Can someone help?

[1990Domer]

My concern is that the Church makes a claim that a group of people has the capacity to “experience
an exclusive … sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex”. Is this statement true or false?
I believe the statement is false.

God bless

Have you ever considered taking some Church history or theology classes? Many are offered at either seminaries or at orthodox Catholic universities and colleges.

It’s times like this we need 1ke add her insight.

 

[Thorolfr]

and the males likewise gave up natural relations with females and burned with lust for one another.

So do you think that you could just decide one day to start being attracted to the same sex and stop having opposite sex attraction and then decide the next day to not have same-sex attraction any more and to be attracted to the opposite sex again?

 

[Rau]

I will believe this through faith in Church history, tradition and Apostolic teaching…

There is no teaching that says persons may not experience a psychological or pathological condition which upsets the typical male <—> female sexual attraction. The Church does not teach medical science, psychology or similar disciplines.

 

[jjr9]

Have you ever considered taking some Church history or theology classes? Many are offered at either seminaries or at orthodox Catholic universities and colleges.

It’s times like this we need 1ke add her insight.

Thank you for taking time to reply. What does “1ke add her insight” mean?

God bless

 

[jjr9]

Have you ever considered taking some Church history or theology classes? Many are offered at either seminaries or at orthodox Catholic universities and colleges.

It’s times like this we need 1ke add her insight.

Thank you for taking time to reply.

I don’t believe that this issue requires theology classes.

Can you be a little more specific what you think relevant about “1ke add her insight”?

God bless

 

[jjr9]

So do you think that you could just decide one day to start being attracted to the same sex and stop having opposite sex attraction and then decide the next day to not have same-sex attraction any more and to be attracted to the opposite sex again?

I cannot tell you what brings any individual to any specific temptation other than Satan is a convincing
liar.

My concern is that the Church makes a claim that a group of people has the capacity to “experience
an exclusive … sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex”. Is this statement true or false?
I believe the statement is false.

God bless

 

[jjr9]

There is no teaching that says persons may not experience a psychological or pathological condition which upsets the typical male <—> female sexual attraction. The Church does not teach medical science, psychology or similar disciplines.

You are welcome to your view.

My concern is that the Church makes a claim that a group of people has the capacity to “experience
an exclusive … sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex”. Is this statement true or false?
I believe the statement is false.

God bless

 

[Oneofthewomen]

The Church makes no such claim, that is your interpretation of what you think the Church is saying.

From the CCC, (my bolding)
2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity,140 tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered."141 They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.

The Church is not “claiming” anything, other than using the science/psychology that is known to us today to describe what *homosexual *means.

You are reading W-A-Y too much into this statement. I strongly suggest that you talk with your priest about your struggles with doubting the Church, I think there is something much deeper at play here.

Peace be with you on your journey.

You are welcome to your view.

My concern is that the Church makes a claim that a group of people has the capacity to “experience
an exclusive … sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex”. Is this statement true or false?
I believe the statement is false.

God bless

 

[jjr9]

Thank you for taking time to reply

The Church makes no such claim, that is your interpretation of what you think the Church is saying.

The Church clearly claims a group of people have the capacity to “experience an exclusive … sexual
attraction toward persons of the same sex”.

The Church is not “claiming” anything, other than using the science/psychology that is known to us today to describe what *homosexual *means.

Do you believe the Church is claiming as truth “science/psychology that is known to us today to describe
what *homosexual *means"?

What is it that you think “is known to us today”?

I do not believe the claim that a group of people have the capacity to “experience an exclusive
… sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex” is true and the Church is in error to make the claim.

You are reading W-A-Y too much into this statement.

I believe this a fundamental error by the Church that must not stand.

I strongly suggest that you talk with your priest about your struggles with doubting the Church, I think there is something much deeper at play here.

I have talked with a number of Priests my previous pastor made it clear to me that he thinks
the Church has not gone far enough in accepting the “homosexual person” and should accept “same sex
behavior” presumably in “marriage”. My current pastor I believe to be a good Priest he is from Nigeria,
so communication is an issue, he was insistent that the Church does not condone same sex behavior I have
no dispute with this point. I followed up with an email Father did not reply.

Peace be with you on your journey.

And with you spirit.

God bless

 

[Oneofthewomen]

Sorry, but I am no longer going to continue to argue with you.

You are free to believe what you want. If you think the Church is wrong, and you are getting no where with your local priests, I suggest you write a letter to Pope Francis.

I am sure he’d like to hear how wrong you think he is.

 

[jjr9]

Sorry, but I am no longer going to continue to argue with you.

I am sorry you want to argue I wish to seek the truth.

You are free to believe what you want.

Thank you so are you.

If you think the Church is wrong, and you are getting no where with your local priests, I suggest you write a letter to Pope Francis.

For about 9 years I tried to bring this error to the Church in an informal way by communicating
with clergy and Catholic scholars. The end result being told in a number of ways to go away and stop
bothering them with no substantive response to my concern. In Nov 2013 it came to me that the Church
must have a formal structure to address concerns such as mine. Looking at the situation it seemed the
Judicial Vicar office of my diocese would be the appropriate venue.

My Judicial Vicar suggested writing to Archbishop Di Noia at the CDF and supplied an address
to write Archbishop Di Noia. I received no response, in Mar 2014 I asked my Judicial Vicar to act as
agent for my letter and send it through his office. My Judicial Vicar agreed to this. I also asked if
my Judicial Vicar could give his view on this concern before sending my letter through the Judicial
Vicar office. my Judicial Vicar said:

“I have a good idea of what I want to say but I want to make sure of it before I commit to it.”

In May 2014 I thought it best to just send my letter without the benefit of my Judicial Vicar’s
view. My Judicial Vicar sent my letter in Jun 2014.

In Nov 2014 still no response from the CDF, I suggested that my Judicial Vicar seek my Bishop’s
guidance on how to proceed. My Judicial Vicar was “not about to undertake your(my) crusade” and
suggested I contact my Bishop myself. I took this to be my Judicial Vicar’s form of go away kid don’t bother
me.

I sent my first letter to my Bishop. He was kind and replied by directing me to the CCC of which
I am familiar and a pastoral letter from the USCCB of which I was unfamiliar. Neither addressed my concern.
In Dec 2014 I sent my second letter to my Bishop seeking clarification. He was kind and responded again,
telling me that he is too busy to address my concern but letting me know that my Judicial Vicar can continue
to assist me.

I sent a third letter to my Bishop, letting him know that I had told my Judicial Vicar I would not intrude
on him again and asking my Bishop not assist me if he did not have a calling to. My Bishop did not reply I took
that as his form of go away kid don’t bother me.

Even though neither my Bishop nor my Judicial Vicar had suggested any recourse I felt that there
must be, so I consulted a canonist who informed me that if I feel the CDF has not properly responded to my
concern I have recourse to the Apostolic Signatura.

Since my Bishop had stopped communicating I decided to approach my Judicial Vicar again mentioning
my Bishop’s view that he “can continue to assist you(me)”. My Judicial Vicar said “I am glad that you have found
a canon lawyer who feels that s/he can be of some service to you.” I told my Judicial Vicar I did not say that I had
“found a canon lawyer who feels that s/he can be of some service to you(me)” to the contrary I was informed that
this process requires contacts in Rome which they do not have. My Judicial Vicar told me “I am not able to help
you further in this matter. I am sorry. Sometimes the answer is no and this is one of those times.” my Judicial Vicar
referred me back to my Bishop again.

I told my Bishop I do not believe that the CDF ignoring me is a proper response to my concern and would
like to avail myself of the opportunity the Church provides to address this process. I do not have contacts in Rome
to follow this procedure I am sure that our diocese does. I asked my Bishop if the Judicial Vicar is not the correct
venue can he please give enclosed letters to the person in our diocese who will see that they reach the appropriate
office in the Apostolic Signatura through the appropriate channels. In Jan 2015 I received notification from my
Chancellor that my letters to the Apostolic Signatura would be sent by the diocese. I have not had a response.

My Bishop is waiting for response from the Holy See I do not believe my Bishop will be hearing from

the CDF or the Apostolic Signatura. I have notified my Bishop that I will be attempting to bring this error to the
public square.

Before going to the public square it occurred to me to check with the canonist who suggested the

Apostolic Signatura. The canonist let me know that the Pope is my recourse if I believe the Apostolic Signatura
has not properly responded. My Bishop was kind and send my letters to the Apostolic Signatura in the
past. I hoped that my Bishop would be kind again and send my letters to the Pope. I am certain that if
he sent my letters to the Pope for me the Pope would see them. My Bishop declined and gave me the Pope’s
address. I told the Pope I believe that not responding is an inappropriate response by the CDF. I understand that
the Pope is incapable of reading all that is sent to him I had hoped the letter from my Bishop directing me to the
Pope would get it through. That was early July I do not know what has happened since.

All I request is Truth; for the Church to make the claim that anyone has capacity to “experience
an exclusive … sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex” only serves the evil one not the Lord.
Please help correct this error for the Lord.

