That was fast. When I went to Sunday mass last week as St. James Cathedral, their leadership was evasive and downright elusive when asked about the local Catholic Church's new campaign to oppose a same-sex marriage bill. But this week, the Catholic Church's position was in black and white.

Inside every bulletin at St. James Cathedral, the laity received marching orders today to begin pressuring their state lawmakers to stop the marriage equality measure in Olympia. In fact, Archbishop J. Peter Sartain disseminated the message to all 175 parishes under his jurisdiction of Western Washington and instructed them to print it in their bulletins. Here's the entire statement:

ARCHBISHOP SARTAIN HAS ASKED THAT THE FOLLOWING ANNOUNCEMENT BE PUBLISHED IN ALL PARISH BULLETINS THIS WEEKEND

PROTECT MARRIAGE Legislators will be voting soon on whether to the change current law defining marriage. Marriage between a man and a woman is essential for family life and the foundation of any society. Please call, email or write your state Senator and two Representatives urging them to support the current law and defend marriage as the union of one man and one woman.

Call 1-800-562-6000 to leave a message for your legislators. Go to the Washington State Legislature website at http://aps.leg.wa.gov/DistrictFinder/Default.aspx to find your legislator and to write or email a message to them.

That wasn't all: Copies of a more detailed anti-gay proclamation, issued by Sartain and three other Washington State bishops on January 13, were tucked into the vestibules of St. James. "Upholding the present definition of marriage," the decree warned, is necessary for the "continuation of the human race."

This may be the tip of the Catholic iceberg (as gay marriage looks increasingly likely to appear on the statewide November ballot).

If Minnesota is any indication, Archbishop Sartain could impose the Vatican's agenda on progressive Seattle congregations the same way his colleagues are in Minneapolis: Twin Cities Archbishop John Nienstedt demanded that priests read a "marriage prayer" from the pulpit to advance the church's agenda to pass a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage this fall. Priests were required to get up before their congregations—and laity were expected to recite a prayer—to "proclaim and defend [God's] plan for marriage, which is the union of one man and one woman..." This effort coincided with a lobbying and fundraising campaign. And just last week, Nienstedt warned clergy there will be no “open dissent.”

In Washington State, we may be witnessing the beginning of a similar crusade to turn pulpits into stages for political rallies. After all, our marriage bill may pass the senate, and then it’s all but destined to appear the November ballot. At that point, Rome may perk up its ears, Washington will likely be declared ground zero for a religious war, and the trickle of cash that usually goes skyward from the local collection plates will instead be blasted back down on our statewide election. (Color me shocked: Sartian and the Archdiocese of Seattle have not returned several calls seeking comment.)

Of course, that may not happen in Washington State. Our bishops may not go that far. Or our priests may refuse to comply.

After all, polls show that the vast majority of Catholics—the Jesus-loving folk who go to church, not the bigot bishops who run the churches—support marriage equality. They're even more supportive than the electorate at large.

At today’s sermon—which I sat through, yes—Father Michael Ryan made zero mention of the proclamation. The wording in the bulletin was also telling: The announcement was clearly there at the request of bishop, an announcement Father Ryan wasn’t rushing to espouse. But who knows: The bishops could demand churches lead prayers and campaign, and the National Organization for Marriage, which routinely doesn't report its contributors but is tied closely to the Catholic Church, will have the ears of those bishops.

If that happens, will Seattle's church leadership like Father Ryan push back? I'd like to hope the answer is yes. But when it came to printing anti-gay lobbying messages in today's bulletin, his answer was no.