At Bondings 2.0, Francis DeBenardo has a headline that states that “Pope Francis’ Support of Civil Unions Is Part of a Growing Trend in Catholic Church“. He’s right, and this is important. The growing list of clerics and Catholic theologians who have voiced their support for some form of recognition or appreciation of same - sex relationships have done so in the full knowledge that this is in direct contravention of Vatican documents, and when under the doctrinaire heretic hunters of Rome, any open deviation from the official line could bring dire professional consequences (as Professor Tina Beattie, for instance, has found). Those who have spoken out publicly displayed great courage, and are just the tip of an iceberg. There will be many more, biting their tongues.
DeBenardo’s post lists a number of bishops who have expressed support for civil unions, starting with Vincent Nichols of Westminster. In fact, the process began rather earlier, when the bishops of Portugal adopted the tactic Cardinal Bergoglio suggested for Argentina. Later, Cardinal Christoph Schonborn of Vienna urged a shift in emphasis from an obsession with genital acts, to greater respect for the quality of the relationships. This did not go so far as to support legal recognition, but it does help to pave the way. Other bishops subsequently made statements similar to Shonborn’s.
Combining DeBenardo’s list with some other additions, gives one entry for 2009, four for 2010, just one for 2011, six for 2012 - and two (both from councils for marriage and family) for the first two months of 2013. This trend is accelerating.
- Aug 2009 Portuguese Bishops, (civil unions as alternative to full marriage).
- April 2010 Cardinal Schonborn of Vienna, (support for same-sex relationships)
- June 2010 Bishop Januario Torgal Ferreira, Portuguese ordinariate for armed forces (support for same-sex relationships)June 2010
- June 2010 Bishop Francis A Quinn, retired bishop of Sacramento (complete reform of all sexual doctrine)
- July 2010, Willie Walsh, the retiring Bishop of Killaloe (respect for same-sex relationships)
- ? 2010 Cardinal Bergoglio, now Pope Francis (civil unions as alternative to full marriage).
- Nov 2011, Archbishop Vincent Nichols, Westminster (sees “value” in civil unions)
- Jan 2012, Bishop Pa0lo Urso of Ragusa, Italy (de facto support for civil unions)
- Feb 2012, Bishop Charles Scicluna of Malta (support for same-sex relationships)
- March 2012, Diocese of New Hampshire (civil unions as alternative to full marriage)
- March 2012, Bishop Geoffrey Robinson (complete reform of all sexual doctrine)
- June/July 2012, Cardinal Rainer Woelki of Berlin (support for same-sex relationships)
- Dec 2012, Bishop Giuseppe Fiorini Morosini, Locri-Gerace diocese in Calabria (supported “legal protections” for same-sex relationships)
- Jan 2013, French Bishops’ Conference’s Family and Society Committee (support strengthened civil unions as alternative to full marriage)
- Feb 2013, Archbishop Vincent Paglia, head of the Vatican’s Pontifical Council for the Family (supported “legal protections” for same-sex relationships)
With Pope Francis in possession, the situation changes dramatically. Not only is he the first pope from a country which actually has full marriage and family equality enshrined in law (and is no doubt aware that the country has not collapsed in consequence), not only has he personally argued in support of civil unions - but he is also highly unlikely to be the doctrinal enforcer that Benedict was. With the change in doctrinal climate, expect many more bishops, bishops’ councils, theologians and priests to express their own support. Conversely, expect much less of the vigorous opposition to legislative proposals that we have seen up to now.
Navy blue: full marriage equality
Mid blue: civil unions
Red: Constitutional ban on gay marriage
Black: Homosexuality illegal
I believe that this truly does represent a Kairos moment (an “opportune time”) for the church to move towards a more realistic approach to valuing same - sex relationships and their protection in law. Such moments, however, are opportunities - not events. To take advantage of the moment, and see the transition from formal hostility transformed into actual acceptance, will require hard work. We should begin by looking for points of agreement, where LGBT Catholics and existing Church documents can find some common ground. Later, we can examine the points of disagreement - and examine the internal contradictions and ambiguities in the orthodox teaching.
I have made a personal start by re-reading some key Church documents, and am preparing a summary of the points that I believe we can all endorse. I hope you will join me in this search for common ground.
Thanks for a great post ! I agree this is a Kairos moment for the Church.
Having read the Vatican documents, they do not oppose every form of legal recognition of same sex unions - only those equivalent to marriage. My own Catholic Bishops here in New Zealand publicly supported legal recognition of same sex unions 12 years ago in a parliamentary submission. They have not changed their views.
I would like to know more details of Der Speigel’s report about Cdl Bergoglio explicitly approving a gay couple adopting a child several months ago. I believe that such an act would be fully consistent with official Catholic teaching and with prudent pastoral care.
Let us pray that Holy Father Francis will continue to lead the Church forward into the 21st Century.
Thanks for running a great blog !
God Bless
Sadly, Chris, it’s not true that Vatican documents oppose only those forms of marriage that are equivalent to marriage. The CDF “CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING PROPOSALS
TO GIVE LEGAL RECOGNITION TO UNIONS BETWEEN HOMOSEXUAL PERSONS” (2003) is very clear:
.
It’s rather odd that in this statement, it is proposals to provide for legal recognition that are described as “unjust” laws which must be opposed. On the other hand, it’s encouraging to note that the passage I quote above is immediately followed by an affirmation of the right to conscientious objection:
Terence,
I read the CDF document as referring to recognition of homosexual unions in the sense of, as the document puts it, “been given the legal status and rights belonging to marriage”. That does not rule out supporting homosexual civil unions. This is how my Catholic Bishops here in New Zealand understand the teaching. We have had civil unions here for some years and they are clearly understood as different to marriage and do not confer the same rights (eg adoption). That difference is the main inspiration behind the current moves to legalise same sex marriage here, which is almost certainly pass in the next few months (having overwhelmingly passed it’s first 2 readings).
I believe it is helpful to read the CDF document carefully and with what Francis A. Sullivan once called “creative fidelity”.
God Bless
I read it differently, Chris:
“OR”, not “AND”.
But no matter. What is really important, is not the text, but how it’s applied in practice. Recently, I heard (or read) an observation that orthodoxy follows orthopraxis - doctrine follows practice - slowly, belatedly, but inevitably. That makes it interesting that your NZ bishops and others have found it possible to support civil unions, in spite of this document. “Creative fidelity” is a great descriptor of an important process, which we also see under way in respect of contraception.
Terence,
I read the CDF document as primarily wanting to distinguish between marriage and same sex unions, and opposing legal equivalence between the two.
On the other hand, there is a natural law right for the state to recognise one’s relationship, regardless of how some religions would view the morality of such relationships. EG legal recognition of cohabiting couples.
The CDF is most interested to uphold the Catholic doctrine on sex.
But what is primary for state legislation is to uphold the natural law rights of citizens.
That will also inevitably involve compromise, which is intrinsic in all politics.
John Paul II laid out the basis for the supporting of a lessor law as a compromise when we lack the political strength to pass a better law in Evangelium Vitae 73
I think that principle could be the basis of even a very conservative Catholic support for civil unions instead of gay marriage, as Bergoglio did.
God Bless