Jesus Queer Family: the household of Martha and Mary
This paper explores the idea of queer theory generally and queer theology specifically as a set of techniques for the radical deconstruction of all normative sexual identities and social categorisations. It is argued that these techniques resonate with the praxis of Jesus who was essentially crucified by the Jewish religious and Roman political authorities for his queerness in this sense, because in his life and teaching he subverted all the main institutional structures and taken-for-granted realities of his time in order to reveal the transcendent truth which ‘sets us free’. Since the Bible is witness to Christ as the Word it follows that it can and should thus be read as a queer-friendly text through the lens of the queer Saviour. Biblical exegesis should take account therefore not only of the multiple contexts of textual narratives but also the inescapable queerness of the worldview which their authors took for granted.Continue reading The Queer Christ: Same Sex Desire and Biblical Exegesis (Keith Sharpe)→
Wir sehen Sexualität als integrierte Größe: Zwei Menschen lieben sich, ihre Liebe wächst emotional, körperlich und in unserem Verständnis auch geistlich-religiös. Die größte Freiheit ist erreicht, wenn zwei Menschen sich entscheiden, gemeinsam durchs Leben zu gehen, auch durch Krisen und Krankheit. Diese ganzheitliche Sicht halte ich für einen hohen Wert. Doch kaum jemand kennt diese Begründung, auch Christen nicht. Die Alternative wäre, Sexualität von Bindung zu trennen. Das finde ich nicht richtig.
Sie sprechen vom Ideal. Was ist, wenn es nicht funktioniert?
Das ist eine dramatische Frage. Wir müssen als Kirche sicherlich noch viel dazulernen, was den Umgang mit Brüchen, Unvollkommenheit und Schuld angeht.
Die Kirche muss viel dazulernen beim Umgang mit Brüchen
Warum schließt die Kirche Homosexuelle per se von ihrer ganzheitlichen Sicht aus?
Zu unserem Verständnis von gelungener Sexualität gehört die Weitergabe von Leben. Bei homosexuellen Menschen ist das ausgeschlossen. Damit ist die Sexualität aus unserer Sicht beschränkt. Das schränkt aber die Wertschätzung für diese Menschen in keiner Weise ein, so sehe ich das zumindest. So wie der Mensch ist, ist er erstmal gut. Als ich in Köln das Seelsorge-Amt geleitet habe, habe ich mich regelmäßig mit einer Gruppe schwuler Männer getroffen. Viele aus der Gruppe sind mittlerweile alt und stehen selbstverständlich zueinander, über Krankheiten, Schlaganfälle hinweg. Da ist nichts mehr mit erotischer Leichtigkeit. Aber das ist eh ein Klischee.
Das ist nicht hilfreich. Es zementiert die Debatte.
In der katholischen Kirche bekommen Schwule und Lesben nicht mal einen Segen. Was spricht dagegen?
Wir haben Sorge, dass das mit Trauung verwechselt wird. Homosexuelle sagen: Unsre Beziehung ist anders als die von Paaren mit Kindern. Die Frage ist: Wie können wir differenzierte Wirklichkeiten ansprechen, ohne zu diskriminieren?
Solange die Kirche die Ehe so hoch hängt, fühlen sich die Ausgeschlossenen automatisch abgewertet.
Na ja, das Höchste ist die Ehe in der katholischen Kirche auch nicht.
Wie jetzt?
Jesus hat die Menschen aufgefordert, Ehe und Familie zurückzulassen und sich in die neue, größere Glaubensfamilie einzufügen. Auch wir zölibatär lebenden Priester fallen aus der Ehe raus. Ich würde das nicht in diese Wertigkeit reinbringen. Aber so lange sich jemand abgewertet fühlt, haben wir ein Problem.
Sie fahren im Oktober nach Rom zur Familiensynode. Was erwarten Sie?
Ich hoffe, dass alle dort bereit sind zu lernen, auch von den Erfahrungen anderer Länder und Kulturen. Es wäre schlimm, wenn es nur darum ging, die eigene Überzeugung machtvoll durchzusetzen.
Im Moment stehen sich Reformwillige und Bewahrer unnachgiebig gegenüber.
Ich hoffe, dass der Heilige Geist da Bewegung hineinbringt! Es ist auch abzusehen, dass die Debatte mit dem Ende der Synode am 26. Oktober nicht abgeschlossen sein wird.
Halten Sie eine dritte Synode für möglich?
Es würde der Sache gut tun. Das Thema Ehe und Familie ist nicht in Begriffe und Definitionen zu fassen, weil es um Beziehungen geht, das ist etwas Dynamisches. Es wird immer Menschen geben, die von festen Ordnungen nicht erfasst werden.
Der Fokus in der Bildung ist zu sehr auf die Verwertbarkeit des Wissens ausgerichtet
Was spricht dann dagegen, die bestehende Ordnung zu lockern? Etwa beim Umgang mit Menschen in zweiter Ehe? Die sind von den Sakramenten ausgeschlossen.
Am Eheverständnis will kaum jemand in der Kirche rütteln. Aber das ist ja vielleicht auch keine Frage der Ehe, sondern der Eucharistie. Auf den Punkt gebracht: Kann es menschliche Situationen geben, in denen jemand, der Schuld auf sich geladen hat, über alle Ordnung hinaus zur Eucharistie zugelassen wird? Würde Gott auf jeden Fall sagen: Der darf in der Eucharistie nicht zu mir kommen? Verkünden wir als Kirche etwas, was Gott so nicht sagen würde? Kommt Gott vielleicht gerade in dem, der gescheitert ist, auf uns zu?
Wird sich Franziskus bei der Synode durchsetzen? Manche meinen, davon hänge das ganze Pontifikat ab.
Diese Überhöhung ist das beste Mittel, um die Synode zum Scheitern zu bringen. Ich möchte nicht wissen, wie viele Kommentare von links wie rechts schon in den Schubladen liegen nach dem Motto: „Die haben die Wahrheit verkauft“ oder auf der anderen Seite: „Die haben die Menschen vergessen“. Das macht mir große Sorgen, denn wir werden auch am Tag danach miteinander umgehen müssen.
Ihr Vorgänger hat im sozialen Brennpunkt in Wedding gewohnt. Sie ziehen nach Lichterfelde. Warum?
Das hat sich so ergeben. Ich ziehe in ein Pfarrhaus, das gerade in Wohnungen umgewandelt wird. Ich habe da drei Zimmer, Küche, Bad. Da kann ich in der Gemeinde mitleben und bin irgendwo zuhause in dieser großen Stadt. Noch schöner wäre eine zentralere Lage, damit ab und zu mal jemand vorbei kommt und klingelt. Das wird da draußen wohl nicht passieren.
Wer weiß. Vielleicht wird das ein neuer Pilgerort?
Jetzt sagen Sie nicht, ich bin eine Reliquie!
Erzbischof mit Faible für den Osten
Heiner Koch, 61, ist ein aufgeschlossener Rheinländer mit Sinn für Humor. Er stammt aus Düsseldorf, studierte Theologie, Philosophie und Erziehungswissenschaften und begann als Jugend- und Studentenpfarrer in Köln. Das Engagement für Jugendliche, für Frauen und Familien setzte er auch als Leiter des Seelsogeamtes im Kölner Erzbistum fort, als Generalvikar und als Kölner Weihbischof. 2005 verantwortete er den Weltjugendtag in Köln. In der Bischofskonferenz ist er für das Thema Familie zuständig und fährt im Oktober nach Rom, wo die Bischöfe aus der ganzen Welt über Familie und Ehe beraten.
2013 schickte ihn Papst Franziskus als Bischof nach Dresden-Meißen. Dort habe er Bescheidenheit gelernt, sagt er, was er für eine sehr wichtige Tugend hält, gerade auch für die Kirche. Am morgigen Sonnabend um 11 Uhr wird er in St. Hedwig in sein Amt als Berliner Erzbischof eingeführt. Er zieht in ein Pfarrhaus in Lichterfelde, wo er in der Gemeinde mitleben könne, was er gut findet. Eine zentralere Lage wäre ihm noch lieber, „damit ab und zu mal jemand vorbei kommt und klingelt“.
“The crisis of the family is due also to the inaction of the Church” that is increasingly called to “listen” and “accompany”, to “include” rather than “exclude”, to offer the right tools so that everyone can discover, live and witness to “the incomparable beauty of marriage.” Because the family “is not just a cluster of problems”, but it is especially the Gospel, that is good, good news to announce. On the very eve of the Ordinary Synod of Bishops dedicated to the vocation and mission of the family, the Cardinal Secretary General Lorenzo Baldisseri is clear. Speaking Tuesday afternoon, 15 September, at the pastoral conference of the Diocese of Sessa Aurunca, he summarized the course of the synod from the extraordinary assembly last year and highlighted key issues and expectations related to the work that the nearly three hundred global bishops will conduct for three weeks from Oct. 4.
First, the cardinal revealed the “challenges and fragility of the family in today’s context.” To be able to announce to the world the beauty of the family, in fact, it must shed light on the shadows that, unfortunately, exist in an era in which a pervasive anti-family mentality is spreading, touted as a way of emancipation. Three challenges are particularly serious and urgent: that of ”individualism and emotional fragility”, that of “lack of faith” and the challenge “of economic insecurity and social exclusion.” Without forgetting, added the cardinal, the “ecological crisis” that is also “human”.
In the face of all this – and the synod will be called to give “authoritative and shared” answers – the Church must first of all discover “the art of ‘accompanying’: involving engaged couples, families already established and those that are “wounded”, living, that is, in “irregular” situations. “Without ceasing – said the secretary general of the synod – to proclaim the truth: the Christian doctrine on marriage unique, faithful and indissoluble,” the Church must “discern between different situations” and “include” rather than “exclude.” The entire Church – not just the hierarchy, but the entire people of God – must present itself as “a mother with arms open to all”
Rilanciata dal cardinale Baldisseri a Sessa Aurunca
L’arte dell’accompagnamento
«La crisi della famiglia è dovuta anche alla latitanza della Chiesa» che è chiamata sempre più ad «ascoltare» e «accompagnare», «includere» piuttosto che «escludere», offrire i giusti strumenti affinché tutti possano riscoprire, vivere e testimoniare «la bellezza incomparabile del matrimonio». Perché la famiglia «non è solo un agglomerato di problemi», ma è soprattutto Vangelo, cioè una buona e bella notizia da annunciare. Nell’immediata vigilia del Sinodo ordinario dei vescovi dedicato alla vocazione e alla missione della famiglia, il cardinale segretario generale Lorenzo Baldisseri parla chiaro. Intervenuto martedì pomeriggio, 15 settembre, al convegno pastorale della diocesi di Sessa Aurunca, ha tracciato una sintesi del percorso sinodale fin qui percorso a partire dall’assemblea straordinaria dello scorso anno e ha evidenziato temi e aspettative relativi al lavoro che i quasi trecento vescovi di tutto il mondo porteranno avanti a partire dal 4 ottobre per tre settimane.
Innanzitutto il porporato ha fatto emergere «sfide e fragilità della famiglia nel contesto odierno». Per poter annunciare al mondo la bellezza della famiglia, infatti, bisogna gettare luce sulle ombre che, purtroppo, non mancano in un’epoca in cui «si diffonde con pervasività una mentalità “anti-famiglia”, propagandata come via di emancipazione». Tre le sfide particolarmente gravi e urgenti: quella dell’«individualismo e della fragilità affettiva», quella della «mancanza di fede», e la sfida «della precarietà economica e dell’esclusione sociale». Senza dimenticare, ha aggiunto il porporato, la «crisi ecologica» che è anche «umana».
Di fronte a tutto ciò — e il sinodo sarà chiamato a dare risposte «autorevoli e condivise» — la Chiesa deve anzitutto riscoprire «l’arte dell’accompagnamento»: che coinvolga i fidanzati, le famiglie già costituite e quelle «ferite», che vivono, cioè, situazioni «irregolari». «Senza rinunciare — ha spiegato il segretario generale del sinodo — a proclamare secondo verità la dottrina cristiana sul matrimonio unico, fedele e indissolubile», la Chiesa deve «discernere tra le diverse situazioni» e «includere» piuttosto che «escludere». Al mondo intero la Chiesa — non solo le gerarchie, ma l’intero popolo di Dio — deve mostrarsi come «madre dalle braccia aperte per tutti»
In early October, the Bishop of Osnabrück, Franz-Josef Bode, will take part in the global synod of bishops on the subject of family in Rome.In an interview with the Catholic news agency KNA, he commented on his expectations for this meeting.
KNA:. Bishop Bode, what kind of atmosphere do you expect at the Synod of Bishops?
Bode: There will be a special atmosphere.Because there was already a preparatory synod last year.And because for the first time there have been surveys among the faithful about the issues on the agenda.In this way, opinions and trends have evolved.Therefore, this Synod is eagerly awaited.This is also true for myself
KNA: A major topic will be those who divorced and remarried.You yourself have advocated allowing those affected back to receiving Holy Communion, under certain conditions.Which?
Bode: Marriage is indissoluble according to the will of Jesus.Marriage is entered into with a sacrament, which is never just dissolved.Through the weakness of humans this life relationship can nonetheless break up and fail.People can come to a new relationship, which is more mature, but does not have the same sacramental value as the first.The question is, whether this new reality, which perhaps expresses the covenant between God and humans better than the first, must always have the consequence of exclusion from confession and communion.We should include the question, what circumstances have led to the breakdown of the marriage.Sofar we have treated all alike, whether they bear the blame or not.Moreover, this is connected to a question of the understanding of the Eucharistic celebration.Is it really only the representation of a complete unity in faith and the Church, or is it also a help for journies through life which have their wounds?And that people can’t express that in Confession and receive forgiveness for it, I find that almost more difficult than the question about Communion.
KNA: A big issue will be the dealings with homosexuals and a religious recognition of their stable partnerships.Is there any indication of a solution for that?
Bode: The Catechism makes clear that we do not discriminate against these people.As with others who live together before marriage, so also with them we should recognize their strengths and not only their weaknesses and shortcomings.But civil unions are not to be equated with marriage.Marriage for us is the relationship of husband and wife, from which can come children.The Church can help and assist life partnerships in conversations and in positive companionship.However, it is not possible to give anything which is tantamount to marriage.But we will be able to accompany their path with prayer and a private form of blessing.
KNA: Where people live in fidelity and dependability, can there be recognition from the Church?
Bode: Recognition of what is lived there.It is not a sacrament.But if I am open in principle not to always demand either all or nothing, then the same is true for homosexuality.Where that is also of course dependent.on cultural and political contextsEven the last Synod highlighted the differences in the universal Church.Perhaps we need therefore to go different ways
KNA:. What opportunities do you see for uniform solutions for the Catholic Church worldwide?
Bode: There is always a chance, because we mutually believe in one Christ, because the basis is the Scripture and because we have a tradition of the Church as a whole.Indeed that was always the advantage of the Church, that it builds a community irrespective of borders and across cultures.But in the fundamental concept of marriage and family there is unanimity.Regarding the homosexual way of life, we must accept a greater diversity between cultures.
KNA: What will change about pastoral care after the synod?
A synod is not a Council, that takes decisions which are then pastorally implementrd.The Synod gives recommendations to the Pope, who then prepares written directions from them.Therein, he can of course also set new pastoral priorities.In our recommendations we can keep the doors open for local.pastoral solutionsIt is conceivable to give the priests their own authority, so that in the Pastoral they can take responsibility for finding solutions in respect of those divorced and remarried.For many years already there have been suggestions in the dioceses on how pastors should deal with it.I hope that this can be done in a theologically well- founded manner.We have almost always looked only at what the dogma says of pastoral , but rarely what the pastoral says of dogma .With that,
there’s a dialogue, an innermost connection
KNA: Conservative and reform-minded bishops get together in Rome.Are they really outspoken behind closed doors?
Bode: I hope for a climate in which the different positions can be expressed openly.And in fact, not just in the three minute statements at the beginning of the synod, but also among themselves in small groups.That must occur in a really matter-of-fact manner.For this, elements of prayer, balancing, retreating and meeting again are important.Most of all, it needs time.I do not know how far we will come in three weeks.
KNA: How important is the participation of the non-clergy?
Bode: We cannot indeed as clergy and men discuss by ourselves family issues.It is absolutely necessary that married couples are involved.In addition, very honest statements are flowing in from the surveys.Furthermore, the bishops spoke beforehand with advisers and married couples, especially with women.
KNA: How important is your own family to you as a man living a celibate life?
Bode: I have four older sisters.All four sisters and two children have married.And they already have now eight children in turn.As an uncle and grand uncle, I am well aware of completely normal family life.Unfortunately, two of my sisters have already passed away, so that I am also acquainted with this situation of serious illness and widowhood.In my circle of friends, I have friends whose marriages have failed and have made a good new beginning.In addition, I meet regularly with the six married couples of a family circle from the parish in which I was the pastor.I am very involved with my family.
Der Osnabrücker Bischof Franz-Josef Bode nimmt Anfang Oktober an der Weltbischofssynode in Rom zum Thema Familie teil. Im Interview der Katholischen Nachrichten-Agentur äußerte er sich über seine Erwartungen an dieses Treffen.
KNA: Bischof Bode, was erwarten Sie atmosphärisch von der Bischofssynode?
Bode: Es wird eine besondere Atmosphäre sein. Weil zur Vorbereitung im vergangenen Jahr bereits eine Synode stattfand. Und weil es erstmals Umfragen unter den Gläubigen zu den anstehenden Themen gegeben hat. Dadurch haben sich Meinungen und Richtungen herausgebildet. Deshalb wird diese Synode mit Spannung erwartet. Das gilt auch für mich selbst.
KNA: Ein großes Thema sollen die wiederverheirateten Geschiedenen sein. Sie selbst haben sich dafür ausgesprochen, Betroffene unter bestimmten Bedingungen wieder zum Kommunionempfang zuzulassen. Welche?
Bode: Die Ehe ist nach dem Willen Jesu unauflöslich. Mit einer sakramentalen Ehe ist etwas geschlossen, was sich niemals einfach auflöst. Durch die Schwäche der Menschen kann diese Lebensbeziehung dennoch zerbrechen und scheitern. Menschen können zu einer neuen Beziehung kommen, die reifer ist, aber sakramental nicht die gleiche Wertigkeit hat wie die erste. Die Frage ist, ob diese neue Wirklichkeit, die vielleicht besser dem Bund Gottes mit den Menschen entspricht als die erste, immer den Ausschluss von Beichte und Kommunion zur Folge haben muss. Wir sollten die Frage einbeziehen, welche Umstände zum Bruch der Ehe geführt haben. Bislang behandeln wir alle gleich, ob jemand Schuld trägt oder nicht. Zudem verbindet sich damit eine Frage nach dem Verständnis der Eucharistiefeier. Ist sie wirklich ausschließlich die Darstellung einer vollkommenen Einheit in Glaube und Kirche oder ist sie auch Hilfe für Lebenswege, die ihre Wunden haben? Und dass Menschen das nicht in der Beichte ausdrücken und Vergebung dafür erlangen können, finde ich fast noch schwieriger als die Frage nach der Kommunion.
KNA: Großes Thema wird auch der Umgang mit Homosexuellen und eine kirchliche Wertschätzung ihrer festen Partnerschaften sein. Zeichnet sich dafür eine Lösung ab?
Bode: Der Katechismus macht deutlich, dass wir diese Menschen nicht diskriminieren. Wie bei anderen, die vor der Ehe zusammenleben, geht es auch bei ihnen darum, ihre Stärken zu erkennen und nicht nur ihre Schwächen und Defizite. Eingetragene Lebenspartnerschaften sind aber nicht der Ehe gleichzusetzen. Ehe ist für uns die Beziehung von Mann und Frau, aus der auch Kinder hervorgehen können. Kirche kann den Lebenspartnerschaften in Gesprächen und in positiver Begleitung helfen und ihnen beistehen. Es wird jedoch nichts geben können, was einer Trauung gleichkommt. Aber mit Gebet und einer privaten Form von Segen wird man ihren Weg begleiten können.
KNA: Wo Treue und Verlässlichkeit gelebt werden, kann es eine Anerkennung von der Kirche geben?
Bode: Anerkennung dessen, was da gelebt wird. Ein Sakrament ist das nicht. Aber wenn ich grundsätzlich die Offenheit habe, nicht immer nur alles oder nichts einzufordern, dann gilt das auch für die Homosexualität. Wobei das natürlich auch abhängig ist von kulturellen und politischen Zusammenhängen. Schon die vergangene Synode hat die Unterschiede in der Weltkirche aufgezeigt. Vielleicht muss man da unterschiedliche Wege gehen.
KNA: Welche Chancen sehen Sie für einheitliche Lösungen in der katholischen Kirche weltweit?
Bode: Die Chance gibt es immer, weil wir gemeinsam an den einen Christus glauben, weil die Grundlage die Heiligen Schrift ist und weil wir eine Tradition der Kirche insgesamt haben. Das war ja immer der Vorteil der Kirche, dass sie über Grenzen hinweg, über die Kulturen hinaus eine Gemeinschaft bildet. In der grundgelegten Auffassung von Ehe und Familie herrscht doch Einmütigkeit. Bei den homosexuellen Lebensformen wird man eine größere Verschiedenheit in den Kulturen annehmen müssen.
KNA: Was wird sich in der Seelsorge nach der Synode ändern?
Bode: Eine Synode ist kein Konzil, das Beschlüsse verabschiedet, die dann pastoral umzusetzen sind. Die Synode gibt Empfehlungen an den Papst, der daraus ein richtungweisendes Schreiben verfasst. Darin kann er natürlich auch neue pastorale Schwerpunkte setzen. In unseren Empfehlungen können wir die Türen offenhalten für pastorale Lösungen vor Ort. Denkbar ist, den Priestern eigene Vollmachten zu geben, damit sie in der Pastoral verantwortbare Lösungen finden können etwa mit Blick auf die wiederverheirateten Geschiedenen. Es gibt ja bereits seit Jahren in den Diözesen Anregungen, wie die Seelsorger damit umgehen sollten. Ich wünsche mir, dass das in einer theologisch noch begründeteren Weise geschehen kann. Wir haben fast immer nur im Blick, was die Dogmatik der Pastoral sagt, aber selten, was die Pastoral der Dogmatik sagt. Dabei ist das doch ein Dialog, eine innerste Verbindung.
KNA: In Rom treffen konservative und reformorientierte Bischöfe zusammen. Wird hinter verschlossenen Türen wirklich kein Blatt vor den Mund genommen?
Bode: Ich hoffe auf ein Klima, in dem die verschiedenen Positionen offen ausgesprochen werden können. Und zwar nicht nur in den Drei-Minuten-Statements zu Beginn der Synode, sondern auch in Kleingruppen untereinander. Das muss auf wirklich sachliche Art geschehen. Elemente des Gebets, des Abwägens, des Rückzugs und der erneuten Zusammenkunft sind dazu wichtig. Vor allem braucht es Zeit. Ich weiß nicht, wie weit wir in drei Wochen kommen.
KNA: Wie wichtig ist die Teilnahme von Nicht-Klerikern?
Bode: Wir können ja nicht als Kleriker und Männer allein die Fragen von Familien besprechen. Es ist absolut notwendig, dass Ehepaare dabei sind. Daneben fließen aus den Umfragen sehr ehrliche Statements ein. Zudem haben die Bischöfe im Vorfeld mit Beratern und Eheleuten gesprochen, speziell auch mit Frauen.
KNA: Wie wichtig ist Ihnen als zölibatär lebender Mann die eigene Familie?
Bode: Ich habe vier ältere Schwestern. Alle vier haben geheiratet und zwei Kinder. Und die haben jetzt schon wieder acht Kinder. Als Onkel und Großonkel bekomme ich das ganz normale Familienleben gut mit. Leider sind zwei meiner Schwestern schon verstorben, so dass ich auch diese Situation der schweren Krankheit und Witwenschaft kenne. In meinem Bekanntenkreis habe ich Freunde, deren Ehen gescheitert sind und die gute Neuanfänge gemacht haben. Auch treffe ich mich regelmäßig mit den sechs Ehepaaren eines Familienkreises aus der Gemeinde, in der ich Pfarrer war. Ich bin sehr eingebunden in meine Familie.
Forgive the personal reference, but the same experience is marked by your parents’ divorce …
Yes, I come from a family of divorced parents.My father remarried.My grandparents were already divorced.So I very soon got to know the patchwork situation.I practically grew up in this reality, which is the reality of life of many people today.But I also experienced the essential goodness of the family.Despite all crises, all ideologies that we must denounce and call clearly by name, despite all this, marriage and family are the basic cell of human life and society.
Cardinal Christoph Schoenborn addresses a news conference after a meeting in Vienna September 24, 2010. Senior Catholic officials have been holding talks with their Orthodox counterparts over the last few days in Vienna. REUTERS/Leonhard Foeger (AUSTRIA – Tags: RELIGION HEADSHOT)
I personally felt that in the Synod was a lack of two elements: attention to children and consideration of the family as a vast network of relationships (including grandparents, grandchildren, uncles and aunts …).It seems to me that the Synod has been had to present the nuclear family consisting of wife, husband and children, and has considered the situation from the point of view of the spouses.Do you not think that looking on from the point of view of the children and consider the families linkages that that they are able to create would allow evaluation of things differently, more completely?
Cardinal Christoph Schonborn of Vienna is both a senior cardinal of the Catholic Church, once thought to be a “papabile” at the last conclave, and a notable theologian. He was a student of Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, and later continued as a regular participant in the theological summer schools held by Pope Benedict XVI with his favoured former pupils.
Cardinal Christoph Schoenborn addresses a news conference after a meeting in Vienna September 24, 2010.
His views are worth taking seriously – and are often prescient. When he remarked, a few years ago, that it was high time that the Catholic Church stopped obsessing about gay genital acts, to focus instead on the quality of the relationships, and should consider the value of those previously divorced wanting to remarry, when so many others simply reject the entire institution of marriage, he seemed to be a lone voice in the wilderness. It was widely expected at the time that he would be quickly reprimanded. This did not happen. Instead, many other bishops began to speak along similar lines, which soon became mainstream, and have since become an important thread through the family synods, of 2014 and 2015.
In a notable extended interview with the Italian Jesuit magazine Civita Cattolica, he offered some insights into the synod process, on marriage and family, and on pastoral responses to those in “irregular” relationships.
The published internview is available only in Italian. I offer here my own free translation of the complete Italian texts, in three parts:
The Synod Process and “Doctrine”
Marriage and Family
Irregular Relationships
MARRIAGE AND PASTORAL CONVERSION: Interview with Cardinal Christoph Schonborn
(Antonio Spadaro SJ
During the extraordinary Synod on the family, which took place 5 to 19 October 2014, I was impressed with, among others, by the intervention of Cardinal Schönborn, Archbishop of Vienna. We had a discussion, after his speech in the classroom, during a dinner with a mutual friend. Then he told me about his experiences as a child of a family that has experienced the divorce. His lucidity was not a merely intellectual reflection, but was the result of experience. Strolling under the colonnade of St. Peter, he told me about the absence of grandparents and uncles from Synod speeches. The family, he said, is not only wife, husband and children, but is a wide network of contacts, including some friends and not only relatives. Any divorce affects a large network of relationships, not only on a couple’s life. But it is also true that the network can withstand the impact of the split and support the most vulnerable, the children, for example.
We did not end the conversation. We continued for two subsequent meetings, after a few months, at the headquarters of Civiltà Cattolica. Once with his friend and fellow Dominican Fr Jean Miguel Garrigues, who I also interviewed for our magazine (1). And the interview finally, continued in Vienna at the Kardinal KönigHaus.The following interview is the result of these meetings, which eventually took the form of a dialogue unit. I asked the Cardinal for a reflection closely tied to his experience as a pastor. And this pastoral inspiration that gives body and breath to his words.During the extraordinary Synod on the family, which took place 5 to 19 October 2014, I was impressed with, among others, by the intervention of Cardinal Schönborn, Archbishop of Vienna. We had a discussion, after his speech in the classroom, during a dinner with a mutual friend. Then he told me about his experiences as a child of a family that has experienced the divorce. His lucidity was not a merely intellectual reflection, but was the result of experience. Strolling under the colonnade of St. Peter, he told me about the absence of grandparents and uncles from Synod speeches. The family, he said, is not only wife, husband and children, but is a wide network of contacts, including some friends and not only relatives. Any divorce affects a large network of relationships, not only on a couple’s life. But it is also true that the network can withstand the impact of the split and support the most vulnerable, the children, for example).
Your Eminence, what was, in your view, the intention of the Extraordinary Synod of the family? There has been talk of family joy and challenges of the family.
When Francis became Pope, the theme for the next Synod had already been set by his predecessor, Pope Benedict: general issues of Christian anthropology and, above all, bioethical issues. During his first meeting with the Council of the Synod, Pope Francis observed that it would be difficult to address these issues outside of a framework of background on the family and marriage and, consequently, little by little the issue moved without neglecting the anthropological questions, but placing them in connection with this original anthropology that is the biblical teaching about man and woman, their marriage, their vocation and the great theme of marriage and the family.
But why take up a theme that St. John Paul II dealt with exhaustively in the course of the 27 years of his pontificate?
I think that Pope Francis wanted above all to encourage us – and he repeated it several times – to look at the beauty and the vital importance of marriage and Family with the gaze of the Good Shepherd who makes himself close to everyone. He set in motion this synodos, this common journey, in which we are all called to look at the situation, not with a look from above, from abstract ideas, but with the look of the shepherds who perceive the reality of today in an evangelical spirit. This view of family reality and marriage is not, first of all, a critical look that underlines every failure, but a benevolent one, seeing how much good will and how much effort are there, even amid so much suffering. After all, we are asked an act of faith: to approach, like Jesus, to diverse crowd without fear of being touched.
In the convocation of the Synod on the family by the Pontiff we can therefore read a desire for concreteness, closeness …
Yes, a desire to watch real people in the joys and sorrows, griefs and anxieties of their daily lives and bring them the Good News, and find that living the Gospel in the midst of many hardships, but also such generosity. We must break away from our books to go into the crowd and be touched by the lives ocf people. Look at them and know their situations, more or less unstable, since deep desire is inscribed in everyone’s heart. It is the Ignatian method: look for the presence and action of God in the smallest details of everyday life. We are still far from achieving this auspicious start made by Pope Francis. We have not reached this dimension in ecclesiastical discourse and in the discourse of the Synod. We speak too with a language made of vacuous concepts.
According to some, however, the aim should be eminently doctrinal; some even fear for the doctrine.
The challenge Pope Francis puts to us is to believe that, with the courage that comes from simple proximity, from the everyday reality of the people, we will not turn away from doctrine. We not risk diluting its clarity by walking alongside people, because we ourselves are called to walk in faith. Doctrine is not, in the first instance, a series of abstract statements, but the light of the word of God demonstrated by apostolic witness to the heart of the Church and in the hearts of believers who walk in the world today. The clarity of the light of faith and its doctrinal development in each person is not in contradiction with the way that God works with ourselves, that we are often far from living fully the Gospel.
So what are the challenges with which the ordinary Synod will have to deal?
We can identify several key points which would be detrimental not give proper weight. The first that comes to mind is to become aware of the social and historical dimension of marriage as a family. Too often we theologians and bishops, pastors and guardians of doctrine, forget that human life takes place in the conditions imposed by a society: psychological, social, economic, political, in a historical context. This has been lacking in the Synod. And the thing is amazing compared to the enormous changes that individual during the seventy years of my own life. How can we forget that throughout history marriage has not been accessible to everyone? During several centuries, perhaps millennia, marriage was not what the Bible tells us of man and woman. For a large number of people, marriage was simply not possible, because of the social conditions. Just think of the slaves. We think in many professions for which marriage was both economically inaccessible, it is excluded former professed. In the countryside, up to three generations ago, there were used, farmers who did not marry because they had the option of paying the dowry. In the nineteenth century baptismal records in Vienna, about half of the children were illegitimate children of the servants of the bourgeois houses that they could not marry because they did not have the means. Think of the situation, also present in poor countries. It left me a little shocked that at the Synod we speak very abstractly of marriage. Few of us have talked about the real conditions of young people who want to marry. We complain about the almost universal reality of de facto unions, many young and not so young who live together without getting married civilly and even less religiously; we are here to deplore this phenomenon, instead of asking, “What has changed in the conditions of life?”.
You are a pastor. You are the archbishop of Vienna. What happens today in Austria?
In Austria young people are living – and they are the vast majority – disadvantaged by the tax authorities, if they marry. Furthermore, their work situation is often precarious, and they hardly find a stable and lasting as happened to my generation. How can we want to build a house, start a family in these conditions? We find a social situation that was very common in the last century, when many were excluded from the good of marriage simply because of their situation. I’m not saying that what happens is good, but we need to have a careful and compassionate look at the reality . There’s plenty of finger-pointing on hedonism and individualism of our society. It is more difficult to observe these realities carefully.
I feel that his speech is marked by a faith in the ability of good people, despite everything.
We must bear witness to a deep trust in man, child of God, loved by God, and a deep trust in marriage and the family, the vital cell of society. I was very impressed to hear this positive thread from Pope Francis. For example, when during the Synod he reminded us: “But you do not talk about their grandparents.” And it is true: our speech is often so formal! How many times has he talked about his famous grandmother that so marked his life! He invites us to look with love and with a fund of trust at this reality of the family.
The opponents of gay same-sex marriage and of the “gay lifestyle” (whatever that is), like to claim that their opposition is rooted in traditional family values, “as found in the Bible.” This claim is so completely spurious, is is remarkable how seldom it is challenged. Just a little thought and reflection shows not only how the Gospel values have little to do with modern Western conceptions of the “traditional” family, but they are so far removed from it, that the real values espoused can certainly be described as certainly “queer”, if not quite as specifically gay. In reaching this conclusion, I have been reading and reflecting on the social context of the ‘family’ as experienced in Jewish society and the broader social environment, at Jesus’ own ‘family’ in childhood and maturity, at His actions, and at His words.
The Jewish Family.
It is important to recognise that traditional Jewish society did indeed place enormous importance on the idea of family, both in the narrow sense of the immediate biological family, and in the broader sense of the ethnic Jewish community. This was so important that on the one hand, everyone was expected to marry and produce l, and on the other, that those outside the narrow ethnic group were regarded as inferior, even unclean. The detailed dietary and other regulations well -known from the Old Testament were part of an elaborate legal structure to maintain the ‘purity’ of the Jewish nation. The Jewish family, however, was very different from our modern conception, deeply patriarchal, and with uneven treatment of men and women. Women were were expected to show rigorous sexual fidelity to their husbands, and were thought of as the ‘property’ of their men.
In the broader social environment, the Jewish state in Jesus’ day was under Roman military occupation. Like the Greek society of the time, the Romans too had a deeply patriarchal society, and one in which there was not the modern distinction between ‘homosexual’ and ‘heterosexual’ activities. Distinctions were drawn rather, on the social class of one’s sexual partners, and male citizens would routinely have sex not only with their wives, but also with other lovers, prostitutes and slaves of either gender.
