Pope Francis: Who am I to judge gay people?

[Glad2behome]

If that’s the definition you are using, then no, statistics cannot “say anything.”

Perhaps you didn’t mean it, but that’s what your words were saying.

This is simply untrue.

What bearing does this have on statistics?

He was made a bishop by one person, not the people. The people were more concerned with his connection with a heresy (Manichaeism), than anything else. The last I checked, their concerns were well-founded given the existence of a number of bishops-gone-rogue at the time.

+Sebastian

Okay, your right. Statistics can say a lot about current people, including persons like myself, but when I was in High School, I was held back from current opportunities just becasue the type of mother I had, and other circumstances. I was treated like I needed “extra help”, if you know what I mean.

As for your comments about Saint Austin, are you saying that he should not have been a Bishop and the Holy See should recant his Sainthood? I am not trying to put words in your mouth, just asking for clarification

 

[opus101]

If you saw a teenager get up in church and give a testimony about her commitment to keep her virginity until marriage, wouldn’t this be an inspiration?

No. It would be rather depressing. Why? Because I would expect that of a Mass-going teenager anyway. It might be an inspiration *outside * of church, but certainly not inside.

"But those tempted to homosexual actions DO deal with such voices, every day. I know that we might **wish **that homosexual activity was safely in the “murder” category of socially reprehensible wrongness, but it isn’t. In the world we live in, there needs to be exceptional support for exceptional sins. "

The “exceptionality” of homosexuality and all types of sodomy (even between heterosexuals) is the fact that it is clearly one of the 4 sins that “Cry out to God for vengeance”.

To equate a celibate homosexual with a celibate heterosexual is to try to normalize the disorder and make it more acceptable.

 

[Glad2behome]

Actually, I wasn’t talking about those who simply “mention” their struggles in this area, nor was I talking about those who mention “how cute other guys are”. I was talking about something that lies in between…namely, making a big deal about their sexual orientation and how wonderful they are for not giving in to it. I’m referring to things like a teenager’s blog that was the subject of a post not long ago…“Gay, Catholic, and Doing Fine”.

Why on earth do you feel a need to tell others that you deal with SSA? Why do you feel that they should want to hear about it? It might be okay in a prayer group setting, or some kind of group like Courage, or the confessional.But why do you feel a need to focus on yourself so much that this would even be germain to any discussion whatsoever in a Church setting?

Actually I probably would, and do, find it unnecessary, offensive and sad. Sad because the fellow is obviously so self-absorbed and obsessed with the notion that his disordered sexual orientation is relevant to others. Sad because he used the term “gay”, which does not refer to people w/ SSA struggles who are celibate. In our culture, “gay” has come to mean someone who supports and is active in that lifestyle.

Sad because there are so many, many other aspects to life on this earth than sex…why limit oneself to this label?

I think people with SSA telling others about their struggle is similar to an person that has a drug addiction or alcoholism. I don’t think a person saying “My name is John Doe and I struggle with SSA.” is equal to someone saying “I’m here, I’m queer, get used to it.”
Just a question, should Saint Austin keep his past sins to himself, and not have written his “Confessions” becasue it’s my understanding that the Church teaches heterosexual lusts and acts committed outside Marriage, are equally disordered to homosexual acts.

 

[Glad2behome]

No. It would be rather depressing. Why? Because I would expect that of a Mass-going teenager anyway. It might be an inspiration *outside * of church, but certainly not inside.

But those tempted to homosexual actions DO deal with such voices, every day. I know that we might **wish **that homosexual activity was safely in the “murder” category of socially reprehensible wrongness, but it isn’t. In the world we live in, there needs to be exceptional support for exceptional sins.

The “exceptionality” of homosexuality and all types of sodomy (even between heterosexuals) is the fact that it is clearly one of the 4 sins that “Cry out to God for vengeance”.

To equate a celibate homosexual with a celibate heterosexual is to try to normalize the disorder and make it more acceptable.

Wow…just…wow…

 

[opus101]

it’s my understanding that the Church teaches heterosexual lusts and acts committed outside Marriage, are equally disordered to homosexual acts.

No, although they are mortal sins as well, they are not considered “disordered”.

 

[Glad2behome]

No. It would be rather depressing. Why? Because I would expect that of a Mass-going teenager anyway. It might be an inspiration *outside * of church, but certainly not inside.

QUOTE"
"But those tempted to homosexual actions DO deal with such voices, every day. I know that we might **wish **that homosexual activity was safely in the “murder” category of socially reprehensible wrongness, but it isn’t. In the world we live in, there needs to be exceptional support for exceptional sins. "

The “exceptionality” of homosexuality and all types of sodomy (even between heterosexuals) is the fact that it is clearly one of the 4 sins that “Cry out to God for vengeance”.

To equate a celibate homosexual with a celibate heterosexual is to try to normalize the disorder and make it more acceptable.

So, please me allow to understand and clarify what you are saying. You believe that heterosexuals that practice fornication are somehow disordered than the chase person with SSA? I’m not trying to put words in your mouth but that is I am am interpreting what you are saying.

 

[Glad2behome]

No, although they are mortal sins as well, they are not considered “disordered”.

vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P85.HTM

Please find that in this, please do…

2351 Lust is disordered desire for or inordinate enjoyment of sexual pleasure. Sexual pleasure is morally disordered when sought for itself, isolated from its procreative and unitive purposes.

2353 Fornication is carnal union between an unmarried man and an unmarried woman. It is gravely contrary to the dignity of persons and of human sexuality which is naturally ordered to the good of spouses and the generation and education of children. Moreover, it is a grave scandal when there is corruption of the young.

I find nothing about saying there is a difference between homosexual lusts and heterosexual lusts

 

[The_Bucket]

It would be a pretty huge step if I could just tell fellow church members “I deal with same-sex attraction”, and not feel like I would be condemned, or that “people didn’t want to hear about it”. I certainly don’t support people flaunting their attractions. .

Well herein lies the rub, right? I understand where the other posters are coming from in that we shouldn’t broadcast our struggles to the world, there’s more to life and temptation than sex, all that stuff. I mean, who wants to hear me, in person, say “I struggle with pornography”? Probably no one.

The thing is that even though porn is widely distributed and widely viewed, there’s still a negative stigma attached to it. Yeah, porn “actresses” and “actors” are getting a bit more mainstream and there is the whole 50 Shades of Grey bit, but suffice to say that people have a bigger issue with porn that they do with “two gay people who love each other.”

And that’s why I think it actually is important for those with same-sex attraction but living good Christian lives to step up to the plate. There’s a massive amount of broadcasting on the other side of this issue that says “I’m actively gay, I’m proud and you need to accept me.” We need some messaging that says “Homosexual desires are nothing to be ashamed of. We’re all children of God. Acting on those desires is wrong but you are not a slave to those desires.”

Again, in an ideal situation we’d maybe be more private about our sins. But this is a world now where sin is not only broadcast to the world but it is celebrated as moral good. And it’s not just this issue. And it’s not just sexual stuff either. How can we counter their megaphone if we just tell people to go over there in the corner and suffer in silence or with a friend or two?

 

[Glad2behome]

Well herein lies the rub, right? I understand where the other posters are coming from in that we shouldn’t broadcast our struggles to the world, there’s more to life and temptation than sex, all that stuff. I mean, who wants to hear me, in person, say “I struggle with pornography”? Probably no one.

The thing is that even though porn is widely distributed and widely viewed, there’s still a negative stigma attached to it. Yeah, porn “actresses” and “actors” are getting a bit more mainstream and there is the whole 50 Shades of Grey bit, but suffice to say that people have a bigger issue with porn that they do with “two gay people who love each other.”

And that’s why I think it actually is important for those with same-sex attraction but living good Christian lives to step up to the plate. There’s a massive amount of broadcasting on the other side of this issue that says “I’m actively gay, I’m proud and you need to accept me.” We need some messaging that says “Homosexual desires are nothing to be ashamed of. We’re all children of God. Acting on those desires is wrong but you are not a slave to those desires.”

Again, in an ideal situation we’d maybe be more private about our sins. But this is a world now where sin is not only broadcast to the world but it is celebrated as moral good. And it’s not just this issue. And it’s not just sexual stuff either. How can we counter their megaphone if we just tell people to go over there in the corner and suffer in silence or with a friend or two?

That gets a triple Strangely enough, when I was involved with Pentecostalism, they encouraged persons struggling with private sin and struggles to get up in front of the Church, and they even though they had many “trials and tribulations”, they would proclaim Jesus as the Lord and Savior and they were going to “get right with God.”

It seems that we have went way of the message of the Church to those with SSA:

youtube.com/watch?v=bXq4izbFgAM

 

[The_Bucket]

Our tradition and practice of confession has changed over the centuries. It used to be quite public, much like the Pentecostal practice to which you are referring. Now we have private confession. I think the idea was wise because there is opportunity for great shaming of people who have to confess their sins in public.

And yes, we do not need to burden others by disclosing all of our warts. I’m totally in agreement. But we need to push back against the secular world’s message as it pertains to a number of issues, including this one, and we can’t do that by shutting up.

 

[Glad2behome]

Our tradition and practice of confession has changed over the centuries. It used to be quite public, much like the Pentecostal practice to which you are referring. Now we have private confession. I think the idea was wise because there is opportunity for great shaming of people who have to confess their sins in public.

And yes, we do not need to burden others by disclosing all of our warts. I’m totally in agreement. But we need to push back against the secular world’s message as it pertains to a number of issues, including this one, and we can’t do that by shutting up.

Yes, but I don’t that one needs to forget about going to Confession. Confession is an solemn obligation for Catholics, but I think one that is proclaims besides his/her struggles, he may encourage to go to Confession and be in a state of grace. We must be a witness for our Lord!

 

[Brendan_64]

Our tradition and practice of confession has changed over the centuries. It used to be quite public, much like the Pentecostal practice to which you are referring. Now we have private confession. I think the idea was wise because there is opportunity for great shaming of people who have to confess their sins in public.

And yes, we do not need to burden others by disclosing all of our warts. I’m totally in agreement. But we need to push back against the secular world’s message as it pertains to a number of issues, including this one, and we can’t do that by shutting up.

There is something to be said for publicly declaring one’s sins. Sin is NOT just a private matter between ourselves and God. When we sin, we don’t just sin against God, we sin against the entire Body of Christ on Earth. Each individual’s sin affect all of us, sins are not ‘private business’, our sins are all of our business.

 

[livingwordunity]

I find nothing about saying there is a difference between homosexual lusts and heterosexual lusts

Lust between unmarried heterosexuals is a sin but is not disordered (speaking strictly about the coital act) because “sexuality is ordered to the conjugal love of man and woman” (CCC 2360). Homosexual lust is also a sin. But homosexual attraction, though in itself not a sin when struggled against, is a disordered tendency because it is not ordered to the conjugal love of man and woman.

Catechism of the Catholic Church

2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that “homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.” They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.

2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

 

[Glad2behome]

Lust between unmarried heterosexuals is a sin but is not disordered (speaking strictly about the coital act) because “sexuality is ordered to the conjugal love of man and woman” (CCC 2360). But homosexual attraction, though in itself not a sin, is a disordered tendency because it is not ordered to the conjugal love of man and woman.

Catechism of the Catholic Church

2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that “homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.” They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.

2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

2351 Lust is disordered desire for or inordinate enjoyment of sexual pleasure. Sexual pleasure is morally disordered when sought for itself, isolated from its procreative and unitive purposes.

2353 Fornication is carnal union between an unmarried man and an unmarried woman*. It is gravely contrary to the dignity of persons and of human sexuality which is naturally ordered* to the good of spouses and the generation and education of children. Moreover, it is a grave scandal when there is corruption of the young.

