At the risk of "your eternal soul" - Come June 9

WHEN: This Saturday, June 9 2012 1-4 PM

WHERE: Goucher College Alumni House

WHAT: Forum on MARRIAGE EQUALITY

WHO: Panel of Speakers, led by Sister Jeannine Gramick

Strategy sessions:

HOW TO ENCOURAGE 

A PROGRESSIVE CATHOLIC VOTE 

ON NOV 6TH

IN FAVOR OF 

MARRIAGE EQUALITY 

IN MARYLAND

 This message has elicited enthusiasm as well as the following note from a priest:

"Going against the Magisterial teaching of the Church - same as going against Christ and the Holy Spirit. This is your eternal soul on the line. The Church calls for us to form our conscience in line with the teaching as left from Christ with the guarantee of the Holy Spirit. I urge you to reconsider your actions."

I responded to this note as follows:

Father _________, 

Can I come and talk to you about this sometime? 

I think your statements are fundamentally correct as an expression of the Catholic faith. 

But the marriage equality issue is a matter of access to government by the citizens, not by believers. 

Fundamentally, there is a difference between what the Church teaches that Catholics must believe and do, versus the expectation under the US Constitution that all the citizens have equal access to the courthouse. 

All of the citizens must have equal access to undertake responsibilities and obligations available through legally enforceable contracts. We cannot have different sets of rules for different categories of citizens, based on individual characteristics, attributes or innate and inborn inclinations. 

Civil marriage is an enforceable contract. Civil marriage is not a Sacrament.  

Sacramental life certainly can be and is regulated by the teachings of the Church. But it is a hurtful and pastorally questionable form of prejudice to tell the citizens, Catholics and others, that some citizens, but not others, must be excluded from the benefits and duties imposed by the laws of contract on the grounds that some believers are excluded from a Sacrament of the Church.  

Not all citizens are believers. And of course you know, not all believers follow lives that are in complete accord with the Sacraments. The civil authorities must not be asked to regulate conduct imposed by sacramental obligations. 

All citizens must receive equal access and treatment under the civil law. Any other rule would be prejudicial to some of the citizens and dangerous to all, as privilege would be granted to some who are arbitrarily favored and denied to others who are arbitrarily excluded from full citizenship. 

We cannot tolerate different categories of citizenship, based not on conduct but on personal characteristics. 

If the Magisterium wishes to campaign against civil marriage for some citizens but not all, let the Magisterium make arguments that all the citizens can hear and debate. The Magisterium ought not insist that all citizens must conform their conduct to the Sacraments, that is to behavior that is based exclusively on a faith that many citizens do not share. 

Citizens who are entitled to access to the courthouse cannot be denied this access because of the limitations imposed by a Sacrament. Why not? Citizens, per se (Catholics and others) have not agreed to live in ways that are regulated by the Sacraments. 

Freedom of religion means, in the USA,  freedom from religion, too. 

It would be good to talk about this. 

My eternal soul is waiting for a reply . . .