Celebrating Our Religious Freedom

The following letter (italics) was recently submitted to a conservative Roman Catholic U.S. website in an honest effort to gain some insight on several distinct politically motivated issues.  Whether or not you agree with the viewpoints in this letter is not the issue.  Nor is a question of who is right and who is wrong about the various issues facing many Roman Catholics today.  What is of concern is that so many adult Christians seem to submit to the opinion of others rather than searching their own hearts through the gifts of the Holy Spirit which they received following the Sacrament of Confirmation. Surely God’s gift of faith is unique to each individual and can only be celebrated when we learn to trust directly in our hearts rather than by simply abrogating this gift to others?  To do so will only lead to a continued and destructive form of co-dependency. Remember God accepts us where we are - not where others would have us be.          

I am a relatively new Catholic (2 years confirmed on May 1, so please be patient with me), and am running into some confusion over the correct balance between obedience to the Bishops and where prudential judgment comes into play when it comes to the matter of finding political solutions to problems. I tend to run into Catholics, either in person or online, who fall into one of two categories: (a) Everything the Bishop says or supports is 100% gospel truth and you are not Catholic if you don't automatically jump on the bandwagon of whatever the Bishop is promoting right now, and (b) Everything the Bishop says is just a suggestion and you can make your own judgment about these things. Position B is obviously wrong. No question in my mind on that one. But where I am confused is on Position A and to what degree we are to submit our own logic and reason to the opinion of the Bishop on political matters when you disagree with the manner of implementation of our moral principles. I was under the impression that the Church and the Bishops are to teach the moral principles that should undergird our solutions, but that the actual work of solving these problems falls to the laity and implementation itself is a matter of prudential judgment so long as we are working within the boundaries of those moral teachings. I've read quite a few things lately that suggest (or flat-out say) that this is wrong and that we are supposed to submit ourselves to whatever the Bishops think on matters of implementation.

Now, for me issues such as abortion and SSM are no- brainers. The Bishops teach that intentionally killing an unborn person is wrong. Therefore abortion must always be wrong because it is the intentional killing of an unborn person.That's a pretty direct correlation. Same thing for the issue of same-sex unions. But when it comes to other political matters I get very confused.

For example (and this is only one of many I could give), the current illegal immigration debate. The Bishops have lent their support to the current "comprehensive" bill. Now as far as the morals undergirding their position, I agree completely that all people have intrinsic value and should be treated with dignity and respect. So I can agree that we should not be kicking down doors and dragging kids out of their parents arms and I also agree that no entity should interfere with the Church's ability to minister to people, regardless of their status.

But when it comes to supporting this bill, I have issues. First, I don't think it's a good idea to do "comprehensive" anything. Look at Obama-care for the prime example of the kind of gigantic mess these types of bill cause. There are also, historically, lots of awful little surprises tucked into these type of bills that come back to bite us eventually and has we known that x was snuck in there we might not have supported it. In this particular bill it's just come out that there is a biometric database of all US citizens that would be implemented if the bill passes and is signed into law. Hello, Big Brother! Second, I would rather this be done in pieces and in the daylight- instead of in back rooms between "gangs" where who knows who is even writing these bills, and we all know no one reads them- so we can see what is actually passing, and make sure it is actually implemented.

So I guess my question is am I a bad Catholic because I would see this problem be solved in pieces instead of defaulting to the "comprehensive" position of the Bishops? I have these same views on a lot of other subjects as well. Economics and the reach and role of government are other areas in which I struggle with their conclusions. I agree with the moral premises that the Bishops teach us (keeping the well being of the poor front and center) but I disagree with the various methods of implementations that they endorse and I think that some of what they endorse does not help the poor in the long term and undermines our position and our charitable mission in communities and the lives of individuals. Is is OK for me to see the implementation part a different way or does that make me a bad Catholic or a cafeteria Catholic?

Sorry to write a book for you. But I truly want to be loyal to the teachings of Our Lord and His Church and in this area I am really struggling to see things clearly.

Thanks so much for your time!

Again, as a reminder, you may not agree with the writer’s position on some of the issues, but he/she has every right and duty under canon law, to express them without fear of condemnation.  My sole purpose in bringing this matter to the fore is to ask ‘why, as adults, does your religious institution not teach us to rely on our unique gift of the Holy Spirit?’   

“But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you.”  John 14:26

 
Roman Catholic adults should be encouraged to trust in their hearts, the place where their treasure lies. See also 1 Corinthians 13:11. All Church teachings and other trusted teachers who understand this can be helpful, but until such time that we have come to rely on ‘the God within’ we probably have not learned to trust in God as well as our hearts.

For those who feel they must obey church teachings or have difficulty accepting them remember that Vatican II established for the first time in church’s history, that an informed conscience will always take primacy over any church teachings.  As such Roman Catholics are asked to discover the depths of their own conscience. To obey one’s conscience is the very dignity of the human person; according to it the human person will be judged. See Pastoral Constitution of the Church in the Modern World n. 16 and the Declaration on Religious Freedom, nn. 2,3,14.

Great spiritual teachers, be they bishops, deacons, Popes, etc. will always tell you “except for our Creator we as adults cannot expect others to direct or be responsible for our spiritual growth and development.

Addendum August 26, 2013:

Freedom

Jesus’ notion of the Kingdom is a different understanding of freedom than that of most religious and secular leaders today. We think of freedom as not having to do what we don’t want to do, but divine freedom is the capacity to be fully who we already are, to develop our inherent and true nature, as much as possible—really wanting to do what we know we have to do. Only God can create that freedom inside of us. Love can only proceed from such inner freedom. A mustard seed, yeast, and light—that all develop from within—are some of Jesus’ central metaphors for this freedom-loving Reign of God. Paul just calls it “grace.” For him grace and freedom are almost the same thing (see Ephesians 2:7-10, Galatians 5:1). And I would add to that “heaven.” Freedom, grace, and heaven are the same thing.

Secular freedom only creates individualists and private freedom, but not a society. It never gets around to the common good, which is a central principle of the Gospel and Catholic social teaching, which instead demands from you and demands for others—while ironically giving you all that you really need. Then you become who you most deeply and truly are, a member of a family, a neighborhood, a society, and a planet. If you are trying to “go to heaven” alone or on your own merits, you are preparing for a place other than heaven. - Fr. Richard Rohr, OFM

 

   

 

 

Is God a Conservative or Liberal?

A recent National Catholic Reporter editorial (Feb. 18,2010) asks the question "are liberals dying or hiding?" Furthermore it states "The proposition that liberal Catholicism is dying has been offered from time to time, for decades now, often in a way that reminds one of the schoolyard scuffler more interested in the fight than in any point being made."

The ongoing tension between liberal and conservative Catholics continues to be seen as a threat to the entire institution by some camps. In what should be seen as a healthy approach to spiritual growth as well as promoting mutual understanding is becoming a battle ground for determining 'who is in and who is out!'. Many conservatives have suggested to their counterparts that they cannot be considered true members of the faith and should therefore leave the Church as soon as possible. Fear not that liberals always avoid being equally abrasive or inflexible in their opinions.

So, for the benefit of both I am prepared to lay bare where I stand on some of the issues that challenge the Catholic Church (and many other religions) today. Should I therefore consider myself a dangerous heretic and/or dissenter of the faith if I think a Catholic is someone that:

• joyfully embraces the spirit and vision of Vatican II
  

• continues to search for God in all humankind and creation
  

• never stops asking questions about his/her faith
  

• risks & looks for God beyond established dogma and doctrine and Tradition
  

• trusts the God within
  

• often 'misses the mark'
  

• believes in a God who does not punish and loves all unconditionally
  

• shares the belief that Jesus did not found a church but rather a way of life!
  

• is dedicated to ministering in his community including gays.
  

• believes in equal justice for both women and men in Church leadership
  

• believes that spiritual growth requires 'letting go' and 'letting God'.
  

• challenges the institution to find our unknowable God in and beyond the traditional understandings
  

• recognizes Satan, the devil, etc., not as a separate entity, but as the False-Self or Ego.
  

• understands 'pro-life' to mean life from the Alpha to the Omega
  

• we must not judge people, especially on such divisive issues as abortion/euthanasia, etc., because we have not walked in their shoes.
  

• fears change; but realizes that change is necessary if we are to accept God's ongoing creation and our role in it.
  

• none of the world's religions have the 'corner on the faith market', but all have a purpose and contribution to make under God's plan
  

• the Church has not yet learned the truth behind the dark periods of religious history and the suffering it brought to humankind.
  

• needs to discard judgment with Christ's compassion and understanding
  

• puts God's gift of human potential before human failings
  

Finally, I believe everyone should be free to to add their own personal and unique view on these issues. Bearing in mind that we cannot possibly expect everyone to agree in perfect harmony with one another. Each person's faith journey will take a different or unique path - as was evident for the many saints and believers in our Church. A Church alive is a church engaged in dialogue (not monologue) with all its members. A Church alive recognizes that matters of faith and belief are based on diversity not a some kind of forced institutional idea of unity. The latter has resulted in much religious passivity. If we cannot agree with each other we must at least learn to love one another.

On Change

To live is to change, and to be perfect is to change often - John Henry Newman

If there is one sure challenge we all face, beyond taxes and death, it is change. However, if there is one thing we all resist it is change. When religion talks about change it usually affirms that God never changes. When we give assent to this statement it is important to remember however, that it is our understanding of God that must change and be allowed to grow and expand. What we understood about God as children, will not and cannot serve us as adults. And so change for humanity is not only inevitable but totally necessary if we wish to grow into healthy spiritual beings.

Any religion that refuses to accept change on the basis that this is what our father’s taught us, and so on, is a religion that is still based on fear. When we read scripture and doctrine for the purpose of interpreting who or what is right and wrong, it is merely being used as a legal or historical document. Such limited views may introduce more doubt and fear. Fear to experience God who exists outside time and space. Fear to allow God to do what He does best. Fear to move into the unknown. Fear to embrace an ever expanding universe. The great litmus test for interpreting scripture and religious doctrine for me is ‘does it move me to Oneness’? Or does it cause me to feel separate from my neighbour? Any religion that espouses separation from its neighbours must be acting out of fear and suspicion. We have to learn to trust in God who will reveal our Oneness with the world. This for most of us this may require a quantum leap in change and understanding. But God is patient – change does not have to happen overnight – that’s we he gave us ‘time’!

Change can make us profoundly uncomfortable. Especially when it relates to religious issues. For example just this week the Vatican announced that they would welcome all disenfranchised Anglican priests to their flock. This offer was specifically aimed at celibate Anglican priest who are unhappy at women bishops and with the acceptance of homosexual clergy being introduced into the Church of England. It is interesting to note that during this same week a religious leader of note remarked that if the question regarding the role of women in the church, homosexuality were so important Jesus would have expounded on them not just once but again and again. Are these questions merely a matter of accepting change or do we feel we need to fight all God’s battles for him?

Religious traditionalist/fundamentalist usually resist change. Why? Because its supporters believe that since God does not change than neither should they. At the same time it helps to solidify their particular brand of doctrine. After all they will readily announce, “our religion has always maintained that . . . . .” and so on. Admittedly, we all tend to derive some degree of comfort out of fixed continuity. And when that continuity is disturbed or taken away we may even experience temporary feelings of insecurity or fear. Hence we will try to get back to that illusory space or time where we last experienced feelings of security and comfort. Rather than resist should we not ask ‘where is the gift in this”? As God’s creation is an ongoing thing so too we are called forward. This requires change. But we need not fear change. Change under God’s direction is filled with promise and salvation. It is a promise of healing, forgiveness, peace and un ending joy. All we have to do is be open to change.

On June 15, 2005 The Catholic New Times published the following article on the question of change:

When three Canadian Catholic cardinals recently returned from Rome, following the election of Pope Benedict XVI, Marc Cardinal Ouellet publicly responded to the question of change in the Vatican. "If there needs to be change, it needs to be in the world, not in the doctrine."



Compare this response to the following quote from Fr. Diarmuid O'Murchu in his book Quantum Theology. "Where religions have failed most dismally is in their perception and understanding of the world, which they all tend to dismiss as an inferior, ungodly, and transitory reality. This cosmology goes right back to the Agricultural Revolution, which projected the original mechanistic image that the world was an object to be conquered and .controlled. Adopting this worldview, the religions concocted a self-inflationary, eschatological myth, whereby the world would come to nothing and the religions themselves would triumph. What was intended to be an instrument of God became a god in its own right; religion became an outrageous form of idolatry."


Place these two quotes against the recent warnings from the UN on the state of our global environment ." An estimated 60 per cent of the ecosystems that support life on earth. Fresh water, fisheries and the atmosphere--are quickly being degraded and depleted. They are not expected to last past 2050."


If one takes the time to read O'Murchu's book one will quickly recognize that serious change in church doctrine is not only necessary but essential. Again Fr. Diarmuid states: "Instead of trying to conquer and eliminate the negative, we [must] try to comprehend (not distance) and appreciate its complementary role for the positive."


As God's co-creators, we share an equal and awesome responsibility to bring about those changes. For some, change may require a quantum leap in faith. Remember however, faith is never static and change is the very dynamic of the Holy Spirit.


O'Murchu brilliantly illustrates how 'collective sins' have lead to destructive 'systems' which prevent us from seeing our connectiveness to the world, and indeed the universe. How can we begin to realize our common God given responsibilities if we say: you need to change not us? It is only when we begin to see the bigger picture that we will be better prepared to accept God's universal plan for salvation. O'Murchu goes on to say that "Once we begin to understand and internalize the sacredness of life from within--ourselves, our planet, and our universe--then the classical academic search for an external agent may become quite irrelevant."


Is the Vatican ready for change?

This article was also later published in ‘Online Catholics', an independent Australian e journal under my name.


There are those who refuse to accept change and those who accept change as part of our evolutionary growth especially as it applies to spirituality. A Church that does not change cannot hope to serve those who live in the reality of the present. God the Creator of the ever expanding Universe meets us where we are today, not yesterday, not tomorrow but here in this Holy Instant. Salvation does not change our past, nor does it make promises for tomorrow, it is here in the moment.

"When we pray for miracles and nothing happens could it be because we did not want to accept change?"

"Seek not to change the world, but choose to change your mind about the world." A Course in Miracles