Andrew Greeley

[Rosa Mystica]

Hi all,

You probably all know of Andrew Greeley (the Irish novelist who is also an ordained Catholic priest). I've heard a lot of negative things about him (that his novels are trashy, that his views are liberal, and that he's not a priest in good standing). I was just wondering what you all thought of him, and if the allegations were true. I haven't read his stuff cover-to-cover, but I've looked through it, and it to me, it does look like trash.

 

[ProCommunioneFacior]

Yep, trash is the appropriate word for this dissenting priests views and writings.

 

[InnerPhyre]

I'm a religious studies major. The chapter on Catholicism in one of my textbooks was written by Greely. It LITERALLY said (I'm not taking things out of context or exagerrating in the least) that Catholics worship statues, believe in superstitious charms like rosaries, are morally lax, and it was a wonder why they dont "join a decent Christian denomination." I couldn't believe what I was reading. This man has poison flowing from his pen.

 

[kiwimac]

What a crock of Fertiliser!

I have read almost ALL of Greeley's works, they put him firmly in the centre of the moderate Catholic tradition.

Kiwimac

 

[InnerPhyre]

Is that right? Ok fine. I'll quote the first paragraph of the chapter. This is from the Text World Relgions in America Edited by Jacob Neusner

The Catholics in the World and in America

By Andrew M. Greeley

Catholics - they rarely use the label "Roman Catholics" of themselves and find it ever so slightly offensive - often seem to their fellow Americans to be just a little odd. They worship saints and statues; they have pictures of saints in the stained-glass windows of their often garish churches; they wear medals and carry rosaries that are superstitious charms; they obey a foreigner in Rome; they don't think for themselves, but do what their bishops and priests tell them to; they're clannish; they're morall lax, given to drinking, gambling, and dancing; their politicians tend to be corrupt; and they think theirs is the only true church. There is so much pagan superstition mixed into their beliefs and practices that sometimes they seem barely Christian. Despite all these things, individual Catholics are frequently very nice people; it's hard to understand why they remain Catholic, especially now when there is so much confusion and uncertainty in their church. You'd think they would take the opportunity to escape into a decent Christian religion.



Yea......sounds very moderate to me.....

 

[NDIrish]

Andrew Greeley is squirming in his pants at the prospet of Catholics re-discovering their Faith again. He, and his breed of liberal Catholics are slowly but surely going away.

 

[scraparcs]

Is that right? Ok fine. I'll quote the first paragraph of the chapter. This is from the Text World Relgions in America Edited by Jacob Neusner

The Catholics in the World and in America

By Andrew M. Greeley

Catholics - they rarely use the label "Roman Catholics" of themselves and find it ever so slightly offensive - often seem to their fellow Americans to be just a little odd. They worship saints and statues; they have pictures of saints in the stained-glass windows of their often garish churches; they wear medals and carry rosaries that are superstitious charms; they obey a foreigner in Rome; they don't think for themselves, but do what their bishops and priests tell them to; they're clannish; they're morall lax, given to drinking, gambling, and dancing; their politicians tend to be corrupt; and they think theirs is the only true church. There is so much pagan superstition mixed into their beliefs and practices that sometimes they seem barely Christian. Despite all these things, individual Catholics are frequently very nice people; it's hard to understand why they remain Catholic, especially now when there is so much confusion and uncertainty in their church. You'd think they would take the opportunity to escape into a decent Christian religion.



Yea......sounds very moderate to me.....

Please forgive my intrusion, but that paragraph is simply an exaggeration of how outsiders might perceive Catholics. He is not actually attributing these characteristics to Catholics, but rather stating (with an over-the-top, exaggerated manner) that that is perhaps how Catholics may be/have been perceived by outsiders. That paragraph is not meant to be taken as a literal statement of his beliefs on Catholics.

You could certainly make the argument that he is overly liberal based on his other writings, but the above paragraph is not a statement of his views.

 

[InnerPhyre]

I agree, but he never goes on to tell why those beliefs are untrue. He just leaves it at that, which gives everyone who reads it a wrong impression.

 

[ShannonMcCatholic]

It just makes me want to vomit! We have such an incredible history and depth of tradition that is so beautiful-- and people like Fr. Greely ( who seems embarrassed to be called Father)- want nothing more than to water it all down so that it is nothing! Well those who teach the faith are held up to a higher standard- not only will he be judged for all of his sins, but all of those of those who he led astray....

I will pray for his repentance...

 

[PeterPaul]

He should be excommunicated. Whoops, we don't do that anymore do we?

 

[BAChristian]

He should be excommunicated. Whoops, we don't do that anymore do we?

