S
St.Sharky
Guest
There we go, just like I said, being fired for being homosexual, being fired for how his genetic makeup, something he has no control over.
San Francisco Catholic Charities Head an Active Homosexual
- Status
G
geezerbob
Guest
The genetic makeup bit is still in question. Please stop citing it as proven scientific fact.
Catholic Charities is a, guess what, Catholic organization. The man should be fired for openly living a life which is in complete defiance of Church teaching on the matter. If he were a chaste person with homosexual tendencies, the situation would probably be viewed differently. If he were a heterosexual who was living with a woman without the benefit of marriage, he would deserve to be fired. What’s the difference? If you want to work for a Catholic organization, you should be prepared to live a Catholic life. Period. End of story.
C
Christus_Rex
Guest
L
Libero
Guest
But how does it effect him? NOBODY is perfect…
The interesting question is would you be concerned with the function of this charity before you found out the head was a homosexual?
I frequently hear on this site about how homosexuals wish for their orientation to be accepted everywhere and be in politics and concerned with everything (the gay agenda)
But then I look, and I think but here we have a group of Catholics making a moutain out of a mole hill - everyone knows that this mans orientation plays no part in his ability to conduct a charitable organisation - but yet everyone is going crazy, trying to turn the matter into something it is not…
This man is the head of a charity - he conducts an organisation devoted to charitable acts - until you have put such strong efforts into Charity (like your entire job) then you have NO right to complain!!!
The man should be left alone to carry on with his work, than have to answer to a group of Catholics content on picking out everyone elses flaws…
C
CatholicRevert
Guest
Fantastic post Brendan.
Thank you for making these points, and doing so in such a clear and kind manner.
Pax et bonum!
W
WanderAimlessly
Guest
Wrong.
I said living, not being. Those are two different things. If he was not an active homosexual, I would probably not have a problem.
In addition, here has been a directive not to place children with homosexuals. He is going against this directive. It is called insubordination.
PF
S
Strummer
Guest
Can someone please define for me the word “disorder” as used in the context of the cathechism in reference to homosexuals and/or homosexual acts. Also, is this term used with regard to any other sinful acts?
As I recall the American Psychological Association removed homosexuality from their list of mental disorders. So I’d like to have it explained for me the difference between the Church’s definition and science’s. Thank you.
As I recall the American Psychological Association removed homosexuality from their list of mental disorders. So I’d like to have it explained for me the difference between the Church’s definition and science’s. Thank you.
B
Brendan
Guest
The APA talks about what is a mental disorder, the Church speaks to what is a MORAL disorder.
Which is appropriate. The Church never claimed to be infallible on science, but it IS infallible on moral issues. The APA only authoritative on the science, and is infallible on neither one
Homosexuality itself is a moral disorder of object. Sexual attraction itself it not immoral by nature, there can be good applications of sexual desire, the specific case being one spouse to another.
Homosexuality has a false moral order (disordered) in it’s object, that the object of the sexual desire is one of the same sex.
That is why the Church refers to the Homosexuality as ‘objectively disordered’.
Homosexual ACTS are morally disordered in their very nature. There are no circumstances that would render a homosexual act as being morally licit.
The immorality is part of the very nature of the act, immorality is Intrinsic to the act.
Thus the Church speaks of homosexual ACTS as being ‘intrinsically immoral’.
The net result of the APA’s determination is to increase the moral risk of homosexuals. If science had determined that homosexuality was a mental disorder, that removes a substantial amount of the moral culpability (in much the same way as profanity is not sinful in a person Tourette’s)
But the APA has determined that when a homosexual person engages in homosexual acts, they do it with an actual Free Will.
In a nutshell, the APA speaks only of disorders of the mind, the Church speaks of disorders of the soul and of the morality of actions…
I
itsjustdave1988
Guest
According to recent psychological studies, the APA made a serious mistake in removing it from their list of disorders.
Observe…
Spitzer Study Published:
Evidence Found for Effectiveness of
Reorientation Therapy
Code:
By Roy Waller and Linda A. Nicolosi The results of a study conducted by Dr. Robert L. Spitzer have just been published in the *Archives of Sexual Behavior,* Vol. 32, No. 5, October 2003, pp. 403-417.The study has attracted particularly attention because its author, a prominent psychiatrist, is viewed as a historic champion of gay activism. Spitzer played a pivotal role in 1973 in removing homosexuality from the psychiatric manual of mental disorders… more
I
itsjustdave1988
Guest
He has control over his freewill actions. See here…
Out of the Closet and into Chastity **DAVID MORRISON ** My pilgrimage from being a homosexual-rights activist to living life as a chaste Catholic began in earnest when I read the writings of a modern-day Protestant martyr, Dietrich Bonhoeffer. From there my journey to the Catholic faith was swift, drawn along as I was by the three realities which make the Catholic Church so attractive to homosexuals who seek to live in sexual purity and fidelity. more
A
anamchara
Guest
I just used left handedness because I couldn’t think of anything else, Brendan. I wouldn’t say an addiction is the same thing as a disorder. But then I’m not a doctor
I fully agree.
