John Cavadini on Evangelization and Healing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=UCiJwMRc4co Intrinsically connected is not the right phrase. They have to be the same. Jesus essentially came to "free the captives." This is his anointing that the "deaf hear, the blind see and the poor have the gospel preached to them." Cavadini is wrong to say that healing has to proceed from evangelization because he sees evangelization as the doctrinal presentation of dogma. Evangelization is to free the captives and set them free. It is not a liberalism which allows them to get the crumbs off our table but a Good News which brings them into the fullness of life. It is not that we let them sit at our table but we give them an honored place. We wash their feet. It is not as important to explain the Trinity or the dominance of the pope as it is to set the captives free. "THE SPIRIT OF THE LORD IS UPON ME, BECAUSE HE ANOINTED ME TO PREACH THE GOSPEL TO THE POOR. HE HAS SENT ME TO PROCLAIM RELEASE TO THE CAPTIVES, AND RECOVERY OF SIGHT TO THE BLIND, TO SET FREE THOSE WHO ARE OPPRESSED, The Good News is that the life of Christ is available to all and that we begin this life in this world. Not a proclamation of dogmas that we really do not understand. When we put dogma (evangelization) first we end up with marvelous (and strange) red cossacks and ancient miters which bespeak of empire so that the Vatican becomes a place where we must preserve royalty and from which we will condemn those who set the captives free. When the captives are freed God is glorified. The false glorification of God leads to Charlemagne, Bernard of Clairvoux and the exaltation of Europe over everybody else. Jesus puts the captives first in his anointing. So should we.

Ross Douthat Still Superficial

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/03/opinion/sunday/douthat-the-ratzinger-legacy.html?ref=opinion&_r=0 I appreciate the way Ross outlines his essay. He gives us a lot to consider citing meaningful sources while his interpretations indicate that he has hardly read them. But the biggest mistake Douthat makes is equating Spong with Ratzinger’s Catholic critics. These Catholic critics are people with strong moral values who want to see a gospel Catholicism as opposed to an inquisitional one. Such people as Elizabeth Johnson, John O Malley, Thomas Reese, Hans Kung, Bernard Haring, Charles Curran, Tissa Balasuriva, Paul Collins, Joan Chittister, and a host of others, are hardly people who are laissez faire Catholics. Douthat further shows his certified ignorance with the following statement. “This doesn’t mean there isn’t some further version of reform, some unexpected synthesis of tradition and innovation, that would serve Catholicism well.” If he had seriously read the above authors (and other Catholic scholars) he would have found solid avenues for renewal. While he is clever and outlines the problems of the church he continues to show a stubborness for superficial analysis. As far as Ratzinger is concerned it seems to me that he has come full circle and even like a man without a country, as it were. The young progressive theologian bolted to the right when radical students took over his podium which made him choose a different path. That fifty year turn to the right has had the same result with his own traditionalists making him irrelevant where he could not even control them.

Those Censured by Benedict XVI have more Gospel than he.

Favorable sentiments for Benedict XVI is a result of the “damnatio memoriae” which the Vatican does so well. Indeed, I had to take a double take at feeling sorry for Benedict as he departed from the papacy. It is the power of “teflon” and staging. History will be kinder to Kung than all the theologians you cited. He stayed the course and did not relent under those who truly sought to undermine Vatican II. It would have been very difficult to have the constructive opposition to Rome without Hans Kung. In fact what is best about the great documents of Vatican II bear Kung’s imprint. Mostly everybody else caved in while Kung stuck to his principles. His masterpiece “On Being a Christian” will be read by future generations more than anything by JP II and Benedict XVI. The Vatican can erase the memory, “damnatio memoriae”, of Haring, Guttierez, Kung, Curran and others. But the truth will come out in their favor.

Send the Vatican a Message

“For the Catholic Church, it has been “all bad news, all the time” since Benedict took office in 2005: a papal insult to Muslims; a papal embrace of a Holocaust denier; molesting by priests and cover-ups by their superiors. When the Scottish cardinal Keith O’Brien resigned on Monday amid reports of “inappropriate” conduct toward priests in the 1980s, the routine was wearingly familiar. It’s enough to make any Catholic yearn to leave the whole mess for someone else to clean up.” Benedict messed up. Are we going to face it or continue the absurd rhapsody? Yes it has been all bad news all the time.” Those of you who zero in on missing Mass have not thought it out. Ellie also promised to go to about ten other services on Sunday. Simultaneously!! Of course it is Satire. But do we get the point? Ellie is trying to wake us out of our unconscionable sleep. Where we tolerate the most egregious behavior from the pope and bishops. The scandals that continue are really our fault. Our heroes cannot be wrong. We can’t get out of idolizing humans. The Vatican is more important than jesus. We love the Empire over the church of Jesus Crucified.

Shameful trappings of the papacy

We should not ignore the symbolism of this whole transition. Supreme Pontiff with all his trappings now goes temporarily to lavish vacation home of popes. Then he will return to specifically built quarters just for him with lavish care and attendants. The head of the church, Jesus, was shamefully crucified before two thieves. He never had all these attendants and always served rather than served. The trappings of the papacy remains a prodigious scandal to the Crucified Jesus who insisted that the leaders should serve and that the last should be first.

Galileo and Contraception--The pope's speech

"And we knew that the relationship between the Church and the modern period, right from the outset, had been slightly fraught, beginning with the Church’s error in the case of Galileo Galilei; we were looking to correct this mistaken start and to rediscover the union between the Church and the best forces of the world, so as to open up humanity’s future, to open up true progress." (MEETING WITH THE PARISH PRIESTS AND THE CLERGY OF ROME ADDRESS OF HIS HOLINESS POPE BENEDICT XVI Paul VI Audience Hall Thursday, 14 February 2013) How many caught this in the pope's speech? Comparable to Galileo is the church's stand on contraception. Contraception is considered one of the great health advances of the twentieth century. Yet the RCC has given more grief and caused more harm with its resistance to condoms and other methods to limit birth. Will a future council or synod seek to "correct this mistaken start and to rediscover the union between the Church and the best forces of the world, so as to open up humanity’s future, to open up true progress." Then came Ottaviani, Woyitla and Humanae Vitae. And of course, those self aggrandizers, Neuhaus, wiegel and Novak. Quite an interesting comment by the pope. Do we see the irony?

Wash the feet of one another. Servants not Priests. Gary Wills

The preoccupation with the apology is an unfortunate distraction from the theology involved. Will's theology is sound and Vatican II began to straighten that out until Ottaviani and Co. started to modify the documents. So this is nothing new. This is why Vatican II talked about "presider" rather than priest. The Body of Christ is really the church which is what Jesus meant when he said that the second commandment, Love your neighbor, is equal to the first, Love God with all your being. The harmful sacralization of presiders is a principal reason why there is so much error surrounding this office. At one time there were priests solely for the purpose of saying Mass, nothing else, so they could monetize the stipends. The fallacy that each Mass saves a thousand worlds is related to this. Nowadays a terrible practice of sending Nigerian and Indian priests here is an apt example. Worst of all because these men are needed to minister to their own people so many of whom are living in squalor. The idea for sending the priests here is to continue the Eucharist. The fact is that the community makes the Eucharist, not the priest. That terrible error allows millions in the missions to go without the Eucharist. It is not celibacy that prevents the Eucharist from happening. It is the fallacy of a regal priesthood. The priesthood and bishops are the creation of an Empire church. The hierarchy always got away with this faulty theology because of an uneducated and intimidated laity. Now that the guillotine cannot be used by the church as a weapon we see more clearly. The cover-up of sex abuse should have given us the definitive answer. The bishops and pope were more concerned about their reputation than the welfare of children. We do need officials in the church. But we need to center on the life, death and resurrection of Jesus which the Eucharist is. Not a symbol of power and domination. So stop calling the pope , bishops and priests "Father" because you have one Father in heaven as Jesus admonishes. Keep church officials responsible and remind them that they are servants not rulers. Then your scandals will be minimized http://www.taiw.org/Pages/default.aspx

Compromise by the White House on Contraception

Basically it seems to say that women who work for places that object can purchase their own coverage without cost. I do not see how anyone can object to this. As far as the Catholic church and contraception go it is an irony that what has been arguably the greatest health benefit of the modern era is opposed by an institution whose leaders are not arguably models of virtue. Any objective historian knows that the reason Paul VI was persuaded to go against the recommendation of his birth control commission was the apparent threat to infallibility of the church. The irony is that very few hold to infallibility in the church anymore. No wonder so many women are angry at a leadership who militates against their well being. These false religious liberty bishops have impinged on the basic liberty of women.

