c. 1998 Religion News Service

(Eugene Kennedy, a longtime observer of the Roman Catholic Church, is professor emeritus of psychology at Loyola University in Chicago and author most recently of”My Brother Joseph, published by St. Martin Press.)

UNDATED _ Pope John Paul II’s majestic new encyclical on faith and reason was just being readied for release when the distinguished Roman Catholic commentator, Michael Novak, offered an appraisal on the op-ed page of The New York Times.

A philosopher himself, Novak places John Paul’s philosophical treatise in its historical and cultural context as a call for philosophy to pull back from the lime pit of nothingness to renew itself in the cleansing springs of life.

He also applies it to practices in the American Catholic church, contending that”Roman Catholic bishops and theologians have scanted philosophy … particularly in the United States (they) have tried to be `pastoral’ as opposed to being `intellectual.'” Novak asserts that”a high degree of softheadedness, sentimentality, imprecision and just plain fudging have infiltrated middle and upper-class parishes and daily life.”These are found, he alleges, in matters”of abortion and premarital sex.” Novak identifies the”pastoral”as opposed to the”Yes and No”morality that once characterized Catholicism. The”common style,”he avers,”has become Maybe, Nudge, Wink, If and Y’know.” Indeed, his essay is so much more an indictment than a commentary that one is surprised he does not refer to the bishops and priests he accuses as”perpetrators.” It is an elementary error in philosophy, as Novak must know, to make grave charges about ideas or people without defining one’s terms clearly and making appropriate distinctions about them. He does neither in opposing the”pastoral”to the”intellectual.” Dangerous as well, as philosophers also know, is to condemn a whole class, in this case, American upper- and middle-income parish priests, with assertions about their”pastoral”attitudes that are supported by no evidence, much less proof.

Instead, American pastoral functioning is condemned by innuendo, that is, by implying that its non-intellectual style is right out of Boss Tweed, with nudges and winks as a substitute for principle and probity.

Novak’s caricature of pastoral practice offers shaming and demeaning in place of reflection and analysis. That is a monumental disservice to the bishops, priests, deacons, religious and countless lay men and women who offer pastoral service to their people throughout the country.

What is and where do we find the pastoral life of American Catholicism?

There is no inherent conflict or contrast between what is”pastoral”and what is”intellectual”or”philosophical.” Indeed, Pastoral Theology is a rich discipline that for centuries has reflected precisely on the way to apply the teachings of the church to real-life situations. The word”pastor”means”one who feeds”and the activity is principally one of spiritual nourishment based on Catholic teachings and traditions.

The”Church Pastoral”is not, perhaps to Novak’s regret, the”Church Triumphant.”The pastoral has always been that plane on which the church meets stumbling sinners and aspiring saints as master not of what is neatly reasonable but what is chronically unreasonable about life. The church may be sure of itself but, on the pastoral level, it is always understanding of people who are unsure of themselves.

In this same real life people have premarital sex and abortions and experience terrible losses every day. The church meets not with ecclesiastical trump cards but with the sacraments of forgiveness, healing, and encouragement.

The”pastoral”is intrinsically philosophical because it flows from wisdom about struggling humans that bishops and priests have learned over the centuries. In this space most Catholics have their primary experience with the church. A realistic inspection reveals no wise guy winking but a single-eyed effort to apply, humanely and mercifully, the teachings of Jesus to the lives of ordinary persons.

Pope John Paul II has illustrated the pastoral wisdom of the church in a wide range of settings, from dealing with dictators to hearing confessions in Saint Peter’s. He, of all pastors, would disown commentary that is so out of step with his own life and work.

He would, perhaps, recall his predecessor, Pope John XXIII, who convened the Second Vatican Council for”pastoral”reasons, for the church to examine how it meets the world’s spiritual need. His purpose, he said, with a sense of its profound theological meaning, was”to make the human sojourn on earth less sad.”

DEA END KENNEDY