A Catholic Voice on Gay Marriage

On an early spring evening twenty-one years ago my fiance and I nervously approached the local parish priest in our town to inquire about entering the process to prepare for sacramental marriage in the Church. The priest asked us a number of initial questions, but I was surprised that his very first question was about our racial difference. "Are your two families supportive of this interracial marriage?" he asked. Since we had, at the outset, indicated my fiance was not Catholic, I suppose I'd imagined the first question would be about what religion he was, or about our mutual willingness to marry within the Church, to raise children Catholic, etc. My parents had themselves had what at the time was called a mixed-marriage since my father wasn't Catholic, and I knew a spouse had to be fully committed to a Catholic household.

But, the answer to the priest's question was that my fiance's family, who lived in Nigeria, were very supportive, all of my sisters were very supportive, but at the moment my mother was fearful of what the future would hold for us and especially for our children. We had already made the decision not to push my mother for her approval and not to force a big, church wedding on her and my very large, extended Sicilian family. We told the priest we wanted a small, private church ceremony and then we would celebrate with family and friends later. I had observed my mother's stubborn, persistent opposition to one of my older sister's wedding two years earlier, and I did not want to put my family through that. I knew in her heart she valued my happiness more than her personal comfort level, and I knew once she met my fiance, whom she had up to that point refused to meet, she would love him as much as I did. When the priest asked us if we felt waiting a longer period of time might help give my mother time to accept the marriage, I answered honestly that it likely would not, I looked carefully at the priest, who eyed my fiance suspiciously. His next question, was there a reason we needed to rush things along, felt like a slap across my face. Pregnant women don't go to a priest and ask him when they can begin pre-cana classes to prepare for marriage. They go to city hall and then later see about getting the marriage solemnized. No, we told him, no need to rush. We felt a fall wedding would be best though.

Still resistant, the priest next asked if either of us had been married before and my fiance answered that he had married while he was in college, in a civil wedding in another state. He said he had been lonely in America and married because he wanted to have some family here. There were no children from the two year marriage and he had not seen his former wife in more than three years. The priest said that would be a problem. He asked my fiance what his religion was and when he answered Muslim, the priest shook just a bit. He thought his ex-wife was Baptist or Methodist, but he'd never known her to go to church. The priest then told us we would have to get an annulment of that marriage as it met the test of a prior sacramental union. He said when we had the annulment finalized we could begin the process of preparing for marriage.

Over the next two weeks I pored over Catholic legal texts and spoke to a number of priests and canon lawyers. I described our circumstances. Not one other person agreed an annulment was necessary, and the canon lawyer told me the church does not recognize civil marriage, period, and he would question the need for an annulment of even a marriage between two Catholics if it was simply a civil ceremony. One priest did tell me that if another priest had said it was needed it might be difficult for him to marry us in the church. We went ahead with our plans anyway. Without ever saying it out loud we knew the priest had made his decision based on our different races. It was the late 1980s, but some people still harbored very strong feelings about interracial marriage, even Catholic priests. My mother didn't oppose interracial marriage, she just didn't want one in her immediate family, she thought.

We did marry, and my mother did eventually meet my husband, and as I had imagined, she loved him a great deal. More importantly, his heart was big enough to forgive her short-sightedness and to love her unconditionally from the outset. I couldn't understand my mother's or the priest's feelings or beliefs, but I respected them. I told each of them they were wrong. It was important to say that out loud - that it's wrong to believe some people can't marry because of how you perceive the way they look together or how you fear others will perceive that. And, of course, as God created all of mankind in His image and each human being is a unique miracle, all come into this world equally deserving of human dignity and of having their basic human rights honored.

I have never forgotten what I read and what I was told about the status of civil marriage in the eyes of the Church. The only marriage recognized by the Catholic Church is a sacramental union. The Church doesn't even recognize civil divorce of sacramental marriages. A Catholic who has been married before in the Church must have the marriage annuled or that person is considered to be still married. You can remarry in a civil ceremony, or in another church, but your second marriage is not valid in the Catholic church's eyes and you are considered to be living in sin. Harsh rules. And, as in any institution of man, not always evenly or fairly implemented - but there you have it. There is civil marriage and there is sacramental marriage - one an institution of state the other of God. I have never known the Catholic Church to take a political stand on matters of civil divorce or civil marriage, since those are not matters of faith, but of state, until recently.

In California, where I live, our courts ruled that the equal protections clause of the constitution enables the validity of civil unions between men and women AND between couples of the same gender. Civil marriages in California, as in the country, are matters of property rights and civil or common law. Based upon civil authority, people are 'married' in the eyes of the law - meaning their assets are commingled from this point forward.

As a basic respecter of the human rights of every person on this planet, just as my Savior Jesus Christ was a great respecter of the human rights of all, I didn't flinch at the idea of gay marriage. Just as my husband and I should not have been held up to a different standard than a couple with two white people or two black people or two of anything else in a sacramental union, neither should we be treated discriminatorily in a civil union. The constitutions of the United States and of the State of California afford equal rights to all. The courts spoke. Nothing in my way of being, nothing in my faith or approach to life or my own salvation changed with such an order. I felt fairly comfortable the Catholic Church would stay out of the legal, civil matter since it has always been a Church about human rights and hugman dignity. My church tells me all humans have dignity, and provides sanctuary to illegal immigrants facing persecution. The Missionaries of Charity, founded by Mother Teresa of Calcultta have AIDS hospices throughout the world and I have the great privilege of helping to support one in San Francisco when I lived there by shopping weekly with my work colleages for healthy foods for the guests of the sisters there. Sister Helen Prejean ministered to those on death row and to this day leads on the issue of of working to end the death penalty (legally) in the United States to end state sanctioned execution. When farm workers were being exploited famously in California in the 1960s, the Catholic Church was there to stand up for the rights of the farm workers. Priests and nuns all over the world have ministered to people oppressed and have stood up for the rights of the voiceless - sometimes suffering the loss of their own lives in hte process. The Catholic Church, two recent Popes, have been outspoken about adhering to the doctrine of just war, and about respecting the faiths of all mankind and not imposing faith by force.

Now things are different. Now, despite the fact the issue of who should have access to civil marriage has been decided as one of civil rights, human rights of all people, gay and straight, I hear that I should seek to overturn the Constitution, ignore it, in order to relegate to second class status the rights of gay people. My sister should not have the same rights I enjoy although we have lived virtually the same life, hers more one of service to her fellow man than most people you will meet in your entire life. My nephew, unlike his cousins, should not be entitled to go before civil authority if he chooses some day to take a legal partner in life and share his property, his insurance, his family. Sometimes at mass on Sundays my family and are are invited to join in a prayer service 'until election day' to ensure the Church's will is done in our civil elections on this issue and others. I go to my place of worship, to my sanctuary, and I feel like there is sanctuary no more. I wonder when I drop my offering in the basket if the money will go toward some effort to ensure my sister, my nephew, my cousin, so many of my dearest friends - all God's children, have fewer rights, less basic human dignity than I enjoy under civil law.

I cannot be silent. I cannot pretend this okay, consistent with doctrine. I cannot pretend it is anything other than tyranny. I am not God and I do not know and will never know so many of the mysteries of this life or of my very abiding faith. I stand with my children who were born with hearts open to all and I am so proud of them that they do not close their hearts to their fellow man because someone on this earth, someone who is not God and who does not speak for God tells them that much as Catholics were told to turn in Jews during the Holocaust, to accept that Jews should not own property, should live in ghettos - that they should join the chorus of saying Jesus says civil marriage should be only between a man and a woman. I understand the ambivalence toward dealing in a doctrinal way with the issue of sexuality. But it is wrong to decide to sacrifice the human rights and human dignity of people who aren't just like you just because the issue is thorny. And it isn;'t even an issue of sacrificing those rights - it is an act of overtly trampling on them and reversing them. This is a matter of state, not of faith. In California, within the US, the courts must adhere to the constitution. The constitution conveys equal rights to all. The Church has no business stepping in and saying some people must have lesser civil rights, lesser human rights. It is counter to all things Catholic, all teachings of Jesus Christ. Love God above all things and love one another as I have loved you. It is that simple.

Go search your Old testament and some up with all the abominations in Leviticus. Live by ALL of them if you think they all still apply to all people today. Myself, I don't eat pork. But I've never sought to ban pork from public markets. I don't serve it in my home. I don't get up and leave a party where pork is served. When I am in Church I know I am humble before God. I know that I have sinned and failed many times. I look around me and I know as devout as we all are, as sincere as we all are, we are all imperfect. So why should all of these imperfect people who are sincerely trying to live well, love well - why should they be told to deny the rights of others? How is that moral?

I am a Catholic. My faith in most ways defines me. I live as faithfully as I possibly can - and I know, in my heart and in my soul, that I am meant to respect just laws and just institutions, both religious and secular. I know I am meant to respect and love my fellow man. I follow the example of Christ as best a human can, and I know when I fail that the thing to do is rise back up and strive that much harder. I know that like the priests who walked alongside Cesar Chavez, the nuns who hid Jewish children in their convents, the families who take in refugees, that I should stand tall for the rights of ALL human beings. I should not spin an issue to fit comfortable doctrine and I know very well the difference between a sacramental and a civil union. I know the Catholic Church doesn't recognize civil marriage or civil divorce, but for many people these are valid institutions. I respect and honor and uphold the right of each adult to exercise his or her rights to enter into a civil union. I am not hiding behind Jesus or using Jesus to empower my own thought or words - I know right from wrong. I know Jesus didn't cast a stone. I know Jesus honored His parents. I know His message was one of faith and love. The way I carry that forward and honor it in my life is to remain humble and not elevate myself abvoe others. My rights are not greater than anyone else's. There is no conflict whatsoever for me in recognizing the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness in the civil society of all and in recognizing that the protections under our constitution must apply equally to all. If you share my religious beliefs of spiritual sensibilities, great, and if not, I am grateful to live in a place where I am free to live, to worship, to marry - and so is everyone else.