Which way is this going to go?

Not long ago, the Vatican secretary of state, Cardinal Pietro Parolin, echoed a 50-year-old passage from a book by ... wait for it ... Swiss theologian Hans Küng.

Speaking on Spain's church-owned COPE radio network, Parolin underscored the Good Friday theme of Cardinal Raniero Cantalamessa, preacher for the papal household, and (perhaps unknowingly) brought forth a concept delineated by Küng 50 years ago: Some things can change, but internal church divisions are dangerous.

Dangerous they are, and many divisions fostered by the well-funded hard right in the United States are fixated on pelvic issues and incorporate forms of Trumpism.

The relatively disorganized progressive left can tend to cross the line as well, in the opposite direction.

Still some things, Parolin said, can and should change, although "there is a level that cannot be changed, the structure of the church — the deposit of faith, the sacraments, the apostolic ministry — these are the structural elements."

So, who can change what?

Canon law maintains power in the priestly class, although the combined power of the secular purse and the power of media can present checks and balances to clerical power.

But money also supports clericalism.

Money and media, especially social media, demonstrate the dangers of a clerical-political cash-infused soup.

No doubt about it, there are many people only too happy to replace anything vaguely post-Vatican II with their 1950s imaginings.

There are probably just as many people annoyed at the ill-informed preaching of lace-dressed younger clerics and some bishops. (Recently, the bishop of Kildare and Leighlin, preaching during Ireland's RTE radio Mass, spoke about "Mary Magdalene with her colourful past.")

For those who think the Second Vatican Council was a good idea, there are many legitimate issues to discuss and many "merely ecclesiastical laws" that can and should be modified.

And the majority of the church — the lay 99% — want to have a say.

That is where the question of justice rises to the discussion.

Aside from women ordained as deacons, a fact continually affirmed by historians, there are well-researched, well-documented, well-established facts that support lay participation in church governance.

Over the centuries, the church froze the laity out of any participation in governance and jurisdiction, and the Code of Canon law nailed that door shut.

Canon 129.1 of the 1983 Code of Canon Law — written by then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger — firmly states that laypeople can cooperate but not participate in the power of governance.

Cash, clericalism, divisions and authority

So how does the church — that means all of us — view what is going on with cash, clericalism, divisions and authority?

The money behind the alt-right is lay money aimed at affecting the way the church reacts to questions of justice: for the poor, for the needy, for women, in addition to the fixation on sexual matters.

Change or no change?

The "no-change" folks have a lot of clerical support. Some "change" folks continue to speak, but many simply walk away.

We know the church can change because it has, usually to maintain clerical power.

Over centuries, the church moved to remove women from any role in the celebration of Eucharist, to keep women outside the altar rail "fence" of superstitious misogyny. (The ridiculous beliefs remain: A bishop told me just the other day that his cathedral rector apologized because a woman was in the sanctuary during the Easter Vigil.)

Yet, there is some light at the top of the clerical ladder.

Pope Francis changed the law so women can be installed as lectors and acolytes. Cantalamessa warned against divisions. And Parolin's talk sounded like a passage from Küng's 1971 book, Why Priests? Küng writes:

A multiplicity of opinions, criticism, and opposition have their legitimate place and require a constant dialogue and the constructive display of contrary ideas.

In all this the private sphere of every member of the Church should be respected (whether they are avant-garde or conservative in nature).

In "matters of faith and morals" nothing can be attained with mere votes. In this regard, where it is impossible to obtain some sort of consensus (not unanimity), it is better to leave the question open according to ancient conciliar tradition.

Echoing Küng, Parolin said: "Sometimes ... one fails to distinguish between what is essential that cannot change and what is not essential that must be reformed, must change according to the spirit of the Gospel."

The secretary of state continued, "There is a whole life of the church that can be renewed."

But is there fear that change will cause the far right to take their money and run? You may recall that the church leaves many questions open because, as Küng points out, "it is impossible to obtain some sort of consensus."

I am not so sure avoiding decisions is the best route.

It is never good to prefer peace to justice.

• Phyllis Zagano is a senior research associate-in-residence at Hofstra University, in Hempstead, New York. Her most recent book is Women: Icons of Christ, and her other books include Women Deacons: Past, Present, Future. Study guides for both books are available for free download at sites.hofstra.edu/phyllis-zagano/.
• First published by ncronline.org. Republished with permission.

The Telegraph reported Archbishop Justin Welby saying faith leaders seemed desperate to hide behind "bland" and "anaemic" statements about what they have in common.

This is instead of facing up to the "profound differences" between them, the archbishop told the annual dinner of the Board of Deputies of British Jews in London.

He warned that the pretence that mainstream religions agree on everything is simply "dishonest".

It risks leaving them impotent to halt the spread of extremism.

The audience included hundreds of Jewish community leaders as well as Muslims, Christians and representatives of other faiths.

Archbishop Welby said religious leaders must work together to provide an "alternative vision" to combat the influence of extremists.

"If we don't do that we leave all the good arguments in the hands of the radicals and that is the great challenge I face, and I believe we all face," he said.

"If we're going to do that we have to come together and we have to have the difficult conversations in safe spaces and that's a very, very difficult thing up do."

He added: "We need to move beyond inter-religious interaction in which we the usual suspects issue bland statements of anaemic intent with which you could paper the walls of Lambeth Palace - and much good would it do you - all desperate to agree with one another so that the very worst outcome could possibly be that we end up acknowledging our differences."

"That is not enough in the face of the dangers we face at this time."

The archbishop said it "is disingenuous and ultimately dishonest because alongside all that we hold in common and all that we share there are profound differences between what we believe and the outworking of our faith".

"True friendships and relationships can withstand honesty about differences in values, opinions and religious understandings and a common commitment to mutual flourishing in diversity," he said.

Source

• The Telegraph
• Image: The Guardian

The split in the church took place after Filimone Havili Mone, the former pastor of the Tongan United Methodist Church, was charged with failing to report child abuse.

The Rocky Mountain Conference removed Mone from his post in November, allegedly without any explanation to the church's congregation.

That led a majority of church members agreeing to change the name of the Tongan United Methodist Church to Salt Lake City Laumalie Ma'oni'oni Free Wesleyan Church of Tonga, to elect a new board and modify its articles of incorporation.

The Conference sided with the minority members who remained with the Tongan United Methodist Church and opposed the changes.

In January Etimani Ma'Afu, was elected as president of the Tongan United Methodist Church, but not for the Rocky Mountain Conference of the United Methodist Church.

The Free Wesleyan Church filed a legal challenge alleging that Ma'Afu was improperly claiming authority over the church's assets. The Conference filed a counterclaim asserting ownership and control of the church's charter and assets.

In April, the Conference and the Tongan United Methodist Church jointly sued the Free Wesleyan Church of Tonga and its principals, alleging a breach of fiduciary duty in setting up their unaffiliated congregation.

Source

• The Salt Lake Tribune
• Image: The Salt Lake Tribune

Arriving in Dublin on 17 May for a four-day visit, the queen will be the first British monarch to set foot in the republic since its founding in 1923 and the first to travel to Dublin since King George V in 1911.

She is scheduled to visit Dublin's Garden of Remembrance, which honors those who died fighting to free Ireland from British rule. She also will visit Croke Park Stadium, where British troops killed 14 people in 1920, and attend a state dinner in Dublin Castle, long a symbol of British power in Ireland.

The visit "will sustain a momentum of reconciliation," Archbishop Alan Harper, primate of the (Anglican) Church of Ireland, told ENInews. "It is an ... indication of the transformation of the relationship between the two countries. It has been very widely welcomed in the Republic and in Northern Ireland and is being looked forward to with genuine enthusiasm."

He also said that "a huge amount of work among the main churches has also gone into transforming relationships."

Read more of how the Queen's visit to Ireland might heal divisions

Source

• Image: Monarchist League