Progressive Catholic Perspectives on the Legacy of Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI

To be honest, I wasn’t planning on acknowledging here at The Wild Reed the recent death of Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI, the main reason being that I no longer identify as Roman Catholic or, accordingly, feel connected to the topics and issues that once were the focus of this blog. And, yes, the misguided and dangerous pronuncements of Benedict, both before and after he was pope, definitely comprised an “issue” for myself and this blog’s readership a decade or so ago.

As I note over in the sidebar, I established The Wild Reed in 2006 (a little over a year into Benedict’s papacy) as a sign of solidarity with all who are dedicated to living lives of integrity – though, in particular, “with gay people seeking to be true to both the gift of their sexuality and their Catholic faith.” Accordingly, The Wild Reed’s original by-line read: “Thoughts and reflections from a progressive, gay, Catholic perspective.” It now reads: “Thoughts and interests of a queer seeker of the Divine Presence; a ‘soul dancer,’ seeking to embody with grace and verve the mystico-prophetic spiritual tradition.”

This change reflects how my journey has, in many ways, taken me beyond, or perhaps better still, deeper into the realities that the words “progressive,” “gay,” and “Catholic” seek to describe. In many ways I have the dysfunctional theology of the Roman Catholicism, as formulated and articulated by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (later Pope Benedict), to thank for providing the impetus for my journey of ever-deepening spirituality. This is because the theology of the Roman Catholic church around issues of gender and sexuality never rang true for me. Even as an adolescent I intuitively knew that the way the official church talked about sexuality was profoundly lacking in awareness and compassion, and thus truth. It took many years to fully claim and articulate this intuitive knowledge, and in my achievement of this life-saving endeavor I have, in part, the writings of people like John Sanford, Matthew Fox, Joan Timmerman, and Mary Hunt to thank, along with the music of Dusty Springfield!

The Wild Reed, in many ways, in a record of my journey as both a gay and spiritual man. It’s a journey out from the desolate and life-denying theological landscape concocted by the Roman Catholic clerical caste and into a life-giving and -affirming realm of self-acceptance, authenticity, integrity, and love; a realm I continue to live and flourish within to this day, and one I seek to embody in my daily actions of body, speech, and mind.

A major hallmark of my journey to date is my ever-deepening embodiment of the mystic’s response to God as “the Beloved,” a response found within a range of mystical traditions – Christian, Sufi, Jewish – and one that often has erotic, including homo-erotic, overtones. I’m drawn to this type of universality, though to be sure, it’s a catholicity of religion rather than of church, something that serves as another hallmark of my journey. I’ve also become less theological and more metaphysical in my thinking. My interest in and embodiment of this shift has also been chronicled here at The Wild Reed (see, for example, here, here, here, here, and here).

This all being said, it feels important to acknowledge the death of Benedict as it will bring closure to a major area of focus at The Wild Reed, namely the aforementioned dysfunctional, so-called “sexual” theology of the Roman Catholic clerical caste. And closure, when possible, is always good.

And so this evening I share the thoughts and perspectives on the legacy of Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI by a number of progressive Catholic thinkers, writers, and theologians whose dedication to love and truth I greatly respect.

_______________________

The death of any human being is an occasion of sorrow. We pray for Pope Benedict’s soul and express our condolences to his family, friends, and loved ones. However, his death also calls us to reflect honestly on his legacy. Benedict’s leadership in the church, as Pope and before that as head of the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) [renamed in 2022 the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith], caused tremendous damage to LGBTQIA+ people and our loved ones. His words and writings forced our community out of Catholic churches, tore families apart, silenced our supporters, and even cost lives. He refused to recognize even the most basic human rights for LGBTQIA+ people. Many of us experienced the most harsh and blatant religiously justified discrimination of our lives as a result of his policies.

As leader of the CDF, Pope Benedict, then known as Cardinal Ratzinger, was responsible for a 1986 letter to all the church’s bishops, On the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons. This letter labelled having a gay or lesbian orientation as “objectively disordered” and said that all same-sex intimate relationships were “intrinsically evil” and “essentially self-indulgent.” Released during the height of the AIDS pandemic, it also blamed gay men for the disease, and stated that it was understandable that efforts to secure civil rights for LGBTQIA+ people would be met with violence.

The letter also prohibited groups that dissented from official church teaching on homosexuality from using Catholic spaces such as churches, schools, colleges, retreat houses, and the facilities of religious orders A former CDF official confirmed in 2017 that this directive was aimed at DignityUSA and its chapters. As a result of the 1986 letter, the great majority of Dignity communities, then overwhelmingly housed in Catholic facilities across the U.S., were expelled from those spaces within a year.

Furthermore, Benedict banned the distribution of condoms by Catholic health and social services agencies throughout the world to anyone, regardless of gender, sexual orientation, or marital status, even as a proven life-saving measure, thereby failing to slow the spread of HIV across the globe. Tragically, this policy contributed to untold numbers of deaths and vast needless suffering.

As Pope, Benedict XVI was among the most vocal and powerful global leaders who objected to marriage equality and gay and lesbian people raising children, causing immense damage worldwide. In his Christmas message of 2012, Benedict said gay marriage “destroyed the essence of the human creature,” and said gay marriage, along with abortion and euthanasia, was “a threat to world peace.” He said allowing same-sex couples to adopt children was an “attack” on the “traditional family.”

– Marianne Duddy-Burke
Excerpted from “LGBTQ+ Catholics Recall
Pope Benedict XVI’s Reign as a Painful Time That Caused
‘Tremendous Damage’ to the LGBTQ+ Community”
DignityUSA.org
December 31, 2022

Pope Benedict XVI will be remembered for his failure to achieve what should have been his job one: to rectify the incalculable harm done to the hundreds of thousands of children sexually abused by Catholic priests. When he resigned as Pope, he left hundreds of culpable bishops in power and a culture of secrecy intact.

The tragedy is that in refusing to enact needed reforms, he ended up hurting the faith he cherished. Had he punished cover-up and abuse as sternly as he did doctrinal violations, the Church’s abuse crisis might have ended under his watch. . . . [M]ore than anyone in the Vatican, he knew about the damage done to innocent children. In 1982, when he became head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, he moved to the center of the Vatican’s abuse bureaucracy. As Prefect of the CDF, he implemented Pope John Paul II’s policy of not laicizing abusive priests, even when bishops pleaded with him to do so.

In Spring 2001, the Pope gave Cardinal Ratzinger and the CDF sole responsibility for abuse cases, and in that role, Cardinal Ratzinger read hundreds of files and became the Vatican’s most knowledgeable and powerful person on this issue.

In the last year of Benedict’s life, a church-commissioned investigation in Germany published a report stating that Benedict himself had been complicit with abusers. As archbishop of Munich and Freising from 1977 to 1982, he allegedly allowed four abusive priests to remain in ministry. These recent revelations put his 2010 rebuke of Irish bishops in a troubling light. Benedict too had been lenient toward offending priests; he himself appears to have enabled crimes against children.

Benedict’s public response to the Munich revelations was hailed by some as an apology. Yet he acknowledged no personal responsibility and distanced himself from the cover-up, vaguely acknowledging a collective “we” who had committed some unspecified fault: “All the greater is my pain for the abuses and the errors that occurred in those different places during the time of my mandate.”

In fairness, Benedict responded effectively on several occasions. The consolidation of all child sexual abuse cases under the CDF is seen as as his achievement. It appears to have streamlined the process of disciplining errant priests and led to a significant increase in laicizations of abusers, especially when Benedict became Pope.

He also gets credit for disciplining the powerful founder of the Legion of Christ, Marcial Maciel, a choice John Paul II repeatedly refused to make. At the same time, context is relevant here. By the time Benedict finally punished Maciel, many of his victims had come forward, and the evidence against him was not only overwhelming but public, thanks to investigative journalists Jason Berry and Gerald Renner.

As Pope, Benedict could have done much more. He could have made “zero tolerance” the universal rule of the Catholic Church. He could have forced the resignation of bishops who had enabled sexual predators. He could have decreed that every bishop post on his website the names, assignment histories, and alleged crimes of accused priests. He could have made the CDF transparent in its handling of cases, instead of the black box that it remains to this day. He could have acted on the Vatican’s vast knowledge of these cases, instead of leaving the work to the survivors, investigative reporters, grand juries in the US, government commissions in Ireland and Australia, and church-hired investigators in France and Germany.

It’s clear to even his critics that Benedict was motivated by a zeal to protect the faith he loved. The sad irony is that he ended up wounding it further. His misplaced priorities caused countless Catholics to abandon the Church. His failure to enact real change in the Church’s handling of sexually abusive priests will be his significant and tragic legacy.

– Anne Barrett Doyle and Terence McKiernan
Excerpted from “Statement on the Death of Pope Benedict XVI”
BishopAccountability.org
December 31, 2022

Before becoming pope in 2005, Benedict, known then as Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, had an outsized influence on the Church’s approach to gay and lesbian people and issues.

As the principal author of the 1986 “Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons,” Ratzinger introduced the term “objective disorder” into the Church’s vocabulary to describe a homosexual orientation. He also oversaw the production of the 1994 Catechism of the Catholic Church, which described sexual activity between two people of the same gender as “acts of grave depravity.”

These documents caused – and still cause – grave pastoral harm to many LGBTQ+ people and to Catholics who see the goodness, holiness, and God-given love in the relationships of queer couples. While Cardinal Ratzinger’s statements were intended to settle the debate on homosexuality in the church, they merely widened the debate. Many Catholic theologians, leaders, and people in the pews question this teaching and seek doctrinal renewal on LGBTQ+ issues. Sadly, Cardinal Ratzinger’s words caused many Catholics to leave the church, some going to other Christian denominations or other faiths, and some rejecting any kind of institutional religion.

. . . [As pope] Benedict’s approach to gay and lesbian issues was clearly hindered by the fact that he did not understand the human dimension of love and relationship that characterizes same-gender couples and individuals. He relied on centuries-old, abstract philosophical and theological ideas instead of learning about more recent understandings of sexuality. Most importantly, he failed to listen to the lived experiences of real people.

– Francis DeBernardo
Excerpted from “New Ways Ministry
Marks the Passing of Benedict XVI”
NewWaysMinistry.org
December 31, 2022

Before he became Pope Benedict XVI, Ratzinger spent nearly a quarter of a century (1981-2005) as prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, where he quickly became known as a strict enforcer of official church teaching. . . . Over the course of nearly 50 years, Benedict produced more than 65 books in theology, Christology and liturgy, as well as three papal encyclicals and three papal exhortations.

Yet, whatever contributions he made in his prolific and distinguished career may ultimately be overshadowed by the years he spent monitoring, and sometimes suppressing and silencing, the work of other Catholic theologians and ethicists.

. . . In progressive circles, Ratzinger’s story is often recounted as a cautionary tale about a man who started out progressive and idealist, only to shift into a rigid conservative.

“Ratzinger was part of the majority [of theologians] that wanted the Second Vatican Council,” said Dennis Doyle, professor emeritus of Catholic Theology at the University of Dayton, Ohio. “He wasn’t anti-council and he wasn’t a traditionalist.”

Ratzinger’s understanding of the task of church renewal did distinguish him from many of his fellow reformists, however. Rather than see the purpose of the council as aggiornamento, or an updating or modernizing of the church, Ratzinger stressed the work of reform as a ressourcement, or a return to the sources of the tradition, particularly the theology of the early church fathers.

A year after the council concluded, Ratzinger joined the faculty of Tübingen University, where he took his place among emerging theological stars Hans Küng and Jürgen Moltmann. In 1968, two years into his tenure, a revolt broke out among German University students. Inspired by Marxist beliefs, the students rebelled against the elitism and exclusivity of the German university system.

The upheaval found its way into one of Ratzinger’s lecture halls one day when a student ripped the microphone from his hands and began to protest. Horrified, Ratzinger left Tübingen shortly thereafter, and joined the faculty of the University of Regensburg.

“Most of us think of that moment as Ratzinger’s symbolic shift to the right,” said Doyle. “But in his mind, he was being consistent.”

Rather than having a sudden conversion to conservatism, it may be more accurate to say that Ratzinger’s concerns about the effects of change and modernity on the church were confirmed by the events of 1968. His fears had hardened him and led him to revert even more strongly to the theology of St. Augustine that had thoroughly shaped his religious imagination.

Before and during his pontificate, Benedict often spoke of St. Augustine as one of his greatest companions in his life and his ministry. Augustine placed a strong emphasis on the corruption of human nature by sin and the necessity of grace for salvation. For Benedict, this grace came through the church.

“Benedict had this vision of the church as eternal because he believed that the idea of the church existed in the mind of God,” Doyle said.

As an Augustinian, he was especially wary of the utopian ideas of Marxism that he saw played out by the revolt in Tübingen. He was alarmed by the notion that human beings could create a perfect world.

“For a lot of Augustinians, there is a lot of focus on sin in the world,” said [Fr. Charles] Curran [who was investigated and subsequently deemed ineligible to teach Catholic theology for criticizing the church’s teaching on sexuality, particularly contraception.] “There is a tendency to identify the city of God as the church, and the city of man as the world.” This dualism made Benedict suspicious of worldly ideas.

Many theologians in the U.S. are, like Curran, theological Thomists. They believe that human beings are basically good and that human reason and experience gives us the capacity to learn moral wisdom and knowledge.

“We learn from the world,” as opposed to being suspicious of it, Curran said. “I think that is the primary theological difference between Benedict and many theologians.”

. . . For all his efforts to control or suppress theological inquiry, Benedict’s success remains questionable. One could argue that, during his 24 years as head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and his eight years as pope, theology actually thrived.

“During his time, look what has emerged: liberation theologies of all kinds, feminist theologies, interreligious dialogue, different ways to deal with moral issues in the contemporary world,” said [Sr. Elizabeth] Johnson [who like other theologians faced an inquest by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith or the U.S. bishops’ doctrinal committee]. “I think this richness shows that theology as a vocation is empowered by the Spirit,” she added. “And she will not be quenched!”

– Jamie Manson
Excerpted from “Despite Benedict’s Many Investigations
Into Theologians, Theology Flourished”
National Catholic Reporter
December 31, 2022

When I heard the news of Benedict’s death, I feared that many of those who were hurt by his policies and teaching would find this occasion to be an opportunity to repeat their strong criticism’s of him which they proclaimed while he was pope. Instead, it seems that most of those who disagreed with Benedict have acknowledged his death simply with sorrow, even as they recounted the harm he caused them.

I think the main reason is that since Benedict had already resigned almost ten years ago, his death does not significantly alter church governance. As noted, he had an outsized influence on the most negative policies and teachings concerning LGBTQ+ people. But his passing also seems to be a minor event even for Catholics concerned with LGBTQ+ equality.

When Pope Francis came on the scene, there were fears that he might continue Benedict’s negative approach to LGBTQ+ issues. But his statements and actions over the past decade have proven otherwise. While Francis may not have made the changes that many Catholic LGBTQ+ advocates pray for, the difference between his approach to LGBTQ+to issues and that of Benedict is like night and day.

Benedict’s death highlighted that difference. While he approached these issues like a scholar, Francis’ approach is that of a pastor. Benedict emphasized tradition and continuity, while Francis has encouraged new ideas. The German pope was known for having silenced theologians and censured church leaders, the Argentinian pope has stretched out a hand to many of these same people. Francis has called for wide discussion in the church, including on LGBTQ+ issues, where Benedict had tried to close such conversations. Benedict stressed authority, Francis stresses conscience.

The most significant thing that his death has highlighted for me is how far Catholicism’s approach to LGBTQ+ issues has changed in the ten years since his resignation. We have a pope who has met with and corresponded with LGBTQ+ people and their advocates. LGBTQ+ issues were discussed openly at the synods on the family and the synod on youth, and promise to be a major discussion point during the synod on synodality, based on how often people have raised these issues in local synod conversations. Bishops, archbishops, and cardinals have made statements in support of same-gender couples and love, and they have called for re-evaluating the church’s teaching about such relationships. At least here in the U.S. and in other spots around the globe, the development of LGBTQ+ parish ministry has exploded.

If a little over ten years ago, back in January of 2013, someone had told me within ten years we would see even a fraction of those changes mentioned in the previous paragraph, I would have laughed out loud. Even though I am often accused of being overly optimistic about the church, while living in the church while Benedict was pope, I could never have imagined that such changes would have happened so widely and quickly.

In the late 19th century, the church underwent a similar sudden transformation when Pope Leo XII issued Rerum Novarum, the first encyclical in what would become a series of documents over the next century developing Catholic social teaching. Leo’s emphasis on the rights of workers, his support of labor unions, his critique of capitalism and private property, and his introduction of the principle of subsidiarity which called for decisions to be made at the most appropriate local level – all of these were diametrically opposed to his predecessor Pope Pius IX. The church experienced a momentous “about face” in its approach to society – and over the next 100+ years, it would further develop and refine these teachings.

I think a similar dynamic has taken place between the papacies of Benedict and Francis when it comes to LGBTQ+ issues. We are witnessing an “about face” that is only just beginning, and I believe will continue to develop in the coming decades.

– Francis DeBernardo
Excerpted from “Benedict XVI’s Death Highlights
the Church’s Changes on LGBTQ+ Issues”
NewWaysMinistry.org
January 2, 2023

Benedict XVI is dead. He was a priest, theologian, professor, peritus, cardinal, Prefect of the CDF, Bishop of Rome, and pope emeritus. But he was not a friend to the LGBTQ+ community.

For a while now, I’ve reflected on how I’d feel upon hearing news of his death. Would I feel relief that his teachings can’t hurt us anymore? His teachings contributed to anti-LGBTQ+ sentiment inside and outside the church which often resulted in both spiritual and physical violence against LGBTQ+ people. Would I pity him because he was shaped by the culture of internalized homophobia that dominated the church during his lifetime? Would I be angry thinking that he could have chosen to learn more about LGBTQ+ people, but didn’t?

His decisions caused great harm to the LGBTQ+ Catholic community. As head of the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), then-Cardinal Ratzinger expelled LGBTQ+ Catholic groups from parishes at the height the AIDS epidemic. In a 1986 letter, he said that queer folks brought violence upon themselves when they advocated for their rights. Through many decades he tried, and often succeed at, silencing our heroes and allies – theologians and pastoral ministers who worked for LGBTQ+ inclusion.

In the early 1990s, he railed against secular legislation that would guarantee access to housing, employment, adoption, and military service. According to him, “there is no right to homosexuality.” A decade later, as governments around the world moved to legalize civil unions for same-sex couples, he warned politicians that voting for such measures would be “gravely immoral.” As pope, one of Benedict XVI’s first official acts was to approve a policy barring “those who practise homosexuality, present deep-seated homosexual tendencies or support the so-called ‘gay culture’” from seminary because they supposedly lack affective maturity and their situation “gravely hinders them from relating correctly to men and women.” Indeed, throughout his long Vatican career, Ratzinger/Benedict XVI invented new ways to ostracize queer folks and their allies.

These actions all caused great pastoral, personal, and, at times, even physical harm to LGBTQ+ people.

Now that he’s gone, I reflect on my belief in universal salvation. Some LGBTQ+ people may like to imagine the former pope in hell. Since I’m a universalist, I don’t. I trust that God’s love is strong enough to convince and transform even God’s greatest enemies. I don’t think Benedict XVI is in hell, or even that he was one of God’s greatest enemies.

Benedict XVI was gravely mistaken about LGBTQ+ people. He had a lot to learn in this life, but who could teach him? Since hearing of his death, I’ve imagined Benedict XVI sitting in a heavenly classroom where his teachers are queer martyrs and saints. In death, he’ll have to listen to them, a great change from his life when he claimed to have all the answers.

Benedict XVI will hear about queer love that transcends death from Saints Perpetua and Felicity, martyrs who died in each other’s embrace. St. Sebastian, the patron of AIDS victims whose youthful body was pierced by arrows, will tell him about the beauty and agony of desire. Sts. Sergius and Bacchus, Roman Christian soldiers whose inseparable friendship was consummated in martyrdom, will share how their lovers’ union changed the world. St. John of the Cross, the 16th century Spanish mystic, will recount his erotic same-sex relationship with Jesus. St. Wilgefortis, who prayed for a miracle and grew a beard to escape compulsory heterosexual marriage, can fill him in on how God made her trans. St. Joan of Arc, who dressed as a man for battle against the English, shall reveal the spiritual power of her genderbending spirit.

More recent, uncanonized martyrs and saints can also teach him. Fr. John McNeill, a minister to LGBTQ+ Catholics who was expelled from the Jesuits and lived in a decades-long same-sex relationship, will talk about ways that God’s love breaks through barriers erected by the institutional Church. Marsha “Pay it no Mind” Johnson, the famed black drag queen who participated in the Stonewall Riots yet died a pauper, will disclose the many ways God cares for the poor and non-conforming ones. Alana Chen, the young woman from Denver who died by suicide after receiving dangerous counsel from a priest, will detail the devastation wrought by Catholic teaching and so-called conversion therapy. Matthew Shepard, a college-age gay man who was attacked and left to die in a remote Wyoming field, will articulate the need for LGBTQ+ civil rights and protections. Fr. Robert Nugent, whose commitment to the priesthood resulted in years of suffering after he was silenced by the Vatican, will demonstrate the good fruits of affirming, compassionate ministry.

How much Benedict XVI will have to learn and grow! Soon enough, I hope, communion with queer martyrs and saints will help bring him to perfection. It’s a pity he didn’t get an earlier start, but now he has an eternity to discover God’s beautiful work in queer lives.

– Jason Steidl Jack,
“Benedict XVI in the Company of LGBTQ+ Saints”
NewWaysMinistry.org
January 1, 2023

See also the following chronologically-orderd Wild Reed posts:
• A Catholic’s Prayer for his Fellow Pilgrim, Benedict XVI
• Beyond a PC Pope
• Vatican Stance on Gay Priests Signals Urgent Need for Renewal and Reform
• It’s Time We Evolved Beyond Theological Imperialism
• Listen Up, Papa!
• The “Perfect Papal Visit” Will Require a “Listening Pope”
• Why We Cannot Cheer the Pope
• Travails of a Bishop and a Pope
• And a Merry Christmas to You Too, Papa
• The Pope’s “Scandalous” Stance on Homosexuality
• Benedict's Understanding of the Church
• The Pope’s Message of Ignorance in Africa
• Pope Accused of "Distorting Scientific Evidence" on Condom Use
• Getting It Right
• The Pope’s Progressive Agenda
• Oh, Give It a Rest, Papa!
• An Offering of Ashes
• Game Over
• Let the (Blame) Games Begin
• Rescuing Catholicism
• Terence Weldon: Quote of the Day – May 15, 2010
• Benedict and Georg
• Colleen Kochivar-Baker: Quote of the Day – November 11, 2010
• The Pope’s Latest Condom Remarks
• Pope Embraces an Acceptable Form of Relativism
• No, Really . . .
• Colleen Kochivar-Baker: Quote of the Day – March 23, 2011
• In Rome and Detroit, Two Very Different Sets of Priorities
• Wayne Self: Quote of the Day – December 27, 2012
• Mary Hunt: Quote of the Day – February 11, 2013
• Benedict and Georg Redux
• Jayden Cameron: Quote of the Day – February 28, 2013
• Something to Think About – March 4, 2013
• Something to Think About – March 24, 2013
• Astounded

See also the previous Wild Reed posts:
• Progressive Catholic Perspectives on the U.S. Supreme Court's 2015 Marriage Equality Ruling
• Progressive Thoughts on Recent Developments in Ireland, El Salvador and the U.S.
• More Progressive Catholic Perspectives on Ireland's Historic Gay Marriage Vote
• LGBT Catholics Respond to Synod 2014's Final Report
• Beyond the Hierarchy: The Blossoming of Liberating Catholic Insights on Sexuality – Part I | II | III | IV | V | VI | VII | VIII
• Hans Küng: “The Gospel of Jesus Christ is Stronger Than the Hierarchy”
• Our Progressive Catholic Youth

Quote of the Day

The pope wants the church to apologize to gay people for marginalizing them, while also upholding the Catechism's teaching on homosexuality. You can't apologize to people and simultaneously reassert the doctrine that harms them. That's just dysfunctional, if not downright abusive.

– Jamie Manson
via Facebook

See also the previous Wild Reed posts:
• Quote of the Day – June 26, 2016
• Stop in the Name of Discriminatory Ideology!
• Oh, Give It a Rest, Papa!
• Catholic Church Can Overcome Fear of LGBT People
• "Trajectory is More Important Than the Current Status"




Related Off-site Links:
Pope Says Christians and the Roman Catholic Church Should Seek Forgiveness from Homosexuals for Past Treatment – Philip Pullella (Reuters via Religion News Service, June 26, 2016).
What Does Pope Francis Mean When He Says "Apologize"? – Kimberly Winston (Religion News Service, June 27, 2016).
Gay Catholic Groups Want the Vatican to Do More Than Apologize – Jim Yardley (New York Times, June 27, 2016).
LGBT Catholics Welcome Statement of Pope Francis That the Catholic Church Must Apologize to Gay People, But Say Apology Must Be Followed by Concrete Actions – DignityUSA (June 26, 2016).
Pope Calls for Church to Apologize to LGBT People and Others Who Have Been Marginalized – Francis DeBernardo (Bondings 2.0, June 26, 2016).
Keeping Pope Francis' Comments on the LGBT Community in Context – James Martin, SJ (Commonweal, June 27, 2016).
Cardinal Marx: Society Must Create Structures to Respect Gay Rights – Sarah Mac Donald (National Catholic Reporter, June 28, 2016).
Catholic League's Bill Donohue Melts Down on CNN After Pope Tells Him to Apologize to Gays – David Edwards (Raw Story, June 28, 2016).

UPDATE: Catholics Split on the Value of Pope Francis' Call for Apology – Bob Shine (Bondings 2.0, June 29, 2016).

Quote of the Day

Mercy, it seems to me, is not the door that LGBTQ people need opened to them. Mercy is an act of love, compassion or service given to those who sin or are afflicted in some way. LGBTQ people, same-sex relationships, and transgender persons are not sins or afflictions.

. . . The truth is, gays and lesbians do not need mercy for falling in love with someone of the same sex. My transgender friends do not need the church's mercy for striving to become the persons they believe God made them to be. LGBTQ couples do not need forgiveness for being in loving relationships. These are not sins. There is nothing to forgive.

If LGBTQ persons need mercy and forgiveness, it is for reasons that are no different from the reasons heterosexuals need mercy, like when we fail to be generous, patient, supportive, respectful, kind, compassionate, or faithful.

The irony here is that if anyone should be asking for mercy, it is the Catholic hierarchy. The institutional church should seek forgiveness from the LGBTQ community for failing to speak out when we are killed, beaten or imprisoned, for taking our jobs and our livelihoods, for denying us access to Jesus' Eucharistic table, for attempting to thwart our movements for equal protection under the law, and for promoting teachings that have estranged us from our faith, our communities, our families and, in some cases, even our own beloved partners.

LGBTQ persons do not need mercy from the church. We need justice. We need an institutional church that has the courage to admit that all people, regardless of sexual orientation, relationship status, or gender identity, have the same potential for goodness, wholeness and a sacramental life. Until that day comes, we will not achieve true dignity and full equality in our church.

– Jamie Manson
Excerpted from "LGBTQ People Need Justice,
Not Mercy, from Pope Francis"
National Catholic Reporter
January 20, 2016

For more of Jamie Manson's insights at The Wild Reed, see:
• Quote of the Day – July 29, 2015
• More Progressive Catholic Perspectives on Ireland's Historic Gay Marriage Vote
• LGBT Catholics Respond to Synod 2014's Final Report
• Quote of the Day – August 1, 2013

See also:
• How the Pope's Recent Remarks on Evolution Highlight a Major Discrepancy in Church Teaching on Sexuality
• James Alison on the Likely "Really Big Deal" of Synod 2015
• Beyond the Hierarchy: The Blossoming of Liberating Catholic Insights on Sexuality
• The Many Manifestations of God’s Loving Embrace
• Same-Sex Desires: "Immanent and Essential Traits Transcending Time and Culture"
• Getting It Right
• Remembering and Reclaiming a Wise, Spacious, and Holy Understanding of Homosexuality
• Sister Teresa Forcades on Queer Theology
• Quote of the Day – August 22, 2013
• Beyond Respectful Tolerance to Celebratory Acceptance

Quote of the Day

It is time for us to encourage school leaders, both religious and lay, to refuse to comply with demands [by bishops] that they fire LGBT employees.

Many Catholic schools were founded by women religious. The sisters have a remarkable history of protesting nuclear weapons, racial injustice, income inequality, prison conditions, human trafficking, the death penalty and environmental degradation.

With such a legacy behind them, why would Catholic schools willingly participate in the radical injustice of terminating the vocations of its devoted LGBT employees and subject them to such financial instability and deep humiliation?

Most Catholic schools seem to have a clear advantage over the bishops. The laity has far more respect for women religious than they do for the hierarchy. The majority of Catholics in the United States strongly support the rights of LGBT people. And more than enough Catholic theologians and ethicists have argued cogently for the full inclusion and equality of LGBT people in the church.

Why, then, not call the bishops' bluffs? Imagine the pushback and negative press a bishop would get if he stripped a Catholic school of its identity for refusing to fire an LGBT employee. Imagine the momentum that could be built and the empowering precedent it could set for other schools facing the same turmoil.

– Jamie L. Manson
Excerpted from "Catholic Schools Must Refuse
to Fire LGBT Employees"
National Catholic Reporter
July 29, 2015

Related Off-site Link:
Sister of Mercy Joins Parents in Protests Against Firing of Lesbian Educator – Bob Shine (Bondings 2.0, July 24, 2015).

See also the previous Wild Reed posts:
• Thoughts on the Firing of Kristen Ostendorf
• Quote of the Day – September 2, 2013
• Truth Telling: The Greatest of Sins in a Dysfunctional Church
• Church Fires "Openly" Gay Music Director
• Compassion, Christian Community, and Homosexuality
• Catholic Church Can Overcome Fear of LGBT People

Image: Kristen Solberg.

More Progressive Catholic Perspectives on Ireland's Historic Gay Marriage Vote

Above: Joe Caslin's pro-marriage equality mural on
Caherkinmonwee Castle in County Galway. (Photo: David Sexton)

NOTE: This is a follow-up to the previous Wild Reed post, Progressive Thoughts on Recent Developments in Ireland, El Salvador and the U.S. For my own thoughts on the overwhelming Catholic support for marriage equality in Ireland, click here.

After the Irish vote on gay marriage, which saw 62% vote in favour of a change to the constitution to allow gay people to marry, Archbishop Diarmuid Martin of Dublin said the church needed to take “a reality check” and “not move into denial.” . . . [T]ruth and right are more likely to be found in common consensus than in autocratic dictatorship. But for a Catholic leader, even the mention of a phrase like “reality check” is groundbreaking.

This, after all, is an organisation that has chosen to ignore reality, even when it is up close, personal and staring it in the face. I’m thinking of issues such as contraception, which it continues to pronounce against, while the vast majority of Catholics are more than happy to use it; and child abuse, which it refused to acknowledge, even as the files on its criminal priests stacked up and grew dusty on the desks of cathedral offices the world over.

. . . What led to Martin’s radical rethink was simple: the fear that he will soon be leading a church without any followers. For thousands of years, the men at the top of the Catholic church thought power flowed just one way: now, at long last, they’re realising it’s not that simple. Because a church with no worshippers wouldn’t be a church at all, and the men who run it would have no power any more.

They’d better do something quick. I have an idea: they could start emulating the life of a preacher who lived in poverty 2,000 years ago. Whatever made me think of that? As reality checks go, that one really would take some beating.

– Joanna Moorhead
Excerpted from "The Irish Catholic Church is Changing Its Tune
– Soon the Vatican Will Too"
The Guardian
May 27, 2015

Some of the most effective social media around the ["Yes" vote's overwhelming success] featured families of LGBTIQ Catholics. Their simple statements of love for their children and their hope that they might marry and form good Irish families were persuasive. It was all rather traditional in the end—everyone is entitled to love. While the institutional church lost miserably, the enduring message of post-Vatican II Catholicism—that all persons are equal with corresponding rights and responsibilities—had a good day. The fact that this message was distilled from the rubble of sexual abuse, clergy cover-up, heterosexism, disdain for women, and the rest of the clerically-constructed system is a miracle in itself. The pulpits are still in the hands of the priests, though, and they do not show many signs of sharing.

. . . Irish clergy used to make a living telling other people how to live their lives no matter how flawed their own were. A generation ago people in Ireland went to daily mass after work and heard the messages repeated ad nauseam. Irish Catholics proved they know how to separate the wheat from the chaff, the important values like love and justice from warped attempts to dictate outmoded morality.

It is for lay Catholics around the world to be clear, as Irish voters were, that we can and will make our own decisions.

Much remains to be done to dismantle deeply entrenched structures. But the Irish referendum means that a top-down, clergy-heavy model of church heard its death knell in Dublin. As it reverberates around the world the Gospel message might get a little more airtime. As the Irish say, it will make a glass eye cry—with joy.

– Mary E. Hunt
Excerpted from "Did Ireland Just Bury the Catholic Church?"
Religion Dispatches
May 26, 2015

[I]n falling out of line with the Vatican, Irish people are actually falling in line with their Catholic counterparts in other Western countries, including the United States.

They aren’t sloughing off their Catholicism — not exactly, not entirely. An overwhelming majority of them still identify as Catholic. But they’re incorporating religion into their lives in a manner less rooted in Rome.

We journalists too often use "the Catholic Church" as a synonym for the pope, the cardinals and teachings that have the Vatican’s stamp of approval. But in Europe and the Americas in particular, the church is much more fluid than that. It harbors spiritually inclined people paying primary obeisance to their own consciences, their own senses of social justice. That impulse and tradition are as Catholic as any others.

