Catholics are often accused of being 'homophobic'--the new curse word that means we are afraid of homosexuals. I don't think I'm afraid of homosexuals, although when someone comes on my combox and says that they want to stand on my head and not take their foot off until they have 'squeezed some sense into it' I have to admit that I get a little bit afraid. When I see what homosexuals have done to the good name of Senator Rick Santorum that makes me a little bit afraid.
But I'm not really afraid of homosexuals. I am, however, disapproving of homosexuality. This is not simply because I find sodomy repulsive. I disapprove of homosexuality because I approve of marriage. So instead of blasting homosexuals and homosexuality I wish to defend, support, explain and uphold the truth and beauty of sacramental marriage.
In order to do this, one needs to understand the fully Catholic teaching on marriage. Marriage, for Catholics, is a sacrament. It is a visible means of grace. In other words, through the physical actions and commitment of marriage God's saving grace is active in our lives. Marriage is, if you like, a ladder to heaven. It is one of the ways we participate in our salvation. St John teaches us that "those who live in love live in God and God lives in them." The human covenant of marriage is the most sublime and complete way for most people to experience the love of God. In fact, it is the most urgent and active and obvious way for most people to experience and participate in the grace-filled action of God's salvation.
This sacrament--this means of grace--is something permanent and precious and life giving. It is a path to that self sacrifice that leads to eternal life. Within marriage God's life and love exists in and through and with our human love sealed and made permanent through marriage. Like all the sacraments, it is, by its very nature, life giving and healing and forgiving. Through the sacraments our broken humanity is ransomed, healed, restored and forgiven. This is especially true of marriage with it's drama of joys and sorrows spread over a lifetime. It is also especially true of marriage since only through marriage do a man and woman participate with God in the creation of new human souls.
Because marriage is such a beautiful, eternal, precious and fragile sacrament we love and cherish it. We also oppose everything that would break this precious, fragile and life giving sacrament. Divorce breaks marriage. Adultery breaks marriage. Pornography breaks marriage. Co habitation breaks marriage. Promiscuity breaks marriage. Contraception breaks marriage. Abortion breaks marriage. Child abuse breaks marriage. Homosexuality also breaks marriage.
The proponents of homosexuality will argue that it is all about 'love'. However, their definition of love is "the freedom to have sexual relations with whomever I experience erotic and romantic emotions toward." They may add to this an idea of "commitment" or even "lifelong commitment" but a moment's reflection will show that these subjective and sentimental notions of 'love' can just as easily be claimed by the adulterer, the child abuser, the co habiter and the divorcee. The adulterer will claim that he did not love his spouse any more and loves his mistress more. The co-habiter will claim to be in love with the person he or she is living with. Indeed, the child abuser will claim to love the child and may even claim to 'be in a loving relationship' with the teen they are abusing. The promiscuous man about town may claim to 'love' each woman with whom he has a one night stand. The couple who are using artificial contraception will claim that they are doing so because they love one another and 'can't afford' a child. Abortion has even been rationalized through 'love' by claiming that the person choosing abortion is doing so 'because they love the children they already have.'
Therefore, some other criteria for 'love' must be established, and a Christian society has recognized that bona fide relationship to be the thing we call marriage. In marriage love is objectified and strengthened and clarified by a life long sacrament.
Does this mean that we must hate homosexuals? Some homosexuals may be aggressive and ugly in their campaigning. Some may be disgusting in their promiscuous and degrading lifestyle. They're pretty easy to dislike, but there are heterosexuals who are disgusting in their promiscuity and degrading lifestyle. If we find some homosexual practices repulsive we also find some heterosexual practices repulsive. So that's a red herring.
On the other hand a homosexual person may be gentle, loving, restrained and disciplined and loyal to one partner. This homosexual seems more acceptable and less repulsive. He or she seems like 'such a nice guy' or 'a wonderful gal'. But a person's niceness is not the criteria for moral judgement. Plenty of adulterers, divorcees, child abusers or mass murderers were charming and polite and 'nice'. This again is a subjective, sentimental judgement and therefore a red herring.
Instead we return to the objectivity of natural law and conclude that the sexual organs are designed for a certain purpose and to use them otherwise in any way is deviant. Homosexual acts are therefore, objectively disordered, and according to this argument, so are many other sexual behaviors--of which we also disapprove. Marriage is objectively a sacrament, so likewise, any behavior which breaks marriage is something of which we disapprove. We do not wish for homosexual people to re-define marriage on their terms, but we also disapprove of the re-definition of marriage that has occurred de facto through contraception, no fault divorce, re-marriage, widespread promiscuity and co habitation.
Our response is to note all of these crimes against marriage objectively and then accept on equal terms all people--no matter what their sinful condition. Do we find some of their behaviors repugnant? So be it. However, our natural repugnance does not mean we should hate those people or deny them human rights. We still see each person as a son or daughter of God and we hope to offer to them, as we do to all sinners--the heart of compassion and the chance for redemption, forgiveness, healing, peace and life.
For that is what we wish for ourselves, who are also sinners and in need of the same.
'Homophobia' has already been demonstrated to be an etymologically incorrect term. Link.
ReplyDeleteIt's only thrown out there by free speech bigots who wish to quell rational discussion on the topics of gay marriage and homosexuality.
AMEN FATHER!
ReplyDeleteIt saddens me that the Church is always accused of being anti-sex. Marriage is the true, whole, and completion of sex!
More and more, couples are divorcing... they don't believe in the sacrament of marriage. It's not easy, but we are blessed with many graces when we strive to keep the marriage together. So much is riding on our commitment to this sacrament!
Our children, our neighbors/friends, our city, country, society... everything is affected by our witness! If we can't show what marriage truly is, then how will people know that other forms of intimacy is wrong/deviant?
We've been married 26+ years and we're still going strong. Unfortunately, many of our friends are divorced and they are ending our friendship, probably out of shame.
We feel lost sometimes... and the jealousy/envy of our friends gets literally painful.
But, we love and do what we can.
Thank God for the Church and the Sacraments!
Lotus
Modesto, CA. ; )
What an insightful, succinct, and awesome post. Thank you so much for continuing to organize and voice the thoughts and emotions that many of us have, but lack the skill to express.
ReplyDeleteThis issue has been so twisted and misrepresented by so many.
Your blog is so important to so many.
And good luck in "The Crescat's" Cannonball Awards:-) You've got MY daily vote.
Kay
"Some homosexuals may be aggressive and ugly in their campaigning. Some may be disgusting in their promiscuous and degrading lifestyle. They're pretty easy to dislike, but there are heterosexuals who are disgusting in their promiscuity and degrading lifestyle. If we find some homosexual practices repulsive we also find some heterosexual practices repulsive."
ReplyDeleteMaybe we need to surrender our will and emotions in these areas and ask for the Father's?
But bear in mind, He so loved sinners, that He sent His only begotten Son to die, in their place. Bear in mind that the last Vatican stamp acknowledged words, given by God for man to pray and therefore actually spoken by Him to the Angel, before he was sent to deliver them, ended like this "Lead all souls to Heaven, especially those in MOST need of thy Mercy"
God authored that prayer. It gets no attention in this slavishly articulate blogging world of holy men. Why not? If those are the last known authenticated words of God why aren't they shouted from blog rooftops?
Well?
If God didn't write them, who did? And if God did, then instead of giving our opinions on the so called worse sinners, what should we be crying out to heaven for, on behalf of souls most in need of Mercy, (according to our judgments).
God didn't look at sinful man and shut His Heavenly door, making a safe haven for Himself and His Son. He sent Him right into the thick of it, surrendering to cruel nails.
Does anyone reading this post love a homosexual that much? No?
So what are you going on about, judging one another?
Confess your confusion, it's all you really own. Love.Fast.Pray.
