Boston St. Cecilia’s Parish Celebrates Gay Mass

[Elizabeth502]

So, here’s from the parish bulletin, which is online. Can one identify the LGBT community without giving the impression of endorsement of the lifestyle?

Respectfully, Paul, I do not see the ‘endorsement of a lifestyle here.’ However, neither do I see this Mass as distinct from other Masses. They are extending an outreach, it seems to me, to those from one segment of the community that may benefit from a named welcome. It’s just that I take issue with Jim (above) that one has to name specific groups or affiliations for all to understand that all are welcome – let alone to verify that a parish is “following the teachings of the Catholic Church” ! (What else would they be doing?)

Note that Saint Cecilia’s is proclaiming a reaffirmation, not a new theology or new policy. The Mass, universally, welcomes all. For example, a parish near me mentions in its Mission Statement a Welcome to All (without naming each possible “group” or affiliation – such as Seniors, children, youth, LGBT, etc.). Fragmentation is not necessary. We are one people. We are the Body of Christ.

ALL ARE WELCOME!

Please join the entire Saint Cecilia Parish
community for this Sunday’s eleven o’clock
liturgy where we will reaffirm that Saint
Cecilia is a place of welcome for all, including
the LGBT community. This liturgy is in keeping
with the parish’s Year of Celebration and
Rededication and underscores the welcome
we extend to all people.

In order to mark the occasion, Mass will be
followed by a reception and a bountiful table.
We are asking for your help to make the reception
festive, so if you are able to bring a contribution
for the feast, please contact …

 

[Corki]

Respectfully, Paul, I do not see the ‘endorsement of a lifestyle here.’ However, neither do I see this Mass as distinct from other Masses. They are extending an outreach, it seems to me, to those from one segment of the community that may benefit from a named welcome. It’s just that I take issue with Jim (above) that one has to name specific groups or affiliations for all to understand that all are welcome – let alone to verify that a parish is “following the teachings of the Catholic Church” ! (What else would they be doing?)

Note that Saint Cecilia’s is proclaiming a reaffirmation, not a new theology or new policy. The Mass, universally, welcomes all. For example, a parish near me mentions in its Mission Statement a Welcome to All (without naming each possible “group” or affiliation – such as Seniors, children, youth, LGBT, etc.)

While I see this as more of a tempest in a tea pot than most, it seems that St. Cecilia’s was, in some ways, looking for this controversy. As you point out, the Mass welcomes all. Why then, did the parish feel the need to name only one of the many possible groups or affiiations of people in the community? LGBT are not the only people who the Chuch should reach out and welcome.

Please join the entire Saint Cecilia Parish
community for this Sunday’s eleven o’clock
liturgy where we will reaffirm that Saint
Cecilia is a place of welcome for all, including
the LGBT community.

It’s not like the Vortex and others just jumped rashly to the concusion that this was more than a welcome for all.

The Cardinal said they couldn’t link the Mass to the “Gay Pride” weekend of activities and this looks like a little “push back”.

 

[PaulinVA]

Respectfully, Paul, I do not see the ‘endorsement of a lifestyle here.’ However, neither do I see this Mass as distinct from other Masses. They are extending an outreach, it seems to me, to those from one segment of the community that may benefit from a named welcome. It’s just that I take issue with Jim (above) that one has to name specific groups or affiliations for all to understand that all are welcome – let alone to verify that a parish is “following the teachings of the Catholic Church” ! (What else would they be doing?)

All are absolutely welcome. But, when you mention the LGBT community, which, if one fully participates in the sexual part of it, is sinful, you are sending a mixed message.

Wouldn’t you agree that one of the goals of the “GLBT community” is the acceptance of gay marriage? Another goal of the community is acceptance of gay sexual relationships? Acceptance of being gay as a normal expression of God’s creation? Do you think that endorsing that is in line with Catholic teaching?

Note that Saint Cecilia’s is proclaiming a reaffirmation, not a new theology or new policy. The Mass, universally, welcomes all. For example, a parish near me mentions in its Mission Statement a Welcome to All (without naming each possible “group” or affiliation – such as Seniors, children, youth, LGBT, etc.). Fragmentation is not necessary. We are one people. We are the Body of Christ.

We are indeed the Body of Christ. BUT, we must conform ourselves to the teachings of the Church.

 

[Elizabeth502]

All are absolutely welcome. But, when you mention the LGBT community, which, if one fully participates in the sexual part of it, is sinful, you are sending a mixed message.

I think the pastor would have to have indicators that at least some of the LGBT Catholics at St. Cecilia’s are thumbing their nose at Church teaching because they have made that fact public. (For example, in a parish about 30 miles from me, the priests have a laissez-faire attitude about actively homosexual couples partaking of Eucharist; it’s quite scandalous, and I consider this parish to be politically activist as well, including in the very homilies. And then the gays in the congregation hoot and holler after these homilies, which state that 'being gay = being holier." )

Wouldn’t you agree that one of the goals of the “GLBT community” is the acceptance of gay marriage? Another goal of the community is acceptance of gay sexual relationships? Acceptance of being gay as a normal expression of God’s creation? Do you think that endorsing that is in line with Catholic teaching?

Absolutely, in the secular LGBT community: no question! But that assumes that the Catholic LGBT community = the secular one. Where is the evidence of that from merely the parish bulletin announcement? It does not seem self-evident to me, but then I am not an insider at this parish. I would not know if in this parish LGBT Catholics are practicing immoral behavior. As I’ve said on many other threads, it was true in some parishes near me as recently as 10 years ago, and I do and did consider it scandalous and unsupportable. I.m.o., the bishop at that time, as dear as I find him and as kind a reputation as he has (for charity & moderation, personally), did not communicate clearly about this problem. The absence of leadership on this led to an assumption on the part of the LGBT local community (and some ultra-tolerant priests in certain parishes) that an active sexuality was compatible with Catholicism. It simply wasn’t.

Now we have a different bishop. His opinion on Traditional Marriage and sexuality is unambiguous. I think merely the fact that he has clearly communicated about this has been self-regulating. Active homosexuals know what they are supposed to do, and so are not approaching Eucharist; however, some of them continue to come to Mass, which is obviously fanstastic. Other gay Catholics are practicing (attempting) chastity, and by contrast, they are approaching Eucharist.

It’s all about communicating expectations and clear borders.

So in conclusion, the situation seems to differ parish to parish, certainly in my region, with in some cases LGBT = a secular attitude about that; in others, a Catholic attitude. I’m just saying that the bulletin announcement per se (to an outsider) does not communicate permission, to me. Nevertheless, if there is known ambiguity in this parish, then the pastor should show some leadership and articulate expectations. There are ways to signal to the congregation what expectations are, without having to get ultra-specific. I’ve always thought that there should be a standing announcement in each parish bulletin about this: no more with respect to homosexual behavior than to other controversial behavior – a reminder about the conditions for approaching the Eucharist (remarried divorced Catholics; Catholics with unconfessed mortal sin, etc., and with an announcement about confession times, etc.)

I’ve made my opinions about this known on other threads, as well.

 

[PaulinVA]

I think the pastor would have to have indicators that at least some of the LGBT Catholics at St. Cecilia’s are thumbing their nose at Church teaching because they have made that fact public.

And yet he allows a “Rainbow Ministry” in his parish anyhow.

Absolutely, in the secular LGBT community: no question! But that assumes that the Catholic LGBT community = the secular one. Where is the evidence of that from merely the parish bulletin announcement? It does not seem self-evident to me, but then I am not an insider at this parish. I would not know if in this parish LGBT Catholics are practicing immoral behavior.

Why would a man trying to remain chaste associate with other men, also trying to remain chaste, who are potential sexual partners? That does not seem to be success oriented. I would think it would be better to not have a lot do with hanging out with other people with the same sinful inclination.

It’s all about communicating expectations and clear borders.

There are ways to signal to the congregation what expectations are, without having to get ultra-specific. I’ve always thought that there should be a standing announcement in each parish bulletin about this: no more with respect to homosexual behavior than to other controversial behavior – a reminder about the conditions for approaching the Eucharist (remarried divorced Catholics; Catholics with unconfessed mortal sin, etc., and with an announcement about confession times, etc.)

If only there was more talk of sin and being properly disposed to receive.

 

[Elizabeth502]

And yet he allows a “Rainbow Ministry” in his parish anyhow.

Again, Paul, the name in itself, in a Catholic setting, does not necessarily indicate sexual conduct. Personally, I don’t care for the name, because in my region that phrase connotes secular activism in favor of a homosexual political and social agenda. So this goes back to leadership and judgment and clear communication. Other pastors might have persuaded the group to choose a different name, more in keeping with the intent of chastity.

Why would a man trying to remain chaste associate with other men, also trying to remain chaste, who are potential sexual partners? That does not seem to be success oriented. I would think it would be better to not have a lot do with hanging out with other people with the same sinful inclination.

I also think it is testing temptation, but there are couples who have managed to do this, just as some remarried couples deciding to convalidate their marriages live in the same house as brother & sister while awaiting that event. Personally, I think it is a better idea to live apart in both cases, but one cannot conclude a particular behavior is occurring. Most sexually attracted people find it awkward to share a residence without acting on the attraction, because sexual tension will then interfere in the relationship in most cases.

If only there was more talk of sin and being properly disposed to receive.

Again, there should be far more reminders of proper disposition, and along with that, the parallel message: frequent opportunities for confession. Because I will tell you that in parishes where these two are present, one just doesn’t see actively gay couples receiving communion, nor anyone else in a controversial public lifestyle doing so. People who have no intention of complying go where they sense they have more permission, or they refrain from partaking.

 

[waterbrook]

I agree with Elizabeth, that the announcement says nothing that suggests that it is OK for practicising homosexuals to receive communion but I also think that given the local event at the time it was appropriate to state that the Gay community was welcome. Other goups may not actually need such encouragement to know that they are welcome to attend. why do I say this? Because the only person who has ever asked me if they were welcome to attend a Eucharist was Gay…I was acting as a welcomer at Midnight Mass and a young man walked in and asked if Gays were welcome…what does this say to me? that the gay community have a perception that they are not welcome in churches. How are people to be evangelised if they do not know they are welcome? Not everyone who comes into a service will expect to receive communion.

 

[pnewton]

So, here’s from the parish bulletin, which is online. Can one identify the LGBT community without giving the impression of endorsement of the lifestyle?

ALL ARE WELCOME!

PLEASE JOIN US FOR THIS SUNDAY’S
11:00 LITURGY

Please join the entire Saint Cecilia Parish
community for this Sunday’s eleven o’clock
liturgy where we will reaffirm that Saint
Cecilia is a place of welcome for all, including
the LGBT community. This liturgy is in keeping
with the parish’s Year of Celebration and
Rededication and underscores the welcome
we extend to all people.

In order to mark the occasion, Mass will be
followed by a reception and a bountiful table.
We are asking for your help to make the reception
festive, so if you are able to bring a contribution
for the feast, please contact …

There is nothing in this that I find either objectionable, or identifying with those who are active homosexuals, which, by the way, let me go on record as saying both I and St. Paul can identify with them. Do we not all find ourselves saying that the things we should do, we don’t do and the things we hate we do? We do not have to be able to identify with homosexual sin in order to identify with the temptation of sin in those areas in which we are most vulnerable and repeatedly fall into.

I went to the Rainbow ministry website and could not find anything objectionable there, i.e. endorsement of homosexual acts. I understand that the proximity of a post-Mass get-together inviting the homosexual community specifically to Gay Pride could have been seen as an endorsement, but that problem was avoided.

What I have not seen any where is where this parish endorsed homosexual acts, or the gay lifestyle. What I have seen is unsubstantiated accusations from second hand accounts. No, I do not trust Voris on this. He is far from an objective journalist. I do not trust any of the blogs, written or video, that do not report facts gathered first hand.

 

[PaulinVA]

I went to the Rainbow ministry website and could not find anything objectionable there, i.e. endorsement of homosexual acts. I understand that the proximity of a post-Mass get-together inviting the homosexual community specifically to Gay Pride could have been seen as an endorsement, but that problem was avoided.

What I have not seen any where is where this parish endorsed homosexual acts, or the gay lifestyle. .

Can a parish even have a Rainbow ministry without endorsing the active gay lifestyle? By borrowing the Rainbow symbolism from the secular gay rights community, aren’t you sending a message?

If one is a celibate person with Same Sex Attraction, does one identify with the Rainbow ministry? Should one? Are you "gay’ if you are a celibate Catholic with Same Sex Attraction?

 

[Cider]

I can’t figure out if I’m more disgusted at the “gay” mass with rainbow buttons or with the deliberately obtuse responses spinning support for it.

I seriously doubt that there was any mention of chastity during the homily.

 

[pnewton]

I can’t figure out if I’m more disgusted at the “gay” mass with rainbow buttons or with the deliberately obtuse responses spinning support for it.

It is not spin not to buy everything that bloggers put out. I have yet to read anything that indicates that the parish supported an active homosexual lifestyle. Indeed, it is only “spin” and assumptions that I have read condemning the invitation to Mass (a regular Mass, mind you, not a “gay” Mass) to the homosexual community.

 

[pnewton]

Can a parish even have a Rainbow ministry without endorsing the active gay lifestyle? By borrowing the Rainbow symbolism from the secular gay rights community, aren’t you sending a message?

If one is a celibate person with Same Sex Attraction, does one identify with the Rainbow ministry? Should one? Are you "gay’ if you are a celibate Catholic with Same Sex Attraction?

These are excellent questions. One can surely question the use of the word “Rainbow” in a ministry, but it is surely only a question of prudence. It is not unheard of for a ministry to use advertising that is attractive to the target group. The message must be that one is welcome, even welcome the way they are, without crossing the line of welcoming the sin as acceptable. But to your second set of question, I would hope that there would be Catholics who could say “yes”, as a way of example to us all of the struggle we face against sin, but specifically as an example to those who see only the negative face of the Church on the issue of homosexuality. Yes, there is a also a good message to be sent to those in the homosexual community. No spin.

 

[Tigg]

I know - another blogger, but he does raise some very pertinent questions regarding the Rainbow Ministry at St. Cecilia’s.

USCCB’s guidelines make clear that, “It can be helpful for persons who find themselves with homosexual attractions to gather together in mutual understanding and support. This can be particularly the case because persons with a homosexual inclination may feel ‘different,’ which can lead to isolation and alienation, which are risk factors for an unhealthy life, including unchaste behaviors. Support groups, noted for their adherence to Church teaching, for persons who experience same-sex attraction continue to be an important part of Church ministries and are to be encouraged. **Persons with a homosexual inclination should not be encouraged to define themselves primarily in terms of their sexual inclination, however, or to participate in ‘gay subcultures,’ which often tend to promote immoral lifestyles. Rather, they should be encouraged to form relationships with the wider community.” **(p. 22).

Note this last passage. Persons with a homosexual inclination should not be encouraged to define themselves primarily in terms of their sexual inclination. Isn’t that exactly what St. Cecilia’s Parish is doing when it says that the parish is a place of welcome for the “LGBT” community?

lasalettejourney.blogspot.com/2011/07/st-cecilias-parish-in-boston-ignoring.html

And here is the on-line profile for the Chair of the Rainbow Ministry at this parish whose motto is “Live and Let Live.” Please read the very upper portion.

plaxo.com/profile/show/188980795022?pk=a364953b9408e7d9afa9da18a5a17ecdda3c9180

For anyone with a discerning heart, I’d conclude much prayer is needed for all involved.

 

[Sirach2]

pnewton - your posts …

Thanks for entering the discussion!

 

[Tigg]

They followed the teaching of the Catholic Church to the upmost.

I’m curious as to how you can know this. I’ve been searching for nearly an hour and all I can find posted are parts of the pastor’s homily in which he speaks only of love and inclusion. Could you post a link with the entire homily?

boston.com/news/local/video/?bctid=991615234001

 

[Elizabeth502]

IOther goups may not actually need such encouragement to know that they are welcome to attend. why do I say this? Because the only person who has ever asked me if they were welcome to attend a Eucharist was Gay.

To that I respond, Your Mileage May Vary. I have definitely had divorced persons inquire as to whether they were welcome – in fact, far more of those than those with SSA. Lots of divorced Catholics believe that they are not welcome, either by the congregation or by the priest. I had a close friend who was divorced and not remarried, who believed she could not receive communion. No matter how much I corrected her about this, and how much encouraged her to discuss this with a priest, she was operating under very old assumptions.

Btw, priests are also aware of this and have written about it.

 

[Elizabeth502]

I’m curious as to how you can know this. I’ve been searching for nearly an hour and all I can find posted are parts of the pastor’s homily in which he speaks only of love and inclusion. Could you post a link with the entire homily?

boston.com/news/local/video/?bctid=991615234001

Tigg, my take on Jim’s remarks was that the church “followed the teaching of the Catholic Church to the utmost” because they were tolerant. (Because Jim quoted that part of the CCC when making his remark.) …which is why I challenged him to show evidence that other Masses do not follow the teachings “to the utmost.” I’ve never been to a non-“Gay Mass” that showed intolerance. Certainly nothing in the last 15 years.

 

[Sirach2]

Tigg:

I’m curious as to how you can know this. I’ve been searching for nearly an hour and all I can find posted are parts of the pastor’s homily in which he speaks only of love and inclusion. Could you post a link with the entire homily?

boston.com/news/local/video/?bctid=991615234001

Lest anyone be misled, that homily was recorded the week BEFORE the actual mass being contested in this thread. Father mentioned that the mass would be held “next week.” Nobody has come forth with anything that actually was preached either before the mass or during the homily on the actual day under discussion. That’s the problem. It is “missing in action.” Comments and judgments are being made without any proof whatsoever.

 

[Elizabeth502]

Tigg, I see what you mean. (I’m just referring to tone – at least what I could decipher of the audio.) Sirach has provided corrective information; thanks for that. However, regarding this video, I always recoil when homilies are greeted with clapping. It’s really inappropriate for people to register ‘political’ support of a homily. It’s not a political ‘moment.’ Again, people should be “clapping” internally (it should reflexively “register” with them) when any priest discusses universal tolerance, which is the message of the gospel. Tolerance and inclusion isn’t limited to one group which perceives itself to be marginalized.

Since waterbrook shared his story, I’ll share mine. Many years ago, in a parish in which I tend to be pretty visible, I was in some organized “group” there and I honestly don’t remember the name of it; I think it was a prayer group. One of the members of that group was a woman of about age 40 who had a progressive disease: it was either cerebral palsy or M.S. The point is that she was in constant pain every waking moment of her life. She lived within a block of the parish but it was excruciatingly painful for her to walk home. Therefore, I always offered to give her a ride after our meetings. There was some socializing involved in it, too – usually afterward, as I recall. If no one had invited her, she would have been left out by default.

I found her interesting and inspiring. I doubted I could have lived as gracefully with that pain, but I also just found her interesting as a person, period. And because she moved more slowly, I took care to ensure that she was included in everything. She said to me one day, “I want you to know how much I value your making a special point to include me; you are the only one at this parish who does so. I am invisible to everyone else.” I was in total shock. Seriously. This was and is a parish that is viewed as more receptive to the physically disabled than many other parishes are. That’s why it shocked me. I hardly viewed myself as some heroine, and assumed that many other people had looked out for “K” – at least as much as I had, if not more so.

But the disabled are not as politically organized, or as visible, as activist homosexual groups are. Ditto for the mentally disabled. Ditto for the elderly.

 

[pnewton]

I know - another blogger, but he does raise some very pertinent questions regarding the Rainbow Ministry at St. Cecilia’s.

I did like that blog in that it quotes the USCCB policies extensively. I don’t live in Boston, so I have no idea what the situation there is really like and I am skeptical of those that think they do based on news and blogs. But the USCCB policies and guidelines are very balance and any ministry would do well to follow them. I think it is possible to be welcoming, social and pastoral to the community within those guidelines.