Very disturbing to see at least one faculty member for the upcoming colloquium celebrating the decision quite openly.

I'm not being inflammatory. Please address yourselves to the question at hand.

Whatever you say, Chris. The USSC is addressing civil marriage. Has any organist ever been forced to play for a divorced person's wedding against their will?

Noel,

If you would like to propose a different heading for the topic, I'm happy to relabel it.

Daniel,

Yes, exactly. If the CMAA had a position on whether musicians should knowingly cooperate with the violation of Catholic teaching, would such a person be allowed to teach at the colloquium while broadcasting his opinions


Charles, (Melofluent),

I can't go, but it sounds as if I should be glad I can't.

Richard,

I'm not intending to be inflammatory. If you've seen my comments around here in the past, I may take unpopular positions and try to defend them, but I don't say something just to start a fight, except in good fun (i.e., if it will get Adam Wood to say something lyrical).

The Supreme Court isn't addressing civil marriage, if by that you mean what the states recognize: 30+ states refused to recognize it yesterday; what happens in the wake of this decision is up for others to decide.

I have no idea if an organist has been forced to play for such a wedding. On the other hand, many other people who own businesses catering to those who intend to marry are being so compelled, so it wouldn't be beyond the bounds of possibility.

Charles W,

If he asks what kind of marriage it is before confirming availability, he leaves himself open to charges of discrimination. If he doesn't ask, then, when he finds out, he is unable to back out without, again, leaving himself open to charges of discrimination. Either way, it's a lose, lose situation.

.

(For the record, to eliminate any confusion, my own personal stand is squarely according to the church's teaching, and I am extremely disheartened by the decision -- though not surprised -- especially given that I have a toddler child I must raise in this increasingly hostile society. My point, I suppose, is that the religious freedom battle has been going on for quite some time now, and the problem posed by the OP is a very small drop in the typhoon of potential implications of the Church being on the political losing end of the battles either for religious freedom or the preservation of marriage. In short, the world does not revolve around contracted organists.)

Really!
What are the chances of these 'marriages' taking place in a Catholic church? (Nihil.)
So, unless you are playing somewhere else, you have nothing to worry about.

It seems to me the dilemma is that CMAA has never been exclusively Catholic, but nevertheless firmly grounded in the Catholic perspective. Up to now, this has entailed only minor accommodations, in the pursuit of inclusiveness. I have a feeling this may have to change. Certainly, the type of clergy that feel attached to the work of CMAA, and who participate in the Colloquium, tend not to be those who will chose to do so, should the organization express open ambivalence on this issue. Not to sound overly clerical about it, but really, that would pretty much spell the end of the organization.

My view from the trenches the last couple decades has been instructive. Generally speaking, for parish church musicians who cannot align themselves with the Church's teachings on moral issues, it came down to a) their personal choice to cooperate discreetly, and b) their pastor's willingness to accommodate a). I have seen both, and I have seen both falter in recent years. So far, nobody I know has made a federal case (so to speak) of it. Musicians who could no longer operate within Church teachings have tended to leave more or less quietly; pastors who could no longer tolerate open transgressions on the part of their musicians have dismissed them (or, less nobly, forced them out, one way or another). Nobody can tolerate working in a contentious environment for very long. On the other hand, nobody who has served the Catholic Church with any degree of honesty is eager to actively debase the institution. This rather sanguine perspective is also bound to change in coming years.

The question then becomes whether CMAA is bound primarily to support musicians, regardless of their ecclesial tradition or doctrinal alignment; or whether its work is, and must, remain within the context of the Roman Catholic Church. I should hope, for all our sakes, that the C always precedes the M.

I read a statement by a Greek Orthodox priest in, I believe, Michigan. He stated he would no longer represent or be an agent of the state to perform legal marriages. He intends to do church marriages and let the couple separately perform whatever is necessary to satisfy the secular authorities. I think we may see more of similar actions with the church removing itself from the legal marriage business.

That is the only long term option that the church will have.

Very disturbing to see at least one faculty member for the upcoming colloquium celebrating the decision quite openly.

Quite. I'm with Dearest on this one.

people who didn't want to understand some part of "Supreme Court"

Supreme Court is one thing.

Supreme Being is another. Some don't want to understand that difference.

Kevin - good point about France. That seems like essentially what we have here now (or what we will need to clarify soon). The state can never force the Catholic Church to decide what constitutes sacramental marriage within the Catholic sacramental system. If for no other reason than that the Church is much, much larger than any one nation.

