Gay Catholics

[Guest chi rho]

[quote name='Priscilla' date='Apr 22 2005, 05:09 PM'] I was stunned a few days ago to learn that the Gay movement is infiltrating nearly every religious denomination including Catholics:

[url="http://www.dignityusa.org/"]http://www.dignityusa.org/[/url]

I am all for showing mercy to Gays who want to repent and lead celibate lives, but does the Catholic Church generally condemn practicing gay lifestyles? [/quote]
ok my opinion about homosexuality is that the way u dress, talk, or act does not make u a homosexual. its on;y when u apply any physical or mental affect to the same gender as urself. if i were to be gay. iam not gay when i got to skool, iam a student. when i got to work iam not gay iam a worker. iam only gay when i apply it to my life. not by the way i dress or talk or act girly. gay ppol have the same stuggles as straight ppol are called to do. they still too must have no sexual relationship outside of marriage including oral sex. and yes i do beileve that homosexuality is a mental disorder. as catholics are we can do is to pray for them.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='track2004' date='Apr 23 2005, 07:39 PM'] Just $.02 and my psych student clarification.

When the DSM was under going large scale revisions in the 1970s SSAD was one of the many things they (the APA) changed.  The group got together and decided that people with this 'disorder' were actually leading healthy productive lives and, besides living in a society that disapproves, actually were happy.  The APA realized that being gay wasn't the same as being bipolar or paraniod.  They also realized that being homosexual, even actively, does not contribute to the mental health of a person; in other words, statistically they couldn't tell the difference between heterosexual and homosexual people in terms of overall mental health.  They took Homosexuality out of the DSM.  They did however leave in a blanket, sexual identity category so anyone who was homosexual or transgender (which is still in the DSM as I recall) or just confused about it could get his or her insurance to cover the bills. [/quote]
There is no such thing as [i][b]being[/b][/i] "gay," and so a man must never be reduced in his subsistent reality to the disordered inclinations that afflict his mind ([i]nous[/i]) and will (i.e., the gnomic will, and not the natural will which remains unaffected by the ancestral sin). The homosexual inclination, like other disordered inclinations (e.g., pedophilia and ephebophilia, or kleptomania and other compulsive disorders), does not exist ontologically; instead, it is a "pathological constitution" [1] of the mind ([i]nous[/i]) and gnomic will, caused by the fall of man from grace. Moreover, the Church teaches that the homosexual inclination is a more or less strong tendency ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil, and so although the condition is not in itself a sin, it is not to be thought of as benign, morally neutral, or worse, as a "good." Instead, the homosexual condition must be seen for what it is, i.e., a relative absence of the good in the gnomic will of the creature, and so no one [i][b]is[/b][/i] "gay." [2] That being said, the Magisterium holds that some human beings are afflicted with homosexual tendencies, and those who experience these disordered desires are to strive to overcome them by the power of God's grace. As a consequence, no one must ever identify himself with a moral privation (i.e., an objective disorder of the mind and gnomic will), and when discussing this issue it is vital that a Catholic avoid the politically correct terminology of modern secular culture. Sadly the APA, under pressure from homosexual activists, removed this objective disorder from its category of mental illnesses afflicting man; but regardless, the Church continues to teach that the homosexual inclination, like any other disordered inclination, is a disorder of the mind ([i]nous[/i]) and gnomic will caused by the fall. Therefore, a Catholic must be resolute in teaching the truth about man as it has been revealed in Christ Jesus, and must not fall into the error of describing this pathological disorder with the politically correct terminology of modern secular humanism.

NOTES:

[1] See the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith's instruction, [u]Persona Humana[/u], no. 8; as the CDF instruction explains, "A distinction is drawn, and it seems with some reason, between homosexuals whose tendency comes from a false education, from a lack of normal sexual development, from habit, from bad example, or from other similar causes, and is transitory or at least not incurable; and homosexuals who are definitively such because of some kind of innate instinct or a pathological constitution judged to be incurable." In some individuals this disordered inclination, which is a mental ([i]psychological[/i]) disorder related to the fall, may take on characteristics that cause it to perdure over time, but it remains a disorder nonetheless and must not be thought of as an essential component of a man's nature.

[2] See the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith's instruction, [u]Homosexualitatis Problema[/u], no. 3; I note with sadness that after the publication of the instruction [u]Persona Humana[/u] some people began to teach that the homosexual inclination itself was not objectively disordered, but that only homosexual activity was to be described as disordered. Now in order to clarify this mistake the CDF stated the following: "Explicit treatment of the problem was given in this Congregation's [u]Declaration on Certain Questions Concerning Sexual Ethics[/u] [[i]Persona Humana[/i]] of December 29, 1975. That document stressed the duty of trying to understand the homosexual condition and noted that culpability for homosexual acts should only be judged with prudence. At the same time the Congregation took note of the distinction commonly drawn between the homosexual condition or tendency and individual homosexual actions. These were described as deprived of their essential and indispensable finality, as being [i]intrinsically disordered[/i], and able in no case to be approved of (cf. n. 8, 4). In the discussion which followed the publication of the Declaration, however, an overly benign interpretation was given to the homosexual condition itself, some going so far as to call it neutral, or even good. Although the particular inclination of the homosexual person is not a sin, it is a more or less strong tendency ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil; and thus the inclination itself must be seen as an objective disorder. Therefore special concern and pastoral attention should be directed toward those who have this condition, lest they be led to believe that the living out of this orientation in homosexual activity is a morally acceptable option. It is not."

Edited May 12, 2005 by Apotheoun

[Cam42]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='May 12 2005, 07:12 AM'] There is no such thing as [i][b]being[/b][/i] "gay," and so a man must never be reduced in his subsistent reality to the disordered inclinations that afflict his mind ([i]nous[/i]) and will (the gnomic will, and not the natural will). The homosexual inclination, like other disordered inclinations (e.g., pedophilia and ephebophilia, or kleptomania and other compulsive disorders), does not exist ontologically; instead, it is a "pathological constitution" [1] of the mind ([i]nous[/i]) and gnomic will, caused by the fall of man from grace. Moreover, the Church teaches that the homosexual inclination is a more or less strong tendency ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil, and so although the condition is not in itself a sin, it is not to be thought of as benign, morally neutral, or worse, as a "good." Instead, the homosexual condition must be seen for what it is, i.e., a relative absence of the good in the gnomic will of the creature, and so no one [i][b]is[/b][/i] "gay." [2] The Magisterium holds that some human beings are afflicted with homosexual tendencies, and those who experience these disordered desires are to strive to overcome them by the power of God's grace. As a consequence, no one must ever identify himself with a moral privation (i.e., an objective disorder of the mind and gnomic will), and Catholics must avoid the politically correct terminology of modern culture when discussing this issue. Sadly the APA, under pressure from homosexual activists, removed this objective disorder from its category of mental illnesses afflicting man, but regardless, the Church continues to teach that the homosexual inclination, like any other disordered inclination, is a disorder of the mind (nous) and gnomic will caused by the fall. Therefore, a Catholic must be resolute in teaching the truth about man as it has been revealed in Christ Jesus, and must not fall into the error of describing this pathological disordered with the politically correct terminology of modern secular humanists.

NOTES:

[1] See the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith's, Instruction [u]Persona Humana[/u], no. 8; as the CDF instruction explains, "A distinction is drawn, and it seems with some reason, between homosexuals whose tendency comes from a false education, from a lack of normal sexual development, from habit, from bad example, or from other similar causes, and is transitory or at least not incurable; and homosexuals who are definitively such because of some kind of innate instinct or a pathological constitution judged to be incurable." In some individuals this disordered inclination, which is a mental ([i]psychological[/i]) disorder related to the fall, may take on characteristics that cause it to perdure over time, but it remains a disorder nonetheless and must not be thought of as an essential component of a man's nature.

[2] See the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith's, Instruction [u]Homosexualitatis Problema[/u], no. 3; I note with sadness that after the issuance of the instruction [u]Persona Humana[/u] some people began to teach that the homosexual inclination itself was not objectively disordered, but that only homosexual activity was to be described as disordered. Now in order to clarify this mistake the CDF stated the following: "Explicit treatment of the problem was given in this Congregation's [u]Declaration on Certain Questions Concerning Sexual Ethics[/u] [[i]Persona Humana[/i]] of December 29, 1975. That document stressed the duty of trying to understand the homosexual condition and noted that culpability for homosexual acts should only be judged with prudence. At the same time the Congregation took note of the distinction commonly drawn between the homosexual condition or tendency and individual homosexual actions. These were described as deprived of their essential and indispensable finality, as being [i]intrinsically disordered[/i], and able in no case to be approved of (cf. n. 8, 4). In the discussion which followed the publication of the Declaration, however, an overly benign interpretation was given to the homosexual condition itself, some going so far as to call it neutral, or even good. Although the particular inclination of the homosexual person is not a sin, it is a more or less strong tendency ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil; and thus the inclination itself must be seen as an objective disorder. Therefore special concern and pastoral attention should be directed toward those who have this condition, lest they be led to believe that the living out of this orientation in homosexual activity is a morally acceptable option. It is not." [/quote]
What he said....

[cmotherofpirl]

Can you copy this to the apologetic section?

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='May 12 2005, 06:08 AM'] Can you copy this to the apologetic section? [/quote]
I think Phatcatholic has to do that.

[cmotherofpirl]

Its an excellent answer , but you already knew that

[LittleLes]

While it cannot be proven, do not the gospels (as well as at least one gospel which didn't make it into the Canon of Scripture) suggest that Jesus himself may have been gay?

LittleLes

[Jaime]

Unsolicited advice to folks.

Responding to comments that are clearly posted to "stir the pot" is generally unwise.

[Semalsia]

[quote name='Apotheoun']There is no such thing as being "gay,"[/quote]

I guess there is no such thing as being "straight" then either. I guess none of you are heterosexuals then.

[ardillacid]

[quote name='LittleLes' date='May 12 2005, 08:36 AM'] While it cannot be proven, do not the gospels (as well as at least one gospel which didn't make it into the Canon of Scripture) suggest that Jesus himself may have been gay?

LittleLes [/quote]
Give the verses, Littleles, give the verses. (I thought the only gospel you think is legit is St. Mark's anyway)

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Semalsia' date='May 12 2005, 08:22 AM'] [quote name='Apotheoun']There is no such thing as being "gay,"[/quote]
I guess there is no such thing as being "straight" then either. I guess none of you are heterosexuals then. [/quote]
"God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them." [Genesis 1:27] The difference between 'heterosexual' desires and 'homosexual' desires is that the former are natural and were written into the nature of man by God Himself, while the latter are unnatural and are objectively disordered and were caused by man's fall from grace.

[Kilroy the Ninja]

Ok, we when start suggesting that Christ was gay we're done.


This thread has answered the initial question. It's run it's course.

If dUSt disagrees he'll reopen it.

Go out and get some fresh air.

God Bless.