Uncategorized

In an article by John L. Allen Jr. with Maureen O’Connell an assistant professor of theology at Fordham University titled Young theologians today face ‘paranoia,’ new Fordham prof says

Asserting that church leaders are today attempting to return the church to a “culture one” model, Davidson said that because the socio-economic status of American Catholics is not in decline and because “laity are not willing to grant control” to the hierarchy, “the percentage of Catholics who are culture one will continue to decline.”

If older liberal Catholics are over-represented in reform groups such as Call to Action and Voice of the Faithful, Davidson said, younger conservative Catholics are equally over-represented among new priests, seminarians, and even theologians.

Speaking specifically about theologians, Davidson said that a growing tendency for younger theologians to reflect a “culture one” mentality reflects “a larger pattern of separation between the laity and the leaders of the institutional church.”

O’Connell largely agreed, saying that one distinguishing feature of her generation of theologians is that it came of age in an era of a “near-total disconnect between a culture one hierarchy and a culture two laity.”

Facing that situation, O’Connell said, many younger theologians today feel a need to try to be of pastoral service to the church – working with disparate movements such as Voice of the Faithful, the Focolare and Sant’Egidio, for example, or writing for non-specialized audiences outside the academy. Those activities, she said, represent an attempt to “fill in the pastoral gaps.”

In that light, O’Connell proposed that amid today’s tensions over Catholic identity, perhaps a defining characteristic of what constitutes a “good Catholic theologian” ought to be what she called “pedagogical excellence” – meaning a commitment to teaching and formation.

I don’t think I buy this “culture one” and “culture two” distinction as something defining younger Catholics. For me a good theologian, priest, member of the laity, etc would think in terms of the body of Christ. Certainly throughout history there has been emphasis on one part of the body of Christ over the other and at times unhealthy emphasis. Whether it is clericalism or the unfortunate laity against the “institutional church” – they are both errors. The last 40 years has placed too much emphasis on the laity while at the same time wiping out distinctions between the ordained priesthood and the priesthood of the faithful. Ignoring ontological differences is not healthy and we should instead be seeing the glory in all parts of the mystical body of Christ and not playing off one part of the body against another. A sort of class warfare between the clergy and the laity. Of course St. Paul already saw this tendency in the early Church and preached against it. in 1st Corinthians 12:14-20

For the body does not consist of one member but of many. If the foot should say, “Because I am not a hand, I do not belong to the body,” that would not make it any less a part of the body. And if the ear should say, “Because I am not an eye, I do not belong to the body,” that would not make it any less a part of the body. If the whole body were an eye, where would be the hearing? If the whole body were an ear, where would be the sense of smell? But as it is, God arranged the organs in the body, each one of them, as he chose. If all were a single organ, where would the body be? As it is, there are many parts, yet one body.

As for “pedagogical excellence” that is of course required, but the most important commitment in theology is the commitment to truth in theology the “mother of sciences” and what St. Augustine described as “reasoning or discourse about the divinity.” Formation in error is not a real formation. Maureen O’Connell seems to have a dread of the younger seminarians, priests, etc, similar to Fr. Greeley who tries to dismiss them as “Young fogeys” and this “culture one” distinction is much the same in my opinion. I prefer a “culture of life” that requires everyone in the mystical body of Christ to fulfill their God given roles.

With the recent display of St. Padre Pio’s body I think many people are under the impression that Padre Pio ‘s body is incorrupt. I see this statement made on some Catholic blogs from time to time where they look at the recent photos and assume this is the case. The multiple reports I have seen have stated that they used a wax mask in his case.

“When Pio’s crypt was opened earlier this year, the head was described as partly skeletal, though the hands were reportedly in perfect shape, with no traces of stigmata. A wax mask was ordered from a London company that once supplied Madame Tussauds. They worked entirely from photographs.”

The Church has never seen the incorruptness of a body as proof of anything and is not considered as part of the process for canonization. It certainly appears that God has done this as a miracle from time to time such as in the case of St. Bernadette and others.

To put recent events in some perspective, I have asked Father Michael Pfleger, Pastor of St. Sabina’s Parish, to step back from his obligations there and take leave for a couple of weeks from his pastoral duties, effective today. Fr. Pfleger does not believe this to be the right step at this time. While respecting his disagreement, I have nevertheless asked him to use this opportunity to reflect on his recent statements and actions in the light of the Church’s regulations for all Catholic priests. I hope that this period will also be a time away from the public spotlight and for rest and attention to family concerns.

I hope also that the life of St. Sabina’s parish may continue in uninterrupted fashion. Fr. William Vanecko, Pastor of St. Kilian’s parish, will be temporary administrator of St. Sabina’s and will assure the full complement of ministerial services during this period. I ask the members of St. Sabina’s parish to cooperate with him and to keep him and Fr. Pfleger in their prayers. They are in mine.

It is rather interesting that the Cardinal even brought up Fr. Pfleger disagreement on this. I do hope this "Sabinattical" does him some good.

Whispers in the Loggia

… a St. Anthony 404 page.

A reader sent me a link to this Onion piece which is pretty funny.

American Papist is running a virtual poll on who should be the next vice president of
the USCCB and who should head other committees.

AirMaria.com has an in depth article on the Motu Proprio titled Exorcising the Spirits of Confusion: Summorum Pontificum and the End of Liturgical Freelancing. The article contrasts Sister Joan Chittister ill informed commentary on the document with the actual documents of Vatican II and previous documents of the Church. This is a very good article.

The Holy Father says "It’s cool to pray the Rosary!"

A long range mike picked up the Pope saying just before they left the Vatican. "After the Motu Proprio just take me somewhere far away preferably without newspapers before the new document from the CDF hits the streets."

What a week though is it for the press considering all of the opportunities they have lately been provided to good things wrong. "Vatican reaffirms Catholic doctrine" will be the one headline we will not be seeing. In fact after reading the coverage I was surprised that my computer still worked considering that the Pope has sent us all back in time to the Dark Ages.

It is a good thing though for the CDF to make some clarifications that unfortunately needed to be made. Reading through it I see nothing that changes the understanding that I already had. The problems it seems that progressive theologians and radical traditionalists both tried to make the phrase subsist in the Catholic Church something it is not. One side that it didn’t mean enough and the other that it means too much.

I liked the phrasing of of one response that can pretty much could be used as stock answer for all of Vatican II. The Second Vatican Council neither changed nor intended to change this doctrine, rather it developed, deepened and more fully explained it.

The MSM is of course spinning other aspects of the documents by saying that the Church is calling other "churches" defective and wounded and playing it up the Vatican as arrogant and looking for a fight. Again the document only reiterates the teaching of Vatican II where the Catholic Church call other ecclesial bodies churches where they have apostolic succession and those that don’t have this are ecclesial communities.

I once did a parody about a secret Vatican congregation called the "Congregation for Pissing Off Church Pundit." I am glad to see Cardinal Levada has joined their ranks.

"I can’t fight back the tears. This is the saddest moment in my life as a man, priest and bishop," Luca Brandolini, a member of the liturgy commission of the Italian bishops’ conference, told Rome daily La Repubblica in an interview on Sunday.

"It’s a day of mourning, not just for me but for the many people who worked for the Second Vatican Council. A reform for which many people worked, with great sacrifice and only inspired by the desire to renew the Church, has now been cancelled."

Talk about hyperbole. It is bad enough when the press gets it so wrong, but it is extra sad to see a bishop disparage the Mass used by the Church for 500 years plus. We have been use to radical traditionalists disparage the 1969 missal and not making distinctions between it and the experimental celebration of it. Now we will be having the other side do the same to the Tridentine Rite. Funny how all the talk about diversity and tolerance means that we can not celebrate two approved forms of the Mass within the Latin rite. Maybe we should advertise the Tridentine Rite as a multicultural experience.