There is No Such Thing as a Homosexual Catholic Priest
#36
Quis:

1.  Concede.  Permit me to adjust anthropological to theological.  What I was referring to was a definition of a category of man that has no precedent in Tradition.
2.  Please locate for us a reference to homosexual persons in Catholic theology prior to the 1986 Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Letter Homosexualitatis problema.
3.
Quote: 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.
 Not true.  The invention of a category, 'homosexual persons' does just that.  No one says to the idolater, "you are an idol worshiping person.  Bear your cross and do not perform acts of worship towards your idols.  We deeply respect your special status as an idolator."
4.
Quote: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.

a.  Yes, it is hyphenating (our more accurately coupling) the terms homosexual and person together here in the context of a life of Catholic faith lived in chastity.  Or do you deny that this is the explicit application of pp 2359 in the CCC?
b.  I stand by my statement.  Regardless of what they call themselves, according to the Apostle Paul in 1 Cor. 6:9-11 homosexuals will not inherit the kingdom of God.  To invent a category of personage that has no precedent in Tradition which flagrantly opposes the explicit teaching of an Apostle in Scripture is unsupportable as a Catholic concept.  
c.  You are conflating same-sex attractions with a definitive personal identity.  "Such were some of you."

5.  I never self-identified as a trad, although I support most if not all the positions assumed by Archbishop Lefebvre.  I quoted from the NKJV because of its superior English.  My personal Bible is the D-R.  If you like for the purpose of this discussion, I can limit myself to quotes from the D-R.  Not all of our readers will be comfortable with the archaic English.  I will use the NAB only if no other translations are available.  
a.  You seek a more nuanced definition of "effeminate" (although the provided explanation makes my point nicely  ;)) and omit the very next identity category liers with mankind.  So, "effeminate" as "Passively sodomitical" (receives penile penetration as though a female) or "liers with mankind" (a reference to Leviticus 18:22) both address the behaviors referred to Romans 1:24-28 as a category of personal identity.  "Such were some of you."
b.  
Quote: 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.
 This is a strained interpretation of what the Apostle is referring to in the passage.  

6.
Quote: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".
a.  Romans condemns persons:  Who, having known the justice of God, did not understand that they who do such things, are worthy of death; and not only they that do them, but they also that consent to them that do them. Romans 1:32, D-R
b.  1 Cor. 6:9-11 explicitly condemns homosexuals.  2 Cor. 5:17 declares the results of conversion: a new creation.  Again, "such were some of you."

The verb to "be" is important here.  The Most High God reveals His sacred Name to Moses as "I AM that I AM."  Paul uses the same verbs here to explain what these Corinthians were (homosexuals) and what they are (washed, sanctified, justified...).  He makes a clear distinction based on the status of their individual identity.  You cannot possibly be what you no longer are.  

One is 100% free to employ this language (homosexual persons) as a way of discussing the situation regarding either those unrepentant persons or those who have been converted, but not as a theological term.  The term was adopted in Homosexualitatis problema from the psychological world.  It does not exist in Catholic theology prior to this document.   Even Pope Benedict's reference to this problem in Instruction Concerning the Criteria for the Discernment of Vocations with regard to Persons with Homosexual Tendencies in view of their Admission to the Seminary and to Holy Orders refers not to any previous Papal teaching but to the 1992 Catechism.

The real danger here is the uncritical acceptance of self-identified homosexuals as Roman Catholic Priests and all that that implies.
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Re: There is No Such Thing as a Homosexual Catholic Priest - by Catholic Johnny - 02-20-2011, 12:59 AM



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)