Some Hope But Not Much Joy for LGBT Catholics in Pope’s ‘Joy of Love’ Document

Statement of Francis DeBernardo, Executive Director, New Ways Ministry,                                               in response to Pope Francis’ apostolic exhortation on marriage and family life

While Pope Francis’ latest document, Amoris Laetitia (The Joy of Love), contains some hopeful passages, it does not inspire joy in LGBT Catholics and their supporters.  As far as sexual orientation and gender identity issues are concerned, the pope’s latest apostolic exhortation reiterates church formulas which show that the Vatican has yet to learn from the experiences and faith lives of so many LGBT Church members or their supporters.

Though the pope calls for church leaders and ministers to be less judgmental and to respect individuals’ consciences, he has not provided a new pastoral approach to LGBT issues or people.

On other family topics such as divorce and co-habitation, Amoris Laetitia, offers some hopeful advice—and if this advice were simply applied to LGBT issues, which would not be incompatible to do, this document would have been much more positive.  Pope Francis calls for non-judgmental pastoral care, assisting people in developing their consciences, encouraging diverse pastoral responses based on local culture, and calling church leaders to be more self-critical.  All these things, if applied to LGBT people and issues, could produce enormous positive change in the church.

Pope Francis

Instead of listening to more progressive voices at the synods who called for greater understanding and dialogue with the LGBT community, the pope simply repeated church condemnations of same-sex unions, adoption by lesbian and gay people, and the complexities of gender identity.

Most egregious is his repetition of the synod fathers’ false claim that international aid to developing nations is dependent upon openness to marriage equality.  No evidence exists for such a claim. Randy Berry, the U.S. Special Envoy for the Human Rights of LGBTI People categorically denied this claim last November during meetings with church officials at the Vatican to discuss the persecution of LGBT people globally.

Moreover, Pope Francis’ one statement discussing pastoral care to families with lesbian and gay members is included in a section entitled “Casting Light on Crises, Worries and Difficulties.”  Such a classification reveals an assumption that LGBT topics are simply problems to be surmounted, and it does not recognize the giftedness and grace that occur when a family accepts and loves its LGBT family members.

While Pope Francis repeats church teaching condemning discrimination and violence against LGBT people, the fact that there is no elaboration of this teaching concerning countries that are criminalizing sexual and gender minorities makes these words ineffective.

Many in the Catholic LGBT community had great, but realistic, hopes for this document.  While not expecting a blessing on marriage for lesbian and gay couples, many were anticipating that Pope Francis would offer an affirming message to LGBT people, and not the same ill-informed comments. Many were hoping for something more pastoral from this pope known for warm gestures and statements. Where is the Pope Francis who embraced his gay former student and husband during his U.S. visit?  Where is the Pope Francis who invited a transgender Spanish man for a personal meeting at the Vatican? That Pope Francis is hard to find in his latest text.

The two synods in 2014 and 2015, as well as the wide consultations among the laity which preceded them, served as the research for this new papal document.  Unfortunately, as far as LGBT issues are concerned, there is nothing in Amoris Laetitia that indicates the great call for new approaches to these issues that occurred during these discussions.

Perhaps there is hope in the suggestion made by some bishops at the 2015 synod that the Vatican hold an entirely separate synodal discussion on the issues of sexuality and gender.  While this document has a lot to offer on a variety of important family topics, it did not give adequate attention to LGBT family issues that deserve serious examination by church leaders.

Given the new general pastoral direction of this document, there is potential for further development in regard to LGBT issues.  Much more faithful witnessing of LGBT Catholics and their supporters, as well as continued steps toward dialogue with Church leaders, will further this goal.

In one of the more hopeful parts of the document, the conclusion of chapter 8, Pope Francis actually calls for the continuation of such a dialogue:

“I encourage the faithful who find themselves in complicated situations to speak confidently with their pastors or with other lay people whose lives are committed to the Lord. They may not always encounter in them a confirmation of their own ideas or desires, but they will surely receive some light to help them better understand their situation and discover a path to personal growth. I also encourage the Church’s pastors to listen to them with sensitivity and serenity, with a sincere desire to understand their plight and their point of view, in order to help them live better lives and to recognize their proper place in the Church.”

Such dialogues can transform those in so-called “complicated situations,” but they can also transform the Church’s ministers and leaders.  This process is a proven method for the development of doctrine in the Catholic Church.

–Francis DeBernardo, Executive Director, New Ways Ministry

Reader’s Guide Offers Hints to Tomorrow’s Much-Anticipated Apostolic Exhortation

Pope, cardinals, bishops in the synod hall.

Tomorrow, April 8th, is the day that Pope Francis’ apostolic exhortation Amoris Laetitia (The Joy of Love), his response to the 2014 and 2015 Vatican synods on marriage and family life.  Many Catholics, especially those concerned with LGBT ministry and equality, have been eager to read what this pope, who is always full of surprises, has to say on issues of marriage, family, gender, and sexuality.

The National Catholic Reporter‘s (NCR) Joshua McElwee has provided information from a guide that the Vatican sent to the world’s bishops this week.  The guide is intended to prepare bishops for the release of Amoris Laetitia, but it also gives a tiny peek into what might be in store in Pope Francis’ much-anticipated document.

The NCR article noted that the Vatican document said that “”The Pope’s concern is . . . to re-contextualize doctrine at the service of the pastoral mission of the Church,” perhaps indicating that nothing will be doctrinally novel in the text, as the Vatican has been saying for months, but perhaps there will be new directions in how to present doctrine.

The reading guide said that the document “encourages not just a ‘renewal’ but even more, a real ‘conversion’ of language.”

Language change was a much-discussed topic at the 2015 synod, and the discussion ran the gamut of bishops calling for a departure from terms like “objectively disordered” and “intrinsically evil” in regard to lesbian and gay people and relationships to calls for simply a more pastoral approach of presenting church teaching.  From what the reading guide states, it looks like the pope will be pushing more for the latter type of renovation of church language than the former.

The guide states:

“The Gospel must not be merely theoretical, not detached from people’s real lives. To talk about the family and to families, the challenge is not to change doctrine but to inculturate the general principles in ways that they can be understood and practiced.”

“Our language should encourage and reassure every positive step taken by every real family.”

The guide further stated that the pope “wants to express himself in language that truly reaches the audience — and this implies discernment and dialogue.”

Using language that just tries to soften the true negative meaning of some of the Church’s doctrines will not be satisfactory. At one of the synod’s press briefings, even the very conservative Cardinal Wilfrid Napier Fox  of South Africa said:

“There’s been a lot of emphasis on using language that doesn’t offend, politically correct language, if you like.  I’m not sure that that’s the best way to be prophetic. It is certainly a way of trying to be more pastoral.”

