A Traditional Catholic... with a boyfriend?

[clem456]

Because a romantic relationship is what “boyfriend” means. We can be charitable that they may not be engaging in sodomy but they are pursuing an unnatural and unholy bond. Lets not get too far removed from the real world by misusing the idea of “Charity”

Understood that “boyfriend” carries a sexual connotation. But the relationship is either sexual in nature, or it’s not.

It is a relatively modern phobia that men are not to have intimate (not physically) relationships. If you read the writings of the saints, sometimes the language can offensive to our modern sensibilities in it’s intimacy between same sex friends. That is unfortunate.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

Understood that “boyfriend” carries a sexual connotation. But the relationship is either sexual in nature, or it’s not.

It is a relatively modern phobia that men are not to have intimate (not physically) relationships. If you read the writings of the saints, sometimes the language can offensive to our modern sensibilities in it’s intimacy between same sex friends. That is unfortunate.

LOL If the OP means that the two gay men in question are leading fraternal friendships non sexual in nature then by all means support it. But we all know that is not the case. Come on people!

 

[clem456]

LOL If the OP means that the two gay men in question are leading fraternal friendships non sexual in nature then by all means support it. But we all know that is not the case. Come on people!

I was just saying what I said, that’s all.

 

[Thomas_White]

I’ve tried to keep an open mind about this issue, and I view what others legitimately do in their personal lives as their business and not mine. The Roman Catholic Church is another matter altogether. I cannot see how the Church could reconcile the recognition of gay couples and allow them to openly receive Holy Communion. While I have not thought Pope Francis’s intent goes anywhere near that far, it gets one’s attention. Were this approved, I believe the Church would find itself on the very thin ice of schism, as we have seen occur in several Protestant denominations. It could not possibly work in the Catholic Church as we know it. But I don’t believe this sort of recognition is going to happen either. What the Pope might have in mind remains unclear, or at least it is to me.

 

[OraLabora]

LOL If the OP means that the two gay men in question are leading fraternal friendships non sexual in nature then by all means support it. But we all know that is not the case. Come on people!

We don’t know it with certainty that they are sexually active. The latest “thing” between men these days is “bromance”, and I even read of an example of “bromance” between a straight male and a gay male. These are not sexual relationships.

In ancient times it was not uncommon for males to have deep, intimate relationships with each other, cf David and Jonathan (though the gay rights lobby would have us believe that it was sexual, but there’s nothing to suggest that).

If these “boyfriends” are sexually active, we don’t know the state of their minds nor their place on their walk with Christ. They are perhaps not yet at a point in their lives where they can find the strength and will to end the sexual part of their relationship. Only God knows the state of their hearts and souls, and perhaps their confessors. That applies to all of us and our own habitual sins and temptations.

As the Holy Father said “who am I to judge?”

I’ve tried to keep an open mind about this issue, and I view what others legitimately do in their personal lives as their business and not mine. The Roman Catholic Church is another matter altogether. I cannot see how the Church could reconcile the recognition of gay couples and allow them to openly receive Holy Communion. While I have not thought Pope Francis’s intent goes anywhere near that far, it gets one’s attention. Were this approved, I believe the Church would find itself on the very thin ice of schism, as we have seen occur in several Protestant denominations. It could not possibly work in the Catholic Church as we know it. But I don’t believe this sort of recognition is going to happen either. What the Pope might have in mind remains unclear, or at least it is to me.

It’s really quite simple: though we all recognize that sexual activity between persons of the same sex is grave sin, we do not know that they are in fact mortally culpable. If their confessor determines that they are not mortally culpable, then they can quite legitimately receive communion.

Since the seal of the confessional is inviolate, we must thus keep an open mind and allow for the fact that they may in fact not be in a state of mortal sin even if sexually active.

 

[BrassAnkles]

First, we must understand people are not born nor created to be homosexual. The Bible and science confirm this. In fact, there are more ex homosexuals than homosexuals alive.

mygenes.co.nz/summary.htm

With this knowledge one can develop a better understanding of how to understand this topic. Persons can have SSA for a number of reason AND FEW WANT TO HAVE SSA. One could be because they were sexually abused, or influenced by parents or teachers or other well meaning people that enabled them to become confused about their sexuality. Another cause is rejecting God because of arrogance, from Romans chapter 1.

The second case of SSA can be readily resolved and sometimes it just happens naturally, while sexually molested children could take longer.

Regarding those person who reject God, this could be more difficult because they also reject the Holy Spirit and as such stand in the way of their healing.

