The blog header depicts an important and yet mis-understood New Testament scene, Jesus flogging the money-changers out of the temple. I selected it because the faith that gives us consolation can also make us very uncomfortable. Both Divine Mercy and Divine Justice meet in Jesus. Priests are ministers of reconciliation, but never at the cost of truth. In or out of season, we must be courageous in preaching and living out the Gospel of Life. The title of my blog is a play on words, not Flogger Priest but Blogger Priest.
The Old Testament offered various marriages as symbolic of God’s relationship with his Chosen People (as with Hosea and Gomer). While Israel was constantly unfaithful, he would bring her forgiveness and seek to woo her back to himself. This understanding becomes more serious in the New Testament in that marriage signifies the relationship between Christ and his Church. It is not for man to redefine marriage or its parameters. It is entirely of God’s design (see Genesis). It points to something beyond itself. Catholics would appreciate this mystery as a sacrament.
There are a number of significant marriages detailed in the Old Testament:
Adam and Eve;
Abraham, Sarah and Hagar;
Isaac and Rebekah;
Jacob, Rachel and Leah;
Boaz and Ruth;
David, Michal, Ahinoam, Abigail, Maachah, Haggith, Abital, Eglah and Bathsheba; and
Hosea and Gomer the harlot.
Polygamy was sometimes practiced early in the Old Testament but as with the Muslims today it was probably rarely practiced due to the expense. The Jews practiced a two-tiered marriage, as with see with Mary and Joseph. Jesse Jackson got into some trouble years ago for saying at a Democratic Convention that Mary was an unwed mother. According to Jewish law, however, she was married already. The first stage was betrothal and the second was when the woman came to live in the husband’s house. A dowry was paid to a woman’s father making her his property. The problem with this set up was that it might bypass the woman’s consent. When the man brought the woman to his house, there will be a big celebration or feast in the community.
The Song of Songs celebrates the joys of physical love. Following a terrible curse, we have the poignant night prayer of Tobiah and Sarah. From profane to profound, we see the whole gambit of human love. The old marriage prayers stressed the married life was among the greatest joys not forfeited by original sin or washed away by the flood. The joy and fruitfulness of married life was deemed as a sign pointing to God’s favor and the promise of redemption. A good marriage was thus a taste of heaven.
The new dispensation of Christ would build upon God’s plan seen in Genesis and creation. Further, since the Church was the new People of God, the marriage analogy would refer to Christ and his Church.
Jews and Christians alike understand that God is the author of marriage. This truth is reflected both in Scripture (divine positive law) and in the fabric of creation itself (natural law). As Catholic Christians, we further view marriage as a lifelong commitment between a man and a woman. Marriage has always been a basic building block of human society. We see this in the Bible and in our society today, although there are many novelties which threaten this foundational relationship. We will often speak of marriage and the family as the “little church,” but it is also the basic cell for Western civilization. Marriage has both a social purpose as well as the higher moral and religious significance.
Marriage is a natural right. However, the Church reasonably asks couples to refrain from this right until they have obtained adequate psychological maturation. This coming-of-age is indicated by comprehending marriage as a life-long, complete commitment between a man and woman. They would also have to understand that this relationship is orientated toward mutual love and help (fidelity) and to the procreation and education of children. The background to this awareness is a realistic appreciation of the various difficulties in marriage and how they might handle them. They must be free from coercion in making this promise of a shared life and possess integrity of intention or will, resolved to endure any hardship.
Despite the shameful statistics, the Church is almost alone in teaching that marriage is an unbreakable bond. Non-Christians may know it as the noblest of natural contracts; Christians can embrace it as a sacrament, a covenant through which Christ gives grace. St. Paul tells us that Christian marriage is a sacred sign that reflects the lasting unity of Christ, the groom, with his bride, the Church.
A married couple extracts life from out of their love. First, in their reciprocal fidelity, they nurture and give life to each other. Second, in their openness to children, they cooperate with God in the act of creation. They summon into existence separate individuals who will endure for all eternity. What other human work could ever compare with this? Rather than a onetime event, they continue to give life to their children by caring for their physical needs. They must also aid in their spiritual development, laying foundations for growth in faith and holiness. This latter responsibility cannot be over-emphasized. Third, growing in holiness themselves, the couple’s love and service is a powerful witness, giving life to all whom they meet. Seeing their faithful commitment, we are reminded that this kind of love has not utterly passed from the world.
Jesus raised marriage to the level of sacrament. Although we do not know the precise occasion of its institution, the Church early on recognized that the reality of this relationship was transformed by the commitment of two baptized Christians in a covenant of love. Indeed, Christ identifies himself with the beloved.
Marriage makes two people helpmates to each other in seeking holiness. Spouses are to assist each other in becoming saints who will share eternal life with Christ in heaven. If all their earthly preoccupations bypass this objective, then there is something defective in their love. It must be an ingredient— even if it is tragically reduced to one spouse praying for the other to return to faith practice or to join the Church. Ultimately, sacramental grace brings confidence to the couple that God will help them to persevere in love, fidelity, and holiness.
The sacrament of marriage has certain effects:
1. An invisible bond that will last until the death of one of the spouses; and
2. The graces of the sacrament.
The graces of the sacrament include all those necessary to maintain their collaboration and mutual love in all aspects of their shared life— graces to confront and conquer all threats, troubles, misunderstandings, illness, or anxiety. If we walk with the Lord, his promise of grace and his presence will remain with a marriage for a lifetime. It must be made clear that one might receive the sacrament of matrimony with its permanent bond, but without the graces to faithfully live it out. Indeed, a root cause for divorce among Christians is in this regard; serious sin would lower the sacrament to a sacrilege. This is no light matter. Mortal sin destroys our relationships, both to God and to one another. However, even in these unfortunate cases, with the restoration of saving grace through the sacrament of reconciliation, the graces of marriage would be made fully available.
There are many duties and responsibilities in marriage. Chief among these are fidelity, cohabitation, and mutual help (especially with offspring). Statistics reveal that the Catholic divorce rate is rapidly approaching the national average wherein half of all marriages fail. Interestingly, a Gallup poll discovered that couples who pray together for a few minutes every day and who regularly attend Sunday Mass have a much lower failure rate. Indeed, 98% of such marriages survive and flourish. This says something wonderful about the intimacy of prayer between spouses and God— it is a visible testimony about the positive influence of grace living in true Christian marriages.
This is the fifth installment in this extended dialogue about homosexuality. I must warn the reader that not everyone is polite and few are timid about remarks. The majority express a strong negativity to the disorientation. Unfortunately, one of its strongest proponents was an avowed atheist. I was hoping that we might more deeply explore how some try to reconcile such a lifestyle with a professed Christian faith. The atheist rejects Christian morals because the Bible is just another book to him. Natural law often fails because he rejects intelligent design and order. The active homosexual person who tries to be a Christian would face serious quandaries regarding the Scriptural prohibitions. Does he argue that the Bible is not inerrant and fully inspired? Does he contend that certain teachings are prejudiced and so historically and culturally situated that they no longer speak to us? Would he contend that just as slavery was tolerated, core Scriptural values would override and come to the fore with later reflection about homosexuality? Might such dissenters merely ignore parts of the Bible and our sacred tradition, giving greater gravity to secular humanism and present-day social engineering? These questions really did not arise in this conversation.
DURCK:
Homosexuals are imposing their standards upon me and my children by claiming that such a lifestyle is acceptable and by telling my children that they, too, can live the gay lifestyle. Yes, the gay agenda is to force (yes, force) society to proclaim homosexual and lesbian unions as legitimate and valid. Absolutely not! All of you can talk until you’re blue in the face— I’m not buying any of it.
And when gay couples adopt children, they’re bringing yet a third party into their madness.
Who do any of you think you’re kidding?
MICHAEL:
Durck— you’re right. This is an abuse of the English language. We call them homosexual lifestyles right? Let’s call them what they really are. They’re death styles.
When I was young, my parents took our family for a Sunday ride through historic Bucks County, Pennsylvania. We drove through a town called New Hope. That was the first time in my life that I had witnessed two men kissing each other in public. One of the men was wearing a full length mink coat and then exposed himself to the other man. What stands out the most in my mind was the negative reactions of my parents. This left an indelible impression upon me for the rest of my life. My conscience told me how sick and how wrong that was. I’m sure that my late father, given the chance, would have kicked the crap out of them, only because his children were there.
A gay couple should NEVER, EVER be allowed to adopt a child either. Children need both a mother (female) and a father (male).
We have to fight today to keep normal things normal. It isn’t natural or normal for two people of the same sex to be physically attracted to each other. GET SOME HELP.
MORSE:
So Michael, when I see stories of Christians and Catholics abusing children, should I assume that every Christian and Catholic is a child abuser?
Perhaps Christians and Catholics should NEVER, EVER be allowed to adopt a child. Because of COURSE they’re ALL just horrible child molesters. [sarcasm]
FATHER JOE:
Okay, everybody let us try to place nice.
MORSE:
Why? I’m using his logic. Because two men were once lurid in public, he is casting down judgment on all homosexuals. Why should I not do the same to Christians?
FATHER JOE:
It may be that he could have better made his case. Remember, Christians presume that the believer who lives out his faith is properly disposed to virtue. By contrast, active homosexuality would undermine one’s moral standing, even if discrete. It is still sinful. While there are hypocritical Christians, there are also many homosexuals who reinforce the stereotype of low morals by public acts of lewdness and dissent.
DURCK:
Glad you agree, Michael. I’m sure your late father was incensed that his young son had to witness such a spectacle, but, seeing you today, he would have no cause to worry of any negative effect that sight may have had on you.
My heart breaks for children, especially today— the smut and the insanity they’re subjected to is absolutely criminal. What infuriates me the most is the brainwashing that’s imposed upon them while they’re still so vulnerable.
I know that homosexuals and lesbians are our brothers and sisters and that we should treat them respectfully, but I’m finding the task of loving them increasingly more difficult.
LARA:
See what I mean, Michael, that “anger within?” Never a legit defense; always the offensive attack because they don’t have to live a Christian life, so since they’ve chosen not to, they presume the right to clobber us for our every foible. Speaking of straining on gnats and swallowing camels…
MICHAEL:
Morse— for your info, neither Christians and Catholics, nor priests hold a monopoly on child abuse and pedophilia. That’s what deceived and deluded people try very hard to believe.
You can also thank Almighty God that you weren’t raised by either two males or two females, or were you? If I struck a nerve with you GOOD!
Gay is not OK. If you’re a “CHRISTIAN” then you’ll agree because homosexuality in the site of God is an ABOMINATION.
Be it known that I DON’T HATE HOMOSEXUALS! I LOVE THEM BECAUSE GOD DOES. What I hate is sinful behavior, especially in public and in clear view of innocent children.
Dear Lara, they don’t have any defense. That’s why they’re angry.
If their biological parents never came together in that most sacred act, they wouldn’t be here defending their abnormal and sinful behavior.
MORSE:
Christians who live out their faith are virtuous? Well, the majority of homosexuals are also virtuous. You happen to think you have a monopoly on virtue. The rest of the world disagrees with you.
“Never a legit defense; always the offensive attack because they don’t have to live a Christian life.”
No legit defense? How about the one I have repeated over and over…there is no good reason for homosexuality to be looked at as immoral— none. All you have is a book that says so. A book saying something does not make it so.
FATHER JOE:
Morse, I am using the word “virtue” or “virtuous” not simply in reference to natural virtues but that which is brought about by grace and is supernatural. I would hardly think an atheist could tell me who has and has not been so favored by God, particularly since you deny his existence. How often have I spoken about Catholics as not only a people of “the Book” (the Scriptures) but of a rational faith, too?
Homosexual acts also violate the natural law.
LARA:
The “rest of the world” disagrees with Father Joe?
Oh, please. That’s quite a hopeful stretch of the imagination, I must say, and not only painfully (for you) inaccurate, but a bold-written lie.
The Roman Catholic Church and her priests show more genuine, loving compassion toward you as homosexuals and lesbians than any other group on earth, and even their love you reject and ridicule. Why? Because they refuse, again, out of love for you— to pat you on your head and tell you, “There, there, my child, live as you please with a clear conscience…”
And you think the left cares for you? No, they’re using you, that’s why they couldn’t care less how you live.
“No legit defense? How about the one I have repeated over and over…there is no good reason for homosexuality to be looked at as immoral— none. All you have is a book that says so.” No, there isn’t a good reason for homosexuality to be looked at as immoral, but there are plenty of horrible reasons, aren’t there? No big surprise, either, that the Holy Bible is considered “just a book” to you. If the Bible condoned homosexuality, you wouldn’t view it as just a book, then. I, or anyone else, don’t have to quote you a good reason why homosexuality is immoral— you already know that it’s immoral. Oh, yes you do.
Morse, you’re at the wrong site to seek the validation you’re after, but there are plenty of sites that will tell you what you want to hear. Why waste your time here?
ISHMAEL:
Father Joe, yes God can only judge homosexuals and it’s true that their acts are against God’s laws. But we should respect homosexuals and treat them very kindness and respect.
I don’t have a problem with homosexuals but I don’t agree with the sexual stuff they do. But I believe God will judge us at the same time that he judges homosexuals. I believe the things that homosexuals do is sinful, but that being gay is not a sin.
LEIGH:
OK, everyone is quick to judge the homosexuals whether men or women; but, at the same time, we have Catholic priests molesting BOYS. Maybe you should put all your time and energy on something that matters?
FATHER JOE:
I have spoken about the tragedy of such men in the Church, too. But someone has observed that while not all homosexuals are pedophiles (or pederasts), most of the cases of such sins against children by churchmen have been homosexual in orientation and act.
LEIGH:
I have read the Bible and know what it says about homosexuality. I also know that I will only be judged by God. None of you have the right to throw judgment on anyone else. You are no one to say what is right and wrong.
FATHER JOE:
You have read the Bible, really? What you say is not what the Bible says.
LEIGH:
I know straight people and gay and most of the straight marriages I know (not all) end in adultery and lies. Meanwhile, spouses in all the gay marriages I know have the upmost respect for each other.
FATHER JOE:
You would recommend perverse relationships by castigating marriage? No, you are very much in error.
LEIGH:
I believe a person cannot help who they fall in love with and are attracted to. I am not saying gay is better than straight; I just think everyone should worry about their own relationships and give the gay community a break.
FATHER JOE:
I think we already give them a break. We love them, despite their sinful behavior. However, it would be a false love to say nothing regarding actions which offend God and our nature. We speak not as a perfect people or as kin to the self-righteous Pharisee, but as sinners who know Christ’s mercy.
ISHMAEL:
Father Joe, God does not judge homosexuality because that’s not good.
Homosexuality is not a sin. It is just the ministers out there trying to get people to believe otherwise. God will never judge because he respects and accepts them for who they are. If they are God’s kids, then why does he judge?
FATHER JOE:
Sorry Ishmael, but something objectively wrong is not right just because we want it to be otherwise. The ancient Jews condemned homosexuality as repugnant to God and enacted severe punitive measures against it. Likewise, both Christian Tradition and Scripture are clear in its prohibition and in how such activity deprives one of membership in the kingdom of heaven. Your view of parenthood is flawed; it is a role not of blind toleration, but one where guidance about right and wrong is offered. Divine justice speaks to the demands of natural law and divine positive law. Yes, there is infinite love and wondrous mercy, but never at the cost of truth or by compelling collaboration with moral evil. We are creatures and it is not the place of the creature to tell the Creator that he cannot judge us. We belong to him. Our posture should always be that of humble obedience. God does not merely accept us for who we are but calls us to repentance and conversion. If you do not know that then you are a stranger to the Gospel.
WAYNE:
Father Joe, I am who I am and not defined by my sexuality alone. I feel that I am no less one of God’s children than a heterosexual. I can only hope that God is more compassionate than you are.
I have spent my life trying to be a good person by loving and being considerate of my neighbor and sharing my time, talent and treasure.. I pray and participate at Mass, not just attend, on a regular basis and have faith that God will judge me for all I was in life, not just my sexuality.
“Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.”
FATHER JOE:
Given the weather, I have a few snow balls, but no stones to throw. It is NOT my intention to be inconsiderate or mean. I am, however, a Catholic priest, and as such am obliged to teach and believe what the Church holds to be true. Yes, you are not utterly defined by your orientation; however, although you admit this, you then demand a full acceptance of your homosexuality or else. Sorry, that just does not wash. Like any unmarried heterosexual, you are called to a chaste life without genital or sexual activity. Since homosexuals cannot marry one another, you must then practice perpetual celibacy. As long as you are free from mortal sin, there is nothing that prevents you from the full and active participation in the Mass and Holy Communion. This is a statement of fact. Nothing is said to hurt you. God loves you and so does the Church. But all of us must obey God. The moral code on such questions is quite clear. I will pray for you.
ISHMAEL:
So Father Joe, are you are saying that if you were not a Catholic priest you would agree with homosexuality? You said, “God loves you and so does the church,” but then you said, “All of us must obey God.” It sounds like you are saying God does not love Wayne. It sounds like you are against homosexuality, Father Joe!
FATHER JOE:
No, priest or not, I would accept and believe what the Church teaches. However, as a priest I have a special commission to preach and to teach. It is not my place to substitute the whims of men for the truths of God and his holy Church. The Church rightfully opposes homosexual activity as wrong and as sinful. Homosexuality is a disorientation, a disease of the mind. God loves us all, including homosexuals. However, he wants us to LOVE HIM enough to obey him and to make the needed sacrifices to do so. We all struggle but not all our struggles are the same. Deviant sexual attraction and practices do not constitute a legitimate human right, nor should they be encouraged or normalized. Civil society is very wrong about this. There should even be civil sanctions against such crimes. Until recently sodomy was listed among the vices that were punishable under law.
MARCIA:
Anatomically speaking, the anus was not designed as a sexual orifice nor was man’s seed intended to be planted in feces. Male and female were created by God sexually different so as to procreate the species. Going beyond that design by anyone is perverse.
Homosexual acts are perverted or nicely put, “disordered.” There really is no argument here since the created design of male and female was quite simple and meant for the most basic intellect to understand.
To argue that God allows or accepts anything else negates everything the Scriptures tell us. Sex in and of itself is not necessary for love to exist.
ISHMAEL:
Dear Father Joe, why is the Church so against gay people? It is not a disease of the mind you dumb priest! The problem is ministers out there trying to get people to hate homosexuals. Do you dislike gay people?
FATHER JOE:
I do not hate anybody. But I am a priest and a Christian. I trust God’s Word on this subject. My appreciation of natural law substantiates my religious beliefs. I believe that homosexuals are called to lives of celibate and chaste love. Marriage is between a man and a woman. Sexual expression outside of marriage is a sin.
Some argue that in regard to the condemnation of homosexuality it would be difficult to find anything comparable in the Scriptures to the story of Sodom and Gomorrah. That is true— if you don’t know what the story references.
FATHER JOE:
Scripture has many levels and can be multivalent; nevertheless, how it is understood by the people who claim it does matter and more so than any proposed rediscovery or rethinking of the texts. You are simply bending over backwards to discount one of the two tiers against homosexuality, the witness of Sacred Scripture. The Catholic Church also employs a Christian anthropology that relies heavily upon the perennial philosophy of the Church and natural law.
MAX:
Historically, the story is presented as an indictment of homosexuality. Presumably, those knocking at the host’s door are male homosexuals bent on abusing the host’s male guests. The telling moment in this story, however, is when the host offers his daughters in place of his guests. These were “townspeople.” So, since the host knew them, he would have known that in this situation his daughters would not satisfy homosexual men— from the youngest to the oldest townsman— presumably from five years old to eighty.
FATHER JOE:
Lot offered his daughters because he was desperate and really did not know what to do. The men at the door are true “sodomites,” wanting to have their way with his mysterious visitors. Even the revised New American text has not garbled it: We read: “Before they went to bed, ALL the townsmen of Sodom, both young and old—ALL the people to the last man—closed in on the house. They called to Lot and said to him, ‘Where are the men who came to your house tonight? Bring them out to us that we may HAVE INTIMACIES with them’” (Genesis 19:4-5).
MAX:
Most Catholic Scripture scholars today would see the story differently. Probably it is a story of ancient hospitality codes; the conduct rules between hosts and guests. When one travelled to a distant place he usually stayed with strangers. There were no Holiday Inns. This made for a risky situation for both host and guests. So host-guest rules (Xenia) were critical. In fact, Lot alludes to this in telling the townspeople: “these guests have taken shelter under my roof.” So he must protect them at all costs— including the lives of his daughters and his own. The nature of their assault on the guests symbolizes the degree of depravity in their lives. What was the nature of their depravity? Take your pick. Israelite tradition attributed it to wickedness of the city. The Yahwist (J Source) thought it was homosexuality; Isaiah thought it was a lack of social justice. Ezekiel saw it as a disregard for the poor and Jeremiah thought it was a general state of immorality.
FATHER JOE:
I do not know any orthodox Catholic Scriptural exegetes who would take the sin of homosexuality out of the mix. Your supposition about hospitality codes is just that and probably derived from the few footnotes on the bottom of your Bible. Every school boy who went to a Catholic college learned about the sources imbedded in Genesis. We also know that stories and references are sometimes told with a different emphasis. However, the whole Bible and not dissected parts is what we embrace as God’s inspired Word. The text is clear that these townsmen and boys wanted the visitors for homosexual rape. I would call that being pretty inhospitable! Sodom is destroyed because their perversion capped a vast malaise of immorality. “But among Jerusalem’s prophets I saw deeds still more shocking: Adultery, living in lies, siding with the wicked, so that no one turns from evil: To men they are all like Sodom, its citizens like Gomorrah” (Jeremiah 23:14). The comparison here is less with sodomy and more with the fact that like Sodom, no one is innocent or seemingly willing to repent before it is too late. People selfishly involved with their sinful lives care little for justice or for the poor. Likewise, Ezekiel compares God’s people to Sodom to awaken them from their moral stupor: judging his people as neglectful of the needy, he said, “Rather, they became haughty and committed abominable crimes in my presence; then, as you have seen, I removed them” (Ezekiel 16:50). In any case, this was a bit of an aside. I made reference to Sodom and Gomorrah to show that, even in the earliest days, the Bible condemned such sexual behavior as sin. I doubt that any day soon God will shoot lightning bolts down upon gay people. God would still be displeased, though.
MAX:
In contemporary times it has been fashionable to demonize homosexuality every chance we get in spite of the Church asking that we show kindness and sympathy. Maybe that’s why we like the homosexual interpretation so much.
FATHER JOE:
I neither like nor dislike it. It is simply the way things are and I have no authority to change it. Homosexuals should not be teased or bullied. We should not call them names. They are also God’s children. God calls them to celibate love and holiness. I embraced celibacy as a sacrifice of my priesthood. For the sake of my vocation to serve God’s Church, I freely gave up the right to have a wife and family. Unless some reversal in inclination is in the offering, the homosexual accepts celibacy from necessity. Homosexual actions are sinful. As for the homosexual orientation, it is unfortunate but invokes no fault. The life of purity brings no condemnation, but grace and holiness.
MAX:
For me it’s a question of catecheses. In the Old Testament we need to stop teaching old Babylonian myths and Assyrian folkloric stories and start teaching Hebrew history and how the Hebrew Bible was put together.
FATHER JOE:
Faith is not found in dissected parts of the Bible or in historical-critical analysis of Scriptures. You seem to admit some deficiency in various parts of the Bible, and yet, it is all God’s inspired revelation. The final interpretation of the texts remains with the Pope and the bishops in union with him, not with you and not with the so-called experts. Look to the kerygma of faith, and not to the semi-atheistic techniques that rob the Bible of mystery and ultimately of binding truth.
MAX:
The New Testament, particularly the Synoptics, are written in the genre of Greco-Roman biographies. If one is not familiar with the genre form, he’s not going to really appreciate the New Testament. The average pew Catholic, which is the majority, gets none of this from the pulpit. So as time goes on movements like the New Atheism is going to continue to eat our lunch as we will continue to look sillier and sillier. Catholicism is a defensible religion. So we need to start doing it.
FATHER JOE:
The New Testament gives us four Gospels each with its own particular theology but all about the life of Jesus Christ. If you deny that it gives us the real life of Christ then you fall under the censure of the Syllabus of Errors against the heresy of Modernism. We have Acts that gives us a window into the early Church. We have the Book of Revelation which reminds us about God’s providence and how all things will be consummated in Christ. We have various letters, which instruct and admonish the churches.
We will not survive the New Atheism by adopting its methods or by making Christian truths, dogmatic and moral, somehow relative. Sorry, I will stick to the faith that is survived the ages and is true, not with your new dissenter’s version.
Returning to the topic of this post, homosexual acts are immoral— PERIOD!
Discussion
TS:
“Only God Can Judge Homosexuality”— Assumption: The perfect Deity has a need to cast judgment.
FATHER JOE:
Actually, we have a need for judgment. We bring it upon ourselves. We were made for God. If our faith in words and witness testifies to him, he will give us himself. If we reject him, he will respect our freedom and draw us away from his presence. The joy of heaven and the pains of hell are first fashioned in this world and made final in the next.
MICHAEL:
I don’t understand why we complicate the simple things of life. God desires so much to bless us in abundance. Why are we so ignorant of this?
Instead of being receptive, we’ve chosen to be wayward in disobedience and unworthy of any blessings. God can’t bless us if we are self willed and live according to our flesh. This is an insult to God. I would choose to go without sex my entire life for that fact alone, IF I were a person with homosexual tendencies.
Our Lady told the Fatima children that souls fall into hell like snowflakes because of sins of the flesh. They’ll never know what they’ve missed out on. SEXUAL INTERCOURSE IS RESERVED FOR MARRIED PEOPLE OF OPPOSITE SEX ALONE. God created Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve.
TASTI:
Father Joe, I am glad that you have gay friends and continue to have dialogue with them. That says a lot about you and your ministry. I will read your other posts. You have every right to your opinion as I do. On this issue we differ. I do not have argument with God. It is you I disagree with on this issue. I am sure we can go back and forth on just this point.
Even the clergy is at odds about their own interpretation of Scripture, each calling each other valid or invalid. Look how many churches exist today who broke away from the original Catholic Church because of one point of doctrine or another. Yes, we can go back and forth on this point also.
As passionate as we are about our different points of view on this topic, you have responded to the opposing questions thoughtfully with your points. If I ever have the opportunity to be in Maryland one day, I would love to drop by your parish and visit. You would be a very interesting person to talk to about faith matters.
