Divided Church of England to debate blessings for same-sex unions

The Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby attends the Church of England General Synod meeting in London, Britain, February 9, 2023.

By

  • The assembly is due to meet from July 7 to 11
  • Synod to discuss blessings for same-sex couples
  • Church of England has refused to allow gay marriage
  • ‘This has not been an easy period’ – Bishop Sarah

The Church of England’s governing body will deliberate on how priests could carry out blessings for same-sex couples when it gathers in the cathedral city of York for a five-day meeting on Friday.

The assembly of bishops, clergy and laity – called the General Synod – is also due to discuss on Saturday how to protect vicars who might choose not to pray over the union of same-sex couples.

The CoE, which does not allow same-sex marriages in its 16,000 churches, in January set out proposals to let gay couples have a prayer service after a civil marriage, and apologised to LGBTQI+ people for the rejection and hostility they have faced. The synod voted in favour of the plans in February.

That caused a conservative group of Anglican church leaders from around the world to declare they no longer had confidence in the Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, saying he had betrayed his ordination.

At home, however, there is pressure to go further, with some bishops publicly voicing support for same-sex marriages in churches.

Divisions have run deep for decades on how the centuries-old institution – mother church for the world’s 85 million Anglicans across 165 countries – deals with homosexuality and same-sex unions. Homosexuality is taboo in Africa and illegal in more than 30 countries there.

Welby, who is the spiritual leader of the wider Anglican Communion, called on bishops last year to “abound in love for all”. But he backed the validity of a resolution passed in 1998 that rejected “homosexual practice as incompatible with Scripture”.

Bishop Sarah Mullally told reporters last month: “This has not been an easy period for people right across a range of traditions and we know that has maybe been harder since February than it may have been before.”

She reiterated that the proposals would not change the doctrine that marriage is between a man and a woman, and that there would be protection for those who “on grounds of conscience” choose not to bless same-sex couples.

‘SLAP IN THE FACE’

Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) activists have long been fighting for the same rights as fellow Christians who are heterosexual. Gay marriage has been legal in Britain for a decade.

“Faith is important to many LGBTQ+ people, which is why the Synod’s suggestion that blessings be provided in place of marriages (is) a real slap in the face to our communities,” Sasha Misra, Associate Director of Communications at LGBT rights group Stonewall, told Reuters via email.

Mullally said the CoE was absorbing different views on the complex matter, and that it would take time to produce the full proposals, which are expected when the synod meets in November.

Complete Article HERE!

Bishop named to Vatican office handling sex abuse complaints discounted some victims, US group says

— A U.S.-based group that tracks how the Catholic hierarchy deals with allegations of sexual abuse by clergy says Pope Francis made a “troubling” choice in appointing an Argentine archbishop to a powerful Vatican office

Pope Francis arrives for the Angelus noon prayer from the window of his studio overlooking St.Peter’s Square, at the Vatican, Sunday, July 2, 2023.

By FRANCES D’EMILIO

A U.S.-based group that tracks how the Catholic hierarchy deals with allegations of sexual abuse by clergy says Pope Francis made a “troubling” choice in appointing an Argentine prelate to a powerful Vatican office that handles such cases.

On Saturday, the Vatican announced the pontiff had picked Monsignor Victor Manuel Fernández, archbishop of La Plata, Argentina, to head the Holy See’s watchdog office for doctrinal orthodoxy. Its mandate includes handling sex abuse allegations lodged against clergy.

BishopAccountability.org, a 20-year-old Massachusetts organization that maintains an online archive of abuse in the Roman Catholic Church, said in a statement that the prelate in 2019 refused to believe victims who accused a priest in the La Plata archdiocese of sexually abusing boys.

Francis “made a baffling and troubling choice,” the group said in statement emailed late Saturday in the U.S., citing how Fernández handled the case.

“In his response to allegations, he stoutly supported the accused priest and refused to believe the victims,” BishopAccountability.org said. Fernández “should have been investigated, not promoted to one of the highest posts in the global church.”

Telephone calls to the La Plata archdiocese office went unanswered on Sunday. The archdiocese didn’t immediately respond to an emailed request for comment from the archbishop.

As a leader of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, the 60-year-old archbishop, who will take up his Vatican post in September, “will have immense power, especially when it comes to judging and punishing priests who abuse children,” BishopAccountability.org said.

A trusted adviser to the pontiff, Fernández has been nicknamed the “pope’s theologian″ because he is widely believed to have helped author some of Francis’ most important documents. The pope named him to head the La Plata archdiocese in 2018.

BishopAccountablity.org said after a 2008 child abuse complaint against a La Plata parish priest resurfaced in 2019, the archbishop published a letter from the priest on the archdiocese’s website. In it, the clergyman denied the abuse allegation and said he was slandered.

The archbishop later went to the accused priest’s parish and celebrated a Mass with him, according to BishopAccountability.org.

Despite more allegations surfacing, Fernández allowed the priest to continue work. The archbishop eventually removed him, saying priest requested to leave for “health reasons.” In December 2019, the priest took his own life hours after a judge issued an order for his arrest, according to the watchdog group and Argentine media reports at the time.

“Nothing about his performance suggests that he is fit to lead the pope’s battle against abuse and cover-up,″ BishopAccountability.org said of Fernández.

Francis has pledged that the Catholic Church will adhere to a zero-tolerance policy on clergy sexual abuse.

Complete Article HERE!

Baltimore’s Catholic archdiocese adds 42 names to list of staff credibly accused of sexual abuse

BY Lee O. Sanderlin and Jean Marbella

The Archdiocese of Baltimore added more than 40 names to its public list of Catholic Church staff credibly accused of sexually abusing children, including for the first time deacons, nuns and lay teachers.

The additions, approved at the direction of Archbishop William Lori, mark the largest single expansion of the archdiocese’s credibly accused list since it first published 57 names in 2002 as part of its response to the national clergy abuse scandal. With Friday’s update, the church’s list now runs to more than 180 names.

Although the vast majority of newly added names already were known publicly — 41 of 42 had been published either in news reports or in the Maryland Attorney General’s Office report on eight decades of clergy sexual abuse and cover-ups in the archdiocese — the church said the move demonstrated its commitment to transparency.

The attorney general’s report identified 36 priests, brothers, nuns, deacons and lay people — such as teachers — who had been accused of abuse, but who were not then on the archdiocese list.

Survivors of abuse and advocates had demanded Lori add names to the archdiocese’s list even before the attorney general’s office released the public version of its report in April.

The report called on the archdiocese to be more transparent in listing credibly accused employees and clergy, and Friday’s additions sought to meet that request, about seven months after the report was completed and shared with church officials.

“The decision to add the names is also an acknowledgment of a recommendation by the Maryland attorney general that the Archdiocese expand its voluntary list,” wrote Christian Kendzierski, a spokesperson for the archdiocese, in an email to The Baltimore Sun. “The addition of these names to our public database builds on the Archdiocese’s long-standing commitment to transparency, healing and to ridding the Church of the scourge of child sexual abuse.”

The attorney general’s office did not respond to a request for comment Friday.

Of the 156 names in the attorney general’s report, 46 had not been previously listed by the archdiocese. A Sun review of 36 of those people found that most of them had died. The other 10 names were redacted, but The Sun has since confirmed and published their identities. A court hearing is scheduled in early July to determine whether the attorney general’s office can lift the redactions of those names to the public report.

David Lorenz, director of the Maryland chapter of the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, said that while he was glad the archdiocese published further names, he didn’t view it as a win for survivors as the credibly accused’s identities were already public elsewhere.

“I can’t give them a win for revealing the names of 42 people, 41 of which we already knew,” he said. “When they take this long, it should come with an apology, not a victory lap.”

The sole new name was that of Father Phillip J. Linden, a longtime theology professor at Xavier University of Louisiana, the nation’s only Catholic historically Black college. He previously served as a priest in Baltimore from 1969 through 1986, according to his religious order, the Josephites and church officials.

