Since the Council, for over half a century, the most resonant, radiant, fascinating, creative-yet-loyal, hopeful, rooted and profound echoes of the voice of Christ in his Church have been lay. Vatican II was entirely clerical : the theology of retrieval and reform was received by pope-and-bishops from priest-theologian "periti." It was, however, informed by the remarkable cadre of lay voices noted in a previous essay. That same essay argued that in the current Catholic crisis, a similar colloquium of lay voices, in their lucidity-loyalty-strength-certainty, in fact represent a reliable "lay magisterium" to compensate for a papacy/episcopacy become confused and divided. The argument here is this symphony of lay voices is not only faithful to the Tradition, but breathtakingly creative, diverse, resilient, inspiring and fruitful.
What is "Lay?"
The primary meaning of "lay" is non-clerical, that is to say not ordained. By this understanding lay cannot be clerical and clerical cannot be lay. The problem with this definition: the "lay" diaconate. It destroys the neat binary. I view that as a flaw, not in the binary, but in the diaconate as restored by the Council. Theologically I have never accepted the practice, although I admire the work and persons of many deacons. My view is that the ministry of lay deacons...service, presiding at weddings, baptism, funerals, reading of the Gospel and preaching...can be performed, with Church permission, by the laity by virtue of baptism/confirmation. Thereby the clergy preserves its clear distinction from the laity: groom to bride, father to children, Christ to his body. The sacraments of orders and matrimony are protected in their distinctive charismatic integrities.
By this definition, obviously, non-ordained religious are also lay: consecrated sisters and brothers, secular institutes, consecrated virgins, etc. That is correct. Traditionally for example, within some religious orders there are lay brothers, who are vowed evangelically but not ordained. The emergence of secular institutes after World War II complicates the picture: these involve evangelical vows of poverty, chastity and obedience within a community but are self-consciously lay as non-cloistered and implanted within the secular order. This numerically small but significant development within the Church clouds the meaning of "lay:" are they lay or not? Yes, yes and no! They are lay as non-ordained; they are lay as non-cloistered and "worldly," but they are consecrated in the vows and intrinsically non-married and so not-lay in the ordinary sense.
For purposes of this essay, we will accept a common-sense-Catholic three-part model of: clergy, religious-as-vowed, and lay-as-ordinarily-married. With this we clearly see (with Balthasar) the three Catholic states: apostolic, religious, married. Each is informed by a vow: a giving away of oneself, in order to reciprocate and resound Christ's gift of himself to us, as priest-consecrated-bridegroom. In actual Catholic, life, however, these boundaries are fluid rather than rigid/absolute. We have long had priest-religious. We have, in addition to the permanent diaconate, some married priests, but they are not normal or normative. We have the lay-vowed. We also have single, un-vowed life. This last is best understood as yet-undetermined, waiting for its form, its vow. It becomes, however, with time, (in my view), if not resolved into one of the states, itself as solitary/celibate/obedient (to the Holy Spirit) itself an implicit, indeliberate but eventually accepted participation in the evangelical vocation. Indeed, as indeliberate and involuntary, the "fiat" here becomes arguably profound and total in a manner deeper than the explicit religious vow.
A Litany of Loyal, Lay Voices
A sampling, not exhaustive:
Kiko Arguello (and Carmen Hernandez), Ralph Martin (and Steve Clark, the Ranaghans, Peter and Debbie Herbeck Herbich, Mary Healy), D.L. Schindler (and D.C. Schindler, Michael Hanby, Nick Healy, Adrian Walker), Tracey Rowland, (ex-priest) Ivan Illich, Schumacher, Paolo Freire, Rene Girard and Gil Baile, Remi Brague, Augusto Del Noche, Ferdinand Ulrich, Robert Spaeman, Alistare McIntyre, Mortimer Adler, Marshall McLuhan, Paul Vitz, Conrad Baars and Anna Terruwe, Joseph Nicolosi, Elizabeth Moberly, James Hitchcock, Michael Novak, George Weigel, Robert Royal, Christopher Lasch, Charles Taylor, Christopher West, Dale Vree, R. Reno, Ross Douthat, Louis Dupre, Ralph McInerny, Peter Kreeft, John Finnis, William May, Germain Grisez, Mary Ann Glendon, Scott and Kimberly Hahn, Jason and Crystalina Evert, Mary Eberstadt, Robert George, Jean-Luc Marion, Abigail Favale, Abby Johnson, Angela Franks, Heather King, Chiara Lubich, Helen Alvare, Johnette Benkovic, Leah Libresco, Teresa Tomeo, Janet Smith.
