The cause was a column by the Italian theologian and church historian Massimo Faggioli (pictured), who teaches in the USA.

In the column he linked parts of American Catholicism with the former US president and current Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump.

In response, the bishop's organisation threatened to take legal action. But what exactly had happened?

The article

Faggioli's article, entitled "Will Trumpism spare Catholicism?", drew a connection between Donald Trump and various Catholic figures and hinted at a possible link between Trump and Bishop Joseph Strickland.

Strickland was dismissed from his diocese after his rebellious behaviour and frequent criticism of Pope Francis' pontificate.

Faggioli described overlaps between Trump's controversial right-wing nationalism and the conservative Catholicism represented by figures such as Strickland and the former Apostolic Nuncio to the USA, Archbishop Vigano.

Strickland in particular has repeatedly accused Francis of spreading schismatic ideas with the declaration of blessing "Fiducia supplicans".

After the presidential elections in December 2020, the former chief pastor of the small Texan diocese of Tyler also took part in a demonstration of Trump supporters who did not want to recognise Joe Biden's election victory with a prayer via video message.

Criticism of the Catholic cultural establishment

Faggioli's thesis is therefore based on such events, but above all the "Catholic Prayer for Trump", which took place on 19 March in Mar-a-Logo - the former US president's place of residence.

There, Trump was presented as the "only Catholic option".

Six months before the presidential elections in the USA, the theologian spoke of an "ahistorical fundamentalism of militant Catholicism" that is "mixed with nationalist impulses".

This disguises itself as concern for the "forgotten ordinary American (white) man".

In the original version of the article, Faggioli spoke of an "emerging Catholic cultural establishment" in the United States, dominated by intellectual figures of traditional, apologetic Catholicism.

According to Faggioli, they may be theologically educated, but they are hostile to modernity and are "on Trump's side" with such a view.

Faggioli described overlaps between Trump's controversial right-wing nationalism and the conservative Catholicism represented by figures such as Strickland.

Faggioli was referring to the Barron Media Group's new theological magazine entitled "The New Ressourcement", according to a report in the "National Catholic Reporter".

Among conservative Catholics, Faggioli said, there is "no shortage of academic and intellectual initiatives, with various references to Trumpism", but which are "all intent on orthodoxy".

Barron and his critics

Barron has been repeatedly criticised by Catholics, especially for his collaboration with right-wing thinkers and influencers.

These include names such as Ben Shapiro, former editor of the right-wing internet portal "Breitbart News" and the psychologist, YouTube influencer and author of self-help books Jordan Peterson.

Over the past few years, Barron has responded to his critics by accepting invitations to events organised by companies such as Google, Amazon and Facebook in order to rebut criticism that he is only dealing with "conservative culture warriors".

At the end of January of this year, however, the senior pastor was once again a guest of Peterson to discuss the fallacy of self-deification.

Most recently, however, Barron published a guest post on the internet portal of the television channel "CNN", in which he praised the talk show host and comedian Bill Maher for no longer criticising religions, especially Catholicism, but "woke" thinking.

He therefore sees Maher as an "unlikely ally" in the ongoing and bitter culture wars.

Two cease-and-desist letters to the editors

The publishers of "Commonweal Magazine" reported to the Catholic portal "National Catholic Reporter" that the bishop's media organisation had sent a "cease and desist letter" to Faggioli.

After consultation, the decision was made to withdraw the "controversial" paragraph.

The editors' note reads: "With the author's permission, the editors have removed a paragraph that originally appeared here because Bishop Robert Barron's media office, Word on Fire, has informed us that they consider it defamatory to be associated in any way with Donald Trump and Trumpism."

But even that was apparently not enough for the Bishop of Winona-Rochester in Minnesota: In a second cease-and-desist letter, "Word on Fire" took an even firmer stance against the editors' note.

Once again, dissatisfaction was expressed at being associated in any way with Donald Trump.

Repeated threats of legal action were made against Commonweal, and both the article and the editor's note continued to be labelled "libelous and defamatory".

The editorial team responded with an article entitled "Silencing the press".

In it, the editorial team expressed surprise at Barron's actions: "Public figures must expect journalistic criticism precisely because they are public figures.

"This also includes those who bring their faith into the public eye."

It is their right to complain about criticism, but they are not exempt from it.

"They enjoy no special protection from opinions about their intentions, their statements or the political society in which they live.

"Moreover, no one is entitled to deference or special treatment simply because they speak from a position of religious authority," it says.

And further: "This includes American bishops, including or especially those who maintain a highly visible public presence through interviews, social media and popular media services."

The editorial team emphasises that a different agreement could have been reached.

A letter would have been "an obvious place to start if Word on Fire believes that we and Faggioli need a fraternal rebuke".