Hmmmm, then my daughter who has a disorder " severe learning disabilites brought on by epilepsy" chooses to struggle with reading? I’m not trying to be challenging here, just reflecting on all disorders.
If you go back in my post, I acknowledged it is a sin but not to be “hated”, at least not as I generally use that word.
It seems your defintion of “arrogance” does not allow any discussion of sin, morality, or theogolgy because “the Church says so.” This would seem to run counter to Church’s respect for free will and a well-formed conscience, for how can one form their conscience without interaction and discussion?
My concern with this is some Catholics define “help” in a manner which feeds thier bigotry and baser instincts who all the while claim this thinly masked hatred is supported by the Church. I am not accusing you of this at all but it seems to me that we feed these darker motivations when we use phrases like “hate the sin” and when we justify the termination of a person’s employment basing it on unrelated transgressions.
There’s different kinds of sin. I hate molestation, adultery, physcial abuse or mental abuse of Childern but I find it difficult to “hate” what two men think is an act of love. It is a sin yes and we all pray that those who do have to carry this cross can work hard to live a chaste life but no, I can’t say I can hate a “sin” which is based on an expression of love between two people.
Its interesting you bring up an Alcoholic though. If I had a choice between a gay father like this man who obviously is a wonderful intelligent person and works very hard or a father who was drunk all the time and was slowly killing himself…I think I’d rather have the gay father.
God also wants us to focus on forgiviness and prayer for them, if you choose to hate this sin then that’s your business. I’ll focus on love and prayer.
B
Brendan
Guest
See my post above. There is such a thing as a moral disorder. We all have them. We are all called to resist the corrupted urges that occur in us. Homosexuality is one too.I just used left handedness because I couldn’t think of anything else, Brendan. I wouldn’t say an addiction is the same thing as a disorder. But then I’m not a doctor
Please re-read what I wrote. I wrote about acting on “disordered impulses”, not having a medical disorder. Medical disordered are not actions.
Why not hate that sin to? What sin is to be welcomed?
On matters of Faith and Morals, there really is no discussion. Free Will is always present and make choices for good or ill. Conforiming one’s Will to the Church is actaully the greatest Freedom.
As far as conscience, it is only a “well formed” conscience that the Church deems to be follows, and has specifically stated many times that a conscience is not “well formed” if it is in opposition to the Church on Faith and Morals.
The proclamation of Truth can never be biogoted. It is always freeing. Part of the problem of homosexuality is actually getting those afflicted to repent of the sin and ask for forgiveness.
All sin is to be hated, in ourselves and in others.
It might appear to be Love, but it is a disordered Love, it can never be True, as it is not based on God’s Love.
It pretends to be Love, but they (like those in pre-marital sex and Adultery) are calling something ‘Love’ that is not. They attempt to give a gift they cannot give and recieve a gift they recieve.
What you didn’t say was if the gay father was actively homosexual.
If so, Both are killing themselves, one physically and the other spiritually. They are both in sin, one of Gluttony and the other of Licentiousness.
If you tolerated the contition of either one without helping them overcome it, you would be doing them a gross injustice.
We are called to forgive exactly like Christ did " Neither do I condemn you, GO AND SIN NO MORE"
A lot of people forget to say that last part.
S
Strummer
Guest
Hmm,…the study you cited was done by NARTH (Nat’l Assoc for Research & Therapy of Homosexuality) of which less than 1% are members of either APA (psychicatry or psychology). I think we should all take their findings with a large shakerful of salt.
A
anamchara
Guest
You are asking me to hate a sin I do not. Does it say somewhere in our Catechism that I am suppose to hate this sin? I am asking a serious question. Also, why hate this sin? Why can’t we pray the persons in question remains chaste?
Why can’t we discuss matters of faith and morals? Are we using the word discuss diferently perhaps?
Can you site where this is in the Cathecism Brendan, I honestly can’t remember. Thanks.
While the Truth can never be bigoted the manner in which it is conveyed certainly can be. Futhermore, theres a whole host of biggoted lies that can attach themselves to this proclamation and pass themsleves off as truth.
I know it’s considered disordered but where does it say it’s not real love?
Which is why I acknowledge we need to pray for them to remain chaste.
