Bishop calls homosexuality ‘gift from God,’ seeks to end ‘prejudices that kill’

[eamonnroma]

Same sex attraction is clearly not a gift from God. God does not create homosexuals. God is not a god of disorder. The Catechism is clear:

Ah. So God did not create these homosexual people? Then who did? I had always thought that God was the creator of all.
Is there another God?

 

[eamonnroma]

When people here quote homosexual practices as being sexually immoral. I presume that they are also including the many millions of, if not the majority of, Roman Catholics who use contraception.

 

[BroIgnatius]

When people here quote homosexual practices as being sexually immoral. I presume that they are also including the many millions of, if not the majority of, Roman Catholics who use contraception.

All sex outside of the marriage of one man and one woman, all artificial contraception, and all sexual practices, even between a married couple, that degrade the human person are not allowed (e.g., bondage, S&M, domination, and other practices too disgusting to mention).

Thus, fornication, adultery, masturbation, artificial contraception, homosexual sex, bestiality, concubinage (living together as if married), swapping, open “marriage”, bondage, S&M, domination, rape fantasies and playacting, and a hundred other perversions, are all grave sins.

 

[BroIgnatius]

Ah. So God did not create these homosexual people? Then who did? I had always thought that God was the creator of all.
Is there another God?

God creates the soul at the moment of conception. Genetics, disease, injury and the like produces birth defects. God did not create the birth defects. Environmental factors that may create a serial killer is also not created by God.

The origin of homosexuality is not really known. It is likely to have both a genetic element and an environment element. Either/or God did not create the genes that may be associated with homosexuality and did not create the environment to which the person grew-up.

Such defects in our genetic structure are there because we live in a fallen world. Sins in the past, even 100,000 years ago, may have causes genetic mutations that is still in are DNA, dormant. God did not cause those mutations.

We know that God did not create homosexuality because it violates natural law and divine law. It is, itself disordered. God does not create disorder or anything that violates natural of divine law.

Those with homosexual inclinations, therefore, are called to chastity. By that, they can become holy. Same is true to single heterosexuals. They also are called to chastity.

It is possible, by the way, for some homosexuals to be cured of their inclinations. I was personally involved in a miracle that healed a homosexual woman. Thus, by God’s intervention (i.e., miracle), or by therapy and other means, it is possible to be healed of homosexual inclinations. The men and woman are healed then may marry if they wish, but until then still must be chaste.

Those who are not healed are called to chastity in perfect continence (permanent). This is possible to do. Priests and religious do it all the time, including me as a Consecrated Brother now for 23 years.

By the way, in like manner, God did not create Satan nor evil. God creates a beautiful angel named Lucifer. Lucifer became Satan by his own choice and brought evil into the world as a result.

God gave us free will in order to love Him and our neighbor. God did not create free will in order for us to sin and do evil, but free will gives us the choice to do so id we want. Those sinful and evil choices were not created by God.

 

[pnewton]

When people here quote homosexual practices as being sexually immoral. I presume that they are also including the many millions of, if not the majority of, Roman Catholics who use contraception.

I do not think there is any tendency one is born with to use contraception, so I do not see where this is relevant, which is why it is not being included, like lying is not being included, or gossip.

 

[BroIgnatius]

I’m sure he meant, “God doesn’t make persons homosexual”.

At the same time, I agree that the phrase “God doesn’t make homosexual persons” is a really annoying and ambiguous phrase.

Yes, “Doesn’t”

Nothing ambiguous about the phrase, “God doesn’t make homosexual persons”. It is precise. (see my post #86 about this).

Annoying? I do not see how to anyone who loves God and the Truth.

We know that those who claim to love God but do not follow his teaching, (e.g., sex only within marriage of one man and one women), do not love God no matter how much they protest otherwise. Jesus said this in the Gospel of John:

15 “If you love me, you will keep my commandments.

21 He who has my commandments and keeps them, he it is who loves me; and he who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I will love him and manifest myself to him.”

 

[BroIgnatius]

Hi BroIgnatius. Admittedly I don’t usually read your posts, but I don’t think I need to in order to respond to the above post which I did happen to read. You’re wrong: God made heterosexual persons, homosexual persons (or homosexuals as you put it), bisexual persons …

Wrongo Peter. See post #86

 

[Prodigal_Son]

Yes, “Doesn’t”

Nothing ambiguous about the phrase, “God doesn’t make homosexual persons”. It is precise. (see my post #86 about this).

Annoying? I do not see how to anyone who loves God and the Truth.

We know that those who claim to love God but do not follow his teaching, (e.g., sex only within marriage of one man and one women), do not love God no matter how much they protest otherwise. Jesus said this in the Gospel of John:

I was defending you, BroIgnatius, and I was just about to verify another post your wrote and to compliment you on it, when I read this. Sheesh.

There certainly IS something ambiguous about “God doesn’t make homosexual persons”. I teach logic, and this phrase is ambiguous between two logical structures:

(1) There are persons that God does not create, and these persons are the ones who are exclusively attracted to the same sex.

(2) There is a condition that God does not create IN persons which He creates, and that condition is homosexuality.

You endorse #2, while denying #1. I agree with you.

 

[Brendan]

Ah. So God did not create these homosexual people? Then who did? I had always thought that God was the creator of all.
Is there another God?

God created people. It is through the sin of Adam ( a human act), that our wills are damaged that we are inclined to sin.

Thus the PERSON is a creation of God. the homosexuality is not.
God does not create in anyone a desire to do evil.

 

[James248]

That’s a pretty old one. Yawn.

Still true.

 

[James248]

God created people. It is through the sin of Adam ( a human act), that our wills are damaged that we are inclined to sin.

Thus the PERSON is a creation of God. the homosexuality is not.
God does not create in anyone a desire to do evil.

 

[philipl]

If God created people and all that they are…then not only may their characteristics be “a gift from god”…but if they were created “in god’s image” then I imagine that their characteristics are similar to god, too?

Or do people only ascribe qualities they like–like musical talent–as being gifts from god? And not the ones they don’t like or the ones they think are “sinful”?

.

Like I said, there will come a day that adults attracted to underage children will be “a gift from God”. It will be the “progressive” left that will say it.

 

[BroIgnatius]

I was defending you, BroIgnatius, and I was just about to verify another post your wrote and to compliment you on it, when I read this. Sheesh.

There certainly IS something ambiguous about “God doesn’t make homosexual persons”. I teach logic, and this phrase is ambiguous between two logical structures:

(1) There are persons that God does not create, and these persons are the ones who are exclusively attracted to the same sex.

(2) There is a condition that God does not create IN persons which He creates, and that condition is homosexuality.

You endorse #2, while denying #1. I agree with you.

I don’t know what you are sheeshing about. I simply responded to what was written as I do not think the phrase is ambiguous in practical understanding, if not technically. But, logic lessons are always good to have.

Then anticipating an objection, not from you, but perhaps from a liberal audience, added the last part. Sorry, if you thought that was directed to you.

I usually write to the audience, not just to the person. To anticipate possible responses or queries saves time. I also am very busy, and do not have the time to worry about nuanced logic structures or perfect sentences.

 

[Sy_Noe]

And visa versa, over this same topic. An error in the beginning is an error indeed, and the reversal of the Anglican Church on this very issue has raised the question of who should have the authority to define doctrine. The question is, how many switch to find God’s eternal truth and how many switch to find the answer that best suits them?

I was raised in another denomination so I know people go from church to church trying to find one that best suits them. I also know that this practically means finding a church that conforms mostly to their standard of what is right and wrong. The error in this is an apologetic issue.

The practical issue of ministering to people with homosexual desires remain in the Catholic Church. That much is true. I have always found it objectionable to single out people with this particular sin as somehow in a difference situation than the rest of sinful humanity. However, I find it far more serious an objection to teach that something that God has clearly said is sinful is not sinful. Ezekiel warns that such teaching will impute sin to the teacher.

I don’t think it’s as simple as that. And I would take objection that seekers look for what suits them. On the contrary, I would actually say many in fact do switch to and from in search of truth. To those who do not necessarily see human writers as inerrant and who believe that humans, regardless of how inspired, can still bring themselves, their own times, their culture, their own prejudices into their writings, it is not so cut and dried, so black and white. In the end, the best any of us can do is to seek truth based upon our own faith and understandings. And I believe human understandings of an infinite God can evolve over time if we only humble ourselves to accept the limitations of our finite human minds in understanding an infinite being such as God.

 

[Peter_J]

I do not think there is any tendency one is born with to use contraception, so I do not see where this is relevant, which is why it is not being included, like lying is not being included, or gossip.

Right. The people in question are simply born heterosexual … and not all heterosexual persons practice contraception, just like not all homosexual persons are sexually active.

See also spiritualfriendship.org

 

[Peter_J]

See post #86

Thank you, but I’ll pass – or, at least, if I decide to put it on my “to read” list it will most likely be at the bottom.

 

[Peter_J]

I was defending you, BroIgnatius
…

As is your right to do, of course … and I’ll just leave it at that.

 

[Catholic13]

The Bishop is one who says that homosexuality is a gift from God. I am only supporting his statement by saying that I see and experience this in my life every day.

Your Catholic Church says many things are sins. I am not a Roman Catholic and don’t feel it is my place to comment on why this is so. I honor what your teachings are and those who live by them.

I also honor my friends and colleagues who are saying there is room for differences. Fr James Martin, for one, is working very hard to bridge the chasm that has been made by teachings on homosexuality. He is all over the media these days, as you well know. People are listening very carefully to his words. I think he will effect change in attitudes and practice.

Personally, I don’t believe homosexuality is a sin. I believe it is an integral part of being human for millions of people. Obviously, my branch of the Church has come to teach this, and many of our members as well as our clergy are openly gay men and women. (And in all honesty, we have many of YOUR members now too.)

You and I see the teachings of Christ in different ways, and that is what it is. I disagree with my Baptist friends who say dancing is a sin. I disagree with my LDS friends who cannot share a cup of tea with me because they believe it is against God’s wishes. I sometimes wonder at it all, but as I said, it is what it is.

So there is only one way to respond to your question of why I don’t repent of sins as Jesus instructed us to, and that is to say I DO. I am Christian! However, my personal sins are mine and mine alone, and I would not ask you to concern yourself with them. And I would say if you yourself are Catholic and gay, it is up to you and your spiritual advisor to work that one out.

I’m sure I left you unsatisfied, but there isn’t much else to say other than we disagree.

If you support his statement then please tell us how homosexuality is a gift from God or are you going to keep dodging the question?

How do you believe that homosexuality[homosexual acts] is not a sin? Please explain yourself because there are literally 40 different ways I could interpret that. Are you suggesting that your word carries more weight than God’s? Are you admitting that you dont follow God’s word? Please explain.

 

[James248]

Thank you, but I’ll pass – or, at least, if I decide to put it on my “to read” list it will most likely be at the bottom.

So, what do YOU believe about the Church’s teachings?

 

[Sy_Noe]

If you support his statement then please tell us how homosexuality is a gift from God or are you going to keep dodging the question?

How do you believe that homosexuality[homosexual acts] is not a sin? Please explain yourself because there are literally 40 different ways I could interpret that. Are you suggesting that your word carries more weight than God’s? Are you admitting that you dont follow God’s word? Please explain.

How many times does the poster need to explain?

The poster already said that your Catholic Church says many things are sins. And though he or she honors those who live by its teachings, he or she is not a Roman Catholic. Believes homosexuality instead is an integral part of being human for millions of people. Has said that his or her branch of the Church has come to teach about homosexuality as it has and that you both simply see the teachings of Christ in different ways, and that it is what it is and that there isn’t much else to say other than you disagree with one another on this matter.

I don’t see any of that at all as suggesting his or her word carries more weight than God’s. Nor does it admit to not following God’s word. It merely suggests that each of your understandings and each your faith communties’ understandings today of God’s word are not in agreement. That’s why it’s called faith.