What Does Archbishop Cupich Know About Catechesis Anyway?

An opportunity for Catholic students to dialogue about truth

Dominic Lynch at Lifezette.com phoned new Chicago FrancisBishop Blase Cupich for an interview.  Since we have so many new martyrs, saints, and venerables in FrancisChurch who seem to elude requirements for demonstrating heroic virtue, saintly character, or miracles, I think we might be looking here at some future Patron Saint of Excuses.

In a phone conversation, Cupich shared thoughts about Catholic identity on campuses, what he would contribute to this fall’s gathering at the Vatican on the family, and whether he is a Chicago Cubs or Chicago White Sox fan.

How can Catholic universities in America regain sight of their institutional identities?

It’s very important to keep in mind that there’s always a tension in making sure that the Catholic ethos and inspiration that gave rise to the university continues to be handed on from one generation to another. At the same time, it’s also important to realize that universities are laboratories where people do grow. They need the space to make sure that they incrementally understand the faith. Sometimes that means it’s not all at once — there has to be a certain pedagogy to it.

In FrancisChurch every Catholic is a scientist and every target is a ‘laboratory.’  Freedom to sin is ‘space’ and sinning is ‘growing.’  Spiraling into a pit of vice is ‘incrementally understanding the faith’ according to some ‘pedagogy!’

We also know that a good number of students in our Catholic universities are not Catholic. For instance, various theology classes can’t turn into catechetical institutes. There has to be some awareness of teaching people how to think theologically. That tension is always going to be there in an institution of higher learning.

Teaching theology without catechesis?  Thinking ‘theologically’ without learning theology?  Embrace the ‘tension’ of cognitive dissonance, says Cupich.  In other words, be absurd.  It’s just higher learning, see.

But it sure sounds lower.

Loyola University Chicago recently hosted transgender activist Laverne Cox. How should a Catholic university navigate thorny concerns like that?

I don’t know the context of the person coming there, so I can’t really comment on that particular issue. I do know there are issues of concern to students, and if you can use a controlled environment by which there can be honest and open dialogue so people do come to an awareness of what the truth is, that’s of value. It’s always of value for people to take different steps towards the truth — even in terms of a point-counterpoint. That’s a legitimate way for a university to educate people, in general.

I don’t know too much about that event but clinically speaking, if the environment is controlled by some creepy professor, then you can have a Petri dish of dialogue.

I thought speakers came to teach not learn.  Giving voice to the depraved and perverted allows the guest speaker a chance to learn the truth from who – the odd student foolish or unfortunate enough to be taking the class, but who’s bold, righteous, and honest enough to speak out and receive a C or an F for his tepid critique?

The truth moves one way in a situation like that – out the door.

In FrancisChurch slippery bishops and gay spectacles get mountains of funding while Catholic truth can only pay, protest, and fail.

From here Abp. Cupich skips right over the Synod without saying anything frightening, then moves toward the family in general.  We have to do better accompanying them as they pass on the faith!

When the Synod on the Family convenes again this fall, Communion for the divorced and remarried is an issue to be discussed. Where do you align on that issue?

I don’t think that’s a big issue. The real issue today for families and marriage within the church is: How can the family continue to be the place where the Gospel is passed on? That seems to be where the real crisis is. Some are concerned about a decline in Mass attendance, and that is troublesome. However, I believe we’ve lost a sense in the church that the family is where the Gospel is communicated.

We have to help our families see that if the faith is going to continue, it’s going to have to be handed on within the context of the family. As for the other issues of who can go to Communion and all the rest of it, those are not unimportant, but they’re not the central issues. The Synod should not concern itself with those kinds of technical questions.

If you were to make a specific contribution to the Synod, what would it be?

I’ve been a priest now for 40 years and I think that marriage preparation is too focused on the relationship between the couple. We don’t do a very good job in the church of helping people who get married to see the role they have in bringing children into the world and passing on the faith. We don’t accompany them there.

Pope Francis has repeatedly asked us to “accompany” people. We have to put together marriage preparation programs that factor into the equation of how we are asking them to create a family, a place where the faith is passed on. We don’t talk about that at all to married couples.

How important is that kind of training for Catholics at an early age?

Well, that kind of catechesis is going to be effective not only if it is done well in the classroom, but also if it is supported at home. Too many people believe that they don’t have responsibility for passing on the faith. They think that they can take a child to religious education, go off and pick up the laundry and come back and pick-up a Catholic. We’re not serving families well by not challenging parents to take on the catechesis with us. It starts with building a whole new generation of married couples who see the importance of their part in passing on the faith.

What are your plans to stem the tide of Catholics leaving the church?

It’s not just the Catholic church that is losing regular church attendance. It’s the case for all of the mainstream, mainline religions. The real issue here is there is a redefinition of the human person that the culture wants to promote: that the human person lives in isolation, who is autonomous, who is the author of their own life, and who wants to be left alone. That’s opposed to the church’s understanding that the human person is relational, who lives in community with others and whose life is defined in terms of their relationship with others.

That is scary to some people because communities make expectations of us. We live in a culture today that has a very strong market-driven understanding of human life that wants to divide us. It’s easier to sell products to individuals rather than to communities.

We need to start with this question: How do you see your life? Is it lived in isolation or do you see the value of relationships where we make demands on each other in faith?

Except for the blame he puts on ‘the evil market,’ none of this sounds too bad to me.  That’s the problem.

Well there is that bit about too much autonomy and people thinking they are the authors of their own lives.  That does sound a touch invasive. I guess it’s possible FrancisBishop Cupich might want to author my life a little, and grab what remains of my freedom for the sake of my family’s faith.  Is their faith yet another excuse?

Didn’t he just tell us that transgender college speeches were dialogue and that sinning was space for incremental growth?  Why should I trade my freedom and family so Archbishop Cupich can pass on some of that FrancisFaith?

I am the author of the life God gave me, and I don’t hate my autonomy – especially now that FrancisChurch seems to want it so badly.