It’s gay pride week

Chrissy’s Site Bites @ http://news.webshots.com/photo/2831274810056011884uuxbsl

Click on graphic to embiggen.

If you like this, you might also enjoy @ http://4gfc.wordpress.com/2012/06/23/sf-gay-pride-week-and-sponsers/

25 Comments

Filed under Ronald Reagan

25 responses to “It’s gay pride week

  1. Because nothing says peace, love, and tolerance like going to the White House and flipping off a portrait of a dead president.

    Like

  2. FranklytheNut

    Let’s not forget “class”!

    Like

  3. gfcinthatorder says:
    June 24, 2012 at 7:52 pm (Edit)
    I would also like to make a comment on how the LGBT leaders have chosen to use the Rainbow as a symbol of themselves. This is an abomination to God in itself. One of the first mentions, of the rainbow, if not the first, was in the bible where God gave man His Covenenat (promise) to Noah, after the great flood, to never destroy the earth’s population again.The great flood was sent by God in the first place because of the great evil which had taken over the world at the time. Knowing full well that this was the sign of God’s promise to man, Satan has used it against God, through the sins and shame of LGBT and the likes, to make a mockery of doing this out in the open. It is the equivalent of spitting in God’s face. Something so beautiful that has been taken and used to be such a horrendous abomniation to God. Evil. Know your Enemy!

    Like

  4. Honestly, I have no problem with gay pride week. If they want to have a big parade and celebration to honor themselves that’s their prerogative. I’m proud of who I am (sins and all), even though I’m not perfect. But this behavior is just childish and dispicable. I’m not sayin’ I never act childish or despicable, either, but… I tried to imagine myself in the White House after Obama is gone doing this very same thing to his picture and I just can’t. Even if I secretly wanted to do it, the audacity of doing it so openly in front of other people… I would be very ashamed and embarrassed.

    Like

    • chrissythehyphenated

      Another difference between us and them. We know how to be ashamed.

      Like

    • GP

      I agree. I have no problem with anyone choosing their own lifestyle. But why do they have to be in our face about it so much? Flipping off in the white house is just classless.
      I have no problem with legal partnerships. But why does such a small minority get to redefine marriage for the rest of us? And how can they expect churches to preform marriages if it is against church doctrine? What happened to the separation of church and state. Will we end up having to accept plural marriages or pedophiles? Where will it stop?
      They just had a huge gay pride parade in Chicago. For the most part, it was peaceful although a bit lewd by some reports. I also heard the streets were pretty disgusting this morning-it smelled like a frat house and there was garbage everywhere.
      Another reason why I do not live in the city.
      I once had a friend named Gay. I always wondered if she has changed her name since it has been hi jacked.

      Like

      • That is one thing that has always confounded me. Why does gay pride generally mean flaunting sexual behavior. I wouldn’t want to see heterosexuals walking down the street doing some of the things they do in gay pride parades and such!

        Like

        • @ Mafia Rose & GP,
          I have to totally disagree with the both of you. I have a problem with it. Gay pride week is no more than the evil one taunting those who are good. It is an abomination to God. It is EVIL and that is why they have to parade it around. It is a statement of evil winning over the good. WTH is wrong with people anymore. Have you no fear of God? This is an Evil in our lives today and why lagree that it is okay to do. America is weak because of the spineless. History repeats itself.

          Like

    • I DO have a problem with gay pride week, or gay pride anything. They keep telling us that they were born that way, that they didn’t have any choice in the matter, and they may be correct about that — but if so, what is there to be proud of? What is the point in being proud of something over which one had no control? Should I be proud of being heterosexual, or female, or Caucasian, or of having English/Scots/German blood? Of course not. I had nothing to do with any of that. I was born that way.

      This isn’t gonna make me any friends, but honestly, I’ve never even been able to bring myself to say I’m proud to be an American, because I’m not. I’m THANKFUL to be an American. I happen to be American by either a) an extremely fortunate accident of birth, or b) the grace of God. Either way, I had nothing to do with it, so I have no reason for pride — only abundant reasons for gratitude.

      Okay, end of rant.

      Like

      • chrissythehyphenated

        It made more sense to me when I found out that “gay” means Good As You.

