Following a press statement (see below) issued by the Holy See on Dec 19 stating that the Vatican "condemn(s) all forms of violence against homosexual persons as well as urg(ing) States to take necessary measures to put an end to all criminal penalties against them," Fridae contacted the Catholic Archdiocese of Singapore to ask if it would support the decriminalisation of sexual relations between men under Section 377A of the Singapore Penal Code.
The statement was a follow-up to clarify its opposition to the 'Declaration on human rights, sexual orientation and gender identity' statement presented at the UN General Assembly on Dec 18. Sixty-six nations at the UN General Assembly supported the groundbreaking statement reaffirming "the principle of non-discrimination, which requires that human rights apply equally to every human being regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity."
On Dec 23, Fridae reported: Vatican urges countries to "do away with criminal penalties" against gays
Fr James Yeo, a diocesan priest and Parish Priest of St Anne's Church, replied on behalf of the Archbishop of Singapore Nicholas Chia who was contacted by Fridae last week:
1. There is no current or past official position of the Catholic Teachings on the laws that criminalise homosexual acts. The Catholic Church stands united so the position of the Archdiocese of Singapore is that of the Official Catholic Church, namely that there should be no violence and discrimination towards homosexual persons. The Church teaches that all persons have dignity and must be treated with respect, love and care.
2. If we read the latest Vatican's statement, there is nothing new. It merely says that we must not criminalise homosexuals. But the constant teaching of the Catholic Church is to differentiate between homosexual persons (orientation) and homosexual acts. Homosexual acts are morally wrong. The Church differentiates the sinner from the sins. We condemn sins but not the sinner.
3. I don't think that we need to campaign for anything as our teachings are clear unless people wants to misinterpret them. Laws in Singapore do not criminalise homosexual persons. But homosexual acts are different.
4. Whether one is homosexual or heterosexual, one has to be responsible in the use of one's sexual faculty. Any abuse of one's sexuality regardless of whether one is a homosexual or heterosexual is wrong. It does not mean that if one is heterosexual, he or she can express this irresponsibly in any way he or she wants. Similarly the Church does not condemn persons with homosexual tendencies (orientation) but asks that they like anyone should refrain from irresponsible sexual acts.
5. The Church always differentiates between what is legal and what is moral. Something which is legal may not necessarily be moral.
Holy See: Response to declaration on sexual orientation
From: Vatican Information Service
VATICAN CITY, 19 DEC 2008 (VIS) - Yesterday afternoon was made public the declaration of the delegation of the Holy See to the 63rd session of the UN General Assembly on the theme: "Human Rights Questions, Including Alternative Approaches for Improving the Effective Enjoyment of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms".
Archbishop Celestino Migliore affirmed that "the Holy See appreciates the attempts made in the 'Declaration on human rights, sexual orientation and gender identity' - presented at the UN General Assembly on 18 December 2008 - to condemn all forms of violence against homosexual persons as well as urge States to take necessary measures to put an end to all criminal penalties against them".
"At the same time, the Holy See notes that the wording of this Declaration goes well beyond the above-mentioned and shared intent".
"In particular, the categories 'sexual orientation' and 'gender identity', used in the text, find no recognition or clear and agreed definition in international law. If they had to be taken into consideration in the proclaiming and implementing of fundamental rights, these would create serious uncertainty in the law as well as undermine the ability of States to enter into and enforce new and existing human rights conventions and standards".
"Despite the Declaration's rightful condemnation of and protection from all forms of violence against homosexual persons, the document, when considered in its entirety, goes beyond this goal and instead gives rise to uncertainty in the law and challenges existing human rights norms", the declaration emphasized.
"The Holy See continues to advocate that every sign of unjust discrimination towards homosexual persons should be avoided and urges States to do away with criminal penalties against them".
Printable Version
RSS Feed: 
Reader's Comments
(and they wonder why there are less and less bums on seats during Sunday Mass!)
Am I called to be a gay priest?
This is what I gather judging from the article itself.... :)
by the way, my brother's new husband is freaking out California will nullify their legal marriage so he wants to get remarried in Boston at the Taj . . .I think he married my brother just to get the family money, but we will see how it goes, not too optimistic . .. I will still be a chilly brother in law . . .
Gay without sexual relationship is similar like saying "it's ok to be a bird, but please don't fly".
This statement by the Singapore Catholic Church and the Vatican, once again, surrenders any right of the Church to speak on moral issues with any credibility or moral authority. Shame shame shame.
Priests (and such) are so abnormal and unnatural. They derive such strange ideas from their mythical thousand-year-old books. Not to mention, their choice of a celibate "lifestyle". How many human beings/animals on earth are celibate? So disgustingly unnatural! :)
Also, unnatural sex between straights and gays (unnatural because they do not result in procreation) are both wrong in Christianity but the criminalization of the former was repealed and not the latter. If this Fr James Yeo cannot see that as discrimination and slaps himself like that right in his own cheek with the contradiction of his own first point, he must be missing a chromosome in his DNA or having an extra one.
1. All men and women who give birth to an idiotic child with an IQ below 140 should be sterilized--vasectomy and removal of fallopian tubes at their expense, of course. The IQ test will take place between the ages of 6 and 10, and if the child cannot score 140, well, the child will also be put to death because we don't want stupid, problematic children draining the state of valuable resources.
2. All men and women who require treatment for any kind of sexual disease should be implanted with glowing microchips on their forehead and two cheeks. That way, everyone knows who the diseased individuals are and avoids sex with them. Removal of the chips would result in automatic heart failure.
3. All men and women who engage in extramarital affairs should be jailed for a minimum of 25 years to life. If both parents cheat, and there are children in the marriage, the children will immediately be put to death so as to not have the children draining the state of valuable resources.
4. All men and women who engage in premarital sex should immediately be put to death.
Let's not beat the Church up on everything. Yes, people are once again disappointed that Rome, and her minions, aren't rolling out the pink carpet towards gays around the world. But what did/do you expect? It takes time and, certainly by comparing the Church's current stance to previous ones, there is a definite softening going on.
I can't say that I think the Church will ever fully embrace or condone homosexuality - but, still, I'd rather see the civil and calm exchanges above than consider the raging rhetoric that's still trotted out in too many corners of the world today.
By the way, in case it's wondered - I'm an Atheist, yet also a pragmatic realist; I respect faith and religion of most forms, but get uncomfortable when too many other people go on a God/Church-bashing spree. Regardless of the Catholic Church's previous - and ongoing - wrongs, with countless tribunals around the world (including here in Ireland) still uncovering and investigating the Church's dreadful handling of all kinds of sexual and physical abuse cases in the past (or even present), the fact is that the vast majority of 'staff' in the Church are thoroughly decent people who've served the community well, and usually tirelessly so, with no personal reward. I can think of a lot of nuns, priests and so on who don't deserve to have the sins of The Church dumped on their feet; nor would I castigate any one of them for agreeing with general Church policy on homosexuality.
One of the things with being an adult is to accept that others just think differently, which is their right as much as it is yours/ours/mine to have a different opinion. So, if The Church disappoints or even angers many with this latest missive - Deal With It...
I agree with you only if the offical stand of Christianity does not affect the world's leaders, their view and the laws regarding homosexuality. I will also agree with you if the Christian fundamentalists though who might be in the minority are not so powerful and loud (Prop 8's defeat is a perfect example to show how powerful a small group of extremists can be). I agree that we should all live and let live but I am not helping in any way to criminalize Christians or to affect their lives legally (I'd fail if I tried anyway).
It is not just a difference in opinions. We are seriously being marginalized and disadvantaged because of this difference and we cannot stand idle and silent.
In summary, I do not agree with you.
If Muslims did the same then my childhood in Malaysia wouldnt have felt like shit
If Muslims did the same then my childhood in Malaysia wouldnt have felt like shit
It continues being plain hypocrisy. Of course, that's one of the characteristics of institutionalized religion.
They have to deal with absolutes (absolute values,established at a specific cultural period, then divinized as god's word, so on), so this is meant to happen.
But i'm not going to write more on that, that's for a (secular) sociology class.
The catholic pope said something like "heterosexuality should be protected like rain forests".
Do as i will do: let's each one of us plant a heterosexual in a crop
Well put, Dear_Joshua. "It's OK to be a bird, but please don't fly." :) The number of people who take the Catholic Church seriously dwindles with each passing decade. I agree with versatileaL: the Muslims are worse. Consider countries like Iran and Saudi Arabia, where just BEING gay is a capital offense. Even for teenagers!
Actually, millions of gays attend the services of the Catholic Church, while disregarding the Church's teachings on this subject. The rituals are so colorful, you know. By the way: in Singapore, the Anglican Church is every bit as reactionary as the Roman Catholic Church.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRigtKuK_1A
Of course, if you guys want a better answer, I would introduce the Theology of the Body. Every word in the Bible is written under the influence of the Holy Spirit (the third of the Trinity), they aren't written by people who are smoking dope.
If you never allow yourself to try understanding the faith, whatever the religious man/woman try to preach to you, it doesn't get into your mind. For more information and better understanding:
http://www.chastity.com/chastity/index.php?id=7&cat=Homosexuality
oh eskimody, eskimody! ... Every word in the Bible is written under the influence of the Holy Spirit (the third of the Trinity)???? Then you better shut up.
"I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent." 1 Timothy 2:12.
And oh, you can pass the message on to Thio li-Ann too.
please do not take the Bible LITERALLY. Many people take the Bible literally, therefore they misinterpreted what God is trying to convey.
It would not seem to me to be in contradiction of Church law for local clergy to campaign for laws treating equally homosexual acts and extramarital heterosexual fornication done by all persons Catholic or not. In many countries of the world which have significant Catholic populations, there are no longer laws prohibiting homosexual acts. You might say that this is part of secularisation of the lawbooks just as liberal divorce laws mess up family life (which they certainly do-talk to any man in Australia or New Zealand who has been done over in the divorce settlement). You might also say with equal good sense that it is not right for the secular state to pin laws on ALL gay people which enforce specifically Judaeo-Muslim-Christian moral teaching. In other words, if you are a Buddhist gay man in Singapore why should the Government be banning you from having sex with another man just to please the religious lobbies?
There are further complications of which all readers should be aware. For one thing, the Catholic Church is not the nastiest Christian denomination towards gays; it never was. The Protestants are much more vile, particularly those Tamil Baptists and Methodists, and the Mormons, because they are far more fundamentalist and text-bound.
We at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass accept all persons, and we leave it to the individual and his priest via the Sacrament of Confession as to what he has done, and why, and whether he will do it again. The Confessional is sealed, and not subject to eavesdropping and breaches of confidentiality. It is the best and cheapest and most widespread form of psychiatry in the world and to most people in every Catholic parish of the world it does much more good than harm.
Of course, if you are not Catholic, none of this commentary really concerns you.
Nicholas Chia is one of the worst archbishops in the world today because he is a leftover from the earlier immediately post Vatican II days when every form of tasteless liturgical worship- involving wrecking formerly beautiful Catholic shrines and practices - was encouraged. It is heartbreaking to see the Chapel at Chijmes deconsecrated and with its altar removed (there was no real need to bash it up in that way) but Chia must surely have participated in that act.
There is one group that feels Chia's grotesque discrimination even more than homosexuals- Catholics gay and straight who love the beautiful Tridentine Latin Mass. He does everything he can to stop them from attending it. He actively punishes any diocesan priest who dares to want to celebrate this Mass- long after the Pope has decreed that it should be freely available to the Catholics of any diocese in the world. Thus Chia is presiding over his own 1970s style flared trouser archepiscopal empire, long after other bishops have realised how damaging this period was to the Church and its members old and young.
He is therefore not a proper yardstick for any of you to judge the whole Church by. And as Vercoda so rightly puts it, the Church contains many good and holy people far beyond some pedophiles, sadists and other sickos who are indeed the minority in its ranks.
