Changed my views on Homosexuality

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ellipses
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The events of 1054 were just the cherry on the sundae of what had essentially been a schism for about 300 years. Contact between the churches decreased rapidly after 751, and each went off on their own trajectory basically oblivious to the others existence. The schism wasn’t caused by disagreement over teachings as much as simple geographical isolation. Parting ways did not make the heart grow fonder.

Oddly, immediately before the break, there had been a seventy four year long stretch of Popes from the East, and one more was to follow shortly.

The specific circumstances of that schism do not exist today, and can’t.

Any schism in the forseeable future is going to be more of an internal schism rather than end up in the formation of two or more new separate bodies. That’s basically the situation that is developing right now: a three-way split among traditionalists, conservatives and progressives. Strangely reminiscent of the three-way split in modern Judaism.
 
Irenaeus of Lyons uses the New Testament scripture throughout all of his works, not officially compiled but the texts used were almost identical to what we have now. In fact, this compilation you speak of began in the late Second Century due to all of the heretical texts coming out at the time. The belief in Christ as relates to the Father and the Holy Spirit was also fully as we know it at that time and Irenaeus makes it clear that the that this was the teaching of the Apostles who handed it down from Christ. Read the accounts of Polycarp who lived a few decades earlier, it is absolutely amazing. I mean read in their entirety and not the cliff note versions. When people read the fathers of the Church it is absolutely amazing how easily current “scholarship,” which tries so hard to corrupt the Christian Faith, can be easily discarded.
 
Sexual acts should be imitating a great act of God, by which, through love, we give ourselves to another and can create life. It should be a most special and holy thing, not some play toy.
 
Kei said:
Sexual acts should be imitating a great act of God, by which, through love, we give ourselves to another and can create life. It should be a most special and holy thing, not some play toy.
Click to expand...
This is too true
 
As the French saying goes: “Plus ca change, et plus ca reste la meme chose.” ("The more things change, the more they remain the same.)
 
I know is hasn’t benefited me. As a bisexual woman after reading all of this I am more confused than ever. I really don’t want to offend GOD anymore but having trouble stopping.
 
Kei said:
Sexual acts should be imitating a great act of God, by which, through love, we give ourselves to another and can create life. It should be a most special and holy thing, not some play toy.
Click to expand...
Many heterosexual couples make it a play toy, and many homosexual couples do not. I don’t think it can be decided on sexual preference, but on the actions of the couples involved.
 
Ann1 said:
I know is hasn’t benefited me. As a bisexual woman after reading all of this I am more confused than ever. I really don’t want to offend GOD anymore but having trouble stopping.
Click to expand...
I don’t believe your sexual preferences are offending God. He created you, and sexual preference is not a choice.
 
And they do so improperly.
Homosexual acts are inherently disordered and cannot be done for the proper end of possibly creating life.

Don’t send messages against the Faith and possibly do harm to @Ann1 's spiritual/moral life.
 
Last edited:
Kei said:
Don’t send messages against the Faith and possibly do harm to @Ann1 's spiritual/moral life.
Click to expand...
I’m not. I’m sure God loves @Ann1 dearly, and I feel she takes her advice from her priest certainly not me, an anonymous person she does not know! And God did create her. I don’t believe sexual orientation is a choice. I did not choose to be heterosexual, yet I am. It’s just the way God created me.
 
Last edited:
Indeed she is a beloved creature of God, but that is beside the point of how things may be construed.

Choice or not, it doesn’t equate to fixed biological decision. For instance, twins do not have a 100% rate of similarity in sexuality, more like 25% of identical twin pairs in which one is gay is the other gay. This implies factors outside of pure genetics is at play. Not to say it’s a “decision”, whatever that means. However, how we channel our sexual desires is indeed a choice, and we are not a slave to the most base of pleasures when we have the Almighty and His great love.
 
Kei said:
Indeed she is a beloved creature of God, but that is beside the point of how things may be construed.
Click to expand...
If only one non-heterosexual person would have existed at the time of the crucifixion, Christ would have still died for him or her. @Ann1 is beloved of God. That is the point of what I said.
 
vsedriver said:
there’s a huge difference between calling something ‘relatively unimportant’ and something very secondary. Catholic teaching does not call sexual pleasure ‘unimportant.’ In fact, sexual pleasure is so important that it is reserved for the marital state between a man and a woman
Click to expand...
When would the Church have taught the great importance of sexual pleasure? on the contrary, seeking sexual pleasure as an end, even in marriage is the sin of lust.
The sexual act and the pleasure that accompanies it should aim one of the three ends of marriage in order to be lawful: procreation, unity, and fidelity apart from these ends there is sin of lust.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top