Yesterday, I reported the following to you about how media sources are handling the response of Cardinal Marx, head of the German Catholic Bishops' Conference, when a Bayerischer Rundfunk interviewer asked him recently if same-sex couples could be blessed by the church:
Without fail, almost every single report about this story I can find in the German-language media sums up the story in a headline that echoes what Bayerischer Rundfunk itself reports: "Erzbischof Reinhard Marx: Segnung homosexueller Paare ist möglich."
Then I stated,
In German headlines you can find by such a search [i.e., a Google search], no squeamishness at all about saying that Cardinal Marx responded positively to a question, Can the Catholic church bless same-sex couples? No beating around the bush about whether "yes" means "yes" or whether he was saying yes to a question about blessing such couples while he meant something quite different than blessing them.
And I added,
What American folks interested in religious news are going to take away from reports such as the RNS report about this story is an account of doubt, ambiguity — an account suggesting as its bottom line, Well, the gays remain very problematic for the Catholic church, and there is no one in the Catholic community who really wants to bless or include them.
What German-speaking readers are taking away from this story is quite the opposite: asked whether the Catholic church can bless same-sex couples, the president of the German bishops' conference said yes.
I also told you in my report yesterday that after he was asked whether same-sex couples could be blessed and he said yes to that question, Cardinal Marx "went on to state that pastoral discernment would need to be applied about this in individual cases."
Today, Cindy Wooden of Catholic News Service is reporting for the American publication Crux, edited by the well-known American Catholic Journalist John Allen, "German cardinal urges pastoral care, but not ‘blessing’ of gay couples." Wooden states,
German Catholic media had interpreted the cardinal’s remarks as moving a step back from a suggestion made by Bishop Franz-Josef Bode of Osnabruck in January that the Catholic Church should debate the possibility of a blessing ceremony for Catholic gay couples involved in the Church.
But some English-language media and blogs portrayed Marx’s remarks as meaning he "endorses" such blessing ceremonies.
I told you in my posting yesterday that I would not provide you with a list of links to the headlines about this story in recent reports in the German-speaking media. I did not want to bore you with those headlines. But since the Crux report appears directly to contradict what I state above, I'm now going to list the headlines I find through a simple Google.de search, and I'll bore you by offering my own translation of them. If you doubt my ability to translate German with much expertise — and my German is wooden though serviceable — then use some translation tool to see what you'll discover about these headlines when you take that approach.
The Bayerischer Rundfunk (Munich) headline cited above reads in English, by the way,
"Archbishop Reinhard Marx: Blessing same-sex couples is possible."
Here are the rest of my list of headlines:
Frankfurter Allgemeine (Frankfurt), "Kardinal Marx stellt Segnung homosexueller Paare in Aussicht":
"Cardinal Marx views the blessing of same-sex couples as an option."*
Rheinische Post (Düsseldorf), "Bischöfe wollen homosexuelle Paare segnen - im Einzelfall":
"Bishops want to bless same-sex couples — in individual cases."
In another headline about this story, Rheinische Post reports, "Segnung homosexueller Paare ist in Einzelfällen möglich":
"Blessing same-sex couples is possible in individual cases."
Katholische Nachricten (Bonn), "Kardinal Marx möchte Segen 'im Einzelfall' für homosexuelle Paare":
"Cardinal Marx favors blessing for same-sex couples in individual cases."**
ORF (Vienna), "Segnung homosexueller Paare in Einzelfällen möglich":
"Blessing same-sex couples possible in individual cases."
Die Presse (Vienna), "Kardinal Marx: Segnung homosexueller Paare in Einzelfällen möglich":
"Cardinal Marx: Blessing same-sex couples possible in individual cases."
Der Spiegel (Hamburg), "Kardinal Marx stellt Segnung homosexueller Paare in Aussicht":
"Cardinal Marx views the blessing of same-sex couples as an option."*
Domradio (Köln), "Marx: Segnung homosexueller Paare in Einzelfällen möglich":
"Marx: Blessing same-sex couples possible in individual cases."
Westdeutsche Zeitung (Wuppertal), "Kardinal Marx hält Segnung homosexueller Paare für möglich":
"Cardinal Marx considers blessing same-sex couples as a possibility."***
Katholisch.de (Bonn), "Marx hält Segnung homosexueller Paare für möglich":
"Marx considers blessing same-sex couples as a possibility."***
OVB (Rosenheim): "Marx: Segen für homosexuelle Paare: Kardinal hält Zuspruch im Einzelfall für möglich – Keine generelle Lösung":
"Marx: Blessing for same-sex couples: Cardinal offers possibility in individual cases, no general resolution."
I'm puzzled: what about these German-language headlines supports the Crux headline about this story, "German cardinal urges pastoral care, but not ‘blessing’ of gay couples"? What about these German-language headlines confirms the Crux report that, while "some English-language media and blogs portrayed Marx's remarks as meaning he 'endorses' such blessing ceremonies," German media are representing Cardinal Marx's words as "moving a step back from" Bishop Bode's suggestion that the Catholic church should consider the possibility of a blessing ceremony for Catholic gay couples involved in the church?