        There’s a big element of subservient/adolescent belligerence in it, KWIM? If they were okay with themselves, they wouldn’t need to be shoving it all in our faces, DEMANDING that we approve of their lifestyle, no matter WHAT they do.

        I don’t think any of it has much to do with them choosing how they want to live. I think it’s about them wanting to force us to approve of their lifestyles, no matter what.

        But by acting like this, they are saying they CARE what WE think of them. IOW, they are giving US the power to judge their value as human beings. But it’s only immature or dysfunctional human beings who do this. Really mature, pulled together, self-actualized, whatever-you-call-it human beings don’t do this.

        And ITA and am grateful for your point about thankful, rather than proud. It’s got me thinking that, for a born citizen, “Proud to be American” has the same underlying element of belligerence that “Gay Pride” has. We only say it because the Left rants about how awful America is and how ashamed they are to be American. Well, dammit. They don’t decide these things for me.

        From now on, I’m THANKFUL to be American.

        Like

    • Well, I guess all of these things that y’all are bringing up don’t even figure in it for me. It’s a matter of free will (which was given to us by God) and the freedom of speech guaranteed to them in the Constitution. It’s their prerogative to decide how they want to live their lives and if they want to celebrate who they are. I wasn’t granted any power/authority by God to determine which sins are worse than others, so I leave the judgment to those in the position to do so. The Catholic church welcomes them with open arms and so do I.

      Look, as a counselor, whose spent most of my time working with adolescents, I’ve dealt with too many families torn apart by this issue to carry any hatred around with me in regards to it. If sinning makes one evil, then I guess we can all classify ourselves as evil and doing the devil’s work. I, for one, don’t think it’s quite that simple.

      I don’t go to gay pride events or post about gay pride week on my fb page, but I do support their right to free expression and will fight to preserve it. I also reserve my right to not be part of it if I choose. Isn’t that the freedom that we’re all fighting for?

      Like

      • chrissythehyphenated

        Yep.

        Like

        • GP

          Agree
          And it is not our job to judge. That is up to God.
          I believe in live and let live. But I feel gays should too. They should respect the tradition of marriage. If they did, there would be more support for their lifestyle

          Like

      • Mafia Rose
        June 25, 2012 at 11:19 pm
        Well, I guess all of these things that y’all are bringing up don’t even figure in it for me. That is truly a shame. As a Christian it is your job to “figure into it” Stand for what we believe in or fall for anything.

        It’s a matter of free will (which was given to us by God) and the freedom of speech guaranteed to them in the Constitution. It’s their prerogative to decide how they want to live their lives and if they want to celebrate who they are. I wasn’t granted any power/authority by God to determine which sins are worse than others, so I leave the judgment to those in the position to do so. The Catholic church welcomes them with open arms and so do I. The Catholic Church welcomes them with open arms is in reference to the sinner who is trying to repent of his sin not condoning it. A big difference. You take a very liberal stand on what you think you should be doing and what the job is of others. As a Christian it is your job to promote the Truth and the truth of LGBT’s practices are that which is evil. Do not spread your gray. Your education begets a fool if “gray” is what you get from it. You don’t recognize the difference between Good and Evil. That which is bad is not good. What is so hard to understand about that.

        Look, as a counselor, whose spent most of my time working with adolescents, I’ve dealt with too many families torn apart by this issue to carry any hatredWhat is your problem? You think this is hatred? hatred towards what is evil, yes,towards the sinner no! A family torn apart happens for many reasons. Should we okay killers, molestors…..and anyone else who is practicing these abominable acts. Not in your life. Your “feel good” theology is nothing but “gray and smoke” in your eyes that hides the Truth and allows the evil one to continue his work.

        around with me in regards to it. If sinning makes one evil,
        Sin depending n what type of sin it is, doesnt make you evil. You lose Grace from commiting sin, but you know that , and if you don’t repent of that sin and continue to make the choice to sin you soul becomes gray. Less Light and you cannot see the Truth anymore. You are educated and a Christian and you know that already. Without Grace your soul cannot exist in the Light. Of course you have to believe in Hell also.
        then I guess we can all classify ourselves as evil and doing the devil’s work.
        It is simple and the fools that allow the “gray” in are the ones who make it complicated. It is because they are looking for excuses to live their lives the way they want to and not really searching for the Truth.
        I, for one, don’t think it’s quite that simple.

