Active Users:1210 Time:23/11/2024 04:31:10 AM
This is a classic example of me inadvertently coming to complete agreement with the Vatican. Joel Send a noteboard - 07/09/2010 12:05:52 PM
The current pope (Benedict XIV formerly known as Cardinal Ratzinger) when he still was a cardinal pretty much wrote the "book" on what the Catholic church considers religious "doctrine"/"policy" when it comes to homosexuality.

The document is called "Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons" (written 1985 released 1986).
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19861001_homosexual-persons_en.html

Now this letter references (as a source of logic) the 1975 Declaration on Certain Questions Concerning Sexual Ethics which deals with many things that the Church considers sins relating to sex
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19751229_persona-humana_en.html

Now in the document it recognizes that Homosexuality is probably innate, and it recognizes a difference between being homosexual (aka having homosexual desires) and actively "sinning" (having homosexual relations.) If being a homosexual is innate you can't be excommunicated. Furthermore having homosexual desires itself is not sinful since it is innate, homosexual desires are "disordered" since it "tempts" you to sin, the actual acting on these desires is sinful. Being "disordered" is not the same as sinful, being "disordered" means more likely to sin.

The catholic church also (as doctrine, reality is sometimes a different matter) encourages love and respect for all homosexual people. Furthermore it is very much against persecution and violence of homosexual people. Finally in theory (but sometimes not in reality) the Catholic Church is against the criminalization of homosexuality.

Also if you have had homosexual feelings in the last 3 years, you are "supposed" to enter seminary and thus won't be able to become a priest, "in theory"

------------------------------------------------

On another note, while this is a taboo subject, Benedict XIV (Ratzinger) is very much a closeted gay man. Now I ain't saying he is having sex, I very much believe he is a chaste man, but that doesn't change the fact he is probably a very gay man who is in the closet.

If only it were always so easy and simple (perhaps if they didn't so demonize sexuality of any kind among the priesthood they wouldn't get so many devils for priests. ) I mean, really, it's not like innate temptation to sin is a new concept in Christianity; Christian doctrine, of almost every denomination, teaches that it's present in all of us: You recognize it, you acknowledge it, you repent the occasions when you succumb to it, asking Gods forgiveness and Grace, and you resist temptation in Christ. The particular form that takes is largely irrelevant. The miser forever tempted to steal and hoard is in the same boat: The temptation is constant, but it doesn't become sin until we succumb to it. Christ was tempted 40 days in the wilderness--but He never sinned. Note this more of an "I agree" than anything else. However.... :P

I DO have a couple questions:

1) Why are you so certain Pope Benedict is a closeted homosexual? I doubt it would be the first time, mind; the Medieval Vatican is rather notorious for blithely ignoring any and all of the prohibitions it placed on both the clergy and the laity (hence Bishops who sought as assiduously as any other noble to protect their CHILDRENS welfare) it's just that, to borrow a line from the agnostics, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. ;)

2) Marriage is about raising rather than having children? What about childless couples, hetero or otherwise? Are their marriages somehow lesser? Because that seems counter to what you mean to advocate with the statements. And isn't raising children somewhat predicated on having children? I'm not of the ilk that says a child is better off going from diapers to diploma in an orphanage or with an abusive parent than with the awful gays who might HURT them rather than just regularly beating and brainwashing them like DECENT folk, but this goes to the core of why I honestly believe, with no malice, that same sex couples were not what God intended for humanity: If it were, IMHO, homosexual couples could bear children naturally. It's just one of many examples of how I think members of the opposite sex complement each other in ways that members of the same sex can't. I don't see the difference between male and female as a simple matter of hormones, and firmly believe that most, if not all, women will bring things to the table in a relationship that another man couldn't (and vice versa. )
Honorbound and honored to be Bonded to Mahtaliel Sedai
Last First in wotmania Chat
Slightly better than chocolate.

Love still can't be coerced.
Please Don't Eat the Newbies!

