Practicing gay catholics shouldn't receive communion

  • Thread starter Thread starter 123Strontium
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Rabbitthekitten said:
I don’t see how people who are in a loving relationship hurts anyone else. Whether they are gay, straight or whatever. I think the most important thing is to be in a loving relationship, just sleeping around, I don’t think that is particularly healthy. But how can two people in love be classed as sinful? I know this is not a widespread view in Catholicism, but I just don’t understand how love can be wrong.
Click to expand...
Rabbit,

This is the dilema. How is it you define love?
 
Rabbitthekitten said:
Christ taught us to question established thought.-

While the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them. - Matthew 22:41

He questioned the religious leaders of his time. Church teaching has changed through time. Vatican Councils, Councils of Trent, Etc…

It is not wrong to question church teaching, it helps us to understand our faith.
Click to expand...
Rabbit,

You are to continually form your conscience and in that regard Church Teachings are part of that formation, acceptance, not rejection.
 
Rabbitthekitten said:
The infallible argument is an easy way for conservatives to resist evolution of Church thinking. What a Pope said 200 years ago on a given subject might not be relevant in today’s world.
Click to expand...
Rabbit,

The Church does not conform to the world, nor should you, Pau says…do not be conformed to the world but be transformed by the renewal of your mind…you need to change your mind that conforms to the modern world and not the other way around.
 
Rabbitthekitten said:
Ok, look at it another way. Imagine a gay man in a loving relationship. Devout Catholic but in a relationship with another man. He has sexual relations but confesses them every Saturday, then is free of sin for communion on Sunday. Technically, as far as I’m aware, this person can take the Eucharist no problem? But it circumvents church teaching. Is this wrong? Or is it better not to ‘cheat the system’ and live how God made him?
Click to expand...
Rabbit,

This denies repentance…this denies changing to conform your mind to the teachings of the Church…better that the man stay in an unnatural/immoral sinful relationship and not make a mockery of the Eucharist…this is Scandal…
 
Rabbitthekitten said:
Yes, but the difference is that murdering people causes direct harm to others. Being in a gay relationship doesn’t.
Click to expand...
Rabbit,

Lust, Rape, Incest, Prostitution, Homosexual acts, Masturbation are all sins against Chastity…if one of these men led the other into sin then it harms at least one of them…because one is led and one consents…even if one person is harmed it is harmful…
 
Rabbitthekitten said:
I’ve not been challenged because there has been no real arguments. Just ‘it’s a sin, the church says so’. But why?
Click to expand...
Rabbit,

Sin is defined by the Church in the Catechism and you should read it…you need to change your mind and be transformed by the renewal of your mind…your asking questions suggests that you have not made an effort to form your conscience and you may want to consider doing that…
 
Rabbitthekitten said:
Ok, so why is there so much focus on homosexuals? Why not on unmarried hetrosexuals?
Click to expand...
Rabbit,

Unmarried heterosexuals have not banded together as LGBT trying to change laws, silence thought and propagandize lies…that is why…
 
Rabbitthekitten said:
What divine revelation?
Click to expand...
Rabbit,

In many and various ways God spoke to us in part through the Prophets and in these last days he spoke to us through His Son…and this revelation is Apostolic and is part of the Creed and through which we get a profession of Faith that is divinely revealed…Have you read the Catechism?
 
PatriceA said:
Once again, you are avoiding the questions I and several other posters have asked you. Can’t have a proper debate if its always one-sided.
Click to expand...
90Domer said:
I’ve noticed that he either bolts or answers the questions with an unfair attack. Methinks that resembles someone with an agenda and not someone wanting to debate.
Click to expand...
Me thinks it resembles someone who when faced with the truth, their logic is exposed for what it is…hot air! The truth always prevails. Especially when explained as well as you, PatriceA and many, many others have done here!..🙂

Peace, Mark
 
DexUK said:
It is neither in opposition nor agreement. The Church has not ruled on the matter.
Click to expand...
Dex,

