By Eugene Cullen Kennedy
Aug 26, 2010
Originally published in Bulletins from the Human Side
Even their advocates make the new liturgical translations sound like medicine for -- instead of the symptoms of -- a disorder that demeans the sacramental nature of Catholicism. Swallow this they urge -- like mothers forcing a spoon aquiver with spring tonic on their young -- it will be good for you. Thus Our Sunday Visitor reassures readers that responding "and with your spirit" is superior to "and also with you" because it literally mimics the original Latin, which, of course, is exactly what is wrong with it.
This minor footnote to the impending transition is also a fever reading of this affliction that, as with many illnesses, makes people feel sick before anybody has a name for it. The problem is illustrated by, but extends well beyond the new liturgical translations that are currently being packaged with as little concern for their contents or effects as the patent medicines that were hawked off the backs of 19th century wagons.
These new translations are signals of a widespread spiritual malaise that is a function of shorting out the connection between people’s experience of life and its spiritual, or sacramental, symbolization in their religion. They are thereby denied the energy of a sacramental system to ground them in and guide them through the mysterium tremendum et fascinans (the overwhelming and enthralling mystery) of existence. While religious leaders like to blame this on secularization -- as Pope Benedict does of a Europe that leaves religion out of its official declarations -- the responsibility may lie with the same religious leaders who, out of touch or unacquainted with the mythic depth of sacramental life, cannot keep their people in touch with this vital source of their spiritual lives.
Joseph Campbell termed this massive tear in the fabric of life as "Mythic Dissociation." When this occurs we find ourselves in what poet T.S. Eliot describes as The Waste Land. This basic estrangement from any feeling for the mystical energy of the church as the Sacramentum Mundi, the mystical mirror in which the beleaguered world can see a reflection of its profound longings and strivings, can be observed in the way the sacraments are almost exclusively discussed. They are spoken of as static objects to be regulated rather than living symbols to be celebrated. Those in charge are uncomfortable speaking of sacramental depths but are endlessly preoccupied with their surfaces. How much have you heard about the Eucharist as a Mystery that symbolizes the life-death-resurrection rhythm of human existence compared to the Eucharist that must be controlled -- celebrated only by unmarried males, denied, even though it is food, to hungry Christians who are not Catholics, and, in steamy geysers of words more regular than Old Faithful, never, even if all male priests have been carried away in a heavenly chariot, to be entrusted to the ministry of women?
That the sacraments are being made static entities is also evident in the widespread rush to make, as I heard a pastor put it, "Eucharistic adoration the source of all parish life." The Kingdom of God and Jesus are not so much among you as He is there, all alone waiting for the "adorers" to keep Him company in the long drear vigils of the night. The same pastor recently rejoiced that his church had received the title, as if he were a franchisee, of "Perpetual Eucharistic Adoration Chapel." Private devotions have a revered place in church history but this theological distortion of Jesus’ being in a chapel in need of visitors is a classic example of the "Mythic Dissociation" that, like the dire effects of medicines rattled off on television ads so that you can barely hear them, is a principal side-effect of the misguided movement to find the real Jesus hiding back in the 19th century when He is everywhere in the 21st.
The Reform of the Reform is, in fact, the Waste Land in which, as Campbell observes, "the myth," -- for us, the sacramental system -- "is patterned by authority, not emergent from life, where there is no poet’s eye to see, no adventure to be lived, where all is set for all and forever." The new texts, in effect, split our everyday experience of struggling to work and to love from their sacramental symbolization in the renewed liturgy of Vatican II. This "new" translation turns us back to another world in which the sacraments were dry remedies for shut-ins rather than dynamic sources of spiritual strength to participate in the world’s bittersweet love affair with life in all its hazards and joys. These new texts, drafted by men more interested in controlling their circumstances than giving them away as the loaves and fishes to the hungry crowds, are the real sources of the secularism that remain largely unrecognized by the pope who is so appalled by it.
[Eugene Cullen Kennedy is emeritus professor of psychology at Loyola University, Chicago.]
Thursday, August 26, 2010
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
Cleveland: St. Peter’s reappears: "You just can't do this to people."
