Sodom & the City of God

[The following response was submitted to the New Oxford Review on November 19, 2003, and was published in the January, 2004 issue.]

Response to Peck
I would like to respond to Daniel Peck’s letter to the editor (Sept. 2003) concerning my article, Sodom & the City of God (June 2003). I appreciate Peck’s clear concern with chastity, his recognition of the hypocrisy of many Catholics, and his understanding of the disgust I must feel “toward supposed Christians who want to pick the sliver from [my] eye while ignoring the planks in their own.” There are, nevertheless, several points that deserve a response.
In his excellent article on “Recovering the Art of Christian Polemics” (Oct. 2002), David Mills points out the crucial distinction between those who need correction, and those who need rebuke. Because Peck’s heart seems to be in the right place, I offer the following in the spirit of fraternal correction, in hopes that clarifying Church teaching will change Mr. Peck’s mind.
Peck writes: “This is one reason why normal people — and that is what heterosexuals are, normal people — are so disturbed by homosexuals, whether they act on their lust or not. Homosexuality is so abnormal — queer to use another term — that the very thought of what they actually do or desire disgusts even the most hardened heterosexual sinner.”
In another place, Peck says that “it is very difficult for heterosexuals to keep sexual purity.” The reason for this, according to the Catechism, is that they often desire “morally disordered” sexual pleasure that is “sought for itself, isolated from its procreative and unitive purposes” (#2351). In addition to calling homosexual acts “intrinsically disordered” (#2357), the Catechism says that masturbation is “intrinsically and gravely disordered” (#2352); fornication is “gravely contrary to the dignity of persons” (#2353); viewing pornography is a “grave offense” (#2354); contraception is “intrinsically evil” (#2370); adultery is an “image of the sin of idolatry” (#2380); and that divorce “introduces disorder into the family and into society” (#2385). The Catechism also says that the “disorder we notice so painfully” in many marriages stems from sin (#1607). Heterosexuality is no protection against these “morally disordered” desires.
Christopher West (a lay theologian, expert on John Paul II’s Theology of the Body, and advisor to Archbishop Chaput on issues of human sexuality and marriage) has pointed out that because of the fall, all human beings — regardless of their sexual attractions — are in some way sexually disoriented. That is, all of us — again, regardless of our sexual attractions — have desires which are not in any way consistent with God’s plan for human sexuality.
Mr. Peck says that “the very thought of what [homosexuals] actually do or desire disgusts even the most hardened heterosexual sinner.” Well, so what? Catholics have never believed that the feelings of “the most hardened heterosexual sinner” are a reliable guide for Christian behavior.
Chastity, like all Christian virtues, must be grounded in humility. Unless I fully recognize and confess my own sinfulness, I cannot recognize the extent to which I need grace, and so cannot accept the grace I need to set me free from sin. Therefore, the heterosexual who fails to recognize his own disorder and focuses instead on the disorder of homosexual persons is not only guilty of a lack of charity towards those with same sex attraction: he is also hardening his heart against the grace he needs to live a chaste and holy life.
In response to a question in my article, Peck says that he would be at least a little more comfortable saying that his son was cohabiting with his girlfriend than that his son was a chaste homosexual. He says that “in the first arrangement I would also be expressing remorse that my son is living a sinful life yet am hopeful that he might repent later. In the second case I must publicly identify my son as being psychologically deficient.” This is the kind of comment that earned Christ’s rebuke about straining at gnats and swallowing camels.
Would it not be preferable to have a son who was “psychologically deficient” and living in a state of grace than to have a son who was “normal” (by Mr. Peck’s definition) and living in a state of mortal sin? After all, the “psychologically deficient” son is on the road to being one “of the many saints who lived chaste lives, who sacrificed their very lives for their virginity, or who turned away from lives of decadence, lust, and sex.” And while the road of the “normal” son is, I’m sure, paved with good intentions, it is still the road to Hell. This does not bother Mr. Peck?
God’s judgment is not concerned with the temptations a person faces, but with the choices that person makes in response to grace offered in the face of temptation. For this reason, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith teaches that “the human person, made in the image and likeness of God, can hardly be adequately described by a reductionist reference to his or her sexual orientation. Every one living on the face of the earth has personal problems and difficulties, but challenges to growth, strengths, talents and gifts as well. Today, the Church provides a badly needed context for the care of the human person when she refuses to consider the person as a ‘heterosexual’ or a ‘homosexual’ and insists that every person has a fundamental Identity: the creature of God, and by grace, His child and heir to eternal life.”
With respect to Courage, Mr. Peck says, “I have never understood why one who is struggling with a particular temptation would surround himself with others who suffer from very same temptation.” Has he never heard of Alcoholics Anonymous?
As a purely practical matter, seduction within Courage groups has not been a serious problem—I am not aware of a single instance in which it has occurred. Group dynamics come into play here. Most Courage groups are facilitated by a priest who keeps the conversation on track. And in a group of men committed to chastity and well aware (from personal experience) of the ways and means of lust, any attempt by one person to move the conversation into inappropriate territory will be met by the chaplain or other members who will nip the problem in the bud. Those who persistently cause problems are asked to leave the group.
An in-depth explanation of the value of a support group like Courage is beyond the scope of this letter. But I will say that men like Mr. Peck are one of the prime reasons Catholics struggling with same sex attraction need the support of doctrinally orthodox and pastorally sensitive support groups like Courage. How helpful or encouraging (or true to Church teaching) is it to be told that it is better to live in heterosexual mortal sin than to strive for chastity against homosexual temptations?
Finally, I was baffled by Peck’s assertion that “Even a chaste homosexual such as Belgau is so consumed with his sexuality that he cannot find role models outside his fixation.” My article drew extensively on St. Augustine (who is nothing if not heterosexual). Even my title was an allusion to his writings. Nowhere did I suggest that I cannot find role models in heterosexual saints. What I did say was that in the current cultural situation, where same-sex attracted Catholics are “under constant and extreme pressure” to be “open proud and accepting” of their homosexuality, it is helpful for us to have role models who have been faithful in our circumstances, who demonstrate by their lives that Catholic teaching is not “out of touch” with the realities of same-sex attraction. I believe (to reverse the question) that it is fair to ask whether Mr. Peck would find inspiration from a saint whose cross included the temptation to homosexual acts (should such a saint happen to be canonized in our lifetime).
I certainly agree with Peck that it can be difficult to live a chaste life in our present society, regardless of one’s sexual orientation. For that very reason, it is most necessary that all Catholics know Catholic teaching about chastity, and do everything within their power to help others who are trying to live that teaching. I pray for his growth in grace, and hope that he will pray for mine, as well.

Ron Belgau
Port Angeles, Washington

[ Home ] [ Meetings ] [ Five Goals ] [ Fourteen Points ] [ Chaplains ] [ Resources ]