"I weep for you," the Walrus said:
"I deeply sympathize."
With sobs and tears he sorted out
Those of the largest size,
Holding his pocket-handkerchief
Before his streaming eyes."
-- Lewis Carroll, The Walrus and
the Carpenter.

Oh Peter! Don't be so cynical.

I think the Pope was able to cry because he was among the people of Malta, some of the most steadfast Catholics on the planet. I understand exactly how he feels.

He was among friends.

I often feel that same kind of safety in the LGBT community. Don't you?

Dana, I can see him realistically weeping at a particularly beautiful moment in a choral work, but not by twenty minutes with pre-selected victims. What the process of prelatization of a man in the Church requires is formidable. I look at what became of the very sweet young guy I was friends with the seminary Joe Tyson. Now he is a right wing nut. That is only accomplished by turning the human heart to stone. To say it is all an act is to miss the real point. It is a hardened way of being. These people do not live secret lives so much as lives hidden from their own very selves. Unfortunately this tendency has only increased. And some of it probably comes from a phenomenon outside the Church, namely increased media and computer communication. These guys are potentially scrutinized 24-7. That calls for a persona so impervious that to have it, that is to be successful with it, is almost itself a proof of some sort of abnormality and ability for clinical psychological detachment.

I cannot emphasize how different it all was even in the not so distant past when I was a seminarian. To make this point, let me tell you about the first time I saw the play The Boys in the Band. It was during my last year at St. John Vianney College Seminary. A seminarian named Frank Vega told me that a friend of his who was a Bishop from Puerto Rico was at the seminary and was staying at the seminary and would be celebrating Mass for us the next day. He told me that he would like to go out for dinner and catch a play and would I like to come along. Well, the play turned out to be Boys in the Band, which I didn't know anything about at that point. I recall we were standing with the Bishop during intermission and listening him talk about how he just assumed most of the priests in his diocese were gay, but the important part was that they just didn't rock the boat. The Bishop talked about how he loved the play and how funny it was and how cute some of the actors were, though I hadn't thought so. The Bishop and Frank Vega were literally like old gay pals. I wish I remembered the Bishop's name as the cherry on the cake of this story! Anyways, I am not arguing that all Bishops or priests were as open as this guy. But I think the story shows, as a perhaps extreme case, how different the whole scene was . So dear Dana, it is really not about cynicism, because the Church I encountered in a sense did not have to be cynical because the double-life was considered to be so normal, almost casual. What is similar between all these people is not that 100% are gay or active. But nearly
98% are living double lives in one way or the other. That is that the congruence between one's deepest feelings and opinions and one's habitual modes of action that is a part of everyday people's lives, is simply not present. I do not think the laity really grasps this. Even the cool laity like you.

I only came to understand years after I left the seminary how the winnowing process of the seminary really worked. I realized this with the help of many smart people and by reflection on the types that left or were kicked out and the types that stayed in. The Church, almost like an sensitive organism detects whether the candidate can live with this odd persona. It is not about studies or philosophies or theologies. Nor is it even really about belief. It is a perhaps an unnameable quality of abnormality which allows a guy to function in that way. And it certainly not principally about sex, or lack of it. Perhaps because the quality is so difficult to identify that the laity really can't focus on it negatively. It is what allowed and allows, I assume a guy like Martin Holley who was quite active in seminary with a number of people to fit so well as to become a Bishop. Is that cynicism? I call it identification of something so quirky as to almost escape detection because normal people could not even imagine living in that state. If you ask me, therefore, the Pope ultimately wept because this vast reality is on the cusp of becoming truly recognizable. And that the destroyed lives of these victims are too real to allow it to be dismissed again in the flutter of his white vestments.

I guess, Peter, our experiences with religious people are radically different. I was wrong to call it cynical. That's your perspective from your unique experience. It is perfectly valid.

I apologize.

Oh Gosh, that was not the point to get you to apologize, believe me please! A deep part of my personal desiderata is that the religious experience could be something invigorating and life-affirming, and profoundly felt. Believe me, I am glad you have the experience you had AND came out with a liberal embracing viewpoint. That is a success story. My only issue, not with you believe me, but with a particular Church located in amidst all the Pines in Rome, is that the centuries have accumulated a wealth of creepiness as well as profundity. My only point, basically, is that it is about time that they grow up and sort it out. And that if they are not willing to do it, the world has a responsibility to step in and do it for them. No excuses.

We are like the Buddhist parable of the blind men who encountered the elephant. One describes it as like a drain pipe on feeling its trunk. The other describes it as like a jar on feeling its head. "Just so are these preachers and scholars holding various views blind and unseeing.... each maintaining reality is thus and thus." The Buddha is said to have exclaimed.

For you and me, Peter, the church is our elephant.

That's great! I always prefer looking at things from the potentially humorous side of things. And there is just something funny about elephants. Serendipitously it has also reminded me of something my cousin in Miami just told me the other day. I related his thoughts on the crazy philosopher before. But he also told me that when the Canon Lawyer gave his speech one of the important men of the parish turned to my cousin and said about the Canon Lawyer's relationship with the Archbishop: "This priest reminds me of the guy in the circus who follows the elephant around and scoops up what drops from behind.' I can only say, having known all these characters down there and their personalities, and more importantly the character of the Roman Church lately, I found this very, very funny! Well, what I can say also at this point, is that if you meet the Buddha on the road, have a glass of white wine with him. It might be interesting.