Remembering Ignaz von Döllinger

Today I came upon a good, balanced account of one theologian/historian who has been virtually neglected and forgotten in Catholic history. Dollinger has always been one of my theological heroes though. His famous student, Lord Acton, is well-known for his quote, ""Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men" (John Emerich Edward Dalberg Acton, first Baron Acton (1834–1902). The historian and moralist, who was otherwise known simply as Lord Acton, expressed this opinion in a letter to Bishop Mandell Creighton in 1887)

A time when conscience collided with Church teaching

Story of the 19th century theologian-priest who refuted infallibility

Thomas Albert Howard

October 1, 2014

HERE

/jkk

Donald Cozzens' Talk at King's

  The well-known author of The Changing Face of the Priesthood and other trailblazing works on reform in the Roman Catholic institution, Donald Cozzens, came to give a lecture at King's. He talked about his hopes and fears for the Francis-era Catholic Church. At the end, he gave three scenarios that may happen in the RCC now: a Catholic springtime, a C. thaw and a C. wintertime. 

  The springtime will take place if Francis' reforms succeed. The thaw (he thinks it is the present ongoing situation) is characterized by conservatives (reactionaries) and progressives keeping a status quo of controlled tension. The wintertime, he think, will happen if the reactionary and very right-wing elements of the church succeed to install a man after their own thinking after Francis. 

  He mentioned several times that Faith is trust and hope and that orthodoxy "masquerading as faith" (his words) is not genuine Faith. Of course, I say a firm "Amen" to that.

  I asked a question at the Q&A time about where does the event of Vatican II enter the picture. I pressed him to comment on my reflection that if a whole ecumenical council (Vatican II with its reforming agenda) was undermined by reactionary forces in the Church, what chances does a lone figure (even though he be Pope Francis) really have? 

  He didn't really seriously answer this question to my satisfaction. He evaluated my remark though as "realism", however, he thinks that he (Cozzens) is more "hopeful" than I am. That doesn't really carry weight, does it? I am also hopeful. I'm just trying to insert a little realism to balance what can be an uncritical optimism.

  In fact, a friend (P.M.)  sent me these remarks which basically run along the same lines as my thoughts.

Cozzens comes across as a very likeable person and a skilled speaker, and I was initially impressed with the idea of a Catholic spring. I appreciated his use of Tillich and his emphasis on faith as trust and hope. But the contrast between "hopefulness" and "realism" (the basis of Cozzens' statement about you) is not helpful, for it equates hope with naïvete. And that is the last message one wants to send today. His emphasis on contemplative prayer as the means to reform the Church is, I think, more of a "pious immigration to the interior" which dodges sticky institutional problems than a recipe for reform. One key institutional problem is how bishops are appointed. Not too long ago, I read that in 1829 there were 646 Latin rite bishops, and only 22 of them were appointed directly by the pope. 555 appointments were controlled by states, and the remainder were appointed by cathedral chapters. I'm not in favor of states controlling the appointment of bishops but there has to be significant local input. The Anglican Church does a better job of choosing bishops than we do. Too many members of the curia think of the curia as a permanent fixture. Popes come and go but the curia is forever. Such curial attitudes do not fit well with a servant church of the poor.

  I will have to add here that the Roman Catholic Church is still practically blind to the reality of "empire" and how it corrupts the message of Jesus. There should be a concerted effort to do "Postcolonial Thought/Analysis 101" throughout the church and particularly among the bishops for them to be aware how the reality of empire and its agenda (aka the often unconscious desire for power and--to echo Cozzens--"privilege") which is, in many significant ways, at loggerheads with the compassionate nature of God's basileia, still very much operative in the church institution, often making it a parody of what God's basileia should not be!

  The burning question is, when the demon of empire is finally and significantly exorcised from the RCC, will it still recognizably remain the RCC? I'm not so sure of that. This is one of the reasons why I had to leave the RCC hierarchical structure. I thought it was structurally and significantly adverse to the basileia tou theou. 

/jkk

Jesus as a Zen-Koan

Wow ... It's been a long hiatus from blogging ... the past year has really been so busy for me. I'll try my best to take up writing again little by little and, more importantly, more regularly ... even just a little but regularly.