 

[Thomas_White]

We don’t know it with certainty that they are sexually active. The latest “thing” between men these days is “bromance”, and I even read of an example of “bromance” between a straight male and a gay male. These are not sexual relationships.

In ancient times it was not uncommon for males to have deep, intimate relationships with each other, cf David and Jonathan (though the gay rights lobby would have us believe that it was sexual, but there’s nothing to suggest that).

If these “boyfriends” are sexually active, we don’t know the state of their minds nor their place on their walk with Christ. They are perhaps not yet at a point in their lives where they can find the strength and will to end the sexual part of their relationship. Only God knows the state of their hearts and souls, and perhaps their confessors. That applies to all of us and our own habitual sins and temptations.

As the Holy Father said “who am I to judge?”

It’s really quite simple: though we all recognize that sexual activity between persons of the same sex is grave sin, we do not know that they are in fact mortally culpable. If their confessor determines that they are not mortally culpable, then they can quite legitimately receive communion.

Since the seal of the confessional is inviolate, we must thus keep an open mind and allow for the fact that they may in fact not be in a state of mortal sin even if sexually active.

That a person of sound mind and reason could knowingly commit what the Church views as a mortal sin and not be “mortally culpable” is no simple issue. It could only involve the primacy of conscience, I think. And I agree this is possible. It is a core teaching of the Church. The bottom line is Matthew 7.1: “Judge not, that ye not be judged.”

 

[BrassAnkles]

That a person of sound mind and reason could knowingly commit what the Church views as a mortal sin and not be “mortally culpable” is no simple issue. It could only involve the primacy of conscience, I think. And I agree this is possible. It is a core teaching of the Church. The bottom line is Matthew 7.1: “Judge not, that ye not be judged.”

There could be many factors, such as sexual abuse as a child or indoctrination from well meaning parents and teachers, such as is happening now throughout America and Europe.

As far as “Judge not, that ye not be judged.” recognizing that homosexual actions and homosexual indoctrination are sins is not judging a person. Wanting the person to pay for this sin is another matter. Jesus showed us the perfect example of this concept when he saved the adulterous women from being stoned. In the same light I am trying to reach those that practice homosexuality or homosexual indoctrination because like Jesus I don’t want them to pay for this error that hurts them and so many countless others.

 

[OraLabora]

That a person of sound mind and reason could knowingly commit what the Church views as a mortal sin and not be “mortally culpable” is no simple issue. It could only involve the primacy of conscience, I think. And I agree this is possible. It is a core teaching of the Church. The bottom line is Matthew 7.1: “Judge not, that ye not be judged.”

Another thing to consider is addiction. Sex releases very powerful stimulants and hormones in the brain and it is possible to become addicted to the sensations they provoke, just as it is possible to become addicted to narcotics or alcohol. Addiction does reduce the degree of culpability, whether in drug addicts or alcoholics. It should be the same for sex addicts as well.

There could be many other factors as well. The Church says of masturbation that the following are possible mitigating factors in determining culpability:

To form an equitable judgment about the subjects’ moral responsibility and to guide pastoral action, one must take into account the affective immaturity, force of acquired habit, conditions of anxiety, or other psychological or social factors that lessen or even extenuate moral culpability.

(CCC para. 2352)

Though I’m no psychologist, nor a moral theologian, it seems to me entirely plausible that the same or similar factors can apply to other sexual disorders including homosexuality.

 

[SMGS127]

LOL If the OP means that the two gay men in question are leading fraternal friendships non sexual in nature then by all means support it. But we all know that is not the case. Come on people!

Why?

No, seriously, why?

Why are gay people held to such ridiculously higher standards than straight people? “Oh my gosh, those gay teenagers are holding hands! They must be having sex every day twelve times a day!” followed by “aww John and Susie are holding hands; that’s so cute!”

Straight people are automatically assumed to be celibate until marriage; gay people are automatically assumed to be having sex right out of the gate. The absurdity of it all is part of the culture of intolerance plaguing the Church right now. It’d be better for everyone if we stopped making assumptions about the intentions or activities of those in same-sex relationships we would not make of those in opposite-sex relationships.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

Why?

No, seriously, why?

Why are gay people held to such ridiculously higher standards than straight people? “Oh my gosh, those gay teenagers are holding hands! They must be having sex every day twelve times a day!” followed by “aww John and Susie are holding hands; that’s so cute!”

Straight people are automatically assumed to be celibate until marriage; gay people are automatically assumed to be having sex right out of the gate. The absurdity of it all is part of the culture of intolerance plaguing the Church right now. It’d be better for everyone if we stopped making assumptions about the intentions or activities of those in same-sex relationships we would not make of those in opposite-sex relationships.

They are not, seriously they are not. It is they themselves that define themselves by their sexuality. Having lived around the gay lifestyle I can assure you that it is not the clean happy picture painted by sitcoms with the stylish funny quipping and witty people that adopt kids and have a loving family. It is dark, and devious.
Why do you think it is the culture of the Church that is deviant and not homosexuality? That is kind of backward thinking in my opinion.

 

[Thorolfr]

Having lived around the gay lifestyle I can assure you that it is not the clean happy picture painted by sitcoms with the stylish funny quipping and witty people that adopt kids and have a loving family. It is dark, and devious.

What is the “gay lifestyle” exactly? Lots of gay people I know go to work five times per week, come home to their same-sex spouse in the evening, eat dinner, watch TV, go to the movies from time-to-time, go to church on Sunday, etc. Is that the “gay lifestyle”? It looks to me a lot like the heterosexual lifestyle.

 

[Thomas_White]

There could be many factors, such as sexual abuse as a child or indoctrination from well meaning parents and teachers, such as is happening now throughout America and Europe.

As far as “Judge not, that ye not be judged.” recognizing that homosexual actions and homosexual indoctrination are sins is not judging a person. Wanting the person to pay for this sin is another matter. Jesus showed us the perfect example of this concept when he saved the adulterous women from being stoned. In the same light I am trying to reach those that practice homosexuality or homosexual indoctrination because like Jesus I don’t want them to pay for this error that hurts them and so many countless others.

I realize that recognizing that an act is sinful is not a judgment. While there are the teachings of the Church, there is also the conscience. My conscience tells me whether something is right or wrong, and this is not a judgment. In the Gospel story of the adulterous woman, Christ says, “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.” But it is not that both Christ and the crowd do not realize the woman has sinned. For Christ then says, “Go and sin no more.” It is the casting of a stone that would be judgment, and Matthew 7.1 tells us not to do it. The teaching is of forgiveness rather than judgment.

It is an interesting discussion. But I don’t really think there is disagreement here, or not by much. I should clarify this. My original comment was not what I personally believe but rather concerned what I thought could occur in the Church–but only as a theoretical potential. I added that I didn’t think that what the Pope might have in mind came anywhere close to permitting homosexual couples to receive Holy Communion. But perhaps there are those who would approve of such a proposal. I don’t know.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

What is the “gay lifestyle” exactly? Lots of gay people I know go to work five times per week, come home to their same-sex spouse in the evening, eat dinner, watch TV, go to the movies from time-to-time, go to church on Sunday, etc. Is that the “gay lifestyle”? It looks to me a lot like the heterosexual lifestyle.

Yes, they can indeed do virtuous things. I am not sure of your point though. Racists could do the same things you mentioned. I suppose you like to think of it as a whitewashed norman rockwell world when you think gay lifestyle. But I think we all know what that means. Does every gay person do those things? Certainly not. But an active homosexual with a “boyfriend” is not “waiting for marriage for religious reasons…”

 

[Thorolfr]

With this knowledge one can develop a better understanding of how to understand this topic. Persons can have SSA for a number of reason AND FEW WANT TO HAVE SSA. One could be because they were sexually abused, or influenced by parents or teachers or other well meaning people that enabled them to become confused about their sexuality. Another cause is rejecting God because of arrogance, from Romans chapter 1.

The second case of SSA can be readily resolved and sometimes it just happens naturally, while sexually molested children could take longer.

Regarding those person who reject God, this could be more difficult because they also reject the Holy Spirit and as such stand in the way of their healing.

It’s true that at one time, most people who are gay did not want this. But that is mostly because of the terrible stigma that was attached to being gay. Many gay youth are rejected by their parents and families and end up on the street or are bullied at school. But all of this might be changing now that attitudes are changing.

Also, it is mostly a stereotype peddled by ex-gay groups that most gay people were sexually abused or come from dysfunctional families with bad parents. I myself had a great childhood and great parents but knew from a young age that I was different and was aware of same-sex attractions from the time I was 11 or 12. I was never abused or molested in any way. Growing up more than 30 years ago, I was not influenced by anyone to become gay. In fact, there was tremendous pressure to conform to certain masculine and heterosexual norms. I did not reject God or the Holy Spirit and was not an arrogant child (so stop quoting Romans as a reason for why people become gay). I still go to church every Sunday. I am hardly unique among gay people in having a normal childhood with normal parents. There are many other gay people like me.

