Lost the cultural debate on homosexuality

[Dale_M]

He’s just going to aggravate you. It’s not worth it.

I agree that we shouldn’t take the messages here too seriously, but it is important that when misguided voices speak up, (especially when seeming to speak with authority) that they be corrected. Otherwise the casual reader will come away with the wrong impressions. Jim has done us all a great service.

 

[devotus]

U.K. Cardinal’s permission for “gay mass” dismays Catholic traditionalists

above tread is on Traditional catholicism board…

sad state of afairs

 

[goofyjim]

It never ceases to amaze me how much of an obstacle money is for you. Christ told the rich, young man to give up everything he had to follow Him. Christ called the disciples away from their livelihoods to follow Him. Financial stress does not exempt one from carrying the cross one is meant to carry. Do not settle for whatever loathsome state you find yourself in. The healing is there for those who are willing to work for it.

When Christ told the “rich” man to give up everything he told him to give it to the poor. He mentioned nothing of giving it to an already rich psychiatrist. And the poor such as myself do not have the means to give to the rich for something that isn’t guaranteed. Comes to your senses and do not put an extra burden on those with ssa if they are living chastely.

 

[Other_Eric]

When Christ told the “rich” man to give up everything he told him to give it to the poor. He mentioned nothing of giving it to an already rich psychiatrist. And the poor such as myself do not have the means to give to the rich for something that isn’t guaranteed. Comes to your senses and do not put an extra burden on those with ssa if they are living chastely.

It is instructive to me, the ease with which you can lapse into class warfare themes in order to rationalize away an obligation to self-improvement. To despair of a cure citing that there are “no guarantees” is nothing more than an attempt to justify sloth. The truth is that among those with same-sex attractions,

What the great majority can achieve . . . is a very substantial improvement in their emotional stability, inclusive of its sexual aspects, while a minority even comes to a full cure. This fact contradicts the pessimistic and fatalistic ideas often divulged relative to the changeability of homosexuality. (1)

I would submit that those who wish to make it seem as though sexual orientation is fixed and immutable with no realistic chance for a cure have suckered you in. Even if you were to fixate on only a “minority” coming to a full cure, it should be pointed out that among those who do not succeed, that they were more neurotic and lacked the motivation necessary to obtain the cure. (2)

It should not be overlooked that it is this issue of motivation, an aspect of the will, that is the primary indicator of success in therapy. (3) Like anything worth having, the cure in this instance will require hard work, sometimes over years. In the course of therapy, many personal habits may need to be changed, such as the clothing one wears, the use of alcohol, or the music, books and television programs one might take for entertainment. (4) Nevertheless, this difficulty does not excuse one from doing what it takes in order to follow Christ. Indeed, Christ is a specific and integral component to many of these therapies. (5)

Since cure manifests itself in those who do what is necessary to achieve it. It is important to note that resistance to the therapy is often simply a neurotic reaction in an attempt to protect long-buried painful emotions. (6) This is not an appropriate basis on which to categorically reject therapy. Since cure for the disorder rests strictly within the hands of those individuals subject to it, there can be absolutely no excuse for failing to use the therapy and succeed in it.

It seems to me that your loathing of those psychologists and other professionals who have worked hard to achieve for themselves the wealth they now enjoy is just another way for you to justify your own decision not to do the hard work it will take to cure yourself. You think it is an extra burden that you be encouraged to make of your sexuality something whereby you can make a fruitful gift of yourself to both God and the rest of society. While others return to the master five or ten gold coins, you are content to give back only the one coin that you initially received and grow hostile at the suggestion that this is not wise.

I repeat my encouragement for you to get over this hyper-dramatization of yours and get for yourself the help that you need.

(1) Aardweg, Gerard van den. On the Origins and Treatment of Homosexuality. Westport: Praeger Publishers, 1986. p. 257.

(2) Ibid., p. 255.

