The Byzantine Forum
Newest Members
BC LV, returningtoaxum, Jennifer B, geodude, elijahyasi
6,175 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 385 guests, and 107 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Photos
St. Sharbel Maronite Mission El Paso
St. Sharbel Maronite Mission El Paso
by orthodoxsinner2, September 30
Holy Saturday from Kirkland Lake
Holy Saturday from Kirkland Lake
by Veronica.H, April 24
Byzantine Catholic Outreach of Iowa
Exterior of Holy Angels Byzantine Catholic Parish
Church of St Cyril of Turau & All Patron Saints of Belarus
Forum Statistics
Forums26
Topics35,522
Posts417,629
Members6,175
Most Online4,112
Mar 25th, 2025
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 4 5
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 979
Member
Member
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 979
http://www.realclearreligion.org/printpage/?url=http://www.realclearreligion.org/articles/2013/02/20/7_things_the_next_pope_should_do.html

7 Things the Next Pope Should Do
By Adam DeVille

Charles Borromeo, the reformer coming out of the sixteenth-century Council of Trent, is reported to have quipped that the council fixed the number of sacraments at seven because no man could possibly remember a list with more than seven things on it.

In that spirit, as we adjust to the news about Pope Benedict XVI retiring, let us examine seven changes the next pope should consider implementing: four reforms internal to the Roman Church, and three reforms governing external relations with other Christians.

Reform of the Roman Curia
The immediate post-announcement assessments of Benedict's papacy all had, near the top of their lists of "failures," the so-called Vatileaks "scandal" involving the thieving butler sacked for taking documents that told of possible crimes and misdemeanors in high places. I confess this whole incident bored me to tears and I found it impossible to get the least bit worked up about it because Vatican history is full of such shenanigans, but also because of my very strong fellow-feeling for the pope here.

He and I are academics (though he, doubtless, in quite a different category than I), and I strongly suspect that these administrative tasks bore him quite as much as they do me. We'd both rather be reading, researching, and writing books -- in other words, doing anything other than attending to all the tedious minutiae involved in running churches (and universities).

Nevertheless, dealing with these tiresome matters goes with the job -- or do they? The next pope must seriously ask just how much his job involves in the first place. If much of the Curia is irreformable, then perhaps he should not waste his time on it but simply abolish it. As Joseph Ratzinger himself said repeatedly in the 1960s through the 1990s, "Rome" is expected to do far too much, and many of these responsibilities are better handled at the local level. To that end, as pope he handed over some decisions to local churches, but we very much need more such decentralization in ways I detail below.

And let me here anticipate the usual reaction already from those who fear that decentralization will lead to a doctrinally diminished or more incoherent Church. May I remind you that we have reached the present unhappy state precisely in this hyper-centralized Church with a strong pope appointing all the bishops. The idea that we need more centralization to deal with the rot is sheer nonsense.

Reform of the Roman Liturgy
The most significant and wholly welcome thing Pope Benedict XVI did was his 2007 decision in Summorum Pontificio to permit wider celebration of the older form of the Mass in Latin (often misleadingly called the "Tridentine rite" and more properly called the "extraordinary form of the Roman Rite") according to the 1962 liturgical books (before the reforms ostensibly recommended by the Second Vatican Council). Summorum Pontificio cut out intervening parties, and left the decision up to local communities and their priests as to which form of the liturgy to celebrate.

His successor needs to build on this success while also overseeing further reforms in the so-called ordinary form of the Mass, over which the popes retain control and which the overwhelming majority of Catholics today continue to celebrate in most parishes. The new English translation from 2011 has been a good start, but continued attention is needed to root out the many problems still encountered.

In time, we may hope that a renewed culture of transcendence and mystery will replace the pedestrian banality one so often finds at Novus Ordo Masses. One way to ensure this new culture would be to ban the use of any music written after, say, 1950, and to ban the use of all guitars. Another would be through re-orienting the priest in the Mass so that together with the people he faces East again -- the only historically and theologically defensible orientation (recall the literal meaning of that word!). Finally, getting rid of that vulgar mob of laypeople who rush the altar and manhandle the Eucharist for no reason other than to get out of Mass as fast as possible, would be an enormous improvement.

