CatholicPlanet.Net discussion group  

Go Back   CatholicPlanet.Net discussion group > Catholicism > the Church
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #11  
Old 23rd July 2010, 05:12 PM
Ron Conte Ron Conte is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,636
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sammy View Post
Ron, a homosexual relationship is the greater sin because it can be neither unitive nor marital nor procreative but the adulterous hetersexual relationship may be open to life and genital to genital (unitive). Both would be considered grave mortal sins but the homosexual union is the greater sin?

A sexual act of adultery, natural intercourse, is a grave sin for two reasons: it is non-marital, and it is the breaking of the marriage vows. If the adultery is contracepted, i.e. non-procreative, or (worst still) if it is unnatural, i.e. non-procreative and non-unitive, then it is even more gravely disordered.

A homosexual sexual act is a grave sin for a number of reasons: it is non-marital, non-unitive, non-procreative, and the two persons are of the same gender, such that the act is entirely contrary to God's plan for human persons and sexuality.

So the homosexual act is the more gravely disordered sin.

At least, with adultery, the two persons are still a man and a woman.

So in the case of David and Bathsheba, after the act of adultery, and after the death of her husband, they became husband and wife, and they bore Solomon, who is in the lineage of Joseph, as well as Nathan who is in the lineage of the Virgin Mary and the Christ.
__________________
Ron Conte
Roman Catholic theologian
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 29th July 2010, 09:44 PM
Brother Brother is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,892
Default

A homosexual act goes against the light of reason, even a non-religious person but open to logic and truth can discover this fact. Physiologically speaking, the proper sexual act between a man and a woman brings forth a new human being, brings children; on the contrary, a homosexual act doesn't. Therefore, there is nothing wide of the mark or 'insulting' by calling a homosexual act as distorted.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 29th July 2010, 11:12 PM
Climacus Areopagite Climacus Areopagite is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,433
Default

what is still puzzling me is how someone could be gay yet 'not practicing' or I guess celibate? How am I suppose to judge this or respond to this?

It seems to me to be evil. There is something wrong with people living like this and receiving sacraments, holding positions in the Church, etc. There is of course the scandal aspect, but how does one confront this?

It seems to me that they are using this argument like an excuse or smoke screen because it seems very vague. Does openly gay yet not practicing mean that you accept homosexual acts as immoral, but you accept the tendencies or the gay culture? Does it mean you clear your conscience of living with a 'partner' because you are not practicing? Does it mean you think you were born this way and cannot get help and so you partially accept it yet partially reject it? Does it mean you accept homosexual acts as moral and are waiting for God and the Church to change?

Of course one could be struggling with the tendencies but what I am facing is different

It seems to me that it is more like a choice. The choice is to live a certain way. And this choice is like state of being against a good moral state. And there is such a thing as interior sins. One doesnt have to physically practice the exterior acts since one could be guilty of interior acts. And if one has the tendencies yet is continually putting himself in the position to where he could commit even interior sins, then that person doesnt care about the good.

I really need to get to the bottom of this. I am soon going to have to face this. I have no choice, it is all around me. I am in contact with Catholics who uphold this way of thinking, way of life like a positive value. These are grown men. It is one thing to deal with non-believers, but these call themselves Catholics. I am not necessarily in a position to correct, and I dont think an attempt at correction would do much good. But I can take a stand in other ways.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 30th July 2010, 12:32 PM
Ron Conte Ron Conte is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,636
Default

These remarks from a Cardinal in Chile may help:

http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/jul/10072813.html
__________________
Ron Conte
Roman Catholic theologian
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 31st July 2010, 01:01 AM
Climacus Areopagite Climacus Areopagite is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,433
Default

On one end homosexual acts are intrinsically evil and constitute a grave disorder, a grave matter without exception.

On the other end the tendencies urging one to commit homosexual acts are not sinful in themselves.

In the middle I think a Catholic Christian is called to reject all his sinful tendencies and fight against all of them without any excuses or prejudices as Christ taught us to deny ourselves. This is like a fundamental choice to live one's life in a certain way, actually imitating the Way of Christ. One still may struggle and accept a particular tendency from time to time and so commit a sin, but the important point is that one rejects all one's sinful tendencies which is the result of genuine repentance and conversion. Then the spiritual battle begins until death do you part from your concupiscence. And one might continually encounter new sinful tendencies since they manifest themselves in so many ways throughout life. But the wise thing to do is in general reject them all and fight them as they come. Continually repent and convert.

And so a one who deliberately chooses to accept his homosexual tendencies would be committing an objective sin regardless of whether or not he practices the exterior acts. Accepting the tendency as something of value or a good is in itself lacking in goodness, because the tendency in itself is a type of evil (physical evil). Accepting the tendencies seems to be substantial enough to constitute grave matter since the tendencies are ordered toward gravely disordered acts without exception. So it seems to freely accept homosexual tendencies in themselves regardless of intention or circumstance, constitutes a grave disorder in itself and is an objective mortal sin. And the accepting of the homosexual tendencies could potentially be expressed implicitly or explicitly in many different ways, e.g. living with a partner yet not practicing or choosing to immerse oneself in the 'gay culture.'

Plus freely accepting the tendency would mean one is implicitly accepting the acts to which the tendency is ordered since this type of evil leads to another and greater type of evil namely moral evil and in this case a grave moral evil by nature. If this is true if one were Catholic Christian he would also be committing heresy against Magisterium.

Once one chooses to repent of his homosexual acts as well as reject and fight against his homosexual tendencies his really is no longer homosexual. A side not that is where I think Alcoholics Anonymous errs. At every meeting the attendees admit that they are alcoholics even if they've been sober for months or years. I think that is sending the wrong message.

I think what has been throwing me off is that this is so fundamental. It is really evasive, but I've read Ron's whole work on Catholic Ethics, I'm reading Veritatis Splendor now, I read other things. I have some experience as a Catholic Christian. This is more or less what I have to go with.

Last edited by Climacus Areopagite : 31st July 2010 at 01:52 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 31st July 2010, 02:54 AM
Ron Conte Ron Conte is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,636
Default

I don't think the orientation is accurately described as "tendencies urging one to commit homosexual acts." The orientation would be an attraction, of one degree or another, toward persons of the same gender, and not solely or mainly an urge to commit particular acts.
__________________
Ron Conte
Roman Catholic theologian
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 31st July 2010, 01:22 PM
Ron Conte Ron Conte is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,636
Default

Another problem with homosexuals becoming priests, even if they are chaste, is that they will inevitably feel uncomfortable when their fellow priests express the teaching of the Church that homosexuality is a disorder. There is a certain collegiality among priests. It becomes more difficult for a priest to speak a truth if he knows that some of his fellow priests, esp. those he works with regularly, will be uncomfortable. If there are more homosexual priests, then they and their fellow priests will speak against homosexuality less often, and less strongly, and perhaps even with distortions in Church teaching which water down the truth. Eventually, they will tend not to mention, or even to distort, the teaching of the Church on any area of sexuality. For all the truths of the Faith are inter-related.

Worse still, the faithful will be scandalized. If a priest who is a homosexual is ministering to them, they will have a tendency to reject the teaching of the Church that homosexuality is a disorder. If more and more priests are gay, then the faithful will begin to think that homosexuality is not a disorder. Whatever good is done by these priests will be (incorrectly) viewed as 'proof' that homosexuality is good.

I think that some liberals in the Church understand this principle, at least implicitly, and so they want homosexuals to be priests. They oppose the teaching of the Church on sexuality on many points, because they have accepted the false teachings of secular society. They realize that homosexual priests will be more likely to water down or ignore or distort Church teaching on sexuality, and this is what they seek.
__________________
Ron Conte
Roman Catholic theologian
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 31st July 2010, 01:34 PM
Jeanne D'Arc
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Conte View Post
Another problem with homosexuals becoming priests, even if they are chaste, is that they will inevitably feel uncomfortable when their fellow priests express the teaching of the Church that homosexuality is a disorder. There is a certain collegiality among priests. It becomes more difficult for a priest to speak a truth if he knows that some of his fellow priests, esp. those he works with regularly, will be uncomfortable. If there are more homosexual priests, then they and their fellow priests will speak against homosexuality less often, and less strongly, and perhaps even with distortions in Church teaching which water down the truth. Eventually, they will tend not to mention, or even to distort, the teaching of the Church on any area of sexuality. For all the truths of the Faith are inter-related.

Worse still, the faithful will be scandalized. If a priest who is a homosexual is ministering to them, they will have a tendency to reject the teaching of the Church that homosexuality is a disorder. If more and more priests are gay, then the faithful will begin to think that homosexuality is not a disorder. Whatever good is done by these priests will be (incorrectly) viewed as 'proof' that homosexuality is good.

I think that some liberals in the Church understand this principle, at least implicitly, and so they want homosexuals to be priests. They oppose the teaching of the Church on sexuality on many points, because they have accepted the false teachings of secular society. They realize that homosexual priests will be more likely to water down or ignore or distort Church teaching on sexuality, and this is what they seek.

This brings out very clearly our obligation to avoid the "near occasion of sin", which is so blatantly disregarded in our present times.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 1st August 2010, 01:02 AM
Climacus Areopagite Climacus Areopagite is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,433
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Conte View Post
I don't think the orientation is accurately described as "tendencies urging one to commit homosexual acts." The orientation would be an attraction, of one degree or another, toward persons of the same gender, and not solely or mainly an urge to commit particular acts.
Ron,

O.k. I have to admit I think I am sort of lost in grasping this whole problem

What causes the attraction? Concupiscence?

And if the attraction is the disorder one could then could choose to accept or reject it right?

And I have made some posts here about this problem. What would improve my understanding? What essentials do I need to grasp?

Last edited by Climacus Areopagite : 1st August 2010 at 01:12 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 1st August 2010, 12:15 PM
Ron Conte Ron Conte is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,636
Default

I don't have the answer to every question on this subject.

This article might help:
http://www.catholicplanet.com/articl...ruction004.htm
__________________
Ron Conte
Roman Catholic theologian
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:03 PM.


Powered by vBulletin Version 3.6.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.