(3) Rosen, Ismond. “Psychoanalysis and Homosexuality: A Critical Appraisal of Helpful Attitudes.” Hope for Homosexuality. Ed. Fagan, P. Washington DC: Free Congress Foundation, 1988. p. 53.

(4) Consiglio, William. Homosexual No More: Practical Strategies for Christians Overcoming Homosexuality. Wheaton: Victor Books, Scripture Press, 1991. p. 88.

(5) Ibid., p. 115.

(6) Ibid., p. 143.

 

[goofyjim]

It is instructive to me, the ease with which you can lapse into class warfare themes in order to rationalize away an obligation to self-improvement. To despair of a cure citing that there are “no guarantees” is nothing more than an attempt to justify sloth. The truth is that among those with same-sex attractions,

I would submit that those who wish to make it seem as though sexual orientation is fixed and immutable with no realistic chance for a cure have suckered you in. Even if you were to fixate on only a “minority” coming to a full cure, it should be pointed out that among those who do not succeed, that they were more neurotic and lacked the motivation necessary to obtain the cure. (2)

It should not be overlooked that it is this issue of motivation, an aspect of the will, that is the primary indicator of success in therapy. (3) Like anything worth having, the cure in this instance will require hard work, sometimes over years. In the course of therapy, many personal habits may need to be changed, such as the clothing one wears, the use of alcohol, or the music, books and television programs one might take for entertainment. (4) Nevertheless, this difficulty does not excuse one from doing what it takes in order to follow Christ. Indeed, Christ is a specific and integral component to many of these therapies. (5)

Since cure manifests itself in those who do what is necessary to achieve it. It is important to note that resistance to the therapy is often simply a neurotic reaction in an attempt to protect long-buried painful emotions. (6) This is not an appropriate basis on which to categorically reject therapy. Since cure for the disorder rests strictly within the hands of those individuals subject to it, there can be absolutely no excuse for failing to use the therapy and succeed in it.

It seems to me that your loathing of those psychologists and other professionals who have worked hard to achieve for themselves the wealth they now enjoy is just another way for you to justify your own decision not to do the hard work it will take to cure yourself. You think it is an extra burden that you be encouraged to make of your sexuality something whereby you can make a fruitful gift of yourself to both God and the rest of society. While others return to the master five or ten gold coins, you are content to give back only the one coin that you initially received and grow hostile at the suggestion that this is not wise.

I repeat my encouragement for you to get over this hyper-dramatization of yours and get for yourself the help that you need.

(1) Aardweg, Gerard van den. On the Origins and Treatment of Homosexuality. Westport: Praeger Publishers, 1986. p. 257.

(2) Ibid., p. 255.

(3) Rosen, Ismond. “Psychoanalysis and Homosexuality: A Critical Appraisal of Helpful Attitudes.” Hope for Homosexuality. Ed. Fagan, P. Washington DC: Free Congress Foundation, 1988. p. 53.

(4) Consiglio, William. Homosexual No More: Practical Strategies for Christians Overcoming Homosexuality. Wheaton: Victor Books, Scripture Press, 1991. p. 88.

(5) Ibid., p. 115.

(6) Ibid., p. 143.

This debate is pointless. The Church does not require it so I will not pursue it. I do not have the means and refuse to be judged by you.

 

[Abira]

Hi all

What about this idea:

The church should call homosexually oriented people to chastity rather than heterosexuality.

Firstly I feel that this is more realistically achieved. For those who can never be heterosexual they are put off church teaching because the mountain is too high.

Secondly, we are not called to rid ourselves of all temptation… we are called to carry our own crosses, not exchange them.

The church acknowledges that SSA is often unavoidable and not the fault o the individual. It would be like expecting every man never to be tempted by a woman… but as long as he lives a chaste life there should be no one to sit in judgement of his lifestyle.

I would compare this with a chaste homosexual and make a distincion between chaste and practicing SSA.

Correct me if I’m wrong in what the Catholic church teaches here.

