Are we too critical of homosexuals?

[annad347]

Question: If you see your priest is giving The Eucharist to someone you think is in a mortal sin, what do you do, tell the priest “You shouldn’t be giving that person The Eucharist, don’t you know what they are doing?”

Then after you told your priest about the person and see your priest giving that same person The Eucharist again the following week then what do you do?

To answer the question of the thread… yes I think people are critical to homosexuals mainly because their “sin” is the most obvious, usually because someone who is homosexual isn’t ashamed of how God created them.

People who are critical don’t even know how that person lives their life, they automatically assume a homosexual person is living a in a sinful way.

Even if they are in a committed relationship you don’t know if they are living it as two brothers or sisters in the same home.

Even if they are married you don’t know why they got married, it could have been for financial reasons, medical reasons… you still have no idea how they are living their lives. People who assume they know are being critical, judgmental… IMO.

A person might think they know someone based on their outward appearance but until they walk in that person’s shoes, have the ability to read that person’s mind &/or heart saying who should or shouldn’t be allowed to receive The Eucharist, is between God and that person.

Yes Jesus gave us rules on how He wants us to live our lives, but Jesus said our sins are forgiven when repented. So why should anyone be denied the Body and Blood of Christ.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

For me a homosexual can’t be a Christian anymore than a dog can be a sheep. Not only do they refuse to repent from sin, they boast of their sin and celebrate their sin.

But homosexuals who do repent of their sin, if they have fallen into acting upon their SSA inclination, most certainly can be Christians, and potentially very holy ones at that. It is even possible that someone who experiences SSA has never acted on it, precisely because they understand anything they do would be sinful — there is no such thing as licit gay sex.

Four if you include a co-worker who’s second or third sentence upon meeting you is “my daughter’s a lesbian.” It’s very odd.

That is very strange. Are they proud of it and want to make sure everyone knows about their daughter?

Straight Catholics constantly talk about how they lust and watch porn, so I don’t think it’s weirder for a gay Catholic to be open about their struggles.

Who does this? Are you talking about straight Catholics who are struggling to overcome a lust and porn addiction, or do you mean that this is a common topic of conversation among straight Catholics in general? As for the latter, none that I know do this.

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.

It can work in isolated instances (perhaps when the SSA orientation isn’t that strong or deeply-seated), but generally it doesn’t.

People who are critical don’t even know how that person lives their life, they automatically assume a homosexual person is living a in a sinful way.

Even if they are in a committed relationship you don’t know if they are living it as two brothers or sisters in the same home.

Even if they are married you don’t know why they got married, it could have been for financial reasons, medical reasons… you still have no idea how they are living their lives. People who assume they know are being critical, judgmental… IMO.

I see couples at Mass who may be gay, and I don’t give it a second thought — I don’t know them, I don’t know if they’re “married” or just two friends, I saw two male friends hug each other at the sign of peace and I thought “they may be gay, but there is nothing evil in that sign of affection”. Mine is a highly diverse urban parish. What I see is not blatant or explicit, “ambiguous” would be a better way to put it. Now if I saw them kissing on the lips, or holding hands, or wearing matching wedding-like bands, then yes, many could be scandalized by assuming that they are sexually active. But I’ve never seen anything like that at Mass. Scandal is a sin that few people can even define anymore, let alone comprehend.

 

[frumacat]

Oh boy. The can of worms has been opened. There’s too much for me to say on this topic here, but just a few things I’d like to say from my own experience on this.

Speaking as a gay, celibate Catholic, I can say the experience can be very isolating, and made more so because of the behavior, online and off, of other Catholics.

You see what I had to do there? I had to say ‘celibate’ because if i didn’t specify the assumption by a lot of people who read this would be that they hope I leave my “sinful lifestyle” (which always floors me because my lifestyle consists of going to bed at 9:30 or occasionally staying up to watch cat videos on youtube) and I’d probably be told to do so.

The assumption is that I am extremely promiscuous and that I need to be reminded constantly of my aberrance because it’s ‘merciful’ to do so I don’t go to hell. I’m also told that it’s no different than any other single person, be they gay or straight, because everyone has to be chaste: the difference in how homosexuals must be chaste in order to be faithful Catholics versus how heterosexuals must, doesn’t appear to dawn on them (i.e. straight people can have sex, gays never can). That idea, paired with the fact that celibacy is, quite frankly, very difficult to maintain for many if not most people, doesn’t seem to make people understand the very particular trial Catholics that are gay have. It certainly doesn’t make people more empathetic, in my eyes.

I’m referred to often as having ‘same sex attraction’ because to say I am gay would be giving my ‘affliction’ too much credence and it’s better to make it sound like I have a horrible condition, anyway. It’s one of the sins that cry out to heaven, I’m told (repeatedly). Others just refer to people like me as sodomites.

I’m also told that I waive my lifestyle in peoples faces, especially at pride parades. Its particularly a red flag to me when they bring up pride parades that they haven’t know many gay people very well. They take what is presented in the media and presume every gay person is like that. I get it; people stereotype things that are outside of their direct experience. But when the stereotype is that someone is too huge a moral blemish to stomach or that we’re just too intrinsically evil, it doesn’t leave a lot of room for empathy, does it? It makes us the enemy.

The fact that you call homosexuality ‘celebrated’ is also telling; if you look outside of tv, movies, what the media highlights–if you were to walk in my shoes, you would not feel that way. I’m thankful for my parents, they never kicked me out or disowned me.

I bring these things up to hopefully convey to you how challenging it can be to be a gay Catholic, and how the constant anger and rebuke, which (to finally answer your question) are of course out of proportion with the ‘calling out’ of other sins. I can assure you, you don’t need to call me out. I’m quite aware of the church’s teaching, and so is every other gay Catholic.

 

[Lea101]

So could we also say that having a desire to shoot up heroin isn’t an action, but doing it is?

Yes, the desire to take drugs wouldn’t be an action. For it to be an action, it has to be something you do.

The flip side is that when the pastor mentions porn being a sin, no one labels him “straight-porn-ophobic” or anything like that

While there are people who say that believing homosexual sex is wrong would mean that they’re homophobic, the general term of homophobia is a little broader than that. It’s parents kicking their children out, refusing to talk to them. Or people using slurs, beating them up etc. I even know a guy who will literally feel uncomfortable standing beside a gay man. This sort of things still happen even though homosexuality is much more accepted today.

That being said, while there’s no pornophobic term, the secular society still calls such people ‘judgemental’ ‘prudes’ etc.

There is no comparison between a remarried divorcee and a homosexual.

There is. The term homosexual doesn’t inherently mean someone who is engaging in sin. There are celibate homosexuals. We have some here.

Are you talking about straight Catholics who are struggling to overcome a lust and porn addiction, or do you mean that this is a common topic of conversation among straight Catholics in general?

Just in general. I’m younger (21) and it’s not unheard of to hear that John is struggling when he saw that woman in a tight dress the other day.
I don’t mean to say that they talk about it as if they’re still doing it without any intentions of stopping, but that straight people are more open about their sexual sins.

 

[Pai_Nosso]

Speaking as a gay, celibate Catholic

Ok I just learnt that homosexual is defined as “sexually attracted to people of one’s own sex”. People tend to define it as someone who indulges in gay sex. Now im not sure what to call the people who do indulge in gay sex. Sodomite comes to mind but that term is hated for some reason.

I’m referred to often as having ‘same sex attraction’ because to say I am gay would be giving my ‘affliction’ too much credence and it’s better to make it sound like I have a horrible condition, anyway.

Maybe people refer to you as an SSA because they have the same definition of gay that I did. Or maybe they want to distinguish a person who restrains themselves from giving in to these desires from a person who openly performs gay sex without any guilt. Giving the term gay to both is problematic, I think this causes a degree of confusion and misunderstanding.

I’m also told that I waive my lifestyle in peoples faces, especially at pride parades. Its particularly a red flag to me when they bring up pride parades that they haven’t know many gay people very well. They take what is presented in the media and presume every gay person is like that.

Many don’t know any gay people and can only form an opinion based on what they know. That doesn’t dismiss the fact that the gay lifestyle does get waived in peoples faces even if it’s not you that does it.

The fact that you call homosexuality ‘celebrated’ is also telling

What then is gay pride or mardi gras? Gay sex is not just celebrated, it’s promoted, encouraged and taught. People who disagree or believe it to be a sin are labelled homophobes which is wrong. If u believe it is a sin you would actually be called a homophobic homosexual.

It’s not gay people that I criticize or judge but the fact that society has introduced it’s acceptance and now promotes and encourages gay sex.

I didn’t even know people like u existed so I applaud your decision as I imagine it must be difficult and wish you the best in your personal war against the temptations of evil.

 

[Muff2018]

Yes, they do. My sister-in-law always condemns homosexual relationships, even though she’s been divorced twice and had numerous out of marriage relations, so I get it. Thing is, she’s not Catholic, and wouldn’t dream of being one, so at least she’s honest. Best.

 

[PetraG]

If your first marriage wasn’t valid, the fact that civil law requires a divorce instead of an annulment doesn’t mean you have married a second time when you’re already married. It means you made an attempt at marriage that isn’t binding because the marriage wasn’t valid.
You still have me confused, I guess. Either you were free to marry when you married your current wife when the two of you made vows or you weren’t. If you weren’t, then of course you’re not married to her. Even civil law recognizes that you may not marry when you’re already bound by another valid marriage.
A marriage between two persons of the same sex is impossible. The state can recognize a contract but that doesn’t make it a marriage any more than recognizing a corporation as a person in civil law gives a company an immortal human soul.
(Your accounting of your first marriage as invalid by definition because your first wife filed for divorce doesn’t make sense in light of the Lord’s teaching that divorcing and marrying another is adultery. If the Lord saw a divorce filing as evidence of an invalid marriage, he teaching makes no sense at all. Why quote all the Holy Scripture, then? That is very confusing, too. Maybe your first marriage was a null attempt, but your explanation doesn’t make sense to me.)

 

[Maximus1]

When do we go from not knowing a person is in a state of mortal sin to knowing?

 

[0Scarlett_nidiyilii]

“We” usually don’t, and in that case, it’s none of our business.

It is, however, between the person and God, and it’s up to the individual to abstain from communion if in a state of mortal sin.

Now, some bishops and priests might decide to withhold communion from a person, like maybe they’re known to be a gangster or head up an abortion clinic. In that case, the person is giving public scandal.

 

[Maximus1]

Thanks for that. I have no doubt that it is a well articulated explanation.
I still don’t get the transition from usually don’t, to do.
What you describe roughly sounds like the Golf concept of calling a penalty on yourself. Except when you do that, you revisit the very same unanswerable question about mortal sin. There is a reason only God knows and it includes that we don’t know even about ourselves. The guilty type person guesses culpability and the psychopath guess none.
Scandal is perhaps easier to identify. Here, the scandal includes non uniformity of application which generates scandal of a sort. You are quickly engaged in conduct implicating the" hypocritical" teachings of Jesus which in fact touch on the scandal of inconsistent application of judgement. When you consider the participants in the " big scandal" and the reality that they were not apparently denied communion ( certainly not uniformly), you cannot help but implicate thoughts of legitimacy.
I have to confess, I am troubled by withholding communion.

 

[0Scarlett_nidiyilii]

Except when you do that, you revisit the very same unanswerable question about mortal sin. There is a reason only God knows and it includes that we don’t know even about ourselves. The guilty type person guesses culpability and the psychopath guess none.

But most people are not on the ends of the spectrum of OCD/scrupulosity or sociopath.
Most of us are right in the middle and know perfectly well when we’ve done wrong.

But yes, we are supposed to abstain on our own until we go to confession.

(If you actually are OCD/scrupulous, talk to your MD because there may be treatments you can try. And also let your confessor know so he can take that into account when he advises you.)

 

[Maximus1]

I appreciate your " remedies." They clearly are offered wiith good intentions. And they are good ideas.
One thing. You use the phrase," when you’ve done wrong." I think this is the reality. We know when we have done wrong most of the time. We also know," maybe" it was a mortal sin. But I spoke about KNOWING FOR CERTAIN if something is a mortal sin.
Maybe this is why they use words like persistent when they deny communion.

 

[Alphard]

It’s a word coined to advance the homosexual agenda. It can mean anything, from people hating homosexuals to people rejecting their lifestile. It just serve a way to generate a negative emotion toward the people labeled with it. Just as other words of the current propaganda, like “racist”, “sexist” etc

 

[DAGZ]

I was referring to actively practicing homosexuals that live in perpetual sin with no desire of repentance. I obviously wasn’t very clear on the point of repentance, so thanks for pointing that out.

