Catholic Beliefs on Homosexuality

[GrowingInTheFaith]

Thank you for your defense. I appreciate the considerate words. I do feel attacked on this forum, though I do not think anyone really means any harm. I’m not an adult, I’m not Catholic, the things I know about the Catholic church were learned on the internet, and I’m new to these forums, and this is a personal subject. Some here seem to be forgetting these factors. I’ve tried hard to be patient and act kindly, but I would appreciate it if y’all would be more patient with me. I’m not an expert on the Catechism (I actually just used Google to see how to spell it correctly), Catholic teachings, and this subject. So please, bear with me here. Understand that this is a hard subject. This may not be something that I can be completely taken away from. If you have a problem with stopping after starting to kiss someone in a straight relationship with someone you aren’t married to, if you don’t put yourself in that situation, you won’t have very much trouble with that temptation usually. Not to mention that after you get married, it’s no longer a sin. Homosexuality is not like that. You can never even kiss that person nor is what you want to have (a relationship) ever permissible, at least from most Christians’ standpoints. Meanwhile, the rest of the world is telling you to “be yourself” and encouraging you to act on your feelings. It’s a battle inside of myself. So please, everyone be mindful of the way your posts come off.

 

[GrowingInTheFaith]

Okay, thank you. I’m just at a point where I am going deeper than “because the church says.” That’s how I got to this point in the first place. Like, I’m literally on a Catholic forum as a Protestant. Anyway, thank you for explaining that.

 

[HarryStotle]

To be clear, being enslaved to an inclination means acting on it, not experiencing it. Jesus was not enslaved to the temptation to turn stones into bread, though he certainly did experience it.

However, is being “attracted” the same thing as being “tempted?”

And is the word “tempted” in reference to what Satan was attempting to do or in reference to how Jesus felt or responded? Wasn’t Jesus free from original sin and therefore not under the influence of concupiscence?

We wouldn’t say that Jesus was “attracted” to the idea of turning stones into bread, although the use of the word “temptation” seems to imply that. Was he really tempted to carry out demonic plans? Was he “stones into bread” attracted, so to speak?

Satan was doing the tempting, in the sense of attempting to tempt Jesus. Ergo, the “temptations” of Jesus seem to refer to the actions of Satan rather than Jesus’ affectedness.

Wouldn’t an illicit attraction be indicative of a personal or spiritual deficit? And therefore a personal inadequacy or privation?

 

[Thorolfr]

Homosexuality as an identity is a rather recent invention. Previously, homosexual acts were recognized, but not homosexual persons.

I’m not sure about that. One word invented by the eleventh century Catholic theologian Peter Damian was the word “Sodomite,” i.e. a person who engages in sodomy. That sounds like a medieval version of a “homosexual person” to me, although one weighed down by notions of terrible sin and guilt. So, it’s not surprising that homosexual persons nowadays wouldn’t want to use that word to identify themselves. But plenty of people here in CAF seem to like to use this term as a derogatory equivalent of “homosexual person.”

 

[larina]

give me scientific studies of this that are recent, reliable, and non biased. give me the links to these studies from medical professionals.

 

[larina]

I Agree. All I would say to that person is do research with recent reliable non biased sources in the medical field, ask doctors. And please don’t put out information if you are not knowledgeable in the subject.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

Temptation and attraction are both passive experiences of a desire/need for something.

We wouldn’t say that Jesus was “attracted” to the idea of turning stones into bread, although the use of the word “temptation” seems to imply that. Was he really tempted to carry out demonic plans? Was he “stones into bread” attracted, so to speak?

I certainly WOULD say that Jesus was attracted to the idea of turning stones into bread! Otherwise, the entire passage makes no sense. He was hungry, and wanted food. He was interested in the food part, not in the “following the devil” part. Similarly, people who are attracted to the same sex are fundamentally interested in a GOOD thing: complete intimacy with another person.

All attractions are attractions to things that are good, or that are seen as good by the individual experiencing the attraction. Indeed, if we take Augustine seriously, I think we should say that human beings are incapable of being attracted to evil in itself; we are only capable of being lured in by inferior goods, or by taking good things that aren’t in God’s design FOR us.

The issue of concupiscence is a deep one, but we can confidently say that Jesus didn’t find disobeying His Father appealing in itself, whereas we do.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

First, GrowingInTheFaith, let me introduce myself. I’m also same-sex attracted, and I spent my teenage years agonizing over my attraction to men. I totally get where you’re at. And I won’t try to push you in one direction or the other – this is a hard and important decision, and you need to make it for you. Don’t be overly influenced by those around you, whether they mean well or badly.

Right now, I’m married with kids, because I’m fortunate enough to be attracted to women too. But the attraction to men hasn’t magically disappeared, and it’s sometimes challenging to deal with, for sure.

I’m not sure what the verse is. I think this video brings it up, could you give me your thoughts?

Again, not saying I agree with this video, I just want to know your thoughts on it.

This video is posted by a person who is not a scholar (or not a very good one), and who merely has the agenda to make Scripture say what he wants it to say. It would be much more honest if he said, “Who cares what the Bible says, I’m living my life.” The claims made about the word arsenokoitai, for instance, are simply misleading. The Romans DID have many same-sex romantic relationships, and condemning the Zeus/Ganymede relationship was code for condemning all such relationships, in Roman culture. Moreover, the Sibylene passage doesn’t say what the video says it does. It is plausibly condemning homosexual acts.

That said, the Bible never condemns homosexuality, as such. It never condemns the passive experience of same-sex attraction. It just condemns homosexual activity.

You can question that condemnation, but the Scriptures aren’t going to help you do it. You’ll have to say that the Scriptures simply don’t apply anymore.

 

[Saxum]

The orientation isn’t a psychological disorder. I do not have a psychological disorder and I would greatly appreciate it if you didn’t promote widely discredited claims on homosexuality.

My information is from Dr. Joseph Nicolosi. I first heard about him on EWTN radio years ago. Then I heard Michael Voris (an ex-gay) express approval of Nicolosi’s theories. The approval of these Catholic organisations is good enough for me.

I have my reasons for questioning the mainstream psychological consensus on homosexuality. I question the objectivity of those doctors who quickly dismiss reparative therapy for people with unwanted SSA. It seems like the psychological profession have accepted the politically correct narrative that homosexuals are “born that way.”

I believe that homosexuality has several causes. Some people become homosexual because God gives them over to a depraved mind (Romans 1). Others are victims of demonic activity. And finally, others suffer from a form of gender identity disorder.

 

[OnAJourney]

You also forgot to mention the part where Nicolosi states that if you don’t believe his hypothesis he says don’t try to accept it. In other words he’s telling us that his opinion on SSA is subject to whether you believe his starting premise. He’s saying if you believe or don’t believe him that’s fine. Rendering his opinion on the subject of homosexuality being utterly useless.

Michael Voris is a terrible example to use. All Voris does is accuse priests and bishops he doesn’t like of being unchaste homosexuals.

I was always someone with SSA and I do not have a gender identity disorder. And you can’t tell me that I do because you don’t know myself better than I do. Homosexuality isn’t the sign of a depraved mind. You keep speaking on the behalf of people that you presume to know what and how they think.

How do you account for someone like myself who grew up in a good home and was taught right and wrong. And how do you account for that if I don’t have a depraved mind or gender identity disorders? Are you just going to reiterate that I have them even though I know I don’t?

 

[Sbee0]

Sbee0:

SSA is not a sin, nor is being gay.

Do you distinguish “experiencing SSA” from “being gay”? If so, what do you mean by the latter?

I meant to say SSA thoughts even if fleeting.

 

[John_Martin]

“Human” doing is found where there is “knowing” as the completion of movement. https://softvocation.org/2018/05/24/knowing/
Union with that to which one is appetitively attracted is not human without the knowing of the progress towards the final “end” of the act. Satisfaction of appetites does not satisfy the “con-science”, the “knowing-with” of what really happened compared to what would be the truth.

John Martin

 

[Saxum]

Homosexuality isn’t the sign of a depraved mind.

Romans 1 teaches that some individuals are given over to a depraved mind and become homosexuals. The Word of God is clear that homosexuality is sometimes caused by reprobation.

I can’t speak about you or anybody else. My intention is not to pass judgment on people. My goal is to discover why people are inclined towards an unnatural sexual relationship. This is an interesting topic because homosexuality seems to be on the increase; and I want to know why.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

My goal is to discover why people are inclined towards an unnatural sexual relationship.