A letter would also have led to a constructive or at least clarifying exchange and saved Word on Fire from being "perceived as another well-funded organisation that wants to silence its critics through litigation". Read more

• Mario Trifunovic is a theologian & journalist from the Frankfurt Rhine-Main Metropolitan Area in Germany.

In the latest example of a bully is Minnesota Bishop Robert Barron's Word on Fire organisation threatened Commonweal magazine and theologian Massimo Faggioli over Faggioli's April 22 essay, "Will Trumpism Spare Catholicism?"

The commotion is too weird to behold.

Sticks and stones

It began like all schoolyard fights.

Barron, or someone who works for him, thought Faggioli, who teaches at Villanova University, called the bishop a name.

In best fourth-grade fashion, an unsigned "cease and desist" email went to Faggioli and to Commonweal editor Dominic Preziosi.

Apparently without a lawyer or even a dictionary nearby, the email claimed Commonweal and Faggioli were guilty of "slander,".

That name is usually applied to spoken defamatory statements, instead of published ones, which are libel.

Faggioli's opinion piece examined the influence of conservative, anti-Francis bishops.

He described them as the ones whose political alliances mix "ahistorical, magisterial fundamentalism in militant Catholicism with nationalistic impulses masquerading as concern for the ‘forgotten' common American."

He apparently included Barron in what he called the "'Trump-Strickland' axis,".

He was referring to former Texas Bishop Joseph E. Strickland, a named supporter of the pro-Trump "Catholics for Catholics" organisation.

That organisation counts among its supporters former Trump advisers Michael Flynn and Steve Bannon.

Barron's company complained about his inclusion, and Commonweal indulged him, writing in an editor's note:

"With the author's permission, the editors have removed a paragraph that originally appeared here because Bishop Robert Barron's media ministry, Word on Fire, informed us that they consider it slander for them to be in any way associated with Donald Trump or Trumpism."

Unwilling to take yes for an answer, Barron's folks sent another unsigned email, this time to the entire Commonweal staff.

It said that the retraction notice was "clearly malicious" and that the email was "a formal notice to preserve all records in anticipation of litigation."

Strange and bullying

To be clear, no Catholic, let alone a bishop, should want to be connected to Trump, whose ongoing legal entanglements and documented disrespect for women and migrants are outside the pale.

That Trump benefited from a strange Catholics for Catholics fundraiser at Mar-a-Lago is enough to warn anyone.

It was there a man identified as Father Dennis led what he called "the meal prayer" and former Trump national security adviser Flynn said they would "do the rosary,".

But bullying a 100-year-old liberal Catholic opinion journal emphasises the conservative bent of Barron's enterprises.

It smacks of the sort of "conservatism" Pope Francis recently called "suicidal" on CBS' "60 Minutes."

The "suicidal conservatism" Francis worries about stifles growth and, he said, leaves people "closed inside a dogmatic box."

Those U.S. bishops who cannot think out of the box — and there are many — daily damage the beliefs of Catholics who think Catholic social teaching is a good thing and who wish for less clericalism and more transparency in church matters.

To to start with, where, exactly, does the money go?

The ubiquitous Catholic bully

Bully clerics abound at every level, in the United States and around the world. And bullying Catholic lay initiatives is not new.

In the 19th century, Mother Cabrini, the champion of immigrants, had her problems with Archbishop Michael Corrigan, who wanted her out of New York.

In the 20th century, another archbishop of New York might have wished the same for Dorothy Day.

Now, in the 21st century, a group of lay Catholics suffers a legal threat come some 1,300 miles from Minnesota to a small office suite on New York's Upper West Side.

It may be a good thing that Barron wants to distance himself from Trumpism, because many of his followers may still think Trump is OK.

But bullying is not the way to do it.

• First published in Religion News Service
• Phyllis Zagano PhD is a Senior Research Associate in Residence at Hofstra University. She has written and spoken on the role of women in the Roman Catholic Church and is an advocate for the ordination of women as deacons. Phyllis is also an author at Religion News Service

I found his comments a-historical and thought they suggested that only very smart, well-informed and well-read Catholics could qualify as good Catholics.

Now Barron has launched a criticism of British author and papal birapher Austen Ivereigh.

Specifically, Barron charged that Ivereigh had made conversion a "dirty word," shunned evangelisation properly understood and that the disagreement was essentially terminological.

"What Ivereigh is calling 'evangelisation' is, in point of fact, 'pre-evangelisation.'

One can indeed prepare the ground for Christ in a thousand different ways: through invitation, conversation, debate, argument, the establishment of friendship, etc.," Barron writes.

"One might legitimately say, at this stage of the process, that one is not pressing the matter of conversion, but one is most definitely paving the way for it. Unless it conduces toward real evangelisation, pre-evangelisation is an absurdity."

It is hard not to conclude that Barron's real target is not the biographer, Ivereigh, but the biographee, Pope Francis.

Ivereigh has, in turn, responded at the website Where Peter Is.

He writes:

"Francis is clear, then, what evangelisation is: witness through open-hearted hospitality, service of the poor, a life lived according to the Beatitudes.

"But he is also clear when this becomes proselytism, and here's the challenging part.

"The witness can be in tension with, even contradicted by, our attempt to evangelise by means of persuasion, strategies, theological explanations, and apologetics programmes.

"Why? Because in so far as these lead us to put our faith in our own powers, they suffocate the "meekness of the Spirit in the conversion."

That is, there is something semi-Pelagian in Barron's approach. In fact, the principal agent of evangelisation is the Holy Spirit, not the intelligent bishop.

But there is a related concern here to which Ivereigh alludes, a concern I voiced back in 2019.

There is something a little manipulative about Barron's approach.

Back then, I noticed it in the way he discussed the insights of Hans Urs von Balthasar about beauty as an attribute of God, insights that have played a prominent role in the thinking of Popes Francis, Benedict XVI and John Paul II.

For them, beauty is itself a kind of witness, but for Barron, beauty always seems like it is part of a marketing strategy.

He dazzles the putative convert with it. There is little sense of the person to be evangelised as a subject, a person of dignity and freedom. They are an object, someone to be instructed, and Barron is the instructor.

You see this in the quote above, when Barron writes that "one is not pressing the matter of conversion, but one is most definitely paving the way for it."

If you are calculating how and when to press, it is pretty certain what you are not doing is engaging the person as every bit as mysterious, noble and sinful as oneself, someone in whom God is already at work in ways hidden to either or both of you.

Where Balthasar was always suspicious of the Enlightenment, of the Cartesian cogito and all that followed, Bishop Robert Barron is a man of his age, an age of marketing and consumerism. Continue reading

• Michael Sean Winters is an American journalist and writer who covers politics and events in the Roman Catholic Church for the National Catholic Reporter

Regardless of his impending cardinal appointment, Bishop Robert Barron has made it clear to Américo Aguiar that he intends to evangelise during his visit to Lisbon.

Aguiar, a youthful 49-year-old auxiliary bishop of the Patriarchate of Lisbon, is the primary coordinator of World Youth Day 2023 (WYD) and was recently appointed as a cardinal by Pope Francis.

Aguiar stirred up a debate when he allegedly stated that the WYD with the pope is not about converting people to Christ.

He made the comment while discussing Pope Francis' encyclical 'Fratelli tutti' on Portuguese television.

Aguiar stated that the WYD is not meant to "forcefully convert young people to Christ, to the Catholic Church or to anything else."

Regrettably, his interview snippets were disseminated on news websites and social media platforms.

Often taken out of context, these fragments have incited confusion and disapproval among Catholics who feel their leader abandoned them in their evangelisation mission.

The controversy surrounding the bishop's remarks was ignited primarily by the headline of an article published by the Catholic News Agency (CNA), a service of EWTN.

In response to the criticism, the news agency altered the headline.

Controversy unfortunately enflamed

The comment, when viewed in isolation, sparked controversy among many WYD participants including Barron who, in a recent column, wrote:

"When any Catholic institution, ministry or outreach forgets its evangelical purpose, it has lost its soul."

Barron concluded his column in a somewhat 'stroppy' tone, writing:

"I'm scheduled to give five presentations at World Youth Day in Lisbon, and I want to assure Bishop Aguiar that each one is intended to evangelise."

Regrettably, Barron took the CNA report at face value and seems to have overreacted.

The Pillar, a Catholic media agency, also strongly criticised Aguiar's misquoted remarks, with author Filipe D'Avillz branding him a "raging heretic."

WYD is not Catholic World Youth Day

Aguiar confirmed that World Youth Day is not exclusively for Catholics.

"Popes have never invited only young Catholics; they have always invited youth from all over the world," he said.

He emphasised the importance of the youth who come to Lisbon to meet other young people from different parts of the world, different backgrounds, different faiths and understanding that this diversity is a richness.

He concluded the interview by expressing his hope that the pilgrims would appreciate the mutual contribution of differences:

"'I think differently, I feel differently, I organise my life differently, but we are brothers and sisters and we will build the future together.' This is the main message of this encounter with the living Christ that the pope wants to give to young people" he said.

A chaplain in charge of World Youth Day in a diocese in France affirmed that "WYD is a source of conversions."

"The invitation is sent to all young people, it's not WCYD (World Catholic Youth Day)" the priest continued.

