aalpha1989 Posted May 27, 2006 Share Posted May 27, 2006 Can bi-sexual people get married to the opposite sex? I don't think so, but I'm not sure what the Church teaches about that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heavenseeker Posted May 27, 2006 Share Posted May 27, 2006 If they are geting married to the opposite sex i dont see why the church wouldn't marrie them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qfnol31 Posted May 27, 2006 Share Posted May 27, 2006 [quote name='Cam42' post='991118' date='May 26 2006, 02:31 PM']And Zach, I am not getting into this debate. Sorry, to disappoint you.....I know that you want to argue the inerrancy/infalliblity of the Catechism more......but I am not inclined to do so, in this thread. [/quote] LoL!!! I about fell outta my chair laughing when I read this!!! LoL!!! The Catechism? Umm, I don't think I had the Catechism in mind...I was talking about what hot stuff said, which was very obviously out of teaching. What he said in response to Todd was wrong, even if it's not what he meant. It is how it goes. If the problem is merely physical, well, I shan't repeat because I've already said my two kopecks and am waiting for a response. [quote][quote]A man suffering from this disorder is not healthy as far as his sexual development is concerned.[/quote] That should be prefaced with "In my opinion" because that is all it is.[/quote] [quote]2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity,[font="Verdana"][size=2]140[/size][/font] tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered."[font="Verdana"][size=2][/quote][/size][/font] Andy, you made my day with that comment! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qfnol31 Posted May 27, 2006 Share Posted May 27, 2006 [quote]2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. They do not choose their homosexual condition; for most of them it is a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition. 2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.[/quote] If they are healthy, then what is homosexuality? Natural? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aloysius Posted May 27, 2006 Share Posted May 27, 2006 okay, maybe i'm just a bit confused, but can I ask for a clarification? is hot stuff saying that a homosexual man can be healthy as regards to his sexual developement? that's an oxymoron. homosexuality is an unnatural/disordered sexual attraction; a homosexual may be psychologically healthy in all other aspects but if his psyche is ordered towards something unnatural, the sexual developement of his psyche is not healthy. it seems a very simple axiom to me: a psyche ordered towards something dissordered or unnatural is not a healthy psyche in regards to that thing it is ordered to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Semalsia Posted May 27, 2006 Share Posted May 27, 2006 So if homosexuality is a mental illness/disorder, then shouldn't that mean homosexuals aren't culpable for the sin? Or at least less culpable than a (mentally healthy) heterosexual doing the same thing? If their faulty mind is making them act irrationally, then how could you blame them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qfnol31 Posted May 28, 2006 Share Posted May 28, 2006 It's concupiscence that's inciting the person to act in either case, though. Homosexuals are not culpable for their tendencies, but are culpable for their actions and the thoughts they will just as I am for any lustful thoughts, et cetera. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Socrates Posted May 28, 2006 Share Posted May 28, 2006 [quote name='heavenseeker' post='991290' date='May 26 2006, 08:03 PM'] We have no right in this thread no matter what our view is on the subject. Homosexuality is most of the time caused by a chemical disorder in the brain, yes a few cases are the choice of the individual but not very many. Homophobs are just uncomfertable because they cant handle that other people have a unnatural sexual preferences. [/quote] 1) First of all, there exists no solid scientific evidence that homosexuality is caused by "a chemical disorder in the brain." What chemical imbalance causes homosexuality? None has been found. If that was the case, homosexuality could be treated with chemical/drug treatments. Neither has a "gay gene" been found. There exist many cases of identical twins where one grows up gay and the other straight. No one totally understands the causes of homosexuality, but many studies show that weak/absent fathers and lack of healthy childhood relationships with members of the same sex can lead to homosexuality later in life. And people have successfully been psychologically treated and gone from "gay" to "straight." (See articles linked to earlier on this thread for more details). 2) Even if homosexual tendencies were totally biologically determined (and there exists no solid evidence that they are), this would have absolutely no bearing on whether homosexual activity is sinful. That homosexual behavior is sinful is not my opinion, nor the mere result of "homophobia," but is the constant moral teaching of the Church. (See the Catechism and Scripture.) Thus it is wrong to say that Catholics "must allow those that are homosexual to be that way." That is moral relativism, not Catholic teaching. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uruviel Posted May 28, 2006 Share Posted May 28, 2006 (edited) Yes but can homosexuality be cured? Once you had that 'illness' can you 'cure' it? Edited May 28, 2006 by uruviel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightofChrist Posted May 28, 2006 Share Posted May 28, 2006 [quote name='Semalsia' post='991551' date='May 27 2006, 03:34 PM'] So if homosexuality is a mental illness/disorder, then shouldn't that mean homosexuals aren't culpable for the sin? Or at least less culpable than a (mentally healthy) heterosexual doing the same thing? If their faulty mind is making them act irrationally, then how could you blame them? [/quote] Alcoholism is also a mental disorder/illness yet "No drunkard shall enter the Kingdom of heaven" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaime Posted May 28, 2006 Share Posted May 28, 2006 [quote name='KnightofChrist' post='991087' date='May 26 2006, 01:16 PM'] I confuse ppl offen... objectively disordered would be a psychological disorder or mental disorder. According to good ol Webster Ob·jec·tive·ly adv. In the manner or state of an object; as, a determinate idea objectively [color="#FF0000"]in the mind[/color]. Jamie has yet to show where the Church says homosexuality is [u]not[/u] a mental/psychological disorder. [/quote] And according to the good ol Catechism, are you suggesting that people who lust, masturbate, have oral sex and extra or premarital affairs have mental disorders? [quote]As I've pointed out before, unless you can provide a list of conditions defined as "mental disorders" by the catechism, this "argument by silence" is without merit. If an "objective disorder" lies in the mind, it can be correctly considered mental. Your side has claimed the disorder is not of the mind, yet you have not explained where you consider the disorder to lie.[/quote] And as I've pointed out, I've demonstrated that the Church does not take a position on mental disorders. Therefore we have to take the next step and rely on competent secular sources that the Church recognizes and approves of. The field of Psychology is one of these sources. And accordingly they have stated through blind testing that homosexuality cannot be deemed a mental disorder. I have not explained where I considere the disorder to lie? I wonder why that is.. Oh yeah! Because it would be opinion. Nobody knows. Everyone else is stating opinion as "fact" around here, I thought I would be different and simply state facts. [quote]kay, maybe i'm just a bit confused, but can I ask for a clarification? is hot stuff saying that a homosexual man can be healthy as regards to his sexual developement? that's an oxymoron. homosexuality is an unnatural/disordered sexual attraction; a homosexual may be psychologically healthy in all other aspects but if his psyche is ordered towards something unnatural, the sexual developement of his psyche is not healthy. [/quote] Well Al, research (that I've quoted) proves that wrong. And what if a person with deep seated homosexual tendencies has his/her sexual development move towards chastity? People around here are viewing different and unnatural as unhealthy (in this specific case mentally unhealthy) . Let me give you an example that can be applied. I found out in my mid 20s that I have a condition called dextrocardia. Which literally means my heart is flipped over. Apparently my blood flows in the opposite direction of almost everyone else. Its very rare. It is unnatural It is intrinsically disordered. Yet my heart works fine. It is not defective. It is not in need of curing. In other words, while it is unnatural and intrinsically disordered, it is not a physical disorder. The same can be applied to people who have homosexual tendencies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Era Might Posted May 28, 2006 Share Posted May 28, 2006 (edited) I don't think the analogy quite works, because there is an important difference between a physical disorder and a moral disorder. Even though your heart is flipped around, it does not incline you toward a moral evil. The flow of our blood is not a moral subject. Homosexuality, on the other hand, does incline us toward a moral evil, so in that sense it is something which must be "fixed"; not homosexuality alone, certainly, but all moral disorders. But I think there is some validity to say that homosexuality is not necessarily a psychological disorder. I think it often is, but the Church leaves the question to the competence of other qualified men. I think it would suffice to say that homosexuality is a disorder of the human person. Whether it is a "psychological" disorder would depend on factors such as how you view and define psychology; I suppose a "spiritual" disorder does not have to necessarily be a "psychological" disorder. A person who likes to steal jewelery, for example, is not necessarily a clinical kleptomaniac, although he does have a spiritual problem. Edited May 28, 2006 by Era Might Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qfnol31 Posted May 28, 2006 Share Posted May 28, 2006 I think the difference between a lustful person and a homosexual person is that lust is willed. We have tendencies towards lust, but must actually will the lust for it to be in our minds as lust. Homosexuality is, as far as I can gather, not willed. There is more than a tendency there, it is the complete disordering of the sexuality of a person. If I were homosexual, it is not because I chose it. If I were lustful, it is because I chose it. That's why I don't think your analogy holds here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted May 28, 2006 Share Posted May 28, 2006 [quote name='hot stuff' post='991815' date='May 28 2006, 07:42 AM'] And according to the good ol Catechism, are you suggesting that people who lust, masturbate, have oral sex and extra or premarital affairs have mental disorders? [. . .][/quote] hot stuff, Throughout this discussion you have continued to muddy the waters, because you fail to distinguish between natural desires, which can be misused (i.e., the desire of a man for physical intimacy with a woman), and unnatural desires, which have no proper use at all, and which indicate that a man is suffering from an objective disorder of the mind (i.e., homosexual desires that purdure over time). That being said, the desire of a man for a woman is natural and good, because it is a part of God's plan for the sanctification of the human race. The physical union established by the conjugal act between a man and a woman living in a marriage covenant that is indissoluble is a good of nature, and a true sacramental grace in the New Covenant at the same time, with the goal of uniting the spouses in a life-long gift of self through the power of love with openness to the procreation of children. Thus, this natural desire (i.e., of a man for a woman, and of a woman for a man) manifests the complimentarity of the sexes, and reveals the spousal significance of the human body (male and female), which has the added grace of signifying the union of Christ and the Church. Now on the other hand, the desire of a man for a man -- when it persists over time as some sort of stable mental state (i.e., as a pathological constitution) -- is unnatural and mentally defective, because it is contrary to the good of man and frustrates the natural complimentarity of the sexes. The homosexual inclination -- although not a sin -- is an objective disorder, because it is "a more or less strong tendency ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil," and as a consequence, the inclination itself cannot be seen as morally neutral, or even worse, as a good. [See the CDF Instruction [u]Homosexualitatis Problema[/u], no. 3] Thus, homosexual desires, which arise in the mind and persist over time, are completely abnormal and mentally defective, since they are contrary to nature and evince a form of sexual development that is severely dysfunctional. Now as far as masturbation and oral sex are concerned, both of these are sinful acts, and not merely desires of the mind, which means that your comparison of these acts to the homosexual inclination is inappropriate. Nevertheless, if one makes the necessary distinction between desires that arise in the mind and sinful acts, it is clear that if a man were to experience exclusive desires for self-abuse (i.e., masturbatory desires that replaced the natural desire of a man for a woman), he would be exhibiting signs of a mental defect; and so, the persistent desire for self-abuse would reveal a lack of proper sexual development. The same of course would hold in connection with desires related to oral sex (i.e., if these disordered desires replaced the natural desire of a man to have sexual intercourse with a woman), because an exclusive fixation on these desires would show that the man in question was suffering from an affliction of the mind that is contrary to nature. Such a man would be experiencing a form of sexual development that is objectively retarded. [quote name='hot stuff' post='991815' date='May 28 2006, 07:42 AM']Yet my heart works fine. It is not defective. It is not in need of curing. In other words, while it is unnatural and intrinsically disordered, it is not a physical disorder. The same can be applied to people who have homosexual tendencies. [/quote] This is the crux of our disagreement, because I do hold -- in agreement with Catholic tradition -- that the homosexual condition needs to be cured, both through proper psychological counseling, but also and primarily by the power of God’s grace. As the Church Fathers (and even the Scholastics) taught: grace is the gift of God’s own life by which He heals and perfects man’s nature, because by the mystery of the incarnation all that has arisen in the world through the ancestral sin is washed away in the beatitude of [i]theosis[/i]. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cam42 Posted May 28, 2006 Share Posted May 28, 2006 [quote]This is the crux of our disagreement, because I do hold -- in agreement with Catholic tradition -- that the homosexual condition needs to be cured, both through proper psychological counseling, but also and primarily by the power of God’s grace.[/quote] This is at odds with the catechetical position: [quote name='CCC #2357']Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. [b]Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained.[/b] Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered." They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved. [/quote] At this point you detract from accepted Catholic thought. The reason being is that you are obfuscating the action with the person. The Church quite clearly teaches that the [i]homosexual act[/i] is intrinsically disordered, NOT the homosexual person. Had you said: [i]This is the crux of our disagreement, because I do hold -- in agreement with Catholic tradition -- that the homosexual [u]act[/u] needs to be cured primarily by the power of God's grace.[/i] That would be acceptable. As it is, the position that you take is inconsistent with Catholic thought. It is not the person which the Church disagrees with, but the action of the person. You are equating the sin of the homosexual act AS the homosexual person. That is improper theology and incorrect. We are called to be chaste, heterosexual and homosexual. For the homosexual there is an inclination which is objectively disordered, but this inclination is the act, in and of itself. It is not the mind of the person. The Church has never commented on this and the Church has not taught on this aspect, PRECISELY because we, as Christians, are called to accept the homosexual person with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. If the homosexual is called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter, then how does psychological counselling foster that? The answer is that it doesn't. Why? Because this fullfillment of God's will is done through His grace and through right reason. It is this misconstrual of the idea of the homosexual person v. the homosexual act that is causing the problem. When one requires that the problem is of the mind, then one unites the action with the person in a way that cannot be. Why? Because the Church teaches that through the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection. Nowhere does the Church say that they should seek psychology to reach Christian perfection. What the Church says, is that prayer and sacramental grace are needed, as well as self-mastery and disinterested friendship.....NOT a trip to the local psychology department. Sorry Todd, you are wrong. You cannot equate the homosexual person and the homosexual act as being the same thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts