If I'm not mistaken, we turned five today. I glanced at the sidebar of the NewGathering site (something I almost ever do anymore), clicked on the very first month, scrolled to the bottom, and noticed that the first posts were posted on March, 9, 2017. It looks like the very first post was a piece by David Nickol on contemporary art and the Catholic church. I wasn't around at the very beginning, but I'm glad to have found my way here. And grateful for the company.
Hard to believe it's that long. But it spans the surreal presidency of Trump and a pandemic unequalled for a hundred years which took our own dear Tom Blackburn. Now we see the beginning of a new European war. We've certainly had much to discuss. Happy to be in the company of y'all.
ReplyDeleteTime flies, and it has certainly been an eventful five years. We didn't run out of things to talk about. I have enjoyed being part of the group.
ReplyDeleteI am very grateful for this group, especially because I can no longer easily take part in face-to-face (or Zoom) discussions. Everyone who participates in the conversations here has unique insights that often prompt me to think in a new way. I am grateful too that you tolerate me, even though I am a schismatic Catholic.
ReplyDeleteNot sure I have as much in common with folks on here. I still can't stop banging on about the same stuff I was 5 years ago. I'm much nicer on other groups. Grist for the mill ...
ReplyDeleteI am not sure that any of us really have that much in common with any of the rest of us. Just begin to think of all the ways that we differ from each other.
DeleteI think that is why it works.
Jack - agree with your comment. I think the differences are what make the discussions interesting.
DeleteOn March 4th in the afternoon, Commonweal had announced in a post that its revision of the website would involve merging the blog posts into the rest of the magazine and eliminating comments in the next few days. I realized that all the discussion about the end of the blog would be eliminated so I beginning copying everything in a word document which I have labeled “The Passion, Death, and Resurrection of a Virtual Community.
ReplyDeleteMargaret O'Brien Steinfels Contributor March 4, 2017 - 7:35pm said:
Not a tweeter or facebooker, I will miss all of you--well, almost all! Maybe we should go start our own blog.
Thus begin the almost 18,000 word discussion and exchange of e-mails that led to this blog.
Bernard Dauenhauer Subscriber March 6, 2017 - 7:40pm
Rita asks: "Who will have the last word?" I'm not competing for that distinction. If, however, it's anything like Peter Steinfels' comment, then this site will have ended on a note that demeans far too much effort by too many people. There is an "elitism" that shows itself in honoring even the "unwashed."
That is the last comment that I recorded.
I began reading the first 24 hours of comments to Betty last night. I am going to compile a little report in the next few days on the number of participants, number of comments, themes, etc.
I also have a record of the e-mail conversations during the period in which we were in the “tomb”
I was totally astounded that David Nichol and everyone got the new blog together by March 9th at 6:50 pm about 5 days to the hour after the initial announcement and 3 days after the last comment. That must be some record for an accomplishment by any group or organization.
And, of course, here we are five years later, another major accomplishment by a group.
Wow, 18,000 words.
DeleteA lot of credit also to Jim McCrea, who harvested emails and started a listserve so people could stay in contact, during our tomb time (I like that).
Raber still subscribes to C'weal mag. Outside of the editorials, it strikes me now as extremely academic and stodgey, not offering many new voices or themes. They're still flogging midi century Catholic authors like Flannery O'Connor and Graham Greene in the Books section, and missing more contemporary Catholics like George Saunders and Tony Morrison.
There was always an East Coast slant (with Notre Dame academics thrown in), and that seems even more pronounced.
America mag is more middle brow, but often has more stuff that I connect with.
Jean, your observations about Commonweal seem on target to me. I stopped subscribing several years ago for several of the reasons you mentioned. I seldom even look at the website these days. Agree that the New York, Chicago, Notre Dame slant was very off putting at times.
DeleteAmerica went downhill a bit after Ratzinger/Benedict forced out Reese as editor, but it is OK. The main strengths of Commonweal and National Catholic Reporter over America lie in the editorial freedom they have because they aren’t officially connected to the church, and so aren’t subject to censorship. America is, and it hurt the quality of the publication. It will be interesting to see what changes the new editor will bring to America. It shifted right when Malone took over, at least as far as some of the church related hot- button issues were concerned, especially those of greatest concern to women, such as contraception and women’s ordination. Lots of articles pushing NFP, but none on the reasons 90%+ of married Catholics reject that teaching. Women’s ordination is almost never written about with the exception of a rare article on « allowing » women to ( maybe) become deacons someday. America does show empathy towards gays, while continuing to toe the line as far as gay marriage is concerned. It does take a progressive stance on most social justice issues, however. I’m guessing that is safe because it is aligned with Francis on these issues.
I like the more radical stance of writers in Commonweal on capitalism and economics though I haven't seen much of it recently. I like Commonweal's intellectual articles though I don't consider myself much of an innerleckchul so I need it. America seems to have gone pop theology and toes the party line on many issues. They welcome politically and economically conservative articles in the interest of fairness, I guess, though, in my mind, that means those viewpoints go from dominating 99.99% of the media to 99.995%. Still, America, Commonweal and NCR constitute an alternative to the MSM. I remain a subscriber.
DeleteAmerica's most annoying recent article was from some think tank twit all gung ho for going toe to toe with the russkies in the Ukraine. Give me a break. Like we know what we're doing all of a sudden.
Commonweal is best when they have several POVs on an issue. They don't talk about labor issues much.
DeleteInteresting takes on America. Raber doesn't care much for it. Says the articles are too pat and not a lot of room for nuance. I see what he means, but maybe I am moving into my dotage and just want to read easy stuff.
He also gets the Catholic Worker, which in tone, style, and topic might as well have been put out by the Unitarian Service Committee.
Sadly, the Unitarians near me have all gone Wiccan. I used to look in on the ones near me every few years, but they've gone around the bend even by my loose standards.
I am an online subscriber to Commonweal, thogh I don't know if I'm going to renew my subscription when it comes up. I have the same issues lately that others have mentioned with it; that it skews east and Ivy league, and the articles are excessively long and intellectual (I guess I'm telling on myself that I'm not!) Though they do feature some authors that I like, such as Rita Ferrone.
DeleteI'm going through a phase of revaluating my subscriptions of all kinds, either they have changed or I have. I hate what they have done to our regional daily paper, the Omaha World Herald. The price has doubled, and the content has been halved. Not to mention they laid off a bunch of their best writers to save money, and rarely feature syndicated columns anymore. I actually like America, and will probably renew it. I think it is okay if they try and balance left and right a bit, and have a lot in the middle. I like Fr. James Martin's articles.
What a remarkable group this is!
DeleteThanks to your blogging skills for making this possible!
DeleteI'll second that. Thanks, David.
DeleteJean, when Reese was editor of America the magazine often presented multiple POVs on issues, usually by theologians. Some were written by laity, even female theologians now and then. That’s what made it interesting. Some toed the vatican line while others proposed radically different interpretations of standard Catholic theology. One issue took on the controversy about women’s ordination. The defense of the traditional view was written by Joseph Ratzinger. The other main article by an equally qualified male theologian presented the case supporting women’s ordination. A few years later Ratzinger was Pope and Reese was forced to “resign” “voluntarily” (sic) shortly afterwards. The Jesuits were put on notice that if they didn’t stick to official teachings they would have to submit every issue of America to Rome for approval before publication. America went downhill after that. Around the same time US Catholic (a rather in offensive, mildly progressive publication, pretty conformist, and not “intellectual”) was forced to publicly recant an article that also went against official teaching on women’s ordination and to run a statement in every issue that stated the official teaching. No questions allowed. No thinking allowed apparently. So that leaves Commonweal and NCR.