Some will remember the “Hand of God” film about priest sex abuse in Salem, Mass., particularly the raw moment when the filmmaker is shooting outside the Boston diocesan administrative building where his brother first had first reported his abuse. Bishop Richard Lennon, who had succeeded Cardinal Law until Law’s replacement was named, comes out, pushes the camera, asserting private property rights. When the filmmaker identifies himself, Lennon dismisses him scornfully as “as sad little man.”
In his other episcopal life, Lennon closed a number of Boston churches, disregardful of pleas from parish communities, a half dozen of which occupied their churches and have maintained 24-hour vigils since in the hope of continuing their parish communities in their churches. (Rome recently rejected all of their appeals.) As Cleveland bishop, Lennon is at church closings again—50 so far. Among those closed was 700-member St. Peter in downtown Cleveland.
Unlike other closing parishes whose members were resigned to joining other parishes or, as in Boston, occupying their closed churches, St. Peter parish leaders met every Sunday to pray, consider their future and raise money. They formed a non-profit corporation and raised money to lease a commercial space. When Lennon questioned them, they told him that the corporation was set up to continue social services and education programs and the space was for congregations social gatherings. At that time, they were still exploring the prospect of continuing as a parish.
Anxious, last March Lennon sent letters to each St. Peter’s parishioner suggesting that their salvation was in jeopardy if they conducted worship services outside of a sanctioned church. He told them that he was concerned “for you and your salvation.”
Two questions were prominent as the group moved toward continuing as a church: how many would accept being excommunicated and would their pastor, Rev. Robert Marrone ,come along? On leave, Marrone kept his counsel, talking to few. At 63, he had lived in a culture of obedience since entering the seminary at 13.
Subsequently, after a year of deliberations, the group decided to continue as a parish community and on August 15th about 350, including a few from other closed Cleveland churches, joined by Father Marrone, celebrated its initial Sunday Eucharist in their new space. Marrone had decided to be faithful to the community he had nurtured and served for over 20 years rather than obedient to Bishop Lennon.
"The most important thing to me," Marrone said in an interview "is that the ministry of St. Peter's continues. The closing of St. Peter's was not legitimate. Our rights were violated. We made it clear to the bishop we don't think this is right. You just can't do this to people."
In his homily, Marrone declared, “Today is a day for action, not reaction, imagination, not fear.” He added, “I know it has not been an easy journey or you as it has not been an easy journey for me. But standing here today, I am filled with gratitude, peace, and confidence.”
The liturgy began with the standing-room only crowd singing “Christ be our light. Shine in your church gathered today. Following the closing hymn, the community into extended applause, hugged, and cried tears of joy,
For once, a community joined in its faith journey had escaped the episcopal game of moving deck chairs on the sinking Titanic because they will not yield the power of the celibate male patriarchy to married men and to women, putting first things first. Community, central to the people of ‘God, apparently means nothing to Bishop Lennon and his like.
Parishioner Bob Zack declared, "The bishop says the church is his real estate. Fine, take it. We have no control over that. But we have decided we want to keep our community together."
A University of New Hampshire scholar reports that at least 30 breakaway groups across the country, most, like St. Peter’s, determined to remain Catholics in worship and doctrine.
"The irony is most who splinter off are actually more Catholic in their beliefs than main-stream Catholics. But they really challenge the authority of the hierarchy," she has observed.
Professor William D'Antonio of the Institute for Policy Research & Catholic Studies at The Catholic University of America in Washington, D.C., has found that breakaway groups are born out of Vatican II democratization of the church, calling for collegial decision-making and subsidiary function—making decisions at the lowest level where they may be made effectively. "This movement has continued to expand, mostly in America, but it's spreading world-wide," he said.
Two primary reasons, said D'Antonio, are the church's sex-scandal, which has hurt the credibility of the institution's hierarchy, and a laity that is more educated today than any other time in church history. "They have moved away from automatically doing what the bishop says."
