Category Archives: Religious News

ELCA Council approves gay-friendly ministry policies

According to the polity of the ELCA, ultimate legislative authority resides with the voting members to the Church Wide assembly that meets once every two years. The Church Council acts as the penultimate legislative authority, acting on necessary matters that arise between the biennial Church Wide Assemblies and formulating specific policies in response to general directives emanating from the Church Wide assemblies. And so it was with the much ballyhooed pro-LGBT resolutions at CWA09 that have now been formulated into actual policy language by action of the Church Council over the weekend.

Despite protesting letters from the president of the Missouri Synod (LCMS) and the president of the Roman Catholic Conference of Bishops that encouraged the Council to deviate from the decisions of CWA09, the ELCA Conference of Bishops had earlier taken a significant step toward ministry policy revisions by issuing draft documents in October 2009 (the ELCA Conference of Bishops is advisory). Those draft documents formed the core of the revised ministry policies adopted by the Church Council on April 10th. According to the office of the ELCA Secretary, copies of the actual revised ministry policies will be available online by the end of April.

I reprint the full text of the ELCA press release, followed by the response of Lutherans Concerned North America (LCNA), the LGBT advocacy group.

CHICAGO (ELCA) — The Church Council of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) adopted a series of historic and sweeping revisions to ministry policy documents April 10, the result of months of extensive writing, comment and review by hundreds of leaders and members following the 2009 Churchwide Assembly.
      The Church Council is the ELCA’s board of directors and serves as the interim legislative authority of the church between churchwide assemblies. The council is meeting here April 9-12. The next churchwide assembly is in Orlando, Fla., in August 2011.
      The changes were called for by the 2009 ELCA Churchwide Assembly, which directed that policy documents be revised to make it possible for eligible Lutherans in committed, publicly accountable, lifelong, monogamous same-gender relationships to serve as ELCA clergy and professional lay leaders. The assembly directed that revised policies recognize the convictions of those who believe the ELCA should not allow such service. The assembly also adopted a social statement on human sexuality.
       The council adopted revisions to two documents that spell out the church’s behavioral expectations of ELCA professional leaders — “Vision and Expectations: Ordained Ministers in the ELCA” and “Vision and Expectations: Associates in Ministry, Deaconesses and Diaconal Ministers in the ELCA.” The council also adopted revisions to a document that specifies grounds for discipline of professional leaders, “Definitions and Guidelines for Discipline,” and it adopted revisions to the “ELCA Candidacy Manual,” used by regional committees to help guide candidates seeking to become professional leaders in the ELCA.
      Council members asked few questions and commented briefly on each proposed document before approving them. Only minor editorial changes were proposed and adopted by the council. Each revised document was adopted overwhelmingly.
      The Rev. Keith A. Hunsinger, council member, Oak Harbor, Ohio, who said he does not agree with the sexuality decisions made in August 2009, announced April 11 that he had abstained on each vote on the documents. He explained that he didn’t believe that the first drafts of the documents released last fall embodied the full range of decisions made at the 2009 assembly. “My conscience won’t allow me to vote for any of these documents, but as a member of the board of directors, I can’t vote against the will of the churchwide assembly,” he told the ELCA News Service.
      However, Hunsinger told the council that the final forms of each document reflected “the breadth and depth” of the decisions, including the fact that “we agreed to live under a big tent,” and that multiple voices would be heard. “Because those documents now said that, I feel my ideas and I are still welcome in the ELCA,” he said.
      The revised policies are effective immediately, said David D. Swartling, ELCA secretary. Final revised text of each document will be posted online at http://www.ELCA.org/ministrypolicies by the end of April, he said.
     Following council approval of the policies, the Rev. Mark S. Hanson, ELCA presiding bishop, expressed his appreciation to many, including the council and the Conference of Bishops for leading the revision process over the past few months. He also thanked the Rev. Stanley N. Olson, executive director, ELCA Vocation and Education, the lead staff person working with church leaders and various constituencies through the revision process.
     Olson thanked many others who have worked for changes in ministry policies through more than two decades of effort. “This is the work of many — hundreds, thousands of people who have reflected, thought and prayed. We are still a church that is tense over this, but we are Easter people, and I think we have done an Easter thing today,” he told the council.
     Prior to voting, the Rev. A. Donald Main, Lancaster, Pa., chair of the ELCA Committee on Appeals, which led the effort to revise Definitions and Guidelines for Discipline, told the council that the document had not been revised since 1993. New sections address matters such as integrity, and substance abuse and addiction, he said.
     The Committee on Appeals also “considered each and every word, constantly testing different language so as to be clear and concise as possible, and remain faithful to our charge and to the social statement and ministry policies recommended and adopted by our assembly,” Main added.
     The two Vision and Expectations documents and the Candidacy Manual are “tools in the service of God’s mission through the ELCA, primarily to assist us in that work of calling forth and supporting faithful, wise and courageous leaders,” Olson said. The Vision and Expectations documents were most recently revised in the early 1990s, and the Candidacy Manual was revised in the past few years, he said.
     “We have not attempted to spell out every possible situation and to give definitive direction for every possible situation,” he told the council. “There are broad principles in these documents, and there are guidelines with some details.” Olson added the documents call for the ELCA to trust established processes and its leaders who have responsibility for oversight and decision-making.
     “Our next step is to orient our staff and the candidacy committees,” Olson said. A memo summarizing key policy revisions will be sent this week to help guide synod bishops, staff working with candidates for professional leadership, candidacy committee chairs, seminary presidents and selected staff, and applicants and candidates.
     Olson added that the ELCA Vocation and Education program unit, the ELCA Office of the Secretary and others are responsible for monitoring the new policies, and suggesting further revisions and guidelines if necessary.

