Category: Who Is The Church

Posted on

Evangelizing the institutional church: an interview with Helmut Schüller

By Jamie Manson

Much has been written about Austrian priest and reformer Helmut Schüller since he opened his 15-city U.S. tour, called “The Catholic Tipping Point,” in New York last week.
Schüller has been making news in the Roman Catholic church reform movement since 2006, when he and a group of fellow priests organized the Austrian Priests’ Initiative. In 2011, they made global headlines when they launched the “Call for Disobedience,” an appeal to the Vatican to address the shortage of priests and other predicaments facing the institutional church.

The Austrian Priests’ Initiative is concerned that the dwindling number of clergy is impacting the quality of pastoral care offered to baptized Catholics. Their “Call for Disobedience” suggests reforms such as the ordination of women and married men to address this unfolding crisis.

What makes Schüller an intriguing figure among reformers is that he is not simply an upstart parish priest. He spent years as a hierarchical insider, filling the very public roles of president of Caritas Austria and vicar general under Austrian Cardinal Christoph Schönborn. He has the rare insight of one who has served both in the hierarchy and in the parish. Rarer still, he has risked his position and privilege to be in full, outspoken solidarity with lay Catholic reformers.

Hours before Schüller’s July 16 debut in New York City, he and I sat down for an interview. Since many of the goals and ideas we discussed — such as the plan for an international meeting of priests, the new evangelization, his thoughts about Cardinal Sean O’Malley’s barring him from speaking, and the institutional church’s treatment of same-sex couples — have not made it into most of the media coverage of his speaking engagements, I am offering the text of our conversation, which has been edited for length and clarity.

There’s more to NCR than what you read online. Preview our Spirituality special section from the July 19 edition.
You are using your summer break to embark on a 15-city U.S. tour. What are you hoping to accomplish?

This tour is a way for reform organizations and reform-minded priests to connect with one another. Our goal is to build up an international network of reform movements. We want to make public our sorrows, questions, issues and desire for our church and make it clear that reform-minded Catholics can be found throughout Europe and the United States.

In the United States, there aren’t many priests who openly belong to church reform groups. How will you reach out to them?

As I travel city to city, I’ll be meeting with priests informally in closed sessions. I’m encouraging priests in the U.S. to stay together with the lay movements. The priests here are cautious because there is a lot of pressure from the American bishops. We must be advocates for the people of God, especially when their initiatives are sidelined. I’m not completely familiar with the situation in the U.S. I’m hoping that the next few weeks will enrich my point of view of the struggles here.

Are reform movements in Austria similarly sidelined?

In Austria, we are in somewhat of a different situation. It is clear to our bishops that reformers have a very large majority behind them. We estimate that, in Austria, 80 percent of the Catholic faithful and two-thirds of the priests agree with our platform. If there is pressure from the bishops, the media helped to make it public. The bishops can’t sideline us easily because of public pressure.

Is there a plan to gather reform-minded priests together for a meeting?

The Austrian Priests’ Initiative, which I helped to found, is calling 2013 “a year of internationalization.” In October of this year, we are planning an international meeting of priests from Austria, Germany, France, Ireland, Great Britain, the U.S. and other countries to try to enlarge our network and further discuss the “Call to Disobedience.”

What motivates the “Call to Disobedience”and all of this organization by priests in Austria?

The priests in Austria have realized that after we retire, our communities will be merged. The priest shortage is an urgent, desperate situation. The lay members of our communities are the ones who are building up the church. The more parishes merge, the more that priests are losing the chance to walk with members of their communities through their daily lives. This is about more than compassion. It is about companionship and solidarity with laypeople. Life is not going to get any easier, and we want to offer people the service of the church.

Our second motivation comes from the questions that have arisen out of our pastoral care of our parish communities. The church’s doctrines on divorced and remarried Catholics and same-sex couples have created a lot of pastoral problems. We need a new teaching model on sexual relations. Our teaching should concentrate on the quality of relationships, not the form. Rather than condemning remarried Catholics or same-sex couples, we should be asking: How are they living in relationship? Are they respecting one another’s dignity? We have to respect that people want to live together, that they feel responsible for one another, and that they care for one another.

How did you become the public face of the Austrian Priests’ Initiative?

I was president of Caritas Austria and also served as vicar general for Cardinal Christoph Schönborn. I am better known in Austria because of these public roles, so I became the speaker of group. It helps with the media because they tend to only respect individual persons rather than whole movements. But the initiative is not my movement. A group of priests founded it, and we work as a community. We have a board that meets regularly to reflect on our work, discuss problems and give assistance to parish priests who are alone.

Some have claimed that the Roman Catholic church in Europe is either dying or being replaced by secularism. How do you respond to those claims?

Because of the history of reformation in Europe, the church has had to seriously engage with modern society. This doesn’t mean the church is dying. It is simply struggling with the questions of modernity. Yes, some faith communities are small, but they are very active.

We are confronting the questions, not giving in to secularism. Some want a “contrast church” that is contrary to society. But that’s not the idea of Jesus or the Gospels. The church should go into society and share the daily lives of the people.

Early in his pontificate, Pope Benedict XVI spoke of re-Christianizing Europe. Pope Francis appears passionate about the new evangelization. Do you think Europe needs to be evangelized?

