Are all Homosexual acts as immoral

[Bennie_P]

“Silence the man!” Bah, such an unfortunately common response on these forums. I suggest that you should simply meet this person in private and discuss the issue. Perhaps you could make arrangements for your paster and yourself to have a discussion/debate about the subject as a sort of “issue night” for the youth. It would be an occassion for the youth to hear both sides of the arguments. **I think that the youth are old enough to hear both sides of this particular issue, right? **

Both sides of the issue? If the pastor is teaching against the teachings of the Church, then in the eyes of the youth, just for the fact he is the pastor, many may follow the false teaching he is presenting. This issue needs to taken care of away from the youth, first between the OP and the pastor. If no resolution is found, it may need to be taken to the Bishop (OP - JuicetheBaptist the suggestion you should talk with your spiritual director before you doing anything is the best advice on this whole thread IMHO). The Church is not a debating club and we need not confuse the youth with a debate on the issue as if the youth director and pastor are running for political office or, a popularity contest. A honest discussion of the issue is appropriate for a youth group, but not as a debate between adults before the youth group, especially if the one spreading the faslehood is holding the office of the applied teaching authority.

and as noted by estesbob

Originally Posted by estesbob forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_cad/viewpost.gif
… BUT the Pastor is there to relate the teachings of the Catholic Church and in the Church there is no debate.

 

[guanophore]

Yet relating is the first part of any debate/discussion. To relate to others is to exchange ideas, views on ideas, and applications of ideas. There is black and white theory (theological philosophy in this example), and there is the real world. When you mix in human inter-relations, things are not black and white but a infinite spectrum of grey. As the exchange continues, both parties come out with something out of it, which leads to a mutual level of change from both parties.

The Teaching of Jesus Christ is not mixing in human inter-relations. It is to bring Divine Truth into our lives. You can hobnob with discussion/debate all you want, but it will not change the Truth brought by the Eternal Word. I see myself in you, and I am amazed at how different my thinking has become since I decided to submit my will to the Authority of the Church.

 

[WynCatholic]

Upon brief refection, I also need to add these caveats:
Of course some immoral actions are less moral than others. Otherwise our theology would be Baptistic (where, in theory, all sins are graded on a “pass/fail” comparison to God’s perfection.)
If that is all you are asking, the answer is ‘yes’! Some immoral acts involve force, deception, children, corruption, others, etc. Promiscurity is worse than non-promiscuity.
Do both immoral acts kill the soul? yes.
does one act require less hardening of the heart than the other? yes.
Are they both wrong? yes.
are they both mortal? yes.
do they cause eternal separation from God? yes
do they cause equal eternal consequence? no
should a pastor describe these free acts as necessary evils? no.
are there ‘necessary evils’? yes
Should the church assist people in rationalizing their sin, hardening their hearts, and blinding their eyes? no

 

[WynCatholic]

yet still more reflection:…
There seems to be an underlying philosophy in the Pastor that a person has an absolute right to sexual expression and fulfillment.
That way of thinking is contrary to the Teachings of the Catholic Church.

CCC#2348 …. At the moment of his Baptism, the Christian is pledged to lead his affective life in chastity.

one cannot separate the procreative and unitive aspects of sexual acts.

2351 *Lust *is disordered desire for or inordinate enjoyment of sexual pleasure. Sexual pleasure is morally disordered when sought for itself, isolated from its procreative and unitive purposes.

ccc 2352… “The deliberate use of the sexual faculty, for whatever reason, outside of marriage is essentially contrary to its purpose.”…

.
JP2’s Theology of the Body fills out the teaching. Now if the catechism is not Magesterial enough… ???

 

[thistle]

Leviticus 18:22
You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; such a thing is an abomination.

Leviticus 20:13
If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives.

Jude 7
Likewise, Sodom, Gomorrah, and the surrounding towns, which, in the same manner as they, indulged in sexual promiscuity and practiced unnatural vice, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.