S

 

[Other_Eric]

Hi all

What about this idea:

The church should call homosexually oriented people to chastity rather than heterosexuality.

Firstly I feel that this is more realistically achieved. For those who can never be heterosexual they are put off church teaching because the mountain is too high.

Secondly, we are not called to rid ourselves of all temptation… we are called to carry our own crosses, not exchange them.

The church acknowledges that SSA is often unavoidable and not the fault o the individual. It would be like expecting every man never to be tempted by a woman… but as long as he lives a chaste life there should be no one to sit in judgement of his lifestyle.

I would compare this with a chaste homosexual and make a distincion between chaste and practicing SSA.

Correct me if I’m wrong in what the Catholic church teaches here.

S

Chastity requires heterosexuality. The Church nowhere acknowledges that same-sex attractions are unavoidable. Since Scripture teaches that the temptation is punishment for idolatry, the condition is both avoidable and a result of the behavior the individual freely chooses to engage in.

 

[Abira]

Chastity requires heterosexuality.

how so? Can’t someone with SSA simply live a single life?

the condition is both avoidable and a result of the behavior the individual freely chooses to engage
in.

we’ll just have to differ greatly on this point, Eric… I know whose experience in the matter I’ll be trusting lol…roundabouts and all that lol

the condition is not avoidable for all

the actual choice to engage in homosexual activity is a choice, just as a heterosexual might choose to engage in an act also.

Take care, S

 

[goofyjim]

Chastity requires heterosexuality. The Church nowhere acknowledges that same-sex attractions are unavoidable. Since Scripture teaches that the temptation is punishment for idolatry, the condition is both avoidable and a result of the behavior the individual freely chooses to engage in.

You will never be appeased and probably think even the ministry of Courage is in error. Other Eric I am tired of trading arguments. My avoidance of sexual behavior is chastity enough for me. I am so glad that you are not the Church, which, I repeat does not require those with same sex attractions to be magically heterosexual. Goodbye and take care.

 

[blessedtoo]

Hi all

What about this idea:

The church should call homosexually oriented people to chastity rather than heterosexuality.

Firstly I feel that this is more realistically achieved. For those who can never be heterosexual they are put off church teaching because the mountain is too high.

The Catholic Church, whose teaching is being represented here at CAF, DOES teach that chastity is the only requirement of anyone, period. Nowhere does the Church insist that a person, living in accordance with Her teaching, must undergo any type of reparative therapy, unless they feel compelled. Despite other’s opinions here in this thread, that is all our Church teaches on the issue of SSA.

 

[Abira]

The Catholic Church, whose teaching is being represented here at CAF, DOES teach that chastity is the only requirement of anyone, period. Nowhere does the Church insist that a person, living in accordance with Her teaching, must undergo any type of reparative therapy, unless they feel compelled. Despite other’s opinions here in this thread, that is all our Church teaches on the issue of SSA.

thanks blessed…

I’ve been involved in quite a few similar threads and have always run up against the ‘you should just change’ idea. I usually step into an already heated debate on the topic so it’s nice to hear that the Catholic church does not require more.

If I am a protestant with a vague idea of that why don’t more Catholics agree or stick up for SSA people in the threads. I only came into this one because there was a lone almost stigmatized voice I felt sorry for lol.

Take care, S

 

[Other_Eric]

You will never be appeased and probably think even the ministry of Courage is in error. Other Eric I am tired of trading arguments. My avoidance of sexual behavior is chastity enough for me. I am so glad that you are not the Church, which, I repeat does not require those with same sex attractions to be magically heterosexual. Goodbye and take care.

As that last comment was not directed towards you, I would like to point out that it is not I who is keeping this game of trading arguments going. I am fully conscious of and at peace with your categorical denial of all my arguments. You were kind enough to point out that I am not myself the Church and I fully agree with that assessment so long as I may be permitted to add that neither are you. Since neither of us has been able to convince the other of anything, it is certainly agreeable that we end discussion of this issue. Both of us, after all, will be made fully aware which one was right soon enough. Until then, may God have mercy on us both.

