Serious doubts about Church teaching on homosexuality

[Atisor207]

I have done many bad things in my life and my mother used to tell me I would go to hell constantly. She would insert little religious stamps, relics, and medals under my bed. She would throw holy water at me. .

hahaha you made my night.
I can relate lol

 

[Milasol]

hahaha you made my night.
I can relate lol

yeah xD
If you think this is much I better not tell you about my Catholic Grandma.

They meant well but had a very rudimentary knowledge of the faith and when I grew wiser I realized that they did it out of love. No matter how erroneous the means their love was what won in the end.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

Well that is a bit judgmental on your part.

Judgmental? Far from it! Milasol, I myself experience same-sex attraction. I hid it from everyone until I was 22 years old. It is no exaggeration to say that I DESPERATELY wanted to tell someone, to get help, but I didn’t feel safe.

And I had a good family. But my family just talked about gay people negatively – mostly in the context of condemning pedophile/ephebophile priests.

I don’t judge my family or my church. But I know they could have served me a lot better. I certainly do judge their actions. (Just as I judge that certain actions of sexually active gay people are wrong).

I believe what you said is a typical meme from the left agenda.

Sure. That doesn’t make it untrue. It is always dangerous to assume that simply because your enemy says something, it is automatically false.

Love is what conquers all. And love doesn’t mean to tell a person he/she is always right.

Gosh, when did I say that?!?

I think we need to tell young gay Christians that gay sex is harmful. But we’ll never even have a chance to do that lovingly, unless we welcome them in the Church and invite them to share their struggles with sexual attraction in appropriate contexts.

The Church doesn’t tell us we are right if we are committing adultery. She welcomes us and provides us with the means for salvation and so do the parents even though you think that cursing homosexuality will trump over the unconditional love of a parent.

No one who is hiding can ever *experience *unconditional love. They always have the question, “If you knew X, would you still love me?”

 

[Milasol]

Judgmental?
Sure. That doesn’t make it untrue. It is always dangerous to assume that simply because your enemy says something, it is automatically false.

"

You did make a general statement “parents of Christian families”. How do you know each family reacts or acts the same way?

Not all are like that.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

You did make a general statement “parents of Christian families”. How do you know each family reacts or acts the same way?

Oh, I didn’t mean to imply that all families act this way. I have kids, and I assure you I won’t act this way.

 

[Contra_Mundum_1]

The leaders of that parish – God have mercy! – taught us the Church was wrong on most topics. These were my closest friends. We bought into the lies, and encouraged each other in sin.

(…)

What I remember is my “virtue envy” so I try, as St. Paul says, “to live a life worthy of the calling you have received.” Our attempts, our successes, our failures, our continued attempts, our growth – our living of the Faith, as imperfect as it is, can be a powerful witness to those around us. This is the only “speaking” of the Truth most of us are called to do. Save the words for those to whom we are close.

Gertie,

thank you for answering my question, and I assure you that you don’t ramble at all. I find your story fascinating in so many ways, and I hope that your witness will touch many people, in whichever way God calls you to do it. I completely agree with the above, about witnessing to the Truth in the way we live our life, no matter how much we struggle and fail.

I am so sorry for that awful experience at your parish. It sounds like it was a hotbed of heresy, preying on young people Who knows how much harm they have caused to others as well. They will answer for this, I do not doubt it. Thank God things have changed there and the priests are now orthodox. It is great that you had a chance to share what wonderful things God did in your life with that woman a couple of years ago. I hope it made her think about the role she played in the lives of young, impressionable people.

I do have another question, if you don’t mind answering. Since you got so much support from that parish, why did you leave the church and got angry at it? If you think that this thread has been derailed to the max already, please PM instead.

Thanks again for sharing. God bless.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

The implication is that the Church does threaten people who act on same-sex attraction. But that is not true. The Church educates and exhorts and guides such people, but it does not threaten them. Yes, such people may *feel *threatened by the Church, but the Church is not the one doing the threatening – no more than Jesus was threatening the woman at the well, no more than the Father was threatening the Prodigal Son.

Sadly, some individual Catholics do threaten. They have already received their reward.

Please check your private mail for my reply to these remarks.

 

[Ender]

human reason is (1) capable of arriving at moral truth unaided by Revelation or Church teaching, and (2) capable in arriving at the *independent *conclusion that the Church is correct through the internal working of the Holy Spirit.

