Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => Catholic Living in the Modern World => Topic started by: Lapantolady on June 21, 2018, 07:22:08 PM
-
I have a traditional catholic friend whom I have known for about 4 years. We have kids about the same age and we have slowly gotten to know them better. But we have never been invited to their house. We either saw each other at church or invited them to our house. I knew they were living with relatives, so I just figured they were trying to be considerate of them. But recently we were at an event where we met their nephew. He is eighteen or nineteen years old. It was obvious by the way he dressed that he was gαy, he even had a rainbow bracelet and his eyebrows drawn on. They didn’t introduce us, he was just there. Now I wonder if they never invited us over for that reason. I know they have raised him from a young child, so I think they are enabling him. I am not sure if I should just ignore it, or if I should be asking some questions, or reconsidering our friendship entirely. My main worry is that her kids are being raised with him, so some form of normalization is there. How will it effect my kids when they play together? We were planning to meet up regularly and even go on vacation together. I wouldn’t let my kids read books or watch shows that normalize gαyness, so what about friends? What would you do?
-
Yikes, we truly live in scary times. Honestly, I would put up some distance for the time being, and then find an opportunity to discuss the matter. Raising a child who struggles with sins against nature is one thing, allowing them to wear rainbow bracelets is another. You are absolutely right to try to avoid that for your children, and to not expose them to that, or to children where that is considered “normal” or even just “something so-and-so does” is very dangerous.
-
Definitely keep younger children away from him. fαɢɢօts are, per capita, disproportionately pedophiles compared to heterosɛҳuąƖs. Pedophilia is secretly tolerated in fαɢɢօt culture and community, and there's a term, "chicken hawks", that's used non-judgmentally and humorously within the fαɢɢօt community to refer to the pedos.
The proportions of heterosɛҳuąƖ and ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ pedophiles among sex offenders against children: an exploratory study. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1556756
Abstract
Previous investigations have indicated that the ratio of sex offenders against female children vs. offenders against male children is approximately 2:1, while the ratio of gynephiles to androphiles among the general population is approximately 20:1. The present study investigated whether the etiology of preferred partner sex among pedophiles is related to the etiology of preferred partner sex among males preferring adult partners. Using phallometric test sensitivities to calculate the proportion of true pedophiles among various groups of sex offenders against children, and taking into consideration previously reported mean numbers of victims per offender group, the ratio of heterosɛҳuąƖ to ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ pedophiles was calculated to be approximately 11:1. This suggests that the resulting proportion of true pedophiles among persons with a ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ erotic development is greater than that in persons who develop heterosɛҳuąƖly. This, of course, would not indicate that androphilic males have a greater propensity to offend against children.
Regarding the very last sentence in the abstract, it's merely a subjective opinion, and it was likely inserted so the study would not be blacklisted by politically correct shills and social-engineers. However, the stats & findings are quantitative and very telling.
-
Avoid that family at all cost!!! Be sure you sit down and speak to your children to see what they are thinking, asap! Vacation together, No Way!!
-
It certainly seems prudent to distance the children from them.
But as adults, if you're close enough, probably worth talking about with them. If you've been friends for four years and haven't had any red flags go up yet, that tells you that either they're convincing sociopaths or that they are ashamed of their nephew and want to pretend that he isn't the way he is and have no idea what to do about it. Now I'm guessing they're not sociopaths, so they could probably use some support. Maybe you're not the person to give it to them, but maybe you are.
-
but call a spade! this teenager is not gαy, so don't use the word "gαy"; he is at least effeminate and looking for trouble.
-
@Nadir, why wouldn’t you call him gαy? Are you saying that there is no such thing? As in God made us to follow his will, and anything else is just perversion? Or are you saying that everything together just constitutes a troubled teen?
-
@Nadir, why wouldn’t you call him gαy? Are you saying that there is no such thing? As in God made us to follow his will, and anything else is just perversion? Or are you saying that everything together just constitutes a troubled teen?
Thank you for asking, Lepantolady.
.
In response to your last question, this young man may be ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ. As you describe him, he has taken on the appearances of somebody whose sɛҳuąƖity is confused to say the least, with his decoration and painted eyebrows. He has in all probability been swayed by his "educational" environment and the ambient culture to present himself as a deviate from normal manhood. Whether or not he is an active ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ is unknown at this point but he looks to be headed in that direction.
.
