I am Gay and Engaged, I would return to the Church if Francis would acquiesce

[MamaJewel]

Here’s how I see it: If the Church will now take divorcees on a case by case basis, why not homosexuals in cohabiting relationships? It’s all the same in the eyes of the Church anyway, neither of the two groups are in a legitimate relationship.

As a pagan convert to Catholicism, I could never understand how the Catholic church in America accepts the wide spread use of contraceptives among its parishioners who chose to block pregnancy because they are “done having children”.

That said, I am curious why you link the Church accepting remarriage without an annulment to homosexual relationships. In my catechism class, I learned that God forbids homosexual relations because they have no procreative ability and thus “mock” heterosexual relations, which only rightfully take place between two people who are married to one another. (the man and woman issue wasn’t even being addressed back when I converted and couples were assumed to be a man and woman.)

I would think that gay couples would have had an issue with the church’s welcoming of contracepting couples for a long time now. Personally, I don’t really see any difference between contraceptive heterosexual relations and homosexual relations, except that those in the heterosexual group choose not to have reproductive ability while those in the homosexual group are naturally impeded due to anatomical/physiological reasons.Just sayin…

However, my crew of teenage and young adult children share your perspective. They can’t understand why, if the church believes marriage is truly a sacrament, it will allow divorced-remarried (sans annulment) to receive Eucaharist. Honestly, the remarriage/gay marriage has caused a crisis of faith amongst many young people who feel that the church is just out to discriminate against certain dermographics by picking and choosing which groups to apply the rules to. Their perspective is if it’s the truth, it should applied evenly to all humans, without excluding others.

 

[GEddie]

The Catholic Church accepts everybody who does not flaunt their sins. Contraception is a private matter, and most who use it do not choose to make it a public stink.

If a couple came up for Communion in Tshirts that read “hooray for contraception,” then it would be an issue.

We are all sinners.

Methinks the real problem is those of us who maintain objectively grave unrepented sins, yet pretend nothing is wrong. Methinks we all need to take our LORD’s teaching about Hell more seriously.

ICXC NIKA

 

[Stylteralmaldo]

Well, she was raised Orthodox, and she’s posting advice on a Catholic site.
It just puzzles me as to why.

I know plenty of people raised in a Christian home that have no clue what Christianity is all about. Not saying DaddyGirl fits that description.

 

[KEP1983]

I know plenty of people raised in a Christian home that have no clue what Christianity is all about. Not saying DaddyGirl fits that description.

She’s just trying to ruffle feathers. She appears to have no interest in truth, but rather interested in trying to make the Church accept her own view of truth. 100 years from now her “truth” will cease to exist, and the church will still be standing.

 

[edwest2]

The Catholic Church accepts everybody who does not flaunt their sins. Contraception is a private matter, and most who use it do not choose to make it a public stink.

If a couple came up for Communion in Tshirts that read “hooray for contraception,” then it would be an issue.

We are all sinners.

Methinks the real problem is those of us who maintain objectively grave unrepented sins, yet pretend nothing is wrong. Methinks we all need to take our LORD’s teaching about Hell more seriously.

ICXC NIKA

Over the years, I watched the media as increasingly promoting immorality by depicting immoral behavior as OK. By knowing and unknowing preachers of falsehoods and people who rationalize what they do by watching what others do. The Church has a way for a man or a woman who went through a divorce to get an annulment. It is impossible for two people of the same sex to be married.

And those who like to get us to live like them portray characters who cohabitate like it’s no big deal. Gradually, we replace constant Church teaching against cohabitation with a neutral, “What can you do?” kind of thinking. Or, “My buddy’s doing it, so why not?”

We must recognize sin when we see it and reject it. My solution is not watching TV and movies where bad behaviors are not portrayed as bad. If we become insensitive and indifferent, we risk gradually believing what others show us and forget the Church.

