Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Homosexuality and the Roman Catholic Church
Homosexuality and the Roman Catholic Church
Homosexuality and the Roman Catholic Church
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Homosexuality and the Roman Catholic Church
The Catholic Church’s View on Homosexuality For centuries the Catholic Church has stood firm in its belief that homosexuality is wrong because it goes against natural law and is condemned by the Bible. The Catholic Church relies heavily on the Bible in order to support its stance. However when many of the Bible verses that the Catholic Church uses as support for its argument are looked at from a different angle, one can begin to unravel the very basis of the Catholic Church’s position against homosexuality. According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the Catholic Church bases its stance on Bible verses from Genesis, Romans, 1 Corinthians, and 1 Timothy. The Catholic Church argues that these verses provide clear evidence that homosexuality …show more content…
John Corvino, however, raises the debate that not all sex is for the purpose of procreation. He questions how the Catholic Church can approve of sex for sterile couples, who for obvious reasons cannot procreate, while disapproving of sex for homosexual couples. The Catholic Church answers this question by claiming that sex for sterile couples fulfills the “morally legitimate purposes” (Corvino 6) of pleasure and intimacy between partners. Corvino points out that by giving that answer, the Catholic Church should not be able to condemn sex for homosexual couples on the basis that it is not procreative because it can fulfill the same purposes that sex for sterile couples fulfills (6). Graydon Snyder and Kenneth Shaffer also argue that the Bible does not reject all people who cannot procreate. Their argument is based on a verse from Isaiah (Isaiah 56:3-5) that says a eunuch who keeps the Sabbath and does things that please the Lord will still have a place in Heaven (Snyder 48). If a eunuch, whose sexual acts can never lead to the birth of a child, can have a spot in Heaven, why shouldn’t homosexual people also have a place in Heaven? Verses from 1 Corinthians and 1 Timothy are also used by the Catholic Church as evidence of the sinfulness of homosexuality. Verses from chapter six of 1 Corinthians and chapter one of 1 Timothy contain lists …show more content…
Instead, the greatest weakness of this argument is the lack of passages in the Bible that mention homosexuality. According to Hays, in the entirety of the Bible, there are only six or seven very short passages that even mention homosexuality or homosexual acts (17). Hays insists that we should not be focusing on whether or not homosexuality is a sin based on the Bible, instead we should be considering whether or not we have the right to judge the people who partake in homosexual acts. Hays cites Paul in Romans 2:1-3 to show that none of are without sin and suggests that, just as it is said in the Bible, we should allow only those who are without sin the judge the sins of others
Throughout the essays of Richard B. Hays in “Awaiting the Redemption of Our Bodies” and Walter Winks “Biblical Perspectives and Homosexuality” both authors tackle the difficult subject of homosexuality and how it should be perceived in terms of the bible. Both Authors agree that Homosexuality is a sin according to the bible, but have different perspectives on how it should be handled and received. Christians. Richard B. Hays opens his essay talking about his friend Gary, who was dying of Aids and was struggling with homosexual behavior. In Hays’s “Living under the cross” section he says “there is no reason at all for the church to single out homosexual persons for malicious discriminatory treatment; Insofar as Christians have done so
On May the eighth of this year, the Conference of United States Religious Leaders and Ministers was held in Chicago, Illinois. The conference is an annual event coordinated by church leaders who each send a representative to take part in the discussions. Father Gregory McAllister of the Diocese of Arlington traveled to Chicago to attend the conference and share his knowledge. He spoke on behalf of the Catholic Church, while ministers and clergy from various religions from across the country also shared their views on the topics discussed.
Although Corvino is commonly persecuted by for his beliefs, he continues to justify his reasoning for gay sex by arguing against societies inconsistency in condemnation for sexual acts. By this he means that society condemns sexuality that does not aid in assisting what natural law theorists find most important, reproduction. However, he disputes that non-reproductive homosexual relationships are immoral and unnatural, because the Catholic Church allows sex with sterile, pregnant...
First of all, the evidence that is used in this essay is valid. In a formal argument, any assertion must be backed up with specific, compelling evidence that is accurate, timely, relevant, and sufficient. Such evidence can be data derived from surveys, experiments, observations, and first-hand field investigations or from expert opinion (White 5). Mr. Gomes mentions the verses in the Bible in which the information he is referring to can be found so that the reader can check the verse for themselves. This allows the readers to investigate deeper and form their own opinions. The evidence that he cites is taken directly from the Bible. The Bible is his primary source, not another person�s thoughts or another professor�s notes. In doing this, the information is more likely to be accurate and without bias. Three of the verses from the Bible that he cites are found in the Books of Kings I and II. After investigation, I found these verses to merely discuss prostitution, not homosexuality at all. And anyways, as M...
One argument that opponents use is that homosexual sex is “unnatural.” If the definition of unnatural means something unusual, homosexual sex could be considered unnatural, however, this is completely untrue. Some people claim homosexuality is immoral because animals do not practice homosexuality. The fact is, there are certain animals that do practice homosexuality, and therefore, that argument is invalid.