So, not just a troubled teen, though probably confused with no real man to put him straight.
.
The point I was making is not to use the benign word "gαy" for alleged perversion. ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity is not "gαy' - far from it. It must be fought against and vanquished with the grace of God. It is ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ activists who promote the use of the word gαy to paint ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity in a good light.
.
That is why I said "call a spade a spade". If we don't use the correct terminology we are only deceiving ourselves and playing into the hand of the deceiver.
.
I hope that helps. God bless you.
-
@Nadir, why wouldn’t you call him gαy? Are you saying that there is no such thing? As in God made us to follow his will, and anything else is just perversion? Or are you saying that everything together just constitutes a troubled teen?
gαy means happy. The word has been hijacked by ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs to try and "soften" the perception others have of them. It doesn't sound nasty to be gαy.
It does sound nasty to be a sodomite, which is what a ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ male is in fact.
So don't be swayed by political correctness! Just as abortion is not "birth control", ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs are not "gαy".
-
There is little in this world more creepy and inherently disturbing than an openly feminine-acting sodomite. Seriously, most of the people that hate sodomites are people that spend the most time around them, contrary to the narrative.
Definitely keep younger children away from him. fαɢɢօts are, per capita, disproportionately pedophiles compared to heterosɛҳuąƖs. Pedophilia is secretly tolerated in fαɢɢօt culture and community, and there's a term, "chicken hawks", that's used non-judgmentally and humorously within the fαɢɢօt community to refer to the pedos.
It goes much deeper than that. Male-on-male pedophilia is fetishized within the fαɢɢօt sub-culture almost as much as male-on-male rape is. Every time you see some scandal about rape in the US Army (which is a huge thing, by the way, nice job never mentioning it,mainstream media) it's almost always a sodomite raping a weaker looking, usually short or scrawny, male. Men are naturally dominant, as God intends, but because the lifestyle of the sodomite is an affront to His order, that dominance manifests in the worse, most perverse way possible.
The horror stories I've both read and heard of senior soldiers/officers, picking out some weak-looking guy, that they often safely assume lacks the spine to fight back, and violating him on an almost daily basis, are unbelievable. They have no mercy. Those that do not immediately repent should literally be burnt alive, and I'm not even kidding.
-
I have a traditional catholic friend whom I have known for about 4 years. We have kids about the same age and we have slowly gotten to know them better. But we have never been invited to their house. We either saw each other at church or invited them to our house. I knew they were living with relatives, so I just figured they were trying to be considerate of them. But recently we were at an event where we met their nephew. He is eighteen or nineteen years old. It was obvious by the way he dressed that he was gαy, he even had a rainbow bracelet and his eyebrows drawn on. They didn’t introduce us, he was just there. Now I wonder if they never invited us over for that reason. I know they have raised him from a young child, so I think they are enabling him. I am not sure if I should just ignore it, or if I should be asking some questions, or reconsidering our friendship entirely. My main worry is that her kids are being raised with him, so some form of normalization is there. How will it effect my kids when they play together? We were planning to meet up regularly and even go on vacation together. I wouldn’t let my kids read books or watch shows that normalize gαyness, so what about friends? What would you do?
If when didn't introduce you to her nephew then it is likely that she is ashamed of him and only tolerates him. This is a sad situation that requires our prayers more than our intrusive questions. I think the best option is to say nothing directly and to not ask questions that would tend to make the situation worse.
-
I know they have raised him from a young child, so I think they are enabling him.
He was never brought to mass? Sounds fishy. I'd avoid the entire family completely. May be that the father or others are closet sodomites. Women have little discernment for picking up on the signs of effeminate inclinations in men, and most men today also lack the sense to detect it. Best to avoid the whole family.
Where is your husband in all of this, what does he have to say?
-
There is little in this world more creepy and inherently disturbing than an openly feminine-acting sodomite. Seriously, most of the people that hate sodomites are people that spend the most time around them, contrary to the narrative.
It goes much deeper than that. Male-on-male pedophilia is fetishized within the fαɢɢօt sub-culture almost as much as male-on-male rape is. Every time you see some scandal about rape in the US Army (which is a huge thing, by the way, nice job never mentioning it,mainstream media) it's almost always a sodomite raping a weaker looking, usually short or scrawny, male. Men are naturally dominant, as God intends, but because the lifestyle of the sodomite is an affront to His order, that dominance manifests in the worse, most perverse way possible.
The horror stories I've both read and heard of senior soldiers/officers, picking out some weak-looking guy, that they often safely assume lacks the spine to fight back, and violating him on an almost daily basis, are unbelievable. They have no mercy. Those that do not immediately repent should literally be burnt alive, and I'm not even kidding.
Excellent contribution. Thanks for the posting.
-
Definitely keep younger children away from him. fαɢɢօts are, per capita, disproportionately pedophiles compared to heterosɛҳuąƖs. Pedophilia is secretly tolerated in fαɢɢօt culture and community, and there's a term, "chicken hawks", that's used non-judgmentally and humorously within the fαɢɢօt community to refer to the pedos.
The proportions of heterosɛҳuąƖ and ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ pedophiles among sex offenders against children: an exploratory study. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1556756
Regarding the very last sentence in the abstract, it's merely a subjective opinion, and it was likely inserted so the study would not be blacklisted by politically correct shills and social-engineers. However, the stats & findings are quantitative and very telling.
Worth repeating, excellent. Thanks.
-
I think I will try to answer questions in one post. I have never met the nephew before, so he has not been to mass that I know of. He was homeschooled. I know he has a job now, so that may have been influential in his choices. My friend is a catholic convert, so she was Protestant before. All the family that live close to them are Protestant as well, and they sound enmeshed.
I can see my friend being ashamed of her nephew. I know they have commented that they don’t agree with his choices, but since he is not their child they don’t feel they can enforce standards the way they can with their kids. Not knowing what they meant specifically I guessed they were talking about him coming to mass. They also mentioned that since the house they were living in was not their house they couldn’t lay down the law. I personally don’t agree with either of those statements. Either he needs to adhere to their standards or live with a different relative. And I would not live where I had to subvert my catholic faith. I understand they sold the home they lived in so they could care for another family member in their home.
I have noticed a few red flags, but mostly it was the enmeshment and lack of boundaries with her family.
My hubby doesn’t know them quite as well as I do, so he wants to know more first. I think he is planning to speak to the husband.
-
:pray: :pray: :pray:
So many families have significant problems.
-
It sounds like a tremendously difficult situation to be in. I don't envy the family. There are a lot of things to think about. You say you don't agree with their statement about him not being their son and therefore them not being able to "lay down the law." Why do you disagree with this? Do you treat your nephews the same way you treat your children? Are you morally entitled to? Besides that, the nephew is an adult. And they don't own their house, so it's not like they can kick him out. And have you thought of the possibilities in a situation where they "come out hard" against him? What if he goes to the state? You're worried that the kids might be corrupted by the ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ-- a fair worry-- they might be worried that their children will be seized if they try to help him.
.
It sounds like a really, really terrible situation. Let the husbands talk about it so yours can learn more. This is a situation where to tread lightly.
-
It sounds like a tremendously difficult situation to be in. I don't envy the family. There are a lot of things to think about. You say you don't agree with their statement about him not being their son and therefore them not being able to "lay down the law." Why do you disagree with this? Do you treat your nephews the same way you treat your children? Are you morally entitled to? Besides that, the nephew is an adult. And they don't own their house, so it's not like they can kick him out. And have you thought of the possibilities in a situation where they "come out hard" against him? What if he goes to the state? You're worried that the kids might be corrupted by the ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ-- a fair worry-- they might be worried that their children will be seized if they try to help him.
.
It sounds like a really, really terrible situation. Let the husbands talk about it so yours can learn more. This is a situation where to tread lightly.
In general, I don’t believe aunts and uncles should be laying down the law with their nieces or nephews, that is their parents job. However, they can certainly lay down what behaviors they will and won’t except if the nephew would like to spend time with them.
In this particular case, there are no parents in the picture. The nephew has been raised by them even before they had any kids of their own, so the could definitely be considered adopted parents. So yes, I do believe they are completely morally entitled to do so. At least while he was a minor. Now that he is an adult, he is free to decide what he wants to do, but if he chooses ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity he should not be allowed to live with them. That is a completely reasonable boundary. The problem is, they don’t seem to know how to enact boundaries.
-
Befriending a family containing deviant members from my experience presupposes acceptance of the situation as normal and not a problem. Whatever the family thinks of the situation among themselves, the disquiet of outsiders would not be welcome and be considered intolerant behaviour worthy of censure. I have been involved in situations where former friends have dared challenge me on this subject as though they were educating me and not the other way round.
This climate has been created and and ingrained in society by the establisment, media and educational system. A breeding ground has been the better universities which have hitherto hidden the condition but now are blatant in promoting and spreading it. I know of parents proud of their children's educational achievements that will never have any grandchildren. But if you were to bring up the subject, they would claw your eyes out!
-
In general, I don’t believe aunts and uncles should be laying down the law with their nieces or nephews, that is their parents job. However, they can certainly lay down what behaviors they will and won’t except if the nephew would like to spend time with them.
In this particular case, there are no parents in the picture. The nephew has been raised by them even before they had any kids of their own, so the could definitely be considered adopted parents. So yes, I do believe they are completely morally entitled to do so. At least while he was a minor. Now that he is an adult, he is free to decide what he wants to do, but if he chooses ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity he should not be allowed to live with them. That is a completely reasonable boundary. The problem is, they don’t seem to know how to enact boundaries.
.
In the abstract, I don't disagree at all. I'm just saying that there are real practical considerations that affect a situation like this: him not being an adult, the legal nature of the relationship between them (did they actually adopt him or did he just happen to live with them and over time they became his de facto caregivers?), the fact that they have no legal power to remove him from the environment, the fact that if they try to "intervene" they could conceivably be reported to authorities, and so on. These profoundly complicate this specific situation, even if in the abstract the best solution is already clear.
-
.
In the abstract, I don't disagree at all. I'm just saying that there are real practical considerations that affect a situation like this: him not being an adult, the legal nature of the relationship between them (did they actually adopt him or did he just happen to live with them and over time they became his de facto caregivers?), the fact that they have no legal power to remove him from the environment, the fact that if they try to "intervene" they could conceivably be reported to authorities, and so on. These profoundly complicate this specific situation, even if in the abstract the best solution is already clear.
I can see what you are saying, and it makes sense that there is more to consider than simply setting a boundary. However, given my experience with them, it seems much more a situation of enmeshment than a fear of getting in trouble with the state. Also a false charity. In fact it reminds me very much of my own family. My mother thought she was doing a work of charity by taking in an old catholic man who could no longer live by himself. He regularly said inappropriate things, but she totally ignored it. When he came to live with my family he constantly made sɛҳuąƖ comments to my little sisters. He told other people he was in a relationship with my mom. My mother excused it, saying old people lose their inhibitions. When he could no longer live with them she made my sisters visit him in the nursing home is the name of charity, where he continued to make sɛҳuąƖ comments, jokes and passes at my sisters. My mom was convinced that what she was doing was charitable, despite the fact that she was degrading her own children. I really sense my friend is doing the same thing.
-
Sadly, many children are now being raised in homes such as this one. The children and even sometimes adults have no say in where or with whom they live. People TRULY DO NOT KNOW what's natural and normal. How can they when they've never experienced or seen it, or when they are helpless to change their situation?
Obviously, the father cannot order an adult male (?) out of a house that is not his. It sounds to me as if the father is emasculated in so far as his rightful authority over his family's living conditions. I think the two MEN should have a talk about getting the Catholic family out of the situation. Is there anyone in your chapel who can rent or sell them a home of their own? Even temporarily? If the ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ nephew is 18 or 19, and of sound mind, then he has made his choice. Pray for him, yes, but there isn't anything else to do when one is a guest in another man's castle. Man is a social animal. He cannot survive entirely alone for an indefinite, extended time. Like it or not, we are Catholics IN THE WORLD.
Speak with your children as appropriate to their ages about this effeminate man. Warn them to keep their distance, but do so in a way that they keep their minds free of him. Morbid curiosity can quickly turn to sin.
Definitely do not vacation with them!
Possibly go out to eat or to a public place for a picnic with them, but if you do, be sure the children are directly supervised by you or your husband at all times. No private, kids-only play or conversation allowed.
I have a female cousin whose elder son has made himself into a woman. He now has a "partner" of unknown gender. The "couple" live with my cousin, her shack-up male partner, his adult lesbian daughter, and my cousin's two minor children, a girl of 8 and a boy of 11, both from different prior relationships. The adults all receive welfare and all but one work off the books at various jobs. There are three new vehicles in the driveway, an in-the-ground pool out back, patio, barbecue pit, nice landscaping professionally done. They go on cruises several times a year, and they own two Great Danes and a Collie.
