I had some iPad problems posting the photo of Wendell Berry. This is Wendell and not John Greenleaf!

He is a Kentucky farmer, a writer, an activist, and a cultural critic. His theology isn’t that bad either.

Wendell Berry gave a talk to Baptist ministers in Kentucky on January 11th. I wish someone could sign him up to give the same talk to the USCCB at their next meeting.

“The Bible,” Berry reminded the Baptists, “… has a lot more to say against fornication and adultery than against homosexuality. If one accepts the 24th and 104th Psalms as scriptural norms, then surface mining and other forms of earth destruction are perversions.

“If we take the Gospels seriously, how can we not see industrial warfare — with its inevitable massacre of innocents — as a most shocking perversion?

“By the standard of all scriptures, neglect of the poor, of widows and orphans, of the sick, the homeless, the insane, is an abominable perversion.

Berry’s theology is unquestionably orthodox and Christo-centric. In principle it should delight any red-hated episcopal authority. “Jesus talked of hating your neighbor as tantamount to hating God,” Berry stressed. “Yet some Christians hate their neighbors by policy and are busy hunting biblical justifications for doing so,” he said. “Are they not perverts in the fullest and fairest sense of that term? And yet none of these offenses — not all of them together — has made as much political/religious noise as homosexual marriage.”

Wendell Berry is not gay. John Greenleaf, happily marred to the woman of his dreams for more than 40 years, isn’t either; but he resonates completely with Berry.

“If I were one of a homosexual couple — the same as I am one of a heterosexual couple — I would place my faith and hope in the mercy of Christ, not in the judgment of Christians,” Berry said.

“When I consider the hostility of political churches to homosexuality and homosexual marriage, I do so remembering the history of Christian war, torture, terror, slavery and annihilation against Jews, Muslims, black Africans, American Indians and others. And more of the same by Catholics against Protestants, Protestants against Catholics, Catholics against Catholics, Protestants against Protestants, as if by law requiring the love of God to be balanced by hatred of some neighbor for the sin of being unlike some divinely preferred us.”

My final citation from Berry’s ministerial lecture should be carved in stone and put on granite monuments in front of every seminary, chancery, and cathedral.

“Condemnation by category is the lowest form of hatred, for it is cold-hearted and abstract, lacking even the courage of a personal hatred,” Berry said. “Categorical condemnation is the hatred of the mob. It makes cowards brave. And there is nothing more fearful than a religious mob, a mob overflowing with righteousness – as at the crucifixion and before and since. This can happen only after we have made a categorical refusal to kindness: to heretics, foreigners, enemies, or any other group different from ourselves.”

———

After Ash Wednesday some thoughts about doing theology in a positive and enriching way.

According to an AP article by Rachel Zoll, published on February 6th, the USCCB is again taking on President Obama, this time about immigration and gays.

“The nation’s Roman Catholic bishops,” writes Zoll, “are in a difficult position as the debate over immigration reform gets underway: The immigrant-built American church, known for advocating a broad welcome for migrants and refugees, could end up opposing reform because it would recognize same-sex partners. . . .

“. . . Catholic bishops, with the support of evangelicals and other theological conservatives, have sent a letter to Obama protesting his proposal. In a sign of the sensitivity of the issue, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops would not provide a copy of the statement, saying the signatories agreed not to make the letter public. Sister Mary Ann Walsh, a spokeswoman for the bishops, would say only that recognition of gay couples in the president’s reform proposals ‘jeopardizes passage of the bill.’ ”

So much for transparency and an open discussion of issues.

But then fighting gay marriage is a divine gift of grace. San Francisco Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone, newly installed and flexing his episcopal muscles, said in an interview with the British Catholic Herald that the struggle against gay marriage is a gift from God “and by overcoming it we may achieve spiritual greatness.” And of course Pope Benedict reminded the world in his Christmas message that gay marriage destroys the “essence of the human creature.”

Archbishop Cordileone’s position on gay marriage is dead wrong, says Daniel Maguire, a theologian and Marquette University professor who has written on church teaching and sexuality. Maguire said the interpretation of church teaching held by Cordileone, Cardinal Dolan and other bishops isn’t representative of the position held by many lay Catholics and theologians.

