She's So Lovely

Fans of the long-running British science fiction television program Doctor Who may be pleased to learn that the show’s second successful spin-off, The Sarah Jane Adventures, has been picked up by the Sci-fi Channel here in the U.S. (The “new” Doctor Who and its first spin-off, Torchwood, have been playing on both Sci-fi and BBC America since 2005.)

The character of investigative journalist Sarah Jane Smith, played by Elisabeth Sladen, was a companion of the time and space traveling Doctor in the mid-1970s, during what’s now known as the “classic” or “original” Doctor Who series. It holds the record for the longest running science fiction TV show in the world – 26 years (1963-1989).

Above: Sarah Jane Smith (Elisabeth Sladen) and the
Third Doctor (Jon Pertwee) in the 1973 story, The Time Warrior.
(The Doctor is a Time Lord from the planet Gallifrey and, like all
Time Lords, has the ability to “regenerate” his body when near death.
This concept allows for the convenient re-casting of the show’s lead actor.
To date, ten actors have played the part of the Doctor for television.)

Doctor Who was revived in 2005, and Sarah Jane Smith, once again played by Sladen, made an appearance in an episode of the show’s second season (see the previous Wild Reed post, Blast From the Past: The Return of Doctor Who’s Sarah Jane Smith).

Above: Although she is yet to realize it, Sarah Jane is meeting
the Tenth Doctor (David Tennant) in this scene from the episode of
the new Doctor Who series (2006) that reintroduced
the character of Sarah Jane Smith.

With Sarah Jane frequently considered by fans as the Doctor’s most popular companion, it wasn’t that surprising when the series The Sarah Jane Adventures was launched in 2007 (see What Sarah Jane Did Next).

In both the United Kingdom and the U.S., the show has garnered positive reviews. Ellen Gray, writing for the Philadelphia Daily News, notes, for instance, that:

For anyone who’s shared a love of Doctor Who with their children, only to discover that [its] racy spin-off, BBC America’s Torchwood, might be just a bit too racy, one of the Doctor’s former companions comes to the rescue. The Sarah Jane Adventures stars Elisabeth Sladen as Sarah Jane Smith, a journalist whose investigations are decidedly of the X-Files variety. Aided by her 13-year-old neighbor, Maria (Yasmin Paige), Sarah Jane faces down baddies every bit as big as those Torchwood takes on, but with (a lot) fewer sexual overtones. Could be just what The Doctor ordered.

The Chicago Times observes:

If Torchwood is Doctor Who’s sexy, irreverent cousin, then Sarah Jane is its plucky and earnest aunt. The show offers a satisfying dose of alien-flavored escapism, especially for younger fans of genre fare (Sarah Jane has a few hip and appealing teen companions) . . . [Sladen] projects an air of trustworthiness, courage and unapologetic independence, and though Sarah Jane’s attitude is brisk and unsentimental, it leaves room for plenty of wonder at the stranger things in the universe. And by the way, how many series feature a middle-aged woman as the lead – and even let her battle many-tentacled aliens? Score one for the Brits.

While LowCulture.com.uk declares:

This series has been nothing but a joy from start to finish, with the consensus being that it pisses all over Torchwood from a great height. And you don’t even have to stay up late to watch it. . . . Lis Sladen has been wonderful, Niki from This Life has been funny, the kids have been much less annoying than TV kids usually are, and [the] Hot Dad [from next door] has been, well, hot

A second series of The Sarah Jane Adventures is about to air in the United Kingdom, and the indomitable Sarah Jane Smith will also appear in the season four finale of Doctor Who – which, by all reports, promises to be a real humdinger, involving the return of the evil Davros, creator of the Doctor’s arch foes, the Daleks. (Davros was first encountered in the six-part 1975 story, Genesis of the Daleks, which is consistently ranked by fans as one of the all-time favorite stories of the original series.)

Of course, this is all probably a load of old rubbish for anyone not into Doctor Who. Regardless, I want to celebrate the recent U.S. premiere of The Sarah Jane Adventures on the Sci-fi Channel by sharing the following compilation of clips, artfully put together by Leathertuscadero, from Season 1 of the show, and set to the song, “She’s So Lovely.” How appropriate! It’s followed by excerpts from Jason Arnopp’s interview with Elisabeth Sladen from the November 2007 issue of the Doctor Who Magazine. Enjoy!





Jason Arnopp: How do you like being a leading lady?

Elisabeth Sladen: Oh, lots! But I never think about it. I just go to work and enjoy it. It’s nice to have a little more say, but as Sarah Jane I would always pipe up. When I met Russell [T. Davis, the show’s creator] and Phil [Collinson, esecutive producer] for the first time, I didn’t presume it would be the same at all, but it’s important for me to have some say in Sarah Jane. I’ve lived with her for 30 years.

Jason Arnopp: Sarah Jane does share the Doctor’s loneliness.

Elisabeth Sladen: Yes. When Russell first suggested The Sarah Jane Adventures, I wondered where they could take her, but she’s just opened up and I absolutely relished that. I loved that period of finding things in Sarah Jane, and it’s all come back. I’m so pleased. . . . During a lunch, to talk about where we thought [the first series] should be going, I said, “She’s used to handling aliens, but she’s not used to handling the normality of school.” She’ trying to give [her adopted son] Luke as normal a life as possible, so ignores things she should have picked up on. She decides that she can’t jump before she thinks any more, because she’s now responsible for someone. It’s nice that she tries to be over-protective, but he’s not a normal boy so doesn’t know what things are supposed to be like.

. . . I love those scripts for [the first series’] Whatever Happened to Sarah Jane [story]. So different! It gives you a little insight into why she used to place so much stock in the Doctor, and why she traveled with him. I worked with Graeme Harper on that story . . . I hadn’t worked with the man for 30 years since The Seeds of Doom! The man has not changed. He’s a bouncing ball! The energy and the enthusiasm and the sheer love of it.

Then, of course, there’s the final story, The Lost Boy. All hell breaks loose!

Above: The cast of The Sarah Jane Adventures.
From left: Yasmin Paige (Maria Jackson), Thomas Knight
(Sarah Jane's adopted son Luke), Elisabeth Sladen (Sarah Jane Smith),
and Daniel Anthony (Clyde Langer).

Jason Arnopp: There are few characters on television who we’ve seen growing up, almost in real time. Isn’t it nice that Sarah Jane has developed so well?

Elisabeth Sladen: I had a message from Russell that said, “Who would believe it? Still more to find in Sarah Jane!” That was so lovely, because it gave me confidence. I’m quite happy treading new water because I feel very sound in what I have. There’s no other thing I’ve ever played, where I can think “yes” or “no” so quickly, in terms of what she would or wouldn’t do. Which cuts out a lot of shilly-shallying.

Jason Arnopp: [During the early years] you once wrote some core character details for Sarah Jane. How have those values changed?

Elisabeth Sladen: She’s not so petulant, maybe. But she still has the whole thing of never giving up!



Jason Arnopp: Do you envy any of Sarah Jane’s traits?

Elisabeth Sladen: Her absolute honesty. It’s almost a ruthless honesty, I think. She’s so brave, too.


Jason Arnopp: Your run of 1970s Doctor Who was one of the finest hours in the show’s history, wasn’t it?

Elisabeth Sladen: Oh, I was so lucky. Stories like Genesis of the Daleks . . . I’m amazed that we managed to do that one as we did. It’s a great one, with a fantastic moral dilemma. There’s also the odd story which I think people don’t talk about enough. For instance, Death to the Daleks, the first Dalek story I did. I’ve never really spoken about it, but it’s an amazingly well-pieced-together story, and could perhaps do with being re-evaluated. Sometimes you can let your perception of a story be tainted by how you felt while shooting it. But when you look back, you realize its merits.

Left: Traveling back in time to the Edwardian era, Sarah Jane does her bit to help the Doctor defeat an alien menace named Sutekh and his robotic mummies! (Pyramids of Mars, 1975).


Jason Arnopp: Which of your stories would you show a “new” fan, in order to introduce them to your era?

Elisabeth Sladen: I love the energy of The Time Warrior. It totally clarifies where Sarah Jane came from and why she’s like she is. It gives you a lot of information about her, before she takes on the Doctor’s responsibilities. I love that story for letting Sarah Jane be so strong. Perhaps Terror of the Zygons and Seeds of Doom, too?

Above: The Fourth Doctor (Tom Baker) and Sarah flee from
the carnivorous Krynoid in Seeds of Doom (1976).

Jason Arnopp: Which do you consider the most frightening story from your era?

Elisabeth Sladen: I got the most goosebumps from seeing Davros for the first time. And Genesis of the Daleks also earnt us the most flak, from Mary Whitehouse. There’s a lot of near-the-knuckle stuff in The Brain of Morbius, too. Oh, and The Hand of Fear. That’s more squeamish and unpleasant. [Producer] Philip Hinchliffe was very concerned about some of the things in that one.

Jason Arnopp: Which classic Doctor Who foe would you choose to appear in The Sarah Jane Adventures?

Elisabeth Sladen: I don’t know. They’re all marching towards me, in my head, as I think! Ooh, Sontarans! I’ve got quite a history with them, after The Time Warrior and The Sontaran Experiment. I loved the way you’ve got the [oversized] helmet, then the head’s the same shape underneath! I also loved the Judoon in [the new] Doctor Who – they just don’t stop, they’re like locusts! They made a very scary marching noise.

Above: The Third Doctor (Jon Pertwee) and Sarah
take on a Sontaran in The Time Warrior (1973).

Jason Arnopp: How does it feel to be part of so many fans’ childhoods? Is that a weird feeling and/or nice?

Elisabeth Sladen: It’s very nice! Because I never went into this profession to be known or applauded, excerpt for what I did. I’m just so grateful to have a job, and one which I love. I didn’t go back into these Sarah Jane Adventures as part of a career thing – it was for the sheer joy of being part of a crew again. You feel so cared-for, you really do. I have my liveliness in Russell, Julie [Gardner, executive producer] and Phil, but I never even have to use them. It’s very special that I’m allowed to do this now, because I never saw it coming.


Recommended Off-site Links:
The Sarah Jane Adventures (Sci-fi Channel website)
A 2006 interview with Elisabeth Sladen
The Life of a Doctor’s Assistant
Sarah-Jane.tv

See also the previous Wild Reed posts:
Blast from the Past
What Sarah Jane Did Next
Impossible! . . . It Can’t Be!
She’s Back!
London Calling

The "Perfect Papal Visit" Will Require a "Listening Pope"

A lot has been and is being written about Pope Benedict XVI’s current visit to the United States. One of the most insightful commentaries I’ve come across in recent weeks is by Catholic theologian Richard R. Gaillardetz.

In the March 7 issue of the National Catholic Reporter, Gaillardetz (who will be speaking in Minneapolis this Saturday) imagined “the perfect papal visit,” and noted that “if he pays attention, Benedict will find great diversity in the American church.”

Following are excerpts from Gaillardetz’s March 7 commentary, accompanied by photographs of the pope’s current visit to the U.S.

______________________________________

When Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger was elected pope almost three years ago, many cardinals credited his remarkable listening skills as a factor in his election. Since that conclave we have seen tentative signs of a “listening pope,” one who encouraged freedom of debate at the episcopal synod on the Eucharist and who dared to entertain his former colleague, Hans Küng, for dinner. I would like to imagine what would happen if Pope Benedict were to come to our shores as a “listening pope.” What if he were to see this visit as a kind of papal fact-finding mission?

Such a fact-finding mission might bring him to a more concrete consciousness of an important reality: The American religious scene is not the same as that in Western Europe. Our American church is not without its faults and pastoral challenges, but these faults and challenges are quite distinct from those of the European church. America does not suffer from the forces of secularization. For all of our failings, ours is still a remarkably religious culture. One of the great gifts of the American experiment is its distinctive legal framework for the separation of church and state. This framework has allowed religion to thrive in our country to an extent unmatched in Western Europe. At the same time, one of the peculiar religious consequences of the American experiment lies in the impact of free market forces on American religion. This free market context has led to the individualism of the American spiritual seeker and helped foster a consumerist approach toward religious experiences, beliefs and practices. An awareness of the distinctive shape of our religious scene would only enhance the pope’s pastoral outreach to the American church.



I can imagine a papal fact-finding mission in which the pope would meet not only with VIPs and bishops but with pastors, liturgical and catechetical leaders and other lay ecclesial ministers in order to get a better grasp of the pastoral realities of the American church. To be sure, not everything he would hear would be positive. Catechists and youth ministers would likely express their concern regarding young Catholics’ more tenuous commitment to the institutional church and their inadequate grasp of the basics of the Catholic faith.

Yet he would also learn of an American church filled with parishes that are thriving because a generation of pastors took seriously the implementation of the vision of the Second Vatican Council (1962-65). He would discover an educated laity that wants to be heard, because they have felt empowered by the Spirit and believe that their experience and insight has something to offer church leadership. He might well be impressed by accounts of hundreds of parishes that have implemented Vatican II’s sacramental and liturgical renewal, particularly in the area of Christian initiation. Liturgical ministers might find the courage to tell him that the most serious threats to our liturgical life are not found in pottery chalices and priests shaking too many hands at the sign of peace. They would suggest instead our church’s need for a deeper liturgical spirituality. They would almost certainly warn him of the danger of a weakened eucharistic spirituality as more and more Catholics are deprived of the regular celebration of the Eucharist by a shortage of priests.

The pope is, in fact, supposed to meet with presidents of Catholic universities. When he does, I hope he will set aside any expectations created by the complaints he has likely received about Catholic universities in America. If he really listens to these presidents, he will find that many share his concerns about preserving and even enhancing Catholic identity on their campuses; it is just that they do not all agree that the issue can be solved by imposing the catechism as the primary theology text or by banning on-campus performances of “The Vagina Monologues.” After they discuss issues of Catholic identity, I hope those presidents will also tell him about the remarkable number of students who do service work while completing their studies and then, upon graduating, go on to participate in the Peace Corps, AmeriCorps or the Jesuit Volunteer Corps.


As for the American Catholic theological scene, a topic of intense Vatican concern, I would like to imagine a papal meeting with a representative group of American Catholic theologians. At such a meeting he might receive a report from leaders of the Catholic Theological Society of America, an organization that some critics have characterized as a hotbed of dissent. In that report he would learn that their last national convention was dedicated to the theme “The Bishop in the Church.” He would hear that every bishop in the United States and Canada was invited to attend and that a number of bishops from throughout the world spoke at the conference. If he were to ask those present about the controversial views of certain “questionable” American theologians, he might learn that the American theological community is more ideologically diverse than he imagines and that it has often anticipated Vatican objections with its own critical inquiry. He would hear of vigorous debates in which provocative new works were critically assessed by theological peers.

These theologians might respectfully remind him, however, that the theologian must also be willing to explore fresh readings of the tradition and respond to new questions raised by the world today. This task is inherently experimental and provisional. Consequently, they might point out, many American theologians would prefer that accusations of heresy and dissent be made only with the greatest of care.

I also like to think that the pope would be fascinated by the theme for the upcoming 2008 convention of the Catholic Theological Society of America – “Generations.” This theme was chosen because the most compelling division in American Catholic theology today is not orthodoxy versus dissent. The most compelling tension is largely generational in character and centers on differences between older Catholic theologians whose work has been explicitly shaped by the agenda of Vatican II and a younger generation of theologians who, without repudiating Vatican II, are more concerned with the need for the church to fashion a more constructive response to the demise of a coherent Catholic subculture.

Finally, if the pope were to spend time with some American Catholic theologians it might become more evident to him that even so-called “progressive” theologians remain profoundly Catholic and teach and write out of a tremendous love and appreciation for the breadth and depth of our tradition.

I have but scratched the surface of the many helpful things the pope might learn about our church. As that minister charged with preserving the unity of faith and communion of the universal church, the pope certainly has obligations that go beyond listening. He might properly remind us, over the course of his visit, that there is more to the universal church’s mission than our own ecclesial agendas. He could help us appreciate that we are but part of a much more global ecclesial reality, one manifested not only in New York and San Antonio, Munich and Rome but also in Mexico City and Manila in the Philippines, Bogotá, Colombia, and Kinshasa, Zaire. Even so, we, the American church, are part of that larger ecclesial reality, and the testimony to our distinctive ecclesial richness deserves to be heard.

Richard R. Gaillardetz is Murray/Bacik Professor of Catholic Studies at the University of Toledo, Ohio.

To read Gaillardetz’s “Imagining the Perfect Papal Visit” in its entirety, click here.




Image 1: Pope Benedict XVI bows to greet a spiritual leader during an Interreligious Gathering at the Pope John Paul II Cultural Center in Washington, April 17, 2008. (Reuters/Molly Riley)

Image 2: Pope Benedict XVI visits the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception to hold a Vespers prayer service with the Catholic Bishops of the United States in Washington April 16, 2008. (Max Rossi/Reuters)

Image 3: Pope Benedict XVI waves from a balcony at the White House after being welcomed to the United States by President Bush and First Lady Laura Bush at a ceremony in Washington, April 16, 2008. (Larry Downing/Reuters)

Image 4: Pope Benedict XVI waves from the Popemobile as he leaves the Edward J. Pryzbyla University Center on the campus of The Catholic University of America Thursday, April 17, 2008, in Washington. (AP Photo/Haraz N. Ghanbari)

Image 5: Pope Benedict XVI greets followers at the conclusion of a Mass at Nationals Park in Washington April 17, 2008. (Reuters/Jim Bourg)


See also the previous Wild Reed posts:
Ghostwriting for the Pope
Assessing the U.S. Catholic Church
A Church That Can and Cannot Change
Agreeing with the Vatican
Uta Ranke-Heinemann on the Future of the Catholic Church
Authentic Catholicism: The Antidote to Clericalism
Listen Up, Papa!
What it Means to be Catholic
The Two-Sided Catholic Crisis
Crisis? What Crisis?
The “Underground Church”
A Catholic’s Prayer for His Fellow Pilgrim, Benedict XVI

For more of Richard R. Gaillardetz on The Wild Reed, see:
Reading the Documents of Vatican II (Part 1)
Reading the Documents of Vatican II (Part 2)
Reading the Documents of Vatican II (Part 3)

OutFront Minnesota's 2008 Lobby Day

Today was Outfront Minnesota’s annual Lobby Day at the Minnesota State Capitol.

As in previous years, I and others from CPCSM and Catholic Rainbow Parents tabled with the Faith, Family, Fairness Alliance, and proudly represented Catholics in support of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) rights.

About 1,300 people gathered for Lobby Day’s noon rally, at which OutFront Minnesota Public Policy Director Monica Meyer welcomed those in attendance and noted that: “We have a really powerful voice this coming year. This is really our chance to think and hope and dream of a better state. This is also our chance as GLBT people and allies to really think about what we want our movement to look like in the years to come.”

As you can see from the following photographs, Lobby Day 2008 was a very colorful and spirited event!




Above: Minnesota political leaders who spoke in support of LGBT rights included Senator Scott Dibble (left), State Representative Neva Walker (at podium), and State Representative Karen Clark (fourth from left).




Above: As in previous years it was incredibly heartening to see the great number of young people present at Lobby Day. One student was wearing a sweater with the words: “Gay? That’s fine by me” – which really says it all about the younger generation’s perspective on homosexuality and, by extension, gay marriage.

I’ve long maintained that the reason some older folks in our society are hell-bent on passing legislation to ban same-gender marriage, civil unions, and even domestic partnerships is that they know that if they don’t do it now it simply will never get done. It’s their last chance, really, as the vast majority of the next generation simply have no problem with such issues. Indeed, they’re viewed as non-issues!



Above: Certainly the most color-coordinated group present at this year’s Lobby Day was Project 515.

Launched in October 2007, Project 515 works to ensure that same gender couples and their families have equal rights and considerations under Minnesota law. The organization envisions a world of equalty where “all families are equally valued and respected under the law and in their homes, neighborhoods, workplaces and communities.”

And the significance of “515”? Well, the 2006 Equality of Minnesota statewide survey revealed that “a significant gap exists between the fairness Minnesotans value and what actually occurs under Minnesota law,” say the founders of Project 515. “Nearly eight out of ten Minnesotans said they think government should treat people no differently because of their sexual orientation, and seven out of ten Minnesotans said they believe ‘gays and lesbians should have the same rights and responsibilities as everyone else.’ Yet at least 515 Minnesota laws treat gay and lesbian couples in committed relationships unfairly and unequally.”

Accordingly, Project 515 is committed to changing the debate around long-term same-gender relationships, primarily by identifying the 515 Minnesota laws that contribute to the unfairness same-gender couples and their families experience in Minnesota.

For some examples of unfair and unequal treatment embedded in Minnesota law, view this PDF file on the Project 515 website.



Above: Some of the wonderful folks from P-FLAG Twin Cities, including, at center, my dear friend Deb LeMay, co-founder with her husband, Bill, of Catholic Rainbow Parents.





Above: My friends Phil and Randi Reitan with Daniel Karslake, director of the award-winning documentary film, For the Bible Tells Me So.



Above: Members of the Duluth MN/Superior WI chapter of the Bayard Rustin Commemorative Alliance.



Above: I love this banner!



Above: At one point during the noon rally, Minnesota religious leaders supportive of LGBT rights were invited onto the steps of the Capitol. Sadly, though not surprisingly, there was a total lack of Roman Catholic clergy who came forward. Still, at least one supportive priest I know was present in the crowd - and he was even wearing his Roman collar!



Above: Students from Maple Grove Senior High School, who have courageously taken legal steps to assure that their school’s LGBT student group, Straights and Gays for Equality (SAGE), is provided the same support and resources that other school groups receive.

For an October 2007 Minnesota Monitor story about this issue, click here.



Above: With my friends Deb and Phyllis.


See also the previous Wild Reed posts:
Outfront Minnesota’s 2007 Lobby Day
Getting the Word Out
The Changing Face of “Traditional Marriage”
The Real Gay Agenda
Naming and Confronting Bigotry
Love is Love
On Civil Unions and Christian Tradition
Separate is Not Equal
Mainstream Voice of “Dear Abby” Supports Gay Marriage
New Studies: Gay Couples as Committed as Straight Couples
The Many Manifestations of God’s Loving Embrace
Good News from Minnesota

The Talk of the Archdiocese

In February, a number of folks associated with both CPCSM and The Progressive Catholic Voice gathered at my home to be interviewed by Minnesota Monthly senior writer Tim Gihring. At the time, Gihring was working on a feature article about what was then (and remains today) the talk of the archdiocese: the implications of the appointment of John Nienstedt as archbishop, and how such an appointment reflects the state of the wider church.

