QUOTE TO NOTE: Vatican Official on Civil Unions

Archbishop Vincent Paglia, the head of the Vatican’s Pontifical Council on the Family, was recently interviewed by National Catholic Reporter’s  John Allen, who asked the prelate to clarify his recent statements which supported civil unions for lesbian and gay couples.  Though some commentators felt that Paglia had retracted his support,  his comments in the Allen interview indicate that he continues to back civil unions. Here’s the relevant excerpt:

“ALLEN: Speaking of private law, you recently created a small media frenzy by suggesting that nations could find “private law solutions” to protect the rights of unmarried couples, potentially including gays and lesbians. In some quarters, that was seen as softening the Vatican’s line on gay marriage at a time when bishops in various countries are trying to resist a push for it. Did you learn anything from that episode?

“PAGLIA: Yes, that I have to be more careful in how I talk about these things, and more aware that words can be derailed. You may think they’re going to take you to the station, but in reality they can carry you to the edge of a cliff! But to make clear to you what I actually meant at the time, I proposed what the church has maintained: it is a matter of [protecting] individual rights. Facing the explosion in various forms of living together today, I simply called on states to find solutions which help people and avoid abuses.”

–Francis DeBernardo, New Ways Ministry

‘Known Lesbian’ Reaches Out to Cardinal Without LGBT Friends

In mid-April, Bondings 2.0 reported on a South African cardinal who claimed to know of no LGBT individuals personally, and thus rejected any claims he could be homophobic. Now, a self-ascribed “known lesbian” has written to Cardinal Wilfrid Fox Napier to challenge his statements, and, in between, presents a novel argument for why Catholic prelates fight so fiercely to deny LGBT equality.

Melanie Judge’s piece was published in the Mail & Guardian, a leading African paper, under the title, “Hi, Cardinal Napier. I’m lesbian.” She begins by questioning the cardinal’s involvement on issues of sexuality if he knows of no LGBT individuals:

“For someone who doesn’t know any homosexuals, you’ve spent a considerable amount of time concerning yourself with the lives of lesbian and gay people – specifically our rights to equality and protection under the law.

“If you don’t know us, and then by implication there aren’t any of us in your church, it seems queer that you would assume such an active position in denying us our right to rights.”

Ms. Judge is not content to say that Napier is simply anti-gay.   Instead, she believes his staunch opposition to South African legislation that would legalize civil unions is merely an attempt to preserve his power, and the power of the Catholic Church, that

“…entrenches a version of social relations and human sexuality based on male supremacy, the subordination of women, and the abjection of homosexuality….Perhaps your investment in the lives of sinful others is driven by an interest in protecting that power and the ideology that props it up. If so, I can understand why you’d rail against gays, lesbians and women who challenge your ideology.”

She continues by shedding light on Napier’s attempt to make LGBT people invisible, which contradicts the Church’s call to acknowledge, welcome, and include LGBT people:

“As you would know, a powerful way to neutralise nonconforming people whose very existence challenges your church’s prescription for human interaction is to make them invisible. To deny the very existence of gay and lesbian people is to render them unknowable and unseeable. Excluding people in this way sends a message to lesbian and gay people in your church (many of whom I know and see, and I’m not even Catholic) that they will be not be acknowledged by your leadership. To deny recognition is to deny human dignity, a strategy at the heart of homophobia.”

Ms. Judge’s comments examine the desperate attempts by Catholic bishops to maintain their privilege in a society structured around heterosexual relationships and male dominance, adding the unique perspective of a South African to her critique of oppression:

“Sexuality and gender were heavily regulated and constrained under apartheid and colonialism. Women and queers ‘knew their place’ and ‘suffered’ quietly and invisibly. Now we see a burgeoning of sexual and gender diversity – it’s exciting stuff, Cardinal. It’s a sign of a plural and democratising society in which ­difference is no longer synonymous with dysfunction.

“Shunning difference and enforcing conformity is how the church has asserted its control over populations for centuries. But this unchecked grip on power has been slipping in the face of democratic pressures. I feel for you, Cardinal; it’s hard to compete with the divine prospect of freedom and equality…

“Queers and women are laying claim to the resources, recognition and representations of citizenship – both inside and outside the church. It’s the stuff of democracy and of human rights. Still, none so blind as those who will not see.”

