What Should a Gay Catholic Do?

[chrysostim83]

I think the OP wasn’t out to help his friend: he just wanted to know what folks on these forums think about the situation of gay Catholics as Fr. Martin outlined it.

The answer as it is emerging here, and has emerged elsewhere, is that nobody knows what to think about the situation. Those who disagree with Church teaching on this issue will say, “The Church is obviously confused about what it means to be gay. You shouldn’t let that stop you from living the kind of life that appears to be good to you. So by all means marry, or become a priest, or a religious if you know that’s what God wants you to do.” On the other side, those who agree with the Church will say, “It’s none of our business how you live as long as you don’t get married, or try to become priests, monks, nuns, teachers, cub scout leaders, legal guardians. . . actually, maybe your best bet is not to become anything at all. Oh, and don’t expect the Church to help, because it would cause scandal even so much as to admit you exist. Still, it’s really none of our business how you live.”

Maybe someday a bright theologian will come up with an awesome answer to Fr. Martin’s question which remains faithful to the teachings of the Church. (There’s already some rich material from Edith Stein that could help him find his way.) Till then, gay Catholics will just have to do their best to live the kind of contradictory life that their incorporation in the Body of Christ implies.

 

[camerong]

This started as an interesting discussion, and then turned into a tired morality-of-homosexuality debate. That is clearly not the question posed in the OP.

In the interests of re-aligning the debate…

I think the problem in the article in the OP is that it uses secular standards to judge the worth of a human life. Does not God look at the value of our lives in terms of our faith and our Godly works? Homosexuality does not in any way diminish these things. A homosexual life may very well be a less happy life and have a less wide range of experiences, etc. than that of a heterosexual. For the sake of the debate, let’s concede these points. But what do they matter? We are not here to be happy or have fun, but to worship and work for Him, no?

 

[Bluegoat]

I do not know the answer to this question, but it is one that is very real and difficult for many homosexuals. I am a bit surprised that so many are dismissing it.

Most people when they are of an age to begin discerning their path in life go through a lot of thought, searching for an identity, and sometimes angst. Many think about a few different paths and may even begin to pursue one (say, the priesthood) before switching to another (family life, for instance.)

And these things can cause real heartache, and discernment can be difficult, even when their is no obvious impediment to any path the individual is considering.

Anyone who is gay is given a very difficult path to discernment. It seems on the surface it should be easier, since so much is immediately out of reach, but I think often such individuals are left with the strong feeling they are looking for a way to live their faith very directly, with no possible direction to focus it. That is almost never the case with heterosexuals - there are at least options to explore.

I do have a few specific thoughts though.

One is that there needs to be an understanding that homosexuals have a real place in the Christian community, and that being gay doesn’t make them “less Christian/Catholic” than other members. THis doesn’t mean that people should go around announcing their sexual attraction, but on the other hand trying to keep it hidden or people from guessing is also not required.

There needs to be a general better understanding of the role of single lay persons and how they participate ion God’s plans.

There needs to be a better understanding of the idea that SSA is “intrinsically disordered”. I think it would be especially useful to talk about other intrinsically disordered tendencies, especially the kind that are more common than homosexuality.

 

[camerong]

I think it would be especially useful to talk about other intrinsically disordered tendencies, especially the kind that are more common than homosexuality.

Interesting point–but what other disordered tendencies are you thinking of?

 

[fultonfish]

Prayer

Fasting

Confession

Eucharistic Adoration

Friends can provide good example.

If you are a friend, then you can pray, fast, confess frequently, spend a lot of time at Eucharistic Adoration. Provide good example.

 

[Captain_America]

This is a great topic.

I have a problem with the over-valuing of “romance” and sex in our contemporary life.

We all know how drenched in sex all our movies, television, etc., are. I run into lewd magazine covers at the grocery store!

Certainly sex is overvalued and, dare I suggest this, over-rated?

Romance is something else that gets peddled willy-nilly; but romance is always a fleeting thing, and hardly something substantial.

Put these things together, and it’s no wonder homosexuals are wanting marriage. . . as if that’s some great fantasyland!

 

[Brooklyn]

This thread blows my mind a little bit. Even 10 years ago this topic would have been unheard of on this forum. But so much of the thinking of the world has crept into the Church, that there is actually a discussion about what a homosexual is allowed to do and not do in the Church.

First of all, any sex outside of marriage between a man and a woman (and there is no other kind of marriage in the eyes of God) is mortal sin. Just as I, as a heterosexual, am not morally allowed to engage in sexual activity outside of marriage, it is also true of homosexuals. What is the reason for sex? Sex is to produce life and to strengthen and solidify the relationship between a husband and wife. Whenever sex is separated from life, when it is used merely for personal gratification, it is sin. That is the teaching of the Church and cannot be refuted. That is as true in marriage as it is true outside of marriage. Masturbation and contraception are sin whether used in marriage or by a non-married individual.

Certainly a homosexual carries a very heavy cross. Most homosexuals do not choose same sex attraction. It is not politically correct to say this, but it is nonetheless true. Homosexuality, just like pedophilia or any other sexual attraction outside of heterosexual attraction, is abnormal. That is the teaching of the Church. But just feeling same sex attraction is not of and by itself a sin. It is a cross to bear. It is like any other temptation, and can only be overcome by the Grace of God.

Because of the pedophilia that has happened in the Church, she is extra cautious about anyone exhibiting abberant forms of sexual behaviour.

As has been pointed out in many posts, there are many, many things a homosexual person can do. One of them is sitting around and feeling sorry for yourself because you can’t fulfill your own desires. But if you draw on the strength and grace of God, and take up your Cross as our Lord commanded us, you will earn a high reward in heaven. I heard a talk by Fr. Groeschel this weekend, and one thing he said is that the whole purpose of this life is to prepare for eternal life. Everything in this life is temporary, it is all passing away. Are you willing to trade in eternal life in heaven just so you can satisfy your own desires? You are no better than Esau who sold his birthright for a bowl of soup.

There are people who can’t see, can’t hear, can’t walk, can’t do many of the things that “normal” people can do and take for granted. If you are homosexual, then there are, as was pointed out in the article, certain things you can’t do. It is a heavy cross, and I offer up my prayers for you. But as Christ said, blessed are they who mourn, for they shall be comforted. Do you want Christ to comfort you, or are you going to just follow your own desires and receive the comfort of this world, which could very well lead to loss of salvation?

One other thing to think about. Our Lord lived his entire human life with no sexual contact of any kind whatsoever, as did many saints. It can be done, and if you are willing to take up that cross, great is your reward in heaven.

 

[Orogeny]

Sexual Desire given by God →

Sexual Desire for the same sex →

Act on Sexual Desire →

Hell

Rather than the pedophilia comparison, how about this:

Sexual desire give by God →
Sexual desire for the wife of my neighbor →
Act on sexual desire →
Hell

Would you agree that is a more appropriate comparison to your example?

Very big of the pope to call out and say they are called to a life of chastity, if he loves his celibacy that’s his own decision and people should respect it, but to tell gay people they should live a life of chastity is not only going to NOT work, but anger people, simply because sexual desire is instinctive and engrained in every sexual being, hence why we are called sexual beings. I sometimes wonder if some of these academics need a refresher course in logic.

Moral teaching will always anger some people and some people will act on their sexual desire regardless of moral teaching. Should we abandon moral teaching because some (many) will ignore it or because it may anger some (many)?

At least if they could offer a smarter response whilst holding true the traditionalist stance, we supposedly have brilliant minds in the Vatican and they can’t come up with anything better than half-witted statements.

How about an example.

Peace

Tim

 

[fultonfish]

Courage

 

[itsjustdave1988]

Essentially, the question before you is this: What are gay Catholics supposed to do in life

Exactly what heterosexual Catholics are supposed to do in life…

Eph 4:22-24: “*Put off your old nature which belongs to your former manner of life and is corrupt through deceitful lusts and be renewed in the spirit of your minds, *and put on the new nature, created after the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness.”

See also:

Courage - couragerc.net/

 

[TheRiver]

Rather than the pedophilia comparison, how about this:

Sexual desire give by God →
Sexual desire for the wife of my neighbor →
Act on sexual desire →
Hell

Would you agree that is a more appropriate comparison to your example?Moral teaching will always anger some people and some people will act on their sexual desire regardless of moral teaching. Should we abandon moral teaching because some (many) will ignore it or because it may anger some (many)?How about an example.

Peace

Tim

Well I do not want to derail this thread further, and as someone said, it’s best to keep the discussion close to what it originally started.

That kind of above affair obviously affects two other people across 2 relationships, it’s called cheating, the homosexuality example was between 2 people only, there was nothing about cheating.

I know a lot of people disagree with the Vatican, however it’s this constant failing through hypocrisy, especially in relation to the scandals and the horrible past of the church that keeps a lot of people from fully giving trust to the church in matters, even moral matters. There’s also a way of delivering your message, Pope Benedict XVI may be a caring person, but he’s not someone in touch with how to relate to people in the modern day.

Anyways, back on topic.

 

[Orogeny]

Well I do not want to derail this thread further, and as someone said, it’s best to keep the discussion close to what it originally started.

I believe the OP’s question has been answered.

That kind of above affair obviously affects two other people across 2 relationships, it’s called cheating, the homosexuality example was between 2 people only, there was nothing about cheating.

OK then, make it the girl next door, not the married woman next door. Is fornication OK?

I know a lot of people disagree with the Vatican, however it’s this constant failing through hypocrisy, especially in relation to the scandals and the horrible past of the church that keeps a lot of people from fully giving trust to the church in matters, even moral matters.

I don’t think that is the case when it comes to sex outside of marriage. People will ignore Church teaching on the subject because they won’t control their desires. That is the case in both homosexual and heterosexual people. Anyone who uses problems in the Church as an excuse to sin don’t understand anything about sin. After all, it is not the Church that is going to pay the ultimate price.

Peace

Tim

 

[TheRiver]

I believe the OP’s question has been answered.OK then, make it the girl next door, not the married woman next door. Is fornication OK?

Well if I say yes, you’ll just hit me with a few Bible quotes, but I was going to say no anyways, I think people should ideally wait and if both in the relationship want to, then it’s all the better, but if they can’t, then people shouldn’t make a big deal of it. It’s a sin OK, but don’t we theoretically speaking sin everyday anyways?

I don’t think that is the case when it comes to sex outside of marriage. People will ignore Church teaching on the subject because they won’t control their desires. That is the case in both homosexual and heterosexual people. Anyone who uses problems in the Church as an excuse to sin don’t understand anything about sin. After all, it is not the Church that is going to pay the ultimate price.

What the church teaches is one thing, and what some clergy practice is quite another. It’s called hypocrisy, first it started with the priests, now some bishops are being tangled up in it, not only is it a sin, but it’s a felony! Well done on that one.

In fact some of them even try to help their clergy friends by moving them around instead of handing them over to the authorities, which is probably an even bigger sin. I don’t think I’d be far off the mark to claim that there’s a large amount that goes unreported, and an even larger amount that’s happening in relation to priests and heterosexual, adult-adult sex.

How can you expect most of the common people to control their desires when these so called “holy” men can’t? They preach about “giving” and not having excessive things, but one look at Pope Benedict XVI from last year and you’d think he was getting ready for a fancy dress party, wearing those not only ridiculous looking garments but expensive too! What need does he have for so much fine clothing? He has a personal cobbler too, clearly this is not excessive and is completely in line with what ordinary people have.

Then there was that incident where the Vatican wanted to spend 100,000 euros on a birthday bash for Ratzinger’s older brother

These are a few of the points that show the incredible amount of hypocrisy in the church, it has happened before, and it still is. Like I said, what the church teaches is one thing, but what they practice is quite another.

 

[Orogeny]

Well if I say yes, you’ll just hit me with a few Bible quotes, but I was going to say no anyways, I think people should ideally wait and if both in the relationship want to, then it’s all the better, but if they can’t, then people shouldn’t make a big deal of it. It’s a sin OK, but don’t we theoretically speaking sin everyday anyways?

Right. Since we sin, sin is OK? Is that really what you are arguing?

What the church teaches is one thing, and what some clergy practice is quite another. It’s called hypocrisy, first it started with the priests, now some bishops are being tangled up in it, not only is it a sin, but it’s a felony! Well done on that one.

Again, the Church is not going to pay the price for an individuals sin. Is it OK to put one’s soul in jeopardy because some priests and bishops have done bad things?

In fact some of them even try to help their clergy friends by moving them around instead of handing them over to the authorities, which is probably an even bigger sin. I don’t think I’d be far off the mark to claim that there’s a large amount that goes unreported, and an even larger amount that’s happening in relation to priests and heterosexual, adult-adult sex.

Irrelevant to the point. Let me put it this way - is it ok for anyone to have sex outside of marriage because a few priests and bishops have done horrible things? And, to the OP’s point, should we tell homosexuals that it is ok for them to act out their desires because of those priests and bishops?

How can you expect most of the common people to control their desires when these so called “holy” men can’t?

You have an extremely low opinion of people, don’t you? Do you not agree that everyone is responsible for their own actions? It sounds to me like you are just looking for an excuse.

They preach about “giving” and not having excessive things, but one look at Pope Benedict XVI from last year and you’d think he was getting ready for a fancy dress party, wearing those not only ridiculous looking garments but expensive too! What need does he have for so much fine clothing? He has a personal cobbler too, clearly this is not excessive and is completely in line with what ordinary people have.

Sounds like you have a real problem with the Church in general.

Then there was that incident where the Vatican wanted to spend 100,000 euros on a birthday bash for Ratzinger’s older brother

These are a few of the points that show the incredible amount of hypocrisy in the church, it has happened before, and it still is. Like I said, what the church teaches is one thing, but what they practice is quite another.

Yet you are using the Church as an excuse for sin? I don’t understand your logic.

Peace

Tim

 

[TheRiver]

Right. Since we sin, sin is OK?

No, just don’t make a big deal out of it is what I say. Everyone’s doing it, yet there’s a lot of finger pointing going on; hypocrisy.

Is that really what you are arguing?Again, the Church is not going to pay the price for an individuals sin. Is it OK to put one’s soul in jeopardy because some priests and bishops have done bad things?

According to who? This is not about hell, it’s about how you relate to others, one thing seems to be evading your logic here, there are certain forces at work in this world, and I’m not talking about good and evil, it’s called logic, and logic certainly calls out that by not practicing what you preach you certainly can’t get others to accept your opinion or claim.

Why should I be listening to priests and bishops, or the magisterium if it’s proven that time and time again there have been, idiots running it? If you’re going to point out that the Bible says so, then I’m just going to point out why you’re citing the magisterium then.

Irrelevant to the point. Let me put it this way - is it ok for anyone to have sex outside of marriage because a few priests and bishops have done horrible things?

No, it seems like you haven’t got what I said. It’s not OK because someone else has done it, it just means that the bishops and priests can’t talk about how sinful it is when within their own ranks it’s happening.

It’s like father telling son not to watch porn, but he does it himself, or his wife watches it or something. Do I need to break down the logic in to easier and smaller portions for you to udnerstand the simple point of “hypocrisy” - Go to google, type define: hypocrisy. Keep reading it, until you understand it, then come back.

And, to the OP’s point, should we tell homosexuals that it is ok for them to act out their desires because of those priests and bishops?

As above. I certainly think we should not dismiss their feelings and give them half-arsed responses like “do the rosary” - what a fine answer to everything in life! I have a back pain, do the rosary. I have impure thoughts, do the rosary. I sneezed, do the rosary.

You have an extremely low opinion of people, don’t you? Do you not agree that everyone is responsible for their own actions?

Funny you say that because to many others, it would appear that you are being judgemental and criticizing their way of life.

It sounds to me like you are just looking for an excuse.Sounds like you have a real problem with the Church in general.Yet you are using the Church as an excuse for sin? I don’t understand your logic.

The only problems I have with the Church are the problems it actually has, but unlike you who’s trying to find excuses (such as being blind to the hypocrisy) I’m addressing it.

Like I said before, I stand with certain positions of the Church, such as no abortion, no contraception etc. But definitely not in the case of sexuality.

It’s like trying to go to war with another country but having members of your army ****ing the enemy.

 

[Orogeny]

No, just don’t make a big deal out of it is what I say. Everyone’s doing it, yet there’s a lot of finger pointing going on; hypocrisy.

So it is ok because everyone is doing it?

According to who? This is not about hell, it’s about how you relate to others, one thing seems to be evading your logic here, there are certain forces at work in this world, and I’m not talking about good and evil, it’s called logic, and logic certainly calls out that by not practicing what you preach you certainly can’t get others to accept your opinion or claim.

Is there such a thing as hell? Does sin mean anything?

Why should I be listening to priests and bishops, or the magisterium if it’s proven that time and time again there have been, idiots running it? If you’re going to point out that the Bible says so, then I’m just going to point out why you’re citing the magisterium then.

Don’t listen to them. Do what you want. You have all the answers and the Church estabished by Christ Himself is wrong, so you should be comfortable with where you will be spending eternity.

