Dueling Catholic conferences

[DetroitPole]

I'm surprised no one has posted about this. My apologies if they have.

http://www.freep.com/article/2011061...xt|FRONTPAGE|p

So there has been a liberal Catholic conference at Cobo, and a conservative one in Livonia [[I think the localities alone are an interesting distinction, as cities are usually more liberal than suburbs). Predictably, the conservative one was endorsed by the Archdiocese of Detroit [[or should I say Archdiocese of Livonia?) and the liberal one was blasted by the archbishop.

I have a couple issues with this. First of all, yes, I am a liberal Catholic. I am still a Catholic. The Church is neither traditionally "liberal" or traditionally "conservative." The Church takes a variety of positions - strong stances for social justice and against the death penalty and the war - traditionally "liberal" stances as well as taking other "conservative" stances.

And what the hell is the problem of these people meeting at Cobo and TALKING? As far as I know, they're not denying the creeds, papal infaliability, or any of the infalliable proclaimations of the Church, so what is the damn problem?

And why isn't that lousy archbishop condemning all the conservatives at the Livonia conference that support the death penalty, the wars, and cutting social programs?

It is a shame that within the past couple decades the leaders of the church have started equating Catholicism with conservativism. They seem unaware that Catholicism predates these very recent political terms and even transcends them.

[j to the jeremy]

These events illustrate perfectly why I stopped dealing with organized religion. Workplace politics that play with people's spirituality are uncalled for. There are bigger problems the church should be tackling than this.

[DetroitPlanner]

This topic is larger than just Detroit and the two conferences that happened here. I too am a left leaning Catholic who was amused by the new Archbishop's threats. The Chuch is fearing things that they cannot control, but to try to control people's minds and thought processes is sort of silly as you pointed out because there are such grey lines between what is right and what is wrong when you start labeling them by conservative or liberal values and makes hippocrites on both sides.

The Catholic church needs to become more progressive or it will die. But at least in the mind of those in charge they will purposely kill it rather than give up control that comes with being more inclusive of new ideas.

[DetroiterOnTheWestCoast]

Well put DetroitPole. While the Church "officially" has progressive as well as conservative stances, it is a shame that only the latter seem to matter. But given the way the hierarchy is stacked that is a given.

Perhaps they were meeting in Livonia because there was not enough meeting space in Howell.

[Hypestyles]

... I looked at the website, and saw that it cost money to attend the conference-- could anybody curious just walk into any of the discussions without having paid the fees?
...In particular I wondered if any of the topics concerned racial diversity and the state of urban ministry/social issues..

[SWMAP]

The Catholic Church IS diversity. It's an immense presence in Africa and Latin America. India has large numbers of Catholics. And of course, Catholics in the Middle East are being murdered and driven out by Muslim extremists.
As far as an urban ministry : locally, the Cornerstone Schools [[ founded by Cardinal Maida), Focus Hope, Christo Rey, CYO sports programs, Mercy Health programs, St. John's Hospital, Marygrove College, UDMercy, Capuchin Soup Kitchen, St. Leo's soup kitchen, Dominican Literacy Center, refugee settlement programs- this is only a partial list of Catholic urban ministries, both institutional and personal.

[dtowncitylover]

One of my favorite quotes from a great American Church leader, which still holds true today:

"The trouble with us [the Church] in the past has been that we were too often allied or drawn into an alliance with the wrong side. Selfish employers of labor have flattered the Church by calling it the great conservative force, and then called upon it to act as a police force while they paid but a pittance of wage to those who work for them. I hope that day has gone by. Our place is beside the workingman. They are our people, they build our churches, our priests come from their sons." —George Cardinal Mundelein of Chicago, 1938

The Church supports trade unions, which is why I loathe GOP Catholics. I am a proud "liberal Catholic". The GOP is not pro-life, they are pro-birth. We must make sure that every baby born is raised healthy and given a proper education, something the GOP doesn't care much for, i.e. let's slash Medicaid and destroy the Dept. of Education.

[Orthophonic]

Perhaps they were meeting in Livonia because there was not enough meeting space in Howell.

Ouch - a direct hit! You sunk my battleship!

[beachboy]

From the Freep article: "The conference ... liberal Catholics who want laypeople to have more say in church decision making ... want discussions about women, gay and married priests, and greater accountability on the issue of child abuse by priests."

This is so sad...some "conservative" [[radical right) wingnuts go apoplectic over a few liberals re-hashing long-held ideas. As a moderate and disgruntled Catholic, I wonder what's so bad about a few changes, such as:

- Optional celibacy for priests, bishops, etc. [[a possible way of addressing the priest shortage)
- Married clergy [[could bring back much-needed priests who left formal ministry to enjoy family life)
- Open Communion [[found in most Christian churches - nice, esp. if your sweetie is Protestant...)
- Ordination of women [[why not? it works in most Christian denominations... what is Rome afraid of?)
- Inclusion of openly gay ministers [[estimates are 30-50 pct of ordained RC clergy is gay already)
- Greater collegiality [[local control of churches - many Protestant denominations function well this way)
- Return to episcopal control [[via regional and national Synods of Bishops, instead of from Rome)

These are mainly administrative or peripheral doctrinal issues, having to do with custom and tradition, recent or otherwise. Right-wingnut authoritarians get bent out of shape b/c left-wingnut liberals are questioning their "authority" to dictate practice [[which becomes "custom and tradition") through the Vatican bureaucracy. Meanwhile, left-wingnuts shriek "totalitarianism!" Good grief.

Despite their stupid mistakes, the RC church has been a great civilizing force over the centuries... schools, hospitals, clinics, social justice, music, art, architecture, and much more. Now, we see them squabbling about administrative or legalistic details that other denominations worked out decades ago. One of the RC strengths has been the "big tent" approach - let's hope that also isn't "deconstructed" while radicals rip, tear, and shred to see who's King of the Dirtpile.

[Vox]

From the Freep article: "The conference ... liberal Catholics who want laypeople to have more say in church decision making ... want discussions about women, gay and married priests, and greater accountability on the issue of child abuse by priests."

This is so sad...some "conservative" [[radical right) wingnuts go apoplectic over a few liberals re-hashing long-held ideas. As a moderate and disgruntled Catholic, I wonder what's so bad about a few changes, such as:

- Optional celibacy for priests, bishops, etc. [[a possible way of addressing the priest shortage)
- Married clergy [[could bring back much-needed priests who left formal ministry to enjoy family life)
- Open Communion [[found in most Christian churches - nice, esp. if your sweetie is Protestant...)
- Ordination of women [[why not? it works in most Christian denominations... what is Rome afraid of?)
- Inclusion of openly gay ministers [[estimates are 30-50 pct of ordained RC clergy is gay already)
- Greater collegiality [[local control of churches - many Protestant denominations function well this way)
- Return to episcopal control [[via regional and national Synods of Bishops, instead of from Rome)

These are mainly administrative or peripheral doctrinal issues, having to do with custom and tradition, recent or otherwise. Right-wingnut authoritarians get bent out of shape b/c left-wingnut liberals are questioning their "authority" to dictate practice [[which becomes "custom and tradition") through the Vatican's bureaucracy in Rome. Meanwhile, the liberals shriek about "totalitarianism". Good grief.

Despite their mistakes, the RC church has been a great civilizing force over the centuries... schools, hospitals, clinics, social justice, and much more. Now, we see them squabbling about administrative or legalistic details that other denominations worked out decades ago... arghhh! One of the RC strengths has been the "big tent" approach - let's hope that also isn't "deconstructed" while the radicals play King of the Dirtpile...

Shh. You'll wake Gannon. Or join him in excommunacation, depending on whether or not Virgeron reads this board. And whether he can excommunicate a message board avatar.

But I can't say I disagree with any of the suggestions that are above. Add one more, the use of contraception. I still don't like abortion, but that's a decision best left out of the theology department. If the church wasn't so all fired opposed to basic birth control, perhaps there wouldnt be a problem with excessive abortion?

