Outreach, the LGBTQ ministry founded by Fr. James Martin, S.J., has published a rewritten Confiteor "for LGBTQ Catholics." The Oct. 25 piece, the first in a series on "praying with the Mass from an LGBTQ perspective," drops the Blessed Virgin, the angels and the saints. In their place: "Therefore I ask all my spiritual ancestors, queer saints, and you, the human family, to pray with me, that together we might build a better tomorrow" (Outreach). The author, who lives with "her wife," confesses "transphobia" and "biased judgements." She does not confess the sin the Church names. "I don't believe that my sexuality is wrong," she writes (Outreach). Journalist Michael Haynes flagged the prayer on X Oct. 29 (X).
The prayer is not an accident. It is the fruit of what Martin himself has taught for nearly a decade, in his own name and in his own words.
Start with the definition. The Code of Canon Law says, "Heresy is the obstinate denial or obstinate doubt after the reception of baptism of some truth which is to be believed by divine and Catholic faith" (Canon 751). The truth at issue is revealed. St. Paul writes that "God gave them up to dishonorable passions" and that "the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in their own persons the due penalty for their error" (Rom 1:26-27, RSV-2CE). He warns, "Do not be deceived; neither the immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God" (1 Cor 6:9-10, RSV-2CE).
The Church has never wavered. "Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that 'homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.' They are contrary to the natural law. ... Under no circumstances can they be approved." The inclination itself is "objectively disordered" (CCC 2357-2358). The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith called that doctrine "the solid foundation of a constant Biblical testimony," not "isolated phrases for facile theological argument." It added: "It is only in the marital relationship that the use of the sexual faculty can be morally good" (CDF, 1986). This is a truth taught by Scripture and by the constant tradition of the Church. Martin attacks it on three fronts.
First, he attacks the Church's language about disorder. In his 2016 address that became the book "Building a Bridge," Martin said of the phrase "objectively disordered": "The phrase relates to the orientation, not the person, but it is still needlessly hurtful. Saying that one of the deepest parts of a person—the part that gives and receives love—is 'disordered' in itself is needlessly cruel" (America). In 2017, Religion News Service asked him directly whether he affirms that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered." He did not say yes. "I'm no theologian, but I would say that some of the language used in the catechism on that topic needs to be updated, given what we know now about homosexuality," he said. He then floated a replacement: "A few weeks ago, I met an Italian theologian who suggested the phrase 'differently ordered' might convey that idea more pastorally" (Religion News Service).
"Differently ordered" is not a gentler way of saying "disordered." It is the opposite claim. An inclination that is merely different is ordered to a good, and acts that follow it are good. Martin's phrase denies the doctrine while pretending to translate it.
Second, he treats Scripture's condemnations as dated. In an Oct. 7 essay for Outreach, Martin says the biblical texts "are often called the 'clobber passages,' since they have historically been used to 'clobber' LGBTQ Christians." He sets Leviticus beside the law on pork and mixed crops and says "we need to see these in their historical and cultural contexts." He lumps the condemnations with slavery, which he says Christians now understand "in an entirely new way." As for St. Paul, Martin says scholars argue his words "may be more about male domination, predation or rape, rather than the mutual, loving, consensual relationships that many same-sex couples experience today, a kind of relationship probably unknown to St. Paul" (Outreach).
The Church answered that argument 40 years ago. The CDF named "a new exegesis of Sacred Scripture which claims variously that Scripture has nothing to say on the subject of homosexuality, or that it somehow tacitly approves of it, or that all of its moral injunctions are so culture-bound that they are no longer applicable to contemporary life." Its verdict: "These views are gravely erroneous" (CDF, 1986). Martin repeats the error the Holy See condemned by name.
Third, he blesses what God calls sin. In 2021, the CDF ruled that "it is not licit to impart a blessing on relationships, or partnerships, even stable, that involve sexual activity outside of marriage." God, it said, "does not and cannot bless sin: he blesses sinful man, so that he may recognize that he is part of his plan of love and allow himself to be changed by him" (CDF, 2021). When the Vatican issued Fiducia Supplicans in December 2023, Martin cheered it as "a marked shift from... the conclusion 'God does not and cannot bless sin' from just two years ago." The document, he wrote, "recognizes the deep desire in many Catholic same-sex couples for God's presence in their loving relationships." And: "Along with many priests, I will now be delighted to bless my friends in same-sex unions" (X; X; X). To America, he put it plainly: "Rather than saying God doesn't bless sin, it's saying, God blesses all of us in our desire for God's presence in our lives" (America). The next day, The New York Times showed Martin blessing a same-sex couple (New York Times).
A "loving relationship" built on acts Scripture calls "shameless" is not a relationship God blesses. Martin treats the union as the good and the Church's teaching as the obstacle.
Why does he do it? He has told us. The catechism must be "updated, given what we know now about homosexuality." Scripture must be read in light of relationships "probably unknown to St. Paul." The reason is always the same: modern experience outranks revelation. That is not development of doctrine. It is the denial of it.
And Martin insists he denies nothing. "As a Catholic priest, I have also never challenged those teachings, nor will I," he wrote in 2018 (America). A man who calls the Catechism's words cruel, says they need updating, proposes a contrary phrase, relativizes the texts behind them and blesses the unions they forbid has challenged those teachings. Saying otherwise does not make it so. As early as 2017, Archbishop Charles Chaput warned that his work lacked "an engagement with the substance of what divides faithful Christians from those who see no sin in active same-sex relationships," and that "persons in unchaste relationships … need conversion, not merely affirmation" (CatholicPhilly). Years of such correction have not moved him. No Church authority has yet censured him; Rome has instead kept him close.
But the Church's own definition does not wait on a tribunal. Obstinate denial of a revealed truth by a baptized man is what Canon 751 calls heresy, and Martin's words meet it.
The Church has already said what this kind of ministry is worth. "Departure from the Church's teaching, or silence about it, in an effort to provide pastoral care is neither caring nor pastoral. Only what is true can ultimately be pastoral" (CDF, 1986). Men and women with same-sex attraction are owed the truth, the call to chastity and the grace to live it. "Homosexual persons are called to chastity" (CCC 2359). St. Paul did not end his warning with despair. "And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God" (1 Cor 6:11, RSV-2CE).
That is the bridge. Martin has built a different one, and it leads away from the Church.