MORSE:
“Returning to the topic of this post, homosexual acts are immoral— PERIOD!” Why? If it’s just because you think your god says so, then it’s as completely arbitrary as “wearing hats indoors is immoral.” If you have an actual reason as to any harm that homosexuality causes, by all means present it. I am, however, well read in many of the debunked “homosexuality leads to crime/depression/unsafe sex’ studies.” But, as I said, they are debunked. Anything new, however, would be lovely.
FATHER JOE:
My posts are religious ones. Two Scripture citations were made in the first, next I quoted the universal catechism, and here I record an extended debate. It is a debate within Christianity. Except for the matter of natural law, I had not originally intended to extend it to atheism. As a Catholic, I believe that God exists and that he and his laws are part of an objective order. Christians have as much right as anyone else to have their say and to have their votes counted in a free society. As for the various problems associated with homosexuality, I hardly want to discuss such a sordid business. Let it suffice to say that I know a doctor who has had to perform a great deal of rectal surgery because of the damage caused by anal intercourse. In any case, I think your comment here is mere mischief.
NIGEL:
Nigel cited my initial blog post with the two Scriptures passages that condemn homosexuality…
Pastor, I don’t know where you went to seminary, nor do I know how long you’ve been preaching, but it is clear to me that you’ve forgotten a very important, yet basic, passage from the Bible, and this is what it says:
He answered: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind’; and, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’” (Luke, 10:27)
It seems that you are quite capable of doing the first part of this passage quite well, however you clearly don’t have the slightest clue as to do the second. Gays and lesbians, Father, are just as much your brothers and sisters as anyone else. And yet, here you are belittling them and name-dropping God as a cover for it.
My suggestion to you, then, would be for you to re-evaluate the people you work with on a daily basis. Chances are, you work and pray with gays (whether or not you’re aware of it), so I’d suggest that you change your ways.
I hope that you learn to accept people for who they are, regardless of whether or not you agree with the way they live their lives.
FATHER JOE:
Nigel, I think you were rather rash in judging me before inviting some discussion.
I posted the verses on my Blog to illustrate the negative view that is taken from Scripture about homosexual activity. (The inspiration was a new HALLMARK card that supports gay civil unions or marriages.) In my follow up comments I also quoted the universal catechism of the Catholic Church. It was never denied that gays and lesbians may also be brothers and sisters in faith. I firmly believe that we treat everyone with respect and compassion. Considering homosexual acts as sinful does not mean that we must necessarily hate or discriminate against gays and lesbians.
Regarding Luke 10:27, the love of God and neighbor is not an emotional affair but must have real Christian substance. It refers to a movement of the will and a practical application. The model of love that our Lord gives us is that of sacrifice. Loving God means placing faith in his Son and allowing that love to spill over upon our neighbors. If we firmly believe that certain things are right and wrong, then love must take hard stands. Like Jesus in the garden, the movement of our soul has to imitate Jesus’ submission, “Not my will, but thy will be done.” We want to please God, no matter what the cost. We want our neighbor (composed of both friends and enemies) to be happy and to know the joys of the kingdom and eternal life. Although sometimes ridiculed, there is truth in the proposition that we must “love the sinner but hate the sin.”
I count a number of gay men and even lesbian women among my friends. A few of them agree with me that they are called to a life of chaste celibacy, service and prayerfulness. Others would disagree with me but I remain close to them and their families. They know what I think and I will not deceive them about it. They also know that I am there for them, always ready to bring absolution to those with contrite hearts and to anoint those who will soon see God. Peace!
ROBERTA:
No human has the right to judge what is immoral for another.
FATHER JOE:
Ridiculous! Would you not judge the immorality of a pedophile or a slaver? Sure you would; indeed, while subjective, you have already judged me for judging!
ROBERTA:
If gays want to act on the way they were born let them be.
In the end only the higher being can judge if they have made a mistake or not.
FATHER JOE:
Again this is silly. You are saying that the Church must be silent about Christian morality! The Church and her ministers have every right to transmit the values of faith. The Church also has a right to be a player in the public forum.
ROBERTA:
I know many gay people and most of them are wonderful kind loving people with families, friends, homes, jobs and yes even children. Just let them be and show some love and compassion.
FATHER JOE:
A failure to admonish the sinner is a pathetic love. No one is talking about deliberately hurting people just to make their lives miserable. As a Catholic priest and as a Christian, I have a mission mandate to spread the faith. If St. Paul took your advice, whole epistles would disappear from the Bible. As a priest, one of my duties is the forgiveness of sins and to help people in receiving sanctifying grace. We should all want our homosexual brothers and lesbian sisters to go to heaven, and ourselves along with them. Silence and moral apathy is a false compassion and not from God. You mean well, but such an attitude is defeatist. My suspicion though, is that it reflects a moral decision, that homosexual activity is no big deal. In contradiction, Catholicism regards all sexuality and personhood as tremendously important.
SMILEY:
Father, what about homosexual tendencies? Let me explain. What if a person has a leaning towards this terrible sin which cries out to God for vengeance? The person may never act on it physically, but what about mentally. Does not the Bible say not only committing adultery is wrong but so much as looking at a woman the wrong way?
What about sinful acts committed in the mind leading to self abuse. This is also a mortal sin is it not?
We live in a spiritual minefield where every ad on TV and in the news and on the radio we are exposed to these things. God Help us!
FATHER JOE:
You answered your own questions; yes we can sin in the mind and the imagination.
JOHN:
Please, let us stop the garbage that only God can judge a homosexual, while we have no qualms about the state or city or Feds putting some pedophile or murderer away.
As a true Traditionalist, let us just go back to our Baltimore Catechism with respect to Sin, chapter 6:
What is actual sin? Actual sin is any sin of willful thought, word or deed contrary to the law of God.
What is mortal sin? Mortal sin is a grievous offense against the law of God.
Why is this sin called Mortal? This sin is called mortal because it deprives us of spiritual life, which is sanctifying grace, and brings everlasting death and damnation to the soul.
How many things are necessary to make a sin mortal? To make a sin mortal three things are necessary; a grievous matter, sufficient reflection and full consent of the will.
Let’s now jump to chapter 11.
Why did Christ found the Church? Christ founded the Church to teach, govern sanctify and save all men.
Are all men bound to the Church? All are bound and belong to the Church, and he who knows the Church to be the true Church and remains out of it can NOT be saved.
Now this must come as a shock to the Church of Vatican II that teaches that even those that deny Christ such as Jews, Moslems and Hindus can actually be saved, as Mother Teresa actually taught in India.
This is false, and for those who are homosexual which Scripture clearly condemns, this is a mortal sin in any way shape and form, and I can only guess because upwards of 50% of Catholic priests are homosexual themselves, they don’t have the guts to call it like it is.
Christ can only be shedding tears in heaven for what has become of his beloved Church.
FATHER JOE:
I don’t know how many gays may be in the priesthood. Neither can you know. We need to support our priests. Most of our clergy are good men, faithful to their celibacy, their prayers, and to their parish responsibilities. God may also be shedding tears for those quick to condemn priests and for those adding to the wounds of Mother Church. God bless you, you are right about sin. Peace!
MICHAEL:
John, Mother Theresa taught exactly what the Church teaches. We never deny ANYONE the possibility of salvation. We don’t do that because we know that Jesus has been given complete and full authority by His Father to judge and to rule the Earth. All of us will be judged on three criteria:
The light of truth that we have.
The opportunities that God gave us.
The choices that we’ve made.
I disagree with your assertion that 50% of our priests are homosexuals. That’s simply not true and where did you come up with that figure?
Regarding mortal sin as it relates to modern society, there is no such thing as mortal sin anymore. What we have is moral relativism, which is the denial and refusal of objective truth and moral absolutes. I would love to see everyone adhere to fundamental Catholic teachings, but I’m sorry to say that I think that we’re too late for that. This is not 1953 and Fulton Sheen isn’t on prime time TV.
The old man has a strong grip of his short rope and it’s getting tighter and tighter with each passing day. We don’t have any more spiritual unity in this country, which is our main downfall. Despite all of this, I ask myself what I can do to make things better. I know that I can never change another person’s way of thinking by foisting my views upon them. What I do is this; I try as hard as I can in conforming my life to Christ and my will to the inerrant will of God. I can only account for what I do.
JOHN:
Father, my apologies for broad-brushing the priesthood; those like yourself, who are so honorable and devout, are to be role models for sons of the Church like myself. Such is as was the case 50 years ago when the most honorable and proud thing a parent could show off was a son who entered the clergy!
With respect to Mother Teresa, she was a wonderful beautiful woman; but, by many accounts, she was not in any way an Apostle for the Faith. Neither was she in the business of conversions. She actually compromised the Catholic faith in India and taught the teachings of the Church incorrectly, informing the Hindus (a pagan religion— 1st commandment I may add?) that as long as one were a good Hindu, they could be saved. Any 1st year theology student or anyone who ever read the OT or NT knows this is false. She did much good as a HUMANITARIAN; but, in my opinion is not a saint. Sorry.