Yes, the Pope's Catholic

Cardinal-designate Aguiar has met Francis several times in the run-up to World Youth Day and quotes extensively from the pope's work.

"The world will be objectively a better place if we are able to put the certainty of Fratelli tutti in the hearts of all young people," Aguiar told RTP during the July 6 interview.

The encyclical, published in 2020, is dedicated to fraternity and social friendship.

In terms of substance, the cardinal designate's comments are not at odds with the Jesuit pope's teachings. During his visit to small Christian communities in Morocco in March 2019, Francis warned against any temptation to "proselytise" to swell the ranks.

"The paths of mission are not those of proselytism, which leads always to a dead end," the pope said.

"The Church grows not through proselytism, but through attraction and through witness."

Before Aguiar became a priest he was a politician, a fact he has never hidden and is proud of.

Aguiar is still known in Portugal for his political acumen. He has used it to some effect as he manages preparations for the upcoming World Youth Day in Lisbon — the largest public event in Portuguese history.

When asked by The Pillar if he is flattered or offended when people say that he is like a politician in a cassock: "That all depends on the tone with which they say it," Aguiar replied.

Sources

• La Croix International
• The Pillar
• Word on Fire
• CathNews

Despite concerns about the potential outcomes of the synod, where a diverse group of bishops, priests and laity will convene to discuss the Church's future, Barron is confident that doctrine will not be a topic of discussion.

He bases this belief on Pope Francis' assurances.

Barron says he is taking Pope Francis' word that the Synod will neither discuss doctrine nor vote on doctrine.

"The pope has said it over and over and over again in the lead up to the Synod—that the Synod is not a parliament, not a democratic process. We're not voting on doctrine," said Barron.

However, Barron admits that he is uncertain about what the synod will entail, but he places his trust in Pope Francis to steer it wisely and responsibly.

Barron reinforces the Pope's sentiment that the synod is not a parliament or a democratic process.

As for the American delegation, Barron believes that the American delegation will provide a balanced ideological perspective which he thinks aligns with the Pope's preference.

From a personal perspective, Barron sees the synod not as a platform for reform but as a strategy session to improve evangelisation and effectively accompany people from all walks of life.

He emphasises that the focus is more on strategy, particularly in reaching out to those who feel alienated from the Church for various reasons.

His personal hope is that the synod will extend the work initiated by the Second Vatican Council, helping the Church to better fulfil its mission through evangelisation and accompanying people on their spiritual journey.

Barron does not outline how he will respond should the Synod not focus on how he thinks it should.

The synod, which will gather nearly 400 Catholics from around the globe to discuss the Church's future and suggest changes, will hold two sessions in October 2023 and October 2024.

After the final session, Pope Francis will have the ultimate authority to critique and reject or accept the synod's proposals.

Source

• Catholic Vote

In his Sunday sermon, Bishop Robert Barron said, "Dumbed down Catholicism has not helped evangelisation. Quite the contrary, we did this to ourselves".

The bishop is a controversial figure on both the secular left and right for his nonpartisan ethical advice and largely apolitical social advocacy.

Barron, 62, of the Dioceses of Winona-Rochester, is the most widely-followed online Catholic cleric in the country aside from Pope Francis. His public influence stretches worldwide via his books, videos, radio shows and documentaries with his Word on Fire ministries.

"So, in a way, we met the enemy, and it's us. We did such a bad job as teaching our faith and making it beautiful and making it intellectually compelling," Barron told Fox News Digital in an exclusive interview.

"Many of the disaffiliated [Christians who left their church and no longer claim religious affiliation] have said, ‘I never got my questions answered. I had all kinds of questions. I never got good answers'".

Barron blamed the continuing decline of church attendance — at least in the Catholic rite — on weak spiritual education and a disordered emphasis on approachability.

He said, "We reduced religion — often to feel good — to ethics."

Many traditionalist Catholics point to Vatican II as a reason for the decay in Catholic theological education.

Changes at Vatican II included dropping the requirement for masses to be said in Latin, a greater emphasis on church community, and modifying the liturgy to allow greater participation from the pews.

Barron dismisses critics of the council, saying instead that the damage was done after the council when priests and prelates failed to implement its ideas intelligently.

"[The errors occurred] after the council, not because of the council," Barron said. "It was a pastoral disaster."

In an attempt to reorient the church for the modern times, Barron argues too much emphasis was put on the temporal works of charity and justice — but at the cost of the crucial necessity of theology.

"The church was often reduced to ethics and more precisely, to social justice. Nothing wrong with ethics or social justice, but it was a kind of reductionism and the doctrinal element was underplayed," Barron continued. "A caving in to the very relativistic culture held sway. So that's been a problem for a long time."

