|
|
Contemporary Issues
Church Doctrine Commission
Polish National Catholic Church
"Then
Peter and the other apostles answered and said, "We ought to obey God rather
than men" (Acts, 5:29).
Recent court decisions and legislative discussions in several states have
drawn attention to the question of "same-sex marriages" and the legal
registration of "same-sex partnerships." The admission of homosexual persons
to the ordained ministry in several ecclesial communities also has received
much attention in the secular media. Sadly, the religious and moral
dimension of these subjects is often overlooked.
The
XXI General Synod (2002) overwhelmingly approved two papers prepared by the
Church Doctrine Commission that directly relate to these topics. The first,
entitled, "The Sacrament of Matrimony in the Polish National Catholic
Church," defines matrimony as "a solemn covenant entered into by one man and
one woman in perfect freedom, in which they pledge their love and fidelity,
one to the other, in joy and in sorrow, in health and in sickness, in
prosperity and in adversity, so long as they both shall live." The paper
further emphasizes, "We, as followers of Jesus Christ, must stand by the
values, principles and ideals which are necessary to save the God-given
institution of marriage for the benefit of the individuals, our local
communities, our nation and of all humankind."
The
XXI General Synod also overwhelmingly approved a paper that reaffirmed the
constant teaching of the Church on homosexual conduct. We reproduce this
text below in its entirety, as it directly relates to a significant
contemporary issue. The paper currently represents the authoritative and.
authentic teaching of the Polish National Catholic Church on this subject
and is the point of departure for any catechesis on this subject.
Called to Faithfulness: The Church and Homosexual Conduct
Introduction
In
1978 the XV General Synod of the Polish National Catholic Church (PNCC)
unanimously approved a paper entitled "The Polish National Catholic Church
and the Homosexual Question."1 The text supplied a brief survey
of the causes of this condition and the applicable teachings of the Old and
New Testaments, which regard homosexual conduct as inherently sinful. The
key recommendations of the paper stipulated that the PNCC (1) "View the
continued illicit homosexual relationship as a sinful state not in keeping
with God's natural order"; (2) "Not accept the premise of the homosexual
lifestyle as viable for Christians"; and (3) "Prohibit the conferral of Holy
Orders on any avowed and practicing homosexual." At the same time, the text
admonished Polish National Catholics not "to condemn or to separate"
homosexual persons but rather to help them attain "substantial healing"
through "prayer, professional assistance, counseling, worship and sincere
supportive Christian fellowship ..."
The Current Situation
Since 1978 the recognition of homosexual conduct as an acceptable
"lifestyle" has proceeded apace in Western society, and organized groups of
homosexual persons have openly and often successfully campaigned for
recognition, by civil authorities of their "rights" and demands, one of
which is acceptance of homosexual conduct as no different from heterosexual
conduct. Some researchers have sought to support this with claims that
homosexuality has a biological foundation and hence that homosexual conduct
is not a matter of free choice. To a significant extent, this development
reflects an increased materialism and hedonism that either explicitly or
implicitly denies the transcendent nature of human beings and their
supernatural vocation to union with God through obedience and conformity to
his will. This negative phenomenon, in turn, has led to a relativization of
morality and the belief that sexual ethics stem purely from cultural factors
and can be altered at will either by the consensus of a majority in a given
society or institution or even by individuals themselves. Indeed,
notwithstanding the constant teaching of Scripture and Tradition that the
use of the sexual faculty is morally good only when exercised within the
context of a marriage between one man and one woman, even some churches and
ecclesial communities have, to a greater or lesser extent, come to regard
homosexual conduct as either morally neutral or morally good. The most
visible recent manifestation of this in some ecclesiastical circles is the
"blessing" of homosexual "unions" or "partnerships." The external similarity
of such a "blessing" to a wedding ceremony suggests that, in the opinion of
these circles, there is no ethical difference between heterosexual conduct
and homosexual conduct.
In
light of these developments and to preclude any uncertainty or confusion
about this subject in the minds of the faithful, the Church Doctrine
Commission (CDC) deems it expedient to reaffirm the basic teachings
contained in the 1978 synodal paper and to restate the fundamental
principles upon which those teachings are grounded. While the Church remains
committed to respecting the intrinsic value and dignity of every person,
regardless of his or her sexual "orientation," and consequently deplores
acts of physical violence directed at homosexual persons due solely to this
"orientation," it nonetheless regards it as essential to remain true to its
call to faithfulness - a faithfulness to God's revelation of his will for
humankind as reflected in Scripture and Tradition. This call to faithfulness
applies not only to the Church as an institution but also to each and every
one of its members.
The Scriptural Witness
There can be little doubt that both the Old and the New Testaments regard
homosexual acts as intrinsically disordered because they run counter to
God's plan for his creatures, male and female, and their mutual relations.2
Both Testaments explicitly condemn homosexual acts as deeds of grave
depravity. Attempts by some exegetes to redefine the "sin of Sodom" as a
lack of "hospitality" rather than an intention to assault Lot's angelic
guests3 remain unconvincing, particularly in light of other Old
Testament proscriptions against homosexual behavior.4
The
New Testament, above all the Pauline Letters, restates these condemnations,
albeit in a different manner, for the possibility of redemption through
repentance of this sin - as indeed all others - always exists.5
Indeed, unfaithfulness to God's will in matters of sexual conduct, whether
heterosexual (i.e., adultery and fornication) or homosexual, is linked to
apostasy and idolatry.6
The Patristic Witness
The
Church Fathers of both the East and West, faithful to scriptural teachings
on the intrinsically disordered nature of homosexual conduct, regarded such
behavior as morally reprehensible. True, they often considered this subject
within the context of discussions of pedophilia or ephebophilia.7
But they also condemned homosexual conduct between adult males and between
adult females.8 Their line of argument did not depend solely, or
even largely, upon the aversion they felt towards homosexual acts. indeed,
some of the Fathers recognized that the intrinsically evil character of
homosexual conduct stemmed from the fact that it was unnatural - i.e., that
it contradicted the natural purpose of sexual intercourse, which was the
procreation of children.
John Chrysostom, for example, regarded homosexual behavior, whether
practiced by either men or women, as "an insult to nature itself"9
And St. Augustine described homosexual conduct as "shameful acts against
nature" that "ought everywhere and always to be detested and punished,"
because "God ... has not made men so that they should use one another in
this way."10
The
concept of homosexual behavior as abhorrent precisely because it
contradicted nature - specifically Natural Law - as well as Divine Law
received detailed treatment in the writings of Thomas Aquinas. According to
Aquinas, "Just as the ordering of right reason proceeds from man, so the
order of nature is from God Himself. wherefore in sins contrary to nature,
whereby the very order of nature is violated, an injury is done to God, the
Author of nature." Hence, "since by the unnatural vices man transgresses
that which has been determined by nature with regard to the use of venereal
actions, it follows that in this matter this sin is gravest of all."11
A Crucial Distinction
Implicit in the scriptural and patristic treatment of homosexuality is a
distinction between homosexual "orientation" and conduct. This key
distinction has become more explicit in recent consideration of this subject
and has reflected the insights of contemporary psychology and biology, which
have sought to identify the causes of this phenomenon. Though these studies
remain inconclusive - and those which postulate biological or genetic roots
remain unproved - there can be little doubt that, in many if not most cases,
homosexual persons have not consciously chosen this "orientation."12
While homosexual inclinations represent a moral disorder, they do not
constitute a sin per se. Homosexual persons, like all other human beings,
retain their free will, and they commit a grave (mortal) sin only when they
act upon these inclinations and engage in homosexual conduct, rather than
maintain that form of chastity to which all unmarried Christians are called.
The Church's Response: A Call to Faithfulness
Given the clear teachings of Scripture and Tradition, the Church cannot in
any way approve of or condone homosexual conduct. Some, perhaps, may object
that such a stance, in this day and age, is not "pastoral," for it presumes
to make a judgment that a homosexual "lifestyle" is wrong because it is
inconsistent with Christian sexual ethics and morality. However, a genuinely
pastoral approach to this moral disorder - as indeed to any other ethical
problem, such as adultery or fornication among heterosexual persons requires
that the Church uphold the truth. The Church would fail in its duty if it
either explicitly or implicitly agreed to call something "good" that is
inherently evil. For this reason, the CDC categorically rejects and
deplores the ecclesiastical "blessing" of homosexual "unions" or
"partnerships." Churches and ecclesial communities that have adopted this
practice not only act in a way that is inconsistent with Christian morality
but also seriously complicate efforts to promote Christian unity, for their
action constitutes a grave obstacle to the establishment of full communion.
At
the same time, the Church's rejection of homosexual conduct does not
represent a rejection of homosexual persons. They, like all others, stand in
need of God's grace, forgiveness, and healing when they have sinned. The
Church offers them this, above all through the Sacraments of Penance
(Reconciliation) and the Holy Eucharist, and remains ready to assist them as
they bear their cross in a world where the practice of virtues such as
chastity, self-denial, and the acceptance of Christian faith and morals have
become increasingly difficult.
Footnotes
1
See Proceedings of the XV General Synod of the Polish National Catholic
Church ([Scranton], n.p., n.d.), p. 232.
2
Cf Genesis, 2: 18-25.
3
Cf. Genesis, 19: 1-11.
4
Cf. Leviticus, 18:22, 20:13.
5
Cf. 1 Corinthians, 6:9; 1 Timothy, 1:10.
6
Cf. Romans, 1:18-32. For a detailed discussion of the scriptural data, see
Robert A.J. Gagnon, "Scripture on Homosexuality," Zenit, 21 and 28 March
2002.
7
See, e.g., Didache, 2:2; Letter of Barnabas, 10; Justin Martyr, First
Apology, 27; Clement of Alexandria, Exhortation to the Greeks, 2; John
Chrysostom, Homilies on Titus, 5, and Homilies on Matthew, 3:3.
8
Eusebius of Caesarea, Proof of the Gospel, 4:10; Basil the Great, Letters,
217:62; John Chrysostom, Homilies on Romans, 4.
9
Homilies on Romans, 4.
10
Confessions, 3:8:15.
11
Summa Theologica, Second Part of the Second Part, Treatise on Fortitude and
Temperance, Q. 154 (Of the Parts of Lust).
12
For a survey of the scientific literature on homosexuality, see Fr.
Bartholomew Kiely, "Christian Anthropology and Homosexuality-Antecedents of
Homosexuality: Science and Moral Evaluation," L'Osservatore Romano (English
Edition), 12 March 1997. |
|