Vatican boosts pressure on bishops to widen use of traditional Latin mass
The Vatican told Catholic bishops around the world on Friday they had to obey a papal order allowing priests to say the old-style Latin mass for traditionalist Catholics, whether they liked it or not. The Vatican issued an “instruction” to bishops as a follow-up to a 2007 papal decree authorizing the wider adoption of the Latin Mass, which was in universal use before the 1962-1965 Vatican Council introduced masses in local languages.
The re-instatement of the Latin mass was one of the demands of ultra-traditionalists whose leaders were excommunicated in 1988, prompting the first schism in modern times. The pope, in a nod the traditionalists, satisfied many of them in 2007 when he allowed a wider use of the Latin mass, in which the priest faced east with his back to the faithful for most of the service.
But some bishops around the world said privately it was a headache because of the scarcity of priests trained in Latin, and logistical problems inserting Latin mass in their schedule. The five-page instruction from the Vatican’s doctrinal department, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, made it clear that the pope wants bishops to follow his orders.
“It is the task of the Diocesan bishop to undertake all necessary measures to ensure respect for the ‘forma extraordinaria’,” the instruction said, using a Latin term for the old liturgy. The return of the mass met with resistance in many places and has been privately opposed by some bishops, who either have dragged their feet in implementing the decree or put it on the back burner, saying they had more pressing issues to deal with.
.
Vatican Bank head in money laundering probe–sources
The Vatican bank’s top two officials are under investigation for suspected money laundering and police have frozen 23 million euros ($30.21 million) of its funds, Italian judicial sources said on Tuesday.
They said President Ettore Gotti Tedeschi and director-general Paolo Cipriani were being investigated by Rome magistrates Nello Rossi and Stefano Fava in a case involving alleged violations of European Union money-laundering rules.
The Vatican confirmed the Rome magistrates’ action in a statement that expressed “perplexity and amazement” at the move and “utmost faith” in the two men who head the bank, officially known as Institute for Religious Works (IOR). It said the bank had committed no wrongdoing because it was transferring its own money between its own accounts.
The IOR primarily manages funds for the Vatican and religious institutions around the world, such as charity organisations and religious orders of priests and nuns.
Its cash point machines in the Vatican are perhaps the only ATMs in the world that allow clients to choose Latin as the language to perform operations.
Does that mean you can only ask for CDL euros, and not 450?
Vatican throws down gauntlet to ultra-traditionalist SSPX
The Vatican has thrown down the gauntlet to the ultra- traditionalist Society of Saint Piux X (SSPX), which planned to ordain 27 new priests this month without approval from Rome. A statement by the Vatican press office today declared that the ordinations would be illegitimate. The four SSPX bishops were only readmitted into the Roman Catholic Church in January after 20 years of excommunication. If they go ahead and ordain the priests anyway, they could risk being disciplined — possibly even excommunicated — again.
The SSPX claims its fidelity to the old Latin Mass and rejection of the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965) reforms represent authentic Catholicism as opposed to the “modernism” practiced in the world’s largest church since then. It has also claimed to be loyal to the pope, although this was always hedged with reservations about his authority because of the doctrinal dispute over Vatican II. Having won its bishops’ readmission without making any concessions, it looked set to test the limits again by ordaining priests without Vatican permission.
The Vatican statement quoted a March 10 letter by Pope Benedict to Catholic bishops saying the SSPX did not have any official status within the Church and would have to negotiate it in discussions with Rome. “Until the doctrinal questions are clarified, the Society has no canonical status in the Church, and its ministers – even though they have been freed of the ecclesiastical penalty – do not legitimately exercise any ministry in the Church,” he wrote.
After quoting that, the Vatican statement said: “So the ordinations should still be considered illegitimate.” It added that there were “reasons to think that the definition of that new status is near” and that “doctrinal and, consequently, also disciplinary questions still remain open.”
The statement comes at the last minute — 13 of the 21 were due to be ordained at an SSPX seminariy in Winona, Minnesota on Friday. The rest were planned in Ecône, Switzerland and Zaitzkofen, Germany on June 27. The ball is now in the SSPX’s court, to go ahead with them after all, or not.