Sources

Fox News

However, Bishop Robert Barron, the auxiliary bishop of the Archdiocese of Los Angeles, is not impressed by the election outcome.

In the New York Post, Barron said, "What does bother me is the complete and abject surrender on the part of the presumably religious leaders at Harvard who chose this man. If a professed atheist counts as a chaplain — which is to say, a leader of religious services in a chapel — then "religion" has quite obviously come to mean nothing at all.

"I'm sure Epstein is a nice fellow. I have nothing against him.

"But I do want to urge his presumably religious colleagues at Harvard who elected him: Show a little self-respect.

"Being a chaplain has something to do with the worship of God — and you shouldn't be ashamed to say it.

"All of this has been a long time coming.

"The elite distortion of religion to the level of chatting amicably about improving one's moral life and inner feelings.

"Immanuel Kant famously opined that authentic religion had nothing finally to do with doctrines, dogmas, prayer and liturgy. Rather, faith was all about the cultivation of morality.

"The popular version of Kant's teaching is on display today whenever someone says, "You know, it doesn't finally matter what we believe, as long as we are nice people.

"As a Catholic churchman, I believe in an all-powerful, omniscient and loving God, who brought the entire universe into existence from nothing and who now sustains it and draws it to himself.

"This God chose the people of Israel, whom he gifted with divine law, covenant, prophecy and temple. In the fullness of time, he became incarnate in a first-century Jew called Jesus of Nazareth, who died on a Roman cross, rose from the dead and now invites all people to come under his lordship.

"Say what you want about all of that. Affirm it, deny it, argue about it. Tell me I'm crazy for believing any of it. But by God, it's a religion. Of course, different religions make varying doctrinal claims, but at the very least, they affirm the existence of God," Barron wrote.

In a statement, the Harvard Catholic Center said, "We are happy to restate our commitment to proclaim here at Harvard and beyond that Jesus Christ is Lord, most fully revealed in the Catholic Church."

The Harvard Christian Alumni Society also published a statement saying, "This was not a top-down appointment but a bottom-up vote choosing one rotating representative from a group of peers," the group stated.

"Previously, this role has been filled by chaplains of various backgrounds including Christians and Muslims."

Quesada said that the chaplain president term lasts for one year. But the role can be extended by a year for courtesy purposes. Catholic Chaplains have held the role as president in the past, he noted.

Greg Epstein, 44, who identifies as a "humanist rabbi" and described as a "devout atheist", has been chosen as president of chaplains for the religious community at the Ivy League college.

The various Harvard chaplains, a professional community representing many of the world's religious traditions, unanimously elected Epstein to represent them.

Epstein told The New York Times, "There is a rising group of people who no longer identify with any religious tradition. But they still experience a real need for conversation and support around what it means to be a good human and live an ethical life."

Epstein heads the school's humanist chaplaincy, which represents humanists, agnostics, and atheists. The Times reported his work as "reflecting a broader trend of young people across the United States who increasingly identify as spiritual but religiously nonaffiliated."

"His role is not as the chief chaplain," said Nico Quesada, the Harvard Catholic Center marketing director. "It is actually as the president of the Harvard Chaplains."

Quesada told CNA that Epstein's role as president of the university's chaplains will be purely administrative.

Sources

New York Post

Catholic News Agency

The Washington Post

CathNews NZ

Barron cited a reticence on the part of Democrats to modify even the most extreme pro-abortion positions.

The article, titled "Bishop: Will Catholic Dems support protections for babies who survive abortion?", was published in the New York Post on June 28, 2021.

The bishop noted that despite his family's deep Democratic political background, he struggles "with abortion policy, where the party has lately staked out an especially extreme position."

Read More

Marie Collins pointed out that the new provisions do not mandate that a priest found guilty of abuse be removed from any office he may hold, or from the priesthood.

Instead, the provisions say that a priest found guilty of abuse can be deprived of office or dismissed from the clerical state "where the case calls for it."

Collins, an Irish abuse survivor who resigned in frustration from the Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors in 2017, said, "They had the opportunity to nail it down in black and white."

"They haven't done that," she told the webinar, hosted by the Cleveland-based reform group FutureChurch on June 15.

"As we know, a bishop can think something is very serious where another bishop might think this is not very serious," she said. "[This] is leaving the decision down to personal judgment."

Breda O'Brien, in her column in the Irish Times, said "there are lots of reasons why Catholics are leaving the church. But the failure by the Catholic Church worldwide to act decisively, courageously and truthfully in relation to sexual abuse of children and vulnerable adults is an important and tragic factor."

Bishop Robert Barron, auxiliary bishop of Los Angeles and one of the most popular speakers at the recent World Meeting of Families said recently, "Maybe 50 years ago, people didn't quite understand but if we don't understand it now, we're blind, deaf and stupid. Lives were shattered, broken, destroyed by these acts, so I think it is important for us to name them as crimes of sexual assault and sexual violence."

Collins expressed concern with the way the new provisions describe a priest who abuses a minor or a vulnerable adult as committing "an offence against the Sixth Commandment" with that person.

The Sixth Commandment is the prohibition against committing adultery.

"As a survivor, I find that highly derogatory," Collins said of the provisions' language. "As if somehow, the child was colluding with the priest to break the Sixth Commandment."

"Victims, children, who have been sexually assaulted or abused or raped do not see how that comes within the sin of breaking the Sixth Commandment," she said.

During a June 1 press conference presenting the new provisions, the secretary of the Vatican's Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts had defended the use of the sixth commandment language.

Bishop Juan Ignacio Arrieta said using that language makes the issue "clear" to Catholics living across various cultures on different continents.

Sources

National Catholic Reporter

Irish Times

It's not the first time he's used the term.

He coined the phrase 25 years ago, to critique modern or liberal Catholicism as "a faith that had become culturally accommodating, hand-wringing, unsure of itself."

Barron has long combated post-Vatican II trends that he sees as anthropocentric rather than Christocentric.

He connects these trends with the loss of the beauty and splendor of the Catholic cultural tradition. But he has now become concerned with what he sees as liberal Catholicism's dangerous opposite extreme: the radical traditionalist movement in the church.

Critics of radical traditionalism, myself included, have often pointed out that "rad trads" are in fact neither radical nor traditional.

They are enamored of an imaginary golden age of Christendom, an amalgamation of white neighborhoods in the 1950s United States, Victorian tea parlors and a technicolor version of the Middle Ages, complete with bright shiny crusaders and pious maidens.

They routinely reject actual church traditions, such as the preferential option for the poor, and refuse to consider reviving such egalitarian practices as having women deacons. The tradition they embrace is not only imaginary; it is calcified, dead.

Barron sees this irony: that radical traditionalists have gone so far as to reject tradition itself, specifically papal authority. But he seems to find their stance almost sympathetic, an understandable reaction to "beige Catholicism." He writes:

"It has come about, partly, as a reaction to the same beige Catholicism that I have criticized, but its ferocity is due to the scandals that have shaken the Church the past thirty years, especially the McCarrick situation.

In their anger and frustration, some of it justified, these arch-traditionalist Catholics have become nostalgic for the Church of the pre-conciliar period and antipathetic toward the Second Vatican Council itself, Pope John XXIII, Pope Paul VI, Pope John Paul II, and particularly our present Holy Father."

This type of faith practice, according to Barron, is "self-devouring," destroying its own foundational beliefs, especially in its attacks on recent popes.

While Barron appears to share the frustration of traditionalists with liberal or modern Catholicism, he opposes their rejection of papal authority and Vatican II.

He also is critical of their online behavior, much of which has been directed at him.

In July 2020 Barron hosted an online meeting of Catholic media professionals to discuss his concerns about new trends in Catholic online culture.

According to NCR's August 2020 report, trends addressed including a "culture of contempt" and the ascendance of various radical traditionalist personalities and outlets.

Barron's message is clear: Word on Fire stands as a "middle ground" alternative to the perceived extremes of "beige" (weak, watered-down) liberal Catholicism on one hand, and "self-devouring" traditionalist Catholicism on the other.

This characterization of two perceived extremes is not exclusive to Barron.

The stereotype of liberal or progressive Catholicism as watered-down, weak and overly influenced by secular culture has been around for years.

And Barron is not the only one positioning himself as a moderate and orthodox alternative to the binaries of progressivism and traditionalism. J.D. Flynn, former editor-in-chief of Catholic News Agency, and Ed Condon, former DC bureau chief of the same, recently founded their own media outlet, The Pillar. As stated in their opening post:

"We want The Pillar to be a different kind of journalism. At The Pillar, we aim to take seriously the issues in the Church, and we aim to do so in a way that respects the complexity of the Church's cultures, doctrine, history, and institutions. We look for answers, instead of driving an agenda, a foregone conclusion, or a partisan narrative."

This is all very admirable.

Yet the implication is that other journalistic outlets, this one included, are operating according to an agenda, whereas Flynn and Condon are committed to pure objectivity.

And this implication rests on the false assumption that a middle ground position must automatically be correct.

Moderate or politely centrist Catholicism is not without bias.

It simply has a different set of biases than traditionalist or progressive Catholicism — one being the bias that taking a centrist position equates with objectivity.

In journalism, ideally, one reports truthfully.

One presents facts and evidence.

But because we are operating in religious journalism, it is impossible for us to opine without certain foregone conclusions.

You can call it belief, or you can call it bias.

The question should not be, "Who is without bias?" but rather, "Which biases are most in line with the truth?"

And when it comes to our faith: "Which beliefs are most true to the Gospel teachings of Christ?"

Barron, Flynn, Condon and others consider that they are in line with the truth because they are in line with tradition and the magisterium, unlike the traditionalists who reject Vatican II and the teachings of recent popes, and unlike the progressives who often question magisterial teachings, especially on issues pertaining to sex and gender.

Yet not all progressive Catholics prioritize questioning.

Some do not question at all, but rather emphasize components of Catholic teaching that have been insufficiently emphasized, such as teachings on the dignity of workers, the rights of the poor, the right to a just wage, the right to health care, immigrants' rights, the immorality of capital punishment and care for the environment.

All of these are core tenets of Catholic faith that are far more essential to a Gospel-oriented faith than teachings on contraception or gay marriage.

And the "liberal" Catholics who defend these articles of faith often do so passionately, in the face of pushback and adversity.

In defending their beliefs, they find themselves standing against powerful persons and institutions, both secular and religious.

Other liberal or progressive Catholics are vocal about areas in which the institutional church has failed, such as lack of accountability on the part of the bishops, failure to care for survivors of clergy abuse, a tendency to protect institutions over persons, clericalism and gender inequality.

Women religious, theologians and activists have asked to be given a place at the table, for our voices to be heard. And in response to this we have received harsh criticism, mockery, threats and silencing.

Perhaps the most important area in which so-called liberal Catholics are calling on the institutional church to do better is racial justice.

Moderate Catholics seem content to ignore race issues, to emphasize the beauties of the church's history while glossing over the many times the church has not only failed to stand up against racial injustice but even actively enabled it.

The splendors of Christendom that they laud are almost exclusively the splendors of white Eurocentric Christendom, which happens to be the same Christendom that was intimately involved in efforts of colonialism and even slave trade.

Moderate Catholics seem to avoid grappling with difficult historical truths about the many times Christians failed to follow Christ's teachings on radical love of neighbor.

They also seem happy to ignore the reality that what radical traditionalist Catholics are actively keeping alive is not just traditional liturgy and practice, but the institutional church's racist, colonialist and sexist past.

The problem with the dichotomy that Barron and others set up is that it erases generations of Catholics who have stood up against and suffered injustice meted out by institutional church as well as state.

It also accepts the proposal advanced by traditionalists that they are motivated by love of truth and beauty when what they most frequently defend is hatred and bigotry.

If traditionalist Catholics were genuinely driven by a loathing of the evils of modern secular culture, they would not so enthusiastically embrace ideologies associated with violence, bigotry and discrimination.

When I look for Catholics who are most passionately living out Christ's Gospel, I do not see the moderates who glance away from our past and present evils.

I see instead those who are confronting them. Many of these would likely be labeled "liberal" but they are anything but "beige" (figuratively or literally).

I see Black Catholics who have labored and suffered for justice, activist Catholics who have been imprisoned for their anti-war activism, religious sisters who have stood up courageously against violence.

How would centrist Catholics such as Barron, Flynn and Condon categorize boldly prophetic Catholics such as Dorothy Day, or the Berrigan Brothers?

How would they categorize Black Catholic civil rights activists such as Sr. Mary Antona Ebo, who marched with Dr. Martin Luther King in Selma?

Where in their liberal versus traditionalist binary would they place contemporary Black Catholics who are working for racial justice despite pushback from clergy and parishioners who fret about upsetting white feelings?

What about theologian Fr. Bryan Massingale, who has written and spoken at length about the evils of systemic racism, and called out the church's hierarchy for refusing to address race issues in any way that would upset white people?

Or theologian M. Shawn Copeland, who has been targeted for harassment by far-right media groups such as Church Militant?

Or religious sisters working to end poverty and oppose violence in the global South?

Our social and racial justice activists past and present do not fit the image of blandness and flimsiness evoked by the phrase "beige Catholicism."

And these get conveniently left out of the picture, so only a single binary remains, with polite centrists positioned on a midpoint between two supposed extremes.

Or do Barron and others view the work of Black Catholics and other advocates for justice as somehow conforming to the standards of the world, because they are not vocal enough in promoting magisterial teachings on sex and gender?

Do polite centrist Catholics view racial and social justice work as secular fads, and not central to living the Gospel? Is anti-racism work somehow "beige"?

While I appreciate Flynn and Condon's pursuit of journalistic integrity, and Bishop Barron's willingness to criticize the traditionalists who share many of his tastes, nevertheless, I find their view of the present religious and cultural scene unrealistic.

It is not enough simply to decry ideological battles as vitriolic or uncivil.

We need to see that often these battles are between those who are advancing agendas of hatred and violence, and those who are upholding justice.

Far-right Catholics are not simply problematic due to their rejection of papal authority; they are dangerous, because they have traded fidelity to the pope for a license to violence and bigotry.

And the ones who are doing the most, risking the most, to oppose this anti-Christ agenda are not the moderates who avoid taking a strong stand against bigotry.

The Catholics on the frontlines are the ones who would probably be labeled liberal, modernist or progressive.

Are these the "beige" Catholics?

Or would that term be better reserved for Catholics who take a polite middle ground where they'll rarely have to see injustice, let alone confront it?

• Rebecca Bratten Weiss is an editor, independent academic and freelance writer residing in rural Ohio.
• Originally published in NCR.
• Reprinted by permission of NCR Publishing Company www.NCROnline.org

He told the US Bishops church leaders need to make it a priority to bring them back.

The bishop, chairman of the US bishops' Committee on Evangelization and Catechesis, who is known for his website, "Word on Fire," and for hosting the documentary series "Catholicism," offered a five-step plan of sorts to bring the religiously unaffiliated, or "nones," back to the fold.

He said for starters, the church should lead with its social justice work, getting young people involved with caring for those in need, working in soup kitchens, prison ministries, helping the homeless.

Leaders can reinforce this by reiterating messages on social justice from Popes Leo XIII to Francis.

From there, the church should promote its own writers and artists to show people the beauty of the Catholic faith, he said.

Another key step - and he said he's been "banging this drum for a long time" - is to stop dumbing down the faith.

The bishop, who first brought up this issue of church exodus with the bishops at the spring meeting, said young Catholics, or those of any age, should be able to articulate why they believe what they do.

For starters, "we have to beef up the intellectual content of our religion classes in Catholic schools, our religious education programs, RCIA, confirmation preparation, etc., " he said.

From his own experience, he said he has been asked very basic questions, particularly on the "AMA" (Ask Me Anything) feature on Reddit, an internet news aggregator, about faith, including:

• "Who is God and can you prove he exists?"
• "Can you explain evil and how do you know that your religion is right?"

He said it "breaks your heart to realize we haven't communicated our tradition effectively," but that doesn't mean throwing in the towel. Instead, the work begins locally: in one's parish.

On the parish level, Catholics need to start recognizing that their parishes are not just places where they experience the sacraments, but they should be seen as missionary grounds.

This especially holds true with reaching out to young people because as he put it: "Young people aren't going to come to us; we have to go out to them."

This idea of going out to people is very much in line with Pope Francis' message of accompaniment, he added.

The bishop's last point was about using social media to turn this trend around stressing: "We should invest a lot of time and money to get really good people to work our social media, suggesting that parishes, or even groups of parishes, hire someone to do effective social ministry outreach. Continue reading

"In the vision of Pope Francis, (priests) are the key players in communicating the Divine Mercy to the world. He sees that as our primary mission," Bishop Barron said June 3.

"I think (the Pope) sees the mercy emphasis as the best way to renew the priesthood for our time."

Bishop Barron, founder of Word On Fire Catholic ministries and auxiliary bishop of Los Angeles, was invited to give a catechesis to the English-language participants during the June 1-3 Jubilee of Priests.

The three day event is the latest initiative in the Jubilee Year of Mercy, which began last December and will continue until November.

Before being appointed auxiliary bishop of Los Angeles in July of last year, Bishop Barron served as the rector of Mundelein seminary, starting 2012.

A couple years earlier, the Chicago native launched the Word On Fire online ministries in 2000.

See the rest of CNA's interview with Bishop Robert Barron below:

You gave a catechesis to the English-speaking priests taking part in the Jubilee, with some 800 priests gathered at the Church of Sant'Andrea della Valle. What were some of the main points you discussed?

I talked about the woman at the well, which is a favorite of Pope Francis. I drew four points from it about God's mercy. (First), that God's mercy is relentless, crossing boundaries and borders as Jesus does, reaching out to this triple outsider.

Secondly, the Divine mercy is divinizing. It's not just padding us on the head and healing our wounds; it lifts us up to share in the very divine life. He wants to give the woman at the well water bubbling up to eternal life.

And then thirdly, I talked about Divine mercy as challenging. I'm against the view that the more you say ‘mercy,' the less you say ‘moral challenge.' No: it's both/and. It's mercy all the way, and that implies transformation - metanoia. Finally, mercy sends us on mission. Continue reading

Sources

• Catholic News Agency
• Image: Brooklyn Daily Eagle