Wednesday, June 6, 2018

Pérez Prieto: "Ladaria's veto on female priesthood and intercommunion is shutting doors against the wind"

By Victorino Pérez Prieto (English translation by Rebel Girl)
Religión Digital
June 6, 2018

The cardinal prefect of the Doctrine of the Faith, Luis Ladaria, has recently made two statements with which I disagree and that have stirred up immediate controversy.

In the first -- in an article in L'Osservatore Romano -- he tried again to close the door on the priesthood for women: "The Church has always recognized herself bound by Christ's decision to confer this sacrament on men," he wrote. In the second -- in a letter as prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith -- he states that intercommunion, or communion between Catholics and Protestants, "is not mature enough" to become the norm of the universal Church, particularly in the case of communion of non-Catholic spouses in mixed marriages. In both cases, his words are like shutting doors against the wind since you can't go against history. But moreover, there are powerful arguments against them.

1. Beginning with the second of the statements made -- the one on intercommunion -- another colleague in the College of Cardinals, Cardinal Marx, archbishop of Munich and president of the German Bishops, declared himself "surprised" after the publication of the letter, recalling that in a conversation held in Rome last May, "the participating bishops were told that they should find, as far as possible, a unanimous result, in the spirit of ecclesial communion," and that this was surprising before they had found that consensus... And, what is more serious, the German cardinal pointed out that the question has effects on ecumenical relations with the other churches and ecclesial communities "that are not to be underestimated."

The controversy is coming now because of the pastoral document of the last Plenary Session of the German Bishops' Conference, "Walking with Christ -- In the Footsteps of Unity: Mixed Marriages and Common Participation in the Eucharist." (February 2018). Over three quarters of the members of the Bishops' Conference were in agreement, but the half a dozen bishops who weren't complained to Rome.

In fact, intercommunion refers to much more than communion between Catholics and Protestants in mixed marriages; it is the participation of Catholics in a Eucharist celebrated in a Christian community of a confession different from their own, or in a Catholic Eucharist with the participation of non-Catholics. The question is old and for years, both on the Protestant and on the Catholic side, the voices that cry out for "Eucharistic hospitality" have increased. It is about all those of us who are confessing Christians praying, speaking, serving and being able to celebrate together, despite our differences.

But in this, much more progress has been made in the field of praxis and theology, than in the field of ecclesiastical norms.

Intercommunion has been going on for decades, but in the theoretical doctrinal field there is still a long way to go. When you have participated in Eucharistic celebrations with brothers and sisters of a different confession, you see that there is no problem. I remember the Masses in Taizé more than 30 years ago, in which I participated with other Catholic priests and Protestant pastors. And more recently participation in the Eucharist in Skära Cathedral and in a small rural church with brothers and sisters of the Swedish Lutheran Church. Their celebrations of the Eucharist are very similar to ours, including consecration and communion (http://www.alandar.org/hemeroteca/cantar-en-tierra-extrana/una-semana-ecumenica-en-suecia/). We understood that the sacramentalized Jesus was as "present" in these masses as in what a Catholic priest would do. This can no longer be prevented; it is already a beautiful ecumenical reality.

The priesthood of women, again at the center of the debate

2. With regard to the theme of the priesthood for women -- better than "female priesthood," as an aside -- Ladaria stated that he considers the "no" to women's priesthood "definitive" -- "Christ wanted to confer this sacrament on the twelve apostles, all men, who, in turn, transmitted it to other men. The Church has always recognized herself bound by this decision of the Lord, which excludes that the ministerial priesthood can be validly conferred on women." And to the cardinal "it is a matter of serious concern to see the emergence in some countries of voices that question the finality of this doctrine,"  that "it is a truth belonging to the heritage of the faith."

But what is a matter of "serious concern" to many other theologians and non-theologians, priests, men and women religious and lay Catholic men and women is this stubbornness of the Church in stopping women from being able to access this responsibility in the communities like men and being able to function as ordained priests in them. It is not true what the cardinal prefect says that "the difference of roles between men and women does not imply any subordination," because the possibility of accessing positions of more responsibility in the service of the Church such as it is organized today -- an organization that is more than debatable and that does not come from Jesus of Nazareth -- necessarily passes through the sacrament of Holy Orders. If women can not access it, they will not be able to be pastors or bishops or -- why not? -- popes. Many small base communities have already solved the problem their own way, although sometimes at the expense of the value of the sacrament of Holy Orders in presiding at the Eucharist, especially in the consecration, which is questionable.

Theologian Jesús Martínez Gordo recently recalled in Religión Digital that the most recent position of the Magisterium with respect to the (im)possibility of women accessing ordained ministry is found in three documents "of unequal value": the Inter Insigniores Declaration of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (1976), the Apostolic Letter Ordinatio sacerdotalis of John Paul II (1994) and the Responsum on the authority of said Apostolic Letter signed by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith the following year (1995).

The first is a document in which infallibility or unreformability is not involved, therefore, it does not belong to the deposit of faith. The Responsum on the authority of the Apostolic Letter is a text of the Congregation, its authorship is the responsibility of the Congregation and the Pope is limited to authorizing its publication. In short, the Apostolic Letter of John Paul II aims to "dispel doubts" about it and express a position against the female priesthood, but it does not have dogmatic authority either. This theologian states something obvious: "The degree of authority is lower in John Paul II's text than in those of Pius XII or of Pius IX on the Assumption of Mary and the Immaculate Conception," concluding with all the reason in the world that "seldom in the history of the Church has there been a dogmatic and canonical mess like the one laid out."

Jesus and women

The truth is that in the New Testament we have no clear statement against the priesthood of women. In fact, Jesus did not ordain men or women as priests. Rather, we find evidence - corroborated by other extra-biblical writings of the early Christian churches and frescoes in the catacombs - that women also presided at the Eucharist.

And the truth is that women have been and have returned to being priests in the Church. Not only in non-Catholic Christian confessions, where even bishops abound -- despite the rejection of some sectors that came to "move over" to the Catholic Church because of it, as was the case of some Anglican priests -- but also in the Catholic Church itself. This is the case of the ARCWP and RCWP (Association of Catholic Roman Priests and Roman Catholic Women Priests), which already have about 300 priests and about a dozen bishops who joyfully tend to numerous communities, especially in North America but also in South America and in European countries. It is not that they want "power" like men, but to do what they have felt called to do.

Christian communities are demanding this female service as soon as they hear about it. And the vocations of many women, responding to a well-discerned interior calling -- at least equal to that of men, and in some cases quite a bit better -- show that the priesthood of women is a reality in the Catholic Church, and that it is no more than a matter of time before it is accepted by the hierarchy.

It is true that news like this, which comes from a man named by Pope Francis, bewilders many women and men and they question the renewal of the Church that he has been proclaiming. Above all, they still have to mourn in silence this discrimination in their Church. Others are already beginning not to be silent and to shout aloud in a prophetic voice what they consider legitimate and evangelical. "If they keep silent, the stones will cry out," the Master said.

Friday, June 1, 2018

"Christology and Women": A new book by theologian Consuelo Velez

By Consuelo Vélez (English translation by Rebel Girl)
Religión Digital
April 25, 2018

The Javeriana Theology Faculty has just published my book "Cristología y Mujer. Una reflexión necesaria para una fe incluyente" ["Christology and Women: A necessary reflection for an inclusive faith", Javeriana Teologia Hoy No. 79, 2018]. It was the fruit of a sabbatical semester but above all it is fruit of my theological and existential experience of recent years. As a woman theologian, I have not been able to be distant from a reality that is easy to verify in society and in the Church: the situation of women has changed lately but much is still needed so that, everywhere, it would be reality that because of the fact of "being women" we are not considered in a subordinate position or in second place or, worse, as sexual objects or someone's property.

Hence the concern to contribute to keeping on changing that situation and specifically from the field of theology and faith experience. In fact Christian revelation has not propitiated this situation -- in the book of Genesis the fundamental equality of men and women is affirmed: "God made them in His own image, male and female He created them" (1:27) -- but it has allowed it and has maintained it by a bad interpretation of the Biblical text and by an accommodation to social patterns where the model has been the masculine.

As the book cover says, it emphasizes the Christological because it's a central field in theology and, therefore, from a good Christological understanding that promotes women, a transformation of all other theological fields can emerge.

Many aspects can be treated in Christology; in the book, I look at some that I consider relevant. First of all, I pause to contextualize the perspective from which Christology is approached. We call that perspective feminist theology. This statement has some prejudices. The word "feminist" is often identified exclusively with positions against life or with the loss of femininity.

But we must repeat it "many times" to see if it can be understood: there are many feminisms and we are referring to the fundamental -- that movement that allowed women today to be citizens and hence we can study, occupy positions reserved for men for centuries and bring everything we are to the building of society and the church in true conditions of reciprocity and fundamental equality.

Once this perspective is put forward, I define some fundamental terms: feminist movement, sexism, patriarchy, androcentrism, kyriarchy, femininity and gender, and then I linger on the developments that have already taken place in so-called "feminist Christology," an already long history, of decades, but quite unknown in our context. One of the values of this book is to approach with a simple language -- as is my style -- the work already done in North America and Europe but, as I have just said, very unknown in our theological centers.

Second, I return to what is closest to our reflection and to which many theologians already refer: Jesus' attitude towards women in which his option for them and their inclusion in the group of his own is recognized quite significantly. Later I refer to inclusive language that allows naming God in masculine and feminine. That is His true face and the language -- as a living entity -- has to express it. In this sense, the title "Wisdom of God" that was left aside, privileging masculine titles such as Logos, Lord, Savior, etc., can contribute to enriching an understanding of God revealed in Jesus, inclusive of both genders.

