'm not considering.  But what I would allow is that I don't expect them to, for example, choose that person to be a god parent.  I am fine with them not doing that for that reason.  They don't need to announce the fact.  I'm just saying they have a right to do what they want to do in that department, but to go on and on about it and make mean comments.  There is no reason for it.  So no I don't expect them to publicly declare their acceptance, but they really don't have a right to be outwardly critical either. 

 

Some families are forever crappy about stuff, but a lot of families do come around and they get over it.  Some stuff that was a sore spot for people in our family wasn't on anyone's mind after awhile.  I think family members can go and have a picnic or eat turkey together irregardless of who anyone is attracted to.

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, then, the couple who abused and neglected their kids clearly did not follow "God's plan", did they? That's a no-brainer.

 

Something went wrong there. Somebody (or both) lied or cheated, or beat the other and/or the kids or did something seriously sinful, didn't they? (I do not know the story, and you don't know it all either). That's not God's plan. Don't try to hang that one on God.

 

Your neighbors just were available to try to pick up the pieces when someone seriously sinned against their kids, and that's a good thing that someone cared. That doesn't translate into "See...Gay couples are better for kids than a husband and a wife" if that is what you are attempting to do here. Non sequitur there.

You are attempting to assert fallaciously, "Well a man and a woman married and abused their kids so clearly that was not God's plan so God's plan is instead for gay couples to have their kids".

 

I never said anything about what happened to the children being God's plan except the part where the heterosexual birth parents married and then had children which according to you is God's plan for reproduction and families. I'm simply trying to get you to see that a gay couple can have a loving, long-term, relationship and providing a stable, loving home for children, just as a straight couple can. I never said gay couples are better for kids. But I am trying to get you to explain how my neighbors are causing "pain, damage, and disease" which you seem unwilling or unable to do.

 

Edited for clarity.

Edited by Frances
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have some mutual tolerance situations. Dd doesn't wear her 'Gay OK' t-shirts to some relative's houses, and in return they treat her like her straight sister when she is at their house. 

 

Neither party needs to get in each other's faces about it. Dd doesn't need to force explicit acceptance of her identity and the relatives don't need to force explicit criticism of her identity.

 

I think this only works because both parties are content with a relatively superficial relationship.

 

Treating dd like crap would involve stuff one of her grandmothers would do if she knew - crying over dd, praying over her, blackmailing her with how 'it will give your grandfather a heart attack, sending her tracts on how she is sinning, refusing to see her till she 'repents' etc.

 

Appropriate disagreement ? I suppose choosing to pray about it without involving dd. A single explanation - 'Thank you for telling me. We have a difference of opinion on what this means, and I can't say that I approve of this choice. But you are my grand-daughter and I will always love you.'

Thank you. That was a helpful explanation and appreciated.

I think the mom I know is going to go this sort of direction, which is good. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never said anything about what happened to the children being God's plan. I don't think that way. I'm simply trying to get you to see that a gay couple can have a loving, long-term, relationship and providing a stable, loving home for children, just as a straight couple can. I never said gay couples are better for kids. But I am trying to get you to explain how my neighbors are causing "pain, damage, and disease" which you seem unable or unable to do.

 

FYP

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have some mutual tolerance situations. Dd doesn't wear her 'Gay OK' t-shirts to some relative's houses, and in return they treat her like her straight sister when she is at their house. 

 

Neither party needs to get in each other's faces about it. Dd doesn't need to force explicit acceptance of her identity and the relatives don't need to force explicit criticism of her identity.

 

I think this only works because both parties are content with a relatively superficial relationship.

 

Treating dd like crap would involve stuff one of her grandmothers would do if she knew - crying over dd, praying over her, blackmailing her with how 'it will give your grandfather a heart attack, sending her tracts on how she is sinning, refusing to see her till she 'repents' etc.

 

Appropriate disagreement ? I suppose choosing to pray about it without involving dd. A single explanation - 'Thank you for telling me. We have a difference of opinion on what this means, and I can't say that I approve of this choice. But you are my grand-daughter and I will always love you.'

 

Yeah my atheist kid likes to ask his born again Christian great aunt about religion.  I have to hand it to her.  She has been very cool about it.  I have told him he should not do that.  Leave her be.  I expect her also to leave him be. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For those of us who believe that "all Scripture is inspired by God" (2 Timothy 3:15), this is simply not true. Passages like Romans 1:26-27, 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, and Timothy 1:9-10 were all given by Christ to His church through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. 

 

I didn't say they weren't in the Bible. I meant, during his time on earth, Jesus didn't seem to find it important enough to discuss. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't say they weren't in the Bible. I meant, during his time on earth, Jesus didn't seem to find it important enough to discuss. 

 

I do find it interesting how much money some churches have spent battling something that Jesus never mentioned, rather than spending that money to address things he specifically did.

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do find it interesting how much money some churches have spent battling something that Jesus never mentioned, rather than spending that money to address things he specifically did.

 

That'll preach

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm interested in this. It sounds like your daughter might be close to adulthood, so are you seriously saying that your mom is forbidden to even state to her granddaughter that it upsets her that your daughter chooses to not live in accordance with scriptural views (if that is her issue, just making the argument here)? She can't even SAY so. How is she supposed to respond, if that indeed is her view (assuming, from what you said, but don't know for sure)?

 

What is she allowed to do? Smile and nod. Say she is surprised? Act shocked? State that she thought your daughter believed (however you have raised her)? I'm interested in what is the "acceptable" response, assuming her views are vastly different from your daughter's.

 

I find this very interesting that you seem to think that you can control your mother's thoughts and words, especially when your daughter reaches adulthood.

 

(Caveat - Not talking in any way about if your mom yelled or punched her or something, of course, which would be way out of line and a criminal action in the latter case, so let's take that off the table and assume verbal response.)

 

I don't think I can control anything but if they repeatedly feel a need to point out they don't agree we would all back away from them. Dh, younger dd, and myself are all in full support of oldest. Oldest being an adult won't change how I feel about other family putting her and her choices down all the time.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't say they weren't in the Bible. I meant, during his time on earth, Jesus didn't seem to find it important enough to discuss. 

 

He apparently did find the issue important enough to mention several times in His inspired Word. That should, I believe, make it a significant issue to us, along with all the other topics brought up in the New Testament. When God speaks clearly on any matter, I don't think I'm at liberty to assume it is a minor thing.

 

However, I do agree with those who say some professing Christians tend to ignore other equally important issues and seem to have an unhealthy obsession with this one. I am personally not at all involved in any of the politics surrounding the issue.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nonsense.  It was not prosecuted as a crime long, long before the divorce rate became so high.

 

The Catholic Church fought strongly against legalizing gay marriage, yet I cannot find where they have lobbied to make divorce illegal.

 

The reality is that many Christians are extremely hypocritical and only address certain sexual "sins".

 

Perhaps you are looking for the wrong thing.  The Catholic Church has in  many cases opposed certain kinds of changes in divorce laws.  Typically at the time when the laws were being looked at to be changed and there was active public discussion. 

 

However, it also does not in fact oppose all legal divorce, so I wouldn't particularly expect to see them advocating for that kind of law.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just as an aside, I find it really interesting that people are somehow objecting to the very existence of this discussion apparently.  Just noticing the "stars" and the fact that 18 people have apparently voted in some negative way about this post instead of simply move on to posts they find more interesting and relevant to them. 

 

It made me laugh that people are so touchy that they don't even want something discussed, apparently, even though this discussion will change precisely NOTHING  in their worlds.  Very interesting that you can't see who the 18 people are either, unless I simply can't figure it out (quite possible!).  

 

I think I might have accidentally hit that because my screen was loading and reloading over and over and I was impatiently clicking on everything when I noticed it.

 

I actually think it has been a pretty useful discussion, myself, and it was helpful to see how other people viewed the situation I expressed with the neighbor that I have been pondering for awhile.  Some people really helped me see some things, so I appreciate that.   

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think I can control anything but if they repeatedly feel a need to point out they don't agree we would all back away from them. Dh, younger dd, and myself are all in full support of oldest. Oldest being an adult won't change how I feel about other family putting her and her choices down all the time.

Well, I understand if they "put her down all the time" but that really wasn't what I was asking.   

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is not true. Not one time ever have I ever heard anything like this except from on line haters. Attraction to the same sex is not a disfellowshipping offense. So no matter what you friend told you that is not true. And no one is protecting pedophiles or other sexual abuse. I personally know of three situations....in all cases the authorities were contacted, they were dealt with in the legal system and within the congregation. The consequences will affect them for the rest of their life. In one case an actual pedophile was allowed to attend our meetings but every family was notified and various brothers were assigned to keep their eyes on him at all times.

 

No one has ever ever even hinted to me that pedophiles are good guys who made a mistake. That kind of truth twisting is just crazy.

 

Yes what goes on in congregation discipline is private and confidential UNLESS it breaks the law.....thankfully. No one would want their mistakes broadcast. But believe me I have had conversations with df'd people for one reason or another and yet no one has ever said to me,'hey I was df'd for being a victim or having same sex attraction.'

 

I know there are law suits. I can't speak to every one of them or especially what took place 30 or 40 years ago when society in general had less understanding of how to cope with all sorts of these issues. But there is no wide spread abuse of the process going on.

 

And no one is df'd for questioning anything. Really without revealing TMI I can tell you for a fact there is definite effort to error on the side of mercy than harshness.

 

I have no intention of trying to convince you of anything, but you might just reconsider if you are listening to people who are not being totally honest with themselves and you.

 

 

I understand that it's easier for you to believe that people who have suffered unjust disfellowshipping are liars and haters than it is for you to accept that the organization you have put your faith in has problems.

 

If congregants are now being informed about pedophiles among them, then that's WONDERFUL.  I am really glad there has been a policy change.  I guess something good did come from all of those lawsuits, and I know that's exactly what the plaintiffs hoped and intended.  I'm so glad they succeeded.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I understand if they "put her down all the time" but that really wasn't what I was asking.

But you think it's OK to repeatedly point out they don't agree and that she is sinning? What is that called if someone does that? There's no need for anyone to behave that way and if they choose to do so, we will distance ourselves.

 

I could see them saying it ONE time and us ignoring it and moving on. If it's repeated and she is treated differently or negatively after that, then we distance ourselves.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I understand if they "put her down all the time" but that really wasn't what I was asking.

Think about it this way: how long would you put up with a family member if they made it a point to tell your kids that, according to their beliefs, being a Christian is wrong and immoral?

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand that it's easier for you to believe that people who have suffered unjust disfellowshipping are liars and haters than it is for you to accept that the organization you have put your faith in has problems.

 

If congregants are now being informed about pedophiles among them, then that's WONDERFUL. I am really glad there has been a policy change. I guess something good did come from all of those lawsuits, and I know that's exactly what the plaintiffs hoped and intended. I'm so glad they succeeded.

I have no problem seeing things for what they are. I don't believe I am in an organization with perfect people. But I have many many peers, my close friends, who are elders and your description of how things happen is just not accurate. And at the very worst an unjust disfellowshipping is not a permenant thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He apparently did find the issue important enough to mention several times in His inspired Word. That should, I believe, make it a significant issue to us, along with all the other topics brought up in the New Testament. When God speaks clearly on any matter, I don't think I'm at liberty to assume it is a minor thing.

 

However, I do agree with those who say some professing Christians tend to ignore other equally important issues and seem to have an unhealthy obsession with this one. I am personally not at all involved in any of the politics surrounding the issue.

Yes. My religion isn't involved in politics at all and they do not focus on this particular sin. It is the topic at hand which is why we are all discussing it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Attacking your beliefs is different than just believing differently. I can see how it would be hard if they were attacking your beliefs, rather than living in a way that doesn't follow them.

 

But as for a friendship or relationship with someone who you disagree with or think is being wrong, the current Pope has a good friend who is gay. When he was in the USA he met with that gay man and his partner, they are close. Despite have different ideas about the morality of homosexuality. It was fine. I figure if the Pope can manage to still having a loving relationship so can the rest of us.

In the case of the Pope....who is the head of a religion that claims to believe homosexuality is wrong...it seems to be putting a stamp of approval on the relationship of his friend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the case of the Pope....who is the head of a religion that claims to believe homosexuality is wrong...it seems to be putting a stamp of approval on the relationship of his friend.

Should he act like a jackass to every sinner he meets instead? I can't imagine that would do much to draw people to Catholicism.

  • Like 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the case of the Pope....who is the head of a religion that claims to believe homosexuality is wrong...it seems to be putting a stamp of approval on the relationship of his friend.

I'll be honest and say I don't understand why people feel this way. He's not saying he agrees. He's only showing that people can be friends and be different. It seems like the kind of thing I worked at teaching my dds from birth.

  • Like 16
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the case of the Pope....who is the head of a religion that claims to believe homosexuality is wrong...it seems to be putting a stamp of approval on the relationship of his friend.

 

 

So the Pope shouldn't have any friends who are sinners, because that's approving of their sin?  He's going to be an awfully lonely guy, then. Who is left that he can talk to?

  • Like 14
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the case of the Pope....who is the head of a religion that claims to believe homosexuality is wrong...it seems to be putting a stamp of approval on the relationship of his friend.

 

It's not like his friend is going to him for Confession weekly and being told "Yup, you're good for another week".

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no problem seeing things for what they are. I don't believe I am in an organization with perfect people. But I have many many peers, my close friends, who are elders and your description of how things happen is just not accurate. And at the very worst an unjust disfellowshipping is not a permenant thing.

 

 

I didn't expect you to believe me, Scarlett.  But for anyone else reading this, please know that I spent 17 years in that religion, I'm intimately familiar with the teachings, practices, publications, etc., I have had close family and friends who were disfellowshipped, and my father used to be an elder (pastor).  I'm not making this stuff up.  Honestly, I'm nowhere near creative enough to make this stuff up.  

