by Kyle R. Cupp
If, hypothetically, the church magisterium were to change its teaching and profess the existence and goodness of erotic homosexual love, other foundational changes would first have to be made. First, it would have to broaden its ontological understanding of human sexuality to include as authentic both sex ordered toward procreation and sex not ordered toward that end. Sexual identity would include but not be limited to difference and complementarity. Second, the church would have to revise its traditional reading of the creation myth, perhaps taking a less literal interpretation of the passages related to God creating the human race as male and female. Third, it would have to redefine its conception of chastity so as to include the possibility of exercising temperance and self-mastery with respect to expressions of non-procreative erotic love.
All of these changes in teaching would imply that the magisterium had been wrong about not only homosexuality, but also human sexuality in general, the bible, and the virtue of chastity. To accept homosexuality as a legitimate orientation would mean admitting error about matters of faith and morals—error that, according to the magisterium, cannot be made. Consequently, you won’t see the magisterium giving thumbs up to LGTB people without it first giving thumbs down to its traditional self-understanding. I don’t see that happening. Whether the obstruction is due to the protection of the Holy Spirit or to what Garry Wills calls “the structure of deceit” will continue to be a matter of much debate among those who believe the Catholic Church ought to be a prophetic voice within society. Meanwhile, society will continue on its present course.
Read the entire article here.