Homophobic reaction to the abuse crisis discouraging me - what should I do?

  • Thread starter Thread starter catholic1seeks
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I’m sorry that this has been your experience here. We need you in the church. And I’m sorry for anything I said, especially in your other post
 
Last edited:
All that is needed is compassion and willingness to understand another person, which you have shown and are now showing. There is no hard feelings towards you or any other person who is willing to “walk in another’s shoes.”

My frustration is with those Catholic circles I refer to in my OP, as well as those participants in this thread who are not addressing the topic but instead proving my point.
 
mrsdizzyd said:
In other words, it’s not meant to be taken literally.
Click to expand...
The people who quote that statistic do mean for it to be taken literally, because they want to imply that all gay men are sex fiends who only think about sex all day long.
 
phil19034 said:
To me, a priest having consensual sex with a woman is just big a scandal as a priest having sex with a 16 year old boy.
Click to expand...
And that’s your problem. You’ve gotten to a point where you can’'t even recognize the difference between lesser sins and child abuse.
 
Last edited:
catholic1seeks said:
OK, this is where I’m going to disagree with you. No priest (unless he was married before becoming a priest) should be engaged in sexual activity.
Click to expand...
OK, but this is syntax. As I have mentioned to you before, not everyone uses the following words the same way, nor to mean the same thing. It differs by generation, by region, by experience, etc.
  • Gay
  • Homosexual
  • Same Sex Attracted
And what does “gay priest” mean? For hundreds of years, a “gay priest” would typically mean one who was obviously not chaste, at least committing sins in his mind. You seem to get upset when people don’t use the same syntax as you and do not clarify themselves, but you do not clearly define your words either. So what does the word “gay” mean to you? Is it attached to the inclination or the act?

Regardless, of the 9 you list, 7 are in a state of mortal sin.

Honest question here: In the “heterosexual world” chaste virgins typically do not like to be identified with or mistaken for fornicators, co-habitors, promiscuous people, perverts, prostitutes, etc. So why would a chaste person who experiences same-sex attraction want to identify him/herself we people committing sexual sins?

Finally, the reason we don’t call the rape a heterosexual problem is because so far NO ONE IN HOLLYWOOD is complaining about the massive Hebephilia or Ephebophilia issues they have. Hollywood and the political powerful don’t care about sexual sins. Anything goes to them, as long as it is consensual. A 35 year old man dating a 16 year old actress and moving in with her when he’s 37 and she’s 18… no big deal to them… Again, they don’t care about sexual sins. And they didn’t even care about rape until recently.

I don’t want just rape to end among the Catholic Clergy. I want everyone out who is not chaste. Period.

ONCE AGAIN This is a CHASITY ISSUE. It’s not an abuse issue & it’s not a clericalism issue, because if they were CHASTE IN THE FIRST PLACE, then there would be no scandal.

God bless.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
phil19034 said:
So why would a chaste person who experiences same-sex attraction want to identify him/herself we people committing sexual sins?
Click to expand...
They don’t. Identifying as “straight” has nothing to do with the frequency or context of one’s sexual relations. It just means you’re (at least predominantly) sexually attracted to people of the opposite sex.
 
Last edited:
Thorolfr said:
40.png
mrsdizzyd:
In other words, it’s not meant to be taken literally.
Click to expand...
The people who quote that statistic do mean for it to be taken literally, because they want to imply that all gay men are sex fiends who only think about sex all day long.
Click to expand...
Yes, people who quote it do. I meant the study it came from likely didn’t mean for it to be taken literally.
 
Thorolfr said:
all gay men are sex fiends who only think about sex all day long.
Click to expand...
I think you are exaggerating here.

However, if you look at the epidemiology of aids as well as v.d. and hep, you’ll see what people are trying to explain with the much higher prevalence of these diseases among homosexuals.

I remember back in the 1980’s, when aids was just becoming popular, they had experts on Oprah or whatever, telling the people that it would be widespread before you know it in the straight community, but it never really did.

Considering the facts, you can certainly see where people might come up this kind of conclusion.
 
TheAmazingGrace said:
40.png
phil19034:
So why would a chaste person who experiences same-sex attraction want to identify him/herself we people committing sexual sins?
Click to expand...
They don’t. Identifying as “straight” has nothing to do with the frequency or context of one’s heterosexual relations. It just means you’re (at least predominantly) sexually attracted to people of the opposite sex.
Click to expand...
Right… so again, it is syntax. What does the word “gay” even mean? Because truth be told, it means a whole lot of different things to different people.
 
phil19034 said:
Honest question here: In the “heterosexual world” chaste virgins typically do not like to be identified with or mistaken for fornicators, co-habitors, promiscuous people, perverts, prostitutes, etc.
Click to expand...
That’s not what identifying as “straight” means, Phil.
 
catholic1seeks said:
What do I do?
Click to expand...
I would do nothing. It’s much easier than doing something. It’s less stressful, too. Doing nothing has gotten many through many a crisis. Indeed, if one keeps doing nothing long enough, the crisis will pass as if it never happened.

I’ve found this works with troublesome documents, memos, letters and other unwanted correspondence as well. If I just stack them neatly on my desk, then wait a few months, the documents finally become irrelevant and can simply be thrown away.

I mastered this technique long ago and it has served me well. It has, to no small degree, helped me earn me many a promotion and commendation by helping me avoid troublesome work and situations.
 
Last edited:
phil19034 said:
Because truth be told, it means a whole lot of different things to different people.
Click to expand...
Not really. Most Americans understand that it refers to sexual attraction toward members of the same sex.
 
Last edited:
mrsdizzyd said:
40.png
Shakuhachi:
I know. Do we call people with addictions intrinsically disordered? I Don’t know. I haven’t looked it up. But I think we can look at both crosses in the same way.
Click to expand...
The catechism is not calling the people that. It’s the inclinations that are intrinsically disordered.
Click to expand...
I don’t think that most gay people would find this distinction to be very meaningful. Since many of them probably consider their sexual orientation to be an intrinsic or essential part of who they are, the difference between this essential part being disordered and inclining them to do evil things but not the person themselves doesn’t make much sense. It’s like saying, “You’re not disordered, but your personality, the thing that make you who you are, is disordered.”
 
TheAmazingGrace said:
40.png
phil19034:
Honest question here: In the “heterosexual world” chaste virgins typically do not like to be identified with or mistaken for fornicators, co-habitors, promiscuous people, perverts, prostitutes, etc.
Click to expand...
That’s not what identifying as “straight” means, Phil.
Click to expand...
I know that… but you are ignoring my point. For far too many people, the word “gay” means a whole lot of different things. Regardless of what someone says, there isn’t a standardize definition.

There are people who experience only same-sex attraction, who refuse to call themselves “gay” because to them, being “gay” means that you are part of the “gay lifestyle” and/or active in homosexual acts.

So again, it’s a syntax issue. Does “gay” mean “same sex attracted” or does gay mean “part of homosexual lifestyle”? Again, it differs depending on age, region, experience, etc.

God Bless
 
Last edited:
What exactly is a “gay lifestyle”? I know a LOT of gay people, and I’ve never heard a single one of them say anything about a “lifestyle”. Is there a straight lifestyle?
 
phil19034 said:
Far too many people, the word “gay” means a whole lot of different things. Regardless of what someone says, there isn’t a standardize definition.
Click to expand...
Maybe you’re from a country where the word “gay” really is that confusing, but that’s not true at all for American English.
 
Thorolfr said:
Since many of them probably consider their sexual orientation to be an intrinsic or essential part of who they are, the difference between this essential part being disordered and inclining them to do evil things but not the person themselves doesn’t make much sense.
Click to expand...
You have to consider church documents in their proper context. In Catholic theology, we are not our inclinations. This distriction is essential.

Some would argue that the strong association with SSA and personality is a result of a secular preference for defining ourselves by our inclinations. I’m not totally convinced, but that is the argument.

Having said that, I completely understand how someone might feel like the church thought they were disordered when the church declares SSA disordered.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top