Sunday, 22 April 2012

Insights from the seminar on Sexuality-3

One of the most debated issue during the seminar was homosexuality and the Church's perspective.  From what I gathered, it was Fr Joe's stance from the psychological perspective (and human perspective, if I may add) versus the theological stance of the professors of theology.

Frankly speaking I never reflected upon this topic seriously till the day.  I always thought that one is indulges in homosexual behaviour is not fit for religious and Priestly life.  Well, I now have a slightly better and open perspective.  I came to know that there are those who are naturally (by nature) attracted to persons of the same sex (orientation) and then there is the whole list of circumstances that lead one to act in a homosexual manner (behaviour). Now it is difficult to separate the orientation from the behaviour, because one precedes (or flows) from the other.

However, my point of understanding having heard attentively the presentations and discussions is that homosexuals who are by nature that way, should not be prevented from entering the Seminary and discerning a religious call. (The Church, I believe, too 'permits' this). The rationale that he or she is attracted to the same sex and the context (seminary or a convent) provides a grave danger, is not really sensible.

My argument would be this: If the heterosexual can be trusted to know his or her limits and live a genuine religious life, why not a homosexual?  Furthermore, we say that even a heterosexual ought to have a healthy relationship with the persons of the opposite sex. Why deprive that opportunity for a homosexual, all the more if it strengthens his or her religious vocation.  Finally, just because heterosexuals are a majority, how does homosexuality become wrong?  (At the most it can be termed the minority).

However, I do hold that those who indulge in homosexual behaviour and acts are not to be admitted to religious life for they would do great harm to others (and to themselves).  (Is not the same applicable to 'sexually aggressive' heterosexuals?)

1 comment:

  1. "However, I do hold that those who indulge in homosexual behaviour and acts are not to be admitted to religious life for they would do great harm to others (and to themselves). (Is not the same applicable to 'sexually aggressive' heterosexuals?"

    Other things being equal, (which they are usually not)are you saying that a homosexual will cause greater harm than a heterosexual in a religious setting? Why? Do you mean that if a homosexual is sexually aggressive s/he has more temptation and scope in a same sex setting than a sexually aggressive heterosexual?

    To me it seems like if either of them is following a call to spirituality, they are going to work these things out. If not, then, they are anyway going to do whatever they do- inside or outside the seminary. So their sexual orientation does not really matter.

    ReplyDelete

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...