Catholics: Can homosexual sex acts really be commited in "invincible ignorance"?

  • Thread starter Thread starter urban-hermit
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
In his teaching to his brothers and sisters he always called them to bring sinners back to God through example, not harassment or humiliation. Because when he looked at Christ he saw a humble God. He also reminded his followers that Christ’s last words on the cross were, “Forgive them for they know not what they do.”
In his mystical theology, which the Church not only accepted, but for which the Church gave him a title that has never been given to any other Christian, The Mirror of Perfection, Francis embraced conversion from sin for himself. He embraced the teaching of conversion and he also embraced humanity as Christ embraced it, without the fundamentalist rhetoric. He embraced the cross and the message of the cross.

Neither in his writings, nor in his preaching did Francis ever tell a sinner that they were going to Hell. What he attempted to impress upon sinners the love that God has for us and how to respond to that love with detachment from everything that is of this world, including the pride that many have because they are “saved” or “Catholic.”

Francis did many beautiful things, but there were two that speak to this issue of conscience and sin. First, he travelled to Morocco to preach to the Muslims. When he arrived he sought the sultan to ask for permission to preach to his people. The sultan was so impressed by his humility that he granted it. Francis preached and left. He witnessed to the beauty and humility of the Crucified Christ. So much so, that the sultan said, “If all Christians were like this, I would convert tomorrow.”

The second event that is recorded in history was an invitation that he made to one of his brothers to go preach in a town that was steeped in sin. As they walked through the town, Francis ordered the brother to say nothing to anyone until he (Francis) gave him permission. This was interesting, as Francis was a layman and the other brother was a priest. Obedient to his Father, the brother kept his mouth shut. They passed many churches. As they exited the town the brother asked him where they were to preach. Francis answered, “We just finished.”

As to conscience, moral theology says many things about conscience, but it does not say that we should berate anyone. In one of the threads on this forum there is a list of outstanding bishops. Among them are two of our brothers, Archbishop Chaput and Cardinal O’Malley. Both have spoken in public on this many other sins. Neither has ever walked up to an individual and pointed the finger. They speak to the masses. Individual pastoral counselling and guidance is for the private arena, when someone asks for help.

I presented my idea in a manner consistent with Franciscan mysticism. This may not be the theology of the OP. So be it, but do not take it out of its Franciscan context. Francis hated sin, but refrained from judging the sinner. Because this was not the way that Christ did it. Christ’s admonition was to “sin no more.” It was not, “Caught you!” He preached to the masses or did one on one ministry, such as the Samaritan woman or the woman in adultery, when the opportunity was available.

Some people want to go on a campaign against homosexual sin. What about sins against human life (i.e. Abortion and capital punishment)? Where is the thread that asks “do you hate murder?” or “do you hate barbarism?”
Your thoughtfullness is apparent. You wisdom as well. What pains me here a lot is that people, no doubt myself included have a tendency to believe that what they have uncovered through study and reflection is actual Catholic truth. We all do that. Yet we are not trained in canon or magisterial law, whereas Church leaders are. We are probably more often wrong in our conclusions after perusing the latest encyclical, we simply don’t have the background to know how it fits over time with out pronoucements. Many here seriously believe that Catholic doctrine has never changed one bit over time. They see apparently no evolution in thinking. So it becomes exceedingly dangerous to presume to tell others what the Church teaches. All statements unless one is an actual expert, should be couched in terms of opinion, with at least a fair attempt to promote honest links to good sites so readers can see for themselves.

That is specifically why I decry the tendency here to counsel others about what Catholic teaching is, and what distressed persons should do. Some people come here in a very fragile state and most of us do not have the professional counseling credentials to start offering advice beyond the minimum of helping to direct people to professionals who do. I shudder at some of the things I’ve seen here which pass for “witnessing to the truth.” This forum is simply not the place to deal with counseling issues at all, given the anonymous atmosphere.
 
You sound very angry. That’s unfortunate. Inner peace and inner silence are key to a healthy spiritual life.
Interesting that you would rather make judgements and assumptions about my emotional state and the quality of my spiritual life rather than actually address my post directly. Is that an example of Franciscan spirituality?
 
Interesting that you would rather make judgements and assumptions about my emotional state and the quality of my spiritual life rather than actually address my post directly. Is that an example of Franciscan spirituality?
Please read my message again. I said “you sound” That’s a perception, not a judgment. Perceptions are human. I have no way of knowing if you are angry or if it’s just the tone that comes across in your post.

Remember, we do not have a face and voice in front of us in these anonymous posts. Therefore, it is very easy for us to sound or be perceived differently from what would be the case in a face-to-face dialogue.

I hope this is clearer. 🙂
 
Your thoughtfullness is apparent. You wisdom as well. What pains me here a lot is that people, no doubt myself included have a tendency to believe that what they have uncovered through study and reflection is actual Catholic truth. We all do that. Yet we are not trained in canon or magisterial law, whereas Church leaders are. We are probably more often wrong in our conclusions after perusing the latest encyclical, we simply don’t have the background to know how it fits over time with out pronoucements. Many here seriously believe that Catholic doctrine has never changed one bit over time. They see apparently no evolution in thinking. So it becomes exceedingly dangerous to presume to tell others what the Church teaches. All statements unless one is an actual expert, should be couched in terms of opinion, with at least a fair attempt to promote honest links to good sites so readers can see for themselves.

That is specifically why I decry the tendency here to counsel others about what Catholic teaching is, and what distressed persons should do. Some people come here in a very fragile state and most of us do not have the professional counseling credentials to start offering advice beyond the minimum of helping to direct people to professionals who do. I shudder at some of the things I’ve seen here which pass for “witnessing to the truth.” This forum is simply not the place to deal with counseling issues at all, given the anonymous atmosphere.
I agree with you. I would add that anonymity can lead to anymosity when none is intended. As I said to someone else, perceptions are human. Without a face and voice, our perceptions of the other person and their message can take a different flavor.

I would also add that on issues such as the one on this thread, we should avoid words that carry strong emotions with them, such as “hate”.

We have always believed that as the Church prays so must she teach. An interesting point that crosses my mind is the profession of faith. It’s interesting to note the way that it’s worded.

“Do you reject Satan and all his works” etc. I believe that in her wisdom, the Church deliberately inserted the word “reject” in place of the word “hate.” Because such a word can carry a great deal of emotion. The Church is looking for conviction, not emotion. I realize that in a lot of more popular writings we do use the term “hatred of sin”; however, we don’t do so in the profession of faith or in our liturgy. I find the choice of wording very interesting, because it shows where the Church wants us to go with all sin. She seems to guide us in the direction of conviction and commitment, not necessarily feelings.

On questions of conscience moral theology is clear that the Church speaks from an objective point of view. Subjective culpability is best left to the individual and his/her confessor. We just have to accept that this is the case with all sin. On another thread on Archbishop Lefebvre (sp?) another poster quoted one of the canons on ipso facto excommunication. It would be a good reading, because it is very clear on the difference between objective and subjective culpability. If I can find that post again, I’ll paste the canon on this thread.

That’s a long thread, so it may take some time to find the post. But it’s worth reading that particular post.

God bless you! 🙂
 
Please read my message again. I said “you sound” That’s a perception, not a judgment. Perceptions are human. I have no way of knowing if you are angry or if it’s just the tone that comes across in your post.
How does one perceive without forming a judgment?
 
What pains me here a lot is that people, no doubt myself included have a tendency to believe that what they have uncovered through study and reflection is actual Catholic truth. We all do that. Yet we are not trained in canon or magisterial law, whereas Church leaders are.
Only the clergy can know the faith? Hmm. That seems like clericalism, right?
We are probably more often wrong in our conclusions after perusing the latest encyclical, we simply don’t have the background to know how it fits over time with out pronoucements.
Why bother with the CCC? That is just for bishops, right?
Many here seriously believe that Catholic doctrine has never changed one bit over time. They see apparently no evolution in thinking. So it becomes exceedingly dangerous to presume to tell others what the Church teaches. All statements unless one is an actual expert, should be couched in terms of opinion, with at least a fair attempt to promote honest links to good sites so readers can see for themselves.
This is dangerous. If someone asks if murder is wrong do we say go ask a priest? As a Catholic you have an obligation to learn your faith and share it with others.
That is specifically why I decry the tendency here to counsel others about what Catholic teaching is, and what distressed persons should do. Some people come here in a very fragile state and most of us do not have the professional counseling credentials to start offering advice beyond the minimum of helping to direct people to professionals who do. I shudder at some of the things I’ve seen here which pass for “witnessing to the truth.” This forum is simply not the place to deal with counseling issues at all, given the anonymous atmosphere.
Straw man.
 
newadvent.org/library/docs_df86ho.htm

This is the link to the document ON THE PASTORAL CARE OF HOMOSEXUAL PERSONS

Parr 11 gives a very balanced view on how to approach the question of culpability.

I hope this helps. 🙂

JR

PS I hope that I copied the link correctly too, LOL
 
How does one perceive without forming a judgment?
You know I work with lots of kids and this is the kind of response that I call instigating, not dialogue. Your response explains nothing.

A more approrpriate response would have been to help me see that you’re not as angry as your posts make you sound. Instead, you persevere in trying to engage me in a debate over semantics, pragmatics of language and nuances.

Once again, the message that you send is not one of a person who is trying to reach a new level of spiritual growth and to bring others along. The message you’re sending is one that says you want to argue a point until someone submits to you.

OK, you win, I lose. You’re going to Heaven and I’m damned to hell, not sure why, but I’ll have to take your word for it.

Now you should be very happy.
 
You know I work with lots of kids and this is the kind of response that I call instigating, not dialogue. Your response explains nothing.
You seemed to be disingenuous with your response to that other poster. The idea of parsing perception from judgment to wiggle out of what you said does not seem fair.
A more approrpriate response would have been to help me see that you’re not as angry as your posts make you sound. Instead, you persevere in trying to engage me in a debate over semantics, pragmatics of language and nuances.
More appropriate? I am challenging what you said.
Once again, the message that you send is not one of a person who is trying to reach a new level of spiritual growth and to bring others along. The message you’re sending is one that says you want to argue a point until someone submits to you.
Is that your perception? The message you send is that you want others to accept your way of communicating and anything else is not “Franciscan”.
OK, you win, I lose. You’re going to Heaven and I’m damned to hell, not sure why, but I’ll have to take your word for it.
Now you should be very happy.
You called another poster to task. I saw that as unfair. I called you on it. You want things your way without question.
 
Please read my message again. I said “you sound” That’s a perception, not a judgment. Perceptions are human. I have no way of knowing if you are angry or if it’s just the tone that comes across in your post.

Remember, we do not have a face and voice in front of us in these anonymous posts. Therefore, it is very easy for us to sound or be perceived differently from what would be the case in a face-to-face dialogue.

I hope this is clearer. 🙂
Yes, well, that’s why I, after two years here on CAF, stay away from attempting to “perceive” what people think or feel and prefer rather to simply address their posts directly. If I am confused about a person’s intent, generally I just ask what they meant.

But that’s just me.
 
Only the clergy can know the faith? Hmm. That seems like clericalism, right?
In you abortive attempt to be both snappy and witty, you miss the obvious—lawyers, academia just for starters, theologians, biblical scholars, religious both men and women many who are trained at Master and Doctorate level on these issues.
Why bother with the CCC? That is just for bishops, right?
See above.
This is dangerous. If someone asks if murder is wrong do we say go ask a priest? As a Catholic you have an obligation to learn your faith and share it with others.
No the word would be honest. You are free to share your opinon with anyone. Everyone should be most careful about stating with authority what the Church teaches. And yes, everyone has an obligation to become as informed as they can. For some it is even a hobby to which they devote a good deal of extra time to. We are mostly not talking about basic doctrines here, which most Catholics are competent to speak of. It relates to complicated doctrines not usually referred to in homilies or scripture to which I refer.
Straw man.
The common charge without more of the person who cannot think of any real argument but just knows they disagree because they always disagree with certain people so this must be one of those bad things too kinda claims.
 
I would assume that most people in this country and especially all homosexuals are well aware of the disdain they are held in by a portion of our country. And I think its well known that that portion believes their activities are sinful. So no I don’t believe such “acts” can be done with ignorance. That being said, and assuming nearly everyone agrees, I then wonder why every homosexual who comes here seems to be immediately informed by 5-10 posters that their sexual lives are sinful. They of course state they love the sinner, so I question why they need to make this statement that the lifestyle is sinful which only hurts and insults.
I take your point on the needless continual reassertion to homosexuals that they are sinning. I also appreciate and mostly agree with JReducation’s comments in the same vein.

All that said, I think it is imporant to note that even if homosexuals know that Catholics and others truly believe their actions are sinful, they would need to believe (at some level, in some way) that was true in order to form the required mental state to make any sin asociated with their acts mortal.

There are sins that are presumptively mortal, because comitting those sins is so incompatible with the love of neighbor that it seem impossible to willingly commit them without driving charity and grace from your heart. Murder and rape are generally considered to be in that category. I would not expect sexual sins to fall in that category (although I know some will disagree).
 
I take your point on the needless continual reassertion to homosexuals that they are sinning. I also appreciate and mostly agree with JReducation’s comments in the same vein.

All that said, I think it is imporant to note that even if homosexuals know that Catholics and others truly believe their actions are sinful, they would need to believe (at some level, in some way) that was true in order to form the required mental state to make any sin asociated with their acts mortal.

There are sins that are presumptively mortal, because comitting those sins is so incompatible with the love of neighbor that it seem impossible to willingly commit them without driving charity and grace from your heart. Murder and rape are generally considered to be in that category. I would not expect sexual sins to fall in that category (although I know some will disagree).
agreed
 
The sexual acts in a marriage between a husband and wife are done out of love and respect for the other person. If they have children, their sexual activity is brought to a higher level as they are continuously sacrificing themselves to God and eachother by devouting their time to the proper formation of their children. They are aware that this sexual act can bring forth new life and new sacrifices. Thus, they are constantly giving themselves to others in service as Christ has taught us. The homosexual act can be compared to an assault on one’s dignity and on another individual. The dictionary says that an assault is an apparently violent attempt or a willful offer with force or violence to do hurt to another without the actual doing of the hurt threatened (as by lifting the fist in a threatening manner). The homosexual repeatedly performs this act/assault over and over. Suicide only happens once. Does the homosexual act involve a constant threat before the activity so that full knowledge of the activity that will occur takes place? Have I opened up a knew topic?
 
The sexual acts in a marriage between a husband and wife are done out of love and respect for the other person. If they have children, their sexual activity is brought to a higher level as they are continuously sacrificing themselves to God and eachother by devouting their time to the proper formation of their children. They are aware that this sexual act can bring forth new life and new sacrifices. Thus, they are constantly giving themselves to others in service as Christ has taught us. The homosexual act can be compared to an assault on one’s dignity and on another individual. The dictionary says that an assault is an apparently violent attempt or a willful offer with force or violence to do hurt to another without the actual doing of the hurt threatened (as by lifting the fist in a threatening manner). The homosexual repeatedly performs this act/assault over and over. Suicide only happens once. Does the homosexual act involve a constant threat before the activity so that full knowledge of the activity that will occur takes place? Have I opened up a knew topic?
P.S.-I am not God and can not say that suicide or homosexuality is better than the other. All we need to know is that both are morally reprehensible. It is for God to figure out the rest. I have heard that many homosexuals feel they are faced with the dilemma of choosing between the gay lifestyle and suicide. It appears to be true that these two topics are closely related. Maybe knowing this can help us save some of our brothers and sisters who have chosen this lifestyle.
 
The sexual acts in a marriage between a husband and wife are done out of love and respect for the other person. If they have children, their sexual activity is brought to a higher level as they are continuously sacrificing themselves to God and eachother by devouting their time to the proper formation of their children. They are aware that this sexual act can bring forth new life and new sacrifices. Thus, they are constantly giving themselves to others in service as Christ has taught us. The homosexual act can be compared to an assault on one’s dignity and on another individual. The dictionary says that an assault is an apparently violent attempt or a willful offer with force or violence to do hurt to another without the actual doing of the hurt threatened (as by lifting the fist in a threatening manner). The homosexual repeatedly performs this act/assault over and over. Suicide only happens once. Does the homosexual act involve a constant threat before the activity so that full knowledge of the activity that will occur takes place? Have I opened up a knew topic?
What a disgusting description.
Assault is willfully offering force of violence. I think that a homosexual couple engaging in consensual sex is hardly violent. If you want to continue this line, please also apply it to premarital couples engaging in sexual activity.

Btw, I hold the church’s teaching on Homosexual Acts. I myself am an SSA man, who is living a celibate lifestyle as is called by the church. I participate in my church community actively. I do not condone homosexual acts.

Comments like these, and threads that use homosexual acts to describe the worst possible sin are dreadfully hurtful and insulting. They are applied to all homosexuals, and your post that follows assumes we choose our orientation.

Please remember to read the Catholic Catechism:
“2357 … It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained.”
“2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.”
“2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.”
Remember charity and compassion in what you say and do.

Josh
 
This question was inspired by a turn in the conversation in this thread:

Catholics only: Do you hate homosexual sex acts (as we are obliged to) ?

I do not use homosexual sex acts as an example to single them out as the worst possible sin, as I know that they are not so.

I use them as an example of a gravely wrong act which we know is always and invariable the wrong choice (“intrinsically disordered”) and a choice against God, and really a choice for a form of idolatry of personal pleasure and the body, even if it is not discerned as such by the person committing the homosexual sex act.

The link above starts with a post (by a fine person I am sure, JReducation, whose good intentions I am not calling into question) which gives voice to a common belief about homosexuals and a “primacy of conscience” which I do not think exists in the way he articulates it.

So I am asking whether or not homosexual sex acts can in fact really be committed in “invincible ignorance”, and if so how would that actually happen and what would be the consequences.
Invincible ignorance does not relate to a specific sin. Its to do with lack of knowledge about Christ but living in accordance with his teachings as if you knew him.

With regard to specific sins, for Catholics a grave sin only becomes mortal sin with knowledge that the act is grave and you do it anyway. I don’t believe any Catholic can claim they don’t know homosexuality is a grave sin.

However, all Christians (not just Catholics) should know homosexual activity is forbidden by God and those who say they live only by scripture cannot deny this because it is in the Bible in a clear and unambiguous manner.
 
Certain tribes in the Pacific & elsewhere practised h-sexual acts during the initiation of youths to men.Obviously they thought it no wrong. Likewise with cannibalism, infanticide, head-hunting & a host of other *‘sins/crimes’ *which they practised.

With the arrival of Christian or Moslem missionaries such activities stopped.

There is now growing up a generation of teenagers in US & Europe who is taught that this sinful activity is okay. Whether these men are committing sin or not is almost impossible to say.

However if they persist in their folly after the evil has been explained to them then they definitely are sinning most grieveously.
 
What a disgusting description.
Assault is willfully offering force of violence. I think that a homosexual couple engaging in consensual sex is hardly violent. If you want to continue this line, please also apply it to premarital couples engaging in sexual activity.

Btw, I hold the church’s teaching on Homosexual Acts. I myself am an SSA man, who is living a celibate lifestyle as is called by the church. I participate in my church community actively. I do not condone homosexual acts.

Comments like these, and threads that use homosexual acts to describe the worst possible sin are dreadfully hurtful and insulting. They are applied to all homosexuals, and your post that follows assumes we choose our orientation.

Please remember to read the Catholic Catechism:

Remember charity and compassion in what you say and do.

Josh
👍 THANK YOU.

I came to CAF as a homosexual Catholic looking for help and support to continue living my life according to the teachings of the Church-and naively hoping that I could share how some of the comments made by well meaning Catholics and other Christians can feel hurtful to us. Thankfully, I have the support of a wonderful Priest/Confessor and a Catholic therapist and a loving family so what is said here and in other places doesn’t destroy me.
For the most part, I stay away from even lurking on these threads now, after being hammered over and over with the label “disordered”, having my orientation compared to pedophilia and the general assumption that by my very existence I am somehow more sinful than anyone else. I’m glad to see that I’m not the only one who finds those types of comments hurtful.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top