Pope Benedict criticizes homosexual behavior

[caoindealbhan]

I’ve read the comments on this thread, and I believe that everyone is saying the same thing. The Church has a duty to identify sin, and to encourage those that fall into sin to repent.

Words, however, are extremely important when trying to convey a message. Comparisons fall flat. I read homosexual acts being compared to everything from bestiality to incest. But, to be fair, there is no comparison that would be helpful.

I think sticking to the facts, that the church sees it as a sin, because by its nature it is intrinsically evil is enough.

Now, what else do we really want gays to know?  The Church loves them, though they may sin.  We care for them.  We want their sin de-criminalized.  We want them to be treated fairly for employment and we want those suffering with AIDS to especially know that Jesus embraces each and everyone of them.

 They know the Church sees it as a sin.  But as a repressed social minority they want to know if they are still loved.

 

[RobertLGarrett]

It is very hard, however, to have a dialog when every statement against the destructiveness of homosexuality is viewed as “homophobic”. Indeed, if one isn’t completely on board with the homosexual lobby, then one is viewed as a bigot.

The Divine Will for man is that we become closer to Christ, and this means forming ourselves to meet that end.

Precisely. I believe you and I are expressing the same concern.

 

[RobertLGarrett]

I’ve read the comments on this thread, and I believe that everyone is saying the same thing. The Church has a duty to identify sin, and to encourage those that fall into sin to repent.

Words, however, are extremely important when trying to convey a message. Comparisons fall flat. I read homosexual acts being compared to everything from bestiality to incest. But, to be fair, there is no comparison that would be helpful.

I think sticking to the facts, that the church sees it as a sin, because by its nature it is intrinsically evil is enough.

Now, what else do we really want gays to know?  The Church loves them, though they may sin.  We care for them.  We want their sin de-criminalized.  We want them to be treated fairly for employment and we want those suffering with AIDS to especially know that Jesus embraces each and everyone of them.

 They know the Church sees it as a sin.  But as a repressed social minority they want to know if they are still loved.

We are in agreement here caoindealbhan. However, for many, just knowing that they are still loved is not enough. They want everyone else to accept their actions as licit - they want us to cease considering their sins a sin.

This is true regardless of the sin being discussed. Again…divorce, birth control, abortion…

 

[caoindealbhan]

I forget when it came into use, but to be politically-correct has had some good influences. As a society we have realized that words are important and we must be held accountable for the words we use.

Insults, perjorative terminology, are no longer the norm. What is left? Reason and faith. These sound like good fall-backs, especially the last one.

 

[chevalier]

If he said that in Canada I bet he would be charged with hate speech. It would be interesting if he came to Canada and was arrested.

Head of state immunity, thankfully.

 

[rjs1]

If he said that in Canada I bet he would be charged with hate speech. It would be interesting if he came to Canada and was arrested.

That just confirms the suspicions of many that Canada is fast going down the toilet. Someone once said that Canada is partly like the United States, in so far as it has all the vices of the USA but few of its virtues. It is like a socialist United States.

 

[JReducation]

That just confirms the suspicions of many that Canada is fast going down the toilet. Someone once said that Canada is partly like the United States, in so far as it has all the vices of the USA but few of its virtues. It is like a socialist United States.

This confirms nothing and we have gotten of topic. Not only that, we are now on the verge of shifting in pointing the finger at an entire nation.

The Church is not here to point the finger at individuals or nations. She has been given to us to point the finger at virtue and to point the way to spiritual union with the Divine. She points out sin as a means of pointing to salvation, not as a means of devaluating an entire group of people, their culture, their faith and their moral values.

Fraternally,

JR

 

[KingAlfred]

That just confirms the suspicions of many that Canada is fast going down the toilet. Someone once said that Canada is partly like the United States, in so far as it has all the vices of the USA but few of its virtues. It is like a socialist United States.

‘Hate-speech’ statutes are scary. Talk about mind-control. That’s totally unAmerican. I’d be doing life in Canada, in some underground prison-mine in the Arctic Circle.

 

[caoindealbhan]

Now, now… when you know the Truth, as the Roman Catholic Church does, we can afford to have far more patience than those that want to be correct but have no hope in being.

 

[KingAlfred]

Now, now… when you know the Truth, as the Roman Catholic Church does, we can afford to have far more patience than those that want to be correct but have no hope in being.

To be American is to have *radically free *thought and expression. Without those, there is no United States of America.

 

[JReducation]

To be American is to have *radically free *thought and expression. Without those, there is no United States of America.

Let’s all remember that we are Catholics first and Americans second. Sometimes, the Church commands that we restrain our freedom to use speech. Her voice and authority on faith and morals is superior to any other.

I’ll never forget a young brother in our community once made this comment at the table. “This is America. I can say whatever I want.”

The Minister was not impressed and wanted the brother to understand this. He turned around and said to the novice, “You are ordered to think anything you want, but not say it until you have the Minister’s permission to speak freely.”

We all looked at both and wondered what it was about. After about 20 minutes the Minister said, “Free speech is a gift that can easily be taken away through Divine authority when it is arrogantly used.”

I learned a great lesson that day.

Fraternally,

JR

 

[caoindealbhan]

Dear King Alfred,

                          I'm afraid I disagree with you.  By radically-free expression, I believe that you are saying that a person can express themselves without considering the consequences.  A legal example would be yelling "fire" in a theatre where there was none, or placing grafitti on other's belongings.

                             Correct information said in a polite and respectful manner has far more impact.  We speak in order to be heard.  If we are abusive in expression people hear our abuse, not our message.

               God bless America! :blessyou:

 

[estesbob]

To be American is to have *radically free *thought and expression. Without those, there is no United States of America.

A member of our parish confronted our pastor(an imigrant from Poland) after a preetypointed sermon on abortion. The parishioner said “Father you dont understand, in America we have feeedom of speech” To which father replied"Yes, and you have freedom to go to hell".

 

[Elizabeth502]

Responding to previous comments about ambivalence or silence from priests & bishops…

My theory is that it’s because previously gay priests and gay behavior by priests has been allowed to flourish. Given the priest shortage and given how some of these current (previously ordained) gay priests might be simply Platonic friends of straight priests & bishops, silence or lukewarm response is not so surprising.

It’s going to take a generation of these priests disappearing before the clergy is restored to normalcy. (Out with the straight & gay pederasts; out with gay priests who feel compelled forever to use the priesthood to “come out” and in many cases to find boyfriends within the priesthood. Out with seminaries that allow or even promote a “gay culture” within them that alienates straight seminarians, causing them to leave or never join.)

I know someone in charge of formation for young diocesan seminarians. Disclosure of one’s sexuality & tendencies & interest in controlling oneself is now (finally) a major feature of formation. No longer will there be unanswered questions, never-to-be-dealt-with sexuality, or repression. It will take probably 15 years before the trend is reversed & you will not see ambivalence on the part of bishops.

 

[caoindealbhan]

Dear Elizabeth502,
In faith you are hoping that gay seminarians are going to find a respectful formation situation to become healthy, respected gay priests.

 

[RobertLGarrett]

Dear Elizabeth502,

                            In faith you are hoping that gay seminarians are going to find a respectful formation situation to become healthy, respected gay priests.

If someone entering the seminary identifies themselves as “gay,” they more than likely have “deep-seated” homosexual tendencies and should not be allowed in the seminary.
vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccatheduc/documents/rc_con_ccatheduc_doc_20051104_istruzione_en.html

What we would all hope for, is that a qualified seminarian find a respectful formation situation to become a healthy, respected priest.

 

[caoindealbhan]

Dear Mr. Garrett,

                         I read the website and I'm rather sad that my Church would interpret a person identifying themselves as gay would not be seen as called to Holy Orders.  I could understand if they admitted to homosexual acts, but not for being gay alone.

                           In faith, I will need to struggle with the acceptance of this dichotomy.  Since gays are loved and they can be gay, but not as priests.

                           Sorry Elizabeth, it will take another 100 to 200 years if even that to remove gay people from the priesthood.  If I felt called to the priesthood, and knew I was gay, I would lie too, and say God understands even if the Church doesn't, yet.

 

[RobertLGarrett]

Dear Mr. Garrett,

                         I read the website and I'm rather sad that my Church would interpret a person identifying themselves as gay would not be seen as called to Holy Orders.  I could understand if they admitted to homosexual acts, but not for being gay alone.

                           In faith, I will need to struggle with the acceptance of this dichotomy.  Since gays are loved and they can be gay, but not as priests.

I’m guessing that is because you reject Church teaching regarding homosexual desire being disordered?

Also, personally, I don’t believe “gay” is a static state-of-being. I’m not sure that the Church takes a stand on that, but I believe a person’s being is not defined by their disordered desires. IOW…a man is a man. A woman is a woman. A priest is a priest.

 

[JReducation]

If someone entering the seminary identifies themselves as “gay,” they more than likely have “deep-seated” homosexual tendencies and should not be allowed in the seminary.
vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccatheduc/documents/rc_con_ccatheduc_doc_20051104_istruzione_en.html

What we would all hope for, is that a qualified seminarian find a respectful formation situation to become a healthy, respected priest.

When the Holy See speaks of deep seated homosexual tendencies, she’s referring to individuals who have been involved in a gay lifestyle or gay intercourse. She’s not ruling out gay people who have been celibate.

The Church tries to be consistent with her statement in the CCC, to separate and disntinguish between the activity and the orientation. Every human being has some kind of sinful orientation or some psychologicl weakness. The Church understands this.

She’s not looking for perfect human beings to become priests, religious or lay leaders. She’s looking for holy people not just to avoid another catastrophe, because there will be others of different kinds. She is looking for holy people for the priesthood, religious life and lay leadership, because holy people are intruments of grace for the entire Mystical Body.

Fraternally,

JR

 

[Kevin42]

Dear Mr. Garrett,

                         I read the website and I'm rather sad that my Church would interpret a person identifying themselves as gay would not be seen as called to Holy Orders.  I could understand if they admitted to homosexual acts, but not for being gay alone.

                           In faith, I will need to struggle with the acceptance of this dichotomy.  Since gays are loved and they can be gay, but not as priests.

                           Sorry Elizabeth, it will take another 100 to 200 years if even that to remove gay people from the priesthood.  If I felt called to the priesthood, and knew I was gay, I would lie too, and say God understands even if the Church doesn't, yet.

I think if you will look closely at the Church, and her reasoning for not letting those with deep seated homosexual tendencies into the priesthood, you will find the arguments very compelling and understandable. Either way, no one has a right to become a priest. You are called by God through Holy Mother Church. If you choose to lie to the Church, then you lie to God. If the Church does not call certain men to be priests, they should accept that as God’s will, and humble themselves before it.

Peace and good.