Homosexuality and marriage

[aprilfloyd]

How do you classify murder?

I don’t - our legal system does.

 

[SuperLuigi]

=RevDon;10549360]Nobody wants to redefine marriage.

Then why pressure dictionaries to change the word’s meaning?

In fact, I find that conservatives don’t want to define marriage at all, except as far as it includes procreation, which is a red herring.

Procreation is a key reason the state is even involved in marriage, not directly for good feelings.

An institution with more than a 50% failure rate is hardly successful.

The divorce here is lower than that. Same-sex divorce rates are comparable to or even higher that opposite-sex marriages.

What same-sex couples want is access to the existing institution of marriage.

They do have access; they can marry someone of the opposite sex. In fact, many GLBT folks do that.

They could hardly do worse than heterosexual couples are doing in sustaining marriage.

In a lot of cases, their performance is worse.

 

[SuperLuigi]

I am mystified concerning how you think parenting by same sex parents who adopt children are keeping those children from their biological parents.
Those biological parents–willingly or regretfully–gave up those children.
How do you suggest the children be treated in those circumstances?

As close to a stable home as possible.

Mounting evidence suggests that same-sex couples, whose relationships are often more focused on selfish sexual desires and confused emotions, is not a desirable alternative.

I **believe **

That’s the problem right there. Belief is certainly not evidence, and there is plenty of evidence countering:

that the generativity of same sex couples has been demonstrated time and again. Like religious they bring forth good into the world, and it is the result of the love they share with each other.

.

I wholeheartedly agree with your statement that the state has an interest in marital and family stability.

That’s why most states do not subsidize same-sex marriages, and the ones do have done so on a premise that is not very beneficial to the state itself despite claims to the contrary that led to such changes.

 

[SonSearcher]

I hesitate to ask personal questions, but are you married?

The scapegoat served a very importand function in his culture.

Let’s get down to brass tacks. Specifically what have I stated that is not true?

Heretical seems harsh and I withdraw that portion of the statement but I have to retain a title for you as dissenter.

In your entire argument you continue to state over and over that marriage should be extended to same sex couples. But that is not the teaching of the Church. The teaching of the Church is that the marriage sacrament is between only a man and a woman.

It is very clear over and over.

In its practices and teachings it has never not taught yeah same sex stuff is okay it is allowable… At least I have not seen any proof of another different interpretation that you elude to.

A lot of times the “celibate” aspect of this argument gets over played. Like "you expect loving people to remain celibate? "

Yes I do expect people to keep it in their pants. Have self control. If I am a young man and unmarried the Church expects me to be celibate, same with a young woman.

BTW I am married… and during and right before I came back into the Church and had to abstain and live as brother and sister with my wife, because we would be committing a grave sin if we did otherwise. I did it.

I see you attempting to dissent from official Church teaching and reinterpreting scripture to fit an agenda which you continue to profess which is antithetical to what I have learned from Holy Mother Church. In that Senor is where I see pride.

 

[RevDon]

A. Well, that’s a problem. You see sin differently than me and the Church. I think the Church has been pretty clear that acting on same-sex attraction is sinful.
B. For Pete’s sake, you’re a Catholic priest (I think) – don’t you believe in the fundamental dogmatic truth that the Church cannot error in matter of faith and morals?
C. The Church is not a democracy. Church members do not go to polling booths to vote on issues like same-sex marriage and then send the results to Rome for a papal affirmation.
D. It does not matter. I know someone that struggles with lying (a lot in fact); he has a kind heart and I can see God working in him, but that does not mean that we should legalize lying.

Would you agree that Jesus was focused on sin?

The Church as been in error in the past, but it is an error of logic to speak of “the Church” as if it were a thing that exists by itself. There are leaders of the Church. There are teachers in the Church. There are women religious in the church. There are laity in the church. You seem to be willing to discount the ideas of three-quarters of those portions of the Church, and place all your trust in one quarter. You conform yourself like a sheep to someone else’s thinking, without evaluating the value of those ideas, and you call it holiness. You live in a very small and fragile world that will be shattered if you should discover that those you have trusted have made a mistake.

Use, at least, your imagination. I don’t think you could be accused of sin in doing that. Imagine people who now are outcast are brought into the family of the Church and can use their God-given gifts for the benefit of the Church. Just for a moment imagine (since you don’t know any) good people of the same sex working as couples to build up the Church and each other, calling each other to thoughtfulness, generosity, self-giving, self-examination. Picture them praying together over a meal, attending church together, taking on a ministry together. If you can imagine that, tell me if that is not a picture of people building up the Kingdom of God.

 

[buffalo]

I said nothing about “should.” I merely described what happens.

So, are you making a personal allegation that I am not a true priest? Is this personal?

