Up the River without a Paddle

The Amazon Synod—I intended to not pay much attention to it, but as the synod went on, a couple of items went viral, igniting the armchair experts. The Amazon Synod was called to addressed the challenges of the Church in the rural Amazon region, covering a massive amount of land with a small, indigenous population. From the beginning, some have claimed it’s being used to shoehorn progressive ideas into the Church—first for this specific region then spreading to the rest of the world. And indeed, the synod did suggest allowing married men to be ordained priests and women to entrusted as deacons. But I don’t want to focus on the particular issues or conclusions of the synod. I want to look at how the Amazon region and its people have been presented during this process.

I think the need for dialogue and addressing local challenges is needed in the Church. The Church is universal and should not look like Italian colonial copies dotted all over the world. Yet, the Church is universal and should remain consistent in her teachings and liturgies so that no matter where you are, when you enter a church, you are at home in the presence of Christ.

I did not hear much for the Amazonian people themselves from the synod. Instead, I heard about how unique the region is, how the people are tribal, indigenous—in other words, they are noble savages. These untouched, pure primitive ways had to be preserved—a privilege most cultures did not receive from colonizers.

I understand the dark history of colonialism and the desire to not repeat the mistakes of the past. But it feels like the pendulum has swung the other way, where cultures must never share parts of themselves for fear of “tainting” or “imposing” on another. No culture is pure; no people are a museum piece that must be preserved. The Amazonian people can be exposed to Christianity and still maintain their identity. Ideally, that is what would happen. We must not be afraid to share the truth. Christianity calls for change. We should meet people where they are but not leave them there. 

Bishop Erwin Kräutler (principal author of the synod’s working document) claimed that “indigenous people don’t understand celibacy.” He is calling for married priests because apparently the Amazonian people won’t respect a celibate man. How is that not demeaning to the Amazonian people, that they are incapable to learning about the virtue of celibacy in relation to the Church? He implies the people of the region are too naïve or dumb to learn the principles of Christianity that have been taught in every other region of the world.

It is still a colonial attitude that suggests how we treat one people should be different from how we treat others. It creates a system that “others” the Amazonian people by suggesting they are too different to follow what the rest of the Church is able to uphold. There may be practicalities that are unique and need addressing, but to suggest the people don’t understand or won’t accept some teachings is saying that the Church isn’t really universal at all.