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but I think we still do. I just don't think the Vatican has gotten wind of anything that is severe enough to be excommunicated.

IMO, I would excommunicate all of the priests who were guilty of molestation. FWIW, however, I believe that all of the claims against priests were probably pretty exaggerated. I really seriously doubt that we have hundreds of priests molesting boys. I think a lot of lawyers got phat checks off of that one...and the Church's image got destroyed because of it.

 

[Rosa Mystica]

This is from the Text World Relgions in America Edited by Jacob Neusner

The Catholics in the World and in America

By Andrew M. Greeley

Catholics - they rarely use the label "Roman Catholics" of themselves and find it ever so slightly offensive - often seem to their fellow Americans to be just a little odd. They worship saints and statues; they have pictures of saints in the stained-glass windows of their often garish churches; they wear medals and carry rosaries that are superstitious charms; they obey a foreigner in Rome; they don't think for themselves, but do what their bishops and priests tell them to; they're clannish; they're morall lax, given to drinking, gambling, and dancing; their politicians tend to be corrupt; and they think theirs is the only true church. There is so much pagan superstition mixed into their beliefs and practices that sometimes they seem barely Christian. Despite all these things, individual Catholics are frequently very nice people; it's hard to understand why they remain Catholic, especially now when there is so much confusion and uncertainty in their church. You'd think they would take the opportunity to escape into a decent Christian religion.

Whoa! I suspected he was bad, but had no idea he was this bad! If he's so against Catholicism, why does he call himself a Catholic?

 

[scraparcs]

I agree, but he never goes on to tell why those beliefs are untrue. He just leaves it at that, which gives everyone who reads it a wrong impression.

Given that the book appears to be a text on world religions, his focus is not to expound on the untruth of those caricatures. He should present Catholics in America fairly and accurately in another portion of the text, but a text on world religions in America calls for a presentation of how those religions are perceived and practiced in America, and as such, stating why those beliefs are untrue would not necessarily be essential to the purpose of the text.

Also, it should be evident to a college-level reader that the earlier-cited paragraph is not a literal statement of Greeley's beliefs. If he were writing to a general audience, he should perhaps make it more plain from the context that that is not a statement of his beliefs. However, a college-level reader should grasp that that paragraph is more or less a parody of various outsider perceptions of Catholics in America, even when that paragraph is removed from its context.

Edited one phrase -- wording was a bit combative.

 

[scraparcs]

Whoa! I suspected he was bad, but had no idea he was this bad! If he's so against Catholicism, why does he call himself a Catholic?

Although I have not read the entirety of his other writings (so far I've only read The Catholic Myth and am reading Confessions of a Parish Priest), it does not appear that he is that against Catholicism. That paragraph is a parody of other people's perceptions of Catholics in the US.

Unfortunately, I do not own that text, but I am now quite interested as to what the remainder of the text contains.

 

[InnerPhyre]

Given that the book appears to be a text on world religions, his focus is not to expound on the untruth of those caricatures. He should present Catholics in America fairly and accurately in another portion of the text, but a text on world religions in America calls for a presentation of how those religions are perceived and practiced in America, and as such, stating why those beliefs are untrue would not necessarily be essential to the purpose of the text.

Also, it should be evident to a college-level reader that the earlier-cited paragraph is not a literal statement of Greeley's beliefs. If he were writing to a general audience, he should perhaps make it more plain from the context that that is not a statement of his beliefs. However, a college-level reader should grasp that that paragraph is more or less a parody of various outsider perceptions of Catholics in America, even when that paragraph is removed from its context.

Edited one phrase -- wording was a bit combative.

Unless you've read the entire chapter yourself, you really don't know what you're talking about. I'm telling you that that paragraph would be acceptable if he were to use it and then shed light on how those ideas are misconceptions. He doesn't. He starts off with it, and then goes off in another direction completely. The purpose of studying religion is to come to an understanding of each particular religion from the persepective of those who practice it. That's the function of the rest of the text. An average college student reading the text would not know that Andrew Greely is even a priest, or a catholic for that matter. Most of the other authors of the text are atheist or agnostic professors. I urge you to find and read the chapter for yourself before you insult my intelligence, however subtly.

 

[Cosmic Charlie]

I've always thought of Andrew Greeley as a gadfly. As a writer in a genre he seems to be a lightweight.

Excommunicate him ?

Jeez, can we get the Priests who are child molesters and bishops who leave the scene of fatal auto accidents first ?

 

[Metanoia02]

I've always thought of Andrew Greeley as a gadfly. As a writer in a genre he seems to be a lightweight.

Excommunicate him ?

Jeez, can we get the Priests who are child molesters and bishops who leave the scene of fatal auto accidents first ?

On this we agree!