If evangelization means that the Gospel has to be brought from “us” to “them” and that “they” have to accept that we [the hierarchy] have the wisdom, then I think there will not be success with the new evangelization. The first evangelization that is needed is the evangelization of the church.

Pope Francis seems to have started it now: to be simple, for the poor, to separate himself from wealth. Evangelization has to meet the people, to understand their questions, to understand changes in society, to respect that this modern society has realized a lot of originally Christian ideas, and to find again the origin of our Gospel.

If the new evangelization should become a monologue, there will be a problem. Yes, we have to preach the Gospel, but we must bring it in the language of our time. That’s not watering down the Gospel, but coming into dialogue with world about the Gospel.

What do you think of the claim that we are living in a “culture of death”?

The Second Vatican Council had an optimistic view of modern society. There was no talk of a culture of death. The bishops respected the successes of human society. Of course, Gaudium et Spes recognized that modern society has its darkness, chaos and conflict, but it also recognized that modern society developed the ideas about a fair and just society, about the equal participation of human beings, and the right to individual conscience. This really is the spirit of the [United Nations’] Declaration of Human Rights, and the council respected it.

Mater et Magistra made the point that the church’s position is not to look down on society and say it is dying, but rather to look at what is good in society and discuss what is problematic. The church should be a good companion to modern society. Of course, this is risky. It’s more comfortable to be in a fortress. But the way of Jesus is to go with the people wherever they are.

You were banned from speaking on Catholic grounds in Boston by Cardinal Sean O’Malley. Does it concern you that Cardinal O’Malley was one of eight cardinals Pope Francis chose for his “kitchen cabinet” of advisers?

Well, it’s not really a sign of hope, but let it be. These are the old-fashioned reflexes of an old-fashioned system of thinking. Rather than forbidding these discussions, the hierarchy could instead ask to be represented in these conversations. To forbid someone to speak is a sad thing, but the real sadness is forbidding people to listen.

For me, being banned from speaking is not dramatic — I’ll just go to another church. But for a bishop to say, “You must not listen”? That’s just not possible in our time. We live in an open society. People can get information wherever they want. But this vision of a church where the baptized are “protected” against getting information that the bishop doesn’t want them to have? It is a ridiculous point of view, I think. Maybe what we are seeing are the last reflexes of a dying system. I feel that these ways are fading out. Let’s forget it and be hopeful.

What about the hierarchy’s claim that you are creating disunity in the church?

In these conversations, we are gathering people here who are engaged in this church. They have discussions with me and one another, and then they return to their communities and continue their work for the church. We are not driving them out of the church; we are inspiring them to continue to ask for reform. It is their church. If the bishop could see who the people are who are gathering here, they would not be afraid that we are dividing the church. I think the contrary is happening. I have had people say to me: “I would have left, but after hearing you, I feel there is some hope in fighting for the church and its reform, so I will stay.”

What are the first steps you would like to see the pope and the bishops take in bringing about reform?

One of the important steps would be to encourage the bishops to be with the people, not to be against them in the name of the Vatican. A key move will be to decentralize papal authority and to call the bishops to collegiality and shared responsibilities. The bishops’ synod must function like a real synod. It’s the only way to give the bishops the possibility of filling the space with new ideas. Also, laypeople must be brought into the church’s decision-making. We must put pressure on church leaders to open dialogue and to use the gifts and charisms of the faithful.

What do you say to those who argue that your issues with the institutional church are unique to Europe and the U.S. and that the majority of the Roman Catholics who live in the global South and Asia do not share these concerns?

These societies will be confronted with same questions. Our Latin American and South American colleagues are already saying to us, “Don’t think we don’t have the same problems.” Globally, societies are changing very quickly. In 10 or 20 years, the global South will face the same questions we [face]. In mega-cities, they already are. Church leaders must not hope they can get around these questions. They will arise. Maybe the church in Europe and the U.S. should be thought of not as a dying church, but as a laboratory for the future, where the church engages with the modern society. We should not overestimate the numbers of people going to church, and we should not underestimate the problems the church is facing.

Complete Article HERE!

Posted on

Eleven Reasons Why I’m Leaving The Catholic Church

By Joseph Amodeo recently organized a vigil in front of New York City’s St. Patrick’s Cathedral, which led to the police threatening the arrest of anyone associated with the action. In this exclusive op-ed, Amodeo explains why he has decided to leave the Catholic Church.

 

A few hours after the events that became known as the “Dirty Hands Vigil” unfolded at Saint Patrick’s Cathedral, I received the following message from a priest I know in Manhattan:

“so disappointing!!!!!!!”

Soon after, I found out that his disappointment was not due to the fact that ten Catholics were denied entry to the Cathedral, but rather with me because, in his view, I had attempted to cause scandal.

Well, I have a few disappointments of my own to share:

1. I am disappointed in bishops who have allowed financial interests to drive their response to the clerical sexual abuse crisis.

2. I am disappointed in a Church that has attempted to argue that same-sex couples and their families are somehow less able to live up to the Christian ideal than their heterosexual counterparts.

3. I am disappointed by a hierarchy that has attacked the dignity of women and LGBT people.

4. I am disappointed by a Church that feels it has the authority to silence academic voices like Sr. Elizabeth Johnston, Sr. Jeannine Grammick, or Fr. Robert Nugent.

5. I am disappointed by a Church that asserts free will and the supremacy of the conscience, but negates such teaching with a practical commandment to obedience and what it deems a “well-formed” conscience.

6. I am disappointed by a Church that has failed to meaningfully discern the inclusion of women in the diaconate or priesthood.

7. I am disappointed by the Church’s reliance on time. As we face progress, the Church has allowed its sluggish character to take hold of its conversations with the world.

8. I am disappointed by those who are afraid of the hierarchy.

9. I am disappointed by an institution that has used faith to bully public servants and has denied communion to those who have sought only to serve the common good.

10. I am disappointed by clergy who have used the pulpit as a means to proselytize a particular political agenda.

11. I am disappointed by the American bishops’ selfish claim of ownership of the principle of religious freedom.

In short, I am disappointed in the Church and its hierarchy. Standing in and looking around a Catholic Church, I not only feel as if I am no longer in my own home, but I also fail to recognize the Church itself. As a human being, I will not be a part of an institution that has allowed fear to drive its theology as is evident in nearly all of the issues that I cite above. For this reason, I have decided to leave the Catholic Church.

I am disappointed, frustrated, and saddened; yet amid my decision to leave the Roman Catholic Church, I am liberated. By this decision, I am following a conscience that leads me to believe that humanity has been created in the image of God. If we truly accept and believe this fundamental teaching, our world of judgment turns into a paradise of acceptance and compassion.

I am not leaving the Catholic Church because of any one particular issue or person, rather because I believe that the Church itself has lost sight of its meaning. A Church founded on hope and charity has become a tradition steeped in an approach that can best be described as “command and control.”

With this decision, some will argue that I should stay and continue efforts toward dialogue and the evolution of theology. On the other hand, some will say that I should have taken this step a long time ago, and still others will say “good riddance, so long.” The reality is that the journey of faith cannot be controlled by others, but rather is dependent only on one’s relationship with his/her Creator.
I now stand at new juncture in my faith journey. It is a place that can be described as both unfamiliar and yet eerily recognizable.

As I depart, I remain disappointed in the Roman Catholic Church and its hierarchy; however, I realize now that I am not joined by chains to the Church. In fact, it is the Church that taught me how to free myself from the bonds of oppression so as to constantly seek liberation. The question is when will the Church choose to loosen its own bonds so as to truly engage with the world around it?

Complete Article HERE!

Posted on

After Second Approved Miracle, Pope John Paul II Likely to Become a Saint

The best part of this news is: if this man can make it to heaven, no one else has anything to worry about.

 

by Barbie Latza Nadeau

John Paul II make the wrong call on this guy.

On May 1, 2011, the late pope John Paul II was beatified as a precursor to sainthood after being credited for miraculously curing a French nun of Parkinson’s disease. On that day, the family of a severely ill Costa Rican woman reportedly prayed to the beatified pontiff for her recovery. According to Costa Rican daily La Nación, the sick woman had visited the Calerdon Guardia hospital in San José just days before John Paul was beatified and was diagnosed with an aneurysm on a major blood vessel in her brain. After the beautification and the family’s prayers, the aneurysm miraculously disappeared, according to Alejandro Vargas Roman, the attending physician in an interview with La Nación. Because there was no logical medical explanation and plenty of proof of the prayers to the pontiff, the miracle was chalked up to the divine intercession of the late John Paul II. It was then submitted to the Congregation for the Causes of Saints, along with scores of others, to be considered as his second miracle, which is necessary for attaining sainthood.

This week, after a thorough review, the congregation approved a yet unnamed miracle in which they say John Paul II was responsible for the “inexplicable recovery” of a gravely ill person. On Friday, before Pope Francis officially signed off on the second miracle, rumors hinted that it supposedly took place in Costa Rica. In fact, the Costa Rican woman’s doctor has confirmed that he submitted paperwork to the Congregation reviewing the miracles. Whatever it was, the second miracle now paved the way for John Paul II to become a saint, which will likely be celebrated in a canonization ceremony later this year, possibly on December 8, which is a major Catholic feast day and national holiday in Italy. He will likely be canonized together with John XXIII, another favored pope that Pope Francis decided to beatify without proof of miracles.

In deciding the validity of miracles, the Congregation for the Causes of Saints must consider reams of testimony, including lengthy reports from medical doctors and technicians who must eliminate beyond a reasonable doubt any medical explanation for the recovery. In the case of John Paul II’s first miracle, Monsignor Slawomir Oder, who was then postulator of the cause for that miracle, told The Daily Beast that thousands of cases were presented for consideration as miracles by people in Brazil, Colombia, Italy, Mexico, Poland, Spain, and the United States, but the most compelling was the case of the French nun, Sister Marie Simon-Pierre, who was diagnosed with Parkinson’s disease in 2001 when she was just 40 years old. She was miraculously cured of the disease on June 2, 2005, after a night of prayer to the Polish pontiff, who had died two months earlier. “Since then I have not taken any treatment. My life has completely changed—it was like a second birth for me,” she said at the time her miracle was accepted by the Congregation for the Causes of Saints. Sister Simon-Pierre suffered what seemed to be a brief relapse just as preparations were being finalized for John Paul II’s beautification, but it turned out to be a false alarm. She was the keynote speaker at the beatification ceremony, which drew more than 1 million pilgrims to Rome. “What the Lord has granted me through the intercession of John Paul II is a great mystery difficult to explain with words— something very great and profound— but nothing is impossible for God,” she told those gathered for the celebratory event.

Miracles are by their nature not easy to prove, and the Congregation for the Causes of Saints does not take its work lightly. There are more than 30 monsignors, bishops, and archbishops who shoulder the theological weight of validating miracles, including ascertaining proof that the cured patient spent sufficient time in honest prayer to the would-be saint. But there are also more than 80 consultants, including medical doctors, technicians, psychiatrists, and even hand-writing analysts who investigate every aspect of the miracle in search of a secular explanation. Sister Simon-Pierre underwent extensive psychological testing to vet her belief in John Paul II, and her Mother Superior and sisters in her convent were quizzed about her faith. Doctor Franco Di Rosa sat on the Vatican’s miracle board for more than 25 years as a medical consultant. He described to The Daily Beast how the process works, and how the person who claims a miracle must be thoroughly investigated: “He or she must go to their bishop who then charges outside specialists with verifying that the treatments were ineffective,” he says. “He or she must also go many years without a relapse.”

The postulator of the miracle, who acts as a caretaker to shepherd the miracle process through a labyrinth of bureaucratic red tape, then prepares an extensive dossier including medical records, X-rays, and medication history to substantiate whether conventional treatment may have aided the cure. Two doctors then review the case before sending it to a committee of five medical experts who must all agree that there is no explanation for the reversal of the disease other than divine intervention. “In 99 percent of the cases, we find a medical explanation,” he says. “In the rare cases we don’t, the panel of theologians then steps in to make a final recommendation to the pope.”

In the case of John Paul II, some naysayers have said that his promotion to sainthood has been fast-tracked to ride the wave of the pope’s enduring popularity during troubling times at the Vatican with a barrage of sex and financial scandals. When John Paul II died in 2005, pilgrims held signs and chanted “santo subito,” or “sainthood now,” at his funeral. Pope Benedict XVI sped things up for his predecessor by waiving the standard five-year waiting period between death and beatification for John Paul II to facilitate the process that allowed the late pope’s cause to reach the brink of sainthood so soon.

Whatever the reason, canonizing John Paul II will easily be one of the most important feel-good events in the church’s history. More than a million followers came to Rome for the beatification, and many more are expected when he escalates to sainthood. And that might be just the miracle the troubled church is looking for.

Complete Article HERE!

Posted on

Gay Ambassador Nominee Sparks Controversy In The Dominican Republic

The country’s cardinal refers to Obama’s pick to lead the U.S. embassy in the Dominican Republic a “maricón,” which is usually translated as “faggot,” while others urged the country’s president to reject the appointment. Brewster is one of five out gay nominees for ambassadorships named in June.

 

By J. Lester Feder

When President Barack Obama nominated a gay man as the new ambassador to the Dominican Republic on June 21, he touched off a firestorm of debate in the Caribbean nation — which has devolved even to derogatory name-calling.

Catholic Cardinal Nicolás de Jesús López Rodríguez referred to Brewster as a “maricón” — which is usually translated as “faggot” — during a press conference. At his side, Monseñor Pablo Cedano promised the nominee such an unpleasant stay in the country that he will have to return home.

“I hope he does not arrive in the country because I know if he comes he is going to suffer and will have to leave,” Cedano said. He called it “a lack of respect” that Obama “sent … a person of this kind as an ambassador,” adding, “[W]e don’t despise the person.”

The dust-up over the nomination shows the direct impact that full equality for gays and lesbians in the United States can have abroad. The nominee, James “Wally” Brewster, was a major Obama fundraiser and a national LGBT co-chair for the Democratic National Committee. His nomination, which still must be confirmed by the Senate, is the latest in a flurry of appointments of gay Americans for ambassadorships by the Obama administration. Five others were named just in the last month. Only three openly gay ambassadors have served before them.

While these nominations have raised few eyebrows in the other countries where they will be working — like Spain, Denmark, or Australia — Brewster’s appointment has caused a great deal of concern in the Dominican Republic. Conservative religious leaders and other opponents of LGBT rights have called on Dominican President Danilo Medina to refuse to accept him if he is confirmed.

LGBT activists said the Catholic leaders’ remarks incited violence.

Complete Article HERE!

Posted on

Cardinal O’Malley bars talk by priest over views

File under: We Don’t need no stinkin’ discussion on the topics.

 

by Lisa Wangsness

Cardinal Sean P. O’Malley is banning an Austrian priest from speaking at a Catholic parish in Dedham because the priest advocates ordaining women and making celibacy optional, stances that place him in opposition to church teachings.

The Rev. Helmut Schuller was invited to speak at St. Susanna Parish July 17 as part of a 15-city tour of the United States called “The Catholic Tipping Point: Conversations with Helmut Schuller,” sponsored by a coalition of reform-minded Catholic organizations, including Voice of the Faithful, based in Needham.

But O’Malley has declared he will not allow anyone to speak on church property who advocates beliefs in conflict with church doctrine.

As a result, the coalition that invited Schuller has moved its event to a nearby Unitarian Universalist church.

Schuller is the founder of the Austrian Priests’ Initiative, which advocates allowing women and married people to become priests and greater lay participation as ways of addressing a priest shortage. About 1 in 10 Austrian priests are members, the Austrian Independent newspaper reported; priests’ groups have sprung up in several countries, including Ireland and the United States, and Schuller has said he hopes the movement will spread worldwide.

Terrence C. Donilon, a spokesman for the archdiocese, said in a statement released to the Globe: “It is the policy of the Archdiocese of Boston, and the generally accepted practice in dioceses across the country, not to permit individuals to conduct speaking engagements in Catholic parishes or at church events when those individuals promote positions that are contrary to Catholic teachings.”

Leaders of the coalition that invited Schuller expressed dismay with O’Malley’s decision.

“Cardinal O’Malley is known to be a pastoral person and certainly as someone who is dealing with the ravages of the priest shortage in Boston, I would have hoped he would be more sympathetic” to Schuller’s message, said Sister Chris Schenk, executive director of Future Church, which advocates opening ordination to all baptized Catholics. “Laypeople have to be able to have a voice and a venue to talk about their honest concerns and questions, and to just refuse any Catholic venue for this conversation to take place sends a very, very sad message.”

Larry Bloom, a deacon and director of adult faith formation at St. Susanna, said his parish has a longstanding relationship with Voice of the Faithful, and when that group needed a venue for Schuller’s talk, he did some research. “I found out he was a priest, I found out he had a parish, I found out that he was in good standing with the Archdiocese of Vienna, and then I called them back and said sure,” he said.

When Auxiliary Bishop Walter J. Edyvean told him O’Malley would not allow Schuller to speak, Bloom said it was the first time in his 11 years at the parish that the archdiocese had taken such an action.

Bloom said he was not upset. “The archbishop has the right to have his own thoughts on the matter,” he said, “and he has a lot more to think about than we do at our own parish.”

Schuller’s group, the Austrian Priests’ Initiative, organized a “Call to Disobedience” that was signed by several hundred priests two years ago who pledged to begin serving communion to any Christian of goodwill, including non-Catholics and the divorced and remarried; to advocate for ordination of women and married people; to let trained laity preach, including women; and to oppose closing parishes.

“We will advocate that every parish has a presiding leader, man or woman, married or unmarried, full time or part time,” the manifesto says. “Rather than consolidating parishes, we call for a new image of the priest.”

A fledgling American priests’ organization is meeting in Seattle and discussing a series of reforms, but on the whole, US priests have been less willing to challenge the status quo so boldly.

“It seems to me there is much more of a willingness in Europe, even among the hierarchy, to discuss some of these issues,” said Francis Schussler Fiorenza, professor of Roman Catholic theological studies at Harvard Divinity School. “O’Malley tends to be very theologically conservative and seems to be disinclined to allow open discussion in church venues.”

A survey by the Oekonsult polling group conducted last year found that nearly 90 percent of Austrians supported Schuller’s plan to take the initiative global, according to the Austrian Independent.

The Vatican stripped Schuller of his title of monsignor in late 2012, although he remains an active priest. Cardinal Christoph Schonborn, archbishop of Vienna, said he was “shocked” when the call to disobedience went out. In May he told the Italian newspaper La Stampa that the priests involved could face discipline, the Independent reported.

Schuller, the former head of the aid agency Caritas Austria, served as vicar general of the Archdiocese of Vienna in the mid- to late 1990s under Schonborn, who fired him in 1999 for reasons that are unclear. He is now a parish priest in Probstdorf, just east of Vienna. He could not be reached for comment Tuesday.

Marianne Duddy-Burke, executive director of DignityUSA, a gay and lesbian Catholic advocacy group cosponsoring Schuller’s tour, said she was particularly upset about O’Malley’s decision because the cardinal had been tapped by Pope Francis to sit on a panel of prelates from around the world who will advise him on overhauling church governance.

“Here we are trying to bring a resource for conversation about church governance to the area, and we’re not allowed to have the conversation in Catholic space,” she said.

O’Malley has already offered his own answer to the priest shortage, a bold and risky effort, now in its pilot phase, to group Boston’s 288 parishes into 135 collaboratives, each of which will share a single team of priests, staff, and lay leaders. By using money and priests’ time more efficiently and then focusing on evangelization, parishes can become stronger and more vibrant, the cardinal has said, leading to more young men entering the priesthood. The Archdiocese of Boston has 285 active priests and projects that will decline to 200 by 2022, though it hopes the new plan will bolster those numbers.

Schenk said the only other city where Schuller is scheduled to speak at a Catholic parish is Detroit. Other appearances are slated for Protestant churches or other venues.

Complete Article HERE!

Posted on

Columnist and Activist Both Criticize Cardinal George on LGBT Issues

File under: Francis, The Killer Fruit

 

By Francis DeBernardo

Chicago’s Cardinal Francis George has been in the news lately not only for his vocal opposition to Illinois’ marriage equality bill, but because he recently denied communion to a gay Catholic activist at a Mass celebrating the Archdiocesan Gay and Lesbian Outreach in his city.

cardinalgeorge
What, me worry?

Robert McClory, a columnist for The National Catholic Reporter, took apart an essay about marriage equality written by George in the Chicago archdiocesan newspaper. McClory exposes some of George’s fear-mongering rhetoric, not only on marriage equality, but also on the issue of religious liberty, which seems to be one of George’s main purposes in writing the column.

For example, McClory is justifiably incredulous at George’s depiction of how secular society is “marginalizing” Catholics. McClory writes:

“George then launches out into the deep about the separation of religious faith from public life. He blames John F. Kennedy for starting a roll down the slippery slope and worries Catholics will be eventually barred from federal judgeships, medical schools, editorial offices at major newspapers, the entertainment world and university faculties.

” ‘If Catholics are to be closeted and marginalized in a secularized society, Catholic parents should prepare their children to be farmers, carpenters and craftsmen, small business people and workers in service industries,’ occupations that ‘do not immediately impact public opinion.’ What?”

McClory hits the nail on the head in his concluding paragraph which points out George’s true blindspot:

“Unfortunately, what Cardinal George cannot consider is the possibility that Catholics at the grass-roots level are coming to understand new and different ways to welcome to the table those previously excluded. Many, including not a few theologians, propose that the essence of marriage is the love and permanent commitment of two persons to one another — period. As that conviction matures in time, I believe the church will have to make accommodations with its implications, just as Christians in the time of Galileo had to reinterpret so much they and their ancestors had taken for granted as irreversibly, dogmatically true: the movement of the earth, the sun, moon and stars. It was for many a painful, revolutionary process. And the one believing Christians face now will be for some no less painful and revolutionary. But it must be done, lest the Catholic church disintegrate into a closed, inconsequential cult.”

McClory doesn’t comment on what I consider George’s greatest errors in his essay. Speaking of marriage equality advocates, George states:

“Further, the claim that one is not equal under law is powerful in our society; it makes one a victim. And the claim that one is being demeaned and personally wounded is even more powerful evidence of victimization. “

Yet, isn’t that what so many Catholic bishops are doing when they claim that their religious liberty is being curtailed because of pro-LGBT laws? Aren’t they claiming “victim” status? Isn’t George guilty of exactly the thing he accuses his opponents of doing?

The cardinal presided at the 25th anniversary Mass for Chicago’s Archdiocesan Gay and Lesbian Outreach (AGLO), and he was greeted by about 25 protesters from the Gay Liberation Network and the Rainbow Sash Movement (RSM). The latter group is composed of Catholics who present themselves for communion while wearing a rainbow sash, indicating that they believe in the full equality of LGBT people and that they disagree with the hierarchy’s prohibition of sexual activity between person’s of the same gender. When the RSM’s director, Joe Murray, went to the cardinal for communion, he was refused.

Joe Murray
The Windy City Times reported:

joe-murray1“Murray stood up with his back to Cardinal George during parts of the Mass, and then he went up with the estimated 200 others in attendance to receive communion. George refused him, and Murray walked away with his hands open and empty, showing the congregants that he had been denied.

“But in an emotional show of solidarity, Brenna C. Cronin, who had already received her communion as part of the church choir, went back up and took another communion wafer (called a Host) and brought it to Murray herself.

” ‘One of my brothers, a member of my community, who is a full and equal member of the body of Christ, was denied communion. So I got back in line and I brought him communion, as I would for anyone else,’ Cronin told Windy City Times after the Mass. Cronin, who is a lesbian, has been involved with AGLO for two years and is also a cantor.

” ‘I was denied communion by the Cardinal,’ Murray said after. ‘I turned to Christ, I walked back open handed, and showed the community that I was denied communion, and Christ, in his mercy, sent me a priest [Cronin] to give me communion.’ “

The news story indicates that some in the congregation supported Murray’s action, while others were critical of it. You can read the entire news account HERE. It contains additional comments from both George and Murray.

Complete Article HERE!

Posted on

Politicians who back law on equal rights for gays may be excommunicated – Moldovan Orthodox Church threats

File under: The Making of strange bedfellows.

 

The Moldovan Orthodox Church Synod has threatened politicians who back the law on equal rights for homosexuals with excommunication.

Metropolitan Vladimir of Chisinau and All Moldova told reporters on Friday that “the first step may be to keep such politicians from taking communion.”

Hello darlings! Love my outfit?

The metropolitan said the June 20 meeting of the Synod had lasted for ten hours and addressed the situation with the enforcement of the law on equal rights for gays and the preparations for the visit by Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Russia, who plans to visit Moldova in September.

“The Synod stated its position on the law on equal rights in the adopted declaration,” the metropolitan said, adding that the Synod already asked the authorities to make amendments to the law and to prevent propaganda of homosexuality in society on May 19.

“Unfortunately, our request was not heard and no measures were taken. We want to use another opportunity to draw people’s attention to what is happening and we are addressing them again as the Orthodox Church the second time. When we address them the third time, specific decisions will be made,” Metropolitan Vladimir said. to

The declaration posted on the website of the Moldovan Metropolia on Friday says that “the authorities have not heeded an establishment which, according to public opinion polls, enjoys the highest level of confidence in society.”

“Being ignored like this makes us draw conclusions that the Moldovan Orthodox Church and Christians, who account for 93.4% of the population, were removed from the authorities’ plans in the past few years, whereas non-traditional minorities are getting more and more support from the authorities,” the document says.

The adoption of the law on the prevention of discrimination was a condition set by the European Union for the fulfillment of the plan of actions to liberalize the visa regime between Moldova and the EU. Its adoption was postponed for a long time and the name of the law was changed gradually. In May 2012, the document was adopted as the law On Equality. The guarantees of sexual minorities’ rights are mentioned in the chapter of the law banning discrimination in the workplace.

The Moldovan Orthodox Church and the Communist Party are contesting the law.

Complete Article HERE!

Posted on

Archbishop: “May a lesbian marry a gay man? My answer is ‘yes’”

File under: Marriage Equality Catholic style

A cleric says gay people can totally marry — as long as they marry someone of the opposite sex

 

By Mary Elizabeth Williams

If there’s one thing the Catholic Church is good at, it’s finding loopholes in its own convoluted dogma. These are the people who invented Limbo, after all. So leave it to an enterprising archbishop to find a workaround on marriage equality. If gay men and women want to get hitched, no problem, says Archbishop Oscar Cruz of the Philippines. “I ask this question to myself and I have thought about it for a long time and the answer is ‘yes,’” he declared earlier this week at the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines-National Appellate Matrimonial Tribunal. There’s just one catch.

“May a lesbian marry a gay man?” he told the crowd. “My answer is ‘yes,’ because in that instance the capacity to consummate the union is there. The anatomy is there. The possibility of conception is there.” Apparently in Cruz’s mind, “consummation” is limited strictly to those activities which can result in conception, and conception is good enough to call it a marriage. Cruz went on to to discuss marriage equality, saying, “For the Church, even if you turn it upside down and call it by another name, it would still not be marriage. For the Church, even if a hundred [judges] bless a same-sex wedding, it would still not be effective.” Who needs love or even a like-minded orientation to get the Church’s blessing anyway, when you’ve got straight up anatomy?

But if the Catholic Church can sanction marriage between lesbians and gay men, Cruz also acknowledges it can also retroactively declare that it was never even legitimate in the first place. In the same speech, the Archbishop admitted that homosexuality was valid grounds for annulment, though he added it is rarely invoked. “More often, it’s is about psychological problems,” he said, “meaning there is some kind of mental impairment or emotional disturbance.”

Same-sex marriage is not permitted in Cruz’s mostly Catholic country. And as the Gay News Network reports, two years ago a bill was filed to amend the Philippine Family Code to ban “forbidden marriages.” Sham marriage, however, is still totally fine in the eyes of the country’s Catholic authority. So if you’re a gay person in the Philippines who wants to get hitched, the celibate man in white gown says there’s nothing stopping you. Just don’t try to wed someone you’d want to have an authentic lifetime partnership with.

Complete Article HERE!

Posted on

Croatia Catholic Church forcing people to sign against gay marriage

Gay rights activists have accused the Catholic Church of corruption and manipulating the largely religious public in their fight against equality

 

By Joe Morgan
Archbishop of Zagreb Josip Bozanić is accused of forcing people to sign a petition against same-sex marriage, encouraging violence, and manipulating children into hating gay people.

The Catholic Church in Croatia is corruptly coercing people to sign a petition against same-sex marriage, Gay Star News can exclusively reveal.

Over 710,000 people have signed the petition – over one fifth of the population of the Eastern European country – demanding the government change the constitution to say marriage is defined as between a man and a woman.

But gay rights activists have accused the Catholic Church of immorally manipulating the public into signing their names to oppose same-sex marriage and also of encouraging violence.

If a straight couple wants to be married in a church, or have their child baptized or attend a Catholic school, in many places they are being told they must sign the petition demanding a referendum to ban same-sex marriage in Croatia.

As over 85% of people are Catholic, the religion is deeply embedded in the Croatian culture.

Marko Jurčić, anti-discrimination coordinator for Zagreb Pride, spoke exclusively to Gay Star News about how the Catholic Church is using a ‘fear of change’ to take away human rights.

As Croatia readies itself to join the European Union on 1 July, there have been protests fearing the country will lose its identity like when it was part of Yugoslavia.

Jurčić believes it started when the Social Democratic Party of Croatia, the largest central-left party, took power in 2011.

When the party revealed their plans for unions for gay couples – ‘life partnerships’ – as well as sex education in schools and artificial insemination for single women, the Catholic Church struck back.

Josip Bozanić, the Archbishop of Zagreb, declared ‘war’ against the ‘radical liberalization’ of Croatia.

He successfully got the Constitutional Court to rule children should not be taught sex education in schools, saying it was a ‘violation of parent’s rights’.

Campaign group In the Name of the Family was set up to combat same-sex marriage.

Around 6,000 volunteers have been gathering signatures in over 2,000 locations in the last month. They have denied having backing from the Catholic Church.

Jurčić said it was not the first time a religious ‘war’ against LGBT equality has happened in Europe.

‘It started in France, and [the Catholic Church] lost there. Imagine what is happening east of Croatia!

‘It’s a new war they’re creating. One side is secular, the other religious.’

Jurčić described, after this happened, how there was an increase in hate crime as there were homophobic ‘signs and billboards and places to sign [the anti-gay] petition everywhere.’

He said: ‘People have been recognized by their gender expression or their sexuality and been beaten up. It’s a horrific atmosphere.

‘It has happened especially in Zagreb as there is a growing scene there. A lot of LGBT people have come to the capital looking for a haven, but they have been met with vicious attacks.’

He also alleged the Catholics started religious classes for children to teach them to hate gay, bi and trans people.

Jurčić said he was ‘furious’ by the treatment to the LGBT community especially as there were improvements in the last decade.

