Redemptorist says "ghetto" piety sidelining social justice

[Arba_Sicula]

fix:

Why deny the obvious? His words are for all to read.

Apparently, we just read them differently.

 

[KathleenElsie]

Guar Fan:

I agree, but I don’t think anyone has used that phrase. The title of the article puts the two words together but they don’t appear that way in the text itself.

As far as I can see this is the closest it comes. Must admit I like the concept as stated.

This seems to reflect a return to the old ghetto strategy, of circling the wagons in a hostile world, combined with a heavy stress on Church authority.

 

[Matt25]

grotto:

Anybody who can come up with a term of “ghetto piety” to describe devotional prayer needs some slap therapy!

OK you are not understanding what the man said. He did not describe devotional prayer as ghetto piety. What he described was “a very heavy stress on older forms of piety or devotionalism” which he saw as “a return to the old ghetto strategy, of circling the wagons in a hostile world,”

Did he say the piety was wrong? No he did not.
Did he describe devotional prayer as ghetto piety? Certainly not.

What he was, I think suggesting was that prior to Vatican II the Catholic Church particularly in countries like Britain, Australia and the USA, where it was associated with particular ethnic minorities, acted like an enclosed fortress and sought to avoid interaction with the outside world. Catholics were forbidden, for example, to enter Protestant Churches.

The Vatican Council changed all that. The Church emerged from its self imposed exile and began to interact with the world, to inculturate the Gospel, to use the vernacular in liturgy and so on. What the author is here suggesting that certain elements in the Church are trying to resile from the spirit of Vatican II in order to go back inside the safe old fortress.

No one is suggesting piety is wrong or bad. For the Church as a whole, however, it is not sufficient. The body of Christ has more than one limb and more than one function to fulfill. Thank God.

 

[KathleenElsie]

This makes me remember an OLD song sung in the Baptist Church near where we pastured our horses. I loved to listen to them sing.

The song as I remember it used these words in it. “GIVE ME THAT OLD TIME RELIGION” something if wish and pray for daily.

GOD BLESS

 

[Matt25]

The current Holy Father Benedict XVI was very much an architect of Vatican II so don’t rush to diss it. See thetablet.co.uk/cgi-bin/register.cgi/tablet-00695

Franz König
*
JOHN XXIII was and called himself a simple man, a peasant’s son, and yet he set the signals for the council. He triggered what was to prove a momentous episode in the history of the Roman Catholic Church. It was he who set in motion the transformation of the Church from a static, authoritarian body that spoke in monologues, to a dynamic, sisterly Church that promoted dialogue. As a man of dialogue himself, he re-emphasised its importance both with the world and within the Church…

…*We were in a fortress, the windows and gates of which were closed. The world was out there and we were inside, and yet we were supposed to go out and take the Gospel message to all nations. But although we often shook our heads, we accepted the status quo and all those rules and regulations. And we had absolutely no inkling of how those walls could be removed…

It seems to me that the author of the article that begins this thread is embracing the spirit of Vatican II and those criticising him as a liberal pinko commie are rejecting the Sacred Synod.

 

[fix]

Matt25:

What he was, I think suggesting was that prior to Vatican II the Catholic Church particularly in countries like Britain, Australia and the USA, where it was associated with particular ethnic minorities, acted like an enclosed fortress and sought to avoid interaction with the outside world. Catholics were forbidden, for example, to enter Protestant Churches.

The Vatican Council changed all that. The Church emerged from its self imposed exile and began to interact with the world, to inculturate the Gospel, to use the vernacular in liturgy and so on. What the author is here suggesting that certain elements in the Church are trying to resile from the spirit of Vatican II in order to go back inside the safe old fortress.

Liberal opinion, not fact.

 

[jman507]

Basically, you cannot overly emphasis one area and cut out the rest, be it social justice or devotion.

 

[Matt25]

fix:

Liberal opinion, not fact.

In his address at the opening of the Sacred Synod John XXIII said christusrex.org/www1/CDHN/v2.html

In the daily exercise of our pastoral office, we sometimes have to listen, much to our regret, to voices of persons who, though burning with zeal, are not endowed with too much sense of discretion or measure. In these modern times they can see nothing but prevarication and ruin. They say that our era, in comparison with past eras, is getting worse, and they behave as though they had learned nothing from history, which is, none the less, the teacher of life. They behave as though at the time of former Councils everything was a full triumph for the Christian idea and life and for proper religious liberty.

We feel we must disagree with those prophets of gloom, who are always forecasting disaster, as though the end of the world were at hand.

In the present order of things, Divine Providence is leading us to a new order of human relations which, by men’s own efforts and even beyond their very expectations, are directed toward the fulfilment of God’s superior and inscrutable designs. And everything, even human differences, leads to the greater good of the Church.

Sound familiar?

 

[KathleenElsie]

Matt25:

The current Holy Father Benedict XVI was very much an architect of Vatican II so don’t rush to diss it. See thetablet.co.uk/cgi-bin/register.cgi/tablet-00695

Franz König

JOHN XXIII was and called himself a simple man, a peasant’s son, and yet he set the signals for the council. He triggered what was to prove a momentous episode in the history of the Roman Catholic Church. It was he who set in motion the transformation of the Church from a static, authoritarian body that spoke in monologues, to a dynamic, sisterly Church that promoted dialogue. As a man of dialogue himself, he re-emphasised its importance both with the world and within the Church…

*…*We were in a fortress, the windows and gates of which were closed. The world was out there and we were inside, and yet we were supposed to go out and take the Gospel message to all nations. But although we often shook our heads, we accepted the status quo and all those rules and regulations. And we had absolutely no inkling of how those walls could be removed…

It seems to me that the author of the article that begins this thread is embracing the spirit of Vatican II and those criticising him as a liberal pinko commie are rejecting the Sacred Synod.

Now, now, no name calling. Seems that when an argument can’t be won with intellect then name calling seems to be the thought of the day.

PEACE & GOD BLESS

 

[Matt25]

KathleenElsie:

Now, now, no name calling. Seems that when an argument can’t be won with intellect then name calling seems to be the thought of the day.

PEACE & GOD BLESS

What name calling are you referring to?

 

[fix]

Matt25:

In his address at the opening of the Sacred Synod John XXIII said christusrex.org/www1/CDHN/v2.html

Sound familiar?

Does not sound like what you were saying in the previous post.

Read on:

The great problem confronting the world after almost two thousand years remains unchanged. Christ is ever resplendent as the center of history and of life. Men are either with Him and His Church, and then they enjoy light, goodness, order, and peace. Or else they are without Him, or against Him, and deliberately opposed to His Church, and then they give rise to confusion, to bitterness in human relations, and to the constant danger of fratricidal wars…

 It is easy to discern this reality if we consider attentively the world    of today, which is so busy with politics and controversies in the economic order that it does not find time to attend to the care of spiritual reality, with which the Church's magisterium is concerned...

The greatest concern of the Ecumenical Council is this: that he sacred deposit of Christian doctrine should be guarded and taught more efficaciously. That doctrine embraces the whole of man, composed as he is of body and soul. And, since he is a pilgrim on this earth, it commands him to tend always toward heaven. …

 

[Ani_Ibi]

Matt25:

What name calling are you referring to?

Are you suggesting that you have declined to read the text which the poster quoted?

 

[chicago]

JOHNYJ:

I don’t get it,sorry.What is ghetto piety?
.Basic social justice of course !

Until recent (post WWII) decades, Catholics were seen as living in their own encircled (dare I say poor, ethnic) camps, unwelcome in larger American Protestant society and unfit for the same. In recent times, we have come to be commonly accepted in this society. The previous situation is often referred to as “the Catholic ghetto”.

What the article’s author is presupposing is that there is a retrenchment into isolating ourselves as Catholics, and returning to a simplistic “pay, pray, and obey” type of life. I do think that he is overgeneralizing in his critique and perhaps drawing lines of division which tend to radicalize traditional piety and social justice, pitting them somehow against each other on opposite ends. This is one of the unfortunate things which has also occurred in recent decades (and perhaps one of the things which helped Catholics to “arrive” ironically), whereby the modus operandi has been to get rid of the old (pious devotion), in with the new (social justice). What appears to the author as an emphasis upon the “old” may scare him, as he though we had “progressed” beyond that.

Of course, the problem is when either becomes emphasized to the lack of genuine intergration of both. And, here, I do think that the author may have a point. For, while he is criticizing one side (and may fail to equally criticize the other), I believe that he is onto something in how some people in certain camps do appear to be overemphasizing certain aspects to the neglect or disdain of others. A healthy balance of both (and I might say a complimentariness between the two which helps to build up both) is what is needed. When either is forgotten or overlooked, there is a need for correction.