Ed

 

[BrunoMaria]

“I would return to the Church if Francis would acquiesce”
sounds as if the Church could be luckey to have this member.
Vice versa is true; - any member of the Church is very lucky to be allowed a member of the Church Jesus Christ founded

 

[Stylteralmaldo]

She’s just trying to ruffle feathers. She appears to have no interest in truth, but rather interested in trying to make the Church accept her own view of truth. 100 years from now her “truth” will cease to exist, and the church will still be standing.

“What is truth?” ~ Pontius Pilate (John 18:38)

 

[BrunoMaria]

“What is truth?” ~ Pontius Pilate (John 18:38)

Let’s mind that a pagan asked this. Same as today pagans, doubters and disbelievers ask same question all their life, because they don’t know the truth the Gospel tells.

 

[curlycool89]

This probably condemns me in the eyes of many in this forum, but I don’t care…

I am Gay, and I am engaged to the most loving man on the planet; though there might not be Sexual Complementarity, I believe there to be Emotional Complementarity.

The Church’s attitude toward Homosexual unions (not talking about marriage but sexual cohabitation) has alienated me, and driven me from the Church and from the Gospel.

I would gladly return to the Church, to the Eucharist, and to Our Lord and our Lady if Pope Francis were to acquiesce; I’m not asking him to bless Same-sex marriage, I’m asking him to compromise, to welcome the LGBT community as they are, whether they be in relationships or not.

Don’t let people get you down. I wish you well on your engagement.

And remember that sexual complementarity is a relatively modern idea. A lot of the olde ideas through the ages about marriage included the “natural” hierarchy (ie of a superior male and an inferior female) and an “active” and a “passive” partner (because people wrongly assumed a male was the exclusive active partner in sex. Also Aquinas thought sperm contained all that was needed for a new human, instead of 1/2 as we know today). People condemned same-sex relationships in ancient times because they did not conform to the standard of being hierarchical in nature.

Why were gay men persecuted? Not out of any belief in an importance of sexual complementarity, but because they were acting like a women, something which was a sort of social sin because women were less than men, and for a man to act like a women was condemned. Again, not because of any ideas about proper differences or complementarity, but because women were considered lower. The core of hatred against gay men was actually your garden variety sexist misogyny.

If you didn’t know, that’s where the sexual interpretation of the story of Sodom came from. The first person to make it about sex (instead about about the ancient virtue of hospitality, something which was Serious Business) was Philo the Jew, who wrote it was wrong for the men to act like women because acting like women was debasing themselves.

Gender complementarity was invented because we no longer spoke about marriages in hierarchical or active language. Most people seem to build a relationship on love, not on the “fitness” of their genitals.

 

[johnnyc176]

Gender complementarity was invented because we no longer spoke about marriages in hierarchical or active language.

I’d say it was one of God’s greatest ‘inventions’…

male and female he created them. And God blessed them, and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply,

 

[Brendan]

“What is truth?” ~ Pontius Pilate (John 18:38)

Jesus answered, "I am the Way and the Truth, and the Life.

John 14:6a

 

[curlycool89]

I’d say it was one of God’s greatest ‘inventions’…

male and female he created them. And God blessed them, and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply,

Which suggests something of particular importance, but not something to the exclusion of all others.

 

[Prayer_Warrior]

Your sin is no worse than mine was when I first heard the gospel. I was guilty of grave sexual sin before I came into the Church. I am not any better than you and I am still a sinner, but the difference is that I recognized the grave sin I was in and repented of it. What I say next is not condemnation. But, according the the Scripture I must speak truth to my brothers and sisters in Christ and I am called to correct you. If I did not, it would be a sin on me (Lv 19:17). Even though it’s popular to call us “haters” when we try to correct, it is really an act of love to correct. So I speak the truth of the Scripture as an act of love, not condemnation.

The world will tell you that homosexual acts are not a sin, but the Scriptures repeatedly attest to the opposite. Do you believe in the truth of the Scripture? Jesus’ first words of His public ministry were “This is the time of fulfillment. The kingdom of God is at hand. Repent, and believe in the gospel” Mk 1:15. You have to understand what sin is in order to repent from it and that is where “the world” has gone terribly astray. The “world” has exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator (cf Rm1:25). Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; who put darkness for light, and light for darkness.(Is 5:20) Those (non-Catholic) Christian communities, that ignore the Scriptural truth on grave sin, repentance, and the life to which we Christians are called are not doing sinners any favors. Please consider prayerfully reading the Scriptures, not only the ones that I’ve included, but the Bible in its fullness. Ask the Lord to help you see where the sin is in your life and help you to repent. Jesus died for our sins but He only gives the promise of eternal life to those sheep who hear His voice and follow (cf John 10:28).

Some other Scriptures of note:

1 Cor 6:9* Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither the immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, * 10 nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God. (* it is not a sin to have same sex attraction, only to act upon it)

1 Cor 6: 19 Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, which you have from God? You are not your own; 20 you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body.

Rm 12: 2 Do not be conformed to this world but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that you may prove what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect.

Many people boast of the freedom they have in Jesus not to be “rule bound” as the Jews were under the law. But if you use your freedom wrongly to sin, you will become enslaved to sin, and then where has your freedom gone?

 

[MarcoPolo]

sexual complementarity is a relatively modern idea.

That is incorrect. It is at least as old as the Genesis account where Adam recognized the fittingness of woman as his fulfillment. The OT also transitions into that figure as the relationship between God’s covenant with Israel. The whole New Testament adaptation of that concept is knit right into the idea of Christ the bridegroom and the Church the bride, the two becoming one, etc…

 

[dmftx]

Frankly, and I have only breezed through the posts, the fact that you are attracted to someone of the same sex is not the big issue IF you choose to to be chaste. It is in the NOT CHOOSING that you cannot receive sacraments.

One of the many things that I love about our Church is our consistent alignment with biblical teaching. A huge problem in our society is that there are too many churches watering that down to attract people to them. There are commandments and other laws given to us by God that we don’t have the RIGHT to change.

 

[Dorothy]

Vigilant prayer and receiving the sacraments given to us by our Lord Jesus Christ makes all things possible.

There is no rationalization for any kind of sin when we stand before Our Lord after our death. He gave us everyrthing we need to pick up our cross and follow Him.

 

[shockerfan]

Which suggests something of particular importance, but not something to the exclusion of all others.

God made the designs, set the rules, and has given the world His Church, which he endowed with authority to help answer questions about the designs and the rules.

All are welcome

However

It is up the individual whether or not they exclude themselves

 

[CHRISTINE77]

Which suggests something of particular importance, but not something to the exclusion of all others.

What part of the Catholic Church’s teachings are acceptable to you?

 

[curlycool89]

That is incorrect. It is at least as old as the Genesis account where Adam recognized the fittingness of woman as his fulfillment.

What Adam recognized in Genesis was Eve, someone who was like him, “bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh”.

What made them fit for each other, as opposed to all the other animals God had created, was their likeness, not their differences.

(This is of course ignoring the question of what in the Genesis account is simply allegorical or under the heading of “creation myth”, especially since Genesis 1 and 2 are outright contradictory, since one starts with the creation of humans and the other ends with it).

What part of the Catholic Church’s teachings are acceptable to you?

The fact that you didn’t actually try to give an answer and instead just attacked me tells me that you’ve run out of arguments and resorted to the old “HERESY” argument, which is not an argument in and of itself. An idea does not support itself by it’s own existence, nor is the age of the idea an indication of it’s truth value.

Truth is when an idea matches the external reality of what is. When people try and explain away a part of reality to match a pre-existing idea, that’s just bad science.

 

[JimG]

Sexual complementarity is not a new idea; it wasn’t invented by mankind. Sexual complementarity is inherent in the fact that human beings are male and female. It’s a fact of human anatomy, not a social construct. If human beings were not man and woman, there would be no marriage. There would also be no human civilization, of course.