Recently, a group called the Freedom from Religion Foundation ran a full-page ad in the Washington Post cast as an "open letter to 'liberal' and 'nominal' Catholics." Its headline commanded: "It's Time to Quit the Catholic Church."
The ad included the usual criticism of Catholicism, but I was most struck by this paragraph: "If you think you can change the church from within -- get it to lighten up on birth control, gay rights, marriage equality, embryonic stem-cell research -- you're deluding yourself. By remaining a 'good Catholic,' you are doing 'bad' to women's rights. You are an enabler. And it's got to stop."
My, my. Putting aside the group's love for unnecessary quotation marks, it was shocking to learn that I'm an "enabler" doing "bad" to women's rights. But Catholic liberals get used to these kinds of things. Secularists, who never liked Catholicism in the first place, want us to leave the church, but so do Catholic conservatives who want the church all to themselves.
Advertisement
I'm sorry to inform the FFRF that I am declining its invitation to quit. They may not see the Gospel as a liberating document, but I do, and I can't ignore the good done in the name of Christ by the sisters, priests, brothers and laypeople who have devoted their lives to the poor and the marginalized.
And on women's rights, I take as my guide that early feminist, Pope John XXIII. In Pacem in Terris, his encyclical issued in 1963, the same year Betty Friedan published "The Feminine Mystique," Pope John spoke of women's "natural dignity."
"Far from being content with a purely passive role or allowing themselves to be regarded as a kind of instrument," he wrote, "they are demanding both in domestic and in public life the rights and duties which belong to them as human persons."
I'd like the FFRF to learn more about the good Pope John, but I wish our current bishops would think more about him, too. I wonder if the bishops realize how some in their ranks have strengthened the hands of the church's adversaries (and disheartened many of the faithful) with public statements -- including that odious comparison of President Barack Obama to Hitler by a Peoria prelate last month -- that threaten to shrink the church into a narrow, conservative sect.
Do the bishops notice how often those of us who regularly defend the church turn to the work of the nuns on behalf of charity and justice to prove Catholicism's detractors wrong? Why in the world would the Vatican, apparently pushed by right-wing American bishops, think it was a good idea to condemn the Leadership Conference of Women Religious, the main organization of nuns in the United States?
The Vatican's statement, issued last month, seemed to be the revenge of conservative bishops against the many nuns who broke with the hierarchy and supported health care reform in 2010. The nuns insisted, correctly, that the health-care law did not fund abortion. This didn't sit well with men unaccustomed to being contradicted, and the Vatican took the LCWR to task for statements that "disagree with or challenge positions taken by the bishops."
Oh yes, and the nuns are also scolded for talking a great deal about social justice and not enough about abortion (as if the church doesn't talk enough about abortion already). But has it occurred to the bishops that less stridency might change more hearts and minds on this very difficult question?
A thoughtful friend recently noted that carrying a child to term is an act of overwhelming generosity. For nine months, a woman gives her body to another life, not to mention the rest of her years. Might the bishops consider that their preaching on abortion would have more credibility if they treated women in the church, including nuns, with the kind of generosity they are asking of potential mothers? They might usefully embrace a similar attitude toward gays and lesbians.
Too many bishops seem in the grip of dark suspicions that our culture is moving at breakneck speed toward a demonic end. Pope John XXIII, by contrast, was more optimistic about the signs of the times.
"Distrustful souls see only darkness burdening the face of the earth," he once said. "We prefer instead to reaffirm all our confidence in our Savior who has not abandoned the world which he redeemed." The church best answers its critics when it remembers that its mission is to preach hope, not fear.
(c) 2012, Washington Post Writers Group
Honestly I don’t know why there is so much angst. We not only have a better average than Jesus did with his own betrayal by his apostles, we also know how the good book ends; we win!
Most Catholics, even badly catechized ones, should at least understand that the Catholic Church IS Jesus Christ. Can there be any doubt that Jesus didn’t understand human weakness and transgressions? Why do you think he made the sacraments “priest proof”, or chose Peter as the first pope over almost perfect John?” It was because He intended His church be the hospital for the sinners, not the perfect.
Mr. Dionne I do have to take issue with your cheerleading of disobedient nuns. How can we disobey He whom we love, when obedience is simply a manifestation of that love? Holy obedience is everything; even greater than sacrifice. Consequently, those “out of it” can’t be receptive to the Holy Spirit (Acts of the Apostle), and all of that glorious God-given wisdom.
Allow me to give you a great example of “social justice hijacking” gone very badly: Melinda Gates. According to Catholic Melinda, with her ‘social justice’ training from her Ursuline Academy, despite being against church teachings, has just informed us that her signature project will be to contracept the 3rd world! Even worse, according to the recent Newsweek article, her mentoring nuns from Ursaline Academy have “cheered her on.”
Imagine that, 4 billion dollars, Depo-Provera for every 3rd world fertile women, and let’s just pretend this is really compassion and not eugenics/population control, and or an attack on family and faith. It’s also interesting to note that unlike the modern world, the 3rd world did not oppose Humane Vitae; consequently, especially in Africa, Catholicism is thriving.
Better yet, let’s imagine that those Ursaline nuns, instead of teaching Melinda their version of “social justice”, had maybe introduced Melinda to Pope John XXIII’s masterful letter, “Mater et Magistra.
Besides, God in His Goodness and wisdom has diffused in nature inexhaustible resources and has given to man the intelligence and genius to create fit instruments to master it, and to turn it to satisfy the needs and demands of life. Hence the real solution of the problem is not to be found in expedients that offend the moral order established by God and which injure the very origin of human life. They are to be found in a renewed scientific and technical effort on the part of man to deepen and extend his dominion over nature. The progress of science and technology, already realized, opens up in this direction limitles horizons.
I wonder Mr. Dionne, will you be on the side of the Ursaline nuns as well, as they cheer on a colossus intrinsic evil, convinced, against Church teaching, that it’s all in the name of “social justice?”
Ironically, my Vietnamese pastor has begun dotting his homilies, which until recently were mercifully unintelligible, with the word "Obamacare," and now I'm just as glad I can't understand another word he says. Fortunately, the Mass is the Mass and the Eucharist the Eucharist wherever you go. In Latin or the vernacular, the catholicity of the Catholic liturgy remains, and the faith is the faith, no matter what doctrine is being emphasized or strangulated at any given historical moment. I've been what they call "orthodox," and I've been called a "dissenter" by same; as far as I know, my faith hasn't changed in 65 years and I pray it stays with me until I'm safely past my due date. From long experience, it seems to me most of us, including bishops, just do the best we can, but a martyr such as Bishop Romero or the many nuns and priests who rise to heights of selflessness for the poor and oppressed year in and year out provide the blessed signs we all need that tell us there is a God who communicates himself and gives us reason to believe He cares, a message every human being wants desperately to hear, whether we admit it or not.
I stay with the Church because it is the People of God, as Vat II made explicit. It is reallly rather simple. Do you believe the Holy Spirit was at work in Vat II or do you not?
The conservatives dio not want to change, not because of any theological virtue; it is simply because they want to hold on to power!
Well I have news for them; they have no power. All power comes from God.
Does that give you a clue to the answer to my question?
I love the way E.J writes. He says it so well. I am too old to leave, and if I leave, the bishops win. No way I am leaving. No way I am leaving the Sisters to take all the heat. They are one of the best things about the Church.
1. Elizabeth, the Church has enough real state accumulated as well as amassed other financial assets to cover the donations most us would have made several times over. Perhaps the fact we will not leave any part of our legacy to them might hurt more, but the dwindling number of priests can draw on those resources for a long time.
2. Our great nation roll to the right by tearing appart most of our FDR based official assistance to the poor and the feeble; the Ayn Rands are running amock. This is not "scary" talk or demented ramblings. A clear analysis of the different measures suggested (dismantel our social safety net, let old people die, block educational opportunities and vertical mobility to the emerging poor and struggling middle class, remove funding to our regulatory environment, criminalize non-religious behavior, set the economic elite above the law) are not happenstance.
These steps hark back to measures suggested by Judge Powell during the Nixo Administration in his notorious, not so secret, memo to the American Chamber of Commerce. His objective was simple: mega corporations and oligarchich families should take over all major American institutions. I am sorry,very sorry, to see the survival or activist spirit of the Church during Hitler, Mussolini and Franco renewed by hate, scare tactics and Goebbels type shybboleth. Has our beloved Church succumbed to Powell´s charms?
2. I pray the Holy Spirit brings wisdom to all. And I also pray the example of thinly veiiled hate towards the growing power of women, afroamericans, latinos and younger people in general, does not corrode our deep committment to honor the ancient semitic teaching: love thy neighbor as you love thyself.
3. These are sad days, but let´s rejoice. These reactions (opposition to the sacrament of marriage within the church, penalize women´s demands to receive the sacrment of the order) are typical of those holding on to yesterday´s power sources aware that today´s and tomorrow´s have scaped through their fingers. Let´s hope the new blood will bring greater wisdom and discipline.
In the meantime, I fear the challenge presented by the ascendancy of women´s power within the Church and the shifting tectonic plates on Catholic opinion endorsing married priests have elicited traumatic phobias in key leaders among our current hierarchy; these might lead them to squander inherited spiritual capital. Their new allies among the Fundamentalists and Mormos, I dare belief, will encourage them to abandon their flock and to embrace their alliance. Sad days indeed.
4. Pity the Church has sided with Fundamentalists and Mormons to "put women in their place." Yet, let´s love them, our eldeers for all the good they might have done or might still do. The Spirit works in mysterious ways, even on Church elders.
5. And as far as quitting, fat chance. As a young man I left my country because its communist regime was persecuting my church and my believes. I have risked my life several times to bring the teachings of the Church back to that suffering island. No more quiting.
6. Womem will run the Church, someday. And we will all be better for it. Our Lady and her Son will see to it.
The bishops don't know it, but the Church is still big enough to accommodate all of us. There are so many who are living out their faith in a heroic manner and doing the church's work in spite of the hierarchy. It's a matter of finding others one can relate to and continuing to struggle. Nobody said being a Catholic Christian would be easy.
Indeed the hierarchy makes it really hard for those of us who try share the Good News with others to have any credibility. I can only say I will keep trying even though I have to work around the hierarchy to spread the faith.
Why should I leave the Church, The People of God, because the bishops are a gaggle of Pharisees?
I gotta say many of these comments are truly sad. Do you really think the bishops "win" if you leave? That's absurd. There are only two reasons to be a Catholic: for our own salvation and to help others see the light to theirs.
If the Church ever goes broke, it would actually be a blessing, and yes, we would survive. Not surviving would be a sure sign that this wasn't the true Church.
All this "left, right, progressive, conservative" is a cop out. The Church is the stewart of the fullness of the teachings of Jesus Christ. If every religious fell from grace, I would still not leave the Catholic Church. When we get hung up on the sins of others, it's one thing, and we are required, to admonist the sinner. However, to use those sins as an excuse to leave or "pig out in the cafetaria" is a problem within ourselves. I know because I have been there.
Notihng is more freeing to just "live the faith", in obedience and all of its fullness; to be thankful for the sacraments, keep our eyes on Christ, and pray and be a light for others. Rest assured God will bringg all to justice, including those who rationalize or omit His teachings for their own agendas.
The only thing that should matter to any of us is salvation, and Jesus showed us the way. "If you love me, keep my commandments", which of course starts with, holy obedience.
Agape love demands that we admonish the 'social justice' sisters, regardless of what we think of their superiors.
Concerning my answer to the question (and intimation) there is only one : see John 6, 66-68
"From that time, many of his disciples went back, and walked no more whith him.
/67/ Then said Jesus unto the twelve, Will ye also go away (greek 'hypagein' = give way, leave)?
/68/ Then Simon Peter answered him ; Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life."
Being French, in English I do not have a more recent and Roman Catholic version instead of the King James version. A French version dating from 1968 has been sung for years and years in my different parish churches (I am 80 years old), whether they are 'progressive' or 'conservative'.
Concerning the evolution of the Church on basic maters : see again Saint Peter, how he (and the Church) eventually adopted the ideas of Saint Paul concerning pagans and baptism.
E. J. Dionne, Jr., writes:
The Vatican’s statement, issued last month, seemed to be the revenge of conservative bishops against the many nuns who broke with the hierarchy and supported health-care reform in 2010. The nuns insisted, correctly, that the health-care law did not fund abortion. This didn’t sit well with men unaccustomed to being contradicted, and the Vatican took the LCWR to task for statements that “disagree with or challenge positions taken by the bishops.”
Revenge? It could very well be that revenge against the many nuns who broke with the hierarchy played a part, albeit a very small part, in the Vatican’s statement. It is all the more likely that the predominant part was played by the ultra-conservative forces that have been and still are working to reverse John XXIII's call to “…reestablish the principle of shared authority with all the church's members…in the biblical phrase `People of God’—a community of believers moving forward with humanity…”
Leading the forces to undo Vatican II’s vision of a collegial, less hierarchical church with increased lay involvement and revert to a pre-conciliar, strictly male-led, authoritarian church were Paul VI [1], John Paul II [2, 3], and Joseph Cardinal Rat zinger (now Benedict XVI)[4,5].
A caveat: Reading the noted references could lead to depressing thoughts about the Catholic Church if one forgets that WE ARE THE CHURCH. Also, reading Michael Leach's book Why Stay Catholic? (Loyola Press, 2011) can help with residual depressing thoughts.
1, Giovanni Franzoni, " Vatican II: Lost and betrayed'" Iglesia Descalza, Sept.19, 2011, http://iglesiadescalza.blogspot.com/2011/09/vatican-ii-lost-and-betrayed.html
Franzoni, a former Benedictine abbot, Catholic theologian, and eyewitness to Vatican II, offers reflections at the 31st Congress of the Asociación de Teólogos y Teólogas Juan XXIII in Madrid, Spain.
2. Penny Lernoux, People of God, The Struggle for World Catholicism, 1989.
Toward the end the author's tragically short life (Jan. 6, 1940 – Oct. 9, 1989) she focused on the clamping down on dissent by John Paul II and Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger (now Benedict XVI). The book was based on years of research in Latin America and the United States. Lernoux described John Paul II's attempt to fortify an authoritarian model of the church as an effort to restore pre-Vatican II Roman Catholicism. The book documented the church's dismissal of scholars who questioned John Paul II's papacy. It also dissected various groups struggling for control of the church.
Joshua McElwee aptly titled his review of this book "A document of Vatican II's undoing," [NCR, May 11-24, 2012].
A highly recommended 1995 book review by Dale Wharton can be accessed at
http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/62/284.html
3. Gary Wills, Papal Sin: Structures of Deceit, Doubleday, 2000.
See Chapter 7, "Excluded Women," for John Paul's 1979 "Mary was not a priest" response to then LCWR President Sister of Mercy Theresa Kane ' public request that "half of humankind be included in al the ministries of the church.
4. Matthew Fox, The Pope's War: Why Ratzinger's Secret Crusade Has Imperiled the Church and How It Can Be Saved, 2011.
Fox's provocative book covers three decades of corruption in the Catholic Church, focusing on Josef Ratzinger, Pope Benedict XVI, providing insights from his 12-year, up-close-and-personal battle with Ratzinger. He traces the historical roots of degradation in the Church and offering a new way to understand why Benedict XVI is now mired in crisis as Pope.
Insights into Fox's thinking can be obtained via a two-part interview for NCR by Jamie L Manson as follows: Part 1: Former Dominican sees church's demise as blessing in disguise, Mar. 26, 2012, (http://ncronline.org/blogs/grace-margins/decades-after-expulsion-matthew-fox-see-churchs-demise-blessing-disguise), Part 2: Matthew Fox talks obedience and courage, young adults and the church, Apr. 02, 2012, (http://ncronline.org/blogs/grace-margins/matthew-fox-talks-obedience-and-courage-young-adults-and-church).
5. Paul Knitter, "Küng & Ratzinger vs Benedict XVI," Union in Dialogue, March 15, 2011, http://unionindialogue.org/paulknitter/2011/03/15/kung-ratzinger-vs-benedict-xvi/
Knitter writes: "The only hope for the Church, Küng maintains, lies in the courage and resistance of the laity. Sounds radical? Sure is. But I heard basically the same message from Joseph Ratzinger when he was a promising young theologian serving as a “peritus” (an expert advisor to the bishops) during the Second Vatican Council. At a press conference during the 1963 session (the exact year is fuzzy in my aging memory), he told us that throughout the history of the RC Church it has happened that the Bishops so lost touch with the message of Jesus that it became incumbent upon the laity to exercise their prophetic role given in Baptism and to stand up and refuse to obey!"