Happy Birthday, Sami

In Australia today, my niece, Sami, celebrates her 12th birthday.

Happy Birthday, Sami!

These first six photos of Sami were taken during my longer-than-expected sojourn back home in Australia (May 2006-January 2007) as I awaited the completion of my application for U.S. green card status.



Above: Like her Dad, Sami knows a thing or two about drums! (For more photos of Sami the drummer, click here.)




Above: Sami with her sister, Layne, parents, and grandparents.



Above: One of the last photographs I took when I was in Australia in January 2007 was of Sami and her goldfish.

Because I knew I’d be returning soon to the States and would accordingly miss celebrating her 11th birthday with her, I took Sami shopping at a pet store and asked her to choose a new goldfish - one that I would buy for her as an early birthday present. Sami chose a beautiful black goldfish, which can be observed in the photo above.

The mirror that can be seen in this same photo, and which contains on its surface a frosted image of a deer drinking at a stream, belonged to Sami’s great-grandmother and my paternal grandmother, Nanna Smith, who died in October 2005.



Above: My Dad, Sami’s Grandpa, sent me this photo of Sami celebrating her 12th birthday, just hours after it was taken on the evening of February 13 in Australia (February 12 in the US).


See also the previous Wild Reed posts:
Happy Birthday, Layne
Happy Birthday, Brendan
My Brother, the Drummer
Like Father, Like Daughter
A Rabbit’s Tale
The Bayly Family - July 2006
Catholic Rainbow (Australian) Parents
Gunnedah
Remembering Nanna Smith

The "Underground Church"

A four year-long study by Regis College professor Kathleen Kautzer
reveals new insights into the “underground church” movement
– a movement embodied by Eucharistic communities and parishes
that have intentionally moved beyond the institutional structures
of Rome so as to create and sustain Catholic communities
of vibrancy and authenticity.

I’m a member of a Catholic parish in the Twin Cities that, along with a number of other “progressive” Catholic communities, has recently been ordered by the archdiocese to conform its liturgical practices to the rubrics of the General Instruction on the Roman Missal (GIRM).

I’m sure that for many Catholic parishes, the rubrics of the Roman Missal serve well to express and reflect their faith and community life. Yet for the past 30 years, the parish to which I feel blessed to belong has developed its liturgy in ways that beautifully reflect the presence of the Spirit as discerned in the unique gifts and needs of its members and in our shared lives together. This development has been a very intentional and faith-filled embodiment of Vatican II’s call for the “full and active participation” of the laity in “liturgical celebrations” (Sacrosanctum Concilium (Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy), 1963). Yet many feel that now, in one fell swoop, this embodiment - along with the Spirit that nurtured and inspired it - has been discounted by the archdiocese’s demand that it be abandoned for the rubrics of GIRM. It seems that in this situation, the “form,” which Jesus said “profits nothing,” has been elevated above the “Spirit” which gives life.

According to Catholic theologian and author Richard McBrien, those ultimately responsible for demanding this type of Spirit-denying conformity comprise “a small but powerful and determined group within the Vatican who have never accepted the liturgical reforms of the Second Vatican Council and Pope Paul VI.”

The resistance of this “small but powerful” clique to these reforms (and to subsequent Spirit-led innovations within Catholic parishes and communities from the Netherlands to South Minneapolis) is, insists McBrien, “at root ecclesiological in nature.” What they oppose is the “de-clericalization of the liturgy” and that “full and active participation” of the laity mandated by Vatican II.

In the minds of those resistant to such participation, writes McBrien, “the Church is identical with the hierarchy and the priests who serve under the bishops. The laity, on the other hand, are simply the beneficiaries of the sacramental ministrations of the clergy, in a process ultimately controlled by the Vatican. The problem for the resisters is not so much that the Mass was put into the vernacular, but that the laity could now fully understand it and actively participate in it. . . . It is [the] underlying ecclesiology [of Vatican II] that is rejected, and not simply the changes in language and rituals. What the resisters oppose is the very idea that the Church is the whole People of God, laity included, rather than the hierarchy and clergy alone.”


Inclusive welcoming, participatory liturgies, and democratic governance

The recent efforts of the Archdiocese of St. Paul/Minneapolis to enforce strict liturgical conformity, along with its efforts to promote the pseudo-science of NARTH, forbid dialogue, and ban certain speakers, have left many experiencing feelings of deep frustration, sadness, loss, and anger. Such responses, coupled with McBrien’s observations regarding the rejection by many in the Catholic hierarchy of Vatican II ecclesiology, bring to mind Kathleen Kautzer’s comprehensive study of the “underground church” movement, and specifically this movements efforts to move beyond the institutional structures of Rome so as to create and sustain Catholic communities of vibrancy and authenticity.

Kautzer is an associate professor of sociology at Regis College, a predominately all-women’s Catholic college founded by the Sisters of St. Joseph in Weston, MA. She teaches courses in peace studies, women’s and children’s issues, social movements, and spirituality. For the past four years, Kautzer has traveled the country studying the Catholic reform movement and, in particular, the emergence and growth of Eucharistic communities and parishes that operate outside Vatican control. Her study, soon to be released as a book entitled The Underground Church, drew on theories of nonviolence and social movements to interpret and evaluate the Catholic reform movement.

Last November, Kautzer spoke at the annual Call to Action conference in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. As part of her presentation, entitled “The Underground Church: Nonviolent Alternatives to Vatican Empire,” Kautzer shared photos and descriptions of “Vatican II-styled communities marked by inclusive welcoming, participatory liturgies, and democratic governance.” She noted that “some are within, others outside the institutional structures of the Roman Catholic Church.” Many of the Catholics that comprise these “resistance communities” no longer find dialogue with the hierarchy constructive. Accordingly, they are proactively creating, discovering, and employing “a range of nonviolent strategies to preserve or create vibrant communities that fit their vision of a just Church.”

