• Home
  • |
  • Blog
  • |
  • The church has no problem with gays.

July 30, 2015

The church has no problem with gays.

new-york-city-gay-pride-parade-2013

The mainstream media sincerely believes the Catholic church has a problem with homosexuality. A view shared by a great many people. They are mistaken. The truth is that the Catholic church has no problem with homosexuality and never has had. For evidence turn to the Catechism (a book containing the official teaching of the church) which has long specified that people of same sex attraction deserve the utmost dignity, love and respect. Here is the quote:

“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.

Holding this to be true, for centuries the church has been welcoming of gay people; at it’s altars, in it’s confessionals and even in its seminaries. It is hardly a secret that the clergy has a disproportionate number of homosexual men! The truth then is quite different to what the media implies. Gay people, so long as they are willing to live by the teaching of the church, have always been led in love to Jesus Christ. As Pope Francis said, “if a person seeks God and has good will…who am I to judge?”

Why then is the Church currently clashing with culture concerning homosexuality? What has changed? The answer is found in how homosexuality is promoted in the modern world. With that infamous notion of “pride”. Ah… here is the problem! Pride has ever been the cardinal sin according to church teaching. So the issue isn’t the “gay” part of the slogan but the “pride”

How could Christians embrace pride as a virtue? It would be like asking us to  embrace sloth or greed. No wonder the church is at loggerheads with the world.  Put bluntly the Church cannot embrace hedonistic demand stemming from the logical conclusion of a sexual revolution- be they in regard to gay or straight sex.

When we understand this we see why any suggestion that the church “gets with the programme” is frankly just rude or naive. Christianity cannot be expected to change any of its historic teaching simply to embrace man’s demands. Any change can only come with clear reference to God, morality, scripture and tradition. We are, after all, a people who believe in divine revelation. And, as everyone knows (if being honest about it) such teaching consistently refuses to separate sex from its intended biological purpose.

The problem for the church becomes clear. And we realise that the scale of the problem is huge by simply googling ‘gay pride parade’. Thousands of images pop up and all reflect a clear celebration of sex with no questions asked. People cavort about in next to nothing- sometimes in nothing!- and there is an obvious delight in the perverse and the exotic. Putting it bluntly; this leaves no space in which a Christian can join the celebration. For no space is given for celebration of genuine virtue. Lust is obviously present but not the upholding of chastity or self control. Where is an acceptance of the need for prudence or purity on these parades? And if no space is given, even to the possibility that some sexual practices might be sinful, then what role could the church possibly have?

And that fact has nothing whatsoever to do with the homosexual aspect. That cannot be emphasised enough. It is the hedonistic pride that is the problem. Were straight sex promoted in this way it too would be anathema to the church. Just consider the picture below- what a picture it paints of the effect of such parades on innocence. Its a million miles from what many Christian homosexuals I happen to know believe. That sex is sacred and cannot be divorced from its procreative purpose within marriage and the family.

gay pride New York02

Understand then that the church really does not struggle with homosexuality. It has been around a long time and quite understands the issue and the challenges it presents. Nor does the church say to anything unique to such people. It only says what it also says to unmarried straight people- that chastity and purity are goals worth striving for in accordance with God’s will.

But that will not do for proud paraders of pride! They DEMAND to be accepted on their terms. That is as a people entitled to do whatever they please with their bodies, regardless of what scripture or tradition might say. And this shrill demand is surely a prime example of what pride ever does; it refuses space for God out of desire for self rule. A position necessitating a no from mother church.

Not because she hates gays but because she hates pride, knowing no good comes from it. Indeed it is because the church LOVES homosexual people that she says a NO to demands for living by the aims of the sexual revolution.

In the Gospels a rich young ruler comes to Jesus and asks what he must do to inherit the kingdom of God. Reading his heart, and seeing an enslavement to greed, Jesus asks him to give up his wealth. The rich young ruler discovers this is the one thing he is not willing to do – he leaves dejected. Today many come to Jesus and are also challenged. Can they surrender not money but sex? A sacrifice certainly but not without the reward of sanctification.

It is not being gay that is the sticking point people…IT IS THE PRIDE and the refusal to live by the sexual standard of the Church in all ages as opposed to that being created by the world.

Related Posts

Truth will judge the synod

Truth will judge the synod

To fulfil not abolish

To fulfil not abolish

Archbishop’s visitation

Archbishop’s visitation

Requiem for a Queen?

Requiem for a Queen?

Admin


Your Signature

  • Nice post Fr as we both know just how much we value homosexual people in our church.

    I would suggest the main problem is the language of ‘disordered’ that remains a sticking point for many. As you eloquently suggest the situation is complex but this phrase comes across as an opening sticking point and is perhaps not the most accurate description of what the church is trying to say.

    • I think disordered is a helpful word. When balanced alongside the words respect etc… it helps us to see the problem. Two locks are a disordered arrangement, as are two keys. This says nothing of the worth or value of either. It just points out that the intended purpose is for a key and lock to combine together.

  • “LAST OF THE MOHICANS”: Q. I wonder just what would be said if heterosexual people were to “pride & parade” about on our public streets, in front of the kids, in the all-together – or 99.9% very close to it, wearing (vestiges) of ridiculous, American-Indian dress? But nope, we aren’t supposed to take offence are we, when it’s the gay community “expressing their diversity!?”