The Church distinguishes between Homosexuals by accident and those that claim essentialism without stating that it accepts this notion…
A distinction is drawn, and it seems with some reason, between homosexuals whose tendency comes from a false education, from a lack of normal sexual development, from habit, from bad example, or from other similar causes, and is transitory or at least not incurable; and homosexuals who are definitively such because of some kind of innate instinct or a pathological constitution judged to be incurable.
Click to expand...
In regard to this second category of subjects, some people conclude that their tendency is so natural that it justifies in their case homosexual relations within a sincere communion of life and love analogous to marriage, in so far as such homosexuals feel incapable of enduring a solitary life.
Click to expand...
In the pastoral field, these homosexuals must certainly be treated with understanding and sustained in the hope of overcoming their personal difficulties and their inability to fit into society. Their culpability will be judged with prudence. But no pastoral method can be employed which would give moral justification to these acts on the grounds that they would be consonant with the condition of such people. For according to the objective moral order, homosexual relations are acts which lack an essential and indispensable finality. In Sacred Scripture they are condemned as a serious depravity and even presented as the sad consequence of rejecting God.[18] This judgment of Scripture does not of course permit us to conclude that all those who suffer from this anomaly are personally responsible for it, but it does attest to the fact that homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered and can in no case be approved of.
Click to expand...
The Catholic Medical Association states…

catholiceducation.org/articles/sexuality/ho0039.html
It is, therefore, probably wise to avoid wherever possible using the words “homosexual” and “heterosexual” as nouns since such usage implies a fixed state and an equivalence between the natural state of man and woman as created by God and persons experiencing same sex attractions or behaviors.
Click to expand...
I pointed out on this thread No Silence For This Lamb

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=766634
There are groups that deny the notion that Homosexuality is fixed, immutable and many studies and prominent thinkers have shown that homosexuals can and do change. These reports are available and prove the false teaching of the APA.
Click to expand...
The number of “ No” votes-votes to keep “homosexuality” in the DSM as a mental disorder: 3,810 when compared to the Number of “Yes” votes-votes to remove “homosexuality” from the DSM as a mental disorder: 5,854, should be viewed as those that believed homosexuality is a mental disorder did not vanish and go away and probably did not change their opinion and they have a right to a dissenting opinion, and point of view protected by law. There are 3,810 dissenting voices to the gay agenda within the ranks of the APA and their opinion and view can and should be honored.
Click to expand...
There are at least 3,810 members of the American Psychiatric Association that believe that Homosexuality belongs in the DSM and I can provide numerous studies that are available that show that change is possible for Homosexuals, including 2000 clients having been cared for by Dr. Nicolosi…you in the past said this about Nicolosi and his 2000…
So quack cures are alright then?
Click to expand...
I here on in shall feel free to describe ‘reparative therapy’ as a ‘quack cure’.
Click to expand...
That’s good enough for me.
Click to expand...
I’d love to do a follow up with all those 2000.
Click to expand...
I wonder how many ‘succeeded’ long term?
Click to expand...
You also stated…
From personal experience, although of course this would be statistically untested, I know and have known and have been called upon to be an informal counsellor by a number of homosexual people. Precisely TWO people, over 15 years, representing an order of magnitude less than ‘48%’ have ever acknowledged needing anything so much as a prozac in their entire lives. None whatsoever have ever gone anywhere near illegal drugs, let alone needed treatment.
Click to expand...
I am not sure how it came to be that you were called to be an informal counsellor, perhaps you may want to provide some insight into your counselling experience…
 
Rabbitthekitten said:
No no no. All I’m saying is that you need to think outside of the Catholic box on occasion, look at my reply to Erlembald. They got my point, it’s not a case avoiding anything. It’s a case of taking responsibility for your faith. I don’t think anyone who just accepts what they are told is doing the right thing. That’s the point I am trying to make.
Click to expand...
Why are you assuming that just because someone accepts what the Church teaches can’t think for themselves? Perhaps they have “questioned” and came to the conclusion that the Church was right.
 
I am one of the people about whom this thread has been speaking. I am Catholic and been in a gay monogamous relationship with my partner for over 15 years. I love the Church and attend Mass, but do not receive Holy Communion because I know that I am unworthy and that I am not in communion with the Church. Although this is painful, I have come to realize that God chose me first. I didn’t initiate my conversion to the Catholic faith - the Holy Spirit brought me into the Church. I have faith in that calling and that God knew what He was doing when He called me to convert in 1992 and that things will work out. I understand the testimony that you have given on this thread and it is flawlessly logical, and I accuse myself to be a sinner. Our understanding has changed quite a bit since the times of Leviticus, Paul, Augustine, and Thomas Aquinas (when lepers were untouchable and women were considered unclean at certain times, etc). I am hopeful that a new Revelation from the Holy Spirit may shed a new light of understanding on this issue too. Until then, I pray for God’s mercy and forgiveness. I am not here to argue and will not be posting again. Please pray for me and thank you for your insights.
 
CopticChristian said:
Rabbit,

Unmarried heterosexuals have not banded together as LGBT trying to change laws, silence thought and propagandize lies…that is why…
Click to expand...
I know this is an old topic, and I know I shouldn’t really have anything to say about this particular subject, but this statement isn’t really true. Pre-marital sex is now very widely accepted as being fine and dandy, and it’s often taught as such in schools. It’s probably more widely accepted than homosexuality - I know plenty of people who are fine with pre-marital sex, but think homosexual sex is icky or isn’t biologically correct.
 
Regular_Atheist said:
I know this is an old topic, and I know I shouldn’t really have anything to say about this particular subject, but this statement isn’t really true. Pre-marital sex is now very widely accepted as being fine and dandy, and it’s often taught as such in schools. It’s probably more widely accepted than homosexuality - I know plenty of people who are fine with pre-marital sex, but think homosexual sex is icky or isn’t biologically correct.
Click to expand...
Regular,

I don’t why you post either. Show me where those that believe in premarital sex are trying to overturn marriage laws, trying to suppress the view that marriage is between one man and one woman, rallying around the country to promote premarital sex…they just do it…
 
CopticChristian said:
Regular,

I don’t why you post either. Show me where those that believe in premarital sex are trying to overturn marriage laws, trying to suppress the view that marriage is between one man and one woman, rallying around the country to promote premarital sex…they just do it…
Click to expand...
Well, you can hardly tell me that acceptance of pre-marital sex doesn’t promote the acceptance of contraception and devalue marriage, now, can you? Wouldn’t you also agree that it encourages other ‘deviant’ behaviours, like polyamory, promiscuity and possibly even adultery?

They don’t need to rally around the country. It’s already being taught in schools, and it’s already fine and dandy in the minds of most people. Those people can then have children, who will also believe it’s fine, and thus it shall spread. People who have pre-marital sex don’t need to have a lobby, because they’re such a large group of people. They’re not a tiny minority like the homosexuals. They have much more subtle means of spreading the joys of fornication and, in fact, they already have.
 
Regular_Atheist said:
Well, you can hardly tell me that acceptance of pre-marital sex doesn’t promote the acceptance of contraception and devalue marriage, now, can you? Wouldn’t you also agree that it encourages other ‘deviant’ behaviours, like polyamory, promiscuity and possibly even adultery?

They don’t need to rally around the country. It’s already being taught in schools, and it’s already fine and dandy in the minds of most people. Those people can then have children, who will also believe it’s fine, and thus it shall spread. People who have pre-marital sex don’t need to have a lobby, because they’re such a large group of people. They’re not a tiny minority like the homosexuals. They have much more subtle means of spreading the joys of fornication and, in fact, they already have.
Click to expand...
Regular,

You sound like a rebel with a cause and you can join us in protesting all these evils.
 
Regular_Atheist said:
even I can see that our culture is infatuated with sex. Sometimes there are things that make me feel a little bit unsure.
Click to expand...
Welcome to the club! But seriously this is nothing new. We as mortal men have always been subject to temptations of the flesh. We just deny the sin exists now.

It’s one extreme to the other. We’ve gone from branding and shunning fornicators and adulterers to saying that there really is not such thing as sexual morality so long as everyone’s a consenting adult. There’s a solid middle ground there occupied by Christ who refused to condemn the women caught in adultery but then told her to go and sin no more.

We as a people have been totally incapable of following that example.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top