Somehow, Father, you manage to be one of the few people out there who at once both claims that he is "defending marriage" yet derides a couple's desire to make a lifelong commitment to care for each other and, yes, love each other as meaningless "sentiment."
ReplyDeleteWhen you witness a marriage between a man and woman as a priest, do you tell them that you see commitment as only a sentimental concept? I doubt it. It's at the heart of any marriage that is worth having. Commitment (as you well know as a married man!) is in the end not at all a sappy, sentimental, Hallmarky concept. It's what gets a couple through the tough times: through deaths in the family, and serious (even devastating) illnesses, as well as severe economic hardships and crises of faith. Mere sentiment won't get anyone through those times, at least not as one united, enduring couple.
In your insistence at blasting the unions of people who are gay or lesbian, I hope you won't shoot holes through the very heart of marriage. A marriage-worthy relationship is all about giving, self-sacrifice, honesty, endurance, and then getting up the next morning and making it work when yet another challenge shows up. That's what good straight marriages are about (I'm saying this as as a married man myself), and it's also--whether you believe it or not--what committed gay and lesbian marriages are about. (I know some folks in such marriages...even if you yourself don't bother to mingle with such folks.)
In the midst of that giving, that hard-road commitment and unconditional love, one just might notice a reflection of God's love. You are not willing to entertain that possibility, I realize, but ultimately you are not the one who decides what makes any marriage work.
Anyway. I'm going to be the one who says, "Hell yes commitment and love are a huge part of marriage." You can certainly trivialize those qualities if you wish, but I'm not sure why you would want to.
Anyone who wants to stand on your head and squeeze it underneath his feet would have to get through me first, Father.
ReplyDeleteThank you so much DoctorEric. I may need your phone number at some point...
ReplyDeleteSteve, you have the delightfully annoying tendency of reading into my posts things I never said.
I never commented at all on the commitment and loyalty that some homosexuals couples might show to one another. I am happy to admit that they might exhibit the hallmarks of true friendship.
However, this is not the same thing as marriage.
" (I know some folks in such marriages...even if you yourself don't bother to mingle with such folks.)"
ReplyDeleteSteve, what total crap! I know and love a bunch of gay people. They are fun, nice, loving... and on sex very mistaken. Believe what you want, but attributing motives is a poor thing to do. Before you accuse someone else of fearful sanctimonious posturing, take a step back. You have no idea what others are dealing with, what they have experienced in regard to this issue, or who they do or not not mingle with. So spare me the preens to enlightened tolerance.
Hey Father, when you next attempt to dispute my comment, why not go back and reread your own post first?
ReplyDeleteYou made a valiant attempt to take down committed gay couples by referring to the "commitment" argument as mere sentiment. Here's what you wrote:
"The proponents of homosexuality will argue that it is all about 'love'. However, their definition of love is "the freedom to have sexual relations with whomever I experience erotic and romantic emotions toward." They may add to this an idea of "commitment" or even "lifelong commitment" but a moment's reflection will show that these subjective and sentimental notions of 'love' can just as easily be claimed by the adulterer, the child abuser, the co habiter and the divorcee.
You referred to "subjective and sentimental notions of 'love'..." and commitment. You mocked those two things as being something other than the backbone of marriage.
No, I'm not claiming that romantic love (the sticky sweet Valentine's card version) is what makes a marriage strong. Rather, the kind of love that results in real commitment, real fidelity. And that concept--the genuine article, at least when the couple being discussed is gay--certainly seems to be what you're mocking. Even those gay folks who are committed in a deep way...well, evidently they're just caught up in sentiment and subjectivity. You equated their character and their motives to those of adulterers (people who are cheating and lying) and to child abusers (people who are forcing or manipulating a minor into a destructive action). Where exactly are you doing anything OTHER THAN mocking trust, love, and commitment when it comes to a couple who happen to be gay? Sentimentality, you say. Subjectivity. That's all those couples have?
Those are your words, not mine, not anyone else's. I didn't add anything to your argument; I simply called you out on what you wrote.
"Therefore, some other criteria for 'love' must be established, and a Christian society has recognized that bona fide relationship to be the thing we call marriage. In marriage love is objectified and strengthened and clarified by a life long sacrament."
ReplyDeleteSo, your argument that gay couples can't get married is because they are not really in love. And they are not really in love because, in a Christian society, they can't get married.
That is a very week argument, and not just because of the circular reasoning. You use the term bona fide, which means "in good faith". When I married my wife, I sincerely and honestly committed my life to her because I love her.
Gay couples who declare themselves in love with each other are also doing so in good faith, and have every right to do so no matter what the outcome of their marriage or mine is.
It's stunning that you can simply write that off and compare their love as fleeting as an adulterer's. Go tell that to couples like Richard Dorr and John Mace. Google them.
Are you folks listening, or just talking? Father never said the commitment was not a part of marriage. He said that gay sex was not a part of marriage. Matrimony is a sacrament, homosexual union is not. Love, commitment, attraction, whatever, does not make the sacrament. It might make living up to the sacrament easier or better, but in the end, it is only the love of Christ that makes the sacrament. Homosexual sex cannot do that. I think saying that is somehow a circular argument is, as Father says, a red herring.
ReplyDeleteRichard Dorr and John Mace's story is a perfect example of the sentimentalism I refer to in my later post on heresy and red herrings.
ReplyDelete"John and Richard are such sweet old fellas, and they've been good friends and lovers all those years! Surely we should let them get married!!"
It doesn't matter if they are nice guys or nasty guys. Maybe they've exhibited loyalty and solid friendship and therefore a kind of love. That's nice. We like that. Wonderful.
But it's not marriage.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete(a few typos. this one's right, and i'll stop being ocd)
ReplyDeleteFather,
I must say that I dislike the use of the word 'homosexuality' as another word for gay lifestyle. I am homosexual, but I in no way consider myself gay.
Persons who are homosexual may not be (I am not) okay with being described as gay, because they don't agree with any single cause/activity/event/idea that is called 'gay'.
The word gay is a cultural descriptive term, a culture which I don't support or identify with. Gay always describes activities/places/ideas/causes which are immoral and against Church teaching. Just think about it. People don't march for 'homosexual rights', there aren't 'homosexual pride' groups, or 'homosexual student groups', or 'homosexual bars'.
The word homosexual is a biological scientific term that describes the sexual attractions.
I agree 100% go with the teachings of The Church and have found nothing but understanding and compassion from the few priests with whom I have shared this with. None of them tried to water down the Church's teaching, on either the immorality of the gay lifestyle, or on the abundant love of God for me.
People may disagree with me, but I think my reasons are straightforward, and you can't disagree with my feelings. If you think that what I'm saying makes some sense, please do feel free to share it with others.
Best,
John
Thank you John. I never use the word 'gay' but I like your distinction and think that the word 'gay' should be distinguished from 'homosexuality' as you've described. In future I will use the term 'gay' to refer to the gay lifestyle and 'homosexuality' to the condition.
ReplyDeleteTCN: "Are you folks listening, or just talking? Father never said the commitment was not a part of marriage."
ReplyDeleteNo, he makes is clear that commitment is a part of heterosexual marriage.
But when it comes to gay couples, well, suddenly "commitment" and "love" are too subjective and get dismissed. Heck, even a guy cheating on his wife might say he "loves" his mistress.
Try giving the homily at a wedding and saying, "It's clear that you guys are in love; but c'mon, doesn't everyone say that? You're not in love until I pronounce you man and wife."
Father: "It doesn't matter if they are nice guys or nasty guys. Maybe they've exhibited loyalty and solid friendship and therefore a kind of love. That's nice. We like that. Wonderful.
But it's not marriage."
Whenever I go to a Catholic wedding, everyone speaks about love, between each other and between then and God. In your blog post, you had a nice quote from St. John that "those who live in love live in God and God lives in them." At the next wedding ceremony, I'll have to listen more carefully for when they say, "this couple may also exalt in their matrimony because they have a penis and a vagina between them."
So, my question for you: Do you think couples like Richard and John are truly in love? Yes or no. If no, why not?
Geegee, there are all kinds of love, but there is only one kind of marriage.
ReplyDeleteJohn, I agree wholeheartedly with all of your comments. I also suffer from SSA, same sex attraction. This is a cross we have to bear and hopefully by following the teachings of our Lord Jesus Christ and the church he founded we will be able to live a chaste life and save our eternal souls. A lot of people don't seem to get the fact that the Catholic church cannot err when it comes to faith and morals. No one can change the teachings of Christ who is God.
ReplyDeleteLove is a mystery. I don't think that any couple that plans to get married is able to give a syllogistic demonstration that the sort of love that they have is the kind that married people have. There is an irreducible, emotive element involved. The fact is that some homosexual couples find themselves experiencing and responding to each other in such a way that they can only describe in terms of nuptial love. This is not subjective anymore than my sense that I am not dreaming right now, and actually typing on a laptop is even though I cannot give a rational proof of that. I find the whole biological argument(slot a goes into slot b) to be unconvincing, infertile couples can get married after all. We're not machines, and it took the church a very long time to admit that there is a purpose to sex other than just procreation. A homosexual couple is able to provide a loving home to orphaned children through adoption so such unions perhaps have a role in God's plan, and by standing against them we might be frustrating it.
ReplyDelete"Geegee, there are all kinds of love, but there is only one kind of marriage."
ReplyDeleteAh, now I understand.
I just don't like the circular reasoning: gay couples shouldn't be allowed to get married because they aren't allowed to be married.
If they aren't allowed to be married only because you consider what they do privately in bed to be a sin, well, we can agree to disagree.
But if they aren't allowed to be married because you argue that their love and commitment is somehow less than that of heterosexual couples, then that is absurd and empirically untrue, and that is what I objected to.
Years ago, I took a long, hard look at the love and commitment of gay couples I knew and at my Catholic beliefs and couldn't reconcile the two, so I decided that the Church is wrong on this. If that makes me a bad Catholic, so be it.
Ofcourse, if you are a Roman Catholic, heterosexual or homosexual and get to have a personal relationship with your heavenly Mother, you won't fight all these urges, you will begin to be sensible and mature. That's what a relationship with Our Lady does, in those areas, if you make a daily commitment to it. it's very affiming of one's self too. You won't need another person to be responsible for this, although it's still nice to be esteemed. We're all very keen to commend commitments here, we can all agree and unite on that. Yes? Well, catholic homosexuals and heterosexuals, commit to Our Lady first, then see what happens to the commitment you make to your loved one, it will become elevated I assure you. According to her measure though. She will amaze you. You think you love to the utmost? Wait and see. See if you dare, how to love.
ReplyDeleteHowever, if you have other areas that you find it hard to submit authority back to God with (I do, drink)(because you don't own your own legs eventually, do you ? Haha! Name a man other than Our Lord who got to rise up in His own Power with his own dead legs? Lazurus's were raised by Jesus. Even if you state that other prophets were assumed, by who's VOICE?
One voice. Jesus'
You know, that you know, it's the truth. The veil will lift. It witnesses itself lifting, in each man's life, everytime we hear that a person has been killed in aroad accident, or the news reports that many have been killed in an attack. You immediately think, that could have been me or mine, as if you and yours exist independently of each other.
Hummmpphhh!!!
And yet you claim to believe in the Saviour who prayed that all may be made ONE!
Think about what that means!!
Stop making money, or trying to. Give God control of your finances, not as the prosperity gospellers encourage, as Jesus encouraged. One coat, if you have one and your brother none, give it to him anyway, I klnow the gospel says if you have two, but Jesus also said to go the extra mile.
Why? You may well ask.
Because it will stop you going insane.
Howard Hughes. What a legacy of nought.
My Lord Jesus?
Fresh every morning. Fresh every hour!!!!!!!!!!