Notre Dame's Conference on Polarization | National Catholic Reporter

Notre Dame's Conference on Polarization | National Catholic Reporter by MSW.  MGB: I am not so certain there needs to be a center space for theologians and the bishops to engage.  The practice of theology has changed.  Gone are the days when theologians were on call to provide a scholastically approved justification for whatever the bishop wanted to do. Modern theologians are not priests whose educatition was paid for by the bishop - they are free agents who likely had fellowships working for another theologian when they got to doctoral level work. They are not, therefore, beholden to the bishops except for the made up requirement that they have a mandate to teach at a Catholic university - a requirement that seems to be a formality until someone speaks in a different direction.



Most bishops don't care and welcome intelligent discussion that may be a bit outside the box - as long as it is confined to those publications that only other theologians and students read.  Its when they start proclaiming new truth publicly in the name of the Church that problems happens - or criciticize the Church on something like gay marriage or women priests that they have to take notice.  Then we have the conservatives who need no provocation to take the role of grand indquisitor - especially if they work for the CDF. Of course, there is a difference between those who exxplore different possible interpretations of Christ'd divinity and someone who writes a book on the state of the discipline - reflecting just that and not her opinions.  Sometimes its very nice to be self taught and unaffiliated if one wants to offer fresh perspective, like I do.  I can attack the inquisitors and, if they notice, they are powerless to do anything - as any excommunication has to be based in sin, and calling idiots out is no sin.



To reitierate, who is responsible for the bad state of affairs?  The bishops who are trying to get something that one, they did not pay for and two, really does not exist anymore.  People, including priests, think for themselves now.  Indeed, the promise of obedience is getting a bit too old fasion to maintain.  As for the issues of the day - if certain bishops are allowing their office as teacher to be prostituted for the sake of the Republican Party on either pro-life issues (whether it be the death penalty, abortion, contraception or end of life issues - poor Terri Schaivo - the federal courts knew better than they did) or marriage equality (which I suspect they think of as a pro-life issue - though gay sex certainly is not - sex where egg and sperm are not even in the same bedroom is still unitive and loving inside a permanent relationship - and maybe even an exploratory one).



Leon's piece about identity is interesting.  I think he assumes that it is OK to hold Jesus hostage in terms of Catholic Identity - and that all other identifications are suspect (although I doubt he would publicaly say that membership in the clerical class or the USCCB is a form of identity - except it is). If you consider the Church as an identity group, then some rethinking is necessary on several authority issues.  I doubt Leon goes there, but I certainly do and so do the majority of modern theologians, who of course are a group themselves.  As far as Paul, I seem to recall that he also said that to be Jews, he would be a Jew, to Greeks, to slaves, a slave, etc. to preach the Gospe.  It is still sound adviced - expecially if you add gay and female to the mix.



I wonder if anyone at the Conference in Notre Dame said the same kind of thing.  If not, you should invite me to the second.