And you think that people outside the church would believe that the Church is corrupt because people of the same sex are given the opportunity to have their relationship blessed by the Church and therefore live in a relationship that the Church defines as chaste rather than fornication?
That’s corrupt?

Let’s talk about priests -and for that matter, lay persons- whose primary message is one of judgment and condemnation. Is not the task of the Church to witness to Christ and to perpetuate his ministry? Did he not proclaim that his burden was light?

Look, I can appreciate where you are coming from.
I went to parochial school and I was raised with the belief that nothing was as important as keeping a good relationship with the Church. I believed that if I kept my coloring inside the lines I would go to heaven.
As I matured, I realized that a lot of my energy eas going into seeing just how far I could go toward the lines and not find myself over.
Here’s an example:
Church says Sunday attendance is mandatory.
Not to attend is mortal sin-- going to hell.
How late may I arrive and how early may I leave and still be considered to have attended?
It was stuff like this that drove me nuts! Where was the teaching on the value of my attendance? Nowhere! It was all threat. Luckily in later life through graduate study I learned enough about Mass to come to understand and love it. I don’t want to miss.
The Church is putting all the energy into drawing and protecting the lines instead of calling people to holiness. (Don’t tell me that the lines create holiness; they create fear and anxiety–just look at all the posts on this web site that describe people struggling with scrupulosity.)
What would the Church look like if we used the great command as our starting place rather than the pharisaical practice of hedging around the commandments?

Are you really serving God by denying people the practice of sacramental love? Does God come out any better if the picture that the Church portrays is a big NO!? Isn’t that a false image of God? Isn’t that scandalous to the world?

The Pharisees had a lot invested in trying to make themselves and their nation holy. They believed that when the balance of Israel had tipped in favor of holiness, then God would send a Messiah and deliver them from oppression. So they expanded the application of laws of holiness. What the law said was required of priests making the sacrifice, they extended to all Jews, and then cast out those who wouldn’t or couldn’t live up to that expectation. Jesus went around picking up the broken pieces of people and telling them that God loved them. He ate with tax collectors, considered horrible unclean sinners, and he didn’t tell them that they had to abandon their profession. He asked people to live humbly and lovingly within the circumstances of their lives with the knowledge that God loves them.

I apologize for the true priest comment. I was uncharitable.

 

[RevDon]

As close to a stable home as possible.

Mounting evidence suggests that same-sex couples, whose relationships are often more focused on selfish sexual desires and confused emotions, is not a desirable alternative.

That’s the problem right there. Belief is certainly not evidence, and there is plenty of evidence countering:

.
That’s why most states do not subsidize same-sex marriages, and the ones do have done so on a premise that is not very beneficial to the state itself despite claims to the contrary that led to such changes.

I have seen a study that attests to the fact you aver in the colored section above. I have also read a number of critiques that state the study was not only flawed in its techniques but that the conclusions are grossly overstated, even erroneous. Perhaps you, who demand something more than “I believe” can provide incontrovertible proof that same-sex led homes are not stable environments for kids. That seems what you are claiming. If the evidence is mounting, then you should have no difficulty in providing it.

 

[SonSearcher]

The Church as been in error in the past, but it is an error of logic to speak of “the Church” as if it were a thing that exists by itself. There are leaders of the Church. There are teachers in the Church. There are women religious in the church. There are laity in the church. You seem to be willing to discount the ideas of three-quarters of those portions of the Church, and place all your trust in one quarter. You conform yourself like a sheep to someone else’s thinking, without evaluating the value of those ideas, and you call it holiness. You live in a very small and fragile world that will be shattered if you should discover that those you have trusted have made a mistake.

Use, at least, your imagination. I don’t think you could be accused of sin in doing that. Imagine people who now are outcast are brought into the family of the Church and can use their God-given gifts for the benefit of the Church. Just for a moment imagine (since you don’t know any) good people of the same sex working as couples to build up the Church and each other, calling each other to thoughtfulness, generosity, self-giving, self-examination. Picture them praying together over a meal, attending church together, taking on a ministry together. If you can imagine that, tell me if that is not a picture of people building up the Kingdom of God.

“The most evident mark of God’s anger, and the most terrible castigation He can inflict upon the world, is manifest when He permits His people to fall into the hands of a clergy who are more in name than in deed, priests who practice the cruelty of ravening wolves rather than the charity and affection of devoted shepherds. They abandon the things of God to devote themselves to the things of the world and, in their saintly calling of holiness, they spend their time in profane and worldly pursuits. When God permits such things, it is a very positive proof that He is thoroughly angry with His people and is visiting His most dreadful wrath upon them.”
Saint John Eudes

Rev -
You disguise yourself in a worldy compassion. An empathetic approach. A humanistic world view that flies in the face of the work Jesus did on the cross. You must be careful to scandalize us as you are contributing to the evil ones work of constantly numbing our sense of sin.

BTW… What is your opinion on abortion?

 

[buffalo]

I said nothing about “should.” I merely described what happens.

So, are you making a personal allegation that I am not a true priest? Is this personal?

And you think that people outside the church would believe that the Church is corrupt because people of the same sex are given the opportunity to have their relationship blessed by the Church and therefore live in a relationship that the Church defines as chaste rather than fornication?
That’s corrupt?

Let’s talk about priests -and for that matter, lay persons- whose primary message is one of judgment and condemnation. Is not the task of the Church to witness to Christ and to perpetuate his ministry? Did he not proclaim that his burden was light?

Look, I can appreciate where you are coming from.
I went to parochial school and I was raised with the belief that nothing was as important as keeping a good relationship with the Church. I believed that if I kept my coloring inside the lines I would go to heaven.
As I matured, I realized that a lot of my energy eas going into seeing just how far I could go toward the lines and not find myself over.
Here’s an example:
Church says Sunday attendance is mandatory.
Not to attend is mortal sin-- going to hell.
How late may I arrive and how early may I leave and still be considered to have attended?
It was stuff like this that drove me nuts! Where was the teaching on the value of my attendance? Nowhere! It was all threat. Luckily in later life through graduate study I learned enough about Mass to come to understand and love it. I don’t want to miss.
The Church is putting all the energy into drawing and protecting the lines instead of calling people to holiness. (Don’t tell me that the lines create holiness; they create fear and anxiety–just look at all the posts on this web site that describe people struggling with scrupulosity.)
What would the Church look like if we used the great command as our starting place rather than the pharisaical practice of hedging around the commandments?

Are you really serving God by denying people the practice of sacramental love? Does God come out any better if the picture that the Church portrays is a big NO!? Isn’t that a false image of God? Isn’t that scandalous to the world?

The Pharisees had a lot invested in trying to make themselves and their nation holy. They believed that when the balance of Israel had tipped in favor of holiness, then God would send a Messiah and deliver them from oppression. So they expanded the application of laws of holiness. What the law said was required of priests making the sacrifice, they extended to all Jews, and then cast out those who wouldn’t or couldn’t live up to that expectation. Jesus went around picking up the broken pieces of people and telling them that God loved them. He ate with tax collectors, considered horrible unclean sinners, and he didn’t tell them that they had to abandon their profession. He asked people to live humbly and lovingly within the circumstances of their lives with the knowledge that God loves them.

Lines need to be drawn. When teaching a baby lines are drawn because we love them and look out for them. They fear the punishment of getting their hand slapped when they try to put their hand in the fire. We cannot yet reason. As time goes on they begin to respect that we are looking out for them and appreciate that teaching. They love us back rationally.

We are all on the journey and yes sometimes we need to fear the consequence of our actions. Presumably as we mature we love God and do good to please Him instead of fear. But all fear is not bad. I have a fear of deep water and that means I am very careful and respectful in deep water. I have no problem with this fear. I know I can drown.

No human can judge anyone’s salvation. Only God can. However, we can judge actions. And if we love our brother true Christian charity demands fraternal correction, with love. I really hate this “Don’t judge me” attitude. If you steal, you are a thief. I have no way of knowing how God will judge that. But I certainly can warn a person the consequences.

Yes, Jesus did all those things. Being Divine and we being human as soon as He was born He was dealing with sinners. That is why He came. You know all this.

You know as well as I do the Church needed to make some Mass attendance rules as people always take things to the extreme. If I show up late and miss everything except Holy Communion I have attended Mass? People’s behavior force rules, always.

 

[buffalo]

Hi Buffalo,

Is it all sodomy you have an issue with or just anal sex between men?

I follow the teachings of the Church. You well know what the Church teaches.

 

[RevDon]

Jesus was chaste and celibate.

The Church has the authority of Jesus. She preserves the Deposit of Faith.**
If I didn’t believe this I would have left long ago. The Church also has the obligation to use the God-story in such a way that all people will be drawn to the Father. It’s not a club; it is a shepherd’s crook to draw in those who are far away. God doesn’t need to be defended, and when God is presented as the lover of souls, people will be drawn in. But the out door of the church is a revolving door that is spinning continually. The image of God portrayed as a result of the action of the Church is hateful.**

You do understand the difference between procreative sex and going in the out door? You are not making the claim they are the same? C’mon now…

Of course there is a difference. Can you guarantee that married couples, for whom the exercise of a sexual relationship is not only not considered to be sinful, but is considered a holy duty do not do nthis?

 

[buffalo]

I don’t - our legal system does.

Please clarify.

 

[buffalo]

The Church as been in error in the past, but it is an error of logic to speak of “the Church” as if it were a thing that exists by itself. There are leaders of the Church. There are teachers in the Church. There are women religious in the church. There are laity in the church. You seem to be willing to discount the ideas of three-quarters of those portions of the Church, and place all your trust in one quarter. You conform yourself like a sheep to someone else’s thinking, without evaluating the value of those ideas, and you call it holiness. You live in a very small and fragile world that will be shattered if you should discover that those you have trusted have made a mistake.

Use, at least, your imagination. I don’t think you could be accused of sin in doing that. Imagine people who now are outcast are brought into the family of the Church and can use their God-given gifts for the benefit of the Church. Just for a moment imagine (since you don’t know any) good people of the same sex working as couples to build up the Church and each other, calling each other to thoughtfulness, generosity, self-giving, self-examination. Picture them praying together over a meal, attending church together, taking on a ministry together. If you can imagine that, tell me if that is not a picture of people building up the Kingdom of God.

There are other ecclesiastic communities that people can interpret teachings to their liking.

If they desire to be part of the Catholic Church they need to humble themselves and assent to its teachings.

A chaste homosexual need not even declare his condition.

The issue comes down again to - “I want what I want and I want you the Church to embrace it” I cannot imagine to many people confronting Jesus Himself this way.

But it does bring to mind this:

“There are only two kinds of people in the end: those who say to God, “Thy will be done,” and those to whom God says, in the end, “Thy will be done.” C.S. Lewis

 

[buffalo]

Of course there is a difference. Can you guarantee that married couples, for whom the exercise of a sexual relationship is not only not considered to be sinful, but is considered a holy duty do not do nthis?

There is no guarantee and since it is private they have to deal with this with their confessor and God.

Now as a priest how would you counsel them? Say one came into the confessional, read scripture and asked you this - “I just found out sodomy is wrong.” Would you affirm them and counsel them to continue in good conscience? Or would you try to get them on the right road?

 

[RevDon]

There are other ecclesiastic communities that people can interpret teachings to their liking.

If they desire to be part of the Catholic Church they need to humble themselves and assent to its teachings.

A chaste homosexual need not even declare his condition.

The issue comes down again to - “I want what I want and I want you the Church to embrace it” I cannot imagine to many people confronting Jesus Himself this way.

But it does bring to mind this:

“There are only two kinds of people in the end: those who say to God, “Thy will be done,” and those to whom God says, in the end, “Thy will be done.” C.S. Lewis

The only chaste homosexual is a married homosexual. All others are either celibate or promiscuous.
I can’t imagine Jesus treating people this way.

 

[buffalo]

3 Things People Don’t Know About Same Sex Marriage

1. Countless Americans have switched sides due to peer pressure, bullying, and a fear of being seen as “mean”.

2. Those pushing for gay “marriage” have failed to define “marriage”.

3. Those who decry the slippery slope argument often confirm the slippery slope.

 

[buffalo]

The only chaste homosexual is a married homosexual. All others are either celibate or promiscuous.
I can’t imagine Jesus treating people this way.

There is no such thing as a married homosexual, by definition.

Indeed, chastity is what God calls the SSA to.

Jesus gave us examples - “go and sin no more”.

Jesus overturned the tables in the temple.

He did admonish sinners. It is also the third spiritual work of mercy.

“My brothers, if anyone among you should stray from the truth and someone bring him back, he should know that whoever brings back a sinner from the error of his way will save his soul from death and will cover a multitude of sins.” James 5:19-20

 

[aprilfloyd]

I follow the teachings of the Church. You well know what the Church teaches.

I am trying to establish, if it is anal sex between two consenting men that is the issue.

 

[buffalo]

I am trying to establish, if it is anal sex between two consenting men that is the issue.

It is a contributing factor.

 

[RevDon]

There is no guarantee and since it is private they have to deal with this with their confessor and God.

Now as a priest how would you counsel them? Say one came into the confessional, read scripture and asked you this - “I just found out sodomy is wrong.” Would you affirm them and counsel them to continue in good conscience? Or would you try to get them on the right road?

The issue is based on how it affects the relationship. If one partner objects, then it is a sin against that person.

I can’t find the word sodomy in the bible.
A conference at Liberty University this past week has decided that “gay” is too happy, too political and illusory. “‘Gay’ is a left-wing socio-political construct designed to create grounds for fundamental rights [based on] whimsical capricious desires,” said Ryan Sorba, chairman of the Young Conservatives of California. “Gay identity does not exist.”

Consequently, Sorba and others have urged conservatives to stop using the G-word, and revert to older, hoarier notions like “sodomy.” The irony here is that “sodomy” in the Bible has nothing to do with homosexuality. It wasn’t until the medieval period that the word was even invented – as a legal classification for sins of Catholic priests – and in the Bible itself, the sin of Sodom has to do with inhospitality and greed, not sex.