FULL, CONSCIOUS, AND ACTIVE PARTICIPATION: THE LAITY AS ECCLESIAL SUBJECTS IN AN ECCLESIOLOGY INFORMED BY BERNARD LONERGAN

Full, Conscious, and Active Participation: The Laity as Ecclesial Subjects in an Ecclesiology Informed by Bernard LonerganFull, Conscious, and Active Participation: The Laity as Ecclesial Full, Conscious, and Active Participation: The Laity as Ecclesial
Subjects in an Ecclesiology Informed by Bernard Lonergan Subjects in an Ecclesiology Informed by Bernard Lonergan
Mary Utzerath Marquette University
Part of the Religion Commons
Recommended Citation Recommended Citation Utzerath, Mary, "Full, Conscious, and Active Participation: The Laity as Ecclesial Subjects in an Ecclesiology Informed by Bernard Lonergan" (2011). Dissertations (1934 -). 116. https://epublications.marquette.edu/dissertations_mu/116
AN ECCLESIOLOGY INFORMED BY BERNARD LONERGAN
by
Mary Patricia Utzerath, B.S., M.S., M.Div.
A Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School, Marquette University,
in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy
Milwaukee, Wisconsin
May 2011
THE LAITY AS ECCLESIAL SUBJECTS IN AN ECCLESIOLOGY INFORMED BY
BERNARD LONERGAN
Marquette University, 2011
Unresolved problems and tensions regarding the status and role of the laity persist nearly a half-century following Vatican II. While the magisterium focuses on issues related to the appropriateness or ability of lay persons to carry out roles in the Church that have traditionally belonged to the ordained, sociological surveys indicate that the experience of lay members of the Church in the United States and in much of the Western world includes inadequate formation, confused Catholic identity, marginalization, low levels of commitment in young Catholics, and the steady exodus of Catholics. These problems of the laity are symptomatic of problems within the Church itself.
This dissertation seeks to understand how the full realization of the laity as ecclesial
subjects and the full realization of the Church might be possible. Working within the parameters of the ecclesial vision of Vatican II, it employs the thought of Canadian Jesuit theologian, Bernard Lonergan (1904−1984) to support a framework that both emphasizes the divine initiative in the genesis of the Church as well as the social reality of its existence. Lonergan’s interiority analysis provides the means for transposing abstract notions of human nature and grace into existential categories. It thereby provides the tools by which the full becoming of the laity and of the Church can be described in terms of concrete possibilities.
On the basis of Lonergan’s work the author suggests that the full realization of the laity
and of the Church are directly related to the achievement of authenticity of all its members. Such authenticity requires graced conversion. The author argues that graced conversion is not merely spiritual, but is also a social reality. As such, it flourishes best in an ecclesial atmosphere that provides opportunities for reciprocal sharing and collaboration between and among laity and clergy. The author concludes that graced dialogical collaborations between laity and clergy provide the condition of possibility for the full realization of both the laity and the Church.
i
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Mary Patricia Utzerath, B.S., M.S., M.Div.
I gratefully acknowledge the support of many people who encouraged, inspired, and
bolstered me throughout my graduate studies and the writing of this dissertation.
The first person I want to acknowledge is my dear husband, Jim. I can’t begin to
describe how much his encouragement, heroic sacrifice, help, and loving support have meant to
me throughout my studies and writing. He is for me the model of authentic subjectivity and self-
sacrificing love.
After Jim I want to thank my children, Steve and Michelle, their spouses, Kari and Dan,
and my grandchildren, James, Katie, Meredith, Rowan, and Aedan for their loving support,
understanding, patience, and willingness to accommodate my never-ending busy schedule.
I want to acknowledge also my colleagues in the Department of Mathematics, Statistics,
and Computer Science at Marquette University who have been a source of encouragement,
support, and inspiration. In particular I wish to thank Marian Manyo not only for her friendship
and collaboration throughout our thirty years of teaching mathematics together, but for her efforts
as assistant chair to provide teaching assignments for me that would maximize my research and
writing time. A former colleague, Marie Schwerm, deserves special thanks for her on-going
support and encouragement.
I gratefully acknowledge the support and example of Dr. Susan Wood, my dissertation
director. From before we met I have been inspired by her prolific accomplishments, critical
thinking ability, and exceptionally clear and scholarly writing. Dr. Wood graciously agreed to
work with me on my dissertation before I had solidified what it would be about. I truly
appreciate her efforts to keep me on track and focused throughout the process of my writing. Dr.
Wood’s scholarship and accomplishments will continue to set the bar for me in my professional
career.
ii
I am grateful and honored that Father Robert Doran, S.J. agreed to be a member of my
committee. I am grateful, as well, for his support and help as I worked on this dissertation.
Father Doran graciously read my drafts of Chapters Two through Five after I completed each one.
He also generously provided me with copies of several of his papers as well as the file of De ente
supernaturali: Supplementum schematicum (forthcoming in Vol. 19 of Collected Works of
Bernard Lonergan). Father Doran is an editor of almost every Lonergan work that I used. Not
only is he the general editor of the Collected Works of Bernard Lonergan, he also maintains the
Lonergan Resource and Lonergan Archive websites. I and all Lonergan scholars owe a
tremendous debt of gratitude to Father Doran for his efforts to make the work of Lonergan
available and accessible. Father Doran’s contributions to the field of Lonergan studies and
beyond will surely play a significant role in my future work.
I am grateful to Father Bryan Massingale for the many ways in which his example and
support have helped to nurture my vocation as a theologian. As an M.Div. student at Saint
Francis Seminary, Saint Francis, Wisconsin, I was introduced to the theological field of social
justice in a course taught by Father Massingale. Prior to generously agreeing to be a member of
my dissertation committee at Marquette University, Father Massingale had been a member of my
master’s thesis committee at Saint Francis Seminary where my thesis was entitled, “A Spirituality
for Social Justice.” In his eloquently-expressed and lived passion for social justice, in his efforts
to expose cultures of privilege in the Church and beyond, and in his example of mediating the
experiences, hopes, and wisdom of those who are victims of racism to those for whom these
experiences, hopes, and wisdom are foreign, Father Massingale provides a compelling example of
the vocation of the theologian.
I am grateful to Dr. Andrew Tallon who graciously and generously agreed to be a
member of my committee on the basis of our chance encounter in Marquette University’s Raynor
Memorial Library. A widely-regarded expert on Rahner’s philosophy, Dr. Tallon’s interests also
iii
include Lonergan and Emmanuel Levinas. I hope to become more familiar with Dr. Tallon’s
exceptional work.
Finally, I am grateful to all of my friends who have supported me with encouraging
words and prayers.
CHAPTER
B. Lonergan’s Contribution ............................................................................................. 2
C. Methodology ............................................................................................................... 5
2. Laity in the Ecclesiological Vision of Vatican II............................................ 8
E. Procedure of Dissertation ............................................................................................ 9
II. CHALLENGED LAITY IN A CHALLENGED CHURCH ................................................ 12
A. Introduction ............................................................................................................... 12
1. Sexual Abuse Scandal and Powerlessness of Laity ...................................... 13
a. Lay Voice Consultative Only ........................................................... 15
b. Clergy Accountability to Laity Not Required .................................. 16
c. Exercise of Lay Charisms Inadequately Provided for...................... 18
2. Issues Related to Decline in Priestly Vocations ........................................... 18
a. Issue of Lay Secular Character ........................................................ 19
b. Issue of Lay Participation in Church Governance ........................... 21
c. Issue of Lay Ministry ....................................................................... 23
3. Confused Identity and “Silent Exodus” of Lay Catholics ............................ 25
a. Confused De Facto Catholic Identity ............................................... 26
b. Silent Exodus of Catholics ............................................................... 27
v
ii. Inadequate Formation of Lay Catholics .................................. 30
C. Underlying Ecclesial and Lay Issues ........................................................................ 31
1. Theological Differences ................................................................................ 32
i. Interpretive Issues ................................................................... 32
ii. Christomonistic Bias ............................................................... 34
2. Clashing Cultures .......................................................................................... 38
i. Loss of Distinctively Catholic Culture in U.S. ....................... 40
ii. Influence of Postmodern Culture ............................................ 40
iii. Lockean Roots of American Culture ...................................... 41
iv. Radical Self-Expressive Individualism ................................... 42
v. Problems of Identity ............................................................... 43
b. Ecclesial Cultures ............................................................................ 44
i. Clerical Culture ....................................................................... 45
iii. Classicist Culture .................................................................... 49
D. Bias as Root Problem for Church and Laity ............................................................. 51
1. Lonergan’s Notion of Bias ............................................................................ 52
a. Bias as Perversion of Common Sense.............................................. 52
b. Group Bias ....................................................................................... 54
c. General Bias ..................................................................................... 55
vi
b. Present Operation of Ecclesial Group and General Bias ................. 60
E. Conclusion: The Path Forward .................................................................................. 60
III. LAY VOCATION AS ACHIEVEMENT OF AUTHENTIC SUBJECTIVITY ................ 63
A. Introduction ............................................................................................................... 63
B. Lay Vocation Envisioned by Vatican II .................................................................... 64
1. Lay Vocation as God’s Call to Ecclesial Christian Discipleship .................. 65
2. Lay Vocation as Participation in One Vocation of Church .......................... 66
3. Lay Vocation as Call to Communion ........................................................... 67
4. Lay Vocation Simultaneously Ecclesial and Secular.................................... 68
5. Laity Exhorted to Knowledge ....................................................................... 69
6. Lonergan’s Contribution: Linking Lived to Ideal Lay Vocation ................. 69
C. The Subject Apprehended in Interiority Analysis ..................................................... 70
1. Existenz of Concrete Subject ........................................................................ 71
2. Subject as Conscious .................................................................................... 72
a. Consciousness Defined .................................................................... 73
3. Lonergan’s Cognitional Theory .................................................................... 74
a. Belief ................................................................................................ 76
4. Meaning ........................................................................................................ 79
a. Horizons ........................................................................................... 80
b. Worlds ............................................................................................. 81
d. Undifferentiated Versus Differentiated Consciousness ................... 84
e. Application: Communicating the Christian Message ...................... 85
5. Lonergan’s Existential Subject ..................................................................... 87
vii
b. Existential Subject ........................................................................... 88
i. Existential Decision ................................................................ 89
i. Feelings ................................................................................... 91
ii. Values ..................................................................................... 91
6. Lonergan’s Authentic Existential Subject .................................................... 96
a. Authenticity and Passionateness of Being ....................................... 96
b. Authenticity and Self-transcendence ............................................... 98
i. Intentional Self-transcendence ................................................ 98
ii. Transcendental Method .......................................................... 98
e. Barriers to Authenticity .................................................................. 102
D. Lay Vocation as Achievement of Authentic Subjectivity ....................................... 103
1. Lay Vocation as God’s Call to Become Oneself ........................................ 104
a. God’s Call Located in Passionateness of Being ............................. 104
b. God’s Call Manifested in Concrete Existenz ................................. 105
2. Lay Vocation Authentically Realized in Christ .......................................... 105
a. Committed Knowing in Christ ....................................................... 106
i. Enlarging Horizons ............................................................... 107
iii. Required for Full Realization of Church’s Mission .............. 108
viii
E. Conclusion ............................................................................................................... 110
A. Introduction ............................................................................................................. 112
2. Difficulties of Transposition ....................................................................... 115
C. Grace in Authentic Becoming of Subjects .............................................................. 118
1. Grace and Healing Vector of Development ................................................ 119
2. Religious Experience .................................................................................. 120
b. Laity Called to Fullness of Authenticity in Faith .......................... 123
4. Conversion .................................................................................................. 124
e. Barriers to Religious Conversion ................................................... 130
f. Psychic Conversion ........................................................................ 132
h. Conversion and Healing ................................................................ 137
5. Lay Formation for Conversion on All Levels ............................................. 138
D. Dialogue of Grace ................................................................................................... 140
1. Dialogical Experience of Grace .................................................................. 141
2. Grace as Gift of Openness .......................................................................... 143
ix
4. Role of Charisms in Dialogue ..................................................................... 148
5. Dialogue of Grace as Mediation ................................................................. 149
a. Mutual Mediation........................................................................... 150
i. Mutual Self-mediation in Christ ........................................... 155
ii. Mutual Self-Mediation of Graced Love ................................ 156
6. Conclusion .................................................................................................. 157
E. Lay Vocation Realized Authentically in Dialogue of Grace ................................... 160
1. Lay Vocation Realized in Dialogue ............................................................ 161
2. Lay Vocation Expressed in Dialogue ......................................................... 163
3. Lay Vocation Appropriated in Commitment to Dialogue .......................... 165
4. Ecclesial Vocations Diminished Through Lack of Dialogue ..................... 165
F. Conclusion ............................................................................................................... 166
A. Introduction ............................................................................................................. 169
1. Ecclesiology Informed by Lonergan’s Worldview ..................................... 171
a. Vertical Finality and Obediential Potency ..................................... 172
b. Cosmic Dimension of Grace .......................................................... 174
c. Vertical Finality and Emergent Probability .................................. 175
d. Cosmic Purpose of Church ............................................................ 175
e. World-order and Church-order ...................................................... 176
f. Necessity of Lay Participation ....................................................... 178
x
2. Ecclesiology Informed by God’s Solution to Problem of Evil ................... 181
a. Heuristic Structure of Solution ...................................................... 182
b. Heuristic Structure of Solution Applied to Church ....................... 186
i. Church’s Supernatural Purpose ............................................ 186
ii. Church Contingently Realized in History ............................. 186
iii. Church Constituted by Collaboration ................................... 187
c. Lay Vocation Directed to Graced Collaboration ........................... 189
d. Role of Institution and Clergy in Graced Collaboration ................ 190
3. Ecclesiology Informed by God’s Universal Gift of Salvation .................... 191
a. Holy Spirit as God’s First Gift ....................................................... 191
b. Implications for Ecclesiology ........................................................ 193
i. Charisms and Institution ....................................................... 193
ii. Church-world Relationship ................................................... 195
iv. Relation to World Religions ................................................. 198
v. Evangelization ...................................................................... 198
c. Lay Role Informed by Spirit as God’s First Gift ........................... 199
4. Church as Process of Self-constitution ....................................................... 200
a. Church as Concrete Existential Reality ......................................... 201
b. Church Constituted by Communication ........................................ 202
i. Constitutive Communication ................................................ 203
iii. Liturgy and Prayer as Constitutive Communication ............. 206
iv. Self Informed in Community ................................................ 207
v. Dialogue, Collaboration, and Lay Identity ........................... 208
c. Church as Community ................................................................... 209
xi
ii. Church as Process of Self-constitution ................................. 210
iii. Church as Event of Self-constitution .................................... 212
d. Role of Laity in Communication of Christ’s Message .................. 213
5. Authority in the Church .............................................................................. 215
a. Lonergan’s Analysis of Authority.................................................. 215
i. Authority as Exercise of Legitimate Power .......................... 215
ii. Authority and Authorities ..................................................... 216
iii. Legitimate Authority ............................................................ 217
VI. CONCLUSION: FULL, CONSCIOUS, AND ACTIVE PARTICIPATION ................. 221
A. Introduction ............................................................................................................. 221
1. Required for Authentic Realization of Lay Vocation ................................. 222
2. Required for Authentic Realization of Church ........................................... 223
3. Required for Authentic Realization of All Ecclesial Vocations ................. 224
C. Role of Laity in Authentic Solution to Ecclesial Problems .................................... 224
D. Solution to Problems of Church and Laity ............................................................. 227
E. Conclusion: “A Perhaps Not Numerous Center” .................................................... 228
VII. BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................................................................................................... 232
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
The years following the Second Vatican Council witnessed an exponential growth of
interest in issues having to do with the laity in the Roman Catholic Church. In part this has been
fueled by three concurrent but divergent trends.1 On the one hand, groups of the laity have
expressed the desire to participate more meaningfully in the life of the Church and to have a voice
in Church policy. This desire has found partial realization in a burgeoning of lay ministry since
the council. A second trend has been that of a measurable decrease in lay Catholic identity and
commitment, especially among younger Catholics, as determined by sociological surveys. A
third trend has been that of repeated emphases in some papal and magisterial documents during
this period on distinctions between the roles of the clergy and laity.
The clergy sexual abuse crisis has served to highlight issues about lay role and identity
that underlie these three trends. Most prominently, the clergy abuse crisis highlights the fact that
the laity are functionally marginalized in the Church by virtue of the fact that they have no
deliberative voice in matters of Church policy nor are Church leaders required to be accountable
to them. The clergy abuse crisis also points to tensions between the clerical and paternalistic
cultures that prevail within the Church and the secular cultures that inform the everyday lives of
the laity. Finally, the crisis highlights problems of confusion, even alienation, among some of the
laity regarding their identity and role as members of the Church.
