Defying the Master

First, I must say that Br. Timothy Radcliffe, OP intimidates the heck out of me. Not only is he a published author, residing at Blackfriars in Oxford and, of course, former Master General to
whom I vowed obedience, but he also has an English accent (and really wild hair).
However, I most strenuously disagree with many points of his recent article in The Tablet (may require registration), in which he seeks to interpret the new document
on homosexuality and the seminary put out by the Vatican today.
Fr. Timothy first reminds us of two things: we should interpret the document "positively" (presumably in a way that liberal, Western Europeans would consider positive) and that the vocation is a call from God (not the Church). Then he says something peculiar:

I have no doubt that God does call homosexuals to the priesthood, and they are among the most dedicated and impressive priests I have met. So no priest who is convinced of his vocation should feel that this document classifies him as a defective priest. And we may presume that God will continue to call both homosexuals and heterosexuals to the priesthood because the Church needs the gifts of both.

Now, no one pretends that God doesn't call sinners and broken men to be priests. In a way, all priests (as all people) are "defective" because we are imperfect (only perfect things have no defect). I have no doubt that God calls men who are sexually attracted to men to the priesthood. But that is quite different than God calling a homosexual to the priesthood.
God doesn't call a homosexual to the priesthood qua homosexual, but qua person. God calls us to our vocations as persons--we should not be reduced to our sexuality. God does not call us because of our sinfulness, but in spite of it. Yes, we may bring gifts derived from
our encounter with sin (a sense of humility, fortitude, etc) but the sin or defect is not itself a gift, as Fr. Timothy implies. A same-sex attraction is not a gift, but a defect (which may be seen as an opportunity to grow in virtue, as can all difficulties or temptations). We can see that Fr. Timothy has a very different understanding of homosexuality than does the Church. Fr. Timothy then attempts to understand what the document means by a "deep-seated homosexual tendency." He says that it cannot mean homosexual orientation, because he knows many good priests who have a homosexual orientation and are clearly called by God. But again he falls into a fallacy. He may not go so far as to say "A good priest I know does X. Therefore, X is good," but he comes close. He does seem to be saying that anyone who is called by God to be a priest cannot have a negative trait of enough magnitude to bar them from the ministry. Sadly, however, there are priests with problems relating to alcoholism, sexual abuse, anger issues, etc. Are all these not actually called to the priesthood? Similarly, could one say that all those whose marriages don't work weren't actually called to marriage? Or is there some other explanation?
I think that the vocational understanding of my former Master is a bit simplistic. God calls us to a certain way of life, but it is our choice to follow it. But that is not our only choice, he helps us prepare for the life he calls us to but we can fail in that preparation. If a person felt called to the priesthood, does that mean he could enter the seminary at 9? Of course not. Denying admission would not be an indication that that person is not called, but that he, in the Church's eyes, is not yet ready. Similarly, when the Church says that a man with a "deep-seated homosexual tendency" cannot be ordained, they are not saying that he does not have avocation. He simply needs to mature and reduce this tendency, if not eliminate it. Just because Fr. Timothy knows some good priests doesn't mean that it is not a good policy.
Fr. Timothy further reveals his differences with Church teaching when he says "Seminarians should learn to be at ease with whatever is their sexual orientation, content with the heart that God has given them," which puts heterosexuality on par with homosexuality (or I should say natural attraction to the opposite sex with an intrinsically disordered attraction to the same sex). Fr. Timothy rightly says that this homosexual tendency (or heterosexual one) should not be at the core of our identity, but he belies that statement by consistently referring to "heterosexuals" and "homosexuals" rather than the document's "homosexual tendency." The first overemphasizes its importance in identity. He also inflates its importance by using "orientation" which implies a fixed, immovable position, rather than a tendency. His false understanding is fully revealed when he says "I have known priests who thought that they were gay when they were 30, and then discover that they were not, and vice versa. " Using the phrase "discovered" implies an immutable, ontological status, at the core of one's being, unrelated to self-image, behavior, etc. Presumably any one of us could think we are heterosexual, get married, have children and then "discover" our true selves as a homosexual. This understanding is irreconcilable with his previous statement not to celebrate "as central to their lives what is not fundamental." Something that remains despite behavioral change and self-understanding seems pretty fundamental to me.
The Vatican document reflects a much more nuanced and sophisticated understanding of the human person and sexuality than does Fr. Timothy's writing, which is riddled with contradictions and bad anthropology. Being told you are immature may sting, but it is not a denial of one's vocation. Indeed, it may be a confirmation of it, since immaturity implies potential, a potential that needs to be grown into, but potential nonetheless.
This is what the Vatican document says about vocation:

There are two indissociable aspects in every priestly vocation: the free gift of God and the responsible liberty of the man. Vocation is a gift of divine grace, received through the Church, in the Church and for the service of the Church. Responding to the call of God, the man offers himself freely to Him in love. The desire alone to become a priest is not sufficient and there is no right to receive Ordination. It is the duty of the Church— in Her responsibility to define the necessary requisites for the reception of the Sacraments instituted by Christ— to discern the qualification of he who wishes to enter the seminary, to accompany him during his years of formation and to call him to Holy Orders, if he be judged to be in possession of the requisite qualities.

