The Antinomian Consequences Of Homophilic Quietism
In the above item, we discussed Mike Aquilina’s preference for silence over words in caring for his friends who have problems. Now, what if you’re not an editor like Aquilina, but a professional counselor and a member of a Catholic religious order, and some of the people who come to you make it known that they are homosexual and bring up problems arising from their way of life?
This is the question Sr. Mary Anne Huddleston, I.H.M., addresses in the Jesuit weekly America (Aug. 14). Sister tells us she decided to be “pastoral.” So she offered practical advice, but when it came to the moral issue of homosexual behavior, she remained silent. She neither approved of that behavior nor expressed or explained her Church’s disapproval of it.
In taking this stance, Sister congratulates herself on winning the “trust” of homosexuals.
Sure enough, soon her homosexual counselees were inviting her to “socialize” with them. One example: Three homosexuals, she says, “invited me to accompany them on a visit to Greenwich Village…. I was introduced…into male homosexual culture…. I enjoyed the company of these and other male homosexuals, and I felt anguish over their accounts of ill treatment. I appreciated their sensitivities and talents….”
You May Also Enjoy
We can challenge genetic determinism by reaffirming both our inherent free will to make choices and our inherent dignity.
The priest and school rector demanded a retraction and apology from the concerned parents or they would not be permitted to enroll their children in the parish school.
Whenever gay-rights groups are challenged democratically and lose, they complain of being victims of entrenched bigots. November's elections provide some excellent examples.