        I don’t go to gay pride events or post about gay pride week on my fb page, but I do support their right to free expression and will fight to preserve it. I also reserve my right to not be part of it
        You also have chosen to be a part of it that is why you are posting this in the first place. So your stand will be your judgement and not from me. So since you have chosen you should make a wiser choice. IMO
        if I choose. Isn’t that the freedom that we’re all fighting for?
        The freedom I am fighting for isn’t quite the same as the one you are. Freedom should be free from evil as well. The problem with a lot of the educated people is they lose their priorities in life. God, Family and then Country and in that order. Withour God you will have nothing including the breakdown of the Family. Without the Family you have no Country worth a darn. It means nothing. I love the sinner! But at least I know who the enemy is and you obviously have smoke in your eyes. Your enemy is Satan and He has His own agenda. Since the Garden of Eden. Go figure!

        Like

        • chrissythehyphenated

          gfc, Combative comments may be fine over in the man cave, but here in the garden, we observe Southern Lady Tea Time rules. That means, say what you will about your own beliefs and opinions, but avoid personal assaults (e.g., “you obviously have smoke in your eyes”). Thank you.

          Like

        • Anyone who’s spent any time around me knows that I have very few (if any) gray areas. I have a very clear understanding of who I am and what I stand for AND that I don’t allow anyone to dictate to me my personal beliefs, including the church (hence my differentiation between their “policy” and my own). I have no problem standing up for and defending my personal convictions, one of which happens to be a strong belief in a person’s freedom and free will to express themself how they choose. I will not reverse my decision on this and the fact that you do not agree with it and/or understand why I believe what I do, does not make my beliefs “gray.” I didn’t become a Catholic because anyone else forced their beliefs on me. That was a decision I made entirely on my own and did not come about quickly or lightly. I’ve spent a lifetime carefully considering my beliefs and they are certainly not going to change overnight simply because you disagree.

          Furthermore, your assumptions about the Catholic church are incorrect. They welcome everyone with open arms, not just those who “repent.” I have lived all over this country and attended dozens of Catholic churches and have not once heard a priest deliver a homily ranting against homosexuality (as I have re:abortion and many other controversial issues). We also had an in-depth discussion regarding this very issue when I went through the RCIA proccess and there was no requirement of repentence to be welcomed by the church. They hope that you will repent for your sins and receive redemption, but it’s definitely not a requirement. Just like an alcoholic who goes out and repeatedly abuses alcohol, the church will continue to welcome that person and pray that they will make the right choices for themself. That is all.

          I don’t carry any hatred toward the sinner or the sin. It is my belief that hatred, regardless of how/where it’s directed is equal to any other sin and is indeed the triumph of evil over good. I choose to come from a place of love and I’m okay that you’re not okay with that. That’s MY prerogative. I won’t be bullied into changing my beliefs and I’m fairly certain that LGBTs won’t either. That approach is just too counterproductive for me and I don’t have the time to get wrapped up in emotions about it. So, I hope that I have removed the “smoke” from your eyes as to exactly where I stand regarding this issue. I believe in my right to believe what I choose and express myself freely, as well as their right to do the same.

          Like

  5. One of the reasons Reagan is the boogeyman for the homoculturals is his alleged opposition to AIDS research. I did one of my lightly-researched articles about this here. I’m sure you’ll be shocked to know that the narrative doesn’t fit the facts.

    Whatever you think of homosexuality morally or spiritually, just think about the folks who are “only” homosexual, and not like these creeps waving their IQ numbers in front of Reagan’s portrait, or the obscene paraders, or others whose perversions go far beyond mere homosexuality, saying they represent homosexuals. Must be like being a thinking black person listening to Sharpton, Jackson, and Farrahkhan!

    They should be flipping off Obama. By mere association, he’s surely set the cause of acceptance of homosexuality back 100 years! 😀

    Like

    • Truth has no agenda but that of itself. For those of you who seek the Truth it is out there. It does not have any excuses, has no “gray” or “smoke” to cloud your mind or eyes. The Catholic Church has very explicit and detailed ways in which to understadn and deal with all homosexuality issues and our misguided leaders or counselors that intend to spread God’s Love and Light. So if you are interested in how the Church should be dealing with all of this then read what follows. Pray for guidance so that the Holy Spirit may gyuide you and open your mind to His Will and not your own.

      CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH

      LETTER TO THE BISHOPS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
      ON THE PASTORAL CARE OF HOMOSEXUAL PERSONS

      1. The issue of homosexuality and the moral evaluation of homosexual acts have increasingly become a matter of public debate, even in Catholic circles. Since this debate often advances arguments and makes assertions inconsistent with the teaching of the Catholic Church, it is quite rightly a cause for concern to all engaged in the pastoral ministry, and this Congregation has judged it to be of sufficiently grave and widespread importance to address to the Bishops of the Catholic Church this Letter on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons.

      2. Naturally, an exhaustive treatment of this complex issue cannot be attempted here, but we will focus our reflection within the distinctive context of the Catholic moral perspective. It is a perspective which finds support in the more secure findings of the natural sciences, which have their own legitimate and proper methodology and field of inquiry.

      However, the Catholic moral viewpoint is founded on human reason illumined by faith and is consciously motivated by the desire to do the will of God our Father. The Church is thus in a position to learn from scientific discovery but also to transcend the horizons of science and to be confident that her more global vision does greater justice to the rich reality of the human person in his spiritual and physical dimensions, created by God and heir, by grace, to eternal life.

      It is within this context, then, that it can be clearly seen that the phenomenon of homosexuality, complex as it is, and with its many consequences for society and ecclesial life, is a proper focus for the Church’s pastoral care. It thus requires of her ministers attentive study, active concern and honest, theologically well-balanced counsel.

      3. Explicit treatment of the problem was given in this Congregation’s “Declaration on Certain Questions Concerning Sexual Ethics” of December 29, 1975. That document stressed the duty of trying to understand the homosexual condition and noted that culpability for homosexual acts should only be judged with prudence. At the same time the Congregation took note of the distinction commonly drawn between the homosexual condition or tendency and individual homosexual actions. These were described as deprived of their essential and indispensable finality, as being “intrinsically disordered”, and able in no case to be approved of (cf. n. 8, $4).

      In the discussion which followed the publication of the Declaration, however, an overly benign interpretation was given to the homosexual condition itself, some going so far as to call it neutral, or even good. Although the particular inclination of the homosexual person is not a sin, it is a more or less strong tendency ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil; and thus the inclination itself must be seen as an objective disorder.

      Therefore special concern and pastoral attention should be directed toward those who have this condition, lest they be led to believe that the living out of this orientation in homosexual activity is a morally acceptable option. It is not.

      4. An essential dimension of authentic pastoral care is the identification of causes of confusion regarding the Church’s teaching. One is a new exegesis of Sacred Scripture which claims variously that Scripture has nothing to say on the subject of homosexuality, or that it somehow tacitly approves of it, or that all of its moral injunctions are so culture-bound that they are no longer applicable to contemporary life. These views are gravely erroneous and call for particular attention here.

      5. It is quite true that the Biblical literature owes to the different epochs in which it was written a good deal of its varied patterns of thought and expression (Dei Verbum 12). The Church today addresses the Gospel to a world which differs in many ways from ancient days. But the world in which the New Testament was written was already quite diverse from the situation in which the Sacred Scriptures of the Hebrew People had been written or compiled, for example.

      What should be noticed is that, in the presence of such remarkable diversity, there is nevertheless a clear consistency within the Scriptures themselves on the moral issue of homosexual behaviour. The Church’s doctrine regarding this issue is thus based, not on isolated phrases for facile theological argument, but on the solid foundation of a constant Biblical testimony. The community of faith today, in unbroken continuity with the Jewish and Christian communities within which the ancient Scriptures were written, continues to be nourished by those same Scriptures and by the Spirit of Truth whose Word they are. It is likewise essential to recognize that the Scriptures are not properly understood when they are interpreted in a way which contradicts the Church’s living Tradition. To be correct, the interpretation of Scripture must be in substantial accord with that Tradition.

      The Vatican Council II in Dei Verbum 10, put it this way: “It is clear, therefore, that in the supremely wise arrangement of God, sacred Tradition, sacred Scripture, and the Magisterium of the Church are so connected and associated that one of them cannot stand without the others. Working together, each in its own way under the action of the one Holy Spirit, they all contribute effectively to the salvation of souls”. In that spirit we wish to outline briefly the Biblical teaching here.

      6. Providing a basic plan for understanding this entire discussion of homosexuality is the theology of creation we find in Genesis. God, in his infinite wisdom and love, brings into existence all of reality as a reflection of his goodness. He fashions mankind, male and female, in his own image and likeness. Human beings, therefore, are nothing less than the work of God himself; and in the complementarity of the sexes, they are called to reflect the inner unity of the Creator. They do this in a striking way in their cooperation with him in the transmission of life by a mutual donation of the self to the other.

      In Genesis 3, we find that this truth about persons being an image of God has been obscured by original sin. There inevitably follows a loss of awareness of the covenantal character of the union these persons had with God and with each other. The human body retains its “spousal significance” but this is now clouded by sin. Thus, in Genesis 19:1-11, the deterioration due to sin continues in the story of the men of Sodom. There can be no doubt of the moral judgement made there against homosexual relations. In Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13, in the course of describing the conditions necessary for belonging to the Chosen People, the author excludes from the People of God those who behave in a homosexual fashion.

      Against the background of this exposition of theocratic law, an eschatological perspective is developed by St. Paul when, in I Cor 6:9, he proposes the same doctrine and lists those who behave in a homosexual fashion among those who shall not enter the Kingdom of God.

      In Romans 1:18-32, still building on the moral traditions of his forebears, but in the new context of the confrontation between Christianity and the pagan society of his day, Paul uses homosexual behaviour as an example of the blindness which has overcome humankind. Instead of the original harmony between Creator and creatures, the acute distortion of idolatry has led to all kinds of moral excess. Paul is at a loss to find a clearer example of this disharmony than homosexual relations. Finally, 1 Tim. 1, in full continuity with the Biblical position, singles out those who spread wrong doctrine and in v. 10 explicitly names as sinners those who engage in homosexual acts.

      7. The Church, obedient to the Lord who founded her and gave to her the sacramental life, celebrates the divine plan of the loving and live-giving union of men and women in the sacrament of marriage. It is only in the marital relationship that the use of the sexual faculty can be morally good. A person engaging in homosexual behaviour therefore acts immorally.

      To chose someone of the same sex for one’s sexual activity is to annul the rich symbolism and meaning, not to mention the goals, of the Creator’s sexual design. Homosexual activity is not a complementary union, able to transmit life; and so it thwarts the call to a life of that form of self-giving which the Gospel says is the essence of Christian living. This does not mean that homosexual persons are not often generous and giving of themselves; but when they engage in homosexual activity they confirm within themselves a disordered sexual inclination which is essentially self-indulgent.

      As in every moral disorder, homosexual activity prevents one’s own fulfillment and happiness by acting contrary to the creative wisdom of God. The Church, in rejecting erroneous opinions regarding homosexuality, does not limit but rather defends personal freedom and dignity realistically and authentically understood.

      8. Thus, the Church’s teaching today is in organic continuity with the Scriptural perspective and with her own constant Tradition. Though today’s world is in many ways quite new, the Christian community senses the profound and lasting bonds which join us to those generations who have gone before us, “marked with the sign of faith”.

      Nevertheless, increasing numbers of people today, even within the Church, are bringing enormous pressure to bear on the Church to accept the homosexual condition as though it were not disordered and to condone homosexual activity. Those within the Church who argue in this fashion often have close ties with those with similar views outside it. These latter groups are guided by a vision opposed to the truth about the human person, which is fully disclosed in the mystery of Christ. They reflect, even if not entirely consciously, a materialistic ideology which denies the transcendent nature of the human person as well as the supernatural vocation of every individual.

      The Church’s ministers must ensure that homosexual persons in their care will not be misled by this point of view, so profoundly opposed to the teaching of the Church. But the risk is great and there are many who seek to create confusion regarding the Church’s position, and then to use that confusion to their own advantage.

