Dowling began the talk by reading an account by NCR Washington correspondent Jerry Filteau about a Latin Mass celebrated in April at the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception in Washington. Tulsa Bishop Edward Slattery celebrated the Mass, which featured, in Filteau’s words, ‘the cappa magna, the 20-yard-long brilliant red train behind a bishop or cardinal that has come to be one of the symbols of the revival of the Tridentine Mass.’
Bishop Dowling said: “The Southern Cross [South Africa’s weekly Catholic newspaper] about 3 or 4 weeks ago published a picture of Bishop Slattery with his ‘cappa magna’. For me, such a display of what amounts to triumphalism in a church torn apart by the sexual abuse scandal, is most unfortunate. What happened there bore the marks of a medieval royal court, not the humble, servant leadership modeled by Jesus. But it seems to me that this is also a symbol of what has been happening in the church especially since Pope John Paul II became the Bishop of Rome and up till today — and that ‘restorationism’, the carefully planned dismantling of the theology, ecclesiology, pastoral vision, indeed the ‘opening of the windows’ of Vatican II – in order to ‘restore’ a previous, or more controllable model of church through an increasingly centralized power structure; a structure which now controls everything in the life of the church through a network of Vatican congregations led by cardinals who ensure strict compliance with what is deemed by them to be ‘orthodox’ “Those who do not comply face censure and punishment, e.g. theologians who are forbidden to teach in Catholic faculties.”
“Lest we do not highlight sufficiently this important fact. Vatican II was an ecumenical council, i.e. a solemn exercise of the magisterium of the church, i.e. the college of bishops gathered together with the bishop of Rome and exercising a teaching function for the whole church. In other words, its vision, its principles and the direction it gave are to be followed and implemented by all, from the pope to the peasant farmer in the fields of Honduras.
“Since Vatican II, there has been no such similar exercise of teaching authority by the magisterium. Instead, a series of decrees, pronouncements and decisions, which have been given various ‘labels’ stating, for example, that they must be firmly held to with ‘internal assent’ by the Catholic faithful, but in reality are simply the theological or pastoral interpretations or opinions of those who have power at the centre of the church.”
“They have not been solemnly defined as belonging to the ‘deposit of the faith’, to be believed and followed, therefore, by all Catholics, as with other solemnly proclaimed dogmas. For example, the issues of celibacy for the priesthood and the ordination of women, withdrawn ever from the realm of discussion. Therefore, such pronouncements are open to scrutiny – to discern whether they are in accord, for example, with the fundamental theological vision of Vatican II, or whether there is indeed a case to be made for a different interpretation or opinion.”
“When I worked internationally from my religious congregation’s base in Rome from 1985 to 1990, before I came back here as bishop of Rustenburg, one of my responsibilities was the building up of young adult ministry with our communities in the countries of Europe where so many of the young people were alienated from the church. I developed relationships with many hundreds of sincere, searching Catholic young adults, very open to issues of injustice, poverty and misery in the world, aware of structural injustice in the political and economic systems which dominated the world, but who increasingly felt that the ‘official’ church was not only out of touch with reality, but a counterwitness to the aspirations of thinking and aware Catholics who sought a different experience of church. In other words, an experience which enabled them to believe that the church they belonged to had something relevant to say and to witness to in the very challenging world in which they lived. Many, many of these young adults have since left the church entirely.”
“On the other hand, it has to be recognized that for a significant number of young Catholics, adult Catholics, priests and religious around the world, the ‘restorationist’ model of church which has been implemented over the past 30-40 years is sought after and valued; it meets a need in them; it gives them a feeling of belonging to something with very clear parameters and guidelines for living, thus giving them a sense of security and clarity about what is truth and what is morally right or wrong, because there is a clear and strong authority structure which decides definitively on all such questions, and which they trust absolutely as being of divine origin.”
“The rise of conservative groups and organizations in the church over the past 40 years and more, which attract significant numbers of adherents, has led to a phenomenon which I find difficult to deal with, viz, an inward looking church, fearful of, if not antagonistic towards a secularist world with its concomitant danger of relativism especially in terms of truth and morality – frequently referred to by pope Benedict XVI; a church which gives an impression of ‘retreating behind the wagons’, and relying on a strong central authority to ensure unity through uniformity in belief and praxis in the face of such dangers. The fear is that without such supervision and control, and that if any freedom in decision-making is allowed, even in less important matters, this will open the door to division and a breakdown in the unity of the church.”
“This is all about a fundamentally different ‘vision’ in the church and ‘vision’ of the church. Where today can we find the great theological leaders and thinkers of the past, like:
- Cardinal Joseph Frings of Cologne, Germany, and Bernard Jan Alfrink of Utrecht, Netherlands
- the great prophetic bishops whose voice and witness was a clarion call to justice, human rights and a global community of equitable sharing
- the witness of Archbishop Oscar Romero of El Salvador
- the voices of Cardinals Paulo Evaristo Ams and Aloisio Leo Arlindo Lorscheider
- and Bishops Dom Helder Camara and Pedro Casadaliga of Brazil?”
“Again, who in today’s world ‘out there’ even listens to, much less appreciates and allows themselves to be challenged by the leadership of the church at the present time? I think the moral authority of the church’s leadership today has never been weaker. It is, therefore, important in my view that church leadership, instead of giving an impression of its power, privilege and prestige, should rather be experienced as a humble, searching ministry together with its people in order to discern the most appropriate or viable responses which can be made to complex ethical and moral questions – a leadership, therefore, which does not presume to have all the answers all the time.
One of the truly significant contributions of the church to the building up of a world in which people and communities can live in peace and dignity, with a quality of life which befits those made in God’s image, has been the body of what has been called ‘Catholic Social Teaching’, a compendium of which has been released during the past few years. These social teaching principles are: The Common Good, Solidarity, The Option for the Poor Subsidiarity, The Common Destiny of Goods, The Integrity of Creation, and People- Centerdness – all based on and flowing out of the values of the Gospel. Here we have very relevant principles and guidelines to engage with complex social, economic, cultural and political realities, especially as these affect the poorest and most vulnerable members of societies everywhere. These principles should enable us, as church, to critique constructively all socio-politicaleconomic systems and policies – and especially from that viewpoint, viz. their effect on the poorest and most vulnerable in society.”
“However, if church leadership anywhere presumes to criticize or critique socio-political-economic policies and policy makers, or governments, it must also allow itself to be critiqued in the same way in terms of its policies, its internal life, and especially its modus operandi. A democratic culture and praxis, with its focus on the participation of citizens and holding accountable those who are elected to govern, is increasingly appreciated in spite of inevitable human shortcomings. When thinking people of all persuasions look at church leadership, they raise questions about, for example, real participation of the membership in its governance and how in fact church leadership is to be held accountable, and to whom. If the church, and its leadership, professes to follow the values of the Gospel and the principles of Catholic Social Teaching, then its internal life, its methods of governing and its use of authority will be scrutinized on the basis of what we profess. Let us take one social teaching principle, vitally important for ensuring participative democracy in the socio-political domain, viz. subsidiarity.”
“Applied to the church, the principle of subsidiarity requires of its leadership to actively promote and encourage participation, personal responsibility and effective engagement by everyone in terms of their particular calling and ministry in the church and world according to their opportunities and gifts.”
“However, I think that today we have a leadership in the church which actually undermines the very notion of subsidiarity; where the minutiae of church life and praxis ‘at the lower level’ are subject to examination and authentication being given by the ‘higher level,’ in fact the highest level, e.g., the approval of liturgical language and texts; where one of the key Vatican II principles, collegiality in decision-making, is virtually non-existent. The eminent emeritus Archbishop of Vienna, Cardinal Franz Konig, wrote the following in 1999 — almost 35 years after Vatican II: ‘In fact, however, de facto and not de jure, intentionally or unintentionally, the curial authorities working in conjunction with the pope have appropriated the tasks of the episcopal college. It is they who now carry out almost all of them’ (‘My Vision of the church of the Future’, The Tablet, March 27, 1999, p. 434).
“Is there a way forward? I have grappled with this question especially in the light of the apparent division of aspiration and vision in the church. How do you reconcile such very different visions of church, or models of church? I do not have the answer, except that somewhere we must find an attitude of respect and reverence for difference and diversity as we search for a living unity in the church; that people be allowed, indeed enabled, to find or create the type of community which is expressive of their faith and aspirations concerning their Christian and Catholic lives and engagement in church and world, and which strives to hold in legitimate and constructive tension the uncertainties and ambiguities that all this will bring, trusting in the presence of the Holy Spirit. At the heart of this is the question of conscience. As Catholics, we need to be trusted enough to make informed decisions about our life, our witness, our expressions of faith, spirituality, prayer, and involvement in the world — on the basis of a developed conscience.”
More info: http://bit.ly/ncrdowling
