“That the Vatican would embrace language invented by homosexual activists to promote the homosexual agenda does not bode well for the Papists. Sadly, and to our shame, our evangelical leaders – from Russell Moore at the ERLC to Albert Mohler at SBTS – have already adopted the LGBT language long ago.”
(Pulpit & Pen) The New York Times recently printed an op-ed from John Gehring, a Roman Catholic commentator and author, wondering aloud if the church would ever fully embrace the LGBT movement. After many years of providing expert commentary on the Vatican and its various policies, Gehring’s professional assessment is that yes, the Vatican will come to a full embrace of queer people. The reason, for Gehring, is that Pope Francis has given subtle clues to his evolution on the topic of sodomy, the most astonishing of which is his embrace of the ‘LGBT’ term.
As Gehring writes, “Well, last week, the Vatican used ‘L.G.B.T.’ for what is believed to be the first time ever in a document prepared for a major gathering of bishops and young people in October. ‘Some L.G.B.T. youth,’ it reads, want to ‘benefit from greater closeness and experience greater care from the church.’
As the Vatican commentator points out, this may very well be the first time the Roman Catholic headquarters has used the term, “LGBT.”
Many people are wondering exactly how ground-breaking or earth-shattering that is, perhaps not convinced this signals an evolution in thought. However, the homosexual agenda in America did not gain any momentum or commandeer any power in America until it successfully changed the terminology from sodomy and homosexuality to the initialism, LGBT.
Using LGBT as the term for gross sexual deviancy had many benefits. The initialism began to replace common nomenclatures like “gay,” and “queer” in the 1980s, which had already begun to replace the more scientifically precise and biblically-accurate term, sodomy, in the 1960s.
The first benefit of using the initialism is that it solidified sexually deviant behavior of all stripes. Whether it was men lying with men or women lying with women (different psychological problems underly homosexual behavior between the sexes, and usually have different motivations and outworking), bisexuality (which simply does not fit into the paradigm of “sexual orientation,” thereby fitting into the 21st Century narrative of sexual ethics like a square peg in a round hole), and trans (and its nearly unlimited forms from transvestitism, transgenderism, transsexuality, or even transpeciesism). Instead of having to defend every one of these aberrant, asinine deviations from normalcy and morality (defending anal intercourse between males certainly requires a different apologetic from defending the notion that a man can be a woman by only the virtue of his false self-identification). The term, LGBT – especially when combined with “Q” as first added in 1996 – makes an immoral union for any and all perversions of the only kind of true sexual relationship that happens exclusively between post-pubescent opposite-sex partners.