Peace

 

[QwertyGirl]

Sin is sin and I have an abundance of repented and forgiven sin. I am divorced and remarried. I entered both marriages with the intention of them being for life. To say I am living is sin is false because there is forgiveness of sin. Some things are just out of our control and not the result of our desires or will. “But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.” (KJV+ Mat 5:32).

I have committed adultery by remarrying but I am not remarrying daily and not committing adultery daily. I have repented of my first failed marriage and everything that went with remarrying. I have absolutely no intention of doing it again.

Homosexuals however do not repent of their sin, they are not obedient to Christ, “… Behold, thou art made whole: sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee.” (KJV+ John 5:14)

For me a homosexual can’t be a Christian anymore than a dog can be a sheep. Not only do they refuse to repent from sin, they boast of their sin and celebrate their sin. They have sin parties and sin gatherings. They protests righteousness for the government imposed public acceptance of sin.

There is no comparison between a remarried divorcee and a homosexual.

A better comparison would be with prostitutes or players, those that wake up every morning with the intention of sinning.

Peace.

Your post is a fabulous illustration of why the answer to OP’s original question is a plain and simple “YES”.

 

[QwertyGirl]

It’s happened three times. Four if you include a co-worker who’s second or third sentence upon meeting you is “my daughter’s a lesbian.” It’s very odd.

I have not had this happen. It is very odd, indeed. Perhaps it is the person’s way of giving a head’s up to others to not be speaking derogitorily about gay people (?). I have witnessed this in the work place…Someone makes a very cruel an unacceptable remark about homosexuality in general, not realizing that the person to whom they are making the remark has a gay child. It is very hurtful, obviously.

 

[Lea101]

Maybe people refer to you as an SSA because they have the same definition of gay that I did. Or maybe they want to distinguish a person who restrains themselves from giving in to these desires from a person who openly performs gay sex without any guilt. Giving the term gay to both is problematic, I think this causes a degree of confusion and misunderstanding.

I honestly don’t know anybody outside of the super Catholic circle who think gay is synonymous with a man that has sex with other men. Is it really a thing?

Of course, people in the secular community automatically assume one is having sex regardless of sexual orientation but i don’t think this is the same as thinking gay=sexually active.

 

[DAGZ]

Then there is nothing I can say that will help you understand the power of repentance and forgiveness and that we are not perfect.

Stepping away from church doctrine and into true spirituality let me explain it differently.

There is absolutely no difference between a man that has sex with a woman then later marries a different woman and a man that marries one woman and divorces to marry another. The only difference is how man sees it from his blind point of view. Fornication is sex while rejecting that God has made the two one flesh. Marriage is sex while accepting that God made the two one flesh.

So how many men, according to your point of view, are actually not married to their “first man’s doctrine wife” because of the rejected unions with the women before her.

If you can understand that then maybe you can understand why fornication is the only acceptable reason for divorce according to Christ. It is because fornication breaks one union and creates another.

This union (two becoming one flesh) that happens between a man and a woman during sex and it does not happen between the same gender. And this is why same sex marriage is impossible. It is neither fornication nor marriage it is called abomination.

The church has no power over marriage, that started after Constantine to “tax” the marriage.

I am good with God, washed of my previous sins and am clean living with with my Wife. All things are possible with God even if man can’t comprehend them. Isreal was God’s bride and they were adulterous, now there is a different bride.

So please stop condemning the repented for sins that were forgiven just because they don’t live up to what you believe. It is not my fault if you don’t understand things beyond the constraints of man’s doctrine that decide what is forgiven and what is not or who becomes new and who does not.

Peace.

 

[QwertyGirl]

Of course, people in the secular community automatically assume one is having sex regardless of sexual orientation but i don’t think this is the same as thinking gay=sexually active.

Unfortunately, for those who choose to live in a bubble, it does seem to be a “thing”.

 

[annad347]

I’m quite aware of the church’s teaching, and so is every other gay Catholic.

I believe any Catholic who is openly gay and still goes to church every week has to be one of the strongest Catholic Christan in church.

Think about it, every time you walk in to church, you know what some of the people are thinking, without them even knowing you. You face that head on to worship, as God wants you too.

No matter how you feel, you are doing God’s will by caring your cross in a way no other person in church does… because you know what others are thinking.

Not saying being gay is the cross you carry but the criticism of other church members. You are willing to face that because you love God.

Talk about loving Him as unconditionally as He loves you.