Is Benedict listening more to his critics? His decision to readmit the SSPX bishops in January amid an uproar over Holocaust denial by one of them was a public relations disaster that reaped critical comments from several bishops’ conferences in Europe. In recent weeks, three German bishops — including Robert Zollitsch, president of their conference — openly criticised the planned SSPX ordinations and urged the Vatican to intervene. And now it has.
Several readers objected to the headline on our last post on this issue — “SSPX set to push the envelope against the Vatican again” and suggested that calling the ordinations a challenge was only my personal opinion. One quoted the great theologian Saint Thomas Aquinas at length to try to show the SSPX was not actually being disobedient by ignoring the pope’s warning that it could not “legitimately exercise any ministry in the Church.” As a reporter covering the Catholic Church, I have to assume the pope’s words carry weight. Measured against that warning, the ordination plan did indeed amount to a bid to “push the envelope against the Vatican again.” With this statement, the Vatican has identified the plan as a challenge and declared it illegitimate in advance.
I just pray and hope that those in the vatican has not lost their beliefs on the “dogma”. Bishops and priests except those from SSPX seems to have weakened their faith. It can never never and never be wronged. It will be the same yesterday, today and tomorrow…just as Christ is the same yester, today and tomorrow… Satan must have been in the catholic church now… but don’t be afraid, hold on to the the ROSARY and we all will be saved… God bless us all…
Jordan’s welcome for pope includes translation into Latin
Jordan has pulled out all the stops to give Pope Benedict a warm welcome. It even went so far as to translate King Abdullah’s welcoming speech into Latin. Both the king and the pope spoke in English at the arrival ceremony in Amman today. None of the prelates traveling with Benedict seemed to be fumbling around for headphones to hear the king’s speech in the Church’s official (dead) language. But a stack of Latin translations later appeared in the press centre, along with the Italian and Arabic versions of the speech.
This is not the first time this has happened. Some Latin translations were also provided when the pope visited his native Bavaria in September 2006. Cute touch — but will anybody read this?
Pope lays down the law to French Catholic bishops
Pope Benedict’s speech to France’s bishops at Lourdes was a classic example of an “iron first in a velvet glove” address. Delivered calmly and in elegant French, it basically laid down the law to a group that has been among the most critical in the Church of his turn towards traditional Catholicism. It was billed as a meeting but was in fact a monologue. He read it out without hardly ever looking at the 170 cardinals and bishops before him and left right after finishing the text.
“Benedict XVI gave the bishops a veritable road map to help them trace the paths of the future for the church in France,” wrote Jean-Marie Guénois, religion correspondent of Le Figaro. “He wanted this meeting. It’s the only one he imposed on the organisers. Which shows the importance, in his eyes, of what he wanted to tell them.”
The most striking part was his call to the bishops to make more place for traditionalists. The French bishops lobbied the Vatican last year before Benedict liberalised the use of the Tridentine Latin Mass, arguing that giving the traditionalists too much leeway would undermine the authority of the bishops. The “tradis” are especially strong in France, both in the form of those loyal to Rome and those who have broken with it. The culture war between them and the majority church is deeply rooted and mutual suspicion is strong. Bishops worry that traditionalists want to form a “church within a church” if given the slightest chance. Among mainstream Catholics, that can translate into a high sensitivity to anything seen as rolling back the reforms of the Second Vatican Council.
“I am aware of your difficulties, but I do not doubt that, within a reasonable time, you can find solutions satisfactory for all, lest the seamless tunic of Christ be further torn,” the pope said while talking about the Tridentine mass. “Everyone has a place in the Church. Every person, without exception, should be able to feel at home, and never rejected.”
To bishops faced with serious priest shortages, Benedict warned the bishops not to rely too much on the lay people who now replace missing priests in many functions. He urged them to continue to try to encourage vocations instead. “Where their specific missions are concerned, priests cannot delegate their functions to the faithful,” he said.
