To Make Online Donation to CPCSM via PayPal Click on Donate Button.

About Us

News

News Archives

Upcoming Events

Programs
and Resources

• Persons In Committed
  Relationships and
  Their Children
• GLBT Youth 
  
• Families and Friends
  of GLBTs
  
• General Programs and Services

CPCSM Presentations
and Publications

Newsletter

Membership and Donations

Volunteer Opportunities

To Order Tapes
from CPCSM
(under construction)

Links

• Religious/Spiritual
  GLBT Links
• General GLBT Links
• Reference Materials

To Contact Us

Home

Website maintained by:
David J. McCaffrey

Top

Let Us Cherish the
Beautiful Diversity of
God's Creation

Welcome to the
Catholic Pastoral Committee
on Sexual Minorities

Celebrating and Serving the LGBT Community since 1980

4001 38th Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55406
612-201-4534
cpcsmmail@gmail.com

HAPPY LGBT PRIDE
2010!

Come visit us at CPCSM's Booth (#6061)
in Loring Park on Saturday and Sunday!

Simplified Guides to Twin Cities LGBT Pride

Resources for Finding Pride Booths in Loring Park (Sat. & Sun.)	Description
Official Pride Map of Loring Park with Vendor & Exhibitor Booth Numbers	Enlarge map to 150 - 200 % in order to read booth numbers.
How to Find CPCSM: Enlarged Map Showing Area Near CPCSM's Booth (#6061)	Look for #6061 (6th booth down side-walk from SW entrance at Hennepin Ave & Oak Grove St, near Bike Check area).
Listing of Booths, Sorted by Name
Listing of Booths, Sorted by Number

Sunday's Grand LGBT Pride Parade Resources
Parade Unit/Participant Guide	When & where parade marchers should line-up
Parade Marchers' Line-Up Guide	Parade units sorted by name and by order in parade

*** Please note: CPCSM will not be represented in the Pride Parade this year. ***

Official Twin Cities Pride Website

Archbishop Nienstedt Calls (Again) for a Marriage Amendment to Minnesota's Constitution

Thursday, April 29, 2010

Archbishop John Nienstedt had an op-ed in yesterday’s Star Tribune. Given the current global crisis that the Roman Catholic clerical leadership is facing around the clergy sex abuse scandal, one may well have hoped that the archbishop would have used his op-ed to demonstrate the repentance and truth-telling that Catholics are longing to hear from pretty much anyone in a position of clerical leadership.

Here’s what theologian Rosemary Radford Ruether, in her book Catholic Does Not Equal the Vatican, says needs to be said and heard.

"Bishops need to stand in front of their people and say, “we have failed to deal adequately with this matter of sexual abuse by priests. We have covered it up. We have refused to listen to the cries of the victims. We have protected abusers. We have sent priests to other church communities without informing them of the history of such priests. We are sorry; we have a ‘firm purpose of amendment.’ We are putting these specific policies in place to rectify these situations. We have consulted with lay people, including victims, about these policies, and we want your feed back on them.” Such repentance and truth-telling might approximate what it means to be the church."

Alas, no such “repentance and truth-telling” was modeled by Archbishop Nienstedt. Instead, readers of the Star Tribune were presented with a decidedly illogical rationale for an amendment to the Minnesota State Constitution that would define marriage as a union of one man and one woman.

Why illogical? Well, the bulk of the archbishop's op-ed focuses on how devastating divorce has been for marriage. Okay . . . so wouldn’t a proposed amendment outlawing divorce be the logical solution? Yes, but imagine the outcry that would cause. Better to focus on an issue that still has certain elements of society either feeling uneasy about or firmly opposed to. Yep, you guessed it: gay marriage.

Following are some of my initial thoughts on Archbishop Nienstedt’s op-ed.

• Nienstedt clearly wants Minnesotans to agree with him that the basis of marriage is all about procreating. Yet before he convinces the wider population of Minnesota, he needs first to convince members of his own church. The vast majority of Catholics simply don’t buy it – and for good reason: it's a limited and thus impoverished way of understanding sexuality. (For more on this, see the previous Wild Reed post, Stop in the Name of Discriminatory Ideology.)

• As a gay Catholic man reading Archbishop Nienstedt’s op-ed, I found it very disappointing and disturbing that gay people and their needs and concerns were never once acknowledged or discussed. Collectively, we’re seemingly just an abstraction. This really shouldn’t be surprising as so much of the sexual theology advanced by the Roman Catholic clerical leadership deals only in abstracts. Real people and the diversity and complexity of sexuality simply do not inform the way this leadership thinks and talks about sex, marriage, and what it means to be fully human.

• I know Catholics who attended various sessions of the recent archdiocesan series, “Reclaiming the Culture of Marriage and Life” (see for instance Brian McNeill's Progressive Catholic Voice article, Defense! Defense!) Throughout this series, three threats to marriage were identified and railed against: divorce, gay marriage, and . . . contraception. This last “threat” was notably absent from Nienstedt’s op-ed in the Star Tribune. Hmm . . . I wonder why. Again, the archbishop’s priorities seem to be misplaced. I mean, given the number of married Catholic couples practicing birth control (96 percent according to the US Conference of Catholic Bishops), wouldn’t it make more sense to push for a marriage amendment that defines the purpose of sexual intercourse as making babies? That would be the logical thing. But, remember, this latest effort to ban same-sex civil marriage isn't concerned with logic - or the facts. It’s about appealing to a certain element within both the church and society that will – knowingly or unknowingly – help prop up the collapsing feudal system that is the Roman Catholic clerical caste and its dubious claims of moral authority on matters pertaining to sexuality by scapegoating gay people. And as R. F. Hoffman has observed, this scapegoating of a vulnerable population is not only “pathetic, dishonest, and selfish,” but “unworthy of anyone who would make claims to honesty, charity or moral authority.”

• A number of folks I’ve spoken to aren’t really that worried about Nienstedt’s latest efforts to push for a marriage amendment. They see such efforts as a lost cause. From their perspective the game’s over in Minnesota. Marriage equality will be achieved. It's just a matter of time. Four years ago, Nienstedt, as Bishop of New Ulm, was on the offense. He was, after all, a key player in pushing for an amendment to the State Constitution that would have banned same-sex marriage and all legal equivalents. It was quite the ambitious effort. And it failed. Fast forward to today and the reality that there are six marriage equality bills currently before the Minnesota Senate and the Minnesota House of Representative (see here and here). The authors and supporters of these bills are smart enough to know that they need to wait until after the November elections (and hopefully the election of a Democratic governor) before calling for a vote on any of these bills. (Even if they were to be voted on and passed today, the current Republican governor would veto them.) The point is that Nienstedt is now on the defense. Events have largely overtaken him. His op-ed and (from what I’ve heard) the poorly attended “Reclaiming the Culture of Marriage and Life” series are ultimately futile efforts to stave off the inevitable.


Anyway, I could go on. But let’s hear what some of the readers of the Star Tribune are saying about Archbishop Nienstedt’s call for a marriage amendment.

Shadowman72 writes: Notice how this article lacks one good reason against gay marriage. . . . First off, having children is not a requirement of marriage. There are many straight couples that can’t or don’t have children that still are allowed to get married. . . . Next, [Nienstedt] bring[s] a lot of irrelevant variables into the equation. [He] speak[s] of all the problems with heterosexual marriages, like divorce. Good, now we know the real problem that’s harming the institution of marriage. This has nothing to do with gay marriage. . . . Allowing same-sex couples to marry would not affect . . . heterosexual marriage in any way. In fact, [Nienstedt] article proves that the key problems with marriage do not come from gay-marriage, but from within . . . heterosexual marriages.

Orpheus90 writes: The Rev. Nienstedt’s opinion piece suffers from the usual circular logic (or non-logic) and rhetorical vapidity that plagues so many anti-gay marriage political diatribes. Nothing new in that respect. Frankly, it’s pure schlock. The good Reverend’s intellectual and moral failure here, of course, is not hard to discern: that he is not only unable to address the fundamental animus towards gay people that motivates opinions such as his, but that he would also prefer to exploit such animus rather than address it. (And on that particular score the church has a long standing order of numerous – and undelivered – mea culpas on the historical question of its grotesque mistreatment of minorities). Let’s face it, Rev: on fact and logic, the conservatives have lost the debate on gay marriage. Currently all they have is hysteria and the characteristically petrified rhetoric that you deliver here in dull, desultory fashion. Spare us. Next time, answer this question: where, pray tell, is the voice of moral courage to addresses the needs and rights of gay people from within the shrieking nonsense that calls itself conservatism?

pjacbsma writes: If Rev. Nienstedt is really concerned with loving parents raising children he would support gay marriage. There are tens of thousands of children waiting to be adopted in this world, and allowing gay people to marry would help them in adopting. Nienstedt tries to claim that allowing gay marriage would somehow harm hetero marriage. I have yet to hear anyone explain how exactly that would happen. No, the real motive for Neinstedt is simply to oppose gay marriage because homosexuality frightens him. Fear and hatred should never be embraced by someone who calls himself a Christian. God’s greatest commandment is to love your neighbor as yourself. There is no “unless your neighbor is gay” clause attached to that commandment.

Conniek29 writes: Don’t Catholics have more important issues to deal with? Like a complete lack of moral relevance? Like being the world’s largest, most profitable, international child-sex criminal enterprise? If the Catholic Church cannot be trusted with our most vulnerable, why should anyone listen to what a “made man,” an archbishop, has to say about any moral topic? How many young lives would have been protected from rape if the Catholic Church had never existed?

tjkelner writes: For the Church and in particular the Catholic church, it is about money. Embracing marriage and admonishing birth control is the best way they can keep the faithful providing new revenue sources for the church. As a business model they need to continue to foster beliefs that are beneficial to their end result . . . MORE MONEY for the CHURCH. So, they continue to blast anything that is out of focus with their focus.

WhyShouldI writes: If marriage is about raising children then there should be a place on the marriage license to indicate you plan to have children. Also, if it is about raising children, why are senior citizens not banned from marriage. Are they going to start raising a family? Give gay couples the same rights that you give heterosexual senior citizen couples.

Pdxtran writes: No opponent of gay marriage has ever satisfactorily explained how allowing same-sex couples to marry harms the marriages of committed heterosexual couples. They just say it, and we’re supposed to accept it as if it makes sense. I belong to a church that is accepting and welcoming of gays and lesbians, and I know some same-sex couples whose religious faith and devotion to each other would put the average heterosexual couple to shame.

Paige7 writes: If the Archbishop insists on referring to same-sex marriage as “marriage” (because folks seem to think putting it in quotes indicates it’s fake) then I must start insisting that I refer to Catholics as “Christian.”

Reactions to Archbishop Nienstedt's 4/28/10 Statement

(Reprinted from The Wild Reed)

Saturday, May 1, 2010

_______________________________________________________

Monday, May 3, 2010

Archbishop Nienstedt Has It Wrong

Earlier today I called Kevin Winge (pictured at right), executive director of Open Arms of Minnesota, and thanked him for his excellent response to Archbishop Nienstedt, published on Saturday in the Star Tribune’s “Your Voices” online forum.

Kevin’s response in reprinted in its entirety below.

___________________________

Archbishop Has It Wrong

By Kevin Winge

Star Tribune
May 1, 2010

Too often, the rhetoric of people with power and privilege goes unchallenged. This can be especially true if the authority figure is a religious leader. Followers assume if a faith leader makes a statement, it must be true. But just because the archbishop of the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis pens an opinion piece for the Star Tribune calling for a constitutional amendment in Minnesota to outlaw gay marriage (“Let’s Protect the Meaning of Marriage,” April 28, 2010), that doesn’t make him right.

Rev. John Nienstedt, in his op-ed piece, makes broad generalizations that aren’t substantiated. He states it’s “. . . common-sense wisdom that children need a mom and a dad working together to protect them.” Yes, children need protection (more on that later), but it is not gender that provides that protection – it’s a nurturing and loving parent, or parents, of any gender or sexual orientation, that makes for good parents.

The archbishop writes that, “Defining marriage as simply a union of consenting parties will change the core meaning of marriage. . .” How will that happen, Rev. Nienstedt? How will extending same-sex couples with the same rights and responsibilities that come with marriage change its “core meaning?” Has heterosexual marriage changed in Iowa since gays and lesbians have been allowed to legally marry?

“Marriage,” Rev. Nienstedt says, “exists in civil law primarily in order to provide communal support for bringing mothers and fathers together to care for their children. Same-sex unions cannot serve this public purpose.” Heterosexual couples who can’t have children, don’t want children, or marry after child-bearing years might disagree with the archbishop on this one. But what in the world does Rev. Nienstedt mean that “same-sex unions cannot serve this public purpose?” One reason that many same-sex couples want the legal right to marry is for this very reason: “to provide communal support” for their children. And yes, gays and lesbians have children, too.

Rev. Nienstedt makes the case that marriage is one way to protect children. It can be, both for straight and gay people, but there are others ways to do that. Instead of advocating for Minnesotans to vote on a marriage amendment, the archbishop might want to acknowledge the Catholic Church’s lapses in protecting children from sexual abuse and ensure that protections are in place for future generations. That is something that would actually protect children and families. That is the opinion piece that should have been written.

Archbishop Nienstedt asks, “What will happen to children growing up in a world where the law teaches them that moms and dads are interchangeable and therefore unnecessary, and that marriage has nothing intrinsically to do with the bearing and raising of children?” Of course, no one is saying that heterosexual moms and dads are unnecessary. But be that as it may, the question should be, what would happen to children growing up in a world where gay relationships are acknowledged and celebrated the same way that straight ones are?

In that world, it is likely that there would be greater tolerance of differences. Greater appreciation of diversity. Greater protection of children. That’s what I would want in a family. And that’s what I would want in a church.

A native of Minnesota, Kevin Winge has lived in New York, Boston, and Cape Town, South Africa. He is the executive director of Open Arms of Minnesota, a non-profit organization that provides nutritious meals to people living with diseases.

_______________________________

Following are a few of the comments that have been left online in response to Kevin’s op-ed.

jjfrey writes: Reeling from the never ending problems of the church violating the very children they profess to protect, you may think that Nienstedt would keep his mouth shut on hot social issues. . . . His logic with this argument is flawed and he is simply pandering to an ever shrinking group of ultra-conservatives who like the world the way it used to be – white men in charge, women subservient and children silent. His ignorance and the bias he spews is embarrassing and enlarges the schism which continues to divide an already fractured church.

Andymogendor writes: The archbishop’s editorial was, in my opinion, one of the more ignorant and offensive pieces of writing I have seen in the Star Tribune. There are several kids in my first-grade son’s classes at school who have same-sex parents. These kids are doing great with their caring, compassionate and supportive parents, who in many ways could be seen as role models for a number of the heterosexual parents at the school, and it has done nothing to undermine our son’s experience of his parents, and certainly hasn’t made my wife and me feel that our parenting or marriage is undermined. On the other hand you could argue that people in positions of authority who write nonsense are a much greater threat to our son’s sense of fairness, honesty and integrity.

Leakyboats writes: Regardless of one’s opinion of gay marriage, it seems reasonable to ask – why is Nienstedt talking about this now? There is no time left in the legislative session. Even if time was available, this would not pass. Plus, are there not much more pressing “issues” for Nienstedt to address? Perhaps he should speak out against the foolishness of using tax money to build a stadium when we cannot even afford to provide health care access to the poor. There are two types of Christians, it would seem. The “Thou shalt not” types who love to point our everyone else’s deficiencies and tell us what we should or shouldn’t do. On the other hand, there are the “Love your neighbor” types who are more interested in making the world a better place by helping those who are in need. Nienstedt clearly favors the former and seems to have little time for the latter.

_______________________________________________________

Wednesday, May 5, 2010

_______________________________________________________

Tuesday, May 11, 2010

Dale Carpenter on the "Win-Win" Reality of Gay Marriage

Even though I find myself in disagreement with him, I’m glad Archbishop Niestedt shared his thoughts on gay marriage in a recent Star Tribune op-ed. This is because in response to it, a number of well-reasoned and insightful counter-opinions have been written and published. Many people have been given the opportunity to be enlightened by the perspectives contained in these commentaries - something that would not have happened if the archbishop's piece had not first been published. Initially, there was my friend Ed Flahavan’s April 30 letter to the editor, followed by commentaries by Kevin Winge, Andy Birkey, and Eileen Scallen.

We can now add to this impressive list the May 9 Star Tribune op-ed by Dale Carpenter, professor of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties Law at the University of Minnesota Law School.

It’s an excellent op-ed – one that offers sound reasons for why we should question and oppose the archbishop’s efforts to ban gay marriage in Minnesota. I sincerely hope that Archbishop Nienstedt takes to time to reflect upon and, in some way, respond to Carpenter’s arguments – the central one being that marriage is “good for married people, good for kids and good for society” and that therefore the rights and protections of civil marriage should be afforded to same-sex couples and families. It’s a stance that reminds me of what was shared in the previous Wild Reed post, An Ironic Truth.

Like many others, Carpenter recognizes and critiques the illogic of the archbishop’s op-ed. He notes, for instance, that:

Nienstedt has identified longstanding problems in heterosexual families that were not caused by gay families and has proposed to alleviate them at the expense of gay families.

Carpenter, it should be noted, is a conservative gay man – a Republican, actually. I was first introduced to him via his writings at the Independent Gay Forum. I highlighted his response to British gay rights pioneer Peter Tatchell in The Wild Reed’s Summer Round-Up of 2009. Part of Carpenter’s response to Tatchell reads as follows:

And, yes, we want marriage. Marriage is not a “patriarchal prison” for our partners and children. It is freedom from a queer prison of perpetual grievance and mythologized otherness. It is getting off the tiger’s back of adolescence and accepting responsibilities for families and communities.

In February and March of this year I had the pleasure and honor of meeting Dale when I attended hearings at the Minnesota State Capitol on a number of marriage equality bills currently before both the Minnesota House of Representatives and the Minnesota Senate. Dale was one of those who testified at both hearings in support of the bills. At one point in his testimony he observed that:

Because I’m a conservative, I support the recognition of same-sex marriage in Minnesota. It’s good for stable relationships, good for families, and good for kids.

Later in March, Dale attended the Oscar Night Party I hosted at my home in St. Paul. I appreciated the chance to converse with him in an informal social setting, and learn more about his background and his perspective on various issues.

His May 9 Star Tribune op-ed is reprinted in its entirety below.

Yes, Protect Marriage. Let Gays Wed

The archbishop's fears about damage to families and children are misdirected.

By Dale Carpenter
Star Tribune
May 9, 2010

Marriage is good for married people, good for kids and good for society. Public policy should support and reinforce it. On these important points, Archbishop John C. Nienstedt is surely correct (“Let’s Protect the Meaning of Marriage," April 28). To help sustain families and to protect marriage, however, we should do the opposite of what he suggests. We should let gay couples wed.

There are about 150,000 gay or lesbian Minnesotans. The 2000 census revealed that there are about 9,000 same-sex unmarried-partner households in the state. Whether by adoption or biology, thousands of children here are being raised by gay parents. Minnesota is also one of about half the states where it is possible for a same-sex partner to share full legal responsibility with the biological parent.

The state encourages the formation of gay families. Yet when it comes to protecting these families in the law, Minnesota treats them as worthless. It makes no provision for them.

Marriage offers families irreplaceable legal, care-giving and social support. Law confers rights and imposes obligations on married people in ways often designed to sustain them in times of crisis. It also encourages spouses to commit to each other. It makes them think twice about splitting up. Children are more secure in households where their parents are married.

The welfare of gay persons and their children is a material and moral concern for every humane and civilized citizen. What is Nienstedt’s proposal for dealing with them? So far, he has just one: Retrieve from the dust bin a failed constitutional amendment excluding them from marriage.

Nienstedt worries about fathers’ avoiding parental responsibility, about the unfairness and poverty of single parenthood, and about high divorce rates. Highlighting these problems would make sense if one were proposing, say, to abolish divorce, which affirms that some values are more important than keeping people married at all costs. Banning gay marriage addresses none of them.

If Nienstedt is concerned about single parenthood, he should support same-sex marriage. Prohibiting it guarantees single-parent homes for thousands of children.

Nienstedt is also distressed, more abstractly, that gay marriage would signal that “we have officially abandoned the ideal that children need both a mom and a dad.” But why should anyone believe that their own family is unimportant because the law recognizes someone else’s?

This concern might make sense if one were proposing to eliminate adoption or remarriage, both of which separate biological parenthood from marriage. Gay marriage will not take a single child away from biological parents who want to raise their child and are fit to do so.

In other words, Nienstedt has identified longstanding problems in heterosexual families that were not caused by gay families and has proposed to alleviate them at the expense of gay families.

Banning gay marriage carries its own risks to marriage, including the creation of alternatives designed to replace it. Another danger is the lamentable but growing perception, especially among younger people, that marriage is just one more example of unjustified discrimination against their gay friends.

We should always be cautious about changes to important institutions. No-fault divorce really did transform marriage, because it altered the rules by which 100 percent of married couples lived. Gay marriage, by contrast, will add perhaps 3 percent to the total number of marriages. While it is important for same-sex couples, it will change no rules for entering, conducting or exiting marriage by the other 97 percent.

Minnesota should follow the lead of the 15 states covering about a fourth of the U.S. population, along with more than two dozen countries, that have already recognized same-sex relationships. Five states and seven countries now have full gay marriage. None of the ill effects hypothesized by Nienstedt has come true. And this change is increasingly coming through legislatures, not courts.

Gay marriage is one of those rare reforms in which every affected person is a winner and none is a loser. It’s win-win.

Dale Carpenter is the Earl R. Larson Professor of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties Law at the University of Minnesota Law School.

_______________________________________________________

Monday, April 19, 2010

At UST, a Rousing and Very Catholic Show of Support for Marriage Equality

This past Saturday, April 17, saw close to 300 people gather at the University of St. Thomas in St. Paul, MN, for a CPCSM co-sponsored event that showed support for marriage equality for same-sex couples and protested the presence on campus of two high profile anti-equality activists, Maggie Gallagher of the National Organization of Marriage (NOM) and Bishop Salvatore Cordileone of Oakland, CA. Both were invited to the Twin Cities by Archbishop John Nienstedt and the Office of Marriage, Family, and Life to address the archdiocesan “Reclaiming the Culture of Marriage and Life” spring conference. This conference was held at the University of St. Thomas at the same time as the pro-equality rally, and drew about 150 people.

Three things impressed me most about Saturday’s rally for marriage equality. First, the number of people who turned out for it. I’ve heard no official count, but I estimate that at least 250, possibly 300 people were in attendance. Second, I was greatly impressed and heartened by the number of young people in attendance. I’ve noted before at The Wild Reed, that for the vast majority of people under 35, homosexuality and gay marriage are non-issues. Justice and equality, however, are issues that these younger generations are very much energized by and engaged in.

Finally, I was impressed by just how Catholic the whole event was. By this I mean that most of the speakers at the rally made reference to the positive impact of their Catholic upbringing. This upbringing and what the church taught them about justice, compassion, and the value of both faith and reason, informs and inspires them to take a stand for marriage equality.

One of the first to speak at Saturday morning’s rally at UST was Maggie George (above at right), whose uncle, the late James Patrick Shannon was an auxiliary bishop of the Arch-diocese of St.Paul and Mpls, and a past president of the College of St. Thomas (before it became a university). Maggie was present with her partner Rev. Rebecca Voelkel, Program Director of the Institute for Welcoming Resources of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, and their young daughter Shannon – named after Maggie’s uncle.

“[My uncle] taught me that being a good Catholic meant being truthful, loving richly and deeply and passionately, and always working for love and justice in the world,” said Maggie.

“That’s the kind of legacy and lesson we want for our daughter Shannon,” added Rebecca (pictured with Maggie above and at right). “And it’s how we try to live as Christians, as a family, and as those who work for equality and justice for all people.”

Maggie and Rebecca also asked the University of St. Thomas, Archbishop Nienstedt, the National Organization for Marriage, and the State of Minnesota to “honor the ways in which love has found our family; to respect the ways in which God’s justice and covenant come in different and beautiful ways, and to support the right of all people to say yes to marriage and commitment.”

Alfonso Wenker – a young gay Catholic man, and a 2009 graduate of the University of St. Thomas.

“As a student I was incredibly involved in LGBT organizing,” said Alfonso. (See for instance the previous Wild Reed post, Out and About – April 2007.) “I was told time and again,” he said, “that the University of St. Thomas had a deep commitment to diversity and inclusion, and wanted to welcome LGBT folks on campus. Fr. Dease, the president of the university, told me privately and publicly, that he wanted LGBT people to be welcomed here.”

Allowing the National Organization for Marriage to be on the UST campus this weekend, however, sends a very different message to LGBT students, said Alfonso. That message is: “Our inclusion is not welcome.”

For Alfonso, allowing the anti-equality activists Gallagher and Cordileone on campus signifies “institutional support of an anti-LGBT sentiment.”

“It doesn’t live up to the university’s commitment to diversity and inclusion,” Alfonso noted, “and it ignores the data produced from the university’s most recent climate study that says LGBT populations on campus are suffering.”

Alfonso also introduced his parents who were present at the rally, and talked about the place and role of Catholicism in their lives.

“A core value of our family is being Catholic,” he said. “Being Catholic is as essential to my identity as my being gay is. I can’t separate the two and nor should I have to. As Christians we’re called to the communion table. We’re called to bring our whole selves and to welcome anyone who seeks that table with us.”

“As an LGBT Christian, I should be able to define family in a way that allows me to build the strongest, healthiest life possible,” Alfonso said. “I urge the leaders of the archdiocese and of the National Organization for Marriage to tell the truth: families are stronger when LGBT people can participate fully, honestly, and openly in all aspects of life – including the option to legally marry.”

“I was raised by the Catholic Church,” concluded Alfonso, “a church that taught me to fight for social justice and the ending of oppression for everyone. Our communion table is incomplete as long as we deny LGBT people full rights and inclusion.”

It’s very unfamiliar for me to stand before such a large and impressive crowd and speak out in support of equality, dignity, and human rights for all God’s children,” he began. “I’ve been a rebel, but rarely with a cause. I’m really not a protester, activist, or social justice advocate – although I know what all those thongs are and I do support social justice programs. But I really haven’t been in the front lines fighting for change. What I am is a Catholic, a husband, and a father.”

About his Catholic faith, Joe said: “I was baptized into my faith as an infant, raised in a Catholic family, attended Catholic grade school, married in the Catholic Church, raised my kids Catholic, sent my kids to Catholic schools, and I continue to attend Sunday Mass on a regular basis. My Christian faith and my path through life have blessed me with the opportunity to develop a personal relationship with a God of my own understanding. And that God loves me and you just the way you are. We are all created in God’s image. Our sexual orientation doesn’t matter. Straight, bi, gay, transgender – God loves us all. During this Easter season I have once again been reminded that there is nothing I can do to make God love me any less, and nothing I can do to make God love me any more.”

Joe also talked about being a husband for over 35 years. “I should know a little about marriage,” he said, “but like most things in life I’ve had to learn about marriage the hard way.”

What Joe has learned is quite beautiful and profound.

“I’ve learned that marriage is about two individuals dedicating themselves to each other and to love. It’s about personal sacrifice for the good of each other. It’s about acceptance, respect, forgiveness. It’s about sharing everything you are and have with another person. It’s not about a man and a woman, it’s about two people sharing their undying love for one another.”

Joe also talked about being a dad. “I’m a dad – and not just any dad,” he said. “I’m a very proud father of a successful gay man. My son Alfonso is a protester, he is an activist and an advocate. And he is on the front lines fighting for social justice every day. He’s taught me a lot and for that I’m very proud of him.”

Above: Alfonso’s father, Joe, also spoke at Saturday’s rally.

“As a father,” said Joe, “I want my children to be free from discrimination and prejudice. I want their basic human rights to be always respected. I want them to be always seen and valued as individuals. I want them to live by the Christian values my wife and I have passed on to them. And I want my church – their church – to accept and nurture them as they are. If Alfonso finds someone to love and spend the rest of his life with, I want them to be able to experience all that marriage has to offer, including becoming the loving parents of my grandchildren. I want my church to accept and love all of us just the way we are.”

 

Jason Raether, UST law student representing the student organization OutLaw

 

 

 

Another speaker at the rally was Jason Raether, a UST law student who represented the student organization known as OutLaw. This group, said Jason, strives to “show a presence to LGBT students on a conservative Catholic campus.”

“A lot of people wonder why LGBT students would want to come to St. Thomas,” Jason said, “especially when the Roman Catholic Church does not have the most sterling gay rights record.” The answer, he said, can be found within the university’s mission statement. “It’s a mission statement that says the school is dedicated to integrating faith and reason in the search for truth, through a focus on morality and social justice.”

“The faith and morality aspect of this mission,” said Jason, “appeals to many students. For them, faith and morality do not provide a barrier to same-sex equality and marriage rights. Instead they provide an inspiration.”

“For others,” Jason said, “the reason and social justice aspects of the mission provide a very strong argument for same-sex marriage rights.”

Jason then went on to talk about how marriage rights for same-sex couples are guaranteed in the U.S. Constitution. “This country was founded on the ideals of freedom, liberty, and justice,” he said. “The government’s inability to recognize marriage rights for same-sex couples is contrary to all three of those principles.”

Jason also observed that supporters of discrimination often base their viewpoints on traditional or moral grounds. Yet he is adamant that such justifications do little to undo the “evil and pain that is caused by discrimination and inequality.” As Americans and as Minnesotans, he said, “we do not value hate, we value love.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Above: Nick Kor was another current UST student who spoke at Saturday’s pro-equality rally. He lamented the lack of resources on campus for LGBT students, and reminded the crowd that the UST students present at the rally were also protesting the double-standard of the university’s speakers policy, one that did not allow Archbishop Desmond Tutu to speak, but is allowing Maggie Gallagher and Bishop Cordileone to speak.

“We’re here to show that the University of St. Thomas students and the community do care about LGBT equality and marriage equality,” Nick said. “And I think the sheer number of us here today show that.”

Below, Left: Brian McNeill, president of Dignity Twin Cities, the local chapter of Dignity USA, the largest gay Catholic organization in the country, also spoke on Saturday. He began by reading a part of the preamble of Dignity’s Statement of Position and Purpose.

"We believe that LGBT Catholics in our diversity are members of Christ’s Mystical Body, numbered among the people of God. We have an inherent dignity because God created us, Christ died for us, and the Holy Spirit sanctified us in baptism, making us temples of the Holy Spirit and channels through which God’s love becomes visible. Because of this, it is our right, our privilege, and our duty to live the sacramental life of the Church so that we might be more powerful instruments of God’s love working among all people."

Brian also made connections between the church’s clerical leadership’s fixation on denying marriage rights to gay people and the clergy sex abuse crisis.

“It is not a coincidence,” he said, “that one response of the American bishops to this crisis is the well-documented fact that they are pouring money into efforts to stop same-sex marriage in states across the country. It is clear why they are doing this. The clergy sex abuse scandal completely undermines their credibility as religious authorities. So to help restore their credibility they are trafficking in bigotry against LGBT citizens. Like Republican politicians in the South in the ’60s, they are hoping to gain stature by stirring up hate for a minority group.”

“The bishops say they want to protect children,” said Brian. “Well, we all want to protect children, including the children of LGBT couples. And the very best way we can do that is to allow LGBT couples full access to civil and sacramental marriage.”

Brian concluded his remarks by focusing on “the heart of Catholic teaching on sexual mor-ality,” i.e., “the assertion that every sexual act must be open to procreation.” The bishops may believe this, said Brian, but Catholics don’t. He cited a 2005 Harris poll that says 88% of Catholics use artificial birth control. “In other words,” said Brian, “in the privacy of their bedrooms, 88% of Catholic couples defy this central tenet of the Catholic faith . . . and the basis for the Church’s opposition to gay relationships.”

“The great majority of Catholics are on our side if they are honest and they think about it,” Brian said. “That’s why Dignity Twin Cities and Dignity USA are confident that sooner or later the Church will change.”

	Brian McNeill and partner, Steve

Monica Meyers, Public Policy Director of OutFront Minnesota.

“I don’t usually do this, but I’m going to talk about why personally I am here today,” began Monica, “I was raised Catholic, and from what I know from my Catholic teaching and what my parents have taught me is that we should be standing up for justice, fairness, equality, and speaking out when things are wrong.”

Monica also talked about the state of marriage equality in Minnesota. “Laws in Minnesota exclusively bar same-sex couples from getting married,” she reminded the crowd.

“I met the person that I wanted to spend the rest of my life with,” said Monica, “and I’m so excited about that - and about getting to have that person in my life who reminds me to be the best me every single day, and who makes me want to fight and be a better person. I feel really fortunate to have found that person.”

Monica shared how she and her partner Michelle went to Canada and got married. Yet when they returned to Minnesota they realized that as a couple they were “strangers in our laws.”

“That really saddens me,” said Monica. “But what gives me hope is that we can change that law very easily. And we can do it! All we need to do is to get more people involved, get businesses, non,-profits, unions, places of worship on board and officially supporting marriage equality." Engaging in such organizing across the state will, said Monica, ensure that "we can truly have equality.”

Monica Meyers (at right) with staff and volunteers of OutFront Minnesota which co-sponsored Saturday's rally and protest with the Catholic Pastoral Committee on Sexual Minorities, Dignity Twin Cities, All God's Children Metropolitan Community Church, and the Institute for Welcoming Resources of the National Gay and Lesbian Taskforce.	Kelly Lewis, OutFront Minnesota’s Community Organizer.

Rev. Paul Eknes-Tucker of All God’s Children Metropolitan Community Church.	Senator John Marty (right) participated in Saturday’s rally and protest.

Sen. Marty is the author of one of three marriage equality bills currently before the Minnesota Senate. He was also the 2009 recipient of the Catholic Pastoral Committee on Sexual Minorities’ Bishop Thomas Gumbleton Peace and Justice Award. At last year's CPCSM Annual Community Meeting, Sen. Marty spoke eloquently about his ongoing efforts to achieve marriage equality for all Minnesotans.

My friends Jacki and Noelle - with cute little Quinn. When I started delivering my remarks at Saturday’s rally as Executive Coordinator of the Catholic Pastoral Committee on Sexual Minorities, Quinn recognized my voice and greeted me with a few sharp barks! It was quite funny.

Following is the text of my speech.

My name is Michael Bayly and I’m the executive coordinator of the Catholic Pastoral Committee on Sexual Minorities – CPCSM for short.

We’re an independent, grassroots coalition that for thirty years has been working to create environments of justice, respect, and safety for LGBT people and their families within the Roman Catholic Church.

Yes, you could say we like a challenge!

I’m going to be brief this morning as I really only want to say three things.

First, as much as one can apologize for the actions of others, I as a Catholic would like to apologize for the actions of the clerical leadership of the Roman Catholic Church – and in particular this morning, for the inviting to St. Paul of the two anti-equality activists who are speaking just a short distance from here.

Which brings me to the second thing I want to say: Those invited here today by Archbishop Nienstedt to incite discrimination against gay people and to deny them their civil rights, do not speak for all Catholics. A Pew survey from last October clearly shows this, and I can tell you that here in the Twin Cities there are many Catholics – gay and straight – working to reform the church’s thinking on sexuality.

Which brings me to my third and final point: Much of the reason for why Maggie Gallagher and Bishop Cordileon are here today is to do with the Catholic Church’s profoundly impoverished way of thinking and talking about sexuality. Make no mistake: it’s a dysfunctional sexual theology from which flows misogyny, sexual abuse, homophobia, and all kinds of discriminatory attitudes and actions. I believe that as Catholics we can do better. As pie-in-the-sky as it may sound, I look forward to the day when office holders like Archbishop Nienstedt join those of us who are already developing an understanding of sexuality that is informed by the experiences of all of us, and by the insights of science. For Catholics, this should not be a radical idea. After all, we have a long tradition of relying on both faith and reason in developing Catholic theology. Yet we seem to have lost that when it comes to homosexuality. And that’s really sad – for gay people, for the church, and for society.

For me, and perhaps for you, the struggle for marriage equality and the struggle for a healthy sexual theology within Catholicism are very much connected. That’s not the case for everyone, of course, and that’s fine. But if it does resonate with you, and you’d like to be an upfront Catholic advocate for marriage equality, then please don’t hesitate to see me afterward to compare notes!    Thank you for listening, and thanks for being here today.

 

Join Us in Supporting Marriage Equality!

Editor's Note:  Archbishop John Nienstedt, who has been the strongest voice among the Catholic bishops in Minnesota of the Vatican's anti-gay and anti-same-sex marriage teachings since he was first appointed Bishop of New Ulm and who has put an end to almost all progressive LGBT ministry efforts in the Archdiocese, is now bringing to Minnesota two of the most influential public figures in the passage of California's Proposition 8.

      Please read and sign the following declaration from Catholics for Marriage Equality . . .  

Reprinted from the Wild Reed Blogsite Andy Birkey on the Church's "Blame the Gays" Fixation Over at the Star Tribune’s “Your Voices” forum, Twin Cities-based journalist Andy Birkey (pictured at right) has a detailed exposé of not only the Roman Catholic Church’s misplaced fixation on homosexuality in the midst of the ongoing clergy sex abuse crisis, but of the latest efforts of Archbishop John Nienstedt to deny civil marriage rights to same-sex couples in Minnesota. Andy’s piece is reprinted in its entirety below. Amid Moral Scandal, Catholic Church Focuses on Gays By Andy Birkey Star Tribune – “Your Voices” April 9, 2010 Despite a growing controversy that threatens to undermine the “moral authority” of the Catholic Church, the institution is bringing a pair of gay marriage opponents to the Twin Cities to talk about the immorality associated with two adults of the same gender entering into a lifelong commitment. And while the Vatican is mired in an (yet another) series of international child sexual abuse scandals, they’ve wasted no time in blaming the “gay agenda” for manufacturing the scandal and that “homosexuals” within the priestly ranks are responsible for crimes against children. Maggie Gallagher is the president of the National Organization for Marriage, the lead organization working to beat back same-sex marriage across the country. They’ve already succeeded in revoking marriage rights for gays and lesbians in California and repealed a democratically-passed law in Maine that would have allowed same-sex marriage. The Rev. Salvatore Cordileone, Bishop of Oakland, dubbed the “father” of California’s Proposition 8, was responsible for much of the heated anti-gay rhetoric that permeated California in the 2008 elections. Both have been invited to speak at the University of St. Thomas on April 17 at the “Archdiocesan-wide Reclaiming the Culture of Marriage and Life Spring Forum,” aimed at “helping the faithful Understand the Cultural and Legal Battle over the restoration of marriage and the respect for human life.” The event at the University of St. Thomas is only one part of an ongoing campaign by the broader church hierarchy to mobilize Catholics against legalizing same-sex marriage, something Minnesotans are slowly realizing is the fair and just thing to do. At recent legislative hearings on a trio of bills to allow some rights for same-sex couples, Minnesota’s Catholic bishops sent a representative who said gays and lesbians should not fall in love, should not form families and should not get married. In fact, Father Michael Becker said that gay and lesbian couples cannot feel love from each other and that it’s just about sex and gay sex is about “essentially one person using another.” He restated the Catholic doctrine that people experiencing same-sex attraction should remain celibate. And if speaking out on and organizing against same-sex marriage wasn’t enough, gays and lesbians have gotten a double whammy from the church. As the Vatican and church patriarchy look to deflect a damaging amount of press over the latest reports of crimes against children and efforts by leaders to keep the crimes “dealt with within the church,” Catholic leaders have been talking out of both sides of their mouths. They are blaming the gay community for both perpetrating the crimes and being too outraged about them. Perhaps the most prominent voice in tarnishing gays has been Bill Donahue of the Catholic League. “Eighty percent of the victims of priestly sexual abuse are male and most of them are post-pubescent,” he said recently. “While homosexuality does not cause predatory behavior, and most gay priests are not molesters, most of the molesters have been gay.” The people behind the research that Donahue cites, say he has it all wrong. “What we are suggesting is that the idea of sexual identity be separated from the problem of sexual abuse,” Margaret Smith, a researcher from the John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York, told Politics Daily. “At this point, we do not find a connection between homosexual identity and an increased likelihood of sexual abuse.” It also could be that all priests are celibate men, an important part of Catholic culture. And that priests are many times more likely to be in contact with boys and young men as altar boys and other church roles. That complicates Donahue’s assertion that “most of the molesters have been gay.” Guess what each one of the predators have been? Catholic religious leaders. That this scandal has been ongoing for more than 50 years, one would think the church would look internally to identify the problem, or clean house and strip offenders of the priesthood and turn them over to law enforcement. Perhaps the Pope could offer sincere apologies and offer victims some assistance and acknowledge the level of corruption at work through the ranks of the Catholic hierarchy. But those things don’t seem to high on the Pope’s priority list. On Tuesday, the Pope’s representatives blamed the media storm involving child abuse on gay and lesbians with an agenda. “The pope defends life and the family, based on marriage between a man and a woman, in a world in which powerful lobbies would like to impose a completely different agenda,” said Spanish Cardinal Julian Herranz. “By now, it’s a cultural contrast,” said the Vatican’s dean of the College of Cardinals, Angelo Sodano. “The pope embodies moral truths that aren’t accepted [by gays and lesbians], and so, the shortcomings and errors of priests are used as weapons against the church.” “Shortcomings and errors” is putting it mildly. The sexual abuse of children is a crime in most jurisdictions. As is the covering up of sexual abuse. “Criminal activity” is what has happened in these cases. And irreparable harm to children, something the church can never repair for as long as the victims live. New revelations this week involved a priest in Minnesota who allegedly violated two teenage girls several years ago. The Minnesota bishop in charge didn't immediately go to the police when the accusations became known instead opting to go through the Vatican. Five years later, the priest might actually be prosecuted. That’s a pattern that has developed over the last few weeks as new revelations of alleged abuses and cover-ups are reported. Over the last few decades, allegations of sexual abuse have arisen in Austria, Belgium, Croatia, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Malta, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Slovenia, Sweden, the United Kingdom, Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Mexico, Peru, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the Phillipines. In the United States, cases have gone to court in Alaska, Massachussetts, Illinois, Colorado, Iowa, Hawaii, California, Wisconsin, Florida, Nebraska, Pennsylvania, Arizona, Oregon, Texas, Georgia, and Washington (Minnesota is currently trying to extradite a priest who is living in India). Yet, Catholic leaders continue to say that it's a “homosexual problem” and a concerted effort by gay activists to tarnish the Pope, the Vatican and the Catholic Church. The real problem, however, is the church's stance on sexuality, marriage and religious leadership. Michael Bayly of the Catholic Pastoral Committee on Sexual Minorities, a group of LGBT Catholics based in Minneapolis that is working for structural changes within the church, took issue with the church’s handling of the issue of sexuality, especially the incidents of male sexual assault on young man and boys. “You have to ask why is it that it’s in the Roman Catholic Church that that’s happened. And I think if it is an over-representation [of same-sex abuse], we have to look at what it is about the Roman Catholic Church and its understanding and teaching on homosexuality [that keeps some gay men in the priesthood in an underdeveloped psycho-sexual state],” he said on a recent radio interview. “[W]e are all ultimately responsible for our own behavior. But I think the structure of the church [and] its way of thinking and talking about human sexuality are very dysfunctional.” Prominent commentator Andrew Sullivan, himself a Catholic, got to the heart of the matter: I don’t believe that you can tackle this problem without seeing it as a symptom of a much deeper failure of the church to come to terms with sexuality, sexual orientation and the warping, psychologically distorting impact of compulsory celibacy in the priesthood. If women and married men were allowed to be priests, if homosexuality were regarded in Catholic theology as a healthy and rare difference rather than as a shameful disorder, this atmosphere would end, and these crimes would for the most part disappear and the cloying, closeted power-structure which enabled them to go unpunished for so long would finally crumble. And the church could grow again. Through the truth, not around it. But it's exactly that truth that this pontiff and his enablers refuse to acknowledge. It would kill them. So, while the church in the Twin Cities dwells on evils of gay marriage at “an archdiocesan-wide initiative inspired by Archbishop John Nienstedt,” perhaps the church in the Twin Cities, Rome, and around the world should start a real forum on morality starting with the culture of Catholic leadership. And society should think twice about following the Pope’s edicts on same-sex marriage. Because an institution that has trouble acknowledging its own (criminal) immorality does not have any business pointing the finger at anyone else, let alone continuing a campaign to deny their rights. Andy Birkey is a journalist and LGBT community advocate. His writing about LGBT issues has been honored by the Sex Positive Journalism Awards and the Online News Association. In 2008, Andy was selected by DIVA MN to be honored as one of their Club Kids, one of “ten twenty to thirty-something activists making positive impacts in the community.” To learn about the protest being planned for the visit to the Twin Cities of Maggie Gallagher and Bishop Salvatore Cordileone, click here. Recommended Off-site Links: 1985 Letter Shows Future Pope Stalled Pedophile Case - Gillian Flaccus (Associated Press, April 9, 2010). Rescue Catholicism from the Vatican - James Carroll (The Boston Globe, April 5, 2010). Defense! Defense! - A Report from the Front Lines of the Culture Wars - Brian McNeill (The Progressive Catholic Voice, December 3, 2009). See also the previous Wild Reed posts: Donohue’s “Blame the Gays” Tactic Refuted by John Jay Study Researcher Blaming the Gays An Offering of Ashes The Roman Catholic Pyramid is Crumbling Andy Birkey on Katherine Kersten’s "Bullying Tactics" A Catholic Voice for Marriage Equality at the State Capitol MN Legislators Hear from Advocates and Opponents of Marriage Equality Same-sex Marriage: Still Very Much on the Archbishop’s Mind Posted by Michael J. Bayly at 3:51 PM 2 comments Labels: Andy Birkey, Clergy Sex Abuse Scandal Quote of the Day The problem . . . is not that the Church is especially evil, it’s that it’s essentially the same as everyone else. And if the Church is so wrong on how to treat pedophile priests, why isn’t the Church equally misguided in other decisions about what is “healthy” for the human person? We can make distinctions all we want about the “office” of the Bishop or the “office” of the Holy Father or about “ex cathedra” versus something lesser; and we can blog to the end of time about how the Church, too, is comprised of sinful individuals. But, pastorally, does anyone think those distinctions matter? Is that what the Church has to do to maintain credibility? How many hairs can the Church continue to split?   Matt, in a comment in response to the March 24 dotCommonweal post, “From Munich to Milwaukee, Scandal Dogs Benedict”

Church's View of Sex the Root of Its Troubles

By Maureen Gaffney, PhD

[Editor’s Note: The following op-ed was first published in the December 2, 2009 issue of the Irish Times.]

After the first wave of revelations over a decade ago, the sexual abuse of children by the clergy was explained away by the Roman Catholic Church by the bad apple theory – that these isolated “sexual acts” were transgressions by a minority of weak priests. In the wake of the Dublin diocesan report, that explanation has been amplified to include institutional failures of decision-making in dealing with offenders and victims, and a culture of secrecy and cover-up.

But tidying up corporate governance and instituting a more transparent culture is not going to resolve the scandal of clerical sexual abuse. That will require the church to face up to a much more profound problem – the church’s own teaching on sexuality.

Consider the list of issues the church has failed to deal with credibly since the 1960s: premarital and extramarital sex; remarriage; contraception; divorce; homosexuality; the role of women in ministry and women’s ordination; and the celibacy of the clergy. All have to do with sexuality.

Very few Catholics are looking to the church for moral guidelines in relation to any of these questions anymore. And why would they? After all, the church’s teaching on sexuality continues to insist that all intentionally sought sexual pleasure outside marriage is gravely sinful, and that every act of sexual intercourse within marriage must remain open to the transmission of life. The last pope, and most probably the present, took the view that intercourse, even in marriage, is not only “incomplete”, but even ceases to be an act of love, if contraception is used. Such pronouncements are so much at variance with the lived experience of most people as to undermine terminally the church’s credibility in the area of intimate relationships.

The sexual revolution, particularly the development of effective contraception, and the growth of the women’s and gay rights movements, has left the church stranded with an archaic psychology of sexuality. The world has moved decisively away from a view of sex as simply procreation. What preoccupies men and women in the modern world is trying to understand the psychological roots of their own sexuality: how it is formed; how central it is to their identity and sense of self; and probably most essentially, how it can make or break their relationships. Even the clergy cannot put up a credible defence for the insistence on priestly celibacy in the face of the almost complete collapse in vocations and the mounting evidence that many priests have ignored teachings on this matter.

Richard Sipe is a former priest and a recognised authority on celibacy. On the basis of his research in the US and other countries, he estimates between 45 and 50 per cent of Catholic clergy are sexually active. A study in Spain found that of those clergy who were sexually active, 53 per cent were having sex with an adult woman; 21 per cent with adult men; 14 per cent with minor boys and 12 per cent with minor girls. His own research showed 20 per cent of priests were involved in a more or less stable sexual relationship with a woman, or with sequential women in identifiable patterns. Another 10 per cent were in exploratory “dating” relationships that might include sexual contact.

Sipe estimates the proportion of gay men in the priesthood as between 30 per cent and 50 per cent, significantly greater than the proportion in the general population. About 10 per cent of clergy in the US were involved in homosexual activity. A further 12 per cent identified themselves as homosexual or as having serious questions about their sexual orientation, although not all were sexually active. These men find themselves in a church which views a homosexual orientation as “an objective disorder”, “a more or less strong tendency towards evil”. How can gay men and women in religious life, or those troubled by their orientation, work out their sexual identity in such an environment, let alone minister to their gay and lesbian flock?

All of those issues are institutionally denied or shrouded in secrecy. Hardly surprising, then, that paedophilia can flourish in such an environment. It is important to stress here that homosexuality and paedophilia are two quite separate phenomena. A 2004 study for the American bishops found the percentage of clergy accused of child sexual abuse was consistently between 3 and 6 per cent, and the overall average is 5 per cent.

As the institutional structures of the church have weakened in the wake of successive scandals, it is likely that the proportions of priests who are actively engaged in sexuality of one kind or another may have increased.

Yet, the church has remained unmoved in the face of the mounting evidence of defection from its sexual teachings by both laity and clergy, although in the case of the offending clergy, they seem entirely capable of keeping their doctrinal orthodoxy psychologically separate from their actual behaviour.

It is predictable what will now happen. The church’s “learning curve” will crank up temporarily and its corporate governance on child sexual abuse may improve. And then, it will be business as usual. But no amount of improved decision-making and transparency will enable senior clergy to respond effectively to the church’s crisis of sexuality.

To do that, they must confront the root cause of the problem – that the Catholic Church is a powerful homo-social institution, where men are submissive to a hierarchical authority and where women are incidental and dispensable. It’s the purest form of a male hierarchy, reflected in the striking fact that we all collectively refer it to as “the Hierarchy.”

It has all the characteristics of the worst kind of such an institution: rigid in social structure; preoccupied by power; ruthless in suppressing internal dissent; in thrall to status, titles, and insignia, with an accompanying culture of narcissism and entitlement; and at a great psychological distance from human intimacy and suffering.

Most strikingly, it is a culture which is fearful and disdainful of women. As theologian William M Shea observes, “fear of women, and perhaps hatred of them, may well be just what we have to work out of the Catholic system”. Until that institutional misogyny is confronted, the church will be unable to confront the unresolved issue of its teaching on sexuality and the sexuality of the clergy. Instead, celibacy will continue to be used as a prop to the dysfunctional homo-social hierarchy. The hierarchy will continue to project its fear of women on to an obsessive effort to exert control over their wombs, their fertility and their unruly sexual desires. That is the psychology of exclusion.

It is to be hoped that the Catholic Church in Ireland will resolve this issue. Not just because many of us don’t want to lose the reassuring moral presence of the church, nor because we cannot easily do without the intelligent altruism of devoted religious, but because the great joy and hope of the Christian message was never more badly needed.


Maureen Gaffney is a clinical psychologist. She is chairwoman of the National Economic and Social Forum, which advises the Government on economic and social issues, and is a member of the board of the HSE.

Star Tribune Article Gives Background to CPCSM Program

(Editor's Note: The following article contains some misquotes, which represent historical errors about CPCSM's relationship with the local archdiocese. Corrections and clarifications, placed within brackets [ ], have been made by David McCaffrey, who was a personal witness to CPCSM's founding and the group's subsequent history. For additional discussion and clarification of this article's factual errors, please see Michael Bayly's comments in his Wild Reed blogsite.)

Gays reject Catholic church's attempt to 'cure' them

David Joles, Star Tribune Gay and lesbian Roman Catholics who contact the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis for spiritual guidance can find themselves directed toward a 12-step program aimed at changing their behavior. Australian-born Michael Bayly, who is the executive coordinator of a gay-Catholic committee, has organized a protest forum. Bayly, who is a member of St. Stephens Catholic Community, believes the Catholic Church needs to be “more accepting of diversity”

Gay and lesbian Roman Catholics are protesting a therapy aimed at helping them become celibate. The programs are provoking national -- and even international -- protests from critics.

By JEFF STRICKLER, Star Tribune

Last update: November 17, 2009 - 12:08 AM

Gay and lesbian Roman Catholics who contact the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis for spiritual guidance can find themselves directed toward programs aimed at helping them become celibate.

Called reparative therapy, the programs are provoking national -- and even international -- protests from critics who say they are ineffective at best and, in some cases, harmful.

[Clarification: Mr. Strickler has confused the Courage Apostolate with reparative therapy itself. The primary goal of Courage is to assist its same-sex orientated members to maintain lives that are abstinent from sexual relationships. Although the group maintains that it does not advocate reparative therapy for its members, its web site is linked to a number of "ex-gay" ministry groups that do provide reparative, or "conversion," therapy for their members. Also, if its members do request reparative therapy, Courage will not discourage them, and in many cases will refer the members to therapists who support their mission and who also practice reparative therapy. Finally, Courage's founder, Rev. John Harvey -- prior to his retiring when Rev. Paul Check became the group's executive director -- did invite the late Peter Rudegeair, to accompany him to speak at various conferences that Courage sponsored in the US and in other countries. Mr. Rudegeair, a psychotherapist and member of NARTH, was one of the foremost proponents and practitioners of reparative therapy.]

