Religion
Related: About this forumLet's Hear It For Catholic Leaders Who Defend Marriage Equality!
Posted: 06/18/2012 4:35 pm
Bernard Schlager, Ph.D.
Executive Director, Center for Lesbian and Gay Studies in Religion and Ministry, Pacific School of Religion
Last month -- just a week before the president announced his support for marriage equality -- I had the privilege of hearing Governors Chris Gregoire of Washington and Martin O'Malley of Maryland speak (at the Human Rights Campaign [HRC] offices in Washington DC) about their hard-fought battles to secure marriage equality in their respective states. To listen to these two Catholic politicians eloquently and passionately defend the right of same-sex couples to get married in the eyes of the state was a wonderfully refreshing and genuinely empowering experience. And it made me proud to be Catholic especially at a time when many American bishops are ratcheting up -- in truly unprecedented ways -- their divisive and un-Christian attacks on queer people.
What should we make of the fact that five Catholic governors have come out in support of marriage equality? To date -- in addition to Gregoire and O'Malley -- former Governor John Baldacci of Maine, Governor Andrew Cuomo of New York, and Governor John Lynch of New Hampshire have all worked to extend the civil right of marriage to their lesbian and gay constituents and all of them are practicing Catholics.
With the news full of stories about Catholic bishops lining up (and often coughing up millions of dollars) to deny marriage equality to same-sex couples, it is indeed remarkable to see these five governors do the right thing and advance significantly one of the most important social justice movements in our country today. And their actions find firm theological support (surprising to many) in the rich Catholic tradition of social justice which is rooted in centuries-old church teachings on the dignity of the human person and the duty of the individual to follow her/his conscience in all matters (see, for instance, The Second Vatican Council's Declaration on Religious Freedom [1965]: §2 and §3).
Perhaps the most eloquent explanations of how her Catholic faith played an important role in her decision to defend marriage equality comes from Governor Gregoire who had initially opposed, on religious grounds, civil marriage for lesbian and gay couples. Speaking in a television interview on Seattle's KING Channel 5 on 4 Jan. 2012, the governor related how she had been hesitant to support marriage equality, in large part, because of her Catholic faith. It was in talking with her own daughters, however, that she began to understand that marriage equality was a civil rights issue similar in some ways to the Civil Rights movements of the 1960s which she had supported passionately as a child. After talking with a priest friend who supported her change of heart on the matter and after entering into respectful dialogue with her local bishop (who did not support marriage equality), Gregoire made the bold and faith-filled decision that she could not in good conscience deny the right of civil marriage to lesbian and gay couples in her state. Moreover, it was as a person of faith, as a Catholic, that she realized that she had a moral obligation to support marriage equality.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bernard-schlager-phd/lets-hear-it-for-catholic_b_1590242.html
Not to mention Joe Biden who, inadvertently or not, gave a well-timed kick in the ass.
laconicsax
(14,860 posts)(I'm not sure I'd call them "Catholic Leaders" since they aren't leaders of Catholicism, but that really isn't important.)
Goblinmonger
(22,340 posts)I thought it was actually the Catholic leadership.
rug
(82,333 posts)And do you think they just happen to be Catholic or that it's a conscious choice?
Goblinmonger
(22,340 posts)The headline is unclear. That was my whole point.
rug
(82,333 posts)Marriage equality is a civil issue and these Catholic Democrats found no impediment to doing the right thing. You might even say they enabled this progress.
Goblinmonger
(22,340 posts)So I wouldn't say they did this because they were Catholic. They have been taught as Catholics, by this and prior Popes, that gay marriage is wrong. And if they have similar liberal stances about abortion, they may not be Catholics in good standing depending on the bishop you listen to.
rug
(82,333 posts)As to why they have taken this position, I would not presume to catalog their motives beyond noting the strong component of social justice, inter alia, of Catholic tradition. Catholics are diverse and are not unthinking sheep.
Goblinmonger
(22,340 posts)Which means that their church didn't make them do this. They did this because they are good people. In my mind, that they did this in opposition to the teaching of the hierarchy makes it pretty clear that they didn't do this because they were Catholic.
rug
(82,333 posts)Goblinmonger
(22,340 posts)That's why I used the phrase, "in my mind." What I do know is that the hierarchy of the RCC has never had the position these people are taking. In fact, the last two popes have been very outspoken AGAINST gay marriage calling it the biggest threat to humanity (or something like that). I KNOW they didn't get their stance on gay marriage from the hierarchy/leadership of their church.
rug
(82,333 posts)Goblinmonger
(22,340 posts)And people with hair.
And people with two arms.
And people that wear shoes.
And people that drink water.
rug
(82,333 posts)Goblinmonger
(22,340 posts)rug
(82,333 posts)Nice trivializing.
Goblinmonger
(22,340 posts)It is making a statement about causality. If we don't know why they did it, then we no more know it is because of their shoes than their religion. Unless you are now changing your position to state that we DO know why they did it and it is because of their religion.
rug
(82,333 posts)Rather than applaud the work these politicians have done, you choose to construct a screed about the Catholic Church and assert, without evidence, that their action is extraneous to their principles, including their religious principles. Humans do not act in a vacuum. I suppose the shoe is just a gratutous detail.
Goblinmonger
(22,340 posts)But you are the one that said we can't know why they did it. I agreed. You, though, continue to put the Catholic label on them when talking about the great things they have done. I have pointed out that if we don't know why they did it, it could be anything.
And how do I make the assertion without evidence.? I said that the stance they take is in direct contrast to, at least, the last two popes. Do I really need to provide the link to where JPII and Ratzy have said that?
rug
(82,333 posts)I agree with that entirely.
Goblinmonger
(22,340 posts)Leaves out the Catholic stuff which, we both agree, we have no reason to know if it is a cause for their actions.
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)I agree.
Indeed, the "Catholic stuff" is only mentioned because it GOES AGAINST what a "good Catholic" should do.... oppose church doctrine.
They did it because they see what is "right", not because they are Catholic, and in spite of being Catholic. Why should some religion get credit for this? It's like giving credit to Catholicism for opposing Catholicism. It's disingenuous and dumb.