I can't get over the gay thing

[Hope_Philomena]

I try so hard to accept every teaching of the Catholic Church, and I wish to convert so badly. Many Catholic teachings, like abortion, make perfect sense to me and I agree with them wholeheartedly. But the homosexual issue has placed a seed of anger in me, and it will only grow if I do not fix this…

I just don’t understand the Catholic point of view. Are gay people going to hell for being with someone they love? Is this true? Someone, please tell me that this is not true. This makes no sense to me, no sense at all.

A friend of mine, in his senior year of high school, is currently dating another boy and they are both quite happy and in love. This friend, he is such a good and moral person, the sweetest guy I have ever met. But is he not allowed to go to Heaven because of his sexuality? (At seventeen, of course he is young, but he knows his sexuality very well. He has done a great amount of thinking, and I highly doubt that one day when he’s an adult he will just say “No, that was just a phase. I’m straight!” So please do not comment about how seventeen is a young age to determine your sexuality. That’s not what this thread is about)

I, of course, do not want my best friend to go to hell. But I also want him to be happy, and I have seen how he is only happy with other boys, not girls. So if I have to decide between begging my friend to give up his love to get to Heaven, or remaining happy in the flesh and blood, then I cannot choose. I cannot accept this.

No, I am not trying to argue with the Church. I’m trying to understand. Will someone with knowledge of this topic give me resources to look at, or thoughts to ponder? Someone help me understand.

P.S. I have read many articles on this website, but I still don’t understand.

 

[Scottgun]

To put it bluntly, homosexuals are not going to Hell for being “with someone they love”, which is quite a euphemistic way to put it. Rather, ANY sexual contact, be it heterosexual or homosexual, outside of a true marriage (i.e. a man and a woman) is a grave offense against Chastity, which if unrepented of, risks the eternal loss of Heaven.

“Love” is not some magic word that makes any behavior acceptable. A man may love his daughter. Does that justify incest? Not at all. A man may love Germany. Does that justify gassing Jews? Hardly. There is actually nothing wrong with a man loving another man. But that doesn’t justify sexual contact there either. In fact, this is one of the harms of the onslaught to normalize homosexual acts: it destroys the capacity for men and women to form proper bonds of friendships with people of the same sex.

In this depraved age people have come to believe that sexual pleasure is an entitlement and that people will live unfulfilled lives without it, or that love automatically means sex and it just isn’t so.

 

[JimG]

You might want to read Jennifer Fulwiler’s “A Conversation with my gay friend.”

 

[Path_Finder]

The original post is very moving, this is to the real crux of the matter. I have for a long time felt and you meet them on the internet that a lot of gay folks become anti-religion because they feel religion rejects them. This is a source for a lot of soul-searching if not sadly worse, so I totally empathize with the original post and will pray for your friend. I would assert it is a puzzle to many. Just my 2 cents.

 

[Hope_Philomena]

To put it bluntly, homosexuals are not going to Hell for being “with someone they love”, which is quite a euphemistic way to put it. Rather, ANY sexual contact, be it heterosexual or homosexual, outside of a true marriage (i.e. a man and a woman) is a grave offense against Chastity, which if unrepented of, risks the eternal loss of Heaven.

“Love” is not some magic word that makes any behavior acceptable. A man may love his daughter. Does that justify incest? Not at all. A man may love Germany. Does that justify gassing Jews? Hardly. There is actually nothing wrong with a man loving another man. But that doesn’t justify sexual contact there either. In fact, this is one of the harms of the onslaught to normalize homosexual acts: it destroys the capacity for men and women to form proper bonds of friendships with people of the same sex.

In this depraved age people have come to believe that sexual pleasure is an entitlement and that people will live unfulfilled lives without it, or that love automatically means sex and it just isn’t so.

A man and a daughter is not nearly the same thing as a boy and a boy. Same goes for the Germany analogy. There are many reasons for a father not to have that relationship with his daughter; doing such a thing with a minor is illegal, genetic mutations could result, etc. But if a boy and a boy had… Sex, or whatever, what would happen? Nothing. Maybe HIV, but that can happen in any sexual relationship. A child does not come out of the relationship, but I don’t understand why that is wrong.