Entitled “Fate of the Faithful,” Gihring’s story has recently been published in the May issue of Minnesota Monthly. As you’ll see from the following excerpts, it’s a well-written and balanced piece of journalism, and one to which I’m more than happy to have contributed in some small way. (Note: I've bolded the names in the following excerpts.)

________________________________

Excerpts from
Fate of the Faithful
By Tim Gihring
Minnesota Monthly
May 2008

There is a precept in the Catholic Church called ecclesia semper reformanda, meaning “the church is always reforming”—a surprise to anyone who believes it has all-too-successfully resisted change. Yet the church of today looks nothing like the church of 1950, which looked nothing like the early church, an institution many scholars believe included women leaders and married priests. And the latest makeover occurred less than 50 years ago.

When Catholic leaders gathered in the early 1960s for the landmark discussions known as the Second Ecumenical Vatican Council, or Vatican II, they mandated modernization—not to conform to contemporary mores, but to assert the church’s relevance in a fast-changing world. After all, Joe Catholic could by then zip around the world in a jet, watch the president on TV, and more than ever—given John F. Kennedy’s status as the first Catholic in the Oval Office—hope to become the president. Meanwhile, Catholic worship seemed literally backward—still led exclusively in Latin by priests who faced the altar, not the congregation.

Vatican II changed all that. The service, or liturgy, could be led in the language of the people. The people, or laity, were empowered to participate. Nuns threw off their habits, the laity joined choirs, led Sunday school, and no longer felt they were going to hell if they missed a mass. The liberating spirit of these changes inspired several generations of Catholics to question other church teachings or traditions seemingly incompatible with modern life.

Some now say they went too far. In dispensing with bad theology, maybe some good was lost, too, say critics—baby Jesus thrown out with the bath water. Today’s young seminarians are struggling to lead a church still awash in the sea change instigated by their elders and, perhaps not surprisingly, they’re looking for anchors. “They just want to get in touch with their cultural roots,” says [Robert] Kennedy [head of Catholic Studies at the University of St. Thomas in St. Paul]. “They’re not carrying some of the baggage that their parents carried in the ’60s and ’70s—they’re freer to look at the tradition of the church and be excited. They’re pushing back a little bit, saying some of that’s kind of interesting and beautiful.”

The type of priest many Catholics have come to know is being displaced. After Vatican II, the most popular priestly model was the so-called servant-leader, whose accommodating, or pastoral, manner toward the faithful reflected a significant break from the shepherd priest who had all the answers and whose sheep were, well, sheep. Now, some traditionalist young priests, often called John Paul or JP II priests, are returning to the more authoritarian mold of pre-Vatican II.

One local seminarian (who favors the pre-Vatican II Latin mass slowly being reintroduced in traditionalist parishes), has posted images on his blog of the kind of priest he hopes to become: black-and-white pictures of pre-Vatican II priests facing the altar, historic paintings evoking the majesty of old. Adapting his philosophy from a group called Concerned Roman Catholics of America, he says, “I will not allow the Holy Catholic Church to be torn apart and assaulted by the forces of modernism, syncretism, heresy, and the gross immorality of some of its clergy in the name of the ‘Spirit of Vatican II.’ I will not allow our Catholic youth to be robbed of their faith or have their innocence destroyed in the name of ‘tolerance,’ ‘ecumenism,’ ‘diversity,’ or any other politically correct ideology of the day.”

Kennedy warns against extrapolating from such examples. “It’s true that some enclaves around the country seem to want to reconstruct some imaginary version of the [pre-Vatican II] church,” he says. “I don’t know what they’re smoking.” But today’s youth returning to a pre-Vatican II church—“that’s not going to happen.”

Nevertheless, the generational difference is enough to disturb many servant-leader priests. “They don’t admire the young priests,” says Dean Hoge, a sociology professor and expert on priests and seminarians at the Catholic University of America in Washington, D.C. “They feel the young men are too concerned with their own status.” In turn, the JP II priests call their elders—sometimes called Vatican II priests—“social-worker priests” or “Protestant priests,” he says, as if they’ve “somehow watered down what it means to be a priest.”

Social workers or not, many Vatican II priests fostered a progressive agenda. The nation’s first archdiocesan Commission on Women was begun in the Twin Cities in 1979 by then-Archbishop John Roach to explore the role of women in the church. Also at that time, the Catholic Pastoral Committee on Sexual Minorities (CPCSM) formed in St. Paul. With Roach’s blessing, says CPCSM co-founder David McCaffrey, the group introduced a sort of sensitivity training in parishes and eight out of the 11 local Catholic high schools—a curriculum enabling counselors to better serve gay Catholics. “During the peak of our work,” says McCaffrey, “we became almost mainstream.”

By 1999, after conservative parents complained, says McCaffrey, CPCSM was no longer welcome. Last year, the archdiocese frequently ran afoul of gay advocates, as when it forbade a CPCSM-sponsored talk in October by a lesbian and her father to be held at a Minneapolis church. Soon after, [Coadjutor Archbishop] Nienstedt clarified the church’s position on homosexuality in the archdiocesan newspaper, the Catholic Spirit. In an earlier column, he had called homosexuality a disorder, explaining that “such inclinations are not sinful in themselves” but acting on them is. This time, he said even those who “actively encourage or promote homosexual acts or such activity within a homosexual lifestyle formally cooperate in a grave evil,” which many read as a literal condemnation of those who’ve supported the loving relationships of their gay children or friends.

