Enlightened Catholicism

Pope Francis Is All For Collegiality--At Least Amongst Bishops And Cardinals

2013-06-13T15:09:00.002-06:00

Pope Francis was elected to perform this task. Perhaps any other initiative should wait lest the stench from this pile corrupt everything else.

In a meeting with members of the ordinary council of the Synod of Bishops Pope Francis had some thoughts on collegiality and the further use of bishops in the structure of the Church. He even said the furtherance of collegiality between bishops and Rome was a fruit of the Second Vatican Council. The following excerpt is from a Religion News Service article written by Cindy Wooden as posted on the NCR. It's interesting not only for the topics Francis addressed with his bishops, but maybe more so for what is not addressed.

.....In the text prepared for the meeting Thursday -- a text the pope said would be handed to the council members -- Pope Francis had described the synods as "one of the fruits of the Second Vatican Council" and a structure "at the service of the mission and communion of the church, as an expression of collegiality."
"Open to the grace of the Holy Spirit, the soul of the church, we trust that the Synod of Bishops will undergo further developments to further promote dialogue and collaboration among the bishops and between the bishops and the bishop of Rome," he had written....

....Council members were invited to tell the pope their initial ideas for the next world Synod of Bishops. Their suggestions included: the meaning of the church, the church's encounter with the world, collegiality and "synodality" -- basically the relationship between the College of Bishops and the pope -- ecology, the family, interreligious dialogue and formation of the laity.

After listening to several cardinals' suggestions, the pope joked, "The cake is only half cooked, huh?"
The council members were to continue meeting and to vote on three possible themes to suggest to the pope. He told them, "I'd take a fourth, too."

Pope Francis said, "The family is a serious problem. ... Today many people, even Catholics, don't get married but live together. Marriage is seen as provisional. It's a serious problem."

The pope said that in October, he and his cardinal-advisers would discuss who they would entrust with "a study on pastoral work with families. The synod? A special synod? With the presidents of bishops' conferences? This is a problem that we'll look at in October.".... (How about a commission instead of a synod and adding to it some people who actually have the families? This would not be a completely novel approach. It was tried once before.)

**********************************************

The overwhelming message that comes from this article is that Pope Francis sees collegiality as the purview of bishops and cardinals. I guess that would make sense if the topics of discussion were limited to bishops and cardinals, but almost all of the topics these bishops and cardinals will discuss and decide upon involve the lives of the laity. It seems to me that what Francis has in mind is just another way of Church leadership getting together and maintaining their role as those who teach the role of the laity to the laity. Just another way for our Holy Fathers to use Holy Mother Church to parent the lay children. It would be really novel if our Holy Fathers allowed for the idea that the lay children are also mature adults capable of expressing legitimate observations about their own state in life. I would hope that one of Francis' Cardinal advisers might mention this concept as a topic for discussion. Maybe then we would someday read that one of the topics will be the role of women in the Church. That particular topic is no where mentioned in this article. It's an oversight I did not find especially novel.

I really am truly glad that Pope Francis is committed to expanding collegiality. Even limiting the concept to the world's bishops is better than having virtually everything Catholic determined by the Vatican curia--not too mention the personal whims of one pope. It is even possible that part of the input from the world's bishops will come from laity those bishops consult. Maybe some of those bishops will expand the concept of collegiality to include lay expression in their own sphere of influence. Maybe this can be a case of a 'trickle up' theory.

I'm also interested in the fact the gang of 8 is to be expanded to the gang of 9 with the addition of an Eastern Church representative. The Eastern Church contains a number of autochthonous churches and their experiences may point to the future for global Catholicism. Regional expressions may turn out to be a more efficient way to both evangelize and organize. The Vatican would then become a center for coordination and networking, rather than a monarchical dinosaur with too many of it's clerical caste playing their own version of the Game of Thrones. Maybe we could even develop a meaningful system of accountability for our bishops--one that has some teeth. That would be novel. There is potential here, but that potential could be easily stymied if Pope Francis sets too limited an agenda or allows his advisers to dictate a limited agenda for him. It would be really unfortunate if all that came of Francis' appeal to collegiality is another avenue for rubber stamping the thoughts of a given pope. In order to avoid that Francis has to start dealing with the corruption and careerism in the curia. I don't think he will be able to do much about that unless he is prepared to take on the influence of the right wing 'New Movements' and their moneyed interests. If he fails to do anything in this sphere, his musings about collegiality will be nothing more than a still born concept.

Pope Francis Answers Questions From Children. He's A Wild Card Fer Sure

2013-06-07T10:44:00.000-06:00

117 cards to draw from and our cardinals seemed to have drawn the wild card.

Pope Francis has been a refreshing cup of tea for me because he is not afraid to be spontaneous, and it's in his spontaneity that I catch glimpses of his true self. I don't always agree with some of his spontaneous thoughts, but that's not the real issue. The real issue is he isn't afraid to show the world his thinking and his reasoning is mostly unscripted and unimpeded by much of a verbal censor. These qualities were fully on display in an interchange he had with young Italian and Albanian students this morning in Rome. The following is an excerpt from this article taken from the Vatican's Information Services website.

...The floor was then given to several students and professors who asked the Pope unscripted questions. To the first student, who asked about the doubts regarding belief that he sometimes has and what he could do to help him grow in faith, Francis answered:

“Journeying is an art because, if we're always in a hurry, we get tired and don't arrive at our journey's goal. If we stop, if we don't go forward and we also miss the goal. Journeying is precisely the art of looking toward the horizon, thinking where I want to go but also enduring the fatigue of the journey, which is sometimes difficult … There are dark days, even days when we fail, even days when we fall. [Sometimes] one falls but always think of this: don't be afraid of failures. Don't be afraid of falling. What matters in the art of journeying isn't not falling but not staying down. Get up right away and continue going forward. This is what's beautiful: this is working every day, this is journeying as humans. But also, it's bad walking alone: it's bad and boring. Walking in community, with friends, with those who love us, that helps us. It helps us to arrive precisely at that goal, that 'there where' we're supposed to arrive.” (The only thing I might add to this description of the 'art' of journeying is that sometimes the destination you think you are walking towards is just another step in the journey.)

An elementary school girl asked if the Pope continued to see his friends from grade school.

“But I've only been Pope for two and a half months,” he answered. But he understood her concern and continued “My friends are 14 hours away from here by plane, right? They're far from here, but I want to tell you something, three of them came to find me and greet me and I see them and they write to me and I love them very much. You can't live without friends, that's important.”

The next question, also from a grade school girl, was if he wanted to be Pope.

He responded by asking her: “Do you know what it means if someone doesn't love themselves very much?” He continued: “Someone who wants, who has the desire to be Pope doesn't love themself. ... But I didn't want to be Pope.” (This is a profound answer to an insightful question. Self love does not need the validation of external success. In fact, when a person is truly operating from self love, these kinds of questions don't even come up nor is that unsought for success likely to turn one's head in the wrong direction.)

Another girl asked why he had forsaken the wealth of the papacy, living at the Domus Sanctae Marthae instead of the Apostolic Palace apartments, and other similar choices. (Finally someone gave Pope Francis a public opportunity to answer this question. His answer is illuminating.)

He answered: “It's not just about wealth. For me it's a question of personality. I need to live among people and if I lived alone, perhaps rather isolated, it wouldn't be good for me. (In more ways than one.) A professor asked me this question: 'Why don't you go live there?' and I answered, 'Listen, professor, it's for psychiatric reasons.' Because … that's my personality. That apartment [in the Apostolic Palace] isn't so luxurious either, don't worry. But I can't live alone, do you understand? And well, I believe that, yes, the times talk to us of so much poverty in the world and this is a scandal. Poverty in the world is a scandal. In a world where there is so much wealth, so many resources to feed everyone, it is unfathomable that there are so many hungry children, that there are so many children without an education, so many poor persons. Poverty today is a cry. We all have to think if we can become a little poorer, all of us have to do this. How can I become a little poorer in order to be more like Jesus, who was the poor Teacher?” Returning to the original question, he finished: “It's not a question of my personal virtue. It's just that I can't live alone.” All the rest, not having so many things, “is about becoming a little poorer”. (The question Pope Francis asks about 'becoming a little poorer' is the one people in the first world are going to have to answer, and better it be an honest choice than the forced situation we are all facing.)

The Pope also answered questions related to his choosing to become a Jesuit, but the last of the eight questions was from a young man who asked how young people should deal with the material and spiritual poverty that exists in the world.

The Holy Father responded: “First of all I want to tell you something, tell all you young persons: don't let yourselves be robbed of hope. Please, don't let it be stolen from you. The worldly spirit, wealth, the spirit of vanity, arrogance, and pride … all these things steal hope. Where do I find hope? In the poor Jesus, Jesus who made himself poor for us. And you spoke of poverty. Poverty calls us to sow hope. This seems a bit difficult to understand. I remember Fr. Arrupe [Father General of the Jesuits from 1965-1983] wrote a letter to the Society's centres for social research. At the end he said to us: 'Look, you can't speak of poverty without having experience with the poor.' You can't speak of poverty in the abstract: that doesn't exist. Poverty is the flesh of the poor Jesus, in that child who is hungry, in the one who is sick, in those unjust social structures. Go forward, look there upon the flesh of Jesus. But don't let well-being rob you of hope, that spirit of well-being that, in the end, leads you to becoming a nothing in life. Young persons should bet on their high ideals, that's my advice. But where do I find hope? In the flesh of Jesus who suffers and in true poverty. There is a connection between the two.” (Hope is found in the Resurrection as well as in the lifestyle and teachings of Jesus. A person can truly gamble on their high ideals only when the fear of failure (death) is not so strong that it stifles the ability to take the gamble.)

***********************************************

Pope Francis may do some of his best teaching with children, especially when those children are insightful, astute, and really want to hear the answers. Sometimes those children come in adult bodies. I find myself liking him more and more because he tells it the way he sees it. He truly does have a gambler's attitude in that he isn't afraid of losing when he plays his cards and he's honest about why he's even playing the game. As he says, it isn't about losing or falling down, it's about getting up and continuing the journey. Amongst a host of careerist clergy he has to seen as the wild card Joker amongst the Catholic royalty. The Cardinals may have been looking to elect a place holding version of a suicide king, but they got the Joker instead.

I've played a lot of poker, and to me the having the joker in the deck always represented another reason to hope. Might not have been a sure thing, but the presence of the joker did add to the hope quotient. I have the same kind of feeling about Pope Francis. He's by no means a sure thing but he does add to the hope quotient and he does have people wondering and thinking and guessing where he's going next.

Solidarity Is Not The Way Of The Ferengi

2013-05-31T11:53:00.002-06:00

In the Star Trek universe, the Grand Nagus, otherwise known as the "Ferengi Pope", has a different idea of solidarity, but then the Ferengi were created to be ultra capitalists on steroids. The Catholic neocons should take note.

Solidarity seems to be the current word making the rounds. I don't find that particularly surprising given the current economic situation around the globe. People seem to finally be making the connection that resources are finite and that distribution of those resources will in fact necessitate a change in the world view of what constitutes an ethical distribution of finite resources. Today I offer two voices who both say the same thing from different starting points and then I add my own view from a very different starting point. First I offer one of Pope Francis' latest homilies on this subject, a subject which is popping up frequently in his homilies. It is followed by the thoughts of the Spanish theologian Jose Antonio Pagola. The Pope Francis article is courtesy of NCR and Pagola's courtesy of Iglesia Descalza.

Francis links Eucharist with global solidarity

Thomas C Fox - National Catholic Reporter - 5/31/2013
One of themes Pope Francis repeatedly returns to in his talks and spiritual reflections is the idea of solidarity – a global solidarity, rich and poor, stemming from the recognition of being children of God. He sees the church as the instrument of building this recognition and then drawing humanity together.

This recognition, he insists, is not without responsibility. We are all required to live in solidarity with each other, rich and poor. This means caring for each other. Those with resources have a particular responsibility to “feed” those without such resources.
Francis returned to his “solidarity” theme in his Corpus Christi homily Sunday. The following is an excerpt from his homily.

"The multiplication of the loaves [is born of] Jesus' invitation to his disciples: 'Feed them yourselves', 'give', share. What do the disciples share? What little they have: five loaves and two fishes. But it is precisely those loaves and fishes that, in God’s hands, feed the whole crowd. And it is precisely the disciples, bewildered by the inability of their means, by the poverty of what they have at their disposal, who invite the people to sit down and— trusting Jesus' word of—distribute the loaves and fishes that feed the crowd. This tells us that in the Church, but also in society, a keyword that we need not fear is 'solidarity', that is, knowing how to place what we have at God’s disposal, our humble abilities, because only in sharing them, in giving them, that our lives will be fruitful, will bear fruit. Solidarity: a word upon which the spirit of the world looks unkindly!” (Or distorts it to mean something else entirely.)

“Tonight, once again, the Lord gives us the bread which is his body. He makes a gift of himself. We also experiencing “God's solidarity” with humanity, ... a solidarity that never ceases to amaze us. God draws near to us. In the sacrifice of the Cross He lowers himself, entering into the darkness of death in order to give us his life, which conquers evil, selfishness, and death. This evening too, Jesus gives himself to us in the Eucharist. He shares our journey, or rather, He becomes food, real food that sustains our lives even at the times when the going is rough, when obstacles slow our steps. In the Eucharist, the Lord makes us follow his path, the path of service, sharing, and giving—and what little we have, what little we are, if shared, becomes wealth, because the power of God, which is love, descends into our poverty to transform it.”

“Discipleship, communion, and sharing. Let us pray that our participation in the Eucharist may always inspire us: to follow the Lord every day, to be instruments of communion, to share what we are with Him and with our neighbor. Then our lives will be truly fruitful.”

Amidst the Crisis

Jose Antonio Pagola - translation by Rebel Girl - Iglesia Descalza
The economic crisis is going to be long and hard. We shouldn't kid ourselves. We won't be able to look the other way. In our more or less immediate environment, we will be meeting families who are forced to live on charity, people threatened with eviction, neighbors hit by unemployment, sick people who don't know how to solve their health care or medicine problems. No one knows very well how society will react.

Undoubtedly, the powerlessness, rage, and demoralization of many will grow. That the conflict and crime will increase is predictable. It will be easy for selfishness and obsession with one's own security to grow.

But it's also possible that solidarity will grow. The crisis could make us more humane. It could teach us to share what we have and don't need. It could strengthen ties and mutual support within families. Our sensitivity to the neediest could grow. We will be poorer, but we could be more humane.

In the midst of the crisis, our Christian communities could also grow in brotherly love. It's the time to find out that it isn't possible to follow Jesus and collaborate in the humanizing plan of the Father without working for a more just and less corrupt society, one that is more supportive and less selfish, more responsible and less frivolous and consumerist.

It's also time to regain the humanizing strength that lies in the Eucharist when it's experienced as love confessed and shared. The meeting of Christians, gathered each Sunday around Jesus, must become a place of consciousness raising and impulse towards practical solidarity.

The crisis could shake up our routine and mediocrity. We can't commune with Christ in the privacy of our hearts without communing with our brothers and sisters who are suffering. We can't share the bread of the Eucharist while ignoring the hunger of millions of human beings who are deprived of bread and justice. Passing the peace among ourselves while forgetting those who are socially excluded, is a joke.

The celebration of the Eucharist must help us open our eyes to discover who we have to defend, support, and help in these times. It must awaken us from the "illusion of innocence" that lets us live in peace, bestirring ourselves and fighting only when we see that our interests are in jeopardy. Experienced faithfully every Sunday, it can make us more humane and better followers of Jesus. It can help us live through the crisis with Christian insight, without losing dignity or hope.

*******************************************

I always thought the economic system in the Star Trek universe was interesting in that the Federation had somehow moved beyond the need for money and there was, according to Captain Kirk, no poverty on the 23rd century Earth. Instead of money, humanity had access to Federation credits and the gold pressed Latinum coveted by the Ferengi. The members of the Federation themselves though, had somehow evolved beyond the need for the acquisition of personal wealth. I always wondered how that happened. I suspected it must have had something to do with the invention of replicators. What's the point of acquisition if everyone had virtually unlimited access to anything they wanted. Personal challenges would have to be found in something else. Maybe such things as exploring the Universe or pursuing knowledge or hobnobbing with more advance beings or attempting to solve what must have been an enormous garbage problem brought on by a humanity that could replicate what ever it wanted. In any event, Gene Roddenberry never did explain how the economic system in his fictional world was created, or why humanity evolved beyond personal greed and/or the pursuit of wealth as the marker for personal success. Or for that matter, why the Ferengi didn't use replicators to produce gold pressed Latinum bars. Maybe that's why Star Trek is frequently placed in the Utopian genre of literature. Exactly like actually living the Christian way as espoused by Jesus is generally considered Utopian.

I bring the replicator thing up because Pope Francis' homily revolves around the feeding of the 4000 by Jesus. That's a pretty good feat of replication on the part of Jesus. If Christians had ever consistently 'replicated' this feat, we might have a very different economic system and very different definition of personal success. Nice thing about the kind of replication Jesus is written to have accomplished is that it can't be weaponized. I'm not sure that can be said for Star Trek's replicators which is one reason it would be nice if Christians had retained any of the spiritual gifts listed in the Gospels and executed by the Apostles. When humanity creates through science it is always weaponized before the consumer technologies can grace the consumer market. This is probably the main reason I have very little faith that science will actually ever result in the enlightened more benevolent universe of Star Trek.

Francis' point is the Apostles trusted that Jesus would somehow take their meager stocks and make them adequate. The miracle was in their trust that God would provide. This kind of thing still happens today but it's not so spectacular and is almost always chalked up to random coincidence. I can't begin to recount all the anecdotal stories I've heard, or been involved with, where adequate supplies just 'coincidentally' become available. Manifestation does seem to be a product of human faith/consciousness, but it doesn't usually happen quite like Jesus feeding 4000 or Captain Picard asking for Earl Grey tea and having it materialize in a replicator. It's much more subtle which creates less of a threat to those not quite ready to credence it happens, and unfortunately it's seeming randomness reduces it's trustworthiness. But the real truth is probably something different. Humanity is far more up close and personal with scarcity than it is adequacy. Coping with scarcity is reality. Reveling in abundance is fantasy. The First world has successfully created a reality in which more and more people are now experiencing the reality of scarcity and it is a reality that is coming home to the First World. The manifestation of scarcity is more believable because it's so much more a part of our collective reality. The poor will always be with us because we don't seem to have the imagination to create a different reality. Antonio Pagnola makes a pertinent observation about the growth of demoralization with it's concomitant obsession with personal security. It can potentially result in a no holds barred competition over scarcity rather than a collective cooperation towards mutual adequacy.

Both Francis and Antonio Pagnola see a further awakening to solidarity as the antidote to a our individual fears about scarcity. The Ferengi solution of ruthless competition need not be the only answer. There is enough if people are willing to share. God does and will provide if people trust and believe and are willing to act in solidarity with one another. That too is part of the story in the feeding of the 4000. Had those few with something to share withheld it for fear for their own survival, Jesus would not have been able to multiply anything.

I view the current economic mess as an opportunity to once again try the idea of Christian solidarity, and like Pope Francis, I see this as not just a local experiment, but a global necessity. Humanity needs another economic system. One more in keeping with the dignity and rights of all people. Not one that keeps enshrining the Ferengi amongst us as the epitome of the successful human.

And Now Word That Another Vatican II True Believer Has Passed On--Fr Andrew Greeley

2013-05-30T10:46:00.002-06:00

Fr Andrew Greeley, one of America's most outspoken priests, died last night at 85 years young.

The Chicago Tribune reports this morning that Fr Andrew Greeley has died at his home. While a fall fractured his skull in 2008 and silenced his voice, his influence on Catholic thinking continued to be tremendous. I had my occasional issues with Fr Greeley, but I have truly missed his voice. Whether I agreed or disagreed with his writing, he always forced me to think and clarify my agreements or disagreements. May God grant him peace and show him the answers to the questions he researched while here on earth.

Priest, author, critic Andrew Greeley dead at 85

By Trevor Jensen and Margaret Ramirez - Chicago Tribune - 5/30/2013

Rev. Andrew Greeley, the outspoken Roman Catholic priest, best-selling novelist and sociologist known for his deeply researched academic appraisals and sometimes scathing critiques of his church, died Wednesday night, several years after fracturing his skull in a freakish fall in Rosemont.

Rev. Greeley died in his sleep at his apartment at the John Hancock Center, according to his spokeswoman, June Rosner. He was 85.
Rosner said Rev. Greeley had been in poor health since an accident on Nov. 7, 2008. He was at Advocate Lutheran General Medical Center when a piece of his clothing apparently got caught in the door of a departing taxi and he was thrown to the pavement.
The family released a statement this morning saying “our lives have been tremendously enriched by having the presence of Fr. Andrew Greeley in our family. First and foremost as a loving uncle who was always there for us with unfailing support or with a gentle nudge, who shared with us both the little things and the big moments of family life.
“But we were specially graced that this man was also an amazing priest who recently celebrated the 59th anniversary of his ordination to the priesthood. He served the Church all those years with a prophetic voice and with unfailing dedication, and the Church he and our parents taught us to love is a better place because of him. Our hearts are heavy with grief, but we find hope in the promise of Heaven that our uncle spent his life proclaiming to us, his friends, his parishioners and his many fans. He resides now with the Lord of the Dance, and that dance will go on.”
A highly-regarded sociologist, preternaturally prolific author and unabashedly liberal Chicago priest, Rev. Greeley regularly took his church to task in both his fiction and his scholarly work. His non-fiction books covered topics from Catholic education to Irish history to Jesus’ relationships with women.
Rev. Greeley authored some 50 best-selling novels and more than 100 works of non-fiction that were translated into 12 languages.
His racy novels and detective stories, which often closely paralleled real events, aired out Catholic controversies and hummed with detailed bedroom romps that kept readers rapt and coming back for more. Best-sellers like The Cardinal Sins in 1981 earned him millions of dollars, much of which he donated to the church and charities.
Rev. Greeley filled many of his books with the results of work he did at the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago, where he’d done work since his days as a doctoral candidate in the early 1960s. He also taught sociology at the University of Arizona. But, Greeley said his immense body of research and writing was merely a reflection of his calling to be a priest.
“I’m a priest, pure and simple,” Greeley told the Tribune in 1992. “The other things I do — sociological research, my newspaper columns, the novels I write — are just my way of being a priest. I decided I wanted to be one when I was a kid growing up on the West Side. I’ve never wavered or wanted to be anything but.”
Rev. Greeley’s research at NORC showed “that the idea that societies inevitably become more secular as they modernize is untrue,” said Tom W. Smith, director of the General Social Survey at NRC.
“I think he drew many of his hypotheses from his vocation as a Catholic priest,” Smith said in an e-mailed statement. “He then put those ideas to rigorous scientific testing.”
Rev. Greeley criticized the church hierarchy over issues including its teaching on contraception and the way bishops handled the sexual abuse crisis. His blunt criticism set him apart from other Catholic sociologists, said Martin Marty, professor emeritus at the University of Chicago Divinity School.
“Some sociologists are cautious,” Marty said. “He took risks all the time. But he was extremely careful to be sure he had the data.”
“So, he didn’t just crunch numbers. He interpreted them….and he was never afraid to interpret things very loudly.”
Marty, who also shared the same Feb. 5 birthday as Greeley, said there was never any doubt that Greeley loved the church.
“He was a very, very faithful Catholic and he was a proudly celibate priest. He wasn’t ever changing himself,” Marty said.
Much of his more recent research on Catholicism included calls for the Church to respond to the needs of contemporary Catholics.
In his 2004 book, “The Catholic Revolution: New Wine, Old Wineskins, and the Second Vatican Council,” Greeley wrote that the Vatican II reforms caused a rift between leadership and laity that resulted in a new generation of Catholics who have redefined the faith in their own terms.
These Catholics, Greeley wrote, hold onto core doctrines and traditions even as they disagree with the rules in such areas as sexual behavior.
Robert McClory, associate professor emeritus at Northwestern University and a former priest, said Rev. Greeley was one of the few Catholic scholars who was able to critique the Catholic Church without himself becoming a dissident.
“He was able to be critical of the hierarchical church while balancing that criticism with the sound sociological data that he had been working on for more than 40 years,” McClory said.
“It’s not as if he was dissenting. He would say, ‘The figures are there, you can look at them and the church needs to decide what to do about that.’ “
McClory said Rev. Greeley also had the gift of making his data clear and interesting to the general public.
“He was not a scholarly sociologist,” he said. “He had a popular approach to his writing which interested people on issues that they would not normally be interested in.”
Rev. Greeley possessed an unpredictable, sometimes volatile temperament which resulted in people following his columns to find out what he would say. He lashed out at the Bush administration in a series of essays that became a book entitled, “A Stupid, Unjust, And Criminal War: Iraq 2001-2007.” Before the 2008 election, Rev. Greeley wrote a column predicting Barack Obama would lose because racism would defeat him.
“He was gutsy. He was not afraid to take on the religious and political establishments,” McClory said.
His muscular writing and straightforward opinions are evidenced in an excerpt from his 2004 book, “Priests: A Calling in Crisis,” written after the church’s sexual abuse crisis:
“In the worst-case scenario, the Catholic Church in the United States….may go down the drain, but not because of attacking infidels, not because of celibacy or homosexuality or sexual abuse, not because of secularism and materialism, but because of incompetence, stupidity, and clerical culture — all enemies from within.”
Rev. Greeley’s research often contradicted commonly held opinions, according to Rev. John Cusick of Old St. Patrick’s Church in Chicago, who called Rev. Greeley a mentor.
Cusick recalled opining that young people were leaving the church until Rev. Greeley set him straight — young people still identified themselves as Catholic, they just didn’t practice their religion in the same way as previous generations.
“He taught me to trust the data, don’t just trust hunches,” Cusick said. “He’s an intellectual. He could wax a story and in the next breath carry on a phenomenally intellectual conversation with anyone in Hyde Park.”
In Chicago’s religious circles, Greeley was praised by some as a philosopher-priest and panned by others as an irascible trouble maker.
Catholic officials often didn’t know what to make of the controversial priest. In 1986, then Cardinal Joseph Bernardin reportedly turned down $1 million Rev. Greeley offered to support Catholic Schools — Rev. Greeley instead established a private fund for the archdiocese’s inner city schools.
Seventeen years later, the Chicago Archdiocese accepted Greeley’s donation of $420,000 for a scholarship endowment.
Rev. Greeley grew up in Chicago’s Austin neighborhood and attended the St. Angela School and Archbishop Quigley Preparatory Seminary.
He studied for the priesthood of St. Mary of the Lake seminary in Mundelein and was ordained in May 1954. He earned a doctorate in 1962 from the University of Chicago. While studying for his doctorate he was attached to Christ the King parish in Chicago’s Beverly neighborhood.
His prodigious output amazed even those he knew him best.
“I was with him … years ago in the summer, and he was writing three books simultaneously,” Cusick said. “Go and figure that one out.”

More Prophetic and Insightful Words From Another Of Vatican II's True Believers

2013-05-30T10:07:00.001-06:00

Don Andrea Gallo in the clerical clothes he neither aspired to nor was ever going to be 'graced' with wearing.

Once again I want to give a shout out to Rebel Girl who authors the blog Iglesia Descalza. The current post up at her site is a translation of an interview for the MicroMega publication with the recently deceased Italian priest Don Andrea Gallo. Don Andrea was something of a thorn in the side of conservative Italian bishops and a vocal critic of the restoration movement of the previous two popes. I want to encourage readers to take in the whole interview and have excerpted a couple of paragraphs to hook folks into doing so:

Is secularity a value?

Of course it is, and there are very profound secular ethics. There is no contradiction between fidelity to the Church and attachment to the need for secularity. Secularity isn't secularism, on the contrary -- it's the respect for all faiths by the state which ensures the free exercise of religious, spiritual, cultural, and creative activities of the diverse communities. And in a pluralistic society, secularity is the only space for dialogue and communication between the religions.

The "non-negotiable principles" seem to be very far from that subversive and liberating power of the Gospel that we talked about earlier. What happened to gospel themes such as social justice, care for the marginalized and the oppressed, wealth and poverty?

Attention to power and privileges has eclipsed them. The Church, including my archbishop who is also president of the CEI [Italian Bishops' Conference], has supported Berlusconi for years. Now he's backing Monti. Communion and Liberation applauds the powers that be, Famiglia Cristiana even wrote it, talking about the Rimini Meeting this summer. Rather than defending the non-negotiable principles, there's attention to the defense of privilege. Moreover, the holy monks told me too -- the Church is governed by Opus Dei and other elite troops: Communion and Liberation, the Community of Sant'Egidio, the Legionaries of Christ, with their founder, the pedophile father Maciel, who was even a protege of Pope Wojtyla. In this case too, we must return to the Council, where it talks about the "poor Church for the poor," and liberation theology -- decapitated by Wojtyla and Ratzinger -- that proclaimed the fundamental option for the poor.

But there's a part of the Church and many Catholic organizations that help the poor ...

It's true, but you have to be very careful. There are two roads -- they look similar; they really go in opposite directions. The church hierarchy and some sectors of the Catholic world offer solidarity that has positive aspects but that is limited to welfarism, and so confirm, even reinforce, the dominant economic system of exploitation, neo-colonialism over the dispossessed of the world. The way forward is that of liberating solidarity, which calls into question neo-liberalism. Dom Helder Câmara, the great bishop of Olinda and Recife, had it all figured out: "When I feed the poor," he said, "they applaud me, and when I ask why the poor are hungry, they call me a Communist." The Church has not yet made a clear-cut choice. But if the Church wants to be Catholic, it should be Christian; if it wants to be Christian, it should be poor, otherwise it will be an apparatus that governs the world, but it is certainly not the church of Jesus.

*********************************************

There is a lot more in this interview with Don Andrea, thoughts which really hit the nail on the head. The interview came before the election of Pope Francis and I can't help but wonder what Don Andrea would make of Pope Francis. I suspect like other proponents of liberation theology such as Leonardo Boff, Francis' call for the Church to be the 'a poor Church for the poor' would strongly resonate. But I also wonder if Don Andrea would warn Francis about the two paths of Catholic charity. Will Francis' church of the poor serve as nothing more than a facade cloaked in piety which really serves to stifle discussion of any real reform in the Church or in the system of neo colonialism, or will this impulse be followed to it's logical conclusion of solidarity with the poor and all the attendant reforms this would entail?

My biggest fear is that Pope Francis is truly interested in Catholicism becoming a 'poor church for the poor' but is not prepared to follow that idea to where it will ultimately lead. I have fears that when it comes to dismantling those Church structures which are all about power and privilege that he won't be allowed to dismantle them or won't even really try. It just seems to me that Pope Francis can not effect meaningful change for the poor of the world by speaking as the head of a Church that can't or won't model that solidarity in it's own structures and teachings. In other words he can not make one his intentions for this Sunday's global Eucharistic Adoration a plea for God's help for the alleviation of the suffering of women and children in the world and do it from the ultimate leadership platform from the world's most gender exclusive leadership organization.

Until this pope or another pope can face the fact that the current constitution of the Church is part of the problem of global poverty and not the solution, I have to hope more prophets like Don Andrea can percolate up from the bottom until change is not about change, but about recognizing what has already happened.

I Still Have Pope Francis' Back Because He Is Right And The Vatican Is Wrong

2013-05-27T18:18:00.001-06:00

Vatican Spokesman Fr Thomas Rosica explaining how Pope Francis is wrong about that salvation/redemption thing.

What to make of this. Fr Thomas Rosica achieved fame, beyond Canada's Salt and Light Catholic TV Station by working as the Vatican's English spokesperson during the recent resignation/election cycle. The following article from Irish Central is most likely correct is stating it is the Vatican which is correcting Pope Francis. I guess this means the Vatican is infallible and not our current Pope.....or maybe the retired Pope is not so retired as we were led to believe.

Vatican corrects infallible pope: atheists will still burn in hell

Cahir O'Doherty - Irish Central - 5/26/2013

The Vatican has just announced that, despite what Pope Francis said in his homily earlier this week, atheists are still going to hell.

What a relief. For a brief moment there it was possible to imagine a brave new world of compassion, generosity and acceptance, not qualities we have come to associate with the Holy See. (Well, it's hard to maintain you sell the lone insurance policy to heaven if your main salesman is telling folks salvation is about how you treat others rather than about Catholicism as an insurance policy.)

Said Pope Francis this week: 'The Lord has redeemed all of us, all of us, with the Blood of Christ: all of us, not just Catholics. Everyone! ‘Father, the atheists?’ Even the atheists. Everyone!'

That seemed like a pretty clear admission that people of other faiths and none have intrinsic worth to God and will be saved alongside the faithful. But this turned out to be wishful thinking.

Although they are otherwise good, moral people they are still doomed to burn in a lake of fire for having the temerity to have been born outside of Catholicism or having chosen to remain so.

The Rev. Thomas Rosica, a Vatican spokesman, spelled it out for the world on Thursday. People who know about the Catholic church 'cannot be saved' if they 'refuse to enter her or remain in her,' he said.

So that's one tall order of eternal hellfire for the rest of us, then.

It makes for an interesting spectacle to see the infallible pope being corrected by his handlers, doesn't it? For a moment it was possible to recall the welcoming and indulgent style of the short lived Pope John Paul I in the unexpectedly all-embracing words of Pope Francis. But you'll recall how quickly John Paul I was replaced by the much more doctrinaire John Paul II.

There's no question that Pope Francis sees the divinity in all human beings, but that's a message that comes with caveats. God may make them all, Jew and Gentile, but unless they're Catholic they're ultimately kindling. The Vatican waited 24 hours to correct him, but they corrected him. (I actually thought it would take less time, which is why I ended my last post by stating I have Pope Francis' back on this one.)

Yes, yes, the Council of Trent clearly taught that Jesus Christ, humanity's one and only Redeemer, redeemed both Jew and Gentile. But there is a huge difference between redemption and salvation. See how that works? Judas Iscariot was redeemed by Christ's death on the cross, but he was not saved - Catholics believe he is damned in hell.

To be justified requires faith - and that faith must be Catholic. You see where this is going?

If I was Pope Francis, I'd be employing a food tester right about now.

*********************************************

I knew the Pope Francis tolerance limit was going to be reached and reached early in the halls of the Vatican. Apparently Francis is no longer the breath of the Spirit permeating the votes of the Cardinals. At best he is not an infallible pope, but a theologically delusional pope. At worst he's a heretic who somehow managed to get where he is on the wafts of the infamous 'smoke of Satan'.

I actually deluded myself for a short time with thoughts that under this Pope we could all continue the growing into adult spirituality envisioned by Vatican II. Silly me. Catholicism has never historically preached adulthood. The thing that Paul mentions when he speaks about giving up childish things and acting like adults is not for Catholics. At least not as far as the Vatican is concerned.

I now wonder how this Pope will assert himself. There is one thing in the above article that gives me great pause. It's the distinction made between redemption and salvation. That is a pretty good example of 'Jesuitical thinking'. It's the kind of thing thinking that's needed to soothe the children who need the security of the Catholic insurance policy while giving the adults a moment of head scratching. It's theological BS.

Now for a mystical moment of my own. In one deep meditative state I was taught the truth of salvation with regards to time. I remember very vividly the point in the meditation when it dawned on me that the salvation story was endless. I turned to my 'teacher' and I asked: "Are you showing me that salvation history is endless?" He replied, "It continues until every sentient being is once again aware of the God who is their Creator and loved them into being. It continues until everyone of them comes Home". "That's the prodigical son parable on a cosmic scale", I said. He replied, "That it is and that is what you and many others are about". So is Pope Francis.

News Flash: Change The Mass Translation--Jesus Did Die For All

2013-05-23T09:04:00.003-06:00

Well, according to Pope Francis, the correct answer is a resounding 'YES'.

The following is the full text from Vatican Radio of Pope Francis' homily at yesterday's Mass. A Huffington Post article covering this sermon is currently their number one read post. This sermon is sure to generate a great deal of conversation, if not angst, in the Catholic world. When I first read this I couldn't help but reflect on the brouha over the new English translation and it's change from Jesus dieing 'for all' to Jesus dieing for 'many'. In Pope Francis' world Jesus died for all. I doubt that in this particular case, this Pope's words are going to end this particular discussion. Judging from the headline that Vatican Radio chose to run, someone at Vatican Radio needed to change the emphasis of the Pope's homily because the headline does not exactly mention the idea that Jesus died for all--even atheists. Bold parts of the article are in the original text.

Pope at Mass: Culture of encounter is the foundation of peace

(Vatican Radio) “Doing good” is a principle that unites all humanity, beyond the diversity of ideologies and religions, and creates the “culture of encounter” that is the foundation of peace: this is what Pope said at Mass this morning at the Domus Santae Martae, in the presence of employees of the Governorate of Vatican City. Cardinal Bechara Boutros Rai, Patriarch of Antioch of the Maronites, concelebrated at the Mass.

Wednesday’s Gospel speaks to us about the disciples who prevented a person from outside their group from doing good. “They complain,” the Pope said in his homily, because they say, “If he is not one of us, he cannot do good. If he is not of our party, he cannot do good.” And Jesus corrects them: “Do not hinder him, he says, let him do good.” The disciples, Pope Francis explains, “were a little intolerant,” closed off by the idea of possessing the truth, convinced that “those who do not have the truth, cannot do good.” “This was wrong . . . Jesus broadens the horizon.” Pope Francis said, “The root of this possibility of doing good – that we all have – is in creation”:

"The Lord created us in His image and likeness, and we are the image of the Lord, and He does good and all of us have this commandment at heart: do good and do not do evil. All of us. ‘But, Father, this is not Catholic! He cannot do good.’ Yes, he can. He must. Not can: must! Because he has this commandment within him. Instead, this ‘closing off’ that imagines that those outside, everyone, cannot do good is a wall that leads to war and also to what some people throughout history have conceived of: killing in the name of God. That we can kill in the name of God. And that, simply, is blasphemy. To say that you can kill in the name of God is blasphemy.”
“Instead,” the Pope continued, “the Lord has created us in His image and likeness, and has given us this commandment in the depths of our heart: do good and do not do evil”:

"The Lord has redeemed all of us, all of us, with the Blood of Christ: all of us, not just Catholics. Everyone! ‘Father, the atheists?’ Even the atheists. Everyone! And this Blood makes us children of God of the first class! We are created children in the likeness of God and the Blood of Christ has redeemed us all! And we all have a duty to do good. And this commandment for everyone to do good, I think, is a beautiful path towards peace. If we, each doing our own part, if we do good to others, if we meet there, doing good, and we go slowly, gently, little by little, we will make that culture of encounter: we need that so much. We must meet one another doing good. ‘But I don’t believe, Father, I am an atheist!’ But do good: we will meet one another there.”
“Doing good” the Pope explained, is not a matter of faith: “It is a duty, it is an identity card that our Father has given to all of us, because He has made us in His image and likeness. And He does good, always.”

This was the final prayer of Pope Francis:

"Today is [the feast of] Santa Rita, Patron Saint of impossible things – but this seems impossible: let us ask of her this grace, this grace that all, all, all people would do good and that we would encounter one another in this work, which is a work of creation, like the creation of the Father. A work of the family, because we are all children of God, all of us, all of us! And God loves us, all of us! May Santa Rita grant us this grace, which seems almost impossible. Amen.”

Text from page http://en.radiovaticana.va/news/2013/05/22/pope_at_mass:_culture_of_encounter_is_the_foundation_of_peace/en1-694445
of the Vatican Radio website

*****************************************

"The disciples, Pope Francis explains, “were a little intolerant,” closed off by the idea of possessing the truth, convinced that “those who do not have the truth, cannot do good." This quote will most likely go over like a lead balloon in some areas of US Catholicism--even some very high ecclesiastical areas of US Catholicism. Especially when it's followed up by this quote: ""The Lord has redeemed all of us, all of us, with the Blood of Christ: all of us, not just Catholics. Everyone! ‘Father, the atheists?’ Even the atheists. Everyone! And this Blood makes us children of God of the first class! We are created children in the likeness of God and the Blood of Christ has redeemed us all!

I've often thought that fully understanding the mission of Jesus in the way that Pope Francis articulated it yesterday is the demarcating line between those who understand Jesus' Way, and those who need the 'way' of Catholicism. One is very inclusive and the other is very self justifying and exclusive. As Pope Francis points out emphatically, Jesus very definitely came down on the side of inclusion.

I suspect Pope Francis is going to get some blow back over this homily, but speaking of backs, on the thoughts he articulated in this sermon, I have his.

Cardinal O'Brien Represents A Major Challenge For Pope Francis. Business As Usual Won't Deal With It

2013-05-18T12:19:00.000-06:00

I can't say I was surprised to find a photo of Cardinal O'Brien with the pedophile Jimmy Savile. Apparently they did a lot of fundraising together. O'Brien did revoke Savile's papal knighthood after the explosion of allegations against Savile surfaced in the British Press.

Pope Francis has a mess on his hands. The mess is Cardinal Keith O'Brien and what O'Brien really represents. In Cardinal O'Brien's case it's not just the worst aspects of clericalism, it is also the worst aspects of the official Church teaching on homosexuality, and the seemingly untouchable status of reaching high rank in the Church. O'Brien's behavior of harassing and abusing his lower clergy is of a different order from the kinds of sexual harassment laity encounter in their work places. In theory and practice laity have resources and systems of accountability they can use to get some justice. This is true even in male dominated professions like the military. Although the US Military has a spotty record to say the least, when the evidence is there, even highly decorated generals like David Petraeus can be disciplined and forced to resign. Not so Cardinals in the Roman Catholic Church and O'Brien is hardly the only Cardinal who used his position for sexual favors with impunity, for decades, and without fear of sanction.

Cardinal O'Brien has been 'ordered' by the Vatican to leave Scotland for the Catholic version of penitential R&R. O'Brien seems to have incurred this penalty because he couldn't stop himself from engendering more publicity. He failed to 'let this die down and blow over' like a good Cardinal should. I strongly suspect he is being publicly penalized because many Cardinals are seriously upset with the threat O'Brien's press exposure is to them personally. The following is from today's Guardian UK. It aptly discusses these points and others. It also debunks some of the misinformation that is currently making the media rounds.

Cardinal Keith O'Brien still a danger, say abuse accusers

Catherine Deveney - The Observer - 5/18/2013
The four men whose accusations of sexual misconduct led to the dramatic resignation of Britain's leading Catholic cleric as archbishop have attacked a Vatican announcement last week that he will leave the country for a period of "prayer and penance". The three priests and one ex-priest, whose complaints were first reported in the Observer in February, say Cardinal Keith O'Brien should have been sent for psychological treatment instead.

One of the priests warns: "Keith is extremely manipulative and needs help to be challenged out of his denial. If he does not receive treatment, I believe he is still a danger to himself and to others."

The four men are demanding an investigation into O'Brien's "predatory behaviour" and say that stripping him of his cardinal status should not be ruled out. Despite making statements to the papal nuncio three months ago, they have heard nothing about a formal investigation into the cardinal, who was a vociferous public opponent of homosexuality.

"Removing O'Brien from Scotland might temporarily reduce the embarrassment to the church authorities but this story has not been fully told yet," says Lenny, the ex-priest complainant. "We have been patient but I'm still waiting to be told what, if any, process the church has in mind."

"They're all passing the buck on this," agrees one of the priests. "It's a smokescreen. We need an investigation and Keith needs to be challenged by professionals to acknowledge the damage he has done to people, himself and the church." (It's certain O'Brien won't be challenged by his own professional peers.)

The Vatican's statement followed O'Brien's recent return to Dunbar, in his old diocese of St Andrews and Edinburgh, where he was due to retire. Peter Kearney, director of communications for the Catholic church in Scotland, told the Observer that no one in Scotland had the authority to challenge O'Brien's behaviour, his return to Scotland or his residence in church property. "We are part of the Roman Catholic church and the ultimate authority for the way the church functions in Scotland lies in Rome. The only person who is senior to the cardinal is the pope."

"That," says one complainant, "is farcical." "I don't care about red hats," says another, "but if the red hat is shoring up his perceived power, it has to go." (That is a prime issue--the red hat and the type of governance it represents. Just as it was for Cardinals Law and Bevilaqua and Rigalli and Mahony and Egan and on and on and on.)

Although there is no official investigation by the Scottish church, behind the scenes Bishop Joseph Toal of Argyll and the Isles has been asked to talk informally to the complainants. "It's been hard listening to what's being said," he admitted to the Observer. "But it's important we hear what they're saying and the gravity of the situation. If I can help in some way, I will." (But of course, as far as exacting some measure of justice, you can't help in any way at all.)

Calls for an investigation have been backed by Catholic theologian Professor Werner Jeanrond, master of St Benet's Hall at Oxford University. "Instead of dealing with issues we are constantly presented with this half-baked solution of removing people. It is not a grown-up church handling this case. I am in favour of investigation on the personal level, so that he can own up to his concealment and own his own life again, but because he was in the clerical life it also has to be a formal investigation. We also have to have an investigation into why we are in this mess."

O'Brien's downfall reveals a bigger tragedy, argues Jeanrond. "As a church, we have failed to come to terms with homosexuality. Once and for all we have to face up to the fact that there are homosexuals, gays, lesbians and transsexuals." Jeanrond has been shocked by the absence of an organised laity in Britain compared with other European countries. "As soon as something happens on the clerical side, the whole church is paralysed. That's ridiculous. Is the whole of Jesus's mission coming to an end because Keith O'Brien has sinned?" (I suppose it does when clerical deference is so ingrained that it becomes all mixed up with the authority of Jesus---exactly as all the ingraining is designed to do.)

The four complainants say an investigation is about justice, not vengeance. "I will give forgiveness if asked," says one, "as long as the damage has been recognised. At times, we don't do ourselves a lot of good by throwing pardon around like confetti without a change of heart. I am angry at the system that licked his boots and allowed him to get on with it." (So am I.)

***************************************************

The Cardinal O'Brien story is one of those Catholic stories that got temporarily lost in the pageantry of a papal election and the Easter season and the sheer novelty of Pope Francis. I, however, have not forgotten that the accusations against Cardinal O'Brien reached EP Benedict's desk three days before he retired. Nor have I forgotten the report written by Benedict's three cardinal investigators and left for Pope Francis to peruse at his leisure. Rumors before the papal resignation/election cycle intimated that gay issues in the upper clergy were prominent in this report. That would hardly be shocking news and I suspect it is information that is probably underscored by the allegations against Cardinal O'Brien.

The Cardinal O'Brien story is truly a mess for Pope Francis and I have my doubts about whether he is the Pope who can meaningfully deal with it. It is first and foremost an issue of unbelievable clerical hubris in which Cardinal O'Brien acted on his understanding that he was untouchable in Scotland. A personal belief which was directly verified by the Archdiocese' own spokesman. And yet this begs the question why O'Brien also acted as if he was untouchable by Rome until Benedict's resignation and that reason may be contained in that report of Benedict's three octogenarian cardinals. If O'Brien represents business as usual in the cardinal ranks, reforming the curia will take more than shuffling lines of communication and downsizing the curia. It will take changing the clerical culture itself. This is one case of reform where it certainly seems starting at the top and having that change cascade down is going to have to be the chosen path. For all of Francis' talk of tacking careerism in the Church it seems to me the first place to start is to demonstrate there will be no advantage to holding higher clerical offices. The operative principle should be the higher a man progresses the more stringent the accountability.

The second issue which O'Brien represents is the sick expression of the 'homosexual lifestyle' in the priesthood. I agree wholeheartedly with Professor Werner Jeanrond, the Church has to come to grips with the fact there are real people who are gay, lesbian, bisexual, transexual, and transgendered people in God's creation. The Church has to face the fact these are not disorders, they are facts of human life. These are people, equally God's children. They are not just 'sexually deviant acts' or 'gender assignments'.

Unfortunately I am not convinced that Pope Francis is the right pope to deal with this aspect of the O'Brien debacle either. Nothing Francis has done to this point indicates his ideas of gender and sexuality have evolved to take the Church to some more 'grown up' position as advocated by Professor Jeanrond. Sending O'Brien off on some short term penitential placement is not dealing with any of the really important dysfunctions the O'Brien case raises. O'Brien truly represents a pastoral and reform challenge for Pope Franics. I hope and pray Francis is up to it.

The Winds Of Change Are Stirring More Strongly

2013-05-06T10:03:00.003-06:00

The effects of clerical sexual abuse on the Church have been this bad. "Francis, repair My Church" is more relevant than ever.

The following is the Change.org petition begun by Australian Bishops Geoffry Robinson and William Morrison. For me this is another indication that the election of Pope Francis has freed some of our bishops and cardinals to speak that which could not previously be spoken. If there was one area, among many, that sorely disappointed me about the previous two papacies it was their inability to really grasp the causes and damage clerical sexual abuse has done to the Church. Even to this very day there are bishops like Meyers and Finn who still think they are above both church and secular law, that from their positions as bishops their judgment is above accountability. Lay Catholics have for too long sat back and let the hierarchy dictate the response and solutions, which have included neither valid responses nor any real solutions. Here are two bishops who are willing to bring the laity into the discussion. I encourage readers to read Bishop Robinson's post, the letter being sent to Pope Francis, and please sign the petition. We can not let a third papacy continue to failed policies of the last two.

Pope Francis, The Vatican: For Christ's Sake Stop Sexual Abuse.... for good!

Sexual abuse within the Catholic Church has been nothing short of an epidemic of catastrophic proportions. The devastation of victims, the ruination of priests and religious, the damage to a major world religion and its faithful are horrendous and incalculable.

Australian Bishops - Geoffrey Robinson and Bill Morris call on the new Pope to seize the opportunity of his appointment to not only sweep the Church clean but to put His /God’s house in order for all time.
ROYAL COMMISSION WILL NOT PREVENT SEXUAL ABUSE FROM HAPPENING – FOR GOOD.
Bishop Robinson identifies three major tasks to be performed in eradicating sexual abuse from the Church: identifying and removing all offenders; reaching out to, and assisting, all victims and survivors; and identifying and overcoming the causes of both abuse and the poor response to abuse by the Church’s hierarchy. The Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse is investigating the first two of these tasks however it does not have the scope or power to make the changes necessary to ensure that systemic sexual abuse NEVER happens again in the Catholic Church.
Bishop Robinson has considerable expertise, having been involved in these first two fields for eighteen years. He and Bishop Morris firmly believe there is a desperate need to address the third element: preventing abuse from happening in the first place . . . for good! He is calling for nothing less than a Council of the whole Church, inclusive of the laity, to confront the issues that contribute to the causes of systemic sexual abuse.
MANY CATHOLIC GROUPS CALL FOR CHANGE.
There are many people and many groups around the world seeking change in the Catholic Church. Though they may have slightly different emphases, there are a number of changes, common to all groups. These groups are calling out for:-
1) Greater Inclusiveness – a Church that is as much for women as for men, for laypeople as for clergy, for the marginalised as for those in the mainstream.
2) Greater Openness – if there are scandals, it is better to bring them into the light and confront them rather than seek to conceal them.
3) Greater Participation – not taking away the power of the Pope, but asking for greater participation and consultation, so that the whole Church may have a more active role in the mission of the Church.
4) Greater Sense of Mission – a greater concentration on the person and mission of Jesus Christ rather than on authority, laws, obedience and theological conformity.
Bishops Robinson and Morris believe it’s time to unite as one voice that the Vatican can no longer ignore.
IT’S TIME FOR ACTION
This global petition will give Catholics a collective voice. It will let the new Pope know the intensity and solidarity we feel in relation to the sexual abuse issue. It will show him that the whole Church wants to help him, to work with him on this issue of paramount importance. We want the new Pope to lead the Church into a future he and all Catholics yearn for - and the world needs.
FOR CHRIST’S SAKE - FIND YOUR VOICE AND GIVE YOUR SUPPORT
By signing this petition you are assisting every Catholic group calling for change. You are helping to create something very special: - the voice of the faithful. You will be helping to create a church for the future, free of sexual abuse, full of participation and inclusiveness–, a Church where loving God, through Jesus Christ makes us proud and full of the Holy Spirit. This is the voice we want the Vatican to hear. .
So if you are Catholic and believe that it’s time for the Church to listen to its people; if you’re a Catholic who wants to stamp out sexual abuse from ever occurring again please sign this petition.

For Christ’s and our Church’s sake encourage your family, friends and fellow parishioners to do the same. Together, as Catholics we can make a change.
For more details on Bishop Geoffrey Robinson’s action plan to end sexual abuse¬- for good, read his latest book, For Christ Sake: End Sexual Abuse in the Catholic Church…for good.

To:
Pope Francis, The Vatican

We, the undersigned members of the Catholic Church, have been sickened by the continuing stories of sexual abuse within our Church, and we are appalled by the accounts of an unchristian response to those who have suffered.

When so many people either offend or respond poorly, we cannot limit ourselves to blaming individuals, but must also look at systemic causes. The situation is so grave that we call for an Ecumenical Council to respond to the one question of doing everything possible to uproot such abuse from the Church and produce a better response to victims. An essential part of this call is that the laity of the whole world should have a major voice in the Council (for it is our children who have been abused or put at risk), and that the following subjects be included:

1. The continuing influence of the idea of an angry God
2. The immaturity that arises from passive obedience in adults
3. The teaching of the Church on sexual morality
4. The part played in abuse by celibacy, especially obligatory celibacy
5. The lack of a strong feminine influence in every aspect of the Church
6. The idea that through ordination the priest is taken above other people (clericalism)
7. The lack of professionalism in the life of priests and religious
8. The unhealthy situations in which many priests and religious are required to live
9. The constant placing of right beliefs before right actions
10. The passion for secrecy and the hiding of faults within the Church, especially in the Vatican
11. The ways in which the protection of papal authority has been put before the eradication of sexual abuse
12. The provision of structures to make a reality of the ‘sense of faith’ (sensus fidei) of all Catholic people
13. The need for each Conference of Bishops to have the authority to compel individual bishops to follow common decisions in this matter.

Sincerely,

******************************************

And again, here is the link to the petition: http://www.change.org/en-AU/petitions/pope-francis-the-vatican-for-christ-s-sake-stop-sexual-abuse-for-good

Although I am aware that previously the Vatican has blown off all such efforts, seemingly to prefer single anonymous letters from right wing traditionalists, I have a feeling under Pope Francis this time things might be different. He said over this weekend that sexual abuse of children has to stop. I can only hope he understands fully that sexual abuse of children will not stop on any level if real change is not implemented in ALL the areas which contribute to clerical and Catholic family sexual abuse. If he does nothing else during his papacy, really attempting to solve this issue would precipitate serious reform. For Christ's sake, Amen.

Update: This link is to a story coming out of Africa that I have been following, but not writing about because it was hard to substantiate in the American mainstream press. Now however, the LA Times has written about this very courageous priest. Should anyone think Africa will not be the next pressure cooker to blow over clerical abuse of children, they need to read this article. Clerical abuse is global, systemic, and the hierarchy responds the same everywhere. It has to stop.

If you have the time, check out some of Fr Musaala's Utube videos. He has a real gift.

Cardinal Dolan's 'Dirty Freddy' Story Was No Joke

2013-05-06T09:02:00.001-06:00

No dirty hands can pass through the doors of St Patrick's Cathedral on Cardinal Dolans' watch. Well, unless they belong to OD bishops.

The following is an excerpt of an article written by Joseph Amodeo from Huffington Post about a small demonstration--10 people--they attempted to conduct at St Patrick's Cathedral. It was in response to Cardinal Dolan's 'dirty Freddy' blog post from the previous week. I wrote about this blog post myself. The response from the Archdiocese was completely over the top. It was all about fear, not dirty hands and not dirty gays. I'm quite sure in a future blog post, Cardinal Dolan will tell us he had nothing to do with it.

Cardinal Dolan Denies Catholics Entry at Cathedral Because of Dirty Hands

Jospeph Amodeo - Huffington Post - 5/5/2013
"Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. For everyone who asks, receives; and the one who seeks, finds; and to the one who knocks, the door will be opened" (Matthew 7:7-8).

Today, myself and others knocked at the door of St. Patrick's Cathedral, but the door was not opened, rather it was slammed in our faces. As I begin to write this article, I'm cognizant of the raw emotions that I feel deep inside my heart. It's a feeling that I'm unfamiliar with, because until today, I have never been denied a seat at Christ's table. In fact, today marks the first day that I have ever felt disowned, abandoned, and lost.

Earlier today, a group of Catholics including myself gathered on the corner of East 46th Street and Fifth Avenue in Manhattan. We gathered for a simple purpose, to dirty our hands as we prepared to attend Mass at St. Patrick's Cathedral. We were soiling our hands as a silent response to Cardinal Dolan's column last week in which he suggested that LGBT people were welcome in the church so long as they washed their hands. As we began to rub our hands together with pieces of ash, our hands took on the look and feel of the effort that has defined our work to receive an equal seat at the table of Christ in the Catholic Church. Those participating were not only LGBT Catholics, but also allies and, perhaps most importantly, parents of LGBT children. We gathered not in protest, but as a silent witness.

It is what transpired in the moments after soiling our hands that I have trouble understanding and placing in the context of the Christian experience. At around 9:30am, the ten of us gathered were greeted by four police cars, eight uniformed officers, a police captain, and a detective from the Police Commissioner's LGBT liaison unit. The detective informed us that the Cathedral would prohibit us to enter because of our dirty hands. It was at that moment that I realized the power of fear. The Archdiocese of New York was responding out of fear to a peaceful and silent presence at Mass. Even in light of this, we decided that we would walk solemnly from our gathering spot to the Cathedral with hopes that we might be welcomed.
As we reached St. Patrick's Cathedral, we were approached by Kevin Donohue, who identified himself as being in charge of operations for the cathedral. Sadly, Mr. Donohue's tone was both cold and scolding. What astounded me most was when he said that we could enter the cathedral so long as we washed our hands first. Even now, writing those words I find myself struggling to understand their meaning, while coming to terms with their exclusionary nature.......

********************************************

It took 10 of New York's finest to respond to this 'threat' from 10 of Cardinal Dolan's sheep? Are you kidding me? Over dirty hands? Or maybe the real message is no one gets to poke fun at Cardinal Dolan's expense and protecting his dignity necessitates 10 of New York's finest including a precinct Captain. If I had any doubts that Cardinal Dolan was a walking, talking, joking, smiling, bundle of personal insecurity, I don't any longer. He strikes back like any other bundle of insecurity we usually call a bully. Dirty Freddy indeed.

I feel for Joseph Amodeo. From the rest of his post it is obvious he was nurtured in a very different form of Catholicism from one that Cardinal Dolan represents. It does hurt when that other form, the one with all power, strikes out from it's black and white view of 'us vs them'. The US Church seems especially plagued with black and white bullies in the Episcopal ranks. Just ask the LCWR. All Catholics need do to be received by this bunch of bishop bullies is admit they are apostates and can't lead themselves, wash their hands, or completely disempower themselves is some symbolic fashion to gain admittance to the table. Wash their hands, bow their heads, and I assume brown our noses while we're at it.

In the meantime I have another question. Why is it that Opus Dei Bishops like Kansas City's Finn and Newark's Meyer's are never disciplined when they egregiously violate not only the Dallas Charter, but secular law? Why don't they have to wash their figuratively dirty hands? Why isn't Cardinal Dolan demanding these men wash their dirty hands? I can only come to the conclusion that at his childhood table the dirty Freddies may have had to wash their hands, but that rule didn't apply to dirty priests. There is no other conclusion to draw.

My Cardinal Hero Speaks Up And I Say WOW!

2013-05-05T13:47:00.002-06:00

Cardinal Braz de Aviz during his question and answer session for the gathering of global women religious superiors. Photo credit: NCR/Robyn J Haas

I have had an instant connection with Cardinal Braz de Aviz since I first read his personal story a few years ago. I have been following his career with more than a little interest. My intuition tells me this man holds key cards to the future of Catholicism. The following article was just posted on the National Catholic Reporter and details his interaction with the International Union of Superiors General.

Vatican religious prefect: 'I was left out of LCWR finding'

Rome - Joshua McElwee - NCR - 5/5/2013
The controversial Vatican decision last year to place the main representative group of U.S. Catholic sisters under the control of bishops was made without consultation or knowledge of the Vatican office that normally deals with matters of religious life, the office’s leader said Sunday.

That lack of discussion over whether to sharply criticize the Leadership Conference of Women Religious (LCWR), said Cardinal João Braz de Aviz, caused him “much pain.”

“We have to change this way of doing things,” said Braz de Aviz, head of the Vatican’s Congregation for Religious.

“We have to improve these relationships,” he continued, referring to the April 2012 order regarding LCWR from the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith -- approved by Pope Benedict XVI -- that ordered the U.S. sisters’ group to revise.
“Cardinals can’t be mistrustful of each other,” Braz de Aviz said. “This is not the way the church should function.”

Braz de Aviz, who has led the Vatican’s Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life since 2011, made the comments Sunday during an open dialogue session with some 800 leaders of sisters’ communities at the triennial assembly of the International Union of Superiors General.
Answering questions from the sister leaders for over an hour and a half, Braz de Aviz spoke openly, referring several times to tensions between sisters and bishops on church authority, questions of obedience, and the future of religious life. (Answering direct questions for an hour and a half is mind boggling in itself.)

At one point the cardinal even called for wide-ranging review of structures of church power.
“We are in a moment of needing to review and revision some things,” Braz de Aviz said. “Obedience and authority must be renewed, re-visioned.”
“Authority that commands, kills,” he continued. “Obedience that becomes a copy of what the other person says, infantilizes.” (Yes, yes, yes!)

Braz de Aviz also told the sister leaders that “women’s leadership needs to grow a lot in the church,” referring to a remark made by Pope Paul VI during a session of the Second Vatican Council (1962-65) -- where the late pope asked the council fathers: “Where’s the other 50 percent of humanity that isn’t here?”
The Vatican mandate regarding LCWR, which was released in April 2012, appoints Seattle Archbishop Peter Sartain as the group’s “archbishop delegate.” It gives him final authority over its workings, and requires the group to revise its programs and statutes.

LCWR, which traces its roots to the 1950s, represents about 80 percent of the some 57,000 U.S. sisters.
Braz de Aviz spoke Sunday in Italian with his words being simultaneously translated into five other languages.

He said that his office -- which is tasked with overseeing the work an estimated 1.5 million sisters, brothers, and priests around the world in religious orders -- first learned of the move against the U.S. sisters’ group in a meeting with the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith after the formal report on the matter had been completed.

At that meeting, Braz de Aviz said, he told Cardinal William Levada, an American who has since retired as head of the doctrinal congregation, that the matter should have been discussed between the Vatican offices.
“We will obey what the Holy Father wants and what will be decided through you,” Braz de Aviz told the sisters he had said to Levada. “But we must say that this material which should be discussed together has not been discussed together.”

“I obeyed,” Braz de Aviz continued telling the sisters. “But I had so much pain within me.”
He also said it was the first time he was discussing the lack of consultation publicly, saying previously he "didn't have the courage to speak." (Not many did have the courage to speak during the last two pontificates. More than a little infantilizing was the order of the day--even, and maybe especially, amongst senior curial officials.)

Speaking at a press conference following his talk, Braz de Aviz said that while his office “always obeys” the pope, “the problem very often is what kind of news goes to the Holy Father.”

Saying that different Vatican offices will sometimes give the pope varying viewpoints on situations like the LCWR matter, Braz de Aviz said “there’s a sort of like ‘Who is going to win?’”

“This struggle of who is going to win is not good, he continued. “But Peter and Paul also had problems. The answer is: ‘the Holy Spirit’ will win.”

LCWR’s status with the Vatican has been the subject of much discussion at the global sisters’ meeting. Franciscan Sr. Florence Deacon, LCWR’s president, told the assembly in a speech Saturday that the situation with the group indicated that “serious misunderstandings” exist between Vatican officials and Catholic sisters. (If readers haven't read the article linked in this paragraph, it's well worth your time.)

Asked during his dialogue with the sisters if it would be possible to have a meeting between LCWR and Pope Francis to discuss the matter, Braz de Aviz responded: “I think so.”
“But I know the pain is very big,” he continued, repeating: “Very big.”

Several former leaders of LCWR expressed pain and disappointment weeks ago when a Vatican press release said Pope Francis "reaffirmed" the doctrinal congregation's move.
“I don’t think Pope Francis would be a stranger to you,” Braz de Aviz told the sisters Sunday. However, the cardinal said, the pope “has confirmed the doctrinal review, he wants that to go forward.”

Braz de Aviz also responded to a question regarding a separate investigation of U.S. Catholic sisters launched by his Vatican congregation under his predecessor, Cardinal Franc Rode.
That investigation, known as an apostolic visitation, examined individual orders of U.S. Catholic sisters and resulted in a detailed report that was quietly submitted to Rome in January 2012.

That report, Braz de Aviz said, “has been sent to the pope, it is up to him to see if he will make it public.”
Earlier Sunday, Braz de Aviz had told the sister leaders during his homily at Mass with them that they are “co-essential” with the church’s bishops and the two groups must “walk together” in their leadership.
Referring to consecrated life as a “charismatic dimension” of the church, the cardinal told the sister leaders: “Today we need to rediscover that in the church there are two dimensions that are both co-essential, equally essential: The hierarchical dimension and the charismatic dimension.”
(This sentence is a definite departure from the ecclesial understanding of the previous two popes.)

“We need to walk together, following, listening to the Holy Spirit -- men and women together,” he said during the homily.
Reflecting on Sunday’s reading from the Acts of the Apostles, which recounts the apostles’ decision to not require circumcision for Christians, Braz de Aviz said the account indicates the church has to discern when it is in a “new moment.”

“This is something we always have to be doing in the church, to discern constantly in order to move forward,” he said. “This also gives us the opportunity today, it seems to me, to understand the important question in our life as consecrated persons.”

During his dialogue session with the sister leaders, Braz de Aviz spoke again about men and women in the church working together, referring to the Genesis account that “God created them, man and woman. God created them in the image and likeness of God.”
That account, the cardinal said, emphasizes two things: “Man and woman are not God; they are creatures” and “man, without woman, is not humanity; and vice-versa.”

Part of the struggles between men and women in church leadership, said Braz de Aviz, stem from to “reconstruct our relationships” with one another. “Our relationships,” he said, “are sick, profoundly sick.” (Two thousand years of imbalance will produce a profoundly sick relationship.)

Regarding the advancement of women into church leadership positions, Braz de Aviz said “we can take a lot of steps in this direction” to create “a church more maternal” and not only paternal.
“The two aspects together would be much more balanced, much more human,” he said. “We must not be afraid of this.”

During his homily earlier Sunday, Braz de Aviz also revealed how Pope Francis had chosen the new second-in-command for his Vatican congregation, Franciscan Fr. Jose Rodriguez Carballo.
Rodriguez, formerly the minister general of the Orders of Friars Minor, was announced as the secretary for the Congregation for Religious April 6.

Pope Francis, Braz de Aviz said, asked him when making the decision: “Who do you want as your secretary? Give me three names.”
“So I gave him three names,” Braz de Aviz told the sister leaders. “But [the pope] said, ‘Of the three, which is the one you want?’ I said this one, Carballo. [The pope] said, ‘Good, fine.’ And he gave us Jose Carballo.”

“It’s a wonderful, simple way of doing things: I trust you, I trust Carballo, so that’s it,” Braz de Aviz said. “He doesn’t complicate it.”

***********************************************

I have to say Cardinal Braz de Aviz is such a ray of hope in an otherwise still dismal Vatican scene. The LCWR can't help but feel a little better after this exchange with Cardinal Braz de Aviz. I know I do--especially after having just written about a bishop of a totally different stripe.

Holy Wisdom Monastery Off Limits For Diocese of Madison Wi. Priests and Religious

2013-05-05T12:06:00.003-06:00

Holy Wisdom Monastery was finished in 2010 and was awarded the U.S. Green Building Council's Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design platinum award as the most eco friendly new construction in the US. Of course, caring about the Earth is one the charisms of the Benedictine Women of Madison--amongst other concerns.

My favorite bishop, Robert Morlino, is back up to his favorite thing. After threatening a parish with interdict I wondered when he would get around to Holy Wisdom Monastery which is now infamous for inspiring the words 'going beyond Jesus'. Those are the words that all trads who think the LCWR are a bunch of pagan New Age priestesses will use with regularity to dis the LCWR. The words come from the paper Sr Lauri Brinks presented to the LCWR back in 2007. The very paper for which the Congregation for Doctrine and Faith took serious umbrage and in fact, directly mentioned in it's 'assessment'. Given all of this, I am truly shocked Bishop Morlino took so long to inform his diocesan priests that Holy Wisdom was off limits. The following is from the Wisconsin State Journal.

In the Spirit: Holy Wisdom Monastery now off-limits to Catholic priests

Bishop Robert Morlino is continuing to put more distance between the Madison Catholic Diocese and Holy Wisdom Monastery, a former Catholic monastery on the outskirts of Madison that is now a non-Catholic ecumenical retreat center.

In the latest development, Morlino is now prohibiting priests in the diocese from “attendance or participation at all events held at Holy Wisdom Monastery and all events sponsored or co-sponsored by Holy Wisdom Monastery or the Benedictine Women of Madison,” according to a March 7 letter to priests leaked to the State Journal.

A February visit to the monastery by Sister Simone Campbell, an outspoken, progressive Catholic nun, appeared to be the final straw for Morlino. (I bet it was the final straw. Sr Campbell happens to be the head of NETWORK, a social justice lobby which itself was mentioned by name in the CDF assessment.)

The monastery, in the town of Westport on the northwest side of Lake Mendota, once was a Catholic high school for girls run by Benedictine nuns. After the school closed in 1966, the nuns turned the site into an ecumenical retreat center, offering a place of hospitality to a wide range of people and groups.

In 2000, the monastic Catholic sisters at the site welcomed a Protestant woman to live with them, a move that led them to seek independence from the Catholic Church. The Vatican approved their request in 2006. The monastery is now managed by the Benedictine Women of Madison, an ecumenical community led by Sister Mary David Walgenbach, who is Catholic. (It is a community of exactly three consecrated women.)

Morlino’s action highlights a longstanding beef some Catholics, especially those who are more tradition-minded, have with the monastery. The monastery’s worship services, they say, retain so many elements of a Mass that unsuspecting Catholics could be duped into thinking the services are valid representations of Catholic teaching. This is especially worrisome, they say, because the worship services diverge from church doctrine in profound ways, such as allowing women to preach and embracing the relationships of gay couples. (Well, if these poor unsuspecting Catholics were duped, it wouldn't be a sin anyway and if these Catholics think women are allowed to preach, they can't be good upstanding Catholics and deserve to be duped by some hybrid ecumenical service. LOL)

“Holy Wisdom Monastery is perhaps best known among local Catholics for substantive rejection of the Catholic faith, so I would think priests or sisters should know they are not sending a good message if they attend events there,” said Elizabeth Durack of Madison, who attends the Cathedral Parish in Downtown Madison and has been vocal in encouraging “faithful Catholics” not to attend activities at the monastery.
The monastery’s worship services, while attended by people from many Christian backgrounds, have become particularly popular among liberal Catholics and those displeased with Morlino. (How utterly unsurprising.)

Morlino, in his letter to priests, said it was his duty “to protect the integrity and unity of the faith.” There “is a grave potential for scandal and confusion among the faithful, owing to Holy Wisdom Monastery’s status as a former Catholic monastery,” he wrote.

Diocesan spokesman Brent King said no single incident or priest precipitated the bishop’s decree; however, King said, publicity surrounding Campbell’s Feb. 14 appearance at the monastery “brought more attention to a Catholic giving an address at a former Catholic monastery” and “added to the ongoing confusion.” (Probably has nothing to do with the fact Sr Campbell has a higher media profile than Bishop Morlino.)

Campbell led the “Nuns on the Bus” campaign last year in opposition to Janesville Congressman Paul Ryan’s federal budget proposal, which she viewed as detrimental to the country’s social safety net. Her February appearance at the monastery was sponsored by the Interfaith Coalition for Worker Justice of South Central Wisconsin. (Also probably has nothing to do with the fact Morlino gave cover to Ryan's budget, against the statements of the USCCB, while the Nuns on the Bus did the exact opposite.)

Among those at the event was the Rev. Stephen Umhoefer, pastor of Nativity of Mary Catholic Church in Janesville, who gave the benediction and spoke warmly of Campbell’s work. His parish is part of the Madison diocese, and he is a diocesan priest. He declined comment.

Walgenbach also declined to comment. In the past, she and others at the monastery have said they do not consider themselves less Catholic because of their ecumenism. “The Catholic spirituality is bigger than the Roman Catholic Church,” Walgenbach told me last year.

Read more: http://host.madison.com/lifestyles/faith-and-values/religion/in-the-spirit-holy-wisdom-monastery-now-off-limits-to/article_a451b181-1eab-5657-98d5-8ae5989a3e94.html#ixzz2SQmsg3UQ

****************************************

When reading the above article I couldn't help but remember a comment of Pope Francis from his Holy Thursday homily:

"Those who do not go out of themselves, instead of being mediators, gradually become intermediaries, managers. We know the difference: the intermediary, the manager ... doesn't put his own skin and his own heart on the line, he never hears a warm, heartfelt word of thanks," he said.

Bishop Morlino doesn't quite fit the above description because he does go out of his way to placate orthodox Catholics. In doing so he doesn't need to become an intermediary or a mediator because operating from one end of the Catholic spectrum negates him even having to mediate anything coming from the Vatican. All he needs to reference is in his head and his head is full of Canon Law and the Catechism. In this particular case of Holy Wisdom Monastery, there isn't much question the Benedictines of Madison are outside or 'beyond' the catechism and the Vatican itself freed them from Canon Law. I'm just surprised it took an appearance by Sr Simone Campbell for Bishop Morlino to finally give the word about Holy Wisdom Monastery, but then that would be two strikes against the CDF assessment. Two strikes and they are out.

I can't help but wonder why it is OK for Pope Francis to conduct services in a detention center but not OK for Madison priests and religious to attend any events at Holy Wisdom Monastery. I bet I might even find instances in the Madison Diocese where Roman Catholics share service space with other denominations. This kind of thing happens everywhere anymore and no one gets scandalously confused. Ecumenical services happen in their hundreds on a daily basis, and even Bishop Morlino has no problem with mixing with protestants during political prayer breakfasts and what not. Of course, I'm not sure those ecumenical political things actually include any Democrats or other kinds of progressive Catholics, but I'm prepared to be wrong. Which leads me to believe this latest edict is really about LCWR nuns--x LCWR or not-- and their ecumenical services and their politics. On that, I'm willing to bet I'm not wrong.

A Red Flag Over The New Pope

2013-05-04T12:01:00.002-06:00

While there are many things about Pope Francis I find laudatory, there are also some things which throw up some serious red flags. I happen to believe one of those red flags will color too many of his decisions. That flag is illustrated in a homily he gave this morning. The following excerpt is taken from Vatican radio's translation of his homily. The link is at the bottom of this excerpt.

“You may ask the question,” continued Pope Francis, ‘Father, what is the weapon to defend against these seductions, from these blandishments, these enticements that the prince of this world offers?’. The weapon is the same weapon of Jesus, the Word of God - not dialogue - but always the Word of God, and then humility and meekness. We think of Jesus, when they give that slap: what humility! What meekness! He could have insulted him, no? One question, meek and humble. We think of Jesus in His Passion. His Prophet says: ‘As a sheep going to the slaughter.’ He does not cry out, not at all: humility. Humility and meekness. These are the weapons that the prince and spirit of this world does not tolerate, for his proposals are proposals for worldly power, proposals of vanity, proposals for ill-gotten riches.”

“Today,” continued Pope Francis, “Jesus reminds us of this hatred that the world has against us, against the followers of Jesus.” The world hates us, he repeated, “because He has saved us, redeemed us.” Recalling the “weapons to defend ourselves” he added that we must remain sheep, “because sheep are meek and humble, [and when we are sheep] we have a shepherd.” The Pope concluded with an invocation to the Virgin Mary, asking her, “to help us become meek and humble in the way of Jesus.”

Text from page http://en.radiovaticana.va/news/2013/05/04/pope_francis_at_mass:_fighting_evil_with_meekness_and_humility_/en1-689083
of the Vatican Radio website

*****************************************

I have a difficult time believing Jesus came to teach us how to weaponize the spiritual attributes of humility and meekness. I don't think Jesus came to teach spiritual principles as battle strategies or to use as weapons in military campaigns of any sort. Spiritual or secular. Jesus came to teach love and compassion as the two attributes which enact the will of the Father on earth exactly as they do in heaven. There is nothing in the Lord's prayer about wars and weapons. There are lines about forgiveness and forgiving, and about being delivered from evil. There are no lines about conquering evil in the name of Jesus or remaining sheep under the protection of some shepherd as military protector.

Pope Francis has consistently used this kind of military weaponizing language when speaking about Jesus and Catholic spirituality. I find this trend of Francis' irritating if only because the first thing humanity usually does with a new technology or scientific discovery is weaponize it. I would sincerely hope spirituality could be evolved in such a way that it precludes weaponization of it in any way shape or form. Actually, I'm beginning to believe it is precisely this use of spirituality as a weapon in a some inner dimensional war that is precluding Catholicism from leading it's followers in engaging in the spiritual acts that Jesus did. The aim of any spiritual system should not be to further the kind of dualistic split inherent in an 'us against the enemy' mentality, but to transcend such dualisms by seeking a more holistic and encompassing point of view. The idea is to heal such divisions, not conquer them.

As long as Francis preaches the war and weapons form of spirituality, rather than reducing the dualism in Catholicism, he will increase it. That for me, is a very big red flag.

An Important Challenge From The German Church

2013-04-29T07:53:00.003-06:00

Germany's Cardinal Kasper has also called for women deacons and Cardinal Reihard Marx, one of Pope Francis' Great 8 is on record for this statement about women's ordination: We must go on thinking about this intensively. Perhaps we have not yet come to the end of the road we set out on together.”

While the USCCB head is discussing 'dirty hands' and and how this gives him permission to exclude Catholics, his German counterpart is talking inclusion and reform. Pope Francis has some work to do in getting his upper leadership on the same page.

Women Catholic deacons 'no longer taboo'

The Local - 4/29/2013

Germany's top Roman Catholic has called for women to be allowed to become deacons, which would enable them to perform baptisms and marriages outside of mass - a novelty for Catholic women.

Archbishop of Freiburg Robert Zollitsch, who chairs the German Bishops' Conference, called for the change at the end of a four-day meeting to discuss possible reforms.

The conference, the first of its kind, invited 300 Roman Catholic experts to propose reforms. Zollitsch's comments echo year-long calls from the Central Committee of German Catholics to permit women to become deacons. On Sunday, Zollitsch said that aim was no longer a 'taboo.'

Zollitsch said the Catholic Church could only regain credibility and strength by committing to reform. He described an "atmosphere of openness and freedom" at the conference.

Deacons assist priests during church services and can perform baptisms and marriages outside of mass. Their primary role however is to serve the needy in their community and their duties are considered secular rather than pastoral.

Another proposal to emerge from the conference was to extend the rights of remarried divorcees to sit on church bodies such as parish councils. Conference members also discussed the possibility of granting them the right to receive Holy Communion and attend confession.

"It's important to me that, without undermining the sanctity of marriage, these men and women are taken seriously within the church and feel respected and at home," said Zollitsch. At present the reforms remain speculative and there is no proposed time-frame for their implementation. The position of divorcees remains highly controversial within the Church.

The conference also touched on the difficulty, particularly in eastern Germany, of recruiting people to work for Catholic institutions such as hospitals and kindergarten. At present the Church can only employ Roman Catholics. However Zollitsch called for work permits to be extended to non-Catholics and to those with "different lifestyles." This would technically apply to homosexual people too. However Church labour reforms are unlikely to be introduced in the next three years. (But the odds are all these reforms will begin happening now, as Zollitsch has verbally opened the door.)

While reform might be slow to come, the sentiments expressed at the conference are a signal to many that change is on the way. "I have never experienced a process of strategy development as transparent as this one," said Thomas Berg, of the Baden-Württemberg Leadership Academy, who attended the conference.

***********************************************

I wrote before, I think in a comment, that the resignation of Pope Benedict and the election of Pope Francis has opened some fissures and let off some pressure. This German conference and AB Zollitsch's remarks are another major indication of this phenomenon. More and more bishops are talking meaningful reform and not just rearranging deck chairs--except in the US. This latest from Germany is unique simply because it's a request from an entire national Church, an important national Church whose financial clout is second only to the US. I cannot imagine this sort of thing happening during the papacies of Benedict or JPII. Yes, the German Conference put it's foot down about a few things, most notably a couple of bishop appointments, but to advocate for major changes in the Diaconate, hiring and firing practices, and for pastoral ministry to irregular marriages is huge, and could never have happened before February 28th.

Here in the US we are still mired in the Benedict/JPII Church as can be seen in the tripe written by Cardinal 'dirty hands' Dolan, the removal of gay employees simply on the reception of single anonymous letters, and the continued coddling and mishandling of abusive priests. There is an arrogance in too many of the US bishops that is breath taking in it's application. If there is one national Bishops conference that exudes a fundamental cancerous clericalism, it's the USCCB. None of this is really not all that surprising since it seems to be molded in the image of Cardinals Bernie Law, Justin Rigali, and Roger Mahony, and this is not to forget the boys from Bishop Bruskewitz's Nebraska stable. They may differ in terms of theological emphasis, but not in clerical privilege and diocesan 'ownership'. God only knows how much money the California crop has spent on Cathedrals. It's most likely only exceeded by the amount they spent on clerical abuse. It's no wonder Cardinal O'Malley is the US Cardinal selected by Francis for his kitchen cabinet of 8. There was no other real credible choice.

As to these proposals from Germany, they are the first necessary steps in restoring gender balance in the Church. The next step is to free priests to marry. These are not truly reforms, but the recovery of past practices. They will be easily accepted in the third world because women hold real positions of spiritual authority in Indigenous cultures. Unfortunately, while they would be welcomed in the US Church, they would not be forthcoming from our current crop of bishops--at least not all of them. What I would like to see is a similar gathering of laity and bishops in US, and more than that I would like to see Pope Francis mandate similar gatherings in all national Churches. It is the only feasible way for lay Catholics to have meaningful say in the Church. It's not democracy, but at least it's a long step from absolute monarchy. The German Church has opened an important conversation and laid down an important challenge--not that this exact scenario hasn't happened before--the question is will the result be different.

Synchronicity Gives Me A Perfect Example

2013-04-28T11:20:00.001-06:00

No dinner for this child at Cardinal Dolan's table.

In my previous post I made the point that a celibate male priesthood has only the experience of being the child in the parent/child relationship and that leads to directly to a authoritarian paternal paradigm. There is never the kind of dialogue that carries on between parents and adult children. The following is from Cardinal Dolan's personal blog. It illustrates this issue in spades.

All Are Welcome!

April 25th, 2013

It was a lesson I began to learn when I was seven or eight . . .
My buddy Freddie from across the street and I were playing outside. Mom called me for supper.
“Can Freddie stay and eat supper with us?” I asked.
“He’d sure be welcome, if it’s okay with his mom and dad,” she replied.
“Thanks, Mrs. Dolan,” Freddie replied. “I’m sure it’s okay, because mom and dad are out, and the babysitter was just going to make me a sandwich whenever I came in.”
I was so proud and happy. Freddie was welcome in our house, at our table. We both rushed in and sat down.
“Freddie, glad you’re here,” dad remarked, “but . . . looks like you and Tim better go wash your hands before you eat.”
Simple enough . . . common sense . . . you are a most welcome and respected member now of our table, our household, dad was saying, but, there are a few very natural expectations this family has. Like, wash your hands!…
So it is with the supernatural family we call the Church: all are welcome!
But, welcome to what? To a community that will love and respect you, but which has rather clear expectations defining it, revealed by God in the Bible, through His Son, Jesus, instilled in the human heart, and taught by His Church.
The Church is Catholic . . . that means all are welcome;
The Church is one . . . that means we have a Person — Jesus — and His moral teaching that unite us;
The Church is apostolic . . . that means that His teaching was entrusted to His apostles, and carefully handed-on by His Church. The sacred duty of the Church is to invite people, challenge people, to live the message and teachings of Jesus.
This balance can cause some tensions. Freddie and I were loved and welcomed at our family table, but the clear expectation was, no dirty hands!
Blessed John Paul II used to say that the best way to love someone was to tell them the truth: To teach the truth with love. Jesus did that — He was love and truth in His very person — and so does His Church.
We love and respect everyone . . . but that doesn’t necessarily mean we love and respect their actions.
Who a person is? We love and respect him or her . . .
What a person does? Truth may require that we tell the person we love that such actions are not consonant with what God has revealed.
We can never judge a person . . . but, we can judge a person’s actions.
Jesus did it best. Remember the woman caught in adultery? The elders were going to stone her. At the words of Jesus, they walked away.
“Is there no one left to condemn you?” the Lord tenderly asked the accused woman.
“No one, Sir,” she whispered.
“Neither do I condemn you,” Jesus concluded. “Now go, but sin no more.”
Hate the sin; love the sinner . . .(Uhmm Tim, Jesus welcomed and forgave her BEFORE the 'sin no more' statement and his forgiveness was not contingent on her 'sinning no more.")

************************************************

This is Cardinal Dolan's take on why the Church loves gays but kicks them from the table. Gays have dirty hands like little Freddy. We are not to take the message that gays are dirty hands, but just that good daddies make sure there are no children with dirty hands at the dinner table.

Someone needs to sit down with Cardinal Dolan and spend some time explaining to him that Jesus did not have a contingent form of love. Jesus did not relate to people as if they were seven or eight year old children and he was some uber parent. Jesus referred to his followers as his brothers and sisters not as his children and there is nothing in the Gospels where Jesus refused to feed people if their hands were dirty.

And I don't know about Cardinal Dolan's family, but it was my mother who decided who was or was not welcome at the table in our house, and I don't remember her kicking too many people from the table for dirty hands, sexual orientation, or an alcohol problem. If she had the family ranch would have had too few to labor in it.

When Insanity Is Taught As Reality

2013-04-28T10:26:00.000-06:00

I have to blame my daughter for getting me started on this particular insanity--again. But it's nice to know poor Mario will never find his princess presiding in a cathedral--ever. I can keep my search strictly to castles.

This has been a chaotic week for me and so I've fallen behind with blogs I cherish reading. This morning I was able to catch up somewhat and found a brilliant piece by Bill Lyndsey over on Bilgrimage. In it Bill is pondering the events at the funeral he recently attended for his uncle. He wonders why churches let women talk before the services, astute brilliant caring women, but not during services where the ownership of a phallus trumps the intelligence of any female. I wonder that myself, because I think it's the underlying elephant in the room when it comes to the CDF and the LCWR. The following is an excerpt from Bill's post:

Something about this seems not quite right to me. Something about this seems screamingly wrong to me, and what's wrong about it all seemed to me to be in stark relief at my uncle's funeral. Women whose moral insights are far sharper than the conventional moral insights of preacher men who haven't had to think much about the complexities of making the gospel message they deliver critically pertinent to the world in which they live are permitted no say at all once the preaching and the praying begins, with the invocations of Father God and the songs to the Father in Heaven who sent His Son to save us all from sin.

Half the church sits in silence while the other half claims to be God. What struck me very strongly at my uncle's funeral is not merely how wrong--how insane--this arrangement and the theological system undergirding it are.

What struck me is also how much damage this arrangement (which is how most cultures in the world do business, so that patriarchal religion is merely aping the culture at large with its ideology of male entitlement and female subordination) damages us. How it damages the world in which we live. How it damages our religious institutions to shut out the interesting, accomplished, morally astute voices of women while letting the voices of less interesting, less accomplished, less morally astute men posture as God speaking to the rest of us who sit in meek submission and silence receiving God's words from God's phallic emissaries.

**************************************************

The gender issue is not going to go away. Argumentation which leads with 'that's the way we've always done it' is not going to persuade in cultures in which 'the way we've always done it' have gone the way of the Dodo bird. More and more people are waking up to the fact that relegating the thoughts of educated intelligent women secondary to possession of a penis is truly, as Bill writes, insane. Women's 'genius' is not limited to family and pregnancy. No matter how many times women are told by men that this is their genius, this constant repetition will not make it true. This mantra also has the negative impact of minimizing the contributions of men to family life and lets men off the hook when it comes to taking responsibility for their children while giving secular legal systems a free reign to curtail male rights to interact with their own children. It's promoted a situation in which too many men can pay for them but not play with them.

In Catholicism, the other situation I've found somewhat insane, is promoting celibate childless men as the experts on families and family life. When one's sole experience of family is strictly from the child end of things, it shouldn't be surprising that an authoritarian paternal mode is the default method of interaction. Actual parenthood involves many more paradigms than using reflexive authority to make your point and influence behavior. Anyone who has raised teenagers is well aware of this fact, and the older one's children become, the more listening and the ability to dialogue become more and more prominent. A parent reaches the stage where the relationship becomes far more about equals than parent child. Unless it involves grandchildren. Then, as my own mother informed me, grandparents get to enjoy and spoil the grand children without the problems of raising them. The actual parents are not allowed to voice any opposition to this arrangement. This resulted in driving back to Nevada from the ranch with a seven year old on a sugar high with a car full of toys informing me I was 'really mean and not nice like Grandma' because I wouldn't stop at every tourist trap for seven hundred and fifty miles to check out the toys. But I digress.

There was one time when the celibate childless men allowed married lay people with children to have a voice. That was back during the papal commission on birth control. That lay voice was an eye opening experience for the vast majority of the clergy on that commission. They voted to allow for artificial birth control because they heard from thousands of Catholic men and women that family life was not like Ozzie and Harriet, father did not always know best, and that Mr Ed had better advice than Fr Ed. Pope Paul VI opted to reinforce the authority of childless celibate popes and the results of that decision are seen in generations of empty pews and fewer and fewer vocations. We have now reached the point that young women are less inclined to participate in religion than young men. That's a first and that is a damning sign for the future. Unless Pope Francis can work some sort of gender miracle with in the Church, his predecessor will have gotten precisely what he wanted, a much smaller remnant church in the West with almost all vocations coming from Africa. This will last only as long as women bring up the rear in access to educational and economic opportunities in Africa.

I'm well aware that the conservative Catholic will say it was birth control itself that caused all these problems for the Church. Fewer children equals fewer vocations they will say and birth control most definitely raises the 'it's all about me' quotient. I've found that interesting in that it implies vocations are directly dependent, not on God, but on women having many children. The historical idea seems to be that God calls some of the surplus children to religious vocations. There is of course, another truth. God wouldn't have to rely on the surplus children if Catholicism didn't insist on a completely celibate male clergy. God could rely on volunteers from all of His children which seems to be the message from the Pentecostal and Evangelical movement. If all Catholics could participate in the sacramental life of the Church, including leading the liturgy, we would have more than enough sacramental leaders and no gender issue.

Pope Francis is certainly familiar with the explosion in Pentecostal and Evangelical churches in Latin America. He's also familiar with the popularity of Christian Base Communities in Catholic Latin America, a movement which was severely curtailed by his two predecessors precisely because Benedict and JPII felt these lay led communities diluted the theology of the celibate male priesthood. Gender is one elephant in the Catholic livingroom, but the other is the celibate male priesthood itself. Is Catholicism defined by it's desire to follow the teachings of Jesus or by it's uniquely celibate male priesthood? Pope Francis appears to me to believe that for him the Church is both/and. Unfortunately as far as women are concerned this is not really a both/and statement. It's an 'I am/you are not' statement and that is not what Paul tells us Jesus taught.

Reform Is Coming: Italian Bishops Need Not Apply

2013-04-22T20:51:00.002-06:00

Looks like the Catholic version of the Emerald City is going to get an influx of employees from other countries and none of them will have ruby red slippers.

Since it's back to work tomorrow, I wanted to post this article from the TelegraphUK about yesterday's article in the London Sunday Times which was behind a pay wall. The eight cardinals Pope Francis selected to help him with reforming the curia are not kidding around. Adding women to the mix is just part of what they are thinking. It doesn't appear to be a good time to be an Italian bishop in the curia. It seems those men will be given employment elsewhere.

Pope Francis 'to appoint more women to key Vatican posts'

By Tom Kington in Rome - The TelegraphUK - 4/21/2013

Cardinal Oscar Andres Rodriguez Maradiaga of Honduras said he was backing more posts for women after the Pope named him this month to lead a task force of eight cardinals from around the world to reform the Roman Curia, an alleged hotbed of intrigue, infighting and corruption.

The cardinal's comments, made to The Sunday Times, were backed by Vatican spokesman Father Federico Lombardi on Sunday.

"It is a natural step – there is a move towards putting more women in key roles where they are qualified," he said....

.....In his general audience on April 3, the Pope noted how women were the first witnesses of the Resurrection, adding that, "The Apostles and disciples find it harder to believe in the Risen Christ, not the women however!"

This was a message about the importance of the role of women in the Church," said Carlo Marroni, a Vatican expert at Italian daily Il Sole 24 Ore. "That said, the question still gets handled cautiously as it touches on the issue of ordination for women."

Women have taken on a number of key roles at the Vatican, including Sister Nicla Spezzati, the undersecretary of the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Flaminia Giovanelli, the undersecretary, at the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace.

St Peter's is run by a woman, Maria Cristina Carlo-Stella, who is the head of the Fabbrica di San Pietro, the Vatican office in charge of the basilica. (Wonder if the theologian of Benedict's papal household was aware of this. Why she could be fixing the roof or something.)

"But that is still very few," said Marco Politi, a Vatican watcher at Italian daily Il Fatto Quotidiano. "Look at Germany and the US, where women have many key positions in the dioceses." (Three barely qualifies for tokenism.)

Cardinal Maradiaga, the head of the group, who speaks six languages, plays the saxophone and trained as a pilot, said he would be scrutinising the controversial Vatican Bank, which has been linked to scandals.
Pope Francis formed the task force after complaints that the Vatican was unresponsive to the needs and requests of cardinals outside Italy and Europe.

Cardinal Francisco Javier Errázuriz Ossa, the retired archbishop of Santiago, Chile, and one of group, has warned that the Vatican was overpopulated with Europeans.
"Forty European bishops working for the Holy Father and for the government of the Church are too many," he said. (40 is not tokenism. It's excessivism. Maybe by the time this group of Cardinals is done the numbers of bishops vs women will be reversed.)

********************************************

Pope Francis' gang of eight cardinals certainly seem to have a different perspective on management than I had first thought. The above article contains some interesting and potentially reform inducing thoughts. The addition of more women certainly would raise the level of input from women and coupled with downsizing the quotient of bishops would more than likely enhance their voices--and the voices of laity in general. I would also think reducing the number of bishops would put real breaks on careerism amongst the clergy.

I would love to be present when Cardinal Rodriguez Maradiaga starts in on the IOR or Vatican Bank. As it stands right now, there are no longer any Italians involved with the IOR Board of Directors and the bank's president is a German. Board members are German, Swiss, or American. Credit card transactions are being handled by a Swiss financial services group. All this is no doubt due to the Bank's troubles with the Italian banking system which has in the past frozen substantial transactions, accused the Bank of money laundering, complained of the lack of transparency in regard to account holders and others could use those accounts, and stopped credit card transactions through Duetsche Bank--again because of money laundering concerns. It certainly looks as if the Vatican, under Bertone, has switched to non Italians and non Italian financial services to put some distance between itself and Italian banking regulators. Perhaps Cardinal Maradiaga might want to start his investigation with the previous bank president, Ettore Gotti Tedeschi, who was summarily fired, complete with character assassination by the Bertone led board and specifically under the signature of the American KofC CEO Carl Anderson. Tedeschi complained about lack of transparency at the bank, but was also implicated in IOR money laundering as well as questioned about the same issue at another bank.

There were Italian reports that Cardinal Bertone received a two million euro 'charitable donation' at the last IOR Board meeting in 2012. It may be that this was a method of helping the Salesians pay off their legal and settlement fees from multiple abuse cases, but it's fishy none the less. I have not been able to find an article about this in English, but this would be relevant with regards to Cardinal Maradiaga as he is also a Salesian. I'd appreciate it if anyone finds any links verifying this story about Cardinal Bertone. In any case, Pope Francis has already cancelled bonuses for the four other Cardinals who are tasked with supervising the lay Board and the over all management of the IOR.

Any way one looks at it, these cardinals seem very serious about changing the culture in the Vatican. I can easily believe this last conclave was a referendum on the Italian curia and their method of doing business by non Italian cardinals. The truth is the Church is no longer an Italian or European enterprise and it's better for all concerned the Vatican reflect that fact. This is not to say the Church is doing swell in Latin America because it isn't, but continuing along the same path was not going to fix anything anywhere and fresh eyes do sometimes come up with fresh solutions. Besides, it will be nice to have some female faces, and truth is, there isn't any real canonical reason some of them couldn't wear cardinal red.

A Strange Link Between Two Very Different Men Continues Unto Heaven

2013-04-22T12:57:00.001-06:00


Maybe some dysfunctional relationships are made in heaven and maybe for God's inscrutable purposes.

I read early this morning in the National Catholic Reporter a John Allen story about 'unblocking' the canonization process for Oscar Romero. While not really surprised, because this was expected under Pope Francis, I was none the less happy. Here's the first part of the story:

Francis 'unblocks' Romero beatification, official says

A Vatican official responsible for the sainthood cause of Archbishop Oscar Romero of El Salvador announced Sunday that the cause has been "unblocked" by Pope Francis, suggesting that beatification of the assassinated prelate could come swiftly.

Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia spoke Sunday in the Italian city of Molfetta at a Mass honoring the 20th anniversary of the death of Bishop Antonio "Tonino" Bello, known as one of Italy's premier "peace bishops."
In addition to being the president of the Vatican's Pontifical Council for the Family, Paglia also serves as the postulator for Romero's sainthood cause.

The Vatican's Congregation for the Causes of Saints has been studying the Romero case since 1996, after the church in El Salvador formally opened the procedure in 1990.
At the end of his 20-minute homily Sunday dedicated to the memory of Bello, Paglia said: "Just today, the day of the death of Don Tonino, the cause of the beatification of Monsignor Romero has been unblocked."

Happy that the cause for AB Romero has been 'unblocked', I clicked over to Vatican Insider and learned about another Canonization process. This one not being blocked, but fast tracked at the speed of light as far as these things usually go.

The Vatican doctors approve the miracle to make Wojtyla a saint

"A saint now!" The canonisation of Wojtyla is getting closer quickly and it could be celebrated next October. In fact, in the past few days, the medical council of the Congregation for the Causes of Saints has recognized as inexplicable one healing attributed to the blessed John Paul II. A supposed "miracle" that, if it is also approved by theologians and the cardinals (as it is very likely), will bring the Polish Pope, who died in 2005, the halo of sainthood in record time, just eight years after his death.

It all happened in great secrecy, with maximum confidentiality. In January, the postulator of the cause, Mgr. Slawomir Oder, submitted a presumed miraculous healing to the Vatican Congregation for the Saints for a preliminary opinion. As it is known, after the approval of a miracle for the proclamation of a blessed, the canonical procedures include the recognition of a second miracle that must have occurred after the beatification ceremony.

Two doctors of the Vatican council had previously examined this new case, and both gave a favourable opinion. The dossier with the medical records and the testimonies was then officially presented to the Congregation, which immediately included the examination in its agenda. In the past few days it was discussed by a committee of seven doctors, the council (presided over by Dr. Patrick Polisca, Pope John Paul II's cardiologist), Pope Benedict XVI's personal physicians and now Pope Francis's. The medical council also gave a favourable opinion, the first official go-ahead by the Vatican, by defining as inexplicable the healing attributed to the intercession of the blessed Karol Wojtyla.

**********************************************

So once again these two men are linked with major events announced with in the same 24 hour time frame. The last such day was when AB Romero was assasinated and JPII signed the document which would have removed Romero from his position as Archbishop of San Salvador. Pretty amazing coincidences I have to think.

JPII was always going to be declared a saint. He himself set the process in motion that would see that he would be fast tracked when he removed the position of Devil's Advocate. That particular task is now in the hands of his official promoter. One might think that would be a conflict of interest, but I guess it's much easier to move saints through the process without someone trying their best to 'block' said process. Unlike Romero whose process has somehow managed to be 'blocked' for over thirty years. He must not have gotten a very good promoter or his promoter didn't find the necessary doors to sainthood nearly as wide open as did JPII's promoter. In any event, Romero could be canonized in the same time frame as JPII because if Pope Francis determines Romero is a true martyr -which he is - than the miracle business isn't necessary. It is distinctly possible both men could share the same Canonization day. Pope Francis could save the Vatican some money and the entire Church could try to sort through the all the mixed messages.

Things Are Changing And They Won't Stay The Same

2013-04-21T07:36:00.002-06:00

This Photo from the NY Daily News demonstrates cell phone photography at Benedict's and Francis' papal elections. This photo strikes me as potentially prophetic about how much lay participation each will have engendered.

Here's a couple of stories that have the rad trads going this Sunday morning. The Sunday Times article is behind a pay wall and I have been unable to find a free copy. NCR has just begun their annual donation drive so that link will begin with a video appeal.

Pope’s strongman blasts old guard aside

The pontiff is to give more women top jobs and break the grip of Italian cardinals, his key aide tells John Follain in Vatican City

John Follain - The Sunday TimesUK - 4/21/2013
POPE FRANCIS plans to appoint lay women to top jobs in the Vatican and to dilute the power of Italian cardinals in a radical shake-up of the Catholic Church’s government following a series of scandals.
In a move branded as “revolutionary” by Vatican watchers, the Pope last weekend appointed eight cardinals to advise him on the governance and reform of the Curia, the church’s bureaucracy which has been tainted by controversies over child sex abuse by priests, leaks of papal files and allegations of corruption.
In an interview with The Sunday Times, Cardinal Oscar Andres Rodriguez Maradiaga of Honduras, whom Francis named to head the panel and who is now seen as a “power behind the papal throne”, predicted a difficult fight ahead for the Argentine pontiff.

Another Vatican voice backs civil unions for same-sex couples

John Allen - National Catholic Reporter - 4/21/2013
Another veteran Vatican figure has signaled openness to civil recognition of same-sex unions, in the wake of similar comments in early February from the Vatican’s top official on the family. It’s a position also once reportedly seen with favor by the future pope while he was still Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio in Buenos Aires, Argentina.
The latest expression of support for civil recognition as an alternative to gay marriage comes from Archbishop Piero Marini, who served for 18 years as Pope John Paul II’s liturgical Master of Ceremonies.

“There are many couples that suffer because their civil rights aren’t recognized,” Marini said.

************************************************

This is going to be one interesting papacy. I have to agree with Cardinal Rodriguez Maradiaga, Pope Francis may have some hard sailing ahead. John Allen remarks later in his article that the comments of Archbishop Marini and the earlier comments of Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia, President of the Pontifical Council for the Family appear to be undercutting French and US Bishops. I would agree, and that's because both archbishops framed their statements as a matter of civil rights and the French and US bishops have consistently stated in one form or another that gays have no rights to a legalized form of partnership. I'm sure the same right wing argument will be leveled against women holding meaningful positions in the hierarchy--women have no rights to any leadership position in the Roman Catholic Church which would make male clerics subordinate to them. Rough sailing ahead indeed.

I don't know where all this will eventually finish. I don't think Pope Francis does either which is why hope and trust are recurring themes for him. His multiple references to the Holy Spirit at large in the Church is another indication to me that he is willing to tip a few dominoes without having to know how many will then go down. I don't know if that's a John XXIII kind of Pope or something new altogether. I do know it takes a lot of faith and a lot of courage to make major decisions, even with the best of information, not knowing precisely how it will all come out. I think that's called leadership.

I have no doubt Francis knows his main opposition will come from the right and it will come hard, strong, and not particularly Christ like. He experienced that himself over the civil union question in Argentina. This was the only issue he lost as president of the Argentine Bishops Conference. I will keep that in mind when it seems he is keeping progressives on something of a roller coaster ride.

I also think Francis is a very strategic pope. If the Rodriguez Maradiaga interview turns out to be correct, last weeks affirmation concerning the investigation of the LCWR makes some sense. If Francis intends to appoint lay women to high positions in the curia he gave the right wing a sop. Since lay women includes all sisters and nuns I will be curious to see how many religious women are included in these appointments. Personally, I would really hope one of them is Leslie Anne Knight. I have reason for my hope.

Just to review, Leslie Anne Knight was the president of Caritas Internationalis until 2011 when she was refused the necessary nihil obstat to run for another four year term. This nihil obstat was under the purview of the Secretary of State's Office and not to grant her this Vatican seal of approval was a decision of Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone. The Cardinal who led the Board of Directors for Caritas and was sandbagged by this decision, taken completely behind his back, was none other than Cardinal Rodriguez Maradiaga. The following is taken from the Tablet's coverage:

"Cardinal Rodríguez wrote to all directors of the 165-member international confederation on 5 February to inform them of the Vatican’s decision. The letter, which was seen by The Tablet, notes that Secretariat of State officials met a CI delegation on that same day and gave only a verbal account of why the Vatican refused to approve Dr Knight’s candidacy. The cardinal does not mention those reasons in his letter, but does say that the CI bureau, in an extraordinary meeting, “expressed their incomprehension at the reasons provided” and “reaffirmed their positive view of Lesley-Anne Knight’s work for Caritas and the Church”.

Anyway, I will be very interested in Pope Francis' appointments because there's a new dealer at the table and he is not going to use the old stacked deck. Amen.

When Art Is Too Real And Jesus Becomes An Inconvenient Truth

2013-04-20T14:38:00.002-06:00

This is one powerful depiction of Jesus by sculptor Timoth Schmalz, drives home the challenge of His message for 21st Century Catholics.

I might be a little late with this post, since it's been featured on Huffington Post and other outlets, but art is timeless. Problem with this piece is it may be too timely, at least in the sense that Jesus might actually have had to sleep on a few benches if He were here today living and teaching amongst the marginalized of our large inner cities.

The following is an excerpt of an article by Leslie Scrivener originally in Toronto's theStar.com. It explains how 'Homeless Jesus' actually was rejected and made homeless by two prominent Cathedrals, the Catholic one in New York and the Catholic one in Toronto. Artist Timothy Schmalz calls this ironic. I call it typical of protecting a particular Catholic mindset from the hard truths of the Gospel--or not wanting to appear hypocritical, or both.

Sculpture of Jesus the Homeless rejected by two prominent churches

Leslie Scrivener - theStar.com - 4/13/2013
Jesus has been depicted in art as triumphant, gentle or suffering. Now, in a controversial new sculpture in downtown Toronto, he is shown as homeless — an outcast sleeping on a bench.

It takes a moment to see that the slight figure shrouded by a blanket, hauntingly similar to the real homeless who lie on grates and in doorways, is Jesus. It’s the gaping wounds in the feet that reveal the subject, whose face is draped and barely visible, as Jesus the Homeless.

Despite message of the sculpture — Jesus identifying with the poorest among us — it was rejected by two prominent Catholic churches, St. Michael’s Cathedral in Toronto and St. Patrick’s Cathedral in New York.

“Homeless Jesus had no home,” says the artist, Timothy Schmalz, who specializes in religious sculpture. “How ironic.”

Rectors of both cathedrals were enthusiastic about the bronze piece and showed Schmalz possible locations, but higher-ups in the New York and Toronto archdiocese turned it down, he says.

“It was very upsetting because the rectors liked it, but when it got to the administration, people thought it might be too controversial or vague,” he says. He was told “it was not an appropriate image.”

The Toronto archdiocese tried to help him find an alternative location, including St. Augustine’s Seminary in Scarborough. But Schmalz, who describes his work as a visual prayer, wanted to reach a wider, secular audience. “I wanted not only the converted to see it, but also the marginalized. I almost gave up trying to find a place.”

Now the sculpture stands near Wellesley St. W., outside Regis College at the University of Toronto. It’s a Jesuit school of theology, where priests and lay people are trained, with an emphasis on social justice.

Bill Steinburg, communications manager for the Toronto archdiocese, says the decision not to accept the sculpture at St. Michael’s may have had to do with renovations at the cathedral and “partly to do with someone’s view of the art.”

To some who have seen it, it speaks the message of the Gospels. When theologian Thomas Reynolds came upon it he felt “the shock of recognition.” He quoted the biblical passage: “ … the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head.”

“I’m so used to seeing images of Jesus that are palatable,” says Reynolds.

But recent depictions of Jesus in political and social contexts have spurred controversy.

At Emmanuel College, the educational arm of the United Church where Reynolds teaches, there is a graceful sculpture showing Jesus’ suffering in a crucified woman. Schmaltz says he intended that his Jesus the Homeless can be interpreted as either male or female....

....Jesus the Homeless is provocative, says Reynolds, because it ‘punctures the illusion of normalcy.

“In certain ways, Christian communities have been privileged and considered themselves the norm in society and that has made Christians comfortable in our complacency.”

Schmalz, 43, roots the sculpture in his experiences in Toronto, where he trained at the former Ontario College of Art. “I was totally used to stepping over people. You’re not aware they are human beings. They become obstacles in the urban environment and you lose a spiritual connection to them. They become inert, an inconvenience.”......

******************************************

I don't know if this sculpture was rejected because of gender issues or hypocrisy issues or because it isn't a comfortable presentation for Catholics who prefer Jesus safely on the Cross dieing for their sins. Whatever the reason, Homeless Jesus is a powerful and haunting statement of just how hard Jesus' teachings really are. Under this Pope, it may be that Homeless Jesus could find a home in the heart of the Vatican. It would make an interesting contrast to some of the other art in St Peter's. After all Jesus was a homeless vagrant teacher long before He became Catholicism's 'King of Kings'. It never hurts to celebrate and remember one's roots. Sometimes it helps one see where everything started going wrong.

AB Chaput On The State Of His Archdiocese--It's A Mess

2013-04-20T10:12:00.001-06:00

For AB Chaput, trading the Rockies for the Phillies was easier and more successful than swapping Archdiocesan management jobs.

Archbishop Chaput recently gave an acceptance speech for an award bestowed on him by Philadelphia's Catholic Philopatrian Literary Society. He joins a long list of Philadelphia movers and shakers. In this speech he was his usual pull no punches self. His take on the state of health of the AD of Philadelphia is that of a patient on life support. It's hard to see how Philadelphia will be able to pull off the World Meeting of Families with it's papal visit scheduled for 2015 without a huge influx of help from other dioceses. The following is taken from CatholicPhilly.com with thanks to the NCR for first bringing this to my attention.

Archbishop gives stark, frank assessment of archdiocese at Philos dinner

CatholicPhilly.com - 4/15/2013
In his acceptance speech it became clear that if you ask Archbishop Chaput a question he is not apt to sugar-coat the answer. Although he is happy to be Philadelphia’s Archbishop, he said his answer as to how he has enjoyed the past 19 months is, “I haven’t liked it at all.”

Quite honestly, “It has been an awful time,” he said. “We’ve had huge problems with the clergy which has been a great sadness to the Church, a great sadness for the priests and a great sadness for all of you here. I have had to make decisions about the future of their lives that have been extraordinarily difficult not only for them but for their families; their moms, their brothers and sisters.” (And no words about the victims of these priests and the difficulties for their families, and so in this respect, he carries on in a line of other self referential Philly clerics.)

Coupled with this, he said, “I have had to close about 50 schools and will be closing parishes in the next couple of years in a way that will be disappointing to a lot of people. We have financial problems that are unimaginable.”

The Philadelphia archdiocese does have a distinguished history and Archbishop Chaput listed some of its past accomplishments, for example the home of two saints, an honor shared in America only by Hawaii. It had the largest Catholic school system in the country. It is home to a large number of Catholic colleges and universities. It still had more parishes (until recently) than Los Angeles, which is more than three times as large in Catholic population.

“This is an extraordinary place,” Archbishop Chaput said. “But things have changed immensely.”
He pointed to the practice of faith, with Mass attendance hovering around 20 percent when it once was about 75 or 80 percent. The church and schools were built on the assumption that the high numbers would always be there. (It's a very different story when one's Archdiocese isn't being bolstered by immigration as was Denver during his tenure. The truth of the Philly numbers speak directly to the disconnect between the Church and the post modern world.)

“Things have changed,” he said. “The problems we have financially are not admitting we have to change. Not in terms of our values and enthusiasm but in terms of how we look at our structures. We can’t keep open parishes that are empty; we can’t keep schools that have only 80 kids in them, we just can’t.” (And neither can you ignore the all important question: "Why has this happened?" for which the answers might just involve 'values and enthusiasms').

Change, he said, is going to be awkward and difficult, but “if we are going to be the Church that Jesus Christ wants us to be, we have to be different.” (That's an understatement.)

The Archbishop reminded his audience that the early Church as established by Jesus had no buildings. The first Christians continued to worship at the Temple and synagogues until they were expelled and then the churches they built were very small. The Church, he said, “is not a building it is the people of God, all of us together.”

Dealing with all of these problems that have built up over the years is a distraction. “I spend all of my time trying to figure out how we are going to do the next thing,” he said. “I ask your patience.” (Poor man. It's the price of monarchical leadership.)

As an archdiocese, “we have a lot of work to do,” he said. “I hope that when I turn 75 and the Pope says it is time to retire and get out of here you will have a reason to give me an award. You don’t have any yet. But we will do it together because I know you love the Lord and love His Church. Let’s do it together.”

*****************************************

Wasn't it Jesus who said 'by their fruits you shall know them?' Seems to me this was a cogent observation on the part of Jesus. This stark assessment of the Archdiocese of Philadelphia proves His point. Forty years of princely mismanagement has cost the Church in Philly 71% of it's practicing Catholic population. Of course, the Princes of the Archdiocese had a lot of help from the Kings and Princes in the Vatican, but even with that help, Philly is a prime candidate for an award for Pope Francis' definition of a 'self referential' church.

I actually have some empathy for AB Chaput. He's worked his whole clerical life at the beck and call of Rome, participated in many a political machination, was involved in more than one 'investigation' and his reward is to oversee the rapid decline of one of America's premier historical Archdioceses. He was the quintessential careerist and is now in a place where he must think and act creatively on his own. He is thoroughly enmeshed in what the governance structure of Rome, the one he faithfully and blindly served, has produced in Philadelphia.

Unfortunately, he is singularly unprepared to deal with this mess with any kind of effectiveness now that his main enabler is off the papal stage. He is too concrete a thinker, too black and white a decider, and too frequently reacts from the victim perspective. When he is finished, most of the financial numbers will add up. The one for Mass attendance will not. That one will continue to drop, unless Francis can somehow effect a global change in structure and pastoral emphasis that bypasses all the concrete thinkers, black and white deciders, and perpetual victims that his predecessors elevated to the hierarchy.

AB Chaput in some ways is already a Francis cleric. He is not ostentatious, has lived simply, was a member of a religious community before he was a bishop and maintains his connections. But unlike Francis, Chaput has relished being in the political spotlight and used his episcopal positions to garner favor amongst right wing political and curial elites. Since he doesn't appear to have done this for the usual perks, (other than career advancement which may not have been one of his goals) I have to believe he is truly a concrete, right wing, victim thinker. That is not the definition of a pastoral bishop. If Chaput is to have any real impact on the one number that actually counts--the practicing Catholic number--he is going to have to undergo a radical conversion in his world view. But in order to do that, he is going to have to stop thinking of himself as an unworthy victim constantly reacting too things, dependent on higher authority to bolster his authority. He has to learn to accept himself as having the personal competence and the innate worthiness to successfully complete what he has been tasked to do. He has to stop whining and start winning hearts and minds. He has to learn to trust in others where he mistrusts in himself. He has to pick up, what will be for him a true cross, in living Pope Francis' pastoral expectations. If he can do it though, he will find that the fruits are different and the burdens are lighter. He will then understand it's going to take real change on the part of the entire church hierarchy to really untangle the mess in Philadelphia. It's not just on his shoulders. If he can get that, he can then become part of meaningful solutions for the Philadelphia's everywhere on the Catholic globe, and there are a lot of them.

Pope Francis Concurs With EPBXVI: The LCWR Must Have Male Coaches

2013-04-15T09:52:00.002-06:00

Pope Francis will continue to rule with aid of 8 elder men in red and the LCWR will remain in the CDF dog house. Oh well, I didn't expect change in either of these areas.

Yesterday I wrote about my angst concerning Pope Francis and today it was confirmed. Under Francis nothing will change for the LCWR. They will continue to be under the direction of three male coaches because Francis believes the CDF was correct in it's assessment--the LCWR was not playing the Catholic game by the rules.

From the Vatican website:

Today the Superiors of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith met with the Presidency of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious (LCWR) in the United States of America. Most Rev. J. Peter Sartain, Archbishop of Seattle and the Holy See’s Delegate for the Doctrinal Assessment of the LCWR, also participated in the meeting.

As this was his first opportunity to meet with the Presidency of the LCWR, the Prefect of the Congregation, Most Rev. Gerhard Ludwig Müller, expressed his gratitude for the great contribution of women Religious to the Church in the United States as seen particularly in the many schools, hospitals, and institutions of support for the poor which have been founded and staffed by Religious over the years.

The Prefect then highlighted the teaching of the Second Vatican Council regarding the important mission of Religious to promote a vision of ecclesial communion founded on faith in Jesus Christ and the teachings of the Church as faithfully taught through the ages under the guidance of the Magisterium (Cf. Lumen gentium, nn. 43-47). He also emphasized that a Conference of Major Superiors, such as the LCWR, exists in order to promote common efforts among its member Institutes as well as cooperation with the local Conference of Bishops and with individual Bishops. For this reason, such Conferences are constituted by and remain under the direction of the Holy See (Cf. Code of Canon Law, cann. 708-709).

Finally, Archbishop Müller informed the Presidency that he had recently discussed the Doctrinal Assessment with Pope Francis, who reaffirmed the findings of the Assessment and the program of reform for this Conference of Major Superiors.

It is the sincere desire of the Holy See that this meeting may help to promote the integral witness of women Religious, based on a firm foundation of faith and Christian love, so as to preserve and strengthen it for the enrichment of the Church and society for generations to come.

The LCWR has released a statement, which confirms the above and concluded:

The conversation was open and frank. We pray that these conversations may bear fruit for the good of the Church.

**************************************************

This confirms some of my thinking from yesterday. It's not so much that the LCWR is a group of women leaders, it's that they have an authority to their witness in direct competition to the authority which has been severely eroded in our male leadership. This authority is not seen as appropriately complementary. It if for this reason I dismiss the complaints about a few sisters engaging in acts and speculation which cross doctrinal boundaries. At bottom it isn't about those few sisters, it's about the real authority carried in witness of the LCWR member communities. Even Mueller has to admit the face of the Catholic Church in the US is a product of the historic and continuing efforts of these congregations.

In tandem with this authority of witness, Francis also spoke yesterday on careerism in the clergy. He made the point that one must live their witness. One's walk must match their talk and that all Christians must root out the idols that prevent them from emulating the teachings of Jesus. Personally I think Roman Catholicism should root out the idol of male entitlement which precludes the clergy from truly understanding women are capable of being much more than spiritually dependent children or fertility gardens for boys bound for the priesthood. This kind of 'rooting out' is not going to happen under Francis and never was going to happen. He will encourage his clergy to live more like the sisters, but he will never encourage the sisters to share rule with the clergy. So while the culture moves further and further away from women being dependent on men, Catholicism will not. It will keep it's women sacramentally and spiritually dependent on ordained men. It will keep it's gender definitions rooted in only the second creation story in Genesis and it's sexual morality defined by acts and not relationships. It will become less and less relevant as a cultural insitution, even if Francis is capable of making a dent in clerical careerism. In the end though, if the relationship between men and women does not change to reflect a true equality, all the reform in the world in the exclusively male clerical structures will be futile and ephemeral. The collective consciousness of humanity is moving away from patriarchy and hierarchy and making equal space for the feminine impulse towards creativity and mutual consensus.

Am I disappointed in Francis? Not really. Before this Conclave I had very little hope that underlying gender issues would ever be on the table. Too much of Catholic theology is wrapped up in unexamined male entitlement. As Mary Hunt states it: If God is male, males must be gods. The idea that God has no gender never computes. The idea voiced by St Paul in Galatians that--There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus--has evolved to the point we no longer make distinctions between Jews and others and we no longer approve of slavery, but 2000 years later we still haven't gotten the last part. We still have huge distinctions in gender expectations and Catholicism still insists women are spiritual dependents rather than active agents in their own right.

I can easily believe the LCWR leadership when they write that their conversation was open and frank. I suspect that kind of conversation about women will continue all through the papacy of Francis and most likely beyond him. For me, I will be very happy if all he manages to do is close the Vatican Bank and institute meaningful collegiality because I suspect any change in the place of women is not coming from the top. It will come welling up through the bottom. Decentralization of Vatican authority can only help that bottom up change. So while the men still insist on their rightful place as coaches to the ladies, I do see a future in which this changes. And of course, this explains my observation from yesterday about why so many men hold coaching positions in women's highschool and college athletics--it sends a very real message about traditional male authority over women.

Things Are Changing Very Fast In The Worlds Of Gender And Marriage And This Will Be The Challenge Frances May Not Be Ready To Acknowledge In His Reforms

2013-04-14T12:44:00.000-06:00

Forty years ago I played on this same basketball court to a total crowd of maybe twenty.

I have to admit I am truly stunned with the accelerating change in attitudes about gay marriage. This might be a real-time example of the snowball phenomenon in which a small ball starts rolling down hill and becomes the catalyst for an avalanche. Or to put it differently, get enough effort behind an idea and once the collective consciousness reaches a certain point or critical mass, a chain reaction starts, change occurs, and there is no going back. There will be no going back on gay marriage.

I also have believed for a very long time that the real threat in gay marriage is it's implied gender equality, and that is a legacy of the women's movement. I look back on the women's movement and stand stupefied by the changes in some areas that have occurred just in my lifetime. Back in the early 70's I played basketball on the first team my high school ever had and followed that up by playing on the first team the college I graduated from ever had. I can honestly say I never envisioned women's collegiate basketball reaching the heights it now currently enjoys. And yet, I'm saddened to know that male coaches significantly out number female coaches on both the high school and college levels and I don't why that should be. That too, I never expected. So it seems women still have some more walking to do when it comes leadership roles, and this brings me to Pope Frances and his reforming the Church.

I have really been impressed with Francis in the opening days of his papacy. He has walked his talk and modeled a very different concept of clerical service from what has previously passed as normal in Rome. I have taken a great deal of hope in his sermons and actions--and I have also carried around a certain undefined nebulous angst that I couldn't identify. I think I've now identified my angst. I will not be at all surprised if women under Frances will be allowed to take a higher profile, to operate in more areas, but are never allowed to wield authority in the spiritual or temporal leadership of the Church. Women will be players, but never coaches. This is why I am very curious about what Frances will do with the LCWR situation. EPBXVI through the CDF essentially stated that sisters can play but they will no longer coach themselves. They have to live their respective charisms using the strategies chalked up for them by their male coaches. In Catholicism gender complementarity means women do not infringe on the leadership prerogatives of men. Women are not independent free agents, they are perpetual spiritual dependents.

Frances is going to have to face this gender issue because women no longer accept rigid gender definitions which assign them a dependent role without their consent. The change in gender definitions for women have by necessity changed the gender definitions for men. Younger men and women do not see gender in the same rigid terms as previous generations, and this means they see relationships differently. Marriage is no longer the first relational choice. More and more marriage is coming after children have appeared in the relationship. The dependency issue has evolved into interdependency as both genders work both inside and outside the home. Marriage has moved from mother and children dependent on father to children dependent on both parents with less differentiation in roles. Gay marriage is no threat to this kind of marriage, it only affirms it and this is one reason gay marriage is overwhelmingly accepted by younger generations. But here's the rub for Catholicism. This kind of gender equivalency in marriage carries with it a huge threat to patriarchal religious structures. It does so because neither gender is operating under those patriarchal definitions and reserving authority strictly to males makes no sense and will make even less sense to children raised in this kind of family.

A relational arrangement based in an equal interdependence is very different from one based in a dependent form of gender complementarity. If culture in general mirrors family arrangements then we can expect ever further changes in the culture. The question I have is whether Catholic theology can adapt to changing gender roles and responsibilities. So far the answer is a resounding "NO". That will have to change. The theology will have to adapt to the much larger increase in feminine input and leadership through out the culture. None of this is going to be easy for a Church which has traditionally been led exclusively by men and whose underlying theology is so dominated by male thinking and male analogies.

Unfortunately, I don't actually have a lot of hope in Pope Frances taking the Church very far down the road to gender equality, but I do have hope he takes the Church very far down the road in redefining male leadership and how it's expressed. That would be a bridge to more change in the future and that future could come much quicker than any of us expect. I certainly never thought I would live to see the day when women's college basketball drew the same sold out crowds the men's version does.

Pope Francis Is One Of The Simple People

2013-04-08T09:53:00.002-06:00

No more solo papal walks on the First Class deck of the Catholic Titanic for Pope Francis. He's commanding a different kind of papal barque.

One of the differences between Pope Francis and Emeritus Pope Benedict is their definition of 'simple people'. Francis sees 'simple people' as those living a simple less encumbered life, and teaches all should strive for that simplicity. EPBenedict seemed to see 'simple people' as less educated and less sophisticated than himself, and thought these people should be protected from people of similar education, sophistication, and intelligence, like Hans Kung and others. These were the people who didn't meet Benedict's criteria for properly formed Catholic intelligentsia. The following article from Vatican Insider really demonstrates the simplicity of Francis. Francis called a long time friend to wish him happy birthday and then drops the bomb shell about a planned December visit to Argentina. What are friends for other than to share news and views?

Francis: “I’m staying at St. Martha’s House because I don’t want to isolate myself"

ANDREA TORNIELLI - Vatican Insider - 4/5/2013
Pope Francis told a priest friend of his that he will be visiting Argentina in December and also explained why he has not moved in to the papal apartment, preferring to stay in the Domus Sanctae Marthae (St. Martha’s House), the Vatican residence where the 115 cardinal electors stayed during the Conclave. Francis likes dining with others, chatting and sharing news.

Francis telephoned Fr. Jorge Chichinzola, parish priest of the Church of Holy Martyrs in Posadas in the afternoon on Easter day. “He called me at 17:10 to wish me for my birthday. I guessed it was him straight away: sometimes he would call a day before to make sure the phone line was active. “How are you? he asked me.” Fr. Chichizola talked to radio LT4 Red Ciudadana about their conversation and said he had spoken to Bergoglio just a few hours before the Conclave started.

The Argentinean priest, who was ordained at the same time as the new Pope, said Francis confirmed he was going to visit Argentina next December and added that he “never forgets his friends.” But during last Sunday’s telephone call , Bergoglio talked to Fr. Jorge about his reasons for staying in St. Martha’s House. Francis “likes sitting down to table with others, chatting and sharing news. He doesn’t want to be isolated.” When they showed him the rooms in the papal apartment, he said: “This is too big for me.” “He also added that he was driving his escorts and security staff crazy because he likes getting close to people, but that now they are getting used to it,” Fr. Chichinzola said. (I suspect this means they have accepted the fact Francis is willing to entertain personal risk in order to be accessible to the faithful. There is no changing his mind.)

“He is a man who is not afraid of taking risks and will continue along his path. He told me that one of his security guards brought him a letter written by one of his children and he replied to it.”

The Pope’s words confirm the reasons that led to him deciding not to live in the papal apartment: Francis likes meeting people even at lunch and dinner time. He doesn’t like isolating himself.

*******************************************

I think the change in papal styles, and what those changes imply, is going to take some getting used to for all Catholics. In some respects Francis reminds me a lot of myself. To say I live a simple life style is an understatement and I do eat a lot my meals in a communal setting with some interesting and simple dinner companions. Yet on the other hand, I could also understand Pope Benedict's more solitary academic life style because that reflects part of me as well. On my days off I am very solitary and spend hours researching and writing. What my two lifestyles have taught me though, is that really effective evangelization is easier accomplished out and about, mingling with people and 'being' in a full and honest way my belief structures. I don't necessarily live all my academic interests, but they do influence my conversation and 'being'.

Most of us don't actually get to fashion an ideal world for ourselves that let's us live our comfort level. Most of humanity has to adapt to external circumstances and try to make those circumstances comfortable. Francis has gone out of his way to provide some comfort for people in really trying circumstances. He has made the comfort of the Church of the Poor as available to as many people as he could. Living as he does has most certainly helped the authenticity of his effort. It would be hard to substitute spiritual wealth for material wealth if he himself was living in the lap of luxury. "Easy for him to say" would be the truthful if cynical view of that kind of faith expression. It really does help to live the talk, maybe especially if it is by personal choice, not forced circumstances. I am well aware that I have had the freedom to choose to live simpler. I have not always lived simply. I am also well aware that part of that choice was directly predicated by a desire to remove a lot of stress, and not necessarily because I wanted to live a life more closely aligned with the Gospels. I can also report that having done so, it is easier to live a life more closely aligned to the Gospels. The Way not only makes spiritual sense, it's provides for less stress and that's always a good and healthy thing.

Pope Benedict also lived a pretty simple life, but not in the same way as Francis. Benedict's idea of a simple life meant paring down the interests he pursued. I have no doubt he could have lived in a monastic cell and been quite happy--as long as he had access to a really good library, really good music, and a close cadre of fellow academics. I could lose everything I own except my computer and internet access because they give access to an incredible library, good music, baseball and hockey coverage, and the ability to communicate with lots of other people and opinions. Give me a computer and an Internet card and I could live in a cave--as long as it had running water and enclosed plumbing. Unfortunately for Pope Benedict, his cave was pretty opulent. It's very opulence necessitated other people tasked with maintaining it's opulence. It made it too easy to define 'simple' people in a quite different way from Francis. History will never record Pope Benedict as a 'populist' pope, and I firmly believe Benedict would personally be appalled if his papacy were ever to be described as such. His was a papacy for the refined, not the shanties.

EPBenedict would have never announced a major visit to his native country without going through the proper diplomatic channels. He may have told his brother beforehand but his brother would have stayed silent. It's just not done. Pope Franics however, had no problem with announcing his upcoming visit to Argentina in the most natural way for him, via a phone call to a long time friend. That's the way it's done when friends and family matter more than protocol, and that may be the singular message of this papacy. Friends and family matter more than protocol. Life is meant to be lived simply but does not mean those living it simply are simple. Jesus may have lived simply, but I don't think anyone who has studied the Gospels would call Him simple. Or to put it differently, the Barque of Peter is no longer the Titanic. It's to be a barque with deck chairs and life preservers for everyone.

Jesus and Gender and Men and Women Behaving In A Good Way

2013-04-07T17:33:00.000-06:00

Not exactly the image usually associated with Divine Mercy Sunday. It's just my favorite icon of feminine service and protection.

For a very long time now I have believed that the so called 'pelvic' issues are not primarily about biology or abuse of procreative sexuality. They are about maintaining rigid definitions of gender behavior and identity, and this is so because maintaining these gender definitions maintain patriarchy and the status quo of the social structure derived from patriarchy. At a fundamental level this gendering is core to much of Catholic theology.

I had one spiritual teacher who ruminated on both his Native and Catholic upbringing and he came to the conclusion that core to Jesus' teachings were to bring men to an understanding of their full potential as humans, to get them to transcend their ideas of what it meant to be male. Concurrently, the same was true of women, which is why Jesus treated his male and female disciples pretty much the same. Each was capable of learning what He taught, and each needed different parables to bring home that point because each gender definition had their unique deficiencies. He said in his own Native tradition ceremonies had been developed to do pretty much the same thing. That was why the Sundance was at first strictly a male ceremony about offering blood to Mother Earth to facillitate creative generation. Women did not have to do such a thing because they did it through child birth and menses as part of their inherent nature. Women were also more directly connected to the spiritual which is why male medicine men rarely took on female apprentices. Male training was more physically taxing because it took more to breakdown male barriers to communication with the unseen spirit world. Why, sometimes men had to be taken to the threshold of death before they let go of their barriers. He laughed and said it was a real case of having to almost 'die to live' type of situation. Women weren't that pigheaded and if they paid attention to their intuition they would discover they didn't need rigid training or apprenticing because the spirit world would provide it. For him being a woman would have been a much easier path to spiritual things because he himself was one of those men who had to almost die before he found that life.

I offer that last as a context for how I understand some of what Francis said in his Angelus talk on women and their witness to the Resurrection. I offer an extract of that talk from NCR coverage:

...."The women are driven by love and know how to accept this proclamation with faith: they believe, and immediately transmit it, they do not keep it for themselves… In the professions of faith of the New Testament, only men are remembered as witnesses of the Resurrection, the Apostles, but not the women. This is because, according to the Jewish Law of the time, women and children were not considered reliable, credible witnesses.”

“In the Gospels, however, - Bergoglio continued - women have a primary, fundamental role. Here we can see an argument in favour of the historicity of the Resurrection: if it were a invented, in the context of that time it would not have been linked to the testimony of women. Instead, the evangelists simply narrate what happened: the women were the first witnesses. This tells us that God does not choose according to human criteria: the first witnesses of the birth of Jesus are the shepherds, simple and humble people, the first witnesses of the Resurrection are women. This is beautiful.” (Francis would have been more accurate if he had said "God does not choose according to 'male' criteria."

“This is the mission of women, of mothers and women, to give witness to their children and grandchildren that Christ is Risen! Mothers go forward with this witness! What matters to God is our heart, if we are open to Him, if we are like trusting children. But this also leads us to reflect on how in the Church and in the journey of faith, women have had and still have a special role in opening doors to the Lord, in following him and communicating his face, because the eyes of faith always need the simple and profound look of love. The Apostles and disciples find it harder to believe in the Risen Christ, not the women however,” Bergoglio said.

Women certainly do have a special role in opening doors to the Lord and to the messengers of the Lord. That role is first and foremost about love and how love is at the core of creation. It is about how service to creation is the proper way in which to relate to the unseen forces of love which guide and under-gird our reality. This kind of service is not the submissive service we normally think of when we hear stories about women's 'work'. It is very active, but in a different way. It's centered in 'being' a fully competent human. That's why I've always found the statues of Mary standing on a globe with her foot on the serpent to be a very powerful statement. When it comes to serving and protecting creation, the feminine principle rules, not because it's passive, but because it's patient and measured. When action is necessary it is targeted, relentless, and final.

Over on the blog A Seat at the Table, there is a current post is about Sr Sandra Schneider's lastest biblical work entitled Women and the Word. This post dovetails nicely with Francis' talk. Sr Schneider also makes an observation very similar to my Native teacher, that Jesus' teachings went directly to the limits of gender definitions:

.....The [other] conclusion which flows from our reflections on the gender of God and the sex of Jesus is that both men and women are called to conversion. Men are challenged by Jesus to reject the cultural definition of masculinity as well as the patriarchal structures and behaviors which flow from it. In Jesus they have the assurance that there is another, and truly redemptive, way to be a man. Women are challenged to develop a renewed sense of themselves as adult children of God made in the divine image, as sisters and friends of Jesus who have put on Christ and who are called and empowered to represent Christ in Church and society....

Pope Francis may not agree completely with Sr Schneider's or my Native teacher, but he is modeling a masculine way of handling great power which is not usual for most men. It is however, the way Jesus taught men would need to handle power in order to stay congruent with the Father's will. I sincerely hope Francis keeps stressing this understanding of male servant leadership and puts the 'pelvic and gender' issues on the very back burner. It would give culture warriors pause and allow others to find a better path for gender expression. One less enslaved to ideas that may be great for maintaining the status quo, but are in fact, very limiting to one's spiritual path.