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

[Spencerian]

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.

Beau, I disagree.

The Church as the Magisterium has **always **understood the sanctity of human life and rights. But it was the **members **of the Church in America and the human biases and cultures of the past which fought against the teachings already present which made African acceptance into the Church more difficult than was necessary. As poster Catharina illustrated, while the Church was slow in removing bias from its ranks, they *did *begin to ordain Black priests *prior *to the 1960’s civil rights movement.

It’s a far cry from the Protestant side, where the"Black Church" formed because white Protestants (north and south) kept harsh membership restrictions. Protestants and other sects maintained the status quo of segregation, some even through the 1960s and beyond, such as the Mormon.

It’s the notion of segregation that Fr. Pfleger appears to wrongly accuse the Church of doing, even to this day.

Unless you are questioning whether Black women were also being shunned to join religious life as nuns, I will not enter into discussions on women as ordained members of the Church, for that is going on in other threads.

 

[catharina]

Beau, I disagree.

The Church as the Magisterium has **always **understood the sanctity of human life and rights. But it was the **members **of the Church in America and the human biases and cultures of the past which fought against the teachings already present which made African acceptance into the Church more difficult than was necessary. As poster Catharina illustrated, while the Church was slow in removing bias from its ranks, they *did *begin to ordain Black priests *prior *to the 1960’s civil rights movement.

It’s a far cry from the Protestant side, where the"Black Church" formed because white Protestants (north and south) kept harsh membership restrictions. Protestants and other sects maintained the status quo of segregation, some even through the 1960s and beyond, such as the Mormon.

It’s the notion of segregation that Fr. Pfleger appears to wrongly accuse the Church of doing, even to this day.

Unless you are questioning whether Black women were also being shunned to join religious life as nuns, I will not enter into discussions on women as ordained members of the Church, for that is going on in other threads.

Great response.

An aside:  today is the feast of St. Charles Lwanga and Companions, Ugandan Martyrs.

"One of 22 Ugandan martyrs, Charles Lwanga is the patron of youth and Catholic action in most of tropical Africa. He protected his fellow pages (aged 13 to 30) from the homosexual demands of the Bagandan ruler, Mwanga, and encouraged and instructed them in the Catholic faith during their imprisonment for refusing the ruler’s demands.
For his own unwillingness to submit to the immoral acts and his efforts to safeguard the faith of his friends, Charles was burned to death at Namugongo on June 3, 1886, by Mwanga’s order. ... ."

[americancatholic.org/Features/SaintofDay/default.aspx](http://www.americancatholic.org/Features/SaintofDay/default.aspx)

~~~~~~~~~~

Second aside:  
The Mormons are not and have never been considered Christian by the Church.

 

[Catholicdude92]

The only af am I know are all Catholic. My confirmation sponsor is black. I know several black priests. Being from Idaho I probably know half the black people in the state. All of them are Catholic.

The majority of my church is Hispanic. At the English masses most everyone is friendly, but if you go to a bilingual mass (not everyone) but lots of people won’t sit next to you or really talk to you. Some of them I know speak English, but they prefer to speak amongst themselves in Spanish. It goes both ways.

 

[Catholicdude92]

Great response.

An aside:  today is the feast of St. Charles Lwanga and Companions, Ugandan Martyrs.

"One of 22 Ugandan martyrs, Charles Lwanga is the patron of youth and Catholic action in most of tropical Africa. He protected his fellow pages (aged 13 to 30) from the homosexual demands of the Bagandan ruler, Mwanga, and encouraged and instructed them in the Catholic faith during their imprisonment for refusing the ruler’s demands.
For his own unwillingness to submit to the immoral acts and his efforts to safeguard the faith of his friends, Charles was burned to death at Namugongo on June 3, 1886, by Mwanga’s order. ... ."

[americancatholic.org/Features/SaintofDay/default.aspx](http://www.americancatholic.org/Features/SaintofDay/default.aspx)

~~~~~~~~~~

Second aside:  
The Mormons are not and have never been considered Christian by the Church.

Great story! Very inspiring!

 

[DawnInTexas]

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.

One of these days, Beau, you’re going to have to go visit another Country-outside our Borders, first of all.

Second, remember-our Church teaches that vocations begin with God (a calling)-yet parents are to encourage their children to pray and ask.

With the breakdown of the family in our Society, thing is-it’s a higher percentile of minority families whom the children are being raised in a single parent family. Therefore, less prayer as a family. The loss of the father-and the values he brings to the child every day while growing up, and developing into an adult-is missing.

Where are the fathers, Beau?

As a whole:
datacenter.kidscount.org/data/acrossstates/Rankings.aspx?ind=106

also-

Click Here: The Incontrovertible Facts about Fathers

…Dr. Anna Sardaki of Uppsala University’s Department of Women’s and Children’s Health in Sweden, said, “We hope that this review will add to the body of evidence that shows that enlightened father-friendly policies can make a major contribution to society in the long run by producing well-adjusted children and reducing major problems like crime and antisocial behavior.”…

Who’s to blame for that?

With the father in the household, there’s a balance. God gave mothers and fathers different roles in the family. Children are robbed when they’re raised in a single parent home-no matter what race or even Religion they are.

God is our Father. The Father missing from the family is-devastating. Religious upbringing begins at home-and it was designed with the Father taking his responsible place. The mother has hers too, but cannot replace the Father.

…There’s something to this.

God Bless.
+Jesus, I Trust In You!
Love, Dawn

 

[DawnInTexas]

Lol! One more thing—I forgot—my Methodist husband just mentioned. He said he has never been in a Protestant Church-and seen a black parishoner, unless it was a black church.

They were segregated when he went (have things changed?)

(Granted, he’s been going with me to the Catholic Church for the last 22 years, so things may have changed. Actually, I’ve been in more Protestant Churches in this time than he has. Honestly? I don’t think he’s been in a Protestant Church in the last 22 years).

Anyway, his maternal grandfather was a Baptist Minister. He would go and preach (also) at the black Baptist churches. I asked him if a black preacher ever preached in his grandfather’s church. He said no.

When my husband’s parents came to visit and attended Mass with us, they were blown away at the black, east indian and asian parishoners-we had a mixed congregation. I don’t think they ever got over that.

I never knew different. Not in the Catholic Church. All my life (I’m 51).

Beau-do you know the percentage of african americans-who are Catholic? I believe the majority would be of the Protestant denominations. Am I wrong?

My best friend (I love her so, and miss her) when we lived in N.Carolina was (black. She called herself black) Catholic. We attended daily Mass in our little Catholic Church. Our parish priest from that time-is now the Bishop of Charlotte. He used to call us Lucy & Ethel. I always claimed to be Ethel. I wish we lived close. We had such fun. Right before we moved from there, our children had chickenpox together. (Oh, what fun!) Really. Her husband was a doctor, mine a pilot-so they were gone a lot. We’d cook at her place or ours, and we’d all eat together. I had the funky ideas of things for the kids to do-like catching mud bugs with KFC chicken on a string in the stream. I’ll never forget the day they all went up and were hanging upside down on the pole in one of our kids’ closet—and the bar came down. (Thank God nobody was hurt!) Oh, what memories! What a wonderful time. Anyway, enough of this…

God Bless.
+Jesus, I Trust In You!
Love, Dawn

 

[Thunderbird]

Beau-do you know the percentage of african americans-who are Catholic? I believe the majority would be of the Protestant denominations. Am I wrong?

Sorry, I know you asked Beau but according to the Pew Forum, the breakdown is as follows:

59% of AfAms in America belong to “Historically Black Protestant Churches,”
15% Evangelical Protestant Churches
12% Unaffiliated
5% Catholic
5% “Other”
4% Mainline Protestant
<1% Refuse to Respond

This study was conducted in 2007.

 

[Devout_One]

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.

Do you find it at all discouraging that given the long history of the existence of the Catholic Church in the U.S., you can only point to the ordination of an AfAm bishop in 1973 as evidence that there is no longer any discouragement of vocations among AfAm men?

Do you think his time in the seminary was an experience for him that was free of racism?

I do not understand why so many here are unwilling to even consider the voices of the AfAm Catholics (clergy, religious, and lay) who have stated that there has been overt discrimation against AfAms in the Church…barring admittance to seminaries, unwillingness to accept AfAm priests…is it so hard to believe them given the overt racism in the laws, public policies, and practices of the U.S.? I am not speaking only of the distant past but the present also.

 

[DawnInTexas]

Sorry, I know you asked Beau but according to the Pew Forum, the breakdown is as follows:

59% of AfAms in America belong to “Historically Black Protestant Churches,”
15% Evangelical Protestant Churches
12% Unaffiliated
5% Catholic
5% “Other”
4% Mainline Protestant
<1% Refuse to Respond

This study was conducted in 2007.

No, don’t be sorry! This is a Forum! Thanks!

So, 5% claim Catholicism. Looks like mainly Protestant. 59% are Black Protestant Churches-which I would assume would fall in line with what my husband had said (my earlier post).

God Bless.
+Jesus, I Trust In You.
Love, Dawn

 

[Spencerian]

Do you find it at all discouraging that given the long history of the existence of the Catholic Church in the U.S., you can only point to the ordination of an AfAm bishop in 1973 as evidence that there is no longer any discouragement of vocations among AfAm men?

Do you think his time in the seminary was an experience for him that was free of racism?

I do not understand why so many here are unwilling to even consider the voices of the AfAm Catholics (clergy, religious, and lay) who have stated that there has been overt discrimation against AfAms in the Church…barring admittance to seminaries, unwillingness to accept AfAm priests…is it so hard to believe them given the overt racism in the laws, public policies, and practices of the U.S.? I am not speaking only of the distant past but the present also.

Devout One,

Perhaps you can provide substantiated accounts that give evidence to what you noted about racism in the Church. Better: What time in the Church are you implying? It sounds as if you are stating the “now” and not the past but I cannot be sure.

With due charitableness and respect, phrases such as “Considering the voices of” or noting people who “have stated” are known as 'weasel words’. These are phrases that attempt to provide an evidential or eyewitness weight to a claim but without giving one bit of actual evidence.

I think that, in this thread thus far, we already ***have ***pointed out empirically that, yes, even the members of the Church in America had some bias that slowed the growth of Black clergy. The two major points, one of which I restate and one I’ll note of the present, is that (1) the Magisterium’s teachings itself allowed any man to work in joining the clergy, it fell to the American clergy members of the times past who, through their weaknesses, could not make it so. And point (2), the Catholic Church today hardly has racism within its ranks as a problem. I can point to several parishes in my town that are Black-dominated, and a whole **continent **were African Catholic membership has *tripled *in the last 20 years.

The Church has a long way to go in moving Protestant Blacks to the fold, but those in our race are a tenacious people that hold to its heritage and traditions well.

 

[Devout_One]

Perhaps you can provide substantiated accounts that give evidence to what you noted about racism in the Church. Better: What time in the Church are you implying? It sounds as if you are stating the “now” and not the past but I cannot be sure.

With due charitableness and respect, phrases such as “Considering the voices of” or noting people who “have stated” are known as 'weasel words’. These are phrases that attempt to provide an evidential or eyewitness weight to a claim but without giving one bit of actual evidence.

I think it is the past and the present. I listed things I have seen but it would probably make more sense if it came from a higher authority.

How about the pastoral letter from the African American Catholic Bishops in What We Have Seen and Heard?

**"Unhappily we must acknowledge that the major hindrance to the full development of Black leadership within the Church is still the fact of racism…

If in the history of the American Church many Black men and women found their vocations to the religious life and priesthood blocked by racist attitudes, this is no longer tolerable…

Blacks and other minorities still remain absent from many aspects of Catholic life and are only meagerly respresented on the decision making level… This racism, at once subtle and masked, still festers within our Church as within our society. It is this racism that in our minds remains the major impediment to evangelization in our community.**"

 

[WatchingMedia]

Pfleger does nothing to set the record straight on behalf the Church.
He merely likes to fan the flames of discord for his personal ego.