FATHER JOE:
Mother Teresa always sought to be of one mind and heart with Christ and his Church. She had many wonderful insights into the wonder of human creation and the sanctity of life. She embraced poverty so that she might pour out herself entirely for the poor. She never made any claim about being a theologian. Saints sometimes make practical mistakes and/or fail to make distinctions in the faith that are entirely accurate. But saints are always humble, and like Mother Teresa, always deferred to men like Pope John Paul and Cardinal Ratzinger (Pope Benedict XVI). I recall once that she was quite apologetic when she mistakenly received Holy Communion at a Mass offered by a priest of the Patriotic Catholic Church in China. She honestly admitted that she did not know such was prohibited. Although the old Tridentine form was used, she said it looked the same and she had not followed the current political situation between the Church and the government of Communist China. China had invited Mother Teresa and her sisters to start a house in their country. A similar invitation came from Cuba. Doors closed to most in the Western world were opening to her. Such is the mysterious power of love, and a sign that God’s providence was leading her footsteps.
Her sisters in Washington reached out to the poor and offered tender care to those dying from HIV complications. Many of these suffering people were homosexual; and yet, the sisters loved them unconditionally. That is also the face of the Catholic Church on this important issue.
We Christians want to avoid sin that offends God. We do not unilaterally harm God but we do wreck our love relationship with Him by sinning. Created in His loving image, we fail to live up to expectations. Without Jesus and His deal to make it all right, we would be planning our new residence in Hell. But we have taken Jesus as Savior and Lord and He keeps us in His Father’s loving will. As Lord, Jesus bases and defines ALL sin as lack of love (Matthew 22:36-40). Such obvious sins as theft, murder and adultery are unloving because each has a victim, someone not receiving love.
FATHER JOE:
Yes, sin is always a violation of love.
FRED:
Please tell me, who is the unloved victim in a homosexual relationship? Neither is a victim, neither is unloved. Where is the hurt? Who could bring suit against the “sinner”? What Gospel writer or Bible prophet claimed homosexuality is sinful? Jesus didn’t. These are not rhetorical questions; they are unanswered by those who refuse God’s grace and live by working the law.
FATHER JOE:
St. Paul’s words cannot be rationalized away. He was the great apostle who spoke about us as living in the freedom of grace that faith brings and not under the yoke of the law. However, he is also the one who exhorts against homosexual activity as a sin that can cost us eternal life. Are you saying that the epistles of St. Paul in the Bible are not God’s inspired Word? The teachings of Christ come through his words and actions and through the witness and message of the Apostles in his living Church.
Your questions are good ones and I will attempt to answer as best I can:
1. Who is the unloved victim in a homosexual relationship?
There are many victims, beginning with Christ who as the saving Lamb of God suffered and died under the weight of all the sins committed or ever to be committed. If we loved Jesus as we should, then we would make a better effort to live a virtuous life in keeping with the commandments. The Jews understood the commandments against sexual immorality as also referring to homosexual misconduct. It was for that reason that they enacted a dire punishment upon those caught. I must also add a corrective. Sometimes sin is not a matter of an “unloved victim” but rather of a person or persons who were not loved enough. True love requires discipline and sacrifice. When I prepare couples for marriage and discover that they are cohabitating and/or fornicating, their response is often that they love each other “too much” to wait. I would not deny that they love each other, but there is something of a lie about what they say and do. If they loved each other as true Christians should, then they should be willing to undergo any difficulty and sacrifice for the beloved. Thus they lie about the depth of their love. The second lie is their relationship, itself. The marital act is a loving act between a husband and wife. Between anyone else it is a fraud and cannot express what God intends for it to convey. Two homosexual men or two lesbian women might have incredible affection for each other. Because of their sexual disorder, this accompanies a passionate interest as well. But sometimes true love does not mean intimate embracing or being together. Sometimes it means walking away and distance. Sexual love is only permitted between spouses in marriage. Unmarried heterosexuals are not entitled to it. Marriage by definition is a covenant or contract between a man and a woman. There is no such thing as same sex-marriage. Thus, people of the same gender may never engage in sexual acts with one another. I know this sounds harsh, but I believe that homosexuality is viewed as an abomination by God. I see no way around the Scriptural testimony or the basic physical mechanics of human nature. Men and women’s parts fit together and they are made for each other. Homosexuality means trying to rewrite the manual, and the end result does not work very well. There is no potential for offspring and the bodies themselves are sometimes harmed. Love does not have to be sexual. If there is no possibility of reversal, I believe homosexuals are called to a generous and prayerful love in the context of the Church and for the larger community. But this love must be chaste and celibate.
2. Where is the hurt?
The hurt comes from a failure to love each other as God intends. One may not immediately become aware of the harm on a subjective level, but it is there. Just as kids who say they are in love take no note of the STD they transmit from one to the other; homosexual couples may only become aware over time of the emotional frustration inherent in feigning legitimate sexual intercourse. Further, there must be a spiritual effect, given that there is an objectively immoral relationship. As for Catholics, the Magisterium of the Church leaves no doubt that homosexual acts are always and everywhere disordered and wrong. The question might be better phrased as, “Who does it hurt?” I hear this all the time from young people who are sexually active. They learn all too soon that it hurts them and that there are serious consequences for sinful behavior. Casual relationships often break off; as for homosexuals, statistics show that the gay pick-up scene is more the rule than the exception. A husband and wife can truly express the two becoming one flesh. Gay sexual activity always leaves the partners somewhat estranged from each other. No matter how much they try, they are never one flesh. This makes infidelity all the easier. The manner by which they parrot the marital act is in itself somewhat abusive and an ugly caricature of the male-female dynamic.
3. Who could bring suit against the “sinner”?
Traditionally I suppose it was society that punished certain sins judged as criminal. The federal government forced the Mormons of Utah to give up plural marriage and up until recent times, sodomy and homosexual activity were illegal in most places. Indeed, cohabitation between men and women was punishable in some states, like Virginia. Many places were so concerned about it that after five years, the legality of common law marriages was imposed. The judgment that most matters, is that of almighty God. Anyone who contends that God would look the other way or favor homosexual unions is fighting two thousand years of tradition. Contemporary revisionism is on pretty shaky ground.
FRED:
It is noteworthy that Gay people employ themselves in loving professions like medicine, education and the ministry. However, some Christians evidently work in the Biblical judicial system.
FATHER JOE:
That is not fair! All Christians should seek to know the mind of God so that they might better please him. God revealed his truths to us for a reason, not so they may be ignored or rationalized away. Many Christian heterosexuals are also in the service ministries, but any denial of the objective moral order represents a false compassion. Homosexuals are urged to be chaste and celibate, not because we are busy-bodies or want to hurt them, but because we love them and want them to do what is right. It is in their interest to be holy and in a right relationship with God and his Church. This relationship has both a personal and a corporate component. We take St. Paul seriously when he says that certain types of conduct can cost us our place in the kingdom of heaven.
FRED:
Certainly if God didn’t want men to have sex with other men, He would have said “Man shall not lie with man PERIOD” (see Leviticus 18:22, 21:13). God wanted Moses to eradicate rampant idolatry in the Jewish nation. That whole “… as with a woman” thing condemns straight men pretending to make it with a woman, such as during idol worship. Paul explains it further when putting down the straight Romans (1:26-28) for “leaving their natural relations” (i.e., as with a woman) and having idolatrous sex with men. Gay men are attracted to other men by definition and by God. They can only imagine what sex “… as with a woman” would be like.
FATHER JOE:
There is some confusion in your words at this point. Fred, you are not being honest with yourself or us. God is abundantly and brutally clear. The issue with the Jews was a lot more complicated than idolatry. Jewish and Christian anthropology will not permit homosexuality. The verdict for such sins in the Old Testament was terrible, either God raining down fire from heaven upon two cities or the stoning to death of those who were exposed. Arguably the ancient Jews were more bloodthirsty than we would care to think about; but penalties aside, homosexuality was never tolerated.
Many in the pagan world (who worshipped false gods or idols) also tolerated homosexuality. We are not to be like the pagans, yesterday or today. Looking at the context that you note from Leviticus, we read:
“You shall not offer any of your offspring to be immolated to Molech, thus profaning the name of your God. I am the LORD. You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; such a thing is an abomination. You shall not have carnal relations with an animal, defiling yourself with it; nor shall a woman set herself in front of an animal to mate with it; such things are abhorrent” (Leviticus 18:21-23).
Goodness! The ancient Jews classified the evil of homosexuality as between child sacrifice to demons and sex with animals! Certain elements of the Levitical codes were based upon accidentals and custom. These prohibitions here represent a significant understanding of what makes up the substance of humanity: the sanctity life and value of children as opposed to the barren vulgarity of sodomy and zoophilia.
