Several Catholic organizations in the US seem to be uncomfortably and awkwardly preoccupied with gay issues. Catholic Answers Live, a radio show I love, sometimes has specific shows dedicated to same-sex marriage or homosexuality. I just switched on EWTN on my TV and the show was talking about the “militant homosexual agenda.” Catholic bloggers and articles are always dedicating topics on this issue; everytime I go to
NewAdvent.org, there is a good chance I’ll see a highlighted article casting the issue in a severe light.
My question is, what is this emphasis on this issue meant to achieve? Is it supposed to help those gay persons who are already struggling to find a place in the Church? Is it supposed to convince the “militant homosexual” activists? Is it supposed to reach out to those in the Church and the world who disagree with church teaching and accept homosexual relationships? Or is it supposed to comfort those who already agree with church teaching?
Maybe I am just sensitive. But I do not see the point with this over-emphasis. I could see how such a preoccupation would turn away those from the Church, as it is making me really disappointed with the USA church’s outreach to those on the fringes.
Consider the thinking of St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas from the
Summa Theologica on the sins of unnatural vice.
Summa Theologica II-II, 154, 12 Whether the unnatural vice is the greatest sin among the species of lust?
Objection 1. It would seem that the unnatural vice is not the greatest sin among the species of lust. For the more a sin is contrary to charity the graver it is. Now adultery, seduction and rape which are injurious to our neighbor are seemingly more contrary to the love of our neighbor, than unnatural sins, by which no other person is injured. Therefore the unnatural sin is not the greatest among the species of lust.
…
On the contrary, Augustine says (De adult. conjug. [The quotation is from Cap. Adulterii xxxii, qu. 7. Cf. Augustine, De Bono Conjugali, viii.]) that “of all these,” namely the sins belonging to lust, “that which is against nature is the worst.”
I answer that, In every genus, worst of all is the corruption of the principle on which the rest depend. Now the principles of reason are those things that are according to nature, because reason presupposes things as determined by nature, before disposing of other things according as it is fitting. This may be observed both in speculative and in practical matters. Wherefore just as in speculative matters the most grievous and shameful error is that which is about things the knowledge of which is naturally bestowed on man, so in matters of action it is most grave and shameful to act against things as determined by nature. Therefore, since by the unnatural vices man transgresses that which has been determined by nature with regard to the use of venereal actions, it follows that in this matter this sin is gravest of all. After it comes incest, which, as stated above (09), is contrary to the natural respect which we owe persons related to us.
With regard to the other species of lust they imply a transgression merely of that which is determined by right reason, on the presupposition, however, of natural principles. Now it is more against reason to make use of the venereal act not only with prejudice to the future offspring, but also so as to injure another person besides. Wherefore simple fornication, which is committed without injustice to another person, is the least grave among the species of lust. Then, it is a greater injustice to have intercourse with a woman who is subject to another’s authority as regards the act of generation, than as regards merely her guardianship. Wherefore adultery is more grievous than seduction. And both of these are aggravated by the use of violence. Hence rape of a virgin is graver than seduction, and rape of a wife than adultery. And all these are aggravated by coming under the head of sacrilege, as stated above (10, ad 2).
**Reply to Objection 1. **Just as the ordering of right reason proceeds from man, so the order of nature is from God Himself: wherefore in sins contrary to nature, whereby the very order of nature is violated, an injury is done to God, the Author of nature. Hence Augustine says (Confess. iii, 8): “Those foul offenses that are against nature should be everywhere and at all times detested and punished, such as were those of the people of Sodom, which should all nations commit, they should all stand guilty of the same crime, by the law of God which hath not so made men that they should so abuse one another. For even that very intercourse which should be between God and us is violated, when that same nature, of which He is the Author, is polluted by the perversity of lust.”
]. Meanwhile, on other threads, we read person after person bemoaning the absence of Church commentary, so I suggest “obsession” is in the eye of the beholder.
