Thursday, August 16, 2012
For All the Children . . .
"For All the Children," the powerful and inspiring music video made by over 300 Catholics in April of this year, was premiered last night at a special C4ME-MN event entitled "I Do! Believe in the Freedom to Marry."
Please share this video far and wide through your online social networks. Also, if you were part of the making of this video and/or present at last night's premiere, please consider sharing your thoughts and experiences in a written piece that we can post on Sensus Fidelium. Reflections and articles can be e-mailed to info.c4me@gmail.com.
Finally, for images and commentary on C4ME-MN's "I Do! Believe in the Freedom to Marry" event, visit this album on our Facebook page.
"For All the Children": Music and lyrics by David Lohman.
Recommended Off-site Link:
Catholics Rally for Freedom to Marry – Star Tribune (August 19, 2012).
Wednesday, August 15, 2012
An Update on Tonight's Event
C4ME-MN's "I Do! Believe in the Freedom to Marry" will be taking place this evening (7:00-8:30) in Loring Park as originally planned. Don't forget your blanket and/or lawn chair! Also, yard signs will be available!
We look forward to seeing you this evening at Loring Park for an inspiring night of solidarity and entertainment!
Tuesday, August 14, 2012
Yard Signs Now Available!
An eye-catching yard sign declaring "Another Catholic Voting No" is C4ME-MN's latest effort to get the word out that Catholics can in good conscience vote 'no' on the Minnesota 'marriage amendment.' As you know, the 'marriage amendment' refers to the November 6, 2012 ballot initiative that asks Minnesotans to vote on limiting the freedom to marry by amending the state constitution to define marriage as “solely between one man and one woman.” (For more about the amendment, see here, here and here.)
Because of our non-profit status, our yard signs are not for sale. However, a $10 donation per yard sign is recommended and would be greatly appreciated.
For information about ordering and picking up signs in St. Paul,
contact Mary Kay Orman at c4me.stpaul@gmail.com
or call 651-699-1671.
or call 651-699-1671.
For Minneapolis ordering and pick-up information,
contact Michael Bayly at info.c4me@gmail.com
or call 612-201-4534.
Burnsville and area residents, contact
Rose McMurray at 612-710-8327.
Winona residents, contact
Leslie Hittner at lhittner@hbci.com.
Red Wing residents, contact
Tom Bottolene at tom@circlevision.org.
St. Cloud residents, contact
Danielle Bunting at dabgal@gmail.com.
To view and/or order our DVD, Catholics for Marriage Equality, click here.
NOTE: Our yard sign was first unveiled at C4ME-MN's "I Do! Believe in the Freedom to Marry" event on August 15, 2012. For photos and commentary on this event, click here.
or call 612-201-4534.
Burnsville and area residents, contact
Rose McMurray at 612-710-8327.
Winona residents, contact
Leslie Hittner at lhittner@hbci.com.
Red Wing residents, contact
Tom Bottolene at tom@circlevision.org.
St. Cloud residents, contact
Danielle Bunting at dabgal@gmail.com.
To view and/or order our DVD, Catholics for Marriage Equality, click here.
NOTE: Our yard sign was first unveiled at C4ME-MN's "I Do! Believe in the Freedom to Marry" event on August 15, 2012. For photos and commentary on this event, click here.
Tuesday, August 7, 2012
Catholic Q&A on the Minnesota 'Marriage Amendment'
Following are concise answers to nine frequently asked questions about the Minnesota 'marriage amendment.' We hope these responses will complement the previously published Tips for Speaking as a Catholic in Support of Marriage Equality, a resource that offers more in-depth responses.
1. What is the ‘marriage amendment’?
The 'marriage amendment' refers to the November 6, 2012 ballot initiative that will ask Minnesotans to vote on whether or not the state constitution should be amended so as to define marriage as “solely between one man and one woman.”
2. If the amendment is passed, how will it affect Minnesota law?
It will have no effect as Minnesota already bans civil marriage rights for same-sex couples. It will, however, make it virtually impossible for the courts to grant civil marriage rights to same-sex couples or for the state legislature to pass legislation in favor of such rights in the future.
3. If the amendment is defeated, how will it affect the Roman Catholic Church?
There would be no effect whatsoever. If the ‘marriage amendment’ is defeated in November, same-sex civil marriage will still be illegal in Minnesota. And if civil marriage rights were one day extended to same-sex couples, our nation’s separation of church and state would guarantee that churches, including the Roman Catholic Church, would always have the freedom to choose whom they marry.
4. Since the bishops are strongly urging a ‘yes’ vote, can a faithful Catholic vote ‘no’?
Yes, a faithful Catholic can vote ‘no.’ This is because our tradition teaches that conscience is the highest norm and that we are to follow our conscience even in opposition to official church authority. In 1968, Fr. Joseph Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XVI) expressed the Church’s understanding of the primacy of conscience: “Above the pope as an expression of the binding claim of church authority stands one’s own conscience, which has to be obeyed first of all, if need be against the demands of church authority.”
5. Why are the bishops telling Catholics to vote ‘yes’?
The bishops see the granting of civil marriage rights to same-sex couples as a threat to the meaning of marriage and to the church’s religious liberty. In truth, however, in their support of the ‘marriage amendment,’ the bishops have made numerous unsubstantiated claims and provoked false fears. They warn, for instance, that if civil marriage rights are extended to same-sex couples, churches will be forced to perform sacramental marriage for a gay couple. This is untrue. (See response to Q. 3)
6. Why are many Catholics conflicted or committed to voting ‘no’?
The reasons are numerous. Many are torn between the urgings of the hierarchy to support the amendment and their wanting to support the gay people they know and, in many cases, lovingly accept. Many are unconvinced by the arguments of the bishops, recognizing instead that supporting legal recognition of adult, same-sex unions as marriages does not go against any church teaching. It is a prudential decision regarding what is best for the common good in a pluralistic society. For example, Catholic teaching opposes divorce, but this does not translate into an obligation to work for the repeal of secular divorce laws or prevention of their passage by a constitutional amendment banning civil divorce.
7. Doesn’t the Bible condemn homosexual relations?
Modern biblical scholarship approved by the Church shows that passages in Leviticus and elsewhere condemn homosexual rape and pagan worship involving sexual rituals. Since the biblical writers had no concept of homosexual orientation, the Bible does not condemn loving, committed same-sex relationships.
8. Why use the word ‘marriage’ to describe same-sex unions?
In our society it is only the word ‘marriage’ that conveys the joy, connection, and deep commitment that is made between two people who love one another. In addition, civil marriage automatically provides the rights and responsibilities of 515 statutes in Minnesota law to opposite-sex couples and families. That these are denied to same-sex couples and families strikes many as hurtful and unfair.
9. The bishops insist that same-sex marriage will harm children. Is this true?
Because the bishops are not calling for the large number of children already being raised by same-sex couples to be removed from their families, many Catholics question the integrity of the claim that children are in danger. Research has consistently shown that lesbian and gay parents do not differ from heterosexuals in their parenting skills, and that their children do not show any deficits compared to children raised by heterosexual parents. It is the quality of the parenting that predicts children’s psychological and social adjustment, not the parents’ sexual orientation or gender. It also concerns many Catholics that by denying same-sex couples the right to marry, the State is reinforcing and perpetuating the stigma historically associated with homosexuality. According same-sex couples inferior status relative to opposite-sex couples gives rise to ostracism, harassment, discrimination, and violence. For Catholics, such treatment is unacceptable. The bishops themselves teach that the “intrinsic dignity of each person must always be respected in word, in action and in law.” (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Letter to Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons. 1986.)
See also the previous Sensus Fidelium posts:
Fr. Bob Pierson: Why Catholics Can Vote 'No'
Marriage Amendment Not In Best Interest of Children and Families
Theological Considerations Behind Opposition to the Proposed Minnesota 'Marriage Amendment'
Tide is Turning on Public Perception of Same–Sex Marriage
A Catholic Case for Same-Sex Marriage
Catholics Lead the Way! – The Latest Statistics on Religious Support for Marriage Equality
A Few Questions . . .
1. What is the ‘marriage amendment’?
The 'marriage amendment' refers to the November 6, 2012 ballot initiative that will ask Minnesotans to vote on whether or not the state constitution should be amended so as to define marriage as “solely between one man and one woman.”
2. If the amendment is passed, how will it affect Minnesota law?
It will have no effect as Minnesota already bans civil marriage rights for same-sex couples. It will, however, make it virtually impossible for the courts to grant civil marriage rights to same-sex couples or for the state legislature to pass legislation in favor of such rights in the future.
3. If the amendment is defeated, how will it affect the Roman Catholic Church?
There would be no effect whatsoever. If the ‘marriage amendment’ is defeated in November, same-sex civil marriage will still be illegal in Minnesota. And if civil marriage rights were one day extended to same-sex couples, our nation’s separation of church and state would guarantee that churches, including the Roman Catholic Church, would always have the freedom to choose whom they marry.
4. Since the bishops are strongly urging a ‘yes’ vote, can a faithful Catholic vote ‘no’?
Yes, a faithful Catholic can vote ‘no.’ This is because our tradition teaches that conscience is the highest norm and that we are to follow our conscience even in opposition to official church authority. In 1968, Fr. Joseph Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XVI) expressed the Church’s understanding of the primacy of conscience: “Above the pope as an expression of the binding claim of church authority stands one’s own conscience, which has to be obeyed first of all, if need be against the demands of church authority.”
5. Why are the bishops telling Catholics to vote ‘yes’?
The bishops see the granting of civil marriage rights to same-sex couples as a threat to the meaning of marriage and to the church’s religious liberty. In truth, however, in their support of the ‘marriage amendment,’ the bishops have made numerous unsubstantiated claims and provoked false fears. They warn, for instance, that if civil marriage rights are extended to same-sex couples, churches will be forced to perform sacramental marriage for a gay couple. This is untrue. (See response to Q. 3)
6. Why are many Catholics conflicted or committed to voting ‘no’?
The reasons are numerous. Many are torn between the urgings of the hierarchy to support the amendment and their wanting to support the gay people they know and, in many cases, lovingly accept. Many are unconvinced by the arguments of the bishops, recognizing instead that supporting legal recognition of adult, same-sex unions as marriages does not go against any church teaching. It is a prudential decision regarding what is best for the common good in a pluralistic society. For example, Catholic teaching opposes divorce, but this does not translate into an obligation to work for the repeal of secular divorce laws or prevention of their passage by a constitutional amendment banning civil divorce.
7. Doesn’t the Bible condemn homosexual relations?
Modern biblical scholarship approved by the Church shows that passages in Leviticus and elsewhere condemn homosexual rape and pagan worship involving sexual rituals. Since the biblical writers had no concept of homosexual orientation, the Bible does not condemn loving, committed same-sex relationships.
8. Why use the word ‘marriage’ to describe same-sex unions?
In our society it is only the word ‘marriage’ that conveys the joy, connection, and deep commitment that is made between two people who love one another. In addition, civil marriage automatically provides the rights and responsibilities of 515 statutes in Minnesota law to opposite-sex couples and families. That these are denied to same-sex couples and families strikes many as hurtful and unfair.
9. The bishops insist that same-sex marriage will harm children. Is this true?
Because the bishops are not calling for the large number of children already being raised by same-sex couples to be removed from their families, many Catholics question the integrity of the claim that children are in danger. Research has consistently shown that lesbian and gay parents do not differ from heterosexuals in their parenting skills, and that their children do not show any deficits compared to children raised by heterosexual parents. It is the quality of the parenting that predicts children’s psychological and social adjustment, not the parents’ sexual orientation or gender. It also concerns many Catholics that by denying same-sex couples the right to marry, the State is reinforcing and perpetuating the stigma historically associated with homosexuality. According same-sex couples inferior status relative to opposite-sex couples gives rise to ostracism, harassment, discrimination, and violence. For Catholics, such treatment is unacceptable. The bishops themselves teach that the “intrinsic dignity of each person must always be respected in word, in action and in law.” (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Letter to Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons. 1986.)
See also the previous Sensus Fidelium posts:
Fr. Bob Pierson: Why Catholics Can Vote 'No'
Marriage Amendment Not In Best Interest of Children and Families
Theological Considerations Behind Opposition to the Proposed Minnesota 'Marriage Amendment'
Tide is Turning on Public Perception of Same–Sex Marriage
A Catholic Case for Same-Sex Marriage
Catholics Lead the Way! – The Latest Statistics on Religious Support for Marriage Equality
A Few Questions . . .
Monday, August 6, 2012
A Sneak Peek
With a little over a week to go before C4ME-MN's August 15 "I DO! Believe in the Freedom to Marry" event, here's a sneak peek at the video we'll be premiering . . .
See also the previous Sensus Fidelium posts:
Save the Date!
Catholics Sing Their Support for Marriage Equality
"The Holy Spirit Descended Upon Them . . ."
See also the previous Sensus Fidelium posts:
Save the Date!
Catholics Sing Their Support for Marriage Equality
"The Holy Spirit Descended Upon Them . . ."
And don't forget C4ME-MN's previous video series,
Sunday, August 5, 2012
Celebrate Marriage for All
By Linda Boyd
Note: This op-ed was first published August 5, 2012 by Inform, the "forum of Fargo/Moorhead."
I don’t think I’m that old, but then I realize that in my lifetime I have witnessed extraordinary events in civil rights history.
Not so long ago, it was illegal for people of different races to marry. (It says so in the Bible, said the supporters of miscegenation laws.)
Not so long ago, it was proper and fitting for women to have fewer civil rights than men. (It says so in the Bible, said the foes of the women’s rights movement.)
Of course, I am not quite so old to have experienced the defense of slavery or the persecution of Galileo for proclaiming that the Earth was round and revolved around the sun.
Now we are at the very cusp of another sweeping societal change. For the first time, more than 50 percent of Americans believe same-sex marriage should be legal.
Foes of gay marriage cite the Bible, of course, as their ultimate authority. “I agree with 3,000 years of recorded history. I believe marriage is a sacred institution between a man and a woman,” stated Mitt Romney. That’s a bit rich coming from a man whose own great-grandfather left the country to live in Mexico so that he could have multiple wives.
Today, many churches and people of faith are offering a different take on the matter. Two months ago more than 120 religious leaders met in Minnesota to form Clergy United for All Families to speak out against the proposed gay marriage amendment. Represented were Lutherans, Baptists, Methodists, Catholics, Episcopalians, Jews, Presbyterians, Congregationalists, Quakers and more. “I will be voting no because of my faith, not in spite of my faith,” said the Rev. Kelly Chatman of Redeemer Lutheran Church of Minneapolis.
Marriage is a civil right, a contract offered and recognized by the state. Today, people of different races can marry. People past childbearing age can marry. People can marry, divorce and remarry. People can marry while in a drunken stupor and later have it annulled. But there is one group of people who cannot legally marry in most states: two people of the same gender.
Homosexuality is no more a sin than left-handedness (which was once considered a sin, and is the root of the word “sinister”), according to many leading theologians. There is no logical or humane reason to deny the civil right of marriage based on inborn sexual orientation. Of course, churches can, and do, set their own rules regarding the religious sacrament of marriage, and will always retain that right.
As we contemplate civil rights progress through the centuries, one thing is remarkably consistent: Those most vehemently opposed to extending civil rights to others cite biblical authority as their justification. It’s curious, though - once a civil right is granted, religious opposition fades away. Certainly, today’s churches no longer passionately defend the institution of slavery from the pulpit as God’s will. And it is my fervent hope that I will live to see the day when marriage among any and all of God’s beloved children is celebrated in our society.
Linda Boyd is a Fargo School Board member, a former city commissioner, and executive director of the Fargo-Moorhead Symphony Orchestra.
See also the previous Sensus Fidelium posts:
Fr. Bob Pierson: Why Catholics Can Vote 'No'
Marriage Amendment Not In Best Interest of Children and Families
Theological Considerations Behind Opposition to the Proposed Minnesota 'Marriage Amendment'
Tide is Turning on Public Perception of Same–Sex Marriage
A Catholic Case for Same-Sex Marriage
Catholics Lead the Way! – The Latest Statistics on Religious Support for Marriage Equality
A Few Questions . . .
Note: This op-ed was first published August 5, 2012 by Inform, the "forum of Fargo/Moorhead."
I don’t think I’m that old, but then I realize that in my lifetime I have witnessed extraordinary events in civil rights history.
Not so long ago, it was illegal for people of different races to marry. (It says so in the Bible, said the supporters of miscegenation laws.)
Not so long ago, it was proper and fitting for women to have fewer civil rights than men. (It says so in the Bible, said the foes of the women’s rights movement.)
Of course, I am not quite so old to have experienced the defense of slavery or the persecution of Galileo for proclaiming that the Earth was round and revolved around the sun.
Now we are at the very cusp of another sweeping societal change. For the first time, more than 50 percent of Americans believe same-sex marriage should be legal.
Foes of gay marriage cite the Bible, of course, as their ultimate authority. “I agree with 3,000 years of recorded history. I believe marriage is a sacred institution between a man and a woman,” stated Mitt Romney. That’s a bit rich coming from a man whose own great-grandfather left the country to live in Mexico so that he could have multiple wives.
Today, many churches and people of faith are offering a different take on the matter. Two months ago more than 120 religious leaders met in Minnesota to form Clergy United for All Families to speak out against the proposed gay marriage amendment. Represented were Lutherans, Baptists, Methodists, Catholics, Episcopalians, Jews, Presbyterians, Congregationalists, Quakers and more. “I will be voting no because of my faith, not in spite of my faith,” said the Rev. Kelly Chatman of Redeemer Lutheran Church of Minneapolis.
Marriage is a civil right, a contract offered and recognized by the state. Today, people of different races can marry. People past childbearing age can marry. People can marry, divorce and remarry. People can marry while in a drunken stupor and later have it annulled. But there is one group of people who cannot legally marry in most states: two people of the same gender.
Homosexuality is no more a sin than left-handedness (which was once considered a sin, and is the root of the word “sinister”), according to many leading theologians. There is no logical or humane reason to deny the civil right of marriage based on inborn sexual orientation. Of course, churches can, and do, set their own rules regarding the religious sacrament of marriage, and will always retain that right.
As we contemplate civil rights progress through the centuries, one thing is remarkably consistent: Those most vehemently opposed to extending civil rights to others cite biblical authority as their justification. It’s curious, though - once a civil right is granted, religious opposition fades away. Certainly, today’s churches no longer passionately defend the institution of slavery from the pulpit as God’s will. And it is my fervent hope that I will live to see the day when marriage among any and all of God’s beloved children is celebrated in our society.
Linda Boyd is a Fargo School Board member, a former city commissioner, and executive director of the Fargo-Moorhead Symphony Orchestra.
See also the previous Sensus Fidelium posts:
Fr. Bob Pierson: Why Catholics Can Vote 'No'
Marriage Amendment Not In Best Interest of Children and Families
Theological Considerations Behind Opposition to the Proposed Minnesota 'Marriage Amendment'
Tide is Turning on Public Perception of Same–Sex Marriage
A Catholic Case for Same-Sex Marriage
Catholics Lead the Way! – The Latest Statistics on Religious Support for Marriage Equality
A Few Questions . . .
No Faith Should Be Able to Impose Marriage Policies
By Barbara Stark
Note: The following was first published August 5, 2012 as a letter to the editor of the Duluth News Tribune.
[Frank Schuber is] an out-of-state political consultant [who] has come to Minnesota to further what he calls his “personal crusade:” to pass a constitutional amendment to limit the freedom to marry in Minnesota. He has come to town to impose the policies of one faith — his faith — on everyone. That is not how our secular society is supposed to work.
The marriage amendment on the November ballot is simple. It will limit the freedom to marry, and it is a bad idea.
We all understand commitments. Our commitments to each other and to our families are the building blocks of our society. Commitment means taking care of one another, in good times and in bad, in sickness and in health. In fundamental ways, taking care of each other requires our commitments have legal standing. We need to be sure that if we purchase a house and make a home together it will continue to be a home for our loved ones after we pass away. We need to be sure we can arrange for insurance coverage for our loved ones. We need to be sure our pension plans will cover our loved ones.
Commitments are personal, but they have practical consequences. When individuals make deep commitments to each other and want to care for each other, they should be encouraged. The marriage amendment will stand in the way of the most important commitment of all — marriage — for many Minnesotans.
No faith group should be permitted to impose its particular views of commitment on the entire community.
Do not limit the freedom to marry.
I plan to vote “no” on the marriage amendment in November.
Note: The following was first published August 5, 2012 as a letter to the editor of the Duluth News Tribune.
[Frank Schuber is] an out-of-state political consultant [who] has come to Minnesota to further what he calls his “personal crusade:” to pass a constitutional amendment to limit the freedom to marry in Minnesota. He has come to town to impose the policies of one faith — his faith — on everyone. That is not how our secular society is supposed to work.
The marriage amendment on the November ballot is simple. It will limit the freedom to marry, and it is a bad idea.
We all understand commitments. Our commitments to each other and to our families are the building blocks of our society. Commitment means taking care of one another, in good times and in bad, in sickness and in health. In fundamental ways, taking care of each other requires our commitments have legal standing. We need to be sure that if we purchase a house and make a home together it will continue to be a home for our loved ones after we pass away. We need to be sure we can arrange for insurance coverage for our loved ones. We need to be sure our pension plans will cover our loved ones.
Commitments are personal, but they have practical consequences. When individuals make deep commitments to each other and want to care for each other, they should be encouraged. The marriage amendment will stand in the way of the most important commitment of all — marriage — for many Minnesotans.
No faith group should be permitted to impose its particular views of commitment on the entire community.
Do not limit the freedom to marry.
I plan to vote “no” on the marriage amendment in November.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)