What started the conversation was one member's forwarding an MSNBC account of "sit-ins" at closed Catholic churches in New England to everyone else on his distribution list. I'll call the guy who was the catalyst for the ensuing discussion "d'Artagnan."
What follows is a lightly-edited summary of our email thread as it was shaped by the fellows with the most to say (me included). With a tip of the hat to John Zmirak, from whom I borrowed the phrase, names have been "changed to protect the immanent."
Athos:
Where there is no vision people perished; where there is no faith, church closes...Have you ever asked yourself why Evangelical churches have grace and resources flowing in them but the Catholic Church...is closing churches all over America? Simple answer: Our Church leaders don't have a clue about Jesus Christ and the amazing work He has done for us and for His Church...Instead of preaching the Gospel, they teach doctrine. Instead of leading people to Christ, The Redeemer, they lead them to Church documents...It is very shameful to see a church close down just because there [are] no resources...we are saying to the world that Jesus Christ is not a provider and cannot be trusted to maintain His own Church. I am angry! Feel free to comment."
Porthos:
"The closing of any parish due to the lack of financial resources and clergy is a shame. This shame is compounded in New England and other areas where closings are the direct result of legal monetary settlements associated with priests physically abusing children and the subsequent attempts, led by [forcibly retired] Cardinal Law, to cover up these actions.
"However, the resource issue isn’t solely due to the immoral actions of the clergy. Read the bulletins of the local churches and note the participation of the parish members regarding the offertory...
"My personal opinion is that Catholics tend to vote with their wallets. This is how we express our satisfaction/dissatisfaction with the homilies of our pastor and the state of the global Catholic Church. We want services, but we do not want to pay for them. We want more say in how the money is spent. How many of us volunteer to sit on the parish council? True, the Catholic Church is not a democracy, but intelligent input is given consideration.
"Athos, I hope your comments are an expression of frustration rather than true belief...The Catholic Church is not perfect, but I cannot agree with your general theme that the Church is so clueless. If that were truly the case, the doors of every Catholic Church would be padlocked and anarchy would be much closer than some of us already fear."
Aramis:
"I think the reason the protestants are doing so much better financially has more to do with the fact that they are taught to tithe rather than with any spiritual superiority. I also have to disagree with Athos on the Church not knowing Jesus: the only reason any Christian church knows anything about Jesus is because the Catholic Church passed on His teaching, preserving it from being twisted, generation after generation.
"The problem is that all you hear from the pulpit is some humanized 70's Jesus love preached.
"The problem is that [priests] DO NOT preach doctrine and dogma, and they allow every Catholic to go [his or her] own way regarding the Faith, and they don't correct erroneous understanding; they allow it to fester and spread. That is the true failing of the Church.
"With regards to [not reaching] Hispanics and other immigrant communities, blame it on the Novus Ordo Mass that causes us to be segregated...The failing is not that [many bishops] don't know Jesus, but that they refuse to stand by Him regardless of human opinion. Unfortunately, so do many of us."
d'Artagnan:
"Teaching, living by, and tightly following the Ten Commandments (of which the most important - - see Matthew 22 - - is LOVE) and the Beatitudes will do more for us than anything else we’ve discussed in this email string thus far (my opinion)....The Latin Mass may be fine for you, Aramis -- but [it] wouldn’t do anything for me or my family. "
Monsieur de Tréville:
"I'm mostly with Porthos on this question. I hope you're frustrated, Athos -- but frustrated in a good way. One touchstone for me is what Ignatius of Antioch said in A.D. 110: “For as many as are of God and of Jesus Christ are also with the bishop.”
"One could argue that we had better bishops back then-- Ignatius was personally acquainted with John the Apostle, after all. But that wasn't his point, and that wouldn't explain why the church has lasted as long as it has. I think Athos means to indict "middle management," as it were. Anyone who thinks Pope Benedict XVI, or Pope John Paul II before him, is or was unaccaquainted with Jesus hasn't read either of those popes.
