THE USEFUL letter from Quest (June) allows this fool to rush in and comment. I hope charitably, on the place of the Catholic homosexually inclined.
It seems to me that physical sexual danger to other Catholics is minimal. I suggest tnere is a real danger in the effect that persons that one might call reluctant homosexuals can have upon the general atmosphere.
Expressed sexuality in normal development leads on to marriage and its socially acceptable delights and happiness. Expressed homosexuality, certainly in the past and to a considerable extent now. can only lead to public degradation and humiliation.
This is not a judgement but a fact. As a consequence, the sex drive as seen through a pair of heterosexual eyes. is worthy of development towards holy matrimony, whereas seen through a pair of homosexual eyes it is only worthy of eradication.
In one case there is a proper joy in sexuality, in the other a likely hatred of it engendered by public reaction. It is necessary to say that a hatred of sexuality and all things pertaining is at the basis of more than one heresy, certainly that of Mani whichcame nearest to wiping out Christianity.
Belloc says that one could avoid being burnt at the stake (as a Cathari or "pure one") by producing proof of marriage. I believe that a carry over of this hatred of sexuality into marriage causes much spiritual death.
I suspect that the homosexually inclined can and do offer example to all in their public service to others, devotion to duty in their chosen profession, a raising of the general atmosphere of affection, and they sacrifice a great deal for love. with considerable suffering.
Surely they have our sympathy? Certainly they have mine. Perhaps Quest could answer, for I cannot, whether the normal state of affairs in Catholic schools wherein children during those years when their affections are being formed are confined to the company of one sex, including the teachers, leads to a normal state of affairs in later life?
Does the hard line domination of cruel confessional policy have a constructive effect? Are all adolescents really hell bent, and as worthy of eternal napalm as the Hitlers or Stalins? Is stiff upper lipism in the family and church (suppressional and ritualisation of all emotion) really a prime beneficial Christian doctrine?
Or should the Christian and papal example of good works freely offered leading to the blessing of labour in charity for others receive more attention hitherto than mere words?
With reference to adolescence I have observed, as a life long educationalist that wise teaching dismisses natural mistakes as part of the learning process whereby we conquer the effects of the Fall. and get it eventually right. Christ came not to condemn but to save — save through expressed love of God and each other and that is the normality against which all men and women should measure themselves.
Christopher O'Reilly Redruth, Cornwall.