A gent named Ed Delgado sent me this and it seemed like it oughta be up here…
To paraphrase the old sports-talk intro: "Long-time Reader, First-time Emailer"
I was interested in your thoughts regarding Liberace and, indirectly, the Catholic Church. It's always of interest to me how the non-Catholic world views Catholicism. We have been accused of taking Genesis literally, hating homosexuals, and hating women. That's a lot of hate for an outfit whose founder stunned his audience by telling them to turn the other cheek and pray for their enemies! For the record, the Vatican is on board with evolution, does not promote anyone carrying a "God Hates Fags" sign, and, although there are no women priests, has a tradition where some of the greatest Doctors of the Church were female (St. Catherine of Siena, St. Theresa of Avila, etc). As much as many in America want the church to bend to the times (and there are good reasons for some change), I don't know if the faithful will be impressed by a church that makes their decisions just so that it can curry the favor of Bill Maher or the movers and shakers in show business.
The church does say that homosexual activity is a sin. But in the Catholic world, it is the same sin that straight people commit when they sleep around so it shouldn't be a shock when the bishops make declarations against same-sex marriage. I've been going to Mass and paying attention for over 40 years and I don't recall any priest saying that homosexuals are basically evil. I do recall sermons during the AIDS crisis in the 80's about how we would be wrong to scapegoat or stigmatize the gay victims of this disease. No one called us "hateful" back then.
Your comments about your Catholic friend ring very true. We do feel a profound disappointment in our leadership. I honestly don't know how I would react if my nephews or younger brother was molested by a priest but I'm guessing it would take a lot of rosaries to repent for what I would do to him! That being said tho', I bet it would be hard to find anyone more betrayed by these perverts than their fellow priests who have done nothing wrong. These men, who have given up so much to follow their vocation, are now in the position of cleaning up after their former colleagues (and possibly close friends) who have damaged the church due to their irresistible (I guess) impulses. It's actually disgusting to see that enemies of the church now feel emboldened and justified to make comments suggesting that the church is a huge pedophilia ring.
As disappointed as we are, however, I don't know too many people who have decided to up and quit the church. Maybe it's just the circle of people I know, but I think that people who take their religion seriously know that it doesn't just hinge on the actions of your local minister, priest or rabbi. Then again, it may be the old saying that if you look around to find the "perfect church," it will become imperfect as soon as you join it!
Anyway, I enjoy your posts very much and will always think of you and Mel Tormé during Christmas time.
Frankly, I can't imagine the Catholic church doing anything that would win the approval of Bill Maher unless they have a big going-outta-business sale with black hookers.
I do feel sorry for those who have pursued their faith in good faith and for the many good priests who feel their calling has been in some ways dishonored. I think the public reaction is understandable given how the first instinct of the church leadership when confronted with reports of molestation did not seem to be, "We have to make sure the guilty parties are punished" but rather "We have to keep this inside the church." If Jerry Sandusky had been an elder of the clergy instead of a football coach, he would not now be in a prison cell. He'd be living the rest of his life comfortably in The Vatican, probably priding himself on his forgiveness of those who thought ill of him.
I would take issue with the comparison of gay sex out of wedlock to straight sex out of wedlock. The analogy would work if gay sex within wedlock was possible for all. At least, that would be consistent. As it is, the policy seems to be, "You cannot have sex until you are married — oh, and you gay people in the back…you can't get married!" To forbid marriage to gays is to essentially force them all into so-called adulterous relationships…so they're kind of screwed two ways either way.
But thanks for your thoughtful letter, Ed. I don't disagree with anything else in it except that in my lifetime, I've encountered a lot of people who were sure they'd found the "perfect church" and it was their mission in life to drag you out of your imperfect one and into theirs.