Newsflash - Love is not always moral
In the November 18, 2015 St. Petersburg edition of the Tampa Tribune, on page 10 of the first section was an associated press article by Rachel Zoll entitled “U. S. Catholic bishops want voters to oppose gay marriage.”
The bishops meeting in Baltimore “issued an election-year guide stressing a moral imperative to evaluate candidates according to their position on marriage and abortion.” The decision Tuesday followed a brief debate at their national assembly over whether the document reflected the priorities of Pope Francis.
The guide called Faithful Citizenship “…addresses a broad range of issues in Catholic social teaching including protecting immigrants and the environment, fighting racism, and poverty, and opposing the death penalty. However, the bishops said they consider opposition to gay marriage and abortion rights paramount in this presidential election season and beyond.”
The document was approved overwhelmingly by a vote of 210-21 with five abstentions. Archbishop Leonard Blaire is quoted as saying, “Francis wants bishops to promote the ‘totality of issues of catholic thinking’ … holding up with is right and true and just.”
Oh my. Is this really the same week as the bombings in Paris, the daily bombing by allied planes in several countries, the homelessness of 3 million Syrian refugees alone in addition to all the other homeless adults and children fleeing violence, millions more, including many in this country, who are homeless and without access to enough food, medicine, prenatal care, and adequate birth control?
Is this the same group of priests (now bishops) about who study after study has revealed:
To the average person, this demand of Canon Law 277 imposes a seemingly impossible task, namely perfect and perpetual continence. Although the church propagates the myth that bishops and priests are celibate, this is not based on fact. Several modern studies have used various methods to measure the degree of celibate observance. No researcher so far has assessed that more than 50 percent of Roman Catholic clergy at any one time are in fact practicing celibacy. http://ncronline.org/blogs/examining-crisis/secret-sex-celibate-system Secret sex in the celibate system
A.W. Richard Sipe | Apr. 28, 2010
Another quote:
“I would estimate that at least 70% of priests are sexually active all during their life or at some stage of their life. Fifty years ago the priesthood was a mixture of heterosexual and homosexual men. Today most Catholic priests are gay.” Bishop Pat Buckley 23/05/2012
http://wisecatholic.blogspot.com/2012/05/most-catholic-priests-are.html
I could cite a lot more studies and estimates by priests and others, but those can be easily found by researching at one’s local library or just goggling sexually active Roman Catholic Priests on one’s home computer. The point is that we humans are sexual. We are either openly or secretly sexual. There is no reason to suspect that the bishops who issued the guidelines for Catholic voters in the 2016 elections are only among the 30% to 70% (various estimates from priests and others with an insider’s knowledge of Roman Catholic priests who remain both chaste and celebrate - do not engage in ANY willful sexual release). I personally have known and worked with/for Roman Catholic Priests regarding issues of social justice and as their coach/therapist. I have known very few who refrained from any willful sexual release. They were having or had sexual relationships with adult males and females. Some, as we know, also had had sex with minors (that is a topic for another blog). I have had a similar experience with women who are nuns.
There are no accurate statistics on the number of Catholic Priests who have fathered children and/or those who have helped their female partner obtain an abortion. (Statistics on nuns who have become pregnant are even less available although again if one goggles “Nuns who have had abortions” one will get a lot of hits. This will also get one to studies about nuns who have been raped or otherwise sexually abused.
The point is that the bishops are knowingly and willfully issuing guidelines for voters which do not reflect what they know about the members of the clergy in the church they “lead.” What could possibly be the motive in pretending as if who we elect will determine the behavior of the average Catholic lay person much less the behavior of Roman Catholic members of religious orders who have taken a vow of chastity and who officially chastise those who engage in sexual activity with a person of the outside of a heterosexual marriage or those who have made the painful decision to get an abortion, use birth control, use the morning after pill, or support their partner in their decision to get an abortion?
Let me be perfectly clear. Abortion for any reason grieves me. I do not think I could be supportive of such a decision. Furthermore, ideally, I do not think that any of us “should” put ourselves in the position of having to make such a decision. Yet, we know that:
· We are sexual.
· All birth control methods fail.
· We are not always in a position to take responsibility for a child.
· There are sometimes painful decisions recommended by a physician because of a medical condition of the mother or the child.
· No amount of shaming, legal or religious punishment, religious vows, or other methods have ever reduced the sexual behavior to that between consenting adults in a legally and religiously established heterosexual marriage.
There are many reasons to be of sound mind when making a decision to have sexual relationships. Disease, possible pregnancy, personal values, the risk of one person feeling casual and one feeling emotionally connected can all be reasons to refrain from sexual intimacy with another consenting adult. Although there may be many who can easily seem to separate physical sexual intimacy from an emotional or spiritual connection, many of us are either unable or unwilling to do so.
The question of whether the sexual contact/interaction is between two (or more) people of the same or opposite gender is, for me, a non-issue. As a person who comes out of a Christian spiritual framework, I cannot envision a God of my understanding who has set up a genital watch program to ensure that one’s genitals only have contact with the genitals of a person who has a different number of chromosomes. (A difference of one to be exact.). While there was a time in our evolution when we humans were fearful that there were a limited number of sperm at a time when many mothers and children died in childbirth, we have known for a very long time that the average male has an overabundance of very active sperm, one of which will swim its little heart out to reach the egg.
Even the tiny bacteria and viruses that may be responsible for sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) seem to be unaware of the need to discriminate between same and opposite gender relationships. Imagine the ire of the God of their understanding on judgment day! Oh my!
There is a famous passage in the New Testament and similar advice in almost every religious or spiritual tradition which says, “How can you say to your brother, 'Brother, let me take the speck out of your eye,' when you yourself fail to see the plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye.” (Luke 6:42 or Matthew 7:5). Perhaps the time and energy of the Bishops would be better spent practicing the HOW of the 12-step program (Originally just AA and then later adapted for narcotics, sex, overeating and other addictions). The HOW of the program is: Honesty, Open-mindedness, and Willingness. Perhaps the bishops could lovingly become willing to be honest with themselves about their personal history with their genitals and the history of the interaction between their genitals and those of another person of the same or opposite gender. Then perhaps they could use the same principles to fess up to the sad, often-tragic decisions made regarding pregnancies for which they had some involvement or responsibilities.
Then and only then might they find that the goal of Pope Francis is “holding up what’s right and true and just” (words of Archbishop Leonard Blaire of Hartford Connecticut quoted the article first mentioned in this post). Perhaps Pope Francis is on to something. Perhaps killing others (directly and indirectly by withholding food, shelter and clothing as well as with guns and bombs) should command our attention. Perhaps there is something intrinsically wrong with any religion which teaches that killing (justified war) is moral and loving is immoral. Perhaps hypocrisy is indeed a “sin” which destroys that sacred child who practices it. Perhaps we need to embrace the hypocrite within others and ourselves and, thus, free them and us of the “secrets” which destroy. I find it difficult to believe that the God of my understanding wants anyone to live with the burden of hypocrisy. Perhaps I am wrong!
Written November 19, 2015
In the November 18, 2015 St. Petersburg edition of the Tampa Tribune, on page 10 of the first section was an associated press article by Rachel Zoll entitled “U. S. Catholic bishops want voters to oppose gay marriage.”
The bishops meeting in Baltimore “issued an election-year guide stressing a moral imperative to evaluate candidates according to their position on marriage and abortion.” The decision Tuesday followed a brief debate at their national assembly over whether the document reflected the priorities of Pope Francis.
The guide called Faithful Citizenship “…addresses a broad range of issues in Catholic social teaching including protecting immigrants and the environment, fighting racism, and poverty, and opposing the death penalty. However, the bishops said they consider opposition to gay marriage and abortion rights paramount in this presidential election season and beyond.”
The document was approved overwhelmingly by a vote of 210-21 with five abstentions. Archbishop Leonard Blaire is quoted as saying, “Francis wants bishops to promote the ‘totality of issues of catholic thinking’ … holding up with is right and true and just.”
Oh my. Is this really the same week as the bombings in Paris, the daily bombing by allied planes in several countries, the homelessness of 3 million Syrian refugees alone in addition to all the other homeless adults and children fleeing violence, millions more, including many in this country, who are homeless and without access to enough food, medicine, prenatal care, and adequate birth control?
Is this the same group of priests (now bishops) about who study after study has revealed:
To the average person, this demand of Canon Law 277 imposes a seemingly impossible task, namely perfect and perpetual continence. Although the church propagates the myth that bishops and priests are celibate, this is not based on fact. Several modern studies have used various methods to measure the degree of celibate observance. No researcher so far has assessed that more than 50 percent of Roman Catholic clergy at any one time are in fact practicing celibacy. http://ncronline.org/blogs/examining-crisis/secret-sex-celibate-system Secret sex in the celibate system
A.W. Richard Sipe | Apr. 28, 2010
Another quote:
“I would estimate that at least 70% of priests are sexually active all during their life or at some stage of their life. Fifty years ago the priesthood was a mixture of heterosexual and homosexual men. Today most Catholic priests are gay.” Bishop Pat Buckley 23/05/2012
http://wisecatholic.blogspot.com/2012/05/most-catholic-priests-are.html
I could cite a lot more studies and estimates by priests and others, but those can be easily found by researching at one’s local library or just goggling sexually active Roman Catholic Priests on one’s home computer. The point is that we humans are sexual. We are either openly or secretly sexual. There is no reason to suspect that the bishops who issued the guidelines for Catholic voters in the 2016 elections are only among the 30% to 70% (various estimates from priests and others with an insider’s knowledge of Roman Catholic priests who remain both chaste and celebrate - do not engage in ANY willful sexual release). I personally have known and worked with/for Roman Catholic Priests regarding issues of social justice and as their coach/therapist. I have known very few who refrained from any willful sexual release. They were having or had sexual relationships with adult males and females. Some, as we know, also had had sex with minors (that is a topic for another blog). I have had a similar experience with women who are nuns.