Another chapter in the book refers to the masculinity of Jesus. No one is denying that Jesus was male, without a doubt, and no one is claiming to change that. But you need to liberate that masculinity from an exclusively male vision to allow us women to identify with Jesus too and be able to be in his image, without being told that because we are not men we can not occupy the places that men occupy because Jesus was male. It is an interesting discussion because it greatly enriches the Christological vision and new horizons of understanding for men and women emerge.

The last chapter refers to the cross of Christ, a theme so central to the experience of the Christian faith, but while it ought to be a redemptive and transforming sign, it has sometimes been a sign of passive resistance and resigned acceptance of the violence that is suffered. In the case of women, it has been a repeated story of the call to forbearance to save family members -- be it father, mother, brothers, husband or children --without taking into consideration that women have the right to their own lives and not for that do they stop being a good mother or a good wife or much less a good Christian. We recover the cross of Christ in its most authentic sense, showing how the cross denounces all violence against women and at no time contributes to their resignation and denial of their fundamental dignity.

In the postscript of the book it is said that it is aimed at women who already conceive of themselves in a different way, capable of questioning traditionally assumed roles and proposing another way of being and acting. But, of course, the book is also aimed at men because, in face of women's new way of positioning themselves, they need to rethink their identity and feel called to contribute to this new social configuration that breaks with the established roles due to biological sex and builds inclusive gender identities and authentic reciprocity between the sexes.

The invitation, therefore, is to read this book but especially to fully understand this patriarchal and sexist reality that has constituted us and of which today we are all still debtors - as Pope Francis affirms - and look for ways of transformation. Hopefully these reflections, which are limited and only explore some fields, can continue to be deepened but, above all, can be lived out to build a truly inclusive, liberating society and church, creator of communion and reciprocity among all.

Thursday, May 31, 2018

"If secularism is reducing faith to the private sphere, this weakens the public space": An interview with Teresa Forcades

By Jonatán Soriano (English translation by Rebel Girl)
Protestante Digital
May 15, 2018

With Teresa Forcades (Barcelona, 1966) one could talk about many subjects. Degree in Fundamental Theology from the Faculty of Theology of Catalonia, which did not validate her theological studies in the United States because of being partly Protestant, and later a doctorate with a thesis on the concept of person in classical Trinitarian theology and its relationship to the modern notion of freedom as self-determination, the Benedictine nun and doctor in medicine too has experience in public life. Specifically through the Procés Constituent platform, presented in 2013 in Catalonia with the aim of establishing a popular debate to decide what political, economic and social status is wanted for Catalonia, from a pro-independence and anti-capitalist base.

Between 2013 and 2015, Forcades enjoyed a large media presence in the territory, while presenting the platform on a tour together with its other very prominent representative, the economist Arcadi Oliveres. In addition to her demanding discourse, she stood out at the image level, since she appeared in long pants and a veil.

The movement was about to enter the elections to the Parliament on September 27, 2015, but an internal vote resulted in not doing so. "We lost a great opportunity," she states now.

We're reviewing from the Faculty of Theology of the University of Humboldt (Lutheran, by the way), where she teaches, that moment of greatest public exposure.

Question: You've had a Protestant formation.

Answer: Here we aren't so accustomed to it because the Spanish State is one of the most negative examples of Christian ecumenism. Protestantism has not had the recognition that it has in other countries and, therefore, the formation is viewed as dichotomous. I have moved a lot through the United States and Germany and that doesn't occur to them because the theological formation is incorporated in the university and the easiest thing is that you have professors who can be Catholic as well as Protestant, and not even know it. My training is first extra-academic, because of the interest I had while studying medicine in Barcelona and through the Cristianisme i Justicia studies center. That was before the official formation. Then I went as a doctor to the United States and there I began to study at the Catholic seminary of Western New York. I completed the first two years of what would be the degree, which is known there as "Master of Divinity." At the end of those two years I got a scholarship to go to Harvard, which has considered itself non-denominational (not ascribed to any religious confession) for years, despite having been founded in the seventeenth century by Methodists. They are interested, above all, in the possibility of Christian ecumenism and interreligiousness. At Harvard, the formation was divided into three blocks. The first was philosophy, the second was focused on the Bible, and the third on interfaith dialogue. There were Catholic teachers but they were a minority. In fact, I think I only had two. We are talking about the years between 1995 and 1997, and at that time the Harvard Divinity School was part of the Theological Institute of Boston, along with the Episcopal Theological School, the Holy Cross Orthodox School of Theology, the Jesuits' Boston College and the Weston Jesuit School of Theology. This, in practice, meant that in all of them you could do cross registration, that is, they gave you the degree of the institution with which you had 50% of the training and in my case it was Harvard, although I took classes in all the others because I had a very big interest. Therefore, my first degree in theology is non-denominational.

This caused that, when I returned to Barcelona to enter as a nun and I wanted to do a degree specializing in Catholic theology and then a PhD, the Faculty of Theology of Catalonia told me that they couldn't validate my studies because they were from a Protestant university. My reaction was to do a medical doctorate, because I didn't want to sit down again in the first course to be taught who Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were . Later there was a change in the Dean of the Catalan faculty and a Jesuit took office, so I wrote to the Jesuits with whom I had studied in the United States so that they would inform those in Catalonia that they would indeed recognize my degree. Finally, the faculty did not recognize the degree but I had the right to take an exam to demonstrate my knowledge. I'm explaining all this to make clear the difficulties of theological dialogue that we still have. In the end they agreed to give me an exam for which I had to prepare 50 subjects, although I would only have to be examined on one between two chosen at random, which were "Easter" and "justification by faith." I chose "justification by faith" because I had studied in a largely Protestant faculty. From there, I was able to do a specialized degree in Fundamental Theology, which deals with the dialogue between faith and philosophy, with contemporary thinking and all those questions that aren't limited to dogmatic discussion but have to do with apologetics.

Q: How has that Protestant formation influenced you?

A: The perspective that I found at Harvard didn't have the ecclesiological institution element as something central, so important in the Catholic tradition, but the search for the sense of faith at the individual level, which has been characteristic of Protestantism throughout the years. That confronting, asking what you think, how you live and what God is for you. These questions have also existed in the Catholic tradition but have not characterized its perspective. To me this seemed liberating, very appropriate for a 21st century Christian faith that, inevitably, should have that personal component.

Also the study of biblical languages so in depth. In Catholicism it is also studied, but the mastery of Greek and Hebrew isn't presupposed in Catholic theology if you don't devote yourself to being a biblist. This preponderance of the original languages is something that I would not have today had I not studied at a Protestant faculty.

When I was working as a doctor in New York, I decided to attend a Protestant Episcopal church instead of a Catholic one. It's not that I had a crisis of faith, but that I wanted to open my mind. There I attended three years and one of the great novelties was to see a woman presiding. I looked around to see what faces the men were making, in case they were upset, but no one seemed to be because it was normal. In addition to being a pastor, Susan was a clown in the children's section of a hospital, so she had an intense communicative capacity, and for me it was very important to know her.

Q: But you have not considered being a Protestant.

A: No. At fifteen, I read the gospel and for me it was an experience of conversion. Then I read Leonardo Boff and Liberation Theology and Las Moradas by Saint Teresa and I was completely in love, and am up until now. It's like feeling in continuity with a whole tradition that has been one of political commitment to social justice and, later, the mystique of having your eyes open and touching the ground with your feet. In just one case I thought about becoming a Protestant. Specifically a Quaker. I was moved by the actions of Margaret Fell and George Fox in the 17th century. I have never known a Quaker community but that trajectory of pioneers in the field of pacifism, in humanizing prisons, in community instead of individual biblical interpretation without being mediated by some power structures that are distant, in the rights of women ... all this impressed me, although it didn't provoke a serious consideration of the abandonment of Catholicism, which I have rooted in my heart.

Q: Change of subject. How has the Procés Constituent experience been to date?

A: From the beginning it has been a cause for controversy because I was dressed as a nun and with a veil. Controversy between some members of Procés Constituent but, above all, with other groups with whom we entered into alliances or political conversations. There were people for whom the fact of being dressed as a nun -- and being one -- was a factor of trust, and for others, it was a contradiction due to the fact of being on the left. In our country, there are people who think that, because of being on the left, we should be against religions in general, but very specifically oppressive religions, which is the view that has been held about Catholicism because it has had, and still has power. The most acute part of this tension was experienced at the time I said I would go up for the elections (to Parliament on September 27, 2015). There were people who didn't accept it because they thought that going up for an election was something unlike a nun. It's not that I considered it proper for a nun, but it was an exceptional and temporary event. In fact, this had already happened during the democratic transition with parish priests who became mayors of towns. In my case, it was not only the factor of belonging to a religious community but also the factor of being a woman and a religious.

Q: And now, would you fit into politics?

A: No. But I didn't fit then either. It wasn't about entering the party game, but about promoting a popular constituent process. I'm very skeptical of party politics. A democracy reduced to parliament seems to me a shame. It's not about which party you like or which one you feel good in. The motivation, in my case, was the conviction that in Catalonia there was an opportunity to promote a reflection at the popular level about the definition of a new constitution and the relationship that one wants to have with the Spanish State. But we didn't want to take advantage of it. The idea of participatory democracy instead of an exclusively representative democracy is advancing in some countries but it's one of the main challenges for Western democracies.

Q: How do you perceive the current approaches of secularism?

A: When I was at Harvard, public theology had become fashionable, which has to do with theological reflection taking place in the public space. And I totally agree with this approach because I was also trained in it. If secularism means relegating faith to the private sphere, not because the person chooses so but because that's how it's regulated, I believe that this is incompatible with Christianity and the other great religions. If it is believed that the condition to have a plural society is that faith is reduced to the private sphere, I think that this weakens the public space and implies a violation in terms of rights. But it is also impossible for there to be cohesion and social development because this is a substantiation of non-religiosity. That is to say, from a point of view of ethical and political reflection, an artificial identity of the citizen is being constructed. The citizen is allowed to be in the public space according to the criteria that the State says. This is closer to totalitarian thought.