I would suggest that this description of it misses the internal experience of being same-sex attracted. I would say that there are two important facets to this experience, both of which are independent but sometimes combined:

(1) The desire FOR a person of the same sex. This needn’t be sexual, and it’s CERTAINLY not the desire for a sex act. It’s just “falling in love”, in some sense. It’s not clear to me that this is wrong, though it can be problematic, certainly. If you watch kids, they fall in love in this sense all the time. They become transfixed by someone (often someone of the same gender), and want a close relationship with that person. I think it’s dangerous if Christians offer blanket condemnations of this sort of thing. Many saints had deep and meaningful friendships. Though we would also be naive if we didn’t think that this sort of thing could be dangerous, if not coupled with virtue.

(2) The desire for sexual stimulation with a person of the same sex. It’s not clear to me at all that this is something only gay people have. It’s usually quite taboo, though, so few people admit to it. At any rate, this desire is clearly a desire for something bad, on the Catholic view. But it’s not necessarily what gay people are describing when they say that they are attracted to people of the same sex.

 

[Saxum]

It’s just “falling in love”, in some sense. It’s not clear to me that this is wrong, though it can be problematic, certainly.

What do you mean by ‘love?’ There’s certainly nothing wrong in having a deep friendship with a person of the opposite sex; the Greeks called this type of love ‘philos.’ It’s the kind of love experienced by a platoon who has become a band of brothers or a football team.

However, there is something wrong when the emotional bond between two same-sex friends is romantic - when the love has an erotic element. This type of love is designed for opposite sex relationships. Erotic love calls for the total gift of self to another in a ‘one flesh’ relationship. It is a deep spiritual bond that is designed to mirror the inner life of the Holy Trinity. That’s why the nuclear family is sometimes called the ‘Holy Trinity on Earth.’

Is there not some way to help people with SSA understand and experience this longing for fruitful, procreative union? The union between man and woman reveals much about what it means to be human. A man without this internal understanding of sexual complementarity does not fully understand his natural gender role.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

However, there is something wrong when the emotional bond between two same-sex friends is romantic - when the love has an erotic element.

I think you’re confusing these two terms, romantic and erotic. Romantic traditionally means “characterized by intense interest and devotion”. (Its modern meaning is shallow and silly). There’s nothing intrinsically sexual there. Mind you, it’s a touchy thing, and for good reasons most friendships don’t involve a romantic interest for long. But it makes perfect sense to talk about a “falling in love” sort of experience when talking about meeting someone you totally click with of the same sex, and wanting to spend lots of time with that person.

Erotic means something different, at least if you’re using it in a sexual sense (as what you say next implies). It used to be used for the desire to “become one mind”, and that could actually be an appropriate goal in a friendship – though a lot of virtue would have to be involved.

Is there not some way to help people with SSA understand and experience this longing for fruitful, procreative union?

Why wouldn’t they understand it? I’ve certainly had times in my life when I desperately wished that a man was the type of person I could have a family with, the natural way (pregnancy and childbirth). But the fact that man isn’t like that indicates something about God’s plan for me.

 

[Saxum]

But the fact that man isn’t like that indicates something

I have a serious question and I apologise if it sounds a little nutty. But do you think people with SSA are natural eunuchs? There’s a Christian book out there which has this theory.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

I have a serious question and I apologise if it sounds a little nutty. But do you think people with SSA are natural eunuchs? There’s a Christian book out there which has this theory.

I assume you mean to refer to the NT passage about some being natural eunuchs, some made eunuchs by men, and some eunuchs for the kingdom? If so, then maybe. With one huge qualifier…

Being same-sex attracted doesn’t mean NOT being attracted to the opposite sex. I’m attracted to both, and I’m married to a woman. So I’m obviously not a natural eunuch.

 

[Mary888]

I’m not an adult,

OP the discussion is not age-appropriate for you and definitely not online. Please discuss this subject with your parents or pastor not strangers on line.

 

[OnAJourney]

Is there not some way to help people with SSA understand and experience this longing for fruitful, procreative union? The union between man and woman reveals much about what it means to be human. A man without this internal understanding of sexual complementarity does not fully understand his natural gender role.

No. I’m not interested in marrying a woman or having children. And there is no way to make someone like myself long for either of those things if the interest and desire is lacking