I attended the Catholic Theological Society of America annual conference in San Diego held at the beginning of June and one of the things that has really stayed with me was what my friend and colleague Ruben Habito (of Perkins School of Theology) was expounding in his presentation at the Asian/Asian-American Theology Consultation. He suggested that Jesus can be a "Zen Koan." Of course, to understand that, one has to understand first what a Koan is. A Koan is a way of grappling with something that is not usually cognitively penetrable. What it could do to the practitioner of Zen requires that the practitioner swallow it into one's system and let it dissolve there like--Habito adds--an Alka-Seltzer tablet. Then, with continuous engagement, the Koan becomes more and more a part of one's system until it can lead one to SATORI (enlightenment).

Jesus, as well as some other significant sections of Christian doctrine, can also be thought of in a way as not cognitively penetrable. Take teachings such as the divinity and humanity of Christ, the various attributes of God, etc. But if one considers them like Zen-Koans, they become, in a way, understandable. They are actually transformed into ways by which we can penetrate deeper the greatest mysteries of life and of reality. They can act as remarkable paths for us to hold what are usually thought of as irreconcilable entities in a creative and harmonious balance of yin-yang.

The Christological Hymn of Philippians 2 should be Interpreted in light of Gen 1!

Today, while I was proctoring the midterm exam of the Paul course, I was reading Jerome Murphy-O’Connor’s Paul: A Critical Life (1996). In his section on Paul and the Philippian community, he argues that the famous Christological hymn in Philippians 2 should be read through an Adamic typology lens, hence, vis-a-vis Genesis 1. At that moment, I experienced a kind of intellectual epiphany and realized that Jerome MOC’s explanation is actually the best one I’ve encountered so far.

The Christological hymn has always been used to claim an early notion of pre-existence in the New Testament and has been lined up with John’s Prologue on the Word in order to prove, among other things, the notion that even biblical writers had some idea of Christ’s divinity that early on in the tradition. Well, Philippians 2 is actually based on a re-reading of Genesis 1. Adam, made in God’s image (hence, the mention of Jesus as being in the “form” of God), fell from grace and did not fulfill his original destiny of being God’s glorious image but instead had to be subjected to the punishment of a life as a slave - toiling, experiencing hardship and eventually dying. Christ, on the other hand, was faithful all throughout to God’s will and did not deserve any punishment at all. However, he freely subjected himself to the lot of Adam and thus he can be humanity’s rightful saviour and was raised to the glory that Adam was supposed to have attained if he had not fell.

This Adamic typology of course makes so much sense because Paul elaborates on it in other parts of his corpus of works such as in the letter to the Romans 5.

Jerome MOC’s insight is of course not a new thing. As he states in his book (p. 227), he already wrote about it back in 1976 and James D.G. Dunn also wrote about it in 1980. It’s just a wonder why I never paid attention to this aspect of Philippians 2 up until today!

Thanks, Jerome Murphy-OC for this insight. Intellectual epiphanies are what make an academic dedicated to the pursuit of truth and learning so happy. I cherish and relish them!

The Pope Francis Interviews: Some Things that Strike Me

I’m following rather closely how Pope Francis’ papacy is unfolding. After all, last February in an online article (here), I prophesied that Pope Ratzinger’s resignation might bring about great changes.

The other day, I finally found the time to read in their entirety the two interviews of Pope Francis that have been creating a lot of buzz lately.

Interview for Jesuit periodicals <http://www.americamagazine.org/pope-interview>

Interview with Eugenio Scalfari, founder of the Italian newspaper La Repubblica <http://www.repubblica.it/cultura/2013/10/01/news/pope_s_conversation_with_scalfari_english-67643118/?ref=HRER3-1>

My overall reaction is very, very positive. After having written a very critical evaluation of the long tenure of Joseph Ratzinger (as prefect of the CDF and pope) last February (here), I was not expecting such a drastic shift of style of being pope in such a short while from this remarkable pope from Argentina. The Holy Spirit can sure pull some surprises!

Francis has proven himself to be a thorough “Gaudium et Spes” pope. That is to say, he embodies the so-called spirit of Vatican II as expressed in the Pastoral Constitution of the Church to the Modern World (Gaudium et Spes) in which it encourages the whole church to walk with people today in all their joys and sorrows. I make mine the reflections of my favourite theologians, Leonardo Boff, in his blog because I practically agree with all of them because they are also the thoughts that I have on Francis’ papacy so far.

from Leonardo Boff <http://leonardoboff.wordpress.com/2013/10/05/with-pope-francis-the-third-world-has-come-to-the-vatican/>

With Pope Francis, the Third World has come to the Vatican

Leonardo Boff

Theologian-Philosopher

Earthcharter Commission

There is broad awareness of the many innovations that Pope Francis, the Bishop of Rome, as he likes to be called, has introduced in papal behavior and in his style of presiding over the Church, with tenderness, comprehension, dialogue and compassion. More than a few are perplexed, because they were accustomed to the classic style of the popes, forgetting that it is a style handed down from the pagan Roman emperors, from the name «Pope» to that richly adorned cape on their shoulders, the muceta, the symbol of absolute imperial power, which Francis promptly rejected.

We must remember once again that the present Pope comes from the periphery of the central European Church. He has a different ecclesiastical experience, with new customs and with a different way of experiencing the world and its contradictions. As he consciously expressed it in his lengthy interview with the Jesuit magazine, Civilta Catolica: «The young Churches have developed a synthesis of faith, culture and the life hereafter, which therefore is different from that developed by the older Churches». They are not characterized by change, but by stability and it is hard for them to incorporate new elements coming from the modern secular and democratic culture.

Here Pope Francis emphasizes the difference. He has the consciousness that he comes from a different manner of being Church, which has matured in the Third World. The Third World is characterized by profound social injustices, by the absurd number of favelas, shanty towns, that surround almost every city, by the always despised native cultures, and by the legacy of slavery shadowing the afro-descendants, who are subjected to great discrimination. The Church understands that, besides her specific religious mission, she cannot avoid her urgent social mission: to stand with the weak and oppressed, and to struggle for their liberation. In several gatherings the Bishops of the Latin-American and Caribbean continent, (CELAM), developed the preferential option for the poor in challenging their poverty, and the liberating evangelization.

Pope Francis comes from this ecclesiastical and cultural breeding ground. Here, in the Third World, these options, with their theological reflections, with their form of living the faith in community networks and with celebrations that incorporate the popular style of praying to God, are obvious matters. But they are not so for Christians of the old European Christianity, who are filled with traditions, theologies, cathedrals and a sense of the world impregnated with the Greek-Roman-Germanic culture in the articulation of the Christian message. Because the Pope comes from a Church that gave centrality to the poor, he first visited the refugees in the Isle of Lampedusa, continued with the Jesuit center in Rome, and then the unemployed in Corsica. It is natural for him, but it is almost a «scandal» for the Roman curia, and unprecedented to other European Christians. The option for the poor reaffirmed by the last Popes was purely rhetorical and conceptual. There was no real encounter with the poor and with those who suffer. Francis does exactly the opposite: the good news is affective and effective praxis.

Perhaps these words by Francis clarify his style of living and of seeing the mission of the Church: «I see the Church as a field hospital after a battle. It is useless to ask a gravely wounded soldier if his cholesterol and blood sugar are high. First the wounds must be healed, then we can talk of the rest». «The Church, --Pope Francis continues--, often focuses on small things, on petty precepts. The most important, much better, is to first announce: "Jesus saved you". For this, the ministers of the Church must in the first place be ministers of mercy. The structural and organizational reforms are secondary, that is, they come later. Therefore, the first reform must be the reform of attitude». «The ministers of the Gospel must be capable of warming people's hearts, of walking with them in the night, knowing how to dialogue, and also being able to enter their night, their obscurity, without getting lost». «The people of God –Pope Francis concludes– want pastors, not functionaries or clerics of the State». In Brazil, talking to the Bishops of Latin America, the Pope tasked them with forging a «revolution of tenderness».

Therefore, centrality is not given to doctrine and discipline, so dominant lately, but to humans, and their searches and inquires, be they believers or not, as Pope Francis showed in his dialogue with Eugenio Scalfari, the former editor of the Roman daily, La Repubblica, who himself is a non-believer. These are new winds that blow from the new peripheral Churches, touching the whole Church. Spring is really coming, filled with promises.

In a sense, the ‘Scalfari’ interview impressed me more because there Francis was talking with a professed non-believer and making points that, he hopes, are more universally valid.

In the Jesuit interview, what particularly struck me was Francis’ immediate reply to the question about what Ignatian principle helps him in his papal ministry: discernment. Of course, let me let Francis speak for himself:

QUESTION: What does it mean for a Jesuit to be elected pope? What element of Ignatian spirituality helps you live your ministry?”

“Discernment,” he replies. “Discernment is one of the things that worked inside St. Ignatius. For him it is an instrument of struggle in order to know the Lord and follow him more closely. I was always struck by a saying that describes the vision of Ignatius: non coerceri a maximo, sed contineri a minimo divinum est (“not to be limited by the greatest and yet to be contained in the tiniest—this is the divine”). I thought a lot about this phrase in connection with the issue of different roles in the government of the church, about becoming the superior of somebody else: it is important not to be restricted by a larger space, and it is important to be able to stay in restricted spaces. This virtue of the large and small is magnanimity. Thanks to magnanimity, we can always look at the horizon from the position where we are. That means being able to do the little things of every day with a big heart open to God and to others. That means being able to appreciate the small things inside large horizons, those of the kingdom of God.

“This motto,” the pope continues, “offers parameters to assume a correct position for discernment, in order to hear the things of God from God’s ‘point of view.’ According to St. Ignatius, great principles must be embodied in the circumstances of place, time and people. In his own way, John XXIII adopted this attitude with regard to the government of the church, when he repeated the motto, ‘See everything; turn a blind eye to much; correct a little.’ John XXIII saw all things, the maximum dimension, but he chose to correct a few, the minimum dimension. You can have large projects and implement them by means of a few of the smallest things. Or you can use weak means that are more effective than strong ones, as Paul also said in his First Letter to the Corinthians.

“This discernment takes time. For example, many think that changes and reforms can take place in a short time. I believe that we always need time to lay the foundations for real, effective change. And this is the time of discernment. Sometimes discernment instead urges us to do precisely what you had at first thought you would do later. And that is what has happened to me in recent months. Discernment is always done in the presence of the Lord, looking at the signs, listening to the things that happen, the feeling of the people, especially the poor. My choices, including those related to the day-to-day aspects of life, like the use of a modest car, are related to a spiritual discernment that responds to a need that arises from looking at things, at people and from reading the signs of the times. Discernment in the Lord guides me in my way of governing.

“But I am always wary of decisions made hastily. I am always wary of the first decision, that is, the first thing that comes to my mind if I have to make a decision. This is usually the wrong thing. I have to wait and assess, looking deep into myself, taking the necessary time. The wisdom of discernment redeems the necessary ambiguity of life and helps us find the most appropriate means, which do not always coincide with what looks great and strong.”

The underlined parts above (my emphases) clearly show that Francis is not working with a ‘dogmatic’ mentality but is well aware of the ambiguity and contextual character of real life - this is why, he thinks, discernment is so important. Truly Remarkable!

I continue to monitor this remarkable man and this exciting papacy closely ...

Despite Politeness, Exclusionary Attitude in Catholicism Remains if Teaching does not Change

An article by Jamie Manson at NCR struck me profoundly. Despite all the positive energy being generated by Pope Francis since his election in March, despite the real hope generated by Francis’ teachings, gestures and actions, such as shifting the focus from an inward-looking church to a more people-oriented church, simplicity, humility, and so on, the truth is, as Manson states eloquently in her article, wounds inflicted by the very rigidly doctrinaire reigns of John Paul II and Benedict XVI on people will not really heal unless certain teachings of the church do not change. Manson presents Catholic positions on homosexuality as a case in point. If homosexuality and homosexual acts cannot be seen as part of God’s overall plan for some humans and are treated as intrinsic evils, no amount of  politeness on the part of the church toward homosexuals will help alleviate the situation in a real way because, at the end of the day, they will still be considered as having chosen a “sinful” lifestyle.

This is why a deeper rethinking of Christianity and Catholicism, in particular, is necessary. It was why I couldn’t remain in a position of an “official” representative of Catholicism.

The full article of Jamie Manson is at:

http://ncronline.org/blogs/grace-margins/wounds-will-not-heal-if-teachings-remain-same

The "Spiritually Independent"

I noted yesterday that the website Spirituality & Practice has organized an e-course entitled The Way of the Spiritually Independent by a certain Rabbi Rami

Link: http://www.spiritualityandpractice.com/ecourses/ecourses.php?id=158&key=spws

Moreover, Frederic and Mary Ann Brussat in the same website has an essay welcoming the so-called "Spiritually Independent" which advocates giving up the negative images about them as implied by the common appellations, “Spiritual but not Religious” (SBNR) and “Nones.” This is a welcome encouragement to change our paradigms about SBNR. I heartily endorse it!

Link: http://blog.spiritualityandpractice.com/blog/spiritual-literacy/welcoming-the-spiritually-independent

MY QUESTIONS ABOUT JOHN'S GOSPEL OR ‘JOHN AS A THEOLOGICAL PROBLEM’

Robert Kysar in John, the Maverick Gospel concludes (p. 26) that “[w]e can be grateful to the early church for not excluding the Fourth Gospel from its canon. Had it done so, we would be far poorer.”

This is, I think, the conclusion of the majority of Johannine/biblical scholars regarding John. Now I think that there is a need to examine John, however, as a theological problem because there is a number of issues one can really consider major problems when dealing with the gospel not only in a literary way but more so in a theological way. Some of them can be expressed as: What problems resulted as a result of the tradition (in this context, ‘tradition’ means: the way of recounting Jesus’ life and person) that John began (or continued)? Did John’s focus on Jesus’ identity subvert the intentions of Jesus in his earthly career (Here I refer to the ‘real’ or even the ‘historical’ Jesus)?

Did the focus on Jesus’ identity and the high christology introduce a fundamental warp/distortion upon the “regnocentric” focus of the pre-Easter Jesus?

One specific area I wish to focus on is the following:

Itinerarium mentis (literally, ‘Itinerary of the Mind’ or Process of Development in the Faith)

Hypothesis: John disrupts the itinerarium mentis undergone by the first followers of Jesus

In his gospel, John immediately proclaims that Jesus is the logos, that Jesus is “one with the Father.” However, considering the matter historically, the early Christians reached those conclusions ONLY after a long process. Before they reached a high theology about Jesus, first, they had to encounter the figure of Jesus himself as a human. They had to be exposed to the words and deeds of this charismatic “rabbi” from Nazareth. They had to live with him, follow him, etc.

Now, if this was true of the first followers of Jesus, it cannot be said of communities and individuals who are introduced to Jesus predominantly by means of John’s gospel. John does not respect that long process but short-circuits it by proclaiming at once that Jesus is God “My Lord and my God!”  That’s the problem (for me)!

The Process of Faith

Before Christians everywhere could finally claim that Jesus was somehow divine, it took a long time and a long process of development in their corporate faith after long, arduous and even bloody struggles. When the gospels (especially John) came to be written down, that signaled the end process of a long developmental process.

However, in the case of John, the reader is invited to make a faith decision without respecting the fact that before such a faith decision could be done, one needs to go through a long process by which one encounters Jesus in his humanity, is attracted to this, then, after due discernment, considers Jesus a “prophet” or “rabbi”, then, from there, one makes the leap to consider Jesus as messiah of God and then as closely as possible to the being Israel called YHWH.

In light of all this, how are contemporary readers to make sense of this gospel, which, traditionally, has been the most popular gospel among Christians?

Astonishing Denigration of Women and Sex from "Great" Christian Teachers

I've been following an article on the website Catholica by Dr. Christopher Geraghty about 'How Catholicism can be Revived" in the 21st century (here). In today's piece about sex and science, I found a compendium of truly astonishing denigratory remarks on women and sex from supposedly "great" Christian teachers such as Augustine of Hippo and Thomas Aquinas, unfortunately, only a small sampling of a whole history of woman-denigration and even downright misogyny in Christianity, particularly in Catholicism. The full article is found here but here are pertinent quotes.

+++from Geraghty article+++

To understand why our Church is now so hung-up on questions of sexual orientation and behaviour, and on the question of women's role in the institution, we should tune in, at least once in our lifetime, to the twisted minds of Christian leaders like Quintus Septimius Florens Tertullian [ca 160-225], Gregory of Nazianzan [329-389], Augustine [354-430], John Chrysostom [ca 347-407], Thomas Aquinas [ca 1225-1274], Albert the Great [ca 1200-1280], as they talk disrespectfully about women, about bodies and sexual activity. We should try to fathom the world these men inhabited. Once you have read the authors, you will be in no doubt as to why our Church has persisted in imposing on us, by rules, by teachings, solemn declarations and condemnations, such an unholy misogynistic culture, such pruriet attitudes which prevents her from saying anything meaningful to the modern world.

"Do you not know that you are each an Eve? The sentence of God on this sex of yours lives in this age: the guilt must of necessity live too. You are the devil's gateway; you are the unsealer of that forbidden tree; you are the first deserter of the divine law; you are she who persuaded him whom the devil was not valiant enough to attack. You so carelessly destroyed man, God's image. On account of your desert, even the Son of God had to die". [Tertullian, De Cultu Feminarum Libri Duo, bk 1, ch. 1, PL vol. 1 cols 1417-1419. Cfr. On the Apparel of Women, ch. 1, Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 4, ed. Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, Christian Literature Publishing Co., New York, 1885, p 14]

"Fierce are the dragons and cunning the asps, but women have the malice of both beasts" [Gregory of Nazianzan, Poemata Moralia 32 vv 117-118, Patrologia Graeca (J.P.Migne) vol 37 col.925]

"What is the difference whether it is in a wife or a mother? It is still Eve the temptress that we must beware of in any woman ... If it was good company and conversation that Adam needed, it would have been much better arranged to have two men together as friends, not a man and a woman." [St Augustine of Hippo, De Genesi ad litteram, Bk 9 ch 5, PL vol. 34 col. 396. Cfr. The Literal Meaning of Genesis, translated and annotated by John Hammond Taylor SJ., vol. II, Newman Press, New York, 1982, p.75.]

This popular theme of the pub mates, club comrades, lodges and football teams was taken up later, in the thirteenth century, by theologians and scholars such as Albert the Great and Thomas Aquinas. Both tried to persuade their students that women were good for procreation and that once that work was done, their usefulness was limited. For all other activities and for true companionship, a man is better served by another man. A woman can make no contribution to a man's intellectual life. For these intellectual giants, women were in truth developmentally retarded men. They do not fulfil nature's primary intention viz. perfection. They are the weaker sex, with less physical and intellectual strength.[Albert the Great, II sent. 20, 1 and IV sent. 26, 6. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae I, q 52, a.1 ad 2; q 92 a.1]St Thomas believed that men have "more perfect reason" than women [Summa Contra Gentiles III, 123]and that because of a defect in their reasoning ability, like children and mentally ill persons, they are not permitted to act as witnesses in court proceedings [Summa Theologiae II/ II q. 70. a.3]. But let us return toSt Augustine and St John Chrysostom.

"I consider that nothing so casts down the manly mind from its heights as the fondling of women, and those bodily contacts which belong to the married state." [St Augustine of Hippo, Soliloquiorum Libri Duo, bk 1, ch. 10. PL vol. 32 col.878. Cfr. Wolfgang Hormann,Augustinus, Opera, sect 1, pars IV, Soliloquiorum libri duo, de immortalitate animae.., Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum Series, Vindobonai, Hoelder-Pichler-Tempsky,1986. St Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, pars IIa,IIae, q.151 De Castitate, art. 3, ad 2, Marietti, Rome, 1952, p. 653.]

"The whole of her bodily beauty is nothing less than phlegm, blood, bile, rheum, and the fluid of digested food. If you consider what is stored up behind those lovely eyes, the angle of the nose, the mouth and cheeks, you will agree that the well-proportioned body is merely a whitened sepulchre" [St John Chrysostom, Ad Theodoram lapsum, para. 14, PG vol. 47 cols 297-299. Cfr. An Exhortation to Theodore after his Fall, The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church, vol. IX, St Chrysostom, ed. Philip Schaff DD., LL.D., Wm B Eerdmans Publishing Company, Michigan, pp. 103-104. (Jacques-Paul Migne published in Paris, between 1856 and 1866, 161 volumes of the works of the early Christian writers who wrote in Greek. The series is known by its abbreviated title Patrologia Graeco-Latina (PG). The first 81 volumes contain only a Latin translation of the original Greek text while the remaining volumes presented the original Greek text together with a Latin translation in parallel columns. Migne also published, between 1844 and 1855, a series of 217 volumes containing the works of early Christian writers who wrote in Latin – Patrologia Latina (PL).]

"There are in the world a great many situations that weaken the conscientiousness of the soul. First and foremost of these are dealings with women. In his concern for the male sex, the superior may not forget the females, who need greater care precisely because of their ready inclination to sin. In this situation the evil enemy can find many ways to creep in secretly. For the eye of woman touches and disturbs our soul – and not only the eye of the unbridled woman, but that of the decent one as well." [St John Chrysostom, De Sacerdotio, Bk 6 Chapter 8. PG vol. 48 col. 684. Cfr. The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church, vol. IX, pp. 78-79]

In reviewing the Church's attitude to the body, flesh, sex, marriage and creation, we should not bypass the Celtic traditions of the Penitentials which reflect the beliefs, the superstitions and practices of the Church in Ireland, in Britain and throughout Europe from about the sixth century to the tenth or eleventh century. The Penitential of Finnian of Clonard dates from the first half of the sixth century. Canon 46advised and exhorted that married couples should regularly abstain from engaging in any sexual activity, and for lengthy periods.

"...since marriage without continence is not lawful, but sin, and (marriage) is permitted by the authority of God not for lust but for the sake of children ... not for the lustful concupiscence of the flesh. Married people, then, must mutually abstain during three forty-day periods in each single year, by consent for a time, that they may be able to have time for prayer for the salvation of their souls; and on Sunday night or Saturday night they must mutually abstain, and after the wife has conceived he shall not have intercourse with her until she has borne her child..." [John T. McNeill and Helena M. Gamer, Medieval Handbooks of Penance, a translation of the principal Libri Poenitentiales and selections from related documents, Columbia University Press, New York, 1938, p. 96.]

The Penitential of Abbot Cummean was in circulation in the Frankish Empire in the early ninth century and was probably known in Ireland in the seventh century. It provided the penances to be imposed for a whole variety of sins (the many forms of gluttony, avarice, anger, violence, pride, misuse of the sacred species etc), especially sins of a sexual nature – fornication by a bishop, a priest, a deacon, bestiality by clerics, sodomy, oral sex, kissing, defiling virgins, polluting glances, suggestive advances etc. Within this context, the Penitential provided:

"30. He who is in a state of matrimony ought to be continent during the three forty-day periods and on Saturday and on Sunday, night and day, and in the two appointed week days, and after conception, and during the entire menstrual period.

31. After a birth he shall abstain, if it is a boy, for thirty-three (days); if a daughter, for sixty-six (days)." [op.cit., p. 105]

At he end of the twelfth century, Innocent III succeeded his uncle, Celestine III, as Bishop of Rome. He was elected by the Cardinals to be Pope when he was thirty-six years old and only a cardinal deacon. As a deacon he showed his colours in an essay on "The Misery of our Human Condition":

"Oh the supreme ugliness of sexual pleasure! It not only makes the mind effeminate but the body sick; not only stains the soul but defiles the person as well... Sexual pleasure is preceded by lust and wantonness; it is accompanied by a foulsome stench and uncleanliness; it is followed by sadness and remorse. Man has been formed of dust, clay, ashes and, a thing far more vile, of the filthy sperm. Man has been conceived in the desire of the flesh, in the heat of sensual lust, in the foul stench of wantonness.... Sexual intercourse is always infected – even in matrimony – with the desire of the flesh, with the heat of lust and with the foul stench of wantonness. Because of this, the union of the sexes itself is contaminated; whence, too, does the soul inherit the infection of sin....for in sexual intercourse one loses dominion over one's reason and thus sows ignorance; the heat of lust is enkindled and so anger is propagate; pleasure is satiated and concupiscence is contracted.

"When we purchase a horse, an ass, a cow, a dress, a bed, a chalice or only a water-pot it is only after having first tried them out. But man's financé is scarcely shown him lest he reject her before marriage. After marriage, however, he must keep her in any case – be she ugly, stinking, sick, stupid, proud, nagging or exhibiting any other fault.... Consider the food that nourishes the child in his mother's womb. It is evident that the embryo is fed by the menstrual blood; ... This substance is said to be so detestable and impure that it makes trees barren and vineyards unproductive. It can kill grass and if a dog eats out of it, rabies result. Should the menstrual blood infect the male seed it may cause leprosy and elephantiasis in the child." [Pope Innocent III (formerly known as Cardinal Deacon Lotario dei Conti di Segni), De Contemptu Mundi sive De Miseria Humanae Conditionis Libri Tres, bk 1 , chs 1-18 . PL vol. 217 cols 702-711. Cfr. On the Misery of the Human Condition – De Misera Humanae Conditionis, ed. Donald R Howard, tr. Margaret Mary Dietz, Bobbs-Merrill, Indianapolis, 1969.] 

Albert the Great, one of the great theologians of the thirteenth century, had a similar problem.

