Showing posts with label reform. Show all posts
Showing posts with label reform. Show all posts

Friday, 15 March 2013

Vatican III - an Option to Real Reform


 
Now that the election of a new Pope has been resolved we can perhaps focus on the future of the Roman Catholic Church.  David Perlich reporting today for the Canadian Broadcasting Corp. summarized the situation well when he stated “Pope Francis has accepted an enormous burden. He's the leader of a Roman Catholic Church beset with grave challenges. Amongst them: a dysfunctional curial government culture, a church whose reputation has been plagued by scandal and questions over its relevance in the modern world and the everyday lives of Catholics.”  At this point Catholics should ask is it fair or reasonable that one man, the Pope, should be burdened with such a huge problem and be expected to bring about the necessary reform"?  
It might surprise some to learn from Hans Küng and his scholarly work ‘Christianity – Essence, History and Future’ (2002)  “the great ecumenical reform Council of Constance which met from 1414 to 1418 declared: the council is above the Pope. The gathering understood itself to be a general council [like Vatican II] legitimately assembled in the Holy Spirit, representing the whole church.  Its authority was directly bestowed by Christ, and everyone, even the Pope, had to obey it: in matters of faith, the abolition of the schism and church reform.  Anyone – even if this should be the Pope – who refused to obey the commands and resolutions of this council and any legitimate ecumenical council on the points mentioned was to be duly punished.  This was a clear defeat for the Roman curial system, which had taken the Catholic Church of the West to the edge of the abyss.  Authority in the church does not lie in a monarch but in the church itself, of which the Pope is the servant not the master.”
Küng tell us that the Council of Constance, while still normative, was amazingly soon replaced by the restoration of papal absolutism.   One can easily see its implications on papal authority or power; which was only further advanced by endowing the power of infallibility on a Pope,  as decreed by the First Vatican Council at Rome in 1869.   Summarizing Küng’s views on this important fact:
  • The papacy has increasingly become an institution of power
  • The papacy developed more and more power structures by adopting highly developed Roman jurisprudence and imperial legal practise [note the current Catechism & canon law]
  • The papacy has preserved the trappings of power and control
Accordingly, is it not reasonable now to suggest that the many challenges facing the Roman Catholic Church and Pope Francis I* be placed in the hands of the next ecumenical council?  This would not only release Francis from having to deal with all these difficult issues by himself but put it in the hands of many perhaps even through the influence of the laity?  Is it not in the interest of ALL Roman Catholics to have a spiritual leader, such as Jesus, who is a true shepherd instead of an enforcer of the law?
Again Küng asks " Should the church of the future no longer appear as the bulwark of reaction against democracy but in the spirit of its founder as a community in ‘freedom, equality and brotherhood’?   In the light of the gospel should the future church not consist of a community of free men and women and at the same time be an advocate of freedom in the world and become a community of those who are fundamentally equal?  The church a community of brothers and sisters instead of a system ruled in patriarchal fashion"?
Speculating on the future of Catholicism Küng asks “under a new pontificate might not and should not the question of infallibility be investigated again, with objectivity, scientific honesty, fairness and justice?” Addressing the question of ecumenism Küng suggests that "the pluralization of religion will give men and women new spiritual perspectives –deepening their own religious feelings through insights, symbols, ethnical demands and meditative practices of other religions and alternative movements".  
Finally, the idea of a Third Ecumenical Council as envisioned by the Council of Constance more than 600 years ago, may be the only means through which the Vatican along with the People of God can break through the current crisis of the institution.
on his second day as Pope Francis I  was already and unfairly  accused of failing to speak out against human rights abuses during military rule in his native Argentina. See details here.
 

Tuesday, 5 March 2013

Cardinal Marc Ouellet Challenges Reform


Soon cardinals will join the most exclusive “club” in the world – the group responsible for electing the new Pope. However, cardinals  who are over 80, will receive the nomination in recognition of the outstanding work carried out during the course of their long service, but having reached the age limit for electing cardinals, they will not take part in the conclave. One of the those eligible individuals is Canada’s Cardinal Marc Ouellet.

I first learned about our countryman Cardinal Marc Ouellet upon his return from Rome in 2005 following the election of Pope Benedict XVI.  At that time Ouellet was quoted as saying “It’s business as usual”.  Or in other words we have elected a Pope who is as conservative as his predecessor and that’s fine with me. 

Today the conservative Roman Catholic news media tout Ouellet as the hopeful and potential successor to Benedict XVI.  However based on his conservative views it would appear his election would certainly mean more of the same as experienced under his predecessor and for a billion Catholics around the world.

But who is this Cardinal?  A recent (Feb. 22, 2013) article in The Globe and Mail under the title ‘Ouellet Would Help DefendFortress Vatican’ paints a very dogmatic picture for the future of Catholicism should he be elected.  He once admitted that being pope "would be a nightmare." He would know, having enjoyed the confidence of two pontiffs as a top-ranked Vatican insider. Among other things Ouellet is opposed to gay marriage, condemns abortion regardless of the circumstances, and more importantly appears opposed to any serious church reform.  Another meaningful insight into Cardinal Ouellte's background comes from an unusual outside source offered by the Basque news eitb.

Yesterday Canada’s national broadcasting corporation (CBC) represented by Peter Mansbridge interviewed Cardinal Ouellett  asking him some very pointed questions about the Vatican's handling of the sexual abuse scandal.  Ouellet somewhat remorsefully stated “we have learned a lot from its mistakes”.  However, when pressed if he thought that the Church had done enough Ouellet  failed to admit that the church still has not addressed the endemic and systemic problems long identified by experts that continue to seriously prevent the church from moving forward on this issue. The CBC plans to present the conclusion to this two part series tonight during which Peter Mansbridge will ask Cardinal Ouellet if the church doctrine needs to re-act to social reality.  It will be interesting to watch Ouellet’s response because On June 15, 2005 The Catholic New Times published the following article on precisely this question. His response at that time was  "If there needs to be change, it needs to be in the world, not in the doctrine."

Compare this response to that from Fr. Diarmuid O'Murchu from his book ‘Quantum Theology’ which states "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”. To ignore O’Murchu’s remarks would deny the overwhelming facts why so many Catholics in the western world have left the church.  In the absence of any meaningful dialogue directly with so many disenfranchised Catholics would almost certainly spell the end for this 2000 year old church.  But it would not necessarily mean the end of a more compassionate and understanding God for the majority of people. Perhaps we will then learn that being Christian means to imitate Jesus, not by building more basilicas and dictating more doctrine and dogma, but by living a life that follows Jesus’ command to Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength. The second is this: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’[There is no commandment greater than these.”

UPDATE: Mar.8, 2013
According to CNN News Rome -- A group representing survivors of sexual abuse by priests named a "Dirty Dozen" list of cardinals it said would be the worst candidates for pope based on their handling of child sex abuse claims. The complete list which includes Cardinal Marc Ouellet can be read here.

Saturday, 31 July 2010

A Word from a Reformer

St. Angela of Foligno



There is nothing in Canada's secular newspaper the National Post Religion Blog to suggest it cannot be ecumenical or is restricted to one religion. In fact, the invitation to 'get down on your knees and blog' clearly states that "this section is intended as a forum for everyone who has an interest in today's great religious issues. You will find a range of commentary on religion and society, intercine(?) battles within faith and the meaning and purpose of religious beliefs and observance. All views are welcome and being religious is not a requirement to join in the comment sections." However, its articles and views often appear to have a particular Roman Catholic interest sparking a variety of debates. It even has acquired a 'resident' Roman Catholic priest. Perhaps we could now invite a representative from each major religion.

If the Catholic Church seems to be a frequent target, in this blog, it is only because many people, Catholic or otherwise. are directly and indirectly affected by its global influence and exposure. You don't have to be Catholic to notice Pro-Life rally's, to be aware of its position on gays, abortion, etc. and its ongoing demand to impose legislation of its particular brand of ethics and morals throughout the country. The fall-out of these issues affect everyone. It should not come as a surprise that some of these views are going create battles within the faith when they conflict with inherited beliefs.

Some of the issues raised in Charles Lewis' recent article 'Dear Catholic reformers: thanks for the advice, really' suggests that the Catholic who does not share the Orthodox view of the Church is 'free to go'. We know that many have. But does the Church belong only to the conservatives? Where would you draw the line? How would you know? And, finally who would decide? A religion based on such criteria is better known as a cult. Religion that 'grows like wildfire' due to the strict observance of orthodoxy will not survive. History has shown it will be quickly taken over by more evangelical religions such as is happening in South America. The Church may continue to resist change or reformation, but change is the way of the Spirit.

Statistics reveal that today, in North America, there are more lay people (especially women) studying theology then members of the clergy in our seminaries. This represents a major shift in what was once, and until recently, considered to be the exclusive domain of the clergy. Educated lay people are learning today that matters of religion belong to them as much as it does to the institution. While this may be seen by some, especially the clergy, a serious assault on their authority, it does not really need to be so. When scripture tells us that the 'body of Christ' is made up of many parts we need to consider sharing our combined and unique God given gifts for the good of building his Kingdom.

What the Catholic Church is experiencing is a challenge to its authority. But that challenge is no different than it was for Peter and Paul on the question of circumcision. A wise spiritual advisor once said "A Church in crisis is a church alive"! The battle between 'conservative' and 'liberal' was every bit as intense between rivalling Bishops at Vatican II. At times it was even vicious! Just read O'Malley's book What Happened at Vatican II. Change is inevitable – Jesus said it was even necessary if we were to experience transformation- it's called metanoia or repentance.

We may not all be experts on matters of religion but our unique experience of God cannot be denied. Nor should this experience be dependent on fixed formulas or legal requirements. God meets us where we are – not where someone or an institution would have us be. There is the mystery! Vatican II teaches that while Dogma and doctrine can inspire and guide us it must never become the substitute for an informed conscience in Christ.

In recent years the Catholic Church has indicated a desire to return to a more predictable understanding of the 'faith'. This has been expressed in various documents such as 'Dominus Jesus' (2000), Catechism of the Catholic Church (1993), Canon Law 1983). Some of these documents contain wonderful scriptural interpretations, but they all reflect a legalistic rather than a 'holistic' approach to religion. This negative approach makes it extremely difficult to encourage any true and honest dialogue among God's people. Instead we become angry and issue forth judgments based on unquestionable teachings of the Church. This attitude leads only to division. Who is in and who is out. Jesus never turned down anyone, that I recall. So, what is really needed is dialogue, not monologue. We need dialogue between clergy and laity and more importantly with God - that requires reformation!

The role of the any religious institution is to bring people into a personal relationship with God. A God, to quote St. Angela of Foligno, who is present in everything that exists, in a devil and a good angel, in heaven and hell, in good deeds and in adultery and murder, in the beautiful and the ugly. So why can't we learn to see him in all those issues that are being presented in the Holy Post Blog. In the end these exchanges must lead us to grow in our faith and not force us to pour new wine into old wine skins.

Sunday, 25 April 2010

Church in Crisis



Note: For the first time since starting this blog, I have dedicated this page entirely to the words of Fr. Hans Kung, because it offers some very constructive solutions to the problems facing the Catholic Church today. At the same time I believe that the Catholic laity need to exercise their legal and moral responsibilities to bring an end to this most serious crisis in the church's 2000 year history. If the Roman Catholic Church is to survive it must be based on the full integration of the clergy with and the approval of the laity.



Church in worst credibility crisis since Reformation, theologian tells bishops


HANS KÜNG


Pope Benedict has made worse just about everything that is wrong with the Roman Catholic Church and is directly responsible for engineering the global cover-up of child rape perpetrated by priests, according to this open letter to all Catholic bishops


VENERABLE BISHOPS,


Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, and I were the youngest theologians at the Second Vatican Council from 1962 to 1965. Now we are the oldest and the only ones still fully active. I have always understood my theological work as a service to the Roman Catholic Church. For this reason, on the occasion of the fifth anniversary of the election of Pope Benedict XVI, I am making this appeal to you in an open letter. In doing so, I am motivated by my profound concern for our church, which now finds itself in the worst credibility crisis since the Reformation. Please excuse the form of an open letter; unfortunately, I have no other way of reaching you.


I deeply appreciated that the pope invited me, his outspoken critic, to meet for a friendly, four-hour-long conversation shortly after he took office. This awakened in me the hope that my former colleague at Tubingen University might find his way to promote an ongoing renewal of the church and an ecumenical rapprochement in the spirit of the Second Vatican Council.


Unfortunately, my hopes and those of so many engaged Catholic men and women have not been fulfilled. And in my subsequent correspondence with the pope, I have pointed this out to him many times. Without a doubt, he conscientiously performs his everyday duties as pope, and he has given us three helpful encyclicals on faith, hope and charity. But when it comes to facing the major challenges of our times, his pontificate has increasingly passed up more opportunities than it has taken:


Missed is the opportunity for rapprochement with the Protestant churches: Instead, they have been denied the status of churches in the proper sense of the term and, for that reason, their ministries are not recognized and intercommunion is not possible.


Missed is the opportunity for the long-term reconciliation with the Jews: Instead the pope has reintroduced into the liturgy a pre-conciliar prayer for the enlightenment of the Jews, he has taken notoriously anti-Semitic and schismatic bishops back into communion with the church, and he is actively promoting the beatification of Pope Pius XII, who has been accused of not offering sufficient protections to Jews in Nazi Germany.