Many see the programs as an example of the Vatican's swing toward conservatism, and an insulting blow to a decade of bridge-building between the church and the gay community.

"[Retired Archbishop] Harry Flynn came to us -- we didn't go to them, they came to us -- in the late 1990s and asked us to serve as resource people for the church," said Michael Bayly, executive coordinator of the Catholic Pastoral Committee on Sexual Minorities (CPCSM). "Then a new pope comes in. Now the archdiocese won't even take our phone calls."

[Correction: Michael Bayly was clearly misquoted here. In the fall of 1995, Sister Mary Ellen Gevelinger, OP, then the Director of Personnel for the local archdiocesan schools office (known then as the Catholic Education and Formation Ministries), having heard of CPCSM's training work within parishes and schools of the archdiocese, invited CPCSM to consult with her as she responded to requests from a number of secondary Catholic school presidents who requested training for their teachers and staff to learn how to more adequately respond to the special needs and gifts of their LGBT students. Her request resulted -- with Archbishop Flynn's knowledge -- in CPCSM presenting two training workshops to Sister Mary Ellen's archdiocesan staff and to the faculty and staffs at 8 of the 11 Catholic high schools, where the group assisted the schools to create "safe" programs for their LGBT students.]

So they are speaking out on their own. They're hosting a forum Tuesday at St. Martin's Table Restaurant and Bookstore in Minneapolis that they say will shine a spotlight on what they term the "pseudo-scientific organizations" that endorse reparative therapy.

Under the auspices of its Office of Marriage and Family, the Catholic church's programs are modeled after Alcoholics Anonymous and its sister program for the families of addicts, Al-Anon. The programs, called Courage (AA) and Encourage (Al-Anon), are intended to help gays remain chaste.

The chaplain of the local Courage chapter, the Rev. James Livingston, was out of town Monday and unavailable to comment. In explaining the programs, the archdiocese's website contains links to material that some gays find objectionable. That includes a Q&A with the director of Courage's national office, the Rev. Paul Check, in which he says, "People are relieved to know the condition [of homosexuality] is both treatable and preventable."

"Homosexuality is not an illness," objected David McCaffrey, one of the people who founded CPCSM in 1980. "You shouldn't be treating it because there's nothing to treat."

Check also was not available to comment, but a person in his office became angry when she heard about the forum. Although not an official spokesperson, she said, "We don't tell anyone what to do. We just try to help them live according to the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church."

A decade ago, [Correction: Another misquote: the request was made 14 years ago.] the CPCSM was asked to conduct sensitivity training sessions for the archdiocese. "That's how much things have changed recently," Bayly said.

He pointed to an article last November in the Catholic Spirit, the archdiocese's newspaper, endorsing the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH). Describing itself as a nonprofit educational organization serving people with "unwanted homosexual attraction," it maintains that through therapy, homosexuals can "develop their heterosexual potential."

In 2006, the American Psychological Association (APA) issued a statement challenging reparative or "conversion" therapy: "The APA's concern about the positions espoused by NARTH and so-called conversion therapy is that they are not supported by the science," it said. "There is simply no sufficiently scientifically sound evidence that sexual orientation can be changed."
NARTH does have its supporters, however. In 2003, Psychology Today magazine ran an editorial citing data "which suggests that sexual orientation conversion therapy is at least sometimes successful."

NARTH is not connected to the Catholic Church and is endorsed by some Protestant denominations, also. Minnesotans aren't the only ones objecting. There have been protest marches outside NARTH meetings in Dallas and London, and there's a NARTH protest page on Facebook.

A Courage drop-out

Tonight's forum features a panel that includes Bayly; Dr. Simon Rosser, a professor in the University of Minnesota's School of Public Health, and Philip Lowe Jr., a former member of the Twin Cities chapter of Courage.

They will present an APA report that recommends that therapists address the distress of Catholic homosexuals "but not aim to alter sexual orientation," which it says "has the potential to be harmful."

Lowe spent 15 months in the Courage program in hopes of finding a way to reconcile his religion and his sexuality."I went to weekly meetings, I went to confession, I did everything you were supposed to do," he said. Through it all, he battled with the feeling that he was supposed to distance himself from who he is. "It wasn't a positive experience."

He quit the group and the church a year ago. He has since found a new partner and a new church home, St. Mark's Episcopal Cathedral in Minneapolis.

"We've been embraced by that community," he said. "I wish that everyone could experience that."

So, why don't other homosexuals leave the church?

"We identify the church as the people in it, not the hierarchy that runs it," McCaffrey said. "Besides, we've been Roman Catholics all of our lives. It's part of our lives. It's who we are."

Bayly doesn't expect the forum to change the church's stance on homosexuality, but he does hope that it might open a line of communication.

"All we're trying to do is start a discussion," he said. "We're trying to do a little consciousness-raising about the needs and gifts of the gay and lesbian community."

Jeff Strickler • 612-673-7392

CPCSM's Upcoming Program To Challenge Archdiocese's
Treatment of LGBT Persons and Families As Unethical
And Inappropriate According to Recent APA Report

Almost 30 years ago Archbishop John Roach called for “competent and compassionate pastoral ministry” for LGBT persons and their families within the Archdiocese of St. Paul-Minneapolis (Catholic Bulletin, 9/21/1991) – a ministry that was built and maintained through the dedicated and tireless efforts of CPCSM leaders in cooperation with parishes and schools of the archdiocese. Sadly, under subsequent archbishops we’ve witnessed such ministry efforts undermined and usurped by rigid doctrinal fundamentalism and pseudo-science discredited by all mainstream professional mental health and medical associations.

Over the past five or six years the archdiocese has adopted and advocated the Courage Apostolate of the Catholic Church (http://couragerc.net) as the only pastoral program that it recommends for Catholic gay men and lesbians (whom the Courage leadership prefers to label with the pseudo-scientific term of [men and women who have] " same-sex attractions"). (See Rev. Jim Livingston's letter of 2-2-09 to all priests and deacons of the local archdiocese.)

Further, the Courage Apostolate, which employs a 12 step-like program (similar to the program developed by Alcoholics Anonymous) to help their members “recover” from “same-sex attractions,” supports individuals who seek “reparative therapy.”  Courage also maintains links on its national website to pseudo-scientific organizations that endorse and/or offer reparative therapy.

In August of this year, the American Psychological Association, in its in-depth 130-page report, entitled Report of American Psychological Association's Task Force on Appropriate Therapeutic Responses to Sexual Orientation, repudiated “reparative therapy” -- i.e., attempts to change a person’s sexual orientation through therapy and prayer.

Near the end of the Report (Appendix A, p. 119), the Task Force presents a long list of resolutions that flow from its in-depth search of the research literature relating to same-sex sexual orientation and professional and religious sexual orientation change efforts. The following resolutions from that list seem to relate directly to the collaborative efforts of the Courage Apostolate and the local archdiocese to offer supportive services to gay/lesbian/bisexual Catholics.

[Be it resolved, that the American Psychological Association:]

Affirms that same-sex sexual and romantic attractions, feelings, and behaviors are normal and positive variations of human sexuality regardless of sexual orientation identity;

Reaffirms its position that homosexuality per se is not a mental disorder and opposes portrayals of sexual minority youths and adults as mentally ill due to their sexual orientation;

Concludes that there is insufficient evidence to support the use of psychological interventions to change sexual orientation;

Encourages mental health professionals to avoid misrepresenting the efficacy of sexual orientation change efforts by promoting or promising change in sexual orientation when providing assistance to individuals distressed by their own or others’ sexual orientation;

Concludes that the benefits reported by participants in sexual orientation change efforts can be gained through approaches that do not attempt to change sexual orientation;

Advises parents, guardians, young people, and their families to avoid sexual orientation change efforts that portray homosexuality as a mental illness or developmental disorder and to seek psychotherapy, social support and educational services that provide accurate information on sexual orientation and sexuality, increase family and school support, and reduce rejection of sexual minority youth;

Encourages practitioners to consider the ethical concerns outlined in the 1997 APA Resolution on Appropriate Therapeutic Response to Sexual Orientation (APA, 1998), in particular the following standards and principles: scientific bases for professional judgments, benefit and harm, justice, and respect for people’s rights and dignity;

Oopposes the distortion and selective use of scientific data about homosexuality by individuals and organizations seeking to influence public policy and public opinion and will take a leadership role in responding to such distortions;

Supports the dissemination of accurate scientific and professional information about sexual orientation in order to counteract bias that is based in lack of knowledge about sexual orientation; and

Encourages advocacy groups, elected officials, mental health professionals, policy makers, religious professionals and organizations, and other organizations to seek areas of collaboration that may promote the well-being of sexual minorities.

On November 17, come hear three speakers share their perspectives on this situation and offer steps that can be taken to hold the Courage Apostolate accountable – both locally and nationally –for its support of reparative therapy. (See following insert for more details.)

Recent APA Report on Appropriate Therapeutic Response
to Sexual Orientation In Opposition to Archdiocese’s
Treatment of LGBT Catholics and Their Families

The American Psychological Association’s recent report, released earlier this month, on “Appropriate Therapeutic Responses to Sexual Orientation” proves to be an indictment of the position that the St. Paul and Minneapolis Catholic Archdiocese’s takes on the nature of homosexuality and on the services that it provides and recommends for its lesbian/gay/bisexual (LGB) Catholics and their families.

LGB Catholics or their families seeking pastoral ministry services from the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis--for example, by calling the Office of Marriage and Family Life, will receive only a referral to the Courage Apostolate (for LGBs) or to its program Encourage (for the family members and friends of LGBs). Both groups are collectively called "Faith In Action" in the local archdiocese, which states that its mission is to support men and women with "same-sex attractions" to live chaste and holy lives. The Courage website indicates a positive attitude toward conversion therapy and will support its members who seek out such therapy. Also, the website has multiple links to organizations within the "ex-gay" movement.

Among the many anti-gay or "ex-gay" links on the Courage website is a link to the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH), an organization that recommends conversion therapy for gay men and lesbians and promulgates documents based on pseudo-science -- both of which have no credibility among any of the reputable professional mental health or medical associations, such as the Amercian Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association, the American Psychoanalytic Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the Council on Child and Adolescent Health, and many others. (Please see the article in this issue of the Progressive Catholic Voice reporting on CPCSM’s recent educational program, “The Myth of Conversion Therapy and the Pseudo-Science of NARTH.”)

The underlying attitudes toward LGBT persons and their families, reflected by the Archdiocese through its staff in the Office of Marriage and Family Life and by its website, are not only sorely lacking, they are reprehensible. In fact, it should be said that Courage and Encourage provide neither competent nor compassionate pastoral ministry. To tell LGBT persons that they are "objectively disordered" and must maintain a lives of sexual abstinence simply because they find themselves attracted to members of their own gender is outrageous – especially when the vast majority of today’s behavioral and biological scientists believe that homosexuality is innate, not freely chosen, and not a psychological disorder that can or should be treated.

Furthermore, it is an outrage to LGBT persons and their families for Courage to compare the situation of gay men and lesbians with that of alcoholics who follow the 12 steps of AA. It is not appropriate to recommend that LGBT persons follow an adaptation of those same 12 steps in order to abstain from pursuing meaningful committed relationships. Forming such relationships is the only way that God has created them to find the love in another person that mirrors God’s unconditional love for them.

Therefore, the approach that the local archdiocese advocates, through its Faith In Action Program, is contrary to the life-experience of millions of LGBT persons and has no foundation in the current sciences and in present-day medical and mental health practice. But to recommend that LGBT persons abstain from all committed same-sex relationships, while giving tacit approval to conversion therapy when all reputable professional groups have condemned it as being ineffective and potentially dangerous, is also incompetent, insensitive, and lacking in compassion -- and is even unethical.

Further, John Gonsiorek, a national expert on competent psychological practice and ethics said at CPCSM’s recent program about conversion therapy and NARTH that for a church group to advocate for conversion therapy is tantamount to practicing psychology – and bad psychology at that -- without a license, which is a criminal offense in Minnesota.

Over its past 25+ years working in the local church, CPCSM has provided workshops and inservices to virtually all of the heads of archdiocesan offices during Archbishop Roach's administration, presented its parish-based gay-lesbian ministry training to more that 25 parishes, resulting in active LGBT ministries in at least 6 parishes and competent and compassionate pastoral staff at many other parishes.

In addition, for 10 years, from 1983 to 1993, Catholic Charities and CPCSM cosponsored a program in which Deacon couple Roger and Donna Urbanski, who have a gay son, faithfully provided one-to-one counseling and a monthly support group for Catholic family members and friends of LGBT persons.

From about 1993 to 1997, CPCSM was an active member of a Study Group on Sexuality and Spirituality, requested by a group of local Catholic high school presidents, which was comprised of representatives of most of the local Catholic high schools and the archdiocesan education staff and met monthly under the auspices of the Archdiocese's Catholic Education and Formation Ministries (CEFM) Program.

At about the same time CPCSM, by presenting its 4-session Safe Staff Training Program to the whole CEFM staff and to 8 of the 11 Catholic secondary schools in existence at that time, helped create for LGBT students in most of the participating schools, safe spaces and safe school staff patterned after the groundbreaking Safe Staff Programs (Out For Equity and Out For Good) in both the St. Paul and Minneapolis public high school districts. (CPCSM's safe staff training program is fully described in its recently published book (edited by Michael Bayly), Creating Safe Environments for LGBT Students: A Catholic Schools Perspective (Harrington Park Press).

For the incoming archbishop, with edicts more characteristic of a dictator than a pastoral leader, to put a end to nearly 30 years of these excellent pastoral efforts, carried out by good, holy, well-intentioned Catholic professionals --with the blessing of the local ordinary--who were trained to carefully listen to and respond to the special, unique pastoral needs of each person seeking their care, cries to heaven for justice!

Senator John Marty Recipient of CPCSM's
2009 Bishop Gumbleton Peace and Justice Award

At its 29th Annual Community Meeting, on June 22nd, at St. Martin’s Table Bookstore and Restaurant in Minneapolis, the Twin Cities-based Catholic Pastoral Committee on Sexual Minorities (CPCSM) presented its 2009 Bishop Gumbleton Peace and Justice Award to Minnesota Senator John Marty. The inscription on Sen. Marty’s award reads as follows: Through your inspiring commitment to justice and your tireless advocacy on behalf of all citizens of Minnesota – including LGBT citizens – you have enriched lives, strengthened communities, and modeled selfless service and authentic leadership. We especially honor your faithful and courageous efforts to ensure civil marriage equality for LGBT Minnesotans. Accordingly, with deepest respect, friendship, and gratitude, the Board of Directors of the Catholic Pastoral Committee on Sexual Minorities present you with its Bishop Gumbleton Peace and Justice Award at its Annual Community Meeting, June 22, 2009.

Michael Bayly, CPCSM's executive coordinator, presented Sen. Marty with his award. CPCSM’s Fr. Henry F. LeMay Pastoral Ministry Award went this year to longtime CPCSM supporter and former Board member, Beverly Barrett, who unfortunately was not able to be present at last night’s meeting.

Michael Bayly (left), CPCSM Executive Coordinator, with Senator John Marty after having presented the senator with the 2009 Bishop Thomas J. Gumbleton Peace and Justice Award at CPCSM’s Annual Community Meeting.

Click here for a copy of John Marty's 2009 Bishop Gumbleton Peace and Justice Award.

________________________________________________________

A Related Story

John Marty at CPCSM's 2009 Annual Community Meeting:
"We Can Make It Happen"

Senator John Marty speaks with LGBT Catholics and their allies about
his commitment and efforts to achieve marriage equality for all Minnesotans

On June 22, the Twin Cities-based Catholic Pastoral Committee on Sexual Minorities (CPCSM) hosted its 29th Annual Community Meeting at St. Martin’s Table Restaurant and Bookstore. CPCSM's executive coordinator, Michael Bayly, welcomed those in attendance and introduced our special guest speaker, Minnesota Senator John Marty – who was later awarded CPCSM’s 2009 Bishop Gumbleton Peace and Justice Award. John Marty, son of Lutheran religious scholar Martin Marty, is a member of the Minnesota Senate, representing Senate District 54. He is also a Minnesota DFL candidate in the upcoming 2010 gubernatorial election. Marty entered politics in 1984 and throughout his successful political life has been a tireless advocate on environmental issues, health care reform, government ethics, and campaign finance reform. As part of his position on the latter, he does not accept soft money contributions or contributions from lobbyists, and he sharply limits the amount of contributions he will accept from any one person. Not surprisingly, Sen. Marty also opposes the public funding of stadiums and professional sports teams. In the area of health care, he is a supporter of the use of medical marijuana, and the chief author of the Minnesota Health Plan, a proposed single, statewide plan that would cover all Minnesotans for all their medical needs.

Of particular interest to the LGBT Catholics and their allies is the fact that in 2008 Sen. Marty co-authored Senate File 3880 (renamed earlier this year Senate File 20), a bill that would provide for gender-neutral marriage laws in Minnesota and thus allow same-gender couples to marry.

At CPCSM’s June 22 Annual Community Meeting, Sen. Marty shared the history and current status of Senate File 20. He also talked about why as a person of faith he supports marriage equality for all. Sen. Marty began his talk by noting that when he was growing up in the 1960s, he viewed the Catholic Church as a leader of social justice issues. “It was very supportive of anti-war and anti-poverty initiatives and of civil rights for African Americans,” he said. “Unfortunately, somewhere along the line things changed, and it’s difficult to hear today of how Catholics cannot openly talk about sexual orientation or civil rights for LGBT people. It’s almost bizarre when you see what’s happening in the rest of society, where for the first time people are opening up on these issues. People’s attitudes are changing and it’s good to see that happening.”

Moving Forward

Recalling the time in 1983 when the first gay rights legislation was introduced by Rep. Karen Clark, Sen. Marty said that there were people who cheered when Clark observed that some opponents of equal rights for gays like to quote scripture to support their view that she as a lesbian shouldn’t have the right to live. “I found that to be really, really sick,” said Marty, who then provided a helpful overview of the subsequent gains that have been made in relation to gay rights in Minnesota.

He notes that in 2006 he began to notice a marked difference in attitudes around the issue of same-gender marriage – even within many faith communities. Then in 2008 he was approached by a gay partnered man and asked if he would introduce a marriage equality bill. Marty’s response was unequivocal: “I’d be glad to,” he told the man, “I’d be honored.”

Marty is adamant that as a civil society we should not ban people from doing something because some people’s religious beliefs say that it’s wrong. “That’s really offensive to me,” he said, “and so I was pleased to draft a bill for marriage equality.”

Although the passing of Prop 8 last November in California was viewed by many marriage equality advocates as a setback, Marty chose to view it as an opportunity to invigorate the movement. At a rally in Minneapolis shortly after the passage of Prop 8, he told the gathered crowd of his belief that “we’ve got to move forward, and we’ve got to move forward now.”


Words Matter

"Words matter,” Marty insists. “My wife and I have been married for over twenty years. We called our commitment ceremony a wedding; we called it a marriage. If you’ve had a commitment ceremony in a church or elsewhere and you think of it as a marriage, then call it that. Don’t worry about what other people say, you call it what you want and define the term. When people use the terminology that matters most to them, then other people’s attitudes are changed. “I’m actually not that concerned about whether or not we call all government-sanctioned unions ‘civil unions’,” he says, “but we’ve got to use the same terminology for everyone. If someone wants to change marriage [in the civil arena] to union, well, that’s not a fight I care to get involved in. What I object to is different terminology that implies that some types of marriages are less good than others, that says we can’t use the word ‘marriage’ for them. I find that offensive.”

Marty observed that for a long time a lot of people in the LGBT community were saying that they don’t dare use the word “marriage” because it will incite their opponents and because they felt they didn’t have public support. The term “civil unions,” these folks reasoned, might be palatable and thus garner public support.

“The trouble with that argument,” says Sen. Marty, “is that as we discovered over one hundred years ago ‘separate but equal’ doesn’t work. In fact, there’s no such thing as ‘separate but equal,’ and it took sixty years for the Supreme Court to realize how wrong that was and to undo it. There’s no ‘separate but equal’ in racially segregated schools, and there’s no ‘separate but equal’ in having both marriages and civil unions. If you’re going to call them equal, you have to give them the same name. I don’t care what you call them but they’ve got to called the same thing.”


Changing Attitudes

Sen. Marty noted that OutFront Minnesota, the state’s largest LGBT support and lobbying organization, is supportive of his bill and have implemented a 3-5 year strategy to reach out to people around the state and facilitate dialogue. Faith communities will especially be focused upon, a strategy that Marty stressed was key.

“People’s attitudes around this issue have and are changing significantly,” he said. So much so that he sees marriage equality being achieved in Minnesota within three years. “I don’t think that’s unrealistic,” he said. “It’s no longer the uphill battle it was.”

“People change,” he reminded those in attendance at Monday’s CPCSM gathering. “They wake up, and they grow and they learn. The more we take control of the language, and the more we’re not afraid to speak out, the more attitudes change. And they are changing. They’re not changing by the decade anymore, they’re not changing by the year anymore. They’re changing by the month. We’re seeing a really profound difference in attitude. And it’s largely a generational thing. One of my colleagues told me: ‘My parents would never join a church that would marry a same-sex couple; my kids would never join a church that wouldn’t.’ She’s absolutely right about her kids – and, actually, I doubt she’s right about her parents.”

“Church pronouncements don’t change people’s minds,” Marty insists, “it’s folks figuring out that the two people who sit in the pew in front of them at church every Sunday are not friends but partners. That’s what changes people’s minds. Because they know these two guys, they know that they are nice people, that they’re just like us. They’re taxpayers, they work hard, they take care of their home. And the more people come out, the more we have same-sex marriages happening in other states, left and right, the more minds are changed. So I’m convinced that it’s not too far away, and I think three years is a legitimate goal for us in Minnesota. And we can make it happen.”


A Loving and Christian Thing to Do

Toward the end of his talk at CPCSM’s Annual Community Meeting, Sen. Marty shared how his faith encourages him to advocate and support marriage equality. “The Bible I read says that we’re supposed to love each other; that God loves us and cares about us, and created us in His image,” he said. “Making lifelong commitments is something we’re supposed to be proud of. We’re supposed to make commitments to each other. That’s a loving and Christian thing to do.
Yes, I can read stuff in the ancient Hebrew law, in Leviticus, that I don’t think people should take as a standard for how to live their lives today, unless that is they want to do all that stoning of everybody that’s prescribed, but then most of them would be stoned as well. We know that that’s all ancient stuff, that in its own context and with the knowledge of that time it made sense. But it doesn’t make sense today.”

During the question-and-answer session that followed Sen. Marty’s talk, he stressed that, “as a politician, it’s not my role to figure out where the churches ought to be on this or that issue. Our bill explicitly says that this law does not mean that any church has to marry a same-sex couple. It also says that the government shouldn’t tell a church who they can and cannot marry.

“The best thing to do,” he suggested, “is not to vilify them but to say how we think they’re wrong. Let them go into their little clubhouses and do whatever they want, but just let everybody else have their marriages, have their lives, and have their rights.”

“I believe we ought to have marriage equality,” Sen. Marty reiterated, “and I’m working for that and I think attitudes are changing and a lot of people of faith are understanding it – largely because of groups like CPCSM that are initiating and encouraging dialogue from a faith perspective. And regardless of what some leaders of faith communities choose to say and do, the role of government is to treat people equally.”

Sen. John Marty converses with attendees at CPCSM’s Annual Community Meeting, including, at left, CPCSM president Mary Beckfeld.

Other attendees at CPCSM's Annual Community Meeting, at St. Martin's Table Bookstore and Restaurant, Minneapolis, on June 22, 2009.

Mark your calendar!

CPCSM Annual Community Meeting

Featuring Minnesota Senator John Marty

7:00 - 9:00 p.m.

Monday, June 22, 2009

St. Martin's Table Restaurant and Bookstore

2001 Riverside Ave., Minneapolis

(See Map for Directions)

We are very excited to have Sen. Marty speak at this year’s annual CPCSM community meeting.  Sen. Marty is a tireless advocate for justice for all – including LGBT people.  He is a co-author of SF 3880, a bill that would provide for gender-neutral marriage laws in Minnesota.

Sen. Marty will share the history and current status of this bill, and talk about why as a person of faith he supports marriage equality for LGBT people.

CPCSM’s two annual awards – the Father Henry F. LeMay Pastoral Ministry Award and the Bishop Thomas Gumbleton Peace and Justice Award – will also be presented at the meeting.

  Light refreshments will be served and a free-will offering requested.

(Click here for poster for this event.)

Top of Page

What's New

Two CPCSM-related
Blog Sites . . .

The Progressive Catholic Voice
a media project of CPCSM,
recently ranked No. 2 in
Online Christian Colleges'
list of "50 Best Catholic Blogs."

__________

For daily thoughts and reflections from a progressive, gay, Catholic perspective, visit
The Wild Reed,
the blog of CPCSM's executive coordinator Michael Bayly.

Other Upcoming Events _______________ CPCSM's Annual Community Meeting July 13, 2010 7 - 9 pm St. Martin's Table Restaurant and Bookstore 2001 Riverside Ave., Mpls (Map) Featured Speaker: Janet Bystrom Director of RECLAIM RECLAIM provides counseling and support services to LGBT youth and their families. Janet will talk about her work with RECLAIM and about issues facing LGBT youth, Including youth from a Catholic background. (Download an 8.5x11 Poster for this event.) __________________ The Catholic Coalition for Church Reform's Synod of the Baptized Claiming Our Place at the Table Saturday, September 18, 2010 Ramada Plaza Hotel, Minneapolis, MN For more information and/or to register, click here. _______________ Dignity Twin Cities Liturgy When: 5:00 p.m., Second and Fourth Sunday June 11 and June 25. Where: Prospect Park United Methodist Church (22 Orlin Ave. SE, Minneapolis). Dignity Twin Cities meets every second and fourth Sunday of the month at 5:00 p.m. at Prospect Park United Methodist Church. Dignity Twin Cities is one of 70+ Dignity chapters across the nation. Dignity encourages and helps LGBT people experience dignity through the integration of their spirituality and their sexuality. The organization envisions and works for a time when LGBT Catholics are affirmed as beloved persons of God and, as such, can participate fully in all aspects of life within both church and society. For directions to Prospect Park United Methodist Church, click here. For more information, visit the Minneapolis Gay Catholics Meetup site. _______________

DVD Now Available Online

For More Information on the Video and Where to Order It

Available Now
from Haworth Press!

Creating Safe Environments
for LGBT Students:
A Catholic Schools Perspective
Michael J. Bayly, Editor

A unique publication, the  first of its kind anywhere!

Compiled from CPCSM's three years of experience conducting "Safe Staff" training seminars with local Catholic high schools.

More about the book,
with reviews.

Now on sale locally at:
St. Martin's Table
2001 Riverside Avenue,
Minneapolis, MN 55454
612-339-3920

News

US Bishops Issue Regressive and Spiritually Violent Statement 11-14-06

Editorials
Michael Bayly's Response to US Catholic Bishops Statement on Gay Ministry

Be Not Afraid: You Can Be
Happy and Gay
Nov. 16, 2006

When 'Guidelines'
Lack Guidance
Nov. 15, 2006

Other Reactions to US Bishops' Document

NACDLGM
November 17, 2006

DignityUSA
November 12, 2006

Catholic Organizations
for Renewal
November 12, 2006

National Religious
Leadership Roundtable
of the National Gay & Lesbian Task Force's (NGLTF)
October 20, 2006

Letters to the Editor
Star Tribune
Nov. 17, 2006
Georgia Mueller
Catholic Mother of Gay Man

Positive Pastoral Care:
A Sampling of Resources
________________

Developing List of Resources
(NACDLGM)
Gay Adolescents in Catholic Schools
By Robt. Mattingly, SJ
Momentum**
Part I (Sept - Oct ' 04)
Part II (Nov - Dec ' 04)

Creating Safe Environments
for LGBT Students:
A Catholic Schools Perspective
Michael J. Bayly, Editor
Based on CPCSM's work with local Catholic high schools

Tell Me The (Whole) Truth:
School Supplies to Get
Real Sex Education
Lambda Legal Publications, 9/5/2002

Facts About Homosexuality
and Child Molestation
Gregory M. Herek, Ph.D., Professor
Dept. of Psychology, University of Calif. at Davis

Library of Resources
Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network (GLSEN)

Coming Out: A Guide for Youth and Their Allies
GLSEN

Journal of Gay & Lesbian
Issues in Education
Haworth Press

Free HRC Guide to
Coming Out:
> In English
> In Spanish
> For African-Americans

School Survival Guide
A project of the LGBT Center of NY:
Run by and for youth

More Facts About
Reparative Therapy

Lambda Rising: An
Excellent Resource
for Ordering
GLBT Books

Science in the News

Important Reminder!

Support CPCSM
in your workplace!

As a member of Community Shares Minnesota (formerly Community Solutions Fund) we benefit from their presence in workplace giving campaigns throughout the Twin Cities and greater Minnesota.  This means new audiences and new dollars for us! So if you are looking for options in your workplace this fall, know that wherever Community Shares MN is represented, you can designate your gifts to the organizations nearest and dearest to your heart - including us!  Tell your friends and co-workers!

Also, remember that you can designate all or a portion of your Community Shares MN donations exclusively to CPCSM. (Currently, the only way you can donate to CPCSM without mailing us a check.)

For more information, please contact Michael Bayly at the CPCSM office 612-201-4534 or cpcsmmail@gmail.com

CPCSM News

CPCSM's 2006 Annual Community Meeting
a Great Success

CPCSM Members Show Family Photos at MN Senate Committee Hearing on Marriage Amendment

Catholic couple clashes
with church over gay rights
By Kay Harvey
Pioneer Press, 2-26-06
Story About Catholic Rainbow Parents' members Charlie and Maria Girsch

CPCSM Cofounder and
Source of Inspiration,
Bill Kummer, Passes Away
on January 29, 2006

CPCSM Newsletter
Rainbow Spirit
Spring 2006**

**Adobe Acrobat
needed to read or print this .pdf document. To download free software, click here.

New CPCSM Program Catholic Rainbow Parents Check out their new web page and read the group's original Declaration and their more recent official statement: "Catholic Rainbow Parents for Constitutional Integrity."Find out how you can show your support by signing the Declaration! Media Coverage Ritual of Affirmation and Sending Forth Reported in Pioneer Press (10/13/05)* *Adobe Acrobat needed to read or print this .pdf document. To download free software, click here. Catholic Rainbow Parents Formation Reported in the NCR  (8/26/05)

New CPCSM
Web Page
Gay Priests & Pedophilia

Guest Commentary

Speaking Against the Proposed Marriage Amendment

On civil unions and
Christian tradition
By William C. Hunt, STD
St Paul Pioneer Press,
Oct. 31, 2006

History Reveals Unsavory Mix of Religion, Constitutional Law
By Rev. Michael Tegeder
St. Paul Pioneer Press
January 10, 2006

Online Donations
Click here for
instructions about
how to make a secure donation by credit card
to CPCSM or to
Catholic Rainbow Parents.



Other GLBT
Catholic News
Gay theology pioneer
trusts 'God's
shrewdness'
(About John McNeill)
By ROBERT J. McCLORY
NCR, 11-11-05

Proud to be celibate,
gay priest
By RENEE K. GADOUA
Religion News Service
NCR, 11-11-05

Memphis Bishop
Welcomes Home
Gay Catholics
NCR, 6-17-05

Other
Commentaries
By CPCSM Leaders

 

Inspirational Links

Daily Scripture Readings
(New American Bible)

New Resources
for Families and
Friends of GLBTs
Come Out and
Celebrate Program
with
Sample Packet
of Materials
for Downloading

---

CPCSM's Parents' Speakers Bureau

An Excellent Local Support Group
for GLBT Youth
The Naming Project



Other Resources
Out of the Darkness,
Into the Light**
The Present and
Future Impact of
GLBT Ministry
on the Church
1/10/2001
By Fr. Greg Tolaas

About Us
History of Gumbleton
and LeMay Awards

Other Relgious Links

GayCatholicForum.org Christian Lesbians.Com Nationwide Welcoming Congregations Index

FAIR USE ACT

All article postings to this website are subject to the guidelines set forth by fair use. The fair use of a copyrighted work, including use for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. Copyright owners are, by law, deemed to consent to fair use of their works by others. The Copyright Act does not define fair use. Instead, whether a use is fair use is determined by balancing the following factors: [1] The purpose and character of the use. [2] The nature of the copyrighted work. [3] The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole. [4] The effect of the use on the potential market for, or value of, the copyrighted work.

This web site was last updated on:
April 16, 2010