BUT, it does become an interesting question of conscience for a faithful Catholic working in a church music position in a tradition that performs gay marriages.

I haven't fleshed this out, so take it as you see fit, but perhaps musicians should take advantage of the Hosanna-Tabor ruling and have their positions officially declared by the parish or diocese to be "ministerial" positions.

I like the idea. Perhaps they might even have to pay us more. LOL.

I worked as DOM/Organist in a Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) for 5 years. That makes me quite familiar with liberal Christianity, since I think only the United Church of Christ is more liberal. It wasn't uncommon for some to be in what Catholics would consider improper relationships. Many had been divorced multiple times and it wasn't uncommon for members to decide to be re-baptized. I never understood that one. I took the position that I couldn't live their lives, only my own.

I'm drafting a contract for a freelance wedding I'm doing. I've listed my responsibilities and the groom's responsibilities, among which is:
"To arrange a licit marriage under the canon law of the Catholic Church."
This came up when I'd exchanged a mess of emails and realized with amusement that, in typical male obliviousness, he'd never told me the name of the bride. When I told my wife, she was horrified. "OMG, it's a guy, we're going to get sued." "It's a Catholic wedding; that can't happen." "Bet me." Given that there are several "catholike" groups in town, I realized that there was a greater than zero chance of running into trouble, and overkill was in order.

Richard R. asks

...whether CMAA is bound primarily to support musicians

Sounds like a no-brainer to me. Love of sacred music can make for odd bedfellows, much as defense of 'traditional marriage' (historically as one man, one or more women) has allied bishops with the Church of Latter Day Saints.

There's a really tacky joke in here somewhere about solving the problem of having to play that hackneyed piece of camp from Wagner's "Loengrin" for a processional, but I can't for the life of me figure out how to make it work.

I'll just go back to nursing my bourbon and figuring out what the world will look like when I wake up tomorrow.

Then there's the whole question of what to do about my AGO membership.

I hope everyone collaborating with the CMAA will respect CMAA's identity as a Catholic organization.

I thought the question was "may we expect that we will be required to play", but maybe subsidiarity requires organizations like CMAA to do their part to keep the issue from having to be addressed by the Vatican.

As music professionals I think we might worry instead about a stand on stuff that Melo has sniffed out. I fully expect someone here to pipe up and say this doesn't matter because the recessional song is not officially part of the Mass. ;-)

Thanks, Richard for the shout. If I sniff so well, maybe someone should ship me upstate New York for the other prison escapee.
As I see it, this issue's ramifications aren't about we musicians and our Catholic fealty.
This issue is political as the SCOTUS has provided a platform for the executive and legislative branches at the federal and state level to dictate, on their terms, what constitutes a separation between church and state. And in this era, guess who'll prevail?

Dad:

I was going to click the thanks on your post, but wondered what 'serving such a marriange' means. Can you elucidate?

Francis: donr has it.

One person's moral turpitude is party time for another. ;-)

I don't see same sex weddings in Catholic churches during our lifetimes. In Orthodox churches, hell will freeze before then. The Protestants will continue to do as they please as they have always done. Maybe we shouldn't be that concerned about what they are doing.

And we know the world is saved, if we rely on politicians! Now, Jazzer, you know that that is a joke, right?

I don't see same sex weddings in Catholic churches during our lifetimes

I don't see same-sex weddings in Catholic churches at any time unless the State creates a kind of faux church like in communist countries, which I don't see either since the USGov likes to keep up the lie that it is neutral and tolerant on moral topics.

However, everything on the perimeter of the Church is fair game: hospitals, schools, universities, homeless shelters...and musicians who moonlight for non-Catholic events.

This is why I think the Hosanna-Tabor "minister" option ought to be explored. As a Catholic in a ministerial position, you could argue that you are still representing the Catholic teachings on marriage which does recognize the validity of man-women marriages outside the communion. Without it, you might be able to keep on trucking, but I think eventually you will run afoul of a situation similar to:

With all due respect Gavin...I cannot agree with you. Being silent in the face of evil makes you complicit with the evil. Besides...all it does is buy you a little temporary safety. You will eventually have to pick a side in this fight.

Learn to live on Lentils and you won't have to flatter the king.

"Play the music and sing"

Nice take on it. Of course the next stage is making sure everyone is singing enthusiastically. Kinda like in The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly where Confederate prisoners are forced to play while one of their own (they believe) is being tortured and the guard commands: "More feeling."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IK94ch0hfcc