The Church’s Fetish for Forgiveness

On the eve of the 2024 Synod for Synodality, the pope led the delegates on a prayer of forgiveness for the sins of the Church. While I appreciated the gesture, after reading the final document, I couldn’t help but think of this opening ritual as some kind of fetishized performance of forgiveness-seeking.

To offer more context: at the end of September, the city of San Francisco (where I live) hosts the annual Folsom Street Fair, which is an internationally known BDSM and sexual kink festival that spans several blocks and takes place over an entire weekend (BDSM stands for bondage, domination, sadism and masochism). As I witnessed people walking around the city wearing leather and all sorts of sexually provocative attires, I began to think about the meaning of these sexual performances which, rather than intending to hurt or oppress, are reenacted by the kink community as a form of liberative sexual expression, exploration and enjoyment.

A few days after the 2024 Folsom Street Fair, I read the news that Pope Francis had led the synod delegates in a prayer for forgiveness and I could not help but think about the BDSM of it all.

By making this claim, I don’t wish to minimize the importance of forgiveness or of BDSM. Forgiveness is an important and incredibly meaningful part of the healing journey—interpersonally, intrapersonally and communally—so I am happy to see that the Church is readily and openly admitting that it has sinned and is asking for forgiveness. Similarly, BDSM, for many people, is a meaningful and pleasurable exploration of their sexuality through consensual relationships that subvert sexual norms and make room for things society deems “indecent.” In other words, when intentionally practiced, BDSM can serve as an avenue for sexual liberation. Both forgiveness and BDSM can be good things!

However, without the right framing or intentions, both practices can become problematic and oppressive.

BDSM becomes oppressive when it focuses on the pleasure of one partner while disregarding the well-being of the other, or when one partner seeks pleasure at the total expense of the other. Consent and consideration for the other’s well-being (to a reasonable extent even in the most “extremely painful scenarios”) is at the heart of the BDSM experience, and that—I believe—is where the virtue of the practice lies. Even in these “extreme” cases of sex-pain performances, the masochistic partner (who enjoys receiving pain) has voluntarily opted to engage in that practice and finds the pain pleasurable up to a certain limit which should be clearly communicated to the sadistic partner (who enjoys inflicting pain) beforehand.

Without consent, BDSM is a heinous crime. However, even if there is consent, without concern for the well-being of the other, it can perpetuate oppression by erasing a person’s humanity (often women’s) for the sake of sexual pleasure. This hedonistic disregard for the other’s well-being, though it may be pleasurable, represents an empty and disingenuous practice of BDSM by removing one of its central virtues: consensual solidarity between the partners grounded in communication and concern for each other’s enjoyment and well-being.

Similarly, when forgiveness is performed without a genuine concern for the human beings being hurt and without an intention to change, it can become an empty gesture that can bring about some sort of psycho-spiritual pleasure without the desire for transformation.

To expound on this observation, I go back to my 3rd grade catechism lessons in Puerto Rico, where a nun taught me the five steps for a good confession: 1) examination of conscience, 2) contrition, 3) intent to not sin again, 4) telling your sins to the confessor and 5) completion of penance. From my lessons, I recall the nun’s insistence that the most important part of this reconciliation process was “contrition.” However, as I grow older, I have come to realize that there is far more value in the “intention to not sin again” than in internal “contrition.” Without an intention to change, especially when the sin involves hurting another person, feeling sorry for one’s sins seems like an empty or disingenuous gesture. Furthermore, intention to not sin again should spark within the penitent a curiosity for the ways in which one can avoid continuing the hurt. Therefore, the third step to a good confession, in my view, is the true measure of and the foundation for the contrite heart.

When the Catholic hierarchy celebrates a ritual of forgiveness before a synod, pious as it may be, but shows no other sign of intending to change, it resembles an oppressive form of BDSM where a performance of pain (of asking for forgiveness) and pleasure (of feeling forgiven by a merciful heavenly Father figure) disregards the actual well-being of those hurt by the sin.

As I read through the final document produced by the synod, I was encouraged by the emphasis on the sensus fidelium, the openness to have diversity in the Church as different local contexts grow in different ways, the encouragement to go to the margins and include all voices through active listening, the call for accountability and transparency in the synodal process and the explicit mandate to ongoing listening and consultation on behalf of Church leaders. However, I also noticed that some of the most controversial issues, incidentally involving some of the most oppressed members of our Church (e.g., inclusion of LGBTQ+ persons—especially transgender persons—and women’s ordination), were not mentioned. In fact, there was a regurgitation of the human anthropology of gender that perpetuates hurt against trans folks.

While some of the synod delegates assured Catholics that the synod delegates were more friendly toward these issues than in the previous session, probably due to the interpersonal relationships they had cultivated with each other over the past three years, many Catholics (including myself and many of my Catholic friends) explicitly yearn to see from our leaders a more genuine and decisive concern for the wellbeing of LGBTQ+ persons and the ability of women have equal access to all levels of Church.

Until such concern is made explicit and acted upon, any ritual of forgiveness seems like an empty fetishization of contrition, like a problematic version of spiritual BDSM that might be pleasurable but lacks substantive concern for those hurt by the sins of the Church.

---

Ish Ruiz is the assistant professor of Latinx & queer decolonial theology at Pacific School of Religion.