...and scandal.
.
I worked with a traditional Catholic fellow who once mentioned his concern over a young couple we both knew who as yet had no children, "They better say something or everyone will assume thy are contracepting." (I know!) I never, ever would have thought anything as to why a couple was childless until my friend mentioned that. He explained himself by insisting that a young, childless, married Catholic couple could be a source of scandal to others - as in the case of both holding jobs or going to school - if after a year or so of marriage there was no child or any talk of a family. He also felt they needed to disclose to their friends and families if they were experiencing problems conceiving - so great was the risk of an appearance of scandal as regards contraception. Personally, I believe it is no one's business.
.
Although I thought of this episode in connection with a story coming out of Canada concerning a homosexual man who lives with a male friend, albeit chastely, yet who was nevertheless ordered by his bishop not to serve Mass at his parish church:
.
PETERBOROUGH, ON, July 7, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Jim Corcoran, the owner of one of Canada's largest and most lavish spas, has launched a human rights complaint against the Bishop of Peterborough Ontario for refusing him permission to continue to serve as an altar server. Corcoran admits that he is homosexual and lives with another homosexual man, but says that he follows the Church's teaching and lives a chaste lifestyle. According to the Catholic Register, Bishop Nicola De Angelis asked Corcoran to accept his decision that he not serve on the altar based upon the bishops' desire to avoid public scandal. Corcoran is seeking monetary damages of $25,000 from the bishop and $20,000 each from 12 parishioners who complained to the bishop about Corcoran and his roommate having been invited by the local priest to serve on the altar at Masses. - Source
.
After reading sections of his blog and the piece in the Canadian Catholic Register, it appears as if the parishioners have problems with the pastor and Mr. Corcoran was caught in the crossfire. The pastor seems to be the one who invited the men to serve on the altar in the first place. In any event, I think it would be better for Concoran to be obedient to his bishop - the bishop is in charge of liturgy for his diocese - not the parish priest or an altar server. If 12 parishioners complained, the bishop obviously was seeking to avoid cause for greater scandal. Corcoran would do well to be submissive, or at least work things out with the bishop and the pastor privately. Of course that is much too much to expect of people today, isn't it.
.
Corcoran says that he follows the teaching of the Church regarding homosexuality and that he lives a chaste life with his friend:
.
“I’m a chaste homosexual and practise my faith,” he said. While Corcoran does live with another gay man, they are devout Catholics who refrain from sexual activity in accordance with church teaching, he said. - Source
.
Nothing wrong with that and besides, that is all the Church asks - aside from requiring same-sex attracted people to refrain from promoting the homosexual lifestyle. Which may explain further why the bishop felt it necessary to intervene - I trust the men themselves had no intention of doing that - flaunting their orientation or promoting it - however other parishioners may have understood it differently. This issue is not a matter of housing or job discrimination, but doctrine and the spiritual care of souls - scandal can drive people away from the Church, as this case may have already done. One dissenter explained:
.
“Dorothy and I know personally 25 or 30 who have left the church, are going to church elsewhere,” Ward said. “We know some of them who aren’t going to church at all.” - Source
.
That is no laughing matter, but unfortunately the incident has already become politicized and contentious. I noted on another blog that a commenter speculated as to the nature of Corcoran's chaste relationship, explaining the double-speak some gay activists use regarding chastity. They can separate chastity from celibacy, or propose same sex monogamy as living chastely. Hence if a person has a partner, they may think they practice chastity by refraining from outside sexual relations, as heterosexual married couples do, or they may avoid direct sexual contact yet indulge in mutual masturbation, pornography, what have you. Of course there is absolutely no way a faithful Catholic could define such an arrangement as a chaste relationship. Likewise, many people do not consider masturbation sinful either. It is. Additionally, some gay activists see celibacy as a separate issue from chastity - it is not - not for the unmarried Catholic at least. Because of such dissimulation, trickery and blatant error, a person can easily be deceived - both the deluded persons involved in such a friendship, as well as the curious looking in.
.
It looks to me as if Corcoran has fallen prey to the 'damned if you do, damned if you don't' reality zealous religious types can sometimes subject sincere people to. It is a fact of life. Nevertheless, one must avoid giving scandal at all cost. It is a tough life - sometimes people suffer for righteousness sake even at the whim of fellow Catholics. The lives of the saints are replete with such examples, founders of religious orders falsely disgraced and dismissed from their congregations, former prostitutes alienated and denied entry into religious life, and so on.
.
Besides, life isn't always fair. Divorced and remarried Catholics can't do a lot either - but they can attend Mass and pray and perform good works. That said, since Corcoran has brought a lawsuit I have to wonder if there isn't some sort of agenda motivating him at this point.
.
