The Rashomon Effect
Have you ever seen the Japanese movie Rashomon? It's a Kurosawa classic, and what stands out is this theme ... if a number of people experience the same occurrance, you can be assured that each will have a different view of it.
I bring up the movie because I've just read two articles oabout the same issue .... gay adoptions/the Equality Act in the UK ... one in The Tablet, and the other at First Things. Thier takes are so different, it's hard to believe they're discussing the same thing. By now, you must know which side I throw down on (the Tablet's :-), but below is a little from each article.
*********************
Moralism and UK Adoption Laws, from First Things ....
Overweening moralism is, if you believe most of what you read in the newspapers, the unique sin of conservative religious people. Of course, it isn’t actually true—as witness this latest example of moralism, a secular-liberal moralism imposed by law, from Great Britain .....
In this case, the religious believers are clearly on the side of conscience and freedom, while secular liberals are promoting a state-imposed moralism that coerces everyone, at least everyone who desires to cooperate with the state for the common good. Thus, the Anglican archbishops of Canterbury and York, in solidarity with their Catholic brethren, wrote to Blair: “The rights of conscience cannot be made subject to legislation, however well meaning.” .....
The law doesn’t really imagine that Catholic adoption agencies are somehow preventing gay and lesbian couples from adopting elsewhere. The proposed law is, instead, a device to rebuke the Church, to tell the Church that its teachings about homosexuality and marriage are false, a way for gay-rights activists to attack Christianity under the mantel of nondiscrimination .....
The stance that the government takes toward same-sex marriage will have implications not only for state marriage law but much else—including religious liberty. Legal moralists on the left won’t have it any other way.
************************
And here are a few bits from the Tablet article, Sex and the secular liberal .....
In the past week it has been disconcerting to read about the way the "gay adoption" issue seems to have been tackled by the Catholic Church in England and Wales, which made it clear to the Government that it could not accept equality regulations that would put same-sex couples on an equal footing with heterosexual couples as adoptive parents .....
These aspects of the adoption row obscured a very important point of principle under the surface, one which in a calmer discussion could have been brought usefully to the fore. The Labour Government's commitment to equality is genuine and has grown as more traditional socialist values have lost their persuasive edge ..... The primary duties of the new Commission centre on working for "equality" and "diversity", the first being statutorily defined as "equality between individuals", the second as "the fact that individuals are different" ......
Liberal society is leavened through with toughness: it has plenty of state powers to resist subversion from within as well as from without; it has a whole cohort of laws punishing hate speech and other kinds of unacceptable talk. It now has anti-discrimination laws to prohibit not all kinds of discrimination but rather only those that offend against its model of tolerance and broad-mindedness - like refusing to accept same-sex couples for adoption, for example. In the post-socialist age, non-faith-based progressives are deadly serious about imposing their liberalism, as the Catholic hierarchy has now found to its cost.
How should the Church react to the challenge of this liberal vision of society? It should recognise, first, that it is much better than the rampant capitalist world of competing selfish individuals that might otherwise be on view, and second, that it seeks a much better world than one in which all are allowed to discriminate to their heart's content. And finally, with one large exception, the liberal vision of society is very close to that of the Church, with progressives and Catholics being almost always on the same side on such key issues as esteem, dignity and opportunity for all. The one exception, the radically different approach taken to sexuality, is often more to the fore among the senior church leadership that it is on the ground at parish level.
The liberal vision of a tolerant society based on mutual respect but also on a rejection of intolerance is not one to be feared. Rather, it is an offer of partnership that the Church should joyfully seize. But first it has to work out how on earth to manoeuvre itself out of the cul-de-sac of sexuality into which its universality has forced it. Liberal society knows exactly where it is going; does the Church?
********************
Wikipedia says of the Rashomon Effect that it epitomizes the subjectivity of perception, by which observers of the same event are able to produce substantially different but equally plausible accounts of it. It seems that nowhere can such an effect be more noted than where the issue of what is "right" is up for grabs.
Read Roger Ebert's review of Rashomon here
I bring up the movie because I've just read two articles oabout the same issue .... gay adoptions/the Equality Act in the UK ... one in The Tablet, and the other at First Things. Thier takes are so different, it's hard to believe they're discussing the same thing. By now, you must know which side I throw down on (the Tablet's :-), but below is a little from each article.
*********************
Moralism and UK Adoption Laws, from First Things ....
Overweening moralism is, if you believe most of what you read in the newspapers, the unique sin of conservative religious people. Of course, it isn’t actually true—as witness this latest example of moralism, a secular-liberal moralism imposed by law, from Great Britain .....
In this case, the religious believers are clearly on the side of conscience and freedom, while secular liberals are promoting a state-imposed moralism that coerces everyone, at least everyone who desires to cooperate with the state for the common good. Thus, the Anglican archbishops of Canterbury and York, in solidarity with their Catholic brethren, wrote to Blair: “The rights of conscience cannot be made subject to legislation, however well meaning.” .....
The law doesn’t really imagine that Catholic adoption agencies are somehow preventing gay and lesbian couples from adopting elsewhere. The proposed law is, instead, a device to rebuke the Church, to tell the Church that its teachings about homosexuality and marriage are false, a way for gay-rights activists to attack Christianity under the mantel of nondiscrimination .....
The stance that the government takes toward same-sex marriage will have implications not only for state marriage law but much else—including religious liberty. Legal moralists on the left won’t have it any other way.
************************
And here are a few bits from the Tablet article, Sex and the secular liberal .....
In the past week it has been disconcerting to read about the way the "gay adoption" issue seems to have been tackled by the Catholic Church in England and Wales, which made it clear to the Government that it could not accept equality regulations that would put same-sex couples on an equal footing with heterosexual couples as adoptive parents .....
These aspects of the adoption row obscured a very important point of principle under the surface, one which in a calmer discussion could have been brought usefully to the fore. The Labour Government's commitment to equality is genuine and has grown as more traditional socialist values have lost their persuasive edge ..... The primary duties of the new Commission centre on working for "equality" and "diversity", the first being statutorily defined as "equality between individuals", the second as "the fact that individuals are different" ......
Liberal society is leavened through with toughness: it has plenty of state powers to resist subversion from within as well as from without; it has a whole cohort of laws punishing hate speech and other kinds of unacceptable talk. It now has anti-discrimination laws to prohibit not all kinds of discrimination but rather only those that offend against its model of tolerance and broad-mindedness - like refusing to accept same-sex couples for adoption, for example. In the post-socialist age, non-faith-based progressives are deadly serious about imposing their liberalism, as the Catholic hierarchy has now found to its cost.
How should the Church react to the challenge of this liberal vision of society? It should recognise, first, that it is much better than the rampant capitalist world of competing selfish individuals that might otherwise be on view, and second, that it seeks a much better world than one in which all are allowed to discriminate to their heart's content. And finally, with one large exception, the liberal vision of society is very close to that of the Church, with progressives and Catholics being almost always on the same side on such key issues as esteem, dignity and opportunity for all. The one exception, the radically different approach taken to sexuality, is often more to the fore among the senior church leadership that it is on the ground at parish level.
The liberal vision of a tolerant society based on mutual respect but also on a rejection of intolerance is not one to be feared. Rather, it is an offer of partnership that the Church should joyfully seize. But first it has to work out how on earth to manoeuvre itself out of the cul-de-sac of sexuality into which its universality has forced it. Liberal society knows exactly where it is going; does the Church?
********************
Wikipedia says of the Rashomon Effect that it epitomizes the subjectivity of perception, by which observers of the same event are able to produce substantially different but equally plausible accounts of it. It seems that nowhere can such an effect be more noted than where the issue of what is "right" is up for grabs.
Read Roger Ebert's review of Rashomon here
16 Comments:
Good post, Crystal.
I have yet to see Rashomon, though I love Kurosawa.
Dear Crystal,
It is such a touchy issue so I hope that as Christians, you and your readers will forgive me if I ruffle a few weathers.
I have to say that from my experience as a Roman Catholic, there is no way that I can see any Catholics practicing or non-practicing accepting that same-sex of any form can possibly be condoned by “The Blessed Holy Trinity”. I know that there are certainly a large number who would condom “The Blessed Sacrament of Marriage.” but just because God forgives through prayer certainly still does not mean that He agrees with many of our behaviors.
I must also say that I really feel sorry for Catholic now-a-days because in order to honestly protect their Christian believes while still following Christ’ Teaching, many may have to become Martyrs because “The Only Begotten Son of God” showed US The Way and it was not through violence.
Although my bark is worst than my bite and most people would not really know that for a fact, so I guess that will probably be my physical downfall and if that’s the case I hope it simply surprises me. Even if my forgiven sins can, I could never be a hypocrite and say that it’s ok to knowingly indirectly or directly say that there’s nothing wrong with homosexuality. Our forgiven sins or so called gods will eventually find out that it’s wrong to accept everything just so we can make it easier to keep the peace and I hope that they learn a lot quicker than Emperor Nero did!
I’ve checked this over and over with my heart and heart of hearts and there’s still no way that they will give an inch. They just seem to say that if you’re blind, you’re blind and it’s not always pleasant to be blind and going around pretending that we can see when we truly can’t does not make it right with God although He's got an Endless Love for US.
Thank You for allowing me to comment again Crystal and probably as usual we might have to continue learning to agree to disagree but if we just hang in there, Jesus Christ did say that there’s nothing impossible for His Heavenly Father.
God Bless All His Children
Hi Liam - it's an interesting movie :-)
Vuctor - yep, we're still agreeing to disagree on this one. I'm glad we can do that and still remain friends.
Crystal, I'm sure that your spelling of vuctor was as much an honest mistake as was my spelling of weathers where I meant to write feathers.
Victor, I'm sorry .... it was a mistake. My eyesight isn't the best.
I know that there are certainly a large number who would condom “The Blessed Sacrament of Marriage.”
That's one of the more interesting typos I've seen in a while.
Which is not meant as any kind of comment on the discussion at hand, or on the person making the typo.
I prefer to completely side-step the real issue of your post and simply second your recommendation of Rashomon.
Liam, I can't believe you haven't seen Rashomon! Damn it, man, get your priorities in order. PhD, Schmee-h-D. We're talking about one of the most important films in cinema history! What are you going to tell St. Peter when you get to the pearly gates and he goes through the list of essential films you should have seen? I got you to see a Fred Astaire-Ginger Rogers film, but I can't continue to be be responsible for your cinematic soul.
Here's a question: How many films actually become a part of our vocabulary? I can only think of Rashomon ("the Rashomon effect") and Gaslight, which actually gets its own listing in the Oxford English Dictionary. [verb, trans. "To manipulate (a person) by psychological means into questioning his or her own sanity."] Any others?
Hi Will ,
It's funny how a movie can become part of cultural short-hand. I was watching an episode of Stargate SG-1, and a scientist was trying to explain to an audience a way of sending a message through a relay system. No one understood what he meant until he said ... they send a message across the countryside...(silence)... Lord of the Rings. (everyone begins to nod in collective understanding) Lord of the Rings, you know when they light all those signal fires on the mountaintops. :-)
Hi Crys,
You know where I stand on this issue, as I posted on this at length on another thread you did on it once. I said at the time that it was all that I was going to write on it. All that I'll add now is that I'm listening and reading respectfully. I don't understand what causes homosexuality, and the cause is going to have a lot to do with how I ultimately look at this in the long run. I don't think anyone knows for sure. I suspect, with a lot of other people, that it is a complex combination of biological and environmental factors. Since no one knows for sure, I don't think any psychologists should be so confident in stating what the effects of same-sex parenting has been on children. It hasn't been going on long enough in any case, for them to really tell. A lot of people, like the Catholic Church hierarchy in particular, have gotten into trouble following the conventional wisdom held by psychologists. In their case, it was being told that pedophiles could be treated and rehabilitated. Personnel decisions were based upon that advice. We now know that they cannot be rehabiliated. My point is not to equate pedophilia with homosexuality. I'm just asking you to please forgive me if I'm a bit skeptical about accepting such studies at face value.
I don't believe is scapegoating gay people, but on the other hand, I wouldn't accept being branded as a bigot if I failed to see how two men make for a marriage. The Chuch/State issues surrounding the whole thing scare the hell out of me.
Rashoman was a great film, as are all of Kurosawa's films. I remember audibly gasping once during Ran when there was a scene of the two opposing armies facing each other. One samurai rode his horse out into the middle of the field to meet his opponent, and as he did so, the shadow of a cloud followed him as he rode. Breathtaking shot...
My favorite of Kuroswa's films was Yojimbo
Jeff,
I think I understand your concern, if homosexuality is caused in part by environment. I tend to think it's purely a physiological thing, but who knows for sure.
I see what you mean about pedophilia. - I think neither sexual orientation nor sexual pathology would be possible to change with therapy. Did you ever see the movie Clockwork Orange? When I think of negative reinforcement used for that kind of thing, I remember that movie - ugh!
Yojimbo was great! :-)
William -- I'm doing my best! I'll try and see Rashomon soon. I have seen Yojimbo.
As far as the whole homosexuality issue goes, I'd have to say that between what I've read on the science involved and especially what I've seen firsthand with many gay friends and acquaintances, I can only conclude that 1) people who are gay have no choice in the matter, and 2) those who have accepted and embraced this fact are healthy, happy individuals (at least as much as the heterosexuals I know). I would assume same-sex attraction is biological, though how it plays out in society (like opposite-sex attraction) is culturally conditioned. Ancient Athens was not exactly Chelsea.
"Therapy" to change gay people certainly seems not to work. Mormons encourage it, and I have heard that the suicide rate among young gay Mormons is very high. For my part, I can't imagine any kind of therapy that could make me lose my attraction for women and make me attracted to men.
I have no problem with adoption by gay couples. A stable, loving environment seems to be the key for healthy kids. I admit that the Church-state problems that come up regarding these issues are touchy, and the British example is a good one. On the other hand, Crystal, you made a good point in an earlier post when you said something to the effect that if you change "gay adoption" to "black adoption," we'd have a greater problem with the church's position.
You and I agree, Liam.
It's interesting what advances in technology can do to people's perceptions and hopes.
Years ago, a lot of gay activists were hoping that a biological cause could be found for homosexuality. Now, many of those same activists are afraid of a biological cause being found, because they fear that someone will use that information to try to "fix" them.
Yojimbo was the inspiration for A Fistful of Dollars. Clint and his mule with no sense of humor! :-)
Hi Crystal,
Been too busy and too sick to keep up with my blog reading, so I am late on this thread.
Years ago I attended a talk by a Catholic psychologist and one of the most interesting thing he said was that there were two forms of homosexuality. The first was transitional, and that almost all males went through this stage around the time of puberty. He claimed that getting into a homosexual relationship during that time could extend the time, but that almost invariably the person would return to heterosexuality.
The second type was fixed and could not be changed. He noted that in his experience the people that fit in this category almost always carried a deep anger.
Such a case could help explain two phenomena that I observe. One is that I think many people dislike gays because they are afraid they are one, or are attracted to that lifestyle. And secondly, the disagreement as to whether it is an environmental issue or genetic. Few seem to consider that it could be both. So one person studies the first group and says environmental/choice, another studies the other group and says genetic. And both are right.
As for adoption, I have some serious questions about the reasonableness of the Church's position. First, I think one has to decide what marriage is. As a Catholic I see it as sacramental in nature, a covenant between the couple and God. But as a citizen I also see it as a legal agreement that grants certain legal rights to the couple, such as tax breaks or the right to make death bed decisions regarding one's partner.
So we use the word marriage to denote two separate things, a civil partnership, and a Sacramental relationship. So Dick and Jane enter a civil partnership and want to adopt. Or maybe Dick and Jane are divorced Catholics and can't be married in the eyes of the Church. That is OK, the Church is quite willing to allow adoption by people that they do not believe are married.
So it seems to me that the Church is stepping into a legal situation, that it is not "rendering unto Caesar what is Caesar's."
And more so, I think adoption, like marriage, also falls into the legal system and is under that control of the state. I think that when the Church starts trying to regulate either civil laws or science it gets itself into deep problems.
Since adoption is a legal process, certainly not a sacramental one, it seems to me that the Church has two choices, to follow the law in adoptions,or get out of the business. And it is a business and I suspect a very lucrative one.
Another problem I have with the Church's stance is that it seems to be based on the assumption that a child should be raised by a mother and a father, and suffers gave harm if not. It seems to me that an extension of their stance is that children should be taken away from single parent families. This certainly seems strange to me.
I think that we are entering a time when the Church and State are struggling for political power. How this shall play out is beyond me, but I suspect that a lot of people will be hurt.
Oh, I agree that current studies are highly suspect and at best are often report with great bias. I would also like to point out that while pedophilia cannot be cured there are individuals that do not act on their drives. I don't believe that drug addiction or alcoholism can be cured either, but there are a lot of us out here who are recovering and not using or drinking.
Peace, let us hope that God will grant all of us goo sense with out having to knock our heads too hard :-).
Mike L
Hi Mike ... I hope you're feeling better.
That's interesting about the transitional stage at puberty. I think women go through that too.
I agree about the church and state thing. When I read the Tablet article, it said that the Church had sent letters to different government officials, telling them how they wanted things to turn out. This shocked me, but then I guess that kind of thing happens here too, with the religious right, and even the left, letting the government know how they feel on certain issues.
Thanks for the kind words :)
Who knows where to download XRumer 5.0 Palladium?
Help, please. All recommend this program to effectively advertise on the Internet, this is the best program!
Post a Comment
<< Home