(om me 11 Robert Hefner, Andrew Hamilton A hard • A s Tm s
Thi s special gift Like Andrew Hamilton (Summa theologiae, September- October 2005) I am reluctant to be the fool who rushes in, especially as his column is the first thing I read in each issue, and I am conscious also of Henry Beard's warning, Et casu Latine loqui cum sodale societatis [esu ne umquam conaris (May you never try out your Latin [or anything else] on a Jesu it ). Like Hamilton, I have some questions to ask of Jan Anderson's report of her research in her book Priests in Love. They are centred on the theme of justice. I am deeply sympathetic to the plight of those men who, in good faith, answered a call to ministry and find themselves unable to meet the celibacy conditions. Sometimes this is the result of some very unenlightened training processes in days gone by and lost opportunities to begin the development of a mature personality, or of heavy demands m ade and not supported. I am conscious, too, of how easy it is to practise self-deception in these circumstances. In particular, I am conscious that the partners of the priests in this study are vulnerable because of the inequality of their positions and the impossibility of public recognition. While Anderson and her interviewees address these issues and she accepts that the committed relationships are responsible, I believe the issues must remain relevant. The thrust of her argument, it seem s to me, is that these priests and their partners do not simply see themselves as victims in a sad tale, as Hamilton puts it. They have taken responsibility to m aintain their commitment to ministry and also to follow a path to becoming authentically human; in other words, to find a solution to the problem . (It is difficult to consider these untested ideas without resorting to cliche.) H amilton makes it clear from the beginning that he is responding to an argument about compulsory celibacy for Catholic priests. Anderson and her interviewees also m ake it clear that the gift of celibacy can and has been a source of grace for the Church over its history, although they also m ake the point, I believe, that the two calls, to ministry and to celibacy, are not necessarily tied together. They also draw on the human history of the Church to suggest that compulsory celibacy has a non-graced story as well. Hamilton is correct to point to the deep earthing of clerical celibacy in Catholic history. I believe that Anderson and her interviewees do see this as well, but that her argument points to an equally important issu e, which is simply the social reality that for a very large proportion of the Church earthing is largely not providing nourishment, and that it is nourishment that is the central issu e. It is in his final sentence that I believe Hamilton shifts the terms of his contract with his reader. His 'splendid foolishness' is reminiscent of som e of the writing of A parting word L_ letters G. K. Chesterton, especially his biography of St Francis. While we need reminding that it can be gloriously human to have such heroic generosity, we must also rem ember that this was a special, and not compulsory, gift. In these times it is di ffic ult for any organisation to justify a request for heroism . People are too suspicious and mindful of past betrayals to hand over what is now seen as their own responsibility. Times, and the sign s of the times, have changed and so h as the Church, particularly in its recognition of the vocation of the baptised and the call to be fa ithful in m arriage or in partnersh ip. These might be the splendid foolishness that fertilises these challenging new times. To read the signs of the times does mean reading with the analytic tools available in these times, and I hope Anderson is widely read. Martin N. White Prospect, SA <strong>Eureka</strong> <strong>Street</strong> welcomes letters from our readers. Short letters are more likely to be published, and all letters may be edited. Letters must be signed, and should include a contact phone number and the writer's name and address . Send to: eureka@jespub.jesuit.org.au or PO Box 553, Richmond VIC 3121 When I first became editor of <strong>Eureka</strong> <strong>Street</strong>, m y predecessor, Morag Fraser, left me a book as prescribed reading. It was James T hurber's The Years with Ross. It described the early years of The New Yorker u n der its fou n ding editor, Harold Ross, and t h e peculiar brand of managerial madn ess h e pion eered th ere. H is system of payin g writers was notable. H e created a sch edule that only h e u nderstood, and made payments only when h e remembered to. His exam ple h as b een infectiou s in publishing h ou ses since. In her ode to grammar, Eats, Shoots and Leaves, Lyn ne Truss describes an argum ent b et w een Ross and Thurber abou t t h e proper use of the Oxford comma. It ended in fisticu ffs . Thurber in sisted that the only acceptable u sage was 'red, w h ite and blue', Ross that it was 'red, w h ite, and blue'. I tell these stories of quirky passion because I sh all treasure sim ilar stories of the passion for truthful writin g and of human vagary as I leave <strong>Eureka</strong> <strong>Street</strong> to take up a new role w ith the Australian N ursing Federation. N o doubt the m ovemen t from Church to Trade Union spon sorsh ip will generate more stories! I would like to thank you wh o form th e <strong>Eureka</strong> <strong>Street</strong> communit y. You h ave en cou raged me most deeply when you h ave t old m e that <strong>Eureka</strong> <strong>Street</strong> publishes views and argu m ents t h at others do not . It is preciou s because it hosts a foru m for public conversation in Australia, on e in w h ich n ew writers can join . It h as been my privilege to en able t h is conversation bet ween writers and readers. I would like to thank particularly M orag Fraser, Andy Hamilton SJ, Jack Waterford, M ich ael McGirr, Anthony Ham and Robert Hefner. I am grateful to them as mentors and friends. Robert H efn er h as k in dly agreed to act as editor of <strong>Eureka</strong> <strong>Street</strong> fo r the coming issu es. H is sen sitivit y and ex perien ce will en sure that you will continu e to enjoy <strong>Eureka</strong> <strong>Street</strong> and to b e drawn into t h e conversation it represents. - Marcelle Mogg NOVEMBER- DECEMBER 2005 EU REKA STREET 5
Change language