Commonweal: A Letter from India
The Important Parts of the Letter:
India’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has been in power since 2014, increasing its hold on the country with each election. About six months ago, my husband, Ravi, and a few others began telling people here that its projected win in this year’s elections was far from certain. Few believed them. While everyone wanted it to be true, all the signs said otherwise: not only would the BJP win, but the win this time would be historic. Our children in the United States and the United Kingdom concurred. The reliable sources they were hearing confirmed the news here: Narendra Modi, India’s strongman, was coasting toward a third term as prime ministerBut when the votes were counted after the largest election in the world (650 million people voted), the BJP failed to achieve its projected landslide of four hundred seats and could not even win a clear majority. Without the support of allies, it would be unable to form a government.What did Ravi and his friends know that the mass media and political pundits missed? They had been out and about in villages, small towns, and large cities for months, talking to women, unemployed youth, farmers, and small-business owners. They soon realized that, in spite of a massive media campaign to promote the BJP, many voters had rejected its ideology of hate.The 2024 elections were simultaneously the most hotly contested and the most unequal in India’s seventy-five-year history. Modi did everything in his power to ensure his victory. He jailed some opposition leaders, filed charges of tax evasion and money laundering against others, bought almost all the major media, and froze the bank accounts of the Congress Party—the second-largest political party in the country.Outspent and outmaneuvered, the opposition parties still managed to unite as the Indian National Developmental Inclusive Alliance (INDIA), with an agreement to support whichever candidate was the most likely to win in a particular district. Many commentators believe that, had there been a level playing field, INDIA would now be forming a government instead of the BJP.
My Comment: Again, we see the failure of even a very well-organized Right-wing Government to convince most of the people of its success! While Modi won the most votes it was not the landslide that he desired. Again, we see, as in France, that many people are so frightened by Right-Wing Extremism that they will combine with other sectors of society to stop it from succeeding.
Thanks for linking that article, Jack. I had let my Commonweal subscription lapse, but I always enjoyed reading Jo McGowan's pieces.
ReplyDelete(Her last name is the same as my married name, but no relation to my husband's family). It is encouraging to hear that well-organized and well funded Right Wing groups don't always get to steam-roller their agenda through.
As far as USA politics goes, I don't think the opposition to MAGA-ism is making the same mistake they did in 2016, which was complacency. They are unfortunately making other mistakes, such as being a circular firing squad.
I had thought that India was doing well with religious tolerance, so it was disappointing to see that go backwards when Modi became prime minister.
DeleteThanks for this. I have given up on trying to follow every story, and it’s only recently that I started reading news at all. The global trend away from right wing extremism is a somewhat Hopeful sign.I hope that Americans will see the light in November . After reading the story in the NYT this morning confirming the overwhelming, right ward tilt of priests ordained since 2010 ( both politically and in how they see the Catholic Church) it seems the future is not bright for any but the most conservative Catholics. Their efforts to go back to the not so good old days that they think is “ real” Catholicism will accelerate the departure of moderate and progressive Catholics from the pews and Benedict’s smaller but purer church is closer than ever. While some people are backing away from right wing extremism, it appears that the American. Catholic church is rushing towards it, parish by parish.
ReplyDeleteI saw the NYT article, and I thought they were doomsaying a bit. By definition, a young man considering the priesthood or entering formation is going to skew more conservative than your average college student. They have to be willing to commit to a vow of celibacy. They will need to be on board with Catholic teaching; the articles of the Creed, and sacramental theology.
DeleteWe have lived in our town for 29 years and I have known several young men who entered the priesthood. Like all of us who get married or start a career, they had things to learn and maturity to gain. I'm not seeing them turn out as ideologues though.
Of course there are priests who get into a right wing, very political bubble. There was one down the road from us who attended the Capitol insurrection (supposedly to do exorcism?). Anyway he got a stern rebuke from the archbishop. Eventually he asked to be released to join the FFSP society (Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter). But that isn't typical, even in our somewhat conservative neck of the woods.
I think we need to pray for the young priests, to be empathetic and effective in their ministry. Like all of us they are living in challenging times.
This was an interesting article on the America site about changes in seminary formation:
Deletehttps://www.americamagazine.org/faith/2024/06/24/catholic-seminaries-formation-248199
Among other things that were discussed was "digital detox", to counter the influence of online " shadow formation", which tends to isolate students into ideological silos.
The answers given by the young priests themselves do clearly indicate a strong g rightward shift. Which is what appears in comments on Catholic sites frequently - complaints by moderate and progressive Catholics about their new priests. Unfortunately it seems that the majority of American bishops are also on the right politically and in terms of the church “.vision”., This was predicted at a big conference e at Boston College that was held about 25 years ago - that the JPII and Benedict priests did not share the views of most lay Catholics then, especially especially the young. So Benedict’s smaller but purer church became a self- fulfilling prophecy it seems as more and more and more of those who shared their anti-Vatican II, anti- progressive views were attracted to the priesthood, and started pushing these conservative views. The results have been a steadily growing loss of people from the church as the older VII vision priests were replaced by JPII/Benedict priests. Now the extreme conservative bishops and priests dominate. Many of the priests of my era had been attracted by the new openness of Vatican II and stayed because of the increasing emphasis on social justice - aka the teachings of Jesus. Many of the Vatican II priests started to leave after JPII had been in a few years, and the reversal of the VII vision also resulted in a massive drop in new candidates applying to seminaries. I have bad the A Erica article yet.
DeleteKatherine, both formal studies @nd the Abe dot Al stories of my friend who worked with most of the priests in the Los Angeles archdiocese for 25 years conclude that the large majority of the JPII and Benedict priests - younger than the priests I knew- are gay. Since gays were still in the closet for many of those years, and they weren’t allowed to marry, the priesthood may have seen to be a good way to go if they also had a Religious bent - nobody would be hassling them about when they would find a wife and settle down. I have read that while about 50% of all priests are gay, among the younger priests it’s closer to 75%. Which, if true, shows a big cognitive dissonance in their opposition to gay marriage. Denial - and strong hostility towards gays who are not closeted and who might wish to marry. Jim McCrae and his husband were pledged to each other in 1972, the same year my husband and I were married, but they weren’t allowed to get married. When they did, it was in an Episcopal church even though Jim had been a dedicated and committed Catholic his entire life - until his welcoming, inclusive Catholic parish was decimated by a new uber conservative bishop.
DeleteYes, praying for clergy. I'm not sure if it helps them, but it helps me lighten up and get the chip off my shoulder.
DeleteIf I had to use the local parish as a gauge, I'd say the Church is not smaller. It has lost some wobbly Catholics like me, but increased in size with fans of some of the old wdays and Polish customs that the priest encourages. (And if, like me, you tend to think there's not much diff between the mostly Czechs and Germans and the Polish priest and his fans, think again!)
Is it purer? God will have to figure that out.
Thanks for calling our attention to that NY Times article. In case it's not behind a paywall, the article is here:
Deletehttps://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/10/us/catholic-priests-conservative-politics.html?campaign_id=9&emc=edit_nn_20240711&instance_id=128464&nl=the-morning®i_id=87407961&segment_id=171842&te=1&user_id=7bba122dbc8acf5289c69a5c9f2867a2
A priest's personal views on a basket full of hot-button issues may or may not be important to his pastoral work. I agree with Michael Sean WInters that there is no particularly conservative or liberal way to do a baptism or a funeral.
Personally, what I care about is:
* Is the priest collaborative leader, or is he a top-down ruler? I don't know that those characteristics track perfectly with a priest's self-identity as liberal or conservative. But a priest who is not willing to collaborate in decision-making and who demands obeisance is going to struggle in pastoral work, even if he happens to be assigned to a "conservative"-leaning parish. At least that's my view. I think the people's unwillingness to put up with with priest-as-squire is a cultural attitude that transcends liberal/conservative divide. What I've personally observed is that the priests who want to live on a pedestal tend to gravitate to the conservative religious orders (where, to be sure, they may still end up with a parish assignment).
* Will he refrain from preaching "right politics"? The preacher, whether he is conservative of something else, should preach the Good News of Christ's salvific work, and let the people figure out their own political applications of the Gospel. The one thing in the NY Times article that worried me was when one of the young priests referred to the church's refusal to recognize same-sex marriage as "a core tenet of our faith". I don't agree. The Paschal Mystery is a core tenet of our faith. The church's views on same-sex marriage flow in some way from core tenets of the faith, but it is not itself something that is core to our faith. I'd much rather preachers preach about the Paschal Mystery, or God's mercy, or something that is truly core to our faith, rather than harangue parishioners about same-sex marriage or abortion or IVF every single week.
Jean, wasn’t your parish combined with another parish? It has been observed that conservative Catholics will very often leave their moderate parishes to attend a parish with a conservative priest. I suspect that your pastor hadn’t attracted new Catholics, but has gained congregants at the expense of other parishes. I have seen this happen.
DeleteMy friend who worked with the many priests in LA felt that the gay priests were often more pastoral than others. Her theory is that they suffered so much from anti- homosexual hatred and being treated as “ other” that they had developed more compassion - empathy - for parishioners who were struggling with the range of issues that they faced.
DeleteJim I agree with you about leadership, a priest shouldn't be my-way-or-the-highway. Because if he is, people will choose the highway.
DeleteI also agree with you that he shouldn't preach "right politics". Or any other kind of politics. He can tell us we need to pray about our choices, and that we should apply moral principles to them. Leave it at that. If we're old enough to vote, we're adults. Let us figure it out for ourselves.
And yes, he should stay focused on the actual core tenets of our faith.
Katherine, the problem with the bishops and priests saying to pray about it is that the also say that abortion is THE paramount issue and that nobody can vote for candidates who are pro- choice.
DeleteI have not actually heard that we can't vote for a candidate who is pro-choice from the pulpit. What I have encountered is people putting brochures saying that under our windshield wipers in the parking lot. Also Catholic voting guides. And pro life scores for every single candidate, including city council or county supervisor, who have no conceivable connection to any legislation dealing with life issues. The people putting this stuff out are very, very dedicated to their cause. I just wish the pastor would tell everyone they can't distribute election related material on church property.
Delete"nobody can vote for candidates who are pro- choice."
DeleteI don't doubt that is said from the pulpit. It shouldn't be. Even Pope Benedict didn't go there.
Is Donald Trump pro-life? (Whatever that question means.) I believe, in 2016, he claimed to be. Now, in 2024, he's taking the position that, during his presidency, he kept his end of the bargain with the organized pro-life movement and seems to more or less consider himself "off the hook". He's said he's against abortion, but so do many Democrats of the "personally opposed but..." variety. His current take is, Let each state decide for itself. A lot of pro-life advocates don't think that's very good.
According to comments I read at various Catholic websites a whole lot of priests around the country say that during homilies. I think you must have a moderate pastor and you do have a pretty good bishop, so maybe the right wing political stuff has to be toned down in your diocese. My very, very conservative evangelical brother in law ( a libertarian who votes for trump, and I haven’t quite figured out how you can be both evangelical, conservative Christian and Libertarian at the same time, but…) sent me a video of the homily of a right wing priest at a Catholic Church in Maryland who was definitely saying you can’t vote for anyone who is pro- choice, pro- gay rights, etc.. His parish is one of the former Episcopal parishes that joined the Papists because of women priests, gay priests etc. It was quite a diatribe and it went viral in evangelical circles apparently.
