JOE HESCHMEYER SAID:
“1) As background, there are real limits to what the Church hierarchy can do with Notre Dame both legally and canonically. And since at least the Land O' Lakes Declaration in the 60s, ND has made it clear that it isn't going to be docile about accepting pastoral oversight.”
i) Last time I checked, the president of ND is a Catholic priest. Is Heschmeyer telling us that the Vatican, or the Diocesan Bishop, has no control over the actions of its priests?
Yet Catholic apologists fault Protestantism because we lack an accountability system. We’re a law unto ourselves. Freelance agents. “Ecclesial deism” and all that good stuff.
If, however, Catholics priests are also freelance agents, who are canonically at liberty to defy their religious superiors, then Catholicism suffers the same systemic problem that it imputes to Protestantism.
ii) Isn’t it circular to excuse the hierarchy because there are “canonical” limits to what the hierarchy can do to rein in a “stubborn” priest? After all, isn’t the Vatican the source of canon law in the first place? So if there are “real limits,” then these are self-imposed limits. Why not rewrite canon law?
“If you're arguing in good faith here, you presumably want the hierarchy of the Catholic Church to enforce orthodoxy on the abortion issue. That's exactly what they tried to do here. There was a small and recalcitrant group legally in charge of deciding whether or not to honor Obama. They refused the exhortations of literally dozens of Catholic bishops.”
So the hierarchy can only “exhort” a “stubborn” priest to do the right thing? If a priest disobeys his religious superiors, is he not subject to ecclesiastical discipline?
“You can determine this pretty empirically. Look to the first-responders to the abortion issue, trace who's given the most money, who's got the most volunteers praying and protesting, who makes up the overwhelming majority of March for Life marchers, however you want to measure it. The Catholic Church manned the pro-life cause virtually single-handedly prior to the early 1980s.”
Of course, Catholic politicians have also been in the vanguard of legalizing abortion. If we want to determine this “empirically,” we could begin with all the proabortion Catholics in Congress. Or what about the late Justice Brennan, who was instrumental in legalizing abortion. What about proabort Catholic governors? And big city mayors?
"If, however, Catholics priests are also freelance agents, who are canonically at liberty to defy their religious superiors, then Catholicism suffers the same systemic problem that it imputes to Protestantism."
ReplyDeleteHmmmmm. Does seem like a log-eyed Pharisee pointing out someone else's speck. Rather hypocritical behavior.
Rogue Romanism
ReplyDeleteI just read this article over at CNN. And what may be happening with "Rogue Romanism" is that the Roman Catholic Church is finding it challenging and difficult in dealing with "modernism" in both the laity and the hierarchical clergy.
Excerpts: "A report this month on who gets abortions showed some surprising results: Catholic women are about as likely as any other woman to terminate a pregnancy.
According to the Pew Research Center, for example, Catholics supported Obama in the 2008 election by 1 percentage point more than the general public. Even when it comes to abortion, which the Catholic Church strongly opposes, American Catholics are only 2 percent more likely than the general public to favor making it illegal.
The difference in viewpoints between traditionalists and modernists is profound - and has dramatic effects on today’s culture wars. David Campbell, a Notre Dame political scientist, explains that traditionalists believe in an eternal and transcendent authority that “tells us what is good, what is true, how we should live, and who we are."
Modernists, on the other hand, would redefine historic faiths according to the prevailing assumptions of contemporary life. They are less dogmatic, more tolerant, more open to change."
Excellent posts, Steve. Though I do find myself uncomfortable sometimes with the kind of rhetoric you employ... Would you mind elaborating on your theology of insult? Is swearing from the pulpit acceptable in your opinion? What about Ephesians 5:4? What does that verse mean? What are your thoughts on the whole Driscoll vs MacArthur fiasco?
ReplyDeleteI'm really not sure about any of these questions myself although I tend to think that we should not use such strong rhetoric... until I get angry that is... :P
(Is there anyway to have your e-mail automatically updated when someone responds if you forgot to hit the button before posting?)
ReplyDeleteClick the box that says "Email follow-up comments to _____@___.com" and it will update you.
ReplyDeleteDAVID J. HOUSTON SAID:
ReplyDelete"Excellent posts, Steve. Though I do find myself uncomfortable sometimes with the kind of rhetoric you employ... Would you mind elaborating on your theology of insult?"
I've blogged on that issue on many occasions.
"Is swearing from the pulpit acceptable in your opinion? What about Ephesians 5:4? What does that verse mean? What are your thoughts on the whole Driscoll vs MacArthur fiasco?"
I haven't followed Driscoll's ministry close enough to offer an informed opinion.
I suspect it's partly a generation gap issue. Also, MacArthur is a PK from a fundamentalist background. By contrast, Driscoll's background is completely different (from the little I've read).
So each man had very different formative experiences. A culture shift as well as different demographics.
God's not mocked!
ReplyDelete"...ii) Isn’t it circular to excuse the hierarchy because there are “canonical” limits to what the hierarchy can do to rein in a “stubborn” priest? After all, isn’t the Vatican the source of canon law in the first place? So if there are “real limits,” then these are self-imposed limits. Why not rewrite canon law?...".
It is as though God is off on vacation somewhere and doesn't have time to be God of His creatures and other things created.
I still don't understand the need for mosquitos? Those blood suckers really know how to get to the point of life!
NATAMLLC SAID:
ReplyDelete"I still don't understand the need for mosquitos."
God made them for hell. They were created to make life a bit more stimulating for the damned.
However, the day of judgment has yet to arrive, so they are having a temporary layover on earth before they proceed to their final destination.