The Pope and the faithful whose faith the Church protects.
Dissent and neo-clericalism
The 'silent schisms' in the Church
and the Pope's call for a return to
the essentials of the Christian faith
by Andrea Tornielli
Translated from the Italian service of
Although much media attention has understandably been focused lately on the outcome of the dialog between the Holy See and the FSSPX, the society founded by the late Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre which may soon return to full communion with Rome, there is no doubt that another type of dissent within the Catholic Church is far more vast and widespread.
The dissent is most notable in central Europe (Austria, Germany and Belgium) and Ireland, where groups of priests have signed on to various appeals, including an open 'call to disobedience' (of Rome), in matters regarding sexuality, priestly celibacy, female priests, and a greatly expanded ecclesial role for laymen
[including carrying out some priestly functions].
In the United States, there has been an uproar over the decision of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith to censure the Leadership Conference of Women Religious (LCWR) and place them under supervision by a US bishop because of their positions on abortion, contraception, homosexuality and women's ordination in direct contradiction to Church teaching
[along with their various heterodox affirmations on Catholic doctrine over the years].
There are 'silent schisms' within the Church, often reported in the news, which contribute to shatter the image of a 'Church triumphant'
[not that the pilgrim Church on earth can proclaim itself the 'Church triumphant'!].
Schisms that cannot easily be explained away as hiccups of the post-Vatican II controversies and its progressivist fringe which appears destined for extinction.
In the face of such dissent, one sees the difficulty that bishops have in trying to 'manage' dissent, hoping instead that 'Rome will intervene' for them. On the other hand, it cannot be denied that
it would be difficult to confront the dissenters' demands openly.
[And why should that be? Isn't it the bishop's duty to lay down Church law and discipline in his jurisdiction? The Austrian and German bishops have tried all these years to 'dialog away' dissent, to no avail, because dialog is obviously futile when the Church cannot change its teachings and practice to accommodate the dissenters' demands for 'reform'. In the Church, No is No, and there is no room for compromise on doctrine and Tradition. So why all the rigmarole of dialog - when the dissenters themselves are obviously set in their positions. Why can't the concerned bishops simply say, "Look, you may believe your arguments are unanswerable, but the Church will not change what is has taught and done for centuries just because you want her to. If you cannot live with that, then leave!"]
Benedict XVI gave an example of how the issue can be confronted from the pulpit, even, in his homily at the last Chrismal Mass. He referred to the 'call for disobedience by some European priests', and specifically to their demand for ordination of women.
The Pope replied by posing questions as to what it means for a Catholic to conform himself to the will of Christ and to follow him. The approach he took - as he did with the FSSPX - was that of someone who, being the Rock as well as the supreme authority of the Church, continually gives the profound reasons which underlie the Church's doctrinal positions, in language appropriate to the times.
For almost a quarter-century, Joseph Ratzinger led the Church's doctrinal office, during which he had to deal on a daily basis with such problems.
Before he had even been called to Rome by John Paul II, this is what he said of the role of the Church, in a homily dlivered in Munich in December 1979:
The Church Magisterium protects the faith of the simple folk - those who do not write books, who do not speak on TV, who cannot write editorials for the newspapers. This is its democratic task. She must give voice to those who do not have a voice.
It is not the learned who determine what is true in our baptismal vows - rather it is our baptismal vows that determine what is valid in the interpretations of the learned. It is not the intellectuals who must be the measure for the simple folk - rather, it is the simple folk who must be a measure for the intellectuals.
Intellectual explanations are not the measure for our baptismal profession of faith, but those baptismal vows, in their ingenuous literalness, should be the measure of all theology. The baptized person - he who keeps his baptismal vows - does not need to be taught. He has received the definitive truth and carries it with him along with faith itself...
Finally, it must be clear as well that to say someone's opinion does not correspo0nd to the doctrine of the Catholic Church is not a violation of human rights.
Everyone should have the right to form his own opinions and express them freely. The Church with Vatican-II expressed herself decisively for freedom of expression, and it continues to be. But this obviously does not mean that every opinion external to the Church can be recognized as 'Catholic'.
Everyone can express what he wants to, according to his own conscience. But the Church should be able to tell its faithful which of those opinions corresponds to the faith, and which do not. This is her right and her duty, so that Yes remains Yes, and No is No, thereby preserving that clarity which she owes to her faithful and to the world.
In the light of those statements, one can better understand why Benedict XVI wished to establish a new dicastery dedicated to the new evangelization and why he has decreed a Year of Faith.
For Papa Ratzinger, the call to the essentialness of the baptismal vows, whose ABC's are often ignored in the very heart of that Europe which was once Christian, is urgent.
But it would be a mistake to say that his urgent call is intended only as a reproof to certain dissent. It is a far wider and deeper call which also involves the ecclesiastical world that is more in line with this Pontificate - involving them in the urgency of announcing the faith, and of a deeper knowledge of its contents.
Indeed, many career-minded prelates should detach themselves from undue interest or closeness to political causes, from taking sides in partisan politics, from being named to membership in public entities, and in general, avoid undertaking public interventions in matters that can be carried out with greater freedom by lay Catholics.
One of the outcomes hoped for by Vatican II, which began 50 years ago, was the role of the laity in the Church. It is not out of place to note that the very deceree dedicated to this subject,
Apostolicam actuositatem, appears to be, of all the Vatican-II documents, the one that has been least realized concretely in the life of the Church.
In many countries, a neo-clericalism has emerged that seems to consider laymen simply as the 'secular arm' of the local hierarchy which directs everything or would want to, even in areas outside their competence.
[And here I thought that when Tornielli used 'neo-clericalism' in his title alongside 'dissent', it was a wonderful term to describe the wannabe 'dictatorship of the dissidents' who would, in fact, impose themselves as the clericalists of their alternative church! It turns out, he really means the 'neo-clericalists' among the Church hierarchy.]
On the matter of dissenting priests, surely they have all forgotten - or are ignoring - the vows they made before God and the Church when they were ordained. I was struck with this thought when watching the ordfination rites earlier today and listening to the questions that the Pope, as principal celebrant, asked of the ordinands collectively and individually before they were anointed with the Holy Chrism. In which, among other things, they vow to respect the teachings and Tradition of the Church.
And the last vow they make, one by one (as opposed to their responses in unison to the other vows), is most notably this:
Sorry for the fuzzy reproduction - it comes from the libretto of the Mass today (4/29), but for some reason, Mons. Marini's office has disabled the 'Snaoshot' tool for the librettos which are in PDF, and the screen-capture image is bad!
[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 30/04/2012 11:37]