Feb 8, 2013

Proof of Heaven: Ruminations on Being Gay and the Afterlife





I've been in a period of retreat and seclusion for the past several months, since before Christmas, and it's been a wonderful respite from all of the 'problems and turmoil' of the world. I did keep one eye slightly open upon various news items around the world, as well as the usual sordid scandals within the Catholic Church. Yet  somehow all of it seemed so very unimportant and slightly unreal, when set against the peace and joy from the indwelling Spirit, the living flame of Love, as John of the Cross so lovingly described it, a living Presence calling one into communion with the Beloved in solitude and silence. 



There are times when we are called to retreat into the depths of this inner silence and other times when we are called to carry the peace that 'surpasses understanding' into the troubled marketplace. While I feel deeply connected to the mystical core of the Catholic faith, and called to witness to this essential living mystery, I don't feel called by vocation to focus so intently upon all of the scandalous stories surrounding this imploding institution. If one focuses too myopically upon these scandals up close, it can be quite depressing and dispiriting and give one the illusion that 'this is all there is,' when in fact the Catholic charism continues in its burning intensity and will long outlast the petty if shocking scandals of the moment. Yes, living the charism does compel one to witness against the sins and distortions that obscure this living mystery, but living the mystery itself must take priority over focusing upon the scandals - which can become an addiction all in itself. Personally, I'm not called to act as a watchdog, but I value and respect those who do feel so called and rely upon them to keep me informed. 

As an aside, I've just finished reading Hilary Mantel's Booker Award winning, Wolf Hall, which chronicles the separation of the English Church from the Roman Catholic Church in the 16th century, all written through the eyes of the supposed villain of the times, Thomas Cromwell, who engineered the death of the 'saintly' Thomas More (for those readers who know their English history). I found it interesting and worthwhile to be reminded of the terrible scandals of the past, scandals that always seem to be associated with the Roman branch of the Catholic Church. In this case, it is the fact that Alessandro Farnese succeeded Clement VII to the papacy, despite having fathered four sons (or so Mantel alleges). And it was good to be reminded that we burned individuals at the stake for simply  possessing a copy of the Gospels written in the vernacular.  So this has been the conundrum, the paradox, the continuing never ending scandal of the Roman Catholic Church, that so many of us feel mystically bonded to an inner Mystery living within such a scandalous institution, a Mystery that calls us to belief in its holy existence despite all the scandals and signs of contradiction, as well as despite the baffled, outraged  incomprehension of those outside the Church  who -quite understandably- cannot fathom our complicity in such a faith. What is it that we find so compelling that justifies our continual devotion despite so many crimes and scandals. And then there are those like myself who feel called to live the mystery on a mystical level, without practicing the faith on a practical level by joining a formal Roman community of worshipers. The only way I can personally protect the 'living flame' is by maintaining a certain distance. 





During these past few peaceful months, I've been doing reading and research for the novel I'm writing a crime novel set in Prague which is also a young gay teen love story. Since the novel also has a 'Catholic' aura to it, I've also been going back through some classic Catholic/Christian literature, from Dostoevsky to Graham Greene to present day works (which are few and far between). The first book I finished within the past few months was John Greene's award winning young adult novel, The Fault in Our Stars, which received Time Magazine's endorsement as the 'best novel of 2012,' a fact which somewhat lowers my respect for Time Magazine's judgement. 





Green's award winning book is about two young teens dying of cancer and yes, as the awards attest, he does manage to avoid most of the cliches and sentimentalities of such works, while creating two of the most original teen voices in contemporary fiction. Yet not entirely. The love story is indeed profoundly moving and the unflinching honesty, even cynicism, with which these young teens face death is truly inspiring in part. Unfortunately, however, religion or spirituality of any kind is relentlessly ridiculed in the novel, and one gets the sense that the author thinks it is 'uber' cool to be so starkly atheistic and despairing, when in fact such a stance is already a bit old fashioned. Every adult in the novel is portrayed as foolish and befuddled by life and of very little help to the young lovers themselves, and that is certainly a standard cliche of young adult fiction. Every representative of a belief in the afterlife is depicted as a self serving delusional fool. Only the teens are clever enough to see through the the ruses and hypocrisies  of adult believers and to face head on the brutal fact that this earth is only a doomed and dying rock spinning around a dying star, and we ourselves are mere molecules doomed for extinction.

This rather traditional teen atheism reminded me of a passage from Graham Greene's The Power and the Glory, which was itself published in 1940, at a time when such sentiments were indeed fashionable:

In reference to the Mexican lieutenant, who is doggedly tracking the 'Whiskey Priest' with an eye to arresting him (at a time when being Catholic was a crime punished by death in Mexico), Greene puts these sentiments into the man's mind:

It infuriated him to think that there were still people in the state who believed in a loving and merciful God. There are mystics who are said to have experienced God directly. He was a mystic, too, and what he had experienced was vacancy- a complete certainty in the existence of a dying, cooling world, of human beings who had evolved from animals for no purpose at all. He knew. 


The possibility of a spiritual dimension to the human person, a dimension that might be 'eternal' and might transcend the physical limitations of the body, this possibility is not even hinted at within John Green's novel, which I consider quite irresponsible for an author of young adult teen fiction. 


 Yes, it is refreshing and iconoclastic in a healthy sort of way, to reject all false comforts and escapist dreams, and instead to face heroically the stark truths of human mortality. Yet when dealing with young teens, there should at least be the hint of an alternative viewpoint and the possibility of an argument for a more spiritual vision, even if as an author one does not want to endorse that viewpoint oneself. Fair enough.  But there isn't such an alternative viewpoint in John Green's novel, which makes the hype surrounding this work all the more disturbing. Yes, the love story is very moving, so much so that I mourned for days after the 'death' of one of the principal characters (the young boy who so passionately loved the girl), and mourned more deeply than I can remember ever mourning for a fictional character. It is the great achievement of the book, that the young couple come so alive that one grieves for their passing and feels their terrible loss. But stacking the deck against a spiritual viewpoint mars the book considerably, and in my opinion, places it firmly in the realm of old fashioned, outdated cliche, all comments to the contrary notwithstanding. Teens deserve better than this.


By a synchronistic coincidence, simultaneously with The Fault in Our Stars, I was also reading the remarkable 'near death' memoir by neurosurgeon, Dr. Eben Alexander, Proof of Heaven.




Dr. Alexander, a brilliant neuro-scientist who received his credentials from some of the most prestigious schools in America,  shared the convictions and scientific view of the vast majority of doctors and scientists - that near death experiences, while certainly real enough subjectively for those who passed through them, were also simply nothing more than the final chemical discharges of the brain. It was a prejudice he was to see shattered by his own seven day near death experience. 

This book is being lauded as 'the longest near death experience' ever recorded (seven days in a coma), and it is an astonishing, inspiring story, not least for the fact that Dr. Alexander is precisely the sort of scientist who would have endorsed Greene's sentiments above. He had no religious convictions at all prior to his experience and remained convinced - ala the prevailing scientific world view - that when the brain dies, consciousness dies with it. " Human beings ... had evolved from animals for no purpose at all."

From Amazon.com's blurb:

One morning in 2008 he fell into a coma after suffering a rare form of bacterial meningitis. Scans of his brain revealed massive damage. Death was deemed the most likely outcome. As his family prepared themselves for the worst, something miraculous happened. Dr Alexander's brain went from near total inactivity to awakening. He made a full recovery but he was never the same. He woke certain of the infinite reach of the soul, he was certain of a life beyond death.

In this astonishing book, Dr Alexander shares his experience, pieced together from the notes he made as soon as he was able to write again. Unlike other accounts of near-death experiences, he is able to explain in depth why his brain was incapable of fabricating the journey he experienced. His story is one of profound beauty and inspiration.

Dr. Alexander should not have recovered at all from his coma, let alone a full recovery with all of his mental faculties restored. Medically speaking, his recovery is nothing short of 'miraculous', and he now firmly believes it was for a reason. He feels he has been  called, because of his medical background and former convictions, to witness to the nature of the Afterlife, a 'reality' which so many of his scientific colleagues firmly refuse to accept. 

His account of his spiritual journey into the world of the Spirit beyond death is the most profoundly moving rendition of a NDE I have ever read, it is beyond astounding. And because it is so extensive and detailed, you feel as if in some way you have taken the journey with him. This is by far the most 'realistic' description of a NDE currently on record. Yet it needs to be read to be experienced, so there is little point in my attempting to summarize it. I cannot recommend the book too highly. 

However, apart from the beauty of the Spirit world he encountered, two other things struck me with particular force about the book. The first is his sensitive account of the thoughts and sentiments expressed by his concerned family members and friends who gathered around his bedside during his coma and who attempted to comfort one another. Alexander gathered these comments together after his recovery and they give a picture of a remarkable community of loving friends struggling through a terribly painful and distressing experience, one which challenges their own faith and convictions. The  comforting, spiritual remarks they make to one another (not always with complete conviction, more out of desperation and hope) are precisely the kinds of comments that John Green ridicules with such sarcasm in The Fault In Our Stars, and reading these accounts simultaneously with Green's novel revealed to me in stark clarity how shallow and contrived Green's writing is in this regard, despite his justly lauded success in characterization. Dr. Alexander's loving community of family and friends seems so psychologically healthy and well balanced and gives one a sense that they reflect the best of human nature during the most trying of times. 

The second thing that struck me about the book is that during Dr. Alexander's seven day journey into the afterlife he meets a sister whom he never knew he had (since he was adopted at an early age), but whose existence he discovered when he inquired of his natural birth parents after his full recovery. But...and this is my point, nowhere during his seven day sojourn does he encounter Jesus or any representative member of the Christian faith, despite having attended Episcopal services with his family. He states that the Episcopal Church and its services never resonated within his being, since he did not consider himself a 'man of faith,' and attended more out of familiar bonding. After he returned from his NDE, however, he found he could experience a connection with the same loving Divine Presence of his NDW within the hallowed walls of the Episcopal Church- but still without any explicitly Christian content. He had become a believer in the Divine and the Afterlife, but not in strictly Christian terms. And that is a very contemporary sentiment and a healthy counter balance to any sense of exclusivism on the part of any religious tradition. His book also makes a perfect counterbalance to the cynicism and bleakness of John Greene's teen novel.

But back to The Fault in Our Stars. One of the stories John Greene does hold up for ridicule is the story of the 6 year old Italian Catholic girl , Antonietta Meo,  whose leg was amputated and who died at the age of six, radiating joy and serenity to all those around her and expressing a passionate love and devotion to Jesus that rivals the greatest saints. Her cause for canonization Benedict XVI approved in 2007, thus paving the way to making her the youngest non martyred saint in Catholic history. The story of Anonietta is introduced into Green's novel by one of the more reprehensible and untrustworthy characters in the book, Peter Van Houten, and for the young cancer ridden young teens he constitutes one more failure of the adult world to offer them any authentic succor or hope. Hazel, the narrator, responds to the story of Antonietta and her joyful embrace of suffering and  sublime acceptance  of death, as "Bullshit," which is probably understandable in a young teen dying of cancer without any spiritual resources to aid her. So we are not expected to take the story of Antonietta Meo seriously in Green's novel, or are we...It's difficult to say, and I suspect he may have dropped the story into the text as a subtitle indirect suggestion, knowing that certain curious readers would immediately follow the link, which is exactly what I did. 




Born in 1930, Antonietta contracted osteosarcoma at the age of six and had to have her leg amputated. 

From the Vatican website:


A religious sister who was a nurse in the clinic testified: “One morning, while I was helping the nurse was in charge of ordering the room of the little girl, her father entered. After caressing her, he asked her: “Do you feel much pain?” And Antonietta said: “Daddy, the pain is like fabric, the stronger it is, the more value it has.” The religious sister added: “If I had not heard this with my own ears, I would not have believed it.”

She begins to go to elementary school at the age of six, with a prosthesis that bothers her greatly. However, she offers it all to Jesus: “May each step that I take be a little word of love”. She wants to celebrate the day of the anniversary of her amputation with a big lunch and with a novena to Our Lady of Pompeii, because thanks to this event she was able to offer her suffering to Jesus.

The night of Christmas of 1936, she receives her First Holy Communion with great fervor, and a few months later she receives Confirmation. The amputation of her leg had not stopped the tumor that had spread to the head, hand, foot, throat, and mouth. Both the pain of the illness and the treatments that tried to heal her were very strong.

When they would meet a poor person, it was she who wanted to give her the cent that she had. She liked to attend school and catechism class; she wrote to Jesus: “I go enthusiastically, because I learn so many beautiful things about You and Your saints.”

She died in the midst of terrible pains. She had not even completed seven years of age.
She has been declared “Venerable” by Pope Benedict XVI on December 17th, 2007. Her life has been a witness of sanctity for children who suffer.


However, the Vatican website was certainly not enough for me, so I came to Antonietta's letters, and it was here I became convinced we are in the presence of one of those remarkable mystical events in the Roman Catholic tradition that are so inexplicable to non believers. How can a child so young be so evidently advanced in the spiritual life, reaching heights of rapturous love for her Divine Beloved. This is what the Roman Catholic tradition does best, however, which is to provide a tradition that fosters such sanctity and a haven for such astounding mystical growth for which no rational explanation suffices. And no amount of cynicism on our part or resentment against the hierarchy and the Pope for this or that grievous offense, should prejudice us against believing in the sanctity of this extraordinary child. 

Here is one example:
Dear Jesus the Crucified I love You so much I love You so I want to stay with You on the Calvary and I suffer with joy because I know I'm on the Calvary. Dear Jesus. I thank You for having sent me this illness because it is a means to get to Paradise. Dear Jesus tell God the Father that I love Him, too. Dear Jesus I want to be Your lamp and Your lily dear Jesus. Dear Jesus give me the strength to bear this pain I offer You for the sinners. Dear Jesus tell the Holy Spirit to enlighten me with love and fill me with Its seven gifts. Dear Jesus tell sweet Virgin Mary that I love Her so much and I want to stay with Her on the Calvary because I want to be Your victim of love dear Jesus. Dear Jesus I entrust my father confessor to You and grant him every necessary favour. Dear Jesus I entrust my parents and my sister Margherita to You. Dear Jesus
Greetings and kisses Antonietta of Jesus

It is one of the hallmarks of very advanced spiritual development, in the Catholic tradition especially, that the 'soul' displays a passionate, loving thirst for 'suffering,' not as a good in itself, but as a means of further purifying the soul to bring it closer to the Divine Flame and as a means of proving one's love for the Beloved. It is not suffering itself that is being lauded, hallowed or absolutized, but a thirst for sacrifice born out of love. This is all the more remarkable when such loving sacrifice and sanctity manifests itself in the life of a child - which in my view simply offers evidence for belief in the possibility of 'reincarnation,' and that is hardly a Catholic view. (Thanks for Prickly Pear for pointing out to me that 28% of Catholics believe in reincarnation.)

The problem arrises, however...and it goes without saying this constitutes one of the weakness of the Roman Catholic Tradition - when this mystical thirst becomes misinterpreted by those of us who are not so highly developed spiritually and in our lesser hands, this thirst becomes distorted into an unhealthy obsession with suffering as a good in itself and the suffering saints of our tradition are then worshipped and 'pedastaled' as signs of the tribal superiority of our religion. This is especially a temptation for figures of authority like the Pope, who one suspects, uses the existence of such special charisms within the body Catholic as justifications for his own particular policies and spiritual worldview. 'See the kinds of holy witnesses I am called by God to protect and  foster, and part of this protection must include resistance to all the 'modernist' influences in the Church since Vatican II which would diminish our respect for the kind of holiness manifested in the life of Antonietta Meo.' That this particular kind of holiness is a very partial and limited one goes without saying. 

However, how many schoolchildren have been oppressed by such stories told to them at an age when they are far too young to appreciate the mystical depths of such young lives. And this brings me back to Graham Greene's The Power and the Glory. At one point in the novel, a mother is tirelessly reading the story of the Mexican martyr, Blessed Padre Juan Miguel Pro, to her young children, one of whom is a perfectly normal, rambunctious little boy of six. As the mother drones on and on:

"Juan, unknown to all but his Confessor, was preparing himself for the  evil days ahead with the most rigorous mortifications. His companions suspected nothing, for he was always the heart and soul of every merry conversation...."

I don't believe a word of it, the boy said with sullen fury, not a word of it.

How dare you!

Nobody could be such a fool. ...

Go to your father.

Anything to get away from this....it  sounds so silly..." 

And of course as readers, we sympathize completely with the little boy and his resistance to such stultifying sanctimoniousness, one of the worst aspects of the Roman Catholic tradition, and this resistance brings us back to the cry of "Bullshit" uttered  by Hazel in The Fault in Our Stars in reaction to the story of Antonietta Meo. 

And yet such holy children exist and their sanctity is real as is their witness in the face of suffering and death, however qualified by weaknesses that have been blotted away by hagiography. 

As an example of synchronicity, which we used to refer to as 'Providential' coincidences, at the same time as reading the above two books, I was also browsing through the superlative new biography of Jack Kerouac by Joyce Johnson, The Voice Is All, because Kerouac is another tormented Roman Catholic writer, who remained 'chained' to the Roman Catholic tradition, despite his immersion in Buddhism. 


And what did I find? That Kerouac remained haunted all his life by the memory of his 'saintly' older brother, Gerard, who died  of Rheumatic Fever at the age of nine when Kerouac was four. Kerouac remembered the gentleness and sweetness of his brother's nature and his remarkable courage and serenity in the face of death. So yet again another example of youthful spirituality in the face of death.

As another example of synchronicity, I was also reading and just finishing, David Plante's deeply moving memoir, American Ghosts, which chronicles his experience of growing up Catholic and gay in Canada in the 1950's. (I read about four or five books at the same time, switching from one to another when losing concentration, a practice I picked up in college.). 



In his youth, Plante went through a deeply pious, intensely devout Catholic phase, attending daily Mass in the early morning, practicing mortifications, and contemplating a vocation to the priesthood. He was nonetheless haunted by the Indian religion of his Canuck Indian ancestors, which colored his own Catholicism with the hint of a deeper, darker mystery.  However, in early youth, he had left the faith of his childhood behind, convinced that God did not exist, and like the young lovers in The Fault in Our Stars, equally convinced that reliance upon religious sentiments in the face of death constituted false hopes and delusions to be avoided. One needed to face the stark reality of death without flinching. Plante also has a model of Catholic mystical devotion to sacrifice and suffering, his demented and unbalanced Aunt Cora, who at first impresses him deeply until he sees through the sham of her mystical devotions. This is biography not fiction and the reader accepts Plante's sorrowful judgement that this one witness to holiness is ultimately false. 

Plante then embarks upon an astonishing spiritual journey as a gay man and discovers in his gay sexuality an experience so rich and powerful that it transports him into a rare spiritual dimension, a dimension that would be denied him within the Roman Catholic tradition, not simply because it is gay, but because it is simply richly sexual and mystical combined. 

In a moment of epiphany with is first lover, he states:

I saw him walk through the streaming beam of moonlight towards my bed, towards me, his erection preceding him. My defeat (he thought the young man had earlier rejected him) turned immediately to the glory of the onrushing realization of everything, everything, everything I had ever wanted, with no possibility now of anything being held back, and I held out my arms to him. No sensation, none, had ever been or would ever equal the sensation of his body in contact with my body. 

And in having so much, I wanted more, and the more I had the more I felt that everything would come together into something complete, something even more complete than a body, something that, as if it enveloped, gave the body its  completeness. I made love, made love with a passion that amazed me, for that completeness, for that more, for everything. I made love for the completeness of everything beyond us, of everything out in the world there was to see, to hear, to touch, to taste and to smell...Making love, I was free joyously free, in the sense of everything coming together of itself, far beyond my ability to bring it together. 

Coming alive for the first time as a sensual human being, Plante felt he could now approach the communion rail in Church and that "instead of my bowels bursting asunder, I would emit a glow from all my body for having come alive in all my senses. Able to imagine, with delight in my imagination, being in my own beatific state, I felt very far away from a state of sin."

His journey takes a dark turn after these transcendent moments, however, as Plante is unable to find any support in his traditional Catholicism for his radiant sensual experiences as a sexual gay man.

The death of a dear friend in Paris, leaves him "feeling with utter starkness, that nothing, absolutely nothing was possible that might give meaning to this world, and that any longing I had for such a meaning led only to a false devotion to what did not exist." And that, of course, is the sentiments of the young lovers in The Fault in Our Stars, and one suspects, of the author John Greene, himself, the fear of believing in false comforts. 

Of his dead friend, he says, "That Sonia and I were both lapsed Catholics was, she had said to me when we'd found this out about each other, 'our secret.'
She rejected God, any God, with a force that would have destroyed God had God existed....She would rage, rage, not only against any belief in God, which she found totally uninteresting, but against God himself for ever having supposed he existed, for ever having supposed he was of any interest to anyone. He had never existed, and he was of no, but absolutely no, interest. 

As a beautiful girl and athletic and blond, Sonia was born in India and then educated in the convent school of the Sacred Heart nuns in Roehampton, England. She hated, then and forever, the nuns...The nuns, she said, had made her bathe in a long white shift so she wouldn't see her body, had denied her a mirror to brush her hair, had insisted she lie in bed with her arms crossed over her girl's bosom as if she were a corpse so that she would be in the position to receive God if he came during the night to take her away into the hereafter, that hereafter for which she must sacrifice everything here.

One reads such a passage with a weary sigh of recognition,  the terrible harm caused by a sexually repressive religious tradition, which has absolutized and exalted a false sense of suffering into a mystical ideal. And yet the soul of Antonietta Meo remains a pure witness to the possibilities of joy in suffering borne out of love. 

Plante continues:
She reacted with outrage to the saying that humans can be more than human, that when they are touched by God's grace they transcend themselves, cease to be selfish, and become selfless and devoted and helpful to others, that a person has a soul and that after death the soul is meant to be united with God in eternity. She would have denounced you: Humans have no souls and no other fate but to die, and to die means to cease to exist and nothing more...

I believed she had the right to, believed that in rejecting a faith that tried to destroy her in the name of trying to save her she had earned the right to denounce hypocrisies.

From this point on, Plante's journey becomes even more interesting. He meets, falls in love with and marries a Greek man named Nikko, who is a devout Greek Orthodox Christian. He attends Easter services with Nikko every year without recovering his childhood religious faith, the loss of which he counts as the "worst thing that had ever happened to him." 

He then meets a young woman named Mary, a devout but enlightened Catholic, who seeks to draw him back to his religious faith. Following her suggestions, he does visit a Catholic Church and immediately feels himself transported into a deep and silent mystery.

So there was a great silence and stillness in the church, and I, in that silence and stillness, went into what I can only call a state of grace.

Yet Plante feels this is not a 'state of grace' leading him to abandon his present convictions and return to the faith of his childhood. Meeting his friend, Mary, that afternoon, he tells her. 

"Mary I do not believe in God . All I believe is this: There is no salvation for us, there is no life after death for us, there is no eternity for us. God does not exist. 

Accepting a temporary post at the University of Quebec in Montreal, Plante returns home to Canada in 1990 after many years of exile living in London with his husband, Nikko. He finds that religion had disappeared from the language,

"that religion, for which  le Canada had been, when I was growing up, the mystical country of miracles, had vanished...Canadians stopped going to church, boys no longer had vocations to be priests or girls to be nuns, and the seminaries and convents were left to the old religious who could no longer function, or they were sold. ...My students were writing in a language that had nothing to do with God..."

Yet Plante continues to yearn for transcendence and to heal the split within his own being between the secular and the religious. He finds himself in church both wanting and not wanting to be there, and yearning for a sense of meaning both for himself and for his ancestors, 

"I wanted this, I longed for this, for all my ancestors. And at the same time I knew, with the same starkness of fact that came to me when I saw how many in my ancestral world could not sign their names, that what I wanted, what I longed for, was impossible for them, for for anyone, because there was no world beyond this world."

Plante then travels to France in search of his roots and the history of his French ancestors, and while there experiences an epiphany that resolves in one powerful spiritual insight the sense of division between his own being. One can only call such a moment a 'state of grace,' given to him freely and gratuitously outside the context of his childhood faith, because he has been called into a different dimension, one free of reliance upon religious institutions, but no less spiritual and whole for all that. It is a Zen like moment of pure awareness that lifts Plante above the need for the reconciliation of opposites and in that pure moment, his longing for healing disappears, because he has become whole. Suddenly, he is free of the past, of his Canuck Indian ancestory, his Roman Catholic history and devotions, free of his supposed atheism and despair, free of all negativity and doubt, simple immersed in the sacred awareness of the moment. 

He sees the dead filled with 'star bright awareness.'

I thought, "Their awareness is illuminated by that infinite darkness behind them, which makes their awareness so acute, so dazzling, so utterly without personal thought or feeling, so utterly without commentary, utterly without opinion, utterly without judgement, but radiant with attention to everything all together, with impersonal compassion for everyone, with all-inclusive love, which the living themselves are incapable of. 

He returns home and a year later travels with his lover Nikko to the island of Paros. One evening they walk to the sea and stopped and gazed at the dark blue waters. Plante said to his lover, Nikko, and realizes that here, just here, has always been the answer to his quest and his relentless searching. He says to Nikko, "If I were to fix one of the moments in my life which I would like to last forever, it would be this one."


And Nikko asks, "Why fix any moment?"

To which Plante replies, "Because it's so pleasant, because I feel it's so whole."


And to himself, Plante asked the question, "Why did you feel the moment whole? I answered myself, because his love is enough. 

This gay man has ended his long, lonely, religious journey with the awareness that the love between himself and his lover is sufficient to all things. This love even answers the question of personal survival after death, because in the radiance of this love, such a question is no longer relevant  and the supports and comforts of religion are no longer needed.  Love is enough. 

It is a beautiful, moving ending to a long religious search and it is noteworthy that Plante's  'enlightenment' occurs outside any explicit religious context or structure. The message I take away from this is that each of us is called to a particular path, the Spirit blows where she wills, and while some find their sustenance within a religious tradition, others are led elsewhere, the Spirit thereby revealing to us that no spiritual path, tradition, institution is an absolute. However, what should be most moving to us in the LGBT community is that the Spirit revealed herself most fully to David Plante within the love that flowed between himself and his husband of forty years, Nikko. 

Plante ends his book with this poem. 

In your darkness, God,
Help me to see
The carafe of water, the glass
The spectacles left on the open book,
And the pillow on the unmade bed. 


Check out David Plante's memoir of his forty year relationship with Nikko:

The Pure Lover: A Memoir of Grief




Dec 13, 2012

One Gay Man's Return to the Catholic Church: A Reason not to Boycott


AS a complement or contrast to my previous post, 50 Reasons to Boycott the Catholic Church, here is a very inspiring story taken from the book. Sense of the Faithful, How American Catholics Live Their Faith, by Jerome Baggett (2008). I find it most interesting that this anecdote constitutes the opening of the book itself.




Ending and Beginning

“The thing about American Catholicism is that it both exists and doesn’t exist!” Bill
McNamara blurts out these words but then seems surprised by them, as if he had
happened unexpectedly upon someone from his past. He tarries a bit, refl ecting.
“What do I mean by that?” he asks, now seemingly reacquainted and rightly confi -
dent that he has anticipated my next question. “I mean it exists in the sense that it’s
an it, something you and I can talk about, and we can identify elements of it and so
forth. But it doesn’t exist as some monolithic, unchanging thing. It’s not as if any
one person understands it and lives it out the same way all the time or in quite the
same way as anyone else.”

Even though Bill was among the very first people I interviewed for this book,
I permitted myself an early conclusion: He knows what he is talking about. After
many cups of tea and through constant interruptions by Rusty, his seal-point
Siamese— whose name, like those of all of the respondents in this book, is a
pseudonym—Bill’s account of his life and faith demolished the idea that American
Catholicism could be “some monolithic, unchanging thing.”

Born into a working-class family in the early 1930s, Bill grew up in an almost
entirely Irish section of Philadelphia. His upbringing was typical of the “urban villagers”
about whom sociologist Herbert Gans once wrote so compellingly.1 The
ethnically defi ned neighborhood, the modest economic means, the large family that
included Bill and fi ve younger siblings, the clearly prescribed gender roles to which
his contractor father and stay-at-home mother purportedly strictly conformed, the
traditional—and, in this case, traditionally Catholic—mores: Bill can recall it all in
vivid, if not wistful, detail. The particulars of his religious upbringing are especially
memorable to him. He attended nearby parochial schools until he was swayed by an
unexpectedly generous fi nancial aid package to enroll in a large public university,
where he majored in accounting. He went to church each week without fail, and,
unless serving as an altar boy for an unpopular (read: inordinately early) Mass, he
was typically accompanied by his entire immediate family. This instilled in him
an enduring love for the beauty of the Mass and especially its music, which he
still compares favorably to the “cacophonous crap” one hears at other, mercifully
unnamed parishes. One of the younger parish priests served as a “friend and kind
of mentor” for Bill who could talk to him about nearly anything, including at one
point his own—admittedly short-lived—thoughts of entering the seminary. And,
of course, there are the stories that seem to be standard fare among Catholics of
Bill’s generation. From the accounts of his mentor’s many kindnesses to the somewhat
overwrought “ruler-wielding nun” tales, from now-humorous accounts of
fi rst confession trepidation (“Hell, it was scary in that little booth!”) to feelings of
intense piety while accompanying Jesus along the Stations of the Cross each Friday
afternoon during Lent, Bill’s world was Catholic through and through.

However, once he entered his twenties, that world came to an end. “I never
had any animosity like a lot of gay Catholics who had bad experiences in school or
things like that,” he confi des. “I wasn’t against it, but I didn’t feel that comfortable
with it anymore.” Always attracted to men, Bill fi rst became sexually active at the
age of twenty-six. Then, rather than concealing from others what he considers his
“honest, true self,” he moved to San Francisco, where he got a well-paying job with
an insurance company and eventually began his new life as an openly gay man.
He closed the door on his Catholicism slowly at fi rst, then fi nally slammed it shut.
This age-old tradition seemed incongruous with his new city and job, new friends,
and, after ten years or so, a relationship and then a newfound level of intimacy with
Daniel, his partner for eighteen years. Daniel attended weekly Mass at Most Holy
Redeemer church in the city’s burgeoning gay enclave, the Castro District. But he
went a bit less often when he and Bill bought a house together across the bay in the
Oakland Hills. Bill, on the other hand, preferred to sleep late most Sundays.

Everything changed when Daniel contracted AIDS, and Bill became his primary
care provider. This tragedy brought Bill agonizing stress and heartache, but
it also introduced him to a face of Catholicism that he had not previously known.
The AIDS Support Group at Most Holy Redeemer sent volunteers to help tend to
Daniel’s health and personal needs, which, toward the end of his life, required daily
visits. Even in his grief, Bill was impressed by these people’s witness to their—and
once his—faith. This was not the intolerably dogmatic “Churchianity” that had
come to seem ossifi ed and irrelevant to him. Nor, of course, was this the vicious
“God hates fags” message he had heard while doing some church shopping before
moving from Philadelphia. He found this open-hearted and open-minded incarnation
of the faith to be very alluring. So much so, in fact, that Bill began attending
Mass at Most Holy Redeemer not long after Daniel’s death and soon became an
active member of first the AIDS Support Group and then the parish itself.

Bill’s story might appear to fit the familiar “lapsed Catholic returns to Mother
Church” mold, but Bill has not returned to anything; he has begun something new.
On the one hand, he is quite the unabashed Catholic: “I love the traditions, and I love
the mystery; I think it’s a very, very, very rich religion.” On the other hand, though, he
is adamant about his freedom, even obligation, to mine those riches on his own terms
and in accordance with his own needs. He has chosen to be a member of Most Holy
Redeemer across the San Francisco Bay rather than of his own neighborhood parish,
which he considers less “open and affi rming” to gay Catholics. He respects priests
enormously (although he is less generous in his assessment of bishops), but he is also
a strong advocate for the laity’s role in both pastoral ministry and parish governance.
He is a “greeter” at the main (10 am) Mass on Sundays and has sponsored several Rite
of Christian Initiation for Adults (RCIA) candidates. At the same time, he bristles at
the thought of being presumptuous enough to even talk to others about faith in a
way that might be perceived as inappropriately pushy. He calls himself a “very strong
Catholic” but, without hint of apology, eagerly embraces the pejoratively intended
moniker “cafeteria Catholic” as a testament to his own religious agency and capacity
for discernment. In short, Bill has begun something new as a Catholic in response to
developments in his personal life and because he has lived through a period in which
the American church itself has witnessed important social and cultural changes. As
a result, it has also begun something quite innovative.


***

Much as I would like to end this posting on such a glowing note, I can't help but link to a recent article just posted at Iglesia Discalza's Blog about the recent silencing of Colombian Jesuit, Fr. Alfonso Llano Escobar, S.J., for having the temerity to criticize Pope Benedict's most recent book, Jesus of Nazareth: The Infancy Narratives. Benedict has once again silenced a prominent theologian, bringing to an end his thirty year career as a journalist. This is yet again another imperative sign   of why lay Catholics must reclaim their church and become the public voice of theological debate. Read the whole article here.

Nov 27, 2012

50 Reasons to Boycott the Catholic Church: Repost


The following is an alarming summary of recent 'crimes' and negative actions perpetuated by the Roman Catholic Church. I hesitated re-posting it from Alt. Net.Org, because it is harrowing and depressing, and clearly the view of an outsider - yet this is how most non Catholics view the Church, and it makes for a salutary and very necessary shock to the system. The time for complacency is long past.

50 Reasons to Boycott the Catholic Church

The Church uses its resources to oppose social progress and positive change all over the world.
Photo Credit: AFP
  

