Mary Hunt Offers a “Few Friendly Suggestions” for the Synod of Bishops

I always appreciate the erudite and insightful perspective of theologian Mary Hunt. Today I share her thoughts on Pope Francis’ Synod of Bishops, “For a Synodal Church: Communion, Participation and Mission,” which is getting underway next week in Rome.

Mary’s thoughts were first published September 27 by The National Catholic Reporter under the headline, “5 Suggestions to Make the Pope’s Big Synod of Bishops Actually Mean Something.”

____________________

People ask me what I think is going to happen at the first assembly of the two-part Synod of Bishops in Rome this October. I have long had serious reservations about the whole process. My crystal ball is being repaired so I have no earthly idea. Nonetheless, I refuse to join hands with right-wing conservative Catholics, many in the U.S., who condemn the synod as the stuff of the devil. You can almost hear them singing to that old Mary Poppins tune, “Super-synodality-reaps-excommunication” wishing it were Gregorian chant.

I prefer to think constructively about what might turn a laudable idea flawed by structural problems into a truly historic, world-changing event. That might be expecting a lot from religion in a secular age, but human encounter is human encounter and sometimes it has unexpected results.

I offer a few friendly suggestions. If it is too late to implement some this year, there is always next October, and the October after that, and the one after that, which leads to my first suggestion:


1. Make the synod an annual affair.

Let it be like the assemblies of other religious groups – a chance to gather the community in prayer, a place to discuss differences in respectful ways, an opportunity to bask in the infinite variety of the human spirit, a time to set new directions and shape policy.

It does not have to be in Rome every year. In fact, twice might be enough for this century. Think Mongolia, Malta, Argentina, Canada, Nigeria and Australia.

One year it could be regional gatherings; the next year local meetings with international meetings held every once in a while (think carbon footprint, people). But setting aside a few days, or beginning to think about a “Synod Week” worldwide, would be a way to make this much vaunted “walking together” approach more than divisive rhetoric.


2. Livestream the synod sessions from start to finish.

Pope Francis’ declaration to journalists earlier this month that there would be no televising of the synod sessions is disappointing. But it looks as if his Vatican colleagues rescued him from what in the vernacular in Buenos Aires is referred to as a porqueria (politely, “nonsense”), and parts of the assembly will be shared. Concerns for safety for those in danger in their homelands are real and to be handled with care. But the notion of putting large parts of synod activity under “papal secret” seems quaint and extreme in the internet age. Good luck with that.

I urge erring on the side of streaming most of it, but again that might be next year. In 1971, when musician Gil Scott-Heron wrote “The Revolution Will Not Be Televised,” his was a call to action, a satirical way to encourage people to abandon their couches and get involved. Fifty years later, watching history unfold is a way to be involved, to include and spark more and different participation. Think Tiananmen Square and Arab Spring, Black Lives Matter protests and women’s marches.

Livestreaming all synod plenary sessions is a no-brainer. Small group conversations would be exempt. But opening and closing remarks, prayers, liturgies, guidelines for discussion, and especially the inevitable floor interventions will make for important viewing. At a minimum, they will demystify the whole process, making it more than just a Hail Mary pass to save a sinking institution. Even if the coverage is as boring as watching grass grow, it is everyone's grass and the optics of inclusion are not trivial.


3. Express synodal concepts and ideas in plain language without rhetorical fetishes and flourishes.

The crisis which has forced this synodal process is, in plain English, of the institutional church’s own making. It is the fruit of five decades of official refusal to change so that a vibrant religious tradition can endure in postmodernity. Add a global epidemic of clerical sexual abuse and its cover-up by bishops, and the handwriting is on the wall. If this synodal process does not amount to more than another document that few people read, I think the future of Catholicism is in serious peril.

It is anyway, but don’t make it worse by using spiritualized language and obfuscating jargon. This boat is taking on water like the Titanic and everyone knows what happened there. The synod, if it lives up to its history and name, is a chance to speak honestly of mistakes and structures that do not work. It is time to beg apologies and listen, listen, listen to the new people in the room, namely, anyone who is not a bishop or above on a ladder that is teetering.


4. Include openly queer people, women priests, and a lot of non-Catholics.

The guest list for the upcoming synod is so heavy on clerics that it is hard to make the case that something different is really envisioned. Of the roughly 364 voting delegates, about 273 are bishops. God forbid they come in their finery. It is not even a bishop with a plus-one. Incremental change on this one won’t cut it. We live in a visual age so convincing people that something new (albeit old) is happening here will be impossible. A synod worth its salt needs to look more like a parish association gathering, not the corporation’s board meeting.

That no openly queer people are on the current roster is lamentable. The operative word is “openly,” and how sad is that? Given the high percentage of gay men in the Catholic clergy, I would guess that those at the synod could fill more than a few of the roundtables at which participants will sit and discern.

The shame is that highly skilled and committed LGBTQI+ people from groups like DignityUSA and the Global Network of Rainbow Catholics are not front and center. If there is to be the merest mention of same-sex anything it must include out people speaking their truths: “Nothing about us without us,” or the whole thing is a sham. How tragic that some LGBTQI+ people will participate, but not be able to bring their full selves to the table.

Similarly, the hoped-for discussion about women deacons and the indefensible ban on talking about women priests pale before the reality of Catholic women who are already engaged in the same work as ordained men. Roman Catholic women priests, both from the eponymous organizations and those now ordained in Anglican, Lutheran, or other communions, would bring a touch of reality to a still largely abstract conversation.

Women are ministering, including sacramentally, and the sun is coming up the next day. What needs to be addressed is how Catholics think about the ordination of anyone. Why not invite some of these women to talk as equals? Some women’s groups (Roman Catholic Women Priests and Association of Roman Catholic Women Priests, for example) have bishops they could send, if anyone were still interested in standing on that ceremony. But a robust conversation with women who wish to serve and have been excommunicated for their willingness to do so would give the often vacuous term “discernment” a good name.


5. Finally, the elephant in the synod aula is the matter of papal power, the fact that the pope speaks first, last, and always despite synodal claims to build consensus before doing anything.

It is a sweet theory, but in practice, as was clear after the synod for the nine-nation Amazon region, lack of consensus can cover a multitude of sins. And, according to present polity, what changes accrue are those that the pope makes. Nothing new here.

So, one has to ask if this synod is really more than a charade, a way to keep people busy, thinking they are doing something useful when that is not altogether clear. Moreover, being able to vote, and even voting in the majority does not assure anything. Papal protestations that a synod is not a parliamentary project ring hollow. I fear that a synod without a change in ecclesial structures will only further cement an already problematic model of church.

The real story in Rome in October will probably be outside the hall, where progressive groups will express their faithful views in creative ways. No invitations needed. Stay tuned to the livestream and let’s see what shakes in Rome in the beautiful weather and in the full glare of bright lights. We can but hope.


NOTE: Mary Hunt’s article is part of NCR’s Synod on Synodality feature series. To view the full series, click here.

Related Off-site Links and Updates:
Synod 2023: What Has Pope Francis Said About Synodality? – Hannah Brockhaus (Catholic News Agency, September 17, 2023).
Vatican Gathering Tackles Topics From Women in Ministry to LGBTQ+ Catholics – Jason DeRose (The National Catholic Reporter, October 4, 2023).

See also the previous Wild Reed posts:
• Beyond the Hieracrchy: The Blossoming of Liberating Catholic Insights on Sexuality
• Mary Hunt: “Catholicism is a Very Complex Reality”
• Our Catholic “Stonewall Moment”
• Stop in the Name of Discriminatory Ideology!
• LGBT Catholics Respond to Synod 2014’s Final Report
• “Trajectory is More Important Than the Current Status”

For the Twin Cities-based Catholic Coalition for Church Reform’s 2010 Synod of the Baptized, see:
• Introducing the Catholic Coalition for Church Reform
• Many Voices, One Church
• “Something Exciting and Joyous”
• Preparing to Claim Our Place at the Table
• CCCR Responds to Censure by Chancery
• An Exciting Endeavor
• A New Phase
• Prayer of the 2010 Synod
• The Spirit of Pentecost is Very Much Alive in the Church of St. Paul-Minneapolis
• Taking It to the Streets
• Out and About – August 2010
• Countdown to Synod 2010
• Out and About – Autumn 2013

See also the following Progressive Catholic Voice posts:
• Synod of the Baptized Uncovers Deep Well of Hope
• A Tradition Worth Fighting For
• Council of the Baptized Launched in Minneapolis-St. Paul
• Countdown to Synod 2013
• A Pre-Synod Get-Together
• Photo of the Day – September 29, 2013

Remembering David McCaffrey, 10 Years On

.

I envision and work to create a Church that is open
& responsive to the needs and gifts of all its members;
a Church that is meaningful and nurturing of all,
and one that recognizes the equal status of all.

– David J. McCaffrey

1947 – 2011

Ten years ago today, my dear friend and colleague David McCaffrey died after a brief illness. He was 64.

Left: David and I at one of many planning meetings we hosted and/or attended over the years of our friendship and our shared work around LGBT-education and justice issues within the Catholic Church.

David was a tireless advocate for LGBT Catholics and an incredibly caring and generous individual. His compassion and commitment to justice and to the good news of liberation for the marginalized and oppressed were hallmarks of his life, as was his dedication to the Catholic LGBT community, his humor, and his warm and welcoming smile.

A year before his death, David was a recipient of the Adsum Award at the Catholic Coalition for Church Reform’s Synod of the Baptized. Adsum is a Latin word which means “I am present and listening.” Whenever the participants in Vatican II were gathered at St. Peter’s Basilica their traditional prayer was the exclamation: adsumus – “we are present and listening.” The Adsum Award recognizes those individuals who are known within the local church for having committed to being present and attentive to the Spirit. Accordingly, they have served as partners with the Spirit in re-creating the face of the church in the Archdiocese of St. Paul-Minneapolis.

David J. McCaffrey was a worthy recipient of this award. An honors graduate of the University of St. Thomas (1969, magna cum laude), David spent almost 30 years working in medical and social science research at the University of Minnesota. He was dedicated to ensuring that church teaching on gender and sexuality was informed by the findings of this important research. In 1980 he was one of six co-founders of the Catholic Pastoral Committee on Sexual Minorities (CPCSM), an advocacy and educational non-profit that worked to create environments of respect, acceptance and safety for LGBTQI persons and their families in the Catholic Church and wider society. I served as CPCSM’s executive coordinator from 2003 until it’s disbandment in 2015. (For David’s recollections of the founding of CPCSM, click here.)

In the 1980’s, David played a crucial role in CPCSM’s groundbreaking Needs Assessment Survey of local LGBT Catholics. He was also the executive producer of CPCSM’s 1988 video, Silent Journeys of Faith, and the editor of its companion guidebook. Both resources were major components of CPCSM’s training workshops given to pastoral and social justice professionals of 25 parishes throughout the archdiocese.

In the 1990s, David played a major role in the development and implementation of CPCSM’s Safe Staff Training Initiative, which provided sensitivity training around LGBT issues to the educational leadership of the archdiocese and to administrators and faculties of eight of the high schools of the archdiocese. (This initiative culminated in the 2007 publication of Creating Safe Environments for LGBT Students: A Catholic Schools Perspective, the book – and “courageous document” – that I authored.)

In the years before his passing, David maintained CPCSM’s extensive website (archived here). He also took an invaluable leadership role in Catholics for Marriage Equality MN and was an active member in his faith community, St. Stanislaus Catholic Church in St. Paul.

Today, on the tenth anniversary of his passing, I honor David by sharing a selection of photographs taken over the period of time when I knew and worked with him (1994-2011). I also share one of David’s writings from 2008.

If, like me, you knew and loved David, then I’m sure you’ll enjoy this very special commemorative post. You may even see yourself in a photo or two!

So without further ado, let’s get started . . .

Above: The cover of the September 30, 1994 issue of Gaze Magazine, featuring David with fellow CPCSM co-founder Bill Kummer (left) and Dignity Twin Cities president Brian McNeill (center).

Written by Zoé Diacou, this cover story, entitled “Crossing the Catholic Church,” examined “local GLBT Catholics’ twenty-year struggle with the hierarchy” by interviewing people associated with Dignity Twin Cities, which was celebrating its 20th anniversary that year. I’d joined Dignity within weeks of my arrival in Minnesota in January 1994, and its welcoming environment provided me my first opportunity to meet other gay Catholics. Diacou’s article included insightful comments from David and Bill, both of whom have now passed (Bill in 2006, and David in 2011).

To read Zoé Diacou’s article “Crossing the Catholic Church,” click here.

Above: My first photo with David. We’re pictured standing with Bishop Thomas Gumblton and fellow-members of our planning team for Bishop Gumbleton’s October 1994 visit to the Twin Cities.

From left: CPCSM board member Mary Burns, David, me, Bishop Thomas Gumbleton, CPCSM co-founder Bill Kummer, Darlene White, Dale Korogi (who at that time was at the Basilica of St. Mary, one of the venues at which Bishop Gumbleton spoke and celebrated mass), and Joan Bednarczyk (from the Church of St. Stephen in Anoka, where Bishop Gumbleton’s talk was entitled “From Fear to Faith: A Catholic Bishop's Personal Journey with His Gay Brother”).

As I document here, it was through Dignity Twin Cities that I first became involved with the Catholic Pastoral Committee on Sexual Minorities (CPCSM). Years later I would serve as the organization's executive coordinator.

Throughout the spring and summer of 1994, CPCSM worked to bring Bishop Gumbleton to the Twin Cities for a series of talks in October. I organized a speaking engagement for the bishop at the College of St. Catherine, and gave it the title, “Bridging the Gap: Reconciling the Church and Its Sexual Minority Members.” I used a picture of the construction of the Sydney Harbour Bridge in the promotional material.

Above: David in November 2004, pictured with me and my friend Raphael, who was visiting from Australia at that time.



Above: David with my parents, Gordon and Margaret Bayly, during their visit to the Twin Cities from Australia in the summer of 2005.

Above: With David and Catholic feminist theologian Mary Hunt – February 2006.

CPCSM had partnered with St. Joan of Arc Catholic Church to bring Mary to Minneapolis for a symposium entitled “Exploring Contemporary Issues Within the Catholic Church.” For the text of Mary’s talk, “One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic: An Ecclesia for Our Children and Ourselves,” click here.

Above: CPCSM's inaugural Bill Kummer Forum on April 28-29, 2006, featured renowned theologian and author Daniel Helminiak, who offered a two-part presentation entitled “Gay Body, Gay Soul: A Catholic LGBTI Perspective on Sexuality, Spirituality and Marriage.” Pictured from left: Rev. Paul Tucker (then-pastor of All God’s Children Metropolitan Community Church), Daniel, Paul Fleege (CPCSM treasurer), and David and I.

For my 2006 Rainbow Spirit interview with Daniel, click here.

Above: On the evening of Friday, April 27, 2007, members and friends of CPCSM attended the inaugural Minnesota GLBTA Campus Alliance Spring Dinner at the University of St. Thomas.

Clockwise from front left: Mary Lynn Murphy (then-CPCSM president and Catholic Rainbow Parents coordinator); Tom Murr; Gretchen Murr (then-president of P-Flag/Twin Cities); David and his partner Michael; Paul Fleege (then-treasurer of CPCSM); Kathleen Olson; and Cheryl Maloney (then-executive director of Twin Cities Pride).

For more images and commentary on this event, click here.



Above: From left: David’s partner Michael, David, Aimee, me, and Mary Lynn at Twin Cities Gay Pride 2007.



Above: A meeting of The Progressive Catholic Voice planning team – August 2007. From left: Beverly Barrett , Mary Lynn Murphy, Paul Fleege, Gerry Sell, Susan Kramp, Mary Beckfeld, David, Rick Notch, and Paula Ruddy.



Above: David with longtime CPCSM supporter Theresa O’Brien – January 26, 2008.



Above: David with Mary Beckfeld, the recipient of CPCSM’s 2008 Father Henry F. LeMay Pastoral Ministry Award – June 23, 2008.



Above: David and his partner Michael were among a number of friends who gathered at my home in St. Paul on Saturday, August 2, 2008, to meet and welcome my older brother and his family who were visiting the U.S. at that time. From left: My nephew, Brendan; Tom White; Rick Notch; Sue Ann Martinson; David and Michael; me; my nephew, Mitchell; Rita McDonald, CSJ; and Kate McDonald, CSJ.



Above: David and his partner Michael – December 2009.



Above: David with Kathleen Olsen, leading the singing of “We Shall Overcome” at the Cathedral of St. Paul – October 31, 2010. Approximately 150 people gathered at the Cathedral that day in loving opposition to the MN bishops’ campaign of intolerance and discrimination against the LGBT citizens of Minnesota. For more images and commentary, click here.

Above: With David and our friend Paul – December 2010.

Above: David with (from left) Sheila Nelson, CALGM president, and Myrna Ohmann, Catholic Rainbow Parents co-founder – February 26, 2011.



Above: Standing at left with (from left) attorney Jeff Anderson, journalist and author Jason Berry, psychologist and Walk-In Counseling Center executive director Gary Schoener, and David – June 16, 2011.

Berry, well-known for his meticulous reporting on sexual abuse by Catholic priests, was visiting St. Paul as part of his national book tour for Render Unto Rome: The Secret Life of Money In the Catholic Church.



Above: The last photo of David, taken at Twin Cities Gay Pride 2011 – Sunday, June 26, 2011.

From left: Rick, David, Paul and me.



In Zoé Diacou’s 1994 article, “Crossing the Catholic Church,” it’s noted that David felt unable to worship regularly at any parish, "primarily as a result of personal and spiritual burnout and betrayal." Thankfully, by the time of his death, David had for many years found a welcoming and supportive spiritual home at St. Stanislaus Catholic Church in St. Paul. Indeed, at his funeral mass on July 15, 2011, a beautiful portrait of David and his partner of 13-and-a-half years, Michael, adorned the sanctuary (above), the same sacred space from which Michael delivered a heartfelt eulogy for David. To read this eulogy and for images of the mass, click here.

__________________________

I close by sharing an article that David wrote for The Progressive Catholic Voice in 2008. It’s actually a response to a commentary in the Star Tribune newspaper by University of St. Thomas professor Stephen Heaney. In this commentary, Heaney – who at that time sat on the board of the Archdiocese’s Faith in Action (a.k.a Courage) program – attempts to defend statements on homosexuality by then-Coadjutor Archbishop John Nienstedt.

As I’m sure you’ll agree, David’s well-researched and reasoned response methodically and effectively demolishes Heaney’s argument. It also exposes the archbishop’s statements and, by extension, the Church’s teaching on homosexuality, as being both intellectually dishonest and morally bankrupt. As I said earlier in this post, David's was dedicated to doing whatever he could to ensure that church teaching on gender and sexuality was informed by the latest medical and social science research. It was his passion, and we were so fortunate to be gifted by it. Thank you, David!


• • • • • • • • • • • •

Far from “Innocuous”
A response to Stephen’s Heaney’s defense
of Coadjutor Archbishop John Nienstedt’s
“innocuous” statements on homosexuality

By David J. McCaffrey
The Progressive Catholic Voice
January 2008

In his December 29, 2007 commentary in the Star Tribune, University of Minnesota professor Stephen J. Heaney implied that there are a small number of people who oppose the Church’s teaching on homosexuality, as recently articulated by Coadjutor Archbishop Nienstedt in his column in The Catholic Spirit. Furthermore, Heaney asserts that Nienstedt’s column about homosexuality, far from being of concern or controversy, is in fact “innocuous.” That particular column includes the following “innocuous” statement of the archbishop’s:

Those who actively encourage or promote homosexual acts or such activity within a homosexual lifestyle formally cooperate in a grave evil and, if they do so knowingly and willingly, are guilty of mortal sin. They have broken communion with the church and are prohibited from receiving holy Communion until they have had a conversion of heart, expressed sorrow for their action and received sacramental absolution from a priest.

I assert that Heaney is wrong on both accounts. Not a small number of people oppose the type of anti-gay speech from religious leaders like Archbishop Nienstedt, and such speech is far from “innocuous.”

For example, as for Heaney’s implication that there is a small number opposing Nienstedt’s articulation of the Church's teaching on homosexuality, in a Fall 2007 Harris Study of heterosexual Americans, 56 % of all those surveyed – and 60 % of those aged 18 to 44 – said people should be more supportive of equal rights for gay people. Further, according to the poll’s findings, a majority of Americans (71 %) said they have spoken out against anti-gay comments, saying they felt it was “the right thing to do.”

Also, according to the September 2007 study among young people in the U.S., aged 16 to 29, by Christian pollster George Barna, 91% of non-Christians and 80% of churchgoers say present-day Christianity is “anti-homosexual.” And that “they believe that Christians show excessive contempt and unloving attitudes towards gays and lesbians.” Such research results do not represent small numbers of people, as Professor Heaney would have us believe.

Refuting Heaney’s assertion that Nienstedt’s column is “innocuous” is a 2003 national survey of adults by the prestigious Pew Research Center for The People & The Press and the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life. This study found that “people who hear clergy talk [negatively] about homosexuality are more likely to have highly unfavorable views of gays and lesbians.” If that is true, then statements such as Nienstedt’s, from a religious leader, are far from “innocuous.”

How many local Catholics, including families with LGBT members, have been encouraged to hold negative views toward their loved ones after reading or hearing Nienstedt’s statements? How many more coworkers, neighbors, and even family members will now feel more self-righteous permission to further discriminate against members of sexual minorities who are trying to live honest and self-actualized lives?

Beyond the significance and the impact of Nienstedt’s recent statement on homosexuality, we need to seriously consider both this statement’s substance – that those who encourage and support gay people are cooperating in a grave evil and thereby are guilty of mortal sin; and its foundation – that persons who are innately homosexual and attempt to live honest, self-actualized lives, as their consciences dictate, are “intrinsically disordered.” I assert, as does virtually every reputable medical and mental health professional organization, that homosexuality is innate and not based on choice and that it cannot and should not be changed through unsafe and unethical methods known as “reparative” or “conversion" therapy.

Therefore, the Church’s teaching that homosexuality is “intrinsically disordered” and that those who find themselves to be constitutively homosexual must maintain life-long sexual abstinence is clearly based on outdated science and must go the same way as the Church’s past teachings on the solar system, slavery, the dynamics of human reproduction, and the status of women – all of which were also based upon outdated science.

For any academic institution to be relevant and credible, its curriculum must remain consonant with the findings of today’s human sciences. In the case of a Catholic academic institution like the University of St. Thomas, its curriculum should also be open to theological developments that are informed by the sciences and the lived experience of the faithful. In this way, such academic institutions will continue to grow with society and with the living faith of the people of God.

The recent decision by St. Thomas’ board of trustees to proactively democratize its board structure by making the chairman and vice-chairman positions electable represents one such change to ensure the University’s relevance and credibility. Traditionally, both board positions had been held ex-officio by the Archbishop and the Vicar General of the Archdiocese of St. Paul-Minneapolis, respectively. However, based upon advice from the Association of Governing Boards of Colleges and Universities following a review of St. Thomas’ board structure, the University’s trustees voted in October to make the board’s by-law changes.

Another clear sign of such progress would be for the University administration and faculty to cease clinging to concepts about human nature, and especially human sexuality, that are based upon medieval notions seriously out of sync with today’s mainstream science and the authentic life experiences of gay people of faith. Such a change would greatly assist these students as they follow their conscience in seeking honest and fulfilling lives that are true to how God created them while enabling them to utilize their many talents to the fullest in responding to the multiple needs of today’s world.

– David J. McCaffrey
The Progressive Catholic Voice
January 2008

See also the previous Wild Reed posts:
• David McCaffrey Looks Back at the History of CPCSM
• David McCaffrey: “History Matters”
• CPCSM Co-Founder David McCaffrey Responds to “Not Catholic” Assertion
• David McCaffrey on the Honoring MN State Representative Karen Clark at the 2004 CPCSM Annual Meeting
• 20 Years Stateside
• Sad News
• “I Have Never Felt Closer to Anyone in My Entire Life Than to David”
• God Is in the Roses
• Remembering David McCaffrey, One Year On

Quote of the Day

Earth to Rome: lots of communities are already celebrating both same-sex blessings and same-sex weddings, indeed even calling them Catholic marriages, naming them as sacraments because they are. According to contemporary Catholic definitions, a sacrament is an occasion when a community lifts an everyday human experience to public expression because it is holy. For example, a baby does not ‘become’ Christian through the Sacrament of Baptism. The fact of their being part of a Christian community is highlighted in the baptismal ceremony (i.e., sacrament) for everyone to affirm and embrace.

Likewise, with ordination. Magic words spoken by a bishop do not a priest make. The ordinand’s demonstrated commitment to ministry is recognized and affirmed in the Sacrament of Ordination. That is why in Catholic teaching, the ministers of the Sacrament of Marriage are the people who make a covenant with one another, not the priest who is a witness along with the rest of the community called church. As was true in the civil arena, it is a short step from heterosexual marriage to same-sex marriage in religion.

So the Vatican’s ethical contortions in [its recent document] are all the more pitiful. It claims that the church can bless “individual persons with homosexual inclinations” who live according to the Church’s teachings, i.e., a celibate existence. But should such persons find love, happiness, companionship, energy to create family and spark community, should it occur to such persons and their loved ones that their lives are healthy, good, natural, holy, and worthy of celebration and encouragement, the answer, to quote this dubious document, is “Negative.” Happily, the Roman Catholic institutional Church is only a small and shrinking part of a much broader Catholic community that has more common sense and ethical savvy. Catholic people are far more generous in their thinking and blessing than many Vatican officials.

Meanwhile, it’s heartening to know that on the strength of this document, people, including some priests and deacons, are jumping out of the woodwork to offer their pastoral services to bless same-sex couples. Thanks to the media coverage of this [document], ministerial resources offered by groups like DignityUSA, New Ways Ministry, and the Global Network of Rainbow Catholics are getting broader attention. Some other Christian denominations around the world are making clear that they will bless Catholics whether the Catholic Church does or not.