As for Romans, you are presumptuous in saying that “straight Romans” were condemned for homosexual sex. St. Paul is a Pharisee, he knows the Jewish law. The condemnation here is because some followed their inclination, their homosexual disorientation. By the way, bisexuals stand just as condemned by their conduct as others who violate the natural order and God’s will. Sexual disorientation is viewed by the Church as an effect of Original sin. God did not design men to be so orientated. They are wounded or broken.
Imagine, for a moment Fred that God is speaking to you through St. Paul (Romans 1:18-27):
“The wrath of God is indeed being revealed from heaven against every impiety and wickedness of those who suppress the truth by their wickedness. For what can be known about God is evident to them, because God made it evident to them. Ever since the creation of the world, his invisible attributes of eternal power and divinity have been able to be understood and perceived in what he has made. As a result, they have no excuse; for although they knew God they did not accord him glory as God or give him thanks. Instead, they became vain in their reasoning, and their senseless minds were darkened. While claiming to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for the likeness of an image of mortal man or of birds or of four-legged animals or of snakes. Therefore, God handed them over to impurity through the lusts of their hearts for the mutual degradation of their bodies. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie and revered and worshiped the creature rather than the creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. Therefore, God handed them over to degrading passions. Their females exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the males likewise gave up natural relations with females and burned with lust for one another. Males did shameful things with males and thus received in their own persons the due penalty for their perversity.”
You are suppressing the truth for what you want to selfishly believe. You worship the creature, the folly of men before the wisdom of God. That which should be clear and evident is made foggy in your mind. Here is further Scriptural testimony (1 Timothy 5-11):
“The aim of this instruction is love from a pure heart, a good conscience, and a sincere faith. Some people have deviated from these and turned to meaningless talk, wanting to be teachers of the law, but without understanding either what they are saying or what they assert with such assurance. We know that the law is good, provided that one uses it as law, with the understanding that law is meant not for a righteous person but for the lawless and unruly, the godless and sinful, the unholy and profane, those who kill their fathers or mothers, murderers, the unchaste, practicing homosexuals, kidnapers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is opposed to sound teaching, according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, with which I have been entrusted.”
Jude 6-7 offers another witness on this matter:
“The angels too, who did not keep to their own domain but deserted their proper dwelling, he has kept in eternal chains, in gloom, for the judgment of the great day. Likewise, Sodom, Gomorrah, and the surrounding towns, which, in the same manner as they, indulged in sexual promiscuity and practiced unnatural vice, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.”
FRED:
“Homosexual” was coined about 1865, so any Bible translation since then that uses a form of that word is a lie that needs to be emended. (The King James Version is honest.) It premiered in a1946 English Bible and continues to condemn loving Gays.
FATHER JOE:
Do you prefer the label sodomites? [Given that this biblical term is increasingly viewed as hurtful and offensive, I am weaning myself from using it.] The word “Gay” is unfortunate. I have met very few happy homosexuals.
FRED:
What is the most love one can show another sinner? Offer them an eternity with God through the redemptive cross of Jesus. Instead of judging them, shouldn’t Christians be telling those “sinful” homosexuals that Jesus died for their sins? The stumbling block is that Gays do not want to affiliate with unloving and judgmental Christians. Know Jesus, know love. No Jesus, no love.
FATHER JOE:
What do you think the Church is trying to do? We want homosexuals to know divine forgiveness and salvation in Christ. However, this requires the admonishment: repent and believe! If we did not love them, we would keep our mouths closed and allow them to continue toward perdition. We speak out because we love and care. Unfortunately, certain homosexuals interpret this as hatred and being mean-spirited. Jesus is both the judge of the world and the lover of souls. He is Divine Justice and Divine Mercy, in person. You focus upon his mercy but neglect his justice. The problem is not that homosexuals “do not want to affiliate with unloving and judgmental Christians,” but rather, that they are resisting conversion and hard obedience, as well as those Christians who love them too much not to tell them the truth. Homosexual acts are wrong. God does not approve. Embrace purity and platonic friendships.
Discussion
TASTI:
Self-righteousness, however packaged, using scriptures to legislate your brand of religious morality against a group of people in a democratic society is simply reflective of the same kind of intolerance that goes back ages. Scriptures have been used to justify racism, hate and all kinds of acts against mankind in the name of God. Thankfully, there are those within the Catholic and Christian community who don’t share this same kind of narrow perspective. The fight for civil rights for the LGBT community will continue and will eventually win.
FATHER JOE:
Who is self-righteous? I quoted Scripture and the universal catechism. Your problem is not with me but with God and his Church. Apparently you have not read all my posts on this subject, because I believe that everyone, including homosexuals, should be treated with respect. I have friends who are gay. However, I disagree with the homosexual lifestyle. They disagree with me and I disagree with them. Why would you deny me the right in a democratic society to express my ideas, no matter how offensive you might find them? I advocate no violence or gross acts of discrimination. I believe in working within the system, yes, even though the legislation and judicial process might very well go the other way. I do not believe in policing bedrooms and neither do I believe in a totalitarianism that masquerades as democratic liberalism. As for Catholics who think differently, yes, some do, and that is their choice. However, as a priest and a Catholic Christian, I remain with the solid teaching of Christ and his Church and not with that of the contemporary dissenters. They base their views less upon the preaching of the Church than upon the views of MTV and a secular culture.
LARA:
At the risk of sounding like a simpleton, Father, this question has occurred to me: does our incessant insanity ever cause our Creator to weep?
STEVE:
“They are senseless, faithless, heartless, and ruthless. Although they know the just decree of God that all who practice such things deserve death, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.” (Romans 1:26-32)
…to me this sounds like the self-appointed kings and queens I see braying continuously about the perceived evils in others.
Before swinging that bat so widely, let’s just purge the church of all the homosexuals.
Then let’s see how many guys are left standing there in their satins and velvets and embroidered hats.
FATHER JOE:
Most of the clergy I know and with whom I have worked are faithful to their celibacy. I would suspect they are also mostly heterosexuals, although a few bad eggs have given the Church pretty bad press. Pray that priests and bishops will be faithful to God, loving and protecting their flocks. By the way, even REAL MEN can wear the fancy uniforms. Peace!
GRAHAM:
Make no mistake about it: practicing homosexuality is a sin that will send people to hell; but, let’s not forget adultery, fornication, lying (white lies included), hatred, malice, envy and so forth. Read the 17 works of the flesh by Paul.
However, I do believe there are those individuals who are truly born with a desire for their own sex; it is a curse brought down through the generations— and it is an abnormality. God said He would visit the sins of the fathers from 3-4 generations ago upon the children.
(Exodus 20:5) “… for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me.”
In conclusion, the desire for your own sex, in and of itself, is not sin, just temptation. If, however, that desire is put into practice, you have sinned.
Love the Lord your God and He will make your ways straight (no pun intended).
(Exodus 20:6) “And showing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.”
FRACTAL:
Love is good, God is Love. Liberty is good, too.
RENEGADE ICONOCLAST:
Mat. 7:1-5 “Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.”
speck: ‘sin’ between consenting adults
plank: pedophiles running around in the Church
FATHER JOE:
You would quote Scripture to get me to stop quoting Scripture? Pleeease! As for your “speck” and “plank” distinction, it is misapplied. Serious sins are all planks: fornication, homosexuality, as well as pederasty and pedophilia— all planks that need removal if blindness is not to become permanent. Mortal sin is mortal sin, although I would grant you that the sin between a man and woman is “according to nature” and the others are “opposed or in contradiction to nature.”
MORSE:
“…and begin to impose that lifestyle on me, my children and those who have not chosen such a life,” this makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.
No one is imposing anything on you. No one is forcing you or your children to be gay. We’re just trying to keep people not unlike yourself from imposing your lifestyle on others.
Here’s a nice metaphor: if you’re hitting someone with a stick, and I take the stick away, I’m not imposing on your rights. I’m protecting the right of the person you’re hitting.
JOHN:
Homosexuality is definitely wrong and serious sin. Yet that does not mean that they cannot enter the kingdom of heaven. They can repent and become chaste in their lives and receive the sacraments if they free themselves from this sin. Yes it is hard to reason with homosexuals, abortionists and atheists that get ugly and turn their heads from logic. I personally thought I could change them but it is not me, it is God that does the changing.
This post is a revision of comments made some years ago. I thought I would revisit the topic of the Church’s view of homosexuality and various responses it elicited. Rather than one inordinately long post, this is the second of a series.
A proper understanding of the postulate, “Only God can judge… but that verdict is not pending,” permits little room to escape revealed and objective morality. Homosexual attraction and “sense of self” is a serious DISORIENTATION. While in itself that may not bring down the full weight of culpability; practicing a homosexual lifestyle is explicitly condemned in the Bible. It is not an accidental or trivial matter that can change with the times and morphing cultures. Indeed, the deontological prohibition is confirmed by a teleological appreciation of natural law. Homosexual acts are grievously sinful. While I cannot speak about individual souls or persons, certainly these are the types of acts that can cost one the gift of salvation. Neither I nor the Church defines who is or is not in hell. There is no reverse polarity to the canonization process, where sinners are cursed while saints are beatified. I am well aware that some minimize the worth of divine positive revelation. However, while the Church comes chronologically before the New Testament and a complete Christian Bible; having been ratified by the Church, every Christian stands under the scrutiny of God’s Word and is not the master of revelation and truth. I am amazed sometimes that people fault the Pope for things about which he has no authority to change. The Magisterium interprets and defines Christian doctrine; it does not assemble it brand new or offer something in radical contradiction to previously defined objective truth.
My emphasis here is not upon human subjectivity, but the absolute claims that come from God and his revelation. Subjectivity may mitigate fault because of weakness or ignorance; however, it does not make objective truth into something purely relative. As for the issue of conscience, such must be properly formed and instructed. There is no way for an educated Catholic not to appreciate or to know about the Church’s stance on homosexuality. I will admit that homosexuality is a malady of the mind, but it does not strip one of complete freedom, that is unless we are also talking about a person who suffers from serious mental retardation. Children and those with gross mental defects are blameless and innocent because they do not have a sufficient capacity for reason. Given the context of the average homosexual, I fail to see how absolutely all guilt might be escaped.
It may be a mistake here (regarding dissenters and political proponents) to paint the picture of a benevolent homosexual, misled but well-meaning. Yes, there are a few who quietly struggle while respecting traditional values. I have known reverent souls among them who regularly frequent the sacrament of Confession. However, note the Hallmark card. The post is about something entirely different… the push for gay marriages and the social acceptance of homosexuality as normative. Homosexuality has become increasingly militant with vulgar public acts. Unless one is discussing the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah, there is little else comparable in the Scriptures. God’s judgment was terrible upon them. We may be invoking God’s justice upon us, too. Little ones are being led astray, not simply because there is an absence of good catechesis but because secular modernity preaches its message more effectively than we do.
The subjective element is left to the divine judgment of individual souls. However, we can say that regarding artificial contraception, abortion and homosexual acts— that they constitute at all times and circumstances, the grievous “matter” of mortal sin. They are those types of acts which can forfeit our relationship with God and blacken the soul. While God is certainly generous with his mercy, we should not commit the sin of PRESUMPTION in supposing that people cannot in general commit such mortal sins. Salvation is purely a gift, not something that we deserve or can merit apart from Christ.
Here is the teaching of the Catholic Church, in her own words (the universal catechism):
[CCC 2357] Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that “homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.” They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.
[CCC 2358] 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.
[CCC 2359] Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.
Discussion
MICHAEL:
What a cross!
Isn’t it remotely possible for a person to be attracted to members of the same sex and still be chaste? It certainly is. If love is in the will; then a person (gay or not) can choose to love God by not participating in sinful behavior.
Not every homosexual is a practicing homosexual.
If I were gay, and thank God I’m not, I would be scared to death of engaging in such a sinful act with anyone. The injustice already has the penalty built in, as you say.
DURCK:
I have read the dialogues (in this and the previous post). As you all know, the homosexual and lesbian lifestyles are being incorporated into the curricula of grade schools, high schools and colleges.
Are we not responsible, and therefore accountable, for protecting our children from such distortions in thinking? Are not those non-practicing homosexuals and lesbians similarly responsible to promote purity in our children, regardless of their own inclinations?
Respecting our gay brothers and sisters is not an issue for me. What I don’t and will not respect is the insinuation made by many gays that their lifestyle is “natural” and therefore acceptable.
I interpret the defense of “only God can judge,” as a means to deflect responsibility, just as politicians avoid responsibility for supporting abortion by insinuating the issue is above their pay grade.
Is the heart of the matter not the avoidance of accountability?
FATHER JOE:
We make moral judgments all the time. The expression, “Only God can judge,” probably relies upon a type of atheism (which is at the heart of moral relativism) or the hope that God is so distant that he does not really care what people do. What such critics are really saying is, “No one can judge me, not you and not God.” We have the natural law and divine positive law; do they expect God to come out from behind a cloud and give them an update on their status? No, they do not, and so saying that “only God” can judge them is an attempt to avoid a “negative” judgment all together. They refuse to accept any judgment other than a lenient and positive one.
MICHAEL:
We were all better off when they were “in the closet.” They have no shame today.
LARA:
Thanks, Father. I’m growing tired of God’s name being thrown about with such flagrant disregard, not to mention being tired of having to defend my own belief.
Living the Catholic faith is no walk through the park (as I’m sure you’re aware). I fail miserably and often, but I march on, Father, doing the best I can. I’ve behaved wrongly and plenty of times— but I recognize wrong and try never, ever, to rationalize my behavior in order to pacify my conscience.
I’m simply losing my tolerance for others who commit wrong and do just that.
MICHAEL:
Lara, the joy comes from knowing that you do “good” and that your life can make a positive difference in this crazy mixed up world. What they do is on them.
LARA:
True Michael, but we, and our children, have to live with their foolishness.
When the topic of homosexuality is raised, immediately there are those who deny that we can make a moral evaluation. We are told, “It is not for us to judge, only God.”
Adapted New Hallmark Card for Gay Marriage
Yes, it must be admitted that God is the judge of such things, but that verdict is not pending but has already been expressed by his revealed Word:
“Do you not know that the unjust will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators nor idolaters nor adulterers nor boy prostitutes nor sodomites nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God. That is what some of you used to be; but now you have had yourselves washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.” (1 Cor. 6:9-11)
“Therefore, God handed them over to degrading passions. Their females exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the males likewise gave up natural relations with females and burned with lust for one another. Males did shameful things with males and thus received in their own persons the due penalty for their perversity. And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God handed them over to their undiscerning mind to do what is improper. They are filled with every form of wickedness, evil, greed, and malice; full of envy, murder, rivalry, treachery, and spite. They are gossips and scandalmongers and they hate God. They are insolent, haughty, boastful, ingenious in their wickedness, and rebellious toward their parents. They are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless. Although they know the just decree of God that all who practice such things deserve death, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.” (Romans 1:26-32)
Discussion
MICHAEL:
His mercy endures forever.
There’s always the mercy of God for those who seek it with a contrite and sincere heart.
No one has to remain in a perpetual state of mortal sin.
Those who have disordered passions or unnatural desires can always ask God, our Lady, and St. Joseph for the gift, grace and virtue of Chastity. They will come around.
Chastity means living purely for God alone in a state of grace.
For the unrepentant reprobates, they will never know what they’ve missed out on. God leaves them to themselves and He always punishes in areas of disobedience— AIDS for instance.
DAN:
I have to admit to attempting to “argue” and “reason” with people in the “blogosphere.” I find that it is impossible— especially with those posting on anti-Catholic blogs. Any argument that I have offered that tries to be reasonable, is usually met with an amazing amount of name calling and anger.
Without even specifically mentioning homosexuality, or same sex attraction, I have been castigated, for even daring to suggest that perhaps the fulfillment of our personhood is better served by trying to over-come our tendencies rather than indulging them.
It seems that we’ve got ourselves a really, really, self-centered, immature culture at this time.
VISITOR:
In my opinion, homosexuals know that homosexuality is not natural. Virtually every living human being possesses a conscience— so do homosexual men and lesbian women.
There are numerous accounts illustrating how homosexuals and lesbians, who have rejected the lifestyle, almost instantly become targets of relentless abuse and harassment by those who remain in it. Clearly, crisis of conscience is at work behind that level of anger.
Today, narcissism reigns. Reality has become personal perspective. Lies have become the truth— but only to those who can’t face the truth. Or won’t.
Every one of us must grow up, eventually, either gracefully or kicking and screaming. Some of us may not grow up until the day we die.
May we all be in a state of grace when that day comes.
OPUS: (in reference to Hallmark same-sex card)
Hallmark has made a small percentage of their profits from me since I was teenager. They’ll make from me not another nickel.
LARA:
Only God can judge homosexuality. Only God can judge whether or not abortion is wrong. Only God can judge if euthanasia is murder. What is this?
When God said we must become as little children, He didn’t mean for us to interpret that statement literally, but you’d certainly think so from the statements made by those advocating homosexuality, abortion and euthanasia.
Reading and listening to the never-ending distortions of what’s right and what’s wrong is enough to send an adult’s head spinning off of their spine— imagine the effect all of this craziness has on children? For crying out loud, the animal kingdom appears less cruel to its own than are many human beings to other human beings. Animals can’t be human, but, evidently, many humans seem satisfied to take on the behavior of animals to justify their actions.
Enough! God said plenty about homosexuality, euthanasia, and abortion in His Bible, which, by the way, APPLIES TO THE WHOLE OF THE HUMAN RACE. That includes ALL OF US, not only to those of us who read its contents and follow its precepts.
