Traditionalists on SSA

[mrld20]

I was just curious… The Church obviously recognizes that homosexuality is wrong. The Church teaches people with same-sex attractions need to be celibate and avoid sexual contact.

It also teaches that just a homosexual disposition is not in itself sinful yet “disordered.”

Do traditionalists think the Church needs to take more of an aggressive position on homosexuality than it already does?

 

[followingtheway]

Well, I know some Catholics as well as other Christians who kinda believe something like that. They say things like homosexuals can turn into heterosexuals and that the “homosexual disposition” is temptation.

I’m personally undecided on the whole thing.

 

[NewsTheMan]

Who are these “traditionalists”?

The Church needs to do no more than she already does. It’s all there in the CCC. Reject the sin, love the sinner. Stand courageously in the face of opposition to traditional marriage, etc.

Individual members of the Church - mainly Priests - could perhaps be more vocal in what the Church teaches.

 

[tlimon]

First, we can know through natural reason and revelation that homosexuality as a practice is impermissible. Second, science could potentially tell us whether homosexuality is a disorder or not. However, regardless of whether homosexuality is a disorder or not, the act itself is sinful and the condition of SSA, without more, does not rise to the level of sin.

I suppose the argument could be made that homosexuality is a disorder because, at least biologically speaking, SSA is an aberration when put into context of ordinary human sexuality. Thus, homosexuality could be considered a disorder like blindness could be considered a disability.

If I had SSA, I suppose that if someone told me that I was disordered that I would interpret that as being “freakish”. However, if you were to use the term “disordered” just mater-of-factly as I had just mentioned, then I think there would be little to take offense to.

That said, I think that God may allow us our disorders and disabilities to use them as a platform for which to do great things in for God. The youth catechism does a good job (in my opinion) showing how the heavy cross of SSA could lead to great and amazing things done in for the sake of the Kingdom if those touched by SSA remain faithful to the Church. I am reminded of the blind man who was born blind so that others may know the glory of God (paraphrased, of course).

God bless you, mrld20

 

[NewsTheMan]

tlimon, Natural Law answers the question for us: homosexuality, and SSA, are disordered. Biologically and in a deeper ontological sense.

 

[tlimon]

tlimon, Natural Law answers the question for us: homosexuality, and SSA, are disordered. Biologically and in a deeper ontological sense.

This is true. However, I fail to understand how being disordered both biologically and ontologically rises above a simple truism. Most, if not all, sin, specifically the propensity toward sin, which is to say original sin, seems to fall into this category.

Further, the main preoccupation of people who are concerned with the Church’s teachings on homosexuality revolve around their culpability in the matter. Therefore, biological or ontological, no matter which way you slice the pie, the individual afflicted with SSA, without more (i.e. and actual sin), does not put their soul, or has had their soul put (because who is doing the disordering, really), in a state of mortal sin by which their soul is endangered.

 

[Aelred_Minor]

First, we can know through natural reason and revelation that homosexuality as a practice is impermissible. Second, science could potentially tell us whether homosexuality is a disorder or not. However, regardless of whether homosexuality is a disorder or not, the act itself is sinful and the condition of SSA, without more, does not rise to the level of sin.

I suppose the argument could be made that homosexuality is a disorder because, at least biologically speaking, SSA is an aberration when put into context of ordinary human sexuality. Thus, homosexuality could be considered a disorder like blindness could be considered a disability.

If I had SSA, I suppose that if someone told me that I was disordered that I would interpret that as being “freakish”. However, if you were to use the term “disordered” just mater-of-factly as I had just mentioned, then I think there would be little to take offense to.

That said, I think that God may allow us our disorders and disabilities to use them as a platform for which to do great things in for God. The youth catechism does a good job (in my opinion) showing how the heavy cross of SSA could lead to great and amazing things done in for the sake of the Kingdom if those touched by SSA remain faithful to the Church. I am reminded of the blind man who was born blind so that others may know the glory of God (paraphrased, of course).

God bless you, mrld20

I think you are using a very clinical definition of “disorder”, whereas when the Church uses the word it is in a more philosophical sense. Homosexual attraction is objectively disordered sexuality because it diverts from the unitive (partially) and procreative (entirely) purpose of sexuality, because it is simply attraction to the wrong person, etc. whether or not it fits a neurologist’s or psychologist’s technical definition of a “disorder” (if there is a set technical definition; I know very little about these fields).

 

[JReducation]

I was just curious… The Church obviously recognizes that homosexuality is wrong. The Church teaches people with same-sex attractions need to be celibate and avoid sexual contact.

It also teaches that just a homosexual disposition is not in itself sinful yet “disordered.”

Do traditionalists think the Church needs to take more of an aggressive position on homosexuality than it already does?

My friend, the tail may never wags the dog. It is not what we think that the Church should say that matters. What really matters is what the Church says we should think.

We have the right to ask the Church to clarify for us, but we have no right to tell the Church to tighten up here and loosen up there. At the end of the day, it is we who assent to the Church, not the Church who assents to us.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF