Advertisement
This morning's Washington Post made me choke on my coffee: "Catholic Church Gives D.C. Ultimatum." The Catholic Archdiocese is playing political hardball by threatening to cut off social services to the city's poor--including the homeless, the hungry, the sick, and children--if D.C. expands gay and lesbian civil rights and recognizes same-sex marriage.
That's right. The Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Washington is holding poor people hostage in order to keep gay and lesbian persons from getting married. They are willing to trade the indigent for getting their theological way.
I don't like to criticize other people's religious faiths or churches. There's plenty enough to criticize in my own Protestant tradition. In the last year, however, we have witnessed a new authoritarian activism on the part of the Roman Church hierarchy that has an impact well beyond the Catholic Church. This new coercive Catholicism is akin to the development of the Christian Right in evangelical churches in the early 1980s--a religious-political movement that reshaped American culture. This is everybody's business.
In the last year, new Catholic politics emerged in the Prop 8 campaign in California where the church invested vast resources of money and leadership to overturn gay marriage; and then did the same in Maine. Last week, in a political maneuver worthy of Tom DeLay, authoritarian Catholic bishops forced a Democratic Congress to adopt the Stupak Amendment undermining the legal right to choice by threatening to torpedo health reform. Now they threaten the D.C. City Council? Using the lives of poor people as a political tool?
I don't want to be alarmist about this. Nor, in this ecumenical age, do I wish to be seen as a nativist calling for a new anti-Catholic crusade. That would be a terrible misrepresentation of these concerns. Nor do I want to offend Catholic friends and family. But it is profoundly disturbing that the Roman Catholic Church appears to be using threats and fear to manipulate a democratic political process to enforce Catholic doctrine regarding abortion and human sexuality. There seems to be a political pattern developing that should cause broad-minded citizens--Catholics included--to ask some serious questions regarding what is happening within the Catholic hierarchy.
Recently, Congressman Patrick Kennedy did just that. In an argument with his own bishop about health care, Kennedy reminded the Bishop of Rhode Island that American Catholics have a long history of diversity and dissent regarding formal Catholic teaching. Disagreement with the Catholic Church was, Kennedy argued, part of the dynamic of being Catholic in a democratic society. Here's the bishop's answer:
"The fact that I disagree with the hierarchy on some issues does not
make me any less of a Catholic." Well, in fact, Congressman, in a way it does.
Although I wouldn't choose those particular words, when someone rejects the
teachings of the Church, especially on a grave matter, a life-and-death issue
like abortion, it certainly does diminish their ecclesial communion, their
unity with the Church. This principle is based on the Sacred Scripture and
Tradition of the Church and is made more explicit in recent documents.
For example, the "Code of Canon Law" says, "Lay persons are bound by an
obligation and possess the right to acquire a knowledge of Christian doctrine
adapted to their capacity and condition so that they can live in accord with
that doctrine." (Canon 229, #1)
The "Catechism of the Catholic Church" says
this: "Mindful of Christ's words to his apostles, 'He who hears you, hears me,'
the faithful receive with docility the teaching and directives that their
pastors give them in different forms." (#87)
It is worrisome that a Roman Catholic bishop would remind a member of
the Kennedy political family that "docility" is the primary calling of faithful
Catholic laity. What about courage, compassion, and creativity?
Oddly enough, Roman Catholic leaders have adopted a strategy of
authoritarian engagement with the body politic at the very moment at which
their church is declining. One in ten Americans is now an ex-Roman Catholic, with numbers
dwindling, churches closing, a decline in the number of priests and religious,
and with only immigration holding the number of communicants steady. With the
church clearly in crisis, the bishops apparently have chosen to use the sick,
poor, homeless, children, the faithful laity, and marginal as tools to increase
their public power and influence by coercing public policy to fit their
theology. You'd think that they
would be looking inward to see what is eroding Catholic congregations instead
of lobbying Congress and threatening politicians.
This is not what John F. Kennedy would have imagined for his beloved
church when he so courageously broke through the boundaries of anti-Catholic
prejudice to become the nation's first Catholic president. The eternal flame at his grave in
Arlington witnesses to the ancient Catholic vision of universal peace, justice, and love. The new authoritarian Catholicism is not
only playing politics but it is replacing a more generous vision of historic Catholic
faith--the traditional one that sides with the poor, the oppressed, and the outcast--with a vision of political power. For that, I am deeply sad. Coercive religion should have no place
in a church or a pluralistic, democratic nation--much less in City Hall or the
halls of the United States Congress.
By John Gehring
Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good
Just in time for Halloween, Bill Donohue of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights is once again spooked about all those "radical secularists" lurking ominously behind ever corner. In case you didn't notice, these godless heathens are "waging war" against American culture and plotting to "smash the last vestiges of Christianity in
You have to hand it to the guy. Donohue makes righteous indignation and throwing rhetorical bombs into an art form. He is about as subtle as a fist in your face. If you are looking for reasoned and sensible analysis turn on PBS, Donohue seems to snarl. His latest depiction of cultural doom probably elicits a yawn from most religious Americans who are not obsessed with the bogeymen of multiculturalism, secularism, homosexuality and
Everyday in our churches, mosques and synagogues people of faith gather humbly to pray for wisdom, compassion and justice. We give public expression to this faith by comforting the sick, welcoming the strangers among us and seeking peace in a world torn by violence. We lobby Congress to pass health-care reform, fix a broken immigration system and address global climate change as profound moral issues. Even on difficult issues, we reject culture-war showdowns by encouraging pro-choice and pro-life elected officials to find common ground and reduce abortions by increasing support for pregnant women, expanding adoption opportunities and preventing unintended pregnancies.
Keeping track of Donohue's latest offensive comment keeps the watchdogs at Media Matters for America busy. Here's a few of his signature gems:
▪ "
▪ "A lot of these people are gold diggers looking to get money from the Catholic Church." -Speaking about the clergy sex abuse scandal. The Last Word with Matt Cooper 5/29/2009
At least when he gets to feeling down about things, Donohue raises his chin and cheers himself up with this comforting thought:
▪ "The culture war is up for grabs. The good news is that religious conservatives continue to breed like rabbits, while secular saboteurs have shut down: they're too busy walking their dogs, going to bathhouses and aborting their kids. Time, it seems, is on the side of the angels." On Faith,
It's sad, if unsurprising, that the media regularly turns to Donohue for a "Catholic view" on issues. While Donohue's bluster makes for sensational television, he rarely raises his voice to speak about issues at the heart of Catholic social teaching. While the U.S. Catholic bishops' 2008 election-year statement on political responsibility emphasized a consistent ethic of life tradition that recognizes torture, unjust war, the death penalty, genocide, racism and poverty as "direct assaults on innocent human life," Donohue is uncharacteristically mute on these points. Abortion is not the only "life issue" for Catholics. As Auxiliary Bishop Gabino Zavala of
We live in an age where the shrillest voices often drown out sober debate and thoughtful insights. Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh watch their ratings soar with every outrageous remark. Bill Donohue gets invited on TV because he bellows and bloviates with the best of them. While some enjoy the antics, most of us are tired of the noise machine. Faith and reason are not enemies, but together help illuminate our path through the dark forests of fear, ignorance and injustice. Sometimes we just need to turn down the volume and tune out the shouters to find our way.
People of faith will be conspicuous at the National Equality March in Washington this weekend. I don't remember hearing religious voices at my first March on Washington in 1993, so I consider this a sign of progress. But no matter how many more of the faithful may be marching with us this year, the Church, writ large, is late to the party.
With the exception of the United Church of Christ, the Unitarian Universalists and the Jewish Reform and Reconstructionist movements, much of organized religion still struggles to shed its homophobic past and to liberate its sexual ethic from moralism and shame. No wonder growing numbers of Americans find the Church irrelevant to their lives, particularly their sexual lives.
This is not to say the Church is a hopeless case. Far from it. As this summer's actions at the Episcopal and Lutheran general assemblies demonstrated, our religious communities are finding their way forward on the long journey from "sexuality is sinful" to "sexuality is holy," and from "God created sex for procreation" to "God created sex for pleasure." That journey requires a transformation in religious thinking, followed by a transformation in religious teaching.
This week I attended the annual alumni gathering at Union Theological Seminary in New York, where the workshops and panels centered on the theme of "Sex and the Church." Marvin Ellison, professor of ethics at Bangor Theological Seminary, pointed out that much of contemporary heterosexual sex is "queer sex" in the eyes of traditionalists. Contracepted sex, non-marital sex and casual sex challenge centuries of religious moralism, yet progressives are finding the theological grounds for defining queer sex as sinful increasingly shaky.
Ellen Armour, a feminist theologian from Vanderbilt, noted how feminist and queer theory has helped break the shackles of sexual and gender binaries (straight or gay, male or female) and opened our eyes to the diversity of sexualities and genders in the human population. What queer people themselves have learned, though, is that even the broader array of new identities we have created - gay, lesbian, bisexual, queer - do not nearly define human experience, which can be remarkably fluid over time. Sexuality and gender is not only diverse across humanity, but within individual lifetimes as well.
Debra Haffner, executive director of the Religious Institute, said the attention paid to gay and lesbian issues has created space for organized religion to rethink its relationship with sexuality more broadly. How do we break the silence surrounding sexuality in our congregations, how do we raise children to be sexually healthy and make ethical decisions, how do we recognize the connections between sexuality and spirituality?
David Carr, a Biblical scholar at Union, concluded that "affirming human erotic connection is a central, if not the central, human vocation."
Religious progressives marching in D.C. this weekend are taking a stand for equality and social justice. May their activism awaken the larger Church to its responsibility, long overdue, to shed outdated moralism and embrace humanity it all of its queer, sexual, spiritual glory.
Kate M. Ott, Ph.D. is the Associate Director of The Religious Institute: Faithful Voices on Sexuality and Religion
On Monday, Carolyn and Sean Savage of Sylvania, Ohio, told the national audience of the Today Show that Carolyn was implanted with the wrong embryo during an in vitro fertilization (IVF) procedure. What if she were to come into your church or synagogue or mosque to tell her story, instead of the Today Show?
For millennia, religious traditions have provided direction, discernment and doctrine on issues of fertility and childbirth, family and kinship. These themes resound in the sacred texts and historical traditions of every major faith. Yet most faith leaders and communities are unprepared to deal with issues raised by use of assisted reproductive technologies, or ARTs.
The Savages explained they were hoping for a fourth child from the embryos they had created from previous IVF cycles. Although their two sons were conceived through heterosexual intercourse, their daughter was conceived through IVF after the couple experienced secondary infertility, including 10 years of persistent attempts and miscarriages. The Savages, upon learning of the misplaced embryo, faced two choices: terminate the pregnancy, or carry the fetus to term and give the child back to his/her biological parents. They chose not only to continue this pregnancy, but also to continue to use IVF and a gestational surrogate to have more children.
The Savages' circumstances are not an everyday occurrence. But there is no doubt that the use of ARTs has begun to shift the way we think about reproduction, family structure and children. More than 3 million babies worldwide have been born using ARTs, and approximately 12% of women of child-bearing age in the U.S. have used an infertility service.
Chances are someone in your faith community has used ARTs. Clergy and religious professionals must be prepared to deal pastorally with couples and individuals who may use ARTs for genetic screening, acquire donated sperm, egg or embryos, hire a surrogate, or preserve their own sperm or eggs in the case of a severe illness, such as cancer.
These technologies raise ethical issues and moral questions for religious leaders and the families they serve. ARTs give new hope to those who have been unable to conceive - but at what price? The technologies often impose unreasonable health risks and an extraordinary financial burden. High costs restrict the use of ARTs to the well-off and well-insured (and so far there has been no mention of assisted reproduction in the debate over healthcare reform).
The Savages cite religious beliefs for their decisions, but religious beliefs related to ARTs range from complete opposition to caution to encouragement. What does your faith tradition say about use of ARTs, and what are those teachings based on? Long-held belief in the "blessing of fertility," coupled with an inherent bias for biological children, can lead to repeated attempts at assisted reproduction, when there are other ways of creating family. It is time to lift up religious perspectives that value diverse family structures and expand our understanding of creativity and generativity in order to guide ethical discernment and inform compassionate counseling.
Today the Religious Institute released A Time to Be Born: A Faith-Based Guide to Assisted Reproductive Technologies to help clergy and other religious professionals address the complex pastoral, moral and ethical issues raised by assisted reproductive technologies. The manual provides an overview of the technologies and how they are used; examines traditional religious perspectives on reproduction and fertility; and outlines a model of pastoral care and counseling that will enable religious leaders to effectively minister to the individuals and communities seeking their help.
Reproductive technologies are sophisticated and ever changing. By no means can any clergy member or religious professional be expected to know how all of them work or what makes someone a candidate for various technologies. But clergy and religious professionals do need to know how their faith traditions view ARTs. The Today Show gave the Savages a forum to tell their story, but couples and individuals choosing to use ARTs should be able to turn to their faith communities for moral discernment, compassionate counseling and support.