And it's long overdue...

58 Boston priests urge Cardinal Law to resign (Bos Globe)

The Boston Revolution is long overdue. The first shot was fired when Law arrogantly rejected the advice - and money - from a local Catholic lay group intent on reforming these abuses. Now that he's been recalled to Rome, hopefully for a dressing down and defrocking all at once, it's become a "shot heard 'round the world."

There are major implications in this for the future of Catholic governance in the US, if not elsewhere as well. How it plays out remains to be seen, but I see this as a major blow to the closed society of the religious and an important inroad by the laity in active management of Church policy and affairs. From there, it's only a small step to major reformation of theological values as well, including the Church's stand on gays. How ironic that it had to begin this way.

gmginsfo, do you really think Law's ouster would have any effect on "theological values as well, including the Church's stand on gays"? With the Church poised to bar all gay men from the priesthood, it seems to me any ouster of Law would only drive the Church to more hiding and protectiveness, and they would even more need a scapegoat for their crimes.

This is a big issue for all of us raised Catholic. On a practical level, I refuse to donate to my Catholic high school any more (if I am not good enough for their Church, why should my money be good enough?) and I could barely stand going to the weddings of some friends this summer, because I had to enter a Catholic Church. And if the Church does ban gays from the priesthood, I want a refund on the cost of my sister's wedding and my mother's funeral, as both were conducted by priests I am pretty sure were gay.

On a theological level, if gay men cannot receive holy orders, a sacrament, as several Vatican officials have claimed (and I presume lesbians can therefore not become nuns or sisters), does that mean I was not confirmed? What about my baptism? The Church better come up with some theological justification for this stance, or they basically are saying gays can't receive the sacraments, and that is a HUGE shift in theology.

[ December 10, 2002: Message edited by: CPT_Doom ]

Law may very well resign, but the current Pope is not going to move an inch on Church governance. The current Vatican has even sheltered and promoted a Mexican priest who has been charged with a wide array of sexual assaults and abuse--the power is vested in Rome, not in the faithful. Far too many of the leading U.S. prelates are in retrenchment mode too. I say this as a baptized Catholic who spent all but two of my K-12 years in Roman Catholic schools (Montessori, Sacred Heart, Benedictine, etc.).

Many of the more progressive Church leaders (like Joseph Cardinal Bernardin) have either died in the last 10 years or simply do not have the influence to push the Church in the right direction. The only sign of hope I see among the American cardinals is Theodore Cardinal McCarrick of Washington, but he has as much hope of being the next pope, or pushing for a more open, welcoming agenda, among the likes of Mahoney, George, etc., as Saddam Hussein has of exchanging reading lists with Laura Bush!

Doomster - pardon the Bushism (and I'm still curious about the monoker) - yes, as a born and bred (but cf. reared) Catholic, I do believe that. The scenario's basically a replay of Henry 8 and the C of E: civil issues impinge upon Church management and prerogatives. The civil authorities dominate over the ecclesiastical ones and doctrine and theology get swept up along the way, changing in the process. But I also agree with FT that a LOT of the problem is the inertia resident in the Vatican. Look for that to change with the choice of his successor. Nothing is set in stone - even the rock of St. Peter!

[quote]Originally posted by fantomas:
The current Vatican has even sheltered and promoted a Mexican priest who has been charged with a wide array of sexual assaults and abuse--the power is vested in Rome, not in the faithful.

---

Hence.....

[Los] Crimen[es] del Padre Amaro!!

Wow, the Catholic Church is really suffering some intensive scrutiny these days.....I wonder if it will mean a healthier Church in the future.

At least, and good for them, Mexico has the balls to question their Catholicism.

[ December 11, 2002: Message edited by: bluebird48234 ]

Episcopal bishops of MA criticize Vatican over homophobia (Bos Globe)

[quote]Originally posted by gmginsfo:
But I also agree with FT that a LOT of the problem is the inertia resident in the Vatican. Look for that to change with the choice of his successor.

---

This, it seems to me, is wishful thinking. THe college of cardinals is now comprised almost exclusively of men elevated by JP II, who most definitely imposed a theological litmus test in choosing new princes of the Church.

Whenever JP II is called to his eternal rest, there is likely to be little change in the direction of the Church on any of the issues that now threaten to overwhelm it. He hs done his utmost to assure that.

Ironically then, the Church's most dynamic leader in more than a generation may well have sown the seeds of its destruction.

The Anglican Catholics around here haven't been shy with their opinions about the shameful behavior of their Roman church brethren. From Bishop Tom Shaw (openly gay, btw, although celibate) right down to the pastor of the Episcopal parish in J.P. that I drop in on from time to time, they've been pointedly critical of the way Law and the rest of the RC heirarchy have dealt with the victims of the outrageous acts committed on its watch. They've also directly criticized the Vatican's continuing attempts to scapegoat gay priests, its agressive, obsessive homophobia.

Boston is about 1/4 Catholic; the Church's history here runs wide and deep. The Cardinal had been a true power broker, operating at the highest levels of state politics and commerce. That's all gone. The anger and sorrow and sense of betrayal are palpable -- in a very real sense, it's a town in mourning.

And it's not over by a long shot. In today's news, the (Catholic) Attorney General of Massachusetts publicly accuses the church of "using 'every tool and maneuver' to impede a criminal investigation of the 'elaborate and decades-long' scheme to cover up crimes of sexual abuse." In order to avoid criminal indictment in neighboring New Hampshire, the bishop there "signed an agreement with the attorney general, acknowledging that there was sufficient evidence to secure convictions" of child endangerment on the part of the diocese. In Boston, more and more local priests are clamoring to join the forces of revolution by signing the letter -- an unprecedented gesture of disobedience toward their "boss", Cardinal Law.

As GMG points out, we're seeing a number of striking similaries to the history of Reformation and the establishment of the Church of England. I wonder if all this may be pointing toward another schism, perhaps the birth of American Catholicism as separate from Rome. The pope is revered as a holy man, but one who's only selectively "infallible." We know that a large percentage of Catholics in this country disagree with and disregard Vatican pronouncements on many "immorality" issues, including contraception and abortion, the role of women in the Church, priestly celibacy and to some extent, openly gay clergy. The Anglicans, Orthodox etc have gotten along without a pope quite nicely. The American Catholic church?

[ December 11, 2002: Message edited by: redsoxbreath ]

[quote] As GMG points out, we're seeing a number of striking similaries to the history of Reformation and the establishment of the Church of England. I wonder if all this may be pointing toward another schism, perhaps the birth of American Catholicism as separate from Rome. The pope is revered as a holy man, but one who's only selectively "infallible." We know that a large percentage of Catholics in this country disagree with and disregard Vatican pronouncements on many "immorality" issues, including contraception and abortion, the role of women in the Church, priestly celibacy and to some extent, gay clergy. The Anglicans, Orthodox etc have gotten along without a pope quite nicely. The American Catholic church?

---

Actually, there is an "American Catholic Church" that has been trying, subtly, to attract new members during the crisis. Don't know if they will be successful, but it could be the start of a schism.

Incidentally, I wonder if the Church understands how bad it will look, and not just to the gay community, if they actually ban gay priests. Particularly with the recent release of so much more documentation in Boston, it is clear that the Church has not only been covering up priests who abuse boys, they have been covering up priests who abuse their power. I mean really, seducing novitiates by telling them you getting them closer to Christ? Good old heterosexual abuse rears its ugly head.

I have a feeling that if the Church continues to scapegoat gay man, while the members focus on the cover up, it will backfire. Not that the faithful will suddenly rise up for gay rights, but the Church will look even more like a spin machine trying to keep attention off the truth.

We shall see.

BTW, for gmginsfo and anyone else interested - CPT_Doom,a form of Captain Doom, is a nickname given by my former roommates. It comes from a season a few years back when I captained an Ultimate Frisbee team full of complete novices to the sport. I told my roommates, who all also played Ultimate, that my goal for the season was to score at least 10 goals in a game - when games are played to 15, not to necessarily win any. My roommates were already apt to think me a bit cynical about life in general - I prefer the term pragmatic - so they christened me Captain Doom, and it stuck. I even have a black VW GTI with the license plates "Doommbl" for Doom-mobile.

Oh, and the team didn't score more than 9 points in any game that year.

Doom, Thanks for the explanation, which makes perfect sense. Now I can rest easy knowing you're not some kind of Gothic death tripper! And anyone who plays with a Frisbee is all right in my book. "Flat flip flies straight" - except when I'm flicking my wrist!

BTW, the American Catholic Church you speak of used to be a hyper-conservative sect that said Masses in Latin, was rather secretive - and was condemned and persecuted by the bishops. I agree, maybe it's time for a home-grown version free from Rome. Watching over us, Sister Seton? Somebody better, because more and more of my friends are trying to get me to go Episcopalian all the time!

Well, gmginsfo, I gave up on the Church a long time ago, but for some reason won't convert to any other religion. I don't know why, except that being a Catholic is part of my cultural heritage (Irish) and more than my mere religion. I think it's a lot like being Jewish in that regard.

I actually would hate to see a schism, but would love for the Church to return to the Second Vatican Council days, when some needed understanding and nuance were added to the Church's teaching. I still remember being taught in Senior Religion Class in HS that in the Vatican II documents, it was stated (and I'm paraphrasing) that each individual had to come to their own understanding of morality and the truth; that the Church could act as a guide and teacher, but could not dictate what a person thought or felt. That never was really put into action, now, was it?

Seeing as most Cardinals and Bishops have been appointed by JPII, it is nearly impossible for the Church to return to those roots without a major shake-up, and I don't think that is going to happen. What I fear is that the Church will just become more doctrinaire and conservative, signing its death warrent in the process.

BTW - what is up with the Boston diocese and bankruptcy - it is a coward's way out! IMHO if the Church wants to lead morally, the first thing the Boston diocese has to do is take blame and open its arms and pockets to the victims. I actually wrote a nasty letter to Law, after he advised that Catholics not go to gay commitment ceremonies, in which I told him if he were a true Christian, he would sell of every asset the Boston diocese had in order to make good on his and the Church's sins - and the first thing on the auction block should be his house! I doubt he will be taking my advice.

The Catholic Church is also seeing the bulk of its growth in Latin America and Asia these days. In fact, I would not be surprised to see a non-European pope chosen after JP2. Symbolically, it would probably be a good choice, but the Catholic church in those areas is probably more socially conservative...

Doom - those are exactly my sentiments about the Church. It's part of me, even though I stopped going to Mass as soon as I could in HS and only fitfully return to it every now and then. I like your reference to V2, morally relativist as it might be, because within the framework of two millenia of theological study and debate there's a certain moral compass that naturally leads to a life well lived. Think about it: how much time did the post-Paul Fathers of the Church spend denouncing homosexuality? Not one whole Hell of a lot! Their other lessons are the ones that we can and should live by - and they provide a good basis for living a good gay life too.

The most recent catechism focuses on committed partnerships as best fulfilling the Christian ideal. They call it husband and wife and limit it to men and women, but I say it can apply to us too. I don't expect everyone to agree, but for me it works and it's the life I aspire to. You could do a lot worse.

Gmg and Doom, exactly my experience and sentiments too. Bewildered by the evidence of my sexuality, at least I was clear that I was not inherently evil and condemned to Hell for it. Fed up with the guilt-trips and knowing innately that they were wrong, I was outta there by 16. Man, the RC's are just so sick around sex and sexuality... I agree, it'll be a long time before the Vatican gets a clue.

Bankruptcy would be a very bad mistake, although consistent with their pattern of cynical disregard for their victims.

[ December 12, 2002: Message edited by: redsoxbreath ]

Resignation Thursday continues: word out of Rome, in a Fox News exclusive, is that Law went there with resignation in hand, just as he did once before, only to have the Pope reject it. This time, though, it's a sure thing.

Law probably wants to resign, but it remains to be seen how the Pope will concede this one. The rebellion of the clergy there, and now the laity, means that if he sends Law back to stay on, there could be an even more serious backlash. But if JPII does accept Law's resignation, he'll appoint someone as conservative if not more so than Law. The issue really is, what is the Vatican going to do about the widespread disaster caused by these senior prelates? Law was not the only one: Edward Cardinal Egan of New York, Roger Cardinal Mahoney of Los Angeles, and other Cardinals and bishops presided over these coverups, and yet they've received no real sanctions from their higher-ups.

It will be very, very interesting to see how the Vatican responds. Perhaps there is another John XXIII lurking among some of those Latin American or African or Asian Cardinals. Who was the Nigerian who'd been mentioned many times? Francis Cardinal Arinze? Is he an arch-conservative? Could he last with the powerful Opus Dei folks, Ratzinger, Navarro Valls, and that ilk running things at the highest levels?