|
More than 3,000 of the anti-gay marriage DVDs
that were sent out by Archbishop John Niendstedt, St. Paul, were
returned to him by the recipients. The following letter was sent to him
last Friday. Dear Archbishop Nienstedt,
Where is the DVD explaining the negative
impact current U.S. economic policies have on the poor, not just here,
but around the world?” We would like to add that even if you did choose
to produce a DVD on these issues, we would be opposed to releasing it
shortly before an election where it would so obviously be politically
motivated.
The article, “Losing faith in the Catholic Church's direction,” by Bonnie Erbe, Scripps Howard News Service, is available at http://www.scrippsnews.com/node/57834 *** Tom Roberts is NCR editor at large. Read all the installments of Roberts’ series on the Emerging Church at http://ncronline.org/node/21623. What follows is an excerpt from the last article in the series. Outline of new life In hindsight, the headline -- Emerging Church -- was, as headlines often are, at least inadequate, suggesting that something whole might be emerging in place of something else. The reality is more complex. The reporting would take me to Ohio, New Jersey, New Mexico, California and Pennsylvania, and included interviews with experts both inside and outside the Catholic community. What precipitated the project was a conference in Florida in 2009, the culminating event of a four-year study, Emerging Models of Pastoral Leadership, financed by a $2 million Lilly Endowment grant. The financing and the study have since been extended. The 1,200 people who showed up at the gathering, most of them lay, and the stories they told clearly demonstrated that change was under way. The gathering also illustrated a central reality that will, for better or worse, contribute to shaping the future of the church: The U.S. bishops to this point appear to have little interest in using the abundant data that’s been collected by Catholic sociologists to construct any national plans for the future of the church. Whether it’s the priest shortage or the growth in the number of lay ministers, the surge in the number of permanent deacons, the exodus of millions of Catholics from the church or data tracking the attitudes of Catholics for more than a quarter century, there appears to be little appetite for discussing such trends on a national basis. … One explanation advanced by experienced church observers is that bishops, who value their autonomous status as leaders in their own dioceses, shy from national plans and programs. … If there is an equivalent to a force of nature in the church, it is the significant shifts in demographics that have occurred over the past 50 years, most notably the steady erosion in the number of priests and other vowed religious who once served as a solid foundation of the local Catholic community. It became clear during my reporting that any consideration of the future has to begin with a reading of the considerable data available and what it might portend. The drop in the number of priests, for starters, is an erosion that forecasters began warning about more than 20 years ago. Church leaders at the time belittled the findings or rejected them outright. The decline in the number of priests is but a leading indicator amid a range of data that begins to paint the picture of how dramatically and in how many ways the church has changed empirically in the last half century. *** Isn’t marriage incompatible with the Catholic priesthood? Or does that rule only apply to some? New Catholic priest brings wife, kids with
him *** Infographic of the Day: Does the U.S. Really
Have That Many Guns? *** Archbishop Joseph Tobin, Secretary of the Vatican’s Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life, said that he does not expect any “punitive” fallout from the visitation, and that before any decisions are made, women’s communities should have a chance to know the results and to respond. That addresses a central concern of many women religious, who have objected to what some perceive as the secrecy of the process. Tobin said that as a matter of “justice and charity,” he will “strongly advocate” for feedback and a right of reply. Tobin’s comments on the visitation came in a Dec. 6 interview with NCR in Rome. Read the entire interview: http://ncronline.org/node/21623 *** We Are Church: The Pope's book "Light of the
world" brings too little light to the world. A new approach to the use
of condoms is only a first step and should be followed by a fundamental
revision of the Church’s sexual teaching. The International Movement We are Church
welcomes the fact that the Pope in his new book "Light of the world" has
ended the Church’s total ban on condom use. However, the acknowledgment
by the leader of the Roman Catholic Church that condoms are a critical
means to prevent the spread of HIV and other sexually transmitted
infections is long overdue. We do not devalue the small concession Pope
Benedict has made, nor do we underestimate the profoundly beneficial
effect this concession will have for those bishops, priests, religious
and organisations like Caritas International who in their work with AIDS
patients and in the prevention of the spread of the pandemic recognise
the role of condoms. who in their work with AIDS patients advocate the
use of condoms for the prevention of the spread of the pandemic. Now it
will become easier and more legitimate for international organisations
to collaborate with Catholic organisations in the fight against HIV and
AIDS. While our Pope says that condoning the use of
condoms could be “a first step in a movement toward a different
approach, a more humane sexuality” We are Church sees the Pope’s words
as the Catholic hierarchy's own first step in addressing the realities
of sex and sexuality. It is important to remember that back in
November 2006, the “Pontifical Council for Health Pastoral Care” had
recommended in a report to the Pope, that the Church should no longer
consider it immoral when a couple use condoms if one partner is infected
with HIV. We are Church strongly supports those Catholic moral
theologians who consider the prevention of HIV as more important than
following the hierarchy’s strict ban on "artificial" birth control. In an informal way, this new book provides
interesting insights into the Pope’s thinking. But it is perfectly clear
that there is no U-turn on key theological, pastoral and moral issues
concerning women’s ordination, celibacy, homosexuality, ecumenism etc..
Nevertheless the book will herald a new era if the minimal yet
significant concession regarding the use of condoms leads to a return to
a culture of open-minded dialogue within the Roman Catholic Church - one
of the indispensable principles of the Second Vatican Council (1962-65).
But, as Hans Kung argues, the papal principle
of infallibility is a large obstacle in the way of changing the thinking
of those who hold the leadership of our worldwide faith community. This
is also apparent when one sees the hostile comments made by
fundamentalist theologians. Today the majority of the faithful feel that
the Roman Catholic Church urgently needs new insights regarding
sexuality – humane indeed as the Pope himself underscores, loving and
free from fear - because sexuality is a life-giving force for every
human being created and loved by God. We Are Church presented a discussion paper
calling for future-oriented Christian sexual ethics in 2008, 40 Years
after the Encyclical "Humanae Vitae" was issued on July 25th, 1968. “The
church's ministry shouldn't any longer barricade itself behind
centuries-old walls. Likewise, it shouldn't any longer ignore the
well-proved knowledge of human sciences on sexuality and sexual ethics”,
We Are Church said. When talking about the Encyclical "Humanae Vitae", we should not forget that the majority of the members of the commission established in 1962 by Pope John XXIII and enlarged by Pope Paul VI then voted for responsible parenthood without banning any means of contraception. It was Pope Paul VI who did not follow the vote of the overwhelming majority, but instead proclaimed the contrasting minority vote as official doctrine of the Church. This has had substantial consequences: The encyclical's positive reception and perception were reversed. Thereby the Catholic Church to a large extent lost its credibility and standing with regard to questions of human sexuality and sexual life. About We Are Church: *** GOD Will Find YOU... Father John Powell, a professor at Loyola University in Chicago, writes about a student in his Theology of Faith class named Tommy: Some twelve years ago, I stood watching my
university student's file into the classroom for our first session in
the Theology of Faith. That was the day I first saw Tommy. My eyes and
my mind both blinked. He was combing his long flaxen hair, which hung
six inches below his shoulders. it was the first time I had ever seen a
boy with hair that long. I guess it was just coming into fashion then. I
know in my mind that it isn't what's on your head but what's in it that
counts; but on that day I was unprepared and my emotions flipped.. I
immediately filed Tommy under 'S' for strange... Very strange. Tommy turned out to be the 'atheist in
residence' in my Theology of Faith course. When he came up at the end of the course to
turn in his final exam, he asked in a cynical tone, 'Do you think I'll
ever find God?' I decided instantly on a little shock therapy.
'No!' I said very emphatically. 'Why not,' he responded, 'I thought that
was the product you were pushing.' I let him get five steps from the classroom
door and then called out, 'Tommy! I don't think you'll ever find Him,
but I am absolutely certain that He will find you!' He shrugged a little
and left my class and my life. I felt slightly disappointed at the
thought that he had missed my clever line -- He will find you! At least
I thought it was clever Later I heard that Tommy had graduated, and I
was duly grateful. Then a sad report came. I heard that Tommy had
terminal cancer. Before I could search him out, he came to see me. When he walked into my office, his body was
very badly wasted and the long hair had all fallen out as a result of
chemotherapy. But his eyes were 'Tommy, I've thought about you so often; I hear
you are sick,' I blurted out. 'Oh, yes, very sick. I have cancer in both
lungs. It's a matter of weeks...' Can you talk about it, Tom?' I asked. 'Sure, what would you like to know?' he replied
'What's it like to be only twenty-four and
dying? 'Well, it could be worse. 'Like what? 'Well, like being I began to look through my mental file cabinet
under 'S' where I had filed Tommy as strange. (It seems as though
everybody I try to reject by classification, God sends back into my life
to educate me.) 'But what I really came to see you about,' Tom
said, 'is something you said to me on the last day of class.' (He
remembered!) He continued, 'I asked you Then you said, 'But He will find you..' I
thought about that a lot, even though my search for God was hardly
intense at that time. (My clever line. He thought about that a lot!)
'But when the doctors removed a lump from my
groin and told me that it was malignant, that's when I 'So, I began with the hardest one, my Dad.. He
was reading the newspaper when I approached him.. 'Dad. 'Yes, what?' he
asked without lowering the newspaper. 'Dad, I would like to talk with you.' 'Well, talk. 'I mean . It's really important.'
The newspaper came down three slow inches.
'What is it?' 'Dad, I love you, I just wanted you to know
that.' Tom smiled at me and said it with obvious satisfaction, as though
he felt a warm and secret joy flowing inside of him. 'The newspaper fluttered to the floor. Then my father did two things I could never remember him ever doing before. He cried and he hugged me. We talked all night, even though he had to go to work the next morning. It felt so good to be close to my father, to see his tears, to feel his hug, to hear him say that he loved me.' 'It was easier with my mother and little brother. They cried with me, too, and we hugged each other, and started saying real nice things to each other. We shared the things we had been keeping secret for so many years. 'I was only sorry about one thing --- that I
had waited so long. Here I was, just beginning to open up to all the
people I had actually been close to. 'Then, one day I turned around and God was there. He didn't come to me when I pleaded with Him. I guess I was like an animal trainer holding out a hoop, 'C'mon, jump through. C'mon, I'll give you three days, three weeks.''
'Apparently God does things in His own way and at His own hour. But the important thing is that He was there. He found me! You were right. He found me even after I stopped looking for Him.' 'Tommy,' I practically gasped, 'I think you are
saying something very important and much more universal than you
realize. To me, at least, you are saying that the surest way to find God
is not to make Him a private possession, a problem solver, or an instant
consolation in time of need, but rather by opening to love. You know,
the Apostle John said that. He said: 'God is love, and anyone who lives
in love is living with God and God is living in him.' Tom, could I ask
you a favor? You know, when I had you in class you were a real pain. But
(laughingly) you can make it all up to me now. Would you come into my
present Theology of Faith course and tell them what you have just told
me? If I told them the same thing it would not be half as effective as
if you were to tell it. 'Oooh.. I was ready for you, but I don't know
if I'm ready for your class.' 'Tom, think about it. If and when you are
ready, give me a call.' In a few days Tom called, said he was ready for
the class, that he wanted to do that for God and for me. So we scheduled
a date. However, he never made it. He had another
appointment, far more important than the one with me and my class. Of
course, his life was not really ended by his death, only changed. He made the great step from faith into vision.
He found a life far more beautiful than the eye of man has ever seen or
the ear of man has ever heard or the mind of man has ever imagined. Before he died, we talked one last time. 'I'm not going to make it to your class,' he
said. 'I know, Tom.' 'Will you tell them for me? Will you tell the
whole world for me?' I will, Tom. I'll tell them. I'll do my best.' So, to all of you who have been kind enough to
read this simple story about God's love, thank you for listening. And to
you, Tommy, somewhere in the sunlit, verdant hills of heaven --- I told
them, Tommy, as best I could. If this story means anything to you, please
pass it on to a friend or two. It is a true story and is not enhanced
for publicity purposes. With thanks, *** The following article is available in its
entirety at Commonweal magazine (http://commonwealmagazine.org) Defenders of the Faith! By Margaret O'Brien Steinfels In a church without enemies, what are they to do? “Defender of the Faith” was the title bestowed in 1521 by Pope Leo X on Henry VIII as a reward for the English king’s “Defense of the Seven Sacraments” against Martin Luther. When Henry broke with Rome, Pope Paul III rescinded the title. It was restored to the king by Parliament in 1544 and is still used by his successors, though Henry’s turnabout made the title an irony rather than an honor. Irony remains a characteristic of the title even in the Catholic Church. Following the Second Vatican Council (1962–65), Catholicism abandoned its self-understanding as Defender of the Faith and made peace with its enemies. Yet nearly five decades later the title is brandished again by some Catholics and calls are sounded for the church militant to take up the banners of war, or at least of the culture wars. The church has had enemies. U.S. Catholicism certainly had them, especially after immigrants from Europe inundated American cities during the nineteenth century, overwhelmed the locals, and raised fear among their historic enemies, the Protestants, that the papists would soon rule the country. (But whoever imagined six Catholics on the Supreme Court?) In the midst of this struggle, Catholics took full advantage of the separation of church and state and the reigning ethos of individualism and entrepreneurialism, making themselves Americans while maintaining their religious defenses against the enemy. The powerful Catholic subculture that developed had two effects. First, schools, colleges, parishes, hospitals, orphanages, etc., flourished under the Catholic brand, and Catholics prospered within them. Second, whatever the inroads of secularizing influences on U.S. culture, the Catholic ghetto long staved off what Max Weber called the “disenchantment of the world.” By the end of World War II, there was
fraternization, especially among the lay members of different religions:
The creation of a Judeo-Christian movement (remember Will Herberg’s
Protestant–Catholic–Jew?) became a religion in itself. Other shifts and
adjustments—the dialogue Mass, the reformed Easter liturgy, and vital
lay movements—presaged the changes of Vatican II and eased its
reception. The council declared a truce with Protestants and everyone
else. For a decade (1965–75) the Catholic Church was
a darling of American culture. As the author Peter Quinn, chronicler in
fact and fiction of American Catholicism, has observed: “The idea that
we were besieged just disappeared.” As we now discover, the old ways were not so
much demolished as put in storage. The strut work of battlements
remained in place, in Rome and within the clerical culture, especially
among some in the hierarchy and those who yearned to join its ranks.
Once again, Defenders of the Faith behave as if the church is under
siege. Unlike the hoary past, the sources of this siege seem to be
within the battlements as much as without. … So? In a church without enemies, what is the Defender of the Faith to do? The short answer is get new ones, and so we have. And when there are not enough of them outside our ranks, we pounce on ones we detect within. To invoke a well-worked phrase, we have met the enemy, and it is us. *** BY MICHELE R. PISTONE AND JOHN J. HOEFFNER Connection readers no doubt are aware that the
Catholic Church is a strong proponent of the right to migrate. The roots
of this position are deep. Biblical support is plentiful-Exodus 23:9 and
Matthew 25:31-46 are favored passages-and the basic social teaching,
from Rerum Novarum on, has been stated with unusual clarity John Paul
II's encyclical Laborem Exercens fairly summarizes this Not everyone agrees. Opposition stems from many quarters, even from groups expressly claiming to articulate a Christian point of view. One such group bemoaned migration, stating that it can imperil fulfillment "of the duty to serve the common good, especially in developing countries," and has issued a call for it to be "restricted." What group would make such statements? You may know them as the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, and yes, it is that Conference of Catholic Bishops. What's more, these statements, issued in 1976, have never been repudiated and accurately reflect a position now held consistently for more than 50 years not only by the U.S. bishops, but also by Catholic bishops worldwide. There is, as you might have guessed, a catch, as in the following statement from a 1969 international meeting of the Sacred Congregation of Bishops: "Especially in underdeveloped areas where all resources must be put to urgent use, those [persons] gravely endanger the public good, who, particularly possessing mental powers and wealth, are enticed by greed and temptation to emigrate. They deprive their community of the material and spiritual aid it needs." The predominant concern, in other words, is with the phenomenon commonly known by the loaded term "brain drain," or at least that portion involving the migration of skilled and educated persons from developing to developed countries. Indeed, the U.S. Bishops' 1976 statements expressly invoked the term, and of course their call for immigration restrictions was limited to the migration of the skilled and educated. There is great intuitive appeal in the Church's position on "brain drain," and perhaps you are now saying to yourself, "Well, yes there is, and rightly so, because brain drain is … different." Do the differences, and there are some, justify singling out this type of migration for restriction? Our view is that they do not, and that it is time for the Church to reevaluate and change its position on general policy from a position of opposition to one of neutrality, and on the level of the individual migrant from a position of implicit criticism to one of understanding and respect for individual agency. Such changes are warranted for many reasons. For example, recent developments in larger considerations in Catholic Social Teaching itself have made it easier to justify migration, even by the educated, away from societies that, intentionally or not, deny their own people the opportunity to exercise their talents. Special note is due here to the recognition of "the right to economic initiative" as essential to human dignity. Globalization, technological developments, and
increasing recognition of the importance of remittances also have
undermined the policy against migration by the skilled and educated.
Indeed, far from necessarily causing a failure to fulfill their duty to
serve the common good of their homelands, today's globalized economy
means that many of the most important contributions that migrants can
make to their homelands are possible only because they have migrated.
Catholic Michele R. Pistone, a professor at Villanova University School of Law, and John J. Hoeffner, an attorney, are authors of Stepping Out of the Brain Drain: Applying Catholic Social Teaching in a New Era of Migration (Lexington Books 2007) and an essay included in And You Welcomed Me: Migration and Catholic Social Teaching (Lexington Books 2009). This article appeared on www.networklobby.org. Network is a National Catholic Social Justice Lobby *** Another comment from the realm of Catholic social justice. Democrats often frame the debate over the Bush
tax cuts in classic class warfare terms, as cutting taxes for the middle
class while sticking it to the wealthy. That’s because everyone gets the tax break on the first $250,000 of income, no matter what he or she makes. In fact, people earning more than $1 million would see a larger tax cut in dollar terms, about $6,300, than those at the lower end of the income scale. A person who earns $30,000 annually would receive a cut of $771, while a person who takes home $100,000 a year would see a $3,766 break, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation. “If you have $1,000,000 of income, you get a tax cut on $250,000 of income. Yes, the middle class benefits from these cuts, but so do the wealthy,” Michael Ettlinger , vice president for economic policy at the Center for American Progress, wrote in a report on the center’s website. The White House and congressional leaders sometimes try to make the distinction, but it often gets lost in the black-and-white terms of the debate as a fight between the middle class and the wealthy, which Ettlinger called a “false idea.” Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1110/45708.html#ixzz16mC1RfGq |