On Fiducia Supplicans

 

[Note: I'm posting this opinion piece that I found online which doesn't align with the interpretation of most "Catholic" prelates out there. I believe this makes the most sense for me as someone who bears the heavy cross of same-sex attraction and yet striving to be truly faithful to what Holy Mother Church has always taught and preached. Please pray for the grace of discernment and conversion for a world that is sinking deeper and deeper into the quagmire of confusion and darkness.]

𝗖𝗼𝗺𝗺𝘂𝗻𝗶𝗾𝘂𝗲 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗦𝘂𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗶𝗼𝗿 𝗚𝗲𝗻𝗲𝗿𝗮𝗹 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗦𝗦𝗣𝗫

𝙃𝙚 𝙬𝙝𝙤 𝙡𝙤𝙫𝙚𝙨 𝙢𝙚 𝙠𝙚𝙚𝙥𝙨 – 𝙖𝙣𝙙 𝙢𝙖𝙠𝙚𝙨 𝙤𝙩𝙝𝙚𝙧𝙨 𝙠𝙚𝙚𝙥𝙚𝙧𝙨 𝙤𝙛 – 𝙢𝙮 𝙘𝙤𝙢𝙢𝙖𝙣𝙙𝙢𝙚𝙣𝙩𝙨.

We are dismayed by the declaration 𝙁𝙞𝙙𝙪𝙘𝙞𝙖 𝙨𝙪𝙥𝙥𝙡𝙞𝙘𝙖𝙣𝙨 of the prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, on the question of blessings for “couples in an irregular situation and couples of the same sex”. Especially since this document was signed by the Pope himself.

Although it purports to avoid any confusion between the blessing of such illegitimate unions and that of a marriage between a man and a woman, this declaration avoids neither confusion nor scandal: not only does it teach that a minister of the Church can call down God’s blessing on sinful unions, but by doing so, it actually reinforces these situations of sin.

The call for such a ‘blessing’ would consist only of asking for these people, in a non-liturgical framework, that “all that is true, good and humanly valuable in their lives and in their relationships be invested, healed and elevated by the presence of the Holy Ghost”.

But to make those who live in a fundamentally flawed union believe that the same could have any positive value is the worst kind of deception, and the most serious lack of charity towards these lost souls. It is wrong to imagine that there is anything good in a situation of public sin, and it is wrong to claim that God can bless couples living in such a situation.

Doubtless, every man can be helped by the prevenient mercy of God, and discover with confidence that he is called to convert in order to receive the salvation that God offers him. And Holy Church never refuses a blessing to sinners who legitimately ask for it: but then, this blessing has no other object than to help the soul to overcome sin in order to live in a state of grace.

Holy Church can therefore bless any individual, even a pagan. But never, in any way, can it bless a union that is sinful in itself, under the pretext of encouraging what is good in it.

When we bless a couple, we do not bless isolated individuals: we necessarily bless the relationship that unites them. However, we cannot redeem an intrinsically bad and scandalous reality.

Such encouragement to proceed pastorally with these blessings leads in practice, inexorably, to the systematic acceptance of situations incompatible with the moral law, whatever else is said. This unfortunately corresponds to the assertions of Pope Francis, who defines as “superficial and naive” the attitude of those who force people to behave “in a way for which they are not yet mature, or of which they are not capable [1]."

This idea, which no longer believes in the power of grace and rejects the cross, does not help anyone avoid sin. It replaces true forgiveness and true mercy with a sadly impotent amnesty. And only accelerates the loss of souls and the destruction of Catholic morality.

All the convoluted language and sophistical dressing up of the document of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith cannot hide the elementary and obvious reality of these blessings: they will do nothing more than reinforce these unions in their intrinsically sinful situation, and encourage others to follow them. This will merely be a substitute for Catholic marriage.

In fact, it manifests a profound lack of faith in the supernatural, in the grace of God and the strength of the cross to live in virtue, in purity and in charity, in accordance with the will of God.

It is a naturalistic and defeatist spirit that loosely aligns itself with the spirit of the world, the enemy of God. This is one more surrender and subjugation to the world, on the part of the liberal and modernist hierarchy, which since the Second Vatican Council has been at the service of the Revolution inside and outside the church.

May the Blessed Virgin Mary, guardian of faith and holiness, come to the aid of the Holy Church. May she especially protect those most exposed to this chaos: children, now forced to grow up in a new Babylon, without reference points or a guide that reminds them of the moral law.

Don Davide Pagliarani

Superior General

Menzingen, 19th December 2023

[1] Pope Francis, Interview with the Jesuits at Lisbon, 5th August 2023.

On The Dignity and Vocation of Homosexual Persons

This has just been out, a month before the upcoming Synod. The local bishops have finally spoken on the topic of homosexuality through a pastoral letter and I urge everyone especially those who identify themselves as members of the LGBT community to reflect deeply on this letter. After reading this, I hope that we come to realize that homosexual persons have dignity and vocation from God, that homosexual attractions and urges do not define who we really are and so discover in the process the basis of our true identity - which is that of a beloved child of God - unique and precious in His eyes so as to die for us on the cross in order to save us from our sinfulness.

A Pastoral Response to the Acceptance of Homosexual Lifestyle And Legalization of Homosexual Unions

The Nature of Marriage in the Divine Plan

THE creation narratives at the beginning of Sacred Scripture reveal that God made human beings in His image and likeness. He created them male and female, equal in dignity but not identical nor interchangeable.

He made one explicitly for the other – “It is not good that the man should be alone” (RSV, Gen. 2:18)1 – equal as persons, not alike but complementary. So that in relating to each other, as male and female, one would complete the other as two halves coming together to be whole.

This complementarity between man and woman, as St. Pope John Paul II has pointed out, is observed and affirmed at the biological, emotional, psychological, and spiritual levels. But it is most manifest primarily in and through the union of two complementary bodies, male and female.

“The body, which through its own masculinity or femininity right from the beginning helps both (man and woman) to find themselves in communion of persons, becomes, in a particular way, the constituent element of their union, when they become husband and wife.”2

Simply put, human beings, created by God as either male or female, are meant to complement each other in a union of the two intended from their creation. And human sexuality, characterized as distinctly masculine or feminine, is ordered by nature towards that union, of one specifically with the other.

Having created man and woman, Scripture continues, God instituted marriage as the form of life in which the complementarity of man and woman would be fulfilled and perfected. “Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and cleaves to his wife, and they become one flesh” (Gen. 2:24).

And as it is ordered or directed to the union of man and woman, human sexuality is also ordered towards the procreation and education of children. It is in and through the conjugal union that God has willed to give man and woman a share in His work of creation: “Be fruitful and multiply” (Gen. 1:28).

In the Creator’s plan we see, therefore, that sexual complementarity and fruitfulness belong to the very nature of marriage. In other words, marriage by its very nature and intention is unitive and procreative.

Marriage is also the form of life best suited for the flourishing of children. As St. Thomas Aquinas explained, human children need, not only nourishment for their bodies, but also education for their souls. This they acquire best, according to St. Thomas, when they have both parents – father and mother, male and female – as their teachers and role models.3

The Catechism of the Catholic Church explains: “The intimate community of life and love which constitutes the married state has been established by the Creator and endowed by him with its own proper laws. . . . God himself is the author of marriage.”4

In sum, the Catholic Church teaches that marriage is the institution established by God for the foundation of the family: “The matrimonial covenant, by which a man and a woman establish between themselves a partnership of the whole of life, is by its nature ordered toward the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of offspring; this covenant between baptized persons has been raised by Christ the Lord to the dignity of a sacrament.”5

In other words, God created human beings as male and female, complementary and specifically for each other, and ordered or directed towards union and procreation that are intended to be fulfilled and perfected in marriage.


The Nature of Homosexuality in the Created Order

Created either male or female, and by their masculine or feminine sexuality thus directed towards union with the other who complements them, men and women are naturally drawn and relate to each other in this order.

There are some men and women, however, often through no fault of their own, who find themselves sexually attracted to individuals of the same sex.6

A comprehensive explanation for same-sex attraction or homosexual tendencies and inclinations remains elusive to this day, but research undertaken within various branches of science and medicine at various levels indicate that male and female homosexuality, though different in character, have both biological and environmental causes.

Sexual attraction towards the same sex is not a sin. But it is, in the light of our understanding of marriage, objectively disordered – in the sense that it is not ordered towards the union of male and female in a relationship of natural complementarity.

Homosexual acts or practices that may arise from such attraction, although they may proceed from and be motivated by genuine affection between two persons of the same sex, are similarly not ordered to the union of the two persons and to the procreation of children.

Because they are not unitive and procreative – the distinct qualities of a complementary union of man and woman in marriage – homosexual acts or practices are “contrary to the natural law”7. Hence, they are, from the perspective of natural law, gravely disordered and considered “sins gravely contrary to chastity”.8

The Catholic Church acknowledges that the number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies could be more than we think and that this inclination “constitutes for most of them, a trial.”9

The Catholic Church looks at her children who have deep seated homosexual attraction with motherly compassion and paternal love, even as she reminds them that in cultures that have lost sight of the richness and diversity of friendships that enhance the human condition, those who struggle with homosexuality are called to witness to the life-giving nature of virtue-based friendships not ordered to sexual acts.

Those who find themselves sexually attracted to others of the same sex are called to develop chaste friendships with both men and women.

The Church certainly recognizes that like all growth in virtue, this challenge is a difficult one that will require a robust supernatural life that is radically open to the grace and mercy of God. Frequent recourse to the sacraments of penance and the Holy Eucharist is a necessary condition for growth in holiness.


The Social Reality of Homosexual Unions

Over the past few years, in an increasing number of countries, including traditionally Catholic countries, homosexual unions have been granted legal recognition equal to that of marriage.

In our understanding of God’s creation of man and woman in complementarity and in His establishment of marriage, however, there are absolutely no grounds for considering homosexual unions to be similar or even remotely analogous to God’s plan for marriage and the family.10 A homosexual union is not and can never be a marriage as properly understood and so-called.

In response to this emerging social reality and for the guidance of the faithful, therefore, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith instructs:

In those situations where homosexual unions have been legally recognized or have been given the legal status and rights belonging to marriage, clear and emphatic opposition is a duty. One must refrain from any kind of formal cooperation in the enactment or application of such gravely unjust laws and, as far as possible, from material cooperation on the level of their application. In this area, everyone can exercise the right to conscientious objection.11

Concretely, this means that Catholics cannot participate in any way or even attend religious or legal ceremonies that celebrate and legitimize homosexual unions. Understandably, this will be a particularly heavy cross for families that have been touched by homosexuality. The Church reaches out with compassion to these families whose loved ones have entered into such unions.

In countries where homosexual unions have not been legalized – a vast majority of countries worldwide, including the Philippines – Catholics are called to give witness to the whole moral truth about human sexuality, which is contradicted “both by approval of homosexual acts and the unjust discrimination against homosexual persons.”12

Moreover, Catholics are called to resist all attempts to normalize homosexual behavior and homosexual unions in their culture.

The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith also recommends the following actions that may be effective in societies that may begin to manifest an inclination to legalize homosexual unions:

• Unmasking the way in which such tolerance [of homosexual unions] might be exploited or used in the service of ideology;
• Stating clearly the immoral nature of these unions;
• Reminding the government of the need to contain the phenomenon within certain limits so as to safeguard public morality and, above all, to avoid exposing young people to erroneous ideas about sexuality and marriage that would deprive them of their necessary defenses and contribute to the spread of the phenomenon.13

Catholics are called to oppose all gravely unjust laws that contravene both divine law and natural law – including all laws that legalize homosexual unions – because these unjust laws pervert and undermine the common good.

They are at the same time called, perhaps even more so in societies that legally recognize homosexual unions, to be charitable to every single homosexual person they know.

In particular, families with members who struggle with homosexuality are called to love them unconditionally, thereby outlasting all their other same-sex loves. This love, however, must be a love in truth that avoids praising, consenting to, or defending the so-called “homosexual lifestyle.”

Finally, given their unique vocation, Catholic politicians are obliged to oppose the legal recognition of homosexual unions in a particularly vigorous way. When legislation in favor of this recognition is first proposed, the Catholic lawmaker has a moral duty to express his opposition clearly and publicly and to vote against it. “To vote in favor of a law so harmful to the common good is gravely immoral.” 14

And, in countries where legislation in favor of homosexual unions is already in force, the Catholic lawmaker must try to obtain at least the partial repeal of the unjust law when its total abrogation is not possible at the moment.15


Arguments Against the Legalization of Homosexual Unions

Marriage is a social institution that has been granted privileges and benefits by the state because it is an institution of the natural law that contributes to the common good in a way that no other relationship can, i.e., the procreation and education of children.

Marriage binds a man and a woman together for life so that the offspring of their union would have the experience and benefit of the complementary male and female presence in their total development.

Homosexual unions, on the other hand, do not have the basic biological and anthropological elements of marriage and family. They are not able to contribute in a proper way to the procreation and survival of the human race16, and thus it would be an injustice to grant them legal recognition along with the same benefits and privileges accorded to marriage.

Neither can this injustice be mitigated by allowing homosexual couples to either adopt children or use artificial reproductive technologies to engender them. Such actions would intentionally deprive these children of the experience of fatherhood or of motherhood that they would need to develop and flourish, not only as human persons, but as persons living in a gendered society where socialization involves the learning of gendered social norms.

This too would be a grave injustice, especially in light of the principle, “recognized by the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, that the best interests of the child, as the weaker and more vulnerable party, are to be the paramount consideration in every case.”17

It would likewise be unjust if homosexual unions were granted privileges and benefits identical to those of marriages because this act would redefine marriage, making it “an institution devoid of essential reference to factors [that are necessarily] linked to heterosexuality; for example, procreation and raising children.”18


Responding to Arguments for the Legalization of Homosexual Unions

In any debate that runs current to a proposal to legalize homosexual unions, four major arguments have been and will continue to be advanced.

The following enumeration and discussion is presented for the understanding and enlightenment of Catholics seeking appropriate responses to such arguments.

1. To deny homosexual unions the legal status of marriage is to unjustly discriminate against homosexual persons who simply wish to express their love and commitment to their same-sex partners as heterosexual spouses do.

The Catholic response: Distinguishing between persons or refusing social recognition or benefits to specific individuals or groups of individuals is immoral only when it is contrary to justice. Marriage is more than just the mutual affirmation one’s love and commitment to a beloved. This is why the state regulates and licenses marriage in a way that it does not regulate other types of friendship, which to some degree, all involve the mutual affirmation of love and commitment between and among friends – because only marriage can naturally and directly contribute children and a stable environment for the raising of those children, to the common good.

Denying homosexual unions the social and legal status of marriage simply affirms that these unions, as well as other non-marital unions similar to them, are not equivalent to marriage because they cannot give society what marriages can give. This is not opposed to justice. On the contrary, justice demands it.19

2. Homosexual unions should be legally recognized because individuals, whether they are heterosexual or homosexual, should have the right to do whatever they want to, if doing so does not hurt or impinge upon the freedom of others.

The Catholic response: As the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith explains, it is one thing for individual persons to freely engage in their private activities, and another very different thing for them to demand that the state sanction these activities, especially when they would harm the common good.

This would be the case if homosexual unions were legally recognized.20

Rightly respecting individual autonomy does not mean that society has to do everything that an autonomous individual demands that it do.

3. Homosexual unions should be legally recognized because they are occasions for virtue, and as such, are good for society. There are many instances where same-sex couples have clearly grown in virtue, for example, the virtues of patience, forgiveness, and generosity, in and through their efforts to build a life together.

The Catholic response: It may be true that homosexual unions, in certain cases, may be occasions for the growth of imperfect natural virtue. However, this alone would not be a reason for granting them the legal status of marriage, because they still do not and cannot contribute to the common good in the same way that marriages do.

Moreover, the Catholic Church has the obligation to remind same-sex couples that natural virtue is insufficient for salvation and for the eternal beatitude to which everyone is called. Only the supernatural virtues are salvific.

4. Marriage as a social institution has evolved and changed numerous times over the course of human history to accommodate the needs of a particular society and culture. Thus, marriage should evolve once more to accommodate our contemporary notions of human sexuality that recognize the fluidity not only of gender identities but also of sexual orientations.

The Catholic response: The truth about marriage, i.e., that it is a social institution ordered towards the life-long union of a man and a woman and the procreation and education of their children, is attainable by human reason.

However, given fallen human nature, especially given the interior disarray of our carnal desires that obscures our intellect, it is a truth that is often hard to grasp, and only after a long time, and with the admixture of many errors.

Not surprisingly, therefore, there has been and will continue to be throughout history, much confusion about the nature of marriage. Nonetheless, error is not a reason to abandon truth.


A Pastoral Response to the Legalization of Homosexual Unions

In societies that have legalized homosexual unions and in societies that are inclined to grant homosexual unions legal status, the Catholic Church is called, like her Lord did in his own time, to preach the good and saving news of marriage, by turning once again to God’s plan “in the beginning,” especially as it has been taught in the papal magisterium of Pope St. John Paul II in his Theology of the Body.

To the Catholic people and to other Christian believers, the Catholic Church is called to renew her efforts to catechize the faithful about the true nature of creation and marriage. This is especially urgent for our young people who may be led into error and doubt by those social movements that want to normalize homosexuality and to legalize homosexual unions.

For the Filipino people, we the Catholic bishops will be publishing a short catechism that specifically responds in simple language to the most common questions and objections raised by critics of the Church’s teaching on marriage and homosexual unions. Notably, however, we also acknowledge that the confusion surrounding the true nature of marriage cannot be driven out of the culture without the penance, prayer, and fasting of God’s holy people (cf. Mk. 9:29).

To families with members who struggle with homosexuality and who are tempted to ostracize their sons and daughters, the Catholic Church is called to preach mercy as her Lord did, without forgetting that the mercy of Jesus is always accompanied by his challenge to the woman caught in adultery that “from now on, do not sin again” (Jn. 8:11).

For the Filipino people, we the Catholic bishops consider addressing the familial shame that is experienced by Filipino families touched by homosexuality. It is a shame that needs to be redeemed in Christ through the intercession of Mary, the Mother of God.

Finally, and most importantly, to homosexual individuals who are tempted either to pride or to despair, the Catholic Church is called to preach the power of grace through prayer and Holy Communion, and the mercy of Jesus Christ through the sacrament of penance.

It is Jesus Christ, and he alone, who can heal every broken human heart that yearns for unconditional love and authentic friendship. It is Jesus Christ, and he alone, who faithfully accompanies the homosexual person from grace unto glory.



From the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines, August 28, 2015

+SOCRATES B. VILLEGAS
Archbishop of Lingayen Dagupan
President, Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines


Endnotes:
_______________________________________
1 Catechism of the Catholic Church, §1605.
2 Pope John Paul II, “Marriage, One and Indissoluble in the First Chapters of Genesis,” General Audience, November 21, 1979, Vatican City.
3 St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra gentiles III-II.122.8.
4 Vatican II, Gaudium et spes, 48 §1. (cf. CCC, §1603)
5 Codex Iuris Canonici, can. 1055 § 1; cf. Gaudium et spes, 48 § 1.
6 In the United States, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported in 2014 that 1.6% of the U.S. population identify themselves as gay, lesbian, and that 0.7% consider themselves bisexual. For details, see Ward et al., “Sexual Orientation and Health Among U.S. Adults: National Health Interview Survey, 2013,” National Health Statistics Reports Number 77, July 15, 2014.
7 Catechism of the Catholic Church, §2357.
8 Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, “Considerations Regarding Proposals to Give Legal Recognition to Unions Between Homosexual Persons, June 3, 2003,” §4.
9 Catechism of the Catholic Church, §2358.
10 Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, “Considerations Regarding Proposals to Give Legal Recognition to Unions Between Homosexual Persons, June 3, 2003,” §4.
11 Ibid, §5.
12 Ibid.
13 Ibid.
14 Ibid., §10.
15 Ibid.
16 Ibid., §7.
17 Ibid.
18 Ibid., §8.
19 Ibid.
20 Ibid.

Sodomy - A Sin that Cries to Heaven

I once heard a certain pastor of a gay church here in the Philippines said on a national TV debate that often quoted argument that Sodom and Gomorrah were punished because of the sin of inhospitality. Seriously? Fire and brimstone punishment for being inhospitable? Sodomy is so grave that it is one of the sins that cries to heaven. It is a sin against nature and an abomination in the eyes of God. Persist in this sin and you will be lost forever. Repentance is the only way out and like Lot and his daughters never ever look back.


And the Lord said: The cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is multiplied, and their sin is become exceedingly grievous. I will go down and see whether they have done according to the cry that is come to me: or whether it be not so, that I may know. – Gen. 18:20-21

The “Sin of Sodom” is described as “carnal sin against nature, which is a voluntary shedding of the seed of nature, out of the due use of marriage, or lust with a different sex.”1 Given modernity’s substitution of God and Nature with the will of the individual as an autonomous moral universe, sodomy – more specifically active homosexuality, not orientation – has become part of the new post-Christian norm. Neither Divine Law nor Natural Law form an external guide for the modern man; thus, the only boundary of autonomous individual is the autonomy of another. The boundary for what is and is not moral appears to be consent. Consequently, moral dialogue has been flattened to mere platitudes, e.g., this isn’t hurting anyone, it’s my body and my choice, love is love. Many often comment on the modern West’s apparent lack of morality, but few comment on the fact the West has lost the vocabulary to even discuss on morality.2

A few distinctions. First, the issue of same-sex marriage is not a religious issue, it is a rational and philosophical one. Considerations of marriage as a natural institution, the moral import of natural law, and the harmony between unity and procreation in sex are all within the purview of the natural virtues and reason; however, as geology and astronomy may both tell us the Earth is round, so too can the two sciences of theology and philosophy tell us the same thing.3 For example, no one holds that the commandment thou shall not murder was unknown before God revealed it on Mt. Sinai. It was revelation confirming reason, a demonstration of the greater truth that grace perfects nature.

The discussion for this list is less about same-sex marriage and more about a proper interpretation of Scripture. It is a conversation about those who do see Sacred Scripture as a moral authority, but attempt to harmonize their modernist views on sexuality with the Holy Bible. Typically, this leads to “new” interpretations of Scriptures on homosexuality. These interpretations are often weak and out of context, but since they serve the end that people want people follow them. A tenuous intellectual argument will always serve as long as it achieves the end people desire, especially if that end is wrapped in autonomy and sexual gratification.


On the Interpretation of Hospitality Violations

Those who argue that Sodom and Gomorrah should be understood outside any homosexual context often submit that the divine judgment of those cities was due to violations of Ancient Near East hospitality laws. In The Sin of Sodom & Gomorrah is not about Hospitality, the good Msgr. Pope offers a strong rebuttal. In part:

First there is a text from Ezekiel:

Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. They were haughty and did abominable things before me. Therefore I did away with them as you have seen. (Ezekiel 16:49-50)

Now this is the text used most often by those who deny any homosexual context in the sin of Sodom. And, to be fair, it does add a dimension to the outcry God hears. There are clearly additional sins at work in the outcry: pride, excess or greed, and indifference to the poor and needy. But there are also mentioned here unspecified “abominations.” The Hebrew word is תּוֹעֵבָ֖ה (tō·w·‘ê·ḇāh) which refers to any number of things God considers especially detestable, such as worshiping idols, immolating children, wrongful marriage and also homosexual acts. For example, Leviticus 18:22 uses the word in this context: Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; it is an abomination.4

But of itself, this text from Ezekiel does remind us that widespread homosexuality is not the only sin of Sodom. And while the abomination mentioned here may not be specified exactly, there is another Scriptural text that does specify things more clearly for us. It is from the Letter of Jude:

In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire. In the very same way, these dreamers pollute their own bodies, reject authority and slander celestial beings. (Jude 7-8)

And thus it is specified that the central sin of Sodom involved “sexual immorality (ἐκπορνεύσασαι) and perversion (ἀπελθοῦσαι ὀπίσω σαρκὸς ἑτέρας – literally having departed to strange or different flesh).” And this would comport with the description of widespread homosexual practice in Sodom wherein the practitioners of this sin are described in Genesis 19 as including, “all the men from every part of the city of Sodom—both young and old.”

Hence we see that, while we should avoid seeing the sin of Sodom as only widespread homosexual acts (for what city has only one sin?), we cannot avoid that the Scriptures do teach that homosexual acts are central to the sins of Sodom which cry to heaven for vengeance, and for which God saw fit to bring a fiery end.

Genesis 19 speaks plainly of the sin, Ezekiel 16 broadens the description but retains the word “abomination,” and Jude 7 clearly attests to sexual perversion as being the central sin with which Sodom and Gomorrah were connected.

One of the takeaways from the good monsignor’s commentary is that sexual perversion is not the only sin of which Sodom and Gomorrah were guilty. Many allow themselves to be confused by arguments that attempt to replace the primary sin (sexual perversion in a homosexual context) with the secondary sins.5 And while the discussion here is not necessarily why homosexuality is a sin that cries to heaven, it should serve to clarify that it is impossible to read the Sodom and Gomorrah narrative outside a homosexual context.


[Source: www.stpeterslist.com]

Footnotes:

1. Douay Catholic Catechism of 1649, Q. 928 – Thank you to Taylor Marshal for posting this excerpt on his blog. Marshall makes the point that America has failed “four for four” on these sins that cry out to heaven.

2. Moral Vocabulary: When he was Archbishop of Denver, His Excellency Chaput gave a talk that incorporated the problem of the lost moral vocabulary. Repentance & Renewal, 2010.

3. Theology as a Science: For an introduction to understanding Sacred Doctrine as the Queen of the Sciences and how she orders those sciences, see Queen of the Sciences and Queen of the Sciences II.

4. SPL Note on Leviticus & Homosexuality: When Lev. 18:22 is cited as an undeniable condemnation of homosexuality in Scripture, it is often met with certain sophist rebuttals, e.g., Leviticus also outlaws shaving, tattoos, and eating pork. First note that these statements are an assertion, not an argument. The underlying argument that is needed on both sides is how one decides what is still valid law and what is not. In short, as Catholics we know that the OT is perfected in the NT and the NT is foreshadowed in the OT; thus, we see in Scripture Christ’s intent to perfect the law, not abolish it. Certain laws, however, demand a change in order to be perfected. For example, the OT law of circumcision was perfected in the Sacrament of Baptism. The Levitical laws on purity are a subject we see both St. Peter and St. Paul address. Homosexuality, on the other hand, was restated as a sin by St. Paul. In reverse, one could always ask those who use this argument against Leviticus what their hermeneutic for understanding the OT and NT is. It will, inevitably, be their own autonomous will. For more see Catholic Answers on the subject. 

5. Further Commentary on the Hospitality View: In addition to Msgr. Pope’s article, Catholic Answers addresses it in their treatment of homosexuality in general and Fr. Longenecker comments on it in his article The Sin of Sodom. In related studies, the good Msgr. Pope has written about the wrath of God and several other articles on homosexuality (Biblical Teaching on Homosexuality, the “Lost Generation of the Church,” and a Pastor’s Attempt to Teaching the Bible on Homosexuality). Catholicism holds that the laws of the State are drawn from the laws of nature, and the laws of nature are distinct from the divine laws in Scripture. To understanding the relationship of laws and the context in which Catholicism advocates for the legal defense of natural marriage, see Think like a Catholic – 7 Questions on the Four Laws. A collection of Catholic documents on sexuality and the pastoral care of homosexually oriented person is found at 5 Catholic Documents on Family, Sex, and Homosexuality. Those who still question the traditional interpretation of the Church on homosexuality may reference Early Church: 12 Quotes on Homosexuality & Other Sexual Sins. 

Same-Sex 'Marriage' and the Marxist Agenda

Did you think that the SCOTUS ruling upholding the legality of same-sex marriage in the United States was just about tolerance and marriage equality rights? Think again.

The Marxist Agenda Behind the Rainbow

by Douglas Hagmann

If you think Friday’s Supreme Court decision was about equality or equal rights for the three percent of the American population (at the expense of the 97 percent), you couldn’t be more wrong. If you think that Friday’s decision has no impact on you because you don’t care what people do in the privacy of their bedrooms, you couldn’t be more wrong. If you think the homosexual agenda is about tolerance, diversity or other slick marketing buzzwords, you are not only wrong, but sorely misinformed, misguided or you are purposely facilitating a lie.

America has a huge problem right now. Multiple problems, in fact, but like the victims of a train wreck, we must do triage so we can apply treatment in order of importance. The blunt force trauma inflicted upon America by five rogue members of our judiciary, redefining marriage as a result of a highly potent cabal of activists intent on America’s destruction, certainly moves this problem up the list of importance.

In order to know how to fix the problem, however, you’ve got to know as much about the problem as possible. You need accurate information, not the spin of some morally bankrupt politician or the spin of agenda-driven talking heads who confine their discourse to the captive narrative of the archaic and completely fictitious right-left political paradigm. The next federal election will not solve our problems, for our problems are so threatening to our life and liberty, we might not have the time.

