T
theCardinalbird
Guest
Here’s the problem I see though. Is Gab saying that homosexual attractions are the abomination or the act?
What are your ideas for the LGBT person's vocation in the Church?
- Status
D
DarkLight
Guest
I’m honestly kind of confused about this.
So far he seems to be saying that the act is the abomination, but that the attraction is itself the result of some specific sin beyond the general nature of a fallen world.
C
catholic1seeks
Guest
He would surely say the act,
but he is diminishing the orientation/same-sex attraction by trying to forge any other factor other than genetics. That’s the wrong perspective. Because no matter how you put it, so long as you acknowledge homosexual attraction is a real, unchosen condition, then you have to also acknowledge that God has allowed people to really have/develop this condition.
But dilemma: Such a condition makes one more prone to choose the “abomination,” the sexual act, as Gab says. Well, that would mean God has, in SOME indirect way, allowed some people (gay people) to more easily fall into abominations (gay sex) than other people (eg, straight people).
So we have to square this out responsibly.
My personal opinion is that the VERY fact that gay people HAVE same-sex attraction means their culpability is OFTEN LESSENED or diminished when they, for example, enter into same-sex relationships. It’s much harder for a straight person to want to have gay sex, after all. So a straight person in this case would be more culpable.
but he is diminishing the orientation/same-sex attraction by trying to forge any other factor other than genetics. That’s the wrong perspective. Because no matter how you put it, so long as you acknowledge homosexual attraction is a real, unchosen condition, then you have to also acknowledge that God has allowed people to really have/develop this condition.
But dilemma: Such a condition makes one more prone to choose the “abomination,” the sexual act, as Gab says. Well, that would mean God has, in SOME indirect way, allowed some people (gay people) to more easily fall into abominations (gay sex) than other people (eg, straight people).
So we have to square this out responsibly.
My personal opinion is that the VERY fact that gay people HAVE same-sex attraction means their culpability is OFTEN LESSENED or diminished when they, for example, enter into same-sex relationships. It’s much harder for a straight person to want to have gay sex, after all. So a straight person in this case would be more culpable.
Last edited:
T
theCardinalbird
Guest
T
theCardinalbird
Guest
If that is the case then that is a cross one must carry. We after all do not live in a perfect world. But I still find that Satan has a hand in this. He often wants to hinder our journey to heaven.
But how strong is the evidence for genetics in this area? Also falling into sin is most likely from our fallen nature, no? Surely environmental factors also increase the attraction’s power?
But since when does having an attraction to the same sex decrease the blame for entering in a same sex relationship? If I say chose to go into this relationship with full knowledge, deliberately with my will, have I not committed a mortal sin?
Cannot a person control him or herself in not entering into these kind of relationships?
Last edited:
C
catholic1seeks
Guest
It’s not a hard one:
Is a same-sex attracted person or a heterosexual person more likely to want a same-sex relationship?
The mere desire in itself may lessen culpability, since it affects how actions are chosen.
Is a same-sex attracted person or a heterosexual person more likely to want a same-sex relationship?
The mere desire in itself may lessen culpability, since it affects how actions are chosen.
T
theCardinalbird
Guest
Ok. I agree. But then what are you trying to prove here?
C
catholic1seeks
Guest
Not prove; respond to your Q:
Also, it’s tricky to say a relationship is “mortal sin.” What about a gay relationship is mortal sin? The sex acts? Something else?
Last edited:
T
theCardinalbird
Guest
Well when we speak of the typical same sex marriage, would we not agree that same sex acts will be committed? If not, then why call it marriage? It would be more like a powerful friendship no?
That is what I wonder now (before I said I agree, but now I am really thinking about it). Perhaps it is or isn’t wrong to say a gay marriage is a mortal sin ( it is clearly denounced by the Church though)
We know the three requirements for a mortal sin are:
Grave matter.
Full knowledge.
Deliberate consent.
Talking about homosexual acts
If are we talking about the culpability of an SSA person committing homosexual acts then if it is a mortal sin, the three requirements must be met. You think that the culpability (blame) for committing homosexual acts could be lessened for having SSA, but the questions then are this:
If the attraction (desire) influences the actions, then would it not be the responsibility of the person to try and avoid the occasion where this act could be committed?
Also, if this responsibility is not taken, while the person know full well he or she is attracted to the same sex, and allows him or herself to be lead into this sin (despite knowing he/she has a desire that should not be acted on), then would not the blame be on them for allowing this to occur?
An example:
If I (having SSA and am familiar with Church dogma) chose to walk into a bar, knowing full well this place is the perfect place for homosexual hook ups, then am I not to blame for putting myself in the position of being tempted and more likely to act on this desire?
Keep in mind the three requirements must be met for it to be a mortal sin, but in terms of SSA being a factor that decreases culpability, well, then if one is familiar with the Church and this teaching then he/she should know better to be putting him/herself into a situation where homosexual acts could occur.
Talking about a gay marriage
A gay marriage is a choice that is not so easily made. It requires time and if one is Catholic and discerning this then he/she should know to say no.
Last edited:
M
Mtdobbs
Guest
I find this whole debate interesting, and important, as a huge argument always come back to heterosexuality and the nuclear family(procreation) Yet when we look at the “Holy family”, Mary and Joseph never consummated their marriage , so were they even married ??and Joseph wasn’t the biological father of Jesus, only the adopted or foster father … and yet this family is the “Iconic Holy Family” it’s funny that their family dynamic shares more similarities with an “irregular” family than with a nuclear one. Just some thoughts.
T
theCardinalbird
Guest
Nevertheless it was still one man and one woman. They were betrothed so yes they were married
When Were Joseph and Mary Married?
When the Archangel Gabriel visited Mary and declared unto her that she was called to be the Mother of God, as we see recorded in Luke 1, her response would beco...
The Son of God was conceived by the Holy Spirit and born of the virgin Mary. That was the only part that was not normal. Mary and Joseph were married and this should not be considered an irregular family just because God’s will was being done through two holy people.
Last edited:
M
Mtdobbs
Guest
Joseph was a foster father and Him and Mary got married and never had sex. This is very irregular compared to 100 percent of Catholic marriages today (I know there’s was Jewish)
T
theCardinalbird
Guest
From Catholic.com
the idea that the “Church would say Mary and Joseph did not have a valid marriage—is false. This objection has been dealt with a long time ago. Thomas Aquinas considers it in the Summa Theologiae (cf. ST III:29:2). Basically, a marriage is valid as long as the two parties exchange valid matrimonial consent, which involves the exchange of a right to marital congress with the spouse. The intent to exercise that right is not required for the consent to be valid. Therefore, according to the standard account, the marriage between Mary and Joseph was valid because the right was exchanged even though it was not intended by the parties to be used. There have been parallel cases down through history, and these are known as “Josephite” marriages, after St. Joseph.”
G
Gab123
Guest
Some people don’t like to refer to abortion as murder either. Even though innocent life ends up in a trashcan at the hands of doctors who know exactly wha they are doing.
And it is the Word of God that uses the word abomination. The New American Bible, the NIV and plenty of other current Bibles use the word abomination.
The problem with evil is that it tries to hide and mask the truth and dress it up with all sorts of sophisticated language in order for it to be more palatable. One can rationalize the most evil things if only one plays around with the wording; “affair” sounds much more sophisticated than “ADULTERY”. “choice ” masks “murder”. “Lifestyle” masks “vice”; “romantic relationship” masks “abomination”; etc. So don’t be fooled. Never be ashamed to speak the truth, especially the aword of a God.
As for you calling me self-righteous, I have always made clear the difference between sin and sinner. There’s a big difference. As for homosexuality, the catechism itself speaks of homosexual acts as intrinsically evil, while pope Francis has described gay marriage as a Satanic attack on the family. And in a world that is rapidly teaching children how to sin, the words of Christ about the millstone and the sea are very apt. We cannot dress up evil and present it as something good.
