The Independent News Source
NCR on Kindle - NCR classifieds - YouTube - Twitter - Facebook - Email Alerts - RSS
Printer-friendly version
PDF versionU.S. bishops blast book by feminist theologian
No call for disciplinary measures against Johnson
Mar. 30, 2011
Sr. Elizabeth Johnson
A widely popular 2007 book by Sr. Elizabeth Johnson, one of America’s most prominent feminist Catholic theologians, is marred by a series of “misrepresentations, ambiguities and errors” and thus “does not accord with authentic Catholic teaching on essential points,” according to a statement released today by the Committee on Doctrine of the U.S. bishops’ conference.
In particular, Johnson’s treatment of the Trinity in Quest for the Living God, according to the bishops, “completely undermines the Gospel and the faith of those who believe in the Gospel.”
Despite that conclusion, the bishops did not call for any disciplinary measures against Johnson, such as a ban on teaching or publishing. Johnson, 69, is a distinguished professor of systematic theology at the Jesuit-run Fordham University in New York.
According to the statement, the committee felt compelled to publicly denounce Johnson’s 2007 book Quest for the Living God because it is directed to a “broad audience,” and because it’s being used in many venues “as a textbook for the study of God.”
When it appeared, Quest for the Living God drew praise in many quarters for sketching new understandings of God based on various contemporary intellectual currents, including political, liberation, feminist, black, Hispanic, interreligious, and ecological theologies.
The statement, however, asserts that the book reaches many conclusions which are “theologically unacceptable.”
The Committee on Doctrine of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops is chaired by Cardinal Donald Wuerl of Washington, D.C. Though dated March 24, its statement on Johnson’s book was released today.
Johnson is a high-profile theologian who holds numerous awards and honorary doctorates from a host of Catholic institutions, and who has served as president of both the Catholic Theological Society of America and the American Theological Society. In 2008, Quest for the Living God won the first place award from the Catholic Press Association in the “academic theology” category.
The 21-page statement from the doctrine committee outlines seven categories of problems in the book.
First, at the level of method, the statement accuses Johnson of questioning core elements of traditional Christian theology, including its understanding of God as “incorporeal, impassible, omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent.” Doing so, the statement asserts, is “seriously to misrepresent the tradition and so to distort it beyond recognition.”
Preview NCR's Family Life Issue
Watch this video from NCR Editor Dennis Coday for highlights from our annual Family Life special section.
You won't find these articles on our website. Subscribe now to receive all the content from each biweekly issue.
Second, the statement faults Johnson for treating language about God in the Bible and in church tradition as largely metaphorical, implying that truth about God is essentially “unknowable.” Even if mysteries such as the Trinity and the Incarnation can never be fully grasped, the statement says, they can nevertheless be “known.” While Johnson bases part of her argument on early church fathers, according to the statement, her position actually has more in common with Immanuel Kant and “Enlightenment skepticism.”
Third, the statement asserts that in talking about the “suffering” of God, Johnson actually undermines God’s transcendence, suggesting that God differs only in degree, not in kind, from other beings.
Fourth, according to the statement, Johnson advocates new language about God not based on its truth but its socio-political utility. In particular, she argues that all-male language about God perpetuates “an unequal relationship between women and men,” and thus has become “religiously inadequate.” In fact, according to the statement, male imagery about God found in scripture and tradition “are not mere human creations that can be replaced by others that we may find more suitable.”
Fifth, the statement asserts that Johnson’s emphasis on the presence of the Holy Spirit in non-Christian religions “denies the uniqueness of Jesus as the Incarnate Word.” In effect, according to the statement, Johnson’s argument suggests that for the fullness of truth about God, “one needs Jesus + Hinduism, Buddhism, Islam, etc.”, a position it says is “contrary to church teaching.”
Sixth, the statement says, Johnson’s treatment of God as Creator ends in pantheism, undercutting the traditional understanding of God as “radically different from creation.”
Seventh, the statement faults Johnson’s understanding of the Trinity. Johnson treats traditional language about God as three persons as symbolic, according to the statement, thereby undercutting the church’s belief that “Jesus is ontologically the eternal Son of the Father.”
In its conclusion, the statement says the root problem with Johnson’s book is that it “does not take the faith of the church as its starting point.”
“It effectively precludes the possibility of human knowledge of God through divine revelation,” the statement says, “and reduces all names and concepts of God to human constructions that are to be judged not on their accuracy … but on their social and political utility.”
With today’s statement, Quest for the Living God joins a handful of other recent books by prominent American theologians which have been singled out for formal criticism by the Committee on Doctrine. Those works include The Sexual Person by Todd Salzman and Michael Lawler(Georgetown University Press, 2008); Being Religious Interreligiously by Peter Phan (Orbis, 2004); and two 2006 pamphlets on contraception, abortion and same-sex marriage by Daniel Maguire.
In each case, the doctrine committee criticized both the reasoning and the conclusions, but did not seek to impose any disciplinary measures upon the authors. In general, sources say, the idea behind that approach is to focus on ideas rather than persons.
It’s also striking that these statements have come from the doctrine committee of the U.S. bishops rather than the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. That’s in keeping with recent congregation policy that disputes ought to be addressed on the local level whenever possible, especially when the theological issues involved have already been addressed by the Vatican in other venues.
The doctrine committee's full statement is here.
Here are remarks by Cardinal Donald Wuerl of Washington.
[John L. Allen Jr. is NCR senior correspondent. His e-mail address is jallen@ncronline.org.]
More coverage from NCR
Shortly after Johnson's book The Quest for the Living God was published, she discussed it with NCR editor Tom Fox. Their discussion was posted to the NCR web site as a two part podcast: Elizabeth Johnson and the Quest for the Living God.
Fox's review of that book is here: A hunger for mature theology
In August 2008, Johnson addressed a joint assembly of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious and the Conference of Major Superiors of Men, the main umbrella groups for women’s and men’s orders in the United States, meeting in Denver. NCR senior correspondent John L. Allen Jr. covered the event and filed this story: Theologian Elizabeth Johnson: 'Drench anger with forgiveness'
The text of Sr. Elizabeth Johnson's address is on the LCWR website at: www.lcwr.org/lcwrannualassembly/2008assembly.htm.
WELL, ANOTHER GOOD BOOK TO
WELL, ANOTHER GOOD BOOK TO READ. I think what bothers many people about the male, clerical leaders of the church today is their certitude toward just about everything. Only they know God, only they can speak for God and only they can interpret traditions, writings and history.
There are all sorts of
There are all sorts of instances in the Old and New Testament where humans attempt to put God in a box. The thinking is if I can force God into my definition, I have some control. It still happens. It's not just the old men in the Vatican that do this either ... all of us do it to one extent or another. Elizabeth Johnson will continue as she has, doing what a theologian is supposed to do. We may be indignant by the action but it's truly much ado about nothing.
Hmmmm...then there have been
Hmmmm...then there have been many wars over "nothing"....
sounds like a potentially
sounds like a potentially good read to me too
Take it from one who had
Take it from one who had heard much of its contents in a talk given by Sr. Doctor Johnson, CSJ two years before publication and who waited rather impatiently for its publication - there's no "potential" about the spiritual worth of this book. It's personally and communally worth the time and effort to read and absorb its many messages.
What better way to sell a
What better way to sell a book than have the U.S. bishops 'blast' a book...immediately a best seller.
Yes, everytime the bishops
Yes, everytime the bishops condemn a motion picture, they give you the best movie review of them all. You know exactly what's worth goint to see. I never fail to read their reviews.
Well since I heard of this
Well since I heard of this particular dispute about the book Quest for the Living God, I have ordered the book for its renewed publication -- July 21, 2011 --
I am intreaged because I find that my l wholepersonal life has been a QUEST for the LIVING GOD! And, would like to see or udestand why Sister Elizabeth Johnson's book is so frightful to Bishops of USA; are we wrong in searching for the Living God in our daily lives? As far as I am concerned, I trust in the words of Jesus: "Ask and it will be granted to you, Seek and you will find, Knock and it shall be opened to you!" What are the "men of the cloth" so frightened about, since God, Himself wishes to be found, loved, worshiped and pursued into Eternity!
I pray that Light of Christ fill this controvery . . .
To the bishops I say: "Woe
To the bishops I say: "Woe to you, teachers of the law & Pharisees, you hypocrites! You are like whitewashed tombs,
which look beautiful on the outside, but on the inside are full of dead men's bones & everything unclean."
To Sister Elizabeth, I must quote my 19 year old niece here & say: " YOU ROCK" !!!
PS: I've just ordered multiple copies of your book, as you are a PROPHET & a VISIONARY !
May God Bless your vocation & ministry ! I only wish I were on of your most blessed students at Fordham U!
"Mindful of Christ's words to
"Mindful of Christ's words to his apostles: 'He who hears you, hears me',the faithful receive with docility the teachings and directives that their pastors give them in different forms" (CCC 87).
Father John N. on Mar. 31,
Father John N. on Mar. 31, 2011.
You stated:
("Mindful of Christ's words to his apostles: 'He who hears you, hears me',the faithful receive with docility the teachings and directives that their pastors give them in different forms" (CCC 87).)
--------------------------------------------------
Ah, yes! That is what Pope Benedict hopes that "the little people (most of the laity)" will do with everything that the Vatican or the local episcopacy states.
Jesus' words were to the 12 Apostles----who had a unique, and unrepeatable role in the proclamation of the Gospel. But sadly, that is not the case of the Vatican today. Too many of the popes, and bishops----have not fulfilled their task given to them by Christ.
By the way, Jesus did not establish the papacy as we have had it. That began since the papacy began to function like a secular agency of government---instead of being totally dedicated to the spreading of the gospel.
"Thirdly, I believe with
"Thirdly, I believe with equally firm faith that the Church, the guardian and teacher of the revealed word, was personally instituted by the real and historical Christ when he lived among us, and that the Church was built upon Peter, the prince of the apostolic hierarchy, and his successors for the duration of time. Fourthly, I sincerely hold that the doctrine of faith was handed down to us from the apostles through the orthodox Fathers in exactly the same meaning and always in the same purport. Therefore, I entirely reject the heretical' misrepresentation that dogmas evolve and change from one meaning to another different from the one which the Church held previously. I also condemn every error according to which, in place of the divine deposit which has been given to the spouse of Christ to be carefully guarded by her, there is put a philosophical figment or product of a human conscience that has gradually been developed by human effort and will continue to develop indefinitely." -Oath Against Modernism
Father John N. on Apr. 01,
Father John N. on Apr. 01, 2011.
