Catholic US Military Chaplains Banned From Presiding Over Funerals Of Married Gay Soldiers

[muriel_volestrangler]

Calling same-sex marriages “evil,” the Archdiocese that is in charge of Catholic priests serving U.S. service members has released a statement banning its chaplains from presiding over the funerals of legally married gay, lesbian, or bisexual military personnel.

Soldiers and other military personnel, including officers, who die of the field of battle or in other service to their country — for example, if they had been among those who were killed in the D.C. Naval Yard shooting — will be denied a Catholic funeral.

Archbishop Timothy P. Broglio, (image, above,) in a statement that “reiterates Church teaching on homosexuality,” commanded that while “the tradition of the Catholic Church always tries to find reasons to bury the dead, a priest may not be placed in a situation where his assistance at a funeral for a Catholic would give the impression that the Church approves of same sex ‘marital’ relationships (see CIC, c. 1184, §1,3º).”

Additionally, regardless of faith, Catholic chaplains have been directed to not formally participate in weddings of same-sex couples, to not participate in “marriage retreats” if same-sex couples will be present, and to refuse to counsel service members who are in same-sex relationships.

http://thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/catholic-us-military-chaplains-banned-from-presiding-over-funerals-of-married-gay-soldiers/news/2013/09/25/75699#.UkW6s21vCBp

Via Slacktivist

[cbayer]

1. They've also been told they can't provide counseling to these service members.

Disgusting.

[LiberalLoner]

2. I agree. Disgusting and so wrong.

[xfundy]

3. It's Christian Love™!

Indistinguishable from hate, because that's what it is.

[rurallib]

4. WWJH - Who Would Jesus Hate?

[rug]

5. What is the CIC?

[muriel_volestrangler]

6. 'Codex Iuris Canonici'

Can. 1184 - § 1. Exequiis ecclesiasticis privandi sunt, nisi ante mortem aliqua dederint paenitentiae signa:
1° notorie apostatae, haeretici et schismatici;
2° qui proprii corporis cremationem elegerint ob rationes fidei christianae adversas;
3° alii peccatores manifesti, quibus exequiae ecclesiasticae non sine publico fidelium scandalo concedi possunt.
§ 2. Occurrente aliquo dubio, consulatur loci Ordinarius, cuius iudicio standum est.

Can. 1184 §1 Church funeral rites are to be denied to the following, unless they gave some signs of repentance before death:
1° notorious apostates, heretics and schismatics;
2° those who for anti christian motives chose that their bodies be cremated;
3° other manifest sinners to whom a Church funeral could not be granted without public scandal to the faithful.
§2 If any doubt occurs, the local Ordinary is to be consulted and his judgement followed.

http://www.jcu.edu/Bible/480/Codex/Parallel_Version.htm

[rug]

7. Ah, ok. Now I have to see what their obligations are as military officers.

[skepticscott]

8. I'm sure the pope will be all over this

Ending this kind of despicable bigotry in the RCC is what he's all about...isn't it?

Reform, thy name is Francis. Go to it!

[rexcat]

9. Time will tell...

but for some reason I don't think I would hold my breath waiting on this one... but I would be glad to eat my words if his popeness would come to the side of reason on this issue.

[struggle4progress]

10. Well, I think it's silly. But I don't understand why anyone, who regards all religion as hokum,

would really care much one way or the other

[Heddi]

11. Wait...you don't see why this is a big deal?

You don't see why service members who died, but who also happened to be part of a same-sex relationship, and still continued to maintain their faith, aren't allowed to have a chaplain preside over their funeral?

You think that's "silly"?

I think that's bigoted.

What other denial of civil rights do you find "silly"?

To me, use of the word "silly," instead of "disgusting," "hateful," or another word which indicates strong emotion is....sick.

"Silly" is not what this is. BIgoted is what it is. Disgusting is what it is. Hateful, misguided, and steeped in 17th century logic is what it is. Silly, it is not.

Silly is a word we use to describe children's games, not civil rights. ANd certainly not the civil rights of the people who are fighting, or have fought, to keep our country safe.

Silly? Sickening.

[rug]

13. If you read the links, the prohibtion is against presiding at Catholic funerals.

The article doesn't address a chaplain's obligation for non-Catholic services.

[Heddi]

14. That still doesn't make it "silly"

nor does it make it any less hateful or bigoted

[rug]

17. I didn't say it's silly.

Hyberbole and inaccurate statements don't address the issue.

[Heddi]

19. you didn't say it was silly. S4P, the person I was responding to initially

said it was silly.

