Roman Catholicism – Whither Goest Thou?

[Thomas]

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 ...

 

[TheLightWithin]

It will be interesting to see what develops as they elect a new Pope. The movie Conclave came out at the perfect time - enough earlier for people to have seen it and thought about it.

Then when the new Pope starts - what then? If there is someone from Africa or Asia, how will Western Catholics respond? If there is a Reform minded Westerner, how will Africa and Asia respond?

 

[Nicholas Weeks]

Report of College of Cardinals on all 252, voting or not. Many details, historical, personal, theological. Papabili listed:

The College of Cardinals Report

 

[wil]

I'm of the Reform School – there, that surprised you

Surprised who?

My view? (Which of course could be entirely wrong) you have trad shoes, and walk a trad path, with a trad knowldege you lean on, but have a reformed empathetic understanding heart from exposure to the world with family and friends.

Without both, you wouldn't be you.

This is me, my interpretation of what I have seen in my limited knowledge and exposure to you here. I love ya brother and the insight you have shared. If I am 100% wrong, know there is no insult...only appreciation.

 

[Thomas]

My view? ...

Well, if you know your astrology, you'll know that Pisces hate it when people say "I know you" and will sometimes go out of their way to demonstrate they don't.

But as you're my brother I am obliged to make an allowance, and realise it's sometimes useful to get an insight into oneself from someone who knows one.

Love you too, ya big galoot.

 

[Thomas]

Then when the new Pope starts - what then? If there is someone from Africa or Asia, how will Western Catholics respond? If there is a Reform minded Westerner, how will Africa and Asia respond?

We can only wait and see ...

 

[Thomas]

Where to go from here?

For the Trads, there's only one way, an entrenchment, a backwards – and that is to continue the path of decline.

From my reading, one thing was a common experience among theologians of the immediate pre-VII era, and that was the Church's teaching of a dry, dusty and defensive manualist tradition of neo-scholasticism which opposed 'modernism' in all its perceived forms.

For all its critics assert, Vatican II did not kill the 'Catholic Milieu' – that was already exhausted and the Church was already in decline. John XXIII saw that – the Church needed fresh air, to breathe, rather than continue holding its breathe, as it were, as the world fell apart around it. The Church needed to be in the world, rather than building barricades against it.

+++

Reform Catholics need to own the story – Vatican II didn’t break the Church, the Church was already broken.

Reform Catholics need to continue the story, and bring to the fore the rich history of the main currents and characters at Vatican II. The themes of Ressourcement (Return to the Sources – to the pre-Scholastic era of Scripture and Patristic commentary) went some way towards this.

This was not an abandonment of tradition, it is very much a revitalising of a moribund movement. Catholics need to show that Ressourcement theology is not the modern, heretical novelty the Trads accused them of, but rather the contemporary flowering of a long tradition of Christian thinking and living.

The late Pope Francis has taken some preliminary steps here. He was required to stem the growing movement of Trad opposition to anything suggestive of Vatican II. He has overseen the Synod on Synodality, an early attempt to restore the process of a Church life that the Council envisioned, in the spirit of a collegiate participation and leadership, rather that top-down authority. While his teachings are more informed by Vatican II than by previous councils, and he was more liberal than BXVI or JPII, he is no more a liberal progressive than an ultra-conservative.

+++

Should the next Pope stand as his successor, then that pontiff could potentially make some of the changes that many Catholics wanted Francis to make but did not. Should be be in the line of BXVI or JPII, then we can see a return to a top-down authority, a shrinking Church which favours a small band in unquestioning communion with a supreme pontiff.

It falls to Catholics now to maintain the pressure to achieve Francis' legacy – his plea for mercy and compassion on migrants and the marginalised (a stark contrast to current global political trends and a test of actual Christian values); a call to see Christ in each and in all; and the call to collegiate, mixed lay and clerical structures that can bring out a Catholicism with both breadth and depth, fit to face the future.

 

[wil]

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

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

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

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.

 

[Thomas]

The College of Cardinals Report

From this, we can derive the following:

Cardinals hatted by:
Francis – 108 (plus 49 other cardinals 80 or over and thus not eligible to vote)
Benedict XVI – 22 (plus 40 not eligible)
John Paul II – 5 (plus 40 not eligible)

22 Cardinals are considered papabile (most likely choices), but then JPII wasn't, so this is not really indicative.

Assuming cardinals were chosen by popes because they held similar views, one might assume that the college will elect someone to continue the legacy of Pope Francis ... but we cannot assume that.

 

[Thomas]

What we're up against:

Restricting the Old Latin Mass
In July 2021, Pope Francis issued a papal decree imposing restrictions on the celebration of the Latin Mass. The decree continues to prove controversial; many Latin Mass parishes, especially in the US, closed, with more under threat.

Pope Francis insisted the restrictions were necessary to promote unity, believing some adherents of the Latin Rite were opposed to Vatican II.

His goal was to have just one form of the rite, in the vernacular.

Commentary:
It's probably true that the Latin Rite was a rallying point for the Trads, it's nevertheless a shame because it is a restriction. Better to have the Latin Rite as an option, and seek a better and more suitable language for the vernacular. There was never a single Rite of the mass, and it seems a shame to lose an historical diversity.

Whatever one's views, when it comes to it, the Trads have a richer liturgical heritage, and generally better art, better music, etc., than the common vernacular expressions. Moreso now when 'religious art' seems generally to be sensationalist. My opinions on 'folk music' at mass is well known, I think – in the setting, it's execrable. If your folk music can produce an equivalent of, say, Corsican Polyphony, Gregorian Chant, Buddhist Chanting, Islam's Adhan, then OK, but in my experience, it doesn't.

Promoting a “Synodal Church”
Francis believed synodality as central to the renewal and future of the Catholic Church, "a way of journeying together, listening, of collaborative discernment, and being more participatory and inclusive".

Critics say the concept undermines the Church’s hierarchical structure; excludes conservative and traditional groups and may be used to push for radical change of doctrine and morals. Proponents argue it is not about changing Church teaching, but rather finding new ways to live out the Church’s mission in today’s world.

Commentary:
The bureaucracy never wants to surrender its authority. It's a complex question, as there's clear evidence that the Church made decisions without the Pope, and not until the Church because the religion of the Roman Empire was central authority so asserted.

Footnote:
Those with longer memories will recall @junatoo3 and myself at loggerheads over the question of the influence of Emperors on Church doctrine. I refuted those claims and tend to still hold that position. However, I'm probably warmer towards @juantoo3 on the broader question of the nature of the Church after its Roman 'elevation' – a tutor of mine said "It's not the miracle of Constantine's Conversion, the miracle is the Church surviving being made the Religion of State."

I'm not so sure it's that clear. I think the Church, in adopting a collegiate style of governance from the Roman State (a senate-style forum), also adopted the worst excesses of secular rule – all the pomp and circumstance, the wealth and the palaces. its Autocracy.

Rather than 'render unto Caesar", the Church decided to be both Christ and Caesar – the former a shepherd, the latter an emperor – and failed to succeed at either, falling between the two throughout its history, leading to its rich, tragic and often unenviable heritage.

In short, the Emperors didn't do it to us, we did it to ourselves ...

Focusing on Climate Change
Francis made 'climate change' a priority of his pontificate, a moral and ethical obligation directly tied to caring for God’s creation and protection of the most vulnerable. While many Church leaders echo his concerns, others say the emphasis exceeds the religious scope of the Church, question his solutions, and even question the science of climate change (hopefully this latter is a sign of the advanced age of the critics).

Reassessing Humanae Vitae
The 1968 controversial encyclical on artificial contraception as "intrinsically evil.” Reassessed in recent years in light of a more flexible approach. Some theologians, including the new leaders of the Pontifical Academy for Life, have suggested the teaching is not infallible (a whole other debate/can of worms), and have explored the possibilities of change. Support of or opposition to a reassessment is regarded as a reliable indicator of faithfulness or dissent vis-à-vis the authority of the magisterium.

Commentary:
Whatever anyone says, many simply ignored it. And many good Catholics left the Church because of it.

My view is the Church should offer braod instruction, but stop treating its flock like children, and removing their own moral agency on matters that are simply not as simple as they would like. How, for example, the permissible 'rhythm method' is not a means of avoiding conception, I have no idea ...

Communion for Divorced & “Remarried”
Francis controversially allowed some divorced and civilly remarried Catholics to receive Holy Communion on a case-by-case basis under certain circumstances and after a period of discernment. The Church had until then barred divorced and civilly remarried couples from receiving Holy Communion because, objectively, they are living in a state of adultery.

BXVI, in his days as Cardinal Ratzinger, made note of American Bishops who were allowing annulments at a figure at least ten times greater than the rest of the Church, a clear indication of a means of 'getting round' the question, and an obvious example of the reality of the 'beinding of the rules while declaring a faithfulness to magisterial teaching.

Supporters embraced the change as a pastoral necessity in addressing social complexities of today. Critics said it potentially contradicted previous teaching on the indissolubility of marriage, and could lead couples to flout the moral law.

Married clergy
And female deacons ... Francis kicked that tin can firmly down the road ...

Commentary:
Increasingly a nonsensical position when the Orthodox allow married clergy, as do the Anglican communities, and those priests, converting to Catholicism, are allowed to function as priests, and be married ...

 

[Nicholas Weeks]

[...]
Assuming cardinals were chosen by popes because they held similar views, one might assume that the college will elect someone to continue the legacy of Pope Francis ... but we cannot assume that.??

A Buddhist's favored choices for next Pope, all traditional. From Ceylon, Guinea, USA, Germany:

Cardinal Malcolm Ranjith

Cardinal Robert Sarah

Cardinal Raymond Burke

Cardinal Gerhard Ludwig Müller

 

[TheLightWithin]

Restricting the Old Latin Mass
In July 2021, Pope Francis issued a papal decree imposing restrictions on the celebration of the Latin Mass. The decree continues to prove controversial; many Latin Mass parishes, especially in the US, closed, with more under threat.

I never understood why this was. What is the problem with the Latin Rite? Aside from being incomprehensible to many, that can be dealt with by studying Latin or memorizing what things mean in the rite. Did he t

Pope Francis insisted the restrictions were necessary to promote unity, believing some adherents of the Latin Rite were opposed to Vatican II.

Did he think that the existence of the Latin Rite was going to rile up the adherents?

His goal was to have just one form of the rite, in the vernacular.

Did he think this would make the Traditionalists and their feelings go away?

I'm not Catholic by any stretch, but from what I know if it, it seems to make sense to offer a diversity of Rites if it's physically possible to do so.
Even if they were offered primarily on special occasions. And if churches that offered them also offered classes on Vatican II and what it stood for and how beneficial it was.

 

[TheLightWithin]

Reassessing Humanae Vitae
The 1968 controversial encyclical on artificial contraception as "intrinsically evil.”

That always seemed like such overreach and overkill
What mental gymnastics did they have to do to reach such a draconian conclusion?

 

[TheLightWithin]

Communion for Divorced & “Remarried”
Francis controversially allowed some divorced and civilly remarried Catholics to receive Holy Communion on a case-by-case basis under certain circumstances and after a period of discernment. The Church had until then barred divorced and civilly remarried couples from receiving Holy Communion because, objectively, they are living in a state of adultery.

The wholesale opposition to divorce under any circumstances seems to be based on something taken out of cultural context: The concern Jesus expressed for women abandoned by husbands without due process, without a get, without support, IF am not mistaken. Correct me if I am.
Refusal to allow any divorce seems hardheaded and to have even more "hardness of heart"

 

[TheLightWithin]

Married clergy

Wouldn't it make some sense to have some limited orders of priests who can marry? Not every order need allow it. When Married Orthodox or Anglican priests convert, if they wish to become Catholic priests, they need to join those orders, maybe? Rather than what might otherwise be a case by case situation. Case by case situations can seem incredibly reasonable and considerate at times, other times it can look like people getting special treatment or inconsistency. So yeah, why not have certain orders allow marriage, and people who want to be in that order have to apply or something.

I can see though, how even that would be a radical cultural change from what Catholics around the world for centuries have been used to.

 

[Thomas]

I never understood why this was. What is the problem with the Latin Rite?

I think it's seen as a kind of Trojan Horse for the argument that everything is better if we go back to pre-VII days.

I'm not Catholic by any stretch, but from what I know if it, it seems to make sense to offer a diversity of Rites if it's physically possible to do so.
Even if they were offered primarily on special occasions.

I agree.

At the local Dominican Priory, there is a Liturgy called 'The Dominican Rite'. I asked one of the monks what was distinct about the Rite. Nothing much, as it happens. But he did begin to tell me that the pope wasn't too happy with it, and there was some back-and-forth, at some point I asked, "When was this?" Turns out it was in the Middle Ages!

Those monks have long memories!

And if churches that offered them also offered classes on Vatican II and what it stood for and how beneficial it was.

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

 

[Thomas]

That always seemed like such overreach and overkill

You'd have to read and study the encyclical. It's a very nuanced argument ... I'm not sure even now I'm fully informed on it, but I do know, of course, the public debate broke down to those absolutely for v those absolutely against, both sides pitching a distorted interpretation of the document. I'm not defending it, but I'm not calling for its dismissal.

 

[Thomas]

The wholesale opposition to divorce under any circumstances seems to be based on something taken out of cultural context: The concern Jesus expressed for women abandoned by husbands without due process, without a get, without support, IF am not mistaken. Correct me if I am.
Refusal to allow any divorce seems hardheaded and to have even more "hardness of heart"

Well it's an ongoing debate. Depends who's 'cultural context', or interpretation of cultural context ...

... again, I'm not disputing with you. That a woman, or man, stuck in an abusive relationship has 'no way out' seems terrible.

+++

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.

Let's face it, most people want to get married for the dress and the 'do' (celebration) – they get married in church, and never step foot inside it again. It's a farce. So if a couple want a day, to spend a fortune on clothing and catering, OK. If they want a priest to bless the union, OK. If they want to take an unbreakable oath before God, then I'd reserve that for those couples who have been together n-number of years.

But that in itself will require a complete revisioning of what marriage is about ...

 

[Thomas]

Wouldn't it make some sense to have some limited orders of priests who can marry?

Not that simple ... it's either a 'yes' or a 'no', and at present it's a 'no', but a 'yes' in some circumstances.

Technically then, and spiritually, there is nothing saying a married priest cannot perform sacramental acts.

It was not a condition from the get-go, but it emerged pretty soon.

In the Orthodox world priests can be married, but bishops cannot.

I can see though, how even that would be a radical cultural change from what Catholics around the world for centuries have been used to.

Yep, and there is a large consensus that nothing in the tradition can be changed.

There is a growing rational argument that, despite that argument, the reality is things change all the time, because the interpretation/understanding changes ...

But what you've got is a hardcore conservatism that believe if you allow one little change you open the floodgates to everything being questioned – and they're right, the hardcore liberalisers will kick into action at the first sign of allowance.

It's not gonna be easy ... and it's nowhere near as easy as the non-Catholic thinks it is. Every decision has ramifications and unseen consequences ... so the safe thing is not to change.

 

[wil]

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

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

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

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?

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.

This level of religion is reading a book, like reading a book, my most often preferred level of spirituality is listening to the wind in the leaves converse with the birds and the babbling brook.