US bishops warn of errors in feminist sister's book

  • Thread starter Thread starter dfp42
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
There are very many more books that are worth warning about (as the opening poster says), and the bishops in the U.S. and other countries have come out with official warnings about other writers. However it seems the bishops do this only when it comes to books that are widely used, and this sister’s book is widely used in schools, where it will do harm to the faith of many students.
 
I’m exposed to an awful lot of theology, but I have to say I have never heard of her and was never exposed to her either in undergaduate or in graduate school.
 
Recently, a few books by US theologians have been criticized by the US Catholic bishops. That such criticism is coming from the USCCB and not from the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith reflects a shift to deal with such matters at national level.
John Allen:
With today’s statement, Quest for the Living God joins a handful of other recent books by prominent American theologians which have been singled out for formal criticism by the Committee on Doctrine. Those works include The Sexual Person by Todd Salzman and Michael Salazar (Georgetown University Press, 2008); Being Religious Interreligiously by Peter Phan (Maryknoll, 2004); and two 2006 pamphlets on contraception, abortion and same-sex marriage by Daniel Maguire.

In each case, the doctrine committee criticized both the reasoning and the conclusions, but did not seek to impose any disciplinary measures upon the authors. In general, sources say, the idea behind that approach is to focus on ideas rather than persons.

It’s also striking that these statements have come from the doctrine committee of the U.S. bishops rather than the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. That’s in keeping with recent congregation policy that disputes ought to be addressed on the local level whenever possible, especially when the theological issues involved have already been addressed by the Vatican in other venues.
Click to expand...
ncronline.org/news/spirituality/us-bishops-blast-book-feminist-theologian

The full 21 page statement from the bishop’s committee is here:
www.usccb.org/doctrine/statement-quest-for-the-living-god-2011-03-24.pdf

Cardinal Wuerl’s introductory remarks, which make for easier reading, is here:
www.usccb.org/doctrine/statement-quest-for-the-living-god-remarks-2011-03-30.pdf.
 
Corrections can come from the USCCB, or the Bishops in charge of an affected Dioceses. Any correction without penalty, such as requiring that the erring book ceased being published or excommunication for continued heresy means nothing to these people. It comes across merely as a book critique.

Is Fordham, Catholic University of America (the Bishop’s University), and other Catholic Universities going to be required to stop using her book as a teaching tool?

This gets back to the fact that Seminaries, Convents, and most Catholic Universities are not required to use the “Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition” as a Student Text.
Studying the CCC would help keep students from making errors, keep teachers from making errors, and expose purposeful errors from enemies within the Church.
 
When the bishop mentions 7 catagories of problems there is little point in discussion.The bishop is an intelligent man.He didn’t misinterpret what she thinks or wrote.
 
The book came out in 2007, and it is just now being red flagged in 2011 ?
A lot of people had a lot of time to get the wrong information on Catholic teaching.
It seems there should be a much faster way to let Catholics know which books to keep away from.
 
valentino said:
When the bishop mentions 7 catagories of problems there is little point in discussion.The bishop is an intelligent man.He didn’t misinterpret what she thinks or wrote.
Click to expand...
Excellent point. With her change in the substance of the Trinity, Sister has essentially created her own faith, on the model of Joseph Smith or Charles Taze Russell. After deviating so radically from the faith to which she made vows, why on earth would she then apply for the Imprimatur? She needs prayer.
 
Dale_M said:
Recently, a few books by US theologians have been criticized by the US Catholic bishops. That such criticism is coming from the USCCB and not from the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith reflects a shift to deal with such matters at national level.
Click to expand...
Traditionally it was the bishop’s responsibility to reject teaching contrary to our faith.

For a while the Office of Inquisition (recently Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith) took over this responsibility, but there are just too many books.

It is natural, that only the most influential ones are criticized, also it is natural that the conference of bishops sees from different perspective what is more influential that any individual, regardless of his or her expertise.
 
Sr. Elizabeth, in her response to the bishops’ criticism, complains that her work was misinterpreted and that she wasn’t given an opportunity to defend it before the public denouncement.
I would like to express two serious concerns. First, I would have been glad to enter into conversation to clarify critical points, but was never invited to do so. This book was discussed and finally assessed by the Committee before I knew any discussion had taken place. Second, one result of this absence of dialogue is that in several key instances this statement radically misinterprets what I think, and what I in fact wrote. The conclusions thus drawn paint an incorrect picture of the fundamental line of thought the book develops. A conversation, which I still hope to have, would have very likely avoided these misrepresentations.
Click to expand...
That being said, as a scholar I have always taken criticism as a valuable opportunity to delve more deeply into a subject. The task of theology, classically defined as “faith seeking understanding,” calls for theologians to wrestle with mystery. The issues are always complex, especially on frontiers where the church’s living tradition is growing. Committed to the faith of the church, I take this statement as an occasion to ponder yet further the mystery of the living God who is ineffable.
Click to expand...
At this time I will make no further statements nor give any interviews.
Click to expand...
americamagazine.org/blog/entry.cfm?blog_id=2&entry_id=4072
 
Dale_M said:
Sr. Elizabeth, in her response to the bishops’ criticism, complains that her work was misinterpreted and that she wasn’t given an opportunity to defend it before the public denouncement.
…in several key instances this statement radically misinterprets what I think, and what I in fact wrote. The conclusions thus drawn paint an incorrect picture of the fundamental line of thought the book develops. A conversation, which I still hope to have, would have very likely avoided these misrepresentations.
Click to expand...
Interesting. So, Bishops read my book and misinterpreted what I wrote? Well, if trained people didn’t understand what you were trying to say…
Click to expand...
 
laszlo said:
Traditionally it was the bishop’s responsibility to reject teaching contrary to our faith.

For a while the Office of Inquisition (recently Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith) took over this responsibility, but there are just too many books.

It is natural, that only the most influential ones are criticized, also it is natural that the conference of bishops sees from different perspective what is more influential that any individual, regardless of his or her expertise.
Click to expand...
As well, the Bishop is the Shepherd of his flock. To me, Sister’s complaint is in the same vein as the complaint leveled by Sister Carol Keehan against Bishop Olmstead regarding the Catholic Health Organization. They both bemoan an alleged “lack of communication”. The Sisters seem to lack the very same obedience that they vowed on the day of their consecration. They have veered from holiness into worldliness, it would appear. The Church, representing the Divine Physician, therefore applies a medicinal remedy to the situation.

Because of such disciplinary problems, there was the recent Apostolic visitation of certain holy orders.
 
zdon011 said:
I wonder if the book in question was published through the order or a Catholic publishing house. If it had been, then I assume it would have been checked for doctrinal errors in order to qualify for Imprimatur.
Click to expand...
Her book was published by a company called Continuum. It describes itself as…
…a leading independent academic publisher, unconstrained by the interests of any global media group or academic institution, and based in London and New York.
Click to expand...
continuumbooks.com/about-us.aspx
 

“She said that she had “serious concerns” over how her book was interpreted, adding that “she would have been glad to enter into conversation to clarify critical points, but was never invited to do so.”
Sr. Johnson also argued that a “result of this absence of dialogue is that in several key instances this statement radically misinterprets what I think, and what I in fact wrote.”
Cardinal Wuerl said on Wednesday, however, that by seeking an imprimatur – the bishop’s approval – prior to publishing her book, Sr. Johnson could have engaged “in dialogue” with the bishops “concerning Catholic teaching.” “It would have been helpful if Sr. Elizabeth Johnson had taken advantage of that opportunity,” he said.”
Like somebody else here indicated, after the book came out, her words stands on their own, it is read and interpreted by the reader, her comments, outside the book, are immaterial and seldom heard.
Why did she care about the Imprimatur, if she is unwilling to follow the doctrine of those that give the Imprimatur? Her logic seems to be amiss.
Women have written great books with an Imprimatur, two of my favorites are Raissa Maritain (Prayer and Intelligence, 1928) and Edith Stein, aka St. Benedicta of the Cross (On the Problem of Empathy, republished 1989).
Somebody recommended Humility towards the Truth on all serious matters. It always helps in communications, including books and comments on books.​

I think Edith Stein is under-appreciated. She originated the “Logic of Emotion” about a century after the “three geniuses” started Psychology, yet they not only failed to consider outlooks other than their own; they ignored the possibility of a female perspective and the emotional logic all of us use. Freud was proven to have exaggerated (falsified?) his accomplishments -lack of humility?
An example of humility was shown by Jesuit P. Chardin, who stopped writing on Phenomenology when he was directed. Coincidentally, Husserl, who originated Phenom… was the Thesis Advisor of Edith Stein, but she was never confused. She must have been very, very bright. Others have been swayed by Thesis Advisors. Integrity does include humility and respect, I think. 🙂
 
PaulinVA said:
Interesting. So, Bishops read my book and misinterpreted what I wrote? Well, if trained people didn’t understand what you were trying to say…
Click to expand...
Most bishops are not theologically trained. Watching them attack Elizabeth Johnson is like watching people in birch bark canoes armed with bows and arrows attacking a fully armed “British Man of War.”
 
Dale_M said:
Towards the end of April, the Catholic bishops invited written comment regarding their statement. Sr. Elizabeth composed a rather lengthy rebuttal, which has been recently made public.
ncronline.org/news/faith-parish/johnson-letter-us-bishops-doctrine-committee

I haven’t read it, but StAnastasia’s post prompted me to do a Google search. I decided to share the link since the letter seems to be getting some attention from bloggers.
Click to expand...
Dale_M, thanks for posting this. Elizabeth Johnson’s response to the bishops is superb. I like her penultimate paragraph:

“College curricula typically include critical literary hermeneutics, complex economic and political theory, postcolonial accounts of history, sociological analysis, pragmatic philosophical approaches, gender theory, and the practice of scientific methods. In view of the sophisticated study students make in other disciplines, presenting religion in a simplistic way would be deadly. Rather than simply imparting information to be appropriated, theology in the college and university setting aims to think: it invites students to discover Christian faith critically and appreciatively by raising questions, offering interpretations, making comparisons, evaluating, and testing new thought forms, all to encourage growth in understanding. For students to engage with theological investigations guided by a competent professor is not only not harmful but can be positively beneficial, promoting intellectual and frequently spiritual growth. Students are much better prepared to face the world in flux if they have grappled with faith in this way.”
 
StAnastasia said:
Most bishops are not theologically trained. Watching them attack Elizabeth Johnson is like watching people in birch bark canoes armed with bows and arrows attacking a fully armed “British Man of War.”
Click to expand...
You should be very careful about what you say.

Here is the document in pdf form from the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops pertaining Elizabeth Johnson’s book. I highly recommend people read it: usccb.org/doctrine/statement-quest-for-the-living-god-remarks-2011-03-30.pdf

We should all remember the following as well:

Code of Canon Law : Can. 1369 A person who in a public show or speech, in published writing, or in other uses of the instruments of social communication utters blasphemy, gravely injures good morals, expresses insults, or excites hatred or contempt against religion or the Church is to be punished with a just penalty.

Talking about Bishops. I notice you like to use in other topics the NCSE (The National Center for Science Education). It is located in Oakland so I thought I would bring up the following about the Bishop of Oakland:

Bishop Salvatore Joseph Cordileone
*In December of 1974, during his first year of college and with encouragement from a young parish priest he respected, Cordileone attended a seminary vocation retreat. It was during this first year at San Diego State that Cordileone discerned his call to the Priesthood and entered St. Francis Seminary, transferring as a sophomore to the University of San Diego.

Cordileone graduated three years later in 1978 with a B.A. in Philosophy. He was accepted to study in Rome and continued in the seminary at the Pontifical North American College. He received the Bachelors Degree in Sacred Theology in 1981 from the Pontifical Gregorian University and then chose to return to be ordained a priest in San Diego and begin his first pastoral assignment.

On July 9, 1982, Bishop Leo T. Maher ordained the Reverend Salvatore Cordileone. Soon thereafter he took up his assignment as associate pastor at St. Martin of Tours Parish in La Mesa, where he remained for three years. In 1985 he was again sent to Rome, this time to study the new Code of Canon Law. He spent the next four years again at the Gregorian University, completing his doctorate.

Upon Father Cordileone’s return to San Diego in 1989, he became secretary to Coadjutor Bishop Robert Brom and a year later became adjutant judicial vicar. Pastoral work called to him again in 1991 and Father Cordileone accepted appointment as pastor of Calexico’s Our Lady of Guadalupe Parish, four blocks from the Mexican border.*oakdiocese.org/Homepage/Bishop/Profile%20SJC.pdf

Here is the directory that is useful: usccb.org/directory.shtml
Also about morality: usccb.org/catechism/resource/rat92art.shtml#morality

Last but not least, HIS HOLINESS BENEDICT XVI said on April 21,2006, “This evening I want to address a heartfelt “thank you” to the community of the City which has desired to combine the commemoration of Rome’s Birthday with the anniversary of my election as Bishop of Rome. Thank you for this gesture, which I deeply appreciate."
vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2006/april/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20060421_natale-roma_en.html

and

**THE ROMAN CURIA **
*In exercising supreme, full, and immediate power in the universal Church, the Roman pontiff makes use of the departments of the Roman Curia which, therefore, perform their duties in his name and with his authority for the good of the churches and in the service of the sacred pastors.
CHRISTUS DOMINUS, 9
*vatican.va/roman_curia/index.htm

Thanks for giving me the opportunity to share with all participants on this thread valuable information.🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top