Harmony Within Variety in the Symphony of the Laity
As with their predecessors, the cadre of lay Catholic intellectual described in the previous essay ("Magisterium of the Laity?"), there is a remarkable variety among these lay voices. For sure there are streams or schools of thought: the Neo-Cats, the Charismatics, the Neo-Thomists, the Neo-Conservatives, the iconoclastic radicals, and so forth. (Aside: note the prevalence of the prefix "neo" which suggests a creative retrieval of the past.) But there is no doctrinal system as such, except for the Catholic faith. Imagine an argument between Freire, Novak, Schindler, Kiko, and Ralph Martin! Wow! This is heavenly stuff! Most of these are unique and creative thinkers, drawing from a vast variety of sources, but with primacy of allegiance to Christ and the Deposit of Faith. They are NOT in dissent from the official Magisterium. They are loyal to it and echo it, each in a distinctive, personal voice. Along with this defining allegiance to the Catholic legacy, the following characterizes them:
Mystical. In distinctive, unique manners each of these thinkers is informed by a rich mystical love of God, Christ's Church and the splendor of Being as Creation.
Philosophical, Informed by Faith. More philosophical than theological, they are rigorously intellectual and ontological; not sentimental, fideistic, or rationalistic. They drink deeply of the Great Tradition, of Thomas, doctors and fathers, but also from a range of contemporary sources in thought and art.
Self-Taught, Home-Grown. While there are a number of "schools of thought" here, these thinkers are fee-in-spirit, eclectic, wide-ranging, and broadly read. Not academic in a narrow sense, they draw from serious scholarship but speak a lay vernacular.
Phenomenological. Rather than systematic and ideological, they draw directly from experience as they are sophisticated in a hermeneutic that is both intellectually and spiritually grounded.
Pragmatic Engagement with History, Culture, Politics. Most are passionately engaged in the cultural/political struggles of the day. They share a sense of history with an underlying ontology of Being/Event and stability/movement rooted in the Memory of our eternal God.
Anti-Modern. In varying degrees, they reject modernity as technological control, materialism, the hegemony of bourgeois bureaucracy.
Morally Conservative. Most are married and all share a passionate regard for the primacy of the family, marital fidelity, sexual chastity, the spousal meaning of sexuality, the sacred forms of masculinity/femininity. All are seasoned, zealous warriors against Cultural Liberalism.
Realistic in Face of Evil. Some have converted into Catholicism or from a lukewarm version of it. All are realists in their sense of sin, evil, the tragedy of human life, and our desperate need for a Savior.
Receptive of and Reverent Before, not Reformative of the Hierarchical Church. Grateful to receive God's grace in Sacrament and Word, these lay minds are not reformers, critics of Church structures, partisans in the politics of the institution. They are zealous to lead lives of holiness, engaged in their families, communities and the broader culture.
Catholic in Solidarity with the Poor and Subsidiarity. Critical of both global capitalism and the expansive liberal state, these lay voices largely move outside of the Democrat/Republican paradigm in a politics of communion with the underclass and in intermediary communities of faith and support.
Slaying of the Fathers
Mainstream clerical and academic theology after the Council was largely a "slaying of the fathers." It asserted a discontinuity with the Catholic past, the late Tridentine Church. This posture was opposed, of course, by the Communio school of classic Vatican II clerical theologians including John Paul, Benedict, DeLubac, Danielou and Balthasar. But they have been a small, if immensely significant force. The liberalizing theological fashion also rejected the "lay fathers" of the previous 50 years. Almost immediately after the Council names like Maritain, Undset, Blondel, (and the 50 noted in the prior essay) were either rejected or ignored.
The entire Cultural Revolution and vaulted "Spirit of Vatican II" progressivism can be best understood as an explosion of Oedipal lust and rage. Lust in its unbridling of sex from marriage. Rage at paternity as authority, tradition, justice, truth and harsh love. The 50 lay voices in this era are, in that sense, loyal to those of the previous half century. They are loyal to their fathers, even as they are for us, the current and future Church, fathers.
In Gratitude to the Fathers
We are grateful and joyous as we consider these contemporary lay fathers and doctors, masculine and feminine, who give us life, hope and guidance as they themselves draw from our Catholic faith, obedient to the Magisterium/Deposit, and radiant with the extravagant generosity of our heavenly Father.
No comments:
Post a Comment