Sr. Maureen Fiedler to U.S. Catholic Bishops: Read Handwriting on Wall about Gay Rights

After the Maryland legislature passes a bill enacting civil marriage for same-sex couples, Sr. Maureen Fiedler encourages the U.S. Catholic bishops to read the handwriting on the wall: 

The bishops might profitably re-examine old positions and -- at the very least -- stay out of the potential fray in Maryland in the fall. Same-sex marriage is defined these days as a civil rights issue, and there will come a time when the bishops will not want to be cited in history as against civil rights for gay and lesbian people. (The Vatican was defending slavery as late as 1866 -- not something to be proud of.) 

Moreover, their position further alienates young people, not something the church needs these days. 

Many Catholics might say, "Hey! Church teaching is not up for grabs. It cannot change with the wind." 

True, but it can change. It's well to remember that Catholic teaching has changed for good reasons over the centuries on a number of serious issues: usury, religious freedom, scriptural interpretation, even slavery. (For documentation, see my first book, Rome Has Spoken.) 

Maybe it won't take centuries this time.

As Fiedler's article notes, the Catholic governor of Maryland Martin O'Malley pushed for the marriage bill  and has stated that he will sign it into law.  As Michael O'Loughlin noted recently at America's "In All Things" blog, four of the five laws enacted by state legislatures to permit same-sex marriage have been signed into law by Catholic governors (O'Loughlin was writing before the Maryland bill passed).  When New Jersey governor Chris Christie recently refused to sign into a law a bill for same-sex marriage passed by his state legislature, Washington governor Chris Gregoire, a Catholic, wrote Christie a letter telling him that her faith journey has led her to the conclusion that discrimination is wrong, and that gay citizens deserve the same rights that heterosexual ones have.

In all likelihood, these expressions of the sensus fidelium will have little to no impact on the thinking of the U.S. Catholic bishops as they continue their nationwide "religious freedom" crusade against marriage equality.  These expressions of the sensus fidelium will not affect the thinking of the U.S. Catholic bishops because they are answering to Rome as they mount their crusade.  And under the last two papal regimes, the thinking of the faithful or of theologians on matters of faith or morals has not mattered at all.

What Rome thinks and says is what counts under Benedict, as under John Paul II.  Causa finita est . . . .