Are we too critical of homosexuals?

[czeaiter]

We often criticize homosexuals, particularly those who are supposedly “married”. We tell them not to receive The Eucharist etc.

But what about divorcees who remarry? Are they really “married”? Are we as vocal as to whether or not they should receive The Eucharist? Should fornicators (such a technical word) receive The Eucharist?

I’m trying to figure out if we are hypocrites or if there is something more insidious with homosexuality that we should call out. (My opinion: Unlike divorce, the world seems to celebrate homosexuality.)

P.S. To any divorcees and homosexuals reading this, please excuse me if I’m being offensive. I’m really not trying to be judgemental.

 

[0Scarlett_nidiyilii]

Nobody in the state of mortal sin may receive the Eucharist

 

[redbetta]

The thing is, with homosexual couples, it’s more obvious that they are living in a state of state sin whereas you cannot tell just by looking at a heterosexual couple whether they are fortificating or validly married. There is that and the militant aspect of homosexuality.

So, it may seem that homosexuals get a disproportionate amount of criticism, but, no one is out there proudly proclaiming they are on their eighth marriage.

 

[1ke]

We often criticize homosexuals, particularly those who are supposedly “married”. We tell them not to receive The Eucharist etc.

Teaching the truth about same sex relations isn’t being “critical”.

As for any individual regarding receiving communion— that is between them and God, and between them and their pastor.

But what about divorcees who remarry? Are they really “married”?

Not if they lack a decree of nullity, no. And they should not present themselves for communion either.

Are we as vocal as to whether or not they should receive The Eucharist?

Yes, we are.

Should fornicators (such a technical word) receive The Eucharist?

No. Not if they haven’t gone to confession.

 

[linguistic_nerd]

Being critical of the person itself would be wrong. As stated in the CCC, persons with same sex inclination should be treated with respect and acceptance.

But it does not mean that we’ll tolerate their sinful lifestyle. So it is our duty to fraternally correct thier errors in lifestyle (without rash judgement of course)

 

[Pnwcatholic]

And yet they do. But if you are the wrong kind of sinner then people freak out if you recieve. I think people should tend their own house.

 

[commenter]

Obviously we can’t judge the person, but should judge the action. The Church needs to emphasize whatever truths are currently forgotten, to explicitly focus on refuting whatever errors are most common at this time.

Burglary is currently regarded by almost every one as evil. There’s not much need to explain that fact. But other actions that are evil are heavily advertised as good, or neutral.

The Church has a need to focus on those areas, not all areas equally.

 

[commenter]

And yet they do. But if you are the wrong kind of sinner then people freak out if you recieve. I think people should tend their own house.

You would not judge the person who is a heavy smoker, and thinks smoking is harmless. But if you know and care about them, you might explain that it does in fact harm them.

In the parable of the Good Samaritan there were others who passed by the robbed man, who chose to “tend their own house”. The Good Samaritan wasn’t like that.

 

[Aquinas11]

But what about divorcees who remarry? Are they really “married”? Are we as vocal as to whether or not they should receive The Eucharist? Should fornicators (such a technical word) receive The Eucharist?

No no & no

This is why Pope Francis got so much criticism for Chapter 8 Amoris laetitia that permitted divorced who remarry to receive Eucharist

 

[vz71]

And you are right… people should clean their own house.

But a sin that is public and noticed must be acted upon. I am certain that if everyone held up a sign saying if they were in a state of mortal sin, the priest would advise all that are to not receive.
Regardless of the actual sin.

 

[adamhovey1988]

I have a friend that I haven’t spoken to in a few years but he is gay. Now, why do I bring this up? Because, he’s well aware of my disapproval of his lifestyle. I haven’t talked to him for a while because he works, not because we had a falling out. He’s still my friend, no matter what he does. But a good friend will tell you when you’re wrong.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

But what about divorcees who remarry? Are they really “married”? Are we as vocal as to whether or not they should receive The Eucharist? Should fornicators (such a technical word) receive The Eucharist?

I don’t see anything in AL8 that explicitly allows divorced and “remarried” people to receive communion. The closest thing I see is an oblique reference with a footnote:

…the consequences or effects of a rule need not necessarily always be the same.336

336This is also the case with regard to sacramental discipline, since discernment can recognize that in a particular situation no grave fault exists. In such cases, what is found in another document applies: cf. Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), 44 and 47: AAS 105 (2013), 1038-1040.

Talk about something being buried.

In a nutshell, it says that some people might not have sufficient reflection and full consent of the will, thereby mitigating their culpability for the sin. I don’t buy the first — if someone is being pastorally counseled, they are (I would hope) being told of the grave sinfulness of living in an invalid marriage while conducting a conjugal life (i.e., not a Josephite marriage). So they know, they have been told, and refusal to accept the teaching would be saying “the Church is wrong and I am right”. If we let people “get by with this”, we are then in the position of “the tail wagging the dog” or “the children tell their parents what to do”. As for full consent of the will, the only justification would be someone living in an invalid marriage but not wanting to be in the marriage — forced to enter into it and/or to stay in it — and not wanting to conduct a conjugal life but being forced to by their spouse. Should we not oppose people being forced to live like that? I certainly do.

Where the woman is the aggrieved spouse, should not any feminist worth her salt (or his salt — not all feminists are women) be opposed to a woman having to live like that? A feminist wouldn’t have to be Catholic or even Christian to find it repellent for a woman to be forced to violate her conscience. What if it were, for instance, a Muslim woman being forced to violate halal, or a Jewish woman being forced to violate kosher?

 

[Weave]

I think equating a homosexual relationship to that of heterosexual fornicators to be a false equivalence. On one hand you have the homosexual relationship that can never be moral because it rejects the very nature of human sexuality. A sexual act between members of the same sex can never be moral. Whereas the sexual act between man and woman is good and natural within the context of marriage. The fornicator’s sin is different from the homosexual’s sin because it is distorting a good and natural act rather than being a completely forbidden act. Both are gravely sinful but in different ways.

 

[Lea101]

Do I think in general, Christians are too critical? Yes. I think more people tolerate other sins more than homosexuality.

Recently came across a video of a Christian conservative saying that people shouldn’t communicate with gay people because that’s condoning their sin. Another one said gay people cannot be a Christian.

Someone in my family once “joked” about how they would kick me out or kill me if I was a lesbian, but said they would take me in if I get pregnant before marriage.

So yeah I think there are people who are more critical about homosexuality, but mainly because of their personal repulsion to gay people and the acts. Not because they simply see it as wrong.

We shouldn’t tolerate certain grave sins more than others. Without repentence, these sins make you end up in the same place anyway.

 

[gracepoole]

The thing is, with homosexual couples, it’s more obvious that they are living in a state of state sin whereas you cannot tell just by looking at a heterosexual couple whether they are fortificating or validly married. There is that and the militant aspect of homosexuality.

So, it may seem that homosexuals get a disproportionate amount of criticism, but, no one is out there proudly proclaiming they are on their eighth marriage.

Sure they are. They aren’t shutting their 8th wife up in the attic.

 

[redbetta]

But they are not loudly proclaiming she’s number 8. Nobody is proud they have had that many marriages. Ever notice how society ridicules celebrities for how transient their marriages are?

 

[HomeschoolDad]

I think equating a homosexual relationship to that of heterosexual fornicators to be a false equivalence. On one hand you have the homosexual relationship that can never be moral because it rejects the very nature of human sexuality. A sexual act between members of the same sex can never be moral. Whereas the sexual act between man and woman is good and natural within the context of marriage. The fornicator’s sin is different from the homosexual’s sin because it is distorting a good and natural act rather than being a completely forbidden act. Both are gravely sinful but in different ways.

Agreed wholeheartedly. Gay sex is an abomination that can never be made right, whereas illicit sex between two people of opposite gender is rightly ordered in its nature, it is just being carried out in circumstances which God does not intend or bless (fornication and adultery).

This said, gay sex can never result in pregnancy, and thus they are never in the position of using an abortifacient, nor in aborting medically or surgically. And yes, I humbly submit that sodomy is not as bad as murder.

Do I think in general, Christians are too critical? Yes. I think more people tolerate other sins more than homosexuality.

Recently came across a video of a Christian conservative saying that people shouldn’t communicate with gay people because that’s condoning their sin. Another one said gay people cannot be a Christian.

Someone in my family once “joked” about how they would kick me out or kill me if I was a lesbian, but said they would take me in if I get pregnant before marriage.

So yeah I think there are people who are more critical about homosexuality, but mainly because of their personal repulsion to gay people and the acts. Not because they simply see it as wrong.

We shouldn’t tolerate certain grave sins more than others. Without repentence, these sins make you end up in the same place anyway.

Agreed as well. A celibate person who experiences SSA but does not act on them can potentially be a person of great holiness, in that they are resisting an unwanted temptation and accepting that they must remain forever celibate rather than act upon it. I would hope that such a person would attempt some therapy to try to have normal attractions and quit experiencing SSA, but that is not always possible. The anecdotal evidence indicates that it fails more often than it works.

Despite what some fundamentalists would tell you, being gay is, most of the time, not a choice. It occurs for reasons we don’t fully understand. I would like to see a society where gay people could embrace celibacy and either make this known if they wished, or keep it to themselves under the rubric of being a “confirmed bachelor/ette”, “not the marrying kind”, what have you, and not be asked or be speculated about. I have known people who remained inexplicably single — “they surely could get married if they wanted to” — and it might be that, it might be intersex, it might be some kind of psychological trauma they never got over, or it might be something else.

 

[Willing_Spirit]

It’s easy to tell someone they are wrong. It’s harder to help them with their battle. We are quick to say “That’s a sin! You shouldn’t!” as we go home to the comfort of our spouse and children each night while they can’t. Yes, I think we are too critical, and not helpful enough. I can’t imagine living with same sex attraction.

 

[gracepoole]

But they are not loudly proclaiming she’s number 8. Nobody is proud they have had that many marriages. Ever notice how society ridicules celebrities for how transient their marriages are?

Again, these numerous wives aren’t being hidden away. A Catholic with an 8th wife presenting himself for communion in a parish he regularly attends is in plain site.

 

[redbetta]

What is the point you are trying to make? The point I was trying to make is is that 1. it may seem that homosexuals receive a disproportionate amount of criticism because it is easier to tell that they are leading a sinful lifestyle. But, heterosexuals who let it be known or even advertise their sinful lifestyles also get criticized.

Another point that others have made in this thread is that, unlike most other sexual sins, really Catholics/Christians are the only ones left critical of homosexuality in a society that outright celebrates it. Nobody celebrates divorce. At best, it’s considered a necessary evil. And, if someone has had more then two marriages, people really start to question what is wrong with you.