Customer Reviews

Why I Am a Catholic

5 star:		(15)
4 star:		(13)
3 star:		(10)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(14)

 

 

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.

Wills has written an essential book. It doesn't deal directly with the current Church scandals, but it's timely in that it gives us reason to hope for reform. Wills made a big splash criticizing the Church in his last book. He made it very clear how the Church fathers are more interested in protecting themselves than ministering to the faithful. One would have thought from that book that he was done with Catholicism, that he would turn his back on the Church.

Here he shows why he hasn't run from his faith. The Church has incredible powers to regenerate itself in times of crisis. It can change, and still remain the Church.

I have struggled with so many of these issues over my life. Repulsed by so much that is asserted under the banner of Catholicism, but also drawn over and over again back to its beauty and message of goodness. With this book I can begin to reconcile these inclinations. I don't think I'll ever throw myself wholeheartedly back into the Church (unless it truly changes), but I can with all my convicion say I am one of the faithful. I just wish those in the Church would heed Wills's message of reform. We would all of us--even non-Catholics--be better off.

I highly recommend this important book. Thank you, Mr. Wills for being so brave and honest.

I loved this book! This is a great book if you are Catholic but cannot agree with the Party Line or if you want to discover why some Catholics are not as conservative as you may be.

I read "Papal Sin" (Wills other famous book) and didn't appreciate the argument because the book didn't seem complete. It seemed to juxtapose the argument from a true historical perspective. As such, I put that book down thinking the book was interesting but I wasn't convinced.

However, with this book I was thoroughly satisfied. The historical backdrop was so detailed that it left me wondering, "Why ARE you Catholic, Mr. Wills?". The answer comes with his discussion of the Creed - a must read. The only item I would disagree on is his interpretation of the Lord's Prayer. The author interprets the prayer through an End Times lens. While this may be true to certain clues in the Greek; I don't beleive it's true to the Prophetic spirit of Jesus when sharing the Prayer. The Prayer is a backdrop to our relationship with God the Father (read it in context of what comes before and after within the book of Matthew). As such, I beleive the spirit of the Prayer is timeless i.e. past, present and future. Despite my disagreement, Mr. Wills is far more educated and expresses his argument beautifully, so I humbly cannot take points off for his viewpoint.

The criticisms others here have written are entirely justified. I haven't read Papal Sin, but Wills describes in his introduction how that book was critical of the papacy, and how the question was raised by several categories of critics- Why are you still a Catholic? One would assume, then, that the present book was written to answer that question. Instead, incomprehensibly (following a brief biography), Wills launches into a historical review of all the papal sins that I would have thought were the subject of the first book. He gets to the modern day, and he criticizes (then) Pope John Paul II and (then) Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger. What he does nowhere that I can see is to find very much good to say about any of the popes. The final pages are an apologetic for the Church in general, that basically the popes really are important and that it is the people of the Church that prop him up. Somehow, after he states in the historical portion that the bishop of Rome did not have the primacy of the Church for at least 5 centuries, he finds Peter at this last stage, reclaims the papacy as a flawed but necessary part of the institution, and proclaims all right with the Church because it has maintained consistency where it counts. Hey, this should have been Chapter One!

My problem with the book isn't with the opinions. Wills can write a history of the ineptitude of popes if he wants, but a) I thought he did that already with Papal Sin; b) this book goes from the apparent apologetic of the introduction to the polemic bulk of the ensuing content with so little warning that one feels that this whole other book reared its beastly head and forced itself upon him. This inconsistency of theme is glaringly obvious so the question that forces itself upon the reader is- Why is Wills obsessed with the papacy? Why not skip over this long blow-by-blow history and just sum it up in a chapter? Why not either write the book implied by the title, or change the title? I know the answer, it's because the publisher assumed a market for a follow-up to the controversial first book, so no serious attempt was made at editing this thing.

Garry Wills' WHY I AM CATHOLIC examines the history of Catholicism and how it correlates with Wills' own Catholic belief. The book is divided into three sections, which begins with Wills' explanation of the writing the book, he proceeds to provide an extensive and chronological examination of the history and the hierarchy of the Catholic Church (a crash course to Catholic history 101) from its inception to the present state, and concludes with the Apostles creed and how it relates to his core theme of the book, why he remains loyal to the Church and its creed.

WHY I AM CATHOLIC is not an autobiography of Wills' religious life. However, he provides minimal accounts of his association as a young man who once studied to become a priest, but preferred scholarly pursuits towards Classical studies. Furthermore, his Catholic beliefs and loyalty towards the church remains an important aspect in his life in spite of the current overtones of corruption and sexual abuse that has existed throughout its history.

Wills' expertise in Classical studies and an interest in religious history placed the history of the Catholic Church within the context of World history. This was the informative part of WHY I AM CATHOLIC. However, if Wills' intention was to convince readers of his loyalty to the Church, his discussion of the Catholic religion, and how it relates to his personal view was somewhat buried in the mix.

As a lapsed Catholic who read Wills's other books (What Jesus/Paul/the Gospels Meant and Papal Sin), I then found "Why I am a Catholic" "a must." To recap:

I loved the "Meant Trilogy" because Wills is an incredibly concise, informed, and opinionated author. The man taught Greek for ages and you can clearly see that he has poured over the Bible with care, thought, and reverent searching. After many decades, he distilled his vision of Christianity in 3 slim, easy-to-read books. If you ever sat in Church listening to the readings and thinking, on its face, this makes no sense, then these books are a superb starting place. Or perhaps you decided to tackle the historical Jesus, only to find yourself in a truly bewildering maze. These books are just what the doctor ordered.

Then Papal Sin, which laid out several awful chapters from papal history. The basic thesis: once the papacy conceived of itself as God's unique and singular gift to mankind, then its preservation and image as incapable of error became paramount, even when the price was justice, intellectual integrity, charity.

Now his "Why" book, written because so many people asked him this question. Enter the historian Wills, who shows us how incredibly changing and typically precarious the papacy has been. The papacy has been held by heretics, warlords, dimwits, and lovers of power. Let's just be honest. And the papacy as we see it today--largely through the experiences of JPII and Benedict--is a very recent development. The "everything-but-infallible" statements that JPII was fond of and now his successor loves to issue are dangerous exaggerations of that office. What is the papacy for Wills? Focusing on the history of the early church, he thinks it is a necessary and priceless symbol of unity around which the people of God can organize. What a refreshing thought. But does that vision describe the papacy of the Church now?

I marked it down (would have given it 4.5 stars) somewhat because it is "3-books-in-one," each with a different style. The first is Wills the autobiographer, the second is Wills the historian (great stuff!), and the third is the believer (some of the material seems less rich than is typical for Garry). Each has a somewhat different voice and, depending one's tastes, has varying appeal.

But minor. The book is a mature person's guide to the papacy -- someone who wants the historical record as a perspective with which to contextualize the present circumstance. And someone who, despite the nastiness of what has come before, can still look to the Church with hope. Job well done.

Like all of Wills' books, it's intelligent, well-written and engaging. It makes a good companion to his "Papal Sin" and--along with Hans Kung's "On Being A Christian"--it speaks in a truly "catholic" voice--based on the Gospels and not on 2 centuries of fallible human Church figures. Wills' takes his religion seriously--his books on St. Augustine are equally probing--and one gets a much clearer idea of Christian possibilities from his books than one gets from the gasbags spouting their faith on television or the know-it-alls who can only regurgitate the letter and not the spirit of their Faith. This book can instruct as well as comfort those who, like me, remain appalled at the generally low level of engaged intellectual thought about Catholicism.

The essence of Gary Wills' book is that the Catholic Church is imperfect lead by imperfect people in an imperfect world . . . and yet, in spite of all the stupid and bad things the institution has done (the crusades, for example), the causes the leaders have lead (for centuries maintaining the sovereign nation of the Papal States), and the horrors the world has experienced that could have destroyed other churches, the Catholic Church with its pontiff has remained constant and worthy of the name of the Chair of Peter.

Wills' book goes through the centuries of the Bishop of Rome, as it moved from the Apostle all the way to the current pope, and it can seem a bit long-winded. It did, I must say, spur me on to learn a lot more about the early Christian church, and I have gone on to learn a great deal more about how the early church decisions lead to important historical events like the great Schism of the 11th century. I am happy that Wills took the time to lay out the evolution of the Pope's position because it took me in places that I had never known about (like Pope Honorius who was declared a heretic by subsequent popes for naming someone else as a heretic earlier).

It is through learning about the Church leaders, whether they be the popes or other leaders within the Church (and Wills loves Augustine!), that Wills accepts the divine inspiration of the Church (the entirety of the Church, not just the leadership) through the centuries. He then goes to the core prayers of inspiration--the Apostles' Creed and the Lord's Prayer--and explains how they have moved him to be a better man.

A very good book.

Garry Wills is a bonafide intellectual, with a lot of prestigious book awards as proof --- but don't let that scare you off. There are no long passages here in other languages without translation, and no footnotes to stumble over - though, if you're interested in reading further and knowing sources, there are endnotes, plus an index for ease of later reference. But mainly there's a lot of the same clear writing and passionate belief in his subject that won Mr. Wills those awards, like a Pulitzer and a couple from National Book Critics, and the National Medal for the Humanities (1998).

I first became aware of Garry Wills when I read BARE RUINED CHOIRS back in the early 1970s. I read (and write) mostly fiction, and I admit I was drawn to that title because I'm a certifiable Gothic nut. But no matter what attracted me, I stayed with the book and have always been glad I did. A couple of years ago I read PAPAL SIN, which, as Wills says in his introduction, directly inspired the writing of WHY I AM A CATHOLIC. The present book stands very well on its own, and you don't have to be a practicing Catholic to appreciate it. The book gives to its reader on a lot of different levels, depending on what experience you bring to your reading, and what you want to get back.

In a first and perhaps too brief section, Mr. Wills gives a barefaced, affecting account of growing up Catholic in a working-class family, going to Catholic schools and being taught by nuns and priests, of what happens and doesn't happen when you're a really smart kid who thinks maybe too much. His memories are sharp, poignant, and evocative of a time not long ago, yet now gone forever. (Confession: I'm about a decade behind him in age, and my eyes were moist more than once with remembering things like how we girls in the choir used to play canasta behind the organ during certain long sections of the solemn high masses of Holy Week.)

Given that he skipped a grade of elementary school, Garry Wills couldn't have been much more than 17 when, in the early 1950s, he graduated high school and went immediately into the novitiate at a Jesuit Seminary. There he had difficulties, which he tells with courage and candor. He lets us see how the problems of his early years gave rise to the man he became. Certain themes, and the admiration of certain men and their minds (Chesterton, Augustine, Aquinas), began then and have been worked, reworked, refined into the vision he presents later in this book --- and in fact, in all his books.

The middle section of WHY I AM A CATHOLIC is the book's longest and most scholarly. The material is essentially the same as in PAPAL SIN, yet it is presented differently. As fascinating as it is to have read the earlier book too, I think the presentation here is more meaningful in some ways. Wills spells out the history of the errors of the papacy --- including the whole "I say to thee thou art Peter and upon this rock" thing. Wills wants us to understand that the papacy is not the Church. Popes do make mistakes (gross understatement). You can be a good Catholic and disagree with what's coming out of Rome; in fact, you might be a better Catholic for having reasoned out for yourself, and for having expressed your disagreement, in whatever way you chose. You could even write a couple of books about how you disagree, yet still go to Mass every week and say the rosary every day --- as Wills himself does.

The concluding section, an analysis and defense of The Credo, AKA the Creed, AKA the Apostles' Creed, I thought was something of a letdown. I believe my reaction was a personal one --- even though when I'm reviewing a book, I try to read more objectively than I otherwise might. But WHY I AM A CATHOLIC had become personal to me by that point, I can't deny it. I cared, I was examining myself and my own vacillations and permutations of faith, I was taking it all to heart. Other readers may find this third section to be, as Wills appears to have intended, a natural, moving, affirming outgrowth of the previous two.

Originally scheduled for publication about now, WHY I AM A CATHOLIC was moved up to mid-July 2002 because of the conference of Catholic bishops called in the United States for that same time --- the conference that developed groundbreaking policy for dealing with priests accused of sex abuse of minors. In October, the Vatican (i.e., the papacy) refused to accept the recommendations of the United States bishops. That news was pretty much obscured by The Sniper and Bush vs. Saddam, but I'm sure Garry Wills noticed.

I'm equally sure he was not surprised that the Vatican refused to accept the decision of the US bishops. He's disappointed, maybe, but he will still be a Catholic. His passion for his faith is a bright light, one that illuminates and does not blind.

--- Reviewed by Ava Dianne Day

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!