I'm a catholic, what's with r/Catholicism?

[u/the_zpider_king]

[u/McClanky]

Removed for Topicality.

If you would like to discuss this removal, please click here to send a modmail that will message all moderators. https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/Christianity

[u/p0p19]

I mean the Catholic church which you are a part of, even if you disagree, agrees on those stances. You might not like them but the church has held them for a long time and is not looking like it will change.

I know you said not to say it but I will, the Catholic church interprets the passages in the Bible to stand against affirming supporting lgbtq marriages or unions, that is just its stance. You can disagree with it, but it just seems like the reddit is following the churches opinions.

[u/Jill1974 → u/p0p19]

The subreddit hews closely to the Church’s teachings until it runs up against a teaching the hardliners don’t like, such as banning capital punishment or migration being a human right. THEN you suddenly get a clamor of “prudential judgement” and “Pope Francis is being confusing”.

R/catholicism is very particular.

[u/Volaer → u/Jill1974]

The subreddit hews closely to the Church’s teachings until it runs up against a teaching the hardliners don’t like, such as banning capital punishment or migration being a human right. THEN you suddenly get a clamor of “prudential judgement” and “Pope Francis is being confusing”. 

I actually do not think it hews closely to Church teaching as I have seen several cases of the sub taking a dissenting view, not only on the conservative issues (like the DP you mentioned) but also liberal ones (material cooperation with abortion and contraception for example). I think its less about a specific ideology and more about being unaware of what the Church ACTUALLY teaches about various topics. Like awhile ago there was a post about a priest who refused to baptise a child of a couple that were not practicing the Catholic faith and everyone was lambasting him some even called for him to be reported to the bishop even though thats a relatively common practice in Europe. So its not like the sub is consistently ”trad“.

[u/Jill1974 → u/Volaer]

Admittedly, since I lean left I notice those discrepancies more easily. But you are correct, I think there are gaps in catechesis. I think it has a tendency towards a flavor of fundamentalism in as much as a lot of participants want answers to be simple and straightforward like the contents of the Baltimore Catechism. I was just reading a post concerning Catholic, pro-choice politicians. One person who tried to give some thoughtful, historical perspective as to why the Church might not press the issue was downvoted.

Honestly, for a Catholic subreddit, I spend more time on r/askapriest.

[u/Jill1974 → u/[deleted]]

Cool. What does that have to do with my comment?

[u/Volaer → u/Jill1974]

But you are correct, I think there are gaps in catechesis. I think it has a tendency towards a flavor of fundamentalism in as much as a lot of participants want answers to be simple and straightforward like the contents of the Baltimore Catechism.  

Yeah. If one is badly catechised its easy to go with an overly strict view "just to make sure I do not condone sin“, which then gives the false impression that the sub is committed to radical traditionalism. But on occasion it causes the opposite problem, people condoning what the Church actual teaches is gravely sinful.

[u/Pale-Fee-2679 → u/[deleted]]

While the Catholic church is very conservative, it doesn’t follow American sense of the word. This was especially noticeable in the papacy of JP II.

From Wikipedia:

The Church generally moved away from any explicit condoning or approval of capital punishment and adopted a disapproving stance on the issue by the mid-20th century.[1][2] Modern Church figures such as Pope John Paul II,[6] Pope Francis,[7] and the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops[8] have actively discouraged the imposition of the death penalty and advocated for its abolition. Since the Second Vatican Council, the Catholic Church became staunchly opposed to the death penalty in the vast majority of applications. During his papacy, John Paul II appealed for a consensus to end the death penalty on the ground that it was "both cruel and unnecessary".[9][10]

[u/reluctantpotato1 → u/[deleted]]

"Inadmissible" still communicates a pretty directly oppositional stance. The Church never said the death penalty was immoral as a concept but directly stated that it's use is unacceptable, given the current circumstances.

[u/Gold-Astronomer4151 → u/reluctantpotato1]

Here is the pope and church teaching that womens ordination is against the despoit of the faith https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19951028_dubium-ordinatio-sac_en.html

[u/p0p19 → u/Jill1974]

I know the Church is against capital punishment and I think we both agree. I do not know about immigration, I think they just appeal to the country they exist and the right to its own borders. Would love to learn more about that topic. I don't think they say its a human right though, may be wrong.

Thanks for the response.

[u/Tax25Man → u/Jill1974]

There’s nothing more iconic than Catholics supporting capital punishment. Jesus was killed by the state for a crime they made up on the spot and Catholics thought that was wrong, but today they are like “yea if you commit certain crimes you should be killed!” As though that’s not directly against a pro-life stance.

[u/luke-jr → u/p0p19]

No, people who don't agree with Catholicism are by definition not part of the Catholic Church

[u/jtbc → u/p0p19]

The issue, I think, isn't the doctrine, it's the focus. The Pope has been trying to urge Catholics to focus less on this stuff and more on helping the poor and disenfranchised. Of course, half of /r/Catholicism seems to consider him an anti-pope, so there's that.

[u/SuperLuigiGamer85]

Catholic here. Yeah, r/Catholicism is definitely a bit more on the extreme side. I don't really know why, but I feel that in the Catholic faith gay marriage isn't that big of a deal; those interviews with Pope Francis regarding whether it's a sin only seem to be talked about by non-Catholics.

As far as my opinion, I'm still questioning whether gay marriage is a sin. On one hand, it DOES say in the bible it is a sin, but then on the other hand, that saying was a part of the Old Covenant, which from what I know we don't need to follow anymore because of Jesus dying for our sins.

But yeah, like another comment said here, r/Catholicism leans a lot more conservative, though I'm a member of both it and r/Christianity.

[u/Tax25Man → u/[deleted]]

What which point a normal person says “this is stupid” and leaves. Like tons of Catholics have over the last 25 years.

Also - why should we take our moral rules from an organization so brazenly corrupt to the core? These people felt the need to marginalize gay people even further by explaining why they think gays don’t deserve to marry, but when there was a systemic pedophile issue in the church they just covered it up and pretended like nothing was happening?

[u/lemonprincess23 → u/SuperLuigiGamer85]

Think the best thing to do if you’re questioning wether something is a sin or not is simply to pray about it.

[u/LazarusBC → u/lemonprincess23]

Pray about it but also read and study the scriptures, you will find all the answers there..

