36 questions for bishops

1975

Persona humana: Declaration on certain questions concerning sexual ethics

• Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith Franjo Seper, prefect
• 29 December 1975 Read it

The four paragraphs of Section VIII deal with homosexuality, sandwiched between extra-marital sex and masturbation. This is the first mention of homosexuality in an official Vatican teaching document.

The document states that considerations of the morality of homosexuality based on “observations in the psychological order” are “in opposition to the constant teaching of the Magisterium and to the moral sense of the Christian people.” It posits there are two kinds of homosexuals: curable and non-curable (some are “non-curable” due to a “pathological constitution”).

Regarding their situation in the world, gays and lesbians must “be sustained in the hope of overcoming their personal difficulties and their inability to fit into society.”

Persona humana states its position in natural law terms which will characterize later documents: “...according to the objective moral order, homosexual relations are acts which lack an essential and indispensable finality...homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.” Appealing to Scripture, the document says Revelation describes homosexual activity as a “sad consequence of rejecting God.” A footnote cites Romans 1:24-27, 1 Corinthians 6:10, and 1 Timothy 1:10 as proof texts. See the passages. This footnote is the only supporting evidence provided. It’s notable that no Old Testament passage is cited.

Statements in Persona humana prompt these questions:

1. Should Church teachings be informed by scientific findings? Tweet it
2. Can and should a gay orientation be “cured?”Tweet it
3. Do gays & lesbians suffer from a “pathological constitution?”Tweet it
4. Why does the Church teach that gays and lesbians are unable to fit into society?Tweet it
5. How is a gay orientation a consequence of rejecting God?Tweet it

1986

Letter to the bishops of the Catholic Church on the pastoral care of homosexual persons

• Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith Joseph Ratzinger, prefect
• 31 October 1986 Read it

While Persona humana held that allowing psychological findings to influence Church teaching was “in opposition to the constant teaching of the Magisterium and to the moral sense of the Christian people,” This letter takes a different position, claiming the position against homosexuality “...is a perspective which finds support in the more secure findings of the natural sciences, which have their own legitimate and proper methodology and field of inquiry.” These “findings” are not described.

There is a caveat: “The Church is thus in a position to learn from scientific discovery but also to transcend the horizons of science and to be confident that her more global vision does greater justice to the rich reality of the human person in his spiritual and physical dimensions, created by God and heir, by grace, to eternal life.”

The letter marks a change in Church teaching; while Persona humana claimed that homosexual activity was “objectively disordered,” it is now the orientation itself which is described that way: “the inclination itself must be seen as an objective disorder.”

After this change in teaching, the letter offers a discussion on the interpretation of Scripture. It maintains that one should not examine the context of individual scriptural proof texts, but that they should be evaluated only in terms of their consistency and fidelity to Church teaching. For this reason, the letter holds that historical-critical scriptural study does not apply to these passages regarding homosexuality: “Scriptures are not properly understood when they are interpreted in a way which contradicts the Church’s living Tradition.”

After stating that the Creation story of Genesis and its subsequent corruption by original sin forms the “platform” for a discussion of homosexuality, the letter cites the story of Sodom (Genesis 19:1-11), where Lot offers his daughters up to be gang-raped rather than his male guests: “There can be no doubt of the moral judgement made there against homosexual relations.” The letter adds: “In Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13, in the course of describing the conditions necessary for belonging to the Chosen People, the author excludes from the People of God those who behave in a homosexual fashion.” Thus, in one paragraph, the three Old Testament proof texts are provided. See the passages.

The next two paragraphs present the three New Testament proof texts cited by Persona humana, identifying homosexuality as a consequence of idolatry.

The next argument presented returns to the Creation story and the importance of symbolism in the “Creator’s sexual design.” Procreation, the letter states, is a “form of self-giving which the Gospel says is the essence of Christian living.” Therefore, the homosexual orientation is “essentially self-indulgent.”

The letter asserts “Thus, the Church’s teaching today is in organic continuity with the Scriptural perspective and with her own constant Tradition.” However, no citations are offered as to this “constant Tradition.”

The letter then denounces the movement within and outside the Church to secure the civil rights of gays and lesbians. Such efforts to secure civil rights are all “deceitful propaganda.”

And yet there are limits: “It is deplorable that homosexual persons have been and are the object of violent malice in speech or in action. Such treatment deserves condemnation from the Church’s pastors wherever it occurs.” However, the letter explains, violence against gays and lesbians should not be surprising; gays and lesbians actually bring it on themselves by advocating to “protect behavior to which no one has any conceivable right.”

While the letter previously stated that the spirituality of sexuality is rooted in the Creation story, that does not apply to gays and lesbians. The gay and lesbian experience of sexuality is to be rooted in the Cross: “Fundamentally, they are called to enact the will of God in their life by joining whatever sufferings and difficulties they experience in virtue of their condition to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross.”