The famous bishop of Hippo, St. Augustine, is claimed as a cornerstone of Christian theology by both Catholics and Protestants. Many of his views are regarded by Christians as authoritative interpretations of the Bible because they have withstood heated debate throughout the centuries. Christians ought to ask, however, whether such allegiance is justifiable in all cases. Augustine's idea of sex after matrimony, for example, is very narrow, restricting actions and emotions married Christians today consider part of the beauty of intercourse. A logical assertion then, is that Augustine's view of sexuality, as delineated in many writings, is a response to his life of sensuality prior to salvation; therefore, his idea about the intent for sex within marriage stems more from his former sin than from Biblical perspective.
Homosexuality according to Kantian ethics is wrong, and if it were to be applied in the categorical imperative, there would not be an engagement of the hypothetical imperative. The hypothetical imperatives are only focused on doing things so that a person can be successful in a particular activity. The only good practice according to Kant is the one that will keep the human race moving and homosexuality is therefore not a good practice because if the entire world turned to gay and lesbian marriages, It would mean that the human race would come to an end and this is not what God intends for his
Additionally, it is a complex and confusing lifestyle that the world, and some in the Church, have embraced as being normal. This lifestyle was not God’s intent. First, God created man and woman, and he blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number” (New International Version, Gen 1.27-28). Same sex relationships cannot be fruitful nor enable procreation as God designed. Secondly, God does not change his mind (1Sam 15.29).
I will begin first with the idea that sexual behavior should not be granted its own moral code. Sexual ethics only makes sense if sexuality plays a unique role in human life. If procreation has significance precisely because it is a contribution to God's ongoing work of creation, sexuality is supremely important and must be governed by restrictive rules, which would therefore prohibit sexual acts that are not for procreative purposes. This justification of sexuality as a unique aspect of human life, however, is dependent on a theological claim that there exists a God who micro manages the sexual lives of individuals. Without the presence of such a God, there can exist no separate restrictive rules on the nature of sexual acts. Even if we grant that there is a God, most people will agree that sex is more often used as a way to intensify the bond between two people and therefor sex is the ultimate trust and intimacy that you can share with a person.
The Church follows deontology because they consider their own rules as absolute. From a deontological position, the Roman Catholic Church is acting under the proposition that God himself is against homosexuals, so people should follow His rule that homosexuality is a sin. However, I believe that there are two types of deontological positions in this situation because I have observed two types of deontologists. While all deontologists consider rules absolute and follow them independently of external circumstances, some deontologists follow rules and norms set by other institutio...
These questions arise from our own desires as Christians to reflect a biblically sound attitude towards sexuality and relationships. That same desire to act according to biblical scriptures is subject to opposition from today’s culture and views about sexual relationships, gender, and roles. A new definition of marriage, sexual orientation, and sexual practices is challenging our relationship with God and our view of human sexuality. Bishop John Spong defines sex and its impact on relationships: “Sex can be called at once the greatest gift to humanity and the greatest enigma of our lives. It is a gift in that is a singular joy for all beings and enigma in its destructive potential for people and their relationships.” (Spong, 1988)
My arguments will be ignoring a major element in factoring the morality of homosexuality, the law. Yes, many people know that stealing and murder are both wrong, but this is based on socialization and learning passed down from previous generations. The aim isn’t to ignore the rules, but examples from history relating to homosexuality will not aid in proving ground for its ethics. A rational, autonomous decision making process must be used in order to decipher right from wrong, which can lead to solid, concrete answers.
We have no right to judge. We should leave that to the Lord, and he will make the right decision. He will decide what the sinner does and doesn't deserve. Christians know what to abide by. They may know that being a homosexual is going against Gods word, but they also know that the Lord says that one should love all no matter what circumstances.
the same for all. There, however, there exists a striking difference between the two. Whereas scientific truth is impersonal and by its nature imposes itself; the truth of faith entails a free personal engagement and implies a personal encounter. The concern for objectivity in science however could be the great profit to the education towards a right attitude of faith. This is especially so because it is frequent to see faith deviate into sentimentalism and subjectivism by its appropriation of personal views.
Religion is a major aspect on why society believes that homosexuality is wrong and should not be accepted. Individuals who are against the LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender) community because of their religion believe that “homosexuality is a horrid transgression of God’s plan” (Bawer 74). They consider them sinners because they are going against God’s original intention; relationships should be between a man and a woman. Nia Augustin is a member of the Christian community and believes that supporting or being homosexual goes against her religion beliefs. In her interview, Augustin stated, “I have been told that the purpose of a man and woman being together is to reproduce, but a homosexual couple cannot do that, so that's not of God.” Homosexuality is sinful and wrong in the eyes of religious individuals because it involves sex that does not produce life. However, it is ironic that individuals that use contraceptives to prevent them from creating another life are not judged as cruelly by society. Even though homosexuals are not able to have children, they are still people and they deserve to be treated likewise.