Another Gay Music Director Fired: Gay Catholics keep getting the boot ... yet all are welcome?

The world doesn't get it...

"Catholic teaching on homosexuality is black and white. On the ground, though, how this teaching is applied is much murkier." - Crux

In the last week there have been two stories about gay 'couples' getting married.  Both 'couples' were married in civil ceremonies in States where it is legal to do so.  They are legally married - not sacramentally married.  One couple was barred from Communion and no longer allowed to volunteer or participate in the parish choir.  That happened in Montana.  

Similar stories have popped up online ever since I began blogging - before same sex marriage was legal, two guys or two women living together as 'partners' were treated the same way.  They were sometimes barred from lectoring, Communion, volunteering, and so on.  I believe several of those cases were resolved, yet when it comes to civil, legal marriage - it appears there is no way to reconcile that.

In the Montana case, the couple was instructed that if they wish to be admitted to the reception of Holy Communion they had to undo what they had done.  

The men agreed to write a restoration statement that, in part, would uphold the concept of marriage being between a man and a woman, during an August 25 conference call with Father Spiering, Bishop Warfel and other diocesan officials. They said they did not intend to challenge the Church’s concept of marriage with their union, rather they just wanted civil protection. 

However, the statement also included a timeline for the two men to cease living together and divorce, which they would not agree to. - Source

A Lewistown, Montana, couple who married in Seattle 

last year so they could make medical and financial decisions 

for each other as they grow older.

The parish administrator and the bishop acted within their rights.

The men originally said they married only to receive civil protection and benefits afforded married couples.  Though gay marriage is not legal in Montana, evidently they would be eligible for benefits on the Federal level.  Which means, even if they divorced one might receive benefits as a former spouse.  I was told a divorced woman can receive her husbands SS death benefits even if the former spouse remarries - both widows can 'collect' - or so I was given to understand.  I mention it only to suggest they could still benefit even from divorce.  Regardless, it seems to me the mandate to get a 'divorce' only further recognizes that some sort of a marriage - albeit civil - took place.  I wonder if it would have more prudent for the Church authorities to ask that the men have the marriage civilly annulled instead?  It seems to me a statement repudiating the attempt to wed, stated within the context of a document confessing their support of Church teaching on marriage and sexuality would suffice to repair the scandal.

That said, the requests made to the men seem fair enough to me - except for the request to separate or live apart.  They have obviously invested savings together and share ownership of property, and so on.  Many times older opposite-sex, divorced and remarried couples remain in the same house, living as brother and sister when the situation warrants such an arrangement.  I would think that these two men could be allowed the same benefit or dispensation - especially in view of a public act of repudiation.  Unless of course they are sexually active.  Considering their age, I'd think not, but who knows now days in the age of Viagra?  The fact that they attempted civil marriage, which is a public act, has definitely complicated things.

Jamie Moore

The day the music died.

In Minnesota, Jamie Moore, a Music Director for a parish was recently terminated for getting married to his boyfriend.  What was he thinking?  How have these men been catechized?  What were they told about Catholic teaching on marriage and sexuality?  In this case, did they not understand requirements for employment at a Catholic Church?  The parish must have made that clear, after so many instances like this have come to light over the past few years.

On local news, Jamie stated that he knew this could happen - but he had hoped it wouldn't come to this.  The pastor at his church did know of his relationship and was willing to keep him on.  Archbishop Nienstedt was informed and ultimately ruled against it.

A popular music director at a Catholic church in Victoria has been asked to resign after marrying his longtime same-sex partner. 

Jamie Moore was asked to resign by Archbishop John Nienstedt, the Rev. Bob White told his parishioners at St. Victoria Catholic Church. 

Moore agreed to the archbishop's request, White said. 

In a statement, Nienstedt said that the teachings of the Catholic Church must be upheld. He said public conduct contrary to the teachings and law of the church is a reason for immediate dismissal. - Source

The Archbishop acted appropriately of course.

"Disparate policies"...

Nevertheless, this keeps happening, though some churchmen and gay-Catholic activists insist the Church is changing - doctrinally the Church cannot change her teaching on marriage and sexuality - yet some people seem to think otherwise.  By doing so they offer a false hope to the vulnerable and naive.

Catholic teaching on homosexuality, which prohibits sex between two people of the same gender, is black and white. On the ground, though, how this teaching is applied is much murkier. 

Individual bishops and pastors decide if children of same-sex couples have a right to baptism or to attend Catholic schools, leading to disparate policies. Some Catholic institutions offer health insurance to spouses of gay employees, while others fire openly gay teachers or organists. Catholic hospitals and, in some cases, Catholic bishops have supported laws criminalizing homosexuality, while others have condemned them. Could the Synod on the Family address some of this confusion? - Crux

In the Crux article there is a story of a woman's parish priest greeting her after Mass and cordially asking about her 'wife' who couldn't make it that Sunday.  That's where the confusion not only comes from, but is perpetuated.  It is a false hope.

The Montana guys may have experienced similar approval by their former pastor, and then the new priest shows up and lays down the law.  The confusion in the Church isn't limited to individual pastoral care or dissident parishes either.  Sometimes it can - and does - come from the top.  It isn't pastoral care at all, but rather, pastoral abuse.

"An overly benign interpretation was given to the homosexual condition itself, some going so far as to call it neutral, or even good."

In the discussion which followed the publication of the Declaration, however, an overly benign interpretation was given to the homosexual condition itself, some going so far as to call it neutral, or even good. Although the particular inclination of the homosexual person is not a sin, it is a more or less strong tendency ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil; and thus the inclination itself must be seen as an objective disorder.

Therefore special concern and pastoral attention should be directed toward those who have this condition, lest they be led to believe that the living out of this orientation in homosexual activity is a morally acceptable option. It is not. - CDF

Yet Cardinal Dolan says "Bravo!" when a gay football player "came out" - and another Cardinal says the Church has always been supportive of gay couples...

On the question of homosexual unions, legalized by the Brazilian Supreme Court in 2011, Cardinal Damasceno Assis is quoted as saying,

"It is a decision by the Supreme [Federal Court, the highest Constitutional Court in Brazil]. Of course, for the Church, it [homosexual union] cannot be equated to marriage, that is different. But, regarding respect for the stable union between these people, there is no doubt that the Church has always [sempre] been trying to do it this way", said Damasceno Assis - Rorate

Even the Washington Cardinals have indicated a more benign approach to gay Catholic 'couples' - although in practice couples have been refused Communion by individual priests:

Cardinal Donald Wuerl of Washington, and his predecessor, Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, were also on Sunday morning news shows addressing the issue of gay rights and stressing that the church needed to be welcoming. As McCarrick put it, the church could be open to civil unions as an alternative to gay marriage. - Catholic acceptance of gay people.

Confusion reigns.

Welcoming and acceptance have multiple meanings.  The Church welcomes sinners - all of us are sinners - inviting us to repent.

I've written before that gay people would do better not working for the Church - in any capacity - I wouldn't even help with the collection.  People get mad at me for saying that.

Gay people are easily persuaded that being gay is their core identity.  Though they try to live chastely, sometimes they just can't understand why it seems so impossible.  They try to live celibately, but every now and then, deep down they somehow can't be convinced of the necessity to do so.  They accept Church teaching but they sometimes give in to the temptation to believe a development of doctrine can create a loophole to accommodate their personal needs.

Likewise, a growing number within the Church are convinced more must be done for gay people, because gay is a sort of gender neutral 'third way'. There is a great deal of confusion generated and the tension is all around us - even promoted.  "Spiritual friendship" is promoted in a way that is just a cuddle away from genital contact and lifelong civil union.

Many gay people falter - they go in and out of the Church. Some leave the Church entirely, others give up the practice of the faith all together, some just take a break. Most struggle, rising and falling, and through discouragement, depression, frustration, sloth or acedia, and even from societal pressure - it is easy to fall into compromise. It's very human. Despite all of that, some come back, some keep trying.  Some don't and they end up blaming the Church and insisting the Church change doctrine.

The Church can't do that.

Gay marriage is not marriage.

Don't kid yourself or others.

If you want a lover, a same sex spouse, or just want to be 'out-there' - don't work for the Church.

The Church is all stocked up anyway.

I know gay people will disagree with me, and that is fine.  I'd like to note once again that the Spiritual Friendship movement has organized a conference on the issue of how to be a gay-Catholic, faithful to Catholic teaching, and participate in your parish … as one friend explained, because "people just don’t know what to do with you" otherwise.  Personally, I think sometimes it can be the other way around too.

No offense intended towards my gay and Catholic friends or the Spiritual Friendship people, because I trust they are sincere.