There is No Such Thing as a Homosexual Catholic Priest
(02-25-2011, 12:35 AM)St. Drogo Wrote: I still don't understand the point of contention. Since the word homosexual is itself a neologism (invented by the Hungarian physician Benkert in the 1860s), it's very difficult to give any precise definition for it.
And this is a good argument for not using it in a Catholic doctrinal document.  But it is in CCC 2357-59.

Quote:Benkert defines it thus: "In addition to this normal sexual urge in man and woman Nature in her sovereign mood has endowed at birth certain male and female individuals with the homosexual urge, thus placing them in a sexual bondage which renders them physically and psychically incapable even with the best intention--of normal erection. The urge creates in advance a direct horror of the opposite sex, and the victim of this passion finds it impossible to suppress the feeling which individuals of his own sex exercise upon him." My only substantial objection to this definition is Benkert's conviction that homosexuality is a congenital trait--NARTH is an excellent resource for information on the psychogenesis of homosexuality.

There is no support in Scripture or tradition for it being caused by anything other than concupiscience and lust (James 1:12-16).  And no antidote for it other than faith, repentance, grace through the Word and Sacraments, and renewing of the mind (Eph. 4:21-24; Rom. 12:1-2)

Quote:Is this--taking or leaving the possible hereditary aspects--the definition of homosexual you are working with? If so, are you claiming that sanctifying grace alone will cure a homosexual's psychological imbalance when they become a Christian? If so, you are definitely conflating categories.

No sir.  I am taking the position that the properties belonging to the new birth in Christ by water and the Word (Baptism) do not allow for a Catholic to self-identify as a "homosexual person."  They may and often do battle persistent tendencies, but my position is that it is wrong for a Church authoritative document to insert [what you rightly called] a neologism into a doctrinal statement when that neologism is based on personality theory (psychology) and not theology as defined by the traditional, consistent teaching of the Church on this issue (I provided many quotes from Tradition on this issue in reply #164).  That this is exploited by Modernists to disastrous proportions to great hurt of the Faithful is beyond question.  No one can be a "homosexual person" if they are new creatures in Christ (2 Cor. 5:17; Gal. 6:15), else they make God the author of sin in creation or Christ the author of sin in the new creation. 

Quote:I see you've already brought in some curious and incomprehensible language about "theological categories" and "anthropological categories."

All due respect, sir, the confusion is caused by the introduction of theologically unsound  terminology into a body of doctrine.  Prior to 1986, there was no such thing as a "homosexual person" in any Magisterial teaching documents.  So what changed?

Quote:Man, woman, and orthosexual are not theological categories so I do not see why it should be any different in the case of homosexuals. When the CCC refers to "homosexual persons" I think it is strongly implied, albeit in excessively polite terms, that it is referring to a psychological imbalance.

You doctors and scientists deal in psychology.  The CCC is supposed to deal in solemn pronouncements and explanations of Catholic doctrine that will benefit us in the salvation of our souls and those of others.  This requires precise terms, definitions and explanations as we have seen in past catechisms, syllibi, Papal encyclicals, and concilliar documents with anathemas, decisions, approved terminology, etc...  "Male and female created He them..." (Gen. 1:27)

Quote:It's not all that different from the classic genera of the four temperaments. As a "melancholic person", I have a definite predisposition to despair and there are many activities--not sinful in themselves--that I must avoid if I am to avoid sin. Does having an appropriately regulated melancholic temperament make me any less of a Christian? If not, I do not see how an appropriately regulated (i.e. chaste) homosexual inclination is any more of an impediment to being a Christian.

Respectfully disagree.  Sacred Scripture never condemns a personality type or a proclivity towards nonvolitional mood swings (temperament).  An "appropriately regulated (i.e. chaste) homosexual inclination" would not necessitate identifying oneself as a homosexual person.   Please consider how this very thing is ruthlessly exploited in religion, society and politics to the great detriment of each.

Messages In This Thread
Re: There is No Such Thing as a Homosexual Catholic Priest - by Catholic Johnny - 02-25-2011, 02:15 AM

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)