The Independent News Source
Twitter - Facebook - Email Alerts - RSS
The church of magical thinking
by Jamie L Manson on Mar. 12, 2009
Printer-friendly version
Send to friend
PDF version
Printer-friendly versionSend to friendPDF versionFor Roman Catholics seeking reform in their church, it might be fair to call this season the winter of their discontent.
In early February, the front page of The New York Times reported on the church’s new offering of indulgences. This piece came on the heels of another cover story about the pope’s decision to lift the excommunications of four schismatic bishops who reject the reforms of the Second Vatican Council.
These actions arrived after a summer highlighted by the placing of a severe interdict against Sr. Louise Lears that banished her from her ministry and from receiving the sacraments, and an autumn colored by the excommunication of Maryknowll Fr. Roy Bourgeois . Both were punished as a result of their open support of the ordination of women.
Traditionalists were welcomed back to the dinner table, while those seeking to expand the guest list were sent away hungry.
At the same time, the faithful were given new opportunities to reduce their time in purgatory by days or years. They could even have their purgatorial sentence revoked via the plenary indulgence (assuming, of course, no additional sins are committed). Though they cannot be bought (such practices were outlawed in 1567), indulgences can be earned through charitable contributions and good works (limit one indulgence per sin per day).
Psychologists define “magical thinking” as the belief that one’s thoughts, words, or actions can exert more power or influence over events than one actually has.
Lately I’m wondering if some of those in the church’s leadership aren’t struggling with a serious case of it. Not only are they assuming power that belongs to God alone, they are using functions like excommunication and indulgences on a people for whom these realities are no longer relevant or real. Indulgences and excommunications only create barriers between people and the understanding they seek, and they drive the church into an ever-deepening irrelevance, especially for younger generations.
The church has lost its power over the people through its unwillingness to meet human beings where they are. Anyone who argues that this is not the work of the church needs to wrestle with the mystery of the Incarnation: God’s great act of taking on human flesh, meeting us where we are, in order to seek a deeper communion with us. Though they left the Medieval worldview regarding their faith decades ago, people today are no less in need of guidance and support in finding a spiritual path, in answering timeless questions about God and suffering, and in seeking out deeper understandings of life’s purpose. The people of God are starving for meaning, and all the church seems willing to deliver is magical thinking.
Asked why the church was once again promoting the need for indulgences, Brooklyn Bishop Nicholas DiMarzio, said, “Because there is sin in the world.” But, really, is there any greater sin than willfully separating a human being from the love of God? Welcoming people to the table, regardless of their beliefs, their sins, their sanctimoniousness, was the central purpose of Jesus’ ministry in this world. That the Roman Catholic hierarchy seems bent on undoing the work of the Incarnate God is not simply sad, it is profoundly erroneous.
But God always finds a way to break through the barriers.
In my recent travels, I had the powerful opportunity to listen to a member of Sr. Louise Lears’ parish tell the story of the nun’s attending Mass on the first Sunday after she was placed under interdict. Her 85-year old mother was at her side. Not wanting to jeopardize the parish any further, Sr. Louise followed behind her mother as she went up to receive Communion. Her mother took Communion, broke it, turned around and gave it to her daughter. After witnessing this, Sr. Louise’s sister, Kate, and many other parishioners went and did the same. By the end of communion, Sr. Louise’s hands were filled with fragments of the Eucharist. After the Mass was over, as the family was standing in the back, Louise’s mother said to her daughter, “I was the first person to feed you, and I will feed you now.”
O, Church, where is your victory? O, Hierarchy, where is your sting?
Though the church may attempt to magically separate the children of God from the table of God, Eucharist will always rise out of the people. True presence, true Communion becomes real not by the will of church authorities, but through the loving will of God. The power belongs to God and God alone. If our church leaders had their minds and hearts centered in God, rather than on their own power, they would realize that they were truly powerless when it comes to determining who is entitled to be a recipient of God’s presence in this world. They would realize the absurdity of even assuming such a power. God breaks through, regardless of the defenses we construct.
The church hierarchy seems to have an unhealthy attachment to its power. Surrendering every now and then to the power of God might do them some good. At the very least — and this is no small thing — it would keep God’s people from being sent away empty. Perhaps if God were given the chance to have God’s way from the outset, the church would encourage the four schismatic bishops, Sr. Louise, and Fr. Roy to sit at the dinner table as equals, not with the mistaken understanding that any of them had any power over the other, but rather in an authentic effort to make God more fully present to one another.
And then perhaps, to paraphrase Shakespeare again, the winter of our discontent could begin to change into a glorious summer.
Jamie Manson received her master of divinity degree from Yale Divinity School where she studied Catholic theology, personal commitments and sexual ethics with Mercy Sr. Margaret Farley. She is the former editor in chief of the Yale magazine Reflections, and currently serves as director of Social Justice Ministries at Jan Hus Presbyterian Church, working primarily with New York City’s homeless and poor populations. She is a member of the national board of the Women’s Ordination Conference.
You sound very confused. The
You sound very confused. The excommunication of Fr. Bourgeois is because the Church recognizes limits on its power, the Church recognizes that it does not have the power to ordain women, so I guess the church is doing what you are asking in this regard, as it is in lifting the excommunications of the SSPX bishops. The Church lifts excommunications where it can, when it can, in other cases it simply can't, because of the limits of Church power.
This horrific Eucharistic abuse you descibed ought to be reported to the ordinary. Anyone know where this happened?
Sounds pretty clear to me!
Sounds pretty clear to me! Exceptionally clear, in fact.
I am so grateful to read
I am so grateful to read words that could have come from my own heart. There are MANY of us who agree. We must continue to challenge and call to accountability but we must not stop living our own lives like the responsible adults we have become, in spite of the hierarchy of a dysfunctional church.
In the interest of good
In the interest of good mental hygiene, why don't you just become a Protestant? It is, seemingly, the religion you profess. The Protestant reformers were good theologians with strong claims in favor of Protestantism (claims that nonetheless should be rejected, but not because they are stupid). Liberal Catholicism of the type found here is nothing, but a rehashing of the worst, intellectually shallow Protestant screeds of the 16th century. It is better (in terms of intellctual consistency and mental hygiene) to be a serious, thoughtful, and committed Protestant deeply in love with Jesus than a dissenting Catholic deeply in love with the ever changing politically correct fads of the world. The intellectual gymnastics one must go through to both claim Catholicism and so openly dissent from the teachings of Mother Church are truly breathtaking.
Please remember that the Church is always in need of reform and renewal, but it always happens through deeper friendship with the Lord, fidelity to the Church, and personal holiness, not from the "revolutionary" antics of Fr Bourgeois and Sr. Lears.
What you call revolutionary
What you call revolutionary antics, I call following conscience. Both obviously believe that the "mother church" is in error. Both choose to follow their conscience in that regard. In that, they follow a long and solid line in history. A line of others who placed conscience ahead of obedience to authority. A line of others who were persecuted, often murdered by or for the leadership. A line of others, many of whom are now considered saints because as it turned out, they were in effect correct. The mother church was in error.
Time will tell if St. Louise, Fr. Roy, Reuther etal are in error or if they truly are visionaries, like so many who have gone before them, visionaries who will shape the church of tomorrow, the way the saints of the past are shaping the church today.
Regardless however, there is a sinister thread that charactizes the attitudes and behaviors of far too many of those who call themselves "truly faithful catholics" exemplified in your comment: "why don't you just become a Protestant".
In catholicism, protestant is a demeaning and derogatory term. Another way of saying the same thing would be to "get out of my church you worthless piece of ---". I'm guessing that rendition is more accurately describes your real feelings about this situation. Credit to you for finding a nice way of saying it, but the sentiment is still the same:
"GET OUT! We dont want you here! You're not like us, you dont belong here."
That sentiment appears with increasing regularity in the rhetoric of those who call themselves truly faithful catholics. It has also appeared with predictable regularity throughout history in some form or other in every culture. It would be wise to remeber the ultimate results that were produced by that sentiment, and ask, is that really what we want to be creating here now?
Amen Sister!
Amen Sister!
Such wisdom for a young
Such wisdom for a young person. It gives hope that perhaps not all of the
clear-thinking Catholics have left the Church. That reality allows for an
even larger hope - that the Church will evolve into what it was always
meant to be - the People's church (all people). Perhaps the strongest love
of Church comes from those who stay with the Church in spite of its exasperating behavior. All those voices that persist to speak the truth, form ripples, ripples form waves and waves wash away injustice, fear, narrow-mindedness, and arrogance. People struggling to know the pure God without the veil of the hierarchy in the way will not be denied. As the article states, "God always finds a way". Perhaps this is precisely why the hierarchy works harder and harder to maintains its position through intimidation - it senses we have discovered the truth that we no longer feel we need it to reach God. Keep the faith, change the Church.
Well said.
Well said.
Great article and sooo true.
Great article and sooo true. Jesus was definitely inclusive and not exclusive. He also didn't give people "tasks" or indulgences in order to be forgiven. He offered the Bread of Life to all who would partake. I think Jesus is quite sad about the state of his "Roman" church these days. Kerrie Weitzel
I admire the depth and
I admire the depth and cogency of Jamie Manson's article. We, many of us readers here, share the frustration and anger with Rome as a given, yet walk our walk with God in spite of the hierarchy who have generally lost site of the mission of Jesus: "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, Because he anointed me to preach good tidings to the poor: He hath sent me to proclaim release to the captives, And recovering of sight to the blind, To set at liberty them that are bruised..." (Luke 4:18).
Manson's beautiful document is a sign of hope that there are young people who might not be following in our footsteps, but are on the same path. They are starting with a level of consciousness (vis a vis Merton, Keating, Wilber, Rohr, Bourgeault, Bruteau, etc.) that you and I might just be sliding into; some might have no idea what I'm talking about. These fresh practical, committed, spiritually hungry and searching youth are thinking not only with the benefit of broader and deeper knowledge of things religious and sacred that our recent gifts of information technology provides; they are discerning with their hearts and filtering a wide variety of teachings and experiences with their souls. They know that faith in and relationship with the living Christ embodies the "Good News" of which Jesus spoke. They are aware that THEY and WE are the true church; not the hierarchy, not Rome, not the Vatican. They give me hope for the welfare of humankind that the institutional church as we know it is not providing.
Jerry Cierpilowski
Lock Haven, PA
67 years old
So true.
So true.
I had not heard the story
I had not heard the story about Sr. Louises mother, but when I read it, it brought tears to my eyes. He we see very clearly the true expression of divine love, the true expression of Christ's teachings.
It has always amazed me that those who are supposedly learned and trained in scripture can miss the most important scriptural teaching Christ gave us regarding communion. At the last supper, Judas shared communion with all of the disciples, including Judas. Scriptures tell us that by that time, Judas has already betrayed Christ. Knowing of the betrayal, Christ shared communion with Judas as an example for us to follow. Christ could easily have "excommunicated" Judas, but did not.
If Christ did not exclude Judas from the communion of the last supper, then who are any of us, regardless of title or position, to deliberately, and in some cases with malice, exclude or call for the exclusion of anyone from communion? In my personal opinion, excommunication is a sin. The fact that it seems to be selectively utilized at the whim of individuals in the Magisterial Authority lends further credence to that belief.
There is a beautiful story I
There is a beautiful story I once heard. It takes place in Punjab, India during the early 20th century. At that time, Britain controlled India and it wasn't uncommon for Christian Missionaries to be found traveling within the subcontinent.
It just so happened that some went to visit an Indian mystic by the name of Sawan Singh at Dera Jaimal Singh in Beas. During their conversation, one of the missionaries asked Sawan Singh, affectionately known as the Great Master, what the fate of Judas was, after having betrayed Christ. Great Master replied that Judas is sitting in the lap of his beloved Jesus.
Sawan Singh's point is that although Judas may have betrayed Jesus (and eventualy felt sorrow for doing so), there is no way the Jesus would leave one of own disciples. It goes along with the story of the shepherd leaving his flock of 99 sheep to go gather the one that has gone astray.
It is true that we don't
It is true that we don't exactly know the end fate (Heaven or Hell) of Judas. Afterall, God works outside of time.
However, it seems to me that Sawan Singh's opinon here comes close to denying the concept of free will.
This is one of the reasons Hell exists. It doesn't exists because that's where God puts people He doesn't like. It exists because it is what we choose everytime we do NOT choose God. People go to hell because that is their choice, and God, even in His infinite power, will not force us to do something against our free will.
I wonder what his answer would be on the fate of Lucifer and his demons? Are they sitting in the lap of the Lord as well?
Well that depends on whether
Well that depends on whether you take the story of Job literally because God and Lucifer certainly had enough of a relationship to run a little betting action on Job's behavior. Job's impeccable behavior actually brought God to admit He might have been acting a little unfairly in letting Lucifer stack the metaphorical deck against Job.
Interesting story Job. Lot to learn from it.
Hi Colkoch1, I'm MollyJ
Hi Colkoch1, I'm MollyJ writing as Cartman08. I couldn't "deny" my MollyJ identity be de-registering it.
Glad to see you here.
What is your evidence that
What is your evidence that hell exists?
Yeah, honey, that's it: Pope
Yeah, honey, that's it: Pope Benedict suffers from magical thinking. You're way out of your depth. Your graduate degree ain't worth a pile.
Loving words, undoubtedly
Loving words, undoubtedly from one who considers themselves a truly faithful catholic.
Harsh words, deserved because
Harsh words, deserved because the author doesn't know what she's talking about. Even Jesus called the Pharisees a brood of vipers. They deserved it too.
Yes Jesus did call the
Yes Jesus did call the Pharasees a brood of vipers because of their self-righteousness and their exclusion of others. Sound familiar?
Actually, the author is very
Actually, the author is very dead on. Jesus did indeed call the Pharisees a brood of vipers, and yes, the did deserve the label. He also gave us a very detailed description of them in Matt 23, a description that is also a detailed description of the Magisterial Authorities of the RCC today.
As we read the news of the bishops activities, Morlino's is the most recent, we clearly see that the Magisterial Authorities, at least the most outspoken and visible ones, are indeed being the "brood of vipers" that Jesus described.
There are detailed descriptions throughout the New Testament of the "truly faithful jews" as well. They are the ones who screamed "spare barabas, crucify Jesus" the loudest. In contemporary times, we read the very same words over and over in these threads, always written by the "truly faithful catholics".
What we have is a clear case of history repeating itself, Pharisees = Magisterial Authorities, angry mob = truly faithful catholics, and while there is no person of Jesus, Jesus is present and is being crucified by both groups every day. How do we know? "Whatsoever you do, to the least of my brothers, that you do unto me". Words that the "truly faithful catholics" ignore in their haste to defend the faith from the liberal protestant heretics.
Everytime a truly faithful catholic cries "excommunicate him", they are in reality crying "excommunicate Jesus". Every time they say "get out you heretic", they are in effect saying "get out" to Jesus. Everytime they defend the corrupt leadership of the RCC, they in effect deny Jesus and his teachings.
