Why do I belong to the Catholic Church?


‘Bishop X is wrong to finger the condom…’ This amusing comment made by French politician, André Santini, when speaking on the subject some years ago now, is the most fitting response to the remarks made this week by the Pope on his arrival in Africa.


The only thing is, it is getting to be a bit much.


In his remarkably moving memoirs, Jean-René Etchegaray recalls the enthusiasm with which the younger Catholic generation had welcomed the Second Vatican Council (Vatican II): in one fell swoop, the Church caught up on lost time and embraced the 20th century. It focused on issues such as its Jewish roots and its relations with other religions, while placing emphasis on peace among nations and respect among peoples; it recognised the value of a social market economy and defended freedom against totalitarianism; it also undertook a revision of the liturgy and the sacraments; finally, it sought to convey the Gospel message that no one has summed up better than St Augustine: ‘Love, and do what you want!’ Ever since, throughout the world, countless unnamed clergy and lay people alike are showing us, by their example, the very best of their faith.


Unfortunately, Vatican II dates back more than 40 years. After the breath of fresh air brought by John Paul II, who urged Christians to take courage in the face of all forms of alienation and resignation (‘Do not be afraid!’), the Church gives the impression of running a century behind. Its self-willed persistence in failing to understand the sexual dimension of human life leads to an astounding denial of the teachings of contemporary science, human existence and, ultimately, the fundamental law of Christian charity.


What justification is there, in this 21st century, for the Church to reject the equality of men and women within its own body by prohibiting women from administering the sacraments? Will our womenfolk have to threaten to boycott all religious ceremonies until they are accorded full spiritual equality?


How many more paedophile tragedies will it take for priests to be absolved from the obligation of chastity? Not only is this burden too heavy for many of them to bear, but the prohibition of conjugal life is completely counter-productive as it prevents the others from understanding what family life is all about, i.e. everything that cannot simply be learnt from the Bible but from the most intimate of personal relationships.


I have personally experienced the tragedy of marital separation. My wife filed for divorce so that she could remarry. My whole life fell apart. After five years of being on my own, I also remarried. For this alone, I was excommunicated from the Catholic Church, and my second marriage could not even receive a simple blessing. The Church believes that it has said it all by repeating ‘What God has joined together, let no man put asunder!’ In so doing, it chooses to forget that marriage is the only sacrament that is not administered by a priest but by the two marriage partners themselves. Above all, it condemns the deserted marriage partner to a lifetime of solitude, it disregards the primary objective, which is to act in the best interest of any children, and it persists in turning a blind eye to the way we live today: one out of two marriages now ends in divorce. Meanwhile, a significant proportion of Catholics are living in ‘sin’ because they are involved in a ‘sinful’ relationship with a person of the same sex. By what perverse twist of logic could a message of love give rise to such an instrument of mass excommunication?


Since the introduction of the contraceptive pill, the Catholic Church seems to be panic-stricken by everything that has anything to do with sexuality. It assumes its leading role in highlighting the spiritual dimension of the issues raised by abortion, embryo research, medically assisted procreation, the birth of ‘designer babies’, and assisted suicide. However, it fails to follow through and responds to these complex and painful issues with simplistic answers in total disregard of the underlying law of Christian charity. It makes itself look ridiculous, as demonstrated by Mr Santini’s mockery, when its highest dignitaries strongly condemn intimate contact with rubber!


Which Gospel has taught our doctors of theology that sex is unclean, that sexual abstinence is the fulfilment of the human condition, that carnal love is merely a necessary evil, that procreation is the only excuse for the pleasure of the senses, that the happiness of children, parents or unmarried persons is less important than respect for the dogma laid down a thousand or two thousand years ago, in short, that it is the letter that gives life and the spirit that kills?


Why do I still belong to this Church which refuses to forgive me, even though it has so much to be forgiven for itself if it still believes in the incredible message that comes from its own God?


Alain Lamassoure, 21 March 2009