U.S. Bishops Vote for Process that Could End Gender-Affirming Care at Catholic Hospitals
The U.S. bishops voted unanimously at their spring assembly last week to begin revisions of their medical guidelines that could lead to gender-affirming care being banned at Catholic hospitals.
As Bondings 2.0 previously reported, an action item at the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ spring assembly was whether or not to revise the Ethical and Religious Directives (ERDs), which dictate what services may or may not be provided in Catholic healthcare. While the process is not solely focused on transgender patients’ care, that issue will be part of revisions. The Committee on Doctrine’s recent doctrinal note on gender transitions, which was quite negative, will likely inform the revisions, alarming LGBTQ+ advocates.
The item, approved unanimously by voice vote, was introduced by Bishop Daniel Flores of Brownsville, the doctrinal committee’s chair. However, some bishops expressed concern with potential changes to the ERDs regarding trans patients, according to the National Catholic Reporter:
“Before the vote, several bishops expressed their hopes that the doctrine committee will consult widely with Catholic health care providers and others as it goes about revising the ethical and religious directives, or ERDs, which also include the bishops’ mandates on issues that include end-of-life care and abortion.
“Cardinal Joseph Tobin of Newark, New Jersey, also called for consultation with people from the transgender community, noting the importance of listening to people.
“San Diego Cardinal Robert McElroy said that the bishops’ health care directives are ‘meant to be a pastoral medical document to inform and guide’ the nation’s Catholic health care ministries. . .
“Tobin told NCR that the March 20 doctrinal note reflected ‘limited consultation’ with the transgender community. ‘You need to broaden that,’ he said, adding that he hopes the doctrine committee heard that message.”
NCR also reported on comments by Bishop Michael Olson of Fort Worth, who is on the doctrinal committee, who said there is “a lack of clarity between what is authentic gender dysphoria and the gender ideology that in part is preying upon these people and increasing their suffering.” NCR continued:
“Olson. . .told NCR that the committee consulted extensively with members of the transgender community. Olson said he also met with Dominican Sister of Peace Luisa Derouen, who has ministered among the transgender community since the 1990s.
“‘It involved a great deal of listening,’ said Olson, who declined to give a timeline as to when the doctrine committee might finish the revisions. He said the committee will proceed carefully. He described revising the directives as a ‘synodal’ process that will require significant listening to show pastoral sensitivity and compassion to people while staying true to Catholic moral doctrine.”
Revisions to the ERDs may proceed differently than the doctrinal note. However, despite Olson’s claim that trans people were consulted, many observers criticized the note for any reference to or acknowledgment of such engagement. Bioethicist M. Therese Lysaught instead said the note “could have been written in the 1950s,” adding, it showed “next to zero knowledge of, experience with, or expertise in transgender persons and the complexities of Catholic health care, even less compassion or Christian virtue.”
Even Michael Sean Winters, a columnist at the National Catholic Reporter not inclined towards transgender rights, agreed last week that the ERD revisions were “worrisome” as “it is hard to imagine how this discussion won’t open up a new front in the culture wars for the bishops.”
Included in his commentary was a notable section about how the bishops on the Committee on Doctrine thus far rejected any suggestions from the Catholic Health Association (CHA). Winters reported on an exchange he had with Sr. Mary Haddad, RSM, CHA’s president:
“‘In a meeting we had with USCCB staff last month, we were told that the next step for the adoption of the doctrinal note is to revise the ERDs,’ Haddad told me in an email. ‘This isn’t a surprise to me. The body of bishops must agree on initiating a process to revise the directives. If they do support the process, I know that CHA will be involved.’
“Then she added the part that worried me. ‘CHA works closely with the USCCB. We reviewed the doctrinal note, but all our suggestions were not accepted.'”
“If the bishops’ conference is not listening to the Catholic Health Association, to whom are they listening?”
Winters cited one group to whom many bishops listen when it comes to issues of gender, sexuality, and reproductive healthcare, the right-wing National Catholic Bioethics Center. He concluded:
“The bishops need to listen to the frontline Catholic health care workers represented by the Catholic Health Association, not the culture warriors who now rule the roost at the National Catholic Bioethics Center. There is no pressing need to change the Ethical and Religious Directives and any effort to do so will likely cause the church to be seen, yet again, as a field marshal in the culture wars. That is not a good look for pastors.”
With the bishops’ vote, revisions to the ERDs, including how gender-affirming care is handled, will now proceed. The Committee on Doctrine should listen to the plethora of voices—including some of their fellow bishops, as well as theologians, bioethicists, healthcare professionals, LGBTQ+ advocates, and most importantly, trans and nonbinary people themselves—all calling for a wide, inclusive, and thorough consultation before any changes are made that will greatly, and perhaps harmfully, impact patients at Catholic hospitals.
—Robert Shine (he/him), New Ways Ministry, June 22, 2023
Robert, how dependent are Catholic hospitals on Catholic $$? Could they withdraw affiliation in the same way some Catholic colleges have?
The bishops need to listen to the frontline Catholic health care workers represented by the Catholic Health Association, not the culture warriors who now rule the roost at the National Catholic Bioethics Center