A story

As I was rummaging through my collection of books at home I came across this particular book, which I had in my collection only because of one particular explanation or presentation of ethics.  Most importantly it was not a book about ethics at all.  However, during my first year of Practical training when I choose to teach Philosophy of Morality, this particular narration put things in perspective, primarily for me and for most of my students as well. Besides the last para about the aspiration of a 'teacher' somehow found a resonance within me.

The context is the value of a story!

For instance, almost every student will admit - at least in theory - that love is more important than sex. But when it comes to actual practice, it's a different ballgame.  For example, "Why can't my boyfriend and I sleep together?  We really love one another." Well, I argue, in the first place you can sleep with him. Short of chaining you in the cellar, who can stop you? The real question is whether it's the best gift you can give one another.  Now that response usually makes them raise their condescending eyes toward heaven and wonder if my insanity can ever be cured.  "Of course it's the best gift you can give someone you love!" 

Well, I rejoin, you love your parents; you love people of your own sex; do you give them that gift too?  More groans. "Father, you're really dumb! There's only one person - at least one person at a time - that you give that gift to." Backed into a corner once more, I go for my last weapon: I tell a story to illustrate what I mean, in this case a true one. 

When I was born, I was a breech birth, which means I came into the world folded in half, not headfirst but rear-end first. (Usually there are some wits who capitalize on that, but I continue undaunted.) As a result, my mother was so torn by the delivery that she had to have a great many stitches.  The doctor told my father that he should stay out of bed with her for about three months. But my father, who was the kindest man I have ever known, didn't want to take even the slightest risk of causing my mother even the slightest pain. So he stayed out of bed with her for a year.  That raises the question: Which way did he show more love for her - by getting into bed with her or by staying out of bed?  Is it possible that there is an even greater way of showing love than sex? 

Perhaps not everyone in the class immediately understands what I'm getting at, but it's rare that the story doesn't make everyone of them think, make them wonder if perhaps there might be an aspect of love they haven't thought about.  As a teacher, that's my job: to make people think, to make them reassess, to make them grow - which often means leaving behind opinions that are comfortable, reassuring, self-serving.  

William J. O'Malley The Living Word: Scripture Myth  Vol. 1 (New York: Paulist Press, 1980) 30-31.

Celibacy and Sexuality

As part of the psycho-sexual integration seminar held last week, Fr P.O. Jose made an interesting observation.  When asked why was it that this topic never really discussed in religious formation curriculum in the past, he replied, that it was purposely ignored.  Somehow, besides the various imaginary stigmas and prejudiced notions that hindered an open discussion on topics related to sexuality, there was this peculiar underlying belief that the vow of chastity would somehow make things alright!  That making the vow of chastity would spare one of all the inclinations of the body and sexuality.

Today we realise that the vow of celibacy and a holistic understanding of sexuality is a real bonus for us to love, love all and love deeply. 

Priesthood and homosexuality

Last week there was a seminar for our students on psycho-sexual integration. As the conclusion of the same there was a panel discussion. During the discussion there was one point made by Fr Jose Mathew, in his usual sober tone, as a matter of fact. When asked why is it that the Catholic Church does not look very encouragingly upon those with homosexual tendencies as candidates to religious or priestly life, he  gave the Church's viewpoint, then from the point of psychology and finally concluded stating this: Why is it that this point alone is being singled out as 'against' the Church.  The Church clearly sets down certain requirements of those who are called to serve the rest.  There is community life (for the religious), the demand of detachment (poverty), humility (obedience)... and so is this aspect too.  That as men called to live in a community as Brothers to reach out to serve those to whom we are sent to, especially we as Salesians called to serve the young, we need to be men who can love one and all equally. And for this if our inclinations and motivations draw us to one or only a few then we will never be able to truly be generous in loving everyone.  

Human sexuality ... gone to the dogs!

I finished correcting my Anthropology answer papers of the second year students. I'm happy, in general with their performance.  Most of them got the essential points right and they did convey it in a very synthetic and systematic manner.  However, a couple of them were all hotch-potch!  One in particular, seems to be totally way off the mark...

There was a question asking them to present a synthetic understanding of human sexuality in ten sentences.  And here's one of the points he wrote:

A man cannot live without woman. man can not control his sexual feelings but woman can control her sexual feelings. woman can recognise the person who is sexual person and who is not.  

As if that was not enough, here's the next point:

... human sexuality is making relation with everyone not only particular person but with other human being and animals. (emphasis added)

That'd be anthropology gone to the dogs! 

Sharing convictions

My journey to Hyderabad for the Administrators' meet was an interesting one.  Half way through the journey, after lunch time, the young man sitting opposite to me was keen to start a conversation.  I certainly did not mind.  By the time the train reached Secunderabad station, late in the evening, he was sharing some of his most intimate experiences and thoughts.  However, what Bharat (that's his real name - revealed, because no one on earth, besides me, will ever know who it is!) found most difficult to understand was my choice to remain a bachelor all my life.  I did not reveal to him that I was a 'pastor' or someone in that line, but told him that I was engaged in some sort of service and the rest as truly I am.  He was all the while trying to convince me that life without marriage would be a real disaster.  Well, I did discuss with him my personal reasons for this choice and several other things too.  He saw the point in what I was explaining but somehow could not reconcile to the fact that I was giving up marriage.  Rather for him I was giving up sex!

We had a great conversation about love, sex, marriage, fidelity, service, friendship, loyalty ... He was typically a youngster and me a professed religious.  I'm sure had I given him some 'pious' thoughts and 'spiritual' solutions, he would have listened for sometime and have forgotten them by the time the train reached its destination. But now this I can be sure, the things we discussed would be ringing in his ear, loud and clear.  And I hope it helps him for the better. 

Insights from the seminar on Sexuality-3

One of the most debated issue during the seminar was homosexuality and the Church's perspective.  From what I gathered, it was Fr Joe's stance from the psychological perspective (and human perspective, if I may add) versus the theological stance of the professors of theology.

Frankly speaking I never reflected upon this topic seriously till the day.  I always thought that one is indulges in homosexual behaviour is not fit for religious and Priestly life.  Well, I now have a slightly better and open perspective.  I came to know that there are those who are naturally (by nature) attracted to persons of the same sex (orientation) and then there is the whole list of circumstances that lead one to act in a homosexual manner (behaviour). Now it is difficult to separate the orientation from the behaviour, because one precedes (or flows) from the other.

However, my point of understanding having heard attentively the presentations and discussions is that homosexuals who are by nature that way, should not be prevented from entering the Seminary and discerning a religious call. (The Church, I believe, too 'permits' this). The rationale that he or she is attracted to the same sex and the context (seminary or a convent) provides a grave danger, is not really sensible.

My argument would be this: If the heterosexual can be trusted to know his or her limits and live a genuine religious life, why not a homosexual?  Furthermore, we say that even a heterosexual ought to have a healthy relationship with the persons of the opposite sex. Why deprive that opportunity for a homosexual, all the more if it strengthens his or her religious vocation.  Finally, just because heterosexuals are a majority, how does homosexuality become wrong?  (At the most it can be termed the minority).

However, I do hold that those who indulge in homosexual behaviour and acts are not to be admitted to religious life for they would do great harm to others (and to themselves).  (Is not the same applicable to 'sexually aggressive' heterosexuals?)

Insights from the seminar on Sexuality-2

Fr Joe during the seminar on sexuality and celibacy stated more than once that a truly inspired and inspiring religious or Priest will have three or four encounters with a person of the opposite sex where in he or she will feel that it would be great to settled down in life with that person.  He also was quick to add, that this is normal; it is healthy and there is nothing sinful about it. However, what makes this delicate balance of relationship murky is clarity of who and what we are and what we intend to do or be.  Blessed is he who is able to develop a healthy relationship with a person of the opposite sex for he/she that would certainly ensure a greater living out of one's religious vocation.

Someone during the break asked me, "How is it possible to jump in the well and not get wet?" He continued, "Fr Joe is asking us not to shriek from relationships with women but how does one still stay 'clean'?"  I shared with him what I truly felt about this:  Relationships are relationships, but what makes or breaks them is the attitude one has when one's dealing with the other.  Furthermore, if one is open and sincere, seeking the good of the other and knowing well what is good for oneself, both those involved in the relationship will benefit out of it.

