"'... it was a truant’s freedom that I loved' - Not precise but dead on."
That's what Fr. Z wrote regarding a translation of The Confessions of St. Augustine by Pine-Coffin.
For example, when Augustine is talking about his profligate youth in Carthage, P. renders “amans vias meas et non tuas, amans fugitivam libertatem” (3.3.5) as Good article - or well-intentioned. I've thought along these lines as well - but it would be opposed by gay activists all the same. She mentions Dr. Nicolosi and they hate him and his research - gay Catholics like Tushnet and friends at Spiritual Friendship totally reject his stuff as well as Courage. I'll read this again and may work it in to some posts, but the resistance to this type of thing is strong - precisely because the gay Catholic movement wants to keep the gay identity thing and 'sanctify' it., not yours, but it was a truant’s freedom that I loved”. Not precise but dead on. - Quaeritur
I think the quote from St. Augustine is dead on for many reasons. It may be difficult for me to be 'precise' however. I've been outsmarted by better writers and thinkers, and my thoughts on particular moral issues are considered by some to be dated, at best.
That said, I really think the still-pagan-Augustinian 'problem' is what affects many younger people and their rejection of faith and morals. Augustine is a great saint, a great example, in every aspect of his life, from his relentless search for truth to his licentiousness. Of course penitents of all ages have been drawn to the Saint on account of his repentance and conversion, and most especially his teaching. Today I see mirrored in Augustine's pre-converted life, something similar to what I see in the new atheists turned new converts, as well as many - though not all - gay-Catholics/Christians. It seems to me not a few struggle to assimilate their sort of 'personal truth' into their Christian experience. Yet once again, Augustine is a wonderful example of how to do that, as well as what not to do. Nevertheless, some would disparage his example as too culturally bound, feeling the need to revise and reinterpret his 'stuff' to suit progressive thought.
"I loved my own way..."
So you see, I'm already in way over my head, but I think many today retain an inordinate attachment to that "truant’s freedom" and subsequently remain ensnared to some degree, holding on - perhaps only by a thread, to the "I loved my own way, not yours..." POV. (At least when challenged.)
I've been reading many things on the 'problem' of 'gay-Catholic'. Most of these people feel the linguistic battle over gay vs. same sex attracted is a waste of time. I think SSA works for official Church publications, but ordinary, every day use of gay is pretty universal - so what can I say? The debate reminds me of a Seinfeld episode when Frank Costanza was discussing chickens while at dinner in Susan's parents house.
Frank Costanza: Let me understand, you got
the hen, the chicken and the rooster. The rooster goes with the chicken. So,
who's having sex with the hen?
George
Costanza: Why don't we talk about it another time.
Frank Costanza: But you see my point here? You
only hear of a hen, a rooster and a chicken. Something's missing!
Mrs. Ross: Something's missing all right.
Mr. Ross: They're all chickens. The
rooster has sex with all of them.
I'll take it a bit further. "You got your LesbianGayBiTrannie ... which one is SSA?" Like Susan's dad, I answer, "They're all queer. Some just don't have sex." Or something like that - but you get the idea.
And that, people, is one more reason why gay people hate me.
Moving along...
Reading gay-Catholics is helpful in understanding some of the problems they still have in understanding Catholic teaching. It also helps explains how non-gay Catholics seem to be second guessing themselves, Church teaching, pastoral care of homosexual persons, mean Pope Ratzinger, and same sex marriage issues. Joseph Bottum's about face comes to mind - followed up by his explanation for that here:
"What’s changed is my encounter with young people, or what has changed me is my encounter with young people. My reading of the rising generation of Catholic bloggers…these are 20-somethings. They’re out of college, they’re serious Catholics […] and they’re saying, “Look I understand the theology and I accept the theology but I have a phenomenological crisis, because here in front of me are these people who are growing […] to see the Catholic Church as the image and the focus—to use a literary word, as the synecdoche—for all oppression of homosexuals.” There are bishops and priests and many Catholic spokesmen who agree with him as well.
Then there are those well meaning advocates who believe a new approach to homosexuality is needed.
If we are going to save our culture, it is important that Christians change their approach toward homosexuality. Fighting the GLBTQ (Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer) agenda in the legislatures and courts will not succeed as long as the GLBTQ activists define the debate. We must treat same-sex attraction and sexual identity disorders (the so-called transgendered and queer) as what they are—preventable and treatable problems.
Such a change in attitude has happened before with alcoholism and abortion and needs to happen again. - Crisis
As I wrote to a friend: "Good article - or well-intentioned. I've thought along these lines as well - but it would be opposed by gay activists all the same - 'preventable and treatable' are red flags even to the most faithful 'gay-Catholic'. The author mentions Dr. Nicolosi and most 'gay-Catholics' despise him and his research - NARTH - 'gay-Catholics' totally reject his stuff, as well as Courage Apostolate. Which, BTW, is 'new' in the Church - it's been tried and is true - rejection of the Apostolate suggests to me at least, a certain elitist resistance. Resistance to the idea of homosexuality as a 'preventable and treatable problem' is pervasive and strong - precisely because the 'gay-Catholic' movement wants to keep the gay identity thing and 'sanctify' it."
Yep.
... to be continued.
