Saturday, September 30, 2023

Career-Free, Happy and Careerist-Critical

I have had no career or profession.  I am amateur, lay, uncertified and entirely lacking in technical expertise and occupational status. And happy about it!

There is nothing wrong with a career or profession as I understand it: a lifelong, well-paid occupation, involving elaborate training and certification, social status, participation in a guild, expertise in a specific field, path for progression, in providing a defined service to society.

In our complex society, we need tons of good professionals. Our seven children are all such: teacher, lawyer, physician's assistant, psychologist, social worker, theologian, nurse. They have a total of 8 bachelor and 9 graduate degrees. I am proud of them and happy for them.

What I criticize is careerism. That is a system of belief and practice that:

1. Values a person according to career achievement or lack thereof. 

2. Divides society into two tiers: the winners, professionals, with specialized expertise who reap the rewards in salary, security and status; and the losers, the low-achievers, who work dead-end jobs with low income, security and prestige.

3. Rewards technical expertise in a very specific, limited area, as it undermines agency and initiative in most human activities, developing a dependency upon a vast bureaucratic, technological network of specialists.

I would have loved to be a psychologist, theologian, or lawyer. But I am happy with what I am: a non-professional, amateur, worker. I had a good job, for 25 years, in UPS as clerk, driver, supervisor. I supported my family. It was a job, not really a career. It did not define me.

A career or profession endows you with a body of knowledge, beliefs, values, practices, expertise in a specific area. It is enriching for the professional and the community. In modernity, it normally positions you as a piece within a larger, mechanical, mathematical system: of law, engineering, medicine, schooling and so forth. In varying degrees, one becomes a cog in broader system, with diminished agency, autonomy and liberty.

Being career-free brings its own values. One is free from the techno-regulated-bureaucracy, free to wander in wonder among many fields of learning and study. One stays closer to common sense, concrete experience, ethnic wisdom, prudence, working class culture, and the simplicity of our faith. An unending, fascinating dialogue follows with a symphony of random, non-systematic partners. One slowly develops a unique, creative, personal point of view. One finds his/her own distinctive voice.

At the age of 22, 1969, I graduated college, left the seminary, uncertain about a call to the priesthood,  entirely bereft of career aspirations. I had my very first date with a girl, Mary Lynn Remmele; fell madly in love; courted her patiently; married in January 1971; and  lived happily ever after.

Free of career constraints, I pursued, with my partner, my three life defining aspirations: study, of our Catholic faith and of  psychology, culture, history; catechesis, the sharing of our faith with others, especially the young; and closeness to the poor.

In a marvelous few years (1970 to 19744, when our daughter was born), I: studied at Woodstock Jesuit Theology School, Union Seminary, Columbia University as an non-matriculated mendicant; taught religion at Jesuit Xavier H.S.; taught English as a Second Language in the South Bronx; lived with a lovable Puerto Rican Hippie and then with an Orthodox, Jewish, maverick, neurotic, endearing linguistic scholar; hang out with my friend George in the gay community of the lower East Side; chaired the religion department and taught in St. Mary's H.S. Jersey City; served as parish representative and also summer bible school teacher in St. Al's parish and Duncan Projects Jersey City; participated in Second Chance Family, a sensitivity group in NYC. 

Together we: studied Spanish in Ponce, Puerto Rico; spent lots of times in Manhattan, seeing movies and eating out; made Cursillo and Marriage Encounter; did Ecumenical Institute conference on imaginal education; participated passionately in a Charismatic prayer group and parish at Christ the King Church, Jersey City; and started our family. 

I was particularly blessed by marriage to the best mother and wife of my generation. She entirely supported me and enabled me to throw myself into my amateur studies, catechesis and service of the poor. Early in our engagement, it occurred to me that I should not marry as I had no interest in the ordinary bourgeois life: successful career, security, house in suburbs with picket fence and 2-car garage. I wanted something countercultural, radical. So I told Mary Lynn, in some ways an ordinary middle class woman, that we should not marry as I intended what I called an "apostolic" life: out of the ordinary, low in achievement and status, interest in study, catechesis and service of the poor. She responded: "I want that too." She has been a superb partner. 

Looking back today, age 76, I make my own the famous words of Lou Gehrig in 1939: "...today I consider myself the luckiest man on the face of the earth."  

Hall of Fame of Amateur (from "amo" out of love), Lay, Non-expert, Uncertified, Credential-free Learner-Catechist-Philosophers

John Rapinich my beatnik, eccentric, poetic, artistic, autodidact, Jewish, convert, charismatic, neo-cat, best friend,

Pat Williams, my ex-pugilist, ex-marine, librarian, catechist, college mentor.

Frank Sheed, lay catechist, writer, publisher, theologian.

G.K. Chesterton. Everyone knows him.

Baron Friedrich von Hugel, aristocrat, genius, free-ranging, modernist, mystic and loyal Catholic.

Dorothy Day and Peter Maurin of the Catholic Worker.

Kiko Arguello and Giuseppe Generenni of the Neocatechumenal Way.

Catherine DeHueck Doherty, Adrienne von Spier, Madaleine Delbrel, Carol Houselander. 

Eric Hoffer, hobo, autodidact, working class philosopher. 

Charles Peguy, French poet, journalist, activist, playwright, convert, mystic.



Friday, September 29, 2023

Most Unpracticed of the Ignored Precepts of the Church: Letter 57 to Grands

 No one talks about the five Church precepts. Do you know them? If so, congrats to the parent or teacher who taught you. It is rare.

If you join a track or basketball team, you have rigid, firm rules: attendance at practice, games, etc. You may be committed to 10 or 20 or more hours weekly. It is a part time job. When you join the Catholic Church there are only 5 simple, easy rules. They take a little over an hour a week. But they are ignored. It is a shame. Here they are:

1. Mass on Sundays and holy days of obligation.

2. Confess (grave) sins at least annually.

3. Receive Holy Communion at least once annually during Easter season (Ash Wednesday to Pentecost.)

4. Fast and abstain on designated days of penance (Fridays, Lent).

5. Assist the material needs of the Church according to your means.

These are really easy: one hour weekly and a few things intermittently throughout the year.

The one most ignored is 4: specifically fast/abstain on Fridays. The traditional practice was abstinence from meat. However the American bishops allow us to choose an alternate.

This is small, but important. On Good Friday Jesus suffered and died for us. So, on every Friday, we all do something for him. Small is good. Something bigger is great if you have the desire for it. But we really need to do something. It is a precept, which is a law, a requirement, an obligation. It is not a suggestion, not an option. If you are Catholic, you do it...Period!

It could be: waking early to pray, abstaining from social media or screen time or sweets, setting aside time to pray the stations of the cross or the litany to the Divine Mercy. You may make up your own. It should hurt a little at least. That is what makes it a sacrifice. 

It is a good thing that all us Catholics do it together, on Friday. We don't have to talk about it too much, but it might be good to talk about it a little, especially in the family, to encourage others. 

Even a small sacrifice of a little thing works against our sinful nature, strengthens us in virtue, and draws us closer to Christ and his Church. 

This morning I woke up craving, as I do every morning, my coffee. Then I was frustrated because I love the sugar kick I get but I give up my sugar in my coffee every Friday. I started to look for a reason to have the sugar: is it a feast day of some sort? Don't I really need that energy boost to get started? Nothing worked. So I decided to pray: "Jesus, I will do what pleases you." Then a thought came to my mind:  "Jesus, you suffered and died for me on a Friday. I will give up a teaspoon of sugar for you today, Friday."  I have been laughing about that all day!

The bad news: If you haven't been doing some penance on Friday it may because of an invincible ignorance so you are probably free of guilt. Now that you know, you will be responsible for a sin if you do nothing.

The good news: If you do it freely, generously, joyfully...you will be helped to overcome sin; you will grow interiorly in serenity, fortitude, wisdom and all the virtues; you will draw closer to Christ. And if you bring friends and family members into the practice, they will benefit as well. And we all will! How cool is that?

Don't thank me: this is the least a good Grandfather can do!  LOL!

 

Thursday, September 28, 2023

Schism? The Centripetal Forces of Catholicism

 For just over half a century the Church has been in a de facto, but not declared theological schism: two Churches, one of Tradition and one Progressive or Liberal. We have not divided because of the powerful centripetal dynamics of the Catholic Church. The German Church is now in genuine schism but Pope Francis lacks the clarity of intellect and strength of purpose to acknowledge the reality. Nevertheless, it is worth pondering the fierce spiritual/moral forces that keep our Church in unity, despite the conflict and tensions.

The Catholic Instinct is an urgency to stay in union and communication, even in contradiction and conflict. It is like a mother who is determined to keep her family together, whatever the cost. So we saw, for example, that the rebellion against Humanae Vitae by theologians and even bishops was not crushed, but was tolerated, for the sake of unity and peace, by the Vatican. Even John Paul and Benedict, always clear in their magisterial teaching, allowed a wide range for freedom and dissent. We Catholics, like our mother's milk and the air we breathe, interiorize a strong identity as part of something greater than ourselves, something global, trans-generational, historical but eternal, present in this life and the next. 

Papacy, Episcopacy, Priesthood are stable, abiding structures which keep us in unity, regardless of the particular personalities. Whether you love or hate Benedict and Francis, as a Catholic you give your loyalty. Already, right after the death of the Apostles, St.Ignatius of Antioch was exhorting the communities to preserve their unity around the bishop/priest/deacon. That abides in the Church forever.

Confession of Sin fiercely keeps us together: the ground is level at the foot of the cross. We confess at mass, in Penance, in our exam of conscience. It is at the heart of our faith. When we confess our own sins, we are disinclined to judge, to demonize, to impute evil to the brother and sister.

Sacramental Economy holds us together even as we differ in our views, theological or political. When we gather for Sunday Eucharist we suspend our differences and arguments and open ourselves to graces from heaven. In Confession we own our own sins, and cease from accusing the other. In baptism, confirmation and ordination our soul receives a permanent seal, which can NEVER be removed, and joins us together eternally, even if we renounce it our ignore it.

Catholic Culture is a dense, deep, rich tapestry of life that binds us together and relativizes our disputes: music, liturgical seasons, artwork, Churches, pilgrimages, feast days, sabbath, funerals, weddings, baptisms. All of the above and so much more glues our corporate life and allows us to battle each other and resolve conflict with some serenity and mutual respect.

Body of Christ, literally, is how we understand ourselves as Church: as the hand and eye are part of the body, so we are joined to each other, organically, in Christ. If a part of the body is sick, wounded or weak, we care for it, protect it. Only in the extreme case, when the infection threatens to kill the entire body, do we consider amputation.

A schism is an amputation. It is part of the body breaking off to its own. It is like a branch cut off from the vine. Oftentimes, a sector of the Church will separate, as in the Protestant Reformation. It is possible that the German Church, in large part, will do so in the foreseeable future. Sometimes, Church authority has to declare a group in schism. Pope Francis, given his pronounced proclivities, could conceivably renounce the Latin Mass community, but not the German "synodality." 

The dark side of Catholic craving for unity is that Truth gets compromised. The reluctance to judge, to draw clear boundaries, to clarify identity...allows widespread confusion, vagueness, weakness to undermine our faith. 

In a helpful newsletter recently, Ralph Martin recalled the Arian heresy of the 4th century. This view denied that Christ was fully God; it saw him as a creature, although a heavenly one. Many progressives today actually share this view. Most of the Church, especially the episcopacy, was under the control of this heresy for much of the century. There were always strong voices for the truth, notably St. Athanasius. A small band of clever, forceful Arians gained control as many bishops and others were confused or indifferent. Orthodox belief endured, however, even in the darkest times in the quiet, humble faith of the laity. Martin sees that today's Church is nowhere as bad as that during the Arian heresy. However, things could get worse for us.

In a classic essay, ("Satan Unbound" First Things, Dec. 1, 2022) Patricia Snow notes the abandonment by the Church, after the Council, of the network of exorcisms in the liturgy. She recalls the vision of Pope Leo and his creation of the prayer to St. Michael which was prayed at every mass and has made a spontaneous, unofficial resurgence over recent years. The story is that Pope Leo heard, in a dream, Satan brag to God about his devastation of the Church and that he could do far more. God allegedly told him he had 50 to 70 years. It did not specify when. The historicity of the story is tentative. Even if he did have that exact dream, it is private revelation and nonbinding. However, it makes sense! We are now just over 50 years since the Church largely abandoned martial vigilance and rigor for a happy-go-lucky, go-along-to-go-get-along, rosy secularism. 

In the late 1960s Lucifer launched his greatest initiative since the Garden of Eden. He found in the USA and the West the most prosperous, affluent, powerful, comfortable, secure, and arrogant bourgeois society in human history. He released a legion of demons upon us: materialism, consumerism, techno-scientism, relativism, sexual liberation, neo-antiracist-racism, careerism, hedonism, progressivism as utopian optimism and contempt for the past, individualism, pantheism, sentimental romanticism, Jungian subjectivism, capitalistic neoliberalism, Marxism, and the Crown Prince, indignant-histrionic-homosexualism. This demonic assault was entirely successful: it is currently in control of all the power centers, the elite institutions of the West. 

Especially within the Church a spiritual/cultural war rages: between our Catholic faith as received and the demons of modernity that push to accommodate to the now dominant culture.  

I am hopeful. I see, dispersed across the globe, many communities of faith...clear, deep, orthodox, passionate, generous, expansive faith. There are parishes, families, associations, renewal movements Latin Mass groups...often small, numerically not impressive, but fierce in conviction and certainty. These groups, working with likeminded priests and bishops, keep the light of faith, in all its warmth and illumination, alive. By a certain spiritual "chiaroscuro," the light of Christ shines the more strongly as the dark descends.  These abide within the Church, even in times of chaos, showing forth the Truth. In the gentle power of the Holy Spirit, they will prevail over the darkness of error, as did the church of St. Athanasius.  


Tuesday, September 26, 2023

Discontent, Pope Francis, "Making a Mess," and "Synodality"

 "Contentment is the most unpracticed of the virtues."   Josef Pieper (as I recall reading long ago)

I take Pieper here to mean an inner serenity, receptivity, gratitude, sense of abundance. This does not mean a static, inert passivity. Rather, it exists in tension with a holy restlessness: to renounce sin, to come close to God, to alleviate suffering, to overcome injustice, to resist evil, to exult in the Good, the True, the Beautiful and the Glory of God. Such ferocity and zeal flow from a prior and primary Joy.

Consider: a good marriage rests in contentment. The spouses are happy with each other. This does not eliminate tension, disagreements, fights, criticisms, disappointment, struggle and hardship. But such negativity and conflict can be absorbed patiently, if imperfectly, and channeled positively  because of a deeper, stronger satisfaction. An appreciation. A reverence. A gratitude. A delight.

"Discontent" may be the key to the Francis pontificate. 

Fr. James Martin SJ astutely observed that the "synodality" movement is the culmination of Francis remark: "Who am I to judge?" That is accurate. The task of the Bishop of Rome is, of course, precisely to judge what is good and bad, true and false: in belief and action. It has never been his job to judge the heart of any person. No human being can do that. The heart and soul is sacred and impregnable: unavailable to us for evaluation. We cannot even judge the inner value of our own actions: they are complex, mysterious, contradictory and enigmatic. In that sense, "who am I to judge?" is a truism, a tautology, a redundancy.

But there was more to the remark than that. However inchoately, Francis and Martin represent a move away from the objective moral order, from clarity and consistency in norms,  from the intellect and the Logos of Creation as the guide to the will; a movement into emotionalism, an emasculated conscience, a concern for feelings; a movement into pity without toughness; compassion without demands, mercy without truth, wrath or justice. The amorphous, vague, uncertain nature of "synodality" is expressive of its indeterminate, sentimental nature.

But even more revelatory of the purpose and intentions of this papacy is his exhortation to our youth: "Go and make a mess!" That was an extraordinary and significant expression. How could any reasonable adult advise adolescents, in all their instability, to ""make a mess?" But the remark unveils an underlying resentment, a discontent, a repressed anger.

Imagine your teen son is going to Grandma's house and you say to him: "Make a mess!" The comment is ridiculous, unless you are angry at Grandma.

Francis is unhappy with the Church as received; the Church as it actually is; the Church as handed over to him. He is resentful. He is discontent. So he wants to disrupt; to make a mess; to tear down what he sees as dogmatic, rigid, judgmental, reactionary. What does he want in its place? Nothing very clear of defined. But it would involve lots of compassion, listening, acceptance; and elimination of boundaries, laws, certainty and clarity. 

He resents the clergy as superior, arrogant, detached, legalistic. 

He resents the Latin Mass as a rejection of the "Spirit of Vatican II."

He resents the USA and Europe for their inordinate wealth and power. He sustains the Argentinian hatred for "the North." He configures any reluctance to accept refugees from the South as Dives despising Lazarus. He is slow to stand with Ukraine as he prefers to see the invasion as a response to an expansive NATO.

It is said that he has a propensity to use vulgar language. This indicates an underlying disgust, a repugnance, a dissonance.

And so the vaunted "Synod on synodality" is the most amorphous and vague of events. It will be, at best, a waste of much time, energy and resources. It will in large part be a huge pity-party: complaints from the "victim coalitions."  At the same time it will be a conspiracy, a crusade by those most discontent with the Church to change belief and practice on marriage, sexuality, gender, the sacraments, and the nature of the Church. 

We will do well to divert our attention away from this "circus of discontent." 

We do well to content ourselves with the Church as given to us, to delight ourselves with the abiding, sacramental presence of Christ; to exult in the lives of the saints, in heaven and on earth; to be grasped by the Spirit of the Living God; to pour ourselves out recklessly in acts of Mercy; to abide serenely in companionship and contemplation. 



Monday, September 25, 2023

The Church: our Mother, the Bride of Christ, a Whore

High school religion class, Seton Hall Prep, circa 1964, the priest calmly asks: "How would you feel...if you learned that your mother was a whore?" Quiet in the class. Not a word is spoken, I am feeling: "That is disgusting!" The silence lingers. Calmly, the priest  speaks:  "You would feel, I am sure, disgust, shame, anger...more disgust, more shame, more anger...confusion...shock." Again he pauses in silence to allow the reflection to continue. No comment from us students.  Finally, slowly and thoughtfully, he adds: "But...at the end of the day...she is your mother. You will always love your mother." Again quiet. Finally, slowly, he moves to his purpose:  "The Catholic Church is your mother. The Catholic church is also a whore. She is made up of sinners. All of us are sinners. Priests, religious, bishops and pope are all whores. All unfaithful. Nevertheless, the Church is your mother. You have no other. She is yours to love. Even when she is a whore." 

I took this to heart and never forgot it. It was, perhaps, the defining and singular lesson I retain from high school religion. This immunized me against being scandalized by the Church. 

This is simple, solid Catholic dogma: The Church is One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic; it is guided and inspired by the Holy Spirit; it is efficacious in the sacraments and infallible in its teaching. But it is peopled by sinners, at every level. So: do not be scandalized by the Church, which is to say the people of the Church, not the Church herself,  in all the infidelity and filth. On Calvary Christ was betrayed by one, denied by another, abandoned by 10 of the remaining 11, and accompanied by a solitary disciple and a handful of women. That is the Church: yesterday, today and until Christ returns.

Recently, I was told by two people who are close to me that I am "delusional about the Church." By this they meant I am in denial about the corruption in the clergy: the hypocrisy, the pervasive gay clerical culture even as the Church preaches chastity. 

"Delusional" is a strong word: it suggests a pathology and psychosis as in paranoia. No, I responded, I am not delusional. My observation of the Church is not filtered through a lens of extreme anxiety, anger, resentment, or schizophrenia. My observation of the Church is filtered through a lens of  affection and loyalty. Genuine love, if it is sober and truthful, does not distort but clarifies jugement.

Is my estimation of the corruption within the Church inaccurate, too low? Possibly. I am by temperament very positive in general. I do have, for a layman, an extraordinary knowledge of the clergy: I have always been involved with the Church and have befriended a broad range of priests including eccentrics, mavericks, homosexuals, gays and even sexual predators. I am not living in a dream world regarding the Church. 

Bu, philosophically, I am firmly guided by two related principles.

First, St. Ignatius of Loyola counsels us to always put the best possible interpretation upon the actions of another believer, especially one in authority such as a bishop. This is sound advice. He is not advocating the unreality of Pollyannish optimism, but a prudence that, given uncertainty, prefers a temperate trust in Church relations. This carries with it, obviously, the risk of underestimating malice and evil. It is a risk we soberly accept.

Secondly, it is my observation that the single most common sin is rash judgement. A violation of the eighth commandment, "thou shall not bear false witness," it is more a failure of the intellect than of the will. It is not so much malice intention as a sincere mistake in judgement. The judgement is clouded, often enough, but distrust, fear, resentment, and weakened intelligence. In many cases there may be low culpability: it may be motivated by the intention to protect others. Nevertheless, it is an injustice.

Last night, we viewed again the amazing movie Doubt with breathtaking performances by Meryl Streep, Philip Seymour Hoffman, Amy Adams, and Viola Davis. The ambiguity of the situation is brilliantly maintained throughout. With what we now know of the priestly abuse that was about to explode at the time of the story (1964), it is hard not to root for the fierce, indignant Sister Superior. But, from my philosophical posture on rash judgement, the nun protagonist is guilty of such. The surprising ending is in some way a confession of such on her part. 

