Garry Wills: "Why Priests? A Failed Tradition"
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2013-02-13/garry-wills-why-priests-failed-tradition
Pope Benedict XVI, the Roman Catholic Church's top priest, took the world by surprise with his decision to resign. Pulitzer Prize-winning author -- and lifelong Catholic -- Gary Wills asks why we need priests and suggests Christianity would have been better off without the priesthood.
Guests
Garry Wills
professor emeritus of history at Northwestern University and author of numerous books, including the Pulitzer Prize-winning "Lincoln at Gettysburg," "Saint Augustine" and "Why I Am a Catholic."
Monsignor Charles Pope
pastor, Holy Comforter-St. Cyprian in Washington, D.C.
Related Items
Read An Excerpt
Reprinted by arrangement with Viking, a member of Penguin Group (USA) Inc., from "Why Priests?" Copyright © Garry Wills, 2013.
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
I love the Diane Rehm Show and I try to set time aside daily to listen. I am retired so it's normally not a problem but today I wish it had been. After listening (trying) to Garry Willis I have come to the conclusion that it's no wonder that participation in organized religion in the U.S. has fallen to a low level. The last I heard was 76% claim to be affiliated but only 16% participate. With all the gibberish that Willis was spouting out as fact and even arguing with callers is there any surprise that no one understands or wants to be involved? Grown men arguing over topics that there is little chance of proving except in their minds. OMG! I have come to the conclusion that organized religion is a hobby, a special interest and only there to collect money and influence political positions that dictate their beliefs. I will never understand why Guns and God should be in the same sentence but the right wing evangelicals have figured it out...M O N E Y!
Sorry Diane!
With due respect to Mr Wills, a lot of good information, but not enough knowledge to substantiate "Why Priests". Please consider having speakers such as Dr Scott Hahn, Dr Peter Kreeft, Dr John Bergman, Fr Robert Barron, Ralph Martin, and Stephen Ray, for a more balance discussion to "Why Priests" " A tradition worth safe keeping"
I expect a lot from NPR and Diane. It bothers me when people (both commentators and guests) continually refer to the Roman Catholic Church as "the Church," as if the Roman Catholic Church is the only church. It is not; there are many other churches. Please refer to the Roman Catholic Church with its name, not as if it were the only church. You would do that with Baptists, Orthodox, independents, etc. Treat those of us who are not Roman Catholics as if our churches matter. Thanks.
Mr Wills said he is a Catholic, but he rejects much Church teaching. It is like saying "I'm a baseball player, but I don't believe you shouild be out with three strikes. It should be four strikes."
As a lifetime listener and supporter, I am disappointed at the insensitivity and intolerance exhibited by the choice and timing of this broadcast. Gary Wills' expressed views are completely antithetical to Catholic teaching and theology. While he has every right as an American to hold those views and to express them, the Diane Rehm producers were irresponsible in the timing of this broadcast to coincide with Ash Wednesday, a deeply holy day on the Catholic liturgical calendar, and the recent announcement of Pope Benedict XVI's resignation, and in the undue weight afforded to Mr. Wills' personal opinions.
Both the content of discussion and the timing were tantamount to granting a representative of "Jews for Jesus" time at the table during Yom Kippur - a disrespectful miscalculation I am certain the producers would never make.
The timing of this discussion was profoundly offensive to all devout and practicing Catholics in the US, and to the countless Catholics throughout the world who have in the past and who presently endure persecution and face death for their faith.
As a Catholic, I found the herisies that were spewed by Mr. Wills horrendous. Why he claims to be a Catholic is beyond me. His knowledge of Scripture, Church History, and Sacramental Theology leaves much to be desired. How disturbing, Diane, that you would have such a guest on during this critical time in the life of the Church. Just once, I would like to hear a guest on your show (or anywhere else on NPR for that matter), who defends the Church rather than maligning it.
The scholarly community today recognize that their own personal area of expertise is extremely limited. For instance, a good church historian will admit to being an expert on maybe only 70 years of history, and would refer to others outside of those years.
Here we have the a typical "Jack-of-all-Trades/Master of None" situation with Gary Wills, where in typical media attention grabbing fashion, Ms Reims feel compelled to ask what the public wants to hear. Mr. Wills doesn't even have the humility to at least acknowledge his limitations. The catholic church, having dealt with these things before, will give a resounding rebuttal in writing, and not rely on spur-of-the-moment reflections of a monsignor.
An interesting side note: at one point Mr. Wills correctly questions the monsignor's response of "surviving these many years" as a weak argument regarding the truths that were being discussed. But in the final utterance he himself uses that same argument for his own version of the truth.
If Jesus is Truth itself, and God is infinite, the truth will always rise, and make every single person's version of it seem "like straw".
Please consider inviting Cardinal Dolan on your show. Provide him with this morning's interview with Mr. Wills. I found Mr. Wills condesending and rude to the Monsignor and many in our group of listeners disappointed with your choice of guests or lack of vetting his public behavior.
I can't wait to read this book! I have no denominational hate, and truth be told, I am a Protestant. However, my sister is a Roman Catholic, as is 3 or 4 other members of my extended family. But this is not about denomination. In my opinion, the author raises two larger questions. The first, how much of worshiping God is obedience to God? The second, is Christianity a matter of Sola Scriptura, or tradition? In my opinion, According to the Bible, it neither is, nor should be the latter.
I sincerely wish Garry Wills had gone into greater detail that the congregation of believers in what later became the Church in Rome, was simply one of many churches, i.e., the Church in Corinth, the Church, Galatia, or the Church in Ephesus. In the 1st Century, the Church in Rome had no pre-eminence. In fact, in order to get converts, the Church in Rome adapted various pagan practices, all of which are still practiced, and many of which were condemned during the Reformation.
Diane
Thank you for the program, I am a regular listener. That said I don't feel you gave the Monsignor a fair opportunity to rebut Mr Willis's views. If the intent was to air Mr Willis's view then do so and avoid the pretense of having an opposing view. If you want to be balanced then give enough time for the opposing view to be aired. The few minutes given the Monsignor was not enough.
My personal view is that only God is perfect, any thing touched by man is in someway flawed. This includes the church's leadership at times but also includes Mr Willis. The difference is that the dogma of the church has been enduring despite attempts to undermine it. I seriously doubt the church would have lasted as long as it has or have grown worldwide as it has, had Mr.Willis views been in place.
Listening to Gary Wills explain his thoughts about Catholicism was sad. Somehow, in all his years and study, he has missed the truth, beauty, and joy of God and the Catholic Church.
What a way to live. What is his real problem under the facade?
It's so easy to find the true teaching of the Church about any issue. Why does he, or any of us, spend so much time trying to dredge up half-truths? Discovering the remarkable doctrines and teachings of the Church, and why they are what they are, is liberating. Let's not guess or assume we know what the Church teaches, or take it from someone else who is going on hearsay. Let's go the source and let the Church speak for itself.
Having been a long-time fan and admirer of Diane and the show, I feel compelled to voice my anger over today's interview. The guest's criticism of the Catholic church was extremely offensive. The guest's comments seem like a vendetta against the Church. The interview was horrible and unbalanced.
Sarge, you asked me: "So somebody who has arrived at a different conclusion than you is a non thinking person?"
The premise on which Christianity is based and which is the bare minimum a Christian has to believe to qualify as a Christian: a deity is born as his son, of a virgin; sacrifices himself to himself to save his believers from himself; rises from the dead; ascends into heaven to go back to himself promising to return to earth, is either true or not true.
Anybody who arrives at the conclusion that it is true did not do so involving thought. At least not of the kind that includes logic, reason, parsimony and the evaluation of evidence.
Now, such individuals may be perfectly capable of balancing their checkbook, doing differential equations, even administrating the genome project but when it comes to their religion they switch to non-thinking mode i.e. faith and become, albeit it momentarily, non thinking persons.
I found it in bad taste for NPR to run this show on Ash Wednesday of all days. As far as Mr. Wills' comments, he has basically placed himself outside of the Church, despite his claims to be a Catholic. To show such a wanton disregard for Christ in the Eucharist and the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, Mr. Wills rejects the basic tenets of our faith and Christ's command to "Do this in remembrance of Me". I pray that during this Lenten Season, Mr. Wills regains his faith in the true presence of Christ in the Eucharist and the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.
Amen, We need to pray for this poor soul, that he see's the truth. Jesus is present in the Blessed Sacrament. see www.catholicdoors.com/misc/santarem.htm
Spread the faith. JMJ
Mr. Wills' immense intellectual accomplishments have apparently caused him to believe that he himself is now infallible. On his sole authority he lobbies to redefine Catholicism, rejecting every central tenet (but somehow claiming it's still Catholicism). His contentions are absurd; the real presence in the Eucharist was clearly defined and understood early in the Church's history (though that did not stop theological work to clarify the term precisely). He twists Augustine's teaching and confuses distinct concepts such as the body of the faithful and the real presence. Scholars such as Aquinas are discounted because they don't agree with Wills. But why am I surprised? As a failed aspirant to the priesthood, Wills' hatred for the ministry he was unable to achieve is not surprising, particularly as a would-be Jesuit, given the order's tortured intellectualism. Martin Luther effectively went through the same process, and reached the same conclusions.
Christianity and Catholicism were effectively one and the same until Luther's revolt. Wills conjures up a vague origin of the priesthood sometime in the "middle ages", but it is possible to date the Mass and its sacrificial nature much farther back toward apostolic times, albeit with some dating uncertainty as documents from the first 300 years of Catholicism are sparse (not surprising for a church which was illegal under the Roman Empire). But the 'failed' priesthood has a far longer history than Wills wants to admit.
Gary Wills says he remains a Catholic, but this is the same as a saying you are a staunch republican who believes whole-heartedly in Maoism and Marxism-Leninism or a Mormon who rejects the teachings of Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon. The statement is meaningless. Wills is a Protestant (or a Catholic apostate), and he should have the guts to admit it. Choosing a different religion or sect is one thing. Trying to destroy Catholicism because you can no longer believe in it is contemptible.
I would have loved to hear a question about the word, and meaning of it, "Dominion."
It has been interpreted over time, to mean , and in all religions, that Gd put nature and all life here for humans to use as we will. This dangerous and selfish interpretation has created the very world we have. We claim some Gdlike position and do anything we wish to our planet.
The word, "Creation," IS synonomus with the word, "Environment."
SO how ARE we treating our CREATION, our environment?
How does our definition of "Dominion," threaten every living being upon this once pristine place?
And what of biotechnology, splicing genes and making new life forms? How does the "church" reconcile science manipulating Gds work for profit and share holder gain? Never a deep question asked, so never a deep discussion about how humanity is still so lost spiritually, morally, ethicaly.
Jesus would be sick if He saw today, the result of our definition of "Dominion."
If what is happening today in our world is a reflection of "religion," Jesus would weep! War, torture, venal food systems that make people sick, external gratifications taking the place of spiritual practices.... OMG, is this what so called religion teaches?
Diane Rehm did a great disservice to the Catholic church today in allowing Mr. Wills to run on about the priesthood and then interrupt Monsignor Charles Pope who was asked to come into the studio to defend against the new book of Wills's called "Why Priests? A Failed Tradition"
I'm sure Father did his best but the host should have had equal talent to fairly represent both sides like Patrick Madrid, Fr. Mitch Pacwa, Father Barrons or Father Larry Richards and many more that would have dropped everything to defend the priest hood on national listener supported PBS radio.
Fatal typing mistake in your show's transcript will alter what people remember of your show against the Catholic church, "I mean, the Catholic Church has perjured for 2000 years."
However Mrs. Rehm, you provided some ten pages to Wills and the last three and only 698 words for Monsignor Charles Pope to defend the church.
Gary Wills says "most Protestants don't even have a communion of our sort." obviously still believes he is still a Catholic but would rather have a church where laypeople not only interpret on their own but then start to preach. In this new church of wills there would be 300 parishioners all standing up preaching their own interpretation.
Mrs. Rehm if you expect listener supported programming you will have to represent fairly the issue and not allowing someone to sell his book with the quiet approval of a priest on your show that never gets to speak. I hope you will have equal time for the priesthood someday to solely explain their view.
jamille6 wrote: " The priesthood also refers to the leadership of the church and the authority by which decisions are made and doctrines and policies established and maintained."