As I’ve already suggested, those reveling in the rainbow of diversity and whose chests swell with pride at the luminous display at the seat of American power fall into one of two groups: the ignorant, misguided, brainwashed and/or spiritually, morally and selfishly decadent (i.e. unwitting dupes), or the facilitators of one of the biggest lies ever perpetrated on our nation. What we have witnessed is not the beginning of tolerance and diversity, but its unceremonious demise through the completion of one giant step in the orchestrated dismantling of our country that is part of a much larger plan. It is a critical and vitally important step toward the formation of a “new world order” that no “dignified” journalist or syndicated talk show host will ever acknowledge exists.

The destruction of the moral fabric of America was set in motion generations ago under not a rainbow flag, but a Communist flag. Who better to usher in this mortal wound to our nation than the Manchurian Marxist Messiah of mystery and dubious origin and his cabal of renegade abettors?

What we see taking place today might not have been completely stopped, but it might have been slowed had those who held the attention of Christian conservatives pressed the legitimate issue of the eligibility and allegiance of Barack Hussein Obama as a candidate for the highest office in America. Alas, it was not to be, as those most revered by the conservative right dutifully parroted the lie that the background, origin and constitutional eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama, or Barry Soetoro, perhaps, was nothing but a distraction.

Over the din of their vocal objections, or in some instances, assurances and more lies, those of us in search of the unadulterated truth can hear the unmistakable sickening sound of our freedoms, liberties and rights Cheyne-Stoking as their traumatic death approaches. Yet, those who fought us then continue to dismiss us today. They adhere to a choreographed narrative that fits within the script of the big lie, and one that is as shrewdly narrow as it is factually shallow. For this, it appears, requires less intellectual aptitude of the entranced American than the necessary first steps of a full recovery would require.

Meanwhile, Americans are served their daily portion of the big lie – in this case, sold under the pretext of diversity and tolerance and illustrated by the silly mantra “love wins.” Love, much like equal rights, has absolutely nothing to do with the larger agenda of rending America’s moral fabric. Redefining marriage and the traditional family is a well-documented plank of the Communist takeover of America, a tactic to destroy our Constitutional Republic, and an admission requirement to enter a system of global government.


The Homosexual Agenda is rooted in Communism

The activist homosexual agenda in America has its roots in Communism. On January 10, 1963, Representative A. S. Herlong, Jr. of Florida read 45 goals of Communism in America into the Congressional Record. Listed at #26 was to “present homosexuality, degeneracy, and promiscuity as normal, natural and healthy.” What was considered abhorrent behavior and a sin by all of the world’s major religions only a half-century ago is not only accepted and ostensibly “legitimized” today, but is being openly celebrated at the White House and state houses across America.

Why is virtually no one asking how approximately three-(3) percent of our population has seemingly succeeded in changing the moral and legal landscape for 97 percent of the population? How did this change happen so quickly? It nearly mirrors the meteoric rise of Barack Hussein Obama from a virtual unknown to the putative President.

The answers exist in history. The promotion of the fraudulent research of Alfred Kinsey, the highly organized and well-funded efforts of Marxist Harry Hays, founder of the Mattachine Society in 1950, the effective use of Hollywood and Madison Avenue, to the refinement of the homosexual agenda by homosexual activists Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen in the 1980’s – when they made public their very specific tactics in their book, After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the ’90s, were all cogs in the larger mechanism designed to destroy the morality of America.

When you read the dissenting opinions of Justices Thomas and Scalia in last Friday’s SCOTUS decision, you will see some very chilling statements, including these from Justice Clarence Thomas (Please read and consider these in the context of the above):

“The Court’s decision today is at odds not only with the Constitution, but with the principles upon which our Nation was built. Since well before 1787, liberty has been understood as freedom from government action, not entitlement to government benefits.”

“Aside from undermining the political processes that protect our liberty, the majority’s decision threatens the religious liberty our Nation has long sought to protect.”

“Our Constitution—like the Declaration of Independence before it—was predicated on a simple truth: One’s liberty, not to mention one’s dignity, was something to be shielded from—not provided by—the State. Today’s decision casts that truth aside. In its haste to reach a desired result, the majority misapplies a clause focused on “due process” to afford substantive rights, disregards the most plausible understanding of the “liberty” protected by that clause, and distorts the principles on which this Nation was founded. Its decision will have inestimable consequences for our Constitution and our society.”

The end of the beginning

Many people believe that this ruling will remedy perceived injustices against a (falsely) significant segment of our population. These same people believe that this ruling marks the end of a long and arduous journey for equal rights. They are wrong, for this is merely the end of the beginning. The global activists, the Marxists and Communists propelling this agenda don’t care about rights, despite the pretty packaging. There is no pot of gold at the end of this rainbow.

Having been empowered by SCOTUS, enablers and abettors at the Executive branch and others in power, they are now “all in” to complete the destruction of our nation. The agenda is as big as the lie.

Barring any immediate intervention and unified civil disobedience, what will follow will be exponentially worse to what will be left of our nation. Unless immediate action is taken, the mortal blow that was delivered to our country last week will become fatal.

It is imperative that we understand the depth, breath and scope of the lie and the globalist, Communist agenda behind it. It is important we identify the agents of destruction. They, and their agenda, must be fully exposed.

Alternatively, the Cheyne-Stoke respirations of our liberties and freedoms we (still) enjoy under our Constitutional Republic will cease. Not because of their recovery, however, but due to their death.

Pray. Prepare.



About Douglas Hagmann

Douglas J. Hagmann has been a veteran investigator in the private sector for nearly three decades, working for many Fortune 100 companies investigating high-value fraud cases. He is an author, public speaker and the senior host of the Hagmann & Hagmann Report.

Fathers, Sons and Homosexuality

Fathers, love your sons. Today as we celebrate Father's Day, I want to remind all fathers out there to spend quality time with your sons and build an intimate relationships with them. Many of us men struggling with same-sex attractions have a lot of deep and painful issues with our own fathers and although we do not want to put the blame on them for our personal struggles, I think it is fair to say that many fathers today do not know how to become good fathers. This very short article will reveal to you that missing link in your relationships with your sons that I hope may create a truly lasting and authentic father-son relationship. Happy Father's Day!

A SHARED DELIGHT

by Joseph Nicolosi, Ph.D.

In my search for the particular quality of father-son bonding that is fundamental to the development of the boy's masculine identity, I have been led to a phenomenon that I call "a shared delight."

I am convinced that the healthy development of masculine identification depends on this phenomenon. This special emotional exchange should be between the boy and his father, although a father figure or grandfather may serve the purpose where no father is available. It is not a single event or one-time occurrence, but should characterize the relationship.

This particular style of emotional attunement is especially important during the critical developmental gender-identity period.

Homosexual men have great difficulty recalling childhood father-son activities that were fun, exciting and enjoyable and included success and achievement for the client-- a shared delight. They typically do not have many positive memories of their fathers coaching them to gain a new skill that involves bodily activity or strength. Indeed, many lament this deprivation.

An example of "a shared delight" is found in writer and social commentator Malcolm Muggeridge's autobiobiography. Malcolm's father was his hero; and as a teenager, Malcolm would travel to his father's office in London. When the young man arrived, he noticed an embodied shift in his father:

"When he saw me, his face always lit up, as it had a way of doing, quite suddenly, thereby completely altering his appearance; transforming him from a rather cavernous, shrunken man into someone boyish and ardent. He would leap agilely off his stool, wave gaily to his colleague... and we would make off together.

"There was always about these excursions an element of being on an illicit spree, which greatly added to their pleasure. They were the most enjoyable episodes in all my childhood."

As we work with men who experience same-sex attractions, we hear that repeated theme--their inability to recall "a shared delight."

Physical interaction between father and son appears essential in making the father feel familiar, non-mysterious, and approachable in the boy's eyes.