“Just as the Cross was central to the expression of God’s redemptive love for us in Jesus, so the conformity of the self-denial of homosexual men and women with the sacrifice of the Lord will constitute for them a source of self-giving which will save them from a way of life which constantly threatens to destroy them.”

A pastoral suggestion is made to help gays and lesbians in their spiritual life: go to confession frequently.

The letter warns bishops to be wary of organizations that “attempt to mislead the pastors and the faithful” on this subject. “The neglect of the Church’s position prevents homosexual men and women from receiving the care they need and deserve.”

The letter orders that all support from Church institutions for gay and lesbian groups should be withdrawn, that no such groups be allowed to meet on Church property, and that they are to be denied religious services.

Statements in the Letter to the bishops of the Catholic Church on the pastoral care of homosexual persons prompt these questions:

1. Why the change to make gay orientation “intrinsically disordered” rather than activity?Tweet it
2. What are “more secure findings of the natural sciences” that support the Vatican position?Tweet it
3. Why is the historical-critical approach forbidden for scriptural passages on homosexuality?Tweet it
4. Do scripture scholars agree that the Sodom story is principally about homosexual activity?Tweet it
5. Do scripture scholars think Paul knew about the scientific concept of a gay orientation?Tweet it
6. How can you tell which precepts of the Book of Leviticus still bind Christians?Tweet it
7. Why should gays and lesbians not be put to death as commanded in Leviticus?Tweet it
8. Why is procreation an essential aspect of following the Gospel?Tweet it
9. How is homosexual activity inherently self-indulgent if it involves mutual giving?Tweet it
10. Why two bases of sexuality for Christians: Creation for straight, Cross for gay and lesbian?Tweet it
11. Why are movements toward securing civil rights for LGBT persons “deceitful propaganda?”Tweet it
12. What “care” do gays & lesbians “need and deserve” that civil rights movements prevent?Tweet it

1992

Some considerations concerning the response to legislative proposals on the non-discrimination of homosexual persons

• Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith Joseph Ratzinger, prefect
• 24 July 1992 Read it

The document states it was occasioned by civil-rights legislation protecting gays and lesbians from discrimination. “Such initiatives, even where they seem more directed toward support of basic civil rights than condonement of homosexual activity or a homosexual lifestyle, may in fact have a negative impact on the family and society.”

The first nine paragraphs restate parts of the 1986 letter.

Then, under a section titled “Applications,” the document states: “‘Sexual orientation’ does not constitute a quality comparable to race, ethnic background, etc. in respect to non-discrimination. Unlike these, homosexual orientation is an objective disorder and evokes moral concern.”

While gays and lesbians have the same rights as all people, such as the right to work and housing, it is “not only licit but obligatory” to limit such rights because gays and lesbians are like contagious or mentally ill persons, for whom it is acceptable to restrict rights “in order to protect the common good.” This appears to be a new exception to Church teaching that all humans are entitled to and even obligated to work. See a sample passage on the right to work from the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace.

“...there is no right to homosexuality which therefore should not form the basis for judicial claims.” This is because unlike race, sex, age or other forms of discrimination, gays and lesbians can avoid discrimination by keeping their orientation secret, so no protection is necessary. If such legal protections are enacted, that would be bad because then people would come out of the closet and claim those protections.

Equal protection for gays and lesbians is rife with dangers, such as in the areas of adoption and foster care, protection of homosexual acts even in private, securing benefits in unions such as public housing, employment and health care. According to the document, all these ideas are harmful — and it’s not enough just to be neutral; they must be actively opposed by the Church.

Statements in Some considerations concerning the response to legislative proposals on the non-discrimination of homosexual persons prompt these questions:

1. How exactly do equal rights for gays & lesbians negatively impact society?Tweet it
2. How are gays & lesbians like people with contagious diseases or the mentally ill?Tweet it
3. Is keeping one’s sexual orientation a secret the only moral way to avoid discrimination?Tweet it
4. Should healthcare benefits be taken away from partners of gays & lesbians?Tweet it
5. Why do social justice teachings on employment and housing not apply to gays & lesbians?Tweet it

1997

Catechism of the Catholic Church

• Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith Joseph Ratzinger, prefect
• 15 Aug 1997 Read it

The treatment of homosexuality in the Catechism consists of three paragraphs (2357-2359). It is covered after pornography, prostitution, and rape.

On the orientation of gays and lesbians, their responsibility is “if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.”

As scriptural basis, it cites four of the six usual proof texts as evidence of “grave depravity:” Genesis 191-29; Romans 124-27; 1 Corinthians 6:10; 1 Timothy 1:10. It is not clear why the Leviticus proof texts were omitted.

“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.”

Statements in the Catechism of the Catholic Church prompt these questions:

1. What's considered unjust discrimination against gays & lesbians besides torture or murder?Tweet it
2. What are examples of just discrimination against gays & lesbians?Tweet it
3. Do most gays & lesbians consider their orientation a trial?Tweet it
4. Is any part of the “trial” gays & lesbians encounter caused by the Church?Tweet it
5. What is the theological definition of “grave depravity?”Tweet it

2003

Considerations regarding proposals to give legal recognition to unions between homosexual persons

• Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith Joseph Ratzinger, prefect
• 3 June 2003 Read it

The goal of this document is to offer “arguments drawn from reason which could be used by Bishops in preparing more specific interventions.” While previous documents addressed the issue of homosexuality in a Christian context, this document claims to invoke natural-law arguments “addressed not only to those who believe in Christ, but to all persons committed to promoting and defending the common good of society.”

Accordingly, the document states that the “Church’s teaching on marriage and on the complementarity of the sexes reiterates a truth that is evident to right reason and recognized as such by all the major cultures of the world.” This teaching is centered on procreation and is founded on the Creation story in Genesis:

1. men and women are complimentary, “where nature and spirit are united;”
2. marriage is instituted by God, “involving the use of the sexual faculty;”
3. complementarity and procreation are essential to marriage. Furthermore, the document states, Jesus made marriage a sacrament, and marriage is a symbol of the union between him and the Church.

“Marriage is holy, while homosexual acts go against the natural moral law.” The three New Testament proof texts are cited to make the case that homosexual activity is “a serious depravity.”

For the first time, this document cites ancient Christian sources as evidence that homosexuality was consistently condemned by the Christian community from earliest times. Three passages are chosen as the most persuasive early Christian writings to support the document’s claims.

The first is a citation from St. Polycarp’s Letter to the Philippians (V,3) on the duties of deacons, youths, and virgins, which quotes First Corinthians, excluding the “effeminate” and “abusers of themselves with mankind” from the kingdom of God. See the passage.

The second citation is from St. Justin Martyr’s First Apology (27:1-4), which cautions against allowing infants to be uncovered because that will cause them to be prostitutes (male or female) when they grow up. Then those prostitutes may later unwittingly have sex with their own relatives in a pagan ceremony. See the passage.

The third citation is from Athenagoras, Supplication for the Christians (34). This passage decries pedophiles who outrage “all the noblest and comeliest bodies.” See the passage.

The document states that civil rights protections for gays and lesbians are evil. It is necessary for the people to disobey such laws, according to the document; otherwise exposing young people to these ideas would “contribute to the spread of the phenomenon.”

Next, the document provides a section with “arguments from reason against legal recognition of homosexual unions.”

“Every humanly-created law is legitimate insofar as it is consistent with the natural moral law, recognized by right reason, and insofar as it respects the inalienable rights of every person.” States cannot recognize unions between gays and lesbians because this is a threat to marriage.

The next argument against “homosexual unions” is that they do not contribute to the survival of the human race. It is then claimed that sexual relations are “human” only when they “open to the transmission of new life.” This would seem to forbid the marriage of infertile heterosexuals, although the document does not explain this point. Then the subject of children “placed in the care of such persons” is raised: gays and lesbians who raise children are committing an “act of violence” against their own children, in open defiance of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.

Recognizing “homosexual unions” is an arbitrary state action because such recognition is not properly based on protection of civil rights in that it equates cohabitation with marriage in the law.

Individual liberty is also not an argument of the state to permit “homosexual unions” because “there are good reasons for holding that such unions are harmful to the proper development of human society, especially if their impact on society were to increase.” These reasons are not provided in the document.

The document states that the only reason for the state to recognize marriage is to “ensure the succession of generations.” Gays and lesbians do not need “homosexual unions” because there are already legal recourses to protect their rights. Legislators are morally bound to oppose unions between gays and lesbians.

The document was signed on 3 June, the memorial of St. Charles Lwanga and companions. These Uganda martyrs were killed when they resisted rape by the king. In choosing this date for signing, the CDF was intentionally equating rape with consensual gay/lesbian relationships.

Statements in Considerations Regarding Proposals to Give Legal Recognition to Unions Between Homosexual Persons prompt these questions:

1. Does allowing infants to go naked cause them to become prostitutes as Justin Martyr claims?Tweet it
2. Are gay men pedophiles as implied by the inclusion of the passage from Athenagoras?Tweet it
3. How does civil recognition of “homosexual unions” cause more people to be gay or lesbian?Tweet it
4. How exactly do “homosexual unions” threaten the marriages of straight people?Tweet it
5. Why are marriages that don't result in procreation not “human?”Tweet it
6. How are adoptions by gays & lesbians not giving, but rather violent?Tweet it
7. Are bishops who support civil unions rather than marriage in violation of Church teaching?Tweet it
8. Would it have been better if the king had raped women rather than the male Uganda martyrs?Tweet it