«

»

Apr 12

TCitMW: Responses to Critics

“3. Contraception. I apologize, but this is one of the two Roman Catholic positions that I have no respect for (the Marian doctrines are the other one). People are going to have sex outside of marriage. You can’t stop them from doing so, so if you want to prevent abortions, you need to make contraception available. You can not use contraception within marriage if you want to, but please stop trying to take it away from everyone else.”

I apologize, but this is one of the Protestant positions that I have no respect for (remarriage after divorce is another). It’s defeatist. The lesser of two evils is still evil. It’s also illogical. If people are willing to reject one command of the Church, why wouldn’t they reject another? I’d certainly consider artificial contraception a lesser sin than pre-/extramarital sex. I simply don’t believe that a fornicator would actually bother to observe injunctions against contraception.

“5. LGBT issues. I’ll divide this into 4 parts, corresponding to the four sources of revelation.”

“Scripture: The traditional and much abused proof texts don’t say all that much.

I strongly recommend Love and Responsibility and Theology of the Body as defenses of the Scriptural rejection of homosexuality (and other disordered sexual passions).

“Tradition: Not as one-sidedly anti-gay as you might think. St. Paulinus of Nola and Ausaunius were two early Christians who were definitely a male/male couple, though weather
they were gay in the modern sense is debatable. Read John Boswell’s Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality, and L. William Countryman’s Dirt, Greed, and Sex, for more examples.”

I am not well versed in the historical details of saints’ lives. I found a page called “Calendar of
Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Saints”
. I’d be very interested for someone with greater knowledge of Church history to review the claims made.

“Reason: The chief end of marriage is to contain lust, and a marriage where sexual desire is absent does not fulfill this end, ergo gay marriage is acceptable.”

Say what now?!? I thought the chiefs ends of marriage were unity (Genesis 2:24) and procreation (Genesis 1:28). And people say Catholics are ignorant of Scripture…

“The APA and the ASA both accept LGBT persons as psychologically normal and healthy. Reputable research has always pointed to this conclusion.”

I am a bit skeptical of the notion that reputable research always has and always will find homosexuality to be normal and healthy. Besides, since when does either group determine morality? Let’s assume LGBT persons are indeed normal and healthy. So what? That just tells me they choose their sin, rather than being predisposed to it in some way.

“Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!” – Isaiah 5:20

Hmmm…

“Experience: I have seen LGBT people get saved and be sanctified without their sexual orientation being affected. OTOH, they have universally exchanged promiscuity for monogamy, settling with ‘partners’ (effectively spouses) of the same sex, or dating chastely in pursuit of such a goal. Furthermore, on this issue it is impossible to love someone gay while hating his gayness, because gayness is not a sin, it is a condition of life, just like being black is a condition of life. See Fred Phelps for an example of the end result of calling ‘homosexuality’ a sin.”

First of all, I’ve seen a lot of people accept Jesus and fail to renounce all of their sins. Either they try and continually fail (which is ok, so long as they continue to earnestly try and confess their failures), they do not try because they are self-righteously picking and choosing which Christian doctrines they wish to adhere, or they do not try because some person or group has failed, through wilful or accidental negligence, to inform them of orthodox practices and beliefs. Secondly, what proof have you that gayness is merely a condition of life, like blackness? That’s a pretty strong claim to make without evidential support. Lastly, I am not Fred Phelps, nor do I advocate his kind of evanglization to gays. I don’t think unrepentant homosexuals are any more guaranteed hell-fire than unrepentant adulterers, thieves, liars, drug abusers, racists, or any other sinners. I do not hate gays. I simply do not find their
lifestyle to be consistent with orthodox Christian practices or the created order.

Get Adobe Flash player