– Mary E. Hunt
Excerpted from “The Vatican ‘Doubts’ Same-Sex Love,
But More Doubt the Vatican”
Religion Dispatches
March 16, 2021

Related Off-site Links:
Vatican Says Yes to Gay People, No to Blessing Gay Unions – Thomas Reese (National Catholic Reporter, March 17, 2021).
Catholics React to Vatican Ban on Clergy Blessing Same-Sex Marriages – NPR News (March 16, 2021).
Catholic Priests Vow to Bless Same-Sex Unions in Defiance of Vatican – Jordan Williams (The Hill, March 16, 2021).
Catholic Parishes Are Already Supporting and Celebrating Same-Gender Couples – Francis D. Bernardo (Bondings 2.0, March 15, 2021).
CNN’s Don Lemon on Vatican Refusing to Bless Same-Sex Unions: “God Is Not About Hindering People” – Aris Folley (The Hill, March 15, 2021).
Why Do So Many Catholics Support Marriage Equality? Blame the Catholic Imagination – Jamie Manson (National Catholic Reporter, October 8, 2012).

UPDATES: Love Is No Sin: Response to Vatican Statement on Same-Sex Marriage – United Theological Seminary (March 18, 2021).
Bishops Criticize Vatican’s Ban on Blessing Same-Sex Couples – Malo Tresca (National Catholic Reporter, March 19, 2021).
Vatican’s Decree on Gay Unions Risks Making Francis Into a Hypocrite – Editorial Board (National Catholic Reporter, March 19, 2021).
Ruling on Same-Sex Blessings “Is Not Last Word” – Christopher Lamb (The Tablet, March 18, 2021).
Pope Francis Seen as Distancing Himself from Vatican Ban on Blessing Same-Gender Couples – Robert Shine (NewWaysMinistry.org, March 22, 2021).

See also the previous Wild Reed posts:
• Beyond the Hieracrchy: The Blossoming of Liberating Catholic Insights on Sexuality
• Mary Hunt: “Catholicism is a Very Complex Reality”
• Our Catholic “Stonewall Moment”
• Stop in the Name of Discriminatory Ideology!
• Relationship: The Crucial Factor in Sexual Morality
• The Many Manifestations of God’s Loving Embrace
• A “Fruit” Reflects on the Meaning of “Fruitfulness”
• Getting It Right
• The Standard of Sexual Ethics: Human Flourishing, Not Openness to Procreation
• Joan Timmerman on the “Wisdom of the Body”
• A Catholic Statement of Support for Same-Sex Marriage
• Tips on Speaking as a Catholic in Support of Marriage Equality
• LGBT Catholics Respond to Synod 2014’s Final Report
• “Trajectory is More Important Than the Current Status”

Liberating Paris

Exploring the meaning of liberation in
Jennie Livingston's 1990 documentary Paris Is Burning

The Wild Reed's 2018 Queer Appreciation series continues with a piece I wrote in 2002 when studying film and theology at United Theological Seminary of the Twin Cities. This paper focuses on the 1990 documentary film Paris Is Burning which, as Caitlin Breedlove recently noted, "[gave] the world its first peek into the exclusive 'ball' culture and [gave] drag queens, trans men and women, femmes, and gay individuals a spotlight unlike any they’d had before."

Paris Is Burning has been in the (entertainment) news recently with the release of writer and director Ryan Murphy's FX drag ball series Pose. According to Noel Murray of The Verge, the premiere of Pose is "the perfect time to revisit the landmark documentary that captured the scene that started it all." As you'll see, my piece on Paris Is Burning takes a more critical look at the scene it documents.

___________________________________

My interest in writing about Jennie Livingston's documentary film, Paris is Burning, revolves upon five interrelated questions:


• How do the majority of ball participants understand "liberation"?

• How and why is this understanding problematic?

• Does the film lift up a dissenting voice?

• What is a feminist/queer theological understanding of liberation?

• How could such an understanding translate within the ball scene?


For many of those interviewed by Livingston, the drag ball circuit, or scene, offers a sense of belonging and community. Because of their "otherness" in terms of race, gender-identification, and/or sexual orientation, these individuals are marginalized by society. Yet at the balls they feel free to express themselves. As black men, such expression can potentially be of challenge to the status quo: "For black males to take appearing in drag seriously, be they gay or straight, is to oppose a heterosexist representation of black manhood," notes author, feminist, and social activist bell hooks in "Is Paris Burning?", one of the essays in her 1992 book, Black Looks: Race and Representation. "Gender bending and blending on the part of black males has always been a critique of phallocentric masculinity in traditional black experience," says hooks.

Yet hooks also notes that the subversive power of black males in drag can be altered when such images are informed by "a radicalized fictional construction of the feminine that . . . makes the representation of whiteness as crucial to the experience of female impersonation as gender."

Right: Octavia St. Laurent in Paris is Burning (1990).

Evidence of this alteration and its implications abound in Paris Is Burning. "To be real is to look like your straight counterpart, cynically notes Dorian Corey, one of the black participants in the ball scene. Another notes that it is every minority's dream to "live and look and work as the white person." Still another states that if one has "captured the great white way of living and looking" than one is "a marvel." This "great white way" is epitomized for the ball circuit participants by '80s television shows like Dynasty and by white "supermodels." Accordingly, bell is adamant that what viewers are witnessing in Paris Is Burning is "not black men longing to impersonate or even to become like 'real' black women but their obsession with an idealized fetishized vision of femininity that is white."

Above: Pepper LaBeija in Paris Is Burning (1990).

Thus for many of those who participate in the balls, liberation from marginalization and disempowerment is achieved by becoming like a wealthy white female. Theologically, such an outlook implies liberation is about looking beyond one's own intrinsic, God-given worth and seeking to imitate another who, by their external appearance and circumstances, represents that which is "worthy and good." Furthermore, it implies that God gives this worthiness and goodness to some while denying it to others, and that the hallmarks of such worthiness and goodness are outward signs of wealth and power. Finally, it reduces our struggle for liberation to a personal, individual striving for economic betterment.

The achieving to be just like a wealthy white female is also problematic for hooks as she observes that "the longing to be in the position of the ruling-class woman . . . means there is also the desire to act in partnership with the ruling-class white male." Thus the oppressive power structure – the "brutal imperial ruling-class capitalist patriarchal whiteness" – which ensures that those who populate the ball circuit are disempowered and marginalized, remains unchallenged.

Above: Willi Ninja in Paris Is Burning (1990).

Indeed, the power structure is viewed as something to aspire to, as the exclusive club that one must strive to join. There is no (or little) sense of awareness of the systematic injustice and oppression at work, no desire to band collectively in order to expose, undermine, and transform this system into one that ensures that no one suffers marginalization and disempowerment. For hooks, the glow from Paris Is Burning does not come from the flames of a transforming fire but rather from a sacrificial altar to a false god. The film, she notes, portrays "the way in which colonized black people (in this case black gay brothers, some of whom were drag queens) worship at the throne of whiteness, even when such worship demands that we live in perpetual self-hate, steal, lie, go hungry, and even die in its pursuit."

Yet Paris Is Burning does lift up a critical and dissenting voice. In her discussion of the film, hooks notes that the elder black drag queen Dorian Corey (left) tells viewers that "the desire for stardom is an expression of the longing to realize the dream of autonomous stellar individualism." Corey laments that the ball scene is no longer about what you can create but about what you can acquire. He understands the way that consumer capitalism has undermined the subversive power of the drag balls, in much the same way, I would argue, that capitalism has undermined the subversive power of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and intersex (LGBTI) movement in general. The end result is that conformity masquerades as liberation.

What, then, might a queer theological understanding of authentic liberation look like? I use the word queer as defined by feminist theologian Mary Hunt, as meaning "all whose sexual identities and practices fall beyond the parameters of 'hetero-patriarchy'." Hunt insists that queer theology with feminist input "signals a new way to bring together people from a broad spectrum of 'sexual outlaw' positions and invite their theological reflections."

Theologically, liberation, says Joyce Ann Mercer, is "the struggle for freedom from oppression as subjugated people become conscious of their situation and work to transform the conditions of their existence." It is important to note that such transformation includes personal and social change. within the Christian sphere, theologians of liberation emphasize "the biblical theme of God's action on behalf of enslaved, poor, and outcast persons as a central paradigm for faith." A key tenet of liberation theology, Mercer reminds us, is God's "preferential option for the poor," which is understood as "a call to solidarity with suffering persons, including those oppressed by unjust power relations structured around gender."

One of the reasons I am drawn to Paris Is Burning and, in particular, to bell hook's critique of it and, by extension, the wider realities of capitalism and patriarchy, is that I see hook's analysis similar to my own of the wider LGBTI community/movement. It was hook's viewing of Paris Is Burning that was instrumental in the articulation of her broader critique. For me, it was a "fashion spread" entitled "Burmese Dreams" in OUT Magazine's April 2000 edition. What made this particular marketing ploy especially repugnant was that OUT Magazine editors not only approved the putting of brown face paint on a Caucasian model but also showed this model holding various tools and implements used in Burma's slave labor camps. These camps, established by Burma's brutal military dictatorship and populated by an estimated six million men, women, and children, serve the interests not only of the corrupt military regime but also of Western corporations which profit from the military's trampling of human, labor, and environmental rights.

In an article I wrote for Lavender Magazine, I lamented that "the selling out to corporate rule is a betrayal of all that makes our journey as LGBTI people and as authentic human beings unique – heightened conscious insight, increased creativity and inclusivity, and greater compassion."

I also responded to this "sell-out" by establishing a network of LGBTI activists called Queers United for Radical Action (QURA). One of QURA's primary aims is to inform its members and the wider LGBTI community on the threats to democracy, human life, and the environment posed by corporate-led globalization, militarism, and environmental degradation. One way that we seek to do this is by establishing working connections with other justice, peace, labor, and environmental organizations within the Twin Cities. This "bridge-building" is itself a "radical action," as it helps facilitate an awareness of the root or source of the problems facing not just sexual minorities, but all who are oppressed by "brutal imperial ruling-class capitalist patriarchal whiteness," in the words of bell hooks. Although QURA is not a "religious" group, within my own life and work I understand the activity of bridge-building as part of God's liberating action in and through people.

How would God's liberating action look in the community depicted in Paris Is Burning? First, the competitive aspect of the balls would be absent. People would come together not to compete but to share, compare, learn, and celebrate. These qualities would be valued for what they are; they would not have to be legitimized by and through competitiveness. Everyone would be considered special and a "winner" by virtue of their unique gifts of self.

Free of competitiveness, there would be a return to creativity – a lifting up of the beauty and giftedness within as opposed to the outward seeking and acquisition of the perceived beauty and gifts of others. Such lifting up would be challenging as it would reach out to and empower others to similarly free themselves from imitating standards and norms set by entities bent on domination, control, and exploitation. Connections would be made with others who have suffered at the hands of this system, stories would be shared, and suffering and hardship utilized as vehicles to self-understanding, social solidarity, and radical action.

Imbued with and motivated by liberation grounded in the sacred dimension of creation, the drag queen ball circuit would serve not primarily as a refuge but as an empowering force for positive transformation – for both individuals and the wider society. Indeed, in time the wider society would become the drag queen ball circuit, just as it would become the home for other groups which had once felt compelled to construct ghetto-like subcultures. Fantasy, within this re-envisioned society would be employed for purposes of exploration, not as means of escape. Furthermore, the ever-expanding self that such fantasy would encourage to emerge would be cherished, respected, and honored; its journeying path would be celebrated and made way for by all.

– Michael Bayly
June 2002

Above: Performers featured in Jennie Livingston's
1990 documentary Paris Is Burning.
(Photo: The Kobal Collection)

NEXT: Stephanie Beatriz on the Truth of Being Bi


See also the previous Wild Reed posts:
• Making the Connections . . . Then and Now
• Reclaiming and Re-Queering Pride
• A Lose/Lose Situation
• Michelangelo Signorile on the Rebellious Purpose of Queer Pride

Related Off-site Links:
The Ballroom Revolution: Behind the Glitter and Glamour Is a Sad and Tortured History – Arkee Escalera (Esquire, May 31, 2018).
The Music and Meaning of Paris Is Burning – Julianne Escobedo Shepherd (NPR News, April 30, 2012).

Quote of the Day

[Amoris Laetitia, Pope Francis’ Apostolic Exhortation on Love in the Family] reflects the papal conundrum of pastoring realistically in the contemporary world without changing any church doctrine or major teaching. The result is unequal opportunity ambiguity. Some things can be parsed – as in the communion debate – while other things are off the table, such as same-sex marriage. Rationales for such decisions are lacking other than wan references to previous church teachings. It reminds this reader of Francis’ openness to gay priests (“Who am I to judge?”) and his claim that the ordination of women is a settled matter. Settled by and for whom? Once again the patriarchal power paradigm is shored up by a pope who likes to have it both ways. Certain pastoral decision-making is kicked downstairs to priests and bishops, but that is effectively how things work now. Theology follows practice.

The fundamental problem in this document is methodological: there is only one ideal – heteronormative uncontracepted sex in monogamous marriage – in relation to which everything else is derivative, lesser, lacking, and/or forbidden. At the same time, the Pope wants to welcome and be pastoral to everyone. Catholic market share has slipped precipitously worldwide due in large part to this ‘one, holy, catholic and apostolic’ way of looking at sexuality. Thinking postmodern Catholics simply do not take kindly to such groundless generalities in the face of so much evidence to the contrary. What about Uncles Pat and Bill who love and share so generously?

– Mary E. Hunt
Excerpted from "Pope Francis’ Love Letter
is an Opportunity Lost"
Religion Dispatches
April 11, 2016

See also the previous Wild Reed posts:
• An Erotic Encounter with the Divine
• On Eve of Amoris Laetitia's Release, "A Moment of Pause and of Prayer"
• James Alison on the Likely "Really Big Deal" of Synod 2015
• Quote of the Day – October 30, 2015
• Beyond the Hierarchy: The Blossoming of Liberating Catholic Insights on Sexuality (Part 8)
• "Trajectory is More Important Than the Current Status"
• Quote of the Day – October 20, 2014
• LGBT Catholics Respond to Synod 2014's Final Report

Related Off-site Links:
Do the Pope's Latest Words on Marriage and Homosexuality Go Far Enough? Not for Me – Charles P. Pierce (Esquire, April 8, 2016)
Pope Francis' Amoris Laetitia is a Closeted Argument for Gay Marriage – William Saletan (Slate, April 8, 2016).
Seven Notes re: Amoris Laetitia and the Papacy of Pope Francis as a Project to Shore Up Waning Heterosexual Male Power and Privilege – William D. Lindsey (Bilgrimage, April 10, 2016).
Catholic Families Need More from Pope Francis – Michele Weldon (USA Today via Religion News Service, April 11, 2016).
Pope Francis' "The Joy of Love" Falls Short – Gina Messina (Feminism and Religion, April 12, 2016).
LGBT Faith Community Voices Disappointment Over "Joy of Love" – Bill Daley (Chicago Tribune, April 12, 2016).

Beyond the Hierarchy: The Blossoming of Liberating Catholic Insights on Sexuality (Part 8)

The Wild Reed's series highlighting the liberating insights on sexuality that are emerging and “blossoming” beyond the Vatican, continues with the recently released statement by the Asociación de Teólogas y Teólogos Juan XXIII, an international group of theologians from countries ranging from Spain to Cameroon, Venezula to the U.S.

This statement compellingly calls on the bishops at the Synod of the Family, currently taking place in Rome, to give full equality to women and to lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people in the Church.

Following is the full statement (with thanks to "Rebel Girl" at Iglesia Descalza for the English translation).

Keeping intact a certain model of family, proper to a time and culture, is not part of the Faith of the Church. According to the gospels, Jesus of Nazareth was deeply critical of the family model of his time and culture. Therefore, the Asociación de Teólogas y Teólogos Juan XXIII deems it necessary to present the following proposals to the Synod of Bishops that is being held in Rome:

1. We believe that the different sexual identities, options, and orientations must be respected as an expression of the diversity of ways of experiencing sexuality among human beings. Consequently, homosexuality and homosexual marriages should be recognized in the Catholic Church on equal terms with heterosexuality and heterosexual marriages. Christian homosexual people should not be excluded from any church task, activity or responsibility, or from participation in the sacraments.

Respect for non-heterosexual people doesn't seem to reconcile with their exclusion from certain church roles, for example being a godparent at a baptism or the priestly and theological ministry. Both exclusions have occured recently – in the Diocese of Cádiz with a transsexual man and in the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith with a homosexual priest – and they demonstrate clear discrimination because of sexual orientation and belie the often repeated concept in Church teaching documents of acceptance towards non-heterosexual people.

2. We believe that the indiscriminate condemnation by Church teaching of the voluntary interruption of pregnancy should be reviewed. We consider it necessary to repeal Canon 1398 of the Code of Canon Law decreeing excommunication for anyone who procures the abortion, if it occurs, and that it is contrary to the absolution of the sin of abortion decreed by Pope Francis on the occasion of the Extraordinary Jubilee Year of Mercy. Also the right of women to decide in conscience on this matter should be respected.

3. There are no biblical, theological, historical, pastoral, much less dogmatic reasons, to exclude married men or women from any ecclesial ministries, ordained or unordained. Equality of Christian men and women through baptism must translate into equal conditions for men and women in access to the realm of the sacred, in the development of theological and moral doctrine, as well as in participation in church duties and governing bodies, without any discrimination on the grounds of gender, ethnicity or social class. Therefore we ask that sexist ideological, cultural and normative barriers be removed and that the full incorporation of women in the above areas, including access to the priesthood and episcopate, be implemented.

4. As regards divorce, there is no dogma of faith that prevents it, nor that prohibits the access of separated or divorced and remarried people to the Eucharist. The current exclusionary discipline in this area, perhaps understandable in the past, has no justification today and, far from drawing people in those circumstances to the Christian community, it marginalizes them, drives them away, and stigmatizes them. In addition, it lacks a gospel basis. We therefore believe that the Synod of Bishops should remove that prohibition, currently in force, and facilitate access to Eucharistic communion by separated or divorced and remarried persons without imposing any corrective requirements. We believers are moral agents with the ability to decide freely in conscience in this area. This decision must be respected.

5. It is necessary to acknowledge the significant advances made by feminism on equality between men and women and in their liberation. In light of these developments, the patriarchal structure of the doctrine and practice on Christian marriage should be revised.

6. The Synod can not be reduced to matters relating to Christian marriage. We believe it a priority for it to do an analysis of the situation of poverty and social exclusion in which millions of families find themselves, to prophetically denounce it, to express its solidarity with the most vulnerable families and contribute to the elimination of the causes of this situation based on the ethical gospel option for poor and marginalized people.

Statement signed by: Xavier Alegre. Asociación de Teólogos y Teólogas Juan XXIII. Spain • José Arregi. Theologian. Spain • Olga Lucía Álvarez. Asociación Presbíteras Católicas Romanas. Colombia • Juan Barreto. Asociación de Teólogas y Teólogos Juan XXIII. Spain • Fernando Bermúdez, Asociación de Teólogas y Teólogos Juan XXIII. Spain • Leonardo Boff. Ecotheologian, member of the Earth Charter Commission and writer • Ancizar Cadavid Restrepo. Theologian. Colombia • José María Castillo. Asociación de Teólogas y Teólogos Juan XXIII. Spain • José Centeno. Asociación de Teólogas y Teólogos Juan XXIII, Spain • Juan Antonio Estrada. Asociación de Teólogas y Teólogos Juan XXIII. Spain • Máximo García. Asociación de Teólogas y Teólogos Juan XXIII. Spain • Antonio Gil de Zúñiga. Asociación de Teólogas y Teólogos Juan XXIII. Spain • Ivone Gebara. Theologian and philosopher. Brazil • Axel Hernández Fajardo. Emeritus Professor at the Escuela Ecuménica de las Ciencias de Religiones. Universidad Nacional. Costa Rica • Rosa María Hernández. Asociación de Teólogas y Teólogos Juan XXIII. Spain • Mary Hunt. Theologian. Women's Alliance for Theology, Ethics and Ritual (WATER) • Gabriela Juárez Palacio. Theologian. Co-founder of Teólogas e Investigadoras • Rosa Leiva. Federación Latinoamericana de Presbíteros Casados. Ecuador • Juan Masiá. Theologian. Japan • Federico Mayor Zaragoza. President of the Fundación Cultura de Paz and the Comisión Internacional contra la Pena de Muerte. Spain • Cyprien Melibi. Theologian. Cameroon • Arnoldo Mora Rodríguez. Co-founder of the Departamento Ecuménico de Investigaciones (DEI). Costa Rica • Mario Mullo. Federación Latinoamericana de Sacerdotes Casados. Ecuador • Carmiña Navia. Theologian. Colombia • Marisa Noriega. Theologian. Co-founder of the Asociación Mexicana de Reflexión Teológica Feminista. Mexico • Gladys Parentelli. Auditor at Vatican II. Venezuela • Federico Pastor. Asociación de Teólogas y Teólogos Juan XXIII. Spain • Victorino Pérez Prieto. Asociación de Teólogas y Teólogos Juan XXIII. Spain • Suyapa Pérez Scapini. Theologian. El Salvador • Margarita Maria Pintos. Asociación de Teólogas y Teólogos Juan XXIII. Spain • Javier Omar Ruiz Arroyave. Activist. Masculinidades Liberadoras. Colombia • José Sánchez Suárez. Theologian. Comunidad Teológica de Mexico Santiago • Sánchez Torrado. Asociación de Teólogas y Teólogos Juan XXIII. Spain • Fernando Silva. Asociación de Teólogas y Teólogos de Juan XXIII. Spain • Aida Soto Bernal. Asociación Presbíteras Católicas Romanas. Colombia • Juan José Tamayo. Asociación de Teólogas y Teólogos Juan XXIII. Spain • Elsa Tamez. Theologian and biblical scholar. Mexico • Andrea Toca. Theologian. Co-founder of the Asociación Mexicana de Reflexión Teológica Feminista. Mexico • Fernando Torres Millán. Theologian. Coordinator of Kairós Educativo. Colombia • Olga Vasquez. Theologian. El Salvador • Evaristo Villar. Asociación de Teólogas y Teólogos Juan XXIII. Spain • Juan Yzuel. Asociación de Teólogas y Teólogos Juan XXIII. Spain.

Above: Cardinals and bishops at the end of a morning session of the Synod on the Family – Vatican City, October 9, 2015. (AP Photo/Alessandra Tarantino)

For Francis DeBernardo's excellent coverage from Rome on the Synod on the Family, see:
On Synod’s First Day, Differing Opinions on What Can Be Expected – Francis DeBernardo (Bondings 2.0, October 6, 2015).
Synod Day Two’s Question: Who Is Inside and Who Is Outside the Church? – Francis DeBernardo (Bondings 2.0, October 7, 2015).
In Advance of the Synod, Global Network of Rainbow Catholics Launches in Rome – Francis DeBernardo (Bondings 2.0, October 8, 2015).
Archbishop Discusses African Bishops’ Silence on Criminalization of LGBT People – Francis DeBernardo (Bondings 2.0, October 9, 2015).
Will Language Be the Only Thing That the Synod Updates? – Francis DeBernardo (Bondings 2.0, October 10, 2015).
A Synod Discussion Asks the Question: What Is Mercy? – Francis DeBernardo (Bondings 2.0, October 11, 2015).
Synod Fathers on Gay Issues Couldn’t Be Any Further Apart Than They Already Are – Francis DeBernardo (Bondings 2.0, October 12, 2015).
Trying to Interpret the Language of the Synod – Francis DeBernardo (Bondings 2.0, October 13, 2015).
Allowing Local Strategies Sounds Like a Good Idea – Except If You’re in Newark – Francis DeBernardo (Bondings 2.0, October 14, 2015).
Should the Church Be a Mother or Father to Families? What’s the Difference? – Francis DeBernardo (Bondings 2.0, October 15, 2015).
Challenges of Reporting from the Synod: Homophobic Statements, Leaked Documents, the Rumor Mill, and How to Keep Up With It All – Francis DeBernardo (Bondings 2.0, October 16, 2015).

Recommended Off-site Links and Updates:
Having the Wrong Discussions . . . – Questions from a Ewe (October 13, 2015).
Synod System Stacks Deck Against Women – Mary E. Hunt (National Catholic Reporter, October 6, 2015).
The Synod, LGBT Catholics, and Women: Meh – William D. Lindsey (Bilgrimage, October 13, 2015).
Cardinals’ Secret Letter to Francis Warns of Plot to Rig Reforms – David Gibson (Religion News Service, October 12, 2015).
Christians Have Hurt a Lot of LGBT People. It's Time To Embrace Them Instead – Sr. Simone Campbell (The Huffington Post, October 10, 2015).
Homosexual Relationships: Another Look – Bill hunt (The Progressive Catholic Voice, September 8, 2012).
We’ve Got to Accentuate the Positive, Synod Bishops Say – John L. Allen Jr. (Crux, October 9, 2015).
At the Synod, the Moment of Truth – Rocco Palmo (Whispers in the Loggia, October 9, 2015).
German Group at Synod United: Church Doctrine Has Developed Over Time – Joshua J. McElwee (National Catholic Reporter, October 15, 2015).

See also the previous Wild Reed posts:
• Beyond the Hierarchy (Part 1)
• Beyond the Hierarchy (Part 2)
• Beyond the Hierarchy (Part 3)
• Beyond the Hierarchy (Part 4)
• Beyond the Hierarchy (Part 5)
• Beyond the Hierarchy (Part 6)
• Beyond the Hierarchy (Part 7)
• Human Sex: Weird and Silly, Messy and Sublime
• Sex as Mystery, Sex as Light (Part 1)
• Sex as Mystery, Sex as Light (Part 2)
• Making Love, Giving Life
• Intrinsically Sexual
• A "Truly Queer Theory" on Sex
• The Non-Negotiables of Human Sex
• Sons of the Church: The Witnessing of Gay Catholic Men: A Discussion Guide

Blossom images: Michael J. Bayly (Port Macquarie, March 2015).