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
(03-13-2013, 09:29 PM)DrBombay Wrote: [ -> ]
(03-13-2013, 09:27 PM)per_passionem_eius Wrote: [ -> ]
(03-13-2013, 09:26 PM)DrBombay Wrote: [ -> ]
(03-13-2013, 09:22 PM)Papist Wrote: [ -> ]delete

I agree.

Were you this witty on CAF?  I must search your posts there!

I was a lot more pro-SSPX, at least toward the end.  Somebody had to defend them and that task fell to me.  Meh, I did what I could.

How did you fall away from being an 'SSPXer'?  By meeting some of them?!
(03-13-2013, 09:32 PM)per_passionem_eius Wrote: [ -> ]
(03-13-2013, 09:29 PM)DrBombay Wrote: [ -> ]
(03-13-2013, 09:27 PM)per_passionem_eius Wrote: [ -> ]
(03-13-2013, 09:26 PM)DrBombay Wrote: [ -> ]
(03-13-2013, 09:22 PM)Papist Wrote: [ -> ]delete

I agree.

Were you this witty on CAF?  I must search your posts there!

I was a lot more pro-SSPX, at least toward the end.  Somebody had to defend them and that task fell to me.  Meh, I did what I could.

How did you fall away from being an 'SSPXer'?  By meeting some of them?!

I never was an SSPXer.  I just thought they were viciously and unfairly attacked on CAF and most of the trads over there were too cowed to say anything.  So I did.  That might have been my downfall.  Although my downfall probably had more to do with being an inveterate smart ass than an SSPXer, but it's kinda lost in the fog of memory so I could be wrong.
(03-13-2013, 09:01 PM)DrBombay Wrote: [ -> ]And the philistines had the temerity to ban me! Marian Carroll, my nemesis, hated me from day 1.

Did they actually ban you?  Your account there doesn't have the customary subtitle of shame under it.

I assume you were Dr. Bombay.  And yes, I'm stalking you in 2006.
(03-13-2013, 10:41 PM)Pheo Wrote: [ -> ]
(03-13-2013, 09:01 PM)DrBombay Wrote: [ -> ]And the philistines had the temerity to ban me! Marian Carroll, my nemesis, hated me from day 1.

Did they actually ban you?  Your account there doesn't have the customary subtitle of shame under it.

I assume you were Dr. Bombay.  And yes, I'm stalking you in 2006.

Yes! They even allowed me to use the period and space! For all their other faults, that was a great blessing which some forums don't allow.  Said forums shall remain nameless. *cough*  :sneaky:

I was actually suspended for a month for the horrible offense of calling a neo-Catholic a neo-Catholic, so I told Marion Carroll to stick it and just disable my account altogether. Okay, I didn't actually tell her to stick it.  But I resigned in protest.  Or in a fit of pique.  Something along those lines.  Again, it was a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away....
(03-13-2013, 08:29 PM)Papist Wrote: [ -> ]
(03-13-2013, 02:13 PM)StCeciliasGirl Wrote: [ -> ]
(03-13-2013, 10:01 AM)Melkite Wrote: [ -> ]I haven't bothered to read the whole thread, but man, what I have has been a laughingstock!...

I understand that many are uncomfortable with this topic and would prefer to live in a make-believe world where it doesn't exist (hence, DWIP).

Then you have not read the thread.

Excuse me... Habemus Papem.

But we do not feel uncomfortable with you at all. Please read the thread. ♥

Considering that Christ ate with sinners and tax collectors, I'm quite certain he would comfortable eating with some who struggles with SSA.

Indeed, did I suggest otherwise? In fact, I imagine spending time with Christ actually improved the lot of the sinners and tax collectors who dined with Him; and when we put time into Adoration, that our struggles would be much less of a problem, as well.

If I suggested that anyone here wouldn't dine with someone who struggles with SSA, please accept my apologies! (The Habemus Papem literally happened as I was posting, and stopped the post to look up who our Papa was, and to pray!)

But I would have concluded my post to Melkite that this thread isn't a "laughingstock", nor are the posters uncomfortable with those who have SSA. I wish he would read the thread; I've read many very positive posts in addition to Vox's, and it might make Melkite feel a little better about the thread and the posters here if he were to read the thread before calling us all names.
I just had a read through where this headed and I just want to say a couple of things then I'll probably leave it alone.

I find it pretty hard to swallow being called (collectively or by inference) a "hater" and whatnot just because I don't like the homosexual lobby that is a very real problem in the Church and because I don't think it's good to discuss SSA issues on a public forum. I also don't like the implication that I started this thread with the intention of gay-bashing or something. Some people here "protest too much" because of the emotional/ personal aspects of struggling with an attraction to a particular sin.

I think an opportunity to realistically and seriously discuss a real threat to the heart of the Church has been passed over in favour of yet another sort of "self-help" thread. Personally, I don't really like seeing threads about struggles with masturbation etc either. It's not because I hate people who do it, but because I think it's imprudent to air such things on a public forum, especially when jokes start being made etc. (Eg one poster said something jokingly about being attracted to a bloke on TV or something. Sorry to sound like a puritan, which I certainly ain't, but is that kind of thing really prudent when the issue is so serious?)

I'm sorry if I've upset some by saying things the wrong way or because this is a topic I can get pretty uncompromising/ insensitive about. I just can't help feeling that the way culture is going and the way the Church has been influenced by active homosexuals (or supporters or enablers or even just tolerators) among the clergy, this issue needs some serious confrontation, and I fail to see how emphasizing the importance of distinguishing between temptation and sin etc is really doing much for anyone. Of course there's a difference, of course having SSA doesn't make someone a sinner or a bad Catholic... duh... but there's a reason why Benedict highlighted the same issues that I have tried to raise in this thread. And I feel very deeply that a can of worms has finally been opened and to some extent the future of the Church (on the ground level) is at stake.

I'm sure that Benedict would not have called people with SSA "filth", but I'm also sure he used the term to describe those in the clergy who act on it, spread it, use it to oppress and humiliate young seminarians, and ruin the lives of children. He wasn't just talking about pedophiles. I've heard enough stories from people directly and experienced enough personally to know that this is an issue that shouldn't be skirted around or diverted onto tangents if we care about the Church. Many here have quoted about the "little ones" and things being brought out into the light etc... That's exactly the point.

And to those who said that they were worried about giving up the faith because of nasty people among Catholics, join the club! The nasty people I've met, apart from self-righteous pharisee types etc (who are just a part of any group with a shared ideology), were the wolves in sheep's clothing - people who disdain the very real and supernatural grace of ordination.

(03-16-2013, 06:05 AM)Benno Wrote: [ -> ]I just had a read through where this headed and I just want to say a couple of things then I'll probably leave it alone.

I find it pretty hard to swallow being called (collectively or by inference) a "hater" and whatnot just because I don't like the homosexual lobby that is a very real problem in the Church and because I don't think it's good to discuss SSA issues on a public forum. I also don't like the implication that I started this thread with the intention of gay-bashing or something. Some people here "protest too much" because of the emotional/ personal aspects of struggling with an attraction to a particular sin.

In your first post which started this thread, you wrote about a real problem in the Church and then went on to say:
Quote:I also think that homosexuality is one of the worst evils possible. I'm not surprised that "the world" celebrates it these days, but I can't for the life of me understand why Catholics (even trad ones) seem to think it's some kind of complex issue that needs sympathy and discussion etc.

Nobody brought a new subject to this thread.  You introduced it in the OP when you made that comment.  It sounded to me like you were denying or at least misunderstanding Church teaching, which is
Quote:CCC 2358 - The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

I do not struggle with an attraction to that particular sin but I tend to protest when I see people denying Church teaching.  If you cannot understand why people with SSA must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity, then you clearly do need to discuss it with people who can explain this to you.

Here is a blog post by a heterosexual woman working on this aspect of Church teaching.  Perhaps you will find it helpful:
http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/2...rder-of-me
Quote:As someone who struggles with food—too often losing the battle and gaining the weight—I found that something rang true in that layman’s response. Whether I act on my food urges or not, they are always with me, and the gluttony in which they find release is certainly as detrimental to my soul as any “sin against chastity.”

I am “intrinsically disordered” when it comes to food, and it doesn’t really matter how I became so. Whether it is due to a genetic pre-disposition, or a habit of psychological buffering—or some combination of nature and nurture—the fact remains that I am disordered, and I must deal with it. Every day. Sometimes hour by hour, sometimes minute by tempted minute.

Up to now I have done a very poor job of dealing with it, largely because until that moment of clarity, I had not recognized the disorder. Like most same-sex attracted persons, I had thought of my battles and defeats in terms of weakness, shame; discipline, programming, and willpower; there was no connection to the transcendent, so how could I ever transcend myself?

This blogger has an insight that helps her to understand that people with SSA are not really so very different from herself.  We are all damaged by original sin.  I also draw your attention to the 4th comment down, by sheepcat (whom I know in real life - I just saw him last week at the TLM) which makes an important clarification to her post.

(03-16-2013, 06:05 AM)Benno Wrote: [ -> ]I think an opportunity to realistically and seriously discuss a real threat to the heart of the Church has been passed over in favour of yet another sort of "self-help" thread. Personally, I don't really like seeing threads about struggles with masturbation etc either. It's not because I hate people who do it, but because I think it's imprudent to air such things on a public forum, especially when jokes start being made etc. (Eg one poster said something jokingly about being attracted to a bloke on TV or something. Sorry to sound like a puritan, which I certainly ain't, but is that kind of thing really prudent when the issue is so serious?)

I'm sorry if I've upset some by saying things the wrong way or because this is a topic I can get pretty uncompromising/ insensitive about. I just can't help feeling that the way culture is going and the way the Church has been influenced by active homosexuals (or supporters or enablers or even just tolerators) among the clergy, this issue needs some serious confrontation, and I fail to see how emphasizing the importance of distinguishing between temptation and sin etc is really doing much for anyone. Of course there's a difference, of course having SSA doesn't make someone a sinner or a bad Catholic... duh... but there's a reason why Benedict highlighted the same issues that I have tried to raise in this thread. And I feel very deeply that a can of worms has finally been opened and to some extent the future of the Church (on the ground level) is at stake.

It is precisely because the topic is important that we must discuss it with as much clarity as we can possibly bring to it.  Conflating a bunch of different things together is not going to lead to useful actions.  We have to make distinctions a be very clear which thing we are talking about.  There is the homosexual tendency or attraction, also called SSA.  These are not sins, but rather opportunities for Grace.  Personally, I am greatly encouraged to strive for virtue when I hear about people with SSA who answer the Church's call to chastity.  So I am very grateful for those who post to this forum about this.

SSA which is not sinful is very different from homosexual actions which are gravely sinful.  Because we are living in a culture which denies that these actions are sinful, it is useful to thoroughly understand and to be able to explain Church teaching about this.

This is different from homosexual activism which is directed at creating political and social acceptance for sinful homosexual activity.  It too is a sin.This activism is attempting to stamp out any opposition to homosexual activity and is opposed to the Church herself. 

This is different yet again from the problem of men with SSA in the priesthood, although there is some overlap when these men are homosexual activists.

We cannot simply go with gut reactions of anger and disgust.  We must control our emotions in order to bring clear thinking and clear speaking to addressing these very serious problems.  Jumbling all these different things together can only be an obstacle to taking the correct actions.
 
(03-16-2013, 06:05 AM)Benno Wrote: [ -> ]I just had a read through where this headed and I just want to say a couple of things then I'll probably leave it alone.

I find it pretty hard to swallow being called (collectively or by inference) a "hater" and whatnot just because I don't like the homosexual lobby that is a very real problem in the Church and because I don't think it's good to discuss SSA issues on a public forum. I also don't like the implication that I started this thread with the intention of gay-bashing or something. Some people here "protest too much" because of the emotional/ personal aspects of struggling with an attraction to a particular sin.

I think an opportunity to realistically and seriously discuss a real threat to the heart of the Church has been passed over in favour of yet another sort of "self-help" thread. Personally, I don't really like seeing threads about struggles with masturbation etc either. It's not because I hate people who do it, but because I think it's imprudent to air such things on a public forum, especially when jokes start being made etc. (Eg one poster said something jokingly about being attracted to a bloke on TV or something. Sorry to sound like a puritan, which I certainly ain't, but is that kind of thing really prudent when the issue is so serious?)

I'm sorry if I've upset some by saying things the wrong way or because this is a topic I can get pretty uncompromising/ insensitive about. I just can't help feeling that the way culture is going and the way the Church has been influenced by active homosexuals (or supporters or enablers or even just tolerators) among the clergy, this issue needs some serious confrontation, and I fail to see how emphasizing the importance of distinguishing between temptation and sin etc is really doing much for anyone. Of course there's a difference, of course having SSA doesn't make someone a sinner or a bad Catholic... duh... but there's a reason why Benedict highlighted the same issues that I have tried to raise in this thread. And I feel very deeply that a can of worms has finally been opened and to some extent the future of the Church (on the ground level) is at stake.

I'm sure that Benedict would not have called people with SSA "filth", but I'm also sure he used the term to describe those in the clergy who act on it, spread it, use it to oppress and humiliate young seminarians, and ruin the lives of children. He wasn't just talking about pedophiles. I've heard enough stories from people directly and experienced enough personally to know that this is an issue that shouldn't be skirted around or diverted onto tangents if we care about the Church. Many here have quoted about the "little ones" and things being brought out into the light etc... That's exactly the point.

And to those who said that they were worried about giving up the faith because of nasty people among Catholics, join the club! The nasty people I've met, apart from self-righteous pharisee types etc (who are just a part of any group with a shared ideology), were the wolves in sheep's clothing - people who disdain the very real and supernatural grace of ordination.

Thanks for sharing, Benno.  Your posts and the reactions to them have been eye-openers for me, in a good way. :)
Well, since Benno seems intent on bumping the thread (which had gone quiet), I might as well repeat this:

http://catholicforum.fisheaters.com/inde...sg33877401

It's fascinating to me how someone who insists that a subject should not be discussed keeps bringing it up. 
In fairness, Impy, it had gone quiet IMO because the discussion about SSA had run its course, but I didn't start the thread to be about SSA. The thread became not so much a discussion about the original issue I was raising as another thread about SSA. Jayne rightly points out that I am to blame for the tangent because of my off the cuff remarks about not understanding why even trads consider homosexuality to be a topic that needs serious discussion/ sympathy etc. That is probably evidence of me needing to pray and think about it more, which I promise I will do. For what it's worth, your posts have always stood out to me as genuinely edifying, humble, and... good! At this point in my understanding of things, I simply won't back down on my opinions because I have a real sense that there is something seriously wrong going on with the way that these issues are being thought about and dealt with even by trads. But like I said, and I mean it, I will pray and think about it especially until Easter. My prayer/ thought may lead me to a change of mind/ heart or it may make me even more uncompromising about it. We'll see.
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