1

TheAbuseofPowerintheChurchanditsImpactontheIdentity,ReciprocityandFamilial RelationsofaWorldChurchinthe21stCentury The Roman Catholic Church is in deep crisis. Pope Benedict XVI publicly admits the church suffersfromproblemsofitsownmakingbornfromthesinswithintheChurchwhichwesee today in a truly terrifying way.1 Among the attempts to give the crisis a name, none is as courageousandtruthfulastheonethatcallsittheabuseofpower.2Thebreadthanddepth of the abuse is shaking the church to its foundations as it severely impacts the identity, reciprocity,andfamilialrelationsofthePeopleofGod. 1. ACorporateIdentityinCrisis ThereissomethingdistinctiveaboutthechurchasacommunityofdisciplesofJesustheChrist. ItisperhapstheonlyfaithcommunitythatdarestocallitselfthebodyofitsLordandSavior. Inrecenttimesthephenomenonofclergysexualabuse,thepatternofneglectifnotoutright coverupbychurchleaderswhohavetheresponsibilitytodealwithit,andtheappallingsilence of those who knew about it, have seriously impaired the Churchs corporate identity. This is happening at the same time that the theological claims that underpin it are under close scrutiny.Theseeventsdonotonlycallintoquestionthestructuresofchurchgovernanceand authority,butalsobleedtheveryheartofitsidentityasthehistoricalandmysticalbodyofits

PopeBenedictplacesblameforsexscandalsonCatholicChurch,TheWashingtonPost(12May2010),A08in www.washingtonpost.com/...AR2010051104(accessedon5/25/2010). 2 JamesKeenan,SexAbuse,PowerAbuse,TheTablet(11May2002),910.

1

LordandSavior.Ifthequestionofpowerandauthorityinrelationtochurchgovernanceis,in thelastanalysis,anecclesiologicalquestion,3thedisturbingissueiswhatsortofembodiment istheChurch,asBodyofChrist,expressinginhistorygiventhephenomenonofpowerabuse? Ifthebodyiscomprisedofbothvictimsandperpetratorsaspartofallthefaithful,whatsortof bodyisit?Ifthepresentcrisisistopointtoafuturehope,whatsortofbodycoulditbe?4 CrisisofIdentity,CrisisofLaw ThefoundationalprincipleoftheChurchscorporateidentityisclear:allChristians,by reason of baptism, possess equality in dignity and responsibility for the churchs life and mission (LG 32). The problem is, some would say, the lack of a legal application of this principle.5 Despite the deep egalitarian spirit of the Christian sacraments of initiation, church laws continue to restrict, if not disregard, the rights of the faithful. These include the ethical requirementsofparticipatorygovernance,collegialdecisionmaking,selectionprocessofoffice holders,andmechanismsofaccountability,tonamebutafew. Thechurchscurrentsystemoflawsmakesitdifficultforallbothordainedandnon ordainedtorecognizesuchequalityor,atleast,giveitapracticaleffect.Itisnotthelackof correctdoctrinewhichisincrisis,butthelackoftruthfulnesstogiveastructurecommensurate with the interior reality of corporate identity. This huge gap needs to be confronted,

AgnesCunningham,PowerandAuthorityintheChurch,inJamesMallett(ed.),TheMinistryofGovernance (Washington,DC:CanonLawSocietyofAmerica,1986),8097,hereat95. 4 InframingthistheologicalethicalquestionwearehelpedbyFrancesWard,TheologicalStrandPowerin HelenCameronetal.(eds.),StudyingLocalChurches:AHandbook(London:SCMPress,2005),221233. 5 See,forinstance,MichaelFahey,DiocesanGovernanceinModernCatholicTheologyandinthe1983Codeof CanonLaw,inJamesMallett(ed.),TheMinistryofGovernance(Washington,DC:CanonLawSocietyofAmerica, 1986),121139;andJohnBeal,ItShallNotBeSoAmongYou!CrisisintheChurch,CrisisinChurchLaw,inFrancis OakleyandBruceRussett(eds.),Governance,AccountabilityandtheFutureoftheCatholicChurch(New York/London:Continuum,2004),88102.

3

consideringthatlaws,fromtheviewpointofCatholicmoraltheology,giveexpressiontothe innerrealityofthechurchasacommunityofloveempoweredbytheSpirit.6Lawsmaynever satisfy the full measure of moral responsibility, but nevertheless, as repositories of moral wisdom,theyhelpshapeandsustainacollectiveidentity.Inthesamewaythatbonessupport thebody,lawsprovidetheframeworkforthecommunityofbelieverstobeabletoidentifyand promotethebasicvaluesandethicalstandardswithoutwhichitcannotlive. CrisisofIdentity,CrisisofAuthority For others, the crisis of the Churchs corporate identity is due either to the misunderstanding of what authority entails, or to actual misuse, perhaps even abuse, of that authority.IntheChurch,thosevestedwithpowerandthosewhoarenextinlinearesocialized by two accounts that seem contradictory.7 One account, perhaps the dominant one, says churchauthority,liketheproverbialkeyreceivedbyPeterfromJesus,issolelyreceivedbythe ordainedfromChrist.Theotherholdsthatchurchauthorityisgrantedbythecommunityasan investiture of certain rights held by the community, given in trust to the officebearers to exercise.8 The authority of the believing church as a whole is the prior condition of the authorityofofficeholders. Todirectlylinktheabuseofpowerwithchurchidentityandauthorityistocallattentionto the fact that every view of authority is essentially bound up with a system of ideas. The dominantsystemclaimstheprimacyoftheauthorityoftheordainedoverthesensusfidelium

RichardGula,ReasonInformedbyFaith(Mahwah,NJ:PaulistPress,1989),250. See,forinstance,GerardMannion,WhatDoWeMeanbyAuthority?inBernardHoose(ed.),Authorityinthe RomanCatholicChurch:TheoryandPractice(London:Ashgate,2002),1936. 8 Ibid.,22,3233.

7 6

of the believing community. The other asserts that the authority of officeholders is an institutional tool to shape corporate identity by empowering those from whom their power comesinsteadoflordingitoverthem(1Pet5:3).Theglobalphenomenonofchurchauthority abuseoughttoalertusthatneitherpersonalqualitiesnorassumedcharacteristicsofthose invested with power, or the claim to be representing a tradition, are sufficient to establish legitimacy.Thetheologicalethicalchallenge,itseems,isforaworldchurchtocriticallyengage theideasthatbuttressadominantsystemofauthoritythatisabuseprone. CrisisofIdentity,CrisisofEthos AthirdviewspeaksofabodyofChristmadedocilebythedominantethosorliving processesofclericalism.9Muchofwhatimpelsallmembersofasocialbodytoactcomesfrom thesurroundinginfluencesandacceptedpractices.IntheChurch,thisisthepowerofclerical ascendancy.Theclericalethosaccruesprivilege,separateness,status,andentitlementforthe membersoftheClub.Thisincludestheprivilegeofsimplybeingabletofitintoareadymade and grandiose identity, and the language of an allmale inner circle that excludes the competenceorgenderofthosewhoallegedlylacktheabilitytobeaniconofChristtheHigh Priest.10 As a result there is advancement to a higher form of status, creating inferiors from whomunquestioningdependenceisexpectedifnotdemanded.Thisentitlementtothevirtual identificationoftheholinessandgraceofthechurchwiththeclericalstateand,thereby,with

MichaelPapesh,ClericalCulture:ContradictionandTransformation(Collegeville:LiturgicalPress,2004);George Wilson,Clericalism:TheDeathofPriesthood(Collegeville:LiturgicalPress,2008). 10 MaryDalycallsitchristolatrywhileDorotheeSoellewarnsusagainstchristofascism.Seethediscussionin MargaretFraser,LanguageofGod,GenderandAuthority,inBernardHoose(ed.),AuthorityintheRoman CatholicChurch:TheoryandPractice(London:Ashgate,2002),193215.

9

the cleric himself11 creates a Pharisaical mindset. Even those excluded from the the Club, are,inmanyways,shapedbythatpower,inasmuchasitalsoconstructsrealityforthemand definestheirlivesaccordingtoprescribedrolesinasingledrama. To direct attention to the living processes by which corporate identity is constructed and sustained is to argue that the phenomenon of church power abuse is rooted in a highly dysfunctionalchurchethos.Tolocatepowerabuseintheclericalethosistoappreciatepower notasapossession,notassomethingtheclergyalonehas,butasonethatratherpermeates institutional life in complex and subtle ways. Most significantly, it manifests itself in the relationships of dominance and subordination within different roles and functions that are exercised within (the) organization.12 If power is never in anybodys hands, never appropriatedasacommodityorpieceofwealth,thenboththeclergyandthelaityarenot only(the)inertorconsentingtargetofpoweranditsabusebutarealwaysalsotheelement ofitsarticulation. Inclericalism,theproblemisnotthatpowerisinthewronghands.Rather,allintheChurch areagentsoftheasymmetricalrelationsofpower,notitspointsofapplication.Thus,thewhole bodyofChristismadedocileandmoldedintonormality.Theonesrewardedwithmorepower areinfactthesameoneswhoacquiescedocilelytotheauthoritybeingadministered.Forthis reason, much of the causation of church power abuse is unacknowledged and not easily

DonaldCozzens,SacredSilence:DenialandCrisisintheChurch(Collegeville:LiturgicalPress,2004),118. WeareborrowingtheinsightofMichelFoucaultasexplainedinFrancesWard,TheologicalStrandPower, 225,andinasimilarveinseeKarenLebacqz,ProfessionalEthics:PowerandParadox(Nashville:AbingdonPress, 1992),137151;alsoseeMichelFoucault,PastoralPowerandPoliticalReason,inC.Gordon(ed.), Power/Knowledge:SelectedInterviewandWritings197277(Hertfordshire:TheHarvesterPress,1976/1980),78 108,especially98.

12 11

accessible.Thismakestheclericalethoshighlyresistanttochangeandresilientenoughthatno onecanfullyanticipateitsdysfunctionaloutcome. 2. TheAppallingDeficitinTrinitarianReciprocity ThereisanotherthingpeculiarabouttheChurch.Itistheonlyfaithcommunitythatclaimsto be a people made one from the unity of a God professed as Father, Son and Spirit (Lumen Gentium, 4). In the trinity of persons the Church finds the highest model and grounding mysteryof(its)unity(UnitatisRedintegratio,2).Divinerevelation,therefore,presentsuswith an image of a God who is a unity of reciprocal relations different, unique, necessary relations.13 AsintheHolyTrinity,sotoothechurchsrealityliesinthereciprocityofrelationships. BeingunitedintheSpiritwiththeSon,intheirmissions,respondingtothedepthofGod,who is for us Abba, we find individually and collectively our deepest reality.14 That reality is reciprocalrelationswhere,asintheTriuneGod,identitydoesnotdestroydifferenceand eachmemberoftheChurchistakenseriouslyastherevelatory,holy,indwelttempleofthe Spirit. But in recent times this unity in reciprocity has been very difficult to come by for Godspeople,andwearelefttoechoJesusprayerthattheymaybeoneasyouandIareone (Jn17:2022). Achurchlivingadoublelife

DavidMcLoughlin,CommunioModelsofChurch:RhetoricorReality?inBernardHoose(ed.),Authorityinthe RomanCatholicChurch:TheoryandPractice(London:Ashgate,2002),181190,especially185. 14 Ibid.,189.

13

Therootcauseofthecrisisinreciprocity,itseems,isthattheologyissayingonething; the organizational practice implies something else.15 Lumen Gentium, for instance, envisions thatthevarietyoflocalchurcheswithonecommonaspirationisparticularlysplendidevidence ofthecatholicityoftheundividedChurch(LumenGentium23).TherestorationofLatininthe liturgy,thereturntotheTridentineMass,andthecomingnewtranslationsoftheRomanMissal are not just forms of cultural insensitivity, but modes of a systematic dismantling of the reciprocityofculturesandlanguagesintegraltothevisionofthesecondVaticanCouncil.16 Moreover,thereisnotalackofprofound,wellreasoned,theologicallysophisticated, and perfectly orthodox theologies of the laity and lay ministry.17 However, if the 1997 CDF Instruction18isatallanindication,layinvolvementinchurchgovernancecannotinanywaybe institutionalized through deliberative structures. The surfeit of advisory and consultative bodies, convened in recent years to tame autocratic and paternalistic governance, is not working. The churchs social teaching acknowledges the aspirations to equality and participationastwoexpressionsofhumandignityandfreedom(OctogesimaAdveniens22, 24)andclearlyprefersdemocracyoverotherformsofhumanorganization(CentesimusAnnus

Ibid.,187.Inasimilarvein,FrancisOakleycontendsthatifoneviews(theSecondVaticanCouncils)effortnot intermsofabstracttheologicalformulationsbutratherinconcreteoroperationaltermsasanattempt()to restoreaneffectiveconstitutionalbalanceinthegovernanceofthechurch,then,inthatattemptitmustbe judgedtohavefailed.SeeFrancisOakley,ConstitutionalismintheChurch?inFrancisOakleyandBruceRussett (eds.),Governance,AccountabilityandtheFutureoftheCatholicChurch(NewYork/London:Continuum,2004),76 87,especially79. 16 WithintheChurchparticularChurchesholdarightfulplace.TheseChurchesretaintheirowntraditionswithout inanywaylesseningtheprimacyoftheChairofPeter.ThisChairpresidedoverthewholeassemblyofcharityand protectslegitimatedifferences,whileatthesametimeitseesthatsuchdifferencesdonothinderunitybutrather contributetowardit(LG13). 17 R.ScottAppleby,FromAutonomytoAlienation:LayInvolvementintheGovernanceoftheLocalChurch,in StephenPope(ed.),CommonCalling:TheLaityandGovernanceoftheCatholicChurch(Washington,DC: GeorgetownUniversityPress,2004),87107,hereat105. 18 CongregationfortheDoctrineoftheFaith,InstructiononCertainQuestionsRegardingtheCollaborationofthe NonOrdainedFaithfulintheSacredMinistryofthePriest,13August1997,article5,paragraph3.
15

44,4647).Whilethechurchseemstowantdemocraticstructureseverywhereelse,itdoesnot wantthemintheorganizationalaspectsofitsownlife. Whatisclear,fromanorganizationalstandpoint,istheunwillingnessofthehierarchy, followingtheleadofthepope,tograntfullconsiderationtosuchtheologies,andtobeginthe processofrestructuringthechurch.19Asaresult,thereisnogenuinereciprocityamonglocal churches, on the one hand, and between clergy and laity in all aspects of Roman Catholic ministry, on the other. If no less than the Trinitarian reciprocity is the core reality that the church is called to witness in the world, democratic ethos and structures may well be the urgentlyneededorganizationalrevisionsinthechurch. Achurchoftwocompetingclaimsofsupremepower Othertheologiansseethecrisisintwocontendingclaimsofsupremeauthority.20Inthe church two agencies are endowed with full, supreme and universal power: the supreme pontiff acting alone, and the college of bishops united with its papal head (LG 22). To complicatematters, the two seats of power are in disparity. While all bishops are called to a pastoralsolicitudetothewholechurch,onlythepapalheadoftheepiscopalcollegeholdsthe powerofjurisdictionoverall(LG23).Besides,thereisnofirmlyestablishedinstitutionalized governmental mechanism capable of imposing constitutional restraints on the freewheeling exerciseof(papal)authority.21Mattersbecomeworseasthislackisparalleledateverylevelof

19 20

R.ScottAppleby,FromAutonomytoAlienation,105. FrancisOakley,ConstitutionalismintheChurch?7980. 21 Ibid.,80.

church leadership from bishops synods powerless in governance all the way down to the merelyconsultativeand/oradvisorydiocesanandparishcouncils. To confront the crisis of reciprocity in the church is to revisit an unresolved tension betweenthepoweroforderandthepowerofjurisdiction.Classicalcanonlawdefinesthe formerasthecapacityspecificallyconferredbyordinationtoadministerthesacramentsand topreachtheWordofGodwithauthority,whilethelatterreferstothegeneralauthorityto directandgoverntheaffairsoftheChurch,andalsotherighttoobediencefromthegoverned. However, it does not appear in the Churchs tradition that the power to govern was always connectedtothepoweroforder,andneitheristheformeraderivativefromthelatter.22 Crisisofreciprocityastheexclusionoftheauthorityofthepoor Thefactthatithasnotbeeneasytopassfromamodelofchurchbasedonthepowerof orderandjurisdictiontoabodybuiltonthepowerofreciprocalrelationsspeaksvolumesabout theasymmetricalpowerrelationsinthechurch.Butwouldasimpleappealtothemoralwillof those who have competing claims be enough to free the church from the trajectory of self destruction? Should the tension be soothed by a mere balancing of interests of those competingwithinthesystem?Orshouldadecentconsultationhierarchy23beimplemented topreventpowerabuseor,atleast,mitigateitsilleffects?

HughLawrence,OrdinationandGovernance,inBernardHoose(ed.),AuthorityintheRomanCatholicChurch: TheoryandPractice(London:Ashgate,2002),7382,especially7880;JohnBeal,ItShallNotBeSoamongYou! 9596describesthetensionasbetweenjuridicandcommunionmodelsofchurch. 23 FollowingtheeminentpoliticaltheoristJohnRawls,Russettsuggestsclearandpredictableproceduresof consultationtomakeahierarchicalsocietydecentandwellordered.SeeBruceRussett,Conclusion:Monarchy, Democracy,orDecentConsultationHierarchy?inFrancisOakleyandBruceRussett(eds.),Governance,

22

10

Perhapsthekeytoachurchofreciprocityisnothow,butfromwhosevantagereciprocityis imagined.Whatofthevoiceofthoseexcludedfrompresentauthoritystructureandtheones left out by those who wish to reform or replace it? What of those who do not have the economic,psychological,organizationaloreducationalspaceorskillstoparticipateinshaping any proposed model of authority and governance?24 What does it profit a church to have structuresofreciprocitythatexpresstheimperativesofmoderndemocraticsocietybutwhich, atthesametime,excludethepoor,thedisadvantagedandmarginalized?Divinerevelationis clearandconsistent:theTriuneGodwelcomedthepoorintoitsownreciprocalcommunionas firstbeneficiaries.Hence,thetheologicalethicalchallengeishowauthoritativetheirvoiceand experiencewillbeintheconversationtodeterminestructuresofreciprocalrelations. 3. TheCrisisintheChurchsFamilialRelationswiththeWorld There is one final thing particular about us as Church. Unlike other faith communities, we confessthattheChurchandtheworld,liketwohumanfamiliesofthesameorigin,aremutually related. Instead of fleeing from it or being indifferent to it, we take it upon ourselves as a family of Gods children to serve as a leaven and a kind of soul for human society by fostering mutual exchange and assistance in our common concerns (GS 40). In return we professthatachurchwhichisnotenrichedbythedevelopmentofsociallifemaynotbeable to understand itself more penetratingly, express itself better, and adjust itself more successfully to our times. The enrichment is mutual in that whoever promotes the human

AccountabilityandtheFutureoftheCatholicChurch(NewYork/London:Continuum,2004),196202,especially 199200. 24 JohnOBrien,TheAuthorityofthePoor,inBernardHoose(ed.),AuthorityintheRomanCatholicChurch: TheoryandPractice(London:Ashgate,2002),217230,especially219223.

11

family (in all its dimensions)according to Gods design, contributes greatly to the Church communityaswell(GS44).But,asrecenteventsaremakinglamentablyclear,theenvisioned familialrelationsofmutualexchangeandassistancehavebeenseriouslycompromised. TheCrisisofitsPrivilegedSocioPastoralLocation The location from which the church carries out its service to the world is of crucial importance.Itcanlimitorexpanditsfieldofvision,reduceorincreasetherangeofitschoices, anddeterminethetypeofpublicinterventionsitoughttotake.Notallsociallocationsofferan angle of vision that is mutually beneficial for both church and society. Even in these post colonialtimes,forinstance,particularlyincontextswhereRomanCatholicismstillenjoyssocial dominanceandpoliticalinfluence,thenationstatecontinuestobethepreferredlocusofthe churchs public interventions in the world. In fact, much of how the church understands and carries out its relations with the modern world is framed with the state as counterpart, the statebeingtheconventionalcontainerofsocietyandcenteroflegitimatepower. The problem is that the territorial state itself is called into question by the process of globalization.25 The problems and challenges of everyday life are now cutting across national frontiers.Networksofglobalinterdependenceandobligationaregettingmoreexpansive,and the contours of society are no longer coextensive with the geographical domains of states. Moreover, the legitimate power of states is increasingly embedded in a complex network of authority relations opening up new spaces of power and new levels of public intervention,

UlrichBeck,WhatisGlobalization?(Cambridge:Polity,2000),especially12,21,64;andDavidHeld, Cosmopolitanism:TamingGlobalization,inDavidHeldandAnthonyMcGrew(eds.),TheGlobalTransformation Reader(Cambridge:Polity,2000),514529.

25

12

birthingnewtransnationalactorsintheprocess.Inshort,thearchitectureofthinking,acting, livingwithinstatecumsocialspacesandidentitiesiscollapsing. Giventhefactthatthenationstate,astraditionallocationoftheChurchsengagement withtheworld,isbeingputintoquestion,fromwhichnewvantageshouldthechurchtakeits placeinthepublicsphereasaformofpracticeorientedtotheserviceofsocietyandopento humanneedinallitsvariety?26Itdoesnotappearenrichingtotheworldifaworldchurchin the21stcenturycontinuestoinsistthatitsabuseofpowerispurelyadomesticmattersubject onlytothepowerofitsownlaws.Toclaimseparationofchurchandstateasareasonfornot recognizingwhenabuseofpowerisacrimeis,initself,abuseofpower.Tobearelevantmoral communityinaglobalizingworld,theChurchmustrecognizecivilandotherformsofauthority as partners, and must not be afraid to be under the scrutiny of public legal and judicial institutionswhetheratnationalandinternationallevels. TheCrisisintheSocialCarriersofCatholicisminthePublicSphere Thecrisisinthechurchsfamilialrelationsisalsoaboutthesocialcarriersofitspublic role in the world. Modern history cannot turn its back on the long list of Catholic social movements that advocated for modern human values and democratic processes and championed for economic justice and social betterment. If not for the critical interaction of suchmovementswiththemodernizingsociety,theworldwouldnothavebeenabletoreceive thehelpiturgentlyneeded.Theproblemisthat,inthefaceofvastlyalteredsocialandcultural

JamesSweeney,CatholicSocialThoughtasPolitical,inJohanVerstraeten(ed.),ScrutinizingtheSignsofthe TimesintheLightoftheGospel(Leuven:Peeters,2007),207220,hereat213.
26

13

settings which are now more pluralistic and global, these social carriers of the Catholic faith haveeithercollapsedorhavebeensecularized.27 ThelaypeopleoftodayareengagedfarlessintheserviceoftheChurchsinstitutional intereststhaninthepropheticandcompassionateservicetosocietyatlarge.Whereasbefore theyallowedthemselvestofunctionasthehierarchyslongarm,todaytheirprojectsareno longer burdened by the need of hierarchical mandate or endorsement. Where before their organizationsandmovementspassivelywaitedforordersfromacentralauthorityandsimply hadtoexecutethepapalorepiscopalagenda,todaytheyarenetworkingtoadvocateforissues common to their regions and continents. Moreover, in other contexts where traditional expressionsoffaithconvictionsarebreakingdown,laypeoplearegivingbirthtonewCatholic movementsandareengagingtheirmembersininterfaithand/orecumenicaldialoguetowards aglobalsocietybasedoncommonmoralandspiritualvalues. BehindthecrisisinthetraditionalsocialcarriersofCatholicismisactuallyakairos.Their disintegrationhasspawnedspontaneousexperimentsinpossibilitiesofnewformsoflifefor Christianityandthechurch.28Theseexperimentsaddresstowhatisfaultyorobstructive,and sometimes even absurd in the existing church organization, in light of radically altered circumstances. More importantly, their public engagement has thus far sparked renewed interest in religion. Some faith communities are increasingly being drawn into policymaking

JohnColeman,TheFutureofCatholicSocialThought,inKennethHimes(ed.),ModernCatholicSocial Teachings:CommentariesandInterpretations(Washington,DC:GeorgetownUniversityPress,2005),522544, especially532537. 28 RobinGill,TheologyandSociety:AReader(London:Cassell,1996),399.

27

14

andtheircritiqueofmainstreamglobalinstitutionsaremoreappreciated.29Thechurchsnew social carriers and the initial contours of their public engagement are thus poised to arrest Catholicismsdismalparticipationinpostmodernandpostcolonialsettings. But, even as new spaces for a mutual exchange with the world are opening up, the hierarchydoesnotseeinthemtheproverbialnewwinenordecipherfromthemtheinitial contoursofthenewwineskins.Churchofficeholdershavenotuntilnowrecommendedthese new social carriers. Even interreligious movements of peace, justice and ecology have been metwithsuspicionorlackofclaritybytheVatican.30BenedictXVIsseparationofjusticeasthe task of the state and charity as the churchs duty poses a serious problem to churchworld relations anchored on mutual solidarity.31 The moral system of dividing the expertise to formulate teachings as exclusive to the hierarchy, and the competence to apply them as belonging to the laity,32 perpetuates hierarchical control and obscures the laitys ethical subjectivityintheexerciseoftheirpropermission. TheCrisisoftheRomanCatholicCulture

See,forinstance,HelenCameronetal.(eds.),StudyingLocalChurches:AHandbook,56,10,235;Wendy Tyndale,SomeReflectionsonaDialoguebetweentheWorldsReligionsandtheWorldBankwithReferenceto CatholicSocialThought,inJohnColemanandWilliamRyan(eds.),GlobalizationandCatholicSocialThought: PresentCrisis,FutureHope(Maryknoll,NY:Orbis,2005),157171. 30 GregoryBaum,ReligionandGlobalization,inJohnColemanandWilliamRyan(eds.),GlobalizationandCatholic SocialThought:PresentCrisis,FutureHope(Maryknoll,NY:Orbis,2005),141155,especially150154. 31 SeeStephenPope,BenedictXVIsDeusCaritasEst:AnEthicalAnalysisinLindaHogan(ed.),AppliedEthicsina WorldChurch(Maryknoll,NY:Orbis,2008),271277.Ajustsociety,thepopecontends,mustbethe achievementofpolitics,notthechurch.Thechurchrathercontributestoabetterworldonlybypersonallydoing goodnow,withfullcommitmentandwhereverwehavetheopportunity,independentlyofpartisanpartiesand programs(DeusCaritasEst,28and31). 32 See,forinstance,theCompendiumoftheSocialDoctrineoftheChurch,539540andtheearlierdocumentbythe CongregationforCatholicEducation,GuidelinesfortheTeachingoftheChurchsSocialDoctrineinForming Priests,5863.
29

15

Thechurchsfamilialrelationswiththeworldisincrisislastlybecause,whiletheextent of the power of its Roman Catholic culture has shrunk, modernity, which was the Churchs declaredenemybeforeitbecameitslegitimatepartner,appearstohavewonitsrightfulplace inhumansociety.33Modernityhasevolvedtobecomethematrixinwhichallformsofsocial life exist, not excluding Roman Catholic life. Hence, by being an evolving part of a likewise evolving modernity, Roman Catholicism is also in the process of continuous religious modernizationandcanthereforenolongerclaimimmunityfromchange.Oneradicalresultis that,inmanynationstatesandsocieties,notmuchisleftoftheRomanCatholicsubculture thatservedascontainerofchurchidentityandauthority. Withthisdisintegration,whatcontourswillanewformofCatholicismadopt?Willthere comeaboutanareligioussocietywithoutCatholicchurchesorwithsmallchurcheswhichare but moribund reminders of old glory? Or will there be a band of small residue churches fighting against an areligious society in which Catholicism has to operate? Will Catholic churches continue to decline in some contexts as many Catholics continue believing without belonging to a centralized institution? Or will these churches thrive vigorously in local and diversecontextsandplayakeyroleonequaltermswithotherreligiousactorsinacompetitive religiousfield? Even in nations where Christianity was imposed during the process of colonialization,

Roman Catholic cultural identity also appears to be ending. Today the continuity and

SeethediscussioninStafHellemans,FromCatholicismtoModernitytotheProblematicModernityof Catholicism,EthicalPerspectives8(2001)2:117127andBillMcSweeney,RomanCatholicism:TheSearchfor Relevance(Oxford:Blackwell,1980).

33

16

historicityofidentityarechallengedbytheimmediacyandintensityofglobalconfrontations.34 Cultureisincreasinglyevolvingintoathirdspaceoraplaceoffluidity,whereformerfixities andunitiesaredissolvedandreformed,sothatnewnegotiationsofpowercanoccurbetween peopleofdifference.35WhatusedtobeadistinctlyRomanCatholicidentityofaFilipino,for instance,isnowchallengedbynewandproductivekindsoffusionorcreationofnewidentities brought about by cultural encounters that cut across territorial, spiritual, and religious boundaries. Thepresentriskistoprolongthepowergamebyreducingthechurchtoasitewhere conflicts and struggles which are colonial in origin continue to be played out in neocolonial ways.Thefuturehope,however,isforthechurchtotaketheforefrontinbecomingaspace of fluidity where former fixities and unities are dissolved and reformed so that new negotiationsofpowercanoccurbetweenpeopleofdifferenceandthemixingorrenewalof identity36ispossible.Inthislight,forethicstoadequatelydealwiththeissueofpowerinthe Church,itwillbehardputtoshowthatbeingRomanCatholicisconstitutiveofbeingatruly catholicchurch. Conclusion To admit that the terrifying problems of our own making are born from the sins withintheChurchplacesamostseriousburdenofethicalresponsibilityonthewholePeople ofGodtoovercomethecrisisoveritsownabuseofpower.InorderfortheChurchscorporate

KevinRobins,EncounteringGlobalization,inDavidHeldandAnthonyMcGrew(eds.),GlobalTransformation Reader(Cambridge:Polity,2000),239245,hereat242. 35 FrancesWard,TheologicalStrandPower,229citingastudybyHomiBhabha,CulturalDiversityandCultural Differences,inB.Ashcroft(ed.),ThePostColonialStudiesReader(LondonandNY:Routledge,1995). 36 Ibid.

34

17

identitytobetheethicalembodimentofChristsmysticalbodyinhistory,ithastoaddressthe deficienciesofitslegalsystem,thecontradictionsofitsauthoritystructure,andthehegemony of its clerical ethos. If the grounding mystery of the Churchs unity is the reciprocity of the Triune God, it has to embrace democratic ethos and structures into its own life, resolve the disparitybetweenthepoweroforderandthepowerofgovernance,andlistentothevoiceof thevictimsofpowerabuseasitbuildsachurchofreciprocalrelations.TheChurch,asleaven forhumansociety,mustfosterfamilialrelationswithaworldthathasradicallychanged.Ithas to be ready to subject itself to the same standards by which it judges all other forms of authority and public institutions. It should arrest the Church leaderships proclivity to control the laity, and become a space where the diversity of a catholic identity is appreciated as constitutiveofbeingtrulychurch. Thetrajectoryofchurchrenewalisirreversibleandareturntothepastisnotthewayto taketheChurchintothefuture.37
AloysiusLopezCartagenas,STD SeminarioMayordeSanCarlosSchoolofTheology JuanLunaAvenue,Mabolo, CebuCity,Philippines louiecartagenas@yahoo.com

MymostsinceregratitudegoestoDenisNolan,DeaconMichaelGhiorsoandFr.DomingoOrimacoofOurLady ofMercyParishinDalyCity(California,USA)fortheirinsightfulcommentsandhelpfulsuggestions.
37