So much of what lies behind adult same-sex attraction is that deep, lingering, unsatisfied desire for physical closeness with a man. With internalization of the father's masculinity, there will be no need to sexualize another man.

That Thing Called Same Sex 'Marriage'

As Ireland finally embraced the legalization of same sex 'marriage', we are again reminded of the very pitiful state of affairs that we find ourselves in in this increasingly secularist and modernist society of ours. The short video above should help enlighten us on why moral issues like same sex 'marriage', divorce, euthanasia, etc., are not a matter of and subject to popular opinion polls and referendums, but are solidly based upon the natural law and God's moral order. As we are also celebrating today the Feast of the Pentecost, let us implore the Holy Spirit to grant us His seven gifts particularly the gifts of wisdom and fear of the Lord to help us do the right thing.

On Gay Religious and Priests

It is appalling to think that within the hierarchy of the Catholic Church are religious men leading scandalous lives. This video narrates in particular a former Jesuit's experience while he was in seminary formation. To say it is shocking is an understatement.

To all practicing gay men in the priesthood or the seminary I have two words for you - GET. OUT.

And for those future gay seminarians who have plans of hiding behind the veil of religious life their deep seated same-sex struggle with no intentions whatsoever to divulge their condition to their superiors or seek help to reform their lives, I also have two words for you - STAY. OUT.

Or better yet join us in Courage. Frankly, we don't need gay men in the priesthood. We need real men who are fully capable of fulfilling the role of spiritual fathers to us, the flock. We have had enough of the sex abuse scandals in the Church.

May this video be an eye opener to all of us.

Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons

This was a letter issued by then Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger and now Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI. It is good to be reminded of this my dear brothers and sisters, clergy and laity alike, because of the growing misunderstanding and confusion on how to deal with the issue of homosexuality from a Christian perspective. On this feast of the Angelic Doctor St. Thomas Aquinas I hope you will find time to peruse this very timely and relevant scholarly work of our beloved Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI.


1. The issue of homosexuality and the moral evaluation of homosexual acts have increasingly become a matter of public debate, even in Catholic circles. Since this debate often advances arguments and makes assertions inconsistent with the teaching of the Catholic Church, it is quite rightly a cause for concern to all engaged in the pastoral ministry, and this Congregation has judged it to be of sufficiently grave and widespread importance to address to the Bishops of the Catholic Church this Letter on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons.

2. Naturally, an exhaustive treatment of this complex issue cannot be attempted here, but we will focus our reflection within the distinctive context of the Catholic moral perspective. It is a perspective which finds support in the more secure findings of the natural sciences, which have their own legitimate and proper methodology and field of inquiry.

However, the Catholic moral viewpoint is founded on human reason illumined by faith and is consciously motivated by the desire to do the will of God our Father. The Church is thus in a position to learn from scientific discovery but also to transcend the horizons of science and to be confident that her more global vision does greater justice to the rich reality of the human person in his spiritual and physical dimensions, created by God and heir, by grace, to eternal life.

It is within this context, then, that it can be clearly seen that the phenomenon of homosexuality, complex as it is, and with its many consequences for society and ecclesial life, is a proper focus for the Church's pastoral care. It thus requires of her ministers attentive study, active concern and honest, theologically well-balanced counsel.

3. Explicit treatment of the problem was given in this Congregation's "Declaration on Certain Questions Concerning Sexual Ethics" of December 29, 1975. That document stressed the duty of trying to understand the homosexual condition and noted that culpability for homosexual acts should only be judged with prudence. At the same time the Congregation took note of the distinction commonly drawn between the homosexual condition or tendency and individual homosexual actions. These were described as deprived of their essential and indispensable finality, as being "intrinsically disordered", and able in no case to be approved of (cf. n. 8, $4).

In the discussion which followed the publication of the Declaration, however, an overly benign interpretation was given to the homosexual condition itself, some going so far as to call it neutral, or even good. Although the particular inclination of the homosexual person is not a sin, it is a more or less strong tendency ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil; and thus the inclination itself must be seen as an objective disorder.

Therefore special concern and pastoral attention should be directed toward those who have this condition, lest they be led to believe that the living out of this orientation in homosexual activity is a morally acceptable option. It is not.

4. An essential dimension of authentic pastoral care is the identification of causes of confusion regarding the Church's teaching. One is a new exegesis of Sacred Scripture which claims variously that Scripture has nothing to say on the subject of homosexuality, or that it somehow tacitly approves of it, or that all of its moral injunctions are so culture-bound that they are no longer applicable to contemporary life. These views are gravely erroneous and call for particular attention here.

5. It is quite true that the Biblical literature owes to the different epochs in which it was written a good deal of its varied patterns of thought and expression (Dei Verbum 12). The Church today addresses the Gospel to a world which differs in many ways from ancient days. But the world in which the New Testament was written was already quite diverse from the situation in which the Sacred Scriptures of the Hebrew People had been written or compiled, for example.

What should be noticed is that, in the presence of such remarkable diversity, there is nevertheless a clear consistency within the Scriptures themselves on the moral issue of homosexual behaviour. The Church's doctrine regarding this issue is thus based, not on isolated phrases for facile theological argument, but on the solid foundation of a constant Biblical testimony. The community of faith today, in unbroken continuity with the Jewish and Christian communities within which the ancient Scriptures were written, continues to be nourished by those same Scriptures and by the Spirit of Truth whose Word they are. It is likewise essential to recognize that the Scriptures are not properly understood when they are interpreted in a way which contradicts the Church's living Tradition. To be correct, the interpretation of Scripture must be in substantial accord with that Tradition.

The Vatican Council II in Dei Verbum 10, put it this way: "It is clear, therefore, that in the supremely wise arrangement of God, sacred Tradition, sacred Scripture, and the Magisterium of the Church are so connected and associated that one of them cannot stand without the others. Working together, each in its own way under the action of the one Holy Spirit, they all contribute effectively to the salvation of souls". In that spirit we wish to outline briefly the Biblical teaching here.

6. Providing a basic plan for understanding this entire discussion of homosexuality is the theology of creation we find in Genesis. God, in his infinite wisdom and love, brings into existence all of reality as a reflection of his goodness. He fashions mankind, male and female, in his own image and likeness. Human beings, therefore, are nothing less than the work of God himself; and in the complementarity of the sexes, they are called to reflect the inner unity of the Creator. They do this in a striking way in their cooperation with him in the transmission of life by a mutual donation of the self to the other.

In Genesis 3, we find that this truth about persons being an image of God has been obscured by original sin. There inevitably follows a loss of awareness of the covenantal character of the union these persons had with God and with each other. The human body retains its "spousal significance" but this is now clouded by sin. Thus, in Genesis 19:1-11, the deterioration due to sin continues in the story of the men of Sodom. There can be no doubt of the moral judgement made there against homosexual relations. In Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13, in the course of describing the conditions necessary for belonging to the Chosen People, the author excludes from the People of God those who behave in a homosexual fashion.

Against the background of this exposition of theocratic law, an eschatological perspective is developed by St. Paul when, in I Cor 6:9, he proposes the same doctrine and lists those who behave in a homosexual fashion among those who shall not enter the Kingdom of God.

In Romans 1:18-32, still building on the moral traditions of his forebears, but in the new context of the confrontation between Christianity and the pagan society of his day, Paul uses homosexual behaviour as an example of the blindness which has overcome humankind. Instead of the original harmony between Creator and creatures, the acute distortion of idolatry has led to all kinds of moral excess. Paul is at a loss to find a clearer example of this disharmony than homosexual relations. Finally, 1 Tim. 1, in full continuity with the Biblical position, singles out those who spread wrong doctrine and in v. 10 explicitly names as sinners those who engage in homosexual acts.

7. The Church, obedient to the Lord who founded her and gave to her the sacramental life, celebrates the divine plan of the loving and live-giving union of men and women in the sacrament of marriage. It is only in the marital relationship that the use of the sexual faculty can be morally good. A person engaging in homosexual behaviour therefore acts immorally.

To chose someone of the same sex for one's sexual activity is to annul the rich symbolism and meaning, not to mention the goals, of the Creator's sexual design. Homosexual activity is not a complementary union, able to transmit life; and so it thwarts the call to a life of that form of self-giving which the Gospel says is the essence of Christian living. This does not mean that homosexual persons are not often generous and giving of themselves; but when they engage in homosexual activity they confirm within themselves a disordered sexual inclination which is essentially self-indulgent.

As in every moral disorder, homosexual activity prevents one's own fulfillment and happiness by acting contrary to the creative wisdom of God. The Church, in rejecting erroneous opinions regarding homosexuality, does not limit but rather defends personal freedom and dignity realistically and authentically understood.

8. Thus, the Church's teaching today is in organic continuity with the Scriptural perspective and with her own constant Tradition. Though today's world is in many ways quite new, the Christian community senses the profound and lasting bonds which join us to those generations who have gone before us, "marked with the sign of faith".

Nevertheless, increasing numbers of people today, even within the Church, are bringing enormous pressure to bear on the Church to accept the homosexual condition as though it were not disordered and to condone homosexual activity. Those within the Church who argue in this fashion often have close ties with those with similar views outside it. These latter groups are guided by a vision opposed to the truth about the human person, which is fully disclosed in the mystery of Christ. They reflect, even if not entirely consciously, a materialistic ideology which denies the transcendent nature of the human person as well as the supernatural vocation of every individual.

The Church's ministers must ensure that homosexual persons in their care will not be misled by this point of view, so profoundly opposed to the teaching of the Church. But the risk is great and there are many who seek to create confusion regarding the Church's position, and then to use that confusion to their own advantage.

9. The movement within the Church, which takes the form of pressure groups of various names and sizes, attempts to give the impression that it represents all homosexual persons who are Catholics. As a matter of fact, its membership is by and large restricted to those who either ignore the teaching of the Church or seek somehow to undermine it. It brings together under the aegis of Catholicism homosexual persons who have no intention of abandoning their homosexual behaviour. One tactic used is to protest that any and all criticism of or reservations about homosexual people, their activity and lifestyle, are simply diverse forms of unjust discrimination.

There is an effort in some countries to manipulate the Church by gaining the often well-intentioned support of her pastors with a view to changing civil-statutes and laws. This is done in order to conform to these pressure groups' concept that homosexuality is at least a completely harmless, if not an entirely good, thing. Even when the practice of homosexuality may seriously threaten the lives and well-being of a large number of people, its advocates remain undeterred and refuse to consider the magnitude of the risks involved.

The Church can never be so callous. It is true that her clear position cannot be revised by pressure from civil legislation or the trend of the moment. But she is really concerned about the many who are not represented by the pro-homosexual movement and about those who may have been tempted to believe its deceitful propaganda. She is also aware that the view that homosexual activity is equivalent to, or as acceptable as, the sexual expression of conjugal love has a direct impact on society's understanding of the nature and rights of the family and puts them in jeopardy.

10. It is deplorable that homosexual persons have been and are the object of violent malice in speech or in action. Such treatment deserves condemnation from the Church's pastors wherever it occurs. It reveals a kind of disregard for others which endangers the most fundamental principles of a healthy society. The intrinsic dignity of each person must always be respected in word, in action and in law.

But the proper reaction to crimes committed against homosexual persons should not be to claim that the homosexual condition is not disordered. When such a claim is made and when homosexual activity is consequently condoned, or when civil legislation is introduced to protect behavior to which no one has any conceivable right, neither the Church nor society at large should be surprised when other distorted notions and practices gain ground, and irrational and violent reactions increase.

11. It has been argued that the homosexual orientation in certain cases is not the result of deliberate choice; and so the homosexual person would then have no choice but to behave in a homosexual fashion. Lacking freedom, such a person, even if engaged in homosexual activity, would not be culpable.

Here, the Church's wise moral tradition is necessary since it warns against generalizations in judging individual cases. In fact, circumstances may exist, or may have existed in the past, which would reduce or remove the culpability of the individual in a given instance; or other circumstances may increase it. What is at all costs to be avoided is the unfounded and demeaning assumption that the sexual behaviour of homosexual persons is always and totally compulsive and therefore inculpable. What is essential is that the fundamental liberty which characterizes the human person and gives him his dignity be recognized as belonging to the homosexual person as well. As in every conversion from evil, the abandonment of homosexual activity will require a profound collaboration of the individual with God's liberating grace.

12. What, then, are homosexual persons to do who seek to follow the Lord? Fundamentally, they are called to enact the will of God in their life by joining whatever sufferings and difficulties they experience in virtue of their condition to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross. That Cross, for the believer, is a fruitful sacrifice since from that death come life and redemption. While any call to carry the cross or to understand a Christian's suffering in this way will predictably be met with bitter ridicule by some, it should be remembered that this is the way to eternal life for all who follow Christ.

It is, in effect, none other than the teaching of Paul the Apostle to the Galatians when he says that the Spirit produces in the lives of the faithful "love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, trustfulness, gentleness and self-control" (5:22) and further (v. 24), "You cannot belong to Christ unless you crucify all self-indulgent passions and desires."

It is easily misunderstood, however, if it is merely seen as a pointless effort at self-denial. The Cross is a denial of self, but in service to the will of God himself who makes life come from death and empowers those who trust in him to practise virtue in place of vice.

To celebrate the Paschal Mystery, it is necessary to let that Mystery become imprinted in the fabric of daily life. To refuse to sacrifice one's own will in obedience to the will of the Lord is effectively to prevent salvation. Just as the Cross was central to the expression of God's redemptive love for us in Jesus, so the conformity of the self-denial of homosexual men and women with the sacrifice of the Lord will constitute for them a source of self-giving which will save them from a way of life which constantly threatens to destroy them.

Christians who are homosexual are called, as all of us are, to a chaste life. As they dedicate their lives to understanding the nature of God's personal call to them, they will be able to celebrate the Sacrament of Penance more faithfully and receive the Lord's grace so freely offered there in order to convert their lives more fully to his Way.

13. We recognize, of course, that in great measure the clear and successful communication of the Church's teaching to all the faithful, and to society at large, depends on the correct instruction and fidelity of her pastoral ministers. The Bishops have the particularly grave responsibility to see to it that their assistants in the ministry, above all the priests, are rightly informed and personally disposed to bring the teaching of the Church in its integrity to everyone.

The characteristic concern and good will exhibited by many clergy and religious in their pastoral care for homosexual persons is admirable, and, we hope, will not diminish. Such devoted ministers should have the confidence that they are faithfully following the will of the Lord by encouraging the homosexual person to lead a chaste life and by affirming that person's God-given dignity and worth.

