Novus Ordo Moral Theologian sees “Sacramental Character” in “Commited, Loving” Same-Sex Unions
BARF BAG ALERT: The latest aberro-sexual trash comes once again from the heart of apostate Europe, from Germany. The internet portal Katholisch.de, which is maintained by the German National Conference of Novus Ordo Bishops, has published an interview with the “moral theologian” Stephan Goertz, who is part of the “Catholic-theological” faculty of the University of Mainz. Goertz is the editor of the new book, “Wer bin ich, ihn zu verurteilen?” — “Who am I to judge him?”, a title that quotes the words of “Pope” Francis regarding sodomites who are of “good will” and “seek the Lord.”
We are reproducing an exclusive translation of this interview below. This conversation with Goertz is a very important read, for it demonstrates how far gone the country is that once upon a time produced saints like Gertrude the Great, Albert the Great, Fidelis of Sigmaringen, Norbert, and others. The “Catholics” of Germany are Modernists through and through — there is not a shred of Catholicism left in them, which is why the Vatican II Church is dying out in the land of Luther.
Having upset the theological and supernatural order, the Modernists are now coming for the natural order: “Male and female He created them” so that they would “increase and multiply” (Gen 1:27-28) — even this very basic truth of creation, of the natural order, is now dismissed as essentially nothing more than a fairy tale for the primitive peoples of the past, to be superseded by the “scientific discoveries” of divinized modern man. The Satanic Non Serviam — “I will not serve” — is evident, and it is used to advance the mass apostasy awaited by the Church to a considerable degree. God is mocked, and Divine Revelation set aside, as the Faith is replaced by a feel-good pseudo-theology the Modernists find appealing.
Use extreme caution when reading the text below, and keep a barf bag handy. It ain’t pretty!
“Not to Condemn Others”
Moral theologian Stephan Goertz on the Church’s attitude towards homosexuality
Mainz – Aug. 25, 2015
“If someone is homosexual, seeks the Lord and is of good will – who then am I to judge him?” Thus Pope Francis expressed himself two years ago at a press conference on the return flight from his first trip to Latin America. Following this, “Who am I to judge him?” reads the title of a new anthology of essays on the topic of “homosexuality and the Catholic Church”. In an interview the Mainz moral theologian Stephan Goertz explains the motives behind publishing the approximately 400-page book.
Question: Mr. Goertz, why do so many religions have such a difficult time with homosexuality?
Goertz: Religions such as Judaism, Islam, or Christianity originated at a time when our current scientific knowledge of human sexuality was not yet available. What back then was accepted without question, was equated with the divine order: The earth is the center of the universe, men and women do not have equal rights, all men are attracted to women, all women to men. And this has an effect on sexual morality.
Question: What followed from this?
Goertz: Procreation was considered the primary God-given natural purpose of sexuality. And sexual behavior was not allowed to endager the social order. In this paradigm, there was no room for sexual relations between men or women.
Question: In your book you specifically deal with the topic of “homosexuality and the Catholic Church”. Aren’t there more important, more pressing topics in the Church of today?
Goertz: This we should ask those for whom homosexuality apparently still presents a problem. It would be irresponsible if theology did not have anything to say about this. First, sexuality is something that affects all people. And secondly, on a political level, in many parts of the world we are still dealing with discrimination, persecution, and exclusion of homosexuals. Thus it would be an important Christian testimony for the Catholic Church to present herself in terms of a categorical rejection of discrimination.
Question: The Church has said for a long time that homosexuals cannot be discriminated against. But then there are also Tradition and Bible passages in which homosexuality is condemned…
Goertz: When interpreting [the Bible], we must always take into consideration the concrete historical situation of the authors of the biblical texts.
Question: In the book of Leviticus, sexual acts between people of the same sex are called “abominations” that are “punished with death”. That sounds rather clear.
Goertz: Here the context is that sexuality had to fulfill the primary purpose of ensuring the continuity of the race. This is obviously no longer our situation, and especially since the [Second Vatican] council no longer our sexual morality. That’s why individual quotes, taken out of context, cannot be used to answer a contemporary moral question. This would be a fundamentalist way of dealing with biblical passages.
Question: Objection: Aren’t you doing exactly the same thing when you pick quotes that correspond to your view of things?
Goertz: For me this is about a basic theological attitude founded on the Bible: that God has unconditionally promised his love for all people, that natural, social differences are to be overcome among the people of God, that we are not to condemn others. This to me carries more theological weight than precepts about the “nature” of individual sexual acts.
Question: The problem is that these days anyone who wants to speak about homosexuality and the Church dispassionately, immediately finds himself in the crossfire of right-wing blogs or leftist church critics…
Goertz: From some circles one indeed gets the impression that one can barely break through by means of arguments anymore. It is the task of theology to evaluate the arguments and to ask what the Christian message requires of us today. In this we must carefully draw [the necessary] distinctions and approach the issues with frankness. And then such a theology will hopefully also be regarded accordingly by the bishops.
Question: For the fall, the world synod of bishops on the subject of marriage and the family is on the agenda. From your point of view, what can we expect in terms of dealing with homosexuals in the Church? And what would be desirable?
Goertz: It is perhaps realistic to emphasize once more that homosexuals are not allowed to be discriminated or criminalized, and that they have, of course, their place in the Church. This is an important message from a global point of view. Perhaps we will also finally succeed in abandoning the old condemnations of homosexual acts. I would consider it desirable to seek even more strongly a direct dialogue with homosexuals within the Church and stop talking and making moral judgments over their heads. This would be quite a positive signal.
Question: Then we might also possibly have to raise the question, however, that is now already being discussed in politics: to what extent matrimony is to be put on a par with gay or lesbian relationships.
Goertz: Differences can be recognized for what they are and yet be treated with equal esteem and respect. One could pose the theological question whether a committed, loving homosexual union, which sees itself as a relationship of faith in the God of Israel and Jesus, does not possess a sacramental character. Homosexual relationships could then find ecclesiastical recognition.
Question: Might this also take place by means of external signs one day, such as a blessing of homosexual couples?
Goertz: Even though I do not expect this to be discussed at the synod at this point already, theologically I do not see any problem there in principle.
That there is no Catholic Faith left in this man, Stephan Goertz, is obvious. His religion is Modernism — it has nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with the Catholic religion, as the entire world knew it until the death of Pope Pius XII in 1958. This abominable “theology” being put forth here is nothing but a most destructive Modernism, a Modernism that does not even content itself with dismantling Faith but also zeroes in on reason and the natural created order. It is nothing but man spitting God in the face and audaciously asserting, “We shall now make man in our image and likeness”!
Well did Pope St. Pius X, in his landmark 1907 encyclical Pascendi, prophesy that Modernism logically leads to atheism (see also this well-done cartoon). Stephan Goertz is an atheist dressed up as a Catholic. Don’t be surprised if Francis soon names him, too, a “papal” consultor, as he did with the no-less scandalous “Fr.” Timothy Radcliffe, OP, who blasphemously claimed that sodomy can be an expression of “Christ’s self-gift”!
Goertz’s apostate pseudo-theological trash is based on the so-called “historical-critical” method of theology, condemned by the Church (see nn. 29ff. in Pascendi) and beloved by the adherents of the Nouvelle Theologie, such as Yves Congar, Henri de Lubac, Hans Urs von Balthasar, Joseph Ratzinger, and Marie-Dominique Chenu, who became theological “experts” at the Second Vatican Council (appointed by “Pope” John XXIII) and were the darlings of the post-conciliar Novus Ordo magisterium (all of the ones mentioned, with the exception of Chenu, were made “cardinals” after Vatican II).
Goertz obviously does not believe in the inerrancy of Holy Scripture — he does not believe that it was dictated by the Holy Ghost (see Pope Leo XIII, Encyclical Providentissimus Deus, n. 20) but treats it as simply a historical narration subject to the conditions of the times in which it was written, to be superseded at any point by human “scientific” discoveries, as though human science could ever give greater certainty than that which God Himself has revealed.
Goertz’s false and disgusting theology thus runs directly contrary to the teaching of the First Vatican Council, which defined infallibly:
If anyone says that human studies are to be treated with such a degree of liberty that their assertions may be maintained as true even when they are opposed to divine revelation, and that they may not be forbidden by the church: let him be anathema.
If anyone says that it is possible that at some time, given the advancement of knowledge, a sense may be assigned to the dogmas propounded by the church which is different from that which the church has understood and understands: let him be anathema.
(First Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Dei Filius, Chapter 4: Canons 2-3)
But then of course, Goertz does not believe in the teachings of the First Vatican Council, either. He is, as we noted, an atheist. He ultimately believes only in himself, in what makes sense to him — the traditional Catholic definition of Faith as the assent of the intellect, aided by divine grace, to all that God has revealed because He, who cannot lie or err, has revealed it, is entirely absent: “Such is the nature of Catholicism that it does not admit of more or less, but must be held as a whole or as a whole rejected” (Pope Benedict XV, Encyclical Ad Beatissimi, n. 24; see also our informative podcast on this topic).
This is not to pooh-pooh natural science, of course. Genuine empirical science has its place, and it is very important. But the knowledge it produces is necessarily always merely provisional, as it is based on observation and subject to falsification, using an inductive method of arriving at truth. It could never trump Divine Revelation, for there can be no surer way of knowing the truth than to cling to what has been revealed by God, who can neither deceive nor be deceived.
Goertz is yet another example of the extreme decay of what passes for “Catholicism” in the heart of Europe, fully backed by the “Pope” and his episcopal henchmen in the false Modernist Sect that has been masquerading as the Catholic Church ever since the bogus election of John XXIII in 1958.