You may not agree with me about the Church and the state on legislation, you may not be Catholic at all, but on 1st January it is still Christmas so I wish you a very Happy Christmas and New Year 2009.There is much to look forward to, especially the retirement of Archbishop Chia.
Next they'll be telling us we chose to be gay. Pardon, you mean they already are!! LOL
If you really understand the Bible, the Holy Spirit long existed before the creation of the World (Genesis). Holy Spirit did not exist only from New Testament (NT) onwards. Many people mistaken that the Holy Spirit exist only from NT onwards.
The whole Bible is written under the influence of the Holy Spirit. Therefore the Bible is known the Word of God. The Bible definitely is not written by the knowledge or wisdom of men alone (so it's not human's invention but God's)
Anyway, this is not a forum about religio or Christianity. Let's get back to the main topic. Personally I feel that the Church has made Her stand quite clear already. They don't condemn people with same sex attractions. Like what St Augustine said "Love the sinner, hate the sin".
"According to the Catholic News Service, an explanatory note published Dec 19 in L'Osservatore Romano - the Vatican newspaper - said that if the resolution on sexual orientation aimed simply at ensuring no country treated homosexuality as a crime "there would have been no reason for the permanent observer of the Holy See in New York to criticise that document... The Catholic Church maintains that free sexual acts between adult persons must not be treated as crimes to be punished by civil authorities."
If the Vatican intends that "free sexual acts between adult persons must not be treated as crimes to be punished by civil authorities" then the Catholic Church in Singapore should support the repeal of S377A!
Anyone able to seek clarification from the office of the Catholic Church in Singapore on this?
Brought up a Catholic I walked away at 14 yrs being far too intelligent for it's teachings and the BaBle they waffle on, nothing to do with being same sex orientated either it just didn't make sence...treat the catholic church as important YOU give it more credence than it's due YOU empower it with importance...personally I lend my support to building healthy alternatives and let it just shrink away
The NZ Catholic website said:
An explanatory note published Dec. 19 in the Vatican newspaper said that if the resolution on sexual orientation aimed simply at ensuring no country treated homosexuality as a crime "there would have been no reason for the permanent observer of the Holy See in New York to criticize that document."
"The Catholic Church maintains that free sexual acts between adult persons must not be treated as crimes to be punished by civil authorities," said the note in L'Osservatore Romano.
http://www.nzcatholic.org.nz/viewDocument.aspx?DocumentID=1661
The Church urges people with same-sex attraction to live a life of Chastity despite their sexual inclination. God has created 'sex' (sexual intercourse) beautifully, which is for procreation and life-giving purposes. Not for any form of pleasure or gratification.
At the end of the day, God wants His people to live a pure and holy life. It's ok to have same-sex attraction but it's still important to live your life with Chastity and Self-control.
First, the historical legacy of the church-sponsored 'Inquisitions' which saw the burning and persecutions of countless homosexuals remains (ergo the origins of the term 'fag', the burnt corpses remaining).
Second, the historical legacy of the Nazi holocaust which saw the extermination of deemed homosexuals in accord with the discredited ideology of racial and genetic purity. Along with the travesties against Jews, Gypsies and others, the Church has stood accused of silence in the face of these crimes. While apologies have been made to some communities the GLBT community has not heard from the Holy See on this matter.
Third, the simultaneous repression of homosexuality amongst the clergy (in accordance with the teachings noted in the statement noted in the article); alongside the cover-ups and shielding from prosecution of known abusers who either had repressed their sexual tendencies (including homosexuality) resulting in destructive and abusive behaviors that affected the lives of countless children and non-consenting adults. Again while recent acknowledgements have been made about shielding abusers, no direct connection or discussion about the open policy that represses and vilifies homosexuality within the church has been made whatsoever.
If this troika of issues were to be discussed openly and constructively then perhaps gay people might feel some intent for true reconciliation and healing were somewhat possible within the leadership of this massive organization. Until such a time the legacy of church-sponsored institutional violence, repression and the legacy of killings from the times of the Inquisition to the Holocaust all in the face of eternal silence remains and resolutely must not be forgotten.
