Gays and catholics

[YipYupYep]

Having Same Sex Attraction in and of itself does not make the person evil at all, and that by itself does not mean the person is sinning. What causes evil to enter the picture is when that person acts on that attraction and engages in relations with someone of the same sex.
This is similar to the heterosexual person that engages in pre-marital sexual relations. That act is evil and sinful as well.

Well said. Gay or straight, sexual misconduct is the same with this one important caveat. Holy Matrimony can cure a whole lot of straight sexual problems in the single person. They can get hitched. The gay boy or girl is left with serving out a hard bid. Arguably a life sentence. I would just hope, and I would just pray, that the gay person can change and live a life without degeneracy finding love and attraction in the opposite sex.

 

[Brendan]

That’s a fact.​

A straight person who is blown up with pride & self-conceit - all things being equal - would seemto be in a far worse state than a homosexual who corresponds to God’s grace. People make far too much of homosexuality, & abortion: these are nothing in comparison with pride.

People make quite a bit about homosexuality and abortion because they are sins that reside on top of pride.

In the person who engages in homosexual acts, not only is there the sins against chastity, it is rooted in the prideful act of claiming to have greater knowledge of morality than Christ’s Church.

In abortion, not only is there a sin against live, there is the pride that one knows better than God on if one can accept the gift if life.

So these sins are made much of because they involve sins not only against chastity and life, but of pride as well.

 

[Methodi]

Well said. Gay or straight, sexual misconduct is the same with this one important caveat. Holy Matrimony can cure a whole lot of straight sexual problems in the single person. They can get hitched. The gay boy or girl is left with serving out a hard bid. Arguably a life sentence. I would just hope, and I would just pray, that the gay person can change and live a life without degeneracy finding love and attraction in the opposite sex.

Gay people really cannot change, I was also told by a catholic priest that gay men should not marry women & vice versa.

 

[Et_Cetera]

I love my gay friends. They are wonderful people, and I don’t mind at all what they do in their private time.

 

[Methodi]

I love my gay friends. They are wonderful people, and I don’t mind at all what they do in their private time.

I too have had many gay friends over the years, I can truthfully say they were fine people save for a very few, but there is good & bad in all of us . They certainly do have a trial in that they cant be themselves, but that is changing fast. I believe the Good Lord has created them for a reason , there are far too many of them for it to be a accident.They have been throughout history & in every far corner of the earth

 

[Tantum_ergo]

I will tell you why I personally think that at this time there appear to be ‘so many’ gay people.

I personally think that in the last century or so we saw a huge degeneration of heterosexuality. . .much of it due to the contraceptive mentality which has led not only to abortions but also to divorce, to ‘objectifying’ people, and to a huge rift between men and women in general (though of course there are many exceptions).

In addition to the objectifying of women and men came the separation of the sexual act into ‘gratification’. With this came an opportunity (perceived) for many gay people to claim that if ‘love’ (now nearly universally understood to involve the ‘separate’ act of sex between two people who ‘claim’ to ‘love’ each other, with the ‘love’ superseding any need for them to be married to each other). . .exists for ‘heterosexuals’, then why ‘deny’ it to homosexuals who claim to ‘equally love’ their ‘object of desire’.

So far this has led to a loud vocal minority demanding ‘gay rights, gay marriage’, gay pride, etc.

But I personally believe that the true reason this situation has come about is that it gives an opportunity to the **chaste homosexual person **to do something more worthwhile, more heroic, and even more Christian than we have ever seen before. . .something that we rarely see in heterosexual people in contemporary society who have fallen into such grave sexual sin themselves.

That** worthwhile, heroic and Christian** action I think we will see from a growing population of chaste homosexual saints-in-training with be the complete and total **rejection **of the current vocal minority demand for ‘gay rights’, and in its stead, a firm dedication to Christian teaching. I believe that these courageous people who reject evil and insist on following Christ, even at personal cost and suffering, will be among the greatest saints in history and will be a part of the great movement for penance that will restore Christianity to the world.

 

[happynoodlecat]

My question is, since the Church concept on homosexuality is pretty much based on the Natural Law Theory…if there was science-based and universally accepted evidence that there is a “homosexuality” gene in the human DNA strand, would the Church change its stance?



An easy understanding of Natural Law Theory

 

[Scottgun]

My question is, since the Church concept on homosexuality is pretty much based on the Natural Law Theory…if there was science-based and universally accepted evidence that there is a “homosexuality” gene in the human DNA strand, would the Church change its stance?



An easy understanding of Natural Law Theory

It wouldn’t change anything anymore than a genetic predispostion to alcoholism would make an alcoholic’s drinking acceptable. Or a genetic disposition toward kleptomania making stealing acceptable. There is no gene that forces anyone to pull down their pants involuntarily.

 

[happynoodlecat]

It wouldn’t change anything anymore than a genetic predispostion to alcoholism would make an alcoholic’s drinking acceptable. Or a genetic disposition toward kleptomania making stealing acceptable. There is no gene that forces anyone to pull down their pants involuntarily.

but there’s apparently something that causes most guys to like girls and vice versa

predisposition to alcoholism and kleptomania doesn’t make it any less right for someone to indulge in those activities, I agree, but wouldn’t it lead to more of a tool to, perhaps “correct” individuals who engage in these sorts of activities? If that was the case, like through gene therapy or whatnot, a “magic pill to cure homosexuality” would the Church say that was lawful and just?

You must also take into consideration that just because someone has a predisposition to something such as alcoholism or even schizophrenia, doesn’t mean they’ll actually engage in it or be affected by it. Just the same way as someone who does not have this genetic predisposition can follow down those paths. It’s not nurture vs. nature…it’s nature and nurture combined.

but i’m thankful for your response.

 

[Scottgun]

but there’s apparently something that causes most guys to like girls and vice versa

Which is the way it is supposed to be.

predisposition to alcoholism and kleptomania doesn’t make it any less right for someone to indulge in those activities, I agree, but wouldn’t it lead to more of a tool to, perhaps “correct” individuals who engage in these sorts of activities? If that was the case, like through gene therapy or whatnot, a “magic pill to cure homosexuality” would the Church say that was lawful and just?

I don’t know, but as a wild guess, it would not be wrong as the homosexual inclination, while not sinful in itself, is “objectively disordered” and thus medicinally restoring it to proper order would be acceptable (voluntarily that is.)

You must also take into consideration that just because someone has a predisposition to something such as alcoholism or even schizophrenia, doesn’t mean they’ll actually engage in it or be affected by it. Just the same way as someone who does not have this genetic predisposition can follow down those paths. It’s not nurture vs. nature…it’s nature and nurture combined.

We are in agreement. It’s my point as well–genetics is not destiny.

but i’m thankful for your response.

You are welcome.

 

[chrisb]

Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the gready nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. ~ 1 Corinthians 6:9-10

Therefore come out from them and be separate, says the Lord. Touch no unclean thing, and I will receive you. I will be a Father to you, and you will be my sons and daughters, says the Lord Almighty. Since we have these promises, dear friends, let us purify ourselves from everything that contaminates body and spirit, perfecting holiness out of reverence for God. ~ 2 Corinthians 6:17-18

Modern liberal Theology where everyone attempting to avoid error or everyone attempting to separate themselves from those who blatantly live lives in contradiction of our Faith are somehow Pharisees is so contrary to our own Faith.

Cling to the Good and flee from Evil. If someone is ‘living in a state of abject sin’ and advocating for that activity, that individual should be avoided. That includes everyone of us.

I honestly think that the ‘Roman Catholic Church’ has gotten too big to follow the Faith anymore.

 

[YipYupYep]

a growing population of chaste homosexual saints-in-training

What’s this growing population of chaste homosexuals stuff. Never heard any of that. What I have heard is quite the opposite. What I have heard is that an average gay adult man living in the USA will have, not hundreds, but thousands of gay sex encounters, all with different men.

