Replies

50. Homosexuals have gifts and qualities to offer to the Christian community: are we capable of welcoming these people, guaranteeing to them a fraternal space in our communities? Often they wish to encounter a Church that offers them a welcoming home. Are our communities capable of providing that, accepting and valuing their sexual orientation, without compromising Catholic doctrine on the family and matrimony?

51. The question of homosexuality leads to a serious reflection on how to elaborate realistic paths of affective growth and human and evangelical maturity integrating the sexual dimension: it appears therefore as an important educative challenge. The Church furthermore affirms that unions between people of the same sex cannot be considered on the same footing as matrimony between man and woman. Nor is it acceptable that pressure be brought to bear on pastors or that international bodies make financial aid dependent on the introduction of regulations inspired by gender ideology.

52. Without denying the moral problems connected to homosexual unions it has to be noted that there are cases in which mutual aid to the point of sacrifice constitutes a precious support in the life of the partners. Furthermore, the Church pays special attention to the children who live with couples of the same sex, emphasizing that the needs and rights of the little ones must always be given priority.

51) does say that the homosexual relationship is not on the same level as marriage, but 52) seems to give the homosexual couple the right to adopt, have children by artificial means, etc. Of course I’m glad they singled out the innocent children of these relationships as having rights that must be met. But it doesn’t mention that is is wrong to bring children into this type of union in the first place. Doesn’t a child have a fundamental right to a mother and a father? The Church doesn’t seem to be addressing this issue and the homosexuals will not see anything wrong with bringing children into their union. This union mentioned in 51) is not a marriage, but no criticism is given by the Church of homosexuals who treat it as a marriage and bring children into the unit. I agree that we have to worry about the children already in this type of union, but if they want to join the Church, you would think the homosexuals would need to follow Church teachings on marriage and become celebrate.

but 52) seems to give the homosexual couple the right to adopt, have children by artificial means, etc.

That seems to me to be a VERY broad reading of item #52. I agree with you that perhaps they should have mentioned that is wrong to bring a child into that environment, but sadly, too often the child is already there. They clearly put the child's welfare at the top of the priority list.

People should read this. Most of the cardinals didn’t want any discussion of homosexuality in the report. It was barely mentioned. It was put in by a liberal asst to the head of the committee that drafted the report. This is big news. No way in the world the Catholic Church flips 180 degrees on the act of sodomy and starts “valuing” positive aspects of depravity. Because there is none. And mentions children being raised by homosexuals, but Francis has called homosexual adoption the “work of the devil”. The Catholic Church is against homosexual adoption. This is the story is the liberal press should be reporting and the ass that put the language in the report should be sent packing. But he got the report out for all the world to see, packed for full lies about homosexuality that was barely mentioned in the first week of the Synod.

http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2014/10/magister-pitched-battle-on-mad-monday.html

“The passage on homosexuality and homosexual “couples” of the Synod relatio is just so scandalous and absurdly opposed to everything the Church has always taught that its sole rational purpose must have been taking attention away from the main artificial debate, on communion for individuals in public state of mortal sin for adulterous relationships without valid confession (the so-called “communion for remarried divorcees”). Most interventions in the Synod Hall this Monday have reportedly been against this repulsive passage”