Can homosexual behavior and the inclination at its origin be ordered toward a good life, a life that is complete, fulfilled, and happy?

[djeter]

An article by Fr. José Noriega, Vice-Chancellor of the Pontifical John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family at the Pontifical Lateran University in Rome. Fr. Noriega specializes in sexual ethics and is a professor of moral theology. He examines homosexuality not from the point of view as an act against nature but in the light of a moral theological perspective: Can homosexual behavior and the inclination at its origin be ordered toward a good life, a life that is complete, fulfilled, and happy?

Married couple’s (male/female) sexual relation can be instrumentalized for the sake of pleasure. Yet the Church seems to view those relationships different from the “instrumentalized” relations of gay couples, which it condemns vigorously. What is the difference between the dormant procreative nature of an infertile couple and those of two gay men or women?

We are, in our Catholic beliefs, embodied souls or ensouled bodies. In John Paul II’s Theology of the Body we learn that “body expresses person.” Fr. Noriega walks us through the homosexual relationship and the nature of the intimacy lived out between two people in a homosexual relationship:

“Because the sexual difference is not included as a constitutive element of the persons’ identity, or of the possibility for personal communion, it is in reality only the semblance of real intimacy. It opens up a space for the other, a space that is also physical, but within a false complementarity, because it is not built on the significance of the bodily differences (which are structurally denied from the beginning), but on the satisfaction the two may attain through genital activity.”

False complementarity….a semblance of real intimacy: Christians are called upon to be truth-tellers and Fr. Noriega explains what the truth of homosexuality is here.

Your reactions? Note that the article passes by the condemnation of homosexuality as an act against nature and deals with sexual behavior not as a question of biology, but rather of the construction each partner chooses to give his or her own sexual identity. Secondly it confronts the notion that a homosexual relationship may open up the possibility of an intimate relationship, a friendship. It explains Church teachings in these contexts and is a valuable approach in dealing with homosexuals and the Church for all concerned Catholics to learn.

dj

 

[Lutheranteach]

I’m always amazed at the Church leader’s ability to:

A) Discuss something they have not experienced
B) Discuss something in absolutes that is a unique personal experience

I feel it’s as if I, as a male, went up to a pregnant woman, and told here exactly what her labor was going to be like on every level. 1) I don’t know, I’m male and have never and will never experience labor 2) I don’t know, and no one knows, exactly what it will be like because it’s different for everyone.

As for the intimacy part. I am not buying it at all. I may not like it, understand it, etc. But I do believe their are gay and lesbian couples out there with a relationship that is as deep. meaningful, loving, and intimate as married couple who has ever lived.

 

[lynx]

I’m always amazed at the Church leader’s ability to:

A) Discuss something they have not experienced
B) Discuss something in absolutes that is a unique personal experience

I feel it’s as if I, as a male, went up to a pregnant woman, and told here exactly what her labor was going to be like on every level. 1) I don’t know, I’m male and have never and will never experience labor 2) I don’t know, and no one knows, exactly what it will be like because it’s different for everyone.

As for the intimacy part. I am not buying it at all. I may not like it, understand it, etc. But I do believe their are gay and lesbian couples out there with a relationship that is as deep. meaningful, loving, and intimate as married couple who has ever lived.

Great reply

 

[Booklover]

I’m always amazed at the Church leader’s ability to:

A) Discuss something they have not experienced
B) Discuss something in absolutes that is a unique personal experience

I feel it’s as if I, as a male, went up to a pregnant woman, and told here exactly what her labor was going to be like on every level. 1) I don’t know, I’m male and have never and will never experience labor 2) I don’t know, and no one knows, exactly what it will be like because it’s different for everyone.

As for the intimacy part. I am not buying it at all. I may not like it, understand it, etc. But I do believe their are gay and lesbian couples out there with a relationship that is as deep. meaningful, loving, and intimate as married couple who has ever lived.

Nonsense! You’ve bought the myths of the homosexual agenda.

Vickie

 

[lynx]

Nonsense! You’ve bought the myths of the homosexual agenda.

Vickie

I’m glad you put the smiley, otherwise I wouldn’t have known you were being facetious

 

[Booklover]

Great reply

Nonsense! The same goes for you. These people left on their own would simply die out since their unions are sterile, not to mention neurotic!

Vickie

 

[lynx]

Egads and gadzooks Perhaps that be the case, but if it makes them happy why not go with the flow? Happiness is an internal emotion that can only be dictated by the person. So if someone wants to have a sterile union and it doesn’t affect me I say let’em have it.

 

[patg]

I’m always amazed at the Church leader’s ability to:

A) Discuss something they have not experienced
B) Discuss something in absolutes that is a unique personal experience

I feel it’s as if I, as a male, went up to a pregnant woman, and told here exactly what her labor was going to be like on every level. 1) I don’t know, I’m male and have never and will never experience labor 2) I don’t know, and no one knows, exactly what it will be like because it’s different for everyone.

As for the intimacy part. I am not buying it at all. I may not like it, understand it, etc. But I do believe their are gay and lesbian couples out there with a relationship that is as deep. meaningful, loving, and intimate as married couple who has ever lived.

I agree - great post!

It is also funny that the church is so insistent on “natural” relations - natural birth control, natural sex acts, etc. and yet denies that which is obviously natural for numerous people who are naturally “wired” a little different than most in this area. I wouldn’t be surprised to find that the church once condemned the use of the left hand by left handed people… you can be left-handed but don’t be a practicing left-hander!

 

[StevenFrancis]

Can homosexual behavior and the inclination at its origin be ordered toward a good life, a life that is complete, fulfilled, and happy?

---

Many people of every persuasion and stripe who are not called to the vocation of marriage, decide to put their sexual energy to rest in the life prayer of chastity. According to the St. Paul it is the preferred state of all men, though he understands marriage, and does not condemn it. If one chooses a life of chastity, and then has the grace to not make a big public fuss about it, but rather have their lusts as a cross to carry, without action ever taken, then their heart is completely open to Jesus. There is nothing reserved or hidden. The chaste are often the ones called to the beautiful vocations of the Priesthood, or religious life, and have the fullest lives that a human is capable of having. Homosexuality can never be “ordered”. It is disordered. It CAN be accepted as a cross, and used for personal intensification of obedience to God, giving more meaning to ones actions to the glory of God. Our happiness and fulfillment is in paradise. But a person living God’s will for them is also given some happiness here in most cases as well. Not always. (See the lives of the Saints), but sometimes.

Peace,

Steven

 

[Booklover]

Egads and gadzooks Perhaps that be the case, but if it makes them happy why not go with the flow? Happiness is an internal emotion that can only be dictated by the person. So if someone wants to have a sterile union and it doesn’t affect me I say let’em have it.

We live in an immoral world with a contraceptive mentality made possible by the birth control pill. We’ve detached sentiment from reason and made love and romance the highest ideal in life. In the name of love and passion, any rule and convention can be broken. When applied to morality, this mentality is devastating since adultery and even prostitution can be rationalized and even acclaimed. Many so-called Christians today see nothing wrong in premarital sex or cohabitation before marriage. Is it any wonder then, that something as unnatural as homosexuality can be applauded as bringing “happiness” to those who engage in it? If “happiness” can justify homosexual acts, then other deviant forms of sexual behavior deemed pleasurable can also be logically justified. These include: pedophilia, pederasty, ephebophelia, gerontophelia, necrophelia, sadism, masochism, bestiality and other types of deviant behavior.

Vickie

 

[lynx]

We live in an immoral world with a contraceptive mentality made possible by the birth control pill.

I know, isn’t modern science the best

We’ve detached sentiment from reason and made love and romance the highest ideal in life. In the name of love and passion, any rule and convention can be broken. When applied to morality, this mentality is devastating since adultery and even prostitution can be rationalized and even acclaimed.

It is the world’s oldest profession.

Many so-called Christians today see nothing wrong in premarital sex or cohabitation before marriage. Is it any wonder then, that something as unnatural as homosexuality can be applauded as bringing “happiness” to those who engage in it?

First, cohabitation before marriage has been spectacular, at least for me. Second, homosexuality occurs many places in nature.