Melanie Judge respectfully confronts Cardinal Napier for both the ignorance his statement contains and the the underlying causes driving his anti-LGBT efforts.

–Bob Shine, New Ways Ministry

Two More Cardinals on the Record Endorsing Civil Unions

The number of cardinals endorsing civil unions for lesbian and gay couples continues to grow.

Cardinal Christoph Schonborn

Thanks to QueeringTheChurch.com, we have this report from London’s The Tablet magazine:

“A leading cardinal has said that same-sex relationships should be respected and recognised in law amid signs of a change in church thinking on the subject.

“Cardinal Christoph Schönborn, the Archbishop of Vienna, made the remarks in a lecture at the National Gallery evening titled “Christianity: Alien Presence or Foundation of the West?” on Monday.

“ ‘There can be same-sex partnerships and they need respect, and even civil law protection. Yes, but please keep it away from the notion of marriage. Because the definition of marriage is the stable union between a man and a woman open to life,’ Cardinal Schönborn said.

“ ‘We should be clear about terms and respect the needs of people living in a partnership together. They deserve respect,’ he added.

“Two other cardinals, Colombian Ruben Salazar and Theodore McCarrick have recently suggested the Church should not oppose same-sex civil unions.”

Bondings 2.0 had already reported about Cardinal McCarrick’s comments.  You can read the blog post about them here.

Cardinal Ruben Salazar

We had not heard of Cardinal Salazar’s support for civil unions before this news, and a web search revealed that his comments were only minimally noted in the Spanish-language press. Colombia’s El Tiempo reports that his support for civil unions was stated in the context of declaring that the term “family” can only be used by heterosexually-headed households.  What follows is a translation from the original Spanish text:

“There can be no true marriage but between a man and a woman, and only on this basis can there be a real family,” said Salazar, President of the [Colombian]Episcopal Conference, who said that it is not a personal position but of vision of the universal Church, reflected also in the Constitution. . . .

” ‘The other unions have a right to exist; no one can ask them not to exist, but they should not try to equate themselves with the family.  They should not not assume the role of the family within the state, that’s where it starts to subvert the social order,’  Archbishop of Bogota also said and cautioned that these statements are not looking to attack the country’s gay community, much less violate their rights.”

Cardinal Salazar was elevated to the College of Cardinals by Pope Benedict XVI in November 2012, during the pope’s last consistory of naming cardinals.

Over the past year,  more and more cardinals and bishops have been speaking positively about either the need for civil unions or for greater respect for lesbian and gay couples.  A recent survey of many of these endorsements can be found here.

Cardinal Schonborn, who was often spoken of as a papal candidate,  made headlines last year when he reinstated an openly gay man to a parish council after the local pastor had removed him.

While it is disappointing that many of these church leaders  support civil unions out of a a desire to reserve marriage for only heterosexual couples, I think we need to keep this step forward in perspective.  We need to see it for what it is:  a step forward that was unthinkable a year ago.  More importantly, the fact this this strategy of supporting civil unions was also endorsed by Pope Francis when he was Cardinal Bergoglio in Argentina makes it even more possible that this strategy can develop.

Is hierarchical support for civil unions ideal?  No, especially not when it is a stopgap measure against marriage.  But none of us know how the Holy Spirit works, other than that even our imperfect ways can some times be used for good purposes.  Who knows what the Holy Spirit has in mind with this new trend?

–Francis DeBernardo, New Ways Ministry

Denver Catholic Charities Will Not Let Same-Gender Couples Adopt

If a civil unions bill becomes law this year in Colorado (and it looks likely that it will), the Archdiocese of Denver’s Catholic Charities has said that it will not place children available for adoption in families headed by same-sex couples.  9News.com reports the statements of two Catholic officials on the matter:

” ‘Our desire is to provide them [children] with a safe and stable environment,’ Tracy Murphy with Catholic Charities of Denver said.

“The debate begins when you examine what the Catholic church means by that.

