Gay Marriage, and the English Catholic Church: More Sanity From Vincent Nichols

Archbishop Vincent Nichols has once again demonstrated sanity and moderation on the place of the Catholic Church in modern society. While there are many loud, outraged voices raised in complaint in the US and in the UK over alleged assaults on religious freedom and of perceived persecution of Christians, Nichols has correctly pointed out that what is happening is not the "persecution" of Christians, but an attempt to separate the legal and cultural life of the country from its Christian roots. He is saying in other words, that what is happening is a removal from the Church of its previously privileged position. This may be deplorable, unfortunate, or welcome - but does not amount to persecution, any more than the removal of apartheid in South Africa represented the persecution of Whites.

The origins of complaints of persecution in the UK are in a series of high profile court judgements which have consistently found that religious freedom does not give Christians the right to contravene anti-discrimination laws. Recently, the volume has stepped up with complaints against the proposed introduction of marriage equality. (A former Anglican Archbishop of Canterbury, Lord Carey, has launched an on-line petition drive in opposition to gay marriage). Archbishop Nichols says that the Catholic Church in England and Wales is against the proposals - but will leave actual opposition to individual Catholics as individuals, but the Church "as a whole" will not join in the campaign.

After a fortnight which has seen the emergence of a "Christianist" backlash – most recently in evidence with an internet petition against gay marriage spearheaded by Lord Carey, the former archbishop of Canterbury – Nichols seems to be supporting the movement from a careful distance.

Catholics will be encouraged to sign the petition against gay marriage as individuals, but the church as a whole will not be part of Carey's campaign even though it opposes a change in the law.

On Monday, Washington Governor Chris Gregoire signed into state law the bill providing for legal recognition of same - sex marriages. Bishop Grant Hagiya of the United Methodist Church, was quick to express his support.

I give you a new commandment, that you love one another. 
Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another. 
By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another. 

John 13:34-35

I greet you in the very name of our Lord, Jesus Christ!

Difficult letters, like difficult conversations are never easy. However, God never promised us easy, and there are times when we must take up the cross and walk in faith. I write today not representing the United Methodist Church, for only General Conference can do that. So, even though I write this letter as your Bishop, I hope it will also be received as your friend in Christ.

With the signing by Governor Gregoire of a bill legalizing same-sex marriage in Washington as of June 7th, the state joins six others in recognizing this union. Personally, I celebrate the signing into law of the legalization of same-sex marriage for our state. It is an historic moment for the people of this geographic region, and it marks a secular turning point in the liberation of those who have too long been oppressed in our current times. I celebrate with those who will be free to enjoy equal health and security benefits through the state institution of marriage. 

I also personally grieve over our United Methodist Church polity that will not recognize same-sex marriage. I believe that it is wrong, and we should work for a more inclusive and humane response. The reason for this stance is that I believe that Jesus Christ is the incarnation of God's divine love for the entire creation, and no one should be shut out from God's embracing Grace. God's Grace is so pure and encompassing that anything that attempts to limit or control this love must be transformed.

-read the full letter at  Reconciling Minisgtries Network

(emphasis added)

The bill has been signed, but is unlikely to take effect too soon. Opponents will attempt to have it overturned at the ballot box, probably supported by several Catholic and other faith - based groups. It is good to have this public demonstration that there is religious support for equality too - just as we already know that most Catholics support it.

It is also an important illustration of the deep support for inclusion within the United Methodist Church, the largest Mainline Protestant denomination of the USA. In recent years, proposals to admit to ordination openly gay or lesbian, partnered candidates for ministry, and for approval for same - sex  weddings in church, have been a staple of every general assembly of the UMC - as they will be again this summer - but have been consistently defeated, largely on the back of strenuous opposition by delegates from outside the US. So, same - weddings in a Methodist church are in conflict with the denominations rule - book, the "Book of Discipline". But many Methodist pastors see any refusal to conduct such weddings, as in conflict with their obligation to minister to their entire congregation, setting up a direct conflict. Over a thousand US ministers have publicly declared that even without approval from General Assembly, they will simply ignore the Book of Discipline on this matter, and marry same -  sex couples, regardless.

 

More than a thousand United Methodist clergy across the United States have signed statements committing themselves to fulfill their vow to ministry by marrying or blessing couples regardless of their gender. More than a third of the population of the United States lives where marriage or civil unions for gay and lesbian couples are legal. When parishioners come to their pastors to request that they officiate at their weddings, ministers face a conflict between their vow to minister to their whole congregation and their vow to uphold the Book of Discipline which asks them to deny ministry to some of their members.

