Letter: Catholic teaching on homosexuality

Mr Charles Wookey
Thursday 08 April 1993 18:02 EDT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Sir: The two headlines adopted for Andrew Brown's report today ('Catholic Church seeks change in policy on gays' and 'Bishops aim to modify Vatican's stance by announcing that homosexuality is not sinful') are highly misleading and inaccurate. There is no intention to propose a change in the Church's teaching on homosexuality.

The Catholic Church's teaching makes a distinction between a person's sexual orientation on the one hand and activity on the other. The report correctly quotes Cardinal Hume as saying that 'being homosexual is not sinful or a sin; an inclination is not a sin'. This is not a modification of the Church's teaching. It repeats what is stated in Cardinal Ratzinger's 1986 letter to the Bishops which, through misleading quotation, Mr Brown contrives to place in opposition to Cardinal Hume's remarks.

The key passage in the Vatican Document reads: 'Although the particular inclination of the homosexual person is not a sin, it is a more or less strong tendency ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil; and thus the inclination itself must be seen as an objective disorder.' I have italicised the words omitted by Mr Brown. They make all the difference.

Yours faithfully,

CHARLES WOOKEY

Assistant for Public Affairs

Archbishop's House

London, SW1

8 April

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in