When President François Mitterrand died in Paris, his wife and mistress stood side by side at his grave, something that would be unthinkable in the United States. Everyone in the France knew that he had a mistress while he was president.
There is some sophistication in this ability to separate personal from political morality. We should be more concerned about a politician’s positions on issues than about his or her sex life. If a candidate can achieve peace and prosperity, as a citizen we can ignore his or her personal vices even if as human beings we might be appalled.
On the other hand, one’s personal life may give hints of how one would do business or politics. Would you make a business deal with someone who cheats at golf? If the answer is no, then why would you trust a person who cheats on his or her spouse? My guess is that many men are less judgmental of sexual infidelity than of cheating at sports. If you cheat on your wife, no one cares; but if you cheat on the guys, then you are not a gentleman.
Adultery is a sin because it is a betrayal of the commitment to love another person exclusively forever. It is a violation of love and trust. The hurt and pain it causes is often inconsolable. In the Hebrew Scriptures, God often portrayed Israel’s violation of the covenant as adultery. God will always forgive. Saints may be able to forgive. But to expect one’s spouse to be a saint when you were not, it expecting a lot.
It is bad enough when politicians stray, but when the clergy stray, it is even more scandalous. They should know better because they preach a higher standard. Not only is there infidelity, there is hypocrisy and scandal to be dealt with. Again, God will forgive. The church can also forgive, but it can also appropriately require real penance and resignation from positions of authority and respect.
No one wants to return to the days when adultery was against the law, but as a society we have to stand up for fidelity in marriage. The family is the foundation of society. It needs all the support it can get.
The Mitterrand funeral was also surprising on a personal level. Danielle Mitterrand decided to stay with her wayward husband and she did so with eyes wide open. "Yes, I had married a seducer, and I had to put up with that," she told L'Express. Her reasons for staying are not clear. "I was never bored with him," she reports.
She used her position to show support for Fidel Castro, Subcomandate Marcos, Algerian militants and the Kurdish and Tibetan people, even when her positions were at odds with her husband. “I often stood even farther to the left than my husband, because I was free of the restraints that come with being in government,” she told Spiegel. “He never resented that in me.”
Is this a case of French practicality trumping American romanticism? Should a woman be condemned for staying in a loveless marriage because she prizes career and/or family over love? Or perhaps she hopes against the odds for conversion? That is a decision only the woman can make.
Please e-mail On Faith if you'd like to receive an email notification when On Faith sends out a new question.
Email Me | Del.icio.us | Digg | Facebook