You stated:
"Thirdly, I believe with equally firm faith that the Church, the guardian and teacher of the revealed word, was personally instituted by the real and historical Christ when he lived among us, and that the Church was built upon Peter, the prince of the apostolic hierarchy, and his successors for the duration of time. Fourthly, I sincerely hold that the doctrine of faith was handed down to us from the apostles through the orthodox Fathers in exactly the same meaning and always in the same purport. Therefore, I entirely reject the heretical' misrepresentation that dogmas evolve and change from one meaning to another different from the one which the Church held previously. I also condemn every error according to which, in place of the divine deposit which has been given to the spouse of Christ to be carefully guarded by her, there is put a philosophical figment or product of a human conscience that has gradually been developed by human effort and will continue to develop indefinitely." -Oath Against Modernism"
------------------------------------------------------------
Ah, yes! And the world is flat and the sun, moon, and all the stars in the universe revolve around it.
Sorry, the world and culture have changed since "The Syllabus of Errors" came out. By the way----are you aware that there was an Ecumenical Council called Vatican Council II held in the early 1960's?
Are you also aware that there is very strong evidence that St. Peter never was in Rome at any time? But that the Christian community there was most likely started by a woman and her husband (her name is Junia---and she's a relative of St. Paul).
These modern means of uncovering the REAL history are terrible, aren't they?
Get over thyself. When did
Get over thyself. When did Christianity ever extol or are Jewish forefathers that the world is flat and that our world is revolved around by the sun, moon, and all the stars. Also the Syllabus of Errors has as much application today as it did when convoked because of menaces like thyself who seem to come with the 'enlightenment speak' that puts the Human as Theos and Deos. Please get a grip and just see what the doctrines of Our Lord transmitted through his Holy Spouse have done for the world whilst preparing us for the coming Our Lord.
Ah, yes, Fr. John!! The oath
Ah, yes, Fr. John!! The oath against modernism.....incidentally it forbade scriptural research etc. so you may be in violation of it yourself!! You had best check with the Holy Office, now the CDF, to make sure you have not excommunicated yourself.
The oath does not forbid
The oath does not forbid study of Scripture. Why would you lie?
I am always surprised when
I am always surprised when people describe decisions from the hierarchy of the Catholic Church, a large group of males, to be coming from 'HER'. The whole church is the spouse of Christ, NOT the hierachy or the Vatican bureaucrats.
I am so looking forward to obtaining Sister Elizabeth's book.
"Mindful of Christ's words to
"Mindful of Christ's words to his apostles: 'He who hears you, hears me
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
How very convenient for the buggering humbug purveyors to continuously fall back on this quote to justify virtually everything they say. Truly, one of the most abused quotes in scripture; one of many.
Indeed,--- IF--- Jesus
Indeed,--- IF--- Jesus uttered those words.
Which bishops or popes or
Which bishops or popes or even Vatican councils in church history was perfectly correct in (his) intepretations of Scripture? Beware of what you cite. Intepretations change with enlightenment over the ages and that is the only fact that we know for certain.
Should we also receive with
Should we also receive with docility the serial rape of our children at the supervision of our bishops?
So long as you're willing to
So long as you're willing to receive with docility the serial rape of our children at the supervision of our teacher's unions, school administrators, and Departments and Boards of Education.
The problem is NOT pedophiia - it's the homosexual recruitment of our younger (mean age 15) male teenagers, and thanks to the bishops turning it around beginning in 2002 the Catholic Church is NO LONGER the locus of the problem (if, indeed, it EVER was). Action by those same bishops you snidely attack reduced reported cases from a high point of 600 in 2003 to below 10 per year now.
This is NOT the case in Protestant churches, where the very lack of the centralized ecclesial authority you decry means NO ONE is dealing with it at all. Worse, in our public schools where ostensibly there IS a centralized authority, those weilding it collude with the unions to hide the problem on a far larger scale ever imagined by the homosexuals vamping on our kids in the Church.
To wit, from the Associated Press, four years ago:
Students in America’s schools are groped. They’re raped. They’re pursued, seduced and think they’re in love.
An Associated Press investigation found more than 2,500 cases over five years in which educators were punished for actions from bizarre to sadistic.
There are 3 million public school teachers nationwide, most devoted to their work. Yet the number of abusive educators _ nearly three for every school day _ speaks to a much larger problem in a system that is stacked against victims.
Most of the abuse never gets reported. Those cases reported often end with no action. Cases investigated sometimes can’t be proven, and many abusers have several victims.
And no one _ not the schools, not the courts, not the state or federal governments _ has found a surefire way to keep molesting teachers out of classrooms.
Those are the findings of an AP investigation in which reporters sought disciplinary records in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The result is an unprecedented national look at the scope of sex offenses by educators _ the very definition of breach of trust.
The seven-month investigation found 2,570 educators whose teaching credentials were revoked, denied, surrendered or sanctioned from 2001 through 2005 following allegations of sexual misconduct.
Young people were the victims in at least 1,801 of the cases, and more than 80 percent of those were students. At least half the educators who were punished by their states also were convicted of crimes related to their misconduct.
The findings draw obvious comparisons to sex abuse scandals in other institutions, among them the Roman Catholic Church. A review by America’s Catholic bishops found that about 4,400 of 110,000 priests were accused of molesting minors from 1950 through 2002.
Clergy abuse is part of the national consciousness after a string of highly publicized cases. But until now, there’s been little sense of the extent of educator abuse.
Beyond the horror of individual crimes, the larger shame is that the institutions that govern education have only sporadically addressed a problem that’s been apparent for years.
I know this is off-topic, but I post this because the major identifying feature of progressive "Catholicism" I see expressed here time and again on EVERY topic is the claim you all can rewrite Church teaching as you like and reject teachings advanced by the bishops because of THEIR failures to protect kids by hiding the problem. THAT is now past history in the Church, but the unions & their admisitrator allies are currently hiding far greater numbers of homosexual predators in our schools - and you have nothing to say about that.
You simply use the sexual abuse crisis as a club to strike down Church teachings you hate.
If you apply your reasoning to the public schools, then we should all reject the school system's authority over teaching our kids and convert 100% over to home-schooling. Then we can kill sex education for good, which instructs too many kids in homosexuality, so you might be on to something.
Phil, one thing you failed to
Phil, one thing you failed to mention: public school teachers and administrators do NOT take vows of poverty,
CHASTITY, and obedience. Nor do they represent themselves as "other Christs on earth"! Seems likes a very
SIGNIFICANT point to overlook!
I'm also mindful of Jesus'
I'm also mindful of Jesus' words to the Pharisees from the Gospel lesson this past Sunday: "Now that you say 'We see', your sin remains."
In what world do these
In what world do these hierarchs live? Why don’t they go a little deeper back in cosmic history a learn something about truths ordinary people understand? These are BADTIMES FOR TRUTH.
======================================================
Deep theology and deep science have evolved esoteric languages and concepts that are generally impenetrable for ordinary folks. Serious but limited effort to penetrate their obscurity has occurred but to little effect; to the contrary there is disinterest and disregard, even calculated arrogance on the part of religion and science against each other’s worldview. Arrogant disregard damages church credibility and harms everyone.
Sister Ilia Delio, O.S.F., continues to try to engage science and theology in dialogue/study to mitigate the mutual disregard of religion and science for each other, but has met with little responsiveness, as have I. My lifetime commitment since 1957 has been to find a go-between for science and religion by learning their languages and concepts and finding their convergences. In AMERICA Magazine, April 4, 2011, pp. 14-19, Sister Delio airs her frustration that religious educational institutions (at any level) do not provide a learning forum that seeks the coming together of religious/scientific truths.
She writes:
“The mechanization and specialization of higher education has rendered the university a multiversity. Instead of educating students to know the universe and stars “turning together as one,” academic disciplines, including theology and philosophy, have become highly specialized, competitive fields. If the modern church is reluctant to embrace insights from modern science as integral to revelation, part of the hesitancy may be due to the place theology holds within the academy…
“In the late 20th century theology entered into dialogue with the cultural pluralities of gender, race, history and philosophy, it nonetheless settled into the university system as an academic silo, just as the sciences sequestered themselves into specialized disciplines. Religion and science grew more estranged… Few Catholic theologians are grappling with the sciences on their own terms as a means of theological reflection… While the church recognizes the importance of science for the development of faith, it also recognizes the limits of science as the ultimate horizon of meaning…
“Scientists tend to see the relationship between the two disciplines as one of either conflict or independence, theologians, when they are interested, tend (to see) dialogue and integration. Undoubtedly, science and religion are independent disciplines, each with its own language, methods and tools of analysis, but the academic structure has kept them intellectually as well as spatially apart…
The Evolution Trilogies of this writer present both esoteric languages and concepts of deep theology and deep science in a way that connects with real life and means something personally and socially. It’s not easy but it’s important to make religion and science accessible to ordinary folk. GREEN RELIGION (book six) gives a study method that lets readers bite off a little at a time on a daily basis so as to avoid mental indigestion. http://www.authorhouse.com/Bookstore/BookDetail.aspx?BookId=SKU-000376381
While the challenge to lighten up religious/scientific heaviness isn’t easy it’s important because science and religion need each other’s truths to retain credibility and have relevance. In the long run science will win out if religion chooses to ignore scientific knowledge. Fixation in disconnection is a sure path to irrelevance. Churches are now [at risk of] becoming museums because of the mass exodus of people from them.
The melding of religious jargon with scientific is a new language, and it certainly reveals a new worldview. Letting jargon get in the way of truth is a hazard to health and sanity. Mastery of jargon and discovery of truth begins in home and community, from the bottom up, not from the top down. The correlation of science and religion needs to happen in the earliest years if one would preserve through life a credible sense of truth and become comfortable and conversant in both worlds.
http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474979177330
...failing to hear God's
...failing to hear God's word, they hear only the sound of their own (male) voices
There we go again, ad hominem
There we go again, ad hominem arguments carry the day. Would it not be refreshing to get beyond the female-chauvinist and male-chauvinist categories when discussing theological facts and truths?
You can certainly discuss the nature, style and composition of church leadership, but please don’t mix up categories in your reasoning. It only leads to nonsense and division.
DID I MISS IT? I hope it's
DID I MISS IT?
I hope it's still in print.
Anyone have a second-hand copy they're willing to part with?
Sister Maureen Paul Turlish
maturlishmdsnd@yahoo.com
______________________________
P.S If you live in the tri-state area please come to Philadelphia for our monthly First Friday Vigiling in support of victims of childhood sexual abuse this Friday, April 1st from 12 noon to 1 P.M. in front of the Archdiocesan offices at 222 North 17th Street in center city. Voice of the Faithful of Greater Philadelphia is in the pursuit of Justice, Accountability and Transparency from the Archdiocese of Philadelphia.
Visit: www.votfgp.org
APRIL IS SEXUAL ABUSE AWARENESS MONTH
Dear Sister: Pot calling
Dear Sister:
Pot calling kettle black on abuse coverup: http://www.lcwr.org/lcwrpressreleases/pressreleases/Statement%20regardin...
SNAP has repeatedly asked for information on sexual and physical abuse from the LCWR. Nothing but vague excuses, and little, if anything, forthcoming from its members. The bishops are paragons of transparency compared to the LCWR.
I am reminded of a Charles
I am reminded of a Charles Simic poem: "And Who Are You Sir? I'm just a shuffling old man, ventriloquizing for a god who hasn't spoken to me once."
YOU GO Girrrrrlll!!! I
YOU GO Girrrrrlll!!! I consider Elizabeth Johnson as more of a "credible" and intellectually honest theologian than all of the Curial Curmudgeons in the Vatican - those irrelevant members of the Magisterium who continue to base their theological doctrines on Patristic patriarchal thought and consider Thomistic systematics to be the gold standard of theological training - and they wonder why Catholics are jumping from the titanic while the Church is frantically shifting around the deck chairs of a doomed ship. Deo Gratia for the inspiration and insight that comes from courageous Catholics such as Elizabeth Johnson - and thanks to her for making me feel a little less insane in these days of fear and reactionary witch hunting.
Rick Folker
Kansas City, MO
That's pretty much the
That's pretty much the definition of "apostolic," yes. Ubi episcopus, and all that (that's from that disciple of St. John (the woman hater), St. Ignatius of Antioch).
You mean Sister didn't
You mean Sister didn't receive an imprimatur from the bishop? Isn't that sort of like not getting the favor your thought was in the box of cereal? Who cares. Nobody in his/her right mind listens to these morally bankrupt fogies anyway.
The People of God are perfectly capable of making their own moral judgments and forming their own opinions. The bishops are being replaced by the internet,but they still don't get it.
The Catholic Bishops condemn
The Catholic Bishops condemn themselves by their action against one of the greatest living theologians. Yes, may it increase readers of this excellent book and increase appreciation for Elizabeth A. Johnson.
AH YES, IN ONE SENTENCE THIS
AH YES, IN ONE SENTENCE THIS DOCUMENT DENYS THE REALITY OF THE INCARNATION: "GOD DOES NOT USE HUMAN, AND THUS LIMITED MEANS OF REVEALING HIMSELF TO THE WORLD." THIS QUOTE IS TOTALLY IN CONTEXT AND APPEARS IN THE DISCUSSION OF FEMININE NAMES OF GOD.
These right wing males have
These right wing males have not got it yet. They are out of touch with reality. They cannot stop the Spirit..for she blows where she wills..What are they on about 'the faith of the church'? Whose church?
Sorry I misquoted you. I
Sorry I misquoted you. I should have written to be politically correct shouldn't you have written "SHE/HE BLOWS WHERE SHE/HE WILLS?
Whose Church you ask? My
Whose Church you ask? My Church, and the Church of all faithful and orthodox Catholics.
This woman, and her writings is why the actual, but invisible schism that exists today must be made public, and the Church become much smaller. The bishops, and faithful Catholics throughout the world have nothing religiously in common with this woman, and anyone who finds this vile creature acceptable. I have a right as a Catholic not to have my faith confused with her religion.
Let the separation begin!
"I have a right as a Catholic
"I have a right as a Catholic not to have my faith confused with her religion."
You must be in another church because no Catholic member of the laity has ANY rights period, despite the babblings of canon law after the 1983 revision of it. An empty set of words Rome has never taken seriously.
If you subscribe to Pope B16's policy of a smaller Church, you are as guilty of heresy as he is. The only people who need to do the "separating" are faithful Catholics looking to take back their Church from the perverted pontificating purveyors of pure humbug driving it into the ground now.
Where is the consistory of cardinals to demand Benny 16's resignation, or force him into exile, then, if necessary, elect an anti-pope to replace him? The shrinking Peter's Barque needs to be recaptured by a reinvigorated crew and Captain Ratzinger rowed ashore.
Yes! Sister, and your
Yes! Sister, and your siblings, the cafeteria is closed!
To think that the hierarchial
To think that the hierarchial church is synonomous with God is idolatry. History isn't finished yet, and neither is the church.
Amen! If you are 'Catholic'
Amen!
If you are 'Catholic' and you do not accept the teaching authority of the Catholic Church maybe you'd be more comfortable in the Episcopal Church USA? You can have women priests and call the Holy Trinity by any name you can imagine - just like Sister Johnson recommends.
Can we please have a
Can we please have a non-Vatican view?
If you are not interested in
If you are not interested in the truth and you cannot make up your own mind and formulate your own view, no other view will help you. If, on the other hand, you are interested in the truth and want to make up your own mind, you will be interested in reading every view. So, what will it be? a Groupie or an adult thinker?
A new idea for you: if you
A new idea for you: if you are interested in the Truth then you read the Truth. Here is another truth for you that hasn't been well taught- The Church and her male hierarchy (oh the horror!) are charged with defending the deposit of Faith, that is, Divine Revelation handed down through the Apostles, via the Holy Spirit, through the Church. No one of us is guaranteed to know Divine Revelation - not this sister, nor you and me. The Holy Spirit can speak to us and through us, but if what we say goes against Church teaching there is another spirit speaking.
Woe to those who change Truth. Woe to those who have corrupted the little ones with their false teaching. Woe to those who through the hardness of their hearts will not recognize the Authority of Christ in the Church.
"The Holy Spirit can speak to
"The Holy Spirit can speak to us and through us, but if what we say goes against Church teaching there is another spirit speaking."
Dear Anonymous, do you realize what you're saying is that Church teaching is a higher authority than the Holy Spirit.
Watch out, you can blasphemy the Father and the Son but not the Spirit.
For heaven's sake the Vatican is not the highest authority, I hope I don't need to tell you who is.
The authority of Christ in
The authority of Christ in the Church is not expressed by the Magisterium perfectly, and neither is He always represented well by dogmatic theologians. The truth, unfortunately, is that literal, fundamentalist interpetations of Church and the demands of the pseudo-orthodox that EVERYONE must believe without critical analysis everything that the holy mother church, (sometimes a whore, according to Dorothy Day) is irrelevant, psychologically unsound, inauthentic, in other words, a LIE.
In my reading of the Bible, the devil is the author of lies. By a process of a not-too-arcane theological analysis one may arrive at the conclusion that sometimes Holy Mother Church is a liar. I believe current media reports would support that view. The church should not be, even if many in control and those deceived by them want it to be, a cult.
Funny, I went through
Funny, I went through seminary with the same kind of professors. Except that "they" were "Church" and dissent from the norm was punished by something much worse than having your book's theology questioned.
Anonymous on Mar. 31,
Anonymous on Mar. 31, 2011.
You stated:
"A new idea for you: if you are interested in the Truth then you read the Truth. Here is another truth for you that hasn't been well taught- The Church and her male hierarchy (oh the horror!) are charged with defending the deposit of Faith, that is, Divine Revelation handed down through the Apostles, via the Holy Spirit, through the Church. No one of us is guaranteed to know Divine Revelation - not this sister, nor you and me. The Holy Spirit can speak to us and through us, but if what we say goes against Church teaching there is another spirit speaking.
Woe to those who change Truth. Woe to those who have corrupted the little ones with their false teaching. Woe to those who through the hardness of their hearts will not recognize the Authority of Christ in the Church."
--------------------------------------------
Here's a new idea for you. We received VERY little by way of doctrine from the Gospels (the words and actions of Christ).
Much of what has come down as teachings of the Church----as the Deposit of Faith----comes from unsustainable ideology occuring during the fall of the Roman empire (the Dark Ages). AND also from---(oh, horrors), HERESIES---that in a few centuries removed from their actual appearance, later became part and parcel of the Church's teachings and practice.
Jesus ordained NOBODY as priest at the Last Supper and consecrated NOBODY as bishop. Jesus' Last Supper established a new remembrance meal. During the Apostolic period, this celebration was the Agape meal. I doubt if any scriptural scholar or theologian worth her/his salt would say that the Last Supper was a sacrifice. St. Paul, in his letter to the Hebrews, does a masterful job of stating that there is only ONE high priest----and that priest is Jesus---and that there is no other---and no need for another.
Jesus' Last Supper established a "Remember Me" Celebration. The next afternoon, He offered the bloody---once for all----and for all time---sacrifice of Himself.
The Catholic Church defends multiple teachings (and often contradictory teachings) and practices that it has designed for itself---as The Deposit of the Faith. The problems that we are seeing today with the issues of the priesthood (who may and who may not become a priest), result from a sense of elitism, power, and privilege founded on the Church's doctrine of the priesthood---that justify much of its structure.
An example of this would be seen in the words of one auxiliary bishop, who made an off-the-cuff comment about Fr. Roy Bourgeois's situation. "If he doesn't recant his position, he will be REDUCED to lay statis."
This comment says it all. Being a priest is a matter of privilege (not for the lowly laity). And the higher up one goes, the greater the elitism one enjoys and the greater power one attains. But, according to the rules and regulations that the Church has devised for itself, the priesthood is a privilege for males only to possess---women need not apply.
Hi Littlebear, You should get
Hi Littlebear,
You should get hold of Scott Hahn's books/audio tapes, he goes through the last supper in great detail and identifies all sorts of things Jesus did there that signifies his sacrifice. He also goes into the priesthood that Jesus established, the position of "prime minister" he created when he gave the keys to Peter, and how the apostles and beleivers of His time accepted all of this without question.
Look at one of the first things the apostles did after Christ ascended into heaven - they got together to appoint a replacement for Judas. They didn't ignore Judas for what he did, they knew that Judas left a position that needed to be filled. And the process they used ws the same process the Jews used to choose a high priest. There was no doubt on their mind that Jesus instituted the priesthood.
I've been going over Scott Hahn's material lately and I've been blown away by what he's written, it really is worthwhile to read. One of his main points is that Jesus is the new and everlasting king from the line of David, Mary as his mother is the queen mother, and Peter was his first prime minister.
chris w on Mar. 31,
chris w on Mar. 31, 2011.
You stated:
"Hi Littlebear,
You should get hold of Scott Hahn's books/audio tapes, he goes through the last supper in great detail and identifies all sorts of things Jesus did there that signifies his sacrifice. He also goes into the priesthood that Jesus established, the position of "prime minister" he created when he gave the keys to Peter, and how the apostles and beleivers of His time accepted all of this without question.
