Homosexuality disordered/if you speak a foreign language please read this

[veritasluxmea]

Nothing in this conversation so far about offering those struggling with SSA a way to change.  There are Christian organizations that do this.  Eventually I hope the Vatican catches up.  D. James Kennedy had one outfit in Fort Lauderdale FL that helped those struggling with SSA change, by the power of the Holy Spirit in large part.  Catholics need to broaden themselves and incorporate these extremely helpful elements that are for the most part being advocated by non-Catholic Christians.

Militant homosexuals (including those posing as "open-minded" heterosexuals) hate these charitable organizations because it puts them at odds with the world, but let us never allow them to frame the discussion to pretend these do not work.  Look into it yourself.  I am not going to debate it since the proof is there for those with eyes to see and a heart set on truth.  If you truly are seeking the truth and not just trying to see how far the Catholic Church can be pushed, then please search out these organizations and disregard the snide comments that will ensue from the haters of these good loving Christian organizations.

 

please for the love of phatmass nobody take the bait or overreact 

All disorders and predispositions to sinful behavior can be overcome.

overcome doesn't always mean it goes away 

Edited April 7, 2015 by veritasluxmea

[Norseman82]

Nothing in this conversation so far about offering those struggling with SSA a way to change.  There are Christian organizations that do this.  Eventually I hope the Vatican catches up.  D. James Kennedy had one outfit in Fort Lauderdale FL that helped those struggling with SSA change, by the power of the Holy Spirit in large part.  Catholics need to broaden themselves and incorporate these extremely helpful elements that are for the most part being advocated by non-Catholic Christians.

Militant homosexuals (including those posing as "open-minded" heterosexuals) hate these charitable organizations because it puts them at odds with the world, but let us never allow them to frame the discussion to pretend these do not work.  Look into it yourself.  I am not going to debate it since the proof is there for those with eyes to see and a heart set on truth.  If you truly are seeking the truth and not just trying to see how far the Catholic Church can be pushed, then please search out these organizations and disregard the snide comments that will ensue from the haters of these good loving Christian organizations.

With Christ all things are possible.  All disorders and predispositions to sinful behavior can be overcome.

God Bless and guide!

E

​There is a group called "Courage".

[Eliakim]

 

overcome doesn't always mean it goes away

​You must understand Holy Scripture informs us that sometimes things we struggle with probably never completely go away.  2 Cor. 12:8-10.  But for some they do.

But in both cases by His grace we are set free from bondage.

E

[superblue]

​http://img.thesun.co.uk/multimedia/archive/01715/gun-shooting-fail_1715961a.gif

​

[PhuturePriest]

​

​You're cute when you're annoyed.

[superblue]

​You're cute when you're annoyed.

​you wish I was annoyed , ya really haven't even scratched that surface, I was just taking a moment to stoop to a level you would understand is all. next time just say missed me.

[Luigi]

Misplaced (I offer this only as an interested party in vocabulary, not a follower of this debate)

'Misplaced' can also mean 'lost.' '​Misdirected' might be clearer and still not be judgmental. 

[PhuturePriest]

Or, we can just say disordered, because it is not ordered towards God's design for the sexual act. Dumbing down the Catechism only succeeds in losing the important nuances of theological language which are necessarily inherent to it. It also encourages the furthering of society's ever-growing stupidity. We should instead educate ourselves to a higher standard in order to understand these things, and all will be better off for it. The fault lies not in the nuanced and educated language of the Church, but in the ignorance of the common people. Enlighten the people on what the Catechism means when they ask, and they will not only understand it, but become smarter. There's nothing but winning in this scenario.

Edited April 8, 2015 by PhuturePriest

[superblue]

Or, we can just say disordered, because it is not ordered towards God's design for the sexual act. Dumbing down the Catechism only succeeds in losing the important nuances of theological language which are necessarily inherent to it. It also encourages the furthering of society's ever-growing stupidity. We should instead educate ourselves to a higher standard in order to understand these things, and all will be better off for it. The fault lies not in the nuanced and educated language of the Church, but in the ignorance of the common people. Enlighten the people on what the Catechism means when they ask, and they will not only understand it, but become smarter. There's nothing but winning in this scenario.

​even better , now we can walk around with our noses in the air, and have pity on those poor ignorant common people who just don't understand the Catechism and bring them up to your enlightened level of amesomeness.

 

 

[Aragon]

I do think PhuturePriest does have a valid point though, superblue. The terminology used by the Catechism does have very negative connotations but perhaps I and others are being a little sensitive. I've considered these three points:

1) Regardless of the psychological connotations of the word 'disorder' in English the word also has a very long tradition of use in Catholic theology where it has a different meaning that doesn't have anything to do with mental illness.

2) The Catechism doesn't reserve this hard language just for homosexuality. As DUST pointed out contraception, masturbation, lying, excessive affection for material goods, and all forms of lust are described as 'disordered'. I guess according to the CCC homosexuals hardly have a monopoly on disordered desires. We all have them in some form or another.

3) The Catechism is primarily written for the bishops and catechists to use as a reference text in teaching the faith and informing adapted catechetical resources (like YOUCAT, school text books, and books explaining Catholicism such as 'Catholicism for Dummies'). One would hope those responsible for the doctrinal formation of the laity would explain to the teaching of the Catholic Church in a more intelligible and pastorally sensitive manner.

Edited April 8, 2015 by Aragon

[Catlick]

No matter how you will phrase the Church teaching on homosexuality, it will always be regarded as insensitive by the LGBT-crowd unless you... phrase it in such a way that no one will recognize the Church teaching on homosexuality in it. 

Many bishops take the latter option. Many of them will burn in Hell for all eternity, for they refuse to guard their flock from the snares of mortal sin. 

By now we should know that the world hates the Church not for the gift paper she wraps around her presents, but for the presents themselves. 

Edited April 8, 2015 by Catlick

[CrossCuT]

I'm not sure it matters what word(s) is used. It is highly probable that any word(s) used to describe the inclination and/or act of homosexuality as erroneous or sinful will be viewed as harsh and judgmental. 

​I agree with this statement.

If you want to describe something as negative, sinful, erroneous, or whathaveyou, then regardless of which synonym you use, it will have a direct negative meaning or at least a negative connotation. 

[Era Might]

'Misplaced' can also mean 'lost.' '​Misdirected' might be clearer and still not be judgmental. 

​That's another possibility, but I prefer the connotation of "place" over "direct" because to place something is a definite act, whereas to "guide" something is not. And actually I kind of like the connotation of "lost" as well, in the context of what we're discussing, because it suggests that the person can find their sexuality, that it hasn't been lost, only misplaced. "Disordered" is very mechanistic, it leaves no room for connotations of meaning and value. What does it mean to be a sexual being, even without "having sex"? I think that's a significant question that maybe doesn't get asked in the context of "disorder." I think one can argue even in a Catholic perspective that our "disorders" are not things to "fix" but are something positive in ourselves, a St. Paul might put it, they are the thorns in our flesh, we cannot live without them.

Edited April 8, 2015 by Era Might

[Luigi]

Personally, I don't care what word(s) anyone uses. All words have denotations (referential definitions), connotations (associated but implied positive or negative value), and usages (who can say it, to whom, in what situations, to achieve what interpersonal goal). And as others have pointed out already - although not as clearly as I will point out now - the connotations change, the denotations change, and the usages change, sometimes less rapidly and sometimes more rapidly.

We've seen these kinds of continual terminology changes in lots of other fields - race (Negro, Afro-American, Black, African-American), disability (retarded [originally a politically correct term to replace "idiot"], mentally challenged, cognitively delayed), sexual orientation (qwerty [as an insult], homosexual, gay, qwerty [as a statement of pride]), and other sensitive areas.

The positive or negative connotations are not actually in the word (although they do get associated with the word) - the connotations are in the attitude of the speaker. The usages change depending on both the changes in connotation and on who's in power at the moment.

These changes in terminology are trying to force speakers to use a neutral word, or a technical word (which are thought to be neutral), or a non-insulting word. But changing the word doesn't (often) change the speaker's attitude. many people adopt the new terminology without adopting the new attitude it's supposed to express.

And, as others have also pointed out, the Church is not in the business of change. The Church is in the business of preaching the everlasting truth. So they coin technical philosophical & theological terms (which are thought to be neutral) and use them for centuries at a time. But then the denotations, connotations, and usages change in various societies/cultures, such as England and the US, and those people - thinking they are the only people on the face of the earth and the way they use the words is the only possible way to use the words - take offense.

Which gets us back to something else other people have said - it really doesn't matter what words I use when I tell a person something she don't want to hear. She's liable to tell me that I'm using the wrong terminology, when in point of actual fact, she doesn't like to know what I'm telling her.

 

SIGH.

 

[Luigi]

To follow up.

What probably needs to happen, based on usage and the ways people perceive words, is:

The Church will - and should - retain its technical philosophical-theological terminology, but pastors who are dealing with individuals should use the more commonly accepted word-of-the-week in current usage in their particular society-culture.

 

Amen.