Twenty years ago, this cousin was married to a man, had three children with that man. The man was gainfully employed at a printing firm. My cousin made custom cakes to sell from home and was mainly a homemaker, wife, and mother. They owned two used cars, went on picnics, or visiting for vacations, and lived in a small starter house in a working class neighborhood. Hubby was a volunteer fire fighter. They were married at St. Rita's RC Church, and went to Mass (n.o.) every week. My cousin taught the First Holy Communion catechism class to second graders for a few years.
What happened? Husband was caught cheating, they separated, divorced. Husband took two girls, wife, the boy. Husband moved back to U.K., remarried, girls visited a few times then drifted away. Wife lost 95 lbs., got plastic surgery, started a partying lifestyle, went through man after man, tried out a woman, son left to raise himself, was abused by mom's boyfriends, decided he was "gαy," then that he wasn't , he was a woman in a man's body. Had surgery, hormones, the works. Cousin gets abandoned with a boy by one guy, a girl by another. Current guy's adult lesbian daughter becomes homeless, moves in with her father and his "family." Mass? Church? God? "You're joking, right?"
VOILA! The new normal American family!
As a child, my family used to get together with cousins family at least once a month. We'd have cookouts, kids would play in yard, adults tslk, play jarts, badminton, we'd go on picnics at the river, swim, boat, fish...clean family fun after Sunday Mass or on Saturday. All my cousins on both sides of our family lived similarly. Grandparents and often neighborhood friends joined us.
Out of this large extended family, there are only three people left who have kept the traditions and the Faith. Me, age 60, Mom, 94, Dad, 88. I never married; wanted to be a teaching sister, but there were no real ones left by the time I'd have tried it out. Of three brothers and two sisters, all are divorced, one is "remarried," two are "shacked-up," one is deceased. Two grandchildren exist, but their mother hasn't communicated with the family in a decade. The boys would be high school age by now. One sister calls Mom and Dad about once a month. She never contacts me and despite living 12 miles from Mom and Dad, almost never visits them. I live 85 miles, call every day, drive out out on Friday night and drive back very early on Monday morning. I've discovered I basically cannot retire. At 60, I work 55-60 hours at a private school teaching special needs children. When I get home, I eat, shower, pray the Rosary, and fall into bed so I can get up and do it again the next day. Saturdays I clean, shop, do laundry, and cook for the three of us. Sundays we go to Mass if Mom's health allows. If not, we read the Mass. In the afternoon I do lesson plans, prep work, then go to bed by 8:30 as I have to be out by 3:50 am.
VOILA! THE NEW NORMAL AMERICAN CATHOLIC FAMILY LIFE!
If we took surveys of such things at trad. chapels, and everyone was 100% honest, I think we'd discover almost nobody is unaffected by these sorts of problems.
-
I can see what you are saying, and it makes sense that there is more to consider than simply setting a boundary. However, given my experience with them, it seems much more a situation of enmeshment than a fear of getting in trouble with the state. Also a false charity. In fact it reminds me very much of my own family. My mother thought she was doing a work of charity by taking in an old catholic man who could no longer live by himself. He regularly said inappropriate things, but she totally ignored it. When he came to live with my family he constantly made sɛҳuąƖ comments to my little sisters. He told other people he was in a relationship with my mom. My mother excused it, saying old people lose their inhibitions. When he could no longer live with them she made my sisters visit him in the nursing home is the name of charity, where he continued to make sɛҳuąƖ comments, jokes and passes at my sisters. My mom was convinced that what she was doing was charitable, despite the fact that she was degrading her own children. I really sense my friend is doing the same thing.
.
You're much closer to the situation than I am, so your impression is worth more.
.
If/when your husband talks to the other husband, I'd love to hear how that went. Even if they're mainly to fault for this, perhaps their friendship with you is in some sense their way of trying to figure out a way to become better with the boundary issues. In my experience, people who are poor at setting boundaries and who lack courage do not typically make a habit of getting close to people who take them very seriously-- you might have something useful to teach them!
-
He was never brought to mass? Sounds fishy. I'd avoid the entire family completely. May be that the father or others are closet sodomites. Women have little discernment for picking up on the signs of effeminate inclinations in men, and most men today also lack the sense to detect it. Best to avoid the whole family.
Where is your husband in all of this, what does he have to say?
There is probably more to this situation than anyone here would know about. The less said the better. Less gossip more prayers.
-
The less said the better. Less gossip more prayers.
/thread
-
Vianney, St. Jean Marie. Sermons of the Curé of Ars: Sermons for all the Sundays and Feast Days of the Year (Kindle Locations 4636-4744). KIC. Kindle Edition.
ELEVENTH SUNDAY AFTER PENTECOST ~DETRACTION~
“And the sting of his tongue was; loosed; and he spoke right.” —Mark vii. 35.
SYNOPSIS.—Detraction a very common sin, although one of the most vicious and one of the most harmful. It brings the saddest consequences in its train. The different ways in which we may become guilty of detraction, and other sins often caused by it.
Definition of detraction.
Calumny.
Exaggeration of faults.
Making known the faults of others without good reason.
Disparaging the good actions of others.
Detraction by significant silence.
Pretended pity.
Tale bearing.
How we should act when slandered or calumniated.
How slanderers must accuse themselves in Confession.
It is greatly to be desired that it might be said of each of us what the Gospel says of this deaf mute, whom Christ healed, “He spoke right.” Alas, on the contrary, can we not be reproached for very frequently speaking wrong, when we speak of our neighbor? In fact, what is in that respect the behavior of the greater part of the Christians of today? They criticize, censure and generally denounce the actions of their neighbor: this is of all evil habits the most common, the most widespread, and perhaps the most vicious and the most harmful. It is a vice which we can never sufficiently detest; a vice, which brings in its train the saddest consequences, and spreads harm, and affliction everywhere. Ah, that God would give me the coal with which the angel cleansed the lips of the prophet Isaias, so that I might purify the tongues of all men. How much misery would be banished from the face of the earth, if we could exterminate backbiting, slander, and defamation of character! If, my dear brethren, I could inspire you with great horror of these great wrongs, you might be delivered from them forever- more, and I will therefore attempt to show you: What detraction is; in what different ways we may become guilty of it, and what other sins are very often caused by it. I will not attempt to show you the enormity and heinousness of this vice of detraction, which causes so much misery, and which is the origin of so many other sins, of so much hatred, even of murders, and lifelong enmities. This vice spares neither good nor bad; it is enough for me to tell you, that this vice is one of those that are responsible for most of the souls that go to hell. It is necessary to know the many various ways in which we may become guilty of this sin, so that knowing this evil, we may the more easily avoid it, and avoid the harm which it causes in the lives of others. If you ask: What is detraction, I have to answer: It consists of making known a defect or fault of our neighbor unnecessarily, and in such way as to cause him injury, to his good name or otherwise. This may happen in various ways.
When we impute something bad to our neighbor which he has not committed, a defect which he does not possess, we commit calumny; a most detestable act, which unfortunately, and in spite of its great wrong, is very common. This is not detraction, it is more sinful, but from detraction to calumny is only a small step. If we are honest, we must admit that we invariably add something to, or magnify the bad which we know of our neighbor. A slanderous story that has passed from tongue to tongue, no longer resembles that which was said at first, it has been so much engrossed and aggravated; from which fact we must conclude that a detractor is almost invariably also a calumniator, and a calumniator is a very wicked person. We exaggerate as a rule the bad that our neighbor does. When you notice any one commit a fault what do you do? Instead of covering it with the mantle of charity, or at least trying to excuse it, you like to exaggerate it. St. Francis of Sales says: “Do not say this or that one is a drunkard, and a thief, because he once stole or was intoxicated; Noah and Loth were intoxicated once, and yet neither the one nor the other were drunkards.” St. Peter was not a blasphemer because he blasphemed once. A person is not vicious, because he once fell into sin, even not if this happened several times; therefore, we run danger of being guilty of detraction if we accuse them. When Simon saw Magdalen weeping at our Saviour’s feet, he said: “This man, if he were a prophet, would know surely that this woman at his feet is a sinner.” He was greatly mistaken: Magdalen was no longer a sinner, but a holy penitent, because all her sins had been forgiven her. Consider the proud Pharisee, who in the Temple praised his own good works, and thanked God that he was not like others, adulterers, extortioners, and thieves, or like the publican. He denounced the publican as a sinner, when at that very moment this publican was justified.
“My dear children,” exclaimed St. Francis de Sales, “since God’s mercy is so great that one moment suffices for Him to pardon the greatest crimes, how dare we say, that a man who yesterday was a great sinner, is the same today!” We invariably deceive ourselves if we think badly of our neighbor, no matter what reasons we have for our opinion. We are also guilty of detraction when without sufficient reason we disclose secret faults or bad actions of our neighbor. There are persons who think that if they know anything bad about their neighbor, they may tell it to others, and make it a subject of conversation. This is a grave error. Our faith enjoins upon us nothing so much as love of our neighbor. Reason itself tells us that we should not do to others, what we do not wish done to ourselves. Let us look at this subject more closely: Would we like it if someone saw us commit a fault, and then went and made it known to everybody? Certainly not; on the contrary, were he charitable enough to hide it, we should feel very grateful to him. Consider how annoyed you feel when anyone says anything derogatory of you or your family. Justice and charity are opposed to this carrying of tales. As long as our neighbor’s faults are concealed he preserves his good name; but as soon as you make them known his reputation is injured and you thereby cause him a greater injustice than if you robbed him of his belongings, for the Holy Ghost tells us that a good name is above riches. We commit the sin of detraction when we put a disparaging interpretation on our neighbor’s good actions. Such persons impute motives to you, which you never had; they slight all your doings and sayings: If you are pious and perform your religious duties faithfully, you are in their eyes, a hypocrite. They say sneeringly, that you are a saint in church, but a devil at home. If you do good works, they claim that you do them from pride, to show yourself. If you avoid association with evil doers, they call you an idiot. If you look carefully after your affairs, they say you are miserly. Yes, dear brethren, we may say with truth, that the tongue of the detractor is like a worm which gnaws all good fruits: that is to say, the best actions of man, and seeks to make them look bad. We may commit the sin of detraction even by significant silence; when someone is praised in your presence, you remain silent; the expression of your face, your scornful, significant smile causes suspicions of the one who is being praised.
Others clothe their evil work in the dress of pretended pity. “You know So-and-so,” they will say. “Have you heard what happened to him? Ah, it is too bad that he was so careless! You would hardly have believed that he would do such things!” St. Francis says that such detraction is like a poisoned arrow that is dipped into oil, so that it may penetrate deeper. But the most atrocious detraction and the most lamentable in its consequences is that, when we carry back to others what has been said of them. Such informants produce the most frightful evils, arouse hatred, even bƖσσdshɛd. To understand how culpable such persons are, the Holy Ghost says: “God hates six things; but the seventh he abhors, and that is ‘tale-bearing.’” Here we have briefly the various ways in which we can commit the sin of detraction. Examine your heart and see whether you have not been guilty in one of these ways. We must not be anxious to believe all the bad that we hear about others; even if appearances are against the accused, we should not readily believe. Remember that St. Francis de Sales was once accused of having killed a man, so that he might live with his wife. The Saint left it all in God’s hands, and had no fear for his good name. To those who advised him to defend himself, he made answer that he would leave the task of making reparation to the care of the one of whose permission his good name had been smirched.
That calumny is one of the greatest afflictions for man is proved by the fact that God permitted the Saints, to whom He sent the greatest trials, to be calumniated. If detraction or calumny is our share, the best thing that we can do, is to keep silent, beseech God that we may bear it for love of Him, and pray for our calumniators. Console yourselves with the thought that God permits it to befall those whom He regards with a merciful eye. When anyone is calumniated, God has decided to lead that one to a high state of perfection. We ought to commiserate those who slander us; but tor ourselves personally we should rejoice; for these are trials which will count for us in heaven. Let us return to our subject, because our chief object is to learn how the detractor injures himself. Detraction may easily become a mortal sin, and certainly is a mortal sin in important matters, where grave results are the consequence. St. Paul numbers it amongst those sins which close heaven against us. The Holy Ghost says that the detractor is cursed by God, that he is an abomination before God and men. Detraction is great or small according to circuмstances, or to the dignity of the person spoken of. It is a greater sin to make known the defects and faults of our superiors, our parents, of husband or wife, brothers, sisters, or relations, than those of strangers, because we should have more charity for our friends than for others. To speak badly of persons consecrated to God, of the servants of the church, is a much greater sin on account of the lamentable results to religion and of the detriment to their position. The Holy Ghost speaking by the mouth of the prophet says: “To abuse and revile His (the Holy Ghost's) servants is to touch the apple of His eye”; that means nothing can offend Him more.
