Serious doubts about Church teaching on homosexuality

  • Thread starter Thread starter naomily
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The attraction of men to women, and vice versa, is a natural condition. Yes. But that’s not what “heterosexuality” means.

www.firstthings.com/article/2014/03/against-heterosexuality

All of this is a defense of marriage. Though if you’re terribly attached to the word “heterosexual”, more power to you. But know that this word did not exist in any language prior to around 1900, so it’s obviously not of theological importance.
If we cease to use the word heterosexual, then homosexual and bisexual need to go to. I don’t see how that will help discussion.

The human “blueprints” provide for opposite sex mating, including attractions and the physical equipment consistent with that. Not every instance of the “as-built” person matches the blueprint well, in this context, and in others.
 
If we cease to use the word heterosexual, then homosexual and bisexual need to go to. I don’t see how that will help discussion.
I never proposed stopping using the word. I said it was a social construct. I believe in using social constructs; I use them all the time!

For example, I am happy to say that today is a Saturday, even though “Saturday” is a social construct. 🤷
 
I never proposed stopping using the word. I said it was a social construct. I believe in using social constructs; I use them all the time!

For example, I am happy to say that today is a Saturday, even though “Saturday” is a social construct. 🤷
Saturday isn’t a social construct. It’s a word. Do you think if the whole human species got together with their calendars and decided to cancel Saturday and work to a 6 day week, that the cycles and seasons would just change to accommodate this shorter ‘construct’? A unique 24 hour period that came around every 7 sunrises has always existed. Maybe the cavemen referred to it by one short grunt followed by 2 long grunts to indicate the time that measured something related to their animals or crops or whatever or maybe they were still only aware of the cycle of the months and years, but these cyclical divisions always existed.

You’re trying to say that hetero and homosexual are contructs like intelligent design which makes a scientific discipline of faith that can be deconstructed when its found to be unworkable… (which ID is). I don’t agree. I think they work ok to identify the social ideologies that need to be debated around the phenomenon. Two different definitions of the couple or family. Can humanity accommodate that? Catholic teaching says no.

Personally I think the strongest witness of truth is yet to be revealed and that will be in those many people of the past who have recognised this affliction as a disorder and regarded it as the ‘thorn in the flesh’ per St Paul. These are the people who quietly put family and tribe above their individual inclinations and live according to that standard, whether married or single by the grace of God and the comfort of the Holy Spirit. I think this is the far greater story of courage and saintly virtue that can change the tide.
 
Well the Church hasn’t taught that it is wrong to consent to homosexual romantic feelings, merely the sexual ones. It is unbelievable that this hasn’t been clearly addressed, but you can probably follow your own conscience on it
 
Saturday isn’t a social construct. It’s a word. Do you think if the whole human species got together with their calendars and decided to cancel Saturday and work to a 6 day week, that the cycles and seasons would just change to accommodate this shorter ‘construct’? A unique 24 hour period that came around every 7 sunrises has always existed. Maybe the cavemen referred to it by one short grunt followed by 2 long grunts to indicate the time that measured something related to their animals or crops or whatever or maybe they were still only aware of the cycle of the months and years, but these cyclical divisions always existed.
Social constructs are created by creating words. As for the week, there is nothing natural about it. We could divide time into sections of 14 days (half-moons) or 28 days (moons) or we could not use the moon to tell time at all. All of these things are “up to us”. There’s nothing all that special about 7-day chunks. (Genesis talks about seven days, but it doesn’t, so far as I know, describe this as a “week”.)

Of course, if we changed to a 6-day week, we would just have more weeks in the year. Not rocket science. Please research the invention of the Julian calendar.
You’re trying to say that hetero and homosexual are contructs like intelligent design which makes a scientific discipline of faith that can be deconstructed when its found to be unworkable… (which ID is). I don’t agree. I think they work ok to identify the social ideologies that need to be debated around the phenomenon. Two different definitions of the couple or family. Can humanity accommodate that? Catholic teaching says no.
I agree. But everything you’ve said here is about marriage, not heterosexuality. Of course, being opposite sexes is a necessary component of marriage. 🤷
Personally I think the strongest witness of truth is yet to be revealed and that will be in those many people of the past who have recognised this affliction as a disorder and regarded it as the ‘thorn in the flesh’ per St Paul. These are the people who quietly put family and tribe above their individual inclinations and live according to that standard, whether married or single by the grace of God and the comfort of the Holy Spirit.
These people are right in front of you. I am one of them. I would be happy to describe my tendency to lust after men as a thorn in the flesh. But I don’t think there’s anything wrong with using the word “gay”. Nor does the Church, apparently (see CCC, letters from Benedict, and interviews with Francis).

Of course, to reject a temptation arising from an inclination, you first have to accept that you have the inclination.
 