(For Bondings 2.o posts about the debate on language at the synod, please click here and here and here.)

The reader’s guide offers (and remember, in this post I am quoting from a reader’s guide about the apostolic exhortation, not the exhortation itself) hints that the pope may simply promote a new use of language to soften negative teachings.  For instance, it states:

“Discernment … encourages us to grow from good to better. One of the characteristics of discernment, according to St Ignatius of Loyola, is the insistence not only on taking the objective truth into account, but also on expressing this truth with a good, a constructive spirit.”

Perhaps, though, there will be openings in pastoral practice that may allow for future development not only of language, but of doctrine itself.  The reader’s guide offers two hints that Francis may include material in the apostolic exhortation that lean in this direction.  In three different spots, it states:

• “Like his predecessors, Pope Francis asks that as pastors we discern amongst the various situations experienced by our faithful and by all people, the families, the individuals.”
• “For the culture of dialogue, the inclusion of everyone is essential.”
• “The Pope’s vision of society is inclusive. Such inclusion involves the effort to accept diversity, to dialogue with those who think differently, to encourage the participation of those with different abilities.”

These statements highlight characteristics of Pope Francis’ rhetoric which has given hope to many progressives:  his willingness to acknowledge variety and diversity of life situations, and his emphasis on dialogue and radical inclusion.  These are hopeful steps forward–especially if we remember the darker days of popes who would ignore diversity, dialogue, inclusion, and even sometimes condemn these ideals.  They are hopeful steps that could lead the way for a serious discussion about LGBT issues. But, if they don’t go any further than that in their level of generality, they will only be first steps toward true equality and justice, with much work and advancement still to be done.

On the disappointing side, the reader’s guide notes that the apostolic exhortation will contain a summary of Pope John Paul II’s “Theology of the Body” lectures, which it says are an “important source” for the document.   Numerous theologians have pointed out that “Theology of the Body” ideas rest on ill-informed understandings of gender and the role of sexuality in people’s lives and relationships.  If Amoris Laetitia focuses too much on principles based in this type of thinking, it will be a sad disappointment.

Of course, we will know tomorrow what the pope actually has to say.  For some earlier speculation from Bondings 2.0 posts, please see the Related Posts section below my signature.

As soon as the document is released, and we have time to digest its contents, New Ways Ministry will post its analysis and response on this blog, probably some time in the later morning, Eastern U.S. time, on Friday, April 8th.

–Francis DeBernardo, New Ways Ministry

Related Posts

Bondings 2.0:  “The Million-Dollar Question: What Will Be In the Pope’s Apostolic Exhortation?”

Bondings 2.0:  “What Can We Expect from Pope’s Upcoming Document on the Family Synod?”

Bondings 2.0: “Bishops at Synod on the Family React to Final Report, Speculate on Next Steps for LGBT Topics”

Bondings 2.0:  “Not All Synod Bishops Agree That a Change in Language Would Be Helpful”

Bondings 2.0:  “Australia’s Archbishop Mark Coleridge: Finally, a Bishop Who “Gets It” ! ”

Bondings 2.0:  “Will Language Be the Only Thing That the Synod Updates?”

 

 

 

 

 

What Can We Expect from Pope’s Upcoming Document on the Family Synod?

Pope Francis has been called the “pope of surprises” for all the out-of the-ordinary things he has said and done.  But it is no surprise that his much-anticipated apostolic exhortation in response to 2015’s Synod on the Family is . . . well, much anticipated!  Pope Francis said he would issue the document before Easter, March 27th, and some Catholic Church observers have been betting on March 19th as the release date because that is the feast of St. Joseph under the title of “Husband of Mary.”

Cardinals and bishops in the synod hall. (Francis DeBernardo Photograph)

In anticipation of the document, Joshua McElwee of The National Catholic Reporter gathered thoughts from some church observers about the document, but he noted that it is difficult to foresee how the pope might respond:

“[The apostolic exhortation] should sum up the debates and decisions of the closely watched synod meetings, but, as with anything from the predictably unpredictable Argentine pope, it is unknown what direction Francis will take in his writing.”

McElwee reported observers’ thoughts about what the pope might write.  Among the more controversial issues the pope might discuss are divorce/remarriage, contraception, and same-gender marriages and relationships.  While it seems that people are expecting the most substantial input from the pope on the topic of divorce/remarriage, his response to discussions of LGBT issues is also being anticipated.  McElwee quoted Richard Galliardetz, a Boston College theologian:

“Gaillardetz . . . expressed hope that Francis’ exhortation would address lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people positively.

“The theologian mentioned that the report from the 2015 synod was not as open toward gay people as an interim report published from the 2014 synod, which had a section titled ‘Welcoming Homosexual Persons.’ ”

” ‘I hope the pope will recover the gains we saw in the [2014] synod and affirm the graced character of many committed, stable same-sex relationships,’ he said.

“Overall, Gaillardetz said, he hopes the pope will ‘follow his pastoral instincts, which generally lead him to meet people where they are.’

” ‘Modern Catholic teaching has had far too much said on marriage and family that traffics in highly romanticized language often tragically far removed from ordinary human existence,’ Gaillardetz said.”

Regular readers of Bondings 2.0 may recall that I was privileged to have press credentials for the October 2015 synod at the Vatican and reported daily from there during the length of the meeting. In reviewing my posts and notes from the month that I was in Rome,  I’ve come up with a few things that I think (and hope) Pope Francis might include in the apostolic exhortation.

First of all, while I would love to see great change in the church regarding LGBT issues, I don’t think that we will see BIG changes in the pope’s upcoming document.  (Though, I will be the first to celebrate if this prediction turns out to be wrong!).   At the synod, I saw that there are some in-between steps that the Church needs to take before we are able to make any big changes. I’d like to mention three of them which I think stand a pretty good chance of getting mention in the pope’s upcoming document:

Change in the language of church doctrine:  In many bishops’ interventions, there was a call for a transformation of language that was harmful, offensive, and inaccurate.  What comes to my mind is “objective disorder” to describe homosexual orientation and “intrinsic moral evil” to describe sexual intimacy of a gay or lesbian couple.  Archbishop Mark Coleridge of Brisbane, Australia was the most explicit in his call for such a change.  In an interview, he stated: 

“For instance: The distinction between sin and sinner breaks down, particularly in the area of sexuality. I don’t think we can any longer say that we condemn the sin but not the sinner. “Because, you see … a person will say in the cultures that you and I come from that my sexuality isn’t just part of me, it’s part of my whole being. . . . “So to say that this act is intrinsically disordered is now taken for granted to mean I am intrinsically disordered.”

