What is worse polygamy or Homosexuality?

  • Thread starter Thread starter SITA
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

SITA

Guest
Hello everyone I’m new here. I was having a discussion with my husband and was wondering what was a greater sin Polygamy or Homosexuality? Thanks for your replies
 
I agree with Justin mary and I don’t think it’s ever helpful to play the what is worse this sin or that sin… a sin is a sin etc. comparing them is not a habit worth getting into as it promotes judging each other, gossip and pride, though I’m not saying you are doing that as you are talking about the sin, not the person, but it is so easy to slip into talking about the people doing these things, it is best to avoid the whole issue all together.
 
Whichever sin in the heart of the individual is most strongly opposed to God is the worst sin.

Since I’m guessing this question will eventually go to the presence of polygamy in the OT: homosexual sex is disordered and polygamy is intemperance. It ended up making both Jacob and his wives miserable. The wives feuded with each other and Jacob was monkey in the middle, and he only ever wanted one wife, which was Rachel.
 
Last edited:
Both constitute grave acts of sexual immorality. Although, at one time polygamy was tolerated whereas homosexuality never was.
 
SITA said:
what was a greater sin Polygamy or Homosexuality?
Click to expand...
Pretty simple, but also complex:

The complex side resides in what sense we view sacred scripture…Once upon a time, in ancient times, and as evidenced in scripture, polygamy was the norm (that would be considering the Literal Sense [not to be confused with taking scripture “literally”])…today, not so much.

Then, the question of which is worse (assuming both are sinful acts, which is another whole discussion in itself, because “being” homosexual, and committing homosexual acts are two completely different things), is simpler, because scripture tells us that if we have broken one commandment, it is no different than breaking them all (or any other).
 
Thanks for your replies. In the general discussion with my husband we were both arguing that both are great sins, but I was saying that probably homosexuality was worse given that it went against natural law whereas he was saying that polygamy was worse because is a sin against the dignity of marriageq. Now, I told him that I thought he said that because society is trying to normalise homosexuality with marriage etc…
I just wanted to make sure my opinion wasn’t wrong!
 
Aquinas argues along your lines that insofar as homosexuality violates the natural law he considers it among the most serious sins of lust. With which he also (very tactfully) lists sexual contact with animals, masterbation, and non-procreative (if you catch my drift) sex between opposite-sex partners.

Here is my source. Articles 11 and 12 are where he answers your question.

Source

I agree with others that the arguement likely holds not much value. I’m not even sure why Aquinas addresses that point if I’m honest, perhaps he gives an answer why somewhere else…
 
SITA said:
Hello everyone I’m new here. I was having a discussion with my husband and was wondering what was a greater sin Polygamy or Homosexuality? Thanks for your replies
Click to expand...
Asking which mortal sins are worse than others is pointless because dying unrepentant in a state of mortal sin you go to Hell no matter what type of mortal sin is on your soul at death.
 
Weave said:
Both constitute grave acts of sexual immorality. Although, at one time polygamy was tolerated whereas homosexuality never was.
Click to expand...
The ancient Greeks might disagree about the never tolerating homosexuality bit.
 
Last edited:
SITA said:
Hello everyone I’m new here. I was having a discussion with my husband and was wondering what was a greater sin Polygamy or Homosexuality? Thanks for your replies
Click to expand...
St. Thomas Aquinas thought that polygamy was not intrinsically evil, but was distinctly Christian. Homosexual acts of lust are unnatural vice.

St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae,
Second Part of the Second Part (Secunda Secundæ Partis), Question 154. The parts of Lust
Article 12. Whether the unnatural vice is the greatest sin among the species of lust?
Reply to Objection 4. Gravity of a sin depends more on the abuse of a thing than on the omission of the right use. Wherefore among sins against nature, the lowest place belongs to the sin of uncleanness, which consists in the mere omission of copulation with another. While the most grievous is the sin of bestiality, because use of the due species is not observed. Hence a gloss on Gen. 37:2, “He accused his brethren of a most wicked crime,” says that “they copulated with cattle.” After this comes the sin of sodomy, because use of the right sex is not observed. Lastly comes the sin of not observing the right manner of copulation, which is more grievous if the abuse regards the “vas” than if it affects the manner of copulation in respect of other circumstances.
Click to expand...
 
That doctrine of Catholicism is one of the most problematic for me (not necessarily because I commit so many mortal sins but rather in principle). I realize you don’t make the rules, but what is the rationale of this? Doesn’t the rest of one’s life count for something with respect to judgment and salvation? I also wish to ask you and others whether this is a hard and fast doctrine of the Church? In other words, cannot the mercy of G-d supersede even dying unrepentant in a state of mortal sin?
 
Last edited:
meltzerboy2 said:
That doctrine of Catholicism is one of the most problematic for me (not necessarily because I commit so many mortal sins but rather in principle). I realize you don’t make the rules, but what is the rationale of this? Doesn’t the rest of one’s life count for something with respect to judgment and salvation? I also wish to ask you and others whether this is a hard and fast doctrine of the Church? In other words, cannot the mercy of G-d supersede even dying unrepentant in a state of mortal sin?
Click to expand...
The problem with that is it would mean Christ (God) had lied and we know that is not possible.
Authority was given to the Church in matters of faith and morals and because Jesus said what the Church binds on earth will be bound in Heaven it means all Church teachings have the full authority of God behind them and cannot be changed.
The Church infallibly teaches that anyone dying in a state of mortal sin goes immediately to Hell. It means no chance to repent after you die otherwise it would mean God lied.
 
meltzerboy2 said:
That doctrine of Catholicism is one of the most problematic for me (not necessarily because I commit so many mortal sins but rather in principle). I realize you don’t make the rules, but what is the rationale of this? Doesn’t the rest of one’s life count for something with respect to judgment and salvation? I also wish to ask you and others whether this is a hard and fast doctrine of the Church? In other words, cannot the mercy of G-d supersede even dying unrepentant in a state of mortal sin?
Click to expand...
While the Church encourages us to be vigilant to maintain a state of grace, she also tells us an act of perfect contrition may prepare you for the next life.

I believe it’s far easier on my conscience to go to confession regularly than to rely on being perfectly contrite at the right moment.
 
Is perfect contrition measured objectively from a vantage point outside of yourself? In other words, if you truly believe you have offered an act of perfect contrition, is it possible not to have done so? Also, does not confession require perfect contrition or are your sins absolved regardless of your sincerity by the sacramental act itself?
 
Last edited:
meltzerboy2 said:
Is perfect contrition measured objectively from a vantage point outside of yourself? In other words, if you truly believe you have offered an act of perfect contrition, is it possible not to have done so? Also, does not confession require perfect contrition or are your sins absolved regardless of your sincerity by the sacramental act itself?
Click to expand...
I believe it is God who measures your contrition.

& it only works if you die. If you don’t die you need to go to confession as soon as you can. So you can’t be perfectly sorry and “bypass” Jesus’ command to confess our sins to one another. This benefits you as you don’t have to worry if your sin has been absolved. You hear Jesus in the voice of the priest say, “Your sins have been absolved.”

& contrition is required for confession. I don’t think it needs be perfect.
 
Last edited:
We don’t rank sins in this manner. It’s pretty obvious that both of the sins you mention concern grave matter and have the potential to be mortal sins. They could also be venial sins if someone were truly unaware that their actions were wrong.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top