Kautzer defines the “underground church” as the movement to reform the Church structurally. The term encompasses a range of Vatican II-styled parishes and reform groups, from Voice of the Faithful to Call to Action.

Generally, all such parishes and groups are working for four basic reforms:

1) A formal role for laity in decision-making.

2) Fiscal transparency and accountability (an important issue, says Kautzer, given that a recent study found 85% of the dioceses looked into had serious problems of embezzlement).

3) An inclusive priesthood - one welcoming of married clergy, women, and gays.

4) A commitment to renewing and expanding the direction of Vatican II.

Kautzer chose the term “underground church” in part because it parallels Elisie Boulding’s concept of the “underside of history,” which Kautzer explains is the idea that “in any society, even if the dominant culture is oppressive and hierarchical, there is always an underside where people try and practice cooperation and nonviolence.”

Although the scope of Kautzer’s four-year study was limited to the U.S., she notes that there are similar “underground church” movements underway and flourishing in other parts of the world. Perhaps the most well known of these is represented by the liturgical reforms being carried out by the Dutch Dominicans.


“Above-ground communities”

Kautzer organized the communities she studied according to the different forms of non-violent resistance they embody. Many Vatican II-styled parishes, for instance, along with the reform group Voice of the Faithful, comprise the “lightest form” of non-violent resistance. These “above-ground communities” often employ the “insider tactics” of “protest and persuasion.” They attempt to work “within the system” and, in the case of Voice of the Faithful, avoid “controversial” issues such as female ordination.


“Borderline communities”

“Borderline communities,” says Kautzer, are those engaged in “a little stronger form of non-violent resistance” than the “above-ground communities.” They sometimes engage in the “insider tactics” of protest and persuasion, but more often than not engage in the “outsider tactic” of non-cooperation. Some examples of borderline communities include:

1) Convents in which Catholic nuns perform their own liturgies (including Eucharist) and new types of rituals.

2) Eucharistic communities that are at least tolerated by the hierarchy and rely on “insider priests” (i.e., priests recognized by the Vatican) but engage in church reform work.

3) Vigiling Parishes that are resisting closure orders and conducting their own rituals (e.g., St. James the Great in Wellesley, MA, which is part of the Council of Vigiling Parishes).


The “underground church”

The “underground church” is defined as groups, parishes, or networks of parishes that operate outside of Vatican approval or control, and work for church reform. They tend to employ the “outsider tactics” of non-violent intervention and the creation of parallel institutions. Examples of the underground church include:

1) Catholic reform organizations such as Corpus, Women’s Ordination Conference, Roman Catholic Womenpriests, Catholics for a Free Choice, and Dignity, which, unlike the others, says Kautzer, “has no choice but to operate as an underground church because of the Church’s punitive policies towards homosexuals.” (In most dioceses, including the Archdiocese of St. Paul/Minneapolis, Dignity is banned from meeting on church property.)

2) Eucharistic communities that are not approved by the Vatican, rely primarily on lay persons or “outsider” priests (i.e., priests who have married, resigned, or been defrocked), and engage in church reform work. For example: Community of God’s Love in Lowell, MA.

3) Parishes that are not recognized by the Vatican, but retain the “Catholic” label and engage in church reform work. For example: Spiritus Christi in Rochester, NY, and St. Stanislaus Kostka in St. Louis, MO.

4) Communions and/or networks of parishes that are non-Roman yet identify and are recognized as Catholic, and provide governance structure and support services for “underground” parishes. For example: the Old Catholic Church (for an extensive interview with Rev. Robert Caruso of Cornerstone Old Catholic Church in St. Paul, MN, click here), the Reformed Catholic Church, the National Catholic Church, and the Ecumenical Catholic Communion. This last group has developed a constitution based on the Association of the Rights of Catholics in the Church. Among other things, this constitution expresses welcome to all “regardless of race, national origin, religious affiliation, gender, or sexual orientation,” and mandates that people within parishes vote on policy and elect their priests.


Disadvantages and Advantages

Kautzer acknowledges that the underground church communities are labeled “schismatic” by the Vatican. Others dismiss the movement as being like a modern-day Protestant Reformation. “It is in a way,” says Kautzer, “but the difference is that people aren’t creating new denominations. They’re saying, We are Catholic, but we’re just going to do it without Vatican approval.”

There are, of course, some potential pitfalls – including the ongoing struggle for funding and membership, and the potential for cult-like and/or unqualified leadership. However, it’s not as if qualified leadership is guaranteed by reliance on the Vatican, notes Kautzer. In addition, the Vatican itself encourages cult-like organizations, for example, Opus Dei. Many of these organizations, says Kautzer, are documented in Gordon Urquhart’s book, The Pope’s Armada: Unlocking the Secrets of Mysterious and Powerful New Sects in the Church.

Advantages of the underground church include not being restricted by Vatican pronouncements – many of which reflect a narrow and impoverished theology, especially around issues of gender and sexuality. As a result, the underground church, says Kautzer, “challenges dualistic categories that separate laity/clergy, men/women, celibate/married, the sacred and the profane, thereby embodying the notion of the priesthood of all believers and the sacred dimension of reality.”


Impediments to Reform

As to why so many Church hierarchs are resistant to the type of change heralded by the underground church, Kautzer suggests that one factor is that many of them, especially those within the Vatican, “tend to be isolated and surrounded primarily by like-minded colleagues selected precisely because of their conformity and subservience.”

Drawing on the theories of human consciousness development pioneered by Ken Wilbur, Kautzer notes that the current pope, like his predecessor, operates primarily from a “traditionalist philosophical framework” – one that is highly authoritarian and dismissive of alternative perspectives and views. Most Catholics, Kautzer contends, operate from a “post-modern or even integralist framework” or worldview. Within Wilbur’s model of human consciousness development, these are two stages beyond where the vast majority of Vatican officials are. “This gap in worldviews,” says Kautzer, “makes it difficult for people to communicate.”

