Skip to comments.U.S. Gay Catholics Say 'No Sex' Doctrine Tough to Follow
Posted on 04/07/2005 6:20:40 AM PDT by Clint N. Suhks
SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Peter Novak has practiced Catholicism his whole life, starting as an altar boy and then studying for seven years toward becoming a priest.
Yet in recent months, the 39-year-old gay man, who did not complete his seminary studies, has been thinking about leaving the church because of the legacy of Pope John Paul's stance on homosexuality.
"It's not an easy life to do that, to want to maintain your identity as Catholic and gay," said Novak, who married his partner in San Francisco last year.
"The church came out very much opposed to gay marriage and I would say that was part of it," he said, explaining why he stopped going to Mass regularly more than a year ago. "It has challenged my ability to feel comfortable in the church."
Under Pope John Paul, the Vatican preached that gays should be treated with compassion but made clear it absolutely opposed gay sex and called homosexuality a disorder. The Pope referred to gay marriage as an "ideology of evil."
The Pope "would be very compassionate to the gay person," said Fr. Donald Cozzens, former president-rector of Saint Mary Catholic Seminary in Cleveland. Yet he would "require of them what he feels the Gospel requires of all of God's people, which is if you are not married, you do not have an active sexual life, whether within a committed relationship or not."
Many gay American Catholics ignore such teachings, as do heterosexuals who skirt church rules against birth control.
In areas such as San Francisco's Castro Street, a center of gay life, Catholic churches perform a delicate balancing act.
In front of the Most Holy Redeemer Church two blocks away, a billboard shows well-built male models urging gay men to telephone.
"We provide the teachings of the church with the understanding that people will make their own choices," said Michael Greenwell, a priest from the Carmelite Order.
GAY CATHOLICS AT PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH
DignityUSA, a group of gay Catholics, conducts its own services, often with former priests. After a 1986 Vatican letter denounced homosexuality as "an objective disorder," U.S. Catholic churches barred group meetings on their property.
So in San Francisco, Dignity meets weekly at a Presbyterian church.
Catholic teachings on homosexuality may not have changed much under John Paul, but his papacy coincided with the gay rights movements, AIDS and priest sex scandals highlighting issues related to homosexual clergymen.
The Pope also strongly opposed gay marriage, discussing it in his last annual address in January and calling it in his last book published in February "a new ideology of evil," which incensed many gays.
"The clock has been turned back during this papacy for gay people," said Jeff Stone, a DignityUSA member in New York.
In San Francisco, Catholics played key roles during last year's marriage of more than 4,000 same sex couples.
Mayor Gavin Newsom, a Catholic, ignited the issue by allowing the weddings until they were barred by the California Supreme Court. Then, just last month, a Catholic judge ruled California's ban on homosexual marriage unconstitutional.
Both traditionalists and reformers seem to agree the Vatican is unlikely to make changes toward gays under the next Pope.
"I don't think the teaching can or will change," said Mark Brumley, president of St. Ignatius Press, the largest U.S. Catholic publisher.
"Thanks to the legacy of John Paul II, we are going to see a much more energetic and persuasive presentation of the truth of that teaching about human sexuality," he said. "I think the next Pope will build on what John Paul II has done."
The membership increases by over 300 million in 25+ years Reuters is focusing on this degenerate. "Values" gap indeed.
Dueteronomy 22 does not concern itself with sexual prohibitions - it is about dealing fairly with others. If you appreciate context, then you must admit my argument is strengthened by consideration thereof.
But there is Breast cancer....
I simply don't think they considered female homosexuality to be sex at all. There is no evidence to support the view that they share our modern conception of it; that there are many obvious places to mention it, and they are not mentioned, but the male version is specifically mentioned, supports this conclusion.
Sounds like something God would allow then...
Breast cancer strikes married women as well, and also unmarried non-homosexual women. It doesn't, to my knowledge, prefer homosexual women over others. Compare this to AIDS which infects homosexual men at something like 100 times the rate it affects normal men. Moreover, we haven't yet figured out what triggers breast cancer, so drawing any conclusion based on a small difference is dubious; whereas the means of transmission of HIV and the factors that facilitate it are well known and unmistakably attributable to sodomites.
I'm not implying that there is any virtue to female homosexuality. There are many evil acts that are not specifically forbidden. I am saying is that it is of virtually no importance, and the language of the Bible reflects that.
What does 'thou shall not enjoy the fruit of thine own body' mean then?
Yes, I agree, but it has to be real repentance. IE. no more talk about abortion, being gy, or supporting euthanasia. The trouble here is people often talk the talk but do not walk the walk. Please, let's not have a revolving door here.
Ping to self.
Let me ask you this then...
If God were to give the law today, would female homosexuality be forbidden?
Whould not, "thou shall not lie with thy neigbors wife apply equally to the female reader? The places where man in general are used, or "you"?
Thou means you the reader. So how could a woman reader have a lesbian relationship? Is the daughter of the neighbor not forbidden to lie with out of wedlock?
Its all about seeking both society's and the Vatican's imprimatur of their sins.
Agreed. I don't know why anyone would not be sincere though, God isn't fooled, and knows what's in the heart. Jesus would have allowed Judas to repent. If the sinner can't admit the sin, then they will never come back through the door.
What....you didn't like my OT joke?
I don't know what Deuteronomy you're reading but it's about misrepresenting virginity,adultery, rape and incest...usually with the result of a good stoning.
Instead of ignoring the fact transsexualism is the same pathology of homosexuality, why don't you ask your Rabbi if Deut 22:5 isn't about sexual context.
Or just remain closed eyed to it, I don't really care anymore.
The example jesus gave was that he used overwhelming love and kindness along with forgiveness to showman the error of his ways, and to bring people to salvation. He saved more souls that way. The heritic drives away and divides people, and often condems his own.