Priest In Texas Newspaper: "Homosexual Acts Lead To The Damnation Of Souls" [EWTN]

  • Thread starter Thread starter EWTN_News
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
So you disagree with the Priest that homosexual acts lead to the damnation of the soul? Can you show us how that is contrary to church teaching?
For one thing, the Church teaches that more than objective mortal sin is necessary for mortal sin to exist. Also, even if one commits a mortal sin, one has the option of forgiveness. I can see where the argument could be made that the priest overstated the Church’s position. The statement made, out of context, is a statement of something other than fact.

Homosexual acts may lead to the damnation of the soul or sometimes the lead to damnation. He could have even couched the phrase in a more theological light.

Unrepented homosexual acts objectively lead to the damnation of the soul.

I am sure the priest in question fully understands all these caveats, but when writing, it is easy to miss a point here or there. Once the stir was in full fury, it was too late to back down, especially in light of erroneous opposition.
 
does the bishops say that homosexuality is ok?
stop playing with words. watch for the devil working on you.
Read the document. Find out for yourself. Are you afraid of the document and what it asks in terms of ministering to gays?
 
Read the document. Find out for yourself. Are you afraid of the document and what it asks in terms of ministering to gays?
I did -and the document says the same thing I said:

Cultural Obstacles

All ministry to persons with a homosexual inclination must be guided by Church teaching on sexuality. The basis of this ministry, if it is to be effective, has to be a true understanding of the human person and of the place of sexuality in human life. “**Departure from the Church’steaching, or silence about it, in an effort to provide pastoral care is neither caring nor pastoral.”**30
Love and truth go together


And later:

At the same time, there are features specific to contemporary Western culture that inhibit the reception of Church teaching on sexual issues in general and on homosexuality in particular. For example, there is a strong tendency toward moral relativism in our society. Many do notadmit an objective basis for moral judgments. They recognize no acts as intrinsically evil but maintain that judgments of good and bad are entirely subjective. In this view, matters of sexual morality should be left for individuals to decide according to their own preferences and values, with the only restriction that they not cause manifest harm to another individual.
 
Read the document. Find out for yourself. Are you afraid of the document and what it asks in terms of ministering to gays?
and just how do you minister to gay? how can they know it is a sin if we dont tell them? how do you tell them?
 
Are you suggesting that the devil is at work even in the language of the letter to American Bishops from the USCCB that I quoted above?

Here is the complete document, 26 pages long: usccb.org/doctrine/Ministry.pdf
The USCCB has no standing. Here is the directive to the Bishops from the Vatican: Letter To The Bishops Of The Catholic Church On The Pastoral Care Of Homosexual Persons.

P.S. It says homosexual acts are an intrinsic moral evil that are never morally acceptable.
 
The USCCB has no standing.
What does this mean? It has no authority? No weight? It should be ignored? What?
But this is 24 years old and counting. Have there been no Vatican directives on ministering to gays since then? Can you quote what this document states about love and hate, etc (what we are discussing now)?
P.S. It says homosexual acts are an intrinsic moral evil that are never morally acceptable.
I am sure that it does. All Catholic documents do. The question is, what ELSE does it say about how to treat gays and minister to them? Does it address that?
 
This document has one, and at the most, three paragraphs about miinistry and understanding other than to make sure that bishops are teaching that homosexuality is wrong. This document is a defense of the immorality of homosexuality and a call to bishops to resist the pressures within the church that would suggest otherwise.

I have no objection to these things; they are all quite familiar, but not on the topic I have been commenting on. The letter I quoted is 26 pages long (MUCH longer than this Ratzinger letter) and goes into much greater detail about how to minister to gays in our contemporary society. And it warns bishops NOT to sin in the process of their ministry in more ways than ONLY teaching heresy (which of course would be a problem).
 
