Anne Hathaway, who stars in silly movies, has left the Catholic Church because her brother, Thomas, has come out of the closet as a sodomite. Now, we don’t generally look to Hollywood for heroic professions of the apostolic faith. No, when it comes to religion, we’re generally used to celebs making magnanimous fools of themselves. On this score, Anne does not at all disappoint:
Why should I support an organization that has a limited view of my beloved brother?
Diogenes (a fellow philosopher, by the way) has a great piece on this foolishness, showing that the Church’s view of Thomas — a sinner in need of redemption — has not changed; whereas Anne and Thomas, in accepting and practicing degenerate behavior — and leaving the Church over it — have changed.
Note well these two sentences, wherein much ironic merriment is made over Anne’s strangely selected word in that quote above, “limited”:
It was not the Church but the Hathaway clan that adopted a different attitude after Thomas emerged from the closet. Future prospects are indeed limited for Thomas, and for Anne and her family, too, as long as they remain outside the Church. [Emphasis mine.]
Is Diogenes saying that there’s no salvation outside the Church?
He is, of course, at least implicitly, which brings me to a point that has been made before on this site. In circumstances like this, where are the voices of all those sincere neo-orthodox folks who have “limited” this doctrine to mean that “there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church for people who leave it“? Mind you, their liberal doctrinal evolution is unacceptable, but they might at least display something like integrity by saying, every once in a while, that to leave the Church is to risk one’s salvation. There is, sadly, ample opportunity to say such a thing.
Perhaps Anne Hathaway has a bit more integrity than these folks.
Still, she needs to wise up… or should I say, get smart?