I worked with a traditional Catholic fellow who once mentioned his concern over a young couple we both knew who as yet had no children, "They better say something or everyone will assume thy are contracepting." (I know!) I never, ever would have thought anything as to why a couple was childless until my friend mentioned that. He explained himself by insisting that a young, childless, married Catholic couple could be a source of scandal to others - as in the case of both holding jobs or going to school - if after a year or so of marriage there was no child or any talk of a family. He also felt they needed to disclose to their friends and families if they were experiencing problems conceiving - so great was the risk of an appearance of scandal as regards contraception. Personally, I believe it is no one's business.
.
Although I thought of this episode in connection with a story coming out of Canada concerning a homosexual man who lives with a male friend, albeit chastely, yet who was nevertheless ordered by his bishop not to serve Mass at his parish church:
.
PETERBOROUGH, ON, July 7, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Jim Corcoran, the owner of one of Canada's largest and most lavish spas, has launched a human rights complaint against the Bishop of Peterborough Ontario for refusing him permission to continue to serve as an altar server. Corcoran admits that he is homosexual and lives with another homosexual man, but says that he follows the Church's teaching and lives a chaste lifestyle. According to the Catholic Register, Bishop Nicola De Angelis asked Corcoran to accept his decision that he not serve on the altar based upon the bishops' desire to avoid public scandal. Corcoran is seeking monetary damages of $25,000 from the bishop and $20,000 each from 12 parishioners who complained to the bishop about Corcoran and his roommate having been invited by the local priest to serve on the altar at Masses. - Source
.
After reading sections of his blog and the piece in the Canadian Catholic Register, it appears as if the parishioners have problems with the pastor and Mr. Corcoran was caught in the crossfire. The pastor seems to be the one who invited the men to serve on the altar in the first place. In any event, I think it would be better for Concoran to be obedient to his bishop - the bishop is in charge of liturgy for his diocese - not the parish priest or an altar server. If 12 parishioners complained, the bishop obviously was seeking to avoid cause for greater scandal. Corcoran would do well to be submissive, or at least work things out with the bishop and the pastor privately. Of course that is much too much to expect of people today, isn't it.
.
Corcoran says that he follows the teaching of the Church regarding homosexuality and that he lives a chaste life with his friend:
.
“I’m a chaste homosexual and practise my faith,” he said. While Corcoran does live with another gay man, they are devout Catholics who refrain from sexual activity in accordance with church teaching, he said. - Source
.
Nothing wrong with that and besides, that is all the Church asks - aside from requiring same-sex attracted people to refrain from promoting the homosexual lifestyle. Which may explain further why the bishop felt it necessary to intervene - I trust the men themselves had no intention of doing that - flaunting their orientation or promoting it - however other parishioners may have understood it differently. This issue is not a matter of housing or job discrimination, but doctrine and the spiritual care of souls - scandal can drive people away from the Church, as this case may have already done. One dissenter explained:
.
“Dorothy and I know personally 25 or 30 who have left the church, are going to church elsewhere,” Ward said. “We know some of them who aren’t going to church at all.” - Source
.
That is no laughing matter, but unfortunately the incident has already become politicized and contentious. I noted on another blog that a commenter speculated as to the nature of Corcoran's chaste relationship, explaining the double-speak some gay activists use regarding chastity. They can separate chastity from celibacy, or propose same sex monogamy as living chastely. Hence if a person has a partner, they may think they practice chastity by refraining from outside sexual relations, as heterosexual married couples do, or they may avoid direct sexual contact yet indulge in mutual masturbation, pornography, what have you. Of course there is absolutely no way a faithful Catholic could define such an arrangement as a chaste relationship. Likewise, many people do not consider masturbation sinful either. It is. Additionally, some gay activists see celibacy as a separate issue from chastity - it is not - not for the unmarried Catholic at least. Because of such dissimulation, trickery and blatant error, a person can easily be deceived - both the deluded persons involved in such a friendship, as well as the curious looking in.
.
It looks to me as if Corcoran has fallen prey to the 'damned if you do, damned if you don't' reality zealous religious types can sometimes subject sincere people to. It is a fact of life. Nevertheless, one must avoid giving scandal at all cost. It is a tough life - sometimes people suffer for righteousness sake even at the whim of fellow Catholics. The lives of the saints are replete with such examples, founders of religious orders falsely disgraced and dismissed from their congregations, former prostitutes alienated and denied entry into religious life, and so on.
.
Besides, life isn't always fair. Divorced and remarried Catholics can't do a lot either - but they can attend Mass and pray and perform good works. That said, since Corcoran has brought a lawsuit I have to wonder if there isn't some sort of agenda motivating him at this point.
.
I think it is better to spend one's life in service to others out of love for Christ and with a clear conscience than serving Mass.
No comments:
Post a Comment