The readings for this Twentieth Sunday in Ordinary Time are very confronting. In the first reading we hear about the prophet Jeremiah who had the misfortune to live and prophesy at a time when Jerusalem was being invaded by foreigners (Jeremiah 38:4–6, 8–10). He advised the people and their king to surrender. They thought he was a traitor, undermining the morale of the troops. It just happened that he was right. They dumped him down a well so that he might die. A few just men came forward and rescued him.
In Luke's gospel, Jesus is headed for Jerusalem. 'Do you suppose that I am here to bring peace on earth?' Not a bit of it. He promises nothing but fire and division — and not just division and disagreement with our enemies, but division within families and within the church community (Luke 12:49–53).
On my first reflection on these readings, I thought they had no application to us today. But then I thought again.
During the week, I had to appear on the SBS Insight TV program about same sex marriage. Many bishops were asked but none was available. Same sex marriage is a difficult and complex legal, political and social question in a country like Australia, especially at election time when our political leaders are taking different approaches. So I don't want to preach about that. But I do think it is time from the pulpit to say something about the Catholic Church's attitude to, and language about, people who happen to be homosexual.
Much of the official Church's teaching on this issue over the last 40 years has been shaped by the thinking of Joseph Ratzinger before he became Pope Benedict XVI. In 1975 the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith which he headed issued a document which distinguished the homosexual orientation from homosexual acts which were described as being deprived of their essential and indispensable finality, as being 'intrinsically disordered'.
Then in 1986 the Congregation still headed by Cardinal Ratzinger issued a new document saying that 'an overly benign interpretation was given to the homosexual condition itself, some going so far as to call it neutral, or even good. Although the particular inclination of the homosexual person is not a sin, it is a more or less strong tendency ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil; and thus the inclination itself must be seen as an objective disorder.'
Many people, including many Catholics and many homosexuals, find such language unhelpful and upsetting; they even contest its truthfulness. Thank God, as Pope, Benedict did not repeat much of this language. But many Church leaders still think it the only Catholic way to speak about homosexuality.
Earlier this year, Archbishop Mark Coleridge, probably the most theologically literate bishop in Australia, appearied on the ABC TV program Q&A distinguishing between sexual orientation and lifestyle: 'They are not necessarily the same thing. Lifestyle is chosen, sexual orientation is not.' He said the homosexual orientation could be seen as 'a warp in the creation' and that it was 'impossible' from his point of view to be seen as just a part of God's plan.
On Insight, Penny Wong, a very eloquent and poised politician who is known to be lesbian, sharing with her partner the parenting of their child, addressed Monsignor John Woods saying, 'I think it's interesting you use words like respect at the same time as having a discussion about whether or not homosexuality is in fact natural or, by implication, you know a result of some form of disorder. I don't think that's particularly respectful.'
Much of the two-hour discussion was not put to air by SBS. At one stage of the discussion, I said that I found talk of homosexuality being a disorder unhelpful. Addressing Penny Wong, I said that I thought her homosexuality was as natural, complex and mystical as my heterosexuality.
During the rest of the week, I received a range of emails from some very conservative Catholics who were questioning my moral courage, wondering why I was just going with the prevailing social trend, not being true to church teaching etc. They obviously thought I was being untrue to myself as well as to the Church. There was more than a dose of adverse moral judgment in it all.
Later in the week, as often happens with us priests, someone came to see me for a pastoral conversation. He was an adult Catholic, a good man, and a fine Catholic. He told me that he was gay. He had 'come out' to a number of his friends, but it obviously was not easy.
I called to mind the media press conference that Pope Francis gave recently on the plane on the way back from World Youth Day. He was asked about homosexuality and he said, 'If a person is gay and seeks the Lord and has good will, well who am I to judge them?' I think Pope Francis now gives us a better way of engaging in respectful discussion in our Church and in the community about the complex issues relating to homosexuality, including civil recognition of same sex marriage.
Our theological starting point should be that we are all created in the image and likeness of God, whether we be gay or straight; that we are all called along the road to Jerusalem; and that the Lord's purgative fire and promise of division is extended to us all in preparation for the invitation to the banquet where there is neither gay nor straight, and where each of us prays, 'Lord, I am not worthy that you should enter under my roof, but only say the word and my soul shall be healed.'
It's time we dropped the unhelpful, judgmental language of intrinsic and objective disorder when respectfully trying to determine appropriate laws and policies for all people who want to support and nurture each other and their children.
Fr Frank Brennan SJ is professor of law at Australian Catholic University, and adjunct professor at the College of Law and the National Centre for Indigenous Studies, Australian National University. This article is taken from his homily at the Church of the Transfiguration, Woden, Canberra, 18 August 2013.