Technically speaking, I'm a Catholic.
I've been baptized, I've attended Catholic school from kindergarten to 12th grade, I can impart the story of Jesus Christ's birth, death and resurrection to any interested party and I've even got my own Confirmation name -- it's "John."
The problem is that I'm no longer a "practicing" Catholic and more of a spiritual nomad. I've got an interest in different types of Eastern and Western religions, but I haven't found one with which I'd permanently align myself. In other words, I'm still searching.
However, I would say I still have an affinity for the church. I try my best to stick up for Catholicism if it's on the defensive side of an argument, and I even side with anti-abortionists about 80 percent of the time. I suppose this allegiance is only natural when you've spent most of your life learning the beliefs, practices and traditions of one single faith. To be calm and nonchalant during a heated Catholic bashing is like doing nothing while someone beats up your friend.
But a recent Catholic Church-related controversy has me all mixed up.
According to an article in the Washington Post, the Catholic Archdiocese of Washington has issued a threat to the District of Columbia: Stop protecting the rights of gay men and lesbians, or else.
There's a bill that is headed for a D.C. council vote next month. According to the article, "Under this bill, religious organizations would not be required to perform or make space available for same-sex weddings, but they would have to obey city laws prohibiting discrimination against gay men and lesbians."
Apparently, this is not possible for the Archdiocese to accept. The article states, "Fearful that they could be forced ... to extend employee benefits to same-sex married couples, church officials said they would have no choice but to abandon their contracts with the city."
Abandoning their contracts would mean abandoning 68,000 people, including one-third of Washington's homeless population who utilize city-owned shelters managed by the church.
Are homosexuals so dangerous and threatening that to grant them equality results in a loss of social services for those that really need it?
I think I understand where the church is coming from. There is a necessity for the church to remain completely isolated from secular society, and this is just their way of maintaining that isolation. The institution condemns same-sex marriage and homosexuality itself, so to grant support for this bill that prohibits discrimination against homosexuals means the church is acting against its beliefs as a religious body.
So what's worse? Being a hypocrite or being the guy that takes away social services for 68,000 people that desperately need help?
It's a tough issue, no doubt, but I had higher expectations for the Catholic Church. We live in progressive times. Diversity is, for the most part, being embraced and opinions on what is "acceptable" are constantly being challenged. Is it too much to ask for the church to adapt to a changing social landscape?
My theology teacher from high school told us how important it was to attend mass regularly once at college. He said it was important to have a strong spiritual compass.
I agree with him. But if a religious institution cannot practice what it preaches -- charity, compassion and empathy without prejudice -- then why would I want to be aligned with it?
Jesus Christ made a point to associate himself with the sick, the poor, and the sinners and helped those who were in need of it. There was no criteria for his help, either. Jesus's love and ministry wasn't discriminatory.
By cutting off special services for those that need it, is the Catholic Church following Jesus' message? This desperate measure serves not only to isolate the Church from those that utilize their services but also from those that are still searching for their spiritual compass to live by -- like I am.
