The Rainbow Sash Movement (RSM) is calling for a national public dialogue with Dignity and New Ways Ministry on moving from pews of our Church to streets of the LGBT Community. While Dignity has moved away from the parish life of our Church, New Ways Ministry focus seems to be conferences and seminars, the RSM has been moving into our Catholic parishes. Our call for dialogue is not about those strategies rather what more can be done in the face of Church sponsored homophobia and sexism.
The view from the LGBT Community is that Catholics need to step up to plate when it comes to public opposition to the war on LGBT Community directed by the Vatican. Or we need to leave the Church, and stop supporting such an organization that does harm to our community. Our opinion is that Integrity and gospel values call us to address these issues.
Dismissing these concerns out of hand will only call into question our leadership in both the Catholic Community and LGBT Community.
The RSM understands these to be difficult and complex issues from a spiritual perspective, but one we believe none the less needs to be addressed in an open, forthright and transparent manner. Our community deserves no less clearness and leadership from LGBT Catholic organizations, not more liturgical theater, incense, and bells.
Board of Directors
Rainbow Sash Movement
Dear colleagues,
As a relatively new activist with LGBT advocacy, I don’t expect much attention to what seems to me to be the next level of involvement with the church by LGBT’s and their reportedly majority of catholic allies.
Your call to dialog with the other LGBT advocates does touch directly on what seems to me to be that next level. I do understand in the short time (out in 2000 in Vermont see ) I’ve been pitching into LGBT advocacy that RSM has been criticized for its approach, apparently the aggressive moves it has made directly in cathedrals and the like. Some tell me the language of RSM has been too attacking. I don’t know the facts.
But what does seem to me imperative, out of my understanding of truth-seeking-telling, that the church needs people of conscience to stand up for their beliefs and when necessary what is needed is church disobedience/non-violent direct action–always in a loving, caring, positive way. This level of direct involvement with the church seems to be what RSM is promoting and acting on.
What I’ve come up with is the notion of what I call “The Galileo Reconciliation Commission” (GRC). I don’t see Brother Ratzinger’s retirement as a potential for Brother Roncalli-like window opening. In fact I think that any new Pope will simply continue on Brother Ratzinger’s and Brother Wojtala’s violent conservative rule (Brother Matthew Fox calls it a “war”, a “schism”). The potential for Brother Turkson to be elected would only worsen things for us LGBT’s. Instead of failure or weakness, this pope’s resignation is an astute act of perseverance for his conservative convictions, assuring his witness of his accomplishments.
So I see those of us with such difficult issues of dissent continuing to be persecuted notwithstanding all the “All Our Children” type tolerance and the DADT situations in many parishes. Our dissent has to take a second row to married priests (I’m one of those), women priests, church governance and the other “easy” issues. Ours is doctrinal. But I’m asking for all people with dissent to dig in, lovingly, and by speaking out, by standing up/down, with the moral strength of our convictions, and move our opponents to a loving, respectful position as well. Moving to this new level is not at all to deny or put down the wonderful work of all the groups like Dignity, New Ways, etc. etc. In fact it is their work that has prepared the way to this new level.
The idea of the Galileo Reconciliation Commission (GRC) is to assemble all the values from ecumenical theology within the church and treat internal dissenters with a minimum of recognition. No more excommunication, denunciations, no more firings. I think a basic principle should be “to do the least harm”. No more inflammatory pronouncements, at least footnotes to the catechism that the whole church recognizes dissent on these issues. The history of the crusades, the witch-hunts, persecution of the Galileo’s–unchristian–should be ended in our age.
The GRC will only have an impact from the sheer weight of dissenters of good faith, and who eschew calling names and disrespecting their opponents . None of the watered down post Vat II mechanisms and canon law–collegiality, laypersons councils, etc. etc–will ever touch this stuff. O.K. I was slow to come to the conclusion that what was wrong with many church teachings would never be changed given the politics post Vat II bringing back the pre-Vat II regime of male hierarchs. I got married in 1970 (ordained in Rome in 1963, S.T.L. from the Gregorian, residence at the North American College) thinking the thousands of us pushing for this change would actually get some respectful attention. I have not succeeded in populating a seminary with one single male replacement. I went about my “vocation” in social justice without getting involved in church politics. So to that extent I have to accept the conservative takeover as partly my fault. Now, though, if the reports are true that a great majority of people in the pews of our parishes accept LGBTs, then direct action has to be seen as a moral duty.
Thank you RSM for your witness!