Deliver Us from Evil

It would be ungentlemanly of me to say how many years ago Marion Walsh was my student at Harvard Divinity School. But she has spent the years since building a career in public service, mostly as Massachusetts state senator. Now she has emerged as a lightning rod for a gathering storm that threatens to pit some priests against their people, other priests against their bishops, Catholic politicians against Catholic hierarchy, and Church against state—even before it spreads to the rest of the country.

Since November’s Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) decision, Massachusetts law currently provides that (1) civil marriage is a civil right guaranteed all the state’s citizens, and (2) there are no constitutional grounds for denying that right to same-sex couples.

On March 29, the legislature narrowly approved a draft constitutional amendment defining civil marriage as the union of “one man and one woman” while also creating civil unions for same-sex couples.

Catholics like Marion Walsh make up 67% of the legislature, in a state where half the population is Catholic. In rising to oppose the amendment, she admitted the SJC decision was “ahead of our mainstream culture and even ahead of my own sensibilities,” but then offered her own constitutional standard: “my level of comfort is not the appropriate monitor for the constitutional rights of others.” She then touched on three relevant topics, noting (1) marriage’s history includes many variations, (2) civil rights ought not to be determined by majority rule, (3) Massachusetts seemed to her like a “moral glacier,” slowly extending rights to all citizens.

Meanwhile, the Massachusetts Catholic Conference (MCC) took two steps to back up their bishops’ aggressive campaign to remove constitutional protection for same-sex marriage, by announcing a voter registration campaign to boost turnout against legislators like Marion Walsh, and by sending the state’s pastors a video arguing against both same-sex marriage and civil unions. One Canton, Massachusetts, pastor decided to play the video at Mass—and when a worshipper rose to protest, the pastor had him removed by the police. So things are starting to get ugly.

“CrossCurrents” readers know I have already questioned the bishops’ strategy and suggested an alternative: sharply distinguish “civil marriage” from “the sacrament of matrimony”—and then adopt the French custom whereby couples must be legally married by a civil magistrate before they come for their church wedding. Once American Catholic priests stop officiating civil marriages, the Church will be out of the civil marriage business, free to define Christian marriage as it chooses.

Instead, the bishops and their policy arm, the MCC, are waging battle over defining marriage outside as well as inside the church. This puts pressure on Catholic lawmakers not only to defend their faith but also to argue that public policy should conform to it.

The bishops, aware this raises church-state questions, have generally based their campaign on secular (rather than religious) arguments:

§ Marriage, “civilization’s most enduring institution,” should not change.

§ Same-sex marriage destroys the “essential” link between marriage and procreation.

§ Unelected judges “forced” elitist policy on the public.

§ Voters should decide the issue.

§ Same-sex marriage will hurt the poor, aged, and especially children.

§ Same-sex marriage will cause homosexuality to spread.

§ Same-sex marriage will “accelerate the death of marriage.”

This approach shrewdly supports the bishops’ “church-as-expert-on-humanity” strategy, appealing to reasons that anyone (Christian or not) can understand. But it also exposes three weaknesses of the bishops’ strategy.

First, it is weak on persuasiveness. The MCC video piles fact upon fact and argument on argument, but the connection between the facts, the arguments, and the conclusions is questionable at best. The result is a garbage pail full of facts serving fallacious logic to reach fraudulent conclusions. (Example: claiming same-sex marriages will “increase the number of unmarried parents”—when in fact thousand of children of gay couples will now grow up with married parents). Appealing to reason backfires, obviously, if your arguments are not reasonable.

Second, the approach is ethically weak. Boston Globe columnist Eileen McNamara has charged the bishops with “scare tactics.” Despite the basic Catholic principle that “the end does not justify the means,” McNamara may be right. Arguing that “unelected judges” imposed elitist policy “without consulting” the voters implies that democracy is threatened—but our whole constitutional system depends on independent judges protecting constitutional rights from the tyranny of the majority. Arguing that “affluent” gays seek civil marriage for “special benefits” both demonizes them and camouflages the fact that civil marriage in Massachusetts is a civil right. Arguing that children will be endangered and homosexuality itself will spread stigmatizes homosexuals as though they were our modern lepers, to be quarantined in the interest of public safety.

And beyond scare tactics is the threatening tone of the editorial in the Boston Pilot (Boston's diocesan newspaper) aimed at lawmakers like Marion Walsh:

“Legislators who decide to vote to harm the institution of marriage—whether by allowing same-sex marriage to stand unchallenged or by creating civil unions—will feel the backlash in November.”

The bishops’ strategy depends on presenting Catholicism as an “expert on humanity,” but scaring, demonizing, stigmatizing, and threatening others hardly displays “humane” means appropriate to that strategy.

Finally, the strategy is politically weak. The voter-registration drive designed to pressure lawmakers to fall in line or face a bolstered “Catholic vote,” even if plausible, it distracts from a reasoned discussion of the issue by triggering first amendment concerns. Eileen McNamara wants the Attorney General to revoke the Church’s tax-exempt status, claiming the bishops aim “to fashion themselves as ward bosses.”

To keep its tax-exempt status, the Church must keep rules that prohibit endorsing any candidate, announcing opposition to any candidate, holding candidate-support events on church grounds, using church funds to support a candidate or PAC, or asking others to support a candidate. Registration drives are allowed, as are publishing information about candidates without comment, and even equal-time candidates’ events. But one false move, indicating in any way any preference for or opposition to one candidate, could jeopardize a tax-exempt status worth millions. Assuming that is not the plan, the Pilot’s threat looks more and more like wishful thinking—hardly a strong political tactic.

In short, the brewing storm over same-sex marriage challenges our bishops to devise a strategy that unifies rather than divides, inspires rather than scares or threatens, and elevates the dialog rather than elevating one group at the expense of another. Perhaps they are over-zealous in appointing themselves as the “experts on humanity” most qualified to define marriage outside as well as inside the church. Perhaps it would be more prudent to remember that glaciers, while slow, are also unstoppable.

Send Your Comments and Questions to bfswain@juno.com

Dr. Swain’s opinions do not represent the views of this parish or any other official body.

Bernie Swain has devoted more than 30 years to adult spiritual formation in dioceses in the US, Canada, and France. Since 1991 he has maintained a private practice as trainer, teacher, and consultant to leaders in parishes and other religious organizations. He holds degrees in theology and political science from Holy Cross, Harvard, The University of Paris, and the University of Chicago. His writings include Liberating Leadership (Harper & Row, 1986) and more than 200 articles in periodicals such as The National Catholic Reporter, Commonweal, The Miami Herald, The Catholic Free Press, The Pilot, Harvard Theological Review, and Liturgy. A lifelong layperson, he lives in Boston with his wife and three children

CrossCurrents Is a weekly subscription service available for parish websites;

for Information, contact bfswain@juno.com or call 617-282-0183