For those who believe homosexuals can change their orientation....

[Hadrianus]

The actual study presents its conclusions with caution. Essentially, it concludes that some people can change their orientation, some cannot. This makes perfect sense because each person is different The two extreme positions which hold that either all those with SSA cannot change, or that all those with SSA can, are more ideological than scientific or theological, properly speaking.

 

[francisca]

The actual study presents its conclusions with caution. Essentially, it concludes that some people can change their orientation, some cannot. This makes perfect sense because each person is different The two extreme positions which hold that either all those with SSA cannot change, or that all those with SSA can, are more ideological than scientific or theological, properly speaking.

Some people can change some can’t – this fact is the reality for all kinds of problems, and not only for homosexuality cases. All people who want to change either from “shyness” or “anger” or many other things will also be one of the cases of “some can change some can’t”.

Let’s try with “anger management” for example. If a person commit something that offend others because he can’t manage his anger, will the people say “it’s alright, because that is who he really is” ? The answer is no. In fact the law will require someone who commit an offence related to anger to go through anger management program.

Despite anger management program success rate is not really 100%, none say that “unmanagable anger” is alright. Despite some people just can’t change, doesn’t mean that we can say-- on the bases that he can’t change-- that such is “a normality” and therefore doesn’t need to be addressed AS IF it’s part of who he is. Because an unmanagable anger is NOT a normality and is NOT part of who a person is. Instead, it is a problem.

So you see, to conclude that “some people can change some people can’t” is as good as NOT to conclude anything. Thus APA actually has not been able to build good enough argument to regulate anything at all.

 

[Hadrianus]

Some people can change some can’t – this fact is the reality for all kinds of problems, and not only for homosexuality cases. All people who want to change either from “shyness” or “anger” or many other things will also be one of the cases of “some can change some can’t”.

Let’s try with “anger management” for example. If a person commit something that offend others because he can’t manage his anger, will the people say “it’s alright, because that is who he really is” ? The answer is no. In fact the law will require someone who commit an offence related to anger to go through anger management program.

Despite anger management program success rate is not really 100%, none say that “unmanagable anger” is alright. Despite some people just can’t change, doesn’t mean that we can say-- on the bases that he can’t change-- that such is “a normality” and therefore doesn’t need to be addressed AS IF it’s part of who he is. Because an unmanagable anger is NOT a normality and is NOT part of who a person is. Instead, it is a problem.

Francisca, your analogy is quite false, because in the question of anger we are talking about a behavior. When we speak of SSA we are not talking about a behavior necessarily, but simply a condition. No one, and certainly not the Church, suggests that the mere condition is harmful to society. The “some can change and some cannot” makes perfect sense. Just substitute the phrase 'suffering from cancer" and you will see the obvious point. No one would seriously object to the phrase “some can be cured and some cannot” in that context. For what it is worth, I believe that everyone, whether homosexual or heterosexual is capable of leading a chaste life by the grace of God and through the frequentation of the sacraments. As Catholics we should all seek to avoid sin, and God has given us the means to do so. Psychotherapy has not been part of the Church’s praxis during most of its two thousand year history. In saying this I do not oppose therapy,but we need to examine its strengths and weaknesses. Psychotherapists are not gods, nor do they claim to be. Every individual case must be regarded as individual.

I am far from suggesting that someone of a homosexual orientation should not consider trying to change it, but I do believe strongly, that exaggerated claims for success in this area should not be, well, exaggerated. As there is nothing sinful in the orientation itself, there is no need to impose any kind of “forced cure” upon anyone. Anger is entirely different, left uncontrolled it does harm society. I’d say the same for homosexual acts; but these latter are containable by grace and the sacraments which God has given us. Surely, that suffices.

So you see, to conclude that “some people can change some people can’t” is as good as NOT to conclude anything. Thus APA actually has not been able to build good enough argument to regulate anything at all.

 

[Hadrianus]

Let me add here that I do not think our battle is with the APA. They are merely secular psychologists and not moral theologians. They may say whatever they wish, but Catholics form their consciences based upon the Magisterium of the Church, not upon the opinion of the APA. I cannot stress this enough. God established His Church to lead us into the truths necessary for our salvation; we may, if we wish, take into account the findings of secular disciplines, but this is by no means obligatory for Catholics.Our right and duty is to form our consciences in accordance with the Catholic Faith. Beyond that we are free to consider the findings of secular thought, but we are not obliged to endorse it.

