Which Homosexuals Are "Incurable"?

[CopticChristian]

Grace & Peace!

That’s nice. Of course it’s a bit irrelevant, but…it’s nice.

Yes, on these forums and in its associated subcultures, “gay” means more or less what you defined it to mean. As I said above–time, culture and context all contribute to changes in a word’s meaning.

I wonder what this statement would look like if you actually considered it in light of the Incarnation–I mean, we didn’t invite God into the nest of sin we made of his world, but look…he invited himself!

You should not ever presume to think that you know where God will not be.

“Nothing redeeming in any acts performed by a homosexual…” Any acts?

Well, it’s a good thing that I don’t particularly believe in works-righteousness, otherwise I might disagree with you and say a homosexual can do lots of stuff that’s redeeming. But as it is, I would apply what you say here to pretty much everyone…not just homosexuals. “For all have sinned,” says St. Paul.

Under the Mercy,
Mark

All is Grace and Mercy! Deo Gratias!

Mark,

You are a stickler for clarity…forgive me…

“Nothing redeeming in any acts performed by a homosexual…”

A person involved in Prostitution, taking advantage of women, a Pimp, may give to the poor, however in the context of the sinful life, while it may appear to be redeeming it is a work and who would agree that a work without grace has any redeeming value.

Al Capone gave to the poor, yet he was a criminal. Do we accept his gifts to the poor as redeeming of his sinful life?

So, Homosexuals engaged in a relationship that propagate the notion that homosexuality is just a variant of life live in sin. When living in sin, homosexuals that engage in any activity that continues this sinful relationship, justifies this sinful relationship, in any way…cannot do any work that is moved by the grace of God, because grace for the work must be absent sin to glorify God, as the motives are to continue in that sinful life. Where sin abounds grace abounds all the more…to work or to repent?..you decide…eat drink and be merry for tomorrow we may die or get on your knees and repent of your sin…leave your homosexual partner and come to Christ…that is really the only choice…

 

[Deo_Volente]

Grace & Peace!

Mark,

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-Spirit

The two spirit homosexual activity is documented above. These people were essentially homosexual.

It occurs to me that you did not actually read the article to which you linked. Did you? Not all two-spirit people would be considered “homosexual.”

It also occurs to me that you did not pay very close attention to the context of my remarks. Which is baffling–because it’s not that hard to pay attention, Coptic. But an egregious lack of attention on a variety of levels is the only way I can explain this:

If you believe that we should put homosexuals on a reservation and form a tribe perhaps that is what you are hinting at, I don’t know.

You’re projecting. I would not suggest something so insulting to both same-sex attracted people and Native Americans. But following your morally questionable claim that homosexuals qua homosexuals are evil and your absurd assertion that homosexuals wouldn’t be able to identify as homosexual without certain body parts, it should not surprise me that you’ve still more obscene and insulting things to casually mention here and there.

Given that some conservative religious folks have in fact called for deporting same-sex attracted people to islands and/or concentration camps; and given the US government abuse of Native American peoples through the reservation system and the various abuses suffered by Native peoples at the hands of US representatives and citizens before, during, and after the reservation system was imposed; and given that the reservation system has ghettoized many tribes and cultures, virtually assuring that they will not rise out conditions of extreme poverty and crime any time soon; given all that, how could you suggest that the reservation system would be good for anyone, be they Native American or same-sex attracted? How could you belittle Native cultures so completely by assuming that you can just round up a bunch of disparate folks, call them a “tribe” (in the same way the Lakota or the Sioux are a tribe) and throw them on a reservation as if all were just hunky-dory? And how could you assume that* I would desire such things for anyone based on a purely informational response to someone’s disbelief that no one had same-sex marriage before? Are you trying *to be ridiculous? Because it’s hard for me to believe that someone could be so flabbergastingly insulting and absurd just as a matter of course.

I can only assume that it’s your desire that you not be taken seriously. If that’s indeed the case, then…it would behoove me to acquiesce to your desire. Because honestly, at this point, I’m finding it very hard to take anything you write seriously.

Under the Mercy,
Mark

All is Grace and Mercy! Deo Gratias!

 

[Deo_Volente]

Grace & Peace!

I am going by some of my pastors homilies about Rome and where we are heading to.

Based on what you’ve said, I don’t think the pastors you’re referring to were very good historians, though I’m quite sure they were good and lovely pastors In order to find out what caused Rome to fall, why not read the history yourself and evaluate the evidence?

Your eluding the obvious of the reality of our culture today and the 56 million babies killed so far. But I am sure you will correct me.

Speak, it’s clear that “Western” culture is in decline, but I think what you may see as a cause of that decline (proliferation of abortion) I see as a symptom of it. As a culture, we’ve put all our eggs (as it were) into the basket of liberal democracy–and liberal democracy is failing because the one thing in the world that it cannot actually do is assert a public value. So all values are seen as true, all opinions equally valid, everything is relative. This leads to increasing atomization (breaking up of real social relations) in society–traditional structures begin to buckle, crumble, and fall and the only thing that’s left that appears to have any sort of veneer of value is “the individual.” So we think, “well that’s okay! That’s good! As long as the individual follows his best interest (within the limit of the law of course!), everything will be just fine!” Except it won’t. Because individuals don’t matter apart from the communities to which they belong. And the limit of the law was never meant to be the limit of moral reasoning or action. But that’s the great failure of the specifically American liberal democratic ideology: it lends itself to rampant individualism, and rampant individualism means the gradual erosion of the familial, the social, the communal, the political, etc.

How did you become Catholic, any help for a stubborn Irish Protestant? My daughter-in-law, comes straight from Ireland. seven years ago
Thanks and God Bless

I’m not a Roman Catholic, speak, but an Anglo-Catholic. I’m Anglican–the see with which I’m in communion is Canterbury, not Rome. I admire Rome very much, though (in particular, I admire the current Pope who is one of the most brilliant theologians to come along in quite some time–I was stunned by his resignation).

Under the Mercy,
Mark

All is Grace and Mercy! Deo Gratias!

 

[Deo_Volente]

Grace & Peace!

A person involved in Prostitution, taking advantage of women, a Pimp, may give to the poor, however in the context of the sinful life, while it may appear to be redeeming it is a work and who would agree that a work without grace has any redeeming value.

Al Capone gave to the poor, yet he was a criminal. Do we accept his gifts to the poor as redeeming of his sinful life?

So, Homosexuals engaged in a relationship that propagate the notion that homosexuality is just a variant of life live in sin. When living in sin, homosexuals that engage in any activity that continues this sinful relationship, justifies this sinful relationship, in any way…cannot do any work that is moved by the grace of God, because grace for the work must be absent sin to glorify God, as the motives are to continue in that sinful life. Where sin abounds grace abounds all the more…to work or to repent?..you decide…eat drink and be merry for tomorrow we may die or get on your knees and repent of your sin…leave your homosexual partner and come to Christ…that is really the only choice…

There is nothing we can do to merit redemption, Coptic–whether or not Capone was the crime lord he was doesn’t have any effect on that basic fact. We can do all the good living and good deeds in the world, but if we lack faith, hope and (in particular) love, then what good is it all really? Lacking faith, hope, and love, such a “good” life would be, at best, a radical failure of imagination.

Speaking of a failure of imagination, though, your comparison of an organized serial murderer and crime lord with a loving relationship (regardless of whatever sin may or may not be committed in such a relationship–sin plagues all relationships) is a major category mistake.

It’s also a mistake to assume that you know someone’s motives–two people in a relationship may in fact wish to continue in the relationship not because they want to persist in having sex with each other (should they actually be having sex with each other), but because they love each other, and their mutual love humanizes both of them and contributes to their demonstrable growth in- and capacity for- virtue. If sin (sexual or otherwise) were to occur in such a relationship, it would certainly not be because such sin is the relationship’s goal or reason for being. Again, you’re making a lot of assumptions.

(I’m beginning to suspect that those assumptions come from a place of fear, not faithfulness, hence the persistent absolutism in your posts. A paralyzing fear of sin [which is sometimes mistaken for faithfulness] can render us incapable of recognizing the good when it presents itself to us. We don’t want to make a mistake when pursuing the good, so we cling to the forms of the good to which we are accustomed, unable, in our fear, to imagine that the good may present itself to us in unexpected ways. So when it does present itself to us in an unexpected way, we tend to fearfully reject it. Such a failure of imagination is, in fact, a failure of faith.)

I wish I could appreciate your call to repentance, Coptic, but since I’m not convinced that you know what you’re talking about–given the frequent category mistakes and the willingness to make inaccurate assumptions–it’s unclear to me what you’re actually calling me to do. Moreover, given your absurd statements in this thread, it’s hard to see in your call a genuine concern.

Under the Mercy,
Mark

All is Grace and Mercy! Deo Gratias!

 

[Dakota_Roberts]

The words of some of the posters here seem to continue to vindicate Hadrianus in his assertion that many American Catholics for all practical puposes hold a Pelagian view of grace.

 

[The_Bucket]

When living in sin, homosexuals that engage in any activity that continues this sinful relationship, justifies this sinful relationship, in any way…cannot do any work that is moved by the grace of God, because grace for the work must be absent sin to glorify God, as the motives are to continue in that sinful life.

Are you saying that anyone in grave sin is incapable of doing anything good or inspired by God? Because that’s insane. A good many people in homosexual relationships are likely not aware that they are doing anything wrong, much less gravely wrong. They are, by definition then, not committing mortal sin.

And even if they were in mortal sin, they’re still capable of doing other good things and doing them because they know those acts to be godly.

 

[CopticChristian]

Are you saying that anyone in grave sin is incapable of doing anything good or inspired by God? Because that’s insane. A good many people in homosexual relationships are likely not aware that they are doing anything wrong, much less gravely wrong. They are, by definition then, not committing mortal sin.

And even if they were in mortal sin, they’re still capable of doing other good things and doing them because they know those acts to be godly.

Bucket,

I am definetely insane without question.

Explain what it is you mean to be in sin and be inspired by God? Do I believe that God always calls us to himself? Yes. Do I believe that without that call we can respond? No. If you are in sin, living in sin, then explain what is it God would inspire you to do with the exception to discontinue your sin and repent. Just a few words on that.

“A good many people in homosexual relationships”, how many? You know this based on what? Homosexuals you believe are not aware of what they do is that correct and if so how is it they have no knowledge or understanding of what they do? Just a few words on that.

So, living in Mortal sin, sins that are deadly you say that you can do Godly things, because if so, what is the way you do them, since the only way to do them that pleases God is by grace, so how does this happen. Just a few words.

Excuse me while I pound my head against the wall.:banghead:

Forgive me for losing my train of thought.:hypno:

I think I want to smash my computer.:takethat:

I have mood swings and now I want to cry.:crying:

Whoa, back to reality…anyway take your time…:whacky:

 

[CopticChristian]

Grace & Peace!

There is nothing we can do to merit redemption, Coptic-- Speaking of a failure of imagination, though, your comparison of an organized serial murderer and crime lord with a loving relationship (regardless of whatever sin may or may not be committed in such a relationship–sin plagues all relationships) is a major category mistake.

If sin (sexual or otherwise) were to occur in such a relationship, it would certainly not be because such sin is the relationship’s goal or reason for being. Again, you’re making a lot of assumptions.

(I’m beginning to suspect that those assumptions come from a place of fear, not faithfulness, hence the persistent absolutism in your posts.

Under the Mercy,
Mark

All is Grace and Mercy! Deo Gratias!

Mark,

Lacking faith, hope, and love, such a “good” life would be, at best, a radical failure of imagination.

What is your understanding of

Faith
Hope
Charity

How do you get them, what do they do and what is their purpose?

It’s also a mistake to assume that you know someone’s motives–two people in a relationship may in fact wish to continue in the relationship not because they want to persist in having sex with each other (should they actually be having sex with each other), but because they love each other, and their mutual love humanizes both of them and contributes to their demonstrable growth in- and capacity for- virtue.

