Why I Am a Catholic

Rating:
Summary: Nonfiction at Its Best
Review: A stunning sequel to "Papal Sins." Obviously, only someone who cares about the Catholic Church could write these two volumes. The history is always engaging, his reflections on the Creed insightful and exciting.

Garry Wills always teaches me new facts about the Church. In "Sins," it was that the Jewish Christians rolled over on the Greek Christians after Nero's fire. Here, it was that Rome wasn't really a major player in the early Church, separated by geography and language from everyone else.
His exegesis on the Lord's Prayer was tremendous, elaborating on themes he approached in early writings.

Often, when I look around as some of the rightwingers who rule my diocese, I feel like a stranger in a strange land. Wills just tells me I'm in the right place.

Rating:
Summary: Please do not confuse Wills with Catholics OF FAITH
Review: During times like this, with the horrifying priest scandal, papal fragility and charges of anti-Semitism, Catholics obviously can't be pleased to hear more (unnecessary) media attention given to such an insufferably arrogant and hypocritical individual like Garry Wills. But, always the opportunist, Wills recognizes that anti-Catholic sentiment can turn into dividends for his shallow and repetitive assessments of the Vatican and people of shared faith. Yes, FAITH -- that one word that Wills continuously tap dances around because the true meaning of the word still alludes him. Being an intellectual, he knows that the media worships his type and will publish his "declarations" (devoid of solutions) as the "final word." But when will Wills and the media finally acknowledge that the Catholic faith is not simply an intellectual pursuit? It is not just about praying and attending church (and thereby declaring yourself a "devout Catholic," as Wills does). It is not about simply carrying on a religion you were born into, even though you no longer believe in much of it (e.g., Wills undermines the importance in worshiping Mary, yet continues to pray the rosary, which signifies . . worship of Mary). It's not an issue of IQ or theological expertise. Faith must be felt, experienced, continually cultivated and deepened, and approached with HUMILITY (another word obviously foreign to Wills).

Wills can indeed offer much history (and a rather unhealthy obsession) regarding the papal hierarchy. But there are other sources for that information than this book. You don't need the baggage that Wills brings with it. You don't need to read about the many, many doctrines he rejects and writes against, only to be followed by hollow declarations of his loyalty to Catholicism (hence, the ridiculous title of this book). Wills' true character came into clearer view recently with his damning piece for New York Review about the Passion of the Christ film. It was very clear that Wills rejects the significance of the Lord's Passion (THE true core of Christianity), the importance of Mary, the truth and relevance of historical Passion accounts, and the inclusion of any form of guilt or responsibility when considering the extent of Christ's sufferings. Instead of acknowledging the obvious (like a truly humble, honest, caring religious gentleman would) -- that he cannot find a spiritual connection to the story beyond his cold, detached scholarship -- he then proceeded to demean the intelligence, tastes, character, gullibility and religious interpretation of Mel Gibson and all Catholics who derived something far deeper from the film than he could. Nothing about Wills' attitude and manner (as well as respect/consideration for his fellow human beings) represents the ideals that TRUE "devout Catholics" follow in their daily lives.

Simply put, we're all well aware that the Catholic Church has made many mistakes, is currently facing some serious problems, and has many more changes and issues to deal with in the future. You don't need to buy a Garry Wills book to tell you these things. You'll never see the secular media directing you to books providing multi-dimensional understanding of the Vatican and the Catholic faith, but such authors DO exist.

Rating:
Summary: WHY I AM A (LONG-WINDED) CATHOLIC....
Review: Garry Wills, prolific commentator on things political, cultural, and religious, writes again. The only problem is, it takes about 250 pages for the reader to get to Mr. Wills' answer to the question why he remains in the Catholic Church if he has so many quarrels with the hierarchy, the papacy, and their pronouncements on various points of doctrine.

The book is divided into three parts. In the first part, Wills talks about growing up Catholic, his days in the seminary and the Jesuit order, how and why he left the Jesuit order, his work for the National Review and his lifelong infatuation with the 19th-20th century religious writer and journalist, G.K. Chesterton.

The second part is a dreary catalogue of depredations, deceits, abuses of power, and miscues by various popes through the millenia. Wills argues that the papacy in its modern form is a recent invention and that it has evolved several times through different forms. It goes without saying that he thinks papal infallibility has got to go. The second part seems to be a reprise of his earlier book, "Papal Sin."

The third part of the book actually gets around to Wills finally, at long last, answering the question why he remains a Catholic. This fifty page portion of the book is actually quite eloquent and thoughtful and could stand on its own as a book or as a magazine article. Wills's meditation on why he remains in the Church is organized around the clauses of the Apostle's Creed, which he treats with great insight.

I subtract 2 stars because of the redundant material and the interminable delay in getting to the answer to the question. I give 3 stars because the last section is quite good.

Rating:
Summary: Will the Real Catholics please stand up?!
Review: I have not only read this book but I have read all of the customer reviews as well - so this review is somewhat of a review of the reviews as well as of the book itself. As many reviewers have noted, it really is three books in one; a history of Mr. Wills' growing up in the Catholic Church, a short history of the popes, and (finally!) a statement of why he is a Catholic. The first part is personally interesting as a "Journey of Faith," the second is interesting to history buffs (as I am), and the third is one of the best statements on what Catholic faith really can be (Chapters 21 & 22) that I have ever read. Wills, among other things, graphically demonstrates that a "Good Catholic" cannot possibly assent to all papal teachings for the simple reason that they have changed so much over the centuries and are contradictory in many ways. I only wish that his treatment of some of the popes had been a little more evenhanded. My knowledge of history, for example, suggests that Innocent III and Leo XIII were not quite as bad as Wills makes them out to be. Pius XII probably was. On the other hand, he is generally very evenhanded and relatively dispassionate in his writing. I did not at all see the anger some of the reviewers attributed to him, leading me to wonder if it were not really a projection of their own feelings in seeing someone who disagrees with their own position defend themselves so well. Mr. Wills' knowledge of history and dogmatic inquiry is excellent. In any event, traditional Catholics will hate it and liberal Catholics will love it. There doesn't seem to be much of a middle ground.

Let me close with a story of my own. I left the Catholic Church about 30 years ago over such issues as Wills discusses. I thought at the time that to be a Catholic was to violate all sense of my own personal and intellectual integrity and play the fool in addition. Iwas being asked, I thought, to check my intelligence (along with my coat) at the front door. I endured too many disparaging comments about "Cafeteria Catholics" and not being a "Real Catholic." I returned tentatively very recently to find (at least in the parish I attend)all the ideas for which I once argued accepted and welcomed. Birth control has been solved from the ground up - the people simply don't follow or believe the official church teaching. They don't even discuss it anymore! Traditional practices such as married men's and women's ordination are being seriously discussed, again by the laity. And, with the recent scandal regarding sexual abuse, we have realized just how badly a sexually repressed and naive clergy has mislead us. If I could have found what I have 30 years ago I probably never would have left.

The last 75 years or so represent the first time in all of Christian history when the laity are at least as well educated on the average as the clergy. We are perfectly able to distinguish silly teachings from truer ones, the encrustations of centuries of tradition from the heart of the Gospel, the separation of the Pauline from the Christ-ian - as well as the hierarchy is. The Jesus Seminar has indicated how much of Christianity is mythological rather than veridical. This is truly the "Age of the Laity" - and the Church will be better for it!

Rating:
Summary: Thoughtful, reasonably complete review of the issues
Review: Some Catholics have tried in recent years to formulate Roman Catholic Christianity as an exclusive, rather tyrannical religion that requires its adherents to check their brains outside Cardinal Ratzinger's office before proceeding into the fundamental celebration of Catholicism, the Eucharist.

Garry Wills offers a ringing rebuttal. Although the first and last pages of the book are reasonably personal, the meaty middle provides enough in the way of history and apologetics to keep his critics busy for years -- if they bother to read it. Judging from the tenor of some of the negative reviews here, they probably have not.

Of considerable interest is the Wills' discussion of the influence of Chesterton in his life. This should surely surprise some who are determined to paint Wills as a renegade.

The book's final section, which examines the creed, could be read either as exegesis or as devotion.

The book as a whole speaks powerfully to those who feel that any dissent must be squashed, that dissenters must either convert to every jot and tittle of the current magisterium or leave. But, again judging by their reviews here, they are not reading the book; they are reviewing their understanding -- limited though it is -- of the author.

Why not five stars? For me, a non-academic, the book bogged down hard in the middle. If it had been published at its planned date instead of rushed into the stores last summer, might the author and editor collaborated for a more readable result?