 |
 |
My Evolving Views on Homosexuality
| July 13th, 2016 at 5:38:40 PM permalink | |
| FrGamble Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 67 Posts: 7596 | How can something I know to be right feel so wrong. In a few of the recent religion threads the topic of homosexuality has come up numerous times. I have brought this all to prayer with the above thought racing through my mind. I am conflicted about the logical and reasonable teaching of the Church concerning homosexuality. I believe it to be correct and it makes sense to me, yet I can't shake the feeling that something is wrong. In my prayer with the Lord I heard very clearly that a similar type of sentiment, "how can something feel so right be so wrong" is in the minds and hearts of my brothers and sisters with a same sex attraction. It was made clear to me that this is what so many good people must wrestle with. Well, I would like to say that in thinking more about this experience I feel that fighting against "same-sex marriage" in the civil sphere is not appropriate. Long before this issue the state and the law has made it clear that civil marriage is not the same thing as the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony. It is two consenting adults who commit themselves to each other in a contract for their mutual help and a well being. Allowing no fault divorce was probably around the time that this secular conception of marriage developed. If this is the case then why can two men or two women not get married in the civil sense. Fighting against this is like two ships passing in the night and firing broadsides against one another. Neither is using the same idea when speaking about marriage and both seem far too eager to condemn or hurt the other. So in regards to the Church itself (I just want to make sure my bishop is not on this forum). I am wondering if we could not solemnize homosexual unions in a different ceremony than marriage. For us marriage is strictly linked to procreation and the union of spouses so it would need to be something different. Right now my working title would be, "consecrated friendships". Two men or two women who have no interest in getting married and are attracted to the same sex would enter into a covenant for life. They would obviously live together and share the deepest of friendships. They would also commit to living chastely with the knowledge that the Sacrament of Reconciliation is always available to them as it is for anyone but they would be able to live our their intimate friendship without any discrimination. In these consecrated friendships, both friends need not be Catholic, we would then be able to help them adopt children if that was their wish. Perhaps then the government would allow the Church to continue its good work in helping children be adopted. I probably should have written this as a blog post but I thought there would be some desire to comment from the forum. I know that this means nothing to some members (I'm looking at you Nareed) but I wanted to thank everyone for their good comments and challenges about this issue. It has really helped me in my prayer and in my understanding of how the Church's teaching is perceived by those outside of its walls. God Bless! “It is with the smallest brushes that the artist paints the most exquisitely beautiful pictures.” ( |
| July 13th, 2016 at 6:24:33 PM permalink | |
| Evenbob Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 146 Posts: 25011 |
They wouldn't, not any Gay couple I know. Why should they, the whole idea of not having sex because your Gay is beyond ridiculous. The Church's obsession with sex is embarrassing, it's rooted in the psychology of ignorance and intolerance that ruled a thousand years ago. The Church has to wise up and grow up or there will be no priests at all in 25 years. If you take a risk, you may lose. If you never take a risk, you will always lose. |
| July 13th, 2016 at 6:36:20 PM permalink | |
| FrGamble Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 67 Posts: 7596 |
Because they are Catholic and want to live according to what we believe is the law of God. I know many gay couples who do live this way and they are very happy. Not everything revolves around sex you know. Please check out the testimonials on this website: Couragerc.org “It is with the smallest brushes that the artist paints the most exquisitely beautiful pictures.” ( |
| July 13th, 2016 at 6:36:57 PM permalink | |
| Dalex64 Member since: Mar 8, 2014 Threads: 3 Posts: 3687 | Marriage was an institution of the state before it was a sacrament of the Catholic Church, around the year 1100. Marriage continues to be an institution of the state which many religious officials are allowed to perform - in the name of the state, and in the name of their god. The rights of marriage that homosexual couples wish to obtain are the rights granted by the state, not by the church. Perhaps if the church no longer agrees morally with the state definition, rights, and responsibilities of state marriages, perhaps they should divest themselves from filing state marriage licenses, and simply bless the sacrament of marriage upon any person they want, and not to anyone they do not want, and simply refrain from bestowing the rights and responsibilities conferred by the state marriage license, as was the tradition of the church for over 1000 years. "Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." Daniel Patrick Moynihan |
| July 13th, 2016 at 6:47:55 PM permalink | |
| FrGamble Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 67 Posts: 7596 |
Most of what you write is correct except the above statement. Marriage was a Sacrament of the Church since the wedding feast of Cana and was part of human culture long before modern states existed to grant them certain rights and status.
I agree very much and have brought this to my bishop before. I am in Ohio the weekend for a wedding and I had to get a visiting minister license and was thinking the same thing you are. I thought myself and this couple have such a very different conception about what we are doing on Saturday that one civil license should not be used to express two very different realities. “It is with the smallest brushes that the artist paints the most exquisitely beautiful pictures.” ( |
| July 13th, 2016 at 7:00:30 PM permalink | |
| Dalex64 Member since: Mar 8, 2014 Threads: 3 Posts: 3687 | Citation for 1100: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage Under marriage and religion
212 at least is to a Catholic source. "Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." Daniel Patrick Moynihan |
| July 13th, 2016 at 7:02:40 PM permalink | |
| Dalex64 Member since: Mar 8, 2014 Threads: 3 Posts: 3687 |
There you go, problem solved. The church should stop filing state marriage licenses. "Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." Daniel Patrick Moynihan |
| July 13th, 2016 at 7:03:52 PM permalink | |
| Evenbob Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 146 Posts: 25011 |
You mean you think they live that way. But everybody lies about sex, Gays, straights, even priests. They live how they like and take the consequences, just like when old Catholics lied about contraception. Of course they used it, nobody really believes god watches them all the time. Except children, and they grow out of it. If you take a risk, you may lose. If you never take a risk, you will always lose. |
| July 13th, 2016 at 7:08:39 PM permalink | |
| Dalex64 Member since: Mar 8, 2014 Threads: 3 Posts: 3687 |
Marriage was also a part of ancient culture, such as Rome, Greece, Egypt, and Mesopotamia long before modern religions even existed. "Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." Daniel Patrick Moynihan |
| July 13th, 2016 at 7:13:01 PM permalink | |
| Dalex64 Member since: Mar 8, 2014 Threads: 3 Posts: 3687 | More on the history of marriage, and its original and traditional purposes: http://www.livescience.com/37777-history-of-marriage.html "Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." Daniel Patrick Moynihan |