-  Reconciling Minisgtries Network

Gay marriage, in church, will be debated again this summer at the UMC General Assembly, and also by the Presbyterian Church of the USA, and the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America, which have previously opened up to  LGBT pastors, but not same - sex weddings. There can be no longer any doubt: church weddings for all, without discrimination, are coming. It's just a matter of time - and denomination.

Meanwhile, in Washington, Bishop Hagiya is not the only pastor standing up for equality: just the most prominent. Others are doing so too - or at least, trying to avoid taking a stand. The NOM and the like can not claim to be speaking for the religious point of view:

Church leaders vary on approach to gay marriage issue |

When it comes to supporting gay marriage in Washington, there may be one question even more divisive for Christians than the one they're likely to see on the November ballot.

What would Jesus do?

"There's churches on both sides of that in Yakima," the Rev. David Helseth of Englewood Christian Church said. "I expect there will be some congregations and leaders that are very vocal."

Helseth is one of numerous church leaders locally who won't be addressing the issue from the pulpit anytime soon. He said he knows church members who support and oppose gay marriage, and he would rather promote civil dialogue than something that could seriously divide the congregation.

"We are not going to exclude anybody," Helseth said. "Everyone has a place at Christ's table."

The Rev. Mike Scheid of Yakima's Central Lutheran Church said gay marriage hasn't been seriously addressed within his congregation yet, and that's likely because the issue is still ongoing. Scheid said he thinks the topic will become a bigger issue later in the year when a likely referendum settles the question of legalization.

via  Yakima Herald-Republic.

"A Catholic Case for Same-sex Marriage": Gramick, DeBernardo

This month in Maryland and the state of Washington, an extraordinary dynamic is playing itself out:  Two Catholic governors are prodding legislators to pass bills legalizing same-gender marriage. Like Govs. Andrew Cuomo in New York and Pat Quinn in Illinois — whose states recently legalized same-sex civil unions — Govs. Martin O’Malley and Christine Gregoire are acting against the strongly expressed opposition of their church’s bishops.

As Catholics who are involved in lesbian and gay ministry and outreach, we are aware that many people, some of them Catholics, believe that Catholics cannot faithfully disobey the public policies of the church’s hierarchy. But this is not the case.

The Catholic Church is not a democracy, but neither is it a dictatorship. Ideally, our bishops should strive to proclaim the sensus fidelium , the faith as it is understood by the whole church. At the moment, however, the bishops and the majority of the church are at odds. A survey published in September by the Public Religion Research Institute found that 52 percent of Catholics support marriage equality and 69 percent support civil unions.

Those numbers shouldn’t surprise people who are familiar with the Catholic theological tradition. For example, Catholic thinking dictates that we should use the evidence we find in the natural world to help us reach our conclusions. Many Catholics have reflected on the scientific evidence that homosexuality is a natural variant in human sexuality, and understand that lesbian and gay love is as natural as heterosexual love.

 -full reflection at  The Washington Post.

Related articles

• New Ways Ministry: "Bondings" (queeringthechurch.com)
• Marriage Equality and History of Marriage: Some Catholic Resources (bilgrimage.blogspot.com)
• Religion and Gay Marriage: Reactions to Prop 8 Ruling. (queeringthechurch.com)
• Catholics Speak Out for Marriage Equality in Maryland (newwaysministryblog.wordpress.com)

Religion and Gay Marriage: Reactions to Prop 8 Ruling.

[caption id="attachment_21905" align="aligncenter" width="254" caption="Proposition 8 election map"][/caption]

Catholic bishops have been quick to react to yesterday's court ruling that California's Proposition 8 ballot was unconstitutional, speaking of their disappointment at what they see as the "injustice" of the ruling (an ironic choice of words, as it is the business of the courts above all, to deliberate and rule on matters of justice.  The learned judges in this case, confirming earlier decisions by lower courts, have found that the "injustice" lay in creating two classes of persons, one with lesser rights than the other). Frances De Bernardo at New Ways / Bondings 2.0, recalling the active role that the bishops played in perpetrating the original injustice, reflects on the harm that has done to the Catholic Church in California, and draws an important lesson from it: the urgent need, going forward, to move from a political stance on the matter to a pastoral one:

 

Though this case temporarily provides a victory for the marriage equality movement in California, there is still work of reconciliation work to be done in the Catholic Church there.  In a post two weeks ago, I mentioned that a California friend told me that the hierarchy’s heavily funded campaign to pass Proposition 8 has had a harmful effect on the pastoral life of LGBT Catholics and their allies in California.  Many have become alienated from the church and left it because of the vociferous anti-gay nature of the campaign and its rhetoric.  While the hierarchy has been focused on the political nature of the marriage debate, it’s time that they started to look at the pastoral component of it, too, and begin the much needed work of reconciliation–for the good of the entire church.

Francis DeBernardo, Bondings 2.0

 

Other denominations that were active in the Prop 8 campaign against marriage, have expressed similar and predictable disappointment. I am more interested though, in the mounting evidence of an opposite, supportive view from faith leaders.

English Bishop Backs Gay Marriage: Queer Ferment in the Anglican Church.

For years, the major focus of controversy in the Church of England has been over the appointment of women bishops. That debate has now been all but settled (even the opponents agree that change is inevitable). Issues around full LGBT inclusion in church will now move to centre stage.

One sign of this is a bishop who has spoken out publicly in favour of gay marriage:

The new Bishop of Salisbury, The Rt Revd Nick Holtam, has spoken out in support of gay marriage.

Bishop Holtam made the comments in an interview with the Times today ahead of the meeting of the General Synod next week, where civil partnerships in churches and equal marriage are to be discussed.

He said: “We are living in a different society. If there’s a gay couple in The Archers, if there’s that form of public recognition in popular soaps, we are dealing with something which has got common currency. All of us have friends, families, relatives, neighbours who are, or who know someone, in same-sex partnerships.”

He said he was “no longer convinced” marriage should be between a man and a woman.

He continued: “I think same-sex couples that I know who have formed a partnership have in many respects a relationship which is similar to a marriage and which I now think of as marriage.

Bishop of Salisbury Backs Gay Marriage - Pink News

[caption id="" align="aligncenter" width="300" caption="Lesbian priests marry, Boston cathedral, 1/1/2010"][/caption]

He is not alone. The Times interview, in which he was speaking about full marriage, followed an earlier report that over 100 Anglican clergy from the diocese of London have signed a petition asking that the synod next week agree to allow local discretion on conducting civil partnership ceremonies on church. The background is that parliament last year changed the civil partnership legislation, which previously prohibited these from being conducted on religious premises, to permit such premises where church authorities give explicit approval. Up to now, the public stance of the Church of England has been that permission will not be granted. Next week's synod will show that there is significant opposition to that stance.

“He Who Pays the Piper” Corollary: the Lesson From Maine

What happens when the piper disregards the adage, and ignores those who pay him?

Bart's post yesterday ("He who pays the piper") reminded me of Frances De Bernardo's report at Bondings 2.0, on how the diocese of Maine is a stark reminder of this. Back in 2oo9, the Bishop of Portland and his allies threw themselves into the battle to repeal the state's gay - marriage law (and no, it wasn't on the side of the traditional Catholic values justice and equality, or protecting all families).

Catholic Church Doesn’t Need to Take Another Battering’

The Catholic hierarchy’s opposition to marriage equality during Maine’s 2009 referendum has had a “devastating” effect on the church there.

That’s the opinion of a Maine parish administrator, and also of William H. Slavick, who penned an op-ed in the Portland Press Herald entitled, "The Maine Catholic Church doesn't need to take another battering."   Slavick, a veteran church reformer and peace activist who ran for U.S. Senate in 2006, points out that the hierarchy’s supposed “victory” has been a decisive defeat on the pastoral level, with financial consequences, too:

“Recently, a parish cluster administrator acknowledged that the referendum repeal campaign was, for the church in Maine, ‘devastating.’ No explanation was necessary. We know. The lack of charity occasioned wide discomfort. Some left, often among the better educated and more generous. More stopped attending Mass after weeks of campaign bullying. With $200,000 of diocesan referendum contributions unexplained, many refused to make contributions from which the bishop received a cut. That includes the Sunday offertory collection.”

Slavick’s concern is timely because  supporters of marriage equality have gathered enough signatures to stage another referendum on the issue in November, so a new struggle is very near.   Details about the referendum can be read in an article, “It’s on: Same-sex marriage supporters give it another try,” from Maine’s Sun Journal.

- Bondings 2.0.

What is especially shameful about Maine diocesan intervention in 2oo9, is that it was not even honest. As Frances De Bernardo outlined in a previous Bondings post, Marc Mutty, the Director of Public Affairs for the Diocese who had also been the Chair of "Yes on 1," and who led the fight against marriage equality in the referendum now regrets a lot of the anti-gay rhetoric that he promoted  - and even acknowledges that some of it was blatantly untrue.

According to a Portland Press Herald April 17, 2011, article, the documentary contains interviews of Mutty acknowledging that  his words were sometimes false:

"'We use a lot of hyperbole and I think that's always dangerous,' says Mutty during a Yes on 1 strategy session, at the time on leave from his job as public affairs director for the Roman Catholic Diocese of Maine."

'You know, we say things like "Teachers will be forced to (teach same-sex marriage in schools)!" ' he continues. 'Well, that's not a completely accurate statement and we all know it isn't, you know?'"

There is a (small) silver lining here, and it is this: my reading of the situation now, for the 2012 campaign, is that the bishop has indeed learned that "He who pays the piper, calls the tune". He and Mutty have seen the wanton destruction their campaign wreaked on the diocese the last time around. They can read the newspapers, and will know that Catholic support for marriage equality is now even stronger than it was three years ago. They will continue to oppose marriage for all - but I will be very surprised if they throw themselves into this battle with anything like the reckless fervour that they displayed in 2oo9.

The Church is gearing up for another battle - but this time, reluctantly:

Maine's Catholic Church, which played a big role in the campaign to overturn the law three years ago is gearing up for another battle, albeit reluctantly.

"Quite frankly, we don't think we should have to go through this again,” said Church spokesperson Brian Souchet. “It's divisive and contentious lot of money spent on both sides."

NECN.com

Recognizing that it is so contentious, not least among Catholics, perhaps the diocese should simply stay on the sidelines, or at least display some of that "respect, compassion and sensitivity" demanded by the Catechism?

Related articles

• 'Catholic Church Doesn't Need to Take Another Battering' (newwaysministryblog.wordpress.com)
• Meet Marc Mutty (newwaysministryblog.wordpress.com)
• UPDATED: Maine Marriage-Equality Supporters Ready To Announce Another Referendum (queerty.com)
• Lisa Cressman's Reasonable and Concise Answers to Marriage Equality Questions (thewildreed.blogspot.com)
• A Civil Discussion on Civil Marriage (newwaysministryblog.wordpress.com)
• Maine Catholic Church vs Gay Rights Activists (NECN.com)

“Marriage and the Common Good”: Washington Bishops, Washington Catholics

As marriage equality enters the political arena in Washington state, the Catholic bishops have predictably begun rallying the opposition. What is particularly intriguing in this version of Catholic bishops opposing marriage, is that they explicitly recognize that the legal dispute is around civil marriage, and have presented their case in purely secular terms.

Note the opening sentence of their statement, "Marriage and the Common Good" (emphasis added):

Legislation has been introduced in Washington State to change the current law defining marriage. The present law states: “marriage is a civil contract between a male and a female…”

[gallery link="file" columns="4"]

Catholic Bishops Divided on Civil Unions

Bishop,

This is getting really interesting. Last year, Archbishop Vincent Nichols raised a flurry of interest (in support and in outraged horror) when he suggested that there could be value in civil partnerships/unions.  The year before that, Cardinal Christoph Schonborn of Vienna (and others) suggested that it was time for the Church to shift emphasis from "homosexual acts" to the quality of the relationships. Meanwhile, this year in Colorado, Catholic bishops are rallying against proposals for civil unions - as they have done elsewhere in the US, arguing that civil unions are a slippery slope to full marriage equality. In Italy, a new report from Commonweal tells us of an Italian bishop speaking up for civil unions. Largely ignored today, is the historic fact that when Portugal was considering  a law  to provide for full same -sex marriage, their bishops supported civil unions as an alternative, more acceptable to the Catholic Church.

I wonder - is this a sign of a wider, fundamental split between Catholic bishops - or a division between European and American bishops? Either way, I welcome this. Any public recognition of value in civil partnerships encourages discussion of the value of relationships, as something good in themselves, independently of the fuss over genital acts on the one hand, and the definition of marriage, on the other.

 Italian Bishop Advocates Civil Unions.

Maltastar.com reports that Paolo Urso, the bishop of Ragusa (in Sicily,) has called for civil recognition of same-sex couples. (The UPI report is here.)

He’s not calling for civil marriage for same-sex couples, but for civil unions, presumably for heterosexual couples as well as same-sex couples. money quote:

When two people, even if they’re the same sex, decide to live together, it’s important for the State to recognise this fact, But it must be called something different from marriage.

The US bishops, recall, view the civil recognition of same-sex relationships as

a multifaceted threat to the very fabric of society, striking at the source from which society and culture come and which they are meant to serve. Such recognition affects all people, married and non-married…

To my knowledge, the USCCB has not spoken about civil unions for straight couples. (We’ve always just called it “civil marriage.”) So what we see here is two places to draw a line: Urso would have civil unions regarded as different from civil marriage, while the USCCB would draw the line between heterosexual and homosexual couples.

- dotCommonweal 

Related articles

• "Redefinition" of Marriage, Desirable and Undesirable
• Catholics Should Support Civil Partnerships, in Church.
• Archbishop Nichols’ Balanced, Sane Response to British Gay Marriage.
• Marriage Equality and the Church, Updated.
• Polling Evidence: The Gay Marriage Conundrum, for GOP and Catholic Bishops
• 10 Years of Gay Marriage, and the Christian Church
• Queer Families: A Personal, Catholic Case For Gay Marriage
• Pope Benedict’s Strong Argument for Gay Marriage, Queer Families.
• Oz Priest, on the Christian Case for Gay Marriage
• Gay Marriage: Coming (Soon?) to a Church Near You.
• A Catholic Case For Blessing Civil Unions.

• Ill Gov. Pat Quinn Faces Off Against 13 Catholic Bishops (pinkbananaworld.com)

Catholic Church, same sex marriage

Gay Marriage: What Pope Benedict did NOT Say

A number of news reports this week have stated that Pope Benedict has described gay marriage as a threat to humanity:

Gay marriage a threat to humanity's future — Pope

GMA News - ‎19 hours ago‎

VATICAN CITY - Pope Benedict said on Monday that gay marriage was one of several threats to the traditional family that undermined "the future of humanity itself." The Pope made some of his strongest comments against gay marriage in a New Year address ...

Gay marriage is a threat to humanity, claims Pope

Daily Mail - ‎Jan 10, 2012‎

By Graham Smith Gay marriage is one of several threats to the traditional family unit that undermines 'the future of humanity itself', Pope Benedict XVI warned yesterday. The pontiff told diplomats from nearly 180 countries that the education of proper ...

Liberal family values, same-sex marriage a threat to the future of humanity: Pope

National Post (blog) - ‎Jan 9, 2012‎

Pope Benedict XVI attends his annual meeting with Holy See Diplomats at the Hall of the Throne on January 9, 2012 in Vatican City, Vatican. During his speech the Pope pleaded for religious tolerance and an end to discrimination against Christians ...

And plenty more of like ilk. If such a patently and obviously false and malicious statement is really what he said, then the LGBT community, and queer Catholis in particular, would be justified in painting him as public enemy number one.



So - did he say it?

Andrew Brown at the Guardian denies this, and I agree with him.

Gay Marriage: At London "Catholic Voices" Discussion, Gay Catholics NOT Welcome.

At a Catholic event in London next week,  specifically about Catholics and gay marriage, the people most directly affected - gay Catholics themselves- have been excluded.

In London next week,  "Catholic Voices" is hosting an event to discuss the public communication of the Catholic Church's stance on gay marriage. The advance material for this event made it clear that for security reasons , those wishing to attend needed to RSVP ahead of time, or they would be turned away.

Please note that, due to security policies at Notre Dame, nobody will be admitted who has not RSVP’d to the above email address by the date specified. If you are bringing a guest, you must give us their name and email by then.

-Catholic Voices mailer

However, when I tried to RSVP as instructed, I received a prompt response from the organizer, Austen Ivereigh, stating in effect that I was not welcome. Excluded (and not for security reasons). I have never met Mr Ivereigh, who was presumably responding simply to my name. I soon discovered that two other gay Catholics hoping to attend, had been similarly excluded.

Catholic Voices states that they "began with a single aim: to ensure that Catholics and the Church were well represented in the media when Pope Benedict came to the UK in September 2010". It is clear from this little kerfuffle that it is emphatically not all Catholics and the Church as a whole that they are aiming to represent, but purely and simply the bishops: not "Catholic" Voice, but "His Master's Voice".