Empowering local bishops to respond pastorally according to their own judgments, given the unique attitudes and practices of their cultures and communities: One of the things that the event of the synod illustrated is how culturally diverse the Catholic Church is throughout the globe.  Attitudes and customs about marriage and family are widely divergent–not least of all when it comes to LGBT couples and families.  Germany’s Abbot Jeremias Schroder was one of several synod participants who called for this local option, and he used lesbian and gay issues as his example:

“I also have the impression that the understanding of homosexuality, the social acceptance of homosexuality, is culturally very diverse and that seems to me very obviously to also be an area where bishops conferences should be allowed to formulate pastoral responses that are in tune with what can be preached and announced and lived in a given context.”

 A  desire for the Church to be more of a listening presence and accompanying friend, instead of a disciplinarian rule giver:  This theme is a strong one throughout Pope Francis’ writings, speeches, interviews, and comments, so I think it is very likely that it will appear in some way in the apostolic exhortation.   Archbishop Blase Cupich of Chicago touched on this theme in an interview at the synod, where he described the kind of church leader that he strives to be:

“If we’re really going to accompany people, we have to first of all engage them. In Chicago, I visit regularly with people who feel marginalized, whether they’re the elderly, or the divorced and remarried, gay and lesbian individuals, also couples. I think we need to really get to know what their life is like if we’re going to accompany them.”

Pope Francis (lower left) delivers homily at synod’s closing liturgy in St. Peter’s Basilica, on October 25, 2015. (Francis DeBernardo Photograph)

I think there is a good chance that we will see those themes emerge in the pope’s apostolic exhortation because, in fact, he discussed them in his homily at the Mass closing the synod, for which the gospel passage was the healing of Bartimaeus, the blind beggar  (Mark 10).

Of the importance of pastoral language, Pope Francis said:

“The disciples do nothing other than repeat Jesus’ encouraging and liberating words, leading him [Bartimaeus] directly to Jesus, without lecturing him. Jesus’ disciples are called to this, even today, especially today: to bring people into contact with the compassionate Mercy that saves. When humanity’s cry, like Bartimaeus’, becomes stronger still, there is no other response than to make Jesus’ words our own and, above all, imitate his heart.”

He also seemed to be alluding to the issue of allowing diverse, local pastoral responses when he said:

“A faith that does not know how to root itself in the life of people remains arid and, rather than oases, creates other deserts.”

And he emphasized the theme of being a listening Church:

“Jesus is moved by his request and becomes involved in his situation. He is not content to offer him alms, but rather wants to personally encounter him. He does not give him any instruction or response, but asks him: ‘What do you want me to do for you?’ (Mk 10:51). It might seem a senseless question: what could a blind man wish for if not his sight? Yet, with this question made face to face, direct but respectful, Jesus shows that he wants to hear our needs. He wants to talk with each of us about our lives, our real situations, so that nothing is kept from him.”

None of these passages are proof positive that the pope will include these themes in his apostolic exhortation, but I think the fact that he has spoken them already in the context of the synod means he values their importance.

Most importantly, I think that these three steps–change in language, allowing local pastoral decision-making, becoming an accompanying, listening church–need to be taken before we can see any more substantial changes in church teaching and practice in regard to LGBT issues.  As much as I would like quick change, I think that an evolutionary, not revolutionary, progress is more likely the way things will happen.

Given the wide publicity the synod received and the strong anticipation of the pope’s apostolic exhortation, many, many people are eager to learn what Francis will have to say in this docuemnt. Whatever he writes in the apostolic exhortation can shape pastoral care on family and marriage issues for a long time to come.  Let’s pray that the Spirit guides him towards in more inclusive directions than the Vatican has previously taken.

–Francis DeBernardo, New Ways Ministry

Related articles:

The National Catholic Reporter: “Church reform requires decentralization, synodality”

The National Catholic Reporter: “Pope Francis preparing document on the family”

Is the Catholic Church Actually Progressive on LGBT Issues?

Jane Fae

Is the Catholic Church actually progressive on LGBT issues, despite news headlines to the contrary? Yes and no, says Jane Fae,  a U.K. journalist who is a Catholic transgender woman. In a recent essay for Gay Star News, Fae asserts that what matters most is complexity and context of the issues involved.

Because of the complexity, Fae cautioned against LGBT advocates celebrating “bad news” about the Church, such as the contentious debates that took place at the Synod on the Family in October 2015.

Fae said secular LGBT advocates should not rejoice when it seems that the Church is splitting apart.  She wrote:

“The problem. . .is this particular piece of ‘bad news’ [about the Synod on the Family] is equally bad news for the millions of LGBTI people who do not live in broadly progressive countries.”

Why do LGBTI people suffer when the Catholic Church is troubled? Fae suggested any church critique must extend “beyond simple dislike” and include proper understandings of church history and ecclesial politics. Last fall’s Synod on the Family changed little, but those hoping for reforms should have been more realistic about the global church to begin with:

“The demographics of the present church show some 1.3 billion followers with the fastest growing segment in sub-Saharan Africa, an area not exactly known for its celebration of LGBTI values. . .

“Because of its size, the Catholic Church straddles the world, including millions of people whose views on LGBTI rights range from ultra-regressive to highly progressive. Inevitably, it ends up taking a middle of the road position which, equally inevitably, looks very backward from our perspective.”

Fae cautioned against a binary in which the West is progressive and others are “some dark opposite,” describing such thinking as “wrong” and “racist.” Instead, Catholics should consider both how the church fails on LGBT issues and how it leads, depending on the context discussed. She wrote:

“In those areas that are most antipathetic towards LGBTI rights, [the Catholic Church] is frequently a force for progress. Sometimes the main one, sometimes the only one.”

Fae contends that Catholics, including clergy, forcefully defend LGBTI human rights in some pats of Africa and Eastern Europe. She also noted the efforts by LGBT Catholics in London to aid LGBTQI asylum seekers. This is why a divided and troubled Catholic Church is no benefit to the cause of LGBT justice, as Fae explained:

“The church is not going to disappear. And while a split church might be helpful to campaigners in some parts of the world, it would be disastrous for those campaigning elsewhere, in areas where oppression is greatest, and where clergy protect minorities from persecution.”

As for the Synod on the Family, Fae does not consider it a loss. Pope Francis was deftly able to “balance a desire for a far more inclusive church with the need to avoid it splitting up.” For progressive Catholics who want same-gender weddings celebrated sacramentally, it was clearly not a victory. But the synod was a forward step because it avoided schism or disunity, hinted at by certain traditionalist members, while succeeding at shifting language. And to those suggesting shifts in language are not sufficient, Fae finds historical parallels in Vatican II. She wrote:

“Without defining a single new doctrine, just using a new positive vocabulary of spiritual kinship, the council significantly reshaped the church. . .That is the trick that Pope Francis was attempting to repeat.

“He has had few victories so far but the language is shifting. And, if what has gone before is any indicator of what is to follow, where language leads, hearts will eventually follow.”

Living in the Northeast U.S. where LGBT legal rights and cultural acceptance are basically normative, it can be easy for me to forget the harsh realities still faced by millions in our world. Jane Fae’s piece is a reminder that everything is grayer than we might prefer, that context matters significantly, and that change in the church is incremental and happening, even if the pace is painfully slow. You can read her column in full by clicking here.

–Bob Shine, New Ways Ministry

 

 

 

Archbishop Cupich: Respect Lesbian and Gay People’s Consciences

Archbishop Blase Cupich

Archbishop Blase Cupich of Chicago again defended the primacy of conscience regarding lesbian and gay people in an interview in which he also spoke against those who seek to deny Communion to certain Catholics.

Cupich was interviewed by Alan Kreshesky of ABC 7, and he touched on October’s Synod on the Family. Asked about the pastoral care of same-gender couples, the archbishop replied:

“When people who are in good conscience, working with a spiritual director, come to a decision that they need to follow that conscience. That’s the teaching of the church. So in the case of people receiving Communion in situations that are irregular, that also applies.

“The question then was, ‘Does that apply to gay people?’ My answer was, ‘They’re human beings, too.’ They have a conscience. They have to follow their conscience. They have to be able to have a formed conscience, understand the teaching of the church, and work with a spiritual director and come to those decisions. And we have to respect that.”

These remarks build upon his work at the Synod, during which he told Bondings 2.0 that the proceedings would have benefited from listening to lesbian and gay couples. In the past year, he also said that the church must seek “new avenues and creativity when it comes to accompanying families,” and he endorsed legal protections for families headed by same-gender couples in 2014.

Questioned specifically about denying Communion to lesbian and gay people, Cupich responded:

“I think that when people come for Communion, it’s not up to any minister who’s distributing the Eucharist to make a decision about a person’s worthiness or lack of worthiness. That’s on the conscience of those individuals [receiving communion].”

Cupich’s approach is opposite to the one taken recently by Newark’s Archbishop John Myers, directed his priests not to give communion to lesbian and gay couples who have legally married. Cupich is increasingly critical of this nation’s bishops in general, on display most recently during the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops’ fall meeting.

Archbishop Cupich’s words are certainly strong ones in support of LGBT Catholics and their families, but his defense of conscience is undercut by the Archdiocese of Chicago’s harsh ecclesial reality. Two church workers, Sandor Demkovich and Colin Collette, have lost their jobs for making conscience decisions to themselves to a same-gender partner in legal marriages. The Archdiocese denies discrimination in these cases, and Cupich himself has remained quiet.

Advocating respect for Catholics’ conscience, particularly when the faithful dissent from the bishops’ teachings, is greatly needed in our church. That message is far more powerful when advocates live according to the values about which they advocate.

–Bob Shine, New Ways Ministry

 

After Synod on the Family, Catholic Church Faced with Choice on LGBT Issues

Rev. James Martin, SJ

The Synod on the Family is over and Catholics await the possibility that Pope Francis will write an apostolic exhortation on family life derived from the bishops’ deliberations. Many are curious whether the pope’s document will mirror the Final Report or deviate away towards a much hoped for, more merciful approach. Below are more reactions to the synod, and you can find Bondings 2.0‘s full coverage of the Synod on the Family here.

At the moment, the church finds itself with a pastoral choice according to Jesuit Fr. James Martin. In an essay in Time magazine, he wrote about the church’s current “inclusion problem.”

The choice, in an overly simplified form, Martin wrote, is between a “John the Baptist method” which “asks for conversion as a prerequisite for joining the community” and the “Jesus method” where it is “community first, conversion second” as the story of Zacchaeus displays. The former seeks purification, the latter stress mercy. These are “helpful templates” for the church today, said Martin, who observed:

“As I see it, the movement for Jesus was always from the outside-in. He went out to those who were officially excluded or who felt excluded—in his time, that meant primarily the sick and the sinful—and brought them in. He restored them to the community. This is something the church may need to do more of: welcome, meet people where they are, and listen. Certainly conversion is in order for everyone—including me. But how can we change hearts if we don’t welcome them first?”

The National Catholic Reporter‘s editorial on the Synod highlighted how some voices were absent, including those of LGBT people. This choice to not meet people where they are and listen to stories left the deliberations seriously deficient, said the editors. Commenting on Pope Francis’ desire for the church to journey together, they wrote:

“It is essential to note here that the sense of ‘together’ is yet missing a significant component. . .[W]hile there may have been a more respectful tone when speaking about the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community, there was no attempt to actually consult members of that portion of the Catholic community.”

The editorial ended by noting the “kind of change possible” in the church after this Synod, saying the final report posits “a radically decentralized understanding of church authority” and “equally momentous change” in bishops’ self-perception.

Massimo Faggioli

If and how change emerges from the synod will depend, in part, on how the meeting is received by the people of God, according to one expert. Theologian Massimo Faggioli took up the question of reception, now applicable to synodal processes, in Commonweal where he wrote:

“The reception of councils and church teachings involves the laity and the sensus fidelium: without the laity there is no reception in the synodal Church. But it will be most interesting to see how the reception of this Synod and of Francis’s post-synodal exhortation and decisions will be the fruit of the work of the bishops.”

If legal scholar Douglas Kmiec’s reading of the Synod is any indication, reform-minded Catholics may not gladly receive the Synod’s report or Pope Francis’ possible upcoming apostolic exhortation. He wrote at the National Catholic Reporter:

“The synod’s brief discourse of same-sex marriage is equally hurtful [as its treatment of divorced and remarried Catholics]. It is a cruel hoax to say that the church is welcoming of those of same-sex orientation and yet in the same breath not give any acknowledgment of the poignancy of that human relationship.  Is it not an extraordinary act of love for one human being to say to another: ‘I want to walk with you, to be your support, to care for you in illness and to share in your joys?’ That statement is no less extraordinary when it is made between two of the same gender. When the church declares itself closed and disapproving of such relationship, it separates itself from the welcoming nature of Christ, and instead, sets itself up as judge with a standard that is disregarding of the Thomistic advice not to make the perfect the enemy of the good.”