"Woman is less qualified [than man] for moral behaviour. For the woman contains more liquid than the man, and it is a property of liquid to take things up easily and to hold onto them poorly. Liquids are easily moved, hence women are inconstant and curious. When a woman has relations with a man, she would like, as much as possible, to be lying with another man at the same time. Woman knows nothing of fidelity. Believe me, if you give her your trust, you will be disappointed. Trust an experienced teacher. For this reason prudent men share their plans and actions least of all with their wives. Woman is a misbegotten man and has a faulty and defective nature in comparison with his. Therefore she is unsure in herself. What she herself cannot get, she seeks to obtain through lying and diabolical deceptions. And so, to put it briefly, one must be on one's guard with every woman, as if she were a poisonous snake and the horned devil.... In evil and perverse doings woman is cleverer, that is, slyer, than man. Her feelings drive woman toward every evil, just as reason impels man toward all good." [Albertus Magnus,Opera Omnia, tome 12, Quaestiones super De Animalibus, XV, q.11, edition Coloniensis, published by Monasterii Westfalorum in aedibus Aschendorff, 1951.]

The heretical ideas of the second century Gnostics with their dualistic and pessimistic interpretation of the universe, their contempt for the body and all things material – ideas taken up and preached later by the Manicheans, and later again by the Albigensians or Cathars; the extreme, ascetical practices of monks and hermits from the third century and the strange mentality behind them; the Platonic and neo-Platonic dichotomy between body and soul; the ascetic dictates of Stoicism which floated in the ether breathed by the early Church; St Augustine's attitude to sexual concourse and his theory of Original Sinbeing spread like a disease by sexual intercourse; the belief of the early Church that the world was about to end in some general cosmic catastrophe; an emerging fear of women as temptresses, witches and successors of Eve who led Adam astray and upset the spiritual harmony of the world; the development of ascetical, repressive practices to emulate the sufferings of the early martyrs and to chain down the unruly moods and humours; the constant attempts of local councils of bishops to keep their clergy away from women, out of the presbyteries and sacristies, to preserve the accumulating wealth of the Church and enforce the dictates of celibacy – all these ideas and influences have contributed to destroying the creational message of Biblical literature and the fundamental message of the New Testament that the Word of God emptied himself and took on the real form and true character of a flesh man, and resulted in twisting into a tangle any possibility of a healthy theology of sexuality.

Just for fun, let us stop for a moment to recall just a few bons mots of Albert the Great on the subject of sexual activity and its consequences. He thought it was indecent to have sex on Sundays, feast days, on days of fasting and processions [IV sent. d.32 a.10]. Frequent intercourse led to premature ageing and death [de animalibus 1.9 and 15]. Too much sex thins out the brain and the indulgent person's eyes sink into their sockets and his eye-sight deteriorates [Quaestiones super de animalibus, XV, q. 14]. Excessive activity causes baldness because sex dries out the body of the participant and cools him out [ibid. XIX, q.7-9]. Being an observant scholar, Albert noticed that those who have sex often are followed around by dogs, because they are attracted by the strong smell of rotten semen [ibid. V, q. 11-14]. Let's leaveAlbert there, on that elevated note.

Our Church has much ground to cover, putrid stables to clean out before she can speak persuasively to the world and to us about the world, about our lives, our bodies and what they are built to do.

+++end of long quote+++

Gerarghty observes correctly that

Not enough attention has been paid to the beauty and goodness of God's creation, to human intimacy, to a transforming flesh-love between a man and a woman, the exquisite beauty of the human body, to our God-given spontaneous drives and impulses and to the realities of human existence.

It has always struck me that a primary factor why there is such a negative attitude towards sex and women in substantial parts of the Roman Catholic tradition is that theological discourse and thinking on moral issues have traditionally been done (that is, happily, changing little by little) by celibate male clerics who are part of a culture of clericalism that is narcissistic, dysfunctional, patriarchal and deeply condescending towards women and sex in major ways.

As if by coincidence, I also came upon an article in the blogspot 'Enlightened Catholicism' which deals with how Pope Francis, despite his bold and forward-looking comments on gays and women & Catholicism ("there is need for a deeper theology of women") is himself still deeply entrenched in the traditional patriarchal mindset described above. Check the article entitled "Pope Franics Is Not All That Evolved On Issues Of Sex And Gender" here.