Marc Barnes hearts Andy Warhol

Really?  I had to read this article three times, but it looks like Mr. Barnes is giving a major kudos to Andy Warhol over the fact that Warhol was at once openly homosexual, and celibate.  I know, Marc is a young man still getting his way into the world with a wonderful gift of prose.  But Warhol the wonderful Catholic?

OK, there's the rub isn't it.  I noticed that among the comments, most of them are along the lines of 'cool man, I didn't know this, what a great guy!'  Though a few stepped up and pointed out that Warhol was, after all, part of the whole pornculture of the 60s and 70s, that Avant-garde universe that taught the world that wherever you can put your genitals for the ultimate orgasmic experiences,  there need be no morals to follow.  Sexual satisfaction was morality.

And that is the issue here.  Some in the Catholic blogosphere, in keeping up with the modern Catholic  confusion on the issue, are taking notion that same sex attraction is not in and of itself sin, and running with it.  In some cases, it's beginning to sound as if having same sex attraction covereth up a multitude of sins.  If you make, what Mr. Barnes calls, the laudable stand of openly declaring your sexual attraction while not acting on it, apparently everything or anything else you do is off the table. Attend Mass regularly.  Struggle spiritually.  And it's fine, no questions asked.

As one commenter points out, what about leading these little ones into temptation  What about millstones around the neck and all that jazz?  And why do we consider same sex attraction proudly proclaimed laudable?  When did that happen?  Not being a sin in and of itself is one thing.  Being a disordered appetite that is praiseworthy and to be sung over by the angels is something else.

All of this reminds me what I came to realize during the great Lila Rose disaster of 2011: the Catholic blogosphere is dominated by untrained amateurs  or trained amateurs who have only the basest academic training.  These folks aren't, for the most part, trained clergy, with years of theological education and actual experience in the trenches of pastoral ministry.  Without the checks and balances that come with vocational religious ministry,  they are free to inject their opinions,biases, viewpoints, dreams, hopes, fears, jealousies, triumphs  and any one of a thousand factors into their doctrinal musings.

It doesn't mean they are always wrong.  In fact, that's the problem.  As often as not, since there is plenty of information on Catholic teaching to be had, they are quite right   But one must be careful.  Before we know it, the path has verged ever so slightly off the straight and narrow onto a side street of conforming the age old teachings of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church with this or that particular opinion that makes me feel warm and fuzzy because I think that person, that song, that book, or that movie is just so darn swell.  Consumers of Catholic teaching via the Catholic Blogosphere be warned!