The Synod and the 'great et, et' | National Catholic Reporter by MSW. MGB: Lets be clear, the first thousand years of Christianity has no problem with gays and had a rite for their unions. It was only around the first millenium that everyone got all pious on sex. It was not considered incompatible with Christianity. Natural Law reasoning came with Aquinas and the Church rationalized that homosexuality was disordered. We now know differently, gays are born, not made (like in pederastry, which does get repeated by the victims). Natural law should mean that changes in information mean changes in conclusions. If it is not, then it is simply a cover for clerical fiat, which is not truth. Chaput needs to know that natural law is not up for a vote - but it can change and it must. The only thing I agree with Chaput about is that Chaput's conscience is flawed on this issue, including his frame of mind.
Sadly he has friends. The reactionary viewpoint always does. Loyalty is easier than thinking, especially for groups who are predisposed to supress dissent when they are ascendent. Luckily Francis is not one of these people and I hope he does not strive for compromise with those who want loyalty over charity in these discussions. That would be truly human - as is being gay if you were created that way by God. It is not immoral to abandon self-loathing and pursue truth, just as it is not immoral to seek the Eucharist just because they found love in a second marriage. Its not doctrine v. mercy - the doctrine must be merciful.
No comments:
Post a Comment