Father Martin: my responses to the delegates of the Synod who are against LGBT+ issues
James Martin* SJ article published on the website of America The Jesuit Review On September 19, 2024, freely translated by Luigi and Valeria De La Tenda di Gionata
During the first session of the Synod on synodality, which was held last October (2023), I was not surprised by the fact that many delegates of the Synod were against what could be defined, in a broad sense, "LGBTQ issues“. What surprised me was the intensity of the opposition, the language used and the anger that the topic aroused in some delegates. Perhaps because of the fact that I have been dealing with pastoral years with LGBTQ people, many delegates have shared their comments, their questions and their difficulties with me. It was an honor to listen, reflect and answer. Now, in a week, there will be the second and last session of the Synod, which will begin on October 2nd.
Without violating any confidentiality constraint, I can say that some delegates made interventions during the discussions in the round tables and in the synodal classroom last year, that beyond any negative reaction that I had ever heard first by the representatives of the church hierarchy. One thing is to know that these arguments are part of the dialectic in the universal Church; Another is to feel them in person, sometimes face to face. The "disgusting", "repugnant", "unnatural" and "sick" words were frequently used in conversations with me.
At the same time, many delegates from all over the world expressed a strong desire to promote an approach to the LGBTQ community, a pastoral need mentioned twice in the first working document or Instrumentum Laboris (THE'Instrumentum Laboris This year is concentrated less on specific issues such as the role of women in the Church and LGBTQ Catholics, and more on the concept of "synodality" in general).
During the last year I tried to approach the contrary delegates to better understand their opposition. Synodality is based on listening, so how could I have been a good delegate - even more so a good Christian - if I hadn't listened to who did not agree with me? After a delegate, during a plenary session, defined homosexuality as a "western ideology", a cardinal asked me: "Do you want me to help you organize a meeting with him?". We therefore had an open and Franca conversation, which prompted me to look for other delegates, which gave me the opportunity to better understand their doubts. I tried to apply the "assumption" of Sant'Ignazio di Loyola, according to which we try to give the benefit of doubt to another person to better understand his perspective.
While the Synod turned to the end, another participant suggested to me: "In the next year you should aim to card and meet delegates and other authorities of the Catholic Church who do not agree with you, to listen to their concerns and be able to compare you with them». I thought it was a great idea. So, in the last year, I spoke of these themes with cardinals, bishops, priests, religious and religious, and Catholic lay leaders from all over the world, with particular attention to Eastern Europe and sub -Saharan Africa, from where it seems to come great part of the opposition.
What follows is what I heard and my answers. For simplicity, I will use the expression "LGBTQ issues"To represent a constellation of problems that are raised in various areas, ranging from pastoral approaches (promote the reception of LGBTQ Catholics) to more directly theological issues (the church doctrine on homosexuality) up to the most recent developments (such as L 'approval of the blessing of same sex couples in some circumstances). I will keep these anonymous answers.
The opposition to the LGBTQ world can be schematized in the following points, listed in the frequency order with which these positions, sometimes mixed with each other, have been expressed: 1) LGBTQ issues are an ideology; 2) is a form of neocolonialism; 3) is a concern of the western world; 4) supporting LGBTQ people means opposing the doctrine of the Church; 5) LGBTQ people hate the Church.
1. LGBTQ issues are an ideology.
The most common reaction to any reference to LGBTQ people is that the themes related to this issue are simply an "ideology", that is, a system of false beliefs imposed on unaware, often young people. This contributes to explaining the reluctance of many delegates also to use the term "LGBTQ", perceived not as a word that identifies a community of people, but as the reflection of a dangerous ideology.
This concept is a firmly rooted belief between many authorities of the Church and the delegates of the Synod. Pope Francis himself publicly declared his opposition to the so -called "gender ideology". Now, although that expression refers mainly to transgender people, from many Catholics it is used to oppose all LGBTQ issues. Some delegates believed that any discussion on these themes - also the life experiences lived of the LGBTQ Catholics - was a way to satisfy a dangerous ideology. Similarly, some delegates claimed that LGBTQ people did not really exist or were simply people who adhered to an ideology (who made them homosexuals). An African archbishop said to me: "The reason why there are homosexual people in my country is that Americans pay them to become homosexuals".
I have no idea if the Americans really go to other countries to pay people to "become homosexual". But a possible response to concerns regarding "ideology" is to remember that, although today many ideas, positions and considerations on LGBTQ issues exist, the vast majority of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people will tell you that what I am is not the is not The result of a series of ideas, but of their experiences.
Certainly the media can induce young people who are uncertain about their sexual identity to experiment and even question their sexual orientation or their gender identity. However, in general, psychiatrists, psychologists, doctors, biologists, sociologists and, above all, the same LGBTQ people will tell you that their perceived identity is not the reaction to ideas, but to experiences experienced internally in a deep way. For gay, lesbian and bisexual people, this is the way they feel they have been created, not the result of an intellectual choice. And for transgender people, as often points out Sister Luisa Derouen op, this is part of their life path, it is not the answer to an ideology.
2. This is a form of neocolonialism.
Another common objection during the Synod and in my conversations of the last year was connected to the first observation: the colonial powers exported this ideology. In other words, homosexuality would be an import of western colonizers, extraneous to the original culture of other parts of the world, with particular reference to developing countries. "Homosexuality has never existed in our country," a bishop told me. "It's an imported ideology," another said. "An unwanted visitor," said another.
Many people have also expressed their anger for the fact that foreign economic grants are linked to the acceptance of certain LGBTQ rights. They argue that some western aid packages are provided on condition that their country accepts LGBTQ rights. An African priest said to me: "You have no idea how humiliating this is for some countries and for some people." He repeated that word: humiliating. On the other hand, another African priest stressed that the granting of international aid is not usually linked to the promotion of marriage between people of the same sex, but rather to protection of LGBTQ people from harassment, beatings, violence, imprisonment and death sentence.
Unfortunately, the theses of "colonialism" and "ideology" are often used by governments and dictatorships that support homophobic policies, and the Church, in turn, can feel forced to join this political repression. And if the state finances ecclesiastical organizations, it becomes even more difficult to oppose the homophobia promulgated by the government. "My government uses it as a propaganda of hatred," said a bishop of Eastern Europe. "There is so much darkness and anger." The Catholic faithful are also induced by the media controlled by the government to consider these issues as "colonialist" or "ideological" threats, which makes even more difficult for local bishops to show openness to LGBTQ people. Finally, in the countries where the Church is in the minority, and government authorities promote homophobia, Catholic leaders can feel even more intimidated in supporting LGBTQ people.
One of the difficulties in the discussion on this theme during the Synod, and more generally in the Church, is that those who have experience in pastoral care with LGBTQ people may want to encourage others to listen to the experiences of LGBTQ people, but they fear being seen as "colonialists ".
It is interesting to note that, during the Synod, the request to open a discussion on the polygamy, raised by several delegates from Africa, was accepted with greater warmth compared to the question of homosexual couples, despite the fact that the question could be seen as A form of similar awareness: the request for opening to a group of Catholic faithful whose lives do not fully conform to the doctrine of the Church. Unlike LGBTQ issues, polygamy has been included in the last Instrumentum Laboris, which spoke of the need to "discern the theological and pastoral issues related to polygamy for the Church in Africa".
A European delegate said to me: "I was afraid to say something negative about polygamy or positive on LGBTQ issues because I would have been seen as a colonialist". I asked an African bishop, who supported the welcome of the "polygam couples" who wanted to feel part of the church, because the same arguments could not be used for the same sex couples. "Because one is natural and the other is not," he replied.
Yet, as many scholars points out, homosexuality was part of many ancient non -western cultures even before the era of colonialism. Cardinal Peter Turkson has lately underlined this point, reporting that there were words in its native language, the Akan, to describe homosexual people. Luisa Wall, an indigenous person from New Zealand, wrote a article on Outreach Regarding the presence of "people with different sexual guidelines" in the Pacific islands, long before the colonial era.
In fact, one of the most famous stories in the life of the saints, that of Ugandan martyrs, is often used to illustrate the horrors of homosexuality. In 1885, twenty -two Catholic and twenty -two Anglican men, some very young, were horriblely executed after refusing the violent avances Sexual of the local king. However, an aspect of that story is often neglected. A priest of Eastern Africa said to me: «Their story is used against homosexual people in my country. But it also demonstrates the presence of homosexuality long before colonialism. Nobody likes to admit it ». Homosexuality is present in every country, region and diocese.
As several delegates have pointed out to me, the true colonial influence is represented by "Anti-Sodomy", In particular those imposed by the British Empire, who have left a consolidated legacy of homophobia. If we want to consider the harmful effects of colonialism, this aspect must also be taken into consideration in the speech.
3. It is a western concern.
This objection is somehow different from "this is a form of neocolonialism". The idea is that, even if there are LGBTQ people in their diocese, this is not considered a "problem". "Homosexuals in my country are not a problem," an African bishop told me. «Nobody talks about it. It's not a problem ».
An African priest explained that in his country there is no talk of sexuality openly, not even in the family, and certainly not in public. There is therefore a profound cultural diffidence on this issue, and the feeling is that the question is "imposed from the outside" for a pressure of western culture. For some people, in his country, the theme is an anathema. "The bishops are firmly against and if the question is raised, they will deny it or they will say that it is not a problem." But, he added: «Every bishop knows that it exists. It is not a question of conservatives or progressive. They do not have the tools, the ability to talk about it ».
Deeply rooted cultural attitudes and violent practices, such as "corrective" rape, in which lesbians are raped to "heal them," make it difficult to lift the problem. Thus, some Catholic leaders, seeing that in their country few people openly discuss these issues, label it not only as a western question, but more specifically as a purely western concern. This approach is reflected in the refusal by the Secam (Symposium of the episcopal conferences of Africa and Madagascar) to promulgate the document Trust Supplicans, which allowed the blessing of same sex couples in some circumstances, because he would have created "confusion"(Irony of fate, it is also argued that Trust Plea Go against the doctrine of the Church, when the document is precisely part of the doctrine!).
A priest also admitted that, in his country, where homophobia is rampant, there are gay priests who feel a deep sense of shame. "So they try to repress and deny their condition."
However, the growing number of LGBTQ people who run away from persecutions and violence, as described in Mark Gevisser's book The Pink Line, could be the best response to the argument that it is a "western concern." In dozens of countries you can be imprisoned for having homosexual relationships or for defending LGBTQ rights. In seven countries you risk death sentence. The cases of LGBTQ people who flee from their countries out of fear are growing dizzyingly; sometimes the persecution continues even in the refugee camps. For these people, and therefore for their countries and for the Church, it is a very real problem.
4. LGBTQ people oppose the teaching of the Church.
According to this line of thought, any reference to LGBTQ people should be prohibited because they oppose the doctrine of the Church, which states that homosexual acts are "intrinsically disordered". Certainly there are LGBTQ people who oppose the teaching of the Church, who have homosexual sexual relationships and who are married with partners of the same sex. However, the opposition of some exponents of the Catholic hierarchy is stronger and more visceral, more than the fear of supporting someone who disputes the doctrine of the Church. Last year, after I shared the story of a homosexual couple I knew, a Latin American prelate told me that he appreciated the example of disinterested love in the relationship, but that he considered the sexual act in itself not only against the 'teaching of the Church, but "disgusting".
Others argue that the opposition to LGBTQ issues is "biblical, not cultural ». However, as many pointed out scholars of the ancient and the New Testament, the use of the so -called "punitive steps"In the Bible it is highly problematic, since those texts were intended for a completely different context (The same goes, for example, for the biblical songs on slavery) and, moreover, there are many other precepts and rules in the Bible (such as the stone of women for adultery) that we no longer follow. On the other hand, the use of "punitive passages" is almost always very selective and almost always used against LGBTQ people, instead of giving importance to the so -called "Reception texts".
In these conversations, I often invite people to think of a young homosexual of fifteen or sixteen years who has no relationship and is not planning to get married shortly, but who feels marginalized by his church. Or to a lesbian girl victim of the horrors of the "corrective rape". Or even to the gay man who suffers in a refugee or prison camp. Which teaching of the Church are contesting these people? Listening to the stories of LGBTQ people does not necessarily mean rejecting the doctrine of the Church.
5. LGBTQ people hate the Church
I have heard this criticism from several delegates of the Synod, especially from Eastern Europe. The only experience with LGBTQ people from some hierarchy exponents is to become aware of their criticisms about the Church in the media or to attend their protest events. Many reported me of disputes in front of the churches or cathedrals (often on the occasion of the gears of the Pride). This is a problem because it always and in any case related LGBTQ people with the opposition to the Church, and this obviously makes the bishops less likely to listen to them. For our human nature we have difficulty working with people who demonize us - something that LGBTQ people understand well.
A useful response to this criticism is to invite those in front of us to understand that many LGBTQ people (many of whom are not Catholic) are reacting to what they perceive as homophobic comments from ecclesiastical authorities, and to keep in mind that those who protest does not represent the A vast majority of LGBTQ Catholics, who simply want to know that God loves them, that Jesus is with them, that the Holy Spirit enriches their lives e that the Church is their home. It is also important for LGBTQ people to understand how counterproductive their comments full of hate can be counterproductive if you want to establish a dialogue with the church hierarchy.
At the end of my interviews with representatives of the hierarchy and delegates of the Synod in the last year, I often asked the same question: what is the best way to answer these perplexities? Almost everyone gave the same answer: to know LGBTQ people not as stereotypes, but as individuals. In the end, the best way to help those who oppose LGBTQ issues - for all the reasons mentioned above - is to meet them, listen to their stories and know them as loved children of God, that is, as our brothers and sisters in Christ.
* James Martin SJ is the founder of Outreach and editorial director of Average America. In Italy several of his books have been translated and published including "A bridge to build. A new relationship between Church and LGBT people"(Editrice Marcianum, 2018, 120 pages).
Original text: The listened to synod delegates opposed to LGBTQ ISSUES. Here are My Responses.
