Jesuits, Orthodoxy and Fr. James Martin

[sealabeag]

Hi, I have a slightly multifaceted question but it is all intertwined. Basically I’m trying to discern between priesthood and marriage, and have been for some years. I’ve yet to find clarity either way, and haven’t found a religious order I feel attracted too, perhaps with the exception of the Jesuits.
However, the problem I’m encountering is the contradiction between what the Jesuits should be, based on St. Ignatius’ original order, the Jesuits of old, and the Jesuits today. They appear to be, in large part, well… astray. Social justice appears to be to the fore and centre, and orthodox Catholic spirituality less so…
This brings me on to my questions

1. Fr. James Martin is an influential and prominent Jesuit who advocates for “lgbt” rights, etc. Can someone please explain to me why he has not been disciplined and silenced?
2. Is there a Jesuit province which is orthodox, true to the orders original spirituality?

Apologies if this is rambling, it’s late!

Thanks

 

[Vico]

Hi, I have a slightly multifaceted question but it is all intertwined. Basically I’m trying to discern between priesthood and marriage, and have been for some years. I’ve yet to find clarity either way, and haven’t found a religious order I feel attracted too, perhaps with the exception of the Jesuits.
However, the problem I’m encountering is the contradiction between what the Jesuits should be, based on St. Ignatius’ original order, the Jesuits of old, and the Jesuits today. They appear to be, in large part, well… astray. Social justice appears to be to the fore and centre, and orthodox Catholic spirituality less so…
This brings me on to my questions

1. Fr. James Martin is an influential and prominent Jesuit who advocates for “lgbt” rights, etc. Can someone please explain to me why he has not been disciplined and silenced?
2. Is there a Jesuit province which is orthodox, true to the orders original spirituality?

Apologies if this is rambling, it’s late!

Thanks

You may like the Trinitarians founded in 1198. They practice devotion to the Holy Trinity, evangelise non-Christians, assist immigrants, educate the young, and do parish work. They do not seek political office.

 

[dscath]

This brings me on to my questions

1. Fr. James Martin is an influential and prominent Jesuit who advocates for “lgbt” rights, etc. Can someone please explain to me why he has not been disciplined and silenced?

Because your claim is misleading but common. Fr. Martin does not advocate the lgbt lifestyle, he only advocates they be treated with love and compassion (which is, advocating rights, I suppose)…

Why would the Jesuit order discipline and silence him for taking a stand of loving his neighbor?

 

[AlbMagno]

I understand your doubt, you seem to be in the same path of mine! I also am in love with the original Ignatian Spirituality and Charism and don’t find any other Order which “fits” like it.

After some research, I’ve come across a few conclusions which may help you:

1. The Jesuits will continue shrinking due to the advanced age of many members, but they will not go extinct, as there are young members still. AND this “low point” will probably help them to turn away from modern philosophies and stick with the original Charism.
2. Not all Jesuits are unorthodox, in fact there are many “dynamic” but fully orthodox catholics among the Jesuits, but the more liberal and weird ones are usually the ones that appear in the Media or teach Theology. Part of the reason of why Jesuits are generalized as “heretics” is because of the dynamic and varied nature of the Ignatian Spirituality, so sometimes orthodox Jesuits are put together with truly unorthodox Jesuits.
3. There is Hope for the Order. The previous Superior Generals said some weird things many times, but the current one (apart from saying that the Devil is symbolic and later retracting ) is much more conservative and respectful of doctrine, as he usually mentions Tradition and historical spiritualities of the Chrurch in his conferences.

 

[twf]

Wow!!! Thanks so much for bringing to my attention that the Superior General retracted his misguided comments! I saw a lot of “burn the heretic! Suppress the Jesuits” talk it’s wake but saw nothing on the retraction.

 

[Servant31]

I with this. Sorry I don’t know much about the current Jesuit order, I have known a couple Jesuits who seemed to be really solid priests.

 

[Beryllos]

Can someone please explain to me why he has not been disciplined and silenced?

Because he hasn’t actually said or done anything wrong.

It is not unusual for Jesuits to try methods and approaches that others haven’t tried, in order to proclaim the Gospel to people whom others have neglected or abandoned. Fr. Martin goes right up to the limit of what is allowed, but not beyond. Some people think he goes too far, but apparently his superiors think he is within proper bounds (and I agree).

 

[otjm]

Unless you are aware of specific statement which go against Church teaching, that borders on defamation either in libel or slander. Christ was well known to speak with, if not eat with, prostitutes. That does not mean he approved of prostitution.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

If you’re defining “orthodox” as non-controversial, the Jesuits have never fallen in that category, don’t fall in it today, and probably won’t fall in it going forward in the future.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Because he hasn’t actually said or done anything wrong.

It is not unusual for Jesuits to try methods and approaches that others haven’t tried, in order to proclaim the Gospel to people whom others have neglected or abandoned. Fr. Martin goes right up to the limit of what is allowed, but not beyond. Some people think he goes too far, but apparently his superiors think he is within proper bounds (and I agree).

^^ This.
Unlike most of the people here, I went to see Fr. Martin speak. He made a point of announcing during his speech that the Church said that homosexual sex was wrong and that’s just how it is. He did not comment on it beyond that. But he did make the statement so there was no lack of clarity on Church teaching.

Most of his speech was about welcoming gay people to come to Mass and be part of our Catholic community. Nothing wrong with that, as the Church teaches we should be welcoming everyone to come to Mass (although they might not be able to receive Holy Communion if they aren’t Catholic or are not in a state of grace) and be part of our community, and that we should be kind to everyone.

 

[otjm]

Can someone please explain to me why he has not been disciplined and silenced?

First you need to identify exactly what he has said or done. The lgbtq etc. community is as in need of Christ and reconciliation as any other sinner. What someone said the priest said is not sufficient; you need to specifically note his statements and/or actions which are contrary to Church teaching.

“Advocates for rights” is an extremely broad topic ranging from the right to be baptized (which the Church holds) to unfettered sexual activity with others (which the Church does not hold). And just because someone somewhere said that the priest said/did something is not proof that he did - it is called hearsay and is often not just inaccurate, but completely wrong.

I am not trying to defend him; I have not even heard of him. But I have been around long enough that there are people, in print, television and on the internet who are extremely adept at taking something out of context and spinning it to align with their personal philosophy/theology/world view.

There are certainly some people you could speak with if you can reach them; Fr. Mitch Pacwa being the first who comes to mind’ I am sure there are others. And in all fairness to both Fr. Pacwa and Fr.Martin, that should not be on a public phone-in at a radio show Fr. Pacwa is involved in;

 

[otjm]

I have been known to make terse comments; yours seems to carry the implication that Fr. Martin has strayed from Church moral theology.

I don’t know him and have no “dog in this fight”; but I have seen people libeled and slandered based on what someone else has said about them - and I am not going to name names, but both of the speakers are well known on the internet.

He may have not been sanctioned because he has strayed from what the Church teaches on morality, and his superior(s) have also strayed; or he was not sanctioned because his superior(s) judge him to be within what the Church teaches on morality. Your comment does not elucidate.

 

[otjm]

Not any more than being born heterosexual means that God approves of heterosexual unions and heterosexual acts - the point being in both cases, outside of what the Church teaches is a valid marriage.

In short - your comment is not a logical extension.

 

[InThePew]

However, the problem I’m encountering is the contradiction between what the Jesuits should be, based on St. Ignatius’ original order, the Jesuits of old, and the Jesuits today. They appear to be, in large part, well… astray. Social justice appears to be to the fore and centre, and orthodox Catholic spirituality less so…

1. Fr. James Martin is an influential and prominent Jesuit who advocates for “lgbt” rights, etc. Can someone please explain to me why he has not been disciplined and silenced?
2. Is there a Jesuit province which is orthodox, true to the orders original spirituality?

Social Justice is an entirely orthodox part of Catholic teaching and has been since the Church Fathers who in turn of course drew on the Gospels. It’s also an essential part of eucharistic mission - to give on all that we’ve received being Christ for others. Granted, for some it’s become almost a religion in and of itself but, understood properly (as, for example Dorothy Day did) it’s fundamental to our Catholic faith. In the words of Benedict XVI, those who are nourished on the Bread of Christ cannot remain indifferent before the one who is deprived of daily bread.

Jesuits have also traditionally operated on the margins of society - spiritually as well as physically. This often has had drastic consequences - like in Latin America during the 20th century - so it’s not surprising that Fr Martin should be involved in a ministry to those on the margins, involving dialogue and relationship building. As he’s said, the most common response to prejudice, persecution and even violence is, sadly, silence: “a failure of compassion, a failure to experience with, and a failure to suffer with.” His concern is with not so much with what the Church says but rather the way in which it is said.

At the same time, I would say imho that there are times when Fr Martin’s writings are too ambiguous and tend to detract from, rather than support Church teaching. Still, his superiors are no doubt mindful of his true (rather than presumed) motives and also aware that there is nothing in his writings that is heretical. Indeed, it’s telling that, while many in the blogosphere (and places like LifeSiteNews) are only too willing to slate the Jesuits for their presumed liberality in allowing him to continue, none of them complain the lack of involvement in the part of the CDF. Indeed, Archbishop Charles Chaput (hardly a liberal) described Fr. Martin as “a man of intellect and skill whose work I often admire”. Although critical of the ambiguities in Fr Martin’s writings, he also called the ad hominem attacks on him “inexcusably ugly”.

In answer to the second question, what the Jesuits do (which is pretty much anything and everything - God in all things) remains true to their original charism. Granted, as the saying goes if you’ve met one Jesuit you’ve met one Jesuit - but certainly, their spirituality (the Spiritual Exercises being a staple in seminary formation) remains very much true to their founder.

 

[Peaceable]

As he’s said, the most common response to prejudice, persecution and even violence is, sadly, silence: “a failure of compassion, a failure to experience with, and a failure to suffer with.”

Was this in one of his writings? Can you direct me to this? I find the idea of silence as a failure of compassion in this context pretty profound.

 

[InThePew]

Was this in one of his writings?

Building A Bridge, page 38.

 

[catholic03]

The Jesuits are orthodox. Unfortunately, there are some unorthodox ones who appear a lot in the media. This is not unique to the Jesuits. Virtually all members of the Church hierarchy are perfectly orthodox, unfortunately, we hear a lot from the small but vocal minority that do express questionable opinions.

The issue with Fr Martin specifically is that he is particularly ambiguous in terms of his doctrinal and pastoral expression. He could easily mislead people into thinking the Church teaches something it doesn’t with some of the - if not unorthodox - questionable opinions he expresses.

His belief that we must help those on the margins is commendable, but I would not encourage that people take everything he says as being coherent with Church teaching.

 

[vin_dedvukaj]

I believe it is super important to be welcoming to people that experience same sex attraction, the short film “The Third Way” is good demonstrating on how it important is actually is. That being said in my own personal opinion I think Father James Martin has his own personally agenda at times, and I am not sure how good and holy his intentions are most of the time. once again this my own opinion and not fact.

 

[phil19034]

• Fr. James Martin is an influential and prominent Jesuit who advocates for “lgbt” rights, etc. Can someone please explain to me why he has not been disciplined and silenced?
• Is there a Jesuit province which is orthodox, true to the orders original spirituality?

If you learn the answers to these, I’m sure many of us would love to hear the answers…

 

[phil19034]

Unlike most of the people here, I went to see Fr. Martin speak. He made a point of announcing during his speech that the Church said that homosexual sex was wrong and that’s just how it is. He did not comment on it beyond that. But he did make the statement so there was no lack of clarity on Church teaching.

What he says at Church conferences or writes in his books are not really the problem. It’s what he says/does on Twitter, etc. that’s mostly the issue.

On Twitter, he allows people to believe that he holds heretical views (even if it isn’t his intent). He rarely, if ever, clarifies. Instead, he is constantly poking the hornet nest and when people start going crazy on both sides, he never clarifies anything.

That’s the reason so many people (priests & bishops included) have issues with him.