Wednesday, September 22, 2010

MOPS and a break

I finally got HB to take a nap. I also got Mammita to take a nap. I figured that they would be out of sinc since HB usually takes one at 12 noon and then again at 4, but not today. He was too wired. I ended up putting him and Mammita down just now. This is usually when Mammita sleeps.

I went to MOPS today. That's where I picked up Mammita. MOPS (Mothers of Preschoolers) is a non-denomination mom's group. Today they had someone come in from a group that deals with elections and candidates. It was an interesting talk, but you know me. I'm already a politically charged battery. I'm so glad that I left to feed the baby because it took every ounce of my being to not say how ridiculous. I mean she was good in the sense that she talked about parent's should have right's about what should and should not be taught in a public school system to their children. But to some extent, parents can't regulate everything. If they want a child to learn a particular set of values, you won't find that in a public school. The other alternatives are homeschooling and parochial school. Sorry. That's just the facts. Although the King and King book that was required reading in Massachusetts is a bit extreme. I think some highly politically charged things should be allowed to opt out of.

Anyways...this brought us to our discussion groups. We talked about some of the other topics and then I mentioned that I'm Catholic (and a muscian so I know a lot of gay people). I said that I was taught that it was the act that was wrong (gay sex) and that being gay was okay. Someone asked if that wasn't being hypocritical. Then I had to get into the teachings on the church. You know where every sex act must have two components: love and procreation (openness to life). And that's why Catholics don't do BC. I said the attraction part is okay. Well someone misunderstood my definition of "attraction" and took that to mean lust. She said "well I follow the Bible and it says that this is wrong even for heterosexuals. It's adultery."

Attraction, my friends, is not adultery. I had to bit my tongue hard and just let it slide. But in my mind I kept thinking. So you're attracted to your husband, but you love him so it's not lust. Right? Attraction is feeling drawn to someone or something. I'm attracted to music. I'm attracted to blogging. I'm attracted to some of my best girl friends because their funny and whatnot. Does that mean I want to go sleep with one of them? No, it's not that type of attraction. Lust is a perverted form of attraction. It's where you feel nothing for a person except in a sexual way. I'm attracted to my husband and I love him. I feel more for him beyond the sex.

So yes, homosexuals can feel attraction for a person of the same sex, as strange as that may sound. It's the act and perverseness against God's law to be lustful of a person that things go wrong. God intends us to be attracted to someone (hey, we don't have arranged marriages here). He expects that attraction to turn into love, not lust. And lust isn't just gay marriage or gay sex. Lust is premarital sex and co-habitation.

But I think the thing that bothered me most about the whole conversation was the fact that she said "well, I follow the Bible." Is it a common misconception that Catholics don't follow the Bible? Because we do. I read it and have all my life. Biblical interpretation and theology is something else entirely. If she interprets passages differently than myself or the Catholic faith, fine. No problem. But if she is meaning that she follows the Bible and I don't. I get a little upset. No, I don't follow her denomination's interpretation. But then so don't the Anglicans, Lutherans, and Orthodox faiths. I believe, I could be wrong, that all of them have no problem with gays just with the perverseness of gay sex. And as far as I understand things, we all follow the Bible and it's teachings just what those are exactly are up for debate.

Sorry, had to get that off my chest. It upset me to think that someone really thought that a theological difference meant that I didn't "follow the Bible."


  1. *Hugs* I've had that attitude aimed at me quite a bit. My fault, the school I went too lol. But it can hurt... and what you were saying makes perfect sense. Unfortunately if someone's got that attitude they go looking for any little thing they can twist like that.

  2. In her defense, the phrase "follow the Bible" is often said. I don't think that she intended it to be hurtful. What I think she meant was her interpretation of the Bible.

    I am one of the few who are Catholic who attend. MOPS official stance is that it follows the teachings of the Bible. And our particular group meets at a Baptist church. Catholics, I suppose, are a little different breed in that we follow "regulations" and teachings that are strict and aren't open for personal interpretation. Although a vast majority of Catholics do have their own personal interpretation. So when we have these group discussions, for whatever reason, they turn theological. And again, I bring up the Church's stance. I'm guessing because I don't give a whole lot of detail people don't understand it.

  3. That's why I think the one woman thought it was hypocritical until I pointed out why the act was considered sinful but not necessarily the person. The "follower of the Bible" lady was basically saying that to be gay meant that you were sinful. Although she did say that the she herself is sinful and that the Bible says not to judge a person so she can't judge a gay person.

    I wasn't saying that the Church or myself say to judge a gay person either, which was my point in saying that just being yourself doesn't make you sinful. It's our actions that make us sinful (or the lack of action). Also, and more importantly, our intentions are what causes us to sin.

    I didn't know, for example, that if you haven't gone to confession for a mortal sin, and then receive communion that you are causing another mortal sin. But since I didn't know that, I wasn't committing another sin. Now that I know, I know not to receive until I get a chance to go to confession.

    So for a gay person whose been gay since childhood, how can you say that they are sinful?

  4. No I agree with you. This subject came up when I was in Lubbock because there was a guy in our Church choir that was gay. And I agree they don't always mean to be hurtful... what I meant was they're so stuck in that mindset that they won't hear anything else and jump at the first thing they think is wrong. Others do it to be mean, but that isn't as common. I've dealt with both. Only one or two who meant to be that way though thankfully. Either way it can still hurt. Honestly I think the ones who don't mean to do it hurt worse because it shows how little they think of you. Of course I could just be interpreting it that way because of what happened in college, but still.

  5. Sorry, if I sounded defensive. I wasn't trying to. I figured that I should give more context instead of rant.

    A lot of people I knew growing up were taught that Catholicism was not a form of Christianity. That we were "other." So whenever they heard some Catholic theology or hear that I was Catholic, they took it to mean that I need to be saved or evangelized. Their heart was in the right place, but their mindset was to automatically listen to someone else's garbage without asking me, the Catholic. There were so many misunderstandings that even if I cleared them up (or tried to), they wouldn't listen. For example, I would tell them that I was baptized and I would be told that I still wasn't saved because I didn't make the choice myself. But then I was quick to say that have been this way all my life. I guess I don't understand how a person can't be Christian if they were brought up this way and believed this way all their life. I mean it isn't just Catholics who baptize their babies.

    But don't get me wrong, this is not how everybody was. My best friend from College was Baptist and she never said that I wasn't Christian. My other best friend who was also Baptist didn't say that either. In fact, his brother and SIL are both Catholics. So when I visited his church once and heard the minister get up there and Catholic bash, he was highly embarrassed. I think his feeling was that while may disagree about some teachings it's still not the way to convert someone.

    So I totally understand what you're talking about. I think God has made it my life's mission to try and set the record straight. That or he's putting my faith to the fire.

    The biggest problem for me is discernment. When is it a good time to press a Catholic issue and when is it better to back off and avoid hostile conflict. I think what I did yesterday was probably what God wanted me to do. Explain the Church's stance and leave it alone. I'm hoping that the MOPS group doesn't shun me as a result and instead remains open.


I love to read your thoughts. Thanks for sharing!