Are LGBTQ+ People’s Human Rights Being Promoted in the Synod?
Bondings 2.0 writers Robert Shine and Francis DeBernardo are in Rome for the month of October covering the first global assembly of the Synod on Synodality, particularly LGBTQ-related developments. For the blog’s full coverage of this multi-year synodal journey, click here.
REPORTING FROM ROME—The plight of migrants and refugees was at the forefront of the Synod atmosphere in Rome last week, as on Thursday Pope Francis and delegates prayed in St. Peter’s Square beside the “Angels Unaware” sculpture, a monument which depicts the diversity of immigrants throughout history.
The panelists at the press briefing that same day were seemingly chosen for their connection to issues of migration. They included Cardinal Michael Czerny, prefect for the Vatican’s Dicastery for Promoting Integral Human Development, Archbishop Dabula Anthony Mpako, Pretoria, South Africa, and Bishop Daniel Flores of Brownsville, United States.
During the question period, I asked the panel about LGBTQ+ refugees. Lauding the church’s commitment to aiding migrants, I pointed out that sometimes the church contributes to hostile conditions which force LGBTQ+ people to flee, as when bishops support criminalization laws or fail to challenge anti-LGBTQ+ bias. I asked:
“We’ve heard about assembly discussions of LGBTQ pastoral care, but are the human rights of LGBTQ people and the church’s need to defend them being discussed, especially in situations where the church has contributed to creating LGBTQ refugees?”
Archbishop Mpako gave a meandering response about how the need to “approach LGBTQ+ people with compassion and acceptance” was paired with “a traditional Christian anthropology,” and, in his estimation no consensus on this would come any time soon.
Bishop Flores spoke about welcoming migrants in his diocese on the border of the U.S. and Mexico, noting “we don’t ask them about their sexual orientation.”
Cardinal Czerny did not answer.
Bishop Daniel Flores, left, and Cardinal Michael Czerny
In short, the panelists’ answers were non-answers. I asked about the human rights of LGBTQ+ people, particularly vulnerable refugees, and about why the institutional church was not defending these rights more forcefully. They pivoted to pastoral concerns, and weakly at that.
The Papal States may no longer exist, but the Catholic Church remains a politically powerful institution. It has representation at the United Nations. In many contexts, especially in the Global South, bishops retain strong moral authority on social and political issues. And even in locations where the sexual abuse scandal has stripped bishops of credibility, they still have political clout.
Sadly though, this political power is often used against the rights of LGBTQ+ people. As I mentioned, bishops in Uganda and elsewhere champion laws that criminalize queer identities. Less extreme but still influential are the many bishops whose messages perpetuate anti-LGBTQ+ bias in society. In Poland, bishops have used extremist language against gay people, even justifying violence against a Pride parade. In the U.S., the bishops’ conference lobbies forcefully against the rights of LGBTQ+ people and women.
How the Catholic Church approaches LGBTQ+ issues is not solely a pastoral concern. The church, and the Synod assembly, need to examine whether Catholics are abiding by our own teachings to stop anti-LGBTQ+ discrimination, or are the faithful in some areas actually furthering such discrimination. And answering this question is a pastoral concern because many pro-LGBTQ+ Catholics find themselves distanced from the institutional church because of the harmful politicking.
LGBTQ+ issues need to be approached first through the lens of social justice, rather than concerns over the ethics of queer relationships or diverse gender identities. Defending the human dignity of LGBTQ+ people and our participation in society must be the starting point. Pope Francis follows this approach, which has led him to condemn anti-LGBTQ+ criminalization and endorse civil unions for queer couples.
Has the Synod assembly taken up LGBTQ+ issues through this human rights framework? Are there interventions about the need to stop criminalization laws or church leaders’ anti-LGBTQ+ politicking? As usual, the confidentiality rule imposed on participants means finding answers to these questions is tough and maybe impossible.
It is hopeful that the synodal process has finally brought about a dialogue Catholic LGBTQ+ advocates have sought for decades. Whether the dialogue continues is unknown, and we will find out more at the end of this week. If a dialogue does continue, however, the conversations cannot be limited solely to pastoral concerns. LGBTQ+ people’s human rights and the ways the Catholic Church can help—or harm—them must be included.
—Robert Shine (he/him), New Ways Ministry, October 23, 2023
Dear Francis,
Such amazing and clear words from you to the synod participants, esp. to these bishops. So proud of you to articulate so clearly to them–and us–what the lead concern should be: the human dignity and rights of LGBTQ people. I actually have not thought so clearly about it myself, and thank you for helping me. Onward!
(:
Sad
Let us not forget about LGBTQIA+ refugees within the borders of the US. There is a massive exodus going on in the Southern and Middle America States as laws championed by religious groups legally marginalize queer populations, expose them to violence, and eliminate access to medically necessary and life-affirming care.
In many cases, they are leaving everything behind and struggling to set up roots and ways to provide for themselves in new locations. This should be seen as a great shame to all of us that this has been allowed to occur. The USCCB needs to do better, accept responsibility for its role, and promote change that recognizes the dignity of all.
They speak of compassion and respect for Gay folks, but remain silent about laws that denigrate our humanity. Jesus might call them Hypocritical Pharisees.
Amen.
Initially, the first answer seems meandering, but careful parsing reveals it is quite clear actually. If anything, the meandering shows that they know that there is a major problem: After talking about pastoral care for LGBTQ, he pivots to the tension between traditional Christian anthropology and LGBTQ to underscore: “That won’t be resolved anytime soon […] because we are dealing with a tradition that has existed for a long time.” And then he repeats again ‘LGBTQ pastoral care’ ‘while holding the tradition’.
So that’s the plan quite clearly laid out: try to be somewhat nice to LGBTQ people whereas doctrine and teachings won’t move by an inch for years if not decades to come, while implicitly acknowledging that they need to think about it.
Ok then, if they are at least aware that there’s a problem, why not simply replace the three paragraphs in the CCC about homosexuality and chastity by “under revision” rather than leaving them for all to see? Can we all agree that such language is hurtful and damaging?
When our kid came out as transgender at age 25, I experienced a dilemma: follow the teachings of the Church or embrace the teachings of Christ. I went with the latter. It was the best decision I ever made.
Sadly, the Catholic Church will never contradict its doctrine on same-sex behaviour. There are too many Cardinals and Bishops who oppose LGBTQ issues. Several members of the Episcopate want Pope Francis to resign: they say that during the conclave, Archbishop Bergoglio accepted the pontificate without the necessary majority. To make sure that LGBTQ issues are smothered, during these last three weeks, the assembly had other pressing matters to discuss: climate change, immigration, women priests, famine, etc. So, unfortunately, I say not to expect any major shift in the Church’s teachings on homosexuality and even more about their rights in a world of surprisingly blatant hedonism and practical atheism. 😞