There is No Such Thing as a Homosexual Catholic Priest
#33
(02-19-2011, 03:09 AM)Catholic Johnny Wrote: 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.

Problem one is you are changing the board in the middle of the game.  Here you are referring to "theological categories" but previously your referred to "anthropological categories"

"Catholic Johnny" Wrote:However, it must be admitted that no such anthropological category as the "homosexual person" existed before the Pontificate of John Paul II.

Which is it?

Quote: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). 

Well, you are adopting an anthropological position on this, or at least you were until you changed directions.

Be that as it may, the Gospel tells us to bear our Crosses, not that our Crosses will be removed from us.  If someone has a predilection towards a particular sin, that is their Cross.  No one is making any exception in that for anyone.

Quote: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. 

No one is hyphenating anything.  No one said "homosexual-Christian" or "heterosexual-Christian".  What you said, may I remind you, is this:

"a homosexual cannot be a Christian"

Seems like a pretty clear statement to me.  Anyone who has same-sex attraction problems cannot be a Christian in your book.

Quote: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'm not obscuring your point.  If your argument is flailing, it's your fault and your responsibility to clarify it.  Make a better argument.

Those are not peripheral discussions when you say a homosexual cannot be a Christian.  They are relevant and go to the basis of your argument.

Quote: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. 

First, as a trad, you should use a trad Bible. Actually, even a Catholic Bible would be a step in the right direction.  You're quoting from the NKJV.  Why you would use a Protestant Bible to argue Catholic doctrine is beyond me.

Let's try the D-R:

[9] Know you not that the unjust shall not possess the kingdom of God? Do not err: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, [10] Nor the effeminate, nor liers with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor railers, nor extortioners, shall possess the kingdom of God.

Effeminate means more than homosexual.  It means those who seek luxury and avoid pain.  Homosexuals are included in that for philosophical and theological reasons as St. Thomas describes in the Summa, but it means practicing homosexuals.

http://www.newadvent.org/summa/3138.htm

Quote:Objection 1. It seems that effeminacy is not opposed to perseverance. For a gloss on 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, "Nor adulterers, nor the effeminate, nor liers with mankind," expounds the text thus: "Effeminate--i.e. obscene, given to unnatural vice." But this is opposed to chastity. Therefore effeminacy is not a vice opposed to perseverance.

Reply to Objection 1. This effeminacy is caused in two ways. On one way, by custom: for where a man is accustomed to enjoy pleasures, it is more difficult for him to endure the lack of them. On another way, by natural disposition, because, to wit, his mind is less persevering through the frailty of his temperament. This is how women are compared to men, as the Philosopher says (Ethic. vii, 7): wherefore those who are passively sodomitical are said to be effeminate, being womanish themselves, as it were.

In other words, what the Protestants translate as "homosexuals" really means God doesn't like the weak that are weak because of their own luxuriousness.  As St. Thomas points out, homosexuals are effeminate by virtue of being the passive participant in sodomitical acts.  If one does not engage in those acts, they are not effeminate in that manner.

The cite in Romans is clear.  It condemns acts.  No one is arguing homosexual acts aren't sinful.  It doesn't say "homosexuals cannot be Christians".

Reply


Messages In This Thread
Re: There is No Such Thing as a Homosexual Catholic Priest - by Historian - 02-19-2011, 11:16 PM



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)