Dissent: Neo-Clericalism and the Faith of the Ordinary People

By Andrea Tornielli
Vatican Insider
April 25, 2012

vaticaninsider.lastampa.it/en/homepage/inquiries-and-interviews/detail/articolo/chiesa-church-iglesia-vatican-vaticano-scisma-14662/

Faithfuls with the Pope

"Silent schisms" and the Pope's reminder about the essential elements of the Christian messageAlthough (understandably) a great deal of media attention has been given over the past weeks to the outcome of the dialogue between the Holy See and the Society of St. Pius X, the Fraternity founded by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre which could soon enter into full communion with the Catholic Church again, there is no doubt that a whole different kind of dissent of much vaster and widespread proportions is present in today's Catholic Church. This dissent, which is spreading through central and northern Europe - in Austria, Germany, Belgium and Ireland - is leading groups of priests to sign appeals to disobedience, adopting highly critical stances against the "Roman" line of thought, on subjects such as sexuality, communion for remarried divorcees, priestly celibacy, female priesthood and the role of the laity in the Church. Meanwhile, the controversy over the stance taken by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith towards the U.S.'s Leadership Conference of Women Religious - the organisation with the largest number of major Superiors of congregations of Catholic women religious in the United States - continues to rage on. The LCWR has been placed under supervision for its positions on abortion, homosexuality and priesthood, which are not in line with the doctrine of the Catholic Church. There are silent "schisms" forming which the press is necessarily and mercilessly talking about. In doing so they are are shattering the image of an ever triumphant Church. These "schisms" cannot easily be swept under the carpet as hiccups of the post-conciliar dispute or of the old progressivist fringes destined for extinction.

In the face of what is going on, it is often evident that bishops find it difficult to deal with and handle these situations, as they wait for "Rome to do something" on the issue. However, it is undoubtedly difficult to engage in an open discussion about the questions raised by dissenters. An example of how this could be done is the passage pronounced during the homily for the Chrismal mass, which Benedict XVI dedicated to the protest by Austrian priests, speaking about their request to discuss the issue of female priesthood. The Pope addressed them by asking them - and all those who gathered to listen to him in St. Peter's – some questions on what it means to conform to the will of Christ and follow it. The approach he took - and this is also what happened in the case of the "doctrinal dialogues" with the Society of St. Pius X – was the approach of someone who, whilst acting as the "rock" and as the supreme leader of the Catholic Church, does not fail to talk about the deep reasonings that lie beneath certain doctrinal positions; and he does so constantly, using a language that is suitable for the times.

Benedict XVI is a Pope who has been at the head of the doctrinal dicastery, dealing day in day out with all the above mentioned issues. Hence, before he was even called to Rome by John Paul II, he had said: "The ecclesial magisterium protects the faith of the ordinary people; of those who do not write books, who do not speak on television and cannot write newspaper editorials: this is its democratic task. It has to give a voice to those who do not have one." "It is not the learned – he said in a homily pronounced in Munich in December 1979 – who determine what is true about the baptismal faith; it is the baptismal faith which determines what is true in scholarly interpretations. It is not intellectuals who measure up the ordinary people, but the ordinary people who measure up the intellectuals. Scholarly explanations are not the measure of the profession of the baptismal faith, it is the profession of the baptismal faith, in its naive literality, that is the measure of all theology. The baptised individual, who is in the baptismal faith, does not need to be taught. That individual has been offered the final truth and carries it with them with faith itself..."

In the same homily, the then cardinal Ratzinger added: "It should finally also be clear, that saying that someone's opinion is not in line with the doctrine of the Catholic Church, is not a violation of human rights. Everyone should have the right to be educated and to freely express their own opinion. With the Second Vatican Council, the Church declared itself to be in favour of this and it still is so today. But this does not mean that every external opinion should be recognised as Catholic. Each person should be able to express themselves as they wish and as they are able to before their own conscience. The Church must be able to tell its faithful which opinions correspond to their faith and which do not. This is its right and duty, in order to ensure that a "yes" remains a "yes" and that "no" remains a "no" and in order to preserve the clarity it owes to its followers and to the world."

In light of these words, it is easier to understand why Benedict XVI wanted to establish a new dicastery dedicated to the new evangelisation and why he announced the Year of Faith. The focus he gives to the essentiality of baptismal faith, whose basic principles are often ignored even in the heart of a once Christian Europe, is considered by Pope Benedict XVI to be of utmost importance. But it would be a mistake to interpret this call merely as a way to "reprimand" an expression of dissent. It is about a deeper and more far reaching appeal, which should even bring into question that ecclesiastical world which is no longer in line with the papacy. Recalling the urgency of the proclamation of faith and of the need to analyse its content more carefully, should dissuade so many prelates from showing too great and close an interest in politics and political line-ups, in nominations in public entities, in the mass media and in intervening in issues frequently or very frequently, when this could be done more freely by the Catholic laity. One of the outcomes expected from the Second Vatican Council, which began fifty years ago, was indeed to do with the involvement of the laity in the Church. It is not out of place to note that half a century after the Council, the decree on the role of the laity, entitled Apostolicam actuositatem, is the document that has been implemented the least in ecclesial life. Indeed, we are witnessing, in many Countries, a sort of neo-clericalism, which seems to consider the laity merely as the "secular wing" of a hierarchy that controls everything or would like to control everything, far beyond the limits of its competence.