Tuesday, October 27, 2015

Ragged Questions After the Synod — Deafening Silence About How the Homosexuals Took Another One Upside the Head to Facilitate Pastoral Breakthrough for Everyone Else

A stray (but not really) thought as we pack for our drive back home in a few minutes:

Isn't it interesting that almost nothing is being written now in either the Catholic or the mainstream media about how "the homosexuals" took another one upside the head in the latest synod gathering, in order for some pastoral opening to occur for the divorced and remarried (for straight Catholics, that is to say)?

It's as if nothing about the predictable, very old, very tired, very immoral objectification of a segment of the human community — yet again, after all these years — by pastoral leaders of the Catholic church in order to attain a tiny, desired pastoral breakthrough for straight Catholics deserves commentary. 

If that's the case, then why, I wonder?

Is it self-evident that those who are LGBT just do not deserve to be treated in any humane way by the pastoral leaders of the Catholic church? Because Catholic teaching? Because they are, after all, sinners?

Or is the story just so stale that the powers that be consider it not worth telling?

Are most lay Catholics, including the "liberal" ones celebrating the pope's management of this synod, truly that morally obtuse? Are they truly that morally immature?

Is Club Catholic truly so deeply heterosexist that its faithful adherents are simply oblivious to the ways in which they use their LGBT brothers and sisters to score points that make their own lives more comfortable?

Or is there some hidden, unvoiced shame among the many mainstream media voices and the voices in the Catholic media who are celebrating the pope's political canniness in making the tiny breakthrough for divorced (i.e., straight) Catholics happen — shame at their silence, at their complicity, as they celebrate — so that they do not have a clue what to say?

Or how, after all these years, to invite real gay voices into their conversations . . . ?

What do all of you think about this?

(Leah Mickens's very much appreciated comment to me this morning somehow sparks these thoughts as I toss this and that into suitcases and then grab my computer as we head out of our hotel room).

I find the graphic used at many websites, but haven't yet found one that gives information about its origins.

No comments: