Six Very Brief New Year Notes For 2026
Hugh Williams
“On Changing Our Religion”: A New Year’s Letter to Elderly Friends in Six Brief Points
Or, “So, what is happening now?”
“Well, this ‘changing our religion’ phrasing has opened up vast horizons that have been emerging for several years.” (see link at - https://islandcatholicnews.ca/newsstory/on-changing-my-religion/)
1. 1) After Liberation Theology[1], something heard more of a few decades back, we have a deep desire to keep a watchful eye on State power – who has it? And, who desires it? To become entangled in excessively focused local analysis and initiatives without some attention being given to issues of class struggle (rich and poor, capital and labor) and of State power is, it seems to us, seriously misguided. We should have thought all experienced activists would have realized this by now.
2. 2) This of course will likely lead to a consideration of political parties, membership, and party politics. ….. but then, oh my, oh my … here we do have the serious problem of an avoidance of real education for social change plaguing all Parties involved in electoral politics.
3. 3) In the religion of our birth, Roman Catholicism, there has been a serious and specific effort to confront the real problem of what is called clericalism (abuse of authority and power combined with a lack of accountability among the clergy and the laity’s complicity in this) and the alternative opportunity of what is called the synodal way.[2] This difficult undertaking, at least in spirit, continues to abide with us which is one of the reasons we speak about ‘changing our religion’ not about ‘losing it’. In very general secular terms, it is part of a struggle to overcome a destructive elitism by means of more democratic alternative structures. For this particular religious institution, we firmly believe the time has come for such change …
4. 4) Going along with all of this in the points above, is our strong preference for what an old sheep-farmer- Anglican-deacon friend use to call ‘low church’ theology and practice, which says as little as necessary about divine power and eternal matters … preferring to speak only of what is necessary for us to live a good life on earth with others.
5. 5) And at our age, we must speak of certain bodily (and mental) limitations, our numbered days, and the facing of death. Of course we are not alone in this dilemma. At the same time, and perhaps as important if not more important, is that this very personal situation raises the question and issue of succession and of our hope for the younger ones among us …
6. 6) And finally, there is for me the abiding relevance of Bernard Lonergan’s principles of functional collaboration – his methodology of being attentive, being intelligent, being realistic and reasonable, and being responsible. This is the fundamental personally committed stance necessary while at the same time being open to functional collaboration with others that at least to some degree can lead into or along a path involving research, interpretation, historical analysis, dialectic, foundations, doctrines, systematics, and communications. This seemingly elusive outline of an arduous process of functional collaboration with others is never perfect, and rarely fully implemented or completed. But it remains a wise set of guidelines for more effective learning, and perhaps instruction, with and among others in the face of the complex challenges and opportunities we are bound to face in our life together.[3]
HHW
[1] This emancipatory theology that many people, especially in the global south, have tried to develop and put into practice, was summarized nicely by the good Gregory Baum in five main points – 1) sin has a social dimension rooted in sinful social structures, 2) conversion also involves a rejection of excessive (bourgeois) individualism and a social-critical position towards emancipation, 3) the grace that the Christ mediates includes a radical transfiguration of the economy into a cooperative economy, 4) God is not a sky-deity ruling over people like an imperial ruler but a presence in history empowering people to assume responsibility for their future, and 5) Jesus Christ identified with the disadvantaged and upset the existing order or status quo.
[2] This synodal way or method in its most general terms has three major moments for any socially oriented problem solving-decision making group – 1) after careful preparation each person has the opportunity to share their experience regarding some focus concern or topic while others are to listen attentively. 2) Each person on the basis of what they heard speaks again of that in what they heard that has touched them most deeply and favorably, and then of what they heard that may challenge them most. And 3) finally effort is put into identifying key points that have emerged so as to build a consensus out of what is meant to be a collaborative process. It must be admitted that the way of approaching this last ‘moment’, at least in church-based groups is not always clear and is at best still a work in progress for these religious institutions.
[3]One can plainly see how we’ve been affected by Lonergan, not so much by a strict adherence to his epistemology and metaphysics, which in many ways we continue to resist, but by his practical methodology and its strong personal commitment to human intelligence and goodness. Our technical problem with Lonergan’s epistemology and metaphysics is that it remains largely representational while our preference for Rahner’s metaphysics is based upon its participational ontology. And yet where we continue to see this limitation or incompleteness in Lonergan’s philosophical theory, we at the same time see that there is great strength and relevance in his practical methodology.