Heather King, in her poignant "Ravished: Notes on Womanhood," resolved some of my puzzlement about Pope Francis and so many others.
It has baffled and perplexed me that our pontiff, like so many others with fine intellects and good hearts, has no clue about the sexual revolution and the culture war. I have wondered if he lives in another world. He seems unbothered by the plague of male promiscuity and infidelity, the resulting abandonment of women and children in poverty, the objectification and abuse of women across the global culture, the demise of virtuous masculinity and fatherhood and fidelity, the plague of pornography, the degradation and trivilization and sterilization of sexuality and gender. To be sure, Francis (and many who admire him) is not a sexual libertine. He has NOT advocated for sexual license, gay marriage or woman priests. It seems more like he "has no dog in this fight." Or, he would rather not talk about these things. Or, he wants to win people over by welcome and acceptance and downplay the Church's moral teachings. So, he highlights global warming, refugees and the death penalty. To be sure, at his best he is a gifted spiritual director and speaker, using imagery effectively to call us to other dimensions of the gospel. His call to the margins and the poor is exemplary and arguable the heart of his pontificate. But unfortunately, like many conflicts, this Culture War cannot tolerate neutrality. So his decisions have empowered those hostile to the traditional Catholic sexual ethic, The destruction of the John Paul Institute for the Study of the Family in Rome is the most brutal and blatant sign of his implicit assault on the legacy of John Paul.
Here is how Heather King has helped me. She is one very, very high-sexed Catholic woman. I have never known a woman to write so candidly, honestly, transparently about her sexuality: her longings, her wounds, her sadness. She writes as a grateful, happy, unabashed celibate...elegantly about the joys of chastity, about the sorrow of lust. She is "twice-born" (using the terminology of William James) and she knows the delight of purity and the despair of sin. You would not describe her as a culture warrior but she is probably the very most effective, subtle, gentle and effective of us all. She writes from the inside of her "womanhood" and describes it touchingly. She has known, intimately concupiscence (disordered desire) although I don't recall her using that word (she is too cool for such an old-fashioned term; but there is nothing that quite replaces it.). So, she is high-sexed, high-gendered, and high-in-concupiscence, even as she is high on the splendor of the masculine/feminine and chaste/fruitful sexuality.
So, the thought came to me: many are not so high-sexed, so high-gendered, and so high-in -concupiscence...as Heather, myself, an others. Perhaps this is why so many...of fine mind and good heart...don't care much about the culture war over sexuality.
So, the liberal/conservative divide may have something to do with low/high scale on sexuality, gender and concupiscence as well as the high/low bar on your ideal of sexuality. Being high-sexed is not a bad thing; in itself it is preferable as it is associated with intense energy, attraction, focus, generosity and appreciation. Paolo Prosperi speaks of "the generosity of eros." I am not sure what that means but it sounds fantastic! The problem is: concupiscence: disordered or sinful desire. The best combination to have would be high sex and gender, low concupiscence, and a high ideal for sex. This describes John Paul perfectly. He radiated virile energy, paternal tenderness, quiet strength...as well as a a refreshing innocence and purity. I was personally blessed with a father who, more quietly, combined the same ingredients in all I saw of him. He left me a wonderful template of masculine chastity but somehow I got more concupiscence so my adult life has been one of relentless tension between my passions and my aspirations. Obviously, I externalize my inner conflict to the wider world: so I am a fervent follower of John Paul in his teaching on chastity and gender.
And so, with regard to the Culture War, over sex and gender (and innocent life, and tradition, and authority and technology) we might identify three groups: traditionalists (often high-sexed, high in concupiscence, high-gendered, high-barred in ideal); sexual liberators (often high-sexed, high in concupiscence high-gendered, and insistent on lowering the bar); and a third group that seemed placid in their own sexuality, and concerned with other things.
This explains how many gifted, intelligent, goodhearted people are tone-deaf, insensitive, and entirely oblivious of the catastrophic spiritual-cultural war being waged for the heart and soul of our world and our Church. This explains to me how so many are on the sidelines: really have no clear, strong position on gay marriage or woman priests or contraception or pornography. The real cultural liberals, on the other hand, seem to be high on sex and on concupiscence, but they have a low ideal of sex; they are fierce in their determination to enjoy sexual license without boundaries and limits. They rage in fury and demand, from the Church, an approval for a pattern of behavior. They will NEVER get that approval! They hate the Church in her rigor.
The Culture War, raging now for over 50 years, is getting worse, not better. Standing on the sidelines is not really an option.
No comments:
Post a Comment