Catholic Sensibility

" ... I believe it is not unfair to call contemporary liberal Catholicism an "exhausted project," even though some of my best friends are liberal Catholics." George says exhausted. I say the cardinal is engaging in wishful thinking. Let's take a closer look.

To caricature somewhat, the project both for ecclesial renewal and for mission in the world takes its cues from the editorial page of the New York Times or, even worse, USA Today. More than somewhat; this is a substantial caricature. I think the cardinal is out of his element here. I think this portion of his essay is not totally inaccurate when speaking of liberal Christianity. And while grateful for his nod that the NYT may not be devoid of gospel values, I think he vastly overstates the case that liberal Catholics are children of social gospel Protestantism rather than authentic Catholicism. " ... God’s ways are not our ways and that the greatest contribution the church makes to the world is to preach gospel truths in ways that, inevitably, will both comfort and confront any society in which she takes up Christ’s mission." This posture of both comforting and confronting strikes me as the heart of Catholic liberalism. Contemporary Catholic conservatives identify very much with a status quo that places trust in military strength, economic superiority, and cultural stasis. Yes, yes, I know you'll start up with the a-word. But I'm not convinced abortion is the political centerpiece for the establishment that it is for many conservative Catholics. Very few conservatives will break out of their psychological conservativism to confront Republicans on abortion. The Democrats may be idiots when it comes to abortion, but if the R's had any inkling a change in abortion-on-demand would upset the economy or the political status quo, and dissent from the pro-life or anti-abortion folks would be snuffed quicker than a candle in a vacuum. I still see liberals confronting society these days. As a body we're anti-war. We disagree with just about everything the political establishment in the US has stood for since 1981, including a moderate Dem prez who couldn't get universal health care and gave us NAFTA scandals instead. He was Ronald Reagan in an Arkansas suit with a college education and a sex problem. Big deal. But I digress. Low point here: Personal experience becomes the criterion for deciding whether or not Jesus is my savior, a point where liberal Catholics and conservative Protestants seem to come to agreement, even if they disagree on what salvation really means. And a conceded point here: Liberal culture discovers victims more easily than it recognizes sinners; and victims don’t need a savior so much as they need to claim their rights. Although if it gets them a tax break and a cushy government appointment, conservatives play the rights card just as well. The call to personal conversion, which is at the heart of the gospel, has been smothered by a pillow of accommodation. That's as true of the Church which fundraises or celebrates its own insularity. It's a human failing, Cardinal, not an exclusively liberal sin. Liberal Catholicism, in the too general and somewhat unfair way I have sketched it here, has not sufficiently distinguished between the properly theological warrants necessary to argue convincingly to some of its desiderata and the reasons for ecclesial change that take their strength merely from a liberal culture which tells us, as all cultures do, what to think and how to act. In an apostolic church, however, the burden of proof for changing established doctrinal and moral teaching rests on those who ask for change. What the cardinal calls "unfair" I might characterize as "uninformed" or even "deceptive." But I do agree that the liberal argument has been poorly presented all too often. Compared to an uninformed prelate, I have even less patience for people who present valid considerations in secular rather than religious language. The message must be communicated in the language of those who listen. Otherwise, the message is an exercise in narcissism. That is as true for those who propose change for the Church as well as for the Church that proposes change in society. This isn't a crisis of philosophy, but in communication.