What does this mean? It has no authority? No weight? It should be ignored? What?
It has no authority.
But this is 24 years old and counting. Have there been no Vatican directives on ministering to gays since then? Can you quote what this document states about love and hate, etc (what we are discussing now)?
24 years… so what? Homosexual behavior was sinful then, is sinful now, and will remain sinful in the future. Church teaching is not going to change just because you don’t like it.
I am sure that it does. All Catholic documents do. The question is, what ELSE does it say about how to treat gays and minister to them? Does it address that?
It says lots of things, but the part you don’t like is that homosexual attraction is intrinsically disordered and homosexual behavior is gravely sinful.

You provided Bible proofs condemning homosexual behavior in another post IIRC. :rolleyes:
 
How did Fr Rodriguez misstate Church teaching?
I did not say that he did. I am saying that the only logical way to read the Bishop’s OpEd is as saying that neither of the priests’ positions were correct.
 
what does that mean to you? God loves everyone? are you sugesting that God accepts homosexuals without any condemnation? are you saying that it is ok with God?
I am saying that God loves everyone - and that means what it says. God really, actually, truly loves everyone. I think that God accepts all sinners without condemnation, which is not the same thing as saying that sinning is OK with God.

So many Christians seem to want to believe that God loves them more or differently than He loves others. Or that their own sins are somehow less offensive to God than the sins of another. We all sin. God loves and accepts us all. He wants us all to sin less - and to sin not at all if we can manage it. The Bishop is pointing out that telling others that their particular sins are the ones God hates is neither consistent with the Gospel nor conducive to bringing anyone to Christ.
 
What does this mean? It has no authority? No weight? It should be ignored? What?

But this is 24 years old and counting. Have there been no Vatican directives on ministering to gays since then? Can you quote what this document states about love and hate, etc (what we are discussing now)?

I am sure that it does. All Catholic documents do. The question is, what ELSE does it say about how to treat gays and minister to them? Does it address that?
Like any other mortal sin the sinner must be told the sin is grave. How can you minister to someone leaving the discussion of the sinful act out? I don’t get it.
 
I did not say that he did. I am saying that the only logical way to read the Bishop’s OpEd is as saying that neither of the priests’ positions were correct.
Ok- because in the interview I heard Fr Rodriguez quote directly from the Catechism.
 
I did not say that he did. I am saying that the only logical way to read the Bishop’s OpEd is as saying that neither of the priests’ positions were correct.
What did Fr Rodriguez say that was incorrect?
 
I am saying that God loves everyone - and that means what it says. God really, actually, truly loves everyone. I think that God accepts all sinners without condemnation, which is not the same thing as saying that sinning is OK with God.

So many Christians seem to want to believe that God loves them more or differently than He loves others. Or that their own sins are somehow less offensive to God than the sins of another. We all sin. God loves and accepts us all. He wants us all to sin less - and to sin not at all if we can manage it. The Bishop is pointing out that telling others that their particular sins are the ones God hates is neither consistent with the Gospel nor conducive to bringing anyone to Christ.
There are really a very few mortal sins. The homosexual act is an intrinsically evil one. That sin is elevated so it is more grievous. The Catechism affirms this.

III. THE DIFFERENT KINDS OF SINS
1852
There are a great many kinds of sins. Scripture provides several lists of them. The Letter to the Galatians contrasts the works of the flesh with the fruit of the Spirit: "Now the works of the flesh are plain: fornication, impurity, licentiousness, idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, anger, selfishness, dissension, factions, envy, drunkenness, carousing, and the like. I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do such things shall not inherit the Kingdom of God."127
1853 Sins can be distinguished according to their objects, as can every human act; or according to the virtues they oppose, by excess or defect; or according to the commandments they violate. They can also be classed according to whether they concern God, neighbor, or oneself; they can be divided into spiritual and carnal sins, or again as sins in thought, word, deed, or omission. The root of sin is in the heart of man, in his free will, according to the teaching of the Lord: "For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, fornication, theft, false witness, slander. These are what defile a man."128 But in the heart also resides charity, the source of the good and pure works, which sin wounds.

IV. THE GRAVITY OF SIN: MORTAL AND VENIAL SIN
1854
Sins are rightly evaluated according to their gravity. The distinction between mortal and venial sin, already evident in Scripture,129 became part of the tradition of the Church. It is corroborated by human experience.
1855 Mortal sin destroys charity in the heart of man by a grave violation of God’s law; it turns man away from God, who is his ultimate end and his beatitude, by preferring an inferior good to him.
Venial sin allows charity to subsist, even though it offends and wounds it.
1856 Mortal sin, by attacking the vital principle within us - that is, charity - necessitates a new initiative of God’s mercy and a conversion of heart which is normally accomplished within the setting of the sacrament of reconciliation:
 
When the will sets itself upon something that is of its nature incompatible with the charity that orients man toward his ultimate end, then the sin is mortal by its very object . . . whether it contradicts the love of God, such as blasphemy or perjury, or the love of neighbor, such as homicide or adultery. . . . But when the sinner’s will is set upon something that of its nature involves a disorder, but is not opposed to the love of God and neighbor, such as thoughtless chatter or immoderate laughter and the like, such sins are venial.130 1857 For a *sin *to be mortal, three conditions must together be met: "Mortal sin is sin whose object is grave matter and which is also committed with full knowledge and deliberate consent."131
1858 Grave matter is specified by the Ten Commandments, corresponding to the answer of Jesus to the rich young man: "Do not kill, Do not commit adultery, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Do not defraud, Honor your father and your mother."132 The gravity of sins is more or less great: murder is graver than theft. One must also take into account who is wronged: violence against parents is in itself graver than violence against a stranger.
1859 Mortal sin requires full knowledge and complete consent. It presupposes knowledge of the sinful character of the act, of its opposition to God’s law. It also implies a consent sufficiently deliberate to be a personal choice. Feigned ignorance and hardness of heart133 do not diminish, but rather increase, the voluntary character of a sin.
1860 Unintentional ignorance can diminish or even remove the imputability of a grave offense. But no one is deemed to be ignorant of the principles of the moral law, which are written in the conscience of every man. The promptings of feelings and passions can also diminish the voluntary and free character of the offense, as can external pressures or pathological disorders. Sin committed through malice, by deliberate choice of evil, is the gravest.
1861 Mortal sin is a radical possibility of human freedom, as is love itself. It results in the loss of charity and the privation of sanctifying grace, that is, of the state of grace. If it is not redeemed by repentance and God’s forgiveness, it causes exclusion from Christ’s kingdom and the eternal death of hell, for our freedom has the power to make choices for ever, with no turning back. However, although we can judge that an act is in itself a grave offense, we must entrust judgment of persons to the justice and mercy of God.
1862 One commits venial sin when, in a less serious matter, he does not observe the standard prescribed by the moral law, or when he disobeys the moral law in a grave matter, but without full knowledge or without complete consent.
1863 Venial sin weakens charity; it manifests a disordered affection for created goods; it impedes the soul’s progress in the exercise of the virtues and the practice of the moral good; it merits temporal punishment. Deliberate and unrepented venial sin disposes us little by little to commit mortal sin. However venial sin does not break the covenant with God. With God’s grace it is humanly reparable. "Venial sin does not deprive the sinner of sanctifying grace, friendship with God, charity, and consequently eternal happiness."134

While he is in the flesh, man cannot help but have at least some light sins. But do not despise these sins which we call “light”: if you take them for light when you weigh them, tremble when you count them. A number of light objects makes a great mass; a number of drops fills a river; a number of grains makes a heap. What then is our hope? Above all, confession.135 1864 "Therefore I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven."136 There are no limits to the mercy of God, but anyone who deliberately refuses to accept his mercy by repenting, rejects the forgiveness of his sins and the salvation offered by the Holy Spirit.137 Such hardness of heart can lead to final impenitence and eternal loss.
 
Are you suggesting that the devil is at work even in the language of the letter to American Bishops from the USCCB that I quoted above?

Here is the complete document, 26 pages long: usccb.org/doctrine/Ministry.pdf
What is it that you see in the document to support your pro-homosexual position? It is consistent with every other document I have read in the Church regarding homosexuality.

Just pointing to a document and saying “it’s in there - read it” is an ineffective method of trying to prove a point. I’ve read it and still have no idea what you are getting at.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top