Today's Gospel Luke 4 14-21

The central theme of the ministry of Jesus is to free the captives. Francis of Assisi showed how deceptive the claim of spiritual poverty can be if one bathes in material comforts. Those who gazed upon Jesus condemned him as those monarchs in the church still do. The Vatican regales in splendor while millions lack basic necessities. The widespread practice in the church of sending Indian and African priests here and to other prosperous countries while most of their people are still captives living in squalor and domination is a living denial of Luke 4. Spiritual poverty and enlightenment are suspect when the physical aspects are not embraced. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB127968175399519301.html#slide/1

The New Evangelization

The new Catechesis is perhaps a euphemism for control or preserving the hierarchy/empire. Is the new evangelism going to give us homilies on “consubstantial with the Father” and the revelations of Sr. Faustina? Not far from advocating declaring Mary the Mediatrics of all graces. Again. Then maybe it is a question of who needs catechesis. Bernard of Clairvoux certainly needed catechesis because he advocated the killing of infidels as he along with the pope declared the remission of all sins for those warriors who on the way to Jerusalem plundered and ruined most of the towns they passed through. Or perhaps Athanasius of Alexandria who pranced around Egypt and Constantinople declaring that he had the right to be bishop of Alexandria. Or Augustine of Hippo as he advocated soldiers to force people to become Catholics while telling married people that it was a sin to enjoy marital love making. And what about the Fathers of the Church presiding over the massive adulteration of the Christian faith? Or perhaps Pius XII, and too many German Catholic bishops who kept silent about the massacre of the Jews. …..etc. Ah yes. The New Evangelization. Pretty soon it will be declared again that it is at least a venial sin to criticize a bishop and probably a mortal sin.

Is the Church of Dogma replacing the Church of the Way. Again

I guess now that the bishops want to return to preaching dogma rather than proclaiming the scripture, we may as well go back to talking about money all the time. Discipleship is in following the way of Jesus. Not explaining fine points of doctrine and what makes a sin venial or mortal and how the Trinity works. The truth is no one has the faintest idea of the Trinity tho it is touted as more important than the crucifixion. My my. Now that the bishops have profoundly catechized us in saying "and with your spirit" rather than "also with you", we can go back to ignoring scripture which we were forbidden to read at one time. Jesus made it very clear that his anointing was to set the captives free. Now the bishops pretend they are the captives because federal funding is not the way they want it. Yet the captives are still not free. In fact they are being abandoned more and more as the bishops pay Indian and African priests to come here while those priests leave serious captives in their own homelands. So the bishops remain in palaces as they maintain they want to catechize while "the poor do not have the gospel preached to them."

New Year Resolutions to "Set the Captives Free"

Do we challenge our resolutions enough so that we may aspire to a more excellent way? Certainly controlling our weight is admirable but how about those "Behind the Beautiful Forevers" who hardly have the option to gain weight as they endure searing sufferings as they wither away in an unforgiving place. And what kind of an obligation do we have to confront the innumerable Indian priests who minister among us while the women in their country suffer ignominiously at the hands of their male countrymen while too many Indian children languish in slime and deprivation! Surely, the bar should be raised on our aspirations and solutions must be offered in ethics as much as explanations? Is not this the most Christian use of resolutions? To set the captives free. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/08/your-money/deciding-how-to-slice-your-charitable-pie.html?pagewanted=all http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/01/opinion/how-many-slaves-work-for-you.html?hp&_r=0