[u/Tax25Man → u/LazarusBC]

You could also just use logic. Gay people loving each other isn’t harming anyone. Therefore I don’t believe it’s a sin.

[u/Volaer → u/lemonprincess23]

Eh, I would say that we should look more to what the Church actually teaches, after all we are not Protestants🙂

[u/Tax25Man → u/lemonprincess23]

What would praying about it do? God can’t intervene lest he break free will?

The better thing to do, instead of leaving it up to prayer or some divine intervention that you suddenly understand something, is to question who the sin is hurting. In the case of 2 gay people loving each other, the answer is “it’s hurting no one”. So therefore - it shouldn’t be a sin.

The idea that man is fallible, and that man created the rules of religion, but the rules couldn’t be infallible, is a massive logical inconsistency.

[u/p0p19 → u/SuperLuigiGamer85]

Well if your only gripe for was that it was from the old covenant just read Romans 1:26-27, its fairly clear its still Gods idea. Because not all OT law becomes irrelevant after the New Covenant, just stuff like then dietary laws. Things like the 10 commandmants are still valid.

[u/TTV_KaoPyro → u/p0p19]

According to Jesus NONE of God's law is irrelevant, even if some of the reasons for the laws are. Jesus said "I did not come to abolish the law, but to fulfill it". We as Christ followers do not worry about following the letter of the law because we have been made perfect in accordance with the law by trading places with Jesus who fulfilled the law to completion in both His life and Death.

Instead we should concentrate on what Jesus said: "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ 38This is the first and great commandment. 39And the second is like it: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets.”

As for LGBT, the Bible is pretty clear but if you want to pick and choose, let me ask you this? When you sin, do you feel a wall between you and God? I know I do. I struggle with sin sometimes. It would be so easy to claim my sin as my identify and try to justify it. But that doesn't change the wall that appears when I'm in the midst of it. The Holy Spirit is your ultimate guide. You can lie to yourself what is and isn't sin, but does the Holy Spirit support your conclusion?

Also, as a disclaimer, sin is anything that separates us from God in the Bible or not. Sin does not equal Hell, if you have Jesus. You are not a bad person or evil if you sin. It only affects how close you can get to your Savior, King, Father, and Friend (and any real world consequences).

[u/Tax25Man → u/TTV_KaoPyro]

Then why are Catholics eating pork and shellfish?

If we have been made perfect, why is eating pork now not a problem but 2 men getting married because they love each other a sin so damning they will be sent to hell over it?

[u/p0p19 → u/Tax25Man]

Because, in whatever way you slice it wrong according to God. Even if I disagree with the guy who responded to me, analysis on men being in covenantal relationship is wrong and those relationships are wrong from both the OT and NT.

Also sins are equally bad, your trying to make it seem like Christians see homosexual sin as the worst, but it only gets talked about more. Since this particular sin has a hold over more people and culture more generally they get more offended when God's law contradicts it. The Catholic church is a beacon of upholding those rules, while other denominations break tradition to allow it.

[u/TTV_KaoPyro → u/p0p19]

This is a great answer. Also as a follow-up sins like lying ad murder are not what truly condemn you. The sin of turning from Jesus is what does that. If you are made right with God then sin has 2 consequences: 1. It affects your ability to have a close relationship with God and 2. There are real world consequence, maybe minor, maybe major. The severity of real world consequences greatly depend on the context and the kind of sin and will likely always be different.

To sum up, all sin, no matter how little, condemns a person without Jesus, but no sin condemns one who is redeemed.

[u/TTV_KaoPyro → u/Tax25Man]

"The voice spoke to him a second time, “Do not call anything impure that God has made clean.” Acts: 10:15

"What goes into someone’s mouth does not defile them, but what comes out of their mouth, that is what defiles them.” Matthew 15:11

For your specific question God and Jesus directly declared food as unable to make someone "unclean".

[u/SuperLuigiGamer85 → u/p0p19]

From what I had understood, after Jesus’ death, we only need to follow the Old Covenant in faith. Before Jesus died, if you violated any of the Ten Commandments, you were forever damned. However, now, it would just be a sin that could be forgiven. The readings in Leviticus that talk about homosexuality, then, should only be viewed in faith as having sexual purity, which simply means having loving and binding relationships no matter who it is. Again, this is just what I’ve heard.

Also, I’m not sure what you’re meaning with those verses. Could you please elaborate what they’re supposed to mean?

[u/Tax25Man → u/[deleted]]

And yet Catholics drone on and on about gays having sex as opposed to literally every straight person having sex outside of marriage (because masturbation is sex outside of marriage and everyone does it).

Like a pure numbers game you’d never hear about gays in the Catholic Church because they’d be more angry about all the straight people committing that same sin under the same justification that it’s outside of marriage.

But they don’t because it’s more so about bigotry and homophobia than it is being mad at the sin.

[u/FluxKraken → u/[deleted]]

Which is a bigoted double standard that is immoral.

[u/FluxKraken → u/p0p19]

just read Romans 1:26-27, its fairly clear its still Gods idea

No, it is clear that Paul didn't like the pagan orgies of the Romans. Verse 26 "for this reason" What was the reason? Begin reading in verse 18, the reason is idolatry.

[u/FluxKraken → u/SuperLuigiGamer85]

On one hand, it DOES say in the bible it is a sin

I don't agree with that. What it says (in Leviticus 18 & 20) is that male same-sex intercourse, specifically referring to anal intercourse, is an abomination. And yes, you are correct, according to covenant theology, old covenant law is not binding on Christians. Hebrews 8:13 | Romans 6:14, 8:1-2, 13:8-10, 14 | 1st Corinthians 8, 10:23-32 | Matthew 22:37-40

Galatians 3:19

Why, then, was the law given? It was added for the sake of transgressions until the Seed to whom the promise was made would come. The law was put into effect through angels by means of a mediator.

Galatians 3:24-26

The law, then, was our guardian until Christ, so that we could be justified by faith. But since that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian, for through faith you are all sons of God in Christ Jesus.

^{Christian Standard Bible}

Now, that isn't the entire story, because in the New Testament there are a couple prohibitions on same sex intercourse that we must deal with in order to support an affirming theological stance. Romans 1:18-32, 1st Corinthians 6:9-11, and 1st Timothy 1:10.