Well the Church hasn’t taught that it is wrong to consent to homosexual romantic feelings, merely the sexual ones. It is unbelievable that this hasn’t been clearly addressed, but you can probably follow your own conscience on it
We know that to entertain a fantasy romance with someone who is not our spouse is equally sinful as doing the deed.

Matt 5:28 But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.
 
We know that to entertain a fantasy romance with someone who is not our spouse is equally sinful as doing the deed.

Matt 5:28 But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.
Romance isn’t lust.

By your definition, a college-aged woman thinking about her upcoming Valentine’s Day with her date/boyfriend is committing grave matter.
 
Saturday isn’t a social construct. It’s a word. Do you think if the whole human species got together with their calendars and decided to cancel Saturday and work to a 6 day week, that the cycles and seasons would just change to accommodate this shorter ‘construct’? A unique 24 hour period that came around every 7 sunrises has always existed.
The uniqueness of a seven-day cycle is cultural. What exactly is “unique” about Saturday from a strictly natural point of view? If you are lost on a desert island, you will have a sense of morning and evening and (depending to some extent on your latitude) the seasons of the year, but you will probably lose track of what day of the week it is unless you keep careful records.

However, even days and years are culturally constructed to some extent (think of leap years, for instance, or daylight savings time, or the 24-hour division, or the fact that different cultures count the beginning of the day from different points in the daily cycle). I would say that everything is culturally constructed but not everything is a cultural construct. That is to say, some things (like Saturday) are just cultural, while others (like winter) have a natural basis but the way we experience and define them is shaped by culture.

Edwin
 
That’s the point. The whole concept of “sexual orientation” is a modern one. Both “homosexuality” and “heterosexuality” are modern concepts.

Edwin
So is quantum mechanics. Is that a problem?
 
So is quantum mechanics. Is that a problem?
If quantum mechanics is true, then it is not a human construct – rather, it is a discovery. Newton discovered the inverse square law; he didn’t invent it!
 
If quantum mechanics is true, then it is not a human construct – rather, it is a discovery. Newton discovered the inverse square law; he didn’t invent it!
Ok. It is a useful theory. It seems to be incredibly predictive of the real world. It is recent. Is there a problem by virtue of its recency?
 
So besides the fact that I consider most of your post harmful to gay people (though I’m sure you don’t have that intent), this has got to be the most dangerous advice I’ve ever heard, and arguing any of that is sinful has literally no church support.

You are suggesting that gay people cut off all their friends, deny themselves all of their interests in music/art/culture, etc.You are literally telling people to live as hermits in this world, isolated from anything they remotely enjoy, even if it has nothing to do with the evil of sexual activity. NO ONE should be advised to say goodbye to their gay friends just because they become Catholic. What a ridiculous presumption. Ugh.

Also, there is no such thing as a “homosexual lifestyle.” It is literally the most offensive phrase you can actually use to describe an actively gay person. I know some people don’t care about offending gay people as long as they get to use their own terminology, but hopefully you are not one of them.
Sadly when some gay people hear that drivel constantly they start to think they and everyone they care about would be better off if they were dead.
 
So besides the fact that I consider most of your post harmful to gay people (though I’m sure you don’t have that intent), this has got to be the most dangerous advice I’ve ever heard, and arguing any of that is sinful has literally no church support.

You are suggesting that gay people cut off all their friends, deny themselves all of their interests in music/art/culture, etc.You are literally telling people to live as hermits in this world, isolated from anything they remotely enjoy, even if it has nothing to do with the evil of sexual activity. NO ONE should be advised to say goodbye to their gay friends just because they become Catholic. What a ridiculous presumption. Ugh.

Also, there is no such thing as a “homosexual lifestyle.” It is literally the most offensive phrase you can actually use to describe an actively gay person. I know some people don’t care about offending gay people as long as they get to use their own terminology, but hopefully you are not one of them.
He may re-think his post in due course. I suspect what was going through his mind was the kind of wariness parents have about allowing their children to associate with kids who are likely to be a “bad influence” on them. You can’t apply that sort of thinking directly to adults.
 
Okay, so here it is. I’m twenty-three and grew up in your perfect traditional Catholic family. My parents were loving and religious and great. I believed wholeheartedly what I was taught and adored it. And yet, before I even know what homosexuality was (because, like as good like Catholic girls, I was very sheltered), I began to feel romantic urges for girls. This began to creep on me as I grew older and by the time I was seventeen I knew, with some horror, that I had gay feelings.

I can already anticipate your reactions. No, there were no examples of homosexuality in my life. I was not sexually abused. I have healthy, normal relationships with men. You can’t pin this on anything environmental. If I had any choice at all I would have wanted to be straight. You cannot imagine the pain and suffering this has caused me, as a Catholic who wants desperately to be the daughter her parents wanted.

I spent most of my teenagerhood terrified of having close relationships with other women and suffered socially because of it. I tried desperately, and totally alone, to “pray away the gay”. My parents, who are wonderful in every way, didn’t even consider that this could happen to their children. I had no support. I was scared shitless, thanks to some very graphic church sermons and comments dropped by my family, that if anyone found out, I’d be kicked out of the house. Even if I kept my family’s love, there was no getting around that this would change things forever.

Eventually I realized, quite frankly, that my efforts were ********. It was clear that I am who I am. I cannot control my sexuality any more than I can control my love of hip hop, or the color of my eyes. We are born with some preferences, for different flavors of ice cream, and for some genders. I am not a pervert. My feelings for women are as pure and lofty as any my heterosexual friends have.

The more I prayed and tried, desperately, to understand why I am the way I am, the angrier I became. I am angry at my parents and my Church, who created a world of fear. I have spent so much of my life terrified of judgment. I have had no role models, no community, and no compassion.

The Church makes its views on homosexuality very clear. And for all you may claim to love the sinner, hate the sin, you all cannot deny that a Catholic congregation is an unfriendly place for even a celibate homosexual. You cannot deny that being open about who I am would be inviting gossip and cruelty, no matter how closely my life follows Church teachings. It would be like living under a microscope.

I’ve read this community’s responses to questions about homosexuality. I’ve read how, at the first mention of a gay man, you pry into his sexual history.

Imagine telling me at sixteen, a young girl who loved romcoms and longed for romance, that she could never have an intimate relationship. That celibacy for her was not a calling, or a vocation, but a sentence. Heterosexuals choose celibacy and it is a beautiful thing, but homosexuals have no choice. They are slated into one path and let’s be honest here. It sucks.

So yes, I’m angry. It makes it hard to go to Church, to have meaningful relationships with my family. My prayer life is strong and I try to follow God’s teachings, but I feel as if I’m hitting brick walls. I am tired of being told that my soul and body are an abomination and that I am incapable of giving romantic love.

The Catholic Church is scary for me. I wish it wasn’t.

I don’t know quite what I’m saying here, only that the more time I spend with Catholics, the more cruel comments about homosexuality slip, and the more I feel like this isn’t the place for me. This forum feels unsafe for me.

I don’t know what to do.
I’m a little late on this but I insist you to fight back Satan,and google Gay divorce, gay heartbreak, gay problems, ect…especially the case a gay man name killed and eat a guy in Canada i think 2 years ago.
Also, George Smitherman’s husband Christopher Peloso struggled with public role, says ex-mayor | The Star

Many problems come with it, not all smooth as you dream or feel.

I too used to have many urges, but I won at the end. There is nothing better than conquering yourself. I will pray for you and hope you don’t pierce Jesus’s heart one more time or at least your parents’.

Remember no one will love you more than that Jesus and Mary.
Peace and love:)
 
I’m a little late on this but I insist you to fight back Satan,and google Gay divorce, gay heartbreak, gay problems, ect…especially the case a gay man name killed and eat a guy in Canada i think 2 years ago.
Also, thestar.com/news/gta/2013/12/30/george_smithermans_husband_christopher_peloso_found_dead.html

Many problems come with it, not all smooth as you dream or feel.

I too used to have many urges, but I won at the end. There is nothing better than conquering yourself. I will pray for you and hope you don’t pierce Jesus’s heart one more time or at least your parents’.

Remember no one will love you more than that Jesus and Mary.
Peace and love:)
There is no link between homosexuality and cannibalism :doh2:.

I realize your post is well-intentioned, but when people make comments like these, it only serves to push gay people away. I have said this many, many times and I will say it again:

Telling someone something they know to be absolutely false when defending Church teaching will cause them to assume Church teaching is false.

I wish people would just stop trying to justify Church teaching using bizarre secular arguments when the theological argument is self-sufficient. Orthodox Catholics are generally good at explaining the theological basis, but often resort to things they’ve “heard” from someone, somewhere, about the gay community when delving into secular reasons. There is nothing more harmful to the evangelization movement than well-meaning Catholics who scare off LGBT people with crazy rhetoric.
 
Bob,

You say such beautiful things often, about God’s love and our ability to turn from sin. But I want you to understand that, when you write something like you wrote above, it makes me cringe a bit. There are a number of things you don’t seem to understand about the sexual experiences of people like myself. I would ask you to reflect on a few of the things I say:

(1) The comparison with alcoholism is useful in one sense, but completely useless in another. Gay people are attracted to something that is genuinely attractive in itself: a person. God made males and females to be good and attractive. (God did not make alcohol with a similar purpose.) There are some gay people that aren’t interested in gay sex in any form whatsoever, but they’re still gay – or, if you like, “same-sex attracted”.

When you compare a gay man’s desire for another man to alcoholism, you risk alienating him in an unnecessary way. Christ is a stumbling block for sinners, but WE don’t have to be.

(2) There’s nothing about the term “sexual orientation” that implies immutability. Scientists that investigate this stuff regularly report changes in people’s attraction templates – or in their “orientation”. (This is more common in women than men, but happens in men too). What scientists haven’t found is ways that we can – by trying – change a person’s orientation.

So orientations are like the wind: they change, but we can’t control them.

(3) A person could, conceivably, use an orientation as an excuse, even if the orientation could be changed – just as a teenager could use hormones as an excuse for irresponsible behavior, even though they will be less hormonally affected later in life.

Of course, such excuses amount to saying that “I can’t help myself”. If the excuse is literally true, then the person needs therapy for compulsive behavior.

(4) There is nothing about being born male that inherently entails being attracted to women. Moreover, there is reliable evidence that homosexuality, in men at least, is associated with certain conditions of the fetal environment: boys with multiple older brothers are more likely to be gay. (These studies control for the home in which the child is raised.)
Let me say just this: I am in the medical profession and out of my 5 kids, I have a lesbian daughter. THERE IS NO GAY GENE THAT MAKES PEOPLE BIOLOGICALLY GAY!!! PERIOD! Pro-gays have been promoting this cr*p for years as if they could only prove that they were born that way, it would add to their argument. Every person makes choices in life—and some are just wrong, sinful, disgusting and unhealthy. If you think you can find an article by a BONAFIDE medical study–not some pro-gay half crazy group—you go find your study–and post it here. It does NOT exist!
 
Let me say just this: I am in the medical profession and out of my 5 kids, I have a lesbian daughter. THERE IS NO GAY GENE THAT MAKES PEOPLE BIOLOGICALLY GAY!!! PERIOD! Pro-gays have been promoting this cr*p for years as if they could only prove that they were born that way, it would add to their argument. Every person makes choices in life—and some are just wrong, sinful, disgusting and unhealthy. If you think you can find an article by a BONAFIDE medical study–not some pro-gay half crazy group—you go find your study–and post it here. It does NOT exist!
I believe most professionals would concede the cause is unknown. Myriad causes can be imagined. Some are biological, which does not necessarily mean genetic. You cannot know with certainty that ones genetic makeup does not contribute to, or predispose one to, a homosexual inclination. You cannot know that some chemical or hormonal issue in-utero is not a factor. Nor can anyone be certain of the reverse.

I wonder how you explain the circumstances of those who suffer with a homosexual inclination, but have strived to remain chaste and continue to do so. Those who anguish over the lack of attraction they feel for the opposite sex. Does this sound like just “a bad choice” to you?

It is not good science to be too dogmatic. Einstein admitted he made a great blunder in rejecting the ideas of quantum mechanics.
 
Ok. It is a useful theory. It seems to be incredibly predictive of the real world. It is recent. Is there a problem by virtue of its recency?
The questions you’re asking are classic questions in philosophy of science. Theories usually exist to accommodate current observations, so they’ll always “predict” existing observations. A good theory will predict observations we haven’t made yet. But even a really good theory is at least somewhat questionable if it posits the existence of objects of a certain type. This is one of the reasons why quantum theory is still a little bit questionable, from a metascientific level.

As for the theories that homosexuality and heterosexuality aren’t social constructs, this would be confirmed if we observed the same way of understanding sexuality in pre-modern societies. But we don’t – far from it. So they are clearly social constructs.
 
Let me say just this: I am in the medical profession and out of my 5 kids, I have a lesbian daughter. THERE IS NO GAY GENE THAT MAKES PEOPLE BIOLOGICALLY GAY!!! PERIOD! Pro-gays have been promoting this cr*p for years as if they could only prove that they were born that way, it would add to their argument. Every person makes choices in life—and some are just wrong, sinful, disgusting and unhealthy. If you think you can find an article by a BONAFIDE medical study–not some pro-gay half crazy group—you go find your study–and post it here. It does NOT exist!
Starrsmother,

To be honest, you sound a little bit afraid. I understand that. It’s certainly true that no one is forced by their genes (or fetal environment) to call themselves “gay” or have gay sex. But science does seem to be saying that there are certain things that happen before birth that make boys more likely to experience sexual attraction to the same sex.

sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0091302211000227
link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-009-9576-5

And no, this is not a vast left-wing conspiracy. Gay rights advocates fear a “gay gene”, because it could make it easy to eliminate homosexuality entirely.

I would recommend you read the gospel story about the man who was born blind, and reflect on it prayerfully. Jesus said it was not his sin or his parents’ sin who caused him to be that way. He said the man was blind so that God’s salvation could be made manifest in his life.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top