4 July 2008


I'd really rather not say much about GAFCON. I don't want to be too negative. But here goes ...

I'm uneasy about this singling out of homosexuality. I regard the problem of remarriage after Divorce as at least as grave a departure from Christian standards as homosexual genital activity. And also the use of unnatural methods of Cotraception. And above all I feel that the murderous question of Abortion should be mentioned on all relevant occasions.

To single out Homosexuality while not mentioning any of the grave disorders that afflict heterosexual sexuality in our present culture seems to me to run the risk of being, or at least seeming, 'homophobic'. I would have no problem, in an appropriate context, about condemning homosexual genital activity, provided that such other things got mentioned too. And I'm not sure that it's right to assume that all cohabiting homosexuals are in a sinful physical relationship. And let's not forget that we heterosexuals have the opportunity to use our sexuality within marriage; there may be homosexually inclined people for whom contracting a heterosexual union would be impossible. We shouldn't condemn them without being frank about the enormous disorders within our own 'orientation'. Motes and beams.

And, above all, GAFCON fails to mention the immense disorder of the pretended ordination of women. However unedifying a homosexual bishop or priest may be deemed to be, he at least confers valid sacraments. And it is suggested on anecdotal grounds that very many 'women priests' are remarried divorcees; and that the regulations concerning the ordination of remarried divorce(e)s were relaxed precisely because it was foreseen that so many women seeking ordination would have been excluded. Whatever the truth may be here, an ordained woman who is also a remarried divorcee both exemplifies the disorder inherent in her claim to sacerdotal ministry and by the public and structured adultery of her own domestic arrangements presents a skandalon to God's people.


ebed melech said...

Father John,

Very thought provoking post.

I think you are right that the failure to address heterosexual sin and disorders is an issue. There is basically a "wink and a nod" and we move on...

I recently had to tell a couple that was cohabitating that we would not marry them unless they lived like brother and sister until their Wedding Day in 4 weeks. Tough conversation, but in the end they agreed.

If anything, those with SSAD (Same Sex Attraction Disorder) have a psychological issue or cross to deal with that is profound and with which they often struggle. Heterosexuals are not immune to psychological disorders, but it is rare to find a fundamental orientation to "shacking up" that may mitigate culpability in the same way.

I know some friends who courageously wrestle with SSAD, and who cooperate with God's grace to live chastely. They will probably enter the kingdom of heaven before I will.


Fr. Deacon Daniel

Geoff said...

I'm always alarmed when I see a conservative line taken on same-sex unions in New Directions, given its constituency.

Little Black Sambo said...

"Given its constituency"? Do tell us what you know. I am part of its "constituency" so I am quite interested.

Geoff said...

I mean only that it is a publication of Forward in Faith, which has a healthy gay presence. I wasn't trying to be caustic.