And I must also add that according to the Church, Masturbation is disordered

2352 By masturbation is to be understood the deliberate stimulation of the genital organs in order to derive sexual pleasure. "Both the Magisterium of the Church, in the course of a constant tradition, and the moral sense of the faithful have been in no doubt and have firmly maintained that masturbation is an intrinsically and gravely disordered action.

and according to statistics, 90% of men do and 65% of women do:
marriage.about.com/cs/masturbation/f/masturbatfaq3.htm

Not trying to justify it, but don’t act like heterosexual fornication is disordered.

 

[livingwordunity]

2351 Lust is disordered desire for or inordinate enjoyment of sexual pleasure. Sexual pleasure is morally disordered when sought for itself, isolated from its procreative and unitive purposes.

That’s under those specific conditions. What about when the coital act doesn’t involve the use of a condom but the two are committing adultery, for example? What if this couple is open to life and they believe that they are “in love” with each other (though mistakenly, of course)? In that case, I think it’s a sin but not one that is disordered in how the male and female body is made. I think when the Catechism talks about disorder in this case it’s talking about being disordered in terms of morality. But when it talks about homosexual acts being disordered it’s in terms of the biological design of the body. So I see it as there being two types of disorder discussed in the Catechism - one biological, and the other moral.

 

[Glad2behome]

That’s under those specific conditions. What about when the coital act doesn’t involve the use of a condom but the two are committing adultery, for example? What if this couple is open to life and they believe that they are “in love” with each other (though mistakenly, of course)? In that case, I think it’s a sin but not one that is disordered in how the male and female body is made.

2352 By masturbation is to be understood the deliberate stimulation of the genital organs in order to derive sexual pleasure. "Both the Magisterium of the Church, in the course of a constant tradition, and the moral sense of the faithful have been in no doubt and have firmly maintained that masturbation is an intrinsically and gravely disordered action."137 “The deliberate use of the sexual faculty, for whatever reason, outside of marriage is essentially contrary to its purpose.” For here sexual pleasure is sought outside of "the sexual relationship which is demanded by the moral order and in which the total meaning of mutual self-giving and human procreation in the context of true love is achieved."138

And as I said before, according to statistics, most people, this means most heterosexuals have engaged in an disordered act.

 

[Glad2behome]

That’s under those specific conditions. What about when the coital act doesn’t involve the use of a condom but the two are committing adultery, for example? What if this couple is open to life and they believe that they are “in love” with each other (though mistakenly, of course)? In that case, I think it’s a sin but not one that is disordered in how the male and female body is made.* I think when the Catechism talks about disorder in this case it’s talking about being disordered in terms of morality. But when it talks about homosexual acts being disordered it’s in terms of the biological design of the body. So I see it as there being two types of disorder discussed in the Catechism - one biological, and the other moral*.

Then why does the Catechism say that? In my opinion, when the Catechism says masturbation is a disordered, it means both biological and moral.

 

[LordHaveMercy]

It was a brilliant comment because he was able to direct attention to the Church’s true teachings about persons with same sex attraction in a loving and pastoral way. “Who Am I To Judge” was EVERYWHERE that day.

 

[Glad2behome]

It was a brilliant comment because he was able to direct attention to the Church’s true teachings about persons with same sex attraction in a loving and pastoral way. “Who Am I To Judge” was EVERYWHERE that day.

Yes, amen. I believe that those that those with SSA that have sin in their past, and are unsure what to do, I believe that the Holy Father’s words will bring people to Christ and His Church.

 

[livingwordunity]

Then why does the Catechism say that? In my opinion, when the Catechism says masturbation is a disordered, it means both biological and moral.

I agree. Masturbation is disordered on both counts. But an adulterous affair between a man and a woman that is open to life is morally disordered but not biologically disordered. Masturbation is different than this adultery scenario since masturbation is intrinsically closed to life and because it does not meet the requirement of “sexuality is ordered to the conjugal love of man and woman” (CCC 2360).