Today's Chicago Tribune had a political cartoon that summarized my own thoughts on much of what has appeared in commentary since last Saturday: to the left, a woman (with a cross around her neck) exclaims, "He was unyielding on moral principles!" and (oddly) on the right was a man making the same evaluation of the Pope, but ... let us say, not favorably. The caption read "The Legacy of John Paul II" with a line to the effect of "the controversy begins."
Oh, yes.
What I find difficult to understand is why people should have a problem with the Pope not bending in matters of moral teaching. I mean, that is the whole point of moral teaching. Those who would have the Pope "change" his teachings in matters, say, of sexuality, would be horrified if he were to change the Church's moral teachings in matters of, oh, fair wages or the right to form labor unions. There are polls showing that 78% of Catholic Americans "disagree" with the Pope on the morality of artificial contraception. That could just means that 78% of Catholic Americans simply don't know any better; it doesn't mean they have the moral high ground! And in fact, how many people who "disagree" with Church teaching really know what it is, anyway? I suspect most Catholic Americans get their knowledge of Church teaching, especially in the "hot button" areas, from Time and Newsweek (or ABC, CNN, etc.) , and not from direct contact with Papal Encyclicals or the massive catechesis John Paul II provided in his Wednesday audiences (Theology of the Body being the prime example, of course). Or they went to Catholic school or (heaven help us) parish religion classes (once a week, 19 weeks out of the year, until Confirmation), and so they assume they were exposed on an appropriately wide and deep level to everything of significance in Church life and doctrine. When you consider the lack of ongoing religious education in the life of adult Catholics, it is amazing that 22% of them agree with Church teaching!
My hope is that the Holy Father's death will really give people the impetus to find out for themselves, on a genuinely adult plane, what he really taught, and not just take the un-nuanced, stripped down to less than the full truth version that the media cannot but offer. We cannot expect the media to do what is not their job.
And on a highly positive note, we learned recently that there are informal (underground?) study groups around Chicago where young adults are pondering...Theology of the Body!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
This is a difficult situation. For people to be able to fully embrace Church teaching on sexuality, we have to undo the damage done in the 70s when so many of us were told by priests that contraception is a matter of individual conscience. Things have been so bad that you could try to confess this sin and have a priest tell you in the confessional that you had not sinned.
The fullness of teaching in this area is a difficult revelation to a culture beseiged by so much awful imagery and messages from the media. Religious education in most parishes ends when people are 13 or 14. We are barely imprinting the young with the core tenets of the faith in the one hour a week we spend with them. NFP is taught in Pre Cana, I guess, but I don't think there is time to explore the full basis of the teaching.
Those grassroots study groups on Theology of the Body are probably going to be the spark.
Watching the news last Saturday, Chris Matthews asked a priest in Rome about this, bringing up the same points you mention. The priest had a good response; he said that probably 99.9% of Catholics don't live up to the two great commandments very well, but we don't say that we should do away with them.
Post a Comment