Catholics" Appeal for Money Raises Ethical Dilemma

By Joel Connelly
Seattle PI
May 13, 2012

http://www.seattlepi.com/local/connelly/article/Catholics-appeal-for-money-raises-ethical-dilemma-3552819.php

The Most Rev. J. Peter Sartain, second from left, at his installation in 2010. The shepherd's fight against marriage equality, and a lead role in making American nuns toe the line, have brought division to the flock.

Archbishop J. Peter Sartain sent me two letters in April: One was the annual Catholic Appeal asking money for good works, the other an appeal for discrimination, namely repeal of the just-granted legal right for my gay and lesbian friends to marry.

Three words of Nancy Reagan quickly flashed to mind: Just say no!!

Don't give one cent to a man in the purple hat. Don't support a diocese that makes common cause with the National Organization for Marriage that wants to "sideswipe Obama" and "drive a wedge between gays and blacks."

It's an honest, widely shared emotion. Many American Catholics are appalled, hurt and disheartened by the actions of their bishops, and see in those actions a disconnect with the teachings of Christ and message of the Gospel, as well as our belief in a community of the faithful.

Our "shepherds" have set out to force American nuns to toe the Vatican line, with Archbishop Sartain assigned a lead role. They've just begun an "official inquiry" into the Girl Scouts -- yes, the Girl Scouts -- for associating with such groups as Doctors Without Borders, Oxfam and the Sierra Club.

The ideological crackdowns are being undertaken with a lot more vigor than shown by major dioceses in dealing with sexual abuse and so-called "problem" priests. A senior cleric in the archdiocese of Philadelphia, as well as a bishop in Kansas City, face criminal charges stemming from what appears to be criminal negligence.

Yet . . .

Look beyond its maladroit, insular authoritarian hierarchy and you see a Church that is doing the Lord's -- and Caesar's -- work. Catholic Community Services has taken responsibility for services curtailed by cuts in federal, state and local budgets. My parish feeds the hungry, houses the homeless and teaches English as a second language to immigrants.

It poses a dilemma summed up by Fr. Michael Ryan, pastor of St. James Cathedral in a recent sermon:

"Refusing to contribute to the annual Catholic Appeal this year will hurt the tens of thousands of people whom the archdiocese serves far more than it will hurt the archdiocese itself, because this appeal is really not about funding a bureaucy, it is about serving and caring for people.

"It's about housing the poor, the disabled, the elderly, war veterans, people with aocohol and substance abuse issues, and migrant workers and their families. It's also about providing shelters and basic social services."

The Church really has two faces, as this Catholic has learned in the two years since "coming home."

The first is represented by dictatorial autocrats, increasingly prone to excess as their moral authority slips away.

Hence, we have Cardinal Raymond Burke, head of the Vatican's highest court, sneering at nuns for "the public and obstinate betrayal of religious life by certain religious." And Bishop Daniel Jenky of Peoria likening pro-choice Catholic politicians to Judas Iscariot and speaking of his state's legislature as "enemies of the church."

The other face of the church could be seen for years walking the family's standard poodles along 35th Avenue in Madrona, past St. Therese Church.

I'd run into Walt Hubbard, former head of the Urban League in these parts, and hear him talk of the Catholic Interracial Council and its role in ending housing segregation in Seattle. At the church, I'd see a St. James Cathedral van picking up homeless men who slept in the school gym overnight . . . and see kids, many from non-Catholic families, arriving at a good inner-city school.

It's that church to which I want to -- and will -- give. With that contribution goes a message to the Archbishop:

We were hopeful when you arrived here in 2010. The early scuttlebut was that you're a good listener. Yet, on two issues -- marriage equality and women religious -- a lot of us are deeply, deeply disappointed.

In your letter on Referendum 74, while talking of "respect, sensitivity and love" for all, you directed: "It is important to remember that all Christians are called to chastity, and sexual intercourse is so intimate and significant that it is intended only for a man and woman in marriage."

Not only will my gay and lesbian friends be denied the right to marry, but they are directed to refrain from any and all sexual activity. The Q & A on the issue tries to make the distinction, "Human sexual acts are intrinsically disordered, not persons."

How does "intrinsically disordered" uphold anybody's dignity? How is someone to proclaim the "good news" of the Gospels in a secular society when it comes with baggage about the "order of nature" and condemnations of birth control?

O.K., O.K., the check gets put in the mail on Monday, after I take a walk past St. Therese: It'll remind me of where moral leadership really resides in today's Church.