Can we just sit on our anti-gay hands for five minutes?

The conflict within Catholic Charities over placing orphans with gay parents is building, with Gov. Romney now stepping back into the fray (thank you, Dan Wasserman and the Globe, for this cartoon).
I entirely understand taking a position upon principle and sticking with it, even if it's unpopular. But I have to ask: I may be biased as a gay man, but I can't help but think that the amount energy the archdiocese is pouring into gay and lesbian issues right now must look obsessive to the majority of Catholics in the pews who are most worried about their churches' and schools' being closed, their priests' demoralization, and the fact that the Catholic church seems more fragile here in Boston than it ever has. Maybe I'm being naïve or simplistic, but can we just keep quiet about the gays for a bit, whether or not we think that's an important issue, for the sake of the church of Boston's health?


NoisyNorah said...

I'm sure you saw today's NYTimes editorial about the church's opposition to an anti-immigration bill:

"If current efforts in Congress make it a felony to shield or offer support to illegal immigrants, Cardinal Mahony (of Los Angeles) said, he will instruct his priests — and faithful lay Catholics — to defy the law."

Right on, Mahoney, right on. I have to say it's significant that a cardinal, no less, is calling us to be radical Catholics.

Anonymous said...

I just found your blog and I'm wondering if you have any posts explaining your anti-choice stance. I find it fairly amazing that a gay Catholic religious leader who ostensibly knows something about moral complexity defends an essentially misogynist Catholic party line. Must be easy, of course, since you'll never ever be in the position of having, or dealing with, an unwanted or problem pregnancy.

I wouldn't usually stop cold and ask such a thing but it really amazes me that you find it possible to live out your truth as a gay person, which is obviously not acceptable within official Catholic doctrine, yet you find it impossible to extend that sense of agency to women.

BaptizedPagan said...

Thanks for your comment, check out today's (3/4/6) post in response.

Michael said...

I recently saw a column positing that Rev. Fred Phelps (God Hates Fags, Westboro Baptist, etc.) must be gay, else why would he be so obsessed. My first inclination is Helloooo!? How long did it take you to figure that one out?

Similarly, the obsession of the American (and other) bishops does make one wonder... Well, hardly wonder. Those of us who have been gay clergy for many years know very well that some of our mitred brethren bat for our team, even if they work very hard to hide the fact. I am NOT implying that I personally know bishops who are acting out sexually, either gay or straight. (You can do a search and find examples on your own.) I am just pointing out the rather obvious fact that the bishops are sexual beings like the rest of us. And more than a few are gay. Whether their internalized homophobia feeds their clinging to the hard line here, I imagine some of the straight bishops may be working overtime to cover for their gay comrades.

Of course, Archbishop X is not gay! Look what the American bishops say about gays. How could he be? (As I said above, Hellooo!)

Maybe. Meanwhile when I think of every unadopted child who spends another day in an institution while loving people stand out in the cold unable to provide the evangelical corporal works of mercy... Wonder how many days in Purgatory get added onto the bishops' sentence for that?