 |
| Ordination of a Bishop in the Syro-Malabar Rite |
IS DISSENT LEGITIMATE IN THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH?
Let’s
consider a recent case that was reported in the news several days ago.
begin
Some half a million Catholics and 450 priests in southern India have severed links with their apostolic administrator further escalating the five-decade-long liturgical dispute within the Eastern rite Syro-Malabar Church.
Officials of the Ernakulam-Angamaly Archdiocese based in the southern state of Kerala said the majority of Catholics and priests there have cut off official links with the Vatican-appointed administrator, Archbishop Andrews Thazhath.
The decision was taken at a meeting of some 250 priests in the Archbishop’s House on Oct. 18.
Archbishop Andrews Thazhath is “unfit for the position” and the archdiocesan priest will not report to him and obey his instructions on pastoral duties, said an official communication from Father Jose Vailikodath, senior priest and public relations officer of the Archdiocesan Protection Committee (of priests).
The priests in a resolution adopted said that “the administrator or his acolytes will not be invited to any parish or other Church-run institutions” and ended the practice of priests’ reporting to the Archbishop’s House on any matter related to the administration of parishes even those requiring the consent of the archbishop.
A canon law expert, who does not want to be quoted, said the development should be seen as “a very serious move that would have an unexpected impact on the priests.”
“It amounts to severing links with the hierarchy and defying the papal authority. These are very serious violations. I’m not sure if the priests are acting with the kind of awareness they should show here,” he said requesting not to publish his name.
end
https://www.ucanews.com/news/priests-laity-in-india-boycott-vatican-appointee/99132
—UCA News reporter, “Priests, laity in India boycott Vatican appointee,” Union of Catholic Asian News, October 19, 2022
Here is where I believe the root of the problem lies:
begin
The priests and the lay people have accused Archbishop Thazhath of misleading the Vatican by hushing up the signed documents from parishes and more than 400 priests from the archdiocese in favor of the traditional Mass.
They also said that the prelate imposed the synod Mass in the archdiocese without consulting the canonical bodies even after assuring the lay people and the priests he would consult them.
The priests continued to offer Mass facing the congregation in total defiance of the order from the administrator.
The priests in their resolution said the administrator had not taken into confidence the views of 500,000 faithful and 450 priests in the archdiocese and vowed to discontinue all contact with him.
They also claimed that among the 460 priests in the archdiocese, 377 had signed the resolution to boycott the administrator while the remaining, barring 10 priests, had extended their support as they could not sign since they were away.
end
—Ibid.
The resisting group says that their views have not been given a fair hearing. It’s an issue of transparency first, justice second.
If their views have indeed reached the Vatican and have been given a fair hearing and then afterwards the decision to impose a uniform liturgy remains, then the issue becomes refusal to conform to the decision of the hierarchy, according to the account of the canon lawyer.
The case illustrates that there is room for legitimate dissent in the Roman Catholic Church, because the lack of transparency on the part of the archbishop—involving, possibly, deceit—and the injustice wrought as a consequence would constitute a legitimate basis for protest and resistance by the members of the community.
While we can readily imagine justifiable grounds for dissent in the Roman Catholic Church, as in this case, the parameters for legitimate dissent are not entirely settled.
Photo courtesy of Catholic Church England and Wales
ReplyDeletePhoto link:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/catholicism/30255425185
Gonzalinho
Notable historical examples of legitimate dissent in the Roman Catholic Church:
ReplyDeleteAlmost everyone is aware of the strong dissent Saint Paul expressed toward Saint Peter’s position on regulations for Christian converts, as noted in the second chapter of the Epistle to the Galatians. Paul publicly “withstood to his face” this first pope “because he clearly was wrong” (Gal. 2:11), and Peter eventually reversed his position and concurred with Paul in the dispute.
…To cite a far more recent example of responsible dissent, consider the church's reversal of its time-honored stance on freedom of religion—a reversal that occurred over a 15-year period in the 1950s and 1960s. For the greater part of Christian history, it was accepted as absolute doctrine that civil governments had an obligation to officially recognize the church and support it.
Pope Pius IX made the point in no uncertain terms in 1846 in his encyclical Quanta Cura and the accompanying Syllabus of Errors: “The state must recognize [the Catholic Church] as supreme and submit to its influence. . . . The power of the state must be at its disposal and all who do not conform to its requirements must be compelled or punished. . . . Freedom of conscience and cult is madness.” Catholics were told that they need not openly oppose a government that did not so recognize the church (as in the United States); rather, they should tolerate the existing situation until such time as Catholics formed a majority of the voting population.