The movie leaves us hanging in midair, entirely in "doubt" about the situation. But if we have to choose to be the trusting, credulous, innocent Amy Adams nun or the cynical, tough, suspicious Meryl Streep mother superior, I think St. Ignatius of Loyola would counsel the former, as we wait for evidence. It is not delusion; but a preference for trust and a caution in judgement.

A Morning Prayer to St. Joseph

 Pray for me, dear St. Joseph, and for all my men.

By virtue of your holiness, your closeness to the Trinity, your friendship with God, and your docility to the Holy Spirit;

Your faith, hope, and love;

Your humility, chastity, fortitude, prudence and justice;

Your tender and reverent love for Mary your wife and Jesus your son;

Your protection and your provision;

Your quiet strength;

Your strong silence, your listening, your obedience;

Your action, work, rest, sleep and holy death;

Pray for me, my sons, grandsons, son-in-laws, brothers, brothers-in-law, nephews, nephews-in-law, and all my friends from childhood to the present.

Amen!

Friday, September 22, 2023

A Morning Prayer: Draw Me To Yourself, Lord

Draw me to yourself, Lord, fill me with your love.

Draw me to yourself; cleanse me of my sin; pour your blood upon me; make me pure, holy and good.

Draw me to your self in the Eucharist, your gracious act, your perpetual presence, the communion in holiness of the saints, the Body of Christ, the Church.

Draw me to yourself in my marriage; teach me to love Mary Lynn; make me tender, humble, patient, serene, appreciative, reverent, grateful and generous.

Draw me to yourself in my family, work, friendships, relationships, loves and longings.

I am sinful, give me your mercy; I am sick, give me your healing; I am shameful, give me your dignity; I am anxious, give me your peace; I am tired, give me your rest; I am weak, give me your strength; I am lonely, give me your love.

Let my longing, my weakness, my sadness....draw me to you; and draw you to me.

Preserve my heart in purity, patience, perserverance, and peace.

Seal and secure my heart in you love.

Revive, defend, enhance my innocence.

Sanctify me by the indwelling of your Holy Spirit. (Making sign of cross.)

Strengthen me with your beautiful strength.

Make me humble, holy, loving and pure.

Make me quiet, still, calm, attentive, alert, watchful and vigilant.

Make me receptive, docile, pliable, "disponible", responsive, obedient and grateful.

Make me patient, painstaking, longsuffering, persistent and perservering. 

Make me sensitive, compassionate, kind, generous, tender, merciful;

Magnanimous, joyous, zealous, fierce and fearless.

Make me steadfast, wise and prudent in all things, strong but gentle, tender and reverent with my wife.

Make me trustworthy, as I place all my trust in you. 

Inflame me with love for you; and let that fire consume what is not of you, and purify all my loves.

Let me sing your praises, that I might be forever the praise of your Glory!

  




Monday, September 18, 2023

Dear Alana

 Dear Alana is a now-viral 8-episode podcast, a quasi-documentary about Alana Chen, of Boulder, Colorado,  who took her life at the age of 24 in 2019. The story is developed and narrated by Simon Kent Fung who read about the tragic death and found many similarities in his own life: deep Catholic devotion, homosexuality, involvement in what he calls "conversion therapy" and the deep conflicts that resulted. Simon befriended Alana's anguished mother and was given access to her many, intimate journals. What he presents is in part a biographical sketch of Alana, but  filtered through Simon's own conflicts, hurts, and emerging understanding. As such it is troubling on several levels.

Conversion/Reparative Therapy

The villain of the story Simon develops is what he calls "conversion therapy," the coercive, manipulative attempt to change ones "orientation" from "gay" to "straight." We find here the  standard allegation (we see in Netflix shows) of spiritual abuse: the violent repression of a person's sexuality and destruction of the personality of the young and innocent. As such it has been criminalized across the country. This judgement may well be justified. I myself, a Northeastern, urban Catholic have no knowledge, no experience, and no opinion on this practice. It is close to Fundamentalism and Evangelicalism. However, I do have a fair familiarity with something different: Reparative Therapy that has been welcomed in some Catholic circles. (An earlier blog post contrasted the two.) I can state with confidence that there is no Catholic conversion therapy.

Reparative therapy is not the attempt  at "orientation conversion." Rather, it seeks to repair hurts and wounds from destructive experiential dynamics involving family, peers, body image, trauma, and abuse. The logic is that such healing may reduce compulsivity, enhance freedom, and release vigor, health, and generosity in the personality and in sexuality. Some 20 years ago when I first read this literature,  I happily concluded that I would benefit from such work in my relations, as a man, with women: Who doesn't need such repair?

To his credit, Simon gives a detailed, fair and accurate account of the writings of leading proponents Joseph Nicolosi and Elizabeth Moberly. He tells us what he confided to his own NYC therapist, whom he does not name but describes as highly regarded in the Catholic world: the coldness and distance of his father, a traumatic experience in which his father threw him cruelly into the water to teach him to swim, his torment being bullied by the boys in the schoolyard. He recalls his therapist encouraging him to nurture sexually sober friendships with stable, mature, including older men. And so Simon goes to the gym and befriends a slightly older, virile fireman. One day as he is dropped off, his friend says: "See you tomorrow, Brother." The therapist notes the significance: "Do you see? He calls you 'brother' because he sees masculinity in you."

(By the way, later, in the last episode, Simon records a most candid conversation with his father who says he was sorry to learn that his sons homosexuality may have been associated with his failures as a father. He admits to a desire to amend. It is quite touching. And to my mind speaks favorably of the therapy.) 

Simon delivers this "brother"  story in a straightforward, direct fashion, free of emotion or judgement. The incident speaks for itself as a positive therapeutic intervention; but Simon neither commends nor condemns it. I for one loved the anecdote. It is a perfect example of how reparative therapy is supposed to work. In such friendships, a young man grows in masculine self-esteem as he receives the respect of someone he himself admires. This dynamic applies to all of us, whatever our particular issues.

Simon surely knows better, but he persists in referring to conversion therapy. Conversion therapy has now become the ogre, the monster destroying the lives of young homosexuals. The problem is: it is unknown and never mentioned in Catholic circles. You can scour the conservative journals and I doubt you will find a mention. Reparative therapy is a small, niche item. It gets very little attention. And as developed by Moberly and Nicolosi it is not objectionable, neither manipulative nor coercive. It is available to adults who seek it, including some who aspire to transition. It is not a monster conspiracy devouring our young.

It is surely possible that Simon and Alana had the misfortune of seeing bad therapists. My own psychologist daughter firmly cautions against a rigid, heavy-handed practice of these principles. As a good clinician, she is attentive to the particularity of each client. I myself have homosexual and even gay friends who enjoy close, wholesome relationships with their fathers; were not bullied; were not smothered by Mom; are not lacking in athleticism or masculine confidence; enjoy a good body image. It is not unthinkable that these  had such a strong born-that-way propensity that the attraction emerged without the developmental triggers. But such are surely a small minority. 

The Moral Issue and the Psychological Issue

The crusade against "conversion therapy" in Catholic places involves two distinct, but interrelated issues: the moral and the psychological. 

Morally, the Church firmly teaches that homosexual acts are mortal sins. This is the real, underlying objection of Simon and his coterie. Simon seems to remain deeply conflicted in his own Catholicism, so he does not target the moral teaching, but the alleged practice of conversion therapy. It is not the attraction itself, but the actions which are sins. Disordered sexual/romantic urges are normal as a result of original sin. This teaching is repugnant to the LGBTQ campaign. So while the podcast targets an alleged "conversion therapy" that is entirely foreign to Catholic culture,  the real culprit is Church teaching. Simon himself professes to be a Catholic. He does not clearly renounce Church moral doctrine. 

A distinct issue is the origin of the homosexual attraction and the gay identity. The Church takes no position on this. The Catechism mentions that the origins remain largely unknown. This is a valid area for research, discussion and argument.  A small, increasingly canceled cadre of writers and clinicians find that life experiences contribute to the attraction and its compulsion and address this in reparative therapy. This has obvious appeal to those, including devout Catholics, who do not welcome the attraction. Simon seems to endorse the criminalization of such therapy even into pastoral counseling. This would deny the freedom to seek therapeutic relief from toxic dynamics often accompanying the attraction (compulsivity, obsession) and would go so far as to criminalize Catholic instruction on chastity as itself homophobic.

This apparently benevolent cause, to protect the innocent from spiritual abuse, would deny freedom to research, to repair underlying wounds, and to pass on our Catholic legacy on the human body.

Courage

Courage, the self-support group for homosexual Catholic seeking to live a caste life, despised by gay and gay-friendly Catholics, is slandered by Simon. He associates the group with conversion therapy. The group is very clear: they endorse no such therapy or theory. Their goal is to support each other in chastity. Nothing more. Many of their participants seek relief from compulsion and sin, interior peace, purity and fortitude; with no interest in an imagined "conversion of orientation." Others may indeed, independently of Courage, seek reparative therapy or something similar. Simon quotes the founder of Courage, Fr. John Harvey, as privately endorsing the ideas of the therapy and then he conflates this with the purpose of the group. This is an obvious logical error. Courage mirrors the Church: it supports chastity, no particular therapeutic practice. 

Suicide

Is there anything as tragic, heart-breaking, and mysterious as the suicide, especially of a young one. We simply cannot understand it. The impulse to do so is irresistible. But the attempt is useless. The human person...heart and soul, intellect and will, emotions and passions...is a bottomless abyss of Mystery. Even minor acts...a remark, a glance, an eyeroll...are overdetermined...influenced by a universe of forces: history, fatigue, memories, projections, blood sugar, and ad infinitum. We ourselves do not understand our own motivations:  Why did I do that? Why did I say that? We cannot begin to understand any suicide.

Worse than the effort to explain is the intent to blame. The suicide was caused by the therapist! By the girlfriend! By that cultish religion! By weakness of the will! By the family! Even if the victim leaves a note saying "I am doing this because....." it would be foolish to take that explanation at face value, as if the person were capable of an accurate explanation. Even at our best we lack such self-insight.

And so it is deeply troubling that Simon uses the heartbreaking story of young Alana to advance his agenda: his animus against reparative...aka conversion... therapy. There needs to be a boundary around suicide, as with anything sacred. It is private, indescribable, inviolate. It is not to be used for any argument or ideology.

Privacy of Personal Journal

Alana's journal entries, as shared in the podcast, are personal and intimate: involving sexuality, shame, guilt, family, religious sentiments and emotional torment. It is understandable that family members and close friends might read them in an effort to understand her. But putting them on social media, for the voyeuristic interests of thousands of strangers is a violation.

Such disgraceful disclosure is, of course, typical of the culture of total transparency that characterizes the Sexual Revolution and specifically the Gay Movement. The greatest virtue has become transparency and authenticity. Chastity, fidelity, prudence, temperance, fortitude...the classic virtues are discarded in favor of shame-free, shameless authenticity. We see this in the gay practice of "outing" homosexual or gay celebrities who have not publicly come out. Such is a violation of personal integrity. It appears to be a attempt to normalize the gay life, to overcome shame by involving others, against their will.

And so we have Simon, with her mother, unveiling the intimacies of Alana's life, without consent, dishonorably.

Alliance with Mother

Simon gained the trust and compliance of Alana's mother, Joyce. She allowed him access and  use of the journals. This mother/daughter relationship is very delicate; it is itself sacred; it is to be respected. But the cooperation of Joyce with Simon in the project is questionable in several ways.

The journal quotations reveal that Alana was tortured for many years by her Mom's disapproval of her intense Catholicism. As an adolescent, she lied to her mother in order to attend daily mass. Her intention to become a nun was vigorously resisted. Later she writes with grief about her Mom's refusal to accept her religious identity. We start to see any irony here: the goal of Dear Alana is to unveil the effort to deny her "sexual orientation." But Alana's own words show her resentment at the denial of her Catholic identity and the maternal attempt to "convert" her.

Her journal also notes her immense distress about the fighting of the parents, before their divorce,  and her feelings of guilt that she as unable to heal the rupture. Clearly, Alana was an exquisitely sensitive soul. She was tortured by the discord and the divorce.

Alana's father is still alive but gets little mention. Did he approve of Simon's use of the journals? Was he even consulted? In Simon's narrative, there are no positive, paternal figures in his or her lives. Both fathers are distant and removed. Alana formed close, trusting relationships with two priests who served as spiritual directors to her. Her own comments are extremely positive. Simon had access to emails and the journals and unveiled nothing inappropriate in their communications. But he contrasts their affectionate tone with that of his own directors and so suggests a romantic or erotic interest. It is not obvious to him that the tone of a fatherly man is different towards "son" and "daughter" figures.  Such a slanderous intimation, made credible by the priest scandal, is understandable in the context of our hyper-eroticized culture, especially the gay world.

We see in the Simon-Joyce alliance a shared distance from the masculine and the paternal. It reflects the broader coalition of the Cultural Revolution: angry women joined with men, troubled in their masculinity,  in resentment against the paternal distrusted as toxic patriarchy. They are joined in antipathy to the two priests directors, the therapy, the Sisters of Life who befriend her, and above all to the paternal religion of Catholicism that she passionately embraced. 

The Priest Problem

Alana entrusts herself, at a tender age, to the spiritual direction of Fr. David Nix. There is no evidence of sexual impropriety. But Simon and Joyce see spiritual abuse at work. This does raise a question. Fr. David's blog (padreperegrino.org) shows him to be a hard right, trad priest: friendly with Mel Gibson, anti-vax, strict old school Catholic. In one essay, "15 Mortal Sins Catholics Are Missing in Confession," he includes in addition to contraception, IVF, and pornography, wearing short shorts and leggings. In a recent tweet he compares Olympic gymnastics to light child porn. This suggests an anxiety and scrupulosity about sexuality. Perhaps Fr. David is the rigid, doctrinaire priest our pontiff has been warning us about. At the least it seems to have been a bad combination: his anxious rigor may have agitated the vulnerable, sensitive Alana. To call this spiritual abuse is an exaggeration, but the mother's concerns warrant respect.

Our Church faces a daunting challenge in the formation of our young. We surely do not want to inflict more shame, anxiety, guilt, conflict and insecurity on young, sensitive, fragile psyches. We do want to assure them of God's and our love for them, as they are. We do not want to fixate them in a static, restrictive identity or orientation. We do  want to invite them into the inner peace, confidence, strength and generosity of sexual purity. May God help us!

Mother/Daughter  Father/Daughter

Any parent can understand the mother's concern that her 14-year-old daughter is secretly receiving spiritual direction from a priest who himself shows signs of sexual imbalance and scrupulosity. The secrecy involved, for example in sneaking away to daily mass and then lying about it, indicates a deeper problem: Alana's distrust of and distance from her mother. Her journal entries show that she experienced her mother as hostile to what was most precious to her: her Catholic piety. And so she distances herself to protect, yes from her own mother, what she most values. This is not uncommon. The early virgin-martyrs violated the Roman protocols and died for their faith. We are familiar today with smothering, borderline mothers who do not respect the boundaries and autonomy of their children. 

The young Alana clings passionately to her Catholic spiritual family and father as she is distant from both parents. The father is entirely absent. We learn nothing about him. We do know that Alana writes of her agony in hearing the two spouses fight and that she blames herself. It seems that at a very sensitive age, when she was herself shaping her own identity, she interiorized the hatred they shared as her own fault. 

A young woman's feminine self-esteem is shaped in different ways by mother and father. The mother is closer; so the trust and intimacy between them allows the daughter to interiorize as her own the feminine identity of the mother. The father is more distant, but as an authoritative figure and representative of the broader world, as "Other,"  he affirms the girl in her value as a woman, in that universe. Alana's story, as told by Simon, who does not interpret it in this way, suggests a perfect storm of dysfunction: when she is needing intimacy with mother and affirmation from father, they are furious with each other and she is blaming herself. We can see that a sensitive girl would become anxious, insecure in her feminine identity. She might sexualize her frustrated desire for intimacy with the maternal. She might look to the priest for the father who is not available. She might seek in prayer and piety to soothe a deep inner loneliness. She might find in self-stimulation a release from the unbearable tension which all of this brings.

I can hear already the indignant chorus:  "You are shaming, blaming the mother and father!" The intent of this essay is not to shame, but to discredit the blame game. It does not help to point the accusatory finger at the parent, priest, or therapist. But it does help to identify obvious factors at work as narrated by Simon from her journal: Alana's torment and loneliness; the scrupulosity of the priest; the crucial relationships with mother and father.

Sexual Compulsivity

It is disrespectful for the podcast to reveal  Alana's difficulties with continence. But since it is so public, we might benefit from some reflection. Her journal notes that at the age of 12, in confession, she encountered Christ in a mystical experience that brought relief from the compulsion of masturbation, a freedom that lasted several years. This addiction returned some years later. Her journal entries show her intense shame, guilt and self-hatred regarding the habit. The accusation here is that the Church was the cause of her disorder and eventual suicide. Judgement against conversion therapy disguises a deeper hated of the Church. This case has been further argued recently in several journals, predictably in America and National Catholic Reporter. 

At one point she cuts the word "defiled" into her flesh. She journals with loathing about herself and her body. She writes of "the voices." Reference to "voices" brings two things to mind: schizophrenia and demonic oppression. Alana is deeply tortured at this point and does get professional attention. We learn of no diagnosis but it is possible that she is experiencing the onset of schizophrenia which often manifests itself in early adulthood. It is also possible, it seems to me as a believing Catholic, that she was being attacked by Lucifer, especially in view of her intense piety and her desire for a religious vocation.

Her mother's response upon reading these entries is noteworthy:  "Who are these people that are teaching her this stuff?" She attributes Alana's self-loathing to the influence of her Catholic friends. She blames this  self-hatred on her Catholic views. Here we start to see this podcast as a conspiracy of Joyce and Simon to discredit  Church and its view of sexuality. The crusade is gaining steam as the podcast is viral and widely recognized in the liberal media. 

She writes glowingly of her friendship with the Sisters of Life, whom she finds full of laughter, fun and encouragement. I know this group and confirm her view: they are entirely wholesome, surging with life and joy. They have denied any endorsement of conversion therapy.

The masturbation compulsion is important. Liberational fashion, prevalent in woke psychology, is that this habit is normal and wholesome. The reality is that it easily becomes addictive and self-destructive. Wilhelm Reich, one of the brilliant grandfathers of the Sexual Revolution, wrote of a patient who frustrated him as she continued the practice of prayer. He noted that the practices of prayer and masturbation could not coexist; that they contradicted each other; that eventually one or the other would prevail. Reich was entirely prescient on this point. The two practices are intolerant of each other. Their coexistence brings tension, shame, and guilt. Clearly, this practice troubled Alana, probably more than her attraction to women, which she realized was not itself sinful. The podcast ignores this. 

On this most delicate subject, the Catholic Catechism is nuanced, stern but tender. It is a serious sin. But it is oftentimes practiced under subjective conditions of anxiety, insecurity, self-hatred and stress; all of which mitigate the culpability. In confession the Church is most merciful with this failing of the flesh. Alana almost certainly tortured herself in a form of scrupulosity. This was not the intention of the Church. Rather, the compulsion and the shame were both somehow the expression of a tortured psyche, afflicted by surging, underlying spiritual and emotional forces. 

There is no mention in the podcast of any involvement in a 12-step program such as Sexaholics Anonymous (S.A.), which is known in recent years to bring great relief and freedom for those (and there are now so many) afflicted by sexual and romantic addictions. This is a strong, Catholic-friendly program as it understands sexual sobriety as restricting sexual expression to traditional marriage. It intuits that masturbation, far from being wholesome, is self-enclosed and itself the "gateway" practice to other sexual disorders of fornication, adultery and homosexual activity. Such fellowship may have relieved the severe shame and tension that tormented her.

Her Conversion from Catholic to Gay

In Simon's telling, she accepted her gay reality after "falling in love." This relationship, however, might best be described as an immature infatuation. It is on-again and off-again in an unstable manner. The girlfriend is described by everyone as likeable, fun and very funny. But Alana swings from elation to torment in a borderline fashion. The liberation of her sexuality brings no peace or joy.

Abruptly, she disconnects from the Church and her old friends. Her journal entries express anger that they fail to reach out to her. It is impossible for us to judge the nature of the separation since we do not hear the other side of the rupture and her own feelings toward them are extremely angry.

In the logic voiced by Simon and Joyce, her renunciation of the Church, her embrace of her gay identity, and her pursuit of lesbian relationships should have been a freeing experience. In fact, she gets worse instead of better. She makes heavy use of marihuana; she is off and on again with depression meditation. She records, and we hear, a session with an astrologist. Simon comments that she seems to be seeking spiritual direction here as she had formerly with her priest advisor. Her lesbian relationship tortures her. She records all this anguish in her journals but keeps it from family and friends.

I have pondered this mysterious conversion, not in so-called-orientation, but the change from a homosexual attraction to the gay identity. Often, the transition seems to be associated with sexual compulsivity and borderline tendencies to narcissism and histrionics, but there is something deeper and sadder. The story of Alana, as told by Simon, is helpful. It suggests that the root cause is a deep interior loneliness, a sadness that is somehow not touched even in one who is surrounded by loving family and friends and devoutly practicing her faith. Her infatuation aroused in her an erotic-romantic elation that relieved her of that piercing sword and surged with joy. But it was unstable. It is the bourgeois illusion that happiness in life can be found in romantic love. As infatuation, it is the mirage in the desert of the one desperate for relief. 

Simon

The narrator is himself a fascinating co-protagonist in the drama. He does mirror his subject: intelligent, gifted, charming, sensitive, and still deeply Catholic. He does not explicitly criticize the Church. He is clearly still struggling with powerfully conflicting feelings. His target is conversion therapy. One senses however that it was not so much an external conspiracy of manipulation and coercion that drew him but his own self-hatred. This mirrors Alana. I do not doubt that he, like Alana, may have encountered dysfunctional priests and therapists. We all do. That is life. But there is not in the Church a campaign to convert homosexuals. This interior torment of shame was the result of a complex, sensitive psyche, interactive with a range of toxic dynamics, notably the distant father and the bullying. Neither Simon nor Alana are victims of a homophobic Church. He does not face a hard binary between conversion  from homosexual to "straight" or conversion to "gay." There is a more serene, promising path by which he befriends his homosexual tendency (which is NOT a hard "orientation") as his share in the concupiscence we all suffer and sublimates it into wholesome, chaste, fruitful expressions.

Attack on our Church

Dear Alana is a skilled, clever, engaging, and sentimentally manipulative production. The tone, music, interviews all elicit compassion; and an aversion to the "conversion therapy conspiracy" which is a straw man. Deeper, however, the hostility is to the Catholic Church. Our received teaching on sexuality as spousal, fruitful and unitive, makes a moral judgment against homosexual acts as it does against pornography, fornication, masturbation and other disorders. 

The gay identity is one of many options which are incompatible with Catholic life: mobsters, pornographers, Marxists, pro-abortion-voting Democrats, libertarian capitalists, abortionists, atheist nihilists, and others freely reject the Catholic way.  The militant gay identity is unique in that it operates within Catholicism, portraying itself as a pitiful, powerless victim; judging the Church as hateful and homophobic; and positioning itself on the high ground of moral superiority. It elicits a soft, cheap pity. It plants seeds of hatred for the Church in our young. 

We love the gay and lesbian as persons; just as we love the libertarian, the Marxist and the nihilist; not in their ideology and practice. 

It is ironic: this podcast is a crusade against conversion therapy; it is itself an effort to convert, us and our children,  away from our Catholic belief and practice regarding chastity and fidelity.

Pondering this Tragic Death

Before suicide, we do well to be quiet. To restrain ourselves in analysis and blame. To avoid weaponizing the catastrophe for our preferred cause. To refrain from a righteous, shrill crusade against the Catholic Church on behalf of the persecuted gay community.  

Before such a tragedy, we do well to avoid blame. The "Alana Campaign" against "conversion therapy" and the Catholic way might want to relax in its strident, righteous indignation. Her suicide occurred well after she left her Catholic practice. It is conceivable that her prayer and fellowship supported her in her torment and she succumbed to suicide when she was deprived of it. It might be that her Catholic life kept her alive, as she dealt with tribulations that we can hardly imagine. Her astrology, unstable love affair, and marihuana use did not help; but we will not see an 8-episode podcast accusing these.  

Alans's story is simply heartbreaking. She was a gifted, poetic, lovable and loving soul. She was saintly in so many ways: her yearning for God, her trust in the Church, her concern for the poor. She suffered an abyss of loneliness and longing. We do well to grieve her suffering; admire her goodness; ponder our own frailty; and commend her to the Merciful God she sought so passionately.




Sunday, September 17, 2023

How to Defeat Synodality? Pray for the Enemy!

Synodality is now a runaway train: speeding down the mountainside, there is nothing that can stop it. It is a Class 5 hurricane moving across the Atlantic straight towards Florida. It cannot be stopped. Before it disappears out to sea, it will do a lot of damage. Clear out and head for the high ground! If that is not an option, plywood your windows, get plenty of water and food, a deck of playing cards and a bunch of magazines, and hurdle in your basement. Ride it out. For all the noise and destruction, it will pass. And then time to rebuild. In a few years no one will know what the word means. And there will be similar hurricanes with different titles. 

Today's Gospel of the merciless servant provides the best strategy: forgive those who have harmed you. Love and pray for your enemy. Who is my enemy? I have always had problems with this: I pretty much like everyone, even Anglicans, and I think everyone likes me. (My wife tells me I think people like me more than they do.) So who are my enemies? Well those who confuse and undermine our faith, from within the Church. 

Here's my top 10 list: Pope Francis, Cardinals Paglia, Cupich, Tobin, Gregory, McElroy, Fr. Jim Martin, the editors of America and National Catholic Reporter, most of the administrators and theologians at Georgetown, Fordham and Boston College. It is a substantial list!

It is absolutely urgent that I myself, sincerely and passionately, pray for these. For many reasons.

First, only the Holy Spirit can really protect, fortify and guide the Church into all truth.

Secondly, this group is in serious error and can only be enlightened by the Holy Spirit.

Thirdly, but most importantly, for my own soul: I need to forgive, love and pray for them. For myself! In my very certitude and care for the Church, I am vulnerable to anxiety, anger, moralism, indignation, arrogance, pride and resentment. Lucifer is dying to get me obsessed in this way. He understands me and my kind of conservative and he knows just how to pull us into his swamp.

When I pray for these specific enemies, by name, I am restored to serenity, hope, confidence, compassion, and joy. I am not afraid of them or their mischief. I get to even like them. I am sure that,  over a good manhattan and fresh fish at a comfortable pub, I would delight in them. And I think, even if my wife is skeptical, that they would like me! 

Now I have a new litany to pray each morning: litany of my enemies.

It is always fun...even in these strange times...to be a Catholic!

"Falling in Love ": Remembering Joe Whalen S.J.

Surprise: (See Bart Geiger, "10 Things that Ignatius Never Said or Did" in Studies in the Spirituality of the Jesuits, Spring 2018) the beautiful reflection, "Falling in Love," popular in the Jesuit community and widely attributed to Pedro Arrupe S.J., it turns out, was actually first spoken by Joseph Whelan, S.J., easily the best teacher I ever had and the single greatest direct, personal influence on my own theology and spirituality. 

Nothing is more practical than finding God, that is, than

FALLING IN LOVE

in a quite absolute, final way.

What you are in love with, what seizes your imagination, will effect everything.

It will decide what will get you out of bed in the morning, what you do with your evenings, how you spend your weekends, what you read, who you know, what breaks your heart, and what amazes you with joy and gratitude. 

Fall in love. Stay in love. And it will decide everything.

September, 1970, I am sitting in the introductory lecture of Whelan's "Catholic Mystics" course at Woodstock Theological Seminary, recently moved to Morningside Heights near Union Theological and Columbia University. At that moment, I am myself head-over-heals in love with Mary Lynn, my then girlfriend, my current wife. Happily, I have stayed in love.

I am blown away by this man. I have NEVER felt such a radiance of love, of joy, of inner serenity. I say to myself: this man is in love, really, really, really in love. It must be with a woman. At the time, tons of priests were falling in love and leaving for marriage. I later realized he was in love...with God. He taught mysticism. It was his expertise. He had studied it. He was himself a mystic. I think the holiest person I have personally known. (I met Mother Teresa and Dorothy Day but can't say that I knew them.) Since that class I have wanted to be such a mystic.

We might describe Joe Whelan as a "nuptial mystic": what permeated his thought and heart was the nuptial love of Christ for his bride, the Church. To love Christ is to love his Church, the actual, concrete, sinful, institutional, often-scandalous Church. That is what I learned from him: to love Christ is to love his Church.

I don't know why the reflection was attributed to Arrupe. I don't remember him speaking of Arrupe. Stranger still is an article (America, "What Lonergan (and Arrupe) Can Teach Us About God, Love, and Being Human," November 6, 2019) by Richard Malloy S.J. that wonders "if Whelan read Lonergan" and than associates the reflection with Longergan's thought. In a longer piece ("Lonergan, Whelan and the Roots of the Arrupe Prayer," http//icvusa.org 2020/5) Father Malloy develops at greater length the Lonergan paradigm of intellectual judgement, of conversion and the eventual "falling in love" in mystical union with God. He speculates that Whelan read the phrase "falling in love" in a Lonergan lecture and developed the "Arrupe prayer." 

In two classes (the second being on "Prayer") I clung to every word out of his mouth, I would have remembered mention of Lonergan. I recall none. I can identify with certainty two prime influences on my mystic-theologian-mentor: Hans Urs von Balthasar and Baron Friedrich von Hugel.

He had us read two pivotal pieces by Balthasar. Prayer is not a work of theology as such, but a series of mystical/poetic reflections. " Theology and Sanctity" is a masterpiece that situates theology always within the prayerful, mystical, liturgical encounter with God in Christ. These two readings were at the heart of Whelan's theology and personal holiness.(And subsequently of mine.) 

Catholic theology since 1965 has been a choice between three paths: the progressivism of the transcendental Thomists Lonergan and Rahner; the conservatism of revived classic Thomism; and the Resourcement, nuptial mysticism of Balthasar/John Paul/Benedict. Whelan is clearly in the third school, in my recall, and he placed me firmly on that path.

Von Hugel was a stronger, and more complex influence on Whelan. He had done his doctorate on him. Hugel was to his generation what Balthasar was to his: probably the most erudite living human person. Hugel, an autodidact, unschooled, learned freely, privately and informally. For example, he learned Hebrew from a rabbi so that he could study scripture. He became a leader in the progressive modernist movement which was decisively condemned by the Vatican. He, a well-connected aristocrat and a layman, was not personally targeted. He escaped the unhappy fate, excommunication,  of his friends Loisy and Tyrell. In filial  obedience, he abandoned that liberal line of scholarship and redirected himself to the study of mysticism, a topic which fit his own temperament. He wrote a classic book on it.

He identified three elements in religion: he historical/institutional, the intellectual/speculative, and the mystical/experiential. He understood, with a sense of complexity/nuance that he shared with Balthasar, the immense tension and drama that occurs between these in real life. He himself exemplified it: he engaged in the most advanced scholarship, but deferred to ecclesial authority, in a deep life of prayer. One story has it that he lectured on the scriptural basis for devotion to Mary; he found almost none at all; but then ended by leading the group in the rosary. He is the rare intellect that could entertain a critical, skeptical scholarship with the piety of a child.

He is surely the most underrated Catholic theologian of the 20th century. Aside from Joe Whelan's classes, I have heard nothing of him in all my own studies. Yet he entertained in himself, all the richness and apparent contradictions of the Catholic intellect, in a manner that we find later in Balthasar, John Paul and Benedict.

Whelan himself is a mystery to me. He wrote a beautiful little work, Benjamin, that inspired me then and that I just ordered this morning. He held important positions: Provincial of the Maryland Province and assistant to the Superior General in Rome. He influenced Flannery O'Connor  He died young at the age of 61. While dying of cancer, he wrote a short piece in America in which he said he was incapable of prayer, in his suffering. The piece was heartbreaking. He was writing from deep within the Dark Night of the Soul. But I find little about him on the internet and when I ask Jesuits about him I usually get: "Oh yes. I know the name." Talk about underrated!

Returning to Malloy's association of the Whelan reflection with Lonergan: there is no clear evidence here. Whelan's approach to spirituality showed no influence of the highly intellectualist Lonergan quasi-Kantian itinerary of experience, understanding, judgment, decision, and so forth. His mystics encountered the person of Christ directly, mystically, in the sacramental Church. 

Yet, as Catholics, we can rejoice and  hope that all of us...whether on the path of Lonergan or Balthasar or St. Thomas...find ourselves ultimately falling in love, together, with God...and staying in love. 

It was a happy whimsy of Providence that in 1970, when I was falling madly in love myself, God sent me to the classroom of this Great Lover, who helped me to fall in love with Jesus and his Bride, our mother the Catholic Church.

Saturday, September 16, 2023

My Episcopalian (Catholic?) Priest Friend and My Anglican Problem

Yesterday, I enjoyed cocktails and lunch at the comfortable, handsome St. Stephen's Pub in Spring Lake, NJ with my high school friend Frank. He was 25 years a Roman Catholic priest; and now 25 years an Episcopalian priest. He likes the Episcopalian thing: less work, more money, and he has a wife. It was a Friday: I had fish; he had a hamburger. He liked (the notorious) Bishop Spong who received him into their clergy. He told the bishop: "Look! I am in my 50s; I have a job and a wife; I am NOT doing any seminary!" Spong winked; brought him in; and got him a job. 

When he is not saying Episcopalian Eucharist, he attends mass at St. Catherine's. He tells me he is not an ex-Catholic Episcopalian priest. He is a Catholic who was a priest, got married, and got a job as an Episcopalian priest. He goes back to his childhood parish in Montclair and prays before the statue of our Blessed Mother.

In high school, during the Vatican Council, I liked all the stirrings of change and renewal. He told me: "It is all a lot of bull shit! Look: You need two things and two things only: the 10 commandments and the 7 sacraments." As a UPS driver, I would stop at his parish in Lyndhurst when he was a happy young priest: very busy, lots of basketball. Somewhere along the way things changed. I visited him when he was a chaplain at a local college: he was furious at the Church. He was now a certifiable liberal. I, meanwhile, had become a staunchly conservative, flamingly charismatic Catholic. We have remained friends. He is a good man. He is a lot of fun.

His theology is Episcopalian which is the equivalent of Catholic Progressive. He believes the Anglican orders are valid. On his deathbed, he will receive, I assume Anglican rites. They will not be (in our Catholic viewpoint) sacramental or efficacious. What will God see? A sincere act of faith but an invalid or null sacrament? A sacrilege? A real sacramental encounter? I am not sure! Luckily, it is not my concern! I have my own issues.

Full disclosure:  I hate Anglicanism! I am ecumenical, but not when it comes to the Anglican Church.

I love saved-sanctified-and-filled-with-the-Holy-Spirit Pentecostals. I pray in tongues with them! I love born-again-Bible-thumping Baptists! I love Jesus with them! I love peace-breathing Quakers, Mennonites, Amish and even Shakers. I prefer my Christianity thick, high octane, countercultural. 

It is not a personal thing! Hey! Some of my best friends and even family members are Episcopalians!

I hate Henry VIII for what he did to his wives and the magnificent medieval English Church. I hate King George III for "taxation without representation." I hate what the English did to the Irish. I hate what Prince Charles did to Princess Diana. I hate the English class system. I hate any religion that is accommodating, effete, bourgeois, and going-along-to-get-along.

 Sure I enjoyed The Crown and Queen Elizabeth (especially as played by the stunning Claire Foy). But I am Catholic, Irish and American...I am no fan of the royals. 

I appreciate the value of a royalty, a king or queen or family that represent the unity of the nation. But "head of the Church!" Absurd! Sacrilegious! Any wonder they are a dysfunctional family?

My problem with the Anglicans is the Sacraments. They are too close for comfort. Baptists, Pentecostals and Evangelicals in general make no pretense of being sacramental. They read the Word and Praise the Lord. No problem there! But the Anglicans have something very close to our sacraments. Our official teaching is that their orders are not valid, so (while their baptism is valid) their Eucharist/Absolution/Confirmation/Anointing are null and void as sacraments. Okay, I accept that. But then they mimic us exactly. It is simply creepy!

Visiting Christ Hospital in Jersey City, I noticed a chapel and entered. Everything felt fine: altar, pews, votive light. I genuflected to the tabernacle, knelt down and prayed. Then I noticed "Book of Common Prayer." My mind jolted: "I AM IN A PROTESTANT CHAPEL! I AM KNEELING BEFORE AND GENUFLECTED BEFORE A SMALL PIECE OF BREAD! WHAT DO I DO NOW?" I rose; quietly bowed my head toward what is at least, for our brethren,  a reminder or symbol of our Lord; and left. I am pretty sure nobody saw me!

Well, Jesus has us loving our enemies. Frank, as an Episcopalian, is my enemy! He is easy to love: especially at the Jersey shore over a good manhattan and fresh cod!


Wednesday, September 13, 2023

Quiet Nothingness

Friends, since college seminary, for 50 years, the four of us enjoyed our get-togethers over beer-and-burgers, particularly the playful, argumentative banter about politics and religion. Deacon-lawyer Dan and missionary-academic Fr. John liberal in both.  My friend Steve is even to the right of me politically. I am myself a staunch, Catholic moral conservative. Steve has considered himself an atheist since college, but he strongly supports the Church and all her traditions. As I group we are, I say gratefully, blessed with intelligence and a wealth of happy life experience. Our mutual respect, affection and sense of humor easily absorbs the passionate differences in opinion.

"What do you think happens after we die?" Dan asks. John, calm-clear-confident responds: "Quiet nothingness." Dan vigorously insists that he will be standing alongside of Jesus, Mary, the saints and angels, his beloved wife and children. Steve agrees with John, but seems to wish he saw things more like Dan. I say very little but my more metaphysical mind is thinking:

Nothing cannot be quiet. Nothing is nothing. It is not something. It is not a thing. It is an abstract concept. We can conceptualize but cannot imagine nothing. It is sheer deprivation. On the other hand, "quiet" is not a thing, but a quality that abides in a thing. We speak of a quiet man, quiet dinner over candlelight, quiet forest. When raising our kids I would often declare a "quiet time" of perhaps 15 minutes, at home or in the car. 

But "quiet" is itself a deprivation, a lack of sound or noise. It is also abstract. And so nothing, as nothing, is inherently quiet: void of noise or sound. Nothing is absolute deprivation: void of sound, sight, smell, intention, future, past, substance, accident. So, literally, "quiet nothingness" is redundant. Nothingness is just that and since it is lack of substance or essence it can contain no accident, qualifier or quantity. Taken literally, John and Steve are atheistic nihilists.

At yesterday's modest, quiet, touching memorial mass (8 of us, in a beautiful chapel, at the spectacular, iconic Maryknoll) for Dan, Fr. John recalled the exchange, which Steve and I remembered clearly. John recalled that a fellow priest had suggested that perhaps both were right, in some way.

My prosaic, lucid mind sees a clear contradiction. John...compassionate, sober, melancholic, sardonically humorous, stoic, disarmingly charming in his low key manner...is right out of Ecclesiastes: "All is vanity." Dan's faith, like his personality and especially his singing, is exuberant, vivacious, vigorous, generous, expansive. By the principle of non-contradiction, they exclude each other: we will encounter one or the other, being or non-being."

I ponder further. "Quiet" as we use the term is not just a deprivation, it also implies peace, rest, contentment. Explicitly it is a deprivation; but as used in our real language it suggests a mystical fullness, Shalom, freedom from dissonance and conflict. It is a positive, implicitly if not explicitly.

"Nothing" indicates "not a thing." But we know that God is not a thing. God is not a being, another creature alongside of all the rest of us. God is Being Itself. Pure existence. Act. "I AM WHO AM." 

I am wondering if post-modern, theology-of-death John is a better metaphysician, a Thomist at that, that I give him credit for and than he is aware. He is, I have always sensed, a mystic. A mystic of the cloud of unknowing. Steve is the same, yes in his cognitive non-theism. Both of them, in their conceptual renunciation of theism seem to be moving, in heart and spirit, towards God in the great transcendence and depth of Mystery which so far surpasses our concepts and pieties. 

As the mass continues in its simplicity and modesty, the irony is striking. Our celebrant verbally and cerebrally affirms the finality of Nothingness. And yet he offers all the canonical, orthodox prayers, along with the liturgical gestures, in a quiet, deep prayerfulness.  The readings, prayers and responses resound over and over again: Dan is alive in Christ. John believes all of it in the depth of his being...or he is the best actor in the world! Steve receives Communion. My canon-lawyer-brain does a quick calculation: he has probably missed Sunday mass about 2,587 times since his last confession. But I am glad that that is none of my business and I am glad that he receives because I somehow know that he is in communion with Christ, as is Dan, if I cannot explain all of this. The mass, as performed by John, becomes for me, a mystical experience. An encounter with quiet not-a-thingness, something beautiful and mystifying and exhilarating.

I am so happy to be there with this small, precious group. We remember in prayer, our classmates, living and dead. I gratefully recall Dan: his immense affection, his bear hugs, his striking intelligence, his zest for life, his huge faith, his extraordinary heart. He really liked me. I really liked him.

I also pray for him. He had about him a fierceness, a deep capacity (which I never really observed, but I sensed it) for anger (mostly righteous). He died angry at the Church, declining a funeral mass. He is not canonizable by ordinary Catholic standards. In the encounter with St Peter at the pearly gates and with his Savior at the particular judgment, there will be fire. Blows. Agonistic struggle. He will not back down easily. But the love of Jesus will prevail. Laughter. Overflowing affection.

May Dan enjoy the Quiet of Not-a-Thingness. May he exult in the extravagant, explosive, ferocious Fire of the hyper-mega-uber-giga-Everything-ness of God!

The  

Sunday, September 10, 2023

Cultural/Historical Context of the Gay Movement

What follows addresses masculine homosexuality. Those who identify as gay or gay-affirming will strongly disagree. 

We have always had homosexual practice with us: in Abraham's time the city of Sodom; in the Maccabees' age the imperialist Hellenic culture; in St. Paul's the decadence of Rome. Our Judaeo-Christian faith has always renounced it as sinful. But a major, dominant, cultural "gay" movement would have been unthinkable in any traditional or ancient society, including that in which I (a boomer) was raised. Prior to 1970 this practice was largely reserved to marginal, fringe groups such as artists and bohemians. Of course we have had generation after generation of family members, priests and religious who have suffered this attraction silently and humbly, in varying degrees of chastity, holiness and heroism. 

The "gay reality" became possible, indeed inevitable, only in the wake of the cataclysmic Cultural Revolution, the sexual liberation of the 1960s. It is indeed, the epitome, the quintessential expression of that contraceptive transformation of the human person.

What is Gay?

It is not a synonym for "homosexual."  Rather, it is:

1.Homosexuality exaggerated into an identity. The attraction becomes the defining, essential structure of the person. A novel category is imagined: "sexual orientation" which creates a hard binary of hetero/homo-sexual. A "born that way" dogma is accepted without any scientific warrant.

2. Homosexual acts are accepted as morally good. Traditions of all religions and cultures that associate sexual acts with procreation are rejected in favor of a contracepted view. Practices of chastity, abstention, and marital fidelity are disparaged.

3. Traditional viewpoints that view these actions as immoral are reconfigured as hateful, homophobic, shaming, vicious and immoral.

4. A novel religious culture is created with belief systems, moral codes and liturgical celebrations including a distinctive literature, "coming out" celebrations and parades.

Contrast: The Great Generation and the Boomers

The moral character of our parents' generation was forged in the suffering of the Depression and combat in WWII. These trials elicited deep religious faith, selflessness, generosity, humility, gratitude. They build the most prosperous economy in human history and raised us, their children, in security, comfort, entitlement. It spoiled us. We did not inherit their moral character. Rather, we grew up pampered, entitled, consumerist, careerist, individualistic, secular, arrogant, narcissistic. The one failure of the Great Generation is that they did not protect us from the Sexual Revolution against which we had no defense.

What we see here is the classic biblical pattern: God allows his people to be afflicted...as in the slavery of Egypt, 40 years of desert Exodus, and exile in Babylon... in order to bring about conversion of heart to humility, faith, fidelity. However in prosperity and comfort they turn repeatedly to idols. And so, after two decades of indulgence, we were vulnerable to the perfect storm that erupted as the Cultural Revolution.

Convergence of Cultural Currents

The Sexual Revolution of the 1960s, in all its complexity, density and power, may have been Lucifer's singular masterpiece, second only to the temptation in the garden. Particularly:

1. The sterilization and trivialization of sex by contraception, surely the most consequential and catastrophic invention in human history. Sexuality was removed from its sacred enclosure within religion, the procreation of human life, the continuance of family and tribe, the communion in heart/body/soul of male and female, the nexus of family and society. It was replaced by sex as expressive, romantic, recreational, and therapeutic.

2. Deconstruction of masculinity/femininity as the technological/materialist complex reconfigured the human as neutered, androgynous units of production and consumption. The two sexes, always defined in relation to each other, as well as to the children and family, became incoherent, sterile and formless.

3. The sovereignty of the Self, desperate in isolation and narcissism, unhinged with the decline of religion, family, and organic communities as well a crisis in allegiance to institutions, permeated the entire culture and expressed itself in the sexual liberation of the Left and the economic libertarianism of the Right.

4. A sentimental, romantic myth became dominant in popular culture, especially entertainment, that "true love" is the pathway to final human happiness. This "true love" is a fantasy, far removed from the hard realities of commitment, fidelity, forgiveness and unrelated to family, ancestry, religion and descendants.

5. Triumph of the therapeutic in a cult of personal fulfillment to fill the emptiness left by a decline of sense of the supernatural, heaven, sacredness, spiritual warfare, evil, Satan, hell and sin. 

6. "Victimhood" became an elevated moral status, in an inversion of the  classic scapegoat dynamic: in the wake of the Civil Rights triumph women, ethnic and sexual minorities self-presented  as victims to enhance their cultural worth. 

7. Tradition was replaced by a progressivism that disparages sacred authority and the past and trusts in science, technology, an imagined Darwinian evolution...the vaunted "curve of history." 

8. The Marxist dialectic of oppressor/oppressed was wedded to a crude Neo-Freudian obsession with sexual liberation that birthed the identity politics of LGBTQ, hard feminism, Black Lives Matter, etc. 

The "gay" person became the ultimate expression of this utopian (but really dystopian) world: sterile, secular, androgynous, isolated, narcissistic, victimized, detached from and ungrateful to the past, sentimentally romantic, therapy-focused, transgressive, righteous in judgment against Church, authority, and traditions around the family. 

Who Becomes "Gay"?

Not all homosexuals become or "come out" as "gay." Many embrace Catholic practice, pick up the cross of frustration and sadness, and live quiet, holy, heroic lives of chastity. Others succumb to the cravings of the flesh but do not identify as "gay."  This choice  seems to be prevalent in the Afro-American community. Such live a hidden, double life with all the distress that brings them and those around them. In a way, however, their discretion witnesses to the truth about sexuality, a truth they are unable to live out but which they do not denounce. We know the Church is always merciful to such sins of the flesh.

The homosexual inclination is not chosen, but received and discovered. What one does with that is a choice. Identifying as gay is a choice, a deliberate decision, an act of the intelligence, will and body. It is absolutely essential to distinguish between homosexual and gay. For example, people ask: how many Catholic priests are gay? They conflate homosexual with gay. I know that we have benefited from the lives and service of many holy, homosexual priests over the years. But recently, over the last half century, we have a new reality, those who identify as such and have created a gay clerical subculture.

A good question is: why do some with same sex attraction decide for, and some against identifying as "gay." Clearly it is an intellectual decision: that the Church is wrong about sex and that intentionally sterile sex is actually a good thing. It is a renunciation of the Church as homophobic and hateful. But this raises another question: why do some receive the Church on this issue and others refuse it? I am unaware of any literature on this. Public research would be fiercely cancelled. But I have noticed that the gay identity is often, but not always, accompanied by a complex of  psychological/spiritual dynamics. I am not alleging direct causation, but close association. In the words of Joshua Slocum: "They come on the same delivery truck." 

1. Incapacity for or aversion to chastity as continence and abstention. This can be rooted in a self-indulgent temperament and sexual compulsivity. Since the Sexual Revolution, our innate tendency to self-indulgence has been intensified by prosperity, entitlement, indulgent parenting, and the triumph of the therapeutic over traditions of asceticism. Sexual addiction itself is surely the most pervasive and unrecognized pandemic of the last 75 years. Sex itself, we know, is not a human need; no one goes to the hospital or drops dead from not having sex. But habits of indulgence lead to compulsivity and lack of freedom. Obviously, the internet has increased the use of pornography and practice of masturbation, the "gateway" to other forms of sexual misbehavior.

2. Tendencies to narcissism, histrionics and the symptoms of personality disorders. The melodramatic, exaggerated paraphernalia of gay culture...parades, pride months, social media saturation, drag queens, etc...speaks for itself.  Even milder expressions like flamboyance and effeminacy have about them a performative, Halloween, costume flavor. Joshua Slocum strongly argues the association of gay life with Axis B disorders.

3. Underlying feelings of passivity, victimhood, and self-pity. As a group, gay people are far more affluent than the general population; but their narrative of victimhood vests them with high moral status in woke, progressive, elite culture. 

4. Attitude of self-righteousness by which they assume a posture of moral superiority in judgement against the "homophobic" Church and its traditions.

5. Underlying all of the above I have sensed a deep, tragic reality: a loneliness, a misconnect even from loving family and friends, an abyss of emptiness. This chasm of sadness is not filled by family, friendships, therapy, religion...and will not be sated by the gay life.

So we see that homosexuality is an attraction, an emotion or passion. But "gay" is an identity, a way of life, an intellectual/volitional/physical attitude, a moral code, a culture, a religion, and a tragedy.

Is "Gay Affirmation" a Manifestation of "Love in Truth?" 

The "gay friendliness" of Catholic progressives is well-intended as compassion for the suffering associated with this condition, including the bullying and  social stigma. But it is sentimental and unrealistic. It is cooperation with behavior that is self-destructive

"Gay" is not happy, or healthy, or holy. The actions themselves are toxic for the body, leading to infection and bone deterioration in bodily parts that were not intended by nature or our Creator for such uses. The actions themselves are inherently degrading as there is a dominant/receptive, an oppressor/ oppressed, an upper/lower. This is in the nature of the acts. The way of life and the culture are futile, depressing, and despairing. Even in places that for decades have been gay-friendly and free of social stigma (Scandinavia, San Francisco, NYC), such communities suffer extreme rates of addiction, mental illness, suicide, and violence. 

The current fashion of herd enthusiasm for gay rights and marriage will certainly decline, if slowly, as the nature of things becomes evident: the tragic consequence of this way of life. But resistance to the Truth is deep in our culture. The widespread acceptance of a sterilized and trivialized sexuality...porn, masturbation, cohabitation, serial divorce...guarantees the acceptance of homosexual activity. Within the Church, a soft, emasculated progressivism is indulgent and enabling. Many liberal Catholics avoid the topic in embarrassment and lack courage to express a truth that may hurt feelings. Some, notably Fr. James Martin S.J., reject the Catholic teaching but disguise it in the trappings of kindness and inclusivity. Others, like Pope Francis, do not reject our tradition, but are eager to please and form a rash judgement against those who do dare to speak this truth. 

We cannot improve upon an old adage:  "Hate the sin. Love the sinner." Our love for the sinner, the actual person, is lessened when we suppress our hatred for sin; our love is inflamed when we grow in holiness and deepen our hatred of sin.  


Saturday, September 9, 2023

Class, Caste, and Hierarchy

My college friend Tim recommended Caste by Isabel Wilkerson, suggesting that the USA and the Catholic Church are both caste systems. I disagree. Let's contrast class, caste and hierarchy.

Class

Every developed society has classes; it is inevitable. The one absolute effort to create a really classless society, Mao's Cultural Revolution in China, 1966-76, competes with Hitler and Stalin as the greatest human calamity of the 20th century. Class society as we encounter it is in part an expression of human sin: the urge to dominate, control, possess. But it is not inherently so. Its essential form is positive: it allows the complexity, diversity, and richness of civilization.

A wholesome class society will have: a just distribution of responsibilities, influence and benefits; mutuality in respect in spite of inevitable clashes of interest; some flexibility in movement between classes; countervailing dynamics of power so none dominate; and a widely accepted religious consensus in tension with freedoms.

An example of such a society is feudal 13th century Europe. Serfs were the bottom of society but they were not slaves. They were protected from Vikings and Visigoths by the knights who gave their lives in combat. They were served by the clergy, who by and large lived celibately and obediently. Monks prayed in monasteries and developed culture and agriculture; Friars wandered around, living poverty, preaching the Gospel. Various orders of women religious lived their own lives, largely free of men. Craftsmen in their guilds had their distinctive, rich cultures and freedoms. The nobility, along with clergy, resisted an expansive royalty (e.g. Magna Carta, England, 1215). Church and State endlessly fought each other for power and prerogatives. It was not a utopia, not a "Camelot." Plenty of sin. But it was a rich, diverse, thriving, complicated universe respectful of the rights of the different groupings.

Another example of a relatively healthy class society is the USA 1945-65. The power of rich, capitalist, often WASP Republicans was countervailed and sometimes trumped by the largely ethnic, Catholic working class: politically in the Democratic Party, economically by the unions, culturally by the Churches. The black family was making great strides economically and religiously (intact father/mother families); women were largely happy to have their men home safe from war and getting lots of overtime; Puerto Ricans were streaming out of their island to NYC for opportunities; the financial gap between capital and labor was narrow as suburban neighborhoods gathered businessmen, lawyers, doctors, factory workers and truck drivers all together on the same block. This was not a utopia or a "Camelot." Plenty of sin. But it was a thriving society, with a huge pie to share, and a congenial, ecumenical, Protestant-but-Catholic-friendly, increasingly anti-racist, anti-communist consensus.

Now, 60 years later, our classes have moved more towards a caste configuration. Our meritocracy allows the most talented and ambitious from all groups to rise to the top. An obsessional anti-racism at the upper echelons has marginalized residues of racism and ethnic prejudice. Sexual identity politics, the ideology of the affluent, has elevated the status of transgressive groups. But the great misfortune is the shrinking of the middle class, the diminishment of the unions,  the persistence of a multi-racial Culture of Poverty, and the division into two societies, largely around education. One group is able to access education/connection/opportunity and flourish. The other half is far more impoverished than their union member parents and vulnerable to family chaos, addictions and deaths of despair.

Isabel Wilkerson's view of our "caste" society is diametrically opposed to the reality I see. She says that the dominant class, Trump voters, are overwhelmingly white and male. I see the Trump phenomenon as the rage of the lower class, disparaged by cosmopolitan elites and deprived of the manufacturing base that sustained an earlier prosperity. I see the upper tier of society as increasingly feminine as women are outperforming men in the academy and a crisis of masculinity has now become a pandemic, especially among the poor. I see the rich and the poor class both as colorless, embracing all groups in a class divide based on merit.

Wilkerson describes a caste system in which she, a black and a woman, is at the bottom. She is a Pulitzer Prize winner; a best-selling author; taught at Princeton. She would see me myself, an old, white man, at the top of the pyramid of power. Her income and wealth may be 10 times greater than mine. I am happy with my place in the scheme of things; but she is far, far above me in the pecking order. As a woke, black, Ivy-league-connected woman, she is at the very pinnacle of privilege and power, along with Oprah (who endorsed the book) and Michele (who would surely be the most popular potential presidential candidate from either party.)

Nevertheless, our society remains largely diverse, robust, and free. Yuval Levin has pointed out that neither the Right nor the Left are able to dominate this fractured, huge society so both sides usually see themselves as losing the Culture War. There remain a mesmerizing variety of interest groups...religious, ethnic, economic, regional...which compete and constrain each other in a manner that allows a fair degree of freedom. Not a utopia; not a "Camelot."

Caste

Wilkerson rightly identifies Nazi Germany, Hindu India, and our anti-bellum/Jim Crow South as caste systems.  Three aspects stand out:

1. An extreme inequality in distribution of goods.

2. A rigidity that prohibits movement between groups.

3. A religious sense of purity that sees the underclass as contaminated.

Let's see if the USA in 2023 is such a system.

My view is that inequality of opportunity and result has worsened since 1965. The wealth/income gap between the lower and upper levels has greatly increased. The class divide has worsened. But I would still not go so far as to see a caste system.

Our meritocratic society is extremely mobile: people are constantly moving up and down the ladder of affluence and influence. Those with less talent, ambition and connections become "losers" and suffer loss of dignity, simmering rage and despair. The smart, energetic and competent become "winners" and enjoy inflated self esteem, status, and material abundance. It awakens anxiety in the upper tiers and the aspiring middle classes who worry that their children will not attend the best schools and get good jobs. This is not, in my mind, an entirely healthy society. But it is NOT a caste society.

Wilkerson gives vile examples of the "contamination" concept: a swimming pool had to be drained because a single black child swam in it. This is, on the face of it, social psychosis, insanity. She, along with her entire coterie, is kicking a horse that died fifty years ago.   Our liberal elite are anti-racist in a self-congratulatory, boastful, self-serving manner. Yet they shamelessly manifest their contempt for the "deplorables" of their cosmos: Trump voters, rednecks, proud boys, Orthodox Jews, anti-vaxxers, traditional Evangelicals and Catholics, gun lovers, uneducated evolution-and-global-warming deniers. 

She constructs in her book an imaginary caste system, perhaps, to camouflage  her real position at the top of a viciously unjust political/cultural order.

Hierarchy

Etymologically, "hier" means "sacred, holy, supernatural" and "arch" means rule. So the word means: "rule by the holy, sacred, supernatural." 

This is entirely different from the accepted understanding of hierarchy as a social order of rankings, top to bottom, with power and privilege concentrated at the top. To the liberal, secular, democratic mind, hierarchy is always oppression of the lower by the upper. The accusation that Catholicism is a caste system suggests a now-secularized version of the classic Protestant contempt for the Catholic clerical-sacramental economy. In a world without the supernatural, however, it expresses the autonomy and resentment of the Sovereign Self who bows to nothing and no one.

For the Catholic, "hierarchy" is a sacred, precious, tender Word. It indicates that the Eternal, the heavenly, has come to us, here on earth, in a fleshly, concrete, systematic, institutional manner.

At a priestly ordination, we wait in line for the first blessing of the priest and then kiss his hands. Because these very human hands will bring us the very Body of Christ. Because this flawed, sinful man will absolve our sins. 

In the Catholic cosmos, Mary reigns as Queen of heaven and earth. She is superior to angels, devils, kings, popes, saints and sinners. She was a poor, humble female from a conquered people. Tradition has it that Lucifer and his legions revolted rather than defer to such a creature. Every free creature faces the same decision: revolt or surrender.

The entire hierarchy exists to serve the ever-embodied Christ who finds his highest expression in the Sacred Host: small, thin, weightless, tasteless, quiet, hidden in the tabernacle and mostly ignored.

The slander against our hierarchy is that it is powerful, arrogant, mostly white men trying to control others' lives. Consider the reality. Priests give up marriage, family, descendants and sexual expression. They pledge obedience to another. They make almost no money. (The just resigned President of Seton Hall University here in NJ was making $1.7 million annually. If a priest takes the job, in accord with the by-laws, he may make $21,000.) In todays progressive society, they are largely despised as retrograde, superstitious and associated with pedophilia. 

The word "catholic" means "universal or inclusive of all." And so we are compelled to reach out an bring into our bosom those of every race, nation, ethnicity. Today is the feast of St. Peter Clavier, a Spaniard who met the slave boats in Cartagena,, Columbia, with food, water, medicine, catechesis and baptism. He is said to have welcomed into the Church over 300,000 of these suffering Africans. That is the Catholic hierarchy.

The Church is composed of distinct "orders" which serve each other. This is different from classes or castes. The most obvious is the apostolic orders of deacon, priest, bishop. From the beginning these were structured by poverty, chastity and obedience: the very opposites of power, privilege, comfort. Obviously, our actual priests fall short of the ideal; but the form is clear and pure and the opposite of a caste.

Among the first "orders" to emerge organically in the Church were virgins and widows. Spontaneously, in patriarchal Rome, young women were grasped by the love of Christ and passionately surrendered themselves to virginity, prayer, and service to the poor. Many gave their lives as martyrs. Eventually these holy urges found expression in religious orders where women lived mostly in freedom from men. Likewise, "widows" were early recognized as a sacred order, women deprived of husbands and income, in need of charitable assistance, who are close to heaven in their prayer and holiness. Even today, in black evangelicalism, the "Church Mother" is recognized and respected, if informally and spontaneously. In Catholic parishes as well we see that it is mostly women who fill the Churches and staff volunteer programs. 

We see here a complex, rich, thriving society of interlocking orders: the masculine (imaging the Groom) priesthood, monks, friars, hermits, cloistered and active orders of nuns, consecrated virgins, lay institutes, brothers, various lay associations/movements, and of course the fundamental "base Church" of the family. Each has its specific tasks, powers, charisms, privileges. The Pope himself is no absolute monarch but oriented to service of the entire Church and fidelity to the received Tradition. Even Pope Francis with his incoherent, irritated discontent with the Church he received has not significantly challenged any fundamental Church doctrine, not contraception, not masculine priests, not homosexuality.

We Need More Hierarchy

We need, at every level of human life, to be under the influence of God, the Eternal, the heavenly.  We need more "rule by the Sacred." In the created realm we need to open ourselves to the resonances from heaven in the True, the Good and the Beautiful

Let us contrast power with authority. Power is the capacity to force someone, externally, as in police action, warfare and power politics. As in power tools.  It is extrinsic, not interior. It has its proper place in things; but it is overrated.

Authority is not coercion. It is the radiance of an interior Good, Truth or Beauty that attracts the heart, intellect and will in freedom. As such, it is influential. Why do we go to a Taylor Swift concert? We are not compelled. We are drawn by the loveliness of her music, voice, performance and style. Why do we devour books in our spare time? We are not compelled. We are driven by a craving to know Reality, to be engaged by Truth. Why do we admire Mother Teresa and other saints? We are not compelled. We delight in her generosity, freedom, goodness. 

So we see that "authoritative" is opposed to "authoritarian." The former attracts from a radiance of interior goodness; the later coerces through violence. The hierarchical economy of the Catholic Church is authoritative in its appeal to human freedom. The caste society is violence of the above to the below. They are polar opposites.

I do not want my children to be "empowered women" or "powerful men." Of course I want them to have interior fortitude; proper self-esteem; and energetic, assertive generosity. I want them to be receptive of the Good/True/Beautiful in the ever-surprising, dramatic events of life and to radiate that and influence many for the good.

USA 2023 is not a caste system. It is fractured, polarized, adrift. It has lost its roots in religion. "Religion" etymologically drives from "bond" so it indicates our bonding with God and each other. We have sundered these bonds diabolically (etymology of "diabolical" is to break apart) on behalf of the sterile, despairing, secular isolation of individualism, narcissism, and the therapeutic. 

We do not need a Darwinian evolution of science/technology deeper into nihilism. We do not need the sexual liberation of Marcuse, Reich, militant feminism and the LGBTQ crusade. We do not need a power take over in the Marxist dialectic of Alinsky, identity politics, CRT, and the hard Left.

We need to open our hearts, intellects, wills, and every social organism to the re-enchantment of the cosmos which can be precisely dated: the Immaculate Conception of Mary. At that precise moment, the heavenly indwelt the earthly in a definitive, permanent, pure fashion. At that moment the Holy Spirit, already anticipating the redemptive Passover of the Son, indwelt a minute, feminine, human creature to prepare a home for God himself. From that seed an endless, indeed eternal surge of grace, live and love flow. Since then we live under the maternal Queenship of Mary (a matriarchy) who collaborates with her son, Christ our King, under the fatherhood of God the Father (patriarchy.)

We cannot adequately give thanks, praise, and exultation for this Splendid Kingdom, for this Rule by the Holy!