Enough Infidelity! Submit Your Mind and Will to the Pope!

Bishop Jenky of the Diocese of Peoria is now demanding it. Like a virus, the Catholic Oath of Fidelity is spreading cross the country. Arlington Diocese demanded it last summer. If you are going to be a catechist in today’s church, you must submit your mind and will to the Pope and to your bishop…to all bishops for that matter.

George Orwell just turned over in his grave.

Here is a sample form, that can be printed on nice paper, suitable for framing. The best part comes at the end.

Oath of Fidelity to the Catholic Church

I, ______________________________________________, with firm faith believe and profess each and every thing that is contained in the Symbol of Faith, namely:

The Nicene Creed

I believe in one God,
the Father almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all things visible and invisible.

I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ,
the Only Begotten Son of God,
born of the Father before all ages.
God from God,
Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father;
through him all things were made.

For us men and for our salvation he came down from heaven,
and by the Holy Spirit was incarnate of the Virgin Mary,
and became man.

For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate,
he suffered death and was buried,
and rose again on the third day
in accordance with the Scriptures.

He ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.

He will come again in glory
to judge the living and the dead
and his kingdom will have no end.

I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father and the Son,
who with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified,
who has spoken through the prophets.

I believe in one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church.
I confess one Baptism for the forgiveness of sins
and I look forward to the resurrection of the dead
and the life of the world to come. Amen.

With firm faith, I also believe everything contained in the Word of God, whether written or handed down in Tradition, which the Church, either by a solemn judgment or by the ordinary and universal Magisterium, sets forth to be believed as divinely revealed.

Dennis Coday in NCR reports:

The church reform group that represents about a quarter of Ireland’s Catholic priests issued a statement of support Friday for Roy Bourgeois, the U.S. Maryknoll priest that the Vatican laicization and dismissed from his order because of his support of women’s ordination.

The Association of Catholic Priests (Ireland) called on the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith “to cease this type of abuse, to restore Fr. Bourgeois to the full exercise of his ministry and to allow for open and honest discussion on issues that are of crucial importance for the future of the Church.”

“We believe that this type of action, ordered by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and implemented by the Maryknoll Order, is unjust, and ultimately counter-productive,” reads the statement from the association.

“Dismissing people because they have sincerely held views that are contrary to those of the Vatican, but which are widely shared by the Catholic faithful, will not end discussion and debate on these topics,” it says.

The Association of Catholic Priests, which was founded by eight priests two years ago, has grown to represent about 1,000 of Ireland’s some 4,000 priests. The association aims at the “full implementation of the vision and teaching of the Second Vatican Council” and a “re-structuring of the governing system of the Church,” according to the group’s constitution.

………….

John Greenleaf responds: OK so where is the support from US priests?

Just before Thanksgiving, I had an email exchange with an old friend, who is now a member of the episcopal hierarchy… He asked me, with a small dose of annoyance, just what I wanted from the church.

I told him I could think of ten points……..

(1) I want a church that affirms the worth, the dignity, and the autonomy of every woman and man, compatible with the rights of others: a church that supports democracy and human rights and aims at the fullest possible development of every human being.

(2) I want a church that affirms the equality of men and women: that all persons regardless of race, religion, gender, or sexual orientation deserve respect and the freedom to live and love in peace.

(3) I want a church that stresses that personal liberty must be combined with social responsibility: that a fair society is based on reason and compassion, in which every person plays his or her part.

(4) I want a church that stresses and practices tolerance and freedom of expression: a church that realizes that all doctrines evolve and that all official teachers (Magisterium) must also be humble learners. We don’t have all the truth. We pursue the truth….

(5) I want a church that rejects intimidation and holds that conflicts must be resolved through patient and humble dialogue.

(6) I want a church that upholds freedom of inquiry in every sphere of human life: the unexamined faith is a childish faith. Adult believers question and probe as they believe.

(7) I want a church that upholds artistic freedom, the value of human creativity, and recognizes the transforming power of art: a church that is not afraid of contemporary art.

(8) I want a church in which the ordained leaders dress and act like healthy contemporary leadership people not museum-piece Renaissance princes.

(9) I want a church in which humility and openness to the signs of the times are the key virtues rather than an arrogant condemnation of all that is contemporary.

(10) I want a church that realizes that the face of Christ is best seen and honored in the face of the woman or man sitting next to me on the bus as I go to work each day.

As Joshua J. McElwee (NCR) has reported, Roy Bourgeois, a longtime peace activist and priest who had come under scrutiny for his support of women’s ordination, has been dismissed from Maryknoll, which he served for 45 years. He didn’t abuse any children. Unlike some bishops, he did not protect and cover up sexual abusers….He simply said it is time to acknowledge women priests.

The Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith made the dismissal in October, according to a news release issued a few days ago by Maryknoll. There was no consultation with Bourgeois. Rome does not consult. Rome speaks and Rome expels.

Tom Doyle, a canon lawyer acting on Bourgeois’ behalf, told reporters he was not aware of the move. Doyle said he and Bourgeois met with Maryknoll’s superior general, Edward Dougherty, in June, and the issue of dismissal had not been discussed.

“The idea then was that things would continue and they would not dismiss Roy and they would continue to dialogue,” Doyle said. “And then this just happened, unilaterally. [Bourgeois] had no idea.”

Rome doesn’t like dialogue, and the old boys club is intimidated by women, who minster with self-assurance, dignity, and grace.

I am still a Catholic; but my mind and heart are anchored in Jesus of Nazareth…not in the increasingly strange Jesus of Rome.

May God bess and protect Father Bourgeois.

Cardinal Sean O’Malley announced a new pastoral plan for the Archdiocese of Boston on Thursday, Nov. 15, 2012.

O’Malley’s plan aims to stabilize the Boston Archdiocese’s declining finances by combining its 288 parishes into 135 clusters that share staffing and resources.

The plan tries to keep parishes somewhat alive as the church deals with diminishing attendance, a looming priest shortage, and decaying parish finances that have left 4 out of 10 parishes unable to pay their bills.

O’Malley said he sees the reorganization as key to a spiritual revival, and his message to parishes was simple: “They must refocus on outreach and evangelization. … We can’t use all of our resources and time, just to serve the active Catholics in the community.”

…….Just 16 percent of Boston Catholics attend church today……Boston was not so long ago a Catholic stronghold.

……..The Boson archdiocese is also facing a major priest shortage. About a fifth of the 420 active priests are 65 or older; and the number of active priests will fall under 200 in a decade.

……..Thomas Groome, Boston College theology professor, said he doubted the archdiocesan reorganization could alleviate the coming priest shortage. He said it might just postpone an honest reckoning of it, which Groome believes includes accepting that married men should be allowed to serve as priests. “To the people of God, the solutions are obvious,” he said.

Meanwhile, the November meeting of the USCCB is over. High points of the meeting:

(1) Our bishops approved an exhortation encouraging greater use of confession.

(2) They approved the hiring of a director of public affairs to reorganize the conference’s Communications Department. (good idea…but what do they have to communicate?)

(3) Our bishops approved a 2013 budget of $220.4 million and agreed to add a national collection for the U.S. Archdiocese for the Military Services.

(4) On a voice vote, our bishops endorsed the sainthood cause of Dorothy Day, the co-founder of the Catholic Worker movement, neglecting of course what she had said: “Don’t call me a saint. I don’t want to be dismissed so easily.”

(5) The USCCB proposed economic message failed. (Probably a good thing!.) Opponents were amazed at the shortsightedness of the document and said more consultation was needed!

(6) The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops adopted a new document on preaching: “Preaching the Mystery of Faith: The Sunday Homily.”

AND………

(7) Just a year after U.S. Catholics began using the new English translation of the Roman Missal at Masses, the bishops agreed November 13th to have work begin on a revision of the Liturgy of the Hours. Our bishops approved beginning work on updates to hymns, psalms, various canticles, psalm prayers, some antiphons, biblical readings and other components of the liturgical prayers used at various parts of the day.

Archbishop Gregory M. Aymond of New Orleans, in presenting the request for a vote to the bishops, said the aim of retranslation would be to more accurately reflect the original Latin texts.

There were short discussions of the issue when the formal vote was taken. Among points raised by some bishops were Boston Cardinal Sean P. O’Malley’s comment about “how pleased I am that the committee wants to revisit the Glory Be,” because laypeople tend to use an older version than the bishops do.

GLORY BE INDEED!
WHAT’S HAPPENING?
ARE ALL THE LIGHTS GOING OUT.

The USCCB is meeting in Baltimore this week (12-15 November) for its annual Fall General Assembly. The bishops won’t be singing alleluias in their hotel corridors.

Despite strong attacks on him, by highly politicized bishops, President Obama has been reelected.