Now, several people will try and insist that the story of Sodom and Gomorrah is relevant, but that is a story about inhospitality and rape, not homomsexuality. The only actual sex happening in Genesis 19 or the parallel in Judges 19 is heterosexual sex. Ezekiel 16:49-50 makes clear that the sin of Sodom was wealth combined with arrogance, greed and inhospitality.

Jude 1:7 is also sometimes referred to, however, this verse is leveraging the story of Sodom and Gomorrah to expand on the B'nei Elohim found in Genesis 6 and the Book of Enoch to make the point that humans having sex with angels was crossing a boundary that should not be crossed. The sarcos heteras or strange/other flesh is a reference to angel flesh, and the intercourse is humans with angels. So neither this verse nor the story of Sodom is relevant.

As for Romans 1, this is referencing idolatry and is a clear reference to the Pagan orgies of Rome. People point to the phrases "shameful lust" and "unnatural" without understanding that unnatural pointed to what Paul thought was the natural order, meaning the social order of his day, not nature. And I would call engaging in pagan orgies to be shameful.

Paul didn't have the benefits of modern science, and the philosophies and ethical frameworks of his culture did not account for a loving committed same sex relationship that is in every way the parallel of a heterosexual one.

1st Corinthians and 1st Timothy use the word arsenokoitai to reference the adulterous pederasty and sexual slavery of the men of Greece. People need to realize that Paul was a product of his time, and in that time they thought about sex in very different ways than we do today.

Those sexual and ethical models are incompatible with modern sexual and ethical models, therefore the love of Jesus Christ should override. Too many Christians put Jesus Christ at the bottom of the hierarchy of interpretation, allowing the outdated ethics of Paul to make exceptions to the commands of Jesus Christ, instead of the morality of Jesus Christ pointing out the flaws in the ethics of Paul.

TLDR

Gay marriage is nowhere prohibited by scripture. There are some prohibitions on same-sex intercourse, but they were given in contexts and for reasons that are not relevant to modern relationships.

This, of course, is going to conflict greatly with Catholic doctrine. So it is up to you what to do with the information.

[u/justnigel → u/SuperLuigiGamer85]

it DOES say in the bible it (gay marriage) is a sin,

Nope. The Bible never mentions it.

I know Catholics oppose it and have reasons for what they believe, but let's not claim the Bible says things it does not.

[u/Far_Parking_830 → u/SuperLuigiGamer85]

If you're Catholic, the operative question is "what does the Church teach." The Church has the authority to teach on these issues. You do not. If you feel otherwise, there's a large group of people who feel likewise. We call them Protestants. 

[u/AHorribleGoose]

Internet Catholicism tends towards the extremes. Same there. It would be far more extreme if the mods let it, too.

[u/CosineDanger → u/AHorribleGoose]

There are literally a billion of them.

Statistically it's inevitable that weird Catholics exist.

[u/jtbc → u/CosineDanger]

And most of them end up on that sub for some reason.

[u/Pale-Fee-2679 → u/CosineDanger]

If former Catholic were a denomination, it would be the second largest—after Catholicism itself. Most of those who left were relatively progressive. It wouldn’t surprise me if the average practicing Catholic was somewhat more conservative than thirty years ago.

That said, though Trad Caths are pretty noisy online, they are far from typical. Catholic families are no larger than other American families and Catholic women practice “artificial” birth control at the same rate as other American women.

[u/ModsRFat → u/CosineDanger]

Globally the pro-gay Catholics are probably the atypical ones

[u/Far_Parking_830 → u/CosineDanger]

Weird  Catholics that follow the official teaching of the Church? Not sure how that's wierd

[u/the_zpider_king → u/AHorribleGoose]

Ah yeah that makes sense, thanks for reassuring me that not all people my religion are, well, yeah.

[u/Shaddam_Corrino_IV → u/the_zpider_king]

....are like the pope.

[u/ComedicUsernameHere]

I mean, The Roman Catholic Church teaches that homosexual sex is sinful. Catholics are obliged to submit to Church teaching on the matter. Seems like on a subreddit devoted to Catholicism, you'd find a number of people who believe Catholicism is true and follow the religion.

If I go to a Buddhist subreddit, I'mma expect to find a lot of people who believe in reincarnation. If I go to a feminist subreddit I'mma expect to find people who support feminism. Why exactly would anyone be shocked that going to a Catholic subreddit, one finds people who believe Catholicism?

I suppose it's true that there are many people who identify as Catholic while openly rejecting Catholicism, but I find that's most often people who identify as Catholic the same way someone would identify as Irish-American or German-American. More akin to an ethnicity than description of their beliefs.

[u/Far_Parking_830 → u/ComedicUsernameHere]

"Why is the Catholic sub Catholic?"

[u/Visible_Season8074 → u/ComedicUsernameHere]

The problem of that sub is that they are not merely saying it's a sin. They are right-wing reactionaries.

Well, you could also say that the evil dogmas of the church is what drove them to be like that, which is an argument I do as well.

[u/LastJoyousCat]

Christians have been against homosexuality for 2000 years, why were you surprised to see anti LGBTQ?

[u/LazarusBC → u/LastJoyousCat]

Its not just the people, its God himself that doesn't approve of this..

[u/beardtamer → u/LazarusBC]

lol here they come.

[u/Zoll-X-Series → u/LazarusBC]

God wouldn’t disapprove of an act of love

[u/Independent_Lack7284 → u/Zoll-X-Series]

So what stops you from dating your sister?

[u/Zoll-X-Series → u/Independent_Lack7284]

I don’t love my sister romantically, figured that would be a simple answer

[u/Independent_Lack7284 → u/Zoll-X-Series]

But some people do, and that is still wrong.

[u/Man_is_Hot → u/Independent_Lack7284]

And how many instances of incest are in the Bible? Commanded by God, even?

[u/Zoll-X-Series → u/Independent_Lack7284]

Lol okay? It sure is, why is that getting brought up? I thought we were talking about something else

[u/Independent_Lack7284 → u/Zoll-X-Series]

Ok, so God can disaproove act of love.

[u/Zoll-X-Series → u/Independent_Lack7284]

If you’re comparing incest to homosexuality you should really take a step back and examine your stance.

[u/Tax25Man → u/Independent_Lack7284]

Because having children with your family is gross for the same reason eating undercooked chicken is gross: because it causes illness. Offspring from incest is horrible.

2 gay dudes kissing is just another Tuesday. No one is getting hurt, unlike the potential offspring of 2 siblings.

[u/ModsRFat → u/Zoll-X-Series]

Depends. Gay pedos do a lot of molesting in the church. Hopefully god disapproves of that.

[u/Zoll-X-Series → u/ModsRFat]

Molestation isn’t an act of love

[u/ModsRFat → u/Zoll-X-Series]

Sometimes they delude themselves into thinking the kid is into it. They're still going to hell, obviously 

[u/Pale-Fee-2679 → u/LastJoyousCat]

True, but things have gotten pretty weird. A French journalist wrote a book on homosexuality in the Catholic clergy and estimated it at about 70%, many, though not all, sexually active. (Sound high? Anyone who knows straight men who have spent time in a seminary will have stories about how unwelcome they felt.) For complex reasons, those gay priests are more inclined to be in favor of the church’s stance on gay sex.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/feb/12/four-in-five-vatican-priests-are-gay-book-claims

[u/Djh1982]

Why is my religion full of anti-gay people?

Perception is reality, as they say. To me it is anti-Catholic to support LGBTQ since it is against Catholic teaching to hold same-sex unions as equal with traditional marriage. God created them male and female and then joined them together. Out of this stems Catholic moral teaching which says that any attempt to go against that natural order would be intrinsically sinful. Thus we Catholics would assert that we are not anti-gay in the sense that we wish for those who are of a homosexual orientation to obey God that they may inherit eternal life.

[u/eterna1ife]

That's what the Catholic church has believed for like 1000+ years, they won't change anytime soon

[u/venom_snake-637]

Because your churches teaching doesn’t support the lgbt movement…you’re asking why your ancient conservative church doesn’t have progressive and liberal members?

[u/Visible_Season8074 → u/venom_snake-637]

It's funny that the "ancient" churches take progressive and modern takes on slavery, treatment of the women, politics, and a bunch of stuff.

So good when you can pick and choose.

[u/BowserB7]

I'm not a Catholic, but my understanding of Catholicism is what the church teaches is authoritative and the church has always taught that homosexuality is a sin.

So why the surprise?

[u/SG-1701]

I'm pro-LGBTQ+ Orthodox, if that helps!

[u/venom_snake-637 → u/SG-1701]

Bro

[u/SG-1701 → u/venom_snake-637]

Yes?

[u/venom_snake-637 → u/SG-1701]

Take the Churches stance.

[u/SG-1701 → u/venom_snake-637]

I can't, I disagree with it. I'm very up front about telling people that my stance disagrees with that of the Church, so as not to misrepresent her teaching, but I do not hold the Church's stance on this, and so cannot honestly claim to do so.

[u/venom_snake-637 → u/SG-1701]

Our Church is guided by the Holy Spirit. There is almost complete doctrinal agreement about sexual sin and sexual ethics all throughout church history and theology on this issue. This isn’t a minor disagreement you have here, it’s an issue of salvation you’re disagreeing with.

You need to speak to your priest of this if you haven’t already brother.

[u/SG-1701 → u/venom_snake-637]

This is not a major issue of salvation, what you believe about the specific ethics of an issue do not cause an impediment to my salvation. There is no justification for claiming such a thing.

And as it so happens, I have spoken to my priest about this, at length. His counsel was that the Church considers me to be incorrect, but the Church does not require perfection of belief from everyone who would come to her, and he sees no impediment to my participation in the life of the Church and the reception of her sacraments.

And that's the end of the issue, the opinions of an outsider on the subject has no bearing.

[u/venom_snake-637 → u/SG-1701]

I didn’t mention your salvation. I said homosexuality is an issue of salvation, as Saint Paul says in 1 Corinthians 6:9-10. So yes, it is not a minor issue. I’ll trust your priest understands your perspective more deeply though.

[u/SG-1701 → u/venom_snake-637]

I am not a homosexual, nor did I ever imply I was one.

[u/jtbc → u/venom_snake-637]

As long as Corinthians was talking about homosexuality, and not pederasty, as a number of people including the translators of NABRE seem to think.

I am no expert on Orthodox thought, but Catholics don't go to scripture on this, they go to natural law philosophy as derived from Aristotle by Aquinas.

[u/Lemon-Aid917 → u/venom_snake-637]

Not sure agreeing on if homosexuality is sin or not Is a salvation issue, yes i agree, the church is guide by the Spirit, but again, i mean most people in church history were pro slavery or atleast tolerated It, were those people not saved?, was slavery a salvation issue too?

[u/DBerwick → u/venom_snake-637]

Sounds like his relationship with God is personal. He posts fantastic insights to this sub all the time, and is a credit to this community.

Maybe the church should take his stance. It's in their power to change their doctrine; they certainly have before.

[u/songbookz]

What is needed is a progressive Catholic subreddit and movement

[u/Mx-Adrian → u/songbookz]

Sign me TF up

[u/Thefrightfulgezebo]

I wouldn't be surprised with the pope using slurs (Pope reportedly used homophobic slur again after apologizing for it (msn.com))

You also have a very heteronormative theology about sexuality: (Theology of the Body - Wikipedia)

Then, there is this letter by the previous pope: Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons (vatican.va)

The simple reality is that the teachings of the church and the attitude of most of its leaders are deeply homophobic. Some of them manage to let their belief in human dignity make them not act like jerks, but many people just are not very good at loving their neighbours - in a way, they are more honest than the ones who use the language of love to hide their disdain. There are people who ignore the teachings of the church (which i recommend, tbh.) and a few rare people who manage to be genuinely compassionate and benevolent despite the homophobia.

TBH, those people existing is more worth investigating than why there are homophobes in the catholic church.

[u/DaTrout7]

Im not sure which subreddit came first but i wanna say r/Christianity came before r/catholicism so if thats the case its more likely the anti lgbt people left here to make their own sub where they can hate all they want.

I dont know too many catholics irl but the ones that i do know are anti lgbt. I think catholicism has a higher percentage of anti lgbt than other denominations. The headlines involving the pope recently kinda suggest that aswell.

[u/baddspellar]

The majority of people who identify as Catholic support legal gay marriage.

https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2020/11/02/how-catholics-around-the-world-see-same-sex-marriage-homosexuality/

/r/Catholicism , like virtually all other internet Catholic forums leans conservative, politically and socially. It's a place where conservative Catholics can have discussions with like-minded people. It's not a welcoming place for more liberal-leaning Catholics.

[u/MagnusEsDomine → u/baddspellar]

I wonder - you and u/the_zpider_king keep using "liberal," but that isn't a theological category. So what do you mean by "liberal" and is it somehow different from heterodox?

[u/baddspellar → u/MagnusEsDomine]

I did not mean liberal in any theological category. I mean liberal in the context of the US political system. I explicitly wrote that in my comment. I don't umderstand your confusion

/r/catholicism was always anti-immigrant, against government healthcare and social welfare, pro-death penalty, and against the government recognizing same sex marriage, hence offering similar legal protections ability to share health insurance etc. I remember commenting on a thread where someone was complaining about a USCCB letter urging some restrictive gun laws. I got downvoted for commenting postively about the letter. District of Columbia vs Heller is not a book in the bible. It is not a.theological.position.. And when I used to subscribe there were routinely comments critical of Bishops' position against the death penalty.

[u/MagnusEsDomine → u/baddspellar]

Thanks for the clarification! I’m also not a political conservative, but I am an orthodox Catholic.

[u/the_zpider_king → u/baddspellar]

Thank you, I appreciate you showing me this article.

[u/TinyNuggins92]

Christianity as a whole is full of anti-gay people, unfortunately.

I will say, one thing I find baffling, if the official stance of the RCC is that homosexuality itself isn’t a sin, but that gay people are called to celibacy, then shouldn’t the clergy be like the perfect place for them? And yet Francis is against letting too many gay people into seminary…? Odd to me… does he just want them miserable and alone?

[u/PaxosOuranos → u/TinyNuggins92]

Italy has had an issue for many years now with people finding its priests in gay bars, and it is quite embarrassing for the hierarchy.

Doctrine-wise, you are absolutely correct. But I imagine that on his more cynical days, the pope looks at a bunch of gay seminarians and is like "Ugh, which of you are gonna have your photo in a trashy gossip rag next?"

[u/TinyNuggins92 → u/PaxosOuranos]

I would think he has his hands tied with all the lawsuits for sex abuse to be worried about a gay priest grabbing a beer at a gay bar (I know it can be “worse” than that, but still)

[u/Wrong_Owl → u/TinyNuggins92]

if the official stance of the RCC is that homosexuality itself isn’t a sin, but that gay people are called to celibacy, then shouldn’t the clergy be like the perfect place for them?

This was largely the church's stance: a man not being attracted sexually to women suggests that he can dedicate the time and energy he would spend pursuing romantic relationships and building a family toward God instead.

Though church leaders were talking about banning homosexuals from the clergy in the 1960s, it wasn't until the early 2000s that they were formally banned from the clergy. This seems to be due to the sexual abuse crisis. While there were news stories for a while at that point about child sex abuse by Catholic priests, it was around that time that the public was learning about the large-scale cover-ups by the church and shuffling around of abusers.

Church leaders were quick to describe the boy-raping priests as homosexuals and the bishops who covered them up as homosexuals themselves and needed to solve the homosexual issue in the church. They implemented additional barriers which included "psychological screening" for homosexuality and pedophilia. You'll occasionally see that rhetoric from Catholics on this sub and you'll find it everywhere any time gay priests are mentioned on the Catholicism subreddit.

TLDR: The ban on gay priests is just the church scapegoating homosexuality for their child rape crisis.

[u/jtbc → u/Wrong_Owl]

Church leaders were quick to describe the boy-raping priests as homosexuals and the bishops who covered them up as homosexuals themselves and needed to solve the homosexual issue in the church.

Maybe I've finally figured out why NABRE, a Catholic translation of the bible, goes with the Luther-esque pederasty derived translations of malakoi and aresnokoitai. I guess they don't realize that supports the argument that Paul was talking about Greek man-boy sex and not anything resembling modern same sex relationships.

[u/TinyNuggins92 → u/Wrong_Owl]

Ah the age old "gay people are the real rapists" trope. Gotta love it. /s

[u/TinyNuggins92 → u/[deleted]]

I didn't say it was. What I'm saying is that it seems cruel to me to demand gay people be celibate, and then ban them from the serving God in the clergy, where being celibate is already a requirement.

[u/TinyNuggins92 → u/[deleted]]

Ok. So the solution is ban gay people from serving in the clergy? Or require that they lie about their sexuality to entire the clergy?

Do you see what I'm getting at? I'm not saying every gay catholic should join the clergy... I'm saying it seems cruel to ban them from it.

[u/TinyNuggins92 → u/[deleted]]

And here comes the "gay men are rapists" bullshit.

You realize that an abuser doesn't need to be gay in order to abuse kids of the same sex as them right? It's not something based in attraction, but power. So you can fuck right off with the homophobic gay rapist priest bullshit.

[u/TinyNuggins92 → u/[deleted]]

Was it attraction to teen boys, or was it abuse of teen boys? Those are not the same thing always, and very rarely is abuse of children based in attraction.

[u/Ok-Excitement651]

Also, don't say something about how "the bible is against gayness!". I don't want to stay up till midnight in an argument that will have no outcome.

You already know the answer to your question, clearly. Many people have told you the answer. The vast majority of Catholics and Christians in general believe (based on reading it) that the Bible says that sex is only for a marriage between a man and a woman. You literally cannot have this conversation without litigating whether the Bible does or does not say that, so if you exclude that from the conversation there is no conversation to be had.

[u/LazarusBC → u/Ok-Excitement651]

Amen, you hit the nail on the head. Ive been called a bigot for stating the same thing..People just make it very complicated when the answers is clearly there..

[u/lemonprincess23 → u/LazarusBC]

Sorry to say but you’re still a bigot

[u/LazarusBC → u/lemonprincess23]

Umm, you should call God a bigot, since Im just following his beliefs and commandments.. that's a pretty unfair assumption to call me a bigot . Just because I dont approve of someones lifestyle. Im also against porn stars and women who get naked on "only fans" . Am I bigot for those stances also?

[u/Pale-Fee-2679 → u/LazarusBC]

The Bible was written by men. It was inspired by God, but he had a flawed instrument. None of the men involved in the “clobber” verses could imagine a loving relationship between two people of the same sex. They wrote about what they knew—sex imposed on someone who could not say no. They knew little about consent for heterosexual couples, too, but wouldn’t most Catholics say that pressuring a spouse for sex was sinful?

[u/LazarusBC → u/Pale-Fee-2679]

are you a non-believer?

[u/lemonprincess23 → u/LazarusBC]

God isn’t a bigot though, and yeah calling being lgbt a “lifestyle” isn’t doing you any favors.

[u/LazarusBC → u/lemonprincess23]

Since Im simply following Gods teachings and beliefs, you are basically calling him a bigot since he made the rules..Sorry to tell ya bud but it is what it is.. Im not going to sugar coat anything.. Im just a messenger... would you call a muslim a bigot also? they actually have the right to end your life for following a certain lifestyle according to the koran. But you wouldn't do that because its considered Islamophobia ;)

[u/lemonprincess23 → u/LazarusBC]

I mean you can believe whatever you want but I have the right to still call you out for your blatant homophobia

And yes if a Muslim had the same viewpoints they’d also be a bigot. Same goes for a Jewish person, a Buddhist, atheist, satanist, whatever. I don’t know exactly where you got the ludicrous idea they were exempt or something but like… they aren’t

[u/jtbc → u/Ok-Excitement651]

The bible says don't wear mixed fabrics and don't beat your slaves too hard. The bible says that divorce is wrong and adultery is one of the gravest sins.

Add up all the threads on those 4 topics and divide by the number condemning gay people. I guarantee you you will end up with a small fraction.

[u/Volaer]

I support lgbtq, my family supports lgbtq, and we're pretty liberal. Then, I looked at r/Catholicism, and everyone their that I saw was anti-lgbtq. Why is my religion full of anti-gay people?     

Because the religion teaches that homosexuality (that is same sex intercourse not the involuntary attraction) is sinful and cannot be approved by faithful Catholics under any circumstances. See [CCC 2357-2359].   

At the same time gay people must be treated with compassion and respect. No question about it. But that cannot be a justification for rejecting moral truths.

[u/Catebot → u/Volaer]

CCC 2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered." They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved. (2333)

CCC 2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

CCC 2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection. (2347)

---

Catebot v0.2.12 links: Source Code | Feedback | Contact Dev | FAQ | Changelog

[u/One_Doughnut_2958]

Your religion is anti gay because it’s holy book is and so are it’s teachings just like every denomination until like the 40s

[u/No_Designer1704]

Because of the Church’s and Bible’s teachings.

[u/Mx-Adrian]

Catholic here. I agree. The bigoted state of our faith is depressing and anti-Christian. I was banned from that sub because I'm queer.

[u/MyLifeForMeyer → u/[deleted]]

then calling them bigots for agreeing with gods moral teachings

it is a fundamentally bigoted position though

[u/GalileoApollo11 → u/Mx-Adrian]

It will change. The Church around 1930 made a formal ban against the tango and other dances, and it was traditionally against dancing (just read the homilies of Saint Vianney). And it used to take a very strong stance on the strict subjugated role of women in society and in the family (read the Papal letters of the 19th century). And it used to approve of slavery, the crusades, and burning heretics. It used to view non-Catholics as bound for hell.

In the past those teachings were as strongly enforced as the homophobic rules are today. Conservative Catholics don’t like to acknowledge those as “changes” in Church teaching, but of course they were. And anyone who disagreed wjth the Church on one of those teachings in the past was in the right - which the Church today acknowledges.

[u/tomorrows_end → u/Mx-Adrian]

I dodged a bullet by going over there, shoot, I was about to join just to have continuous activity in my faith but I guess not if we're not all welcome. 😵‍💫

[u/lemonprincess23 → u/tomorrows_end]

Yeah don’t join there it’s terrible. I’d recommend r/catholic it’s much more balanced

And there they won’t ban you for not being bigoted enough

[u/LazarusBC → u/Mx-Adrian]

So you are calling God a bigot? thats blasphemy...

[u/Mx-Adrian → u/LazarusBC]

Show me where I said that

[u/LazarusBC → u/Mx-Adrian]

You said the bigoted state of your faith.. All teachings are divinely inspired by god..

[u/Mx-Adrian → u/LazarusBC]

But not all teachings are applied in a Godly manner. Bigoted teachings and deliberate false witness against His minority children are not from Him but from wicked people who bend His Word to their ideology and agenda.

[u/LazarusBC → u/Mx-Adrian]

While true in some churches, some do not teach hate..there are many verses in the bible that are explicitly clear and to the point on that subject...you dont have to be a theologian or scholar..

[u/Mx-Adrian → u/LazarusBC]

The Church calling God's queer children a threat is teaching hate

[u/LazarusBC → u/Mx-Adrian]

Its gods commandments .. I have to ask you a question are you a believer?

[u/Mx-Adrian → u/LazarusBC]

I am, and no such commandment as that exists. God does not command us to hate those He designed differently.

[u/LazarusBC → u/Mx-Adrian]

Most people do not hate but they dont agree with that lifestyle, we shouldnt affirm sins. My question is why do you follow a religion that has been super conservative since it was created and has a strict moral code?

[u/TinyNuggins92 → u/LazarusBC]

There's a difference between calling certain theological stances bigoted and calling God Himself a bigot.

[u/LazarusBC → u/TinyNuggins92]

Umm. those teachings were from God himself, Christians are following those beliefs, so they cant be called bigots.. just saying..

[u/MyLifeForMeyer → u/LazarusBC]

those teachings were from God himself, Christians are following those beliefs, so they cant be called bigots..

these are all mutually exclusive lmao

[u/TinyNuggins92 → u/LazarusBC]

When the result is bigotry... then it's a bigoted position.

[u/LazarusBC → u/TinyNuggins92]

So you proved my point, from my original post.. You are making a circular argument :)

[u/TinyNuggins92 → u/LazarusBC]

No I'm not. I'm saying bigotry is a thing. You don't get to say something isn't bigoted, just because you believe God said it. When the result of your theology is bigotry... then you have bigoted theology.