DeleteDonald Trump was openly pro- choice until he decided to run for president and started cultivating the right wing. He quickly realized that catholics and evangelicals would drive a whole lot of votes to his candidacy, with the complicity of ministers and priests ignoring the laws banning telling people how to vote ( the evangelicals used names not just saying “only anti- abortion candidates”) from the pulpit even though they are supposed to lose their tax exemption for it. A law as widely ignored as the Hatch Act that bans civil servants - like many of the White House staff - from politicking. Dolan in New York violated that rule too along with a few other bishops I think.
Deletehttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hatch_Act
Nobody should have believed that he was really anti - abortion. Five minutes with google would have turned up the evidence, but they really liked that he might ban civil rights for gays by distorting America’s practice of religious freedom, ban all abortions , even if the mother might die ( see Ireland, Malta, Arizona under that awful bishop who excommunicated the nun who approved an abortion because she wanted to save the life of the mother) etc and help impose their distorted religious beliefs on all, and, of course, deny asylum to poor immigrants at the southern border as well as ban all future Muslim immigrants.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trumps-many-abortion-positions-timeline-rcna146601
The “ lying mainstream media” reported all of this in real time but the MAGA people chose to ignore it. How can they possibly be surprised at the latest pivot? He knows that abortion bans are very unpopular even in red states which is why so many anti- choice activists are fighting ballot initiatives in states that legislated abortion bans. Trump has NO principles other than self enrichment as Jean has so often pointed out. He wants to be Pres to continue to avoid going to jail, to not have to pay the millions he owes in civil damages, and to ensure he and his family, and his billionaire buddies, will have billions more coming to them with the dirty deals he makes with governments like Saudi Arabia.
And all of those ‘ good” christians who ignore the gospels, , including Catholics, will vote for him.
This is a critique of the homily video from Maryland that went viral
Deletehttps://samrocha.medium.com/staring-into-the-abyss-of-fr-ed-meeks-partisan-homily-78a3b3d392e7
The GOP Platform is now easier to find online. Despite being very weak on abortion and gay marriage, there are lots of school positions designed to make white Christian nationalists.
DeleteThere's this interesting nugget: "Republicans will use existing Federal Law to keep foreign Christian-hating Communists, Marxists, and Socialists out of America. Those who join our Country must love our Country." Apparently you can only love America if you love Christians. And I wonder where they'll deport The Boy to since he's voted Socialist in every election. Or, yikes, me for that time in my wayward youth I voted for Gus Hall!
Read more here: https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/2024-republican-party-platform
Wow, as bad as they have become I can’t believe they would put such an unconstitutional pledge in their platform. Our freedoms will be gone if they take over the White House and Congress, with the complicity of the Supreme Court.
DeleteYeah, that culture-war content in the Republican platform makes it pretty much radioactive to suburban voters like me. I don't think either candidate actually wants to win the election. Or if they do, they can't conceive of doing it in any way except to have a bigger, more pissed-off base than the other guy.
Delete"...they can't conceive of doing it in any way except to have a bigger, more pissed-off base than the other guy." Yeah, Jim, it feels that way to me.
DeleteAt first the election year felt like that dry, dusty, 500 mile trip in a car without air conditioning to visit relatives when I was a kid. "Mom, Dad, aren't we there yet?"
Now it feels like the trip where we're the adults driving, and there are tornado warnings, and it's starting to hail. We're still a hundred miles from nowhere, and there's no place to get off the interstate.
Katherine, exactly! ... and then, just as you're about to run out of gas, Godzilla's foot suddenly stomps down, six feet in front of your car.
DeleteAs for the article on conservative young priests, I think seeing everything in terms of liberals and conservatives fits well into media narratives but does little service to the reality of lived Catholic experience.
ReplyDeleteBack in 2010 when the PrayTell liturgy blog was founded the big issue was the forthcoming New Missal. Conservatives argued that with an accurate (e.g. literal, even archaic translation) people would come back the Mass after the guitar Masses, etc. of the post conciliar era.
Liberals countered that the clumsiness of the new translation would drive more people away than it would bring back. I don’t think the new translation made much of a difference.