Jesus’ Families.
My reflections on this theme were initially prompted by a posting on “Nihil Obstat” for the feast of the Holy Family, in which she pointed out how very atypical for the time was the Lord’s own childhood family, so often quoted as a model for all Catholic families.
But our childhood families are not the only ones we live with. More important as we grow older are those adult families we make for ourselves, usually by forming couples in marriage or out of it, and with or without children. As LGBT people we are also very conscious of how often we may remain single, but still form looser groups of friendship, who may in a real sense become our ‘families’ of a different sort.
So what were the adult ‘families’ that Jesus made for himself?
First, and famously, He did not marry. This alone is remarkable, given the expectation in Jewish society of marriage and procreation. So, what were His other relationships – what informal ‘families’ did He form? We get the answer to this easily enough by looking at the Last Supper. The Jewish Sabbath meal, and most especially that of Passover, are the occasions above all when Jewish people get together as families. It is significant then that the Lord spent his own Passover meal – which we know as the ‘Last Supper’, with the 12 apostles: these were the people we must take to represent His closest family. Who were these men? If they ever had wives and families of their own, they had been set aside to spend the rest of their lives with Jesus.
Think about it: on the most solemn holy day of the Jewish calendar, when it was customary for all Jewish people to share a ritual meal with their closest family, Jesus and the apostles spent the evening as a group of single men. Does this not sound remarkably like a modern group of urban gay men spending our equivalent family festivals sharing meals together, away from biological families?
Single people know, of course, that the concept of “family” can be fluid. In addition to our closest, most intimate circle, there are often others who might be very close, almost family, but not quite in our innermost circle. Who represented this ‘almost family’ circle to Jesus Christ? The most obvious candidates to me are the household of Mary, Martha and Lazarus, with whom He had an obviously close and special relationship. What was the nature of this household? Once again, very far from the expected “traditional” family. The two women are described as ‘sisters’ and come across to me as the stronger, more vividly drawn characters: Lazarus is famed more for his death and rescue from it, than for anything in his life. Even at face value, this is an unusual household: Jewish women would typically have been married off at an early age, not still living as adults with their brother. Where such households did exist, it would normally be the brother, as the only male, who would be expected to dominate the household and be the focus of attention. For a clearer understanding of the household, it is worth remembering that the word ‘sisters’ may have been used euphemistically: it is at least possible that Mary and Martha were a lesbian couple, living with a gay friend as lodger.
So: in His families of choice, the Lord spent His time either with a band of single men, or with a household of two single women (possibly a lesbian couple), and yet another unmarried man. Even in the broader social circle, I am not aware of any instance where He is reported as spending time with a a conventional married couple with children. Thus far, in examining the Lord in His own family context, we have found not an endorsement, but a repudiation, of the traditional family.
I still need to show that this repudiation of the traditional family is continued in His words and actions. That I will do later in a follow-up post.
Gay men in the modern Western world are accustomed to accusations a homoerotic orientation is seen as effeminate, sissyish. This is a complete myth, as is easily shown by the many counterexamples from the butch, bear and leather-oriented sub-groups that co-exist with the more camp and drag groups. The words “gay male” cover an astonishing degree of diversity. Still, stereotypes persist. Sometimes, though, they are not what we would expect.
In classical Greece and in Tokugawa Japan, same sex lovers were especially associated with courage and with military prowess. Elsewhere, the important virtues of “courage, proficiency in hunting, and the ability to dominate women” were so closely identified with masculinity that they were routinely passed on to young boys in the most direct way possible – by direct transfer from older males to younger in pure male essence – in semen, by anal or oral sexual intercourse.
“The homosexual practices are justified by the belief that a boy will not mature physically unless semen is implanted in his body by an adult. Valued male qualities, such as courage, proficiency in hunting, and the ability to dominate women, are transmitted in the same way. Repeated intercourse builds up a supply of the vital substance in the boy’s body.”
But, says Greenberg, intercourse with women is believed to be debilitating. While this pattern of childhood homosexuality is found in a minority of Guinean societies, where it was recorded, it was obligatory for all. From a remarkably early age (sometimes as young as seven, sometimes ten or twelve), boys learnt to accept the all-important semen from an older age group. As they matured, these boys in turn would pass on their own semen to those younger than they. Not until they were fully mature were they permitted intercourse with women – by which time, presumably they were strong enough to withstand the debilitating effects of the experience.
The semen was transmitted in different ways: sometimes by anal intercourse, sometimes orally – or even by insertion into special incisions in the skin. In these cases, the semen was obtained from the older men, following special ritual intercourse with women.
The practice of passing on of manly virtue or other skills by donating semen was not restricted to New Guinea, although it was most widely studied and recorded there. In some Australian aboriginal groups, such as the Bora of the Kimberley region, drinking semen formed a part of intitiation rites. In Brazil, apprentice healers learned their skills from older, experienced healers – and did so by “sexual communication”. In parts of northern Morocco, an important skill for young boys was the ability to learn the Koran, but they believed this was impossible until they had first been penetrated. The ability to learn the Koran was passed on to the new generation in the semen of their elders.
