• JustJohn

    when the priests are able to sort of keep it in their own pants, then MAYBE they can have a leg to stand upon for such bullcaca.

    as it is, clergy and youthgroup leaders are the single biggest threat to a child. they must be quarrantined. shipped off to an island. disallowed from reproducing their genes, etc.

  • Pingback: It’s all about sex | Civil Commotion()

  • Frank

    There are only two options for those who suffer from same sex attraction and want to follow Christ: celibacy or marriage with a member of the ppposite sex. Anything else is sinful.

  • Frank

    Keep laughing. I am sure you will realize when you grow up how not funny it is. So sad.

  • Kate

    Fun to finally hear your full thoughts after sitting with you for the conference – congrats on the writing gig and good luck!!

  • Eliel Cruz

    It was great hanging with you Kate! Glad to have met you.

  • Pingback: Election Aftermath * ‘Fix My Choir’ * Ebola Blues: Wednesday’s Roundup | Election Aftermath * ‘Fix My Choir’ * Ebola Blues: Wednesday’s Roundup | Social Dashboard()

  • Larry

    Or most sanely, join a church which is affirming and tell people like Frank where to stick their 2 options.


    If the choice is a life of ridiculous restriction to please a religious sect or living like a normal human being, obviously the latter is the saner choice.

    It is obvious the Catholic church does not really want to treat gays as fully functioning human beings. They actively work to discriminate against gays under color of law. The idea that one can live as gay and be treated with respect by the Catholic Church is nothing more than wishful thinking. So why bother sticking around?

  • Doc Anthony


    (1) Might have helped the conference a little, if Courage had been invited as one of the conversation partners. Wouldn’t have hurt anything, and it might have made everything a little less one-sided. But this is Notre Dame, and it’s totally predictable that they would shut out Courage.

    (2) A very good question:

    “What happens then when an LGBT Christian says they’re called for a different vocation than the two that are Church approved? There wasn’t any conversation on the inevitable, and large, group of individuals who don’t feel called to celibacy.”

    So the conference leaders punted on THAT issue too.

    Any Catholics out there want to take their place and respond to this specific paragraph? Anybody else of any flavor?

  • Frank

    Yes everyone has the freedom to join a false church.

  • Frank

    God would never call anyone into sinful behavior. if anyone feels called to engage in homosexual behavior thats not God calilng that’s Satan calling.

  • Eliel Cruz

    From my understanding, not having Courage involved isn’t making it “one sided.” Courage get’s far more airtime on this topic than those who identify as lesbian and gay celibate Catholics.

    The purpose of the conference, like i stated in my piece, was to be able to show pastoral approaches to the LGBT community. You’re not going to be able to do that invited individuals who tell you “Don’t identify/say gay.”

    But i would be interested in hearing the answers to my questions too.

  • Pingback: A Strange Thing Happened on the Way to Notre Dame | Letters to Christopher()

  • How does one get from “people are making being gay all about sex” to “if people in gay relationships can’t morally have sex, we aren’t respecting their vocation”?

    I’m not sure it’s the faithful Catholics that are making homosexuality “all about sex”, my friend.

  • Eliel Cruz

    I’m not sure where you get the latter part? I’m asking for more than one narrative to be given. Yes that includes those who are in relationships, no relationships aren’t just about sex.

  • Charlene

    One would think that a “journalist” would ask a few questions and get the facts. “From my understanding…” is…lazy (but easier than a little work). Also, this snarky comment about a Courage member who “seemed to only attend the first night to attend specifically for Ron Belgau’s presentation…” is…more lazy, and worse, factually incorrect.

    For a complete look at this perspective (or does this conflict with the “freelance” part” of your “journalist” title?” readers (goodness, even the “journalist”) may wish to access the facts of this situation.

    (One can only assume this is pro bono work…or is someone actually paying this “journalist?” Good writing and reporting is hard work…very little on display here.)


    And one would think that the only apostolate approved by the Catholic Church–Courage–would be invited. But we’re talking about the formerly catholic University of Notre Dame, so understood. What is NOT understood is the “journalist” statement:

    “The group encourages members to avoid identifying as gay or lesbian, which is perhaps why they weren’t involved in the conference. Yet the shift in language was necessary in order for the conference to discuss LGBT people as more than just sexual acts.”

    Memo to “journalist,” the question of identity as understood and taught by Courage is exaxctly that–our first and most important identity is not LGBTQ, but as men and women in Christ…children of God–which is why Courage discourages the so-called “gay identity.”

    But you knew that, right?

    Final note…”celibacy” is so…yesterday. CHASTITY–the Virtue of Chastity–that’s where’s it’s at.

  • Eliel Cruz

    Thanks Charlene for taking the time to comment on my blog. I am a journalist, but not for RNS. I’m a blogger which means i get to give commentary. I see I’ve upset you with my speculations, i would have been so happy to have had a conversation with that person from Courage if they were to stick around. Also, these aren’t just my speculations but many people who have no professional ties to the groups thought the same thing. That’s the way it looked, though i’m glad that’s not what happened– according to that link you just sent me.

    It still really doesn’t change the fact people advocating for courage made things really uncomfortable and awkward.

    As for the rest of your comment, yes i do understand what Courage is about according to the website. Yes, that’s probably why they weren’t invited as the language is incredibly problematic. From the responses, including yours which really includes much more snark than what you read into in one of my sentences, perhaps it was a good thing Courage wasn’t officially invited. Not only do you deny being gay as an identity, which really is sexuality 101, your remarks show no room for respectful dialogue.