LoL. Be well, RAFOlk.
Reply to message
Gay Marriage and Religious Institutions - 04/09/2010 11:36:14 PM 1372 Views
Religion 100% aside, it's"okay" because she breached her contract - 05/09/2010 12:18:36 AM 961 Views
Well, my tripes with it are a little in line with that - 05/09/2010 01:26:56 AM 974 Views
Re: Well, my tripes with it are a little in line with that - 05/09/2010 01:41:34 AM 919 Views
goodness knows that the military sign their rights away ALL THE TIME - 05/09/2010 02:44:58 AM 778 Views
While I understand that view - 05/09/2010 04:05:29 AM 926 Views
There is a difference in the degree of the transgressions and the public nature of them as well. - 05/09/2010 02:30:06 AM 881 Views
agreed. There may be some hypocrisy in the church employment practices... - 05/09/2010 02:49:44 AM 837 Views
That's the crux of it. - 07/09/2010 11:24:44 AM 975 Views
Re: There is a difference in the degree of the transgressions and the public nature of them as well. - 09/09/2010 06:43:23 AM 1156 Views
I could not believe this post was serious. - 10/09/2010 02:04:10 AM 966 Views
Good god... - 10/09/2010 10:52:03 AM 937 Views
To recieve federal funds you can't discriminate - 05/09/2010 04:02:13 AM 977 Views
She chose to work for a Catholic institution. - 05/09/2010 05:54:23 PM 781 Views
what a stupid thing to say - 05/09/2010 07:38:16 PM 921 Views
Um... no? One can be excommunicated for any number of things. *NM* - 05/09/2010 08:22:29 PM 315 Views
yeah back in the time when there was no electricity *NM* - 05/09/2010 08:25:17 PM 357 Views
...um, no. I'm not sure where you're getting that from, but it's completely wrong. - 06/09/2010 01:06:49 AM 825 Views
You can't be excommunicated for being gay - 06/09/2010 02:51:21 AM 908 Views
No one here said you could. - 06/09/2010 03:00:07 AM 837 Views
I am not disagreeing with that, excommunications do happen - 06/09/2010 03:07:57 AM 921 Views
This is a classic example of me inadvertently coming to complete agreement with the Vatican. - 07/09/2010 12:05:52 PM 886 Views
Wow! What an underwhelming argument. - 06/09/2010 04:24:32 AM 885 Views
Actually, the Pope has the right to say "sorry, you're not a Catholic anymore". - 05/09/2010 08:43:34 PM 1030 Views
See above post - 06/09/2010 02:52:25 AM 767 Views
What? - 06/09/2010 02:56:59 AM 777 Views
Nope - 06/09/2010 03:03:48 AM 807 Views
Inaction, like, for example, not saving lives where you could have is also grounds for expulsion. - 06/09/2010 06:35:31 PM 686 Views
Hmm, but I think that's a different type of inaction than the kind he's discussing - 06/09/2010 08:02:50 PM 1000 Views
I never infered that that was the case. - 06/09/2010 08:24:30 PM 703 Views
mmm, but your example isn't inaction ALONE - 06/09/2010 08:46:56 PM 806 Views
Hmm interesting question. - 06/09/2010 10:35:19 PM 889 Views
is excommunication about "use" though? - 06/09/2010 10:36:55 PM 925 Views
I don't know. - 07/09/2010 05:47:42 AM 764 Views
yah, I'd agree with that - 07/09/2010 11:59:01 AM 925 Views
Well thank god you aren't the pope - 07/09/2010 03:29:00 AM 887 Views
I would say the same for you. - 07/09/2010 05:50:55 AM 832 Views
Dismas is a Saint? - 07/09/2010 12:08:45 PM 905 Views
It's pretty hard to argue with that one. *NM* - 08/09/2010 04:18:41 AM 294 Views
Yeah, was just surprised they'd made it official is all. - 08/09/2010 04:36:28 AM 872 Views
You are purposefully trying to split hairs - 07/09/2010 03:15:08 AM 811 Views
Calling me an idiot... - 07/09/2010 05:52:39 AM 821 Views
My turn to split hairs: - 07/09/2010 12:10:33 PM 815 Views
does excommunication mean you are no longer Catholic? - 06/09/2010 08:52:58 PM 700 Views
i'm pretty sure we have this conversation on a weekly basis. *NM* - 06/09/2010 09:05:33 PM 334 Views
Yeah. - 06/09/2010 10:34:10 PM 682 Views
is being Catholic a belief system or a club? - 06/09/2010 11:03:00 PM 792 Views
Depends on who you ask - 07/09/2010 03:12:23 AM 940 Views
It's both. - 07/09/2010 05:54:13 AM 888 Views
I'm unsure about that. It doesn't invalidate baptism. - 07/09/2010 08:23:33 AM 765 Views
I thought conformation is what made you a member of the church *NM* - 07/09/2010 06:42:36 PM 304 Views
You're correct. - 08/09/2010 02:33:45 AM 802 Views
Hey I haven't brought up the last two times - 07/09/2010 03:30:18 AM 786 Views
My god people that cheat or divorce shouldn't be Catholic - 06/09/2010 02:26:23 AM 701 Views
I'm inclined to agree. - 07/09/2010 11:31:59 AM 764 Views
Re: I'm inclined to agree. - 10/09/2010 02:36:05 AM 886 Views

Reply to Message