The fact is, Benedict sees in Judaism only the historic root of Christianity; he does not take it seriously as an ongoing religious community offering its own path to salvation. The recent comparison of the current criticism faced by the pope with anti-Semitic hate campaigns – made by Rev Raniero Cantalamessa during an official Good Friday service at the Vatican – has stirred up a storm of indignation among Jews around the world.


Missed is the opportunity for a dialogue with Muslims in an atmosphere of mutual trust: Instead, in his ill-advised but symptomatic 2006 Regensburg lecture, Benedict caricatured Islam as a religion of violence and inhumanity and thus evoked enduring Muslim mistrust.


Missed is the opportunity for reconciliation with the colonised indigenous peoples of Latin America: Instead, the pope asserted in all seriousness that they had been "longing" for the religion of their European conquerors.


Missed is the opportunity to help the people of Africa by allowing the use of birth control to fight overpopulation and condoms to fight the spread of HIV.


Missed is the opportunity to make peace with modern science by clearly affirming the theory of evolution and accepting stem-cell research.


Missed is the opportunity to make the spirit of the Second Vatican Council the compass for the whole Catholic Church, including the Vatican itself, and thus to promote the needed reforms in the church.


This last point, respected bishops, is the most serious of all. Time and again, this pope has added qualifications to the conciliar texts and interpreted them against the spirit of the council fathers. Time and again, he has taken an express stand against the Ecumenical Council, which according to canon law represents the highest authority in the Catholic Church:


He has taken the bishops of the traditionalist Pius X Society back into the church without any preconditions – bishops who were illegally consecrated outside the Catholic Church and who reject central points of the Second Vatican Council (including liturgical reform, freedom of religion and the rapprochement with Judaism).


He promotes the medieval Tridentine Mass by all possible means and occasionally celebrates the Eucharist in Latin with his back to the congregation.


He refuses to put into effect the rapprochement with the Anglican Church, which was laid out in official ecumenical documents by the Anglican-Roman Catholic International Commission, and has attempted instead to lure married Anglican clergy into the Roman Catholic Church by freeing them from the very rule of celibacy that has forced tens of thousands of Roman Catholic priests out of office.


He has actively reinforced the anti-conciliar forces in the church by appointing reactionary officials to key offices in the Curia (including the secretariat of state, and positions in the liturgical commission) while appointing reactionary bishops around the world.


Pope Benedict XVI seems to be increasingly cut off from the vast majority of church members who pay less and less heed to Rome and, at best, identify themselves only with their local parish and bishop.


I know that many of you are pained by this situation. In his anti-conciliar policy, the pope receives the full support of the Roman Curia. The Curia does its best to stifle criticism in the episcopate and in the church as a whole and to discredit critics with all the means at its disposal. With a return to pomp and spectacle catching the attention of the media, the reactionary forces in Rome have attempted to present us with a strong church fronted by an absolutistic "Vicar of Christ" who combines the church's legislative, executive and judicial powers in his hands alone. But Benedict's policy of restoration has failed. All of his spectacular appearances, demonstrative journeys and public statements have failed to influence the opinions of most Catholics on controversial issues. This is especially true regarding matters of sexual morality. Even the papal youth meetings, attended above all by conservative-charismatic groups, have failed to hold back the steady drain of those leaving the church or to attract more vocations to the priesthood.


You in particular, as bishops, have reason for deep sorrow: Tens of thousands of priests have resigned their office since the Second Vatican Council, for the most part because of the celibacy rule. Vocations to the priesthood, but also to religious orders, sisterhoods and lay brotherhoods are down – not just quantitatively but qualitatively. Resignation and frustration are spreading rapidly among both the clergy and the active laity. Many feel that they have been left in the lurch with their personal needs, and many are in deep distress over the state of the church. In many of your dioceses, it is the same story: increasingly empty churches, empty seminaries and empty rectories. In many countries, due to the lack of priests, more and more parishes are being merged, often against the will of their members, into ever larger "pastoral units," in which the few surviving pastors are completely overtaxed. This is church reform in pretence rather than fact!


And now, on top of these many crises comes a scandal crying out to heaven – the revelation of the clerical abuse of thousands of children and adolescents, first in the United States, then in Ireland and now in Germany and other countries. And to make matters worse, the handling of these cases has given rise to an unprecedented leadership crisis and a collapse of trust in church leadership.


There is no denying the fact that the worldwide system of covering up cases of sexual crimes committed by clerics was engineered by the Roman Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith under Cardinal Ratzinger (1981-2005). During the reign of Pope John Paul II, that congregation had already taken charge of all such cases under oath of strictest silence. Ratzinger himself, on May 18th, 2001, sent a solemn document to all the bishops dealing with severe crimes ( "epistula de delictis gravioribus" ), in which cases of abuse were sealed under the "secretum pontificium" , the violation of which could entail grave ecclesiastical penalties. With good reason, therefore, many people have expected a personal mea culpa on the part of the former prefect and current pope. Instead, the pope passed up the opportunity afforded by Holy Week: On Easter Sunday, he had his innocence proclaimed "urbi et orbi" by the dean of the College of Cardinals.


The consequences of all these scandals for the reputation of the Catholic Church are disastrous. Important church leaders have already admitted this. Numerous innocent and committed pastors and educators are suffering under the stigma of suspicion now blanketing the church. You, reverend bishops, must face up to the question: What will happen to our church and to your diocese in the future? It is not my intention to sketch out a new program of church reform. That I have done often enough both before and after the council. Instead, I want only to lay before you six proposals that I am convinced are supported by millions of Catholics who have no voice in the current situation.


1. Do not keep silent: By keeping silent in the face of so many serious grievances, you taint yourselves with guilt. When you feel that certain laws, directives and measures are counterproductive, you should say this in public. Send Rome not professions of your devotion, but rather calls for reform!


2. Set about reform: Too many in the church and in the episcopate complain about Rome, but do nothing themselves. When people no longer attend church in a diocese, when the ministry bears little fruit, when the public is kept in ignorance about the needs of the world, when ecumenical co-operation is reduced to a minimum, then the blame cannot simply be shoved off on Rome. Whether bishop, priest, layman or laywoman – everyone can do something for the renewal of the church within his own sphere of influence, be it large or small. Many of the great achievements that have occurred in the individual parishes and in the church at large owe their origin to the initiative of an individual or a small group. As bishops, you should support such initiatives and, especially given the present situation, you should respond to the just complaints of the faithful.


3. Act in a collegial way: After heated debate and against the persistent opposition of the Curia, the Second Vatican Council decreed the collegiality of the pope and the bishops. It did so in the sense of the Acts of the Apostles, in which Peter did not act alone without the college of the apostles. In the post-conciliar era, however, the pope and the Curia have ignored this decree. Just two years after the council, Pope Paul VI issued his encyclical defending the controversial celibacy law without the slightest consultation of the bishops. Since then, papal politics and the papal magisterium have continued to act in the old, uncollegial fashion. Even in liturgical matters, the pope rules as an autocrat over and against the bishops. He is happy to surround himself with them as long as they are nothing more than stage extras with neither voices nor voting rights. This is why, venerable bishops, you should not act for yourselves alone, but rather in the community of the other bishops, of the priests and of the men and women who make up the church.


4. Unconditional obedience is owed to God alone: Although at your episcopal consecration you had to take an oath of unconditional obedience to the pope, you know that unconditional obedience can never be paid to any human authority; it is due to God alone. For this reason, you should not feel impeded by your oath to speak the truth about the current crisis facing the church, your diocese and your country. Your model should be the apostle Paul, who dared to oppose Peter "to his face since he was manifestly in the wrong"! ( Galatians 2:11 ). Pressuring the Roman authorities in the spirit of Christian fraternity can be permissible and even necessary when they fail to live up to the spirit of the Gospel and its mission. The use of the vernacular in the liturgy, the changes in the regulations governing mixed marriages, the affirmation of tolerance, democracy and human rights, the opening up of an ecumenical approach, and the many other reforms of Vatican II were only achieved because of tenacious pressure from below.


5. Work for regional solutions: The Vatican has frequently turned a deaf ear to the well-founded demands of the episcopate, the priests and the laity. This is all the more reason for seeking wise regional solutions. As you are well aware, the rule of celibacy, which was inherited from the Middle Ages, represents a particularly delicate problem. In the context of today's clerical abuse scandal, the practice has been increasingly called into question. Against the expressed will of Rome, a change would appear hardly possible; yet this is no reason for passive resignation. When a priest, after mature consideration, wishes to marry, there is no reason why he must automatically resign his office when his bishop and his parish choose to stand behind him. Individual episcopal conferences could take the lead with regional solutions. It would be better, however, to seek a solution for the whole church, therefore:


6. Call for a council: Just as the achievement of liturgical reform, religious freedom, ecumenism and inter-religious dialogue required an ecumenical council, so now a council is needed to solve the dramatically escalating problems calling for reform. In the century before the Reformation, the Council of Constance decreed that councils should be held every five years. Yet the Roman Curia successfully managed to circumvent this ruling. There is no question that the Curia, fearing a limitation of its power, would do everything in its power to prevent a council coming together in the present situation. Thus it is up to you to push through the calling of a council or at least a representative assembly of bishops.


With the church in deep crisis, this is my appeal to you, venerable bishops: Put to use the episcopal authority that was reaffirmed by the Second Vatican Council. In this urgent situation, the eyes of the world turn to you. Innumerable people have lost their trust in the Catholic Church. Only by openly and honestly reckoning with these problems and resolutely carrying out needed reforms can their trust be regained. With all due respect, I beg you to do your part – together with your fellow bishops as far as possible, but also alone if necessary – in apostolic "fearlessness" ( Acts 4:29, 31 ). Give your faithful signs of hope and encouragement and give our church a perspective for the future.


With warm greetings in the community of the Christian faith,


Yours, Hans Küng – (New York Times Syndicate) © Hans Küng

Wednesday, 29 April 2009

on Religious Intolerance




There is no longer any doubt that there is a growing crisis within the Catholic Church today. A crisis that could set back the Church more than four hundred years. Many Catholics unwillingly find themselves on opposite ends of the religious spectrum. As the Vatican desperately clings to many outdated teachings and the need for more control; more people are leaving and seeking meaning in other Christ like life giving communities. The obsessive pursuit for control could eventually spell the demise of the entire Church. While many ordinary Catholics continue to question the mystery of God the Church insists that it already has the privileged but arrogant position of possessing all the necessary truths. All that is expected from the rest is an unquestioning obedience to all Church teachings. Failure to comply is once again seen as heresy. This unhealthy position has put many searching Catholics in direct opposition with the ruling hierarchy of the Church as well as members of their own community. The Church steadfastly ignores the fact that many Catholics have a much broader understanding of what it means to be ‘church’ in a multi-religious community. For the first time in history more lay people are studying theology than members of the clergy.


Ignoring the call for the reforms instituted by Vatican II the hierarchy persists in implementing more and more rigid forms of orthodoxy. It is understandable then that a vast number of Catholics, throughout the world, are experiencing profound feelings of alienation from the faith and Church they once embraced. For its part the Catholic hierarchy makes no apologies for its unbending position and unwillingness to enter into dialogue with its followers especially anyone who does not agree with its teachings. In fact Pope Benedict XVI has stated on several occasions that the future of the Church will depend on a much smaller community of believers. Just think of what kind of Catholic that will be? It seems that today the Catholic Church will no longer tolerate anyone who dares question authority. It has even inaugurated various forms of punishment, ranging from withholding communion, to silencing and finally excommunication. Right wing elements, drunkenly empowered with the support of the Vatican, have launched specific campaigns to shame and condemn entire factions within their own Catholic community! This has caused some courageous individuals such Jesuit Fr. Kavanaugh to conclude: 'We Catholics are in danger of becoming known not by how we love but by how we hate.'


Many parishioners today fearful about growing problems such as the economy, global warming, swine-flu, or war in the middle east find that their greater spiritual needs go completely unanswered. Working on a diet of fear; hardly a week goes by when the Church does not issue a stern warning about what a Catholic is to believe or not to believe and practise. Most official Church edicts are expressed in difficult or archaic legalistic terms which tend to create more division than understanding. The terms are reminiscent of the G.W. Bush era when the latter stated ‘if you are not with us, you are against us’! In the absence of true dialogue there can only by division.


Catholic news services provide an alarming increase in the spreading division among Catholics believers. An on-line edition of an US based Catholic weekly today carried the following headline “Kansas City Bishop to pro-lifers: ‘We are at War!” In his rant to a group of high school students, the Bishop was not condemning non-believers but all Catholics who may not agree with his opinion!!! His religious intolerance combined with a constant use of the term ‘warriors’ for God, to fight those who stand in his way, spoke in a manner reminiscent of a return to the dark ages, the crusades, Spanish Inquisition and burning of people at the stake. Canadian readers should note that the issue of abortion has several important political ramifications unique to the recent Democratic election USA.


As the battle for orthodoxy heats up the Church will continue to polarize its remaining followers instead of building bridges to those it has so shamelessly abandoned. Is there not enough religious intolerance in the world today?