The Independent News Source
Twitter - Facebook - Email Alerts - RSS
Questioning
by Kate Childs Graham on Apr. 23, 2009
Printer-friendly version
Send to friend
PDF version
Printer-friendly versionSend to friendPDF versionBesides college, the only other time I went to Catholic school was in kindergarten. At St. Thomas Aquinas School, we went to Mass once or twice a week (It was 20 years ago, so the details are a bit fuzzy).
Before one particular Mass, I decided that when everyone was standing, I would sit and when everyone was sitting, I would stand.
Now, one could certainly see this as a five-year-old testing her boundaries, which is probably what it was. However, looking back, I would like to think that I wasn’t only seeing how long I could pull the stunt off, but that my five-year-old self was also actively questioning.
After all, no one had ever explained to me why we stood or sat during different parts of the Mass. I did it because that is what I was taught to do, because that is what everyone else did.
I am not sure that I ever inquired as to the "why," but if I did, the conversation might have gone something like this:
Me: Why do we stand at certain parts of the Mass and sit at other parts of the Mass?
Adult: Because that’s the way we’ve always done it.
Me: But why?
Adult: Because certain parts of the Mass are so important that we need to stand.
Me: But why?
Adult: Because that’s how it is.
Me: But why?
And so on.
I had pretty respectable religious education –- at home, at school and at church. However, while it was packaged differently, my religious education was not very far from the Baltimore Catechism. There wasn’t room from dialogue or for finding my own truth. There were answers to questions and stickers when you memorized another prayer and that was about it.
There was no questioning.
My fear is that my questioning-less religious education is reflective of a bigger trend in our church. Our church –- the Catholic church –- has forgotten how to question. Question our doctrine. Our tradition. Our leaders. Our beliefs.
To me, this seems strange. We are a church built on questioning, built by questioners. St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Augustine, Julian of Norwich, St. Claire of Assisi –- to name a few –- were all questioners. In their time, these thinkers and others asked innumerable questions, trying to be closer to God, trying to be better Christians.
While we now have a lot to learn and cling to from the likes of St. Augustine, this certainly does not give us license to stop questioning. After all, St. Augustine was philosophizing in the 5th century and plenty has since changed. Surely then, our questioning must continue in order to find answers that respond to our modern world, our modern church.
Unfortunately, many questioners of our time are being excommunicated or censured. After a five-year investigation of his book Jesus Symbol of God, Jesuit theologian Robert Haight has been forbidden to publish or teach by the Catholic hierarchy. For their views on women’s equality in the church, Fr. Roy Bourgeois, Sr. Louise Lears and others have been reprimanded by the Vatican. Fr. Marek Bozek and Call To Action members in the Lincoln, Nebr., diocese were excommunicated for questioning. The list goes on.
Worse yet, those folks in the pews who begin to question, feeling no space for dialogue or change, are fleeing the church. Between 2006 and 2007, the U.S. Catholic Church lost 400,000 members. In fact, one of the largest religious identities in the United States is “former Catholic.” Surely, these statistics are reason enough to open the floor for questioning and dialogue.
So, the big question then is: Why have we stopped questioning? Or, maybe it is: Why is it that the hierarchy of the Catholic church no longer condones questioning? Or, maybe still: What is there to lose by questioning?
Historically, when leaders have allowed and encouraged questioning, they have left themselves open for criticism, change and possible loss of power. And sometimes, that has scared the very same leaders into cutting off all dialogue.
Take an example from within the church, the (abridged) story of the Papal Birth Control Commission. Pope John XXIII appointed a commission to evaluate and study Catholics’ use of birth control. When John XXIII died, Pope Paul VI continued the commission and expanded it to included married men and women. Although the commission overwhelming came out in support of birth control, Paul VI, fearing that if he permitted birth control, he would lose power as a moral authority, favored a minority report and upheld the Vatican ban on birth control.
The moral of this story is simple: We cannot be afraid, the leaders of our church cannot be afraid of questioning and subsequent change. Indeed, the act of questioning is what has and can make the Catholic church a truly just church.
In short, when a five-year-old asks us, “Why?” Let our answer never be, “Because.” Instead, let us ask the child and ourselves, “Well, what do you think?”
Kate Childs Graham writes for ReligionDispatches.org and YoungAdultCatholics-Blog.com. She also serves on the Women’s Ordination Conference board of directors and the Call to Action Next Generation Leadership Team.
If you love Him you will
If you love Him you will remember to keep the commandments. Jeusu Christ is Risen! Allelulia! Alleluia!
Very true. Even Jesus
Very true. Even Jesus questioned his leaders. We need to be a questioning church!
I think the author here is on
I think the author here is on to a profound insight, but one that needs to be embedded in more contaxt. It is our culture in the U.S. that has occluded the capacity to question in the great tradition of fides quaerens.
Very simply, I think that (1) the ideologically driven thrust of our cultural approach to education in the past several decades, (2) the media driven reduction of learning to entertaining sound bites, (3) the lack of training in critical thinking (e.g. philosophy), and (4) religious educators who lack sufficient training to safely allow robust debate all contribute to a generation incapable of dialectical debate that leads both 'sides' to new insights.
While there may be an element of authoritarianism, I think our general culture is in need of critique. And ultimately it is not 'questioning' itself that is a good, but questioning that is informed by good method and, if it is to be real theology, by living faith that thirsts for understanding. Questioning alone, without good thinking, more often leads to mere doubt; or worse, to a loss of faith.
So, let's heed our author's call for a faith hungry enough to quest for understanding!
Aquino is correct, yes,
Aquino is correct, yes, critical thinking is essential, but the exploration of "fact", the "given" before logic takes over is neither sufficiently appreciated nor practiced. It is the prerequesite of the scientist, the fodder of the poet, the field of the philosopher sure, but it is also the meat and potatoes for each and every one of us. This, I think, is the validity behind the adage about taking time to smell the flowers. We relegate that adage to good feeling and bath-room quote books, but the process of sensory contact on to the mind's encapsulating of reality is the source of awe, wonder, the "question" and "quest-ion'ing". It is pre-logic.
I would add to his analysis as well, that in contemporary society we fail to reflect sufficiently. Maybe I mean "meditation", but in many respects meditation is a dimension and practice of reflection.
While I agree that Aquino is
While I agree that Aquino is basically correct that there is not enough good critical thinking in our church, I would maintain that it is the Episcopacy itself that are the greatest offenders. The very fact that they would force a licenser to teach Catholic Theology in our Catholic Institutions is a good example. The Episcopacy are not the best experts in theology, but it is the theologians that they are licensing that have much better resumes and consistent work ethic to discover what the Spirit is telling us today. The Episcopacy reduces our best institutions to cathecatical centers, not major Universities for the study of theology. It would be like a major asking the professors at a University to be licensed in Political Science or Philosophy or even Physics by him. The Bishops are the Catholic Church's administrators and recently there are many questions about their poor leadership. This article points out correctly that it is the critical thinkers that are brought to a modern day Inquisition by the Roman Bishops. Most of the past presidents of the American Catholic Theological society have suffered for the past 15 yrs. under this poor method of Episcopal critique. Critique for the Bishops means are you teaching as we instruct you to. This, indeed, is an authoritarian approach and leads only to the degradation of critical thought in the University and in the Church as a whole.
As a scientist, I have described several times on these pages the lack of scientific integrity by these very same Bishops. We are dealing with a group of megalomaniac Bishops who hide behind a self promoted authority because they are worried about their own power, especially in these times of financial and sexual scandals that have pointed to the very poor leadership of these Bishops including the one in Rome.
Finally, we do not have a secular crisis on our hands what we have is a very poor clericalism that the People of God must deal with if they hope to have a church with integrity.
Peace and understanding,
R. Dennis Porch, MD
Bravo! Yes, Yes, Yes
Bravo! Yes, Yes, Yes
As always, Kate illuminates a
As always, Kate illuminates a critical aspect of our faith -- the importance of critical thinking. With this article, she inspires Catholics to follow our consciences and she holds the Catholic hierarchy accountable for attempting to go against it's own teaching by not encouraging Catholics to think through different aspects of the faith.
Brava, Kate! I look forward to your articles and am never disappointed.
There have always been those
There have always been those who question.
There role is essential to develop theology and Catholic doctrine.
They have often been given a hard time for questioning.
