 |
| Desmond Tutu Would Prefer Hell Over Homophobic Heaven Photo: Huffington Post |
Last week Desmond Tutu, in true Desmond Tutu
style, sparked debate when he, according to various news sources such as the Huffington Post, said: “I would not worship a
God who is homophobic and that is how deeply I feel about this.” He is also
reported to have said: “I would refuse to
go to a homophobic heaven. No, I would say sorry, I mean I would much rather go
to the other place.”
Tutu has become a master at drawing
attention to both himself and his cause. This statement was clearly intended to
do just that. Tutu’s statement is completely incomprehensible but I suspect
that he does not care too much about that. He achieved what he set out to do,
which was to attract attention to the cause that he is supporting.
I am not entirely sure what Tutu was really trying
to say when he made these statements. I can only speculate.
For the sake of being charitable I must go
with the assumption that Desmond Tutu is simply saying that homophobia is
offensive and must be shunned by Christians. If this is true and this is indeed
all that Desmond Tutu was saying, then we can of course all agree that he is
correct.
It is totally unacceptable for any person to
be treated with less dignity because of his or her sexuality. A person’s
sexuality should, quite frankly, never be a consideration in our manner of
dealing with other people. We should not ever think of people in terms of them
being homosexual or heterosexual, but always only as persons!
This is exactly the point that Cardinal
Napier tried to make, unfortunately unsuccessfully, in his interview with the
Mail & Guardian a few months ago. I wrote about this in an earlier Blog post - “How to Use A Sound Bite Unethically”.
In that interview Cardinal Napier explained that
he couldn’t be homophobic because he does not know any homosexuals. This
statement was unfortunately taken to mean that Cardinal Napier literally does
not know any homosexuals.
What Cardinal Napier was in fact saying, and
I know this because I spoke to Cardinal Napier telephonically thereafter, was
that he does not think of people in terms of their sexuality. He does not, for
example, think of me as heterosexual Mark Nel, or as homosexual Mark Nel. I am a
person and he knows the person, not the sexuality.
This should of course be an example to all
of us. A person’s sexual orientation is not important and should make no
difference to us whatsoever. The Catechism of the Church emphasises that homosexual
persons “must be accepted with respect,
compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their
regard should be avoided.”[1]
We cannot tolerate the homophobic behaviour
that is evident in society today. Corrective rape and all the other horrendous
things that homosexuals are apparently subjected to are completely
unacceptable. We must join forces with those who have made it their mission to
bring an end to this.
The Church teaches us quite clearly that: “Respect for the human person proceeds by way
of respect for the principle that ‘everyone should look upon his neighbour
(without any exception) as 'another self', above all bearing in mind his life
and the means necessary for living it with dignity.’ No legislation could by
itself do away with the fears, prejudices, and attitudes of pride and
selfishness, which obstruct the establishment of truly fraternal societies.
Such behaviour will cease only through the charity that finds in every man a ‘neighbour’,
a brother.”[2]
It may be a shock to some Catholics but it
really is necessary for each of us to fight homophobia. Our focus
must be on the person, not on what that person does in the privacy of his or
her bedroom.
If however Desmond Tutu is saying that as a
Christian I have to accept as moral, homosexual acts, then he is of course speaking
absolute nonsense. Church teaching in this regard is equally clear: “Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which
presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always
declared that ‘homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.’ They are contrary
to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not
proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no
circumstances can they be approved.”[3]
So, depending on what Tutu meant, he is either right and we can agree and join him in fighting homophobia, or he is sadly terribly wrong and misguided, not to be taken seriously. Yet, even if the latter is true, we must nevertheless continue to fight homophobia as one of the great evils of our society! Homophobia is totally unacceptable!
He almost certainly means we should amend our morals and condone homosexuality completely, including marriage of same sex couples.
ReplyDeleteTutu has always been a blurb. He obviously is a lost cause or, a cause without a cause.
ReplyDeleteHe likes to be on stage and will say anything to get there.
As a so-called clergyman and bishop of the Anglican tradition, one would have thought he was fully acquainted with both Sacred Scripture and Tradition for "it is an abomination for a man to sleep with another man".
This communist has no fear of the Lord. False Prophet!
5
Make no mistake, it is a case of the latter here. Tutu sees homosexual acts as moral, and wants everyone else to see it that way too. He is an advocate of same-sex "marriage", thinks homosexuality is inborn (rubbish!) and is just all-round, fiercely and vociferously pro-gay. The man certainly is a peculiar "Christian" with his anti-scriptural beliefs and teachings. Whether he is calling on Christians to emulate buddhists, or denying that Christianity alone possesses all truth on God (in his book, 'God Is Not A Christian') - it seems Tutu always has a scandalous soundbite ready for anyone who will listen. I'd hate to agree with Robert Mugabe of all people, but his comment on this Tutu debacle over the weekend at a rally is spot-on: "When the bishop cannot interpret the bible properly, he should resign and leave it to those who can”.
ReplyDeleteHe is too, too much for me. His tongue is hinged in the middle
ReplyDeleteTutu was saying both, sort of, but seeing as the second interpretation is what you find most objectionable, let me deal with that.
ReplyDelete1. You are free to believe whatever you like, as is Tutu. He was speaking for his own beliefs. Note his use of the personal pronoun. He wasn't telling you to do anything, so...relax.
2. The catechisms, church doctrine and scriptures have and are used to incite and defend homophobia, as some of the comments in this article illustrate. How do you fight homophobia while believing homosexual acts (whatever those are) to be "acts of grave depravity"? Do you say no to violence against homosexuals, but yes to depriving them the same rights as everybody else? If that's the case, then you are a homophobe. Believe what you like about the morality of it, by all means. It's not about that. It's about rights. If you believe, for whatever reason, that homosexuals should not have the same rights as everybody else, then you are a homophobe.
Firstly, Tutu is not speaking for only his own beliefs. I assure you that there are a great many Anglicans who share Catholic belief on homosexual acts.
ReplyDeleteSecondly, Catholic beliefs are never used to deny homosexuals their rights. You will, I am sure use the argument of marriage rights and, if you do argue that, you are wrong. Marriage is not their right. Holy Matrimony, the Church Sacrament, not the civil ceremony, is between a man and a woman. So homosexuals acquire no such right, just as a ten old child in South Africa acquires no right to vote.
In short, Catholics are not because of their beliefs homophobic.