For quite some time many Catholic bloggers have become quite used to criticizing our Bishops for timidity or worse. Not these days. I enjoyed reading and writing about so many Bishops rising to take on heterodox politicians such as Biden and Pelosi. As much as that was, I think this is even better.
Some people were concerned when Sacramento Coadjutor Bishop Jaime Soto accepted an invitation to be the keynote speaker at the National Association of Catholic Diocesan Lesbian and Gay Ministries held last week. If I knew about it, I would have been concerned too. It was too easy to imagine a Bishop showing up at such a conference to tell them that God love’s them just the way He made them and that they should never be discriminated against. Too easy to imagine technically true platitudes that are completely besides the point but designed to send the message, “Don’t worry about what the Church teaches, you are just fine.”
I suppose that is what the attendee’s at this conference expected too. That is emphatically not what they got!
[Cal Catholic Daily] But there was noting ambiguous about Bishop Soto’s remarks to the group. “Sexual relations between people of the same sex can be alluring for homosexuals, but it deviates from the true meaning of the act and distracts them from the true nature of love to which God has called us all,” Bishop Soto said. “For this reason, it is sinful. Married love is a beautiful, heroic expression of faithful, life-giving, life-creating love. It should not be accommodated and manipulated for those who would believe that they can and have a right to mimic its unique expression.”
At least five members of the audience walked out during the bishop’s address. When he finished speaking, there was general silence — with only a very small number applauding.
The chairman of the conference then announced that the bishop would answer questions at a reception that would be held in another room. That led to widespread expressions of disapproval from members of the audience, who said they wanted to be able to express their responses immediately. It was agreed that those who wanted to speak would line up. The bishop was told twice by the chairman that he was free to leave if he wanted — or to stay and listen. Bishop Soto stayed and sat quietly listening to every response.
A series of about eight speakers came to the microphone to express their unhappiness with what the bishop had said — and what they felt he had not said. One woman said, in essence, “We know what the Church says. What we wanted you to talk about is the value of our lived experience as lesbian women and gay men.”
Two speakers — one man and one woman — thanked the bishop for his address and voiced their agreement with what he had to say.
While the audience members were responding to the bishop’s remarks, a board member of the National Association of Catholic Diocesan Lesbian and Gay Ministries came up to one of the tables in the room and said, “On behalf of the board, I apologize. We had no idea Bishop Soto was going to say what he said.”
Wow! Wow! Wow! My hat is off to Bishop Soto for the courage and conviction displayed by preaching such an unpopular but needed message in such a hostile setting.
I am particularly struck by the board member apologizing because he had no idea what the Bishop would say. I imagine not. This gives me hope that perhaps in the not too distant future we will once again expect Bishops to teach what the Church teaches, no matter who the audience is.
I have one lingering question though. I can’t help but wonder if the attendees enjoyed their spanking?
September 27, 2008 at 5:42 pm
Wow, this is great, right on Bishop! I guess the truth will prevail.
Thank you for posting.
Here We Are
September 27, 2008 at 5:59 pm
Honest, tough and Godly love for a change from another of our bishops…something that seems to be growing now in America a precisely the right moment…as our society has degenerated sexually to the point of being almost indistinguisable from crowded, penned-in swine.
But change for the better will be hard-fought by many so-called progressives, especially that fifth column in the Church, deeply committed to their beloved Libidos and social tyranny.
September 27, 2008 at 6:44 pm
Great story, glad the bishops are standing up for the truth. However, I think that last lingering question wasn’t very fair or loving. The church teaches that a homosexual orientation is disordered, but that doesn’t mean that homosexuals have any higher rates of other sexual fetishes. It is unfair to suggest so.
September 27, 2008 at 7:32 pm
Love means telling the truth. Hooray for a strong bishop!
— Mack
September 27, 2008 at 7:53 pm
“I can’t help but wonder if the attendees enjoyed their spanking?”
Only the ones wearing leather outfits.
September 27, 2008 at 9:54 pm
Excuse me, was that the National Association of Catholic Diocesan Lesbian and Gay Ministries?
September 28, 2008 at 1:07 am
That association is probably like The Call to Action bunch that want to be given the seal of approval. They want the Church to change so they can sin without feeling guilty. The latter is for women priests, married priests–anything contrary to church teaching. They have self excommunicated themselves, but continue to spit in the face of the clergy.
September 28, 2008 at 1:33 am
Bishop Soto has a lot of courage. It takes guts to speak truth when you are pretty sure that a very high percentage of the audience will disagree with you, and then listen when they tell you exactly that. I found the full text of his address, and it is a beautiful statement. Click here to read his address. Way to go, Bishop Soto.
September 28, 2008 at 3:20 am
alleluyah, praise God for the courage of this bishop! …and may more of them come forward!
September 28, 2008 at 5:22 am
“However, I think that last lingering question wasn’t very fair or loving. The church teaches that a homosexual orientation is disordered, but that doesn’t mean that homosexuals have any higher rates of other sexual fetishes. It is unfair to suggest so.”
Must be a new reader.
September 28, 2008 at 5:55 am
Josh-
Have you ever seen a gay pride parade? You will quickly be disabused of your belief that homosexuals are no more prone to other fetishes or disordered sexual predilections.
September 28, 2008 at 8:19 am
We need to reboot the system on this one. Recall CCC 2358: “[Homosexuals] must be treated with respect, compassion, and sensitivity.”
Notice that it doesn’t say that they should be treated with snark, smug sarcasm, and oblique disdain. This is important if we want to persuade the culture about the Catholic view of sexuality. It’s important if we actually mean what we say about “approaching Christian perfection.”
Do we care about the disposition of their souls? If you want to bring them to the truth, you’re not going to win them over with thinly veiled bigotry. I’ve seen those gay pride parades, too, and most of that outlandish behavior doesn’t jibe with the gays I know. Why drag out that anecdotal evidence and smear the entire population with it? That’s like saying most priests are pedophiles; ergo, Catholicism is bad. It’s a generalization meant to discredit everyone by association.
Furthermore, why do we say “hate the sin, love the sinner,” and then have such a hard time living that out when it comes to certain classes of sins? Why are we so tone deaf to the disrespect, lack of compassion, and insensitivity we exhibit too often toward gays, whom the Church clearly says did not choose their disorder and experience it mainly as “a trial?” Shouldn’t we be *extra* careful in these matters, since it’s such a “deep-seated” (again, the CCC, not my words) condition?
— Anon For Now
September 28, 2008 at 10:51 am
What a beautiful address! And one that is so loving and powerful coming from someone who has himself taken a vow of chastity for love of the Lord, and invites his audience to join him in following Christ’s teaching. “The teaching of the Church regarding the sacred dignity of human sexuality is not a rebuke but an invitation to love as God loves us.”
I also agree that in this sensitive and hard discussion we need to leave the snarkiness behind and “show we are Christians by our love”.
September 28, 2008 at 3:00 pm
last sentence wrecked the whole article. Grow up!
September 28, 2008 at 3:32 pm
The article was well written and the Bishop was spot on. However,as the son of a gay mother I agree with several other readers that the last sentence ruined whatever intent it may have had.
I can safely attest that not all gay people are gimps or into S/M nor do they display any of the stereotypical traits that they have been given over the years.
I would never suggest that the Church must accept sinful behavior however that low blow was hurtful.
I enjoy this blog and I hope that the author learns some self restraint in the future
Matthew
September 28, 2008 at 3:53 pm
How do I put this sensitively? While I understand our obligation to respect the inherent dignity of all God's creatures (and I do), I think the use of sarcasm and even a little mocking is perfectly justified in this instance. Juvenile, perhaps, but justified.
The attendees, at whom my remark was aimed, were attempting to make it appear (by the use of Diocesan and Catholic in the title of the Conference) to legitimize the organization as a Catholic one.
Bishop Soto gave them the Truth even though that is not what the wanted or expected. They thought that he would further legitimize them as Catholic, He did not, but rather scolded (spanked) them. They deserved it, and then some.
I did not (as some of the hyperventilating here would suggest) that the entire gay community is in to S&M. That is an overreaction to some simple, but apropos, mocking.
Lighten up.
September 28, 2008 at 4:31 pm
Great punning headline! As good as anything Dawn Eden can create!
September 28, 2008 at 5:26 pm
Patrick: I am not hyperventilating nor do I think the others who have objected to that last sentence are hyperventilating.
I didn't say that you were implying all homosexuals are into S&M merely that they were more disposed toward it. Regardless of whether or not that is true I see no reason to even put it in the article. That's not the point, the point is the mocking not the content of the mocking.
There is a difference between praising a bishop for standing up for the truth (good) and laughing at someone who "got theirs" (not so good).
What is "apropos mocking?" Homosexuals who want the church to put a stamp of approval on their sexual conduct do, I guess, technically "have it coming to them." But should we high-five each other about it?
Do you laugh when you hear that someone engaged in promiscuous sex (straight or homosexual) gets herpes or AIDS? How does that help anything? To put it another way, what good was achieved by the mocking? I honestly can't think of one, and the potential negative effects are large.
How about instead of the mocking and high-fives we pray that the message the bishop delivered will reach some people. The only good that comes out of someone "getting theirs" is the repentance that happens afterwards. Let's pray for that repentance.
This is not to say that I don't think you are doing so. I read your blog often and you seem like the kind of person who does pray that sort of prayer. But that witness can be lost and the chance that those corrected will repent lowers when we rejoice in the correction.
September 28, 2008 at 5:45 pm
“Lighten up” won’t do. On this issue we cannot afford to use double intendre or sarcasm.
You run a good page. You will be held to a high standard by those of us who read it.
As Gerald (of Cafeteria is Closed renown) realized that he was being hurtful and judgmental towards gays he gave up on the Church’s position altogether. His blog imploded over this. He was more sarcastic than you, but nonetheless. . . .
You must do better if you want to sustain your readership.
September 28, 2008 at 5:46 pm
Josh,
With all due respect, I don’t think it is an either / or situation.
I can pray for them at the same time I make a joke at their expense.
The line was intended to be funny. I think it is funny. Besides, if I gave up mocking, I don’t know what else I would do.
The line is not vitriolic or wishing evil on them in any way. No, it is not much more than needling. To get exorcised over it entirely misses the point.