      9. The movement within the Church, which takes the form of pressure groups of various names and sizes, attempts to give the impression that it represents all homosexual persons who are Catholics. As a matter of fact, its membership is by and large restricted to those who either ignore the teaching of the Church or seek somehow to undermine it. It brings together under the aegis of Catholicism homosexual persons who have no intention of abandoning their homosexual behaviour. One tactic used is to protest that any and all criticism of or reservations about homosexual people, their activity and lifestyle, are simply diverse forms of unjust discrimination.

      There is an effort in some countries to manipulate the Church by gaining the often well-intentioned support of her pastors with a view to changing civil-statutes and laws. This is done in order to conform to these pressure groups’ concept that homosexuality is at least a completely harmless, if not an entirely good, thing. Even when the practice of homosexuality may seriously threaten the lives and well-being of a large number of people, its advocates remain undeterred and refuse to consider the magnitude of the risks involved.

      The Church can never be so callous. It is true that her clear position cannot be revised by pressure from civil legislation or the trend of the moment. But she is really concerned about the many who are not represented by the pro-homosexual movement and about those who may have been tempted to believe its deceitful propaganda. She is also aware that the view that homosexual activity is equivalent to, or as acceptable as, the sexual expression of conjugal love has a direct impact on society’s understanding of the nature and rights of the family and puts them in jeopardy.

      10. It is deplorable that homosexual persons have been and are the object of violent malice in speech or in action. Such treatment deserves condemnation from the Church’s pastors wherever it occurs. It reveals a kind of disregard for others which endangers the most fundamental principles of a healthy society. The intrinsic dignity of each person must always be respected in word, in action and in law.

      But the proper reaction to crimes committed against homosexual persons should not be to claim that the homosexual condition is not disordered. When such a claim is made and when homosexual activity is consequently condoned, or when civil legislation is introduced to protect behavior to which no one has any conceivable right, neither the Church nor society at large should be surprised when other distorted notions and practices gain ground, and irrational and violent reactions increase.

      11. It has been argued that the homosexual orientation in certain cases is not the result of deliberate choice; and so the homosexual person would then have no choice but to behave in a homosexual fashion. Lacking freedom, such a person, even if engaged in homosexual activity, would not be culpable.

      Here, the Church’s wise moral tradition is necessary since it warns against generalizations in judging individual cases. In fact, circumstances may exist, or may have existed in the past, which would reduce or remove the culpability of the individual in a given instance; or other circumstances may increase it. What is at all costs to be avoided is the unfounded and demeaning assumption that the sexual behaviour of homosexual persons is always and totally compulsive and therefore inculpable. What is essential is that the fundamental liberty which characterizes the human person and gives him his dignity be recognized as belonging to the homosexual person as well. As in every conversion from evil, the abandonment of homosexual activity will require a profound collaboration of the individual with God’s liberating grace.

      12. What, then, are homosexual persons to do who seek to follow the Lord? Fundamentally, they are called to enact the will of God in their life by joining whatever sufferings and difficulties they experience in virtue of their condition to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross. That Cross, for the believer, is a fruitful sacrifice since from that death come life and redemption. While any call to carry the cross or to understand a Christian’s suffering in this way will predictably be met with bitter ridicule by some, it should be remembered that this is the way to eternal life for all who follow Christ.

      It is, in effect, none other than the teaching of Paul the Apostle to the Galatians when he says that the Spirit produces in the lives of the faithful “love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, trustfulness, gentleness and self-control” (5:22) and further (v. 24), “You cannot belong to Christ unless you crucify all self-indulgent passions and desires.”

      It is easily misunderstood, however, if it is merely seen as a pointless effort at self-denial. The Cross is a denial of self, but in service to the will of God himself who makes life come from death and empowers those who trust in him to practise virtue in place of vice.

      To celebrate the Paschal Mystery, it is necessary to let that Mystery become imprinted in the fabric of daily life. To refuse to sacrifice one’s own will in obedience to the will of the Lord is effectively to prevent salvation. Just as the Cross was central to the expression of God’s redemptive love for us in Jesus, so the conformity of the self-denial of homosexual men and women with the sacrifice of the Lord will constitute for them a source of self-giving which will save them from a way of life which constantly threatens to destroy them.

      Christians who are homosexual are called, as all of us are, to a chaste life. As they dedicate their lives to understanding the nature of God’s personal call to them, they will be able to celebrate the Sacrament of Penance more faithfully and receive the Lord’s grace so freely offered there in order to convert their lives more fully to his Way.

      13. We recognize, of course, that in great measure the clear and successful communication of the Church’s teaching to all the faithful, and to society at large, depends on the correct instruction and fidelity of her pastoral ministers. The Bishops have the particularly grave responsibility to see to it that their assistants in the ministry, above all the priests, are rightly informed and personally disposed to bring the teaching of the Church in its integrity to everyone.

      The characteristic concern and good will exhibited by many clergy and religious in their pastoral care for homosexual persons is admirable, and, we hope, will not diminish. Such devoted ministers should have the confidence that they are faithfully following the will of the Lord by encouraging the homosexual person to lead a chaste life and by affirming that person’s God-given dignity and worth.

      14. With this in mind, this Congregation wishes to ask the Bishops to be especially cautious of any programmes which may seek to pressure the Church to change her teaching, even while claiming not to do so. A careful examination of their public statements and the activities they promote reveals a studied ambiguity by which they attempt to mislead the pastors and the faithful. For example, they may present the teaching of the Magisterium, but only as if it were an optional source for the formation of one’s conscience. Its specific authority is not recognized. Some of these groups will use the word “Catholic” to describe either the organization or its intended members, yet they do not defend and promote the teaching of the Magisterium; indeed, they even openly attack it. While their members may claim a desire to conform their lives to the teaching of Jesus, in fact they abandon the teaching of his Church. This contradictory action should not have the support of the Bishops in any way.

      15. We encourage the Bishops, then, to provide pastoral care in full accord with the teaching of the Church for homosexual persons of their dioceses. No authentic pastoral programme will include organizations in which homosexual persons associate with each other without clearly stating that homosexual activity is immoral. A truly pastoral approach will appreciate the need for homosexual persons to avoid the near occasions of sin.

      We would heartily encourage programmes where these dangers are avoided. But we wish to make it clear that departure from the Church’s teaching, or silence about it, in an effort to provide pastoral care is neither caring nor pastoral. Only what is true can ultimately be pastoral. The neglect of the Church’s position prevents homosexual men and women from receiving the care they need and deserve.

      An authentic pastoral programme will assist homosexual persons at all levels of the spiritual life: through the sacraments, and in particular through the frequent and sincere use of the sacrament of Reconciliation, through prayer, witness, counsel and individual care. In such a way, the entire Christian community can come to recognize its own call to assist its brothers and sisters, without deluding them or isolating them.

      16. From this multi-faceted approach there are numerous advantages to be gained, not the least of which is the realization that a homosexual person, as every human being, deeply needs to be nourished at many different levels simultaneously.

      The human person, made in the image and likeness of God, can hardly be adequately described by a reductionist reference to his or her sexual orientation. Every one living on the face of the earth has personal problems and difficulties, but challenges to growth, strengths, talents and gifts as well. Today, the Church provides a badly needed context for the care of the human person when she refuses to consider the person as a “heterosexual” or a “homosexual” and insists that every person has a fundamental Identity: the creature of God, and by grace, his child and heir to eternal life.

      17. In bringing this entire matter to the Bishops’ attention, this Congregation wishes to support their efforts to assure that the teaching of the Lord and his Church on this important question be communicated fully to all the faithful.

      In light of the points made above, they should decide for their own dioceses the extent to which an intervention on their part is indicated. In addition, should they consider it helpful, further coordinated action at the level of their National Bishops’ Conference may be envisioned.

      In a particular way, we would ask the Bishops to support, with the means at their disposal, the development of appropriate forms of pastoral care for homosexual persons. These would include the assistance of the psychological, sociological and medical sciences, in full accord with the teaching of the Church.

      They are encouraged to call on the assistance of all Catholic theologians who, by teaching what the Church teaches, and by deepening their reflections on the true meaning of human sexuality and Christian marriage with the virtues it engenders, will make an important contribution in this particular area of pastoral care.

      The Bishops are asked to exercise special care in the selection of pastoral ministers so that by their own high degree of spiritual and personal maturity and by their fidelity to the Magisterium, they may be of real service to homosexual persons, promoting their health and well-being in the fullest sense. Such ministers will reject theological opinions which dissent from the teaching of the Church and which, therefore, cannot be used as guidelines for pastoral care.