And so, we have the curious position that, at a Catholic event specifically about Catholics and gay marriage, the people most directly affected - gay Catholics themselves- are excluded.

This morning, the Guardian has taken up the story:

Episcopal Church in Minn. passes resolution opposing marriage amendment

In marked contrast to the Catholic bishops, who have thrown unprecedented resources into supporting a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage, the Episcopal church in the state is opposed to the amendment.  Episcopal Bishop Brian N. Prior says this decision is grounded in the firm principle that the Church has always stood with the marginalized.

In theory, the Catholic Church shares this firm Biblical principle, and indeed the majority of Catholics agree with the Episcopal church in extending it also to the LGBT community. The exception,  in the case of homoerotic relationships, is Catholic bishops who are prepared to sacrifice authentic Catholic values and Catholic families, where they are in conflict with Vatican ideology.

Members of the Episcopal Church in Minnesota, which held its annual convention over the weekend in Minneapolis, passed a resolution opposing the marriage amendment to the state constitution banning same-sex marriage.

 Episcopal Church in Minn. passes resolution opposing marriage amendment 

The church is joining other denominations and non-profit organizations in signing the “Resolution against the Constitutional Amendment to Ban Marriage for Same-Sex Couples” as prepared and presented by Minnesotans United for All Families.

That group is trying to defeat the amendment set for a vote on the November 2012 ballot, which would define marriage as a union between a man and a woman.

 “The Episcopal Church in Minnesota has always stood with the marginalized,” said Bishop Brian N. Prior, IX Bishop of Minnesota, said in a released statement. “Regardless of race, ethnicity, gender, gender orientation or immigrant status, Episcopalians in Minnesota have always embraced both the Gospel mandate of love of neighbor and the Baptismal Covenant imperative to respect the dignity of every human being.”

 Episcopalians (which number about 22,000 members in Minnesota) join other faith-based groups already gearing up for the heated political battle ahead this year.

 StarTribune.com.

Related articles

• Walter C. Righter dies; Episcopal bishop played role in gay rights in church
• Episcopal Church Leader Backs Scottish Government on Gay Marriage

• "Wrong and Impractical" (thewildreed.blogspot.com)
• Marriage Matters: Standing On the Side of Love (mlp.org)
• A Battle Between The Religions Brewing Over Same-Sex Amendment In MN (lezgetreal.com)
• Frank Griswold: "Maybe this is the desert time". (kiwianglo.wordpress.com)
• New Minnesota Poll Shows 48 Percent Favor, 43 Percent Oppose Anti-Gay Marriage Amendment (towleroad.com)
• more on same sex marriage in Scotland (thinkinganglicans.org.uk)

Joseph O’Leary, on Catholic Theology and “Redefining” Marriage

Fr Joseph O'Leary has a useful short post at his blog, on the eruption of opposition by the English bishops to the (very modest) proposed amendments to the UK civil partnership provisions. He makes the point I have done before, that the Church has itself participated in the constant redefinition of marriage over the centuries, but adds an important observation that I had not realised: that historically, these redefinitions have come from the people, and only later have been ratified by the state and the church. Nothing new, then, in the current process of redefinition. In many countries, the state is already following the popular lead in recognizing same sex relationships. Most churches (not all, not by a long way) are further behind - but they too will catch up, in time:

Apparently the recent papal visit has galvanized opposition among English Catholic bishops to anything resembling gay marriage. Now they denounce Quakers and liberal Jews for daring to host civil partnership registrations, saying that no one has the right to redefine marriage. In fact, of course, marriage has been redefined many times throughout history. It is only since the 15th century or so that the Church itself has defined marriage as a sacrament. Such redefinitions come from the people in the first case, and are only later ratified by church and state. Today the Church has to face the growing reality of gay unions that resemble marriage, and when it buries its head in the stand, refuses to come up with an intelligent response, refuses dialogue and consultation, it is only making itself ridiculous.

Related articles

• Confused English Bishops, and the Catholic "Redefinition" of Marriage. (queering-the-church.com)
• Memo to Cardinal George: "Redefining" Marriage. (opentabernacle.wordpress.com)

New York Catholics Support Gay Marriage

Barbara Bush's public support for gay marriage has garnered a lot of press attention over the past week. Reporting on this the Washington Post has drawn my attention to another finding that should have drawn more attention. Alongside the number of Republican politicians and Evangelical Christians who are breaking ranks with their traditional opposition and starting to support equality, the majority of US (and European) Catholics have already parted company with their bishops on the matter. This has been demonstrated in several polls in recent years, at national level, and in state level polls, as in Rhode Island.

When I read and reported on the recent finding of the Quinnipiac poll that a majority of New Yorkers now support full legal recognition of same sex marriages, I neglected to follow through on my usual practice of checking the cross-tabs for a breakdown by religion. This was a mistake. (In mitigation, I plead that I was under intense pressure  for time last week). As the Washington Post has now observed, the national pattern is found in New York, too.  An absolute majority of New York Catholics support full marriage (not simply civil unions). As the paper's report notes in its concluding remark, "Republican and Catholic leaders may find themselves increasingly out of touch with the rhythm and blues that are moving their constituents and congregants on these issues".

For how much longer can bishops, in the US or elsewhere, get away with claiming to speak for "Catholics" on such matters (or, in the Philippines), it is patently obvious that they are not speaking of the real beliefs or real Catholics, but only for Vatican doctrine and the rule book Catholics who would prefer to get their ideas from a moral manual, without personal thought or reflection?

Pope Benedict's Strong Argument for Gay Marriage, Queer Families.

Last Sunday, I picked up a little book at the Soho Masses bookstall called "Christians and Sexuality in the Time of AIDS", a useful little book, which I bought at a ridiculously low bargain price. Some of the insights have little to do directly with the main theme, and it is one of these that is relevant here, an observation made by James Alison in his introduction, writing about Pope Benedict XVI and the nature of his theology.  James has frequently observed that when we respond too quickly or too superficially to the pope's reported remarks, we often underestimate his thinking, which is substantially more nuanced than we usually recognize. In his position, he argues, Benedict cannot do other than repeat the well-worn, established magisterial positions on topical issues.

The really interesting questions surrounding what a pope is doing are never the politically immediate headline grabbers, but always the small, apparently insignificant tinkerings around the edges which are either going to make change possible over time, or try to block it.

When I read these words, they brought into focus for me the speech that Benedict  gave to a group of Italian politicians and public officials last Friday, which has been widely interpreted as an attack on gay marriage. This is not the way I interpreted the speech: instead, I wrote (in the post below) that the reference to "marriage between a man and a woman", and to the forces undermining it, were curiously minor. The main thrust of the speech was more usefully seen as in praise of strong families - which could equally well apply to the families of same sex parents as to any other.   After reading James Alison, I thought how perfectly his warning applies to the present case: well, of course he made the obligatory noises about marriage between a man and a woman (how could he not?) - but the headline writers have missed the main points. With just a little "apparently insignificant tinkerings around the edges", this attack on gay marriage can instead be read as a statement in praise of all families - including those which are queer. 

I submit my original post below, just as I wrote it Sunday -- with profound apologies to my colleague Bart, who very generously responded to my request for preliminary comment with some very useful and helpful suggestions, which I have duly ignored. This is not in any way a reflection on his contribution - but just on my acute lack of time this week.  (I am writing this close to midnight, as it is). I will revise and refine this text later, to incorporate the additional links, Bart's contribution - and possibly later thought as well (both my own and that of readers' comments).

Cathedral Wedding for Senior Lesbian Clerics

When Massachusetts introduced same sex marriage in 2003, it as alone among American states. Since then, a steady trickle of others have followed, either with meaningful civil unions or with full marriage equality. More will follow this year, and is increasingly obvious, as VP Biden has observed, that full marriage equality for gay and lesbian couples is now "inevitable" across the country. It is now only a matter of time.  Although the opponents of same-sex marriage claim theirs is a principled stand based in religion, it is also becoming obvious that religious opposition too is crumbling. As with so much else that was previously prohibited on the pretext of religious belief, the religious objections to homoerotic relationships will in time be recognised as without religious validity for the modern world.

One recent Boston wedding was just one more among many - but it carries with it strong symbolic importance, and is an important signpost to a future without religious discrimination. Two lesbian Episcopalian clerics, each holding an office of some seniority and importance in their diocese, were married in the Cathedral Church of St Paul in Boston, in a wedding service solemnized by the Episcopalian bishop of Massachusetts, the Right Reverend M Thomas Shaw SSJE.  What could be more respectable than that?

Gay Adoption, Gay Marriage as Moral Obligations: Two Jewish Views (and one Christian)

Here's a refreshing change: instead of the spurious, religious arguments against gay adoption and gay marriage, two more voices (this time, from Jewish perspectives)  speaking out on the positive faith-based reasons in favour of each.

In the first of these, at the Jerusalem Post, the orthodox Rabbi, television host and author of religious books on relationships Shmuley Boteach argues strongly in favour of gay adoption. Last month, he participated with Rosie O'Donnell in a New Jersey public discussion on the subject. In an article published before this event, he reflected on these issues, and especially on an aspect that I see as the most important of all. When a friend he spoke to expressed regret that Rosie's four adopted children would never have a father (the standard, theoretical argument against gay adoption), Rabbi Shmuley replied with the obvious and important, reality-based response:

that without Rosie they wouldn’t have a mother either.

Same-Sex Church Weddings Inch Closer in Finland

Last year, the Swedish government and the state church, the Swedish Lutheran church, between them approved legal recognition for same sex marriage including church weddings - the first country in the world where this has happened. At the time and since, I have noted that other Scandinavian countries were likely to follow suit: I know that the subject has been discussed (out of the public eye) by church authorities in all of them. Now the Finnish Lutherans have taken a public step in that direction.

Chart of the Day: Religion and Gay Marriage

Last week, Pew Research reported on the latest update in their continuing series of surveys on American attitudes to same-sex marriage. The headline finding, that for the first time fewer than half the sample opposed gay marriage was widely reported, as was the finding that support has been growing steadily since polling first began. From the viewpoint of the Churches, a further finding, that support is growing in all denominational sectors, and that opposition among Mainline Protestants has collapsed dramatically, had somewhat less attention.

Nevertheless, it is important to emphasise (as I did last week) that the battle over marriage equality has largely moved on from a struggle between the Christian churches and the rest, to one being waged within the churches. This prepared by the Economist from the Pew data shows the point clearly: Atheists, the unaffiliated and Jews show clear support.   White Catholics and Mainline Protestants are divided, but with pluralities in support, and have shown clear movement towards acceptance in recent years.

Only Blacks and White Evangelicals continue to show strong opposition, but even in these groups there has been some modest growth in support since the previous survey (for 2oo8/9). We can expect that within a few years, even these groups will become more closely divided, given the pronounced support among the youngest people from all religious backgrounds, while on the other side of the divide, there will be more Protestant denominations and local congregations moving to accept same sex marriage, even in church.

Gay marriage: coming (soon?) to a church near you.

Gay Marriage: Coming (Soon?) to a Church Near You.

It is now widely recognized that the move to marriage equality is irreversible. From polling evidence, the trend is clear. Politically, candidates for office are increasingly recognizing the dangers of homophobic rhetoric, and some are starting to see the value of declaring openly for equality. Courts are ruling that discrimination, in marriage law, in military service, and in adoption law, is plainly unconstitutional. As some US states and countries of Europe, Latin America and elsewhere move towards recognizing queer families, the greater visibility that follows erodes resistance easing the path to equality for those that follow.

All this is well known - for civil marriage. What is less widely recognized is the extent of change that has also been taking place in the churches. Inevitably, this will lead in time to acceptance also for same-sex church weddings. From the position just a few years ago where almost all major denominations were strongly against homosexual relationships, and public condemnations passed without comment, this claim may seem hard to swallow, so let us review the evidence.

Mormon Prop 8 Apology: A Lesson for Minnesota's Catholic Bishops

As the Minnesota bishops prepare for their determined campaign to prevent marriage equality in their state, they would do well to reflect on the experience of the Mormons in California over Prop 8. As is well known, the Mormons, like the institutional Catholic Church, were among the mainstay of the opposition to equality, donating substantial sums in cash and in kind to funding support for the ballot initiative.

Since the vote, there have been numerous indications that the Mormon leaders have begun to recognize the hurt their actions have caused to their own members. (I would be surprised if the Mormons were to make the same mistake again). In the clearest demonstration yet of this change of heart, a senior member of the Church  has apologised to lesbian and gay Mormons of California. In a move that Joanna Brooks at Religion Dispatches correctly describes as historic, the leader of the church in California invited Elder Marlin K Jensen to a meeting to hear the stories of pain and suffering the Church had caused to gay and lesbian Mormons, not just by the support for Prop 8, but by its entire approach to homosexuals and their place in the Church. At the conclusion of this testimony  - Elder Jensen apologized.