But you responded, almost in a way that would be excusing the behaviour noted in the OP, as if to imply that, based on your "clarification" that the issues in the OP weren't "as bad" as they were being made out to be.

That, coupled with S4P's admonition that this whole issue was "silly" led me to make the response I did.

If you have an issue with my use of the word "silly," please take it up with the person who originally used it in a derisive manner meant to downplay the issue.

[rug]

20. That's your inference.

I'm more interested in the facts than your inferences and hyperbole.

[Heddi]

21. I am more interested in exposing bigotry than excusing it

and I have no further use in conversing with you in this thread if you can't see that the actions outlined in the OP are bigoted and hateful, and quite hurtful to the service members who are denied certain services of a chaplain because of the relationship (same-sex)they are in.

I feel pity for anyone who doesn't find the behaviours outlined in the article linked in the OP to be hurtful, hateful, and bigoted.

[rug]

22. Then you should do it more intelligently.

Playing to the peanut gallery and relying on exaggerations, without bothering to know exactly what is in fact happening, accomplishes less than nothing.

Your pity is irrelevant because it is not at all about you.

[Heddi]

24. Please point out how I have exaggerated

and please do tell me what you know about me and how this issue does or does not apply to me.

I had no idea you passed yourself off as a clairvoyant (and if that is the case, your skills need some fine tuning)

Since it appears so important to you, I will let you get in the last word, as I have no use for conversing with those who do not find the behaviours outlined in article linked in the OP to be disturbing or bigoted and instead decry those who oppose it as engaging in hyperbolic behaviour, etc.

[rug]

25. This is how you make it about you: "I feel pity for anyone who doesn't . . . ."

Who cares?

Now as to what this thread is about. Chaplains are both clergy of denominations with specific beliefs and military officers. The issue is whether those roles clash and, when they do, how do those roles play out.

The exaggeration is that the homophobic Catholic Church is once again expressing bigotry towards gay members of the military. They will not bury them.

If you look a little more closely (perhaps you can set down your pity if that burdens you), you might see what is going on.

For one thing, Catholic chaplains are bound by Catholic doctrine when ministering to Catholic members of the military. As officers, they are required by separate oath to minister to all service members.

When exactly does the question of military funerals come up? I seriously doubt that any chaplain, including Catholic chaplains, will refuse to minister to service members injured or dying in the field. In that instance, the thrust of the article - and your comments - does not apply.

I expect most funerals take place in the home towns of the deceased, not in the midst of combat. In that instance, it's far less a military issue. Persons in same sex relationships (as well as those who are now able to die in matrimony) die every day and are buried in Catholic services every day. That is the fact of the matter if you care to "expose" those facts as well.

The Archbishop's letter is far more political than pastoral. It's in the same vein with the other hortatory proclamations that Catholics cannot participate in the ACA because of mandated contraceptive and termination of pregnancy coverage. Those declarations are bullshit and the Catholic Hospital Association announced in July that there is no conflict between the statute and Church doctrine.

I expect when this plays out, sans hyperbole and pity pronouncements, there will be a similar outcome.

That is the exaggeration.

Now, since you've already said - twice - that you're done conversing with me, please don't disappoint me again.

[eomer]

30. The Archbishop's statement calls gay marriage sinful and evil.

That sounds homophobic to me, not to you?

Here are the parts of the statement I'm referring to:

Obviously, anyone who is known to be in a sinful relationship is excluded from ministries in the Catholic community.

Consequently in response to a doubt raised by the AMS regarding the question of a person’s possible cooperation with evil, the National Catholic Bioethics Center (NCBC) stated:

“Commanders of United States military installations/veterans’ facilities (hereafter, ‘commanders’) would not be engaging in morally illicit cooperation, but rather tolerable remote mediate material cooperation with evil by implementing federal employee benefits accruing pursuant to same-sex marriage, as required by United States v. Windsor. -snip-"

[rug]

31. Not only is it homophobic but it's Manichean.

Last edited Sun Sep 29, 2013, 12:05 PM - Edit history (1)

Note the statement applies to anyone, straight or gay, in a "sinful" relationship. That includes straight Catholics who were married outside the Church.

In short, the current emphasis in Catholic doctrine is that any sexual activity, solo, straight, gay, or group, is a grave sin. It's not just same sex relationships. I say emphasis because at its root it's a distortion of the teaching. Remember the parable of the woman found committing adultery.

John 8:1-11

1 but Jesus went to the Mount of Olives.

2 At dawn he appeared again in the temple courts, where all the people gathered around him, and he sat down to teach them. 3 The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group 4 and said to Jesus, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. 5 In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?” 6 They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him.

