Just a test…
Subscribe to Blog via Email
Follow me on TwitterMy Tweets
Previously on ajk2…
Just a test…
You may know that I am currently taking a philosophy class. It’s Medieval Philosophy.
I don’t like not knowing things. And yet, I hate learning how to think. It’s quite the conundrum in which I’m finding myself. Perhaps if things were better explained it might be easier to understand how arguments are framed, but I’m finding that when I’m shoved into the middle of a subject I’ve only been introduced into, that I flounder because I don’t know how to swim in this water yet. This water is different. It’s slick, it’s heavy.
I’m here to say that I have a love/hate relationship with philosophy right now. I know it’s extremely useful. It’s also a prerequisite for the Master of Divinity program, so it’s necessary. But.
I marvel at how time absolutely flies. I’m still stunned it’s not at least the beginning of November, if not September. Have I honestly been directing homeschool since mid-August? Feeling a bit like we’ve accomplished nothing, and yet I know there’s evidence somewhere that would prove me wrong.
And I noticed that my last post here was in April. Good GRAVY that was before I turned 37. I’m not old.
One of the big things this year that I attempted was applying for Military Chaplaincy. I had two concerns as I applied:
1) my health – my back is still recovering from a bulging disc and I’m mediocre at doing the work I need to strengthen. I also majorly re-injured it in August.
2) whether my Bachelor of Theology would be accepted, because officially they only accept a Master of Divinity.
I started the application process in … April? March? Something like that. It took until the end of September before I got word back that they would not accept my BTh.
Before I got word about that, I decided that I wanted to move towards starting my Masters anyway. It’s something I’ve wanted to do since I finished my BTh, but things just never worked out *coughcough*St. Paul University sucked*coughcough*. One thing has led to another and I’m just now this semester finishing up a philosophy class, one of the three pre-requisites I need for the MDiv. I’m planning on one class a semester at this point because I’ve not been in school for…oh…over a decade, and I’m still not sure how I’m going to fit it into my life with homeschool and Catechesis of the Good Shepherd. Mercifully, the CGS program is rather quiet this year, but that also didn’t stop me from flying to Portland to start training for the next level. But that’s another story for another time.
I did re-injure my back, and it wasn’t because I looked at a gym and my back went out (though I’d deserve it, tbh). This time, however, it was because I attempted some more heavy-handed fitness (kickboxing) and I foolishly pushed myself too hard. Recovery is better than the first time I had a bulging disc (that took 4 years), but it’s still taking time to heal. And I’m only mediocre at doing the strengthening and stretching work I should be doing, so I’m not really helping my case as quickly as I could. But I’ll get there :).
In other family news, Spencer is gearing up to grow something tall. His foot size is basically the same as mine (and wow is that ever a jump in price shoe-wise!). Cassia is gung-ho into her martial arts (like, crazy excited about it) and Felicity is adamant that she hates mushrooms and has always done so. This is, of course, untrue.
And Andy’s doing karate. It’s been a bit of a full of activity season. In the midst of all this, I also received an official apology letter from my abuser. So, there’s that. I have many thoughts about it, few which I’m willing to share, but can overall say that I think I’m at peace with it (the letter, that is; there’s far more to it than just that).
All this to say, I hope you have a start to the Advent season. I hope it is full of joy and that you can enter into honestly preparing your heart. Not just a token ‘yeah, we have an Advent wreath’ or ‘I’ve bought myself an Advent calendar – you know, the beer one,’ but a It's not every year you get to celebrate the incarnation of the One True God into time and creation as a ...thirty-seven year old. Click To Tweetreally, truly reflective season for you. It’s not every year you get to celebrate the incarnation of the One True God into time and creation as a …thirty-seven year old. Or at least, in my case. This year is unique and different in how I will look at the readings and asking what God is calling me to do. I’ll never have this chance as a thirty-seven year old again to do this. What perspective do I uniquely have this year that is important? I’m looking forward to seeing how this year unfolds.
Happy Catholic New Year to you. Cheers to ringing in the new season.
Having had half a day more to think about the letter, there are a few other things that are sitting with me.
I find there is some weird nostalgia regarding olden times. In with the nostalgia is authentic need to go back to some traditions and practices that were lost in the mid-1900s, so it’s hard to just flatline say that we can’t go back to the way it was. There are layers to that statement, the first obviously that we are different that we were then, so we actually can’t go back. Secondly, just because it was prior to Vatican II/sexual revolution does not mean it wasn’t a broken system/church. I feel that Pope Emeritus Benedict inadvertently indicates that prior to this time sexual abuse was not in the church. I would heartily disagree with this. I do not think he intended to say it as such, but he also did not acknowledge it, so it is hard to say. Thirdly, I do believe that we are greatly lacking authentic relationships with Jesus and so in our sinfulness it’s hard to see the sin and to turn back to God. But I don’t believe this is necessarily only a problem that has occurred in the 20th century. I think this challenge has been here since the start of Christianity. It’s just taken a very distinctive embodiment in the 20th century.
Pope Emeritus Benedict comments a lot on how ‘the west’ has lost its place for God. But it is not only the west that is beset with sexual abuse problems. Most notably, India has been in the public eye for one of its bishops raping a nun continuously and blaming her for it, while a priest who would have stood witness against him is suspiciously murdered. (I am still terribly upset over this situation and the lack of commentary). I’ve just read that the church in Japan is now investigating sexual abuse cases up to 20 years ago. Pedophilia and abuse of power have been around far longer than the sexual revolution.