      We encourage the Bishops to promote appropriate catechetical programmes based on the truth about human sexuality in its relationship to the family as taught by the Church. Such programmes should provide a good context within which to deal with the question of homosexuality.

      This catechesis would also assist those families of homosexual persons to deal with this problem which affects them so deeply.

      All support should be withdrawn from any organizations which seek to undermine the teaching of the Church, which are ambiguous about it, or which neglect it entirely. Such support, or even the semblance of such support, can be gravely misinterpreted. Special attention should be given to the practice of scheduling religious services and to the use of Church buildings by these groups, including the facilities of Catholic schools and colleges. To some, such permission to use Church property may seem only just and charitable; but in reality it is contradictory to the purpose for which these institutions were founded, it is misleading and often scandalous.

      In assessing proposed legislation, the Bishops should keep as their uppermost concern the responsibility to defend and promote family life.

      18. The Lord Jesus promised, “You shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free” (Jn. 8:32). Scripture bids us speak the truth in love (cf. Eph. 4:15). The God who is at once truth and love calls the Church to minister to every man, woman and child with the pastoral solicitude of our compassionate Lord. It is in this spirit that we have addressed this Letter to the Bishops of the Church, with the hope that it will be of some help as they care for those whose suffering can only be intensified by error and lightened by truth.

      (During an audience granted to the undersigned Prefect, His Holiness, Pope John Paul II, approved this Letter, adopted in an ordinary session of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and ordered it to be published.)

      Given at Rome, 1 October 1986.

      JOSEPH CARDINAL RATZINGER
      Prefect

      ALBERTO BOVONE
      Titular Archbishop of Caesarea in Numidia
      Secretary

      Joseph Ratzinger is our POPE today for those who do not know this.

      Like

      • I assume this was meant to be in response to me, since it deals directly with the Catholic church and her stance on homosexuality. I’ve read it in the past, and now I’ve read it again. I see nothing in here that contradicts anything that I’ve said. If anything, it supports my previous comment(s). I suspect that you are somehow reading what you think I am saying, rather than what is actually being said.

        If you care to read the scriptures cited in the letter (along with the context in which they are contained) you may also spot some of these gems (among others)…

        Leviticus 18:19 “You shall not approach a woman to have intercourse with her while she is unclean from menstruation.”

        Leviticus 20:9 “Anyone who curses his father or mother shall be put to death;”

        1 Timothy 1:5-7 “The aim of this instruction is love from a pure heart, a good conscience, and a sincere faith. Some people have deviated from these and turned to meaningless talk, wanting to be teachers of the law, but without understanding either what they are saying or what they assert with such assurance.”

        Romans 2:12 “All who sin outside the law will also perish without reference to it, and all who sin under the law will be judged in accordance with it.”

        Romans 2:19-21 “…and if you are confident that you are a guide for the blind and a light for those in darkness, that you are a trainer of the foolish and teacher of the simple, because in the law you have the formulation of knowledge and truth–then you who teach another, are you failing to teach yourself?”

        Like

  6. MR,
    This is not about you or your beliefs. The fruits of their (LGBT) labors is how one can know (not judge) them. What is written is very clear. How one decides to follow is their “right” as is their destination come judgement day. I am not here to convince you or any other. I only offer a “Truth” to those who are looking. I am here to love the sinner and hate the sin, because sin is my enemy. Temptation comes from evil and sin comes from the sinner. So all that exist that is evil is my enemy and I will expose it whenever I see it. It IS that simple.
    Homosexuallity is a great EVIL in our lives today, period! End of story. This is Truth and I a here to profess it.

    Like

  7. GP

    It is up to God to be the judge, not us.
    Someone’s gay lifestyle does not hurt me personally, except when they try to get in my face so I just do not think of this as a big issue to me, except for their insistence to redefine marriage.
    I do not think public displays of being overly affectionate or sexual is right in any case. If they had a decent rainbow parade, where one would not be embarrassed to bring children, that would be okay with me. But these parades seem to be a license for lewd behavior in public.
    Keep it in your own homes folks, not in the street. When you do, you really make it all look depraved and lose support.

    Like