On Assumption Sunday, there was a visiting priest from Boston who said mass since the pastor was away. In his homily he mentioned that the Assumption was about how we come to God in our bodies, male or female, black or white, ..., gay or straight.
I never heard any ordained priest say anything like that where I could see them in person. It just shocked me.
I reflected a little about what he said. I wonder, should he have said, "adulterous and non-adulterous", "liar or non-liar", etc? Just because we have an inclination to sin, does it mean that we have to identify with a particular, potential sin?
Some people think that the LGBT label is their identity. Some people think that their profession is their identity. For some, the color of their skin links them to others.
How is an inclination of sinfulness regarded as identity? Those of the current LGBT subculture think they are discriminated against: they think they're hated. Should equality be not linked to sin (inclination and/or acts) but to dignity as human persons in our bodies?
Some more thought is needed. Just thinking as I write. (Be nice now if you comment.)
(Good read: Obedience vs. Conscience)
"Gay or straight"?!?!
ReplyDeleteBodies come in genders, shapes, sizes and colors. Gay or straight is none of those.
I totally agree.
ReplyDeleteWe might as well say, "kleptomaniac or giver", "cannibal or vegan", or some such.