Homosexuality.

Your magazine and its contributors' vehemence against the very notion of "Same-Sex Marriage" is in some ways understandable, as is too, the repugnance with which you force yourselves to mention homosexuality. Its justification is quite another question.

Surprisingly the only authority quoted, in virtually all the articles on the subject, is the Old Testament Book of Leviticus.

At 18:22 he states that homosexuality is an abomination.

At 11:10 he states that eating shellfish is an abomination.

He has further rules and instructions as well:

One may not approach the altar of God if one has a defect in his sight (21:20).

He expressly forbids trimming the hair about one's temples (19:27).

To touch the skin of a dead pig makes one unclean (11:6-8).

It would appear from the several prohibitions cited above that anyone who has eaten any shellfish has committed an abomination; and that a priest who wears eye-glasses or has a haircut is forbidden to approach the altar of God; and that the proud football team of Notre Dame and those of other universities are unclean because a football is a pigskin.

Can you or your contributors explain why only one of Leviticus' prohibitions is singled out?

On the matter of marriage I seem to recall (from Religious Knowledge classes) that it is the couple's agreement to live in a loving relationship that confers marriage upon them. The function of the Church is simply to witness their agreement and to bless it; that of the State to witness such agreements (including those witnessed by any Church ceremony) and to impose certain legal obligations upon such couples.

Thus same-sex marriages cannot be prevented by Church or State. The Church may refuse to bless such marriages and the State may refuse to recognize them.

Could the Church's current loud and public opposition to homosexuality, including same-sex marriages, be influenced by the many recent and successful lawsuits against certain priests who betrayed their trusts?

Frank Mulrooney

Belleville, ON

Editor's response: First, your quotes from Leviticus omit one very important difference. Leviticus 11:10 states that eating shellfish is not permissible according to the law of God given to the Jewish people. On the other hand, Leviticus 18:22-25 not merely states that homosexuality and bestiality are abominable perversions, but that for suck behaviour God had cast out all those who inhabited the lands before, because of these practices.

Second, our rejection of sodo-matrimony has not been vehement, but rather; sober, persisting, and unrelenting. The articles were based on science (those on the sociological and medical aspects) or on reasoned analyses of the religious, philosophical, or political aspects of homosexuality (See list in the May issue, pp. 26-27).

Third, as for the idea that marriage is no more than "a loving relationship," that is the stuff propagated by the Catholic New Times. For a proper view, please visit the websites of the CCCB, OCCB, and the Vancouver; Edmonton, or Halifax archdioceses; or, read the homily printed in this edition, pp. 24-27.

Fourth, recent lawsuits have indicated bishops' neglect in not recognizing the disastrous effects o fallowing homosexuals into the priesthood, and of not understanding the tremendous drive by the homosexual community to demand acceptance and equality for its lifestyle over the last 30 years.