tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8383701632927065467.post402077423257988046..comments2023-08-21T03:51:17.425-06:00Comments on Enlightened Catholicism: As 2013 Begins, It Brings Some Justice For Leslie-Anne Knight And A Stirring Message From One Of Her New Employerscolkochhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03432916690101599393noreply@blogger.comBlogger26125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8383701632927065467.post-77607448864874290132013-01-19T12:20:51.833-07:002013-01-19T12:20:51.833-07:00Great quote Paul. It's probably why Jimmy Car...Great quote Paul. It's probably why Jimmy Carter is a charter member of the group of elders.colkochhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03432916690101599393noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8383701632927065467.post-61323256045033811642013-01-19T08:46:29.143-07:002013-01-19T08:46:29.143-07:00FYI Colleen:
I am commenting weeks after this art...FYI Colleen:<br /><br />I am commenting weeks after this article was published but I think this piece by President Jimmy Carter is relevant to this discussion and perhaps might merit more discussion here in the future. See: "Losing my religion for equality"<br /><br />www.theage.com.au/opinion/losing-my-religion-for-equality-20090714-dk0v.html<br /><br /><i>"The truth is that male religious leaders have had - and still have - an option to interpret holy teachings either to exalt or subjugate women. They have, for their own selfish ends, overwhelmingly chosen the latter. Their continuing choice provides the foundation or justification for much of the pervasive persecution and abuse of women throughout the world. This is in clear violation not just of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights but also the teachings of Jesus Christ, the Apostle Paul, Moses and the prophets, Muhammad, and founders of other great religions - all of whom have called for proper and equitable treatment of all the children of God. It is time we had the courage to challenge these views."</i><br /><br />p2pAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8383701632927065467.post-17437168288800010932013-01-04T22:28:29.363-07:002013-01-04T22:28:29.363-07:00It does if you are male and have a male definition...It does if you are male and have a male definition of what it means to be a bride. If you are a woman in the 21st century it's not so neat.colkochhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03432916690101599393noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8383701632927065467.post-73753478556308709122013-01-04T21:03:27.040-07:002013-01-04T21:03:27.040-07:00Prickliest and Coleen, I think the bridal image is...Prickliest and Coleen, I think the bridal image is more about old mistaken notions of reproduction. It was assumed that the seed was in the semen, planted into the soil that was the womb. That makes a wonderful image of how God "fathers" us, planting life into mother earth, mother church. That also makes the man the creator and head, and shows why Eve's sin meant nothing but Adam's was damning.<br /><br />Only problem is, now we know more. Why cling to these old images? Doesn't Mary's yes then make her a co-creator? In the same way, aren't we called to be co-creators with God, both as church and as earth, giving a wonderful new spin to this old thought? If only we could update our images along with our knowledge. Instead, the old images feed the old fears, and on it goes.<br /><br />Matt Connolly<br />mjcnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8383701632927065467.post-63634944660791314332013-01-04T20:51:25.803-07:002013-01-04T20:51:25.803-07:00"When bridal imagery is used to describe the ..."When bridal imagery is used to describe the relationship between God and the Church (or God and Israel), it implies that the Church (or Israel) has some kind of exclusive relationship with God, which I think is unfortunate and something that is best avoided."<br /><br />## Bearing in mind that the Bible is a *gradual* revelation of God, not something completed in a short time, but something spread over many centuries, there was a tendency, which is seen in some parts of the OT, to think of God as being a tribal god - with Israel being, not so much the recipients of a graciously-given covenant, but the special favourites of God. The problem, was that God *had*, in a way, specially favoured Israel - but the people treated this love and favour as bestowing privileges on them *without remembering* that God's love of them, was meant to evoke a corresponding love for God from them. Chauvinism arises when God's exclusive & unreserved Love for His People is treated as a reason for thinking oneself privileged, without having to love in return, in the same total way as God. And Jesus insists on this total & unreserved love of God, in the Sermon the Mount, by going beyond the letter of the law, to the attitudes behind the actions it forbids. <br /><br />So there is an "exclusive relationship" - but it is God's free gift, not man's desert in any way at all. The danger in being the beneficiary of this Love can be averted, by remembering that this exclusive love is from God first, & is wholly undeserved, wholly gratuitous, and that it is not an encouragement to national, social ecclesiastical or individual narcissism or pride, but something God gives in order for those who receive it to share it with everyone else. Jesus embodies it, & shows it - especially by His Last Supper, Death & Resurrection. <br /><br />There is no absolute protection against abusing God's love - so long as we imperfect and flawed human beings, there can't be. ISTM this bridal imagery gives us very precious insights into God's Love, into His ways of dealing with His People, & into Christ most of all, that other images don't give us. Whatever imagery we use, it will always be in danger of abuse. By being convinced that God is a God of grace above all, we will have very strong protection against turn the Bible into a defence for our egoism. <br /><br />ISTM that the two sets of imagery, bridal and parental, are complementary - each can say something that the other cannot, each casts light on Christ in its own way, and shows us something about life in Christ, now & after the end of time. Rat-biternoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8383701632927065467.post-28289719326626726142013-01-04T15:30:52.603-07:002013-01-04T15:30:52.603-07:00When bridal imagery is used to describe the relati...When bridal imagery is used to describe the relationship between God and the Church (or God and Israel), it implies that the Church (or Israel) has some kind of exclusive relationship with God, which I think is unfortunate and something that is best avoided.<br /><br />There are plenty of instances in the Old Testament where Israel is described as God's "son," (or where individual Israelites are called "sons," "daughters," or "children" of God) and Jesus encouraged his followers to think of themselves as God's children, and I think imagery like that is more apt than bridal imagery.PrickliestPearhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07606660660913560540noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8383701632927065467.post-19786307489287740042013-01-04T06:46:12.208-07:002013-01-04T06:46:12.208-07:0025 neocats would be spookier than 25 hockey player...25 neocats would be spookier than 25 hockey players. That's too funny.colkochhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03432916690101599393noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8383701632927065467.post-77862263156250763282013-01-04T06:37:26.397-07:002013-01-04T06:37:26.397-07:00Exactly Rat, which is why I said the reference was...Exactly Rat, which is why I said the reference was more than sarcasm. To me it visually states a truth about Jesus and the Church that the bride imagery does not. Brides in Israel at this time were property. Granted we are all 'God's property', but Jesus taught us a very different view of how God relates to his people.colkochhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03432916690101599393noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8383701632927065467.post-33879667683783905812013-01-03T22:28:32.459-07:002013-01-03T22:28:32.459-07:00The bridal imagery does have the advantage of reca...The bridal imagery does have the advantage of recalling the bridal imagery used for Israel in the OT, which led on to the NT use of it for the Church, the New Israel. It also means that God's faithfulness to & patience with & great love for Israel is implied. Another reason I like it is that is used in Revelation: "the heavenly city, the new Jerusalem, come[s]down from heaven like a bride adorned for her Husband" - this is both a present reality,and a future certainty. (Rev. is one of my favourite books, & not because of the fantastic beasts in it either. The bridal theme is also never far away from the Gospel mentions of meals and banquets: these are hints of the "wedding-banquet of the Lamb" in Revelation. Bridal imagery is very important to Biblical thought about the end of history. <br /><br />I see what you mean though. OTOH, the hierarchy is not ultimate; no human being can be - but Christ is. Compared to Him, we are as nothing. <br /><br />The amusing thing about the donkey reference is that when Jesus rode into Jerusalem on a donkey, that was not just humility, as per Zechariah 9.9, which emphasises that aspect of His entry: there is also a reference to 1 Kings 1.34 - which mentions how Solomon rode on a donkey to his crowning. IOW, there is a clear hint to the reader that the Entry into Jerusalem is a royal event. As to what you say about humility - complete agreement there. I'm pretty sure I wouldn't have thought of your idea :) Rat-biternoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8383701632927065467.post-81809631767057146412013-01-03T19:29:40.809-07:002013-01-03T19:29:40.809-07:00"Christ is Lord - the Church is His Bride, &a..."Christ is Lord - the Church is His Bride, & must not seek to be His rival." I really like your comment Rat. I wish though that the Bride of Christ imagery would just be dropped. It makes no sense when the the hierarchical Church as all male.<br /><br />What I think it should be, for a number of reasons, and not all of them sarcastic is: "Christ is Lord, and the Church is His donkey." We might see a little humility, a little more service, and a little more self identification on the part of our male leadership.colkochhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03432916690101599393noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8383701632927065467.post-45804815775542908042013-01-03T18:45:04.995-07:002013-01-03T18:45:04.995-07:00...and then the code word was "25 neocats&quo......and then the code word was "25 neocats" on my last comment.<br /><br />Spooky!<br /><br />p2pAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8383701632927065467.post-48615942460537318662013-01-03T18:43:06.107-07:002013-01-03T18:43:06.107-07:00Well they both seem to have settled but nobody see...Well they both seem to have settled but nobody seems happy with either deal. Woke up this morning to hear USA eliminated Canada at the World Jr. Championships. And now I see I can't use my credit card at the Vatican gift shop.<br /><br />Let's hope the rest of 2013 is better than this.<br /><br />p2p<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8383701632927065467.post-37755623838635434212013-01-03T15:57:15.494-07:002013-01-03T15:57:15.494-07:00From the first of those links, on child marriage:
...From the first of those links, on child marriage:<br /><br />"Catholics who allowed children to be married have even been excommunicated.<br /><br />Their children have been denied baptism and the "guilty" families have been barred from attending Church functions."<br /><br />## How is it fair, or Christian, to punish children for the wrong-doing of their parents ? I do not understand that at all. (I'm assuming the report is accurate. In this case, I hope it's not.) Rat-biternoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8383701632927065467.post-6445189613743881942013-01-03T15:50:08.983-07:002013-01-03T15:50:08.983-07:001. Thanks for the references - I at least was not ...1. Thanks for the references - I at least was not aware of them.<br /><br />2. The CC is not being attacked, but vigorously criticised. I know criticism is often treated or interpreted as anti-Catholicism. but they are not the same. Christians should, as you say, on this topic, and others, "agree and fight together".<br /><br />I don't know what you think, but for me, as for others, the reputation and (for lack of a better word) the *ego* of the CC cannot be, indeed, must not be, the Most Important Thing In The World. The Church is not final, not even as an authority and a teacher - if it is to be a *Christian* body, it has to be subject to correction, and it has to be subject to Christ. It is more important to be Christian than to be Catholic - to be Catholic in any sense worth discussing, one must put Christ above the Church; one must regard Him as more important than the Church. If one puts the Church above Christ, that is is idolatry - which is not in any a Christian or a Catholic value. And a Church that has idolatrous attitudes is not helping its members - it is harming itself. The early martyrs preferred to suffer death rather than to let Caesar occupy the place of Christ - the CC has a tendency to try to occupy His place, & that is as wrong as it was almost two thousand years ago. Christ is Lord - the Church is His Bride, & must not seek to be His rival. Rat-biternoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8383701632927065467.post-30512876672615617172013-01-02T06:37:33.243-07:002013-01-02T06:37:33.243-07:00there the Archbishop of Dehli against child marria...there the Archbishop of Dehli against child marriage in India seven years ago well before Tutu. But nobody noticed this news.<br />http://www.zenit.org/article-14233?l=english<br /><br />The Catholic Church in India took decisions very strong:<br />http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/6361303.stm<br /><br />And Catholic agencies are helping children:<br />http://crs.org/india/child-labor-marriage/<br /><br />So I find very sad that Tutu's text and campaign was used there for an attack against the Catholic Church when in this topic Christians could agree and fight togheter.domicshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02775415782548456535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8383701632927065467.post-2758627384502584502013-01-02T06:25:55.567-07:002013-01-02T06:25:55.567-07:00You are right, there have been statements made fro...You are right, there have been statements made from Pope Benedict such as this quote, mentioned in your articles, from a 2008 speech"<br /><br />"There are places and cultures where women are discriminated against or undervalued for the sole fact of being women, where recourse is made even to religious arguments and family, social and cultural pressure in order to maintain the inequality of the sexes, where acts of violence are consummated in regard to women, making them the object of mistreatment and of exploitation in advertising and in the consumer and entertainment industry. Faced with such grave and persistent phenomena the Christian commitment appears all the more urgent so that everywhere it may promote a culture that recognizes the dignity that belongs to women, in law and in concrete reality."<br /><br />The difference I guess, is that Pope Benedict, or other Church leaders, rarely deal with the specifics of child marriage and reproductive dangers. No question women are exploited sexually in the entertainment industry, but girls are exploited by religious traditions that insist they marry early and have children often. In the case of official Catholic teaching these girls can't even protect themselves from the transmission of HIV, much less one pregnancy after another. This too is a form of violence against women.<br /><br />The Vatican has indeed focused on domestic violence, and cultural sexual exploitation of women, but as long as it stands as the last bastion against a woman's right to determine the size and spacing of her own family as a right with in marriage and to protect herself against the transmission of sexual disease, it is a hollowed out message.colkochhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03432916690101599393noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8383701632927065467.post-8822072748253088862013-01-02T05:58:05.822-07:002013-01-02T05:58:05.822-07:00Bishop Tutu is saying what bishops and the Church ...Bishop Tutu is saying what bishops and the Church is continually telling. Of course if you read what they say only when international agencies will find something to make a controversy it is not their fault.<br /><br />http://www.zenit.org/article-32824?l=english<br />http://www.zenit.org/article-30632?l=english<br />http://www.zenit.org/article-18661?l=english<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />domicshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02775415782548456535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8383701632927065467.post-63311634811657544562013-01-01T18:12:09.390-07:002013-01-01T18:12:09.390-07:00I really am happy for Leslie-Anne Knight, especial...I really am happy for Leslie-Anne Knight, especially since I think she was another victim of the Vatican's witch hunt mentality. Right there with the LCWR.<br /><br />Happy New Year to you too.<br /><br />Good god we might actually get a hockey season before the US Congress gets a fiscal cliff deal. Does that mean hockey players and owners have higher IQ's than US Congress people. colkochhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03432916690101599393noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8383701632927065467.post-58919984085827019392013-01-01T18:09:11.118-07:002013-01-01T18:09:11.118-07:00Abuse breeds abuse, generations of abuse. That...Abuse breeds abuse, generations of abuse. That's one of the points Richard Sipe keeps trying to point out, and one truth the Bill Donohue's want to silence by insisting the abuse crisis was just a 'progressive/gay priest thing. Clerical abuse and 'mentoring' can be traced back in the American Church to the Civil War, when American bishops and cardinals had enough money to travel to Rome for extended stays, and to train seminarians in Rome's seminaries. They didn't just learn Latin and European affectation.colkochhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03432916690101599393noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8383701632927065467.post-71723806294040925652013-01-01T18:05:18.828-07:002013-01-01T18:05:18.828-07:00We do Bill, we have a lot more work to do. But as...We do Bill, we have a lot more work to do. But as Rat says below, it is a privilege to be alive at the same time as prophetic voices like Desmond Tutu and Nelson Mandela. And in his own backwards way, Raymond Burke.colkochhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03432916690101599393noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8383701632927065467.post-46745898817071331102013-01-01T18:02:55.620-07:002013-01-01T18:02:55.620-07:00Great comments Rat. I really really like this:
&...Great comments Rat. I really really like this:<br /><br />"To deny the priority of dogma over people can seem like a betrayal of the Church, of its members, and of Christ. And yet - if the Church is to be Christian, & not "merely" Catholic, it cannot play safe in that way. To be Catholic is not enough."<br /><br />I wish I would have written this because it's absolutely true and defines a real difference between progressives and conservatives. I may be too far in the Christian camp in the sense my Catholic identity might be too de emphasized, but God Almighty, Catholicism has itself been a cross to bear for too many women and children for too long.<br /><br />Happy New Year to you too.colkochhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03432916690101599393noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8383701632927065467.post-90557158333616346852013-01-01T15:40:16.482-07:002013-01-01T15:40:16.482-07:00It requires a sort of conversion to get from empha...It requires a sort of conversion to get from emphasising doctrine & dogma & all the stuff that keeps one safe in one's comfort zone, to going beyond that and letting other people be more important. There is a great deal in Catholicism to re-inforce the notion that dogma must come first, and that idea has been in the Church's psyche for most of her life. To deny the priority of dogma over people can seem like a betrayal of the Church, of its members, and of Christ. And yet - if the Church is to be Christian, & not "merely" Catholic, it cannot play safe in that way. To be Catholic is not enough - the Church can't indefinitely avoid having to fall in the ground & die, just as all of us have to; but it seems to be, well, petrified of doing so. It will only be safe & free if it stops hanging on to freedom & safety - but Catholic theology has recently been very wary of paradoxes like that. STM we are still quite a distance from having a Pope who thinks like Abp. Tutu. The Church suffers from "orthodoxism" - orthodoxy turned unhealthy. <br /> Rat-biternoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8383701632927065467.post-68731471269453110812013-01-01T15:09:30.606-07:002013-01-01T15:09:30.606-07:00Bishop Tutu is saying what any decent bishop ought...Bishop Tutu is saying what any decent bishop ought to say. It would be very easy to let oneself be depressed by the comparison with Catholic bishops. As for Catholic identity - our identity is shown by how we treat people - not by yet more tribalism. We are meant to reach out beyond our own community (unless Jesus was wrong) - not re-inforce the walls that divide us from others. The very people the Church ought to insist on helping are those it tries to shun.<br /><br />Yesterday I came across a page about Sister Jeanine Gramick - she is someone who is living the Gospel, like Bp. Tutu. It is a privilege even to be alive at the same time as people like these. <br /><br />Happy New Year, everyone. Rat-biternoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8383701632927065467.post-15892933753298151992013-01-01T12:44:33.508-07:002013-01-01T12:44:33.508-07:00Colleen, a wonderful posting. As you say, this is...Colleen, a wonderful posting. As you say, this is good news for the new year. But as you also say--and you're absolutely right--Benedict could never make the gospel affirmations that Tutu makes about the rights of women and sexual minorities.<br /><br />We Catholics continue to have work to do in 2013.William D. Lindseyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07246026074693891965noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8383701632927065467.post-18426146712247579542013-01-01T09:15:17.723-07:002013-01-01T09:15:17.723-07:00Thanks, Colleen. Yes, violence against women isn&#...Thanks, Colleen. Yes, violence against women isn't a "women's issue." A lady I know was abused by her husband and she verbally abused her son. So now we have two damaged persons who would otherwise be intelligent and well-balanced contributing members of society. The son in turn beat up his sister and God only knows what the trauma will do to her. It goes on and on. <br /><br />And thanks for the good news about justice for Leslie-Anne Knight. And I love p2p's remark that Burke is not worthy to touch Tutu's hem. So true. Betty ClermontAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com