    As Lord Gnome was apt to say, “Shome mistake, shurely?

  • Modern understanding of human sexuality has proved that homosexuality is not a tendency, a deviation or a disorder. It is rather a God- given human condition and homosexuals have the same right to fall in love, make commitments and express their sexuality as heterosexuals. Anything else is unjust, discriminatory and unchristian.
    The majority of gay people do not parade around semi- naked at gay pride events. In fact people in general should not be defined by their sexuality which is not chosen by us but determined by God.
    One day the Church’s social teaching will move out of the dark ages. Until then it will be quite rightly ignored.

    • David could you show us the proof for your claim that homosexuality is not a tendency. I have never seen any scientific data to prove this, indeed the latest research suggests that environment is the big deal. Hence there are identical twins where one is gay and another is not.

      • There is a lot of research on genetic and environmental causes but at the end of the day all research agrees that it is not a choice. Human nature encourages conformity and many people who are gay have struggled with their sexuality. Being able to be who you are, being accepted and and not condemned for expressing ones sexuality leads to a healthy person.
        At the end of the day there is a massive inequality in the way sexuality is understood by those opposed to gay relationships. If you are fortunate enough to be heterosexual then it is possible to choose to marry and pursue happiness. If you are homosexual you can never fully express your sexuality in a lifelong loving relationship with another homosexual.
        Those heterosexuals who are in loving sexual relationships/marriages have no right to deny the same fulfilment to gay people.

      • Your comment
        ‘David could you show us the proof for your claim that homosexuality is not a tendency. I have never seen any scientific data to prove this, indeed the latest research suggests that environment is the big deal.’
        Is very reminiscent of the old nature vs nurture arguments about many other human behaviours or traits. Usually, the answer is that it is a balance between both genetics and environment which is almost certainly the case here.
        I find it hard to believe that you have extensively reviewed all the scientific literature available to enable you to come to your conclusion as I found that a google scholar search on evidence for a genetic basis for homosexuality gives 37,000 hits. Some for and some against. In respect of your response to gay people, this is an interesting study http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/content/72/2/291.short
        As is this which illustrates the complexity of the issue.
        http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/273/1605/3031.short

  • To use the word “disordered” and suggest that it is respectful is ridiculous: disorder = illness. Your catechism suggests that they struggle with their “condition” – what do you expect when faced with this attitude?

  • Can’t agree with you there, Ed. ‘Disordered’ is a pretty unhelpful comment and causes considerable pain that prevents people from hearing what the church is actually saying.

  • “Modern understanding of human sexuality has proved that homosexuality is not a tendency, a deviation or a disorder. It is rather a God- given human condition and homosexuals have the same right to fall in love, make commitments and express their sexuality as heterosexuals.”

    I suppose that, mutatis mutandis, the same claims might be made about other paraphilias: paedophilia, foot-fetishism, coprophilia, and the like. Of course, what gives away the ignorance (or insoucisance) of the comment is the deploying of the phrase “God-given human condition,” as though the Fall and Original Sin could simply be wished away.

    • William
      The things you mention are horrible perversions.
      The fact that you equate them with homosexuality is unjust and unchristian and quite frankly verges on the silly.

  • I can’t agree with Fr Paul on this point, does not the term “disordered” simply mean not ordered towards procreation … in which case, the term is a neutral one. And, as such, could be applied to certain heterosexual acts too! Where our Orthodox brethren would have a problem, is with the idea that this condition could be described as “intrinsic”. I think that for Orthodoxy, all sin is extrinsic to our human nature, because God’s creation is good. May I please give a plug to an interesting book which I read while on retreat at the Orthodox Patriarchal Monastery of St John the Baptist in Essex, it is called: “Christian Faith & Same-Sex Attraction – Eastern Orthodox Reflections” by Thomas Hopko. It is published by Ancient Faith Publishing, 2005, and I found it very helpful. Fr Thomas is Dean Emeritus of St Vladimir’s Orthodox Theological Seminary in New York, USA.
    PS. On a personal note, I’ve asked our local Greek Orthodox priest here in Cornwall if I may be received into the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Thyateira & Great Britain before Christmas this year and I’m currently receiving instruction in the Orthodox Faith …

    • Mark,
      Best wishes for your reception.
      Orthodoxy, the other lung of the Church has many beautiful and rich traditions and devotions.
      It is interesting,the point you make about ‘intrinsic’. I have always believed there is a contradiction in the Catechism on this point. If something is intrinsic it cannot, at the same time, attract culpability. However if it were extrinsic it would involve culpability and conversely if homosexuality were really extrinsic then one could simply choose heterosexuality and then there would be no problem for Catholics.

  • If it is pride that is the problem, you appear to be suggesting that shame is called for instead. It is rather hard to understand the relationship between this and the assertion that you or the church ‘have no problem’ with something which people should associate with shame.

    • The opposite of pride is humility not shame. The article asks for the humility to follow Christ and even stresses that there is to be no shaming.

  • Thanks a lot for sharing this with all people you really recognize what you are speaking about! Bookmarked. Kindly additionally discuss with my website =). We can have a hyperlink trade arrangement among us!

  • {"email":"Email address invalid","url":"Website address invalid","required":"Required field missing"}
    >