Confessions

Earlier I wrote a series of posts about the Nicene Creed and why I am Catholic. I do acknowledge that the Roman Catholic Church is a human institution. It has its flaws, and it has its apologies to offer.

Long ago, within a few weeks of Jesus' death, the Holy Spirit inspired Christians to form a church. It was a perfect institution. Then Father, Son and Holy Spirit made the one mistake they have ever made throughout all eternity. They let people into that perfect institution. (Well, at 58 years of age, I may have something to say about shoulder and hip joints. If I'd been there at the creation, I might have had some useful tips to offer. ) (jk!!) So much for perfection. And please don't bother me with the idea that your church is perfect. No human institution is, and nothing brings out the cynic in me like a claim of perfection, either by an institution or by an individual.

So, let the apologies begin. Not from the Catholic Church - I am obviously in no position to offer such apologies - but from me. One, and only one, communicant member of said Church.

TO A LOT OF KIDS. TO A WHOLE LOT OF KIDS:

The institutional church has offered apologies for the clerical sexual abuse issue. Numerous dioceses of the Church have been sued, and some have gone into bankruptcy. That is as it should be, and maybe we haven't yet paid enough of a price.

To those who were abused, I am so sorry that this happened to you. I can't imagine the pain, the suffering, the sense of betrayal. The list of people around whom you should have been absolutely safe and protected would include parents, doctors, police, teachers - and your parish priest. I deeply regret that this was not so for you, and I suspect that your experience has led you to doubt whether you could ever be safe around anyone. I know it doesn't help much, but for what it's worth, this is truly a hot  button issue for me, largely because of your hurt.

It does seem that factions within the church have decided to get on their hobby horses over this. From the conservative side,.it was "Get the gays out of the priesthood!" (Yes, I think we will also owe apologies to our GLBT friends, if for no other reason than this.) The problem I see with that position is that the Catholic Church does not hold that homosexual orientation is a sin. If the orientation is not sinful, and if one is taking a vow of celibacy, what's the issue? What, exactly, is the difference between gay and straight celibacy?

Another problem with the "Get the Gays out!" approach as a solution to clerical sexual abuse is that it reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of pedophilia. The majority of pedophiles are not gay. Most are straight. Many are married, although many of those marriages are troubled. Pedophilia, like rape, is not a crime of sex. It's all about power. The pedophile's marriage tends to be troubled because these people do not deal well in relationships in which the power is equal, and that's what a marriage is.

My approach to pedophile priests: as soon as a credible allegation is made the priest would be suspended from all clerical activity pending investigation. The allegation's credibility would not be determined by the bishop, but by a board consisting of qualified people (qualification details would be too much to address here). If the board determines that the priest is guilty, defrock. Immediate, first offense. Another characteristic of pedophiles: they don't grow out of pedophilia, and they don't age out of it. The church authorities should cooperate in every possible way with criminal investigation ad prosecution. Come clean; be an open book.

And about the bishops' complicity: if a bishop hears of a priest who may be abusing youngsters, and the bishop's only action is to move the priest elsewhere and shield the priest from publicity, does that not make the bishop an accessory after the fact? And, if that priest then commits further abuse at the new parish, does that not make the bishop an accessory before the fact?

From the left, the hobby horse was, "Let them marry!" See the above info about the marital status of pedophiles.

An apology is also due to the priests of the Church. The vast, vast majority of priests understand celibacy, see it as the gift it is, and live it faithfully. Statistics I have seen indicate that, in the very worst dioceses, at the very worst, about 4% of priests may have been engaging in such behavior. I can just hear the snide "You know they all do it." What ill-informed blather! What I know is that very few ever did. Almost all remain the faithful servants of the Lord that they were called to be. I thank God for them, I'm lucky enought o have some as friends, and I apologize to all who have been painted with this brush.

There are other apologies we owe, and I'll discuss them, as well. But, for many of these, I would not hold your breath waiting. We just recently got around to apologizing for what happened to Galileo.

Thanks for hanging out for a few. As always, I would love your thoughts.

The Creed - my faith - reflections - conclusion

We believe in God, the Father almighty,

Maker of heaven and earth,

of all that is seen and unseen.

