Contra “The Controlling” Catholic Church: Against the Caricature that The Church is A Homophobic, Racist, Sexist, and Exclusive Institution   Leave a comment

1. Introduction

“When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me.” (1 Corinthians 13:11)

As a child coming of age into young adult years, my Reversion to Catholicism is one marked by an initial hatred for The Catholic Church as I understood it. I was the poster child of Progressive Modernist thought who yet embodied a fierce New Age Protestantism about things pertaining to The Church and the surrounding cultural and spiritual developments that I found myself growing up around in. This series is written to rebuke the writings of my Youth, a sort of self-imposed Penance to atone for my own personal ignorance. The writings of my youth are held on the internet at the Yahoo! Voices website, there are 4 Articles written between July to November 2007, just after my graduation from High School. It should be noted that the rebuke is thematically addressed rather than chronologically answered.

The First Article written in July 2007 was titled, “Christianity Vs. True Christianity: A Problem with the Church?” This article embodied perfectly my Anti-Catholic view influenced by Progressive Modernism, Protestant propaganda yet New Age influences at the time. The Second Article written in August 2007 was title, “Church of Christ: The Church is Not the Real Thing!” This article embodied my confusion and the varieties of cultural propaganda set against the Church, this article sounds most like what I hear today, and that I have come to fight most against today. The Third Article was written in the same month and was titled, “Is the Bible Really Full and Complete?” This article was my argument that the Bible was incomplete and that since it has been left to many revisions it is no longer a trustworthy book, this attack the notion that The Bible was the Complete and Final Word of God. The Fourth and Final Article was written in November 2007 and was titled, “My Road to Christian Gnosticism” Here it is showcased for all to see my love of Heterodoxy and lack of understanding of Orthodoxy, of course in celebrating fighting against the superstitious ignorance of the Church I now confess that I was the one being superstitious and ignorant.



II. My Argument Against My Past Self

When I was a teenager coming of age and trying to make sense of the world around me I thought the Church was the premier institution that crystallized outright Homophobic, Racist, Sexist, and Elitist Exclusivism. As I got older however, I realized I was very wrong. This brief post is written to prove to you just how wrong I was, my hope is that through reading this you to will reconsider the cultural propaganda set up against the Church.

The Church As Homophobic

As a teenager growing up, I was the happy liberal living in suburban America, I saw the actions of those from the conservative and religious community as being people of hatred, fear mongering, and backwardness. This found a strong resonance in me as a child coming age as it related to the Religious Community (aka The Church) and the Homosexual Community. I saw the Church as inherently Homophobic and in my happy liberal state of mind I saw Homosexual Unions as something that shouldn’t bother us, I didn’t see how Homosexual Unions were destroying the fabric of America, and quite frankly I didn’t want to know since I found it to be all fear mongering anyway.

But without going explicitly too religious on the reader in explaining the problem of Homosexuality, since I was not interested in the Conservative Religious Interpretation of Scripture (especially the Literalistic) at the time either, I want to minimize the Scripture quoting and focus more on a philosophical position. To do this I am going to cite from the book, “Theology of the Body for Beginners” quote from the works Bl. John Paul II (JP2) to better communicate to you this opposition toward Homosexuality and elucidate on the difference between The Action and The Person.

JP2 in his Theology of the Body series, makes the point that in Christianity we are to follow Christ in all things, obviously the Religion of Love will have something to say about Sexuality. According to JP2, Christ’s Love is Free, Total, Faithful, and Fruitful because we are called to follow Christ so must our acts of Sacred Bonding be the same. Now as it relates to Homosexuality, this union is first of all not spiritual because even if we were to grant that a homosexual union is Free (as in Consent is given), Total (as in Nothing is held back between the 2 consenting individuals), and Faithful (as in the 2 consenting individuals in holding nothing back from themselves seek to be true to each other), the Homosexual Union by its very essence can never truly be Fruitful (as in the possibility of new life is open).

This is why Homosexual Sex is a sin in Christianity. “Sin” in Christianity means, “To Miss The Mark” or “Not Reach The Full Purpose of its Being Created” Clearly, Homosexuality is a sin because sexual union serves the purpose first and foremost, without debate to create new life but instead the best it can be used is to achieve orgasm and nothing else. Perhaps one can say, “Ah but with reproductive technologies the Homosexual Union can now create life.” However, the Church looks down upon reproductive technologies not because it seeks to have its adherents suffer infertility or live in fear of being fruitless. According to the author of, “Sex Au Naturel” new life is to come into the world through natural means, no sex without babies and no babies without sex, children are seen in Christianity first as a gift not as a right, if the child was seen as a right that would lead to treating the child like a slave rather than a person, since they would be owned by someone else (e.g. Property). It is ironic of course that a culture so overly-sexualized and so “Pro-Choice” would excel at producing babies without sex. Now to be even more shocking, the Church does not condemn Fertility Drugs and Methods that would only seek to enhance the Natural Method to Procreation.

The next thing that needs to be elucidated upon that I didn’t know from back in my teen years and to which I Praise God that this distinction exists is the fact that The Church does not condemn a person just because they are born with a sexual attraction to members of the same-sex. The Church has always condemned actions never a person’s predispositions. Those who attack a person’s predisposition are rightfully called homophobic fundamentalists of the Protestant thought, but The Catholic Church and Orthodox Churches say it’s the actions that make a person Good or Bad, especially when it is repeated habitually. To attack a person because they have an attraction to members of the same-sex makes as much sense as attacking a person who is prone to abuse alcohol but what matters is if they actually abused alcohol. I’ve seen it written elsewhere that God when He made us; made us as a Composite Being in a word with Body, Soul, and Spirit after we fell the Spirit went astray, the soul caved in, and the body suffered as it does today. Who’s to say that Homosexuality being of predominantly biological origin then is a genetic error rather than a “natural” occurrence in nature? With this said, Homosexuality as a Predispositions is not a sin, the action is because it isn’t fruitful it isn’t open to the possibility of new life, the genital organs are considered throughout the animal kingdom the means of producing new life, it is no different for Humans.

**ADDENDUM** Being a student of Psychology, and having been instructed in Social Psychology with a topical exploration of the issue of Love, I refer the reader to The Triangular Theory of Love that I find to be rather insightful in understanding the diverse manifestations of human affection. In this Triangular Theory of Love I have heard from the Popular Culture that, “If 2 People Love One Another Than You Have No Right To Stop It!” Now, lets assume we are following The Triangular Theory of Love when the Popular Culture speaks that message, the highest form of that Love would need to be Consummate Love, however Consummate Love as I have already described is Love that is able and willing to bring new life into the world, as I described above and will be describing in a future article in this series. So if Homosexual “union” cannot be Consummate Love by its very nature what could it be? Because, Homosexuality automatically entails same-sex attraction then it appropriates 1 of the 3 factor’s called, “Passion.” Now in light of Gay “marriage” being approved we see also that Homosexual “unions” also have A Higher Divorce Rate than compared to their Heterosexual Counterparts, this I would take to mean that Homosexual “unions” lack 1 of the 3 Factors of Love called, “Commitment.” Even if we granted that Homosexual partners had the 3rd Factor of, “Intimacy” the best we could grant to them is that their Love is a Romantic Love which more often then not is an expression of Lust and at worst (assuming Intimacy isn’t present) merely an Infatuation, which is a Lust manifesting again. You might say, “Heterosexual Couples have Romantic Love and Infatuations with others and the Church doesn’t rail against them!” To which I reply, “But The Church does rail against these Expressions of ‘Love’ for they are not the Fullest Expression of Love, hence why the Church teaches to hold off sex until marriage!” One can see the consistency of the Church in this.

**ADDENDUM #2** Upon revisiting this issue over again in my mind, I believe that it would not be very far off to say that the Gay Pride Movement in the Modern West, but in particular speaking mainly of America is an Idolatrous Movement. Now you might think that to be quite unfair or brash, or typical “conservative religious mumbo-jumbo” but for those intellectually honest enough consider the Foundation of what Gay Pride means: You take Pride in Your Sexual Orientation, and when it is addressed in a Movement then it carries with it a communal emphasis on Sexual Orientation, its basically an expression of worship, wherein you give your time and energy over to something that is a part of who you are yet is larger than yourself. God commands us to worship Him and Him alone, but some people in our culture would rather exchange The God of Love and The Kingdom of Heaven for socio-political gains rooted in an obsession on ones Sexual Orientation. Now does this mean that, “I Support Gay Bashing?” No absolutely not, but not because they are gay but because they are individuals accorded with a level of dignity and respect having been made the Image and Likeness of the same God who made me. This is what differentiates the Catholic Position from the Gay Pride position, we Catholics do not reduce a person to their orientation and exploit their orientation for socio-political gains, in fact we Catholics are more generous than their own “Gay Pride Movement” because we would tell a person who has a same-sex attraction, that they are more than their Orientation and there are people with Same-Sex Attraction who are glad that such a message as ours, exists.

The Church as Racist

When I was a teen coming of age, I noticed that the majority of religious peoples were rich white conservatives, even in my own parish growing up for the most part was white and never saw any other ethnic group out there. As I got older I was told that the Church supported Slavery and being a liberal I saw Racism and Slavery as pretty synonymous and that the Church is Anti-Semetic, so I attacked the Church for being the originator and sustainer of Racism.

However, as I got older, I realized something. The word, “Catholic” means Universal! This Universality is not a universality of ideas, thank goodness but rather it is a Universality of Peoples. The Catholic Church first and foremost even in the early days didn’t make a distinction between Greeks, Jews, and Romans, among other groups like the Egyptians as well. The fact that up until very recently the Church celebrated The Mass around the world in Latin is a testament to its own Universality.

The other claim lies in the fact that when the Spaniards came to the new world, they enslaved the natives and The Church approved, however The Church did not approve unanimously! To point to the Libertarian author Thomas E. Woods Jr. in “How The Catholic Church Built Western Civilization” he makes it clear that Clergymen were engaged against Spanish Civil Authorities in their mistreatment of the Natives, a Dominican Friar named Antonio de Montesinos, Father Francisco de Vitoria, and Bishop Bartolome de Las Casas. In fact the actions of these men were the necessary prerequisites for the Enlightenment notions of fair and equal treatment under the law.

Finally as it pertains to the actions of The Catholic Church against Jews up and down the centuries, it is an unfortunate reality that some Unchristian things were done against the Jews in the name of Christ. However that should not mean that we give up on the King and his Kingdom, since the actions done against someone do not emulate the actions that a person ought to have emulated. Even if this does not serve as a good enough reason, consider the fact that while Jews were being persecuted and hunted down wherever Hitler had his presence there the Church fought against the Genocidal Eugenics program Hitler and his administration coined as the “Final Solution,” by helping the Jews.

The Church As Sexist

As a teenager coming of age, living with a Liberal Postmodern mindset regarding the Feminine I saw the Church as the most misogynistic institution out there! Especially where it comes to a women’s Right to Choose, allowing a Women Priesthood, and just the overall attitude toward women. As a child coming of age, I attended the Novous Ordo Mass which is often called the Feminine Mass, so it is interesting to see that my own Strong Pro-Feminine Politically Correct Views should occur even in the spiritual realm. However as I got older and I began to disdain Political Correctness on its own merits I was able to think more objectively about the situation.

With regard to a women’s right to choose, through personal experience and after being a Pro-Choicer I am of the philosophical position of Pro-Life Libertarian, in a word since a Libertarian seeks to fight against aggression than it only makes sense to protect the fetus against the aggression of the mother, this is a perfect balance between being a Christian and Libertarian as it pertains to this issue, for the Christian is called to refuse absolutely making a person born or unborn anything less than a person. To briefly bring the abortion issue back to the homosexual issue, the two are the same although the means are different, for they both seek to deny Loves Fruitfulness (i.e. the possibility of new life); this is why abortion is frowned upon. However, contrary to popular misconception, if the mother’s life is in danger then the Ethical Code of the Double Effect is called into play, so as to safeguard the mothers’ life. The Church is not here to control women; it’s here to safeguard Life in a constantly changing world. The only person, who does not appreciate the statements of The Church or care to safeguard Life, is someone who does not value Human Life or see its sacredness.

With regard to a Women Priesthood, all I can say is that at no point in Christian History were women ministers of The Sacraments, at best a woman and only at certain times in history was a woman called to become a deaconess but even then Deacons did not distribute the Sacraments. Does this mean that women did or cannot participate in the Church? The point of the Priesthood is to get people to heaven, nothing more, and there are definitely plenty of women saints who have done incredible things exactly because they weren’t Priestesses or held a clerical position. Men were called to become Priests exactly because the Priesthood is a very masculine position, not conferred upon women. Does this mean that the Church is misogynistic? No, the Church has a mission to bring light to a dark world, men and women alike are called to do this, but each one has its own predispositions to making this work, to argue over roles is to miss the mission of the Church.

Finally as it pertains to the Feminine overall, I saw the Church as an overtly Masculine institution and it is, but back then I had a problem with it. Today Masculinity as a trait is one marked with a sense of Reason and a Force That Gives. However, one must keep in mind that at one point Christianity was considered a women’s religion back in the Pagan Roman world! Typically you need to ask yourself as well, what religion would claim that a religion based on Love could have a masculine Godhead, Love itself is a Feminine Quality. As well the due Veneration of The Virgin Mary and Women Saints throughout the ages is something of an impressive counter to the so-called “Hyper Masculine” claim to Catholicism. Today I go to the Traditional Latin Mass in part for its considered Masculinity and this what one Woman had to say about the Traditional Latin Mass,

“I believe the reason it blesses men so much to see a women veiled isn’t because he thinks that now ‘she knows who’s boss.’ It’s because as a woman embraces her role, so a man may embrace his. Very few men enjoy a power struggle with women. Most will relent because they simply don’t want more aggravation at home, which to them is to be a place of refuge. When a woman understands what God has called her to be, there is peace. The woman feels it and so does the man. This, is what I believe happens when a man looks at women at a Traditional Latin Mass. It is radical in its counter-cultural approach and God blesses it.”

Ultimately, in Catholicism one sees that Courage being a Masculine Quality can and does coincide ultimately with Love, being a Feminine Quality and that The Living God is called The Merciful Judge and Healer of the Sick. I would go so far as to say that The Anti-Feminine mentality that most complain about is not against Catholics but Protestantism since they find Devotion to the Virgin Mother to be a form of idolatry, even though in the Bible itself it is made abundantly clear that God Wills to, “Bless Her Name.” Let us keep in mind that even the Early Church Fathers knew that ultimately it was Mary’s Choice to be overshadowed by The Spirit that made all this possible.

The Church as Embodying Elitist Exclusivity

Again as a teenager being a product of the larger cultural political correctness around me, I was turned off by many of the damnations and condemnations of the Religious Community around me. However as I got older I realized a few things that would undo the Religious Pluralism of my youth. First of all, the Church has its own dogmas and does not nor should it seek to compromise those Dogmas, and for this I say Praise God for these Dogmas are both Dead and Set in Stone yet filled with contemplation that is liberating rather than limiting. The Church is called The Universal Church because of the people who can come to it, not because it seeks to accommodate to every cultural fancy and popular opinion of the present moment. This is a testimony to the Truth of the Living Faith, for it has been preaching the same thing for 2000 years and has not allowed itself to veer off track from its original message, rather it unfolds but this unfolding does not invalidate the previous statements.

Second of all, The Church is designed to gather all truth to itself, its inclusive to ideas in the sense that it does not accommodate to ideas but rather seeks to liberate the Seeds of Truth from the errors due to our own fallen nature. The Church does not see itself as saying “Only Us” rather it says, “We have the Fullness of Revelation.” Therefore, the Church does not say, “all the other long-standing religions of the world are evil” in the absolute sense rather they are not the fullness of what God wants to show us. The same Holy Text that tells us without Christ we are not Saved, is the same Holy Text that tells us to seek wisdom everywhere. Christianity is the end of Religion exactly because in Christ the last thing about God to be shown to us is His Love for Us, once that is shown even in a human relationship there is nothing else left to be said. It is only rational then to reach out the Fullness of what God wants to show you, the only person who does not want that is someone who either is actively rebelling against God or naively can’t understand the Fullness of what is revealed, but even then a choice is presented, to try to understand or give up, I say Love makes it worth it to understand.

In conclusion to this part of my series I say The Church as the Mystical Body is not Homophobic, it Fears nothing but God, even the fearing of losing a soul is subordinated to that Holy Fear of God. The Church as the Mystical Body is not Racist, its founded on the Foundations of Charity and Justice, and Justice is the opposite of prejudice, Charity the opposite of thinking one person better than another simply because of where they come from, how they look, or what cross they carry. The Church as the Mystical Body is not Sexist, it simply admits that Man and Woman are equal in body and dignity but not in the roles they take part in. The Church as the Mystical Body is not an Elitist Exclusive Society, but is an inclusive community of persons united by a Person and who yearn to see the world as He does and to act as He does in the hope of changing the world by Advancing the Kingdom of His Father in our dark, frail, and suffering world. Does this Mystical Body suffer affliction? Of course it does, but we knew that FOR, “We carry the Treasures of the Kingdom in Earthen Vessels.”


What Do You Think?

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: