Is pedophilia more sinful than homosexuality?

[TEPO]

That goes for pedophiliac/gay issues. Pedophilia excites more anger than does gayness, possibly because of the relative innocence of the youths involved. But the anger felt by those uninvolved does not, in itself, equate to severity of sin.

ICXC NIKA

This is a great point too…

Whether the sin is mass murder or repetitive mind groping, there is no difference in severity here either. It is our modern society with its relativistic ideology that actually compromises our perception of the severity of all mortal sins. They are all equally repulsive as far as we can say for sure… Right?

 

[underacloud]

Yes, the subjective nature of sin… Surely the church has a position on this to some extent… I would think.

The Catholic Church does discuss circumstances which determine one’s responsibility for sin (the subjective nature of sin). Here are a few pertinent sections from the catechism (for the full context it would be easy to look up the entire relevant sections).

*CCC 1735 Imputability and responsibility for an action can be diminished or even nullified by ignorance, inadvertence, duress, fear, habit, inordinate attachments, and other psychological or social factors.

CCC 1793 If - on the contrary - the ignorance is invincible, or the moral subject is not responsible for his erroneous judgment, the evil committed by the person cannot be imputed to him. It remains no less an evil, a privation, a disorder. One must therefore work to correct the errors of moral conscience.

CCC 1860 Unintentional ignorance can diminish or even remove the imputability of a grave offense. But no one is deemed to be ignorant of the principles of the moral law, which are written in the conscience of every man. The promptings of feelings and passions can also diminish the voluntary and free character of the offense, as can external pressures or pathological disorders. Sin committed through malice, by deliberate choice of evil, is the gravest. *

Essenstially, sin involves objective wrong, but whether the sinner is held responsible for that wrong is a complicated matter involving their freedom of will (which is no doubt influenced by mental disorders, or even to a degree tendencies) and their knowledge of the matter (the formation of their conscience.

It is completely wrong to declare that all practicing homosexuals will go to hell because they die in mortal sin. We don’t know this at all. God alone is the judge of each individual. We can only look at the objective nature of the sin and say that it is wrong. We do not know whether God will hold each sinner accountable.

The same goes for pedophilia, although as others have addressed, we have a graver concern to erradicate this sin wherever we encounter it for the protection of innocents.

 

[jmvizanko]

If pedophilia is a mental “disorder” that requires treatment, then how is it a sin…?

If homosexuality is not a mental disorder, but a sexual “orientation” that requires no treatment, then how is it not a sin…?

Is it true then that the sin of acting out as a homosexual with no remorse is more grave than the sin of acting out as a pedophile full of guilt?

Well outside of the Christian perspective that all sins are equally evil (such as murder and stealing a piece of gum), its definitely more evil. Adults can consent to having gay sex. Children cannot give consent, and are therefore being raped. One is two adults doing something the both want to to each other, and one is an adult doing things to a child that doesn’t even understand what is being done to them, even if they are not outwardly resisting it.

 

[pnewton]

A mortal sin is a mortal sin. I don’t get how why people try to figure out which one is worse?

The Church considers it significant. A deadly disease is a deadly disease, but in better understanding it, a cure may be found.

old.usccb.org/catechism/text/pt3sect1chpt1art8.shtml

Sins are rightly evaluated according to their gravity…

The gravity of sins is more or less great: murder is graver than theft. One must also take into account who is wronged: violence against parents is in itself graver than violence against a stranger.

As the latter part of this indicates that the person wronged affects the gravity of the sin, surely damaging children is worse than damaging oneself, especially in light of the words of Jesus, millstone and all that.

 

[Arizona_Mike]

“Pedophilia” is a psychiatric diagnosis of a sexual attraction to children. One could be a pedophile one’s whole life and not act on those urges. Sexual abuse of children may (or may not) stem from such a behavioral disorder, but such actions are not covered under the legal standard of nonculpability for reasons of insanity.

Not all the people who harm children sexually are pedophiles, by the way. Many of those involved in the sexual abuse of children (often the most violent ones) are “non-preferential” sexual offenders who don’t have an exclusive sexual interest in children, but act out of a desire to demonstrate control and dominance over a less-powerful person, and their victims can include both adults and children, of both genders. The victims of child abduction resulting in homicide are more likely to have suffered from the actions of non-preferential offenders (with a wider base of victims) than preferential offenders (the classic “pedophile”). In both cases, there could a wide number of contributing factors to a desire to commit such evils (genetics, abuse in childhood, early sexual exposure, pre-natal substance abuse, or a combination of such factors), but ultimately, free will is the ultimate determiner of what actions they take. External factors may impel, but they don’t compel. No predisposition can override the individual’s knowledge of good and evil and the ability to choose to do or not do an act.

Is it more sinful than consensual homosexual acts between adults? Common sense would seem to tell us so, and the fact that Jesus described the abuse of children as meriting special (quite specific) punishment in Matthew 18:6, to a degree of detail that is probably unique in the gospels for a specific sin, would also tell us so, as well as Jesus’ description of the special judgement that awaits such offenders.

 

[thistle]

The Church considers it significant. A deadly disease is a deadly disease, but in better understanding it, a cure may be found.

old.usccb.org/catechism/text/pt3sect1chpt1art8.shtml
As the latter part of this indicates that the person wronged affects the gravity of the sin, surely damaging children is worse than damaging oneself, especially in light of the words of Jesus, millstone and all that.

It makes no difference. As I said in an earlier post the effect is the same (both put you in a state of mortal sin) and the consequence of dying unrepentant is the same (both send you to Hell) so the difference in gravity of a mortal sin is not relevant.

 

[dailey]

The Church considers it significant. A deadly disease is a deadly disease, but in better understanding it, a cure may be found.

.

Huh? I’m a bit confused by your answer. I was simply stating what the Church states. Mortal sin can send you to hell. So to say one sin (assuming they are both mortal) is “worse”, IMO, makes no sense.

However, I do realize how society views pedophiles so I can see where it may be viewed as “worse”. But I am willing to bet a pretty penny that there are pedophiles who made it to heaven…and many “good” folks who didn’t…

 

[GEddie]

Huh? I’m a bit confused by your answer. I was simply stating what the Church states. Mortal sin can send you to hell. So to say one sin (assuming they are both mortal) is “worse”, IMO, makes no sense.

However, I do realize how society views pedophiles so I can see where it may be viewed as “worse”. But I am willing to bet a pretty penny that there are pedophiles who made it to heaven…and many “good” folks who didn’t…

Indeed, we are likely to meet heinous sinners of all stripes in Purgatory.

ICXC NIKA

 

[underacloud]

It makes no difference. As I said in an earlier post the effect is the same (both put you in a state of mortal sin) and the consequence of dying unrepentant is the same (both send you to Hell) so the difference in gravity of a mortal sin is not relevant.

Actually, many theologians have hypothesised regarding the nature of hell and whether eternal punishment will be equivalent for all there. There are theories (and all specific matter regarding hell are but theories) that eternal punishment will be worse for some than others, depending on their respective sins.

Moreover, while mortal sins can be forgiven through confession, temporal punishments will remain. So a “worse” mortal sin will have a greater temporal punishment attached.

While a mortal sin is a mortal sin, there may be other factors in determining whether one is worse than another. Certainly, from the viewpoint of a victim, I think sins definitely vary in their degree. If I am a single man and I masturbate, I commit mortal sin, but who, other than me, is a victim? If I am a married man with a family and I commit adultery, my sin has many victims, although it falls in the same class of mortal sin as the previous. If I commit purgury under oath to save my own skin, it may be a mortal sin, but if I commit purgury and implicate an innocent person in a crime, it is a much worse sin.

 

[thistle]

Actually, many theologians have hypothesised regarding the nature of hell and whether eternal punishment will be equivalent for all there. There are theories (and all specific matter regarding hell are but theories) that eternal punishment will be worse for some than others, depending on their respective sins.

Moreover, while mortal sins can be forgiven through confession, temporal punishments will remain. So a “worse” mortal sin will have a greater temporal punishment attached.

While a mortal sin is a mortal sin, there may be other factors in determining whether one is worse than another. Certainly, from the viewpoint of a victim, I think sins definitely vary in their degree. If I am a single man and I masturbate, I commit mortal sin, but who, other than me, is a victim? If I am a married man with a family and I commit adultery, my sin has many victims, although it falls in the same class of mortal sin as the previous. If I commit purgury under oath to save my own skin, it may be a mortal sin, but if I commit purgury and implicate an innocent person in a crime, it is a much worse sin.

None of that makes any difference to your immortal soul. A mortal sin is a mortal sin if you die unrepentant and you go to Hell.
Also even if there are additional punishments in Hell for worse offenders again I do not see what difference it makes because the Church teaches that the chief punishment of Hell (which applies to everyone there) is eternal separation from God so what difference will some additional punishments make?

 

[pnewton]

None of that makes any difference to your immortal soul. A mortal sin is a mortal sin if you die unrepentant and you go to Hell.

Well, if we do not engage in that sin, it makes no difference to any of us. The question in the OP though has to do with Church teaching. The Church does teach that sin bears different measures of gravity, as noted in the catechism quote above.

 

[indiecath]

In all charity, homosexuality is not sinful and should never be compared to some as horrible as pedophilia. Please grow up.

 

[pnewton]

In all charity, homosexuality is not sinful and should never be compared to some as horrible as pedophilia. Please grow up.

Homosexual attraction is no more or no less sinful than attraction to children. Both are gravely disordered, but the attraction itself is only temptation to sin, not sin itself. In both cases, the act itself is gravely sinful. Thus, there are multiple points of comparison.

The comment about growing up is something that has no place here. In fact, resorting to insult to avoid discussion is not exactly a mature act.

 

[indiecath]

Homosexual attraction is no more or no less sinful than attraction to children. Both are gravely disordered, but the attraction itself is only temptation to sin, not sin itself. In both cases, the act itself is gravely sinful. Thus, there are multiple points of comparison.

The comment about growing up is something that has no place here. In fact, resorting to insult to avoid discussion is not exactly a mature act.

That belief is against my conscience. Homosexuality was designed by God himself and there for is not sinful.

 

[pnewton]

That belief is against my conscience. Homosexuality was designed by God himself and there for is not sinful.

Sin is not a matter of opinion. Is the man who thinks it is okay to beat and abuse women get a pass because it is not against his conscience, or he thinks that is just the way women should be treated? No. This is why there is a need to look beyond just what we think and feel to some absolute standard of right and wrong. In this area, the Catholic Church has never wavered and continues to be the bastion of truth in a turbulent sea of relativism.

 

[TEPO]

While a mortal sin is a mortal sin, there may be other factors in determining whether one is worse than another. Certainly, from the viewpoint of a victim, I think sins definitely vary in their degree. If I am a single man and I masturbate, I commit mortal sin, but who, other than me, is a victim? If I am a married man with a family and I commit adultery, my sin has many victims, although it falls in the same class of mortal sin as the previous. If I commit purgury under oath to save my own skin, it may be a mortal sin, but if I commit purgury and implicate an innocent person in a crime, it is a much worse sin.

I think we’ve worked our way up to the truly intended purpose of The knowledge of Eternal Law… We have reached the point for why it was written.

When we become influenced by relativist ideologies, we run the risk of heresy, in that we begin to rationalize sin according to the material values of nature -as if it were an ends. But the material values of nature (natural law) were not set up as our end but as a guide whose purpose is to establish order.

As Catholics, we’ve been Ordained to participate in Gods Eternal Law, which is timeless. Without time there is no beginning or ends, so this could explain why Jesus said that it is a mortal sin to even mentally lust over a woman -because in heaven, there is no time for our thoughts to develop into acts… time and nature will not exist anymore to us as our guides.

So as Catholics we have been given a bit more knowledge than what nature alone is capable of… We are actually above natural law, but not to the level of eternal… Those who follow relativist ideologies as their sole guide to values lack vital knowledge. They need our prayers.

Just as a thought -is it possible that when Jesus said one sin is worse than another, He was meaning that it was worse for our sake, and not necessarily in terms of gravity… After all, a sin against the Holy Spirit means our acceptance of grace has been compromised. That would certainly make it worse in that respect.

newadvent.org/cathen/09076a.htm
“According to St. Thomas, the natural law is “nothing else than the rational creature’s participation in the eternal law” (I-II.94). The eternal law is God’s wisdom, inasmuch as it is the directive norm of all movement and action.”

" if we are not to be irreverent in our concept of God, but to represent Him as best we can, we must try to conceive Him as excluding all, even the least, change or succession; and his duration, consequently, as being without even a possible past or future, but a never beginning and a never-ending, absolutely unchangeable “now.”** This is how eternity is presented in Catholic philosophy and theology.**"

 

[Brendan]

In all charity, homosexuality is not sinful and should never be compared to some as horrible as pedophilia. Please grow up.

In further charity, both are disordered attractions. A pedophile can live a chaste life, as can a homosexual.

So, by themselves, neither are sinful, but only become so when acted upon.

 

[NeedImprovement]

. . . Homosexuality was designed by God himself and there for is not sinful.

There is absolutely no basis to support such an absurd claim , which could hardly be considered complimentary to God .

God didn’t design homosexuality - :dts: , God “designed” man and woman ; here it is from God’s own mouth:

**" But from the beginning of creation, 'God made them male and female.

For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother (and be joined to his wife),

and the two shall become one flesh.’ So they are no longer two but one flesh.** "

Anything else , would have to be the fruit of a wounded or very misguided imagination .

 

[GEddie]

In all charity, homosexuality is not sinful and should never be compared to some as horrible as pedophilia. Please grow up.

That is your opinion. I understand your desire to be charitable toward homosexuals, believe me.

But you do not get to define what is a sin, any more than you get to define what is a crime under the law. Saying “I don’t believe smoking crack is wrong” will not get you out of jail. Likewise with sexual sins before God.

God Bless, ICXC NIKA

 

[GEddie]

God did not design homosexuality any more than He did bulimia or anorexia. Those are malfunctions of the human body’s nutrituional function. Homosexuality is a malfunction of the human body’s sexual function.

How is that so? Because, physically, sexuality is not just for two bodies to experience pleasure together. It is primarily for procreation of the next generation. Homosexual behavior is incapable of bringing that about.

ICXC NIKA