I have never known the Mormons to change scripture interpretation and then preach it as failed priest candidate Gary Wills. At the end of his speech he said in the transcript that all community should interpret and then be the preachers. I'm sure in your church the dogmas not doctrines are not voted on by the church members.
I didn't hear any discussion about the institutionalized, non-biblical tolerance for homosexuality in the churches ranks. If Biblical standards for pastors had been adhered to all along this wouldn't have become an issue. Similar to the thought: "If AIDS patient #1 had been monogomus would we have an epidemic?"
Religous persectution in tone, or fact is no respecter of holy days.
As a Catholic, I try to maintain an open mind to other's thoughts and challenges. But by choosing a radical and inflammatory guest on one of our holy days shows extreme disrespect and distaste on your part. I agree with having Mr. Willis' right to express his views; he is very intelligent individual. But your choice to have him do so on Ash Wednesday was terribly insensitive. I certainly hope that you would not have an anti-semitic guest on during Hanukah, or a racist with you on Martin Luther King's holiday. Please show equal respect to the peaceful followers of the Catholic faith.
With admiration and respect, I have come to expect more from you and your show. But your choice of this subject matter on Ash Wednesday, and your less than fair moderation of Mr Willis' behavior reminded me of the EIB mentality, not that of NPR.
Not a very Christian attitude, ay 'bama.
I shall no longer listen to YOU.
This is a comment for Diane directly. Although I am very conservative, I appreciate listening to your show because of the decent and respectful dialogue between your guests, yourself, and the callers. It is usually very enlightening. However, your choice yesterday of giving time to a man so ignorant of the truths of Christianity was a disgrace to you and your show. I am a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, not a Catholic, but I suffered in behalf of my many friends who so faithfully believe in their religion. I was also amazed that a so-called expert could say that Peter was not even a priest or a bishop! Indeed he was an apostle! Christ bestowed his priesthood and the holy apostleship upon him as well as the other eleven. Upon Christ's death and resurrection, Peter was given the keys of the priesthood to lead the Church. He was not a pope but a prophet. Yes, there was an apostacy from all that Christ taught and when the last of the apostles died, the priesthood was taken from the earth, but Jesus Christ himself, through Joseph Smith, restored all the saving doctrines of His church, including the Aaronic and Melchizedek Priesthoods. Today there are prophets and apostles on the earth leading His Church. You would find it enligtening to invite one of the leaders of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to explain this on one of your programs. It would be uplifting rather than absolutely appalling as was yesterday's discussion.
What a disappointing show. I listened with an interest in hearing a dialogue. Instead, I heard an endless monologue from Garry Wills. Why even have Monsignor Charles Pope on the show if he contributes less than 1% to it? Not to mention, she picked someone way outside the norm to feature on the show. It would have been much more interesting if there had been an allowance for a conversation between the two and/or if she had introduced a mainstream practicing Catholic into the show. I kept waiting for it to become an interesting debate and it never did.
I repeatedly feel frustrated with Diane Rehm, where she sets up herself as a neutral party, then it becomes obvious that she has her own agenda, conveyed in the form of poor mediation and question handling. Not to mention that even as a non-religious person, I find it offensive that this blatantly one-sided debate was aired on Ash Wednesday. When someone who is not even religious finds this show offensive, there's something obviously wrong with the show. Diane Rehm, you can do so much better than this!
I listened to some of the discussion between Gary Will and Monsignor Charles Pope. Not surprisingly it went downhill pretty quickly. Within minutes the discussion devolved into "you're wrong" no "you're wrong".
Because both men are discussing their beliefs, which are based on faith, they immediately ran into conflict. And, because faith is belief in ideas for which there is no evidence, there is no way to resolve the conflict.
Both men relied on the documents on which their beliefs are based. Unfortunately those documents are based on the beliefs of the founders. The difference between the beliefs of the founders and the beliefs of Mr. Will and Monsignor Pope is that the founders wrote their beliefs down. Other than that, there is no evidence to support either position. Hence the inevitable conflict.
And 1000 years ago, and 1500 years ago. Now we are having it again.
If there is no need for priests, do we need ministers
Since many Protestant Churches are named in honor of St. Paul, what should happen to them ?
Too meny men! The catholic church needs a female Pope, even better, a menstruating woman.