‘Born This Way’

The Supreme Court has recently begun to hear arguments in two cases related to “gay marriage” — a doubly-deceptive oxymoron which ought always to be put in quotes, if used at all.

It is no surprise that, early in the oral arguments of the case, the champions of these unnatural unions claimed justification for their cause in the pseudo-scientific supposition that homosexuality is biologically determined. In the words of that pop icon of indecency, Lady Gaga, homosexuals are “born this way.”

But according to the scholars and clinicians at the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH), they are not: “Homosexuality is not biologically determined; it is potentially changeable; and attempts at change are not inherently harmful.” (The Catholic psychologist, Dr. Joseph Nicolosi, was one of the three founders of NARTH, which offers clinical help to persons with unwanted homosexual tendencies. Other organizations that offer various forms of help would include Courage, the Institute for Marital Healing, and the Imago Dei Institute, which is run by our very good friend, Dr. G.C. Dilsaver.)

Various theories that have set out to link genetic or epigenetic causality to homosexual tendencies have been advanced but not proven. As with other mental disorders, the causality of homosexuality is likely to be complex and multiform. And we must include sin, original and actual, as part of the cause.

Yes, I just ranked homosexuality with “other mental disorders.” As Patrick J. Buchanan stated in a recent column concerning the two cases before the Supreme Court: “Before 1973, the American Psychiatric Association regarded homosexuality as a mental disorder. Most states treated it as a crime.” The removal of homosexuality from the DSM, the APA’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, was politically and ideologically driven.

To affirm that homosexuality is a psychological disorder does not deny moral culpability. That is to say, the acts are still sinful.

Numerous homosexuals have been cured of their condition. Many others yet struggle with disordered temptations but live a sacramental Catholic life in sacrificial fidelity to the Church’s teaching. Such individuals have a cross to bear, but so have all sinners who wish to live a truly Christian life — and that includes you and me.

After all, when it comes to Original Sin and its sorrowful effects, we were all “born this way.”

Let us place ourselves on the firm bedrock of Church teaching. The Church has consistently, universally, and therefore infallibly proclaimed the grave immorality of homosexuality. Some would be surprised to learn that the Catechism of the Catholic Church says that homosexual acts are “acts of grave depravity” that are “intrinsically disordered,” “contrary to the natural law,” and which “do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity.”

All homosexual acts (including not only deeds, but deliberate thoughts and words) are sinful. The homosexual tendency is unnatural. But as in all matters pertaining to sin, it is not the temptation — the disordered concupiscence — that is sinful, but deliberate thoughts, words, and deeds that act on the temptation.

And what of the question of compassion for the homosexual?

This is something gravely misunderstood in our day, and deliberately so, for there has been a decades-old concerted effort on the part of activists to demonize opposition to the homosexualist agenda. Marshal E. Kirk and Hunter Madsen announced in their 1989 book, After the Ball, How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90s, that “We intend to make the anti-gays look so nasty that average Americans will want to disassociate themselves from such types.” This book was a blueprint for a multifaceted psychological operations program designed neutralize opposition.

The case for “gay rights” is based on a false anthropology. Resistance to it is weak because of a pandemic misunderstanding of human rights, the same misunderstanding of rights most Catholics lamentably fall into when defending our religious liberties against the evil Nanny State. Quite simply, we have no right to do what is wrong.

“Gay Christian” apologists would have us misread the parable of the Prodigal Son, turning it into a story of unconditional acceptance rather than merciful forgiveness. But the prodigal did not come to his father’s house with his sinful accomplices in tow, demanding that Dad accept his alternative lifestyle. The young man was sorry for his sins, which he humbly acknowledged.

The question remains: is there a genuine compassion for the homosexual person? Of course there is. And it is Catholic.

Let me begin with an analogy. True Catholics hate the hideous abomination of abortion. In charity, we also have to realize that the flip side of the issue concerns helping the poor women who have had them. Planned Parenthood and other profiteering “abortion providers” want them as return customers. We want them as contrite sinners who come to the Good Shepherd for His mercy — which requires their acknowledging their sin and doing penance. This is true mercy, not indifference to evil.

In the same vein, there must be genuine compassion for the homosexual. As a person created in the image of God and called by grace to share in His likeness, the homosexual should be treated with supernatural charity. Unnecessary severity, unkindness, and degrading treatment are not likely to lead to a conversion, are they? (I say this knowing full well that much of what I have written would be called degrading by interested parties on the other side of the culture war. So be it.) Even if the person steeped in sin does not understand his own dignity, which is based on truths which he himself denies, we must realize it. Therefore, genuine compassion, based upon this truth, will entail trying to convert the sinner, and giving him opportunities for genuine spiritual healing through penance, prayer, and the sacraments. This will bring his dignity from potency to act.

How this might be done will vary according to the people involved and the circumstances. It ought not be complicated, though; the corporal and spiritual works of mercy are within reach of all the faithful.

Sometimes this compassion will be in the form of “tough love,” a charitable severity that can drive home to the offender the seriousness of his offense. In this way, Saint Paul treated the Corinthian man caught in unnatural vice with his stepmother: “Put away the evil one from among yourselves” (I Cor. 5:13). The sinning Corinthian, as we know, converted.

There is a revulsion that all men have when faced with something they find disgusting. Call it “the yuck factor.” Since such reactions are often founded upon the natural law and good manners, they can be helpful safeguards of morality. However, there are many things that appear disgusting but yield real goods. For instance, butchering a cow is not pleasant to see, but filet mignon is delicious to eat. People need to base their moral sense on sound principles rather than mere disgust, for the yuck factor can be overcome or even misdirected. As we saw, homosexual activists are presently doing their very best to make those who hold Christian standards appear, in the words of Kirk and Madsen, “so nasty that average Americans will want to disassociate themselves from such types.”

We know that there is no evil that man or demon can commit, out of which God cannot derive a greater good. If there is a bright lining in this rapid resurrection of Sodom and Gomorrah, it might be this: The only institution that has the entire truth about man is the Catholic Church. When every man-made institution has capitulated to the homosexual agenda, that uniqueness will become more obvious. And when society has been all but destroyed by the depravity, and the depraved themselves seek relief, they will know exactly where to find it. God is merciful.

  • GeneDe

    Well stated, Brother, and to the point. The “only” problem is, is that we are faced with a complacent media that would like nothing better than to see the “supreme court” turn marriage upside down. As well, of course, the scourge of abortion also seen as a “right” since ’73’s decision of R v W. We are fighting, and must continue to fight, an uphill battle for the hearts and souls of those willing sinners who have become the “useful idiots” of the radical left/socialist/communists. The Prodigal Son is a wonderful example of the repentant sinner! Thank you for that.

  • You’re welcome, Gene, and thanks for your kind comment. The media, I think, is more than complacent; they are activists who are on the other side.

    The folks who are the true victims here are many: first, those struggling with the disordered attraction who are made to think of themselves as victims in the wrong way (i.e., because their attraction is labeled “disordered” or “unnatural” by the Church) and encouraged to commit vice; next, those children in public schools who are indoctrinated to think this is acceptable behavior and that they should consider it for themselves (which amounts to recruiting); next, all those who are learning in whatever way that being “born this way” is an acceptable excuse for committing vice — any vice.

    Think of the teenage boy struggling with impurity, trying, e.g., to avoid the “solitary sin.” If he sees others falling all over themselves in acceptance of a homosexual’s “gay lifestyle,” he may be sorely tempted to give up the struggle because maybe he, too, was “born this way.”

  • Lisa Vasilak


  • Lauraelizabeth

    thank you i really love this. I am very vocal about being against homosexual ‘marriage’ and, at my extremely liberalized catholic college, that is basically social suicide. Yet, (and I thank the Holy Ghost for this) no one argues with me when I tell them how much more we care about the afflicted gay persons……because it is basically our one, true JOB to care (and fight to the death) for the good of their immortal souls! Keep on writing! Pax +

  • Turtlecurls

    The bible is against the illicit homosexuality of the day, namely group orgies to the gods & Greek ideas that raping young boys is the highest form of sex. Sadly, you are violating the word of the bible by projecting that prohibition of illicit behavior, onto the natural born that way behavior of perfectly decent human beings. I am neither gay nor close friends with a gay person. Yet I can spot intolerant & ridiculous belittlement. Pat Bucanan is wildly hateful at Jews & others. If you agree with him, you should be doing deep introspection to see where you went wrong. Only 30 years ago, the psych field thought autism was from poor quality mothering. When you go backwards in time to unproven claims, you show an unwillingness to grow as our knowledge base has grown. Now that’s manipulative & sad. When you leave context out of the reading of the bible, you get to non-spiritual conclusions, as you have.

  • You seem to assume that I am basing my case against homosexuality on scripture alone. I am not. Although it is quite clear to me that Holy Scripture reprobates homosexuality (I find the contrary argument that you present, offered by modernist biblicists, to be gratuitous), my major authority is the constant and infallible teaching authority of the Catholic Church, which mediates to the believer the revealed data of Scripture and Apostolic Tradition. Never has the Church wavered in her teaching. Neither, to my knowledge, has Orthodox Jewry, which still interprets the relevant passages of the Old Testament in conformity to the natural law. (Reform Judaism, a product of the Enlightenment, is another matter.)

    The only historical Christians (nominal ones) who defended the probity of homosexual acts were heretical sects, like various gnostic groups.

    I belittled nobody, so your recognition of “intolerant & ridiculous belittlement” is baseless.

    Mr. Buchanan is not “wildly hateful” of Jews or anyone, unless the words “wildly hateful” have a meaning other than common English usage would give them. I have been told that his research assistant is Jewish, though I cannot vouch for that.

    I’m glad you presented the argument about autism. It is a perfect illustration of the bad argumentation of the homosexualist apologist. If it is indeed true that the common opinion among psychologists was that autism resulted from poor quality mothering, and if competent professionals have now proven scientifically that there is another causality, then they got the causality of the condition wrong and have corrected their error. But notice: that the condition itself is a defect or abnormality no one has denied. Autism is still viewed as a defect, as it was previously. In my piece, I deliberately passed over the question of the causality of homosexual tendencies. But that it is an abnormality I cannot deny, and neither can the field of psychology, since it represents something contrary to nature.

    Because we live in a reflexively hypersensitive age, let me add one thing: in referring to autism as a “defect” and like terms, I certainly do not mean that such people are evil. The flu, cancer, and headaches are defects. So is Downs Syndrome, and some of the most pleasant people I have encountered have the latter condition. The defects of our nature can become marvelous occasions of grace, as was St. Paul’s “sting of the flesh.”

  • Susan Mullen

    I am a convert to Catholicism. I am celibate and have been for many years. And I was “born this way”. Every other sexual minority person I know was also “born this way”. I read Dr. Groeschel’s book, “The Courage to be Chaste”, several years ago. I believe the group, Courage, is based on this book. Dr. Groeschel focused on chaste celibacy for sexual minority people. I’m 63, and over the years I’ve found that chastity is a gift that some people have and some don’t. I would not judge someone based on the presence or absence of that or any other gift.
    I wish people who have only a theoretical stance on this issue could just sit and listen to us. I, for example, knew I was “not like other girls” from about age 9. Many of us know that at an even younger age. We live as best we can. Some of us are angry, some aren’t. Some of us want to get married, some don’t. A lot of us vote. Not a one of the many, many of us that I know personally wants to recruit — something people seem to be very afraid of.

  • Jim

    I’ve heard it advanced by our Eastern Orthodox counterparts that through The Fall, Man’s mind collapsed in on itself and the body subject to death also became subject to disease and disorders. It would not be too far-fetched to say that, “Perhaps there is a certain genetic influence” however this reductionism to all things genetic has problems:

    (1) That there needs to be a genetic influence for Attraction to the Different Sex, because sexual attraction would need to be a genetic thing in part, but I have not heard of excessive coverage for a genetic basis for different sex attraction, to show that sexual attraction is all genetically determined. Certainly there is a biological component to this, we are a composite being after all.

    (2) Consider this, if there is a neurological basis to a particular trait (lets use aggression as an example) then there is also a genetic basis too. However, just because one may have a lowered tolerance level toward things that could trigger aggression from a genetic predisposition, this does not mean that said person will behave aggressively if raised in an environment that either encourages patience or discourages acts of aggression. Theres a give and take:

    I am not saying that its “Nature-V-Nurture” as Christians we need to realize that God created a world wherein nothing happens in a vacuum rather everything is happening all at once and that everything informs everything else, so I say I think as Christians practicing that Christian Act of Reconciliation we ought to move toward a new Paradigm that has “Nature With Nurture” rather than a conflicting paradigm of “Nature-V-Nurture”

    Likewise if there is even a small heritability with same sex attraction, then we need to examine how we are raising our children and what we are exposing them too because if we raise them in Virtue than same sex attraction could be minimized and if we raise them with Vice that small percentage of heritability will be justified by cultural assumptions and propaganda. If there is a large heritability with Same Sex Attraction than this is still true albeit a stronger therapeutic intervention maybe required. God gave us Free Will, if there is a temptation in our life we ought to freely choose to remove it, in order that we may receive the Graces needed to get into Heaven.

  • criadodeverdade@wordpress.com

    Please see this scientific sharing on homosexuality:http://criadodeverdade.wordpress.com/2011/10/07/homosexuality/

  • John S

    Anna: Thanks for being vigilant with information. The site you linked to is excellent. It will take some time to get through all of the references. The enemies of God would have us believe that the scientific community is solidly behind them. Genuinely scientific people, as in those who study objective reality without an utter contempt for facts, tell quite another story.