Romans 1:26-27
Therefore, God handed them over to degrading passions. Their females exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the males likewise gave up natural relations with females and burned with lust for one another. Males did shameful things with males and thus received in their own persons the due penalty for their perversity.

1 Corinthians 6:9-10
Do you not know that the unjust will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators nor idolaters nor adulterers nor boy prostitutes nor sodomites nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God.

1 Timothy 1:9-11
with the understanding that law is meant not for a righteous person but for the lawless and unruly, the godless and sinful, the unholy and profane, those who kill their fathers or mothers, murderers, the unchaste, practicing homosexuals, kidnappers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is opposed to sound teaching,
according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, with which I have been entrusted.

 

[fix]

He challenged me to show a source where the Church has declared homosexual acts to be immoral.

There are plenty of those sources.

He also told the us that we should follow what we truly believed to be right (although not what we think is easiest). How this distinction can be translated to a 16 year old, I have no idea!

This needs an explanation about conscience and truth.

He claims as well that because they are in a loving relationship, certain homosexual acts are necessary sins.

Love needs to be defined.

He argued that we would prefer them in these relationships than in promiscuous ones.

That is rather absurd. Why would separation from God ever be a lesser evil?

This is his idea of the pastoral approach. What do teens know of the pastoral approach? And does that make it right or acceptable? I look forward to your response. Please furnish me with definitive Church statements which I can bring back to him.

Sounds like moral relativism. The issue is not simply homosexual acts, but a false understanding of truth and love.

 

[bilop]

And as adults we have to trust children to live the best lives they can, to keep away as many prejudices from them as possible to not burn bridges towards others they never knew the differences about when they were young. It is a teaching of youth that adults often forget as the work their way through the hard world. If this was remembered more, the world would be a better place. It is never wise to sow seeds of division in our young.

This is exactly wrong.

We SHOULD be prejudiced against evil, against sin.

We SHOULD flee from sin. We should not shun individuals because of their sin, but we should never approve their sin.

The world would be a better place if we stopped denying the eternal truth of Christ in order to make people feel better about their sins.

God Bless

 

[catharina]

This is exactly wrong.

We SHOULD be prejudiced against evil, against sin.

We SHOULD flee from sin. We should not shun individuals because of their sin, but we should never approve their sin.

The world would be a better place if we stopped denying the eternal truth of Christ in order to make people feel better about their sins.

God Bless

… and Amen!

 

[Exalt]

What is there to debate? By debating one gives legitimacy to a totally illegitimate position.

That kind of thinking is not going to work with youth today. In nearly every other academic field, they are constantly being told to challenge, scutinize, and find evidence for the things they are taught in school. It’s not enough to just write an essay anymore - you have to back it up with credible sources and hard research. It’s not enough to just give kids mathematical and scientific forumulas, you have to show and provide (in some cases, massive amounts of) evidence for that given theorm. Even in literature cases, ideas are fleshed out, constantly debated and discussed. And that frequently includes a large degree of disagreement among the students. And that disagreement and debate is constantly encouraged.

So you’re going to try and lead these teens to Church teaching by conveying to them them: “What is there to debate about homosexuality? By debating one gives legitimacy to a totally illegitimate position.” It flies in the face of everything they are doing in other fields of study and academic thought. If you said something like that at your local youth group, you’d probably get muffled laughter, rolled eyes - and thier attention would be suddenly turned off. Why?

For this particular issue, there are probably a good number of teens who are aware that this isn’t exactly a cut and dry issue. Odds are, a few probably have at least a one openly gay friend. They probably at least know that homosexuality is something that some friends (and family) think is just fine. So for you to say that this issue is “closed to debate” is going to strike them as (at the very least) suspicious and (at the very worst) a silly attempt at shielding them from non-traditional ideas. And like I said, they’ll understand that this isn’t nearly as cut and dry an issue as it used to be.

 

[Exalt]

You read about it in the catechism, and in the scripture.

So all it takes for you to believe something is that it’s in the catechism or in the bible?

 

[Bennie_P]

That kind of thinking is not going to work with youth today. In nearly every other academic field, they are constantly being told to challenge, scutinize, and find evidence for the things they are taught in school. It’s not enough to just write an essay anymore - you have to back it up with credible sources and hard research. It’s not enough to just give kids mathematical and scientific forumulas, you have to show and provide (in some cases, massive amounts of) evidence for that given theorm. Even in literature cases, ideas are fleshed out, constantly debated and discussed. And that frequently includes a large degree of disagreement among the students. And that disagreement and debate is constantly encouraged.

So you’re going to try and lead these teens to Church teaching by conveying to them them: “What is there to debate about homosexuality? By debating one gives legitimacy to a totally illegitimate position.” It flies in the face of everything they are doing in other fields of study and academic thought. If you said something like that at your local youth group, you’d probably get muffled laughter, rolled eyes - and thier attention would be suddenly turned off. Why?

For this particular issue, there are probably a good number of teens who are aware that this isn’t exactly a cut and dry issue. Odds are, a few probably have at least a one openly gay friend. They probably at least know that homosexuality is something that some friends (and family) think is just fine. So for you to say that this issue is “closed to debate” is going to strike them as (at the very least) suspicious and (at the very worst) a silly attempt at shielding them from non-traditional ideas. And like I said, they’ll understand that this isn’t nearly as cut and dry an issue as it used to be.

A discussion of the issue is a more practical in this situation. In a discussion the opposing teachings can be presented, but a debate is more of popularity contest of who can present the best argument and many times, we see it all the time in political debates, it is the best speaker or best looking speaker, not the truth that wins in many a debate. There is no debate about the truth concerning the teachings of the Church. Counterpoints of the issue can be presented and accomplish the needs of treating the youth intellegence with respect. But in this situation the truth needs to presented as the Church teaches not by the charisma of the best speaker. To think the children need a spectecle to understand the truth insults thier intellect just as much as MTV does trying to sell them acne cream to make them popular.

 

[StevenFrancis]

So all it takes for you to believe something is that it’s in the catechism or in the bible?

These are where the doctrines and morals of Christianity are codified. Christians who are in full communion with the Church know and trust these teachings to be true because the codifications derive from the dogmas, and axioms of Christianity. There is a default security in the truth of these documents, and a level of trust implied just as a lawyer trusts the codification of case law in his law books, or an American trusts the codification of rights and laws in the Constitution. The simple appearance of single items in these books doesn’t make the item true in and of itself necessarily. But a perponderance of information from a generally trusted source allows one to accept it’s truth an validity with some degree of confidence, because the user has come to trust the documents based on directly checking into the validity of enough of the items, that they can be accepted as true without discomfort. It is ‘reasonable’ to accept the information codified within. Particularly for Christians, who have faith that the bible, in particular, is the divinly inspired Word of God.

 

[brianwalden]

That kind of thinking is not going to work with youth today. In nearly every other academic field, they are constantly being told to challenge, scutinize, and find evidence for the things they are taught in school. It’s not enough to just write an essay anymore - you have to back it up with credible sources and hard research. It’s not enough to just give kids mathematical and scientific forumulas, you have to show and provide (in some cases, massive amounts of) evidence for that given theorm. Even in literature cases, ideas are fleshed out, constantly debated and discussed. And that frequently includes a large degree of disagreement among the students. And that disagreement and debate is constantly encouraged.

So you’re going to try and lead these teens to Church teaching by conveying to them them: “What is there to debate about homosexuality? By debating one gives legitimacy to a totally illegitimate position.” It flies in the face of everything they are doing in other fields of study and academic thought. If you said something like that at your local youth group, you’d probably get muffled laughter, rolled eyes - and thier attention would be suddenly turned off. Why?

