They know not what they do…Catholicism redux
There’s something of a clash between good intent and consequential action in the Catholic Church. It is an ancient institution based on age-old dogma, and sometimes the way it thinks, demonstrates this. Despite its best efforts and intentions, the Church continues to fall foul of the modern world, where its dogma conflicts with current social realities. The recent comments from the Pope on how abstinence should be the choice in Africa and not condoms, has got the Church in hot water with those fighting the AIDS epidemic there. The Church appears to believe that no sex is a more pragmatic policy than safe sex, which empirical evidence does not appear to support. The Catholic Church, unlike some other religions, fails to update its tenets. It lacks the capacity for making its thinking contemporary. It stands the risk of being considered an irrelevant religion in all but the emerging countries in Africa and Latin America. The Catholic Church dogma on most matters of sexual politics is anathema to current social thinking and policies.
For example, a rational thinker cannot be other than saddened by the publication from the Church, “Guidelines for the Use of Psychology in the Admission and Formation of Candidates for the Priesthood.“ This details how the Church plans to screen all potential priests for potential psychological problems, including homosexuality. It seems a rather archaic view that homosexuality is a psychological condition, and further, that can be “screened” for as if it is a form of curable mental disorder. Taking such an outdated view of a person’s sexuality, once again opens up the Church to allegations of being unsupportable under rational analysis in today’s world.
But there again, maybe there is a social backlash in these uncertain times by those who felt safer with past traditionalist values on issues such as homosexuality, as the results of the Prop 8 ballot revealed. This was a measure to roll back the rights for homosexuals to marry. This Proposition, surprising many, was implemented even in States like liberal California. Religious groups spent massive amounts of money on ads, including a major investment by the Mormons, urging the faithful to vote that marriage only be defined as between a man and a woman. Bearing in mind this was not an issue of homosexuals asking to be married in church, just to have their marriage legitimized under law. As a result of this proposition, same-sex marriage rights were lost. How did this proposition succeed in this day and age? It was primarily a religious vote that brought out Christians of all ilks, including faithful Catholic Hispanics and African-Americans. It was a proposal that succeeded from the pulpit not the political dais.
The Catholic Church can be considered orthodox and historic. It is a missionary faith with representation around the world, with a special focus in Africa and Latin-America. The Catholic Church does many good works. The Catholic Church has excellent schools. It does, however, appear to many moderate individuals to be increasingly not germane to the current world. In a world where we face scarcity of resource and over-population, it denies the moral right for contraception, In a continent where AIDS is endemic, it preaches against the use of condoms. Scientific thinking is that homosexuality is not a psychological disorder, despite what the Church appears to believe. The Church needs to adapt its doctrines using consequential thinking processes. This philosophy already exists within Catholic dogma, where it can be ruled that the intent of the act governs its morality. For example, the use of a condom to prevent disease is not a sin, but an act of good intent. It is up to the Church leaders to best frame its dogma for the faithful, and it has options of interpretation within its own disciplines and tenets of thought. Churches will be full today with the faithful at prayer, but we are ever hopeful what they hear from the pulpit is a message of tolerance not one of bigotry.
Sphere: Related ContentComments (2)
It is saddening to read articles projecting a condemnation of Catholic teachings and practices that perhaps inadequately or completely fail to recognize the bases for such beliefs.
The Catholic Church has existed for over 2,000 years. As a result, the Church has guarded itself and its teachings against new interpretations, reinvention, and social movements, including the recent acceptance of homosexuality and homosexual marriage. But the Catholic Church does not stand against homosexual marriage because it is jealous or fearful of change or of any minority. It does so because it believes (arguably, very objectively) that it is following God’s will as revealed in Biblical Scripture. Therefore statements such as, “The Catholic Church… fails to update its tenets,” and, “[The Catholic Church] lacks the capacity for making its thinking contemporary,” assume that ‘updates’ and ‘being contemporary’ are not only desirable qualities, but inherently better ones. The Catholic Church, along with many other Christians, Muslims, and Jews, disagrees. For religions that believe in an eternal God, what effect could ‘popular beliefs’ and ‘contemporary understanding’ have on him? There is a saying: You can argue with a heretic, but not an unbeliever. Simply said – The Catholic Church uses the basis of divine authority to inform its decisions while the legal system and society tend to use social or civil rights. The two are dissimilar. Should one system’s basis be applied to the other?
It is also, if seen in the right light, understandable that the Catholic Church wishes to conduct psychological screenings for priests, especially for what the document in question calls “deep seated homosexual tendencies.” The instructions from the Vatican also ask for candidates to be screened for their ability to stay chaste in their vows of celibacy. Had the Vatican better screened for these in the last century, the (rightfully) shameful and horrific sexual abuse scandal in the Catholic Church might have been averted. In light of that scandal, it is surprising that such measures would be condemned. If the Church hadn’t taken steps to prevent similar crimes in the future, people, both within the Church and without, would have been outraged. This is the obvious and necessary update to be implemented if one can only employ “consequential thinking processes.”
One should be comforted, however, to know that the Catholic Church, although resistant to change, does think honestly and acknowledge truth. Eventually Copernicus was vindicated and admitted to be correct. Pope Benedict recently announced that science and faith (even evolution) are compatible. If homosexuality and Christianity are indeed compatible, the Catholic Church will come to see it. It will eventually acknowledge this sun. But only if a sun exists.
Thank you for the comment. I am of the view that dogma is a detriment to development. Church dogma has always been somewhat interpretative in response to pressure from its flock and an inherent desire to survive. I am also of the view that any belief set that fails to adapt to current societal norms will over time find itself marginalized. I think that with some creeds will find this happening to them, and will have to seek new recruits in the developing world where societal gains have yet to be made. It is less an issue of understanding, more a criticism of rigidity of a value set I believe to be incorrect. The Church will endure, but its flock in the developed world will diminish unless it becomes more tolerant and encompassing.