The Independent News Source
NCR on Kindle - NCR classifieds - YouTube - Twitter - Facebook - Email Alerts - RSS
PDF versionReclaiming Catholicism
by Richard McBrien on Mar. 01, 2010
There is a new book out, entitled Reclaiming Catholicism (Orbis Books) and edited by my friend and former colleague at Boston College, Thomas Groome, chair of its Institute of Religious Education and Pastoral Ministry, and by Michael Daley, religion teacher at St. Xavier High in Cincinnati.
Perhaps the book will help younger Catholics to better understand and appreciate Catholicism’s roots in the pre-Vatican II era, and older Catholics to recall the spiritual assets that contributed to their own religious formation.
Individual books, however, usually have limited impact, and I suspect that Reclaiming Catholicism will be no exception.
Nevertheless, one hopes that younger and older Catholics alike will find something of value in this one.
A sampling of the contributors and their entries yields such a hope: “Studying the Bible, Then and Now,” by Sr. Diane Bergant, C.S.A.; “The Humbling of the Priesthood,” by Fr. Donald Cozzens; “The Pre-Vatican II Church and Women,” by Susan Ross; and “Sin: ‘Don’t Lose All That Old-Time Catholic Guilt,’” by Fr. Charles Curran.
There are also entries on major Catholic personalities of the pre-Vatican II period: John Courtney Murray, S.J., Teilhard de Chardin, S.J., Thomas Merton, Archbishop Fulton Sheen, Msgr. John Tracy Ellis, Mary Perkins Ryan, Sr. Marie Augusta Neal, S.N.D., Dorothy Day, Sr. Mary Luke Tobin, S.L., and Fr. Theodore Hesburgh, C.S.C., who, like some others, straddles both sides of the conciliar divide.
There are also entries on the Baltimore Catechism, Catholic schools, contraception, Confession, the Rosary, and even the Legion of Decency.
Full disclosure: I contributed two entries to the collection. The first is on the church, before and after Vatican II, and the second is on Fr. Hesburgh, president emeritus of the University of Notre Dame, where I continue to teach.
I believe that the book’s appearance is timely, if for no other reason than that it might prove helpful to Catholics who are currently discouraged and demoralized about the state of their church.
By way of example, I received two e-mails in the past few days alone that reflect the pain suffered needlessly by so many good Catholics. I say “needlessly” because, with a higher quality of leadership, especially at the episcopal level, many of the church’s problems would not exist.
NCR: February 3-16, 2012
Subscribe to NCR to get all the news and special features that aren't always available online. In this issue:
- US News: Bishops Host Conference on Immigration
Conference fields advocates' questions on law, policy
- Special Section: Deacons. Serving as parish administrator; roles of wives; and more
- Study: Black Catholics are more engaged
New study by Notre Dame researcher about parish involvement in America
A few weeks ago, prompted by the newly-released film “Invictus,” this column pointed to the example of Nelson Mandela, elected to the presidency of South Africa after spending the greater part of 27 years as a political prisoner in that country.
Rather than seize the opportunity to “get even” with his long-time tormentors in the Afrikaner-dominated government, Mandela used the reins of power to heal his nation’s divisions and bring whites and blacks together.
That is the challenge of real leadership: to unite rather than to divide, to make a fractured country into a community.
It only requires a short step to apply the lessons of Mandela’s leadership in South Africa to papal and episcopal leadership in the Catholic church.
Enlightened leadership was exercised in the relatively brief pontificate of John XXIII, and it was also exercised by so many of the bishops of the same time and since: Bernard Alfrink of The Netherlands, Leo-Jozef Suenens of Belgium, Joseph Bernardin of Chicago–to cite only three examples.
Why did the high promise of the Second Vatican Council give way to the doldrums experienced by so many active and committed Catholics today?
One e-mail correspondent informed me that he had resigned from his parish council and that he and his wife had decided to leave the parish to which they had belonged for many years to take up membership in a downtown parish effectively staffed by a religious community.
When my correspondent lectored for the last time at his long-time parish, his judgment, he said, was confirmed. The new associate pastor preached what my correspondent considered a divisive homily that derided the religious education of the past 30-40 years and denounced what he called “cafeteria” Catholics.
It was, in the judgment of this demoralized Catholic, “a poorly veiled condemnation of Vatican II.” It was something to which he wanted to be subjected no longer.
The second e-mail came from a fellow priest, who was appalled by a statement attributed to one of our bishops as he joined other bishops in opposing same-sex civil unions legislation.
The bishop asserted that “not all discrimination is unjust. Some is quite justified because it is based on reality and truth”–namely, that gays and lesbians are nothing more than perverts, who deserve no protection from the law?
If Nelson Mandela had followed the example of some of our priests and bishops, one wonders where South Africa would be today.
© 2010 Richard P. McBrien. All rights reserved. Fr. McBrien is the Crowley-O’Brien Professor of Theology at the University of Notre Dame.
To achieve most fully this
To achieve most fully this noble and essential goal, of reclaiming CAtholicism, to "help younger Catholics to better understand and appreciate Catholicism’s roots in the pre-Vatican II era, and older Catholics to recall the spiritual assets that contributed to their own religious formation" I can find no finer and more faithful set of books than the forty years of labors of the Reverend Father Richard P. McBrien, commencing with his landmark discussion urger: "Who Is A Catholic?" and onwards.
"Enlightened leadership was
"Enlightened leadership was exercised in the relatively brief pontificate of John XXIII"
- I find this statement funny, as most people around here have never even read what he wrote. A few even condemned things he taught outright, with one in particular progressivist poster calling the Blessed Pope a Pontius Pilate wannabe when I posted a section of his writing here a month ago.
"The new associate pastor preached what my correspondent considered a divisive homily that derided the religious education of the past 30-40 years and denounced what he called “cafeteria” Catholics. It was, in the judgment of this demoralized Catholic, “a poorly veiled condemnation of Vatican II.” It was something to which he wanted to be subjected no longer."
-hmm, so the correspondent thinks we DON'T have to accept all the teachings of the Church? He thinks we can pick and choose which teachings of the Church flatter us most and only accept those? Does he actually think Vatican II taught that we are free to reject teachings of the Church we don't like? This person actually had a position of AUTHORITY in the parish? This person should try actually READING what Vatican II taught.
"not all discrimination is unjust. Some is quite justified because it is based on reality and truth"
- This is totally correct. Do we not discriminate when we do not allow bigamy? Do we not discriminate when we demand that a priest that has abused children be replaced? Every one of you here discriminates every single day in some way: when you choose not to answer the phone because you don't want to talk to who is calling, when you craft your wills to leave certain property to some family members and not to others, etc.
"that gays and lesbians are nothing more than perverts, who deserve no protection from the law?"
- I seriously doubt that he said those words. He probably said that homosexual marriage should not be allowed by law, which is true, just like we shouldn't allow bigamy or people to marry animals or inanimate objects. He probably said that homosexual behavior is disordered and sinful, which it is. I would ask for a reference where he said that they deserve no protection of law. I'm guessing he wouldn't be able to provide it.
"...so the correspondent
"...so the correspondent thinks we DON'T have to accept all the teachings of the Church? He thinks we can pick and choose which teachings of the Church flatter us most and only accept those? Does he actually think Vatican II taught that we are free to reject teachings of the Church we don't like?"
- The Holy Spirit moves differently in each of us. We are not cookie cutter creations. If my conscience, rooted in my faith in God, tells me that something is not right, I follow my conscience even if that position is at odds with "church teaching". My faith is rooted in God, not in the institutional Roman Catholic church which is headed by fallible individuals.
"Do we not discriminate when we demand that a priest that has abused children be replaced?"
-Abusing children is a crime. People who commit crimes - theft, vandalism, forgery, murder, child abuse, etc - and are found guilty are called criminals. Criminals are typically removed from the general population and often lose their jobs as a result. Priests who abuse children are criminals and need to accept the consequences of their actions.
"The Holy Spirit moves
"The Holy Spirit moves differently in each of us. We are not cookie cutter creations. If my conscience, rooted in my faith in God, tells me that something is not right, I follow my conscience even if that position is at odds with "church teaching"."
- We must have a well formed conscience that is harmony with the Holy Cathlic Church's teachings. To say that we can disregard any teaching of the Church we want because we think otherwise is in direct conflict with even Scripture itself, for you would basically be saying that those who say "This is a hard saying, and who can hear it?" are just as correct as those who say "Lord, where can we go?"
You are pushing moral relativism.
There are certainly many things we can have different views on. However, on the teachings of the Church, we may NOT go against what she teaches. If I were to say that my conscience tells me that Jesus was not truly divine, but the greatest and most exaulted created being (like some of the early heretics) am I just as correct as you who would claim that he is divine? If you think so, then you are basically saying that what is really TRUE doesn't matter.
"Abusing children is a crime."
- but is the person calling on the phone that you choose not to answer a criminal? What about nephew Bob, who you choose to leave less money to in your will than your other nephew John, is HE a criminal? Are all the people you disciminate against all the time in various ways (please see the definition of the word 'disciminate') criminals then? If one is a criminal, is it then ok to discriminate against him?
pete read this lent mater et
pete read this lent mater et magistra
read PACEM IN TERRIS
I have read them, Charles. If
I have read them, Charles. If you have, perhaps you could point out where in the documents is states that we as Catholics are free to cast off the teachings of the Catholic Church if we find them burdensome or we dislike them?
Interestingly, in this entire
Interestingly, in this entire passage on the figures who have made contemporary Catholicism what it is, not one mention is made of Pope John Paul II. I thank God for the grace of his quarter century pontificate, the leadership of a bishop who WAS a Council Father (and not just somebody who read about the Geist of the Council in a book, preferably of Fr. McBrien's viewpoint), a real intellectual who has contributed to the mighty renewal of theology, especially moral theology (as opposed to the pseudo-Catholic theology of Fr. Curran), and who a lion's share of work to foster the authentic spiritual renewal of the Church. Presumably Fr. McBrien's vision of "unity" would lead us to something akin to the mess called Anglicanism (with which most of Fr. M's heroes in the 1960s and 1970s had the greatest desire to reunite): a "church" of unity in all things except faith and morals. And notwithstanding the respect due to icons, let me be an iconoclast and suggest that Theodore Hesburgh did more to undermine Catholic higher education (and the Catholic identity of Notre Dame) that any other single figure in contemporary American Catholicism. His "Land O'Lakes" Declaration was misguided and has continued to subvert the genuine witness that--especially today, almost 50 years after the Council--one would have hoped our institutions of tertiary education would have been able to provide.
Tell us all please what you
Tell us all please what you take as the REverend Father Richard P. McBrien's "viewpoint?
Is it not that of a Gregorian trained academic theologian, a scholastic Doctor of Divinity free of viewpoint?
How do you defend the presumption of your "Presumably?"
What did Wojtyla really do at VAtican Two? What did he REALLY do in World War II?
Great comments. AMEN!
Great comments. AMEN!
Pseudo-theology of Fr Curran
Pseudo-theology of Fr Curran ???. Well it appears the overwhelming majority of catholics accept artificial birth control as necesarry(fr curran 1 JPII 0). It seems a large amount of catholics agree that direct abortion to save the mother^s life as a last resort may be needed(fr curran 1 JPII 0) It seems that a large amount of catholics would agree that masturbation to provide semen for testing for cancer that could save your life is morally licit (fr Curran 1 JPII the pharisee 0) etc etc etc
Kimmy #s two and three are
Kimmy #s two and three are both licit, b/c acts to save lives are licit.
As for #1, illicit sexual acts have always polled well among the faithful.
Fr. Richard McBrien:
Fr. Richard McBrien:
You are deserving of an "ATTA BOY".
John Reid
Looking at the names of the
Looking at the names of the contributors, I think the first step to "reclaiming Catholicism" would be to put them all on a desert island where they could teach and write to each other and not destroy the faith of others.
Better for you and for me,
Better for you and for me, anonymous, would be to take all of their works and writings to that desert island for careful study this Lent.
As I in fact do with forty years of this great theologian's work now this Lent.
Hey, you and me can have a
Hey, you and me can have a bonfire there! Much more fun.
I continue to be dismayed by
I continue to be dismayed by the leadership of my Church. The promise of Vatican II has been squandered. During the last several years we have witnessed the priest pedophilia scandal; the failure of the bishops to act in the face of it; the welcome extended to a holocaust-denying apostate bishop; the liturgy wars; the "visitation" imposed on women religious . . . I could go on.
In the face of all this, it is not easy to remain Catholic; it is impossible to support the hierarchy. Even so, after much soul searching, I have decided I am not leaving. This has been MY church my whole life long. I will not be driven away.
What then? I can only continue to pray for the Church . . . for the hierarchy,for our priests and religious, for all the People of God. May the Holy Spirit reclaim God's Church, opening hearts and minds, bringing about the inclusive, welcoming Church Jesus means us to be. I do not believe Jesus ever intended His Church to be the autocratic, legalistic institution it has become.
MaryJean, I walk with you on
MaryJean, I walk with you on your journey, as I believe Christ does as well. It is a difficult one, I know.
The peace of Christ be with you.
Catholic's in America need
Catholic's in America need leadership and the trends a backward, to pre-Vatican II approach is repugnant to me a craddle Catholic. I would liken this move to a depiction on the latest "Titanic" release. The laity the 39 to 54 year old Catholics are the poor Irish and other immigrants in the 3rd class below-deck passage.
We have no intention of being scurried below deck to appease a misdirected treatment and diagnosis for the malady of Priestly abuse, Episcopal abuse and general problematic concept of 'priest' and the "authority of the episcopacy".
We are and remain Catholic because of the eucharist, not because of the clergy or Bishop's they are the "husk", the real nourishment comes from the kernel, which is Jesus, who is freely available to all of us in the form of bread & wine.
The trouble clerics have with Vat II is the spirit, the Lord and the understanding of speaking, 'Jesus Christ is Lord" is no longer under their control. I spent 28 years actively being on a growth track toward being a informed active Catholic laymen. I have gone to and attended over 25 retreats and studied with three different orders as a laymen, then left as novice relocation was announced.
The stupefaction has continued to erode the post-Vat II experience as the Council was the first word, not the last, the Priests and Diocese who continue this natural tendency of bullying will be shocked by the break they will cause.
As McBrien wrote in his preface, the church is in Crisis, and the opportunity to bridge the change is fragile and the luggage you burden us with exceeds its weight, we are a Pilgram Church on earth, pick up your anchors.
Keep the Faith
Catholic's in America need
Catholic's in America need leadership and the trends a backward, to pre-Vatican II approach is repugnant to me a craddle Catholic. I would liken this move to a depiction on the latest "Titanic" release. The laity the 39 to 54 year old Catholics are the poor Irish and other immigrants in the 3rd class below-deck passage.
We have no intention of being scurried below deck to appease a misdirected treatment and diagnosis for the malady of Priestly abuse, Episcopal abuse and general problematic concept of 'priest' and the "authority of the episcopacy".
We are and remain Catholic because of the eucharist, not because of the clergy or Bishop's they are the "husk", the real nourishment comes from the kernel, which is Jesus, who is freely available to all of us in the form of bread & wine.
I have 3 children, and I teach them using our old CCD materials, I see the stuff I was equipped with as a child, it was all priest and mass gestures, the later evolved program is partly responsible for my relationship with church, my God and even care about these efforts that effect relationships to the divine.
The trouble clerics have with Vat II is the spirit, the Lord and the understanding of speaking, 'Jesus Christ is Lord" is no longer under their control. I spent 28 years actively being on a growth track toward being a informed active Catholic laymen. I have gone to and attended over 25 retreats and studied with three different orders as a laymen, then left as novice relocation was announced.
The stupefaction has continued to erode the post-Vat II experience as the Council was the first word, not the last, the Priests and Diocese who continue this natural tendency of bullying will be shocked by the break they will cause.
As McBrien wrote in his preface, the church is in Crisis, and the opportunity to bridge the change is fragile and the luggage you burden us with exceeds its weight, we are a Pilgram Church on earth, pick up your anchors.
Keep the Faith
The more right wing the
The more right wing the bishop, the greater the anger from the lay people. People have had it and they really aren't going to sit there in the pews and take it. This kind of bishop and priest has no moral authority any longer and the hypocrisy and dishonesty are so obvious that lay people turn their backs. This is why the Church is imploding. These types of ignorant and bigoted bishops and priests stand out. The more they say, the greater damage to innocent people like women, homosexuals and progressive thinkers. It is a massive turn off and with each personality of this type, the old Church dies. The Church of Vatican II will be an ongoing work in progress that takes decades and perhaps, centuries before we will see what the Council Fathers began. It's exciting to think of what the Church envisioned by the Council Fathers will look like. It will be the opposite of the right wing captivity of the current imperial model. I look forward to this book and I thank NCR again for another exciting read.
“Bishops break out in
“Bishops break out in shingles in the face of ambiguity; laity live with it each day in their homes, jobs and social life.
Chancery offices constantly view the faithful as so befuddled that, without unctuous instruction, they would confuse the holy water fountain with a birdbath.
Why is it that a Church founded by a man who walked on water is now often administered by mean, mindless men who walk on the manure of guilt and betrayal and who prefer to flay consciences rather than to read the book of John? It’s awfully hard to subordinate one’s love of God to the rules of earthly ministers.
Good Shepherds don’t need fences; poor ones erect them.”
Tim Unsworth selections, taken from the book “Tim Unsworth”, a collection of his articles in NCR between 1982 and 2007, published by Acta Publications in 2008.
Catholics, like any other
Catholics, like any other citizen, can always vote against an unacceptable pastor or bishop with their pocket book and their feet. It is the patrimony of the Church spirituality and the centrality of the eucharist which really matters.
When you've lost your connection and faith in those, it's all over.
You never really answered
You never really answered your own question: "Why did the high promise of the Second Vatican Council give way to the doldrums experienced by so many active and committed Catholics today?" I count myself among the "Catholics who are currently discouraged and demoralized about the state of their church." My question back to you Fr. McBrien is where can we find reason for hope again?
come out to the desert to a
come out to the desert
to a place apart
come out to the desert to a
come out to the desert
to a place apart
Except for the fact that this
Except for the fact that this column was written by a great thinker, I'd call the column something less than edifying. It is not that it is a poor column; not at all. But it is a column all too true.
Our pastor preached yesterday a highly amusing homily, and he got the laughs he expected. However, it was uncannily on target against him. He is often criticized for his behavior before and after Eucharist of not seeing people evne though they are right in front of him. So he discussed how he sometimes does just that, not intentionally, but it happens. So he laughed it off. He'll not change.
I finally have satisfied myself about one thing about our Church from the autobiography of Archbishop (and Abbot General) Rembert Weakland. As a homosexual, he considers himself to have been "hard-wired" that way, that it ws not a choice. And I believe him, and I've adopted that idea for myself in viewing the homosexual situation in my Church.
Notice, I said MY Church -- because it is mine, just as any other Catholic can call it MY Church. The clergy cannot must not be allowed to continue to try to take it away from us. The idea that all wisdom resides in the hierarchy (and I admit I'm a member of that body) is hooey.
Dear Father McBrien, You are
Dear Father McBrien, You are right in saying that healing division is the right thing to do as in the case of Nelson Mandela. If we examine many of the expectations of the laity after Vatican 11 we will find that many Catholics were looking for changes that just were/are not possible. At the time many of my Catholic friends said that the Church was going to change their position on birth control( were going to allow it ), personal confession ( were going to drop it ), divorce ( would be allowed ), female priests ( would be allowed ),and many more outlandish comments to the effect that the Catholic Church would no longer be ONE, HOLY, CATHOLIC, and APOSTOLIC. Personally I have never seen a definitive epistle that stated simply what would be changed and what would remain as was at the time of pre-Vatican 11. Many Catholics assumed much and we created the turmoil that now exists. Will " Reclaiming Catholicism " explain what Vatican 11 was all about in succint language that all can understand??
The pope has blamed the
The pope has blamed the sexual abuse of children and youth in Ireland (and, consequently in the US, Canada, Germany, etc., etc.)on a "lack of faith".
So, the inculcation of faith among clergy and we "little ones" is by reinventing the middle ages, words and turns of phrasing and gestures that are even more remote from our language of love and communication?
An earlier post spoke of a relationship with Christ that was strong and beautiful irrespective of language and form. In a way I envy this person but like most, I need to know, as a human being the "Person"/person I am encountering. I will submit to overpowering authority because I am a coward; I cannot love simply because it is demanded of me. To assume otherwise, and this is what these authorities certainly seem to do, is to fail miserably as humans, as followers and representatives of our loving God. Liturgy is meant, among many ends, to help bring the many into this sort of beautiful relationship.
When the sexual abuse of
When the sexual abuse of children is finally laid at the Vatican's own front door, which I believe will happen in due course, there will be a whole lot of egg on the central Church's face. Making it very difficult to say it all happened because of "a lack of faith".
The question still remains after the most recent incidents in Ireland and Berlin, what did Rome know, when did they know it, and how far up the totem pole did that knowledge go? No number of bishops or priests, or efforts by EWTN can stop that process from being played out,or begin to explain it away if the scandal falls into the pope's lap.
Another home run from the
Another home run from the beloved and enlightened Father McBrien. One more reason to just hang in there. Many of my Vatican II friends have simply given up on the "institution" as such. Although the temptation is great when we encounter Christian leaders of other denominations to join them and bail out of this sinking ship, we hang in there because it is OUR church too.
Even though our church has been captured in capite et in membris by a bunch of reactionaries who seem to wish, and act as if, Vatican II had never happened, we pray the Holy Spirit will win out in the end, renew the face of the earth and sweep away these unwelcome forces into the dustbin of history.
"Why did the high promise of
"Why did the high promise of the Second Vatican Council give way to the doldrums experienced by so many active and committed Catholics today?" When original thinking is suppressed in favor of medieval understanding of the world; when clericalism, elitism, and sexual bias of all sorts are held up as standards to be emulated; when the grab for power overshadows and contemptuously contaminates the teachings of Jesus; then the thinking, active and committed Catholics vote with their feet. The "doldrums" are here because they [thinking, active and committed] have gone! An institution can only stifle the Spirit for so long before it dies!
The king of non sequiturs and
The king of non sequiturs and faulty logic strikes again. Opposing gay marriage in no way implies that all gays are perverts or that they ought not be protected by the law. The question is whether a new right to same-sex marriage should be artificially created for a particular segment of society; a "right" with no basis in existing law or in reality. A man can no more marry a man than he can marry a tomato. Why is that so hard to see?
Let's then protect gay
Let's then protect gay couples by law, and allow them to check a box on their tax forms which gives them the same tax and federal benefits that married couples receive under the law. Or take them away from straight married couples.
and yet tomatoes are well,
and yet tomatoes are well, you know, so luscious, are they not?
I mean coming home last hot season here to the hermitage what greater delight could I possibly hope for than my row of cherry tomatoes waiting so eagerly to greet me, to refresh me, to relieve me in so many ways, a love made in heaven, the love fruit as it once was called when thought poisonous.
I can hardly wait for this year's seeds to sprout. What's taking so long! It grows so lonesome without her, awaiting, when I come home again, hot and thirsty, and alone . . .
Libertas, a tomato can
Libertas, a tomato can neither give nor receive love, whereas another man can. "What is that so hard to see?"
If there ever was a time that
If there ever was a time that we needed the Holy Spirit it is now. But are our hierarchy listening????
I am a catholic woman of 72 young years and 40 years in ministry. Lived the before and after and now after the after of Vatican II. What a time of joy it was with the council documents. I felt that the church was finally treating us like teenagers instead of children. We had some choices in the how of communion, reconciliation and conscience.
Now I feel us slipping back into preVatican II sadly. I think the problem is a severe lack of adult education. Working with the RCIA with adults and children and their parents...it is amazing what the Catholics don't know what they don't know. The "new" Catholics are in a much better place than "old" catholics.
I pray and try to trust in the Holy Spirit to take charge of the helm before we hit a tragic storm.
Perhaps the Holy Spirit is at
Perhaps the Holy Spirit is at work now and you are ignoring it? Ever consider that? After Vatican II, many of those "in ministry" left the Spirit to follow their own interpretation of the Council (often without reading a single word of the documents). The results were thousands of priests and religious leaving, rampant dissent (championed by this author and publication among many others), the loss of 2 generations of catechized Catholics, shrinking Mass attendance, no vocations, complete and utter chaos, clown Masses, giant concelebrating puppets, etc etc etc. Interestingly, those bishops and priests whom you assume are going against the Spirit have parishes and dioceses with many vocations, higher attendance, many young families, reverent liturgy, and a vibrant faith. I guess to you the Holy Spirit must not like those things.
at the last papal conclave,
at the last papal conclave, why was the white smoke so long in coming?
Actually the decline started
Actually the decline started before Vatican II. Pius the XII spoke alarmingly of the major drops in religious vocation after World War II.Vocations declined greatly after the englightenment. Dissent has a large history in the church. There was one Pope who condemned carnivals in Italy & was ignored. Good old Pius the IX condemned democracy & when people voted in democratic governances in the western world ,the Vatican was forced to accept democracy & claim it supported it all along.These are but few of many many examples. Serious studies show a drop in mass attendance in the USA after the release of Humanae Vitae. Reality dictates----there would be many vocations to the priesthood if the Vatican drops its man made law of celibacy which has nothing to do with the priesthood.It^s the Vatican that^s the problem not Vatican II.
Sounds interesting and
Sounds interesting and worthwhile, but is it just for American catholics? If so, something in the title should say that. The list of names mentioned is, with the exception of one, very American. Catholicism isn't just something "American". Catholics from other cultural backgrounds often have different stories to tell. But OK, this may still be a good book to read by young and old.
Dear Fr. Richard, Thanks for
Dear Fr. Richard,
Thanks for the reading tip; it sounds so interesting. I'm on my 4th set of Campus Ministers, being a former Chairperson of the Religion Department at Joliet Catholic Academy, hiding out in our Guidance Department for now some 10 years, a former Roman Catholic priest, just now celebrating my 40th Wedding Anniverary with profound gratitude to my current fellow Carmelites and Franciscans, as well as to the hospitality of the Good Christian Brothers
who first took a chance on me in providing me ever so meningful employment. I find only peace and goodwill to them all for providing me all sorts of shelter
after ten years of trying to find a meaningful job in the secular market.
I have labored over Thomas Groome's methodology of teaching religion: namely placing our stories at the feet of the Great Stories of Scripture, not easy to do for high school students with practically no history, only the profound potential of our continued telling of the great stories of our Salvation History.
So I sit amused, ever so close to retirement ... reflecting in ashes of my life ... its blessing and mistakes ... waiting to see what happens next in my crazy old and ever new church ... wondering if my ministry is done.
Be assured ... whether at my armchair sitting erect in retirement or at my deathbed waitin' for the Lord ... on my 'must read' list.
In Christ,
Mr. Sewell
"Judge not, that you may not
"Judge not, that you may not be judged". A biblical lesson for some of our dear Bishops.
reminder to self, come back
reminder to self, come back here in a couple of days, this is likely to become a very interesting blog, with people's reminiscences. Nobody stimulates good discussion better that Fr. McBrien.
well, here is one reminiscence: weekday morning in the vast church of a parish attached the house of a religious order, in a populous eastern state. at the altar the high mass speed read/sung and accompanied by the lady in the loft, playing the organ and singing solo her one and only piece, a Missa Brevissima. Meanwhile, at the many side altars, the triple ringing of the sanctus bell, as one after the other of the private masses reached the moment of consecration. communion not given to the people until after ite missa est, last gospel, prayer to st. michael, and sometimes the people's kneeling at the communion rail for the kissing of the sacred image. Even so, the high mass only took 15 minutes, 20 tops.
That post brought back
That post brought back memories. I'd forgotten about the "last" gospel reading.
Problem is that those who hanker for the past are not even aware of the atrocities that went on.
In this ("Nobody stimulates
In this ("Nobody stimulates good discussion better that Fr. McBrien") we discover certain evidence of the beauty and truth of this professor of theology doing his job as it need be done: present a theme and step back; provoke discussion and critical exploration of a theme. If only we studied carefully enough his earliest works which describe faithful methodology for reliable theological research. I strongly recommend reviewing those works from forty years ago, one of which contains in the appendix an outline for such a logical process of critical thinking; I cannot here for the moment recall which.
One does not need to wonder
One does not need to wonder or contemplate for too long as to where South Africa would be today "if Nelson Mandela had followed the example of some of our priests and bishops." It would definitely be a much different world, and not a better one had Mandela chosen the wide path of destruction and divisiveness, vengeance, ignorance and fear, such as today's perverted fundamentalist populist US Bishops who believe in calling others perverted and deserving no protection from the law. These same Bishops, however, deserve no protection from the law when it comes to their covering up and hiding pedophiles. These Bishops, the real perverts, have a perverted sense of justice, and a justice that they will not extend to anyone but themselves.
Follow these Bishops at your own peril and disgrace.
we definitely need something
we definitely need something to lift our spirits! just knowing that Fr. Richard McBrien and his colleagues are "out there" and not afraid to write, edit or speak makes it easier for some of us to stay in the pews on Sundays despite the negative messages. thank you for what I know will be another fine book in the great set mentioned by frere charles.
Fr. McBrien is no reliable
Fr. McBrien is no reliable guide to what is genuinely Catholic.
The Reverend Father Richard
The Reverend Father Richard P. McBrien for over forty years has been the ONLY reliable guide for the anglo American Roman Catholic
And Pope John Paul II, Pope
And Pope John Paul II, Pope Benedict XVI have not been? You have discredited yourself.
If I were to make a statement
If I were to make a statement like this, I would back it up with evidence, reasons, etc. You obviously don't find that necessary. Could you explain?
Anybody know anything about
Anybody know anything about this travesty, this arrogant abrogation of the dictum "de Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum":
==========================================================
Houston, Texas, Mar 2, 2010 / 06:01 am (CNA/EWTN News).- On Monday evening, Archbishop Charles Chaput of Denver delivered a talk at Houston Baptist University, in which he criticized President John F. Kennedy's historic campaign speech on his faith impacting his possible presidency as "sincere, compelling, articulate - and wrong." (etc., etc., etc., ad nauseum)
==========================================================================
frere charles, Kennedy
frere charles,
Kennedy bashing heated up in 2004, when the right-wing wanted Catholics to see George Bush as a better choice than John Kerry and again in 2008 when Mitt Romney made an anti-secular speech about his Mormonism.
Kennedy bashing has been a pet project of new Catholic right wing at least since Fr. Neuhaus founded Evangelicals and Catholics Together (ECT).
Now, as the recent speech by Cardinal George illustrates, it's become Mormons and Catholics together...against the gays(!)
In the old days the battle lines were drawn in respect to doctrinal definitions about Jesus and the Church but today all that's been forgotten and the Church's great cause now is an alternative natural science ("natural law").
Historically speaking, the Church's present obsession with homosexuality is pathetic. This is the great battle of our time? Things are so desperate that Cardinals of the Church praise and flatter Mormonism like churchmen of the past praised Socrates?
And men like Chaput are so completely distrustful of their fellow Americans - it's very frustrating and infuriating. Chaput has nothing but contempt for the ethics and aspirations of Americans who don't do what he says.
But wasn't Socrates alleged
But wasn't Socrates alleged to be, well, you know, when not a slave to his wife, that is . . .
In any case, anyone interested in a full transcript of then-candidate and Senator Kennedy's historic address, and the several follow up questions he answered without benefit of spin doctor, words written on his hand, a speaker in his ear, etc., might wish to read very carefully this Lent (far more carefully than Chaput, apparently) the excellent analysis entitled John F. Kennedy: Catholic and Humanist by Albert J. Menendez.
Not only do we find here, as I wrote, the full speech but also a transcript of what followed as reported in the New York Times, as an appendix to the book, which is very good.
For instance on page 134 of that great book we read of a minister of the Church of Christ asking: "Pope John XXIII only recently stated, according to St. Louis Review dated December 12, 1958: 'Catholics must unite their strength toward the common aim and the Catholic hierarchy has the right and the duty of guiding them.' Do you subscribe to that?"
Candidate Kennedy replied impromptu: "Well, now, I don't, I couldn't describe guiding them in what area. If you're talking about in the area of faith and morals, in the instructions of the church, I would think any Baptist minister or Congregational minister has the right and duty to try to guide his flock. If you mean by that statement that the Pope or anyone else could bind me by a statement, in the fulfillment of my public duties, I say, 'No.' If that statement is intended to mean, and it's very difficult to comment on a sentence taken out of an article which I have not read, but if that is intended to imply that the hierarchy has some obligations, or has an obligation, to attempt to guide the members of the Catholic Church, then that may be proper. But it all depends on the previous language of what you mean by 'guide.' If you mean direct, or instruct, on matters dealing with the organization of faith, the details of the faith, then, of course, they have that obligation. If you mean that anyone could guide or direct me in fulfilling my public duty, then I do not agree."
Is this the kind of thing which incenses Chaput so deeply?
Very good book, which includes several other primary sources, including this from the centenary celebration of Boston College:
" . . .In this hope I am much encouraged by a reading in this last week of the remarkable encyclical, 'PACEM IN TERRIS.' In its penetrating analysis of today's great problems, of social welfare and human rights, of disarmament and international order and peace, that document surely shows that on the basis of one great faith and its traditions there can be developed counsel on public affairs that is of value to all men and women of good will. As a Catholic I am proud of it; and as an American I have learned from it. It only adds to the impact of this message that it closely matches notable expressions of conviction and aspiration from churchmen of other faiths, as in recent documents of the World Council of Churches, and from outstanding world citizens with no ecclesial standing. We are learning to talk the language of progress and peace across the barriers of sect and of creed. It seems reasonable to hope that a similar process may be taking place across the quite different barriers of higher learning (pp. 139f)."
Peter Callahan What exactly
Peter Callahan What exactly do you mean by "kennedy bashing'? Is it understanding the organized crime font for the family fortune? Or is it Old Joe's getting fired as UK ambassador b/c he was a Nazi sympathizer?
Is is the power lust that led JFK to buy into every anti catholic stereotype out there, and to agree to a Know Nothing position b/4 taking office? Is is noting JFK's less than honorable private life?
Is it noting how Teddy left a woman to die in a car in a river? Is it wondering why Trust Fund Teddy is always going after 'earnings' not 'assets', especially ill gotten assets?
That's not 'bashing', that's speaking truth to power.
Truth hurts doesn't it
Truth hurts doesn't it Charlie.
"sincere, compelling, articulate - and wrong."
AMEN!
What IS Truth? Veritas?
What IS Truth?
Veritas?
there is an article about the
there is an article about the Mile-High Cardinal's remarks elsewhere in NCR, which i haven't yet read, but will read now that you have raised the issue. But doesn't the adage apply to the persons only of the dead, not to their words or deeds? How else could there be any History?
That is too fine a point of
That is too fine a point of moral theology for me to tred securely.
For the actual History (and not Chaput's revisionism) please read the primary sources conveniently gathered in:
John F. Kennedy: Catholic and Humanist by Albert J. Menendez (Prometheus Books February 1979)
corrections: Archbishop not
corrections: Archbishop not Cardinal. Article not in NCR (not yet anyway) but here: http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/1342344?eng=y.
What a week, George and the Mormons celebrating homophobia, Chaput and the Southern Baptists celebrating the triumph of religion over the u.s. constitution. What next, boycotting the president at Notre Dame? oh, they already did that.
In the present state of the
In the present state of the Church, "Catholicism" is becoming an embarrassing word. It stands for identity fixation, and has lost any biblical resonance.
actually it is an
actually it is an embarrassing word because all we see in the media are the scandals.
Kill your tv and read the Reverend Father Richard P. McBrien instead.
I finally agree with Fr.
I finally agree with Fr. McBrien, if episcopal leadership were better we would have fewer problems. I would go further and suggest this could come about by teh bishops truly fostering with their service of leasdership Catholic unity in necessary things (faith, the sacraments and the bond of communion with the Pope and Bishops) and freedom in optional things. My models to be imitated? Benedict of Rome, Charles of Denver and some others. May their numbers increase!
There is nothing that marks
There is nothing that marks someone as living in the past as pointing to Mandela as a role model. His movement put burning tires around the necks of their opponents.
I have recently been asked to
I have recently been asked to review the new analysis of Mandela's Way: Fifteen Lessons on Life, Love, and Courage by Richard Strengel, and received the uncorrected proof today.
Admittedly I have had time for only a cursory glimpse, but cannot find here the necklacing which you allege.
I do recall nevertheless an excellent article here on our beloved ncronline.org regarding President Mandela's drawing his divided nation together through sports. Did you not read it? It was the January 19, 2010 column by this Reverend Father Richard P. McBrien entitled something like "What Effective Leadership Looks Like" and I highly recommend it to your review.
This book too.
frère charles du désert OSB OBLAT (Congrégation de Subiaco)
frere charles Necklacing:
frere charles Necklacing: The practice became a common method of lethal lynching during disturbances in South Africa in the 1980s and 1990s. The first recorded instance took place in Uitenhage on 23 March 1985 when African National Congress (ANC) supporters killed a councillor who was suspected of being a collaborator.[1] The victim may take up to 20 minutes to die, suffering severe burns in the process.
Necklacing sentences were sometimes handed down against alleged criminals by "people's courts" established in black townships as a means of circumventing the apartheid judicial system. Necklacing was also used to punish members of the black community who were perceived as collaborators with the apartheid regime. These included black policemen, town councilors and others, as well as their relatives and associates. The practice was often carried out in the name of the ANC, and was even implicitly endorsed by Winnie Mandela,[2] then-wife of the imprisoned Nelson Mandela and a senior member of the ANC.
As a 'moral leader', the good Mr Mandela did very little to stop his organization from this barbaric practice. In fact, his support for his wife Winnie continued even after she extolled necklacing and other crimes:
In a speech she gave in Munsieville on 13 April 1985, she endorsed the practice of necklacing (burning people alive using tyres and petrol) in the struggle to end apartheid. She said, "with our boxes of matches and our necklaces we shall liberate this country".[7]
Further tarnishing her reputation were accusations by her bodyguard, Jerry Richardson, that Winnie Madikizela-Mandela ordered kidnapping and murder. On 29 December 1988, Richardson abducted 14-year-old James Seipei (also known as Stompie Moeketsi) and three other youths from the home of Methodist minister Rev. Paul Verryn. Mrs. Mandela claimed that she had the youth taken to her home because she suspected the reverend was sexually abusing them. The four were beaten in order to get them to admit to sex with the reverend and Seipei was also accused of being an informer. Seipei's body was found in a field with stab wounds to the throat on 6 January 1989.[8] This incident became a cause célèbre for the apartheid government. In 1991, she was convicted of kidnapping and being an accessory to assault in connection with the death of Seipei.
You'll note that Mandela did not divorce her until 1992. Actions, Frere, speak louder than words.
As for further proof how passe Mandela is in the real world, check the box office for Invictus.
frere chalres Check out the
frere chalres Check out the latest from South Africa:
Nelson Mandela has been accused by his former wife of betraying South Africa's black population.
In a savage attack, Winnie Mandela said he had done nothing for the poor and should not have accepted the Nobel peace prize with the man who jailed him, FW de Klerk.
The 73-year-old said her ex-husband had become a 'corporate foundation' who was 'wheeled out' only to raise money for the ANC party he once led.
'Mandela let us down. He agreed to a bad deal for the blacks. Economically we are still on the outside. The economy is very much "white".
'I cannot forgive him for going to receive the Nobel with his jailer de Klerk. Hand in hand they went. Do you think de Klerk released him from the goodness of his heart?
'He had to. The times dictated it, the world had changed.'
...
Ironic, no?
To be correct, the
To be correct, the "necklacing" you speak of - and misrepresent - occurred while he was in prison, and was done by the movement that his former wife (Winnie) was involved with. There was never a connection to Nelson Mandela.
OHtor Um, the 'leader' of
OHtor Um, the 'leader' of the movement, a secular 'saint' never disavowed it, and did not separate from his wife when she extolled the 'virtues of it.
It's caused plausible deniability.
It is interesting that most
It is interesting that most of the proponents of the last 40 years are gray haired and speaking to dwindling audiences of gray hairs. Soon all that will be left of the entire era is a series of 1970 CBS documentaries. You remember ... they portrayed nuns dressed in polyester leisure suits(sporting horned rim glasses) dancing around priest dressed in faded jeans (wearing peasant shirts and sandals). Groovy.
Meanwhile the 20 to 40 something families are juggling multiple infants, herding adolescents, and wrestling with teenagers while kneeling to receive communion on our tongues.
Fr McBride ... in the future, you will be subject of my grandchildren school reports. And when they approach shaking their heads asking "why," we in my generation will sigh and say, "he just wanted to be relevant and tried futilely to invent a new church in which he could reign as an aristocrat."
Post new comment