Skip to main content

On Pastoral Theology (Again)

Pastoral theology isn't just for pastors. Pastoral theology is the art and science of leading people to know, understand, and love God. It involves essentially "translating" the truths of the faith into language and experience that people understand. Sometimes, though, it involves sinners being sinners. We all know that correction and admonition can be part of that, but how do you actually speak the truth in love, in concrete situations?

If it is true that God has designed our sexuality in a particular way, such that any number of behaviors are contrary to His purpose by their very nature, I have to speak that truth at some point. Maybe not in 30 seconds. Maybe not upon meeting their loved ones for the first time. Maybe not. But if I never say it, if I don't hold out God's design and purpose as a goal, then I do not love them as God does, and for His sake.

But someone linked a story, obviously to provoke a reaction, of a "gay" couple bringing forward the gifts of bread and wine that would be used for the Eucharistic sacrifice. It will become the body and blood, soul and divinty, of Our Lord. Am I against that?

No. I want all wicked sinners to know and believe that they belong at Mass. You might not actually be worthy to receive Holy Communion. I've been there myself. But bringing the gifts is a great act of service to God and others. It's something praiseworthy that anyone should do, if they can.

I suppose another problem is that in most places, families bring the gifts. Well, true enough that we don't want to communicate that various arrangements are families when they aren't. But perhaps we should discourage the bringing of the gifts as principally a family activity. Just thinking out loud. I definitely want people to know that they are welcome, even if they are sinners. We all are, at one time or other.

But about Fr. James Martin, SJ: I find most things he says unclear, at best. At worst, from what I've seen, he distorts the teaching of the Church on human sexuality. I would never speak of "our LGBT brothers and sisters" and similar things, because I leave ordinary people with the impression that homosexuality is an acceptable part of a normal Christian life. Or that the Church will teach otherwise. She won't, because she can't. Father, you should know better, and I suspect you do.

If I encountered someone who was really emotionally harmed by Westboro Baptist Church or someone, I might be extra-gentle in presenting the topic. But it's not a time to be seeker-sensitive. Overall, I have not been in a place where Christian leaders were insensitive to good people who were struggling with sin. In fact, I see a much greater danger of Christians failing to speak the truth, or hold on to truths they know, because they are unpopular. Divorce, fornication, adultery, you name it. Someone somewhere is ready to excuse it, because it will cost them something to tell the truth.

It's absolutely true that God is Love. But actually, especially with God, it's OK to say, "Define your terms." It's the best thing I learned in school. You think at first you're being pedantic, but then you realize, "If we don't say what we mean, we won't know what we're doing."

If your child does drugs, it might feel good to say or do lots of things, but love wants, and wills, and goes toward what's best for another person. If you don't do that, it isn't love.

I don't find the Catechism hurtful or insensitive at all. Convicting, at times, perhaps. But I always return to the truth that God loves me, and He won't ever deceive me. "The Church teaches..." and "Jesus says..." are functionally equivalent. The Church's essential character is holiness, the perfect otherness that defines God's purity and perfection, not by nature, but by a divine gift.

So, you won't hear me whine about "the institutional Church," either. I digress.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

We Don't Need No Magisterium: (Jason's Version) (But Actually, We Do)

Hilarious Com-Box Quote of The Day: "I was caught immediately because it is the Acts of the Apostles, not the Acts of the Holy Spirit Acting Erratically."--Donald Todd, reacting to the inartful opposition of the Holy Spirit and the Magisterium. Mark Galli, an editor at Christianity Today, had suggested that today's "confusion" in evangelicalism replicates a confusion on the day of Pentecost. Mr. Todd commented after this reply , and the original article is here. My thoughts: By what means was this Church-less "consensus" formed? If the Council did not possess the authority to adjudicate such questions, who does? If the Council Fathers did not intend to be the arbiters, why do they say that they do? At the risk of being rude, I would define evangelicalism as, "Whatever I want or need to believe at any particular time." Ecclesial authority to settle a particular question is a step forward, but only as long as, "God alone is Lord of the con...

Who Is Out Here Having Sex And Children With People They Don’t Like?

 And look, I’m not married. I’ve never been married. I have no children. I didn’t choose that; things just worked out that way. If you must know, I haven’t had sexual intercourse either. I probably should say “coitus,” so I am not arguing with some progressive activist about what “sexual intercourse” means. But I figured out from influencer videos or something what a “dead bedroom” was. Unless a couple mutually agrees that they don’t want to have sex/coitus anymore (hopefully to pray and serve) this is usually bad. I’ve known enough couples that it’s probably an indicator of trouble, especially for couples who are still able to have children. Is it really that wild to at least hope that Mr. and Mrs. Vance love each other? That a fourth child yet born at least might indicate that they enjoy each other?  Children are definitely not responsible for their parents’ happiness. That’s absolutely true. But wouldn’t any child hope their parents were happy, when they came into being? As...

What I Should Have Said

 I was functionally fired from my teaching job in November, 2024, after an unjust administrative "process" initiated by HR , and triggered by false accusations the content of which I was never told. My "defense" therefore could have no reasonable basis or direction. I won't say the name of the Local Education Agency, but the town where I lived and worked was Cheraw, South Carolina. I think that once I was on administrative leave, they could use nearly any indiscretion of mine as the final straw to remove me. I did connect with students on social media in protest, and I did express hope that I would quickly be returned to the classroom. The principal of the high school where I worked--a true lackey of the bureaucracy, and fully committed to educational ideas, methods, and solutions that don't work--also allowed his personal dislike of me to take the form of a belief that I was a substandard teacher. He gave me an unsatisfactory review on October 12, and we ha...