Gay, lesbian Dignity

[pio_s]

Can someone be involved in a lesbian or gay relationship and still be a faithful Catholic?
Certainly yes, not as a matter of public Church teaching but only as a matter of conscience, only as a matter of personal application of the whole of Catholic teaching to their particular case.

In 1975 the Vatican published a Declaration on Certain Questions Concerning Sexual Ethics. One of those questions was homosexuality. A principal author of that document was Fr. Jan Visser, C.Ss.R. In an interview published in the January 30, 1976, edition of L’Europa, he said: “When one is dealing with people who are so deeply homosexual that they will be in serious personal and perhaps social trouble unless they attain a steady partnership within their homosexual lives, one can recommend them to seek such a partnership, and one accepts this relationship as the best they can do in their present situation.” One of the very men who formulated the Vatican teaching that homogenital acts are wrong allows that in certain individual cases one may not only permit but even recommend a homosexual relationship.

Similarly, speaking about Catholics who dissent on Church teaching about contraception, the Canadian bishops wrote in 1968: “Since they are not denying any point of divine and Catholic faith nor rejecting the teaching authority of the Church, these Catholics should not be considered nor consider themselves cut off from the body of the faithful.”

this came from dignityusa.org/local.html under FAQ

I dont see this distinction from concience and teaching weather it is wrong to be in an homosexual relationship. What do you think this site is saying and what are your opinions on it (have you heard of organizations like this)?

 

[fix]

Certain acts are intrinsically evil. They may never be done. There is no circumstance where it would be morally licit to engage in these acts.

Explicit treatment of the problem was given in this Congregation’s “Declaration on Certain Questions Concerning Sexual Ethics” of December 29, 1975. That document stressed the duty of trying to understand the homosexual condition and noted that culpability for homosexual acts should only be judged with prudence. At the same time the Congregation took note of the distinction commonly drawn between the homosexual condition or tendency and individual homosexual actions. These were described as deprived of their essential and indispensable finality, as being “intrinsically disordered”, and able in no case to be approved of (cf. n. 8, $4).

In the discussion which followed the publication of the Declaration, however, an overly benign interpretation was given to the homosexual condition itself, some going so far as to call it neutral, or even good. Although the particular inclination of the homosexual person is not a sin, it is a more or less strong tendency ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil; and thus the inclination itself must be seen as an objective disorder…

CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH

“Though it is true that sometimes it is lawful to tolerate a lesser moral evil in order to avoid a greater evil or in order to promote a greater good, it is never lawful, even for the gravest reasons, to do evil that good may come of it (cf. Rom 3:8) — in other words, to intend directly something which of its very nature contradicts the moral order, and which must therefore be judged unworthy of man, even though the intention is to protect or promote the welfare of an individual, of a family or of society in general”.133

The Church, one hears, is lacking in understanding and compassion. But the Church’s motherhood can never in fact be separated from her teaching mission, which she must always carry out as the faithful Bride of Christ, who is the Truth in person. “As Teacher, she never tires of proclaiming the moral norm… The Church is in no way the author or the arbiter of this norm. In obedience to the truth which is Christ, whose image is reflected in the nature and dignity of the human person, the Church interprets the moral norm and proposes it to all people of good will, without concealing its demands of radicalness and perfection”.149

When it is a matter of the moral norms prohibiting intrinsic evil, there are no privileges or exceptions for anyone. It makes no difference whether one is the master of the world or the “poorest of the poor” on the face of the earth. Before the demands of morality we are all absolutely equal…

vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_06081993_veritatis-splendor_en.html

 

[setter]

this came from dignityusa.org/local.html under FAQ

I dont see this distinction from concience and teaching weather it is wrong to be in an homosexual relationship. What do you think this site is saying and what are your opinions on it (have you heard of organizations like this)?

Dissident organizations always cite dissident sources and opinions, as if to give them the air of legitimacy.

 

[m134e5]

What do you think this site is saying and what are your opinions on it (have you heard of organizations like this)?

I think it ( both the organization, and what they say) is a bunch of…(I cannot write the two words I want to say next).

DignityUSA and like-minded groups are heretical- plain and simple. Such organizations do not work for the salvation of souls. They do not promote holiness in any way. They promote evil. These organizations are led by satan. They are examples of the works and empty promises of satan we vow before God and the Church to reject.

Homosexual actions (promoting or practicing) are mortal sins- it is not complicated to understand. Those who insist on doing them or condoning them anyway put their souls at risk- just as those who commit other mortal sins.

 

[Dirk_Skene]

Dignity’s teachings are not in line with the Church. There is no room for argument on this :tsktsk: However “Courage” is Any anology is poor but I guess one could say “Courage” is kinda like AA for homosexuals.

