Cleansing Fire

Defending Truth and Tradition in the Roman Catholic Church


The New Homophiles and the “Gift” of “Gayness”

December 19th, 2014, Promulgated by benanderson

Do you remember the synod where changes were proposed to discipline and terminology in which it was assured that there would be no changes to doctrine? Of course, it’s not that easy. You can’t just do a 180 on discipline and terminology and expect doctrine to remain cogent, especially when there is no logical way to square the discipline with the doctrine. It’s common knowledge that the most disputed change concerned giving communion to divorced and re-“married” couples who have made no firm amendment to live in accord with God’s law. Another radical proposal made by the revolutionaries was to change the Church’s terminology regarding homosexuality. There was even language in the midterm Relatio addressing the gifts of homosexuality. The ambiguity as to whether homosexuals have gifts as humans just as everyone does or whether their gifts are unique to them as homosexuals seemed intent to apply the latter. Of course, all of these new ideas are not new at all. St. John Paul II along with Cardinal Ratzinger and later Pope Benedict XVI couldn’t have been more clear on both of these now “open” issues (of course they aren’t really open – this is all just one big game).

In my mind, the orthodox Catholic world has firmly and thoroughly squashed the idea of communion for the divorced and re-“married” (who live as though they are married). Not that it wasn’t squashed from the get-go, but it’s been discussed enough now that anyone paying attention really has no excuse to continue entertaining the idea. As to the question of the “gifts” of homosexuality and whether people ought to identify as homosexuals, this question seems to be getting less attention. To address this, I’d like to call your attention to Austin Ruse’s article in Crisis Magazine “Fifteen Minutes for the New Homophiles” where he provides a refute of the recent WaPo article celebrating what he calls the “New Homophiles”. Here’s the gist of it:

Conservative Christians, opponents of the gay agenda, opponents particularly of gay marriage, are so eager not to be considered bigots that the New Homophiles are acceptable to them. What a welcome relief. See, we’re not bigots. We like those celibate “gay” Christians! While dialogue and engagement are good things, Christians still need to take a closer look at New Homophile claims.

Prior to this article, Austin Ruse wrote a series of articles worth reading which provides a little more background.

The New Homophiles – December 20, 2013

The New Homophiles: A Closer Look – January 3, 2014

The New Homophiles and Their Critics – January 17, 2014

So what authority does Austin Ruse have? None that I know of, but I think he makes good sense. Nevertheless, we do have an important document by Cardinal Ratzinger as head of the CDF:

If you read this letter, you’ll find that the “new homophiles” bring nothing new to the table. Cardinal Ratzinger already said it all. It’s not like he forgot or missed something (same goes for JP2 on communion/marriage). The only thing left to say is – which side are we on?

* In these cases we’re not talking even talking about dreaded 50 year old teachings that existed pre-Vatican II. We’re talking about teachings that were decisive less than 2 years ago.

Tags: ,


11 Responses to “The New Homophiles and the “Gift” of “Gayness””

  1. avatar Scott W. says:

    God’s teachings on Chastity are quite straightforward yet many work hard to pretend not to understand them or pretend that there is nuance where there isn’t any. Christians are simply going to have to get used to being called bigots because there is nothing that they can say that will satisfy people determined to provide cover for sin. One thing often said by Christians that is mostly useless is “hate the sin, not the sinner”. That is, making a distinction between homosexual acts and the inclination or orientation.

    Now making the distinction is perfectly true and reasonable and should be said, but it falls on deaf ears because when it comes to sex, after multitudes of discussions show, the homosexualists think the inclination is justification (if not an outright mandate) for doing it.

    Case in point: Gordon College is threatened with losing accreditation unless it loses its policy of forbidding homosexual practice among students and faculty. They got in trouble because this supposedly discriminates against homosexual orientation. It proves two things: 1. That homosexualists make no distinction between act and orientation as I said. They come as a set and 2. The whole “it doesn’t affect heterosexuals” line is shown for the baloney it always was. If the college can’t restrain homosexual acts, on what grounds could they possibly restrain heterosexual acts? The message is clear: complete societal capitulation to licentiousness.

    To recap, Christians need to keep speaking the truth as always, but we need to stop worrying about proving we are not bigots. When people hate truth and goodness, no amount of insisting you are really a nice guy will work.

  2. avatar Bernie says:

    Excellent. Thanks especially for the links.

  3. avatar Tom says:

    Ben Anderson and Scott W.:

    Thanks for your ‘new-to-me’ words, “homophile” and “homosexualist”.

    I think they can be useful when ‘homophobe’ is introduced in conversations about this topic.

    Also, I pray and know that our Church shall continue to recognize, repel and sustain herself from these constant Alinskyphile/Alinskyist attacks that have been so effective here in the body politic of the USA.

    “The gates of Hell shall not prevail…”

  4. avatar Scott W. says:

    Thanks for your ‘new-to-me’ words, “homophile” and “homosexualist”.

    You’re welcome. It’s the only word I can think of that includes the fact that much of this nonsense is not necessarily propelled by homosexuals, but by ideologically-addled heterosexuals.

