[PLUG-TALK] A word from Courage on homosexuality...

[Someone]

Homosexuality


Every human being is called to receive a gift of divine sonship, to
become a child of God by grace. However, to receive this gift, we must
reject sin, including homosexual behavior—that is, acts intended to
arouse or stimulate a sexual response regarding a person of the same
sex. The Catholic Church teaches that such acts are always violations of
divine and natural law. 

Homosexual desires, however, are not in themselves sinful. People are
subject to a wide variety of sinful desires over which they have little
direct control, but these do not become sinful until a person acts upon
them, either by acting out the desire or by encouraging the desire and
deliberately engaging in fantasies about acting it out. People tempted
by homosexual desires, like people tempted by improper heterosexual
desires, are not sinning until they act upon those desires in some
manner. 

  

Divine Law



The rejection of homosexual behavior that is found in the Old Testament
is well known. In Genesis 19, two angels in disguise visit the city of
Sodom and are offered hospitality and shelter by Lot. During the night,
the men of Sodom demand that Lot hand over his guests for homosexual
intercourse. Lot refuses, and the angels blind the men of Sodom. Lot and
his household escape, and the town is destroyed by fire "because the
outcry against its people has become great before the Lord" (Gen.
19:13). 

Throughout history, Jewish and Christian scholars have recognized that
one of the chief sins involved in God’s destruction of Sodom was its
people’s homosexual behavior. But today, certain homosexual activists
promote the idea that the sin of Sodom was merely a lack of hospitality.
Although inhospitality is a sin, it is clearly the homosexual behavior
of the Sodomites that is singled out for special criticism in the
account of their city’s destruction. We must look to Scripture’s own
interpretation of the sin of Sodom. 

Jude 7 records that Sodom and Gomorrah "acted immorally and indulged in
unnatural lust." Ezekiel says that Sodom committed "abominable
things" (Ezek. 16:50), which could refer to homosexual and heterosexual
acts of sin. Lot even offered his two virgin daughters in place of his
guests, but the men of Sodom rejected the offer, preferring homosexual
sex over heterosexual sex (Gen. 19:8–9). Ezekiel does allude to a lack
of hospitality in saying that Sodom "did not aid the poor and
needy" (Ezek. 16:49). So homosexual acts and a lack of hospitality both
contributed to the destruction of Sodom, with the former being the far
greater sin, the "abominable thing" that set off God’s wrath. 

But the Sodom incident is not the only time the Old Testament deals with
homosexuality. An explicit condemnation is found in the book of
Leviticus: "You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an
abomination. . . . If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of
them have committed an abomination; they shall be put to death, their
blood is upon them" (Lev. 18:22, 20:13). 

  

Reinterpreting Scripture



To discount this, some homosexual activists have argued that moral
imperatives from the Old Testament can be dismissed since there were
certain ceremonial requirements at the time—such as not eating pork, or
circumcising male babies—that are no longer binding. 

While the Old Testament’s ceremonial requirements are no longer binding,
its moral requirements are. God may issue different ceremonies for use
in different times and cultures, but his moral requirements are eternal
and are binding on all cultures. 

Confirming this fact is the New Testament’s forceful rejection of
homosexual behavior as well. In Romans 1, Paul attributes the homosexual
desires of some to a refusal to acknowledge and worship God. He says,
"For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. Their women
exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the men likewise gave up
natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one
another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in their
own persons the due penalty for their error. And since they did not see
fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a base mind and to improper
conduct. . . . Though they know God’s decree that those who do such
things deserve to die, they not only do them but approve those who
practice them" (Rom. 1:26–28, 32). 

Elsewhere Paul again warns that homosexual behavior is one of the sins
that will deprive one of heaven: "Do you not know that the wicked will
not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually
immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual
offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor
swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God" (1 Cor. 6:9–10, NIV). 

All of Scripture teaches the unacceptability of homosexual behavior. But
the rejection of this behavior is not an arbitrary prohibition. It, like
other moral imperatives, is rooted in natural law—the design that God
has built into human nature. 

  

Natural Law



People have a basic, ethical intuition that certain behaviors are wrong
because they are unnatural. We perceive intuitively that the natural sex
partner of a human is another human, not an animal. 

The same reasoning applies to the case of homosexual behavior. The
natural sex partner for a man is a woman, and the natural sex partner
for a woman is a man. Thus, people have the corresponding intuition
concerning homosexuality that they do about bestiality—that it is wrong
because it is unnatural. 

Natural law reasoning is the basis for almost all standard moral
intuitions. For example, it is the dignity and value that each human
being naturally possesses that makes the needless destruction of human
life or infliction of physical and emotional pain immoral. This gives
rise to a host of specific moral principles, such as the unacceptability
of murder, kidnapping, mutilation, physical and emotional abuse, and so
forth. 

  

"I Was Born This Way"



Many homosexuals argue that they have not chosen their condition, but
that they were born that way, making homosexual behavior natural for
them. 

But because something was not chosen does not mean it was inborn. Some
desires are acquired or strengthened by habituation and conditioning
instead of by conscious choice. For example, no one chooses to be an
alcoholic, but one can become habituated to alcohol. Just as one can
acquire alcoholic desires (by repeatedly becoming intoxicated) without
consciously choosing them, so one may acquire homosexual desires (by
engaging in homosexual fantasies or behavior) without consciously
choosing them. 

