How To Defend the Church's view on homosexuality

[Weareyoung]

It seems like more and more Christians today (and even some Catholics) feel like there’s nothing wrong with same-sex “marriage” or homosexual actions. I am posting this in “non-Catholic religions” because this view seems to be growing among protestants and I have many protestant friends.

Some “Christians” will even go as far as to say that Jesus would endorse homosexuality. When I bring up New Testament bible verses like 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 they usually say something like: “What trash! Jesus would never say that!”

Their arguments are usually “God is love and wants us to love each other so we should let everyone love everyone equally.” Either they say this or say that Jesus’ death was enough to save you even when you have no intention of turning away from sexual sins.

How can I convince people that Jesus would regard homosexual actions as sins?

How can I defend the Church’s views on marriage and homosexuality if I get in a position where I feel I have to defend it against someone I know while still being loving to them? I need a persuasive reason why homosexuality and Christianity are not compatible.

I believe it is important to gently lead others away from sin and I believe it is a grievous action when people who should know better like “Christians” intentionally lead others into sin, especially when they are sexual sins. Some “Christians” will say that “telling people what is and what is not a sin is judging.”

Also if anyone has a non-religious argument to why marriage is between a man and a woman this would be helpful. And I think it is very important to still be loving when discussing matters like this with people who do not agree.

 

[Calgar]

I’ve argued against this mentality quite a few times and it ends one of two ways. They will eventually accept that they were incorrect and change, or they will harden their hearts and refuse to speak with you (some go so far as to stick their finger in their ears! ).

Start with the Bible. Show them the old testement verses on homosexuality. They will immediately point out that it’s the old testement and doesn’t count. Then suprise them by showing them the new testement verses on homosexuality (google will give you the list of verses to read yourself).

Now you’ve reached the crossroads. They will either take what you’ve shown them and do some deep thinking on their beliefs, OR they will then tell you that the Bible is in error.

And that leads to a whole different line of argument.

Hope this helps you.

 

[michael64]

Here are some views that are helpful:
“The human person, made in the image and likeness of God, can hardly be adequately described by a reductionist reference to his or her sexual orientation. Every one living on the face of the earth has personal problems and difficulties – but challenges to growth, strengths, talents and gifts as well. Today, the Church provided a badly needed context for the care of the human person when she refuses to consider the person a “heterosexual” or a “homosexual” and insists that every person has a fundamental identity: a creature of God, and by grace, his child and heir to eternal life.” (Letter from the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, Oct,1986)

Some persons find themselves through no fault of their own to have a homosexual orientation. Homosexuals, like everyone else, should not suffer from prejudice against basic human rights. They have a right to respect, friendship, and justice. They should have an active role in the Christian community. Homosexual activity, however, as distinguished from homosexual orientation, is morally wrong. Like heterosexual persons, homosexuals are called to give witness to chastity, avoiding, with God’s grace, behavior which is wrong for them as non-marital sexual relations are wrong for heterosexuals. Nonetheless, because heterosexuals can usually look forward to marriage, and homosexuals, while their orientation continues, might not, the Christian community should provide them a special degree of pastoral understanding and care. (Excerpt from: To Live In Christ Jesus – National Conference of Catholic Bishops, 1976)

 

[geoformeo]

I posted this on another thread dealing with contraception and gay “marriage” in the Apologetics subforum (and don’t know how to link it), but it may help here:

When dealing with atheists or agnostics, you have to meet them where they are: you need to start on common ground. In this regard, since they have no belief in God or the Bible, you can’t start with religious arguments. You have to start with discussing these topics from a naturalistic perspective. Which, of course, we religious folks (especially Catholics) have no trouble doing, because God is Truth, no matter if that truth is scientific or religious.

To the topics at hand. Both are quite easy to refute naturalistically, and stem from the same basic biological principle, briefly discussed below.

The reason sexual reproduction exists/evolved is for the procreation of life to ensure the survival of species through increased genetic diversity. Period. Any natural or artificial thwarting of or unintended use of any other natural biologic process (respiration, digestion, excretion, etc.) is harmful to the body, and is considered a disorder (would we not find it disturbing if someone intentionally inhibited their excretory functions?).

Homosexual and contraceptive acts are intrinsically disordered because they a) can never produce or intentionally prohibit the product (the conception of a life) that is very reason the natural process of sexual reproduction exists; b) use the sexual act solely for pleasure; pleasure is a fortunate by-product of sex, not the reason for sex (we would consider it a serious disorder if someone used food only for the pleasure of taste, chewing it up and spitting out everything, but never consuming anything (analogous to contraception); or if someone found pleasure by eating something that was indigestible (plastic, glass); analogous to homosexual acts); and c) are naturally improper uses of human physiology (it doesn’t take an anatomist to know the penis belongs in the vagina, not the anus); and barriers to the natural end of any naturalistic biological process always result in harm to the individual with the barrier.

As for the Church “getting with the times”, the Church has held firm to these teachings for 2000 years, and has seen many empires, kingdoms, political states, and governments come and go–many of which were crying for the Church to “get with the times.” This culture, too, will pass, but the Church that Christ built will never go away.

Last point, with regard to gay “marriage”. Marriage is an institution that transcends culture and time, and has always, in every culture, in every era of human history, on every continent, been defined as the committed union of a man and a woman. No government has the authority to change its definition, just as no one has the right to start calling pigs cows or apples oranges, or changing the definition of a square to include shapes that have rounded edges.

 

[rhiannonh]

As you are Catholic and you have posted this in a non catholic area. Might I point out to you that some people wont have to defend the church view on homosexuality as some churches may well be okay with homosexuality and therefore nothing to defend. May I suggest this whole thread be moved elsewhere so people don’t make the mistake of joining in an discussion to defend the church when the church might be fine with it. Bearing in mind this is a non catholic discussion area.

 

[JonNC]

It seems like more and more Christians today (and even some Catholics) feel like there’s nothing wrong with same-sex “marriage” or homosexual actions. I am posting this in “non-Catholic religions” because this view seems to be growing among protestants and I have many protestant friends.

Some “Christians” will even go as far as to say that Jesus would endorse homosexuality. When I bring up New Testament bible verses like 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 they usually say something like: “What trash! Jesus would never say that!”

Their arguments are usually “God is love and wants us to love each other so we should let everyone love everyone equally.” Either they say this or say that Jesus’ death was enough to save you even when you have no intention of turning away from sexual sins.

How can I convince people that Jesus would regard homosexual actions as sins?

How can I defend the Church’s views on marriage and homosexuality if I get in a position where I feel I have to defend it against someone I know while still being loving to them? I need a persuasive reason why homosexuality and Christianity are not compatible.

I believe it is important to gently lead others away from sin and I believe it is a grievous action when people who should know better like “Christians” intentionally lead others into sin, especially when they are sexual sins. Some “Christians” will say that "telling people what is and what is not a sin is judging."
Also if anyone has a non-religious argument to why marriage is between a man and a woman this would be helpful. And I think it is very important to still be loving when discussing matters like this with people who do not agree.

As a Missouri Synod Lutheran, we share a similar view to the Catholic Church on the issue. The part I bolded is well said - I like your emphasis on “gently”.

Jon

 

[Weareyoung]

As you are Catholic and you have posted this in a non catholic area. Might I point out to you that some people wont have to defend the church view on homosexuality as some churches may well be okay with homosexuality and therefore nothing to defend. May I suggest this whole thread be moved elsewhere so people don’t make the mistake of joining in an discussion to defend the church when the church might be fine with it. Bearing in mind this is a non catholic discussion area.

This is my opinion. I believe that believing homosexual actions and Christianity are compatible is a perversion. This is true if you actually follow the words of Christ and “take up your cross and follow Me.” This means that nothing in your life should be more important than God. I know there are Christians who are not Catholic who believe that marriage and sex should be between one man and one woman. I am of the opinion that sex and marriage do have meaning. When you take away the value of sex and marriage, you take away the value of life.

So, rhiannonh, I am posting this in “Non-Catholic Religions” because I am looking for help from non-Catholics to help defend why I believe marriage is between one man and one woman to my Protestant friends because if I gave them my Catholic views they wouldn’t listen. If I moved this thread to a Catholic area I would get nothing but Catholic advice and that would not help me. Also I would like if you could let me know what denominations you think accept homosexual actions as not sinful (besides the Anglican Church) and tell me what their views on other consensual sexual sins are. Artificial insemination? Pornography? Prostitution? Promiscuity? Infidelity? Morning after pill? etc.

Healing begins with recognizing the horror of sin. Christ’s death should not be encouraging you to sin. If you even attempted to understand the concept of God becoming man to die for YOU, you wouldn’t be so quick to encourage others to sin. Some think there’s nothing wrong to drive nails into the hands of Christ but there’s everything wrong when it’s their own hands… Sex is a gift from God. To take His gift and make it into something He never intended it to be is wrong if you subscribe to the Catholic (or actually any Christian) faith. If consensual homosexual actions are not sins then no consensual sexual actions can ever be sins.

If you do not believe that sex and marriage were meant to be between one man and one woman please do not post here. You do not have to be Catholic to believe this. I am asking for advice from people who share my view.