I know, this time was REALLY long...

First of all, I apologize to loyal blog readers that i have not been updating lately. There are two reasons. The first is that I still don't have my computer although I have been assured it is being fixed. The second reason is my back pain. It has been getting worse or at least not getting better. I had an MRI last week (a horrible horrible experience, i might add) and hopefully will find out next week how that turned out. I figured out a way to describe how I feel, finally, so that at least half the population can relate. A way beyond describing the massive amounts of painkillers I'm on in addition to the physical therapy and muscle relaxers. Basically, the last month has been like having PMS for the last month - feeling sluggish, moody, and extreme pain
(but in the mid back instead of the abdomen). So yeah, girls, you know what I'm talking about. I apologize as well to anyone who has been on the recieving end of my back-induced bad mood.

On to the next thing, which I SWEAR I would be just as pissed off about if I was not in pain. My sister was nice enough to CC me on an email to a family member who is a priest asking about this horrendous proposed ban on gay men becoming priests which the Vatican is apparently going to approve. The article is at http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/09/21/news/pope.php. I had heard mumblings about this. I had read what my sister thought about it. But then, after actually reading the article, I got ten times more angry. Here's a quote from the article:

"He said, however, that the ban was not absolute: The very definition of homosexuality, he said, is not fixed. He said there may be cases in which the church decides after discussion with a prospective seminarian that he would still make a suitable, celibate priest."

Apparently the problem with gay men is the "temptation" a seminary would present with their "homosexual tendancies" which one conservative source called a DISORDER!! Okay, good point y'all. You can't argue that heterosexual men would have the same "temptation." How lucky that they get to be taken out of the real world away from the temptation of numerous single women! The blame is being put on homosexuals in general based on cases which were overlooked or covered up by high ranking officials in the Catholic Church. Since some bishops, archbishops, cardinals, and popes decided that sexual abuse in the Church should be hidden and overlooked in many cases (by not removing priests at all from their ministry despite their mortal sins that were also illegal), the Vatican and our new pope are condemning an entire group of people who are not necessarily to blame! So yes, there is more "temptation" in the seminary for gay men but if the people in charge of the seminary did their job in supervising their "flock" and helping them get past "temptation" IF they should happen to find it a problem, those men would be STRONGER IN THE END THAN THE HETEROSEXUAL MALES WHO HAVE BEEN PUT INTO AN ARTIFICAL, WOMANLESS ENVIRONMENT!!!! Every male priest will eventually have to work with women as well as men. According to the arguement posed in this article, that would be temptation and thus background of banning a group of people from serving God.

I am Catholic, as most of you know. This issue and this article incense me to no end. I have been able to reconcile my personal beliefs with the Catholic Church's actions up to this point. I was under the impression that the Catholic Church was against homesexual ACTS but not all gay people!!! I even have problems with that much but have personnally discerned what I believe to be Truth (which is really what every intelligent being who is religious does in some way with his or her faith in a religion).

In my Feminism and Fertility class, we have started talking about how over time religions change with new issues and growth, in particular dealing with views on women, fertility, and the traditional family. History contains many examples of changes within religions that reflect new interpretations of past experiences and texts as well as times that reconciliation and change within the religion is not possible and new theologies and religions are born. Vatican 2 is an example of the first situation; The Protestant Reformation is an example of when beliefs could not be reconciled and radical "reinterpretation" or change occured based on the foundational texts and experiences of Christianity. I'm really curious to see what happens in the next few weeks over this issue, especially the reaction of American Catholics and more liberal churches around the globe.

This proposed "policy" is discrimanatory and irrational. The problem with sex abuse is that the higher powers let it happen. I would be fine if they were proposing more strict entrance requirements, maybe more counseling, and better interviews. Anything that would treat all applicants equally instead of alienating a group of individuals who happen to be homosexual but are BELOVED CHILDREN OF GOD NO MATTER WHAT!!! It is not a sin to be gay, but this policy strongly implies that it is, even without the uneducated and bigotted comments by conservative religion commentators who do not even seem to know the history and laws of nature and the Church. I know I am not the pope or the Dalai Lama or anyone with years of religion study but some of this seems like common sense. Banning a group based on biological differences is equivalent to racism. That is not something I want associated with the religion I follow. It's time for change and this is not the kind of change I'm looking for. For now I'm still Catholic and I hope that I can stay with the tradition and culture I love. But actions like these are despicable and I don't know how many more ignorant choices I can "accept" or reconcile in any way.

I am very curious to know what others think about this so comment away! I'll be checking for comments but my back doesn't like sitting at the computer for very long. But I'll try to update again soon.