This is true for some things and untrue for others, as is demonstrated by the differences of opinions on any number of moral issues, and it is clearly untrue with regard to this particular issue.

But the wrongness of gay sex has nothing to do with any specific teachings of the Christian faith. It is available to natural reason, unaided by faith.

Then why do so many affirm it as good? Natural reason is clearly leading to competing positions.

The intellect, when clouded by sin, cannot be trusted to make accurate judgments.

True, which is kind of a problem for natural reason.

But the question of EVANGELISM is not a question of obedience. It’s a question of acceptance. You can’t be expected to obey Mother Church – nor to believe she is infallible – until you accept the teaching of the Church.

The OP identified herself as Catholic. The arguments I make to Catholics are very different than those I make to others. I was pointing out the implications of rejecting church doctrines, which may be an irrelevancy to those outside the church but is of the gravest concern to those within.

By putting infallibility forward as a basis for our moral teachings, we are setting up an unnecessary stumbling block to faith.

It isn’t immediately clear why believing the church is right - and infallibly right in some things - is a hindrance to faith.

We should argue on the basis of natural law, as Aquinas did, not on the basis of revealed truth.

This is wrong about both the church and Aquinas.(CCC 157) Faith is certain. It is more certain than all human knowledge because it is founded on the very word of God who cannot lie. To be sure, revealed truths can seem obscure to human reason and experience, but “the certainty that the divine light gives is greater than that which the light of natural reason gives.” (Aquinas)

Do you propose that the only way to know if something is moral is through asking the Church? Don’t you realize that such a view is contrary to Aquinas, Augustine, and the deposit of faith?

If I’m not Christian then the opinions of Aquinas and Augustine are no more relevant than those of Marx and Engels. Either there is a way to say “This is right. Period.” or morality cannot be said to exist.

God would still exist, even if the Church weren’t infallible. God existed long before the Church existed, and thus before the Church was infallible.

If there is no way to know God’s mind then his existence, as far as moral choices go, is irrelevant. If his church on Earth cannot be trusted to know his laws then those laws might as well not exist.

Ender

 

[Prodigal_Son]

Ender,

In other contexts on this forum, I’ve seen you make some really sharp observations and make some very good arguments. You strike me as reasonable (plus you picked a screenname from a really cool book, so you must be awesome). So I’m perplexed that you keep misunderstanding me. Either I’m not explaining myself well, or you’re not reading carefully. So let me try to use someone else’s words, from another thread – a thread I posted on the topic of evangelism:

Joe 5859 said:

Although, it is technically true that the Church does have that authority, appealing to that authority is definitely not the way to convince the unconvinced. It might work for me if someone were to correct my faulty understanding of something with an appeal to Church documents. But that’s definitely not the best starting point for most apologetics arguments.

I think it’s easy to fall back on arguments from authority for those of us who accept the Church’s authority and perhaps struggle to articulate the reasons behind the teachings. Whenever we are at a loss for words, “Because the Church says so” covers a multitude of our rhetorical deficiencies.

I recently read a book that I really liked: How to Defend the Faith Without Raising Your Voice: Civil Responses to Catholic Hot Button Issues. They take that thomistic approach of articulating what their opponents are saying by trying to get at the underlying positive intent behind those who disagree with Catholic moral teachings on a number of issues. And then they move from there to reframe the issues from a Catholic perspective.

I think that’s really the only way to get anywhere. If we don’t at first try to acknowledge that there is something true undergirding even false conclusions (and, perhaps more importantly, acknowledge that the other person is not evil incarnate and one of Satan’s minions), then they are not likely to want to listen to anything we have to say. And who could blame them?

Joe pretty much made the point I’m trying to make. To respond to a couple points you made:

This is true for some things and untrue for others, as is demonstrated by the differences of opinions on any number of moral issues, and it is clearly untrue with regard to this particular issue.

Not so. You’re assuming that people have actually considered the issue in an unbiased manner, and you’re assuming that they haven’t been brainwashed by society. But I’ve spent time teaching in college classrooms, and I can tell you that these kids have reasoning skills that they don’t tap into. When we discuss abortion, my students very quickly realize that the only real viable options are (a) nearly all, or all, cases of abortion are wrong, or (b) infanticide is sometimes morally permissible. The light of natural reason shines on them quite easily, when prompted by good arguments.

Then why do so many affirm it as good? Natural reason is clearly leading to competing positions.

You seem to think that all people are using “natural reason” whenever they think about anything. Most philosophers and theologians, however, think that most people, most of the time, don’t engage in critical thinking at all.

True, which is kind of a problem for natural reason.

No, it’s a reason that true moral education involves stripping away the scales that sin puts over our eyes. This cannot be done by simply asserting infallibility.

The OP identified herself as Catholic. The arguments I make to Catholics are very different than those I make to others.

Good. But, for better or worse, many/most Catholics don’t believe the Church is infallible, and you can’t take that for granted – especially when the person is specifically questioning an infallible teaching!

It isn’t immediately clear why believing the church is right - and infallibly right in some things - is a hindrance to faith.

Huh? I don’t think it is a hindrance to faith. I myself believe the Church is infallibly right about very many things.

This is wrong about both the church and Aquinas.

(CCC 157) Faith is certain. It is more certain than all human knowledge because it is founded on the very word of God who cannot lie. To be sure, revealed truths can seem obscure to human reason and experience, but “the certainty that the divine light gives is greater than that which the light of natural reason gives.” (Aquinas)
​

Sorry, I did not mean to imply that Aquinas argued solely on the basis of natural law. But Aquinas argued for the wrongness of sodomy from natural reason, not from revealed truth.

If there is no way to know God’s mind then his existence, as far as moral choices go, is irrelevant. If his church on Earth cannot be trusted to know his laws then those laws might as well not exist.

But one must have the ability, at the very least, to discern the true Church. (Remember, there were once two “popes” at once, in Avignon and Rome – were people who lived at that time bereft of guidance?) This ability comes from the Holy Spirit, and is available to anyone who seeks in humility. You cannot know that a group is the true Church simply by asking whether they infallibly say that they are.​

 

[Tigg]

The Church does not condemn homosexuals as such for their psychological attachments to each other. What the Church condemns is sodomy. So long as you have a loving relationship with another same-sex person, but don’t act on it, there is no reason for you to feel threatened by the Church or by the prospect of offending God.

ummm…You’ve given us something new to think about as underlined. Not sure I can agree with this, although perhaps I’m not understanding what you mean by “a loving relationship with another ss person.”

Jesus has said if you lust for another [woman] you have already committed adultery in your heart…

Just to clarify, the sixth commandment forbids all actions, desires and thoughts that are contrary to chastity, decency and modesty. We can sin against purity in our mind just as surely as a physical act. If a SS person is having a loving relationship with another, I would think that would be the near occasion of sin for them, and if it constitutes lust, it would break this commandment as surely as the act of sodomy.

 

[Guilou67]

have you ever seen the short movie the third way? You can watch it for free online on vimeo dot com. Forty minutes in length.

I’m bisexual myself. Born this way too. It’s just part of the way i am and i don’t try to change it and feel that the ministries that try to make gay people pray away the gay are sometimes downright degrading. We live in a fallen world, some people having disordered sexuality is part of the consequences of original sin. I deal with my disordered inclinations the same way i deal with my desires for people of the opposite sex. I am single and so i am celibate, and so looking at any man or any woman in a lustful way is not right. So, if i (a female btw) see any man or any woman who might cause me to lust, i look away. Practice custody of the eyes, and mortify your imagination. It is not a sin to be gay. It is a sin to be disobedient to the church. Being obedient despite our desires is exactly the self sacrifice and dying to self so often talked about in catholicism. It’s doing what god, who is love itself, would have us do, and we know what he wants us to do through the teachings of the church, even when it doesn’t make us feel good. This is what will make us saints. To totally die to self. Giving ourselves over to christ in every way. Giving him the good in us and also the bad. Put your hand in christ’s hand, close your eyes, and walk forward with the faith of a child. He won’t let you down.

amen to that sister in christ.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

ummm…You’ve given us something new to think about as underlined. Not sure I can agree with this, although perhaps I’m not understanding what you mean by “a loving relationship with another ss person.”

Jesus has said if you lust for another [woman] you have already committed adultery in your heart…

Just to clarify, the sixth commandment forbids all actions, desires and thoughts that are contrary to chastity, decency and modesty. We can sin against purity in our mind just as surely as a physical act. If a SS person is having a loving relationship with another, I would think that would be the near occasion of sin for them, and if it constitutes lust, it would break this commandment as surely as the act of sodomy.

Well then, let’s agree to disagree.

