FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Catholics and homosexuality
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37
(03-10-2013, 01:22 AM)JayneK Wrote: [ -> ]Father Hardon's Catholic dictionary has a good entry on homosexuality:
Fr. Hardon's Catholic dictionary:
In general, some form of sexual relationship among members of the same
sex. From a moral standpoint, three levels are to be distinguished:
tendency, attraction, and activity. Homosexual tendencies in any
person are within the normal range of human nature, whose fallen
condition includes every conceivable kind impulse that with sincere
effort and divine grace can be controlled. Sexual attraction for
members of the same sex may be partly due to the peculiar make-up of
certain individuals or, more often, the result of indiscretion or
seduction and presents a graver problem; yet this, too, [b]is not by
itself sinful and may in fact be an occasion for great supernatural
merit.
When the condition is pathological, it requires therapy.
Active homosexuality is morally indefensible and has been many times
forbidden in revelation and the teaching of the Church. The most
extensive declaration on the subject was the Congregation for the
Doctrine of the Faith, approved by Pope Paul VI on November 7, 1975.[/b]

And here is a good Michael Voris video on the subject:
Thank you for sharing this. It's brings some clarity and perspective to the conversation.
(03-10-2013, 01:15 AM)JayneK Wrote: [ -> ]Lecturing Papist like you have done above is totally out of line.

It was not a lecture or meant to belittle anyone.  And I will take your lecture to me where it comes from, a former gay rights activist.

There are two lines to this thread, the homosexual infiltration of the clergy and homosexual Catholics.  With the despicable state of the homolobby in the Church these days there is very good reason why Catholics do not want to hear the words homosexual and Catholic in the same sentence any more. 
(03-10-2013, 02:08 AM)mikemac Wrote: [ -> ]
(03-10-2013, 01:15 AM)JayneK Wrote: [ -> ]Lecturing Papist like you have done above is totally out of line.

It was not a lecture or meant to belittle anyone.  And I will take your lecture to me where it comes from, a former gay rights activist.

There are two lines to this thread, the homosexual infiltration of the clergy and homosexual Catholics.  With the despicable state of the homolobby in the Church these days there is very good reason why Catholics do not want to hear the words homosexual and Catholic in the same sentence any more. 


Not a single person has posted in favour of homosexual infiltration of the clergy.  There has been a lot of heated language to defend an uncontested point. 

As for "homosexual Catholics," some people try to avoid the problems with the word 'homosexual" by speaking of Same Sex Attraction.  This term too is being rejected by some in this thread.  The reality is that some people are struggling with this and it won't go away if we just don't talk about it.

I am ashamed of what I did as a gay rights activist.  But I have tried to learn from my mistakes.  I shared this mistake so that others could learn from it too. 
Well that's not exactly true.  Check out Lateran15's posts on the previous page.  No wonder people like myself get heated up when they hear Catholic and homosexual (or Same Sex Attraction, same thing) in the same sentence.
(03-09-2013, 11:13 PM)mikemac Wrote: [ -> ](snip)

In this day and age there is no need to explain why someone is not married.  To say that is what is pushing homosexuals into seminaries where they attempt to "hide out" is complete nonsense.  Homosexuals are entering seminaries because it is a deliberate infiltration of the Church.

Yeah, people can get by without having to explain being unmarried these days, but what is being advocated here is a "return to a time" when that wouldn't be the case. That is the problem (one of them).
(03-10-2013, 02:08 AM)mikemac Wrote: [ -> ]
(03-10-2013, 01:15 AM)JayneK Wrote: [ -> ]Lecturing Papist like you have done above is totally out of line.

It was not a lecture or meant to belittle anyone.  And I will take your lecture to me where it comes from, a former gay rights activist.

There are two lines to this thread, the homosexual infiltration of the clergy and homosexual Catholics.  With the despicable state of the homolobby in the Church these days there is very good reason why Catholics do not want to hear the words homosexual and Catholic in the same sentence any more. 

Not wanting to sound rude, but this post sort of admits that folks arguing on "your side" of things are using demagoguery out of frustration and anger. That's not conducive to coming up with sound arguments, or even logical ones. 

It's understandable that folks are angry about the lavender mafia, but their existence doesn't mean that babies should be thrown out with bathwater. The fact is that the Church teaches that being a homosexual is not a sin, but that sexually acting on homosexual impulses is. It's a sociological fact that some -- probably most -- people benefit from fellowship and support when struggling against an inclination to sin. It's another fact that the era when the very mention of homosexuality was "taboo" led to situations in which homosexuals would hide in seminaries as a cover. And it's also true that there shouldn't be shame attached to being homosexual in itself since being a homosexual is not a matter of sin any more than being a schizophrenic or a bipolar are. It's true, too, that the shaming of homosexuals as homosexuals (not speaking of homosexual acts here) harms people -- and it harms those who are likely already "messed up" in some way by virtue of their being homosexual in the first place.