[This report is much indebted to Michael Malley’s Cleveland Plain Dealer article. whs
In his other episcopal life, Lennon closed a number of Boston churches, disregardful of pleas from parish communities, a half dozen of which occupied their churches and have maintained 24-hour vigils since in the hope of continuing their parish communities in their churches. (Rome recently rejected all of their appeals.) As Cleveland bishop, Lennon is at church closings again—50 so far. Among those closed was 700-member St. Peter in downtown Cleveland.
Unlike other closing parishes whose members were resigned to joining other parishes or, as in Boston, occupying their closed churches, St. Peter parish leaders met every Sunday to pray, consider their future and raise money. They formed a non-profit corporation and raised money to lease a commercial space. When Lennon questioned them, they told him that the corporation was set up to continue social services and education programs and the space was for congregations social gatherings. At that time, they were still exploring the prospect of continuing as a parish.
Anxious, last March Lennon sent letters to each St. Peter’s parishioner suggesting that their salvation was in jeopardy if they conducted worship services outside of a sanctioned church. He told them that he was concerned “for you and your salvation.”
Two questions were prominent as the group moved toward continuing as a church: how many would accept being excommunicated and would their pastor, Rev. Robert Marrone ,come along? On leave, Marrone kept his counsel, talking to few. At 63, he had lived in a culture of obedience since entering the seminary at 13.
Subsequently, after a year of deliberations, the group decided to continue as a parish community and on August 15th about 350, including a few from other closed Cleveland churches, joined by Father Marrone, celebrated its initial Sunday Eucharist in their new space. Marrone had decided to be faithful to the community he had nurtured and served for over 20 years rather than obedient to Bishop Lennon.
"The most important thing to me," Marrone said in an interview "is that the ministry of St. Peter's continues. The closing of St. Peter's was not legitimate. Our rights were violated. We made it clear to the bishop we don't think this is right. You just can't do this to people."
In his homily, Marrone declared, “Today is a day for action, not reaction, imagination, not fear.” He added, “I know it has not been an easy journey or you as it has not been an easy journey for me. But standing here today, I am filled with gratitude, peace, and confidence.”
The liturgy began with the standing-room only crowd singing “Christ be our light. Shine in your church gathered today. Following the closing hymn, the community into extended applause, hugged, and cried tears of joy,
For once, a community joined in its faith journey had escaped the episcopal game of moving deck chairs on the sinking Titanic because they will not yield the power of the celibate male patriarchy to married men and to women, putting first things first. Community, central to the people of ‘God, apparently means nothing to Bishop Lennon and his like.
Parishioner Bob Zack declared, "The bishop says the church is his real estate. Fine, take it. We have no control over that. But we have decided we want to keep our community together."
A University of New Hampshire scholar reports that at least 30 breakaway groups across the country, most, like St. Peter’s, determined to remain Catholics in worship and doctrine.
"The irony is most who splinter off are actually more Catholic in their beliefs than main-stream Catholics. But they really challenge the authority of the hierarchy," she has observed.
Professor William D'Antonio of the Institute for Policy Research & Catholic Studies at The Catholic University of America in Washington, D.C., has found that breakaway groups are born out of Vatican II democratization of the church, calling for collegial decision-making and subsidiary function—making decisions at the lowest level where they may be made effectively. "This movement has continued to expand, mostly in America, but it's spreading world-wide," he said.
Two primary reasons, said D'Antonio, are the church's sex-scandal, which has hurt the credibility of the institution's hierarchy, and a laity that is more educated today than any other time in church history. "They have moved away from automatically doing what the bishop says."
[This report is much indebted to Michael Malley’s Cleveland Plain Dealer article. whs
Wednesday, August 11, 2010
Latest Vatican document is final straw for women
The Irish Times - Monday, July 26, 2010
The Vatican document has shocked many Irish Catholics, prompting them to ask about theological reasons why the church objects to women's ordination.
ANALYSIS: The Vatican must no longer be granted immunity from equality legislation, in the name of liberty, equality, and even the Gospel, writes MARY CONDREN
THE VATICAN'S recent Normae de Gravioribus Delictis document prescribes automatic excommunication for anyone involved in the ordination of a woman. In according greater penalties to those who "attempted" women's ordination than to clerics who abused children, it has further shocked many loyal Irish Catholics, prompting them to inquire about the theological reasons why the Roman Catholic Church objects to women's ordination.
A Vatican document issued in 1976 set out some of these arguments clearly.
1. That incarnation took place in the male sex and therefore women were excluded from the priesthood
Logically, this means that women should be excluded from baptism as well, since it is an ancient teaching of the church that "whatever has not become incarnate cannot be redeemed". If the church insists here that "God became man" means God became male, then it cannot simultaneously argue that in liturgical language "man" means both male and female.
2. That no women were ordained in the New Testament
Jesus did not ordain anyone. Ordination as we know it today did not take place at all in the New Testament, and took another 300 years when Christianity and empire merged.
3. The practice of the church has a normative character in the fact of conferring priestly ordination only on men, it is a question of an unbroken tradition throughout the history of the church
This is the argument from tradition whose logic is as follows: If something wrong goes on for five years it might be mortal sin; if it goes on for 10 years it becomes venial sin; if it goes on for 2,000 years it is no longer considered wrong, but tradition.
The argument from tradition was also used against freedom from slavery, and many other issues in the history of the church.
4. When Christ's role in the Eucharist is to be expressed sacramentally, there would not be this "natural resemblance" which must exist between Christ and his minister if the role of Christ were not taken by a man; in such a case it would be difficult to see in the minister the image of Christ
The church appears to be saying what feminists have suspected all along: that the image of Christ cannot be seen in a woman. Does this not make nonsense of the whole of Christian moral theology, which is based on the fact that we must "see Christ in the image of our neighbour, man or woman"?
What are the theological criteria for deciding between what is authentic Christian theology and mere phallic worship?
Over the years, many other arguments have been put forward to exclude women from ordination. Thomas Aquinas, for instance, could find no theological reason for such exclusion, but eventually concluded that women, like slaves, could not "signify eminence", and, therefore, could not become priests. (Mary Robinson, Mary McAleese?)
Others sought to argue for women's subordination in the realm of nature, but by 1976, even the Vatican knew better than to go down that road. In reality, they invented new arguments, and the one regarding Jesus's "maleness" was considered by many distinguished Catholic theologians to be "approaching heresy".
Before the Vatican issued the document, it had asked the pontifical biblical commission to explore the biblical reasons for excluding women. Seventeen out of 17 members concluded that they could fine none. To their great credit, several members resigned in protest at the use the Vatican had made of their work.
The 1976 document was a watershed for many women who had sought to serve the church and had begun theological and ministerial studies to that end. Some persisted and, at least in Ireland, remained mostly impoverished and marginalised.
Others despaired of remaining in perpetual opposition, and began to explore the deep seated psychological, anthropological and political reasons for the Vatican's stance.
They looked, for instance, to Scandinavia where, since the late 1960s, women had been ordained. However, a "let-out" clause allowed those male clerics who disapproved to maintain "clean dioceses", "clean parishes", and even "clean vestments", ie those that an ordained female body had yet to defile.
But the clerics continued their deliberations. What would happen if a pregnant woman came to be ordained? If her foetus turned out to be a male child, would apostolic succession automatically pass on to him? Would funeral or Eucharistic rites "take" if a woman priest happened to be menstruating?
The arguments raged until a cartoon appeared in the national newspapers. A male cleric was depicted asking the Lord whether he should resign. The Lord replied: "Think of your salary my son."
Where equality legislation has been passed throughout the world, the Vatican has been granted immunity. But this latest document is the last straw.
In many impoverished countries, in the name of religious freedom, such misogynist attitudes legitimise violent practices toward women and children. All such immunity must now be withdrawn, in the name of liberty, equality, and even the Gospel.
Dr Mary Condren lectures at the Centre for Gender and Women's Studies in Trinity College Dublin and is director of the Institute for Feminism and Religion. www.instituteforfeminismandreligion.org
The Vatican document has shocked many Irish Catholics, prompting them to ask about theological reasons why the church objects to women's ordination.
ANALYSIS: The Vatican must no longer be granted immunity from equality legislation, in the name of liberty, equality, and even the Gospel, writes MARY CONDREN
THE VATICAN'S recent Normae de Gravioribus Delictis document prescribes automatic excommunication for anyone involved in the ordination of a woman. In according greater penalties to those who "attempted" women's ordination than to clerics who abused children, it has further shocked many loyal Irish Catholics, prompting them to inquire about the theological reasons why the Roman Catholic Church objects to women's ordination.
A Vatican document issued in 1976 set out some of these arguments clearly.
1. That incarnation took place in the male sex and therefore women were excluded from the priesthood
Logically, this means that women should be excluded from baptism as well, since it is an ancient teaching of the church that "whatever has not become incarnate cannot be redeemed". If the church insists here that "God became man" means God became male, then it cannot simultaneously argue that in liturgical language "man" means both male and female.
2. That no women were ordained in the New Testament
Jesus did not ordain anyone. Ordination as we know it today did not take place at all in the New Testament, and took another 300 years when Christianity and empire merged.
3. The practice of the church has a normative character in the fact of conferring priestly ordination only on men, it is a question of an unbroken tradition throughout the history of the church
This is the argument from tradition whose logic is as follows: If something wrong goes on for five years it might be mortal sin; if it goes on for 10 years it becomes venial sin; if it goes on for 2,000 years it is no longer considered wrong, but tradition.
The argument from tradition was also used against freedom from slavery, and many other issues in the history of the church.
4. When Christ's role in the Eucharist is to be expressed sacramentally, there would not be this "natural resemblance" which must exist between Christ and his minister if the role of Christ were not taken by a man; in such a case it would be difficult to see in the minister the image of Christ
The church appears to be saying what feminists have suspected all along: that the image of Christ cannot be seen in a woman. Does this not make nonsense of the whole of Christian moral theology, which is based on the fact that we must "see Christ in the image of our neighbour, man or woman"?
What are the theological criteria for deciding between what is authentic Christian theology and mere phallic worship?
Over the years, many other arguments have been put forward to exclude women from ordination. Thomas Aquinas, for instance, could find no theological reason for such exclusion, but eventually concluded that women, like slaves, could not "signify eminence", and, therefore, could not become priests. (Mary Robinson, Mary McAleese?)
Others sought to argue for women's subordination in the realm of nature, but by 1976, even the Vatican knew better than to go down that road. In reality, they invented new arguments, and the one regarding Jesus's "maleness" was considered by many distinguished Catholic theologians to be "approaching heresy".
Before the Vatican issued the document, it had asked the pontifical biblical commission to explore the biblical reasons for excluding women. Seventeen out of 17 members concluded that they could fine none. To their great credit, several members resigned in protest at the use the Vatican had made of their work.
The 1976 document was a watershed for many women who had sought to serve the church and had begun theological and ministerial studies to that end. Some persisted and, at least in Ireland, remained mostly impoverished and marginalised.
Others despaired of remaining in perpetual opposition, and began to explore the deep seated psychological, anthropological and political reasons for the Vatican's stance.
They looked, for instance, to Scandinavia where, since the late 1960s, women had been ordained. However, a "let-out" clause allowed those male clerics who disapproved to maintain "clean dioceses", "clean parishes", and even "clean vestments", ie those that an ordained female body had yet to defile.
But the clerics continued their deliberations. What would happen if a pregnant woman came to be ordained? If her foetus turned out to be a male child, would apostolic succession automatically pass on to him? Would funeral or Eucharistic rites "take" if a woman priest happened to be menstruating?
The arguments raged until a cartoon appeared in the national newspapers. A male cleric was depicted asking the Lord whether he should resign. The Lord replied: "Think of your salary my son."
Where equality legislation has been passed throughout the world, the Vatican has been granted immunity. But this latest document is the last straw.
In many impoverished countries, in the name of religious freedom, such misogynist attitudes legitimise violent practices toward women and children. All such immunity must now be withdrawn, in the name of liberty, equality, and even the Gospel.
Dr Mary Condren lectures at the Centre for Gender and Women's Studies in Trinity College Dublin and is director of the Institute for Feminism and Religion. www.instituteforfeminismandreligion.org
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)