I am sure he’d like to hear how wrong you think he is.

I am sure the Pope is humble enough to admit if the Church is in error.

God bless

 

[Thorolfr]

For about 9 years I tried to bring this error to the Church in an informal way by communicating
with clergy and Catholic scholars. The end result being told in a number of ways to go away and stop
bothering them with no substantive response to my concern.

Why are you so concerned about this issue? Aren’t there more important things to be concerned about?

 

[at9009]

All I request is Truth; for the Church to make the claim that anyone has capacity to “experience
an exclusive … sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex” only serves the evil one not the Lord.
Please help correct this error for the Lord.

I am sure the Pope is humble enough to admit if the Church is in error.

God bless

I think the may difference between your view point and the church’s is this: The Church would recognize that people can experience exclusive same sex attraction due to the brokenness and fallen nature of man. It simply represents the person’s own concupiscence.

The Church makes no statement on the origin of such attractions or whether or not the attractions are permanent.

I personally have difficulty understanding how admitting that someone can experience only attraction to the same sex is only serving the evil one? Now if I said because of that then same sex acts would be okay (WHICH are not and can never be morally okay). Then I can understand how that perspective would serve the evil one and I would agree with you.

However, I have difficulty understanding your argument on why someone having exclusive same sex attractions is impossible or a false statement. You seem to completely ignore and flat out reject the experience of many devout and committed Christians who do indeed experience only same sex attraction or such little opposite sex attraction that marriage most likely isn’t their vocational calling.

Anyway, God bless and I pray that God gives you peace.

 

[davidv]

I am sorry you want to argue I wish to seek the truth.

Thank you so are you.

For about 9 years I tried to bring this error to the Church in an informal way by communicating
{snip}

Seems to me that is strong evidence that it is not the Church that is in error.

 

[Rau]

I think the may difference between your view point and the church’s is this: The Church would recognize that people can experience exclusive same sex attraction due to the brokenness and fallen nature of man. It simply represents the person’s own concupiscence.

The Church makes no statement on the origin of such attractions or whether or not the attractions are permanent.

I personally have difficulty understanding how admitting that someone can experience only attraction to the same sex is only serving the evil one? Now if I said because of that then same sex acts would be okay (WHICH are not and can never be morally okay). Then I can understand how that perspective would serve the evil one and I would agree with you.

However, I have difficulty understanding your argument on why someone having exclusive same sex attractions is impossible or a false statement. You seem to completely ignore and flat out reject the experience of many devout and committed Christians who do indeed experience only same sex attraction or such little opposite sex attraction that marriage most likely isn’t their vocational calling.

Anyway, God bless and I pray that God gives you peace.

Jjr9 is not seeing the difference between attractions and temptations. He has said they are the same thing (though that does not explain the absence of attraction to the opposite sex that some people find accompanies SSA). He has also said people experiencing SSA are confused. He has also said it is an error to say “they do not choose their homosexual condition” (SSA), which is to imply they lie when they say they had no choice over the direction of their attractions. When confronted with these points he waves them away as “tangential”.

He appears to regard the very experience of SSA as sinful, which would make sense if it were something that could be chosen. Never mind that it seems to me to be impossible to choose such an attraction. Little boys don’t much like little girls. And when they get to teenagers, that generally changes without any willful effort. If it does not, we are entitled to believe domething is amiss - but not that the individual has made an evil choice, for there is no choice being made! The church is clear that SSA is not sinful, and hence not chosen.

He will not confront any of these issues, but instead simply rejects scientific conclusions, for if they are to stand, his belief that SSA is chosen is disproven.

 

[jjr9]

Why are you so concerned about this issue?

I believe the Lord gave us His Church to be a pillar of truth in a world full of temptation
not to be a barometer of the current secular consensus as it has in this instance.

I believe all members of the Church have an obligation to the Lord to point out an error by
the Church if they see one.

Aren’t there more important things to be concerned about?

I believe that this is the only instance where the Church claims something to be true
which is false. So not really.

I believe that the so called “science” involved with the “homosexual person” is junk science
with a predetermined result. For example you cite studies saying:

“Statistical parametric mapping showed that viewing erotic film excerpts that induced sexual
arousal was associated, in both groups, with activation of the middle prefrontal gyrus, bilateral
temporal lobe and postcentral gyrus, thalamus, insula, vermis, left precuneus, occipital cortex, parietal
cortex, and cerebellum. In homosexual men, the left angular gyrus, left caudate nucleus, and right
pallidum were activated; in contrast, heterosexual men showed no activation in these regions.”

