For the same Paul who condemns
homosexual acts as sinful is the Paul who tells women like Anita Bryant to remain silent in the church (I Cor.
The Catholic Church has always
condemned homosexual acts as «intrinsically evil», as well as of course distinguishing clearly between wounded tendencies, sin, and sinner.
Thus we must ask to what extent we consider the proscriptions
against homosexual acts in Leviticus generally binding upon the Christian conscience.
Because there was no concept of gay marriage when the Bible was written, the Bible does not, and could not, address the sinfulness of
homosexual acts done within the context of gay marriage.
Since homosexual acts by their very nature are neither unitive nor generative, but masturbatory, they can have nothing to do with marriage.
A great many people are convinced that the latter is the case — and thus that any expression of the Church's teaching
on homosexual acts will be insensitive and disrespectful.
To put this in other words,
homosexual acts damage what Pope John Paul II rightly calls the «nuptial meaning of the body.»
Why then would we preach a gospel that says that sexual immorality,
including homosexual acts and unmarried sex, is acceptable by God?
Archbishop of Canterbury and the Archbishop of York have released a joint statement on the 50th Anniversary the law which
decriminalised homosexual acts in the UK.
To the neglect of most other vices, Evangelicals are hyper - concerned with pointing out how being queer is a sin, and that the Bible explicitly
denounces homosexual acts.
Yet the original says that the Church's moral tradition in this matter is based upon «Sacred Scripture which
presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity».
As I walked away, I realised that the rally had been a protest in favour of gay rights and later, that Wednesday 23rd February 1994 was the day the government lowered the age of consent for
homosexual acts from 21 to 18.
And he often does it as a way of saying, with quite wilful and undaunted pride, that he is a gay man in a country
where homosexual acts would remain illegal for at least another half decade.
The Catholic Catechism
calls homosexual acts «intrinsically disordered» and calls on gays and lesbians to live in chastity.
Added to the reasons already given to show
how homosexual acts violate the nuptial meaning of the body and the unity of the human person as a bodily being, respect for the health and life of homosexual males ought to make one realize that anal sex, the characteristic kind of homosexual male behavior, is morally bad.
For this reason, Evangelicals and others are not being incoherent when they allow for the use of contraception (a mistaken judgment) while
judging homosexual acts immoral.
The loneliness and lack of male confidence from the adolescent stage of life that lead to same - sex attractions to teen - age males can be resolved with no
further homosexual acting - out behaviours in highly motivated persons.»
That means that a heterosexual
practicing homosexual acts is perverted as in the case of ALL the men of Sodom wanting to engage with the angels (strange flesh).
If females — perhaps even girls before puberty — had the psychic inclination to realize their full orgasmic potentialities, then there would have to be sexual acts between females, and these would far outnumber all heterosexual acts and all male
homosexual acts combined!
Richard Lovelace represents the past evangelical consensus when he argues: «If we can reinterpret the Scripture to
endorse homosexual acts among Christians, we can make it endorse anything else we want to do or believe.6116 Such would have been the near - unanimous opinion of evangelical theologians until recently.
If Paul is not
depicting homosexual acts as sins that lead properly to the condemnation of the sinner but as the key illustration of the results of idolatry, what conclusions can be drawn directly by the reader as to Paul's intention for those who agree with him?
Persons
choosing homosexual acts are not speaking the «language of the body,» in which the body itself is integral to their union as bodily beings.
In the precise
sense homosexual acts comprise anal or oral intercourse chosen by two males, with the intention that at least one of them achieve satisfaction by ejaculating within the other's body.
Choosing to engage in
homosexual acts thus damages or violates the «nuptial meaning of the body» and thereby the capacity of the person to give himself bodily to another in marriage.
The patriarchalism of Hebrew culture shows its hand in the very formulation of the commandment, since no similar stricture was formulated to
forbid homosexual acts between females.
However, I believe that if we seek to understand why Paul
saw homosexual acts as radically contrary to God's design for human sexuality, we will come to understand both the Gospel itself — and that design — much more deeply.
One of the reasons Roman Catholics oppose a revision of the historic teaching of the Church is that they
believe homosexual acts contravene natural law.
What are we to make of those Old Testament passages that in addition to rape condemn
other homosexual acts?