The version of Catholic teaching on sex that I received was pretty straightforward. Don’t do it unless you are married, love each other and won’t mind if a baby results. Girls shouldn’t wear highly polished shoes with a skirt and if they sit on a boy’s knee should have a telephone directory underneath. Instances of self gratification need to be reported at confession and will result in ten Hail Marys. PopeHomosexuality is mainly practised by Protestants but if God has made you that way you just should accept that it’s part of a bigger plan, avoid acting on your urges and control them with pious ejaculations – of the prayerful sort.

Now you don’t have to agree with any of that but it does have an unworldly internal coherence. That’s why headlines like “Pope accused of stoking homophobia” in The Times are a bit pointless. He’s just sticking to the same message his organisation has been putting out for nearly two millenia. The novel twist is bringing the rainforest into his homophobic discourse. “Behaviour beyond traditional heterosexual relations was a “destruction of God’s work” is just what he’s paid to say but the punchline “The tropical forests do deserve our protection. But man, as a creature, does not deserve any less” wasn’t obvious.

Public homophobia is part of the job description  for senior clerics in most religions. More irritating are the acolytes who maintain that the man who is running the business does not properly represent its true values. So when somone criticises the Pope for “a lack of openness to the complexity of creation” or “homosexuality is a manifestation of love, another face of God” one has to put the question “How many bishops do you have?”

Sincere religious believers have a real problem in trying to reconcile their sexuality with their belief if they are not disposed to practise heterosexual marriage. Every major religion is homophobic. The Pope has just reminded us of that. Lots of people reach their own compromises and come up with their own interpretations of doctrine to justify their lifestyles. That’s a pointless exercise because sooner or later the powers that be try to turn back history’s clock and force the choice between returning to their reactionary orthodoxy or living the way you want.

7 responses to “Religious leader seems to be anti-gay shock”

  1. Good argument. I was reminded of a BBC interview a while ago with some Catholic spokesperson, who was slightly bemused to hear the Pope criticised as ‘authoritarian’. (Well, er…) The interviewer followed up by asking if the Pope wasn’t perhaps being rather ‘dogmatic’. Entirely possible, I’d have said.

    But I didn’t quite agree with this:

    Lots of people reach their own compromises and come up with their own interpretations of doctrine to justify their lifestyles. That’s a pointless exercise

    On the contrary, I think it’s a very useful exercise, at least in the sense that it can make a lot of people less miserable. Leaving the Church might make them even less miserable, but then so would socialist revolution.

    Like

  2. “Lots of people reach their own compromises and come up with their own interpretations of doctrine to justify their lifestyles. That’s a pointless exercise”

    I cannot agree with that. There is a battle within religions between conservatives and those who wish the religion to adapt to reflect changing social attitudes.

    And there is also some complication, bcasue in some other a\reas the churches are progressive – for example the prominent role beng played by the Roman catholic church in britaion n the campaign to provide pathways to citizenship for illegal immigrants; or the opposition of the church to nuclear weapons.

    Like

  3. But Andy the conservatives always win. If Ratzinger had announced that he was going to allow gay people to get married in Catholic churches it would have blown his organisation apart.

    Religious believers live in the real world, meet gay people and have sex lives that break the rules of their faith. Nonetheless the Ratzingers of the world write the rule book and anyone seeking the consolation of religion has to defer to their authority if they want to be properly observant.

    Like

  4. Peter Tatchell recently highlighted a shift by Catholic bishops in England and Wales:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/dec/11/gayrights-catholicism

    Ratzinger has always been of the view that it is better to have a pure Church, even if that means losing members, so I hardly expect much of a shift from him.

    Like

  5. Hopefully he’s studied the evidence for climate change, and isn’t just taking the argument on faith.

    I’ve always been drawn to the Rowan Atkinson Are You A Gay Christian? line – “God just wants you to be miserable; he hates poofs”, the Bible may not all be about hating gays, but I don’t see any strong gay role-models therein. When the Pope chooses to make a particular issue out of it, it is likely to increase the persecution of gays round the world. Beyond the rainforest comparison his argument seems to be: if everyone was gay there would be no babies to baptise and the human race would die out, so we have to defend society from gayness everywhere. This simple nonsense can be extremely destructive. The “not enough babies” argument I seem to remember emerging in a more racist form a few years ago in Italy: (white) Europeans aren’t having enough kids. Isaac Asimov used to say that one way to help avoid destroying the planet through over-population would be to encourage more people into a gay lifestyle.

    I think there is some value in nailing the Church Dawkins-styley whenever they accuse anyone else of being dogmatic or not substantiating their beliefs. When I first expressed some socialist opinions to one of my great-uncles he said I was dogmatic, I found it difficult to believe the chutzpah of anyone with conventional religious beliefs making such an allegation.

    A few years ago Eamonn McCann started a round of the game Just A Minute at Marxism on the subject of The Second Battle of Drogheda with the words: “Cardinal Josef Ratzinger, head of the Congregation of the Faith, aka The Inquisition…”

    Like

  6. I want to hear more about the (apparently well known) game “Just A Minute at Marxism”, please. It sounds like it has great application at parties, lowercase P.

    Like

  7. Maeve it’s a very entertaining radio programme on which the guests have to speak with no hesitation, repetition or deviation for a minute. You can listen to it at http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/comedy/justaminute.shtml.

    It’s perfect for pottering around the kitchen.

    Like

Leave a comment

Trending