No doubt, the truly faithful catholics in their self righteous indignation, and their "defending the faith", will rant and rave, scream and shout, deny, villify, and do whatever it takes to silence these words. They will, as has been done so often throughout history, persecute those who dare to speak these words. They will do it in the name of Jesus, in the name of God. They will do the same that the angry mob did in Jesus last days. They will do it with the blessings of the Magisterial Authorities.
But, it really doesnt matter. For every voice that is silenced, another will speak. Even if every voice is silenced, the rocks and stones will sing the truth. The corruption within the Magisterial Authorities is so rampant, that it cannot be hidden any longer. It cannot be whitewashed any more.
I see Matt 23 get thrown
I see Matt 23 get thrown around a lot. I am guessing you all accept it.
Does that include verse 1-3 of that chapter?
Up to the point where we are
Up to the point where we are being told to do something illegal, immoral or in obvious violation of the scriptures.
vv 1-3 get thrown around a lot by the "truly faithful catholics" in a vain and obvious attempt to divert attention from the fact that the entire chapter is a very clear depiction of the contemporary Magisterial Authority and of the Vatican.
Those who throw it around also fail to realize that in quoting those three verses, they are in effect admitting that the Magisterial Authorities and the Vatican are NOT adhering to the same rules that they demand the laity adhere to. In fact admitting that the Magisterial Authorities are corrupt.
Example of obvious violation of scripture - a recent comment by one of the Magisterial Authorities justifying the excommunication of the mother and doctors: "abortion was a more serious sin than rape"
This is a clear violation of the teachings in James 2:10:
"For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles at just one point is guilty of breaking all of it." (NIV)
ALL OF IT!!! That is consistent across all translations. But no doubt, the "truly faithful catholics" will find a creative way to rationalize this away.
In his speech in Cameroon, on March 17, Pope Benedict stated:
"In the face of...abuse of power, the Christian must never remain silent."
This statement mandates that all faithful take a vocal and unyielding stand against the abuses, corruption and inappropriate actions that continue to permeate the structures of power, INCLUDING the Magisterial Authorities and the Vatican.
Catholics in the US who voted Obama, (which is indeed stemming the abuse of power in the US) in spite of the villification they received at the hands of the bishopric, were following the mandate of the Pope. Those who demand prosecution of all those involved in the pedophile scandal are following the mandate of the Pope. Those who demand a greater financial accountability to stem the ungodly rate of embezzlement within the RCC are following the mandate of the Pope.
Or, did I misunderstand the message. Was the real message that we are only to speak out about the abuse of power OUTSIDE of the Magisterial Authority and the Vatican? Only to speak out about abuse of power when it serves the hidden agenda of the Magisterial Authority and the Vatican? Only to speak out about the abuse of power when it makes the Magisterial Authority and Vatican look good, but not if it will make them look bad?
So, to summarize, you DON'T
So, to summarize, you DON'T "do what they teach".
Just wanted to clear that up...
To repeat again what I have
To repeat again what I have already said before: I do what they teach as long as it is not illegal, immoral or a clear violation of scripture.
Since abortion seems to be the only issue here, let me restate:
The church teaches abortion is wrong. I dont have any problems with that teachings. However, abortion is a non-issue for me. End of discussion. My concerns are for the pastoral needs of the living. I choose not to be involved with the antiabortionists or their cause.
Where is the problem with that? As near as I can tell, there is nothing here in which I have violated any of the canon or catechisms.
What have I done to be labeled "proabortion"?
What have I done to be told I did not deserve to receive communion?
What have I done to be told I am not catholic?
What have I done to be told "you dont belong here"?
Wonderful article. Couldn't
Wonderful article. Couldn't say it better myself as someone who was glad to see Vatican II come in. I didn't know the story of that Eucharist where the mother and other parishioners shared with Sr. Louise but that is what I believe Jesus meant when he said his eucharistic words at the last supper. I think his real intention was to point out that as we share in his life by sharing ours with others we will all enjoy heaven. That is what seems to have happened on that Sunday. I hope it will continue to happen that the People of God rise to the level of Jesus message even if the hierarchy does not. Amen.
Very good. Thank you.
Very good. Thank you.
Ya know...after reading
Ya know...after reading Jamie's attack on the Catholic Church (again), I'm beginning to wonder if there is any place for this moderate 20-something year old in the community of the National Catholic Reporter. I'm coming to the conclusion that a lot of the people behind NCR are never going to be happy with anything the Chuch does. If the Church is the cause and pain of your frustrations...simply just walk away. I can think of many churches (Episcopal comes to mind) where your far left-extremist views could be welcomed and appreciated.
Please...for goodness sakes...stop attacking the Church I love with your hatred and bad theology. My two year old niece is more rational than some of the people that I have seen writing in NCR!
When the NCR decides to be a little more balanced by welcoming other points of view...let me know. Isn't that what inclusion and diversity is all about???
That's why I try to post here
That's why I try to post here when I can. One of the few that stand by the Church and expose the errors that get taught here.
When you are astonished at what the people on the NCR proclaim as 'Catholic teaching', just remember this from 2 Tim 3-4 and it will explain a great deal:
"For there shall be a time when they will not endure sound doctrine but, according to their own desires, they will heap to themselves teachers having itching ears: And will indeed turn away their hearing from the truth, but will be turned unto fables."
Please direct me to the
Please direct me to the statement where the NCR states it offers editorial opinion as official Catholic teaching? I'm sure I've missed it.
I don't see how you could
I don't see how you could miss it.
"National Catholic Reporter"
No where does the NCR claim
No where does the NCR claim that the opinions of it's contributors or editors is official Catholic teaching. Opinions are not official teachings.
But what I really don't
But what I really don't understand is WHY you are not posting on THE WANDERER's FORUM...Oops! my bad. That's right, there IS NO FORUM for free expression on the Wanderer's website....please feel free to continue to enjoy NCR's liberal FREEDOMS...where your feedback is never censored. It's very clarifying.
Those same words clearly
Those same words clearly apply to the Magisterial Authorities and the Vatican. And as you say, they really do explain a great deal.
Why, Moderate Catholic 20
Why, Moderate Catholic 20 something, do you think that you love the Roman Church more than Ms. Mason, or I, an ancient 67 year old? Why do you think that we laity do not have a responsibility to call our hierarchy to fulfill THEIR responsibilities. Canon law REQUIRES us to do so. Check it out.
When our bishops and cardinals hide despicable crimes; when career-clergy put their personal advancement over compassion and the Good New of Jesus; when our best theological minds are silenced because they have done their very best to use their gifts for the people of God rather than find justification for what they have been told to reiterate; when the fiefdom of the Vatican disregards women as "adjunct" rather than integral to the functioning of the church, I MUST, MUST speak out. They are WRONG. THEY are destroying the church you say you love. ALL our voices must be heard or we live a lie.
Mr, Moderate Catholic 20 something you haven't lived long enough to love the church any where near as much as I. Perhaps you should reassess just WHAT it is that you LOVE about this church of ours. The rules? The sacraments? The exclusivity? The statues? The liturgical forms? All good, but those are not the church. They are elements, some are only symbols. Grow up, Mr. Moderate. Remember, it is NOT the hierarchy or faith in the "church" that is going to "get you to heaven."
And if you do decide there's isn't "any place" for you in this NCR community, it won't necessarily make you correct in your beliefs and attitudes. You might be. So might I. We are the church.
Jerry Cierpilowski
67 year old cradle catholic/Catholic
You know, moderate Catholic,
You know, moderate Catholic, I am a fifty-something, one of the first groups in my parish to receive First Communion at a non-Latin mass. So a post-Vatican II church is all that I have known. But it was unmistakable that my parents struggled with Vatican II practices. They liked the English mass but they struggled with some of the ideas--the hand shake of peace, the moving away from the catechism and some other things toward an ill-defined "something else". (I'm not sure the core ideas of Vatican II made it "intact" to my mid-Kansas parish.)
So what you say, this sense of isolation, of not being able to imagine what this woman is so upset about, is not news. Ah, change, you are such a double edged sword.
Our Church does indulge in magical thinking. From a psychological perspective the changing of bread into Christ, wine into blood is on its' face, magical thinking. That idea, in itself, could render a whole 'nother article. I prefer to think in terms of what core idea, theme, archetype does the consecration represent? What draws us to it? All ideas for another column.
I guess my point in talking with you is this. The retro-movement may for you represent a moving in a correct direction, a comforting direction. So be it. But just know, it's not that way for everyone.
My parents were highly distressed by pieces of Vatican II; but somehow they walked forward in faith. And we saw some of the excesses of Vatican II moderated. It was the dialogue with the whole of the church family that caused some of that moderation. So I'm assuming, because you call yourself a moderate Catholic, that you are invested in that dialogue to some degree. Hang in there is what I say. We need us all at the table.
Manson's essay represents to me a valid perspective, one worth reading. Asking questions is not bad in and of itself. Finding points of agreement with your opposites can inform and strengthen your own belief. When we've had effective dialogue at NCRCafe, that's always been a by-product for me.
Dear Moderate, Look at what
Dear Moderate,
Look at what you've written: "simply just walk away". You're telling someone to leave the church because they have the gall to express their frustrations. Do you want to be surrounded only by those who think and perceive as you do? What kind of catholicity would we have if everyone exhorted everyone else who disagrees with them to go away? How can you write about diversity and balance when you tell people who differ to find another church?
The forum provided by NCR allows people like you to publish their views as well as those like Jamie. Frankly I don't know of any other place more balanced.
Beautiful reflection. Thank
Beautiful reflection. Thank you!
Well said Jamie! You do put
Well said Jamie! You do put yourself out in the mix of things. The church does need to look again to see what Jesus was about in his world and bring that about in ours. Christ was not about being 'Catholic' - No such thing then. Christ was about challanging the power of the religious authorities of his time. Maybe that's what we are to be about in following him? After all, isn't this a truth?
Incarnation: God’s great act of taking on human flesh, meeting us where we are, in order to seek a deeper communion with us.
May we all participate in that Incarnation and be that deeper communion with God. Thank you Jamie for prodding us to action. JH
MOMS trump POPES and
MOMS trump POPES
and ARCHBISHOPS every time...
On earth as it is in heaven!
Jamie, you have done it
Jamie, you have done it again. Your writing illuminates, in cogent langauage,
another of the many hypocrises prepetrated by the unreachable leadership
of our beloved Catholic Church. And, as always, you leave us, not with recrimination, but with a pastoral call to what is most important; that we embrace the principle of inclusion.
Very strange. My explanation
Very strange. My explanation of why she is wrong on the subject of Indulgences never got posted. Too bad I didn't save it in a text file on my machine.
Oh well. Suffice it to say that she is totally wrong with regard to the subject of indulgences and shows a complete lack of understanding on the subject of excommunication, especially as it pretains to the SSPX situation.
Hey, MikeKC, all I can tell
Hey, MikeKC, all I can tell you is that I also have had some postings swallowed up into the ethernet. But I do not think you should take it personally. You can always write Dennis Coday and ask him if your posting was edited out due to content but I think he will just tell you it was lost. But make no mistake, he would also tell you if it was edited out for content.
That's ok, Mike. I am sure
That's ok, Mike. I am sure THE WANDERER will be only too happy to post your "lost" perorations on indulgences in their FORUM. OMG! I just realized, there is NO reader's FORUM with The Wanderer...go figure.....Hope you are happy with the FREEDOM afforded to you here amongst us flaming liberals you so disdain at NCR!!!
Craig, you are right on!
Craig, you are right on! Amen!!!!
same old thing in NCR:
same old thing in NCR: articles about women being oppressed by the male hierarchy, we are victims, Jesus loves everyone, blah blah blah.
Thanks for the laughs! This
Thanks for the laughs! This has to be the funniest thing I've read all week. I can't decide if it's hubris that leads so many to think they're smarter than the Pope or just plain ol' delusion.
On March 17, Pope Benedict
On March 17, Pope Benedict stated "In the face of...abuse of power, the Christian must never remain silent."
It occurs for me that you are villifying one who is following the mandate of the Pope to speak out against the abuse of power (another word for abuse of power is corruption).
I would join my voice to all
I would join my voice to all who expressed a positive and heartfelt appreciation of the clarity and cogency of Jamie's insightful statement.
I myself come from a background of having studied quite a few years of Catholic Church history, philosophy, and Catholic theology in a Roman Catholic Seminary, and having an M.A. in Catholic theology from a Catholic college, and having taught theology for two years in a Catholic university. And from my perspective, she's right on the money. I hope all who read here will read her with an open mind, and try to learn from the sense of Christian values she brings to this Catholic community.
We need more voices, and pens, like hers. And fewer with the snide disdain and dismissals that have also arisen here.
I lost my previous comment
I lost my previous comment but let me repeat my response:
As a former Maryknoll Sister I support the Fr. Roys and Sr. Louises of this world...too bad the Church does not have more members with their courage and convictions.The Hierarchy is so blinded with their power ( and it has corrupted them )... that I believe the Church has to be reduced to Ashes before it can rise again as the Church of Jesus.
Mary Ellen Sullivan
Jamie - you are as lost as
Jamie - you are as lost as the sister and her family in St. Louis. I see someone at war with her Church, who will never give credit to her Church until it mirrors a government that can be controlled. This is a yet another example of what Jesus predicted (the last sentence):
"You are Peter and upon this rock I will build my Church. And she will withstand everything, even the Gates of Hell".
Anything you bring in this litte forum is nothing compared to what the Catholic Church has withstood the last 2000 years. A constant barrage of violence, threated violence, and non-violent social pressure that has never let up on Her since then. This type of logic has all been visited before. A mere blimp on the radar screen. Most people are too smart to see that your example is not the way.
It must be frustarting for you and others. Try as you might, she will always stand. And when she can no longer withstand the weight, and is ready for the fall, the Jesus you are trying to reinvent or speak for will return to strengthen Her. And, He'll ask what in the world you were thinking. Just as He asked Saul.
Wow what an article. Leme
Wow what an article. Leme see, should I follow Jamie's illuminated new age way of thinking (actually, a very old one rehashed over and over for centuries) or actually follow what the Church has directed for 2000 years to have a shot at heaven (like not always trying to make a mockery of Jesus' Church).
A close one (not really). Thanks for once again reminding me that misguided Catholics still think it's not a sin to openly preach hate against the Vatican. On the other hand, to your credit, you did so in such a nice, cuddly, utopian, and politically-correct way.
The focus should be on Jesus and His Sacraments in the Church. Instead, it is always on people. Men, in particular. Look to the Virgin Mary if gender is so important, an example of a human being (without divinity) who was far more perfect that anyone who has or ever will live.
People like this don't truly believe in Jesus, I can't see how it is possible. Why, because He is a Divine Saviour who was a Man on earth who will stand over each of us in judgement when we pass away. And gender seems to be everything. If we hate the old men we feel are the engine of the establishment in Rome primarily because they are men with spiritual power over us, how could we ever accept Our Lord in His Kingdom?
Gender, race, or acquired power gathered on earth won't matter when we meet God, only how many good works we have done. Perhaps these are tests from God to find out who will stand by His Church when it is not in style, even when not in complete agreement with everything She does.