 

[francisca]

Handrianus:

Francisca, your analogy is quite false, because in the question of anger we are talking about a behavior. When we speak of SSA we are not talking about a behavior necessarily, but simply a condition.

Well, except that homosexuality “condition”-- as you put it-- will cause a certain behavior. In the same way, anger is not necessarily a behavior until somebody decide to “act” on it.

No one, and certainly not the Church, suggests that the mere condition is harmful to society.

The church knows exactly that homosexuality behavior is an abomination.

The “some can change and some cannot” makes perfect sense. Just substitute the phrase 'suffering from cancer" and you will see the obvious point. No one would seriously object to the phrase “some can be cured and some cannot” in that context. For what it is worth,

I don’t object the reality of “some people can change some can’t”. I do understand this reality completely. I am trying to show that the fact that some people can’t change-- this fact-- can’t be used to decide “the normality of a behavior for that particular person”.

To replace “the anger management” example with your example of “cancer condition” will not change anything.

The quiestion remains : do we need to cure them? To say that we should NOT cure a cancerous patient, must be preceded by a set of prove that cancerous condition is healthy, and therefore need no cure.

If such prove can’t be established, or even worse, if some studies shows that cancerous condition is an unhealthy state, then the answer should be clear: cure.

Whether we have the cure ready, that is another question. If we say that cancerous condition is not dangerous and therefore it needs no cure, then there will never be any attempt to find the cure.

I believe that everyone, whether homosexual or heterosexual is capable of leading a chaste life by the grace of God and through the frequentation of the sacraments. As Catholics we should all seek to avoid sin, and God has given us the means to do so. Psychotherapy has not been part of the Church’s praxis during most of its two thousand year history. In saying this I do not oppose therapy,but we need to examine its strengths and weaknesses. Psychotherapists are not gods, nor do they claim to be. Every individual case must be regarded as individual.

An epileptic case was in the bible. Jesus said it’s the devilish possession. So He performed an exorcism on the boy. He said “Satan, leave”. The boy was healed. Modern health care would have called an ambulance and brought the boy to the nearest hospital.

Nowadays, it is known that in the case of epileptic condition, the patient’s brain generate a chaotic electrical waves. Scientist has found a way to use external electrical waves to help put in order the patient’s chaotic neuron waves.

Psychotherapist are not gods-- as you put it-- they need guidance in doing their job. An ethic. A good ethic is inspired by good phylosophy, the one that is being truthful to the patient.

I am far from suggesting that someone of a homosexual orientation should not consider trying to change it, but I do believe strongly, that exaggerated claims for success in this area should not be, well, exaggerated. As there is nothing sinful in the orientation itself, there is no need to impose any kind of “forced cure” upon anyone. Anger is entirely different, left uncontrolled it does harm society. I’d say the same for homosexual acts; but these latter are containable by grace and the sacraments which God has given us. Surely, that suffices.

Aha! The whole long post is about saying “sexual orientation is not sinful”

That is agaist the bible, honey. A direct oppostion to God’s word !

Let me add here that I do not think our battle is with the APA. They are merely secular psychologists and not moral theologians.

… whch is why I talked about the reality of our biological body and normality of human sexual behavior, so on and on and on. None of these are philosophical. Yet APA did not address such issues when they regard homosexuality as “a sexual orientation”

They may say whatever they wish,

APA should not say anything without enough prove.

but Catholics form their consciences based upon the Magisterium of the Church, not upon the opinion of the APA. I cannot stress this enough.

True

God established His Church to lead us into the truths necessary for our salvation; we may, if we wish, take into account the findings of secular disciplines, but this is by no means obligatory for Catholics.Our right and duty is to form our consciences in accordance with the Catholic Faith. Beyond that we are free to consider the findings of secular thought, but we are not obliged to endorse it.

All the above rhetoric, yet question the truthfulness of the bible regarding homosexuality as an abomination!

