What are Pope Benedict's Views on Sexual Orientation Disorder & Disease(SODD)/Homosexuality?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Gaurdian
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
How about this?

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20030731_homosexual-unions_en.html

It was written when he was still cardinal, but it is reasonable to assume he has not changed his mind:
Sacred Scripture condemns homosexual acts “as a serious depravity… (cf.* Rom* 1:24-27;* 1 Cor 6:10; 1 Tim *1:10). This judgment of Scripture does not of course permit us to conclude that all those who suffer from this anomaly are personally responsible for it, but it does attest to the fact that homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered”.(5) This same moral judgment is found in many Christian writers of the first centuries(6) and is unanimously accepted by Catholic Tradition.

Nonetheless, according to the teaching of the Church, men and women with homosexual tendencies “must be accepted with respect, compassion and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided”.(7) They are called, like other Christians, to live the virtue of chastity.(8) The homosexual inclination is however “objectively disordered”****(9) and homosexual practices are “sins gravely contrary to chastity”.****(10)
Click to expand...
 
Aren’t all sins disordered?

I’m sorry that offends homosexuals, but the Church does make a distinction between active homosexual acts, which are disordered, and the human person, not engaging in active homosexual acts, but struggling with the orientation towards homosexuality.
 
Jennifer123 said:
Aren’t all sins disordered?

I’m sorry that offends homosexuals, but the Church does make a distinction between active homosexual acts, which are disordered, and the human person, not engaging in active homosexual acts, but struggling with the orientation towards homosexuality.
Click to expand...
Yes they are, but there is a difference between an action or desire being disordered and a disorder (i.e. psychological or physical). That is why it is found offensive. You will not find the Church proclaiming that homosexual tendencies are a disorder, but you will find her teaching that they are disordered. Lust is also disordered, but people who lust (most of us) don’t have a disorder. We all have a problem with concupiscence.

Also, the OP calls it a “disease.” Certainly, homosexual tendencies are not a disease. I find that offensive, and I am not homosexual.
 
rlg94086 said:
Also, the OP calls it a “disease.” Certainly, homosexual tendencies are not a disease. I find that offensive, and I am not homosexual.
Click to expand...
If it was a disease wouldnt more people be catching it:shrug: 😉

By the way OP, I looked up SODD since I had never heard of it and it only comes up in your post on this forum, so how widely accepted is it really??
 
I have seen SODD in print and heard the term over the past couple of years, mainly at the college level at state schools and in Clinical references, so the term may be more technical than most, but it is out their quite a bit. We have two extended family members with SODD and they have never protested or been offended that I am aware of, but I do not try and harp on subjects like this or split hairs about phraseology in this area.

If someone doesn’t like the term then don’t use it.😉 Someone who is a Pedophile, may want to refer to themselves as having, CASA(Child Adult Sex Attraction). I am not offended by that term, but if others are, use something else.
 
Gaurdian said:
I have seen SODD in print and heard the term over the past couple of years, mainly at the college level at state schools and in Clinical references, so the term may be more technical than most, but it is out their quite a bit. We have two extended family members with SODD and they have never protested or been offended that I am aware of, but I do not try and harp on subjects like this or split hairs about phraseology in this area.

.
Click to expand...
So what “disease” do these family members have? Does the family quarantine them for fear of catching this “disease”? Have other people caught this “disease” by being around them?
 
Gaurdian said:
I have seen SODD in print and heard the term over the past couple of years, mainly at the college level at state schools and in Clinical references, so the term may be more technical than most, but it is out their quite a bit.
Click to expand...
Can you give a better reference? What publications? What college/state school? Can you find something other than your post as a citation? At least then we wouldn’t have to assume you are making it up. What country are you in? Perhaps, it is peculiar to your location.
We have two extended family members with SODD and they have never protested or been offended that I am aware of, but I do not try and harp on subjects like this or split hairs about phraseology in this area.
Click to expand...
Great. Then use socially acceptable terms like homosexuality and/or SSA (Same Sex Attraction), which are actually in common use. 👍
If someone doesn’t like the term then don’t use it.😉 Someone who is a Pedophile, may want to refer to themselves as having, CASA(Child Adult Sex Attraction). I am not offended by that term, but if others are, use something else.
Click to expand...
I haven’t heard of that acronym, but it is not offensive at all. It accurately describes the condition. Although, in the case of pedophilia, I think it is still considered a psychological disorder in both the secular and religious communities. So, in that case, it could be CASAD. 😉
 
I don’t get where “disease” comes from in your acronym. Does that mean if I sneeze on someone they become gay? :confused: I wasn’t aware I had this power…lol

Pope Benedict is a well-educated man, surprisingly up-to-date, and his views on this matter are in uniformity with what the Catechism and the Church teaches:

Our “condition” is disordered inasmuch as it deprives the person of entering into a biblical marriage relationship which entails an open gateway to life and a sexual and biological complementary. Even so, I don’t think he’s the type to shun us like lepers or something. As the Catechism says, “They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity.” (“Love the sinner, hate the sin,” comes to mind.)

