tears of grief and anger
By Diogenes (articles ) | October 19, 2003 8:39 AM
Chesterton once wrote that, in the eyes of the world, a priest is reckoned a knave for breaking his vows and a fool for keeping them. In his op-ed in today's NYT ("Losing a Church, Keeping the Faith"), Andrew Sullivan attributes both the knavery and the folly to the celibate. Like most of Sullivan's lamentations on the predicament of gays in the Church, it is very well-written and deeply dishonest. He affects to believe that the Church condemns "infertile" intercourse (full stop) and "emotional" and well as sexual relationships between gays -- without further qualification. As a specimen of polemic, very adroit; as personal testimony, wholly contemptible.
Gay men are being deterred from applying to seminaries and may soon be declared unfit for the priesthood, even though they commit to celibacy. The American Catholic church has endorsed a constitutional amendment that would strip gay couples of any civil benefits of any kind in the United States. For the first time in my own life, I find myself unable to go to Mass. During the most heated bouts of rhetoric coming from the Vatican this summer, I felt tears of grief and anger welling up where once I had been able to contain them. Faith beyond resentment began to seem unreachable.
Putting aside the fact many people besides gays are required to make painful decisions in order to follow Christ -- decisions with consequences more far-reaching than any he contemplates -- Sullivan fails to acknowledge the honesty and guts of those homosexuals who struggle against the odds to remain chaste, precisely because they believe God speaks through His Church. Yet Sullivan saves his compassion, not for those who heroically resist temptation, but for those who succumb.
Granted also that Sullivan is right in claiming that there are many gay priests who live duplicitous lives, there are also priests who not only keep their vows but who work (quietly and without public congratulation) to help homosexual Catholics understand the Church's teaching and live it with integrity. Perhaps Sullivan can dismiss them as fools -- admittedly it isn't a shrewd career move. But must they be accounted knaves as well?
An appeal from our founder, Dr. Jeffrey Mirus:
Dear reader: If you found the information on this page helpful in your pursuit of a better Catholic life, please support our work with a donation. Your donation will help us reach five million Truth-seeking readers worldwide this year. Thank you!
Progress toward our Spring 2013 goal ($34,555 to go):
All comments are moderated. To lighten our editing burden, only current donors are allowed to Sound Off. If you are a donor, log in to see the comment form; otherwise please support our work, and Sound Off!
Posted by: Pseudodionysius -
Oct. 19, 2003 11:17 PM ET USA
Sullivan's latest screed is Emotivism (Alasdair MacIntyre) run amuck. He has rejected Aristotle and is rambling his way toward Nietzsche
Posted by: shrink -
Oct. 19, 2003 4:25 PM ET USA
Gay celibacy, as Sullivan would have it, is an oxymoron. Not long ago, we were told by the gays themselves that the difference between the gay and the homosexual was that the former reveled in his homosexuality, and the other did not. Hence, once the gay man begins in earnest the life of sexual continence he ceases to be gay, just as once the playboy renounces his life of promiscuity, he ceases to be a playboy.
Posted by: John J Plick -
Oct. 19, 2003 8:12 AM ET USA
I do not generally read The New Tork Times and this is a good reason why not. I fear that my mind would be reduced to gelatin by repeated exposure. The article in question borders on the overtly satanic. How else but with the aide of a demon could a man weave emotion and intellect into an apparently single piece making homosexuality within the Church sound like the most natural thing in the world. Again, "Fides et Ratio." We do not accept what is stupid and self-destructive.