The Progressive Catholic Voice
An independent and grassroots forum for reflection, dialogue, and the exchange of ideas within the Catholic community of Minnesota and beyond December 2007 |
 |
 Dedicated to St. Francis of Assisi, who heard and responded to God’s call to “repair my Church,” and, in so doing, emulated the justice-making and compassion of our brother Jesus.
|
________________________________________________
Dialoguing with the Archbishop Archbishop John C. Nienstedt writes a column in The Catholic Spirit entitled "In God's Good Time." We take his public statements as an opportunity to discuss his views with him. The Progressive Catholic Voice Responds to
Archbishop Nienstedt's Dear Archbishop Nienstedt: For the week of November 2, you take for your subject the "new evangelization." We would like to ask you for clarification on the two conflicting approaches to evangelization presented in your column. You first define it as conveying the culture created by the Gospel message to the cultures of "the world of business, the world of science, the world of health care, the world of rap, the world of the internet, etc." You point out the common ground between the Christian culture and the "secular" culture in each of these worlds. The commonalities are "human nature and the natural law which governs it…the desire for happiness, the appreciation of goodness and beauty, the need to love and be loved, the ordering of the common good." You say that lay people are the missionaries of today, bringing Christian culture into their everyday relations in the world by addressing these basic human needs. We take this to mean that by relating to our neighbors at the deepest levels of the human spirit, we follow Christ. What a beautiful vision for a leader to give us! We thank you for it. But you also make some statements that contradict the vision. You say that the "secular" culture does not "admit Christ's lordship over the created order nor each person's dignity as being made in Christ's image." This is a "clash" of two cultures with "worldviews . . . totally different in their perspectives." Are you including all non-Christians in a "secular" worldview? Can people with different worldviews live together peaceably or is it inevitably a "clash"? In speaking about preparation for the role of evangelizers, you turn from defining evangelization as conveyance of the Gospel message of love to defining it as conveyance of "knowledge and understanding of the faith" which can only be taught by "priests and pastoral leaders." "The 'new evangelization' cannot happen without them." Do we understand you correctly? Are you saying that priests and authorized pastoral leaders must teach the laity the doctrines and tenets of the Catholic church so that, armed with orthodoxy, we will go into our workplaces and teach others? Do you mean that the "new evangelization' is about making all US citizens believers in Christ? Believers in Roman Catholicism? Relating to people at the deepest levels of human spirituality and teaching them Christian or Catholic beliefs are quite different goals. Will you please clarify this? We would like to tell you our view about preparation for the role of evangelizers. In our Catholic life we have learned that the message of Jesus and the theology of the Christ are about God, about an unconditionally loving God whose will is the well-being of the whole human species in relation to the whole creation. We learned the Christian message that we should love one another as God has loved us. The best witness to this faith is a community of people who actually demonstrates to the world what it looks like to love one another. We need the leadership of bishops, priests, and pastoral leaders to create this community among ourselves in the Archdiocese, but it cannot be a top-down indoctrination about beliefs. Love is not generated that way. Love is based on respect, recognition of individual worth and reciprocal care. It grows through continuous communication, of which Eucharist is a sign. In addition, we have to show the same respect to the world. Rather than an oppositional attitude toward the "secular" we can acknowledge that we are at home in this world. We can become partners with our fellow citizens in creating a just nation. We find many of our non-Catholic and non-Christian neighbors in this pluralistic society superior to us in kindness, human understanding, tolerance, and respect for individual freedom and equality as well as more zealous in caring for the marginalized. They may be more adept at creating communities that witness to the Gospel message than we are. Armed with our belief in an unconditionally loving God and loving community support, we can be open to learn from the world as well as demonstrate our faith by our lives in it. We are open to your critique of this view. Yours sincerely, The Editorial Team of The Progressive Catholic Voice: ___________________________________________ The Progressive Catholic Voice Responds to
Archbishop Nienstedt's
Archbishop Nienstedt's, November 30, 2007, Letter to the Editor of the Star Tribune In his Nov. 28 column, Nick Coleman accuses me of not being compassionate toward friends and relatives of persons with same-sex attractions. I vigorously deny the charge. For 13 years I prepared priesthood candidates for celebrating the Sacrament of Penance by counseling them to welcome persons with warmth, compassion and understanding. Anyone who has celebrated that same sacrament with me knows I follow my own advice. What Coleman wants is for the church I represent to be accepting and compassionate toward homosexual acts and lifestyles. And that can never be. Coleman further claims the Catechism of the Catholic Church does not say that homosexual acts are a "grave evil." What it does say is the following: "Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity (Genesis 19: 1-29, Romans 1: 24-27, 1 Corinthians 6: 10, 1 Timothy 1:10), tradition has always declared that 'homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.' ... Under no circumstances can they be approved." As a priest and bishop, I have the responsibility before God and in the name of Jesus Christ to call all men and women to conversion, the first step of which is recognizing sinful activity for what it is. Sometimes that is not a comfortable thing to do, but it is always the compassionate thing to do. John C. Nienstedt The Progressive Catholic Voice Responds Dear Archbishop Nienstedt, Thank you for responding to Nick Coleman's column in the Minneapolis Star Tribune. We, as fellow Catholics, take it as an indication that you may be willing to talk with us too. You defend your compassion for sinners in the Sacrament of Penance. Yet Coleman's point about compassion, we believe, was about empathy for people who do not believe as you do that they are committing sins by their sexual activity, and for their friends and families who also do not believe they are committing sins by supporting them. None of them will be coming to confession to receive your compassion. The point is that the teaching about mortal sin and homosexual acts is itself a harsh and unloving teaching because it fails to understand the physiology and psychology of human sexuality. People who admit that they are "disordered," and who live celibate lives are accepted in the community. Similarly, people who admit that they are disordered while continuing to be sexually active – though as long as they consider and confess such activity as "sin." These individuals are in a continual state of conflict and misery but they are still accepted community members. Only those gay people who have a healthy acceptance of their own sexuality and are trying to create healthy relationships are excluded from communion. Doesn't that sound like a "disordered" moral teaching? As a bishop you cannot hide behind a closed and immutable tradition of moral teaching based on a few quotations from the Bible. You know well, we suspect, that moral teaching changes all the time. For example, Archbishop Flynn's moral teaching on racism "In God's Image: Pastoral Letter on Racism" could not have been written in the 1800's nor in the early 1900's. It is a product of the reasoning of the late 20th century. We agree that teaching is the role of the bishop. But good teachers do not just hand on rigid formulae. We call upon you to understand all the most current and well-discussed thinking of the scientific and philosophical communities on a particular question and to dialogue with the faithful about their experience in the matter. We also ask you to be slow to pronounce iron-clad rules of behavior for all members of the Church with the threat of exclusion as punishment. We admire your seriousness about your role as priest and bishop to call all men and women to conversion. We would willingly follow you if you showed us that you yourself are willing to be honest about the development of moral teaching, doctrine, and church governance. It has been a mark of the Catholic church over the centuries that its teachings are based on reason as well as faith. We call upon you to be willing to reason with us in all of these areas. Yours sincerely, The Editorial Team of The Progressive Catholic Voice: ________________________________________________
In the November 1 issue of The Catholic Spirit, the official newspaper of the Archdiocese of St. Paul/Minneapolis, editor Joe Towalski discussed what the Church "really teaches" about homosexuality. Towalski's editorial was in response to the archdiocese's October 22 decision to prohibit 82-year-old "cradle-Catholic" Robert Curoe and his lesbian daughter Carol from speaking at a CPCSM-sponsored event at St. Frances Cabrini Catholic Church. (To read more about this, click here and here.) Towalski's editorial reiterates the official church teaching on the immorality of "homosexual activity," and reaffirms the catechism's call for homosexuals to be "accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity." The editorial also directs people to the 1997 U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishop's statement, Always Our Children -- a statement that encourages parents to "accept and love" themselves and their gay son or daughter, and to do all that they can to "urge [their] son or daughter to stay joined to the Catholic faith community." As executive coordinator of the 27-year-old Catholic Pastoral Committee on Sexual Minorities (CPSCM), I wrote and submitted a "counter-point commentary" to The Catholic Spirit in response to Towalski's November 1 editorial, while my friend and fellow Progressive Catholic Voice editorial team member, Paula Ruddy, submitted a letter-to-the-editor. Neither was published in subsequent issues of the newspaper. Upon inquiring why this was the case, we were informed that it was not possible for The Catholic Spirit to serve as a forum for dialogue around church teachings. Following are the two commentaries that The Catholic Spirit refused to publish. In his November 1 editorial, Joe Towalski notes that homosexuality is a "hot button issue for the church," yet he does not say why this is the case. I'd like to suggest that one reason why many issues related to human sexuality remain controversial is because the majority of Catholics intuitively sense that the teachings of the church about these issues lack credibility. The reason for this is simple: the laity has had no part in shaping these teachings. The belief that the laity should be consulted in matters of doctrine, especially when teachings concern their lives intimately, is part of Catholicism's rich heritage. For instance, the great English theologian, Cardinal John Henry Newman (1801-90) wrote: "The body of the faithful is one of the witnesses to the fact of the tradition of revealed doctrine, and . . . their consensus through Christendom is the voice of the Infallible Church." With regard to the issue of homosexuality, the "body of the faithful" is still very much engaged in the journey towards "consensus." And in other areas, the consensus that has been reached is at odds with the teaching of the hierarchical church. For instance, even the US Conference of Catholic Bishops concedes that 96 percent of married Catholics use birth control. Clearly, the church's teachings on a range of sexual issues are not set in stone. This shouldn't be at all surprising, for as Jesuit Philip Endean reminds us: "Dogmas of tradition exist not as truths complete in themselves, but rather as resources for helping us discover the ever greater glory . . . of the God whose gift of self pervades all possible experience." And, whether we like it or not, "all possible experience" includes gay people's experiences of love, intimacy, and relationship. The reality is that gay people can and do experience sexual relationships marked by justice, wholeness, and life-giving love. Shouldn't such experiences be considered as sources in the ongoing formulation of church teaching on homosexuality? And if not, why not? What exactly are the sources of the Church's teaching on homosexuality? Shouldn't such sources include the findings of science and people's experience? These are the types of questions that many Catholics are asking. They are legitimate questions with important theological and pastoral implications. Yet sadly, the "official" church response to such questions is woefully inadequate. It's simply not good enough to say, "Well, this is how it's always been, so it must be right," especially since it's clear that the basis of "what it's always been" has been informed by limited sources from bygone eras. And when we limit our sources, we limit and obstruct God's wise and loving outreach to us – and end up with limited and impoverished church teachings. As Catholics we can do better. Michael Bayly __________________________________________ In the November 1, 2007, issue, editor Joe Towalski does a good job of spelling out the "fullness" of the hierarchical teachings on homosexuality. By this he means that although the teaching is that homosexual activity is sinful, the teaching also states that homosexuals should be treated with love within the church. Two points: First, the bishops' moral teachings are not infallible and have changed significantly over the years. Unlike disciplinary rules, the bishops can't just declare sexual relations to be sinful on their authority. They have to have reasons. Towalski does not go into the theory of human sexuality underlying the teaching. In The Human Core of Spirituality, (SUNY, 1996), Daniel Helminiak shows that reducing the purposes of sex to procreation robs it of its most human dimension, the spiritual. It would be wise of the bishops to enter into dialogue about human sexuality with the scientific and philosophical communities rather than to insist on a closed set of pronouncements. Second, it doesn't take a scientist or a philosopher to see the fallacy in calling the bishops' teaching a loving one when people are denied participation in such a basic need of human life as sexual expression. Moreover, there is daily evidence of the suffering caused by the rejection of people in an essential aspect of their personhood. It is a violence to them. For these two reasons many of the Catholic faithful reject the teaching of the hierarchy on this matter. We don't believe that committed homosexual relationships are per se sinful. I admire the hierarchy's determination to strengthen family life, but condemning committed relationships of homosexuals is counterproductive and cruel. Paula Ruddy ________________________________________________
If you've been out of town or on another planet this month, you may not have heard about the statement from Archbishop Nienstedt that appeared in The Catholic Spirit. If you're one of those few, here it is: "Those who actively encourage or promote homosexual acts or such activity within a homosexual lifestyle formally cooperate in a grave evil and, if they do so knowingly and willingly, are guilty of mortal sin. They have broken communion with the church and are prohibited from receiving Holy Communion until they have had a conversion of heart, expressed sorrow for their action and received sacramental absolution from a priest." It's Church moral teaching someone told me. Irrefutable, irreconcilable, someone said. Even he, even an archbishop, doesn't argue with Church moral teaching, they said. But I wondered why he chose to make this first pastoral act such an incendiary one. Why make it something that would deeply wound so many people? I know of a lovely old man in northern Minnesota, a life-long by-the-book-Catholic, who is weeping. He loves his lesbian granddaughter and he loves her partner. He wants them to have a life fully and lovingly shared. Now he believes he can't receive communion. And he cries. For the first time in seventy years of a faithful, deeply reverential life, he won't be allowed to receive communion. There are mothers and fathers shaking their heads in consternation, wondering what kind of law can ask them to want less fully lived lives for their gay sons or daughters. How many are wracked with pain of being asked to choose between loving and receiving communion? How many wondering how they can make a confession to be 'reconciled' when it goes against every fiber of their humanity? I believe there are young people out there somewhere who are beginning to realize that they are, at the center of their very nature, homosexual. They have been trying to make some sense of it and may be finally reconciled – only to read the archbishop's words. They are now wondering how they can go on living – or if they really want to – now they hear how much pain they may cause those who love them. How many young people are facing these heart-rending questions? I know there are men and women shaking, knowing that if their employers knew the truth about them, they would lose their jobs, lose their careers. Many of them work for churches. Have for years. Now the "rubber hits the road." What kind of loss will it mean to this Roman Catholic Church, if these talented, gifted people have to leave their employment? Most of the other states won't be facing this problem. Even other dioceses in the state of Minnesota may not be feeling this pressure. But right here, right now, in the Archdiocese of St. Paul/Minneapolis, we are. There is a group of gay men and women who love the Church. They have banded into a group who grapple unceasingly with how to be gay and Catholic. They fight with all that is in them to be accepted and loved in their own churches. Why, I wonder, why, with people leaving the Catholic Church in droves all over the world, why are these people being excluded? And why, bottom line, is it always about sex? A wise woman told me years ago she'd read that "the only sin is not loving." I don't know who said it originally, maybe St. Augustine, maybe Chardin, maybe Charlie Brown in one of his theological discourses. But it was someone who is supposed to know about these things. We talk a lot about the Creator and the value of all creation. We have been left the stewards of this creation and that surely includes all God's people. We've been trying lately to learn to be better stewards of natural resources, of God's magnificent creation. Doesn't it seem true that the same stewardship is asked of us when it comes to the care of humans? I don't know who wrote this moral teaching that Archbishop Nienstedt is emphasizing – but it seems something's been misconstrued. Just wait 'til the Holy Spirit hears about this! Ronnie B. Angelus is an 81-year-old lay Catholic woman. ________________________________________________ "Because of Jesus" The national Call To Action conference held annually in Milwaukee on the first weekend of November, is always a treat for us. It is like a gigantic family reunion – a family of thousands. The theme for this year's conference was Racism to Reconciliation: Church Beyond Power and Privilege. The conference came on the heels of the Archdiocese of St. Paul/Minneapolis preventing the appearance of Carol Curoe and her father, Bob at a Catholic parish in Minneapolis. They were to speak about their recently released book, Are There Closets in Heaven? A Catholic Father and Lesbian Daughter Share Their Story. Their story was deemed inappropriate to be shared in a Catholic space – perhaps because it did not have the proper ending. The Call to Action conference was the antithesis of the archdiocese's action. The conference was a welcoming place of stories by and about the marginalized, stories that are valued because the storytellers are valued – valued as the gifts from sisters and brothers of one family. Dolores Huerta, organizer and advocate for farm workers along with Cesar Chavez, was the recipient of the 2007 Leadership Award. Referring to racism she said: "Since it is accepted that human life began in Africa, we are ALL Africans . . . get over it!" Richard Rodriguez, author and essayist was the third plenary speaker. He reminded us of the artificial construct of race. One drop of black blood makes a person black. In reality there is no black/white, only shades of brown. Moreover, the scandal of the church as he sees it is: "They know not love . . . to love would mean to become a learning church not a teaching church." Rodriguez finished his presentation by telling us something about Jim, his partner of 20+ years. A street person, an older man named Phil, would frequently approach Jim for money outside the bookstore Jim owned. Jim always obliged, though he knew it made some customers uncomfortable. As Phil lay dying, Jim visited him in the hospital and these are the last words Phil shared with his benefactor: "I used to think you gave me money because you wanted sex. Then I thought you gave me money because you wanted drugs. Now I know: it was because of Jesus!" Hopefully, more and more of our own stories are lived out "because of Jesus." Darlene and Tom White are founding members of Catholic Rainbow Parents. ________________________________________________ The Emerging Church:
A Non-Catholic Reflects Baptized in the German Reform tradition, reared Methodist Synod Lutheran and, for forty-three years, an Episcopalian, I have early memories of hearing the Pope described as the "Anti-Christ." My childhood friendships with Catholics became an early test of my capacity to reject socialized prejudice. I passed the test but, except during John XXIII's life and some of John Paul II's, I have rarely been inspired to respect papal leadership. The more ambiguous authority of the Archbishop of Canterbury has been a great comfort, especially when I've disagreed with his words or behavior. The Episcopal Church's quasi-democratic processes give the laity a voice, albeit only equal to the smaller ordained community, in a combined legislative house still confronted by a separate House of Bishops and, in general, scarcely more capable of inspired action than the U.S. Congress or state legislatures. Now I've been excited to learn of Call to Action (CTA) and The Progressive Catholic Voice. As a national Episcopal anti-racism trainer/consultant, I was attracted to CTA's November conference in Milwaukee. I am part of fledgling networks in Minneapolis and nationally that hope to develop an interfaith anti-racist action movement. The pre-conference workshop on "white privilege" confronted participants with the painful awareness of how the "white" supremacist lie still pervades American culture. Eddie Moore, Jr.'s keynote address confronted us with the extreme skepticism legitimate among people of color when we claim to be anti-racist while enjoying our "white" advantages, or even denying them. The rich discussion in the Minnesota CTA caucus was inspiring, as members struggled with leadership trends in the church. I was drawn back to Episcopal struggles and, especially, the 1974 "Philadelphia 11" women, including two from Minnesota, whose irregular ordinations motivated the 1976 General Convention that finally officially authorized clergy women. But I thought I saw the future of the wider church when I heard the story of Spiritus Christi Church in Rochester, NY, told partly by its senior pastor, Rev. Mary Ramerman, and associate pastor, Rev. Jim Callan. The dramatic details were unfolded by Myra Brown, the African American minister for music, hospitality, and youth, who directs the Anti-Racism Ministry (ARM) and has provided crucial leadership in building this initiative.
Rev. Mary's leadership, of course, places Spiritus Christi outside larger institutional sanction. But that may be where the Holy Spirit is leading faithful Christians. As the various political processes of institutional Christianity – be they democratic or authoritarian, of whatever denomination – fail to lead us to faithfully recover the full diversity and inspirational richness of the Church of Pentecost, the true Church of Christ may emerge with new, more truly catholic dimensions through the ministry work of communities like Spiritus Christi. Lou Schoen can be reached at louschoen@aol.com. ________________________________________________
Bob and Carol Curoe, authors of the book, Are There Closets in Heaven? A Catholic Father and Lesbian Daughter Share Their Story, tell a touching story about "coming out" as a lesbian in a very Catholic Midwestern farm town. It is welcome news that Carol's family and community gradually reached a point of acceptance and support for Carol and her partner. Various versions of that story have been told and retold in all kinds of communities across the country. There is another twist on that story, though, which is becoming more common as more young people come out, and at younger ages. It is a story we seem to hear less about, maybe because it lacks emotional punch and drama. It is the coming out non-story. The coming out non-story is the non-traumatic, non-apologetic, matter-of-fact coming out story. In this rendition, there is no shame; no withering parental self-doubt; no pointing fingers of blame; no miserable tears, broken relationships, or broken hearts. This scenario is one in which Catholic parents do not struggle with acceptance of their lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender (LGBT) children. They do not fear church teaching, they question it. They do not permit their loving parental authority to be undermined by unloving church messages. They resist the judgment of others (though they most certainly fear hatred and the violence it instills). They tend to have straightforward relationships with their gay kids, and form solidarity with them on this topic. They educate themselves about the subject and discuss it freely with friends. They believe that sexual morality has nothing to do with orientation or gender. They celebrate their gay kids' relationships and reach out to the families of their children's partners. They embrace the offspring of those relationships, if there are any. In effect, they do something easy: they treat their gay kids like their straight kids. An extreme example of a non-story made wonderful was a Minnetonka family that threw a black tie party to celebrate their daughter's coming out event, and then placed a full page ad in the New York Times, just to make a point! Though families as accepting as this one are often religiously affiliated, they also tend to hold worldviews that are strongly influenced by intellectual and/or experiential diversity. Openness also seems to characterize such families, and the roots of that probably go deep into the childhoods of the parents themselves. Either from open relationships with their own parents, or broad life experiences, they seem to develop a heightened ability for sensing hypocrisy. In other words, they soon develop at an early stage in their lives, a built-in "bogus detector." For instance, as kids, they tend to understand that while churchly rants about the pitfalls of sex tell one story, Sunday morning smiles on parents' faces tell quite another. Similarly, it seems bogus to them that women cannot be priests, while learning at home (and from experience) that women are equal to men. Labeling birth control as a "grave sin" seems bogus when marriage is for loving and supporting each other. Words like "disordered" sound bogus to parents of gays who know, better than anyone, the moral goodness of their children. For those with a developed bogus detector, too many "official church teachings" just never square with reality. Being grounded in reality, these people grow up thinking for themselves for a lifetime. With parents like that, the next generation feels safe to embrace its own identities, character, interests, talents, etc. With full affirmation, a bond of trust takes hold, freedom flows, and wonders begin to happen. Kids come out of closets unfettered, and grow into happy and self-actualized adults. Parents from open families are often embarrassed by praise for accepting and loving their gay kids. What is not to love about gay or straight kids who are all gifts from God? What is not to appreciate about all forms of loving expression? Parents who accept the totality of their children are simply doing what they are supposed to do. They are showing wisdom and leadership, and honoring the covenant they joined at the birth of their children. All of the arbitrarily selected biblical references, or condemnations by a sexually uninformed and repressed hierarchy cannot shatter that covenant. It is not breakable. It is certainly great when families like the Curoes eventually find common ground with one another, and there is nothing wrong with struggling on this journey. Perhaps families that do not struggle so much just find common ground sooner, and suffer a bit less in the process. And they do give needed leadership to a society that still lacks positive, public, parental role models on the question of homosexuality in family and church. One young Catholic mother recently called CPCSM to say that her fourteen-year-old son had come out that day. She wondered if we could direct him to any LGBT social gatherings. She wanted him to enjoy the same kind of opportunities that her four straight children enjoyed. I would call that a perfect example of a coming out non-story. You will be hearing more of these in the future. Mary Lynn Murphy is the president of CPCSM, the convener of the Catholic Rainbow Parents, and a founding member of The Progressive Catholic Voice. ________________________________________________ "In Retrospect, I Now Realize It Was All Pretty Simple" I was raised in the old Catholic tradition of God the Father – the stern, authoritarian God who was in charge of all things, judged humankind with a long list of rules or "shalt nots", and promised to send us to an everlasting furnace if we really screwed up. While this doctrine may have been accepted by most Catholics as appropriate, it did not work for me. I had a great deal of difficulty loving and relating to this kind of God. He seemed just too much like my earthly father, who was also extremely authoritarian and, in many ways, violent. Thus I learned to fear both my fathers from an early age. Both had many rules, seemed hard to predict, and were punishing – my earthly father physically, and my Heavenly Father with his promise of Hell. My problem was that I realized from a very early age that I was not like most males; yet, I was taught that if I lived the life that seemed right for me, I would incur the wrath of my earthly father and be judged worthy of eternal damnation by God, my Heavenly Father. It was indeed a lonely, desperate feeling. I did try hard to be the "right type of person." I worked and studied hard as a student, tried to obey all the rules and commandments, and followed the prescribed path to success and salvation – weekly Mass, sacraments, marriage, children, etc. Yet as I got older, it became more and more difficult for me. I became increasingly unhappy and unsettled. My outward persona did not match how I was feeling inside. I was moody, depressed, and questioned my worth as a husband and parent. I realized that I couldn't be a good Catholic if I feared God, and could not be a successful, productive person if I was ashamed of who I was. How could I relate to others if I could not accept myself? I was tired of living a lie. In desperation, I moved away from my family, bit by bit. I continued to support them and love them, but I could not continue to live with them. I left feeling still depressed, unhappy, and now guilty for hurting my family. At this point in my life I did not love God or feel loved by God. I feared him now more than ever. I felt desperate and, at times, suicidal. I thought about turning my back on God, but something kept me coming back to church. This was when my spiritual life began to change, and it happened in a very simple way. It was at St. Joan of Arc that I first heard God referred to as Mother. Mother to me meant love and acceptance. Certainly, this was how my earthly mother was, and for most of my life I prayed to Mary, the mother of God, for this love and acceptance. It was just that simple. When I de-genderfied God, I no longer had to fear God the Father. I could now relate to a loving, creator God. I also learned, over time, that I was a worthwhile creation of that loving God. I continue to explore my new felt love for that loving God; and continue to learn how to love who I am. Though it continues to be a journey, this new realization has deepened my spirituality and empowered me to reach out to others. Steve Boyle is a founding member of "The Progressive Catholic Voice." ________________________________________________
(Originally published December 21, 2004, in the Boston Globe) The single most important fact about the birth of Jesus, as recounted in the Gospels, is one that receives almost no emphasis in the American festival of Christmas. The child who was born in Bethlehem represented a drastic political challenge to the imperial power of Rome. The nativity story is told to make the point that Rome – and all it represents – is the enemy of God, and in Jesus, Rome's day is over. The Gospel of Matthew builds its nativity narrative around Herod's determination to kill the baby, whom he recognizes as a threat to his own political sway. The Romans were an occupation force in Palestine, and Herod was their puppet-king. To the people of Israel, the Roman occupation, which preceded the birth of Jesus by at least 50 years, was a defilement; and Jewish resistance was steady. (The historian Josephus says that after an uprising in Jerusalem around the time of the birth of Jesus, the Romans crucified 2,000 Jewish rebels.) Herod was right to feel insecure on his throne. In order to preempt any challenge from the rumored newborn "king of the Jews," Herod murdered "all the male children who were 2 years old or younger." Joseph, warned in a dream, slipped out of Herod's reach with Mary and Jesus. Thus, right from his birth, the child was marked as a political fugitive. The Gospel of Luke puts an even more political cast on the story. The narrative begins with the decree of Caesar Augustus calling for a world census – a creation of tax rolls that will tighten the empire's grip on its subject peoples. It was Caesar Augustus who turned the Roman republic into a dictatorship, a power-grab he reinforced by proclaiming himself divine. His census decree is what requires the journey of Joseph and the pregnant Mary to Bethlehem, but it also defines the context of their child's nativity as one of political resistance. When the angel announces to shepherds that a "savior has been born," as scholars like Richard Horsley point out, those hearing the story would immediately understand that the blasphemous claim by Caesar Augustus to be "savior of the world" was being repudiated. When Jesus was murdered by Rome as a political criminal – crucifixion was the way such rebels were executed – the story's beginning was fulfilled in its end. But for contingent historical reasons (the savage Roman war against the Jews in the late first century, the gradual domination of the Jesus movement by Gentiles, the conversion of Constantine in the early fourth century) the Christian memory de-emphasized the anti-Roman character of the Jesus story. Eventually, Roman imperialism would be sanctified by the church, with Jews replacing Romans as the main antagonists of Jesus, as if he were not Jewish himself. (Thus, Herod is remembered more for being part-Jewish than for being a Roman puppet.) In modern times, religion and politics began to be understood as occupying separate spheres, and the nativity story became spiritualized and sentimentalized, losing its political edge altogether. "Peace" replaced resistance as the main motif. The baby Jesus was universalized, removed from his decidedly Jewish context, and the narrative's explicit critiques of imperial dominance and of wealth were blunted. This is how it came to be that Christmas in America has turned the nativity of Jesus on its head. No surprise there, for if the story were told with Roman imperialism at its center, questions might arise about America's new self-understanding as an imperial power. A story of Jesus born into a land oppressed by a hated military occupation might prompt an examination of the American occupation of Iraq. A story of Jesus come decidedly to the poor might cast a pall over the festival of consumption. A story of the Jewishness of Jesus might undercut the Christian theology of replacement. That we have this in common with Rome is caught by the Latin motto that appears just below the engraved pyramid on each American dollar bill, "Novus Ordo Seculorum." But as Iraq reminds us, such "order" comes at a cost, far more than a dollar. The price is always paid in blood and suffering by unseen "nobodies" at the bottom of the imperial pyramid. It is their story, for once, that is being told this week. James Carroll's column appears regularly in the Boston Globe. His most recent book is Crusade: Chronicles of an Unjust War. ________________________________________________ Help Protect Coldwater Spring Coldwater Spring is a 10,000-year old spring located just upstream of the confluence of the Mississippi and Minnesota rivers in Minneapolis. Flowing at about 90,000 gallons per day, Coldwater is the last natural spring of size in the Twin Cities. It's also considered the birthplace of the state of Minnesota (as it was here that the soldiers who built Fort Snelling lived). Before white settlement, the spring and its surrounds was a traditional sacred site for Dakota, Anishinabe, Ho Chunk, Iowa, Sauk, and Fox peoples. A decision about ownership of this Mississippi bluff-top 27-acre property, just 1.3-miles south of historic Minnehaha Falls, is due from the Department of the Interior (DOI) soon. Friends of Coldwater urges the DOI to mandate ownership of the Coldwater property to the National Park Service and to link Coldwater's 27-acres with a 2-block, 23-acre Veterans Administration parcel to form a 50-acre bluff-top park. Please join Friends of Coldwater in advocating for Coldwater Park, a 50-acre National Park Service urban wilderness running south along the Mississippi bluff from Minnehaha Regional Park to Fort Snelling State Park. The federal level offers recognition to Native Americans and the best available environmental protections. In this proposal, Coldwater Park would be designated as a Green Museum where Coldwater Spring is preserved and protected, and the land is the museum. To learn more about Coldwater Spring and/or to take action to ensure the establishment of Coldwater Park, visit the web site of Friends of Coldwater. ________________________________________________
Advent Vespers
Send an Anti-War Message for the Holidays: When: 6:30-7:30 p.m., Friday, December 21, 2007. Where: Library Plaza, Hennepin and Lagoon Aves., Uptown Minneapolis. The Iraq Moratorium and the General Strike for Peace have launched a national campaign asking that the third Friday of every month be a day for local actions against the Iraq war. On December 21, the third Friday of December, join an anti-war protest and vigil at Hennepin and Lagoon Avenues in Minneapolis to send an anti-war message for the holidays. There will be signs, banners and candles to create a visible antiwar presence on one of the busiest intersections in Minneapolis. As the holiday season approaches, these celebrations of peace are overshadowed by the continuing U.S. war in Iraq. For more information, contact Iraq Peace Action Coalition: Poster for this event is available from WAMM as a .pdf file at: Minneapolis Anti-War Protest 12-21-07.
When: 6:30 p.m., Friday, December 28, 2007. Where: St. Joan of Arc Catholic Church The Twin Cities Peace Campaign – Focus on Iraq presents the tenth annual Candlelight Service for the Children of Iraq and Other Child Victims of War. This service commemorates the children who have been and continue to be victimized by war. Through such a commemoration, it is hoped to renew and re-energize the resolve of those in attendance to change the conditions that caused the suffering of these children in the first place. Click here for coverage of the 2004 Candlelight Service at St. Joan of Arc. For more information, call 612-522-1861.
When: 7:30 p.m., Friday, December 28, 2007. Where: Prospect Park United Methodist Church. Dignity Twin Cities meets every second and fourth Friday of the month at 7:30 p.m. at Prospect Park United Methodist Church. Celebrating its 33rd anniversary this year, Dignity Twin Cities is one of 70+ chapters of DignityUSA 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 the both church and society. ___________________________________________ Upcoming Events – Looking Ahead Pax Christi Annual Retreat When: 9:00 a.m., Saturday, January 5 – 10:00 a.m., Sunday, January 6, 2008. Where: St. Paul's Monastery Benedictine Center Pax Christi Twin Cities invites you to join them in their Annual retreat with Mel Duncan, Executive Director of Nonviolent Peaceforce, who will lead a series of reflections, meditations, and exercises to help participants illuminate their path of spiritual activism. For more information, including cost, call 651-699-8565.
When: 7:00 p.m., Monday, January 28, 2008. Where: St. Joan of Arc Catholic Church Antonia Juhasz is a leading international trade and economic policy analyst and the author of The Bu$h Agenda: Invading the World, One Economy at a Time. She will be speaking at St. Joan of Arc Catholic Church at an event sponsored by the Twin Cities Peace Campaign – Focus on Iraq, Women Against Military Madness (WAMM), and the Iraq Peace Action Coalition. For more information, including cost, call 651-699-8565.
When: 7:00 - 9:00 p.m., Tuesday, January 29, 2008. Where: The House of the Beloved Disciple Featured speakers include: John C. Gonsiorek, PhD, Clinical Psychologist In the November 8 issue of The Catholic Spirit, Fr. Jim Livingston claimed that the Church’s teaching on the immorality of “homosexual activity” can be scientifically supported by the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH). When serving as bishop in Detroit, Archbishop Nienstedt invited NARTH co-founder Joseph Nicolosi to speak as an “expert” on the issue of homosexuality. Yet what exactly is NARTH? How credible is this association and its work in the wider scientific community? What does NARTH teach about homosexuality (or, to use its terminology, “same-sex attraction”)? and about conversion therapy -- changing one's sexual orientation through psychotherapy, which it advocates? What does the medical and mental health scientific community have to say about the nature and effectiveness of conversion therapy? To learn the answers to these questions and others, join us for a special presentation sponsored by the Catholic Pastoral Committee on Sexual Minorities. More information: 612-201-4534 Watch the CPCSM web site (www.cpcsm.org) for more details. ________________________________________________ To Subscribe: If you received this e-newsletter directly from us and wish to continue receiving it, you need to take no further action (you are already on our list of subscribers) . If you did NOT receive this e-newsletter directly from us (e.g., forwarded by a friend), and wish to continue receiving it, please send us an email at the following email address: progressivecatholicvoice@gmail.com; and be sure to include the word "Subscribe" in the Subject Line of that email.
If you received this e-newsletter directly from us and do NOT wish to continue receiving it, please send us an email at the following email address: progressivecatholicvoice@gmail.com; and be sure to include the word "Unsubscribe" in the Subject Line of that email. To Contact Us with Your Questions, Comments, or Articles for Publication: Please send an email to progressivecatholicvoice@gmail.com and include your questions or comments, or attach the article you are requesting our editorial board consider for inclusion in a future issue of the e-newsletter. ________________________________________________
| ||||