” ‘The Catholic church understands the best foundation for a child’s life is to be in the home of a father and a mother that is going to raise them in a family environment that is a strong, healthy marriage,’ said Monsignor Tom Fryar, who serves as pastor for the Denver Cathedral.

“By dictionary definition, the church does discriminate when it comes to adoptions– not just against gays but also against single people.

“They only let married couples adopt. Even if the laws change, the church won’t.

” ‘We cannot,’ Fryar said. ‘It goes against our faith.’ “

Catholics who oppose the civil unions law are trying to get a “conscience clause,  which is explained by 9News.com’s  report:

“Last year’s bill contained the words: ‘This article shall not be interpreted to require a child placement agency to place a child for adoption with a couple that has entered into a civil union.’

“Supporters of civil unions begrudgingly included the clause last year, hoping it would help get the bill through the GOP-controlled House. Now that Democrats are in control, they are less inclined to accommodate religious organizations who opposed civil unions when the bill did have the clause.”

Putting the politics aside, it is amazing that Msgr. Fryar would say that adoption policy “goes against our faith.”  This is not a faith issue. Our faith does not say anything about what an ideal family would be for a particular child.  One need only look at Scripture, Catholic history, and the lives of the saints to know that there are many models of families and forms of childcare other than relying on a heterosexual standard.  Furthermore, the children and the parents involved may not necessarily be Catholic.

A Colorado lawmaker commented on the adoption controversy by making reference to segregation laws:

” ‘It sounds like, “we have our water fountains, and there are other water fountains for you,” ‘ Sen. Jessie Ulibarri (D-Commerce City) said.”

–Francis DeBernardo, New Ways Ministry

Italian Bishop States His Support for Civil Unions for Lesbian and Gay Couples

An Italian bishop has stated his support for civil unions, though not for marriage, for same-gender couples.

 

Bishop Giuseppe Fiorini Morosini

GayStarNews.com reported that Bishop Giuseppe Fiorini Morosini, of the Locri-Gerace diocese in Calabria (the southernmost part of Italy), has written a letter to his churches where he stated:

“same-sex couples should have their civil rights recognized.”

He also added:

“However, same-sex couples are not families. We can not give them the right to a regular marriage. . . .A marriage is a union between a man and a woman, but every couple should have civil rights.”

While this may not sound like earth-shaking news, it is interesting to note that over the past year, we have seen a small trend among some Catholic leaders (and conservative political leaders, too) to support civil unions as an alternative to marriage.

For example, the diocese of Manchester, New Hampshire, ended up supporting a bill in the state legislature which would have instituted civil unions as an alternative to marriage.  Similarly, Archbishop Vincent Nichols of Westminster (London), England stated his support for civl unions at the end of 2011.  In May of this year, Cardinal Rainer Maria Woelki of Berlin, Germany, said that he thought homosexual and heterosexual couples should be treated similarly by the church.

More importantly, Bishop Morosini’s comments differ markedly from an Archdiocese of Milan spokesperson who, in July, said that establishing a civil union registry in that Italian city would lead to polygamy.

No, the earth isn’t shaking because of Bishop Morosini’s comments, but taken in the context of these previous statements from other church leaders, I think we are witnessing the beginning of some kind of shift.

–Francis DeBernardo, New Ways Ministry

 

 

 

New Zealand Member of Parliament to Catholic Bishops: “Love is love”

In New Zealand, a gay Member of  Parliament has publicly chastised the members of his nation’s Catholic hierarchy because of their opposition to a proposed law to enact marriage equality.

Kevin Hague

Criticism of the bishops came from Kevin Hague, a Green Party MP, who was responding to a recent letter that the prelates wrote to members of Generation Y (people in their 20s), urging them to oppose marriage equality.

GayNZ.com reported the story which is based on a blog post that Hague wrote on Frogblog, the New Zealand Green Party’s blog.   The following are excerpts from that post:

“It’s not a surprise that the NZ Catholic Bishops have chosen to oppose Louisa Wall’s Bill for marriage equality. After all, they opposed Homosexual Law Reform, they opposed human rights protection on the grounds of sexual orientation and they opposed Civil Unions. I’m beginning to sense a theme.