I am a straight man and I know and have known quite a few gay men. Who and what I am consists of a great many sides of me. My sexuality is just one part, although a larger part. In the gay man, his sexuality is the whole nine yards. It is how they define themselves as a human being. That’s not me, nor is it any straight man I know. Correct me if I am wrong.

If, in fact there are a growing number of chaste gays, they really are saints and deserve a very just reward.

 

[Methodi]

My question is, since the Church concept on homosexuality is pretty much based on the Natural Law Theory…if there was science-based and universally accepted evidence that there is a “homosexuality” gene in the human DNA strand, would the Church change its stance?



An easy understanding of Natural Law Theory

The Church knows that homosexuals are that way through no fault of their own , being homo is no sin in itself just the carrying out a homosexual act is sinful, so the church says. There has been research done & they found that heterosexual & homosexual brains differ. Again I say there are too many of them in the world for it to be a accident, God must have created them that way for a reason. There are mysteries that we will never understand. Being we are sexual beings, remaining chaste is difficult, most heterosexuals cannot remain chaste

 

[BarbaraTherese]

My question is, since the Church concept on homosexuality is pretty much based on the Natural Law Theory…if there was science-based and universally accepted evidence that there is a “homosexuality” gene in the human DNA strand, would the Church change its stance?



An easy understanding of Natural Law Theory

Interesting question to ponder; however I don’t think that The Church would change it’s stance. If science should discover that there is a biological reason for same gender sexual attraction, such biological cause does not mean that the person does not have free will and to some degree in control of himself/herself and their sexuality (as in heterosexuality). Over and above that, Scripture is rather clear on the subject and the morality of it.

The same moral position governs homosexuality as does heterosexuality and the laws connected to sexuality. Both orientations are subject to sexual drives that are also governed by the virtue and call to Chastity, including in the married state. Those who are validly married are called to non celibate Chastity.

I draw this to the attention however, from Clause 1861 of the Catholic Catechism:

However, although we can judge that an act is in itself a grave offense, we must entrust judgment of persons to the justice and mercy of God.

This is as binding on us all as is our moral law connected to sexuality and same gender sexual attraction.

We do need to remember however, that serious/mortal sin has three requirements that must be present at one and the same time in order for a sin to be serious or mortal:

1857

For a *sin *

to be mortal, three conditions must together be met: "Mortal sin is sin whose object is grave matter and which is also committed with full knowledge and deliberate consent."131
1858 Grave matter is specified by the Ten Commandments, corresponding to the answer of Jesus to the rich young man: "Do not kill, Do not commit adultery, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Do not defraud, Honor your father and your mother."132 The gravity of sins is more or less great: murder is graver than theft. One must also take into account who is wronged: violence against parents is in itself graver than violence against a stranger.
1859 Mortal sin requires full knowledge and complete consent. It presupposes knowledge of the sinful character of the act, of its opposition to God’s law. It also implies a consent sufficiently deliberate to be a personal choice.*** Feigned ignorance and hardness of heart133 do not diminish, but rather increase, the voluntary character of a sin.***
1860 Unintentional ignorance can diminish or even remove the imputability of a grave offense.*** But no one is deemed to be ignorant of the principles of the moral law***, which are written in the conscience of every man.

The promptings of feelings and passions can also diminish the voluntary and free character of the offense, as can external pressures or pathological disorders.

Sin committed through malice, by deliberate choice of evil, is the gravest. 1861 Mortal sin is a radical possibility of human freedom, as is love itself. It results in the loss of charity and the privation of sanctifying grace, that is, of the state of grace. If it is not redeemed by repentance and God’s forgiveness, it causes exclusion from Christ’s kingdom and the eternal death of hell, for our freedom has the power to make choices for ever, with no turning back. However, although we can judge that an act is in itself a grave offense, we must entrust judgment of persons to the justice and mercy of God.

