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
DeoGratias72,
Yes, philosophy is still a necessary prerequisite for the study of theology.  I highly suggest you read Pope St. Pius X's Doctoris Angelici:

http://maritain.nd.edu/jmc/etext/doctoris.htm
(03-07-2013, 03:53 PM)Burdensome1 Wrote: [ -> ]So, which is it, then?  Is homosexuality a particularly virulent, dangerous and perverse temptation, or is analgous to a to heterosexual temptation and no big deal to gather a lot of people with temptation together?  How can we have it both ways? 

I'm not trying to "have it both ways" because I see acting on homosexual impulses as a sin, not something "particularly" nefarious. But even if it were a "particularly" virulent, dangerous, and perverse temptation, it doesn't follow that it's a bad idea to have support groups for people who suffer from those sorts of at attractions.

(03-07-2013, 03:53 PM)Burdensome1 Wrote: [ -> ]And, hell yes mixing the practice of the Catholic religion with group psychological therapy is modernist.  I'd think that was obvious.  It's not?  

Thirdly, the seal is on the priest, but the sins are those of the penitent.  The priest can't reveal the sins, and so we don't know the sins of others an can take no delight or solace in them.  Again, why is this controversial among trads?

Support groups aren't, necessarily, "psychological therapy" any more than talking to friends is "psychological therapy." And even if it were psychological therapy, there's nothing "modernist" about it necessarily. Psychology -- the study of the psyche, or soul -- isn't modernism. Psychology can and should be a perfectly Catholic discipline; it doesn't have to be all Freud and Szasz or whoever. Having a group meet in a Church basement isn't "mixing the practice of the Catholic religion with" psychology anyway. The liturgy is the liturgy, catechism class is catechism class, and the occasional bingo or poker game or group meeting in the church basement is not the Catholic religion. Catholic bereavement groups, for example, aren't typically considered "modernist" or a mixing of "the Catholic religion with some modernist psychology.

No one should be taking "delight" or "solace" in anyone's sins, of course. But that's not the purpose of a support group.  Priests can't reveal the sins of others, but people can reveal their own sins. Engaging in a support group doesn't mean one has to reveal his sins, however.

I don't think this is "controversial among trads" in general.


I have to say Burdensome1's comments are a breath of fresh air not to mention Benno's and MikeMacs. As long as you treat homosexuality "special" they will continue to think of themselves as "victims". I can't tell you how many times I've been on CAF and had people with SSA say there is nothing wrong with being homosexual as long as they don't act on it. BEING homosexual not just the acts is disordered. Sure it's disgusting the stuff they do both men and women but they are ATTRACTED to the same sex which is in itself against nature. Even if they don't "act" on it that in itself is whacked. I've had many SSA people on CAF tell me it's ok to go to bars and parades and hang out with other SSA people and even hold hands as long as they don't "cross the line". Really?? Do you really think God is fooled? Do you really think he's not offended and or grossed out that you dig the same sex even if you don't act on it-(and that covers sinful thoughts too). The mere attraction for a guy to look at another guy and think "ok he's fine and very attractive" is sick. And sorry but I'm against group therapy there are prisons full of child molesters who get there rocks off when they relive the fear and sadness of their victims. How is it different for some homosexuals to get together and feel special and say "well I was walking passed the gay bar the other night and reminded me of this and that time and I was so tempted to go in"-how does that help it perpetuates the lifestyle!!! It stays in that mindset!! A married man can see beauty but is he allowed to be "attracted" to that person? How is it any different than homosexuals? Why can't he or his wife be attracted to others but not act on it?

I smell a doubstandard meant to keep homosexuals a special group and victims...I know what the CCC says btw and did any of you notice that the part of the white catechism book under JPII which had "they don't choose...etc." in it is now gone from the CCC?

It was seen as one of the many sins that cry up to Heaven (most people have no idea about that today) do you think that was just the acts or do you think that covered attraction to someone of the same sex ie another same sex person??