‘We’re not afraid. We have experienced a lot of change in this country since 2002, and we are all a part of the movement.

‘We changed the face of this country. It’s frustrating, it’s empowering how people have come out, how many public figures have supported us.’

The anti-gay petition will be handed to the Croatian government on Friday (14 June), a day before Zagreb Pride.

Zoran Milanovic, Croatia’s social democrat prime minister, has admitted there ‘probably ought to be referendum, provided all the preconditions are met.’

To amend the constitution, there must be a parliamentary majority of two thirds.

Jurčić hopes Saturday’s Pride will be an antidote, a breath of fresh air against the Catholic Church’s corruption.

‘Our role is to empower LGBT people who are being threatened in the hostile environment,’ he said. ‘We will continue to empower them, but the problem is the damage has already been done.’

When contacted by Gay Star News, the Croatian Catholic Church chose not to comment.

Complete Article HERE!

Posted on

St. Andrew’s Catholic Parish will carry banner in Portland’s Pride Parade

File under: When the people lead the leaders will have to follow.

By Nancy Haught

Parishioners from St. Andrew Catholic Church, which has a longstanding commitment to social justice issues, will march in Sunday’s Portland Pride Parade with a banner proclaiming their parish identity, despite the wishes of Archbishop Alexander K. Sample.

At least four Catholic parishes are expected to participate in the parade, according to the Rev. Tara Wilkins, executive director of the Community of Welcoming Congregations. Members of St. Francis of Assisi, St. Philip Neri and St. André Bessette (the Downtown Chapel) also are expected to march. In the past, they have carried parish banners, Wilkins said.

Monsignor Dennis O’Donovan, vicar general of the Archdiocese of Portland, called St. Andrew’s pastor, the Rev. Dave Zegar, on May 31 on behalf of Sample, parishioners say. O’Donovan relayed the message that individuals could walk in the parade but that the archbishop did not want St. Andrew’s members to walk as a community.

Sample, who was installed as archbishop April 2, is in San Diego to attend the annual summer meeting of United States bishops, according to Bud Bunce, spokesman for the archdiocese. He could not be reached for comment.

Bunce confirmed that O’Donovan had made the phone call. While the archdiocese respects all people, Bunce said, “this was not an event that St. Andrew’s parish could be in as a parish.”

On June 4, Zegar met with a group of St. Andrew’s parishioners, who decided to stand by their 17-year commitment to Portland’s gay community. At Mass on Sunday, Zegar shared the group’s decision with the congregation, who responded with a standing ovation, according to Tom Karwaki, who chairs the parish’s pastoral council.

The Rev. Steve Newton, a Holy Cross priest who is pastor of St. André Bessette, said no one from the archdiocese had called him about the parade. Parishioners from the Downtown Chapel have walked in the parade for years.

“The Catholic Church supports gay people, even though there is a broad difference of opinion on their lifestyle,” Newton said.

Sample
Darling, where did you get that pretty hat?

At St. Andrew’s on Sunday, a bulletin insert recounted the history of the parish’s welcoming ministry. A formal committee began meeting in 1996. St. Andrew’s helped staff a booth at Portland Pride in 2000, and members began marching with their banner, which reads “Welcoming the Whole Family,” in 2001.

Susan Kelly, a member of St. Andrew’s since 1969, said the move to become a welcoming congregation was partly due to a respected couple within the church who were parents of identical twin girls. The twins “came out” in high school, and their parents agonized over how the church would react. The mother finally confessed to a friend at St. Andrew’s.

“It got us all thinking about how we deal with this issue,” Kelly says. “How can we reach out and get over this Christian – not just Catholic –attitude that if you’re gay or lesbian, you’re not part of the community?”

The official teaching of the Catholic Church is that homosexual acts are contrary to natural law and incompatible with living a Christian life. But 2006 pastoral guidelines from the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops say the church must welcome homosexuals to full and active participation in the faith. St. Andrew’s bulletin insert quoted the document.

“Essential to the success of ministry to persons with a homosexual inclination will be the support and leadership of the bishop and other pastoral leaders,” the guidelines read. “This is particularly important because more than a few persons with a homosexual inclination feel themselves to be unwelcome and rejected.”

How many feel unwelcome became evident Thursday when the Pew Research Center released the findings of an April survey on the religious attitudes of lesbians, gay men, bisexuals and transgender adults. Eight in ten adults said the Catholic Church, along with Islam and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, were “unfriendly” to the LGBT community.

Kelly summarized the reasons that parishioners are insisting on carrying their banner in one word: visibility.

Joy Wallace, a member of St. Andrew’s since 1998, says it is common for members of the gay community and their advocates to seek out St. Andrew’s because they’ve seen the parish represented in the annual Pride Parade.

“The banner is important because it says we are a community of faith,” says Jane Braunger, a parish member since the 1980s. “For us not to embrace this statement as a core commitment about openness and acceptance and living the Gospel is cowardly.”

Karwaki said parishioners would like a chance to talk to the archbishop about their ministry and explain their commitment to the Pride Parade. He says Zegar asked for such a dialogue and the parish is drafting a letter to Sample.

“We’re not acting out of disobedience,” Karwaki said. “We’re acting out of obedience to the Gospel and the mission of this parish.”

Complete Article HERE!