Jesus said that his followers would have to take up their crosses and follow him.
Questioning and standing up for what you believe to be right, despite the consequences, is simply what taking up ones cross and following Jesus means.
The sermon on the mount spells it all out:-
Blessed are they who are persecuted for the sake of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are you when they insult you and persecute you and utter every kind of evil against you (falsely) because of me. Rejoice and be glad, for your reward will be great in heaven. Thus they persecuted the prophets who were before you.
"You are the salt of the earth. But if salt loses its taste, with what can it be seasoned? It is no longer good for anything but to be thrown out and trampled underfoot. You are the light of the world. A city set on a mountain cannot be hidden. Nor do they light a lamp and then put it under a bushel basket; it is set on a lampstand, where it gives light to all in the house. Just so, your light must shine before others, that they may see your good deeds and glorify your heavenly Father.
"Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place.
www.usccb.org/nab/bible/matthew/matthew5.htm
God Bless
Dear Kate Childs Graham and
Dear Kate Childs Graham and anyone else who cares to listen: Thank you for your succint and valid article. In response to your question here is what I think.
Metaphorically, the search for the "holy grail" became termed a "quest". It is my personal philosophy that the grail is really the quest. That is the real secret of the grail, the true lesson of the beautiful and profound myth. Those who see it as a "cup", "crusader treasure", the "head of Jesus", or "Christ and Mary's descendents" or any cultish object have missed the whole point. Or, they have substituted their own mythical object: i.e., answers, e.g., a "code" or one of the above. There is no "answer" to the profound questions about man, woman, life or God which, if truly asked, does not embody and elicit further questions, depth, hights, subtelties, caveats, conditions to be sought and then lead to more while basking in the substance of the beauty of the piece of truth we find.
It seems that the scriptures have been lost to the myth seekers and become the exclusive territory of the answer custodians. While I agree that theology and organization and discipline are important there should be room for the "questers".
Questing (quest'ioning) is a trepidatious venture. When the knight went on "his" quest it implies that he "took upon himself"; the "others" had to "let go" and the journey was fraught with "dragons", as well as the allures of the maidens and other temptations. King Arthur himself a "lett'er goer" was blind-sided by one of those he let go but ironically, it included one he didn't let go - his wife. So is it "love" or "control"? Do we rule by the control of answers or the risk of question? Unfortunately the middle ground, the wise and prudent route continues to elude us.
We have lost the confidence in ourselves and in our truths to see their mythical value, their contribution to the quest to which we are all called or impelled. I think that we are called, one resists and controls impulsions. Jesus (as well as everything else He was/is) is the "myth" that was what he symbolized, He opened up quest to all, not just to the elite.
The church, our society (a la Disney) have taken away myth, we have substituted quick answers (easy rewards) for what should be lingering questions. I suspect that is one of the reasons why the church put Gibben's history on the "list". It firmly placed Catholicism/Christianity within the context of man's mythological track. (The church as been scared of quest'ioning since the five hundreds)
There is room for intelligent
There is room for intelligent questions, and answers. However this writer and those that share her pro-abortion, pro-death agenda aren't interested in answers, they already have all the answers and want the church to conform to them.
There are many WITHIN the church who have raised intelligent questions, for example a minority of Catholics had questioned if the "Tridentine" mass and formula for the sacraments had ever been abrogated, most Catholics, Bishops laity and Priests would have said yes, though less then two years ago Pope Benedict said that the questioning minority was right the Tridentine mass was never lawfully suppressed and can be celebrated by any Latin rite priest.
There is a difference between asking an intelligent question and being an anti-Catholic, something that this author wants you to forget.
Questioning the Church and
Questioning the Church and Her authority is all fine and dandy, I suppose - but when it comes to questioning groups like Call to Action and the WOC, well, then it's no longer a two-way street. Re: the response given when the Vatican announced the intent to review women religious.
Perhaps the issue isn't that the Church isn't loathe to hear the questions. It's that the dissidents and heterodox don't like the answers.
All one has to do is look at
All one has to do is look at everything that happened around the pedophile priest scandal. It was call to action etal that helped bring that to light. It was the leadership of the church that used blackmail, extortion and intimidation to silence the victims. That is all the evidence we need to see the real character, the true nature of the RCC Leadership.
If challenging the criminal behavior of our leadership is dissident and heterodox, then so be it. Far better to be labeled a "protestant" than to be a criminal coconspirator.
Ig, according to the
Ig, according to the Catechism, Church = the People of God. The hierarchy and/or the pope do not by themselves constitute the Church; they are but part of the Church. Look back into history--at Jesus, Augustine, St. Thomas Aquinas...and you'll discover that our faith was born of questioning. Indefectibility itself requires that the Church continue to question.
BTW, your reference to a "two-way street" is a comparison of apples and oranges; unlike the Vatican, Call to Action and the WOC are not repressive regimes.
Yes, the Church is the People
Yes, the Church is the People of God. That is one of the many descriptions of the Church. It is also the Body of Christ. Sometimes, though, cancer forms in the body and has to be removed for the sake of the body. And as Christ said in the Gospels - "those who do not bear fruit are cut off and thrown into the fire."
The Pope is the voice of Christ on Earth. And the hierarchy is a necessity for all of us. You may want to read paragraphs 874-896 in the Catechsim.
I stand by my statement - when the Church proclaims that a) She has no authority to ordain women; b) birth control is an intrinsic evil; c) abortion is an intrinsic evil; d) homosexuality is a disorder and homosexual acts are gravely immoral; e) divorce and remarriage w/o an annulment is invalid; f) sex outside of marriage is immoral; g) IVF is gravely immoral, et al ad infinitum, the dissidents and heterodox obstinately refuse to accept the answers, and hope that by continually asking the questions, they'll get their way. It's been going on for 2000 years, and will continue to go on. But the Church is an anvil of Truth against which many hammers of heresy have been broken. Like Arianism, Manicheism (wrong spelling, I know), Nestorianism, etc.
You said that our faith was born out of questioning, and you included Jesus in your list. Um, Christ founded the Church - and is the second person of the Trinity - so who exactly did he question? Himself? Wouldn't that make him schizophrenic? Does that make any sense at all?
Our faith is born out the free gift from God, that we believe in Him, we believe everything that He has said and revealed, as proposed by the Church, because He is truth itself and can neither deceive nor be deceived. Our faith grows and develops as we better understand what it all means - and that involves asking questions - and then trustingly accepting the answers as true, and beneficial to our reaching heaven. I'm speaking in regards to faith and morals here.
But go ahead and continue to wail and gnash your teeth - long after you and I and everyone else is dead and buried, Christ's Church will still be standing as a beacon of hope against the darkness of the culture. And praise be to God for that, now and forever!
As to the Vatican being a repressive regime - thanks for the laugh!! Last time I checked, I don't have the Swiss Guard hiding under my bed or a bishop tapping my phone lines. Ha ha ha. For all the "tolerance" Call to Apostasy and the CRONES claim to have, they certainly aren't tolerant of people like me who freely choose to stay faithful to Christ, His Church and Her teachings.
Re "Call to Action and the
Re "Call to Action and the WOC are not repressive regimes" - are you sure about that? Ever try to disagree with them?
Kate: "... Paul VI, fearing
Kate: "... Paul VI, fearing that if he permitted birth control, he would lose power as a moral authority, favored a minority report and upheld the Vatican ban on birth control."
And, Kate, you know this by some infalible inner voice or statement by Paul VI, or can you cite a source rather than expressing an unsubstansiated opinion?
Questioning is integral to
Questioning is integral to our faith. Jesus encouraged questioning with numerous people throughout the New Testament. His longest dialogue is with the Samaritan woman. He praised her and made her his Apostle to the gentiles of Samaria. He welcomed questioning and thinking about religion and changing traditions when necessary (food laws, helping people on the Sabbbath , teaching women about religion, making women public apostles, preachers, witnesses, etc.) Jesus tells us in the book of Matthew to question and to make requests of God. Kate is correct about the very importance of questioning in our faith. Thanks for writing about this and reminding us of the need for us to be thinking and questioning, thoughtful Catholics. Great work, Kate!
For someone who reads,
For someone who reads, writes, engages, and questions the relationship between the Church and the culture along the lines of Augustine, Aquinas, Julian of Norwish, and Clare, you might want to try reading a few things by this guy who used to have some position or another in the Church--some guy named Joseph Ratzinger. He had a few interesting, and astoundingly insightful, things to say in his various books and essays.
Anecdotal evidence suggests
Anecdotal evidence suggests that Catholics have done nothing but question in recent decades, so the author's assertion that "our Church has forgotten how to question" is baseless. The evidence she provides of those censured is, precisely, evidence of questioning. That these people were censured is evidence of censure, not of inability to question. Questioning is alive and well, but the problem seems to be that we have questioned so much that we don't know who we are anymore.
Andrew challenges the
Andrew challenges the article's thesis. Without rereading the article, maybe she would have been wiser to say that the institutional church has stifled questionning - over the centuries -andisonce again resorting to that strategy because Catholics are searching for the ability to question - and practicing - and learning.
Growing up in a "Catholic" educational environment, the only questions asked were "of me". My role as a good kid was to first, learn the answers and then be able to repeat them. Such rote religious education retards and sometimes essentially alters, redefines or contradicts religious "development". The questions were never mine; it was not my duty to question but to learn answers. The questions had already been asked, categorized and printed in bold in the catechism and my role was to learn the predetermined answers, nothing more nothing less.
Yes, we have in many ways lost our ability to question. How many of us think about Pinocchio and the significance of this "story", the questions it raises, the challenges it poses and the lessons it offers if we approach it with "eyes to see and mind to ask"? We don't need to. We and generations have grown up with Walt Disney's "catechism" answer". So goes the church. It is not all the fault of church but "wonder", "awe" and their impulse to question need to be recovered in our souls. Ultimately, Christ's church will benefie.
Philosophy answers the
Philosophy answers the questions, theology answers them. God created an order to finding Truth.
Kate - your exchange with
Kate - your exchange with your kindergarten teacher reminds me of an exchange with my parish priest in high school.
Me: Why can't women be ordained?
Priest: Because that's what the church teaches.
Me: But why does the church teach that?
Priest: Because the church has always taught that only men can be ordained.
Me: But why?
Etcetera, so forth.
I agree with much of what Aquino wrote - not only do we need to teach our children to think critically, we need well prepared catechists, priests, and leaders who take our questions seriously, and are prepared to engage in the conversation. I've found that when my questions and misgivings are taken seriously, I'm given more information and resources, and I learn much more about the history and development of our church and its teachings. Questioning has given me more respect for my religious heritage. It's when I've been shut down that I was more likely to turn my back on it.
Perhaps the real problem is
Perhaps the real problem is that the laity for far too long has been far too unquestioningly obedient.
We continue to see a steady stream of deception, criminal behavior, issuing from all levels of the RCC Leadership. We see them using issues like abortion to elevate their political standing within the heirarchy. We see them distorting scriptures to suit their own personal agendas. We see them censuring anyone who dares to bring into the light of public scrutiny their atrocious violations of catechism and canon. We see them committing criminal acts to protect their "image" and cover up their crimes.
Yes, the catholic laity has been far to trusting, far too obedient for far too long.
Well said Kate, Questioning
Well said Kate, Questioning is key to growth in all areas and aspects of our lives. Silence is not always golden!
Let the church guide you.
Let the church guide you. Sure you can question, but I doubt you will find a question that has not been dealt with by the church in her 2000 years of existence from abortion to womenpriest etc. The church exist to protect the teaching of christ from doctrinal errors. If the error exists, it is the duty of the church to make corrections and thus the censure and or excommunications. Besides, there are things that we do not have answers to and we take it based on faith not science such as the doctrine of the trinity, immaculate conception etc.
Has the author of the articles read Paul VI's Humanae Vitae? If so, please refute Pope Paul's arguments instead of playing the power card based on no facts. Would you rather do what is right or what is popular? The pope did what was right going against the recommendations of the majority report. The church cannot contradict the teaching of Jesus Christ even if it was 2000 years ago and even if time changes.
I want to be corrected if I am wrong as it could mean eternal damnation or does that not exist because "respectable theologians" has questioned it?
Thank you, Kate. Our church
Thank you, Kate. Our church needs more thoughtful young people as you! Keep working at it. And know that you have many, many "older" Catholics supporting you and praying for the continuation of your work. "Because" is NEVER the right answer!
