"It is...Our will that Catholics should abstain from certain appellations which have recently been brought into use to distinguish one group of Catholics from another. They are to be avoided not only as 'profane novelties of words,' out of harmony with both truth and justice, but also because they give rise to great trouble and confusion among Catholics. Such is the nature of Catholicism that it does not admit of more or less, but must be held as a whole or as a whole rejected: 'This is the Catholic faith, which unless a man believe faithfully and firmly; he cannot be saved' (Athanasian Creed). There is no need of adding any qualifying terms to the profession of Catholicism: it is quite enough for each one to proclaim 'Christian is my name and Catholic my surname,' only let him endeavour to be in reality what he calls himself." -- Pope Benedict XV, Ad Beatissimi Apostolorum 24 (1914)

Saturday, June 9, 2012

Dissidents Dig In

U.S.: Franciscans side with the LCWR


The Franciscan Brothers Minor have sent an open letter to Rome asking for the rules of the Catholic Magisterium to be respected

Some are talking about a “boomerang effect” but it is still early days. The reactions triggered by the Vatican’s investigations into the LCWR show no sign of ceasing. After letters and demonstrations – such as last week’s one in Washington, during which the city’s Apostolic Nuncio, Viganò, opened the doors of the Vatican embassy to some LCWR demonstrators – and after stands were taken by important figures from the world of culture, journalists and individual clerics such as the Jesuit, James Martin, it is now the turn of the Franciscan Brothers Minor of the United States to do their bit. The organisation sent an open letter, dated 31 May, to Rome which is now being published across U.S. and foreign media.

 The fact that the letter was signed by the heads of all 7 American Provinces and that the minister general was also an American – the only one in the Order’s history – proves it is an influential document. The minister general, Fr. John Vaughn from the Province of Santa Barbara (which comprises all Western American states) had lived in Rome from 1985 to 1991.

The letter sent by the Franciscan brothers began: “We, the Leadership of the Friars Minor of the United States…”. In it, they expressed “deep concern” regarding “the recent Vatican Doctrinal Assessment of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious (LCWR),” led by American cardinal William Levada, who, they say “may inadvertently fuel the current climate of division and confusion.”

“We write, too, as a public sign of our solidarity with you as you endure this very difficult moment. We are privileged to share with you the journey of religious life. Like you, we strive in all that we do to build up the People of God.”

“For us, there can be no dispute that God has been and continues to be revealed through the faithful (and often unsung) witness of religious women in the United States.” Indeed, this was recognise din the preamble of the Vatican note which announced that the nuns were being placed under investigation. Schools, hospitals and institutions supporting the poor were founded and still being run by religious male and female institutions. But this is not the only service provided by those who have opted for the evangelical counsels, the Franciscans wrote.

“The late 20th century and the beginning of this century have been times of great social, political and cultural upheaval and change” (in the U.S., the memory of the September 11 attacks is still very much alive and so there was no need to cite it). Such contextual changes require us, as faithful members of the Church, to pose questions that at first may appear to be controversial or even unfaithful, but in fact are asked precisely so that we might live authentically the charisms we have received, even as we respond to the “signs of the times. This is the charge that we as religious have received through the “Decree on the Renewal of Religious Life” from the Second Vatican Council and subsequent statements of the Church on religious life.”

The Franciscan Brothers are convinced that many of the issues they currently face in today’s society are challenges to respond better and faithfully to the Gospel, the Church and its Founders’ charisms.

They confessed they were “concerned that the tone and direction set forth in the Doctrinal Assessment of LCWR are excessive, given the evidence raised.” The worry is that “the efforts of LCWR to facilitate honest and faithful dialogue on critical issues of our times must not result in a level of ecclesial oversight that could, in effect, quash all further discernment.” This could then be repeated in other sectors and groups within the Church.

We all operate within different areas of expertise, the Franciscans wrote, referring to the various groups within the Church. “When there appears to be honest disagreement on the application of moral principles to public policy, it is not equivalent to questioning the authority of the Church’s magisterium.”

“Rather than excessive oversight of LCWR, perhaps a better service to the people of God might be a renewed effort to articulate the nuances of our complex moral tradition. This can be a teaching moment rather than a moment of regulation - an opportunity to bring our faith to bear on the complexity of public policy particularly in the midst of our quadrennial elections,” the Franciscans said. They then went on to suggest that this moment be transformed into an opportunity for comparison and dialogue, as set out in the Mutuae Relationis document on relations between clerics and bishops.

They explicitly added: ‘it is desirable that questions having reference to both bishops and religious should be dealt with by mixed commissions consisting of bishops and major religious superiors, men or women.”

“We hope that our bishops will take particular care to see that the way they take action is as important as the actions themselves in serving the People of God.” This was said in reference to the inquiry Commission set up by the Vatican, led by the Bishop of Seattle, Sartain and made up exclusively of bishops, without the slightest involvement of the anticipated religious component.

The Franciscans ended their letter with the greeting “Fraternally”, assuring their prayers. But the text expressed all the dignity of a body asking for the rules and pronouncements of the Catholic teaching to be respected.



CTSA board statement on Sr. Margaret Farley
June 8, 2012, 10:14 am
Posted by Grant Gallicho

This morning the Catholic Theological Society of America board released the followingstatement responding to the Vatican’s “notification” on Sr. Margaret Farley’s book Just Love:

On June 4, 2012, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith published a “Notification” entitled “Regarding the Book Just Love: A Framework for Christian Sexual Ethics by Sister Margaret A. Farley, R.S.M.” The “Notification” judged that, in a number of respects, Professor Farley’s book presents positions on matters of sexual ethics that are contrary to the teaching of the Magisterium.

We, the undersigned members of the Board of Directors of the Catholic Theological Society of America, wish to note that Professor Farley is a highly respected member of the theological community. A former President of the CTSA and a recipient of the Society’s John Courtney Murray Award, she has devoted her life to teaching and writing on ethical issues and has done so in ways that have been reflective, measured, and wise. Her work has prompted a generation of theologians to think more deeply about the Christian meaning of personal relationships and the divine life of love that truly animates them. The judgment of the “Notification” that a number of Professor Farley’s stated positions are contrary to the teaching of the Magisterium is simply factual. In our judgment, however, Professor Farley’s purpose in her book is to raise and explore questions of keen concern to the faithful of the Church. Doing so is one very legitimate way of engaging in theological inquiry that has been practiced throughout the Catholic tradition.

The Board is especially concerned with the understanding of the task of Catholic theology presented in the “Notification.” The “Notification” risks giving the impression that there can be no constructive role in the life of the Church for works of theology that 1) give voice to the experience and concerns of ordinary believers, 2) raise questions about the persuasiveness of certain official Catholic positions, and 3) offer alternative theological frameworks as potentially helpful contributions to the authentic development of doctrine. Such an understanding of the nature of theology inappropriately conflates the distinctive tasks of catechesis and theology. With regard to the subject matter of Professor Farley’s book, it is simply a matter of fact that faithful Catholics in every corner of the Church are raising ethical questions like those Professor Farley has addressed. In raising and exploring such questions with her customary sensitivity and judiciousness, Professor Farley has invited us to engage the Catholic tradition seriously and thoughtfully.

Signed, John E. Thiel, Ph.D.
Fairfield University
Fairfield, CT

Susan A. Ross, Ph.D.
Loyola University
Chicago, IL

Richard R. Gaillardetz, Ph.D.
Boston College
Chestnut Hill, MA

Mary Ann Hinsdale, I.H.M., Ph.D.
Boston College
Chestnut Hill, MA
Past President

M. Theresa Moser, R.S.C.J., Ph.D.
University of San Francisco
San Francisco, CA

Jozef D. Zalot, Ph.D
College of Mount St. Joseph
Cincinnati, OH

Michael E. Lee, Ph.D.
Fordham University
Bronx, NY

Kathleen McManus, O.P., Ph.D.
University of Portland
Portland, OR

Judith A. Merkle, S.N.D. de N., Ph.D.
Niagara University
Niagara, NY

Elena Procario-Foley, Ph.D.
Iona College
New Rochelle, NY

June 7, 2012


No comments:

Post a Comment