Reminds me of this article: spiritualfriendship.org/2015/09/20/spiritual-friendship-and-courage-on-the-need-for-variety-in-ministry/I’ll trust the priest who wrote the article that said such feelings are neutral. If I caused confusion over the word desire instead of feeling, that’s my bad. But my point still stands.
The part about identifying as homosexual: no sin. I’ve never been a fan of the small clique that uses SSA instead of gay or homosexual. Pope Francis used the term gay. Pope Francis also.embraced a gay man and his partner when he visited the US.
And before someone mentions Courage: I was part of Courage. I left. Just because it is an apostolate doesn’t mean there can’t be other orthodox organizations. Just to be clear, an orthodox priest I knew who ran our Courage group and who I still speak with from time to time saw no problem in me calling myself gay or homosexual. He also said as much about feelings being neutral. And he has an STL doctorate. So…
The problem arises in what is a gay identity. That is an ideological analysis of what is a very concrete fact: I am sexually attracted to men. Like it or not that is the bare fact of the matter when people call themselves gay or homosexual. No one outside a small subset of Christians uses the term SSA. And thus evangelizing with such a limited term serves no one outside of those already suited to such terminology. In other words, it barely deserves the term evangelizing.That’s ok. Yes, feelings are different from desires.
I’m glad you gave Courage a try. Yes, there are other orthodox groups. Even just a Catholic men’s group might be helpful - there are single guys who join those (they won’t help with gay issues specifically, but just with virtuous living).
As I said, there are various reasons and intentions a person may have for calling himself gay or homosexual. Some of those are bad others not sinful. We could probably say that “most of the time” a person who identifies himself as homosexual is making a conscious decision about what he wants to do – but that’s just an indication of our culture. Yes, true - it’s not necessarily the case that everyone would do that.
I thought of another good reason why the label could (and actually should) be used.
I asked a gay friend (celibate Catholic) why he didn’t want to go to the gym and work out.
He said it was a place that was an occasion of sin for him - and that made a lot of sense. Identifying himself as gay would be helpful if he had a job, for example, that put him in a situation with men like that.
Or even if he found a woman who was taking an interest in him. In fairness to her, he could explain his orientation that way.
So, it can be a helpful term to use, for the right reasons.
I just get concerned when a person wants to lock himself in to an identity like that. There’s a “gay culture” that will help convince a person that this tendency and temptations are “who he really is”. That may be fine in some ways, but there’s a risk of rationalizing the sin in many cases.
A man can be single and celibate for a lot of reasons that he does not need to explain.
Also, as I said elsewhere, in some cases (not all) it’s possible for a gay person to discover aspects in his mental habits and emotional needs that can move him away from a gay-identity.
I think there’s also this assumption that all people who call themselves gay or homosexual are out there marching in gay pride parades and flying rainbow flags, and so “they are worse than adulterers because adulterers don’t advertise their sins and demand public recognition that they are not sinning”.The problem arises in what is a gay identity. That is an ideological analysis of what is a very concrete fact: I am sexually attracted to men. Like it or not that is the bare fact of the matter when people call themselves gay or homosexual. No one outside a small subset of Christians uses the term SSA. And thus evangelizing with such a limited term serves no one outside of those already suited to such terminology. In other words, it barely deserves the term evangelizing.
I realize this is not the same as a controlled study, just one person’s experience. But I’ve been gay all of my life. I was attracted to men since I could remember. And only realized what that meant later in life. I was never, at any point in my life (I’m 28) attracted to a female at any point. Not in the slightest. I prayed to God when I was young to make me attracted to women. It never happened.I think there’s also this assumption that all people who call themselves gay or homosexual are out there marching in gay pride parades and flying rainbow flags, and so “they are worse than adulterers because adulterers don’t advertise their sins and demand public recognition that they are not sinning”.
Thanks. I would not want to invalidate yours either.reggieM, I don’t want to invalidate your experiences,
I can assure you that people are very comfortable in confiding in me - so you can rest easy about that!but considering your attitudes about homosexual attractions being as disordered as urges to commit suicide or molest children, I am not sure that anyone would be comfortable confiding to you that they have any such attractions even if they are weaker than before.