My Very Own Catholic Meme!!

Wow! It seems that my one and only Amazon review has burst onto the Catholic blogosphere in a big way! I noticed that Richard John Newhaus, editor of First Things mentioned it in his blog today. He said that he got it from Catholic World News. They both quote the abysmal Thanksgiving day prayer:

CELEBRANT: As consumers, we are conditioned by our economy never to be satisfied. But God, too, is a fantastic supplier, and we stop and take a sample inventory on this special day for giving thanks.

LEADER : For the smell of new rain, for pumpkins, and Snoopy, for the aroma of homemade bread, for cotton candy, for funny looking animals like giraffes and koalas and human beings; let us give thanks to the Lord.

2. For the smell of fall in the air, for paychecks, and smoked ribs, for the intricate designs of window frost, and for ice cubes and ice cream; let us give thanks to the Lord.

3. For clean sheets and peanut butter, and perma-press, and stereo-headphones, for vacations and seat belts, for escalators, and for views from tall buildings, and for red balloons; let us give thanks to the Lord.

4. For first romances and second romances, for eyes to see colors and ears to hear music and feet to dance, for dissenters and the right to dissent, for black and red and brown power, for pine trees and daisies, for newspapers and sandals and frogs; let us give thanks to the Lord.

5. For parks and woodsmoke and snow, for the smell of leather, for funny buttons and powerful posters, for pecan pies and long hair and french fries and recycling centers, for jet planes and for finding a nearby parking space, for zoos and splashing fountains and rock music and Bach music, let us give thanks to the Lord.

CELEBRANT: God, you overwhelm us with your goodness. And we have yet to mention your greatest gift, our brother Jesus! For these and all your gracious gifts please help us to learn how to live thankfully each day.

Curious as to whether I really did start the meme, I went to Google. The first reference is to the CWN article. The second is by Karl Keating, published in May 2004 [scroll to bottom], scant weeks after my review was put up on Amazon. Further evidence is that he used the same quotations I used (but fewer of them). (also, there is a Dominican/Catholic Answers grapevine, so anything is possible).
In July, 2004 Fr. Dowd published bits of the same prayers in his Waiting in Joyful Hope blog (and linked to my review!). Thank you Fr. Dowd for your kindness.
But this is not a blog about my lack of recognition! No, it is to show how small the Catholic world is. And I wanted to share with you the rest of the story. Fr. Newhaus and Karl Keating implied that we are far removed from these prayers. But I want you to do an exercise with me.

1. Put yourself in the mindset of a new liturgist. You want to order a "Prayers of the Faithful" book. So you go on the world's biggest book buying site.
2. Then you type in "Prayers of the Faithful"
3. And then you click on the top choice.
4. You are lead here. There are no obvious red flags. It was published in 1997 by the innocuous sounding Liturgical Press. It has a plain red and gold cover. It seems to be the most popular choice. Why not?

Well, that's why I simply had to write a review, my first and only on Amazon. I had to because that imaginary liturgist was our liturgist, at St. Albert's Priory, the Dominican House of Studies for the Western Province in Oakland. We actually ordered it and our poor lector read from it. I was so amused/angered that I snatched the book from the sacristan after mass and proceded to read through it cover to cover.
It truly is a scandal that it is the only Prayers of the Faithful available even today. I actually kind of wish that we hadn't sent it back. It would have been a great souvenir. Well, if you want to get me one for Christmas, I hear that Amazon has one left!!

If you're not outraged, you're not paying attention!

This article is truly stomach-turning. Anyone who doesn't think that the baby is alive (or wants to live!) after reading this is truly blinded by his ideology. I will let the article speak for itself...

50 babies a year are alive after abortion

by FIONA MACRAE, Daily Mail 08:31am
28th November 2005

The debate over abortion was reignited last night after it emerged that 50 babies survive botched terminations in Britain every year. The figures are the first to show the true scale of a problem thought to have been confined to just a handful of babies.
Now some of the country's leading doctors will investigate how so many survived to be born after just 22 weeks of pregnancy. Shockingly, some of the babies may have gone through more than one abortion.
The revelation triggered demands for the time limit for terminations to be cut. The procedure is currently offered 'on demand' up until the 24th week of pregnancy.
The latest figures emerged from the Confidential Enquiry into Child Health (Cemach), which monitors pregnancy deaths on behalf of Britain's six royal colleges of medicine. The study showed that, each year, up to 50 babies survive abortions carried out after 22 weeks.
Doctors in Norwich are treating a toddler born at 24 weeks after three botched
terminations. The boy, now aged two, has a range of medical problems. Cemach's report to the Department of Health could see Britain's abortion procedures being overhauled.
Currently, abortions at 22 weeks of pregnancy and above involve the fatal injection of a chemical into the baby's heart while it is still in the womb.
Any babies that survive the procedure, and are born alive, are entitled to medical care. However, anti-abortion campaigners claim that some are so unwanted that they are simply left to die.
Last night, one of Britain's leading obstetricians accused the doctors who carried out botched abortions of 'sub-standard' medicine.

Hmmm... Tradition is right again!

Just to avoid confusion, a "de facto relationship" is a nice way of saying "living together", which is a nice way of saying "living in sin" or "shacking up". Unfortunately, even otherwise faithful Catholics often see nothing wrong with it. Even those who wouldn't do it themselves see nothing wrong with others doing it. Also common (and not unrelated) is the use of contraceptives, because it would be irresponsible to have childen in a "trial marriage" (and goodness knows they wouldn't want to act irresponsibly).

Love is better if it's not lived in sin

By Barney Zwartz
November 27, 2005

LIVING "in sin" can damage future married life, says a new study that also suggests devout Christians have better love lives.

"Having experienced a de facto relationship in the past is associated with lack of intimacy and greater insecurity in a current relationship," Andrew Cameron, one of the report's authors, said yesterday.

"Our research also shows that the greater security, intimacy and harmony experienced by Christian married partners can be only partly explained by the fact that far fewer Christians have had de facto relationships and multiple partners."

Dr Cameron said the fact that Christian belief was strongly linked to healthy relationship across all four of the study's indicators - security, intimacy, harmony and conflict over gender roles - suggested something more complex was going on.

The research - by a team from Edith Cowan University in Perth, the National Church Life Survey and Anglicare, based on a 350-question survey of 1500 Australians - was presented by Anglican researchers at a conference in Sydney yesterday.

The research found that religious people, especially orthodox Christian believers, experienced greater wellbeing than people with a secular or Eastern spiritual orientation. It found that marriage enhanced feelings of security and harmony, and gave a slight advantage in intimacy. De facto relationships were more strongly linked to insecurity than were such factors as poor health, poverty or work stress.

Nearly one in 10 people who once had a de facto relationship now reported a cold marriage, compared with one in 20 who had not had a previous de facto relationship. Only 7.5 per cent of married people doubted their relationship would last, compared with 21 per cent of de factos, and 42.5 per cent of married people said their partners treated them very well, compared with 31 per cent of de factos who felt that.

Dr Cameron, who is ethics lecturer at Sydney's Moore Theological College, suggested that "Bible-believing" Christianity enhanced the health of a marriage.

Theology of the Body
I have the hardest time with books on the Theology of the Body. A couple of summers ago, I brought a copy of JPII's Theology of the Body with me to Latvia. One day, I was taking a bus from Gulbene, Latvia to Riga. About thirty minutes out, the bus broke down. So we had to switch buses. Only after we had gotten underway did I realize that I had left my book on the previous bus.
This past summer, my laptop was stolen at the Termini train station in Rome. In it, I had my Liturgy of the Hours (volume 4) and a copy of Love and Responsibility. I just received a new copy of L&R in the mail (inspired by Miss Natalie of Life is Romantic). As she blogs her way through, I will follow.

Also, I plan on going to Christopher West's seminar this weekend. I'll report my experience.

Welcome
I created this site originally to leave comments on the blog of a friend. But I have been contemplating starting a new blog for some time now. And I have the perfect name: Quodlibetica. Quodlibet means: "Either a topic for (or exercise in) philosophical or theological discussion, or a light-hearted medley of well-known tunes."
The same site has a commentary of this definition:

These disputations, often on subtle points of logic or religious doctrine, were frequently exercises or improvised oral examinations for students, in the same spirit as moots (mock court cases) are for the legal fraternity. This may be why this Latin word was given to them, as it derives from quod, what, plus libet, it pleases, so roughly “what pleases you” or “as you like”. It seems to have had much the same idea behind it as the modern hand-waving whatever—argue away, the word seems to be saying, the result is of little consequence.

I like this name because it is related to the Dominican practice of disputatio or disputation. It also is a Latin title, which in the blogosphere indicates that the author is Roman Catholic (which I proudly am). I also love music and the word is closely tied to music. My intent is to investigate the mundane: to apply philosophical tools to the everyday.