What about any of these headlines contradicts my statement to you yesterday (I'm evidently one of those "English language . . . blogs" that got the whole story wrong, according to Crux) that the headlines in the German-language media show no squeamishness about saying that Cardinal Marx responded positively to a question, "Can the Catholic church bless same-sex couples"? And that, by contrast, American accounts of this story are creating doubt and ambiguity about what Cardinal Marx said while the opposite is the case in the headlines being offered German-language readers . . . .
One would like to know what American religion reporters have invested in creating such doubt, and in giving legs to a false interpretation of this story that began on the blog of the rabidly anti-LGBTQ Catholic blogger Dwight Longenecker. It's . . . odd . . . isn't it, to find U.S. Catholic journals that represent themselves as middle-of-the-road aligning themselves with that ugly, hateful, destructive current of American Catholicism that has had such baleful influence on queer Catholic lives?
Or is it?
P.S. Wooden makes mention of an English translation of Cardinal Marx's statements to the Bayerischer Rundfunk interviewer by the German Catholic Bishops' Conference to which I cannot point you, unfortunately, since she does not include a link to that document.
P.P.S. If you doubt that some of these so-called middle-of-the-road Catholic religion reporters have aligned themselves with those attacking Catholic News Agency as they report about this story — that is, have aligned themselves with the rabidly homophobic wing of the U.S. Catholic church who initiated the attack on CNA when it first reported this story — then take a look at the dig implied in the Crux article's statement that "[s]ome English-language media and blogs portrayed Marx’s remarks as meaning he 'endorses' such blessing ceremonies."
That dig is directed at CNA, whose headline when it broke this story spoke of Cardinal Marx endorsing blessing ceremonies for same-sex couples. I myself have certainly not stated that Cardinal Marx "endorsed" blessing ceremonies for same-sex couples — though I have defended and continue to defend CNA and its reporting about this story against those maliciously attacking CNA. I have made clear in my reporting about it that Cardinal Marx responded affirmatively to a question about whether the church can bless same-sex couples, and then went on to speak of the need for pastoral discernment about this on a case by case basis.
If I can be blunt, I personally would not want a blessing from a church that harbors people of the ilk of these religion reporters and journal editors. What could such a blessing possibly mean from people so oblivious to their unmerited power and privilege as heterosexual human beings, who claim to have the last word on who God is and what She thinks about LGBTQ people? Who are so supercilious and so cruel and so willing to distort the truth in the service of their unholy agendas . . . . They can keep their heterosexist "blessings" to themselves and for themselves, thank you very much.
Later: please see this subsequent posting discussing what seems to be the English translation of Cardinal Marx's remarks to which Cindy Wooden's article refers.
P.S. Wooden makes mention of an English translation of Cardinal Marx's statements to the Bayerischer Rundfunk interviewer by the German Catholic Bishops' Conference to which I cannot point you, unfortunately, since she does not include a link to that document.
P.P.S. If you doubt that some of these so-called middle-of-the-road Catholic religion reporters have aligned themselves with those attacking Catholic News Agency as they report about this story — that is, have aligned themselves with the rabidly homophobic wing of the U.S. Catholic church who initiated the attack on CNA when it first reported this story — then take a look at the dig implied in the Crux article's statement that "[s]ome English-language media and blogs portrayed Marx’s remarks as meaning he 'endorses' such blessing ceremonies."
That dig is directed at CNA, whose headline when it broke this story spoke of Cardinal Marx endorsing blessing ceremonies for same-sex couples. I myself have certainly not stated that Cardinal Marx "endorsed" blessing ceremonies for same-sex couples — though I have defended and continue to defend CNA and its reporting about this story against those maliciously attacking CNA. I have made clear in my reporting about it that Cardinal Marx responded affirmatively to a question about whether the church can bless same-sex couples, and then went on to speak of the need for pastoral discernment about this on a case by case basis.
If I can be blunt, I personally would not want a blessing from a church that harbors people of the ilk of these religion reporters and journal editors. What could such a blessing possibly mean from people so oblivious to their unmerited power and privilege as heterosexual human beings, who claim to have the last word on who God is and what She thinks about LGBTQ people? Who are so supercilious and so cruel and so willing to distort the truth in the service of their unholy agendas . . . . They can keep their heterosexist "blessings" to themselves and for themselves, thank you very much.
Later: please see this subsequent posting discussing what seems to be the English translation of Cardinal Marx's remarks to which Cindy Wooden's article refers.
* Literally, stellen in Aussicht means "to place [something] in prospect."
** Literally: "Cardinal Marx would like blessing for same-sex couples in individual cases."
*** Literally, halten für möglich means "to hold [something] as possible.
The graphic is a screenshot from the Bayerischer Rundfunk article linked above.
No comments:
Post a Comment