Pope Francis has yet again created a stir in popular culture and Christendom alike with recent statements that have been making their rounds across social media this week. According to Juan Carlos Cruz, a homosexual victim of sexual abuse that had the privilege of speaking to the Pontif, Francis told him the fact “that you are gay does not matter. God made you like this and loves you like this and I don’t care.”
Many Christians and non-Christians alike have been sharing this story and asking for thoughts. Some news outlets are portraying the statements as groundbreaking shifts in the church’s historic stance on homosexuality. And many atheists view the statements as inconsistent and indicative of a failure in the moral framework of Christianity itself.
Many Christians have long adamantly opposed any claim that homosexuality may be a behavior that has genetic or congenital origins. Studies purporting to show a genetic link to homosexual behavior or same-sex attraction have been proposed and debunked for years but the desire to find such a link has long persisted. No matter what the statement may or may not represent, the implications for many are clear and two-fold.
One implication is that the ability for one to be born with a predisposition to otherwise sinful behavior is contradictory to what God as creator and designer would ever do. Surely, a good God would not allow someone to be born with an active, inborn desire towards a sinful lifestyle. On the one hand, such a claim does make some logical sense in that many Christians, especially Intelligent Design proponents, expect to see creation that is designed and is consistent with His nature. However, many who would see such a genetic link as evidence against a creator do not take into account the effects of a fallen, sinful humanity and a broken world. Given the fall, an otherwise initial good or optimal design could easily have deteriorated throughout human history to the present degree.
The other implication is that, were a “gay gene” to be discovered, this could otherwise signal that such behavior is actually “natural” or could or should be accepted as normative for some human beings. However, such a conclusion does not hold up when applied under other circumstances. For instance, if a similar gene could be found that was linked to actively hating homosexuals, a “gay bashing gene”, would or should this then be an indication that such behavior is also normal or healthy? Furthermore, if a predisposition to obesity, alcoholism, or extreme violence could be shown to originate in an individual’s genetic code, should these behaviors therefore be seen as natural or healthy?
Of course not. The fact is that all of us are predisposed to behavior or conditions that are otherwise unhealthy for us and we do not otherwise attempt to legitimize that behavior simply due to the fact that we are predisposed to it or that it is difficult for us to resist or live in spite of.
I have also witnessed some atheists claiming that the inconsistency in the Pope’s statements and other denominations within Christendom reflects poorly on the state of objective morality proper, that if the Church cannot be consistent in its moral teaching, if they cannot “figure it out”, how would anyone else be expected to do so? But such claims are illogical. For one, otherwise physical sciences like physics or biology often suffer from the same sort of inconsistency. Two scientists observing the same data may draw completely different conclusions. But despite their inconsistency in interpretation, we do not then claim that, given the data, no objectively true conclusion exists.
In much the same way, objective moral values and duties either exist or they do not. Either certain actions and behaviors are moral or immoral. Even were we unable to observe or evaluate those moral values, that would not preclude them from existing. Our difficulty or inconsistency in discovering or applying them is our own failing, not that of moral values themselves.
My heart aches for those who deal with unwanted same-sex attraction. The social and political culture of the day routinely targets these individuals with contrary claims and attempts to use them for their own political gain. Science may one day discover a genetic link to homosexual attraction and behavior but whether that ever occurs the nature of that behavior remains the same. Homosexuality is a destructive behavior and Christians more than anyone should be willing to reach out in love to support and shepherd individuals who have been affected by it.
“God would not allow someone to be born with an active, inborn desire towards a sinful lifestyle”
This puzzles me as an objection, for (given our innate sinful nature) isn’t this the very condition that literally every human is born into, and isn’t this already a view that no Christian disagrees with? Since the fall, all of us ARE born into a lifelong inclination towards a sinful lifestyle. So why should the specific sin of homosexuality make this theologically sound concept suddenly unpalatable? For although it true that we are we are all born to sin, not all of us are driven towards the exact same sins.
Yes, Jeremiah, I think this is where the concept of a fallen world is useful. I believe that, intuitively, it is an objection that is akin to the classic, “why would God create people that he knew would go to hell?” It has some emotional or rhetorical power at first blush but given the other facts of the Christian worldview it either falls flat or is easily explained.
As well, there seems to be something culturally powerful about the area of sex in this way, I think. The idea of one struggling with anger issues or the desire to steal, for instance, and needing to live in self control against those behaviors is one thing. However, the idea that one would struggle with an illicit sexual desire that would have to be constantly consciously repressed is too much for some people. I imagine the idea of living a celibate lifestyle period would be unbelievable, if indeed it came to that.
Thanks for the comment!