The St. Louis Post-Dispatch has an article about Courage, the Catholic ex-gay group, meeting there and a protest held by Catholic Action Network for Social Justice.
Protestors objected that Courage views homosexuality as changable through reparative therapy.
Christina Nair, speaking for Courage, said the group does not engage in reparative therapy but would support people who seek out such therapy. The group does not force anyone into a life they don’t want, she said.
“The purpose of Courage is to provide support for men and women with same-sex attractions who want to live a chaste life,” she said. “We’re not trying to ‘cure’ anyone. We provide spiritual support.”
Contrary to Exodus’ message of “change is possible”, those persons who do not wish to live consistent with their same-sex attractions are provided by Courage with a more honest assessment of their future
A “chaste life” for some people might mean eventually getting married to someone of the opposite sex, Nair said. For others, it may simply mean not acting on same-sex attractions.
Do they really expect that every gay and lesbian should be living a celibate life, when many of their priests have been have problems following it? I know that some could life such a life, but for most it is condemning them to a lonely life of bitterness and frustration. This isn’t realistic, far from being natural, and most definately a form of abuse.
I can’t wait to see the day when the Vatican ends up alone. These old world fools are driving the church into oblivion.
Shouldn’t they be doing this outreach to the ministry of the Catholic Church? I mean, sorry – but I find it to be rather hypocritical that a church with some 12,000 cases of child sexual abuse, some of which was covered up for over 50 years, has the resources to play this game with the gays.
My bet is that they looked at this as a potential moneymaker.
Well personally I think Courage is doing good work both complying with the Church, and with helping people who suffer from SSA. No one knows what causes homosexuality, some people get over it, others don’t. They are doing good work.
Oh yeah, and Xeno, it wasn’t the church, but local abuse of power which caused the sex abuse, and it wasn’t the Church that started courage. To the best of my knowledge it is a lay organization to help people with SSA in the church.
Paul
oops, my comment to Xeno should have been to Kevin. Sorry. But now that I look at the actual post again – man! Why would anyone protest a courage meeting? It seems like the majority of the “Pride” community has to disrupt things – especially Mass! I mean – It just makes me sick. Why can’t and jeer during a time when people worship? Or in this case are having a private meeting? It’s really sad.
Paul
Paul said:
No one knows what causes homosexuality, some people get over it, others don’t.
Could you please provide an authoritative reference for this statement? Even the major ex-gay organizations are not so casual about this point.
… it wasn’t the church, but local abuse of power which caused the sex abuse…
It would appear that the abuse and cover up which enabled it reached high into the organization that is the Catholic Church. It certainly wasn’t confined to a “local abuse of power.”
It seems like the majority of the “Pride” community has to disrupt things – especially Mass! I mean – It just makes me sick. Why can’t and jeer during a time when people worship? Or in this case are having a private meeting? It’s really sad.
We can’t know exactly what the circumstances were from this article, so I don’t know how you can address them as though you do. As to the rest – yes, isn’t it a shame, all those uppity gays making a fuss over their rights. What is this world coming to? Next thing you know, women and blacks will want the vote.
[Moderator Note: Paul, if you want to post further, please provide a valid email address where requested.]
I think that Courage has some credibility and I would not join in a protest against them. If they believe that they should remain celibate, that’s fine with me. And if they wish to have a mutual support group to help them reconcile their religion with their orientation, that’s not a bad thing.
Also, I may be mistaken but I don’t think Courage behaves as a political organization.
My only complaint would be that they perpetuate the myth that “some people get over it, others don’t”.
So far, I’ve not seen anything that convinces me that “some people get over it”. That may be true, but if so it certainly isn’t a very large number. This statment is pretty much the equivalent of saying “some people have six fingers, some don’t”.
And I think Paul misunderstood the protest. This was not the “Pride” community that was protesting. This was a protest from within the Catholic community. Some Catholics disagree with some of the beliefs of Courage and were protesting those beliefs.
This was not interupting Mass. You may be thinking of an interuption of Mass in New York in the 80’s, but that’s hardly fair to blame on these protesters.
I’m with Timothy. As an earstwhile Catholic, I have no problem with those who choose to live a life of chastity and seek support in that decision. I was there myself (although not a member of Courage), but, well, Catholic teaching says that chastity is a gift to those who are called to chastity. I wasn’t.
Given my understanding of Courage, I don’t think I’d protest.
As far as I know, Mass wasn’t interrupted. If it were, I’d join in with those who would condemn it. Unlike in non-liturgical settings where the leader has carte-blanche as to what goes on there, Masses tend to be rather non-political, although a priest can certainly get his shots in during the homily. But the whole character of the Mass is one in which protesting is highly innapropriate, ninety precent of it being prayer and all.
And to be fair, I would extend that principle to non-liturgical worship services. It’s okay to protest outside if you want to, but to interrupt the service itself is not only exceptionally belligerant, it is misguided and conterproductive as well.
But, as far as I know, that did not happen here.
Just dropping in to say…
No, mass wasn’t interrupted (I was there). The focus was protesting SLU’s renting space to the organization, as well as an effort to repudiate some of their claims.
The ‘protest’ was more of a ‘vigil’ with Christian songs, sharing of testimonies, and ten minutes of silent protest.
There will be a writeup in the Vital Voice next weekend, which should have my pics and summary.
I was there too. My motivation was that Courage links to NARTH in its website and uses Nicolosi and other discredited psychologists and counsellors as references on its printed material and website. In other words, while Courage does not itself provide reparative therapy, it advocates RT. St. Louis University, which offers degrees in social work, counselling, psychology, and residencies in psychiatry, ought not to host or be made to host a conference that recommends therapies that are not considered “standard of care” by the medical/ psychology/ counselling major professional associations and academic communities. If Courage and the Church wish to hold conferences recommending quack remedies, they should hold them somewhere other than an academic institution.
If they had stuck to theology and self-help, without reference to reparative therapy proponents, I would have no issue with them. After all, we should uphold freedom of conscience.
There was only enough amplification for the group to hear itself against a busy rush-hour intersection. I doubt the church, across a 6 lane street, or people on that sidewalk, would have heard anything specific. Signs were respectful. Most were on the order of “our love is not a disorder”,”God’s love is for all”,”God made me gay”, “gay by grace”. PFLAG and Dignity signs were also in evidence.
To Paul –
There were an awful lot of local abuses of power, and they extended well beyond the borders of any single country. And those abuses included the coverup of thousands of cases, sometimes in collaboration with local authorities, and other times with the approval and often intervention of the Vatican.
I’m not Catholic, so while this is going to sound harsh, it isn’t aimed at any particular chosen religion: There is no credibility to preach about morality when you conceal the corruption in your own organization.
Religious and denominational beliefs are CHOSEN -and it appears to me that the greatest confusion among gays about their self-identity and worth is caused by those who chose that “religious” indoctrination FOR them as a child. I’m naturally suspicious when the same people who indoctrinated a philosophy that isn’t innate also tries to market itself as the “cure” for the innate characteristics causing the conflict. It starts looking like a scam.
The focus was protesting SLU’s renting space to the organization, as well as an effort to repudiate some of their claims.
Courage meeting at a Catholic university.
In other news: Pope is Catholic.
SLU is a CATHOLIC university. Why would you protest the presence of an organization that upholds Church teachings on sexuality at a Catholic university? Seems rather arrogant of you, if you ask me. How would you feel about someone protesting the presence of say, a “pro-choice Catholic” group or gay pride group on campus? Those would seem to contradict the mission of a Catholic university. Really folks, don’t be so silly.
First off I have added a valid e-mail as requested above.
Now I haven’t read the whole forum but I will go answer the questions posed by David Roberts – along with commenting on some bits that weren’t questions. Then I’ll attempt to answer any other comments in another post.
“Could you please provide an authoritative reference for this statement? Even the major ex-gay organizations are not so casual about this point.”
Some people think they know but no one is sure yet. Why do you think this – https://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/5120004.stm – made such headlines if everyone knows what causes homosexuality? All I know is that nothing definite has been established so far. My personal beliefs are that it is sometimes chosen, and sometimes a result of insecurity, abuse, or other like things. But then again no one knows yet so I’m not going to go out and tell everyone this.
“It would appear that the abuse and cover up which enabled it reached high into the organization that is the Catholic Church. It certainly wasn’t confined to a “local abuse of power.””
Well this time it seems that you should elaborate and give some sources. I personally believe – from all that I’ve read – that it was local abuse, as to say it took place on the local individual bases and wasn’t a top down kind of thing. I am certain that some bishops were involved, and I believe that they along with the priests should be removed, however I don’t believe the cardinals and the pope, and every archbishop knew about this…
“We can’t know exactly what the circumstances were from this article, so I don’t know how you can address them as though you do. As to the rest – yes, isn’t it a shame, all those uppity gays making a fuss over their rights. What is this world coming to? Next thing you know, women and blacks will want the vote.”