If you’re asking whether he believes it to be inborn or something, then I don’t know. He usually follows the most recent medical and psychological opinions on such matters (it’s not his area of expertise, after all) and usually will explore the ramifications of their findings.

Sorry I couldn’t be more specific. I was looking up an article for you, but my computer threw a fit.
 
Gaurdian said:
I have seen SODD in print and heard the term over the past couple of years, mainly at the college level at state schools and in Clinical references, so the term may be more technical than most, but it is out their quite a bit. We have two extended family members with SODD and they have never protested or been offended that I am aware of, but I do not try and harp on subjects like this or split hairs about phraseology in this area.
Click to expand...
I’m a Religious Studies and Psychology undergraduate major (just about to start my final semester) - I’ve done a bunch of research on topics of theology, psychology, and homosexuality and I have never, ever seen this term.

But just to make sure, I went and looked at a few research databases to see if the term really was used. I looked at PsychINFO, Academic Search Complete (Formerly Academic Search Premier), the ATLA Religion Database and the Catholic Periodical and Literature Index and found ZERO returns on both “Sexual Orientation Disorder and Disease” and “SODD.”

Get your facts straight, buddy. :cool:
 
No such thing as “SODD”. No such condition exists that is referred to as a “disease and disorder”.

“Common and well accepted”? Nice try, but no.

Offensive? Yes, I think so, especially to chaste homosexually oriented Catholics. The acronym obviously intended to make one think of the word “sodomy”, so please, let’s not try to justify it’s use. :tsktsk:

If you want to discuss the Church’s or Pope’s (one in the same, as previously stated) views on homosexuality, fine…that’s different. 👍
 
rlg94086 said:
Yes they are, but there is a difference between an action or desire being disordered and a disorder (i.e. psychological or physical). That is why it is found offensive. You will not find the Church proclaiming that homosexual tendencies are a disorder, but you will find her teaching that they are disordered. Lust is also disordered, but people who lust (most of us) don’t have a disorder. We all have a problem with concupiscence.

Also, the OP calls it a “disease.” Certainly, homosexual tendencies are not a disease. I find that offensive, and I am not homosexual.
Click to expand...
“Although the particular inclination of the homosexual person is not a sin, it is a more or less strong tendency ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil; and thus the inclination itself must be seen as an objective disorder.”

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19861001_homosexual-persons_en.html

BTW - written by Cardinal Ratzinger. This may help the OP.
 
Gaurdian said:
Dale, Thanks for your comments. The term Sexual Orientation Disorder Disease(SODD) is very common and well accepted term and not meant to offensive. It is like Multiple Scaroses or Spinal Meningitis, etc. Their is no profanity in the title or lewd sexual context. If some want to say SSA intsted of SODD that is fine with me they have the exact same meaning.

I do not find this term any more unlikable then the term Heterosexual and if I wanted to call myself OSA (Opposite Sexual Attraction) I could do that too. It is part of responsible and free speech.

As for the Church reaching out to those with SODD, I believe we see this every single day, as it is documented above in the CCC quotes. The Catholic Church NEVER turns away any sinner, which is all of us, that is of good will and desires to be an awakened Christian. I see Catholics everywhere helping others try and remove the scales from the eyes of the current secularized and relative world around us.

SODD, is what, it is.

Lastly it may be more productive to start a new thread on this topic if it is of interest to you and the others, all I was trying to do is find out what the Pope has about SODD, recently. It looks like others are not aware of his recent writing either.
Click to expand...
I am 60 years old University Educated and have never heard of the term you used. Please show an established journal that uses the term.
 
Since Courage does not use the term SODD or NARTH I don’t think of it as being accepted.
 
I also googled the terms but did so with these:

“sexual orientation disorder” and “sexual orientation disease”.

The first turns up well, the OP interestingly, but the others are clearly referencing homosexuality.

But put “disease” in place of “disorder” and then the links are pointing to HIV/AIDS.

I don’t think the term SODD is catching on.
 
Everyone should realise by now that “Gaurdian” is not making a genuine post. He is simply making up these acronyms and trying to bait us all to see how long this thread will get discussing this stupidity.
Can’t you tell by now he has no interest in the teachings on homosexuality. We’ve already told him what the Church (and the Pope) teaches!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top