“The Catholic Bishops Pastoral Letter  is addressed to “Kiwis of Generation Y” and is entitled ‘From the Beginning of Creation’. I won’t take apart the whole letter but believe it could charitably be described as confused. Essentially the Bishops assert that the Church should not be able to define marriage, but then proceed, as the Church, to tell not only Church-going Catholics but also (explicitly) the entirety of Generation Y what they should think about the issue and the Bill. They also assert that it is not for legislators to define marriage, saying instead that ‘civil law reflects and protects human nature’.

“I respond by saying that there is overwhelming evidence that ‘human nature’ is, in fact, a very broad spectrum, which includes homosexual and bisexual orientation. “

Hague points out that the bishops’ message to New Zealand’s young adults is likely to be falling on deaf ears:

“Overall, twice as many New Zealanders support this change as oppose it. But for Generation Y, to whom the Bishops’ letter was addressed, four times as many support as oppose it.”

Hague offers an alternative message that he wishes the bishops would have said:

“Even though the Church also apparently believes that:

‘Every sign of unjust discrimination in their [homosexual persons] regard should be avoided,’ (2258 in the official Catechism of the Catholic Church)

the New Zealand Bishops have nonetheless opposed every initiative proposed to reduce or eliminate discrimination. How refreshing it would have been if the Bishops had, instead, said ‘marriage is both a civil contract and, in the eyes of the church, a sacrament. It is our constant belief that the latter has to be between a man and a woman since the validity of sacramental marriage has to be established by consummation. However, over the years the idea of marriage as a civil contract has developed in many ways (the easy availability of divorce for example). Any opposition to gay marriage, therefore, should be debated on its civil merits without regard to the Church’s religious position which will not be directly affected: is it necessary for justice to all? Is it in any way damaging to the civil contract? We have in the past made clear that while the church disapproves of homosexuality, the individual homosexual must not be discriminated against in any way.’ ”

Hague’s final message to the bishops is a simple sentence:

“Love is love.”

Hague closes his blog post with a video of an Australian commercial which went viral earlier this year.  I’ll let the video speak for itself:

–Francis DeBernardo, New Ways Ministry

Archdiocese Claims Civil Union Registry Will Lead to Polygamy

The Archdiocese of Milan’s spokesperson on family issues has compared the city’s plan to establish a registry of civil unions, which would include same-gender couples,  to promoting polygamy.

According to London’s Independent newspaper, Alfonso Colzani, archdiocesan official, said:

Alfonso Calzani

” ‘”There’s the risk that giving equal status to families based on marriage with those founded on civil unions will legitimise polygamy.’

“This was, he said, because people in civil partnerships would be freer to have sexual relations with other people.

“He added: Introducing ‘a communal register of civil unions is an ineffective initiative – and maybe only a PR exercise. Instead it is the family that needs support in this time of hardship. The concept of marriage is a precise one and not to be confused with homosexual unions.’

“The Milan diocese, Italy’s biggest and richest, is headed by Cardinal Angelo Scola, who has strong links with Communion and Liberation, the ultra-conservative catholic political lobbying group. Cardinal Scola was selected for the post of Milan’s archbishop last year by Pope Benedict.”

Giuliano Pisapia

The initiative to register civil unions came from Milan’s mayor, Giuliano Pisapia, who wants to extend protections to heterosexual and same-gender couples:

“Although largely symbolic, Mr Pisapia said that his plan would provide some additional legal rights for cohabiting couples who were unable to marry.

” ‘The establishment of a register of civil unions is aimed at recognising and protecting the rights of many couples in Milan and the rest of the country, couples that have been waiting too long for legal recognition,’ he said.

“Mr Pisapia noted the key ruling earlier this year by the Supreme Court of Cassation that said same-sex couples had a ‘right to a family life’ – and by implication, the same benefits and rights as straight couples.”

Italy’s LGBT civil rights organization, Arcigay, was quick to repudiate the Milan archdiocese’s polygamy assertion:

“In a statement, Arcigay said opposition to simple civil unions shown by the church, right-wing newspapers and politicians across the political spectrum ‘showed an incredible concentration of homophobia and prejudice.’ “

–Francis DeBernardo, New Ways Ministry

N.H. Diocese Supports Civil Unions as a Way to Forestall Marriage Equality

The New Hampshire House last week voted down a bill (HB 437) that would have repealed the state’s marriage equality law, and you can read about the vote and the debate which preceded it in this Concord Monitor news story.

Not mentioned in the news story–and actually not mentioned in most of the coverage of this debate–is that New Hampshire’s Catholic diocese of Manchester, which opposed marriage equality, has come out in support of civil unions as a way to forestall marriage.  According to a PolicyMic.com article,

“Historically, Roman Catholic officials have opposed virtually every regulation, policy, and law proposed to protect LGBT people nationwide, including all proposals for civil unions. However, faced with the choice of either retaining New Hampshire’s full marriage law which was signed on 3 June 2009, or else repealing it and replacing it with civil unions instead, church officials decided – for the first time ever – to endorse civil unions for LGBT people.”

According to the statement on HB 437 found on the Diocese of Manchester’s website:

“The Diocese of Manchester consistently has opposed legislation that would establish civil unions. However, the proposed amendment to HB 437 falls into a category of legislation which the US Bishops have previously considered: bills in civil law which may not reflect the fullness of the Church’s teaching, but which nonetheless provide an “incremental improvement” in the current law and a “step toward full restoration of justice.” (USCCB, Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship, 32)”

To be clear, the Diocese does not see civil unions as an ideal to be achieved, but as a step toward making sure that full marriage rights are not granted to lesbian and gay couples.   Still, it is an interesting development that shows that the Catholic hierarchy can, if they want to, take a different position on the question of rights for lesbian and gay couple other than outright and total opposition to everything.

The Manchester Diocese’s policy’ decision comes just two weeks after the neighboring Diocese of Portland, Maine, said they would not take an active political role in that state’s upcoming referendum on marriage equality.  For links to stories on that decision, check out Bondings 2.0′s blog posts here and here and here.

Can these decisions be a sign of things to come from other bishops?  Is the hierarchy beginning to learn that opposition to marriage equality is not worth the time and investment?  Stay tuned.

–Francis DeBernardo, New Ways Ministry

 

 

The U.K.’s Marriage Equality Debate Heats Up

The Catholic debate about marriage equality has been heating up in the United Kingdom lately.  With proposals to legalize same-gender marriages in both England and Scotland, both sides in the debate have been issuing strong statements.

The BBC reports that on Sunday, March 11th,

“A letter written by the two archbishops representing London’s Roman Catholics – to be read in churches this weekend – alerts churchgoers to a potential future political fight to preserve traditional marriage.

“The letter – by Archbishop Vincent Nichols and Archbishop Peter Smith – tells Catholics that changing the nature of marriage would be a “profoundly radical step” which would reduce its effectiveness and significance. . . .

“The letter – to be read out in 2,500 churches this weekend – ends by telling Catholics they have a ‘duty to do all we can to ensure that the true meaning of marriage is not lost for future generations.’ “

Martin Pendergast

Martin Pendergast, a leader in Britain’s Catholic LGBT movement, offered a response to the letter in an essay published in The Guardian. Part of his argument against the archbishops’ letter rests on clear historical fact and part rests on an important distinction between marriage and civil unions:

“State and church have regularly redefined marriage and its structures over centuries due to changing cultural patterns, religious influences, and insights in social and human development. The structures of marriage are rooted not in biology or gender difference per se, but in relationality. If not so, those with clearly no potential for fertility could not enter a valid marriage. Faith communities have countenanced and rejected polygamous marriage, allowed nullity, divorce and remarriage, and the 20th-century Catholic church developed its earlier teaching that marriage was solely for procreation, declaring its purpose is twofold, including the mutual relationship of the couple.

“Yet I am not a supporter of same sex marriage for myself. Marriage essentially depends on the subjection of one person to another, even if it’s a mutual subjection, in the exchange of vows. So I don’t seek such status. Civil partnerships are based on equality, legally expressed in a joint signing of a contractual covenant, rather than through vows. This value of equality is what those of us in same-sex civil unions bring to the common good. For those of us who are people of faith, the sacramentality of such unions is what we strive to live out. Many parents, families, friends, and members of congregations have grasped this message even if, sadly, much religious leadership has not.”

In Scotland, Cardinal Keith O’Brien has been speaking out forcefully–and recklessly–against marriage equality in that nation.  Recently, he compared the legalizing marriage for lesbians and gays to legalizing slavery:

“Cardinal Keith O’Brien, the head of Catholics in Scotland, described gay marriage as a “grotesque subversion of a universally accepted human right” and said the Government’s plan to reform marriage laws was “madness”.

“In a stinging response to the Government’s assurances that no church would be compelled to conduct gay marriages, he wrote: ‘No government has the moral authority to dismantle the universally understood meaning of marriage.

” ‘Imagine for a moment that the Government had decided to legalise slavery but assured us that ‘no one will be forced to keep a slave’. Would such worthless assurances calm our fury? Would they justify dismantling a fundamental human right? Or would they simply amount to weasel words masking a great wrong?’ “

O’Brien’s grossly insensitive remarks prompted The Tablet, Britain’s leading Catholic publication, to publish three opinions from prominent Catholics, under the heading “Can Marriage Ever Change?“  Below are excerpts from each of them:

Timothy Radcliffe, OP

Timothy Radcliffe, OP, a former master of the Dominicans world-wide:

“Marriage is founded on the glorious fact of sexual difference and its potential fertility. Without this, there would be no life on this planet, no evolution, no human beings, no future. Marriage takes all sorts of forms, from the alliance of clans through bride exchange to modern romantic love. We have come to see that it implies the equal love and dignity of man and woman. But everywhere and always, it remains founded on the union in difference of male and female. Through ­ceremonies and sacrament this is given a deeper meaning, which for Christians includes the union of God and humanity in Christ.

“This is not to denigrate committed love of people of the same sex. This too should be cherished and supported, which is why church leaders are slowly coming to support same-sex civil unions. The God of love can be present in every true love. But “gay marriage” is impossible because it attempts to cut loose marriage from its grounding in our biological life. If we do that, we deny our humanity. It would be like trying to make a cheese soufflé without the cheese, or wine without grapes”

Martin Pendergast

Martin Pendergast(quoted at the beginning of this post), a founding member of the Cutting Edge Consortium:

“I believe Timothy Radcliffe risks idealising marriage too strongly, seeing it through his own dedicated prism of vowed celibacy. He states that “marriage is founded on the glorious fact of sexual difference and its potential fertility”. But the social and anthropological structures of marriage are rooted not in biology but in relationality. As the Hebrew Scriptures say: “It is not good for a person to be alone.” Also, what of those who clearly have no potential for fertility – are they to be prevented from marrying, limited to a version of civil unions?

“Faith communities have redefined marriage throughout their history, countenancing and rejecting polygamous marriage, allowing divorce and remarriage, and the Second Vatican Council stated that the ends of marriage are twofold, not solely based upon procreation. In medieval times the focus was so strongly on betrothal rites that marriage, in some places, was a rarity, since so few people could fulfil the social and economic requirements for a marriage to take place before the altar. And what of all those “sworn brotherhood” rites, adapted also to include same-sex female partners, identified by researchers such as Alan Bray and John Boswell?”

Tina Beattie

Professor Tina Beattie, director of the Digby Stuart Research Centre for Catholic Studies, University of Roehampton:

“If we want to understand the sacrament, we need to look to Christ and the Church, not to the abundant diversity of participation within that sacramental love that constitutes our bodily human relationships. I’ve been married for 37 years and I have four children, but the loving relationships of my gay friends have helped me to understand more deeply what marriage means as a partnership of equals. I hope that they in turn have been enriched by their married heterosexual friends, and have better understood what their love means within the sacramental love of Christ and the Church.

In these times of radical change in our understanding of sexuality and human dignity (especially the full and equal dignity of women in this life and not just in the life to come), maybe we heterosexuals need the marriages of our homosexual friends to help us to understand what marriage looks like when it’s not corrupted by traditions of domination and subordination.”

–Francis DeBernardo, New Ways Ministry

England’s Leading Catholic Archbishop Again Strikes a Moderate Note

Archbishop Vincent Nichols

Archbishop Vincent Nichols, the leader of the Catholic church in England and Wales, has made the news once again for offering a more moderate position on marriage rights for lesbian and gay couples, and issues related to the topic, than some of his more conservative religious colleagues.

Last week, in response to a speech at the Vatican by England’s Lady Warsi, a Conservative Party member in the British cabinet, in which she decried persecution of Christians by “militant secularism,” Nichols commented to The Guardian newspaper:

“”I personally don’t feel in the least bit persecuted. I don’t think Christians should use that word.”

These comments were made in the wake of a petition circulating the internet by Lord Carey, the former Anglican Archbishop of Canterbury, which denounces marriage for lesbians and gays.  The Guardian article notes that

“Catholics will be encouraged to sign the petition against gay marriage as individuals, but the church as a whole will not be part of Carey’s campaign. . .”

In a post entitled “Gay Marriage, and the English Catholic Church: More Sanity From Vincent Nichols” at QueeringTheChurch.com, blogger Terry Weldon notes:

“Archbishop Vincent Nichols has once again demonstrated sanity and moderation on the place of the Catholic Church in modern society. While there are many loud, outraged voices raised in complaint in the US and in the UK over alleged assaults on religious freedom and of perceived persecution of Christians, Nichols has correctly pointed out that what is happening is not the “persecution” of Christians, but an attempt to separate the legal and cultural life of the country from its Christian roots. He is saying in other words, that what is happening is a removal from the Church of its previously privileged position. This may be deplorable, unfortunate, or welcome – but does not amount to persecution, any more than the removal of apartheid in South Africa represented the persecution of Whites.”

The Guardian report notes a shift in favor of LGBT rights among English Catholics:

“The emergence of the Catholic church into the mainstream of national life has been accompanied by a change in character: the old working class Irish-based Catholicism has almost vanished, to be replaced by a much less traditional English middle class which largely rejects the Church’s teachings on birth control and homosexuality, while still treasuring it for its spiritual value.”

The hierarchy, led by Nichols, is also taking a more moderate approach to civil unions legislation than their counterparts in Scotland:

“The reasoned tone [of Nichols] seems a deliberate attempt to take the high ground in the national debate. The statements of the English Catholic bishops in favour of civil partnership (as an alternative to gay marriage) contrasts very noticeably with the grumbling anathemata issuing from the Scottish and Irish churches on the subject.”

A Tablet article highlights the different approach taken by the Scottish the the English/Welsh hierarchies on the issue of civil unions.  Back in December 2011, Bondings 2.0 reported on Nichols’ support and reasoning for civil unions.  You can access those two posts by clicking here and here.

While certainly not a progressive on these marriage issues, Nichols represents a moderating voice in the Church which at least holds open the possibility of discussion on these matters.  The Guardian notes that his perspective on issues of homosexuality are far more pastoral than many other prominent church leaders:

“When asked how to interpret the notorious Vatican description of homosexuality as ‘a tendency towards an objective moral evil’, Nichols gave me a carefully prepared talk on the roots of Catholic philosophy. ‘This is a philosophical construct,’ he said.

“It is all part of a careful balancing act between the demands of Catholic theology, and of conservative factions in the Vatican, and the reality of the English Roman Catholic Church, where several of the most prominent lay figures are either gay themselves, divorced, or married to divorced people. . . .

“In most countries, the Conservative wing of the Catholic church is more or less homophobic, but in England the Catholic Herald, which would be their paper, has been edited by an openly gay and partnered man (who died this month) and does not attack the bishops on that front. . . .

“Phrases like ‘abstract moral evil’, [Nichols] said, are not aimed at any individual. ‘One talks about objective moral evil, you might say today, that’s racism. No matter what’s intended or understood, that, objectively, is wrong. In a similar way, you can say, in every sphere of life there is objective moral evil.  But that does not imply subjective moral guilt.  That does not imply guilt on an individual.’ “

–Francis DeBernardo, New Ways Ministry