Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Tue, 13 Oct 1992 16:27:51 -0400
From:         Eric James Ewanco <ewanco@MLO.DEC.COM>
Subject:      Re: Homosexuality

Excerpts from catholic: 13-Oct-92 Re: Homosexuality Len
Howard@PEGASUS.COM (1924)

> There is no marriage for homosexuals, by definition. So it seems strange
> to exclude them from sexual activity because they cannot do something
that is not allowed by law.

Homosexual activity is wrong regardless of whether you can get a
homosexual marriage.  Even if the state permitted homosexual marriages,
at least in the eyes of the Roman Catholic church, homosexuality would
still be wrong because it is inherently wrong.  It is not its
extramarital character that makes it wrong; it is its very nature.

Excerpts from catholic: 13-Oct-92 Re: Homosexuality Len
Howard@PEGASUS.COM (1924)

> I hold the positions suggested by Owen Thomas and John Macquarrie, that
> theology is a dynamic issue, and needs to be constantly reevaluated to
> keep it in contact with current social thought.  Our teacher of theology
> in the Diocesan Institute went so far as to say that any theology
> writing older than 20 years is out of date.  This does not say that
> scripture is out of date, mind you, only that our understanding of the
> perpetual truths contained in the Bible must constantly be reevaluated
> in light of new information.

HA! What a joke!  God remains the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow.
What was divine truth 2,000 years ago is still divine truth and does not
need to be "reevaluated." Conforming theology to "current social
thought" is simply a euphemism for following the teachings of popular
culture instead of following the more difficult teachings of our Lord
Jesus Christ.

Christ promised to reveal to us all truth, and to bring to memory those
things which he said.  All public divine revelation ended with the death
of the last apostle.  Therefore there is no reason to "reevaluate"
anything; we have everything, and there is no reason to change it for
Christ has revealed all things to us accurately.  If homosexuality was
morally wrong in 100 A.D., it is still morally wrong.

Excerpts from catholic: 13-Oct-92 Re: Homosexuality Len
Howard@PEGASUS.COM (1924)

> This problem of the theological aspects of homosexuality cuts across
> many lines, and with the diversity of opinion in the theological arena
> it is no wonder that we cannot agree here.  I would merely hold up the
> truth that God loves each one of us from all eternity.  It is not our
> job to judge our fellow humans, it is our job to love them.  Jesus did
> not qualify the second great commandment by saying "Love your neighbor
> as you love yourself if his ideas agree with yours."  We are charged
> with loving the unlovable, wheather we like them or not.

Let's also not forget that we must love the sinner but hate the sin, and
turn the person AWAY from that sin.  As Jesus told the adultress, "Go,
and sin no more."

We are called to love homosexuals, but not accept their sin.  Scripture
says that we must not "judge" one another, but it also says that we will
be held responsible if we do not attempt to turn people away from their
sin!  It would seem you would allow anyone to do anything and not tell
them what they are doing is sinful -- this is NOT what is meant by
"judging" someone.  Judging someone means judging their state of
salvation or their motives; it does not mean we cannot say that what
they do is sin, for Scripture calls us to correct one another.

Jesus loved sinners, but he did not allow them to continue in their sin,
but rather brought them to repentance and conversion.  Let us do the
same: love homosexuals, bring them to a realization of their sin, and
encourage them to repent of their sin and turn to holiness.

Eric
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic