Gay Catholics/ Christians, Ministry, Church structure

“Two Kinds of Catholics”

Here’s a great quotation about Catholics I’ve been wanting to share for a long time. Trouble is, while I know exactly where I read it, and the background of the speaker, I can’t track down the magazine where I saw it, so I can’t share the name. Here it is, anyway - details will follow when I have found them:

There are only two kinds of Catholics: those who think, and those who don’t.

I was reminded of this once again, reading the hysterical rant at California “Catholic” Daily over the inclusion by the Church of the Most Holy Redeemer, San Francisco, of Bishop Charles Otis in a roster of speakers for an Advent lecture series.

Church of the Most Holy Redeemer, San Francisco

CCD’s horror at the invitation to Bishop Charles appears to be inspired by this

“...on April 24, 2004, he “married” a man named Felipe Sanchez Paris in a ceremony at St. Gregory of Nyssa Episcopal Church in San Francisco“.

Bishop Charles did not “marry” his husband, he married him, as the law and records of California clearly show. The scare quotes so beloved by CCD are not appropriate - and it is in the same spirit that I refer to them above, as California “Catholic” Daily.

Other speakers at Most Holy Redeemer that are condemned by CCD include

  • Rev. Jay Emerson Johnson, a staff member at the Center for Lesbian and Gay Studies in Religion and Ministry at the Pacific School of Religion
  • Fr. David Matz, CPPS, who is currently studying at Pacific School of Religion for a Doctor of Ministry degree focusing on LGBT issues.
Both of these are involved in academic study - that is, thinking about - ministry and LGBT people in faith. The others named by CCD are all involved in actively doing LGBT ministry. But, it seems, thinking about ministry, or doing it, should be strictly verboten for Catholics - unless it is restricted to simply shouting out reminders about the sin of sodomy. You can clearly see which of the “two kinds of Catholics” that introduced this post, includes CCD and it’s readers - and it’s not the one that thinks.
Let us take a moment, now, to step back from the Advent series and the ensuing CCD panic, and reflect on just what it is that MHR is all about.
MHR Parish, located at 100 Diamond Street (at 18th Street) has existed as the Roman Catholic religious center of the Castro neighborhood in San Francisco since 1900. Located just 2 blocks from the heart of the historic Castro district, the parish reflects the diversity and excitement of the surrounding neighborhood. MHR is an inclusive Catholic community — embracing all people of good faith — Catholics as well as those people interested in learning about the Catholic experience — regardless of their background, gender, race, social status, gender identity or sexual orientation.
Located in the Castro, it is not surprising that the parish catchment area includes a wide diversity of people, and it is simply natural that the local parish community should likewise include a wide diversity, including (but not limited to) sexual minorities. It is also natural that the ministry offered should, in keeping with Church teaching, be based on respect, dignity and understanding, without passing judgement. Rather, it is based - surprise - on the example of one Jesus Christ, who gives one of his celebrated titles to the parish as a name - “Most Holy Redeemer”, and whose image features prominently on the home page of the parish website:
It is sad that in a post dated just two days after the feast of Christ the King, CCD should so utterly forget the example and message of Christ, and our obligation to build God’s Kingdom on earth - a kingdom of love, mercy and justice for all.
Except, say the CCD and its readers, those nasty gays and lesbians, who (it seems) should be excluded. But Christ’s example was clear. His ministry notably and conspicuously included everyone, prominent among them social outsiders and outcasts of all kinds. His method of ministry also was notable for his manner of engaging people in discussion - even women, whom the standard self - righteous Jewish man would never dream of engaging in theological debate.
Theological discussion, of course, requires thought. The kind of Catholic that prefers not to think, is prone to spout this kind of drivel in the CCD comments thread, simply displaying ignorance of the scriptures:
The issue is not the politically correct term, “homosexual”, but sodomy. A man on man or boy is sodomy; sodomy is an eternal death sentence, and at one time God prescribed the death sentence to sodomites more than to any other class of sinner.
This is a serious Catholic news source, and it has been taken over by anti-Catholics who wish to prod us into giving in to their aggressive tactics and coming around to their disordered way of thinking about the sin of sodomy.
The infiltration of the Church by sodomites is deep.
So, what exactly is this “sin of sodomy”?
There were two parts to the story of Sodom and its destruction: the general, pervasive wickedness that led the Lord to his original decision to destroy the cities, and later, the attack on the angelic messengers he had sent to search for enough good men, to justify averting the destruction.
Ezekiel makes clear the nature of the original general wickedness:
Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. 50 They were haughty and did detestable things before me. Therefore I did away with them as you have seen.
Ezekiel 16:49-50
When the angels visited Sodom, they were offered hospitality by Lot. This hospitality to travellers was a crucially important moral obligation in Biblical times - but instead of respecting it, the townspeople demanded that Lot release his guests, to be raped by them. This was the immediate trigger to the destruction: not same-sex love, but rape and hostility to strangers.
In the contrast between the ministry of Most Holy Redeemer to all the people of the Castro, including the sexual minorities and social outcasts, and the outraged indignation of CCD and its claque, just which side more closely resembles the example of Christ - and which, in its arrogance and refusal to help the “poor and needy”, resemble the people of Sodom?
Two kinds of Catholics - those who think, and those who don’t. More specifically, those who think about the Gospels, and its implications for creating God’s Kingdom in the modern world, and those who pharisee - like, prefer simply to regurgitate their prejudice, camouflaged as righteousness.
Related articles
Enhanced by Zemanta
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

Leave a Reply