Thinking

David at 42 has some interesting thoughts on the ridiculousness at the St. Paul Cathedral this last Sunday. Basically, his point is: Yeah, it's lame that they won't give communion to LGBT supporters, but what else would you expect? Here's a direct quote:

Look, rainbow-sash people: the crabby, constipated scolds at the Cathedral of St. Paul aren’t interested in changing anything; all the more so with Joey Ratz running things now. Go find a nice queer-friendly Episcopal church instead. They’re practically the same thing anyway.

Now, as a heathen agnostic myself, I'm more than sympathetic to this point of view. It's one of the reasons I quit going to Catholic mass, even though I quite enjoy the ritual and there are some nice, liberal congregations out there. And, as David says, with Pope Ratz in charge, it seems like a wasted effort. But: I can't help but think that now in particular is when the Church needs its dissenters. I think that the numerous gay and feminist Catholics I know would say that they stay in the Church because the good things they get out of it outweigh the bad. And it seems to me that if there ARE things worth preserving about Catholicism qua Catholicism (if you get me), then the solution is not for the progressives in the Church to go elsewhere, but rather to do exactly what they did in St. Paul: make it very clear that they believe the Church can encompass and embrace them and be the better for it, and they're not going away until it does.

But like I say, as a non-church-goer and a bordering-on-militant agnostic, I dunno that I'm qualified to judge. What do y'all think?