Skip to comments.The Ideology of Homosexuality [Ecumenical]
Posted on 11/16/2010 9:44:10 AM PST by Pyro7480
Regarding the problem of homosexuality that is emerging today, the Christian conception tells us that one must always distinguish the respect due to persons, which involves rejecting any marginalization of them in society and politics (except for the unalterable nature of marriage and the family), from the rejection of any exalted "ideology of homosexuality," which is obligatory.
The word of God, as we know it in a page of the letter to the Romans by the apostle Paul, offers us on the contrary a theological interpretation of the rampant cultural aberration in this matter: such an aberration the sacred text affirms is at the same time the proof and the result of the exclusion of God from the collective attention and from social life, and of the refusal to give him the glory that he is due (cf. Romans 1:21).
The exclusion of the Creator determines a universal derailing of reason: "They became vain in their reasoning, and their senseless minds were darkened. While claiming to be wise, they became fools" (Romans 1:21-22). The result of this intellectual blindness was a fall, in both theory and practice, into the most complete dissoluteness: "Therefore, God handed them over to impurity through the lusts of their hearts for the mutual degradation of their bodies" (Romans 1:24).
And to prevent any misunderstanding and any accommodating interpretation, the apostle proceeds with a startling analysis, formulated in perfectly explicit terms:
"Therefore, God handed them over to degrading passions. Their females exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the males likewise gave up natural relations with females and burned with lust for one another. Males did shameful things with males and thus received in their own persons the due penalty for their perversity. And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God handed them over to their undiscerning mind to do what is improper" (Romans 1:26-28).
Finally, Paul takes pains to observe that the greatest abjection takes place when "the authors of these things . . . not only do them but give approval to those who practice them" (cf. Romans 1:32).
It is a page of the inspired book, which no earthly authority can force us to censor. Nor are we permitted, if we want to be faithful to the word of God, the pusillanimity of passing over it in silence out of concern not to appear "politically incorrect."
We must on the contrary point out the singular interest for our days of this teaching of Revelation: what St. Paul revealed as taking place in the Greco-Roman world is shown to correspond prophetically to what has taken place in Western culture in these last centuries. The exclusion of the Creator to the point of proclaiming grotesquely, a few decades ago, the "death of God" has had the result (almost like an intrinsic punishment) of the spread of an aberrant view of sexuality, unknown (in its arrogance) to previous eras.
The ideology of homosexuality as often happens to ideologies when they become aggressive and end up being politically triumphant becomes a threat to our legitimate autonomy of thought: those who do not share it risk condemnation to a kind of cultural and social marginalization.
The attacks on freedom of thought start with language. Those who do not resign themselves to accept "homophilia" (the theoretical appreciation of homosexual relations) are charged with "homophobia" (etymologically, the "fear of homosexuality"). This must be very clear: those who are made strong by the inspired word and live in the "fear of God" are not afraid of anything, except perhaps the stupidity toward which, Bonhoeffer said, we are defenseless. We are now even charged sometimes with the incredibly arbitrary accusation of "racism": a word that, among other things, has nothing to do with this issue, and in any case is completely extraneous to our doctrine and our history.
The essential problem that presents itself is this: is it still permitted in our days to be faithful and consistent disciples of the teaching of Christ (which for millennia has inspired and enriched the whole of Western civilization), or must we prepare ourselves for a new form of persecution, promoted by homosexual activists, by their ideological accomplices, and even by those whose task it should be to defend the intellectual freedom of all, including Christians?
There is one question that we ask in particular of the theologians, biblicists, and pastoralists. Why on earth, in this climate of almost obsessive exaltation of Sacred Scripture, is the Pauline passage of Romans 1:21-32 never cited by anyone? Why on earth is there not a little more concern to make it known to believers and nonbelievers, in spite of its evident timeliness?
Does not matter the source is Catholic and therefore suspect.
you are so correct. i agree entirely.
I do agree, it is demonic, but let’s be honest and understand that to God all sins are sins, they are not separated into sins he can live with, no , all have fallen short of the glory of God...all sins are despicable and abominations to our Holy Father whom we cannot even look upon without dying..
While indeed homosexuality is a terrible sin, all sins have their demonic roots and all demons are satanic..That is why we need Jesus salvation so much...Even today the best Christians are sinners and grievous unto God, if it were not for the blood of Christ in our hearts we would be possessed..
Because of this it is al;so important that those who have indulged in any sinful activity be able to forgive themselves while at the same time viewing the sin as what it is, demonic..looking at others wives with lust etc...you know the 10 commandments I am sure, while forgiven of these sins in Christ, the 10 commandments will once again be real in Heaven, it could not be Heaven unless we obeyed these commandments..
Peace to you in Christ..
|The exclusion of the Creator determines a universal derailing of reason: "They became vain in their reasoning, and their senseless minds were darkened. While claiming to be wise, they became fools" (Romans 1:21-22).|
Yes, homosexual behavior --- perverse sex relations, split off from their true meaning of man-woman bonding and fertility --- spring from a "flesh passion," but much moreso, and more dangerous, is that the wide acceptance of the "twisting" of sex involves a derailing of reason.
The almost-universal acceptance of contracepted intercourse, for example, is a perversion in itself, and paved the way for the acceptance of homosexual intercourse. People no longer accept the intrinsic meaning of intercourse as an act that uniquely "means" the transmission of life (that is, the marital act, unimpaired and unaltered, means "lovemaking is life-making") ---
People who can deliberately twist the act so as to split that meaning away from sexual intercourse, will eventually accept and justify any kind of sexual jack-assery.
This derailing of reason, the denial of the instrinsic structure of sex, goes far beyond the 1 - 2% of the population who are actively homosexual.
John tells us how to treat them rather clearly.
2 John 7-11 7Many deceivers, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, have gone out into the world. Any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist. 8Watch out that you do not lose what you have worked for, but that you may be rewarded fully. 9Anyone who runs ahead and does not continue in the teaching of Christ does not have God; whoever continues in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. 10If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not take him into your house or welcome him. 11Anyone who welcomes him shares in his wicked work.
that said, there is also no doubt that some sins are more harmful to the psyche and more destructive to the mental and physical survival of the sinner, reflect a “deeper” level of depravity, as it were.
All sinners need Jesus, and there is not one word of Scripture which minimizes the reality of the sin of man, even the “best” of men. Our righteousness are as filthy rags in front of God, no doubt about it.
I always thought this an interesting paper.
Maybe. That sort of argument seems to reflect a very JPII understanding of sexuality. It seems to suggest that the division of the sex act and the loss of reason sets up a sort of continuum where, for example, promiscuous heterosexual sex for mere pleasure, is sort of in the same path as gay sex.
That just doesn’t ring true.
That’s sort of like saying eating too much at a banquet is the same “type” of thing as eating excrement. Yes, both are wrong. And both involve “eating”. But one is done by a person who has fleshly desires, but desires which are also normal and wholesome if exercised in the right context. But gay sex and the eating of excrement are done only by mentally ill people who are deeply depraved (and also sinners).
They both deny that sex has an intrinsic structure which is meaningful and providential.They both assume that you can restructure what sexual intercourse IS to fit your preferences.
It's a safe bet that the vast majority of heterosexuals who approve of homosexual sex, also approve of contraceptive sex.
It's also a safe bet that the vast majority of heterosexuals who don't approve of contraceptive intercourse, also don't approve of homosexual intercourse.
PLacemark for pingout tomorrow.
What are they supposed to do then? Like parolees, what are they supposed to do? They have to eat. They need to work.
Yet, we aren’t allowed to judge what’s in a person’s heart. God looks on the heart. So, if someone is clearly gay looking and at church, I guess we have to think the best of him, and that that little sodomy thing is between him and his maker.
Women only have such rights as men choose to give them.
So, if someone is clearly gay looking and at church, I guess we have to think the best of him, and that that little sodomy thing is between him and his maker.”
Well, not at the church I attend, nor at any church I would ever attend. That is where the hard line on repentance and church discipline comes in. Repent, or hit the road.
Hmm... I repeat, we are not allowed to judge what’s in a person’s heart. We ARE allowed, required, to judge a person’s actions, their “fruits” if you will. But just because someone is a bit effeminate and you think he’s probably faggotish, you aren’t allowed to conduct an inquisition. Even if they ARE gsy, you don’t know if they repent and are sorry, even if they keep succumbing to the urge. In other words, they don’t answer to you.
There are varying “results” from differing sins. Homosexuality is vile in every way for it affects the entire person, body, soul and spirit..not to mention the mind. The ‘effects’ of this sin on family, children, wives, culture and all other areas is vast as well. Not to mention the God speaks very candidly about this particular sin.
So though all sin is sin...how they play out can be vastly different. Homosexuality kills others as much as abortion does for it infects the innocent as well as the guilty.