Catholic Church leaders in Africa and Central Asia prohibit the blessing of same-sex couples, despite recent Vatican approval. In fact, Catholic bishops in several countries have objected to the Vatican’s, and Pope Francis’, recent approval of blessings for same-sex couples, underscoring the divisiveness of the issue in the global Catholic Church.

The Catholic bishops of Africa and Madagascar issued a unified statement refusing to follow the Vatican declaration allowing priests to offer blessings to same-sex couples and asserting that such unions are “contrary to the will of God.” The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops issued a brief statement focusing mostly on its assertion that same-sex couples remain ineligible for liturgical blessings and reiterating the church’s position that marriage is a union of a man with a woman.

Some bishops in Germany and Belgium, however, have long defied the earlier Catholic Church ban on blessing same-sex unions, even going so far as to produce a rite of blessing for same-sex couples.

Anti-LGBTQ policies and punishments, elsewhere, remain strong. In Africa, for example, 33 of the 54 nations across the continent have laws that make same-sex activity a crime punishable with fines and even lengthy prison sentences. In Somalia and some of the states of Nigeria people can even be legally put to death for same-sex behavior.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church, promulgated by Pope John Paul II in 1992, is still in effect and considers sexual activity between members of the same sex to be a grave sin and same-sex attraction as objectively disordered.

Nevertheless, on Monday, December 18, 2023, in an official declaration “Fiducia supplicans” issued by the Vatican’s Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, and approved by Pope Francis, it is now permissible for priests to bless same-sex couples as long as they are not part of regular Church rituals or liturgies. [The “Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith” (DDF) was originally founded by Pope Paul III in 1542 and was then known as the “Inquisition.”]

With this new declaration the DDF and Pope Francis have firmly established the possibility of blessing same-sex couples and remarried divorcees as a pastoral option. Pope Francis also emphasized, however, that blessing same-sex people should not be equated with blessing their sins! His remark reminded me of the earlier 2021 DDF declaration which had stated flat-out that the church couldn’t bless the unions of two men or two women because “God cannot bless sin.”

So now the Vatican takes small steps in the right direction? Time will tell. One of my theologian friends observed that the December 2023 DDF document is akin to kindly giving a glass of water to a starving person, but only a glass of water.

In any event, in view of recent developments, an historical-critical perspective is helpful…

LOOKING AT SACRED SCRIPTURE AGAIN

Up to now, the traditional religious condemnation of same-sex behavior had been based on: Genesis 19:1-11; Leviticus 18:22, 20:13; Romans 1:26-7; 1 Corinthians 6:9; and 1 Timothy 1:10. In the light of contemporary biblical scholarship, however, it is impossible to affirm that these texts provide a solid foundation for condemning same-sex behavior today.

The Hebrew Scriptures and New Testament texts should not be taken literally but should be interpreted in terms of the authors’ times, culture, and social contexts – an historical-critical interpretation.

The understanding, back when the Hebrew Scriptures and the New Testament were composed, was that all human beings were naturally heterosexual and, therefore, any same-sex behavior was unnatural, a perversion, and immoral. That biblical assumption is now understood as incorrect, because some people are, by nature, same-sex oriented.

Relying upon the historical-critical method, it is clear that the traditional condemnation of same-sex behavior lacks legitimacy. Change does happen. The old understanding of human sexuality is time-bound. A new understanding has already begun taking shape. As an older Catholic historical theologian, I have often chuckled that in 1943, the year I was born, the Vatican endorsed a more critical study of Scripture based on an increase in historical knowledge. The Vatican recognized explicitly that “past ages” did not have “all the information which was needed for their clearer exposition.” Historical development.

No doubt the most influential biblical account leading to the condemnation of same-sex behavior has been the biblical account about Sodom in the book of Genesis (Genesis 19:1-28). A contextual exegesis, now agreed upon by most contemporary biblical scholars, shows that a same-sex condemnation based on the Sodom account is really not an accurate biblical interpretation. Scripture scholars today are in agreement that Inhospitality was the real sin of Sodom. The residents of Sodom refused to offer shelter to the two visiting angels who entered their city that evening.

If one asks why God would destroy Sodom because of inhospitality, one must realize that hospitality in ancient Near Eastern culture was highly valued. Travelers were vulnerable to all kinds of cruel treatment such as robbery, assault, rape, and murder. The clearer sin in both the Hebrew text and the original Hebrew context was the sin of inhospitality. Even the historical Jesus, in the Gospel of Luke, affirmed this inhospitality interpretation, in his reference to Sodom when his disciples were not welcomed in a town with hospitality. (Luke 10:8-12)

A CONTEMPORARY PERSPECTIVE

The heterosexual – “other-sex” – orientation is an innate, deep-seated, and stable orientation to, predominantly, persons of the opposite sex. It is natural. The homosexual – “same-sex” – orientation is a similarly innate, deep-seated, and stable orientation to, predominantly, persons of the same sex. It is natural. A person’s sexual orientation is neither chosen nor readily changeable. It simply is. And… sexual acts – whether heterosexual or homosexual – are moral when they are natural and expressed in a truly human, just, and loving manner.

FOR FURTHER READING

Creighton University theologians, Todd A. Salzman (who completed his doctorate in theology at the Catholic University of Leuven in 1994) and Michael G. Lawler, have written extensively about Catholic sexual morality. I strongly recommend their book The Sexual Person, Toward a Renewed Catholic Anthropology, Georgetown University Press, 2008. Their book provides a helpful context for current ethical debates about marriage, cohabitation, sexual orientation, and reproductive technologies.

Todd and Michael contend that the Catholic Church is inconsistent in its teaching. It adopts a dynamic, historically conscious anthropology on social ethics; but it still adopts a static, classicist anthropology on sexual ethics. They propose a definition of human sexuality that finds love and truth in all just and loving heterosexual, lesbian, gay, and bisexual acts.

Historical-critical thinking is important. We observe. We reflect. We can change.

Jack

 

This week some more thoughts about actions in the New Year…

A good friend sent me a note about my “Another Voice” post of last week:

“Most of our words are too hollow for conveying the meaning of all that is rushing us along. For the sake of loving our grandchildren, I hope we can find, in one another’s voices, the new words that are beacons for digging through the rubble of what is happening, for sustaining life when we find it, and bringing new hope– hand to hand– for personal wholeness and social cohesion where the old civilization has crumbled once again.”

Our language is important and meaningful language springs from thoughtful observations about meaningful life experiences.

I have seven observations and questions:

 

• 1 The historical Jesus, whose Hebrew name was Yeshua, belonged to the Hebrew faith tradition and had a keen knowledge of the Hebrew Scriptures. He did not establish a new religion. He did not set up a church. His disciples worked out those things later. Jesus lived and called people to a new way of life. His early followers were called “followers of the Way” because the early Jesus movement was known as “The Way” (Acts 9:2; Acts 24:14). The name “Christianity” did not occur until Antioch, several years after Jesus’ resurrection. (Acts 11:27).

— Thought-starter: How do we live and promote the Way of Jesus today? How can we best live and describe it? How can we really inspire and motivate people? Are so many of our traditional words too hollow? Why are so many people dropping out of Christianity? While Christianity is currently the predominant religion in Latin America, Europe, Canada and the United States, the religion is declining in many of these areas, particularly in Western Europe, North America, and Oceania.

• 2 Historically, in Jesus’ days a rabbi would begin to take on students at the age of 30. It was at the age of 30 that Jesus, we believe, began his public ministry. Jesus’ disciples were not a group of middle-aged men but a group of young men and women, probably under the age of eighteen and some perhaps as young as 15. They were inspired by his example, teaching, and wisdom.

— Thought-starter: Where do young men and women today get their Christian inspiration? What do we need to do? Whose wisdom do they admire today? Do we understand their life experiences and their language? How can we speak meaningfully to them about Jesus?

• 3 As the post-Resurrection community of Jesus’ disciples and followers began to grow, non-Hebrew members also joined.

— Thought-starter: How do we welcome God-seekers today – young and old — especially those turned-off by organized religion?

• 4 Post-Resurrection followers of Jesus had growing concern about passing on the heritage of Jesus the Christ to future generations. This called for religious structuring: the composition of the Gospels AND the formation of Christian faith communities with their own rituals, symbols, and leadership.

— Thought-starter: What kinds of institutional structuring and re-structuring do we need today, especially in view of institutional misogyny, clericalism, and doctrinal rigidity? Is it helpful, for example, to say priests can bless same-sex couples but that their sexual expression, according to the Catholic Catechism is still “intrinsically disordered”? Why not simply acknowledge that same sex unions can indeed be healthy marriages?

• 5 In the earliest Christian communities men and women held leadership roles and presided at celebrations of Eucharist. At first there was no ordination. No separate clergy. Later ordination was introduced, not to transfer some kind of sacramental power but for quality control. Only qualified men and women could lead Christian communities.

— Thought-starter: How do we provide quality-controlled Christian leadership today? Should we have annual performance appraisals for clergy and bishops? And if they don’t pass? Should parish councils interview candidates and select their own pastors?

• 6 Religion is not faith. Religion is a system of beliefs, rituals, and symbols designed to help people understand their faith experience. We use religion. We don’t worship it. Religion is healthy when it points to the Sacred. It is unhealthy when it only points to itself not to the Sacred.

—Thought starter: Are our religious words, rituals, and symbols pointing people to the Sacred? How should they be adapted today?

• 7 What about our official statements of belief? Our creeds? The Nicene Creed, is accepted as authoritative by the Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Anglican, and major Protestant churches. It was promulgated – at the insistence of Constantine, who was Roman Emperor from 306 to 337 CE — at the Council of Nicaea (325). Curiously, the Nicene Creed says nothing about what Jesus had taught, beyond the idea that God is a Father. It says nothing about loving one another, about compassion, or forgiveness, or helping the poor and needy, or renouncing violence, or building bridges with one’s enemies. Thanks to Constantine and his Council of Nicaea, institutional Christianity shifted its identity focus from correct Christian conduct to doctrinal fidelity and institutional obedience. It was indeed a major shift.

—Thought starter: How do we make a changed institutional focus? A focus on Jesus-style Christian conduct? Is it time for a new statement of belief? This may take some time yet for the institutional churches, but it will happen. Right now, however, how about gathering a group of friends and writing your own creed? I once asked a group of my university students to do that. The results were amazing and deeply moving. Much better than what Constantine’s fourth century bishops came up with.

Jack

We are historically conscious people. We realize that the present and the future come to us out of our past. What happened yesterday — and what we did yesterday — shapes what happens today. What happens today, of course, shapes tomorrow.

We move along as we grow and change. In 1942, T. S. Eliot (1888 – 1965) wrote the following words in his poem Little Gidding: “For last year’s words belong to last year’s language. And next year’s words await another voice.” Eliot’s words inspired my blog “Another Voice” which I launched in 2010. My focus, as an historical theologian, has been contemporary religious and ethical issues. I am not all-knowing and readily admit that I am not infallible, but I do try to stay alert to new biblical and historical discoveries, and my eyes open to what is happening today.

A friendly reader suggested, once again, that I “avoid politics and stick to theology.” I understand his concern, but I would also stress that our contemporary Christian responsibility is to be critical observers about all aspects of our shared human life. Politics, especially today, warrants critical observation and commentary from a Christian values perspective.

So, we move on into the New Year…

In 2024, I hope that with all our voices we can discover the truth that is so often hidden or totally distorted in news reports, far-right and far-left political and religious rhetoric, and in social media. I am thinking right now, for example, about the billionaire megalomaniac who bought Twitter in October 2022 and transformed it into “X” which quickly became a haven for disinformation, white supremacism, and Neo-Nazi sympathizers.

Yes, we need to work together to combat ignorance. But as the Irish playwright and political activist, George Bernard Shaw (1850 – 1956), often said: “Beware of false knowledge. It is more dangerous than ignorance.” Authoritarian leaders, in their authoritarian dogmatism, thrive on false knowledge and denigrate — and often destroy — people anchored in critical observation and critical thinking.

Authoritarian dogmatism of course destroys democracy. The big challenge around the globe in 2024, will be selecting and promoting honest, well-informed, and critical-thinking leaders. In this new year we may very well see one of the starkest erosions of liberal democracy since the end of the Cold War.

In Europe, extreme nationalist and far-right parties are growing in Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Switzerland, and even Finland and Sweden.

Globally, more voters than ever will head to the polls in 2024. At least 64 countries, representing a combined population of about 49% of the people in the world, will hold national elections. The results will be consequential for years to come.

In the United States, of course, elections are scheduled for November 5, 2024. On January 8^th President Biden already launched his re-election campaign with a strong speech at Mother Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal (AME) Church in Charleston, South Carolina. Meanwhile the 45^th president and his far-right-Christian supporters have launched his re-election campaign, proclaiming him a “sent by God” messianic figure who will MAGA — “Make America Great Again.” Well, the election year 2024 is already in full swing. [Although many of his supporters believe the 45^th president created the loaded slogan, MAGA, it was popularized by Ronald Reagan as a campaign slogan in his 1980 presidential campaign.]

Twenty twenty-four will truly be an historic U.S. election year. The people of the United States will be deciding if their country will remain a real democracy or succumb instead to neofascism and autocracy. During this presidential election year, the president and vice president will be elected. In addition, all 435 seats in the United States House of Representatives and 34 of the 100 seats in the United States Senate will be contested to determine the membership of the 119^th United States Congress.

We need to courageously denounce the purveyors of misinformation and absolute falsehood. As Mahatma Gandhi (1869 – 1948) once famously said: “non-cooperation with evil is as much a duty as is cooperation with good.” We need to support, defend, and encourage good leadership.

We need to help build and support communities of truth-seekers and truth-speakers, within our friendship groups, parish communities, and professional associates. As we do this, we must emphasize the key values for communities of trust and truth:

(1) A focus on the human heart not just the brain: stressing active care, concern, and compassion for others. Jesus stressed love of neighbor. He didn’t say “just think nice thoughts about the other.”

(2) An openness to the deeper dimensions of our human experience. Call this a kind of meditative spirituality. Reality is much richer and more amazing than many people realize. Creator is with us, calling us to be creative.

(3) A stress on critically questioning all the information that bombards us day and night. Is everything now relative and up for grabs? What does the search for truth mean today?

(4) A stress on the genuine human values of fairness, trustworthiness, and honesty.

My warmest regards as we journey into this New Year. We do not have to be pessimists. But we do have to be observant and thoughtful and constructive realists.

Jack

 

PS And I want to sincerely thank all who responded to my 2023 Another Voice annual appeal.