The Independent News Source
NCR on Kindle - NCR classifieds - YouTube - Twitter - Facebook - Email Alerts - RSS
Printer-friendly version
PDF versionThree strengths of contemporary Catholicism
by Richard McBrien on Oct. 24, 2011
Given all the negative and disheartening news we have been hearing about the Catholic Church in recent years, it's good to be reminded of some of the positive things about Catholicism, in addition to its sacramental life and (sometimes) vibrant parish life.
So writes my colleague and friend, Brad Malkovsky, one of the best and most popular teachers in Notre Dame's theology department. He reports that his undergraduate students have responded "quite well" to what he calls "Three Strengths of Contemporary Catholicism."
The first strength is Catholicism's openness to other religions, especially after Vatican II. It must be noted that Prof. Malkovsky specializes in comparative theology and is an expert in Hinduism, having spent a good part of his graduate studies in India.
The Catholic Church, he says, has led the way here and has set an example of collaboration and sharing with other religions that is truly prophetic.
Because the short document spent so much space (its last three pages) on Judaism and anti-Semitism, Jews have rightly made a lot of the council's Declaration on the Relationship of the Church to Non-Christian Religions, better known perhaps by its Latin title Nostra aetate ("In our times").
The late Cardinal-Archbishop of Vienna, Franz König, referred to Nostra aetate as "one of the most, if not the most, important" of all of the council's declarations ("It must be the Holy Spirit," The Tablet, December 21/28, 2002, p. 6).
The document underlines the point that the Catholic Church "rejects nothing of what is true and holy" in other religions and stresses the importance of dialogue with them.
According to Cardinal König, "This briefest of declarations owes its existence to three people without whose determination, dedication and patience it would never have come about."
They were Pope John XXIII, who was determined to put an end to accusations that the Catholic Church is anti-Semitic; Cardinal Augustin Bea, one of the major figures at Vatican II who was asked by the pope shortly after John XXIII's election to consider how the Jewish question could be incorporated into the council; and Msgr. John Österreicher, a native Austrian and a convert from Judaism who had fled from Austria to the United States before World War II.
In 1964, Pope Paul VI established the Secretariat for Non-Christians, and in 1988 Pope John Paul II gave it its present title, namely, the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue.
Subscribe to NCR
Want to read more about important issues in the life of the Church? A subscription to NCR will keep you up to date and informed.
The second strength, according to Prof. Malkovsky, is the Catholic Church's openness to scientific research. Instead of simply dismissing every finding of the scientific community as unbiblical, there is a greater willingness on the part of the Catholic Church today to ask, "What is the possible theological significance of the data yielded by the new research?"
Evolution is now generally accepted, and has been since the days of Pope Pius XII (1939-58). Catholics, except those who are more influenced by evangelical and fundamentalist Protestant-ism than by the teachings of the Catholic Church, are not part of the evolution-versus-creationism debate. That issue is settled as far as the Catholic Church is concerned.
The Catholic Church teaches that God is the creator of the universe, but how God accomplished creation is compatible with evolution (see the many references in the Catechism of the Catholic Church under "Creation").
However, Prof. Malkovsky reports that most of his students were unaware of the church's teaching. I assume that many of his students think that evolution is incompatible with Catholic doctrine.
Prof. Malkovsky also reports that Wikipedia has a good article on this issue. I might add that the one-volume HarperCollins Encyclopedia of Catholi-cism, which I edited, has an excellent entry on "evolution" by John Haught (pp. 497-99) and another excellent entry on "creation" by Sr. Elizabeth Johnson, C.S.J. (pp. 375-76).
The third strength, according to Prof. Malkovsky, is that Catholic social teaching is the most developed among the world's religions. The Catholic promotion of human rights and justice in all spheres of life -- social, economic and political -- is unique among all religions and is also too little known among Prof. Malkovsky's students.
Most of his students have never heard of liberation theology, either, or the "preferential option for the poor," which Pope John Paul II endorsed in his encyclical, Centesimus annus ("The hundredth year" [after Pope Leo XIII's Rerum novarum], n. 11).
A very good link on the main themes, documents and issues of Catholic social teaching, according to Prof. Malkovsky, can be found here.
I would also recommend my own article, "An Ecclesiological Analysis of Catholic Social Teachings," in Catholic Social Thought and the New World Order, University of Notre Dame Press, 1993, pp. 147-77.
© 2011 Richard P. McBrien. All rights reserved. Fr. McBrien is the Crowley-O'Brien Professor of Theology at the University of Notre Dame.
It's not the Faith that is
It's not the Faith that is negative; It's the hierarchy and all its corruption of the Faith.
Your problem is you. Defining
Your problem is you. Defining the Church of Jesus Christ as corrupt when you have no evidence other than your reading of the NYT or NCR in its wild moments. Did you ever sat silently in the Sacrament chapel in St Peter's or read or heard any TV Mass homily by HH B XV1. Negative comments on the NCReporter sites are a pimple on the Body of Christ. State your case rather than blast from the hip with your Ouzi.
I think Fr. McBrien states
I think Fr. McBrien states his case quite well. I have heard Masses by Pope Benedict XVI, as well as the homilies he has given, and I don't think he would find any disagreement with these three 'strengths.' The National Catholic Reporter does the Church a great service by publishing commentary from scholars like Fr. O'Brien. You obviously think so as well, HermitTalker, or you wouldn't be reading it.
HermitTalker on Oct. 24,
HermitTalker on Oct. 24, 2011.
You stated:
"Your problem is you. Defining the Church of Jesus Christ as corrupt when you have no evidence other than your reading of the NYT or NCR in its wild moments. Did you ever sat silently in the Sacrament chapel in St Peter's or read or heard any TV Mass homily by HH B XV1. Negative comments on the NCReporter sites are a pimple on the Body of Christ. State your case rather than blast from the hip with your Ouzi."
----------------------------------------
1) You don't know the writer that you criticized. He definitely has a better background in religious studies than you are giving him credit for.
2) Secondly, the Truth is the Truth---no matter who states it (as Thomas Aquinas wrote it). Perhaps you need to face reality----the hierarchy of the Church have committed CRIMES against children and youth. And not only in this country---but in a number of other countries as well. They twist the truth to suit their own point of view. In many dioceses, they have bled the financial life-blood of their people defending Criminal priests that should go to jail. Some bishops should be sent to jail as well.
3) You placed private prayer and liturgy on the same scale with the absolutist governance style of the Vatican and the hierarchy, which is stiffling the life of the whole Church, is power-hungry and is blatantly corrupt as well. If you believe that Jesus Christ began a Church that is power-crazed as the Vatican Curia (and many bishops are), you are sadly deluded.
4) And this accusation has been made in several books, newspapers, magazines, websites all over the world, by theologians, by academics, by lawmakers, by ordinary Catholics (who are alert and knowledgable).
we are all humans and commit
we are all humans and commit mistakes, too. who doesnt? but in essence, the Catholic church means well , that's why we have produced saints. stop all this combatant exchange of views and if we cant say nice things , let's just pray that the Holy Spirit touch all erring people, including you and myself.
HermitTalker: Whoa! Your
HermitTalker: Whoa! Your response is way over the top! I feel really uncomfortable with your statements and conclusions. Actually, I experience you, HermitTalker, as blasting from the hip with your Ouzi!
Note to HeermitTalker: It's
Note to HeermitTalker: It's not Ouzi, it Uzi. Obviously, your knowledge of Israeli submachineguns and other things is rather limited.
perhaps he invites us all to
perhaps he invites us all to embrace a eucharistic agape around a nice jug of ouzo?
While aniseed, licorice, mint, wintergreen, fennel and hazelnut fall among my favorite food groups, I do not drink fermented beverages, and while I fail to fire further from the hip, I certainly embrace such a call to comprehensive and compassionate eucharistic action as revitalizing our purposefully divided church, should she deign to permit this Ciprian (or of Lesvos?) hermeneutic.
Could not agree with you
Could not agree with you more! Jesus is once again being crucified, this time by the Vatican Hierarchy as it seeks to hold on to its clerical power.
Another thing that upsets me: Benedict speaks of the option for the poor while dressed in the opulence of the papacy and the riches of the Vatican as a background.
Actually, it's NCR and people
Actually, it's NCR and people like you....
One of the strengths of
One of the strengths of Catholicism is that it has not fallen into Biblical Fundamentalism, which is a philosophical dead end. That and the traditional Catholic concern for the poor. So many of the Evangelicals fall into the Biblical Fundamentalism trap, and throw the poor under the bus. We Catholics have our problems, but at least we can think.
Unfortunately there are many,
Unfortunately there are many, many Catholics that read the Bible Fundamentally and are allowed to act on a poor understanding of the Word.
Yes, LC/RC, Opus Dei, and
Yes, LC/RC, Opus Dei, and other "Trads" seem to want to wallow in ignorance.
"ignorance is
"ignorance is strength"
-Orwell
An insightful and
An insightful and well-balanced comment.
A holier than thou comment.
A holier than thou comment.
those evangelicals I see
those evangelicals I see around the plaza in front of the Cathedral in Ciudad Juarez actually appear quite concerned for the desperately poor who gather there, and often bring food after preaching quite vigorously.
I have photos of same but cannot access them here, sorry.
There is one group in particular which regularly comes to a vacant lot a few blocks north of the cathedral. Others seem not removed at all from the very poor themselves.
Perhaps it is those you see on US television in their crystal palaces and such, calling to send in the dough-re-mi, that are of such? Gene Scott, Bush baptizer Bill Graham, Tammy Faye, all those boys? I do not know, as I do not watch television any longer, particularly in English. Material wealth as a sacrament of God's favor? Those guys?
Give me money, I spread it around. In fact I got to go feed some kids now.
The Chrystal Cathedral is in
The Chrystal Cathedral is in bankruptcy, and the diocese of Orange has considered buying it, Billy Graham is in a wheelchair and has never had any scandal financial or sexual connected to his name, and Tammy Faye is dead a long time now.
in fact, here they are, the
in fact, here they are, the evangelicals feeding the homeless in a vacant lot in Ciudad Juarez. after a moving address:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/charlesjscanlon/sets/72157626077536721/detail/
Really like that Benedict XVI
Really like that Benedict XVI has declared a "year of faith"...the hierarchy has demonstrated no faith in the Holy Spirit or the people of God. and this so-called "Year of Faith" will be based on the Catechism...that's not faith, that's doctrine!!
What is
What is faith?
==================
Is faith hierarchically fixated belief, as in "the hermeneutic of continuity", meaning that every new faith understanding must "faithfully" root in the worldview-faith understanding as advanced since Irenaeus, or, does it mean, faith shaped by the evolved consciousness of reason-and-faith-accommodating each other? So, when it comes to faith, whose conscience prevails, the institutional or the personal?
In reality and practice, faith is mired in "the hermeneutic of continuity", in pre-Vatican II rhetoric, which does NOT accommodate EVOLUTION.
Sylvester P. Steffen, your
Sylvester P. Steffen, your reasoning eludes me. Actually I think it might be that your conclusion eludes me. What do you mean by "in reality and practice"?
I cannot understand the term "faith" except in contrast to "belief". I'm convinced that "faith" was practiced by the earliest disciples of Jesus; that "belief" came about later as result of conciliar decrees and credos and, yes, catechisms. Much of controversy now seems to come from describing the one as the other. They are not identical.
Ordinary people aren't so
Ordinary people aren't so subtle in distinguishing between religious belief and faith. Most accept that faith, religious belief, is what church teaches. What church teaches is defined by worldview presumption of 2000 years ago, and precedent of Old Testament mythology.
Faith supposes reason as religion supposes science (scientia). Evolutionary science has had no impact on religious faith, belief. Theological education is woefully deficient in understanding and correlating evolutionary history.
www.secondenlightenment.org
Sylvester L Steffen
The Three strengths of
The Three strengths of contemporary "progressive" Catholicism, I would say.
