Synod ‘Fight for Soul’ of Catholic Church, Flap On English Translation of Key Report; Anti-Gay Law Advances in Kyrgyzstan; Global LGBT Recap

The big story this week is the ideological warfare and spin-control struggles that broke into the open after the public reading on Monday of a working document called a relatio that was intended to summarize discussions to date at the Catholic bishops’ synod on the family.

The document contained language that felt to many like a major departure – what some called a “stunning shift” in the church’s approach to gay people. That draft and the media response to it provoked a furious backlash from conservatives, who are hoping for a major re-write before the final document is presented to bishops on Saturday.

Among the rhetoric drawing attention was the statement that gays and lesbians have “gifts to offer” the church.

“Homosexuals have gifts and qualities to offer to the Christian community. Are we capable of welcoming these people, guaranteeing to them a fraternal space in our communities? Often they wish to encounter a church that offers them a welcoming home. Are our communities capable of providing that, accepting and valuing their sexual orientation, without compromising Catholic doctrine on the family and matrimony?”

The report also said that some gay couples give each other “mutual aid to the point of sacrifice” and “precious support in the life of the partners.” To many journalists and LGBT and liberal Catholics, this kind of language praising gay couples was nothing short of astonishing. One Vatican journalist called it a “pastoral earthquake.”

For example, Francis DeBernarndo of New Ways Ministry, told the Washignton Blade, “It’s really a total reversal of the attitude and approach the church leaders have taken regarding lesbian and gay people for decades now.” Tom Roberts wrote in the New Republic, “Pope Francis Just Ripped the Weapons From the Culture Warriors’ Hands.”

At the Guardian, Lizzy Davies wrote

Is this the modern family according to Francis? From gay relationships to extramarital sex, from divorce and remarriage to civil unions, the Roman Catholic church has signalled it is ready to adopt what some see as a markedly more conciliatory tone towards those in “irregular” familial setups.

The New York Times’ Elisabetta Povoledo and Laurie Goodstein similarly called it “the first signal that the institutional church may follow the direction Francis has set in the first 18 months of his papacy, away from condemnation of unconventional family situations and toward understanding, openness and mercy.”

The conservative backlash was immediate and intense, if sometimes contradictory. Some conservatives lamented what they saw as a betrayal to the church’s teachings, while others, like George Weigel at National Review, downplayed the relatio’s significance and blamed the media for blowing things out of proportion.

Nicole Winfield of the Associated Press described the backlash this way:

A fight for the soul of the Catholic Church has broken out, and the first battlefield is a document on family values that pits increasingly alarmed conservatives against more progressive bishops emboldened by Pope Francis’ vision of a church that is more merciful than moralistic.

Thomas Peters of the National Organization for Marriage was appalled about the Vatican press office’s handling of the document and the conversations it spawned.  He argued that conservatives must overcome the “falsehood” that “only the revisionists speak from a place of mercy,” adding, “True mercy is always rooted in the truth. And authentic mercy can never contradict the truth.

Cardinal Wilfrid Fox Napier called the situation “virtually irredeemable.” Conservative American Cardinal Raymond Burke, said the report” lacks a solid foundation in the sacred Scriptures.” Burke went so far as to demand that Pope Francis speak out and clarify that church doctrine on marriage and homosexuality is not being changed. John Thavis provides a summary of conservative gripes.

It’s not only conservative Catholics that have been weighing in on the synod: Protestants like Rick Warren joined conservative Catholics in a pre-synod letter calling for the bishops to be outspoken advocates for “timeless truths” about marriage. American anti-gay activist Bradlee Dean, who announced, “I’m no friend of the Roman Catholic Church, their councils or their Popes,” slammed “the liberal leaning Pope Francis and his Roman ecclesiastical hierarchy” for focusing on positive contributions “sodomites” can make in the church.” And Brooklyn-based Orthodox Rabbi Yehuda Levin, a spokesman for the Rabbinical Council of America, appealed, according to LifeSite News, “to conservative cardinals to resist all efforts to tolerate or accept homosexuality” at the synod.

According to Levin, who said he was not speaking for the Rabbinical Alliance, “The Catholic Church is a real bulwark at the United Nations and internationally, the premier defender of family and pro-life values.” Orthodox Jews share those values and rely on the Catholic Church as an ally. Moreover, “As things go in the Christian community, they soon go in the Jewish community,” he said.

“Why discuss homosexual unions at all?” Levin asks. “What’s to discuss?” The rabbi said Scripture is clear on the immorality of homosexuality and “true compassion” demands that we call our neighbour out of their sin.

Levin worried that some Catholic leaders are falling prey to a “militant methodology” organized by radical homosexuals that has already forced public schools, governments, and professional bodies such as the American Psychological Association to accept homosexuality as normal.

Levin appealed to the retired pope Benedict to “step forward and preach the unadulterated truth.”

The truth, he added, is that homosexuality is wrong, and taking a so-called non-judgmental approach to it can only encourage its growth. “There is something worse than murdering a child,” Levin said. “Because, as the Talmud says, when you kill someone physically you don’t touch them spiritually. But when you lead a person into heinous sin, you kill them spiritually in this world and the next world.”

All the hoopla led to a bit of bactracking, at least rhetorically, but liberals and conservatives jockeyed over the extent to which the Vatican’s statements clarifying the relatio’s role in the process marked any walk-back from its ideas.

In response to such reactions, the Vatican backtracked a bit Tuesday. In a statement, it said the report on gays and lesbians was a “working document,” not the final word from Rome.

The Vatican also said that it wanted to welcome gays and lesbians in the church, but not create “the impression of a positive evaluation” of same-sex relationships, or, for that matter, of unmarried couples who live together….

It is not clear where the chips will fall. On Thursday, Winfield of Associated Press reported, “The Vatican is watering down a ground-breaking overture to gays — but only if they speak English.”

After a draft report by bishops debating family issues came under criticism from conservative English-speaking bishops, the Vatican released a new translation on Thursday.

A section initially titled “Welcoming homosexuals” is now “Providing for homosexual persons,” and the tone of the text is significantly colder and less welcoming.

The initial English version — released Monday along with the original — accurately reflected the Italian version in both letter and spirit, and contained a remarkable tone of acceptance extended to gays. Conservatives were outraged.

The first version asked if the church was capable of “welcoming these people, guaranteeing to them a fraternal space in our communities.” The new version asks if the church is “capable of providing for these people, guaranteeing … them … a place of fellowship in our communities.”

The first version said homosexual unions can often constitute a “precious support in the life of the partners.” The new one says gay unions often constitute “valuable support in the life of these persons.”

In nearly all cases, the first version followed the official Italian version in verbatim; the second provides a different tone altogether.

In contrast, the Catholic News Agency argued that the original English translation was inaccurate.

While the working report is not a final document, there is plenty of intrigue over who will be responsible for drafting that final document. While bishops elected conservatives to committees that will consider portions of the final report, Francis himself appointed a group of his own choosing to oversee the drafting. According to the Associated Press:

The bishops themselves elected a host of known conservatives to lead the working groups hammering out details of the final report. In an apparent bid to counter their influence, Francis appointed six progressives to draft the final document.

America magazine’s Gerard O’Connell called that move by Francis “unprecedented and highly significant.” The final report that emerges “will provide the basis for discussion in Bishops’ Conferences and Churches around the world between now and the synod of October 2015.”

It will serve as the equivalent of a Working Document in preparation for the next synod which is expected to come up with important proposals regarding the pastoral approach to the family in the 21st century, including those regarding how the Church will respond to the questions of cohabitation, the admission of divorced and remarried Catholics, other irregular situations, same-sex unions and much else.…

But on Thursday, James Martin reported that “Pope Francis added two new members to the drafting commission, Cardinal Wilfrid Napier of Durban and Archbishop Denis Hart of Oceania, apparently to further include different viewpoints (particularly from African bishops). Cardinal Napier had been on record as describing the first ‘relatio’ as nearly ‘irredeemable.’”

O’Connell wrote that the openness of the conversation at the synod, which has exposed differences of opinion and priority, is itself a direct consequence of the more open approach championed by Francis:

Every participant that I have spoken to in private, as well as those who met the press, gave fulsome credit to Pope Francis for creating a climate of freedom in which everyone has felt totally free to say what they really think on a given topic.  “People are very relaxed, and even make jokes”, Archbishop Diarmuid Martin of Dublin commented.  He said the Pope has contributed greatly to this climate not only by advocating that they speak freely and boldly on the first day but also by arriving early each day, greeting participants when they arrive, and mingling with people at the coffee breaks.

It is well known that in past synods a discreet but effective censorship was exercised by Vatican officials, but what was even more serious and damaging to the realization of an open and honest debate was the “self-censorship” exercised by the bishops themselves at these gatherings. Archbishop Jose Maria Arancedo, President of the Argentine Bishops Conference, stated this frankly in an interview on October 9 when, referring to past synods, he said, “The worst censorship is self-censorship”.

A second very important factor that differentiates this synod from previous ones is that “the inductive” rather than “the deductive” method has prevailed. Archbishop Paul-André Durocher, President of the Canadian Bishops Conference, highlighted this particular aspect at a Vatican briefing on October 9.

“What’s going on in the Synod is we’re seeing a more inductive way of reflecting, starting with the real situations of people… and finding that the lived experience of people is also a theological source, a place of theological reflection”, he stated.

“The bishops are speaking as pastors”, many participants confirmed. They are speaking from personal experience and honest conviction on a wide variety of issues.  At times they are doing so with great passion, also from their experiences of the happy or broken marriages of their own parents.

On the other hand, there’s plenty in the document that affirms church teachings and stakes out more conservative politicians. As the New York Times notes,

The document also criticizes pressure by the United Nations and some Western nations to compel countries in Africa and elsewhere to rescind laws that restrict the rights of gay people, in exchange for financial aid. It says it is unacceptable “that international bodies make financial aid dependent on the introduction of regulations inspired by gender ideology.”

“Gender ideology” is a construct being pushed by Catholic leaders in Poland and across Europe as a shorthand for everything conservatives don’t like about nontraditional views on family, women, and LGBT people.

It is not clear how much change will actually result from this synod, or next year’s. Patricia Miller has noted in RD, the synod’s signs of greater welcome to LGBT people has not extended so much to women. At National Catholic Reporter, Heidi Schlumpf has a hard time getting excited about the bishops’ “gradualism” on family issues. Father James Martin, S.J., suggests, “Maybe this is not so much Vatican III as the continuation of Vatican II.”

But even that would be too much for conservatives. George Weigle at the National Review warned that the future of the church is at stake:

And if theTimesand others really want to dig into a serious debate that’s underway beneath the surface at the 2014 synod, they might consider this: The experience of the 20th and early 21st centuries suggests that there is an iron law built into the Christian encounter with modernity, according to which Christian communities that maintain a clear sense of their doctrinal and moral boundaries survive and even flourish, while Christian communities whose doctrinal and moral boundaries become porous wither and eventually die.

Russia: Activists Arrested for Coming Out Event; Orthodox Protesters Attack Gathering

In Moscow, eight activists were arrested when they staged a Coming Out Day protest. Also in Moscow, Queer Russia reports that the Sakharov Centre hosted a meeting of the “Be open – Your World will Become Wider” campaign, which was attended by about 50 participants sharing stories of coming out.  According to the LGBT group Rainbow Association, “several dozen” aggressive Orthodox activists began protesting with Orthodox Christian icons and attempted to break into the Sakharov Centre. Police detained some of the most violent protesters, but then began investigating whether there were violation of the law banning “gay propaganda.” People were allowed to leave the event only after a meticulous check of people’s documents ensured that there were no minors present.

Chile: Pro-Equality Priests Investigated

Three Catholic priests who have come out in support of marriage equality are apparently being investigated by the Vatican, though the Bishop of Santiago Cardinal Ricardo Ezzati told the Catholic News Agency this week that he had not initiated any action against the priests. According to the CAN, Father Felipe Berrios, a Jesuit, defended marriage equality in public comments made in June this year.

Asked about “same-sex marriage,” Fr. Berrios said the Church’s position differs from that of Pope Francis and that he doesn’t have a problem with such unions.

“Gays and lesbians are telling me that sexuality between them is much deeper than that between a man and a woman. They are broadening my outlook on sexuality, they are making me much more humane. Why can’t they get married? If they are the ones who marry each other and the State recognizes the marriage, why can’t they do it? In other words, enough is enough,” the priest said….

Vatican sources confirmed to CNA that the cardinal has not made any accusations against the priests and said that the misinformation in the media is intended to “intimidate the Chilean bishops from denouncing the grave doctrinal errors that exist in the public statements of the three priests.”

Scotland: Government Sets Date for Start of Same-Sex Marriages

The Scottish Parliament voted for marriage equality back in February. Now December 31 has been officially set as the start date for same-sex marriage ceremonies in Scotland. According to the announcement, couples in an existing civil partnership will be able to exchange that partnership for a marriage beginning on December 16.

Kyrgyzstan: Anti-Gay Bill Advances; US Embassy and Activists Protest
The Parliament of Kyrgystan voted its initial approval of a harsh anti-gay law that would criminalizeeven the dissemination of ideas that promote LGBT equality. Radio Free Europe reports:

Kyrgyzstan’s parliament has approved a draft law that bans “propaganda of same-sex relations” in the first reading.

Lawmaker Kurmanbek Dyikanbaev told RFE/RL on October 15 that 79 deputies voted for the legislation, while seven voted against it.

The law has to pass the parliament’s approval in two more readings and then be signed by the president before coming into force.

According to RFE, the bill would ban the creation of groups that defend the rights of sexual minorities and would punish “propaganda of non-traditional sexual relations” with up to a year in jail.

According to Reuters, “The new bill proposes to slap fines or prison terms of up to one year on those “forming a positive attitude to untraditional sexual relations” among minors or in mass media.

The US embassy is Kyrgyzstan released a statement critical of laws that limit civil society and harm democracy. It said in part, “No one should be silenced or imprisoned because of who they are or whom they love. Laws that discriminate against one group of people threaten the fundamental rights of all people.”

Activists in Washington DC planned a protest at the Kyrgyz embassy for Thursday afternoon.

Caribbean: Women and Sexual Diversity Conference

IGLHRC reports that the second Caribbean Women and Sexual Diversity Conference was convened in Surinam last week. Jamaican activist Paige Andrew reports on the event’s workshops and the need for additional research to support activism in the region, and she writes:

The conference culminated with a pride march, which was a part of Suriname’s Coming Out week and without a doubt the most liberating experience I have ever had. I have lived in both Jamaica and Trinidad which are countries which do not celebrate LGBT pride, so it was an incredible experience to openly march for a cause close to my heart.


  •' cranefly says:

    The synod document is obviously not perfect. It’s problematic in plenty of ways. But it’s amazing that so many plain statements of obvious fact constitute a “pastoral earthquake.” It shows just how craven the Church has been towards LGBTI people. There is nothing remotely contradictory to modern Catholic orthodoxy in acknowledging that gay people (like everyone else) have gifts to offer their community and form strong supportive relationships. The outrage is not orthodoxy, it’s bigotry, and the bigotry is screaming like a demon fighting an exorcism.

  •' Jim Reed says:

    Doesn’t the church need at least a little bigotry or other irrational moral judgments in order to establish itself as a moral authority? What good would it be for a church to just say “follow the laws that have been established for the country you live in”? That church wouldn’t have any divine authority. The church needs something besides the law of the land to divide the people into good and bad, so that they can make judgments and show they are at least partly in charge of people’s lives.

  •' Tony Adams says:

    Peter, an excellent summary, but I think the most significant part of the story is something you didn’t mention. The release of the draft was intentional. This pope wanted that draft to be seen by you and me. This pope is making his real beliefs known to you and me and to everyone else outside the fortress of the hierarchy. His opinions on marriage and equality are clear to us. He is also showing us the chains that bind him (Cardinal Ray Burke, etc.) He wants us to scale the walls of that fortress. He is giving enough rope to men like Ray Burke and forcing their hands. That is the good news of this synod document. No matter how they twist the translation, that good news cannot be undone and we can expect more of it. This may not be the strategy we would have hoped for from Francis but it is clearly his version of collegiality and local governance. Refreshing, with a slightly bitter aftertaste.

  •' cranefly says:

    To your point, the outraged on the Catholic Right seem far more afraid of the Church (hypothetically) contradicting itself, than of anyone losing their soul. And I would hypothesize that the number one concern is protecting the political power of the bishops, and the influence of conservative political ideology. The defense instinct grounded in concern for institutional self-preservation. But this indicates to me that the actual teaching is arbitrary. So I wouldn’t say that bigotry is necessary, except as a weapon to protect against cognitive dissonance.

  •' Whiskyjack says:

    Exactly. The Church has set itself up as a moral authority with access to timeless, unchanging Truth. I suspect it will do just about anything rather than admit that it was wrong about a stance that it has so publicly adopted. In the meantime, the rest of the world (at least the secular part of it) will continue to develop its morality in a manner consistent with modern science.
    We discovered years ago that homosexuality was neither a mental disorder nor a lifestyle choice. Accordingly, it is immoral to persecute or discriminate based on sexual orientation. It’s that simple.

  •' Jim Reed says:

    The church needs something irrational to control people on. If not this then it would have to be something else. Who is suggesting what irrational moral judgments could be substituted, and remember, it has to be something hard to take or the church doesn’t have very much authority.

  •' cranefly says:

    I think, if they treated their own theology honestly and sorted out infallible from fallible teaching, they could find a way of making progressive changes consistent with the supposed core doctrines and core principles of the church. Most mainstream Protestant churches have, and while conservative Catholics like to dismiss those changes as “go with the flow” placation, there was serious intellectual and theological soul-searching involved. The Catholic Church makes a show of intellect and theology, but ultimately idolizes power and authority over truth and human well-being.

  •' Frank6548 says:

    Homosexuality is disordered and against the Will of God, this sinful. That fact will never change

  •' Frank6548 says:

    Francis believes homosexual behavior is sinful and marriage is between a man and a woman.

  •' Whiskyjack says:

    I suspect that absolutely nothing is infallible. The Church was wrong about witches, they were wrong about Limbo, they were wrong about heliocentrism, they were wrong about the age of the earth, and they continue to be wrong about a lot of other things – contraception and homosexuality being just two examples. They are not in

  •' cranefly says:

    I pretty much agree. I refer to infallibility in a face-saving kind of way.

  •' Tony Adams says:

    I think Francis believes that all human beings are sinful because we do not share fully in the divine nature of Jesus and that our behavior follows suit. and necessitates our frequent approach to God acknowledging our sinfulness and asking for forgiveness (which, according to Francis is always granted.) The idea being that sin is really a lack, a piece of the pie gone missing. The maxim is “Bonum ex integra causa. Malum ex quocumque defecto.” If you don’t buy that premise, you won’t appreciate how Francis is working through it to be a good shepherd. When he looks at the cards in his hand, he considers compassion and love and forgiveness to be the trump cards. Church doctrines are lesser cards (and Cardinal Ray Burke is the Queen of Diamonds.)

  •' Andre M says:

    Frank, stop embarrassing yourself. Give up your pride and arrogance and reflect Christ’s humility. You bring shame to Christ’s name.

  •' Frank6548 says:

    There can be no love, compassion or forgiveness without the truth.

  •' Andre M says:

    Frank, you know nothing about truth, and you display it here daily. Quit this path; you are just embarrassing yourself and besmirching the name of Christ.

  •' Tony Adams says:

    And you, Frank6548, are part of that truth, but you ain’t the whole of it. No one of us is.

  •' Frank6548 says:

    All I’m saying is that claiming homosexual behavior is not sinful is not truthful therefore has no love or compassion.

  •' Andre M says:

    Frank, it’s time to give up your arrogant pride. You’re just looking like a fool. It’s really sad.

  •' Gregory Peterson says:

    I read the relatio as being about accepting Gay gifts and talents, as long as those gifts and talents don’t include gifts and talents in leadership.

  •' Tony Adams says:

    The synod documents, especially the closing letter just issued are as toothless and syrupy as Mrs. Doubtfire in their approach to marriage. In fact, watch this clip in which Mrs. Doubtfire explains marriage and then read the synod messages and docs using Robin Williams’ Mrs. Doubtfire voice. You won’t know whether to laugh or cry.

  •' Jekyll says:

    Now Kyrgyzstan, a country hardly mentioned in the news will take center stage because it dared do something about homosexuals that the West cannot abide by.

  • petemontdc says:

    Hey, Tony, I think that’s a fascinating point – I think the Synod was definitely a chance to run that flag up the pole and let everyone see the right-wingers shoot it down

  •' DHFabian says:

    A forward step that, at least in another time, would have served to encourage Christians to step away from hard-nosed judgmental dismissals of entire chunks of the Earth’s population, choosing instead to keep a human face on those we currently reject as “the others.” At the same time, the church of this era took a big leap backwards when it comes to addressing our current attitudes toward, and treatment of, our own poor.

  •' DHFabian says:

    I think one big area of uncertainty is whether we follow “churchism” or the teachings of Christ. What did Jesus say about the range of issues that define our social attitudes and our laws, from our human relationships to poverty to war? Of course bigotry defines us, and this is greatly exploited by social and political figures. We’re more easily manipulated than we want to believe. This is why we need the sort of discussions that are centered on facts, and that prod people to actually do a very difficult thing — regard all others as equal human beings in an effort to understand their circumstances.

  •' DHFabian says:

    My impression has been that the political right has sought to change the church in their own image, to become a tool used for their purposes. Historically, there is certainly nothing new about this.

  •' DHFabian says:

    The “timeless, unchanging truth” is a reality, but our understanding of it sometimes evolves, and is sometimes exploited, corrupted, pushing us backwards. Americans are very inclined to having their religious views manipulated by social and political forces, making it difficult to recognize the “timeless truth.” We’re very inclined to find ways to embrace ideas that utterly contradict Christ’s teachings, “explaining away” those teachings. A striking example is our current (mis)treatment of our own poor.

  •' DHFabian says:

    I don’t believe that, at least in America, the church controls anyone.We’ve certainly seen the church “bend” to reflect whatever ideas are currently “popular,” implicitly promoted by the media. Can anyone argue that America’s core values are currently seen in the dollar sign and not the cross? We see this in everything from our international relations to our treatment of our own poor.

  •' DHFabian says:

    We can note that the pope did try to raise the issue of America’s treatment of our own poor, but it didn’t sell. When your job is to appeal to the public, you need to sell what the (buying) public will buy..

  •' DHFabian says:

    Disagree. Faith, and the humility to grasp that there is so much that we don’t understand yet, can drive love, compassion and forgiveness. The hardest of all Christ’s teaching, IMO, are the ones about humility, acknowledging how little we truly understand.

  •' Jim Reed says:

    You can have it both ways. The church can’t control everything, and they know that. But they need to keep at least some little bit of control over something, because without that they are nothing.

  •' Whiskyjack says:

    Selecting which “truths” from the bible that are timeless and unchanging is a very problematic exercise. There is much in that book that is simply wrong, both from a moral standpoint and from the standpoint of physical reality.

    Having said that, I do not disagree that there are worthwhile moral principles expressed at various places. Treating other humans as one would wish to be treated yourself seems worthwhile, but the principle was expressed in a number of other cultures well before the bible was composed. I don’t see how Christianity can lay claim to being the exclusive source of any “timeless, unchanging truth.”

  •' Frank6548 says:

    So then you do agree there can be nothing without truth.

  •' cranefly says:

    They’re successful because no one is “just Catholic” or “just Republican.” People conflate their own religious and political identities.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *