On July 2, a new Catechism called “Witnesses of the Lord” was presented to the media which is aimed at children between 10 and 14 years old, with the objective of being able to continue the catechesis after the First Communion, and to be able to be used in the preparation of the Sacrament of Confirmation.
It is a text with a great presence of visual language, since 114 of its 332 pages are images. In a very brief summary of its physical characteristics, I can mention that it is comprised of 50 chapters (here you have the summary), and that these are grouped into five parts, differentiated by colors, according to the central theme they refer to.
In the video presentation at a press conference, a topic that has generated quite controversial is pointed out: a journalist from Antena 3 asks about a phrase that appears in chapter 58 and says like this'Some mistakenly believe that everyone can choose or choose sexual orientation regardless of the body with which he was born. But sexual identity is not chosen, it is a gift that is received. 'He is also interested in qualifying a supposed call to chastity, considering relationships before marriage as sin, as well as the consumption of pornography.
Responsible for answering these questions in the first place is responsible for conducting the act, that is, the RVDMO Mr. José María Gil Tamayo, who is Secretary General of the Spanish Episcopal Conference. Refers to what the 'gender ideology' does not apply to the Catholic Church, since a Catechism is a repository of Faith, it is the doctrine of Jesus Christ and the Gospel. He also explains that young Christians live in a situation where there are issues raised in the journalist's question, and the Church must teach you to live with a Christian coherence.
The reactions did not wait, and it was a matter of hours that the Huffington Post picked up the response of the Spanish Confederation of Lesbians, Gays, Bisexuals and Transsexuals (COLEGAS). Its president Francisco Ramírez called this content unacceptable in the Catechism, and outdated and rusty speech of condemnation of homosexuals and their unions. He also complained about the lack of sensitivity, commitment and rapprochement by the Episcopal Conference.
In the opinion of the representatives of COLEGAS, it is unfortunate that the Church (Spanish, it is understood) maintains its traditional postulates, and does not follow the new Gospel of Pope Francis, who seems to want to put aside this type of condemnation, focusing on the real problems of the society.
Question of form
Before continuing, I would like to write down the entanglement of the phrase mentioned in the Catechism, I transcribe it to analyze it: 'Some say erroneously that each one can choose or choose sexual orientation regardless of the body with which he was born. But sexual identity is not chosen, it is a gift that is received. We are not creators of ourselves. God is the only Creator. '
Well you can not go very deep, because it is clear that there is a fairly big confusion in the concepts, because sexual identity is mixed with sexual orientation, when they are not the same (and delving into this will make me fall into a speechless speech). In the first place, he speaks of the fact that sexual orientation cannot be chosen, when it is linked to personal capacity, it will be emotional, affective and sexual attraction for people of the same sex, of the different one, or both.
Secondly, sexual identity is mentioned as a gift, when it is an experience with respect to gender, and not a divine gift; probably this misrepresentation cause some young people and their families to perceive a distancing from the Catholic Church. In any case, not only is homophobia or transphobia glimpsed, as far from social reality as far as sexuality is concerned.
Cause suffering to young people?
In the debate, COLEGAS puts 'on the table' the issue of pain or suffering that homosexual (and transsexual) adolescents would add, upon receiving the teachings of a catechism that denies the sexual reality that they live daily (and for which on many occasions they will be exposed to discrimination).
Perhaps questions of faith should be raised differently, so that no one who intends to follow it would feel excluded; although on the other hand the teachings to be received depend not only on the basic text of the Catechesis, but also on the catechists themselves, on the parents ..., yes, it would be desirable for everyone to row in the same direction.
According to the absence of premarital relations and the claim that the consumption of pornography is considered a sin, I see the first as very outdated, I am more in favor of insisting on a good sexual affective education. And about pornography, it is a matter that is complicated to simplify, but in any case, I would ask for a social effort for young children and preteens to avoid certain pornographic content that could distort your vision of sexuality, and affective development that is biologically and psychologically expected from each stage of development.
Finally, I have to point out that I am aware that the view has been turned towards these specific aspects reflected in the Catechism. I know it's much more, and some people feel upset about the way everything has been simplified. But without doubting that it fulfills the role for which it has been thought (I suppose it because I am not a believer so my vision is from the outside), the statements that motivate this entry are less striking.
