Catholicism \nmisunderstood
In the IDS on Tueday, Sept. 25, columnist Grace Low wrote an editorial titled “Hippie Catholics.” While I was very happy to see Ms. Low take pride in her faith and identify with the Vatican’s eco-friendly future plans, I feel that my fellow Catholic misrepresented the Church’s beliefs in her closing line, “Now can we please have condoms and acceptance \nfor gays?”\nThese two closely linked issues have been hot-button topics for years, and unfortunately there has been widespread misunderstanding about what the Catholic Church really teaches about them. The Catholic Church is perfectly accepting of homosexual people; in fact, if we take a look into the Catechism of the Catholic Church we find it to say that “They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided.” The problem with homosexuality is the practice of homosexual acts – as the Church’s belief is that sex should be open to the possibility of children, these types of acts present a problem, as they cannot possibly result in the gift of a child. This therefore obviously implies that homosexuals are called to a life of chastity – something undoubtedly seen as humanly impossible according to today’s culture. Difficult? Of course. I can’t imagine having to do it. But then again, being a Christian isn’t supposed to be a walk in the park.\nThat leads to a minor point about condoms. It would be a gross waste of time for anyone to hold their breath waiting on permission from the Holy See to use condoms, and this simply follows from the argument against homosexual acts. If the couple isn’t open to children, then sex is wrong. Conjugal love between two people must have the beautiful potential of bringing forth a new life, a new person, a new soul.\nI applaud Ms. Low for her Catholic pride. However, we must all be careful about how we represent that with which we identify ourselves.\n \nMichael A. Skaggs\nJunior