 

[Exalt]

this came from dignityusa.org/local.html under FAQ

I dont see this distinction from concience and teaching weather it is wrong to be in an homosexual relationship. What do you think this site is saying and what are your opinions on it (have you heard of organizations like this)?

#1. Dignity correctly identifies official Catholic teaching on homosexuality: “The Catholic Church holds that, as a state beyond a person’s choice, being homosexual is not wrong or sinful in itself. But just as it is objectively wrong for unmarried heterosexuals to engage in sex, so too are homosexual acts considered to be wrong.”

#2. Dignity also correctly identifies official Catholic on the primacy of conscience: The “Catholic Church also teaches solemnly that people are obliged to form their conscience carefully and responsibly and to follow it as the bottom line in every moral decision.”

In these two capacities, *Dignity *correctly teaches Church teaching. It is in how they apply the second teaching (the primacy of conscience) that they get in to the trouble with some Church leaders and the congregation.

But I think there are some points in *Dignity’s *stance on homosexuality that even conservatives ought to listen to. Especially what they say about “Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons” …

13. What did people find harsh and uninformed in that 1986 Vatican letter?

• It backed away from the prevailing ethical opinion that a homosexual orientation is morally neutral and called it “an objective disorder.” Whatever this is supposed to mean, it suggests that gay people are sick, despite massive evidence to the contrary in medical, psychological, and sociobiological research.
• As if blaming gay people for the AIDS epidemic and ignoring their heroic — and virtually solitary! — efforts to stem it, the letter said: “Even when the practice of homosexuality may seriously threaten the lives and well-being of a large number of people, its advocates remain undeterred and refuse to consider the magnitude of the risks involved.”
• Regarding gay-bashing it read: when gay people seek to “protect behavior to which no one has any conceivable right, neither the church nor society at large should be surprised when other distorted notions and practices gain ground, and irrational and violent reactions increase.”
• As for securing the civil rights of gay people: “The bishops should keep as their uppermost concern the responsibility to defend and promote family life” — as if lesbian and gay children, sisters, brothers, fathers, or mothers were not part of family life.

As far as thier whole stance goes, I definately applaud thier efforts. Whether conservatives like it or not, a large number of educated Christians within the Catholic church find no moral problems with homosexuality in of itself. Families in Churches across the nation are being faced with children “coming out.” It’s no surprise to me that there’s an organization that represents the viewpoint of mainstream psychology and science - there’s nothing wrong with homosexuality in of itself. As Christians become more educated about the Bible and Church history - and see the many inconsistencies therein - they won’t take thier faith for granted. They’ll start questioning. And for many, homosexuality will be at the top of that list. I think in the future we’ll start to see mainstream Christianity start to turn around on the topic of homosexuality. *Dignity *is evidence of that change.

 

[fix]

#1. Dignity correctly identifies official Catholic teaching on homosexuality: “The Catholic Church holds that, as a state beyond a person’s choice, being homosexual is not wrong or sinful in itself. But just as it is objectively wrong for unmarried heterosexuals to engage in sex, so too are homosexual acts considered to be wrong.”

#2. Dignity also correctly identifies official Catholic on the primacy of conscience: The “Catholic Church also teaches solemnly that people are obliged to form their conscience carefully and responsibly and to follow it as the bottom line in every moral decision.”

In these two capacities, *Dignity *correctly teaches Church teaching. It is in how they apply the second teaching (the primacy of conscience) that they get in to the trouble with some Church leaders and the congregation.

But I think there are some points in *Dignity’s *stance on homosexuality that even conservatives ought to listen to. Especially what they say about “Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons” …

As far as thier whole stance goes, I definately applaud thier efforts. Whether conservatives like it or not, a large number of educated Christians within the Catholic church find no moral problems with homosexuality in of itself. Families in Churches across the nation are being faced with children “coming out.” It’s no surprise to me that there’s an organization that represents the viewpoint of mainstream psychology and science - there’s nothing wrong with homosexuality in of itself. As Christians become more educated about the Bible and Church history - and see the many inconsistencies therein - they won’t take thier faith for granted. They’ll start questioning. And for many, homosexuality will be at the top of that list. I think in the future we’ll start to see mainstream Christianity start to turn around on the topic of homosexuality. *Dignity *is evidence of that change.

The group is disingenuous and does not present Church teaching correctly.

1. Conscience is a pupil, not a teacher. Truth is always superior to conscience.
2. An erroneous conscience is not automatically non culpable.
3. Forming one’s conscience in direct contradiction to magisterial teachings is objectively wrong.
4. When the Church speaks of the inclination as an objective disorder she is speaking about a philosophical understanding, not medical.
5. The magisterium is the authority whether some like it or not.

 

[setter]

#1. Dignity correctly identifies official Catholic teaching on homosexuality: “The Catholic Church holds that, as a state beyond a person’s choice, being homosexual is not wrong or sinful in itself. But just as it is objectively wrong for unmarried heterosexuals to engage in sex, so too are homosexual acts considered to be wrong.”

#2. Dignity also correctly identifies official Catholic on the primacy of conscience: The “Catholic Church also teaches solemnly that people are obliged to form their conscience carefully and responsibly and to follow it as the bottom line in every moral decision.”

In these two capacities, *Dignity *correctly teaches Church teaching. It is in how they apply the second teaching (the primacy of conscience) that they get in to the trouble with some Church leaders and the congregation.

Can you pleae cite the exact paragraphs of the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) that you purport Dignity is referencing.

I offer these two CCC citations as what the Church actually teaches:

1783 Conscience must be informed and moral judgment enlightened. A well-formed conscience is upright and truthful. It formulates its judgments according to reason, in conformity with the true good willed by the wisdom of the Creator. The education of conscience is indispensable for human beings who are subjected to negative influences and tempted by sin to prefer their own judgment and to reject authoritative teachings. (CCC)

**1792 **Ignorance of Christ and his Gospel, bad example given by others, enslavement to one’s passions, assertion of a mistaken notion of autonomy of conscience, rejection of the Church’s authority and her teaching, lack of conversion and of charity: these can be at the source of errors of judgment in moral conduct. (CCC)

Whether conservatives like it or not, a large number of educated Christians within the Catholic church find no moral problems with homosexuality in of itself. … *Dignity *is evidence of that change.

Aswe can see that you have “come out of the closet” with your pro-gay lifestyle agenda. The fact that you find support in an organization such as Dignity speaks for itself as to why the Church has disassociated itself from this organization.

 

[Benedictus]

As we can see that you have “come out of the closet” with your pro-gay lifestyle agenda.

You may call it an agenda. Others would call it accepting people for who they are.

 

[setter]

You may call it an agenda. Others would call it accepting people for who they are.

Accpetance of others without accepting also the truth is deception and disservice to the eternal welfare of such lost and disturbed souls.

 

[Dan_Grelinger]

You may call it an agenda. Others would call it accepting people for who they are.

This is an example of why many are confused. I believe that many try to confuse the issue on purpose, constantly saying that not accepting typical homosexual behavior is the same as not accepting the individual. The ‘agenda’ is not about accepting individuals, it is about ‘normalizing’ behavior that is not good. We are called to accept the individuals, we are not called to accept bad behavior.

Dan

 

[Exalt]

Aswe can see that you have “come out of the closet” with your pro-gay lifestyle agenda. The fact that you find support in an organization such as Dignity speaks for itself as to why the Church has disassociated itself from this organization.

Maybe. But the Church can’t ignore this forever. As more and more educated people learn about the issues, the reasoning, and the evidence involved, the Church’s teaching will continue to lose support.

I’ll be the first person to say objective truth isn’t up to the majority vote. But as far as* knowing* where objective truth stands, I think most educated people will throw thier wager in with the side that has the better reasoning. “Because the Bible says so” just isn’t going to work anymore. The Natural Law argument will become the only real argument against homosexuality - but I have a feeling educated Christians will begin to see through that one as well, as mainstream psychology already has.

 

[Dan_Grelinger]

As far as thier whole stance goes, I definately applaud thier efforts.

Does this mean you applaud their whole stance, or that some things you applaud and other things you would not?

there’s nothing wrong with homosexuality in of itself.

If by homosexuality, you mean the tendency of same sex attraction, and if by nothing wrong you mean not inherently immoral, then you speak true. Is that your meaning?

It appears, though not explicitly stated, that you believe homosexual activity is not displeasing to God. Is that also your belief?

Dan

 

[Dan_Grelinger]

Maybe. But the Church can’t ignore this forever.

 

[Riley259]

#1. Dignity correctly identifies official Catholic teaching on homosexuality: “The Catholic Church holds that, as a state beyond a person’s choice, being homosexual is not wrong or sinful in itself. But just as it is objectively wrong for unmarried heterosexuals to engage in sex, so too are homosexual acts considered to be wrong.”

#2. Dignity also correctly identifies official Catholic on the primacy of conscience: The “Catholic Church also teaches solemnly that people are obliged to form their conscience carefully and responsibly and to follow it as the bottom line in every moral decision.”

