Jesus Condemned Sodomy And Homosexuality in The Strongest Terms

And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet. Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city. (Matthew 10:14-15). 

And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear you, when ye depart thence, shake off the dust under your feet for a testimony against them. Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city. (Mark 6:11)

I can’t hear anymore that now widespread lie according to which “Jesus does not mention homosexuality”. Let us clarify a couple of things, shall we?

It is known even to Elton John that for around 6,000 years both Jews and Christians have said “sodomites” to indicate those culpable of practising sodomy and other forms of same-sex sexual perversion. If anyone is so stupid that he believes that 200 generations could be wrong concerning what the Bible means, than he is also too stupid to be helped. But the others, they certainly will not have any doubt.

Also, whoever has a minimum of acquaintance with the Gospel knows the fiery, imaginative, powerful language often used by Our Lord. He makes his point in a very emphatic way. He hammers it down the ears of the listeners. He uses expression like “depart from me, you cursed, in everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels” instead of “I should make you aware that when you die you might get in some big trouble because you did not help the poor”.

It must also be said that the Jews in the time of Jesus (and all Jews and Christians afterwards) had no doubt whatsoever about the gravity and depravity of the homosexual acts. We all know that the refusal of such sexual perversion was very strong among the Jews, and that they took the Genesis episode extremely seriously.

Then the Lord rained down burning sulfur on Sodom and Gomorrah—from the Lord out of the heavens. Thus he overthrew those cities and the entire plain, destroying all those living in the cities—and also the vegetation in the land. (Genesis 19: 24-25). 

There can be no doubt, no hesitation whatsoever in the realisation that every single adult listener and reader of Our Lord’s word in the following 2,000 years was perfectly aware of the sins in question, of their gravity, and of the gravity of the perversion that gives rise to them.

In the episode mentioned above, Jesus is making a very simple point: those who refuse to receive the Apostle and hear their words – those, in a word, who refuse to accept the message and authority of Christ through those he has sent to spread it – are culpable of an extremely grave sin; a sin whose gravity has quite a new quality, in obvious correspondence with the new situation created by the Incarnation. Therefore, Jesus expresses the gravity of the refusal to receive His truth in a very emphatic way: saying that those who make themselves culpable of such a sin will be punished even more gravely than those culpable of the very epitome of extremely gravely sinful behaviour: the Sodomites and the Gomorrheans, in which drawer all sexual pervs, trannies, and assorted freak shows find easily a place. 

The point is so simple, so evident, and made so loudly that there is no explanation how anyone could say that Jesus does not mention homosexuality, other than the fact that the ones who talks in such a way has never read the Gospel.

Here, the obfuscation artists try to hide behind the usual V II finger and state that Jesus is speaking of sodomy qua behaviour, not homosexuality qua “attraction”. This is a typical madness of the new times, and one that no one applies to any issue other than homosexuality. No one says, for example, that pedophilia as attraction is not a problem, only raping children is. A perversion can never be a behaviour, and therefore never a sin in itself; but there is no doubt that logic and sanity demand that the perversion be condemned as perversion with the same energy with which we condemn the behaviour as behaviour. 

Here, Jesus is speaking of an extremely bad behaviour. A behaviour that was considered, so to speak, almost – and bar blasphemy, and the like – the mother of all bad behaviours. But no sane person can have any doubt that the perversion is grave in the same proportion as the act following upon it is sinful. There is no way the inclination to commit incestuous acts can be considered something, in the sphere of perversions, lighter than the act of committing incest in the sphere of behaviour; or that the inclination to screw one’s own dog is little matter, and it only gets bad when one actually does it.

No. If you have a functioning brain you must recognise that Jesus has chosen the extremely grave perversion of homosexuality to express, in the extremely grave sin of sodomy it originates, the sin of all sins bar the direct refusal of God. There is simply no way you can accept the gravity of sodomy whilst downplaying the perversion that originates it. This is not the way logic works, and is not the way every single reader or listener of the Gospel in these 2,000 years would have understood it.

Jesus did not touch on homosexuality? Please, please let us stop with this nonsense.


Posted on June 13, 2015, in Catholicism, Conservative Catholicism, Traditional Catholicism. Bookmark the permalink. 4 Comments.

  1. Later, God condemned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah and turned them into heaps of ashes. He made them an example of what will happen to ungodly people. But God also rescued Lot out of Sodom because he was a righteous man who was sick of the shameful immorality of the wicked people around him. Yes, Lot was a righteous man who was tormented in his soul by the wickedness he saw and heard day after day. So you see, the Lord knows how to rescue godly people from their trials, even while keeping the wicked under punishment until the day of final judgment. He is especially hard on those who follow their own twisted sexual desire, and who despise authority.
    2Peter 2:6-10

  2. “No one says, for example, that pedophilia as attraction is not a problem, only raping children is.”

    Unfortunately there are mental health professionals saying that “minor attracted individuals” should be treated as if it were any other “sexual orientation.”

  3. Fr. [edit] posted this video of a talk he gave at [edit]. It is called “sodomites, really?” And blasts everything you’ve said as valid even the meaning of sodomites.

    [edit: link cancelled]

%d bloggers like this: