By Brian Roewe
Note: This article was first published February 11, 2012 by The National Catholic Reporter.
FutureChurch, a church reform group based in Ohio, congratulated Pope Benedict XVI in a statement Monday "for his wise decision to resign," saying "it takes courage to recognize when one no longer has the physical strength and health to fulfill the responsibilities of one of the world's most demanding jobs."
“This precedent-setting decision, at least for the modern era, is pointing the Church away from a monarchical model where a leader rules for life,” said Sr. Christine Schenk, executive director of FutureChurch, in a press release. “Pope Benedict is making it clear that papal leadership is an office, and doesn’t belong to any one person. This is good for the Church, and bodes well for the future.”
A member of the organization's board of trustees, Mary Louise Hartman, pointed to past instances where a papacy's final years was filled with "delayed, poor or politicized decisions," and said that the pope's resignation signals he understands that reality "and is taking steps to avoid problems that come with trying to govern when one is in declining health."
FutureChurch has focused its mission on seeking greater participation for all Catholics in the life and leadership of the church. That includes calling for married and celibate priests, opening the diaconate to women, and providing resources and support to parish communities faced with closing churches and parishes.
Related Off-site Links:
Pope's Sudden Resignation Sends Shockwaves Through Church – Philip Pullella (Reuters via Yahoo! News, February 11, 2013).
A Truly Historic Announcement – Colleen Kochivar-Baker (Enlightened Catholicism, February 11, 2013).
Pope Benedict to Resign at the End of the Month – John L. Allen Jr. (National Catholic Reporter, February 11, 2013).
Pope's Mission to Revive Faith Clouded by Scandal – Nicole Winfield (Associated Press via Yahoo! News, February 11, 2013).
New Ways Ministry on the Resignation of Benedict XVI – Francis DeBernardo (Bondings 2.0, February 11, 2013).
Gay Catholics Respond to Pope's Impending Resignation – DignityUSA (February 11, 2013).
Let an Inclusive Church Rise! – WATER's Statement on the Resignation of Pope Benedict XVI – Women's Alliance of Theology, Ethics, and Ritual (February 11, 2013).
Voice of the Faithful Prays for Pope & a Renewed Church as Benedict XVI Steps Down – Voice of the Faithful (February 11, 2013).
Call to Action Responds to Pope's Resignation – Call to Action (February 11, 2013).
Catholics United Statement on Pope Benedict XVI’s Announcement of Resignation – Catholics United (February 11, 2013).
Monday, February 11, 2013
A Taboo, a New Pope, and a Trurer Church (Part 2)
By Jerry Slevin
Note: This article was originally published on Jerry Slevin's blog Christian Catholicism. For Part 1, click here.
Are cardinals watching current events?
Some current developments strongly suggest that the seemingly irresolvable priest child abuse problem may contribute to toppling this medieval monarchy soon. Significantly and surprisingly, two prominent Cardinals, Martini and Pell, had recently indicated publicly that the child sexual abuse problem continues, in one case even pointing a finger at the Vatican’s administration. These very knowledgeable Cardinals apparently were unwilling to accept their own Pope’s public relations efforts that try to suggest that the priest child abuse problem has been sufficiently curtailed.
How many other Cardinals will also soon be publicly rejecting this papal media spin, if only to protect themselves better from increasingly relentless international prosecutors and survivors’ civil lawyers on the horizon? Will Catholics find out more about many Cardinals’ actual views before the next papal election, especially since the next Pope can be expected to try to continue indefinitely the Vatican’s control over the criminal legal defense strategy that is apparently imposed now on all of the hierarchy worldwide? Perhaps, some Cardinals will not want to handcuff themselves to the railings on the Vatican’s Titanic?
Having observed for several years, as an experienced lawyer, the misguided and ineffective legal defense strategy of the current Pope, it seems inadvisable for Cardinals and Bishops worldwide to concede their legal defense to a distant Vatican administration often controlled, it appears at times, by octogenarians worried more about protecting themselves first. Philadelphia’s Monsignor Lynn may have found this out the hard way when he reportedly was recently denied sufficient funds for an effective appeal of his recent child endangerment criminal conviction for his actions while serving as a subordinate of Cardinals Bevilacqua and Rigali. Should Cardinals really rely on a Vatican administration that, after months of warnings, let their credit card payment system ‘bounce” in the midst of the busy holiday tourist season, as just occurred?
Will the priestly breaches that, as indicated above, two significant Cardinals had recently implied were still being tolerated, of the deep-seated social taboo against sexually violating children lead soon to ending papal dominance of the Catholic Church? Jesus, of course, reiterated this taboo in his stern prohibitions in the Gospels against harming children. Can celibate and childless Catholic hierarchs, like Cardinal Sodano who reportedly referred to news reports of alleged earlier papal cover-ups of priest sexual abuse, as “petty gossip”, even begin to understand the revulsion felt by countless Catholic parents at these obscene violations of children.
Reportedly, there have been over 100,000 child victims of Catholic priest abuse in the USA alone so far, according to experts at a Vatican conference last February. This is hardly “gossip”, and surely not “petty”. Apparently, celibate and childless Catholic hierarchs do not yet sufficiently appreciate the power of this revulsion! Now they must be compelled by international prosecutors to appreciate this.
Have worldwide Catholics and their democratically chosen political leaders now finally had enough of the endless abuse horror stories and the hierarchy’s inadequate and cynical efforts to curtail them effectively? It appears increasingly clear that Catholics worldwide have had enough. Majorities of Catholics in Australia, Ireland, the Philippines and the USA, for example, have just effectively resisted significant Vatican pressure regarding child protection and/or related contraception policies the Vatican opposed strongly.
In particular, the Pope aimed many “moral arrows” at President Obama in connection with the recent November elections, apparently hoping decisively to topple the leader of the world’s most powerful nation. The Pope missed by a wide margin. Now what? Will President Obama now finally investigate priest abuse of Catholic children in the USA, as many Catholics have recently petitioned him to do? Time will tell, as the pressure builds for President Obama to act, especially as Australia’s Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, moves forward with an unprecedented royal commission investigation of child sexual abuse in organizational settings, including in the Catholic Church. What is President Obama waiting for to establish a comparable U.S. national investigation commission on child sexual abuse in organizational religious, educational and youth group settings, including in the Catholic Church?
The modern worldwide papal geo-political strategy, that began mainly in the 1930′s with facilitating the fascists Mussolini and Hitler, of influencing Catholic voters in exchange for expected political favors from “papal preferred” successful candidates, appears now to be bankrupt, at least as bankrupt as many U.S. Catholic dioceses now are under the weight of significant priest child abuse financial settlements that seem often to be agreed upon at the last minute by U.S. bishops apparently to keep potentially incriminating hierarchical files secret.
How are these current developments likely to lead to the toppling of this long standing hierarchical structure? What would the potential consequences be for Catholics if this happens?
Pope Benedict XVI at 85 years old still reigns over the Roman Holy Empire to be sure. He has so far continued to rule despite the abuse scandal that he has faced, unsuccessfully mostly, often since his days as Archbishop of Munich three decades ago.
The bizarre episode of key documents leaked recently by the Pope’s bold butler raises substantial doubts, however, about how firm this aging Pope’s grip remains on the levers of papal power. Since the butler still likely knows many more papal secrets and cannot any longer be “burned at the papal stake” for copying and distributing documents, he has been pardoned after a very harsh imprisonment process. Will the butler, whose relationship to the Pope does not appear to have been legally privileged and protected, soon be subpoenaed to testify in civil and criminal proceedings involving alleged Vatican misdeeds? Have we heard the last from the butler yet? Probably not.
A new Pope, as mentioned above, is expected by many soon to succeed Pope Benedict XVI. But will it matter much by then? Especially, when it seems that the next Pope may already have been, in effect, pre-selected by the current Pope and Vatican Cardinals that hold significant power over papal candidates’ selection and election. This Pope and his predecessor, John Paul II, carefully selected all of the current voting Cardinals, evidently seeking “Yes Men” who would obedient ally continue these two Popes’ increasingly hierarchical and retrogressive policies. These two Popes witnessed up close as youths the rigid discipline of the Third Reich and both seem thereafter to have held clerical “obedience” to be a “cardinal virtue”.
But are the Vatican Cardinals going to be the last word here? While no European emperors or monarchs in the last century have had a significant say on selecting popes, the modern rule of law is now being applied by constitutional democracies increasingly to the previously unaccountable Vatican administration. At the same time, the modern papal geo-political strategy continues to produce spectacular failures, thereby weakening in many cases the Vatican’s ability to resist these significant legal incursions. These important legal and political developments will likely and should have considerable impact on the next papal election and its aftermath.
Prosecutors and abuse survivors’ civil lawyers from constitutional democracies worldwide, from Australia in the Pacific to Ireland in the Atlantic and to the USA in between, are relentlessly advancing legally on Rome, armed with the powerful modern weapons of international human rights law. They may soon be joined by the woman prosecutor from the independent International Criminal Court, who is reviewing a criminal complaint filed against the Pope and Cardinals Sodano, Bertone and Levada, alleging crimes against humanity related to the cover-up of the sexual abuse of children by Catholic priests worldwide.
The current Pope, and any designated successor, will likely be unable to prevent some of these lawyers from breaching the high Vatican walls and gaining access to secret papal files, initially relating to the child abuse scandal, but who knows what else? What might these lawyers find? Once these files are public, it is impossible to predict all of the potential outcomes, but none of them will likely support continuation of the current Roman Holy Empire.
Meanwhile, papal political power also appears on the wane in many other countries, often as a reaction to the papal failure to curtail effectively the worldwide sexual abuse of children by Catholic priests.
As European monarchs chose not to stop the Italian nationalists from seizing the Papal States in 1870 in part out of dissatisfaction with papal failures to adopt political reforms, it is not likely the Vatican will get much sympathy from current political leaders. The days of Cardinal Sodano complaining, as he did, about aggressive U.S. lawyers for survivors of priest sexual abuse to President George W. Bush’s Secretary of State are over. Now the focus shifts to Australia.
Will Australia's Commission compel Vatican changes?
Cardinal George Pell, Australia’s prominent Cardinal, has been considered by some informed sources as a top prospect to be elected pope in the next papal election expected to be held soon. After spending considerable time in late October in Rome with the Pope and numerous other top Cardinals and Bishops at the lengthy Evangelization Synod that was mainly silent on the priest child sex abuse scandal, Cardinal Pell indicated unexpectedly in a public speech last month that the criminal moral cancer of sexual abuse of children by priests is the most important and powerful barrier to Catholic evangelization at present. As Cardinal Pell now faces an unprecedented Australian national governmental commission to investigate thoroughly organizational child sexual abuse in Australia, including in the Catholic Church, he surprisingly admitted in his recent speech that the Catholic Church has failed to deal effectively with some predatory priests and to help enough abuse victims heal. He further acknowledged that much more needs to be done in the child protection area.
Amazingly, as mentioned above, the Evangelization Synod orchestrated by the Pope in late October barely mentioned the child abuse scandal. What may have caused Cardinal Pell so suddenly to “get religion” on abuse matters? Evidently, Cardinal Pell is very concerned about the unprecedented investigation commission, and he should be from all indications. So should Pope Benedict XVI and so should worldwide Cardinals and Bishops.
Cardinal Pell’s quick “conversion” raises questions of where Pope Benedict VI now stands. The October Synod seemed to indicate that the Pope will continue mainly to avoid the abuse scandal. The continuation of Kansas City’s Bishop Finn after his child endangerment conviction suggests continuing Vatican stonewalling. Moreover, the appointment of Cardinal Law’s former canon lawyer as chief Vatican abuse case prosecutor suggests more of the same.
Pope Benedict XVI is generally publicly elusive, doesn’t give journalists regular access and often clouds his carefully drafted statements, and now “Tweets”, with mystical smokescreens. But he has given some clear indications of his ongoing strategy on predatory priests, especially by some of his consistent actions and failures to act, including the recent Synod, Bishop Finn’s retention and his new chief prosecutor appointment. What might the Pope’s current strategy be?
The Church’s organizational structure is analytically fairly simple. At the top is a pope who is “chief executive officer”, supreme legislator and top judge for life. In practice, papal decisions appear often to be influenced strongly, if not at times controlled by, senior Vatican Cardinals, especially the Secretary of State, currently Cardinal Bertone, who succeeded Cardinal Sodano, who appears still to be influential. Both of these Cardinals have reportedly been linked to several long standing scandals; Bertone to the Vatican Bank and a Milan hospital scandals and Sodano to the Mexican child sex abuser, Fr. Maciel, who eluded Vatican investigators for almost a half century by, among other things, reportedly frequently sprinkling large cash payments to powerful members of the Vatican clique.
The Pope, with his Vatican management team, controls Church canon law and judicial proceedings, and selects and controls worldwide Catholic bishops, who can be removed promptly by the pope. Priests and male and female members of religious orders are controlled directly by local Bishops and/or Vatican managers who direct the orders’ superiors. Any who deviate from currently favored Vatican theological or even political positions are generally disciplined promptly, often harshly and unfairly.
Pope Benedict XVI’s strategy appears targeted at maintaining maximum obedience to current papal theological, ecclesiastical and political positions. Opposing positions are at best given lip service, with the result that millions of Catholics, including priests, have left the Catholic Church in frustration, if not disgust. Some who stay try almost hopelessly and usually unsuccessfully to effect changes by stressing contrary precedents, especially the positions approved at the Second Vatican Council. In theory, clear positions approved by Church Councils could trump a contrary Vatican position. In practice, especially under Popes Benedict XVI and his immediate predecessor, in several crucial areas the Vatican’s interpretations of the Council is what controls Church practice, regardless of the weakness of the arguments supporting them.
The Catholic Church’s key “product identity” appears, as mentioned above, to be to create a “monopoly” on the Eucharist, a central element of Catholic worship at the Mass, and on the all male celibate priesthood currently needed to offer the Eucharist worldwide, subject to the control of Bishops and ultimately the Vatican. A common meal of fellow believers in Jesus’ time, at least occasionally overseen by women, has become the central “unique product” in the Vatican’s “marketing” strategy. The pope and his Vatican management team, through numerous “theological” and liturgical statements, seeks to protect and preserve the Vatican’s monopoly here, but need a sufficient number of obedient priests to offer the “product”.
The Vatican seeks zealously to preserve its worldwide “market position” by protecting its “monopoly” on the Eucharist and on the requisite celibate male priesthood against other Christian religious traditions externally and against alternative viewpoints internally, especially espoused often from women seeking admission to the priesthood.
While millions of Catholics have left the Church in rejection of the Vatican’s positions and approach, the Vatican’s prohibition on contraception has helped generate millions of “replacement Catholics”, born to Catholic couples whether or not the couples wanted or could afford to have additional children. Some of those children who survive, often in miserable circumstances, become future sources of Vatican power and wealth, as well as of new priests to serve to fill numerous priest shortages worldwide.
Against this organizational background, the Vatican has seemed incapable of containing its worldwide crisis of children being sexually assaulted by priests. Priests are needed to offer the main “product”, the Eucharist. It takes years under current procedures to train young men to serve as obedient and low wage “producer priests”. The supply of domestic priests is diminishing in many countries and foreign “imports” have not and realistically in most cases cannot satisfactorily resolve the shortages.
Fearful of permitting priests to marry or to have women as priests, both of which means the Vatican might have to risk being viewed as “fallible” and then have to deal on a equal basis openly with women priests or priests’ wives, and even some mothers, on all issues, including child protection matters, and also pay at least married priests higher wages, the Vatican has to date thereby retracted the potential supply of new priests.
Consequently, Bishops are increasingly forced at times to ordain questionable seminarians and still even to retain predatory priests. Given the artificial constriction, by prohibiting married and female priests, of the already diminishing candidate pool, the prospects are increasingly bleak for solving the predatory priest problem, no matter what the Vatican and its apologists may say otherwise!
Moreover, the Vatican’s financial policy seems impervious to the multi-billion dollar continuing cash drain from child abuse claims. A continuing revenue stream from governmental subsidies, docile Catholics’ and protected plutocrats’ contributions, and Vatican investments and tax free properties, and a willingness to close parishes and schools almost indiscriminately, makes paying lawyers to protect Bishops an acceptable cost of business, like some Wall Street financial firms that often treat fraud claims as an acceptable cost of doing business.
Survivors’ lawyers, as alluded to above, seeking usually the most cash for their clients, sooner rather than later, can apparently be depended on to settle claims and keep the bishops’ potentially incriminating files sealed if the settlement amounts are high enough. Apparently, bishops will often pay whatever it takes to protect them. While this expensive litigation process has benefited a small percentage of abuse survivors, it has not benefited many other survivors nor stimulated the Bishops yet to adopt real accountability measures like thorough independent audits.
What can cardinals and Catholics do?
Are there steps Cardinals can take to reduce, or at least mitigate, the adverse effects of the likely implosion of the Holy Roman Empire? Yes, simply put, Cardinals should only vote for a papal candidate who will publicly commit, as a pre-condition of his election, to do the following:
1. Serve as Pope for five years only, and
2. Call an ecumenical council, to be held within 12 months outside Europe, with voting lay participants holding the same number of total votes as clerical participants, including an equal number of women that will review and update:
Are there steps that lay Catholics can take? Yes, simply put, just suspend all funding of Catholic causes if the Cardinals fail to take all the above steps at the next papal election, and do not resume contributions until all of these steps are taken.
In view of the unlikelihood, as indicated above, that the current Vatican administration will effectively curtail any time soon predatory priests on its own initiative, Catholics need to press their political leaders to compel the Vatican to take promptly all feasible corrective action to protect defenseless children from predatory priests.
Additional information
Several of the themes discussed here are considered in more detail in my statement “Vatican: A New Child Protection Policy Now?”. Please read it at your convenience.
Please also circulate this full statement or relevant portions thereof widely, as you may consider helpful to reforming the Catholic Church, to protecting defenseless children, to comforting suffering abuse survivors and to giving many discouraged Catholics some new hope.
Matters described above can be readily supplemented by relevant material on the Internet by entering the relevant key words in Google for links to the underlying news and other reports.
Finally, several excellent and readable books available in bookstores or online amplify much of the foregoing. Helpful summaries and/or reviews of most of them are presently freely available at Amazon.com/books.
These selective books are:
• The Theology of Fear by Fr. Emmett Coyne.
• Can the Catholic Church Be Saved? by Fr. Hans Kung (forthcoming soon in an English version).
• What Happened at Vatican II by Fr. John O’Malley, S.J.
• Trent: What Happened at the Council by Fr. John O’Malley, S.J.
• Electing Our Bishops: How the Catholic Church Should Elect Its Leaders by Joseph O’Callaghan.
• Render Unto Rome: The Secret Life of Money in the Catholic Church by Jason Berry.
• Perversion of Power: Sexual Abuse in the Catholic Church by Mary Gail Frawley-O’Dea.
• The Case of the Pope: Vatican Accountability For Human Rights Abuse by Geoffrey Robertson.
• The Politics of Sex and Religion by Robert Blair Kaiser, available for FREE as an E-Book here.
Jerry Slevin is a retired Wall Street lawyer. He blogs at Christian Catholicism.
Note: This article was originally published on Jerry Slevin's blog Christian Catholicism. For Part 1, click here.
Are cardinals watching current events?Some current developments strongly suggest that the seemingly irresolvable priest child abuse problem may contribute to toppling this medieval monarchy soon. Significantly and surprisingly, two prominent Cardinals, Martini and Pell, had recently indicated publicly that the child sexual abuse problem continues, in one case even pointing a finger at the Vatican’s administration. These very knowledgeable Cardinals apparently were unwilling to accept their own Pope’s public relations efforts that try to suggest that the priest child abuse problem has been sufficiently curtailed.
How many other Cardinals will also soon be publicly rejecting this papal media spin, if only to protect themselves better from increasingly relentless international prosecutors and survivors’ civil lawyers on the horizon? Will Catholics find out more about many Cardinals’ actual views before the next papal election, especially since the next Pope can be expected to try to continue indefinitely the Vatican’s control over the criminal legal defense strategy that is apparently imposed now on all of the hierarchy worldwide? Perhaps, some Cardinals will not want to handcuff themselves to the railings on the Vatican’s Titanic?
Having observed for several years, as an experienced lawyer, the misguided and ineffective legal defense strategy of the current Pope, it seems inadvisable for Cardinals and Bishops worldwide to concede their legal defense to a distant Vatican administration often controlled, it appears at times, by octogenarians worried more about protecting themselves first. Philadelphia’s Monsignor Lynn may have found this out the hard way when he reportedly was recently denied sufficient funds for an effective appeal of his recent child endangerment criminal conviction for his actions while serving as a subordinate of Cardinals Bevilacqua and Rigali. Should Cardinals really rely on a Vatican administration that, after months of warnings, let their credit card payment system ‘bounce” in the midst of the busy holiday tourist season, as just occurred?
Will the priestly breaches that, as indicated above, two significant Cardinals had recently implied were still being tolerated, of the deep-seated social taboo against sexually violating children lead soon to ending papal dominance of the Catholic Church? Jesus, of course, reiterated this taboo in his stern prohibitions in the Gospels against harming children. Can celibate and childless Catholic hierarchs, like Cardinal Sodano who reportedly referred to news reports of alleged earlier papal cover-ups of priest sexual abuse, as “petty gossip”, even begin to understand the revulsion felt by countless Catholic parents at these obscene violations of children.
Reportedly, there have been over 100,000 child victims of Catholic priest abuse in the USA alone so far, according to experts at a Vatican conference last February. This is hardly “gossip”, and surely not “petty”. Apparently, celibate and childless Catholic hierarchs do not yet sufficiently appreciate the power of this revulsion! Now they must be compelled by international prosecutors to appreciate this.
Have worldwide Catholics and their democratically chosen political leaders now finally had enough of the endless abuse horror stories and the hierarchy’s inadequate and cynical efforts to curtail them effectively? It appears increasingly clear that Catholics worldwide have had enough. Majorities of Catholics in Australia, Ireland, the Philippines and the USA, for example, have just effectively resisted significant Vatican pressure regarding child protection and/or related contraception policies the Vatican opposed strongly.
In particular, the Pope aimed many “moral arrows” at President Obama in connection with the recent November elections, apparently hoping decisively to topple the leader of the world’s most powerful nation. The Pope missed by a wide margin. Now what? Will President Obama now finally investigate priest abuse of Catholic children in the USA, as many Catholics have recently petitioned him to do? Time will tell, as the pressure builds for President Obama to act, especially as Australia’s Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, moves forward with an unprecedented royal commission investigation of child sexual abuse in organizational settings, including in the Catholic Church. What is President Obama waiting for to establish a comparable U.S. national investigation commission on child sexual abuse in organizational religious, educational and youth group settings, including in the Catholic Church?
The modern worldwide papal geo-political strategy, that began mainly in the 1930′s with facilitating the fascists Mussolini and Hitler, of influencing Catholic voters in exchange for expected political favors from “papal preferred” successful candidates, appears now to be bankrupt, at least as bankrupt as many U.S. Catholic dioceses now are under the weight of significant priest child abuse financial settlements that seem often to be agreed upon at the last minute by U.S. bishops apparently to keep potentially incriminating hierarchical files secret.
How are these current developments likely to lead to the toppling of this long standing hierarchical structure? What would the potential consequences be for Catholics if this happens?
Pope Benedict XVI at 85 years old still reigns over the Roman Holy Empire to be sure. He has so far continued to rule despite the abuse scandal that he has faced, unsuccessfully mostly, often since his days as Archbishop of Munich three decades ago.
The bizarre episode of key documents leaked recently by the Pope’s bold butler raises substantial doubts, however, about how firm this aging Pope’s grip remains on the levers of papal power. Since the butler still likely knows many more papal secrets and cannot any longer be “burned at the papal stake” for copying and distributing documents, he has been pardoned after a very harsh imprisonment process. Will the butler, whose relationship to the Pope does not appear to have been legally privileged and protected, soon be subpoenaed to testify in civil and criminal proceedings involving alleged Vatican misdeeds? Have we heard the last from the butler yet? Probably not.
A new Pope, as mentioned above, is expected by many soon to succeed Pope Benedict XVI. But will it matter much by then? Especially, when it seems that the next Pope may already have been, in effect, pre-selected by the current Pope and Vatican Cardinals that hold significant power over papal candidates’ selection and election. This Pope and his predecessor, John Paul II, carefully selected all of the current voting Cardinals, evidently seeking “Yes Men” who would obedient ally continue these two Popes’ increasingly hierarchical and retrogressive policies. These two Popes witnessed up close as youths the rigid discipline of the Third Reich and both seem thereafter to have held clerical “obedience” to be a “cardinal virtue”.
But are the Vatican Cardinals going to be the last word here? While no European emperors or monarchs in the last century have had a significant say on selecting popes, the modern rule of law is now being applied by constitutional democracies increasingly to the previously unaccountable Vatican administration. At the same time, the modern papal geo-political strategy continues to produce spectacular failures, thereby weakening in many cases the Vatican’s ability to resist these significant legal incursions. These important legal and political developments will likely and should have considerable impact on the next papal election and its aftermath.
Prosecutors and abuse survivors’ civil lawyers from constitutional democracies worldwide, from Australia in the Pacific to Ireland in the Atlantic and to the USA in between, are relentlessly advancing legally on Rome, armed with the powerful modern weapons of international human rights law. They may soon be joined by the woman prosecutor from the independent International Criminal Court, who is reviewing a criminal complaint filed against the Pope and Cardinals Sodano, Bertone and Levada, alleging crimes against humanity related to the cover-up of the sexual abuse of children by Catholic priests worldwide.
The current Pope, and any designated successor, will likely be unable to prevent some of these lawyers from breaching the high Vatican walls and gaining access to secret papal files, initially relating to the child abuse scandal, but who knows what else? What might these lawyers find? Once these files are public, it is impossible to predict all of the potential outcomes, but none of them will likely support continuation of the current Roman Holy Empire.
Meanwhile, papal political power also appears on the wane in many other countries, often as a reaction to the papal failure to curtail effectively the worldwide sexual abuse of children by Catholic priests.
