Is Homosexuality Genetic?

  • Thread starter Thread starter MugenOne
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
cristininha said:
Some catholics don’t interpret the bible in condemnation of gay acts. I don’t think most of them would try to speak in the name of all the catholics.
Click to expand...
It is official teaching:

Chastity and homosexuality
[2357](javascript:openWindow(‘cr/2357.htm’)😉 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity,141 tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered."142 They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.
2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.
[2359](javascript:openWindow(‘cr/2359.htm’)😉 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.
 
buffalo said:
It is official teaching:

Chastity and homosexuality
[2357](javascript:openWindow(‘cr/2357.htm’)😉 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity,141 tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered."142 They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.
2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.
[2359](javascript:openWindow(‘cr/2359.htm’)😉 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.
Click to expand...
Does official teaching = truth?
 
cristininha said:
Some catholics don’t interpret the bible in condemnation of gay acts. I don’t think most of them would try to speak in the name of all the catholics.
Click to expand...
The Bible is not the only source of condemnation of “gay” acts. For a Catholic to believe that homosexual acts are not intrinsically disordered sins against chastity is to deny assent of faith to the Church’s teaching. Such a Catholic would not be in union with the Church.
 
Galileo was a person who didn’t believe in some official teachings of his time.
 
cristininha said:
Some people would say No.
Click to expand...
I am sure some people would. But we are talking about faithful Catholics who believe the Church to have the fullness of truth, to give assent of faith to what the Church teaches and to not twist the teachings of the Church to fit the agenda of the day.

By definintion, they would say “yes”.
 
Corki said:
The Bible is not the only source of condemnation of “gay” acts. For a Catholic to believe that homosexual acts are not intrinsically disordered sins against chastity is to deny assent of faith to the Church’s teaching. Such a Catholic would not be in union with the Church.
Click to expand...
Some people at the hierarchy of the Church and some followers have believed in the past that those who were in dissent with some official teachings were not in union with the Church. That can happen at any time.
 
buffalo said:
Oh here we go again. Click the search link on Galileo. There is a lively thread going.
Click to expand...
I don’t want to debate Galileo. I just gave his example to demonstrate that in some cases, the official teaching has been proven to be false.
 
cristininha said:
Some people at the hierarchy of the Church and some followers have believed in the past that those who were in dissent with some official teachings were not in union with the Church. That can happen at any time.
Click to expand...
You are correct. Those in dissent are not in union with the Church. This is not just a teaching of the past. It is the constant teaching of the Church.
 
Corki said:
You are correct. Those in dissent are not in union with the Church. This is not just a teaching of the past. It is the constant teaching of the Church.
Click to expand...
That does not mean that all those who are in dissent are incorrect. And the Church has apologized a few times because of conflicts of truthfulness.
 
cristininha said:
That does not mean that all those who are in dissent are incorrect. And the Church has apologized a few times because of conflicts of truthfulness.
Click to expand...
Well, dissent is not just about what you believe. It is about what you say and do. If you say and do things that are not according to Church teaching than you are incorrect.

Citation please for the Church appologizing for “conflicts of truthfulness”?
 
Corki said:
Well, dissent is not just about what you believe. It is about what you say and do. If you say and do things that are not according to Church teaching than you are incorrect.

Citation please for the Church appologizing for “conflicts of truthfulness”?
Click to expand...
The Church has apologized “because of” and not “for”:

It has apologized for its treatment of Galileo in the 1600’s, and it has apologized to Indians and Blacks for the Church’s role in slavery and racial massacres.

ourtimelines.com/zpapol.html

highbeam.com/doc/1P1-36507819.html

The Church’s role in these two examples was based on the official teachings of the time which have been proven incorrect.
 
cristininha said:
The Church has apologized “because of” and not “for”:

It has apologized for its treatment of Galileo in the 1600’s, and it has apologized to Indians and Blacks for the Church’s role in slavery and racial massacres.

ourtimelines.com/zpapol.html

highbeam.com/doc/1P1-36507819.html

The Church’s role in these two examples was based on the official teachings of the time which have been proven incorrect.
Click to expand...
This is getting off topic but:

As Buffalo said, there are plenty of threads on Galileo. He was punished for disobediance primarily.

As for the second link, it led to a story that could not be read with out a membership. It appeared from the viewable snippet to have been an apology by Brazilian bishops for actions by local priests. Hardly an apology by the Church for or because of Church teaching.
 
Corki said:
This is getting off topic but:

As Buffalo said, there are plenty of threads on Galileo. He was punished for disobediance primarily.

As for the second link, it led to a story that could not be read with out a membership. It appeared from the viewable snippet to have been an apology by Brazilian bishops for actions by local priests. Hardly an apology by the Church for or because of Church teaching.
Click to expand...
You asked for citation and I cited those two sources. You can make your own research and deepen your knowledge into the subject if you like. There are plenty of material in many other websites.
 
cristininha said:
You asked for citation and I cited those two sources. You can make your own research and deepen your knowledge into the subject if you like. There are plenty of material in many other websites.
Click to expand...
Gallaio was punished for mocking the Pope.

The Church never taught that slaves should be abused.

Of course neither of these have anything to do with faith and morals. the idea that if one can find a case of members of the Church acting badly that means homosexual behavior is OK is specious.
 
cristininha said:
Does official teaching = truth?
Click to expand...
Ugh. NO! Will the Modernist reactionaries never get this through their heads?

(P.S. Please don’t assume I endorse liberal views simply because I prefer orthodoxy over conservatism.)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top