This sin consequently is a crime, the enormity of which surpasses all comprehension. Christ also said: “Whosoever despises you, despises me.” After all this, dear brethren, you will readily admit, that for a good Confession it is not sufficient to say that you have slandered your neighbor; you must also say whether it happened from levity, hatred or revenge, or whether we sought to injure our neighbor’s reputation. We must mention of what persons we spoke; whether it was about superiors, parents, or persons consecrated to God, and whether we spoke this to one or many persons: all this is required for a good Confession. Some people, when asked whether their detraction injured their neighbor, answer no. You are in error, my friends! Every time that you reveal an unknown fault of your neighbor’s, you injure him; for in every case you lessen the respect which those who are listening to you, had for him. Hence we may conclude that we can hardly ever say anything bad of our neighbor without in one way or another injuring his good name. But, you will say, when it is already known, then there is no more harm. My friends, if the whole body of some unfortunate person was covered with leprosy, except a small part, and if you said: Because nearly the whole body is covered with leprosy this place ought to be covered too, would this be charitable and just? You must, on the contrary, have compassion upon the unfortunate person, conceal and excuse his faults as much as possible. Consider, whether it would be right, if, seeing a sick man on the brink of an abyss, we would take advantage of his feebleness and of his perilous position to push him down? Now we do the same thing when we dwelt upon the know defects of others. But you will say, may we not tell them to a friend under the seal of secrecy? There again you are in error, for why should you expect others to keep a secret when you cannot yourself do so? It is like saying to a person: “My friend, I want to tell you something, but be wiser and more reliable than I; do not break the secret which I am about to break.”
The best thing is to be silent in matters that do not concern us, no matter what is said or done do not meddle with anything, except to work for your own salvation. The Holy Ghost says: “Those who speak too much do not always speak well.” I hope to God, that my words have made a lasting impression upon your minds and hearts, and that you have realized the great wrong of evil speaking. I may safely say that a majority of us have suffered one way or the other by detraction, slander or calumny, and the bitter woe and heartache caused by these sins are perhaps not unknown to you. Be careful then, not to do to others that which you do not wish done to you. Sometimes, when desiring to pay a high tribute to the good qualities of a friend, we say: “He never speaks ill of others.” This proves that we are conscious of the wickedness of evil speaking. Let us then try and earn this high tribute for ourselves, and let us show to our neighbor the mercy which on our last day we shall expect of God. Amen.
-
First of all, you don't invite evil into your home. Your Mother exposed you to false charity and danger to your souls. No " Catholic" man would cuss or be perverted. The man sounded like he was possessed.
And yes. An Aunt and a Uncle has a Catholic duty to save their relatives' souls. If the aunt and uncle own the house, it should be their rules. The man should be head of the house; not some spoiled rotten young man.
You have a husband and you were blessed with children. That should be enough. Your children have each other and you.
Stop the false charity. Instead of vacationing, your trad friends should be saving money to move out on their own instead of exposing their children to a disturbed young man. Children are taking everything in. They see that sin is being accepted.
-
Seraphina, it is so sad what is happening to our families. My husband and I are shunned. Just found out most of our nieces and nephews have been brainwashed to be sodomites. I wonder if my sister in law who is a sister of no mercy is a lesbian. I do know she voted for Hellery.
-
Being shunned turned out to be blessing.
-
Keep your kids away for sure. But, did the boy also have gαy mannerisms? I've noticed that the kind of dress you describe has become more common among boys in general as there's increasing effeminacy and androgyny.
-
Our friend left the Church after his sister's husband was having sodomite sex with the parish priest. His sister remains with husband because of the five children to support.
-
I question whether this kind of gossip and calumny? detraction? is in line with Catholic morality?
-
No intention of gossiping.
Pointing out that sins of sodomy and adultery is spreading. And no one is sorry for their sins; excuses are made to justify them.
-
I'm just wondering what your Catholic friend, the convert mother is thinking?
I would keep my family at a distance, but still try to maintain a friendship with her.
Since she surrounded by protestants, I'd expect she could use Catholic friends as the situation develops.
If you maintain a rapport with her, you can offer the Catholic perspective and even key advice.
-
Love and pray for that poor ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ man.
But keep your children away from him - if your children are old enough, explain what a horrible state that ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ is in.
-
Love and pray for that poor ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ man.
But keep your children away from him - if your children are old enough, explain what a horrible state that ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ is in.
We don't even know that this person in question is ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ. He could be just very avante guarde in his style.