  • Aaron Lopez

    May I ask if you have been watching some of Michael Voris’ videos, or if you know that he is watching you guys? I ask because recently he had published a video about homosexuality with similar ideas.

    I ask this because if true, it just shows how much stronger the devout Catholic community is becoming, which can only be the bane for non-orthodox and liberal beliefs!

  • Aaron Lopez

    The idea of being “born this way” probably alludes to the idea that there is a ‘gay gene’ or a gay predisposition embedded into an individual during conception. The counterargument is that no authoritative source has forwarded the notion outright, and it is looking likely that it is the result of the environment. If it really was a genetic predisposition, the next big question – most dangerous to liberals and the homosexual agenda – is if such a defect can be cured through medical procedures.

    But as you said, whether or not it is truly genetic or truly a nurtured trait, is irrelevant. Chastity is something willed and put into action, and pleases God.

  • Eleonore

    Some folks have indeed noticed that Michael Voris and the SBC website are talking about the same topics, not only this particular one, but also the Holy Father’s recent statements as well as one that has been associated with SBC since Brother Francis published his essay “Sentimental Theology” in 1947. This is a good thing. Traditionalists and other Catholics need to be on the same page.

  • I do watch most of Michael Voris’ “Vortex” episodes. On the issue of “Born This Way,” I think that we both landed on the same thing coincidentally. I know I did not get it from him; and I doubt that he got the idea it from me.

    Here, by the way, is a link to his video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ej9aaVRXYPQ

  • Gregory

    If homosexuals were in fact, “born this way”, we wouldn’t find such a high percentage of them in prisons where homosexuality is the only game in town. It is true that homosexuals are no better or worse than the rest of us. We are all guilty of various transgressions. But to claim that homosexuals are born that way is no different than saying that thieves are born that way.

    Homosexuals should not be singled out for persecution, but their actions are wrong. And we are all guilty of sinful behavior.

  • Billy Ten Eyck

    I’m sorry, but when a person expresses such ridiculous ideas, they must be challenged. What church do you know of that approves group orgies to “the gods” and raping young boys as “the highest form of sex?”

    Also, you would be hard-pressed to convince a single soul “besides the one in the mirror” that you have any idea how to engage in proper exegis of Scripture, particularly considering the heresy and contempt that screams out from your post above.

    Please, turtlecurls, have some respect for Brother Andre, and show some faith in Christ’s promise to protect the Church, which is the pillar and foundation of Truth, from heresy and moral relativism such as what you have posted above.

  • Turtlecurls

    Are you unable to read or not know history? I said “the illicit homosexuality of the day.” What did you think “of the day” meant. Apparently you erroneously concluded it means “today.” It means 4000-3000 years ago. FYI, at the time the bible was being interpreted, pagan cultures around the Jews were doing group orgies to the gods, & Greeks thought raping young boys was the highest form of sex.
    So now that you know what I wrote – try again. Your insults make no sense whatsoever. They only show you are unaware of the context & culture at the time the words were first being interpreted, to the point that these obvious references didn’t even cross your mind.
    I will reply to Andre’s comments when I have more time to correct the many inaccuracies in them.

  • Billy Ten Eyck

    You were correct in that I read it as “our day,” so I completely misread the first part of what you said. My apologies.

    However, the rest of what I said still stands, ESPECIALLY since I just realized that you’re trying to imply the bible was only talking about some types of homosexuality and not others. Unfortunately, that notion sustains an unfortunate level of laughability. Not to mention your contrasting “the day’s” types of homosexuality with “the born-that-way behavior” of today’s homosexuals. What a load…I’m certain Brother Andre will put up with your baseless assumptions that make sweeping generalizations about homosexuals, in a much more charitable way.

    I will admit to intolerance of donkeys right now, because I can’t seem to help myself when criticizing your completely subjective and utterly errant accusations.

    Please post something out of Buchanan’s writings, or maybe a clip of him on T.V., that supports your statement that he is “wildly hateful at Jews & others.” (Hint: “I disagree with (x’s) views/actions/etc” doesn’t count.)

  • schmenz

    Alas the idea of a homosexual perversion “gene” is not irrelevant. It is one of the foundational building blocks of the homosexual movement, If you accept that rather ridiculous and hilariously unscientific idea you will have gone a long way to giving acceptance to their warped views. I advise caution here.

  • schmenz

    Before you get around to correcting Brother Andre’s inaccuracies, perhaps you would like to correct the inaccuracies in your limited views of Greek and Roman culture. In some of those cultures, during certain epochs, the paganism they practiced centered on order and beauty which included a natural revulsion of perversion. It is true that some cultures fell victim to the ugnliness of the worship of Baal and all his pompms and works.

    Facts and context first, my friend, then rants.