Why can people not have sex just for pleasure? From what I’ve heard, it involves pleasure. It’s about bonding, being fully connected with someone. I’m not talking about orgasmic pleasure, I’m talking about the joy of being one with the person you love. I guess I just don’t understand why all sex must be for making a child. Or is it not? Please correct me if so.

 

[Hope_Philomena]

You might want to read Jennifer Fulwiler’s “A Conversation with my gay friend.”

I have read this, and I love Jennifer Fulwiler very much When I first read it maybe a year ago, it answered some of my questions, but not all of them.

Path_Finder:

The original post is very moving, this is to the real crux of the matter. I have for a long time felt and you meet them on the internet that a lot of gay folks become anti-religion because they feel religion rejects them. This is a source for a lot of soul-searching if not sadly worse, so I totally empathize with the original post and will pray for your friend. I would assert it is a puzzle to many. Just my 2 cents.

Thank you for your two cents, and your prayers for my friend are greatly appreciated.

 

[JimG]

Catholic sexual morality is a whole cloth. One can’t divide it into little strips and only choose the parts that we like.

Here’s the big picture. There are men, and there are women. Human beings come in those two categories. Physically, they are sexually complementary. They are made for each other. Only man and woman can engage in the conjugal act that can lead to procreation, and as a byproduct, the continuation of the human race.

Sex is by nature procreative. It produces children. But new humans aren’t born ready to enter the workforce. They are dependent for 18 (or maybe 21 or more) years. They need mom and dad. Thus the institution of marriage was born. Mom and dad and children need to stay together in a natural family.

Sex outside of marriage is wrong, whether it is fornication / co-habitation, one night stands, solitary sex, adultery, or anything else other than the conjugal relations between husband and wife.

Sexual acts between persons of the same sex are also wrong, because they violate the nature of our sexual organs and is necessarily non-conjugal.

Two men can be good friends, Two women can be good friends. They can not engage in sexual activities without violating morality, any more than a man and woman can engage in sexual relations outside of marriage without violating sexual morality.

To answer one of your questions, sex can’t be just for pleasure any more than eating can be just for pleasure. It is too powerful for that. It binds a husband and wife together, produces children, and gives children brothers and sisters, creates families which are the basis of civilization.

Sexual morality began to be tossed aside in a great many areas during and after the sexual revolution. The results have been uniformly disastrous: increased fornication, out of wedlock births, single mothers, absent fathers, aborted babies, cohabiting couples. If you get the chance to do some more reading on this, I recommend Mary Eberstadt’s book “Adam and Eve After the Pill.” Same sex relations are just the latest ill wind blowing across the land.

 

[Hope_Philomena]

Catholic sexual morality is a whole cloth. One can’t divide it into little strips and only choose the parts that we like.

Here’s the big picture. There are men, and there are women. Human beings come in those two categories. Physically, they are sexually complementary. They are made for each other. Only man and woman can engage in the conjugal act that can lead to procreation, and as a byproduct, the continuation of the human race.

Sex is by nature procreative. It produces children. But new humans aren’t born ready to enter the workforce. They are dependent for 18 (or maybe 21 or more) years. They need mom and dad. Thus the institution of marriage was born. Mom and dad and children need to stay together in a natural family.

Sex outside of marriage is wrong, whether it is fornication / co-habitation, one night stands, solitary sex, adultery, or anything else other than the conjugal relations between husband and wife.

Sexual acts between persons of the same sex are also wrong, because they violate the nature of our sexual organs and is necessarily non-conjugal.

Two men can be good friends, Two women can be good friends. They can not engage in sexual activities without violating morality, any more than a man and woman can engage in sexual relations outside of marriage without violating sexual morality.

To answer one of your questions, sex can’t be just for pleasure any more than eating can be just for pleasure. It is too powerful for that. It binds a husband and wife together, produces children, and gives children brothers and sisters, creates families which are the basis of civilization.

Sexual morality began to be tossed aside in a great many areas during and after the sexual revolution. The results have been uniformly disastrous: increased fornication, out of wedlock births, single mothers, absent fathers, aborted babies, cohabiting couples. If you get the chance to do some more reading on this, I recommend Mary Eberstadt’s book “Adam and Eve After the Pill.” Same sex relations are just the latest ill wind blowing across the land.

Thank you, that makes sense.
Is a homosexual relationship allowed if it does not involve actual sex? What if there is just kissing and hugging? Just something to express how they feel without sex. Or are they not allowed to be together at all?

 

[JimG]

Thank you, that makes sense.
Is a homosexual relationship allowed if it does not involve actual sex? What if there is just kissing and hugging? Just something to express how they feel without sex. Or are they not allowed to be together at all?

Well sure, two persons of the same sex can be friends–even intimate friends: it is called friendship, not a homosexual relationship. There should, however, be no ‘romantic’ involvement. That would be an occasion of sin. For that matter, a boy who perceives himself as homosexual could still be friends with a girl, even intimate friends, with no romantic involvement.

And of course, persons who are attracted only minimally to the opposite sex can still marry someone of the opposite sex. Marriage requires the ability to complete the marital act, not a particular set of emotions.

 

[WilT]

I see two problems to your question. Here are the answers.

1. Love: God made man for woman…simple- Genesis.
2. Man with man** is not **biologically or physically sexually compatible or complimentary…simple

That’s just the basics. The other more complicate reasons are Doctrinal

 

[WilT]

Just because we fall in love doesn’t make it True Love.

I can love my dog… not healthy
I can love my car…too material
I can love $$$…another god
I can love food…leads to addiction
I can love my country…God comes first
I can love my mom…weird to love mom too much

my point is that just because we fall in love that doesn’t makes it all ok. As Christians there is only one True Love and that comes with instructions thru scriptures and Catholics wise traditions and understanding. All other loves are disordered except those approved by God.

 

[ClearWater]

I try so hard to accept every teaching of the Catholic Church, and I wish to convert so badly. Many Catholic teachings, like abortion, make perfect sense to me and I agree with them wholeheartedly. But the homosexual issue has placed a seed of anger in me, and it will only grow if I do not fix this…

I just don’t understand the Catholic point of view. Are gay people going to hell for being with someone they love? Is this true? Someone, please tell me that this is not true. This makes no sense to me, no sense at all.

A friend of mine, in his senior year of high school, is currently dating another boy and they are both quite happy and in love. This friend, he is such a good and moral person, the sweetest guy I have ever met. But is he not allowed to go to Heaven because of his sexuality? (At seventeen, of course he is young, but he knows his sexuality very well. He has done a great amount of thinking, and I highly doubt that one day when he’s an adult he will just say “No, that was just a phase. I’m straight!” So please do not comment about how seventeen is a young age to determine your sexuality. That’s not what this thread is about)

I, of course, do not want my best friend to go to hell. But I also want him to be happy, and I have seen how he is only happy with other boys, not girls. So if I have to decide between begging my friend to give up his love to get to Heaven, or remaining happy in the flesh and blood, then I cannot choose. I cannot accept this.

No, I am not trying to argue with the Church. I’m trying to understand. Will someone with knowledge of this topic give me resources to look at, or thoughts to ponder? Someone help me understand.

P.S. I have read many articles on this website, but I still don’t understand.

Well, have you read the Bible? It has many teachings which may be hard to accept, but it has been pretty clear about homosexuality, but the Church tries to help those with same sex attraction.

However, we don’t believe it’s helping matters to say that homosexuality if fine when the Bible says it’s not, the Old Testament and New Testament. By lying to a person and saying things are fine, when they’re not, we don’t believe it’s ultimately doing that person any favors.

Well, God designed us male and female to become one.

You saw his reaction to Soddom and Gomorrah, for example, and there are numerous other quotes. In no place does it accept homosexuality as an acceptable lifestyle, but it doesn’t mean we are unsympathetic.

A lot of people read the Bible or hear what the Church says, prefer to leave rather than change. So, people will say they want to divorce, leave over that, despite what Christ said.

Henry VIII found it hard that he was denied an annulment, and he ran out, began his own church. In fact, a lot of people have done exactly that, found Christ’s words too hard, decided they knew better.

Christ established his original Church, not churches. Yet, we had people leaving over this, divorce, the Pope, all kinds of issues.

If you want to divorce, I’m sure you can find a church that will also lie to you, tell you that’s fine, too. You can find a church that willing to tell you whatever they think you want to hear. In fact, I’ve heard there are over 30,000 Christian denominations.

Most just want to take the easy way. Catholicism is hard. Let’s face it.

However, I think if you were to research the Bible that you’d see the Catholic Church has taken a stance of telling us the truth, risking losing members, rather than lying and getting more.

Do a Google search on what the Bible says about this. If you can read that and still think you can in good conscience condone this, it will not be for lack of research.

If you reject this teaching, it will be because you reject the Bible, really.

 

[ClearWater]

Christ said we should enter through the narrow door, that the way to hell is wide, that many take it, that the way to heaven is the narrow path.

 

[JamalChristophr]

We have to submit our wills to God. We don’t make the rules here.

I’m heterosexual but have been celibate a long time.

If I can do it, people with same sex attraction could do the same thing.

People who submit their will to God’s Plan go to heaven.

We don’t judge gays and say Joey or Jenny are going to Hell because they are gay but if a person does not repent of a serious transgression against God’s laws, that is to say his will, and his love, then that person will exclude themselves from Heaven.

Heaven is for the humble, not the self-willed who can’t become small and submit to God.

 

[ClearWater]

Christ said that those who teach others to obey the commandments will be called “Great” in the kingdom of heaven. Those who disobey the commandments and teach others to do the same will be called the “least”.

Christ said if we love God we would keep his commandments. This falls under the commandments.

Here’s just one Bible quote. We are not making this up. Here are several translations, so you can see it’s not just our translations but the others, as well.

biblehub.com/1_corinthians/6-9.htm

 

[Weejee]

I can’t get over the gay thing either.

There are things in the Hebrew Scriptures, as in the book of Leviticus (can’t give you chapter and verse) but you’ve probably heard in other places that Leviticus bans us from eating shrimp and other foods that were dispensed with in the book of Acts in the New Testament. (The part where Peter has the dream where a cloth full of unclean animals is lowered before him and he is told to “kill and eat.”)

Saint Paul has two spots where he comes down on homosexuality, but St. Paul believed in slavery, and that women should cover their heads in church, but we don’t do that anymore. Its day is over.

Jesus never said a thing about homosexuality. And yet he did say, in the three synoptic gospels, that remarriage of the divorced was adultry. So the No Remarriage Ban is authentic.

The gate is pretty narrow. I’m female, and predominantly gay. In college I acted on it. The only other times I was tempted, (and I mean violently tempted) I did not succumb because I was married to my husband, and the Bible is pretty emphatic about committing adultery.

My marriage was a failure sexually, but good in companionship, and it only got better as we aged. After 26 years, my husband died, God rest his soul. I could start dating women if I want to, but I don’t want to because I am sixty-one, and sick and dying.

I’m a cafeteria catholic, and I can’t see the big sin in that. I try and accept and obey all I can, but I can’t take it whole cloth.

You pray to God for both yourself and your friend. We all need the help of God to limp along in this sad and complicated life.

 

[CBinNY]

I have Same Sex Attraction and for years either ignored or tried to rationalize the Catholic teachings away so I could do what I felt was right. But I grew to hate the gay life, there is little real love. People are objectifying each other for what they can get. Not that Heterosexuals don’t do the same. I didn’t feel much joy.
. God drew me back to the church through actual grace and I had a conversion. I saw that SSA was a temptation not a lifestyle and started resisting the temptations through the grace of God, mostly through confession. Once I was free of the guilt and was in a state of grace I felt hope and eventually joy. I’m not cured of these temptations but live a chaste life.
. It can be a difficult thing to understand, Hope Philomena but an incorrect understanding of sin is the issue, all sin, not just homosexual sex sin. When you sin you are separating yourself from God. God is not punishing you directly you are rejecting him. A soul goes to hell because they have no communion with God. God is telling us come live with me and you will have joy and have it abundantly but if you do these others things you are running away from me.

