Dreaming of the Future of a Failing Church

By Joseph Stanley

After two thousand years of tradition, can the Catholic Church really change? Flash forward a hundred years into the future and enter a world full of possibilities. Joseph Stanley explores the possibilities of what could be. A hopeful look into the future, this book is a must read for anyone who has dealt with religion. It provides an informative look at the past while exploring the multitude of possibilities of how it might inform the future. Distressed by the current situation, Stanley discusses the possibility of change and growth for the Catholic Church while at the same time using the failures of the church as a cautionary tale for present and future generations

• Language: English
• Publisher: Raider Publishing International
• Release date: Aug 16, 2011
• ISBN: 9781466144194

Joseph Stanley

THE AUTHOR who writes under the pseudonym is a very highly qualified individual in civil law, philosophy, Buddhism and Christianity. He has wide experience of teaching in various parts of the world at University level. His thoughts recorded in this book will certainly provoke deep and searching reflection in the reader.

Book preview

Dreaming of the Future of a Failing Church

By Joseph Stanley

Published by Raider Publishing International at Smashwords

Copyright 2011 by Joseph Stanley

Smashwords Edition

Smashwords Edition License Notes

This ebook is licensed for your personal enjoyment only. This ebook may not be re-sold or given away to other people. If you would like to share this book with another person, please purchase an additional copy for each person you share it with. If you're reading this book and did not purchase it, or it was not purchased for your use only, then you should return to Smashwords.com and purchase your own copy. Thank you for respecting the author's work.

Preface

We and our opinions and perspectives do not dictate what the Church is now and certainly not what it has been; and the experience of this loss of control is itself salutary. The Church was clearly and blasphemously wrong for the greater part of two millennia on the subject of slavery; many would add that it has been no less wrong for even longer about the status of women. To be ‘Catholic’ now involves resisting the temptation to blot out and forget this past, and the equally powerful temptation to condemn from a superior vantage-point. This kind of Catholicity obliges us to recognize the Church’s fallibility and to admit our complicity in the Church’s continuing liability to failure and betrayal. We can only be grateful that even a slave-owning Church had just enough sensitivity to the challenge of the gospel for a protest to be generated (however slowly) and a new awareness – of which we are the direct beneficiaries – to come into being. This is a Catholicity which may weep over the universal liability to error, yet rejoice at the universal pressure towards truth, penitence and transformation. says Rowan Williams , present Archbishop of Canterbury.

What will this pressure towards truth, penitence and transformation bring to the Church – especially the Catholic Church – let us say, a hundred years from now? It is hard to say. Will it be different? Definitely. What contours will it take? One can perhaps hazard a guess, because those contours are being shaped now – people’s thinking patterns being changed by IT, events in the church which evoke adverse reactions to the role models and authority figures in the church, the emerging self-confidence of people and especially of women, the growing concern for self, instant gratification, increased emotional rather than doctrinal content in catechesis and so on and so forth.

Will these forces jell together and reach a critical point? If so, when? It is almost impossible to predict. Who could have predicted that the storming of the Bastille (14th July 1789) would mark the French Revolution with its subsequent revolutions all through Europe in the 19th century – starting some 60 years later? Who could have predicted that when the East German government announced on 9th November 1989 that all German Democratic Republic citizens could visit West Germany and West Berlin, that crowds of East Germans would cross the wall and with the fall of the Berlin Wall, communism would crumble as in a game of nine pins. Who could have predicted that the symbolic act of Rosa Parks, who refused to give up her seat on a bus to a white passenger on 1st December 1955, would lead to the succession of events, movements and legislation that would see an Afro-American elected the US President in 2008? These events have resulted not merely in ideological changes, but have also had economic and political repercussions throughout the world. Now, the events in Tunisia (January 2011) – Do they signify the beginning of another wave like that of the mid-19th century? Who knows?

The central issue, whether in the church or the broader society, is which class of society is invested with power (the de facto situation) and which is excluded. The excluded group seeks to snatch power for itself and, once in power, discovers that wearing the mantle of power does not change the situation on the ground too much – people continue to be selfish, they continue to claim to be rational and the world situation changes independently of individuals and individual countries.

In the Western Church, the Roman Latin Rite Church, which is numerically the largest in number (a billion or thereabouts). It is often forgotten that there are six other major groupings of churches, representing traditions of their own , consisting of 21 churches, (altogether totaling around 170 million). These Churches and the Roman Church and form the Catholic Church (according to the 2010 Annuario Pontificio, totaling around 1.116 billion). The issue in the Roman Church of modern times power has been centralized (starting especially in the 20th century) in the person of the Pope. But the other 20 churches have their own traditions with much less centralization.

What about events of our time? How will they impact the Church? What will the Church look like in another hundred years? Even though accurate prediction is not possible, the imagination can envision possibilities. When we look at Church History, Tradition, Scripture, Theology, in the light of the ground realities in the church and in the world, are we not entitled to say: What has been, can come into existence (albeit in an altered form) again – the old adage ab esse ad posse valet illatio?

The Church as an institution will take on the forms of this passing world in its institutions and in its sacraments. But there is also the unremitting function of the gospel in history – the Word that goes forth from God’s mouth and does not return empty (Is 55:11)? What can we expect in the not too distant future? How are priests, religious and laity to prepare for this emerging church?

In the book, The The Arians of the Fourth Century, John Henry Newman , wrote: The episcopate, whose action was so prompt and concordant at Nicæa on the rise of Arianism, did not, as a class or order of men, play a good part in the troubles consequent upon the Council; and the laity did. The Catholic people, in the length and breadth of Christendom, were the obstinate champions of Catholic truth, and the bishops were not. Of course there were great and illustrious exceptions; first, Athanasius, Hilary, the Latin Eusebius, and Phœbadius; and after them, Basil, the two Gregories, and Ambrose; there are others, too, who suffered, if they did nothing else, as Eustathius, Paulus, Paulinus, and Dionysius; and the Egyptian bishops, whose weight was small in the Church in proportion to the great power of their Patriarch. And, on the other hand, as I shall say presently, there were exceptions to the Christian heroism of the laity, especially in some of the great towns. And again, in speaking of the laity, I speak inclusively of their parish-priests (so to call them), at least in many places; but on the whole, taking a wide view of the history, we are obliged to say that the governing body of the Church came short, and the governed were pre-eminent in faith, zeal, courage, and constancy. This is a very remarkable fact: but there is a moral in it. Perhaps it was permitted, in order to impress upon the Church at that very time passing out of her state of persecution to her long temporal ascendancy, the great evangelical lesson, that, not the wise and powerful, but the obscure, the unlearned, and the weak constitute her real strength. It was mainly by the faithful people that Paganism was overthrown; it was by the faithful people, under the lead of Athanasius and the Egyptian bishops, and in some places supported by their Bishops or priests, that the worst of heresies was withstood and stamped out of the sacred territory, And Newman goes on to document his statement. Today, perhaps we can legitimately ask: As the bishops are losing moral authority, are the laity assuming the role that is proper to them with the moral authority that naturally follows it?

I bring together in this little work two articles of mine and two other articles – the one from Dom Cyprian Vagaggini (a theologian and important figure of the liturgical revival of Vatican II) and the other, from Humphrey O’Leary (a qualified canonist, who moved easily in several other areas of knowledge). The purpose of this work is not to provide solutions to the very complex issues presently troubling the church. These articles provide material for reflection and are meant to provoke thinking, so that in our day as in the 4th and 5th centuries, the laity would still prove to be the salt of the earth and retain the church as the city on a hilltop and the light that cannot be hidden under a basket.

Basically, these articles embody a dream. I know I will not live to see it become a reality. In the words of George Bernard Shaw (1856-1950), You see things; and you say, 'Why?' But I dream things that never were; and I say, 'Why not?'

25th April 2010, Joseph Stanley

Contents

PREFACE

DREAMING OF THE FUTURE OF CATHOLIC CHURCH

PASTORAL CARE: PREPARING FOR THE FUTURE?

THE MAGISTERIUM: GENERAL PROBLEMS AND HERMENEUTICS

REVERSAL OF POSITION BY THE CHURCH

NOTES

Dreaming of the Future of Catholic Church

Every institution always seeks to preserve and augment its power, but the philosopher Charles Taylor, in A Secular Age, has traced the genesis of a culture of control from the seventeenth century onwards. Society is seen as a mechanism rather than an organism, which needs to be adjusted and manipulated.

Monarchs claimed absolute power even over the Church. Imperial powers took possession of the world; millions of people were enslaved and treated as commodities. Once society has ceased to believe in God’s gentle providential government of the world, then the state must take his place and impose its will. This culture of power is perhaps one reason for the widespread abuse of children in our society. The Church, alas, has often been infected by this same culture of control. This happened partly because the Church has for centuries struggled to defend itself against the powers of this world who want to take it over. From the Roman Empire at the time of its birth until the Communist empires of the twentieth century, the Church has fought to keep hold of its own life, and often ended up by mirroring what it opposed.

We will not have a Church which is safe for the young until we learn from Christ and become again a humble Church in which we are all equal children of the one Father and authority is never oppressive…..

Painfully, the Lord is demolishing our high towers and our clerical pretensions to glory and grandeur so that the Church may be a place in which we may encounter God and each other more intimately. Jesus promises rest for our souls.

So if we face this terrible crisis of sexual abuse with courage and faith, then it may precipitate a profound renewal of the Church .

It is always dangerous to write about the future. Who knows what will happen? The demise of the church has been predicted many times. Recall the cry of Voltaire (1694-1778) – Crush that infamous thing or the statement of Nietzsche (1844-1900): God is dead and we have killed him. But somehow the church has survived to see another century. Will the church of the 21st century and later, survive in a persistent vegetative state – without moral authority, making moral demands and claims that no one heeds? Will a renewal take place along lines that we do not see at present? I venture to write a trajectory for the future of the church – a dream. It is altogether possible, but unlikely. Possible, because not one thing in the changes envisaged goes against the doctrinal heritage of the Church. Unlikely, because change is always rejected and cultural change takes centuries. Non-theological factors are often more influential than theological factors. Yet, there are many new things at the present time – the growth and the very rapid proliferation of IT (Information Technology), the growth of communities of varying types, constant linkages, and especially a strong watchfulness exercised by secular powers and institutions forcing the church to unmask itself and go back to basics. These trends demand change, even from persons who are not in the first place open to change. I dream of a future for the Church. I dream that a shoot will spring from the stem of Jesse, and a branch from his roots will bear fruit (Isaiah 11:1).

At the present time, many issues that are wrong with the Church (sexual abuse, cover-up, double standards, one-sided claims for freedom of conscience and so on) have been highlighted (even sensationalized) and brought to general attention by the secular institutions (the judiciary, the media of mass communication etc.). So it will continue to be in the future. The power base of the Church lies with its lay membership, who provide the man-power and the financial support of the church. As the man power and financial support erode, many forms of organization will need to be re-shaped. In addition, globalization is proceeding apace. It is effecting major changes in the world. Who will be the superpower(s) in a hundred years? An educated guess is that it will be China, with India not too far behind. Who will be the key innovators in IT? Perhaps India, which invented the zero and made IT possible. If such be the case, then, the mind sets and ethos of these nations will certainly impact the Church and its institutions as well, starting in the first place with individuals, who would be trying to get ahead in society. These will very likely be among the forces that will impact on and transform the Church of the future.

The Moral Authority of the Church?

Today (2011) many talk of the sexual abuse and betrayal of trust by members of the clergy. True, there is no excuse for such behavior, much less, excuse for cover-up of such activity. But which institution on earth can ever pledge itself never to let its membership indulge in such activity – there will always be offenders. Sin is a reality. No institution can guarantee that its membership will not sin . An institution can only pledge never to cover up the sin of its membership. And it is the cover-up together with the refusal to act for the common good (the welfare of victims and possible victims) that has aroused such outrage. And that outrage has eroded the moral authority and standing of the church. But – make no mistake - moral authority began to erode long ago. At the present time, the issue is more a cry of outrage. A society that does not express its outrage is doomed to destruction.

If there is one single event in history that marks as it were a watershed – and such kind of specification is not always accurate – when the leadership of the church, Pope Paul VI, in particular, and bishops, who towed the line began to lose their moral authority, it was the publication of Humanae Vitae (1968). There was disbelief among people (what do celibates understand about the intimacy of the bedroom?) Several Conferences of Bishops expressed their disagreement. Unfortunately, the message which Humanae Vitae intended to convey got mixed up (or, backfired?) and evoked the wrong responses. People are rational, but they are also selfish. And so their reasoning: Let us decide according to what we are capable of. They know the Church’s position. They have – at least the majority of them – taken their own position with the conviction that this does not hinder their relationship to Christ. And so, began a trend: If one issue can be decided by ourselves – ignoring the teaching of the church - why not others as well? Was this assuming adult responsibility before God for one’s actions (in preference to acting to avoid guilt)? Or was it selfishness and self-interest prevailing over rationality and the pre-condition of renunciation in the following of Christ?

A brief glance at the background of the encyclical may be useful. In 1965, Paul VI appointed a commission of 52 persons including lay women and medical experts as well as cardinals and bishops. A majority report in favour of some relaxation in the Church’s teaching on contraception, was submitted to the Pope. A minority report on holding the line was also submitted to the Pope. Pope Paul then appointed a smaller commission of 16, and 12 of these came out in favour of a change. But it was the four voices of this smaller commission that the Pope heeded. Now what was the message this was supposed to send? The Tablet reports a first person account of something that happened some time later. "I [Fr. Roland Quesnel C.Ss.P)] was working in the Vatican’s mission department at the time and when Anthony Pantin, the newly appointed Archbishop of Port-of-Spain, Trinidad, came to Rome a year after Humanae Vitae was issued, he asked Cardinal Villot, how he should present the encyclical in Trinidad. Cardinal Villot replied: Go and see Fr. Visser. He wrote the encyclical. Fr. Jan Visser C.Ss.R. one of the minority four had been chosen by Pope Paul to draft the encyclical, which His Holiness then revised and approved. I went with Archbishop Pantin to see Fr. Visser and was allowed to listen to the conversation. I remember very clearly the words Fr. Visser used: Your Grace, the written word is one thing. How it is interpreted is another. Fr. Quesnel goes on to comment It’s a pity that that was not printed in red at the end of the encyclical. It would have saved a good deal of heart searching by millions of faithful Catholic couples.

Humanae Vitae wanted to affirm strongly that sexual relation is a human act that arises from and flows into human love (a love of choice and decision) as distinct and different from a similar act (of an animal) that arises from and flows into the satisfaction of passion and appetites. A human act calls for responsibility – for humanization of an animal act. The humanization of sex , the best in the circumstances – these are words that Benedict XVI is just beginning to use in 2010. (Why at this time? Who knows? Perhaps the clearer the realization of one’s mortality, the clearer becomes one’s grasp of essentials.) With this new language, there is the possibility of a rational conversation with a human partner instead of stone walling .

The encyclical intended to clearly assert that sex among humans is not the same as sex among animals; there is a need to strive for rationality. The exercise of sexual powers among rational beings aims at communion with one other and remains open to life. (Not going on the done thing: First date introductions; second date dinner together in a romantic location; third date sex …. ). Every effort of the human incorporated into Christ by baptism, that seeks communion, needs to be stamped by the necessary pre-condition for the following of Christ – Take up your cross, daily… Was it not necessary that the Son of man suffer and so, enter into glory … Call it what you will - humanization of sexuality, a first step in the direction of a moralization, a first assumption of responsibility. That said and acknowledged, in practice, the practical principle is: Do what is humanly possible in your specific circumstances. Leave the rest to God’s mercy. Everyone is called to be a disciple – and that is for one’s entire life. (Discipleship of Christ is not a period of preparation, so that the disciple can go off and be a master/ rabbi in his own right.) Think of the negative behavior of the first disciples and how slow they were to learn in Christ’s company. Think of Christ speaking of divorce as an interim measure because of your hardness of heart – almost as good as saying you were unable to do any better at that time. But if you are perpetual disciples, you will grow and keep growing, like the first disciples and bear witness in the strength of the spirit. The call to follow came from God – you simply responded to the word proclaimed. And then, you did your best – as did the first disciples. But it was ultimately the cross (with the glorification of Christ and the outpouring of the Holy Spirit) that transformed the first disciples. That is the reality that is remembered and re-enacted and lived by the disciples of Christ today.It is really the only transforming paradigm in the following of Jesus.

In the late 20th century, the issue of sexual abuse by the clergy became a major scandal. Unfortunately, who brought it to light? Not the Church, which, following a policy of secrecy, dealt with the matter in the sphere of conscience. Administratively, the church authorities just kept transferring offending clergy from one place to another – sometimes, to another jurisdiction or country. In fact, the church had settled – or, thought it had settled - many cases with financial payments on the condition of silence. Those paid off and others as well brought the matter before the courts. Was it the Lord acting through his anointed one, Cyrus the King of Persia (Is 45:1) – today’s secular courts of justice – to ensure that another temple would replace the one that had been in ruins? To make sure that a branch would emerge and grow from the root of Jesse (Is 11:10, Rom 15:12)?

The secular courts highlighted the issue. In the US, the courts awarded punitive damages of