Kautzer also draws on the insights of psychotherapist Mary Gail Frawley-O’Dea, author of Perversion of Power: Sexual Abuse in the Catholic Church, when she describes many Catholic hierarchs as “narcissistic,” a state that Frawley-O’Dea maintains is “reinforced by the highly deferential treatment of unchecked power.”

In light of all of this, Kautzer, paraphrasing Gandhi, insists that: “We must be the change we want to see in the Church.” “If ‘We are the Church’,” she says, “then we don’t have to sit back and wait for the hierarchs to make decisions.”


Status and prospects of reform

The hierarchs, however, are making decisions – ones that many Catholics find, at the very least, problematic, and, at most, intolerable. It’s too early to say how my Catholic community or others within the Archdiocese of St.Paul/Minneapolis will respond to the latest demands to conform. My sense is that the “insider tactics” that many have embraced for years are rapidly losing their appeal.

Perhaps the abandoning of such tactics is long overdue. After all, during her talk at the 2007 national Call to Action conference, Kautzer could give “no substantive examples” of successful insider strategies (i.e., of people working, protesting, and attempting to persuade authority figures within the system) bringing about reform. For substantive change to occur, she declared, outsider strategies must be employed.

“There’s a lot of exciting stuff going on in the underground church,” said Kautzer. But within reform groups focused on insider reform, great difficulties and obstacles – including financial – are being encountered. Voice of the Faithful, for instance, is experiencing a “funding crisis.” People seem to be giving up on insider reform, she said, and are “tired of having the iron thumb of the hierarchy on their back and saying that you can’t talk about this, or think that, or do this.”

“The prospects for reform are dim if we rely solely on insider tactics,” said Kautzer. This is especially true given that the new priests coming into the priesthood tend to be very conservative and authoritarian; that Vatican II priests, bishops, and cardinals are either “dying off or being forced out”; and that Pope Benedict XVI has stated publicly that he wants a smaller, purer Church, and that he wants reformers to leave unless they can support everything the hierarchy teaches. “[The pope] doesn’t care if you leave,” says Kautzer. “He’s happy to push you out the door.”

This isn’t true, however, of all cardinals and bishops, many of whom are not as isolated as the pope. They are acutely aware of what such an exodus would mean financially for the Church. Even some conservative Catholics are worried. Writing in the February 2008 issue of the Catholic World Report, Russell Shaw refers to David Carlin’s book, The Decline and Fall of the Catholic Church in America, and notes that: “Carlin concludes that the outcome of the crisis will probably be the de facto collapse of the Church in America and the retreat of Catholics into the status of a ‘minor and relatively insignificant sect.’ Traditionalists will have won the internal Catholic power struggle, mainly because the progressives will have drifted away. But in the end, the small band of traditionalists will find themselves isolated in ‘a new Catholic quasi-ghetto,’ with about as much influence on the culture as the Amish and Hasidic Jews have now.”


Movement of the Spirit

I’m not interested in living in any type of ghetto, yet that’s what Pope Benedict XVI seems intent on creating for Catholics. I’m drawn to a Church open to the Spirit, a Church that recognizes and celebrates itself as the Risen Body of Christ, alive and afoot in the world; a Church unafraid of journeying and engagement, of growth and change. My sense is that the birthing and rising of the “underground church,” as described and documented by Kathleen Kautzer, is the movement of the Spirit, seeking and finding welcoming and fertile soil beyond the fortress-like walls of the Vatican’s current state of rigidity and its fearful retreat into conformity.

I cannot help but think that Kautzer’s study validates Rosemary Radford Ruether’s observation that the more the hierarchy stagnates and retreats, the more numerous and freewheeling the creative initiatives that spring up on the ground.

I do not believe that such initiatives herald the destruction of the Church or it’s collapse into insignificance. Rather, I believe that the initiatives that comprise the “underground church” are, in fact, the hope of the Church, and herald its transformation into the fullness of new life.


See also the previous Wild Reed posts:
What It Means to Be Catholic
Beyond Papalism
Uta Ranke-Heinemann on the Future of the Catholic Church
Crisis? What Crisis?
An Australian Bishop’s “Radical” Call for Reform
“Uncle Vince” is at it Again!
It’s Time We Evolved Beyond Theological Imperialism
The Two-Sided Catholic Crisis
Chris McGillion Responds to the “Exacerbating” Actions of Cardinal Pell
Authentic Catholicism: The Antidote to Clericalism
A Catholic’s Prayer for His Fellow Pilgrim, Benedict XVI
Paul Collins and Marilyn Hatton
Listen Up, Papa!
In the Garden of Spirituality: Ron Rolheiser
The Old Catholic Church: Catholicism Beyond Rome

Darren Hayes, Coming Out . . . Oh, and Time Travel

You may recall that I recently shared the insights of British actor Ian McKellen on the positive effects of “coming out.” Those insights were originally published in the November-December issue of The Gay and Lesbian Review – a wonderful bi-monthly journal of history, culture, and politics, and one to which, if you don’t already subscribe, I strongly encourage you to do so.

In the latest issue, there’s a great interview with singer/songwriter Darren Hayes (pictured above). And, guess what? He too talks about the positive impact that living openly as a gay man has made in his life.

The interview is conducted by Jason Roush (author of After Hours and Breezeway ), who notes that Hayes is “probably best known as the singing half of the popular Australian boy band Savage Garden, which scored a string of radio hits around the globe in the late 1990s.”

Writes Roush: “Born in a working-class suburb of Brisbane in 1972, Hayes faced an upbringing with few creative outlets . . . though 80’s pop had saved him in many ways. While he was married to a woman when Savage Garden first achieved international stardom, he publicly came out as gay in 2006 when he married graphic designer Richard Cullen [pictured with Hayes at right]. He and his husband stood at the front of the line to be legally partnered in the United Kingdom, second in fame only to Elton John and David Furnish.”

Following are excerpts from Jason Roush’s interview with Darren Hayes.

_____________________

Jason Roush: How did coming out when you married your partner Richard affect your life, your career, and your music?

Darren Hayes: The main difference has been the way I feel about myself. My self-esteem skyrocketed because I felt so accepted and loved. Getting married was the decision I made, rather than to come out. To me, I met the man I want to grow old with, and I wanted my audience to know that I was proud of that, not ashamed.



Jason Roush: In the press release for your latest CD [This Delicate Thing We’ve Made], you mention that until you met your husband, “the 80’s were the last time I was really happy.” Do you feel that being gay and less open about it during your Savage Garden years contributed to that unhappiness?

Darren Hayes: Well, no. I wasn’t an open book, but I never lied about it. In fact, no one ever asked me, “Are you gay?” My sadness had little to do with my job and more to do with my own internalized homophobia. I hated who I was, and mostly I was ashamed – ashamed of my childhood, ashamed of being gay. It made me hate myself, and therefore my world was a sad place, regardless of number one hits.

Jason Roush: This Delicate Thing We’ve Made is a soul-baring record in so many ways. What compelled you to explore with such candor the difficult childhood memories to which you’ve returned in a number of these songs, especially the epic journey of “How to Build a Time Machine” and “Casey”?

Darren Hayes: Honestly, it was a healing process for me. I made peace with my past in song. I loved that I could take something so tragic and use it for something beautiful and transformative. I also thought it would be inspiring to tell the story of a family and a person who survived the experience instead of being overwhelmed by it.

_________________________

It’s strange, but during the past couple of days while I’ve been laid low by a cold, I’ve been thinking back to my own adolescence and young adulthood in Australia. I’ve wondered what it would be like to go back to a certain point, say 1984 and my first year of college, and to start over with what I know now. Of course, I don’t think time travel works that way! We have the insights today only because of the choices we made and the various journeys undertaken back then.

Still, it’s an intriguing thought. For instance, if I could start over in, say, 1984, I would not have tried to “fit-in” so much with “the crowd,” but instead would have explored my life as a young gay man. And I would had come out to people who I believe, in retrospect, would have been supportive of such explorations. I did none of these things. And yet I wouldn’t go so far as to say I “hated” myself, though there definitely came a time when I hated the dishonest and cowardly life I was living.



I recently came across the above faded snapshot of the first guy I ever found myself physically attracted to. When we first became friends in college in Armidale I was 18 and he was 21. It’s funny, but he seemed so much older than me, and, in many ways, he was. I wouldn’t say he was the first guy I ever feel in love with. (No, that wouldn’t happen until 1987 and with someone very different.) Yet, without doubt, our friendship and, moreover, my attraction to him physically, awakened within me the realization that, yes, I really was gay. I guess I have him to thank for helping me grow in self-awareness, for nudging me along on my coming out journey.

He himself was as straight as they come – a robust and athletic young man who, as far as I know, is still in good shape and works as a professional surf lifesaver in Australia. Good for him! I haven’t seen him since 1989, but I still sometimes think of him and wish him well.
Anyway, enough of such reveries. Following is the music video for Darren Hayes’ song “Casey,” from his latest album, This Delicate Thing We’ve Made. The lyrics of this song remind me somewhat of the feelings I had for my friend all those years ago.

Will we write this movie?
Make it end like we want it to?
I was a mix-up kid
and you were my sanity.
I want to be someone.
I want to be beside you.
If you take me away all the pain will change
into a memory of when we were amazing.

Note: “Casey” will be available on iTunes from March 3, 2008.

Recommended Off-site Link:
• DarrenHayes.com

See also the related Wild Reed posts:
• One of These Boys is Not Like the Others
• A Lesson from Play School
• Engelbert Humperdinck: Not That Easy to Forget
• Trusting God’s Generous Invitation
• “Seven Wonders”: My Theme Song for 1987

Life-Giving Words of Liberation and Truth

The following commentary was published in last Tuesday’s St. Paul Pioneer Press.

As you’ll see, it’s the simple yet incredibly powerful testimony of Mary Jean Smith, the mother of a lesbian.

It’s the type of testimony that gives me hope. Why? Because in its bold and unapologetic expression of steadfast love, wisdom, and openness to the presence of God in all aspects of human life, it has the potential to change hearts and minds.

And without doubt, such testimonies are changing both the world and the Christian Church – primarily by helping liberate both from centuries of ignorance and, in the case of the Church, spiritual blindness* and hubris. For such liberation I give thanks and praise to God.

In short, Mary Jean Smith’s words are life-giving. They are words of liberation and truth. And I am honored to share them via The Wild Reed.

________________________________________

It’s Not a Mortal Sin to Work for Justice
By Mary Jean Smith
St. Paul Pioneer Press
January 29, 2008

My husband and I have been married 49 years. We are the parents of five grown daughters, one of whom is a lesbian. I speak with passion concerning our experience, which is marked by intense sadness because of the alienation my daughter and others like her continue to suffer, especially at the hands of the [Roman] Catholic Church.

Our daughter is in a long-term loving relationship. She and her partner have pledged their fidelity to one another in a commitment ceremony. They are the parents of a son, a fine young man of heterosexual “inclination” who is a full-time college student. Our daughter is a college graduate employed as a counselor; her partner is a registered nurse. Together, they also care for three mentally challenged adults in their home.

From the time our daughter was about 15 until she was a young adult, she was suicidal. She was struggling with the painful emotions of being “different,” thinking she was mentally ill, and terrified. She was hospitalized on at least three occasions, during which time we, too, were very much afraid. Adolescents often fear the consequences of “coming out” to family and friends because of the built-in ridicule, hatred and discrimination.

Our daughter says that even when she was 7 or 8 years old, she had the feelings of being different from her sisters and other girls her age. Sexual orientation is not chosen. It is primarily determined by genetics and hormones. When God created humankind in God’s own image and likeness, God saw that it was good.

It was not until our daughter could come to terms with who she was and that God created her this way that she was able to accept herself.

We find it strange that any reference to persons of homosexual orientation is always reduced to sexual acts. They are sexual beings like the rest of us, but as with their heterosexual counterparts, spend very little time in actual genital activity. Have you asked a married couple lately how often they engage in sexual intercourse? Gay and lesbian people are productive members of society. They work at meaningful vocations eight or more hours a day, spend time eating and sleeping, shopping, doing chores, watching TV, reading, studying and doing a myriad of other activities. And yes, they raise children - sometimes adopted, hard-to-place children with special needs. Once in awhile, they make love.

Regardless of what the “experts” say, there are no “former” homosexuals. Many gay and lesbian persons marry in an attempt to live as society expects; however, many of these marriages end in disaster. They cannot live a lie. Our lesbian daughter cannot change her sexual orientation any more than our four heterosexual daughters can change theirs.

Because of and through our daughter, we have met many other gay and lesbian people, wonderful human beings. We all know many gay and lesbian people, although we may not realize it. They are our doctors, nurses, teachers, chefs, artists, musicians and, yes, even nuns and priests. The gay priests we have been privileged to meet are among some of the holiest and most talented. (Please do not confuse homosexuality with pedophilia. They are not the same. And most pedophiles are heterosexual.)

Our daughter and other same-sex couples we know mirror our own ideal of marital love. She and her partner are loving parents and are supportive to other members of their families. We feel blessed to have her as our daughter. Although it was a difficult and painful time while she was finding out who she was, and there were times when we asked God to “take this cup away,” we now thank God for sending her to us. Her life is truly a gift, and we will continue to support her and the gay community as well as try to change society's attitude toward them.

I don’t recall Jesus saying anything about homosexuality, although it’s been with us since antiquity. He said nothing about sex, either, but he did have a lot to say about love and removing the plank from one’s own eye before talking about the speck in another’s.

As part of my own education, I did extensive research on homosexuality. I suggest those who have a problem with the issue do the same in an effort to further understand and rid the mind of flawed ideas as well as hurtful, vindictive judgments. The archbishop and others are wrong on this issue. I am not guilty of mortal sin. It is not a sin to love my daughter and work for justice on her behalf.

Mary Jean Smith lives in Chetek, Wisconsin.

______________________________

* Here’s how “modern-day mystic,” Chuck Lofy, explains “spiritual blindness” within the Roman Catholic Church:

[The problem with the Roman Catholic Church is that] power is in the hands of celibates. As a result, human experience of God within the full range of human sexuality has not been recognized or valued. What’s valued is a system of logic. So for the pope it is logical that when you think of the penis and the vagina, the point of sexuality is to procreate within the framework of heterosexual marriage. It’s a logical, intellectually-based paradigm. But it doesn’t align with human experience in the real world.

The place where the church impinges itself on the conscience of the Catholic is almost invariably in the area of sexuality – whether that’s masturbation, divorce, birth control, homosexuality, premarital sex, or married priests. These realities don’t fit into the limited logical paradigm of someone like the current pope. Yet at the same time there are all kinds of inconsistencies within this particular paradigm; for example, allowing sex when one or both partners are past the age of procreation. Or the fact that priests in the Greek Orthodox Church, which is aligned with Rome, can and do, in fact, marry. Gary Wills in his book Papal Sin, accurately identifies such inconsistencies as examples of “intellectual dishonesty.”

The institutional church is a power structure that in some areas of life in intellectually dishonest or spiritually blind – something that Jesus consistently warned against. For me, one of the most important things Jesus said was when he said to the religious leaders of his time, “If you knew you were blind, you would have no sin. It’s because you say, ‘We see’, that your sin remains”.

Image: “Full Bloom” by Linda Moskalyk.

See also the previous Wild Reed posts:
Voices of Parental Authority and Love
The Bishop’s “Guidelines”: A Parent’s Response
Vermont Mother Tells It Like It Is
Grandma Knows Best
Catholic Rainbow (Australian) Parents
The Triumph of Love – An Easter Reflection
300+ People Vigil at the Cathedral in Solidarity with LGBT Catholics
Interesting Times Ahead
An Open Letter to Archbishop Nienstedt
Archbishop Nienstedt’s “Learning Curve”: A Suggested Trajectory
The Many Manifestations of God’s Loving Embrace
The Non-Negotiables of Human Sex
Joan Timmerman on the “Wisdom of the Body”

“Here I Am!” - The Lenten Response

Today is Ash Wednesday, and the start of the season of Lent.*

To mark this important day, I’d like to share two reflections. The first is an Ash Wednesday reflection by Maria Hill, CSJ. It’s from Springtime of the Soul, a Lenten guide published by the Congregation of St. Joseph.

As the starting point for her reflection, Hill uses two verses from the Book of Joel:

It is the Lord who speaks, “Come back to me with all your heart. . . . Come back to the Lord your God, for [I am] all tenderness and compassion, slow to anger, rich in graciousness.” - Joel 2:12-13

What a personal invitation to intimacy! God speaks to each of us individually on this Ash Wednesday and asks for our whole heart, not just part of it, not just all of it sometimes, but all the time.

We know that the entire person of Jesus is totally given to us in the sign of unconditional love that is the cross. The life of Jesus manifests his compassion to all who come to him in need. He always forgave those who sincerely expressed sorrow for their wayward ways. God desires an intimate relationship with us, that together we might create the oneness that would satisfy every human heart and bring unity to a world in need of peace and healing.

If our response is indifference, he waits. If our response is weakness in the face of temptation and we succumb, he forgives. If our response is, “Don’t jar me out of my comfort zone!”, he continues to invite, so great is his love.