 

[Thorolfr]

I suppose you like to think of it as a whitewashed norman rockwell world when you think gay lifestyle. But I think we all know what that means. Does every gay person do those things? Certainly not. But an active homosexual with a “boyfriend” is not “waiting for marriage for religious reasons…”

Nor does every heterosexual person live a Norman Rockwell life and I doubt that most heterosexual couples wait for marriage either. As for whether active homosexuals with boyfriends might want to wait for marriage for religious reasons, until recently that was not even possible since they were not allowed to get married in most states and most churches would not perform such marriages. But now they are legal in 35 states and some Episcopalian churches, Presbyterian churches, Lutheran churches (ELCA), the United Church of Christ, some Quakers and others do perform religious weddings for same-sex couples.

 

[Corki]

What is the “gay lifestyle” exactly? Lots of gay people I know go to work five times per week, come home to their same-sex spouse in the evening, eat dinner, watch TV, go to the movies from time-to-time, go to church on Sunday, etc. Is that the “gay lifestyle”? It looks to me a lot like the heterosexual lifestyle.

Yeah, yeah, yeah,… We have been through this discussion dozens of times.

The best we came up with for an alternate term to “homosexual lifestyle” is “actively homosexual”. Immoral behavior is not just sex. There are other immoral behaviors. In fact, in the scenario you describe (go home, eat dinner, go to Church) if they are doing those things as a couple, they are acting immorally. If they are holding themselves out to the world as boyfriends or spouses, they are acting immorally. Whether you call it “homosexual lifestyle” or “actively homosexual” or something else, is describes a category of immoral activities that includes, but is not limited to, homosexual sex acts.

 

[BrassAnkles]

It’s true that at one time, most people who are gay did not want this. But that is mostly because of the terrible stigma that was attached to being gay. Many gay youth are rejected by their parents and families and end up on the street or are bullied at school. But all of this might be changing now that attitudes are changing.

Also, it is mostly a stereotype peddled by ex-gay groups that most gay people were sexually abused or come from dysfunctional families with bad parents. I myself had a great childhood and great parents but knew from a young age that I was different and was aware of same-sex attractions from the time I was 11 or 12. I was never abused or molested in any way. Growing up more than 30 years ago, I was not influenced by anyone to become gay. In fact, there was tremendous pressure to conform to certain masculine and heterosexual norms. I did not reject God or the Holy Spirit and was not an arrogant child (so stop quoting Romans as a reason for why people become gay). I still go to church every Sunday. I am hardly unique among gay people in having a normal childhood with normal parents. There are many other gay people like me.

The fact that you became gay because even though you are not arrogant does not mean that the Bible verse is wrong regarding a cause of homosexuality.

Also, children can become confused by suggestion from society and parents, this is psychology 101. There is a lot of influencing factors, not only can bullies have a negative effect but well meaning people who classify children as homosexual.

 

[Thorolfr]

Also, children can become confused by suggestion from society and parents, this is psychology 101. There is a lot of influencing factors, not only can bullies have a negative effect but well meaning people who classify children as homosexual.

There are lots of gay people like myself who lived at a time when no one would have suggested that we become gay, especially our parents. What parent would have wanted their children to suffer the stigma of being gay? And when I was growing up 40 years ago, society was still very anti-gay and their was much more pressure then not to be gay. How many people back then would have become confused about what society thought about homosexuality? How many people back then would have had someone suggest to them that they should be gay? Not impossible, of course, but I don’t think there would have been many. I never even met another gay person until I was 21 but still knew I was attracted to my own sex by the time I was about 11.

 

[BrassAnkles]

There are lots of gay people like myself who lived at a time when no one would have suggested that we become gay, especially our parents. What parent would have wanted their children to suffer the stigma of being gay? And when I was growing up 40 years ago, society was still very anti-gay and their was much more pressure then not to be gay. How many people back then would have become confused about what society thought about homosexuality? How many people back then would have had someone suggest to them that they should be gay? Not impossible, of course, but I don’t think there would have been many. I never even met another gay person until I was 21 but still knew I was attracted to my own sex by the time I was about 11.

I grew up before you did and yes homosexuality pervaded our society then as well. As far as wayward attraction, I had that too. In fact the majority of people who have SSA change to OSA.

If I understand correctly you identify as Christian but choose to live a chaste life, and this is good. What I don’t understand is why you would not want to have these temptations eliminated.