In Kmiec’s estimation, at this point, Pope Francis and the Synod Fathers have answered the question, “Who am I to judge?” with “We will.”

Robert Mickens

In terms of how the synod will affect the bishops, Robert Mickens of the National Catholic Reporter suggested the Synod’s real outcome was the outing of bishops’ real views before Pope Francis. Such acts clarify what reform in the church will really mean going forward. Mickens explained:

“In other words, the pope has gotten to know the bishops much better and is now in a stronger position to distinguish those who are on board with his vision of renewing and reforming the church from those who are not.

“But if the more than 250 bishops (there were also non-bishop synod fathers) who were at this latest synod assembly are truly representative of the worldwide episcopate, Francis may have a difficult road ahead.”

Worth noting is Pope Francis’ continuing transformation of the episcopate with more pastorally-focused and merciful prelates replacing conservative predecessors. John Allen of Crux notes two such appointments coming just days after the Synod’s conclusion.

In Bologna, Italy, he replaced a hard-line conservative with “Matteo Maria Zuppi, well-known in the city of Rome as a fixture in the center-leftCommunity of Sant’Egidio, known for its work in ecumenism, interfaith dialogue, and conflict resolution.”  In Palermo, Francis “tapped 53-year-old Corrado Lorefice, another figure well known in Italian ecclesiastical circles for his anti-Mafia activism, his efforts on behalf of the victims of prostitution and human trafficking, and his writings on the Church’s “option for the poor.”

These replacements, as has been noted from early on in his papacy, may be Francis’ lasting impact on the church and may clear a path for more inclusive LGBT pastoral care.

Sidney Callahan

Sidney Callahan wrote in America about what the Synod means not for the institutional church, but for families and added a historical reminder helpful for Catholic families hurt by or divided over current church teachings:

“The Christian family is proclaimed in Catholic teaching as ‘the domestic church.’ How fitting then that after the recent synod Catholic families can be more closely modeled on Vatican II’s more open vision of the church. Families too can be inspired to be more accepting, inclusive, just and personally responsive to individual conscience. . .

“Unfortunately in the course of human history, Christian values were often distorted, co-opted and overthrown by powerful regimes. . .In many of these struggles those on the side of core Christian values might have to oppose established powers, including the church.”

The Synod’s failure to invite women to participate fully generated much criticism.  Jesuit Fr. Thomas Reese’s question about why a lay brother was allowed to vote, but no woman religious (who would be canonically equal to a lay brother), written about in America, is one example. As Episcopalian Bishop Gene Robinson has suggested on several occasions, the Catholic Church will not evolve on LGBT equality without also evolving on equality for women.

Questions of gender justice in the church are certainly worth consideration by LGBT advocates. One adviser, Sr. Carmen Sammut, who heads the International Union of Superiors General, raised an interesting point about the bishops’ deliberations compared with the institutional discernment processes common to women religious’ communities. She told the National Catholic Reporter:

” ‘For me, the weakness for this method was that there was no real time allowed for a real discernment process. . .When you have such very big differences, how do you bring all that together?’ “

She added there was “no ideal family out there,” asking a question pertinent to all Catholics as we come to understand, affirm, and support families in their diversity:

” ‘How do you become free enough to go beyond fear?’ “

So what is next for LGBT Catholics? Will the church, its leaders and its families alike, be able to move beyond fear into the freedom of the Gospel where all people are welcomed, nourished, and celebrated?

GLAAD hosted a Google Hangout recently to discuss the topic of the future of the Catholic LGBT movement in the wake of the synod, welcoming Francis DeBernardo of New Ways Ministry, Marianne Duddy-Burke of DignityUSA, and Ross Murray and Janet Quezada of GLAAD to the conversation. You can watch the discussion below or by clicking here.

What do you think? Is the choice for the church between the “John the Baptist method” and the “Jesus method”? Will Catholics receive the Synod’s report? Are bishops changing their tone? What is next for LGBT Catholics and their families? Let us know in the ‘Comments’ section below.

–Bob Shine, New Ways Ministry

Bishops at Synod on the Family React to Final Report, Speculate on Next Steps for LGBT Topics

Bishops gathered in St. Peter’s for the Synod’s closing Mass

Bishops who participated in the Synod on the Family in October have had much to say since the Final Report was released and Pope Francis concluded with a Mass during which he exclaimed, “Today is a time of mercy!”

Below are reactions, organized by country, that emerged from church leaders in the final days of the Synod and in the week since. You can access Bondings 2.0’s full coverage of this historical event here.

Austria

Cardinal Christoph Schönborn of Vienna said gay advocates might be “disappointed” by the Synod’s final report, according to The New York Times. Progress did not occur because “cultural differences must be respected,” he said, perhaps an allusion to the strong opposition from many African and Eastern European bishops to any inclusion of LGBT people.

Australia

Archbishop Mark Coleridge of Brisbane, dubbed “Star of the Synod” by Bondings 2.0 for his interventions and blogging efforts, affirmed that there is still a need for new language around homosexuality even if teachings remain the same. USA Today quoted him:

” ‘If you say that an act is disordered. . .you’re saying that I am intrinsically disordered. And at that point you have alienation and a sense of exclusion. . .Can we find a way of saying the same thing that, in fact, is positive, less alienating, less excluding and more accessible to many if not most people?’ “

You can read more about Archbishop Coleridge’s insightful understandings about the language used to express church teachings here.

Belgium

Bishop Luc Van Looy of Ghent wrote a letter to diocesan pastoral ministers and said, in part, that “the time when the Church was out to judge or condemn is over.” He reiterated this during a press conference, reported The New York Times, saying:

” ‘It is a welcoming church, it is a church listening to the people and also speaking in clear terms. . .I think this could be the beginning of a new church.’ “

England

Cardinal Vincent Nichols of Westminster (London) compared the “sense of vibrancy” he felt at the Synod to Vatican II, which he experienced as a seminarian in Rome. He told America that the church has entered its “next period of refreshing its pastoral stance and [is] saying that we must find specific, detailed ways in which the great mercy of God becomes real to people in their lives through the ministry of the church.” Commenting on the Synod’s limited engagement with homosexuality, Nichols said:

“That’s true, and I think it’s because a kind of logic emerged that this synod must be about the family, and I think the struggles, the upsets and the challenges that a person faces with the same-sex orientation don’t strictly fall within the parameters of the family, except in as much as they are a member of a family into which they were born. But I’m afraid that it didn’t get the attention that I would have hoped but I understand why.”

