I am encouraged by the English-speaking groups. They organized their thoughts in different ways, but it seems the thread running through them was a reaffirmation of Church teaching on marriage and a need to remember that faithful married Catholics need to be encouraged.
Why not say all sin is intrinsically disordered, instead of listing them, it would appear logical. Sin is an offense against God, and not in keeping with his God-given rational nature which is afflicted by concupiscence, ignorance, and weakness of will,the lack of grace. I’m inclined to think the homo-sexuality is intrinsically wrong combined with a psychological disorder. I find a great public aversion for those who practice it, eg. Russia, Africa, and even in our own society, even though those who do the hating do sinful acts themselves. It appears so obviously wrong, because it is regarded as unnatural, yet other sins of sex are not. I do agree that we can’t judge the guilt of an individual, but we can judge the act. Of course to practice Christian love in any case, is to love like Christ, even though we do not condone these sexual practices. I see the Pope’s actions as emphasizing the positive aspects of the human personality and actions. Thanks for the references, By the way I was interested to know what St. Thomas had to say.
An act can be immoral, without being intrinsically so. A good act done with ill intention is an example.
Not all sin is intrinsically disordered, giving alms to the poor can be sinful if one does it for fame.
Give me some examples of a good act done with ill intentions, I always thought that it was the intentions that governed the guilt of the person. eg. If a man looks with lust at a woman he has already committed adultery (Mat 5:28) so the intention is crucial to sin, so is a serious matter, and full knowledge. I know that the ill intention make the act immoral, it deals with the right and wrong in man’s ethical choices, and if it is wrong it is bad and immoral, not consistent with man’s rational nature. By homo sexuality I am concerned with the wrongness of the act, and not the guilt of the person. I know if the act is not objectively conducive to the well being of the individual or society that it is bad and wrong. If the act is truly good, but the intentions are evil, then it only involves guilt on the part of the person How can an act be good, when good is defined as that which is objectively conducive to a person’ well being, and used to produce an evil outcome, or bad outcome on the part of the ill wisher, I can only guess that is due to the ignorance of the ill wisher, but if he sinned and that sin is not intrinsically disordered as I believe all sin is disorder in the moral sense, it sound pretty confusing. How would you define his sin, just disordered? . I can only judge an act to be evil in relation to the Divine Law as expressed in the Natural and Moral law which are used interchangeably
Joie gave you an example where a good act is done for bad intentions eg. A person who makes donations to the poor in order to earn notoriety.
I share your concerns.
I understand where you are coming from…we all need to be praying and communicating our concerns to our Bishops.Dear Pro Vobis, you are really good with languages. If there is something, somewhere, please find it.
You know, I am concerned about that Catholic teenager, or individual who wants to come into the Church. And up until now, has been trying to change their ways, to be Godly & follow the Commandments. And I fear that they may just say, well, after reading or listening to CNN, I am OK the way I am (even if in a sinful/disordered relationship).
“I do not have to mend my ways, because the Church said I am OK” This will just help many “rationalize it all” As it is, TV shows, movies, schools have been pushing their agenda on us all for years, making us believe it is all OK. And if we do not go along, we are bigots, evil, etc. The media is truly enjoying this. People in sinful situations will just hear what they want to hear…Sorry for the rambling on…:bighanky:
Thank you & may God bless you.
"CCC:
Not everyone is attracted to the same sex. Not all gay people have had or been interested in a relationship of a romantic nature of someone of the opposite sex. Of those that have some found them unsatisfying because they are not attracted to the opposite sex in general.
That cannot be wrong. what is wrong is refusing to save that life when you ar able to. white lies cannot all be wrong imho.Totally agree. And what about the laity in general? The confusing message could certainly lower people’s moral standard. What used to be sin is no longer sin. This won’t help people to follow Jesus but follow the world. What about the seminarians? What kind of priest would they become if they follow the “new rule”?
if we say something is sin but we not treat it like a sin ,that makes us worse than unbelievers. we are hypocrites!
It is a matter of great debate. See for example:so is it wrong to lie to save a life? if a jew is hiding in my house from the Nazis and I am asked who they are and I say my nephew/niece visiting from another province. is that wrong? my understanding was that the church engaged in a lot of lying in world war ii to save jews disguising them as relatives or hiding them in monasteries and ven giving them forged documents like baptism certificates and pretending that they were catholics when they were not. So I don’t see how it can be wrong to tell a lie in order to save human lives. if someone is looking to kill a child and they are hiding under my bed, I will tell a blatant lie to get the people looking to go away.
We are still treating it like a sin, just not a profoundly heinous sin; we are now treating it like fornication instead of child molestation.
It God who said it a profoundly heinous sin and it remain so. child molestation is obviously on a different level of double sin, lust + hurting an innocent. there is no innocent in gay affair but lust remain which is very grave because not just unmarried but on top unnatural patners.
it not our fault…
I don’t think it’s a case of “imperfect relationships”, everybody with human failings is in an “imperfect relationship”. I think it’s a case of overlooking the activity which, if objectively sinful, will result in an eternal separation from God. The real question is: Is the synod and, by extension and approval, the Holy Father ready to declare that divorce and remarriage without a declaration of nullity irregular but not sinful?
Actually the report did not mention “sin” at all. It is like sin does not worth mentioning any more. And that is really bad.