Maria Hill’s beautiful words remind me of the lyrics to the Emmylou Harris song, “Here I Am” (from her 2003 album, Stumble Into Grace). I like the idea of God’s voice sounding like Emmylou Harris’! And the fact that it’s left up to the listener to decide if the song’s simple chorus of, “Here I am,” is part of her call or the response she’s longing to hear.

It’s a beautiful song, and a very appropriate source of reflection for this season of Lent, this time of responding to God’s call; of “starting over;” and, in the words of Carol Crepeau, CSJ, of “trying for a full graced life again.”

I am standing by the river,
I will be standing here forever.
Tho you’re on the other side,
My face you still can see,
Why won’t you look at me?
Here I am.

I am searching thru the canyons,
It is your name that I am calling.
Tho you’re so far away,
I know you hear my plea,
Why won't you answer me?
Here I am.

I am in the blood of your heart,
The breath of your lung,
Why do you run for cover?
You are from the dirt of the earth,
And the kiss of my mouth.
You have always been my lover.
Here I am.

I am the promise never broken,
And my arms are ever open.
In this harbor calm and still,
I will wait until,
Until you come to me.
Here I am.

* The traditions of Lent come from the season’s origins as a time when the church prepared candidates, or “catechumens,” for their baptism into the Body of Christ. It eventually became a season of preparation not only for catechumens but also for the whole congregation. Examination of conscience, study, prayer, and works of love are disciplines historically associated with Lent. Conversion - literally the “turning around” or reorientation of our lives towards God - is the theme of Lent. Both as individuals and as a community, we look inward and reflect on our readiness to follow Jesus in his journey towards the cross. The forty days of Lent correspond to the forty-day temptation of Jesus in the wilderness and the forty-year journey of Israel from slavery to a new community.


See also the previous Wild Reed posts:
• The Lenten Journey
• The Onward Call

The Problem with Juno

. . . is, well, Juno.

Earlier this evening I came across a review of the film Juno. It’s from the World Socialist Web Site – which, incidentally, has a fantastic archive of film reviews – and is written by the very knowledgeable and articulate Hiram Lee. I appreciate and resonate with Lee’s perspective on the film, one that I saw about a month ago.

I admit that I found Juno likable enough, but also somewhat disposable. I mean, nothing from it really stayed with me. And like Lee, I found the film’s biggest problem to be the character of Juno herself, and for the reasons that Lee cites.

I notice that Juno’s been nominated for “Best Picture” at this year’s Academy Awards. If it wins this award it will be a travesty. Indeed, I’m not convinced that it deserves any of the awards its been nominated for!

Oh, and if you want a travesty that’s already transpired, look no further than Sean Penn’s film Into the Wild not being nominated for “Best Picture” or Best of-much-of-anything for that matter (except “Best Supporting Actor”). What’s the Academy thinking?!

Anyway, here are some excerpts from Hiram Lee’s review of Juno. (NOTE: I’ve added the links within this review.) Feel free to share your own thoughts by leaving a comment at the end of this post.

______________________________

Excerpts from
Juno: An “Apolitical” Film about Teen Pregnancy
By Hiram Lee
World Socialist Web Site
February 4, 2008

Juno, the new film from director Jason Reitman, has been lavished with praise and awards. Two weeks ago, it received Academy Award nominations in several categories: best picture, best director, best actress and best original screenplay. And like most of the movies nominated for best picture this year, it is not very good.

Juno is a comedy about teen pregnancy and adoption, but not a social satire, properly speaking. It is no Miracle at Morgan’s Creek (Preston Sturges, 1944). While there are countless jokes in the film, none of them shed much light on the subject matter. Instead, Reitman and screenwriter Diablo Cody inject crack after crack into their story almost at random. The humor is largely imposed on the events, not drawn from exploring the real-life contradictions and relations that such events might generate. It would have been second nature to a Sturges or a Jacques Tati to uncover the absurd or ridiculous possibilities of the situation itself.

“I actually see the movie as completely apolitical,” Reitman told CanMag.com in a recent interview. This stance, in itself a political position, also says a great deal about the film. One gets the impression the director has made a point of not stepping on anyone’s toes. He has, consequently, produced a toothless and evasive work that doesn’t challenge anyone or anything.

. . . Perhaps the film’s greatest flaw is the character of Juno herself; she may in fact be the film’s least genuine element. She is quirky, like so many characters we’ve seen in this sort of comedy. We know this because she frequently has an unlit pipe stuck in her mouth, listens to The Stooges and has a telephone shaped and painted like a hamburger. Juno refuses to give a straight answer to any question put to her. Instead, every line out of her mouth is a joke, a quip or, worse, a zinger. “Being pregnant makes me pee like Seabiscuit,” she says at one point. In the same scene she points out the difference between Presidents Franklin and Theodore Roosevelt: “Franklin was the hot one with polio.” This all becomes tedious rather quickly.

Ultimately, Juno is not a real living and breathing human being so much as she is a contrivance, a mouthpiece for screenwriter Diablo Cody’s one-liners. It’s disconcerting, but not in an interesting way, to hear the screenwriter’s adult (or quasi-adult) humor and vocabulary emerge from 16-year-old Juno. The teenager can be heard to say in one scene, “I’m telling you I’m pregnant and you’re shockingly cavalier.” The words simply do not fit in her mouth.

To read Hiram Lee’s review in its entirety, click here.


See also the previous Wild Reed posts:
Reflections on the Overlooked Children of Men
Pan’s Labyrinth: Critiquing the Cult of Unquestioning Obedience
Reflections on Babel and the “Borders Within”
The New Superman: Not Necessarily Gay, But Definitely Queer
What the Vatican Can Learn from the X-Men
Casanova-Inspired Reflections on Papal Power - at 30,000 Ft.
Alexander’s Great Love
Dew[y]-Kissed

Celebrating Dusty

London Diva, Memphis Belle:
Dusty Springfield, circa 1968.

I haven’t bought any new music in quite some time, but Just A Little Lovin’, the latest album from Shelby Lynne, might well be my next purchase.

Not that the songs on this album are actually “new.” All but one were recorded by the late, great British vocalist, Dusty Springfield (1939-1999), with four of them coming from the singer’s revered Dusty in Memphis set of 1968. Lynne’s latest release is thus a tribute album of sorts. Or, better still, an “inspired by Dusty” album.

Regular visitors to The Wild Reed would know that Dusty Springfield is one of my favorite singers (she even features in a homily I once delivered!). Needless to say, I’m very curious about Shelby Lynne’s reinterpretation of some of Dusty’s greatest songs, especially after reading Thom Jurek’s glowing review of Just A Little Lovin’. (See excerpts below.)

According to Jurek, Lynne’s album is “perhaps the finest tribute in song Springfield has ever received . . . [and in a manner] not only fitting, but celebratory”

A Review of Shelby Lynne’s album,
Just A Little Lovin’

By Thom Jurek
Billboard
February 2008

Shelby Lynne’s first record in two-and-a-half years [pays] homage to the late Dusty Springfield. Nine of its ten cuts are inextricably linked with the legendary British vocalist.

Perhaps the first thing to make the listener aware of is that Lynne makes no attempt to sound like her subject. She is a singer with her own phrasing, manner of articulation, and sense of rhythm. Therefore, her choice of material is one that best represents [Dusty’s] diversity. Four cuts that appear here come from the Dusty in Memphis period, as well as the title track to The Look of Love and some of her mid-’60s hits from Great Britain that were not originally released in America, like the single version of the Rascals’ “How Can I Be Sure.” But all of these tracks, with the exception of the self-penned “Pretend,” were graced by the voice of Springfield.

This was a daunting task. And one Lynne took seriously. Recorded in the Capitol Records Studio with Frank Sinatra’s legendary microphone as well as the equally legendary producer Phil Ramone, Lynne knew what to leave out as well as what to include. While most singers will automatically shoot for “Son of a Preacher Man,” Lynne steers clear, knowing it’s one of those tunes that should never be covered again.

She does, however, tackle “Just a Little Lovin’,” “Breakfast in Bed,” “Willie and Laura Mae Jones,” and “I Don't Want to Hear It Anymore,” from the Dusty in Memphis set. Lynne’s versions of these songs are closer, steamier perhaps, and are deeply intimate versions. They’re understated while keeping their sensual feel. Ramone understood the strength in Lynne’s phrasing from the word go. The band is small, with guitarist Dean Parks, Rob Mathes on keyboards, drummer Gregg Field, and bassist Kevin Axt (who plays upright as well as electric). Curt Bisquera guests on drums on two tracks. The “Southern” in Lynne’s delivery doesn’t carry these songs into the stratosphere, but it does take them deep into the belly of the listener.

The taut, easy sensuality in her singing adds a different kind of depth and dimension to these tunes. When Lynne gets to the in-the-pocket feel of “Breakfast in Bed,” written by Donnie Fritts and the late, great Eddie Hinton, she comes toward the tune’s subject not so much with innocent empathy and tenderness as with a much rawer acknowledgment of what’s needed, and without the trace of the vulnerable in Springfield’s song. It’s simply awesome.

“Willie and Laura Mae Jones,” by Tony Joe White has got that rough, swampy, acoustic earthiness in it, and Lynne adds her guitar to the sparse, slow growl in Ramone’s and engineer Al Schmitt’s mix. This tune about interracial love was written by White and recorded by Springfield when the subject was taboo in America. Springfield made a song like this palatable, with that slight British accent and her incredible phrasing and delivery: if she was singing it, it had to be innocent, right? Lynne gets at White’s lyric with all the blues and rumbling toughness without having to push anything into the red. The way the song fades before the tale ends is a wonderful touch.

Randy Newman’s “I Don’t Want to Hear It Anymore” carries inside it the trace of both the South and Lynne’s adopted West Coast home. She can tell this ambivalent, heartbreaking tale as if it were her own, all the while uncannily recalling Springfield’s empathy and grace.

Other signature pieces of Springfield’s, such as “I Only Want to Be with You,” are treated very differently. The poppy, bubbly Springfield version (she was in her 20s when she cut it) is slower, and has the feeling of new love from a protagonist who never expected it. There’s genuine surprise in it, as well as surrender, as if this conversation is really one the singer is having in the mirror. The piano and Parks’ lush, acoustic guitar lines with their jazz feel entwine perfectly. It’s sparse and elegant, and Lynne’s got just the hint of vulnerability in the slightly smoky grain of her voice.

“The Look of Love” is executed wonderfully here. It’s a daunting song for anyone, and Springfield’s version has remained unchallenged for more than 40 years. Lynne doesn’t challenge it at all. She doesn’t overdo it, but instead offers tribute by trying to read this song in a very different way. In her own way, which she acknowledges fully in the reading, she has been deeply influenced by Springfield. She lets the instruments lead along her, holding herself back and letting the emotion come through the words as they occur to her. It’s not as sultry as Springfield’s, but feels very honest, truthful. There’s a boldness in it that has more to do with an embrace of being overwhelmed by anticipation.

The other Bacharach/David cut here, “Anyone Who Had a Heart,” has to be heard to appreciate the uniqueness of Lynne’s interpretation. It’s not upside down, but more a tracing of Springfield’s version, like a mirror image, and the brushed snares, twinned melody lines between guitar and piano, and that solidly paced bassline turn this waltz into a haunted love song of the highest order.

“How Can I Be Sure” is simply startling: Lynne sings it accompanied only by Parks on acoustic guitar. No swirling strings, no squeeze box, no popping snares. It’s radical, but it’s a fitting closer to this fine set

Lynne’s own entry here is a very classy if desperate pop song; it’s treated especially sparsely. Lynne’s channeling Springfield on it, because there is that pronounced vulnerability in this song that the late singer put into everything she did, but it’s radical coming from Lynne, who lays it on the line – usually with a swagger.

Just a Little Lovin’ is perhaps the finest tribute in song Springfield has ever received, at least on tape. That such a fine singer and songwriter has interpreted her in such an empathic, respectful, canny, and sophisticated manner is not only fitting, but celebratory.


To read Tom Jurek’s review of Shelby Lynne’s Just A Little Lovin’ in its entirety, click here.

_________________________

Following are two clips courtesy of YouTube. The first is of Dusty Springfield performing her first hit song, 1963’s “I Only Want To Be With You.” The second is an audio clip of Shelby Lynne's version of this same song. Enjoy!







For more of Dusty at The Wild Reed, visit:
• Remembering a Great Soul Singer
• Classic Dusty
• Yeah, Baby, Yeah!
• Soul Deep

Recommended Off-site Links:
Shelby Lynne’s Dusty Trail - Rob Hoerburger, New York Times Magazine, January 13, 2008.
Dusty Rides Again - Rob Hoerburger, New York Times Magazine, October 29, 1995.
Woman of Repute (my website dedicated to Dusty Springfield).
The Making of Dusty in Memphis - Michael Bayly, Woman of Repute.
The Invention of Dusty Springfield - Adam Sweeting, The Independent, March 26, 2006.
In Private - Peter Doggett, Record Collector, May 1999.

Out and About - January 2008

To be honest, I haven’t been “out and about” that much this past month - primarily because of the sub-zero temperatures and the often icy conditions.

Hey, I am an Australian, remember. And even though I’ve lived in Minnesota for fourteen years, I've never really acclimatized to the winters here. I guess you can take the boy out of Australia, but not Australia out of the boy!

One event that did warm me, however, was the wonderful retreat I participated in on Saturday, January 5. It was the Sisters of St. Joseph of Carondelet, St Paul Province’s third annual Stirring the Fire - A Midwinter Day of Reflection, and it was open to sisters, consociates and consociate candidates of the CSJ order. (I’m one of the latter! To learn what that means, click here.)

This day of retreat and reflection, always placed at the beginning of the New Year, renews a custom of the first sisters. For a more fruitful beginning of the year, the sisters would review the previous year and prepare themselves through prayer and reflection for a renewal of love of God and neighbor.

The context of reflection for this year’s Stirring the Fire retreat was unifying love, “the sacred mystery that embraces us in Communion.” The day included meaningful ritual, inspiring speakers, quiet time for reflection, and small group sharing. At one point, we were all invited to write about the ways we would strive to embody unifying love in 2008.

This prayerful day of reflection was just what I needed as I prepared to face a new year - one that will inevitably bring a range of experiences, both rewarding and challenging.



Above: Sitting (at left) with my friends Michael Douglas and Mike Murphy at a social event for the leadership of the Catholic Pastoral Committee on Sexual Minorities (CPCSM), Catholic Rainbow Parents, and the editorial team of The Progressive Catholic Voice online journal - Saturday, January 26, 2008.



Above: Catholic Rainbow Parents Rich Kramp, Mary Lynn Murphy, Susan Kramp, Tom White, and Myrna Ohmann - January 26, 2008.



Above: Mary Beckfeld; Theresa O’Brien, CSJ; and Darlene White.



Above: Tom White; Brigid McDonald, CSJ; Tom Murr; and David McCaffrey.



Above: Standing from left: Darlene White, Mary Lynn Murphy, Mary Beckfeld, and Georgia Mueller. Sitting from left: Susan Kramp, Mike Murphy, Ron Ohmann, Rich Kramp, and Michael Douglas.



Above: Theresa O’Brien and CPCSM co-founder David McCaffrey - January 26, 2008.



Above: On the evening of Tuesday, January 29, thirty-five people braved sub-zero temperatures to attend the CPCSM-sponsored program, “The Myth of ‘Conversion Therapy’ and the Pseudo-Science of NARTH,” at the House of the Beloved Disciple in Minneapolis.

The towering puppet in the background is “the Brown Jesus,” which the members of Spirit of the Lakes United Church of Christ carry with them when they participate in the annual Gay Pride Parade in June. The Brown Jesus is part of the community’s Anti-Racism Initiative, and certainly sends a powerful and beautiful message of welcome, inclusion, and celebration of diversity.



Above: One of the keynote speakers at CPCSM's program, “The Myth of ‘Conversion Therapy’ and the Pseudo-Science of NARTH,” was Jeffry G. Ford, MA, 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 the National Association for Research and Treatment of Homosexuality (NARTH).

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.

To be sure, Jeff 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. Because of this personal and professional experience, he is now able 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 Psycohtherapy (Haworth Press, Volume 5, No. 3/4, 2001). It was simultaneously published in the book, Sexual Conversion Therapy.




Above: The second featured speaker at CPCSM’s January 29 “The Myth of ‘Conversion Therapy’ and the Pseudo-Science of NARTH” program was John C. Gonsiorek, PhD, 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.

A consulting editor for Professional Psychology: Research & Practice, John is also the author of a number of publications, including: 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.

NOTE: In a future Wild Reed post I’ll share some of the highlights of both Jeff Ford’s and John Gonsiorek’s presentations at the House of the Beloved Disciple on January 29.

(A special thanks to CPCSM co-founder and vice-president, David McCaffrey, for compiling much of the above biographical information on both Jeff and John.)



Above: Some of the attendees at the CPCSM program, “The Myth of ‘Conversion Therapy’ and the Pseudo-Science of NARTH” - January 29, 2008.


See also the previous Wild Reed posts:
Back in the USA
It Sure Was Cold!
An Energizing and Spirited Weekend
Out and About - April 2007
Out and About - May 2007
Out and About - June 2007
Out and About - July 2007
Out and About - August 2007
Out and About - September 2007
Out and About - October 2007
Out and About - November 2007
Out and About - December 2007