Beginning in 1950 Father John Courtney Murray, a Jesuit theologian, argued that the old tradition must yield. In a series of articles in Theological Studies magazine and in public appearances, he contended that the state should not be the tool of the church and has no business carrying out the church’s will. Rather, he said, the civil government’s single yet profound obligation is to insure the freedom of all its citizens, especially their religious freedom.
“Every man has a right to religious freedom,” he wrote, “a right that is based on the dignity of the human person and is therefore to be formally recognized . . . and protected by constitutional law. . . . So great is this dignity that not even God can take it away.” Murray claimed the old doctrine as enunciated by Pius IX was not an absolute, static thing but a teaching that had been developing over the past 100 years—a development which Murray saw in the writings of Popes Leo XIII and Pius XII.
https://uscatholic.org/articles/200807/catholic-dissent-when-wrong-turns-out-to-be-right/
—Robert J. McClory, “Catholic dissent: When wrong turns out to be right,” U.S. Catholic, July 28, 2008
Gonzalinho
Some conditions that have been advanced for legitimate dissent—I agree with them:
ReplyDeleteU.S. bishops even set out norms for legitimate dissent. It is proper and acceptable, they said, “if the reasons for disagreement are serious and well founded, if the manner of their dissent does not question the right of the hierarchy to teach or cause great scandal.”
The bishops took note of John Henry Newman’s description of circumstances in which conscience could oppose the authority of the pope and they praised “the spiritual tradition which accepts enlightened conscience, even when honestly mistaken, as the arbiter of moral decision.”
Theologians throughout the world, like Bernard Haring, Walter Burghardt and Karl Rahner, weighed in on the subject, arguing for the right, even the obligation of disagreement.
https://www.ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/dissent-dont-you-dare
—Robert J. McClory, “Dissent? Dont You Dare!” National Catholic Reporter, September 9, 2011
However, it’s not entirely clear what “cause great scandal” consists in. How do you determine “great scandal,” for example, or establish causality?
Gonzalinho
SENSUS FIDELIUM AT WORK?
ReplyDeleteA Catholic archdiocese in the southern Indian state of Kerala could be headed toward snapping all ties with the Vatican over a decades-long liturgy dispute.
...“If the protest movement is allowed to continue for long, there is a possibility the archdiocese might declare itself as an independent Church,” opined a Christian leader who did not want to be named.
https://www.ucanews.com/news/indian-churchs-bitter-liturgical-dispute-deepens/99497
—UCA News reporter, “Indian Church’s bitter liturgical dispute deepens” Union of Catholic Asian News, November 22, 2022
In significant part this dispute appears to be about liturgical theology.
begin
The discipline known as “liturgical theology” deals with the importance of worship in the life of the Church. It can deal with seemingly mundane items such as the history of various liturgical items, such as a corporal (the cloth on which the paten and chalice are placed during the celebration of the Eucharist). But it also treats what is most essential in our worship, such as the meaning and importance of signs and symbols in liturgy, and the significance of liturgical participation of the laity and the related role of the clergy. Perhaps the most important question in liturgical theology is a rather simple one: What exactly constitutes liturgy?
Liturgy is a ritualistic act which, in some way, makes Christ present to his Church through signs and symbols, and which brings about the reality they symbolize. Thus the Church’s liturgy is often connected with the sacraments. But is not reducible to the sacraments alone. There are a variety of other types of liturgy: a separate, stand-alone Liturgy of the Word or the Liturgy of the Hours, for example. In all the Church’s liturgical forms, Christ is acting. His action comes through the whole Church, which is his body, gathered in his name.
end
https://www.simplycatholic.com/introduction-to-liturgical-theology/
—Father Harrison Ayre, “Introduction to Liturgical Theology,” Simply Catholic, 2022
The entire article is worth reading as explanation.
If it is a dispute involving liturgical theology, then the doctrine of the reception of the faithful comes into play.
See “The Doctrine of Reception”:
https://oddsandendsgonzalinhodacosta.blogspot.com/2017/10/the-doctrine-of-reception.html
Are the priests and laity in the Ernakulam-Angamaly archdiocese of the Eastern rite Syro-Malabar Church on the right side of the dispute?
Not if they formally separate from communion with the Roman Catholic Church under the pope in an act of schism.
What motivates me to look closely at this dispute is the depth of feeling among the many thousands of the faithful, priests and lay. It’s very curious.
Personally, I would not quarrel over this issue. If the bishop wants to impose his preference of liturgy, I would just live with it for the time being.
Gonzalinho