Regarding LGBT, Fr James Martin is orthodox

  • Thread starter Thread starter catholic1seeks
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

catholic1seeks

Guest
Fr James Martin, SJ, has been in the Catholic news world for the past year or so due to his book on LGBT persons, Building a Bridge. The book seeks to bring the magisterium and institutional church closer in dialogue with LGBT persons. Many have wrongly condemned Fr James for spouting some kind of heresy.

Well, once and for all, here he expressed what church teaching actually is:

Building a Bridge intentionally steered clear of issues of sexual morality, since I hoped to foster dialogue by focusing on areas of possible commonality; and the church hierarchy and the majority of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Catholics remain far apart on these issues. It also makes little sense to begin a conversation with topics on which the two sides are the farthest apart. Overall, the book was about dialogue and prayer, rather than moral theology. (As a Catholic priest, I have also never challenged those teachings, nor will I.)
Click to expand...
So Fr. James Martin manifestly accepts the Catholic teaching on homosexuality.
 
Last edited:
Homosexual acts are, according to the catechism, “intrinsically disordered” and “contrary to natural law.” (The bulk of the catechism’s attention to homosexuality is contained in Nos. 2357-59.) Consequently, the homosexual orientation (and by extension, any orientation other than heterosexuality) is regarded as “objectively disordered.”

Where does this teaching come from, and what does it mean? While this teaching has some biblical roots (Gn 19:1-29; Rom 1:24-27; 1 Cor 6:10; 1 Tm 1:10), we can perhaps best understand it from the church’s traditional reliance on natural law, which was itself heavily influenced by the writings of St. Thomas Aquinas (who himself drew on Aristotle).

Natural law is founded on the idea that God’s divine will and divine plan for the world and for humanity are not only revealed in the natural world but are, perhaps more important, self-evident to the human mind. During my philosophy studies, the Catholic sister who taught us medieval philosophy told us, “Aquinas wants us to see that the world makes sense.” One can understand God’s plan, says Aquinas, not only by observing nature but also by using our reason.
Click to expand...
Needless to say, all these considerations rule out same-sex marriage. Indeed, official church teaching rules out any sort of sexual activity outside the marriage of a man and a woman—thus the church’s prohibitions on activities like premarital sex, adultery and masturbation.

But there is more to the church’s teaching on this topic in the catechism. Perhaps mindful of the specialized philosophical and theological language, the church teaches that “every sign of unjust discrimination” against gays and lesbians (again, here “homosexual persons”) must be avoided, and gays and lesbians must be treated with the virtues of “respect, compassion and sensitivity.” In my experience, this is the section of the catechism’s teaching on homosexuality that is the least known by most Catholics.
Click to expand...
 
catholic1seeks said:
So Fr. James Martin manifestly accepts the Catholic teaching on homosexuality.
Click to expand...
He does. Unlike so many who rushed to criticize and denounce him, I’ve actually read his book.

There’s nothing unorthodox or heretical in it. Nothing at all.
 
I’ll bring the marshmallows–we’ll make s’mores!
🍫
*searches for graham crackers and marshmallows and sticks
 
There’s something to be said for not making one’s adherence to Church teaching as vague as possible.
 
While there’s certaintly been a bit of overeacting by some on the internet, he’s certaintly made some statements that I’ve found alarming. It depends on which crowd he’s tallking to, but I’ve seen times when it would have been ideal to affirm the church teaching on morality, but he remained silent allowing the implication that the doctrine on homosexuality could change/develop, to remain in the air, and spoke as if assent to all church teachings wasn’t important.
Also not a fan of these “God made you gay” statements, and criticizing the catechism for saying “objectively disordered” either. and suggesting being gay is the deepest part of your identity ect. Not at all.
 
Last edited:
Thank you for posting this! I haven’t read his book but I have been a huge proponent of trying to reach people through commonalities. I understand Fr Martins reasons for steering clearly of the moral teachings of homosexuality l, as they are present in thousands of Catholic books and the Church has always been so clear on its teachings. There has been a horrendous pastoral outreach to so many SSA Catholics. Reading your article, with the link, has brought me great joy! I thank you! God bless
 
Objectively disordered is such a theological/ moral statement. It really benefits few with SSA and risks alienating people more. We lose them if we wound them.

Proverbs 18:19
An offended friend is harder to win back than a fortified city.
 
You don’t just obscure truth for fear of offending someone. I don’t see how or why it should be rewritten.
This is the catechism, so I would expect it to be moral/theological.
 
Last edited:
Until 1973, the American Psychiatric Association considered homosexual inclinations to be abnormal.

Which of course they are.

The has been a campaign of creeping incrementalism at play here in society and, sadly, some in the Church.

The goal is to normalise sodomy. The goal is to make homosexuality as accepted as heterosexuality.

Father Martin’s writings and talks display absolute mastery of dancing on the line between heresy and orthodoxy on the issue of homosexuality.

But have no doubt about the end goal. All the talk of “tolerance” and “building bridges” really comes down to seeing the day come when the Church offers blessings of gay unions.
 
I’ve read a few of his books. Fr Martin never claims infallibility, his work reaches people with love.
 
Despite Fr. Martin’s statements to the contrary, I do not believe that he is orthodox. He may sincerely believe he is, but objectively he is not. I do not base my conclusion on one thing alone that he has said, but rather a repeated pattern of him making sometimes heterodox statements, and sometimes blatantly heterodox statements. His repeated antagonism and criticism of anyone that in any way dares to reaffirm the Church’s teaching on homosexuality does not help his case either. Just scroll through his twitter feed and you’ll see what I mean.

Here are a couple of statements made by Fr. Martin on homosexuality:

He stated in response to an question/answer session at Villanova University:

“I do hope that in 10 years’ time you’ll be able to kiss your partner – or, you know, soon, to be your husband [at the sign of peace during Mass]
. Why not?”
Click to expand...

About the Church’s teaching on homosexuality on not being defined:
For a teaching to be really authoritative it is expected that it will be received by the people of God, by the faithful. So you look at something, like, say, the Assumption . . . people accept that. They go to the Feast of the Assumption, they believe in the Assumption. It’s received. From what I can tell, in the LGBT community, the teaching that LGBT people must be celibate their entire lives—not just before marriage as it is for most people but their entire lives—has not been received.
Click to expand...
He has also associated himself with dissidents that have acted against the Church, such as New Ways Ministry, a group of homosexual advocates that have been rejected by the Church for spreading heretical views. He gave a talk last year with Sr. Jeannine Gramick, SL, one of the co-founders of New Ways Ministry, who was formally censured by the Vatican and ordered not to speak on behalf of the Church, a prohibition that has not been lifted to this day. The Archdiocese of Cincinnati asked them to remove any Catholic labels or associations from the event.

Is there a chance that he really does believe in the teachings of the Church on homosexuality? Perhaps there is a small chance. But I cannot believe that in face of the first-hand evidence that he himself has provided. Some may believe that he is truly sincere and orthodox, and that is their prerogative. I do not.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top