Homosexuality and Catholicism – Wikipedia

There are multiple documents issued by Catholic Church regarding homosexuality . The current general position is expressed in the Declaration about some issues of sexual ethics issued by the congregation for the doctrine of faith in January 1976, which, after having distinguished between homosexuals whose trend […] is transitory It is homosexuals […] of innate instinct or pathological constitution, judged incurable , indicates for the latter that:

after-content-x4 «Their guilt will be judged with caution; But no pastoral method can be used that […] agree on a moral justification. According to the objective moral order, homosexual relationships are acts without their essential and indispensable rule [first] »

Position reiterated ten years later in the document ” The Pastoral Persons Homosexual Care ” ( Pastoral care of homosexual people ), issued by the same congregation for the doctrine of faith in 1986 signed by the then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, who reads:

“On the other hand, it should be noted that the particular inclination of the homosexual person, although it is not in sin, nevertheless constitutes a trend, more or less strong, towards an intrinsically bad behavior from a moral point of view. For this reason the inclination itself must be considered as objectively disordered ”

( The Pastoral Persons Homosexual Care , 1986, Joseph Ratzinger )

The position from the Catholic Church is attentive to the discrimination suffered by the homosexual individual, and firmly condemns any malicious act or expression towards him ^[2] ; At the same time, the Catholic Church expresses a clear opposition to any public recognition of unions between people of the same sex, which is, for some critics, evidence of ideological homophobia in the Catholic tradition ^{[3] [4]} .

However, the magisterial position meets a certain dissent in the same Church, both among the faithful of some geographical areas ^[5] , than between some bishops ^[6] than among the same theologians ^[7] .

The Catholic Church considers homosexuality from a moral point of view and does not adopt a specific theory of the causes, although numerous theories have been advanced on the differentiation of sexual orientation. The catechism, regarding homosexual orientation, merely affirm:

“His psychic genesis remains largely inexplicable.” after-content-x4

( Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2357 )

«A non -negligible number of men and women has innate homosexual tendencies. They do not choose their homosexual condition ”

( Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2358, 1992 edition )

“A not negligible number of men and women has deeply rooted homosexual tendencies.”

( Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2358, amendment of 1995 )

The Catholic Church explicitly condemned verbal and physical aggressions to the detriment of homosexual people:

«It should be firmly departed that homosexual people have been and are still the subject of malicious expressions and violent actions. Similar behaviors deserve the condemnation of the church shepherds, wherever they occur. They reveal a lack of respect for others, skimpy of the elementary principles on which a healthy civil coexistence is based. The dignity of each person must always be respected in words, actions and laws. ”

( Congregation for the doctrine of faith, Letter to the bishops of the Catholic Church for the pastoral care of homosexual people , 1986 [8] )

The Catholic Church makes an important distinction in formulating its moral judgment on homosexuality:

• On the one hand there is the trend homosexual, whose origin is not yet clear;
• On the other hand there are sexual intercourse between homosexuals.

The first, the trend homosexual, belongs to the pre-moral sphere, in the same way as all the other things that the human person feel .
The seconds, or the behavior sexual in sexual act, belongs to the sphere of will, decisions, of what the human person wants Do of his life.

Another distinction that the Catholic Church considers it important to do is between moral evaluation objective is that subjective (This distinction always applies, in any moral evaluation, regardless of the object):

• When a person or community form a moral judgment, they always express it at the level objective , morally judging a certain type of action like Good O bad ;
• the moral judgment subjective Instead, it must always be very cautious, because nobody is able to evaluate all the implications and interference, the past and education, etc., which have contributed to shaping some behavior.

Exemplifying, the corruption it is a serious sin, while the corrupt people They must be approached with humanity and help to change.

It is the distinction between sin and sinner who made Pope John XXIII consistently with the constant teaching of the magisterium: the first is condemned, but to save the second.

Basically, the doctrine states that sexual intercourse between people of the same sex cannot be approved in any case, and that they would be contrary to natural law even if, as some support, the homosexuality It was not the result of a deliberate choice; Also in this case, in fact, that fundamental freedom that characterizes the human person and that allows it to avoid the activity homosexual. ^[8]

The life of the priest or the monk, with the relative vote of chastity, according to school theology is a moral example of equal dignity before God and before other men, or superior, to that of the married couple with children. The practice of chastity is also lawful for the lay people, that is to say for those who remain single without making the priestly choice, as well as inside married couples. In this vision, the faithful (priest or secular) renounces sexual activity to open up to a greater and more universal love than that aimed for a single person for life, sexuality is not denied or repressed against human nature, but is sublimated in another way. However, even with a declared choice of chastity, for people who affirm their homosexual tendencies, the rule of the magisterium is applying to admit them in seminars and monasteries. From a moral point of view, the subjective difficulty of practicing this choice of chastity is a merit that does not prevail and does not erase the fault linked to the presence of homosexual desires and fantasies, even if these do not find a concrete realization.

The Summa Theologica (Quaestio 105, article 7) It makes a minimum final hint of homosexuality, after a treatment on the pleasure that according to Aristotle and Aquinate is generally something natural and legitimate. Aquinas distinguishes the pleasures of human nature in pleasures of reason -which are the contemplation of truth and the acts of virtue-, from the pleasures of nature as it stands out from reason, as common to man and other beings, such as Those that concern the conservation of the body or as for the individual, such as food, drink, sleep and the like, or as for the species, such as the use of sexuality “in some individuals some of the natural principles of the species is corrupt, e So what is against the nature of the species becomes, under a certain aspect, natural for them. […] So it can therefore happen that what is contrary to the nature of man, both with respect to reason and with respect to physical conservation, becomes natural for this determined man, for the corruption of nature that occurred in him. And this corruption can depend on the body – on a disease, p. Eg, which to feverish makes you seem to love sweet things and vice versa; or from a vicious complexion, so some feel pleasure in eating the earth or coal, or in other things like that; – Or from the soul: and this is how some out of custom feel like in anthropophagy, sexual intercourse with beasts, homosexuality or in other things of the genre, which are not compliant with human nature “.

P. E. Schillebeeckx observes that “it is remarkable that the Fathers of the Church, which all consider the procreation and foundation of a family as the only authentic sense of sexual life, never feel the need to demonstrate it with an argument. For them as for the rest of the primitive and ancient world, it is an evidence that is not contested by anyone and that does not need to be tried: it is the common prerequisite, never questioned, of all their considerations. When St. Augustine wants to insist on the duty of procreation, it simply refers to the content of the marriage contract, positive and legal, which was formulated in the tables wedding , in which the mention was explicitly made of the procreation of children . The original evidence, never put in question, is thus legally confirmed by Roman law “(DOC, Sex rights and marriage, Mondadori, Milan, 1968, pp. 32 s.).

German theologian Herbert Doms, in his book From the meaning and purpose of marriage (Breslavia, 1935), immediately translated into the main European languages, moved a criticism of the classic positions of the Augustinian current and Thomist, while reiterating the primacy of the extrinsic end of the offspring, underlines in the classical position an insufficient enhancement of the intrinsic and immanent end of the emotional bond which unites the spouses, who would risk, in his opinion, to remove all meaning from the marriage, where there was no concrete possibility of a fruitful coupling, and on the other hand does not justify what is positive in marriage life for personal perfection of the spouses.

Some theologians prefer to replace the term “homosexual person” with “homo-affective person”. Although the term “homosexual person” was used in the catechism, it did not include misunderstandings both within the specific discussion in the catechism and in the period of promulgation of the catechism itself, that is, it did not mean a third sexual pole but simply a tendency present for “genesis” Not clear between the two sexual polarities, male and female. ^[9]

Some progressive current theologians, ^{[ without source ]} They note that in the case of homosexuals, the invitation to chastity comes to coincide with a non -full realization of the personality and the divine project towards each man, since the university and procreative purpose is not fulfilled in the family life or in the priestly life, from the which remain excluded. The theological current in favor of the homosexual relationship as “minor good” notes that in the relationship there are the three elements with which tomism defines human and divine love: gift, gratuity and loyalty. ^{[ without source ]} The substantial difference concerns the possibility of achieving the only unique and procreative end (or properly procreative end, which also incorporates the university) with a single sexual act, as can happen in the union of man and woman: an ending is inevitably unique because It concerns the unity of the person, body and soul, mixed and inseparable. ^[ten] Another critical point is that knowledge cannot be a priori according to tomism (with the exception of faith), but always starts from the natural and sensitive world to reach the intellect and the transcendence of the spiritual substance, as happens with the five ways: In Tommaso’s anthropology, the knowledge of the entity, and in particular of living creatures, proceeds hand in hand with love, which have the source before and the ultimate goal in the creator ^{[ without source ]} .

In formulating a moral judgment on homosexuality, the catechism of the Catholic Church uses the following terms: “Trends” (CCC, 2358), “Relationships” (2358), “Acts” (2357) and “Practices” (2396). In particular, 2396 lists the “homosexual practices” between sins against chastity together with extramarital sexual intercourse (fornication) and masturbation.
In Catholic literature on homosexuality, the term “tendency” is, mostly, synonymous with “sexual orientation” in a scientific sense (Miglietta, 2007; Danna, 2009), while the use of the term “relationships” appears controversial. By distinguishing between occasional relationships and emotional relationships, some authors properly speak of “love” even with reference to pairs of the same sex. For example, Cardinal Basil Hume declared: “The love between two people are of the same sex or different sex, it must be appreciated and respected”. ^[11]

Interpretation of references to sexuality in biblical texts [ change | Modifica Wikitesto ]

The Bible, according to the Catholic Church, clearly states that God created man and woman (Genesis 1,27 ^[twelfth] ) with their sexual difference, and that the former found in the second a “help that was similar to him”, “bone of my bones and meat of my meat” (Genesis 2,18-24 ^[13] ).
According to Catholic interpretation, the Bible sees procreation as a fundamental aspect of human life. Therefore, the heterosexual couple who has contracted marriage would be the only custodian of the Trinitarian image of God ^[14] ; The wealth of the sexes lies in their encounter-confront-diaologist to be a sign of fruitfulness as God is fruitful in “entering” the world of the other “forgetting” himself, as God does with us. ^[15]

As we have seen, instead of the homosexuality other texts of the New Testament born in the environment of Greek culture, the moral judgment that is expressed is condemned differently by some customs of the time, but consistently with some aspects of the religious and philosophical culture of the religious culture speak. time ^[16] .

In particular, the first chapter of Letter to the Romans which reads:

«[…] The men, leaving the natural relationship with the woman, turned on with passion for each other, committing men with men with men, thus receiving themselves in themselves the punishment that adhered to their transfer. And since they despised the knowledge of God, God abandoned them at the mercy of a depraved intelligence, so they commit what is unworthy, full as they are of all sorts of injustice, wickedness, greed, malice; full of envy, murder, rivalry, fraud, malignancy; Defamators, mistial, enemies of God, outrageous, superb, fanfaroni, ingenious in evil, rebellious to parents, senseless, unfair, heartless, without mercy. And despite knowing the judgment of God, that is, that the authors of such things deserve death, not only do they continue to do them, but also approve who makes them. ”

( Letter to the Romans 1.21 [17] )

Based on these interpretations, the moral judgment of the Catholic Church on homosexuality is as follows:

• The homosexual activity reduces the rich symbolism, meaning and end present in the creator’s design. In its intrinsic sterility it contradicts the vocation to a life of self-donation in the love expressed by the complementary conjugal union between man and woman.
• Although “the psychic genesis of homosexuality remains largely inexplicable”, the tradition of the Church has always declared that “the deeds of homosexuality are intrinsically disordered “,” are contrary to natural law. They preclude the gift of life in sexual act. They are not the result of a true emotional and sexual complementarity. In no case can they be approved “. ^[18]

Evaluation of subjective homosexual orientation [ change | Modifica Wikitesto ]