In these two capacities, *Dignity *correctly teaches Church teaching. It is in how they apply the second teaching (the primacy of conscience) that they get in to the trouble with some Church leaders and the congregation.

But I think there are some points in *Dignity’s *stance on homosexuality that even conservatives ought to listen to. Especially what they say about “Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons” …

As far as thier whole stance goes, I definately applaud thier efforts. Whether conservatives like it or not, a large number of educated Christians within the Catholic church find no moral problems with homosexuality in of itself. Families in Churches across the nation are being faced with children “coming out.” It’s no surprise to me that there’s an organization that represents the viewpoint of mainstream psychology and science - there’s nothing wrong with homosexuality in of itself. As Christians become more educated about the Bible and Church history - and see the many inconsistencies therein - they won’t take thier faith for granted. They’ll start questioning. And for many, homosexuality will be at the top of that list. I think in the future we’ll start to see mainstream Christianity start to turn around on the topic of homosexuality. *Dignity *is evidence of that change.

Homosexuality in and of itself is morally neutral but it is objectively disordered. Homosexual acts are always gravely sinful and the Church speaks the truth about this. Dignity is a dissident group that seems to ignore and/or disobey Catholic teaching. You’re getting into dangerous territory if you start to endorse their ideas…look at the Courage ministry instead.

 

[Dan_Grelinger]

Can someone be involved in a lesbian or gay relationship and still be a faithful Catholic?
Certainly yes, not as a matter of public Church teaching but only as a matter of conscience, only as a matter of personal application of the whole of Catholic teaching to their particular case.

Interesting reasoning. It appears that the only way for homosexual behavior to be consistent with Church teaching is to assume that Church teaching contradicts itself. Not only contradicts itself, but does so in a very area where the Church says it is infallible.

So, is the only way to be a faithful Catholic is to believe that the Church contradicts itself and proclaims infallibility fallibly? The only way to be faithful to the Church is to disrespect the Church? I’m not sure that I buy that one.

Dan

 

[AndyF]

Benedictus:

That would be withholding charity, for that would be resigning our brothers to the fate they are choosing.

We can assist such a person by not assigning him a label that confirms his identifying himself with the sin. Terms such as “coming out of the closet” implies he had a condition that has always remained hidden from society until now when he had the courage to bring it to light. “He’s gay” implies that he is this state by nature. These and others should be avoided as they convey acceptance of the act and classifies the sin as one where the sinner has no responsibility in attempting to prevent it.

These unfortunate victims need the community as a perspective because the nature of this subtle and devious sin masks from the victim realities his brothers are aware of, and for the time being until the Holy Mother through the Rosary peels back the mask through added powers of discernment and actual life style changes that she rewards her devoted followers, we need to carry a larger responsibility.

AndyF

 

[rpp]

Maybe. But the Church can’t ignore this forever. As more and more educated people learn about the issues, the reasoning, and the evidence involved, the Church’s teaching will continue to lose support.

The Church has NEVER ignored this. So what if people reject Church teachings. People always have. There have always been people that promote gross evil. There have always been people who call good evil and evil good, which is what Dignity is doing.

I’ll be the first person to say objective truth isn’t up to the majority vote. But as far as* knowing* where objective truth stands, I think most educated people will throw thier wager in with the side that has the better reasoning. “Because the Bible says so” just isn’t going to work anymore. The Natural Law argument will become the only real argument against homosexuality - but I have a feeling educated Christians will begin to see through that one as well, as mainstream psychology already has.

Objective truth, it never changes. It cannot change. If it could, it would not be truth.

The truth about the abomination of homosexual activity is part of the deposit of faith. It is in the Bible in numerous places, right there with murder, adultery and theft. If someone does not want to “know” this, then they are conciously rejecting Church teaching. And that can imperil their immortal soul.

If a person wants to reject the Bible and the Church and Natural Law and applaud those who do, that is their right. However, when they say the Church must change the unchangable, then they are flirting with either heresy or apostasy.

 

[Exalt]

Objective truth, it never changes. It cannot change. If it could, it would not be truth.

And you believe the Church holds all objective truth and can teach no wrong?

 

[Exalt]

Interesting reasoning. It appears that the only way for homosexual behavior to be consistent with Church teaching is to assume that Church teaching contradicts itself. Not only contradicts itself, but does so in a very area where the Church says it is infallible.

So, is the only way to be a faithful Catholic is to believe that the Church contradicts itself and proclaims infallibility fallibly? The only way to be faithful to the Church is to disrespect the Church? I’m not sure that I buy that one.

Dan

I’m sure that most people would not accept that as valid reasoning. Homosexuality is wrong because it violates the Church’s infallibility?

Well. How do you know the Church is infallible?