 

[KathleenElsie]

chicago:

Until recent (post WWII) decades, Catholics were seen as living in their own encircled (dare I say poor, ethnic) camps, unwelcome in larger American Protestant society and unfit for the same. In recent times, we have come to be commonly accepted in this society. The previous situation is often referred to as “the Catholic ghetto”.

What the article’s author is presupposing is that there is a retrenchment into isolating ourselves as Catholics, and returning to a simplistic “pay, pray, and obey” type of life. I do think that he is overgeneralizing in his critique and perhaps drawing lines of division which tend to radicalize traditional piety and social justice, pitting them somehow against each other on opposite ends. This is one of the unfortunate things which has also occurred in recent decades (and perhaps one of the things which helped Catholics to “arrive” ironically), whereby the modus operandi has been to get rid of the old (pious devotion), in with the new (social justice). What appears to the author as an emphasis upon the “old” may scare him, as he though we had “progressed” beyond that.

Of course, the problem is when either becomes emphasized to the lack of genuine intergration of both. And, here, I do think that the author may have a point. For, while he is criticizing one side (and may fail to equally criticize the other), I believe that he is onto something in how some people in certain camps do appear to be overemphasizing certain aspects to the neglect or disdain of others. A healthy balance of both (and I might say a complimentariness between the two which helps to build up both) is what is needed. When either is forgotten or overlooked, there is a need for correction.

Good critique. Thank you.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

Nohome:

An interesting article that says just this:

philanthropy

Nohome

Nohome:

A uniquely American respect for success lies at the heart of American philanthropy. It allows for wealth to be accumulated without excessive criticism and suspicion, while at the same time placing a moral obligation on the shoulders of the wealthy to reinvest in their society. This American approach to wealth is deeply ingrained in our culture. Even those who do not consider themselves “religious” have absorbed these values.

Then to Hell with it. If the Apostles had been from the USA, the Church would not have survived the Crucifixion - being skewered on a cross was, humanly speaking, the most abject failure possible. One half-expects those who are not religous to fall for this kind of thing - what is really bad, is that those who have been given something better to believe should be deceived by it. For how can they share the Good News of Christ, if they know only a Christ Who was successful ? Wealth-worships neuters the Good News entirely - and is severely rebuked in the NT, not least by St. James: blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?navigated=yes&book=Jam&chapter=004&version=rsv in the whole of chapter 4 of his letter, and here -

• James 5:1 Come now, you rich, weep and howl for the miseries that are coming upon you.
• Your riches have rotted and your garments are moth-eaten.
• Your gold and silver have rusted, and their rust will be evidence against you and will eat your flesh like fire. You have laid up treasure for the last days.
• Behold, the wages of the labourers who mowed your fields, which you kept back by fraud, cry out; and the cries of the harvesters have reached the ears of the Lord of hosts.
• You have lived on the earth in luxury and in pleasure; you have fattened your hearts in a day of slaughter.
• You have condemned, you have killed the righteous man; he does not resist you.
• Be patient, therefore, brethren, until the coming of the Lord. Behold, the farmer waits for the precious fruit of the earth, being patient over it until it receives the early and the late rain.
• You also be patient. Establish your hearts, for the coming of the Lord is at hand.
• Do not grumble, brethren, against one another, that you may not be judged; behold, the Judge is standing at the doors.

as well as by Christ:

• Mat 19:24 And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.
• Mar 10:25 It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.
• Luk 18:25 For it is easier for a camel to go through a needle’s eye, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.

The Good News does not pander to our avarice, selfishness, and possessiveness - it puts them to death: unlike the nonsense in that quotation. Heaven is entered through tribulation, not through “success”. What but “success” did satan promise to Christ ?

Is it a coincidence one of the world’s freest, most entrepreneurial, and most religious nations is also the world’s most philanthropic nation? Americans donate like no other people, whether you look at total donations, per capita giving, size of gifts, or types of giving. And as our wealth increases, so does our generosity.

This self-congratulation and depreciation of others is prideful & forgets the praise of Christ for the widow who gave the little she had. Pride ruins any value US giving might have. Such thinking is wholly pagan.

 

[fix]

chicago:

Until recent (post WWII) decades, Catholics were seen as living in their own encircled (dare I say poor, ethnic) camps, unwelcome in larger American Protestant society and unfit for the same. In recent times, we have come to be commonly accepted in this society. The previous situation is often referred to as “the Catholic ghetto”.