The homosexual orientation, which many men and women present, is also considered by the catechism as an “objectively disordered” inclination. ^[19]

Homosexuality “constitutes a test for most of them. Therefore they must be welcomed with respect, compassion, delicacy. In their regard, every brand of unjust discrimination will be avoided ». ^[19]

«Homosexual people are called to chastity. Through the virtues of self -control, educators of inner freedom, through the support, sometimes, of a selfless friendship, with prayer and sacramental grace, can and must, gradually and resolutely, approach Christian perfection “. ^[20]

The rights of homosexual people according to the Catholic Church [ change | Modifica Wikitesto ]

The Catholic Church has offered indications about the recognition of the homosexual condition and the rights of homosexual people, on various occasions, through the organ of the congregation for the doctrine of faith:

• On July 24, 1992 with the document Some considerations concerning the response to legal proposals on the non -discrimination of homosexual people ^[21] . It is said that “there is no right to homosexuality, which therefore should not constitute the basis for judicial claims”.
• On 31 July 2003 with the document Considerations about the legal recognition projects of unions between homosexual people .

At the end of 2008 Msgr. Celestino Migliore, permanent observer of the Holy See at the United Nations, expressed himself against a declaration project proposed by France on behalf of the European Union to request the universal decriminalization of homosexuality and the promotion of gender identity, contesting the fact that in the form in which it was presented, it does not limit itself to asking for the abolition of the crime and the penalties provided for homosexuals in some countries, but would also open the way for the condemnation, as “discriminants”, of those countries that deny the The wedding is homosexual, thus introducing “new and relentless discrimination”. ^{[22] [23]}

In 2011 the Church, through the words of the permanent observer of the Holy See at the UN office in Geneva Silvano Tomasi expressed a strong dissent to the inclusion of sexual orientation and gender identity between human rights, such as approved by the United Nations Human Rights Commission. ^[24]

The Catholic Church explicitly asks the States of clearly affirm the immoral character of this type of union and of contain the phenomenon within limits that do not endanger the fabric of public morality , also adding that it is a male that must be tolerated and not approved or legalized. ^[25]

During the return flight from the Apostolic Journey to Cuba and in the United States of America in 2015, Pope Francis expressed his personal consent to the forecast of conscientious objection in favor of government officials who do not intend to issue marriage licenses between people of the same sex. At the same time, he defined conscientious objection as an element of human rights that should belong to any jurisdictional system. ^{[26] [27]}

Homosexual unions [ change | Modifica Wikitesto ]

From a doctrinal point of view, any type of union or coexistence between homosexuals is not entitled to the Catholic community ^{[ without source ]} ; Although many nations with a population with a Catholic majority have legitimized the facts also between homosexuals and in some cases even marriage ^{[ without source ]} .

In particular, the civil recognition of these unions that provides for rights such as participation in the inheritance and reversibility of the pension in the event of the death of the partner, is not accepted as it entails the extension of rights and protections that the State already recognizes to married heterosexual couples.

Foster care, adoption, parenting [ change | Modifica Wikitesto ]

A particular reserve is moved to the adoption of homosexual people and unmarried couples.

According to some positions, even the only extension to these unions of economic protections could lead to legislation in favor of adoptions by de facto couples: the criteria for the division of the inheritance, as well as the reversibility of the pension, are contemplated inside of family law, and the economic protections for the de facto unions, extending to the latter the major protections that family law assigns to marriage unions, would lead to a more extended equation between de facto unions and “family”. ^{[ without source ]}

In the case of parents who interrupt their relationship/marriage for the manifestation of the homosexual orientation of one of the two, the custody of the children, it is supported, should favor the heterosexual parent as a homosexual parent, according to the Catholic Church, could not adequately playing the maternal/paternal role essential to the growth of the child ^{[ without source ]} (although the associations of psychologists and psychiatrists claim that there is no difference between the parental skills of pairs of the same sex and opposite sex ^{[28] [29] [30] [thirty first]} ).

Several critics argue that the attitude of the Catholic Church and some of his members with respect to homosexuals is not of tolerance and acceptance, but that rather comes to discrimination and homophobia. ^{[32] [33] [34]} The same use of the word trend instead of the term orientation, scientifically correct, ^{[35] [36]} It expresses a wish to assign the homosexual orientation a secondary position compared to the heterosexual one. ^[37] The main associations for the defense of the rights of LGBT people reproach the Catholic Church to impose a confessional and scientifically incorrect vision, ^[38] which materializes in the firm opposition repeatedly manifested to the approval of laws that condemn the discrimination based on sexual orientation, the civil recognition of homosexual unions ^[39] and towards resolutions at the UN that encourage a vision of positive homosexuality and far from the positions of the high Catholic hierarchy. ^[40]

The homosexual associations firmly condemned the opposition manifested by the Holy See, in the person of Celestino Migliore, his permanent observer at the United Nations, to the “declaration on human rights, sexual orientation and gender identity” presented at the Nations United by France, as representative of the European Union, ^{[41] [42]} In which the decriminalization of homosexuality is requested in those states where homosexual acts or homosexuality in itself are considered crimes and the principle of non-discrimination is reaffirmed, which requires the extension of human rights to every human being regardless of the ‘sexual orientation or gender identity. ^{[43] [44]} The best opposition was due to the latter request, since many states currently do not recognize the right to marriage – indicated as one of the fundamental rights in the universal declaration of human rights ^[45] – Among people of the same sex, and therefore implement discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. The fear is what the motion opens the way for the condemnation, as “discriminants”, also of these countries and obliges them to recognize new forms of marriage, to which the Church is against. ^{[forty six] [47]}