Linden is accused of abusing a boy in the 1970s when he was a pastor at St. Francis Xavier parish in East Baltimore, according to the archdiocese. The archdiocese did not describe the allegation further.

Linden, who is in his 80s, has not been criminally charged. The archdiocese reported the allegation to law enforcement when it received it in August 2020, a spokesperson said.

Attempts Friday to reach Linden, his family and the Josephite order were not successful.

A spokesperson for Xavier University of Louisiana declined to comment on the allegations. Linden worked at the university from 1991 through May 2018, the spokesperson said. The Josephite order lists Linden as having been the dean of the university’s theology department, however the university spokesperson said that position never existed.

Father Phillip Linden in 1970.
Father Phillip Linden in 1970.

A Texas native, Linden celebrated his “Golden Jubilee” of 50 years in the Josephite order in 2019. Also known as the St. Joseph’s Society of the Sacred Heart, the Josephites are an order of Catholic priests and brothers who serve the Black community. The society’s headquarters is in Baltimore.

The archdiocese has maintained its credibly accused list, separate from that of the attorney general, with its own set of criteria — namely that it included only people who were clergy, meaning priests and brothers. Friday’s additions expand that criteria to include deacons, nuns and lay people, but it would be up to the archdiocese’s Independent Review Board to determine whether the wider criteria is used going forward.

The decision to add more names came the same week that one of Baltimore’s most well-known Catholic families filed a wrongful death lawsuit against the archdiocese over abuse Frank Gallagher Jr. suffered as a teen. Also Friday, a Baltimore County judge acquitted a former Catholic school wrestling coach in the only prosecution that has arisen from the attorney general’s investigation.

The additions mark a step toward recognition of some of the horrors survivors have dealt with. Among others, the archdiocese’s list now includes John Merzbacher, a former Catholic teacher who spent the last 28 years of his life in prison for the rape and torture of a student. Merzbacher died May 12 in prison.

For a name to go on the archdiocese’s list, a complaint or report has to be made to Catholic officials. The church reports the complaint to law enforcement and, once authorities give the archdiocese permission, church officials conduct their own investigation. Evidence is then presented to the Independent Review Board, an interfaith group of eight community members from legal, academic, health care, social work and law enforcement circles. Lori appoints the members.

The board meets quarterly and votes as to whether it considers the allegations credible. Lori then determines what course of action to take, if any, regarding making a name public or disciplinary action. Priests or brothers who die before a single allegation of child abuse is received aren’t added to the list unless a third party corroborates an allegation, or a second allegation is made against the same person.

As well as the 36 unredacted names from the attorney general’s report, the archdiocese added one of the 10 redacted names to its credibly accused list Friday: Father Joseph O’Meara.

Identified in the report as abuser No. 155, O’Meara was removed from ministry in 2020 at St. Agnes/William of York Parish in Catonsville after three women said he had inappropriately touched them. The attorney general’s report says O’Meara inappropriately touched a 7-year-old girl in 1984, sliding his hand up her leg to her genitals under a table at a dinner.

An attorney for O’Meara, Michael P. May, declined to comment Friday on O’Meara’s addition to the archdiocese’s credibly accused list, but previously confirmed O’Meara is one of the redacted names.

Kendzierski, the archdiocese spokesperson, declined to comment on O’Meara being one of the redacted names, citing a Baltimore Circuit Court judge’s confidentiality order regarding the ongoing process over how much more of the report should become public.

The archdiocese previously said it could not reveal the names of the redacted abusers, citing the court’s order. The attorney general’s office, subject to the same order, disagreed with that stance, saying the church is uniquely positioned to release any redacted name because the information would come from its own files.

Michael Joseph Miller also was added Friday to the credibly accused list, despite not being included in the attorney general’s report. A former member of the Conventual Franciscan Friars, Miller was arrested in Connecticut in 2011 on child pornography charges and was sentenced in 2013 to five years in prison plus 20 years of probation. Miller was a faculty member at Archbishop Curley High School during the 1994 and 1995 school years, and again from 2003 to 2006. He celebrated Mass occasionally at St. Isaac Jogues in Carney and St. Margaret in Bel Air from 2003 to 2006.

The Baltimore archdiocese acknowledged his arrest at the time, but stated it did not have any knowledge of incidents involving children here. On Friday, the archdiocese said a man came forward earlier this year to say Miller solicited and sent inappropriate photos to him when he was a student at Archbishop Curley in the mid-2000s.

According to reports in the Hartford Courant, Miller chatted on Facebook with seven teenagers about sexual issues, inviting one to come over and watch porn and engage in sex. Pornographic videos of children and adults turned up on computers he used, according to news coverage of his trial. The Hartford archdiocese said he was removed from the ministry in 2011.

Michael Joseph Miller
Michael Joseph Miller

The Connecticut sex offender registry listed an inmate release date of December 2017, and online court records show that as of January 2020, he remained on probation. The registry gives his address as that of the RECON retreat in Robertsville, Missouri, a residential facility for troubled clergy affiliated with the Servants of the Paraclete organization. It describes itself as a Catholic congregation of priests and brothers who provide care for their counterparts in need.

Miller could not be reached for comment. No one responded to messages left Friday for the Servants of the Paraclete.

Not including Linden, O’Meara and Miller, the following names appeared in the attorney general’s report and were added to the Baltimore archdiocese’s credibly accused list. Three priests — Douglas Dempster, Robert Trupia and William Virtue — are listed in the attorney general’s report as having either lived or worked in the Archdiocese of Baltimore, but have not been accused of abuse here.

A + next to the person’s name means they are deceased:

  • +Affrica, Louis — priest
  • +Brotzman, Stephen — lay teacher
  • +Brown, Wayland (Diocese of Savannah, Georgia) — priest
  • +Callahan, Robert — priest
  • Dempster, Douglas (Diocese of Wilmington, Delaware) — priest
  • +Ernst, Francis (Jesuit)
  • +Evans, Terence — priest
  • +Figlewski, Alphonsus (Conventual Franciscan)
  • +Firlie, Joseph — deacon
  • +Flood, Theonella (School Sisters of Notre Dame) — sister
  • +Hill, Joseph (Vincentian) — priest
  • +Hiltz, Robert — priest
  • +Jameson, William — priest
  • +Julian, Albert — priest
  • +Justice, John — deacon
  • +Kelly, Thomas M. — priest
  • +Krach, Joseph — priest
  • +Kuhl, Thomas — deacon
  • +Leary, David — priest
  • +McCrory, William — priest
  • McIntyre, Patrick — lay teacher
  • +Merzbacher, John — lay teacher
  • +Messer, Joseph — priest
  • +Morgan, Eugene (Christian Brother) — brother
  • +Morgan, William (Society of the Divine Word) — brother
  • +Mountain, John — priest
  • +Nagle, Alan — priest
  • +O’Hara, Leo — Leo O’Hara was a lay candidate to become a deacon
  • +Stallings, Albert — priest
  • +Sullivan, Cuthbert (Passionist)
  • +Tomasunas, Thomas (Capuchin Franciscan)
  • Trupia, Robert (Diocese of Tucson, Arizona) — priest
  • Virtue, William (Dioceses of Joliet and Peoria in Illinois) priest
  • +Wagner, Francis — priest
  • +Whelan, Thomas — priest
  • +Wooden, Roger — priest
  • +Yocum, Francis (Sisters of Saint Francis of Philadelphia) — sister
  • +Zerhusen, Henry — priest

One person identified in the attorney general’s report as an abuser was described by their victim as someone who began a relationship with a church official themselves while still a minor. While the archdiocese added that person’s name Friday to its list, The Sun does not name people who have been sexually abused without their permission. The newspaper attempted to contact the individual to ask about the victim’s statement regarding them, but was unable to reach them.

Complete Article HERE!

Why all Christians should support LGBTQ persons

by >

I recently saw a sponsored social media post by a Catholic that said “Call the LGBTQ community for what they are: sexual degenerates.” A Catholic website garnered over 90,000 signatures in attempts to stop a recent LGBTQ ministry conference at Fordham University — a conference whose modest goal was “to build community, share best practices and worship together.” Meanwhile, a prominent Catholic speaker campaigns to “Reclaim the Month” of June — with t-shirts and everything! — for the Sacred Heart of Jesus, which is apparently threatened by Pride month.

And this is just a mild sample — and all in my limited purview as a Catholic whose experience with LGBTQ support has otherwise been generally positive.

Unsurprisingly, the Christian community at large offers a range of perspectives on LGBTQ issues. Many progressive churches perform same-sex marriages, ordain openly gay ministers, and embrace theologies that allow for a more inclusive sexual anthropology. Many other churches maintain a traditional Christian sexual ethic and understanding of marriage. The Catholic Church itself, while officially upholding its longstanding sexual teaching and ethics, varies largely in its approach to LGBTQ issues and support of LGBTQ persons.

While it may be true that many traditional communities are not openly hostile to the LGBTQ community, one may nevertheless feel unwelcome simply for being gay or trans. Indeed, as the abovementioned examples demonstrate, some Christians go at length to stress that LGBTQ persons aren’t welcome. Moreover, many churches do not offer opportunities for their LGBTQ individuals to flourish and offer their own gifts.

In other words, many churches do not encourage their LGBTQ members to be, well, church. But it shouldn’t be like this. All churches — conservative or progressive, Catholic or otherwise — should welcome, appreciate, and care for LGBTQ persons. Here are seven reasons why.

1. Because LGBTQ above all refers to individual persons and not merely any moral or political issue.

We’re so accustomed to relating LGBTQ to the so-called “hot button” issues of the day — often in the realm of political ideology and activism — that we forget the faces behind the acronym. But to put first things first, LGBTQ individuals are (surprise!) people. Whether gay, lesbian, trans, or straight, all of us are made in the image and likeness of God. Each person is stamped with an intrinsic dignity, no matter one’s experiences, struggles, and weaknesses.

God calls every person into relationship with him. The human person is literally designed for intimate communion with his Creator, and being homosexual, bisexual, or transgender doesn’t change this. The Church’s job is to advance — not obstruct — every person’s relationship with God in its work of evangelization and pastoral care. It’s no secret that the Catholic Church adheres to a traditional Christian understanding of marriage and the family. But consider how Pope Francis nevertheless addresses the need to affirm the dignity of those who are gay:

“We would like before all else to reaffirm that every person, regardless of sexual orientation, ought to be respected in his or her dignity and treated with consideration” (Amoris Laetitia 250).

Affirming the dignity of the LGBTQ person involves an appreciation and engagement with the concrete reality of the individual. The call to accompany the person — in view of her experiences, however complex and messy — is therefore more important than a mere recitation of abstract principles. “Realities are greater than ideas,” as Pope Francis would say. When we consider the Holy Father’s own approach, it makes sense that our reasons for LGBTQ support should begin with this basic call to encounter other persons as persons. Rather than have a ready-made answer from the “realm of pure ideas,” we are called to accompany the person in the specific situations of her life — even if (and especially if) they challenge our usual ways of thinking (Evangelli Gaudium 232).

2. Because the Church is for everyone.

The Church is for everyone. That’s what the word “catholic” means: the Church is universal, encompassing all kinds of people. “There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female,” as Paul says, for we are “all one in Jesus Christ” (Gal. 3:28). So why does it seem like our churches pick out LGBTQ persons to the extent of making them “other”? There is no other in the Body of Christ. As I once heard a priest say, there is no “them and us” — there’s only “us.”

Because the Church is one big Us, we cannot go about our lives while disregarding the rest of our brothers and sisters, particularly those in need. Paul likens the Church to a body with many parts — a union so intense that “if one part suffers,” then “every part suffers with it” (1 Cor 12:26). Do our churches recognize the suffering endured by many of its LGBTQ children? Do some of our churches actually make the lives of LGBTQ Christians more difficult, whether by simply acting as bystanders or by actively engaging in insensitive rhetoric?

The challenge of the Church is to ever expand its tent, for its mission is to the gather the human family into the Family of God. Many Catholics are shocked by such outreach, but often those we consider “outside” the Church are precisely those who most belong. Then again, this is the way of the Kingdom. In his earthly ministry, Christ initiated the in-gathering of the Kingdom of God by going to — and preferring — those otherwise considered outside the household of God. The Church, says Pope Francis, has to “go forth to everyone without exception” because in the Church “there is a place for everyone, with all their problems” (EG 47-48).

3. Because, well, Jesus.

When it comes to reaching out to LGBTQ persons, then, we have a solid foundation in the example of Christ himself. It sounds cliché, but really, what would Jesus do? If one searches for the Jesus of the Gospels, it’s not hard to find a guy who is compassionately concerned for the outcast and other. Christ preferred the poor, the sick, the sinner. Christ went to the margins — to those otherwise excluded from society. It doesn’t seem like too much of a stretch to imagine a gay man in that category, does it?

Many Christians counter by pointing to a Jesus who “loved in truth” (with a firm emphasis on “truth”), who would “name the sin for what it is.” They will argue that Christ may have reached out to the outcast, but only for the sake of the individual’s salvation. According to this line of thinking, the emphasis is not on accompaniment per se but really about conversion. In this view, the most necessary part of Christ’s outreach involves a demand that the sinner turns away from her sin. But we must realize that first Christ invited those he encountered into a deeper relationship with himself, and this relationship is the seed from which conversion grows. What he did in his encounter with the Samaritan woman at the well, he does with all of his broken, would-be followers. Jesus calls us into a deeper life founded on himself. And even here, the focus of Christ is not on condemnation but on how an intimate relationship with Christ is the only way to transform our lives and set us on a trajectory for true fulfillment.

The flaw in the approach of some Catholics towards the LGBT community is not that they want to tell the “truth in love” or believe we should take sin seriously. The issue is an inordinate focus on sin in the LGBTQ community, as if being gay or trans or queer was especially sinful. (Be assured: LGBTQ Catholics are quite familiar with what the Church says about them in relation to sin.) The inordinate focus on sin by some Christians comes across as a thinly-veiled desire for control and certainty. In a different context, Pope Francis talks about contemporary Catholic gnostics who want to “force others to submit to their way of thinking.” I would submit that this gnosticism lurks behind many Christians’ constant insistence on emphasizing sin when speaking about the LGBTQ community. Instead of proceeding from Christlike care for gay or trans individuals, such thinking reduces Christ’s teaching to a “cold and harsh logic that seeks to dominate everything” (Gaudete et Exsultate 39). Once again, it’s just another sample of the idea trumping the reality of the person.

4. Because sexuality is more than just sex.

Are LGBTQ persons — as members of the human family — sinners? Of course. Can sexuality be used in sinful ways? Again, definitely! But identifying LGBTQ persons as morally disordered, simply due to their being gay or trans or queer is unwarranted and unjust. Acts can be sinful, and desires towards sinful acts can be morally disordered. But something like sexuality or sexual orientation, which are much broader than desires to commit specific acts, can hardly be reduced to an intrinsically sinful inclination.

A popular slogan among some traditional Christians is “love the sinner, hate the sin.” Oddly, I’ve only ever heard this in reference to homosexuality, which in itself is telling. But if we only focus on sexual activity (as if that’s all it means to be gay or lesbian or trans), then we are doing a grave injustice to the persons involved. To get this, all one has to do is reflect on one’s own sexuality: Think how it affects you in multiple aspects of life. It’s not just about who you want to go to bed with; it also concerns how you relate to others, how you see the world, and how you desire to love and be loved.

Churches can’t start and end with sexual ethics. If our churches want to maintain traditional teaching, they will still need to consider that homosexuality is as much about personality and relationship-making than “sexual acts.”

5. Because LGBTQ persons are made for relationship.

LGBTQ persons want meaningful lives centered on love, relationship, and self-giving. They are like everybody else in that way. It’s a sad fact that, for many traditional churches, the “best” pastoral advice offered to gay persons is simply to “remain celibate.” That’s it. For traditional churches, marriage is not an option. However, in many of these same churches, marriage is the only conceivable path to intimate relationship. This is as much part Western culture’s fault as it is the Church’s. In effect, we’re made to believe that we’ll be forever alone and unfulfilled if we’re never married.

It’s not hard to see, then, why our modern culture has demanded gay marriage. If marriage is the only way to ensure meaningful relationships, then ought it be a right for everyone? Makes sense to me. Yet if traditional churches are to maintain marriage as a man-woman institution — as well as the only legitimate place for sex — they must find other ways to foster vocations of love and relationship for LGBTQ persons in our churches. Thankfully, there are Catholics doing just this. (Anyone who has not read up on Eve Tushnet should do so!) The greater Church must recognize this basic human need for relationship as one that affects the self-understanding of LGBTQ Christians. We don’t want lonely, loveless lives!

All people — regardless of sexual orientation or sexual identity — need intimate, self-giving relationships. The human person is not meant to be alone (Gen 2:18). This is as true of the gay or lesbian or trans person as it is for the heterosexual man or woman. While the Christian is called to carry his or her cross, the LGBTQ person’s embrace of the Christian faith does not change this fundamental anthropology. In our support of LGBTQ persons, can we promote meaningful paths of love and relationship? Can our churches recognize committed partnerships as a locus of Christian love — or are they to be rejected from the get-go as inherently sinful? Such questions cannot be avoided if we are to responsibly listen to the experiences of LGBTQ Christians.

6. Because LGBT persons have gifts to offer the Church.

Should we really be surprised if many LGBTQ persons perceive they have nothing to offer their churches — especially the ones that have routinely called them “objectively disordered” and hell-bound? Should we be surprised that gay persons feel unwanted when openly gay teachers and workers are fired from Catholic schools and businesses?

LGBTQ persons testify to the diversity of God’s creation and the manifold ways of reflecting the divine wisdom. This doesn’t mean the human condition as we now find it entirely reflects God’s will, for we cannot ignore the presence of sin and the present imperfection of a creation still “groaning” for its renewal (Rom 8:22). Still, the LGBTQ community challenges us to expand our understanding of humanity. LGBTQ persons challenge the Church in particular to discern how God is working their lives. “God is present in the life every person,” as Pope Francis says, and “we cannot exclude this by our presumed certainties” (GE 42). When the Church can recognize and embrace the Spirit in gay and trans and queer folk, the Church will live up to its calling as the family of God.

I truly feel a great embarrassment for our Church — a Church that claims to be Christ’s universal family — whenever Catholic leaders and institutions decide to single out LGBTQ persons as particularly scandalous or sinful. It seems to me —informed by the Jesus of the Gospels and pastoral approach of Pope Francis — that it is such Catholic leaders and institutions that really act scandalously and sinfully.

7. Because the Church is called to listen.

Supporting LGBTQ persons is a call to first listen to them. As Church, our posture must always be of listening. The Church first receives God’s revelation; the Church then teaches. The Church must first discern the Word of God before it can proclaim it. Since the Second Vatican Council and especially with Pope Francis, the Catholic Church has sought to posture itself from a position of listening — of listening to non-Catholic traditions, of listening to the surrounding culture, of listening to the experience of the lay faithful. No longer is the Church seen primarily in terms of a downward pyramid, where the hierarchy issues commands to a passive laity. Instead, the entire People of God receives and teaches the Word of God; the pope and bishops are servants first. The Church does not always have a ready answer. Instead, the Church must discern what God may be saying here and now.

Many Christians would claim to be “courageous” in their fight for truth in a secular culture. Many conservative Christians believe their challenge is to be “courageous” by standing up for traditional values and rebuffing the modern way. Many Catholics also want “courageous” priests to preach out strongly against moral evils in society, or “courageous” bishops to speak out against political opponents. In the midst of the many cultural wars — both outside and inside the Church — there is a call for a new crusade to defend a certain approach to traditionalism and orthodoxy. And the stance tends to be one of suspicion and resistance. Instead of openness to what could be, these Christians think they already have the answers.

Responding to LGBTQ issues with suspicion and resistance, these Christians choose the comfort of “settled doctrine.” But this is an easy way out, and it’s anything but courageous. Arguably, fear, not courage, lurks behind this approach. There is a fear of change, a fear of a shaken worldview, or a fear that Christianity is not as neat-and-tidy as otherwise hoped.

Listening is an act of true courage. Becoming vulnerable by opening ourselves to the experiences of another is courageous. Allowing ourselves to be challenged and embracing new questions is how we allow the Holy Spirit to lead us into further truth. Closing ourselves off prevents the Spirit from moving us beyond ourselves. Closing ourselves off is divisive and sinful. It is contrary to the way of Christ, who was self-giving, even unto death.

Complete Article HERE!

German Catholic church ‘dying painful death’ as 520,000 leave in a year

— Speed of departures has been driven by series of child abuse scandals and accusations of a cover-up

A man prays in Cologne Cathedral. The Catholic church in Germany has 21 million members.

By

The Catholic church in Germany has revealed it is losing followers like never before, with more than half a million people deciding to renounce their membership last year.

According to the Bonn-based German Bishops’ Conference, 522,821 people left the church in 2022, a number far surpassing predictions made by the institution itself and higher than most observers had expected. The previous record year for departures was in 2021, when just under 360,000 people left.

Thomas Schüller, a canon lawyer, said the church would struggle to recover from the fallout. “The Catholic church is dying a painful death in full view of the public,” he told German media.

The church has 21 million members, according to 2022 figures, amounting to 24.8% of the population.

The speed of the departures, driven by a series of child abuse scandals and accusations of a widespread cover-up, has shocked clerics.

According to evidence gathered by authorities, it appears to have accelerated further still since the publication of an expert report on abuse in the archdiocese of Munich and Freising, and discussion surrounding the perceived complicity in the scandal by Pope Benedict XVI, who has since died.

Last year there were legal battles over compensatory payments for victims of abuse in Cologne and Traunstein in upper Bavaria, as well as accusations that Cologne’s cardinal, Rainer Maria Woelki, lied about what he had known about abuse cases and when. Woelki, who was the focus of police raids this week on properties linked to the church, including his own residence, denies the claims.

The Protestant church, which has also been beset by abuse scandals, has similarly been losing members at an alarming rate, with 380,000 people leaving in 2022. According to last year’s figures, it has 19.5 million members in Germany.

Schüller said there were several reasons why people were choosing to leave the Catholic church, but he said the events in Cologne had acted like a “combustive agent”.

The departures mean a considerable loss of income for the church, which gathers billions of euros in tithes or taxes each year.

All Germans who declare an affiliation to the Protestant, Catholic and Jewish denominations are officially registered as such with their local authorities. They are liable to pay the Kirchensteuer or Kultursteuer (church tax or cultural tax), which amounts to between 8% and 9% of a person’s income tax and is drawn from their monthly income by the tax office, which passes it on to the appropriate denomination.

Those who wish to leave have to officially renounce their membership, a process known as a Kirchenaustritt, or church withdrawal, by actively visiting the local register office and paying a €30 administrative fee.

The church tax was first enshrined in German law in 1919 and reaffairmed in the Reichskoncordat between Nazi Germany and the Vatican in 1933. It was reaffirmed in law again in 1949.

Neighbouring Austria introduced a compulsory tax for Catholics in 1939 after the annexation of Austria into Nazi Germany the previous year, and has retained it since, in what is explained as an effort to keep churches independent of political influence.

Complete Article HERE!