 

[blessedtoo]

You were kind enough to point out that I am not myself the Church and I fully agree with that assessment so long as I may be permitted to add that neither are you.

OtherEric, you are right: you are not the Church (or, apparently Catholic) and neither is goofyjim. However, as I pointed out (and gave links to), goofyjim is witnessing Church teaching. You have no cause to continually insist that he, or anyone else living in accordance with the teaching on chastity, try to “change” what is not sinful behavior. By doing this, you confuse other posters who think that you are representative of what Catholics believe.

 

[blessedtoo]

If I am a protestant with a vague idea of that why don’t more Catholics agree or stick up for SSA people in the threads.

Most Catholics on this forum do know the Church teaching. Others, who depart from this, should state that they are voicing their own opinions.

 

[Abira]

Most Catholics on this forum do know the Church teaching. Others, who depart from this, should state that they are voicing their own opinions.

thanks blessed…

I think in this area tha Catholic church has a much better understanding of SSA then some people.

If they had the personal experience that I have had to have then they would realise that it was neither a choice, decision, welcome… and certainly not changeable at will!

I feel slightly more reassured now

S

 

[Other_Eric]

OtherEric, you are right: you are not the Church (or, apparently Catholic) and neither is goofyjim. However, as I pointed out (and gave links to), goofyjim is witnessing Church teaching. You have no cause to continually insist that he, or anyone else living in accordance with the teaching on chastity, try to “change” what is not sinful behavior. By doing this, you confuse other posters who think that you are representative of what Catholics believe.

What I believe some are “witnessing to” is not the full teaching of the Church at all. It is instead an abridged version of what the Church genuinely teaches, selectively edited in order to accommodate whatever one is already predisposed to do. In the end it is nothing more than sloth animated by the presumption of God’s mercy.

To begin with, the Church teaches that all the baptized are called to chastity. (1) What the Church means by “chastity” is

the successful integration of sexuality within the person and thus the inner unity of man in his bodily and spiritual being. (2)

In one with same-sex attractions, the sexuality is disordered, (3) its every expression is a grave sin against the natural law, which can never be approved of. (4) Since it is impossible to integrate a disordered sexuality within a person, chastity is impossible in the presence of same-sex attractions. The ethic of simple suppression, advocated by some, is no more than “an expression of repression and unrealism.” (5)

Disordered or not, it is impossible for the human person to live without the sexuality. The Church teaches that sexuality governs even those relationships between individuals that are platonic in nature. (6) Indeed,

one of the most dangerous forms of this [sexual] unrealism is to think that one can live without sexuality. This is the old heresy of manicheism or albigensianism which long ago led to terrible excesses on the part of those who sought to be absolutely pure. (7)

The authentic call of the Church to those with same-sex attraction is not repression, but redemption. Thus, mere abstinence flies in the face of John Paul II’s Theology of the Body:

John Paul’s anthropological vision seeks to reclaim everything that is authentically human – everything that God created man to be “in the beginning.” But this cannot happen if man ignores or suppresses his sexual desires. (8)

Since those with same-sex attractions can neither express their sexuality nor extract it from their being, the question becomes, how does one do what one should and “gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection?” (9) The answer is obvious, at least to me. The person with same-sex attractions approaches Christian perfection as he or she approaches a heterosexual orientation.

It is therefore in charity that I direct all with same-sex attractions to do what it is that the chastity they are obligated to follow requires. I will not endanger my own soul nor display such casual indiference for those with the disorder by offering them a remedial form of sexual morality on the malformed theory that they are unable to live up to the real thing.

(1) Catechism of the Catholic Church. Vatican City: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1993. ¶ 2348. Available online at: vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P85.HTM#$2DY

(2) Ibid., ¶ 2337. Available online at: vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P85.HTM#$2DY

(3) Ibid., ¶ 2358. Available online at: vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P85.HTM#$2DY

(4) Ibid., ¶ 2357. Available online at: vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P85.HTM#$2DY

(5) Groeschel, Benedict J. The Courage to Be Chaste. Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press, 1985. p. 42.

