In Buenos Aires I used to
receive letters from homosexual persons who are “socially wounded” because they
tell me that they feel like the church has always condemned them. But the
church does not want to do this. During the return flight from Rio de Janeiro,
I said that if a homosexual person is of good will and is in search of God, I
am no one to judge. By saying this, I said what the catechism says. Religion
has the right to express its opinion in the service of the people, but God in
creation has set us free: it is not possible to interfere spiritually in the
life of a person.
A person once asked me, in a
provocative manner, if I approved of homosexuality. I replied with another
question: “Tell me: when God looks at a gay person, does he endorse the
existence of this person with love, or reject and condemn this person?” We must
always consider the person.
OK—it’s a step. It’s
better than Benedict,
who tended to couple the word “homosexuality” with the phrase “intrinsically
evil,” or the like. And we all took the bait—hey, after all those years of
Ratzinger, we’re yearning for a pope who gets it, who starts moving the church
forward.
And he certainly seems
different—living in the guest house, driving a Ford escort, eschewing the pomp
that was Benedict’s lifeblood and focusing on the poor. But how liberal is this
pope? Here are his views on women, from the same interview:
I am wary of a solution that can be reduced to a kind of “female
machismo,” because a woman has a different makeup than a man. But what I hear
about the role of women is often inspired by an ideology of machismo. Women are
asking deep questions that must be addressed. The church cannot be herself
without the woman and her role. The woman is essential for the church. Mary, a
woman, is more important than the bishops. I say this because we must not
confuse the function with the dignity. We must therefore investigate further
the role of women in the church. We have to work harder to develop a profound
theology of the woman. Only by making this step will it be possible to better reflect
on their function within the church. The feminine genius is needed wherever we
make important decisions. The challenge today is this: to think about the
specific place of women also in those places where the authority of the church
is exercised for various areas of the church.
Is it just me, or is
anyone else out there confused about that first sentence, and the reference to
“female machismo?” I think what he’s saying is something like, “insisting that
men and women are equals and should be able to hold the same positions is
wrong. Women and men are intrinsically different, and no, dears, no priesthood
or God forbid papacy for you!”
And am I the only one
who is thoroughly sick of the church’s trotting out Mary every time women raise
legitimate questions or demands? Partly because as I understand it, biblically
speaking, Mary isn’t an especially likeable character—nor does she seem to
figure very prominently in the life of Jesus. Here’s Wikipedia
on the subject:
There is also an incident in which Jesus is sometimes interpreted as
rejecting his family. "And his mother and his brothers arrived, and
standing outside, they sent in a message asking for him[Mk 3:21] ... And looking at those
who sat in a circle around him, Jesus said, 'These are my mother and my
brothers. Whoever does the will of God is my brother, and sister, and
mother.'"
But all this veneration of
Mary seems to come with the message: we’re perfectly happy to put you on a
pedestal, but not in the priesthood. And notice as well that the pope’s
“liberal” views on homosexuality don’t go that far, he hardly comes out and
says, “both gay and straight people were made in God’s image, both of their
loves are of equal worth, and gay people will have the same rights and
privileges as heterosexuals in the Catholic church, including marriage.”
Nonetheless, everybody
is jumping on the bandwagon, including the Reverend Timothy M. Dolan, the
Archbishop of New York. Here he is, courtesy of The New York Times:
After Sunday Mass at St. Patrick’s Cathedral, Cardinal Dolan, who has
himself softened his language on homosexuality in the past year, likened the
pope to the Yankees’ retiring relief pitcher: “I think he’s our Mariano Rivera.
He’s a great relief to all of us.”
Ummmm, this is a guy who
said the following
to The New York Times during Holy
Week this year:
“Well, the first thing I’d say to them is: ‘I love you, too. And God
loves you. And you are made in God’s image and likeness. And — and we — we want
your happiness. But — and you’re entitled to friendship,’” Cardinal Dolan
said. “But we also know that God has told us that the way to happiness, that —
especially when it comes to sexual love — that is intended only for a man and
woman in marriage, where children can come about naturally.”
Yeah? This sounds
suspiciously like all those people whose views are “evolving,” and can’t we say
it, at last. “Evolving” simply means not sticking your neck out until it’s
absolutely imperative—failure to do so will make you look like a complete
hypocrite. Great—now we know that God loves us, as well as the Cardinal, but
sex with a person of the same gender is a sin.
The person who gets it? Gene Robinson, who just
about caused a schism in the church, when he became the first openly gay
bishop. And as you’ll see in the clip below, he doesn’t mince words: we’ve done
a lot of damage to gay people, and we’re gonna have to work hard to repair the
damage. There’s a reason why LGBT people are suspicious and angry. He comes out
and says it to a group of Presbyterians who will be giving out glasses of water
at the Gay Pride march later in the day: “You are representing the community of
Christians, Jews and Muslims who are 95% of the repression we LGBT people have
experienced in our lives.”
Or how about, “you are
the oppressor offering the cup of water to the oppressed?” Robinson doesn’t
pull the punches, or—perhaps a better image—hesitate to go into the temple and
lecture to the money lenders. Nor—from the faces of the stony Presbyterians—is
his message better received.
And Robinson is out
there, walking the talk—passing out the cups of water to drag queens,
scantily-clad boys, street performers, and the just-general-folk who drift by.
For all the talk of not
focusing on abortion, homosexuality, contraception—what are we hearing? A sort
of Catholicism of Nice—we won’t talk about it, we won’t judge, now come into
the church but please, lower your voices, don’t rock the boat, no demands.
Congratulations—the
Catholic Church has progressed to Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.