 

[mrld20]

francisca a homosexual orientation is not sinful… The Church even says so… Homosexual acts are sinful…

And the the word to use is not “abomination”; to someone who is a faithful Catholic with deep seated SSA I find it offensive…

The Church uses the word “unnatural” to describe homosexual acts… The Church also teaches that changing ones orientation is only possible for a few people… Not everyone can change like myself. I had an experience with an “ex-gay” ministry. After a year of therapy my homosexual feelings were even stronger and I was on the verge of suicide…

 

[michelleds]

francisca a homosexual orientation is not sinful… The Church even says so… Homosexual acts are sinful…

And the the word to use is not “abomination”; to someone who is a faithful Catholic with deep seated SSA I find it offensive…

The Church uses the word “unnatural” to describe homosexual acts… The Church also teaches that changing ones orientation is only possible for a few people… Not everyone can change like myself. I had an experience with an “ex-gay” ministry. After a year of therapy my homosexual feelings were even stronger and I was on the verge of suicide…

actually, the CCC says that they are “intrinsically disordered” and “under no circumstances can they be approved”. The Bible calls homosexual acts abominations and as someone with SSA, but faithful to the teachings of the Church, that shouldn’t be offensive to you.

From the Courage website at couragerc.net/Catholic_Language.html

The Catholic Church speaks of homosexuality in several senses. In the Catechism it says that “homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex.” It goes on to say that “homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.” [CDF, Persona humana 8.] 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." In SC #7 it speaks of homosexuality “as behavior to which no one has any conceivable right.”

I would suggest all readers of this thread to read that entire page at the link above. although lengthy, it has some important concepts that address some of the misconceptions found here in this thread and others similar.

 

[francisca]

francisca a homosexual orientation is not sinful… The Church even says so… Homosexual acts are sinful…

And the the word to use is not “abomination”; to someone who is a faithful Catholic with deep seated SSA I find it offensive…

The Church uses the word “unnatural” to describe homosexual acts… The Church also teaches that changing ones orientation is only possible for a few people… Not everyone can change like myself.

The word “abomination” is in the bible.

Sexual orientation is not sinful only if you have a medical/ clinical case that cause you this way. Otherwise there shouldnot be ANY “sexual orientation”. Even for those who has clinical reason, they should not act on their inclination.

If you have no clinical reason, instead you dwell in temptation all the time, that is sinful.

To resist temptation means ask the Lord to change you. You will be renewed,

If you are deep seated, and is practisin chastity, your chastity must reflect the understading that to act is to comit sin, and to dwell in the temptation is also sinful. Thus your chastity must be based on HOPE OF HEALING AND NOT on the belive that GOD CREATED ME THIS WAY & GOD WILLS MY SUFFERING. To think that “God created me this way” when He did not is a grievious sin.

 

[mrld20]

I’m not going to bother with a response to francisca… The Church teaches a homosexual inclination is not in itself sinful; that’s good enough for me no need to pick a fight…

 

[Hadrianus]

I’m not going to bother with a response to francisca… The Church teaches a homosexual inclination is not in itself sinful; that’s good enough for me no need to pick a fight…

You seem to have summed this up well. I would only add that we are all born in sin. God creates the soul perfect, but from the moment that it is incarnate it is subject to the consequences of Original SIn. Every human being is born with a strong inclination to sin. How this sin manifests itself is different in each individual.

 

[Dakota_Roberts]

francisca a homosexual orientation is not sinful… The Church even says so… Homosexual acts are sinful…

And the the word to use is not “abomination”; to someone who is a faithful Catholic with deep seated SSA I find it offensive…

The Church uses the word “unnatural” to describe homosexual acts… The Church also teaches that changing ones orientation is only possible for a few people… Not everyone can change like myself. I had an experience with an “ex-gay” ministry. After a year of therapy my homosexual feelings were even stronger and I was on the verge of suicide…

a homosexual orientation is intrinsically disordered, but not in and of itself sinful. The Old Testament does call homosexual acts an abomination (Lev. 18:22) along with eating shellfish (Lev. 11:10).

 

[francisca]

You seem to have summed this up well. I would only add that we are all born in sin. God creates the soul perfect, but from the moment that it is incarnate it is subject to the consequences of Original SIn. Every human being is born with a strong inclination to sin. How this sin manifests itself is different in each individual.

I see.

So therefore it is OK to sin, and it is “normal for everybody to sin” for we all are born sinful. It is part of who we are.

Smooth.

 

[Hadrianus]

Yes, we are all born in sin and our destination is hell. Only through the redemptive sacrifice of Our Lord do we have any hope of heaven. He established His Church, which He founded upon the Apostle Peter. His Church possesses the sacraments through which we obtain the sanctifying grace necessary to save us.

Whether we are talking about homosexuality, or heterosexuality, or shoplifting, these are all very secondary things. None of us will ever go to heaven unless we die in a state of grace. That means that, at the moment of death we must either by already in a state of grace, or, by the great goodness of God, be given the opportunity to make an act of perfect contrition for our sins.

I must say that when reading your posts, and that of others, I have the impression taht you are so deeply infected by Protestant thought, that you seem not to understand the proper Catholic teaching on this point. Please read the Catechism of the Council of Trent, as well as the Catechism of the Catholic Church published by John Paul II; and read them attentively and understand the authentic Catholic doctrine of Original Sin and its consequences.

 

[francisca]

Whether we are talking about homosexuality, or heterosexuality, or shoplifting, these are all very secondary things. None of us will ever go to heaven unless we die in a state of grace. That means that, at the moment of death we must either by already in a state of grace, or, by the great goodness of God, be given the opportunity to make an act of perfect contrition for our sins.

Because of the above (bolded sentence), therefore one must repent.

To receive the grace of God is to act according to His will (because the grace of God will give a person the strength to do so). If we have not died to the flesh, then we can’t say, “I have died with Him” (In other words, “I have not received the grace of God”). But if we died with Him we will be raised with Him to an everlasting life. (Meaning if Christ died for me, I will become new person risen from the death, with new spirit, which will live forever. This is the meaning of receiving sanctifying grace).

Back to homosexuality: to cure or not to cure.

Apostle James said

James 1:
13 No one when tempted, should say “This temptation comes from God”
14 God never tempted and can never tempt anyone
15 Instead, each of us is lured and enticed by our own evil desire
16 Once this desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin, and sin, when fully grown, gives birth to death.

So you see, Apostle James explains, the reason that some people commit suicide is not because God being too harsh on them, giving them too heavy a suffering, neither does He tempts them with a certain type of sexuality that is an abominable. Instead, **their sin is the cause of their death. **

To argue that homosexuals will become “unhappy” if being treated, is not according to the word of God. The bible says otherwise.

St Peter explains that there are “Two Types of Suffering”

1Peter 4
15 I suppose that none of you should suffer for being a murderer, a thief, a criminal or an informer;
16 but if anyone suffers on account of being a Christian, do not consider it a disgrace; rather let this name bring glory to God.
17 The time of judgement has come…
19 So then, if you suffer according to God’s will, entrust yourself to the faithful Creator and continue to do good.

In verse 15 is a type of suffering because of own sin. Verse 16 is a type of suffering because one follow the will of God. Verse 19 says that the latter type of suffering can be entrusted to the faithul Creator. Thus if a person suffer because he repent, he can entrust his suffering to the Lord. But if he suffers because of his own sin, he will be alone in that sin, and one day, this sin will give birth to death.

 

[Hadrianus]

Of course, God does not send temptations as such, but he does permit them, and this applies to all people. Nowhere in Scripture does God speak of psychotherapy. It is a modern tool which may benefit some people. I have no opinion on that subject as I am not a therapist.

More problematic is your view that a homosexual orientation is a sin in itself. This is seriously contrary to the teaching of the Church, but I imagine must stem from your unfamiliarity with Catholic teaching on the Fall and the consequences of original sin.
To say that all of us commit sins, does not mean that sin is morally permissible, and it is no more permissible for those with SSA than for anyone else. But all of us, whatever our temptations, possess free will and can correspond to the graces offered to us. Though, that said, I do think it is more difficult for protestants, and of course, effectively impossible for atheists. But that is why the Church engages in missionary endeavors.

 

[francisca]

Of course, God does not send temptations as such, but he does permit them, and this applies to all people. Nowhere in Scripture does God speak of psychotherapy. It is a modern tool which may benefit some people.** I have no opinion on that subject as I am not a therapist.**

More problematic is your view that a homosexual orientation is a sin in itself. This is seriously contrary to the teaching of the Church, but I imagine must stem from your unfamiliarity with Catholic teaching on the Fall and the consequences of original sin.