My points for further clarity were thus laid out for him:

• Do I hesitate to share my friendship (friend) with those of my community confreres? 
• Does the relationship enhance the quality of my ministry and the ministry/life of the other?  (A true and genuine relationship will automatically do great wonders for one's mission).
• Do I have the liberty and space to express my sincere feelings and emotions to the other without fear of being misunderstood or manipulated?  
• Does the relationship widen my horizon to include more and more people or does it close the world in only on just the two of us?  (The former is a great indicator of a healthy relationship; the latter is a sign of immaturity in friendship). 

Affective Maturity and Celibacy

Fr Joe Mannath made it very clear in his introductory message that he would not say good things or things which are 'nice' rather he would share what he considers right and present his reasons and statistics for the same.  With that said, he did challenge some of our assumptions about formation, celibacy and sexuality.  I'm sure in the days to come there'd be more of such challenges and reminders to focus on what is real than what is 'nice'.

As for my expectations from this seminar, I use a phrase Fr Joe used once during his preliminary talk this evening:  convinced and inspiring celibate. I wish to understand, and if need be, confirm, clarify or change my own understanding of celibacy and sexuality so as to become a more integral person.

As by way of basics, he defined sexuality merely as being a man or a woman.  He did not hesitate in stating that most people think sexuality is a problem and celibacy is the solution; while celibacy is the problem, sexuality is our given human nature.  One really does not need celibacy to become spiritual or holy.  But none can become anything at all without one's sexuality... because sexuality is basically who we are. There is no denying that fact of life.  

Chastity

While the animator shared some good points about the virtue and vow of chastity, I picked up the following terms which make a lot more sense than just 'sexual purity': wholesome relationship (this is basically what I have been driving at during my Anthropology classes with my students); sexuality as openness or universality wherein everyone is included and there are no 'particular friends'; transparency too comes within that aspect, I guess.

Another aspect which the preacher hinted at but is very relevant is the relationship between sexuality and trust. People, especially those facing difficulties in their relationships, prefer to approach a Priest for they trust that he is a man of God. That though he lacks an experiential knowledge of such matters, he can be trusted because he is detached from any bonds. This trust truly means a lot. And trust ought to be earned.

If I fall in love with a girl...

The following is the answer (verbatim) of one of my students - a Seminarian, studying in the second year of his course in Philosophy, unfortunately - to the question, "As a Seminarian, what would you do if you fall in love with a girl? Why?"

Suppose I have fallen love with girl as a seminarian, first and formost, I will enjoy with love. Then I will reflect and think, for valid reason. Is it good for me as a seminarian? What am I doing is correct? After reflecting if it is good to me, I will continue the love with that girl. If it is not good, I will give suggestion to her to choose one more and then I say that I am not correct suitable for you. Then, I say that we are not to be lovers, but as friends we continues. If she agrees I am so happy, if she does not, I will share with rector that depends up on the rector's decission.

The class I earlier took dealt with human sexuality and the need to have a balanced outlook to life and attitudes, especially as normal human beings who have made a choice for a particular way of life. If this were to be just one of its kind, I would not have really been perturbed but this is the general attitude among the students. They really do not see any discrepancy, whatsoever, in living on both the sides of the fence... comfortably! I'm sure it has much to do with the general trend in the Church today, where Priests (and even Bishops) are rightly accused of loose morality.

That every person however saintly he or she is, has issues to deal with is not surprising; but the inability to see what is evidently wrong and not recognise and acknowledge it in any way atleast as something odd, is alarming.

The Church, Scandal and Communication!

Faced with scandal, a mainstream culture that rejects Catholic values, and a slow-working internal Church structure that struggles to keep up with the 24/7 news cycle, how should Church communicators approach their tasks?

Father José María La Porte, a professor of Social Communications at the Pontifical University of the Holy Cross, organized a major conference for Church communicators on the theme "Identity and Dialogue," which was held earlier this month in Rome. His distinction between "fast food news" and "slow food news" is very enriching; so is the whole concept of communication, criticism and the Church.

ZENIT asked him about his opening presentation at the conference, in which he pitched several proposals for a new communications strategy. Here's the interview!