And here is the text of the LCNA response:

This weekend, the ELCA Church Council meeting in Chicago moved the decision of the 2009 Churchwide Assembly into policy by replacing the language in church documents that excluded ministers in committed same-gender relationships with a policy that allows congregations and organizations to call a fully-qualified minister in a committed, same-gender relationship. And, the Council also approved the way to reinstate ministers who have been removed from the roster because of the previous policy and to receive ELM pastors onto the roster of the ELCA. The Council also made the benefits of the ELCA pension plan available to rostered ministers and employees in committed, same-gender relationships.

There were no votes on the Council opposing the adoption of the revised documents, the pension plan inclusion, and the rite of reception for those Extraordinary Lutheran Ministries pastors who were ordained “extra ordinem.”

The ELCA has reached two milestones long sought by the movement for full inclusion. First, it has eliminated all prohibitions against qualified people in a same-gender relationship serving on the ELCA”s roster of ministers. Second, and more importantly, it created a pathway that frees the gifts of ELCA members to pursue ministry and mission with new vigor. Each of these steps is crucial for both our continued healing and our bold walk into a more just future.

These actions are important because they are a major milestone along the journey of full inclusion. We have a policy that recognizes the gifts of its members to spread the good news of God in Christ Jesus and that will allow the return of those who have been removed or alienated from rostered leadership solely on the basis of the old policy.

Bishop Hanson said that one of the results of the Council”s actions would be new life in the church through new leaders. Bishop Hanson also thanked the Church Council for shepherding this task in most thoughtful way. He lifted the Conference of Bishops” participation up as key to the process.

As we reflected on the great amount work and effort it took , we observed a paradox. On one hand, in order to follow God”s call for justice, the former policy forced us, as a community, to restrict how we could use our gifts. Many of us spent considerable time and effort working to make the ELCA a more inclusive church. However, even within a relatively narrow focus on the policy concerning LGBT people”s role within the church, we have lifted up crucial questions for the church: What is the relationship of sexuality to salvation in Christ? What is the diversity in God”s wondrous creation? What is sinful? How do Lutherans read and interpret scripture? Who continues to face barriers to ministry and mission? How do we journey together faithfully, in spite of so many differences? What some people have dismissed as a narrow issue has both opened up and profoundly deepened our moral and theological life. God indeed works in mysterious ways.

Although we are closer to full-participation than we ever thought that we would be, there is still further to go. The ELCA continues to be heavily involved in a myriad of issues as it reaches out in Christ”s name and mission. We pray that our well-earned celebration as a community of reconciliation will renew us, will energize us to go yet more miles with even more joy and less fear, together with the whole people of God, as we follow Christ in love, healing, and abundant life.

Since the August decision to change policy, we have heard from many of you that it feels as though celebration is “stuck in our throats.” Verily, the time has come to clear our throats. Currently, censures are being lifted from congregations, for which we can celebrate. Soon, we will start to see pastors received and reinstated across the whole church. By the time we gather together in Minneapolis at Let Justice Roll Down Like Waters, we will be ready to shout out in holy joy! We hope that you can join us in July to add your voice to the chorus of people singing praise and thanksgiving to God.

Finally, there are acknowledgements to make. There are so many people who have worked to overturn the policy of the ELCA for so long. Among them, we offer thanks to God for the past and present service of the Goodsoil Legislative Team, the Regional Coordinators, Board, and staff of LC/NA, countless volunteers in congregations and synods, and the working group of Extraordinary Lutheran Ministries.

Alleluia! Christ is risen! Thanks be to God!

I have a crush on Rachel Maddow

For those who don’t know, Rachel Maddow is the host of her own show on MSNBC on weeknights. She is the freshest voice on network news. According to her description from her website,

Rachel has a doctorate in political science (she was a Rhodes Scholar) and a background in HIV/AIDS activism and prison reform. She shakes a mean cocktail, drives a bright red pickup, hates Coldplay, loves arguing with conservatives, spends a lot of money on AMTRAK tickets, and dresses like a first-grader.

She could also have been a lawyer. As a former trial lawyer myself, I envy her skills at cross examination evidenced in the following interview (aka smackdown) of a reparative therapy advocate and pseudo-psychologist named Richard Cohen. I was kidding about that crush part since she’s gay–I’m straight–and we’re both in happy relationships.

Enjoy.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Pastor Br’er Rabbit wants to dual roster with LCMC: should the ELCA toss him into the briar patch?

LCMC Pastor Tony Stoutenburg, who has been a frequent commenter here at times, sent me an email link to a press release from the SW California Synod of the ELCA.

The Southwest California Synod Council of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, meeting at the Synod offices in Glendale on March 20, 2010, voted to instruct Bishop Dean Nelson to call together the Synod Consultation Committee to address whether or not there is cause for disciplinary action against Lutheran Church of the Good Shepherd, Torrance, and Christ Lutheran Church, Santa Clarita, and the clergy of both congregations. The Consultation Committee is made up of ordained and lay persons elected by the Synod Assembly.

The Synod Council took this action upon learning that both congregations had recently voted to affiliate with Lutheran Congregations in Mission for Christ (LCMC), while retaining their membership in the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA). The ELCA has recognized LCMC as a separate Lutheran church body since 2003 but has no official relationship with the denomination. For clergy or congregations to attempt to belong simultaneously to different denominations is precluded by the constitution of the ELCA.

What is the ELCA to do with congregations or pastors that attempt to be dual rostered with both the ELCA and LCMC? While dual rostering is permitted with denominations in full communion with the ELCA (Episcopal, UCC, PCUSA, RCA, Moravian, & UMC), the ELCA has no such relationship with LCMC. Clearly, the present attempt to dual roster with the LCMC violates the ELCA constitution, but the question persists—what is the appropriate ELCA response?

A follower of this blog from Florida reported in a private email that she heard LCMC rabble rousers openly suggesting to congregations that were unable to mount the 2/3 necessary majority to sever ties with the ELCA, that dual rostering was a convenient shortcut. “Dual roster then wait for the ELCA to kick you out,” was the gist of the message. Similar sentiments were expressed on the Friends of the LCMC Google group (which is now private and hidden from prying eyes like mine) based on the example of a small group of Pennsylvania congregations that were not LCMC but part of their own tiny organization.

To the LCMC, this process serves the twin purposes of accomplishing a departure from the ELCA without following constitutional procedures and makes the ELCA out to be the “heavy” and the poor LCMC church that is expelled the martyr. Is expulsion a classic Br’er Rabbit briar patch response? Is a reprimand or censure the better response in the case of congregations? What is an appropriate punitive response for the pastors, who often are the real culpable party anyway? Removal from the ELCA roster?

Another RIC synod of the ELCA

When my wife and I moved from Upsala to Northfield in November, 2008, we left many church friends behind, not merely in our ELCA congregation in Upsala, but across the Northeast Synod of Minnesota where we had been active in many ways. We had frequently attended synod assemblies, which alternated between Duluth and Cragun’s resort near Brainerd, and Lynn served as WELCA synod president, board member, and parliamentarian for annual assemblies.

In Northfield, as members of Bethel Lutheran, we are now part of the Southeastern Minnesota synod of the ELCA, and we are learning our way around. I have attended several conference and synod gatherings, and Lynn and I will be voting members at this spring’s 2010 synod assembly.

