Over at La Salette, the hysteria over perceived demonic influence at this site continues. This time, the concern is directed at Fr JohnQ’s defence of my original post. Once again, the crazy’s attempted refutation depends on extended observations that are entirely irrelevant to what Fr John, or I, actually wrote. This time, his statements are all about how Jesus, while fully human, was also perfect. I have no problem, with that.
So, what’s the connection? It appears to lie in the belief that being perfect, he could not possibly have had a same-sex orientation (perhaps not any sexual impulses at all). Why not? Well, presumably because the homosexual condition is intrinsically disordered. I just don’t buy that. The claim may be in the notorious CDF document, but anybody who is prepared to swallow every disordered statement on human sexuality from the Vatican, just because it has been written by sexually repressed, celibate theologians with no real-life experience of the subject they are able to admit to, is not living on the same planet as the rest of us.
There’s one feature above all that fascinates me about the fulminations of these orthotoxic Catholics (thanks, Jim McCrae, for this useful and descriptive label). That is how they base the bulk of their arguments on entirely theoretical constructs, almost completely ignoring any kind of evidence – from either the Gospels, or from empirical research. No basis in reality, whatever.
So, back in the real world, it’s worth taking another look at what got them so agitated in the first place: a reference in my post on John the Evangelist that he may have had a relationship of special intimacy with Jesus. I did not make the claim, in this post or previously (which they appeared to assume), that Jesus was “homosexual” (gasp!), or that this relationship was sexual (horror)! However, I want to be absolutely clear on what I have said in the past.
At this time of year, with its constant thoughts on the Nativity and Holy Family, we should also reflect on Jesus’ own Queer Family. We must also recognize that the incarnation means more than simply becoming a baby in a crib: it also entailed becoming fully human, in a specifically male body, experiencing all the sexual impulses and physical responses that other men have (and experiencing these impulses does not make him in any way less perfect). He was not in any way “gay” in the modern sense of the word, but based on the evidence of his life and words, could be described as “genderqueer“. Certainly, his ministry constituted a rejection of what some people refer to as the “traditional” family, as shown by the Gospels’ Queer Values.
Not only are there distinctly queer themes in the life and message of Christ, but the Catholic Church itself, while outwardly homophobic, displays many homoerotic characteristics. These are evident in much of the clerical culture and practices, but also in the rich history of queer saints and martyrs. (I have been rather neglecting these over the last year or so, but will now be giving them far more attention again, as I work towards assembling the entire narrative for publication in book form. For new readers who have missed the earlier posts, catch up at the queer saints pages:
- Calendar of Queer Saints and Martyrs
- The Story of Queer Saints and Martyrs: Synopsis
- Prologue: Before Christianity
- The Early Christians: Saints and Martyrs for the Church
- ‘Saints and Sinners in The Medieval Church
- The Great Persecution: Martyred By the Church
- Modern Saints, Modern Heroes: The Great Revival.
- Epilogue: All Saints
