Gabrielle,

These are strange questions you are being asked to answer. Everyone knows that the Catholic Church has not changed her stance on this; the principle is affirmed in the New Testament and has been a constant teaching of the Church and cannot change.

I don't understand Question 2 because it seems pretty obvious. Maybe the only question is the term lie because those who don't know the Bible may not understand what it means, but within the context of the Bible it is crystal clear that it means sexual congress (see Deuteronomy 22:22, Deuteronomy 22:29, 2 Samuel 12:24).

As for Question 3, it hasn't impacted it at all, again, it is pretty clear and straightforward.

It seems to me two things are true:

1. Your teacher is trying to get you to regurgitate what she or he taught you;
2. Your teacher is trying to distort the obvious meaning of the passage, to water it down and complicate what is very simple.

Homosexual acts are forbidden in Christianity, especially Catholicism, period. Full stop, end of story. They always have been, they always will be, regardless of what the culture is trying to say. Anyone who tries to convince you otherwise is doing you a disservice. We can talk about why this is from a theological and moral standpoint, but facts are facts.

Here is the official statement from the Catholic Church on homosexuality from the Catechism of the Catholic Church. This is definitive; do not let anyone convince you this is not Catholic teaching. The Catechism was published in the 1990s so it is recent.

For more information see On the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons (1986).

Whether you opt to regurgitate the teacher's errors on an assignment to please her is up to you.

Eric

Gabrielle,

I'd like to add a clarification. The Catholic Church has never advocated the death penalty for homosexual acts and does not now.

I am referring strictly to the moral character of the acts.

Eric

Oh! My apologies, I misunderstood you.

I hope I didn't offend you. I'm trying to understand your question about translation, though. It sounds like you're assuming that the passage was translated into one language, then into another with the original language lost, then likewise serially into different languages like the telephone game.

That is not the way it happened; we have the original language of the text (Hebrew) and a faithful translation into Greek of earlier manuscripts (the Septuagint) and these agree. While certain translations may be inaccurate, everyone's working from manuscripts in the original language (or a language one translation removed) so there are really no inaccuracies introduced by all the translations, because they are all translated from the same sources (not other translations).

It's not comparable to making N-generation photocopies of photocopies of photocopies until it is unreadable; it's like making hundreds of photocopies from one master, one generation each (and verified against one photocopy of a lost original).

I suppose there may in fact be countless interpretations, but that's only a recent phenomenon. Until the culture at large started opposing Christian teaching on the topic, (in the 1980s or 1960 at earliest), the interpretation was uniform.

It was only when people sought to justify the culture's acceptance of homosexuality that people tried to re-interpret Scripture to fit the culture's values, thus introducing the countless interpretations. I challenge you to go back to 1900 and see how many of these countless interpretations are sustained by history. In any case, Catholics interpret Scripture in light of Tradition as discerned by her teaching office (the Magisterium), and whatever other Christians may argue from Scripture, the Catholic teaching on this matter will remain the same. Since the very beginning people have distorted Scripture (2 Peter 3:16), so that is why Catholicism relies heavily on Tradition and its teaching office in interpreting Scripture.

I'm not sure how Islam factors into this. They do not consider Leviticus to be inspired Scripture; they rely only on the Koran. While there are many points of contact between Islam and Christianity and Judaism, last time I checked, Islam rejected the Hebrew Scriptures — as we have them — as corrupt.

It's confusing because they acknowledge many of the people and stories and what they believe to be the original Scriptures, but they do not believe that what the Christians and Jews confess as Scripture is authentic.

Eric