self-indulgence and spiritual harm

By Diogenes (articles ) | Mar 06, 2007

Salt Lake City's Monsignor Robert Bussen has made it a project to address the particular affective needs of Monsignor Robert Bussen the marginalized:

Father Bob, as everyone calls him, knew the Catholic Church had little credibility with gays, given its opposition to same-sex marriage and the tendency of some to blame the priest sex-abuse scandals on homosexuality.

Sure, Bob. And by the same reasoning, I'm sure you'll agree, the Church has little "credibility" with kleptomaniacs and necrophiles, given her opposition to their indulgences. So you'll be restoring trust by offering an Unsold-or-Colder Liturgy, am I right?

He designed a special monthly Mass for gays, lesbians and their families at St. Mary of the Assumption in hopes of making them feel welcome. ... "It was a tremendously affirming experience," Bussen said this week. "The Mass was more symbolic than anything, reaching out to families who love their church and their children and don't want to have to choose. But [the church] has to earn their respect. They will not tolerate any more rhetoric that attacks their children."

Great. Bussen might have used his theological training and pastoral enthusiasm to help fragile persons grasp the Church's hard sayings. Instead, he joins the mob that insists it's the teaching that's to blame, whence he becomes just one more in the long clerical line of damaged pansies, who hide behind the Church yet at the same time are out to do her down. Like my little lord in the velvet collar who clings to nanny's hand when the playground bullies are around -- knowing her frown will keep them at bay -- they find this same sternness of hers oppressive once the danger is past and they have in mind mischief of their own.

Among the tactics of the wounded wounders, especially repellent is the cat-and-mouse game they play with the faithful, trading on their piety, compassion, and good will in order to dispose them to tolerance toward "the marginalized," while keeping them too confused to reprove their pastors for their failure (in the language of Canon 285) "to shun completely everything that is unbecoming to their state." The innocent and ingenuous laity -- hearing their natural revulsion at unnatural appetites condemned as bigotry -- are made to feel guilty of a defect of charity. The same article coyly identifies Bussen with a gay priest blogger who waged a propaganda campaign by foregrounding selective self-pity:

"My bishop gave me the supportive counsel," he writes. "I was right in claiming, embracing and cherishing this dimension of my life. ... This holy fire is sacred, not secret. It must not be trashed by anyone."

Wrong. The bishop should have taught (from Zechariah 13:9) that God's refining fire burns away impurity. He did his priest a double disservice by failing to urge repentance and by inviting him to regard his disordered appetites as flames of holiness. Bumptious gay priests richly deserve to get hammered. But hammering isn't the real point. Other goods are at stake.

Readers of C.S. Lewis's The Great Divorce will remember the myth in which the dreamer encounters various souls at the point of choosing heaven or hell: choosing, that is, to abide with their besetting sin -- and so be damned -- or to throw it off by accepting the offer of salvation. One of the figures is an oily, dark man "parasitized" by a lizard-like creature perched on his shoulder and continually whispering into his ear. After much pathetic reluctance, the man permits his parasite to be ripped away from him and killed, whereupon the man -- almost killed himself by the pain -- stands erect and whole; and the slain lizard (in one of Lewis's better imaginative thrusts) comes back from death to life, no longer as a reptile but as a great stallion, which the man mounts and controls with perfect mastery.

Lewis's lizard is an allegory of any high-energy habitual sin -- i.e., any besetting lust, whether the lust be lust for power, or acclaim, or the satisfactions of the flesh. It's not a question of dividing "good" lizards from bad; any sin that a man ultimately refuses to do without will damn him. And any man, when he is in the grip of his pet obsession, convinces himself that he can't survive apart from it: his parasitism tries to be accepted as symbiosis, or even to claim identity with the host organism ("I am who I am"). Yet, in this scheme, every parasite is a perversion of a desire originally wholesome. When the perversion is put to death -- mortified, in traditional language -- the underlying wholesome desire becomes free to take on its proper life, sub-ordinated to the rationally governed human will. The bloodsucking reptile becomes an obedient warhorse.

It stands to reason that the history of the saints includes many who had been tormented by the "pet lizard" of homoerotic attractions. Instead of welcoming and coddling the parasite, however, the saints put it to death, and devoted the reborn energy for the good of souls -- theirs and others. We can't know how many cantatas, orphanages, cathedrals, theological masterpieces (as well as humbler spiritual and corporal works of mercy) owe their origin to fierce, but mortified, appetites. And there are many Catholics today vexed by the same obsession who have chosen to struggle against it -- and who succeed in their struggle. They face all the hardships their predecessors faced, in addition to one hardship no predecessor encountered: the huge contrary current of gay propaganda that not only urges but praises surrender to one's sexual demons.

For chaste homosexuals fighting against these odds, the damage done by those Catholic clergy who publicly embrace their pet reptiles -- who throw open the gates to the enemy from inside the fortress -- must be not only disheartening but cruel. Sybarites are hardened in their sins. The rest of the Church is deprived of the spiritual bounty that attends regenerate life. Everyone loses.

It's dismaying, if not surprising, that Bussen's present superior offers his support exactly where it doesn't belong. "He's not doing anything unorthodox," interim diocesan administrator Msgr. Terrence Fitzgerald is quoted as saying. "Our bottom line is to care for the people, and that's what he's doing." Bussen's not caring for the people, Monsignor, he's taking care of himself. Indulgence is the enemy of charity.

Sound Off! supporters weigh in.

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!

Show 17 Comments? (Hidden)Hide Comments
  • Posted by: - Mar. 10, 2007 8:34 PM ET USA

    Thank you Diogenes! A comment on Fr. Bob's paragraph stating the Church has to earn their respect. Excuse me! Not only doesn't the Church have to earn their respect, but the Church doesn't want their respect. She only exists for the salvation of souls; thus, what she wants is nothing less than humble obedience. She never attacks anyone with rhetoric, but in fact uses TRUTH to attack a LIE. Join me in prayer for Fr. Bob who is obviously delusional as he attemps to exchange the TRUTH for a LIE.

  • Posted by: - Mar. 10, 2007 1:35 PM ET USA

    You might be interested in his response to all this in the Park City newspaper.

  • Posted by: - Mar. 09, 2007 7:47 PM ET USA

    Uncle Di should be congratulated for his restraint. I personally had a bout of Tourette's Syndrome after reading this thing.

  • Posted by: - Mar. 09, 2007 5:23 PM ET USA

    Very well written and highly insightful. This is one post I'll be turning back to. Well done!

  • Posted by: - Mar. 07, 2007 10:02 PM ET USA

    I too think that a righteous wrath is called from when booting Cartier's "Mon Secret" collection from the Temple

  • Posted by: - Mar. 07, 2007 7:04 PM ET USA

    From this months Magnificat: " Jesus is a very disturging Presence,..and aims directly for the core of the heart. He is abrasive and even hurtful, because he is not delicate withe crust on our heart; he does not connive withit or humor it." Father Richard Veras Was Jesus smiling at the Samaratin woman when he chastised her for her irregular marriage? I think not.

  • Posted by: - Mar. 07, 2007 6:52 PM ET USA

    Funny, the rush to defend a pro-gay priest (with an earring no less.) I think one of the greatest scandals in our time is the prevalence of the pro-gay element in the clergy. You would have to be blind not to see what the sexual abuse scandals are: male homosexual activity and desire for adolscent boys, not "children" in the usual sense, and certainly not girls. Awful, but the days when a "Scandal" was a priest having an adult consenting, single woman "on the side" are long gone.

  • Posted by: - Mar. 07, 2007 11:00 AM ET USA

    Re: Charity. I suppose Diogenes could pull a punch now and then when he busts a clerical malefactor but I'd suggest that his tough love is more in line with the desperate needs of the time. Has anyone noticed that no one listens anymore to our soft-spoken bishops? I recall some pretty harsh words that issued from the lips of the Lord when, I presume, milder words would not have answered.Well done indeed, Diogenes.

  • Posted by: - Mar. 07, 2007 7:16 AM ET USA

    If you are a man with an earring, you better be the captain of a ship flying the Jolly Roger flag, have a parrot on your shoulder, and say, "Argh!" a lot.

  • Posted by: - Mar. 06, 2007 10:56 PM ET USA

    That is quite a summation, the best I have ever read, regarding the violent inner warfare of any human being confronted with oft habitual sins of a compulsive, craving nature--of which lust is perhaps the most powerful and difficult. To lose the battle is to lose one's soul and therefore the greatest gift of God to man--his essential and holy freedom to choose--but choose rightly that he may have life. Not to choose rightly is to be dead while walking. Some churchmen have chosen be be zombies.

  • Posted by: - Mar. 06, 2007 10:17 PM ET USA

    Absent Catholic adult supervision, this sounds like a job for...SUPERMORMON

  • Posted by: - Mar. 06, 2007 7:53 PM ET USA

    The good Monsignor should know better than to use the term "the bottom line" when referring to gays. When will the Bishops finally come to the realization that it is this presence of gays in the clergy that has caused so much harm to our Church?

  • Posted by: - Mar. 06, 2007 6:26 PM ET USA

    Maybe The Great Divorce should be mandatory reading for Catholics, complete with explanation of the imagery. The strident insistence that our sins "are" us and therefore must be embraced needs to be confronted with the truth that there is no sin in heaven. Pray that the gift of clarity may be given to all of us, especially our leaders. And then the courage and humility to act.

  • Posted by: - Mar. 06, 2007 6:19 PM ET USA

    Diogenes, Your application of C.S. Lewis' analogy is an excellent one but do you think the first half of what you wrote could have been more charitable?

  • Posted by: - Mar. 06, 2007 5:33 PM ET USA

    C'mon, what gave him away? Was it the auricular accoutrement?

  • Posted by: - Mar. 06, 2007 5:20 PM ET USA

    Smack dab, bang on Diogenes! I know these targets aren't perfect targets until you shoot them, and you sure do make it look easy. But I know it isn't.

  • Posted by: - Mar. 06, 2007 4:35 PM ET USA

    And it is more than a fair guess that Father Bob's new ordinary, the Most Rev. John C. Wester, will also give him the utmost support. Bishop Wester is even at this moment packing his carpet bags to move from his Auxiliary seat in San Francisco to rule the See of Salt Lake. Replacing, of course, George Niederauer, who came from there to SF---to replace his roommate-to-be, the present prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.