DeleteAlthough Francis does not silence theologians, priests, and women religious as JPII and Benedict did by the dozens, censorship is alive and well in some parts of the RCC.. NCR reported on a recent example of US Catholic having to pull articles, and refers also to the censorship of 2002.
https://www.ncronline.org/news/opinion/ncr-connections/editorial-independence-catholic-media-critical
From Wikipedia on Reese’s “resignation” as editor of America.
Over a period of five years beginning at the turn of the millennium, Reese adopted various stances at odds with official Catholic teaching on matters such as homosexuality, priestly celibacy, birth control, and the abortion debate. He resigned from America in 2005.
I well remember that Ratzinger, for all practical purposes, equated women’s ordination as a mortal sin of the same degree of evil as that of priests sexually molesting kids. When Maryknoll priest Roy Bourgeois refused to recant his belief that ordination should be open to women, following his well-informed and formed conscience, he was kicked out of the priesthood against his will. Essentially Rome was ordering him to violate his conscience, ignoring its own catechism teachings on primacy of con science. Basically they were ordering him to lie about what he truly believes. Yet the recent popes, including Francis, have rarely dealt with clerical molesters, including nuncios and bishops, with the same severity.
Arguing that the church should treat women as equal persons is one of the worst of all heresies it seems in the RCC. Following Aquinas and Augustine, the church still insists through its official teachings that women are second class human beings, willed by God to be subservient to men, to support men, but not to exercise any authority over men in the church, nor in the family. The Catholic Church is as backwards in its thinking in this as are evangelicals.
I remember the Reese controversy. The Church has always been mired in a certain amount of contempt and fear of women. So has Western civilization for much of its recorded history.
DeleteLapsed Catholics can argue--with merit, of course--that the Church has been slower to accept women as full members of the body of Christ, fully capable of receiving and administering the sacraments.
My upbringing, for all its dysfunction and instability, never foisted any girly expectations on me. And I guess I identified enough with women who furthered the faith or shook it up a bit, that I pretty much figured I could be Catholic while ignoring the patriarchy. A mistake, but there ya go.
I also have a pretty deep skepticism about organized religion. Like a university, it's necessary to preserve and encourage exploration of thought, but it can get insular, political, and, on some level, a racket.
Jean,
DeleteI liked you comparison with academic life. For all its great accomplishments in supporting research, and even in some places good teaching, I found academic was often very insular, political and even at some level, a racket.
I found it less accountable to its many constituents than the church. For all their faults and the ability of pastoral staff to focus on positive feedback they get from groupies, low attendance and financial contributions do provide an incentive for change.
I have found more accountability in the mental health system here in Ohio. That is likely because agencies are funded but not operated by local mental health boards. Beside federal and state monies, local boards also past local tax levies just like school boards. While some county boards are insular and political, the presence of family and consumer movements especially in the larger counties has brought accountability through open meetings and sunshine laws. The fact boards do not directly operate services means they can hold agencies accountable by threatening to give money to other agencies who might do a better job.
All institutions and organizations are about power and money at some level. It's all about who gets to make the rules and control the money.
DeleteI couldn't say if academia is less accountable than the Church.
Catholic priests, deacobs, and other functionaries haven't wrecked my faith. But they haven't furthered it, either, except to help me clarify what I don't believe or admire in a fellow Christian.
A fellow failed convert told me once that all the Church wanted was our money and our kids. I thought that he was excessively cynical. But certainly the Church wants compliance, conformity, and keeping your mouth shut. I am uniquely unsuited to all three.
That is a great quote by Bernard! I wish he was still around. Such a valuable contributor.
DeleteThere is a word for people who are eager for us to go to war with Russia, but as a man of the cloth, I don't think I'm allowed to use that word in public.
I think Commonweal is still an interesting read (and I love when Rita writes!) but I just don't have the time to read as much as I'd like. I subscribe to one print magazine now, which comes once or twice a month, and I'm always at least six issues behind and slipping a little bit farther each week.