Tuesday, July 13, 2010
Are Catholics afraid to speak out?
Fr. James Martin believes that Catholics, including bishops, are more afraid of speaking out these days that in past eras:
Today in the Catholic Church almost any disagreement to almost any degree with almost any church leader on almost any topic is seen as dissent. And I'm not speaking about the essentials of the faith -- those elements contained in the Apostles Creed and the Nicene Creed -- but about less essential topics. Even on those topics -- for example, the proper strategy for bishops to deal with Catholic politicians at odds with church teaching, the new translations of the Mass, the best way for priests to address complicated moral issues, and so on -- the slightest whiff of disagreement is confused with disloyalty.
Fr. Martin doesn't indicate whether this pressure to conform is simply a form of self-censorship, whether it emerges from the laity, or is the product of a conscious effort by Church hierarchy. As a relatively new Catholic who hasn't experienced much in the way of pressure to conform, I'm hardly qualified to compare today's climate with the past. It's always a tricky project, though, to uphold a meaningful sense of community based on shared beliefs without jeopardizing the healthy forms of disagreement that contribute so much to any community's vitality.
https://mirrorofjustice.blogs.com/mirrorofjustice/2010/07/are-catholics-afraid-to-speak-out.html
Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the
comment feed
for this post.
I do respect Fr. Martin, though I think he makes far too much of this. As a person who is in the Catholic public eye (in particular, I'm on the radio across N. America 3 hours/day in addition to my frequent public speaking appearances) I am sensitive to the possibility that I might say something that is going to offend someone or detract from Church teaching (either because of my delivery or because I'm putting something in a new way that people haven't considered before, or even saying something that is just not correct despite the fact that I always exercise due diligence--you just can't cover every base)so you'd think I'd be sympathetic to his comments on this topic, but I'm just not.
I think Fr. Martin's comments show a lack of subtlety that I find disappointing for a man of his intellectual and spiritual gifts.
First, while I actually agree that the Church can only grow in the face of vigorous discussion about the meaning of revelation in the modern world, I also recognize that different levels of that dialog need to be conducted in different contexts in order to not cause chaos, confusion, loss of faith, and dissention for dissention's sake.
That doesn't mean that we need to protect "the ignorant laity" (of which I am a proud, card-carrying member) from this vigorous debate, but it does mean that we need to be sensitive to the fact that not everyone has the sophistication or spiritual maturity or formation or intellectual chops to appreciate the finer points of certain debates without either giving into despair, mindless radicalization, or a loss of faith altogether.
I don't even just refer to internal vs. external forum, though that's a factor. There are just certain things that you can communicate well in an academic forum that you can't communicate well in a talk at a parish. There are some things you can say to friends that you'd be horrified to hear in a homily. There are some things I just can't communicate well on the radio that I can communicate well in therapy--or vice versa. Context is an impotant part of the message. Brining this back to the topic at hand, to be done well, there are some discussions that just need to be had between the bishops--or between theologians--or some combination thereof--instead of individual bishops (or theologians)doing an end run around episcopal or academic collegiality by fomenting dissent in the ranks so that they can later claim to have a finger on the pulse of the sensus fidei simply by surfing on the wake they created themselves by rocking the barque--so to speak.
It's a bit of a dance, but families totally get this. In any family, every decision affects everyone else, but there are some decisions that need to be discussed by mom and dad alone, or mom, dad and the eldest children, and some decisions that can be discussed at a whole family meeting. A healthy family will be as generous as possible with who is included in these discussions, but they must also respect propriety and the developmental abilites of the members, otherwise the family becomes mess either because of parentified children (who were included too much) or aliented members (who were included too little). It is a dance, but most families pull it off. Why can't the Family of God?
Finally, the other factor Fr. Martin & Co. do not take into account is that an important component of being "loyal opposition" is a willingness to take your lumps. St. Thomas More may have died, "the King's good servant" but he still died--and willingly and without whining about it--in support of his principles. Its a fact of life--a sad fact but a fact nevertheless--that some truths will never be taken seriously until someone is willing to spill their own blood to defend them. The legitimate call to be loyal opposition is a call to martyrdom, anything short just makes you look whiny, petty, and relativistic.
If you want to cast yourself in the role of loyal opposition, then fine, but don't act like a bitchy little girl when they come for your head. That's the price you pay for being a prophet. Either be sure of your math and be willing to die (or at least be criticized a bit--I mean really, when was the last time the CDF actually martyred somebody for heaven's sake?) for the truth you're spouting or shut up and help toe the line while you keep working things out in your head (or in the appropriate academic/episcopal/pastoral context). But it is just poor reality testing to think that anyone at any time in history---and not just Church history--ever got a thank you card for rocking the boat or spitting in the eye of authority. It just doesn't happen and its bad form to criticize the hierarchy for not living up to expectations that no one else at any place or time in human history ever lived up to.
So there. ;-)
Greg