I call it papal biology: looking at people and their human relationships as functions of their genitalia. The issue came up again last week when a papal theologian explained that women cannot become priests because they lack the genital equipment that Jesus had. For me the issue came up nearly five decades ago when I told my bishop I was leaving the seminary because I wanted to get married. The bishop was furious and sent one of his key advisors to talk me out of leaving. Father X told me it was stupid for me to leave just to get marred because as a priest I could easily get sex any time I needed it “from a woman or a guy if you swing that way.” I told him marriage for me was first of all about affection, love, union, and commitment rather than just a legitimate way to get sex.

Hmmmmmm……. In the Scriptures I hear Jesus saying: “where two or three are gathered, there I am.” He didn’t specify any particular genitalia requirement.

Incidentally, 59% of Catholics in the United States (according to a poll released by the Public Religion Research Institute) support allowing gay and lesbian couples to marry.

Sometimes I think we should change the name of our national episcopal conference……from USCCB to USCRB : United States Conference of Romanized Bishops.

Jerry Slevin, a “retired Catholic and Harvard schooled international lawyer” asks the question and offers a very plausible explanation.

In his blog http://christiancatholicism.com/ Slevin explains it this way:

Pope Benedict XVI for the first time publicly shamed a voting Cardinal, Mahony of Los Angeles. The Pope’s pawn, Archbishop Gomez, publicly referred to Mahony’s child abuse cover-up conduct as ‘evil.’ This unprecedented and selective public papal condemnation, in my view as an experienced retired lawyer, significantly increases the risk for Mahony that he will yet still be criminally prosecuted, possibly for obstruction of justice or perjury. Prosecutors now have a papal blessing to go after Mahony. Yet the Pope has also just permitted Ireland’s voting Cardinal Brady to exit gracefully, without papal condemnation. Brady was reportedly involved in priest abuse cover-ups at least as ‘evil’ as Mahony. Why the different treatment for two Cardinals?

The signal is clear. The Vatican is prepared, it appears, to use selectively the criminal prosecution risks inherent in the worldwide abuse scandal to intimidate voting Cardinals……

You can file this under: “what’s in a name?” Or “freedom of the press Catholic baloney” Or (my favorite) “Catholic fundamentalists aim to strengthen strangle-hold on US Catholic Church.”

As CNA (Catholic News Agency) reported on January 31st, a canon lawyer at the Catholic University of America says that a recent column in his diocesan newspaper by Bishop Robert Finn (Bishop of Kansas City-St Joseph, Missouri) serves as a strong urging to the National Catholic Reporter to re-establish its fidelity to the Church.

“What he’s doing here,” Dr. Kurt Martens said, “is he’s giving them a warning, saying ‘Be careful, because…I’ve looked into the NCR’s positions against authentic Church teaching on a number of issues.’”

“He has, as a diocesan bishop, not only the right, but the duty or obligation to oversee what is happening in his diocese,” Martens told CNA in a Jan. 30 interview, and “to make sure that the name ‘Catholic’ is not used in vain.”

The National Catholic Reporter’s editorial offices are in Kansas City.

In his January 25th column for his diocesan paper, “The Catholic Key,” Bishop Finn wrote that “in light of the number of recent expressions of concern, I have a responsibility as the local bishop to instruct the Faithful about the problematic nature of this media source which bears the name ‘Catholic.’”

Robert Finn takes issue with NCR’s editorial stance………..

“In the last months,” The Kansas City bishop writes “I have been deluged with emails and other correspondence from Catholics concerned about the editorial stances of the Reporter: officially condemning Church teaching on the ordination of women, insistent undermining of Church teaching on artificial contraception and sexual morality in general, lionizing dissident theologies while rejecting established Magisterial teaching, and a litany of other issues.”

Kurt Martens, an associate professor of canon law at the D.C. university, who works closely with the USCCB, said that the gravity of the National Catholic Reporter’s editorial stance of supporting the ordination of women is significant – because it endangers church unity the sacraments.

Apparently even thinking and expressing one’s theological thinking in print is now dangerous and deviant. Is the Catholic Taliban taking over?

Martens continued……….“Bishop Finn is…exercising vigilance over the use of the title ‘Catholic’ in his diocese. And if there is a need, he intervenes by first warning, and ultimately taking away that title ‘Catholic.’”

In his column, the bishop noted that in 1968, his predecessor Bishop Charles Helmsing condemned the publication “and asking the publishers to remove the name ‘Catholic’ from their title – to no avail.”

Martens said, “it is correct that the title ‘Catholic’ can only be used with permission, explicit or implicit, of competent ecclesiastical authority” – who in the National Catholic Reporter’s case, is Bishop Finn.

“His authority as local bishop is that he has indeed that right and obligation to verify that every organization that calls itself Catholic, is indeed Catholic.” He said this is important so that the faithful are not “misled” by writings in disagreement with Church teaching.

Dr. Martens also speculated that Bishop Finn’s final step could be to remove the National Catolic Reporter’s permission to use the name “Catholic,” which is “perfectly within his rights.”

Permission to use the word “catholic”? The local bishop has the right to control an independent newspaper? It is all so very strange…….and it is a terrible aberration. Arrogant authoritarianism parading as virtue.

If the National Catholic Reporter is not open to dialogue with Bishop Finn, Dr. Martens said that the bishop “might have no other option but to take away their right…to use the title ‘Catholic.’”

In doing so, Bishop Finn would be exercising his responsibility of governing his diocese.

Martens observed that the bishop “has not only the right to do so, but he has the obligation. If there is indeed a problem with the editorials, as is the case here, and you see that someone uses the term ‘Catholic,’ yet is constantly undermining the Magisterium of the Church, then a bishop cannot just sit back and relax and enjoy a drink.”

“He has to intervene. It’s not only a right to intervene, but an obligation also. The combination of the two is important. What Bishop Finn does here, is what he has to do as a bishop.”

Have a fine week end!

Catholic John W. Greenleaf

New York Times Editorial
January 27, 2013
The Cardinal and the Truth

No member of the Roman Catholic hierarchy fought longer and more energetically than Cardinal Roger Mahony of Los Angeles to conceal the decades-long scandal involving the rape and intimidation of children by rogue priests. For years, the cardinal withheld seamy church records from parents, victims and the public, brandishing endless litigation and fatuous claims of confidentiality.

The breadth of Cardinal Mahony’s cover-up became shockingly clear last week with the release in court of archdiocese records detailing how he and a top aide concocted cynical strategies to keep police authorities in the dark and habitual offenders beyond the reach of criminal prosecution.

“Sounds good — please proceed!” the cardinal, now retired, instructed in 1987 after the aide, Msgr. Thomas Curry, cautioned against therapy for one confessed predator — lest the therapist feel obliged to tell authorities and scandalize the archdiocese. The two discussed another priest, Msgr. Peter Garcia, who admitted specializing in the rape of Latino immigrant children and threatened at least one boy with deportation if he complained. Cardinal Mahony ordered that he stay out of California after his release from a New Mexico treatment center out of fear that “we might very well have some type of legal action filed in both the criminal and civil sectors.” Monsignor Curry worried that there might be 20 young people able to identify the priest in “first-degree felony” cases.

It was the cardinal’s obligation under the primacy of secular law to instantly notify authorities of any priest’s criminal behavior. Instead, he invoked a nonexistent church privilege to hide miscreant clergy and shield the church and his own reputation. Cardinal Mahony has repeatedly apologized in recent years and insisted that the archdiocese was mending its ways. A lawyer for the archdiocese insisted that the scandal and the cardinal’s cover-up were “part of the past.” Not really. While statutes of limitations on possible criminal charges may have run out, Cardinal Mahony and his former aide could be deposed in civil suits. Monsignor Curry also managed to advance up the hierarchical ladder and would seem to merit instant removal from his current post as auxiliary bishop for Santa Barbara.

A January 25^th post on the LGBT website Bondings 2.0 has created a cloud of misinformation about the position of the bishops of France vis a vis gay marriage.

The post gives the impression that the French hierarchy has moved away from the hardline anti-gay marriage position of the Vatican and has issued a “recent” statement encouraging dialogue and openness to gay marriage. I wish they had. Unfortunately they haven’t. Not everything posted on the Internet is true and accurate and this little matter of “Bishops in France Release Hopeful Statement on Same-Sex Relationships” is a good case in point.

In September 2012 a study committee set up by the French conference of bishops did indeed issue a statement encouraging an open dialogue about the issue of same-sex unions. On the committee were six French bishops. At the time the committee’s report made little news because it was quickly pushed to the side. That same September the French bishops (there are more than a couple hundred active French bishops in active ministry) began their ad limina visits and Pope Benedict was very firm with them that marriage and the family “must be promoted and defended from every possible misrepresentation of their true nature, since whatever is injurious to them is in fact injurious to human coexistence as such.” He stressed that the truth about marriage must be promoted in bold and creative ways. The French bishops have consistently followed his admonitions.

On Sunday January 13^th 2013 several hundred thousand (at least four hundred thousand and some say eight hundred thousand) demonstrators marched in Paris to protest French President François Hollande’s move to legalize same-sex marriage. Cardinal André Vingt-Trois of Paris was there to greet and encourage the marchers as was Cardinal Philippe Barbarin of Lyon, who condemned the “violence” of the proposed law that would “change the meaning of a word.”

If “Frigide Barjot,” the provocative self-appointed figurehead for the January 13th march could be believed, many of the anti-gay protesters were atheists, Jews, Protestants, leftwing voters, and homosexuals who are against gay “marriage.”  In fact most of the protesters were far-to the right Catholic traditionalists drawn from across France to give the impression that France is anti-gay marriage. The key group behind the protest was Civitas a radically Catholic traditionalist organization led by Alain Escada, a French-speaking Belgian with strong sympathies to the Fraternity of Pius X, founded by the excommunicated Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre.

Support for same-sex marriage in France is now at about 65%. The Paris protest this January misrepresented French attitudes. Unfortunately, the post in Bondings 2.2 has misrepresented the attitudes of the French bishops, who are more in sync with the Vatican than the people of France.

And so the old institution carries on — more in sync with an increasingly romanticized past than the living and realistic present………..

My good friend in Missouri, Robert S., reacted immediately to my posting last Sunday…the Downton Abbey/Vatican-hierarchy reflection…..He has written what he would like to see as a Papal Tweet. I added just a few modifications. It is a bit longer than the usual tweet of 140 characters. But then…It is a PAPAL TWEET. Holding the Keys of the Fisherman the pope does deserve some special perks.

Dearly Beloved in Christ,

Inspired by the fact that the Holy Spirit came down upon all in the upper room at Pentecost, and continues to dwell within all the faithful to bring Christ’s message about God’s love for us to the whole world, I too am compelled to give voice to this same Spirit in the pathways of the world using whatever means available, as our beloved predecessors have always done. 

I invite you to join me in using the modern technology of the Internet to share with each other the gifts of the Spirit, for the benefit of all humankind. As an example to you all, I urge every Christian community to deploy the new gifts of communication to share, instruct, listen, and work out what is needed to live with the dignity we humans have, being made in the image and likeness of God, and to preserve our mother-earth.  

Our communication networks today – smartphones, iPads, Facebook, etc. – break-down the old authoritarian structures; level hierarchies; and put all of us on an equal horizontal level of brother-sister shared responsibilities. These changes are particularly difficult for me and for the papal office. Change is in the wind. Change must come. God’s Spirit is with us.

• To this end, I ask that the Church throughout the world to initiate a communication structure whereby members who are able, and so choose, can communicate mutually with their pastors, parishes with parishes, priests with priests, and all with their bishops, using whatever means modern technology can and will provide for this purpose, while always in keeping with the spirit of the two commandments that Christ gave to love God and one another.  

• I am aware of the difficulty that this entails; but I see no real alternatives for respectfully sharing concerns, ideas, needs, and resources.

• All around us, we witness today the devastation of war, poverty, weapons of death, and destruction. The old authoritarian structures must go. Otherwise, we walk down a path to utter oblivion.  Jesus Christ, with His Holy Spirit guiding and helping us, offers a clear and certain way to a better future.  We must take it.

My blessings and prayers to all sisters and brothers who share equally our image and likeness of a beloved and loving God, who gave us the ability to know and love the vast created universe and our very special place in it. God who is our Mother and our Father deemed it wise to share our humanity and show us how important each human person is.

Very Sincerely,    

Benedict XVI

Brother and Pope — Tweeting Friend in Christ

(Tweeted from Rome, on a cold winter day,  in this Eighth year of my Pontificate: Benedictus Pontifex Maximus.) 

6 January 2013

The quote from Joan Chittister came from her November 16, 2012 NCR column.
I would like to thank Fr. Patrick Collins for calling it to my attention again.
– John Greenleaf