This week, hundreds of delegates from around the world began a monthlong meeting as part of Pope Francis’ “Synod on Synodality”—a gathering to discuss the future of the Catholic Church. It could radically change the religion. The group is considering groundbreaking alterations to orthodoxy on same-sex unions and whether or not women can be ordained as priests. The process has changed, too. For the first time, delegates include women.

A synod is a conference for church leaders and lay people to engage in conversation about how to bolster the good of the church. Since the 1960s, delegates from the global church have come together to discuss evolving issues. The current synod is part one of a multi-year process that will culminate in 2024 with Francis’ decisions and includes particularly controversial topics, like celibacy and divorce.

The lead up has been punctuated by conservative concerns about just how liberal this meeting may get. The synod kicks off days after a letter became public in which the pope considered blessing the existence of queer couples and the allowance of female priests.

Pope Francis wrote that while marriage is an “exclusive, stable and indissoluble union between a man and a woman, naturally open to conceiving children,” pastoral charity is also needed, and may be discretionary. Pastoral prudence, he wrote, “must adequately discern if there are forms of blessing, solicited by one or various persons, that don’t transmit a mistaken concept of marriage.” On female priesthood, the pope asserted that, whereas nobody can publicly contradict the church’s current rules prohibiting women’s ordination, they should study it.

For some, this rhetoric may seem like the bare minimum. But for others, like Americans on the right, it’s scary as hell.

Conservative Catholics across the U.S. have been some of the most vocal globally in pushing against reforms, and fear that the church is changing in a way that doesn’t match scripture or their ideology. One New York City priest, Reverend Gerald Murray, worried publicly that the pope “will authorize things that are not contained in Catholic doctrine or that will contradict it,” like women deacons or blessing gay unions. “We’re not Protestants,” he said.

Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke, Archbishop Emeritus of St. Louis, a vocal opponent to Pope Francis, was in the group that sent the pope a letter inquiring how he would be responding to these issues at the summit. “It’s unfortunately very clear,” Burke said on Tuesday, “that the invocation of the Holy Spirit on the part of some has as its aim to push forward an agenda that is more political and human than ecclesiastical and divine.” (Burke was not invited to the meeting at the Vatican.)

Pope Francis’ track record on queer and women’s rights is complicated. He formally allowed women to read from the Bible during Mass, but also came out against women becoming ordained. Speaking about queer people in 2013, the pope famously asked, “If they accept the Lord and have goodwill, who am I to judge them?” He has argued that homosexuality should not be treated as a crime in different countries but clarifies that he still thinks it’s a sin. Francis has framed many of these decisions as instances where localities should turn toward scripture and an evolving discernment as it befits their needs as part of his hope of growing the Catholic Church.

Because of this potential divide between local and global doctrine and application, it is possible that American Catholics may not even see these changes, should they be formally supported by the pope but not adopted by local priests.

As Mother Jones previously reported, American catholicism has splintered as some of the devout entrench themselves in wider conservative politics. Right-wing provocateurs like Milo Yiannopoulos and Steve Bannon notably have moved in Catholic circles saying Pope Francis should be curtailed. Yiannopoulos, who touts a traditionalist form of Catholicism, has been telling anyone who will listen to him, to “make the Vatican straight again” and “make America homophobic again.”

The pope himself seems unfazed by the ire of American Catholics. “They got mad,” he told reporters in late August after a squabble. “But move on, move on.”

  • ubermeisters@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    if we are going to control the population ever again, we are gonna have to make some comprimises, or continue shedding members to more rational trains of thought and self respect.

    There I had the entire month of meetings for you.

    I’ll take 10% of the churchs’ revenue now, please and thanks… Jesus said I need it more than you.

    • bradorsomething@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      Easy there, 10% tithing is the Mormons. Catholics are more nuanced, using “what you can afford,” “what the church needs,” and guilt together.

      • ubermeisters@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        My experience is mainly with Baptist and non-denominational. my family was poor as fuck, so the church urged us 10% instead of the commonly held 15%. I figured I’d return thier generosity…

    • Art35ian@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      I still don’t get how Christianity survived evolution.

      Evolution = no Adam and Eve. No Adam and Eve = no Original Sin. No Original Sin = the entire Bible falls apart.

      They must have used some serious white-out tape to work around that one.

      • ubermeisters@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        Christianity’s never been about Original Sin. It’s been about fear of death and mitigation of that fear. Didn’t take long for people to see the inherent power this type of belief system provides for the purported “chosen speakers”.

        • Art35ian@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          The story starts with Original Sin. It’s where the Devil, sin, heaven and hell, and retribution and forgiveness all starts.

          If you can’t have Eve biting the apple, you can’t have a Bible, period.

          • ubermeisters@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            I refuse to argue this with you because it’s not a fair debate in the slightest…

            Proceeds to anyway though apparently:

            I’ve over a decade and a half of formal biblical education, read cover to cover umpteen times in a cornucopia of translations and revisions, and none of it matters for shit. The Bible is the Bible becuase it gives mankind a way out of death. NOBODY gives a fuck about the rest of it; that is all positioning, pomp, and self persuasion.

            And let’s not pretend like the Bible makes any fucking sense to begin with so you crying about the Baseline rationale possibly being wrong makes zero sense.

            • Art35ian@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              Hey man, I’m on your side.

              Sunday School, church, prayer, grace, Youth Group. I did it all, and I call it all horseshit now.

              I’m just saying, once you get past all the introductions, the Bible opener is Original Sin. And once evolution became fact, that scene #1 of the Bible falls on its ass, so everything that follows it has to as well.

              • JesusLikesYourButt@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                11 months ago

                You realize that Jews, the people who wrote the Hebrew Bible that makes up what Christians call the old Testament, didn’t and do not believe in original sin? That’s a later christian invention, doesn’t even go back to Jesus.

              • ubermeisters@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                11 months ago

                TBH, you could remove the entire Old Testament and most Christians would be probably be happier. The divide between Judaism and Christianity would sure get worse though. Not that most Christians know they are reading the Torah for the first half of their precious book lmao.

      • flicker@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Not Christian anymore but I grew up extremely Roman Catholic and I can answer this.

        My priest preached evolution. The idea here being that the concept of Adam and Eve could very well have been some distant ancestor. After all, there had to be, even in evolution, a “first” man and woman, reaching some unknown criticality in the evolutionary process.

        Just like the “earth was created in 7 days” bit, when Christians say, but what is a “day” to God?

        I don’t follow it anymore but I thought I could shed some light.

        • Art35ian@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          11 months ago

          I’m not arguing with you (more, your former priest), but if God made man in his own image, it can’t really be said that Adam and Eve is now allowed to be represented by a few multi-celled crawlers in the primordial soup.

          Also, he apparently created ALL the land animals AND the people on the sixth day. Pretty weird if we’re now admitting that people were land animals.

      • Zloubida@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        That’s not how it works. Genesis is a myth, a story who puts chronologically an existential truth.

        The original sin is original in that it predates us.

        • ubermeisters@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          yep. bible unequivocally states that “God created all things”. There is zero wiggle room there, unless the original translation of “all” means something less encapsulating than our modern day notion of the term.

          OG sin is that of the creator, YHWH aka God, not ours, according to those dusty ass scrolls so many people continue to die over.


          EL SHADDAI? MORE LIKE Y’ALL GON’DIE

          • jehova

          I wonder what next iteration of the Horus myth will overtake Christianity eventually.