In the United States, I was in consultation with a colleague who wore a yarmulke, another with a Sikh turban, and a colleague wearing a veil. That was normal and we were visiting a public hospital. We were showing our beliefs in the public space and, for me, it was an enrichment.

Q: What do we have to move towards?

A: I'm arguing for the public character of theology and religion in a secular context conceived as a separation between religious institutions and the State. I'm interested in the arguments of John Locke about what the separation between Church and State means. Locke defends this separation, but reaffirms that the State can "judge religions" even if it is to declare them all equally valid. Maybe they are or maybe they aren't, but it's not the State that should determine it. How can a representative of the State argue with philosophical consistency that all religions are equal? The State can't be put above religions but it must guarantee that this debate can take place without favoring one religion to the detriment of the others. I think this is the idea that can help us most today.

On the other hand, we have the French Revolution and the Goddess of Reason who substantiates, in the name of the State, a notion of good. And the notions of good we must build among all, in a plural society, but avoiding the possible imposition of some over others. If we need something at the social level, it's the motivation toward personal sacrifice for the common good, but that's not so easy to achieve. It can't be presupposed. Throughout history there have been national or nationalist motivations or religious motivations that have led to facing up to injustice. Religion has played a role in the capacity for social cohesion. Getting to that is the challenge of 21st century society, but it's not done by relegating religion to the private sphere.

Q: But the reality is not very hopeful at this time.

A: In our context there is a struggle of privileges, still established, of the Catholic Church with the Spanish State. There is still the 1953 concordat with the Vatican. There is a government that gives medals to the Virgin and that shapes the public presence in such a way that it reminds us of that alliance of the past. On the other hand, there are city councils and political representatives who rebound against this and act in a prepotent or discriminatory way against religions in general and, very particularly, against Catholicism.

It's an interesting moment because it's a moment of transition. It's necessary to find a way to make this debate public and alive because it's a moment in which, as a society, we can orient ourselves in a new way. After 40 years of National Catholicism that was about disparaging other religions and Christian traditions, then came the rebound, a relative one because the concordats are still there, and now we're in a moment where there are voices for a secularism that I don't I think is positive because it aims to promote and defend from the institutions a model of an areligious citizen.

Wednesday, May 30, 2018

Toribio, a cardinal who smells of sheep and mines

By Victor Codina (English translation by Rebel Girl)
Religión Digital
May 23, 2018

On Pentecost, Pope Francis named 14 new cardinals, many of them from marginal areas. Among them, Toribio Ticona, a Bolivian emeritus bishop from a poor peasant jurisdiction who, before being bishop, was a peasant, bootblack, miner, bricklayer, and newspaper vendor.

Many were surely surprised with this nomination that breaks the traditional image of cardinal princes of the Church, members of noble families and bishops of great world capitals. Toribio responds to another image, that of the poor and simple pastor, always close to the peasant and mining people.

I have met him several times and I especially remember an occasion when he invited me to a meeting of the Church Base Communities in the mining district of Siglo XX. Toribio was the one who served at table.

This nomination is not casual; it responds to Francis' concern to reform the Church, to go back to a poor Church and for the poor, a Church that goes out to the borders and is a field hospital, where the pastors aren't taskmasters or feudal lords, but servants who smell of sheep, who break recalcitrant clericalism and build a Church People of God.

This designation is also a criticism of a society that builds walls to defend itself from poor migrants and where the representative of the most powerful country calls foreign immigrants "animals", a world where wealth, consumption, prestige and power are valued, and one escapes with the "bread and circus" of princely weddings and spectacular sports championships.

In the face of this false and unjust world, Toribio's nomination means that there are other values more important in life, such as honesty, work, simplicity, justice and solidarity with the poor.

Finally, this nomination reminds us of the gospel of Jesus who came not to be served but to serve. He washed his disciples' feet and said that the most important in the Kingdom of God are the little ones and the poor.

Thursday, January 18, 2018

Pope Francis' teaching seems made for what Peru needs today

By María Rosa Lorbés (English translation by Rebel Girl)
Observatorio Social-Eclesial
December 15, 2017

Miguel Cruzado, a Jesuit from Piura, receives us to talk about the Pope and his upcoming visit. Father Cruzado, despite his youth, has had a distinguished career in the Peruvian and universal Church. He was the provincial superior of the Society of Jesus in Peru in 2010 and several years later was named by the Father General as his General Counselor and Regional Assistant for Southern Latin America and had to move to the Jesuit General Curia Community in Rome. He returned again to Peru and was just named director of Fe y Alegría a few days ago.

What do you think is the most important aspect of the Pope's visit? How do you feel about this great ecclesial event?

It makes me very enthusiastic because I think it's very important that some of Francis' central themes be developed, heard and debated in Peru, both in the Church and in society. There are societies, hemispheres, realities where Francis' teaching, although important, may not seem urgent. In Peru, it goes to the heart of what we're experiencing today -- the importance of Christian discernment in a church with pastors who don't accompany their faithful very much, the situation of the poorest in the face of the naturalization of social inequalities, public responsibilities in the midst of the tremendous ethical crisis that we are experiencing today. It's as if Francis' teaching were made for what Peru needs now.

At this moment, before the coming of the Pope, people are looking more towards the Church; it's in the display window. What do you think the average Peruvian sees when he looks at that Church?

Unfortunately, I believe that in recent years the Church, myself included, has been moving away from real life, from the important issues of people's lives. Especially the poorest and the youngest. In fact, as we know from various studies, the ones who leave the Catholic Church are the poor and the young adults. We're losing people because we don't have a message that's close to their lives.

It concerns me not only because they are the majority of the population in our country, but also because they are the ones who we want to accompany especially as Church. God is without a doubt in the working class and youth worlds of Peru; their alienation from the Catholic Church expresses our inability to hear Him and recognize Him in their midst. Alienating ourselves from the lives of the people is alienating ourselves from God Himself.

We have reached a point where we aren't even controversial; we arouse more indifference than debate. Not only are we decreasing, we are, moreover, less and less relevant to people's lives. For example, for young people with future reference points, for families with openness to the challenges of distances and ruptures between their members, special situations that are sometimes painful, for professionals with criteria to discern ethical life, the political and economic options in society. The Church is a weak voice among many others, one that is losing legitimacy, mostly it's not even a voice that is sounding.

We need Pope Francis...

In that sense, I think that the Pope's visit could help us to focus as Church on the relevant issues we are experiencing as a society. The Pope has something of this spiritual grace of a pastor who feels and acknowledges what people are experiencing, and reacts to it. I think Francis will get what we are experiencing in Peru and know how to respond to what we need to attend to today from the Gospel. Even though he comes with already prepared texts, you have to also pay attention to his spontaneous words, the unforseen reactions. That's where we should be revitalized as the Catholic Church, since they aren't idle reactions for a photo, a video, they're reactions of someone who feels what the people are living, linking it to what is most authentic in Christian tradition, the Gospel.

So, as believers and as citizens, what should we expect from this visit -- to be content, unsettled, or called to change?

I hope and am convinced, because of Francis' charisma and because he knows Peru, that this visit can give us back a bit of hope, both to the Church and to society. We're a bit down as Church and society. We've been hit again and again. The corruption is showing the worst of us. We don't recognize clear voices that help us orient ourselves as a nation. In the Church, we haven't had a clear word, in which we recognize ourselves as a community, in a while. I think the enthusiasm and joy with which Francis lives can help us lift our gaze to renew ourselves and seek common horizons.

But Francis is coming for a few days. What he can awaken will depend on how the people, all of us, receive the message. It will depend a lot on how the media, pastors, opinion leaders take the key points from Francis' message and promote them to make decisions. The Francis effect depends on Peruvians the day after Francis leaves. It will be very important to get what the Spirit is saying to us during the visit so that it later becomes messages to develop. That's why the "reception" of Francis is very important. "Reception" is a theological concept that implies not just listening but also interpreting for one's own life and putting into practice.

Because of what we've been saying, what do you think the Peruvian Church should do to respond to the Pope's invitation to be a poor Church and for the poor?

It's true that the Church's public voice is losing importance, but at the level of people's daily life, the Church in Peru, thank God, has thousands of laypeople -- men and women, men and women religious, who are this "field hospital Church" that Francis wants. A Church that welcomes people, listens, heals, that doesn't discriminate and helps us to be a little more human and therefore more holy. Unfortunately these things aren't public and appear as movements, partial or private initiatives; they aren't seen as the most visible face of the Church.

In the face of what you're saying, there is in effect a public opinion that doesn't know what the Church is doing at the service of society, sometimes in the most remote corners, a Church that serves the poorest.

I believe that the Church in Peru has a tradition that has become invisible. A tradition of closeness, solidarity, involvement with the poorest and with the working class worlds of Peru, with what is most authentic in us as a nation. It has been made invisible by people who haven't understood it, by narrow political viewpoints, by fearful theological opposition. However, it must become visible because it is real, it exists. It is the Church without communiqués or declarations, the everyday one.

In Fe y Alegría alone, we're talking about 43 religious orders and thousands of laypeople -- men and women -- committed to the education of the poorest in Peru. Half are religious, but the other half are laymen and women, teachers who direct the best public schools in Peru and sometimes have better evaluations than others from private schools in the country. How many health missions to people in indigenous areas carried out by religious, laymen, laywomen, there are in Peru -- tens of thousands. The work for people's rights as well. For example, on the issue of equality between men and women and stereotypes and gender equality, the huge work that is being done and has always been done for the rights and defense of women and girls has not been made visible. It is organized by lots of Christian organizations in Peru, above all in the most wounded areas, where there is the greatest danger. That work didn't begin now, but has been going on for decades.

Today more and more men and women are becoming aware of the role of women and many Christians have collaborated, contributed, and are working on this daily, but it's not visible. Christian voices are  becoming more visible and they're in the newspapers, sometimes of our pastors, who instead view with mistrust all these efforts for equity and women's rights for which so many have been fighting for decades, long before these debates began.

So there is a Church that is close to the people, to the poor, to the most typical of the country and that, moreover, knows how to discern. Being a Christian isn't applying a few rules to fulfill them, it's believing and listening to God. These people who are close to poor people are discerning, trying to listen to what God is saying and asking from people's lives. That is believing in God, not just applying rules, but always thinking about what God is asking of me in this situation. Francis asks us to be a Church on the borders that discerns. That's why I do believe that Francis will help us to know more about this rooted, massive Church, close to the poor, to its own and that is discerning and is linked to so many people.

Making that Church visible is important, and above all, because through this it will be placed at the center of the public agenda, the social problems, the debates that the country doesn't raise.

Yes, above all because it allows you to get closer to the fundamental problems of the country's reality. We have been making the gospel dialogue with the culture, looking for ways to believe and recognize the seeds of the gospel that are proper for Peru. That Church not only works hard but has a word, a theological and spiritual reflection. A Church that discusses fundamental issues in the lives of people. Unfortunately these issues are not always picked up by our pastors, by us priests. We have become too formal and fearful. We are afraid, for example, of talking about the inequalities that exist in society. It seems normal that some Peruvians are condemned to a very low quality education. That is not normal, it's not good and it has been taken as normal. We are afraid to question gender stereotypes that do so much harm. And we contribute to normalizing inequalities between men and women. I hope the Pope helps us lose that fear a little.

Father, you're one of the few Peruvians who knows the Pope. I would like to ask you, what's he like? What would you say about him? How is Francis up close?

The first thing that struck me is that he is attentive to the people around him. He captures details of people. Suddenly, a group approaches that doesn't know what to say and it's as if the Pope has guessed. He reacts naturally, he's not silent, he's not suspicious. He intuits people, he has that grace of a pastor close to people.

Another trait is that, just as he's close he is also very demanding. He encourages us to continue the good we might be doing but also raises high challenges. That's how he is with everybody, with every order. He raises big challenges. His closeness isn't a cheap closeness, it's an expensive, demanding grace. What's surprising is that nobody feels offended, but rather recognized. We feel his trust. He knows we can go further.

The Pope has already made various trips to Latin America. Did any of his comments on his return strike you?

He always comes back happy from his trips in Latin America. And before the trips, yes, one senses that spiritually the Pope is preparing for something decisive. Which you see in the messages he gave when he arrived at his destination. In Latin America, Francis has said things that will always be remembered. He has opened immense doors for the universal Church teaching. Like what was said in Ecuador to indigenous people, in Bolivia to the popular movements, in Paraguay to women, in Colombia to a divided society.

Thank you, Father Cruzado. Do you want to add anything more?

I'll add something as an educator. Francis has had a message every year for educators. He has stressed a complete education for all, that helps people and communities to grow. The school, he has said, is like a small Church in which you grow, you discern, you are welcomed. I hope he challenges us in that respect in Peru and that we move beyond an instrumental view of education, just as techniques to offer and as a place for training people, that he helps us reassess the central role of the teacher in society in general.

Saturday, December 23, 2017

At a moment in history, the center of everything is in a woman

By Leonardo Boff (English translation by Rebel Girl)
Leonardoboff.com (em portugües)
12/17/2017

The Christmas holiday is wholly focused on the figure of the Divine Child (Puer aeternus), Jesus, the Son of God who decided to dwell among us. The celebration of Christmas goes beyond this fact. Restricting ourselves to him alone, we fall into the theological error of Christomonism (Christ alone counts), forgetting that there are also the Spirit and the Father who always act together.

It is worth highlighting the figure of his mother, Miriam of Nazareth. If she had not said her "yes," Jesus would not have been born. And there would be no Christmas.

As we are still hostages of the patriarchal era, it prevents us from understanding and valuing what the gospel of Luke says about Mary: "The Holy Spirit will come upon you and the energy (dynamis) of the Most High will pitch His tent over you and therefore the Holy Begotten One will be called the Son of God."(Lk 1:35)

Common translations, dependent on a masculinist reading, say "the virtue of the Most High will overshadow you." Reading the original Greek, that is not what is said. Literally it states: "the energy (dynamis) of the Most High will pitch His tent over you (episkiásei soi)." It is a Hebrew linguistic idiom meaning "dwelling not transiently but definitively" upon you, Mary. The word used is skene meaning tent. Pitching a tent over someone (epi-skiásei), as the text states, means: from now on Mary of Nazareth will be the permanent bearer of the Spirit. She was "spiritualized," that is, the Spirit is part of her.

Curiously, St. John the Evangelist applies the same word, skene (tent), to the incarnation of the Word. "And the Word became flesh and pitched his tent among us (eskénosen -- it is the same basic verb), that is, he lived permanently among us.

What conclusion do we draw from this? That the first divine Person sent into the world was not the Son, the second Person of the Holy Trinity. It was the Holy Spirit. The one who is third in the order of the Trinity is first in the order of Creation, that is, the Holy Spirit. The receptacle of this coming was a woman of the people, simple and pious like all the peasant women of Galilee, named Miriam or Mary.

In welcoming the coming of the Spirit, she was raised to the height of the divinity of the Spirit. That is why the evangelist Luke rightly says: "Therefore (dià óti) or because of this the Holy One will be called the Son of God" (Lk 1:35). Only someone who is at the height of God can bring forth a Son of God. Mary, for this reason, will be deified similarly to the man Jesus of Nazareth who was assumed by the eternal Son and thus was deified. It is the eternal Son incarnate in our humanity who we celebrate at Christmas.

Behold, at a moment in history, the center is occupied by a woman, Miriam of Nazareth. In her is working the Holy Spirit who dwells in her and who is creating the holy humanity of the Son of God. In her are present two divine Persons: the Holy Spirit and the eternal Son of the Father. She is the temple that houses both.

Our Lady of Guadalupe, so venerated by the Mexican people, with mestizo traits, appears as a pregnant woman with all the symbols of pregnancy of the Nahuatl culture (of the Aztecs). Every time I went to Mexico, I mixed with the crowds who come and visit the beautiful cloth image of Guadalupe. Dressed as a friar, I often would ask an anonymous pilgrim, "Little brother, do you worship the Virgin of Guadalupe?" And I always received the same answer, "Yes, little friar, how can I not worship the Virgin of Guadalupe? Yes, I adore her."

The devotee answered rightly, for in this woman two divine Persons are hidden, the Son who grew in her womb by the energy of the Spirit that was dwelling in her. And both, being God, can and should be worshiped. And Mary is inseparable from them, so she deserves the same worship. Hence the inspiration for one of my most read books, O Rosto materno de Deus (Vozes, 11th ed., 2012. In English translation as The Maternal Face of God, Collins Publications, 1989).

I have always lamented that most women, even women theologians, have not yet assumed their divine portion, present in Mary, by the work of the Holy Spirit. They remain with just Christ, the deified man.

Christmas will be more complete if, together with the Child who shivers from the cold in the manger, we would include his Mother who warms him, supported by her husband the good Joseph. He would also deserve a special reflection, something I have already done in these pages of Jornal do Brasil: his relationship with the heavenly Father.

In the midst of the crisis of our country, there is still a Star like the one of Bethlehem to give us hope and a Woman, bearer of the Spirit that inspires us to find a saving way out.

The domesticated Gospel

By Victor Codina (English translation by Rebel Girl)
Blog de CJ
December 19, 2017

We often discard gospel texts that are hard for us to understand. For example: that what we do to the poor, we do to Jesus, that the mysteries of the Kingdom, hidden from the wise and prudent, have been revealed to the little ones, that in the Magnificat it is said that God has put down the mighty from their thrones and has lifted up the lowly, that in the beatitudes it is proclaimed that the poor are blessed and a "woe to the wealthy" is delivered, that God prefers mercy to sacrifices ... It even seems right to us that the older brother in the parable of the prodigal son did not want to participate in the festive feast.

Nor does it persuade us to hear that we have to carry the cross every day, rather we're in tune with Peter when he refuses to accept the passion of Jesus. We don't like to hear that we are to be born again, nor do we fully understand that God dwells in us, or that where there are two or three gathered in His name, He is present. Nor have we taken seriously the fact of not calling anyone father or teacher, because we call priests "father", bishops "his excellency", cardinals "his eminence", and the Pope "his holiness". We also don't like to hear that we have to be vigilant, because the Lord will come when we least expect it. And that resurrection business is so strange to us that we prefer to think that the soul is immortal, as the Greek philosophers and the Roman sages used to say.

To many men it is shocking that some women anointed the feet of Jesus with perfumes and tears, that the woman with the issue of blood touched the fringe of His mantle and that a Syrophoenician woman changed Jesus' plans. Nor do they like that Jesus first appeared to women and charged them to announce the resurrection to the disciples.

In short, we are accommodating the Gospel to our way of life, we are making the Church worldly, we are living a bourgeois Christianity, without cross or resurrection, with an "a la carte" faith. We domesticate the gospel, we mutilate it, we adapt it and make it politically correct. We have transformed Christmas into the celebration of consumption. The salt has lost its flavor, we have become pious Pharisees who fulfill external rites and norms, faith is reduced to a kind of béchamel sauce that coats the outside but doesn't transform life. Can it surprise us that many young and not so young people, men and women, are moving away from this style of Church? Is it strange that Pope Francis is talking about reforming the Church? We can not extinguish the fire of the Spirit.