The Fidelity of Dissent: Part II

                                                                                                

Why did Jesus come? Was it to simply enter into the institutions of man and be as good a Jew as he could be? Indeed not. Rather, the gospels indicate that Jesus sought to reform, purify and call God's people back to true fidelity, just as the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob had done time and time again all throughout the Hebrew Scriptures. It is thus my contention that Jesus is the greatest example of loving dissent ever found in all of Salvation History.

Ok, I need to ease back a bit so as to reassure my concerned Catholic brothers and sisters that I am not about to go rope-a-dope on Mother Church. Truly, I love the church and have a strong desire to see her embrace all that Jesus called us to when walking the earth 2,000 years ago.    I do mean to bring the term dissent front and center and express just how emphatic the Catholic church values and in fact, requires each of her members to lovingly, prayerfully and doggedly develop the self-awareness of one's conscience. So sacred is one's fiercely-formed conscience that the church reminds us that to disobey it - even in light of church teaching- is disingenuous and dare I say, sinful! 

One of the church's greatest proponents of this assertion is none other than Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI who understood the danger of kowtowing to authority. In 1941, he took part in the indoctrination of German youth that sought to fan the flames of Germany's new military and economic ascension. To his credit, he did see what was happening and faced imprisonment when he abandoned the Hitler youth. As if to prevent the church and the world from ever having to enter another crucible such as World War II, he taught us that, "Freedom of conscience is the core of all freedom."

Along with the Bishop of Rome is the entirety of the world's bishops who formulated the basis for their teaching in the Catechism of the Catholic Church; a compendium of teaching meant to help all bishops observe the universally held teachings meant to preserve orthodoxy. In this section entitled, Formation of Conscience, it advises that, "Man has the right to act in conscience and in freedom so as personally to make moral decisions. He must not be forced to act contrary to his conscience. Nor must he be prevented from acting according to his conscience, especially in religious matters." (CCC 1782)

During the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965) the church recovered the fullness of our Christian identity by proclaiming that through our baptism, we possess the indelible character of Christ in our priestly, prophetic and royal nature. A popular phrase today is the moral requirement calling on us to "speak truth to power" which in this instance flows from our prophetic nature. In her wisdom, the church nodded respectfully to our Protestant brothers and sisters when upholding the phrase attributed to Augustine, Ecclesia semper reformanda est or "the church must always be reformed." 

Twenty years later, this message found powerful expression as Saint Pope John Paul II issued the revised Code of Canon Law. To the church's credit, the law dictates the following recourse to the lay members of the church:

"The Christian faithful are free to make known to the pastors of the Church their needs, especially spiritual ones, and their desires. According to the knowledge, competence, and prestige which they possess, they have the right and even at times the duty to manifest to the sacred pastors their opinion on matters which pertain to the good of the Church and to make their opinion known to the rest of the Christian faithful, without prejudice to the integrity of faith and morals, with reverence toward their pastors, and attentive to common advantage  and the dignity of persons. (Paragraph 212 §2,3) 

Certainly, those most ardent supporters set upon the preservation of the institution will highlight a thousand other passages that must be followed before one dare speak.  In response, I would contend that any assertions that supercede one's held conscience is a return to the very Pharisaical fervor that Jesus himself came to thwart! Even so, I do wish to honor and respect the church by speaking to the importance of how one confronts the church's leadership. To do so, I'll summarize what the theologian Elisabeth Johnson wrote. She insisted that dissent:

1. comes from one's dedication to the common good and seeks the growth of the church.

2. flows from one's adherence to the gospels even while honoring the church's traditions.

3. demands a rigorous amount of prayer, study and reflection before speaking.

4. takes into account it's costs to the community of believers in proportion to what is sought.

5. never gives license to speak disrespectfully to the bishops.

6. will not unduly lay heavy burdens upon one's fellow believers.

7. avoids dualistic (black & white) thinking and is open to dialogue with the church. 

Beneath the vitriol and division that pervades our culture, there are some who have faithfully held dissent in a respectful way. I encourage the reader to read this article entitled, Conscience, Dissent and the Non-Ordination of Women written by Sr. Christine Shenk, CSJ. 

Theological and ecclesiastical rules aside, I wish to focus and express my dissent in relation to the poisons of exclusivity and the harmful ways this manifest within the church.  Primarily, I am concerned that the church will become more impoverished and diminished to the extent we exclude women from ordained ministry as well as the harsh ways we marginalize and denigrate those who are gay and transgender. One recent example of how this manifests in the life of the church in Wisconsin where the bishop is articulating the ugliness of exclusion which is counter to the lived-example of love as found through Jesus Christ of the gospels. 

Within the integrity of my own conscience, I can no longer stay silent as  some within the church seek to uphold exclusion as a form of orthodoxy. I speak as one who worked within a parish for 10 years; seeing the deadening results of this poisonous teaching and practice that numbed us and disabled our collective spirits. We would begin mass with the opening song, "All Are Welcome" by Marty Haugen, a glad song that flowed from the wide source of a growing church that invited all people:

Let us build a house
Where love can dwell
And all can safely live
A place where
Saints and children tell
How hearts learn to forgive

Built of hopes and dreams and visions
Rock of faith and vault of grace
Here the love of Christ shall end divisions

All are welcome, all are welcome
All are welcome in this place

Let us build a house where prophets speak
And words are strong and true
Where all God's children dare to seek
To dream God's reign anew

Here the cross shall stand as witness
And a symbol of God's grace
Here as one we claim the faith of Jesus

All are welcome, all are welcome
All are welcome in this place

Let us build a house where love is found
In water, wine and wheat
A banquet hall on holy ground
Where peace and justice meet

Here the love of God, through Jesus
Is revealed in time and space
As we share in Christ the feast that frees us

All are welcome, all are welcome
All are welcome in this place

The unfortunate reality was the incongruence of how these noble lyrics were being sung in juxtaposition to the mean sensibilities spoken about regularly and written from the hand of our own bishop and found within the strict tenets held by those priests and laity who subscribe to his moral strictures. The truth is that all are not welcome in our church. Because of this disparity and dissonance, many Catholics are growing despondent about our church's ability to fully live into our call to be Christ in this world -- and especially to one another. 

It is my firm observation that a great many of those who seek to stay at the table are growing more and more disconnected to the church they seek to be in communion with. Furthermore, I contend that many of these, especially those who work within and for the church, do not feel at liberty to speak and voice any semblance of dissent for fear of sanction and being held as suspect by those they serve. Fear is the generating force hidden beneath the power of exclusion. The few who operate in fear, who have power to bring sanctions and cast dispersions, are dominating the bigger narratives of what it means to be church. 

When I began to see the erosion of our public witness as a result of this fear, I became more and more convicted that I must speak out. I do confess that I was held captive out of that fear, knowing that to speak out against our bishop would not be viewed as healthy dissent but disloyalty and disrespect to the church. Alas! Now I am free in conscience and connection to write about what so many others feel but cannot make public. To hold off any longer would be yet one more unfortunate act of acquiescence on my part and my love for the church cannot bear it.

Lest we who love the church set a tone for what it means to be church from the diminished keynote of fear, now is the time to demonstrate our prophetic nature from our baptism while claiming the courage from our confirmation and speak up for the health and well-being of our church. May the Holy Spirit guide us as we speak up and really, REALLY open the doors and dust off the sign that hangs there, All Are Welcome.