This is the Priest at a Mass in action.
youtube.com/watch?v=3HNOsR4ZaTc&feature=related

These type of people just want to cause separations between Catholics or between Americans depending on their stage. So that they can become heros to small groups rather than telling the truth to their supporters.

Politically we have a black President, a black US Attorney General, a black Supreme Court Justice.
In the prior Administration we had a black Secretary of State, and a black Supreme Court Justice.
Yet those “divide and conquer” types of personalities still talk about discrimination.

If there is a Church problem in Chicago its Michael Pfleger’s fault. He has been there for years. What has he personally done about the so-called problem in Chicago ? ? ? ?

We don’t have Bishops ordained based upon skin color - that is reverse discrimination.
There are black Bishops and black Cardinals.

I’m sick of all the “divide and conquer” and “cause dissention” stuff, from those unwilling to look beyond the end of their own nose. I hope this garbage does not work in the upcoming elections. - That is Pfleger’s real motivation. He is a socialist, and wants the black vote. (Make them feel not part of the Church. Make them feel not part of the Amercian majority. - if he is successful, he can push his agenda.)

 

[Beau_Ouiville]

Beau, I disagree.

The Church as the Magisterium has **always **understood the sanctity of human life and rights. But it was the **members **of the Church in America and the human biases and cultures of the past which fought against the teachings already present which made African acceptance into the Church more difficult than was necessary. As poster Catharina illustrated, while the Church was slow in removing bias from its ranks, they *did *begin to ordain Black priests *prior *to the 1960’s civil rights movement.

As someone who was alive prior to the civil right period, I consider your statement very small beer, indeed. The Catholic Church in America certainly had programs and practices which were at best intolerant toward ethnic minorities. To ignore this fact is self-denial.

I’m sick of all the “divide and conquer” and “cause dissention” stuff, from those unwilling to look beyond the end of their own nose. I hope this garbage does not work in the upcoming elections. - That is Pfleger’s real motivation. He is a socialist, and wants the black vote. (Make them feel not part of the Church. Make them feel not part of the Amercian majority. - if he is successful, he can push his agenda.)

Just weep what happened under the rug and pretend it was all imagined, huh? Let’s call a spade a spade and move on.

 

[WatchingMedia]

As someone who was alive prior to the civil right period, I consider your statement very small beer, indeed. The Catholic Church in America certainly had programs and practices which were at best intolerant toward ethnic minorities. To ignore this fact is self-denial.

Just weep what happened under the rug and pretend it was all imagined, huh? Let’s call a spade a spade and move on.

What is in effect in the present, is not what did or did not happen 15 to 40 years ago. Prior to the civil rights era is ancient news.
(Unrelated - did you know that Martin Luther King had a rosary that he respected, given to him during a march by a Catholic woman who was praying for him ?)

Pfleger is like the NY Times trying to make everyone think discrimination is happening now throughout the majority of the Church.
Again, he has been in Chicago long enough that if he saw injustices in the Church, he personally has had plenty of time to fix them. Let him point his finger at himself.
The majority of us have never lived in Chicago.

 

[Devout_One]

I think that, in this thread thus far, we already ***have ***pointed out empirically that, yes, even the members of the Church in America had some bias that slowed the growth of Black clergy. The two major points, one of which I restate and one I’ll note of the present, is that (1) the Magisterium’s teachings itself allowed any man to work in joining the clergy, it fell to the American clergy members of the times past who, through their weaknesses, could not make it so. And point (2), the Catholic Church today hardly has racism within its ranks as a problem. I can point to several parishes in my town that are Black-dominated, and a whole **continent **were African Catholic membership has *tripled *in the last 20 years.

I pointed out previously that the teachings of the Universal Church were not against the AfAm. We are in agreement on this. I think to categorize racism on the part of the American clergy as weakness soft peddles what is at play…it is a sin…an evil. They could have made it so but chose not to do so.

To refocus you on the point, we are discussing the U.S. Catholic Church and therefore Africa is not germane to this discussion.

You cite predominantly AfAm parishes as an example as to racism in the Church’s ranks not being a problem.

Ask yourself why AfAms go to a “Black dominated” parish? Do they all live in one neighborhood? Is the worship style at these parishes monolithic? In other words, is it really that “their” worship style is so radically different that it serves as the main and sole impetus for the AfAms congregating at a particular parish?

In my experience in attending AfAm dominated parishes, there are different styles of worship from gospel, to a cantor to chorales, to no music during Mass (all in one parish on any given Sunday)…so one has to wonder if style of worship is the *sole *reason why they go to those parishes.

On the matter of racism not being an issue within its ranks, I think the Bishops believe otherwise as evidenced by pastoral letters on the matter. For example, Brothers and Sisters to Us (1979); Dwell in My Love: A Pastoral Letter on Racism (Cardinal George 2001); Created in God’s Image: The Sin of Racism and a Call to Conversion (Bishop Melczek 2003); Made in the Image of God: A Pastoral Letter on Racial Harmony (Archbisop Hughes 2006).

Additionally, here is a quote from His Holiness Pope John Paul II’s homily in St. Louis in 1999 on the pressing issue of racism:** As the new millennium approaches, there remains another great challenge facing this community of St. Louis, east and west of the Mississippi, and not St. Louis alone, but the whole country: to put an end to every form of racism, a plague which your Bishops have called one of the most persistent and destructive evils of the nation.**

Certainly you are not contesting the late Holy Father’s words or are you suggesting that the U.S. Catholic Church has purified the sin of racism within its ranks so thoroughly as to have eradicated it all together in the 10 years since the Holy Father’s statement?

 

[catharina]

Do you find it at all discouraging that given the long history of the existence of the Catholic Church in the U.S., you can only point to the ordination of an AfAm bishop in 1973 as evidence that there is no longer any discouragement of vocations among AfAm men?

Do you think his time in the seminary was an experience for him that was free of racism?

I do not understand why so many here are unwilling to even consider the voices of the AfAm Catholics (clergy, religious, and lay) who have stated that there has been overt discrimation against AfAms in the Church…barring admittance to seminaries, unwillingness to accept AfAm priests…is it so hard to believe them given the overt racism in the laws, public policies, and practices of the U.S.? I am not speaking only of the distant past but the present also.

Really OBVIOUS that you didn’t read this thread.
My point regarding Bishop Gregory pertained to his education (the where/when of it).

Take a breath and go back and READ the entire thread and THINK about it -
or continue to sound really ignorant with your off-the-mark comments…

 

[catharina]

Sorry, I know you asked Beau but according to the Pew Forum, the breakdown is as follows:

59% of AfAms in America belong to “Historically Black Protestant Churches,”
15% Evangelical Protestant Churches
12% Unaffiliated
5% Catholic
5% “Other”
4% Mainline Protestant
<1% Refuse to Respond

This study was conducted in 2007.

Terrific. Thanks for the numbers.

 

[WatchingMedia]

One of the Good Guys !

He happens to be a CARDINAL. Oh, by the way, he is black, and I’d have him as my Cardinal or neighbor any day.

Three separate statements.

youtube.com/watch?v=Cc0g3UMRtMM&NR=1

youtube.com/watch?v=Cc0g3UMRtMM&feature=related

youtube.com/watch?v=EcZhjmYn1K8&feature=related

 

[Beau_Ouiville]

One of the Good Guys !

He happens to be a CARDINAL. Oh, by the way, he is black, and I’d have him as my Cardinal or neighbor any day.

Well, Bishop Gregory used to live in my neighborhood and there are some here who have personal issues with him. Which have nothing to do with race.
WatchingMedia;6712881:

What is in effect in the present, is not what did or did not happen 15 to 40 years ago. Prior to the civil rights era is ancient news.

Not to me. You’re talking about my childhood.

 

[canadianguy1143]

Let’s call a spade a spade and move on.

I’m all game for that. I don’t know what the past was like but it doesn’t sound good from what you have said. But, perhaps its just me, that Father Pfleger doesn’t want to move on when he talks about it this way.