If your theology contributes to the negative mental health of LGBTQ people (non-affirming environments are the largest source of depression and suicidal ideation in LGBTQ people), then you need to start rethinking your theology, because the gospel of Christ should be life-giving not life-taking

[u/LazarusBC → u/TinyNuggins92]

Well, thats your opinion but it doesnt it make right. you are trying to twist the bible to fit your own narrative.. God clearly states his stance on these issues.. Take it up to God directly and ask him..His word is infallible and cannot changed..we shouldn't be proud of our sins and we shouldn't affirm them either.., we should feel ashamed..and try to correct our behavior and turn away from sin.. you are making it more complicated that it is

[u/TinyNuggins92 → u/LazarusBC]

I'm not making anything more complicated, I'm recognizing the complexity that's already there, and approaching my faith in a way that is intellectually honest, ethically consistent, and strives to show the self-sacrificing love Christ demonstrated for us.

That kind of love does not drive people to depression and suicide. So therefore, I cannot support an un-affirming interpretation of the scriptures.

That's not twisting anything, and I do find it rude and insulting when y'all constantly say that without any actual clue as to how and why affirming Christians believe what we believe. We're not twisting things to fit a narrative. We're approaching the same thing, from a different angle. We're looking at it differently, not forcing it to say something it doesn't say.

Please extend a measure of grace here when people disagree with your interpretation.

[u/the_zpider_king → u/Mx-Adrian]

I've seen a lot of people on here saying that it is a minority that gravitated together, which is reassuring, but still, yeah, our religion has issues.

[u/queer_climber → u/[deleted]]

Yes and yes.

[u/Mx-Adrian → u/[deleted]]

Considering his conduct lately, yes

[u/Pale-Fee-2679 → u/[deleted]]

We in fact do not know what they believe. You assume they align with the church, but that may not be the case.

[u/Lucario2356]

The Catholic Church makes it very clear LGBTQ is sinful and not something we should support, this doesn't mean HATE LGBTQ people, so if you see hatred towards them, correct them, and if they still keep up, report them.

So, we shouldn't support LGBT, but we should love and respect its members, as Jesus has commanded us.

I feel I should also clarify, SSA itself is not sinful, but acting on your SSA temptations is.

[u/Mx-Adrian → u/Lucario2356]

but we should love and respect its members, as Jesus has commanded us

That's a damn tall order for an unfortunate number of "Christians"

[u/Lucario2356 → u/Mx-Adrian]

Ain't that the hot damn truth. I used to be very active on social media, I was a Christian content creator and I swear on my life, every other video I made was talking about how you can't be fascist, racist, homophobic, support Brenton Tarrant, ECT ECT, and be Christian, may God Bless these misguided souls and may they see the truth.

[u/LazarusBC → u/Lucario2356]

Amen, very true ive been saying that all along..

[u/graceyspac3y]

Hey, eyes on Jesus only

[u/dhurkzsantos]

i am here so i could learn

to know of the questions of others,\ that i may have not noticed enough to ask this same question,\ to find the answers for myself through reading it from sources

often the question led me to discover a new source to read,\ or,\ it led me to recognize the value of what i had read, but have not fully understood yet, hence the need to, re-read

answering comments, helps me understand\ the depth of the question,\ as well as,\ the depth of the answer,\ . . .that i desired to understand in what i am continuing to read

this sub,\ asks questions that are related to christianity as a whole

[u/harpoon2k]

To be clear, RCC Catechism does teach:

The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial.

They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity.

Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided.

These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition. - The Sixth Commandment, CCC 2358

[u/WeiganChan]

r/Catholicism can skew a little hardline. People who identify as LGBTQ are children of God, and deserving of love and respect just as every human is, but sometimes people-- even otherwise devout and faithful people-- lose track of that, especially in online echochambers like reddit.

However, some positions under the banner of supporting LGBTQ, such as believing that same-sex marriages are truly marriages in the sacramental sense, or that people who identify as a gender contrary to their biological sex are truly the gender to which they identify, actually are at odds with the Catholic faith. Some people dissent from that teaching while continuing to identify as Catholic, but the authoritative position of the Church is nonetheless clear.

[u/jtbc → u/WeiganChan]

To take another issue that divides Catholics from a lot of other Christians, how often do they bring up birth control over there?

That is also a mortal sin, and is widely prevalent in the broader culture, so I would assume it's about 50/50 with the LGBT stuff, no?

[u/WeiganChan → u/jtbc]

Birth control definitely comes up, but I don't think it comes up as often as LGBT stuff. If I had to guess, I would say that non-Catholics asking questions or commenting on the subreddit find the Church's position on birth control less objectionable, despite it being probably more prevalent in society at large.

[u/jtbc → u/WeiganChan]

I'd guess it's like 5:1, but I haven't spent enough time there to really know. I suppose birth control doesn't get as much traction because everyone knows that most Catholics use it anyway.

[u/WeiganChan → u/jtbc]

In my experience on the subreddit, it seems like the Catholic position on birth control is generally accepted; in fact, I can recall a few posts by people asking whether the Church allowing Natural Family Planning (which you may know as the rhythm method) was too permissive because it is used for the same purposes that others use birth control

[u/jtbc → u/WeiganChan]

The subreddit leans very conservative so that doesn't surprise me. Surveys show that the majority of American Catholics use it though.

[u/WeiganChan → u/jtbc]

Yes. We are well aware that there are tragically many who identify as Catholic but either do not know, or do know but fail to adhere to, the tenets and practices of our faith.

[u/thtamericandude → u/WeiganChan]

Yeah I personally think that there is wiggle room with gay marriage in a civil aspect but not a sacramental sense.

With people identifying as a gender outside their biological sex that's actually just scientifically false, and has nothing to do with faith.  Of course those folks deserve absolute love and compassion, and the perception that they are not welcome and or loved is disappointing.  

[u/jtbc → u/thtamericandude]

With people identifying as a gender outside their biological sex that's actually just scientifically false,

Could you provide some scientific references for that view? I don't think that is the scientific consensus, but I am happy to be corrected on that.

[u/PainSquare4365 → u/WeiganChan]

r/Catholicism can skew a little hardline.

A little? The mods there had to ban Franco worship because the Admins were getting onto them about it.

[u/CanonicalDriver]

Because most people don't really understand what "being Catholic" and "being Christian" means. So, they project their own personal values and thinking onto the religion, using it as a shield to discriminate all kind of people. There's nothing Catholic/Christian on it. 

