In my recent
post on Pope Benedict’s legacy I argued that it was time for the Catholic
establishment to take a new approach to issues of gender and sexuality. I
suggested that if it didn’t, it could expect a rough ride at home and face increasing
marginalisation on issues where it has much of value and relevance to say such
as social justice and peace. And I argued that whilst change was far from straightforward,
theological rigidity would continue to inflict real damage in the developing
world.
A week it seems is not just a long time in politics. At the
time I wrote the piece, Cardinal O’Brien was making the headlines as the only
man in Britain to have a vote in the conclave to elect a new Pope. Barely a
week later, the Cardinal has resigned in the wake of complaints about
inappropriate behaviour.
In between times he had been in the news for speaking out about
the issue of celibacy in the priesthood and by arguing that the next Pope
should come from the developing world. It’s not gone unnoticed that one of the
favourites from Africa whose cause he was advancing has effectively scuppered
his chances by arguing that abuse within the church was the result of gay
tendencies in the priesthood.
That much and more we all know. Whether Cardinal O’Brien is
guilty I don’t know and that’s not the point or the focus of this piece. The
complaints should obviously be investigated properly and independently. What
does surprise me in that regard however is the church hierarchy’s assurance
that this will happen because it’s clear that the church has learnt from its
past mistakes and now takes the handling of such complaints very seriously.
I’ve no doubt that many victims of abuse within the church
would question the veracity of that assertion. The reality is that the church establishment
has been woefully slow to act and has all too often regarded itself as above
the law. In any event this of course is a different story because it involves
not children but serving and former priests.
And the notion that the Cardinal has resigned to avoid the
allegations becoming a distraction to the main event, the election of a new
Pope, smacks of self interest and hypocrisy on the part of the hierarchy. Several
others due to vote in the conclave have form in relation to the cover up of abuse
against children.
My recent post prompted a friend of mine to suggest that I
was mad and to ask why I would want to be part of a club that simply doesn’t
welcome me as a gay man with views on gay marriage, abortion, contraception and
gender equality so at odds with those of the hierarchy. Others would go further
I’m sure. Why collude with an institution that preaches what it does on such
matters with enormously damaging consequences, in the developing world in
particular?
These are very fair questions and challenges. The answer
lies in part in
the story of my own faith and identity and in part in a belief that things
can and must change. So walking away is often tempting and would be a perfectly
rational response. For the moment though I plan to stay. In fact I’d argue that
for liberal Catholics, this is no time to leave. We have a responsibility to
speak up for institutional change.
I have never had any desire to take my political stance to
Mass itself. I go to church to pray in peace and long may that continue. I’ve
sometimes speculated that I may have cause to get up and walk out in protest
against preaching on abortion or sexuality, but one way or another that moment
hasn’t presented itself. Just as well because in my imaginings when it does and
I shout shame on you at the pulpit and turn on my heels, I trip on my shoelaces
and embarrass myself horribly in front of a packed congregation. It would of
course be worth the embarrassment.
But I have become increasingly vocal about the
unacceptability of the Catholic establishment’s stance and the need for change.
Whether it’s helpful to call people bigots is a moot point but it’s important to
name bigotry.
Calling gay marriage a ‘grotesque subversion of a human right’, is bigotry.
Suggesting that there is a ‘link between same sex sexual practice and early
death’, is bigotry.
It’s been reported that the Cardinal didn’t so much resign,
but was pushed. That much would be consistent with the response of the Vatican
to stories of a gay network in its midst. And therein lies one of the
fundamental problems with the hierarchy of the Catholic church, its secrecy. It
is the ultimate self serving powerful male elite, concerned to protect itself
at all costs. Political parties would do well to distinguish their response to
allegations of sexual harassment from such a charge.
Whatever the truth of the allegations that have been
levelled at the Cardinal, is it really surprising that they should surface in
an institutional culture so backward in relation to sex and sexuality? An
institution the establishment of which denies the right of its officials any
form of active sexual expression. And one that seeks to constrain the sexual
choices and behaviours of its lay members where women and gay people are the biggest
losers. Worst of all an institution the establishment of which would seek to
deny those most at risk and vulnerable, basic sexual health protection.
And is the fact that the Cardinal previously had a
reputation as more of a liberal on the issue of homosexuality something we
should bear in mind when considering his recent pronouncements? I’d say it is,
but not because I think that merits sympathy. If as some are suggesting his
outspoken views on issues of sexuality in the recent past are about currying
favour with the Vatican, quite the reverse.
And what of his recently expressed view that the celibacy of
priests is not a matter of ‘divine origin’? Of course he was right. But his
argument that it should be a ‘free world’ for priests would have provided
little comfort to those whose freedoms he and others in the church
establishment have sought to curtail and deny.
Cardinal O’Brien’s departure is a seismic moment in the life
of the Catholic church in Scotland for sure. But what does the future hold? And will any good come of it? Neither the cause nor the manner of his
departure leave much room for immediate optimism given what they remind us
about the church hierarchy.
I wouldn’t deny that many Catholics support some or all of the
church’s teachings on sex and sexuality. But it’s undoubtedly the case that
many Catholics in Scotland remain faithful despite, rather than because of, the
hierarchy and its stance. And there must be a glimmer of hope that in all the
noise their voices will at last start to be sought and heard. For as long as that hope remains, this
liberal Catholic is staying put, but not quietly.
No comments:
Post a Comment