14. With this in mind, this Congregation wishes to ask the Bishops to be especially cautious of any programmes which may seek to pressure the Church to change her teaching, even while claiming not to do so. A careful examination of their public statements and the activities they promote reveals a studied ambiguity by which they attempt to mislead the pastors and the faithful. For example, they may present the teaching of the Magisterium, but only as if it were an optional source for the formation of one's conscience. Its specific authority is not recognized. Some of these groups will use the word "Catholic" to describe either the organization or its intended members, yet they do not defend and promote the teaching of the Magisterium; indeed, they even openly attack it. While their members may claim a desire to conform their lives to the teaching of Jesus, in fact they abandon the teaching of his Church. This contradictory action should not have the support of the Bishops in any way.

15. We encourage the Bishops, then, to provide pastoral care in full accord with the teaching of the Church for homosexual persons of their dioceses. No authentic pastoral programme will include organizations in which homosexual persons associate with each other without clearly stating that homosexual activity is immoral. A truly pastoral approach will appreciate the need for homosexual persons to avoid the near occasions of sin.

We would heartily encourage programmes where these dangers are avoided. But we wish to make it clear that departure from the Church's teaching, or silence about it, in an effort to provide pastoral care is neither caring nor pastoral. Only what is true can ultimately be pastoral. The neglect of the Church's position prevents homosexual men and women from receiving the care they need and deserve.

An authentic pastoral programme will assist homosexual persons at all levels of the spiritual life: through the sacraments, and in particular through the frequent and sincere use of the sacrament of Reconciliation, through prayer, witness, counsel and individual care. In such a way, the entire Christian community can come to recognize its own call to assist its brothers and sisters, without deluding them or isolating them.

16. From this multi-faceted approach there are numerous advantages to be gained, not the least of which is the realization that a homosexual person, as every human being, deeply needs to be nourished at many different levels simultaneously.

The human person, made in the image and likeness of God, can hardly be adequately described by a reductionist reference to his or her sexual orientation. Every one living on the face of the earth has personal problems and difficulties, but challenges to growth, strengths, talents and gifts as well. Today, the Church provides a badly needed context for the care of the human person when she refuses to consider the person as a "heterosexual" or a "homosexual" and insists that every person has a fundamental Identity: the creature of God, and by grace, his child and heir to eternal life.

17. In bringing this entire matter to the Bishops' attention, this Congregation wishes to support their efforts to assure that the teaching of the Lord and his Church on this important question be communicated fully to all the faithful.

In light of the points made above, they should decide for their own dioceses the extent to which an intervention on their part is indicated. In addition, should they consider it helpful, further coordinated action at the level of their National Bishops' Conference may be envisioned.

In a particular way, we would ask the Bishops to support, with the means at their disposal, the development of appropriate forms of pastoral care for homosexual persons. These would include the assistance of the psychological, sociological and medical sciences, in full accord with the teaching of the Church.

They are encouraged to call on the assistance of all Catholic theologians who, by teaching what the Church teaches, and by deepening their reflections on the true meaning of human sexuality and Christian marriage with the virtues it engenders, will make an important contribution in this particular area of pastoral care.

The Bishops are asked to exercise special care in the selection of pastoral ministers so that by their own high degree of spiritual and personal maturity and by their fidelity to the Magisterium, they may be of real service to homosexual persons, promoting their health and well-being in the fullest sense. Such ministers will reject theological opinions which dissent from the teaching of the Church and which, therefore, cannot be used as guidelines for pastoral care.

We encourage the Bishops to promote appropriate catechetical programmes based on the truth about human sexuality in its relationship to the family as taught by the Church. Such programmes should provide a good context within which to deal with the question of homosexuality.

This catechesis would also assist those families of homosexual persons to deal with this problem which affects them so deeply.

All support should be withdrawn from any organizations which seek to undermine the teaching of the Church, which are ambiguous about it, or which neglect it entirely. Such support, or even the semblance of such support, can be gravely misinterpreted. Special attention should be given to the practice of scheduling religious services and to the use of Church buildings by these groups, including the facilities of Catholic schools and colleges. To some, such permission to use Church property may seem only just and charitable; but in reality it is contradictory to the purpose for which these institutions were founded, it is misleading and often scandalous.

In assessing proposed legislation, the Bishops should keep as their uppermost concern the responsibility to defend and promote family life.

18. The Lord Jesus promised, "You shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free" (Jn. 8:32). Scripture bids us speak the truth in love (cf. Eph. 4:15). The God who is at once truth and love calls the Church to minister to every man, woman and child with the pastoral solicitude of our compassionate Lord. It is in this spirit that we have addressed this Letter to the Bishops of the Church, with the hope that it will be of some help as they care for those whose suffering can only be intensified by error and lightened by truth.

(During an audience granted to the undersigned Prefect, His Holiness, Pope John Paul II, approved this Letter, adopted in an ordinary session of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and ordered it to be published.)


Given at Rome, 1 October 1986.

JOSEPH CARDINAL RATZINGER

ALBERTO BOVONE

Titular Archbishop of Caesarea in Numidia

Secretary

Same Sex 'Marriage' Is A Grave Sin

More than a couple of days ago, news broke out of a popular 'lesbian' singer/former child star's 'marriage' to a stage actress in the US. This is a sad reflection on how our society is becoming corrupted by evil and nobody seems to be speaking out against it because nowadays we are supposed to be 'welcoming and tolerant' of such things. Well, not if you ask our Lord Jesus Christ. Our Lord has deep compassion for sinners but he will never ever condone sin.

In a private revelation to a visionary (Maria), he speaks openly about the issue of same-sex marriage. Please note that this is a private revelation and everyone should practice caution and due diligence. Personally, after reading this and finding it not to be contradictory in anyway to the Scriptures or the Church's teaching on homosexuality, I deemed it worthy to be shared to everyone who is searching for truth. In posting this we are not in any way passing judgment on anyone as only the Lord has the right to judge a human person, but instead we are just upholding the Church's teaching on this topic. This message was given on March 16, 2012.


My dearly beloved daughter, the pain and suffering of My poor followers, who have to watch, helplessly, as new laws, contrary to My Teachings, are reaching unprecedented levels in the world.

Not only do you have to witness sin, children, you then have to watch as sin is presented to you, where you are forced to accept it as being humane.

I refer to one sin in particular, same sex marriage, which is presented as a natural right.

You are then expected to accept this abomination, as it is set before My Father’s Throne in a church.

It is not enough for these people to condone same sex marriage in the eyes of the law, they then want to force God the Father to give them His blessing. He could never do this, because it is a grave sin in His Eyes.

How dare these people think it is acceptable to parade this abominable act in My Father’s churches?

Children, I love every soul.

I love sinners.

I detest their sin, but love the sinner.

Same sex sexual acts are not acceptable in My Father’s Eyes.

Pray for these souls because I love them, but cannot give them the Graces they desire.

They must know, that no matter how much they try to condone same sex marriages, they are not entitled to participate in the Holy Sacrament of Marriage.

A Sacrament must come from God. The Rules for receiving Sacraments must stem from My Father’s Teachings.

You cannot force My Father, God the Most High, to give His blessing, or access to, His Holy Sacraments, unless they are respected in the way they are meant to be.

Sin is now presented in the world as a good thing.

As I have said before the world is back to front.

Good is presented as evil and those people who try to live by the Laws of God the Father, are sneered at.

Evil, no matter how you dress it up, cannot be turned into an act of goodness, in the Eyes of My Father.

My Father will punish those who continue to flaunt their sins before Him.

Heed this warning, for your sins, which are carried out when you refuse to obey God, will not and cannot be forgiven.

This is because you refuse to accept sin for what it is.


Your Saviour


Jesus Christ