Posted by Mundabor
Allow me to say first of all that I am not criticising here Bishop Zavala’s private failures. We all have ours, we all are sinners and we all would not want a huge megaphone attached to our confessional.
What I would like to point out is that it seems to me that there are ten Zavalas for one Corapi, that is: that heterodox and controversial positions are rather likely to be the indicator of something that doesn’t work in the private vocation and in the private life of the religious involved.
If we think of the scale of the problems in Belgium, or of the problem caused by homosexual priests in general – most of them, no doubt, very “open” in many a matter of doctrine – it seems to me that their number eclipses those of the conservative religious who gravely fail their duty – or give public scandal – like Corapi or Maciel.
Once again, it is not for us to substitute ourselves to bishop’s Zavala’s confessor for his private shortcomings; but in my eyes it is very fitting for us to reflect that once again, progressive controversial religious are people who have a big problem with some aspects of their vocation.
I can easily imagine homosexual priests expressing themselves in “liberal” ways if not necessarily in the matter of homosexuality – where they might be more easily outed – in some other matter like, say, “peace”, “social justice” and the like. When the rules of the shop begin to prove a constraint on their inclinations, they begin to become hostile to the shop. Out goes loyalty, in comes self-gratification and easy feeling of being “just” and “popular”, possibly to compensate for private remorse or just out of sheer self-gratification. The same goes for progressive priests-with-girlfriend, or atheists, or not believing in the Real Presence, & Co.
Bishop Zavala was, at least, not a sodomite. He was weak, but he was not perverted. He was weak, also, in not having resisted to an episcopal appointment certainly posterior to the beginning of his long-term affair, thus exposing the Church to a far bigger scandal. He was weaker still in allowing himself to become involved in an activity which must necessarily expose him to a great risk of being found out some day. One wonders what can have motivated him, if not a great desire for popularity, again probably as compensation for a sense of inadequacy. The motivating factor of all heterodox do-gooders, really.
I am a cynical man. Whenever a religious takes positions going more or less overtly against traditional Church teaching, I can’t help wondering how comfortable he feels in his habit, or whether he is trying to compensate for some problem or conflict. In my simple world, the priest at peace with himself is, I think, as naturally loyal as water is wet.
Next time you hear of a pacifist, or socialist, or global warmer, or suspiciously progressive priest, think of what can be behind.