What the article’s author is presupposing is that there is a retrenchment into isolating ourselves as Catholics, and returning to a simplistic “pay, pray, and obey” type of life. I do think that he is overgeneralizing in his critique and perhaps drawing lines of division which tend to radicalize traditional piety and social justice, pitting them somehow against each other on opposite ends. This is one of the unfortunate things which has also occurred in recent decades (and perhaps one of the things which helped Catholics to “arrive” ironically), whereby the modus operandi has been to get rid of the old (pious devotion), in with the new (social justice). What appears to the author as an emphasis upon the “old” may scare him, as he though we had “progressed” beyond that.

Of course, the problem is when either becomes emphasized to the lack of genuine intergration of both. And, here, I do think that the author may have a point. For, while he is criticizing one side (and may fail to equally criticize the other), I believe that he is onto something in how some people in certain camps do appear to be overemphasizing certain aspects to the neglect or disdain of others. A healthy balance of both (and I might say a complimentariness between the two which helps to build up both) is what is needed. When either is forgotten or overlooked, there is a need for correction.

I think that is a fair summary. The priest in the article seems to come from one extreme of this issue. His “camp” has been in “power” for too long. The pendulum is swinging back and hopefully there will be a correction that will balance things.

See the reporting from the current Synod and we see these things being played out in Rome right now.

 

[put_off]

“…social encyclicals, which are generally ignored or down-played by the conservative wings, except for the morals of sexuality and family life,” Fr Duncan asserts."

But I agree with MiddleBear regarding the rhetoric. And as Johnny J. began this thread, I want to yell from the rooftop that… social justice is IMPOSSIBLE WITHOUT CHASTITY AND THE TWO-PARENT FAMILY. That’s mother and father, of course. If you ask what a just society looks like, that is what it looks like, those are the pillars which hold it up.

The real crime of these conservatives seems to be that they want to clean up their own backyards first, get the plank out of their own eye, and heal themselves. And what’s the liberal response: “you’re stalling!” Foolish non-virgins. Most families and individuals do have oil to spare, though, and they can share it: how they do so is between them, God, and their spiritual advisors.

 

[Nohome]

Gottle of Geer:

Then to Hell with it.

Fine. If it makes you feel better, it appears that the poorest Americans are also the most generous.

Frankly, a wealthy person can do more for society in that:

1. They have the resources to help others.
2. They support themselves and do not add to the load of charity organizations.

If I follow your advice, I too become poor and dependant on society. I suspect the charities I support prefer that I remain gainfully employed and generous with my blessings.

As to “It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God”, this is just another way of saying “you can’t take it with you”. Many a rich man have left their entire estate to charity and depart from this existence poor. They too will find God’s mercy, but they will help a great number of people along the way. Seems to me Mathew was just giving some sound financial advice for the end of life.

Nohome

 

[stellina]

jman507:

Did Jesus spend 40 days in the desert?
Did Jesus help the poor and the sinners?
Did Jesus follow the moral law?

Yes, Yes, Yes.

Personal devotion and social justice are both needed. We need to have mercy on others, but we also need to try to make sure they live a moral life. We need to have a balance, and even some will balance more a little bit one way or the other, but we do need concern for all sides.

If social justice is far more important than devotion, would you say that since this day is the Memorial of Saint Therese of the Child Jesus, she’s not so important?

I should say that you should thank God, that if your out on one of those Social Justice missions some old lady who never misses her devotions, who may have just spent her earlier years raising her family and after immagraiting helped with the building of a church and school in the area where she lives, might just be praying for you to give you grace for your work.

Excellent observation. My mother (on her way to being a lottle old lady but not quite there yet) says the rosary every day, always has a novena going, does the First Fridays, etc. and gives literally thousands of dollars a year to various charities. She also used to volunteer for Meals on Wheels until she had her knee replaced & couldn’t stand for long periods anymore. Guess what else? There are millions of people like her in this country, so don’t tell me that people who follow the old traditional devotions aren’t interested in “social justice”. More of us are saved by the prayers of little old ladies than we can imagine.

 

[koda]

Gottle of Geer:

as well as by Christ:

• Mat 19:24 And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.
• Mar 10:25 It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.
• Luk 18:25 For it is easier for a camel to go through a needle’s eye, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.

I think this is quite a bit more than you can’t take it with you. If you love your stuff/money more than God (who instructs us to share what we have with those who have none) then you will not make it into heaven. If you love money more than your fellow man, then you also love it more than you love the Lord as “whatever you don’t do for the littliest of mine, you don’t do for me.”