Richard Cohen, a columnist for the Washington Post, recently wrote1 "...But the task [of criticizing the Church's policy against condom use] ultimately has to fall to Catholic dissidents. True, there are fewer than there used to be -- Cardinal Ratzinger saw to that -- and they have to be respectful of the new pope. But they, like their brethren in the liberal Protestant churches, have to be more forceful in their opposition and their challenge to authority. In the United States these churches have been downright wimpish when compared with the more politically robust ones to their right. The liberal to moderate Christian churches in America, once in the forefront of the civil rights and other progressive movements, have muted their voices and faded as a political and social force. They are missed...."

Fr. Francis Responds...

 

Dear Mr. Cohen:

 

I am a priest of the Archdiocese of Washington.  I presently teach theology in the seminary of the Archdiocese of Agaña in Guam.  I had the chance to read your column for April 21 on the web page of the Post.  May I presume to share my reactions with you?

 

You are right in saying, that because we all live in the same world, what happens in the Catholic Church has at least an indirect effect on all of us.  It is unavoidable.  It does not mean, however, that non-Catholics, like non-Americans, ought to be helpless victims of forces beyond their control.  The Catholic Church welcomes an open dialogue all people of good will.  Every day she has to deal with life and death issues.  The very fact that you raise the issues that touch the daily lives of people shows that you are a person of good will.  However, something more is needed to make a positive contribution.

 

The Catholic community finds your approach to moral issues at times very frustrating.  Your attempts at dealing with moral issues are often viewed as missing the point.  You come to the table with a mountain of presuppositions and expect us to engage the issues in the terms that you propose, buying into your presuppositions in the process.  When we do not, you are left wondering what fools these folks must be.

 

You understand that when good people disagree, it is because they are viewing a given issue with different presuppositions.  Your conclusions regarding “latex theology” or any other issue are the result of your presuppositions.  So are ours.  This is the prince we pay for having different presuppositions.  The real issues that divide us are not the conclusions that we draw as a consequence of our presupposition.  The real issues that divide us are the presuppositions themselves.  If we do not identify and address them, we will continue to be like ships passing in the night.

 

You are entitled to express your opinions, however negative they may be.  I am open to dissent from wherever it comes.  I might learn something in the process.  However, why not do it intelligently?  Inform yourself about how your opponents view the issues.  If you are open, I make you an offer.  Before you dash off another column like the one of yesterday, in vintage Cohen style, charging that the Catholic Church is fighting human nature itself, let me help you identify the underlying presuppositions that lead the Church to take the stands she does.  The best way to dialogue constructively is to show how your opponent’s views are based on faulty presuppositions.  If you want Benedict XVI to sit up and listen to you, that is the way to do it!  As a citizen of the world you have an obligation to do that.  But please, do us a favor, inform yourself of the real issues as we see them first.  Then, when you do have something to say, it will be constructive because it will be to the point, not as you see, but as we see it.  Your criticisms of John Paul II are not credible to us because you have not engaged him on the level of his metaphysical and philosophical anthropological presuppositions.  You judge him on the basis of your presuppositions, rather than answer him on the basis of his.  If I can help you learn to do that, it will be time well spent.  But, whenever you do, do not waste the opportunity you have to address the Catholic community by treating us as if we were a bunch of telephone poles.

 

Respectfully yours,

 

Francis Michael Walsh

A Pope for Better or Perhaps Worse

By Richard Cohen

Thursday, April 21, 2005; Page A23
Being a non-Catholic nowadays is a bit like being a non-American most of the time. Important, maybe even historic, decisions are being made and you are totally locked out. America chooses a president who gets a bee in his bonnet about Iraq, and a hunk of the world goes to war. The cardinals of the church choose a pope and maybe an even bigger hunk of the world is affected -- everything from population control to AIDS. The import is clear: We -- that's all of us -- have a new pope.

That new pope is Benedict XVI, the former Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger of Germany. It almost goes without saying that he is not my cup of tea. He is stolidly conservative in his theology and no different from the previous pope in his opposition to the ordination of women or married men. As for gays, he clearly considers them to be an abomination. These, though, are matters that concern Catholics and their church and are no business of mine. So, too, Benedict's conviction that Catholicism is the one true belief. I would expect nothing less from the pope.

But in other areas -- particularly population control and the worldwide fight against AIDS -- what the pope does, how the Vatican rules, affects us all. We can fully expect that the new pope will not depart one iota from John Paul II's fervent opposition to anything other than the most rudimentary forms of birth control -- abstinence in one form or another -- including, of course, opposition to the use of condoms as a method of preventing the spread of the HIV virus. Here is where we all have a stake.

This emphasis on condoms is sometimes derided as "latex theology." But condoms happen to be the cheapest and most effective way of preventing the spread of the HIV virus. This is particularly meaningful in the world's poorer regions, where there are often no medical facilities to speak of. In sub-Saharan Africa -- home to 10 percent of the world's population but 60 percent of the people infected with HIV -- some 25 million children and adults currently have AIDS. That's not about latex, it's about death.

The catastrophe of AIDS and the population growth in areas of the world that can least afford it are matters that concern us all. The near collapse of the African middle class, riddled by AIDS, is a calamity. It will cost us all money, of course, and it may result in a war or two, but the immediate consequence is the death of so many people and the orphaning of children -- misery upon misery for people whose lives are already miserable enough. All over Catholic regions of the Third World, the church instructs against the use of condoms. It advocates abstinence. It fights human nature itself.

When I raised these matters in a recent column discussing the legacy of Pope John Paul II, I was barraged by e-mail, some of it favorable but some of it simply demanding that I butt out. This was none of my business, some Catholics told me. I beg to differ. It shows no disrespect to an intellectual such as Benedict XVI to engage him intellectually on these matters -- and boldly so. He is a man of firm convictions, not mere prejudices.

But the task ultimately has to fall to Catholic dissidents. True, there are fewer than there used to be -- Cardinal Ratzinger saw to that -- and they have to be respectful of the new pope. But they, like their brethren in the liberal Protestant churches, have to be more forceful in their opposition and their challenge to authority. In the United States these churches have been downright wimpish when compared with the more politically robust ones to their right. The liberal to moderate Christian churches in America, once in the forefront of the civil rights and other progressive movements, have muted their voices and faded as a political and social force. They are missed.

I am not troubled by the new pope's past -- his membership in the Hitler Youth or the German army. He was a kid and acting under compulsion. But I am troubled by his present -- his archconservative views. As a non-Catholic, I lack standing to challenge him on most issues. But as a citizen of the world, I have an obligation on matters that affect us all. On Christmas and other important occasions the pope traditionally issues a statement headed " Urbi et Orbi " -- "to the city and to the world." More than ever, the world will be listening.

cohenr@washpost.com