So, it was with great interest and pleasant surprise when a news release crossed my desk from Lutherans Concerned North America (LCNA) which praised our new synod for its recently adopted statement of affirmation and inclusion. Turns out that the 2009 synod assembly voted to become a Reconciling in Christ (RIC) synod and to appoint a task force to craft an LGBT friendly welcoming statement. Our synod becomes the 24th synod of the ELCA to officially become RIC (out of a total of 65 synods nationwide). In a nutshell, the RIC movement is for synods, congregations, and individuals to become overtly gay friendly and welcoming.

The single element that is central to the program is the Affirmation of Welcome. It is simple, yet powerful in its witness … Making the Affirmation promotes a publicly inclusive ministry and helps heal the pain of doubt.

Here is the full statement of the SE Mn synod:

Affirmation of Welcome

Baptized into the waters of Christ and raised to new life by the strong word of God, fed and nourished by the body and blood of Christ, the people of God in the Southeastern Minnesota Synod of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America decided in the 2009 assembly to be a Reconciling in Christ Synod. This synod, called by the Holy Spirit, is kept in unity with Jesus Christ in the one true faith. We are freely forgiven in Christ and we are in full service to one another. Whenever we meet in worship, prayer, deliberation and decision, as a large and diverse body of Christians, we recognize various ministries to ensure all people are welcomed into a transforming relationship with Jesus Christ. As baptized believers created in the image of God – including, but not limited to, people of every race, nationality, age, political affiliation, marital status, gender identity, economic or social status, sexual orientation, mental and physical abilities – our synod welcomes all people of all backgrounds to become Christ’s devoted disciples.

A Roman Catholic emergency synod of Bishops?

The media and the blogosphere exploded last week with news that the cancerous clergy sexual abuse crisis and its coverup may have reached deep into the bowels of the Vatican. Was the pope himself, in his prior leadership role as Archbishop, complicit in the coverup of abuse of a German pedophile priest? Later, as Cardinal Ratzinger and head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, did he ignore or coverup memos of abuse complaints?

In response, the Vatican churns out press releases suggesting all the problems are ancient history and that the Roman Catholic hierarchy is currently achieving renewed levels of trust. The following comes from a press release from the Director of the Vatican press office dated March 27th and reprinted from the National Catholic Reporter blog:

The truth is that the cases that have come to public attention generally took place some time ago, even decades ago, although recognising them and making amends with the victims is the best way to restore justice and to achieve that ‘purification of memory’ which enables us to look to the future with renewed commitment, with humility and trust.

A contribution to this trust comes from the many positive signals emerging from various episcopal conferences, bishops and Catholic institutions in different countries on the various continents: directives for the correct handling and prevention of abuses, which have been reiterated, updated and renewed in Germany , Austria , Australia , Canada etc.

Other spokesmen for the Roman Catholic patriarchy offer a conspiracy theory that blames the liberal media, as reported by the Guardian of London:

At last, one of Pope Benedict’s closest aides uses the word “conspiracy” in relation to the systematic global cover-up of child abuse by paedophile Catholic priests. Unfortunately, Cardinal José Saraiva Martins believes the conspiracy is against the Catholic church, which is its victim.

But there may be a stirring in the lower levels of the patriarchy as a rumbling is rising amongst the episcopate for a special synod, a gathering of bishops from around the world to deal with a problem that seems increasingly beyond the power of the Vatican to control. As reported by John Phillips and reprinted in the progressive Catholic blog, Englightened Catholicism:

Many bishops have let it be known they want Benedict to convene a special synod or worldwide conference of bishops to examine the problem because of a growing feeling that the Vatican cannot handle this.

Yet to be seen is whether the Vatican hierarchy or a more democratic episcopacy will deal honestly with systemic problems such as a patriarchal, males-only priesthood, mandatory celibacy, secrecy, or the institutional, top-down, manipulative hierarchy itself. Or, as many fear, will this crisis be seen as merely one of public relations?

All quiet on the Lutheran front

As Garrison Keillor frequently notes, “It’s been a quiet week in Lake Wobegon.”

Can’t report on the latest gossip from LCMC because the 91 members of the “Friends of LCMC” Google group apparently grew tired of my comments about their comments since they have now made their little group private, preventing outsiders like me from checking in from time to time to see what’s going on. Don’t think they’d accept me for membership.