As European monarchs chose not to stop the Italian nationalists from seizing the Papal States in 1870 in part out of dissatisfaction with papal failures to adopt political reforms, it is not likely the Vatican will get much sympathy from current political leaders. The days of Cardinal Sodano complaining, as he did, about aggressive U.S. lawyers for survivors of priest sexual abuse to President George W. Bush’s Secretary of State are over. Now the focus shifts to Australia.
Will Australia's Commission compel Vatican changes?
Cardinal George Pell, Australia’s prominent Cardinal, has been considered by some informed sources as a top prospect to be elected pope in the next papal election expected to be held soon. After spending considerable time in late October in Rome with the Pope and numerous other top Cardinals and Bishops at the lengthy Evangelization Synod that was mainly silent on the priest child sex abuse scandal, Cardinal Pell indicated unexpectedly in a public speech last month that the criminal moral cancer of sexual abuse of children by priests is the most important and powerful barrier to Catholic evangelization at present. As Cardinal Pell now faces an unprecedented Australian national governmental commission to investigate thoroughly organizational child sexual abuse in Australia, including in the Catholic Church, he surprisingly admitted in his recent speech that the Catholic Church has failed to deal effectively with some predatory priests and to help enough abuse victims heal. He further acknowledged that much more needs to be done in the child protection area.
Amazingly, as mentioned above, the Evangelization Synod orchestrated by the Pope in late October barely mentioned the child abuse scandal. What may have caused Cardinal Pell so suddenly to “get religion” on abuse matters? Evidently, Cardinal Pell is very concerned about the unprecedented investigation commission, and he should be from all indications. So should Pope Benedict XVI and so should worldwide Cardinals and Bishops.
Cardinal Pell’s quick “conversion” raises questions of where Pope Benedict VI now stands. The October Synod seemed to indicate that the Pope will continue mainly to avoid the abuse scandal. The continuation of Kansas City’s Bishop Finn after his child endangerment conviction suggests continuing Vatican stonewalling. Moreover, the appointment of Cardinal Law’s former canon lawyer as chief Vatican abuse case prosecutor suggests more of the same.
Pope Benedict XVI is generally publicly elusive, doesn’t give journalists regular access and often clouds his carefully drafted statements, and now “Tweets”, with mystical smokescreens. But he has given some clear indications of his ongoing strategy on predatory priests, especially by some of his consistent actions and failures to act, including the recent Synod, Bishop Finn’s retention and his new chief prosecutor appointment. What might the Pope’s current strategy be?
The Church’s organizational structure is analytically fairly simple. At the top is a pope who is “chief executive officer”, supreme legislator and top judge for life. In practice, papal decisions appear often to be influenced strongly, if not at times controlled by, senior Vatican Cardinals, especially the Secretary of State, currently Cardinal Bertone, who succeeded Cardinal Sodano, who appears still to be influential. Both of these Cardinals have reportedly been linked to several long standing scandals; Bertone to the Vatican Bank and a Milan hospital scandals and Sodano to the Mexican child sex abuser, Fr. Maciel, who eluded Vatican investigators for almost a half century by, among other things, reportedly frequently sprinkling large cash payments to powerful members of the Vatican clique.
The Pope, with his Vatican management team, controls Church canon law and judicial proceedings, and selects and controls worldwide Catholic bishops, who can be removed promptly by the pope. Priests and male and female members of religious orders are controlled directly by local Bishops and/or Vatican managers who direct the orders’ superiors. Any who deviate from currently favored Vatican theological or even political positions are generally disciplined promptly, often harshly and unfairly.
Pope Benedict XVI’s strategy appears targeted at maintaining maximum obedience to current papal theological, ecclesiastical and political positions. Opposing positions are at best given lip service, with the result that millions of Catholics, including priests, have left the Catholic Church in frustration, if not disgust. Some who stay try almost hopelessly and usually unsuccessfully to effect changes by stressing contrary precedents, especially the positions approved at the Second Vatican Council. In theory, clear positions approved by Church Councils could trump a contrary Vatican position. In practice, especially under Popes Benedict XVI and his immediate predecessor, in several crucial areas the Vatican’s interpretations of the Council is what controls Church practice, regardless of the weakness of the arguments supporting them.
The Catholic Church’s key “product identity” appears, as mentioned above, to be to create a “monopoly” on the Eucharist, a central element of Catholic worship at the Mass, and on the all male celibate priesthood currently needed to offer the Eucharist worldwide, subject to the control of Bishops and ultimately the Vatican. A common meal of fellow believers in Jesus’ time, at least occasionally overseen by women, has become the central “unique product” in the Vatican’s “marketing” strategy. The pope and his Vatican management team, through numerous “theological” and liturgical statements, seeks to protect and preserve the Vatican’s monopoly here, but need a sufficient number of obedient priests to offer the “product”.
The Vatican seeks zealously to preserve its worldwide “market position” by protecting its “monopoly” on the Eucharist and on the requisite celibate male priesthood against other Christian religious traditions externally and against alternative viewpoints internally, especially espoused often from women seeking admission to the priesthood.
While millions of Catholics have left the Church in rejection of the Vatican’s positions and approach, the Vatican’s prohibition on contraception has helped generate millions of “replacement Catholics”, born to Catholic couples whether or not the couples wanted or could afford to have additional children. Some of those children who survive, often in miserable circumstances, become future sources of Vatican power and wealth, as well as of new priests to serve to fill numerous priest shortages worldwide.
