Craig A. Ford, Jr.
Right this moment’s submit is from visitor contributor Craig A. Ford (he/him), an Assistant Professor of Theology and Spiritual Research at St. Norbert School in De Pere, Wisconsin. He additionally serves on the college of the Institute of Black Catholic Research at Xavier College of Louisiana, the nation’s solely Catholic Traditionally Black School or College (HBCU). He writes on subjects on the intersection of gender, race, sexuality, and the Catholic ethical custom. Craig lately spoke as a part of New Methods Ministry’s panel, “What Dignitas Infinita Ignored: Perspectives on LGBTQ+ Dignity,” which is obtainable right here.
Nearly 4 months in the past, I wrote an article titled “Our New Galileo Affair” that was revealed within the theology journal Horizons. The core of its argument was this: the actions taken on the a part of the Vatican at this time associated to sexual orientation and gender id resemble, in uncomfortably analogous methods, the official statements and actions taken by the Vatican within the 17th century towards astronomer Galileo Galilei. The actions taken towards Galileo quantity among the many most embarrassing within the Church’s historical past. Galileo was condemned as a heretic as a result of he believed—rightly, as we all know now—that the solar rests on the heart of our planetary system, whereas the earth and all the opposite planets revolve round it. The Vatican shouldn’t make the identical errors it did within the 17th century once more within the 21st.
Many people are accustomed to Galileo’s wrongful condemnation, however maybe much less acquainted is Galileo’s extraordinarily insightful theological argument. This theological argument was wanted whereas the science was nonetheless in improvement in an effort to persuade others why it will be unwise for the Vatican to situation a condemnation of heliocentrism prematurely. This is able to be no simple feat, since (1) the dominant mannequin on the time, Ptolemy’s geocentric system, with the earth on the heart of the planetary system, was broadly accepted as as a scientific mannequin, and since (2) many individuals believed that geocentrism was supported by scripture (e.g., Ecclesiastes 1:5 and Joshua 10:12-13). Galileo needed to marshal his theological argument each towards the accepted science of the day, in addition to towards what was taken to be God’s revelation in Holy Scripture.
Drawing on the authority of St. Augustine, essentially the most influential theologian within the Western Christian world, Galileo basically argued two issues. First, that science and revelation are two pathways to 1 singular reality concerning the world that God created. So, on the finish of the day, they will’t contradict one another. And second, in instances the place the science is underdeveloped and could appear to contradict historically-established Church educating, the prudential path directs one to not preemptively disparage the scientific course of. As an alternative, prudence counsels persistence. Augustine mentioned it this manner:
“In matters that are obscure and far beyond our vision…different interpretations are sometimes possible without prejudice to the faith we have received. In such a case, we should not rush in headlong and so firmly take our stand on one side that, if further progress in the search of truth justly undermines this position, we too fall with it.” (Augustine, The Literal Interpretation of Genesis, 1.18.37)
And Galileo, making use of Augustine’s reasoning to his personal scenario, echoed Augustine within the following approach:
“I should think that it would be proper to ascertain the facts first, so that they could guide us in finding the true meaning of Scripture; this would be found to agree absolutely with demonstrated facts, even though prima facie the words would sound otherwise, since two truths cannot contradict each other.” (Galileo, “Letter to the Grand Duchess Christina”)
Due to the Vatican’s resistance, we all know that Galileo was not persuasive. Right this moment, on points associated to sexual orientation and gender id, we’re once more witnessing Vatican resistance. One want solely flip to latest paperwork like Dignitas Infinita and Fiducia Supplicans to see that that is the case. However given what number of theologians and philosophers affirm the givenness and goodness of homosexuality and trans identities—and moreover, given what number of scientists are doing the identical—I imagine these of us calling for a full embrace of our LGBTQ+ siblings are going to change into proper as nicely. The lives and loves of LGBTQ+ individuals enlarge the divine gentle on this world; they don’t diminish it.
In addressing homosexuality and trans id, the Church should take a lesson from its personal previous—and never a drastic one, both. The lesson, as Augustine and Galileo counsel, is to take a posture of listening. The Church ought to embrace the “grace of self-doubt,” as Margaret Farley presents in her essay, “Ethics, Ecclesiology, and the Grace of Self Doubt.” It ought to embrace the knowledge supplied by the late Richard Gaillardetz in his essay “Power and Authority in the Church: For “if the Church is a pilgrim Church,” as we see it described in Lumen Gentium no. 46, then “its official teachers must share in that pilgrim status.”
The lesson, in different phrases, is to let the method of listening and studying proceed, and to place the condemnations to relaxation. In his 1992 speech on the Galileo Affair, John Paul II acknowledged Galileo as having “showed himself to be more perceptive in this regard than the theologians who opposed him.” Nothing much less is owed to the reminiscence of Galileo, and nothing much less is owed to LGBTQ+ individuals whose lives and loves testify to the goodness of the God who created the solar, moon, and stars to which Galileo devoted his life.
—Craig A. Ford, Could 15, 2024
“Well bless their hearts.”