Johanna - If that's all you
Johanna - If that's all you heard perhaps you weren't listening very well. It's possible something like that happened, however there are many sources that explain very well why the Priesthood is reserved to men, your post implied that there is no good reason, and there are several. Asking a question can't only be rhetorical, you have to actually try to seek an answer.
"...however there are many
"...however there are many sources that explain very well why the Priesthood is reserved to men, your post implied that there is no good reason, and there are several." I guess it depends on what one defines as "good reason". Would this "anonymous" lay out these good reasons. Personally I have been graced with several explanations, repeatedly, but not one of them comes up to the standard of "good reason".
The Church is not required to
The Church is not required to give reasons that meet your subjective standard as to what is "good". The Church gives reasons that are true - if you choose to not believe, then take it up with God. It's His Church to begin with, after all.
"The Church is not required
"The Church is not required to give reasons that meet your subjective standard as to what is "good", Igd708 writes. O-k-a-y, however, I was addressing "anonymous". Even so, I will back of and ask either to share their "good" reasons, or even, as Igd708 suggests - God's.
Two things - first, I'll
Two things - first, I'll agree with dennism (whose comment I'm replying to) that I've never received a "good" reason - ie: one that's based on scripture, one that's based on a non-revisionist view of church history, or one that exercises any bit of logic or sense of justice.
Secondly, to respond to Anonymous above, in the exchange referenced above, I was not even given the courtesy of an answer that referenced anything in scripture or tradition. In that particular exchange, the extent of the explanation was "because the church says so, and that's all I'm going to say."
More than the specific question of women's ordination in the Catholic church (a topic which I have researched and read quite a bit about after landing in adulthood), my larger point was that whenever I have been given answers that end at "because the church says so," it served to disillusion me. When I was engaged in real discussion and given further reading and research, my love and respect for the church grew, even if in the end I didn't necessarily agree or understand. My point remains - engaging the questions edifies and informs the faithful. I should think that's a laudable goal for liberal, conservatives, and everyone in between.
Would CTA allow anyone on
Would CTA allow anyone on their board who opposes female ordination?!? Can I question why not?
Tsk, Tsk, questions about the
Tsk, Tsk, questions about the Church's answers are not allowed. They are presented as infallible doctrine handed down by Christ Himself, such as limbo, which was characterized as "infallible" and not open to discussion or questioning until a few years ago, when it was dismissed as the silliness that it was.
Joanna, I had a similar experience with questions like that of women's ordination. Why does the Church teach that women are made equal in the image of God, but women cannot be priests in the Catholic Church? I have been given the following reasons, none of which seem really satisfying in a deeply theological way.
"Because God wants it that way!" (Who DARES to know and speak for the mind of God?)
"Because Jesus only picked men as his followers." (How do we know that as MEN wrote the bible and edited it throughout the eons?)
"Because all women are only supposed to be wives and mothers." (By this reasoning, wouldn't men, then, be destined to be husbands and biological "fathers"? How does this reasoning apply to celibate aunts, women whose children are grown, single women, etc., are their lives meaningless and their gifts and talents to be denied?)
"Because it's the tradition of the Church!" (Doesn't tradition makes a good guide, but a poor master?)
"Because Jesus slips into the priest and he becomes Jesus during the liturgy." (But does it require a male sexual organ to have this occur? Was it Jesus sexuality that mattered most, or his humanity? If it WAS his sexuality, why does the Church insist he was celibate, i.e., he never used his male sexuality?)
"Because Jesus only ordained MEN." (Jesus ordained people? Is that what The Last Supper was, an ordination ceremony?)
The questions are many and they are not welcome.
If you are fearful of
If you are fearful of questioning, you must read, "Why you can Disagree and Remain a Faithful Catholic" by authors Philip S. Kaufman and Richard A. McCormick.
May the Holy Spirit guide you in your questioning. She will bring you to the answers you seek. Blessings to all.
questioning is a vital part
questioning is a vital part of growing up not only religious but on any topic, i've also observed that adult mostly ignore their children questions but that's not something you should be doing, as it is said in the article , discussion is the best way to go. God bless us all
JOhn (ppc)
Post new comment