Posted on 05/09/2005 7:02:00 AM PDT by wideawake
Jesuit Fr. Thomas J. Reese, editor for the past seven years of America magazine, a premier publication of Catholic thought and opinion, has resigned at the request of his order following years of pressure for his ouster from the Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
The resignation caps five years of tensions and exchanges among the congregation, which was headed at the time by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, the Jesuits and Reese, according to sources close to the magazine who asked not to be identified.
A release from the magazine May 6, which did not mention the forced ouster, announced that the new editor is Jesuit Fr. Drew Christiansen, who has served as associate editor.
Ironically, Reese received the news that the Jesuits found the debate "unwinnable," according to one source, when he returned to the magazine's New York headquarters from Rome, where he had covered the conclave that elected Ratzinger as pope.
Contacted on background, a Vatican official said he could not discuss the case.
Over the course of a five-year exchange between the doctrinal congregation and the Jesuits, the Vatican congregation had raised objections to various editorial choices at America under Reese's leadership, including:
An essay exploring moral arguments for the approval of condoms in the context of HIV/AIDS;
Several critical analyses of the doctrinal congregation's September 2000 document Dominus Iesus, on religious pluralism;
An editorial criticizing what America called a lack of due process in the congregation's procedures for the investigation of theologians;
An essay about homosexual priests;
A guest essay from U.S. Rep. David Obey of Wisconsin, challenging suggestions that the church should refuse Communion to Catholic politicians who do not vote as a number of bishops believe they should vote.
In every instance, however, the pieces represented just a portion of coverage of the subject in America, which always published opposing points of view.
According to one source, the communication about Reese's fate was carried on between the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and the superior general of the Jesuits, Dutch Fr. Peter-Hans Kolvenbach, with the content then relayed to Reese's Jesuit superiors in the United States. Although critics of Reese both in the United States and Rome have occasionally accused him of an anti-hierarchical mentality, supporters noted in their responses to the congregation that over his seven years as editor, America routinely published weighty pieces by prominent members of the hierarchy, at one stage including Ratzinger himself.
In February 2002, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith proposed creating a three-member commission of censors for the magazine, though the idea was never implemented. According to sources, the congregation told the Jesuits that the action was in response to concern from bishops in the United States.
Sources said no bishops were identified by name and that Reese was never directly contacted. According to a source close to the magazine, Jesuit superiors said some bishops were upset that Reese often commented on church matters for general media and that such commentary should be solely the province of bishops.
Reese often made himself available to media during the bishops' meetings and other special church events to explain aspects of church life and the intricacies of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. He is the author of three highly respected studies of the Catholic hierarchy: Archbishop, Inside the Power Structure of the American Catholic Church;A Flock of Shepherds: The National Conference of Catholic Bishops; and Inside the Vatican: The Politics and Organization of the Catholic Church.
The entire matter of his disciplining was handled "by chain of command, and the Jesuits were able to hold off for five years, but in the end, saw it as unwinnable. It was either Reese goes or they would appoint a board of censors," said one source.
America, though clearly left-leaning in some of its editorial stances, was widely viewed as a moderate publication that gave vent to a wide spectrum of views. Among its contributors were top theologians, a number of bishops, and, in one instance, Ratzinger himself in an article published in dialogue with Cardinal Walter Kasper, another German cardinal. Over the years, the magazine has also published dozens of articles by noted conservative Cardinal Avery Dulles.
Though pressure for Reese's ouster clearly came from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, to what degree Ratzinger was personally involved in the decision is not known.
In the May 6 release, Reese said, "I am proud of what my colleagues and I did with the magazine, and I am grateful to them, our readers and our benefactors for the support they gave me. I look forward to taking a sabbatical while my provincial and I determine the next phase of my Jesuit ministry."
Christiansen, an accomplished educator, writer and editor, previously was a senior fellow at the Woodstock Theological Center at Georgetown University. He was director of the Office of International Justice and Peace for the United States Catholic Conference from 1991 to 1998 and served as counselor for international affairs for the bishops until December 2004.
"I know I am speaking for all the editors in saying that we are sorry to see Tom go," said Christiansen in the May 6 release. "Fr. Reese greatly improved the magazine, adding news coverage, color and the Web edition. … By inviting articles that covered different sides of disputed issues, Fr. Reese helped make America a forum for intelligent discussion of questions facing the church and the country today."
In point of fact, he did his best to undermine the Magisterium while publishing just enough orthodox material to plausibly evade justice.
America has served as a vehicle for the normalization of heterodoxy in the American Church for decades - one of the best ways for a church-wrecker in a parish to legitimize their dissent is to refer to an official-sounding Catholic publication as their authority. America has done a ton of damage to the faithful in this country.
Good riddance.
ping
BWAHAHAHahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!
Please eliminate HTML tags in headline.
Our pastor's favorite mag. Enough said.
Very well put. This is a favorite tactic of the subversives: if you publish, for example, one article in favor of "gay marriage" and one against, you create the impression that this is an issue on which there is no Catholic position and over which Catholics are free to disagree.
It is simply not unreasonable for the Pope to expect loyalty from publications that are put out by religious orders or the various dioceses.
As if he would have ever published an article defending anti-semitism "just to be fair."
An essay exploring moral arguments for the approval of condoms in the context of HIV/AIDS;
"If an infected husband wants to have sex with his wife who isn't infected, then she must defend herself by whatever means necessary," Barragan said. This position, he said, is consistent with the tenets of traditional Catholic moral theology, which teaches that acts of self-defense can extend to killing in order to not be killed.
"If a wife can defend herself from having sex by whatever means necessary, why not with a condom?" he said.
Barragan says this belief informs his decisions as head of the Council for Pastoral Health, but adds that his views are personal and do not speak for Pope John Paul II. "The Holy Father has never spoken explicitly on the subject," Barragan said.
(Okay, the title is a bad pun, but you try to find something original to say after eveyone else has gotten hold of the story.)
Fr. Tom Reese, editor of America magazine, was sacked, apparently at the prompting of then-Cardinal Ratzinger in March. There’s been lots of talk about it all over the blogs. Diogenes has some pointed remarks to say about the editorial slant at America. Unlike some apologists for the magazine, he didn’t see it as merely discussing controversial subjects, but giving a definite liberal slant to what issues it tackled.
The point is that America’s notion of what counts as a hot topic is selective and ideologically slanted against the Holy See. The true contrast is not between openness and dogma, but between rival systems of dogma: a public one (Catholic), versus a clandestine one (behind or beneath America). And remember that America is not a secular journal of ideas but is trading on the ecclesial prestige accorded its Jesuit sponsorship. That means, when it’s Catholic doctrine that’s under assault, it’s not really even-handed—as would be the case for The New Republic—to give space to a professor to attack the doctrine and equal space to a Vatican official to defend it. Simply by presenting the disputants as representatives of different opinions the doctrine is viewed as up for grabs, i.e., as something less than doctrine. The net result is almost always erosion of Catholic belief.Well said. Just this past week, Reese was on Vatican Radio, which in itself is interesting given the fact that he had been sacked, or at least new he was going to be sacked, by the time the interview aired. But in his interview he passed off the same dissent-but-not-really. He would say that the Church has to discuss “women’s roles in the Church,” by which everyone knows he means women’s ordination, but would dissemble by saying that he wanted to discuss it, but that others did.
Phil Lawler saw this for what it is.
For years, prominent Catholic journalists and scholars have adopted a similar approach to Church teachings: insisting that they are not denying a given doctrine, but merely raising questions that must be addressed. … Since they never take a firm stance that is at odds with official Church teachings, these clever publicists have avoided ecclesiastical sanctions.But now it appears that you can’t hide behind the “some people say” defense anymore. Phil also notes that if this is what is happening, then it has wider implications.
If a Jesuit editor cannot take a neutral attitude in disputes between the Church and her critics, why can the president of a Jesuit university take that same attitude? Why can a theologian, teaching at a Catholic institution, promote ideas that have been condemned by the magisterium? Why can a bishop recruit religious-education directors from among the readers of a publication that champions theological dissent?Is this the first step, or just a shot across the bow. Will more heads roll or was Reese just a sacrifical lamb whacked as a message to keep the rest in line? We shall see.
Some folks hide behind being pastoral
to hide their open dissent from Church teachings.
But it is not "being pastoral" to tell people that that which is dangerous and sinful is OK.
The Church will NEVER approve the use of condoms "to prevent AIDS."
Condoms have a 10-15% failure rate at preventing pregnancy, but a woman can only get pregnant about 7 days out of a typical 28 day cycle.
That's 25% of the days of an average cycle.
However, she CAN get AIDS 100% of the days of her cycle, so the failure rate for condoms in preventuing AIDS would logically be at least twice that of preventing pregnancy, at a very conservative estimate.
The Church will NEVER recommend a woman play with Russian Roulette when she has greater than 1 in 3 odds of eventually contracting this deadly disease using condoms. The Church realizes that human life is a greater good.
ANYONE who promotes condom use to prevent AIDS by married couples is a fool and is endangering the lives of woman in their care, all under the pretense of being "pastoral."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.