Last month in Ireland, Savita Halappanavar died, and she shouldn't have. Savita was a 31-year-old married woman, four months pregnant, who went to the hospital with a miscarriage in progress that developed into a blood infection. She could easily have been saved if the already doomed fetus was aborted. Instead, her doctors did nothing, explaining that "this is a Catholic country," and left her to suffer in agony for days, only intervening once it was too late.
Savita's death is just the latest in a long line of tragedies directly attributable to the doctrines and beliefs of the Roman Catholic church. I acknowledge that there are many good, progressive Catholics, but the problem is that the church isn't a democracy, and those progressives have no voice or vote in its governance. The church is a petrified oligarchy, a dictatorship like the medieval monarchies it once existed alongside, and it's run by a small circle of conservative, rigidly ideological old men who make all the decisions and choose their own successors.
This means that, whatever individual Catholics may do, the resources of the church as an institution are bent toward opposing social progress and positive change all over the world. Every dollar you put into the church collection plate, every Sunday service you attend, every hour of time and effort you put into volunteering or working for church organizations, is inevitably a show of support for the institutional church and its abhorrent mission. When you have no voice, there's only one thing left to do: boycott. Stop supporting the church with your money and your time. For lifelong Catholics, it's a drastic step, but it's more than justified by the wealth of reasons showing that the church as an institution is beyond reform, and the only meaningful response is to part ways with it. Here are just a few of those reasons:
1. Throughout the world, Catholic bishops have engaged in a systematic, organized effort going back decades to cover up for priests who molest children, pressuring the victims to sign confidentiality agreements and quietly assigning the predators to new parishes where they could go on molesting. Tens of thousands of children have been raped and tortured as a result of this conspiracy of silence.
2. Strike one: "What did the pope know and when did he know it?" The current pope, when he was Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, was personally implicated in a case from the 1970s in which at least three sets of parents reported that a priest in his diocese had sexually abused their children. In response, Ratzinger assigned the priest to therapy, without notifying law enforcement, and washed his hands of the matter. That priest was back on duty in just a few short days and went on to molest more children.
3. Strike two: In 1981, again when the current pope was Cardinal Ratzinger, he got a letter from the diocese of Oakland asking him to defrock a priest who had acknowledged molesting two children. Ratzinger ignored this letter, and several followup letters, for four years. Finally, in 1985, he wrote back saying that more time was needed, and that they had to proceed very slowly to safeguard "the good of the Universal Church" in light of "the young age of the petitioner" -- by which he meant not the victimized children, but the pedophile priest. (By contrast, when a rogue archbishop ordained married men as priests, he was laicized six days later.)
4. Strike three: In 2001, Cardinal Ratzinger wrote a letter, De Delictis Gravioribus, to all Catholic bishops advising them how to handle accusations of sex crimes by priests. There was no recommendation to contact the police, but rather an instruction for them to report such cases only to the Vatican and tell no one else: "Cases of this kind are subject to the pontifical secret."
6. They threaten to cut off funding for immigrants' rights advocates because they sometimes work with gay-rights advocates. Preventing immigrants from getting legal and medical aid is less important than ensuring the church isn't contaminated by even indirect contact with anyone who helps gay people.
7. In a sign of how ridiculously disproportionate and unhinged the church's martyrdom complex is, the current pope has compared expanding the rights of women and gay people to the murderous anticlerical violence of the 1930s Spanish civil war.
8. They've used their official UN observer status to team up with Islamic theocracies like Iran and Libya to oppose calls for family-planning services to be made available in the world's poorest nations.
9. They've gone to desperately poor, AIDS-ravaged regions of Africa to spread the life-destroying lie that condoms don't prevent transmission of HIV.
10. In the mid-20th century, they appointed a special papal commission to study whether Catholicism should permit the use of birth control. When the commission almost unanimously recommended that they should, they ignored that recommendation and doubled down on their absolute ban on contraception.
12. They did not excommunicate the stepfather.
13. Savita Halappanavar wasn't the first: Catholic-run hospitals are willing to let women die rather than get lifesaving abortions, even when a miscarriage is already in progress and no possible procedure could save the fetus.
17. They've announced an inquisition into the Girl Scouts to get to the bottom of its association with morally suspect groups like Doctors Without Borders and Oxfam.
18. They've been one of the major forces attacking Obamacare, filing lawsuits arguing that non-church Catholic employers should be able to decide whether or not employee health insurance plans will cover contraception. This is effectively an argument that a woman's employer should be allowed to force her to pay more for medical coverage, or even place it out of her reach altogether, based on his religious beliefs.
19. In Australia, they allegedly derailed a police investigation of an accused pedophile, putting pressure on higher-ups to get an investigating officer removed from the case.
20. They demanded that Sunday school teachers sign a loyalty oath agreeing to submit "will and intellect" to the proclamations of church leaders.
21. Some top church officials, including the current pope, have advocateddenying communion to politicians who support progressive and pro-choice political ideas. Notably, although the church also opposes preemptive war and the death penalty, no conservative politician has ever been denied communion on this basis.
22. They've cracked down on American nuns for doing too much to help the poor and not enough to oppose gay marriage, condemning them for displaying a seditious "feminist spirit."
23. In Germany, where parishioners pay an officially assessed tax rate to the church, they've tried to blackmail people who don't want to pay the church tax, threatening to fire them from jobs in church institutions. In some cases, if the person opts out but later loses the paperwork, they demand on-the-spot repayment of decades of back taxes.
24. In America, bishops have compared Democratic officeholders, including President Obama, to Hitler and Stalin and have said that it jeopardizes a person's eternal salvation if they don't vote as the bishops instruct them to.
25. They fight against equal marriage rights for same-sex couples. It's not enough for the Catholic church hierarchy that they refuse to perform church weddings for gay and lesbian couples; they want to write that prohibition into the civil law and deny marriage equality to everyone who doesn't fit their religious criteria, and have invested vast amounts of money and effort into doing so. In the 2012 election cycle alone, the church spent almost $2 million in an unsuccessful fight to defeat marriage-equality initiatives in four states.
26. They've compared gay sex to pedophilia and incest and called for it to be forbidden by law, saying that "states can and must regulate behaviors, including various sexual behaviors."
27. They've shut down adoption clinics rather than consider gay people as prospective parents. The church's official position, apparently, is that it's better for children to remain orphans or in foster care than to be placed in a loving, committed same-sex household.
28. They barred an anti-LGBT bullying group, anti-teen-suicide foundation from a Catholic school ceremony, explaining that the group's mission is "contrary to the teachings of the Catholic church."
30. They have a history of dumping known pedophile priests in isolated, poor, rural communities, where they apparently assumed that local people wouldn't dare to complain or that no one would listen if they did.
31. They've given huge payouts -- as much as $20,000 in some cases -- to pedophile priests, to buy their silence and quietly ease them out of the priesthood, after specifically denying in public that they were doing this.
32. When the Connecticut legislature proposed extending statute-of-limitations laws to allow older child-abuse cases to be tried, the bishops ordered a letter to be read during Mass instructing parishioners to contact their representatives and lobby against it.
33. To fight back against and intimidate abuse-survivor groups like SNAP, the church's lawyers have filed absurdly broad subpoenas demanding the disclosure of decades' worth of documents.
35. When a Catholic official from Philadelphia, William Lynn, was charged with knowingly returning predator priests to duty, his defense was to blame those decisions on his superior, Cardinal Anthony Bevilacqua, thus acknowledging that the corruption reaches to the highest levels of the church.
36. When confronted with hundreds of complaints about child-raping priests spanning decades, a Dutch cardinal used the same "we knew nothing" excuse once given by Nazi soldiers. Several months later, it was reported that this same cardinal had personally arranged to move a pedophile priest to a different parish to shield him from accusations.
37. In one case, Mother Teresa successfully persuaded the church to return a suspected pedophile priest to duty because he was a friend of hers. Eight additional complaints of child abuse were later lodged against him.
40. They abducted tens of thousands of babies from unwed mothers who gave birth in Catholic-run hospitals all over the world throughout the 20th century, forcing drugged or helpless women to give their newborn children up for adoption against their will.
41. They tried to have the Indian skeptic Sanal Edamuruku charged with blasphemy and imprisoned for debunking a claim of a miraculous weeping statue.
43. Their finances are a disorganized mess, lacking strong accounting controls and clear internal separations, which means parishioners who give to the church can have no assurance of what the money will be used for. According to an investigation by the Economist, funds meant for hospitals, cemeteries and priests' pensions have been raided to pay legal fees and settlements in several diocesan bankruptcies.
45. They've silenced priests who call for the ordination of women and other desperately needed reforms, exhorting them to instead show "the radicalism of obedience."
47. They lifted the excommunication of an anti-Semitic, Holocaust-denying bishop who also thinks women shouldn't attend college or wear pants.
48. When it comes to the question of who's financially responsible for compensating the victims of sex abuse, they argue that priests aren't employees and therefore the church bears no responsibility for anything they do.
49. They canonized Mother Teresa for doing little more than offering a squalid place for people to die. Outside observers who visited her "Home for the Dying" reported that medical care was substandard and dangerous, limited to aspirin and unsterilized needles rinsed in tap water, administered by untrained volunteers. The millions of dollars collected by Mother Teresa and her order, enough to build many advanced clinics and hospitals, remain unaccounted for.
Adam Lee is a writer and atheist activist living in New York City. Follow him on Twitter, or subscribe to his blog, Daylight Atheism.