Reform of Roman Academic Institutions
In 1990, Pope John Paul II promulgated Ex Corde Ecclesia, a document detailing what the Church expects of Catholic colleges and universities. One would think that after nearly a quarter-century, things would be a lot better. In places, much has changed for the better, but too often one still finds a lot of tiresome rubbish being openly taught or celebrated at institutions that claim to be Catholic.

Two changes are possible here. First, the pope could intervene directly with those Catholic universities that have what is called a "pontifical charter," granted directly by Rome. Charter-holding institutions could be given thirty days by the new pope to demonstrate their fidelity to the Church or else risk loss of their charter and all the rights and privileges that go with it.

In other Catholic institutions without charters and thus not directly under Roman control, the local bishops need to learn (as John Paul II was fond of saying) to "be not afraid" of a little bad press if they rebuke academics for talking rot and claiming it's divinely revealed truth. The analogy I always use with my students is the following: my father worked for Ford his whole life. If I walked into his dealership and the employees there told me "You know, Fords are complete crap. You should go down the street and buy a Nissan," then sooner or later Ford Motor Company, if it wishes to survive, has to say to those employees "Put up or shut up. Either promote and sell our products or you're fired."

The same is true for those in Catholic institutions, and the new pope should give them all 30 days to demonstrate that they are willing to teach Catholic theology or get another line of work.

Reform of Roman Religious Orders
Rome's investigation, begun under Pope Benedict XVI, of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious was a welcome development, though it could have been more vigorously and widely prosecuted, and we should hope that the new pope does precisely that. For more than a generation now, too many Catholics have suffered under the woeful influence of these weedy nuns. I know because every day in my classroom I see these students whom the nuns claim to have taught. And what do these students know? They know how to make felt banners, know that the 11th commandment is "Thou Shalt Recycle," and know that "Jesus wants us to be nice to everybody."

They don't know the Bible; don't know God is a Trinity; don't know what the sacraments are; don't know why the Catholic Church teaches any of a thousand things; and certainly don't know any history. Time and again when I explain basic things that, a generation or two ago would have been commonplace among schoolchildren of 7, my twenty-something students ask me in anguished outrage "Why was I not taught any of this in twelve years of Catholic schooling?"

Full Freedom for the Eastern Churches
Few people know that the Catholic Church, while one, is also comprised of twenty-four churches: twenty-three Eastern Catholic Churches, and the one, much larger, Latin or Roman Catholic Church. These Eastern Churches (most of which started out as Eastern Orthodox and gradually became Catholic for a variety of reasons) have recovered some measure of their rightful autonomy since the council, but not all.

Too often we are still subjected to a condescending neo-colonial micromanaging from Rome, complete with absurd regulations, especially (as I note below) concerning clerical celibacy and the appointment of bishops. (Synods in, say, Ukraine, elect their own bishops who can ordain married men as priests for service in Ukraine, but Ukrainian Catholic bishops serving anywhere else are appointed, for no compelling reason at all, by the pope, and forbidden by the pope from ordaining married men -- an utterly incoherent policy. As I have argued elsewhere, there is no historical or theological justification whatsoever for the pope appointing all the world's bishops -- a newfangled system that only came into effect after 1917.)

The simplest way to deal with all this would be for the next pope to abolish the Congregation for the Oriental Churches. At a stroke, he would liberate the Eastern Catholic Churches, reduce expenses in Rome, and go a very long way towards demonstrating to the Orthodox that he is serious about unity by removing this Roman equivalent of Whitehall's old Colonial Office.

Abandonment of Chauvinism about Celibacy
I have tried telling Roman Catholics for years now that ordaining married men will under no circumstances deal with an apparent shortage of priests. The clearest evidence of this remains the Eastern Churches -- both Catholic and Orthodox -- that permit the ordination of married men. In virtually all those churches, there is a shortage of priests. Marriage is thus demonstrably no panacea.

Nevertheless, the discipline of the Roman Church today is a capricious mess: Want to ordain a married man to the priesthood for service in a Ukrainian Catholic parish? Fine, Rome says: do it in Ukraine. But the man is from Cleveland and the parish is full of immigrants in Pittsburgh? Tough. If he's a North American then he has to be celibate. That makes no sense, of course, but the absurdity is doubled when Roman bishops in North America, Australia, and Western Europe start ordaining married Anglican and Lutheran clerics to the Catholic priesthood.

This is just gross hypocrisy of the rankest kind and it must cease at once. Optional celibacy for everyone is the only coherent, defensible policy, and would demonstrate good faith to the Orthodox, with whom unity should be the next pope's highest priority. As a side benefit, optional celibacy would also shut up those most illogical and fatuous of critics who claim that celibacy somehow causes sexual abuse -- a demonstrable lie to anyone familiar with the overwhelming evidence of married teachers, married doctors, married rabbis, married Protestant pastors, and other married men who abuse children.

New Models of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction
Since Vatican II, there has been an unfinished project of creating new structures for regional governance, which could pick up the work left by those curial congregations abolished under my first point above. In the Orthodox Christian East, such regional structures go by the title of "patriarchates." Cardinal Ratzinger himself, from the 1960s, advocated the creation of such patriarchates in the Roman Church.

In 2006, in deleting the title "Patriarch of the West" from among the list of papal titles, Benedict XVI was thought to be taking the first step towards creating new regional structures. We have, admittedly, seen no other visible signs of progress on this score since then, but that is most likely a result of Benedict's being overwhelmed with other problems and running out of steam.

A new, younger pope with more energy should continue on this path, confident of this paradox: a radically centralized Church is no guarantee of strength of discipline or coherence of doctrine (as we have seen in the Roman Church for the better part of half a century); and a decentralized Church is no guarantee of disorder or incoherence -- as the radically decentralized Orthodox Churches, with nonetheless strong doctrinal coherence and conservatism, themselves make clear.

In the end, these seven changes could continue work begun by Benedict, and could end by strengthening the Church in battles that are already joined.

Adam A.J. DeVille is an Associate Professor of Theology at the University of Saint Francis in Fort Wayne, IN and author of Orthodoxy and the Roman Papacy.

Page Printed from: http://www.realclearreligion.org/articles/2013/02/20/7_things_the_next_pope_should_do.html at February 28, 2013

Last edited by Pavloosh; 02/28/13 04:00 PM.
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 469
Likes: 13
E
Member
Member
E Offline
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 469
Likes: 13
Outstanding! I would hope that this paper finds its way into the hands of our next Holy Father!

Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 325
Member
Member
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 325
Originally Posted by Pavloosh
This is just gross hypocrisy of the rankest kind and it must cease at once. Optional celibacy for everyone is the only coherent, defensible policy, and would demonstrate good faith to the Orthodox, with whom unity should be the next pope's highest priority. New Models of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction

The problem with allowing it universally would be that in the Western Church, because of the daily celebration of the Eucharist, a married man would essentially be required to obstain from marital relations permanently. That's why the tradition of priestly celibacy developed the way it did in the West.
Quote
Although celibacy defined in the strict sense as the conferring of Orders only upon unmarried men did not become the law of the Church until the eleventh century, celibacy defined in the broad sense of "absolute continence for a cleric whether he was married or not" was the law and practice of the western Church from the fourth century through the eleventh century.1 During this era, the Church repeatedly issued laws requiring all clerics in major orders, including those who were married, to remain sexually abstinent after ordination. Therefore, the late eleventh-century legislation that restricted ordination only to unmarried men should be considered a reform of an existing tradition, an evolution rather than a revolution in ecclesiastical law and practice. - See more at: http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=7663#sthash.dtC6W8Q0.dpuf

Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,690
Likes: 8
Member
Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,690
Likes: 8
Desertman,
The easiest answer to that is to remove the requirement as is routinely done in the Latin Church currently among priests ordained from protestant sects and among Latin rite Deacons.
Since it is already being dispensed with, why continue citing it as if it is in force?

Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 167
B
Member
Member
B Offline
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 167
Rome desperately needs to offer "Olive Branches" to a laity greatly traumatized by the sexual abuse crisis. Worse than an ecclesial abuse in the past is the hierarchical cover-up of the sexual abuse crisis at various levels.

One such "Olive Branch" is optional celibacy/open priesthood for married men. Was not mandatory priestly celibacy enforced by Pope Gregory VII in order to deal with abuses at parish levels? I.E., priests transferring ecclesial property to their children or families?

I suggest that Rome should institute a policy identical to the Orthodox/Eastern Churches: clergy can be wedded, but bishops must be strictly celibate monks/priests.

Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 209
E
Member
Member
E Offline
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 209
I find much that is commendable in this statement.

But I am worried by parts of it too. Some of the action it urges is plainly authoritarian. This comment might actually apply to several of its parts but I'll take for an example the banning guitars and music written after 1950. While I am not terribly fond of guitars in the liturgy nor of much music used in contemporary RC worship, I cannot honestly say that I think it is really impermissible. I think it is a little bit of a temptation for me (as for others) to think of the new pope--or a local bishop, for that matter--coming down hard on the worst excesses in contemporary liturgy and purging everything I don't like; we probably all imagine this and cheer a little. But I'm not really sure that this policy would do more than alienate many of the faithful. And, among the people who love these 'ditties' are many ordinary, faithful people.

I am reminded of two contemporary hymns that are heard commonly in RC churches in the United States--_Be Not Afraid_ and _On Eagle's Wings_ I have never liked either one, but I admit that my feelings softened for them when I heard them at my grandmother's funeral mass. She had requested them--to her they were deeply meaningful; they powerfully expressed her own faith. I can't imagine taking that away from her just because I don't like them.

I think the better course is simply to strengthen the liturgy by providing better examples. Thankfully, there are movements of church musicians and others devoted to reforming the reformed liturgy and restoring the beauty and reverence of the Church's worship.

Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 469
Likes: 13
E
Member
Member
E Offline
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 469
Likes: 13
Originally Posted by BenjaminRH
Rome desperately needs to offer "Olive Branches" to a laity greatly traumatized by the sexual abuse crisis. Worse than an ecclesial abuse in the past is the hierarchical cover-up of the sexual abuse crisis at various levels.

One such "Olive Branch" is optional celibacy/open priesthood for married men. Was not mandatory priestly celibacy enforced by Pope Gregory VII in order to deal with abuses at parish levels? I.E., priests transferring ecclesial property to their children or families?

I suggest that Rome should institute a policy identical to the Orthodox/Eastern Churches: clergy can be wedded, but bishops must be strictly celibate monks/priests.

I agree with you, but a brick floating in water has a better chance than that happening!

Last edited by Irish_Ruthenian; 03/07/13 09:45 PM.
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 610
J
JDC Offline
Member
Member
J Offline
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 610
I am sorry for your loss of your Grandmother. The hymns you mention are two of the most egregious examples of contemporary hymns. In both cases they are known the voice of God singing to man. As comforting as they are (and they are) they aren't suited to worship, unless the choir is being worshiped by God.

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
Likes: 3
S
Member
Member
S Offline
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
Likes: 3
I would suggest suppressing all hymns and returning to a purely sung liturgy based on traditional Western chant, whether Gregorian, or Old Roman, or Ambrosian or what have you. We could then ditch all the musical instruments, including the organ.

That might inspire the Greeks to get rid of theirs.

Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 209
E
Member
Member
E Offline
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 209
Originally Posted by JDC
The hymns you mention are two of the most egregious examples of contemporary hymns. In both cases they are known the voice of God singing to man. As comforting as they are (and they are) they aren't suited to worship, unless the choir is being worshiped by God.

JDC, I think I'd need to think more carefully about the criterion you seem to propose. (To be honest, I'd be surprised if in the great store of the church's prayer there aren't examples of songs sung in the voice of God. I don't claim to be any great curator, though, so I'll simply state it as a question.)

I don't think 'On Eagle's Wings' is first person discourse in God's voice, but a paraphrase of Ps 91 (in the third person.) While I would rather we sang the Psalms in their integrity, than in (sometimes bawdlerized) paraphrases, I find it hard to agree that they 'aren't suited to worship.'

Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,524
Likes: 26
Member
Member
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,524
Likes: 26
Aye, every Psalm, every scriptural passage set to music is the voice of God singing to man.

Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 209
E
Member
Member
E Offline
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 209
Originally Posted by StuartK
I would suggest suppressing all hymns and returning to a purely sung liturgy based on traditional Western chant, whether Gregorian, or Old Roman, or Ambrosian or what have you. We could then ditch all the musical instruments, including the organ.

StuartK, Of all the (Roman) masses I've regularly attended, the one I loved best was chanted in plainsong (the ordinary at least.) They did use an organ for the processional and recessional hymns, though. And Sung liturgy ranks at the very top of what has drawn me to Byzantine Christianity, as it has for so many other admirers.

I strongly favor supporting the restoration/propagation of chanted liturgy and traditional chants, but I do not strongly favor authoritarian suppressions, especially when the faith really doesn't require them.

Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 610
J
JDC Offline
Member
Member
J Offline
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 610
Originally Posted by eastwardlean?
Originally Posted by JDC
The hymns you mention are two of the most egregious examples of contemporary hymns. In both cases they are known the voice of God singing to man. As comforting as they are (and they are) they aren't suited to worship, unless the choir is being worshiped by God.

JDC, I think I'd need to think more carefully about the criterion you seem to propose. (To be honest, I'd be surprised if in the great store of the church's prayer there aren't examples of songs sung in the voice of God. I don't claim to be any great curator, though, so I'll simply state it as a question.)

I don't think 'On Eagle's Wings' is first person discourse in God's voice, but a paraphrase of Ps 91 (in the third person.) While I would rather we sang the Psalms in their integrity, than in (sometimes bawdlerized) paraphrases, I find it hard to agree that they 'aren't suited to worship.'


You're right about Eagles Wings. But anyway, try hard to think of a single part of the Divine Liturgy which is and comes across as if God were singing to you about you. And consider how much this effect would be magnified by turning the priest around and a generation who were catechised to believe that the Canon was little more than Story Time with Father Steve. The point isn't just one hymn, it's multiple influences all of which say the liturgy is all about YOU!

Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 610
J
JDC Offline
Member
Member
J Offline
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 610
Originally Posted by StuartK
I would suggest suppressing all hymns and returning to a purely sung liturgy based on traditional Western chant, whether Gregorian, or Old Roman, or Ambrosian or what have you. We could then ditch all the musical instruments, including the organ.

That might inspire the Greeks to get rid of theirs.


Suppressing all the hymns would be a terrible blow to popular piety.

Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 209
E
Member
Member
E Offline
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 209

[/quote]

The point isn't just one hymn, it's multiple influences all of which say the liturgy is all about YOU! [/quote]

JDC, I think you state this very, very well. I don't disagree about the importance of rescuing contemporary RC liturgy at all.

Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 4 5

Moderated by  Irish Melkite 

Link Copied to Clipboard
The Byzantine Forum provides message boards for discussions focusing on Eastern Christianity (though discussions of other topics are welcome). The views expressed herein are those of the participants and may or may not reflect the teachings of the Byzantine Catholic or any other Church. The Byzantine Forum and the www.byzcath.org site exist to help build up the Church but are unofficial, have no connection with any Church entity, and should not be looked to as a source for official information for any Church. All posts become property of byzcath.org. Contents copyright - 1996-2024 (Forum 1998-2024). All rights reserved.
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 8.0.0