"So let's talk middle management. There are a fair number of mediocre bishops and, inevitably, mediocre priests as well. Yet the Holy Spirit works with them and with us-- that whole "building straight with crooked timbers" thing.
"I think it's a mistake to think that church leadership means only the people we deal with today. In old-school terminology, we're the church militant, but we can't count out the church triumphant, and would not want to. As for the ordained folk who seem not to be on fire for the Lord, who are we to say whether they are or not? By their fruits we shall judge them -- and we do -- but we could also look at mediocre leadership as the penance imposed on stubborn believers by a merciful God.
"I don't envy our protestant bretheren. [One local megachurch] was last month talking about its plans to become a "multi-site" church, with satellite campuses where the pastor's Sunday message would be streamed on live video to congregations at opposite ends of town. Good for them that they're expanding and bringing Jesus to more people. But the pastor spent more than 20 minutes explaining the multi-site concept to worshippers at one Sunday service. It was all I could do not to chuckle, because, as a Catholic, I'm part of the original "multi-site church" -- and we don't need any stinking video feed to stay "on message."
"To put Jesus on one side and dogma or doctrine on the other is, I think, to set up a straw man. Often we know Jesus through dogma, not in spite of dogma. Doesn't mean we can't know Jesus in other ways, too. But let's not trash dogma. That's not a straightjacket, it's a guardrail on the highway of faith.
"I went back to an essay I wrote in 2004 and found this: "Catholic clerics are called “priests” rather than “ministers” because although he ministers to people, a priest’s main duty is to offer sacrifice. Custom reflects theology (the idea that Mass is a sacrifice), which in turn is anchored by dogma (that when Jesus said of blessed bread, “this is My body,” and of blessed wine, “this is My blood,” He was speaking literally rather than metaphorically). Each element complements the others, and all are meant to illuminate rather than obscure the work of God. To dismiss this chain of reasoning as an unwieldy superstructure welded to some simpler faith is to deny the capacity for making logical inferences, and to miss the organic relationship of each element to the others."
"Hope that helps. In any case, it's my two cents. Thanks for the soap box. You guys are great. All y'all. And when bishops and priests fall down -- hell, even when they don't -- we gots to do catechesis our own selves. That's what we were confirmed for."
POSTSCRIPT the first: d'Artagnan to Monsieur de Tréville:
"You piss me off when you’re logical...I owe you an elbow for this..."
POSTSCRIPT the second: Aramis to all the Musketeers:
"I think some folks misunderstood the context with which I mentioned 70's love. This is the touchy-feely kind of emotionally-driven earthly human love. By contrast, I wanted to elevate sacrificial, charitable, perfect love-- the kind of love that we can only attain to through God's grace and our humility. One type of love is tolerant and accepting of sin. The other is tolerant, loving and accepting of sinners but despises sin and is not afraid to call it out.
"Hope this clarifies things. Peace of Christ be with you."
Antoine who followed the thread none too closely:
"I may have missed the original intent of this discussion, but I gather it was something about Catholic versus Protestant ... not sure we really need to worry about this. Thankfully, it's not up to us! I still contend we are going to be surprised by who we meet in heaven!! Our job is to see that we get there and help as many others as we can in their faith journey ... whatever church they use to get there."
POSTSCRIPT the last: Monsieur de Tréville to all the Musketeers:
"The original thread was NOT Catholic vs. Protestant, and I wasn't trying to turn it that way. But Catholic/Protestant contrast sprang to mind as shorthand for the "personal relationship vs. dogma" tack that the discussion had threatened to take. I hoped to torpedo that ship by observing that personal relationship with Jesus and dogma are not mutually exclusive if properly understood.
"Really short version: the bumper sticker that says "Christianity is not a religion; it's a relationship" is misleading, I think, because, short of the union with God for which we all long, Christianity is (of necessity) BOTH religion and relationship."
1 comments:
How easy you were to spot even before the reference to your 2004 article, Monsieur de Treville!
They are lucky to have you in their group.
Post a Comment