Nov 20, 2012

A Gay Classic for Teens: SONG OF ACHILLES



Thanksgiving approaches for US Citizens, the day we give thanks for all of the   Divine Blessings to our country and our families - as well as a day of mourning and repentance for our criminal betrayal of the Native Americans who first welcomed us so warmly and so generously to the New World (new to whom?). Repentance is also in order for our contemporary crimes as a nation, which are very grave, of which many Americans are aware. 




In the true spirit of the feast,  I give thanks for a significant work of fiction, Madeline Miller's Orange prize winning book, The Song of Achilles, a dazzling retelling of the Achilles & Patroclus myth from the Iliad, which is one of the finest gay teen love stories ever written.  


Madeline Miller is a classics scholar with degrees in Greek and Latin from Brown University, plus postgraduate work at Yale Rep theater, where she worked specifically on transferring the classics to the stage. This is what has given her brilliant novel such vivid verisimilitude. It is such a fresh retelling of the old story, but with a passionate, vulnerable heart at its center, the heart of its narrator the gentle, 'non-violent' healer, Patroclus.

But it's not simply a retelling. Ms. Miller has consciously chosen to anchor the story in a passionate, tender gay love affair between Achilles and Patroclus, an affair which begins, in Ms Miller's retelling, when both boys are in their early teens. And the affair is consummated when the boys are about fourteen.   While the Iliad itself leaves the relationship ambiguous, and most Greek scholars of our day pass over the homoerotic overtones of the affair, the Greeks of the time, especially some hundred years after the epic's appearance, took it for granted that the affair would have been sexual. (See Wikipedia insert below).

There are so many reviews of this book, the glowing ones linked at Ms. Miller's website:

http://www.madelinemiller.com/reviews/

There are also a few pissy ones, notably the New York Times, whose reviewer could barely contain his homophobic disgust. And another snotty one at the Telegraph, insinuating that the work only won the Orange prize because of the riveting plot of the Iliad itself, upon which Ms. Miller piggy backed into the Orange Prize.

Some critique the quality of the writing, finding it a mix of pop teen culture and attempts at highbrow subtlety, but most reviewers are raving about the thrilling narrative thrust of the story (no pun intended), and the heartrending love story at its center.

As a gay author myself, who is currently writing a crime novel with a gay teen love story at its center, I was hugely impressed by Ms. Miller's creation of a viable teen love story between boys that is not the slightest bit self consciously 'gay.' This is what gives the story it's power. The affair is made to seem quite natural (as it is) and unsurprising (as it is not, by our contemporary less enlightened standards). The tenderness and passion, the loving touches and embraces - and the one instance of climax - are seen as one part of the rich pattern of life, disturbing few of the boys' acquaintances. The one exception might by Achilles' mother, Thetis, but even her objections are not phrased in homophobic terms. She simply thinks Patroclus, as a cast away, is not worthy of her god like son.

And that is the heart of the matter. Achilles is the son of a goddess and therefore half divine himself. And out of the fusion of divinity and humanity the boy has emerged as - not a Christ like figure of peace and forgiveness - but an heroic warrior who simply happens to loves other men. In fact he is the greatest warrior of his day, a god-like, near invincible figure of superhuman powers whose sexual love is directed towards a gentle male companion. Ms. Miller makes it very clear that her Achilles loves Patroclus because of his 'orientation'. He has no sexual interest in women. Even Patroclus comes close to a brief affair with a woman, but avoids it because he knows 'it is not for him'. Both boys are orientated towards other males. 

There is no angst here, no 'coming out,' in fact no necessity for coming out at all, no self conscious guilt or shame, no looking over the shoulder, no ridicule, derision, rejection. There is some slight discomfort on the part of some of the characters, how could there not be, but it is minimal. The love between the two boys, passionate, tender, sexual, loving - simply is as a miracle of nature, and accepted as such by those around them. 

As soon as I finished the book, it became so clear how important, in fact, how necessary fiction of this sort has become. There is a place for the 'coming out' stories, chronicling all of the pain, humiliation, heartache, freedom and joy of such a singular event in a gay person's life journey. But we also need to see the love of two males in the context of a homophobic free environment. What would it look like, what would it feel like, and what effect would this have on the characters themselves? More importantly, what effect would this have upon young gay teen readers themselves to see their love reflected so naturally, without the burdens of a disapproving society. 

Perhaps this is one reason Ms. Miller decided to tell the tale - in her own very gay friendly fashion. The love story is so positive, without self conscious guilt or even the need to reflect on the uniqueness of the experience. Nothing has damaged these boys' self-confidence in themselves as loving sexual beings. And one of them is a champion and a hero.  Open-minded, liberal high schools in the US and the UK are already putting the book in their libraries and on reading lists, and it is so right and fitting that they do so. 

We do have other gay teen romances out there (gentle gay nerd and high school quarterback), but so many of them are of the 'teen flick' variety, slightly trashy and gossipy, though I can think of half a dozen heartbreaking classics - A Boys Own Story by Edmund White, At Swim Two Boys by Jamie O'Neill, Rainboy Boys by Alex Sanchez, and finally, Dream Boy by Jim Grimsley, to mention just a few of the gay teen classics out there.

But The Song of Achilles is in a class of its own. It's Orange Prize has given it wide recognition and catapulted it onto best seller lists. A god like golden boy birthed of a divine mother and a human father, the greatest warrior of his age, is not 'Gay' in our sense of the term. He simply falls passionately in love with a gentle, non violent boy with powers of healing (with one spasm of violence at the end of his life), and this love is essentaial to his nature. His lover's violent death is the catalyst for the hero's own moral transformation. The boys are both normal and extraordinary, one hardly notices Achilles' divinity, if such it is, but his glory shines through the book and casts a light upon the love affair of his life as well, rending it normal, unsurprising and astonishing.  

For gay teens everywhere, this is what normal love looks like in a wholesome, tolerant environment -  love without fear, recrimination, shame or guilt. It simply is and it is glorious. 





For those who are interested, here are a few snippets - from Wikipedia and from the pissy NYT review of the book. 


WIKIPEDIA ; Some scholars claim that the exact nature of the relationship between Patroclus and Achilles has profound literary and artistic implications. As Kenneth Dover points out in his Greek Homosexuality,[11] knowing whether Achilles was erastes and Patroclus eromenos or whether their love was egalitarian, was crucial to understanding the thematic makeup of the Iliad, from the perspective of later Greeks.
There are many possible interpretations on the nature of the relationship between Patroclus and Achilles. Three popular ones are:

1-Achilles was the dominant lover, and he learns from Patroclus' that sacrifice is rooted in a startling role-reversal: in death, the student becomes the teacher. The change in Achilles' character hinges on having believed that only glory mattered, and learning otherwise by losing the only thing that mattered more to him than acclaim. Patroclus, the eromenos, in leading the Myrmidons, is elevated beyond the moral caliber of his mentor, and Achilles is redeemed only when, having reflected on his follies, he returns Hector's body to Priam.
2-Patroclus was the dominant lover, his death represents a deliberate lesson to his pupil, Achilles. In this case, the teacher had to die in order to redeem the student, and the pivotal change in Achilles' character occurs when he resumes leadership of the Myrmidons and takes the field against Hector despite his grievance with Agamemnon.
3-Achilles and Patroclus represent an egalitarian homosexual pairing, the time and nature of Achilles' pivotal character development are shaded with gray and open to interpretation.

