Instead of focusing on questioning the sexual relationship, the Church must confront the problem inherent in the negative reactions, both religious and social, with which this issue is faced in the Church and in society. And also take the step of communal, sacramental and pastoral welcoming of these couples and the education of their offspring.

- Juan Masiá, SJ
professor of Bioethics in the faculty of Theology
University of Sophia, Japan,

In his response to Pope Francis’ global consultation on marriage and the family, the Jesuit theologian and Professor of Bioethics has not simply stuck to the rigid structure of the formal questionnaire that was circulated worldwide last year, but has instead submitted his thoughts under the same subject headings as the questionnaire. These ideas were developed, he says, in the context of a meeting with Catholic professionals and couples who are attending continuing education courses in theology. That is, it is the opinion of a distinguished academic theologian, in consultation with Catholic professionals, and with real - world couples who are also engaging seriously with theology. As such, these thoughts deserve to be treated with serious respect.

His full response was published in Spanish at Atrio, but is available in a reliable English translation by Rebel Girl at Iglesia Descalza. Gay and lesbian Catholics will be particularly interested in this excerpt (emphasis added):

5. On the relationships of homosexual couples

It’s not enough to affirm in the Catechism that people with a homosexual orientation should not be discriminated against either in society or in the Church (Catechism of the Catholic Church, n. 2358). It’s not enough to assert that homosexual orientation in itself is not a moral evil (see the instruction of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons, 1986, n.3).

It’s not enough to explain that some texts of Scripture where homosexual practices are referred to should be read in the context of denouncing social customs of the time, that they should never be used to make a judgment of guilt against those who suffer because of their sexual orientation (see the instruction of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Persona Humana, 1975, n. 8). We must go one step further and instead of focusing on questioning the sexual relationship, the Church must confront the problem inherent in the negative reactions, both religious and social, with which this issue is faced in the Church and in society. And also take the step of communal, sacramental and pastoral welcoming of these couples and the education of their offspring.

This is obviously important for its content, but also as a reminder that there are many ways of responding to the consultation on marriage and the family. Many people (and it is indeed, very many) have tried, and struggled, simply to answer the questions as they appeared in the Pope’s original letter to the bishops, or in some dioceses, in modified form. Some people and groups have simply given up at the intractibility of answering them in their cumbersome original form, or because they have now passed the published deadlines set by their dioceses. But the important point is the principle of consultation, not just the mechanics. Archbishop (Cardinal designate) Baldisseri, who is heading the process, has said that responses may still be sent directly to Rome. I strongly urge all LGBT Catholics and their allies who have not already submitted their responses, to do so. This synod was not originally intended to formulate any change in actual teaching, but only to consider and promote the best practice in pastoral ministry - but events have a way of producing unintended consequences. It seems obvious to me from the calibre and substance of the submissions that I have seen published, that the synod will be forced at the very least, finally to acknowledge that the Church as a whole has clearly not “accepted” Church teaching on family and sexuality as it stands, and that there is an urgent need to reconsider.

This is how Masiá makes the case for the necessity of doctrinal reform (emphasis added):

3. On the pastoral of the family and evangelization

• It’s not just a matter of making pastoral practice more flexible without touching the teaching on the alleged “doctrine” of the Church. In fact, for decades many people of faith and bishops and priests who are within the Church have felt totally free to disagree with the exaggerations of so-called “Church doctrine.” But the latter does not change openly and officially and there is an open gap of separation between this gospel pastoral practice and the official positions of the Church through which it loses credibility inside and out. For example, there are believers who think that using a condom is prohibited, and there are non-believers who think that condom use is condemned. But in the consultation room and in moral theology class we say clearly, in Cardinal Martini’s phrase, that “it is neither the Church’s job to condemn it nor is it its mission to recommend it.” However, the Church hierarchies have not dared to say this and so have lost much credibility over the past three pontificates.
• Both in the practice of family ministry and in the documents and exhortations of the Church on marriage and family, three serious flaws must be corrected:1) The lack of distinction between the principal teachings (which are few and very basic, e.g. responsible parenthood) and secondary disputable issues (which can be quite varied, e.g. the recommendations made by Popes Paul VI and John Paul II about contraceptives) should be avoided.2) We should avoid joining the neglect of the main teachings with the endeavor to change blind assent to those other secondary recommendations into a sign of Catholic identity.3) We must avoid that believers who are poorly formed in their faith as adults mistakenly believe you can not disagree with the church on these secondary issues and confuse reasonable and responsible disagreement with dissent and infidelity (for example, dissenting from Humanae Vitae is not a question of sin, or obedience, or faith. This must be clearly taught and not just whispered in the consulting room or the confessional).

- via Iglesia Descalza

Related articles

• “The Meaning of Sex” (Letters to the Catholic Right) (queeringthechurch.com)
• Church entering ‘new era’ under Pope Francis, top papal adviser says (catholicherald.co.uk)
• Methodist pastor offers to perform same-sex weddings (kvue.com)
• Texas Methodist pastor offers to perform same-sex weddings (khou.com)
• Advise the Bishops about Marriage and Family Life (gaudetetheology.wordpress.com)
• Shrugging toward St. Peter’s. (commonwealmagazine.org)
• German theologians and the family synode (stefanhippler.com)
• NCR: Moral Theologians, on the Need for Doctrinal Change (news.queerchurch.com)
• Father Roy Bourgeois Writes Open Letter to Pope Francis: Heal the Wounds of Women and Gay Folks in Catholic Church (bilgrimage.blogspot.com)