She needs that title removed so she can fulfill her career as woke politician! Also, everyone knows she has PR people who feed these stories to the news right? Right??
Gomez's speech is interesting especially because I think the people criticizing him are the same people who routinely harp on wanting bishops to be MORE political. There obviously is a fine line for bishops to comment and teach the faith in regards to political realities, but like Gomez says, it's more than apparent that this political ideological bent has reached religious proportions in much of society and that there really is only a religious answer to it.
I subscribe to The Pillar and normally enjoy Ed's newsletter. Today we need to account for the abysmal quality of his brief notes on Archbishop Gomez's address.
First, being from Mexico does not put him above scrutiny for perpetuating racism or white supremacy. Only in the US do we imagine everyone from south of the border to be part of some all-encompassing non-white race. The reality is that Latin American nations have the same ethnic diversity as the US, and with it, many of the same experiences of racism. Spanish-born and descended people have historically been part of a privileged class, while people of African, Indigenous, and mixed descent have been accorded lower status. I happen to know a few people from Gomez's hometown of Monterrey: one was rejected by his girlfriend's family for being "too indian" for their taste, in case you need evidence that racism lives south of the border, too. Ed's "well he's Mexican" rejoinder comes off as glib and uninformed.
Ed also errs in calling liberation theology a Christian heresy. The CDF has taken the movement to task for excesses, such as naively engaging Marxist thought or overemphasizing material liberation at the expense of spiritual liberation promised by faith in Christ, but liberation theology has not been condemned in the same terms as gnosticism or Pelagianism. I would challenge Ed to read Fr. Gutierrez's A Theology of Liberation and call it heretical.
I read The Pillar for its analysis of the life of the Church, and usually I find it very edifying. In this case, I would want to see Ed analyze the impact of Gomez's comments on a Church having its own racial reckoning: do they alienate Catholics who see it as their duty to combat racism? Do they offer a positive, concrete vision for how Catholics should work for racial justice? Do they even accurately characterize social justice advocates in the first place? All signs indicate that Ed has not done the listening, and lacks the knowledge, to address those questions.
The best race-related coverage Ed or JD ever did was the Gloria Purvis interview on Editor's Desk. It was the best because JD just asked questions and then let Gloria do her thing. Having a race-conscious voice heard, uninterrupted, was a blessing. It's a real blindspot for The Pillar not to have such a voice to do coverage of stories like Gomez's remarks. America is a nation that has been obsessed with race, and therefore the Church in America has absorbed much of that pathology. The Pillar is remiss to want to analyze the life of the Church without having someone around who can do race-conscious analysis. Maybe that's what is on my subscriber wish-list: hire a faithful, orthodox catholic who can engage these issues critically, and then get out of their way.
Uhhh. Think you misspelled Duchy as Dutchy (you were not I suppose finagling for a small Netherlander from your spouse?)
She needs that title removed so she can fulfill her career as woke politician! Also, everyone knows she has PR people who feed these stories to the news right? Right??
Gomez's speech is interesting especially because I think the people criticizing him are the same people who routinely harp on wanting bishops to be MORE political. There obviously is a fine line for bishops to comment and teach the faith in regards to political realities, but like Gomez says, it's more than apparent that this political ideological bent has reached religious proportions in much of society and that there really is only a religious answer to it.
I subscribe to The Pillar and normally enjoy Ed's newsletter. Today we need to account for the abysmal quality of his brief notes on Archbishop Gomez's address.
First, being from Mexico does not put him above scrutiny for perpetuating racism or white supremacy. Only in the US do we imagine everyone from south of the border to be part of some all-encompassing non-white race. The reality is that Latin American nations have the same ethnic diversity as the US, and with it, many of the same experiences of racism. Spanish-born and descended people have historically been part of a privileged class, while people of African, Indigenous, and mixed descent have been accorded lower status. I happen to know a few people from Gomez's hometown of Monterrey: one was rejected by his girlfriend's family for being "too indian" for their taste, in case you need evidence that racism lives south of the border, too. Ed's "well he's Mexican" rejoinder comes off as glib and uninformed.
Ed also errs in calling liberation theology a Christian heresy. The CDF has taken the movement to task for excesses, such as naively engaging Marxist thought or overemphasizing material liberation at the expense of spiritual liberation promised by faith in Christ, but liberation theology has not been condemned in the same terms as gnosticism or Pelagianism. I would challenge Ed to read Fr. Gutierrez's A Theology of Liberation and call it heretical.
I read The Pillar for its analysis of the life of the Church, and usually I find it very edifying. In this case, I would want to see Ed analyze the impact of Gomez's comments on a Church having its own racial reckoning: do they alienate Catholics who see it as their duty to combat racism? Do they offer a positive, concrete vision for how Catholics should work for racial justice? Do they even accurately characterize social justice advocates in the first place? All signs indicate that Ed has not done the listening, and lacks the knowledge, to address those questions.
The best race-related coverage Ed or JD ever did was the Gloria Purvis interview on Editor's Desk. It was the best because JD just asked questions and then let Gloria do her thing. Having a race-conscious voice heard, uninterrupted, was a blessing. It's a real blindspot for The Pillar not to have such a voice to do coverage of stories like Gomez's remarks. America is a nation that has been obsessed with race, and therefore the Church in America has absorbed much of that pathology. The Pillar is remiss to want to analyze the life of the Church without having someone around who can do race-conscious analysis. Maybe that's what is on my subscriber wish-list: hire a faithful, orthodox catholic who can engage these issues critically, and then get out of their way.
I pretty much skip everything else and go straight to The Pillar (newsletter and podcast). Thank you for all you do.