This spring, further archdiocesan orders have limited everything from the role of lay preachers during mass to the kinds of nontraditional, laity-led liturgies some parishes have offered since the 1960s. The Commission on Women was recently folded into another archdiocesan office, which some participants see as a diminishment of its importance. “The post-Vatican II sense of collegiality among the bishops, much less among church leaders and lay people, has faded,” says one local observer, “and the sense of hierarchy has ascended.”

“There are some arguments in favor of the more traditional view of the priesthood,” says Hoge. “They have a stronger morale, they’re happier men. They resign a bit less. And the seminaries that espouse that view are a little stronger, so they say, ‘We’re the way of the future, follow us.’ But the laity, in general, prefer the servant-leader model.”

As a new era dawns, several well-known servant-leader priests here, including the Reverend Michael O’Connell of the Basilica of Saint Mary in Minneapolis—the originator of the popular Basilica Block Party—are moving on or retiring. As a result, some local Catholics conjecture, the archdiocese won’t be as welcoming. “I figure we have about 10 good years left,” says a longtime Basilica parishioner. The local Reverend Mike Tegeder simply predicts bigger and broader clashes, as the spirit of Vatican II won’t easily be exorcised. “The genie is out of the bottle,” he says. “There’s no putting it back.”

Tegeder, the priest at the Church of St. Edward in Bloomington, is among the most vocal critics of Nienstedt’s appointment. Ordained in the late 1970s, he is a classic servant-leader priest. He sometimes sports a worn newsboy cap (Nienstedt prefers a crisp black fedora) and occasionally uses the word “damn” in the non-ecclesiastical sense.

Tegeder notes that Nienstedt’s June trip to Rome, where he’ll receive a lambskin stole as affirmation of his appointment, has been heavily advertised among local Catholics—they can even purchase a tour package to traipse along, something more status-conscious East Coast bishops would encourage. (For his part, Nienstedt has said the criticism of his appointment has been “very inhospitable and not at all in keeping with the classic Minnesota attitude of ‘fair play.’”) Yet Tegeder is hardly an inner-city activist or the head of a nonconformist parish: The Church of St. Edward is a large congregation in a leafy suburb. He’s certainly no less traditional than his church’s staff, who on this day—Ash Wednesday—all appropriately sport a cross of ashes on their foreheads.

Tegeder has gathered the staff to discuss their hopes and fears for the future of the archdiocese. This archdiocese is known for its unusually high number of progressive Catholics armed with advanced religious education, and Tegeder’s staff fits the mold. They are all women, and many have degrees in divinity or theology—“all of them basically have the same education as the priests,” says Tegeder. Vatican II renewed the church’s call for Catholics to inform their conscience through study—in addition to consulting their leaders—and these women have taken the call seriously.

Heidi Busse, who organizes the church’s religious instruction classes as its director of faith formation, is an outgoing 35-year-old with a master’s in theology. She’s occasionally preached at St. Edward’s. But starting this month, as directed by the archbishop’s office, lay preaching will largely be banned during mass. Several parishes have regularly featured lay preachers as a way for parishioners to “break open the word,” Busse says—to hear from a perspective closer to their own. Now, lay people must speak at the end of mass, if they are to speak from the pulpit at all.

“I think there’s a breakdown between reality—the real life in the parish—and theory or doctrine or politics,” says Busse. She isn’t called to be a priest, she says, but is a talented speaker. “We all have different gifts, and it’s hard as a woman or lay person to be told your call is not valid.”

LaLonne Murphy, the parish’s director of liturgy and music, has worked in the archdiocese for 30 years and says the increased stress on guidelines, or rubrics, has been pitched to the parishes as necessary to avoid “confusion” among the faithful. “If Heidi preaches, I don’t think there is going to be any confusion that she is Father Mike,” says Murphy. “We are not confused about these things.”

The women would prefer a dialogue between parishioners and leaders. “We don’t want to run wild,” says Busse. “We don’t want to be relativist…it’s just that the conversation would be so helpful for all of us to be more open to serving each other.” Murphy agrees: “People here tend to be more adult and take responsibility for themselves and the world around them. They’re not waiting for someone to tell them what to do. No one needs another mom and dad.”

The sentiment echoes national surveys that show a growing gap between the Catholic laity and their leaders on such issues as contraception, married priests, and church governance. “They’re moving in opposite directions,” says William D’Antonio, a renowned scholar in the sociology of religion at Catholic University and co-author of the 2007 book American Catholics Today. From 1987 to 2005, the authors’ research shows, the “level of Catholics’ commitment to the institutional church” has trended downward. “By 2005,” says D’Antonio, “there isn’t an age group or gender where there is a majority saying that they look to church leaders as the automatic source of authority.” Instead, more Catholics are looking to their own conscience.

The concept has precedence: Saint Thomas Aquinas wrote, “It is better to die excommunicated” than to disobey one’s conscience. The beloved educator Cardinal John Henry Newman reputedly said, “I shall drink to the pope, if you please—still, to conscience first and to the pope afterwards.” When it comes down to who feels welcome in the church, says Murphy, many of the faithful consult their consciences. “We are not confused when people are not permitted by the institution to join us at the table,” she says, referring to the church’s position on Catholics in same-sex unions. “We are not confused by that. That [church policy] is an abomination.”

Even toward straight people seeking to marry, however, the archdiocese has become less welcoming, claims Tegeder, with some parishes scrutinizing the couple’s commitment to Catholicism when one partner isn’t Catholic. Parishes have also refused to conduct funerals on similar grounds, says Mary Hayden, the church’s director of pastoral care. Murphy is appalled. “Can you imagine Jesus telling somebody they can’t have their funeral someplace? That he won’t stand by them in death? A lot of this law-quoting is about manipulation and fear, telling people they’re going to hell. Fear does not control us. We won’t stand for that kind of bullying.”

What will become of those who feel bullied, the parishioners at the margins? “People are realizing they have different options,” says Tegeder. “Some will want to keep the fight up, others will feel they have to move on.” And still others, says Hayden, will become angry with God.

Since Nienstedt’s welcome mass, many progressives have wondered whether his vision of unity is compatible with theirs. Can he strike a balance between the orthodox ideal of getting everyone on the same page and their hope that diverse perspectives will be embraced? Other Catholics, though, believe he shouldn’t bother accommodating—one man’s hardliner, after all, is another’s true believer. “Bless the Lord! A bishop without a limp spine!” wrote one online commentator upon the news of Nienstedt’s appointment. “Finally, a bishop who knows how to bish!” gushed another.

Several local priests have condemned Tegeder’s views—the Reverend George Welzbacher of the Church of St. John, in St. Paul, calls him a “chronic malcontent” who’s assumed “the role of roadside bomber. Or maybe suicide bomber.” He suggests that those who agree with Tegeder—the insubordinate—have already left the church anyway.

Kennedy says archdiocesan leadership changes so infrequently that new bishops tend to elicit extreme reactions: “Some will say, ‘Thank goodness we got a new sheriff and let me tell you about the guys you need to arrest first,’ and others will say, ‘Oh my gosh, he’s going to change something. How can we prevent that?’”

Even many moderates, however, advocate the occasional archdiocesan housecleaning. “If you don’t sweep and vacuum once a week, things get out of control,” says the Reverend David Smith, recently retired from the University of St. Thomas. Though he notes, “One can raise questions whether they’ve done too much [cleaning]. Sometimes people who call for a housecleaning are pretty restricted about the rooms they want cleaned.”

Those “rooms” may be ideologies, such as gay activism, or parishes with experimental liturgies. “This archdiocese is known worldwide for several parishes that have strayed pretty far from the Catholic faith,” says Janice LaDuke, who blogs about local Catholicism as “Catherine of Alexandria,” the medieval martyr. She says anyone who thinks Nienstedt’s appointment triggered a Catholic culture war here doesn’t know the local church—“This archdiocese has been a battlefield long before now.” And she, for one, welcomes the challenge: “I’ve got my sword handy, my Catechism and Bible at the ready.”

Four weeks before Easter, St. Stephen’s Catholic Church in Minneapolis is standing-room-only with the kind of crowd for whom May Day is a major holiday: bearded men in ponytails, white-haired crones leaning on canes carved with animal totems, a lesbian couple rocking their baby. There are enough Subarus in the parking lot to open a dealership. Some worshippers have never been here before. A few are Lutheran, attending in solidarity. Many are in tears.

St. Stephen’s is one of the churches LaDuke would consider a liturgical outlier, and the battle has been taken to its doorstep. “We are in crisis,” the service’s leader announces. “We don’t know where we’re going to be.” But they can’t stay here. After today—after 40 years—this service is being shut down by the archdiocese. Too many rules broken, Archbishop Flynn wrote to them. Too much “confusion about liturgical practices.”

The 9 a.m. service at St. Stephen’s, a major social-service provider in its blighted neighborhood near the Minneapolis Institute of Arts, was likely the first in the archdiocese to feature the sort of guitar-strumming, dancing-in-the-aisles aesthetic that makes even liberal Minnesotans blush. Of course, there are no aisles here, no pulpit, and, for a long while, no priest. Just two basketball hoops, a stage, and a makeshift altar. The service has always been held in the parish’s gym.

Their communion vessels are made of the wrong material—ceramic instead of precious metal. Women often lead worship. After the homily, a microphone is set up for parishioners to dialogue about the text. Poetry is often read, as in Unitarian churches. Even Tegeder describes it as “kind of a fast and loose community” and suggests the archdiocese was right to question aspects of the service. But he also believes the current hierarchy would consider it a “marginal” community. How did things come to this? And why now?

In his letter to the parish, [Archbishop Harry] Flynn said he sought changes by April, when St. Stephen’s received a new priest, by all accounts a traditionalist. Flynn also noted that St. Stephen’s had been upbraided before; enough changes were not made.

In the bigger picture, St. Stephen’s time may simply be up. Among the phenomena of the Catholic church’s new era is the emergence of liturgical vigilantes, people who visit parishes and note—in blogs or letters to the archbishop—how closely rubrics are followed. Flynn has publicly chastised such busybodies, yet more than one visitor to St. Stephen’s has tattled on the 9 a.m. worshippers. And now the St. Stephen’s folks are divided. Many vow to continue a similar service off-site, outside the archbishop’s purview.

Few, if any, have talked publicly of abandoning Catholicism altogether, not unlike other Catholics under duress. Mary Beckfeld, co-founder of the online journal Progressive Catholic Voice, which launched locally last fall to chronicle alternative viewpoints within the church, is the mother of a gay son and feels she can best affect change on his behalf by staying in the church. “We really love this church,” she says of herself and the newsletter staff. “And I don’t believe I’m living in mortal sin.” McCaffrey, who struggled for years to reconcile his sexuality with Catholicism, says he finally found balance in the inclusive spirit of Vatican II—only to feel it’s been pulled out from under him by the Catholic hierarchy. “That’s the outrage we feel,” he says. “They’re really screwing with our lives.”

Michael Bayly, who edits the Progressive Catholic Voice and directs CPCSM, has long advocated for gays like himself in the church. By baptism, he says, it’s his church, the one he knows and loves—why should he leave? Besides, he says, wherever Catholics are gathered, that’s a Catholic space. If the St. Stephen’s crowd moves underground, they won’t be any less righteous.

