It sounds like Bishop DiMarzio never learned to deal with not getting his own way. Perhaps he should have a random tantrum fruit cup and call it a day. Well, maybe not a fruit cup, maybe the cranky pants french toast. But I suspect there's more to his tantrum than just losing a political battle. Perhaps it's how the USCCB lost this particular battle. But first DiMarzio's tantrum.
Today, Governor Andrew Cuomo and the state legislature have deconstructed the single most important institution in human history. Republicans and Democrats alike succumbed to powerful political elites and have passed legislation that will undermine our families and as a consequence, our society. (I kind of thought war did that, but what do I know?
With this vote, Governor Cuomo has opened a new front in the culture wars that are tearing at the fabric of our nation. At a time when so many New Yorkers are struggling to stay in their homes and find jobs, we should be working together to solve these problems. However, the politicians have curried favor with wealthy donors who are proponents of a divisive agenda in order to advance their own careers and futures. (Well, maybe NOM should change it's name to National Organization for Jobs.)
What is needed in our state is leadership and not political gamesmanship. (What if your political gamesmanship had won, would you still call this political gamesmanship?)
In light of these disturbing developments and in protest for this decision, I have asked all Catholic schools to refuse any distinction or honors bestowed upon them this year by the governor or any member of the legislature who voted to support this legislation. Furthermore, I have asked all pastors and principals to not invite any state legislator to speak or be present at any parish or school celebration. (The ole 'take you ball and run home' response.)
The above request is intended as a protest of the corrupt political process in New York State. More than half of all New Yorkers oppose this legislation. Yet, the governor and the state legislature have demonized people of faith, whether they be Muslims, Jews, or Christians, and identified them as bigots and prejudiced, and voted in favor of same-sex “marriage.” It is mystifying that this bill would be passed on the last day of an extended session under the cover of darkness. (Only because your side held up the vote for ever and ever and ever.)
This issue has been framed as upholding marriage equality. This is not the case since one of the principal purposes of marriage is to bring new life into the world. This cannot happen in same-sex marriage. It is not a civil rights issue, but rather a human rights issue upholding the age-old understanding of marriage. Our political leaders do not believe their own rhetoric. If they did, how in good conscience could they carve out any exemption for institutions that would be proponents of bigotry and prejudice? (Yes it can. Lesbians do it all the time, but then your real issues aren't with lesbians, are they? And you and your fellow bishops were the ones who insisted legislators carve out exemptions the make you the proponents of bigotry and prejudice.)
*********************************
It seems I keep writing that in this incoming new understanding of human consciousness that the traditionalists will get sillier and sillier as they get more and more desperate. DiMarzio must be pretty desperate because this tantrum is pretty silly. Especially the last line of his diatribe. It could be that I am totally misunderstanding his point, but I've read this a number of times and keep coming up with the same understanding. It's their own insistence on these religious exemptions that make them look like bigots and maybe that's because they are bigots. The USCCB could have just trusted that the State of New York had enough sense to make the legal separation of sacramental marriage vs civil marriage two distinct concepts. It is after all, federal as well as state law. Traditionally, these two views of marriage were separate, and in fact the state recognized marriage as a contract long before the Church recognized it as a sacrament. But then what do laity know?
I would like to give DiMarzio credit for enforcing his blanket ban on Republican and Democratic politicians on church property, but I suspect certain politicians who voted 'right' will be allowed to give and accept awards. My guess is these will be for pro life kinds of things. DiMarzio wouldn't want to look too hypocritical. I also suspect his fellow members in the USCCB are not too happy with his single sided broadside blast. It makes them all look like proponents of bigotry and prejudice. Maybe they are---at least the ones who aren't retired.
And one last little correction. DiMarzio states in this tantrum "more than half of all New Yorkers oppose this legislation." That's not true. Here's the headline from an article in the January 27, 2011 New York Daily News:
Gay marriage supported by record number of New York voters: 56% according to new poll ----This is the NY Daily News, not the NY Times.
But there was something else I wondered about. Why was DiMarzio so insistent that big money paved the way. I took this to mean bigger money than the Roman Catholic Church had brought in for the support of Republican legislators. Turns out this was true. Big, usually Republican money, did, in fact play a very big part. And Democratic Governor Cuomo was the real leader in this effort. The following is from Boston.com
....Would the donors win over the deciding Senate Republicans? It sounded improbable: top Republican moneymen helping a Democratic rival with one of his biggest legislative goals.
But the donors in the room — the billionaire Paul Singer, whose son is gay, joined by the hedge fund managers Cliff Asness and Dan Loeb — had the influence and the money to insulate nervous senators from conservative backlash if they supported the marriage measure. And they were inclined to see the issue as one of personal freedom, consistent with their more libertarian views.
Within days, the wealthy Republicans sent back word: They were on board. Each of them cut six-figure checks to the lobbying campaign that eventually totaled more than $1 million.
I also think the Boston.com article hits on the real reason for DiMarzio's tantrum as the article goes on to say this:
I also think the Boston.com article hits on the real reason for DiMarzio's tantrum as the article goes on to say this:
The story of how same-sex marriage became legal in New York is about shifting public sentiment and individual lawmakers moved by emotional appeals from gay couples.
But, behind the scenes, it was really about a Republican Party reckoning with a profoundly changing power dynamic, where Wall Street donors and gay-rights advocates demonstrated more might and muscle than a Roman Catholic hierarchy and an ineffective opposition.
The days of Roman Catholic Bishops having a huge say in how the United States of America politically operates is over. The game has changed and they are not the players they once were--even in the Republican party. This is all probably indicative of how the abuse crisis has affected their moral voice, but more than that, I think it's indicative of how far out of touch they are with where society is moving. It isn't about sexual acts. Married heterosexual couples engage in contraception and the same kinds of sexual acts as gay couples. Maybe, finally, it's about validating love. That's a good thing. That's a Jesus thing.
The days of Roman Catholic Bishops having a huge say in how the United States of America politically operates is over. The game has changed and they are not the players they once were--even in the Republican party. This is all probably indicative of how the abuse crisis has affected their moral voice, but more than that, I think it's indicative of how far out of touch they are with where society is moving. It isn't about sexual acts. Married heterosexual couples engage in contraception and the same kinds of sexual acts as gay couples. Maybe, finally, it's about validating love. That's a good thing. That's a Jesus thing.
