Roman Catholicism – Whither Goest Thou?

[Thomas]

This outsider never understood why priests can't marry...especially with the obvious sexual frustration it has revealed....wwjd

Well Jesus never did ... and arguably had a low opinion of marriage anyway.

And I agree with the frustrations bit ... until some argue that the historic abuse cases are a result of celibacy, which they clearly ain't, in that the same abuses are recorded in denominations which allow a married clergy.

Moreover the lack of ordination of women is why I'll prolly never delve in to know more.

OK ... Jesus never had a woman among the Twelve?

Nor do I understand why divorced folks can't take communion...wwjd

There's sufficient reason to suggest he'd call them hypocrites if they tried.

Latin rite? Why is it opposed and why can't it be like any multilingual church provide services for each differing times of day or days of week?

Because it's not the same thing.

The trad gowns red shoes, pomp and circumstance, as a result of Roman national church? However it came about is another sticking point for me.

But having sticking points without understanding the reasons is a bit like having opinions on matters one knows nothing about – one is absolutely entitled to do so, but no-one is obliged to pay them any heed.

... my most often preferred level of spirituality is listening to the wind in the leaves converse with the birds and the babbling brook.

OK, and yours is a very humanist spirituality, and its laudable ... but there is another order of spirituality.

 

[Thomas]

As an outsider definitely not Catholic, and my my own admission a Christian without the creator G!d as a physical or ethereal entity...

Hard to reconcile ... but OK ... I mean, not a Christian as Jesus would recognise.

What I have learned of know of the Jesuits, they are the closest I get...the most radical among them is what resonates with me.

LOL, really? Those guys are hardcore! Talk about indoctrination!

There are radicals you'd love among the other orders, if you knew them, just as there are conservatives.

Thomas Merton (Cistercian, via Benedictines); Bede Griffiths, aka Swami Dayananda (Benedictine); Timothy Radcliffe (Dominican);

Much of what Francis said was alright with me. (Can't say that about all Popes)

OK ...

Simialr to what is referred to Catholic Light, the Episcopalian Bishop Spong RIP, had some thinking I could get behind.

Yeah, but not Catholic by miles ...

My hope is we continue to see the Christian pulpits lean on beatitudes over the commandments and embracing some of the interfaith Renewal JewBUs leanings. As an American, the Jeffersonian Bible speaks to me as well.

Well the way things are headed in your neck of the woods, there seems not much chance of that ... as for the Jefferson Bible, that would be a good place to start!

 

[TheLightWithin]

Ah ... there's the nub! Who's interpretation of Vatican II, that's the question!

I suppose the official one.

 

[TheLightWithin]

I'm not defending it, but I'm not calling for its dismissal.

Maybe it needs to be reworked? Would that be the work of the new Pope?
It seems like calling contraception "intrinsically evil" is itself, some degree of evil.

 

[TheLightWithin]

My solution:
Offer 'marriage' as a non-sacramental – that is not a promise made before God – union. Kinda like a civil union with a blessing.

There was talk amongst some evangelicals for a time about creating something within their churches called a "covenant marriage" something that was beyond a civil marriage I guess. That was in response to their irritation about civil unions before same sex marriage was allowed. It really bothered some religious people that the government was allowing this and they wanted to make some kind of counterpoint to it.

 

[TheLightWithin]

OK, and yours is a very humanist spirituality

Or nature based, it seems

 

[TheLightWithin]

Hard to reconcile ... but OK ... I mean, not a Christian as Jesus would recognise.

Would the concept of Christian or what a Christian is or is thought to be, even make sense to Jesus?

 

[TheLightWithin]

This young man has a pretty good way of explaining things, at least it gives me a better idea of some things in Catholicism.
I used to watch EWTN from time to time too.
In this case this young priest / friar is talking about Pope Francis in both videos so they seem pertinent.

It really did seem to upset a lot of people that Pope Francis cared about the poor and the environment, and that he was not rageful towards same sex couples, etc. Father Casey does his best to clarify.

 

[Thomas]

Maybe it needs to be reworked? Would that be the work of the new Pope?

That would be seen as one pope rewriting another pope ... that would not go down well.

It's an interesting point – there would be uproar.

But it's not without precedent – Vatican II was a definite change in the way that Judaism, Islam and other religions are seen. Of course, for many, things like this in Vatican II are clear examples that it's a false council and that John XXIII is an heresiarch pope, etc., etc.

 

[Thomas]

Would the concept of Christian or what a Christian is or is thought to be, even make sense to Jesus?

Well in context of the comment ... yes.

Jesus believed in the God of Israel. He said 'if you can't believe in me, believe in the works that I do' (cf eg John 10:38).

My brother-in-Christ Wil cannot bring himself to believe in God the Father, the works that Jesus did, nor even, with any certainty, the existence of Jesus himself, so on a scale of things, although I agree with the idea that Christianity today is a far cry from His time, there are some common elements which are absolutely fundamental to it.

 

[TheLightWithin]

That would be seen as one pope rewriting another pope ... that would not go down well.

It's an interesting point – there would be uproar.

But it's not without precedent – Vatican II was a definite change in the way that Judaism, Islam and other religions are seen. Of course, for many, things like this in Vatican II are clear examples that it's a false council and that John XXIII is an heresiarch pope, etc., etc.

Oohhh... they don't write commentaries and updates on one another???

 

[Thomas]

Oohhh... they don't write commentaries and updates on one another???

Well they do ... but the updates are nuanced – you don't get one Pope saying or blaming a predecessor, as politicians are inclined to do.

Over and again, it boils down to certain people thinking 'tradition' means set in stone and is unalterable. Basically you're up against conservatives that don't like change – any change – and that's where hearts and minds comes into play.

 

[Thomas]

It really did seem to upset a lot of people that Pope Francis cared about the poor and the environment, and that he was not rageful towards same sex couples, etc. Father Casey does his best to clarify.

Yes ... sadly the west seems to be in thrall to certain very unChristian political attitudes at the moment ...

 

[TheLightWithin]

Yes ... sadly the west seems to be in thrall to certain very unChristian political attitudes at the moment ...

The loving kindness that was once considered part of Christian culture and ethics seems more taken over by humanists these days.
This is the REAL measure of the decline of Christianity in the West... not by declining church attendance.
Harder to actually measure, however.

 

[Thomas]

I'm not sure I'd go that far ... depends who you mean by humanists ...

 

[faithforall]

John T. McGreevy’s Catholicism: A Global History from the French Revolution to Pope Francis has been praised as a tour de force in explaining how Catholicism came to be what it is today. I have not read it, I have read a review of a trusted commentator, and I think it pinpoints where I stand:

According to McGreevy, the last two hundred years of Catholic Church history have really been a contest between two very different visions of Catholicism.

One is the Traditionalist vision – centralist, triumphalist, papalist, separatist, and anti-modernist.

The vision of Vatican I, almost entirely subsumed at Vatican II, but reconstituted itself through the pontificates of John Paul II and Benedict XVI.

The other is the Reform Catholic vision – localist, migratory, synodalist, engaged, and modernist.

The Trads centralised authority, banned books and silenced scholarship; the Reform Catholics were the minds behind ressourcement, nouvelle théologie and the spirit of Vatican II.

The problem is the 'stars' often had a foot in both camps. JPII was enormously popular, and a Trad hardliner. Benedict XVI was a Reformer who became a Trad during his pontificate. Francis was a Trad who leant towards the Reform Catholic position ...

Two very distinct ideological visions of what Catholicism is supposed to be.

I'm of the Reform School – there, that surprised you – but really that's what it comes down to for me, even if I have Trad heroes, they are Trad heroes when in their Reform states. Benedict XVI was quite the modernist with regard to universalism, eschatology, judgement and hell, Francis was, very much I think, 'old school', for all his embrace of the outsider.

Whether the collapse of Catholicism – in terms of falling numbers – was the result of Vatican II (as the Trads insist), or the failure of the Magisterium to fully embrace it (as the Reformers will argue), history will tell.

Where the Church goes from here will be decided by the incoming pope. I might be entirely wrong, but I would suggest the push for Reform was largely European; it's not reflective, I think, of Africa or Asia ...

Wow, you really broke down McGreevy’s take on Catholicism’s tug-of-war between Traditionalists and Reformers! I’m with you on finding the Reform side more compelling, especially the push for engagement and openness to the modern world. It’s wild how figures like JPII, Benedict, and Francis can straddle both camps—makes it clear this isn’t a simple black-and-white divide.

I hear you on the numbers dropping and the debate over Vatican II. It’s tough to pin down one cause, but I lean toward thinking the Church’s struggle to fully live out Vatican II’s spirit might play a role. As for the future, you’re probably right that Africa and Asia might not vibe with the European reform push. Their perspectives could shake things up in a big way.

What do you think the next pope’s focus should be to bridge these visions? I’m curious where you see the Church heading!

 

[Thomas]

What do you think the next pope’s focus should be to bridge these visions? I’m curious where you see the Church heading!

I wish I knew ... !

In an ideal world I would hope for a church a little more Katholikos (καθολικός – 'universal') and a little less Roman, in the sense of litigious, and/or juridical. A more collegiate church.

Where would I start? Well Henri de Lubac was one of the cardinal architects of Vatican II and said "the Eucharist makes the Church" in his 1944 work on theology, Corpus Mysticum (p88), so I would start there, using that as a motto of my reform (a hard one for the Trads to challenge, I would have thought ).

So a 'renewal', actually a recovery, of Eucharistic theology, less bound by the arid arguments of the Aristotelian categories which simply bogs down the discussion of transubstantiation, and more an emphasis on union and communion.

Beyond a Sacrament of Redemption, it is a Sacrament of Relation.

As part of that, as the chalice in which the Eucharist sits, a recovery of Liturgical mystagogy – the Church was a liturgical church before it was a scriptural church, and centuries before it was a dogmatic institution.

In that, the implicit message that Christianity is something that one does.

 

[Thomas]

As an afterthought ...

A pilgrim and missionary Church, pilgrim as in a journeying Church, dynamic, not fixed; living, not just remembering. Missionary as in service (rather than recruitment) – it seems to me that in a world where the social order is shifting as it is, there is plenty of scope –increasingly so – for a Church in service to its neighbour – an outreach church to the poor, the dispossessed, the sick and the hungry ... Hang on ... I'm sure somebody said something like this long, long ago!

 

[Thomas]

This, extracted from a video I've mentioned elsewhere, Hart discussing the Baha'i Faith of his friend Rainn Wilson:

"... Christ’s ministry is entirely to the poor of Galilee in Judea, and despite rather perfumed translations, in much of the Synoptics at least, the teaching of Christ is really very practical advice ...

... much of the Sermon of the Mount in the original Greek is beautiful, it retains its beauty, it’s spiritual luminosity and incandescence, but it’s also exquisitely practical – don’t try to stand up to the violent oppressive man by fighting back violently, because you’ll lose, okay? Don’t let them drag you into debtors court. Make peace... The more you appreciate the sheer practicality of His teachings, the absolute concern for the poor, the forgotten, the marginal and the excluded, the more incandescent the spiritual beauty of it becomes."

 

[Thomas]

What do you think the next pope’s focus should be to bridge these visions? I’m curious where you see the Church heading!

Here's a precis of the concluding essay on a Substack feed: a Perennial Digression:

• Ordain married men—and women. Reform Catholic thinkers are mostly uniform on the question of priestly celibacy (it is unnecessary) and less uniform on the question of the ordination of women (with an increasing number trending in the direction of opening at least the diaconate to women).
• Enjoin much more serious, rigorous formation upon clergy—including many years of psychotherapy. We understand that the Church’s clergy shortage means that the prospect of forcing clergy to go through a long period of formation is often a losing one ... (but)
  To borrow an old metaphor, if the priest is a doctor of souls, then it ought to be basically as difficult and harrowing to become a priest as it is to become a doctor: not to gatekeep the job to an elite few, but to ensure that those who want it are sufficiently prepared for it and to bar the way to those unfit for its office.
• Recommit to the intellectual movements that led to the Council—in their present form.
• Recommit to the liturgical vision of the Council to enrich Catholic worship & praying life. The Council gave us the Novus Ordo and the Liturgy of the Hours. Both of these are good, but their regular celebration by most Catholics is lackluster: the average NO Mass in the United States often leaves much to be desired...
• Commit to synodal governance at local, regional, and universal levels. Empower the laity to
  a.) elect their clergy and hierarchy, which is the most ancient and original apostolic practice;
  b.) have plenipotentiary power over ecclesial funds and properties;
  c.) have a vote in the local synodal assembly; and
  d.) be represented at the global level of ecclesial synodality as well.
• Commit to the development of doctrine that defines Vatican II and the postconciliar Popes, especially Francis.