Vatican

Thinking with Ratzinger and Burge: Concerning sex, marriage, doctrine and church decline

When historians write about the career of Pope Benedict XVI I predict that they will include a sobering quote that dates back to his life and work as Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger of Germany.

I am referring to that 2001 interview when — looking at trends in postmodern Europe — he put all of his hopes and fears on the record. I thought of this exchange during a Twitter dialogue the other day with GetReligion contributor Ryan Burge. Hold that thought.

Ratzinger had been candid before. German journalist Peter Seewald probed on this topic by noting an earlier quote in which Ratzinger said that the future church would be "reduced in its dimensions; it will be necessary to start again." Had the leader of Rome's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith changed his views?

That led to this famous reflection by the future pope. This is long, but essential:

[The Church] will no longer be able to inhabit many of the edifices she built in prosperity. As the number of her adherents diminishes … she will lose many of her social privileges. … As a small society, [the Church] will make much bigger demands on the initiative of her individual members. …

It will be hard-going for the Church, for the process of crystallization and clarification will cost her much valuable energy. It will make her poor and cause her to become the Church of the meek. … The process will be long and wearisome as was the road from the false progressivism on the eve of the French Revolution — when a bishop might be thought smart if he made fun of dogmas and even insinuated that the existence of God was by no means certain. … But when the trial of this sifting is past, a great power will flow from a more spiritualized and simplified Church. Men in a totally planned world will find themselves unspeakably lonely. If they have completely lost sight of God, they will feel the whole horror of their poverty. Then they will discover the little flock of believers as something wholly new. They will discover it as a hope that is meant for them, an answer for which they have always been searching in secret.

And so it seems certain to me that the Church is facing very hard times. The real crisis has scarcely begun. We will have to count on terrific upheavals. But I am equally certain about what will remain at the end: not the Church of the political cult, which is dead already, but the Church of faith.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

U.S. Catholics divided by #BlackLivesMatter strategies as 2020 elections loom ahead

The video of 75-year-old activist Martin Gugino being pushed to the ground earlier this month by police in riot gear highlighted the divide between protesters seeking criminal justice reforms and the very officers tasked with ensuring the safety of all citizens.

Gugino suffered a fractured skull in the June 4 incident in Buffalo, a city in upstate New York. He quickly became an example of officers using excessive force, one of many captured on video during protests that arose following the Memorial Day murder of George Floyd while in police custody in Minneapolis. Gugino is described by friends as a devout Roman Catholic and a lifelong advocate for the poor.

“I think it's very unnecessary to focus on me. There are plenty of other things to think about besides me,” Gugino said in a statement.

Gugino’s activism and the Black Lives Matter protests have not only drawn attention to deep fissures in American society on the issue of race, but have further polarized American Catholics. This intra-Catholic doctrinal debate, which began in the 1960s with the Second Vatican Council, remains relevant regarding the relationship between faith and politics.

Progressive Catholics, dating back to Dorothy Day and her social activism of the 1930s, see it as their role to help the United States achieve racial equality.

Traditional Catholics, however, see Black Lives Matter — the actual organization with a detailed policy platform, as opposed to the #BlackLivesMatter cause — as part of a sinister force that wants to spread Marxist ideology. Journalists need to investigate the differences between Black Lives Matter the cause, with many peaceful protests across the nation, often with strong support from churches, and the actual political organization.

While Catholics agree that racism is an issue in American society, the proposed remedies for those ills differ wildly. Again, there are fierce debates here worthy of news coverage.

For example, many Catholics, particularly Latinos, were angered when protesters toppled a statue of Catholic missionary St. Junipero Serra in Golden Gate Park in San Francisco this past weekend. The same was done to Serra’s statue in Los Angeles. Some have accused the Spanish-born Serra, an 18th century Franciscan friar who is credited with bringing Roman Catholicism to California, of brutalizing Native Americans and forcing them to convert.

The events of recent weeks and the looming presidential election continues to fuel the divide among Catholics across the political spectrum.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

2020 White House race: U.S. bishops don't want to make news, but it'll be hard avoid it

You’re damned if you do, damned if you don’t.

It’s like being stuck between a rock and a hard place.

No good deed goes unpunished.

Religion-beat pros will understand if cliches such as these are being muttered by members of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops these days. Why? As Americans prepare to decide who will be their next president this November, members of the Catholic hierarchy are finding themselves in a no-win situation.

Do they speak favorably of President Donald Trump, helping him potentially to win re-election, or do they lend a hand to Democratic challenger Joe Biden helping the former vice president become just the second Catholic to ever serve as a U.S. president? Catholic leaders — be it the pope, cardinals, bishops or your local parish priest — don’t openly endorse candidates for political office.

There is a reason for that. The main reason is that it fosters division among a very large spectrum of people who are all part of the same denomination. IRS rules also forbid nonprofit institutions like churches from engaging in partisan politics — something some pastors avoid by saying they are speaking on behalf of themselves, not the church they represent.

While a few members of other Christian bodies choose to openly back a candidate (for example, some evangelicals and Trump; African-American church leaders and Biden), Catholic prelates see an endorsement as something that could weaken the church’s own authority and belief system.

In other words, you’re damned if you do, damned if you don’t if you’re a Catholic leader. Still, this election will raise all kinds of unavoidable moral and religious questions for Trump and Biden.

Which brings us to Cardinal Timothy Dolan of New York City. He was the target of outrage on the part of left-leaning Catholics for the way he spoke favorably of Trump following a phone call the president had with several U.S. bishops. Dolan, it should be noted, has also received abuse from the church’s right-wing cheering section for the way he’s handled the issue of gay priests.

Trump, on a call with bishops, called himself the best president in “the history of the Catholic Church.”


Please respect our Commenting Policy

British tabloids use online reach and clickbait stories to intensify tale of warring popes

Where do you get your news? This is a question I often ask of my journalism students. If being aware of the world around us hinges on the websites we read, then the answer to this question often reveals a lot about a person’s worldview.

Political polarization and news consumption is a real. For example, even during a pandemic, Republicans and Democrats remain starkly divided in their attitudes toward journalists. Pew Research found recently that while 66% of Democrats say the news media’s COVID-19 coverage has been largely accurate, just 31% of Republicans. The viral Plandemic video has fueled conspiracy theories on platforms where users generate content like YouTube and Reddit.

Toss in decades of liberal media bias, the growing influence of conservative talk radio, advocacy social media and tweet-storms from President Donald Trump and it combines for a lethal cocktail of mistrust. It has gotten more difficult to differentiate between trustworthy news sources on Facebook and Twitter.

This brings me to a news outlet not afraid of covering religion (great!), but one that often fails in its delivery (that’s the bad part). What happens when journalists in this kind of newsroom take one the pope? How about two popes at the same time?

I’m referring to The Daily Express, a newspaper headquartered in London that was founded 120 years ago. You may have not heard of it, but you’ve certainly seen their stories in your Google News stream or retweeted by a friend on both the left and right. Like most online newspapers, the tiny “About us” section at the very bottom of the homepage reveals the following:

Express.co.uk is the digital arm of the Daily Express and Sunday Express – one of Britain’s most famous and trusted news brands.

Since 1900 the Express has been at the forefront of the news, and a fundamental part of the fabric of British life, crusading for truth and dignity and bringing millions of readers informed coverage of the most important world events in both print and online.

The Express has stood up for Britain, talked common sense, and fought for the rights of hard-working men and women across the country.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

No #SURPRISE -- Another Womenpriests story offers public-relations ink instead of news

How many times have your GetReligionistas written about one-sided mainstream press coverage of the tiny Womenpriests church, or movement, or association, or denomination, or independent church?

We have already noted that no one seems to know if the proper journalistic style for the movement’s name is Womenpriests, WomenPriests or Women Priests. Wait, are there now two organizations at work here, Roman Catholic Women Priests and the Association of Roman Catholic Women Priests, Inc.? What’s up?

We have already published a post (“Surprise! It's time for another one-sided look at the birth of a new church — the Women Priests”) that opens with six essential journalism problems to look for when evaluating mainstream media coverage of this issue. Here are the first two and, yes, (2) is really a two-fer:

(1) As Mollie “GetReligionista emerita” Hemingway used to say, just because someone says that he or she plays shortstop for the New York Yankees does not mean that this person plays shortstop for the world’s most famous baseball team. Only the leaders of the Yankees get to make that call.

(2) The doctrine of “apostolic succession” involves more than one bishop laying hands on someone. Ordination in ancient Christian churches requires “right doctrine” as well as “right orders.” Also, it helps to know the name of the bishop or bishops performing the alleged ordination. Be on the alert for “Old Catholic” bishops, some of whom were ordained via mail order.

Also, we have issued this challenge to readers, which — so far — has drawn zero responses:

Would your GetReligionistas praise a mainstream news story on this movement that offered a fair-minded, accurate, 50-50 debate between articulate, informed voices on both sides? You bet. Once again: If readers find a story of this kind, please send us the URL.

We are still waiting. However, a reader recently sent a URL for yet another story that repeats almost all of the errors we have seen so many times. It is clear that, while the Womenpriests church is small, it has a fabulous press-relations team.

This latest Gannett press release on this subject was published by the Daytona Beach News-Journal, under a very typical headline stating, “Defiance in DeLand: Woman ordained Roman Catholic priest.” The reader that sent this in noted:


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Devil in the details: Italian exorcist describes lifelong battle against demons and the occult

At a time when the planet is gripped by a pandemic, science and faith have again come into conflict in the public square, including news reports.

That nagging age-old question about good versus evil (“theodicy”) and the role of God in our lives is on the minds of many (click for tmatt “On Religion” column) while our houses of worship remain shut down for safety reasons.

To be blunt: Debates about the nature of evil now loom over many front-page headlines.

It is in this quarantine life of ours that the book “The Devil is Afraid of Me: The Life and Works of the World’s Most Famous Exorcist” has hit our bookshelves. Open-minded journalists may want to check this one out.

While most people think of the Hollywood version of good versus evil as portrayed in the 1973 movieThe Exorcist “(which would end up spawning a series of less-than-spectacular squeals), this book assures us that the fight against Satan should not be trivialized as part of an afternoon watching a Halloween movie marathon.

The book (originally in Italian and now available in English through Sophia Institute Press) goes into great detail into the life and times of Father Gabrielle Amorth, a Catholic priest who performed scores of exorcisms over his lifetime. The book, edited by a fellow Italian priest named Marcello Stanzione, delves into great detail regarding Amorth’s biggest cases of demonic possession over the years.

While the English translation from the original is, at times, a little stilted, this is a book that forces the reader to explore the supernatural and try to grasp how the fight against evil can take on many forms.

Amorth claims to have conducted some 100,000 exorcisms over a 30-year span before his death in 2016 at the age of 91. Beloved in Italy, Amorth may be the world’s most famous exorcist, but he isn’t alone. Some 200 priests around the world are tasked with taking on demons following the consent of a local bishop.

Amorth was just one of the most famous since he worked in Rome and gained a high-profile thanks to his books and many TV and radio appearances.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

No think piece this weekend! Time to take some virtual tours of stunning religion sites

Enough thinking, especially about the coronavirus crisis.

This is especially true for those of us who are Eastern Orthodox. Today is our Easter — Pascha — on the ancient Christian calendar.

So rather than a lengthy “think piece” to read on this Sunday — as is the norm at this blog — I would like to give readers a chance to do something relaxing and a bit inspiring.

My colleague Clemente Lisi of The King’s College in New York City has created a small collection of Internet links to virtual tours of several important religious sites and regions around the world. Thus, he writes, in a feature for Religion Unplugged:

With most of the world’s population stuck at home in an effort to stem the spread of the coronavirus, travel has come to a standstill. Springtime, and the approaching summer, are typically a time to take a flight and explore another part of the world.

Since most of us are inside and waiting for this pandemic to subside, you can still visit places virtually — with the help of your computer — from the comforts of home. Religious sites and museums, popular with pilgrims and tourists alike, are very popular this time of year.

Staying home doesn’t mean you can’t travel digitally. It is also a chance to research places you’d like to visit once normalcy resumes.

Amen. How else are you going to get to visit the Vatican, the Middle East, important mosques around the world and Westminster Abbey.

But since this is Pascha, allow me to start Lisi’s virutal here — in Hagia Sophia.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

For futures files: Women deacons and Latter-day Proclamation (plus bonus Godbeat anecdote)

Right now, amid a global medical and economic emergency, few editors want stories on complicated religious debates about doctrines and church traditions, nor will distracted readers pay much attention.

Enter the futures file, where religion writers squirrel away material for later coverage when we all get a breather. Here are two key themes from last week.

An important Vatican announcement said Pope Francis has dissolved a study panel that couldn’t agree on whether women should join the order of deacons, and has appointed a completely new commission to undertake the task. This will remain a good situationer months from now because women’s role in the church is perennially interesting and no commission report will appear that soon.

The new study could be the most important — and controversial — result of last October’s synod on the Amazon region. Francis shelved the proposal there to allow married priests in special situations of dire clergy shortages. Deacons could help fill the gap and some said women should be included. Analysts figure that women deacons are more likely to be approved under the liberal Francis than future popes.

Deacons used to be only men on the path to ordination as priests. But the Second Vatican Council restored the ancient order of “permanent” deacons, including married men. They can perform most duties of priests (e.g. leading worship, preaching, teaching, pastoral and charity work, baptisms, weddings, funerals) except for three sacraments: celebration of Mass, hearing confessions and anointing of the sick.

The starting point for writers is a 30,000-word report from the International Theological Commission in 2002.

Also keep on hand National Catholic Reporter articles on the 2020 news here and also here.

The 2002 report acknowledged there were female “deaconesses” in the early Christian centuries but that their functions in church life and, especially, worship “were not purely and simply equivalent to” those of male deacons.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Court frees Cardinal Pell: Washington Post offers basic journalism. And the New York Times?

This will be a very simple post about a very complicated religion-news story.

I am referring to the news that lit up Twitter the other day, when the news broke that Australia’s highest court had — with a 7-0 vote — overturned controversial (I need a stronger word) decisions by two lower courts convicting Cardinal George Pell of sexually assaulting two choirboys at the Melbourne cathedral in the 1990s.

I will not attempt to hash out the many ways that the secret nature of these Aussie court proceedings affected the news coverage. I will not discuss the details of the victim’s testimony against Pell and whether it was possible for a bishop, wearing many layers of thick, complicated vestments and almost certainly accompanied by an aide, to have committed these crimes in a public place.

No, my goal here is to contrast the journalism in two elite-media reports — in The Washington Post and then The New York Times — about this final court decision, which set Pell free and unleashed hurricanes of online arguments (yet again).

In terms of journalism, what is the essential difference between these two stories?

First, let’s look at the Post story, which ran with this headline: “Cardinal George Pell is released from prison after court quashes sexual abuse conviction.” If you read this story, you will find several passages like this:

In a written statement, Pell said he felt no ill will toward his accuser and did not want his acquittal to add to the bitterness in the community.

"There is certainly hurt and bitterness enough," he said. "However, my trial was not a referendum on the Catholic Church, nor a referendum on how church authorities in Australia dealt with the crime of pedophilia in the church.

"The point was whether I had committed these awful crimes, and I did not."

Readers will also read passages like this one:

The decision is likely to upset Pell's many detractors, who hold him responsible not just for the alleged assault on the choirboys but for the broader record of the Catholic Church in Australia, where some 4,444 people reported being abused in recent decades, according to an official inquiry. Their average age was about 11 years old.


Please respect our Commenting Policy