(The Open Road, No. 3, May 1969, pp. 24-28)
John: There’s another sit-in at the Uni today. Are you coming?
Paul: Me? No! I’ve got something better to do. What’s it’s about this time?
John: We’re protesting against the Planned Giving Campaign. They’re building big churches while ordinary people haven’t houses to live in.
Paul: What’s wrong with building big churches? Aren’t they needed?
John: Look, that’s not the point. There’s no need for these churches because the Church itself is irrelevant. It has become part of the Establishment. It’s locked in its own status quo, and it’s happy so long as churches are full on Sunday morning. It has given up trying to change society. Anyone interested in human values can set aside the Church from the word go, because it has nothing to offer. All the Church wants is membership and money.
Paul: do you really think that you can dismiss the Church just like that? Ask yourself honestly – did you ever take the trouble to find out what the Church teaches about human values. Did you ever read the Gospels? – or any Church documents about social affairs? Didn’t Christ say we should love our enemies, that if we have two coats to the man who has none? If that’s not radical enough for you….
John: Christ’s life and teaching is certainly the most human and the most challenging known to man. I wouldn’t say a word against him. I wouldn’t say anything about the Church either, if it really represented him, but it doesn’t. Look at Church leadership today. Does it present people with a real challenge? Hasn’t it very largely conformed to present-day society, contenting itself with keeping in line, and speaking out against social wrongs only when it’s safe? I’ll give you an example. During the war, Pope Pius XII was satisfied to whisper a few cautious “tut-tuts” about Nazism. When did he really do what he should have done in the first place, condemn it, lock, stock and barrel? In June 1945, when the war was over, when it as safe to do it, when he could jump on the bandwagon.
Paul: Look, the greatest critics are always those who have never done anything themselves. It’s easy for them to criticize, to hand out facile, ready-made solutions, because they have no appreciation of the difficulties involved. There were many factors entering into the Pope’s attitude. The Dutch clergy, Catholic and Protestant, blasted off about the treatment of the Jews, and it only brought reprisals. The Pope had to walk a tightrope. One step in the wrong direction could have meant disaster. It’s easy to be “heroic” when the consequences will fall on someone else.
John: Christ preached the truth openly at all times, and didn’t give a damn about the consequences. When priests talk today about moderation they mean mediocrity, when they talk about prudence they mean a substitute for action instead of a guide for it, when they should offer policies they mouth platitudes, when…
Paul: Look, you started off criticising the Church. Now you’ve boiled it down to criticism of the clergy. You may be on the right track there. After all, you’re part of the Church, so if you’re criticizing it, you’re criticizing yourself. What you should be doing if you were logical is to try to strengthen the Church from the inside instead of standing back to fling stones at it. You mentioned Christ a while ago. Didn’t he say, ‘Let him who is without sin cast the first stone?’ Remember that the best reformers always started by reforming themselves. Instead of sitting down to work out programmes of reform for others you should be kneeling down doing some thinking about personal reform. For example, you people who are always protesting might allow other people the freedom of speech that you demand for yourselves. Think of the episode with Brian Lenihan. And another thing, you say that the Church is afraid to stand against the current of opinion. What about yourselves? It’s the done thing nowadays to criticize the Church. You have to do it if you want to be with it. It takes no courage at all to attack the Church today because you have the protection of the herd. If you really want to show that you have some guts, stand up and say something good about it and be prepared to take the abuse and the ridicule you’ll get. Then you’ll really show that you’re not just a fish in a shoal.
John: Thanks for the sermon. I’ll start the novena to St. Jude tomorrow. But seriously, you talk about changing the Church from the inside. How unrealistic can you get? How am I to change the Church from the inside? Join the Legion of Mary? Holy water and miraculous medals! Or should I go to the P.P. with a suggestion? If I could get near him he’d tell me to get out and mind my own business. It’s not just that the organizational structures for lay participation are completely absent, but the attitude needed to make them work is absent, too. Lay people want a say in the things that really matter – the formulation of the Church’s teaching, especially on social affairs – not just a place on fund-raising committees. We’re not interested in doctrines handed down from the throne. They must start from the bottom and work up. If a peaceful revolution like this is impossible then a violent revolution becomes inevitable.
Paul: The kind of Church you’re criticizing is the pre-Vatican II Church. But things are different now. There is a real concern about lay activity in the Church. The attitudes have changed, and in time the structures will be adapted to meet this change.
John: The Vatican Council was a first-class flop, and worse than a flop, because it raised hopes only to disappoint them. If it had never been held, people could still hope for a real Council, but that hope is gone now. As far as meeting real human needs is concerned, it never even got off the ground. It produced plans of action, and then sat back to admire them. Look at South America. Christ and Caesar are hand-and-glove. What about Asia? The church is so hopelessly westernized that it hasn’t got a chance on earth of catching on there. Thomism in Thailand! Cripes!
Paul: Oh, by the way, what are you doing at the Uni? Not logic, I hope? You’d get a doctorate in generalization, half-truth and selective quotation with no trouble at all.
John: I hear you’re doing one on the Church’s eternal triumph over her enemies. You’re lucky, you know. You won’t have to think. Just transcribe liberally, especially from the scholastics – the boys with the ink in their veins.
Paul: Well, anyway, we’ve had some dialogue. That’s right up your alley.
John: Not a dialogue, two monologues. See you later.