Another recent example of the positions of the Catholic ecclesiastical hierarchies was seen on the occasion of the presidential elections of Nicaragua, which were held on November 5, 2006. The Nicaraguan Episcopal Conference in a letter sent to the deputies of the National Assembly on March 25 of the same Year, he asked that in the new penal code that was being written: «Article 204 in force is maintained that refers to sodomy. […] We have found an international campaign aimed at giving legitimacy to homosexual relationships, including the legalization of marriages between people of the same sex. For this reason, it is essential that you protect the family composed of father, mother and children, a fundamental nucleus of the Nicaraguanse company ». Article 204, first paragraph, of the criminal code of Nicaragua thus ordered: «He commits a crime of sodomy anyone who induces, promote, propagandi or practiced in a shameful way sexual acts with people of the same sex. It will be punished with imprisonment from 1 to 3 years in prison ». ^{[48] [49] [50]} Even if in 2007 no one was tried in application of the said article, ^[51] It criminalized homosexual, bisexual and transsexual subjects who practiced sexual acts in order to give scandal, and there was a concrete possibility that anyone who carried out support activities in favor of rights claimed by LGBT people or provided related information and services was also accused of this crime. to their sexual health, ^[50] “By contradicting numerous international provisions on human rights”. ^{[51] [52]} With the entry into force of the new penal code in 2008, homosexuality was deducted in Nicaragua.

The affirmation of “respect for homosexual people” is contested by homosexual associations, meaning that said respect should understand the social integration of the homosexual person and the recognition of his civil rights, including the possibility of contracting marriage or a form of equivalent recognition of the Union.

Starting from 1980, with the foundation of the Guado Group, we witness the proliferation of groups of Catholic homosexuals, who gave life to Italy at Italy Coordination of Christian homosexual groups in Italy ( Church ). ^[53]

An extreme protest against the attitude of the Church towards homosexuality was the gesture of Alfredo Ormando, who, in 1998, set fire to St. Peter’s Square. ^{[54] [55]}

On May 17, 2007, on the occasion of the annual international day against homophobia, the non -governmental organization Human Rights Watch included Benedict XVI in the leader’s ranking that use their authority to deny basic human rights, with these reasons: ” The leader of the Holy See went far beyond the expression of the theological views of the Church on homosexuality. The Pope intervened in politics in many countries to condemn or threaten those who support equal rights or any form of recognition for lesbian families e gay” ^[56] .

The debate on Catholic homosexuals [ change | Modifica Wikitesto ]

Since the sixties of the twentieth century they have arisen spontaneously within the Catholic Church, as in other religious confessions and in society in general, movements, associations and groups of homosexual people. These movements, associations, groups, and the schools of thought connected to them are not based on a unitary approach, but on a plurality of doctrinal hermeneutics, and on different guidelines in the pastoral, pedagogical, social and political fields. The proposed activities range from the spiritual direction, to pedagogical support, socialization, to community sharing, up to the promotion of inclusion, participation and non -discrimination initiatives in the Church and in society.

At the same time, a remarkable Catholic literature, equally varied, has developed on homosexuality. Some authors and schools of thought, adopt an “internal” observation point to the experience of Catholic homosexual people and their socialization. Other movements, associations and groups, or more correctly the exponents of other schools of thought, adopt an “external” point of view, based mainly on deductive approaches starting from doctrinal or theoretical principles, together with inductive approaches starting from cases of people Unhappy or dissatisfied Catholic homosexuals of their condition.

At the theological level, a minority of Catholic theologians tend to criticize the magisterial position and, without ever reaching an equation between gay and straight couples, they propose as “minor good” (but unique factually pursuable for homosexual people) the stable and faithful homosexual relationship : expressions of these new theological tendencies are Giannino Piana ^[57] , Enrico Chiavacci ^[58] in Italy and Charles Curran in the USA.

In this perspective, these authors express themselves favorably on the civil recognition of homosexual unions [first] , on adoptions for these couples and for the possibility of celebrating blessings of couples formed by people of the same sex .

Pastoral and pedagogical disputes [ change | Modifica Wikitesto ]

Pastoral instructions and disputes [ change | Modifica Wikitesto ]

The main pastoral document developed by the Congregation for the doctrine of the faith, and systematically referred to homosexuality, is the “Letter to the bishops on the pastoral care of homosexual people” (CPPO), of 1 October 1986. “In continuity with tradition and the magisterium”, the principle of autorrinannezione, that is “a self -employment implemented in the abandonment to the will of the Father” (CPPO, 12) is affirmed in continuity and with the magisterium “. , “accepting the fruitful sacrifice of the cross”. This would be equivalent to a substantial request for chastity in the celibate sense: “homosexual people are called like other Christians to live chastity”, refraining from “homosexual acts” and every “homosexual relationship”. ^[8]

The practical application of this principle has opened a series of interpretative disputes. “Transformationalism” while accepting the thesis of mandatory celibacy for homosexuals, has proposed a path of transformation aimed at traditional marriage. Other interpreters have, however, supposed to consider the problem of chastity within the homosexual relationship. For example, the moral theologian Don Leandro Rossi, in the essay What chastity for homosexual people? (In Aa.VV., The place of the other. Homosexual people in Christian churches , Meridiana, 2000), claimed that, in the moral evaluation of the homosexual relationship, it is necessary to take into account the homosexual love. ^[59]

The CPPO invited the bishops and episcopal conferences to deal with pastoral care for homosexual people, but paying attention not to give any kind of support to organizations that neglect, are ambiguous, or try to subvert the teaching of the Church, or whose members claim to want to conform their life to the teaching of Jesus, despite having effectively abandoned the teaching of his Church. The episcopal conference that has collected most of all this invitation is the USCCB, the Episcopal Conference of the United States which published in 1997 the letter Always our Children ^{[60] [sixty one]} . Criticism by Narth have been made to this document. ^[62] On the other hand, the subsequent document of the USCCB, Ministry to persons with a homosexual inclination , received criticism from the Dignity/USA Association ^[63] .