And

“This study investigated whether neural circuits or different cognitive processes accounted for
differences in brain activation in 14 heterosexual and 14 homosexual males.”

Do you believe studying brain function of people watching Erotica tells us some people have the
capacity to “experience an exclusive … sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex”? I have
an alternate hypothesis perhaps St Paul knows what he is talking about when he says:

Romans 1:28

“And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God handed them over to their undiscerning
mind to do what is improper.”

Perhaps what the researchers are seeing is what happens to brain function when the sense of
shame is numbed with rote exposure to perverse sexuality mental or physical.

I can’t imagine what would bring individuals to participate in such a survey that by its nature
involves sinful behavior.

At least the one survey says:

"The underlying neurobiological factors involved in sexual orientation are largely unknown. "

Can you cite “science” that is a bit more objective?

God bless

 

[jjr9]

I think the may difference between your view point and the church’s is this: The Church would recognize that people can experience exclusive same sex attraction due to the brokenness and fallen nature of man. It simply represents the person’s own concupiscence.

I believe the Church should not accept something as truth without a truly right and just reason.
Do you know of a truly right and just reason for the Church to claim a group of people has the
capacity to “experience an exclusive … sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex”?

The Church makes no statement on the origin of such attractions or whether or not the attractions are permanent.

The Church claims a group of people have the capacity to “experience an exclusive … sexual
attraction toward persons of the same sex” the Church does not attach a time component so
one has to believe this is a permanent state or a glaring error the Church should correct.

I personally have difficulty understanding how admitting that someone can experience only attraction to the same sex is only serving the evil one? Now if I said because of that then same sex acts would be okay (WHICH are not and can never be morally okay). Then I can understand how that perspective would serve the evil one and I would agree with you.

I believe that the indoctrination children are being subjected to in the secular world should
not be reinforced by the Church.

However, I have difficulty understanding your argument on why someone having exclusive same sex attractions is impossible or a false statement. You seem to completely ignore and flat out reject the experience of many devout and committed Christians who do indeed experience only same sex attraction or such little opposite sex attraction that marriage most likely isn’t their vocational calling.

The CCC says:

84 The apostles entrusted the “Sacred deposit” of the faith (the depositum fidei),45 contained in Sacred
Scripture and Tradition, to the whole of the Church. “By adhering to [this heritage] the entire holy people,
united to its pastors, remains always faithful to the teaching of the apostles, to the brotherhood, to the breaking
of bread and the prayers. So, in maintaining, practicing and professing the faith that has been handed on, there
should be a remarkable harmony between the bishops and the faithful.”

I believe the Church claiming a group of people having the capacity to “experience an exclusive … sexual
attraction toward persons of the same sex” is not in harmony with the “Sacred deposit” of the faith.

Anyway, God bless and I pray that God gives you peace.

Thank you for your prayers I pray that God gives you peace as well.

God bless

 

[jjr9]

Jjr9 is not seeing the difference between attractions and temptations. He has said they are the same thing (though that does not explain the absence of attraction to the opposite sex that some people find accompanies SSA). He has also said people experiencing SSA are confused. He has also said it is an error to say “they do not choose their homosexual condition” (SSA), which is to imply they lie when they say they had no choice over the direction of their attractions. When confronted with these points he waves them away as “tangential”.

He appears to regard the very experience of SSA as sinful, which would make sense if it were something that could be chosen. Never mind that it seems to me to be impossible to choose such an attraction. Little boys don’t much like little girls. And when they get to teenagers, that generally changes without any willful effort. If it does not, we are entitled to believe domething is amiss - but not that the individual has made an evil choice, for there is no choice being made! The church is clear that SSA is not sinful, and hence not chosen.

He will not confront any of these issues, but instead simply rejects scientific conclusions, for if they are to stand, his belief that SSA is chosen is disproven.

Please continue misrepresenting what I say and respond to your misrepresentation if that is
helpful for you.

If you need clarification on something I say please cite what I have said that is not clear for
you and I will try to clarify.

God bless

 

[jjr9]

Seems to me that is strong evidence that it is not the Church that is in error.

You are welcome to your view.

My concern is that the Church makes a claim that a group of people has the capacity to “experience
an exclusive … sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex”. Is this statement true or false?
I believe the statement is false.

God bless

 

[davidv]

You are welcome to your view.

My concern is that the Church makes a claim that a group of people has the capacity to “experience
an exclusive … sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex”. Is this statement true or false?
I believe the statement is false.

God bless

Yet you have not presented evidence other than your own feelings that it is false.