Finding someone attractive (beautiful/handsome) is not the same as being attracted to them. Why are homosexuals allowed to be attracted to someone of the same sex without it being sinful? Just a question...

Oh WTH.  I can always use more time during the day.

This just seems like every debate about homosexuality I've ever been part of on CAF.  No actual Catholic analysis of temptation, just a bunch of modern feel-good rot. 

And Vox, you really need  a sock puppet account to talk to the kids in the pool with, unless every one of your posts is supposed to scare people.
Please correct me, if im wrong but I want to know clearly, in basic terms (because the basics do get muddled) to clarify understanding.

Same sex attraction or SSA is the problem, struggle or sin. Gay, lesbian or homosexual is the self applied label which people allow themselves to be defined BY the sin.
(03-07-2013, 06:06 PM)traditionalmom Wrote: [ -> ]It was seen as one of the many sins that cry up to Heaven (most people have no idea about that today) do you think that was just the acts or do you think that covered attraction to someone of the same sex ie another same sex person??

Thoughts, words and deeds.

I confess to almighty God, to blessed Mary ever Virgin, to blessed Michael the Archangel, to blessed John the Baptist, to the holy apostles Peter and Paul, and to all the saints that I have sinned exceedingly in thought, word, and deed, through my fault, through my fault, through my most grievous fault. Therefore, I beseech blessed Mary ever Virgin, blessed Michael the Archangel, blessed John the Baptist, the holy apostles Peter and Paul, and all the saints, to pray for me to the Lord our God. Amen.

Just the thought of same sex attraction is a sin, just like any other impure thought.

Instead of meeting with others of like mind someone with ssa should call on God immediately when they have impure thoughts with say the Kyrie Eleison.  Asking for God's mercy will chase away the temptations of the devil.

Here's a scenario.  Someone with ssa goes to a "Courage" meeting then after the meeting decides to go for a drink or a coffee with someone from the group, they start talking about the "good old days", one thing leads to another and before you know it ...  
I apologize if this scenario was an occasion to sin in thought for someone that might be reading this.  But this is a clear example of why these impure thoughts should not even come to a persons mind.  Take up your cross in silence.  Don't even speak of it.  Don't tempt others by your participation in such groups.        
(03-07-2013, 07:00 PM)Ursus Wrote: [ -> ]Please correct me, if im wrong but I want to know clearly, in basic terms (because the basics do get muddled) to clarify understanding.

Same sex attraction or SSA is the problem, struggle or sin. Gay, lesbian or homosexual is the self applied label which people allow themselves to be defined BY the sin.

I would say right. But I know several posters on CAF and possibly here that would disagree with the former part saying SSA itself isn't a problem, it doesn't become a problem unless you act on it. I think on the other hand, SSA is THE problem that leads to the latter how else does someone become homosexual without the SSA first.
Mikemac, we're outvoted by the management.  No sense in continuing.
That means I'm outvoted as well because I wholehearted agree with you...dare I say that the pre-VII popes would as well...or heck even those before JPII? (since under him the CCC allowed people to be SSA and it not be sinful in itself)
Now another basic question. Why is social culture and worse, Christianity allowing for people to live a life of sin? why would we allow or even encourage a person to allowed to be defined as a homosexual and continue to live a life full of that sin?

Secular society even casts people as a monster, unChristian or a hateful person to call homosexuality a sin or a bad thing. It's as though we are forced to accept it or adopt it: It's a "right" or fundamental of human life and behavior. Dare anyone say a bad word about it. But it isn't wrong for us to say theft or murder is a bad thing.

I recently saw a meme on social media showing Christ speaking. The blurb basically said He never condemned it and even accepts it. additionally the idea was WE are the sinners for condemning it. And nothing specifically from the bible says it's wrong.

Now that we have to defend the literal word of God to fellow Christians and Catholics. I know they're taking an eisegesis Bible interpretation. But where are the best parts of the Bible to explain they're in error and Homosexuality IS a sin against Christ?
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