Three choices on gay unions

Southern African Catholics who had the privilege of meeting Archbishop Manuel Monteiro de Castro, the apostolic nuncio in Pretoria from 1998 to 2000, will remember him as leaning towards a conservative outlook. His appointment from Pretoria to Madrid was a sign of the Holy See’s high regard for the Portuguese-born diplomat.

This background makes his remarks on homosexual unions all the more noteworthy.

As we report this week, Archbishop de Castro in an address to the bishops of Spain traditionally a conservative group reaffirmed the Church’s teachings on the family, but also advised the bishops that ways could be found by which gay unions could be tolerable to the Church: “There are other forms of cohabitation, and it is good that they be recognised.”

He did not elaborate, but a seed has been planted. The archbishop’s brief comment received wide media coverage in Europe.

As a seasoned and evidently highly valued diplomat, Archbishop de Castro knows what he can say in public, and what to keep private. His comment, therefore, can be interpreted as reflecting at least one strand of thought within the Vatican on how the Church ought to respond to the spreading legal acceptance of gay unions.

Laws that permit homosexuals to enter into civil unions akin to civil marriage (and in some cases virtually identical to laws governing traditional marriages) have been passed or are under discussion in several, mostly European, countries.

In South Africa, too, such a law seems inevitable. Indeed, the question may well be not whether gay unions will become legal, but what form the law would take.

Such legislation may be limited to defining certain legal rights and obligations between partners. Or it may grant such unions the same rights and obligations applied to husband and wife in a traditional marriage (including the right to adopt children). Or the legislators could opt for a middle way.

What such law cannot enforce is the sacramental character of marriage. Religious groups, including the Church, cannot be compelled to bless or validate such unions, or to accept them in any way other than as a legal partnership.

In the debate on the legalisation of gay unions, the Church can respond in three ways.

Firstly, the bishops could oppose any proposed gay union legislation as a matter of principle. This would imply a boycott of discussions on the details of a proposed bill in favour of outright rejection.

Secondly, the bishops could opt to neither oppose nor support such law. This alternative has supporters among many who believe that this is a battle that the Church cannot win in any case, and many who feel that it is not the Church’s purpose to prescribe lifestyle options to people who don’t belong to it.

Thirdly, the bishops may seek to influence the final form of the law by engaging legislators in dialogue. By doing so, the Church may be able to extract from the government guarantees that may help protect the traditional family and perhaps even secure funding for family ministries.

A papal representative has signalled that the Church is not invariably closed to discussion on gay unions. Now is a good time to develop a creative response to a new social reality.