Gay couple with no sex.

[pdudgeon]

I won't comment on this thread anymore. I asked the question and I got the answer; There is no official teaching from the Church that forbids two gay people living together without having sex. The rest was matter of personal opinions and giving too much weight to what people say and consider to be "scandal". Well, once upon a time Jesus's actions were considered scandals, should we now abandon Christ for the sake of what the people thought of him and his actions ? NO!

Thanks to all who took time to reply to my question.

the difference here is that Jesus was sinless, but took on the sins of men for their sake, that they might be made holy in God's sight.

To be clear here, it is not our advice or opinion that you are rejecting, but God's plan of both creation and salvation that is being rejected by you in favor of your own desires.

God has previously examined and subsequently rejected the gay lifestyle [meaning the acting out both physically and mentally] and everything it encompasses, and He has already passed judgement on it.
To make that position even clearer, Jesus came in person to show everyone what God considered to be sin, what sin does to the human body, mind, and spirit, and to show us that it is possible to reject sin and to choose life instead.

As stated before, the anatomy of sin itself as well as the steps a Catholic takes for the forgiveness of sins has already been explained many times in the life of the church.

All the campaigning for that to change will not alter what God has decided.
God is the same, yesterday, today, and always.

There are other places on CF that will have a differing opinion on this matter, and in those places you might find acceptance and support for your stance.
But in OBOB sin is still sin, it still requires resistance, and it still needs forgiveness.

 

[Marius27]

I won't comment on this thread anymore. I asked the question and I got the answer; There is no official teaching from the Church that forbids two gay people living together without having sex. The rest was matter of personal opinions and giving too much weight to what people say and consider to be "scandal". Well, once upon a time Jesus's actions were considered scandals, should we now abandon Christ for the sake of what the people thought of him and his actions ? NO!

Thanks to all who took time to reply to my question.

Look at David and Jonathon and Ruth and Naomi.

 

[frenchdefense]

I don't see why two homosexual men who are attracted to eachother and in love with eachother couldn't live together without sinning. Virtually all of the husband and wife Saints that we know of took vows of celibacy. It isn't the norm, but it is certainly possible for people who wish to serve the Lord. Being a homosexual is a heavy cross to carry, but I don't think it means that you must endure life alone.

According to studies 1 in 5 heterosexual marriages is sexless (or at least sex starved) even without a vow of chastity so,

Whatever.

 

[Rhamiel]

can we all please calm down and stop with the personal attacks and get back to the topic of the OP?

 

[AHH who-stole-my-name]

I see this everywhere. Any time you get into a deep conversation whether it be the computer or friends in your daily life, it seems like it is a debate on loopholes, having your cake and eating it too, or following God what does it really mean? I've done this conversation in my real life and have no intention of playing chess with God's word and carrying the cross on OBOB. Staying out of the fray on this one. I do not look at this as entertainment for its own sake. Millstones scare me.

It just dawned on me what you were saying here. Sorry for my slowness. Yes I think the realization that this conversation needed to be had speaks more loudly than any of the posts her. It shows a gnawing of the conscience and that is never a good thing, when dealing with our destiny.

I think God speaks to us through our hearts and guilt is is nudge coming directly from him. I'n not pointing a finger at anyone here, but if something is burdening anyone I think it should be taken to a higher power since the feeling of the burden might be coming from that source.

 

[AHH who-stole-my-name]

can we all please calm down and stop with the personal attacks and get back to the topic of the OP?

I apologize for my involvement in this charade. I was trying to find answers that were not forthcoming.

 

[eastcoast_bsc]

two sticks of dynamite waiting for a spark.

Exactly.

 

[Rhamiel]

I apologize for my involvement in this charade. I was trying to find answers that were not forthcoming.

I think all of us can get into asking leading questions
I am not saying you did this
but some people just react VERY strongly to the feeling of attempted manipulation
like if they think you are asking leading questions, they will come at you guns a blazing

you can ask me anything, I am pretty blunt
but I am also honest

 

[FreeinChrist]

MOD HAT

This thread is closed for review and clean up

 

[FreeinChrist]

MOD HAT

This thread has had a clean up of off topic posts. Please stay on topic and remember that this is the Catholic forum.​

 

[Michie]

Are you saying Jonathan and David as well as Naomi and Ruth had romantic feelings for one another?

Look at David and Jonathon and Ruth and Naomi.

 

[Sword of the Lord]

Matthew 5:27-28 New King James Version (NKJV)
Adultery in the Heart
27 “You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’28 But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

That would by all reasonable interpretation go for men and women, women and men, men and men, and women and women. Excuse the vulgarity, but if you are living with another dude and you love him and are attracted to him (or women and women), you're going to be lusting for that booty and sinning. It would be impossible not to. Just like it would be impossible for me to build a bar in my house and not stay drunk.

Married couples have an outlet for this. They can have sex. That's why Paul says that even though it is best to be celibate, he knows that it is nearly impossible to not lust or have out of wedlock sex, and so to get married to avoid sinning. Married couples that don't have sex are the exception, not the rule. They're usually no longer sexually attracted to each other, unhappily married and withholding sex, or older in age. Rarely are they just asexual. The same would be true for gay people. They're just like us, after all; just with a different preference. So the argument that married couples live together without sex is a poor one when the context is wholly considered.

 

[Fantine]

If they stay together until they are very old, they may grow into celibacy together...

 

[Michie]

I think the whole Jonathan and David, Naomi and Ruth theory is ridiculous really. People look at things with such an overly sexualized view anymore it is hard for them to comprehend a different time and culture. There are some pretty blatant statements in the Bible concerning homosexuality, marriage, etc. You'd think if there were exceptions to homosexuality we would had known that. I think the theory is based on wishful thinking.

 

[Sword of the Lord]

I think the whole Jonathan and David, Naomi and Ruth theory is ridiculous really. People look at things with such an overly specialized view anymore it is hard for them to comprehend a different time and culture. There are some pretty blatant statements in the Bible concerning homosexuality, marriage, etc. Ypu'd think if there were exceptions to the rules we would had known that. I think the theory is based on wishful thinking.

It's definitely wishful thinking. Both the Bible and the Church is clear on the matter, yet people still think they know better. Truly we are a sick people.

 

[Michie]

I fixed specialized to sexualized. This autocorrect drives me crazy.

It's definitely wishful thinking. Both the Bible and the Church is clear on the matter, yet people still think they know better. Truly we are a sick people.

 

[MikeK]

It's definitely wishful thinking. Both the Bible and the Church is clear on the matter, yet people still think they know better. Truly we are a sick people.

Christ's Church is clear on many matters. We should all submit to all of Her beautiful, True teachings handed down by Christ and the Holy Spirit through His one Church. There are no optional bits.

 

[AHH who-stole-my-name]

I think the whole Jonathan and David, Naomi and Ruth theory is ridiculous really. People look at things with such an overly sexualized view anymore it is hard for them to comprehend a different time and culture. There are some pretty blatant statements in the Bible concerning homosexuality, marriage, etc. You'd think if there were exceptions to homosexuality we would had known that. I think the theory is based on wishful thinking.

People have in mind what they want to find before they seek it. Sexualization is the order of the day and that is supposed to be progress over that which once was.

 

[Rhamiel]

Christ's Church is clear on many matters. We should all submit to all of Her beautiful, True teachings handed down by Christ and the Holy Spirit through His one Church. There are no optional bits.

amen brother

 

[Berean777]

What is the Catholic Church view of a gay couple living together, loving each other, but abstaining from sex ?

You said gay couples. So by that partnership or let us call it sacrilege partnership, by which the verse below applies and therefore sex doesn't become the litmus test to pardon such foley. Rather that love between men and men or women and womenas you define gay couple is a sin on its own without physical action, that is, the very thought is the sin.

Matthew 5:28
But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

What business has a man living with a man if there is no lust involved. Is this love?

No it is attraction therefore lust. There is no business for man to live with another man or women to live with another women as a partnership.

Being affectionate to same sex falls under the definition of lust, no matter how you slice it.