No, it seems like you haven’t got what I said. It’s not OK because someone else has done it, it just means that the bishops and priests can’t talk about how sinful it is when within their own ranks it’s happening.

Except that you keep saying it.

It’s like father telling son not to watch porn, but he does it himself, or his wife watches it or something. Do I need to break down the logic in to easier and smaller portions for you to udnerstand the simple point of “hypocrisy” - Go to google, type define: hypocrisy. Keep reading it, until you understand it, then come back.

You accuse a lot of people of a lot of things and yet you don’t seem to be bothered by people living in sin. Not a lot of logic to that if you ask me.

As above. I certainly think we should not dismiss their feelings and give them half-arsed responses like “do the rosary” - what a fine answer to everything in life! I have a back pain, do the rosary. I have impure thoughts, do the rosary. I sneezed, do the rosary.

I’m still waiting for your suggestion of the directions the Church should give homosexuals.

Funny you say that because to many others, it would appear that you are being judgemental and criticizing their way of life.

Is there such a thing as right and wrong?

The only problems I have with the Church are the problems it actually has, but unlike you who’s trying to find excuses (such as being blind to the hypocrisy) I’m addressing it.

But you can’t be criticised for excusing sin?

Like I said before, I stand with certain positions of the Church, such as no abortion, no contraception etc. But definitely not in the case of sexuality.

Because you have been given the authority by God to decide what is right and what is wrong. I see why you don’t like criticism. With that kind of authority, I probably am not worthy of even having this conversation with you.

It’s like trying to go to war with another country but having members of your army ****ing the enemy.

That gets a complaint to the moderators. If you cannot avoid vulgarity like that, don’t continue the discussion.

Peace

Tim

 

[TheRiver]

So it is ok because everyone is doing it?Is there such a thing as hell? Does sin mean anything?Don’t listen to them. Do what you want. You have all the answers and the Church estabished by Christ Himself is wrong, so you should be comfortable with where you will be spending eternity.Except that you keep saying it.You accuse a lot of people of a lot of things and yet you don’t seem to be bothered by people living in sin. Not a lot of logic to that if you ask me.I’m still waiting for your suggestion of the directions the Church should give homosexuals.Is there such a thing as right and wrong? But you can’t be criticised for excusing sin?Because you have been given the authority by God to decide what is right and what is wrong. I see why you don’t like criticism. With that kind of authority, I probably am not worthy of even having this conversation with you.That gets a complaint to the moderators. If you cannot avoid vulgarity like that, don’t continue the discussion.

Peace

Tim

Thanks for selectively quoting, to respond I have to go back and forth between your quote and my statement, and I am not about to waste one hour doing that.

Yes, go cry to the moderators that I swore and it was censored, it doesn’t really bother me. I can always get another account in either case. It was not even directed at you.

 

[fultonfish]

There are a bunch of threads revolving around women’s rights, homosexuality and other topics with the common thread that might be phrased as “self-actualization” or maybe “marxist self-actualization”.

Seems to me that there was a lot of psychological “analysis” and group therapy applied to religious orders that demolished the God-oriented focus of the orders and people started looking inside themselves instead of at their simply stated goal of “Knowing, loving, and serving God in this life and being happy with Him in the next life”.

Everyone has got problems. I used to think I was the only person with problems and then got active in the Church and found that everyone has got problems and they are far far worse than mine and there is nothing that you could do to make them better. When a child gets cancer and dies or the place where you work goes bellyup and you have to scramble to make a living.

Got to know more people and one person said what they wanted was a miracle.

Most people buckle down and live their lives, but it just seems that an increasing number of people [or maybe I just know an awful lot of people] think that difficulties are abnormal and that they are entitled to happiness. AND they want someone else to provide that happiness. Regardless of the cost to the other person. Or they want “the government” to fix their problem; except that the government doesn’t have any resources of its own: it has to take the money from other people.

The Gay Catholic seems to want to do things that he just isn’t equipped to do. I want to be a football player. I love the game. Every bit of it. But I am fumble fingered and not big enough and not fast enough. And when I do play, I get flustered by the plays when I am actually IN THE GAME. I’m just not psychologically, emotionally or physically equipped to play football. I may know the players and the teams, and my friends say I should be able to do this or do that, but I just don’t have the various assets. And even the best professional players … some of them are not quite good enough and they get cut and can’t play.