Explain virtue to me. What virtue? Is there some reason for virtue in your understanding? How does a relationship of two men loving each other, if that is possible, contribute to virtue and what virtue are you speaking of?

Such a failure of imagination is, in fact, a failure of faith.)

I am a dismal failure, no question. Help me understand imagination and faith as you explain it. Imagination is part of my created being and Faith is a gift. What is it you believe they have in common here?

I wish I could appreciate your call to repentance, Coptic, but since I’m not convinced that you know what you’re talking about–given the frequent category mistakes and the willingness to make inaccurate assumptions–it’s unclear to me what you’re actually calling me to do. Moreover, given your absurd statements in this thread, it’s hard to see in your call a genuine concern.

Here, I must digress…I still harbor difficulty with your sentiment of a prior posting seen here…

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=347202&page=4

The bottom line is this, Jack: God is not a villain. Your sexuality is not a trial, a punishment, a burden, a cross to bear or a test. Like the rest of us, you are wounded by sin, so your sexuality can be misused. It can be abused. But it is not sin. Nor is it a disorder. It is not a stain on your soul. In fact, your sexuality is a good gift from the good God who made you and loves you and wants for you the goodness, joy and love which is nothing less than himself.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=5333525#post5333525

Granted, Jack, you have a hard road ahead of you. If you’re gay, it’s not a particularly easy life all the time. But that’s not God’s fault. Nor is it your own. And you don’t need to make things harder on yourself by insisting that you must destroy what you are in order to be accepted by God or his church. That is not just a hard road, but an impossible one. You do not need to be heterosexual in order to be a Christian, in order to love God, or in order for God to love you. God loves his gay and lesbian children! He does not demand that they abolish, destroy, maim, twist, abuse or injure their sexuality in order to be beloved! And I refuse to believe that he demands of them the abandonment of all hope of intimacy and relationship with someone they genuinely love and who loves them in return. Again, God is not a villain.

For what it’s worth, I think the Pope’s position on condoms in Africa is shameful and appalling. And Rome’s views on homosexuality are confusing because, followed to their logical conclusion with regard to original sin, they lead to a protestant understanding of human nature that most protestants these days would even find difficult to accept.

You, on a CAF website that is for apologetics and defense of the Faith not only supported some unknown person in their homosexuality but criticized the Papacy to support this contention. This, in my opinion is part of the gay agenda to come to the CAF and continually raise questions that support this notion of being gay, that many lurkers and others that struggle with SSA may see as an …Oh well, here is this man telling me that I can be gay…and then perhaps leave the door open for them to leave the bosom of the Church…and I am not alone in this sentiment…

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=2043933#post2043933

After about 120 posts the following appears….Setter, I wasn’t aware that I was a resident homosexual apologist.

Now, I’ll confess that I’m a Christian who happens to be gay and am not completely disinterested in the course of these discussions (which confession impugns my credibility, what little there is/was of it, to be sure), but my aim is not to cast aspersions on the compassionate teaching of the church, but as I do not completely share the Vatican’s understanding of human sexuality, I feel bound to question some of the assumptions on which her teaching is based.

Someone else pointed this out to you and I am not alone…

So explain your understanding of Faith, Hope, Charity, Virtue and imagination…

 

[djeter]

In November of 2007 **Fr. Richard John Neuhaus penned a brief article **that looked back to the statement of the US Bishops, “Ministry to Persons with a Homosexual Inclination: Guidelines for Pastoral Care.” I introduce it here followed by reading selections from the statement. I do it in answer to a recent reader who thought my concern with abortion and gay marriage detracted from the other pieces and more theological meditations found on payingattentiontothesky.

I would hope what follows shows how the Church’s thinking is rooted in its readings of Scripture (Genesis, Paul) and its beliefs concerning Christian anthropology, Temperance and Charity. In fact to get to the idea that Gay Marriage should be supported by the faithful you need to trample upon so much Catholic dogma and teaching one wonders how to remain Catholic at the end of that thought process. I guess I am a little in awe of those who seek for the Church to give a pass on homosexual acts yet to oppose adultery, fornication, masturbation, and contraception (all of which also violate the proper ends of human sexuality).