Nothing out of the Lutheran Core camp since their March 17th release of their March newsletter. I already commented about the overall negative tone of that missive that was their list of things they dislike about the ELCA.

From the ELCA comes fairly routine news; the most recent press releases pertain to a) ecumenical advocacy days, b) HIV religious summit, c) Jerusalem Lutheran hospital, d) other middle east matters, and e) flooding of the Red River along the Minnesota – North Dakota border.

I don’t think I’ll be so bold as to suggest a return to normalcy and away from contentiousness within the ELCA, but that’s been the case this week.

Starring John Boehner

With violent and threatening placards bobbing amidst the tea party protesters, the “N” word shouted at civil rights icon Congressman John Lewis, the “F” word shouted at Congressman Barney Frank, news that the FBI is investigating vandalism against the families of Democratic members of Congress–and the list goes on—the question must be asked: is the Republican leadership part of the problem or part of the solution?

Is Sarah Palin’s website graphic that puts gunsights on the districts of certain Democratic Congressfolk evidence of clear-headed, responsible leadership? Is Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann’s recently repeated rant that our President is un-American the rational voice of the loyal opposition? And what about that angry, defiant speech of House Minority leader, John Boehner, just before the passage of health reform legislation?

Here is a Youtube video that is going viral starring the esteemed minority leader, the voice of the party of No, cheering Americans to a higher calling.

Crumbling Roman Catholic patriarchy

The patriarchy of Roman Catholicism, even the papacy itself, is under siege.

The sex abuse revelations that shook the foundations of American Catholicism in the last decade have reached Europe, first in Ireland, then Germany (implicating the brother of the pope), and today the headlines in newspapers around the world proclaim complicity of the pope himself in covering up the sordid history of abuse on the part of a Wisconsin priest.

In the US, the Council of Bishops stood against the health care legislation that has become the law of the land even as American nuns championed the cause of reform. A small group of Catholic women are inviting excommunication by challenging male only ordination with their own bishops ordaining females in highly public and visible ceremonies. An influential Cardinal has publicly questioned the institution of a celibate priesthood.

Progressive Catholic voices rise. Progressive Catholic organizations such as Voice of the Faithful and Call to Action dare to challenge orthodoxy.

Against this backdrop comes an open letter from Father John J McNeill, not merely a voice for gay rights in the church, but perhaps the voice. I have previously blogged about the lengthy history of Father’s McNeill’s advocacy and the important role he and his writings have played in LGBT equality issues of the last generation. Now, in his open letter to the pope and the entire patriarchal hierarchy, his prophetic voice once again rings clear as he speaks truth to power. His letter, reprinted below in its entirety (with a hat tip to Open Tabernacle blog), is nothing less than a warning that what is presently at stake is the very moral authority of the papacy.

Open Letter to Pope Benedict XVI

In my three areas of expertise; spirituality, psychotherapy and theology, I am aware of a desperate need for spiritual transformation in the culture, the nation, and the Church. I will do my best to make a contribution to that need from my perspective as an older man with many years of involved experience.

Saturday, March 20, 2010

An Open Letter to Pope Benedict XVI, Cardinal Levada, Cardinal George and all Bishops of the Roman Catholic Church in the World on the Issue of Homosexuality:

My initial open letter of November 2000 was addressed to the American Bishops at their annual conference. In the past ten-plus years, the contents of the letter have taken on greater relevance and force in the light of new scientific discoveries concerning the nature of homosexual orientation and the psychological and spiritual needs of GLBT people, as well as recent statements from the Roman Catholic Church’s teaching authority out of touch with those discoveries.

As a result, I would like to readdress the letter to the following: Pope Benedict XVI; Cardinal William Levada, prefect of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF); Cardinal Francis George, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) and his fellow American bishops and, finally, to all the bishops of the Roman Catholic Church in the world.

Catholic gay and lesbian people demand that, if the Church wants to be seen as their loving mother, mediating to us God’s unconditional love, the Church has no choice except to enter into dialogue with its gay members. In 1974, the delegates of DignityUSA’s first national convention requested in a letter that a dialogue be opened between the American bishops and the members of the Catholic gay and lesbian community. With very few exceptions that letter was ignored.

Now, 38 years later, once again in the name of my Catholic lesbian siters and gay brothers I call for open dialogue. For over 38 years, I have ministered as priest and psychotherapist to lesbians and gays. I helped found Dignity/New York to provide a safe and loving community within the Catholic Church for gay people. For over 33 years, I have given retreats for lesbians and gays at Kirkridge, an ecumenical retreat center. I have written four books on gay spirituality: The Church and the Homosexual, Taking a Chance on God, Freedom, Glorious Freedom and Sex: As God Intended: A Study of Human Sexuality As Play. I also published an autobiography on my own spiritual journey as a gay priest.

As a result of my experience, I have come to the conclusion that what is at stake at this point in time is not only the spiritual and psychological health of many gay and lesbian Catholics and other lesbian and gay Christians. What is at stake is your moral authority to teach on the issue of homosexuality. In the past, when you undertook a listening process to hear what the Holy Spirit was saying through the People of God, you won our respect. We respected you when you made your statements on the economy, on nuclear warfare and, especially, your aborted effort to draw up a letter on the role of women in the Church. You listened carefully to what women had to say, and drew up your statements responding to what you heard from women. These actions gave us gay and lesbians reason to hope that the Holy Spirit would lead you into a spirit of willingness to listen to us gay and lesbian Catholics.
What is at stake now is your own moral authority! Unless we gay and lesbian Catholics receive the message that you take us seriously and are willing to listen carefully to what the Holy Spirit is saying to you through our lives and our experience, your judgments on homosexuality will be ignored, for the most part, and you will lose what authority you have left to deserve to be listened to with respect on this issue.

I have never heard the same level of courage from the American bishops in dealing with the Vatican as that shown by the Major Superiors of Religious Men in response to the egregious document issued by The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, entitled, “Some Considerations Concerning Homosexual Persons” as follows:

“We view (this document) as a hindrance to the Church leaders of the United States in this most difficult and sensitive area of human living. —We are shocked that the statement calls for discrimination against gay men and lesbian women. We find the reasoning for supporting such discrimination to be strained, unconvincing and counterproductive to our statements and actions to support the pastoral needs and personal dignity of such persons. Far from a help to the Bishops and other religious leaders in the United States Catholic Church, the statement complicates our already complex ministry to all people.
“Moreover we find the arguments used to justify discrimination based on stereotypes and falsehoods that are out of touch with modern psychological and sociological understandings of human sexuality. We regret such actions by the CDF and we reaffirm our support for the human rights of all our brothers and sisters.”

As a gay Catholic theologian and psychotherapist, I am fully aware of the enormous destruction recent Vatican and USCCB documents, and news items, as well as actions taken by the USCCB and several state Catholic Conferences in the U.S. leading up to the November 2008 elections, have caused in the psychic life of young Catholic gays, and of the violence they will provoke against all gay people. This is compounded further by the initial Vatican reaction and opposition to the United Nations proposal sponsored by France and backed by 27 European Union nations which seeks to end the practice of criminalizing and punishing people for their sexual orientation—their very human nature and spiritual being. I find myself in a dilemma; what kind of faith and trust can I place in a teaching authority that I see clearly acts in an unloving, hateful and destructive way toward my gay family and is more interested in defending its institutional interest than it is in truth and justice? In the name of the thousands of gay and lesbian Catholics and other Christians to whom it has been my God-given privilege to minister, I make this statement:

At this point, the ignorance and distortion of homosexuality, and the use of stereotypes and falsehoods in official Church documents, forces us who are gay Catholics to issue the institutional Church a serious warning. Your ignorance of homosexuality can no longer be excused as inculpable; it has become of necessity a deliberate and malicious ignorance. In the name of Catholic gays and lesbians everywhere, we cry out “Enough!”

Enough! Enough of your distortions of Scripture. You continue to claim that a loving homosexual act in a committed relationship is condemned in Scripture, when competent scholars are nearly unanimous in acknowledging that nowhere in Scripture is the problem of sexual acts between two gay men or lesbian women who love each other, ever dealt with, never mind condemned. You must listen to biblical scholars to find out what Scripture truly has to say about homosexual relationships.

Enough! Enough of your efforts to reduce all homosexual acts to expressions of lust, and your refusal to see them as possible expressions of a deep and genuine human love. The second group you must listen to are competent professional psychiatrists and psychotherapists from whom you can learn about the healthy and positive nature of mature gay and lesbian relationships. They will assure you that homosexual orientation is both not chosen and unchangeable and that any ministry promising to change that orientation is a fraud.