Despite urgent appeals to voters, and threats of mortal sin and refusing Communion to those who disagreed with them, the bishops lost on state referendums on same-sex marriage in Maine, Minnesota, Maryland, and Washington State.

To the bishops great dismay, a majority of American Catholics voted for Barack Obama and gay activists won every referendum.

In Missouri and Indiana, though expected to win, those Republican senatorial candidates, who took the strongest positions on abortion, were also defeated.

This week our bishops will hear addresses by Cardinal Timothy Dolan of New York, president of USCCB, and Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, apostolic nuncio to the United States. They will vote on several action items, including their strategic plan and documents on preaching, the Sacrament of Penance, and challenges to the teaching ministry of a bishop.

So what now? It is not whether a person is a Republican or a Democrat. Certainly a bishop, like any citizen, has the freedom and the right to hold and express a political position. Bishops have the right — the responsibility — to speak out about contemporary moral issues.

These things being said, there are some fundamental Catholic issues that our bishops must open their eyes, minds, and hearts to. Simply condemning those who disagree with them is not only counterproductive; but it is wrong.

I am 100% pro-life: across the board. Nevertheless I think we must talk about abortion, and about the best way to diminish and eliminate abortion. And as an older historical theologian I know as well that despite the attempts of the Vatican and our bishops to silence open discussion of the morality of abortion, questions persist about precisely when human life begins and our Catholic tradition has been far from univocal on this point. The question is not yet settled. Serious reflection and dialogue are the appropriate Catholic response.

I had a friendly discussion with a bishop, not so long ago, who worries about Islamic fundamentalists imposing their values on civil society. That could be a danger, I said, but then suggested that many of our bishops are trying to do exactly the same thing. He was not amused……..

This week our bishops want to reassert their teaching authority. Good teachers must also and always be good learners. Our bishops seem to overlook, however, that strong currents in the Catholic tradition of moral thinking have always emphasized that moral and civil law are not and should not be synonymous. This teaching goes way back to Thomas Aquinas. A religious community can hold moral positions that it regards as strong and even absolute, without seeking to force a multicultural, pluralistic society to adopt its religiously-based moral judgments.

Note for example…..Catholic moral tradition has long held things like adultery or prostitution to be intrinsically evil, but it has not advocated forcing civil society to change or adopt laws to enshrine in civil law the Catholic understanding of these practices. The attempt to make abortion the exception to all rules of prudential judgment–to make it the fundamental moral issue trumping all other moral issues–flies in the face of Catholic tradition itself.

Same-sex marriage? A majority of Americans and American Catholics now support it. It is a civil reality; and I don’t hear many people saying it should become the eighth sacrament.

Artificial birth control? That issue was resolved fifty years ago. Let’s move on.

Women’s ordination? The number of women bishops and priests continues to grow. The whole scale ignorance of our bishops about the history of Catholic women exercising ordained ministry in the Catholic Church is appalling. They would flunk my introduction to Catholic theology class.

Yes indeed……our American Catholic Church continues its pilgrimage along the tracks of Catholic life. Right now, however, our bishops are more the antiquated caboose than the engine.

The term Beatitude comes from the Latin adjective beatus which means happy, fortunate, or blissful. During the 2012 presidential campaign, I endured a barrage of conservative Catholic rhetoric, much of it emanating from episcopal lips. Today, in thanksgiving for the events of November 6th, I offer my conservative Catholic friends some words of encouragement as we all continue the journey forward. I have eleven beatitudes to memorialize the eleventh month of this year when our country and our church entered a new era.

Blissful are those who do not think, for they shall be known as orthodox.

Blissful are “reformers of the reform,” their’s is a lasting place in fundamentalist fantasy.

My prayers and thoughts are with everyone affected by the hurricane.

I appreciate as well the words of Father James Martin, Jesuit priest at America

“If any religious leaders say tomorrow that the hurricane is God’s punishment against some group they’re idiots. God’s ways are not our ways.”

Like Job of old we cannot explain why terrible things happen to people. Throughout his own sufferings, Job did not abandon God because deep down he knew that God had not abandoned him. And so we all continue our journeys though life.

I still believe the opening words of Gaudium et Spes:

“The joys and the hopes, the griefs and the anxieties of the men and women of this age, especially those who are poor or in any way afflicted, these are the joys and hopes, the griefs and anxieties of the followers of Christ. Indeed, nothing genuinely human fails to raise an echo in their hearts. For theirs is a community composed of women and men. United in Christ, they are led by the Holy Spirit in their journey to the Kingdom of their Father and they have welcomed the news of salvation which is meant for everyone. That is why this community realizes that it is truly linked with humankind and its history by the deepest of bonds.”

