A Catholic Cardinal's Lesson on Chutzpah

Here's a definition of chutzpah: during an interview on Meet The Press, New York Cardinal Timothy Dolan claimed the Catholic Church has been“outmarketed” on marriage equality and the Church has been “caricatured as being anti-gay.” Cardinal Dolan, as he often does, tries to have the Church portrayed as “the martyr,” attacked by the evil forces of Hollywood, politicians and “some opinion-molders.” Dolan claims, “We’re pro-marriage, we’re pro-traditional marriage, we’re not anti-anybody.”

Dolan's attempt at spin is easily shot down with examples of anti-gay animus too numerous to mention in one blog post, though I will list a few.

Let's start with 1986 and the paternal-sounding “Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons.” It written by Cardinal Josef Ratzinger, then Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, who 19 years later became Pope Benedict XVI. That document reaffirmed another from 1975 that called homosexual acts “intrinsically disorderd.” The 1986 Letter did not stop at sexual acts in and of themselves. “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.” Ratzinger further declared that when “they engage in homosexual activity they confirm within them a disorderd sexual inclination which is essentially self-indulgent.” (emphases mine)

Ratzinger and the Church equation of LGBT people as being objectively disordered is an assertion as ancient and not based in fact as the Church's once-held belief that the sun revolved around the earth. His belief, and thus the Church's, is that the only purpose of marriage is procreation. The Ratzinger proclamation shockingly declared, “when homosexual activity is consequently condoned, or when civil legislation is introduced to protect behavior to which no one has any inconceivable right, neither the Church nor society at large should be surprised when other distorted notions and practices gain ground, and irrational and violent reactions increase.”

In other words, LGBT people who seek to achieve any form of dignity, human rights or equality should not be surprised by violence toward them because they bring it on themselves. Such an assertion is despicable and encourages attacks, including physical ones, against LGBT people.

By opposing marriage equality, the Catholic Church seeks to impose its narrow definition of such unions on all human beings, regardless of one's belief or no belief at all. Yet, not all religions share that narrow definition of marriage. In the United States and many other countries, marriage is a civil institution, a legal contract providing protections for and placing responsibilities on two people committing to one another with absolutely no requirement or promise of bearing children.

The hierarchy of the Catholic Church has spent millions of dollars and exerted significant pressure on political bodies in state capitals, Washington, DC and the United Nations to halt any advance in LGBT rights, believing any LGBT right relates back to marriage.

Five years ago, the Vatican vehemently opposed a UN resolution endorsing a universal declaration to decriminalize homosexuality. The Church, through its UN envoy, claimed discrimination – not against LGBT people, but toward the Church and countries that do not allow same-sex marriage. The Vatican was particularly opposed to any mention of “gender identity.” To the Catholic Church, punishment for being gay in 76 countries, five of which include the death penalty, is preferable to any attempt to decriminalize homosexuality because such decriminalization could be used to push for marriage equality and threatens "religious freedom," which has become code for the ability to discriminate on the basis of personal religious belief. The UN eventually adopted its first resolution in support of LGBT rights in 2011, but without Vatican support.

The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) is opposed to any immigration reform that includes legally-married gay couples. For the Catholic Church, the inhumanity of keeping a binational gay or lesbian couple separated or living outside the United States is morally acceptable.

Millions have been spent by the Catholic Church and Catholic organizations like the Knights of Columbus in attempts to halt civil legislation in every state that has had a ballot measure on marriage equality. In 2009, the Diocese of Portland, Maine took up a second collection that raised $80,000 in what was then a successful attempt to overturn the state's marriage equality law. In 2012, another collection was taken up by parishes and congregations across Maine – on Father's Day no less – to oppose a ballot measure legalizing same-sex marriage. That attempt failed and Maine was one of three states to approve marriage equality last year.

Providence Bishop Thomas Tobin forbade Catholic family and friends from attending any same-sex marriage ceremony. “Catholics should examine their consciences very carefully before deciding whether or not to endorse same-sex relationships or attend same-sex ceremonies, realizing that to do so might harm their relationship with God and cause significant scandal to others.” In other words, going to your son's or daughter's or classmate's wedding will bring you a step closer to hell.

Minneapolis Archbishop John Nienstedt mailed 400,000 anti-gay DVDs to Minnesota Catholics in 2010 and went so far as to tell a mother that she had to reject her gay son or risk going to hell. “I urge you to reconsider the position that you expressed in your letter. Your eternal salvation may well depend upon a conversation (sic) of heart on this topic.”

Bishop Thomas Paprocki of Springfield, IL, conducted an exorcism at his cathedral, not far from the state capitol, “in reparation” for the legislature passing a marriage equality law. He also went the eternal fire and damnation route, telling a reporter, “If you're voting for someone because you have the intention of trying to promote something that is gravely sinful then you are putting your salvation in jeopardy.”

Dolan's list of anti-gay actions and rhetoric could fill a book. He was co-host of an anti-gay, anti-same-sex-marriage forum in my city of Poughkeepsie in September 2011, shortly New York State's marriage equality law took effect. This past September, Dolan emceed a conference at Columbia University on The Manhattan Declaration, which calls upon “people of faith” to oppose all laws that offer marriage equality, likening same-sex marriage to “polyamorous partnerships, polygamous households, even adult brothers, sisters, or brothers and sisters living in incestuous relationships.” (pages 4-7 of link)

Dolan refused to speak up during last summer's LGBT bashings in his city and the death of Mark Carson, murdered solely because he was gay. Rather, as violence was being perpetrated against gay residents, Dolan, in his role as president of USCCB, was instrumental is providing anti-gay-marriage prayers and bulletin inserts to every Catholic parish in the country in advance of the U.S. Supreme Court rulings on the Defense of Marriage Act and California's Proposition 8.

There are many examples of Catholic and non-Catholic employees of parochial schools and programs who were fired, providing them with no income or health benefits, solely because they are gay, or supported or sought the protection of civil marriage for their long-term, loving relationships. Some of these dismissals followed cowardly acts of unsigned complaints, including one that led to the firing of a beloved teacher whose mother's obituary listed her daughter's partner.

I have said it before, but it bears repeating. Cardinal's Dolan's claim of religious liberty does not trump an LGBT individual's or family's claim to civil rights and common human decency, including the protections offered by civil marriage. To say you are against my marriage and the protections it offers, solely on the basis of my sexual orientation, IS anti-gay, despite any spin by the Cardinal that denies it. Fortunately, the people in the pews ignore his protestations, as a majority of Catholics support marriage equality.

One last thing...While Pope Francis told his hierarchy a few months ago to stop obsessing on gays, abortion and contraception, last week he came out with his “Apostolic Exhortation” “Evangelii Gaudium.” While much of the media focus has been on Francis' call for greater social and economic equality, the document also reiterated the Church's stance that marriage's chief purpose is procreation. Those hoping for change in this area are in for a tremendous disappointment. The fight for LGBT rights must continue, without – and often against – the leadership of the Catholic Church. Dolan's assertion that the battle is not over, comparing the ongoing fight against the Supreme Court's Roe vs. Wade decision, shows that the Cardinal and others in the Catholic hierarchy are in this for the long haul. So are we, the people on the right side of history.

Pope and Change

Not many people had the runner-up of the 2005 conclave, Cardinal Jose Mario Bggoglio, archbishop of Buenos Aires, Argentina, on their short list of papabile, the candidates most likely to be selected pope. Yet, when the 76-year-old stepped onto the balcony of St. Peter's Basilica to greet the 200,000 people who had gathered in the square below, it was clear that change was in the air.

Gone was the sartorial splendor of previous popes, with Bergoglio wearing just a white cassock, though still composed of watered silk. His pectoral cross was a simple design of wood, not the traditional gold. He only donned the heavily embroidered stole when it was time to offer his first blessing, then removed it shortly thereafter. But before he blessed the people, he asked for their blessing first, bowing his head in prayerful humility. He spoke in excellent Italian, off-the-cuff, colloquially, closing with a  wish for “a good evening and a good sleep.”

I've already written about the importance of the selection of the name Francis, in honor of the man called to “rebuild the Church, which is in ruins.” Bergoglio is a Jesuit from the New World,, a Spanish-speaking priest of Italian descent fluent in six languages. While most of the changes we have seen reflect a difference in style, notably from his immediate predecessor, Benedict XVI, they may portend upcoming changes in substance, to a point.

One thing I noticed on that balcony on Wednesday evening, Rome time, was a change in attitude toward the papal master of ceremonies, Msgr. Guido Marini, who favored lace and ancient vestments and liturgies in Latin, and in whom he found a kindred spirit in Benedict. Expect him to be replaced soon. That will send a message to those trying to get the Church to return to the days of priest with his back to the people, a maniple on their left arm, and the people sitting quietly in the pews fingering rosaries and having minimal participation in the liturgy.

Expect changes in Church governance, in the Roman Curia, the Cabinet-like departments that impact the day-to-day and long-term operations of the Church. Francis made a strong statement against Curial careerism shortly before the conclave began. It had the effect of being his pre-election speech, as most commentators have said the cardinals were looking for someone to come in to clean house.

If Francis wants to make a bold statement about women in the Church, he would do well to replace to place women in visible leadership positions in the Curia. Look for a change in the Secretary of State, the Vatican's prime minister, since there is no love lost for the current office holder, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, a Salesian and former archbishop of Bologna. He exposed Benedict to many missteps, especially early in his papacy, and protected the careerists in the Curia. The post will probably stay with an Italian, but perhaps go to someone from the south.

Look for Francis to lay down the law on the priesthood, which has been scandalized by sexual and financial scandals. Seminaries need to produce priests who have a greater calling to assist with social issues, have a preferential option for the poor, and see themselves as servants, not just enforcers of doctrine and who enjoy the power that comes from telling people how to live their lives. I've seen and heard of too many examples of priests ordained in the past two decades and seminarians currently in training who do not exhibit Christ-like qualities and can often be heavy-handed, intolerant and condescending to the laity; who enjoy being too close to money and power; who yearn for a return to the 1940s liturgies at the expense of all other celebrations; who force out good, devout, practicing Catholics who are gay, divorced, or poor and in need of social services or government assistance.

Clericalism, at its worst, empowered priests and the hierarchy to handle the scandals of recent years as they did, protecting the institution while hurting the people who truly make up the Church. If Francis wants to at least attempt to stanch the flow of people from emptying churches, he will redirect the priesthood from fraternity to collegiality that welcomes dialogue, participation, and even veto power over administrative matters by the laity.

Transparency does not exist in many Church operations, but from the local parish to the Vatican, the Church would do well to pay heed to the admonition of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis that “sunlight is the best disinfectant.” If changes are not made, expect even further reductions in donations from the faithful. Also expect condemnation from international banking regulators who have already put the Holy See on notice that it is close to being blacklisted for failure to ensure it is not involved in money laundering and funding terrorists. One way the Vatican was hit financially because of its lack of transparency: the Vatican Museums, a major source of income for the city-state, could not accept credit card transactions for six weeks.

While I would hope for changes in acceptance of LGBT individuals and families, I do not expect any change in that direction, especially judging by Bergoglio's strongly anti-gay comments in the battle for marriage equality in Argentina, a battle he lost. A strong president, Christina Fernandez de Kirchner, stood up to Bergoglio in this human rights debate, and the overwhelmingly Catholic country became the tenth nation to approve marriage and rights to adoption by same-sex couples. Yet, some media reports hint that Francis may, based on past statements, soften his tone on some form of relationship recognition for same-sex couples.  After all, he has now seen that going on three-years after marriage equality became the law of the land in Argentina, the country has not fallen apart, nor has equality threatened the stability of opposite-sex marriages. While any step in this direction would be appreciated, I do not hold out much hope. I would enjoy being proven wrong.

Pope John XXIII had a brief pontificate but changed the direction of the Catholic Church by calling the Second Vatican Council. Pope John Paul I sent signals of dramatic reform until he died just 33 days after being elected pope. However long Francis sits on the Chair of Peter, he has the opportunity to steer the Church in a new direction. He needs the strength of character and the force of personality and example.  He needs to put reform-minded people, not just men and not just clerics, in true positions of power to enforce change. And I hope he looks at the world of 2013 and realizes that changes in families lead to a softening of tone and greater acceptance of all God's children in any situation or stage of life.

One last thing...Giving credit where credit is due, I must thank Bryan Terry for giving me the title to this post. It's from a tweet he wrote on March 13, the date Francis was elected.

Handicapping the Papal Election

On Tuesday, 115 cardinals out of 117 eligible to vote for his successor will meet in the Sistine Chapel conclave to select a successor to Pope Benedict XVI. From among their number, one will be named the 266^th pontiff, whom Catholics believe to be the successor of Saint Peter.

One cannot enter the mind of Benedict to determine whether he wanted to be pope. Only the former Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger knows the answer to such speculation. What is known is that he did not refuse his election. Benedict said he wanted to “re-Christianize Europe.”  If anything, his papacy, just shy of eight years, accomplished the opposite, driving people from the pews through mismanagement of sexual and financial scandals, showing more concern for the Church as Institution rather than the Church as People.

For more than a week, cardinals have been sizing each other up to consider whom they view as “papabile,” or “popeable.” Since Benedict and his successor, Pope John Paul II, appointed all of the cardinal electors, it’s likely that the next pope will be from the same theological vein as the man who appointed him. Do not expect any dramatic change on the hot button topics of women or married priests, a welcoming of gay and lesbian lay participation in the Church, more financial transparency (though individual parishes have been exemplary in this regard), birth control, or changes in the Vatican bureaucracy that protects careerist clerics and stifles reform.

One thing about the Vatican, public opinion holds little sway over the Church – its theology, its archaic system of governance, its image. The belief is the Church has weathered many storms over the years and in time, the public will forget about the latest scandals.  Few Church leaders are prosecuted for crimes. With the exception of Ireland, which took the Vatican to task for the way it handled decades of various scandals, most politicians fear speaking against the Church because of what a potential backlash from the Catholic electorate.

However, Catholic parishioners are voting with their feet and their wallets and pocketbooks. They are leaving the Church in droves or cutting off their financial support. The areas where the Church is growing most around the world are also areas where large populations do not have access to higher levels of education. Those nations are the Church’s future, while Europe, the United States and Canada are its past.

Some on the theological far right are calling for a smaller and purer Church. They may get their wish on the smaller aspect, but if the actions of its highest rankling prelates are any indication, the Church as institution will be far from purer.

Whoever the cardinals choose, the new pope’s background will be scrutinized for any participation, in word and deed or through commission or omission, in any of the scandals that have impacted the Church over the past two decades. He will also face a more skeptical media, more so in Italy than in the United States, where many reporters still remain deferential, if not reverential to Catholic hierarchy. Watch this week’s conclave coverage for examples.

Will it be an American? Doubtful, though New York’s Timothy Dolan and Boston’s Sean O’Malley have been hyped by the media. Will it be a Canadian, like Marc Ouellete, who heads the Vatican Congregation that selects bishops and who has ties to Latin America? Will it be an African like Nigeria’s Francis Arize or Ghana’s Peter Turkson? Some of their political statements, especially on homosexuality, are troubling and will turn off Western Catholics, particularly younger parishioners who have no issue with LGBT rights, including the right to marry. Will it be the Argentine Leonardo Sandri? He combines being an insider and diplomat with being from Latin America, where the Church, while growing, is facing stiff competition from Mormonism and Evangelical sects. Will an Italian, such as Milan’s Angelo Scola, reclaim the chair of Peter? Scola, formerly patriarch of Venice, is not considered a dynamic speaker, and the thought is the cardinals are looking for a showman like John Paul rather than a theologian-professor like Benedict.

There could be a post-election surprise. One of Scola’s predecessors in Venice, Angelo Giuseppe Roncalli, was elected pope in 1958 at age 77.  He was considered to be a caretaker after the 19-year reign of the imperious Pius XII.  Yet, as Pope John XXIII, he changed the direction of the Church through the Second Vatican Council, redefining the role of the Church in the modern world, giving greater voice to the laity, absolving Jews for the death of Jesus, and opening dialogue among various faiths. Serving only 4 1/2 years, the Council’s work continued until Pope Paul VI. John Paul and Benedict, particularly the latter, tried to roll back the work of that Council, euphemistically calling the revisions “reforms.”

We may know who is chosen pope in the coming week, but as more Catholics choose their own direction in their faith journey, whoever succeeds Benedict will have less impact on the lives of 1.2 billion followers. Papal elections still make for good theater and news coverage.

One last thing…thank you to various members of the media who have allowed me to “pontificate” on my own, offering me a forum to discuss my view of Benedict’s decision to abdicate, the process leading to the election of his successor, and the state of the Church today: Mike Moss ofWTOP, the all-news CBS affiliate in Washington, DC; Michelangelo Signorile, ofSirius-XM OutQ; David Badash of The New Civil Rights Movement; and all at the Poughkeepsie Journal, notably Local Editor John Nelson.

An Unholy, Weak Response to Homeless LGBT Youth

It’s been three months since I updated my blog and I thought Easter would be a good time to resurrect it (no pun intended).  I debated writing a post about my new job, but will hold off on that for now because of events that developed over the past week, one of the holiest periods on the Judeo-Christian calendar.  Sit back; this is a long, passionate, personal post.

During “Holy Week,” Catholics and other Christians reflect upon the suffering, death and resurrection of Jesus.  It is a time to seek forgiveness of one’s sins, to commit to be more Christ-like, and to celebrate the redemption of women and men through the selfless act of one Man offering up His life for the sins of the world.

However, this sacred time was marred this year by a response the previous week by New York Archbishop Cardinal Timothy Dolan, whose cold, unfeeling and “victimhood” response to a request by Carl Siciliano, the executive director of New York’s Ali Forney Center, which serves homeless lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender youth, many of whom are forced out of their family’s lives and dwellings solely for being lgbt.  Many of these families consider themselves “Christian” and cite biblical admonitions against homosexuality while throwing their sons and daughters out, choosing to ignore the loving Christ who fed the hungry, gave drink to the thirsty, clothed the naked, visited the sick, gave shelter to the homeless, and offered consolation to the imprisoned and afflicted.

Dolan’s response led a very dear friend, 24-year-old Joseph Amodeo, to resign from the junior executive board of Catholic Charities.  He blogged about it on the Huffington Post, which led to calls from Associated Press, the New York Times, the WashingtonPost, and other media outlets.  For someone so young and so faithful, Joseph has made a tremendous impact in advancing the understanding of lgbt issues and pointing out the hypocrisy of Catholic leadership, which, thankfully, does not mirror the majority of followers in the pews.

This was not the only missed opportunity for the Church to remove the plank from its own eye before pointing out the speck in someone else’s.  A New York Times article detailed how the Catholic Campaign for Human Development (CCHD), under pressure from right-wing Catholics, is ending funding for organizations that serve the poor and marginalized, including immigrants, solely for “guilt by association.”  The issue? Some of these organizations are affiliated with umbrella groups that support equal rights for lgbt Americans, among other issues.  The CCHD said they needed to "more explicitly express the ‘positions, activities and relationships’ grantees are prohibited from taking part in, such as ‘advocacy of abortion, same-sex marriage, euthanasia, racism, as well as use of the death penalty, punitive measures toward immigrants.’ ”  It is ironic that through its defunding, the Church itself is perpetrating “punitive measures toward immigrants.” And somehow, I doubt these same right-wing Catholics are as concerned about enforcing Church teaching on the death penalty and immigration.

I withdrew from active participation in the Catholic Church after Pete and I got married on July 24, 2011, doing so because I did not want to put the pastor of my parish in a position of turning me away should another priest or parishioner object to me being a Eucharistic Minister, lector, or even an usher.  It would be OK for me to sit quietly in church and continue to drop my generous donations in the basket each week, but in all other ways, I was unwelcome and unwanted by the Church to which I devoted my life for 53 years.  Donations that would have gone to the Church this year will, instead, go to the Ali Forney Center and The Trevor Project, the latter provides intervention and support to lgbt youth considering suicide.

Sadly, the Church of the 1960s and 1970s that marched in the streets for the rights of minorities, the poor, the marginalized, has given way to a Church that is consumed with others' sexual behavior, nearly exclusively homosexuality.  And the seminary system, especially in New York, reinforces the view of priesthood as “do as I say” (though, so often not as I do), a legalistic, pharisaic power-trip inconsistent with the compassion of Jesus, the True Pastor and Good Shepherd.  If the Catholic magisterium truly wants a smaller, purer Church, it is getting its wish.

Cardinal Dolan loves to play the victim, complaining about government interference in religion.  As I have said before, the Church can’t have it both ways.  It should not interfere in government, particularly when it comes to civil marriage offering dignity, recognition and protection to gay and lesbian couples.   

One last thing…Even though I am no longer welcome in the Catholic Church, I am grateful to clergy and laypeople from other denominations – Jewish and Christian – who have reached out to Pete and me to offer us a new spiritual home.  While we are so touched by their inclusion and thoughtfulness, we have decided to remain outside of any organized religion and will continue to live our lives is a way that truly answers the question, “What Would Jesus Do?”

Addendum (April 9, 2012). My friend Melissa Steinbach read this post Sunday and gave me a Hudson Valley perspective: "People have no idea of the magnitude of this problem. I work as a case manager with homeless youth ages 16-21 in a transitional living program in Poughkeepsie. The statistics are astounding and some suggest that around 40% or more of homeless youth are LGBTQ. It is unbelievably sad that someone would throw away their own flesh and blood because of his or her sexual orientation. I love seeing articles and blogs like this because the word needs to get out and programs like ours need funding so all homeless youth have supportive environments regardless of their sexual orientation!"

Melissa's program is River Haven's Transitional Living Community (TLC).  It is a part of a great organization called Hudson River Housing and yes, it also deserves our financial support.

How the Catholic Hierarchy Can Learn from a Lay Community

As I started to write this, I was sailing from Kuşadasi, Turkey to Patmos, Greece with Fr. Richard LaMorte, the chaplain at Marist College, and students in my religious studies course “In the Footsteps of St. Paul.”  If you read my previous post, you’re probably wondering, “How can you teach theology when your own religion calls you ‘morally disordered’ and fights against equal rights for you?”  A revelation of sorts (ironic, since Patmos is where the evangelist John is believed to have written the Book of Revelation), came from a discussion I had with John Boss, a Marist junior whom I’ve come to know and respect over the past two years, with whom I’ve had many honest conversations.

John asked me about the difference between religion and faith.  It is a great question and while John wanted my answer to help enlighten him, it was he who helped me reflect on who I am and where I am going in my life.  My response centered on my personal belief that faith is a reason to believe in a particular set of principles, religious or not, in my case, based on the teaching of Jesus Christ.  Religion, on the other hand, is humanity’s imperfect attempt to codify those beliefs into a set of rules to live by – the dos and don’ts of a particular religion.  Human attempts at interpreting the Divine Will will always be flawed because we are imperfect beings.  We try to understand the mind of God, but since we are obviously less than God, we cannot reach the perfection of knowledge embodied by a Divinity.  Yet, groups of people try and form bonds based on a particular set of beliefs. 

All through history we have seen abuses of power that occur when a particular religion says it possesses the truth and those outside that sect are “morally deficient,” which is what the Catholic Church says about anyone who is not a Catholic and says of Catholics who don’t walk in lockstep with every single tenet of the Church.  It is that type of thinking by any religion that leads to wars, whether the Crusades, “the Troubles” in Northern Ireland, or terrorism in many forms that threatens our world today.

Faith and religion always played a role in my life.  As a matter of fact, I once studied to be a Catholic priest, including two years at the North American College in Vatican City and the Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome, called, respectively, the West Point and the Harvard of the Catholic Church.  That time in the seminary system exposed me to both tremendous good and unquestionable evil by people who claim to represent God.  I worked with Mother Teresa’s Missionaries of Charity in a soup kitchen and shelter for homeless men, served as an officer and Chaplain Candidate in the U.S. Air Force Reserves, stationed with the 36^th Tactical Fighter Wing in Bitburg, Germany, and made friends from throughout the States and from several countries.

I also experienced first-hand the psychological head games played by priests in charge of a man’s “formation,” a nice way of saying brain-washing.  I won’t go into details here, after all, I need to keep some material for my book (which I’ll probably never get to write) – “Looking Through Stained Glass.”  Today’s seminarians preparing for ordination need to remember that the faithful in the pews come from a wide variety of backgrounds – age, experience, education, financial status, culture, ethnicity, and sexual orientation.  I see such rigidity in today’s Catholic seminarians and priests ordained in the last ten years that leads me to believe they will get what they probably want – a smaller, “purer” Church, but in no more sole possession of “the truth” than any other religion.

I am now flying from Rome to New York, at the end of our two-week study abroad course that took us to Greece, Turkey, Rome and Vatican City.  The past two nights, I took the students to Trastevere, my favorite section of Rome, its equivalent of Greenwich Village.  My favorite Church is there – Santa Maria in Trastevere, parts of which date to the 4^th Century A.D., or the “Common Era.”  With its luminous mosaics and Cosmatesque floors, it is a beautiful building, but its true beauty comes from the people who use it as their parish church – the Community of Sant’Egidio. 

The Community of Sant’Egidio began in Rome in 1968, in the period following the Second Vatican Council.  Today, it is a movement of laypeople and has more than 50,000 members dedicated to evangelization and charity in Rome and in more than 70 countries throughout the world.  The Community of Sant’Egidio is a “Church public lay association.”  The different communities, spread throughout the world, share the same spirituality and principles which characterize the way of Sant’Egidio: prayer, communicating the Gospel, solidarity with the poor, ecumenism, and dialogue.  They quote Blessed Pope John XXIII, who called on the Church to be the “Church for all and particularly for the poor.”

Whenever I question my faith or whether I should stay in the Catholic Church, I get these little signs, sort of like Jesus saying “Hey, don’t give up on me! Yeah, I wish my followers really lived the spirit of my teaching, not the law I came to abolish, but they don’t listen to me.  Hang around awhile longer, OK?”  Such was the case the last two nights of our stay in Rome, when I attended Sant’Egidio’s Evening Prayer.  Their services are lay-led, with beautiful singing (something for which many Catholic parishes are not known), and a sense of community that draws in everyone.  

The first night, I attended with Father LaMorte, the second with Father LaMorte and John Boss.  While I understood the liturgy and the Italian, John didn’t, but our experience was the same, a true sense of belonging to something bigger than who we are as individuals.  At the beginning of the liturgy, a woman gave John the community’s prayer book so we could follow along, and at its conclusion, a man, probably in his late-20s (you don’t see many people under 60 in U.S. Catholic churches today, especially men), looked over at John and me, smiled, and wished us a “buona sera,” or good evening, with a smile that said, “You are welcome here.”  The members of the community stayed in the Church and hugged, kissed, and talked for more than half an hour.  Contrast that with something that happened in my home parish in Poughkeepsie recently.  Four parishioners, all middle-aged and active in the parish, were talking while standing in the vestibule of the church – not in the sanctuary, where the community was communicating at Santa Maria in Trastevere – and were scolded with a “Shush!” by a priest younger than all of us who was ordained about three years ago.

I picked up a prayer card in the back of Santa Maria in Trastevere. It contained a photo that epitomizes the spirit of the Sant’Egidio Community.  The pews were removed (they are not permanently affixed in these ancient churches) and tables were set up to serve lunch to Rome’s hungry at Christmas.  They came to the church to be fed – physically and spiritually.  Isn’t that what religion is supposed to be about?  For Christians, isn’t that was Jesus asked us to?  Thirty to forty years ago, that’s what the Church did through its social ministry, fighting for equal rights for women, African Americans, Latinos and Latinas, working men and women, and expressing a “preferential option for the poor,” woefully out-of-fashion in the Church and in our country in 2011.

If it weren’t for the pastor of St. Martin dePorres, Msgr. Jim Sullivan, I probably would no longer be a member of any parish (unless I felt like commuting to St. Francis Xavier on 16^th Street in Manhattan, like I did for a few years in the 90s).  He is what priesthood is all about – honestly prayerful, leading through humility, accepting (not just “tolerating”) others, humorous and capable of delivering a serious message through great homilies or simple actions from which the newly ordained can learn much.  We are blessed to have him.

This is a long entry, so I will wrap it up and fill you in later on what our class did during our two weeks abroad.

One last thing…props to Delta Airlines.  Their music selection for June includes “Delta Pride,” with this description “Party in the Sky celebrates Pride.  Delta is proud to be an official sponsor of Pride celebrations in Atlanta, New York City, and the Twin Cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul.”  My message to Delta:  I’m proud to be a Sliver Medallion frequent flyer on your airline.