  5. avatar christian says:

    Challenges to the EEOC have left Catholic Christian schools, colleges, universities, and agencies somewhat helpless in insisting their employees and students live according to a Christian code of conduct.
    Transgender persons and lifestyles, and lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons and lifestyles, cannot be discriminated against in terms of employment or education; it’s the law.
    In my opinion, the LBGT caucus has extensive legal, financial, and political backing and power, so no one wants to mess with them.
    Additionally, marital status is another area where there can be no discrimination.

    I think there is a big difference between creating a hostile work environment for persons of differing sexual orientation, or unwed mothers, or heterosexual couples living together without benefit of marriage (although it has become commonplace nowadays) versus the expectation and demand that heterosexual individuals and individuals with a homosexual bisexual, or transgender orientation live out their lives according to precepts stated in the Bible and the Catholic Christian Church.

    The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Equal Pay Act of 1963, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, Sections 501 and 505 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Titles I and V of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), Title II of the Genetic Information Non-discrimination Act (GINA), and the Civil Rights Act of 1991, were all laws intended to rightfully protect the public from being discriminated according to race, color, sex, religion, national origin, age, disability, and genetic information, as well as reprisal for protected activity.
    —Those with sexual identity problems and orientation, and romantic and sexual desire for their own sex, or their own sex in addition to the opposite sex, who want to act out on these tendencies, additionally living out a deviant lifestyle, have expanded the area of discrimination according to sex. This has backfired for a lot of employers and institutions of education.

    Regarding Catholic education: Catholic employers are not suppose to discriminate according to marital status, so the normal monogamous marriage with chastity is not a requirement for teachers and other staff who engage in sexual activity. A heterosexual teacher or other member of the staff can be involved in one or more sexual relationship(s) and even be living with a heterosexual partner without benefit of marriage. A teacher can also be homosexual or bisexual and be engaged in one or sexual relationships either homosexual, or homosexual or heterosexual, and even be living with a homosexual or heterosexual partner. Additionally, a transgender teacher can dress like a woman one day and a man the next day, and have both a female and male name according to how they feel that day. A female teacher with gender identity issues can have gender reassignment medical process and surgery, where students get to see how a woman is transferred slowly into a man. A male teacher with gender identity issues can have gender reassignment medical process and surgery, where students get to see how a man is transferred slowly into a woman. And all these deviant lifestyles and processes are to be brought across as normal and acceptable to the children.
    —All of these individuals with deviant lifestyle issues are to receive our compassion and prayers, but not our acceptance for their lifestyle.

    Additionally, religion is another area where there can be no discrimination. So whether or not a teacher (or another staff member) has religion or faith, they can teach in a Catholic school. A teacher (or another staff member) does not have to be Catholic or Christian, or practice any of the major faiths. A teacher (or another staff member) can be Rastafarian or practicing Witchcraft, or be involved in other occult practices, and be teaching students.

    The same situation according to sexual identity, sexual preference and lifestyle and marital status, and religion applies to students gaining entry into Catholic schools, colleges, and universities.

    Many of the heterosexuals who feel so inclined to back up deviant sexual lifestyles of individuals with sexual identity issues, and same-sex preferences or combination sex preferences, might think differently if these individuals were teaching their children.

  6. avatar christian says:

    I applaud the men in all three articles about Homophiles posted here, for living a celibate, chaste lifestyle in their same-sex orientation. I think they should be accepted in the Church, but I think it can go too far to put an emphasis on the special gifts of celibate homosexuals in the church.
    It was understood in times past, that eunuchs had a special opportunity to serve God, and be pleasing to God, in their situation and life of celibacy, but there was not a real emphasis on the special giftedness of being a eunuch in the Church. It has been understood that men and women who have been separated or divorced, have an opportunity to serve God, and be pleasing to God, in their situation and life of celibacy, but there has not been an emphasis on the special giftedness of being a separated and divorced Catholic in the Church. There are other situations as well, where Catholics live out lives of celibacy to honor Church teachings, yet they are not hailed in any special way, and much of their spiritual life and offerings are done in quiet, unassuming ways.

  7. avatar raymondfrice says:

    “but there has not been an emphasis on the special giftedness of being a separated and divorced Catholic in the Church. There are other situations as well, where Catholics live out lives of celibacy to honor Church teachings, yet they are not hailed in any special way, and much of their spiritual life and offerings are done in quiet, unassuming ways.”

    FYI/ this may BE CHANGING WITH THE American nun, Cornelia ConnolyMERICAN NUN, Cornelia Connolly.

  8. avatar christian says:

    raymondfrice-I appreciate your mention of the American nun, Cornelia Connolly.

    I was referring to men and women in difficult circumstances and life situations living ordinary civilian/lay lives while being a faithful Catholic Christian. In addition to the eunuchs in the past, there are life-long single Catholic Christians, separated and divorced Catholics, and people in unusual marriage circumstances, as well as those incapacitated in one way or another, who lived out a life of celibacy and chastity out of love and obedience to God and church teaching. Although rare, there is also the person who is born an hermaphrodite, a difficult situation for them and their family. All less than ideal fates and unusual situations in life are not given any special emphasis as a sought out state in life with special giftedness, yet it is understood those involved in these less than ideal fates and unusual situations have a special and greater opportunity to serve God, and to be pleasing to God, in their lay state of life, although they are not hailed in any special way.

Leave a Reply

Log in | Register

You must be logged in to post a comment.

-Return to main page-