The problem of sexual abuse spans far wider than just the west. The thing that determines whether it is public or not is how much of a hush hush culture there is bringing this sin to light. It depends on the culture’s understanding of honour and how that is applied in cases such as minors or vulnerable peoples and powerful, authority figures.
The problem is the culture. Everywhere. The problem is ordained ministers not taking their vows seriously. The problem is that there is little accountability for cover ups.
Do these things stem from not having one’s relationship to Christ central to their lives? Absolutely. From being banned from having God in the public sphere? In part, but I don’t believe on the whole.
In his discussion on the current problem with canon law and pedophile priests, he does not mention once the protection of the victims. He speaks of the problem of the accused in law, wherein it is hard to convict them at all. And he speaks of the need for canon law to “also protect the Faith, which is also an important legal asset.” But nowhere does he mention those who were wronged. Those who have been damaged by the action of ordained ministers. It is a great loss to neglect them in this.
I think he tried, and he said some insightful things. But as someone who has been abused, this is not a letter in which I find terribly much comfort in. I want to know that my church wants to protect me and bring me into relationship with Christ while respecting my God-given dignity. In so many ways, so far, our universal church’s response has been, ‘Meh, you’ll get over it. Let’s not stir the pot too much here.”
Earlier today it was published that Pope Emeritus Benedict wrote a letter, a strong message, as he calls it. This is my very limited but relevant commentary.
He writes this message in three parts, first giving history to how such scandal could come about, the effects it has had on formation for the priesthood, and then finally what he sees as a proper response to the crisis.
I am grateful for more historical context. I don’t think I will ever be wary of trying to understand better where faults come from and hearing about things that are antidote to them. I am pleased he has written this part as a way to understand some rudimentary beginnings of this collapse of morality within our church.
He then proceeds to part two which speaks of this impact on formation of seminarians and the culture of seminaries following the promulgation of relative morality. He speaks of a specific situation at one seminary in the second paragraph, but gives little to no real explanation of what was lacking. At this seminary, apparently seminarians and “candidates for the lay ministry of the pastoral specialist lived together. At the common meals, seminarians and pastoral specialists ate together, the married among the laymen sometimes accompanied by their wives and children, and on occasion by their girlfriends. The climate in this seminary could not provide support for preparation to the priestly vocation.”
Guys, I have questions. There is no reference point for this, no extra notes. It’s a very odd and strange set up, but I want to know what is inherently lacking in sharing community with married and single people. The problem with this part (and I’ll grant it’s a very small part of the document) is that it holds this example up to shame it without telling us exactly the points to why it is shameful. And it’s not that I don’t see that there are less than ideal areas in it, but the part that is sticking with me is that the community meals were also held up for shame. Without defining exactly what is meant by this, the example may as well have been left out for all it’s intent and purpose.
So there was that.
He then outlines more specific incidents of very very poor moral judgement of seminaries. Which wholeheartedly can be endorsed as skewed morality, at best.
He then describes the issues Rome had with altering canon law to address the concerns of pedophilia and priests. He says they were reluctant to change and properly address the situation, and from what I read and would estimate, likely in part due to lack of proper education regarding pedophilia. I would hazard a guess – as it became viewed more as a disease – that the church in Rome was slow to incorporate that knowledge into its understanding of how to properly address these situations.
But he also states that there has been and alludes to there continuing to be large problems of guarantorism within stated law. Now, this is not an English-based word. It is a translation from German. I do not know what he intends with this word and I am ill prepared to figure it out. An informant (*coughcough*Fr.Harrison*coughcough*) tells me that it might mean, “that while there is a legal process, no severe canonical penalty would be applied.” This has been problematic. And he also alludes to collusion surrounding such cases where there have been trials. Also quite problematic.
He mentions that there have been some reforms but does not seem to indicate that they are adequate quite yet. He does not explicitly say this, but indicates that proper addressing of the issues of pedophile priests has not been satisfactorily covered under existing Congregations at the Vatican, which is why Pope Francis has “undertaken further reforms.”
This is the part that sounded like it should have been most encouraging. I had higher hopes; they kind of fell flat. He speaks to our hope in Christ Jesus, incarnate. Which is not misplaced by any means. He means well, and his words are exceptionally true. However, given his starting criticism of the way the Church dabbled in relative morality, I expected more. I expected that we would be encouraged to call out the wrong so that the light might shine forth more clearly. Encouraged to continue the fight for right judgement. All things he alludes to in his previous parts of the message.
I expected more. I don’t know if I have much more to say except that the last section was a bit of a disappointment. If concrete steps were taken (albeit slowly) in the 90s to address the issues, surely could we not also be encouraged to find a way to make sure that the little ones do not stumble in their faith due to the actions of evil? I don’t think it would have been too much to ask, but I also am not constrained by saying too much or too little on a subject and possibly stepping outside of the boundaries of my episcopate.
I suppose to err on the side of saying too little won’t stir the pot. But too little said has been the standard for so long. I yearn for a change in this.
To read the whole of his letter, you can find it in English at the Catholic News Agency.