I can still do millions of other things, but just because I want to be a football player or a priest or an artist doesn’t mean I am entitled to be a football player or a priest or an artist. There is a lot more to it than just wanting it.

There are millions of other things I can do. And I need to focus on the things I can do, rather than on the things I want to do, but just don’t have the resources for.

The best secular sentence I ever read was; “Life is difficult. Once you realize that life is difficult, then all of a sudden, life isn’t so difficult anymore.”

But one thing we can all do is to pray. For ourselves and for one another, including people like the friend of the OP.

 

[Salonika]

I think it is always sad when individual’s lives are determined or tried to be determined by one particular characteristic without looking that them as the unique individual with the particular gifts that they have to offer.

It’s been done to women, people of colour, people of particular age groups (too young to do certain things or too old), those of a particular religion and has usually, in the end,been, if not eliminated, at least reduced.

Isn’t a gay person more than their sexuality in the same way any heterosexual person whether they are married, single, priest or religious is more than this.

In the past a left-hander was sometimes judged judged for this trait alone –“sinister” we were, to be avoided, to be changed.

RobbyS:

One thing that bothers me is the assumption that this is a natural thing rather thing rather a matter of culture. IAC, why not think of being gay as a disability? Many disabled people cannot do many of these things. The severely retarded cannot–or ought not–marry/ become priests because of their limitations.

Don’t think this relevant as most of these examples of what someone cannot do because they do not have the intrinsic ability to perform the tasks.

I still get very angry when my left-handedness is considered a disability.

Brendan:

Just a little twist on what you wrote. What about pedophiles, should they act on their “God Given” sexual desires too?

Irrelevant in my view loving gay consensual relationships and paedophilia are very, very different. Paedophilia involves taking advantage of young people and is horrendous.

BlueGoat:

I do not know the answer to this question, but it is one that is very real and difficult for many homosexuals. I am a bit surprised that so many are dismissing it.

Most people when they are of an age to begin discerning their path in life go through a lot of thought, searching for an identity, and sometimes angst. Many think about a few different paths and may even begin to pursue one (say, the priesthood) before switching to another (family life, for instance.)

And these things can cause real heartache, and discernment can be difficult, even when there s no obvious impediment to any path the individual is considering.

Anyone who is gay is given a very difficult path to discernment. It seems on the surface it should be easier, since so much is immediately out of reach, but I think often such individuals are left with the strong feeling they are looking for a way to live their faith very directly, with no possible direction to focus it. hat is almost never the case with heterosexuals - there are at least options to explore.

I do have a few specific thoughts though.

One is that there needs to be an understanding that homosexuals have a real place in the Christian community, and that being gay doesn’t make them “less Christian/Catholic” than other members. This doesn’t mean that people should go around announcing their sexual attraction, but on the other hand trying to keep it hidden or people from guessing is also not required.

There needs to be a general better understanding of the role of single lay persons and how they participate in God’s plans.

There needs to be a better understanding of the idea that SSA is “intrinsically disordered”. I think it would be especially useful to talk about other intrinsically disordered tendencies, especially the kind that are more common than homosexuality.

Well put.

fultonfish:

The Gay Catholic seems to want to do things that he just isn’t equipped to do. I want to be a football player. Iove the game. Every bit of it. but I am fumble fingered and not big enough and not fast enough. And when I do play, I get flustered by the plays when I am actually IN THE GAME. I’m just not psychologically, emotionally or physically equipped to play football. I may know the players and the teams, and my friends say I should be able to do this or do that, but I just don’t have the various assets. And even the best professional players … some of them are not quite good enough and they get cut and can’t play.

Don’t think this is analogy. I would have loved to have played cricket at a high level – no show but because of factors related to the skills of cricket.

Taking this attitude means a gay has no chance of proving he or she has the skills to do the activity.

 

[Bob4BVM]

This is where the framework of the law comes in, something which the church has had trouble with in the past, usually resorting to say…erm killing people?

Paedophilia is a crime in developed countries, homosexuality isn’t. Also as far as I know, paedophilia is considered a psychological disorder, where as homosexuality isn’t.

Luckily we have independent bodies apart from the church that deal with these things, the last time the church and state were one, there was trouble, just saying this in case you decide to launch a war against psychological definitions or something.

When in doubt, look at the law, it will help you greatly.

Good luck.

You’re right, when you look at The Law, it will help you greatly.
Try reading Pauls letter to the Romans.