[1KielsonDrive]

I'm surprised no one has posted about this. My apologies if they have.

http://www.freep.com/article/2011061...xt|FRONTPAGE|p

So there has been a liberal Catholic conference at Cobo, and a conservative one in Livonia [[I think the localities alone are an interesting distinction, as cities are usually more liberal than suburbs). Predictably, the conservative one was endorsed by the Archdiocese of Detroit [[or should I say Archdiocese of Livonia?) and the liberal one was blasted by the archbishop.

I have a couple issues with this. First of all, yes, I am a liberal Catholic. I am still a Catholic. The Church is neither traditionally "liberal" or traditionally "conservative." The Church takes a variety of positions - strong stances for social justice and against the death penalty and the war - traditionally "liberal" stances as well as taking other "conservative" stances.

And what the hell is the problem of these people meeting at Cobo and TALKING? As far as I know, they're not denying the creeds, papal infaliability, or any of the infalliable proclaimations of the Church, so what is the damn problem?

And why isn't that lousy archbishop condemning all the conservatives at the Livonia conference that support the death penalty, the wars, and cutting social programs?

It is a shame that within the past couple decades the leaders of the church have started equating Catholicism with conservativism. They seem unaware that Catholicism predates these very recent political terms and even transcends them.

Nice post. Thank you.

[1KielsonDrive]

It seems we have a bunch of radicals posting here at DY.

[Detroitej72]

I have often wondered why the church is so vocal about abortion and yet unless you hear it from your parish pastor, silent about social issues. I have heard more than one priest preach about healthcare coverage for all, yet I don't recall the archbishop ever holding a press conference to push this agenda.

As a Catholic, I can get quite irritated when I hear people equate Catholicism with conservatism because, as was noted above, the Church is pretty diverse in terms of issues. Perhaps more conferences like the one at Cobo should happen more often to get the leaders to recognize the difference of opinion.

[ghettopalmetto]

I have often wondered why the church is so vocal about abortion and yet unless you hear it from your parish pastor, silent about social issues. I have heard more than one priest preach about healthcare coverage for all, yet I don't recall the archbishop ever holding a press conference to push this agenda.

As a Catholic, I can get quite irritated when I hear people equate Catholicism with conservatism because, as was noted above, the Church is pretty diverse in terms of issues. Perhaps more conferences like the one at Cobo should happen more often to get the leaders to recognize the difference of opinion.

I couldn't agree more. I'm lucky enough that my pastor *does* stress the importance of service and one being his brother's keeper. On the other hand, though, especially since we live with a secular government, I prefer that the Church not adopt a particular party platform.

Unfortunately, the Protestant evangelicals in our country--as much as they despise the idea of a Pope--seize on the one tenet of Catholic teachings with which they agree and pound it to death, ignoring the other [[arguably more important) teachings, such as doing Good Works.

Catholicism transcends party politics. I think people get disappointed in the Church because they expect it to validate their own political agenda.

[SWMAP]

Detroit ej72 wrote: "I have often wondered why the church is so vocal about abortion and yet unless you hear it from your parish pastor, silent about social issues. I have heard more than one priest preach about healthcare coverage for all, yet I don't recall the archbishop ever holding a press conference to push this agenda

It's absolutely not true that the Catholic church [[locally) is silent about social issues. It is true that Sunday homilies aren't supposed to be polemics. But didn't you see, for example, the discussions recently about this statement from the Michigan Catholic Conference, [[the policy arm of the Catholic church in Michigan)published widely in the State:

"Wednesday, April 13, 2011
[[Lansing)—Michigan Catholic Conference, the official public policy voice of the Catholic Church in this state, today released a statement addressing legislation passed by the House Appropriations DHS Subcommittee that would significantly gut the children’s clothing allowance, and substantially reduce the State Disability Assistance Program.
According to the DHS budget passed by the House subcommittee, the children’s clothing allowance would be substantially reduced from $12.8 million per year to $2.8 million per year while the disability assistance program would be reduced from a $269 monthly allotment to $175 per month. The Conference’s statement is as follows:

“What passed out of House DHS late this afternoon is unacceptable and would only create greater hardships for the poor and disadvantaged children and disabled persons across the state,” said Michigan Catholic Conference Vice President for Public Policy Tom Hickson. “Both of these policies were created in the 1990s to offer necessary assistance to the most vulnerable and those incapable of working when Governor John Engler reformed the General Assistance program. In the last legislative session, after Governor Granholm proposed cutting by half the clothing allowance, the Republican Legislature reinserted the funding. While the House DHS subcommittee’s plans to use the $10 million to increase the Family Independence Program grant income disregard by $4,000 is admirable, the fact is that those funds are being taken from poor and disadvantaged children.
“Michigan Catholic Conference will continue to advocate for funding for these long-standing policies as the House DHS budget, as well as the Senate DHS budget, moves through the legislative process. The Catholic Conference also urges members of the committee to pass policies that do no further harm to those who are already suffering. There is no reason why the state’s most destitute and neediest citizens should be responsible for setting straight the state’s fiscal problems.”

Michigan Catholic Conference is the official public policy voice of the Catholic Church in this state.

[Bham1982]

I too am a socially liberal Catholic, and am dismayed at the [[IMO) very selective and politicized causes.

For example, I am bombarded with pro-life materials and rhetoric at my suburban parish, but don't once recall mention of opposition to the death penalty or opposition to our nations constant warmongering. Never have I heard opposition to guns or our nation's stunning homicide rate.

If we as Catholics are against killing, for any reason, then obviously we need to fight against U.S. military action and U.S. death penalty. We need to also fight against the proliferation of guns in society and against the violence in our poorer communities.

[jackie5275]

I thought in the context of these conferences liberal Catholics meant those not necessarily liberal in the terms of politics, but more so in the terms of let's continue on in the progress & reforms of Vatican 2. While the conservative Catholics are those who have been fighting Vatican 2 since the 60s when it took place & want to return the ways of the Church before it.

I know there's a movement underfoot by some to bring back many of the things that Vatican 2 shelved. This was evidenced to me most recently as last year when we had a couple of priests at my parish who weren't old guys, maybe in their 30s & 40s, but wore the long cassock vestments that I had only previously seen in old photos. They wanted to bring back as much of the use of Latin during the Mass as possible. One of them refused to let me have face to face Reconciliation.

While I was growing up, many of the progress & reforms of Vatican 2 were being implemented. Mass in the native language, priest facing the congregation at Mass, Communion of both bread & wine, Communion in your hand, guitar/folk Mass meaning no organ music guitars instead, girl altar servers, face to face Reconciliation, were all things implemented to keep the reforms going forward. I think these reforms were good because it allowed people to better understand what was going on at Mass & participate more fully. I think the folks at the Cobo conference want the Church to pick up where they left off in the late 70s & keep on progressing. I think the items discussed there like more laity involvement, married priests, etc would have been brought up & faced head on years ago if the momentum of Vatican 2 hadn't been stopped.

Little by little over the past 2 decades the old ways are creeping back in with the "conservative" Catholics saying "We haven't done this or that in many years. We should start doing it again." For example, at my parish, the use of Latin is creeping back into our Mass. While our priest & music director may say "Oh Latin just sounds so beautiful. We need to use it more often." Well, there's a bunch of us out there who don't know it. Therefore, we can't fully participate in Mass because we can't speak/sing Latin. I should not have to take a class to learn another language to participate in Mass. All of us can speak English, just use it.

Yeah, I know some of this is a rant, but I just wanted to make the distinction that I don't think in the regard of these conferences, we're talking about political liberal & conservative.