Difficult for a rich person to enter heaven

That Catholics differ on social justice can be mainly traced to Augustine of Hippo. Augustine catered to the rich while trying to stay faithful to the gospel. Thus the rich did not have to sell all to get into heaven. They had to "expiate" their sins by alms giving, by bequeathing their estates to monasteries. This distinction made it ok to be rich contrary to the words of Jesus which stated that it would be very difficult for them to enter heaven. So even today the wealthy are persuaded that it is better to build 100 million dollar churches than to give to the poor. This is why Romero is ignored and empire builders are made saints. Augustine justified the rich while Jesus said it would be difficult for them to enter heaven. One could see how this translated in the Middle Ages to alms giving through indulgences which virtually purchased heaven. Thus the centuries continual courting and easing the conscience of the rich by the bishops. Cardinal Hayes ostracized the ambitious Spellman for getting to close to his rich friends. Cardinal Spellman knew the game well. Yet. largely ignored, is the action that Augustine asserted should accompany alms giving---forgiveness of enemies. How one was strongly held on to while the other practically forgotten suggests that the rich used the advice to justify holding on to their wealth. While using the artifice of Augustine to justify riches many today go to the extreme of saying that the poor deserve their misery because they are lazy. Dives never looked so good. Augustine and Ambrose owed their positions to rich Romans and they apparently never forgot it. Augustine's dalliance with Pinianus and Melania showed his willingness to ease the conscience of the rich. All of this does not mean that Augustine did not express concern for the poor in innumerable passages. What it says is that when it came to confronting the wealthy Augustine buckled. As he did when he consented to the use of force to compel Christians to enter the orthodox church. This is why wealthy, partisan bishops can continue without opposition in many quarters. Augustine made it easy for them.

Indian Priests to America while Indian Women are Abused

Without a conscience American bishops are paying for Indian priests to come here while the greatest need is in their homeland. How long can this abusive practice continue whereby money determines the pastor while the captives are not freed. The anointing of disciples specifically require freeing the captives. The bishops and pastors dwell in mediocrity while the people perish. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/28/world/asia/a-village-rape-shatters-a-family-and-indias-traditional-silence.html?hp

Rape is still covered up on College Campuses

AMHERST, Mass. — This year has brought news of student athletes charged with sex crimes at Boston University and at Temple, along with countless other less publicized cases. There have been claims that Wesleyan University tolerated a fraternity house where the abuse of women was common. A gang rape at the University of Massachusetts was reported just this week. Enlarge This Image Ilana Panich-Linsman for The New York Times Amherst College Enlarge This Image Ilana Panich-Linsman for The New York Times Dana Bolger, an Amherst College junior who said her rapist went unpunished, helped create a Web site credited with raising awareness about sexual violence at the school. But none has generated more soul searching, or scrutiny from beyond, than a woman’s wrenching account, published in a campus newspaper last week, of being raped in May 2011 by a fellow student at Amherst College and then being treated callously by college administrators. “Eventually I reached a dangerously low point, and, in my despondency, began going to the campus’ sexual assault counselor,” the woman wrote in The Amherst Student. “In short I was told: No you can’t change dorms, there are too many students right now. Pressing charges would be useless, he’s about to graduate, there’s not much we can do. Are you SURE it was rape?”

Set the Markets Free. Not the Captives.

Let the free market reign. When workers complain about working conditions and strike I, since I have the money, will hire goons to beat the crap out of them. The Free Market is fantastic because it allows three year old females to be trafficked to all those admirable men who make our markets what they are. The free market is great I can store a years supply of the best food while the families of Spain and Greece can wait outside restaurants to salvage the scraps. What is Jesus talking about when he says: "I have compassion on the multitude." Does he not know they caused the hunger themselves? And surely Jesus is plumb out of his mind when he continues: "THE SPIRIT OF THE LORD IS UPON ME, BECAUSE HE ANOINTED ME TO PREACH THE GOSPEL TO THE POOR. HE HAS SENT ME TO PROCLAIM RELEASE TO THE CAPTIVES, AND RECOVERY OF SIGHT TO THE BLIND, TO SET FREE THOSE WHO ARE OPPRESSED," Set the captives free? They chose their chains. And error of all errors; the Good Samaritan. What was that man doing walking alone anyway. The priest and the levite knew that. But the stupid, hated Samaritan had a senior or non-market moment. Let the free market roar so I can bribe officials who want to stop me from insider trading and screwing anybody I can. Why free the captives when the market is more catptivating? Why free the oppressed when they spoil all the fun. And if the blind stay blind there is more for me. Preach the Gospel to the Poor? Let them stay "Behind the Beautiful Forevers" and let me have my party!!!

Vatican II Fifty Years Later

Vatican II was a prodigious success. Relations with other Christians and other religions improved astronomically. The importance of baptism, not ordination, as the hallmark and responsibility of the followers of Christ. The recognition of the priesthood of all believers. Recognition of love as a primary end of marriage. Allowing Catholics to pray in their own language. The emergence of women in the church. And much more. The problem was that this was a cyclone which was not controlled. There was probably no way to control it because each side fought for its point of view negating a more practical catechesis for those not close to the council. In addition there were excesses. Some people in the renewal were just as intolerant as those they wanted to supplant. Others thought that anything goes. While there were structures that had to change, other structures like marriage and sex were not safeguarded wisely. On the whole, believe it or not, I think the church is more respected than it was before V2. Then it was considered an outdated institution that was out of touch. Few Catholics challenged the hierarchy while those outside considered the political ramifications. It is easy to repeat sound bites and charged words. Like less priests and closing parishes. Even many V2 critics acknowledge many of its positive aspects.

Bishops in Canada block foreign aid campaign for being too partisan

The bishops are not acting in accordance with Matthew 25: 31-46. Then again they have not for a long time. They insist on living in grandiose mansions with servants while Jesus did not have a home. Of course that is not the part they want to imitate. The fact that Jesus was male they will use to exclude women but the fact that he was poor is irresponsibly ignored. Their answer is they have to live according to their status. Then what is Jesus? Chopped Liver? And have they not learned that the reason all the religious orders insisted on a vow of poverty was because the hierarchy had forgot its mission. The actions of the Canadian bishops is scandalous just as the political actions of the American bishops are in covertly supporting Republicans. Few bishops, in my opinion, will pass the bar of Matthew 25.

Taxing Catholics and Independence of Bishops

While Germany is Europe’s wealthiest Catholic Church there are 25 million Catholics compared to the 75 million Catholics in the US. The numbers make up the difference money wise for the US church. As for the independence of the German bishops it may have to do more with the declining number of Catholics in Europe which keeps the European bishops on their toes. The American Catholic church is declining. Witness all those Indian and African priests making up for the unwillingness of American Catholics to join those ranks. The reason the Catholic bishops feel more secure is that religions are outwardly respected more in the US. As far as I am concerned that just means that there are more hypocrites in the US. Studies show that the morality of Catholics and Protestants are not in accordance with the gospel. Religion, at least in politics and in the media is still in. It will be interesting when that comes crashing down. Maybe the American bishops will become as humble as the German bishops. Perhaps wealthy Catholic Germans don’t use the church to exert power the way American Catholics due because the Church does not have the cachet that the American church has. The American Catholics are pretty fed up. It will be interesting what wealthy conservative Catholics will do when it becomes clear that they are betting on the wrong horse. The power vacuum that might ensue will hopefully be filled by the gospel.

German Bishops and the Church Tax

German bishops want to excommunicate any Catholics who opt out of the Church tax. Their reasoning is that those who refuse to pay the tax are opting out of membership in the church also. Many Catholics disagree. Notice how much the “Sacraments” are talked about in this issue. Critics rightly term the “Church of the Sacraments” as problematic. As if the very reception makes you a disciple rather than the imitation of Christ’s commands. Catholics know the sacraments more than they know the beatitudes which spell out the essential gospel. Somehow the sacraments can be reconciled with war and anger while the beatitudes not so easily. Indian and African priests come here on the money train to administer the sacraments while leaving the world’s poorest in their own country. Why can’t the Mafia be buried in the church when the hierarchy see the sacraments more as matter and form rather than discipleship.