Heresy to believe homosexuals can't change?

[Debora123]

I don’t think it will change for some people, but some have changed(least from what they say). Coming up to me and giving me compliments like “hot” or “cute” doesn’t make me feel right, and I don’t want anyone to do that to me unless I know them well, but many gay people don’t seem to have an idea about that(this is just from experience). You’ve never met anyone who thinks they choose it? Well, you can go met some religious Jews, or some Muslims, or people from other faiths. Are you a practicing homosexual? Andy Warhol was a virgin until his death(from his own, and most other’s accounts. There are some who say otherwise, but there are people who say otherwise for most things), and he was very devout. I ask this because you have Catholic in your religion field, but one can’t be a practicing homosexual and be a Catholic.

Um, I don’t think he is a practicing homosexual.

And by the way, a person indeed CAN be a “practicing” homosexual and still be Catholic. Sins don’t undue a baptism.

 

[Pheonix]

a) It denies the effectiveness of God’s grace, as if God were powerless to change a willing human person from a sinful orientation to the natural orientation intended by God. In truth, God’s grace can work wonders in even the most incorrigible sinner.

Flawed reasoning. God never intended us to be afflicted with concupiscence either, now did He? Why then doesn’t God change a willing human person from a state of concupiscence back to the original state He intended us to be in? Is God powerless to do so? Therefore, admitting that humans cannot get rid of their concupiscence is, by the author’s logic, a denial of God’s effective grace.

Surely God does work wonders with sinners, but that doesn’t mean homosexuals can change their sexuality. They can be chaste and/or celibate, yes, but that’s not the same thing as going from homosexual to heterosexual.

Either way, the author fails to provide any kind of coherent argument and/or reasoning as to why believing a homosexual cannot change his or her sexuality is a denial of God’s grace. Strike one.

b) It represents the homosexual orientation as if it were in itself good, or as if it were equivalent to the heterosexual orientation, so that change would be of no benefit. But the homosexual orientation is inherently directed toward an intrinsic moral evil which is always a serious sin against God, and therefore it is not at all equivalent to the natural inclination of men and women toward each other, which is designed by God and which is not necessarily sinful.

Is our concupiscence, in and of itself, good? After all, concupiscence causes us to sin; sinning is never good. Again, the author is using flawed reasoning.

Further, I fail to see how believing a homosexual cannot change his or her sexuality is the same thing as believing homosexuality is good. How does the author logically reach such a conclusion? Again, the author fails to put forth any kind of credible argument. Unsubstantiated claims can easily be dismissed. Strike two.

c) It represents the homosexual orientation as if it were acceptable to God, so that the individual would not have any moral obligation to change. But God never approves of sin, nor of any impetus toward sin, and human persons are always obligated to change away from sin and away from whatever tends toward mortal sin.

More flawed reasoning. Our concupiscence isn’t acceptable to God either, as it causes us to sin. Therefore, is saying that we cannot get rid of our concupiscence the same thing as saying our concupiscence is acceptable to God?

God doesn’t approve of any sin, mortal or venial. That’s true. But simply being homosexual is not a sin. Further, having a man-crush or a girl-crush (i.e. simply having a crush on someone) is not a sin so long as one doesn’t engage in lustful behavior.

And the author once again doesn’t provide any kind of argument to support his claims. Strike three. Batter out.

Is this actually Catholics teaching? Because it goes against pretty much all of the research that’s out there.

Church teachings regarding homosexuals:

1. Homosexuals are called to chastity.
2. Simply being homosexual is not a sin. This is because science/psychology has yet to discover what really causes homosexual inclinations. Acting on homosexual attractions (e.g. finding a boyfriend/girlfriend and engaging in sex), however, is a sin.
3. We are to treat homosexuals with love and respect, as we should with any person. This is especially the case when one considers how heavy the “homosexuality cross” is to bear, at least for homosexuals who wish to follow Christian teaching.

Nothing here tells us the Church believes homosexuals can become heterosexuals. Surely there are individuals who believe such, but the Church explicitly admits the causes of homosexuality are unknown. This therefore implies the Church has no official stance on the idea of “changing one’s sexuality.”

Heresy is, by definition, a rejection of the Church’s doctrinal or dogmatic teachings. Further, heresy can only be committed by someone who professes to be a Catholic. There are no official Church teachings that tells us we have to believe homosexuals can change their sexuality. Thus, there is no heresy involved in denying the assertion that gay people can become straight.

Good thing too, I guess, because I don’t believe homosexuality is a choice. I honestly don’t understand how some people can even imply that homosexual people just wake up and shout “I’m going to be gay!”

(Not that anyone here has done such a thing, but there are people who do make such claims.)

 

[Debora123]

Flawed reasoning. God never intended us to be afflicted with concupiscence either, now did He? Why then doesn’t God change a willing human person from a state of concupiscence back to the original state He intended us to be in? Is God powerless to do so? Therefore, admitting that humans cannot get rid of their concupiscence is, by the author’s logic, a denial of God’s effective grace.

Surely God does work wonders with sinners, but that doesn’t mean homosexuals can change their sexuality. They can be chaste and/or celibate, yes, but that’s not the same thing as going from homosexual to heterosexual.

Either way, the author fails to provide any kind of coherent argument and/or reasoning as to why believing a homosexual cannot change his or her sexuality is a denial of God’s grace. Strike one.

Is our concupiscence, in and of itself, good? After all, concupiscence causes us to sin; sinning is never good. Again, the author is using flawed reasoning.

Further, I fail to see how believing a homosexual cannot change his or her sexuality is the same thing as believing homosexuality is good. How does the author logically reach such a conclusion? Again, the author fails to put forth any kind of credible argument. Unsubstantiated claims can easily be dismissed. Strike two.

More flawed reasoning. Our concupiscence isn’t acceptable to God either, as it causes us to sin. Therefore, is saying that we cannot get rid of our concupiscence the same thing as saying our concupiscence is acceptable to God?

God doesn’t approve of any sin, mortal or venial. That’s true. But simply being homosexual is not a sin. Further, having a man-crush or a girl-crush (i.e. simply having a crush on someone) is not a sin so long as one doesn’t engage in lustful behavior.

And the author once again doesn’t provide any kind of argument to support his claims. Strike three. Batter out.

Church teachings regarding homosexuals:

1. Homosexuals are called to chastity.
2. Simply being homosexual is not a sin. This is because science/psychology has yet to discover what really causes homosexual inclinations. Acting on homosexual attractions (e.g. finding a boyfriend/girlfriend and engaging in sex), however, is a sin.
3. We are to treat homosexuals with love and respect, as we should with any person. This is especially the case when one considers how heavy the “homosexuality cross” is to bear, at least for homosexuals who wish to follow Christian teaching.

Nothing here tells us the Church believes homosexuals can become heterosexuals. Surely there are individuals who believe such, but the Church explicitly admits the causes of homosexuality are unknown. This therefore implies the Church has no official stance on the idea of “changing one’s sexuality.”

Heresy is, by definition, a rejection of the Church’s doctrinal or dogmatic teachings. Further, heresy can only be committed by someone who professes to be a Catholic. There are no official Church teachings that tells us we have to believe homosexuals can change their sexuality. Thus, there is no heresy involved in denying the assertion that gay people can become straight.

Good thing too, I guess, because I don’t believe homosexuality is a choice. I honestly don’t understand how some people can even imply that homosexual people just wake up and shout “I’m going to be gay!”

(Not that anyone here has done such a thing, but there are people who do make such claims.)

Thanks for laying it all out accurately.

 

[indiancatholic]

I read in the internet about many homosexuals who changed their lives and are leading
heterosexual lives one lady wrote a book about it…

 

[Traditionalism]

Um, I don’t think he is a practicing homosexual.

And by the way, a person indeed CAN be a “practicing” homosexual and still be Catholic. Sins don’t undue a baptism.

He can’t receive communion and such however. If he acts on his urges, then he’s not really able to get them until he works against them and betters himself, least from my understanding, and if he’s practicing homosexual acts, then he can’t really be a faithful Catholic with such anti-Catholic acts that he’d refuse to change.

 

[ivebeenshown]

I honestly don’t understand how some people can even imply that homosexual people just wake up and shout “I’m going to be gay!”

Good morning, Sir Man of Straw!

I don’t think people seriously do believe that. When people say “people can choose to be gay or straight”, what they mean is that people can choose to do things and engage in behaviors that affect their personality over time. I can personally attest to this. I never decided that I wanted to be gay, but when you have family tell you that being gay is okay and the masturbation is healthy, and people teasing you all throughout school calling you gay, you start to ‘experiment’, and then when you find out that you can finish masturbating while thinking of a man, you decide ‘oh, I must be gay’.

The reality is that boys entering puberty are very impressionable and sexual. The first experience of arousal usually has nothing to do with any perceived person or gender and everything to do with physical stimulation. When a boy starts associating a person or gender with that stimulation, you get what is called classical conditioning.

It just so happens that the vast majority of people, either through social or religious influence, choose to reserve their physical stimulation for the opposite sex, and so they ultimately come to associate the physical arousal with the opposite sex. They didn’t just say one day “I’m going to pop a stiffy at the girl in homeroom”.

The problem with saying that people are born with a sexual attraction to one thing or another is that they are very selective about it. Are people born attracted to animals? Children? Japanese comics? Pumpkins? (Yes, pumpkins. Don’t ask how I know about that one.)

The answer is a big, resounding NO!

People choose to engage in sexual stimulation and shape their sexual identities in the process.

 

[CopticChristian]

I have lived in the gay community my entire life and NEVER met a gay person who tried to “turn” anyone! Haven’t you ever heard of “gaydar”??? We know each other, and we don’t hit on straight people! Why face the rejection?

FTR-thinking a person is “cute” or “hot” is NOT trying to “turn” them-it’s a compliment.

I don’t believe that orientation is a choice for ANYONE and I have never met anyone-other than Christians-who think it is.

Turn your statement around-could YOU change your orientation?? And just exactly when did you CHOOSE to be straight?? Do you hit on gay people and try to “turn” them??

We can CHOOSE not to act on our attractions-just as you can. And yes, if God chooses, He can change anyone’s orientation. Many of us have spent a LOT of time on our knees trying to make that happen, but it’s apparently not always in the plan.

Sorry…but this kind of statement makes me crazy. I know you all want to demonize us and make us as evil and threatening as you possibly can, but this just isn’t true.

Seeker,

You have lived in “a” gay community…

not

“the” gay community

This is generaliziation with a conclusion based on that. You live in a microcosm and point out the fallacy of your own perception.

I lived in San Francisco, where “a” gay community exists by virtue of geography, the Castro district that flows into other surrounding parts of the city.

I have been approached by some of the “gay” community that live in that “gay” community and I dare say their “gaydar” was broken. Why do they have to ask me “are you gay” if “gaydar” exists?

While living in San Diego, I travelled on Medical Missions to various parts of the world and worked with a “gay” aneshesiologist. One day out of the blue he called me and asked me out…another broken “gaydar”.

I have seen and experienced others with broken “gaydar”…I find it a nuisance and repulsive.

Nice attempt to solidify something that is amorphous…

 

[Gordon_Sims]

Sorry…but this kind of statement makes me crazy. I know you all want to demonize us and make us as evil and threatening as you possibly can, but this just isn’t true.

I’m not trying to demonize anyone; I’m simply stating my experience. I have two close friends whose marriages almost ended because their wives refused to break contact with their longtime lesbian friends who spent years trying to get them to switch teams. I had at least half a dozen older gay men offer me free vacations in college, all knowing full well that I was straight and all promising to cure me of that. I had countless offers from college classmates to show me the error of my ways. I’ve had numerous talks with homosexual friends & relatives who lamented about the straight ones they couldn’t turn. I have numerous friends who have had similar experiences. Based on mine and my friends’ experiences, I would have a hard time believing someone who has spent a great deal of time around homosexuals telling me they’ve never heard or experienced the same thing. I’m not trying to demonize these people for their efforts (except the ones who tried this with married friends), but I do consider them hypocrites for claiming sexual orientation isn’t a choice when they clearly believe that it is.

 

[livingwordunity]

The following is why it is heresy to believe that homosexuals can’t change:

• Homosexuality is a disorder. Although same-sex attraction isn’t in itself a personal sin, it’s an imperfection and one of the manifestations of our tendency to sin as a result of original sin.
• We are all sinners (including homosexuals). God loves us as we are but loves us too much to want us to stay that way.
• Christ tells is in Holy Scripture “You, therefore, must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect” (Matt 5:48). In Revelation 21:27, it says that nothing unclean shall enter Heaven. That’s why we have Purgatory for those of us who die in friendship with God but have not been made perfect (see Heb. 12:23).
• The Purgatory after this life is for the final purification which began while we were still in this world.
• With God all things are possible. Denying this shows a lack of faith in God.

 

[livingwordunity]

Besides it being heresy to believe it impossible for homosexuals to change (in God all things are possible), some have changed, and the evidence strongly points to homosexuality being a learned behavior as follows:

“In research with 942 nonclinical adult participants, gay men and lesbian women reported a significantly higher rate of childhood molestation than did heterosexual men and women. Forty-six percent of the homosexual men in contrast to 7% of the heterosexual men reported homosexual molestation. Twenty-two percent of lesbian women in contrast to 1% of heterosexual women reported homosexual molestation. This research is apparently the first survey that has reported substantial homosexual molestation of girls. Suggestions for future research were offered.”

Government Source:
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11501300

If God allows some to continue with same-sex attraction then it’s a cross that one has to live with while committing themselves to a life of chastity which in this case means celibacy.

 

[Debora123]

He can’t receive communion and such however. If he acts on his urges, then he’s not really able to get them until he works against them and betters himself, least from my understanding, and if he’s practicing homosexual acts, then he can’t really be a faithful Catholic with such anti-Catholic acts that he’d refuse to change.