The problem with movements that come from Satan, is that they always recruit the so-called “useful idiots” to do the groundwork; we’ll-intentioned ding-a-lings who swallow the lies that mask evil, and become evangelizers of what Pope John Paul II aptly describes as THE CULTURE OF DEATH.
So learn to differentiate between sin and sinner. Pope John Paul II saw the ugly horror of AIDS that ravaged the gay community, the direct consequence of of the lifestyle— yet he visited AIDS patients and assured them of God’s love. It’s all about God’s salvation. Hell is a consequence of sin, yet, the greater the sinner, the greater is God’s mercy. God loves everyone, thus He wants everyone to know the truth and repent and be saved…
G
Gab123
Guest
A thought becomes a temptation; the temptation becomes a fantasy; the fantasy becomes a desire; the desire becomes a deee; the deed breaks the barrier of conscience and becomes a habit; the habit becomes an addiction, the addiction becomes an obsession, the obsession becomes a way of life.
Thus it is that sin darkens the mind, one becomes blinded by truth, just as the eye is blinded by the sun. Conscience is suppressed, remorse turns into a multitude of psychological complexes and the need to be reassured and approved of; yet all the approval in the world, all the colorful floats and reassuring parades only mask the sadness that only Christ can heal.
People can wake up every morning and decide to not commit an abomination, just like you can wake up every morning and decide to not kill your neighbor. Don’t blame God. God is the one calling us to do good, not evil. The problem today is that the world has promoted and encouraged all kinds of sinful lifestyles that people get tangled up with and consequently become enslaved. Thus Jesus referred to sin as slavery. But the spectacularly good news is that Jesus died for our sins an is here to set us free.
We are all sinners in need of the redeemer. Death and judgment is in a matter of time; and time is short; it could happen tonight…in the middle of sleep…you—me—we—are all only - one - heart - beat - away from the next life; the time of mercy is NOW; thus anyone dabbling with mortal sin must be awakend to this fact, much like alerting someone driving in the dark toward a frightful precipice; life is not a game…
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
T
Thorolfr
Guest
So, does the Catholic Church also see the horror of AIDS that has ravaged South Africa and attribute it to “the lifestyle”, in this case, the “heterosexual lifestyle”? I doubt it even though 18.9% of all adults in South Africa in 2016 had HIV/AIDS, or 7.1 million people, most of them heterosexual, in a country of 56 million. The AIDS epidemic is mostly used to bash gay men as you are doing while pretending to show love and compassion for them.
T
Thorolfr
Guest
As it says in Deuteronomy 14:3-8
Just being a pig is “abominable” and I’m sure that eating a pork chop would be an “abomination.” So, each morning we can wake up and decide not to commit an abomination like eating pork. And all my devout Orthodox Jewish and Muslim friends would probably agree that eating pork is an abomination. Or at least most Muslims I know find the thought repulsive.
Last edited:
C
catholic1seeks
Guest
GO do something worthy with your time!
You have NO compassion for anyone who is gay.
All you care about is keeping the letter of the law.
The fact you keep throwing “abomination” in my face just proves you have NO INTEREST in interacting with me in a pastoral way, which is the basis of this thread.
So keep writing long paragraphs. I’m only going to ignore them.
You have NO compassion for anyone who is gay.
All you care about is keeping the letter of the law.
The fact you keep throwing “abomination” in my face just proves you have NO INTEREST in interacting with me in a pastoral way, which is the basis of this thread.
So keep writing long paragraphs. I’m only going to ignore them.
Last edited:
D
DarkLight
Guest
Why did this thread become about defending the church from the world’s view of homosexuality?
The original question was how dedicated Catholics (who are presumably not going out and having gay sex) should fit into a church that tends to be largely focused on marriage and family.
The original question was how dedicated Catholics (who are presumably not going out and having gay sex) should fit into a church that tends to be largely focused on marriage and family.
J
JimG
Guest
The Church has no prohibition against persons who consider themselves gay to marry, as long as they marry someone of the opposite sex.
- Status