Catholic Pastoral Committee on Sexual Minorities

Celebrating and Serving the GLBT Community since 1980

2930 13th Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55407-1420
612-201-4534
cpcsmmail@gmail.com

CPCSM Highlighted and Leadership Quoted in Current
Minnesota Monthly Article About Reactions to Changes
in Local Archdiocese Related to Incoming Archbishop

There is a precept in the Catholic Church called ecclesia semper reformanda, meaning “the church is always reforming”—a surprise to anyone who believes it has all-too-successfully resisted change. Yet the church of today looks nothing like the church of 1950, which looked nothing like the early church, an institution many scholars believe included women leaders and married priests. And the latest makeover occurred less than 50 years ago.

When Catholic leaders gathered in the early 1960s for the landmark discussions known as the Second Ecumenical Vatican Council, or Vatican II, they mandated modernization—not to conform to contemporary mores, but to assert the church’s relevance in a fast-changing world. After all, Joe Catholic could by then zip around the world in a jet, watch the president on TV, and more than ever—given John F. Kennedy’s status as the first Catholic in the Oval Office—hope to become the president. Meanwhile, Catholic worship seemed literally backward—still led exclusively in Latin by priests who faced the altar, not the congregation.

Vatican II changed all that. The service, or liturgy, could be led in the language of the people. The people, or laity, were empowered to participate. Nuns threw off their habits, the laity joined choirs, led Sunday school, and no longer felt they were going to hell if they missed a mass. The liberating spirit of these changes inspired several generations of Catholics to question other church teachings or traditions seemingly incompatible with modern life.

Some now say they went too far. In dispensing with bad theology, maybe some good was lost, too, say critics—baby Jesus thrown out with the bath water. Today’s young seminarians are struggling to lead a church still awash in the sea change instigated by their elders and, perhaps not surprisingly, they’re looking for anchors. “They just want to get in touch with their cultural roots,” says [Robert] Kennedy [head of Catholic Studies at the University of St. Thomas in St. Paul]. “They’re not carrying some of the baggage that their parents carried in the ’60s and ’70s—they’re freer to look at the tradition of the church and be excited. They’re pushing back a little bit, saying some of that’s kind of interesting and beautiful.”

The type of priest many Catholics have come to know is being displaced. After Vatican II, the most popular priestly model was the so-called servant-leader, whose accommodating, or pastoral, manner toward the faithful reflected a significant break from the shepherd priest who had all the answers and whose sheep were, well, sheep. Now, some traditionalist young priests, often called John Paul or JP II priests, are returning to the more authoritarian mold of pre-Vatican II.

One local seminarian (who favors the pre-Vatican II Latin mass slowly being reintroduced in traditionalist parishes), has posted images on his blog of the kind of priest he hopes to become: black-and-white pictures of pre-Vatican II priests facing the altar, historic paintings evoking the majesty of old. Adapting his philosophy from a group called Concerned Roman Catholics of America, he says, “I will not allow the Holy Catholic Church to be torn apart and assaulted by the forces of modernism, syncretism, heresy, and the gross immorality of some of its clergy in the name of the ‘Spirit of Vatican II.’ I will not allow our Catholic youth to be robbed of their faith or have their innocence destroyed in the name of ‘tolerance,’ ‘ecumenism,’ ‘diversity,’ or any other politically correct ideology of the day.”

Kennedy warns against extrapolating from such examples. “It’s true that some enclaves around the country seem to want to reconstruct some imaginary version of the [pre-Vatican II] church,” he says. “I don’t know what they’re smoking.” But today’s youth returning to a pre-Vatican II church—“that’s not going to happen.”

Nevertheless, the generational difference is enough to disturb many servant-leader priests. “They don’t admire the young priests,” says Dean Hoge, a sociology professor and expert on priests and seminarians at the Catholic University of America in Washington, D.C. “They feel the young men are too concerned with their own status.” In turn, the JP II priests call their elders—sometimes called Vatican II priests—“social-worker priests” or “Protestant priests,” he says, as if they’ve “somehow watered down what it means to be a priest.”

Social workers or not, many Vatican II priests fostered a progressive agenda. The nation’s first archdiocesan Commission on Women was begun in the Twin Cities in 1979 by then-Archbishop John Roach to explore the role of women in the church. Also at that time, the Catholic Pastoral Committee on Sexual Minorities (CPCSM) formed in St. Paul. With Roach’s blessing, says CPCSM co-founder David McCaffrey, the group introduced a sort of sensitivity training in parishes and eight out of the 11 local Catholic high schools—a curriculum enabling counselors to better serve gay Catholics. “During the peak of our work,” says McCaffrey, “we became almost mainstream.”

By 1999, after conservative parents complained, says McCaffrey, CPCSM was no longer welcome. Last year, the archdiocese frequently ran afoul of gay advocates, as when it forbade a CPCSM-sponsored talk in October by a lesbian and her father to be held at a Minneapolis church. Soon after, [Coadjutor Archbishop] Nienstedt clarified the church’s position on homosexuality in the archdiocesan newspaper, the Catholic Spirit. In an earlier column, he had called homosexuality a disorder, explaining that “such inclinations are not sinful in themselves” but acting on them is. This time, he said even those who “actively encourage or promote homosexual acts or such activity within a homosexual lifestyle formally cooperate in a grave evil,” which many read as a literal condemnation of those who’ve supported the loving relationships of their gay children or friends.

This spring, further archdiocesan orders have limited everything from the role of lay preachers during mass to the kinds of nontraditional, laity-led liturgies some parishes have offered since the 1960s. The Commission on Women was recently folded into another archdiocesan office, which some participants see as a diminishment of its importance. “The post-Vatican II sense of collegiality among the bishops, much less among church leaders and lay people, has faded,” says one local observer, “and the sense of hierarchy has ascended.”

“There are some arguments in favor of the more traditional view of the priesthood,” says Hoge. “They have a stronger morale, they’re happier men. They resign a bit less. And the seminaries that espouse that view are a little stronger, so they say, ‘We’re the way of the future, follow us.’ But the laity, in general, prefer the servant-leader model.”

As a new era dawns, several well-known servant-leader priests here, including the Reverend Michael O’Connell of the Basilica of Saint Mary in Minneapolis—the originator of the popular Basilica Block Party—are moving on or retiring. As a result, some local Catholics conjecture, the archdiocese won’t be as welcoming. “I figure we have about 10 good years left,” says a longtime Basilica parishioner. The local Reverend Mike Tegeder simply predicts bigger and broader clashes, as the spirit of Vatican II won’t easily be exorcised. “The genie is out of the bottle,” he says. “There’s no putting it back.”

Tegeder, the priest at the Church of St. Edward in Bloomington, is among the most vocal critics of Nienstedt’s appointment. Ordained in the late 1970s, he is a classic servant-leader priest. He sometimes sports a worn newsboy cap (Nienstedt prefers a crisp black fedora) and occasionally uses the word “damn” in the non-ecclesiastical sense.

Tegeder notes that Nienstedt’s June trip to Rome, where he’ll receive a lambskin stole as affirmation of his appointment, has been heavily advertised among local Catholics—they can even purchase a tour package to traipse along, something more status-conscious East Coast bishops would encourage. (For his part, Nienstedt has said the criticism of his appointment has been “very inhospitable and not at all in keeping with the classic Minnesota attitude of ‘fair play.’”) Yet Tegeder is hardly an inner-city activist or the head of a nonconformist parish: The Church of St. Edward is a large congregation in a leafy suburb. He’s certainly no less traditional than his church’s staff, who on this day—Ash Wednesday—all appropriately sport a cross of ashes on their foreheads.

Tegeder has gathered the staff to discuss their hopes and fears for the future of the archdiocese. This archdiocese is known for its unusually high number of progressive Catholics armed with advanced religious education, and Tegeder’s staff fits the mold. They are all women, and many have degrees in divinity or theology—“all of them basically have the same education as the priests,” says Tegeder. Vatican II renewed the church’s call for Catholics to inform their conscience through study—in addition to consulting their leaders—and these women have taken the call seriously.

Heidi Busse, who organizes the church’s religious instruction classes as its director of faith formation, is an outgoing 35-year-old with a master’s in theology. She’s occasionally preached at St. Edward’s. But starting this month, as directed by the archbishop’s office, lay preaching will largely be banned during mass. Several parishes have regularly featured lay preachers as a way for parishioners to “break open the word,” Busse says—to hear from a perspective closer to their own. Now, lay people must speak at the end of mass, if they are to speak from the pulpit at all.

“I think there’s a breakdown between reality—the real life in the parish—and theory or doctrine or politics,” says Busse. She isn’t called to be a priest, she says, but is a talented speaker. “We all have different gifts, and it’s hard as a woman or lay person to be told your call is not valid.”

LaLonne Murphy, the parish’s director of liturgy and music, has worked in the archdiocese for 30 years and says the increased stress on guidelines, or rubrics, has been pitched to the parishes as necessary to avoid “confusion” among the faithful. “If Heidi preaches, I don’t think there is going to be any confusion that she is Father Mike,” says Murphy. “We are not confused about these things.”

The women would prefer a dialogue between parishioners and leaders. “We don’t want to run wild,” says Busse. “We don’t want to be relativist…it’s just that the conversation would be so helpful for all of us to be more open to serving each other.” Murphy agrees: “People here tend to be more adult and take responsibility for themselves and the world around them. They’re not waiting for someone to tell them what to do. No one needs another mom and dad.”

The sentiment echoes national surveys that show a growing gap between the Catholic laity and their leaders on such issues as contraception, married priests, and church governance. “They’re moving in opposite directions,” says William D’Antonio, a renowned scholar in the sociology of religion at Catholic University and co-author of the 2007 book American Catholics Today. From 1987 to 2005, the authors’ research shows, the “level of Catholics’ commitment to the institutional church” has trended downward. “By 2005,” says D’Antonio, “there isn’t an age group or gender where there is a majority saying that they look to church leaders as the automatic source of authority.” Instead, more Catholics are looking to their own conscience.

The concept has precedence: Saint Thomas Aquinas wrote, “It is better to die excommunicated” than to disobey one’s conscience. The beloved educator Cardinal John Henry Newman reputedly said, “I shall drink to the pope, if you please—still, to conscience first and to the pope afterwards.” When it comes down to who feels welcome in the church, says Murphy, many of the faithful consult their consciences. “We are not confused when people are not permitted by the institution to join us at the table,” she says, referring to the church’s position on Catholics in same-sex unions. “We are not confused by that. That [church policy] is an abomination.”

Even toward straight people seeking to marry, however, the archdiocese has become less welcoming, claims Tegeder, with some parishes scrutinizing the couple’s commitment to Catholicism when one partner isn’t Catholic. Parishes have also refused to conduct funerals on similar grounds, says Mary Hayden, the church’s director of pastoral care. Murphy is appalled. “Can you imagine Jesus telling somebody they can’t have their funeral someplace? That he won’t stand by them in death? A lot of this law-quoting is about manipulation and fear, telling people they’re going to hell. Fear does not control us. We won’t stand for that kind of bullying.”

What will become of those who feel bullied, the parishioners at the margins? “People are realizing they have different options,” says Tegeder. “Some will want to keep the fight up, others will feel they have to move on.” And still others, says Hayden, will become angry with God.

Since Nienstedt’s welcome mass, many progressives have wondered whether his vision of unity is compatible with theirs. Can he strike a balance between the orthodox ideal of getting everyone on the same page and their hope that diverse perspectives will be embraced? Other Catholics, though, believe he shouldn’t bother accommodating—one man’s hardliner, after all, is another’s true believer. “Bless the Lord! A bishop without a limp spine!” wrote one online commentator upon the news of Nienstedt’s appointment. “Finally, a bishop who knows how to bish!” gushed another.

Several local priests have condemned Tegeder’s views—the Reverend George Welzbacher of the Church of St. John, in St. Paul, calls him a “chronic malcontent” who’s assumed “the role of roadside bomber. Or maybe suicide bomber.” He suggests that those who agree with Tegeder—the insubordinate—have already left the church anyway.

Kennedy says archdiocesan leadership changes so infrequently that new bishops tend to elicit extreme reactions: “Some will say, ‘Thank goodness we got a new sheriff and let me tell you about the guys you need to arrest first,’ and others will say, ‘Oh my gosh, he’s going to change something. How can we prevent that?’”

Even many moderates, however, advocate the occasional archdiocesan housecleaning. “If you don’t sweep and vacuum once a week, things get out of control,” says the Reverend David Smith, recently retired from the University of St. Thomas. Though he notes, “One can raise questions whether they’ve done too much [cleaning]. Sometimes people who call for a housecleaning are pretty restricted about the rooms they want cleaned.”

Those “rooms” may be ideologies, such as gay activism, or parishes with experimental liturgies. “This archdiocese is known worldwide for several parishes that have strayed pretty far from the Catholic faith,” says Janice LaDuke, who blogs about local Catholicism as “Catherine of Alexandria,” the medieval martyr. She says anyone who thinks Nienstedt’s appointment triggered a Catholic culture war here doesn’t know the local church—“This archdiocese has been a battlefield long before now.” And she, for one, welcomes the challenge: “I’ve got my sword handy, my Catechism and Bible at the ready.”

Four weeks before Easter, St. Stephen’s Catholic Church in Minneapolis is standing-room-only with the kind of crowd for whom May Day is a major holiday: bearded men in ponytails, white-haired crones leaning on canes carved with animal totems, a lesbian couple rocking their baby. There are enough Subarus in the parking lot to open a dealership. Some worshippers have never been here before. A few are Lutheran, attending in solidarity. Many are in tears.

St. Stephen’s is one of the churches LaDuke would consider a liturgical outlier, and the battle has been taken to its doorstep. “We are in crisis,” the service’s leader announces. “We don’t know where we’re going to be.” But they can’t stay here. After today—after 40 years—this service is being shut down by the archdiocese. Too many rules broken, Archbishop Flynn wrote to them. Too much “confusion about liturgical practices.”

The 9 a.m. service at St. Stephen’s, a major social-service provider in its blighted neighborhood near the Minneapolis Institute of Arts, was likely the first in the archdiocese to feature the sort of guitar-strumming, dancing-in-the-aisles aesthetic that makes even liberal Minnesotans blush. Of course, there are no aisles here, no pulpit, and, for a long while, no priest. Just two basketball hoops, a stage, and a makeshift altar. The service has always been held in the parish’s gym.

Their communion vessels are made of the wrong material—ceramic instead of precious metal. Women often lead worship. After the homily, a microphone is set up for parishioners to dialogue about the text. Poetry is often read, as in Unitarian churches. Even Tegeder describes it as “kind of a fast and loose community” and suggests the archdiocese was right to question aspects of the service. But he also believes the current hierarchy would consider it a “marginal” community. How did things come to this? And why now?

In his letter to the parish, Flynn said he sought changes by April, when St. Stephen’s received a new priest, by all accounts a traditionalist. Flynn also noted that St. Stephen’s had been upbraided before; enough changes were not made.

In the bigger picture, St. Stephen’s time may simply be up. Among the phenomena of the Catholic church’s new era is the emergence of liturgical vigilantes, people who visit parishes and note—in blogs or letters to the archbishop—how closely rubrics are followed. Flynn has publicly chastised such busybodies, yet more than one visitor to St. Stephen’s has tattled on the 9 a.m. worshippers. And now the St. Stephen’s folks are divided. Many vow to continue a similar service off-site, outside the archbishop’s purview.

Few, if any, have talked publicly of abandoning Catholicism altogether, not unlike other Catholics under duress. Mary Beckfeld, co-founder of the online journal Progressive Catholic Voice, which launched locally last fall to chronicle alternative viewpoints within the church, is the mother of a gay son and feels she can best affect change on his behalf by staying in the church. “We really love this church,” she says of herself and the newsletter staff. “And I don’t believe I’m living in mortal sin.” McCaffrey, who struggled for years to reconcile his sexuality with Catholicism, says he finally found balance in the inclusive spirit of Vatican II—only to feel it’s been pulled out from under him by the Catholic hierarchy. “That’s the outrage we feel,” he says. “They’re really screwing with our lives.”

Michael Bayly, who edits the Progressive Catholic Voice and directs CPCSM, has long advocated for gays like himself in the church. By baptism, he says, it’s his church, the one he knows and loves—why should he leave? Besides, he says, wherever Catholics are gathered, that’s a Catholic space. If the St. Stephen’s crowd moves underground, they won’t be any less righteous.

. . . Progressives like Heidi Busse find hope in [the] tradition of the church [known as the] sensus fidelium, which holds that the Holy Spirit inevitably guides the faithful in the right direction—even if the church, as an institution, takes some errant turns. “We’re a human church on the one hand, but a divine one on the other,” she says. “Sometimes the hierarchy has to catch up to what the faithful has been doing. The faithful really lead.” Just where the church is on that continuum can only be seen—by the earthbound anyway—in hindsight.

Tim Gihring is a senior writer at Minnesota Monthly.

VIDEO: What’s Morally Wrong With Homosexuality?

CPCSM Cofounder Shares His Frustration with Changes in
Local Archdiocese's Pastoral Ministry for LGBT Catholics and Their Families, Recommends Boycott and Other Political Actions

Ways to Advocate on Behalf of LGBT Persons and Their Families
Or on Behalf of Other Issues of Justice

By David J. McCaffrey

LGBT Catholics or their families seeking pastoral ministry services from the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis, for example, by calling the Office of Marriage and Family Life, will receive only a referral to Courage (for gay men or lesbians) or to Encourage (for the family members and friends of gay men or lesbians). Both groups are collectively called "Faith In Action" in the local archdiocese, which states that its mission is to support men and women with "same-sex attractions" to live chaste and holy lives. The Courage website indicates a positive attitude toward conversion therapy and will support its members who seek out such therapy. Also, the website has multiple links to organizations within the "ex-gay" movement.

Searching the Archdiocese's website for "homosexuality" (after finding that the more respectful term, "LGBT pastoral ministry," yields no results) also leads only to Courage and Encourage. Such a search also results in a link to the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH), an organization that recommends conversion therapy for gay men and lesbians and promulgates documents based on pseudo-science -- both of which have no credibility among any of the reputable professional mental health or medical associations, such as the Amercian Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association, the American Psychoanalytic Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the Council on Child and Adolescent Health, and many others. (Please see the article in this issue of the Progressive Catholic Voice reporting on CPCSM’s recent educational program, “The Myth of Conversion Therapy and the Pseudo-Science of NARTH.”)

The underlying attitudes toward LGBT persons and their families, reflected by the Archdiocese through its staff in the Office of Marriage and Family Life and by its website, are not only sorely lacking, they are reprehensible. In fact, it should be said that Courage and Encourage provide neither competent nor compassionate pastoral ministry. To tell LGBT persons that they are "objectively disordered" and must maintain a lives of sexual abstinence simply because they find themselves attracted to members of their own gender is outrageous – especially when the vast majority of today’s behavioral and biological scientists believe that homosexuality is innate, not freely chosen, and not a psychological disorder that can or should be treated.

Furthermore, it is an outrage to LGBT persons and their families for Courage to compare the situation of gay men and lesbians with that of alcoholics who follow the 12 steps of AA. It is not appropriate to recommend that LGBT persons follow an adaptation of those same 12 steps in order to abstain from pursuing meaningful committed relationships. Forming such relationships is the only way that God has created them to find the love in another person that mirrors God’s unconditional love for them.

Therefore, the approach that the local archdiocese advocates, through its Faith In Action Program, is contrary to the life-experience of millions of LGBT persons and has no foundation in the current sciences and in present-day medical and mental health practice. But to recommend that LGBT persons abstain from all committed same-sex relationships, while giving tacit approval to conversion therapy when all reputable professional groups have condemned it as being ineffective and potentially dangerous, is also incompetent, insensitive, and lacking in compassion -- and is even unethical.

Furthermore, John Gonsiorek, a national expert on competent psychological practice and ethics said at CPCSM’s recent program about conversion therapy and NARTH that for a church group to advocate for conversion therapy is tantamount to practicing psychology – and bad psychology at that -- without a license, which is a criminal offense in Minnesota.

Over its past 25+ years working in the local church, CPCSM has provided workshops and inservices to virtually all of the heads of archdiocesan offices during Archbishop Roach's administration, presented its parish-based gay-lesbian ministry training to more that 25 parishes, resulting in active LGBT ministries in at least 6 parishes and competent and compassionate pastoral staff at many other parishes.

Furthermore, for 10 years, from 1983 to 1993, Catholic Charities and CPCSM cosponsored a program in which Deacon couple Roger and Donna Urbanski, who have a gay son, faithfully provided one-to-one counseling and a monthly support group for Catholic family members and friends of LGBT persons.

From about 1993 to 1997, CPCSM was an active member of a Study Group on Sexuality and Spirituality, requested by a group of local Catholic high school presidents, which was comprised of representatives of most of the local Catholic high schools and the archdiocesan education staff and met monthly under the auspices of the Archdiocese's Catholic Education and Formation Ministries (CEFM) Program.

At about the same time CPCSM, by presenting its 4-session Safe Staff Training Program to the whole CEFM staff and to 8 of the 11 Catholic secondary schools in existence at that time, helped create for LGBT students in most of the participating schools, safe spaces and safe school staff patterned after the groundbreaking Safe Staff Programs (Out For Equity and Out For Good) in both the St. Paul and Minneapolis public high school districts. (CPCSM's safe staff training program is fully described in its recently published book (edited by Michael Bayly), Creating Safe Environments for LGBT Students: A Catholic Schools Perspective (Harrington Park Press).

For the incoming archbishop, with edicts more characteristic of a dictator than a pastoral leader, to put a end to nearly 30 years of these excellent pastoral efforts, carried out by good, holy, well-intentioned Catholic professionals --with the blessing of the local ordinary--who were trained to carefully listen to and respond to the special, unique pastoral needs of each person seeking their care, cries to heaven for justice!

It is for these reasons that I strongly believe that in good conscience I must personally begin taking more drastic political actions against this archdiocese – and I urge all readers of the Progressive Catholic Voice to consider doing the same, whether it be because of the archdiocese’s treatment of LGBT persons and their families, or for another issue of justice about which they feel as outraged as I do.

Much of the change regarding the treatment of LGBT person in this local church came about through the pressure put on the Chancery by members of right-wing fundamentalist groups that threatened both to withhold their contributions to the archdiocese and to contact the archbishop's superiors in the Vatican if he would not take a more conservative orthodox approach – and hence, one that is also less tolerant and compassionate – toward LGBT persons and their families.

Therefore, because these kinds of strategies appear to speak louder to the Catholic hierarchy than do personal appeals or rational arguments -- whether they be from a theological, philosophical, or scientific point of view -- or even public protests, I am recommending the following actions as a show of solidarity for our LGBT brothers and sisters and their families:

The following addresses are to those members of the Catholic hierarchy that are directly responsible for Archbishop John Nienstedt being appointed as the Archbishop of St. Paul and Minneapolis. It is best if your letters come from your heart and reflect your own personal opinions as to why--based on his record in New Ulm as bishop and here, so far, as Coadjutor Archbishop--John Nienstedt is not a good fit as archbishop for this archdiocese. You might consider writing to the Apostolic Nuncio and then sending a copy to both Cardinal Re and Pope Benedict XVI.

Archbishop Pietro Sambi
Apostolic Nuncio to the United States of America
3339 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W,
Washington, DC 20008
Telephone: (202) 333-7121
Fax: (202) 337-4036

Giovanni Battista Cardinal Re
Prefect of the Congregation for Bishops
Palazzo delle Congregazioni,
Piazza Pio XII, 10
00193 Rome
Italy
Tel (from USA): 011-39-06-69-88-42-17
Fax (from USA): 011-39-06-69-88-53-03

His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI
The Apostolic Palace,
00120 Vatican City State
Italy
Email: benedictxvi@vatican.va

Editor's Note: The boycott of the Archbishop's Annual Catholic Appeal that I am recommending here is based upon my own personal outrage about the archdiocese's 180-degree change in its attitudes and the (outrageously incompetent and insensitive) "pastoral care" that it is now recommending for its LGBT members and their families. I am inviting all readers to join me in this boycott. However, there may be other issues that the archdiocese has been addressing about which readers feel more outraged (e.g., liturgical reform, treatment of women, treatment of lay ministers, treatment of non-Catholics at Catholic liturgies, etc.). I strongly encourage readers to feel free to adapt their own boycott efforts, including the wording of the sample statement below, to fit another particular issue of injustice that may seem closer to their hearts.

Also please note that the sample form below allows for a number of options (i.e., withholding only a portion of the Appeal funds and giving them all to one or more LGBT-friendly organizations, withholding all of the Appeal funds and giving all of them to LGBT-friendly organizations or one part of them to LGBT-supportive groups and the rest to other social justice organizations (which you will have to locate through you own searches: for example, by calling the local First Call For Help at "2-1-1", or by online web searching).

The House of the Beloved Disciple
2930 13th Ave. So.
Minneapolis, MN 55407
Phone: 612-201-4534
Email: cpcsmmail@gmail.com

David J. McCaffrey is a founding member of The Progressive Catholic Voice and a cofounder of CPCSM.

The Myth of 'Conversion Therapy' and the Pseudo-Science of NARTH

PART I – DEBUNKING NARTH

In this first of two articles, CPCSM executive coordinator Michael Bayly highlights the insights and information presented by John C. Gonsiorek, PhD1 (1) during his January 29 presentation at the House of the Beloved Disciple.

Held in Minneapolis at the House of the Beloved Disciple, this program featured two local licensed psychologists, Jeffry G. Ford (2) and John C. Gonsiorek, who shared their perspective on the National Association for Research and Treatment of Homosexuality (NARTH) and the theory and practice of “reparative” or “conversion” therapy, advocated by NARTH and other so-called ex-gay ministries and organizations.

These ex-gay groups are adamant that homosexuality is preventable in childhood and treatable in adulthood, and that most gays and lesbians can successfully convert to heterosexuality through what they label “reparative therapy” or “conversion therapy.”

The program was prompted by recent efforts on the part of the Archdiocese to promote NARTH as a credible scientific organization. For instance, in the November 8 issue of The Catholic Spirit (the official newspaper of the Archdiocese of St. Paul/Minneapolis), Fr. Jim Livingston (3) endorsed NARTH by citing the organization as a useful resource and by encouraging people to visit its website so as “to learn . . .about the emotional root causes of homosexuality.”

Fr. Livingston also recommended an audio CD of a talk given by NARTH co-founder Joseph Nicolosi, an individual whom Coadjutor Archbishop Nienstedt, when he was a bishop in Detroit, invited to speak to the priests of the archdiocese as an “expert” on homosexuality.

Many Catholics are concerned by the local Archdiocese’s increasing reliance on the perspective and “findings” of NARTH to support and validate Church teaching on homosexuality.

Dr. Gonsiorek began his presentation with words of advice for Catholics troubled by the Archdiocese’s efforts to present NARTH as a legitimate scientific organization and to use its “findings” to validate Church teaching on the “disordered” nature of homosexuality.

“If you’re going to challenge the Archdiocese in its attempts to introduce what I consider to be a ‘fraudulent healthcare service,’” said Gonsiorek, “then you need to become educated about what the behavioral sciences say about sexual orientation. That has to be the base from which you operate as opposed to reacting to the ‘flakiness’ of organizations like NARTH.”

Dr. Gonsiorek then proceeded to provide some insightful background information on the origins of NARTH – origins inseparable from the wider cultural debate on homosexuality and, specifically, the American Psychiatric Association's 1973 decision to remove homosexuality from its official manual that lists mental and emotional disorders (followed two years later by the passage of a similar resolution of the American Psychological Association).

This change in the diagnosis of homosexuality was the result of the wealth of research data gathered since the early 1950s that showed no difference between homosexual and heterosexual populations in terms of “adjustment.”

Gonsiorek also noted that a significant “sea change” took place in the early 1970s when biological psychiatry began taking over the field of behavioral science from the psychoanalytical establishment. Indeed, the change in the diagnosis of homosexuality, says Gonsiorek, was “essentially a run-up of a long-standing fight” between these two groups, and was an important moment for the biological psychiatrists, “not only because they had a strong data base to support such a change, but because the psychoanalysts had always considered human sexuality to be their domain.”

In time, the psychoanalytical establishment also changed in its understanding of homosexuality; it now has the same sets of policies and principles about sexual orientation as the American Psychological Association and the American Psychiatric Association. Yet there were “old guard” psychoanalysts who were disgruntled about being displaced and seeing their organization change its views on homosexuality. This disaffected group of psychoanalysts formed an alliance with conservatively- and religiously-oriented psychotherapists. It was from this alliance that NARTH was established.

Gonsiorek then outlined the problem with “conversion” or “reparative” therapy, the theory and practice that treats homosexuality as a pathology, as a disorder that can be “repaired” and changed.

“It’s nonsensical to have a treatment for a diagnosis that doesn’t exist,” says Gonsiorek. “With homosexuality being de-pathologized in 1973, what exactly is being treated? There is no data to support that sexual orientation can be changed and there’s no reason to change it; there’s no impairment.”

So why do people subject themselves to such a “nonsensical” treatment? Gonsiorek notes that there can be a “a great deal of coercion, a great deal of social pressure in some families and communities for those struggling with homosexual feelings to submit to conversion therapy. If they don’t, they’ll be socially ostracized.

Some ex-gay therapists insist that in recommending and/or offering conversion or reparative therapy they are merely giving people a choice as consumers to meet their personal health goals. This argument, says Gonsiorek is “specious and borders on malpractice.” Healthcare providers, he insists, “should not just do what consumers want but offer services that are based on established standards of care. And if the consumer wants something that is flakey, the answer is ‘No.’ To give them what’s flakey is malpractice.”

Gonsiorek also noted an “obvious sexism associated with the ex-gay movement.” “Most of the change efforts are focused on men,” he says. “Women are not so important to the ex-gay ministers and therapists.”

And there is yet another aspect of sexism reflected by this movement: If women marry supposedly ex-gay men and the marriage fails, it’s these women and any children produced by the marriage that suffer. “There’s a lot of this type of ‘collateral damage,’” says Gonsiorek, “but it’s rarely talked about by NARTH and the wider ex-gay establishment.”

Big business

Gonsiorek also observed that: “This whole discussion on reparative therapy is occurring in a socio-political context in which it’s becoming standard practice for both corporations and right-wing religious organizations to heavily fund institutes and think-tanks, and to purchase the science they want.”

“We saw this very dramatically with the tobacco company lawsuits, where the tobacco companies, for decades, bought their own science to support their positions,” he said. Yet despite the pseudo-science being exposed in such cases, “the funding by right-wing organizations within the scientific community and within church organizations [remains] big business,” notes Gonsiorek.

“It’s understandable,” says Gonsiorek, “that the lay public can become confused when every behavioral health organization does not support reparative therapy, and yet there are these official-sounding organizations, endorsed by people like archbishops, that make the argument that they are just one more credible voice among many.”

The real issue

At one point during his presentation, Gonsiorek was asked: “How do the people involved with groups like NARTH respond to the reality that every major professional organization in the behavioral sciences disagrees with them?”

Gonsiorek noted that they often attempt to “re-pathologize” homosexuality by making the following argument: Because certain subsets of the lesbian and gay population have higher rates of certain problems, it must mean there’s inherent pathology.

In response to this ploy, Gonsiorek notes that: “In reality, every group that is treated as second class has higher rates of both mental and physical health problems. If you treat people badly, they get messed up. You don’t need a PhD to figure that out. Yet we don’t say that women are inherently pathological because they have a higher rate of depression and eating disorders. Neither do we say that Native Americans are inherently pathological because they have higher rates of alcoholism.”

The “real issue,” says Gonsiorek, “is that if you can find anyone at all in the given population who is not pathological, then that disproves that the group is pathological. If you have a 20 percent higher base rate of a particular problem within a population, and if there are people within that population for whom that particular problem is not an issue, than it’s clear that something else is going on other than inherent pathology.”

Exploring the issue further, Gonsiorek noted that: “What often happens with people who are maneuvered into reparative therapy is that they’ve been trashed for years by churches and communities – even by their own families. As a result, they’re often depressed and anxious. That’s what the problem is, and that’s what requires treatment. So the reparative therapy is often done instead of what needs to be done – which is to undo the damage caused by harassment, ostracism, and disparagement.”

Science and religion

Gonsiorek concluded his talk by noting that “both the behavioral sciences and religion attempt to understand the human condition and to respond to problems within the human condition.” Yet he was adamant that science and religion are “not the same, and that one cannot speak for the other.”

“For a church leader to tell you what is good behavioral science,” he said, “carries about as much weight as your Uncle Joe telling you.”

Reflecting on the current situation in the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis, Gonsiorek said: “As a psychologist, I find it almost fraudulent for someone who claims to be a moral authority to be grandly operating in an area in which they have no competence.”

In the March issue of The Progressive Catholic Voice, Michael Bayly will share highlights from Jeffrey Ford’s (3) contribution to CPCSM’s program, “The Myth of ‘Conversion Therapy’ and the Pseudo-Science of NARTH.”

NOTES

1. John C. Gonsiorek, PhD, is a fellow of American Psychological Association (APA) Division 9 (also called the Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues), and Division 12 (the Society of Clinical Psychology).

John is also a Clinical Assistant Professor in the Department of Psychology at the University of Minnesota, and a Past-President of APA Division 44 – also known as the Society for the Psychological Study of Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Issues. For 25 years, he had an independent practice of clinical and forensic psychology in Minneapolis.

John has published widely in the areas of professional misconduct, sexual orientation and identity, and professional ethics. For many years, he provided expert witness evaluation and testimony regarding impaired clergy and professionals, standards of care, and psychological damages. He has also provided training and consultation to a variety of religious denominations and organizations.

2. Jeffry G. Ford, MA, is a licensed psychologist and psychotherapist. Interestingly, Jeff was formerly the executive director of OUTPOST, an “ex-gay” ministry located in Minneapolis. For ten years, Jeff claimed to be a “former homosexual,” and was a national speaker for Exodus International, the governing board and communication hub for most ex-gay ministries. Today, however, Jeff identifies as a gay man and is a nationally known consultant and speaker on gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender issues. He specializes in addressing the complexities involved with the anti-gay theory known both as “reparative therapy” and “sexual conversion therapy,” which purports to prevent and cure homosexuality. Jeff dedicates his time and energy to challenging the unethical and dangerous use of pseudo-scientific theories associated with the ex-gay movement, a movement that includes NARTH.

3. Fr. Jim Livingston serves as lead chaplain to the local chapter of Courage (which goes by the name of Faith in Action in the St. Paul/Minneapolis Archdiocese). Courage purports to help people move beyond “same-sex attraction” by encouraging a life of “interior chastity in union with Christ.” The movement labels itself a “pro-chastity ministry,” and equates chastity with celibacy. Although Courage -- which, along with NARTH, Livingston enthusiastically promotes in his November 8 commentary -- acknowledges that the “inclination of homosexual attractions” is “psychologically understandable,” the group, nevertheless, considers such attractions “objectively disordered” – a view promulgated by the hierarchical church. Courage often substitutes the words “homosexuality” and “gay” with the NARTH-coined phrase, “same-sex attraction disorder” – a term unrecognized by any professional mental health association. Following NARTH’s lead, Courage likens homosexuality to alcoholism, and conducts its “support groups” using the 12-Step format developed by Alcoholics Anonymous. Some members of Courage even consider their “disorder” to be curable, and explain its origin using debunked theories of dominant mothers, distant fathers, and abusive family relations. Livingston’s commentary in The Catholic Spirit is clear evidence that the quackery of NARTH is actively endorsed and encouraged by some within the leadership of the Roman Catholic Church.

In the February 2008 issue of The Progressive Catholic Voice, Michael Bayly shared the contributions made by John C. Gonsiorek to the CPCSM-sponsored event, “The Myth of ‘Conversion Therapy’ and the Pseudo-Science of NARTH.”

Dr. Gonsiorek was one of two speakers at this program, which took place at the House of the Beloved Disciple in Minneapolis on Tuesday, January 29, and was prompted, in part, by recent efforts on the part of the Archdiocese of St. Paul/Minneapolis to promote the ideology and “scientific findings” of the National Association for Research and Treatment of Homosexuality (NARTH). The other speaker invited to share his perspective on this issue was Jeffry G. Ford, MA, a licensed psychologist and psychotherapist.

Highlights of John Gonsiorek’s presentation comprised Part I of the two-part Progressive Catholic Voice series, “The Myth of ‘Conversion Therapy’ and the Pseudo Science of NARTH.”

Following is Part II, comprised of highlights of Jeff Ford’s presentation at the House of the Beloved Disciple on January 29.

Perhaps the most interesting aspect of Jeffry Ford’s story is that he was formerly the executive director of OUTPOST, an “ex-gay” ministry located in Minneapolis. For ten years, Jeff claimed to be a “former homosexual,” and was a national speaker for Exodus International, the governing board and communication hub for most ex-gay ministries.

Today, however, Jeff identifies as a gay man and is a nationally known consultant and speaker on gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender (GLBT) issues. Jeff dedicates his time and energy to challenging the unethical and dangerous use of pseudo-scientific theories associated with the ex-gay movement, a movement that includes NARTH. In particular, he addresses the complexities involved with the anti-gay theory and practice known both as “reparative therapy” and “sexual conversion therapy,” which purports to prevent and cure homosexuality.

The story of Jeff’s journey away from the world of “ex-gay” ministry is featured with those of other “ex-gays” in a publication entitled, "Finally Free," complied by the Washington, DC-based Human Rights Campaign.

Growing up in a religious home, Jeff responded to his growing awareness that he was attracted to other males by rationalizing that “something had gone wrong” inside of him. He felt shame and a sense of “badness,” and struggled to keep secret his homosexual feelings. Yet his mother could tell that something was going on inside of him. Accordingly, she would have “little talks” with him that invariably started with: “Jeffry, do you know what it is to be a queer?” She also attempted to “butch” him up and would give him examples of what was wrong about being effeminate and queer. She even sent him to a wrangling camp on a ranch in Arizona. Looking back on this experience, Jeff says with a wry smile: “It just didn’t work.”

Nevertheless, by high school, Jeff had “learned how to pass” – learned how to date girls and keep his true desires “under wraps.” In his junior year of high school he became involved with evangelical Christianity, and accepted Jesus Christ as his Lord and Savior. In this rigid, fundamentalist form of Christianity, Jeff found a way to hope and believe that “something” was going to take his homosexuality away; that somehow God, through Jeff’s personal acceptance of Jesus, was going to heal him and set him free.

He began to sublimate, repress, and deny the homosexual feelings he was experiencing. Despite some “dalliances” involving other men – encounters that he never talked about and felt “incredibly shameful about,” Jeff married at the age of twenty. Yet when neither his evangelical Christian faith nor his heterosexual marriage made his homosexual desires disappear, Jeff sought counseling. The Christian counselor he saw at Bethel College was in his own way, says Jeff, compassionate and caring. In retrospect, however, Jeff can also say that this counselor was misguided in his understanding about homosexuality.

He asked Jeff to undergo “aversion therapy” – a form of electric shock “reparative therapy.” Jeff ended up doing forty sessions of this humiliating type of therapy that left painful scorch marks on his forearms. Even after realizing that this type of therapy had failed to take away his homosexual desires, Jeff continued to pursue anything he could so as not to be gay.

The various testimonies contained in this DVD – from former ex-gays and psychologists – attest to the fact that the ex-gay movement pushes what former ex-gay Daniel Gonzales describes as the two biggest lies that drive people into any form of therapy to either change or repress their sexual orientation and/or its expression. These lies are that: 1) a person cannot live their life as a gay person and be a good Christian, and 2) being gay is not a viable or fulfilling way to live one’s life.

One Catholic ex-gay featured in the documentary notes that often after “conversion therapy” fails, many “faith-based” therapists will say that the only choice you have left is celibacy. They realize that the success rate of changing homosexuals to heterosexuals is “very, very poor.” So they try to take a new approach by saying, “Well, if you can’t change, then be celibate.”

To be sure, the lives of ex-gays all seem to be dominated by hopelessness, guilt, internalized shame, and feelings of defectiveness. More than one commentator in the film noted that the sense of worthlessness that ex-gay ministries foster compels many gay people to take unsafe sexual risks. As one former ex-gay noted: “If you serve a mean God, you become sort of mean also.”

One psychologist in the film offered the following insight: “The repression of sexual desire actually makes the idea of acting them out more titillating, makes a person more likely to think sexual thoughts. For those struggling to suppress their homosexual feelings, this repression actually leads to an increase in the acting out of unsafe sexual behaviors – behaviors that might not occur if they were more accepting of their homosexuality.”

One young man interviewed confirmed this, saying that: “I never really dated anyone – male or female – until I made the choice to accept my sexuality.” That acceptance allowed him to start dating, an experience that he describes as “fantastic.” “I was no longer meeting men in dark places having anonymous sex,” he said, “but actually having a relationship for the first time.”

Of course, for some gay people, getting to the point of having a relationship requires breaking free from an ex-gay ministry of one form or another. Breaking free, however, can be a very protracted and painful experience as it is often within these ministries that many gay people have their family, friends, and their sense of faith and community. Yet despite the pain of being ostracized by family and friends, the vast majority do indeed break free. As one former ex-gay declares: “I’d rather be hated for what I am than loved for what I’m not.”

Yet what of those who claim that conversion therapy has worked for them? According to Jeff Ford, ninety-six percent of such people fall into the first two of three categories, the first of which is comprised of people who, despite claimed success, still struggle with homosexual feelings and/or behaviors. The second category is comprised of those who are single and celibate. Only four percent of those who claim that “reparative” or “conversion” therapy has been successful now consider themselves to be heterosexual. Interestingly, almost all of these people work in the ex-gay counseling field. It would seem that for reparative therapy to be successful, one must quit one’s job and become an ex-gay minister and/or therapist and dedicate one’s life to it.

Jeff noted that in the ex-gay world, the expression of same-sex attraction is never talked about as an act of love. It’s only ever understood and talked about as an incarnation of evil. Furthermore, if you accept the “lie” about the normalcy of homosexuality, then you forfeit your place in heaven.

Jeff’s questioning of this dogma against his inner sense and experience of being loved and accepted by God as a gay man was an experience of “deep grace and forgiveness.” It was a liberating experience for him.

Says Jeff: “The ex-gay movement tends to blame the parents and/or supposed experiences of childhood abuse for changing the direction of one’s natural (i.e., heterosexual) sexual orientation. If your unmet needs can be met in ‘healthy’ ways, i.e., in non-erotic same-sex friendships and relationships, then not only will your unmet needs be met, but your heterosexuality will bloom and blossom. That’s the hope and that’s what they promise. And some people will do almost anything to believe this – from years and years of counseling to prayers and exorcisms.

“The problem,” continues Jeff, “comes when people do all these things and yet continue to experience same-sex attractions. They feel like a failure, yet you’re not supposed to talk about such feelings of failure publicly – only in private with your counselor. There’s a lot of restraint on your personal freedom. The extent of this restraint depends on which ex-gay ministry you’re involved with. Some of them demand that you don’t listen to certain types of music, read certain types of books. You can’t be left alone with another person of the same gender. It’s very cult-like, very controlling.”

Jeff certainly has a powerful story to share, and he did so eloquently at the House of the Beloved Disciple on January 29. Without doubt, much of this power comes from the fact that Jeff speaks from experience. After all, he studied and practiced reparative therapies for years. Such personal and professional experience, says Jeff, allows him to offer “accurate answers and powerful insight” into the workings and ideological underpinnings of the ex-gay movement.

Also, unlike many so-called “experts” in the pseudo-science of conversion and reparative therapies, Jeff’s writings have been published in peer-reviewed scientific journals. Most recently his article, “Healing Homosexuals: A Psychologist’s Journey Through the Ex-Gay Movement and the Pseudo-Science of Reparative Therapy,” was published in The Journal of Gay and Lesbian Psychotherapy (Haworth Press, Volume 5, No. 3/4, 2001). It was simultaneously published in the book, Sexual Conversion Therapy.

Jeff also maintains a comprehensive web site entitled Reparative Therapy: A Pseudo Science, that contains a wealth of information, resources, and a detailed account of his “journey through reparative therapy.”

Jeffry G. Ford, MA, Licensed Psychologist, was formerly the executive director of OUTPOST, an "ex-gay" ministry located in Minneapolis, MN, and claimed for ten years to be a "former homosexual." For many years he was a national speaker for Exodus International, which remains the governing board and communication hub for most ex-gay ministries.

Today, Jeff is a nationally known consultant and speaker on gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender issues. He specializes in addressing the complexities involved with the anti-gay theory known both as Reparative Therapy and Sexual Conversion Therapy, which purports to prevent and cure homosexuality; and he challenges the dangerous use of pseudo-scientific theories like these and other discredited methods.

Ford speaks from experience as one who studied and practiced reparative therapies for years. Because of his personal and professional experience, Ford is able to offer accurate answers and powerful insight. Although many so called "experts" in the pseudo-science of conversion and reparative therapies self-publish articles filled with false claims and misinformation, his work and experience has been published in peer-reviewed scientific journals.

Most recently his article Healing Homosexuals: A Psychologist's Journey Through the Ex-Gay Movement and the Pseudo-Science of Reparative Therapy was published in The Journal of Gay and Lesbian Psychotherapy, Haworth Press, Volume 5, No. 3/4, 2001. It was simultaneously published in the book Sexual Conversion Therapy Haworth Press, 2002. Copies of the article, journal, and book can be obtained directly from Haworth Press.

Jeff was featured on the nationally syndicated PBS television show In The Life. He has been interviewed for articles appearing in the Star Tribune, the St. Paul Pioneer Press and a variety of newspapers nationally and internationaly as well as Lavende r and Genre magazines and numerous other gay and religious publications. Twin Cities television and radio news media frequently turn to him as a consultant on LGBT-related issues. His story, along with the stories of twelve other "ex-ex-gays" is featured in the volume Finally Free compiled by the Washington DC based Human Rights Campaign.

Jeff is a licensed psychologist and psychotherapist, as well as a clinical member of the American Association of Marriage and Family Therapists and licensed as a Marriage and Family Therapist and an Independent Clinical Social Worker. He received his master's degree in psychology in 1983 from St. Mary's University, Winona, MN; and received his undergraduate training from both the University of Northern Colorado, Greeley, CO and Bethel College, Arden Hills, MN.

He is the owner and director of Associated Resources In Psychology, PA in St. Paul, MN where he maintains a private therapy and consulting practice.

John has published widely in the areas of professional misconduct and impaired professionals, sexual orientation and identity, professional ethics, and other areas. He is a fellow of APA Division 9 (also called the Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues), and Division 12 (the Society of Clincial Psychology).

Dr. Gonsiorek is a Clinical Assistant Professor in the Department of Psychology, University of Minnesota; and has taught at a number of other institutions in the Twin Cities area. For many years, he provided expert witness evaluation and testimony regarding impaired clergy and professionals, standards of care, and psychological damages; and has provided training and consultation to a variety of religious denominations and organizations.

John is a consulting editor for Professional Psychology: Research & Practice. His major publications include: Breach of trust: Sexual exploitation by health care professionals and clergy; Homosexuality: Research implications for public policy (with Weinrich); Male sexual abuse: A trilogy of intervention strategies (with Bera and Letourneau), and Homosexuality and psychotherapy: A practitioner’s handbook of affirmative models.

For 25 years, Dr. Gonsiorek had an independent practice of clinical and forensic psychology in Minneapolis, and now primarily works as a consultant. He can be reached by phone at 952-994-1386; or e-mail: gonsiorek@comcast.net.

300+ People Vigil at the Cathedral in Solidarity with LGBT Catholics

(adapted from the blogsite The Wild Reed)

Having processed across Summit Avenue, the protesters gather in front of the Chancery as they witness CPCSM's executive director Michael Bayly deposit the open letter to Archbishop Nienstedt into the building's mail slot.

Over three hundred people gathered at the Cathedral of St. Paul on Sunday afternoon, December 2nd for a vigil of solidarity with lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) Catholics, their families and supporters. The vigilers gathered in response to an invitation from the Progressive Catholic Voice (PCV), a coalition of Catholic organizations and individuals (of which CPCSM is a founding group) that recently launched a monthly e-newsletter of the same name. The PCV's invitation to gather for the vigil was prompted by Coadjutor Archbishop John Nienstedt's November 15th statement on homosexuality in The Catholic Spirit, the official newspaper of the local archdiocese.

CPCSM's executive director Michael Bayly set the tone for the vigil with his opening statement, welcoming all who had come to show their solidarity.

[It is very] appropriate that we’re gathering on the First Sunday of Advent – that season of the church year that invites us to reflect, renew, listen, discover, and become our truest selves in the light of Christ.

Advent is traditionally understood as a time of waiting. As LGBT Catholics we’re very familiar with waiting. We’ve been waiting for a very long time for the institutional church to recognize and honor the light of Christ present in our lives AND relationships.

For that to happen, the church’s teaching on “homosexual activity” will have to change. And I have no doubt that it will one day change. My prayer is that Archbishop Nienstedt will join us in being a prophetic voice in working to ensure that this change happens sooner rather than later.

I’d like to close by paraphrasing Pope John XXIII: We should not think of ourselves as being fearfully under siege in a fortress-like church, a church that serves as a museum of unchangeable traditions and teachings. Rather, we should embody a living, growing, and evolving church; one that can be envisioned as a flowering garden of life – full of color, diversity, and possibility.

Friends, I look out and see such a church before me. And I thank you again for having the courage and compassion to be that type of church and to stand here today in solidarity with LGBT Catholics and those who encourage and support them.

By gathering at the Cathedral amid wintry winds that brought a sub-zero wind chill, the 300+ protesters were, in effect, showing that they do "encourage and support lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) family members, and friends who accept and express their sexuality," Further, the group was there to express their disagreement with Coadjutor Archbishop John Nienstedt's recent statement indicating that by encouraging and supporting their LGBT family members and friends, they are “cooperating in a grave evil.”

Through the sea of signs that they carried and by enthusiastically responding to the event's speakers with their applause and cheering, the crowd also indicated that they would like to see the Church’s teaching on homosexuality reformed in light of credible science and the lived experiences of LGBT people and their families

One of the key organizers of the vigil, Michael Bayly, shared with his blogsite readers, "I can’t tell you how happy I am with this incredible turn-out – especially considering the severe wintry conditions we’ve been experiencing in the Twin Cities."

Bayly further elaborated, "No doubt [I thought] due to the inclement weather, the crowd was slow to build. As we began the proceedings with the Bret Hesla song, The Image of God, I thought to myself: Well, fifty people isn’t bad for weather like this. Yet as I began my welcome (and for twenty minutes afterwards), the people just kept arriving and the crowd just kept swelling! (At one point, 325 people were counted.)"

In joy! Oh, in joy do we gather!
Knowing we are all the image of God.

Be strong! Oh, be stronger than hatred,
Knowing we are all the image of God.

We stand! Oh, we stand and we celebrate,
Knowing we are all the image of God.
The Image of God, by Bret Hesla

Catholic Rainbow Parents co-founder Darlene White, who has a lesbian daughter with two children.

Speaking on behalf of Catholic Rainbow Parents, convener Mary Lynn Murphy addressed the crowd with her husband, Mike. Responding to the Catholic Church’s contention that homosexuality is a “disorder,” Mary Lynn declared: “Homosexuality is not a disorder of any kind, but rather an ordinary human characteristic with the exact moral dimensions of heterosexuality. This is not, we believe, and never was, a question of ‘sin.’ It is a simple question of human diversity, and society’s ongoing struggle to learn to accept differences of all kinds.”

“As parents, we lift up the voice of our parental authority on this matter, refusing to allow unloving, untrue messages from any entity to undermine our loving families and the human dignity of LGBT persons everywhere - whether they are found in the pews, in the wider society, or - as they frequently are - in the ranks of the clergy and the hierarchy itself.”

Another inspiring speaker at the Vigil for Solidarity was Dignity Twin Cities president Brian McNeill.

Also sharing an inspiring message was Ronnie Angelus, longtime peace activist and parishioner at St. Joan of Arc.

“People are crying today,” said another speaker, 80-year-old Ronnie Angelus. “People are weeping today. A grandfather who loves his granddaughter and her female partner believes he cannot receive communion. And he weeps. Mothers, fathers, relatives, and friends are told they cannot want abundance of life for their gay family members and friends. Young people grappling with their sexuality are scared and they weep. Somewhere, mixed with rage and disbelief, we stand heartbroken today.”

“And the words of Pastor Martin Niemöeller keep coming to my mind: ‘When they came for me there was no one left to speak for me.’ And make no mistake, they are coming for us. The statement of the Archbishop makes it official and it opens the doors for the hate to spill out. Make no mistake. They are coming for us! If ever there was a time to ask for the gifts of the Holy Spirit, for fortitude and wisdom, the moment is now. In these mighty winds of change it is time to say, ‘Come Holy Spirit, come! Come Holy Spirit, come!’”

Above and below: Soulforce founder and author Rev. Mel White received cheers and applause when he declared that those present were the “hope for the Catholic Church.”

“Throughout history,” Rev. Mel White reminded those vigiling outside the cathedral, “the Catholic church, the Christian church, has been saved by people like you who loved it enough to stand up and say, ‘You’re wrong!’”

Mel White then gave some graphic examples of other heroes for their faith in the history of the Church.

"Giordano Bruno, on the Campo Di Fiori, a Roman Square just outside the Vatican walls, was burned at the stake for confronting Roman Catholic teachings in March of 1600. Then, 400+ years later, John Paul II expressed 'profound sorrow' for the martyrdom.When sentenced, Bruno said tothe bishops, 'You have far more fear in condemning me than I have in being condemned.' "

"Exactly 30 days ago in Linz, Austria, cardinals, bishops and priests gathered to canonize the courgeous layman Franz Jaggerstater who was beheaded by the Nazis in August, 1943. As a young man he had watched with growing horror as the priests in his Austrian diocese, his local bishop, and even the pope had by their silent assent supported Hitler and the Third Reich. Months earlier Franz Jaggerstater had politely refused to be inducted into Hitler’s army after priests, bishops, cardinals, and the pope had advised for 'the sake of your families' not to resist Hitler’s blitzkrieg across Europe. 'We are losing our souls and we don't know it,' Jaggerstatter cried out."

Mel's third story was the following account of a recent "gay martyr." "Beneath the Pope's window, in St. Peter's Square, Alfredo Ormando, a young gay writer, burned himself to death on January 13, 1998, to protest the teachings and actions of the Vatican against God's lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender children."

"There have always been heroes and martyrs who gave their lives for Christ and their faith. If we hope to reach our goal some day, then we, too, must become heroes of the faith," Mel told the crowd. He then concluded his talk by urging the crowd to take over the steps of the Cathedral, which the local archdiocesan authorities had told the vigil's organizers were private property and off-limits for the protesters. "Those are our steps, Mel shouted, "we have a right to occupy them!"

Another highlight of the Vigil for Solidarity was the warmth and energy of the wonderful music provided by (l to r) Kathleen Olsen and Larry Dittberner and Mary Preus (not pictured).

CPCSM co-founder and Progressive Catholic Voice technical editor David McCaffrey, one of the key organizers of the Vigil for Solidarity, made good use of his rich baritone voice throughout proceedings to provide clear and concise explanations and directions to the crowd.

One of the most powerful moments of the vigil was the “die-in and rising up” ritual on the front steps of the cathedral.

As can be see in the photos above, the symbolic "die-in and rising-up" ritual involved the protesters who had gathered on the steps of the Cathedral falling to the ground after David McCaffrey, over the bull-horn, recited Archbishop Nientedt’s recent “life-denying” and "spiritually violent" words regarding homosexuality and then sounded a loud siren. The siren signified the great risk that such a negative statement from a church leader can bring -- risk to the physical, psychological, and spiritual health of LGBT persons and their families.

Eleven-year-old Joseph Olsen proclaimed Jesus’ “life-giving” words: “I came that you might have life – and have it to the full!" (John 10: 10), to symbolize, as David McCaffrey pointed out to the crowd, "that Jesus’ words of life are meant for us all, LGBT and straight people -- just as the teachings of the Church should bring us all the message of God’s unconditional love and not be a source of misunderstanding, fear, hatred, and disunity."

After the die-in participants lying on the Cathedral steps heard the life-giving words of Jesus, they were directed to rise up and everyone joyfully began singing “I Shall Walk in the Presence of God” and began a solemn procession across Summit Avenue to the Chancery, where Archbishop Nienstedt's office is located.

I shall walk in the presence of God, I shall walk.
With the sun and the rain upon me, I shall walk.
In the land of the living, living land, I shall walk.
With my sisters and brothers around me, I shall walk.

After the "die-in and rising-up" ritual, the vigilers processed across Summit Ave. from the Cathedral to the Archbishop's office at the Chancery, where an open letter to him was deposited in the mailbox.

With a large icon of

VIDEO: What’s Morally Wrong With Homosexuality?

CPCSM Cofounder Shares His Frustration with Changes in Local Archdiocese's Pastoral Ministry for LGBT Catholics and Their Families, Recommends Boycott and Other Political Actions

CPCSM Sponsors Educational Program Showing Unscientific and Unethical Practices Behind the Ministry Work with LGBT Persons Now Advocated by Conservative Archdiocesan Leadership