Several stories about doings in the Vatican and the selection of the next pope have me wondering about reform and its possibility. One of those items has nothing directly to do with the Vatican but its musings on the state of Roman Catholic higher education in the United State (even after Ex Corde Ecclesiae) do raise questions about how effective even papal encyclicals are in regulating the faithful.
All sides, liberals and conservatives, seem to think that the church needs to be reformed. Even George Weigel (thanks John Fea), one of Rome’s chief apologists, admits to an NBC reporter that the secrecy of the current conclave is out of touch with the twenty-first century. Progressives want changes on the status of women, contraception (family planning), more democratic participation, and the promotion of social justice. Conservatives want the church to stand pat on women, sex and would likely prefer to see crack downs on renegade elements within the church. But conservatives are not clear on lay involvement compared to the hierarchy’s power (perhaps because some of the most forceful spokesmen for conservatism are laymen). Then there is the complicated issue of how closely Rome’s teaching should follow U.S. understandings of free markets, democratic participation, and foreign relations.
In other words, everyone thinks reform is in order. Something is broken that needs fixing. And yet Rome claims to be a perfect society. So is reformation truly possible when everything is already good (even though it isn’t)? I don’t ask this as a gotcha move. It is a serious inquiry. If you already have the notion that the church is perfect and its sovereign is infallible, and when you score points against Protestants by noting all of our imperfections, is it really possible to admit that changes are needed? Or is it the case that changes will happen in a way that says no one ever did anything wrong? Which is to say that reform never happens.
Old Life 
Darryl,
Not only does the Catholic Church claim to be a perfect society, but she claims that civil society is a perfect society as well (see paragraphs 12-13 of Divini Illius Magistri). That’s because the term translated as ‘perfect’ here does not mean that there is no room for improvement. It is a technical term being used in a technical sense to mean that it has within itself all the means for its peculiar end.
In the peace of Christ,
– Bryan
LikeLike
So something can be perfect and suck at the same time. Boy am I gonna try that one on my wife tonight…
LikeLike
“……….Or is it the case that changes will happen in a way that says no one ever did anything wrong? Which is to say that reform never happens.”
Me: There’s your maturation of the deposit that can only be maintained per prior faith blind…errrrr……commitment. Audacity where incredulity should be. As long as that exchange takes place, reform won’t happen. Thankfully their are multitudes of RC’s who’s BS meter works just fine.
LikeLike
Bryan, if the Roman Church “has within itself all the means for its peculiar end” – that end being “the eternal salvation of mankind” – doesn’t the means include all things pertaining to salvation in this life? And if the RCC has that perfection, then what keeps her from fully, once-for-all-time utilizing that perfection? It seems a bit odd to have that “perfection” (all the means…) at one’s disposal from day one and yet needing any number of reforms or developments over the centuries as pertaining to her administration of the eternal salvation to souls. The selling of indulgences for the securing of one’s eternal salvation comes to mind. Kind of confusing…
Or am I not using “perfect” in a technical enough way?
LikeLike
Catholic converts formerly of the Montanist variety tend toward obfuscation. “Obfuscation” is a technical term being used in a technical sense meaning to darken, confuse, or becloud. When a question cannot be answered directly it helps to obfuscate. Hence, terms that have clear meaning apart from the initiated mean one thing but for the initiated another (see “perfect” above). The good news is Catholicism long ago refuted gnosticism . . .
LikeLike
Bryan, is that definition of “perfect” found in Scripture?
LikeLike
Darryl, I think that definition of “perfection” (i.e. “perfect: to be either really pretty all right or absolutely without blemish”) comes just before the one of “prayer” (i.e. “pray tell: to speak to or implore either divine or human beings”).
LikeLike
That’s the Catholic answer, but do you really believe it, Bryan? This lonely golfer just scratches his head at a response like that. Peace!
LikeLike
And yet wasn’t Calvinistic optimism about God’s sovereignty that Voltaire was mocking in Candide, with Pangloss’ ridiculous teaching about The Best of all Possible Worlds?
LikeLike
Which raises the question of whether male-only-priesthood and the ban on contraception are infallible, ex cathedra, irreformable doctrines? And while we’re at it, let’s toss the celibate priesthood onto the pile of questions…
LikeLike
Rube,
The culture of the religious is going to be THE issue for the foreseeable future. You can’t have sacerdotalism without a robust and healthy clergy. They have neither right now. The homosexuals are entrenched because they needed male celibates to man the pulpits. They’ve never had outstanding success with keeping the hetero’s celibate, but now with the deterioration of ethnic and nationalist traditions(think hispanic, Irish, polish) that kept the clerical pipeline sustained, there was little choice at the novitiate level but to increasingly look past sexual indiscretions and even start to make pastoral distinctions between heterosexual relations with naturally procreative opportunities and homosexual indiscretions with no such opportunities. The only caveat was to ‘keep it quiet’, well that’s just not possible anymore with the ever present media coverage and a 24/7 news cycle manufacturing news to fill the time. Never mind the explosion of social media. The priesthood, with it’s unnatural view of sexual propriety, and it’s access to children-schools, the elderly, the vulnerable and the devout has always been an opportunity for deviants(pedophiles) who hide behind the religious power of the collar, and now everybody knows it. Modernity is about to swallow the heirarchical structure of Rome, whole. They either get on with the “progressives” agenda coming out of Vat II, or you’ll have an RC about a 1/3 of the size. You don’t want homosexuals? Open the door to married men in the clergy, maybe even women or get ready to downsize/collapse.
LikeLike
Sean, if you didn’t have a gospel of life (where everything in the world is part of recreation and redemption), and if you had a recognition that salvation from hell came only from being in fellowship with the Bishop of Rome and receiving the sacraments admininstered by the correct priests, you might have less of a religious shortage. But if I can serve God as much by making money as by going to seminary, why go to seminary?
LikeLike
Darryl,
I can see where economic collapse or lack of economic success might give you more vocations, but as you’re alluding to, in america particularly, that kind of traditionalist approach is first gonna inspire a near revolt among the clergy and religious and then get ready for the money to dry up, and with a vatican that has been increasingly dependent on American funds and quite frankly talent to try to reform and pull them out of all the scandal the roman curia keeps bathing them in….as Calvin said; “good luck with that”. But, let’s say RCC weathers that, then I guess you can rebuild with what’s left after a significant white european and american exodus, and look for your new Ireland, Poland and Latin America. Latin America can probably fill that pipeline up some, but your gonna first need to shake off the Liberation theology that took it’s strongest hold down south. You’re still gonna have major chastity ‘problems’ and a clerical culture that to date has been a refuse for homosexuals looking to find a niche in the society and deviants looking for access and a power profile to hide behind.
LikeLike
Sean, so are you saying the Vatican may have to relocate the way the National Council of Churches has? I mean, downsize.
LikeLike
Darryl,
They might be able to hold onto Vatican city by leveraging St. Peters Basilica for a couple hundred years line of credit.
LikeLike
After going to the local St. Thomas Aquinas sale for several years I, for one, would relish going to a yard sale at the Vatican.
LikeLike