NYT Review: The problem reaches crisis proportions in the handling of the “love affair,” which begins with an embarrassing breathlessness (“My chest trilled with something I could not quite name”) and climaxes — sorry! — in the long-awaited and, it must be said, cringe-inducing consummation: “He seemed to swell beneath my touch, to ripen. He smelled like almonds and earth. He pressed against me, crushing my lips to wine. He went still as I took him in my hand, soft as the delicate velvet of petals. . . . Our bodies cupped each other like hands.”

Nov 18, 2012

Reflections After the Euphoria: US Elections and This And That

Another hiatus in blogging, due to writing pressures and some very rich, rewarding reading. Also, I'm rapturously enjoying retirement of sorts, working as a drama teacher only 1 day a week in a charming Czech village in the forests outside Prague. The rest of the six days of the week, I spend writing, reading, reflecting, praying. I've just finished Madeline Miller's 2012 Orange Prize winning novel, The Song of Achilles, in which she quite consciously chooses - among many options - to frame the tale as a 'gay love story' and the result is fresh, moving and inspiring, especially for gay teens, because the story is told quite naturally, as the  passionate love between two humans who just happen to be boys. I will follow this posting with my own reflections on the novel.  





First a word of thanks to William Lindsey for alerting me to the fact that this blog, together with his own, Bilgrimage, has made it onto a list of "the 66 Very Best Blogs by LGBT Christians in the Entire World", at Fred Clark's Stackvist. I assume that designation was wittily designed to elicit a chuckle, which it succeeded in doing with me. Surely, Fred has not read or seen all of the LGBT Christian blogs in the world, for example the few that do exist in Turkey and Saudia Arabia, not to mention Turkmenistan, Samarkand and China. But it is nice to be included and seeing Gay Mystic on the list gave me an extra spur to keep on blogging on a more regular basis.

I've been following the news these past weeks, first the euphoric reaction by gay folks, including myself, to the US election, which saw four anti gay marriage proposals defeated and the election of the first openly gay, Lesbian senator, and the first US president to openly endorse gay marriage rights. 

However, I did have my misgivings about the level of joy and celebration within the gay community, and it took Chris Hedges at Truth Dig to articulate my own misgivings, or rather my unvoiced question - are we too focused on our own single issue (or double issue, women and LGBT's rights) to the extent that we are blinded to horrendous human rights abuses by the Obama admin that just happen to be off the radar of most Americans. And are we, in our enthusiasm for the gradual success of our own causes, complicit in this act of blindness. All is far from well with the world with the election of Obama, and there are life threatening issues that surpass in moral gravity the issue of gay marriage, gay rights, and even the desperate issue of young gay teens in need of self respect and protection from bullying. It's all a question of proportion, and in much of the euphoria I failed to see much in the way of balance or recognition. Just take a look at GAZA at the moment

Here is Chris at his most powerfully prophetic (keeping in mind his Catholic background):

The liberal class clung desperately during the long nightmare of this political campaign to one or two issues, such as protecting a woman’s right to choose and gender equality, to justify its complicity in a monstrous evil. This moral fragmentation—using an isolated act of justice to define one’s self while ignoring the vast corporate assault on the nation and the ecosystem along with the pre-emptive violence of the imperial state—is moral and political capitulation. It fails to confront the evil we have become.

Liberals have assured us that after the election they will build a movement to hold the president accountable—although how or when or what this movement will look like they cannot say. They didn’t hold him accountable during his first term. They won’t during his second. They have played their appointed roles in the bankrupt political theater that passes for electoral politics. They have wrung their hands, sung like a Greek chorus about the evils of the perfidious opponent, assured us that there is no other viable option, and now they will exit the stage.

Read the rest of Chris Hedges prophetic diatribe here at TruthDig. 

However, for another view, more dispassionate and perhaps more wise, Noam Chomsky says that if he had lived in a 'swing state' like Ohio, he would have voted for Obama.

“Between the two choices that are presented, there is I think some significant differences,” he said. “If I were a person in a swing state, I’d vote against Romney-Ryan, which means voting for Obama because there is no other choice. I happen to be in a non-swing state, so I can either not vote or — as I probably will — vote for [Green Party candidate] Jill Stein.” (Chris voted Green and urged all his readers to do likewise, regardless of swing states, a highly principled position, but perhaps not as calmly rational as Chomsky's.)


So, seen from the comfortable distance of my terraced apartment on the Vltava River, far from the din and noise that is US culture today, there are causes to rejoice in the clear signs of forward movement for LGBT people which the recent US election evidenced. At the same time, however, its impossible to be a person of conscience and not be profoundly disturbed by the insidious and destructive policies of the Obama rule, which will now continue unabated and unchallenged in any truly meaningful way. And this destructive forward movement dwarfs in importance the significant gains in gay rights; in fact the momentum - towards increased deaths abroad and the undermining of civil liberties at home, threatens to capsize the whole boat within which we all, gay and straight, seek refuge from the storm. Chris is more right than not, but Chomsky, the wise and practical sage, has the last word. 

Terrible things going on as well within the Roman Catholic Church, in a state of implosion that can only wring the heart and which I continue to monitor from afar. A convicted pedophile protector Bishop sitting in at the recent US Bishops' conference, without a word of rebuke or comment, because the men's club will not publicly rebuke it's own. The truly horrendous story out of Ireland of the non Catholic pregnant woman in a Catholic hospital denied an abortion of her already fated fetus, resulting in her death. See Colleen Colcoch's coverage of this story at her great blog, Enlightened Catholicism.  And lastly the absurd, yet inspiring story of the young teen denied Confirmation because he publicly supported gay marriage on his facebook page. In my opinion, this public ordeal and humiliation which the teen and his family are now undergoing, with massive media coverage, constitute his true grace-filled rite of passage into maturity.

Isn't the whole point of the sacrament of Confirmation to 'put on the mind of Christ,' and to have the courage of one's moral convictions and to stand up for what one believes is right? This certainly being the case, this young man has now, publicly at least, surpassed all the other members of his Confirmation class in following the prophetic witness of Jesus, the wandering teacher from Galilee. He has been conformed, through contradiction, trial and witness, into the image of the Crucified. Would that all of us Christians could have so fitting a Confirmation. On the more cheerful side, the local bishop of the Evangelical Catholic Church graciously offered to confirm the boy, a magnanimous gesture that elicited sputterings of rage from the Vicar General of the boy's Catholic Diocese. These sputterings of rage and denial - on all fronts in the RCC - are going to continue for some time, so I really feel it is not too healthy for the spirit to give them too much mind. Though that injunction is not a call to passivity and indifference. But the seeds of change have sprouted and there is no stopping them. See Joan Chittister's great column at NCR as an appropriate sign of hope:


The future of the church: Discernment or intimidation?