"I Give My Peace to You... Except the Gays"

Whenever there was a homily said at my elementary parish that I thought was very moving and captivating, I always thought people should applaud him. This usually applied to my Father Cassidy's homilies about the importance of the 'heart and the mind'. He would speak about how too many people focus on the intellect, and forget how important the heart is. 'Remember to separate the intellect from the heart, my dear friends, and to follow the heart.'

Well, on Sunday night, I went to mass, and something extraordinary happened. After the homily that was given, the congregation gave a rousing applause. What was really extraordinary, however, was what the applause was for.

I already knew what was going to happen when the priest said at the beginning of mass that his homily was going to be about the recent legislation that was passed which lifted the ban on same sex marriages in California. After the readings went on, it was time for his homily. If you could even call it that.

As we all know, about a couple weeks ago the Supreme Court lifted the ban on same sex marriage that was put in place a while ago by our state government. The Court ruled that the ban itself was discriminatory, and was contradictory to the laws of protection that all people (including those of the LGBT community) are entitled to.

I would have been fine with everything this priest had to say, because I understand how different kinds of people (especially those of the religious persuasion) might feel about this subject, but after an introduction such as in the paragraph above, the first line he just HAD to say was: "This is wrong."

From then on, the 'homily' continued as a continual bashing of this legislation. It was the usual spiel: the Bible states that no man shall sleep in the same bed as a man, and the same goes for women; preventing this kind of thing from happening is a 'moral obligation'; and, perhaps most importantly to him, knowing that gay and lesbian couples are 'not qualified' to marry is basic 'common sense.' To make matters worse, his interjections were coupled with comments that were obviously focused on a slippery slope mentality. For example, he made the qualification that if something like same sex marriage were supposed to happen, "then what would happen next? A man will try to marry his daughter? Will we have to allow that as well?" Another argument made was that "having two mommies and two daddies actually hurts children. So we must fight against this for the children, so they do not grow up being confused about what marriage really is."


Wow. For all the talk about common sense, it was interesting to see how easily slippery slope comments were being used by this priest. While I had (and still have) much respect for this man, the words of other pastor that I mentioned before kept ringing in my head. For years I had come to this church, and especially through the words of Father Cassidy, homilies rang true. He would say, "the heart is longing to love, and to be loved; but we let the intellect get in our way, and we let it cloud our judgment. We let it cloud our faith. We let it stop us from loving with our whole being. So we must break the connection between the intellect and the mind."

Those kinds of homilies are why I came to mass, for those words would be with me as I left the church doors. But on this night, this was not the case. In a group of people that usually idly sit and listen to the words that we should be hearing, we now see how they awaken with fire because of such a topic. What they clapped for wasn't a homily. It was as if this priest was running for some political position; his SPEECH, not sermon, was indicative of that.

To end, he called for the congregation to help him rally against the legislation, and to bring support for the amendment that could be passed soon which adds to the Constitution the definition of marriage. One man, one woman. As if we needed a definition, as if we've all gotten stupid somehow and needed it in writing.

I understand that your stance as a priest makes you feel this way; but please, do not use your time as a community leader as a stark opportunity to shove some Catholic propaganda into each church-goer's ear. Most importantly, don't call it a homily. Homilies are not supposed to have an agenda, no matter how you put it.

I've grown up learning from my faith background. I've learned about life and love from people like Father Cassidy, who would teach through his words that we must love all with our whole hearts. I'm sure that he would probably have a similar stance against same sex marriage, but at the very least, he wouldn't be so gung-ho about it and he would likely let the congregation members have some room to make their own decisions on the matter.

But now I'm being taught - no, being TOLD - that some people can't have those ideals of love. Slippery slope comments like those regarding a man and his daughter or a woman and her son can be made, but if he really believes that those things will happen because of this legislation, then perhaps he doesn't have much faith in people like the church tries to teach us all to have. So instead of giving each person a chance to learn, it's better to just tell them blatantly. So THAT'S how you get applause for a homily.

Father and daughter, mother and son - going against THOSE kinds of relationships is common sense. But we live in a different world now. I have known people of the LGBT community that show love on a level that some married couples can't even get close to reaching. I come from a school with a PRIDE community that has been too often discriminated against.

I understand where this fight is coming from, but I can also understand the pain that gay couples might go through knowing that they cannot express their love in a way that so many can. And I can't help but question: do they really not deserve it?

Well, despite all that, the main argument is about 'separation of church and state.' This issue on same sex marriage has blurred the line between both, and now church and state are striking at each other. How was this homily different from many political speeches given on both sides of the issue? Maybe that's the first thing that should be looked at. This legislation was about 'civil unions', not religious marriages, was it not? Despite the bashes occurring between both sides, state to government or vice versa, are they not at least entitled to some sort of official recognized union?



I, personally, am trying to remember the words I learned in homilies of yesteryear - to separate the intellect from the mind and to follow my heart. I can only wonder if other people may go the same route, despite the destinations ending up different.