Ahimsa:Being “blind” is certainly objective. Whether a blind person wants to think of herself as “disordered” is up to her.
If you can’t act on it without being quilty of a great sin, then how can it be healthy?
You and the Russians didn’t go into Heaven, you went into space.
The Holy Father declared no such thing. He said that it was possible for a Catholic to believe in a form of the Theory of Evolution without being in violation of Catholic dogma. Not that it was true or even that it was likely, but that a Catholic might reasonably consider it as a scientific hypothesis.
You haven’t shown that the Bible is wrong about anything as yet. Bald assertion is not evidence.
Love it! Thanks for the chuckle!But to insist I am unhealthy implies I need some ongoing treatment. I don’t. And I fully resent those who think I do.
Ahh. :newidea:
I justify SSA in that I believe it is something one is born with. There may be varying degrees and some may be able to act out heterosexually. There is nothing conclusive either way. Everyone is afraid of them finding proof of a biological cause of SSA. Why? When we found the gene for alcoholism it at least gave us the compassion that this not their fault. They just need support to stay sober if they were born with this gene. Well maybe we would take a different approach towards those with SSA if we found out conclusively they were born that way. We would have tons more of Courage groups yet not make anyone fit the social construct of heterosexual marriage. I for one believe God has a sense of humor and gives some of us SSA just to see how well we bear it up. He doesn’t do it out of malice or as a punishment but he certainly doesn’t intend for all of us to get married either.
Not mistakenly. Regardless of how it is phrased or tactfully spelled out, there is no explanation of the words “instrinsically disordered” that will be accepted. You’ve made the same comparisons that I, and many other have in an attempt to explain that we all, to one degree or another, suffer from the disorder of original sin. It manifests differently in each person. In my case, I am disordered in that my fallen nature is driven to drink until I am unconscious. My beloved mother is disordered in that she is obsessive compulsive, and is driven to scrupulosity and ruminating on thoughts and ideas that are not healthy for her. You could give 50 different examples and it would still not be acceptable because there is a knee-jerk defensiveness of the orientation itself, as though in neutralizing the inclination everyone can be exhonerated of accountability. If I had never accepted that I had a disordered nature (or “disease” in the current lexicon!) I would have absolutely no reason to refrain from drinking alcohol.
I appreciate your honesty here, but I want to reiterate that we are not discussing reversion therapy, or advocating it. Catholics understand that it is not necessary for an SSA individual to undergo treatment to “change” their attraction. They need only fulfill their obligation to live chastely, as we all do.
I would agree with you completely, if it were the case that the sinful action was the only identifying feature of the "gay " community. In addition to the disordered act, I find that gay men tend to be warmer, more approachable, kinder and less threatened by affection between men than how most straight men are in our culture. I identify with these traits, I believe they are part of who I am and I’m not convinced that God wants me to eschew these personality traits. Taken to an extreme they naturally incline one to violate boundaries ordained by God, but one does not have to take them to extremes. If that essentially means I stick with the label SSA, well, OK. Maybe our culture’s image of the healthy straight man is a bit disordered.
Let me clarify. By disassociation I mean not searching for ways to defend a lifestyle that is clearly disordered. I mean using language carefully, including terms that are employed by activists who wish to force an agenda to gain approval for their lifestyle. I mean refusing to participate in activities or events which present the behavior as something to be proud of. I mean being careful to draw the disctinction between those who carry the cross and walk with Christ in spite of this disorder and those who willfully refuse to accept there is anything wrong with their orientation and indeed, are offended by the mere notion of a “cross”.
Okay, Jim. Let’s go with your definition. The orientation itself is just okey dokey. So why not the behavior? That makes no sense. If it’s fine to be attracted to the same gender, what stops one from following through?
Not everyone is convinced or adamant in their belief in the alcoholism gene. I am an alcoholic. Do you ever hear me online debating the origin of my alcoholism? Does it matter? And yes, I do consider it a disorder. I can’t drink like other people. That makes my inclination toward alcohol disordered. It doesn’t make ME disordered, just the inclination. And the behavior, if I were to engage in it, would indeed be a sin because it would lead to absolute drunkenness. Whether I was born an alcoholic or my culture, society, family, school, friends or whatever contributed to my alcoholism does not matter a whit.
Do I, of all people, really have to tell you, of all people, what makes something sinful in the eyes of the Church? An involuntary tendency cannot be considered immoral – everybody has those tendencies, and sexual attraction is quite definitely one of those. It’s the voluntary act which constitutes sin.
May draw your attention to Lev. 25:42-46.This scripture was used by slaveowners from Clolumbus to U.S. Confederates, to justify slavery. So, tell me sir, does your God believe in human slavery? Mine does not! And those verses are of scripture are wrong. So, there you have it. Evolution is a theory, not a hypothesis. In case you your not aware, that means it has stood up against all tests to prove it’s false; which means it’s vertually a fact. I.T. can’t even stand up in court let alone in science class, because science it’s not. By the way, I was reffering to the Pope’s anouncement just two days ago. I think you should read it, because you obviously didn’t.
An involuntary “tendency” toward something immoral is disordered, no matter what spin you put on it. Yes, we all have those tendencies and they are all, of a kind, disordered. As fallen human beings, we are inclined to envy, greed, lust, and the other seven deadlies. Our compulsion to sin is disordered. Get it? Oh wait, you would have to accept the Church teaching on original sin. You do accept that, correct?
Shocking!
Watch the rhetoric, Mirdath. Crusade against homosexuality? And pray tell, what can an agnostic teach me about my faith? Could you share the Catholic books, documents, papers, statements, and tracts you’ve availed yourself of to expand your knowledge of Church teaching? Oh, and let’s not leave out the seminars and groups you’ve attended. Can’t wait to hear…
‘Disordered’ and ‘sinful’ are two entirely different things in the eye of the Church. For an act to be a sin, it must be voluntarily committed. An inclination is not an action, nor is it necessarily voluntary. Disordered impulses are part of sharing in our fallen human nature; it’s what we do that matters.
Nope
If you have a better way of putting it, I’m all ears.
More than you’d think!
Oh, let’s see… the bible, of course; the Didache; the epistles of the early popes; the works of Augustine, Aquinas, and others; the Catechism, both the big brown book and the Baltimore (had most of the latter memorized, way back when); random readings from the Code of Canon Law; any encyclicals and bulls I found interesting, though the only one I can name for sure is Humanae Vitae; various ancient and modern philosophical and theological writings ranging from the sublime, as characterized by Ambrose, to the ridiculous, as characterized by Peter Kreeft; oh, and over a decade of trying to be a devout, knowledgeable Catholic! I was confirmed, I served at the altar for years, I helped out wherever needed at my parish; I was even thinking hard about entering the religious life before I realized my faith was a sham!
Mird, don’t you read my posts? Of course I make this distinction. Usually when word wrestling with beloved goofyjim, who, apparently like you, doesn’t understand that I am not equating disordered inclinations with sinful behaviors. I am pretty sure that my compulsion to drink to unconsciousness is, while VERY disordered, not sinful. However, getting hammered certainly is.
Help me Lord!
I consistently put myself as well as all sinners in the same category. We are all subject to the disorder that has resulted from the fall of man. I’m disordered, you’re DEFINATELY disordered , and so is everyone else (except Our Lord, of course). Homosexuals are called to the same thing we all are, perfection in Christ. I only take issue with those sinners who deny their sinful natures and/or behaviors and work feverishly to convince others that they are without the blemish of original sin.I would never call you ignorant. I do believe you are book smart (sometimes) when it comes to the faith. But you are not heart smart. Somehow, your heart has been hardened (for now) to the truth. Which is why I am still happy always to see you here. And why I still pray for you!