Enough! Enough of your efforts through groups like Courage and other ex-gay ministries to lead young gays to internalize self-hatred with the result that they are able to relate to God only as a God of fear, shame and guilt and lose all hope in a God of mercy and love. What is bad psychology has to be bad theology!

Enough! Enough again, of your efforts to foster hatred, violence, discrimination and rejection of us in the human community, as well as disenfranchising our human and civil rights. We gay and lesbian Catholics pray daily that the Holy Spirit will lead you into a spirit of repentance. You must publicly accept your share of the blame for gay murders and bashing and so many suicides of young gays and ask forgiveness from God and from the gay community.

Enough, also, of driving us from the home of our mother, the Church, and attempting to deny us the fullness of human intimacy and sexual love. You frequently base that denial by an appeal to the dead letter of the “natural law.” Another group to whom you must listen are the moral theologians who, as a majority, argue that natural law is no longer an adequate basis for dealing with sexual questions. They must be dealt with within the context of interpersonal human relationships.

Above all else, you must enter into dialogue with the gay and lesbian members of the Catholic community. We are the ones living out the human experience of a gay orientation, so we alone can discern directly in our experience what God’s spirit is saying to us. And for the first time in history, you have gay and lesbian Catholic communities of worship and prayer who are seeking individually and collectively to hear what the Spirit is saying to them in their gay experience—what experiences lead to the peace and joy of oneness with the Spirit of God and what experiences lead away from that peace and joy! God gave you the commission of discerning the truth. But there is no mandate from Jesus Christ to “create” the truth. We pray daily that the Holy Spirit will lead you to search humbly for the truth concerning homosexuality through dialogue with your lesbian sisters and gay brothers.

The only consolation I can offer gay and lesbian Catholics in the meantime is the profound hope that the very absurdity and hateful spirit of recent Vatican and USCCB documents, news items and political actions will lead gay Catholics to refuse them and recognize the contradiction of their message, and that of Jesus, who never once spoke a negative word concerning homosexuals.

I work, hope and pray that lesbian and gay Catholics and other gay Christians will exercise their legitimate freedom of conscience, discerning what God is saying to them directly through their gay experience. I hope, too, that they will be able to de-fang the poisons of pathologically homophobic religion, accepting the good news that God loves them and accepts them as gays and lesbians and refusing to be caught in the vortex of self-hatred vis-à-vis a God of fear.

I believe that we are at the moment of a special “kairos” in this matter. The Holy Spirit is “doing something new.” I was the guest at a gay ecumenical community that established homes for adult retarded people in the city of Basel in Switzerland. The extraordinary spirit of love and compassion that permeated that community was a foretaste of what lies in the future. I believe there is a vast reservoir of human and divine love that has remained until now untapped because of prejudice and homophobia. The Spirit is calling on you to help release that vast potential of human and divine love through your actions.

The worldwide prayerful vigils in December 2008 were to raise our concerned voices over the stance taken by the Vatican to perpetuate the criminalization, incarceration and death sentences towards people of a homosexual orientation. It is not only counter – productive, it violates your own teaching that all persons are due dignity and respect and that homosexual persons should not suffer violence, injustice and discrimination. Furthermore, that they should be welcomed as full and equal members of the Church and society. We pray and hope that the same Holy Spirit who has graciously liberated us who are gay to self-respect and self-love will liberate in you, our Catholic leaders, a profound love for your gay brothers and lesbian sisters and melt away all prejudice and judgmentalism in your hearts.

May you make us welcome as full members in your family in Christ.

May God bless your efforts!

Sincerely in Christ
John J. McNeill

Comments from the Editor of Dignity’s Quarterly News Journal:
The open letter to the USCCB of November 2000 is currently popping up on several Internet user groups and blogsites, and appears in the Appendix in John’s latest book, Sex as God Intended:A Reflection on Human Sexuality as Play.

Since the release of John’s open letter, there have been numerous documents and communications promulgated by the Pope, Vatican offices and USCCB on matters related to homosexuality. Even more so during 2008. Except for minor nuances, they contain the same repetitive rhetoric. Repetition of falsehoods, erroneous interpretations and bad logic doesn’t make for “the truth” and mitigates our trust and respect of “the teaching authority.”

I was in communication with John from the last week of December 2008 through early January 2009 . I learned he had but one response from a bishop of the United States in response to his initial open letter. John has issued this update and said that while announced as an open letter to the Pope, Cardinals Levada and George and the bishops of the world, it was also directed to ordinary gay Catholics for their discernment and investigation of personal and collective lived experience.
John suggests that the more out of touch the hierarchy of the Catholic Church get, “…the more we learn in a painful way to let go and grow up spiritually”. He calls it “…the blessing of fallibility. We are witnessing the birth pangs of the Church of the Holy Spirit.”

Health Care Reform: conservative contrarians

Of the myriad news reports and blog posts about the passage of Health Care Reform, here are a pair of my favorites because they each swim against the tide of their own natural constituencies. One comes from David Frum, an avowed conservative and former speech writer for George Bush the latter, and the second is from Vox Nova, a Catholic blog generally pro-life.

Frum writes a scathing attack against those responsible for the health care bill in its current form—the Republican leadership.

A huge part of the blame for today’s disaster attaches to conservatives and Republicans ourselves.

At the beginning of this process we made a strategic decision: … we would make no deal with the administration. No negotiations, no compromise, nothing. We were going for all the marbles. This would be Obama’s Waterloo – just as healthcare was Clinton’s in 1994.

Only, the hardliners overlooked a few key facts: Obama was elected with 53% of the vote, not Clinton’s 42%. The liberal block within the Democratic congressional caucus is bigger and stronger than it was in 1993-94. And of course the Democrats also remember their history, and also remember the consequences of their 1994 failure.

This time, when we went for all the marbles, we ended with none.

But Frum reserves his harshest criticism for the Rush Limbaugh types, the “conservative entertainment industry”, that lathers up the froth-jawed tea partiers for their own ratings. When Rush’s listeners “are less angry, they listen to the radio less, and hear fewer ads for Sleepnumber beds.”

Frum also dissents from the after-the-loss talking points of the Republican leadership that all will be well for Republicans after the next election cycle.

No illusions please: This bill will not be repealed. Even if Republicans scored a 1994 style landslide in November, how many votes could we muster to re-open the “doughnut hole” and charge seniors more for prescription drugs? How many votes to re-allow insurers to rescind policies when they discover a pre-existing condition? How many votes to banish 25 year olds from their parents’ insurance coverage? And even if the votes were there – would President Obama sign such a repeal?

We followed the most radical voices in the party and the movement, and they led us to abject and irreversible defeat.

Much as I disagree with Frum’s policies, I think his political intuition is right on. “It’s Waterloo all right: ours,” Frum concludes.

The Vox Nova article, Stop the Pro-Life Pity Party, chides the pro-life movement for being all whine and pretense. Here is a list of critical comments:

the pro-life movement turned its back on health care reform.

With leadership like this, the unborn don’t need enemies.

their initial demand is still largely met, and the caterwauling commences that they aren’t being respected. Grow up for crying aloud.

Your agenda never included supporting health care reform. Remember, Scott Brown, a pro-choice Republican, was your savior when he was elected in Massachusetts because he was going to stop the health care bill. You opposed health care reform and didn’t really care about abortion, and you know it. (emphasis mine) Stop blaming others for your faults. Stupak was handy when you didn’t just want to sound like another shrill partisan. Stupak managed to give you legitimacy. You didn’t give Stupak anything. Who was using who here? That’s right, Stupak was used by the pro-life movement.

Again, I think the political intuition of the blog writer is right on. He correctly understands that much of the pro-life rhetoric was mere cover for deeper political motives—whether Republicanism or conservative fiscal policies–or even darker visceral eruptions such as anti-Obama racism. The blog post concludes:

Of course, health care reform is a great thing too, unless you are a pro-life activist in which case it was a bad thing due almost wholly to things having nothing to do with the unborn.

Sometimes, conservatives can shine with brilliant insight.

Lutheran Core is agin it.

1920’s President, silent Calvin Coolidge, was a man of few words. When he returned from church alone one Sunday, his wife asked him what the sermon was about.

“Sin,” silent Cal replied.

His wife pressed him for more. “Well, what did he say about sin?” she asked.

“He was agin it.”

That pretty much summed up the essence of the sermon, and the same can be said of Lutheran CORE. What is CORE all about?

They’re agin it, and the “it” is the perceived sin of their bogeyman, the ELCA.

The Lutheran CORE March newsletter was out on the 17th. Seems they could have waited a few days and called it the April issue. The newsletter contains eleven articles, and four of them are about Lutheran CORE while the point of the other seven is to criticize the ELCA.

What do they say about a group best defined by what it is against?