Oh yeah, but the way I remember it the women’s right movements weren’t throwing condoms at the alter and disrespecting the blessed sacrament. Also I am one of the people that believe the gay community is protesting for extra rights, and disrespecting a sacrament by their “marriages”. I’m not hiding this, and expect to be called a bigot in five…four…three…two…
“I’m with Timothy. As an earstwhile Catholic, I have no problem with those who choose to live a life of chastity and seek support in that decision. I was there myself (although not a member of Courage), but, well, Catholic teaching says that chastity is a gift to those who are called to chastity. I wasn’t.”
Well I assume that by saying “I wasn’t” you are labelling yourself amongst those who are errr…living in mortal sin, disrespecting the church teaching, and disrespecting Jesus in the eucharist if indeed you are receiving so I don’t see any reason why you would be offend if mass was interupted. You already are hurting Jesus from a Catholic point of view.
“As far as I know, Mass wasn’t interrupted. If it were, I’d join in with those who would condemn it. Unlike in non-liturgical settings where the leader has carte-blanche as to what goes on there, Masses tend to be rather non-political, although a priest can certainly get his shots in during the homily. But the whole character of the Mass is one in which protesting is highly innapropriate, ninety precent of it being prayer and all.”
Alexander
Oops, I guess I typed the wrong moniker at the end of my last post. Now hypocrite will be added as well…
Alexander
From what I’m reading, you seem to have trouble with definitions. One doesn’t “disrespect” a sacrament by partaking of it. And by “special”, what on earth do you mean? “Peculiar to a specific person or thing; particular”? Gays aren’t asking for anything that they demand be kept from other people–unlike, say, you.
And there’s nothing hypocritical of using multiple names to post–cowardly, maybe, but no hypocrisy there.
There’s a reason for that, whoever you are. Because you are a bigot.
Alexander (or Paul or whoever you are),
No one (other than the ex-gay movement) is claiming to know the “cause” of orientation. However, by this point there is no credible organization (other than a few anti-gay activists) that believes same sex attration is “sometimes chosen”. This is not a teaching of the Catholic Church – of which you appear to be a part. You stand alone on that one and lose credibility in even stating it. It makes you appear ill-informed.
“Oh yeah, but the way I remember it the women’s right movements weren’t throwing condoms at the alter…”
That’s a strawman argument. The protesters against Courage did not throw condoms at the alter. So suggesting that they did is dishonest. We don’t respect dishonesty here.
I don’t condemn your Catholic faith (although I don’t share it). So while you are entitled to your opinion (“gay community is protesting for extra rights, and disrespecting a sacrament”) it means little to me.
Fortunately, we live in a country and at a time where civil law is not dictated by the Vatican. While it seems clear to me that this Pope (and probably Paul/Alexander) wish for a return to a non-secular government controlled by the Church, those arguments don’t have much sway with me or most rational people in the US (unlike Latvia and Iran where religious control is welcomed by the populace).
A “chaste life” for some people might mean eventually getting married to someone of the opposite sex, Nair said. For others, it may simply mean not acting on same-sex attractions.
As an aside, I think the Courage rep may be mistaken here. The Catholic Church does not teach that homosexuality is chosen, or a mental illness (I believe the phrase is “perceived as a given” by the person “suffering” from homosexuality). However, the Church also believes that sacrament of marriage (which is a sacrament only for those being married within the church, not in a secular setting) cannot be conveyed on anyone for whom there is a spiritual impediment – and the “intrinsicly disordered” homosexual certainly has such an impediment. Not only is the existence of homosexuality in a spouse grounds for a church annulment, a parish priest would be on solid theological grounds to deny marriage to anyone who had been a member of Courage – specifically because homosexuality cannot generally be “overcome,” according to my understanding of the church’s thinking.
Paul (aka Alexander) said:
Some people think they know but no one is sure yet.
I was referring to your statement that “some people get over it, others don’t.” This makes the idea of changing one’s sexual orientation seem passive. Even Exodus would agree that those who claim to be former homosexuals are such only after a great deal of time and effort. Regardless of whether or not it is actually possible for one to change, it isn’t something that just happens. I would also challenge the characterization of homosexuality as something one “gets over” as though it were a disease – it isn’t.
Well this time it seems that you should elaborate and give some sources.
I gave you a source link, read it again 😉