(6) Catechism of the Catholic Church. ¶ 2332. Available online at: vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P84.HTM

(7) Groeschel. p. 35.

(8) West, Christopher. Theology of the Body Explained: A Commentary on John Paul II’s “Gospel of the Body”. Boston, MA: Pauline Books and Media, 2003. p. 197.

(9) Catechism of the Catholic Church. ¶ 2359. Available online at: vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P85.HTM#$2DY

 

[blessedtoo]

**What I believe **some are “witnessing to” is not the full teaching of the Church at all.

Fine. You can “believe” whatever you wish. But when a Catholic, lapsed or otherwise, posits their opinion as fact, they are doing something decidedly un-Christain by misleading people who are living a chaste life.

In one with same-sex attractions, the sexuality is disordered, (3) its every expression is a grave sin against the natural law, which can never be approved of. (4) Since it is impossible to integrate a disordered sexuality within a person, chastity is impossible in the presence of same-sex attractions. The ethic of simple suppression, advocated by some, is no more than “an expression of repression and unrealism.” (5)

I think I see what you’re doing with your quotes. You cleverly rearrange them to read as you want them to read. Nowhere in the link you provided does it’s say “it’s every expression is a grave sin…”. Nor does it say anything like the statement that follows. Never have I read (and I’ve read volumes) in any document that “chastity is impossible in the presence of same sex attractions.” It does not say that in the document you linked. Is that another opinion?

The answer is obvious, at least to me.

If you have extrapolated from the Church teaching that the only way someone with SSA can remain chaste in a truly Christian manner is to re-orient themselves to heterosexualtiy through reparative therapies that even the Church does not demand, than I would say that you are the only one who finds this “obvious.”

 

[Other_Eric]

Fine. You can “believe” whatever you wish. But when a Catholic, lapsed or otherwise, posits their opinion as fact, they are doing something decidedly un-Christain by misleading people who are living a chaste life.

I think I see what you’re doing with your quotes. You cleverly rearrange them to read as you want them to read. Nowhere in the link you provided does it’s say “it’s every expression is a grave sin…”. Nor does it say anything like the statement that follows. Never have I read (and I’ve read volumes) in any document that “chastity is impossible in the presence of same sex attractions.” It does not say that in the document you linked. Is that another opinion?

If you have extrapolated from the Church teaching that the only way someone with SSA can remain chaste in a truly Christian manner is to re-orient themselves to heterosexualtiy through reparative therapies that even the Church does not demand, than I would say that you are the only one who finds this “obvious.”

If you have a different definition of chastity than the one the Church has provided in the Catechism, one custom-tailored for those with same-sex attractions, and that based on that, you wish to lead those individuals to salvation yourself, don’t expect me to have any part of such willful heresy. After all, a church with different standards of morality for different people is anything but a “catholic” church. You may take your illusory comfort in the permissive opinions of whatever volumes you have read. I will take mine from the orthodox sources I have referenced.

 

[blessedtoo]

After all, a church with different standards of morality for different people is anything but a “catholic” church.

OtherEric, I believe that is exactly what you are advocating: a different set of rules for homosexuals.

I encourage everyone reading this thread to look at the link OtherEric provided from the Catechism regarding chastity. Everything you need to know about the Church’s teaching is right there.

 

[Abira]

If you have a different definition of chastity than the one the Church has provided in the Catechism, one custom-tailored for those with same-sex attractions,

Hi Eric,

I’m genuinely confused as to what the difference is between a hetero and homosexual using chastity

As I understand the dictionary definition: the state of not having sexual relations.

I do not have sexual relations, I am chaste… what is the difference in actions between myself and a heterosexual chaste person? just a brief sentence though as I feel as though I’ve missed something in this thread!

S