With a growing number of Catholics divorcing and then remarrying outside the Church, bishops in several developed countries have asked whether the Vatican could relax the marriage laws that require an annulment before a divorced Catholic can remarry in the Church. Benedict recognised that “a particularly painful situation concerns those who are divorced and remarried.” But he said he could not change Church teaching: “The Church, which cannot oppose the will of Christ, firmly maintains the principle of the indissolubility of marriage, while surrounding with the greatest affection those men and women who, for a variety of reasons, fail to respect it. Hence initiatives aimed at blessing irregular unions cannot be admitted”
Benedict also encouraged the bishops to remind the French of their country’s Christian roots now that President Nicolas Sarkozy has said he wants to take a more flexible approach to laïcité, the traditionally rigid separation of church and state. He said: “Drawing attention to France’s Christian roots will permit each inhabitant of the country to come to a better understanding of his or her origin and destiny. Consequently, within the current institutional framework and with the utmost respect for the laws that are in force, it is necessary to find a new path, in order to interpret and live from day to day the fundamental values on which the Nation’s identity is built. Your President has intimated that this is possible. The social and political presuppositions of past mistrust or even hostility are gradually disappearing.”
I’m a practicing Catholic. I attend mass weekly. And I’m going through a divorce.
And I’m tired of feeling like I’m not welcome in The Church. My ex-wife did not go to church. She was critical of my faith. I’m not without fault in the failure of my marriage, but my former wife thought nothing of staying out until 3am on a Friday with her friends.I was the one who was home every night. And she was the one who said “I want to be alone.”
I don’t list my tale of woe, to garner sympathy. But while my divorce drags on, I have to put my love life on hold. My ex and I have been separated for 14 months, the divorce proceedings are 12 months long and she seems to be in no rush to get the divorce behind us.
And I need permission for someone to tell me it’s all right to pursue another relationship? In my opinion, and I could be wrong, I am being held hostage by her, through the Church’s teachings, the Church that she hates.
I made a poor choice of a spouse. I was not an easy guy to live with. Plenty of blame to go around in my marriage. The most I can say is that I was not unfaithful.
And I can’t even apply for an annulment until my divorce is final? How long do I wait for my life to begin?
I met a woman who is a Eucharistic Minister, an active Catholic. But we wait. For what?
I don’t get it.
Breakaway Catholics hope Lourdes changes pope’s views
The arch-traditionalist Fraternity of Saint Pius X, which broke with Rome two decades ago and saw its bishops excommunicated, hopes Pope Benedict’s visit to Lourdes this weekend will inspire him to roll back the reforms of the Second Vatican Council. The SSPX rejects the Council’s opening to other religions and upholds strict adherence to Catholic traditions such as the old Latin Mass. It was encouraged when Pope Benedict allowed wider use of the Tridentine liturgy last year. But in recent talks on possibly reentering the Roman fold, it once again baulked at accepting the authority of a pope who defends the 1962-1965 Council. Many ailing Catholics turn to Lourdes as their last hope for healing after all else fails. Is this a sign the SSPX might see Lourdes as its last hope too?
Rev. Régis de Cacqueray Valmenier, superior of the SSPX’s district in France, stressed in a communique that the breakaway Catholic group welcomed his visit and maintained an“unswerving attachment to the Apostolic See.”
But the rest of his statement made clear it was still at odds with Benedict:
“Let us pray the rosary to the Very Holy Virgin Mary so that the successor of Peter, in this terribly difficult epoch when he must govern the Church, may find at Lourdes the lucidity and the strength to recognise, denounce and extirpate the Council’s errors which are essentially the origin of the crisis in the Church.
“Let us pray that the Catholic faith, outside of which nobody can be saved, shall return to the souls and that Christ the King may reign again over countries and societies.”
SSPX leader Bishop Bernard Fellay basically rejected an ultimatum the Vatican gave it last June to accept papal authority if the fraternity wanted to come back into the Roman fold. In his latest sermon posted on the SSPX website, he argued that he didn’t actually reject any proposals from Rome because there weren’t any serious proposals presented. The Vatican clearly thought they were serious proposals, though, so Fellay seems to be trying to redefine the five points presented to him in order to sideline them without saying so. The rest of the sermon repeated the fraternity’s long-standing position that the Vatican should give in on the Council issue, not the SSPX.
Rev. Alain Lorans, the SSPX spokesman in Paris, confirmed that nothing had changed between the fraternity and the Vatican over the summer. He also denied rumours in Paris that SSPX priests would attend the pope’s open-air Mass on Saturday, which would cause quite a stir in Catholic circles here. Admission is open to the Mass on the Esplanade des Invalides, so they could attend it without an invitation.