Against this organizational background, the Vatican has seemed incapable of containing its worldwide crisis of children being sexually assaulted by priests. Priests are needed to offer the main “product”, the Eucharist. It takes years under current procedures to train young men to serve as obedient and low wage “producer priests”. The supply of domestic priests is diminishing in many countries and foreign “imports” have not and realistically in most cases cannot satisfactorily resolve the shortages.
Fearful of permitting priests to marry or to have women as priests, both of which means the Vatican might have to risk being viewed as “fallible” and then have to deal on a equal basis openly with women priests or priests’ wives, and even some mothers, on all issues, including child protection matters, and also pay at least married priests higher wages, the Vatican has to date thereby retracted the potential supply of new priests.
Consequently, Bishops are increasingly forced at times to ordain questionable seminarians and still even to retain predatory priests. Given the artificial constriction, by prohibiting married and female priests, of the already diminishing candidate pool, the prospects are increasingly bleak for solving the predatory priest problem, no matter what the Vatican and its apologists may say otherwise!
Moreover, the Vatican’s financial policy seems impervious to the multi-billion dollar continuing cash drain from child abuse claims. A continuing revenue stream from governmental subsidies, docile Catholics’ and protected plutocrats’ contributions, and Vatican investments and tax free properties, and a willingness to close parishes and schools almost indiscriminately, makes paying lawyers to protect Bishops an acceptable cost of business, like some Wall Street financial firms that often treat fraud claims as an acceptable cost of doing business.
Survivors’ lawyers, as alluded to above, seeking usually the most cash for their clients, sooner rather than later, can apparently be depended on to settle claims and keep the bishops’ potentially incriminating files sealed if the settlement amounts are high enough. Apparently, bishops will often pay whatever it takes to protect them. While this expensive litigation process has benefited a small percentage of abuse survivors, it has not benefited many other survivors nor stimulated the Bishops yet to adopt real accountability measures like thorough independent audits.
What can cardinals and Catholics do?
Are there steps Cardinals can take to reduce, or at least mitigate, the adverse effects of the likely implosion of the Holy Roman Empire? Yes, simply put, Cardinals should only vote for a papal candidate who will publicly commit, as a pre-condition of his election, to do the following:
1. Serve as Pope for five years only, and
2. Call an ecumenical council, to be held within 12 months outside Europe, with voting lay participants holding the same number of total votes as clerical participants, including an equal number of women that will review and update:
(a) Policies on contraception, divorce, mixed religious marriages and same sex marriages;
(b) Policies on married and female priests;
(c) Procedures for electing bishops and requiring equal lay participation in the elections; and
(d) Procedures for papal elections by worldwide bishops and for papal term limits no greater than ten years.
Are there steps that lay Catholics can take? Yes, simply put, just suspend all funding of Catholic causes if the Cardinals fail to take all the above steps at the next papal election, and do not resume contributions until all of these steps are taken.
In view of the unlikelihood, as indicated above, that the current Vatican administration will effectively curtail any time soon predatory priests on its own initiative, Catholics need to press their political leaders to compel the Vatican to take promptly all feasible corrective action to protect defenseless children from predatory priests.
Additional information
Several of the themes discussed here are considered in more detail in my statement “Vatican: A New Child Protection Policy Now?”. Please read it at your convenience.
Please also circulate this full statement or relevant portions thereof widely, as you may consider helpful to reforming the Catholic Church, to protecting defenseless children, to comforting suffering abuse survivors and to giving many discouraged Catholics some new hope.
Matters described above can be readily supplemented by relevant material on the Internet by entering the relevant key words in Google for links to the underlying news and other reports.
Finally, several excellent and readable books available in bookstores or online amplify much of the foregoing. Helpful summaries and/or reviews of most of them are presently freely available at Amazon.com/books.
These selective books are:
• The Theology of Fear by Fr. Emmett Coyne.
• Can the Catholic Church Be Saved? by Fr. Hans Kung (forthcoming soon in an English version).
• What Happened at Vatican II by Fr. John O’Malley, S.J.
• Trent: What Happened at the Council by Fr. John O’Malley, S.J.
• Electing Our Bishops: How the Catholic Church Should Elect Its Leaders by Joseph O’Callaghan.
• Render Unto Rome: The Secret Life of Money in the Catholic Church by Jason Berry.
• Perversion of Power: Sexual Abuse in the Catholic Church by Mary Gail Frawley-O’Dea.
• The Case of the Pope: Vatican Accountability For Human Rights Abuse by Geoffrey Robertson.
• The Politics of Sex and Religion by Robert Blair Kaiser, available for FREE as an E-Book here.
Jerry Slevin is a retired Wall Street lawyer. He blogs at Christian Catholicism.
Sunday, February 10, 2013
Many Voices, One Church
Note: Continuing with our series that recognizes and celebrates the contribution of lay preachers within the local church of St. Paul-Minneapolis, the editorial team of the PCV is honored to share the following homily for the Fifth Sunday in Ordinary Time, which falls this year on Evolution Sunday.For an introduction to this series, click here. Also, please note that to avoid possible negative consequences, names of preachers and/or parishes are not always disclosed in this series.
___________________________
Readings: Isaiah 6:1-2a, 3-8; 1 Corinthians 15:1-11; Luke 5:1-11..
