In re-examining the posts I made recently regarding my highly ambitious theology of the homosexual body, I neglected to address several important, foundational concepts that are at the very heart of the issue. Though procreative necessity is an important Catholic tenet, it fails to grasp the larger challenge of reconciliation of the homosexual self with one’s faith.
First of all, it’s worthwhile pointing out that homosexuals have, in many ways, but ousted from the realm of religion. Part of this is blatant and very real, while in other cases it is subtle, questionable, or even contrived. The origins of this problem, I believe, rest in the very definition of one’s self as homosexual. While Christian churches (particularly the Catholic Church) are very clear about the disorientation of those with homosexual desires, it also makes clear in other parts of the catechism that human beings are complex creatures with manifold gifts and temptations. It would strike one as odd, then, that the same collection of teachings which uphold the diversity of humankind, should then ostracize individuals solely on the basis of their identification as homosexual. Without blatantly doing so, the Catholic Church, along with other Christian churches, has defined these individuals solely on their homosexuality. As much as heterosexuality is seen as part of one’s character, so should homosexuality. It seems incongruous, then, to oust members of God’s own creation from His church on the basis of only one piece of a complex individual character.
The problem, however, lies not only inside the church. It is also evident in homosexual sub-culture–a group that, for many reasons, has determinately given society a definition of themselves as homosexual that appears all-consuming. This reaffirms the church’s misled position on disorientation, continuing the ostracization of homosexuals. As the cycle continues, the schism between church and homosexual individuals–complex persons with many gifts and talents–grows ever wider.
Naturally, when homosexuality plays such a definitive role in the viewpoint of church officials and religious, it is necessary to point out why this “aberrent” sexuality is disoriented. This hearkens back to discussions I have already begun on faulty reasoning for deeming homosexuality “disoriented”–reasons which, by the church’s own admission–are unfounded. This discussion, however, must be continued at another time.
The next conversation I will introduce is the one which separates church from faith–a clear distinction between the human institution of religion and one’s personal faith, derived from spiritual discernment and personal experiences.