There is No Such Thing as a Homosexual Catholic Priest
This post is in reference to reply #175 (which is too long to quote in its entirety).

Quote:As far as "homosexual persons", before we go into what I believe is an unnecessarily labored interpretation of the phrase on your part,  do you want me to find a pre-1986 use of the word homosexual in Catholic theology, or the exact phrase "homosexual persons"?  Since the word homosexual didn't even really exist before the late 1800's, can I find equivalent phrases such as "sodomitical person", or would those not count?
If you aren't going to give me the parameters of your request, I'm not going to attempt it.  In fact, there is an inherent problem in your request because Tradition with a capital T means those things that are handed down.  I'm going to assume you mean Magisterial, but I'm probably going to regret making even that assumption...
While I'm waiting though, here is another question for you: what is a "theological category" in your mind?  To me that would be: Sacraments, vices, virtues, etc.  "male" and "female" are not theological categories in my mind.  Can you give me some examples of other "theological categories"?

1.  I already answered this several replies ago - please find the catamitical, sodomitical person or whatever nomenclature you can locate in tradition.
2.  Theological category = pertaining to the Faith, and not unduly influenced by science.  Homosexual persons is clearly language informed by an undue relience on pseudo-scientific 'personality theory' and not on revelation.
3.  I admit to using Tradition and tradition interchangeably.  My point is can we locate this line of thinking in RC theology with some extended continuity, ie, not just since Vatican II.

Quote:Paul also is witness, saying, Neither fornicators, nor adulterers, nor the rest, shall inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you: but you were washed, but you were sanctified. 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 He said not, such are some of you, but such were some of you. Sin committed in the state of ignorance is pardoned, but persistent wickedness is condemned.

St. Cyril here buttresses my position handily.  He says after enlightenment, you have no excuse to persist in wickedness.  It is a trap to couple the comtemporary nomenclature for sin against nature with personhood in the order of grace.  It is supremely uncharitible towards the [former] sodomite to do so.

St. Ireneus:
Quote:And such were some of you; but you have been washed, but you have been sanctified in the name of our Lord. 1 Corinthians 6:11 If then it were not in our power to do or not to do these things, what reason had the apostle, and much more the Lord Himself, to give us counsel to do some things, and to abstain from others?

St. Ireneus here demonstrates the freedom to change one's will on things - which cannot exclude the decision to self-identify as one who sins against nature.  This follows naturally from the renewing of the mind (cf Romans 12:2; Eph. 4-21-24)

St. Augustine:
Quote:Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you: but you are washed, but you are sanctified, but you are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God. 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 After reading these, I charged them to consider how believers could hear these words, but you are washed, if they still tolerated in their own hearts— that is, in God's inner temple— the abominations of such lusts as these against which the kingdom of heaven is shut.
(emphasis yours)

How could this be any plainer, Quis?  He is clearly saying that those who have received the grace of conversion in the new birth are NOT CHRISTIANS (kingdom of heaven shut) if they TOLERATE abominable lusts in their own hearts?  And your position is that not only are they sodomites(homosexual persons), but that the Church tells them so!   How can this be a charitable position towards those that have been ensnared in this sinful pattern?

Your comment on St. Augustine's quote:
Quote:These people are not free of their faults, their struggles, etc.  They WERE that way because 1) they are now baptized, 2) they exert their will to not commit those acts anymore.  Fornicators stop fornicating, condemn it, and flee from that sin.  Sodomites stop sodomizing, condemn it, and flee from that sin.  Nowhere does it mean an ex-fornicator stops having an overactive libido or an ex-sodomite stops being attracted to other men.

Attraction here goes to affectivity. 
CCC:  The integrity of the person
2338 The chaste person maintains the integrity of the powers of life and love placed in him. This integrity ensures the unity of the person; it is opposed to any behavior that would impair it. It tolerates neither a double life nor duplicity in speech.

2339 Chastity includes an apprenticeship in self-mastery which is a training in human freedom. The alternative is clear: either man governs his passions and finds peace, or he lets himself be dominated by them and becomes unhappy

Chastity precludes a "double life" (hello?) and demands governance of the passions.  How then can the Church admit to a category of personage that presents the individual with integral barriers to chastity as defined by the CCC?  If we are defined by our passions (homosexual persons), we are certainly capitulating to them, which the CCC calls dominance.

Quote:A fornicator describes someone engaging in actual acts.  A homosexual describes someone who has a predisposition towards a particular sin.  You're comparing apples and oranges.  If you want an accurate comparison, compare what drives the person to perform particular sinful acts.  A person with an over active libido and a homosexual person would be an appropriate comparison.

1.  Fornication is a sin against the moral law, but not against nature.
2.  Sodomy is a sin against the moral law and against nature.
3.  Therefore, the desires to do either cannot be conflated.
4.  This is finally determinate upon the effects each sin has on the sinner.  For the unrepentant fornicator, condemnation without being deprived of the properties of conscience.  For the unrepentant homosexual, condemnation due to depravity of mind(cf. Romans 1:24-27).
5.  This means that in a post-Baptismal condition, the work of repentance, conversion and progress in chastity is much more difficult for the former homosexual because of the damage done against both conscience and nature.
6.  Conflation of the two states is uncharitable to the penitent former homosexual.
7.  Consigning the penitent former homosexual to perpetual status as a homosexual person presents (a) a formidable occasion of stumbling for him; and (b) a gateway for Modernists to exploit this situation for the ruin of souls, as is plainly evidenced by the crisis in the RCC today.

I am speaking in Christ's love for those afflicted with same-sex attraction.  Those who deprive them of the hope of full conversion, complete healing, inner freedom and the prospects of complimentary sexual relationship by consigning them to perpetual status as homosexual persons do them no favor. 

I am speaking in Christ's love for His holy bride the Church.  For to allow this seemingly harmless caveat (homosexual persons) to excuse the forbidden practice of ordaining homosexual men to the holy priesthood is to facilitate the ruin of the Church at the hands of ruthless and demonically-inspired Modernists whom Pope St. Pius X called purveyors of "the synthesis of all heresies" which "anhillates all religion" (Pascendi Dominici Gregis).

These two considerations are at the crux of the matter, which is the explict will of God:

Our Father "desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth." He "is forbearing toward you, not wishing that any should perish." His commandment is "that you love one another; even as I have loved you, that you also love one another." This commandment summarizes all the others and expresses his entire will.  CCC 2822

Messages In This Thread
Re: There is No Such Thing as a Homosexual Catholic Priest - by Catholic Johnny - 02-23-2011, 04:39 AM

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)