Both liberals and conservative saw the New Missal as a swing in the conservative direction along with the Extraordinary Form and the “reform of the reform.” Conservatives on the blog argued that we should get rid of the four hymn Mass and returned to singing the “Propers” i.e. the antiphons associated with the psalm chants of the Introit, Offertory, and Communion. Curious about these chants I decided to include the current Sunday chants during my daily treadmill exercises. What I discovered was that while some of the psalms were chosen for feasts and liturgical periods, the vast majority of the psalms chosen for Ordinary Time were very broadly spread across the whole psalter with few repetitions. It became clear to me that the original purpose of the chants was to introduce the psalms to the people in simple Gregorian chant not the elaborate melodies of the antiphons which were for the choir!
Around the same time, I attended a symposium at Notre Dame on the Liturgy of the Hours. Paul Bradshaw was there. He has emphasized the great difference between the Monastic Hours (composed mainly the recitation of the full 150 psalms) and the Cathedral Hours, which used selected psalms, hymns, canticles, incense and lights (more like our pre-Vatican II Benediction services). Benedicta Ward and I formed a bond during the conversations in the hall-way between sessions. She very much disagreed that the Cathedrals neglected the psalms, indeed they had just found a different place for them.
So, the traditionalist argument for the priority of the Propers being about antiphons was not really the deepest tradition rather it was the psalms that was the deeper tradition. If one really wanted to progress by returning to tradition, we should be singing the psalms rather than their antiphons. In a way both liberals (hymns) and conservative (antiphons) have gotten the choice of material for singing wrong.
Of course, with the resignation of B16 and the advent of Francis the whole EF and 'reform of reform" movement is in disarray. Now that would not be true if it had ever had much backing from the pews or even clergy. There would have been push back against Francis.
When it comes to cultural issues, Evangelicals emphasize life, sexuality and marriage issues. Mainstream Protestants emphasize poverty, social justice and environmental issues. Catholicism and Catholics actually endorse all the issues. We Catholics and our clergy have a difficult time bringing them together given the divisions in our culture between liberals and conservatives.
I remember the four hymn Mass being dissed by the reformers of the reform, who were hoping to introduce singing the propers. But that never gained any traction, at least not here. I've been a choir member for fifty years, more than that if you count grade school choir. We weren't about to give up our hymns. But we don't do four. Usually we do six, plus the Mass parts and the responsorial psalm. A lot of the hymns are actually based on psalms. We get decent participation from the congregation, which I don't think we would if we were just chanting propers.
ReplyDeleteI love the music/ hymn discussions here because I am clueless about all of it. I have no idea if any of the churches I’ve attended sang “ propers”. They sing. That’s all i know. I don’t even know what Propers are. So I guess I will have to do some research. Google…..
DeleteOk- the Introit etc. I remember them from my old St Joseph’s Daily Missal but I honestly don’t remember if they were still part of the masses I used to attend for most of my adult life much less remember whether spoken or sung. It’s sadly clear that I never paid much attention to the details of liturgy and really didn’t understand the angst of those who complained about priests not perfectly following every minute detail of the instructions in the GIRM.
DeleteBreaking Bread, an annual hymnal by Oregan Catholic Press (OCP) is in our pews. Our edition is subtitled with Readings and Daily Mass Propers.
DeleteFor today it gives two options, one for the weekday in Ordinary time, the other for Saint Henry. Each gives the entrance (Introit) and identifies the psalm that goes with it; the Responsory and identifies the psalm that goes with it, and the Communion but not the psalm that goes with it since it is a Gospel verse.
The GIRM says about the Entrance Chant
48. This chant is sung alternately by the choir and the people or similarly by a cantor and the people, or entirely by the people, or by the choir alone. In the Dioceses of the United States of America, there are four options for the Entrance Chant: (1) the antiphon from the Missal or the antiphon with its Psalm from the Graduale Romanum, as set to music there or in another setting; (2) the antiphon and Psalm of the Graduale Simplex for the liturgical time; (3) a chant from another collection of Psalms and antiphons, approved by the Conference of Bishops or the Diocesan Bishop, including Psalms arranged in responsorial or metrical forms; (4) another liturgical chant that is suited to the sacred action, the day, or the time of year, similarly approved by the Conference of Bishops or the Diocesan Bishop.
If there is no singing at the Entrance, the antiphon given in the Missal is recited either by the faithful, or by some of them, or by a reader; otherwise, it is recited by the Priest himself, who may even adapt it as an introductory explanation (cf. no. 31).
Elsewhere the GIRM clearly gives preference to singing. At least for the Entrance Chant clearly the first three preferences include a psalm. You can use a different antiphon and a different psalm. Unfortunately, when the antiphon is recited, the text does not say that the psalm or many verses of it could be recited either by the people or a reader.
Almost all the attention that has been given is to the antiphon, but the psalm is at least as important perhaps even more so. I think the Responsorial Psalm has been a very successful successor to the elaborate Graduals that could only be sung by professional cantors. It is a shame that we did not follow that model in dealing with the Introit, Offertory and Communion music.
The GIRM allows
88. When the distribution of Communion is over, if appropriate, the Priest and faithful pray quietly for some time. If desired, a Psalm or other canticle of praise or a hymn may also be sung by the whole congregation.
In my experience this has only been used to allow the Choir to sing a refection piece!
Of course, the Recession Hymn is not a part of the Mass.
I have been on retreats at a Benedictine monastery. In that setting the emphasis on chant was lovely and appropriate.
DeleteHowever it comes across that the reformers of the reform wanted to push their agenda on everybody else. It is no surprise that whatever the GIRM said, congregations have not embraced chant wholeheartedly, or at all. Nobody asked them what they wanted, which is pretty typical.
Part of the problem is a misunderstanding of the term "chant." In the GIRM that merely means sung as opposed to recited. It does not necessarily mean plain chant. "Chant" could be polyphony or metrical.
DeleteRecently all the hymns of the Office have been given a new translation by ICEL. The hymns are set in both plain chant and metrical on facing pages.
I am not sure it is accurate to say that "congregations" have rejected chant. Mostly it is the musicians and the publishers that have rejected chant. I think the Gelineau psalm chants are very beautiful and very singable. Also, the Meinrad psalm tones are very beautiful and singable. All those are more rhythmic than Gregorian chant.
Then there is the whole question of how to sing Gregorian chant. The style favored by English seminaries whether in English or Latin sounds very Germanic, austere and heavy. The style of Solesmes which is what Benedictine monasteries in the US once sang is very light and fluid.
Most parish music directors believe that chant is too difficult for masses of people to sing together.
DeleteThe psalm text translations don't follow Western civilization's poetry conventions, such as regular meter, standard line lengths and ending rhymes.
Musically speaking, the Western music tradition has settled for a very small handful of musical modes: we call them the "major key" and two or three variations of a "minor key". The chant tradition, whose musical tradition predates this Western "settling", has other modes which sound strange and off-putting to contemporary ears.
The chant tradition also can be dialogical, with an "A side" and a "B side" alternating verses of the psalms. The people would have to divide into two "choirs" to sing them that way.
In a monastery, where monks gather several times per day in a very small and very stable community, in a chapel architected to allow the A side and the B side to sit facing one another, it's not too difficult to chant. But our parishes have much larger communities, they are less stable (most people come only weekly, many of those folks don't actually come every week, and they may not come to the same mass every week), they don't come together nearly as often, laypersons don't pray the Hours - there are many reasons that it's hard to translate these monastic practices to the parish.
Trump was shot and it happened the way I always imagined it. He gets a superficial wound, other people get wounded and killed. He comes out of it with more votes. As if this presidential campaign season can't get any weirder. The best comment came from previously shot Rep. Scalise, "Violence doesn't belong in politics." I guess that means it's ok everywhere else.
ReplyDelete