Sexuality no matter the orientation can be complex ground where morality is concerned and the advice of a priest on the matter should always, to my mind, be sought. Assessing mortal and serious sin condemning the person, if unrepented, for all eternity to Hell is a very serious matter (and a very serious statement to make that is sinful of itself) and, to my mind again, should be left to a priest advised by the person concerned of their personal circumstances in connection with a sexual matter, and no matter its nature.
Be that as it may are same sex sexual acts morally wrong? Yes they are, as are any sexual acts including heterosexual, or even sexual acts committed alone, outside of the bond of The Sacrament of Marriage, and we should state this. However such a statement is different from accusing another of actual mortal sin and if unrepented condemnation to Hell for eternity.

Barb

 

[blessedtoo]

If, in fact there are a growing number of chaste gays, they really are saints and deserve a very just reward.

There are quite a few right here on CAF! If you hang around awhile, you’ll probably run into them!

God bless!

 

[fix]

My question is, since the Church concept on homosexuality is pretty much based on the Natural Law Theory…if there was science-based and universally accepted evidence that there is a “homosexuality” gene in the human DNA strand, would the Church change its stance?



An easy understanding of Natural Law Theory

No, because such a gene does not make the inclination or the actions consistent with natural law. It just means they occur in nature. It does not mean they were ordained by God.

 

[Brendan]

My question is, since the Church concept on homosexuality is pretty much based on the Natural Law Theory…if there was science-based and universally accepted evidence that there is a “homosexuality” gene in the human DNA strand, would the Church change its stance?

No, why should it.

Science has already shown there there is a gene that pre-disposes people towards alcoholism.

Is it your opinion that the presence of that gene should require the Church to take a different stance on habitual drunkeness? Or that the Church should cease any outreach efforts to help alcoholics to live sober lives?

 

[happynoodlecat]

No, because such a gene does not make the inclination or the actions consistent with natural law. It just means they occur in nature. It does not mean they were ordained by God.

I guess my question was, since God did create nature, wouldn’t HE have a specific purpose for it?
If homosexuality existed in nature, which God created…why would God create something in nature that would lead people astray like that?

 

[happynoodlecat]

No, why should it.

Science has already shown there there is a gene that pre-disposes people towards alcoholism.

Is it your opinion that the presence of that gene should require the Church to take a different stance on habitual drunkeness? Or that the Church should cease any outreach efforts to help alcoholics to live sober lives?

with that gene you can make “corrections” you can provide a tool to get people off of that.

if that was the case in homosexuality, would such “corrections” be justifiable then? If it was seen as a gene that predisposes people to it. That’s I think one of the ways I was trying to head with my poorly worded question.

And again, just because you have a gene that has a predisposition towards something does not automatically guarantee that you’re going to become that (like an alcoholic, schizo, whatever). Science has proved that such tendencies are not purely biological…it’s nature and nurture combined.

 

[Corki]

I guess my question was, since God did create nature, wouldn’t HE have a specific purpose for it?
If homosexuality existed in nature, which God created…why would God create something in nature that would lead people astray like that?

Well, by nature, do you mean the animal kingdom or naturally occuring in humans? I have read many times the argument that giraffes sometimes pair up homosexually, so it must be ok for humans too. Well, chimpanzees sometimes eat their young and lions often kill the cubs if paternity is in question. So are those activities ok too?

For humans, there are many things that occur naturally that are still disordered. Blindness, deafness, are disorders of the senses yet they are naturally occuring. And yes, God has a plan for each person and his or her challenge whether it be blindness or homosexuality.

with that gene you can make “corrections” you can provide a tool to get people off of that.

if that was the case in homosexuality, would such “corrections” be justifiable then? If it was seen as a gene that predisposes people to it. That’s I think one of the ways I was trying to head with my poorly worded question.

And again, just because you have a gene that has a predisposition towards something does not automatically guarantee that you’re going to become that (like an alcoholic, schizo, whatever). Science has proved that such tendencies are not purely biological…it’s nature and nurture combined.

The “correction” for someone with a genetic predisposition toward alcholism is to avoid alcohol consumption. The “correction” for someone with a genetic predisposition toward same sex sexual attraction is chastity and celibacy.