Now that the (gold) dust has settled over the papal throne, it’s time I add my two cents to the plethora of criticism that accompanied the obvious ‘habemus papam’ statuses on all social media fora.
Those who follow me with even sporadic regularity (your Monday morning oxymoron – you’re welcome) are aware that I’m usually one of the first to pipe up in defence of equal civil rights for everyone, regardless of gender or sexual orientation.
Nothing has changed, of course, but I do confess to being a tad perplexed at the way the anti-Pope brigade’s first and biggest criticism seems to be that he is against…surprise, surprise….same-sex marriage and relationships.
You don’t say?
People, get a grip on yourselves. There are a thousand and one things that the Church, as a structured organization, can be legitimately criticized for. But expecting the new Pope to do a complete U-turn on the centuries-old dogma that Catholicism is based on is totally unrealistic.
It’s a bit like expecting the president of the Ferrari club to endorse Team Williams. Or walking into Burger King and acting all offended because there is no McDonald’s menu on offer. It just marks you out as somewhat lacking in the logic department.
If you remove the spiritual aspect, the operational logistics of the Church are akin to that of a club. Like every club, there are rules. If you agree with the rules, you sign on the dotted line and wear the membership jacket. If you don’t, you find a different club.
But no matter how hard you try, you’re not going to convince that particular club to change its rules for you. So no, I don’t expect the Church to be anything less than anti same-sex unions. The same way I don’t expect it to come out in favour of divorce or abortion. Isn’t it beautiful how logic puts everything into perspective?
From a human rights point of view, I am more interested in what government – more specifically, our new government – is planning to do about this issue. According to all tenets of modern democracy, we live (at least on paper) in a secular society. It is not church dogma that will affect the implementation of civil rights, but the administration of the day.
Yes, the Church will have an amount of pull in the matter, like all major lobby groups. But we have all witnessed, thanks to the whole divorce issue, that this is a very limited say. At the end of the day it is what the citizens want that counts.
Do I expect a more temperate and inclusive approach by the head of the Church, without resorting to words like “against the plan of God” and so forth ? Yes, I do. But then again, words are just that. Words. Stick and stones, etc etc. Much better to focus the lobbying where it will make a difference. In the corridors of legislative power, both locally and not.