My next reflection, most likely, will be after the presidential election………

Surveying the spectrum of hierarchical rhetoric, on both sides of the Atlantic, we hear and read that “secularization” and “secularism” are now the source of all that is evil, have led to a collapse of Christian values, and are the driving force behind a new wave of anti-Catholicism in the West.

Pope Benedict XVI and his Facilitator for the Synod on the New Evangelization, Cardinal Donald Wuerl, strongly hope the New Evangelization will halt the spread of secularism and relativism in the church, re-fill nearly-empty churches with loyal and obedient laypeople, and disarm a number of other malignant “isms” (like feminism) that threaten contemporary Catholic life.

A few days away from the 2012 presidential election, the crusade against secularism and secularization, is particularly strong in our United States.

At the moment, I am in Philadelphia where his friends and supporters are energetically promoting Archbishop Charles Chaput’s book A Heart on Fire: Catholic Witness and the Next America. In his e-book, Archbishop Chaput outlines the dangers of secularism in the United States and deplores what he sees as a growing American hostility toward religion in general and Roman Catholicism in particular.

A couple days ago, over in Chicago, Cardinal George remarked that strong anti-religious sentiments have emerged during this year’s presidential campaign. He warns of an aggressive anti-religious and strongly anti-Catholic secularism in our American society.

Speaking with a flash of archiepiscopal drama, George acknowledged he had been quoted accurately when predicting: “I expected to die in bed, my successor will die in prison, and his successor will die a martyr in the public square.”

Cardinal George said he had made such a dramatic reference to the prospect of martyrdom to underline the urgency of the problems created by aggressive anti-religious secularism. “Communism imposed a total way of life based upon the belief that God does not exist,” Cardinal George said and added: “Secularism is communism’s better-scrubbed bedfellow.”

Archbishop William Lori of Baltimore, chairperson for the USCCB’s Ad Hoc Committee on Religious Liberty, reiterated in his National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception homily on October 14th: “For some time now, both life and liberty have been under assault by an overarching, Godless secularism, replete with power and money, but sadly lacking in wisdom, both human and divine: a secularism that relentlessly seeks to marginalize the place of faith in our society.”

Over in Peoria, the outspokenly ultra-orthodox Bishop Daniel Jenky is still complaining about President Obama’s “extreme secularist” policies and compares them to those of Germany’s “Iron Chancellor” Otto von Bismarck, to Adolf Hitler and to Josef Stalin.

The conservative Catholic crusade is gathering some local parish steam as well in election battleground states like Ohio. Faithful America reports that last week, the “Nuns on the Bus” went to Ohio, visiting local social service agencies and speaking out about how major federal budget cuts could endanger the poorest and most vulnerable in our society. When the sisters arrived in Marietta, Ohio, they were met by a crowd of angry right-wing protesters who called them “fake nuns” and waved signs labeling their “Nuns on the Bus” tour the “highway to hell” and “bums on the bus.”

Many of these Ohio protesters were recruited from a local Catholic parish, where the pastor invited right-wing activists to distribute their propaganda accusing the sisters of “espousing radical ideology.”

So what is this crusade against secularization and secularism all about?

My first and immediate reaction is to quickly respond that far too many ultra-orthodox bishops and their sympathizers are scapegoating and calling attention to the speck of sawdust in their neighbors’ eyes and paying no attention to the planks in their own. But it is of course more complex.

These days “secularism” is more a principle and “secularization” more a process; but they often overlap of course in contemporary conversation.

Secularism is an outlook, and sometimes an ideology, that maintains that there should be a sphere of knowledge, values, and action that is independent of religious authority. In other words that religious leaders should not run the entire human show.

In American history we see secularism in our principle of the separation of church and state. Secularism can but does not necessarily exclude religion from having any role in political and social affairs. It simply asserts that religious leaders should not control and run political affairs. They can and should, as members of society, enter into constructive dialogue. Separation of church and state actually safeguards the church, as it also safeguards the state.

Secularism is often associated with the Age of Enlightenment and has played a major role in the history of Western society. Church leaders have, from time to time, had difficulties with the Enlightenment. Too much thinking, beyond church control……..We know of course, from our overall Catholic tradition, there really should be no conflict between faith and reason.

These days……most major religions accept the legal structures of secular, democratic societies; and a great many Christians support the secular state, seeing it affirmed, for example, in the teachings of Jesus in the Gospel According to Luke: “Then give to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s.”

Some fundamentalists, however,fiercely oppose secularism, often asserting that there is a “radical secularist” ideology being adopted or imposed on people these days. They see secularism as a threat to “freedom” and to “traditional values.”

The most significant representatives of this kind of religious fundamentalism in our contemporary world are Fundamentalist Christianity and Fundamentalist Islam.

———-

The discussion about secularization is, I think much more complex. I often say in my adult education and adult faith sharing sessions that Jesus of Nazareth was THE great secularizer: He understood, taught and witnessed to the truth that God is met and experienced in secular life. Incarnational theology once again…… Jesus regularly poked fun at or simply denounced those overly religious people who were good at religious practices but in fact far from God. But this is just a part of the secularization discussion.

Secularization is a process of taking-seriously our day-today secular life. I would contend that the theologians and bishops at Vatican II REALLY understood secularization. They understood it as an invitation to dialogue, to discern, and to reflect on the “signs of the times.”

Many of our contemporary Catholic bishops blame secularization for their lost credibility, the decline of their religious authority, and their inability to influence society. Frankly, I think their Vatican II episopal brothers would say: “stop shaking your fingers at the outside world and get your own house in order.” Blessed Pope John would say: Open the windows! We need fresh air! We need new and fresh thinking! And we have made some colossal mistakes!

I can understand that some people are uncomfortable about secularization when it involves state control over spheres formerly controlled by religious institutions. This can affect education, social welfare, law, the media, etc. Loss of power and control can be very discomfiting….. Secularization, however, becomes absolutely essential in our contemporary world with its increasingly ethnic-cultural-religious pluralistic societies.

Good values will be learned and taught and passed on in a society in which all share in values clarification and formation.

Scapegoats are convenient, but they keep people from looking deeply into their own hearts and souls……

The Second Vatican Council — in various jubilee commemorations – is now the official scapegoat for traditionalist Catholic frustrations. 

Our current traditionalist-in-chief, Pope Benedict XVI, is working overtime these days to re-write the history of Vatican II, to misinterpret its significance, and to undo its accomplishments.

On October 11^th, the Vatican newspaper, L’Osservatore Romano, published Pope Benedict’s recollections of Vatican II. His remarks are a clear-cut example of Catholic Newspeak: the current medium of expression for the world-view and mental habits proper to the devotees of pre-Vatican II church theology and practice. “The council fathers neither could nor wished to create a new or different church,” the Pope said. “They had neither the authority nor the mandate to do so. That is why a hermeneutic of rupture is so absurd and is contrary to the spirit and the will of the council fathers.”

Hermeneutics is a process of interpretation. It is nothing new of course. People of every age, if their eyes and ears are open to the world around them, necessarily interpret and express their faith experience in the thought patterns of their own language and culture.

Pope John XXIII, when he announced there would be an ecumenical council, said the church needed a lot of hermeneutics….in his words a lot of aggiornamento: updating! He said the church should not be afraid to open its windows to the world.

Contrary to what we hear and read in Vatican Newspeak, Vatican II did change the church; and thanks to Vatican II the church did change its official teachings.

Vatican II brought good news.

A nineteenth century Catholic, for instance, would be amazed at the transformation of the papacy. Pope Pius IX, who denounced democracy and progress, would have been surprised at the thought of a Pope traveling around the world and upholding human rights and justice.

Our self-understanding as church has changed from that of a clergy-controlled monolithic institution to the church as the People of God…….what a tremendous change. We have shifted from a vertical legalistic model — where bishops are managers — to a horizontal community of faith model, where we are all brothers and sisters. We are still working out an effective collegial way of doing things; but we know we must now do it together.

What was once a triumphalist “fortress church” (fighting against “non-Catholics” and “unbelievers”) is now, thanks to Vatican II, a listening community. We acknowledge that we don’t have all the answers; and we must be engaged in dialogue with non-Christian religions as well as with other Christian churches.

Within the Catholic Church, as well, there have been significant changes:  We have a new code of canon law. New instruments of episcopal collegiality and subsidiarity have been put into place. The church today is not a democracy BUT it is not an authoritarian monarchy either! It is a communion, which should be governed by mutual respect, charity, and openness to the world around us.

The vernacular has been introduced into our Eucharistic liturgy and the other sacraments; and I know very few people who would wish to return to the old Latin liturgy.

Vatican II stressed the dignity of the human person…….Human life (life in this world) is neither evil nor a threat to Christian belief. Vatican II stressed an incarnational theology: “And the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us…” Vatican II saw our daily human life as the place where we meet the living God. That’s why in our liturgy the presider now faces the congregation and not the back wall.

Vatican II changed the image of the church from a medieval authoritarian monarchy to a community of brothers and sisters where “collegiality” should be the practice for governance and decision-making. We see the face of Christ in the eyes of our neighbors.

A new and critical attitude towards the Bible was affirmed at Vatican II. This was a big step and a tremendous change in our Catholic biblical understanding. The Roman Catholic Church, at Vatican II, rejected a literalist understanding of biblical texts and stressed a historical critical understanding. The bishops at Vatican I (1870), for example, insisted that Moses was the author of the first five books of the Old Testament. The bishops at Vatican II understood that such a belief was totally impossible, if not absolutely foolish.

The pre-Vatican II church saw the church and the world at variance with one another and, to some degree, as enemies. Vatican II said that we need to listen to the signs of the times, because it is in this world that we meet and live with God.

Vatican II said as well that human sexuality is not tinged with sin but good. It changed the Catholic understanding of the “ends of marriage” and stressed and that the primary goal of married love is not just generating children but growth in mutual love, support, and joy. Sexual intimacy is grace-filled.

Yes. Vatican II brought good news….. In the church’s relationship with the not Catholic world, it changed Catholic teaching in very significant ways. I mention two big changes in official Catholic teaching: first in its affirmation of God’s ongoing covenant with the Jewish people (see Lumen Gentium and Nostra Aetate), and second, in its affirmation of religious freedom, which previous popes had explicitly condemned. These two reversals in church teaching (a hermeneutic of discontinuity?) contravened at least 1,500 years of church teaching and practice.

Newspeak traditionalists insist that the bishops at Vatican II never really intended to change the church or its theology or its liturgy. It has all been one big terrible mistake. Vatican-inspired revisionists are working feverishly to reverse the Catholic clock.

Many people now suspect the “New Evangelization” is a Vatican PR stunt to bring back a 19th century Catholic ethos and insist that the post Vatican II changes never should have happened. Certainly our American Cardinal from Washington DC sees it that way.

“This current situation is rooted in the upheavals of the 1970s and 80s, decades in which there was manifest poor catechesis or miscatechesis at so many levels of education,” Cardinal Wuerl said a few days ago in Rome, and he further stressed: “We faced the hermeneutic of discontinuity that permeated so much of the milieu of centers of higher education and was also reflected in aberrational liturgical practice. Entire generations have become disassociated from the support systems that facilitated the transmission of faith.” More fundamentalist Catholic Newspeak.

Nevertheless……Clocks break when you turn them back. And some things cannot be turned back.

Vatican II stressed the place and roles of lay women and men. Whether some people like it or not……our Roman Catholic Church, more and more, is going to be directed by lay people, especially in parishes, schools, and pastoral ministry. Vatican II’s “universal call to holiness” has motivated lay women and men to take very seriously their baptismal call to ministry in the church and mission in the world. They are educated, competent, and have long since supplanted clergy as religious educators, theologians, chaplains, and other kinds of pastoral ministers.

The old clerical stronghold on ministry and holiness has been irreparably ruptured. There’s no going back. And right now, there’s no telling where it will lead. But we believe we are not alone. We are not orphans; and God’s spirit is with us.

Catholic Newspeak, however, continues to draw media attention. Archbishop Jose H. Gomez of Los Angeles is in Rome for the Synod on the New Evangelization. Before hurrying off to lunch, a couple days ago, he told reporters: “the teachings of the Catholic Church have not changed, society has changed.”

More ministry of misinformation…….With all due respect to the LA archbishop, he is not just whistling in the Vatican wind. He is wrong. Archbishop Gomez, Cardinal Wuerl, and Pope Benedict are neither evil nor wicked men; but they are manipulating facts to support their own revisionist and regressive agenda.

Indeed, society has changed; but the church has changed as well. It must change. Change is a fact of life. Only museum pieces are static.

More and more, I fear, our grand old church looks more like a museum than a spiritual home for human habitation.

We need to open those windows again……..