I’m glad you’re open to that possibility. It’s also possible for a person, with the help of God, to restructure his thought patterns and correct certain mental habits also.Is it possible for God to take away all SSA, sure.
Belief in the Catholic Faith is not normative also, so I’m not talking about the majority of people in society today.But not normative, anymore than it is normative for all cripples who go to Lourdes being healed.
Good question. I could have said that SSA is a temptation to a sinful behavior so why couldn’t God take them away entirely? That’s saying the same thing. Sure, God could permit temptations, but why is it so hard to believe that He would actually take them away? Other temptations go away - including the temptation to get drunk.I’m not sure why you’re suddenly discussing the acts,
Temptations can be strong or weak. Sometimes they are near-irresistable compulsions. Other times they don’t have as much power over a person. But the temptation is to commit a sin - so either way, it’s something that is fought against.unless you think the only way to remove the risk that someone would act out on SSA is to remove the SSA, and again this seems to show an understanding of SSA not as mere attraction to the same sex (as OSA is attraction to the opposite sex) but some kind of near-irresistible compulsion to sin, as if all gay people are sex addicts.
All sin has a potentially addictive quality to it. If we’re saying that homosexuality is a life-long temptation towards one sort of sin - a temptation that can never go away except by a non-normative miracle equivalent to an amputee having a leg grown back, then the temptation is strong enough to be considered potentially addictive.BTW while I have compared being homosexual to being alcoholic, I do realize that unlike alcoholics, homosexuals are not all addicted to gay sex, though from what I understand the Courage program essentially does treat them like AA treats alcoholics, and even uses a variant of a 12 step program.
I didn’t say I didn’t believe it could happen. I was just concerned that you keep interchangeably discussing temptations and actions as if all gay people are unable to resist temptation, and the only thing that can save them is take their temptations away.Good question. I could have said that SSA is a temptation to a sinful behavior so why couldn’t God take them away entirely? That’s saying the same thing. Sure, God could permit temptations, but why is it so hard to believe that He would actually take them away? Other temptations go away - including the temptation to get drunk.
Many straight posters struggle with the “solitary sin” for all of their lives, and others are tempted to act out their temptations with others. Are those who regularly acts out on heterosexual inclinations also sex addicts?.All sin has a potentially addictive quality to it. If we’re saying that homosexuality is a life-long temptation towards one sort of sin - a temptation that can never go away except by a non-normative miracle equivalent to an amputee having a leg grown back, then the temptation is strong enough to be considered potentially addictive.
It would seem to me that anybody that regularly acts out on homosexual inclinations is a sex addict. There are quite a lot of gays that do just that, so the Courage model probably meets a majority of the need.
With all due respect to Ms. Selmys, I don’t understand why she reads Crisis Magazine in the first place. That makes as much sense to me as reading Breitbart.And this forum in particular often makes me think of this: patheos.com/blogs/catholicauthenticity/2015/08/a-crisis-in-a-teapot-why-gay-catholics-can-never-be-good-enough/
I think you compared it with the regrowth of an amputated limb.I didn’t say I didn’t believe it could happen.
I was pointing to an underlying problem that the temptation may (not necessarily will) signal.I was just concerned that you keep interchangeably discussing temptations and actions as if all gay people are unable to resist temptation, and the only thing that can save them is take their temptations away.
A person who commits fornication with self regularly - yes, of course, that’s the definition of an addiction to an illicit, unfruitful sex act. It’s a good comparison with homosexuality. There are many techniques that sex addiction experts use to help reduce and often eliminate the temptation to “solitary sin”. Normally, one does not hear that it is necessarily a permanent condition. People don’t tend to create a culture or public lifestyle around that particular temptation either. But it’s essentially the same as homosexuality – temptations to commit sexual sins which are oriented to something other than what God intended. Sins of fornication between men and women are less irrational since, at least, they are ordered to something that at least is potentially virtuous. But yes, it is still sinful.Many straight posters struggle with the “solitary sin” for all of their lives, and others are tempted to act out their temptations with others. Are those who regularly acts out on heterosexual inclinations also sex addicts?.
I think the first question the Church may have is “why do you consider yourself gay”? How do you know you are that and what does it mean?And what about the people who identify as gay but do NOT regularly act out on homosexual inclinations, and do NOT have them taken away by God? What answer does the Church have for them?