One of the problems of the Church’s teaching on homosexuality is how little of it is understood by the faithful. There is an onslaught of Catholics righteously intoning the “disorder of homosexuality” or ‘the sinfulness of homosexuals” when the Church specifically teaches that homosexual inclination is not itself a sin. Neither is the inclination to masturbation or fornication. The very fact that the Rainbow Sash Movement originates in the Catholic Church shows how little some of us understand what it is to be Catholic.

Hope you enjoy the post. It doesn’t get any better than Fr. Neuhaus…

dj

 

[CopticChristian]

In November of 2007 **Fr. Richard John Neuhaus penned a brief article **that looked back to the statement of the US Bishops, “Ministry to Persons with a Homosexual Inclination: Guidelines for Pastoral Care.”

I would hope what follows shows how the Church’s thinking is rooted in its readings of Scripture (Genesis, Paul) and its beliefs concerning Christian anthropology, Temperance and Charity. In fact to get to the idea that Gay Marriage should be supported by the faithful you need to trample upon so much Catholic dogma and teaching one wonders how to remain Catholic at the end of that thought process. I guess I am a little in awe of those who seek for the Church to give a pass on homosexual acts yet to oppose adultery, fornication, masturbation, and contraception (all of which also violate the proper ends of human sexuality).

One of the problems of the Church’s teaching on homosexuality is how little of it is understood by the faithful. There is an onslaught of Catholics righteously intoning the “disorder of homosexuality” or ‘the sinfulness of homosexuals” when the Church specifically teaches that homosexual inclination is not itself a sin. Neither is the inclination to masturbation or fornication. The very fact that the Rainbow Sash Movement originates in the Catholic Church shows how little some of us understand what it is to be Catholic.

Hope you enjoy the post. It doesn’t get any better than Fr. Neuhaus…

dj

DJ,

What is it you were thinking when you were moved to post this?

Here you say this…

I introduce it here followed by reading selections from the statement. I do it in answer to a recent reader who thought my concern with abortion and gay marriage detracted from the other pieces and more theological meditations found on paying attention to the sky.

Explain what it is you are speaking of when you register one reader suggested that your concern detracted from what?

I am unable to make sense of what your sentiment is. The article speaks for itself. Explain please.

 

[Deo_Volente]

Grace & Peace!

What is your understanding of

…]

So explain your understanding of Faith, Hope, Charity, Virtue and imagination…

Coptic, before I begin to think about responding to your questions, I need to know the following: are we discussing this current thread, or are we discussing, on this current thread, threads and posts that are several years old? If the latter (and your preference seems to be for the latter given your earlier quotations–without attribution, without context–from other years-old posts I had made), you may want to stick to those older threads.

As it stands, I don’t think you’re actually interested in anything I might have to say–but you do seem interested in what I said many moons ago, as if the intervening years have had no effect on the drift or expression of my thought. That’s odd to me. But. Well. So be it! It’s your choice–if you want to have a conversation now on this thread, let’s have one now, on this thread. If you want to have a conversation with an old thread, you should go have that conversation in those old threads. But please make up your mind.

Thanks.

Under the Mercy,
Mark

All is Grace and Mercy! Deo Gratias!

 

[CopticChristian]

Grace & Peace!

Coptic, before I begin to think about responding to your questions, I need to know the following: are we discussing this current thread, or are we discussing, on this current thread, threads and posts that are several years old? If the latter (and your preference seems to be for the latter given your earlier quotations–without attribution, without context–from other years-old posts I had made), you may want to stick to those older threads.

As it stands, I don’t think you’re actually interested in anything I might have to say–but you do seem interested in what I said many moons ago, as if the intervening years have had no effect on the drift or expression of my thought. That’s odd to me. But. Well. So be it! It’s your choice–if you want to have a conversation now on this thread, let’s have one now, on this thread. If you want to have a conversation with an old thread, you should go have that conversation in those old threads. But please make up your mind.

