This guest post is the ninth in our series on the CTEWC book Reproduction and the Common Good: Global Perspectives from the Catholic Tradition. In this contribution, Madeline Jarrett, PhD Cand., responds to a roundtable conversation about what the Church can do better in order to address the complexities of reproductive injustice in our world.
Chapter nine of Reproduction and the Common Good: Global Perspectives from the Catholic Tradition examines the role of the Catholic Church in advancing reproductive justice. In particular, roundtable members explore the ways that the Church is a resource or a roadblock. Attending to the specificities of their contexts, each contributor describes in both implicit and explicit terms the centrality of structural-cultural change and relatedly, formation (of both church leaders and the laity) for addressing these issues.
Simeiqi He (China / USA) begins the chapter by framing reproductive justice as an issue of love. She invites readers to expand conceptions of reproduction beyond just giving birth and to recognize that human reproduction exists within a matrix of social, cultural, natural, and cosmic manifestations of creative reproductivity. Her insight here raises questions about what might be included in this broadly-construed framework of fecundity. It seems to suggest that expressions of artistic creativity (e.g. painting a mural), vocational engagement (e.g. mentoring a student), or relationally-based production (e.g. cooking a meal for a friend) all reflect the creative act of bringing something new into the world. The many forms reproductivity can take must remain grounded in relationship with our loving God. In light of this, He emphasizes that reproductive justice must always involve openness to being transformed by this love. She notes that the ability of the Chinese Catholic Church to embrace development in areas of reproductive justice rests on its ability to “serve as an outpouring source of life for all living beings” (226). He lifts up the wisdom of the concept of spiritual childhood and its association with femininity. However, I wonder if there is a danger in associating the feminine with the new-born and the little, as it may reinforce paternalistic treatment of women and assumptions of feminine powerlessness. In light of the realities of the Chinese Catholic Church, He gestures to reproductive justice that is rooted in relationships of love and openness to growth.
Eric Marcelo O. Genilo, S.J. (Philippines) calls for a more pastorally-responsive Church with regards to issues of reproduction, offering specific recommendations for Catholic leaders. He begins by critiquing the imposition of Catholic norms onto non-Catholic Filipino populations, which overlooks the rights of Filipino Protestants, Muslims, and Indigenous communities. Regarding the ways these Catholic norms are communicated, Genilo notes that Catholic leaders tend to endorse politicians who speak out against birth control, but overlook their stances on other significant issues related to life and dignity (e.g. domestic abuse, HIV prevention, maternal mortality). Genilo also cautions against the conflation of abortion and contraception by Catholic leaders. Like many of the contributors in chapter eight, Genilo emphasizes the ways that sex education has been vilified by Catholic leadership in the Philippines. Sex education offers an important path forward, as it remains one of the only ways that young people receive information about their reproductive health and safety. To honor their right to knowledge about reproductive health, the lay people of the Filipino Catholic Church should have access to sex education. Rather than imposing norms that do not honor the dignity and diversity of the population, Genilo calls for the Church and its leaders to prioritize pastoral approaches to reproductive issues. Ordained leaders must be formed to engage with issues of reproductive justice with nuance and to approach the members of their community with compassion, goodwill, and attentiveness to their lived situations.
Kathryn Lilla Cox (USA) asks us to consider who we are discussing when we discuss the Catholic Church. While many imagine the Pope, bishops, and other clergy members as “the” Catholic Church, Cox invites us to remember that any conception of the Church is incomplete without consideration of the laity. Her insight here is a critical reminder of the expansiveness of the Holy Spirit’s work in the church, which is operating not only in the clergy, but also in the lives of the whole people of God. Cox names a number of ways that this Spirit of love is endangered by reproductive injustice. Like Genilo, Cox draws attention to the problem of one-issue voting, noting that votes should be informed by holistic approaches to reproductive issues (e.g. access to healthcare, policies that target domestic abuse) rather than one-issue voting. She also names politicizing the Eucharist as a distinct danger to justice in the Church. Here, politicizing the Eucharist may be conceived as a form of idolatry, wherein we reduce the expansive mystery of God’s love to a small and rigid form that fails to hold the other essential elements of the call to justice. Cox emphasizes the need to empower the Catholic laity to speak up to their priests and deacons about adequately representing reproductive issues on the pulpit, and she lifts up the presence of Catholic politicians, lobbyists, and organizations who are exercising their agency in the name of reproductive justice. These insights suggest that, in addition to working for structural change, we must prioritize forming members of the laity to feel empowered to speak with both ordained and political leaders about issues of reproductive justice.
Virginia Saldanha (India) poignantly critiques the ways that Church leadership fails to support women in India. Although abortion is legal in India, the Catholic Church does not speak out about the prevalence of sex-selective abortion, nor does it offer adequate support to women who choose to have children out of wedlock. Like Genilo and Cox, Saldanha highlights the danger of one-issue preaching for reproductive justice. In India, preaching about abortion becomes a barrier to women speaking out about their abusive husbands, undermining both their agency and their safety. She also suggests that ordained leaders should discuss and denounce the prevalence of sexual abuse of Indian women, including marital rape. Priests should address the formation of men (that is, the social and cultural influences that contribute to the harm they perpetrate against women) in their homilies and pastoral service. Reproductive justice in India must involve forming priests who are capable of listening to the experiences of women and acknowledging their own need for growth and conversion. Saldanha suggests that as a result of clericalism, many women imagine priests as stand-ins for God, often to the neglect of identifying and discerning the presence of God within themselves. Thus, reproductive justice also involves empowering women to speak about their experiences (and making sure they are safe to do so) and encouraging religious leaders to embrace the God-given wisdom of the people they serve.
For Julie Clague (UK), reproductive justice must prioritize making women safe, which includes addressing systemic and cultural inequalities and life-threatening social and economic conditions. Like Saldanha and Cox, Clague asserts that the Church must be able to acknowledge when it has fallen short of the mark of justice. Church leaders and members must question and critique abuses of power, unequal access to resources, and the grave mistakes of our shared history (e.g. the Magdalen Laundries). We must remain answerable to non-negotiable norms, such as the inherent dignity of women – a norm that still fails to be integrated into practice in many sectors of our Church. Clague’s analysis suggests that this failure might be addressed through the formation of church leaders. For example, clergy must be educated around the ways that “feminine ideals” like submission to men and uncritical embrace of sacrifice can malform women’s agency and harm expressions of their dignity. All members of the church should be formed to engage in self-critical honesty and restorative justice, which will allow us to move forward in the creation of a reproductive ethic of love and justice.
For each of the contributors to chapter nine, movement toward reproductive justice seems to involve both structural-cultural changes and a renewed practice of formation for the clergy and laity. As they acknowledge past mistakes, failures, and oversights, ordained Church leaders are invited to draw on the Spirit of humility. They might draw on the Spirit of receptivity as they seek to compassionately attend to the complexities of the lives of God’s people. In particular, ecclesial structures must form clergy to accurately recognize the issues happening in the lives of the people they serve, particularly women in situations of distress, danger, or crisis. This practice of recognition is a means of attending to the Spirit who is active in the lives of the people of God. The insights of the contributors also invite the people of God to draw upon the Holy Spirit of empowerment and agency as they continue to work for the reformation of harmful structures and cultures that contribute to reproductive injustice. Engaging in advocacy on both political and ecclesial levels is another means of ushering the Spirit of justice into our midst.
Madeline Jarrett is a PhD candidate in systematic theology at Boston College. Her research engages issues of theological anthropology and eschatology, particularly as they relate to embodied experiences of grace and limitation. She has related interest in temporality, disability, agency, joy, and the theology of Karl Rahner.