“Transformational” groups [ change | Modifica Wikitesto ]

In principle, the “Orthodox” pedagogy presupposes that any suffering and difficulties that can be experienced due to the homosexual condition is combined with the “sacrifice of the cross of Christ”, and that the homosexual person must be helped to live in chastity, with humanity And respect, to tend to holiness and Christian perfection. The relationship between homosexual people is admitted as long as they remain within the limits of a “casta friendship”. Sometimes, however, Orthodox pedagogy is preferred “transformational” pedagogy, which undergoes the influence of “reparactive therapy” (Narth) and “Transformational Ministry” (Exodus, Desert Stream, Living Waters), which developed both in Catholic environment and Protestant in the USA, and is sometimes based on a knowledge of human sexuality which is rejected by the international scientific community. Generally it is aimed at transformational groups, spontaneously or on the basis of a family pressure, that part of homosexual believers who strongly wish to build a relationship with a person of the opposite sex aimed at the establishment of a traditional family. They live with serious suffering the homosexual condition.

Critics argue that “transformational” pedagogy goes far beyond the promotion of the “casta friendship” envisaged by the CPPO, indeed, in many cases, it promotes the development of heterosexual behavior aimed at marriage, even if the “change” of the ‘sexual orientation. This would throw doubts about the validity of the marriage contracted with the person of the opposite sex ^{[sixty four]} And, if he were aware of it, on the moral integrity of the homosexual person who contracts this type of marriage. There are also ethical limits on “transformational” pedagogy. In particular, it can make use of the support of psychologists only under certain conditions. The APA has denounced that the use of “reparative therapies” or “Transformational Ministry” can cause greater suffering than those to which it would intend to remedy and can exacerbate the risk of harassment towards homosexual people ^[65] . However, “transformational” pedagogy could be applicable in harmony with the guidelines of international pedagogy in the rather theoretical case of “situational homosexuality”, that is, in the event that the person shows “homosexual” behavior in the face of an “heterosexual” orientation , and therefore it is helped to discover its true sexual identity and to live it consistently.

Some “transformational” organizations operate in Italy without an official support of the episcopate. The location of the Chaire Objective Associations appears controversial ^[66] e agapo ^{[sixty seven]} , similar to the US Courage Association ^[68] . In particular, Agapo does not propose directly as a group of Catholic inspiration and seems to align with the main knowledge of the homosexuality expressed by the international scientific community (according to which homosexuality is not a disease). However, it is very critical of “affirmative” therapies and what he defines as “gay lifestyle”, not deviating, therefore, as a setting from other openly Catholic groups of inspiration; It is also not clear whether the proposed pedagogy is “orthodox” or “transformational”, but there is a strong support towards explicitly transformational pedagogy groups, such as the Lot group. ^{[69] [70]}

In 2007, in the USA, some former transformational activists signed a public declaration of excuses ^[71] .

Some people involved in transformational programs define themselves as ex-gay, while some people who abandon these programs define themselves to be ex-Ex-Gay.

There is a limited independent scientific literature on transformational approaches, mainly of an ethnographic nature. ^{[72] [seventy three]} However, no reliable publication has ever experienced the effectiveness of these approaches; The official positions of the American Psychological Association, one of the most authoritative institutions in the field worldwide, have declared these interventions useless and harmful ^[74] .

Groups in dialogue with the diocese [ change | Modifica Wikitesto ]

The relationship with the dioceses is very variable, and depends on the type of group, on the path it proposes to its members, and on the presence or absence of members of the clergy, also in function of a spiritual direction. In the US, the Aglo di Chicago ^[75] Unlike dignity/USA, he opted for an intense collaboration with the Archdiocese local. In other cases, always in the USA, it is the diocese itself that proposes a special pastoral (e.g. Los Angeles ^[76] , Oakland ^[77] , Cleveland ^[78] ). In London, the local bishop authorized a Sunday mass to Soho specifically inclusive of homosexual people (who are in large numbers in that neighborhood) ^[79] .

In Italy, the groups of Catholic homosexuals have occasional contacts with the diocese, normally based on cordiality. Sometimes, the local bishop appoints a diocesan manager for this type of dialogue. For example, in Turin, diocesan delegates for dialogue with groups of homosexual believers are Don Walter Danna and Don Ermis Segatti ^[80] . In Turin, a documentation center on faith and homosexuality was recently established at the Abele group of Don Ciotti ^[81] entitled in Ferruccio Castellano. Other groups that have established collaborations with the diocese are: at the oaks of Mamre (Cremona) ^[82] , the arch (Parma) ^[83] .

Some Italian parishes grant places of worship to organize vigils of prayer for the victims of homophobia, born spontaneously in 2007 and then repeated in 2008 and 2009 in numerous cities ^[84] .

Experimental pastoral approaches: the “Pezzini method” [ change | Modifica Wikitesto ]

Completely different both from the typical approaches of “transformational” pedagogy and those of the heterodox Catholic gay militancy is the “Pezzini method”. This method is typical of the La Fonte di Milano group ^[85] , of which Don Pezzini has been animator since 1986, who aims to welcome young and old who need comfort, sharing, friendship, prayer, or who sometimes feel excluded from families or ecclesial communities because of their homosexuality. The groups that have a common path with the source are Crete (Bergamo) and the mosaic (Brescia). They are especially listening groups rather than transformation.

The “Pezzini Method” assumes that a homosexual boy sometimes crosses a difficult adolescence or youth, in which he struggles to find true friends, often experimenting with the exclusion from the peer group. So, finding guys similar to him would contribute not to induce him on occasions of sin, but primarily to alleviating him from suffering, because he could more easily help him feel excluded and misunderstood. Pezzini, in his books, does not defend the “sexual freedom” of homosexuals. Rather, starting from a factual situation similar to that of the divorced divorceds, asks homosexual couples not to waste money on superfluous trips or clothes, but to implement forms of charity and altruism. The mission that is placed is to listen to, putting the “practice of total and cordial welcome” of the Church to any other pedagogical priority. This approach was reaffirmed by the president of Cardinal Cardinal Angelo Bagnasco, when, regarding homosexual people, he said that the Church operates with “the spirit and practice of total and cordial welcome towards all people” ^{[eighty six]} . The meetings of the groups generally take place in two parts. In the first, a biblical theme is presented, followed by a discussion based on personal experiences. In the second part you pray together or go together with Mass.

In general, this approach has received criticism from both some strongly conservative Catholics who consider it “misunderstanding” ^{[eighty seven]} , both from the gay movement that accuses the members of these groups of denying the commitment to the homosexual cause. There is no specific literature on the overall results of this approach.

Other pedagogical and pastoral initiatives in the USA [ change | Modifica Wikitesto ]

The USA are the third country in the world by number of Catholics (61 million faithful in 1998) ^[88] And numerous pedagogical and pastoral initiatives are active for Catholic homosexual people.
Since 1994, the National Association of Catholic Diocesan Lesbian and Gay Ministries (NaCDLGM) has been operational, which brings together the diocesan pastoral workers involved in the pastoral care of homosexuals ^[89] .
The New Ways Ministry association has been operational since 1977 ^[90] , founded by Father Robert Nugent and Sister Jeannine Gramick, subsequently banned by the CDF, who promotes the research and development of a “progressive” Catholic pastoral care towards homosexual people.
In 2004 the lucky family association was founded by Casey and Mary Ellen Lopata ^[91] , which brings together Catholic parents of homosexual children, unlike the Italian Agedo, which brings together even non -Catholic parents. Lucky families apparently adopts pedagogical approaches inspired by the guidelines of the Always our Children .

Other groups in the world [ change | Modifica Wikitesto ]

In Australia, Acceptance groups operate ^[92] , in Canada there is dignity/Canada ^[93] , in Messico the San Elredo community ^{[ninety four]} .

Disputes on “Catholic homosexual culture” [ change | Modifica Wikitesto ]

The culture or subculture that derives from the processes of explicit and sharing of experiences or socialization between Catholic homosexuals, regardless of the pedagogical perspective adopted, can give rise to particular customs, norms, languages ​​within those communities, sometimes resumed in the form of production cultural (non -fiction ^{[95] [96]} , literary ^[97] , documentary ^[98] , cinematographic or other) that challenges the common sense of “homosexual culture” or “gay culture”, generally depicted as a foreign to Christian culture.

Ethnographic and anthropo-cultural literature of Catholic homosexual communities is very limited. ^[99]

Disputes on homosexuality and holiness [ change | Modifica Wikitesto ]

On the relationship between homosexuality and holiness there is a debate within the Catholic homosexual world, as a consequence of the scientific and religious debate on homosexuality and the theories on the differentiation of sexual orientation.

The document Human person of Paul VI distinguishes between “homosexual tendency” (in itself neutral) and “homosexual behavior” (sinful and condemnable). Subsequent documents of the magisterium under John Paul II, however, have defined as “intrinsically disordered” as the tendency as such, at the same time declaring that the homosexual person is “called to chastity” in his path to salvation. From these positions a debate has opened, lively especially in the United States of America, on the compatibility between homosexual tendency and Christian perfection, including the maximum expression of holiness ^[100] .

The fundamental issues posed by the debate are:

1. Can the homosexual person get to Christian perfection, or does his sexual tendency exclude him?
2. If the answer is positive, are there past cases of homosexual people who have achieved this form of perfection to the point of being proclaimed saints?
3. If the answer is yes, who are these people, to be used as a spiritual model?

The US Catholic Gay Community has therefore begun to identify in the hagiographies those data that can lead to homosexual tendencies, up to drawing up a possible calendar of homosexual saints, bisexuals and transgender ^[101] . Particularly active on this line of research was the historian John Boswell.

This type of research finds opposition above all among the most conservative Catholics and which express a more radical position towards homosexuality. They refuse the very concept of “homosexual tendency” by stating that there is a single trend, the heterosexual one, with respect to which homosexuality is a condition to be refused because it was deviant, immoral and inadequate.

Disputes on discrimination [ change | Modifica Wikitesto ]

Controversies on the priestly ordination of homosexual candidates

A controversy built within the Catholic Church in 2005 concerns education that prohibits homosexual candidates or that support gay culture admission to the seminary or priestly ordination. This instruction entered into force a few months after the settlement of the new Pope, Benedict XVI and adds to the list of discrimination that the doctrine of the Catholic Church admits against homosexuals. Previously, with the 1992 considerations, the CDF had already foreseen other forms of discrimination: in the hiring of athletic teachers, in military service, in the location of children for adoption or custody. ^{[102] [103]}

The 2005 education was preceded by an intervention by the Auxiliary Bishop of Detroit, Thomas Gumbleon, who defended homosexual priests ^[104] , and by a subsequent protest letter signed by 39 Italian homosexual priests and religious ^[105] .

More recently, the Dutch Dominicans have publicly expressed themselves in favor of homosexuals in the context of a proposal for liberalization of the Eucharistic celebration open to laity ^[106] .

Disputes on homosexual love

Although Catholic doctrine does not conceive as discrimination the non -recognition of the couple of the same sex, there is a plurality of disputes on the nature of love and the homosexual relationship, including the theme of recognition, both theological and pastoral nature, and of a methodological nature, both of a social and political nature.

• Theological and pastoral disputes . The exegesis, also Orthodox, clarifies the particular contexts in which the Bible is supposed to speak of homosexuality. For example, Sodom’s story would be interpreted as violence against foreigners and in San Paolo there would be a reference to obscene rites in the pagan world ^[107] . Direct reference would not be made to homosexual love. The congregation for the doctrine of faith, however, noted that, albeit written in contexts very different from today, “there is an evident consistency within the scriptures themselves on homosexual behavior. Therefore the doctrine of the Church on this point is not based only on isolated phrases, from which we can draw questionable theological arguments, but rather on the solid foundation of a constant biblical testimony. ” And that to be correctly understood, the interpretation of writing must be in actual agreement with the tradition of the Church. It is on these foundations that, starting from the seventies of the last century, the CDF has codified detailed teachings in the field of “homosexuality” and “homosexual relationship”. The authors deemed heterodox as the former professor of Theology Charles Curran, the former Jesuit John McNeill, and, in Italy, Franco Barbero, a priest resigned by the clerical state, instead go towards a reinterpretation of the homosexual relationship. Barbero, in particular, considers it possible to recognize the love pact between two people of the same sex from a religious point of view, engaged in a mature, faithful, free relationship. Recently, the international magazine of Theology Council He dedicated an entire number “to” homosexuality, to indicate that theological research, also Catholic, begins to evaluate potential fallacies of an excessive generalization of the concept of “homosexual relationship”. In pastoral practice, sometimes, the homosexual couple is somehow “tolerated”. Cardinal Carlo Maria Martini, answering a question about homosexual couples in Night conversations on Jerusalem on the risk of faith He said: “I would never have to think of judging homosexual couples. The homosexuality condemned by the Bible was motivated by the problematic practice of antiquity, when men had, alongside the family, male lovers, sometimes even boys . In the relationship with homosexuality, however, in the Church we must reproach ourselves that we have often been insensitive “. The English theologian James Alison, for his part, brought on a theological plan what was also highlighted by the psychological sciences and other social sciences. Alison writes: “Of all the lies no one is more terrible and more devastating for our being than that according to which we are unable to love”.
• Methodological disputes . Some authors have attempted to distinguish the theological-doctrinal (non-fake) theological aspects from the theoretical (scientifically vulnerable and falsifiable in the face of concrete cases), both in an experiential pastoral perspective (Gramick, Nugent), and in a psychological perspective (McNeill ^[108] ), both in an epistemological perspective (regis). The conceptions of “homosexual love” and “homosexual relationship”, from a strictly epistemic point of view, should be based on rigorous cognitive evidence relating to the concrete experiences of Catholic homosexuals ^[109] , as a useful requirement to avoid prejudices and generalizations. Other authors, such as the theologian Mary Hunt, raised the controversial problem of “power” in the consideration of homosexuality within the Church, similar to the problem of the representation of the female gender and the role of women. If, that is, it may be a “male” and “heterosexual” “power” power effectively grasping the meaning of the role of women and homosexuals in the Church and society ^[110] . With reference to supposed anti -homosexual conditioning, other authors, such as the German theologian Eugen Drewemann (author of Officials of God. Psychogram of an ideal ), they also conjectured that the Catholic clergy is strongly conditioned by an alleged high concentration of repressed homosexuality within it.
• Social and political disputes . At the doctrinal and pastoral level, homosexuality is generally treated as a general and abstract condition or as a condition or individual behavior. The social aspect, both in terms of pressure groups, and in terms of “homosexual relationship” is seen, mostly, as a “to be contained” phenomenon ^[111] . In the context of Catholic social research, a controversial debate is underway on the civil recognition of rights for cohabiting homosexual people. In particular, the theme of the “common good”, typical of the tradition of the Social doctrine of the Church . Mario Picozzi writes in the Christian magazine “Social updates”: The legal recognition of the link between people of the same sex, as a act of acts already in place, finds its justification as this social relationship contributes to the construction of the common good. Taking care of the other, permanently, is the form of realization of the subject and at the same time contribution to social life in terms of solidarity and sharing. And it is precisely for this relationality that the link between people of the same sex, as it happens for other forms of social relationship, can be guaranteed, not in the form of a privilege granted according to the particular sexual relationship, but in the recognition of the value and the Community meaning of this proximity. (Social updates, 06/2008, p. 444). Examples of “common good” and “contribution to social life” by homosexual couples have been proposed: “In a couple the expenses are minor […] because, for example, two rents should not be paid, but if He pays only one. […] The couple generates a social wealth that singles cannot generate! The couple can do what they want of that 40% of income saved: spending it on travel, in jewelry, in dinners away from home. But the superfluous can also spend it to help the most needy, for charity, for works of charity. ” (Regis F., The strong love, p. 174). Although with the Considerations In 2003, the congregation for the doctrine of faith had asked Catholic politicians to vote against any proposal for recognition of homosexual couples, the mayor of San Francisco, the Catholic Gavin Newsom, has been publicly favorable to homosexual weddings ^[112] . Former British premier Tony Blair, now converted to Catholicism, said that the Church should rethink its approach to homosexuals ^[113] . French President Sarkozy, Catholic, had recently declared himself “shocked” for the position of the Church on homosexuality ^[114] .

