If you have ever bought a home, or looked for property for a business (or a church), you may have heard a realtor say this: “Location, location, location.” The Urban Dictionary defines this term as follows: “Phrase to remind people that the most determining factor in the price of a house is the location.”
Money isn’t the only thing that matters, of course.
Back in the 1980s, I began to realize that this location-times-three mantra was affecting many major religion-beat stories that I was covering, especially in Christian flocks that include folks called “bishops.” In so many cases, what happened in churches — even what was taught from pulpits — was shaped by what that congregation’s bishop encouraged, discouraged or even punished.
This basic equation loomed in the background during this week’s “Crossroads” podcast (CLICK HERE to tune that in), which focused on the stunning responses that Pope Francis offered to “dubia” (Latin for “doubts”) documents from five doctrinally conservative cardinals.
Did he or did he not signal his support for same-sex blessing rites (or sort-of rites) in Catholic parishes around the world? Well, this pope is a Jesuit, which means that he declined to give a “yes” or “no” answer. But what he seemed to say was this: There are Catholic clergy who can find ways to show “pastoral charity” to LGBTQ+ Catholics and, if this is OK with their local bishops, they can proceed with blessing gay couples (since that is what many of them are already doing).
Now, this is long and quite Jesuit (the adjective form of the word). But readers need to see all of this to understand what may or may not be showing up in the news that they read. Francis proclaimed:
a) The Church has a very clear conception of marriage: an exclusive, stable, and indissoluble union between a man and a woman, naturally open to the begetting of children. It calls this union “marriage.” Other forms of union only realize it “in a partial and analogous way” (Amoris Laetitia, 292), and so they cannot be strictly called “marriage.”
b) It is not a mere question of names, but the reality that we call marriage has a unique essential constitution that demands an exclusive name, not applicable to other realities. It is undoubtedly much more than a mere “ideal.“
c) For this reason the Church avoids any kind of rite or sacramental that could contradict this conviction and give the impression that something that is not marriage is recognized as marriage.
d) In dealing with people, however, we must not lose the pastoral charity that must permeate all our decisions and attitudes. The defense of objective truth is not the only expression of this charity, which is also made up of kindness, patience, understanding, tenderness, and encouragement. Therefore, we cannot become judges who only deny, reject, exclude.
e) For this reason, pastoral prudence must adequately discern whether there are forms of blessing, requested by one or more persons, that do not transmit a mistaken conception of marriage. For when a blessing is requested, one is expressing a request for help from God, a plea for a better life, a trust in a Father who can help us to live better.
f) On the other hand, although there are situations that from an objective point of view are not morally acceptable, pastoral charity itself demands that we do not simply treat as “sinners“ other people whose guilt or responsibility may be due to their own fault or responsibility attenuated by various factors that influence subjective imputability (cf. St. John Paul II, Reconciliatio et Paenitentia, 17).
Whoa: “The defense of objective truth is not the only expression of this charity.”
Take that, Catholics who have their own bookmarked and annotated copies of Veritatis Splendor by St. Pope John Paul II. That was his career-defining defense of transcendent, absolute truths at the heart of Christian faith.
In a way, Pope Francis is now fleshing out his recent remarks to Jesuits in Lisbon. The big quote there:
… Our understanding of the human person changes with time, and our consciousness also deepens. The other sciences and their evolution also help the Church in this growth in understanding. The view of Church doctrine as monolithic is erroneous.
Will changes unfold everywhere, all at once? Of course not.
However, it would appear that — when it comes to Catholic pastoral care and church life — what matters these days is this: “Location, location, location.”
Thus, Germany is not America. Also, in terms of “pastoral charity” in parts of America, it’s safe to say that San Diego is not Los Angeles, Newark is not Denver and Chicago is definitely not Tyler, Texas. Oh, and Catholic bishops who favor “pastoral charity” frequently get to wear red hats.
The lives of Catholics are already affected by these dynamics, of course, especially if they love smells, bells, Latin, ancient chants and the Catholic Catechism. Some Catholics are, at the moment, happy in their “location, location, location” sanctuaries. Others are not. What will happen in the future to the leaders of Catholic schools, hospitals and other nonprofit ministries? What doctrines define their work?
OK, back to real estate. Long ago, I wrote a piece — “Location, location, location” — for an Anglican publication edited by religion-beat veteran Doug LeBlanc, who would later be the co-founder of GetReligion. The thesis?
When push comes to shove, almost everything depends on location, location, location, location. How someone views the state and the future of the Church usually depends on the Zip Code in which an Episcopalian's kneeler is located.
Now, what readers need to do — mentally, when reading this Episcopalian-centric flashback — is substitute the word “Catholics” in place of “Episcopalians.”
This is long, but I predict that Catholic readers will get the Big Idea in this old essay:
Episcopalian No. 1 lives in the Southwest. His bishop supports evangelical causes and can quote chapter and verse from recent papal encyclicals. The diocese has taken a strong stand in defense of traditional Christian teachings on the sacrament of marriage and has proclaimed that salvation is found through Jesus Christ, alone.
Episcopalian No. 2 lives out West. Her vestry has told the diocese that it will do everything it can to defend the catholic faith and biblical morality. The diocesan bishop — flying in "stealth" mode — has managed to keep from taking a stand. At this point, the bishop is being fair to churches on both the left and right.
Episcopalian No. 3 loves his parish. However, it is located in a Midwestern diocese that strongly supports the national church hierarchy. … The bishop has, privately, told this priest that his parish will have to start opening its checkbook or be demoted to mission status. The priest has called the Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese.
Episcopalian No. 4 is active in her Old South parish, but shuddered when her children came home from a youth group meeting talking about Gaia theory and environmental spirituality. Then the parish formed an Integrity chapter. Whenever she and her husband talk to the rector, they hear that their views matter — but nothing ever happens.
Remember, edit in “Catholic” where needed.
Liberal Catholics living in conservative dioceses will be able to identify with all of this, but they also will that — while the doctrines of the church have not changed, at this point — the “pastoral rules” have changed and, eventually, there is a good chance that Rome will provide them with a bishop committed to “pastoral charity” on the issues that matter to them.
Catholic conservatives already understand all of this. Some are happy where they are, for now. Others are becoming openly distressed.
In conclusion, let me underline the basic point — it’s a journalism question about accurate language — I made in the recent post, “Journalists need to ask: Are emerging Catholic synod fights about 'ideology' or 'doctrine'?”
When pondering that question, I think that readers will find that some of the language used this week at The New York Times is instructive. See this story: “Conservative Catholics, Relegated to Sidelines, Denounce Papal Gathering.”
Sitting under the bright house lights of a theater near the Vatican, Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke, the de facto leader of the Roman Catholic Church’s opposition to Pope Francis, displayed a theatrical sense of timing … for the adoring conservatives in the red velvet seats.
The day before, Cardinal Burke and other traditionalist prelates made public an exchange of letters with Francis in which they aired grave doubts about the legitimacy of a major assembly of the world’s bishops and laypeople that will, on Wednesday, begin discussing some of the most sensitive topics in the church.
In their letters, they urged Francis to slam the door shut on proposals that they believe would erode the doctrine of the church, including the blessing of same-sex unions.
Instead, Francis cracked the door open. In his response, he seemed to reverse a 2021 Vatican ruling that came down hard against the blessing of gay unions. While the pope clearly upheld the church position that marriage could exist only between a man and a woman, he said that priests should exercise “pastoral charity” when it came to requests for blessings.
In other words, it is paranoid conservatives who believe that these debates are about doctrine.
But later, there is this interesting quotation from the Catholic left:
“I can understand why someone like Cardinal Burke is worried,” Francis DeBernardo, executive director of New Ways Ministry, an organization of L.G.B.T. Catholics, said about the pope’s remarks on the blessing of same-sex unions. “Because this will have a tremendous effect on pastoral practice and church life.”
Mr. DeBernardo argued that instead of eroding doctrine, the pope’s view on blessing those unions was a development of it. Just as the legalization of same-sex marriage in the United States normalized the practice, he said, “when pastoral ministers encouraged by the pope start blessing same-gender couples, it is going to normalize same-gender relationships in church life.”
Ah, It appears that candid voices on the left also believe that doctrines are in play. Thus, reporters will need to dig into the headed Catholic debates — for decades — about the precise meaning of the term “development of doctrine.”
For more candid talk on that, see this New Ways Ministry feature about synod goals: “Can Church Teaching Change? LGBTQ+ Advocates Say Yes.”
Also, remember these 2022 words from the pope’s “relator general” who is guiding the rhetoric of the synod, Cardinal Jean-Claude Hollerich of, well, the European Union.
The Church's positions on homosexual relationships as sinful are wrong," said Cardinal Jean-Claude Hollerich of Luxembourg, in a recent interview with KDA, a German Catholic news agency. "I believe that the sociological and scientific foundation of this doctrine is no longer correct. It is time for a fundamental revision of Church teaching, and the way in which Pope Francis has spoken of homosexuality could lead to a change in doctrine. …
Does this view of doctrine affect church life in pews and at altars in this cardinal’s region?
"In our archdiocese, in Luxembourg, no one is fired for being homosexual, or divorced and remarried. I can't toss them out, they would become unemployed, and how can such a thing be Christian? As for homosexual priests, there are many of these, and it would be good if they could talk about this with their bishop without his condemning them."
In other words: “Location, location, location.”
Enjoy the podcast and, please, pass it along to others. You can also subscribe to “Crossroads” via Apple podcasts.
FIRST IMAGE: Uncredited photo, with a Crux feature, of the “skullcap, or zucchetto, worn by Pope Francis in 2014 is currently being auctioned by on-line European agency Catawiki.”