Pope Francis: Who am I to judge gay people?

  • Thread starter Thread starter pepipop
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Greg_N said:
And lepers aren’t our brothers and sisters in Christ?
Click to expand...
Of course. I’m sorry if you don’t see the analogy. You can read about St. Damian to see how lepers were often treated. But if you’d like to discuss it, that should be a separate
thread.
 
EmperorNapoleon said:
This is where you lose me. Homosexuality is a sexual orientation
Click to expand...
The only physical sexual orientation is heterosexual. Homosexuals have a physically heterosexual orientation in how their body is designed from birth. Homosexuality is a state of mind, and the mind is very dynamic and is constantly changing. But as for the topic of the OP, the Pope basically paraphrased what is in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. We are to love the sinner, but hate the sin.
 
MODERATOR NOTE

Please stay on the topic of the original post. Keep the discussion within the context of what the Holy Father said

This is not a thread to debate if homosexual conduct is a sin, nor is it a general debate thread on homosexuality

Keep the discussion within the context of what the Holy Father said
 
ewtn.com/library/curia/cdfhomop.htm

Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church issued on October 1, 1986.
“It has been argued that the homosexual orientation in certain cases is not the result of deliberate choice; and so the homosexual person would then have no choice but to behave in a homosexual fashion. Lacking freedom, such a person, even if engaged in homosexual activity, would not be culpable. Here, the Church’s wise moral tradition is necessary since it warns against generalizations in judging individual cases. In fact, circumstances may exist, or may have existed in the past, which would reduce or remove the culpability of the individual in a given instance; or other circumstances may increase it. What is at all costs to be avoided is the unfounded and demeaning assumption that the sexual behaviour of homosexual persons is always and totally compulsive and therefore inculpable.”
Click to expand...
Given at Rome, 1 October 1986.
Click to expand...
Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, Prefect
Click to expand...
 
EmperorNapoleon said:
This is where you lose me. Homosexuality is a sexual orientation and there is no such thing a person who “used to be” a homosexual. There are plenty of homosexual people who choose to be celibate or even engage in heterosexual relations, but their orientation remains the same and there has never been any documented case of a change in orientation from homosexual to heterosexual or heterosexual to homosexual. As far as the science is concerned, its a fixed attribute.
Click to expand...
This is a myth. Homosexuality is NOT a fixed attribute.

I won’t derail the thread you can refer to forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=781049
 
To get back to the OP, I’d just say that, whatever the cause, Pope Francis extended a hand of kindness while still upholding the Catechism. That’s clear from the video of the press conference that was posted earlier. 🙂
 
StuMondo said:
Point 1) Everyone has their own cross that they take up everyday. That cross can be thought about as a sin orientation that they fight everyday. A sin orientation being a set of sins that the individual is subject to temptation by those sins.

…

Everyone has a specific and unique sin orientation they deal with everyday.
Click to expand...
Sounds right to me.
Point 2) Sin orientations can change over time. Perhaps you did not used to struggle with gluttony or lust but you did used to struggle with vanity. At a previous time, you’re sin orientation was different than it is today.
Click to expand...
Point 3) It is not your choice to have your sin orientation. No follower of Christ wants to be a sinful person, yet we’re still tempted and give in to our temptations from our sin orientation.
Click to expand...
This all sounds right too, although I would say that some sin orientations are less flexible than others. Some, like pride in some people, might be not be flexible at all.
Point 4) Homosexuality is not a sexual orientation. It is a sin orientation. In other words, homosexuality is not a state of being, like your race or your gender. Have you ever met someone who used to be white but now is black? Have you ever met someone who used to be a guy? (not naturally anyway)
Click to expand...
I agree that homosexuality is not like race or gender. However, there are some people who describe themselves as homosexual because they desire close intimacy with people of the same sex, even though they are not interested in having sex. So it’s not clear to me that it’s always a sin orientation.
However, there are people who used to be gay. The fact that there are people who used to be gay, or even people who are gay that used to be straight debunks the theory that it is a state of being.
Click to expand...
I really don’t know. I take them at their words, but these things don’t change easily – and trying to make them change can actually make them much worse, depending on the method. Also, there are lots of people (like myself) who experience attractions to both sexes, so it wouldn’t be accurate to say that such people “became gay” or “became straight”, simply because they act that way. I don’t think any male just “becomes gay”, out of the blue.
Likewise, homosexuality is not a choice. Do you choose to struggle with vanity or gluttony? Of course the answer is no!
Click to expand...
Thank you.
Therefore, no Christian should affirm homosexuality as they would not affirm any other sin. But no homosexual should be proud of a sin they struggle with.
Click to expand...
Very true. But many homosexuals have never heard the Gospel, in all its mercy, so I think we can forgive them for their pride. It is our duty to preach to them!
Can you imagine if a person was out in public proclaiming, “I’m a thief and I’m proud of it. And I’m going to continue to thieve.”
Click to expand...
Well, it’s unclear whether calling oneself “gay” is like this. (Moderator: This is how our posts are on topic – because we are discussing whether Francis is accurate in describing people as “gay”). A thief is a person who has stolen, and steals.

Some people use the word “gay”, however, as a term for someone who is attracted to people of the same sex, even if he or she has never acted on that attraction. I don’t know if this is a good idea. There is a growing movement of celibate gays who call themselves “Side B”, calling themselves gay individuals but fully embracing Church teaching on sexual morality.
Should a person who struggles with sin X and is proud of it and continues to execute sin X be allowed into the priesthood? The simple answer is no. But what about a person who struggles with sin X who isn’t proud of it, is a person who has the Lord at the center of their life and is working to not execute sin X. Should he not be allowed into the priesthood?
Click to expand...
CCC 2358: “Every sign of unjust discrimination in their [homosexuals] regard should be avoided.”
Click to expand...
Is it just or unjust to disallow someone with this particular sin orientation to join the priesthood?
Click to expand...
It does seem like discrimination. We would let murderers be priests, if they were repentant. So what makes homosexuality so dangerous to living a holy and single life? Even “deep-seated” homosexuality?

(I agree, of course, that homosexuals who are proud of it and unrepentant shouldn’t be admitted.)
 
agnes_therese said:
agnes therese;11039299:
Yes, it does. Hope that they will be treated as our brothers and sisters in Christ, rather than lepers, as they are by some.
Click to expand...
Of course. I’m sorry if you don’t see the analogy. You can read about St. Damian to see how lepers were often treated.
Click to expand...
I see it; but it’s paltry.

(Keeping somewhat on topic); homosexuality/SSA is disordered at its core; it is a privation of our God given natural tendencies through the distortion/absence of a good that would otherwise obtain rather than a positive reality in its own right. In view of this; individuals exhibiting such behaviour should be treated in accordance with others who suffer from certain disorders, diseases or ill-conditions, all of whom, are our brothers and sisters in Christ. A leper should not feel any less respected among his Christian peers than one who suffers from homosexual attraction, to use them (lepers) as a standard of maltreatment or neglect is inappropriate.
 
njlisa said:
Unless one is on the wrong side of that pronouncement, it’s impossible to know how it feels. Being called brothers and sisters does instill more hope, I’m thinking. You may think that hope is not warranted.
Click to expand...
You are saying the Pope is not Catholic.
 
Fogwalker said:
On these forums, I frequently see people speak the truth uncharitably. In the mainstream media, I frequently see people speak falsehood charitably. The beauty of Francis’ messages is his ability to speak the truth charitably.

The post I quoted above seems to imply that all proclamations of truth are inherently charitable. Is that what you mean here?
Click to expand...
The charity card is usually a cudgel to stifle debate.
 
njlisa said:
Male on male homosexuality was accepted in ancient Greece, and its society did not come tumbling down instantly. Ancient Greece continues to have an impact on today’s thinking. In fact, Plato’s Symposium celebrates such relationships. This behavior was part and parcel of the idea that women were not worthy companions.
Click to expand...
Cultures that fallen into grave evil do not last. That is not new news.
 
fix said:
You are saying the Pope is not Catholic.
Click to expand...
Um … hardly. My post was in response to the following comment: “The inclination is disordered and the Pope teaches that and always will. That is not uncharitable it is true no matter how many deny it.”

I was suggesting that the tone of that statement might be offputting, in comparison to the Pope’s outstretched hand of love.
fix said:
Cultures that fallen into grave evil do not last. That is not new news.
Click to expand...
As for this post, I went off topic so I don’t want to revisit it.
 
njlisa said:
Um … hardly. My post was in response to the following comment: “The inclination is disordered and the Pope teaches that and always will. That is not uncharitable it is true no matter how many deny it.”

I was suggesting that the tone of that statement might be offputting, in comparison to the Pope’s outstretched hand of love.

As for this post, I went off topic so I don’t want to revisit it.
Click to expand...
People seeking to be offended will always find a way to be offended.
 
Out of sheer exhaustion and lack of anything new to contribute to this discussion, I am unsubscribing to this thread. Happy discussing! :coolinoff:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top