Despite repeated iterations and reiterations of Roman Catholic
Church teaching over the past 30 years from the Vatican and the
U.S. Catholic bishops, the morality of homosexuality remains clouded
and confused in the minds of many Catholics. Stated in the simplest
terms, the core of that teaching emphasizes that being homosexual
is not a sin, but engaging in homosexual acts is
a sin. The distinction between the individual and the act
has consistently been maintained in church teaching: Love the
sinner; hate the sin.
In promulgating the teaching, the church has attempted to walk
a fine line between compassion for the individual and a defense
of firm moral values and the integrity of the traditional family.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church states the church's
condemnation of homosexual acts unequivocally. "Basing itself
on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as great depravity,
tradition has always declared homosexual acts are intrinsically
disordered. They are contrary to 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 circumstance can they be
approved."
Although the church steadfastly condemns homosexual acts, on
the pastoral level it has just as consistently argued for compassion
for homosexual people. In the 1973 document Principles to
Guide Confessors in Questions of Homosexuality, the U.S.
Catholic bishops encouraged confessors to "avoid both harshness
and permissiveness," to not make psychiatric treatment a requirement
when a change in orientation is impossible, to encourage stable
friendships, and to understand that homosexuality is not a choice.
Recognizing that judging the morality of individual acts is
always a complicated issue, the 1975 Vatican document A Declaration
on Certain Questions Concerning Sexual Ethics emphasized
that prudence should be used in judging the culpability for individual
homosexual acts. "In fact, circumstances may exist, or may have
existed in the past, which would reduce or remove the culpability
of the individual in a given instance; or other circumstances
may increase it. What is at all costs to be avoided is the unfounded
and demeaning assumption that the sexual behavior of homosexual
persons is always and totally compulsive and therefore inculpable."
The Catechism points out, "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."
The church notes that homosexual persons are not singled out
to a higher standard of morality. The bishops have consistently
maintained that the expression of sex is licit only within the
confines of a marriage that is open to the possibility of creating
new life. Therefore, church teaching requires the same conduct
from homosexual and heterosexual single people: chastity. The
U.S. bishops also write: "because heterosexuals can usually look
forward to marriage and homosexuals, while their orientation continues,
might not, the Christian community should provide them a special
degree of pastoral understanding and care."
Generally, the U.S. bishops have focused on pastoral concerns.
Along with such concerns, the Vatican also has clarified the philosophical
underpinnings of church teaching. Troubled that the church had
given mixed signals on the matter of homosexuality in its 1975
Vatican document, for instance, in 1986 the Vatican Congregation
for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) emphasized its opposition
to living out the homosexual orientation. The CDF wrote: "In the
discussion which followed the publication of the [1975] Declaration,
an overly benign interpretation was given to the homosexual condition
itself, some going so far as to call it neutral, or even good.
Although the particular inclination of the homosexual person is
not a sin, it is more or less a strong tendency ordered toward
an intrinsic moral evil; and thus the inclination itself must
be seen as an objective disorder. Therefore, special concern and
pastoral attention should be directed toward those who have this
condition, lest they be led to believe that the living out of
this orientation in homosexual activity is a morally acceptable
option. It is not."
The CDF went on to voice its concern that certain organizations
ministering to gay and lesbian Catholics were blurring church
teaching. The doctrinal group wrote: "All support should be withdrawn
from any organizations which seek to undermine the teachings of
the Church, which are ambiguous about it or neglect it entirely."
Most recently the Vatican has addressed the issue of homosexual
marriage, which it considers an assault on the traditional family.
Last year, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith issued
Considerations Regarding Proposals to Give Legal Recognition
to Unions Between Homosexual Persons. The document voices
the concern that if homosexual relationships are approved by civil
law then such a union "becomes an institution of the legal structure
and therefore assumes profound influence resulting in changing
the organization of society 'contrary to the common good.'"
Further, the CDF writes: "Lifestyles and the underlying presuppositions
these express not only externally shape the life of society, but
also tend to modify the younger generation's perception and evaluation
of forms of behavior. Legal recognition of homosexual unions would
obscure certain basic moral values and cause a devaluation of
the institution of marriage."
The document also states: "Allowing children to be adopted by
persons living in such unions would actually mean doing violence
to these children, in the sense that their condition of dependancy
would be used to place them in an environment that is not conducive
to their full human development. (They would be deprived of the
experience of either fatherhood or motherhood.) This is gravely
immoral and in open contradiction to the principle recognized
also in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child,
that the best interests of the child as the weaker and more vulnerable
party are to be the paramount consideration in every case.
"The inevitable consequence of legal recognition of homosexual
unions would be the redefinition of marriage which would become,
in its legal status, an institution devoid of essential reference
factors linked to heterosexuality -- for example, procreation
and raising children. . . . Marriage would undergo a radical transformation
with grave detriment to the common good."
Finally, the document concludes, "The principles of respect
and nondiscrimination cannot be invoked to support legal recognition
of homosexual unions. (Refusing social recognition is only unacceptable
when it is contrary to justice.)"
In calling on Catholic politicians to oppose legalizing homosexual
marriage, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith argues
that legalization would make homosexual marriage a model in society
and "obscure values which belong to the common inheritance of
humanity. The Church cannot fail to defend these values for the
good of men and women and for the good of society itself."
Dealing with homosexuality is one of a few moral issues that
cause many people of good will and divergent understanding a great
deal of pain. The church steadfastly maintains that homosexual
men and women are called to celibacy, along with all non-married
Christians, and all Christians must extend to them compassion
and understanding. "Though at times you may feel discouraged,
hurt or angry, do not walk away from your families, from the Christian
community, from all those who love you," the U.S. bishops plead
to homosexual persons in their 1997 pastoral letter. "In you God
is revealed. You are always our children."
John Monczunski is an associate editor of this magazine.
(July 2004)
