A Theologian Speaks About Homosexuality

The “who am I to judge” Reblog

Mundabor's Blog

Browsing around the net I already in the past found this theologian, Ronald L. Conte, to be one of the very good ones.

Besides strict orthodoxy, the man has the rare gift of expressing himself in an extremely clear and concise way; never becoming boring or convoluted but always sticking to the point and bringing it to his readers with great clarity. He is a bit like the GAU-8 Avenger of Catholic doctrine, aiming straight at error and secular folly.

I stumbled upon an article of him about homosexuality which – as it seems to me – goes straight to the heart of the problem without sweetening of the pill, but also without apocalyptic visions of collective destruction.

His approach is – again, as it seems to me – highly sensible. He looks at the most frequent questions arising in these disturbing times and gives to all of them a…

View original post 564 more words

Posted on August 2, 2013, in Traditional Catholicism. Bookmark the permalink. 7 Comments.

  1. Conte has confidently predicted the Garabandal ‘Warning’ and the beginning of the Medjugorje ‘secrets’ for various dates (all now past), predicted with certainty that Obama would never be president of the US and has been censured by the Vatican for some of his opinions. He regards himself as the ultimate arbiter on all things Catholic and does so very aggressively. The fact that he predicted the papal name of Benedict makes some people regard him as some kind of prophet, but he certainly is not.

    • All very fine, Lepanto, but I am not saying he is a prophet, in the same way as my praising one article of him does not mean I approve of his life, work, or choice of ties.

      M

  2. Conte’s claim that the homosexual are somehow morally culpable for having his ‘homosexual orientation’ is unconvincing.

    The deep-seated tendency towards homosexual acts is an objective disorder. It doesn’t follow that someone is morally culpable for being afflicted with it.

    Furthermore, if Conti is a supporter of Medjugorgje that tells us a lot about his powers of discernment.

    As I’m sure you agree, M, to help homosexuals come out of homosexuality is an act of great charity. I don’t think Conte’s theories are going to be of much use in that regard.

    • Heavens, I have written a long answer to this that has gone lost somewhere…

      I’ ll make it shorter this time: his argument that deep seated tendencies are formed through many acts of consent to a particular sin is perfectly reasonable and in line with Catholic teaching. Unfortunately, in the case of homosexuality everyone seems to believe “it’s just there”. It isn’t, because God did not put it there.

      As to the charitable approach, in cases like this the most brutal is the most charitable. Past ages knew this, our own seems to have forgotten it.

      As to Medjugorje, I have already stated very clearly where I am, so if he is in favour he is obviously wrong.

      M

  3. “is* somehow”

  4. Oh my. Strong stuff. This helps bring into focus that so many of my Catholic friends and relatives have excommunicated themselves for being of the opinion that homosexual marriage is okay, that they see nothing wrong with it. Again, these are weekly Mass attending Catholics–most have voted for Obama. Some have even attended such weddings. The pastor of my local Catholic parish has, then, I now realize, excommunicated himself by saying, in a sermon, that gay marriage is a matter of civil rights. I wrote the bishop of this and received a condescending letter written by one of his underlings that that pastor will be advised to refrain or some such pablum. Are the Masses said by this pastor licit? May I confess to him? I live on the Catholic frontier (very isolated diocese), and a majority of the few priests of this diocese are of the same ilk, or worse (“gay” friendly or themselves gay–one pastor wears a diamond earring stud and oozes the inclination.)

    I imagine, at the Last Judgement, that I will be holding that letter in my hand (though it is recorded in heaven!) I will also be holding the letter I received from Archbishop Cordileone, of San Francisco, beautifully written and signed personally by him, in defense of traditional marriage and asking me not to give up the good fight.

    We are all sinners I never forget, in some way or another, but my heart aches at what I see around me in regards to this particular sin and the phenomenal changes that have taken place in the past fifteen years. I love these people, but when I broach the subject at hand, they look at me sorrowfully and with grit determination tell me that I am wrong, and that Jesus never said anything about homosexuality! One of these women taught religious ed for years.

    Should I simply not worry about those I love, shake the dust from my sandals and move on?

    • Pray for your relatives. Pray for them the more when they are most stupid. Reflect that if it were not for God’s grace, we would be thinking like them.

      But never cease the fact. Let them hate and mock you. I am told in heaven it’s a great currency.

      As to the priest, read all the discussions we had about the SSPX. You are not required to second guess what the priest thinks. If the only Mass you have access to has a stupid priest, take the stupid priest for love of Jesus. If, by travelling, you have access to a SSPX mass, so much the better.

      Of course, when it becomes a clown mass is different. But as long as the priest does what he is supposed to do – at the altar, and in the confessional – I say stay with Peter.

      M

%d bloggers like this: