Archbishop Chaput: The Church Needs to Say Any Kind of Extra-Marital Sex is “Disordered”

Aleteia ^ | November 21, 2014 | Matt Rourke/AP/SIPA

[Mrs. Don-o]

Leader of Philadelphia Church discusses plans for World Meeting of Families, to be attended by Pope Francis.

The Holy See confirmed this week that Pope Francis will visit the United States for the World Meeting of Families in Philadelphia, September 22-27, 2015. The historic visit will fall just one week before the opening of the General Synod of Bishops on the Family to be held in Vatican City, October 4-25, 2015.

When the announcement came, Archbishop Chaput of Philadelphia was on hand at at the Vatican attending the Humanum Colloquium on the Complementarity of Man and Woman in Marriage. The archbishop spoke to some 350 participants about next year's World Meeting of Families at the colloquium's final session.

Aleteia sat down with the archbishop to discuss the Humanum Colloquium, how the Church should care pastorally for people who have been abandoned by their spouses through a culture of no fault divorce, and his hopes for the upcoming World Meeting of Families.

Archbishop Chaput, today you began your remarks by saying: “This is the most interesting colloquium I’ve ever attended in my life.” Why?

Well, it was interesting on three levels: the content was extraordinary, always extraordinary; the composition of the crowd was unique in terms of its religious and cultural dimensions; and we were all on the same page in terms of the complementarity of man and woman being at the root of what marriage and family is all about. And to experience a gathering where people are on the same page, where people come from varied backgrounds, you just don’t experience that.

The quality of the presentations was extraordinary. For just one of those things to take place at a conference is good. For all three of them to take place is just amazing.

What do you think is the significance of having this colloquium on the Complementarity of Man and Woman in Marriage here at the Vatican?

It’s the best place in the world to have anything when it comes to religious dialogue, because even for those who aren’t Christians, the Pope is certainly the most prominent religious spokesperson in the world. For those of us who are Christians — Catholics and Protestants and Orthodox alike — everybody acknowledges a unique role of the Pope in the life of the Christian community. And then, for those of us who are Catholics, we are very proud of being able to pull something like this off in this kind of setting.

How do you think this Colloquium might pave the way for the World Meeting of Families in Philadelphia?

I hope it will lead to a greater participation on the part of people who aren’t Christians. I went out of my way to welcome them, as I thought it would feel strange to them to attend a Christian event. But as I mentioned about our speakers, we even have an atheist speaking. We simply looked for the best speakers. Now, we’ve asked him to speak about subjects in a way that would not be contrary to Church teaching, but our goal was to have the best quality presentations and the best knowledge available.

Twenty-four percent of our speakers are not Catholic. Most of them are Christians. A significant number are Jews. We have a Mormon leader who is talking about how Mormons keep families together, because they have a great reputation when it comes to family life, and we have an atheist who is speaking, which is very interesting.

There was a fair amount of controversy at the recent synod regarding Cardinal Walter Kasper’s proposal to allow those who are divorced and “remarried” to received Holy Communion.

I think there are many more people who are divorced and remarried who go to Communion anyway. If you want to be just clear about it, that seems to be the more prominent position. They kind of ignore the Church’s position that you shouldn’t receive Communion if you’re in a second “marriage.”

What should be done for Catholics who are divorced against their will, in a culture of no fault divorce?

I think we must do our best to support them. Spousal abandonment is a big issue. That’s what this is about, spousal abandonment. And it’s very important for those people to have a voice in this dialogue. There are many people who are faithful to their spouse even after being abandoned, because they believe in the Church’s teaching. And to say that their sacrifice and their heroic witness isn’t of value would be a stupid kind of thing to do.

But what do you do about the fact that there are many, many people who ignore the Church’s teaching on this altogether, and are very casual about receiving Communion? No one seems to talk about that issue.

What do you think should be done?

What can be done in all of this is to accompany people pastorally. In all cases, you don’t just give a principle and say, “Follow it.” It never works. But you don’t help them by not articulating what you believe to be true. So I think you articulate what you believe to be true, but at the same time you accompany them, and encourage them, and help them every step along the way.

Does the Church need to be clearer?

Imitating the Holy Father, [I’d say] I think the devil is very active in the world. And we know that the great tactic of the devil is to be confusing. Because when you’re confused you can do anything you want, because you’re not sure what’s right and what’s wrong.

I think confusion is of the devil. I really believe that. So we should do everything we can to make sure that the Church’s teaching is clear and loving, and that we live that doctrine clearly and lovingly and not just talk about it. But that doesn’t mean that you reject anybody, and that doesn’t mean that you chase people away or condemn them. It means you accompany them in all this, but you do it with clarity.

If we don’t evangelize clearly, the world will evangelize in our place. And that leads to disaster.

How does this apply with regard to someone who is homosexual? The Catechism states that “homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered” and that the homosexual tendency is “objectively disordered.” How does one lovingly explain this to a young man, for instance, who finds this tendency within himself, who perhaps feels shame, and who doesn’t know who to turn to? How does the Church talk to him?

Well, first of all the Church has to talk to the person about it. And often that’s not the case. I don’t think in my whole life as a priest I’ve ever heard a homily on homosexuality. I talk to people, and they say they’ve never heard one either. So the thing is we’re not sitting around condemning people. We’re not talking about it at all.

I think it’s very, very important to talk about the fact that any kind of extramarital sex is wrong, and not just focus on homosexual sex. Any kind of misuse of our sexual powers is wrong. Any sexual activity outside of marriage is disordered. So I think if we use this vocabulary, we have to use it about all of human sexuality and not just focus on people with same-sex attraction. So it has to be in that context. But at the same time, I think we have to make it very clear that, no matter what your struggles are, you’re loved by the Church.

Some people will use our teaching against us. They’ll beat us over the head and say, “You don’t love me, because you don’t let me do what I want to do.” And there’s nothing we can do about that but to keep loving people, and not be terrified or put off by that kind of hostility.

You know, kids do that to their parents all the time. They get mad at them and call them names. But their parents shouldn’t stop speaking to and loving their children.

What’s your hope for the World Meeting of Families next September?

That it transforms family life in the Church and in world through a very dynamic message. It’s going to be a learning experience, a supportive experience, and I hope the papal visit puts a cap on that.

Do you think there is a significance to the World Meeting of Families being held in Philadelphia, where the United States Declaration of Independence was signed?

Amen.

What’s the link?

It’s a providential link. I don’t know that that was on anybody’s mind in the planning stage, but we hope to make that connection. We hope to have a workshop on what the notions of marriage and family life were like at the founding of the country. What was it like in 1776? What did they think about marriage and family life then? That will be an interesting presentation.

See www.worldmeeting2015.org for more about the World Meeting of Families 2015.

[ebb tide]

Does this mean Chaput is telling Francis and Kasper to cease their promotion of church recognized polygamy (adultery) and for Bruno Forte to cease his promotion of recognizing the “goodness” in homosexual “unions”?

[Campion]

“Disordered” (in Catholic moral theology) is another term for “objectively sinful”.

[Salman]

"Disordered" rather than "sinful"?

Not the same concept at all.

[Trapped Behind Enemy Lines]

According to dictionary.com:

Disordered: suffering from or afflicted with a physical or mental disorder.

[Resettozero]

...only explaining why the notion of sin and disordered are different things in my mind.

I see.

But sin is more than a notion that exists because one may be religious or not.

Sin is a very real impediment (a noun, a thing, more than merely someone's thought) that separates one from the Eternal Living Father in Heaven, namely Almighty God whom we all must come to terms with, whether one believes He exists or doesn't.

He does.

[barney10]

Though I see many statements on adultery; I have been unable to find anything, said by Jesus or attributed to him that states premarital sex is a sin.

Yes I know Augustine and Aquinas have spoken on the issue; but where is it written that Jesus spoke on the issue?

[Mrs. Don-o]

POpe Francis is not promoting "church-recognized polygamy (adultery)".

Cardinal Burke, the #1 hoppin-mad opponent of the Synod's weaselly ambiguity, was asked about speculations that Francis would "allow" the recognized remarriage of couples after divorce; he replied that he had no evidence regarding "his [the Pope's] alleged support of a relaxation of the Church's teaching."

Rash judgment is making a judgment on insufficient evidence, on dubious evidence, or against evidence.

You might be tired of hearing this, but I guess I just have to keep repeating it.

[Mrs. Don-o]

In Cathoilic theology, all sin is recognized as being objectively disordered. SOme more than others. For instance, fornication with a robot is more objectively disordered than fornication with a human being of the other sex.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Must be one of those traditions of man.

/sarc/

[Tax-chick]

*snicker*

[Jeff Chandler]

Extramarital heterosexual intercourse is a sin, but it is not disordered.

I agree. Heterosexual intercourse is natural and normal in the physical sense while homosexual activity is not. This is obviously the meaning of the text in the Catechism, which does not refer to adultery or fornication as "disordered". (If I am wrong, please cite the text.)

I think it is a mistake to extend the term "disordered" to include any offense against God -- in the attempt to avoid offending homosexuals -- because it creates the very confusion the Cardinal would avoid.

[lastchance]

Sex outside of marriage is disordered. There is a solution for that, get married. However being attracted to a member of the opposite sex is not disordered (assuming it is appropriate and legal) while being attracted to a member of the same sex is.

[Jeff Chandler]

I must retract what I previously wrote. Please allow me to restate my position. Thank you.

.

While all sin is disordered, homosexual activity is INTRINSICALLY disordered, because while heterosexual activity is disordered outside of marriage, homosexual activity is disordered by its very nature.

(I still think it is a mistake leading to confusion to lump them together.)

[Trapped Behind Enemy Lines]

Exactly the Good Lord created Eve because He did not want Adam to be alone. We are then commanded to be fruitful and multiply, long before marriage was institutionalized. While sexual activity is sinful outside of marriage, it is certainly not a disorder. I think requiring celibacy as a prerequisite for service in the priesthood is more of a disorder than a man and woman expressing physical intimacy. There is absolutely nothing in the Bible which mandates celibacy as a requirement for service in the priesthood. To the contrary, priests were married men in the Bible. So were the early popes, bishops and priests for that matter. Celibacy was introduced much later and for reasons that have nothing to do with anything that can be found in the Bible.

[Mrs. Don-o]

I don't think it's an attempt to avoid offending homosexuals. It may be an attempt to remind us all that our sexual sins are outside of God's order.

I have run into some FReepers (I name no names) who have defended a husband sodomozing his lovely bride on the grounds that if you are married, then anything you do is sanctified by the marriage bed. That's disorered. The fact that we all come into this word with a strong and unsavory tendency toward disorder of some kind--- a kind of moral entropy --- cerainly does indicate that we're all defective and disordered.

Like Lady Gaga says, "born this way."

A staple of Catholic theology. But we do have a Savior.

[NorthMountain]

< sigh >

1) You have quoted only one definition of "disordered".

2) You quoted a second, not first, definition.

I will not attempt to speculate as to why you have chosen to do these things, as I am not a mind reader. I will simply quote the definitions you chose NOT to quote, from your own source:

1) lacking organization or in confusion; disarranged.

2) suffering from or afflicted with a physical or mental disorder : a disordered liver.

Also:

nounbr> 1. a lack of order; disarray; confusion
2. a disturbance of public order or peace
3. an upset of health; ailment

Also

n. A disturbance or derangement that affects the function of mind or body, such as an eating disorder or the abuse of a drug. v. dis·or·dered , dis·or·der·ing , dis·or·ders To disturb the normal physical or mental health of; derange.

Also:

noun 1. lack of order or regular arrangement; confusion: Your room is in utter disorder.
2. an irregularity: a disorder in legal proceedings.
3. breach of order; disorderly conduct; public disturbance.
4. a disturbance in physical or mental health or functions; malady or dysfunction: a mild stomach disorder.

verb (used with object)
5. to destroy the order or regular arrangement of; disarrange.
6. to derange the physical or mental health or functions of.

I offer these additional definitions in the hope that folks will find them useful and informative.

[Trapped Behind Enemy Lines]

Well, then, “breach of order” works best for me. Because you should wait until you are married, although I think it is fair to say most of us did not.

[Tax-chick]

I agree with you. The more pervasive moral disorder, resulting in the more destructive societal disorder, is the violation of God's plan for man and woman and children.

[Tax-chick]

Because nobody wants to believe that something he or she enjoys is “disordered.” That’s a word we reserve for activities that don’t interest us personally.

[NorthMountain]

I think it is fair to say most of us did not.

I think it's fair to say most of us are sinners in need of a Savior. I think it's fair to say that most of us have done things that are "disordered" either by the nature of the act, or by putting the act in improper context.

I certainly fall into that category.