For this particular issue, there are probably a good number of teens who are aware that this isn’t exactly a cut and dry issue. Odds are, a few probably have at least a one openly gay friend. They probably at least know that homosexuality is something that some friends (and family) think is just fine. So for you to say that this issue is “closed to debate” is going to strike them as (at the very least) suspicious and (at the very worst) a silly attempt at shielding them from non-traditional ideas. And like I said, they’ll understand that this isn’t nearly as cut and dry an issue as it used to be.

Exalt, do you think we should have debates over mulitiplication tables? What if it becomes popular belief that 6*8 = 50 or that 2 isn’t really a number? And in science, should we debate what the best speed is for an object to reach terminal velocity or what we’d like the composition of a water molecule to be?

No, of course not. Each discipline has its own methods for determining truth. For example, logic determines truth in mathematics and the scientific method determines scientific truth. Within Catholic theology the combination of Oral and Written Revelation and the Magisterium determine truth - not public opinion or debate.

Discussion is needed and so is honest and difficult questioning, but it shouldn’t be a debate where both sides have equal standing as if this were a political issue. The discussion and questioning should all be directed toward better understanding the truth of Catholic doctrine concerning human sexuality.

 

[Mexjewel]

Jesus defines sin as lack of love.(St.Matthew 22:36-40) What is unloving about homosexual relationships? Who is the unloved one sinned against? All sins have victims; where is the victim of homosexuality?

 

[Newbie2]

Both partners involved.

 

[fix]

Jesus defines sin as lack of love.(St.Matthew 22:36-40) What is unloving about homosexual relationships? Who is the unloved one sinned against? All sins have victims; where is the victim of homosexuality?

Saint Paul declares that “the immoral, idolaters, adulterers, sexual perverts, thieves, the greedy, drunkards, revilers, robbers” are excluded from the Kingdom of God (cf. 1 Cor 6:9). This condemnation — repeated by the Council of Trent"88 — lists as “mortal sins” or “immoral practices” certain specific kinds of behaviour the wilful acceptance of which prevents believers from sharing in the inheritance promised to them. In fact, *body and soul are inseparable: *in the person, in the willing agent and in the deliberate act, they stand or fall together.Veritatis splendor

 

[iamrefreshed]

So all it takes for you to believe something is that it’s in the catechism or in the bible?

Uhhh, YEAH!

That is if you are catholic!

 

[iamrefreshed]

Jesus defines sin as lack of love.(St.Matthew 22:36-40) What is unloving about homosexual relationships? Who is the unloved one sinned against? All sins have victims; where is the victim of homosexuality?

So I take it you don’t view masturbation, euthanasia or assisted suicide as sins?

I mean really, they all think they are not victims?

 

[estesbob]

So all it takes for you to believe something is that it’s in the catechism or in the bible?

No-all it takes is following the teachings of the One True Church.

 

[brianwalden]

Jesus defines sin as lack of love.(St.Matthew 22:36-40) What is unloving about homosexual relationships? Who is the unloved one sinned against? All sins have victims; where is the victim of homosexuality?

The sin someone commits when participating in a homosexual act is the same as anyone else who commits a sexual sin. It’s a denial of both their own dignity and their partner’s by abusing the gift of sexuality which God bestowed upon Man and Woman so that they could enter into the life of the Trinity through the marital act.

Man and Woman were created to complete each other; they are whole individually yet mysteriously more whole through marriage - just as the Persons of the Trinity are whole individually yet somehow more whole in the unity of the Godhead. God lovingly created us to share in this mystical relationship, copying His example of self-sacrificing love. While sins like fornication, masturbation, contraception, and homosexual acts may seem harmless on the surface, they are in fact a denial of our human nature. They tell God that we believe the true reason He created our sexuality is not to unite us with Him, but for our own pleasures and desires. In doing so we mistake the effects (the wonderful physical pleasures) of sex with its purpose (for a husband and wife to share in the life-giving love and unity of the Holy Trinity).

Sexual sins are judged so harshly not because of the physical nature of what a person does with a certain part of his or her body, but because of the magnitude of the lie that they propagate against Man and Woman and their relationship to God.