Ministry with Lesbian and Gay Catholics

[Abira]

The sad truth is that we Christians do those with same-sex attractions no favors by deceiving them into thinking that same-sex attractions are some type of benign thing as long as they are ignored. Make no mistake, they are an evil that points away from Christ and they must be purged. Only then can the individual make a serious attempt to be perfect, just as our heavenly Father is perfect.

I have some questions with my statements for you.

1. How can this be purged? I do not choose SSA in the same way a celibate man may be attracted to a woman, I can not help attraction even though I try to be chaste.
2. How do you know this points away from Christ? I think that some peoples attitudes towards this problem make gay people feel rejected and judged, it is only Gods right to judge.
3. Are you perfect? are there some imperfections that you think God would tolerate and some that you have decided He won’t? everyone can be angry, or do small things wrong… and most of us do big things wrong too… maybe arguing or lying etc.

 

[Other_Eric]

I have some questions with my statements for you.

A proper ministry to people with same-sex attractions will always be one that points these people away from and ultimately out of the disorder. Anything less fosters sloth, despair and is contemptuous of the healing power of Christ. Here are my answers to your questions.

1. How can this be purged? I do not choose SSA in the same way a celibate man may be attracted to a woman, I can not help attraction even though I try to be chaste.

There is any number of therapeutic options available for those who wish to overcome a diseased sexuality. You will find in reading the literature of individuals such as Nicolosi, Socarides, Moberly and others that motivation, an aspect of the will, is a key factor in the individuals who are successful. Those who are motivated to do so, or really want to, can change. Thus, attraction to the same or opposite sex is exactly something that is well within the control of the individual. Difficulties in this regard do not excuse someone from the cross that he has been ordained to bear.

1. How do you know this points away from Christ? I think that some peoples attitudes towards this problem make gay people feel rejected and judged, it is only Gods right to judge.

Properly ordered sexuality in man is directed toward procreation and the union of spouses. This is what sexuality is for. Same sex attractions fulfill neither of these purposes. They distort the sexual relationship into one of pathological self-gratification. Any attempt to say that this abuse of the sexual faculty could possibly point to Christ is an attempt to unmoor sexuality from the purposes for which God created it. The hedonism, disease and willingness to remake nature in one’s own image that forms the hallmarks of same-sex attraction are not properties of Christ. Therefore, same-sex attractions do not point to Christ outside of some scheme that employs the logic of moral relativism.

The faithful are called to make prudential judgments every day. There is nothing opposed to Christianity in this. I refuse to play into whatever victim mentality you hope to foster by appealing to the problem of the supposed (and illusory) rejection of gay people.

1. Are you perfect? are there some imperfections that you think God would tolerate and some that you have decided He won’t? everyone can be angry, or do small things wrong… and most of us do big things wrong too… maybe arguing or lying etc.

To ask whether or not a man is perfect as a way of excusing whatever difficulties one may experience oneself smacks of the sort of tit-for-tat argumentation currently in vogue at the local grade school playground. The proper question to ask is not whether a man is perfect, since none are, it is to ask what a man is prepared to do about his imperfections. The individual with same-sex attractions who obstinately refuses to pursue their resolution is refusing the cross he has been ordained to carry and is therefore ultimately refusing the Resurrection.

 

[Abira]

really[/I] want to, can change. Thus, attraction to the same or opposite sex is exactly something that is well within the control of the individual. Difficulties in this regard do not excuse someone from the cross that he has been ordained to bear.
…
I disagree that people can change their given sexuality. we’ll have to disagree on this point. and i don’t like tghe attitude of… if they wanted to they would because i disagree that it can be changed for many people.
…

I refuse to play into whatever victim mentality you hope to foster

smacks of the sort of tit-for-tat argumentation currently in vogue at the local grade school playground.

…
firstly I am no victim and do not have that attitude in the slightest.

secondly I believe we are asked to carry our cross and not discrd it (ie. changing or having therapies such as aversion etc to change something I believe to be unchangeable for many people)

thirdly I found the two quotes above to be offensive and not called for.

I can’t continue this dialogue with you as an individual (at least in this mood) as this is a personal issue for me, and I cannot talk personally when I feel threatened and patronised by you.

 

[Other_Eric]

You are correct that there will be no ssa in heaven but I need not rid myself of it here on earth to get there. Get this out of your head. SSa does not prevent us from following Christ and being a Christian. You are pontificating where you shouldn’t be.

Is a psychopath excused from ridding himself of his macabre appetites or the kleptomaniac from his or her insatiable taste for theft? Should a perjurer sleep soundly at night knowing that he possesses not the courage to face the truth? Should the adulterer spurn any attempt to properly order his impulses as well? Is the Good News a message that teaches us not to reach out for the hem of Christ’s robe to be healed, to instead hold back and wallow in our miseries? You may hold back in whatever disorders you have grown accustomed to. I will reach for Christ.

 

[Abira]

Other Eric;1790816not the courage to face the truth? Should the adulterer spurn any attempt to properly order his impulses as well? Is the Good News a message that teaches us not to:

Is a psychopath excused from ridding himself of his macabre appetites or the kleptomaniac from his or her insatiable taste for theft? Should a perjurer sleep soundly at night knowing that he possesses reach out for the hem of Christ’s robe to be healed, to instead hold back and wallow in our miseries? You may hold back in whatever disorders you have grown accustomed to. I will reach for Christ.

I could be wrong… but I think I remember goofyjim saying that he was trying to live a chaste life despite SSA… so he is reaching for Christ.

This all hinges on the fact that you believe that even SSattraction (without actual sex) is still wrong. Whereas others will believe that SSA must simply be lived with but not acted upon.

I think we will just have to agree to disagree…and hope that others within the church community that I may have to meet are more approachable lol

 

[Grace_Angel]

The Church says SSA is a disorder. There are many things we don’t understand, and one of them is the origins of these desires in some people. Best to withhold judgement of mysterious abnormal tendencies in some people, of which there is a huge variety of in the human race.

WenkebachCath, I have a little bit of a problem with what you wrote. Not about the judgement bit, that I understand, but I am reading that you are calling for tolerance for aberrant sexual attraction. OK lets look at this, SSA, we dont understand, and we are tolerant, and we wait till we underdstand where these feelings come from. OK. Im cool with that. What about Man/boy attraction. Are we cool with that too? If so OK, if not why not, after all it is his inclination and he is entitled to satisfy and be fulfilled in that desire. So why not?
OK and what about paedophilia, why not, it is the persons inclination towards sex with any child, so if we are not cool with that why not. It is still a abberrant sexual desire so if we are all cool with SSA and need to understand where these attractions come from, then we should surely be OK with paedophilia and man/boy attraction. And OK if these we are cool with, what about human/animal attraction, if we are ok with other abberrant sexual desires why not this one. After all the person also has desires which need to be fulfilled. And so on and on and on.and on and on
We may not judge another human being because we dont know their inner sanctum, but we definitely can judge a sinful inclination and action.
Grace Angel.

 

[Abira]

What about Man/boy attraction. Are we cool with that too? If so OK, if not why not, after all it is his inclination and he is entitled to satisfy and be fulfilled in that desire. So why not?
OK and what about paedophilia, why not, it is the persons inclination towards sex with any child, so if we are not cool with that why not. It is still a abberrant sexual desire so if we are all cool with SSA and need to understand where these attractions come from, then we should surely be OK with paedophilia and man/boy attraction. And OK if these we are cool with, what about human/animal attraction, if we are ok with other abberrant sexual desires why not this one.Grace Angel.

paedophilia has, on most occassions an unwilling victim who will be left with issues to deal with far into their adult life.

we must give an animal the benefit of the doubt, as we have a responsibility to their safety, that they did not consent to a man/animal thing.

same sex relationship (assuming it is monogamous adult relationship etc) has no ‘victim’ that has not given their full and knowing consent.

this is why as a society we must make a distinction - you may not agree with their life choices, but all in their relationships WANT to be there.

This is the way that I see it, I understand that you believe they are all ‘disordered’, but I see a definate distinction between the two (victim/non victim…nonconcensual/concensual)

For me, even though you may believe that all of these crimes will be judged in the same way, that does not make them equal on all levels, and identical in every way.

S x

 

[goofyjim]

Is a psychopath excused from ridding himself of his macabre appetites or the kleptomaniac from his or her insatiable taste for theft? Should a perjurer sleep soundly at night knowing that he possesses not the courage to face the truth? Should the adulterer spurn any attempt to properly order his impulses as well? Is the Good News a message that teaches us not to reach out for the hem of Christ’s robe to be healed, to instead hold back and wallow in our miseries? You may hold back in whatever disorders you have grown accustomed to. I will reach for Christ.

Christ does not turn me away because of my ssa. Thank you but I will not participate in this ridiculous argument anymore.

 

[Abira]

Christ does not turn me away because of my ssa. Thank you but I will not participate in this ridiculous argument anymore.

I agree…

also, even though I am not Catholic, I agree with the official position taken by the church (echoed by my denominations stance in many ways)… even though it is obviously not taken up by all Catholic members!

In the 1976 statement, To Live in Christ Jesus: American bishops wrote:

“Some persons find themselves through no fault of their own to have a homosexual orientation. Homosexuals, like everyone else, should not suffer from prejudice against their basic human rights. They have a right to respect, friendship, and justice. They should have an active role in the Christian community.… The Christian community should provide them a **special degree **of pastoral understanding and care.”

1997, U.S. Catholic Bishops- Pastoral Letter: Always Our Children: A Pastoral Message to Parents of Homosexual Children and Suggestions for Pastoral Ministers, directed to the parents of gay and lesbian Catholics. In this document, the bishops briefly addressed lesbians and gay men, saying, “In you God’s love is revealed.” They also encouraged families to remain as united units when a member ‘came out’ and called for the establishment of ministries sensitive to the needs of gay and lesbian Catholics and their families.

 

[Grace_Angel]

paedophilia has, on most occassions an unwilling victim who will be left with issues to deal with far into their adult life.

we must give an animal the benefit of the doubt, as we have a responsibility to their safety, that they did not consent to a man/animal thing.

same sex relationship (assuming it is monogamous adult relationship etc) has no ‘victim’ that has not given their full and knowing consent.

this is why as a society we must make a distinction - you may not agree with their life choices, but all in their relationships WANT to be there.

This is the way that I see it, I understand that you believe they are all ‘disordered’, but I see a definate distinction between the two (victim/non victim…nonconcensual/concensual)

For me, even though you may believe that all of these crimes will be judged in the same way, that does not make them equal on all levels, and identical in every way.

S x

Abira, you may sleep with whom ever you want, when you want how matimes you want. I am not entring into your home or conscience either but dont try and legitimise SS relationships, by making them sound "normal. Because two adult consent to abberrant sexual activity doesnt make the sexual activity right or legitimate. Sorry.
My using the abberrant sexual inclinations was only rference. They are also abberrant, and in due course, the people whose inclination is towards these will also want these inclinations recognised.
Sexuality is a “sacrament” a gift given my God both for the edification and continuance with God’s involvement of humanity. SS relationships are barren, sterile, and cannot ever be for the continuance and co operative work of God and “man”
Sorry Abira, you do as you wish but dont legitimise it.
Grace Angel

 

[Dale_M]

Sorry Abira, you do as you wish but dont legitimise it.

I don’t think that was Abira’s intent. Rather it was to point out that it is misleading to compare sex between two consenting adults with sex involving a minor. The latter is a crime specifically because a minor cannot give consent.

 

[Lynn-D]

I am somewhat confused over the attitude of some. A kleptomaniac, a perjurer or an adulterer are acts having been committed and not simply an attraction so why the comparison to someone with SSA?

Having an attraction is not the same as committing a sin or are some of the belief that all thoughts should be measured in relationship to actual acts. Perhaps the attraction might be compared to the Devil’s temptation of Jesus which He turned from as well. It might be a test imposed by God and just that.

If I remember my bible correctly was it not St. Paul that made it clear by his baptism of a eunuch, his first by the way, that sex in itself was not the issue but the belief in God and all are to be blessed if in acceptance of Jesus Christ?

As I see it anyone fighting against an attraction and not giving in to it seems NOT to have, “grown accustomed to” a disorder. That person to me seems to be one who might well be closer to heaven than many who attack him for his plight which he seems to be handling well and not giving in to.

Please take heed: Mathew 5:10, Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness’ sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

Lynn-D

 

[rlg94086]

I am somewhat confused over the attitude of some. A kleptomaniac, a perjurer or an adulterer are acts having been committed and not simply an attraction so why the comparison to someone with SSA?

Actually, SSA and kleptomania are a good comparison. Kleptomania is “a persistent neurotic impulse to steal.” Now, without getting into whether SSA is neurosis or not, a kleptomaniac who resists their impulse to steal is very much the same as a person with SSA who resists their desire for homosexual sex. Both of them are not sinning. Neither kleptomania nor SSA would prevent someone from going to heaven.

 

[Abira]

with replies to gracie ( i think it was) I am not trying to legitimise SSA

there is a clear distinction between crimes - those that have consent and those that have victims who do not give consent.

secondly, I agree with the above post: SSA is fine, if the person cannot avoid it, as long as they do not practice it.

So to answer Grace specifically…I do not ‘DO as I want’, I try to do what I’m meant to do, but the idea that SSA is comparable with predatory crimes such as rape and paedophilia is ridiculous.

Take care, S x

 

[Abira]

I don’t think that was Abira’s intent. Rather it was to point out that it is misleading to compare sex between two consenting adults with sex involving a minor. The latter is a crime specifically because a minor cannot give consent.

thanks Dale, I tried to keep it simple but I think my words sometimes trip over eachother

 

[El_Paulo]

Just one or two thoughts…

Something I would like to add to this discussion is that sexuality is a lot wider than ‘sexual’ attraction or the ‘sexual act’. The author,* John Powell SJ*, in discussing the subject suggests that we are sexual with EVERYONE we meet - even as a priest, his sexuality is in no way diminished, it’s just expressed in more specific areas and ways. In short, sexual beings is what we are (there is no such thing as a non-sexual human being) and sexuality is what is ‘expressed’ when any two people meet.

I think it can be problematic to draw indelible lines which segment our sexuality into this or that area - sex is the smallest (though incredibly intimate) part of our sexuality, yet can often be the one thing that is used as THE yardstick with which to measure a person’s Christian authenticity.

El Paulo

 

[Other_Eric]

Just one or two thoughts…

Something I would like to add to this discussion is that sexuality is a lot wider than ‘sexual’ attraction or the ‘sexual act’. The author,* John Powell SJ*, in discussing the subject suggests that we are sexual with EVERYONE we meet - even as a priest, his sexuality is in no way diminished, it’s just expressed in more specific areas and ways. In short, sexual beings is what we are (there is no such thing as a non-sexual human being) and sexuality is what is ‘expressed’ when any two people meet.

I think it can be problematic to draw indelible lines which segment our sexuality into this or that area - sex is the smallest (though incredibly intimate) part of our sexuality, yet can often be the one thing that is used as THE yardstick with which to measure a person’s Christian authenticity.

El Paulo

It is this concept of the pervasive influence of sexuality that forms much of my opinions in this area. To be succinct, two people meeting for the first time on a purely platonic level express their respective sexualities in order to relate to each other. It is unavoidable. In a person with same-sex attractions, this is precisely the sort of expression, that of a disordered sexuality, which will always be sinful. The only legitimate Christian response is therefore one which redirects the sexuality towards its proper affective ends.

 

[rlg94086]

I don’t see your point Other Eric.

If I meet a man with SSA, we would probably start out by talking about hockey or football. I also might ask, “are you married?” or “do you have kids?” or “what kind of work do you do?”

A single man with SSA who is living a chaste life would probably not answer with “I like dudes.” He would probably just say, “no, I’m not married.” I wouldn’t say “hey, man do you like chicks? I do.”

Similar conversations also happen between men and women when they meet platonically. The sexuality questions would generally come up if one was interested in the other. Again, there is no reason the person with SSA couldn’t turn the other person down without telling them their sexual preference.

It is this concept of the pervasive influence of sexuality that forms much of my opinions in this area. To be succinct, two people meeting for the first time on a purely platonic level express their respective sexualities in order to relate to each other. It is unavoidable. In a person with same-sex attractions, this is precisely the sort of expression, that of a disordered sexuality, which will always be sinful. The only legitimate Christian response is therefore one which redirects the sexuality towards its proper affective ends.

 

[James_2_24]

Not sure if anyone has seen extended info on this situation, like the LA Archdiocese’s history with gay’s and lesbians. However, here is a link that contains two other great links on the background to the current problem:

domusdei.org/2007/01/04/la-archdioceses-gay-and-lesbian-track-record/

 

[Grace_Angel]

I don’t think that was Abira’s intent. Rather it was to point out that it is misleading to compare sex between two consenting adults with sex involving a minor. The latter is a crime specifically because a minor cannot give consent.

Not today Dale, but 20 years ago 2 homosexual adults would not be looking for consent or ev en advertising their inclinination. Today, the homosexual lobby has ensured that not only is homosexuality open, at time sin your face, but being touted as an alternative lifestyle, thats all, nothing else.
Slowly slowly does it.
Today paedophilia is despised, bestilaity is despised other abberrant sexual relationshions not accepted, but in 20 years time what is to say that paedophiles wont be seeking to legitimise their inclination, after all they deserve to be allowed to be fulfilled in their desires, dont they?
If you remember abortion was only countenanced for the fvery hard cases. Look what we as a society have. 50 million abortions pa. it was only for special cases wasnt it.
Euthanasia, well the best way to be rid of someone you love very much is to sign their euthansia forms. Its dignity Im told.
And it goes on and on and on.
We start with the best intentions and the slippery slope becomes more slippery and faster.
Homosexuality is “disordered sexuality” legitimisng it gives it credence. Sorry dont agree,
I dont agree that there should be work place discrimination, or medical discrimination, or even legal discrimination, but legitimising union through civil method, so its becomes a pseudo9 marriage, nahhhh. sorry. Namr it for what it is, and I will support this. But not trying to legitimise /consenting to the situation so that it becomes another “normal.”
Grace Angel.