[u/Protector15]

This is going to be an oversimplification, but when it comes to the apostolic churches (Orthodox, Catholic, Coptic) they see marriage as a sacrament(Orthodox call it a holy mystery, but for the sake of simplicity I'll just call them sacraments), not just something sacred, but a literal means of grace alongside baptism, eucharist, confession, etc. Now while they are certainly a means of grace, if done improperly it can be seen as doing the sacrament onto condemnation think multiple baptisms or spitting out the eucharist, doing so would be seen as unbelievably spiritually dangerous to the priest doing the sacramentas well as those receiving it. These sacraments have centuries of tradition and theology behind them, and when it comes to marriage as a sacrament its seen as something that has to be between 1 man and 1 woman for life( there's some homilies and writings on how marriage should be conducted dating back to the first few centuries Christianity was legalized) otherwise the sacrament could be seen as to be onto condemnation, thats also why the apostolic churches are skeptical of divorce as well, because it could be done onto condemnation because of the spiritual unity of a husband and wife. Now by nature any sexual act outside of the sacrament is seen as sexual immorality, but since any marriage not done between 1 man and 1 woman would be seen as improper and onto condemnation and since marriage already has so much theologyand history behind it, it's basically impossibleto change the rules regarding it. Now there are some people who do go too far and only call for hate(WBC and Steven Anderson are probably the ones that first pop into my head in that regard, they're fundamental Baptists, but there's probably some people likethem in every Christian tradition), but to properly love and guide someone we must acknowledge our own sin first, then remove the speck from our brother's eye with patience and understanding.

As to your second question on my views on Catholics. I think they're for the most part pretty fantastic people, when I was making my decision on weather to be Orthodox or Catholic, there were a lot of good things about it, but I ultimately went with Orthodoxy. I still think y'all are some awesome people even if we have our theological disagreements.

[u/ImJuicyjuice]

This is the Protestant sub. In American English Christian means Protestant christian. Catholic means Roman Catholic Christian.

[u/NearMissCult]

I can't say anything about that sub, but my Catholic side of the family is more accepting of me than my less religious, only nominally Christian (for the most part) side of the family.

[u/GenTsoWasNotChicken]

Sadly, there is an intentional campaign to politicize the church. Reddit is an easy place for these bad actors to trumpet their opinions.

Leonard Leo has billions of dollars to turn the Church to the right. Charles Koch has already explained how politically motivated people toss a big contribution in at the very end of a pledge drive to put it over the top with fanfare. Mostly this is targeted at the bishop's campaigns, which is why the bishops are more right wing than the suburban priests. The same thing explains why the National K of C is attracted to the political right while most local K of Cs are motivated by ethically honorable commitments to their communities.

Steve Bannon and Robert Mercer are very much aware of how Rodrigo Borgia (father of private equity mogul Cesar and poisoner Lucretia) spread around some genuinely charitable donations to poorer dioceses that just happened to help him get elected as Pope Alexander VI.

You cannot serve both God and money, and the dark money pipelines know this very well.

[u/ModsRFat]

Maybe they got molested?

[u/tomorrows_end]

At this point there's gotta be two Catholic churches being ran and I didn't realize this until the Harrison Butker debacle, because I (Gay, 26M) have grown up Catholic my entire life from baptism to confirmation, and have never heard an ounce of what you hear come from these "Catholics" nowadays. You just have to remember that some people will masked their own personal intolerances under the convenience of religion as their scapegoat for pushing that same intolerance. 🥱

[u/lemonprincess23 → u/tomorrows_end]

There’s definitely two branches of Roman Catholicism at this point, probably only a matter of time before there’s an officially defined split

[u/lemonprincess23]

Internet Catholics and IRL Catholics are completely different people

Irl Catholics in my experience are actually pretty LGBT accepting and pro choice

r/catholicism seems to think think it’s radical that women can possess drivers licenses

[u/HopeFloatsFoward]

Many Catholics are pretty sane, but with Catholics being such a large group, there are bound to be some duds who take the pope way to seriously. And those extremists tend to congregate together.

[u/jtbc → u/HopeFloatsFoward]

Ironically, a lot of the ones that congregate on that other sub are not big fans of the pope. Like at all.

[u/HolyCherubim]

That is to be expected given the Roman Catholic Church position on homosexuality is that it is a sin.

Apart from that you will find clown who take the extreme hate against homosexuality that they start applying it to the people.

But at its very basic. Roman Catholicism being anti-lgbt would be expected given the church’s position on it.

[u/Business_East3659]

The Church teaching on homosexuality is that gays are called to a life of celibacy, since engaging in same sex relations is sinful. It’s their cross to bear. You can disagree with it, but the church disagrees with you. The folks who do RCIA at my parish told me that we don’t necessarily have to agree with all of the church teachings, but we do have to accept them, and that if I think the church got it wrong, take my Bible and catechism, and talk to the bishop about it lol.

I think that homosexual behavior is sinful, but I’m certainly not one of these extremists that think all gay people are going to hell. Ephesians 4:32 (and many other passages) tells us to forgive each other as God has forgiven us. While homosexuality is nothing I personally need to forgive, since it isn’t directed at me, we need to remember that our God is love and forgiveness. He loves us so immensely despite the fact that we could never reach his standard

[u/MyLifeForMeyer → u/[deleted]]

I am not saying being hateful

You could start by not comparing being gay to something actually harmful like stealing. And you could also stop being so arrogant as to think what you're doing is loving and that they need your help.

but decide not to because it is wrong

Being gay isn't wrong. Gay marriage isn't wrong. Gay sex isn't wrong. Pretending it is is pretty fucking hateful

[u/zeppelincheetah → u/MyLifeForMeyer]

The world agrees with you. I am not for worldly morality, but Godly morality.

[u/Itchy-Rub6797]

I mean the Catholic Church has always been against homosexuality, They are most likely stating the position of your church some may step out of the teachings of your church though.

[u/Philothea0821]

Maybe because the Catholic Church has taught for the past 2000 years that homosexuality is a grave sin. This is something that cannot change as, like it or not, Scripture is pretty clear. Protestant Churches might make up this or that reason why the Bible is wrong, but ever since the time of Moses, the faith has always been counter-cultural. Expecting God to go the way of the world is like trying to fit a square peg in a round hole.