“Defender of the Faith” was the title bestowed in 1521 by Pope Leo X on Henry VIII as a reward for the English king’s “Defense of the Seven Sacraments” against Martin Luther. When Henry broke with Rome, Pope Paul III rescinded the title. It was restored to the king by Parliament in 1544 and is still used by his successors, though Henry’s turnabout made the title an (...)
Article
Defenders of the Faith!
A Personal Reflection on Recent History
The remainder of this article is only available to paid subscribers. If you’re not currently a Commonweal subscriber in print or online, an online-only subscription costs just $34 a year. Click here for immediate access.
You nailed it...Her's an example of how the 'Defenders of the faith' started to attack fellow Catholics at the start of VatII. My San Francisco parish had 15-20 couples in CFM {Christian Family Movement] in the 60s. Because the Crowleys of CFM from your Chicago were on the papal birth control commission and Oked the pill our pastor attacked CFM from the pulpit. Most of the CFM couples had large large famlies [up to 11 children] He said CFM was the ... Communist Front Movement..That was the first baptism of fire we experienced.. The lay Trads have picked up the first clerical attacks on fellow Catholics and that is what we have for the last 45 years. The good news is that vast majority of bishops have tried to tone down the Catholic civil war.. but lay Trad guerrillas with a few clerical leaders and resources are still a partisan strike force that weakens the American Church. {just got an email from a Trad suggesting I send a Chritmas card to the ACLU because this 'flood' will stall their attack on Christmas] maybe they are getting harmless?
So? Now what?
My response to Margaret O'Brien Steinfel's excellent article, "Defender of the Faith!" was mixed. Something like: "Thanks, but I'm not sure I needed that." Her analysis of our Roman Church was as accurate and insightful as it was distressing, even depressing. As a young seminarian in Rome from 1962-66, I was there for all the action of Vatican II and was swept up in the elation and hope of a church that was truly to engage the world (and that means challenge it as much as learn from it). And then, and then came all that Peggy describes -- from a church opening windows for "aggiornamento" to a church slamming them shut under siege. From a church that was ready to "move on" to a church that is hunkered down in opposition to claimed relativism outside and rancorous division inside.
I'm hanging on the first word of Peggy's last, and very short, paragraph: "So?" So what are we to do? Or, as her final section heading has it: "Now what?" How can we Catholics stay with this church and maintain our integrity and nurture our hope? Peggy, can you help us answer your "So?" ??
Paul Knitter: You're in luck. There was a third lecture at the University of San Francisco's Lane Center; it was titled "Reinventing Catholicism." The CWL editors have never shown any enthusiasm for it so it languishes on my hard drive. Perhaps they know best!
I find it rather ironic that Ms.Steinfels didn't expaned on the Church's historical fight against secularism and humanism. This battleground was intense all the way up to and including the years during Vatican II. This "fight" against the vices of secularism and humanistic thought were the tapistry behind Vatican II, and the definitions of these two combatants has changed over the years, depending on whether one is an "orthodox" Catholic or a member of the "Cafeteria" Catholic worldview.
It was this backdrop of conflict regarding secularism and humanism that continues unabated within the ranks of the Roman Catholic Hierarchy and flowed downwards through the pastoral clergy to the ordinary Catholic layperson. This is where the Chuch must come to terms with these two philsophic ways of living as a fully involved person and as a member of the Catholic Church. Secularism can be viewed as either allowing the world to enter the Church or the Church entering into dialogue with the forces of Secularism. I see a win-win situation in this regard. Humanism is a movement of opening up oneself to be fully human in the world and being able to embrace others as sharing the same human identity. The movement of Humanism does not mention God or the notion of a spiritual connection with each other in the human condition, but Humanism doesn't negate the possibility of God as being an active force in the human potential either. It is this "window" where I think the Church needs to investigate and allow our Theology of the Human Being interact with the "forces" of humanism.
I agree with Tom - we could have it 'both/and' instead of either/or. The politics of opposition and condemnation have had their day. It is now time for our faithful people to forge a new way of being and a new way of including all those who are on the spiritual search. Nothing should discredit nor deter anyone from finding their way to a loving and healing God. I sure wish Pope John were to come back to life - we need some new and fresh air.
I suggest that Commonweal invite an essay from Philip F. Lawler to be called "Offenders of the Faith" in order to advance the principle of respectful conversation about what went specifically wrong in our church, how we ourselves became the enemy within. Lawler is author of The Faithful Departed: The Collapse of Boston's Catholic Culture. It's painful reading, but a necessary corrective to one-sidedness.
Excellent article. I, too, wish John XXIII did come back to lead the Church out of it morass. Like our country's right wing lurch, the Church in America lost its moral compass. Too many "orthodox" Catholics are blind to the suffering of the poor. and some of the find themslves amongst the poor due to economic reasons.