This was memo that was released this week from my Diocese and my Bishop about what is going on.
Date: September 29, 2014
From: Bishop Michael W. Warfel
To: Clergy, Religious, Lay Ecclesial Ministers
"As this memo is being sent out, Iāll likely be on a plane flying toward Europe along with a
group of parishioners and one priest from Eastern Montana. Given some of the
tensions that seem regularly to surface in the Diocese, itāll be nice to have a break with
a good section of the faithful. We are scheduled to return just in time for the Holy Spirit
School Gala on Saturday, October 11th and the 100th anniversary of St. Mathias in
Ryegate. Before I departed, I thought it would be important to make some comments
with regard to the polarizing situation that has occurred in Lewistown and other areas of
the Diocese.
Itās highly unlikely that people reading this would be unaware of the controversy that has
resulted surrounding the civil marriage to two Catholic men who are parishioners at St.
Leoās Parish in Lewistown. It is always my preference to address sensitive matters in a
manner in which they do not become public. It unfortunately has become quite public.
There was even an Editorial Opinion piece that referred to this in the New York Times.
Given the very public dimension of the controversy, much as a result of the mediaās
reporting of it, a solution that would be in accord with Church teaching and acceptable
to all is unlikely. The public nature of the issue has drawn the notion of theological
scandal to the fore front.
Some people think of scandal as behavior that simply is shocking in its nature. The
Catechism of the Catholic Church states: āScandal is an attitude or behavior which
leads another to do evilā and it āā¦takes on a particular gravity by reason of the authority
of those who cause it or the weakness of those who are scandalizedā (CCC #2284/85).
Jesus used rather harsh language toward those who, through their actions, lead others
into sin. He said it would be better that they have a millstone tied around their necks
and drowned in the sea (cf. Matt 18:6). That two very well-known and respected
members of the parish as well as the community entered into a civil marriage and that it
has become so public is a matter of scandal. For a bishop simply to ignore this matter,
now that it has become so public, would be in essence to agree with the action and
cause an even greater level of scandal. In my role as teacher, it would be implying to
many people that the teaching of the Church on marriage is seriously in error. At the
same time, it would imply that there is nothing wrong at all with same-sex partners
marrying. It would indicate that same-sex marriages are on par with the millennial held
understanding by Church and society of marriage belonging solely between a man and
a woman. As a Catholic bishop, I simply find it strange that many in our society now
view something that objectively is sinful and so counter to what is taught in Scripture
and our Apostolic tradition as being holy!! Ignored by many is that fact that marriage as
defined by the Church is settled doctrine. As settled doctrine, there may be
development in our understanding, but it is not up for change in its fundamental
definition.
Some would say, it is not fair or it is unjust to deny same-sex partners the civil ārightā to
marry. In reality, it is not unjust at all because marriage and same-sex unions are
essentially different realities. Justice actually requires society to maintain its long
standing definition of marriage. To uphold Godās intent for marriage, in which sexual
relations have their proper and exclusive place, is not to offend the dignity of
homosexual persons.
A central issue with many same-sex partners is the social benefits that are received
through marriage. The legal recognition of marriage, including the benefits associated
with it, is not really about the personal commitment of two individuals, but about the
social commitment that husband and father and a wife and a mother make to the wellbeing
of society. For those who are in same-sex unions, some benefits can be obtained
without regard to marital status such as owning property jointly with another and
designating anyone they choose to be a beneficiary of their will or indicating who they
want to make health care decisions in case they become incompetent or sick.
The issue of withholding Communion from two individuals is likely the most neuralgic
factor in the controversy. In trying to think of an analogous example that could cause a
pastor to deny Communion, one might think of an involved Catholic parishioner who
was then ordained as a Protestant minister. They would likely be acting according to
their sense of conscience and they would probably be a very good person, but they
would have broken their communion with the Catholic Church in a very fundamental
way. In a similar way, when someone enters into a public commitment that is deeply in
conflict with a fundamental Catholic teaching, it impacts their communion with the
Church."
The last paragraph is the decision about what they are going to do. Iām glad that Bishop Warfel said what he said. He has released letters about family and contraception and the like throughout the years. I didnāt think he would back down from this after reading some of his other letters.