If “happiness” can justify homosexual acts, then other deviant forms of sexual behavior deemed pleasurable can also be logically justified. These include: pedophilia, pederasty, ephebophelia, gerontophelia, necrophelia, sadism, masochism, bestiality and other types of deviant behavior.

Vickie

The issue here is that what is deviant is relative to the community. What is it about homosexuality that you find particularly harmful? Cuz you see with necrophiliac beastility pedophile raping murderers, I find that having my puppy murdered and raped repeatedly is detrimental to the puppy (cuz he’s dead), to me (emotionally, for cost reasons) and to others (other people having their puppies killed then raped).

 

[The_Bucket]

Who is the aggrieved party in bestiality unless it is with someone else’s animal? Where is the injury in incest if the parties are of age and consent to the sexual relationship? Where is the wrongness in bigamy and polygamy provided that the parties are of age and consent? And if you are in legal possession of a corpse, where is the aggrieved party in necrophilia?

And lynx, modern medicine is awesome. It has cured many ailments and saved many lives. But it has also destroyed many lives through abortion and helped to foster a culture of selfishness. Booklover is exactly right to say that everything comes down to “being happy” and romantic love these days. It’s perpetual adolescence where a person’s feelings trump everything else. A culture like that is not sustainable.

 

[lynx]

Who is the aggrieved party in bestiality unless it is with someone else’s animal?

The animal.

Where is the injury in incest if the parties are of age and consent to the sexual relationship?

None. I find it gross but if cousin lovin’ is your thing then I just don’t wanna know. But, I won’t get the cops to come over to your house and turn the hose on you.

Where is the wrongness in bigamy and polygamy provided that the parties are of age and consent?

Also none, and I really don’t find this too wrong, albeit not for me as well.

And if you are in legal possession of a corpse, where is the aggrieved party in necrophilia?

The corpse, depending upon the wishes of the deceased, and the family members of the corpse.

And lynx, modern medicine is awesome. It has cured many ailments and saved many lives. But it has also destroyed many lives through abortion and helped to foster a culture of selfishness.

Assuming abortion is wrong and selfish.

Booklover is exactly right to say that everything comes down to “being happy” and romantic love these days. It’s perpetual adolescence where a person’s feelings trump everything else. A culture like that is not sustainable.

I don’t find this true. For instance, robbing a bank and me getting lots of money would make me happy but I don’t do it. There are societal and legal constraints that go along with this action. I think you’ll find that the “love trumps all” motto is grossly overestimated. Perhaps you can give me a few examples in real life of this occurring and repeating.

 

[limabeanerson]

Just curious…

The animal.

What if the animal enjoys it? This can be the case, especially with the male animals? Is it ok then?

None. I find it gross but if cousin lovin’ is your thing then I just don’t wanna know. But, I won’t get the cops to come over to your house and turn the hose on you.

What about Dad and daughter lovin’. Is that ok (and just not for you)?

Also none, and I really don’t find this too wrong, albeit not for me as well.

Is there a limit on how many people someone should be able to marry?

The corpse, depending upon the wishes of the deceased, and the family members of the corpse.

If it is the wish of the deceased do you think its ok?

Assuming abortion is wrong and selfish.

You can give the typical (false) arguments to say abortion is not wrong but how could anyone even make an argument that it is not selfish?

 

[djeter]

I’m always amazed at the Church leader’s ability to:

A) Discuss something they have not experienced
B) Discuss something in absolutes that is a unique personal experience

.

Fr. Noriega is a moral theologian. I presume you wouldn’t want him to discuss pederasty without having exerienced that either.

As for moral absolutes, consider:

Opinions And Values
Different cultures may have different opinions about what’s morally right and wrong, just as they have different opinions about what happens after death; but that doesn’t (mean) what’s right in one culture is wrong in another. What’s believed to be right and what really is right aren’t necessarily the same, just as what’s believed to exist after death and what really exists aren’t necessarily the same. We can be wrong about it.

Just because I don’t believe there is no hell doesn’t mean there is none or that I won’t go there. If it did, the infallible way to be saved would be just stop believing in hell!…Just because a good Nazi thinks that genocide is right, that doesn’t mean that it is….An opinion INTENDS something; it refers to something, it has a referent. If values are only opinions, what are their referent? “Thou shalt not murder” and “Courage is good” aren’t opinions about how many people will be killed or how many people are in fact courageous. Values are not opinions about facts or opinions about opinions (opinions without referents).

Moral Differences Need Common Premises (An Absolute)
Beneath a moral difference you always find some moral argument. Otherwise it’s not a moral argument. Because all argument needs a common premise. You can’t even imagine a totally new morality any more than you can imagine a totally new universe, or set of numbers or colors….

Try to imagine a society where honesty and justice and courage and self-control and faith and hope and charity are evil, and lying and cheating and stealing and cowardice and betrayal and addiction and despair and hate are all good. You just can’t do it….You can create different acceptable rules for driving and speech and clothing and eating drinking…but we are not free to make murder or rape or slavery or treason right, or charity and justice wrong. We can create different mores but not different morals….

We know from experience that we’re free to choose to hate, but we’re not free to experience a moral obligation to hate, only to love.
Dr. Peter Kreeft

 

[djeter]

What is it about homosexuality that you find particularly harmful?

The homosexualist activist movement is now over forty years old. Conservatives sometimes refer to the array of goals this movement has pursued — hate crime laws, employment “non-discrimination” laws, same-sex “marriage,” etc. as “the homosexual agenda.”

Occasionally, we are mocked for the use of this term, as though we are suggesting that this movement represents some sinister and shadowy conspiracy. However, the term “agenda” is a perfectly neutral one. We in the pro-family movement certainly have our own “agenda.” .

The homosexualist agenda demands the universal acceptance of homosexual acts and relationships — morally, socially, legally, religiously, politically and financially. Indeed, it calls for not only acceptance, but affirmation and celebration of this behavior as normal, natural, and even as desirable for those who desire it. There is nothing shadowy or secretive about this agenda — in fact, it has become nearly impossible to avoid encountering it.

There is at least one key difference between the “pro-family agenda” and the “pro-homosexual agenda.” In the case of the pro-family agenda, there is a growing and impressive body of social science research and other evidence confirming that the theoretical foundations of pro-family policies are sound, and that pro-family practices benefit society. Sexual relations outside of marriage have been shown to lead to an array of negative physical and psychological consequences. And social science research has clearly shown that children who are raised by their own, married, biological mother and father have a significant advantage in a broad range of outcome measures.

The same cannot be said of the homosexual agenda. In large measure, the pursuit of this agenda has involved an effort to define the benefits homosexuals seek as a matter of “civil rights,” comparable to that which African Americans fought for in the 1960’s; and to define disapproval of homosexual conduct as a form of “bigotry,” comparable to a racist ideology of white supremacy.

However, these themes only make sense if, in fact, a homosexual “orientation” is a characteristic that is comparable to race. But racial discrimination is not wrong merely because a group of people complained loudly and long that it is wrong. Racial discrimination is irrational and invidious because of what I call the five “I’s” — the fact that, as a personal characteristic, race is inborn, involuntary, immutable, innocuous and in the Constitution.

Homosexualist activists would have us believe that the same is true of their homosexuality. They want us to believe that their homosexual “orientation” is something they are born with, cannot choose whether to accept or reject, and cannot change; and that it does no harm (to themselves or to society), while being protected by the principles of the Constitution.

However, these are empirical questions, subject to being verified or refuted based on the evidence. And the evidence produced by research has simply not been kind to this theoretical underpinning of the homosexual movement. It has become more and more clear that none of the “five-I” criteria apply to the choice to engage in homosexual conduct. Homosexual attractions may be involuntary (but they are not immutable); engaging in homosexual relations, however, is clearly voluntary

The homosexualist movement is built, not on facts or research, but on mythology.

As for the harm that befalls homosexuals:

Findings released in 2005 from an on-going, population-based study of young people in New Zealand showed that homosexuality is

“ . . . associated with increasing rates of depression, anxiety, illicit drug dependence, suicidal thoughts and attempts. Gay males, the study shows, have mental health problems five times higher than young heterosexual males. Lesbians have mental health problems nearly twice those of exclusively heterosexual females.” “Study: Young Gay Men At Higher Risk Of Suicide,” 365Gay.com, August 2, 2005; online at: 365gay.com/newscon05/08/080205suicide.htm link now broken, but here are the search results for gay suicide 365gay.com/search/?search=Young%20Gay%20Men%20At%20Higher%20Risk%20Of%20Suicide and there is more than enough evidence among the results

A 2008 “meta-analysis” reviewed over 13,000 papers on this subject and compiled the data from the 28 most rigorous studies. Their conclusion was: “LGB [lesbian, gay, bisexual] people are at higher risk of mental disorder, suicidal ideation, substance misuse and deliberate self harm than heterosexual people.” Michael King, et.al., “A systematic review of mental disorder, suicide, and deliberate self harm in lesbian, gay and bisexual people,” BMC Psychiatry 2008, 8:70 (August 18, 2008); online at: biomedcentral.com/content/pdf/1471-244X-8-70.pdf

HIV/AIDS is not the only sexually transmitted disease for which homosexual men are at risk. The CDC warns, “Men who have sex with men (MSM) are at elevated risk for certain sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), including Hepatitis A, Hepatitis B, HIV/AIDS, syphilis, gonorrhea, and chlamydia.” Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “Viral Hepatitis And Men Who Have Sex With Men,” online at: cdc.gov/hepatitis/Populations/msm.htm (accessed February 5, 2010).

The above is taken from a report titled by Peter Sprigg*The Top Ten Myths About Homosexuality *. There is much more than I could present here. The point is: Would you let a friend fall victim to alcoholism or a heavy smoking habit? How could you let a son or brother become gay?

dj

 

[djeter]

I agree - great post!

It is also funny that the church is so insistent on “natural” relations - natural birth control, natural sex acts, etc. and yet denies that which is obviously natural for numerous people who are naturally “wired” a little different than most in this area. I wouldn’t be surprised to find that the church once condemned the use of the left hand by left handed people… you can be left-handed but don’t be a practicing left-hander!

I’m amazed by your lack of knowledge of Church teachings, Pat. After reading my reply to Lynx or glancing over Peter Spriggs report, are you still as sanguine about homosexuality? Are you aware of your fellow Catholics who struggle with same sex attraction and seek to live chaste lives within the Church teachings? Do you think alcoholism is a joke? Would you bring booze to an AA meeting?

As for Church teachings on contraception and John Paul II’s TOB, you appear deaf to all that as well. It’s not “funny,” dear. Every person needs training in the virtues. To acquire a virtue — to become temperate, brave, just, or prudent — we must repeatedly perform acts that embody that virtue, acts that we accomplish with the help of the Holy Spirit and with the guidance and encouragement of our teachers in virtue. In our society, chastity is a particular virtue that requires special effort. All people, whether married or single, are called to chaste living. Chaste living overcomes disordered human desires such as lust and results in the expression of one’s sexual desires in harmony with God’s will.

What’s wrong with calling people to their better natures, demanding that they be their best?

dj

 

[djeter]

The issue here is that what is deviant is relative to the community.

You may be on to something here Lynx, Here, read a good book:

payingattentiontothesky.com/2009/09/16/book-recommendation-a-refutation-of-moral-relativism-by-peter-kreeft/

Lots of reading selections from Dr. Kreeft.

dj

 

[larkin31]

I’m always amazed at the Church leader’s ability to:

A) Discuss something they have not experienced
B) Discuss something in absolutes that is a unique personal experience

I feel it’s as if I, as a male, went up to a pregnant woman, and told here exactly what her labor was going to be like on every level. 1) I don’t know, I’m male and have never and will never experience labor 2) I don’t know, and no one knows, exactly what it will be like because it’s different for everyone.

As for the intimacy part. I am not buying it at all. I may not like it, understand it, etc. But I do believe their are gay and lesbian couples out there with a relationship that is as deep. meaningful, loving, and intimate as married couple who has ever lived.

yes, indeed

 

[phoenixrrt62]

I don’t see why not.

I’d think any loving, equal, committed relationship is fine-be it hetero, homosexual, bi, poly…why not?

I’ve had 2 heterosexual marriages, and managed to mess both of them up. So, hey.
Just b/c you are hetero, doesn’t give you a corner on a happy relationship.

Just sayin’