When The Tablet reported Cardinal Schonborn’s remarks urging a rethink on homosexual relationships and on divorce, I saw in this the continuation of a more general softening of the earlier hard-line attitudes in the Church. America magazine suggested that the test would be how long (if ever) it would be before the Cardinal repudiated his remarks, or was rebuked by the Vatican. The Tablet report was published on May 8th, but the interview it referred to had occurred earlier, some time in late April. As we approach the end of May, it is now one month later and still there has been no backtracking by the Cardinal, and also no sign of repudiation by the Vatican, or indeed by any senior prelates anywhere. We can become ever so slightly more confident that the Vatican’s doctrinal glaciers may indeed be melting.
There have been two reports I have seen attempting to downplay the cardinal’s words, but neither by anyone of any seniority or authority. This one, which Catholic Culture enthusiastically headlines
Vatican analyst raps Cardinal Schönborn
does not even attack his remarks on homosexual relationships and remarriage after divorce, but rather those on celibacy.
Surprising and unexpected as it may seem, in the complete absence of refutation or argument over Cardinal’s suggestion that we should start to consider the quality of homosexual relationships and not the “acts”, the only conclusion must be that this is becoming a consensus view in the Vatican - just as it has been for years in the broader Catholic population. Now, how long will we have to wait for a more same formal exposition of such a stance, to replace the nasty “Homosexualitatis Problema?”
While I rejoice in Cardinal Shonborn’s attitude, I’d be amazed if a major shift in Vatican teaching on sexual ethics is underway — and for the simple reason of creeping infallibility.
For example, even though the majority on his commission favored changing the teaching regarding contraception, Pope Paul VI finally came down against contraception in Humanae vitae, I suspect mainly because he did not wish to be seen as contradicting Pius XI or Pius XII.
Otherwise, if popes were to be seen contradicting themselves on issues usually judged to be “serious” matter and possibly gravely sinful, it would seem that the Catholic Church is not the amazing, perfect guide to ethics that it has claimed to be for some centuries.
I have a hard time imagining the Church leadership giving up the aura of infallibility.
Unless the cardinal’s remarks are seen as a kind of trial balloon of retaining the “teaching” but then watering it down so that practically it is the opposite — as was done with the issue of masturbation. In 1975, confessors were urged by the CDF not to assume that masturbation was not mortal sin; now since the Catechism I think most confessors assume it to be subjectively venial sin.
Might *that* kind of shift be happening — retaining the teaching but becoming “pastoral” so that in effect the original teaching is undone?
The last thing that is happening is a “major” change - the Church just doesn’t work that way. Your reference to Humanae Vitae is a good one: we forget, with all the emphasis on the prohibition of artificial contraception, that in its way it included a substantial shift of its own, in approving so-called natural family planning, and so accepting that there is room for sex without procreation. This allowed for a shift in teaching while appearing to reaffirm his predecessors.
I also think your use of the trial balloon concept is appropriate. Remember that Schonborn is not just any cardinal - but could conceivably be in the running at the next conclave.
It would be dead wrong to get too excited too quickly, but I think something is happening. Where it will lead, only time will tell us.