We believe in Jesus Christ,

the only Son of God,

Eternally begotten of the Father,

God from God,

Light from Light,

True God from true God,

Begotten, not made,

One in being with the Father.

Through Him all things were made.

For us, and for our salvation

He came down from Heaven.

By the power of the Holy Spirit

He was born of the Virgin Mary and became man.

For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate.

He suffered, dies, and was buried.

On the third day he rose again

In fulfillment of the Scriptures.

He ascended into Heaven

and is seated at the right hand of the Father.

He will come again in Glory to judge the living and the dead

And his kingdom will have no end.

Up to this point the Nicene Creed is an almost universal statement of faith. Mainline Protestant denominations would subscribe to it. We Roman Catholics recite it each week at Mass. But Eastern Orthodox do not subscribe to it. The reason is in the next passage, and the difference is over one word:

We believe in the Holy Spirit,

The Lord, the giver of life

Who proceeds from the Father and the Son.

The difference is in the phrase "And the Son." It's one word in Latin: Filioque. The Scriptural evidence seems to indicate that the statement as presented in the Creed is correct. Quite a number of times in the Gospels we see Jesus saying that He would send the Comforter. The Eastern Orthodox ask, "Does not this phrase, as written, imply a subordination within the Trinity?" The conclusion I came to: Maybe it does. But if your concern is that "from the Son" implies subordination of the Spirit to the Son, can we even say that the Spirit proceeds from the Father? Is that not also subordination within the Trinity? I think the answer may be that, maybe it is subordination, but it's subordination based on love. My further answer would be that people should not impose their conceptions of relationships and subordination on relations within the Trinity. "For my thoughts are not your thoughts. . ." To put it another way (I'm borrowing this): "A comprehended God is no god at all."

With the Father and the Son He is worshipped and glorified.

(Doesn't sound like we place the Spirit in a subordinate position at all.)

He has spoken through the prophets.

We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic church.

We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.

We look for the resurrection of the dead

And the life of the world to come. Amen.

And that's the Creed.

I am Roman Catholic. Unashamedly, joyfully Roman Catholic. I was not born to the faith. I have been affiliated with two other denominations. I left one of them; I was having some issues in my life at the time, but I never went back. The theological differences between what I think of as the Scriptural position and the positions they took became compelling to me. In this series, if you really want a starting point for those theological differences, see the discussion of homoousios v. homoiousios. If I am one, and you are the other, then it's hard to maintain that the God we worship is the same God.

The next denomination I joined was one of the mainline Protestant denominations. I got my undergrad degree while thus associated, and got about 2/3 of the way throuigh one of their seminaries, on the way to becoming an ordained minister. I'd gotten good grades in my coursework there, and I still have some Hebrew phrases and passages memorized. I did a lot of pulpit supply work (i.e., delivering sermons). I am now very comfortable speaking to groups, and I understand theological reasoning fairly well (I think I do, anyway.) The reason I became a Roman Catholic is a subject for another posting. So are the issues that I think face our Church. I'm not blind, and I don't think I'm stupid. 

Thanks for hanging out for a few. Love your thoughts and responses!

The Response. Or whatever.

I'm sure that Governor Rick Perry is sincere in his religious beliefs. They are, from what I've heard, longstanding beliefs, beliefs on which he acts and by which he lives. Good for him.

But about this event - The Response? The hope is that they'll fill the 71,000 seats of Reliant Stadium with people to pray for whatever they think needs praying for. Again, good for them.

The issue I have is with Rev. John Hagee. Rev. Hagee is a co-sponsor of the event. I am Catholic. Rev. Hagee is anti-Catholic. I know, he has apologized for his public remarks. Really and truly he hasn't apologized for the remarks. He apologized if any Catholic's feelings were hurt by the remarks. He says he recants, and doesn't hold those anti-Catholic views. Well. The problem is that you can't, as hard as you may try, unring the bell. You can't unscramble the egg. I'm thinking he was fully aware of what he was saying and of the impact it would have. Public people making public statements are usually very well aware of what they are saying. Besides, many of his strongest anti-Catholic statements were made in books he wrote and published. Publishing any book involves writing, countless reviews and rewriting. He knew - and he only "recanted" when things got a little - warm? - for Hagee's favorite presidential candidate. Yes, John McCain did have his Rev. Jeremiah Wright.

So you've recanted?

Horsepuckey.

This was a showcase for Gov. Perry's evangelical base. His fundamentalist base, anyway (don't confuse "evangelical" with "fundamentalist". They're not exactly the same thing.) Fundamentalist; conservative; Christian; straight. You'd be hard-pressed to find more than a token presence of anyone who didn't fit that description at this event. (And, since this is now in retrospect - I started writing this on Saturday morning, and am now writing on Sunday night - I can report they didn't get anywhere near 71,000.)

So, could Jews pray for their country? Well, sure; the old cover-up: "Everyone's invited!" was given. But, no Jewish presence among the speakers or pray-ers.

Any Catholics on the dais? Well, no. In fact - well, see the above remarks about one of the co-sponsors, the Good Rev. Hagee.

A word to the wise, Gov. Perry (or Rep. Bachmann, or Gov. Romney or Huntsman): do not disregard the Catholic electorate. We are about 25% of the U.S. populace, and about 27% of the electorate. No other religious voting block comes close to our numbers. And don't think, just because we are firmly anti-abortion and you follow us in that regard, that you have us in your pocket.

Do not disrepect us. If Gov. Perry really wants to make a run at the Oval Office, he should run, not walk, away from the Rev. Hagee, as John McCain had the sense to do.

Do not assume that, because we agree on abortion, we will vote Republican. To wit:

THE DEATH PENALTY. At least the last two Popes have been opposed to it. This is also a pro-life issue and to be a Catholic pro-life person you must respect life from conception to natural death. Meaning: no abortion, no death penalty, no euthanasia. The American bishops, as a group, have called for the end of capital punishment. So where are you, my fundamentalist friends?

IMMIGRATION. The worldwide church, the Pope and numerous American bishops have called for more humane treatment and a more helpful attitude toward immigrants. Funny thing: most of those who are the most virulent anti-immigrants are those whose own ancestors could not have gotten into the country under current law. So, where are you, my fundamentalist friends?

A huge wave of immigration occurred in the nineteenth century. A great number of Irish came over. Many of them were welcomed, and told to go right over there and see that nice Army man. See, we've got this little Civil War thing going on. So the Irish would go to see the soldier, and go to fight in a war that wasn't really his. Then, they would go to their new homes and see signs like, "No Irish need apply"; "No dogs or Irishmen." Poles and Italians ran into much the same sort of bigotry. One thing they all had in common: Poles, Irish and Italians were and are almost all Catholic.

Some felt so threatened by these Catholic immigrants that they formed anti-immigrant, anti-Catholic groups. You may have heard of one such: the Ku Klux Klan. The KKK was largely motivated by an anti-black animus, but they were also anti-immigrant, anti-Catholic, anti-Jewish. Anti-everything except WASP.

Part of the reason the Catholics built such an extensive school system was that, in many parts of the country, the good Protestant parents didn't want their kids contaminated with that Papist stuff. So Catholic kids couldn't get into the public schools.

And now you see the conservatives in their attitudes toward immigration from Mexico, and you can almost see the white robes and hoods coming out. Truth is, those robes and hoods never went away. The immigrants - then white, now brown; then, as now, almost exclusively Catholic - are still seen as a threat. Didn't want to allow those Irish, Polish and Italian kids into school then? You don't want to allow the Mexican kids in now.

And that's what Gov. Perry wants to associate with? Even be in the forefront of?

Oh, yeah, a third issue: THE ECONOMY. Catholic social teaching has never allowed for furthe enrichment of the already-wealthy at the cost of leaving behind the poor, the less fortunate. Rep. John Boehner is a Catholic, and in the recent budget debates his own bishop sent him a letter to remind Rep. Boehner of this. The late pope John Paul II saw that a common thread between the Communist systems and Capitalist systems was that both, rather than enhancing the value of the individual, sought to lessen that value - to grind up the value of the individual. Reread Ayn Rand. Don't pay attention to what she says about her novels' heroes. Pay attention to what she says about everyone else.

Don't take the Catholic vote for granted. To play to your base and to ignore us could be a huge mistake.

Thanks for hanging out for a few. As always, would love your res;ponses.