Cosmos-Liturgy-Sex

Amélie picked up the topic of same-sex couple adoption on Tuesday and was kind enough to link to one of our posts in her discussion (it was probably a mistake attributed to perduring jet lag–but thanks nonetheless!). Continuing on that theme…

Jason Szep writes a Reuters piece from Boston which seems aimed at instructing Cardinal-elect O’Malley that he has a choice to make between cow-towing to conservatives by carrying out the “Vatican campaign against homosexuality” and not alienating liberals (who are supposedly the big money givers I guess?) by adopting a MSM morality, thereby saving untold millions in lost donations. Guess which one he is pushing…

What would you expect from Reuters? Well, that’s what you get:

A tough stand on gay adoption, while sure to rally traditionalists for upholding Vatican teachings, could alienate liberal Catholics and further choke funding at a time when many U.S. dioceses are under financial stress from declining attendance and multimillion-dollar lawsuits in sex-abuse scandals, religious scholars say.

To which religious scholars do you think that they might be referring? The usual suspects would be those who couch this in terms of conservativism v. liberalism. I grow weary with this characterization because it is most often nothing less than a euphemism used to distinguish Catholics who reject the Church’s moral teachings from those who are faithful. Furthermore, it allows those dissenting Catholics to continue to deceive themselves into thinking their dissent is simply an issue of political differences.

The above quote is where Szep seems to offer his advice to the Cardinal-elect: look, you have a choice between towing the line on the Vatican’s moral policy and hurting your bottom line or jettisoning these old teachings and reaping the financial rewards. Obviously, Szep has no clue when it comes to understanding Revealed truth. Nevertheless, he goes on:

It adds to the list of sensitive issues — from abortion to stem-cell research and emergency contraception — separating reformers and conservatives among America’s 65 million Catholics.

O.k., now this is a strategic selection of terms. “Liberal Catholics” are no longer dissenters but “reformers.” Well there are many “reformed” traditions out there. Many of them agree with the “Catholic reformers” on the advisability of not only being in the world, but also being of the world when it comes to sins of sexual license. Why is it that these “Catholic reformers” want to reinvent the wheel instead of just joining up with those who have already gone down that road?

Finally, Szep unveils the identities of his Catholic scholars:

“For some Catholics, this position on gay adoption will be disconcerting. But for those seeking a more conservative path, it will be a good thing,” said Chester Gillis, chair of the theology department at Georgetown University.

So it’s ole Chester; it is not surprising that Doby Gillis continues to retread the tired old liberal-vs-conservative mischaracterization of dissent.

“For those who take their cues from American society, American laws and so forth, they will be uncomfortable with this. They will be forced in some way to choose between their church and their country or their state.”

This is perhaps the first time I have seen it put so bluntly. We have Catholics who look to the culture to define morality rather than to revealed truth. Here is a short statement that shows how we continue to pay the price for the content-less, touchy-feely catechesis that has characterized CCD since the late 60s to early 70s. Szep goes on to ask more “reform-minded” questions:

“Does this reflect the Catholic Church’s ability to impose itself on all its constituent parts, well to a certain extent yes, given the board’s position,” said Nancy Ammerman, professor of sociology and religion at Boston University.

This question reflects a fragmented view of the Church that is not surprising for one who obviously has no clue about Catholic ecclesiology. But even so, I would ask, how does one impose himself on parts of himself? And to end the article:

Catholic scholars said a question for Boston Archbishop Sean O’Malley, who was recently elevated to cardinal, is whether the appeal to conservative Catholics will jeopardize millions of dollars in donations at a time when the Boston Archdiocese faces a $93 million bill to settle sex-abuse cases.

Let’s remind the Cardinal-elect about how he is jeopardizing millions of dollars in donations. I wonder why they do not think it is just as big a danger if they appeal to the “liberals”? Too many “Catholic scholars” have as little ecclesiological clue as Reuters’s reporters. It is clear that the “reform-minded” have the press open to them. This is troubling only for the fact that all too many Catholics receive their understanding of morality, anthropology, ecclesiology, even Church history through the MSM. It is no wonder we have such confusion in Boston.