Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Rice
Right or Wrong?
March 1, 2010
A big issue at Notre Dame a few weeks ago was “sexual orientation” and the status of the
Notre Dame Gay/ Lesbian/ Bisexual/ Transgender (GLBT) community. Enough time has passed
to make it useful to review some of the governing principles as found in the teaching of the
1. Homosexual acts are always objectively wrong. The starting point is the Catechism:
an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction to persons of the same sex. It has taken
a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its
which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, Tradition has always
declared that ‘homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.’ They are contrary to the
natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a
Homosexual acts are doubly wrong. They are not only contrary to nature. They
are wrong also because they are extra-marital. The Letter on the Pastoral Care of
Homosexual Persons, issued in 1986 with the approval of John Paul II, said, “It is
only in the marital relationship that the use of the sexual faculty can be morally good.
2. Since homosexual acts are “intrinsically disordered,” the inclination toward those acts
who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies,” says the Catechism, “is not
them a trial.” No. 2358. That inclination, however, is not in itself a sin.
3. “[M]en and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies,” says the
Catechism, “must be accepted with respect, compassion and sensitivity. Every sign
disorders, it will be useful to recall the admonition of the 1986 Letter that “The
human person, made in the image and likeness of God, can hardly be adequately
Church provides a badly needed context for the care of the human person when she…
insists that every person has a fundamental identity: the creature of God and, by
grace, his child and heir to eternal life.” No. 16. The prohibition of “unjust”
discrimination, however, does not rule out the making of reasonable and just
the Congregation for Catholic Education said in its 2005 Instruction on the subject,
“the Church, while profoundly respecting the persons in question, cannot admit to the
seminary or to holy orders those who practice homosexuality, present deep-seated
4. “[M]en and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies…. are called to
fulfill God’s will in their lives, and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of
the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition….
Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach
them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and
sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian
The positive, hopeful teaching of the Church on marriage, the family and the
transmission of life is founded on the dignity of the person as a creature made in the image and
likeness of God. The “gay rights” movement is, instead, a predictable consequence of the now-
dominant contraceptive ethic. Until the Anglican Lambeth Conference of 1930, no Christian
denomination had ever said that contraception could ever be objectively right. The Catholic
Church continues to affirm the traditional Christian position that contraception is intrinsically an
objective evil.
separates the unitive and procreative aspects of the sexual act. If, sex has no intrinsic relation to
procreation and if, through contraception, it is entirely up to man (of both sexes) whether sex will
have any such relation, how can one deny legitimacy to sexual acts between two men or between
two women? The contraceptive society cannot deny that legitimacy without denying itself.
Further, if individual choice prevails without regard to limits of nature, how can the choice be
limited to two persons? Polygamy (one man, multiple women), polyandry (one woman, multiple
men), polyamory (sexual relations between or among multiple persons of one or both sexes) and
other possible arrangements, involving the animal kingdom as well, would derive legitimacy
from the same contraceptive premise that justifies one-on-one homosexual relations.
rights. The militant “gay rights” movement seeks a cultural and legal redefinition of marriage
and the family, contrary to the reality rooted in reason as well as faith. Marriage, a union of man
and woman, is the creation not of the state but of God himself as seen in Genesis. Sacramento
coadjutor bishop Jaime Soto, on Sept. 26, 2008, said: “Married love is a beautiful, heroic
manipulated for those who would believe that they can and have a right to mimic its unique
expression.” Space limits preclude discussion here of the “same-sex marriage” issue, which we
Professor Emeritus Rice is on the law school faculty. He may be reached at 574-633-4415 or
rice.1@nd.edu.