Nichols added that LGBT topics are “highly politicized,” making it challenging to respond pastorally without being perceived as political by some bishops. According to Queering the Church, Bishop Peter Doyle of Northampton apologized on behalf of England’s delegates for not getting better results on LGBT issues, repeating earlier criticisms he himself made against the Synod :

“I’m very sorry for the LGBT good people who were looking to the synod for something. It was really hard for people of same sex attraction. It wasn’t blocked. There was just so much to deal with.”

Germany

Germany’s bishops said the Synod was “not the end, but a colon” in a statement translated into English at In Caelo et In Terra. In that vein, they acknowledged the church must “say honestly where we have failed as Church” in ways that “led to harsh and merciless attitudes” and “caused people pain,” including those with a homosexual orientation. They offered reflection questions about about how to bring the Synod home:

“How do we open, and not close, the way towards Christ? How do we fully integrate people in the Church? How do we become a Church with open doors? And how do we relate to families in the most difficult situations, such as refugee families, to make a life in dignity possible for them, as the Gospel shows? How can we encourage a new spring in the pastoral care of families in general?”

Abbot Jeremias Schröder of the Congregation of Sant’Ottilia, one of ten religious delegates to the Synod, made relevant comments about a lack of historicity in the bishops’ discussions. Regarding marriage’s history in the church, he told Crux:

” ‘You find that a church wedding in the Western Church comes in about 1,000 years ago, not in the beginning as some people say. . .The way of dealing with failed marriages has been very different throughout history as well. . .And just to spell that out, to make it clear we are living in a history that has shaped and evolved, and not just in a constant tradition that’s been immovable for 2,000 years, I think that would have helped.’ “

He said further that speaking of gay Catholics as “intrinsically disordered” is not a “helpful phrase.”

Berlin’s Archbishop Heiner Koch, in a news story in the Austrian Catholic newspaper, Kathpress, said the German bishops pushed as hard as they could on LGBT issues, without success [English translation thanks to Terence Weldon at Queering the Church]:

“African and Eastern bishops especially have expressed very restrictive views about homosexuality at the Synod. Some put forward positions for which there had been vigorous opposition. ‘Our German representatives said clearly that we do not share this judgement and cannot abandon our ideas on human dignity,’ stated Koch, who is also family bishop of the German Bishops Conference..

“At the same time Koch pointed out that in addition to cultural differences, political constraints sometimes make dialogue more difficult: ‘In many totalitarian states there are far-reaching consequences if you speak out in public about, for example, treating homosexuals as human beings.’ “

Koch also said the discussion on homosexuality in the Church must continue to go forward, and that we must remain in conversation.

Italy

Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia, president of the Pontifical Council for the Family which oversaw the World Meeting of Families in September, told Crux that when it comes to LGBT Catholics or those who are divorced and remarried:

“We continue to walk together, to support and stimulate each other in this path where every journey and every seed of goodness must above all be valued and supported, whatever the story of the wearer.”

United States

Cardinal Donald Wuerl of Washington, D.C. was interviewed by Religion News Service shortly before returning home. Asked about LGBT issues’ absence, he replied:

“I think the initial mistake back in the 2014 synod was that the conversation about respecting gays and lesbians got mixed in with the issue of whether there should be same-sex marriage. Those are two different issues altogether. One is a basic part of Catholic teaching: Of course you respect everyone, made in the image and likeness of God. Now if you’re going to talk about institutional things, that wasn’t clearly spelled out. And I think that left a sort of a taint in the synod.”

He added that it will take time to “develop into more practical applications” the Synod’s call to respect LGBT people, but the Church need not wait for another synod to do so.  Wuerl also had an interesting comment about living church teaching in its fullness, readily applicable to LGBT topics which are too often reduced to sexual ethics and exclusive pastoral practice:

“Yes, we have a very clear teaching and yes, we announce that teaching. But at the same time, that teaching includes the mercy of God and the care of the individual believer. Those two elements of the same reality are what the pope has lifted up and made visible in a way they haven’t been in a long time. If you are not able to minister to that person where that person is, you are not completing the teaching.”

Less positive are comments from Archbishop Charles Chaput of Philadelphia whom USA Today reported as saying “same-sex attraction is not part of God’s plan,” though he admitted the language of intrinsically disordered “isn’t useful anymore” and should be retired “until we get over the negativity related to it.”

In my estimation, what is far more interesting than the words of bishops who attended the Synod on the Family, be they positive or negative when it comes to LGBT issues, will be how church leaders at all levels and across contexts concretely act upon the Synod’s report and the broader movement towards a merciful church that is, to quote Pope Francis, “home for all.”

Words are important, but the real test for the Synod is what impact it begins to have in the daily lives of Catholics and whether the church can more vibrantly channel God’s love while diminishing the obstacles it imposes to life in Christ.

–Bob Shine, New Ways Ministry

“With All Families, Without Condemnation” (And More Synod Reactions)

Frank Bruni

“With All Families, Without Condemnation.” That was the headline last Sunday on Italy’s national Catholic newspaper, a further sign for many that this two-year synod process commenced a new moment in the church. Not all agree, though. Below, Bondings 2.0 provides more reactions to the Synod on the Family.

Frank Bruni, openly gay columnist for The New York Times asked an important question for those  who have closely followed the Synod’s happenings, analyzing each development and commenting on every statement: “Are most Catholics even paying attention?” While those in the media follow developments closely:

“People in the pews are less rapt. The warmth and respect they feel for the current pope doesn’t translate into any obeisance to church edict.”

Polling confirms what many Catholics know anecdotally, that wide rifts exist between official teaching and Catholics’ lived realities. Church leaders, according to Bruni, “see family in terms that are much too narrow and having a conversation that’s much too small” because they are “more interested in dictating the parameters of sex than in celebrating the boundlessness of love.”

Indeed, while some condemn contemporary family configurations as devaluing traditional morality, the columnist says the truth about reality is “more complicated and less somber than that.” Developments in family life are products of feminist and LGBT movements, which have lifted up marginalized and even abused communities to places of greater dignity and freedom. Bruni said that is all “change we should build on:

“Most of us understand, in a way we once didn’t, that there are men who will never know full romantic and sexual love with a woman, and there are women who will never experience that with a man.

“Was society better off when we denied that and trapped gay and lesbian people in heterosexual marriages that brought joy to neither spouse and were constructed on a lie? Did society benefit from marginalizing gay and lesbian people?

“Those are rhetorical questions. Or at least they should be.”

He holds up families who choose to be family, considered nontraditional by some, but in his estimation quite impressive:

“I saw this happen time and again in the 1980s and early 1990s, when AIDS ravaged gay America and many sufferers found themselves abandoned by relatives, whose religions prodded them toward judgment instead of compassion. Friends filled that gap, rushing in as saviors, stepping up as providers, signing on as protectors. Where families were absent, families were born.”

James Martin, SJ

Jesuit Fr. James Martin identified some of they synod’s larger themes, such as discernment and conscience, enlivened by the bishops’ endorsement. He told the Salt Lake Tribune, “relies on the idea that God can deal directly with us, through our inner lives. It is another encouragement to remind people, especially remarried Catholics, that an informed conscience is, as the church has always taught, the final moral arbiter.”

Martin also released a video (which you can watch below on America’s website explaining his key insights from the synod, such as:

“On LGBT issues, again the synod changed no doctrine, but it reminded Catholics of the need to respect the human dignity of LBGT people and, also, to have special care for families with LGBT members. That may not sound like much of a change, but it challenges Catholics in countries where respect and care for LGBT people are not as common.”

In a a CNN essay, he defended change in the church, saying those fearful of reform and of renewal may have conflated dogma, doctrine, and practice. Or perhaps they adhere foremost to a “crushing sense of legalism,” or even “a hatred of LGBT Catholics that masks itself as a concern for their souls.”

Grant Gallicho

Grant Gallicho of Commonweal said the synod “punted” on homosexuality, highlighting Bishop Johan Bonny’s inability to even raise the issue in his small group led by the cardinal who compared LGBT activists to Nazis. But there is hope, for Gallicho wrote: “[T]his listening synod, if it is to be true to the stirring vision of the pope who established it, can never truly come to an end. It is only the beginning.” Commonweal’s editorial echoed this idea, stating:

“In that regard, the real achievement of the synod has been the reinvigoration of the synodal process itself, one in which bishops feel free to speak their minds, to disagree with one another, and even to explore the possibility that reform is essential to the church’s evangelical mission.”

Future synod’s must include more voices within the church it said, given that some bishops like Chicago’s Archbishop Blase Cupich admitted this Synod would have benefited from input by LGBT people. One emerging issue is transgender inclusion, a topic absent from this synod altogether. Francis DeBernardo, executive director of New Ways Ministry, commented to The Advocate about “gender ideology” condemnations in the final report:

” ‘The remarks show that the bishops do not understand the transgender experience or how people experience their gender identity, which is often received as a spiritual, life-giving revelation.’ “

These reflections are just the first fruits of many more commentaries and reflections to come, worthwhile both for analyzing ecclesial happenings and, like with Frank Bruni’s column, spiritual nourishment as well. You can find Bondings 2.0‘s first reaction round-up by clicking here. For Bondings 2.0‘s full coverage of the 2015 Synod on the Family, click here.

–Bob Shine, New Ways Ministry

What I Learned From Observing the Synod on Marriage and Family

Below is a postscript to Bondings 2.0’s reports from the Synod on Marriage and Family in Rome. New Ways Ministry’s Executive Director Francis DeBernardo reported live from the meeting every day for the entire three weeks.  Previous posts can be reached by clicking here.

I’ve had a few days to catch up on some much-missed sleep that went by the wayside during the three weeks of covering the Synod on Marriage and Family in Rome.  And so now I turn to reflecting on the experience of the past month spent in the Eternal City and seeing the workings of the highest levels of the Church’s hierarchy.

I’ve learned more than a few lessons from the experience, and I thought I’d recount some of them for you, in no particular order.

1. Our church is big.  It was not just the variety of clerical dress on display at the synod and in the streets of Rome that made me think this.  It was hearing about how many and varied were the family issues that bishops from around the world are concerned about.  Here’s a small list:  migration, unemployment, physical and sexual abuse, abandoned children, children in war-torn areas growing up with absolutely no experience of family life, families separated because of one spouse needing to travel somewhere else to work, polygamy, lack of basic religious education, sexually transmitted diseases, terrorism, interfaith marriages, and addictions.     These are in addition to the hot button issues like divorce/remarriage and LGBT topics.  Marriage, sexual, and family issues are so different in so many different cultures, it is hard to fathom that the universal Catholic Church can find a “one size fits all” solution to all of them

2.  “Change” is not a dirty word–even for conservatives.  In one of the press briefings at the synod, South African Cardinal Wilfrid Fox Napier described the place of pre-marital co-habitation in his culture.   Marriages, he explained, are negotiated by families, and a dowry is set for the bride which the groom must pay.  Sometimes, it takes a groom a long time to save the dowry, so, before the wedding service is conducted, the couple will live together as husband and wife while the man saves the money to pay the woman’s family.  Napier saw this as an accepted cultural practice, and he hoped church teaching could be changed to accommodate it.  Time and opportunity did not permit me to ask him why that cultural adaptation could be incorporated into church teaching, while marriage for lesbian and gay couples could not.

3.  Bishops have a lot to learn about marriage and family, and about what Catholics believe.   I was struck constantly by the claim of some bishops that while the Church needs to think about exceptional cases of family, it also needs to concern itself with the “average” Catholic family in which there are no problems.  Huh?  Does such a thing exist?  Every family has struggles.  Families are made up of human beings, so of course there will be struggles.  When bishops would state their thoughts about the average Catholic family, it often sounded like this model family accepted all of the Church’s teachings about marriage and sexuality, which, we know, at least in the U.S., is not true.  Further, when bishops spoke about those who did not accept such teachings were those from “secular society and culture,” which, while partially true, does not acknowledge that many inside the Church have problems with Church teaching because of other Catholic values and principles they hold dear.

4.  Because of point number 3, bishops really do need to listen.  Over and over again, I heard bishops say that they needed to learn from couples and families, that families are a gift to the Church, that families are a basic unit of the Church. But then, I would also hear how the church’s pastoral ministers need to better communicate magisterial ideals about marriage and family.  These two points seem to contradict each other.  If families are so important to the Church, then instead of telling them what to do, perhaps the magisterium could learn from these individuals if they would but listen to them   When discussing marriage preparation, we often heard that bishops were talking about a “novitiate” for couples.  Instead of using the model of religious life to help couples, perhaps if the bishops listened to married people and families, the Church would develop a new model that is better suited for the particular experience of marriage.

5.  Catholic symbolic and analogical language are among its most powerful tools.  At one of the press briefings, where Vatican spokespeople reported on the discussions among the bishops in the synod hall, one of the most powerful images that I heard was a report that one of the bishops described the Eucharist as sexual.  “This is my body, given for you,” Jesus’ words of blessing at the Last Supper, repeated at every Mass since, understood in its most incarnational way, is a statement of sexual love, of total giving, of personal gift.  If understood this way, that statement of Jesus can help the Church to see the goodness in sexuality and sexual expression, and its primacy as a way of understanding how much God loves each of us.

6.  Despite all its failings, the Catholic Church still has no peers when it comes to putting on a spectacle. I mean this seriously, and not facetiously.  While I was in Rome, I was able to get to two Masses at the Vatican:  the canonization Mass in St. Peter’s Square and the closing Mass for the synod in St. Peter’s Basilica.  I am not a very liturgically-oriented person, and I am not very “high Church” in my tastes, but I was deeply moved by both experiences.  The power of the symbols, the setting for each liturgy, the beauty of the music, and the faith of the thousands who attended each event nearly moved me to tears.  I never thought I would think that such spectacular liturgies would affect me so deeply, but the reverence with which they were executed and the sheer grandeur of each event were very, very powerful.

7.  Discussion, discussion, discussion.  If the synod proved nothing else, it’s that we need a Church that is willing to discuss the differences that exist among its members, as well as the common values we share.  Pope Francis has opened the doors of conversation which had been firmly shut during the papacies of John Paul II and Benedict XVI.  Now the Church needs to move towards wider discussion, hearing from all quarters, including LGBT people.  A church of discussion must also be instituted at all levels:  parish, diocese, national, international.  We cannot discern the voice of the Spirit if we don’t discuss our views with one another and listen, listen, listen, too.

Being at the synod was the experience of a lifetime.  I am humbly grateful to God for having been provided this opportunity. There are even more lessons I learned from those listed above, so I tried to give you the most important ones.  I return home with a much more optimistic outlook on LGBT issues in our Church.

–Francis DeBernardo, New Ways Ministry.

LGBT Advocates, Vatican Observers React to Synod on the Family’s Final Report

Now that the Synod on the Family is concluded, much is already being written about an event The New York Times called the “most momentous, and contentious, meeting of bishops” since Vatican II.

Below, Bondings 2.0 provides some early commentaries and reactions related to LGBT topics. (For a good general overview of what the Synod’s final document contains, see Joshua McElwee’s article in the National Catholic Reporter.)

In a statement released on Facebook, the Global Network of Rainbow Catholics (GNRC), launched just before the Synod with representatives from more than 30 nations, predicted : “A new era for inclusive pastoral care of LGBT people is going to start after the Synod.” This is due to a door opened on LGBT inclusion through the synodal process that cannot now be closed. The Network said further:

“However, we see clearly in the Synod’s Final Report (Paragraph 76) the beginning of a new era of inclusive pastoral care for and with LGBT people, and their families, which will hopefully be enacted by Dioceses across the world. Since it is explicitly mentioned that ‘specific attention should be paid to families that have a member with homosexual tendencies’, there is, therefore, no longer any reason not to include same-sex couples themselves, as well as children with same-sex parents in such a pastoral focus.”

GNRC criticized elements of the report, including the “baseless accusation that financial aid to poor countries is conditional on the introduction of laws that institute marriage between same-sex people” and the bishops’ failure to publicly object to anti-LGBT criminalization and violence.

Francis DeBernardo

Francis DeBernardo, executive director of New Ways Ministry, viewed the Synod as a start as well, telling The Washington Blade:

” ‘The synod’s final report focused its discussion of LGBT issues solely on families with lesbian and gay members in them. . .This is a step in the right direction, but it must not be the last step.’ ” [For New Ways Ministry’s full statement on the synod, click here.]

Marianne Duddy-Burke

DignityUSA’s evaluation of the final report commented that it “offers little that is positive” for LGBT people and that the synod was a “tragic missed opportunity.” Executive Director Marianne Duddy-Burke said in a statement:

” ‘The final report from the Synod is essentially an endorsement of the status quo. . .It is deeply disappointing to anyone who hoped that new ground would be broken in how the Church deals with a whole range of family issues. . .Our dignity and safety will not be guaranteed. Our relationships will continue to be treated as inferior. Our ability to parent is called into question. I expect we will continue to be seen as ‘threats to the family,’ rather than recognized as already fully integrated into families.”

Nicholas Coppola

Nicholas Coppola, a gay Catholic from New York forced out of parish ministries after marrying his husband in 2012, told The New York Times there was “no hope in this document, none whatsoever.” But he also noted “that they will work with divorced, heterosexual couples proves that they do vote on things and they do change what they call God’s law,” suggesting that the same could happen for LGBT people.

Journalists and columnists have varied their opinions on the Synod, too.

Father Thomas Reese, SJ

Jesuit Fr. Thomas Reese admitted in the National Catholic Reporter that his prediction of the synod’s failure was too pessimistic. Comparing this synod to Vatican II, he said it “achieved consensus through ambiguity” which frees Pope Francis to act as he chooses in the future. Reese listed the losers as those seeking to “emphasize the law over mercy” who opposed all change, while suggesting that “Catholic families of all types” were among the winners (along with the drafting committee and Pope Francis).

Reuters correspondent at the Vatican, Philip Pullella, told PBS that homosexuality “has been sidestepped completely” at the synod, most plausibly because of how contentious it was at the 2014 synod. Vatican observer Maro Politi went as far as suggesting to The Washington Post that this synod fully revealed two churches:

” Francis’s church of forgiveness, mercy and being close to people where they suffer, and the church of the doctors of the law, that in this synod came across as the majority.”

David Gibson

Religion News Service’s David Gibson offered five points for interpreting the synod, including that “silence on gays is preferable to harsh words.” He wrote:

“The absence of any breakthrough language on gays was a tactical retreat by progressives who saw that they did not have the support in the synod to get close to a two-thirds threshold. . .

“Conservatives, on the other hand, painted themselves into a corner at the synod by arguing that the only satisfactory outcome was for the synod to reiterate current church teachings and practices and bar any future flexibility. That didn’t happen, and they are left trying to explain.”

James Martin, SJ

Jesuit Fr. James Martin said  the final report is a “very subtle document, and it’s also just the first step,” since we still can expect that Pope Francis will write his own recommendations based on the synod report.  He told The New York Times:

” ‘The overall message is a message of welcome and a desire to help people in those situations be reconciled to the church, which is fantastic. . .[On ministry to families with LGBT members, the report] might not sound like a lot to American Catholics. . .but it may sound like a lot to, for example, Catholics in sub-Saharan Africa.’ “

There is certain to be more written about this synod as days and weeks progress and Bondings 2.0 will provide further updates on LGBT-related reactions as they emerge. We hope to find more commentaries from women and LGBT people, so if you read any, please send a link to info@NewWaysMinistry.org.

For Bondings 2.0‘s full coverage of the Synod on the Family from Rome, check out the “Synod 2015” category to the right or click here.

–Bob Shine, New Ways Ministry