There’s an intriguing phenomena going on in the culture these days. Over the past several weeks, I’ve read a variety of articles by “Catholics” who to want to define, for themselves, what the word “Catholic” means.
Most recently, writer Charles Pierce, takes this topic up in his lengthy Boston Globe article, “What I Believe.”
“The institutional Catholic Church, for me, has no concrete form, no physical structure, no hierarchy except that of ideas,” Pierce states in the article. He continues, “Even my attendance at Mass is largely contemplative, the priest presiding in a supervisory capacity, his authority dependent wholly on the primacy of my individual conscience.”
In other words, for Pierce, the Church has no authority other than that which he himself deems to give it.
In the article, Pierce goes on to quote Catholics such as Garry Willis and Father Richard McBrien in support of his idea that the hierarchical Church is dead and “irrelevant.”
He quotes McBrien as saying that, ‘the hierarchy is largely irrelevant to any intelligent, educated Catholic.’ That’s curious, given that as a priest of Christ’s Church, Father McBrien himself is part of the hierarchy. Using logic, one could conclude that if Father McBrien were correct, then he himself is irrelevant.
Pierce says that the most fundamental rule of his “Catholicism” is that, “nobody gets to tell me that I’m not a Catholic” - no priest, no bishop, not even the Pope.
He even goes on to say that while he’s still a practicing Catholic, that he’s grown up to become “an anti-Catholic Catholic.”
Perhaps because the Catholic Church is something Pierce was born into, he feels he has the freedom to define for himself what it means to be “Catholic.” As a Catholic convert, I know differently. It wasn’t until I was able to say that I believed everything that the Church taught and believed, and was thinking with the Church, that I was permitted to join her. I’d like to think that anyone claiming to be an “anti-Catholic Catholic” is actually Protestant.
Coming into the Church meant believing that which Christ and His Church proposes to teach and believe. It meant being humble enough to admit that I do not have all the answers, but being willing to submit to a higher authority. It meant being part of a community, a vast communion made up of that great cloud of witnesses who have gone on before, the Saints and angels, the Holy Father and the magisterial Church, the College of Cardinals, bishops, priests and deacons that surround him.
Reading Pierce’s definition it’s difficult to imagine anyone - an apostle or saint - laying down their life for the kind of Church he describes.
Pierce wants a Church without a hierarchy. He doesn’t believe that there’s an authority, outside of himself, that can tell him what he can or cannot do. He wants Christ without His Church, which really isn’t possible.
The key thing that Pierce is protesting is buried midway through the article. There, he speaks of Pope Paul VI’s encyclical Humanae Vitae.
“Catholics discovered that they could ignore the pope in good conscience and remain Catholics, not matter how many people told them they couldn’t,” writes Pierce.
Reading that, I was reminded of Providence Bishop Thomas Tobin’s wonderful letter to Representative Patrick Kennedy of last year. It’s worth quoting from at length.
In that letter, Bishop Tobin takes the time to define what it means to be Catholic.
Quoting from Kennedy, Bishop Tobin writes: ‘The fact that I disagree with the hierarchy on some issues does not make me any less of a Catholic.’
“Well, in fact, Congressman, in a way it does,” responds Bishop Tobin. “Although I wouldn’t choose those particular words, when someone rejects the teachings of the Church, especially on a grave matter, a life-and-death issue like abortion, it certainly does diminish their ecclesial communion, their unity with the Church.”
Bishop Tobin points out that it isn’t just one’s baptism, one’s family ties, or one’s cultural heritage that makes one Catholic.
“Being a Catholic means that you’re part of a faith community that possesses a clearly defined authority and doctrine, obligations and expectations,” Bishop Tobin writes. “It means that you believe and accept the teachings of the Church, especially on essential matters of faith and morals; that you belong to a local Catholic community, a parish; that you attend Mass on Sundays and receive the sacraments regularly; that you support the Church, personally, publicly, spiritually and financially.”
It’s a great definition. And one that’s worth repeating, over and over and over again.
Comments
Post a Comment
My wife does bridal alterations and she hears a lot of women complaining about all the “rules” the Church has when it comes to getting married. These types of anti-Catholic Catholics are nothing new(I was one myself). I now see them as people that want to “use” the Church for what they want and discard the rest. If everyone acted that way the things they want to use may no longer be present. They love the beautiful churches to get married in but we don’t build beautiful churches for the kind of religion described by Mr Pierce. The analogy I like to use is a twenty-something kid that comes home to mom and dads house to do his laundry, eat the food and lay on the couch but he doesn’t want to eat or visit with the family or be home at a decent hour.Take, take, take.
“Which brings me to the most fundamental rule of my Catholicism – nobody gets to tell me that I’m not a Catholic.”
Oh good grief. Can Jesus tell you that you aren’t Catholic on Judgment Day? Well then, what about Jesus conferring the power upon the apostles to bind and loose, and not on you? “Don’t go quoting scripture at me!!!”, right? Right…
Seriously, how does that amount to any more than the shrill rant of a “spoiled brat” child of the Church? When do adults EVER say things like “Nobody gets to tell me…?” How can a major newspaper take itself seriously when it publishes something like that? COME AWWWWWNN!!!
I’ve quoted it before, and I’ll quote it again:
(Mr. Pierce), “What you’ve just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.”
Sadly, we all have friends and family who feel this same way. I don’t know how to reach them except through prayer for they stand with their fingers in their ears (figuratively) singing the “la la la, I’m not listening to you” song and dance we all did as children. With that in mind, I chuckled by the comment that people such as this are nothing more than spoiled brats. Having just re-watched the first Willy Wonka with my kids, they are merely Verunca Salt - “bad eggs”.
The devil didn’t like God’s laws - and rebelled against them. And, God threw him and his followers into the eternal fire. God, who knew he would rebel, still gave him a chance. And, now we also have a chance..
If we choose to follow the ways of the evil one, what makes us believe we aren’t headed for the same fate?
Answer: he who first rejected God and His Laws.
You know, if I don’t believe in aerodynamics, lift, electronics, or flight, I don’t go telling people I’m a pilot. If I did, it wouldn’t change the fact that I’m not. More importantly, all who’d go along with me would crash and burn.
Tim, you write well, but more than that, you proclaim the Truth. Some, perhaps many, don’t want to hear the Truth because they are satisfied with their own truth, which does not in any way negate the real Truth. With God’s help and grace they may one day come to the real Truth or die in ignorance with their own truth, only to find the real Truth, perhaps too late.
“Catholics discovered that they could ignore the pope in good conscience and remain Catholics”
That’s not even Pierce’s own line. That argument (maybe even that exact text) is from a book by James Carroll, another Globe columnist, ex-priest, and Catholic Church “reformer.” Pierce can’t even come up with his own material, apparently.
Your article is extremely insightful, true and prophetic as to what is in store for the (true) Catholic Church. I am so grateful that the Internet has allowed so many “closet Catholics” to speak up. I pray constantly “that we may be one” with the true church of Christ on Earth, and of course that means uniting the immediate famliy first.
I struggle with anger at the dissident and heretical priests and nuns of the past 50 years who have led so many astray.
Well said Tim. As a convert I had to wrestle with the idea of submitting the magisterium - it was one of the most significant and challenging events in my life. Either Christ and his apostles define the church and we submit to Christ’s direct and delegated authority or, we are protestants. I would suggest to all those that subscribe to the latter brand of Catholicism make a bold move to the Episcopal Church. Anything goes there and you can still experience some beautiful forms of the liturgy. Please - be happy - go where you can be free.
To me its so very basic. People that proclaim they are Catholic but pick and choose which beliefs to take as their own should join the non-denominational churches. Which I interpret as “Non-Committal”. They believe in God but want to justify their lifestyles so they can still get into heaven without feeling guilty. These are the same people who throw around the phrase “Catholic Guilt” every time a life choice comes up.
The Catholic faith is not easy but the teachings of the Church are clear. Yes we may have reservations about some issues but pray for answers on those issues. The own issue I struggle with is on the death sentence. The Church is completely against abortion, a fact that I whole heartedly agree with but the death penalty is allowed. Does this make me an anti-Catholic?
I seem to be in a minority here.
“It means that you believe and accept the teachings of the Church, especially on essential matters of faith and morals; that you belong to a local Catholic community, a parish; that you attend Mass on Sundays and receive the sacraments regularly; that you support the Church, personally, publicly, spiritually and financially.”
It’s a great definition. And one that’s worth repeating, over and over and over again.”
So what about the Catholic priests, nuns and bishops who are in diasgreement on some fundamental matters? There are many: the South African Bishop Dowling, Fr. James Martin and several repuatble theologians.They are frightened of speaking out. Freedom to disagree and to debate issues in a civil and open way does not warrant the disgraceful actions of the hierarchy of the church these days.The climate created by Pope Benedict is oppressive and it damages us all. Dissent is completely different from disloyalty. That last sentence is almost fascist “support the Church, personally, publicly, spiritually and financially.” If I disagree with my church I shall say so publicly if needs be. I may seek spiritual direction beforehand but please don’t treat us all like idiots with this diktat of complete unquestioning obedience , Christ did not issue “silencers” to his disciples. He encouraged their questions .
Phil, that people are free to dissent does not mean that they are free to expect the Church to agree.
Ye shall know them by their fruits.
Why do some people call the catholic church gods one and only true church?
A quick glance at its past and present history should be enough to tell you its not, not even close.
Thanks and god bless
Post a Comment
By submitting this form, you give The National Catholic Register permission to publish this comment. Comments will be published at our discretion, and may be edited for clarity and length. For best formatting, please limit your response to one paragraph and don't hit "enter" to force line breaks.