Thanks.

Under the Mercy,
Mark

All is Grace and Mercy! Deo Gratias!

Mark,

Have you changed? If so I am pleased.

Have a go with Faith, Hope, Charity, Imagination and virtue…

 

[The_Bucket]

“A good many people in homosexual relationships”, how many? You know this based on what? Homosexuals you believe are not aware of what they do is that correct and if so how is it they have no knowledge or understanding of what they do? Just a few words on that.

 

[Rau]

When living in sin, homosexuals that engage in any activity that continues this sinful relationship, justifies this sinful relationship, in any way…cannot do any work that is moved by the grace of God, because grace for the work must be absent sin to glorify God

Well, I have to be honest and say that I’m not sure I understand the meaning of “a work that is moved by the Grace of God”. I hope you’re not saying that a person “living in sin”. (Heterosexual or homosexual would seem to be irrelevant here) can do no good act? To say that would be to condemn entirely the worth of someone in that sinful state. I think that is clearly wrong. Are you not aware of individuals living in such a state who are otherwise good and noble people?

 

[CopticChristian]

]

It’s basic logic. Your argument is the one that would require some kind of evidence because you’re arguing that all homosexuals in relationships know that homosexual acts are gravely wrong and yet they persist in it. I find that to be exceedingly difficult to believe.

 

[CopticChristian]

Well, I have to be honest and say that I’m not sure I understand the meaning of “a work that is moved by the Grace of God”. I hope you’re not saying that a person “living in sin”. (Heterosexual or homosexual would seem to be irrelevant here) can do no good act? To say that would be to condemn entirely the worth of someone in that sinful state. I think that is clearly wrong. Are you not aware of individuals living in such a state who are otherwise good and noble people?

Rau,

Let’s ask some basic questions…

We believe, profess our Faith
We live a Sacramental Life
We model Christ
We pray

Ok:thumbsup:

In our profession as per the Council of Orange and Trent and reiteriated in the Catechism…

We are called by God and we respond…we can’t even respond on our own…

Council of Orange…

CANON 4. If anyone maintains that God awaits our will to be cleansed from sin, but does not confess that even our will to be cleansed comes to us through the infusion and working of the Holy Spirit, he resists the Holy Spirit himself who says through Solomon, “The will is prepared by the Lord” (Prov. 8:35, LXX), and the salutary word of the Apostle, “For God is at work in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure” (Phil. 2:13).

So if our response is not of our own then on our own we can do nothing without God that is pleasing to God…

and you can’t do anything pleasing to God without grace…

Council of Orange…

CANON 6. If anyone says that God has mercy upon us when, apart from his grace, we believe, will, desire, strive, labor, pray, watch, study, seek, ask, or knock, but does not confess that it is by the infusion and inspiration of the Holy Spirit within us that we have the faith, the will, or the strength to do all these things as we ought; or if anyone makes the assistance of grace depend on the humility or obedience of man and does not agree that it is a gift of grace itself that we are obedient and humble, he contradicts the Apostle who says, “What have you that you did not receive?” (1 Cor. 4:7), and, “But by the grace of God I am what I am” (1 Cor. 15:10).

If then We are Saved by Grace, through Faith, a Gift, not of our own, and the only works we can do that are pleasing to God are works done by that Grace and Faith…anything you do without grace and Faith is just motion…it may look good, it may please you however without grace/Faith…you are a gong or clanging symbol…because without Love/God…you cannot do anything…

So, in sin, without grace/faith…you give to the poor, build hospitals, fornicate, masturbate, tend to the sick and dying, perform sodomy…do any of these acts fulfill a work that is pleasing to God…?

You tell me…

 

[speakttruth]

Grace & Peace!

Based on what you’ve said, I don’t think the pastors you’re referring to were very good historians, though I’m quite sure they were good and lovely pastors In order to find out what caused Rome to fall, why not read the history yourself and evaluate the evidence?

Speak, it’s clear that “Western” culture is in decline, but I think what you may see as a cause of that decline (proliferation of abortion) I see as a symptom of it. As a culture, we’ve put all our eggs (as it were) into the basket of liberal democracy–and liberal democracy is failing because the one thing in the world that it cannot actually do is assert a public value. So all values are seen as true, all opinions equally valid, everything is relative. This leads to increasing atomization (breaking up of real social relations) in society–traditional structures begin to buckle, crumble, and fall and the only thing that’s left that appears to have any sort of veneer of value is “the individual.” So we think, “well that’s okay! That’s good! As long as the individual follows his best interest (within the limit of the law of course!), everything will be just fine!” Except it won’t. Because individuals don’t matter apart from the communities to which they belong. And the limit of the law was never meant to be the limit of moral reasoning or action. But that’s the great failure of the specifically American liberal democratic ideology: it lends itself to rampant individualism, and rampant individualism means the gradual erosion of the familial, the social, the communal, the political, etc.

I’m not a Roman Catholic, speak, but an Anglo-Catholic. I’m Anglican–the see with which I’m in communion is Canterbury, not Rome. I admire Rome very much, though (in particular, I admire the current Pope who is one of the most brilliant theologians to come along in quite some time–I was stunned by his resignation).

Under the Mercy,
Mark

All is Grace and Mercy! Deo Gratias!

Mark,

Did you read his statement on homosexuality in the last couple of months? If you think he is so brilliant wouldn’t you agree that we can not have SSM or homosexuality endorsed in anyway for the sake of the common good and society? You can find it yourself I am sure or I can copy and paste. I just want to be sure what I am discussing. If you have a SSA then you can never convince the Catholic Church to change her teachings… If this is what all these discussions you have had are about. Michele Arnold one of the moderators did a page on why we can’t have SSM. Great for people to understand the truth. If you have heard about Christopher West the theology of the body, you may understand how beautiful sex is in it proper order. I will pray for you if you have this problem and hope by the grace of God that you will be able to live a chaste life. If I am wrong I do apologize, even still we are all called to chastity.
GB

 

[Rau]

Coptic, further to your Post #115…

Your argument is hard (for me) to follow, but it would appear the bottom line is that (as an example…) a couple engaging in premarital sex live worthless lives and nothing they do in their lives can merit any favour with God other than repenting. The one (continuing) sin utterly dominates and overshadows all else. Is that a fair summary?

Similarly for those in a homosexual relationship?

What position do you hold in circumstances where the ‘participants’ simply don’t view their actions as sinful?

 

[CopticChristian]

Coptic, further to your Post #115…

Your argument is hard (for me) to follow, but it would appear the bottom line is that (as an example…) a couple engaging in premarital sex live worthless lives and nothing they do in their lives can merit any favour with God other than repenting. The one (continuing) sin utterly dominates and overshadows all else. Is that a fair summary?

Similarly for those in a homosexual relationship?

What position do you hold in circumstances where the ‘participants’ simply don’t view their actions as sinful?

Rau,

scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s1c1a8.htm

1861 Mortal sin is a radical possibility of human freedom, as is love itself.** It results in the loss of charity and the privation of sanctifying grace, that is, of the state of grace**. If it is not redeemed by repentance and God’s forgiveness, it causes exclusion from Christ’s kingdom and the eternal death of hell, for our freedom has the power to make choices for ever, with no turning back. However, although we can judge that an act is in itself a grave offense, we must entrust judgment of persons to the justice and mercy of God.

sin removes that grace…

2008 The merit of man before God in the Christian life arises from the fact that God has freely chosen to associate man with the work of his grace. The fatherly action of God is first on his own initiative, and then follows man’s free acting through his collaboration,** so that the merit of good works is to be attributed in the first place to the grace of God**, then to the faithful. Man’s merit, moreover, itself is due to God, for his good actions proceed in Christ, from the predispositions and assistance given by the Holy Spirit.

without grace works have no merit or are not pleasing to God

Name circumstances where someone does not know that their actions are sin?

 

[Rau]

Name circumstances where someone does not know that their actions are sin?

Is implicit in your request is the idea that one only sins when one knows it is a sin?