The Catholic Thing
HOME        ARCHIVES        IN THE NEWS        COMMENTARY        NOTABLE        DONATE
Amateur Night Print E-mail
By Bevil Bramwell, OMI   
Sunday, 15 July 2012

You all know what Amateur Night is. A bar will have an “Open Mike Night” when anyone who wants may go up and sing or otherwise make a fool of himself. Amateur Night also captures the avalanche of theological amateurism after Vatican II. I mean that in the sense of the enthusiastic, though perhaps not the informed amateur.

The Council’s first session started in October 1962 and the last one closed in December 1965. Even as the sessions took place there was preemptive talk in the media. Legions of “experts” spoke and wrote about what the council should do to “bring the Church into the modern world.”

In fact, the council fathers were as much in the modern world as anyone else and yet, strangely perhaps, they did not simply turn the Church into yet another mirror of modern culture like a cable channel or Disney World.

After the council, many priests and nuns took the council documents and ran with them. Often their use of texts was not ecclesial even though “ecclesial communion is the key to our task of proclaiming the Gospel” and the Church as communion is a basic theme of council teachings. (Benedict XVI)

An inescapable hermeneutical requirement is built into using theological statements: namely, that they should be read ecclesially in the unity of the Scriptures and the documents of the Church as the only way even to comprehend them.

This is not eccentricity or authoritarianism. Other complex fields such as medicine or law or engineering, for example, make the same kind of demands. Each field has its own framework of principles and publications. So understanding an article in engineering takes knowledge of pretty much everything else, the technical terms, the mathematics, the logic, previous articles on the subject, etc.

A question for another time is why the rigors of medicine, law, and other disciplines are still accepted in our culture (try being a doctor without being certified!), but taking care with theology is apparently passé or illegitimate.

If unity in communion had been the rule of Catholic mental hygiene after Vatican II, then some people would not imagine that the ‘conservatives (whoever they are) hijacked the council” (“Xavier Rynne’s” nonsense) or that “logically” those of us who were not at the council have the insight to correct it.

Fundamentalist Progressives (no there’s something new under the sun) would not take one line out of a council text and make it the only key to Christian life (look at most of the “social justice” movement). So much writing and speaking would not jump from a line of teaching to “what I think.”

The other day, I came upon someone who misquoted Pope Benedict and then made the misunderstanding the premise for an article. In a different climate of opinion, there would not be the sheer disdain for reasoned theological presentation (and for the persons offering them) that demonstrates a substantial grasp of theology by someone who has indeed done his homework.

Most of all, solipsism in theological things loses the beauty of theology and of the Theos – God, in the process. Without beauty there is no truth, an insight that is valued in other realms as well.  Robert P. Crease note recently that: “The physicist and cosmologist Subrahmanyan Chandrasekar wrote an entire book on Newton’s Principia, the book in which Newton proposes his second law of motion, comparing it to Michelangelo’s painting on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel.”

Chandrasekar knew the history of his field and was extraordinarily adept within it, winning the 1983 Nobel Prize for Physics. He also knew that even cosmologists can get too blasé and lose the sheer awe at beholding the universe.

Awe comes as well to those who know that they handle sacred things, the Church being one of them. Without the beauty that comes from organic unity of thought (because God and his plan of salvation are an organic unity) there is no love, there is only the vitriol and viciousness of political debate rather than a religious discourse.

For some reason – call it the spirit of the sixties – theology, the most vital, disciplined thought in the world, became a free-for-all. Or even worse, a mere set of planks in the platform of a particular ideological group – the “we want homosexual marriage” group or the “we want ordained women” group or the “we’re against authority except our own” group.

Good for you. But in that way of doing theology, theology as such is eviscerated and people use its terms and concepts to mean anything at all.

Bishops became afraid of their clergy (“I can’t look too conservative.”). Dioceses became doctrinal free-for-alls (“pick a parish that teaches what you like”). Religious orders followed the same script. Universities became anything (“the alternative magisterium”).

But the Church is the communion of truth and love that we participate in and subordinate ourselves to. Communion involves both truth and love. Amateurism rarely has the tools to deal with such realities.


Bevil Bramwell
, priest of the Oblates of Mary Immaculate, teaches theology at Catholic Distance University. He holds a Ph.D. from Boston College and works in the area of ecclesiology.
 
The Catholic Thing is a forum for intelligent Catholic commentary. Opinions expressed by writers are solely their own.
  

Rules for Commenting

The Catholic Thing welcomes comments, which should reflect a sense of brevity and a spirit of Christian civility, and which, as discretion indicates, we reserve the right to publish or not. And, please, do not include links to other websites; we simply haven't time to check them all.

Comments (9)Add Comment
0
...
written by Paul Rodden, July 15, 2012
Thank you for another great reflection, Father.

"A question for another time is why the rigors of medicine, law, and other disciplines are still accepted in our culture (try being a doctor without being certified!), but taking care with theology is apparently passé or illegitimate."

Oh please! Definitely for another time!

It is a question I often ask friends (CINOs) and atheists as to why they seem to think there are no experts - or that everyone's an expert. I normally assume it's because everything today is reduced to 'spirituality'.
I know it's a bit selfish, but I'd love to hear your thoughts as I always find your reflections so valuable.
0
...
written by Ignasi Camprubí, July 15, 2012
I agree, there is a clear lack of faith. Do we really believe that God intervene in our world?
0
...
written by Bangwell Putt, July 15, 2012
Regarding the question from Ignasi Camprubi: You are asking this question of Father Bramwell.

My response does not have the authority that his will certainly have.

I could not help but be reminded of an old movie, one with a melodramatic beginning but, as it goes on, serious content that one does not forget. It is "The Keys to the Kingdom." One scene features a young college student, the college president who is a priest, and another priest who is disturbed by a question the student has asked. The question was, "Do we really need a creed?" The answer, given without hesitation and with conviction by the college president is "Yes."

That would be my answer to your question. Yes, I do believe that God intervenes in our world, most often, if asked, in our innermost selves, within individual persons who can then go on to change the world if they will.
0
...
written by Louise, July 15, 2012
Father, this "Night" seems interminable. May the dawn soon come! Great article.
0
...
written by Chris in Maryland, July 16, 2012
To Ignasi:

I think that the idea that God "intervenes" in the world is a remnant of Greek mythology - the gods sitting back, watching, and sometimes jumping in to tip the scales.

I think that Catholic revelation is that God is eternally acting. Creation is made of creatures animated by their Creator. We are not watches from a watchmaker. Every heart that beats is beating only because His eternal Word makes it so, as St. Paul's letter to the Hebrews says - "He upholds the universe by his Word of power.
0
...
written by Chris in Maryland, July 16, 2012
On second read, I believe Ignasi may be asking his question from the point of view of faith.
0
...
written by Fr. Bramwell, July 17, 2012
Chris, with respect but your posting illustrates the point of my column. You seem to know something about Creation but what about redemption?

Louise, I don't want to be gloomy but life is a kind of 'night' where we live by faith. Hopefully we get enough glimmers from the sacraments, from faithful people whom we meet.
0
...
written by Louise, July 18, 2012
Father, there was a time when a Catholic second grader knew more than the amateur theological experts of whom you speak...that's the dawn I'm awaiting. will i live so long, only God knows!
0
...
written by Londiniensis, July 20, 2012
I wish it were as simple as that. Neither the Bologna school nor the Concilium theologians were / are amateurs. And many of the damaging changes, be it liturgical experimentation or pop-catechesis, were sanctioned, introduced, indeed encouraged, by bishops. And the touchstone for this free-for-all, the "horizontal" Novus Mass in the vernacular, was sanctioned by the Pope.

Write comment
smaller | bigger

security code
Write the displayed characters


busy
 

Other Articles By This Author

CONTACT US FOR ADVERTISERS ABOUT US
Banner
Banner
Banner
Banner
Banner
Banner
Banner