Category Archives: Current Events

Thoughts on a Rally

Posted on by

On Saturday (Aug. 28), I decided to ride my bike down to the Washington Mall to witness the “Restoring Honor” Rally organized by Glenn Beck.  Other than having an unexplainable sense that “I didn’t belong” and that “I think these these folks and I see the world very differently,” it’s been hard for me to articulate what I thought and felt about being in the midst of this crowd who were drawn to what I sensed was largely an anti-Obama celebration.  I realize that my sense of things was as much (if not more) an expression of my own biases than the real perspectives held by so many thousands of individuals, but that was my sense, nonetheless.

I didn’t hear many of the main speeches, but the bits and pieces I did hear were largely religious. I saw (on one of the large monitors) and heard bits of the remarks from Alveda King, niece of Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and the African American Outreach Director for the Roman Catholic group, Priests for Life. The part and prayer I heard dealt with abortion, but I heard no mention of or call to abolish the death penalty — one of the positions that Priests for Life espouses. I couldn’t help but wonder why?

Today’s Daily Meditation from Fr. Richard Rohr probably explains better than I can the underlying sense of division that seemed so palpable to me on Saturday.  Would that it were not so!

“We thought that we overcame racism in the 60’s; we thought the church overcame triumphalism at Vatican II, and now forty  years later we are right back into this regressive and dualistic thinking all over again.  …. this judgmental thinking will continue to happen in every group, in every denomination if we see everything with a dualistic mind.  No new emerging church will emerge very far.

The judgmental mind is not looking for truth; it is looking for control and righteousness.  For some reason when we split and refuse to receive the moment as it is, we end creating and even reveling in those splits as our very identities.  These are the culture wars and the identity politics we suffer from today.  They will not get us very far spiritually, because they are largely ego-based.”

Following the Good Shepherd’s Example

Posted on by

Fr. Joe Palacios, who teaches sociology at Georgetown University and whom many of us know, is quoted in an online article from Religion Dispatches about immigration reform proposals and the rights of same-sex couples.

In addition to referencing Fr. Joe’s advocacy work, the story also quotes Sr. Jeannine Grammick speaking very clearly about the opposition of US Bishops to “Uniting American Families Act (UAFA)—which would close a loophole that currently prevents US citizens in same-sex, committed relationships from sponsoring their undocumented partners for citizenship.” Says Grammick, “I find their arguments specious and I think their stand, personally I find it scandalous.”

What is most heartwarming, however, is the reference to two Catholic women who seem to have found a Catholic parish and pastor that welcome them and accept them — and their family — as they are.

Fr. Piers M. Lahey is the pastor of the Church of the Good Shepherd Roman Catholic parish in Pacifica, California. Fr. Lahey lived up to the name of his parish when he went out on a limb and wrote a letter to U.S. Senator Diane Feinstein in supporting her efforts to seek legislation that would provide individual relief to one of his parishioners, Shirley Constantino Tan. Tan and her partner of 24 years are active members at Good Shepherd, but she was subject to deportation after her appeals for asylum were denied. Fr. Lahey wrote that Tan and partner Jaylynn Mercado are “wonderful Christian partners, parents, role models for their two boys, and, as Scripture says, ‘living stones’ helping to form and build up the Church, the Body of Christ, in today’s broken and violent world.”

God bless Fr. Lahey for following the example of the One True Shepherd.  His example of supporting those entrusted to his pastoral care speaks volumes when viewed next to those who claim the title of “shepherd,” but whose actions seem less than shepherd-like.

Texas Republicans & “Birthright Citizenship”

Posted on by

I try my best not to use sweeping generalizations or to speak about huge groups of people as if they all held the same world view or acted in the same way.  I cringe when I hear someone begin a sentence with, “All men are …” or “Women just…” or “Kids these days are…”  The same is true when people start these generalizations not with a trait or characteristic over which we have no control (like our gender, our race, our age or nationality), but also when the “label” is of a more voluntary nature, such as one about our choice of religion, athletic interests, or political persuasion.

Today, however, I’m going to make an exception.  Texas Republicans are nuts!  Their 2010 Texas Republican Party Platform is xenophobic, homophobic, hate-filled, anti-intellectual, self-aggrandizing and just plain stupid. The HRC’s latest mailing highlights the anti-gay elements (see this version, with offending texts highlighted, starting on p. 6).  Well beyond their condemnation of same-sex marriage and a desire to re-criminalize “sodomy” (whatever that is!), are positions from the ridiculous to silly to just plain mean. On the heels of stating that they “deplore all discrimination,” they immediately state that they also “deplore forced sensitivity training.”  So, in their judgment, acts that actually cause harm to people — like discrimination in employment, education, housing, etc. — are assessed with the same moral judgment (i.e. “deplored”) as are attempts to provide education and training to help people understand what such discrimination might look like and how it can occur?

But beyond this sort of silliness, these Texas GOP folks also want to change the Constitution. However, they want to do so not by amending the Constitution, but simply by having the three branches of the federal government “clarify” it.  And what, exactly, do they want “clarified”?  Apparently the language of the 14th Amendment is not very clear to them, though perhaps it’s because their own command of the English language isn’t all that good, which is somewhat surprising, since the Platform also calls for the adoption of “American English as the official language of Texas and the United States”; but I digress.  The Texans want Section 1 of the 14th Amendment to be understood as conferring “birthright citizenship” only on the children of current citizens.  Here’s what the first sentence of the 14th Amendment, Section 1 says:  “Section. 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside,” [emphases added]. Now, I’m no lawyer or Constitutional scholar, but I do understand English, including American English.  To me, that language is pretty clear: if you’re born here, you’re a citizen.

Texas GOPers want this “clarified.”  And just so I don’t misrepresent, here’s their full platform plank:

“Birthright Citizenship – We call on the Legislative, Executive and Judicial branches of these United States to clarify Section 1 of the 14th amendment to limit citizenship by birth to those born to a citizen of the United States: with no exceptions.”

If their view of the Constitution were the prevailing one, how many of us would not be citizens because our parents or grandparents or great-grandparents were born to immigrants who had not yet become naturalized citizens? The vast majority of Americans are the descendants of immigrants — from Europe, Asia, Africa, South America, and every corner of the globe. This openness to the foreigner should be reflected not only in the welcoming symbolism of the Statue of Liberty, but in the very laws that govern our land. America is, always has been, and always should be, a country that sees immigrants not as threats, but as assets; not as people to be feared, but as new neighbors to be welcomed. For Texas Republicans, however, the light’s been turned off and the welcome mat removed.

Military Archbishop as Advocate for Injustice

Posted on by

The Catholic Archbishop for the Military Services, Timothy Broglio, yesterday joined the reactionary crowd of those seeking to retain the military’s discriminatory “Don’t ask, don’t tell” policy regarding gay men and women in the military. That policy flies in the face of common sense and basic human decency. In this season of First Communions, even a 7-year old knows that telling a lie is a bad thing; yet this is what the archbishop and his ilk would have thousands and thousands of well-qualified Americans do if they wish to serve their country in uniform. Instead of being honest and open about who they are as God created them, Broglio would have God’s gay and lesbian children remain in the darkened closet of lies and dishonesty.

Broglio’s outrageous comments demonstrate not only the intellectual emptiness of the position held by most current church leaders, but also raises the question of whether religiously affiliated chaplains who are unable to uphold and adhere to all military policies should continue to serve in the military as military officers — paid for with taxpayer dollars. Even when many military leaders, including the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, support moving away from this failed policy, Broglio continues to repeat the old canard that allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly will hurt “unit cohesion.”

Not only is Broglio’s position a slap in the face of gay men and women, it’s also insulting to America’s straight soldiers, sailors, Marines, and airmen.  Apparently the archbishop thinks they are not as mature as their international counterparts in countries like the UK and Israel, where gays and lesbians have served openly and successfully for years.

Not only is it time for “Dont ask, don’t tell” to be laid to rest, it’s also time for the archbishop to realize that military policies should reflect the non-discriminatory values that represent the best of what it means to be an American.

Giving Manhattan a Bad Name — The “Manhattan Declaration”

Posted on by

You may have heard that a group of Evangelical, Catholic, and Orthodox folks have signed a document that they’re calling the Manhattan Declaration. It’s subtitled, A Call of Christian Conscience, and it was released on November 20, 2009. (Here’s the Manhattan Declaration itself, and here’s a List of Religious Leaders Signatories). If you haven’t read it — you should.

For an overview of it, read the blog entry from National Catholic Reporter. As NCR reports, there were a number of Catholic bishops and archbishops — including Richard Malone of Portland, Maine and Donald Wuerl of Washington, DC — who lent their support to this historically inaccurate and deceit-filled statement.

Here are a few sections that demonstrate how low those who hate gay people will go, all the while cloaking their animus in the claims of being faithful to Christianity and our two thousand year tradition:

  • “The impulse to redefine marriage in order to recognize same-sex and multiple partner relationships is a symptom, rather than the cause, of the erosion of the marriage culture.”
  • “We acknowledge that there are those who are disposed towards homosexual and polyamorous conduct and relationships, just as there are those who are disposed towards other forms of immoral conduct.”
  • “On inspection, however, the argument that laws governing one kind of marriage will not affect another cannot stand. Were it to prove anything, it would prove far too much: the assumption that the legal status of one set of marriage relationships affects no other would not only argue for same sex partnerships; it could be asserted with equal validity for polyamorous partnerships, polygamous households, even adult brothers, sisters, or brothers and sisters living in incestuous relationships. Should these, as a matter of equality or civil rights, be recognized as lawful marriages, and would they have no effects on other relationships?”

So much for a fair presentation of the issue, because all same-sex marriage efforts have also called for the legalization of “polyamorous” and “incestuous” relationships, right??

I have said before and I will continue to say:  the effort to civilly recognize same-sex unions is not about marriage; it’s about seeing God’s gay and lesbian children as fully human and worthy of the dignity of all God’s children — including the right to form loving, stable, and generative relationships.

If I could vote in Maine on Tuesday …

Posted on by

This coming Tuesday (November 3, 2009), voters in Maine will have the opportunity to do what is just and right by saying “No” to an attempt to overturn a law enacted by the legislature and signed by the governor allowing same-sex couples to marry.  I wish I could add my vote in this referendum that many say will be close. While I can’t do that, I can hope and pray that this vote will not be an example of the “tyranny of the majority,” but that Maine voters will continue to provide full recognition for same-sex couples in loving, committed, and faithful relationships.

"There is something radically wrong …"

Posted on by

“…with the institutional Catholic Church.”

That sentiment, expressed by Fr. Thomas Doyle in a National Catholic Reporter commentary on the recent report about decades-long abuse of children by clergy, brothers and sisters in Catholic-run institutions in Ireland, is nothing new to many of us who have lived both inside and outside the walls of clerical life.

While U.S. Bishops spend their pastoral energies condemning Notre Dame University for inviting the President of the United States to speak at its commencement, or organizing letter-writing campaigns to lobby against the recognition of the right to marry civilly for same-sex couples, the Church — the People of God — continue to be ignored and ill-treated.

Where I attend Mass regularly, there’s a man who offers a frequent prayer when the community is invited to voice its own “Prayers of the Faithful.” Today especially, I make his prayer for “new and enlightened leadership in the Church” my own.

Is this the kind of bishop we need?

Posted on by

The Catholic News Agency reports this story about Scranton (PA) Bishop Joseph Martino, who showed up unexpectedly at a non-partisan voter forum held at a parish in Honesdale, PA. Speaking in reference to the USCCB’s document, Faithful Citizenship, Martino apparently dismissed the document and stated, as reported in the local newspaper.

“‘No USCCB document is relevant in this diocese,’ said Martino according to the Wayne Independent. ‘The USCCB doesn’t speak for me….The only relevant document … is my letter,’ he continued, ‘There is one teacher in this diocese, and these points are not debatable.'”

So much for the good bishop’s understanding of episcopal collegiality and the responsibility that each of us has to form and inform our own consciences.

Calif. Prop 8: Don’t Let Religious Bigotry Win!

Posted on by

California Proposition 8 doesn’t just want to relegate gay and lesbian people to the back of the bus — it wants to throw them under it and leave them behind!

Sadly, the forces that most strongly oppose the recognition of these basic rights of gay and lesbian people attempt to root their positions in their own religious view (for example, see Mormon Church steps into the prop 8 battle or Catholic Bishops Support Proposition 8). While I can’t critique the Mormon’s theological position, I think there’s no doubt that the Catholic bishops of California base their stance on a flawed understanding of human history and of Christianity.

Apparently equality in California is losing by 5 points, according to the latest poll numbers. People of good faith throughout the world know that a religion that does not speak the truth is empty. Please join me in fighting the lies that anti-gay groups have been spreading everywhere.

Join me in the fight by donating today to the Human Rights Campaign California Marriage PAC – and your gift will be DOUBLED.
Just click here.

 

Dear Mr. President

Posted on by

June 5, 2006

President George W. Bush.
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500

Mr. President,

I write simply to share with you my deepest disappointment in your decision to support enshrining discrimination in the U.S. Constitution by advocating the so-called “Marriage Protection Amendment” (MPA).

Like its misnamed legislative cousin, the “Defense of Marriage Act,” the MPA would do absolutely no good and would do much evil. It would protect no one, and would continue to harm countless American families. It would not support existing marriages between men and women; it would not enhance the family life of households with a married mother and father; and it would not provide greater resources for children from these or any other families.

It would, however, deny millions of good, decent, hard-working gay and lesbian Americans the same rights that their parents, siblings, neighbors and co-workers so often take for granted.

This amendment is mean-spirited and below the dignity of someone who calls himself a Christian. While there are many issues on which people of good will can disagree, this is not one of them. At its heart, this amendment seeks to undercut the very humanity of millions of gay and lesbian Americans, telling them that they are somehow “less than” their heterosexual fellow citizens.

I raise my voice with those who have called upon you to be the President for ALL Americans, not just the vocal minority of biblical fundamentalists who would want to see America become a theocracy created in their own image. On the day of judgment when the Lord separates the sheep from the goats, (cf. Matthew 25:31-46) I have no doubt that at least some of these “leaders of the religious right” will find themselves dumbfounded, saying with those who have been excluded from God’s Kingdom, “.. ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?'” I pray that you, Mr. President, will learn the true lesson of this passage, seeing the Divine Image in the dignity of every human person, and heeding God’s call to include rather than exclude — including those whom God created as homosexual.

Mr. President, please do the right thing; the good thing. Have the courage to withdraw your support from this bad, discriminatory proposal.

Wishing God’s Peace to you and all those you love.

Timothy MacGeorge
Washington, DC