There are no accurate statistics on the number of Catholic Priests who have fathered children and/or those who have helped their female partner obtain an abortion. (Statistics on nuns who have become pregnant are even less available although again if one goggles “Nuns who have had abortions” one will get a lot of hits. This will also get one to studies about nuns who have been raped or otherwise sexually abused.
The point is that the bishops are knowingly and willfully issuing guidelines for voters which do not reflect what they know about the members of the clergy in the church they “lead.” What could possibly be the motive in pretending as if who we elect will determine the behavior of the average Catholic lay person much less the behavior of Roman Catholic members of religious orders who have taken a vow of chastity and who officially chastise those who engage in sexual activity with a person of the outside of a heterosexual marriage or those who have made the painful decision to get an abortion, use birth control, use the morning after pill, or support their partner in their decision to get an abortion?
Let me be perfectly clear. Abortion for any reason grieves me. I do not think I could be supportive of such a decision. Furthermore, ideally, I do not think that any of us “should” put ourselves in the position of having to make such a decision. Yet, we know that:
· We are sexual.
· All birth control methods fail.
· We are not always in a position to take responsibility for a child.
· There are sometimes painful decisions recommended by a physician because of a medical condition of the mother or the child.
· No amount of shaming, legal or religious punishment, religious vows, or other methods have ever reduced the sexual behavior to that between consenting adults in a legally and religiously established heterosexual marriage.
There are many reasons to be of sound mind when making a decision to have sexual relationships. Disease, possible pregnancy, personal values, the risk of one person feeling casual and one feeling emotionally connected can all be reasons to refrain from sexual intimacy with another consenting adult. Although there may be many who can easily seem to separate physical sexual intimacy from an emotional or spiritual connection, many of us are either unable or unwilling to do so.
The question of whether the sexual contact/interaction is between two (or more) people of the same or opposite gender is, for me, a non-issue. As a person who comes out of a Christian spiritual framework, I cannot envision a God of my understanding who has set up a genital watch program to ensure that one’s genitals only have contact with the genitals of a person who has a different number of chromosomes. (A difference of one to be exact.). While there was a time in our evolution when we humans were fearful that there were a limited number of sperm at a time when many mothers and children died in childbirth, we have known for a very long time that the average male has an overabundance of very active sperm, one of which will swim its little heart out to reach the egg.
Even the tiny bacteria and viruses that may be responsible for sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) seem to be unaware of the need to discriminate between same and opposite gender relationships. Imagine the ire of the God of their understanding on judgment day! Oh my!
There is a famous passage in the New Testament and similar advice in almost every religious or spiritual tradition which says, “How can you say to your brother, 'Brother, let me take the speck out of your eye,' when you yourself fail to see the plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye.” (Luke 6:42 or Matthew 7:5). Perhaps the time and energy of the Bishops would be better spent practicing the HOW of the 12-step program (Originally just AA and then later adapted for narcotics, sex, overeating and other addictions). The HOW of the program is: Honesty, Open-mindedness, and Willingness. Perhaps the bishops could lovingly become willing to be honest with themselves about their personal history with their genitals and the history of the interaction between their genitals and those of another person of the same or opposite gender. Then perhaps they could use the same principles to fess up to the sad, often-tragic decisions made regarding pregnancies for which they had some involvement or responsibilities.
Then and only then might they find that the goal of Pope Francis is “holding up what’s right and true and just” (words of Archbishop Leonard Blaire of Hartford Connecticut quoted the article first mentioned in this post). Perhaps Pope Francis is on to something. Perhaps killing others (directly and indirectly by withholding food, shelter and clothing as well as with guns and bombs) should command our attention. Perhaps there is something intrinsically wrong with any religion which teaches that killing (justified war) is moral and loving is immoral. Perhaps hypocrisy is indeed a “sin” which destroys that sacred child who practices it. Perhaps we need to embrace the hypocrite within others and ourselves and, thus, free them and us of the “secrets” which destroy. I find it difficult to believe that the God of my understanding wants anyone to live with the burden of hypocrisy. Perhaps I am wrong!
Written November 19, 2015
RSS Feed