So it was with some surprise that I received an email from a reader containing a screenshot of a Facebook post from Coughlin that seemed to indicate a willingness on his part to break ranks with the Democratic Party over marriage equality. Coughlin’s District 60 predecessor, Elaine Coderre, was a co-sponsor of the marriage equality legislation that ultimately became Rhode Island law.

Coughlin shared a link to a Washington Post piece entitled, “Republican National Committee reaffirms its opposition to same-sex marriage” and wrote:

My recollection is my Democratic Party barely squeezed out a majority of the popular vote last November. If the leadership keeps pandering on this issue they may find a conservative element of the party changes allegiances giving the Republicans a very solid majority next time around.”

Coughlin’s post seems to indicate that the Democratic Party position on marriage equality is “pandering” and that conservative Democrats might bolt the party over this issue and become Republicans.

I emailed Coughlin and House Communications Director Larry Berman for clarification. I wanted to know if Coughlin considered himself part of the “conservative element” of the Democratic Party and if he supports marriage equality. One also wonders if Coughlin would be willing to change allegiances and switch to the Republican Party, as did Representative Karen MacBeth last week, over this or other conservative social issues. His Facebook post seems to indicate that he might.

Coughlin and Berman declined to respond to my emails.

Rhode Island’s celebration of the Supreme Court‘s historic decision allowing same-sex couples to marry across the United States was also a history lesson about the long battle for full LGBTQ acceptance in our state. Organizer Kate Monteiro spoke eloquently and introduced a steady stream of speakers, but more importantly she paused to remember those who didn’t live long enough to see this day, those who are only spoken of “in the echoes of the wind.”

We live in a better world because of their work and sacrifice.

The celebration was held at the Roger Williams National Memorial, because, explained Monteiro, this is where “religious freedom in the United States was born” and where Belle Pelegrino and the ’76ers first met to demand the right to march in Providence with a sign saying ‘I am gay.'”

“We stand at the top of a very, very high hill,” said Monteiro, “we have carried that pack and we have wanted for water and struggled and slipped and we stand at the top of a hill. And the view is beautiful. It is absolutely splendid. And just a little bit further is the next big hill. Because we are not at the top of the mountain, never mind the other side of the mountain.”

“Tomorrow, in 29 states, someone can be fired for being gay or lesbian, let alone transgender. (That, thank you, is 32 states)… That’s wrong, we need to change it, that is the mountain.”

“Can you imagine if we could go in time and bring Roger Williams here today?” asked Rodney Davis to laughs, “but when you boil it down and get to its purest sense, Freedom, Liberty and Justice was the reason why he came here…”

From a religious perspective, affirmation of same-sex marriage is fundamentally about love and the recognition of the dignity of all people.  The bible teaches that God created every human being in the divine image and every one of us is a manifestation of God’s goodness and beauty.   All couples have the potential to be holy and they deserve our support and encouragement.  Biblical teaching is clear that the greatest commandment is to love God with all our hearts and to love one another as we love ourselves.

As pastors, we value all the families in our congregations and we are pleased that the hurt and the stigma that always comes with inequality has been removed.  Jesus taught a message of love and inclusion.  We can only be pleased that the Supreme Court of the United States, through reasoning with a totally secular perspective, has concurred.

We remember fondly the many advocates who have given voice to a demand for justice.   We recall with gratitude the legislators in the Rhode Island General Assembly who took a reasoned stand for fairness and a supportive Governor who signed the bill.

We pray for people of conscience who may struggle with this decision.  We call for mutual respect, civility and understanding among all people of faith.  Reacting with rejection and negation will not lead to a healing solution.  Tolerance requires respect not agreement.  Let us embrace each other lovingly in a spirit of humility.  Especially in Rhode Island, where tolerance is in our cultural DNA.

San Francisco Archbishop Cordileone’s decision to speak at the “March for Marriage” an anti-gay marriage rally organized by NOM (National Organization for Marriage) on June 19 has caused quite a stir in Catholic circles. Many are imploring the Archbishop to reconsider his decision to speak at the event, citing Pope Francis’s “Who am I to judge?” attitude towards homosexuality, though it is doubtful that the Pope’s words marked a new understanding in the Catholic Church on the issue.  Cordileone’s willingness to ignore liberal trends in the church and to partner with more extreme anti-gay groups such as the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) should not come as a surprise to those following the Catholic Church’s involvement in the marriage equality battle here in Rhode Island.

Bishop Thomas Tobin trailblazed these efforts over a year ago.

Back in January 2013 I reported that the Providence Diocese made the unfortunate decision to partner with NOM and MassResistance as part of a group calling itself the Faith Alliance to Preserve the Sanctity of Marriage as Established by God. At the time, I was surprised to see the Catholic Church openly aligning itself with MassResistance, a Southern Poverty Law Center certified hate group.

Mark Potok, a senior fellow with the Southern Poverty Law Center told me “In our experience, it is highly unusual for the Catholic Church to work with groups like MassResistance, which has repeatedly, and utterly falsely, linked homosexuality to pedophilia, among other things. This is a group that lumps homosexuality in with criminal behaviors like bestiality, claims gay people are dangerous to children, and says, again falsely, that no gay people were murdered in the Holocaust. I should add, however, that we’ve not seen any real history of the Catholic Church working with hate groups. It may be that in this case they’ve simply failed to look into the background of the group they’re allying themselves with. At least I hope so.”

Whether or not NOM is a hate group on par with MassResistance is an open question to some, (though I am of the opinion that they are just sneakier in broadcasting their hate and intolerance, constantly skirting the line.) The one unifying presence in both the Rhode Island and San Francisco cases is NOM operative Christopher Plante, who led the coalition in a failed bid to prevent marriage equality in Rhode Island, and said to the Christian Post in April, that the March on Marriage event is aimed at showing ‘the world, the media, members of Congress and the Supreme Court that the marriage debate is not over. There is a huge groundswell of popular support, popular belief in traditional marriage. And despite what the polls may say, the reality is the majority of Americans believe marriage is between one man and one woman.”

Cordileone, defending his decision to attend the march in Washington, weakly claims that the event is “not ‘anti-LGBT’ … it is not anti-anyone or anti-anything,” but if the history here in Rhode Island is any indication, NOM operatives like Christopher Plante seek the endorsement of institutions like the Catholic Church to provide cover for their alliances with hate groups like MassResistance and other groups that spread ugly smears and lies about our LGBTQ brothers and sisters. Cordileone should weigh the political consequences of selling his status as a church leader so cheaply.

This weekend, as Rhode Island celebrates Pride, we should continue to encourage tolerance and acceptance rather than bigotry and hate, and we can only hope that in the future the Catholic Church will be on the right side of that equation.

“I am appalled that she is asking the Church to punish so many good Catholic people who support the civil rights of the gay community,” Handy, a Cranston Democrat, said in the release. “Unfortunately, her feelings are very symbolic of the Tea Party and right-wing thinking that is so prevalent within the state’s Republican Party Leadership.

“Although I obviously disagree, I respected the Church’s right to oppose my legislation,” Handy said. “However, it crosses the line for a party leader to call for active involvement of the Church in partisan politics.”

“Representative Costa needs to be reminded that her own Minority Leader, Brian Newberry, whom she supports, voted for marriage equality, as did the entire five-member Senate Republican delegation,” Handy said. “Is she looking for the Catholic Church to punish her own party members who voted in favor of this legislation?”

UPDATE: According to a story in the Providence Journal, Costa said her comments had nothing to do with marriage equality.

“I’m praying for each of you, that you turn back to God,” said an email purportedly from Father Brian Sistare, who is now the priest at Sacred Heart in Woonsocket. “I’m also going to let my Parish know exactly how you voted, so come re-election time, you will not be re-elected.”

As non-profit entities, churches are legally forbidden from engaging in political campaign activity.

The email was sent to the 26 state senators who voted for marriage equality and was signed and seemingly sent by Sistare. Sistare, who was a priest at St. Rocco Church in Johnston at the time, did not return a call for comment earlier this week to RI Future and has since declined to comment to other media outlets as well.

Sistare is said to have told married gay parishoners that he would not serve them communion unless they ended their marriages. Divorce is considered a sin to devout Catholics but the church does have an annulment process.

Here’s the full email sent to state senators:

Dear RI Senators who voted for “marriage” between members of the same sex,

       Yesterday was a very sad day for our little state of Rhode Island.  I’m still shocked that each of you took it upon yourself to take the place of God and redefine what He has established.  Marriage has always been understood as the union between one man and one woman.  This is a 5,000 year old fact!  I’m wondering what you will do when a mother comes to you and asks to be married to her son, or a cousin wants to marry her first cousin, or when a man wants to marry 2 or 3 women, or a human being wants to marry his animal?  What will you do, now that you have decided that Marriage is no longer a sacred union between one man and one woman?

        For those of you Senators who are baptized Catholics, I invite you to go to the Sacrament of Confession to receive God’s Mercy and Forgiveness for your grave sin of voting against God yesterday, so you’ll be able to receive Holy Communion again in the Catholic Church.

        For those of you who claim to be a disciple of Jesus Christ, I also invite you to repentance in your own faith tradition; and to those who claim no religious affiliation, I pray that you also see the error of your ways.

        Your decision yesterday will have a lot of consequences on those of us who hold God’s definition of Marriage between one man and one woman.  Already my Pastor from my hometown of Westerly is being accused by a confirmed lesbian, of violating the tax exempt status of the Catholic Church for telling his parishioners to contact Senator Algiere about his upcoming vote – unfortunately, Senator Algiere, you betrayed your own Catholic Faith and your constituents in voting for sodomy yesterday.  Also, my little niece Giana was coming out of school the other day when her fellow 4 year old classmate remarked to her that 2 women could marry.  Thankfully, my niece told the little boy the TRUTH that this isn’t the case, that Marriage is only between one man and one woman.

        I’m praying for each of you, that you turn back to God.  I’m also going to let my Parish know exactly how you voted, so come re-election time, you will not be re-elected.

Fr. Sistare

St. Rocco Church

Johnston, RI

Video from the Marriage Equality celebration held outside Providence City Hall today from 8:30am to 9:30am.

The big day is Thursday, August 1 – for both Rhode Island and Ferri and Caparco.

“We’re very excited,” Tony told me on the phone today and Frank fielded a call from another local reporter. “It just means so much to us.”

Ferri and Caparco have been together for 32 years and they were married in Vancouver in 2006. It was their 25th anniversary together.

“That was a more simple ceremony,” Caparco said. “It was more low key and emotional.”

Their second wedding on Thursday, they both said, will be more of a celebration of their right to marry in Rhode Island – an effort that both were an instrumental part of.

Ferri was politically active in the campaign for marriage equality when they married in 2006, but he was still 14 months removed from declaring he would run for elected office. Fast forward to 2013 and, as a high-profile and highly respected openly gay legislator, Ferri was a crucial part of the very successful campaign to pass same sex marriage rights in Rhode Island this year. House Speaker Gordon Fox, who is also gay and was perhaps even more instrumental in marriage equality, will marry Frank and Tony on Thursday.

While the whole affair has the feeling of a royal wedding, Ferri said it doesn’t seem so from he and Tony’s vantage point.

“It’s a little bit stressful,” he told me when he got off the phone with another reporter. “We’re still pulling all the details together.”

The rehearsal dinner is tonight for the 35 person wedding party. And as Ferri and I chatted, yet another reporter called. In the background I could hear Tony tell him a TV crew would be at their house in 45 minutes.

“45 minutes,” Ferri said to his fiance, “I’m not even shaved yet.”

In anticipation of the first day that Rhode Island’s marriage equality law goes into effect, the City of Providence will hold a three-day pre-registration next week for all couples who plan to obtain marriage licenses at City Hall on Thursday, August 1.

The City’s Department of Vital Statistics, on the first floor of Providence City Hall, will accept pre-registrations for marriage licenses from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m. on July 29, July 30, and July 31. If proper documentation is completed, marriage licenses may then be picked up at the Department of Vital Statistics during normal business hours on August 1 from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.

“Municipalities that celebrate and cultivate diversity are the places where creativity and ideas thrive,” said Mayor Angel Taveras. “I am excited to offer all loving, committed Providence couples the chance to celebrate their right to marry on August 1.”

Couples with at least one party who is a resident of Providence, as well as couples who are residents of another state but who will be married in Providence are eligible to receive marriage licenses and to pre-register at City Hall.

To pre-register and pick up marriage license on August 1, the City of Providence requires the following documents from both parties:

Certified Birth Certificates – birth certificates must include parent(s) name(s)
Valid Photo I.D. – government-issued I.D., passport or driver’s license
Proof of Residency – parties must present a utility bill, bank statement, car registration, tax return or pay stub with current address
If this is not either party’s first marriage, a certified final divorce decree or a death certificate from the previous marriage must be presented.

All documents must be original and in English. If the documents are not in English, a certified translation must be presented and accompanied by the original documents. These documents must be notarized by a notary public.

Both parties must be present at the time of pre-registration and when picking up marriage licenses on August 1. There is a $24 license fee; it is advised that couples pay the fee during pre-registration (check or money order only, made payable to: City of Providence.)

Couples will be required to complete a Rhode Island Department of Health Certificate of Marriage Form, available in hard copy at the City’s Department of Vital Statistics or online at: http://www.providenceri.com/vital-statistics.

How else to explain the June 5th editorial by Justin Katz “Catholics grapple with political change” that appeared in the Providence Journal? Katz seems intent on tying the diminishing political power and moral influence of the present day Catholic Church to what he sees as the growing ease New Englanders have with “tolerance for the authority of others over them.”

Apparently, by turning away from the Catholic Church, a non-democratic hierarchical institution that claims absolute moral authority over all aspects of life and afterlife, and embracing government, a democratic hierarchical institution that merely exercises secular authority, we have given up something of value. The implication is that we have abandoned the one true religion in favor of a new religion, government.

This is of course a very foolish thing to say. Katz implies that religion is impossible to escape, since any rejection of the rules of the Catholic Church automatically makes one a member of the High Church of Government. Katz makes his view quite clear:

In the case of marriage, with narrow exceptions, the state government has essentially issued a command: “Thou shalt treat same-sex relationships as equivalent to opposite-sex relationships.”

Note that Katz conflates the laws of Rhode Island with Biblical edicts. In contrasting secular law with religious commandments Katz is forcing a choice: either the church sets the parameters of the state, or the state has de facto become the church. Under Katz’s formulation their can be no separation of church and state, no renderings to Caesar that which is his or unto the government its due. There is only one supreme authority, and a choice must be made.

But wait, there’s a curious wrinkle to Katz’s essay:

In Catholicism, the individual’s conscience is sacrosanct, and to be shaped by the church’s teachings. In government, the individual’s conscience receives only that space that government officials have deigned to carve out for it.

The history of the Catholic church is not one of an institution that respects the individual’s conscience. In fact, one need only look at the treatment of heretics, the witch trials, the Crusades, the Inquisition, and the Protestant Reformation to see that. I’m sure the individual conscience of Galileo was assuaged by Pope John Paul II’s apology, 367 years too late. One struggles to understand, in the face of so much war and violence against individual conscience by the Catholic Church, what Katz takes the word “sacrosanct” to mean.

Certainly one can make similar claims about the role of the United States government in many terrible violations of persons and consciences: the genocide of Native Americans, our terrible history of slavery and racism, the dropping of atomic bombs on Japan, the environmental destruction our policies continue to have on the world ecology, and our casual acceptance of economic inequality, never mind our second class treatment of women, a shame our country shares with the Catholic Church.

But the United States can change. In fact, it’s based on a Constitution built to change and adapt, not upon a perfect and revered holy book or tablets carved by God. The United States government can be changed from within, by the electorate, via direct action on the part of its citizens. This is because the United States is a product of the Age of Reason, aka the Enlightenment. This was a movement dedicated to the improvement of society through reason and the scientific method, and to challenging old ideas based on faith and tradition.

Enlightenment concepts were revolutionary because all previous authority, whether we thought of it as governmental or religious, was ultimately religious in nature. Kings were chosen by Gods, and the people merely persevered. Personal conscience was irrelevant. Remember that one of the major institutions leading the charge against the Enlightenment was the Catholic Church. It was only the pressure of Enlightenment ideals that forced the church to forgive Galileo, accept the reality of Darwinian evolution and accept the moral right of Jews to exist unmolested.

Katz would have us believe that the Catholic Church is a better guarantor of conscience than the government. He decries governmental intrusion into the marriage equality debate, into reproductive health care and opposes taxpayer funded pre-kindergarten programs. However, when it comes to government sponsored prayers on the walls of public schools, or Christmas versus holiday trees, suddenly government intrusion is fine.

This level of cognitive dissonance, far from being a mere “uncomfortable feeling” would make most people’s head’s explode. But not Katz. He’s busy playing the victim card.

One suspects, however, that Bishop Tobin’s most difficult task, in preparing for his own presentation at the [“Catholicism and the American Experience?”] conference, has been narrowing down the topics that Rhode Island has provided him under Governor Chafee (a left-wing Democrat).

That’s right, Katz is asserting that the heavy hand of government has deprived the Bishop of his ability to speak up on certain issues. One pictures a furtive Tobin, consigned by a despotic Governor Chafee to a dark, dank cell somewhere, smuggling his letters and thoughts out on small scraps of paper to a church forced underground because gay people now have the right to marry each other. Never mind that the church is protected from ever having to perform a same-sex wedding and that their right to discriminate is protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution: Bishop Tobin and the Catholic Church are the victims here.

Katz ends his foolish piece with questions. “What should our relationship with government be? What mediating role should the church play in a representative democracy? Questions upon questions.” Of course, Katz doesn’t really attempt to answer these questions. His whole essay is an attempt to confuse and sow doubt into the minds of readers. Katz seeks to undermine our faith in representative democracy because his view is that government should be small, ineffective and out of the way.

It should be clear by now that Katz, who can seemingly handle any amount of cognitive dissonance his varied views demand, has no problem marrying his Catholic faith to his libertarian (or even Objectivist) views. A small, non-intrusive government that bans same-sex marriage and monitors women for birth control violations? No problem. A church that treats the individual’s conscience as sacrosanct but mandates prayers and Christmas Trees in public spaces? Why not?

Reason be damned. Believe what you want. Who cares how many people suffer? There are no wrong answers.

Except, of course, as Justin Katz amply demonstrates, there are.