Jan Bergstra & Laurens Buijs
Amsterdam Gender Theory Research Team
On April 8, 2024, “ Dignitas Infinita ” (below DI), and in it is written, among other things, about “gender theory.” We believe that the Vatican misses the mark here very obviously, and we do not understand why it does so.
First, we note that the term gender appears seven times in DI. It is unclear whether DI also finds the term gender itself problematic or only its use in “gender theory.” We hold that the Vatican does accept the term gender and thus must have its own gender theory, however simple it may be. Alex Byrne can be consulted for inspiration on how such a thing might be formulated (see also AGTRT-6 and AGTRT-BF42).
In DI (no. 55) it says: “Regarding gender theory, whose scientific coherence is the subject of considerable debate among experts,…” But this is incomprehensible: are the opponents of the tenability of “gender theory” not experts, or do the opponents of gender theory not do theory? What is incorrect about this is that Vatican in DI conveniently identifies gender theory with an extreme position within it, a position with which Varican disagrees. Authors such as Tomas Bogardus and Alex Byrne do gender theory but are explicitly not on the co-essentialist side of gender theory (see also AGTRT-BF14), whereas Robin Dembroff and Elizabeth Barnes are on the co-essentialist side of gender theory.
We assume the Vatican would endorse the positions of Alex Byrne and Tomas Bogardus. The Vatican may know that when experts in gender theory examine its “scientific coherence,” that simply means that the people doing “the science” do not simply agree on all aspects of gender theory. The latter is absolutely correct, but to then simply identify gender theory with the (even in our eyes extreme) co-essentialist position within it misses the mark completely, and deliberately.
On Feb. 26, 1616, Cardinal Bellarmine was required by Pope Paul V to make the following announcement to Galileo Galilei:
“To abstain completely from teaching or defending this doctrine and opinion or from discussing it…. To abandon completely… the opinion that the sun stands still at the center of the world and the earth moves, and henceforth not to hold, teach, or defend it in any way whatever, either orally or in writing.“
Cardinal Bellarmine to Galileo Galilei
On the contrary, what was not said by Cardinal Bellarmine is that Galileo was not allowed to engage in celestial mechanics or astronomy at all. That those disciplines were of utmost importance was in no way in dispute. The communication was only that Galileo was not allowed to take a specific (then deemed extreme) position in it. We note that in 1616 the Vatican dealt with astronomy in a fundamentally more mature way than one does now with gender theory in “Dignitas Infinita,” a remarkable observation.
What is curious here is that the language by which this complication can be avoided has long been available: genderideology. In terms of language, this is not a pretty term but it is not unreasonable or unclear (or from a theoretical standpoint incorrect) to identify gender ideology with the co-essentialist position within gender theory. The Vatican could also have opposed gender ideology, as before, because that is (preferably with description) an indication of a position within gender theory, just as heliocentrism was a position within astronomy.
Read more about gender within the Roman Catholic Church:
The Roman Catholic Church has more diversity of views on gender than one might think
Ostensibly, the transition from the use of “gender ideology” to “gender theory” is a transition to a more friendly use of language, but that is only appearance: the baby is being thrown out with the bathwater.
The mistake the Vatican is making with this is indeed serious and relevant:
- It shows an utter disregard for the importance of the literature on gender theory.
- The Vatican is making it impossible for itself to take a position in gender theory in the coming years (after all, the Vatican does not do gender theory). Another term must then be invented for that, and that will not be easy.
- The Vatican implicitly states that the term gender is redundant and should not be used. This impractically limits their own contribution to the debate. With abortion, the Vatican takes a different approach: that term stands squarely and it is side positions on abortion that DI pronounces on.