More queer hunting...
May 21, 2002

Looks like the knives have been drawn and the hunt has started for every gay man in the Catholic priesthood, at least according to Amy Welborn who links to this "discussion" on which US bishop is gay. It would seem that people, the Good Catholics, are out now to oust all of the Bad Catholics (homosexuals, liberals) from the ranks of the Church. if you read Michael Dubruiel you can get and idea about how a Good Catholic looks at the situation. Reading this letter gives you even more insight into how they are drawing the battle lines.

I don't think prepping for war is an overblown analogy.

With phrases in that open letter I mentioned like "This widespread acceptance of homosexual activity is a grave problem in itself... We believe that the current scandal is a direct consequence of a failure to uphold and promote the teachings of the Catholic Church regarding sexual morality... " and "Once that crucial link between sexual intimacy and procreation has been severed, there is no compelling justification for the restriction of intimacy to marriage, or to partners of the opposite sex..." you can see where that 4th Century world view is headed.

Read a little further and you find:

3. CHURCH LEADERS MUST MAKE A FIRM COMMITMENT TO BE DILIGENT IN INVESTIGATING ANY CREDIBLE EVIDENCE OF DISSENT FROM DEFINED DOCTRINE, OR VIOLATION OF MORAL NORMS, WITHIN THE SCOPE OF THEIR AUTHORITY.

Whenever a Church leader receives evidence that serious offenses have been committed under his jurisdiction--whether it is homosexual activity at a seminary, alcoholic behavior in a rectory, or heterodox teaching at a Catholic college--he has a heavy obligation to investigate the charges promptly and thoroughly.

Anonymous accusations should not be encouraged. But if an individual member of the faithful comes forward with substantive evidence of wrongdoing, he deserves a respectful hearing.

Regrettably, many faithful Catholics in American today have reached the conclusion that their bishops will not address their complaints until they are forced to do so, by adverse publicity. In some cases, bishops and other Church leaders owe apologies to those faithful Catholics who have carefully assembled the evidence of clerical wrongdoing, doing their best to avoid public scandal--only to have their efforts dismissed, and their own integrity questioned, by the officials to whom they addressed their legitimate concerns.

Lay people have the legitimate right to know that their pastors take their concerns seriously. Parents have the right to demand that their children are receiving proper moral formation and adequate protection. Pastors should always recognize that parents are the primary educators of their own children--particularly regarding matters involving sexuality.

Circumstantial evidence of misbehavior should not ordinarily be grounds for disciplinary action; on the other hand, such evidence should not be ignored. A priest whose behavior gives rise to concerns among his parishioners should be required to provide a thorough and convincing explanation for that behavior.

If the evidence of wrongdoing is compelling, the offender must be punished. In order to make a clear moral statement, and avoid the appearance of hypocrisy, Church leaders should make no effort to conceal the true reasons for removal of an official who has been implicated in a public scandal.

While it's only a lay organization, I can't help but feel the sentiments that they express represent a significant flavor for response among the faithful. In trying to correct a serious problem -- the abuse and the cover-up of the abuse of children by priests -- the Church will undoubtedly move into pogrom mode, ousting any and everyone who doesn't tow some arbitrary party line. This ousting will also, I'm sure, take on grudge match qualities, with long simmering "disagreements" between factions finally finding a suitable venue for finality, with attempts made at gaining the upperhandtrying to appear more holy than their adversary.

Like most bureaucracies, rather than questioning the assumptions on which they've been operating, the Church, or elements within it, will find it easier to belive that by shoving out a few of the kinda-powerful-but-easily-scapegoated at the top and a whole lot of not-terribly-powerful-and-very-innocent at the bottom will fix the expressed problems caued by intrinsic, institutional flaws. Nose. Cutting. Face, et.al.

I imagine as an Atheist Homosexual (an AH! guy), I should be sitting back, laughing and pointing out how this just goes to show how seriously whacked religion is and why we'll be better off without it one day. While I do belive that last bit, I can't find any real humor in the situation and that got ya sense is conspicuously absent from my soul.

The tragedy here -- and it is a tragedy, one as old as the oldest of the self-same fables told around the fire flicked dance on that ancient savanna -- is that an institution that is supposed to be a force for good in the world will instead, in a desperate attempt at holding onto a Fiction, unleash holy terror upon its faithful. For the little kids, the earliest victims, the terror of this fiction has already cut deeply into their psyches. For the adults, both young and old, who try to live within the boundaries of a story that never really made much sense in the first place, the Fiction will soon become a sharp blade of divisiveness, pain and retribution.

And no one can take any real pleasure in that.

Posted by Jody at May 21, 2002 10:33 AM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://WWW.nakedwriting.COM/mt-tb.cgi/1208

Comments

Post a comment