That there is an obvious overreaction the other way, towards ridiculous things like homosexual "marriage," gives us no good reason whatsoever to overreact just as far in the opposite direction. Doing that just leads to more push-back from the other side, giving us endless cycles of action/backlash (the same thing is true of radical feminism leading to the PUA type stuff or the "he-boy, he-man rad trad syndrome" some trad men exhibit, all of which can only lead to more radical feminism, and so on). People need to jump off these sorts of cycles,  stop letting anger and frustration rule their thinking, and get real by using Catholic premises and good logic. It's the only way for the nonsense to end, the only way for society to protect itself from the radical "rainbow agenda," and the only way to help people who are struggling against acting on SSA.
(03-10-2013, 01:08 AM)JayneK Wrote: [ -> ]I have also been appalled by the personal attacks on Vox in this thread.  There have been multiple suggestions that she holds unorthodox positions and, as if that were not a serious enough calumny, that she bans people for disagreeing with her alleged unorthodoxy. Not only are these accusations untrue, they show outrageous
ingratitude.  Vox has provided an amazing web site and this forum for us to have discussions.  This has involved considerable time, effort and expense for her.  The least we could do is not use it to insult her and lie about her.

Thanks for this, Jayne :)  I've been pretty ticked at some of the insinuations that I ban people for disagreeing with me. Has never happened. Not even once.
Wow. At least I named the thread OK. It's all about "Catholics and homosexuality", in all sorts of ways.

Sorry but I just don't like It and I especially hate the wolves among those who have gone beyond SSA to SC (sexual corruption). I'm not the kind to dismiss people struggling with their own sins but I hate the fact that a certain sin, and one of the top few worst, has become such an object of compassion among even traddies, while it's become actually celebrated and almost revered by the world. It's sick sick sick. Maybe I'm unenlightened about psychology etc, but back when I was a young bloke reading the bible, trying to do good and praying as a kid (back when Boy George was a weirdo with a catchy song)  I would have thought that homosexuality was something that good souls just don't even have to consider. Maybe I was wrong. Maybe they consider it but don't act on it. Maybe they act on it and repent. It's still one of the worst sins.

I guess some would say that's a lack of charity, but I've known a few people who went into that stuff, and I don't think they would say I've been uncharitable to them. Maybe I'm just a romantic about this topic - men and women are pretty good aren't they?
And no suck up, but I'll put a vote out there for Vox as well. I think she's very fair as a moderator, from things I've read before. She allows enough and only shuts down when necessary. That shows charity and prudence working together, as best she can.
(03-10-2013, 05:29 AM)Benno Wrote: [ -> ]Wow. At least I named the thread OK. It's all about "Catholics and homosexuality", in all sorts of ways.

Sorry but I just don't like It and I especially hate the wolves among those who have gone beyond SSA to SC (sexual corruption). I'm not the kind to dismiss people struggling with their own sins but I hate the fact that a certain sin, and one of the top few worst, has become such an object of compassion among even traddies, while it's become actually celebrated and almost revered by the world. It's sick sick sick. Maybe I'm unenlightened about psychology etc, but back when I was a young bloke reading the bible, trying to do good and praying as a kid (back when Boy George was a weirdo with a catchy song)  I would have thought that homosexuality was something that good souls just don't even have to consider. Maybe I was wrong. Maybe they consider it but don't act on it. Maybe they act on it and repent. It's still one of the worst sins.

I guess some would say that's a lack of charity, but I've known a few people who went into that stuff, and I don't think they would say I've been uncharitable to them. Maybe I'm just a romantic about this topic - men and women are pretty good aren't they?

False compassion is how I went wrong in the past and ended publicly opposing Church teaching.  So I understand your misgivings.  But true compassion is nevertheless a good thing and exactly the response we ought to have for people who struggle with SSA.  It is a burden for anyone to bear and we ought to care about their struggles, just as we care about all the burdens that people carry.  When we pray to our Lord to make our hearts like His, we are asking for hearts of compassion.

Homosexual activity is a horrible sin and it has been horribly destructive to the Church in recent years.  But people who have SSA do not choose this and are not bad people because they have this attraction.  I am fairly certain that Catholics who remain chaste in the face of SSA are better Catholics and better people than I am.  Even benefiting from marriage as a remedy for concupiscence I have sinned against chastity many times.  I have the greatest  admiration for those people who manage to be chaste under more difficult circumstances than I face.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37