J
jjr9
Guest
Do you believe the Magisterium is wrong to claim a group of people experience exclusive SSA?
God bless
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
God bless
M
mackbrislawn
Guest
If there is no difference, why then are the pro-gay lobby not content with civil unions?If a civil marriage and a civil union are the same in all but name, then what is the difference? I say “cheese,” the French say, “fromage.” There is no difference in substance, only the name. To be for civil union is to be for civil marriage. The wording makes no difference that I can discern.
J
JB_Brother_4446
Guest
Wow. So lusting after another person, or in this case, a person of the same sex is not sinful?Only if sexualised, as is any other unchastity or lust also.
T
Thorolfr
Guest
I think he’s saying that unchastity or lust are both sinful, but the attraction by itself (both opposite sex and same-sex attraction) if not acted upon is not sinful.Wow. So lusting after another person, or in this case, a person of the same sex is not sinful?
R
Rau
Guest
That’s right. At this moment I’m not experiencing any sexual attraction of any kind, but I KNOW that a woman can grab my attention in a way that a man cannot. We call this “OSA”, and it does not refer to what one feels “right” now. Thus, it is not temptation.I think he’s saying that unchastity or lust are both sinful, but the attraction by itself (both opposite sex and same-sex attraction) if not acted upon is not sinful.
Now, by all the evidence, there are persons (men, say) for whom the reverse is true. They may experience no sexual attraction at a point in time, but they KNOW that a man can grab their attention in a way a woman cannot. We say the person experiences SSA. That’s not a statement about what the person feels right now. It is not referring to a temptation.
The form a (sexual) temptation may take depends on the starting disposition. Temptation where the object is the opposite sex, the same sex, or either. But there is no temptation, no sin, no “separation” from the Lord inherent in this starting disposition.
R
Rau
Guest
Because the different name reflects a distinction between the relationship of man+woman and man+man. It is a distinction that the “pro gay lobby” does not wish to acknowledge.If there is no difference, why then are the pro-gay lobby not content with civil unions?
Regardless, civil unions are state-recognised sexual relationships. Had they been framed differently, they could have been widely accepted (though not necessarily by the “pro gay lobby”).
S
StudentMI
Guest
Dude, what is your problem with what the Catechism teaches? Why is the existence of people with exclusive homosexual attraction so repugnant and troubling to you? The Pope and his predecessor don’t see it as a problem, the Catechism doesn’t, etc. Get over your irrational fear and just accept it. Even Deacon Jeff addressed this with you before.You are missing the fact that the Magisterium rejected this language, the Catechism does not say,“They do not choose
their homosexual condition.” this is an error the Magisterium corrected hopefully the Magisterium will correct it’s error
of accepting exclusive SSA as true and return to historical Church teaching that SSA is a temptation not brought
on by a “psychological genesis” that “remains largely unexplained” but a separation from the Lord and SS behavior
is sinful.
God bless
Your profile shows you have 105 posts, ALL of them on exactly the same topic. Your obsession with this topic, and your insistence on disagreeing with the teaching of the Church on it, might be construed by some of my SSA friends as a bit suspect.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=13451226&postcount=3Get over it. Give yourself over to the wisdom of the OHCA Church and quit trying to remake God’s Church in your image.
It’s like saying the Church should reject psychology entire and go back to believing schizophrenics are possessed by demons, for pete’s sake.
J
JB_Brother_4446
Guest
So a thing causing you to sin is not sinful?I think he’s saying that unchastity or lust are both sinful, but the attraction by itself (both opposite sex and same-sex attraction) if not acted upon is not sinful.
R
Rau
Guest
Human acts are moral or immoral. Acts are sinful or not. We must “choose” in order to act in a morally culpable manner.So a thing causing you to sin is not sinful?
R
Rau
Guest
What is it that you would propose should be “cut off” if a person who experiences SSA should be tempted to act sinfully? And how is this different for a person attracted to the opposite sex, but also prone to sexual sin?My belief on SSA is this:
“If your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to be maimed than to enter in hell with your whole body intact.”
Although we should not judge a person incorrectly, we must not excuse the harsh realities of sin. SSA is a temptation and an inclination to sin.
J
jjr9
Guest
People have freewill and can do whatever they like this is not my concern although I doDude, what is your problem with what the Catechism teaches? Why is the existence of people with exclusive homosexual attraction so repugnant and troubling to you? The Pope and his predecessor don’t see it as a problem, the Catechism doesn’t, etc. Get over your irrational fear and just accept it. Even Deacon Jeff addressed this with you before.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=13451226&postcount=3
It’s like saying the Church should reject psychology entire and go back to believing schizophrenics are possessed by demons, for pete’s sake.
pray that all come to the will of God so they may come to Eternal Life
I believe the Magisterium does not have freewill and must seek Truth to stay true to
the Sacred Deposit of Faith and our Lord Jesus Christ. I believe it is wrong for the
Magisterium to present what is false as true .
I believe you cannot present anything from psychology that substantiates anyone
has an exclusive SSA. If you do I will concede the point. I believe that psychology
is helpful for many but by it’s nature not an exact science.
Do you believe the Magisterium has authority from the Lord to present what is false
as true? I do not and believe sexuality of any kind is not the important issue here.
God bless
R
Rau
Guest
Alas you can no more prove this has happened than anyone can prove it has not.I believe it is wrong for the Magisterium to present what is false as true.
J
JB_Brother_4446
Guest
I believe that attraction to that person should be cut off.What is it that you would propose should be “cut off” if a person who experiences SSA should be tempted to act sinfully? And how is this different for a person attracted to the opposite sex, but also prone to sexual sin?
J
JB_Brother_4446
Guest
And SSA is an inclination to sin?Human acts are moral or immoral. Acts are sinful or not. We must “choose” in order to act in a morally culpable manner.
T
Thorolfr
Guest
And how would you accomplish this? Give us some details.I believe that attraction to that person should be cut off.
J
JB_Brother_4446
Guest
Pray. Fast. Ask God to help.And how would you accomplish this? Give us some details.
T
Thorolfr
Guest
Lots of gay people have done this and the same-sex attraction doesn’t go away. Some have felt that the only solution left is to commit suicide.Pray. Fast. Ask God to help.
A
at9009
Guest
None of what you said is a bad thing. We should all pray, fast, and ask God for help. However, no where does God promise to remove any person’s cross this side of Heaven (His Will not ours). In fact most people have some type of cross or burden for the rest of their lives. What God does promise is that we will not be tempted beyond what we can bear and that the He will always offer an escape route. He does have the ability but often chooses not to. Why? I don’t know. I take a book of Paul’s thorn in our side that God can use someone’s cross to lead that person to Christ, to show our dependence on him, help humble us, and help us understand true compassion and mercy.Pray. Fast. Ask God to help.
It is extremely frustrating the the attitude that is pervasive is that if a Christian has SSA that many view them as more broken and of a weak faith unless they somehow remove that SSA (some even go as far to see until that person removes that SSA they are not right with God. I have seen that attitude in many Christian circles including some Catholic ones sadly). People with OSA also have plenty of temptations to deal with that are contrary to God’s Will. Magically becoming straight wouldn’t mean an end of sexual temptations. All it would mean is that in some cases, the object of the desire is not intrinsically or objectively disordered.
I have never heard someone tell a person who is an alcoholic, gambler,etc, that basically if they prayed and fasted enough they would be able to drink and not be tempted to drink to a stupor. What they are told that resisting the temptation is good and sin only enters when one willfully engages that temptation. Yet, often a gay/SSA person is basically told or heavily implied they are sinning for having these attractions (and it is often rare to hear that corrected and the true Church position mentioned in public press). It is an incredible frustrating double standard.
Basically it becomes the mentality that a SSA person is damned if they do and damned if they don’t. Add on top of this the loneliness that comes (since our society including Christian culture basically idolatrizes marriage, romance, and the nuclear family) and the SSA Christian feels like there is very little support (Church was meant to be a community a family of fellow believers bounded in Christ but ask any single person and they will describe how they often feel like they are looking in from the outside). Overtime the small victories over temptation begin to feel hollow and the struggles begin to feel unbearable. There has been support failure for SSA Christians trying to live on the right path which is why so many lose faith or even worse lose all hope and self harm.
By God’s grace I have found support in my cross, but other Christians seem to do their best to keep me discouraged and add extra weight to my cross… So, please take extra time to explain what you mean, add extra compassion and charity because SSA Christians have felt burned by a lot of other Christians. So many want to find God but because of pain and past hurt keep a safe distance from God. Just my two cents and minor rant.
A
at9009
Guest
Just as you cannot provide any proof that exclusive SSA is not possible. We live in a broken world affected by original sin that has lead to all kinds of problems from physical medical aliments, mental health aliments like depression, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, etc. We dont’ quite understand some of these medical mental health issues yet we don’t deny them. We don’t deny that some people can be tempted and struggle with alcoholism while others do not.I believe you cannot present anything from psychology that substantiates anyone
has an exclusive SSA. If you do I will concede the point. I believe that psychology
is helpful for many but by it’s nature not an exact science.
Do you believe the Magisterium has authority from the Lord to present what is false
as true? I do not and believe sexuality of any kind is not the important issue here.
God bless
How is it that hard to believe that someone (not everyone, not everyone with SSA) can have exclusive SSA. I don’t see how that is a hard jump and I do not understand you fixation and near obsessive compulsiveness on it.
The morality of same sex acts does not change. It does not matter if the person is attracted to the same sex, whether it is exclusive or not, or whatever. The acts are still amoral.
You are claiming the Magesterium is teaching a falsehood but provide no argument other than your own assertion that it is false. Hope maybe some of this helps.
J
jjr9
Guest
If you wish to believe that a group of people experience exclusive SSA, I have no problem with this.Just as you cannot provide any proof that exclusive SSA is not possible. We live in a broken world affected by original sin that has lead to all kinds of problems from physical medical aliments, mental health aliments like depression, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, etc. We dont’ quite understand some of these medical mental health issues yet we don’t deny them. We don’t deny that some people can be tempted and struggle with alcoholism while others do not.
How is it that hard to believe that someone (not everyone, not everyone with SSA) can have exclusive SSA. I don’t see how that is a hard jump and I do not understand you fixation and near obsessive compulsiveness on it.
The morality of same sex acts does not change. It does not matter if the person is attracted to the same sex, whether it is exclusive or not, or whatever. The acts are still amoral.
You are claiming the Magesterium is teaching a falsehood but provide no argument other than your own assertion that it is false. Hope maybe some of this helps.
If you have no substantive reason or don’t want to share it, I have no problem with this. I will presume
you believe this through faith in something and don’t want to share what that is, I have no problem with
this.
If you believe it possible to prove that something doesn’t exist please tell me how. I believe that
if someone claims that something exists they either have to show substantive reason why or
believe it through faith. I have no faith in exclusive SSA. We can agree to disagree we have
freewill, I have no problem with this.
My problem is the Magisterium claiming a group of people experience exclusive SSA with no
substantive reason and this not being in harmony with the Sacred Deposit of Faith.
God bless
- Status
- Not open for further replies.