Russell Shaw OSV Daily Take
4/15/2015
 Is it time to revive Catholic triumphalism? On the whole, I’d say yes. At the very least, the question isn’t frivolous and deserves serious consideration. For after several decades during which Catholics have offered repeated apologies for a host of mistakes, sometimes real and sometimes imaginary, the feeling grows that a comparable effort devoted to tooting the Church’s horn is now long overdue.

But, first, a word about that word, “triumphalism.” It’s a pejorative term that tends to set people’s teeth on edge. If using it bothers you, try “self-respect” instead. Whatever name you choose to give it, Bill Donohue is a practitioner where the Catholic Church is concerned.

That’s clear from his new book, The Catholic Advantage (New York: Image). Never one to pussyfoot around, Donohue, president of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, lays out a docuмented and persuasive case for the advantage enjoyed by Catholics in relation to what he calls “the Three H’s”—health, happiness, and heaven.

It hardly needs saying that the Catholic Church has had, and still does have, plenty to apologize for. In this, it’s hardly alone. The same is true of virtually every human institution — other churches, government and the political parties, Big Business, Big Labor, the academic world, professional sports, college sports, the medical and legal professions, the military, the entertainment industry. Even — could you believe it? — journalists and journalism.

The difference with the Church is its recent willingness to admit its faults, starting with the scandal of sex abuse and coverup. It’s over 15 years since that horrible episode exploded on public consciousness in the U.S., and Catholic spokespersons are still beating their breasts for it. No doubt they should. But after all this time, surely the point has been made, the reforms are in place, and without altogether dropping the subject, it’s time to move on.

Which brings me back to triumphalism — or self-respect — and its revival. The heart of it can be stated very simply: With all its faults and failings, the Catholic Church is pretty wonderful — and it’s time to start saying so again.

A short list of ways the Church is wonderful includes the following: its sacramental system, especially the Eucharist; its vibrant tradition of prayer and asceticism; its body of doctrine, grounded in divine revelation and faithfully transmitted by a living teaching authority called the magisterium; its liturgy (when done with dignity and reverence); its vast network of institutions and programs for relieving human suffering and meeting human needs — schools, charities, hospitals, and much else; and the huge quantity of beautiful art, music, and architecture with which the Church has enriched the world over the centuries.

In a special way, too, the Church today deserves credit for its stout-hearted defense of traditional values in regard to human life and human dignity in the face of ill-advised, politically correct pressures for change.

Bill Donohue acknowledges that his central point is “profoundly countercultural,” but Donohue, holder of a doctorate in sociology, provides the evidence to support it. As he explains, “those who greet every limitation on their freedom as an unfair burden are the most likely to break norms—the rules of society that are commonly agreed to as a condition of civility. This is as unhealthy for the individual as it is destructive to society.”

By contrast, he writes, “it is not the abandonment of constraint that liberates, it is its rational embrace.” And herein lies the Catholic advantage.

If this be triumphalism, make the most of it.

Russell Shaw is an OSV contributing editor.

So, I read this today:

https://www.osv.com/Article/TabId/493/ArtMID/13569/ArticleID/17328/With-all-its-faults-and-failings-the-Catholic-Church-is-pretty-wonderful-.aspx


The article title is: "With all its faults and failings, the Catholic Church is pretty wonderful And it’s time to start saying so again"

Somehow, that title rubs me the wrong way.  

So does this passage:

Quote

It hardly needs saying that the Catholic Church has had, and still does have, plenty to apologize for.

And this one:

Quote

The difference with the Church is its recent willingness to admit its faults, starting with the scandal of sex abuse and coverup.

Now, I'm not so sure that the Catholic Church has anything to apologize for whatsoever.  Am I wrong in assuming this?  It is not the Catholic Church that is to blame for whatever scandals and crimes that there ever may have been.  Rather, it is the bent elements within the Church who have failed the Church.  It is the individual people within the Church who have strayed from Her teachings that have erred, and it is those exclusive individuals who ought to be held to account for any wrongdoing.  The Catholic Church on Earth--the Church Militant--may have served as a vector for malice, but it was never ever the case that an individual who was doing exactly as the Church taught which led to any kind of tradgedy whatsoever.  

The Catholic Church in this life and the next is completely blameless, and it is perfect.  The people who march under Her banner are the ones who have failed to keep up with the standards.  

The Church has no faults or failings.  The Church has nothing to apologize for.  The clerics and prelates who want to admit the Church's 'faults' are mistaken, and they should instead be explaining any faults as resting on the shoulders of failures who could not serve as perfect examples.  

Am I wrong in this?  Please, I want to hear what you have to say on this one.


-

Laramie -  We need to remove the mote from our own eyes.  This is always the solution, no matter how great or small the problem(in this case, a big problem, the church as a whole).  Among our holy conversation, the blame always must fall on us(faithful catholics as having not done enough).  

In the time of the apostles, there was one betrayer(judas).  That is 1 out of 12, and those are good numbers.  How many betrayers are among the heirarchy in our day(past 500 years)?  And, how many betrayers were among the heirarchy in the past 1000 years?  What was the statistic?  It certainly was not 1 to 12.  A good measuring stick is the holiness of popes.  Because, the superior forms the subject.  We have had only five saint popes in the last 1000 years, and we have had some absolutely rotten popes in the last 1000 years.  Compare that with the first 1000 years of the church, and I would say that blame is more than warranted.  Because, our measuring stick is Christ, and the early church existed.  Catholicisms founder is not aquinas, nor is it the wearer of the triple crown.

I have read Butlers 4 volume lives of the saints, and the exciting reads are from the early church.  The past 1000 year reads did not offer near as much in my opinion.  

"Along the way, she [The Church] made mistakes and committed sins (like the “perpetual servitude” thing)."

I wish that people would stop saying that The Church has sinned. It's the hierarchy that errs. The Church never errs. Whenever anyone is following the whole and complete teachings of The Church, they can never do wrong. I cannot imagine The Church sinning or erring in either Purgatory or Heaven. The Church is one whole fabric--one entire piece of cloth.

I wish people would just say: "The Church hierarchy made mistakes and comitted sins."