Why the Roman Catholic Church is failing its people

Empty church pews

Religious News Service reported on November 19^th that prominent U.S. evangelicals Russell Moore and Rick Warren blasted the sexual revolution at a Vatican conference Tuesday (Nov. 18) and stated it is destroying the institution of marriage.  See details of article here,

What an incredible indictment this article is about institutional religion. The Catholic Church with a historically dismal record on ecumenism has suddenly found two sympathetic soul mates in fundamentalist preachers by the name of Russell Moore and Rick Warren.

If the Vatican was genuinely interested in solidifying the 'institution of marriage' and the family why does it not consult the laity?  If the ‘institution of marriage’ appears to going downhill according to the experts why was the laity not consulted in preparation for the recent Synod on the Family? If we are indeed living in a culture obsessed with sex then yesterday’s religious experts have failed the laity miserably. And perhaps no one failed more in this area than the institution itself on the matter of sexual abuse of children.  Part of the failure must be attributed to the very unhealthy, outdated and damaging teachings on sexuality from the Roman Catholic Church itself.  Take for example the teachings on homosexuality, masturbation, inVitro Fertilization, the use of condoms and other means of birth control, celibacy, etc., one would think like St. Augustine, that human sexuality was not a gift from God but from the devil.  Why would anyone consult a group of celibate men to describe what sexuality and marriage should mean to a modern family?  What about family life itself?  Most families today require that both parents work in order to meet the monthly bills to pay for inflated mortgages, transportation costs, while raising children among staggering education costs.  What do celibate men know about these daily challenges?  Experience is still and only the best teacher.

Instead of condemning families and their sexual behaviour meet families where they are – not where religious institutions would have them be.  For a small minority to hide behind much needed changes on homosexuality (which has long since been identified by ALL major medical institutions as a hormonal issue) is a betrayal upon its victims.  While the Bible does offer its readers warnings about sexual deviation it has nothing to say about homosexuality any more then it has to say about inVitro Fertilization.

Survey after survey suggests that more than 90% of people believe in God.  Thus It should be obvious to religious institutions particularly the Roman Catholic Church that the reason why so many have left the church it is because they no longer believe in an institution that does not listen to them.  

Religious leaders have yet to learn not to denounce people from their self appointed empirical position and instead climb down from that misplaced ladder and like Jesus learn to dine with and be with the sinner.     

Synod on the Family Fail II

What a few Bishops at the Synod for the Family may have missed:

       




"Church leaders should carry out their tasks as a whole not hierarchically but competently, not bureaucratically but creatively, not with regard to their office but with regard to men; they should summon up the courage to involve themselves more with people than with the institution; they should provide for more democracy, autonomy, humanity among all ranks in the Church and strive for better collaboration between clergy and laity.

        Bishops especially should not be appointed for their conformity by secret procedures in the style of Roman absolutism (with the “papal secret” secured by oaths,) but should be elected for a limited time in the light of the needs of the diocese concerned by representatives bodies of the clergy and laity.

        The Pope too, if he claims to be more than Bishop of Rome and Primate of Italy, should be elected by a body consisting of bishops and laypeople which-unlike the college of cardinals, nominated solely by the Pope-which would be representative of the whole Church, not only the different nations, but especially the different mentalities and generations.

        
“Priests” (leaders of congregations and also of dioceses), in the light of the freedom that the Gospel assures them on this point, should decide – each according to his personal vocation – whether they want to marry or not.

        “Laypeople” (parishes and dioceses) should have the right, not merely to offer advice, but also share with their leaders in a well-balanced system with spheres of authority clearly marked out (checks and balances); they should exercise the right to object whenever Jesus himself would raise an objection.

        Women should have at least that dignity, freedom and responsibility in the Church which they are guaranteed in modern society; equal rights in canon law, in the Church’s decision making bodies, and also practical opportunities of studying theology and being ordained.

        In questions of morality and a new slavery set up (in the Church); in particular there should be understanding in the light of the Gospel for a new attitude to sexuality, remembering that the younger generation can find more ways than one of maintaining purity of heart.

        The question of birth control, even by artificial methods, should be left to the married parties to decide conscientiously in the light of medical, psychological and social criteria; the leaders in the Catholic Church should revise the present teaching (the encyclical Humanae Vitae on this point.

        And so on.  The fulfilment of these and similar desiderata must be vigorously demanded and fought for until it is achieved; for the sake of the people who suffer from the present unhappy state of affairs in the Church.

        We must not be silent.  The requirements of the Gospel and the need and hopes of our time are in many outstanding questions so unambiguous that silence out of opportunism, lack of courage or superficiality can involve guilt just as much as the silence of many responsible people at the time of Reformation."

Decision for the Church, Hans Kűng, On being a Christian, (1978)

Finally, it should be noted that had the three controversial topics been dealt with on a more democratic vs theocratic basis (requiring a 2/3^rd. majority),  all items would have comfortable passed. Note results as follows:

Topic                                     Voting results 

Remarried (some)                  104 in favour  74 voted against

Divorced/remarried                112 in favour and 54 were against.

Gays/same-sex marriage        118 in favour and 62 against

For details on these topics see my previous blog here.

Earlier (Sep. 10/14) Fr. Thomas Reese SJ. warned readers of the National Catholic Reporter that the make-up of Synod of Bishops on the family would be a disappointment to those hoping for reform of the Curia and for those who hoped that the laity would be heard.  The details  can be read here.  

Later, when it seemed that the Synod would fail to reach a consensus the bishops in attendance introduced the unusual word 'graduality' as a means of resolving the matter of sexual and medical ethics . According to the bishops  giving emphasis to the concept of 'graduality' was a way of thinking about morality that allows for human imperfection without compromising ideals.  What the word 'graduality' actually means left even some of the clerical experts confounded.  Most ended up suggesting it meant 'we will get it better next time'!  

Update Oct. 31/2014

Its hard to change the Church a further reflection on the synod.    

Who Elects A New Pope ?

Who shall elect a Pope?  Most certainly not those who have found the God within, who is always available 24/7 and speaks directly to our heart.  Why settle for ‘a representative’ who has no direct interest in your welfare and only communicates via complex and confusing documents.

 

Do Catholics have a say in who they want as leader of their particular religion?  The answer is a definitive ‘yes’ simply based on Jesus’ teachings!   However, in reality many Roman Catholics understand otherwise. The following article by  Matthew Fox from his book ‘The Pope’s War’ (2011) may help us discover or re-discover who and how a leader of the Catholic church may hopefully be selected in the future.   

“The late and esteemed Father Bede Griffith wrote a fine article on the true meaning of "magisterium," (the teaching authority of the church) saying: "Many people today think that the magisterium consists of the pope, and the Roman Curia, but this is mistaken. 'Magisterium' comes from the Latin magister, a master, and sig­nifies authority to teach. Strictly speaking there is only one such authority in the Church and that is the Holy Spirit whom Jesus promised to his disciples to 'lead men into all truth.'" He goes on to name four "organs of the magisterium" including the pope and the Roman Curia, which deals with day-to-day administration of the church; the second is the bishops. The pope is "subordinate to the authority of the bishops in communion with the pope who constitute the magisterium properly speaking. This was made clear at the Second Vatican Council." The third organ is the "periti" or expert theologians who advised the bishops. "In a sense it is to the theologians that the word magisterium properly applies, since a theo­logian is a master of sacred doctrine, who has been commissioned to teach theology in the name of the Church."

But the "most important" organ of the magisterium is the laity, "the people (laos)God . . . Strictly speaking, it is the laity, the people of God, who constitute the Church, while popes, bishops and priests are 'minis­ters' chosen from among the laity and commissioned by the Holy Spirit to act in the name of the Church." The whole church is called "a holy nation, a royal priesthood," and all members of the church share equally in the gift of the Holy Spirit The idea that authority comes from above, from the pope and the bishops, is not the ideal of the church as found in the New Testament. Such a "command structure" smacks much more of the Soviet Union than of New Testament church. Popes and bishops "are respon­sible to the laity, the people of God, for their teaching and their actions. Just as the pope has no authority apart from the bishops, so the pope and the bishops have no authority apart from the people from whom they are chosen and whom they represent."

Bede wrote these words at the time of the collapse of the Berlin Wall. His prayer was that Eastern Europeans' newly found freedom might also extend to the Roman Catholic Church. Cardinal John Henry Newman, who has recently received the dubious honor of being named a saint by the same organization that called Escriva a saint, would very much sup­port this analysis of teaching authority in the church. Newman said this about the papacy in his day: "It is anomaly and bears no good fruit. He [the pope] becomes a god, has no one to contradict him, does not know facts, and does cruel things without meaning it." He called the papacy of Pius IX a "climax of tyranny" that was heretical, and decried the fact that an "extreme centralization . . . now is in use." Newman believed the laity should participate fully in the life of the church, and when a bishop objected he said: "The church would look foolish without them." Newman favored individual conscience over groupthink and blind obedience.”

 

Both John Paul II and Benedict XVI were instrumental in developing policies that centralized the control of more than a billion Roman Catholics under the rule of the Vatican.When Benedict ignored collegiality by transferring the power of bishops to the Cardinals he immediately lost and avoided the voice or cry of the people. The role previously assigned to our bishops.So it is now that a select group of cardinals, sworn to be totally obedient to the Pope, are to select a new leader of the Roman Catholic institution.While we may hear that the Conclave is surrounded by the Holy Spirit while they cast their votes, the laity is certainly not less endowed with the same Holy Spirit which they received during their Sacrament of Confirmation.

 

Under the influence of a living but retired Pope our Cardinals are under enormous pressure to elect an individual who will ‘carry on business as usual’. And indeed it may require one more Pope to bring the involvement of the laity out of this antiquantied process. Today more and more educated Catholics understand that when Jesus spoke in parables he was talking about a kingdom (here on earth) that reflected upside down values where the least would be first and the first would be last.         

 

Links: 

CNN News:  http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/06/world/europe/vatican-pope-selection/index.html

      

 

 

College of Cardinals and Vatican II

Cardinal Collins receives red hat

The College of Cardinals, a group of approximately 120 members (as we know them today) has a relatively short history in the Roman Catholic Church.  As part of the ecclesiastical reforms of the eleventh century, the bishops and priests who were cardinals gained increased significance and became a collegial body under Pope Nicholas II.  

The College of Cardinals has become increasingly influential in the church.  Pope John Paul II expanded their role by calling on them – and not the Synod of Bishops – for advice and counsel on certain key issues, like church finances and the child abuse crisis.  More importantly it is this group that holds the exclusive and political right to elect the next pope. 

At Vatican II the decline of monarchy and the democratic ethos prompted the rediscovery of a traditional Christian conviction: every member of the church is fundamentally equal in dignity, destiny and rights.  Vatican II reclaimed this truth and wanted to infuse the church’s life and thinking.  So the Council re-framed the roles of the Pope, bishops and priests from superiority to service.  This concept remains most vigorously opposed by the present hierarchy.  Pope Benedict XVI refuses to recognize that it is the laity, the most numerous body of the church and rightfully recognized by Vatican II as the ‘People of God’, have an equal role to play in the spiritual and political direction of the church. In that sense the Catholic hierarchy including The College of Cardinals therefore usurps the right of the laity to take part in the church’s future.

Cardinal's Oath

I [name and surname], Cardinal of the Holy Roman Church, promise and swear to be faithful henceforth and forever, while I live, to Christ and his Gospel, being constantly obedient to the Holy Roman Apostolic Church, to Blessed Peter in the person of the Supreme Pontiff Benedict XVI, and of his canonically elected Successors; to maintain communion with the Catholic Church always, in word and deed; not to reveal to any one what is confided to me in secret, nor to divulge what may bring harm or dishonor to Holy Church; to carry out with great diligence and faithfulness those tasks to which I am called by my service to the Church, in accord with the norms of the law.
So help me Almighty God.

[Translation by Zenit.]

The recent display of opulence at the Vatican surrounding the election of 22 new Cardinals flies in the face of world wide poverty and the promise to uphold the 'preferential option for the poor'.  

Anyone who thinks that the church’s hierarchy is simply a body that exists primarily to benefit the people it serves relinquishes their most important role and responsibility as Christians to serve the world community in the manner portrayed by Jesus Christ .  Under Canon Law all Catholics are called to share in this responsibility as follows:

•     All Catholics have the right to follow their informed consciences in all matters (Canon 748,1).

• Officers of the church have the right to teach on all matters both of private and public morality only after wide consultation with the faithful prior to the formulation (C.212,C747,C749,C752,C774.1).

• All Catholics have the right to engage in any activity that does not infringe on the rights of others: e.g. they have the right to freedom of speech, freedom of the press and freedom of association (C.212,C.215,C.223)

• All Catholics have the right of access to all information possessed by Church authorities concerning the former's spiritual and temporal welfare, provided such access does not infringe on the rights of others (C.218,C.221,C.223,C.1287).

• All Catholics have the right in a voice in all decisions that affect hem including the choosing of their leaders. All Catholics have the right to have their leaders accountable to them. (C492,C.1287).
• All Catholics have the right to form voluntary associations to pursue Catholic aims, including the right to worship together, such associations have the right to decide on their own rules of governance (C.215, C.299,C.300,C.305,C.309).

·       All Catholics have the right to express publicly their dissent in regard to decisions made by church authorities (C212,C.218,C.753).

• All Catholics have the right while being mindful of Gospel norms to follow whatever paths will enhance their life in Christ; that is their self-realization as unique human beings created by God. They also have the right to guidance that will foster authentic human living both on a personal level and in relation to their communities and the world (C.213).

• All Catholics regardless of race, age, nationality or sex and sexual orientation, state of life or social position have the right to receive all the sacraments for which they are adequately prepared (C.213, C.843).
• All Catholics have the right to have church office holders foster a sense of community. (C.369).

     Since the College of Cardinals and Bishops must swear an oath of fidelity and obedience to the Pope and his Successors its political implications cannot be avoided.  The ever increasing tension between those who want to hold on to Tradition as it existed before Vatican II and those of the ‘Sensus Fidelium’ who visualize and desire a community  that moves and speaks to their struggles and concerns in the present.  This tension is being escalated by a hierarchy that is simply built on power and control.