The List Is Long

As some of you know, I spent 60 years of my life in the Roman Catholic Church. Since I left and became a member of the Episcopal Church, I have tried to keep my criticism of the RCC to a minimum. Many of my family members and friends are RC, and I generally don't make negative comments about the church, unless others bring up the subject first. Then, I might agree or disagree. I admire those who remain with the church and try to bring about change from within, but I reached the point where I could not do that.

Then, too, I hesitate because the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion are far from perfect, as we are seeing, and there would be an element of pot-kettle in the criticism.

As I debated with myself whether to post what I'm going to say here, I read MadPriest's post on the interference of the RC hierarchy in the political process in Scotland, and I remembered the interference in our own most recent presidential election by the pope and certain of the American bishops having to do with John Kerry's views on abortion, interference which may have thrown the election to Bush, since the vote count was quite close, and I decided go ahead.

When the present pope was, as yet, Cardinal Ratzinger, he was the Prefect of the Office of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith for the Roman Catholic Church, one of the congregations of the Roman Curia. His was the responsibility to guard the teachings of the church throughout the world from doctrinal error.

He visited the US periodically to exercise his authority as Prefect, and he was known as "The Enforcer". Certain of the bishops, priests and, especially, the administrators and faculty of the Catholic seminaries and universities dreaded the visits, because those who strayed from orthodoxy - according to the Vatican - were disiplined in various ways.

I attended a Jesuit university in the 1950s, and even with the censorship that was in place in those days, the good fathers did manage to convey the idea that thinking is a good thing. I never recovered from that. Of course, I had been doing a good bit of thinking on my own, but the Jesuits reinforced the idea that it was OK to think.

That being said, I receiived a grade of "C" in my course on Christian marriage, because I persisted in annoying my professor with comments about this passage from Matthew 5:32-35:

But I say to you that anyone who divorces his wife, except on the ground of unchastity, causes her to commit adultery; and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.

My thought was that this passage indicated one reason for permitting divorce and remarriage. He said no, and tried to explain why it did not, but not entirely to my satisfaction. I continued the disussion after he had given me his definitive anwer, and it is my belief that my grade was the result of my persistance in questioning him about the passage. Of course, I could be wrong. It was not a difficult class, and that grade was the only "C" to besmirch my academic record at the university.

But, I digress. This article by John L. Allen Jr. from The National Catholic Reporter from 1999, before the cardinal became pope, is quite enlightening. It is long, therefore, I will give you a few quotes in the event you are disinclined to read the whole piece. Of course, I do recommend that you read the whole thing.

Some say his 18 years as prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the church’s guardian of orthodoxy, have been the intellectual salvation of Roman Catholicism in a time of confusion and compromise.

Others believe Ratzinger will be remembered as the architect of John Paul’s internal Kulturkampf, intimidating and punishing thinkers in order to restore a model of church -- clerical, dogmatic and rule-bound -- many hoped had been swept away by the Second Vatican Council, the 1962-65 assembly of bishops that sought to renew Catholicism and open it to the world. Ratzinger’s campaign bears comparison to the anti-modernist drive in the early part of the century or Pius XII’s crackdown in the 1950s, critics say, but is even more disheartening because it followed a moment of such optimism and new life.

His record includes:

* Theologians disciplined, such as Fr. Charles Curran, an American moral theologian who advocates a right to public dissent from official church teaching; Fr. Matthew Fox, an American known for his work on creation spirituality; Sr. Ivone Gebara, a Brazilian whose thinking blends liberation theology with environmental concerns; and Fr. Tissa Balasuriya, a Sri Lankan interested in how Christianity can be expressed through Eastern concepts;
* Movements blocked, such as liberation theology and, more recently, religious pluralism (the drive to affirm other religions on their own terms);
* Progressive bishops hobbled, including Archbishop Raymond Hunthausen of Seattle, reproached by Rome for his tolerance of ministry to homosexuals and his involvement in progressive political causes, and Bishop Dom Pedro Casaldáliga of Sao Félix, Brazil, criticized for his political engagement beyond the borders of his own diocese;
* Episcopal conferences brought to heel on issues such as inclusive language and their own teaching authority;
* The borders of infallibility expanded, to include such disparate points as the ban on women’s ordination and the invalidity of ordinations in the Anglican church.


From 1999, opinions on whether Cardinal Ratzinger could be elected pope:

There is still the possibility, of course, that Ratzinger will not end his career as the hierarchy’s No. 2 man. At some point there will be another conclave, and Ratzinger, if he’s still around, will be in the running for the top job. Could he become pope?

Fessio thinks it could happen. “If the present pope died suddenly, they might want an older person for interim continuity,” he said. “Ratzinger has many abilities the rest of the cardinals are aware of -- his command of languages, his knowledge of cultures, his knowledge of the faith.”

Reese, however, thinks it unlikely. For one thing, Ratzinger would be almost 75, and he doesn’t think the cardinals will elect someone so close to the official retirement age. Anyway, Ratzinger’s “become too controversial. They will look for someone who can heal divisions rather than exacerbate them,” Reese said. He added, “I could be wrong.”

Allen goes on to say:

Assuming Ratzinger’s tenure in the Vatican ends with his present job, what is one to make of it? Perhaps Waldstein is right that the battle lines are too hardened in the present for any definitive judgment. Maybe it will take the perspective that comes only with time to allow observers to get past the polemics and appreciate his real impact on the church.

Jacques Maritain once said, “The important thing is not to be a success. The important thing is to be in history bearing the witness.” In that light, perhaps Ratzinger will come to be judged positively. He has borne a consistent witness, stood fast for his own vision -- which he would argue is the vision of Christ. It is with such considerations in view that Fessio boldly predicts Ratzinger will be remembered as “one of the great saints of our time.”

Yet the stark divisions, the ruptures in the church Ratzinger has helped to create these past 18 years must also be part of his legacy. Many Catholics can’t help thinking it could all have been different. The same truths could have been presented, the same errors exposed, in more pastoral fashion. The wounds could have been less frequent, less deep, quicker to heal.

From the lengthy quotes, do you get the idea that I really want you to read the whole article?

A longer list of those he disciplined, in one form or another, is found, once again, in The National Catholic Reporter. The names include some of the finest thinkers in the church.

This is the man who is the present Pope Benedict. And, as far as I know, he still has not decided whether Roman Catholic married couples will be permitted to use condoms if one of the parties is infected with HIV.