None of us would be able to have communion if we acted on our sinful urges. (which we all have).

Mortal sins don’t make us cease being a Catholic! Saying that you can’t be a Catholic while in mortal sin is a completely false statement, and one we shouldn’t make.

 

[livingwordunity]

None of us would be able to have communion if we acted on our sinful urges. (which we all have).

Unless we confess our sins first in the Sacrament of Reconciliation.

Mortal sins don’t make us cease being a Catholic! Saying that you can’t be a Catholic while in mortal sin is a completely false statement, and one we shouldn’t make.

That’s true. I used to be confused on this, but I realized the nuance of it. There are only certain kinds of mortal sins which excommunicate us. Some mortal sins are more serious than others.

 

[Debora123]

Unless we confess our sins first in the Sacrament of Reconciliation.

Wow, thanks… I did not know that!

And AS CATHOLICS we are able to utilize the sacrament of reconciliation… whether we are in mortal sin or not. Even if that means we slept with someone of the same sex.

That’s true. I used to be confused on this, but I realized the nuance of it. There are only certain kinds of mortal sins which excommunicate us. Some mortal sins are more serious than others.

Even still, excommunication does not mean the person ceases to be a Catholic.

 

[livingwordunity]

Even still, excommunication does not mean the person ceases to be a Catholic.

That’s interesting. Can you please explain how this is?

 

[CopticChristian]

That’s interesting. Can you please explain how this is?

Living,

This has been explained before on another thread

Once Catholic, always a Catholic, Baptism is not erased by excommunication. Excommunication is disciplinary and not like being found guilty in a court room and stripped of all your rights. It is intended to call attention to the sinner that there are problems in need of correction.

Does exommunication send someone to Hell…

catholic.com/quickquestions/does-the-catholic-church-send-people-to-hell-by-excommunicating-them

It doesn’t. The Church doesn’t have the power to send anyone to hell. Only God can do that. More properly, people who go to hell send themselves there because they choose hell over heaven, themselves over God.

Excommunication is the Church’s top judicial sanction and involves excluding a notorious sinner from communion with the faithful. It is intended as a warning to the sinner that he needs to repent. It isn’t a condemnation to hell.

 

[Debora123]

Living,

This has been explained before on another thread

Once Catholic, always a Catholic, Baptism is not erased by excommunication. Excommunication is disciplinary and not like being found guilty in a court room and stripped of all your rights. It is intended to call attention to the sinner that there are problems in need of correction.

Does exommunication send someone to Hell…

catholic.com/quickquestions/does-the-catholic-church-send-people-to-hell-by-excommunicating-them

Thanks Coptic!

 

[CopticChristian]

Thanks Coptic!

Debora,

I am sure you recall the string of responses where time after time you posted…

“still a Catholic”

 

[livingwordunity]

According to this papal encyclical, heresy (which causes excommunication) creates a situation where people can no longer truthfully identify as a Catholic:

“For there may be or may arise some other heresies, which are not set out in this work of ours, and, if any one holds to one single one of these he is not a Catholic”

source:
papalencyclicals.net/Leo13/l13satis.htm

 

[Traditionalism]

None of us would be able to have communion if we acted on our sinful urges. (which we all have).

Mortal sins don’t make us cease being a Catholic! Saying that you can’t be a Catholic while in mortal sin is a completely false statement, and one we shouldn’t make.

Yes, we all have, but if he refuses to stop his homosexual acts he will be stuck without getting them. I don’t think someone who refuses to comply with the religion can be religious like that. Andy Warhol had no issue being a virgin til his death, nor have many other people, these gays aren’t special and should do it too.

 

[atheistgirl]

I just stumbled across this articlecatechism.cc/articles/homosexuality-sin.htm Which claims that it’s a heresy to believe that gay people can’t willfully make themselves straight. It reads:

Is this actually Catholics teaching? Because it goes against pretty much all of the research that’s out there.

I would be very careful about the accuracy of anything written by that author, on any of his sites, as compared to the official teachings of the Catholic Church.

For example, he claims ''Mary is like Christ in all things except His Divinity. Therefore, Mary had a virgin conception and a virgin birth, similar to Christ’s virgin conception and virgin birth.’'

He claims this is speculative theology, but that

There are ten thousand truths as yet undiscovered within the ancient Deposit of Faith: Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition

My advice would be to stick with official Catholic sources, and official Catholic commentaries.

I think his sites are very misleading. He also signs off as a Roman Catholic Theologian, which makes it sound like he has some kind of approved status within the Catholic Church, which he hasn’t.

Sarah x