But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. 7 When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.” 8 Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground.

9 At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. 10 Jesus straightened up and asked her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?”

11 “No one, sir,” she said.

“Then neither do I condemn you,” Jesus declared. “Go now and leave your life of sin.”

To go from that striking example to the present rhetoric and hateful actions is a perversion and is nothing less than homophobia.

Worse, whatever its teaching on sacramental marriage, it is completely without competence to pontificate on civil regulation of the rights and obligations of a marriage.

It is as fucked up theologically as it is socially. I see the same tinge in this statement on chaplains and funerals.

I do not expect it to stand.

[muriel_volestrangler]

12. It's indicative of an unwillingness to forgive

He thinks he needs to hold the line on "manifest sinners to whom a Church funeral could not be granted without public scandal to the faithful", rather than take into account the wishes or feelings of the spouse, or the person themselves, if they still felt they were a Catholic.

FWIW, Fred Clark doesn't think all religion is hokum by any stretch - he's a liberal evangelical Christian (though he's shying away from that last bale, given the continuous bad behaviour by many who use it). And I don't just post threads here for people who do. cbayer was interested, and it's given rug something to think about.

[struggle4progress]

16. Long Catholic tradition frowns upon activities contrary to church doctrine that cau

If I understand the Catholic doctrine correctly -- and I'm pretty sure I do in this matter -- the Church regards everyone as a sinner, constantly requiring forgiveness, but considers continuing intent to desist as essential to the process, and is likely to view the "celebration" of activity contrary to Church teachings as evidence against intent to desist

Thus, as I read the letter, the Archbishop is not forbidding Catholic chaplains to officiate at the funeral of anyone who is involved, or has been involved, in a same-sex relation, but forbids in cases where the relation is "scandalous" in the sense that it involves some open public defiance of Church teaching, indicating disagreement with and contempt for the Church teachings

[muriel_volestrangler]

18. The point being that marrying is that 'open public defiance'

That's why it refers to the section saying "no funerals for manifest sinners". And the letter also calls same-sex marriage 'evil', albeit one which Catholics who aren't priests are allowed to tolerate.

[struggle4progress]

15. Here's the actual letter:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
09/18/2013
Archbishop Timothy P. Broglio Issues Guidance to Catholic Military Chaplains on Same-Gender Relationships
Statement reiterates Church teaching on homosexuality

... No Catholic priest or deacon may be forced by any authority to witness or bless the union of couples of the same gender ... While the tradition of the Catholic Church always tries to find reasons to bury the dead, a priest may not be placed in a situation where his assistance at a funeral for a Catholic would give the impression that the Church approves of same sex “marital” relationships ... The Church must minister to all regardless of their sexual inclination ...

Archbishop for the Military Services
Washington, DC, 17 September 2013, Memorial of St. Robert Bellarmine

As I read the letter, it does not absolutely forbid Catholic chaplains from providing a Catholic funeral for a member of a same-sex couple except when when such participation would give the impression that the Church approves of same sex “marital” relationships

[dimbear]

23. Good news for Catholics in command positions:

"Commanders of United States military installations/veterans’ facilities (hereafter, ‘commanders’) would not be engaging in morally illicit cooperation, but rather tolerable remote mediate material cooperation with evil by implementing federal employee benefits accruing pursuant to same-sex marriage, as required by United States v. Windsor."

Not taking your gay soldiers out and stoning them.............er, I meant, paying them their benefits.................... is only "tolerable remote mediate material cooperation with evil."

Who here doesn't commit that almost every day?

[atreides1]

26. Then they should all resign their commissions!

Since their commissions come from the President, not the Pope...they need to make a decision! Provide for the needs of all military personnel, or get the fuck out!!!!

[Nay]

27. Then they should be stripped of their commissions and court-martialed

since they refuse to do their duties.

[warrant46]

28. These religious nutjobs need to be kicked out of the Services

What say if they had an objection to say another race receiving the sacrament?

Get them the F$^k out of the service

[MADem]

29. That's problematic. If they've got "the duty" at Arlington, they can't pick, choose and refuse.

I have a feeling that the Military Archdiocese is going to be getting a little talking to right soon by some less-than-empathetic reps at DoD. This could end up at the Vatican -- via our rep there -- in a hurry.

There are jobs that Chaplains need to be detailed to, in order to be competitive for promotion. I'm guessing those "good billets" ain't gonna be happening because if they can't depend on the chaplains to do the job for one, they can't depend on them to do the job for all.