 

[spedteacherita]

The original post is very moving, this is to the real crux of the matter. I have for a long time felt and you meet them on the internet that a lot of gay folks become anti-religion because they feel religion rejects them. This is a source for a lot of soul-searching if not sadly worse, so I totally empathize with the original post and will pray for your friend. I would assert it is a puzzle to many. Just my 2 cents.

You’re right! “Religion” has rejected them. In the light of homosexuality as a sin, so is my overeating, addictive nature, not being a good steward of money and the list goes on. Is my sin worse than someone else’s? No, because we’re all sinful and struggle with it on a daily basis. Unfortunately, a good proportion of mainline Christians have reacted with anger and judgement and have forced a separation between themselves and people who feel they are gay.

It’s up to us to be like Jesus and accept each human for who they are… not condoning the sin but loving the sinner and letting them know that they can find healing and contentment for life within the context of religion - specifically Christianity.

 

[_Abyssinia]

I can’t get over the gay thing either.

There are things in the Hebrew Scriptures, as in the book of Leviticus (can’t give you chapter and verse) but you’ve probably heard in other places that Leviticus bans us from eating shrimp and other foods that were dispensed with in the book of Acts in the New Testament. (The part where Peter has the dream where a cloth full of unclean animals is lowered before him and he is told to “kill and eat.”)

Saint Paul has two spots where he comes down on homosexuality, but St. Paul believed in slavery, and that women should cover their heads in church, but we don’t do that anymore. Its day is over.

Jesus never said a thing about homosexuality. And yet he did say, in the three synoptic gospels, that remarriage of the divorced was adultry. So the No Remarriage Ban is authentic.

The gate is pretty narrow. I’m female, and predominantly gay. In college I acted on it. The only other times I was tempted, (and I mean violently tempted) I did not succumb because I was married to my husband, and the Bible is pretty emphatic about committing adultery.

My marriage was a failure sexually, but good in companionship, and it only got better as we aged. After 26 years, my husband died, God rest his soul. I could start dating women if I want to, but I don’t want to because I am sixty-one, and sick and dying.

I’m a cafeteria catholic, and I can’t see the big sin in that. I try and accept and obey all I can, but I can’t take it whole cloth.

You pray to God for both yourself and your friend. We all need the help of God to limp along in this sad and complicated life.

Fr Vincent Serpa responding to a question regarding foods:

In Acts 10:15 St. Peter had a vision in which God commanded him to eat such foods saying, “ What God has made clean, you have no right to call profane.” Unclean foods pertain only to the Old Law which is no longer binding.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=3458546

Homosexual activity is still condemned in the New Testament, so it is not the same thing as unclean foods. Response from Fr Vincent Serpa regarding a question about sin:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=44871

Regarding St Paul:

First, while Paul told slaves to obey their masters, he made no general defense of slavery, anymore than he made a general defense of the pagan government of Rome, which Christians were also instructed to obey despite its injustices (cf. Rom. 13:1-7). He seems simply to have regarded slavery as an intractable part of the social order, an order that he may well have thought would pass away shortly (1 Cor. 7:29-31).

Second, Paul told masters to treat their slaves justly and kindly (Eph 6:9; Col 4:1), implying that slaves are not mere property for masters to do with as they please.

Third, Paul implied that the brotherhood shared by Christians is ultimately incompatible with chattel slavery. In the case of the runaway slave Onesimus, Paul wrote to Philemon, the slave’s master, instructing him to receive Onesimus back “no longer as a slave but more than a slave, a brother” (Philem. 6). With respect to salvation in Christ, Paul insisted that “there is neither slave nor free . . . you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Gal. 3:27-28).

catholiceducation.org/articles/facts/fm0006.html

 

[Prodigal_Son]

The question you have to ask yourself is this: in a relationship between two men (or two women), once you have deep sharing and love, and you have profound friendship and trust, and you have compassion and companionship, what does sex add to the picture?

Pleasure, sure. But not much else.

So I don’t think the Church’s position is untenable. So far as I know, the Church doesn’t believe that pleasure in itself is a good reason to do anything.

(By the way, I post as a man who was once a boy attracted to other high school boys in my class, so I can totally relate to your friend. I think such relationships can be really sweet. Don’t let the sweetness of it and the goodness of the people involved make you think that all actions arising out of the relationship must be good.)