S
Strummer
Guest
Heh, I like that. Good one.The Church never claimed to be infallible on science, but it IS infallible on moral issues. The APA only authoritative on the science, and is infallible on neither one
Hmm, really? Are you sure? I don’t mean to be argumentative it’s just that I’ve always read the word “objectively” to mean from a non-biased, non-subjective, “outside” point-of-view. You’re saying the word more specifically refers to the “object” which makes the act a disorder? Interesting.
Hmm, I wonder. Everything we do, every step we take (cue Sting
) is informed in some degree by our moral compass. If that compass is damaged by, say being born intrinsically attracted to members of the same sex, can we morally hold such a person as accountable as one with a rightly-oriented compass? The courts and the Church allow for the imparment of a mental affliction. Could not an intrinsic moral affliction similarly affect our wills and lessen our culpability?
U
urban-hermit
Guest
Did I not make my point clear? One of the responsibilities this man has as head of Catholic Charities is facilitating adoptions, foster care, etc. Do you really not see the connection here that he is not able to do his job in a Catholic fashion? being as he has a male lover and they have adopted a daughter and all and does not seem to understand the child needs both a father and a mother… I think you are doing all your reasoning with the assumption that homosexual acts are ok - harmless for the ones doing them as well as their daugher … This is a wrong assumption, from which you are arriving at wrong conclusions.But how does it effect him? NOBODY is perfect…
The interesting question is would you be concerned with the function of this charity before you found out the head was a homosexual?
I frequently hear on this site about how homosexuals wish for their orientation to be accepted everywhere and be in politics and concerned with everything (the gay agenda)
But then I look, and I think but here we have a group of Catholics making a moutain out of a mole hill - everyone knows that this mans orientation plays no part in his ability to conduct a charitable organisation - but yet everyone is going crazy, trying to turn the matter into something it is not…
This man is the head of a charity - he conducts an organisation devoted to charitable acts - until you have put such strong efforts into Charity (like your entire job) then you have NO right to complain!!!
The man should be left alone to carry on with his work, than have to answer to a group of Catholics content on picking out everyone elses flaws…
G
Gabriel_Gale
Guest
First, it’s the American Psychiatric Association that that publishes the DSM which list mental disorders. The APA removed (ego syntonic- those who embrace their same sex desires) homosexuality from the DSM III by consensus (vote) in 1973. A category of homosexuality did remain called ego dystonic homosexuality until DSM IV.
Second, the concept of mental disorder in mental health is a bit of a verbal fig leaf since many mental disorders such as an adjustment disorder after a job loss or grief after the loss of a spouse would never be accepted as a disease by any rational person.
Third, the concept of mental disorder is further limited by the absence of a definition of mental order (health).
Fourth, basically, a mental disorder is whatever emotion or behavior bothers you or sometimes your neighbor. If enough psychiatrists agree on a definition and name for a proposed bothersome emotion or behavior, then the irksome behavior is voted into the DSM.
Fifth, the tendency of the APA over the last 40 years has been to drop sexual disorders from the DSM and increase “addictive” behaviors. In addition to upgrading homosexuality, in the 1994, DSM IV, several other sexual disorder (paraphilias), were upgraded, including pedophilia, voyeurism, sado-masochism, zoophilia,etc.
Dr. Laura busted the APA on pedophilia and the organization quickly backed down and put out a revised DSM IV TR in 2000 which included any pedophilic, voyeuristic or exhibitionistic behaviors.
Needless to say, the word “disorder” is used in completely different senses by the Church and the APA.
L
Libero
Guest
I need more info - from previous experience, I have noticed that it is not usually the head of a company/ charity that deals with the everyday cases - does the CEO of say Wallmart personally check out your shopping?
Either way, it doesn’t sound like he is doing anything illegal - so clearly he is not the problem - rather your government - try making them correct the REAL problem!
B
Brendan
Guest
We can and should. We also need to instruct them on the necessity of it.
We can discuss, but the discussion must always be focused on how we can get a better understanding of what the Church teaches, not about if the Church is wrong in these matters (it’s not)
Certainly, the Truth must be presented charitibly and with no falsehood. But it still must be presented.
The Church does. It is disordered. As Paul says in Corinthians, Love is never hurtful. But homosexual acts hurt the soul. If it is hurtful, it cannot be true Love.
But James tells us we need to more than just pray for others, we are obliged to help them as well.
Christ, as well, did more than just pray for the adulterous woman, he TOLD her not to sin again. We must do the same.
I
itsjustdave1988
Guest
The data speaks for itself. The study was done by Dr. Spitzer, who was one of the champions of the APA removing homosexuality as a disorder. I find the thesis that his study was “biased” to be dubious at best. The bias seems more with respect to the APA as such a study is an embarrasing indicator that their policitally correct decision was not based upon science.
- Status