A friend of mine, theology professor Colin Kerr, has created the Canadian Society of Catholic Bloggers,which aggregates posts from the growing Canadian Catholic blogosphere.
Seeing as we have "Fake Bill Tighe" posting here, apparently concerned about gay issues, I thought this post that I came across via the Society's web site might be interesting.
I would encourage "Fake Bill Tighe" to enter respectfully into discussion here or our Moderator will ban him. But in the meantime, how do we as Catholics ensure that those who struggle with same-sex attraction feel welcomed in our midst? How do we genuinely love them and at the same time uphold the whole of Catholic teaching?
This is an excerpt from Melinda Selmys' blog Sexual Authenticity: Homosexuality and Catholicism:
* * *
I recently had a run in with Father Harvey's argument that there is no such thing as a homosexual orientation, because all people are innately heterosexual. I think this is a lovely and rather clever argument which suffers from only two drawbacks: 1) it uses language in a way that is contrary to common usage, and 2) it's not compelling enough to justify its incomprehensibility.
Point 1 is fairly straightforward. When most people talk about homosexuality as a sexual orientation they're talking experientially, not metaphysically. Unless you happen to be talking to a very committed gay philosopher who believes that his homosexuality forms the ontological matrix of his personhood, this argument commits a category error. The average gay, when he says “I'm homosexual,” means, “I experience predominate/exclusive sexual attraction for members of my own sex.” When he says “My homosexuality is innate,” he means, “I have had homosexual attractions for as long as I've had any attractions at all, and the tendency to have such attractions has probably been with me since birth.” The statement, “you are actually innately heterosexual” is meaningless in this context, because it has absolutely no referrent within his experience. It may be true, but it is true in a way that risks being alienating because it is not recognizable.
Truth should not be like that. Truth is effective when it is coupled with beauty in such a way that it resonates within the chambers of the heart. The heartstrings are plucked so that there is immediate recognition: Yes! That. Ita est. There is no need for a clever argument because it's obvious that the truth has been spoken, that the strings of my heart and the strings of the heart of the other are playing in tune. Christ's statements are always like that. He never argues. He just says things, and if your ears are open, and the heart is properly tuned, then it is obvious that what He's saying is True.
Which brings me to the second objection that I have with this argument. It states that the fundamental sexual orientation of the human person is heterosexual. I politely disagree. I think that the fundamental sexual orientation of the human person is Christological.
* * *
Interesting, no? I do not know enough about Theology of the Body to know whether I agree or disagree with her interpretation. And I believe there is something innate about our nature as male or female. I detest talk of "gender," a malleable, relativistic linguistic term that is wreaking havoc on our ability to understand basic objective reality, which includes our biological sexual differences.
But I also reject views that consider homosexual behavior and orientation a simple matter of a lifestyle choice like one might choose Starbuck's coffee over that of Tim Horton's or Dunkin' Donuts. I would like to know that any person with same-sex attraction who is searching and yearning for a deeper relationship with Christ and may not have his or her act together in terms of chastity or celibacy would find a friend in me, not a friend who would enable or encourage behavior that might separate one from Christ, but one who knows she is in no position to judge.