Wow what an article. Leme
Wow what an article. Leme see, should I follow Jamie's illuminated new age way of thinking (actually, a very old one rehashed over and over for centuries) or actually follow what the Church has directed for 2000 years to have a shot at heaven (like not always trying to make a mockery of Jesus' Church).
Bob: How do you know what the Church has directed for 2000 years? History is beginning to reveal that the Christian Movement wasn't one neat package from the get go but consisted of a number of various movements. And, how do you know that Jesus doesn't approve of criticism toward the Church?
A close one (not really). Thanks for once again reminding me that misguided Catholics still think it's not a sin to openly preach hate against the Vatican. On the other hand, to your credit, you did so in such a nice, cuddly, utopian, and politically-correct way.
Bob: Who's preaching hate? For some reason, you equate constructive criticism as hate. And, who says it's a sin to criticize?
The focus should be on Jesus and His Sacraments in the Church.
Bob: I partially agree. Since the Church is a very "human" organization, subject to sin like the rest of us, we must stay alert to any injustices that may arise.
Instead, it is always on people. Men, in particular.
Bob: Well, of course - people are the Church.
Look to the Virgin Mary if gender is so important, an example of a human being (without divinity) who was far more perfect that anyone who has or ever will live.
Bob: And, how do you know this - unless you have the mind of God and can see into the future!
People like this don't truly believe in Jesus, I can't see how it is possible.
Bob: Nonsense
Why, because He is a Divine Saviour who was a Man on earth who will stand over each of us in judgement when we pass away.
Bob: How do you know that Jesus is going to judge us? Maybe He has better things to do - like help us!! No one is perfect in this world and I really doubt that Jesus expects perfection from any of us.
And gender seems to be everything. If we hate the old men we feel are the engine of the establishment in Rome primarily because they are men with spiritual power over us, how could we ever accept Our Lord in His Kingdom?
Bob: Since when does the Vatican hierarchy have spiritual power of us? That's a new one to me.
Gender, race, or acquired power gathered on earth won't matter when we meet God, only how many good works we have done.
Bob: I agree that good works are very important in putting our spiritual values into action.
Perhaps these are tests from God to find out who will stand by His Church when it is not in style, even when not in complete agreement with everything She does.
Bob: I doubt it.
Jamie, your voice is indeed a
Jamie, your voice is indeed a beautiful, intelligent one.
In his book, "God in the World," Fr. Thomas O'Meara offered the thought that the "pontificate of John Paul II encouraged an intellectually superficial Catholicism of past devotions."
For more than a generation, Catholics have been "fed" on the devotionalism that, more often than not, reduced prayer to formulas to be repeated with frequency at specified intervals -- novenas, rosaries, stations, first Fridays, first Saturdays -- empty symbols that for many of us are not really prayer.
When Catholics begin to offer intelligent discussion, there is still a vocal minority that labels them unfaithful. It's very difficult to engage this minority in intelligent, polite discourse because their stance is those who disagree should leave.
I do hope our next pope will be in the image, likeness, and intelligence of Good Pope John XXIII rather than the narrow-mindedness of JPII or BXVI; that he will once again open the windows of thought and discourse; and that he will encourage an intelligent discipleship unafraid to question and seek.
Your insights offer hope for the future -- please continue to go forward, to think, and to write from your heart and experience. It is always thought-provoking and refreshing to hear your voice.
I am Kate Lears, Louise's
I am Kate Lears, Louise's biological sister who is mentioned in this article. I acted as my conscience dictated by sharing Communion with my sister that day. It was the most natural thing to do and I believe that God would not have wanted me to do any less. When we can all sit down at the same table and share bread, we will have achieved what God exemplified.
Kate Lears
Kate, IMO, you did a very
Kate,
IMO, you did a very noble and courageous deed - coming deep from your heart - by following your own conscious.
Blessings -
Bob
Kate Lears, your conscience
Kate Lears, your conscience is poorly formed; whether you are sinfully culpable for your poorly formed conscience is another matter. What you did was a desecration of the Eucharist and a failure to respect proper Church authority. At the least, you should mention that act in confession. We will all sit down at the same (Eucharistic) table when we all are truly united in following God's will. Those who culpably do not follow God's will are not welcome at the Eucharistic banquet. Don't be like one of the foolish bridesmaids who was found without a flask of oil when the groom came to town; they didn't get to go to the banquet.
Kate, thank you, you have no
Kate, thank you, you have no idea how much your example touched me when I read about it. You have truly set the example of what divine love is about. No doubt those who call themselves "truly faithful catholics" will villify you and call for your excommunication.
You truly exemplified the heart of the words "whatsoever you do to the least ... you do unto me".
Were it not for examples such as yours, I would have long ago given up on the RCC as a hopeless cause and walked away.
Kate, Thank you for standing
Kate,
Thank you for standing up for what is right.
On March 17, Pope Benedict stated "In the face of...abuse of power, the Christian must never remain silent."
Your actions and the actions of all in the church who shared Eucharist with your sister spoke volumes more than any words ever could.
The action of breaking bread brought tears to my eyes.
Keep pursuing the truth.
Peace,
Kathy
Typical power-hungry Women’s
Typical power-hungry Women’s Ordination Conference type hate-speech.
Are you sure the Women's
Are you sure the Women's Ordination Conference is the perpetuator of hate speech? Read this blog and objectively ask yourself, where is the hate coming from? The ones who support Jamie or the ones who condemn her?
Talking about divine order,
Talking about divine order, all they have to do is read the post directly above theirs to see the venom and hate that permeates the rhetoric of those who claim to be "truly faithful catholics".
The post directed to Kate
The post directed to Kate Lears that is.
moderate 20-something
moderate 20-something catholic,you are on to something and give me hope for the future.don't let this gift of insight be stolen from you bypeople who think that because they have lived longer, their opinion cancels out your God-given wisdom.not true.you are also right that NCR is anything but balanced. it certainly is slanted away from God in it's daily Vatican drubbing.a pro-catholic article every now and then might make it less obvious.glad to see that God is pouring out wisdom on the young. that you are wise beyond your years in realizing used to be obvious to all.that one should't throw the baby out with the bath water.
Marcus, I agree. Just because
Marcus,
I agree. Just because you are 67 doesn't mean you are any wiser than someone who is 27. Wisdom doesn't necessarily come with age.
Is the NCR balanced? By this do you mean, does it have an equal number of opinions and stories about the traditional/orthodox Catholic church as well as the progressive church? I would say no, it does not. Newspapers have their slant. If you want to read conservative Catholic Church stories, read the National Catholic Register. They aren't balanced either, but if you read both papers, you might get a broader view of what Catholics are thinking and doing.
Neither "NCR" is slanted away from God. They each see things differently. But to say that this paper is slanted away from God is a cheap shot. Which God, might I ask, just out of curiosity, are you talking about anyway?
My God has room for everybody.
Kathy
Disappointed
Disappointed 20-something
"Not only are they assuming power that belongs to God alone, they are using functions like excommunication and indulgences on a people for whom these realities are no longer relevant or real. Indulgences and excommunications only create barriers between people and the understanding they seek, and they drive the church into an ever-deepening irrelevance, especially for younger generations."
If power does not belong to God alone, to whom, then, does it belong?
Do not be so quick to patronise "younger generations" by saying that the Church is becoming irrelevant to them. As part of that generation (25-30) I'm profoundly glad that the Church reminds us that Final Judgement, Purgatory, and the means to escape it are still around. Relevance doesn't matter, Truth does.
And before people pile on and assume I'm one of "those" young people obsessed with the Latin Mass, I'm not. I grew up attending the Novus Ordo and still do. And I know dozens of young people just like me who find these questions deeply relevant.
Thank you to the people who
Thank you to the people who have a more of a 'balanced approach' on here. It's sad that I have been attacked by a 67 year old guy on here who thinks that I need to 'grow up'. Little does Mr. Jerry know that I am in discernment of a religious vocation and I am a HAPPY AND JOYFUL ROMAN CATHOLIC. Also, there are THOUSANDS of young Catholics like me who are hearing the Lord's call and entering the seminary or religious houese of formation around the country...that are bursting at the seams with many, young, happy, and joyful Catholic men and women.
I'm not some extremist, right-wing, Latin-mass only person. I prefer the Mass in English; I am a well informed and I think that I am fairly well-balanced because I read National Catholic Reporter as well as other periodicals like National Catholic Registrer and Catholic World News that offer more objective info than what I have read in the pages of National Catholic Reporter. Some of you guys may want to try to open up your horizons for a change and read OTHER sources of info besides NCR. :-)
To Mr. Jerry and the other (older) folks on here who have attacked me and my generation for being naive and ignorant, I ask that you look in the mirror. I did not ask for bad, lame, anything goes, abusive liturgies. I did not ask for hand holding during the Our Father. I did not ask for 'inclusive language'. I did not ask for any of the things that some people on here keep fighting about. I think it's time that all of us understand what being Catholic means. How can we be a "universal" church if every person in it is fighting their own, little private battles in it? Your battles are NOT mine! Go to ANY World Youth Day and you will see thousands of young people, who like, me...LOVE the Church and LOVE the Pope and the Magesterium. For some of you all to cast a generalization on us for being 'right-wingers' or 'conservatives'...you are missing the point. We are just being who we are...FAITHFUL Roman Catholic men and women. And because of that...I think I am 'growing up' quite well.
As I read your comments it
As I read your comments it appears to me that you have more than enough anger at people who disagree with you and self-contained arrogance to be a modern bishop. I hope you grow out of it.
PS: When I was discerning my own vocation many years ago, the best advice I received from a priest who was eulogized as "being able to see around corners" (that is, very gifted at discernment) was to read Thomas Merton's "Seven Storey Mountain". In my opinion this classic is more appropriate today than when written.
I only get angry when people
I only get angry when people are attacking me on here and telling me to the "grow up".
For your information, I love Thomas Merton. Seven Story Mountain is a classic and I love reading it over and over again.
Please don't try to pigeon hole me, sir.
Post new comment