But the SSPX will mark the pope’s presence with symbolic acts at its main church in Paris, which is close to the Collège des Bernardins where Benedict will address intellectuals. The pope is due to pass it in his popemobile after the speech, on his way to vespers at Notre Dame Cathedral. “Since the pope will pass close by Saint Nicolas du Chardonnet, the church is decked out in the Vatican colours white and yellow. And when the pope passes by the church, the bells will toll,” Lorans said.
SSPX Bishop Fellay snubs pope’s ultimatum on rejoining Rome
It seems there’s no need to wait until Monday* to see how the traditionalist Catholic Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX) will respond to the Vatican ultimatum and pledge loyalty to Pope Benedict. Its leader Bishop Bernard Fellay spoke about the conditions last Friday (June 20) — before it was known that Benedict had called his bluff — and made clear the SSPX could not accept it. “They just say ‘shut up’,” he said in a sermon at an SSPX seminary in Winona, Minnesota. “We are not going … to shut up.”
In another part of the sermon, he says: “We are, shall we say, something like at a crossroads. In a certain way, Rome is telling us, O.K. we are ready to lift the excommunications, but you cannot continue this way. So we have no choice. We are not going this way. We are continuing what we’ve done. We have fought now for 40 years to keep this faith alive, to keep this tradition, not only for ourselves but for the Church. And we are just going to continue. Happens what happens. Everything is in God’s hands.”
Click here for our news report. Here is an audio file of his sermon (in English). Hat tips to Andrea Tornielli for breaking the story and blogging it along (in Italian) and La Croix’s Isabelle de Gaulmyn for the Vatican clarification (in French). The relevant part of Fellay’s sermon is copied out verbatim on the second page of this post (see below) to give the full context of his comments.
This is not that surprising, given that Fellay has always insisted the schism was not only about the old Latin Mass. SSPX leaders are also firmly opposed to the Second Vatican Council, some of them more staunchly and bluntly than Fellay. The interesting part is that many SSPX followers are probably more interested in the traditional Mass than the other theological points Fellay insists on. So they may go back to Rome now that the Latin Mass will be more widely used in Catholic churches. Tornielli wrote: “Now that they have obtained the Mass in the old rite, many faithful don’t understand why the SSPX doesn’t finally make its peace with Rome.” As Fr. Z puts it on WDTPRS, “Most people want a reverent Mass and sound preaching. They care little for the loftier theological arguments. ”
There’s a lively debate on some Catholic blogs (see among others Angelqueen, Rorate Caeli, The Sensible Bond, The Gregorian Rite, The Pledge of Future Glory) over whether the fact that the five conditions set by the Vatican did not mention Vatican II or the new Mass (novus ordo) means the SSPX might not have to accept them. But a pledge to “avoid the pretense of a Magisterium superior to the Holy Father” covers those two points and lots more. That wording is just a sugar coating for what is a bitter pill for the SSPX.
What do you think will happen now? Will the sheep flock back to Rome while the shepherds hold out in protest?
*N.B. The letter with the five conditions say the ultimatum’s deadline is “fixed at the end of the month of June.” Tornielli translated that as Saturday June 28, while Gaulmyn opted for Monday June 30. As the original was written in French, I’m going with Isabelle’s interpretation.
I have served at Mass for His Excellency and have been in one of his conferences in person and the way in which you portray him is an offense to any honest person. I agree that your ways are totally contrary to the professionalism required from such a serious task as it is journalism: this is yellow journalism, please mature. The Society does “snubs” Vatican propositions, but the problem is that, unfortunately, the authorities do not want to obey Our Lord in many things. The problem is that the Vicars from 1960′s have thought that they know better than the King, who has the virtue of being Omniscient. This unfortunate attitude of the Cardinal Hoyos himself is an immature act in which he reveals private correspondence as if he were member of a gossip magazine rather than a member of the Roman Curia. You, as gossip lovers do nothing but follow up with the game. Please, let us grow up and, for the sake of our souls have respect when we treat with matters of His Holy Church. Thanks God, our spiritual father, Archbishop Lefebvre, chose well whom was he to confer bishopric and they will not be intimidated, neither by these Roman tyrants (who someday will be overthrown) nor from you who only work to put more pressure on the situation. Please, grow up.
Clock ticking as Vatican calls Catholic rebels’ bluff
While most attention on the Godbeat is focused this week on a possible but not probable Anglican schism, the Vatican has started the clock ticking on a real Catholic schism it wants to settle once and for all. And it wants an answer by Saturday (not much Anglican-style muddling through there!). A slow and patient strategy by Pope Benedict to deal with the traditionalist rebels in the Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX) has now reached the endgame phase.
Andrea Tornielli (left), the well-informed vaticanista of the Milan daily Il Giornale, has produced two scoops in recent days about an ultimatum the Vatican has presented to the “Lefebvrists”. He first reported in Il Giornale on Monday that the pontifical commission “Ecclesia Dei” had told SSPX leader Bishop Bernard Fellay that the Swiss-based rebel group should accept by June 28 the reforms of the Second Vatican Council and the validity of the new Mass (“Novus Ordo”) that replaced the old Latin Mass if it wanted to return to the full communion with Rome that was broken in 1988. Tornielli reported today on his blog Sacri Palazzi the actual conditions as written to Fellay (see Fr. Z’s English translation). If the SSPX accepts them, it can become a “prelature” within the Catholic Church, much like Opus Dei is now. If not, they lost their best chance at rejoining Rome and having any influence on the Vatican.
They have already had considerable influence. Pope Benedict has resurrected the old Latin Mass, one of the main SSPX demands. But that was not actually the heart of the matter. His demand that the SSPX must in return accept Vatican II, including its statements on religious freedom, is the one that sticks in the Lefebvrists’ throats the most. This two-track approach seems to be a strategy to welcome back those traditionalists who really just wanted the Latin Mass, and isolate the harder-line types who rejected Vatican II completely.
The conditions, as Tornielli lists them, are written in code to make them as acceptable as possible to the SSPX. So they do not mention accepting Vatican II reforms, but the demand to “avoid the pretence of a Magisterium superior to the Holy Father” and “to demonstrate the will to behave honestly in full ecclesial charity and in respect to the authority of the Vicar of Christ” covers that. Another condition is that the SSPX “avoid any public speech which does not respect the person of the Holy Father and which can be negative for ecclesial charity”. This is effectively a muzzle on SSPX leaders who can be surprisingly critical of the Vatican they say they want to rejoin.
Only a few weeks ago, Fellay produced just the kind of outburst that would be banned if he accepts these conditions. In a sermon commenting on Benedict’s visit to the United States, he said: “And now, we have an absolutely liberal Pope, my very dear brothers. He went to this country [the United States] founded on Masonic principles of a revolution, of a rebellion against God. And, well, he expressed his admiration and fascination for this country that has decided to grant liberty to all religions. He went so far as to condemn the confessional State. And they call him a traditionalist? Yes, this is the truth. He is absolutely liberal and absolutely contradictory. He has some good sides, which we hail and for which we rejoice, such as what he has done for the Traditional liturgy. What a mystery, my very dear brothers, what a mystery!”
Father John Zuhlsdorf of the blog What Does The Prayer Really Say?, a sharp observer of such things, wonders if this is a “papal ‘offer you can’t refuse’”. He hopes they will take it and lists a number of ways they could accept it without having to concede too much. But I doubt a group of schismatics fired up by rhetoric like this will be able to swallow the five conditions by Saturday. My hunch, based on talks over the years with the charming Fellay and some of his less flexible associates, is that they cannot unanimously accept this. It will most probably split the leadership, which may be part of Benedict’s approach. Fellay was down in Rome recently to work this deal out. But it’s still unclear which way he will jump.
Any bets in the meantime on what the SSPX will decide? Let us know what you think.
To add to the confusion, Cardinal Hoyos constantly says that the SSPX are not ‘in schism’, but later on calls them ‘schismatic in nature’.
Yeah, my expression exactly, “huh?”
Latin Mass “power of silence” raises UK Catholic decibels
Cardinal Dario Castrillon Hoyos was at Westminster Cathedral in London over the weekend to lead one of the highest profile celebrations of the Roman Catholic Church’s old Latin Mass here since the 1960s. The Catholic hierarchy in England and Wales has been lukewarm about the prospect of the old rite being celebrated alongside Mass in English, so the cardinal’s presence was a clear reminder of what the Vatican wants.
Before the Mass on Saturday, Castrillon Hoyos met four journalists (myself included) to explain why Pope Benedict decided last year to promote wider use of the old Latin Mass. He praised the traditional Tridentine rite for its “power of silence,” an element of contemplation he said had disappeared from worship since the liturgical reforms of the 1960s. If his pre-Mass briefing is anything to go by, however, the Latin Mass also has a power to raise the decibel level among Catholics in Britain.
The Colombian-born cardinal, who is head of the pontifical commission Ecclesia Dei for relations with traditionalists, said the new form of the Mass had led to “abuses” that had prompted many to abandon the Church. So, he said, the pope wanted the older form to be offered again in all parishes (not only where a group of parishioners requested it, as originally said).
“The experience of these 40 years has not always been so good. Many people abandoned the sense of adoration (of God)…There is (now) an atmosphere that makes it possible for these abuses and that atmosphere must be changed,” he said in English. “It is not a matter of confrontation but of dialogue — fraternal dialogue — making efforts to understand the precious things contained in the new and the old rites.”
The cardinal added that Pope Benedict would soon clarify his motu proprio — the decree allowing wider use of the old Mass — to clear up confusion over issues ranging from the differences between liturgical calendars of the old and new rites, the use of vestments, ordinations to the sub-diaconate and the Eucharistic fast.
How polarising this issue can be within the Church was apparent even in that small group during the 45-minute interview.
Elena Curti, deputy editor of the Catholic magazine The Tablet, said many Catholics like herself were confused at the new emphasis on the old rite. It seemed to diminish the role of the laity, she said, and she asked the cardinal if this was a regression from the reforms of the Second Vatican Council of 1962-1965. The cardinal said no: “The Holy Father is not returning to the past but taking from the past a treasure to make it present today along side the richness of the new rite.”
The Latin mass is the only Mass!. I went to the new mass for years thinking it was the Latin mass translated. When I looked into it more there was a more sinister side. The truth being the new mass is the devils invention with a lot of evidence to back that up. I solemnly believe that the latin Mass needs to be brought back into every Catholic Church.
Benedict is a liberal, according to traditionalist bishop
Pope Benedict is “an absolutely liberal pope.” The United States is “founded upon Masonic principles of a revolution, of a rebellion against God”.
It is clear that the man who made these comments has lost some connection to reality. If I told you he had been the target of a Vatican charm offensive in recent years, you might think I had lost a link to reality, too. However, it shows how strange the relationship between the Vatican and the schismatic traditionalist Society of Saint Pius X has become that its head, Bishop Bernard Fellay, could utter the words quoted above.
Fellay, whose SSPX movement champions the traditional Latin Mass and wants the Roman Catholic Church to turn the clock back to before the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965), thought its star was rising after the election of Pope Benedict three years ago. Benedict has gone a long way to accomodate the SSPX’s liturgical demands, bringing back the Tridentine Mass despite the fact very few other Catholics were asking for it. He has agreed to a new Latin Good Friday prayer that restored traditional phrasing even though it was offensive to Jews (and still not enough for the SSPX). Even Benedict, for all his conservative views, refuses to roll back the reforms of Vatican Two wholesale.
The Swiss-based bishop used the occasion of Benedict’s successful U.S. visit (April 15-20) to issue a declaration of disappointment that the pope was not giving in to his demands. His latest complaint, delivered on June 1 at the Paris church the SSPX has occupied since 1977, is a frustrated outburst that raises the question of whether the Vatican should expend any more energy talking with this group.
Here’s the key quote from his sermon (click for the original French text and the audio file in French):
“And now, we have an absolutely liberal Pope, my very dear brothers. He went to this country [the United States] founded on Masonic principles of a revolution, of a rebellion against God. And, well, he expressed his admiration and fascination for this country that has decided to grant liberty to all religions. He went so far as to condemn the confessional State. And they call him a traditionalist? Yes, this is the truth. He is absolutely liberal and absolutely contradictory. He has some good sides, which we hail and for which we rejoice, such as what he has done for the Traditional liturgy. What a mystery, my very dear brothers, what a mystery!”
Hat tip to Father Z at What Does The Prayer Really Say for flagging this. Despite all his staunch support for traditional liturgy, Father Z had this to say about Fellay’s outburst:
if ++Benedict is a Liberal, then I must be straight with 23 children, that I don’t even know about!! Oh and Mormon too.
Though I’m Gay and an Episcopalian.
Wonder how that works???















