Some argue we must be faithful to tradition. Are we, however, being faithful to the Spirit? God does not go about creating the past, but the future. God is always making something “new”. We can follow God into that “new”, or we can cling to the dust of his passing us by. We need not argue the how and why these questions of human sexuality have been placed before us. They have. Sometimes the Spirit allows things to break apart so we are forced to examine them and re-fit them together into something new
The question of homosexuality cannot be dealt with except in the wider context of human sexuality, and human sexuality cannot be adequately considered outside the context of humanity, humanity called to community and commitment, reason and respect, thankfulness and caring. These questions I place here reflect those being asked by the church. The teachers of the church must give answer and direction.
Are human sex acts to be judged on the basis of genitals, on the basis of eros, on the basis of person, on the basis of person as dialogical? Are sexuality and sexual orientation to be understood as expressions of human dialogic? Are human sex acts primarily procreative of offspring? Are human sex acts essentially procreative of offspring? Are human sex acts essentially procreative of persons, offspring sometimes being the physical issue of the act?Within the confines of a heterosexual relationship characterized by love, sealed in commitment and established in accord with civil and ecclesiastical law, is it licit to engage in the sexual act of intercourse to the frustration of the possibility of conception by either interruption of the act or by some physical or chemical inhibitor? Within the confines of the relationship given in the last question, is it licit to engage in a sexual act of stimulation to orgasm and/or ejaculation without recourse to sexual intercourse? In what way might extreme age, sickness, impotence or infertility bear upon the situation given above? In what way would such acts as considered in the above questions performed by the heterosexual couple relate to such acts performed by a homosexual couple?
This is not an exhaustive retelling of the questions I have received, but they represent the scope of inquiry stirring within the church, the scope of teaching that needs be given. We cannot hide behind endless commissions and committees, political antics and pious posturings. It is given teachers to teach.
We can answer all such questions and catalogue them, and as they have been asked, we must do so. We may also, I most ardently propose, simply, honestly, and maturely aver that human sexuality finds its truth in the fulfillment of human potential created through the caring, compassionate and loving union of two persons freely, mutually, and consensually exploring the boundaries of body and soul toward the continual establishment of a communion (a marriage) acting in itself as the ground fostering a community (a family), the details of which properly belonging to the imaginations and abilities of the connubial coadunators.
The good life need not be—indeed, it is not—a complication, a compilation of rules and regulations. It is the continual and simple act of reverence and respect—virtues that can be fostered and educated, but never, by definition, legislated and enforced.