• Aa.VV., Homosexuality , in Concilium, international magazine of theology 1/2008
• Aa.VV., Recognize homosexual unions? A contribution to the discussion , in social updates, magazine of Christian inspiration, 06/2008, pp. 421–444
• Alison J., Faith beyond resentment. Catholic consciousness and gay consciousness: resources for the debate , Ancona-Massa, Transeuropa, 2007
• Barbagli M., Colombo A., Modern homosexuals. Gay and lesbians in Italy , Bologna, Il Mulino, 2007
• Barbero F., The four, in the Category: Business agents and rapresentatives Homosexuality and gospel , Verona, Gabrielli, 2008
• Barbero F., The gift of loss , Verona, Gabrielli, 2007
• Boswell J., The marriage of likeness: Same sex unions in pre-modern Europe , Vintage books, 1995. ISBN 0679751645
• Boswell J., Christianity, tolerance, homosexuality. The Church and homosexuals from the origins to the 14th century , Leonardo, Milano 1989. ISBN 88-355-0010-9 Christianity, social tolerance, and homosexuality , 1980) (on the homoerotic writings of Alcuino di York, San Paolino di Nola, Aelredo di Rievaulx, Sant’Anselmo d’Aosta and others).
• Boswell J., Discovering love. Archetypes of gay love in Christian history , Croce Library, Rome 1999 ( Recovering gay history. Archetypes of gay love in Christian history , 1982).
• Boswell J. (co -author), Homosexuality in the priesthood and the religious life (1991).
• Bray A., The friend , University of Chicago Press, 2003
• Cavedo R., Bible and homosexuality , in believing today, “homosexual people”, n. 116, 2/2000
• Consoli M., Ecce Homo. Homosexuality and the Bible , Milan, Kaos ed., 1999
• Countryman W., Sex and moral in the Bible , Turin, Claudiana, 1998
• Danna W., Faith and homosexuality , Turin, Effeta, 2009 (with presentation by Card. Severino Poletto, Archbishop of Turin)
• By Martino G., The man that Jesus loved (with texts by Pasquale Quaranta), Fabio Croce Editore, Rome 2004
• Demur C., Müller D., Homosexuality. A theological dialogue , Turin, Claudiana, 1985
• Donatio I. Work gay , Newton Compton Editori, 2010, ISBN 978-88-541-2686-2
• Engel, Randy, The Rite of Sodomy: Homosexuality and the Roman Catholic Church, New Engel Publishing, Export-PA, 2006 ISBN 0-9778601-3-2
• Erees t., Straight to Jesus: Sexual and Christian Conversions in the Ex-Gay Movement , University of California Press, 2006
• Furnish V.P., SE Wow C., Brawley R., Waetjen H., Dale M., Siker J., Bible and homosexuality , Claudiana, Turin, 2002
• Gramick J, Nugent R., Gay souls. Homosexuals and the Catholic Church , Rome, Editori Riuniti, 2003
• Guimaraes, Atila Silke, The Catholic Church and Homosexuality, Tan Books & Publishers, Charlotte (1999) ISBN 0-89555-651-0
• HIMBAZA I., SCHENKER A., EDART J.B., Homosexuality in the Bible , Milan, San Paolo editions, 2007
• Lettini G., Homosexuality , Turin, Claudiana, 1999
• Long F., Protestants and sexuality , Turin, Claudiana, 1998
• Martini C.M., Sporschill G., Night conversations in Jerusalem. On the risk of faith , Milan, Mondadori, 2008
• McNeill J., The Church and homosexuality , Milan, Mondadori, 1979
• McNeill J., Freedom, glorious freedom , Turin, Ed. Group Abele, 1996
• Migletta C., When loving is difficult , Milan, Gribaudi, 2008 (Preface by Mons. Giuseppe Anfossi, Bishop of Aosta)
• O’Neill D., Passionate holiness. Marginalized Christian devotions for distinctive peoples , Trafford Publishing, 2005, ISBN 1-4120-3940-1 (on the ancient cults of saints/and disguises/e, or deemed homosexual).
• Pezzini d., The hands of the potter. A homosexual son what to do? , Milan, again, 2004
• Pezzini d., At the gates of Zion. Stories of homosexual believers , Milan, Monti, 1998
• Pezzini D. (the care of), Reevaulx Aeledo, Spiritual friendship , Edizioni Paoline, Milan 1996 and New City, Rome, 1997
• Forty p. (the care of), Homosexuality and gospel. Franco Barbero replies , Verona, Gabrielli, 2008
• Rakoczy R., The Gay Book of Saints , ISBN 0759650586. Satire of the debate on gay saints, in a gay and camp key.
• Ranke-Heinemann U., Eunuchi for the kingdom of heaven. The Catholic Church and sexuality , Rizzoli, Milan, 1990, pp. 355
• King F. Strong love , Rome, Editori Riuniti University Press, 2008
• Thavenot X., Always my son. Homosexuality in the family , Milan, Paoline, 2004
• Waldemar J., The ethics of the Old Testament. A paradigmatic approach , Turin, Claudiana, 2004
• Walton G, Fag church. Man who integrate gay and christian identities , Journal of Homosexuality, 51(2): 1-17
• Witte B.S., Grubben J.L., Gottschalk J.B.F., Homosexuality and Christian consciousness , Claudiana, Turin, 1976
• Wolkomir M., Emotion Work, Commitment, and the Authentication of the Self , Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, Vol. 30, No. 3, 305-334, 2001
• Wolkomir M., Be Not Deceived: The Sacred and Sexual Struggles of Gay and Ex-gay Christian Men , Rutgers University Press, 2006

Official and doctrinal documents [ change | Modifica Wikitesto ]

• Congregation for the doctrine of faith, Human person (1975). Text in Italian.
• Congregation for the doctrine of faith, Homosexualitatis problem , (official text, signed by Joseph Ratzinger, 1 October 1986). Text in Italian [2] .
• The sixth commandment of the Decalogue (catechism of the Catholic Church) . are Vatican.va .
• Congregation for the doctrine of faith, Some considerations concerning the response to legal proposals on the non -discrimination of homosexual people , (1992).
• Notification of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith to Sister Jeannine Gramick, SSnd and Father Robert Nugent, SDS (Disciplinary decision, 1999).
• Congregation for the doctrine of faith, Considerations about the legal recognition projects of unions between homosexual people , (2003).
• Vatican Congregation for Catholic Education, Criteria of vocational discernment of homosexual tendency for admission to the seminary and sacred orders . Rome, November 4, 2005.
• Episcopal conference of the United States, always our children. A pastoral message to parents of homosexual children and suggestions to pastoral collaborators (Always Our Children: A Pastoral Message to Parents of Homosexual Children and Suggestions for Pastoral Ministers), Origins 27(1997) 17, pp. 285-291).
• Ministry to persons with a homosexual inclination, 2007 (Conferenza episcopale USA)

[ change | Modifica Wikitesto ]

• Matteo Bandini, “It’s not a Gospel” . Interview with Don Franco Barbero , “Pride”, December 2005.
• Bruto M. Brutus, Homosexuality , in “Christianity” official organ of Catholic alliance.
• Gianni Geraci, Vade Retro Sodoma , “Pride”, January 2006.
• Gianni Geraci, Benedict XVI (Joseph Ratzinger) and the condemnation of homosexuality .
• Faith and homosexual people – Documents collected by the progressive Catholic Association we are church.
• The friar chef and love Delia Vaccarello. One, two, three .. Illi all, the unit 24 June 2003
• Testimonies of homosexual Christians – documents collected from Gionata project on faith and homosexuality
• La Repubblica: Benedict XVI against gay marriages . are repubblica.it .