The German synod's plan for a Church without boundaries

One way and another, becoming a parent is an extremely reliable confirmer of common sense. A few of the obvious ones include: boys and girls are generally different; too much passive screen entertainment is bad for you; getting what you want all the time makes you dissatisfied and spoiled.&nbsp; Just recently I have been musing on another eternal truth of which any attentive parent can hardly fail to be aware: boundaries are good, not least because if you have firm boundaries you can allow for a great measure of freedom within those boundaries. If the playpark is firmly fenced round, I can let my children run around and jump and climb to their hearts’ content. There’s no need to keep an eye on them all the time in case they hurtle off towards the woods or the lake. We can all relax and enjoy ourselves. The presence of the fence also renders unnecessary long-winded negotiations about exactly how far off they can go.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The occasion for these reflections has been the vote at a synod of the <a href="https://catholicherald.co.uk/german-synodal-way-votes-overwhelmingly-for-same-sex-blessings-and-transgender-priests/"><strong>German church to introduce blessings for same-sex couples</strong></a>. This follows hot on the heels of <a href="https://catholicherald.co.uk/the-vote-for-same-sex-blessings-shows-the-coe-favours-the-secular-consensus-over-christianity/"><strong>a similar decision by the General Synod of the Church of England</strong></a>. It is striking, when watching the speeches made in favour of such radical departures from Christian tradition, how much they rely on the uncertainty created by weakly enforced boundaries.&nbsp; For example, many English revisionists noted, rightly, that remarriage after divorce is now widespread practice in the CofE, even among clergy, and that there is widespread informal tolerance of irregular sexual relationships. One prominent Anglican priest who campaigns for same-sex marriage has Tweeted about getting engaged to his male partner, even though entering such arrangements remains technically forbidden. From seminary onwards, Anglican clergy face no penalties for open contradiction of the official CofE teaching that the only context for sex is within a marriage between one man and one woman, with the result that there is a large and vocal dissenting bloc within their priesthood.&nbsp; <a href="https://catholicherald.co.uk/pope-francis-calls-german-synodal-way-ideological-and-elitist/"><strong>Liberals at the German Catholic synod</strong></a> had fewer precedents of this kind to draw upon in their arguments for a new approach to sex and marriage. On this side of the Tiber we are more or less holding the line where such matters are concerned, both in word and in action. But when it came to less dramatic but still consequential changes, like letting laypeople give homilies, German synod participants used the same kinds of arguments. One man noted that in the parish where he grew up, lay people gave homilies all the time – which is not allowed under the <a href="https://www.liturgyoffice.org.uk/Resources/GIRM/Documents/GIRM.pdf"><strong>General Instruction on the Roman Missal </strong></a>(GIRM), the document governing what should happen at Mass.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The point is that people pushing for change will always point to existing ambiguities, hypocrisies and inconsistencies as evidence of “facts on the ground” that we cannot ignore because we have to deal with reality. In the Church of England it has been argued repeatedly that the traditional teaching on same-sex relationships was unsustainable because it encouraged concealment and secrecy among the relatively large numbers of homosexually-orientated clergy. Perhaps if the C of E's authorities had shown greater resolve and courage in declining to ordain clergy who lacked the spiritual maturity to avoid such relationships, they would not have such a problem. If we want to maintain orthodoxy, and to hold fast to the faith once delivered to the saints, we cannot do so by fudge and compromise, and muttering under our breath when asked what the Church’s position ought to be. Boundaries that we are too polite or too scared to maintain will very soon be overwhelmed in the name of “consistency” or “fairness”. After all, to return to my parenting metaphor, if one child is allowed to climb over the fence and run away, why can’t all the children do the same?&nbsp;