And you thought Liberal Catholicism was on its death legs.
If ever there was an argument for the need for a clearer separation of the roles of the laity from those of priests, religious and bishops, an argument in the National Catholic Reporter arguing for the removal of barriers on political activity by priests and religious is it (albeit unintentionally):
John A. Donnangelo points to the heroic example of liberation theology of inspired (and frequently heretical) priests of the past, and sees the mandate of John 3:17 ( “God did not send the Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved.”) as meaning this world, now, rather than eternal life:
“If St. Peter is exalted for being a political martyr in defense of the faith, then why today should the clergy and religious outside Vatican City be barred from being defenders of the faith as direct political actors? Is defense of the faith and the pursuit of social justice only the work of the laity? Don’t all Catholics, especially the clergy and religious, have a responsibility to make God’s work their own?
If the church hopes to inspire the development of future men and women “for all seasons,” both religious and lay, such as St. Thomas More, it must recognize that it is in the world and part of it…The church must speak for itself on public matters.”
Don’t liberals read papal encyclicals like Spe Salvi? Or even the rest of Scripture, which is filled with quotes like 1 John 2:13: "Do not love the world or what is in the world.”
And just how is St Thomas More a model for what he is advocating? Last time I heard, St Thomas was a layman.
Most of all, why on earth does Cath News (23 May) single out an item like this as of interest to Australian Catholics?