When Will the Catholic Church End Its War on Gays?

Recently through one of the Google search agents I use to aggregate news stories, I came across a review of the movie "Call Me By Your Name" in the National Catholic Register - which is NOT to be National Catholic Reporter which realizes it is the 21st century, not the 12th century - wherein the reviewer was responding to attacks by Catholic extremists for not strongly condemning the movies strongly enough.  As I am inclined to do, I left several comments on the piece which were for the most part were not greeted kindly (frankly, I was surprised the moderator even published my comments).  

What struck me by many of the comments was an apparent need on the part of many to have someone to condemn and look down upon in order that they could feel superior - much like poor whites that my southern belle grandmother would have deemed "poor white trash" that desperately need to discriminate against blacks due to a similar desperate need to feel superior to someone else. 

The second thing that struck me was the blind embrace of ignorance and a refusal to even slightly admit that medical and medical knowledge has progressed light years from what was know at the time the Church fathers - many of whom seemingly needed mental health care themselves by modern standards - concocted the Church's bizarre rules on human sexuality.  Some even cited writings of the far from holy John Paul II to justify their hatred and bigotry, conveniently forgetting that Popes have proven wrong on moral issues before - e.g., the Popes that issued determination upholding slavery.  The truth is that the Church is wrong in its anti-gay animus and that it is causing countless  younger Catholics to leave the Church.  A piece in the National Catholic Reporter looks at the dilemma facing the Church which could well decide whether the Church largely collapses in modern nations.  Here are excerpts:

In a recent radio interview, Cardinal Reinhard Marx of Munich-Freising said the Catholic Church needs to provide better pastoral support for lesbian or gay people but stopped short of endorsing blessings for same-sex couples as a general practice or policy.

At the same time, he appeared to leave open the possibility of such blessings in individual cases. Marx is the third German bishop, and the highest-ranking by far, to have raised the possibility of same-sex blessings in recent months.

Marx, the archbishop of Munich, is one of the most influential leaders in the Catholic Church. He serves on Pope Francis' Council of Cardinals, heads the German Bishops' Council, and is president of the Commission of the Bishops' Conferences of the European Community.

Marx's struggle to articulate a coherent strategy for addressing the needs of the church's gay and lesbian members (the interview does not seem to have included any reference to transgender, intersex or bisexual people) once again shows the dilemma for those trying to work within the framework of current doctrine, church structure and political polemic of institutional Catholicism. There seems to be a recognition by the cardinal that current dogma and practice are failing many in the church, and a desire to find ways to respond to their needs. Marx sees pastoral responses to individual situations as the solution.

The problem with this approach is that it reinforces the church's official view of lesbian and gay individuals and same-sex couples as less than full members of the body of Christ. It requires priests and other pastoral workers to determine whether an individual situation merits the risk of a secret blessing, and implicit validation of the person's sexual orientation and intimate relationships.

Perhaps the only way for the institution to change is through an incremental approach, whereby the number of individual cases gradually increases, and the experience of those involved somehow convinces a sufficient number of those in authority that a change in doctrine is merited. Then the process of debating the theology and tradition that might support such a change could begin. How long such discernment might take is anyone's guess.

In the meantime, the official church's persistent inability to fully embrace LGBTQI people and their families will continue to drive away not only many of them, but also many members of their extended families, friends, and allies — not to mention massive numbers of young people in general.

It bears noting that, in the United States and many other parts of the world, the people of the church are far ahead of its leadership on LGBTQI issues. In countries where same-sex marriage is legal, tens of thousands of Catholics have rejoiced in witnessing the civil marriages of their children, grandchildren, parents, siblings, cousins and friends, many in ceremonies that include a spiritual blessing.

Countless others, especially where marriage equality has yet to be achieved, have joined their loved ones in rituals that celebrate the commitments lesbian and gay couples have made to each other. Their presence and pledge to honor and support these couples represent the triumph of love over law.

It is a hopeful sign that Marx, other German bishops, and indeed numerous Catholic Church leaders around the world are grappling openly with the place of LGBTQI people in the church. An even more hopeful step will occur when church leaders finally engage the true experts in this struggle in genuine dialogue, and we begin to work out solutions together.

Personally, I view anyone who is LGBT that remains in the Catholic Church as engaging in a form of masochism or still suffering greatly from internalized homophobia (sorry, Andrew Sullivan, but why continue to torture yourself?).  Indeed, one former acquaintance continues to remain a Catholic and not surprisingly has the attendant emotional psychological conflicts and damage one would expect.  The simple solution is to walk away.  As for family members of LGBT individuals who remain in the Church, deliberately or not, they are harming their LGBT relatives.   Only massive losses in membership - and most importantly, revenues - will hasten change in the Church.  

An Out of Touch Criticism of "Call Me By Your Name"

It seems that increasingly many younger gays are utterly oblivious to the reality that many of us older gays grew up in.  They seem oblivious to the reality that for many of us up until 2003, even having a physical same sex relationship put one at risk of a felony conviction.   They also appear oblivious to how much religion has lost its grip over the lives of Millennials compared to those of my generation growing up.  In a recent post, I praised the movie "Call Me By Your Name."  Indeed, Gay Star News, a British LGBT outlet, rated the film as the top LGBT film of 2017.  Similarly, every gay man of my age that has seen the movie has loved it.  Yet in a commentary in The Advocate, the case is made by a young writer who from what I can discern is considerably younger than my youngest child, argues that this exceptional movie isn't a "gay movie" since the main characters do not display a "gay identity."  Here's a sampling of what in my opinion is utter bullshit from someone who is clueless of what life was like for so many of us:

The film is typical of our fetish for straight-acting romance, here presenting a sort of country house fairy tale in which the two leads just happen to be men. It is a summer-affair flick, but with two cocks instead of one. . . . . in its high-class, pastoral isolation, Call Me by Your Name depicts an enchanted utopia where the social realities of gayness cannot intrude.

For gayness itself — gayness as a way of feeling, a way of engaging the world, an identity, a community threatened by disease and violence — has been carefully pushed into the closet. . . . . It is reckless to praise this move as a progressive step toward a post-gay cinema, a stance that toes the line of homophobia. Are AIDS and bullying and fem affect mere distractions from some imagined purity of straightened-out desire? These so-called distractions are simply too gay. They uncomfortably remind us that we are more than our “sexual orientation” alone; we are a community, a subjectivity, a culture, an identity.  

A cosmopolitan, intellectual milieu fills the sun-bathed, Fascist-era villa of Call Me by Your Name as bits of Greco-Roman art, German literature, and Italian cooking decorate the frame — but the queens are for sure locked in the closet.

The attitude of this piece may ring true with young, often self-absorbed young gays who never experienced what those of us in older generations lived through - and which many closeted gays in red states continue to live through.  Go to any gay hookup app and you will find large numbers of still closeted gays married to women who still cannot accept a gay identity as a result of religious brainwashing, fear of job loss, or a financially ruinous divorce from the opposite sex spouse they deal with.  And this true in 2018, so imagine the realty for so many thirty-five (35) years ago when the movie's story is set. 

As the name of this blog underscores, I did not "come out" until mid-life (in fact, I was 49) and even then it took a considerable period of time to achieve a "gay identity."  Like so many of my current circle of gay friends, I married (some friends married more than one woman), had children and only after years of denial faced the reality of our sexual orientation.   For many of us, the story line in the movie is what we felt but never acted upon.  I hope that Call Me By Your Name will secure a wide heterosexual audience and that just perhaps, it will help to further open minds and hearts. 

Meanwhile, those, like the youthful author enjoy the benefits others achieved for them (and from my experience based on my local community often do little to support the larger LGBT community) while lacking any perspective  on what times were like thirty five years ago or what will be viable outside of theaters in major urban centers in blue states.   It is noteworthy that many of the comments on The Advocate article take the author to task as I do.  

I would urge every LGBT individual to encourage their straight friends to see the movie.  It underscores how there is so much more to love than mere physical connection and it might give cause them to think about the harm that an anti-gay society needlessly does to so many.

The Top LGBT Movies for 2017

The enemies of LGBT Americans - which include the current occupant of the White House and the virulently anti-gay Mike Pence - seemingly never tire in their efforts to malign and stigmatize us or to basically depict us as less than fully human. The Roman Catholic Church and a legion of evangelical "Christian" denominations - I use quotation marks because these people are anything but truly Christian - reject science and modern medical and mental health knowledge that confirms that sexual orientation is not a choice and that being gay is not abnormal.  Just as troubling, they utterly ignore the emotional legitimacy of same sex relationships, many of which are more stable and long enduring than those of many heterosexual couples (two friends will soon have their 40th anniversary).  Our lives and loves involve far more than sex acts, just like those of heterosexual couples.  How do LGBT individuals defeat this bigotry and embrace of ignorance?  One way is to live our lives authentically and without apology ("coming out" remains the strongest form of activism).  Another way is to have movies depict our lives with sensitivity and respect.  A piece in Gay Star News - a British outlet - lists its picks for the top 10 LGBT films of 2017.  My favorite is "Call Me By Your Name" which I saw last week in Fort Lauderdale.   Read the entire piece and see the movies.  Here's GSN's review of its No. 1 pick:

Truly amazing films about queer people often make for punishing viewing. Moonlight, Brokeback Mountain – don’t get me started on Boys Don’t Cry.  Love and sex battle with hatred and violence. Conclusions are tragic. Watching these films rarely feels good.

Call Me By Your Name, about an American student who spends a lazy summer in Italy assisting his professor before falling for his son, is different. Homosexual love – between gifted, libidinous 17-year-old Elio (Homeland’s Timothée Chalamet) and sultry, strapping 20-something Oliver (The Social Network’s Armie Hammer), in 80s Italy of all places – is permitted to flourish.

To clarify, don’t expect a sweet, sickly rom com. The wait for the principal players to get it on is agonizing. It makes up the vast majority of openly gay director Luca Guadagnino’s languid 130 minutes, and said flourishing is brief – but thankfully not too brief.

There’s pain too. But it’s deliciously melancholic. There’s no darkness. I steeled myself for the inevitability of prejudice – as the guys skip drunkenly down an empty street, when Elio opens up to his father about the affair – but no such moment arrives. Everyone in the movie is a good person.

Sound too good to be true? It’s allowed to be. It’s fiction, based semi-faithfully on André Aciman’s 2007 novel of the same name. (Fans of the book have slammed the comparable lack of explicit sex; for me it’s a criticism that certainly stands up stronger than with Tom of Finland).

For the most part the movie exists on a different plane – the unreliable world of Elio’s memory, perhaps. The dense foliage and the hanging fruit of his parents’ gorgeous, ramshackle mansion conjure thoughts of the Garden of Eden. But there’s no fall, per se.

Hammer seduces with his booming voice and statuesque physicality, but the movie belongs to Chalamet. On paper, Elio is dislikable. An awkward, arrogant intellectual who speaks three languages and plays piano and guitar. He’s a rich kid who gets to hang out and read all summer: why the hell doesn’t he get a job?

But you quickly fall in love with him, too. After regarding Oliver like a shaking, frightened gazelle would a predator, he gets plucky. He sarcastically imitates his crush’s performed, all-American manliness and the dynamic between them palpably shifts. I didn’t see it coming and my heart skipped a beat. It’s as heightened and erotic a moment as the now-famous peach-fucking scene.

Guadagnino’s luxurious palette and harnessing of light elevate the story. So does the piano-led soundtrack, including three moving contributions from Sufjan Stevens. A near-perfect movie.

Unless you have a heart of stone, the movie will move you.  I am told that the Naro Theater in Norfolk, Virginia, showed previews of the movie in "coming attractions" although no date is set as yet.  For local readers, I recommend this movie highly.   I also highly recommend the book as well.

Early Morning Rant: "Call Me By Your Name" and Hampton Roads' Backwardness

Yesterday began the United States release of the movie "Call Me By Your Name" which has received rave reviews and Oscar buzz ever since it premiered at the Sundance Film Festival earlier in the year.   Outlets as diverse as the New Yorker, Vanity Fair, Wall Street Journal, Variety, The Independent, New York Times, Rotten Tomatoes, etc., have all lauded the movie and its actors and directors.  All of which, of course, means it is NOT showing in Hampton Roads and cannot be found among any of the "coming soon" information" although it appears to be coming to Richmond next week.  With a strong gay romance theme, my fear is that other than the Naro Theater in Norfolk, few theaters in the region may show this movie that likes to view itself as "world class" and sophisticated - Virginia Beach perhaps laughably is trying to court Amazon for a major headquarters facility - yet has a huge Regent University/Pat Robertson display at Norfolk International Airport (which has no international flights).  Talk about telling visitors the area is not sophisticated or accepting!

The irony to me, of course is that places like Hampton Roads - Southwest Virginia even more so - need to see this movie and perhaps have their parochial eyes opened to the reality that love is love (reading the book which the movie is based on, which I have done, would be equally good).  In many ways the husband and I have a very nice life in Hampton Roads, but this is yet another occasion where I am reminded that this is not where I really would prefer to live.  There is a reason why all of our vacations are to truly progressive cities and/or foreign countries (Ft. Lauderdale in a month, Key West in March, and London and Paris next September).  

Yes, Virginia is set for another four years of progressive Democrat leadership under Ralph Northam, Mark Herring and Justin Fairfax which hopefully will improve things over all - an employment non-discrimination law protecting LGBT Virginians would be a nice start.  But socially and culturally, Virginia still has a very long way to go.  As shocking as the concept might be to Virginia Republicans who daily prostitute themselves to right wing religious extremists  best embodied by The Family Foundation, it takes more than low taxes to attract world class, progressive businesses.  Meanwhile, the husband and I will persist in doing our part to open minds in this area even though it gets exhausting at times.