A Catholic view of homosexuality...
http://www.dignityusa.org/faq.html
It is not easy to summarize briefly the body of research on homosexuality in the Bible. But these are the interpretations that some scholars are proposing:
While Catholics do not rely on scripture alone for doctrine, but also upon tradition and the teaching of the church, I think it laudabl that this FAQ explains clearly that the Bible should not be held, in a New Testament church, to condemn homosexuality.
The Catholic church condemns the behavior because it is not procreative. That is apparently the only reason for their condemnation of it.
Their condemnation is thus not based on direct Biblical grounds, but upon a perceived primary purpose for humanity: "reproduce." This is derived from Scripture, but is not directly Scriptural.
It is not easy to summarize briefly the body of research on homosexuality in the Bible. But these are the interpretations that some scholars are proposing:
- The story of Sodom in Genesis 19 is about offense against the sacred duty of hospitality. That is how Ezekiel 16:48-49 and Wisdom 9:13-14 interpret this text. The attempted male rape only heightens the atrocity of this offense.
- Leviticus 18:22 does forbid male-male sex as an "abomination." But the word simply means an impurity or a religious taboo - like eating pork. As in the case of Catholics who used to be forbidden under pain of mortal sin to eat meat on Friday, the offense was not in the act itself but in the betrayal of one's religion. The ancient Jews were to avoid practices common among the unclean Gentiles.
- Romans 1:27 mentions men having relations with men. But the terms used to describe them are "dishonorable" and "shameless." These refer deliberately to social disapproval, not to ethical condemnation. Moreover, according to Paul's usage, different from the prevalent Stoic philosophy of the day, para physin ("unnatural") would best be translated "atypical" or "beyond the ordinary." So it bears no reference to natural law. And it can imply no ethical condemnation because in Romans 11:24 God is said to act para physin. Paul sees gay sex as an impurity (see Rm. 1:24), just like uncircumcision or eating forbidden foods. He mentions it to make the main point of his letter, that purity requirements of the Jewish Law are not relevant in Christ Jesus. See L. William Countryman, Dirt, Greed, and Sex.
- 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 and 1 Timothy 1:8-10 list arsenokoitai among those who will be excluded from the Reign of God. This obscure term has been translated "homosexuals" but its exact meaning is debated. It certainly does not include women but only some kind of male sexual offenders. If it does refer to men having sex with men - which is dubious - it must be interpreted in light of the abuse and licentiousness commonly associated with male-male sex in the Roman Empire. See Robin Scroggs, The New Testament and Homosexuality.
- Finally, Genesis 1-3 shows Adam and Eve created for mutual companionship and procreation. These accounts use the most standard of human relationships to teach a religious lesson. The point is the love and wisdom of God, who made all things good and wills us no evil. Nothing suggests the biblical authors intended a lesson on sexual orientation.
While Catholics do not rely on scripture alone for doctrine, but also upon tradition and the teaching of the church, I think it laudabl that this FAQ explains clearly that the Bible should not be held, in a New Testament church, to condemn homosexuality.
The Catholic church condemns the behavior because it is not procreative. That is apparently the only reason for their condemnation of it.
Their condemnation is thus not based on direct Biblical grounds, but upon a perceived primary purpose for humanity: "reproduce." This is derived from Scripture, but is not directly Scriptural.