[SWMAP]

Here's a good introduction to the Catholic seamless garment of Life philosophy as presented by the Late cardinal Joseph bernardin in a lecture at fordham in the 1980's. Its a reconciliation of bedrock Catholic moral opposition to abortion with social and social justice issues. This is a summary by Richard McBrian, published in the national Catholic reporter. My concern is that catholics are looking in the wrong places for ideas and support of social justice concerns when we limit ourselves to the content of Sunday homilies and what's in the church bulletin. There's a big wide world of catholic thought and discussion that you will find valuable and nourishing if you start reading the bigger stuff.

It has been 25 years since Cardinal Joseph Bernardin, then archbishop of Chicago and the incoming chairman of the U.S. bishops’ pro-life activities committee, delivered the Gannon Lecture at Fordham University in New York, where he called for a “consistent ethic of life” approach to moral issues, an approach that some bishops resist today, as was evident in the recent presidential election.
Bernardin had been invited to speak about the U.S. bishops’ pastoral letter, “The Challenge of Peace,” published six months earlier under his direction. He indicated, however, that he would use the letter “as a starting point for shaping a consistent ethic of life in our culture.”
The Catholic moral tradition, he pointed out, “has something valuable to say in the face of the multiple threats to the sacredness of life today, and I am convinced that the church is in a position to make a significant defense of life in a comprehensive and consistent manner.”
The pastoral letter, he reminded his Fordham audience, had linked the questions of abortion and nuclear war. “No other major institution presently holds these two positions in the way that Catholic bishops have joined them.”
“I am convinced,” he continued, “that the pro-life position of the church must be developed in terms of a comprehensive and consistent ethic of life.” As the new chairman of the bishops’ pro-life committee, he committed himself to “shaping a position of linkage among the life issues.”
The cardinal posed two questions about these life issues: “In an age when we can do almost anything, how do we decide what we ought to do?” and “In a time when we can do anything technologically, how do we decide morally what we never should do?”
The spectrum of life issues, he observed, cuts across genetics, abortion, capital punishment, modern warfare and the care of the terminally ill.
That is why the bishops’ “Respect Life” program, he said, views opposition to abortion and nuclear warfare as “specific applications of this broader attitude.”
“When one carries this principle into the public debate today, however, one meets significant opposition from very different places on the political and ideological spectrum.” Some regard the bishops’ concern about issues of national security to be overstepping their bounds, while others claim that opposition to abortion violates the realm of private choice.
“If one contends, as we do, that the right of every fetus to be born should be protected by civil law and supported by civil consensus,” Bernardin declared, “then our moral, political and economic responsibilities do not stop at the moment of birth.
“Those who defend the right to life of the weakest among us must be equally visible in support of the quality of life of the powerless among us: the old and the young, the hungry and the homeless, the undocumented immigrant and the unemployed worker.”
“Consistency means that we cannot have it both ways,” Bernardin argued. “We cannot urge a compassionate society and vigorous public policy to protect the rights of the unborn and then argue that compassion and significant public programs on behalf of the needy undermine the moral fiber of the society or are beyond the proper scope of governmental responsibility.”
A consistent ethic of life, however, needs a supportive constituency if it is to be effective. “The building of such a consistency,” the cardinal insisted, “is precisely the task before the church and the nation.”
He readily acknowledged that the building of such a consensus on the spectrum of life issues is “far from finished,” even among Catholics.

[jackie5275]

I too am a socially liberal Catholic, and am dismayed at the [[IMO) very selective and politicized causes.

For example, I am bombarded with pro-life materials and rhetoric at my suburban parish, but don't once recall mention of opposition to the death penalty or opposition to our nations constant warmongering. Never have I heard opposition to guns or our nation's stunning homicide rate.

If we as Catholics are against killing, for any reason, then obviously we need to fight against U.S. military action and U.S. death penalty. We need to also fight against the proliferation of guns in society and against the violence in our poorer communities.

I agree. Although, I think the Michigan Right to Life does address the death penalty issue. It's laughable to me all the "pro-life" politicians out there, especially the ones who were in office most of this century, who support war & the death penalty. I guess their definition of "pro-life" is anti-abortion only. Death penalty, war, euthanasia don't fit that definition & are therefore acceptable.

[bartock]

The Catholic Church IS diversity. It's an immense presence in Africa and Latin America. India has large numbers of Catholics. And of course, Catholics in the Middle East are being murdered and driven out by Muslim extremists.
As far as an urban ministry : locally, the Cornerstone Schools [[ founded by Cardinal Maida), Focus Hope, Christo Rey, CYO sports programs, Mercy Health programs, St. John's Hospital, Marygrove College, UDMercy, Capuchin Soup Kitchen, St. Leo's soup kitchen, Dominican Literacy Center, refugee settlement programs- this is only a partial list of Catholic urban ministries, both institutional and personal.

My problems with our local Archdioscese is illustrated in part by 1 - the closing of Notre Dame High School in Harper Woods, 2 - the amount of my money that has directly or indirectly gone towards settlements due to pedophiles in the priesthood, 3 - the Most Blessed Sacrament - all that money to build a fortress. Close a Catholic School, while parishes like St. Joe's, Sacred Heart, Josephat, etc., etc., are slowly dying, but pump $13 million building a compound that maybe 1,000 people a week go to.

Being a Roman Catholic does not mean you have to support those who run the Roman Catholic Church.

[bartock]

I agree. Although, I think the Michigan Right to Life does address the death penalty issue. It's laughable to me all the "pro-life" politicians out there, especially the ones who were in office most of this century, who support war & the death penalty. I guess their definition of "pro-life" is anti-abortion only. Death penalty, war, euthanasia don't fit that definition & are therefore acceptable.

Pro-life is the religious race card. It is a safe play for a candidate running for office because people take such a hard line on it. It is a shame that the Church will endorse - and people will vote - soley based on what someone says is their stand on an issue that I consider close to irrelevant as to whether someone will get their job done. It is not a moral compass, because politicians lie.

[SWMAP]

the Most Blessed Sacrament - all that money to build a fortress. Close a Catholic School, while parishes like St. Joe's, Sacred Heart, Josephat, etc., etc., are slowly dying, but pump $13 million building a compound that maybe 1,000 people a week go

I am not aware of any large pedophile settlements here, and, as to Blessed Sacrament Cathedral - that renewal was, in some ways, an explicit answer to the demolish Detroit and walk away crowd. It was a gift to the city on its 300th birthday. It was an investment in Woodward Ave's renewal. No one knew then how much the economy was going to sink.

[Bham1982]

I believe Blessed Sacrament has only one sparsely-attended weekend mass. Probably not a good investment, but who knew how bad it was gonna be?

Holy Redeemer is probably largest parish in Detroit. I imagine St. Hugo in Bloomfield is largest in suburbs. Shrine is huge facility but declining attendance.

[bartock]

the Most Blessed Sacrament - all that money to build a fortress. Close a Catholic School, while parishes like St. Joe's, Sacred Heart, Josephat, etc., etc., are slowly dying, but pump $13 million building a compound that maybe 1,000 people a week go

I am not aware of any large pedophile settlements here, and, as to Blessed Sacrament Cathedral - that renewal was, in some ways, an explicit answer to the demolish Detroit and walk away crowd. It was a gift to the city on its 300th birthday. It was an investment in Woodward Ave's renewal. No one knew then how much the economy was going to sink.

I didn't say that the settlements were here, but there have been a number of priests locally in hot water over this stuff. Either way, directly or indirectly, some of that money collected locally gets put in the pool. I am very skeptical of the CSA as well because of this.

And I don't see how that was ever an investment in Woodward Avenue's revival, despite stated intentions. It is the Catholic Church version of the pre-renovated Renaissance Center.

[bartock]

I believe Blessed Sacrament has only one sparsely-attended weekend mass. Probably not a good investment, but who knew how bad it was gonna be?

Holy Redeemer is probably largest parish in Detroit. I imagine St. Hugo in Bloomfield is largest in suburbs. Shrine is huge facility but declining attendance.

St. Anne's is massive and well attended also.