Tag Archives: LGBT

Catholics and sex

The official Catholic view about sex is a huge topic and far beyond the scope of a blog post. Yet, there are a number of news items or blog posts flying about cyberspace that are worthy of comment.

Celibate priesthood:

A December 3 post in Catholicism in the 21st Century blog contains a link to the Futurechurch website and the announcement of a new initiative: Optional Celibacy: So All Can Be At the Table.

We are launching an international electronic and paper postcard campaign asking Cardinal Hummes at the Congregation for the Clergy in Rome to open discussion of optional celibacy at the highest levels of the Church. We will also approach national bishops conferences, priest organizations and international reform groups for support in requesting discussion of changing celibacy rules to include both a married and celibate priesthood in the Latin rite of the Roman Catholic Church.

Although the Vatican’s recent invitation to disaffected Anglicans to join Roman Catholicism has been widely dissed as rank sheep stealing (see my posts here and here), does it not open the door a wee bit to married clergy? If the Vatican is willing to accept married Anglican priests en masse, should they not also be more considerate of in-house proposals for a married priesthood?

As an aside, another recent article in Catholicism in the 21st Century blog is rather juicy, entitled “In the Catholic Church it is men who tell women how they should understand themselves as women.”

Gays will never go to heaven:

“Transsexuals and homosexuals will never enter the kingdom of heaven and it is not me who says this, but Saint Paul,” said Cardinal Javier Lozano Barragan, a Mexican cardinal and emeritus president of the Pontifical Council for Pastoral Health (1996-2009).

On this one, at least, the Vatican quickly issued a correction to Cardinal Barragan’s views. Catholic blogger James Martin in America Magazine, the national Catholic weekly, quotes a Vatican spokesman, Father Lombardi:

“It would be better, for example, to refer to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which does talk about homosexual acts as ‘disordered,’ but takes into account the fact that ‘the number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible, ‘” Father Lombardi wrote. Homosexuals “must be welcomed with respect and sensitivity, and ‘every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided,'” he wrote, quoting the catechism.

“Disordered,” yes. Go straight to hell, no. At least it’s something. Or, is it?

The Queering the Church blog quotes gay theologian James Alison:

The experience of many gay people is that the Church in some way or other, kills us. Typically in official discourse we are a “they”, dangerous people whose most notable characteristic is not a shared humanity, but a tendency to commit acts considered to be gravely objectively disordered. Typically our inclusion within the structure of church life comes at a very high price: that of agreeing not to speak honestly … The message is: you’re fine just so long as you don’t rock the boat through talking too frankly, which is the same as saying “you’re protected while you play the game our way, but the moment that something “comes to light”, you’re out.

In this the non-explicit message of the ecclesiastical mechanism is exactly the reverse of the explicit message of the Church. The explicit message is: God loves you just as you are, and it is from where you are that you are invited to prepare with us the banquet of the kingdom. The latent message is: God loves you as long as you hide what you are and deny yourself the search for the integrity and transparency of life and of virtues which it is your task to teach to others.”

Sex Abuse saga continues:

Just as the American Catholic church puts a few years behind the height of the clergy abuse scandal, the Dublin Archdiocese Commission report hits the news, and the scab is pricked anew. Journey to a New Pentecost blog offers the following quote from the report:

The Commission has no doubt that clerical child sexual abuse was covered up by the Archdiocese of Dublin and other Church authorities over much of the period covered by the Commission’s remit. The structures and rules of the Catholic Church facilitated that cover-up. The State authorities facilitated the cover up by not fulfilling their responsibilities to ensure that the law was applied equally to all and allowing the Church institutions to be beyond the reach of the normal law enforcement processes. The welfare of children, which should have been the first priority, was not even a factor to be considered in the early stages. Instead the focus was on the avoidance of scandal and the preservation of the good name, status and assets of the institution and of what the institution regarded as its most important members – the priests. In the mid 1990s, a light began to be shone on the scandal and the cover up. Gradually, the story has unfolded. It is the responsibility of the State to ensure that no similar institutional immunity is ever allowed to occur again. This can be ensured only if all institutions are open to scrutiny and not accorded an exempted status by any organs of the State.

With this report from Ireland, it is worth repeating that a preliminary report to the American Council of Bishops issued just a few weeks ago suggests that the reasons for child sexual abuse are unrelated to gay-straight issues.

Because this post is already long, it will not consider women’s ordination or the Vatican clampdown on nuns in America. But it could. It all comes down to sexuality.

Is the Roman Catholic hierarchy pathologically disordered?

The Catholic catechism calls gays “disordered”. Is the finger pointing in the wrong direction?