Let the world exhort that insanity is sane by all of you wayward children (and you know who you are) who advocate sodomy, murder and every other perversion you’re currently advocating, in the vain attempt to clear your consciences— and you won’t, by the way.
But those of us trying to live Christian lives are not standing by to have the grossest distortions of right and wrong imposed upon our lives or upon the lives of our children.
Think we don’t have that right? Only God can judge.
DURCK:
Am I alone in interpreting as temper-tantrums all of this wailing coming from the homosexual community in that no one has a say in their behavior except for God? (Are they serious about this or do they not believe in God and are using Him as a diversion?)
Assuming they do believe, then yes, I imagine God will have the final say about their lives, after their consciences hand them over. Men or women who live the gay lifestyle are, indeed, free (willed) to live as they choose. After all, practicing sodomists and lesbians are, in truth, our brothers and sisters too.
However, when my homosexual and lesbian sisters and brothers imply that their lifestyle is moral and acceptable (by vainly legislating laws to that effect) and begin to impose that lifestyle on me, my children and those who have not chosen such a life, then I’m taking issue with that right here and right now.
And I will continue to do so with a clear conscience.
MAX:
“Only God can judge… but that verdict is not pending.”
On an objective basis one would be hard-pressed as a Catholic to argue with either part of that statement. . However, it is another matter on a subjective basis. There are many people who have done acts which are objectively wrong but after discerning their consciences and securing information from whatever source available which hey honestly considered reliable, decided on a course of action which turned out to be objectively wrong but for which they incur no subject moral guilt. This situation could arise from many sources: diminished capacity for moral judgment, educational insufficiency, paucity of moral upbringing, intellectual limitations, etc. In the secular world we live in today in this country and in Western Europe, the vast majority of people have to rely primarily on poorly formed consciences. Unfortunately, that is due to a failure of parents and the Church to develop an adequate catecheses and/or talented apologists. Those are the ones we should be praying for because they are in jeopardy. As the Gospel tells us, not all are called to be teachers; but be assured, that those who are will be held to a HIGHER STANDARD. And, those who would mislead a little one, it would be better if he had never been born.
One would indeed sound foolish to hold that every man or woman who engaged in artificial contraception or for that matter any woman, Catholic, Protestant, Jew or atheist who secured an abortion was subjectively guilty of mortal sin. They ALL committed an objectively morally wrong act but as to their subjective disposition— well, that’s where the judgment of God and the pending verdict comes in.
The above is, and has been, the teachings of my Church, the Holy Roman Catholic Church for centuries, and thank God they are because they are the only teachings that are consonant with the image of a just and merciful God.
MICHAEL:
The wages of sin is death.
Yes, God has already revealed how and when He will judge. He also gave everyone a conscience. What we do with it is on us.
This judgment does not apply to those individuals choosing to live a devout and chaste life. It can be done. God loves the sinner and hates the sin.
Many younger men shared the Pauline preference for both celibacy and the single life. They were distinguished from the married men upon whom special rules were given. One might wonder as well if Paul did not already infer something of his marriage analogy in the life of celibate ministers. Christ was the bridegroom and the Church was his bride. The man ordained to Christ’s priesthood was called to regard the Church as his spouse. He embraced our Lord’s spousal love. He had to be willing as was our Lord to lay down his life for her (see 2 Corinthians 11:2 and Ephesians 5:22-32). Over time, there was a tendency to see a priest’s wife as “the other woman.” While it was not strictly the case, the Western Catholic sentiment came to regard the priest with an earthly wife as living in spiritual adultery. One must be very careful about promoting such views today in that they unfairly malign good married priests in the East and Anglican returnees in the West.
We know that Peter was married and there is ample evidence that episcopoi (bishops), presbyters (priests) and deacons also had families (see Mark 1:29-31; Matthew 1:29-31; Matthew 8:14-15; Luke 4:38-39; 1 Timothy 3:2, 12; Titus 1:6). This pattern extended into the patristic period.
Some have assumed, usually those desirous of a change today in discipline, that priestly celibacy was only of later manufacture by the Church. Despite growing evidence to the contrary, they still resist the fact that it is of apostolic origin. Legislation in its favor appears in the fourth century; but, this merely confirmed or codified what was a practice and growing preference in ministry. Hebrew priests of the Old Covenant embraced a periodic celibacy or abstinence during the time of their service. Given that the office and service of New Covenant priests is permanent and perpetual, it would logically make sense that their celibate lifestyle should also never know compromise. This hints to a practice in biblical and patristic times that critics in our sexually addicted society might find unfathomable: that many if not most married Christian priests practiced perpetual continence. As they sought to be new Christs for their communities, they imitated the chaste (dare I say virginal) love of Joseph and Mary. Two themes permeate the Catholic appreciation of celibacy: first, that it is an eschatological sign for the sake of the kingdom (Matthew 19:22) and two, that it should allow us an undivided joyful heart (1 Corinthians 7:32-35).
I know well the biblical texts which speak of the bishop (1 Timothy 3:2), the priest (Titus 1:6) and the deacon (1 Timothy 3:12) as “the husband of one wife.” The Church grew quickly and leadership was desperately needed. It was vital that they were men of faith with a certain degree of stability. The Council of Carthage (390 AD) unanimously stressed that an absolute continence was a fitting discipline to honor the sacraments “so that what the apostles taught and antiquity itself maintained, we too may observe… It is pleasing to all that bishop, priest and deacon, the guardians of purity, abstain from marital relations with their wives so that the perfect purity may be safeguarded of those who serve the altar” (CCL 149, 13). It might seem peculiar to us today, but a man’s fidelity to a monogamous union was interpreted as evidence that he could be just as faithful to perfect continence after ordination.
This is the home of the AWALT PAPERS, the posting of various pieces of wisdom salvaged from the writings, teachings and sermons of the late Msgr. William J. Awalt.
Marriage is a natural right. However, the Church reasonably asks couples to refrain from this right until they have obtained adequate psychological maturation. This coming-of-age is indicated by comprehending marriage as a life-long, complete commitment between a man and woman. They would also have to understand that this relationship is orientated toward mutual love and help (fidelity) and to the procreation and education of children. The background to this awareness is a realistic appreciation of the various difficulties in marriage and how they might handle them. They must be free from coercion in making this promise of a shared life and possess integrity of intention or will, resolved to endure any hardship.
This is the fifth installment in this extended dialogue about homosexuality. I must warn the reader that not everyone is polite and few are timid about remarks. The majority express a strong negativity to the disorientation. Unfortunately, one of its strongest proponents was an avowed atheist. I was hoping that we might more deeply explore how some try to reconcile such a lifestyle with a professed Christian faith. The atheist rejects Christian morals because the Bible is just another book to him. Natural law often fails because he rejects intelligent design and order. The active homosexual person who tries to be a Christian would face serious quandaries regarding the Scriptural prohibitions. Does he argue that the Bible is not inerrant and fully inspired? Does he contend that certain teachings are prejudiced and so historically and culturally situated that they no longer speak to us? Would he contend that just as slavery was tolerated, core Scriptural values would override and come to the fore with later reflection about homosexuality? Might such dissenters merely ignore parts of the Bible and our sacred tradition, giving greater gravity to secular humanism and present-day social engineering? These questions really did not arise in this conversation.
MAX:
FRED:
Many younger men shared the Pauline preference for both celibacy and the single life. They were distinguished from the married men upon whom special rules were given. One might wonder as well if Paul did not already infer something of his marriage analogy in the life of celibate ministers. Christ was the bridegroom and the Church was his bride. The man ordained to Christ’s priesthood was called to regard the Church as his spouse. He embraced our Lord’s spousal love. He had to be willing as was our Lord to lay down his life for her (see 2 Corinthians 11:2 and Ephesians 5:22-32). Over time, there was a tendency to see a priest’s wife as “the other woman.” While it was not strictly the case, the Western Catholic sentiment came to regard the priest with an earthly wife as living in spiritual adultery. One must be very careful about promoting such views today in that they unfairly malign good married priests in the East and Anglican returnees in the West.
Some have assumed, usually those desirous of a change today in discipline, that priestly celibacy was only of later manufacture by the Church. Despite growing evidence to the contrary, they still resist the fact that it is of apostolic origin. Legislation in its favor appears in the fourth century; but, this merely confirmed or codified what was a practice and growing preference in ministry. Hebrew priests of the Old Covenant embraced a periodic celibacy or abstinence during the time of their service. Given that the office and service of New Covenant priests is permanent and perpetual, it would logically make sense that their celibate lifestyle should also never know compromise. This hints to a practice in biblical and patristic times that critics in our sexually addicted society might find unfathomable: that many if not most married Christian priests practiced perpetual continence. As they sought to be new Christs for their communities, they imitated the chaste (dare I say virginal) love of Joseph and Mary. Two themes permeate the Catholic appreciation of celibacy: first, that it is an eschatological sign for the sake of the kingdom (Matthew 19:22) and two, that it should allow us an undivided joyful heart (1 Corinthians 7:32-35).
Blogger Priest 