– Frank Bruni
Excerpted from "On Same-Sex Marriage, Catholics Are Leading the Way"
The New York Times
May 27, 2015

Ireland, the source of Catholic missionaries throughout the word for hundreds of years, has suffered a drastic exodus of people from its church-going ranks since the sexual abuse scandal broke into public view during the past decade. The majority of Irish men and women may still call themselves Catholic, but they no longer accept the hierarchy as believable, particularly in matters of sexual morality. Thus, the stunning rejection of the church’s view of gay marriage as an invalid relationship in the eyes of God and the church. What the church teaches about sexuality is rejected almost as a duty. The church has no credibility in matters of sexuality in Ireland.

The Irish have been brought up by the Catholic Church to view marriage as a sacrament and that’s the reason they can shift sideways to see a same-sex relationship in the same God-blessed way. Because marriage is a beautiful commitment of love, taught to them by the church, the Irish can make the connection to two people of the same sex loving each other with a similar commitment. It is the love commitment they value, and have come to see in their friends and family members who are gay and lesbian as well. Love conquers. The Irish are lovers. It doesn’t matter who the partners are — “I promise to love you all the days of my life, so help me God.”

– Paul F. Morrissey
Excerpted from "Ireland is For Gay marriage Because It is Catholic "
USA Today via Religion News Service
May 27, 2015

I have three suggestions [for why Catholics are so supportive of marriage equality]. . . . First, perhaps the fact that Catholics have a celibate clergy that includes a large number of gay men means that the fear bred from ignorance is less likely to be operative than in other traditions. Second, could it be that a natural law approach to ethical questions, that is, that reason should guide our thinking and our conclusions, is bred into the Catholic bone? Third, might Catholics be so imbued with the sacramental principle that they recognize any expression of genuine love to be evidence of God’s presence in the world, and hence to be cherished rather than condemned? In Ireland or here or elsewhere, the actual principal difference between leaders and people, on same-sex issues or birth control or religious freedom or perhaps many other issues, is that the leadership thinks deductively while the rank and file think inductively. Experience trumps ideology, which—strangely enough—is Pope Francis’s consistent message!

– Paul Lakeland
Excerpted from "Gay-Friendly Catholics"
Commonweal
May 27, 2015

It is time for church teaching to reflect what social science tells us and what Catholic families have long understood: Catholicism must cast off a theology of sexuality based on a mechanical understanding of natural law that focuses on individual acts, and embrace a theology of sexuality that has grown out of lived experience and is based on relationships and intentionality.

. . . On the issue of church teaching on sexuality, the time for dialogue is likely passed. Action is needed. The strongest message out of the Irish referendum is that on its teaching about sexuality, the church today faces a watershed moment, just as it did in 1968 with Humanae Vitae.

– The Editorial Staff
Excerpted from "Ireland Vote for Same-Sex Marriage
a Watershed Moment for Church Teaching"
National Catholic Reporter
May 29, 2015

What a gift the Catholic hierarchy has been handed by the Irish with their overwhelming vote to legalize same sex marriages. Coming just months before the Synod on the Family set for next October in Rome, the vote by this Catholic nation is nothing less than a church plebiscite – a vote of the Catholic sensus fidelium for all to see that official Catholic teaching on human sexuality is wrong, hurtful, and even, at times, immoral.

. . . The Irish vote is a wake up call. If the Synod on the Family ends with only a “pastoral” conclusion, a call that we all need “to open our selves and parishes" to essentially wayward, sinners, that we need to love these “sinners” even as they continue to engage in “intrinsically disordered acts,” it will have failed all of us and the synod, despite the best intentions, will almost certainly end up further eroding - if this is possible - the Catholic church as a moral force on matters of family, human relationship and sexual theology.

It is time we remember: Our gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender brothers and sisters are people, just like the rest of us. Some more generous; others less so. Some more enlightened; others less so. Some more sinful; others less so. Just people, saints and sinners and in-between.

Can the Catholic hierarchy finally admit it has Catholic sexual teachings wrong? Admittedly, it’s a tall order. I admire Pope Francis enormously. However, just withholding judgment without addressing and amending past teaching errors will not be enough. Nowhere near enough.

Bishops, you have been served.

– Thomas C. Fox
Excerpted from "Bishops, Your Church Has Spoken"
National Catholic Reporter
May 29, 2015

I was quite uncomfortable with [Cardinal Pietro Parolin's statement that the same-sex marriage referendum was not only "a defeat for Christian principles, but also a defeat for humanity."] I mean there has been lots of disasters in the world but I certainly would not support the belief that the referendum was among them. To suggest that over a million people who went to the polls and voted yes were so false in their judgment that it was a disaster for humanity is not something I can accept. It is an inappropriate statement . . . [and] not one I think that represents the mind of Pope Francis despite it coming from a very senior Church figure. It is a very heavy judgement on the whole issue.

– Willie Walsh, Bishop Emeritus of Killaloe
Excerpted from "Bishop Willie Walsh: "I Don't Accept the Referendum
as a Defeat for Humanity""
The Independent
May 27, 2015

Cardinal Parolin’s comments [re. the same-sex marriage referendum in Ireland being not only "a defeat for Christian principles, but also a defeat for humanity"] demonstrate exactly the kind of inflexibility and arrogance that have driven so many people from the Church. It is very hurtful and insulting to supporters of marriage equality to be spoken of as having unchristian, even inhuman, values. More than 80% of the Irish people still identify themselves as Catholic, and most of the Irish people who voted to support same-sex couples and families did so because they recognize the love and commitment these couples share. They were moved by the stories of people they know, and by the relationships they have witnessed first-hand. Their vote was no ‘defeat for humanity,’ but a victory for the fundamental Catholic values of love, inclusion, and the inherent dignity of all people.

This issue and these disagreements will be front and center during the World Meeting of Families in Philadelphia in September and the second phase of the Synod on the Family in Rome in October. How our Church leaders respond will impact the lives of people all over the world. We urge the Synod participants to invite in same-sex couples; parents of lesbian and gay people who are married, or who struggle because they can’t be married; and gay couples raising children so they can hear directly from us. We urge respectful listening, a willingness to ask questions, and openness to the Spirit. Like Archbishop Martin of Dublin, we are calling upon our Church leaders to recognize that they must address the new realities in the world with sensitivity, sincerity, and honesty.

– Marianne Duddy-Burke
Excerpted from "Conflicting Comments from Vatican Secretary of State
and Irish Archbishop on Same-Sex Marriage Vote Illustrate Divide
Among Catholic Leadership"
DignityUSA.org
May 27, 2015

[Pope] Francis clearly agrees with [Cardinal] Parolin's "defeat for humanity" opinion on the outcome of Ireland's same-sex marriage vote. Remember that, back in January, the pope famously likened "gender theory" (which provides the intellectual basis for same-sex marriage and a host of other progressive ideas related to sexuality) to "ideological colonization" and even "Hitler Youth." Why? Because, Francis explained, gender theory "does not recognize the order of creation."

But rather than respond directly to Ireland himself, this time, Pope Francis is putting the harsher, condemnatory language in the mouth of his secretary of state while he does the work of evangelizing the youth about the truth and beauty of the church's teachings on marriage.

Parolin is taking on the old-fashioned role of Vatican scold while Francis takes the new, more merciful, catechetical approach. But ultimately, both men agree with the institutional church's opposition to marriage equality. Both men believe same-sex relationships violate the traditional understanding of natural law and gender complimentary.

Most importantly, both men believe these church teachings on marriage are correct and should not change. The problem, they believe, is that the institutional church hasn't done a good job of communicating the church's truths effectively and pastorally. As Parolin himself said in his statement on Ireland, the church "must strengthen its commitment to evangelization." Francis attempted to do just that in his audience the following day.

If the vote in Ireland proves anything, it is that both Francis, the good cop, and Parolin, the bad cop, will fail in their efforts. Ireland demonstrates that the pope's understanding of acting mercifully toward lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people will not be adequate to bring them into the pews.

– Jamie Manson
Excerpted from "Are Francis and Parolin
Playing Good Cop-Bad Cop on Same-Sex Marriage?"
National Catholic Reporter
May 28, 2015

Above: Joe Caslin's pro-marriage equality mural
on South George Street, Dublin. (Photo: David Sexton)

See also the previous Wild Reed posts:
• Progressive Thoughts on Recent Developments in Ireland, El Salvador and the U.S.
• Singing Their Own Song in Ireland
• Quote of the Day – May 21, 2015

Related Off-site Links:
European Bishops Strategize for Positive LGBT Outcome at October’s Synod – Bob Shine (Bondings 2.0, May 27, 2015).
Confidential Meeting Seeks to Sway Synod to Accept Same-Sex Unions – Edward Pentin (National Catholic Register, May 26, 2015).
European Bishops Discuss Improved LGBT and Divorced Ministry – Terence Weldon (Queering the Church, May 25, 2015).
Vatican’s "Defeat for Humanity" Statement Shows Church Officials Have Not Learned from the Irish Example – Francis DeBernardo (Bondings 2.0, May 28, 2015).
How the Irish Became the World’s Leading Gay Activists – Margaret Spillane (The Nation, June 15, 2015)

How the Pope's Recent Remarks on Evolution Highlight a Major Discrepancy in Church Teaching

There's been a lot of media attention focused on Pope Francis' recent comments about evolution.

Reports the Washington Post:

Delivering an address to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, Pope Francis continued his habit of making provocative, seemingly progressive statements. The pontiff appeared to endorse the theory of the Big Bang and told the gathering at the Vatican that there was no contradiction between believing in God as well as the prevailing scientific theories regarding the expansion of our universe.

The way some news outlets are reporting it, Francis has made a groundbreaking declaration. In reality, he's simply reiterating what's been official Catholic thinking on the matter for the past six decades, i.e., belief in God is not incompatible with the acceptance of evolution. During his papacy, Benedict XVI espoused the same view. Indeed, ever since the reforms of Pope Pius XII, the Vatican has espoused belief in theistic evolution, meaning the Divine Presence which we commonly refer to as God, set in motion and infuses the creative process known as evolution.

I welcome Francis reminding us of this, and intend using some of his recent statements in "Companions on a Sacred Journey," the workshop on evolutionary spirituality that I'm currently conducting with groups of local Catholics. Yet the Pope's statements also serve to highlight a major discrepancy in the Vatican's thinking and teaching.


Two different worldviews

This discrepancy stems from two very different worldviews that are employed when dealing with different areas of human inquiry and experience. When it comes to the evolution of the universe, the planet, and humanity, the Vatican is open to what is known as the historically conscious worldview. According to this worldview, reality is dynamic, evolving, and ever-changing. The findings of science are valued and readily integrated into theological understandings and formulations. We see all of this with the Vatican's stance on evolution. Yet when it comes to the reality of human sexuality the Vatican chooses to employ a very different worldview, one that's known as the classicist worldview. Unlike the historical conscious worldview, the classicist worldview sees reality as static, fixed, and always and everywhere the same.

So here's the interesting thing: in important areas such as biblical scholarship and the study of the cosmos, the Vatican has, over time, shifted from the classicist worldview to the historical conscious worldview. Yet in the fields of gender and sexuality, it remains firmly entrenched in the classicist worldview.

In other words, the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church now accepts science when it comes to thinking and talking about astronomy and the evolution of the planet (including the evolution of humanity), but it doesn't accept science when it comes to thinking and talking about the complex reality of sexuality. This discrepancy has been described by some as a glaring and untenable example of intellectual dishonesty. (For more about the classicist and historical conscious worldviews, click here).


A certain mindset

Why are the members of Roman Catholicism's clerical caste so reluctant to embrace the historical conscious worldview when dealing with issues of sexuality? The answer, I believe, is, in part, rooted in a certain mindset that formed in the Middle Ages and lives on in the church's clerical caste. In his authoritative work The Origins and Role of Same-Sex Relations in Human Societies, James Neil clearly and succinctly identifies and discusses this mindset, one that is vividly illustrated by the writings of Saint Anselm of Canterbury, included in Neil's book.

There is one evil, an evil above all other evils, that I am aware is always within me, that grievously and piteously lacerates and afflicts my soul. It was with me from the cradle, it grew with me in childhood, in adolescence, in my youth it always stuck to me, and it does not desert me even now that my limbs are failing because of my old age. This evil is sexual desire, carnal delight, the storm of lust that has smashed and battered my unhappy soul, emptied it of all strength, and left it weak and empty.

It's a rather negative view of sexuality, wouldn't you say?

Personally, I prefer the more poetic and thus, I believe, more honest and truthful musings offered by author Winston Graham who, in the eighth Poldark novel, The Stranger from the Sea, has the character of Demelza imagining sexual desire as "a sea dragon of an emotion . . . causing half the trouble of the world, and half the joy."

Perhaps poor Anselm only ever experienced the trouble and never the joy. It's just a pity that his subjective experience of sexuality become codified as objective truth for a good number of centuries. But that's the danger of the classicist worldview: it can turn the particular into the universal and immutable.

Here's what James Neil writes in The Origins and Role of Same-Sex Relations in Human Societies about Anselm's situation and its consequences for Christianity:

Late in [his] life, Saint Anselm of Canterbury anguished over the sexual drive that, despite a lifetime of devotion to God, stubbornly refused to release him even in old age. In writing these words, Anselm could have been speaking for many other Medieval clergymen who devoted themselves to the church's strict anti-sexual moral teachings – a moral code that demonized their own sexual natures. The roots of the psychological disturbance or neurosis are easy to see in the sincere dedication of these devout clergymen to the ascetic sexual ideal that not only required them to suppress a fundamental human instinct, but taught them that their innermost self was evil. The conflict between their beliefs, on the one hand, and the urges of their bodies on the other, set in motion a psychological struggle that was, in fact, a classic example of neurosis as defined in standard psychoanalytic reference work.

. . . Such a conflict would appear to be particularly acute in the case of a person conditioned by religious indoctrination to be repelled by sex, one of the most basic instinctual drives. If the urges were homosexual, the psychological stress would be even greater. The "neurotic symptoms" produced in individuals with such an internal conflict typically take the form of reaction formation, a psychological defense in which the negativity they feel toward the intolerable characteristic is directed to others who display the same loathed characteristics. . . . The level of hostility they displayed to homosexuality was directly proportional to the strength of homosexual responsiveness recorded within each of them.

Putting it another way, because of the distorted lens through which such clergymen perceived sex, and because of his own emotional discomfort with it, [Anselm] could never deal with the subject truly rationally or dispassionately. Hence the references we see to sexual behavior in the morally conservative clergy of the Middle Ages are in almost all cases couched in histrionic and super-heated hyperbole. Likewise the visceral disgust conservative clergy felt for those practicing homosexuality.

In assessing the impact of the anti-sexual thinking and writings of Anselm, Augustine, William of Auxerre, and others, theologian Daniel Maguire insists that we must be candid in acknowledging that "Catholics and other Christians pumped a lot of bad notions of sex and sexual pleasure into Western culture."

Maguire also makes this interesting observation:

One might think that the puritanical horror of sex has been dissipated in a culture where sex is used ubiquitously in the marketplace to promote sales, and frenzied pornography abounds. However, as theologian Grace Jantzen observes, this obsession reflects the historical Christian obsession and is really “the same preoccupation, turned inside out.” The addiction to pornography is fueled by discomfort with sex. It has been suggested that pornography might dull our feeling for the other – in effect, killing love.

Signs of hope

It seems sadly obvious that when it comes to issues of gender and sexuality, the Roman Catholic clerical caste, including the Pope, remain entrenched in the classicist worldview, one still tied in many ways to the anti-sexual moral teachings of Medieval thinking. Yet there are signs of hope in our church for a renewed understanding of sexuality, an understanding firmly grounded in the historical conscious worldview.

Earlier this month in the Twin Cities, Fr. John Heagle and Sister Fran Ferder, longtime educators and authors in the field of human sexuality, spoke at Call to Action MN's Fall Conference. The title and focus of their presentation was "Where Love and Justice Meet: An Emerging Sexual Ethic for Our Time."

This focus was consciously chosen by the conference's organizers because of the strong believe held by many local Catholics that our church is facing a crucial turning point in its understanding of sexuality. Indeed, for many Catholic worldwide, it has become clear that the lived experience of ordinary people differs significantly from official church teaching. The "traditional" Catholic ethic that most grew up with, an ethic grounded in Medieval philosophy and natural law theory, is simply no longer adequate in addressing contemporary issues of human sexuality.

Throughout their October 18 presentation, Heagle and Ferder explored a biblically-based understanding of the gift of sexuality and the responsibility of faithful loving. Such an exploration involved making the connections between relationships and biblical justice, sexuality, and systems of power. At one point they noted that Jesus had little to say about the biology of sex, but spoke decisively about the qualities of authentic loving: respect, responsibility, covenantal faithfulness, and mutuality.

Overall, it was a very helpful and hopeful presentation, one that explored issues of gender, sexuality, and intimacy in much more meaningful ways then those offered by the hierarchy. This is because Heagle and Ferder are operating within a historical conscious worldview, one that is open to the collective wisdom of humanity.

I would contend that the majority of Catholics are operating within this worldview. In her latest National Catholic Reporter column, Jamie L. Manson offers support to this contention when she compellingly writes:

Many bishops have spent the last three decades remaining silent on issues related to the family or silencing those who dared to question the institutional church's teachings on sexuality. In the meantime, Catholic theologians, ethicists and laypeople have been pursuing deeper inquiries, listening to concrete human experiences, and developing contemporary moral frameworks grounded in the Catholic intellectual tradition.

Many laypeople have already cultivated their own capacity for moral discernment; they have exercised their God-given gift of conscience; they have managed to grow spiritually without institutional church's constant instruction; they have found that their relationships, which the bishops would label "irregular," are, in fact, deeply sacramental.

Another sign of hope is the recent position paper written and published by the Twin Cities-based Council of the Baptized, a 21-member panel of Catholics chartered in 2012 to be a "collegial voice for a growing community of Catholics in honoring their baptismal responsibility for their local church." The council's latest position paper is entitled "Toward a Healthy Christian Theology of Sexuality," and I'll close with an excerpt from its introduction. (The full paper can be read by clicking here.)

The Council of the Baptized of the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis is concerned about developing a healthy Christian theology of sexuality. We know that sexuality is with us from conception to death, and that any knowledge and understandings we can gain about it will be self-enhancing and result in improved personal and interpersonal relationships. Unfortunately, the Church's theology of sexuality often comes across to many people as basically negative – a series of no's and prohibitions. We believe a more positive and nourishing theological approach to human sexuality would better serve as a basis for addressing contemporary questions and for dialoguing with other Catholics, other Christians, our Jewish sisters and brothers, and all who are genuinely interested in dialogue.

As faithful Catholics we have heeded the spirit of the Second Vatican Council and informed our consciences on Church teachings. The proposal [contained in this paper] will show that the Church teachings on sexual ethics are reformable. We ask that the entire People of God – hierarchy, theologians, and laity – be consulted and their voices respected on sexual topics. We urge the Church to take into account the findings of contemporary biological research and the policies of professional health associations and world organizations dedicated to improving health. We ask that men who have taken the vows of celibacy no longer be the sole arbiters of official teaching on Christian sexual morality. Only when the voices and lived experience of the whole "People of God," especially those of women and all those who are sexually active, are taken into account will a sexual ethic be credible and faithful.

See also the previous Wild Reed posts:
• Beyond the Hierarchy: The Blossoming of Liberating Catholic Insights on Sexuality
• The Non-Negotiables of Human Sex
• The Many Manifestations of God’s Loving Embrace
• Same-Sex Desires: "Immanent and Essential Traits Transcending Time and Culture"
• A Church That Can and Cannot Change
• Johnson and Tushnet Debate is as Much About Revelation as it is Homosexuality
• Sister Teresa Forcades on Queer Theology
• Quote of the Day – May 31, 2014
• Jesus, Sex, and Power
• Daniel Maguire on the Wedding of Sexuality and Spirituality
• Getting It Right

Related Off-site Links:
Five Facts About Evolution and Religion – David Masci (Pew Research Center, October 30, 2014).
Conservatives Will Take Their Ball and Go Home if Francis Changes “Their” Church – Patricia Miller (Religion Dispatches, October 28, 2014).
Homosexual Relationships: Another Look – Bill Hunt (The Progressive Catholic Voice, September 8, 2012).
Creating a Liberating Church – Rosemary Radford Ruether (The Progressive Catholic Voice, July 15, 2010).