“Affirming” church not doing it for us

[Anonymous]

Since you said you enjoyed a recent Catholic mass, would consider Holy Trinity in Georgetown, which is Jesuit. As someone who attended both non-Jesuit Catholic schools and a Jesuit school and who has a DS who attends a Jesuit high school, I think Jesuit Catholic churches generally are more progressive and welcoming. They tend to be more focused on community service, caring about others, being a good person etc.

We also are friends with a gay married couple who attends Holy Trinity. Both grew up Catholic but eventually left the church. When they adopted a child, they wanted her to be raised with some religion. They asked if she could be baptized at HT and they were willing to do it. They’ve been parishioners since and said they feel welcome there.

[Anonymous]

Just an FYI, the Catholic Church in Colorado is currently fighting for the “right” to take taxpayer dollars meant for universal pre-K to discriminate against the children of gay parents. They are doing this after their brethren in Philadelphia successfully lobbied the Supreme Court to allow Catholic Charities to take taxpayer dollars to discriminate against gay families in adoption and foster cases.

A sane person would say that anyone LGBQT who signs up for that kind of abuse might have psychological problems. It’s one thing to discriminate- quite another to demand the taxpayers to subsidize it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, I think you're asking an important question and bringing up issues you are uniquely suited to call out. My friends who are looking for what you are looking for speak highly of United Methodist congregations, particularly one in Annadale, I think, I can get the exact name if you want it.
As another resource, I have been really blessed to watch some recent interviews with Dr. David Bennett who might not have the same convictions as yourself, but who is using his studies and life experience to speak specifically to more conservative congregations who need to get over thinking there's something inherently righteous about heterosexuality. I'm believing you will find a great church community as God leads you.

Fundamentalist born-again Christians (the only kind of Christian entering heaven) are not saying heterosexuality is righteous (it is just God’s natural order) but that the Bible says clearly that adultery, fornication, and homosexuality are unrighteous behavior per 1 Corinthians 6:9

Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

You are deceived if you think/feel/believe that homosexuality is righteous behavior in line with God’s natural order. There is no compromise on this matter.

And yet there you are singling out homosexuality among a long list of behaviors exhibited by pretty much all of humanity in one way or another.

It was so singled out because false teachers in the church are declaring homosexuality to be normal and not a sin, even saying God made people gay when he did no such thing, any more than God created adulterers, liars, thieves, and drunkards: it is acquired behavior.

OP’s whole point is that she doesn’t necessarily agree with churches saying “God made gays” or whatever. She seems to be comfortable with a questioning or gray area or allowance for discernment rather than adopting the progressive viewpoints exactly as some denominations have done.
Men buggering teen boys in bible times is just not the same thing as two adult women sharing a bed. It just isn’t.

You seem pretty set in your ways and don’t seem curious. Very black and white. Does your family talk to you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whoa OP, I was going to say you shouldn't write off entire denominations after visiting one church, the community and emphasis of Episcopalians (or any other) can vary hugely from one congregation to the next so you might find a better fit.

But I see above that you want a church that's accepting of gay but not trans people? Good luck with that.

That’s reductive and not at all what I’m saying.
It’s not about being “accepting”. It’s about adopting specific beliefs not tied to scripture. Scripture does not support the existence of a more than 2 sexes, and it also doesn’t support same sex marriage. That doesn’t mean we cannot be compassionate and welcoming to people who experience same sex attraction or do not conform to male or female stereotypes in some way. I don’t have all the answers, but there needs to be some room for people to exist and be welcomed in community without simply adopting the exact current progressive ideologies.

I guess I'd ask what about the Catholic Church makes you feel like you can't exist there in precisely this way, then?

It doesn’t, necessarily. My aunt who is divorced, has friends in her congregation who are gay. It’s more the uncertainty of knowing how to fit in. I have visited multiple Catholic churches in NoVa and they are definitely not all the same.
Most if not all of the gay Catholics we know were raised Catholic. I don’t know any gay people who converted to Catholicism.

Ah...yeah. I encountered this issue in college - I'm not gay but I don't agree with the Catholic church's theology of sexuality more broadly. The problem is, tons of cradle Catholics don't either, but they're already members so they make their own peace. You can't do that as a convert. You have to affirmatively sign on to everything to become Catholic. If you actually DO agree that any kind of sexual relationship you might have as a gay person is simple, you can do that...but do you?

Yes, this is what it comes down to and why it won’t work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just an FYI, the Catholic Church in Colorado is currently fighting for the “right” to take taxpayer dollars meant for universal pre-K to discriminate against the children of gay parents. They are doing this after their brethren in Philadelphia successfully lobbied the Supreme Court to allow Catholic Charities to take taxpayer dollars to discriminate against gay families in adoption and foster cases.

A sane person would say that anyone LGBQT who signs up for that kind of abuse might have psychological problems. It’s one thing to discriminate- quite another to demand the taxpayers to subsidize it.

I don’t know. I’m gay and not bothered by adoption/fostering being to male-female couples. Kids need a mom and a dad. Adults are not entitled to a child. If Catholic Charities is actually causing some kids not to be adopted who otherwise would be, then that could be a problem, but not sure there is evidence of that.

[Anonymous]

Holy Trinity in Gtown is a good rec. as is Floris UMC in Herndon. I’d also check out St. Anne’s Episcopal in Reston.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just an FYI, the Catholic Church in Colorado is currently fighting for the “right” to take taxpayer dollars meant for universal pre-K to discriminate against the children of gay parents. They are doing this after their brethren in Philadelphia successfully lobbied the Supreme Court to allow Catholic Charities to take taxpayer dollars to discriminate against gay families in adoption and foster cases.

A sane person would say that anyone LGBQT who signs up for that kind of abuse might have psychological problems. It’s one thing to discriminate- quite another to demand the taxpayers to subsidize it.

I don’t know. I’m gay and not bothered by adoption/fostering being to male-female couples. Kids need a mom and a dad. Adults are not entitled to a child. If Catholic Charities is actually causing some kids not to be adopted who otherwise would be, then that could be a problem, but not sure there is evidence of that.

Are you ok with paying for that? Because as a taxpayer, you are paying for it. You are paying for people to discriminate against you. Based on their superstitions.

I’ll also point out that straight couples are already getting their pick of the $50,000 white newborns. We’re largely talking older kids than those straight couples passed over.

[Anonymous]

Abiding Presence in Springfield/Burke fit the bill for us. Although democrats, my husband was adamant we not attend an "all are welcome" poster child church because they seem to focus on all politics and nothing else.

I liked OPs No Kings analogy, definitely how some have felt. We have loved the community and traditional aspect at Abiding Presence without the yelling. The members are welcoming to all without being performative.

[Anonymous]

Stick with the Catholic church. I was church shopping and noticed Catholic mass had far more good looking people than Protestant etc. I'd go with eye candy over political grievance any day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Abiding Presence in Springfield/Burke fit the bill for us. Although democrats, my husband was adamant we not attend an "all are welcome" poster child church because they seem to focus on all politics and nothing else.

I liked OPs No Kings analogy, definitely how some have felt. We have loved the community and traditional aspect at Abiding Presence without the yelling. The members are welcoming to all without being performative.

+1 and there are a lot of former Catholics and Episcopalians there, so OP wouldn't be the only ex-pat, so to speak. Pastor Keseley is great.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just an FYI, the Catholic Church in Colorado is currently fighting for the “right” to take taxpayer dollars meant for universal pre-K to discriminate against the children of gay parents. They are doing this after their brethren in Philadelphia successfully lobbied the Supreme Court to allow Catholic Charities to take taxpayer dollars to discriminate against gay families in adoption and foster cases.

A sane person would say that anyone LGBQT who signs up for that kind of abuse might have psychological problems. It’s one thing to discriminate- quite another to demand the taxpayers to subsidize it.

I don’t know. I’m gay and not bothered by adoption/fostering being to male-female couples. Kids need a mom and a dad. Adults are not entitled to a child. If Catholic Charities is actually causing some kids not to be adopted who otherwise would be, then that could be a problem, but not sure there is evidence of that.

Are you ok with paying for that? Because as a taxpayer, you are paying for it. You are paying for people to discriminate against you. Based on their superstitions.

I’ll also point out that straight couples are already getting their pick of the $50,000 white newborns. We’re largely talking older kids than those straight couples passed over.

The researched-to-death fact that kids do best in an intact home with a mother and father, as PP simply points out, is not a "superstition."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, I think you're asking an important question and bringing up issues you are uniquely suited to call out. My friends who are looking for what you are looking for speak highly of United Methodist congregations, particularly one in Annadale, I think, I can get the exact name if you want it.
As another resource, I have been really blessed to watch some recent interviews with Dr. David Bennett who might not have the same convictions as yourself, but who is using his studies and life experience to speak specifically to more conservative congregations who need to get over thinking there's something inherently righteous about heterosexuality. I'm believing you will find a great church community as God leads you.

Fundamentalist born-again Christians (the only kind of Christian entering heaven) are not saying heterosexuality is righteous (it is just God’s natural order) but that the Bible says clearly that adultery, fornication, and homosexuality are unrighteous behavior per 1 Corinthians 6:9

Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

You are deceived if you think/feel/believe that homosexuality is righteous behavior in line with God’s natural order. There is no compromise on this matter.

And yet there you are singling out homosexuality among a long list of behaviors exhibited by pretty much all of humanity in one way or another.

It was so singled out because false teachers in the church are declaring homosexuality to be normal and not a sin, even saying God made people gay when he did no such thing, any more than God created adulterers, liars, thieves, and drunkards: it is acquired behavior.

OP’s whole point is that she doesn’t necessarily agree with churches saying “God made gays” or whatever. She seems to be comfortable with a questioning or gray area or allowance for discernment rather than adopting the progressive viewpoints exactly as some denominations have done.
Men buggering teen boys in bible times is just not the same thing as two adult women sharing a bed. It just isn’t.

You seem pretty set in your ways and don’t seem curious. Very black and white. Does your family talk to you?

How did you know? No – no one talks to me. that’s why I’m here online. Does anyone talk to you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just an FYI, the Catholic Church in Colorado is currently fighting for the “right” to take taxpayer dollars meant for universal pre-K to discriminate against the children of gay parents. They are doing this after their brethren in Philadelphia successfully lobbied the Supreme Court to allow Catholic Charities to take taxpayer dollars to discriminate against gay families in adoption and foster cases.

A sane person would say that anyone LGBQT who signs up for that kind of abuse might have psychological problems. It’s one thing to discriminate- quite another to demand the taxpayers to subsidize it.

I don’t know. I’m gay and not bothered by adoption/fostering being to male-female couples. Kids need a mom and a dad. Adults are not entitled to a child. If Catholic Charities is actually causing some kids not to be adopted who otherwise would be, then that could be a problem, but not sure there is evidence of that.

Are you ok with paying for that? Because as a taxpayer, you are paying for it. You are paying for people to discriminate against you. Based on their superstitions.

I’ll also point out that straight couples are already getting their pick of the $50,000 white newborns. We’re largely talking older kids than those straight couples passed over.

The researched-to-death fact that kids do best in an intact home with a mother and father, as PP simply points out, is not a "superstition."

Foster kids do better in any home that loves them.