Another thing that can help (not necessarily *Will *help) is as you’ve gone through that prayer and discovered no change, you can ask the Lord about this temptation. What are His purposes for you?I was never, at any point in my life (I’m 28) attracted to a female at any point. Not in the slightest. I prayed to God when I was young to make me attracted to women. It never happened.
Just following my post above, Toe …And what about the people who identify as gay but do NOT regularly act out on homosexual inclinations, and do NOT have them taken away by God? What answer does the Church have for them?
Dude, THAT is the message we need to be giving to homosexual Catholics. I’ve thought about this in my own life incessantly. That is what we need to be telling gay Catholics. That was my entire point in this thread and every similar thread I’ve posted in. I am not excusing homosexual acts. I am just saying the PR campaign has been shoddy from the Church at large, especially the laity.Another thing that can help (not necessarily *Will *help) is as you’ve gone through that prayer and discovered no change, you can ask the Lord about this temptation. What are His purposes for you?
He may say, yes – this is your Cross. It’s what he told all of His followers we have to bear (in different forms) otherwise we cannot be His disciples. And that Cross is for your salvation and the salvation of many others!
So, yes - a lot of suffering, loneliness, misunderstanding, confusion and outright pain is there on the path. But we know that can be redemptive and if offered well, it’s a very heroic thing that leads to a very holy life.
The stone that was rejected has become the cornerstone. The last shall be first.
Those who are ridiculed or abandoned or misunderstood - may be the ones who are winning the most graces for themselves and the world.
That’s what Jesus taught through His life, so it seems strange but it’s the truth.
If credible sources (not the regular media who can’t even quote the Pope properly) say it was a mass, than it was a mass. But there is nothing that suggests it was an open communion situation. Catholic masses are not conducted as such.It really was an event that included the Mass. Every single report says Mass happened. The invitation to attend announced that Mass would happen.
angelqueen.org/2017/04/20/new-jersey-cardinal-welcomes-gay-activists-to-his-cathedral/
Mass will be offered by Rev. Francis Gargani, C.Ss.R. Gargani frequently offers retreats to LGBT Catholics, one of which was advertised by the gay-affirmative Open Hearts GLBT Ministry located at St. Patrick – St. Anthony Church in Hartford, Connecticut. The Open Hearts group recently read a book which celebrated the “Queer Christ.” According to a description for the retreat:
What exactly is celebrating their identity? It’s very ambiguous. Bitter medicine can be made palatable by sweetening it, which is what they may have planned by “easing” the transition to Church teachings, but giving just the sweetener is useless.Through ritual prayer, reflective (name removed by moderator)ut sessions, shared discussion, personal time for prayer and quiet, and social gatherings, this retreat offers a special opportunity for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender persons to celebrate their identity and deepen their experience of community in the living God.
Yet when our LORD went to the Temple He was not pleased with the supposed ‘faithful’ He saw there…We all need to remember that while our LORD went to dinner with various sinners, He did not lead them to the Temple to present their unrepented sins there.
…and this in part is why the LGBT issue is so challenging.The LGBT issue is probably the great challenge for faith in the 2000s; to “welcome” those in that sector to faith and repentenace without, at the same time, seeming to welcome the sin. Yes, this will be hard. Very hard. But He never said that faith would be easy or that overt persecution would be the only difficulty.
Correct. The Temple too was full of sinners.Yet when our LORD went to the Temple He was not pleased with the supposed ‘faithful’ He saw there.
Contraception?Yet when our LORD went to the Temple He was not pleased with the supposed ‘faithful’ He saw there…
More accurately: Hypocrisy.Contraception?
I keep hearing anecdotal stories of Church authorities tacitly approving of contraception under certain circumstances. I thought perhaps it’s too exaggerated to be taken at face value…but does it happen more than we think?Contraception?
The line is not blurred if individuals fail to maintain Truth. (because you know, we all fall short).I keep hearing anecdotal stories of Church authorities tacitly approving of contraception under certain circumstances. I thought perhaps it’s too exaggerated to be taken at face value…but does it happen more than we think?
If the line on contraception is blurred, then what moral basis is there to draw a strict line for gays and lesbians?