. . . Progressives like Heidi Busse find hope in [the] tradition of the church [known as the] sensus fidelium, which holds that the Holy Spirit inevitably guides the faithful in the right direction—even if the church, as an institution, takes some errant turns. “We’re a human church on the one hand, but a divine one on the other,” she says. “Sometimes the hierarchy has to catch up to what the faithful has been doing. The faithful really lead.” Just where the church is on that continuum can only be seen—by the earthbound anyway—in hindsight.

Tim Gihring is a senior writer at Minnesota Monthly.

To read Gihring’s article in its entirety, click here.


Illustration: Darren Booth.

See also the previous Wild Reed posts:
Archbishop Nienstedt’s “Learning Curve”: A Suggested Trajectory
Interesting Times Ahead
An Open Letter to Archbishop Nienstedt
Choosing To Stay
No Place for Dialogue in Archdiocesan Newspaper
When Quackery Goes Mainstream
300+ People Vigil at the Cathedral in Solidarity with LGBT Catholics
No, Really . . .
The Shrinking Catholic Tent

Ghostwriting for the Pope

This past Sunday, Catholic author Robert McClory had a wonderful commentary published in the Chicago Tribune. Entitled “Ghostwriting for the Pope,” the piece offers something the pope “might say to the crowds” during his current visit to the U.S., perhaps “in a singular moment of inspiration.”

As regular visitors to The Wild Reed would know, I recently interviewed McClory for The Progressive Catholic Voice, as he will be the keynote speaker at the Second Annual Prayer Breakfast for Hope and Justice, to be held May 3 at the Metropolitan Ballroom in Minneapolis.

Following is McClory’s commentary from the April 13 issue of the Chicago Tribune. Enjoy!

____________________________________

Ghostwriting for the Pope
By Robert McClory
Chicago Tribune
April 13, 2008

Speculation abounds on what Pope Benedict XVI will say to American Catholics when he arrives in the United States this week.

Based on speeches in other countries, the pope might be expected to praise American energy and innovation, then chide Americans for their secularism, individualism, consumerism, materialism, hedonism and lack of religious faith.

But Benedict can be a man of surprises. And I offer here something he might say to the crowds in a singular moment of inspiration—perhaps at Yankee Stadium.

“My dear people, I have thrown away the text prepared for this occasion.

“I would instead like to talk to you from the heart, based on what I was praying and thinking about as I flew into your beautiful and bountiful land. It is time for change—not just for you but especially for me.

“I was deeply troubled when I reviewed the recent findings of your Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life reporting that the U.S. Roman Catholic Church has lost more members in recent years than any other faith tradition. The time has arrived, I am convinced, for something more than assertions of doctrine with the expectation that they will be believed and observed if they are repeated often enough.

“It is now more than 40 years since the Second Vatican Council of happy memory, and it is clear that this period of expected renewal has become a period of fateful withdrawal for some. It is also clear that for many who remain with the church, critical teachings are rejected or simply ignored.

“What does this mean? Is it large-scale apostasy, heresy, a surrender to the relativistic values of the modern world? Or is the Spirit leading in a new direction?

“I confess in all humility that I do not know. What I am keenly aware of is that I, as the successor of Peter the Apostle, am obliged to seek every available way to make the gospel and the truths of the faith ever more transparent to all persons of goodwill.

“I am therefore inaugurating a series of international conferences, dialogues and debates on some of the most disputed church issues, including its position on the ordination of women, homosexual acts, marriage after divorce, stem cell research and artificial birth control.

“Why these in particular? Precisely because they are so fraught with controversy and because they touch so intimately the lives of millions of lay Catholics.

“I want these issues to be openly considered from all sides, not just by bishops and other clergy but by theologians and biblical scholars, by educators and catechists at all levels, and by experts in the social sciences. And I will insist that the laity with informed views on these matters be called forth to speak from their own experience.

“In addition, I will invite input from Orthodox and Protestant churches, whose traditions in these matters have great significance. After all, the Second Vatican Council was forthright in its judgment that these bodies can ‘engender a life of grace’ and ‘provide access to the community of salvation.’

“I recognize that this will be a massive undertaking, requiring organization and goodwill on a scale seldom realized in the history of Christianity. The work will take place on many continents and proceed over many months, even years. It will most certainly stir up hurts and resentments long festering in the body of the church and lead to confrontations among the most opinionated. But the time for forced polite silence, so characteristic of dysfunctional families, is over.

“Late in the pontificate of our beloved predecessor, Pope Jhn Paul II, he confessed that his position as head of the church ‘constitutes a difficulty’ for most non-Catholic Christians, and he longed to ‘find a new way of exercising’ his ministry, a way that is ‘open to a new situation.’

“I have come to believe this ‘new situation’ involves not only the church’s relationship with other Christian bodies but with millions of its own struggling or disenchanted members. I make bold to carry the work forward only because of my firm belief that the Holy Spirit, promised to the church by Christ, is with us still.

“Finally, you may be wondering why I chose to share this grand initiative first with you the people of the United States. I did so because yours is still a young, idealistic nation heartily embracing the future. Catholic Americans have been the most generous in the world in supporting the charities and good works sponsored by the Vatican and other agencies of relief and charity throughout the world. I look, therefore, to you for leadership in this vital undertaking.”

Robert McClory is an associate professor emeritus at Northwestern University, a former Catholic priest and author of As It Was in the Beginning: The Coming Democratization of the Catholic Church.


See also the previous Wild Reed posts:
Assessing the U.S. Catholic Church
A Church That Can and Cannot Change
Agreeing with the Vatican
Uta Ranke-Heinemann on the Future of the Catholic Church
Authentic Catholicism: The Antidote to Clericalism
Listen Up, Papa!
What it Means to be Catholic
The Two-Sided Catholic Crisis
Crisis? What Crisis?
The “Underground Church”
A Catholic’s Prayer for His Fellow Pilgrim, Benedict XVI