Nine Catholic Bishops Express Support to LGBTQ Kids

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Absolutely disgusting.

Excommunicate them.

What they said is what's written in the Bible though...

Absolutely nothing in this statement challenges or even addresses Catholic doctrine on same-sex sexual contact. The only reason why this is such a major step is that the American Church's default position on The Ell Gee Bee Tees for the past thirty or forty years has been boilerplate aw-shucks gay-bashing with a sacramentalized veneer.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Absolutely disgusting.

Excommunicate them.

What they said is what's written in the Bible though...

Absolutely nothing in this statement challenges or even addresses Catholic doctrine on same-sex sexual contact. The only reason why this is such a major step is that the American Church's default position on The Ell Gee Bee Tees for the past thirty or forty years has been boilerplate aw-shucks gay-bashing with a sacramentalized veneer.

Agreed. Just wondering why Libtardo is so offended by such incredibly controversial statements as "God created you, God loves you".

I think we both know why.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Does Catholic doctrine still assert that same sex attraction is "disordered?" I have used the right term there haven't I?  I appreciate their doctrine preaches love and compassion for the "disordered," but to be honest I find that rather condescending. That said, I don't really mind if others find me "disordered," as long as they do not advocate changing/using the law to punish me for it.

That's still the language in the catechism, yes. One of the various recent synods considered editing it but the most conservative bishops (for lack of a better way to put it) filibustered it.

The most conservative, anti-Francis, crypto-anti-Vatican-II wing of the Church, which is still a significant minority of the hierarchy and possibly a majority of the English-language Catholic press, is actually more intransigent and more openly bigoted on this subject than they were a decade or two ago, even though the center of gravity in the rest of the Church is incrementally shifting towards a more tolerant position.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Catholicism doesn't use the word "disordered" in the sense it is casually or medically used, which implies some mental or psychological defect. The Catholic position is that SSA is objectively disordered because acting on it can only ever be sinful in any circumstance, unlike other sexual attractions which can, in proper context, not be sinful (other attractions may be "intrinsically disordered" such as a man's attraction to a married woman who isn't his wife, but this isn't "objectively disordered" as the sinfulness is context-dependent).

But the catechism does use "intrinsically disordered" to describe homosexuality as well as "objectively disordered" and does not use either term to describe infidelity, which contributes to the inaccurate perception among both supporters and opponents of the doctrine that gay sex is taught to be "wronger" than adultery or straight fornication or whatever. This perception is why so many of the bishops at the family synod and the youth synod wanted the language amended.