From what perspective are the
From what perspective are the adjectives necessary? Could your sentence sans the adjectives work just as well. If not, why?
ACTIONS, NOT WORDS ....
ACTIONS, NOT WORDS .... Thanks, Richard, but Prof. Malkovsky should occasionally take his head up from irrelevant papal ideological statements that few in the hierarchy appear to read, and even fewer appear to follow. Interreligious dialogue, in reality, is rapidly approaching extinction, thanks to Joseph Ratzinger and his Roman clique's unrelenting drive towards an exclusive cult-like Church, with a Constantinian ecclesiology, a "mysterious" neo-scholastic theology, and an arcane liturgy, all carefully designed to support the Roman clique, their curial cabal and their 5,000 puppet bishops' modern "sack of Rome".
Add to that the Roman clique's ongoing capitulation to the Holocaust denying fringe group. John XXIII, Cardinal Bea and Msgr. Osterreicher must be turning over in their graves. The brilliant theologian, Walter Kasper,who worked diligently for decades to promote unity among divergent Christian denominations, often now sounds almost to be in desperation at the near destruction of the ecumenical movevement resulting largely from his former university colleague, Joseph Ratzinger's imperial statements and actions. As reported recently and reliably by Reuters, Mr. Ratzinger's recent visit to Germany was an ecumenical disaster.
As to science, hundreds of millions of Catholic women worldwide are daily condemned to unwanted pregnancies, or in some instances even to desperate abortions, by an anti-contraception policy that even Bernard Lonergan derisively observed decades ago was based principally on a flawed and antiquated Aristotelian biology. Aristotle may have been the premier biologist in the fourth century B.C., but I wouldn't have wanted him to have delivered my children, especially given his negative view of women.
But Aristotle served his purpose in 1968 and got the then Roman clique of Messrs. Montini and Ottaviani off the hook in their desperate attempt to salvage "infalliblity" from the independent findings of the pope's own Birth Control Commision. Roman "science" similarly twists numerous scientific studies in its futile effort to prove homosexuality is "an intrinsic disorder". With the 2012 US presidential election fast approaching, the Roman clique and their US puppet bishops are dusting off their quadrennial campaign props to fight "gay marriage".
As to the liberation theology movement, any ND student who can Google will quickly find out that Mr. Ratzinger, on behalf of his autocratic boss, Karol Wojtyla, put the Roman stake into the movement's heart during the 1980's, while brutally punishing many of the movement's prophetic leaders. The Church in the Southern hemisphere has still not fully recovered from the Roman clique's self serving blunder here.
The current anti-gay crusade of the Roman clique is especially cynical and hypocritical, given especially the increasing reports of widespread active homosexuality among Catholic clergy.
Is it any wonder that Notre Dame students by and large could care less about patent papal propaganda. As honest youth, they watch how the Roman clique and their puppet bishops behave instead. Good for them. Many of them, like many ND graduates before them have done and continue to do, will exit the Church soon after graduation and join the US's fastest growing religious group, Former Catholics.
The principal recent positive development that Prof. Malovsky overlooked is the recent criminal complaint filed with the independent International Criminal Court (ICC) by American Catholics against the current Roman clique, alleging crimes against humanity for the worldwide cover-up of the rape of defenseless Catholic children by priests.
For more information on the Roman clique's coercive policies and some positive current developments, please note the NCR comment under the comment heading entitled, "LET'S GO BACK FURTHER", accessible by clicking on at
http://ncronline.org/blogs/bulletins-human-side/you-cant-go-rome-again .
For more information on the Roman clique's political and unscientific approach to undercutting the report favoring permitting contraception of the pope's own Birth Control Commission, please note the NCR article accessible by clicking on at
http://ncronline.org/news/vatican/new-birth-control-commission-papers-re... .
For more information on the Roman clique's effort to push its anti-gay views on the American electorate, as part of an apparent effort to elect a "low-tax-on-the-wealthy" presidential candidate acceptable to wealthy Catholic donor members of Opus Dei, Knights of Malta, the Leadership Roundtable, FADICA, LEGATUS, and similar groups, please note the NCR comment under the comment heading, "WALL STREET, DC AND THE RCC", accessible by clicking on at
http://ncronline.org/blogs/grace-margins/occupy-wall-street-new-generati... .
For information on the current criminal complaint against the pope and others in the Roman clique filed by American Catholics with the independent ICC, please note the NCR comment under the comment heading, "POPE IN HANDCUFFS", accessible by clicking on at
http://ncronline.org/blogs/all-things-catholic/blessing-vatican-really-d... .
These three "strengths" are
These three "strengths" are in fact becoming weaker. "openness to other religions" doesn't mean much when people within your own fold who have new ways to express their Catholicism are routinely silenced and condemned.(Teilhard, Kung, etc.) "openness to scientific research" is compromised by rigid doctrinal thinking that came up with prohibitions on research before the "big bang", and on stem cell research. As for social teaching, the bishops' turn to the right has tried to negate just about all progress made in the last century. No these are not "strengths", but rather three ideas that express what Catholicism can be, things to maintain, to nourish, to treasure.
We now remember the good
We now remember the good teachings that came from Vatican II only in scholarly circles. I think you have the right critique here. I find it interesting that on two of three teachings, the college students never heard about them. In fact, that is the way it is today, one can go to Mass Sunday after Sunday and never hear a thing about the three positives.
"Openness to other
"Openness to other religions"?
I would not dare to state that:
The Tablet Blog
Is the SSPX the tail wagging the dog?
Posted by Robert Mickens, 21 October 2011, 9:00
More and more it appears that the Vatican – or at least Pope Benedict XVI – has been bending over backwards in order to not offend the Society of St Pius X (SSPX) or "Lefebvrists". That certainly seemed to be the case during the papal visit to Germany. And it appears also to be true regarding the programme for next Thursday's interfaith gathering for peace in Assisi. In a marked difference from the other three papal-led Assisi events, the upcoming one explicitly excludes public prayers and praying in groups.
"We got emails from people saying they would have to say a thousand Masses of reparation [because of the previous format]" said Cardinal Peter Turkson, head of the Vatican's justice and peace office, at a press conference last Tuesday. Everyone knows that the cardinal was talking about the Lefebvrists.
So what gives? It sure looks like this miniscule group of clerics - who explicitly reject key doctrinal developments from the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council and lack any canonical status in the Catholic Church - have become the tail wagging the dog.
And yet, this week one of their bishops, Holocaust-denying Richard Williamson, infuriated people once again by accusing the Jews of committing "deicide" by crucifying Jesus Christ. He added that, even today, the Jewish people continued to "act collectively as the enemies of the true Messiah". European rabbis have called on the Vatican to suspend reconciliation talks with the SSPX until the group unconditionally severs all ties with anti-Semitism.
So far, not a peep from that side of the Tiber.
The fourth strength is
The fourth strength is education. Without it, there would be no openness, or ability to look beyond ourselves. It is just like the Holy trinity. Everything gets its strength and existence from the other. Thanks always to Fr. McBrien. I am your biggest admirer. Or first among equals.
These could be said to be
These could be said to be strengths of contemporary Catholicism, that much is true. However, it should be noted that the Church is not simply contemporary, she is eternal; she, like her Lord and Master, is ever old, ever new. That being said, we would do well to recall those strengths of the Church that are universal and timeless:
The Eucharist -- the Real Presence of Jesus Christ, Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity, present in our world in the Consecrated Host and the Precious Blood. Our Lord is present, awaiting us to come and spend time with Him, in every tabernacle in every church, from St. Peter's Basilica and the grandest cathedral, to the simplest chapel and oratory. In the Eucharist, the Lord fulfills His promise that He would "be with us always, until the end of the world". How many of us take the time to be present with Him? How many of us take the opportunity to be in the Real Presence of Christ, to look at Him, and allow Him to look at us?
The Sacraments -- Christ, through His Holy Church, gives us powerful instruments of His grace in the sacraments. Through Baptism, we are grafted into the Body of Christ, Original Sin forgiven. In Confession, our sins are forgiven and we are made whole again. At Confirmation, we profess our faith publicly and receive again the great gift of the Holy Spirit. In Matrimony, a man and wife join themselves to one another forever, becoming one flesh, just as Christ, the Bridegroom, and His Church, the bride, are one. In Holy Orders, men are called and consecrated for ministry as deacon, priest and bishops. In the Anointing of the Sick, those who are ill and suffering are given the strength to place their hope in Christ, to unite their suffering with His, and, in many cases to be physically cured, and in all cases, to receive peace and comfort. And in the Eucharist, we receive the Body and Blood of Christ as spiritual Food to nourish and empower us.
Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition -- Scripture, the written Word of God, and Tradition, the living interpretation of the Word of God, the twin pillars upon which our faith rests. Each mutually dependent on the other, neither one superior to the other, each finds its meaning in the other and taken together are the fullness of Divine Revelation. The Church is so gifted.
The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass -- the supreme act of worship. In the Mass, we are united with Christ's suffering and death. Each Mass re-resents the passion, death and resurrection of the Lord, and in so doing, that salvific moment is efficacious throughout time. At the Mass, we are joined by the saints and angels who worship the Lamb beside and with us. We are caught up in the transcendent moment when Heaven and earth are joined. What greater act of worship could there be?
The Blessed Virgin Mary -- THE example of our faith. She who never sinned, she who always points us to her Son. She who is our mediatrix, who prays with us and intercedes for us with her Son. Like the bridegroom at Cana who went to Mary in his need, "they have no wine", we are confident that Our Lord will answer her now, just as He did then. In that confidence, she reminds us always, "do whatever He tells you".
The Communion of the Saints -- the examples of our faith. These men and women, young and old, clergy and laity, rich and poor, high born and low born, remind us that holiness is the vocation to which we are all called. They remind us that holiness is not necessarily found in doing extraordinary things, but in doing ordinary things with extraordinary love. They intercede for us to God, they help us in our everyday lives, they walk beside us and inspire us to always focus ourselves on God.
The Holy Father and the College of Bishops, guided and preserved by the Holy Spirit -- Our Lord knew that human beings often disagree with one another, most usually in good faith. He knew that over time these disagreements could lead to confusion about that which is true and that this confusion could rupture the community He left behind. So He charged Peter with the mission of "confirming the brethren" and "tending and feeding the sheep" he left behind. Peter, at the end of his life, so charged his successor, St. Linus, who, in his time, so charged his successor, and on, and on. The Bishop of Rome, the Pope, the Holy Father, serves as the symbol and guarantor of the unity of the faith. He is charged with the mission of preserving and faithfully passing on the teachings of Christ. He is aided in this supremely important ministry by the College of Bishops, those successors of the Apostles who are in communion with him, and share with him the responsibility of teaching, governing and sanctifying Christ's Church. Through this ministry, and under the guidance and protection of the Holy Spirit, we can be assured that the teaching of the Church is certain and sure, and efficacious for salvation.
The various devotions of the Church -- the Rosary, Stations of the Cross, the Divine Mercy chaplet, Perpetual Help devotions, litanies, through these devotions, we sanctify each day, and we are drawn ever closer, ever more deeply, into the mystery of Jesus Christ. Through the gift of indulgences, gifts from the spiritual treasury of the Church, we are freed from all or part of the temporal punishment out sins deserve and again, are drawn ever more deeply into the mystery of Christ.
I could go on for hours, perhaps days, discussing the multitude of timeless and eternal strengths of Catholicism. How often, in our overwhelming interest in the present, we forget the eternal. It is a great Church we are part of, it is a beautiful faith we are proud to profess in Christ Jesus, our Lord.
while in the sem did you
while in the sem did you receive instruction on that which is normative and that which is formative in our Faith? You seem caught up in the accessories, and lost, endlessly, to avoid feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, healing the sick, loving the enemy, freeing the imprisoned and granting sanctuary to the illegal, the most certain signs of our Faith in action.
Thus do you miss the Marian myth's greatest gift to us, through the Gospel of Saint Luke, the eternal, eloquent revolutionary war cry, the Magnificat, specifically as she calls for the reversal of this world's imperial order, a cry so often repeated by her debt-forgiving Son:
Fecit potentiam in brachio suo,
dispersit superbos mente cordis sui;
deposuit potentes de sede
et exaltavit humiles;
esurientes implevit bonis
et divites dimisit inanes.
And were you taught that all
And were you taught that all the action in the world is ultimately meaningless if it is not done in the right spirit -- that of evangalization? Did you learn that the goal of Christian labor is not to make the lives of the poor and needy better, though that is a laudable minor goal, but rather to save souls? In your posts, I find much about action, little about the reasons behind the action. Social justice for its own sake is not the goal of the Christian. Social outreach must always be at the service of the greater and larger goal of "teaching all nations". Even at the end of His public ministry, Our Lord did not leave His followers the command, "Go and care for the poor"; no, the final command, the Great Commission, is to "Go and teach all nations".
The Roman Catholic Church is not some giant social outreach enterprise. I fear that, in your quest for social justice, you have missed the forest for the trees. Our Lord's mission cannot be reduced to simple social outreach, it was far more than that. Our Lord called us to far more than simply serving the poor and the needy.
Finally, the role of our Blessed Mother is far greater than some "revolutionary war cry" (which, of course, is not what the Magnificat is). Mary is the example of faith, a frightened girl who said "yes" to God, even knowing it could cost her her family, her marriage, her respect, even her life. She continually said "yes" to God and today is the constant reminder for us to do as she did, to say "yes" to Our Lord when He calls.
People can debate the role of Mary, which moment is more important, which is central to her role in our faith lives. For me, it will forever be that moment at the wedding in Cana, when, despite Our Lord's flat statement that His "hour had not yet come", she had faith enough to turn to the steward and say, "Do whatever He tells you". And the Lord answered His mother's plea. It is that simple faith in her Son that speaks to me. It is that simple statement, made in complete confidence and trust that Jesus would do whatever is best, "Do whatever He tells you" that sums up Mary's role. She intercedes for us with Jesus now, just as she did for the bridegroom, and then, in faith and trust, tells us "Do whatever He tells you". You may call this "myth", but I believe it to be just what it was, a moment between mother and Son that has inestimable value for all who follow her Divine Son.
CWG on Oct. 26, 2011. You
CWG on Oct. 26, 2011.
You stated:
"And were you taught that all the action in the world is ultimately meaningless if it is not done in the right spirit -- that of evangalization? Did you learn that the goal of Christian labor is not to make the lives of the poor and needy better, though that is a laudable minor goal, but rather to save souls? In your posts, I find much about action, little about the reasons behind the action. Social justice for its own sake is not the goal of the Christian. Social outreach must always be at the service of the greater and larger goal of "teaching all nations". Even at the end of His public ministry, Our Lord did not leave His followers the command, "Go and care for the poor"; no, the final command, the Great Commission, is to "Go and teach all nations".
The Roman Catholic Church is not some giant social outreach enterprise. I fear that, in your quest for social justice, you have missed the forest for the trees. Our Lord's mission cannot be reduced to simple social outreach, it was far more than that. Our Lord called us to far more than simply serving the poor and the needy.
Finally, the role of our Blessed Mother is far greater than some "revolutionary war cry" (which, of course, is not what the Magnificat is). Mary is the example of faith, a frightened girl who said "yes" to God, even knowing it could cost her her family, her marriage, her respect, even her life. She continually said "yes" to God and today is the constant reminder for us to do as she did, to say "yes" to Our Lord when He calls.
People can debate the role of Mary, which moment is more important, which is central to her role in our faith lives. For me, it will forever be that moment at the wedding in Cana, when, despite Our Lord's flat statement that His "hour had not yet come", she had faith enough to turn to the steward and say, "Do whatever He tells you". And the Lord answered His mother's plea. It is that simple faith in her Son that speaks to me. It is that simple statement, made in complete confidence and trust that Jesus would do whatever is best, "Do whatever He tells you" that sums up Mary's role. She intercedes for us with Jesus now, just as she did for the bridegroom, and then, in faith and trust, tells us "Do whatever He tells you". You may call this "myth", but I believe it to be just what it was, a moment between mother and Son that has inestimable value for all who follow her Divine Son."
---------------------------
Sorry Clint, but your commentary misses some major points of belief. Social justice forms the basis of the Ten Commandments. It forms the basis of the teachings of the prophets, too, in the Hebrew Scripture. And Justice forms the basis for Christian morality and ethics.
1) Humans are two/one units. We are not just souls (that is what an angel is). Christ spent too much of his time in healing the sick and in feeding the hungry (social concerns) to have it dismissed as a minor action.
When Christ sent the Twelve out on mission he told them "Cure the sick, raise the dead, cleanse the lepers, cast out the demons." (Matt. 10:8).
2) Christ's Beatitudes are the "Be Attitudes" for all who would call themselves "Christian". These are based upon the service that all who are called to leadership should embrace. Christ, in washing the feet of his Apostles tells them clearly that if they would be FIRST----they must accept the role of SERVANT.
3) In the Gospel of Matthew, when the disciples of John the Baptist come to ask Jesus if he is the "one who is to come," Jesus stated: "Go and tell John what you hear and see: the blind receive their sight, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the poor have good news brought to them." (Matt. 11:4-6)
4) At the end of time at the final judgment---Jesus basis admission to heaven strictly upon social justice issues (not adhearing to doctrine and not based upon worship). It is based upon feeding the hungry, giving drink to the thirsty, visiting the sick and those in prison, bringing comfort to the sorrowing----all the works of social justice.
Teach all nations----YES----teach them the Beatitudes----teach them to love God with their whole mind, heart, soul, and strength,----and to love their neighbor as themselves---the TWO greatest commandments.
quod scripsi scripsi. Had
quod scripsi scripsi.
Had you studied your Latin you would know how very liberating this is, and in line with the great women prophets of the Old Testament:
Fecit potentiam in brachio suo,
dispersit superbos mente cordis sui;
deposuit potentes de sede
et exaltavit humiles;
esurientes implevit bonis
et divites dimisit inanes.
You would also know that when Jesus tells us "Feed the hungry" Jesus means "Feed the hungry, clothe the naked, shelter the homeless, heal the sick" no matter what your tea party mutters this week.
The Holy Mother Church until wojo and ratzo served the poor first and foremost, and fully. Now Escriva and Marcial and Carl Anderson take over, they think, for a while, but the Message remains and we go deaf to Jesus at our peril.
Let the one with ears to hear do what the Gospel says.
We retain as our uniquely Roman Catholic letter the one from Saint James the Great, which speaks long and well and powerfully on this matter. Read it carefully. What good does it to tell someone to be well fed and warm and happy, while doing nothing to make it so.
Your theology is a very strange place.
Again I ask, what did you study at the sem? Simply spend time in the quarters of bitter, reactionary, retired, nonpastoral priests hearing their rant against the People of God?
You know, I never recall Our
You know, I never recall Our Lord saying "Feed the hungry, through confiscatory taxation policies". I never recall Him saying, "Clothe the naked, by allowing the government to establish agencies that do it for you, so you don't have to". But, hey, that's just me. Perhaps your Scriptures are different than mine.
And, not that it's really any of your business, but I focused my studies on Church history, Canon Law and liturgy. I know that's a bit eclectic, but those were my interests, still are, as a matter of fact. I never claimed to be a pastor, I had hoped that I might teach at a university or perhaps serve as director of the Office of Worship, maybe even Chancellor (who was also our diocese's archivist. I loved spending hours poring over the diocesan archives).
"I never recall Our Lord
"I never recall Our Lord saying, blah, blah, blah."
Yes, Mr. Green, Jesus didn't tell us *how* to address the very real human needs in our world. He merely identified them, then left it to us to figure out *how* to meet such needs. Jesus, in other words, had faith in our problem-solving capacity.
The Lord, in other words, was not a micromanager.
Unlike B16 and his papal lackeys today.
There's a parallel:
I've offered to *give* you a west coast orange bridge --- FREE! I've simply asked you to forward $100 to defray cost of shipping & handling.
Given your thinking on display here, perhaps you need some help in figuring out *how* to take advantage of my offer???
I know Jesus wouldn't need detailed instructions.
But you do???
SPOT ON!!!
SPOT ON!!!
Not a bad list at all, but
Not a bad list at all, but there are disturbing omissions: how the Beatitudes are practiced, and how the the two great commandments of Christ are practiced. Your list is very accurate about what happens "at church" but not truly Christian in that you give no hint of how Christianity is practiced when not in church.
The Beatitudes and the Great
The Beatitudes and the Great Commandment are all part of Sacred Scripture. They are part of the total message of Divine Revelation, and cannot be studied in a vacuum. The way in which we live them out is found in the way in which we live our entire Christian life.
Moreover, if you look carefully at what I wrote, you will find that I cite the Blessed Virgin as the example of living a life completely pointed toward Christ, doing "whatever He tells" us to do. I point out the saints as examples of ordinary people, doing ordinary things, with extraordinary love. Those are clear instances of living out the Great Commandment: love God by living a life completely dedicated to Him; love neighbor by doing living life and doing ordinary things, acts of kindness, generosity, compassion, out of extraordinary love.
Am I wrong in thinking that
Am I wrong in thinking that Jesus Christ said that the two great commandments are "the whole law and the prophets" and that Scripture therefore should be interpreted in the light of these two commandments?
I'm glad that Father McBrien
I'm glad that Father McBrien reminded us of the Church's three strengths. He provides light at a dark time in Catholicism's history. Those strengths may be battered and bloody but they are deeply rooted and will outlast the reactionary clique that currenly dominates the Curia and most diocesan chanceries.
So take heart! Remember what the English Catholic poet Hilaire Belloc wrote about the Church over a hundred years ago,"any other organization ruled by such knavish imbecility would not have lasted a fortnight."74JEE
Dear Father, thank you for a
Dear Father, thank you for a little light on a dark day. The openness to
Evolution in our church is strictly an openness to a Darwinian understanding.
So, yes God could very well have set the ball rolling, so to speak. But
Evolution is not a pointer back to an origin alone. The greater understanding
of evolution is the forward motion part. It is here that the Pope and the
Vatican coterie stop dead. They do not seem to be able to accept that the
Church and the Faith itself is also evolving. This is very strange, since
evolution severly predicts extinction for anything that fails to evolve.
Right now our real conflict arises for the obvious evolution in the ordinary
catholic popolation and its radical denial by hierarchy led by our Pontiff
with a penchant for a return to a dead past. As you have said: "you can't go
rome again". I am personally lost and in a kind of depression. I love my
church but I have to accept that in it I am a cultural irrelevance. When we
have no say in our church there is a very big problem. I understand this is exaccerbated by the fact that there will always be a substantial body of
decent catholics who happen to be also steeped in a stopped time. They like
the absolutes and unfortunately, like it or not we live the the earliest
understanding of relativity. Relativity may well be all that is.
I welcome all the positives I can get. But, there is this big unmovable block
to the future and I do not see it being moved very soon.
Thanks and God Bless your constant witness to truth and balance.
TomC
Fr. McBrien was doing well
Fr. McBrien was doing well here until he got to the point of "liberation theology." Fr. McBrien seems to equate liberation theology with the preferential option for the poor. May I suggest that this isn't quite right. Blessed John Paul II was at times critical of liberation theology and its advocates, accusing them of wrongly supporting violent revolution and Marxist class struggle.
Wojtyla was wrong, and our
Wojtyla was wrong, and our Church suffers mightily for it.
Wojtyla was bought off.
Study Fr. Roger Haight's work on the subject for starters, and everything you can find by the Rev. Father's Jon Sobrino, Ignacio Ellacuria, Gustavo Gutierrez, Leonardo Boff (including Harvey Cox's book about him) and the rest, as your comment here indicates a need for greater research in the field, the future of our Church if she is to have one at all.
Thank you again Fr McBrien
Thank you again Fr McBrien for bringing out the truth and celebrating the gifts of the Roman Catholic Church tradition and community. The Holy Spirit will prevail if we but continue to be faithful to our calling as disciples of Jesus. We must continue the dialogue with the hierarchical power structure, but try to avoid any financial support. Transforming their distrust of the sensus fidelum to a collaborative approach may take many years. I do believe that holy prophets rather than just ambitious men will eventually bring our church leadership back to the joy of it's saving role in affirming all the diversity of God's people. I imagine a church that has the faith to let go of fears of a consensus-making process within it's own tradition that would include people across genders, states of life, and academic expertise.
Part of the article
Part of the article states:
"Evolution is now generally accepted, and has been since the days of Pope Pius XII (1939-58). ... However, Prof. Malkovsky reports that most of his students were unaware of the church's teaching. I assume that many of his students think that evolution is incompatible with Catholic doctrine."
A summary of some of Pope Pius XII's magisterial Catholic teachings regarding the Bible, creation, and evolution, as well as Catholic doctrine,
are appended:
- Genesis contains real history - it gives an account of things that really happened. (Pius XII)
- Adam and Eve were real human beings—the first parents of all mankind. (Pius XII)
...
- Evolution must not be taught as fact, but instead the pros and cons of evolution must be taught. (Pius XII, Humani Generis)
- Investigation into human “evolution” was allowed in 1950, but Pope Pius XII feared that an acceptance of evolutionism might adversely affect doctrinal beliefs.
References:
(1) Genesis 1,2 etc.
http://www.biblegateway.com/quicksearch/?quicksearch=according+kind&qs_v...
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis%201,%202&version=NIV...
(2) What Does Cutting-Edge Science Teach about Origins
From
Creation Doctrine
What Does the Catholic Church Teach about Origins?
http://www.kolbecenter.org/images/kolbe/pdfs/what_church_teaches.pdf
how does knowing Evolution,
how does knowing Evolution, now undeniable, affect in any way our beliefs in the all-powerful and merciful teaching of Jesus: Love thy enemy.
Actually, Charles, even most
Actually, Charles, even most scientists would say that evolution remains a theory, open to debate and modification as evidence demands. Very few things in science are ever considered to be "undeniable"; even Einstein's Theory of Relativity, the idea that as one approaches the speed of light, time slows and that something moving at the speed of light would occupy all points in existence at the same moment, once thought to be "undeniable", may indeed be deniable at scientists at CERN are attempting to demonstrate. Evolution may be the most plausible and scientifically demonstrable explanation for human beings at the present moment, but it is far from "undeniable".
Evolution does not negate the role of God in creation, but it does force us as believers to take a different view of the way in which God interacts with His creation. If we posit God as the First Cause of creation, which He is, and evolution is indeed the theory by which God created man, then we have to state that God did not create man all of sudden, but rather started the process with the final end in sight. This tells us something about God, that He works, not necessarily through the grand miraculous gesture (though He does do that as well), but primarily through the natural and physical laws that He put into place. This is a profound realization about God, and it has a bearing on the way in which God's plan of salvation unfolds, with implications for us, His followers.
Theology is more than just "love thy enemy", as important a teaching as that may be. But, that is the beauty of Catholicism, there are roles for those who are more active in the world and roles for those who are more contemplative. Our model, of course, should be the Lord, Who was able to be both active in preaching and teaching and healing, and also contemplative in prayer and meditation.
What scientific research are
What scientific research are you looking at CWG? Truth is ALMOST ALL, if not all, scientists in the area of biology, paleontology and anthropology, etc., agree that evolution is now beyond a theory and is established fact. You also jump to discredit Einstein when the fact is that only one study poses the challenge and needs extensive replication as first results are often incorrect. But since it evidently supports your personal vision of the world and beyond, you present it as credible evidence, which it is not. By contrast, your second and third paragraphs do great service in clarifying the contemporary Church's teachings on evolution and science that counters fundamentalist beliefs in the literal reading of scripture.
In my opening paragraph, I
In my opening paragraph, I did not dismiss evolution, but only sought to point out that science continues to advance, and those theories, once thought, "undeniable" can be, and sometimes are, revised, modified, or entirely discounted. The scientists I know at local universities and colleges are quick to point out to their students that science is always open to new theories, new proofs, new ways of looking at old problems. They are quick to remind their students that very few things are ever set in stone, very few things are ever a certainty. Science is always investigating and revising.
Moreover, I did not "discredit Einstein", as if that is some profound sin. Rather, I simply pointed out that scientists at CERN have demonstrated that the Theory of Relativity, once thought to be "undeniable" may not be so, based on their findings. All that I intended to do was to point out that even the most accepted theory in the scientific community can be open to modification, revision or dismissal, as scientific knowledge and experience grows. I don't know what "personal vision of the world" this supports, except that, to borrow from Hamlet, "there are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy".
Keep in mind that the
Keep in mind that the scientists' use of the word "theory" does NOT mean "not quite fact." The way most people use the word "theory" is more like what the scientists mean by "hypothesis" -- something that isn't proved, but MIGHT be true (but it might NOT be).
For a scientist, a theory is an explanatory structure that accounts for all (or almost all) the accumulated data. A theory is the explanation that makes all the data fit together. Constructing a theory is like fitting all the pieces of a jigsaw together. Evolution is the best explanatory structure we have for how there are are so many species that are both so much alike, but also very different. It might not be perfect, but it's the best we have at present.
Theories aren't judged so much on whether or not they are "true." They are evaluated on the grounds of explanatory power, simplicity and elegance. A really powerful theory can even account for apparent counter-examples.
Ann of Amherst, thank you so
Ann of Amherst, thank you so much for explaining the fact that those of us who are, or have been, scientists view theory in an entirely different way from how most people view it, and most especially, opposite from the way in which creationism apologists misuse it. Theory is not a matter of "belief", even though that's how lay people seem to insist on characterizing it - theory is based upon demonstrable fact gathered both from direct observation, and from well-designed experiments which are repeatable by scientific peers.
Good theories are also generally predictive; the theory of Evolution predicts that species do, and will continue to, change in response to changes in their habitat, and in fact, such changes have been, and continue to be, observed.
As regards the theological and spiritual significance of the above, all I can say is that my own, and Catholicism's, concept of God is at once large enough, and humble enough, to accept God's making (and changing) the Universe as God sees fit to do, rather than insisting that it was made in the way any human, or group of humans, want God to have made it...
I couldn't agree more CWG,
I couldn't agree more CWG, it's so refreshing to hear a sane, orthodox viewpoint expressed on these comment threads. The heterodox ultra-liberal readership of the NCR should be reminded that (after having a brief scan of the comments above) most of the issues squabbled over here i.e. women "priestesses", homosexual "rights", the "power structure" of the Hierarchy (pseudo-socialist babble if I ever saw it), the new translation of the Missale Romanum etc. are non-issues for the vast, vast majority of church going Roman Catholics in the world today. Of the billion or so Catholics alive today, very few regard these things as matters of dispute, debate or difficulty in the Faith. The Church is our Mother and we are Her obedient children, partaking of the grace She freely provides as the Bride of Christ Her High Priest. I fear that, in the USA at least, an almost sub-concious attitude of (forgive me U.S brethren) liberal Americanism has crept into your thinking towards the doctrines of Holy Church, that they are somehow matters for votes, or debates or elections, rather than divine laws handed down to the Faithful through a God-appointed earthly Hierarchy that mirrors the celestial one. Reading the NCR, one gets the impression that people are somehow indignant they've got been "consulted" on matters of supreme and universal Truth. Until this sinful spiritual and intellectual pride is crushed out of you and replaced by the Christian spirit of humility, charity and obedience by your clergy and bishops, I fear publications like this one will continue to draw unwary readers.
What planet are you from?
What planet are you from?
By the grace of God,
By the grace of God, Anonymous, I'm from England. God save the Queen, St. George ora pro nobis, etc. etc.
figures . . .
figures . . .
Good question, Charles. If we
Good question, Charles. If we pursue a deep understanding of evolution it might teach us how not to be an enemy, by way of intentional symbiosis and Eucharistic Altruism.
joseph, Just as science
joseph,
Just as science evolves in its thinking so does theology. Ending with Pius XII smacks of cherry picking. How about continuing with JP II whose thought is an evolution in itself. Here's a quote from his address on the topic.
"4. Taking into account the scientific research of the era, and also the proper requirements of theology, the encyclical Humani Generis treated the doctrine of "evolutionism" as a serious hypothesis, worthy of investigation and serious study, alongside the opposite hypothesis. Pius XII added two methodological conditions for this study: one could not adopt this opinion as if it were a certain and demonstrable doctrine, and one could not totally set aside the teaching Revelation on the relevant questions. He also set out the conditions on which this opinion would be compatible with the Christian faith—a point to which I shall return.
Today, more than a half-century after the appearance of that encyclical, some new findings lead us toward the recognition of evolution as more than an hypothesis.* In fact it is remarkable that this theory has had progressively greater influence on the spirit of researchers, following a series of discoveries in different scholarly disciplines. The convergence in the results of these independent studies—which was neither planned nor sought—constitutes in itself a significant argument in favor of the theory.
What is the significance of a theory such as this one? To open this question is to enter into the field of epistemology. A theory is a meta-scientific elaboration, which is distinct from, but in harmony with, the results of observation. With the help of such a theory a group of data and independent facts can be related to one another and interpreted in one comprehensive explanation. The theory proves its validity by the measure to which it can be verified. It is constantly being tested against the facts; when it can no longer explain these facts, it shows its limits and its lack of usefulness, and it must be revised.
What is intentional
What is intentional symbiosis, Eucharistic Altruism?
=================================
It is the miracle of feeding the many with the little. The act of giving all one has for others, a few loaves, a few fish. It is altruism, love for others that is contagious and causes others to give of themselves in like manner. “As I have done, so you should do.”
Eucharistic Altruism is the contagious example that makes the little become the miracle of plenty. Eucharist, intentional symbiosis, is about being something, about self-outpouring. It is not about the “unbeing of nothing”, of self-holding-in. Eucharist is transformational, evolutionary, incrementally revolutionary.
www.divinicom.com
Watch for the Eucharistic website soon to come online: www.wordunlimited.com
How will the positive aspects
How will the positive aspects survive when the electorate (College of Cardinals) of our next leader is little more than a stuffed ballot box, a prize for curia members and the most reactionary of the bishops?
Father McBrien, Thanks for a
Father McBrien, Thanks for a good column reminding us that not all is darkness, and that we are heirs of a vital tradition (at least in parts). However (although you gave yourself some wiggle room) the matter of evolution being a settled matter for most Catholics is called into question by the appointment of Bishop Robert Vasa to the Santa Rosa diocese: He is a "young earth" believer. See http://culbreath.wordpress.com/2007/07/05/bishop-robert-vasa-challenges-...
Well, one says, he's only one among many. The point, though, is that he is a NEW episcopal appointment. Either someone is not vetting candidates very well, or more sinister, they are looking for candidates with certain right-wing views. Or both.
This thread is pretty
This thread is pretty amazing. The archaic orthodoxy of the right debating the intellectual and not infrequently detached strands of thought developed by the left. Where is love in any of this? and what are the people of God to embrace?
Post new comment