"At the end of the day, God wants His people to live a pure and holy life. It's ok to have same-sex attraction but it's still important to live your life with Chastity and Self-control."
What a load of crap. What is impure about same sex.. Says who.. An old book written by old men? Give me a break. Religion is baloney. Invented to control the masses and not relevant today. These people should go and get a real job
And the proscriptions against homosexuality are all to be found in the earliest books of the Old Testament (the Torah). The Jews wanted to multiply! Oh, there is one rather obscure passage in the Epistle of Paul to the Romans with regard to this subject. Do remember that Paul (a.k.a. Saul) began his career as a Jewish Pharisee. The idea that sex was created solely for the purpose or procreation is bullshit. If that were true, then the human species would have been designed like, say, cats! (Whenever cats have sex, a pregnancy results. But then, cats are in heat only a few times a year --- whereas humans are ALWAYS in heat!)
Recited every day to this day in every Jewish synagogue in the world!
I submit that your knowledge of the Bible is quite unsophisticated. Likewise for your comments in this forum.
At the end of the day it's still up to you to believe whether you want to live a chastely and pure life. That's God's wish for us. I am not saying same-sex attraction is impure. Having same sex attraction is not impure at all, it's the actions that impure.
Arthug:
As I said before in my previous posts, one shouldn't take the Bible literally. Anyway, what you are talking abt is the Jewish religion. They don't believe Jesus is the Messiah at all, how would they believe in the Trinity?!
I have my own belief, and I am just sharing with what I know. I personally and truly believe that the Word of God (Bible) is indeed never written by any tom, dick or harry. The person who wrote it definitely is someone close to God and was inspired by the Holy Spirit.
Then partners who cannot have children shouldn't have sex, including elders, the disabled and the impotent. Also, people need no birth control ever.
All these arguments are so shaky... repeated over the years AND rebutted over the years. Why hang on to such unsubstantiated views anymore? Once an argument doesn't hold water, it should be thrown out. Repeating it is just an utter waste of time.
Chastity reminds me of virginity. But virginity doesn't seem to be helpful unless you are female. Virginity then determines if you die or don't when married [if your husband discovers you ain't a virgin that is].
Chastity is the virtue which excludes or moderates the indulgence of the sexual appetite.
[Source: http://www.catholic.org/encyclopedia/view.php?id=2848]
You are right. Contraception remains a 'no' in Catholic Church. Like I said before, sexual intercourse must not be seen as a form of gratification or pleasure (including masturbation or sexual pleasures of any kind).
At the end of the day, all I want to clarify is God doesn't condemn PEOPLE with same-sex attraction. God does condemns the ACTIONS. God still loves the sinners but definitely not the sins.
It's still up to people with same-sex attraction whether they want to live a life of Chastity or not. (Well, afterall, God has given us free-will)
He would have made us like cats or dogs or cows: in heat a few times a year! :) Masturbation, fellatio, bring 'em on! You live your monastic life, and stop preaching to the rest of us. Because, man, you are really tiresome and boring.
After reading this article my stand is that I fully support what the Catholic Faith is teaching which is in regards to calling people with Same-Sex Attraction to live life of Chastity (Condemning the acts but not the person).
*Similarly, people with no same-sex attraction are called to live a chaste life too.
For me, I'll still see sex as a sacred creation from God, not something to be shared before marriage or something to be done for pleasure/gratification. Personally, I felt that the Catholic Church has done a great job in explaining pertaining to this issue (It's totally up to reader whether they want to accept it or not).
Anyway, at the end of the day, God has given us free-will. :)
Feel thankful for enlightened countries that have moved beyond legal sanctions. Children are being adopted and raised, same sex families are flourishing. Prejudice and homophobia dressed up as religion will ultimately end up in the sewer where they belong.
There's no doubt about it. The men that invented God and Religion have a lot to answer for. Eventually Science will prevail but not soon enought I fear...
GALLILLEO ALL OVER AGAIN!
I suppose chastity is easier for women than for men. I wouldn't know. In any event: that should be a personal choice --- not something dictated by the Vatican (or anyone else). As I said: we are not cats, dogs, cows, or pandas! We are humans. In heat year-round. So it is patently absurd to say the sex should be only for procreation. These ideas were promulgated centures ago, when the world was underpopulated. "Be fruitful and multiply" as it says in the Old Testament! Times have changed. The world is now vastly OVERpopulated. The future does NOT look good. I say that having children is an ego-trip (unless you are independently wealthy). Homosexuality may be one of Nature's methods of population control. Another is disease. In former times, probably 50% or more of children died in infancy or childhood from infectious diseases. Clever man has come up with antibiotics and vaccines to thwart Nature. But there can be little doubt that Nature will have the last laugh. Like, say, a disease like AIDS that spreads through the air (like influenze)!
The population explosion should be curbed; but I see scant chance of this happening. "Family values", you know!
Please stay on the topic and do not lead the thread astray. The topic is about the latest stand taken by the Vatican (Dec 19, 2008) as quoted by the article and many below. I repeat the most relevant (to me) portion of the quote:
"The Catholic Church maintains that free sexual acts between adult persons must not be treated as crimes to be punished by civil authorities"
That goes directly against 377A and that is what we are discussing today. Please do not repeatedly regurgitate and bring in distracting details that we already know (and mostly disagree with).
Please stay on the topic!
Reading from this article, I can see that the Catholic Church is trying to bring out two major points here, 'Human Rights' (Protection towards discrimination of people with same sex protection) and 'Chastity' (encouraging people with same sex attraction to live a life of Chastity).
There are many people out there who have same sex attraction yet they still want and is trying to live a chaste life. I must admit that, that includes myself. =)
I get the bit about chastity. I really get it. But answer all of us this very simple question:
Assuming that the Vatican's position of chastity remains unchanged and we know ALL about it, does or does not the statement made by the Vatican on 19 Dec go directly against Singapore's section 377A?
A "yes" and "no" answer would be much appreciated.
Any one of you find their obsession kinda...amazing?:D Add to that people who claim being 'same-sex attracted' yet leading a 'chaste life???? Very good effort.
But methinks chastity, in practice, would be better preached to the many unwed teen mothers out there- at least there are visible results from doing so :p But then again, hey, who are we to control what they do with their bodies? To most, sex is a lot like appetite- some have more, some have little,etc. So 'tastes' varies lol...hey!!!!!
I just realized- as in eating disorders, there are sexual disorders too:
1) the sexual equivalents of the obese glutton- 'eating' up anything that moves, indulgiing any & every kind of fetish/pom in (& outside) the book...eeek
2) self-righteous anorexics who look down their noses on other people- "those greedy gluts, they just can't control their appetite..." they sniff.
Yet covertly eyeing the temptation...& getting really GREEN @ those who enjoy hahaha
(not surprising if they DO indulge...in secret sshhhhhhhhh.... like Father Christmas,
once a year will do :p)
3) there's this third species I call the "sexual 'bullimic'- indulging all they want, often in excess, then 'throwing up' their guilt- often @ their poor shrink, their priest or the church confessional
The above 3 are illustrations of sexual disorders, that commonly afflicts certain people...of a certain envirornment. It does not discriminate, however; & claims many victims: gays, straights,bisexuals lol, in fact anyone with the wrong attitude about sex, just like those with their food, will most certainly end up in dip sheesh over it.
Besides, the Holy See has already made clear its stand- all's written in plain English in the above article, no point repeating them like a broken recorder to uncomprehending cows. :p
Very good points raised dude :)))
The reason why the catholics are so interested in homosexuality???
Absurdly simple. Economical reason. (ie there's money to be made).
By inventing this flaw/sin or whatever you called in a group of humanity and counter that with so called cure, (confession, exorcism & these days cure for homosexuals).
It ensure people will flock to them to be rid of these 'sins'.
In olden days tithing is an important way of making money.
But these days, you can have all these cures easily (if you buy their DVD and Books or whatever they sell over the tele-evangelical channel).
Please log in to use this feature.