How Sentimentality Leads Young Catholics Astray About Homosexuality by Daniel Mattson

[fin]

ncregister.com/blog/mattson/how-sentimentality-leads-young-catholics-astray-about-homosexuality

Many of these children are otherwise strong in core issues of the faith. Parents and teachers at these events often seem mystified why a young person would be willing to save sex for marriage, avoid pornography and decry the evil of abortion, yet at the same time support same-sex “marriage” and homosexual relationships. For many, this seems an odd juxtaposition.

I see this on some articles and blogs by young Catholics. Don’t undergo an abortion, wait until you’re married before you have sex, but being gay is okay, as long as you’re not acting on those desires. There is a dissonance.

 

[ToeInTheWater]

ncregister.com/blog/mattson/how-sentimentality-leads-young-catholics-astray-about-homosexuality

I see this on some articles and blogs by young Catholics. Don’t undergo an abortion, wait until you’re married before you have sex, but being gay is okay, as long as you’re not acting on those desires. There is a dissonance.

Actually there is no dissonance in stating that being gay in terms of having same sex attraction is NOT a sin as long as the desires are not acted on. Much as two straight single people being attracted to each other is not sinful as long as they do not have sex. (I am not referring to lust here, but sexual attraction, that is NOT equated with lust per Catholic thought - though many non-Catholic Christians would find no distinction.)

I can think of at least 3 CAF posters who do identify as gay but do NOT find it okay to actually have gay sex. Now if you think even having same sex attraction is a sin then you are the one who is dissenting from Catholic teaching. If you are simply stating that you believe homosexuality is “disordered” as in, not ordered to the proper ends of sexuality, that is one issue. Yet AFAIK there is no Catholic teaching that “it is a sin to even identify as gay”.

That is a completely different issue from young people actually approving of gay marriage, gay sex, or gay adoption, and that is what is discussed in the NCR article.

 

[MaryT777]

Actually there is no dissonance in stating that being gay in terms of having same sex attraction is NOT a sin as long as the desires are not acted on. Much as two straight single people being attracted to each other is not sinful as long as they do not have sex. (I am not referring to lust here, but sexual attraction, that is NOT equated with lust per Catholic thought - though many non-Catholic Christians would find no distinction.)

I can think of at least 3 CAF posters who do identify as gay but do NOT find it okay to actually have gay sex. Now if you think even having same sex attraction is a sin then you are the one who is dissenting from Catholic teaching. If you are simply stating that you believe homosexuality is “disordered” as in, not ordered to the proper ends of sexuality, that is one issue. Yet AFAIK there is no Catholic teaching that “it is a sin to even identify as gay”.

That is a completely different issue from young people actually approving of gay marriage, gay sex, or gay adoption, and that is what is discussed in the NCR article.

That was my understanding as well. Well said.

 

[TK421]

I see this on some articles and blogs by young Catholics. Don’t undergo an abortion, wait until you’re married before you have sex, but being gay is okay, as long as you’re not acting on those desires. There is a dissonance.

This is the teaching of the United Conference of Catholic Bishops, in the United States and elsewhere, and the positions of the Popes. Technically it would be true at any given time since the Church has always distinguished between sins and temptations. This would be entirely different from seeking marriage with a member of the same sex, which is sacramentally impossible.

It’s accepted in the scientific & psychological community that attraction is (for the most part) not something a person has conscious control over. Although this isn’t 100% true. For example, it’s not uncommon for a straight man who consumes a lot of porn to eventually start watching gay porn, merely because his consumption of the material has eventually lead him from one fetish to another. Known in drugs as “chasing the dragon”. You can also start off straight and eventually - through time and lots of sexual acts - develop some level of bisexuality.

But, a certain percentage of the population is sexually attracted to the same sex.

 

[CrystalMayner66]

ncregister.com/blog/mattson/how-sentimentality-leads-young-catholics-astray-about-homosexuality

I see this on some articles and blogs by young Catholics. Don’t undergo an abortion, wait until you’re married before you have sex, but being gay is okay, as long as you’re not acting on those desires. There is a dissonance.

There is nothing confusing about this at all. Of course young adults see dismembering a baby is evil. Of course they can understand the emotional and medical benefits of saving sex for marriage. Of course they think committed, sacrificial love and family life is a good thing. Of course they see the dignity and talents of their gay friends.

Abortion and using people sexually or having sex before you are ready are wrong for obvious reasons, reasons an atheist can understand. The idea gay marriage is wrong is not obvious. Most people only reach this conclusion after their religion tells them so–I have met only one atheist who opposed gay marriage.

And I completely disagree with the author of the article that homosexuality and dismembering babies are related. Hooray for PLAGAL! plagal.org/

 

[at9009]

ncregister.com/blog/mattson/how-sentimentality-leads-young-catholics-astray-about-homosexuality

I see this on some articles and blogs by young Catholics. Don’t undergo an abortion, wait until you’re married before you have sex, but being gay is okay, as long as you’re not acting on those desires. There is a dissonance.

There no dissonance whatsoever and one can use the term gay and still be in complete fidelity with the church. Mr. Mattsons views and approach to this issue are not the only perspectives, look at a person like Ron Belgau or Wesley Hill. Both also adhere to a traditional sexual ethic but unlike Mattson using the term gay isn’t a end of the world kinda thing. Most gay people in fact use it to simply view an attraction to others of the same sex thus it is essentially an equal to saying ssa.

But regardless, the article isn’t even about thst but rather it’s about gay marriage and acting on inappropriate desires so I don’t even understand why you brought thst point up since the author didn’t bring it up in the article.

 

[at9009]

Actually there is no dissonance in stating that being gay in terms of having same sex attraction is NOT a sin as long as the desires are not acted on. Much as two straight single people being attracted to each other is not sinful as long as they do not have sex. (I am not referring to lust here, but sexual attraction, that is NOT equated with lust per Catholic thought - though many non-Catholic Christians would find no distinction.)

I can think of at least 3 CAF posters who do identify as gay but do NOT find it okay to actually have gay sex. Now if you think even having same sex attraction is a sin then you are the one who is dissenting from Catholic teaching. If you are simply stating that you believe homosexuality is “disordered” as in, not ordered to the proper ends of sexuality, that is one issue. Yet AFAIK there is no Catholic teaching that “it is a sin to even identify as gay”.

That is a completely different issue from young people actually approving of gay marriage, gay sex, or gay adoption, and that is what is discussed in the NCR article.

Thanks for the good post

 

[Peter_J]

I’ve encountered some who are okay with premarital sex but not homosexual sex; and I’ve also encountered some who beleive that sex must wait until marriage but don’t have a problem with it being a same-sex-marriage. So we clearly have our work cut out for us.

As for what you mentioned seeing,

I see this on some articles and blogs by young Catholics. Don’t undergo an abortion, wait until you’re married before you have sex, but being gay is okay, as long as you’re not acting on those desires. There is a dissonance.

that’s what all Catholics ought to believe. I guess I should add traditionalist Catholics to my “we have our work cut out for us” statement.

 

[ToeInTheWater]

I’ve encountered some who are okay with premarital sex but not homosexual sex; and I’ve also encountered some who beleive that sex must wait until marriage but don’t have a problem with it being a same-sex-marriage. So we clearly have our work cut out for us.

I think one of the problem is that the issue has really become polarized. Conservative depictions of all “gays” as promiscuous heathens who love marching naked in gay pride parades, and the backlash among many who are otherwise in agreement with traditional Christian mores on sex, reminds me of the backlash against the “Reefer madness” type demonization of marijuana.

I don’t want to get sidetracked into the MJ discussion but I do think to many who find nothing wrong with smoking an occasional blunt on a weekend, the idea that “marijuana will rot your brain and definitely lead you on the path to hard drugs” is obviously preposterous, and so they wind up denying there is any harm at all in consuming the substance, and chalking up any opposition to narrow mindedness and hypocrisy “because alcohol and tobacco are worse and yet legal”, or even a conspiracy involving Big Pharma, etc.

In the same way, people who see that gay people are NOT all promiscuous AIDS-ridden heathens who are marching around naked and having sex in public, and don’t buy into the “gay people are the enemy in the Culture War who deserve no quarter” narrative, wind up accepting the “all gay people want to do is love each other and raise families in committed marriages just like straight people” narrative, as they see no other alternative.

 

[at9009]

I think one of the problem is that the issue has really become polarized. Conservative depictions of all “gays” as promiscuous heathens who love marching naked in gay pride parades, and the backlash among many who are otherwise in agreement with traditional Christian mores on sex, reminds me of the backlash against the “Reefer madness” type demonization of marijuana.

I don’t want to get sidetracked into the MJ discussion but I do think to many who find nothing wrong with smoking an occasional blunt on a weekend, the idea that “marijuana will rot your brain and definitely lead you on the path to hard drugs” is obviously preposterous, and so they wind up denying there is any harm at all in consuming the substance, and chalking up any opposition to narrow mindedness and hypocrisy “because alcohol and tobacco are worse and yet legal”, or even a conspiracy involving Big Pharma, etc.

In the same way, people who see that gay people are NOT all promiscuous AIDS-ridden heathens who are marching around naked and having sex in public, and don’t buy into the “gay people are the enemy in the Culture War who deserve no quarter” narrative, wind up accepting the “all gay people want to do is love each other and raise families in committed marriages just like straight people” narrative, as they see no other alternative.

There is more to it too. I think our culture by and large had adopted this idolatry of marriage and romantic partner as essential for a fullfillling and affirming life. This was especially encouraged by many Christians during the purity culture where many of these kids grew up. The message was always remain pure now so that you can be perfect with your future spouse and live happily ever after. It was white knuckle now so that it can be better later. There never was a discussion of actually discerning the vocation of marriage and talking about the possible celibate vocation. It was treated as if marriage was a check box in life.

Thus we created this narrative that if one does not marry, they must be immature, selfish, etc. They will also be alone and without love (because rarely do people actually care for developed deep and committted friendships). With all of this, it can make encouraging someone to live a celibate life seem unfairly cruel. But, it is a false narrative that many have bought into, particular conservative Christian culture which has an almost idolatry of the nuclear family above all else.

Add on to a lot of poor theology, mixed in with some gospel of prosperity heresay and you get gay people choose to be gay (often meaning the attractions in their minds) because ‘good Christians’ don’t have that problem and if ‘they had true faith’ they would be ‘fixed.’ We kinda have allowed heterosexuality to be treated as holy which is not true. Heterosexuality has just as many temptations to sin as a person who is same sex attracted. The only difference is there is one situation where the outlet (within a marriage between two people that is open to life) that is morally acceptable. But when our culture basically views divorce and remarraige as a whatever moment, it does seem unfairly harsh on gay people when we are often seemingly so lax on sexual sin from straight people. But this is just my minor rambling thoughts.