There is No Such Thing as a Homosexual Catholic Priest
#25
(02-19-2011, 01:35 AM)QuisUtDeus Wrote:
(02-18-2011, 11:40 PM)Catholic Johnny Wrote: I submit to the teaching of the Church.  However, it must be admitted that no such anthropological category as the "homosexual person" existed before the Pontificate of John Paul II.  In my opinion, it is an antbiblical novelty that is fraught with every kind of danger and cannot be reconciled with previous Catholic teaching.

I'm not sure what you're getting at, if anything.  Originally, homosexuality was seen as a psychopathology and appeared in the DSM.  Because of homosexual advocacy, it was removed from the DSM.

So, let's go back to pre JP2 and even before V2 and for the sake of argument say that it is a psychopathology.  In that case, saying the "homosexual person" is not an anthropological category any more than the "manic depressive person" or the "narcissistic person" or the "chronically morose person", is it?

Part of the problem, I think, is you're falling for the propaganda of those who advocate a "homosexual lifestyle".  It is one thing to identify one's self correctly as a homosexual in that they experience same-sex attraction.  It is something altogether different to identify one's self as a homosexual as a way of living.  Not everyone who is a homosexual - who experiences same-sex attraction - is an advocate of the "homosexual lifestyle".

It is the "lifestyle" that needs to be left behind to avoid sin.  Unnatural acts, improper relationships, etc.  Assuming it is a psychopathology, one cannot leave behind homosexuality as same-sex attraction any more than someone who suffers manic depression can leave that behind. 

Really, what you are saying they have to leave behind is a form of concupiscence.  A disordered form, sure, but all of us who have any kind of libido suffer from concupiscence.  None of us can just leave it behind and identify as non-concupiscent.  What we do is struggle against it, if we fail we go to Confession.  We are still Christians even though we have that struggle, and even though we acknowledge that fault by using some categorizing term.

I think you're doing a grave disservice to the good of souls by implying that people aren't "good enough" to be called Christian even if they are doing the right thing by bearing their Cross and living chastely. A proper understanding and respect of fighting the good fight will also enable those who suffer this Cross realize and accept that the priesthood isn't for them (as it isn't for many of us for different reasons).  Someone who struggles and perseveres against sinful inclinations and succeeds attains a higher degree of sanctity than those of us who struggle and constantly fail.  God bless them, and I hope they pray for me because I can use the help from those more sanctified than myself.  And I'll pray and root for anyone that's fighting the good fight, too, no matter what their Cross is.

QuisUtDeus,
Thanks for the counterpoint.  I am glad you are taking this issue on.  It is extremely difficult and dire for the Church today which has been successfully infiltrated by a substantial number of practicing homosexuals - whom St. Paul says have been given over by God to a depraved mind.  We must take that seriously!  How can one given over to a depraved mind be an alter Chrestus?

Your points.
1.  Psychopathology is not a theological category.  Even the CCC (pp 2357) admits that it cannot identify the psychological genesis of this 'disorder.'
2.  'Lifestyle' is not a theological category.  Attraction is human desire (see James 1:12-16).  It should not define a person.  God created two sexes only.
3.  Pennance, faith, mortification of concupscient desire, and growth in grace and holiness are the lot of all Christians.  No exception should be made for the homosexual.  You are adopting a medical theory and not a Gospel position on this.  The medical theory is "once sick, always sick" (cf alcoholism) and therefore the compassionate response is to help the "alcoholic" (another nonbiblical identity designation with widespread acceptance in the Church) cope with his 'disease.'  The Gospel calls us to "overcome the world" (1 John 5:4). 
4.  I never said anyone wasn't good enough to be called Christian.  I said the opposite: that the sacred and exalted title of Christian was too holy to be hyphenated with a mortal sin. 

I think you are obscuring my point.  Because Catholics are confused about something that the Apostles have made clear (and the Fathers and Doctors in Tradition), we uncritically allow homosexual "Priests" to "minister" in the RCC and they are destroying it from the inside out.  Peripheral discussions about psychology and pseudo-medical theories may help to clear the air as they are dispelled by sound doctrine, but the issue I am raising is the status of those who claim to be Priests and homosexuals at the same time. 

I still haven't seen anyone here on this thread yet address St. Paul's teaching in 1 Cor. 6:9-11 and Romans 1:24-28. 
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Re: There is No Such Thing as a Homosexual Catholic Priest - by Catholic Johnny - 02-19-2011, 03:09 AM



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)