To say that all of us commit sins, does not mean that sin is morally permissible, and it is no more permissible for those with SSA than for anyone else. But all of us, whatever our temptations, possess free will and can correspond to the graces offered to us. Though, **that said, I do think it is more difficult for protestants, and of course, effectively impossible for atheists. ** But that is why the Church engages in missionary endeavors.

Thankyou for the attempt to divert the topic, but I’m not intersted in protestantism/ atheism discussion, not on this thread.

 

[SirJack]

This is an interesting discussion!

In regards to the OP’s question, celibacy doesn’t negate attraction - regardless of the object of attraction. Whether or not our attractions are ordered or disordered according to the natural law is not going to be impacted by whether or not we act on them.

Can people change? I certainly hope so. If they cannot, then education and medicine are futile. lol

Can people change sexual orientations? It would appear that some can. It would also appear that the majority cannot. It seems that some can - with some kind of therapeutic support, and that others can without said support. It is certain however that changing orientation is (a) a rare occurrence, (b) a difficult process, and (c) a deeply personal experience.

I have prayed for God to change me: to make me attracted to women. He has not. I think it is unlikely that he will. I am comforted by the Church’s teaching that while my orientation is disordered in and of itself, that the orientation is not intrinsically sinful.

I appreciate the Church’s recognition that for many of us, this constitutes a trial. I am grateful that the Church calls for us to be supported with compassion, sensitivity, respect and the avoidance of unjust discrimination.

 

[mrld20]

francisca you continue to ignore what the Church teaches… Don’t you get it?! The Church teaches that a homosexual orientation is not sinful… It’s “disordered” yes but it’s not in itself sinful… You keep ignoring this and taking positions contrary to what the Church teaches… Only homosexual acts along with all other sex acts outside of marriage are sinful…

Are you even Catholic?

 

[francisca]

I have prayed for God to change me: to make me attracted to women. He has not. I think it is unlikely that he will.

Be careful with what you pray for. He might answer you when you least expect it !

Have you ever read the story about Aaron’s walking stick which God had it grew bud, then flower, then ripe almonds all in one night (Numbers 17:16-25).

Such sign shows that God can do anything impossible.

I am comforted by the Church’s teaching that while my orientation is disordered in and of itself, that the orientation is not intrinsically sinful.

Yes.

However, I’d like to stress that the meaning of such statement is that homosexuality is not in anyway “an alternative sexuality”. Thus in other words, according to the chruch, the ordered condition is heterosexuality, the only ordered form of sexuality without any alternative.

I stress this because the term “sexual orientation” can be intepreted “as if” the church admit that there is an alternative sexuality, that so long one does not practice it, then everything is OK. Such is NOT what the church say. What the church say is that homosexuality is a disordered condition, NOT a form of sexuality.

I appreciate the Church’s recognition that for many of us, this constitutes a tria. I am grateful that the Church calls for us to be supported with compassion, sensitivity, respect and the avoidance of unjust discrimination.

Yes to all of the above.

Regarding “trial” that homosexuals and people with SSA has to go through:

1Peter 2
20 What merit would there be in taking a beating when you have done wrong? But if you endure punishment when you have done well, that is a grace before God.
21 This is your calling: remember Christ who suffered for you…
24 Jesus went to the cross burdened with our sins so that we might die to sin and live an upright life. For by his wounds you have been healed.

 

[francisca]

francisca you continue to ignore what the Church teaches… Don’t you get it?! The Church teaches that a homosexual orientation is not sinful… It’s “disordered” yes but it’s not in itself sinful… You keep ignoring this and taking positions contrary to what the Church teaches… Only homosexual acts along with all other sex acts outside of marriage are sinful…

Are you even Catholic?

Despite the church say that “sexual orientation” is not intrinsically sinful, this statement is tied to the other statment that say “homosexuality is a disordered condition”. So if somebody suffer this disordered condition, but they “abstain” from the disordered form of behavior, they are not sinful.

I was baptized roman catholic when I was ten, being confirmed when I was 15. I got married in the catholic church. My son was baptized roman catholic . My hubby is also a baptized roman catholic.