PURPOSE OF PRESENT WORK
The present work recognizes that problems of the laity are also problems of the Church.
Thus it seeks to envision what might be possible for the laity and for the Church. It seeks to
better understand both how the laity might more fully live their lay vocation and how the Church
might better realize its vocation and its mission through the full realization of the laity.
1 The trends noted in this paragraph will be examined in more detail in Chapter Two.
2
LONERGAN’S CONTRIBUTION
In seeking to answer the questions of what the full realization of the laity and of the
Church consists and how they are interrelated, the present work employs the thought of Canadian
Jesuit philosopher and theologian, Bernard Lonergan (1904−1984). Although Lonergan
considered himself to be a “Roman Catholic with quite conservative views on religious and
church doctrines,”2 he nevertheless was critical of the cultural syndrome within Roman
Catholicism that he labeled “classicism.”3 In Lonergan’s analysis, classicism is a worldview
largely informed by Aristotelian metaphysics.4 Such a worldview is characterized by a static
concept of normative culture, by an understanding of history that does not take evolution and
development into account, and by the notion that knowledge of things is knowledge of their
ultimate causes based on normative, universal, and certain principles.5
Lonergan attributed the positivistic approach of the manualist and Thomistic traditions
that prevailed in Catholic philosophy and theology prior to and even beyond Vatican II to
classicism.6 He described a positivistic approach as one that emphasizes the merely factual while
ignoring the historical and cultural contexts of the facts.7 Such an approach treats doctrines as
formulas to be memorized and repeated verbatim.8 In Lonergan’s opinion a positivistic approach
to doctrines is problematic for two reasons: first, in its neglect of critical history it fails to provide
2 Bernard F. Lonergan, Method in Theology (1971; repr., Toronto: University of Toronto Press,
1994), 332. Citations are to the 1994 edition. 3 See ibid., 326−27. 4 Lonergan makes this point in many places. One such source is Lonergan, “The Transition from a
Classicist World-view to Historical-mindedness,” in A Second Collection, ed. William F. J. Ryan, S.J. and Bernard J. Tyrrell, S.J. (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1974), 3.
5 Bernard J. F. Lonergan, “Theology in Its New Context,” in ibid., 57−59. 6 Lonergan, Method, 326−27. 7 Lonergan, Understanding and Being: The Halifax Lectures on Insight, ed. Elizabeth A. Morelli and
Mark D. Morelli, rev. and aug. by Frederick E. Crowe with Elizabeth A. Morelli, Mark D. Morelli, Robert M. Doran, and Thomas V. Daly, Collected Works of Bernard Lonergan 5 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1990), 222.
8 Lonergan, Method, 330−31; See Lonergan, Verbum: Word and Idea in Aquinas, ed. Frederick E. Crowe, Robert M. Doran, Collected Words of Bernard Lonergan 2 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1997), 222−24.
3
a contextualized understanding of doctrines;9 and, second, in its emphasis on knowing facts it
fails to adequately address the understanding of the knower.10 For these reasons, Lonergan
rejected a notion of the unity of Catholic faith based on “everyone subscribing to the correct
formulae.”11
Lonergan’s motivation throughout his long career was to move Catholic philosophy and
theology away from such a positivistic approach and classicist worldview in order to bring them
“to the level of one’s time”12 so that they could respond to the exigencies raised by modern
science, modern historical consciousness, and modern philosophy.13 Lonergan’s efforts in this
regard focused on the renewal of Catholic philosophy and on the creation of a method of theology
as a particular application of his general transcendental method. His two major works, Insight,14
and Method in Theology15 represent the achievements of his efforts.
Lonergan’s reconstructed philosophy is based on his approach to the human subject in
interiority analysis, where interiority refers to “one’s subjectivity, one’s operations, their
structure, their norms, their potentialities.”16 Because Lonergan’s interiority analysis focuses on
human intending and human acts, 17 it offers an analysis of the human person in his or her
dynamic, concrete, historical existence. His interiority analysis considers “mental acts as
experienced and as systematically conceived” to be a logical first.18 Lonergan’s reconstructed
9 Lonergan, Understanding and Being, 222. 10 Lonergan writes, “No repetition of formulas can take the place of understanding.” Lonergan,
Method, 351. 11 Ibid., 327. Lonergan associated…