    And actually when you ask LGB people to not be intimate with someone of the same-sex it’s celibacy. Chastity is waiting until marriage, something the Catholic church doesn’t technically allow.

    Thanks for your “engagement.”

  • Pingback: Recognizing Same-Sex Marriage Equality: Not Only a Civil Right but a Spiritual Necessity,PrideNation Magazine()

  • Billysees

    It should be of interest to know the following concerning LGBT folks —

    They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided…….Catechism of the Catholic Church

  • Charlene

    Here is the appropriate response I think you are looking for: “Thank you for pointing out my factual error. I will be extending an apology for my sloppy mischaracterization of the person who asked the question about identity.”

    So…what are you…a journalist AND a blogger? Okay. Maybe I’m missing something. Seriously. On this site you are identified as simply a “freelance journalist…” So this was a blog and not an attempt at a news report? A chimera? Even though this appears on the Religion NEWS Service page? Maybe I missed it–where is this labeled as an “opinion” or analysis piece? Journalism 101. Perhaps this is the work of the editor of RNS…and not your responsibility.

    And “making things really uncomfortable and awkward…” goodness! In other words, there was a challenge–a question–put forth to the party line of LGBTQ/spiritual friends and Identity which made some “uncomfortable?” And…THAT’S your point? Okay…wow. So…no uncomfortableness or awkwardness allowed? Hmmm.

    Regarding identity…people can self-identify all they wish in any manner they wish. This is the great wonder of moral relativism. That does NOT mean I accept that identity!

    What Courage says (BTW, I am NOT a member of Courage, but why let facts in in the way of a good report or blog or whatever) is that our first and best and most accurate identity is that of a man or woman in Christ–a child of God. Pope Emeritus Benedict says: “THE HUMAN PERSON, MADE IN THE IMAGE AND LIKENESS OF GOD, CAN HARDLY BE ADEQUATELY DESCRIBED BY A REDUCTIONIST REFERENCE TO HIS OR HER SEXUAL ORIENTATION.”

    In other words, we’re more than our sexual desires. One might assume this Catholic view of identity–part of the Magisterium, the Deposit of Faith, was covered at a conference of this sort. Is THIS the language you call “incredibly problematic?” If so, who has the problem? Mother Catholic Church?

    Finally, since this was a Catholic conference, one might do a little work and see and understand that there is a vast difference between celibacy and the practice of the Virtue of Chastity. Language is indeed important. Yes, not engaging in sexual activity, except in a marriage between a man and woman, CAN and does involve celibacy (more accurately continence)–but this is a shallow and incomplete version of what we are ALL called to be–CHASTE.

    Chastity–the practice of this virtue (no matter what our state in life, no matter what our sexual desire/inclination), is much, much more than simply not doing something…it brings Grace and an inner peace so one is not at odds with our nature. See Catholic Catechism of the Catholic Church 2357-2359.

    For those wishing to open their minds…try viewing “Desire of the Everlasting Hills.” everlastinghills.org This film does a wonderful job of addressing identity within the context of three people who formerly self-identified as “gay” or “lesbian.”

  • Charlene

    Fully agree. Thank you.

  • Eliel Cruz

    First, I had the chance to watch Desire of Everlasting Hills. Great film! Glad to have had the opportunity to listen to their stories.

    I’ll make my response brief as you don’t seem to actually care to engage. Here’s a breakdown for you since you don’t seem to understand my position at RNS which, i’m assuming, since you’re not a writer in the professional sense the new writing world can be quite tricky.

    I’m a journalist for the other sites i write on. For this site, i’ll be giving the basis of events then adding my commentary. That is the difference between a journalist and a blogger.

    I think you can still bring issues up without making it uncomfortable. I certainly did raise questions that “pushed back” in a way that didn’t make the audience squirm in their seats.

    I sure hope that one day you’ll be willing to dialogue with people like me in a way that doesn’t involved condescending and using caps lock. I look forward to having a respectful, and mature conversation with you whenever you’re ready.

    Thanks for reading my blog.

  • Charlene

    Glad you watched Desire of the Everlasting Hills…

    I don’t seem to want to “engage?” This is a silly and defensive response. Thank you for the educational piece on the difference between a blogger and a journalist. One would suppose a question of this importance and complexity could be asked without making one feel uncomfortable. Was that the reason why the question was broached? More defensiveness. Apologies for the CAPS LOCK, it was meant to set apart the quote from Pope Emeritus Benedict.

    Still awaiting your apology for the initial posting…until then…and until you grow up aka, “mature,” I guess that conversation you seek will have to wait.

  • Ben in oakland

    And “just discrimination” is a loophole you can drive a very, very large truck through.

  • ben in oakland

    No, Frank.

    Option #1. a possibility. Option #2– a crime against the opposite sex spouse and a further contribution to the decline of marriage, broken homes, and children without parent.

    There is a third option. Changing the church. and the church is changing, because decent, fairminded people not poisoned by hate or fear or anti-Christ religious belief will change it.

    It won’t be we gay people. It will be the heterosexual majority.

  • ben in oakland


    And yet, this is exactly what conservative Christianity does to gay people– reduce us to walking sex acts.

    and this is exactly what Benedict did with his “intrinsic tendency towards grave moral evil.” No other sin gets that particular treatment.

  • Pingback: I spent many nights calling out to God to change me - Faithfully LGBT()

  • Pingback: 11 defining moments in 2014 for the Christian LGBT conversation - Faithfully LGBT()

  • Pingback: Catholic Priest , now out as gay, says Catholic leadership is failing LGBT faithful - Faithfully LGBT()