  • Like 10
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the case of the Pope....who is the head of a religion that claims to believe homosexuality is wrong...it seems to be putting a stamp of approval on the relationship of his friend.

 

Scarlett, with all due respect.  That's messed-up.

 

Kindness isn't a stamp of approval.  Kindness is validation that he's a human being, made in God's image just like the Pope was.  Kindness is looking at him and seeing God, which is what we are commanded to do.  It's amazing, really - we see God in "the least of these" (which is all sinners, not any particular kind of sinner) and treat them accordingly and they, in turn, see God in our actions.  It's quite remarkable.

  • Like 15
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't expect you to believe me, Scarlett.  But for anyone else reading this, please know that I spent 17 years in that religion, I'm intimately familiar with the teachings, practices, publications, etc., I have had close family and friends who were disfellowshipped, and my father used to be an elder (pastor).  I'm not making this stuff up.  Honestly, I'm nowhere near creative enough to make this stuff up.  

 

I believe you.  You aren't the first person who I've met who has said exactly what you said.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scarlett, with all due respect. That's messed-up.

 

Kindness isn't a stamp of approval. Kindness is validation that he's a human being, made in God's image just like the Pope was. Kindness is looking at him and seeing God, which is what we are commanded to do. It's amazing, really - we see God in "the least of these" (which is all sinners, not any particular kind of sinner) and treat them accordingly and they, in turn, see God in our actions. It's quite remarkable.

Shrug. I see a very public visit as much more than kindness.

 

To,each his own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shrug. I see a very public visit as much more than kindness.

 

To,each his own.

 

Why does public = more than kindness?  How can kindness only be kindness if it's done in private?  

 

So, if the Pope had treated him the same as he did, only it was not visible or known to anyone else, that would be OK?  But he should do what in public?  What would that look like?  To be kind, but nothing more, in public?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why does public = more than kindness? How can kindness only be kindness if it's done in private?

 

So, if the Pope had treated him the same as he did, only it was not visible or known to anyone else, that would be OK? But he should do what in public? What would that look like? To be kind, but nothing more, in public?

I dont know. My close friends are not people who are actively involved in conduct that is considered sin.

 

You don't think the Pope very deliberately made that a public meeting? It seems political to me. But what do I know. I am not Catholic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This isn't news to me, either.  Thanks for sharing, Greta.

  

Thank you.  I appreciate you saying so.

 

  

I believe you.  You aren't the first person who I've met who has said exactly what you said.

I think I am in a better position to say what is going on in my religion than you guys. But believe what you will. I can't keep being here with people who feel that way. So this will be my last post on this topic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont know. My close friends are not people who are actively involved in conduct that is considered sin.

 

You don't think the Pope very deliberately made that a public meeting? It seems political to me. But what do I know. I am not Catholic.

 

I don't know if the meeting was deliberately public or not.  I don't care, frankly.  It changes nothing about kindness and how to treat people.

 

The bold is confusing and fascinating and sickening at the same time.  I don't know how you can type that in seriousness.  Proud much?

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont know. My close friends are not people who are actively involved in conduct that is considered sin.

 

You don't think the Pope very deliberately made that a public meeting? It seems political to me. But what do I know. I am not Catholic.

 

If I recall correctly, Jesus publicly met with prostitutes. I assume he did so deliberately.

 

ETA: I should clarify that I do not mean to equate homosexuality and prostitution - other than that you would consider both of them sin.

 

Edited by regentrude
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont know. My close friends are not people who are actively involved in conduct that is considered sin.

 

You don't think the Pope very deliberately made that a public meeting? It seems political to me. But what do I know. I am not Catholic.

 

I thought Christians believe that everyone sins? Do you also believe that you don't sin? I don't know much about your denomination, so maybe you guys have differing beliefs?

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I recall correctly, Jesus publicly met with prostitutes. I assume he did so deliberately.

 

ETA: I should clarify that I do not mean to equate homosexuality and prostitution - other than that you would consider both of them sin.

 

 

Yes, He met with sinners deliberately, and we are told why:

 

"And Levi gave a big reception for Him [Jesus] in his house; and there was a great crowd of tax collectors and other people who were reclining at the table with them. The Pharisees and their scribes began grumbling at His disciples, saying, 'Why do you eat and drink with the tax collectors and sinners?' And Jesus answered and said to them, 'It is not those who are well who need a physician, but those who are sick. I have not come to call the righteous but sinners to repentance.'"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

Ă—
Ă—
  • Create New...