A Priest, a homosexual, and a drag queen walk into a chapel. No, this isn’t the start of some joke, but a scene I was honored to witness at a special morning mass the Sunday of this year’s IgnatianQ conference. This event, a conference for members of the LGBTQ community at Jesuit colleges (as well as Notre Dame), brought students to Mount St. James from across the country in order to discuss the relation of faith, Ignatian Spirituality, and LGBTQ identity. Though invited, I refrained from attending the conference, save the aforementioned mass. Due to my lack of attendance, I will not attempt to discuss the mission or credibility of this conference, though I’ve heard positive responses from friends in attendance. Nay; sparked by the once in a lifetime scene from that 9:00 A.M. mass, I would rather discuss the complicated (and oft times misrepresented) relationship between the Catholic church and homosexuality. For now, I will discuss solely homosexuality, as addressing each LGBTQ identity would be excessively long for one article. In doing so, I will omit my personal biases about the Church’s teaching and simply present the teaching as it stands.
I must start by addressing a disparity between how our contemporary culture and the Catholic Church conceptualize the very idea of homosexuality. Our society describes homosexuality as an identity: that is, a group one belongs to based on their attraction to the same sex (gay for males, lesbian for females). However, in order to address homosexuality as a moral issue, the Church can only speak on homosexuality as an action. In a Catholic sense, morality is dependent on action. In other words: a person cannot be morally good or evil in themself, but can act in a good or evil fashion. It is important to note that conscious thoughts as well as physical deeds constitute actions. If, for instance, a lustful thought (or otherwise unholy notion) pops into your head and you chose to dwell on and entertain that thought, you have committed a morally evil action.
So, to address homosexuality in a moral context, we cannot continue (for the sake of this article) to consider homosexuality an identity. There is no morality within an identity to discuss. Thus, I will be addressing homosexuality as an action. Further, to be judged morally, this action must be “freely chosen in consequence of a judgment of conscience” (CCC 1749). A homosexual act into which a person is unwillingly coerced or of which they are invincibly unaware cannot be deemed morally good or evil either. Conscientiousness is muddled in a state of vincible ignorance (ignorance that can be removed through reasonable search for the truth) because the culpability of the moral action varies from case to case. Thus, throughout this article, I will be addressing homosexuality as a freely chosen action made with insight from a well-formed conscience.
This establishes that attraction to someone of the same sex is neither morally good nor evil. An attraction is not an action. In conjunction with an action, however, this attraction can have moral weight. A good action inspired by this desire renders the desire good, and vice versa, meaning that if a homosexual attraction inspires a morally evil action, that attraction is rendered morally evil (CCC 1768).
As the word “homosexuality” blatantly points out, a homosexual act is a sexual act. The Church is very specific about the role and purpose of sexual desires. The role of sex, for the Church, is simultaneously unitive and procreative (CCC 2351). A sexual action should only take place if it deepens the bond between married spouses and is open to the creation of new life. The pleasure derived from sex is a gift from God to encourage and bless this holy act of sex. However, the holy pleasure of and desire for sex can be very easily tainted. This tainting is Lust, wherein one seeks sexual pleasure for the sensation of pleasure itself, disconnecting sex from its sacred connection to Procreation and Unity (CCC 2351). It follows that a homosexual act is disordered because it can never be open to procreation and, as it is done outside the context of marriage, cannot contribute to the unity of spouses. A sexual act performed between two members of the same sex is, therefore, a morally evil action. For quite the same reason, however, so are sexual acts between an unmarried man and woman.
This leads into perhaps the most controversial teaching of the Church on homosexuality: “Why can’t gay people get married? If gay people could get married then they could have sex, right?” The answers to these questions are relatively simple. To answer the first, we need only follow the same argument that explains why homosexual acts are disordered: they are closed to fertility. A Catholic marriage must be “open to fertility” (CCC 1643). As a gay couple cannot reproduce, they cannot be married. Christ instituted marriage as a sacrament in which a man and women are bound in union with the express purpose of procreation. This
is completely unavailable in a homosexual union. As to the second question, the answer to the hypothetical is simply “no.” Again, their sex is still not procreative. Due to the inability to procreate, homosexual relations are “intrinsically disordered,” and “under no circumstances can they be approved” (2357).
None of this, however, means that the Church denies the validity of Same Sex Attraction, nor does it condemn those with such an attraction. In fact, the Church teaches the exact opposite. To elucidate this fact, I will lift a large passage from the Catechism of the Catholic Church to assure no words are omitted or glossed over:
“The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.” (CCC 2358)
This constitutes a state of mind that I doubt anyone would disagree with.
Knowing that the Church does not condemn, and in fact supports, people with same sex attractions - but also considering that homosexual acts and marriages are prohibited - begs a question. What is the place of men and women with same sex attractions within the Church? Everyone is called to a specific vocation by God. Whether the vocation is to married life, religious life, or single life, each human has a certain call. For gays and lesbians, it boils down to either religious life or the single life. Both of these vocations call for homosexuals to be chaste. This does not disavow the potential for deeply loving relationships between members of the same sex. Priests and Brothers can maintain profound love for one another, as can Sisters. Lay single men and women can participate in similarly loving relationships. One could, perhaps, even argue that a chaste relationship between two members of the same sex is not anathema to Church teaching. One could question the purpose of this relationship; romantic relationships are a sort of marriage interview and, without the culmination of marriage, that might leave same sex romantic relationships purposeless. This question is not explicitly answered by the Church, so I will not speak to it myself, though I find it necessarily raised.
Chastity, however, is not a restriction. The Church expounds that chastity is a great freedom in which human passions are correctly governed by reason. This chastity is a virtue and so must be practiced and built, freeing us from subservience to our desires and giving us the discipline to control them instead (CCC 2339). In this sense, just as all other Catholic men and women, homosexuals are called to be free from the slavery of desire. Living and practicing their faith in such a way, with the help of the sacraments, friendships, and prayer, men and women with same sex attraction can live up to the call of every human to Christian perfection (CCC 2359). I would even propose that, perhaps postulating a bit too much, there are special graces these men and women can receive in staying faithful to Christ during their unique struggle. In this way, I consider homosexuality a gift. It is a gift by which the faithful can unite the sacrifice of personal desires to Christ, and, in return, be the recipients of great grace.