The Rev. Michael Pfleger: Why is Catholic Church 'white church'?

  • Thread starter Thread starter canadianguy1143
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Beau_Ouiville said:
How irrelevant! Are pastors of white, suburban parishes held to the same standard?

Father Pfleger has erected housing for the elderly, has worked to stop gun violence, to stop predatory advertising practices and has preached against the evils of alcohol addiction and dependence on the lottery, all in his parish. And I know a deacon who came out of his parish.

But outside folks think he has only one note to play. Maybe we could deal with the accuracy of what the pastor said and not delve into personal aspersions concerning him?
Click to expand...
Personal? The thread is about him, and his shhhtoopid remark.

It is not irrelevant. All Priests I’ve ever known (and there have been many, as we moved many times, and I have traveled the world for years)—and they all encourage parents to pray for their sons to become Priests. Asked all young men to pray for discernment. Asked the congregation to pray for Vocations.

**Lepanto is correct in asking:
Pfleger has worked in a Black parish (more like his fiefdom) for years.

How many young Black men in his parish has he inspired to enter seminary?**

Zero to Seminary? He should at the very least encourage 1-to take his place.

He won’t live forever, you know.

God Bless.
+Jesus, I Trust In You.
Love, Dawn
 
Beau_Ouiville said:
How irrelevant! Are pastors of white, suburban parishes held to the same standard?

Father Pfleger has erected housing for the elderly, has worked to stop gun violence, to stop predatory advertising practices and has preached against the evils of alcohol addiction and dependence on the lottery, all in his parish. And I know a deacon who came out of his parish.

But outside folks think he has only one note to play. Maybe we could deal with the accuracy of what the pastor said and not delve into personal aspersions concerning him?
Click to expand...
Ah, Beau? Yes. Hate to rile you up but …
Actually all pastors are held to this standard re priestly vocations.
 
catharina said:
Give up the illusion that only you knows what’s up.
.
Click to expand...
I am not under any illusion. I am just wondering why the responses here seem to indicate very few know what’s up or think they should be doing something about it.

I have been surprised and disappointed that so few want to discuss the actual points and question presented by Pflegler. Very few here have acknowledged the actual historical treatment of the African American vis a vis the Catholic church. I have read a good deal of criticism of Pflegler, the person, but not as much response to the validity of his actual statements about what people suffered to remain in the Church and by extension the continued discouragement of vocations.

I have read the argument that most slave holders were Protestant and ergo the newly freed slaves would then be Protestant too. I am not in 100% agreement that that is the sole and only reason that more AfAms are not Catholic. If anything, it would make me wonder why the newly freed slaves did not RUN from the religion of the slave holders and into the RC Church? Could it be because the people in the Church were outright hostile and clearly rejected said folks? Could this be a factor as well? Could it be that AfAm Protestants could start their own Protestant churches without the permission of white Protestants? The Catholic Church does not have the same set up in this regard.

What was the Church’s (meaning the Bishops and the people…the actual teaching clearly was not against the AfAms) response to AfAm’s post slavery? Was it welcoming to the freedmen?
 
natcath.com/NCR_Online/archives/031398/031398a.htm

That article was penned in 1998, but has some interesting tidbits of information, including that in a study held in 1996, 51 percent of AfAm Catholics stated that “The Catholic church as a whole does not seem to care about the needs of African-Americans.” These results were “especially interesting because almost half of the 632 respondents were black priests, sisters, deacons and bishops.”

Hmm. Additionally, I’ve heard stories (which may be pure conjecture, as I have no data to back it up) that many seminaries initially refused to host AfAms in their schools, and that many AfAm priests pre-1970 had to go to Rome or other ‘black-friendly’ locales to study and be ordained.
 
Thunderbird said:
natcath.com/NCR_Online/archives/031398/031398a.htm

That article was penned in 1998, but has some interesting tidbits of information, including that in a study held in 1996, 51 percent of AfAm Catholics stated that “The Catholic church as a whole does not seem to care about the needs of African-Americans.” These results were “especially interesting because almost half of the 632 respondents were black priests, sisters, deacons and bishops.”

Hmm. Additionally, I’ve heard stories (which may be pure conjecture, as I have no data to back it up) that many seminaries initially refused to host AfAms in their schools, and that many AfAm priests pre-1970 had to go to Rome or other ‘black-friendly’ locales to study and be ordained.
Click to expand...
Here’s a fact to knock down your heard “stories.”

re **Archbishop Wilton Daniel Gregory

“Gregory graduated from St. Carthage in 1961 (Grammar School), and then attended Quigley Preparatory Seminary South and Niles College in Chicago, and St. Mary of the Lake Seminary in Mundelein. At the age of 25, he was ordained to the priesthood by Cardinal John Cody May 9, 1973.”**

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilton_Daniel_Gregory

IOW, even wiki presents the fact that Archbishop Gregory went through the ordinary
system of seminary formation in his own hometown, Chicago.
 
catharina said:
Here’s a fact to knock down your heard “stories.”

re **Archbishop Wilton Daniel Gregory

“Gregory graduated from St. Carthage in 1961 (Grammar School), and then attended Quigley Preparatory Seminary South and Niles College in Chicago, and St. Mary of the Lake Seminary in Mundelein. At the age of 25, he was ordained to the priesthood by Cardinal John Cody May 9, 1973.”**

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilton_Daniel_Gregory

IOW, even wiki presents the fact that Archbishop Gregory went through the ordinary
system of seminary formation in his own hometown, Chicago.
Click to expand...
Catharina,

Archbishop Gregory’s story is inspiring, but I fear it does not represent the trials that some Blacks had in entering the Church. Take Augustine Tolton, the first Black Catholic priest near the turn of the 20th Century.

I don’t want others to misrepresent the fact that even the Church’s members were challenged in overcoming their biases about Black people in the past. Tolton’s story exemplifies this. He was rejected by* every American seminary to where he applied*. He ended up going to Rome for training.

He ended his life as a celebrated and inspired priest. His case is now being reviewed for canonization.

Tolton served in Chicago.
 
Spencerian said:
Catharina,

Archbishop Gregory’s story is inspiring, but I fear it does not represent the trials that some Blacks had in entering the Church. Take Augustine Tolton, the first Black Catholic priest near the turn of the 20th Century.

I don’t want others to misrepresent the fact that even the Church’s members were challenged in overcoming their biases about Black people in the past. Tolton’s story exemplifies this. He was rejected by* every American seminary to where he applied*. He ended up going to Rome for training.

He ended his life as a celebrated and inspired priest. His case is now being reviewed for canonization.

Tolton served in Chicago.
Click to expand...
Please believe that I’m well aware of Augustine’ Tolton’s life.

Thunderbird had said that he heard “stories” that there was no “open” seminary process
in place for African American applicants pre-1970s. The life of Wilton Gregory refutes
the stories. However what might have traspired in the South might be quite different.

My point is that gross generalizations teach nothing.
 
catharina said:
Please believe that I’m well aware of Augustine’ Tolton’s life.

Thunderbird had said that he heard “stories” that there was no “open” seminary process
in place for African American applicants pre-1970s. The life of Wilton Gregory refutes
the stories. However what might have traspired in the South might be quite different.

My point is that gross generalizations teach nothing.
Click to expand...
I agree. Thanks for your clarification.

Two items that support the trials and successes of Blacks in the priesthood:

One is from the USCCB website, on Black American history and the Church. This page actually says (through Archbishop Gregory’s What We Have Seen and Heard pastoral letter): We Have Seen And Heard. In it they said:
  • “The Catholic Church is not a “White Church” nor a “Euro-American Church.” It is essentially universal, hence, Catholic. The Black presence within the American Catholic Church is a precious witness to the universal character of Catholicism.”*
A second is a Google search that brings up a timeline of Black Americans and the history in the Church. It notes that a James Augustine Healy may be the very first Black priest, and not Augustine Tolton, of which the two are confused.
 
First, ‘She.’ 😉

Second, that was actually a typo. Fat fingers + narrow keyboard = nines where 8s should be. 1870s is generally what I meant to say. Mea Maxima Culpa, ne? Although, I can’t say that it was particularly easy for them after that point either (see: Tolton among others). Georgetown didn’t start admitting blacks into its Seminaries until well after the turn of the 20th Century, even though its first president was black (at least in part).
 
Thunderbird said:
First, ‘She.’ 😉

Second, that was actually a typo. Fat fingers + narrow keyboard = nines where 8s should be. 1870s is generally what I meant to say. Mea Maxima Culpa, ne? Although, I can’t say that it was particularly easy for them after that point either (see: Tolton among others). Georgetown didn’t start admitting blacks into its Seminaries until well after the turn of the 20th Century, even though its first president was black (at least in part).
Click to expand...
Fat fingers, huh?
I have arthritic fingers.
Yep - blips happen.

So, ThunderbirdShe, I agree.
In the 1870s? An entirely different nation, north and south.
 
Spencerian said:
I agree. Thanks for your clarification.

Two items that support the trials and successes of Blacks in the priesthood:

One is from the USCCB website, on Black American history and the Church. This page actually says (through Archbishop Gregory’s What We Have Seen and Heard pastoral letter): We Have Seen And Heard. In it they said:
  • “The Catholic Church is not a “White Church” nor a “Euro-American Church.” It is essentially universal, hence, Catholic. The Black presence within the American Catholic Church is a precious witness to the universal character of Catholicism.”*
A second is a Google search that brings up a timeline of Black Americans and the history in the Church. It notes that a James Augustine Healy may be the very first Black priest, and not Augustine Tolton, of which the two are confused.
Click to expand...
Thanks.
 
Beau_Ouiville said:
Jesuits did not accept black applicants until the sixties. This was verified by a priest who had to attend a different seminary.
Click to expand...
Beau - there are still some communities of religious women who have not yet admitted
any woman other than the white woman. Common knowledge.

YET - the common all-inclusive thread of racism has been altered by many others.
 
catharina said:
Beau - there are still some communities of religious women who have not yet admitted
any woman other than the white woman. Common knowledge.
Click to expand...
Well, how many minority women are among those seeking the life of a religious? The question is if the orders would accept an otherwise qualified non-white female.

What people here fail to credit is that the Catholic Church in America for much of its history was certainly Euro-centric with all the pluses and minuses of that status. To disagree with that fact is self-denial.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top