Look at one of the first things the apostles did after Christ ascended into heaven - they got together to appoint a replacement for Judas. They didn't ignore Judas for what he did, they knew that Judas left a position that needed to be filled. And the process they used ws the same process the Jews used to choose a high priest. There was no doubt on their mind that Jesus instituted the priesthood.
I've been going over Scott Hahn's material lately and I've been blown away by what he's written, it really is worthwhile to read. One of his main points is that Jesus is the new and everlasting king from the line of David, Mary as his mother is the queen mother, and Peter was his first prime minister."
--------------------------------------
Ah, yes, Chris-----and Jesus was 'so into' politics wasn't he?
Hahn's monarchial descriptions of the set-up of the 'kingdom of heaven,' Christ as king, Mary as queen mother, and Peter as prime minister----are as appros to the world that we live in today as a suit of armor.
Jesus used the language that he did---because that was within the comprehension of his audience. He wouldn't be using that language if he were speaking to today's people.
While the Twelve appear to have exercised leadership, it is clear that their role cannot be seen as "priestly," or akin to the later monarchial model of hierarchical authority.
Despite the obvious parallels to the Essenes at Qumran, the Jerusalem church differed in many ways from the constituents of the Qumran community. They wer not stridently sectarian. Nor did they see themselves, like the Qumran Covenanters, as a priestly community established as an alternative to the corrupted temple-cult in Jerusalem.
For the most part, the Apostles exercised their authority only as "ministers of the Word", leaders of community prayer and the public spokespersons for the new movement {Acts 2:42-47; 4:33; 6:2-4). Later, the author of Matthew (16:18-19) will impute to Peter the very foundation of the "Church" (a term that does not appear in any other Gospel) and the "keys of the kingdom". In a passage that has no equal anywhere else in the New Testament, Matthew's Jesus grants Peter absolute authority on earth.
Paul's understanding of Peter's role is different. In 1 Corinthians, Paul explicity mentions 'Cephas' (Peter) 3:23-24, linking Cephas with him and Apollo as servants of Christ. Yet, Paul never implies mutual agreement between Cephas and himself over issues in the Corinthian community.
Paul rather in speaking of "the rock" states that it is impossible to lay any "foundation" other than Jesus Christ (1 Corinthians 3:11). Because there were those who boasted of their authority and their followers, and that this boasting threatened the community (Paul saw Cephas, Apollos, and himself as workers only), Paul states that is is only Christ, and no other, who is the "ROCK" of the community's foundation.
It seems therefore that our earliest records suggest a diversity of views on authority and the exercise of power within the earliest communities. The Catholic Church will LATER express the primacy of Peter and the concomitant "monarchical" model of leadership, which depends heavily on the gospel of Matthew. But Matthew's perspective can hardly be historical. Paul does not recognize the sole authority of Peter, and nor do any of the other Gospel writers.
As far as Mary as 'queen mother'----this would have come with the time of Constantine. His mother, St. Helena, exercised considerable power in his empire. But this does not match the picture of Mary from the gospels.
Well, do I have a church for
Well, do I have a church for you. It's the Episcopal church--them folks think just like you do. I think you would like it, the buildings are nicer and the people better looking. So do not delay and catch that bus before it runs off on you.
AMEN AND ALLELUIA!!!
AMEN AND ALLELUIA!!!
There is sound evidence that
There is sound evidence that the practices of the Church do NOT follow the Deposit of Faith. Archaeological discoveries are supporting this. And practices produces images that speak so loud - their words cannot be heard.
The "Deposit of Faith" has
The "Deposit of Faith" has already been deposited by the universal church through the first seven ecumenical councils, and not by a bunch of U.S. prelates expressing their own opinion. So, let's get off equating the opinions of a few American bishops with the "deposit of faith". Nobody in his right mind thinks they are even close to that deposit in rendering their opinions. All we have is their interpretation, for whatever it's worth.
The bishops of the United States, instead of showing their idea of courage in defending the "teachings of the Church", as they put it, and in attacking Sister Johnson, should, instead be even more courageous in attacking the worst missal ever authorized by the Roman Church for the English-speaking world, "Pell's Folly". The disaster the Primate of Alice Springs is about to have foisted upon us in November by Vox Clara and right under Pope Benedict's nose too.
A new idea for you: if you
A new idea for you: if you are interested in the Truth then you read the Truth. Here is another truth for you that hasn't been well taught- The Church and her male hierarchy (oh the horror!) are charged with defending the deposit of Faith, that is, Divine Revelation handed down through the Apostles, via the Holy Spirit, through the Church.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here's a truth for you too, not such a new idea either. The apostles DEFEND the deposit handed down--the core Christian faith already defined by the first 7 ecumenical councils. Not by an endless succession of Catholic bishops giving their opinions.
Nowhere in scripture is their any guarantee the apostles will be inerrant prophets of things to come. The sole access to the unknown. As in being the only pipelines through which the Holy Spirit inspires the rest of the Church. They're witnesses to the Resurrection and to the truth of Christ's claims. They aren't guaranteed the gift of prophecy, or are they given the powers of the shamans, as in Animism or amongst the Janists.
We, the Presbyterate of the Laity, are also capable of interpreting the Holy Spirit. The bishops' opinions are valuable because they possess knowledge and experience. It have a gift of knowledge, but they aren't the only sources for ascertaining divine wisdom. If they were, it would simply be a matter of the rest of us acceding to their will alone unthinkingly and without making use of our own capacities, knowledge and imagination. The Church has never taught that bishops are the sole source of truth. They, unlike the Prophet and President of the Mormon Church, are not directly inspired.
Yea, exactly...what do they
Yea, exactly...what do they think this is, a Catholic site or something?
What, pray tell, is a
What, pray tell, is a "Catholic site"?
Well, perhaps you could ask
Well, perhaps you could ask the proprietors of the National "Catholic" Reporter? They certainly claim to be "Catholic." What do you suppose that it means to them? For it certainly doesn't seem to mean that they pay any attention to the Vatican...
If only the Commmittee on
If only the Commmittee on Doctrine were less sure of their own positions and could seriously engage Elizabeth Johnson's arguments. Alas, they alone own "truth." This report caricatures her work--it is slander. The misogny among the hierarchy is sinful and contributes to alienating more and more women in the Catholic Church.
This response is a perfect
This response is a perfect example what is wrong with the Church in the US. It seems that it is impossible to have a well-reasoned discussion about anything, and not to descend into murky world of personal attacks.
The bishops are doing what they are supposed to be doing. As bishops, they supposed provide ‘episcope’, oversight, whether they are male or female. They did not condemn Elizabeth Johnson. They took issue with a number of her statements in ONE of her many books. If the criticisms are not personal, if they are professional, dealing with statements and conclusions, then how does it matter who makes them?
Elizabeth Johnson has a chance to respond to the criticism. If she does not, two things can be concluded. She accepts the criticism, or she proves her critics wrong. Otherwise one could question whether she is serious about what she is doing.
Your comments lack basic
Your comments lack basic respect and objectivity. You either have respect for everyone, or you cannot expect it from anyone.
Yes, Elizabeth Johnson is a good theologian, and she should write what she thinks is right. However, the bishops, as bishops, also have to do what they have to do. They are not less certain in their roles as bishops than Johnson is in her role as a theologian. So, what is the big problem here. If Johnson wants, she can always reply and prove the bishops wrong, if they are wrong. To dismiss the bishops criticism because they are bishops is the silliest thing you can say.
What was wrong about this is
What was wrong about this is the bishops were hardly pastoral nor did they act as her teachers. They came out of the blue and publicly trashed her book with zero input from her. Teachers dialogue, pastors dialogue, dictators dictate.
This is analagous to writing a position paper for your boss, who blasts you in a company wide email without ever talking to you about your work.
If the book was for a small,
If the book was for a small, academic audience then I am certain that is what the Bishops would have done. However, they acted strongly because the book was being used to teach Church theology. This wasn't about her, it was about all the students and the general readers.
Isn't it the job of
Isn't it the job of theologians to ask the questions so that we can move beyond our self-imposed limits of God? I doubt if Johnson was looking for a Nihil Obstat anyway. Besides, there is nothing better than a public criticism by the Church against a book to drive book sales. I'm going to Amazon to buy it right now!
Lauri Lumby
Authentic Freedom Ministries
http://yourspiritualtruth.com
I can't agree more. I somehow
I can't agree more. I somehow missed it when it came out--now after reading the bishops' problem with it and then Tom Fox's article, I really want to read it. And the most amazing thing is that it took the bishops four years to let it be known that they don't like Johnson's book. No wonder the bishops appear so out of touch.
Does this increasing assault
Does this increasing assault within the Catholic Church on women in general, women theologians, women called to priesthood and those who support them in the Catholic church remind anyone else of the same mentality as that which currently exists in the "leadership" of Libya? This is all about a last ditch effort to hold on to power and to exclude half of the Church's constituency. Hmmm... also reminds me of the whole Walmart class action suit as well.
It is the 21st century. Enough already. Women are equal, educated, competent and called. Let's get on with it, Catholics!!
Please, try to think more
Please, try to think more clearly. NOWHERE in the bishops' criticism is a word about whether Johnson is a woman. 'Sometimes a cigare is only a cigar'.
Anonymous on Mar. 31,
Anonymous on Mar. 31, 2011.
Please, try to think more clearly. NOWHERE in the bishops' criticism is a word about whether Johnson is a woman. 'Sometimes a cigare is only a cigar'.
------------------------------------------------
Of course, there is no mention that Sr. Elizabeth is a woman. But she is a feminist theologian---and the official church has real problems with that. Here is an exerpt from "Time" about just this point.
"Fr. Thomas Weinandy, executive director of the USCCB Secretariat for Doctrine, told the Times, “The primary concern was not over feminism or nonfeminism. The bishops are saying that the book does not adequately treat a Catholic understanding of God.”
Yet, after knocking Johnson for allegedly wanting to “replace” the presumably masculine names of God found in Scripture with more feminine ones (she’s always advocated both–and both are in Scripture), the committee statement reads: “The Spirit of God does not simply repeat what ’she’ has revealed in Jesus, otherwise these religions would not be different from Christianity.”
The scare quotes around “she”–taken from Johnson’s citation of Michael Amaladoss, SJ–along with the document’s view that Johnson seeks to replace traditional names for God makes one wonder whether Johnson’s feminism didn’t feature more largely in the committee’s mind than Weinandy lets on.
Godwin's Law, new and
Godwin's Law, new and improved!
Post new comment