I don’t believe being a homosexual and being drawn in friendship with another person of the same sex, even to the point of living together, is a sin. I’ve never heard that situation of deeply Platonic same-sex friendships defined as sinful in the Catechism or anywhere else. I know many priests live with other priests as the dearest of friends without being sodomites. The same for the sisters.

What I have read in the Bible on many occasions (Old and New Testaments) is that sodomy is a sin, and a very bad one as Paul often pointed out.

But I agree with you that lusting is also sinful and if same sex people can’t live together without lusting after each other, there is a serious problem that might put their immortal souls in jeopardy.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

Well then, let’s agree to disagree.

I don’t believe being a homosexual and being drawn in friendship with another person of the same sex, even to the point of living together, is a sin. I’ve never heard that situation of deeply Platonic same-sex friendships defined as sinful in the Catechism or anywhere else. I know many priests live with other priests as the dearest of friends without being sodomites. The same for the sisters.

What I have read in the Bible on many occasions (Old and New Testaments) is that sodomy is a sin, and a very bad one as Paul often pointed out.

But I agree with you that lusting is also sinful and if same sex people can’t live together without lusting after each other, there is a serious problem that might put their immortal souls in jeopardy.

 

[estesbob]

Well then, let’s agree to disagree.

I don’t believe being a homosexual and being drawn in friendship with another person of the same sex, even to the point of living together, is a sin…

From Todays Office of Readings:

True, perfect, and eternal friendship
That outstanding youth, Jonathan, son of King Saul, made an alliance with David, but it was not in the hope of obtaining the royal crown or winning the kingdom. For the sake of their friendship, he set David above himself as if he had been his master and not his own father’s servant, expelled, hiding in the desert, sentenced to death, destined for execution – he abased himself and raised David up: You will be king, he said, and I will be next below you in rank.

What an excellent example of true friendship! What a wonder! The king was raging against his servant and stirring up the whole country as if against a pretender to the throne. He accuses priests of treachery and has them killed on the mere suspicion – he has the forests and the valleys searched – he posts armed guards on cliffs and mountains. Everyone swears to punish the object of the king’s anger; but Jonathan, who alone has the right to envy the designated successor to the throne – Jonathan chose to resist his father, keep his friend supplied with news, give him counsel in his adversity. Thinking it better to be a friend than a king: You will be king, he said, and I will be next below you in rank.

See how the father tried to make the young man envy his friend, how he goaded him with insults, threatened him with dispossession, and warned him of the honours he would lose. But even when Saul had condemned David to death, Jonathan did not fail his friend. “Why should David die? What has he done wrong? What has he done? It was he who took his life in his hands and struck down the Philistine – you rejoiced, then. So why should he die?”

At these words the king was beside himself with rage and tried to pin Jonathan to the wall with his spear, pouring out new insults and threats. “Son of a wanton and lascivious woman! I know that you love him, to your own shame and the shame of your shameless mother!” Then he poured out on the young man all the venom he had in him. He tried to stir up ambition and envy, bitterness and jealousy in Jonathan’s breast: As long as the son of Jesse lives, your kingdom cannot be established.
Who would not have been moved to jealousy by these words? Whose love would not have been corrupted, grace diminished, friendship wiped out? But this most loving youth held fast to the oaths of friendship he had sworn, stood up to the threats, endured the insults, and disdained the kingdom for the sake of friendship, careless of the glory he would miss but mindful of the integrity he would keep. You will be king, he said, and I will be next below you in rank.

Here is a true and perfect friendship, solid and eternal: a friendship that envy does not corrupt, suspicion does not diminish or ambition wipe out. It does not cease even under such a trial; even under such a battering it does not collapse. Assailed with abuse, it stands firm; beaten with insults, it does not bend. Go thou, and do likewise.

 

[PoorKnight]

Dear Naomily.

First of all, I want to say how courageous you are for posting here and continuing in the conversation. You are WELCOME here. We WANT you here. We love you! Please continue your exploration of what the Catholic Church ACTUALLY teaches on Same Sex Attraction.

Secondly, as a recovering bigot, I would like to say how sorry I am for all the times I degraded people with Same Sex Attraction in thought, action and word. I am truly sorry.

Third, I would also like to clarify and point out a few things that I pray might help you.

1. You are not a homosexual. No more than I am a porn addict. You are a person. A Child of God; Loved infinitely more than either of us can possibly imagine! I too am I Child of God. Through our common Father in Heaven and Brother in Christ, you are my sister and I love you! I accept you as a Child of God, right now, as you are. You have same sex attraction. I have a personality that is addictive towards pornography. As far back as I can remember I have always had this desire.

But try not make your central identity something you DO or DESIRE, whatever it may be. That is NOT Who You Are. It is an attribute of you, not your essence. I hope this makes sense.

1. I believe you stated that the Church believes YOU are “gravely disordered”. That is not true. The Church believes both our tendencies are “gravely disordered”, not US.

The Catholic Church teaches that ANYTHING that does not lead us towards God is “disordered”. There are many things that are more disordered than others. Some are “Gravely Disordered”.

The Church has NEVER said that ANY PERSON is “Gravely disordered”. The Church loves and welcomes all people, with all our disorders, into her flock. NO “Catholics” have not always been very welcoming and many - I was one - are very bigoted, angry and confused.

I would also say this is true of many LGBT members towards the Catholic Church, so please also be cautious of what they say regarding Church teaching.

1. I don’t know if Same Sex Attraction is something people are “born with”, i.e. genetic, or nurture. I don’t know if it’s “curable”. (I certainly struggle with my sin daily and don’t feel “cured” per se - though I have been chaste in marriage for 4 years now). But I DO know from experience, that When Properly Understood the Church knows what She’s talking about and following Christ’s Teachings - as voiced through the Church - is Always the best way for our lives…

Please note, I did NOT say “Easiest”, “Happiest” or “Free from struggle or suffering”. I suffer daily, every time I resist the temptations to sin. A part of me always will WANT to sin. By the Grace of God Alone, I don’t. But in that struggle, in that suffering, there is Peace and Joy.

I know that probably sounds like “He’s cracked!” But I can attest that while I was living the hedonistic lifestyle, I was angry, confused, scared, bitter, depressed, ashamed, and was very low self asteem.

While this road has been one of the hardest I have ever walked, I now have a sense of contentment, fulfillment and joy that I have never had before.

This article might help you understand Church teaching a little better. It’s not an end-all-be-all for sure, so if it doesn’t do it for you, please continue to research.
conversiondiary.com/2012/07/a-conversation-with-my-gay-friend.html

I believe it was Daniel Mattson, a man struggling with Same Sex Attraction who is living according to Catholic Church teaching, who stated that once understood properly, the Catholic Church Teaching on Homosexuality and people with Same Sex Attraction is the most loving, accepting thing out there… including the LGBT society.

You can look him up too. He did a couple interviews here at Catholic Answers.

Draw close to the Sacraments of Divine Mercy (Reconciliation) and the Eucharist. Continue to pray for God’s Will to be done in your life, however hard or easy that might be.

May God Bless you on your journey. Please pray for me and I will pray for you.
Poor Knight for Christ and His Church

 

[PoorKnight]

Sorry, here is Daniel Mattson’s blog and his signature blog post:
catholicbandita.com/daniel-mattson-why-i-dont-call-myself-a-gay-christian/

 

[Charlemagne_III]

Well done, Poor Knight!

 

[simpleas]

​

Sin seperates of God It is hard to live the Faith if you reject it

I thought that is what you meant. I didn’t know that following purity rules was the only way to follow Christ. What about being kind, patient, loving, giving etc etc to ALL people, regardless of what they do behind closed doors. Most all sin is a rejection of God, so that means most all of us can’t live the faith, IMO.

 

[estesbob]

I thought that is what you meant. I didn’t know that following purity rules was the only way to follow Christ. What about being kind, patient, loving, giving etc etc to ALL people, regardless of what they do behind closed doors. Most all sin is a rejection of God, so that means most all of us can’t live the faith, IMO.

We’re not discussing how one should treat those who reject the teachings of the church-we’re talking about the consequences to those who have rejected those teachings and have no intention of reconciling themselves with the Faith

 

[Guilou67]

Just out of curiosity, how old was your daughter when she realised she was homosexual? I don’t agree with your view and I feel it is a shame it is causing a separation from your daughter, but I am not sure if people who think as you do (ie homosexuals can change and do choose their lifestyle), realise the implications/logic that view has for you.

Did not seem to see ANYWHERE in her post “Separation from her Daughter”. She just said she will not be attending her wedding. And I thing this is also her RIGHT to be obedience to GOD.