United States Senator Rob Portman from Ohio missed at least two opportunities in my estimation. He could have taught us about marriage, and he could have loved his son. The senator, upon learning that his son is gay flip-flopped his stance on gay "marriage" as a legislator. Marriage is a very real, physical thing. It is not some imaginary, made up state in which we pretend to be. The male and female bodies fit together. That's marriage! In Christian traditions, after consent between spouses is exchanged, the marriage must be consummated by their bodies fitting together. The bolt and nut from the hardware store are in a marriage of sorts, be it one of much less importance. The electrical cord and wall outlet coupled together could be said to be in a sort of physical marriage. The bolt and bolt can never marry.
Natural Law reasoning shows us that as the male and female human bodies fit together, two very important things happen on a biological level. Bonding hormones are activated to bond the couple for life, and new life can be transmitted. Attempting to separate the bonding from the transmission of new life is taking the huge chance of using the body of another. Using the body or body parts of another for one's own gratification goes against Natural Law reasoning and is therefore not in the best interest of the other. Many people who feel they are "in love" are actually using the other. This is especially prominent in sexual relationships outside of marriage where there is not a full self-giving of one to the other for the good of the other that is open to new life, whether they are straight or gay.
I'm sure this was a very emotional time for the senator, but I'm afraid he made his flip-flop based on that emotion rather than on intellect. We should be careful making decisions based on emotion rather than intellect lest they bring on other problems. Certainly, the senator wants to show compassion for his son, which is a good thing. But sometimes, we can misplace our compassion.
The culture at large tells people with same-sex attraction that they have two possibilities: repress it, or embrace it flamboyantly "coming out of the closet" as they say. Natural Law reasoning shows us that neither of these two are good or healthy options.
We human beings are much more than our sexuality. We are complex, wise creatures made in God's image with an intellect and a will, which set us apart from all other creatures. Repressing anything is never a good idea. Continued repression eventually leads to explosion. Since we have been created so beautifully, with the ability to reason, will, and heal, we should deal with issues rather than repress them. Sweeping things under the rug is another good analogy. Eventually, you trip over the lump.
Flamboyantly embracing one's same-sex attraction is unhealthy because the dignity of the human person demands more. "It's who you are." is the mantra uttered by the culture. The truth is, it's not who you are. We human beings are much more than our sexuality. And one's sexual urge is not his or her identity. The father of a family does not go around identifying himself as a heterosexual. His heterosexuality is not "who he is", only part of who he is. He is much more that than his sexuality and way much more that his sexual urges toward his wife. His sexual urges are not his identity, nor should it be so for a person with same-sex attraction.
Natural Law reasoning shows us there is a third option that is also embraced by the Catholic Church. One should acknowledge the same-sex attraction and get the support of loving people to help the person with same-sex attraction live a chaste life.
Chaste? Isn't that the same as repression? No. Repression always says "no". But chastity is saying "yes" to one's sexuality in the context of one's state in life. All human beings are called to live in chastity in accord with our state in life. Married people live in chastity by saying yes to sex as a married couple. They are open to life. They are open to union with each other, and the full self-giving and receiving of each other. They don't invite others into the marital union. They don't invite other things into the marital union that would block or thwart the full self-giving of one spouse to another, or the transmission of new life. Those who have promised celibacy or vowed chastity say yes to sex as celibates. We live our lives as sexual people male and female, interacting with all other persons as they are male and female. Celibate chastity points to the next life to which all of us are called to be united to God for eternity.
This third option is counter-cultural because it takes some sacrifice. But the loving option always does. We must define the often misused word "love". As a person acknowledges his or her same-sex attraction, it is important to get support from loving people. To love someone is to will the good of that person. All parents, including Senator Portman are called to will the good of their children. Can it ever be good that one person uses the body of another person for sexual gratification? No, not in a marriage, straight, gay or any kind of relationship. Our dignity as human persons demands that we never use another or allow another to use us. Statistically, those in the gay lifestyle have a shorter live expectancy. Biology and Natural Law show us the lifestyle is dangerous for the human body.
I would ask the senator to reorient his misplaced compassion for his son and to will his ultimate good. I would ask the senator to flip-flop back to supporting real physical marriage instead of an imaginary pretend version of it.
The old engineering maxim goes, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." As it happens, marriage, as an institution in our society, is broken. The problem, at its base, is the infection of the institution with an entitlement mentality. Progressives, rather than fixing the problem, are in the process of pulverizing the institution by further growing the disease and adding new infections on top of it.
ReplyDeleteSo much the worse for society and for our children.
I agree with you Father, Mr. Portman made a terrible mistake not only for himself but for his son. By condoning his behavior he is making the problem worse. He also isn’t helping his son to Heaven, as we are called to do when we are blessed with a child as parents.
ReplyDeleteWe as parents should not condone sinful behavior just because society says it’s okay. Example being: If your child were to go into the street would you just say “honey, please don’t go into the street” or would you, swat the child on the butt so he knows the gravity of going into the street because he could possibly be killed? This is where Mr. Portman has gone terribly wrong. He is worried more about his son physical being and happiness on this earth instead of his son’s eternal life with God in Heaven.
Your right Father, he had a teachable moment and he was afraid of the “Truth” but once you learn the “Truth” you cannot unlearn it. I feel terribly sorry for him and his son.
Thank you for being a priest, and for your blog I enjoy reading it.
“The best parent and guardian of liberty amongst men is “Truth”
~Pope Leo XIII, Vicar of Christ (Immortale Dei 40, November 1, 1885)
Thank you for this post, Father. It is so disheartening hearing people who think they are "in love," as they are almost always just using each other as you point out.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, I come from a family with a lot of practicing homosexuals. Believe me--the gay life is not just rainbows and parades. It is worse than parts that don't fit, and damaging in so many ways that I can't really articulate.
I have three small children and I want them to be chaste--concerned about their own moral cleanliness and that of others--not just on the prowl for sexual opportunities.
You make many other good points in your post, too. God bless! :)
Terrific post, Father! You summarized the case so well! I heard Senator Portman say he wanted the same thing for his son that he and his wife had shared for 26 years. Unfortunately, that's not what his son will have in a same-sex relationship. Ironically, his unwillingness to speak truth as a father virtually guarantees the son will not experience what he says he desires most for him.
ReplyDelete