A hard hitting op-ed piece appearing in today’s Irish Times, entitled Papal Princes immune to censure, thinks so:

The Catholic Church’s hypocrisy starts right at the top of the organisation, writes JASON BERRY

THE DUBLIN diocesan report spotlights the crisis tearing at the Catholic Church’s central nervous system. At issue is the Vatican’s pathological obsession with protecting guilty church officials.

The Vatican ignores justice to protect bishops in their role as regents to the pope.

Finally, in another Irish Times op-ed, quoted here from The Progressive Catholic Voice blog, clinical psychologist Maureen Gaffney goes right to the heart of the matter. In what strikes me as an Irish woman daring to shout that the papal emperor wears no clothes, Gaffney suggests that the fundamental problem is that the Catholic church is stuck in an antiquated and destructive view of human sexuality that leads to negative outcomes for each of the issues addressed here.

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 church] 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.

Oh, those naughty Episcopalians!

The Episcopal diocese of Fort Worth will soon ordain its second woman as priest. On December 5th, Deacon ClayOla Gitane, will be ordained by two bishops, including a female from Washington state where Gitane pursued her call to the priesthood.

According to the blog, Desert’s Child:

[Gitane] is one of more than fifteen women who over the years have had to leave the diocese in order to be ordained priests because all the bishops of Fort Worth prior to 2009 opposed the ordination of women. With God’s help, she will be the last.

Meanwhile, the Rt Rev M. Thomas Shaw, Bishop of the Episcopal diocese of Massachusetts, has issued a statement allowing priests of his diocese to conduct same gender marriages (which is allowed by the laws of the state, er Commonwealth, of Massachusetts). According to the Street Prophets blog, Bishop Shaw made the following statement:

Christian marriage is a sacramental rite that has evolved in the church, and while it is not necessary for all, it must be open to all as a means of grace and sustenance to our Christian hope.

I believe this because the truth of it is in our midst, revealed again and again by the many marriages—of women and men, and of persons of the same gender—that are characterized, just as our church expects, by fidelity, monogamy, mutual affection and respect, and the holy love which enables spouses to see in one another the image of God.

Finally, popular religion columnist Julia Duin of the Washington Times reports that the Episcopal diocese of Los Angeles may elect a lesbian bishop at its upcoming convention this weekend (the recent convention in the Minnesota Diocese also had a lesbian candidate for bishop, but she was not elected).

[E]ver since the denomination voted last summer to allow more gay bishops, there’s been this informal race among dioceses to see who can be first.

Clergy in the Los Angeles diocese tell me that she’s got a decent chance because her executive experience in Baltimore assisting the bishop and mentoring clergy ranks her above the other five candidates for the two jobs.

Sounds like the slogan of Integrity USA, “All the sacraments for all the baptized” is being taken seriously by the Episcopalians.

Should gays be executed? Uganda thinks so. So does the Bible. UPDATED X 2

The equatorial African nation, the Republic of Uganda, has pending legislation that mandates execution of HIV positive gay persons. According to San Francisco reporter and columnist Ralph Stone,

Uganda already punishes gay intimacy with life in prison. The “Anti-Homosexuality Bill 2009” would penalize anyone who “attempts to commit the offence” with up to seven years in jail. Additionally, a person charged will be forced to undergo an invasive medical examination to determine their HIV status. If the detainees are found to be HIV+, they may be executed.

The religion of Uganda is reported to be 85% Christian consisting primarily of Roman Catholic (42%) and Anglican (36%) adherents. Is execution of gays the appropriate Christian response to the HIV epidemic?

“If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall be put to death; their blood is upon them.” Leviticus 20:13 (NRSV)

What say you, literal and inerrant interpreters of Holy Writ?

What say you, Rick Warren–mega-church pastor, best-selling author, and Prop 8 cheerleader–at your recent prayer breakfast sermon to the political leaders of Rwanda, the nation that shares a border with Uganda? When asked about the proposed Ugandan legislation, Warren reportedly responded,

“The fundamental dignity of every person, our right to be free, and the freedom to make moral choices are gifts endowed by God, our creator. However, it is not my personal calling as a pastor in America to comment or interfere in the political process of other nations.”

What say you, Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury (leader of the worldwide Anglican communion) at your speech to the Gregorian Pontifical University on November 19th? As the Anglican leader speaking to Roman Catholic leaders, the two major religious denominations of Uganda, certainly you railed against this draconian legislation. Not so, according to the blog, Episcopal Cafe:

What is not easy, and where the silence has been deafening, has been to find anything said about Uganda and its proposed laws singling out one group of people for harsh and repressive treatment. We also have an Archbishop of York, John Sentamu, a Ugandan himself, who doesn’t mind a bit of publicity now and again, in jumping out of aeroplanes and refusing to wear his white collar until Robert Mugabe leaves office – but when it comes to Uganda and gay people, and that Anglican Church’s intense homophobia, he suddenly has his mouth all zipped up. So it is easy [for the ABC] to talk shop, easy to talk about general situations, and yet when it comes to the minority sheep in the flock in your own back pen, silence is the order of the day.

What say you, the leaders of the ELCA? I see nothing in your press releases at ELCA.org. With a noteworthy history of advocacy for peace and justice issues, the Lutheran World Federation includes most international Lutheran bodies, including the ELCA, and the LWF presidency is currently filled by the ELCA’s own presiding Bishop, Mark Hanson. Commendably, the LWF promotes a sensitive and supportive attitude toward those afflicted with HIV / AIDS, most of whom are in sub-Saharan Africa. Would it be too much to expect a word about Uganda’s proposed legislation? Is the ELCA still stinging from the Lutheran CORE criticisms at 2009 Churchwide assembly microphones that the pro-LGBT resolutions might offend the less enlightened sensitivities of African Lutherans?

UPDATE 1: Another Episcopal voice, past president Susan Russell of Integrity USA, offered the following brief post on her blog, An Inch At a Time:

The Ugandan legislation, if in effect here, would have imprisoned every member in attendance at our church last Sunday for the crime of knowing of the existence of a gay or lesbian person and failing to give their names to the police within 24 hours.
Also affected would be anyone who ever watched American Idol.

UPDATE 2: Lutheran CORE is beating its chest this morning with the announcement that a group of African-American churches known as Oromo Lutherans has joined CORE.

Lutheran CORE is honored to have these faithful Christians standing with us. We are humbled by their faithful witness both during the 2009 ELCA Churchwide Assembly and since then. These faithful Christians faced persecution in their homeland of Ethiopia. They know what it means to stand firm in faith even in the face of intense opposition. Their witness is a source of encouragement to all who bear the name of Christ and to all who stand on the witness of Scripture and thus in opposition to the ELCA sexuality decisions.

The statement from these recent African immigrants starts with the following note of indebtedness to the ELCA:

The people and the Government of the United States have accepted us with extended hands to become part of the nation. We appreciate the hospitality we received and experienced in this country by church and people. We are also grateful to the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) for standing with us in the process of organizing our Oromo congregations in several States of the United States. We are indebted to the bishops and Mission Directors of our respective synods, which have helped us in so many ways. We love our fellow brothers and sisters in Jesus Christ with all our hearts. We have been through many things together with churches that hosted us and pastors and leaders of congregations who shared the warmth of their hearts with us.

but, their statement then offers strong criticism of the ELCA pro-LGBT policies. It is sad that these well-meaning African Americans are critical of the ELCA, which has nurtured their congregations into existence, but it is also the case that their unenlightened view of homosexuality unfortunately reflects the rampant homophobia that exists in Africa, and the proposed legislation in Uganda is merely the most extreme example.

Spirit of a Liberal new blogroll

I’ve been working on a revised blogroll, which is not on my main page but is a separate page accessed under the pages menu. I have reordered the categories, deleted some blogs that no longer seemed appropriate, and added many new ones. I’m sure I missed some, so send me a comment with suggestions.

Books and Writing

ELCA (Lutheran)

GLBT friendly

Northfield, MN

Other denominations

Spirituality

Pre-holiday bits and pieces: #ELCA, #Lutheran, #Catholic, #Presbyterian

As we head into the extended Thanksgiving weekend, here are a few bits of miscellany.

Under the category, “Much ado about nothing”, The ELCA NE Iowa synod council made news this week by passing two resolutions contrary in spirit to the actions of the 2009 Churchwide Assembly, as if to say “don’t force gay clergy on us.” Pastor Joelle from the synod suggests in her blog that the congregations of her synod need not worry:

I don’t see a bunch of leaders in same sex relationships chomping on the bit to come here. I don’t see a lot of pastors, period, chomping at the bit to come here.

It is a bit of a head-shaker why congregations would fear that a gay cleric would willingly go to an inhospitable environment. Ministry is difficult enough as it is. I think it speaks to irrational paranoia and conspiracy theory.

Blogger Susan Hogan at Pretty Good Lutherans has a post with a lively discussion about this news from Iowa.

Under the category, “The squeaky wheel gets the grease”, Minnesota Public Radio is soliciting information about the ELCA / Lutheran Core issues through an online survey. They are apparently hoping to present a major story. As a survey participant, I received a preliminary report, to wit (emphasis added):

Over the past four days, more than 1,200 Lutherans (150+ of whom are pastors or retired pastors) from all over the U.S. and beyond have written us about why you will or will not remain in the ELCA, and how a church split would affect you, your congregations, and your communities.

We’re overwhelmed at the response. Clearly (though not surprisingly), this is an issue that matters deeply to you. Thank you for being willing to talk with us about it.
We’re now reading through responses and planning reporting around what we’re reading (and may contact you again in the upcoming weeks and months to ask you for further insight).

Of the people who wrote to us, most said they haven’t considered leaving the church over the ELCA’s stance allowing people in committed same-gender relationships to be pastors. In fact, many were concerned that we are giving too much attention to those who want to leave, rather than focusing on the story that most individuals and churches plan to stay with the ELCA. Some wrote to say that this change will bring them back to the church, or keep them from leaving.

People who have considered leaving or have already left the ELCA said they can’t be part of a church that disobeys God.

Many, many people would be deeply saddened should the church split. Some said losing congregations would impair the ELCA’s ability to do missions work overseas (though one person stated he now can evangelize gay friends here in the U.S. without feeling like a hypocrite).

Under the category, “Women who seek to be equal to men lack ambition”, comes word that a monk has been suspended for ordaining women. What, you thought I was talking about Catholicism? Turns out that Buddhism suffers from the same streams of misogyny as Christendom. Regarding the Vatican’s ballyhooed survey of American nuns, considered by many as an attempt at repression, a post in National Catholic Reporter tells us that the women religious are resisting:

The vast majority of U.S. women religious are not complying with a Vatican request to answer questions in a document of inquiry that is part of a three-year study of the congregations. Leaders of congregations, instead, are leaving questions unanswered or sending in letters or copies of their communities’ constitutions.

“There’s been almost universal resistance,” said one women religious familiar with the responses compiled by the congregation leaders. “We are saying ‘enough!’ In my 40 years in religious life I have never seen such unanimity.”

It turns out that the present controversy in the ELCA is the fruit of ordaining women a generation or two ago … at least that is what some within the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod (LCMS) or Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod (WELS) believe. In comments following a Lutheran Core blog post, CORE spokesperson Steven King acknowledged that the “justice” and “equal rights” analogies to women’s ordination can be problematic for LGBT ordination issues. But, he assures the anti-women’s-ordination commenter that “there are many Christians who base their understanding of the ordination of women on theological and biblical grounds.” He failed to mention that Biblical passages condemning women leadership are clearer than any supposed anti-gay passages. Hmmm. CORE appears to be Biblical literalists regarding LGBT issues but contextualists regarding women’s ordination. At least the LCMS and WELS are consistent.

Finally, I close with a wedding announcement. The Rev Laurie McNeill of Central Presbyterian Church of Newark has been ordained since 1989 and a former moderator of the PCAUSA Presbytery of Newark. At the conclusion of the Nov 14th Presbytery business meeting, Rev McNeill announced she had been married to Lisa Gollihue on Cape Cod on October 17th. The Presbytery unanimously voted to support her marriage despite official Presbyterian church policy against gay marriage or gay clergy. Stay tuned.

Shuck and Jive blog, The Presbyterian Outlook, and Religion Dispatches blog have excellent posts about the newlyweds.

Here’s Looking at you, kid. #Lutheran Core and #ELCA

Please indulge me with some more Casablanca analogies. Last week, I sarcastically used iconic Casablanca movie lines to criticize the Lutheran Core announcement that they are taking their football and leaving. Well, that’s not exactly what they said. In a rhetorical slight of hand, they claimed that the rest of us ELCA types remaining on the field of play are the ones who have left them. Whatever.

So how are we to respond?

One approach is to wring our hands and cry in our beer. This is the anxiety laden, sky is falling, response. A fellow named Jim Smith offered a comment on Pretty Good Lutherans blog that exemplifies this attitude:

This is a very difficult time in the ELCA, and it is far worse across this nation in terms of congregations in conflict and pain than many imagine. I have many friends across the ELCA and served on some national efforts and what I am hearing is frightening in terms of congregations laying off staff, closing, having to merge, or just imploding. Not a few, not just one or two in a Synod, but hundreds, and yes, probably thousands.

I don’t know Mr. Smith, and his comment is all I know about his views. His concern for the ELCA appears legitimate. and he doesn’t appear to be a CORE rabble rouser. But, I take issue with his blame game and priorities.

I was a CWA voting member. At the assembly, I met over 10 voting members who were for the changes, but voted no because they knew it would destroy the church.

I applaud them. We need to move beyond what we want to what is best for the whole church.

The implication is that the majority of voting members who supported the various resolutions were selfish (how demeaning is it to dismiss the LGBT fairness claims as merely “what we want”). Should church unity be the paramount concern rather than righting a wrong and seeking justice? Is the most important thing to stick together even at the expense of perpetuating bias, prejudice, and inequality? Don’t blame the CORE and WordAlone types for leaving, blame the rest of us for forcing their hand. CORE had threatened to leave, we should have listened to them and knuckled under to their threats.

Emily Eastwood, the Executive Director of Lutherans Concerned North America (an LGBT advocacy group), offers a cogent rebuttal to this view in a Nov 19 press release.

It seems with yesterday’s [CORE] announcement that some ELCA Lutherans cannot even tolerate being in the same church family with congregations who accept us. Anger and fear have overtaken the great commandments from Jesus himself: to love God, and to love your neighbor as yourself.

For 35 years LC/NA has never isolated itself from those who disagree with us. Nor have we threatened to lead an exodus from the denomination by those congregations who found the wait too long or the social statement well short of the advocacy needed for LGBT people in church and society. We have never called for congregations to withhold giving to the ELCA; in fact, we encourage additional stewardship, especially in times like these.

Mr. Smith is correct: there is lots of worry in the ELCA these days over defecting members, defecting congregations, and especially withheld funds that have impacted the mission and ministry work of the ELCA. I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: CORE knows how to inflict pain, but do they know how to heal?

So, how do we move forward? Where do we go from here? Minneapolis is history.

ELCA presiding Bishop Mark Hanson issued a statement and a video last week:

The presiding bishop quoted Romans 5: 1-2a in his open letter: “Therefore, since we are justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have obtained access to this grace in which we stand.”

Hanson wrote: “We stand together in God’s grace, but we are not standing still. We proclaim Jesus Christ and are fully engaged in this mission by actively caring for the world that God loves.” He added that in serving God’s mission, members bring their diversity, tradition and disagreements.

“We go forward in this mission trusting that ‘God’s love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit that has been given to us (Romans 5:5b),'” he wrote.

Blogger Doug Kings criticized the statement as mere public relations, lacking in substance but heavy in fluff:

Obviously the release of the letter and video is an attempt to balance the “negative energy” surrounding last week’s mass layoffs at the ELCA churchwide office, stories of withheld mission support and departing congregations, and the CORE announcement that it would be forming a new Lutheran denomination. All of that, however, is barely acknowledged in the letter itself.

As so often happens with institutions in trouble, the assumption is made that the real problem is public perception. All we have to do is manage the news cycle. We’ll drown out the bad news by shouting good news even louder.

Bishop Hanson’s letter then listed some positives to suggest business as usual. “Play it once, Sam, for old times’ sake.” But it’s not business as usual. The characters of Bogart and Bergman aren’t in Paris anymore, they’re in Casablanca.

Bogie’s first response was to cry in his beer, but by movie’s end he had embraced the new reality, and his character rose to new heights of social consciousness. We must do the same. Instead of ignoring the momentous changes of Minneapolis, we should embrace them. Instead of apologizing for our new policies, we should shout from the rooftops. Let’s stop being embarrassed about what was accomplished, and let’s be proud of what was done. There is a whole generation of youngsters out there that has been turned off by the hypocrisy of the church. Tell them what we have done.

Consider this. A week ago, at the semi-annual meeting of the ELCA Church Council:

the Church Council by voice vote overwhelmingly approved the waiver of the prohibition forbidding application for reinstatement until 5 years had passed since the removal or resignation. The five-year waiting period is a general policy applying to anyone who had been removed for any disciplinary cause or who resigned voluntarily. The waiver granted by today’s action only applies to those removed and those who resigned solely for the reason of their being in a same-gender, committed relationship. Applications to begin the reinstatement process can now be submitted immediately. The process is individual and can vary in the length of time for completion.

This action by the Church Council is the first official enactment of the church council pursuant to actions at the August 2009 Churchwide Assembly in Minneapolis that ordered the elimination of the policy that precluded service in the church by ministers in committed, same-gender relationships. Also today, the church council soundly defeated a proposed amendment to policy that would have required an additional step of approval for candidates in same-gender relationships by 2/3 of the synod council’s executive committee in order to be reinstated.

And how do we hear this news? Does the ELCA boldly proclaim its actions? No, it comes in a press release and blog entry from Lutherans Concerned North America. Why should the ELCA be embarrassed when it does a good thing?

Perhaps it’s too soon, and we’re still grieving the loss of members. Bogie and Bergman can’t be together, but Bogie sees that it’s for the good, and he promises Bergman that she’ll come to that realization also, “maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but soon and for the rest of your life.”

News Flash: Galileo arrested! #Catholic #LGBT

Copernicus expressed the view that the earth circled around the sun and not vice versa. The 17th century astronomer Galileo Galilei agreed:

Galileo’s championing of Copernicanism was controversial within his lifetime, when a large majority of philosophers and astronomers still subscribed (at least outwardly) to the geocentric view that the Earth is at the centre of the universe. After 1610, when he began publicly supporting the heliocentric view, which placed the Sun at the centre of the universe, he met with bitter opposition from some philosophers and clerics, and two of the latter eventually denounced him to the Roman Inquisition early in 1615. Although he was cleared of any offence at that time, the Catholic Church nevertheless condemned heliocentrism as “false and contrary to Scripture” in February 1616,and Galileo was warned to abandon his support for it—which he promised to do. When he later defended his views in his most famous work, Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, published in 1632, he was tried by the Inquisition, found “vehemently suspect of heresy,” forced to recant, and spent the rest of his life under house arrest.

When the Catholic Church of the twentieth century experienced a crisis of priest sexual predation, homosexuals were scapegoated. According to Thomas C Fox, editor of National Catholic Reporter:

It has been so unfair. Elements in our Catholic community have repeatedly placed the blame of the sex abuse scandal that has rocked our church at the feet of a gay clergy.

It has been a case of guilty until proven innocent.

But wait, a new scientific study commissioned by US Catholic Bishops and conducted by the John Jay College of Criminal Justice researchers reports a contrary view:

The study, which is due to be completed next year, was commissioned by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops after the scandal overtook the U.S. church in 2002.

In a presentation to the bishops on Tuesday, Margaret Smith of John Jay said: “What we are suggesting is that the idea of sexual identity be separated from the problem of sexual abuse. At this point, we do not find a connection between homosexual identity and the increased likelihood of subsequent abuse from the data that we have right now.”

Marianne Duddy-Burke, executive director of the gay Catholic group DignityUSA, called the report “very welcome news for gay people, gay priests, and our families and friends.”

She said the John Jay report confirms other studies in concluding that sexual orientation is not connected to pedophilia or other sex crimes. “We hope that the hierarchy of the Catholic Church will finally accept this finding, since it has been borne out through their own study,” Duddy-Burke said.

Surely, the bishops will accept this scientific finding. Surely, the church will promptly and expeditiously exonerate Galileo. Or not, as progressive Catholic blogger Terence Weldon suggests:

The fact that this report confirms what the rest of the world knows [i.e., that homosexuality is not a factor in the cases of abusive priests], is welcome, but not earth-shattering. Don’t hold your breath for the bishops to announce that they accept the report, or will act on this finding, or even for them to release the full report when it has been concluded.

The real causes of the problem lie within the church’s own structures, as numerous observers have noted: the appalling monopoly and abuse of power, compulsory clerical celibacy, and a deeply flawed, seminary based training system that is a hangover from the Middle Ages, leaving priests with minimal understanding of human sexuality, their own or anyone else’s.(Reports elsewhere state that this same interim John Jay report concludes that priests with the better training in human sexuality were the least likely to offend).

The naysayers within the hierarchy were quick to dismiss the scientific report, according to Beliefnet News:

“I wouldn’t put a lot of credence in it,” said Archbishop John Nienstedt of the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis.

After the abuse crisis rocked the church in 2002, Nienstedt helped lead a Vatican investigation of U.S. seminaries aimed at rooting out homosexuality, and served on a committee that drew up new sex abuse prevention policies for U.S. dioceses. He has also written that homosexual orientation is the result of childhood trauma.

And blogger Mark Silk adds:

[Nienstedt promoted] the idea being that if you got rid of the gays, the abuse would stop. Not that Nienstedt doesn’t have a fall-back position; to wit: “a priest has to be accessible to all his people, and someone with a strong same-sex attraction would not be good to have in the pastoral care of people.” As opposed to a priest with a strong opposite-sex attraction?

The bishops’ problem with the John Jay study goes beyond Nienstedt’s species of homophobia, however. If, as the study suggests, sexual abuse by priests is the result of not homosexual orientation but the availability of certain types of people (i.e. altar boys), then someone might be led to the conclusion that clerical celibacy is a big part of the problem. The horror, the horror!

#Lutheran Eva Brunne consecrated as first lesbian bishop #ELCA

Yesterday, Sunday the 8th of November, Eva Brunne was consecrated as the Bishop of Stockholm during an ordination ceremony at the Cathedral of Uppsala. Swedish Archbishop Anders Wejryd conducted the ordination. Not only was the ceremony historic because Brunne is a lesbian in a committed relationship with a female pastor (they are parents of a three year old child), but also because a second female was consecrated as bishop at the same time. Tuulikki Koivunen Bylund was ordained as Bishop of Härnösand in northern Sweden

The photo above is taken from a brief news account in the Local, an English language Swedish newspaper, and the photo below is of Bishop Bylund, copied from a Dutch forum, which quoted my Saturday blog post in its entirety.

For Brunne, her sexual orientation is a non-issue in her role as bishop, except for its symbolism:

Yes, it is important to many people who also live with a same-sex partner that a bishop can also do that. But it’s not a big issue at home in Stockholm. I have yet to be in a workplace where it has been an “issue.”

There have been those who’ve tried to make it difficult for me, but I have always lived openly. Had I chosen to hide parts of my life I probably would have had problems. As a bishop you must be allowed to be a whole person 24 hours a day, otherwise I would never have coped to be who I am and function the way I do.

Radio Netherlands reports that the King and Queen of Sweden attended the ceremony.

Swedish #Lutheran Eva Brunne to be ordained as first lesbian bishop #ELCA

Tomorrow, Sunday the 8th of November, the Lutheran church of Sweden will ordain Eva Brunne as a bishop in ceremonies at the Cathedral in Uppsala. Swedish Archbishop Anders Wejryd will conduct joint ordinations of Brunne, as Bishop of Stockholm, and Tuulikki Koivunen Bylund, as Bishop of Härnösand in northern Sweden.

That two women are being ordained as bishops is noteworthy, but the real news is that Brunne is a lesbian in a long-term, committed relationship with another female pastor. This ordination of an openly lesbian woman as a bishop follows the news a few weeks ago that the Lutheran Church of Sweden will conduct marriage ceremonies of gay couples, which has been permitted by Swedish law since May.

The ordination ceremonies follow the election of Brunne a few months ago. A secular, gay, European blog, Eurout.com, commented at that time, in a post entitled, God Bless Sweden:

With 413 to 365 she won the runoff-election of the Lutheran Church in Stockholm, after she was already the favorite candidate of the majority of pastors during the nomination. “She has this natural authority,” said her fellow church members after the election in several TV interviews. “Her enthusiasm and the ability to see the whole picture, to not get lost in details makes her so precious for this position.”

I want to add, her sense of humor doesn’t hurt either. When Brunne, who was a pastor in Stockholm for 16 years, was asked what she does to relax in her free time, she answered, “I read crime fiction. And I carve. The things you do to conform to Jesus, huh?”

Her partner Gunilla Lindén, who’s also a pastor, gave birth to their now 3 years old son after they entered a registered partnership. International journalists addressed whether this is a problem for the Swedish church, but Eva Brunne only joked, “Um, why? The backyard of the bishop’s house is really big enough.”

There are conflicting reports whether UK Anglican representatives will boycott the ordination. An Anglican cleric who blogs as Madpriest writes, with “embarrassment”:

Five bishops from various levels within the Anglican Church, including Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, have decided not to attend the November 8th ordination of the openly gay Eva Brunne to be the next Bishop of Stockholm.

“The Anglican Church has a moratorium right now concerning the ordination of bishops who live together with someone of the same sex,” Alan Harper, a bishop from Armagh in Northern Ireland, stated.

Back in July, two UK bishops warned that allowing homosexuals to be married in Swedish churches would lead to “an impairment of the relationship” between the Church of England and the Church of Sweden.

In addition to bishops from the Churches of England and Ireland, the churches of Iceland, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, have also elected to skip the ordination, although without providing any specific reason.

Representatives from the churches of South Africa, the Philippines, Denmark, Norway, Finland, and Germany are among the international representatives who have accepted the Church of Sweden’s invitation to attend Sunday’s ceremony.

But Swedish Archbishop Wejryd denies a boycott, according to the English language Swedish newspaper and website entitled The Local. Wejryd indicated that officials from other countries and other denominations are often invited but seldom attend Swedish ordinations:

“We send invitations to those with the highest rank. That’s why the Archbishop of Canterbury received an invitation, but no one expected him to say yes.”

He added that the Church of England would be represented by the Reverend Karen Schmidt, who serves as the Bishop’s Chaplain for the Portsmouth Diocese, with which the Stockholm Diocese has a twinning relationship whereby church leaders from both diocese conduct reciprocal visits with one another.

“The bishop, David Bingley of Portsmouth, couldn’t make it but will attend Eva Brunne’s reception the following Sunday,” Wejryd told the newspaper.

A blog entitled Thinking Anglicans also reports on the controversy, imagined or real, with many interesting comments such as: “So what’s stopping us (the North Americans) from joining with the Church of Sweden and the ELCA and telling the C of E to go get stuffed?”

Criticism of #Lutheran Core #ELCA

Pretty Good Lutherans blog offers several links to blog posts or articles critical of Lutheran Core (one of these was to my own post yesterday). With a hat tip to blogger Susan Hogan for her list, this post will dig into each link a bit.

In a letter to the editor of the Minneapolis Star Tribune entitled “A continuing reformation”, David Weiss suggests the ELCA’s new policy on gays is “a huge change for the better.” Without naming Lutheran Core, Weiss concludes his op-ed piece with these words:

So, to those who say that the ELCA betrayed its own Lutheran heritage last August, I beg to differ. The heart of the Reformation is about grace and welcome offered as a free gift to people otherwise made anxious by social and religious forces. And this year, at long last, from the heart of the Reformation I’m saying to my gay and lesbian brothers and sisters, “Welcome home.”

A second op-ed piece is offered by former bishop of the St Paul area synod, Rev. Lowell Erdahl. Writing on MPR news, Erdahl suggests “Unlearning the things that used to be obvious”. He uses the analogy of the rejection of Copernicus five centuries ago:

Convinced by what was obvious in nature and clearly proclaimed in the Bible, Luther called Copernicus a fool. Calvin asked, “Who will venture to place the authority of Copernicus above that of the Holy Spirit?”

Erdahl then suggests that he “was wrong in my understanding of both homosexual humanity and the Bible.” Erdahl argues that the Biblical texts cited by the opposition “relate to lustful, exploitive same-sex activity, such as temple prostitution, abuse of prisoners and pederasty, but say nothing about homosexuality as we understand it today,” and such texts should not dictate the church’s policy toward the “significant segment of humanity who, through no choice of their own, are attracted to, fall in love with and desire to live in lifelong partnership with persons of the same sex.”

Erdahl concludes: “It will be a great day when homosexual humanity is as clearly understood and as fully affirmed as Copernican astronomy is today.”

The third link is to blogger Joelle Colville-Hanson, an ELCA pastor in Iowa, who confronts Lutheran Core directly, based on comments on Core’s website.

CORE Encouraging Congregations to Oust Pastors who Don’t Agree with them

Lutheran CORE is playing dirty. Got a pastor who agrees with the churchwide assembly decision or simply refuses to make a big old issue out of it? Get rid of them. Yup that’s their suggestion…

This was originally on their resources of “What to do now” You won’t find it on their webpage anymore because they have altered it –but for now it is still here: CORE Suggestions -don’t be surprised if they cover their ass and change that.

In an earlier post on her blog, Pastor Joelle took Core to task for their call for a funding boycott of the ELCA, mocking their stance as “”Well we will stay, call ourselves members of the ELCA, keep our jobs as pastors and other positions in the ELCA, vote in conference and synod assemblies, insist bishops and other leaders in the ELCA listen to us, scold and lecture the ELCA but will not sully our pure wallets by supporting the ELCA with our gold and silver.”

In the next link on Pretty Good Lutherans, Pastor S. Blake Duncan of Illinois also criticizes Core for withholding funds.

When we give as Christians, we are giving of ourselves – our time and our financial resources – out of a sense that everything we have and everything we are is given to us from God. So we give back to God what is already God’s so that the love of Christ can be proclaimed through the ministry of the church. The money I give to my congregation pays for the ministry of the whole church: for the hospital visits, the food pantry, the worship services, the bread and wine of communion, the Sunday school, confirmation. Besides funding our local ministry, a portion is sent to the synod as benevolence. This benevolence pays for Lutheran Social Services’ work of feeding and helping those in need; it pays for synod staff such as the new outreach coordinator who is now working directly with the Wartburg Parish; it provides resources to keep struggling congregations open and serving their communities in places where the need is great but resources are few – such as Trinity Lutheran Church in Kankakee; it pays for the First Call continuing education program for new pastors. A portion is also sent on to the ELCA, where it pays for churchwide youth events, disaster response, new congregational start-ups, campus ministry, Lutheran World Relief, and on and on. The money I give to my congregation each week does all of this! And this is possible only because my congregation is a partner with both the Central/Southern Illinois Synod and the ELCA. To stop giving is to imperil these ministries and risk hurting the most vulnerable programs and people. (Emphasis added)

The final link is to a brief letter to the editor of Star News in Elk River, Minnesota in which an ELCA parishioner notes, “when I heard an emotional plea from the pulpit last Sunday to urge the congregation to vote to leave the ELCA,” that parishioner and others began to work to ensure all views are heard in their congregation.