Pressure continues to be exerted on Church leaders to remove the language of Catholic teaching that states that homosexual acts are “intrinsically disordered” and “under no circumstances can be approved” — pressure that critics believe is part of an effort by some groups and individuals to normalize the sinful behavior within the Church.
The German bishops, who are in the midst of their two-year Synodal Way that includes a reassessment of the Church’s teaching on sexual morality, are the most recent and visible group pushing to alter the teaching with a particular emphasis on changing the language which appears in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
Bishop Georg Bätzing, the president of the German bishops’ conference, said in an interview in December that changes were needed to the Catechism regarding homosexuality and specifically that it should express openness to blessings of homosexual unions — a possibility rejected by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith last month.
Father Christoph Behrens, a priest of the German Diocese of Dresden, said he believed the Catechism’s language was “simply embarrassing from my pastoral and theological point of view.” The priest, whose bishop, Heinrich Timmerevers, asked him to set up a ministry for homosexuals in his diocese and who advocated same-sex union blessings last September, added: “One can only hope that not too many people read this nonsense.”
Further calls to change the Catechism’s language have also come from some American Church leaders including Cardinal Joseph Tobin. The archbishop of Newark, New Jersey said in 2019 it the language was “very unfortunate” and added that he hoped the Church would use different words in its discussion of homosexuality that would be “a little less hurtful.”
For many years discussion has focused on Paragraph 2357 of the Catechism that states: “Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that ‘homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.’ They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.”
The passage describes homosexual acts, and not the persons themselves, as “intrinsically disordered,” but goes on to state in Paragraph 2358 that homosexual inclination is “objectively disordered” along with other sexual sins (the term “objectively disordered” mysteriously does not appear in Paragraph 2358 of the Catechism published on the Vatican’s website and one has to click on “hide the links to concordance” to see it).
The motives for removing the language vary with some, especially in Germany, wanting to see a change in the Church’s teaching. These include proponents of the Synodal Path as well as some German ordinaries such as Bishop Peter Kohlgraf of Mainz, Germany. In February, he suggested in February that Catholics with homosexual inclinations cannot all be expected to live chastely and the Church should adopt a pastoral approach that acknowledges this.
Others are more ambiguous such as Cardinal Christoph Schönborn, secretary of the commission that drafted the Catechism in the 1990s, who has said he considers homosexuality to be similar to other sexual sins, such as divorce and remarriage, and so implicitly not an “intrinsic disorder.” At the 2014 Synod on the Family, he said he saw no reason to change the language at that time but noted “there are developments” in Catholic doctrine.
Similarly, Jesuit Father James Martin has called on the Church to amend the language with which it discusses homosexuality but has stopped short of publicly calling for a change in Church teaching on the matter. In a discussion in 2017, he said that the phrases “objectively disordered” and “intrinsically disordered” had made homosexual people feel “so subhuman,” and he relayed the story of a mother of a homosexual son who once asked him, “Do they understand what that kind of language can do to a 13-year-old boy? It can destroy him.” As an alternative, Father Martin has suggested the phrase “differently ordered” as he believes it could express the concept “more pastorally.”
Others believe a case could possibly be made to change the language while remaining totally faithful to the Church’s teaching on the matter. At the 2015 Synod on the Family, Archbishop Charles Chaput, then the metropolitan of Philadelphia, said he understood the desire to find new, more positive language to deal with the issue, adding that the phrase “intrinsically disordered” may have outlived its usefulness. “That language automatically sets people off, and probably isn’t useful anymore,” he said, while adding that any substitute should not obscure the Church’s view that “same-sex attraction is not part of God’s plan….”
The above comes from an April 20 story by Edward Pentin in the National Catholic Register.
With all the homosexuals in the clergy it is no wonder they want their particular disorder to be normalized by the Church. Such awful shepherds they are. Acting upon their sinful inclinations, and encouraging other to do the same will lead these clerics to their doom. They must be resisted by the faithful.
If it’s all about feelings then think how it will feel to burn in hell for all eternity. Homosexual activity is mortally sinful, how betrayed will homosexuals feel when they realize their earthly shepherds have lied to them.
This would be the last straw for me, if it happens, which I really don’t believe it will. If the gays succeed in this, then it will not be the true church of God that they do it to. Schism will be inevitable.
I think the schism is already here myself, yet still undeclared. So an Athanasian state of the Church is probably imminent.
How about removing the word “Catholic” from the Catechism, if the lavender mafia wants to continually change the Catechism without consulting bishops around the world?
What are they going to do with the Bible?
They view the teachings of the Faith as a sort of “living document,” like the Constitution, which can be twisted to mean whatever they want it to mean, even the opposite of what it says.
Maybe the new CCC should be the Cardinal Cupich Catechism (James Martin, editor). After all, priest Martin Luther made up his own catechism. But, at least he was honest enough to name it after himself. Honest heretics aren’t all bad.
The pastoral approach which acknowledges that people can’t live chastely is the Sacrament of Reconciliation.
But, by the grace of God, we can live chastely. I have had sex with one person only, my wife (and that after we were married). And, we know we’re not the only couple like that on the planet! In fact, we know several others.
Only the Devil and the world (and the flesh) insist we cannot live without sexual activity. No one’s cause of death is lack of sex.
Of course, as with all of our sins, we should go to Confession. Yet, that involves a resolve to sin no more. We shouldn’t leave the confessional and return home (or elsewhere) to commit adultery or fornicate, regardless of the gender of those with whom we are gravely sinning.
The fact that they want to change the language of the Catechism means they want to change the Church’s doctrine. The CCC was never intended to be a guidebook for the average Catholic. It was written to be a compendium and summary of Catholic doctrine for bishops and professional catechists as a source reference book. Publishers wanted to get it in the hands of ordinary Catholics to increase sales.
The introduction to the CCC says that necessary adaptations have to be made in local catechisms and by catechists on account of age and education. The canard that a 13 year-old boy would be devastated by the CCC’s language is irrelevant; a catechist would have to decide whether the philosophical term “intrinsically disordered” should be taught and, if so, to explain what it means.
When I taught freshmen about Church doctrine concerning homosexuality, I used the analogy of stirring cookie dough with a TV remote control. You could do that, but it’s against the purpose of a remote control and it will damage the remote control to use it to stir cookie dough. A remote control has functions and a design that reveal to you what its purpose and correct use are, and stirring cookie dough is contrary to both. Same with the design and purpose of sexual organs. Catholic doctrine about human sexuality and sexual acts is largely an explication of design and purpose in maleness and femaleness. But the other religion teachers openly said that Catholic doctrine was obsolete and would eventually evolve to adapt to the times.
So the attack on Catholic doctrine about homosexual acts is, by extension, an attack on maleness and femaleness, which is by extension an attack on creation, which is by extension an attack on God. Any bishop who gives in to this should hand in his miter and crosier.
Kudos to you, Kevin T.
Kevin, I agree that there are those in the Church who want to change some of the teachings of Christ, our God. As Archbishop Chaput may be pointing out, (to paraphrase) we do not need to be wedded to a specific phrase or words/terms in the Catechism. We do, however, need clarity about Christian teaching about human sexuality. Sexual activity belongs only in marriage (which now needs to be clearly defined as one woman and one man).
Yet, it seems you’re mistaken about the Catechism. In St. John Paul’s Apostolic Letter and Apostolic Constitution accompanying the Catechism, he writes “To my venerable brother Cardinals, Patriarchs, Archbishops, Bishops, Priest, Deacons and to other members of the People of God,” and notes, “The Catechism of the Catholic Church is offered to every individual who asks us to give an account of the hope that is in us (1 Pet. 3:15) and who wants to know what the Catholic Church believes.” That would, apparently, include even those who are not Catholic.
(You’re right that other catechisms may be published based on the needs of those of different ages, cultures, etc. We Eastern Catholics even have a Catechism specifically for us.)
As the Catechism of the Catholic Church itself describes itself (#12), it is, while primary for bishops, clergy and catechists, “useful reading for all other Christian faithful.”
Let us hope and pray that it remains that.
Deacon Craig– “Useful reading?” Yes, it is useful reading in the hands of the educated, literate, and those with at least some background and training in the Catholic Faith! Not everyone can go to a library, check out a copy of the Bible, Catechism of the Catholic Church, Jewish Torah, Muslim Koran, or holy books of any faith, and just sit there and read, and comprehend what they are reading, and actually enjoy it. Not all laymen can comfortably read on that level– especially, today! That’s why we have always needed educated clergy. Kevin is correct. And only clergy are allowed to give sermons, at Mass, and correctly interpret our Bible and Catechism, for the lay faithful. A long time ago, before the horrific downfall of our culture in the 1960s, we had a far better educated citizenry in America, and Catholic kids were well-trained in their Faith by the time they graduated from grade school.
I will finish my post of April 24 at 4:50 pm, by stating that many Catholics today, need lots of instruction in our religion, and the Church should provide for that, just as they used to, before Vatican II. Pope St. John Paul II should have done this– very important!
The catechism can be re-phrased so that people understand it. The teachings can’t change, but the words used to teach them can.
Men who teach the sin of sodomy are heretics, and they’re using their appearance as Catholic priests and bishops to get the Church to teach their heresies.
That’s all we’re seeing here — heresy and apostasy in action by wolves using the Church’s resources to establish the Anti-Church, similar to the way a parasite thrives on a host, albeit of a different species and so is a part of that host only functionally but not constitutively.
Promoting homosexuality is not these deviants’ main goal; instead it is to get the faithful to abandon the faith. They have already rejected the Creed, and they promote deviancy to get others to do the same.
Hey, this seems to be historically familiar…the German connection I mean. Seems similar to something else that caused… what was it… the Protestant Reformation?
Our Church has simply lost all understanding of its mission for Christ on earth– to help purify and sanctify her members, and lead them to Christ in Heaven. Chastity is a very important, basic Christian virtue. Christians must strive for Chastity, a pure heart, and holiness, empty of self, sin, desires of the flesh, and worldliness, so they may be filled with Christ. The Christian life is hard and challenging. Laymen cannot be thrown to the wolves, with no religious training nor ongoing guidance. Our shepherds must courageously lead their flocks. Otherwise, they will simply end up being torn to pieces by the jaws of the Devil. And everyone must face certain hard facts of life with courage and realistic thinking– to “dumb things down” like a baby, and call it “pastoral,” is ridiculous– very irresponsible and lazy!
The mission of the Church is salvation.
“a little less hurtful.” What could be more hurtful than mortal sin and separation from God?
What does “intrinsically disordered” mean?
What does “objectively disordered” mean?
Look it up online by putting in the phrase “intrinsically disordered”, then a comma, then the word “definition” in your search engine. Don’t be slothful. Look up “slothful” while you are at it.
I am sorry I was so curt with you, but if you are smart enough to construct the two sentences you did, you are smart enough to look such words up on line. The computer has a wealth of information on it — some good, some bad. There are many free dictionaries on it. All one has to do is put the word or words in ones search engine, then a comma, then the word “definition” without the quotations marks around it, click the search button and many dictionaries will come up. In fact often the definition will be right there on the link to one of the dictionaries, and one does not have to click on the link.
It means that homosexual acting out is against the natural order of human nature.
The acts in themselves are not ordered to natural sexual instinct.
And please save me the argument that says, “If I feel that way, it is natural”.
A person might “feel” like committing a crime tomorrow. That does not mean that they can or should.
Inherently, essentially, not subjectively and not depending upon the circumstances and the “disordered” part means suffering from an illness or condition that disrupts normal physical, psychological or mental functions.
No in theology, disorder does not mean suffering from an illness or condition that disrupts normal function.
I think Anonymous is closer.
This is probably why they want to change it.
Nobody even knows what it means.
According to the catechism, venial sin constitutes a moral disorder. CCC 1875)
And in CCC 1793, the catechism states that even when a person is ignorant so that they do not know they are sinner, the evil is still a disorder.
And in CCC 1753, it calls lying and calumny intrinsically disordered.
In 1755, fornication is called a disorder of the will.
Somehow I recall the words ‘love the sinner and hate the sin’
The thing is that Fr. James Martin and the German bishops are attempting to say that sin isn’t sin anymore.
That is a made up Protestant cliche’ and does not have a basis in Sacred Scripture.
It’s from St. Augustine. His Letter 211 (c. 424) contains the phrase Cum dilectione hominum et odio vitiorum, which translates roughly to “With love for mankind and hatred of sins.” The phrase has become more famous as “love the sinner but hate the sin” or “hate the sin and not the sinner” (the latter form appearing in Mohandas Gandhi’s 1929 autobiography).
From Catholic.com
Which is Not in the catechism or the bible. Read them and educate yourself.
As far as catechisms, there are plenty of affordable, easy to read, orthodox catechisms out there. Some Catholic churches had lending libraries, and some probably still do. There is “The Penny Catechism”, “Fr. John Hardon’s Catechism” and the always correct “Baltimore Catechisms” for different grade levels, along with many, many affordable prayers books which one can even buy on line used.
As far as Pope Francis writings, I stopped buying them after “Amoris Laetitia”. That did it for me. I do not trust his writings. He probably has a “ghost writer”, but he gave his approval and never corrected the Chapter 8 mess.
It’s a sin and the priest knows that God is coming soon they are going to answer to God if they allow this in our church.