MORAL
33
It seems to me that this solution is not too bad as a prac-
tical pastoral norm but there is a certain amount of haziness in the theoretical principle that grounds it. I would suggest a somewhat different rationale which is a bit more precise and comes to the same practical conclusion. It is based on Schuller's preference-principle as refined by Joseph Fuchs. PREMORAL EVIL AND A PROPORTIONATE REASON
The principle states that premoral evil becomes moral evil only when done without a proportionate reason. In themselves homosexual acts represent human disvalues in a premorai sense. They become moral evil in those circumstances in which there is no proportionate reason for doing them. But if there is a proportionate reason for placing such acts, they remain premoral disvalues but not immoral even on the objective level. I would think that very often an individual's inability ever to engage in normal heterosexual acts would count as such a proportionate reason. One might argue against all of these solutions that they too readily dismiss the possibility of celibacy and the power of God's grace. Maybe so. In any event the theological analysis of this question is far from complete, and as far as I can tell no significant consensus has been reached. Even if a pastor is unable to accept any of the theoretical solutions outlined above, he still can handle the case on subjective grounds in the following way. If Titius can switch to heterosexual behaviour but does not, he is freely chosing homosexuality as a way of life and so chosing to depreciate and trivialize the meaning of human sexuality in a significant way. Such a decision, I think, would be seriously wrong and would make him undisposed to receive the sacraments fruitfully. But if Titius is irreformably homosexual and tries with ordinary diligence to abstain from homosexual behaviour, he can be treated pastorally in much the same way as an adolescent masturbator. For if he has not freely chosen homosexuality as a way of life and yet periodically fails because of his limited options, these single acts of homosexuality probably would not be gravely sinful. And even if they were, his effort to resist them would evidence sufficient disposition for sacramental absolution.