The Reformation for Secular Homosexual thinking

[teeboy]

Grace & Peace!

I’m not arguing whether or not certain interests overlap: that can certainly happen. When they do overlap, though, are we to understand that the interests of religion exist on the same sort of moral spectrum as the interests of a medical or scientific association? Are we to understand that we can comprehend the APA by thinking of it as if it were the Church and the Church as if it were the APA? I think we’d be doing both the Church and the APA an injustice if we did that.

Under the Mercy,
Mark

All is Grace and Mercy! Deo Gratias!

An association doesn’t have individual rights. An individual has choices and may choose not to adhere to promulgations of a secular group. An individual even has a right to choose natural death.

 

[edwest2]

Grace & Peace!

Coptic, it seems that what you’re saying in this post is that what all of this comes down to is a question of authority. And authority may play a part here. But the way that you’re presenting your point, at least in this post, suggests that the sort of authority the APA has and the sort of authority the Catholic Church has are part of the same spectrum of authority but are, perhaps, on different ends of it. But what that sort of rhetoric does is misconstrue the nature of the Church’s authority as well as the nature of the APA’s authority (such as it is).

I.e., by evaluating the APA’s authority, findings and opinions in terms of (as opposed to in the light of) the Catholic Church’s authoritative teachings on faith and morality, you simultaneously conflate the APA’s authority and diminish the Church’s authority by suggesting that the terms by which you understand the one or the other are interchangeable…and then you fault the APA for not being the Church. In sum, you’re not letting the Church be the Church and the APA be the APA. (And, to be honest, I fear that this is all a function of a kind of relativism to which you’ve fallen prey–you believe what you do with regard to homosexuality, the Church does not expressly oppose it, but the APA does…so what’s really under debate here is neither the Church’s nor the APA’s authority…but yours.)

Your rhetoric is further complicated by your acceptance of DSM I, II and III. Why recognize III and not IV? On what basis was the scientific authority of the APA in compiling DSM III compromised when they compiled DSM IV? Is it just on the basis of their shift in an understanding of homosexuality? And how does the refusal to classify homosexuality as a psychiatric disorder go against the authority of the Church, particularly when the church in its catechism does not classify it as a psychiatric disorder either?

Moreover, is it not to be expected that in both medicine and psychiatry that various understandings of disorders, diseases and behaviors will change given experiential and experimental evidence which warrants change be made? Isn’t it on the quality of that evidence and the quality of its evaluation that scientific authority is determined? Would you argue that DSM V is entirely unacceptable on scientific terms when you disagree on moral terms with what does not appear in it?

Furthermore, is not an authoritative scientific approach substantially different from the way the Church authoritatively views and teaches doctrine and dogma? And isn’t that okay? Should the sciences cease experimenting and observing because the Roman Catholic Church will not alter it’s doctrine and dogma? No! Should the Church change what is unchangeable because the sciences are constantly changing and refining our understanding of ourselves and the world around us? No! But can the findings and opinions of scientific and/or medical authorities be integrated into a faithful Catholic understanding of the human adventure? Of course!

So what’s the big deal?

I know you (and others) allege that the APA and similar organizations were over-run with homosexual activists, leading to a shift in their respective organization’s understandings of homosexuality. But in terms of the simple fact of same-sex attraction, it does not appear as if same-sex attracted people are any more psychiatrically impaired then opposite-sex attracted people from leading healthy human lives by virtue of the nature of their sexual attractions. If same-sex attraction (i.e., homosexuality in its most basic or fundamental sense) should be seen in the same light as obsessive compulsive disorder or some other psychiatric disorder, then I’m afraid that what’s really at issue here is: what constitutes a true psychiatric disorder? And I don’t think the Church will be weighing in on that any time soon.

(By the by, I, as an Anglican, believe that the Deuterocanonicals are fully the Word of God. But naturally, if I fully accepted the teaching authority of the Roman Catholic Church in the same way that Roman Catholics do, then I wouldn’t be Anglican…)

Under the Mercy,
Mark

All is Grace and Mercy! Deo Gratias!

The APA was fully compromised in 1973. Years of research with homosexual persons was thrown out. Why? Pressure from radical gay activists inside and outside the APA. Don’t believe me? Read up.

amazon.com/Homosexuality-American-Psychiatry-Politics-Diagnosis/dp/0691028370

The APA gets to rubber stamp everybody from now on, and give them what they want so they can take it to a court as evidence.

Peace,
Ed

 

[CopticChristian]

Grace & Peace!

The point is, though, that before you reply as if you’re replying to what is written, you should actually read the words that were written. That’s how text-based communication works.

The Reformation and the working out of the scientific method within various fields (including psychiatry) are two qualitatively different things and cannot be properly understood if you believe the terms by which you understand the one or the other are fundamentally interchangeable.

The Church is not the APA. The APA is not the Church. And that’s okay.

Read what I wrote, then we can discuss.

Thanks.

Under the Mercy,
Mark

All is Grace and Mercy! Deo Gratias!

Mark,

The Scientific method was abandoned for Politics in the APA.

You accept the Deuterocanonicals on what authority?

Why do you not accept the the authority of the Church?

 

[CopticChristian]

I never heard of SB-1172 before and what group is working to defeat it?

Peace,
Ed

Ed,

California SB-1172 is the Gay agenda attempt to silence anyone that wants to aid children in need. In other words any child that struggles with SSA would then be only allowed to be counseled by a counselor to

Subjugate Religious views and morals
Elevate Homosexual feelings and acceptance that SSA/gay is gay

It will be defeated. In April the Circuit courts should rule that this law is unconstitutional.

 

[CopticChristian]

Grace & Peace!

I’m not arguing whether or not certain interests overlap: that can certainly happen. When they do overlap, though, are we to understand that the interests of religion exist on the same sort of moral spectrum as the interests of a medical or scientific association? Are we to understand that we can comprehend the APA by thinking of it as if it were the Church and the Church as if it were the APA? I think we’d be doing both the Church and the APA an injustice if we did that.

Under the Mercy,
Mark

All is Grace and Mercy! Deo Gratias!

Mark,

You miss the point…

If the Church has the revealed truth and if men on their own accord can form their own religions, did and they persist calling it a Reformation…then

The APA has no revealed truth, but thoughts, Fundamentalist in fact then since thought is thought a counter thought can exist and formulate a point of view that is at odds with the APA and persist and it is in essence the equivalence of a Reformation that will persist and grow in contradistinction to political views of the APA…as APA membership dwindles and they have no voice at all.

 

[CopticChristian]

An association doesn’t have individual rights. An individual has choices and may choose not to adhere to promulgations of a secular group. An individual even has a right to choose natural death.

Teeboy,

And here you have one of the issues that will cause the California Bill SB-1172 to fail…it is called Client Self Determination…You, me and everyone else has the right to seek help on behalf of what we believe to be true…

If someone believes that they are homosexual and appears for counseling asking for help not to have this persuasion…they have the right through Client Self Determination to be given the help they ask for and not be forced to accept…

The only counseling for Homosexuals is acceptance…

 

[Dakota_Roberts]

Teeboy,

And here you have one of the issues that will cause the California Bill SB-1172 to fail…it is called Client Self Determination…You, me and everyone else has the right to seek help on behalf of what we believe to be true…

If someone believes that they are homosexual and appears for counseling asking for help not to have this persuasion…they have the right through Client Self Determination to be given the help they ask for and not be forced to accept…

The only counseling for Homosexuals is acceptance…

Is it self determination if it is chosen by parents?

 

[CopticChristian]

Is it self determination if it is chosen by parents?

Dakota,

Well let us see…

I don’t want that vaccination to prevent measles, mumps, rubella…I want to do it my way.

I don’t believe that the Polio vaccine is necessary…I want to do it my way

I don’t want any allergy shots and I will eat what I want to eat…

We Baptize babies don’t we…

Do children really have a handle on life?

 

[teeboy]

Dakota,

Well let us see…

I don’t want that vaccination to prevent measles, mumps, rubella…I want to do it my way.

I don’t believe that the Polio vaccine is necessary…I want to do it my way

I don’t want any allergy shots and I will eat what I want to eat…

We Baptize babies don’t we…

Do children really have a handle on life?

No.

 

[edwest2]

Ed,

California SB-1172 is the Gay agenda attempt to silence anyone that wants to aid children in need. In other words any child that struggles with SSA would then be only allowed to be counseled by a counselor to

Subjugate Religious views and morals
Elevate Homosexual feelings and acceptance that SSA/gay is gay

It will be defeated. In April the Circuit courts should rule that this law is unconstitutional.

Thank you for the information. You’re right. Sadly, little kids will be and are the biggest losers. Like the following:

christiannews.net/2013/02/17/massachusetts-education-policy-mandates-allowing-boys-in-girls-restrooms/

Children are children and should not automatically be declared capable of having a gender identity. It’s bad. No, I’m not suggesting they be bullied but they have parents, not judges, raising them.

Peace,
Ed

 

[Deo_Volente]

Grace & Peace!

The Scientific method was abandoned for Politics in the APA.

You believe that because of your own political position. You’re free to believe that. The Church has not taken a stance one way or the other. What it has said is that homosexual sexual behavior should be avoided and that people who are same-sex attracted are not sinners for being same-sex attracted. Anything else–such as the advocacy of conversion therapy–is going beyond what the Church teaches and into the realm of personal politics. In such cases, I believe this verse from Jesus’ rebuke to the Pharisees becomes particularly apropos (Matthew 23:4):
“They bind heavy burdens, hard to bear, and lay them on men’s shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with their finger.”

You accept the Deuterocanonicals on what authority?

The larger church to which I belong, its bishops, its canon law, sacred tradition, and the Book of Common Prayer.

Why do you not accept the the authority of the Church?

That’s a whole different discussion, Coptic, and not one that I’m going to have with you. You can’t bring yourself to actually read what I write, so why do I think you could have a conversation with me about authority? You’ve proven to me time and again that you’re not actually interested in a conversation on anything, really. So. Whatever.

Under the Mercy,
Mark

All is Grace and Mercy! Deo Gratias!

 

[CopticChristian]

Grace & Peace!

The larger church to which I belong, its bishops, its canon law, sacred tradition, and the Book of Common Prayer.

That’s a whole different discussion, Coptic, and not one that I’m going to have with you. You can’t bring yourself to actually read what I write, so why do I think you could have a conversation with me about authority? You’ve proven to me time and again that you’re not actually interested in a conversation on anything, really. So. Whatever.

Under the Mercy,
Mark

All is Grace and Mercy! Deo Gratias!

Mark,

You believe that because of your own political position. You’re free to believe that. The Church has not taken a stance one way or the other. What it has said is that homosexual sexual behavior should be avoided and that people who are same-sex attracted are not sinners for being same-sex attracted. Anything else–such as the advocacy of conversion therapy–is going beyond what the Church teaches and into the realm of personal politics. In such cases, I believe this verse from Jesus’ rebuke to the Pharisees becomes particularly apropos (Matthew 23:4):
“They bind heavy burdens, hard to bear, and lay them on men’s shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with their finger.”

I believe as a Physician I have a right to accept and reject what is and is not true and I have a moral obligation to tell others that swallow propaganda that it is not true. You point out Matthew, however Paul says this…

12For all who have sinned without the Law will also perish without the Law, and all who have sinned under the Law will be judged by the Law; 13for [it is] not the hearers of the Law [who] are just before God, but the doers of the Law will be justified. 14For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves, 15in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them, 16on the day when, according to my gospel, God will judge the secrets of men through Christ Jesus.

Recall in the letter to the Romans Paul says exactly what Jesus said, for if you continue to read Matthew, you will see the “woes” and it is referencing the Mosiac Covenant…

so woe to you who say follow Jesus and practice Homosexuality
woe to you who say honor your father and attempt to raise children while practicing sin…

and Paul says…as well…

5But because of your stubbornness and unrepentant heart you are storing up wrath for yourself in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God, 6who WILL RENDER TO EACH PERSON ACCORDING TO HIS DEEDS: 7to those who by perseverance in doing good seek for glory and honor and immortality, eternal life; 8but to those who are selfishly ambitious and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, wrath and indignation. 9[There will be] tribulation and distress for every soul of man who does evil, of the Jew first and also of the Greek, 10but glory and honor and peace to everyone who does good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. 11For there is no partiality with God.

Your deeds will be your undoing if you do evil and don’t forget that the Catechism uses this reference when discussing Homosexuality…

24Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them. 25For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.

26For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 27and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.

and these deeds will be properly rewarded as well…

 

[markeverett49]

You believe that because of your own political position. You’re free to believe that. The Church has not taken a stance one way or the other. What it has said is that homosexual sexual behavior should be avoided and that people who are same-sex attracted are not sinners for being same-sex attracted. Anything else–such as the advocacy of conversion therapy–is going beyond what the Church teaches and into the realm of personal politics. In such cases, I believe this verse from Jesus’ rebuke to the Pharisees becomes particularly apropos (Matthew 23:4):
“They bind heavy burdens, hard to bear, and lay them on men’s shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with their finger.”
!

Couple things here. The Church has not simply said “homosexual sexual behavior should be avoided.” The Church has clearly stated that this orientation is a disorder and that homosexual acts are serious sins. Such acts can never be condoned. Further, the Church’s opposition to same-sex marriage is bold and unwavering. The burden of perpetual chastity for those suffering this disorder is doubtless serious but it is by no means what Jesus was talking about in that verse. This burden is from God, not unfeeling human “lawyers.”

“Conversion therapy”----about which I know little—should be judged as other therapies for sexual disorders are judged.

 

[Deo_Volente]

Grace & Peace!

I believe as a Physician I have a right to accept and reject what is and is not true and I have a moral obligation to tell others that swallow propaganda that it is not true.

As a “physician?” Only as a “physician” and not simply as a human being tasked with making sense of the world?

And on what basis do you determine what is and is not propaganda? Again, I know you think the APA disseminates propaganda, but the simple fact is: neither the catechism nor the APA see homosexuality as a psychiatric disorder. So where is the propaganda here and on what basis can we find it?

I submit to you that your only criterion in evidence for evaluating what is or is not propaganda is your own subjective political opinion and not an objective truth standard or claim.

You point out Matthew, however Paul says this…

Recall in the letter to the Romans Paul says exactly what Jesus said, for if you continue to read Matthew, you will see the “woes” and it is referencing the Mosiac Covenant…

so woe to you who say follow Jesus and practice Homosexuality
woe to you who say honor your father and attempt to raise children while practicing sin…

and Paul says…as well…

Your deeds will be your undoing if you do evil and don’t forget that the Catechism uses this reference when discussing Homosexuality…

and these deeds will be properly rewarded as well…

Your scriptural exegesis is neither good, nor compelling, nor is it on point. It therefore comes across as random with the intent to divert attention from the unordered/disorganized quality of your own thinking.

Okay!

Under the Mercy,
Mark

All is Grace and Mercy! Deo Gratias!

 

[edwest2]

And the latest twist is to ignore biological truth.

ncregister.com/blog/jennifer-fulwiler/raising-genderless-children

Sadly, a “steering committee” will not help.

Peace,
Ed

 

[Deo_Volente]

Grace & Peace!

Couple things here. The Church has not simply said “homosexual sexual behavior should be avoided.” The Church has clearly stated that this orientation is a disorder and that homosexual acts are serious sins. Such acts can never be condoned. Further, the Church’s opposition to same-sex marriage is bold and unwavering.

All that’s fine, Mark, and I’ve no bones to pick with it here.

“Conversion therapy”----about which I know little—should be judged as other therapies for sexual disorders are judged.

Here’s where you go off the rails. The Church does not appear to see homosexuality (understood as same-sex attraction) as a sexual disorder analogous to something that should be treated by a psychiatrist or a physician (the disorder of the homosexual inclination as understood by the catechism is that it runs counter to a “natural” sexual appetite ordered to procreation–this is the diagnosis of moral theology, not medicine, which is right and appropriate for the catechism). Nor does the Church see homosexual sexual behavior as an instance of sexual disorder, but views it as an instance of moral disorder. Otherwise, we would be justified in seeing erectile dysfunction (a sexual disorder) as somehow analogous to homosexual sexual behavior (a morally disordered act according to the catechism). But such an analogy just won’t stand up, pardon the pun.

There is a general conflation on these forums of the catechism’s teaching on homosexuality with certain political views on homosexuality. That conflation is generally indicative of lazy thinking and just doesn’t stand up to closer analysis.

Under the Mercy,
Mark

All is Grace and Mercy! Deo Gratias!

 

[markeverett49]

G but the simple fact is: neither the catechism nor the APA see homosexuality as a psychiatric disorder. !

The Church clearly defines a homosexual orientation as a disorder. It is not defined by the Church as a psychiatric disorder----I’m not sure the Church defines ANYthing as a psychiatric disorder; why would she? It is a moral disorder.

 

[Deo_Volente]

Grace & Peace!

The Church clearly defines a homosexual orientation as a disorder. It is not defined by the Church as a psychiatric disorder----I’m not sure the Church defines ANYthing as a psychiatric disorder; why would she? It is a moral disorder.

Indeed. So how is the Church’s teaching incompatible with the fundamental assertion that homosexuality is not a psychiatric disorder?

Under the Mercy,
Mark

All is Grace and Mercy! Deo Gratias!

 

[Dakota_Roberts]

Couple things here. The Church has not simply said “homosexual sexual behavior should be avoided.” The Church has clearly stated that this orientation is a disorder and that homosexual acts are serious sins. Such acts can never be condoned. Further, the Church’s opposition to same-sex marriage is bold and unwavering. The burden of perpetual chastity for those suffering this disorder is doubtless serious but it is by no means what Jesus was talking about in that verse. This burden is from God, not unfeeling human “lawyers.”

“Conversion therapy”----about which I know little—should be judged as other therapies for sexual disorders are judged.

I’m pretty sure he is talking about the conversion therapy some Catholics demand.

 

[markeverett49]

Indeed. So how is the Church’s teaching incompatible with the fundamental assertion that homosexuality is not a psychiatric disorder?!

The Church’s teaching is not incompatible with that assertion. But then there’s this: we know the Church is right and know the APA may be wrong! It is a disorder and all engagement in homosexual acts as wrong. What else do you need to know here?