---
Dear Bishop Jugis,
I am writing regarding some unfortunate comments made by the Diocese’s communications director, Mr. David Hains. A recent issue of Charlotte Parents magazine included an article which was supportive of homosexual relations among teenagers. The Diocese of Charlotte, which advertises its schools in this magazine, was asked for comments by the Charlotte World newspaper. The following is their report of what Mr. Hains said on behalf of the Diocese:
David Hains, spokesman for the Catholic diocese of Charlotte, said that the diocese “doesn’t find the article objectionable. Catholic teaching teaches all Catholics to be loving towards all people, including homosexuals.” Hains said that the diocese – which does view the homosexual act as sinful – doesn’t view the “Charlotte Parent” article as an endorsement of sin. He also said the diocese “doesn’t try to influence the editorial content of the magazines we advertise in.”
To be frank, this statement suggests that Mr. Hains did not read the article on which he was commenting. The article was full of moral and factual errors, and was precisely an “endorsement of sin.” It encouraged parents to provide moral affirmation to children engaged in homosexual relationships. It gave the impression a young person who feels a sexual attraction to another person of the same sex is irreversibly “gay” and must engage in homosexual activity. It downplayed the moral, psychological, and health risks of teen sex in general, and homosexual sex in particular. It provided a list of “resources” for parents which included only those organizations which support homosexual promiscuity among people of all ages. The only correct advice this article provided for a parent whose child discussed a same-sex attraction was that the parent’s becoming hysterical would not be helpful!
I am deeply disappointed that the Diocese’s official statement on this matter did not even mention the fact that the Catholic Church teaches that all sexual activity outside of marriage is morally wrong. There was no mention of the fact that, while a homosexual desire is not a sin in itself, it is a temptation to sin, and should be treated as such by the person who experiences it and his parents. There was no recognition of the duty of parents to protect their children from the sexual aggression of adults, or even of other legal minors.
I do not understand this. Mr. Hains is a “communications” professional, and so I must assume that his failure to make a clear statement regarding Catholic sexual morality was deliberate. The fact that he did so in the name of the Diocese of Charlotte distresses me greatly. Would Mr. Hains, on behalf of the Diocese, have been equally noncommittal about an article that encouraged parents to be “nonjudgmental” about their heterosexual children’s sexual activity? Shouldn’t the Catholic Church - an organization in which immense damage has been done by sexual abuse of children, particularly adolescent boys - state loudly, clearly, and unequivocally that “CHILDREN ARE NOT AVAILABLE FOR SEX!”?
I must apologize; I am growing upset. I understand that as an advertiser in a magazine, the Diocese is not responsible for the content, and need not pass moral judgment on every article. However, I am still absolutely appalled that, according to its spokesman, the Diocese “didn’t find the article [in question] objectionable.” I respectfully suggest that you locate the relevant issue of Charlotte Parents and see for yourself why Mr. Hains’ statement on your behalf was dreadfully inappropriate.
Yours very truly,
Cy the Tax-chick
---
Mr. Hains' e-mail address was in the Diocesan newspaper. Do you think it would be polite to send him a copy?
Sounds good to me.