Since sexual desire is subject to a high degree of cognitive
conditioning in humans (there is no biological reason why we find
certain scents, forms of dress, or forms of underwear sexually
stimulating), it would be most unusual if homosexual desires were not
subject to a similar degree of cognitive conditioning. 

Even if there is a genetic predisposition toward homosexuality (and
studies on this point are inconclusive), the behavior remains unnatural
because homosexuality is still not part of the natural design of
humanity. It does not make homosexual behavior acceptable; other
behaviors are not rendered acceptable simply because there may be a
genetic predisposition toward them. 

For example, scientific studies suggest some people are born with a
hereditary disposition to alcoholism, but no one would argue someone
ought to fulfill these inborn urges by becoming an alcoholic. Alcoholism
is not an acceptable "lifestyle" any more than homosexuality is. 

  

The Ten Percent Argument



Homosexual activists often justify homosexuality by claiming that ten
percent of the population is homosexual, meaning that it is a common and
thus acceptable behavior. 

But not all common behaviors are acceptable, and even if ten percent of
the population were born homosexual, this would prove nothing. One
hundred percent of the population is born with original sin and the
desires flowing from it. If those desires manifest themselves in a
homosexual fashion in ten percent of the population, all that does is
give us information about the demographics of original sin. 

But the fact is that the ten percent figure is false. It stems from the
1948 report by Alfred Kinsey, Sexual Behavior in the Human Male. The
study was profoundly flawed, as later psychologists studying sexual
behavior have agreed. Kinsey’s subjects were drawn heavily from
convicted criminals; 1,400 of his 5,300 final subjects (twenty-six
percent) were convicted sex offenders—a group that by definition is not
representative of normal sexual practices. 

Furthermore, the ten percent figure includes people who are not
exclusively homosexual but who only engaged in some homosexual behavior
for a period of time and then stopped—people who had gone through a
fully or partially homosexual "phase" but who were not long-term
homosexuals. (For a critique of Kinsey’s research methods, see Kinsey,
Sex, and Fraud, by Dr. Judith Reisman and Edward Eichel [Lafayette,
Louisiana: Lochinvar & Huntington House, 1990].) 

Recent and more scientifically accurate studies have shown that only
around one to two percent of the population is homosexual. 

  

"You’re Just a Homophobe"



Those opposed to homosexual behavior are often charged with
"homophobia"—that they hold the position they do because they are
"afraid" of homosexuals. Sometimes the charge is even made that these
same people are perhaps homosexuals themselves and are overcompensating
to hide this fact, even from themselves, by condemning other
homosexuals. 

Both of these arguments attempt to stop rational discussion of an issue
by shifting the focus to one of the participants. In doing so, they
dismiss another person’s arguments based on some real or supposed
attribute of the person. In this case, the supposed attribute is a fear
of homosexuals. 

Like similar attempts to avoid rational discussion of an issue, the
homophobia argument completely misses the point. Even if a person were
afraid of homosexuals, that would not diminish his arguments against
their behavior. The fact that a person is afraid of handguns would not
nullify arguments against handguns, nor would the fact that a person
might be afraid of handgun control diminish arguments against handgun
control. 

Furthermore, the homophobia charge rings false. The vast majority of
those who oppose homosexual behavior are in no way "afraid" of
homosexuals. A disagreement is not the same as a fear. One can disagree
with something without fearing it, and the attempt to shut down rational
discussion by crying "homophobe!" falls flat. It is an attempt to divert
attention from the arguments against one’s position by focusing
attention on the one who made the arguments, while trying to claim the
moral high ground against him. 

  

The Call to Chastity



The modern arguments in favor of homosexuality have thus been
insufficient to overcome the evidence that homosexual behavior is
against divine and natural law, as the Bible and the Church, as well as
the wider circle of Jewish and Christian (not to mention Muslim)
writers, have always held. 

The Catholic Church thus teaches: "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" (Catechism
of the Catholic Church 2357). 

However, the Church also acknowledges that "[homosexuality’s]
psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. . . . 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 that they
may encounter from their condition. 

"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" (CCC
2357– 2359). 

Paul comfortingly reminds us, "No temptation has overtaken you that is
not common to man. God is faithful, and he will not let you be tempted
beyond your strength, but with the temptation will also provide the way
of escape, that you may be able to endure it" (1 Cor. 10:13). 

Homosexuals who want to live chastely can contact Courage, a national,
Church-approved support group for help in deliverance from the
homosexual lifestyle. 

Courage, 
Church of St. John the Baptist 
210 W. 31st St., New York, NY 10001 

(212) 268–1010 
Web: http://couragerc.net 



           NIHIL OBSTAT: I have concluded that the materials 
     presented in this work are free of doctrinal or moral errors. 
        Bernadeane Carr, STL, Censor Librorum, August 10, 2004 

                IMPRIMATUR: In accord with 1983 CIC 827
          permission to publish this work is hereby granted. 
         +Robert H. Brom, Bishop of San Diego, August 10, 2004