In our Scripture readings for today, we hear how God calls to Isaiah and how Jesus calls to Peter. We also hear some very reluctant responses. In the first reading, Isaiah beholds a breathtaking vision of God. He sees God’s full glory. At this amazing spectacle, he moans, “Woe is me, I am lost.” He worries that he has unclean lips.
Then in our Gospel story from Luke, Jesus tells Peter and the others to lower their fishing nets and give it another try. They catch so many fish their boats almost sink. At this, Peter exclaims, “Depart from me Lord, for I am a sinful man.”
I point out these somewhat cowardly responses because I suspect that many of us share these sentiments. I admit that I do. Often when I perceive God calling me forward to take a new step or move in a new direction, my first response is to resist. “I can’t do what you’re asking, God. I don’t know how; I don’t have the time. And I’m sure not holy enough.” I wish God would go find someone else for the job.
Resistance like this, however, is simply false humility. No matter what our shortcomings, whatever our weaknesses or strengths, we are the one through whom God works.
As you listen further to the Scriptures, note that neither Isaiah nor Peter stay stuck in their resistance. They move past it. Peter drops everything and goes to follow Jesus. At the end of the Isaiah reading, when God asks, “Whom shall I send?” Isaiah finds courage and responds, “Here I am God, send me.”
Can we respond like that? “Here we are God. Send us.” How is God calling us? What is God sending us to do?
One particular way that God calls came to my attention recently. This Sunday is Evolution Sunday. This is a time to look at how science and religion work together. I would like to explore where we might find God’s call in that.
For the last century and a half, science has been uncovering the reality of evolution. As Christians we have been coming to terms with a new understanding of our ancient creation story. Instead of God forming the entire universe in a mere six days, we now know that God’s creation has been ongoing since the beginning of time. It is still ongoing today. Nevertheless, the truth of Genesis still stands; God sees that creation is good.
On this Evolution Sunday, let us remember that science brings us facts, data, and an understanding of the laws of nature. And this is good. Religion, on the other hand, helps us to find meaning in it all, to experience the sacred in creation. And this is also good.
What does this mean for us? Where is God’s call at the intersection of science and religion? I would like to raise up two possibilities.
First, God has created a self-creating universe which is an interdependent web of life. All life, in fact all matter, have evolved from the same source. We are all star dust. We’re born from elements bursting from dying stars somewhere out in the cosmos eons ago. That star dust formed our solar system and our earth. Every creature on earth lives, dies, and goes back to the elements. Those elements then rise back up evolving into new creations.
This is all part of God’s ongoing creative process. In this process, we humans are not removed from the rest of creation. Nor are we superior to is, although we used to think so (and some people still do). We are, in fact, an interdependent part of creation. As Native American spirituality points out, the buffalo are our relatives. So is our environment, the animals, and plants. So are people: those near us, those who are different from us, even those we are at war with. We are all interdependent. We are all sacred parts of God’s evolving creation.
Therefore let us use care with our natural resources. Let us build structures that support people who suffer, who are oppressed, or who are disempowered. The call here is to develop a sense of kinship with the Earth and with each other.
Secondly, just as life forms continue to evolve, so does human consciousness. Theologians working in the area of Evolutionary Christianity point out the evolving phases of human consciousness. In the earliest millennia, consciousness was tribal and rooted in group think. Over time this slowly evolved into a new consciousness called the Axial Period. Consciousness grew to understand and honor the individual. The ancient Greeks said, “Know thyself.” Later in the Enlightenment period, Descartes said, “I think therefore I am.”
Some evolutionary theologians say that we are now entering what they call the Second Axial Period. Human consciousness is evolving into a new phase. We are moving beyond the individual focus and toward greater consciousness of our connectedness. Theologians such as Ilia Delio, a Franciscan nun and author of Christ in Evolution, help us see that as our universe continues to evolve, so does our human consciousness. Things are changing! This is a hopeful message, and I am very excited about how these concepts can help us develop our faith life.
So we must ask, how does God call us in this emerging consciousness?
In this Second Axial Period, we find there isn’t so much individual focus as there was when I was growing up. We have less focus on how do I get to heaven, or am I personally saved. Instead, the focus is moving away from the individual toward asking how we work together to bring about the Reign of God. And that Reign is not up in heaven but right here on Earth, in the midst of God’s creation.
Nevertheless, we are still individuals, and that continues to be important. God still calls each of us as individuals. But the call is not just to grow in our own personal piety. The call is to help the world evolve into the Reign of God that Jesus promised.
The call here is to become active participants. We are not simply to be bystanders, not simply to be recipients of creation. We are, in fact, co-creators with God in evolution. We are called to actively build God’s Reign (1) by cherishing the earth, (2) through our work for justice and for peace, and (3) when we find ways to touch others with compassion. When we do these things, we are co-creating God’s Reign.
As we open ourselves to hear this call, we each need to look inward as individuals to see where our resistance lies. We must ask ourselves what holds us back. Where are we stuck in our excuses, self doubts, or false humility?
As Lent begins for us this week, this time of reflection, let us ask ourselves two questions:
(1) How is God calling me to participate in this evolving co-creation?
(2) How am I responding?
Maybe we can sit with these questions in our hearts until we too can courageously respond as Isaiah did, “Here I am God. Send me.”
________________________________________
For an excerpt from Ilia Delio's book The Emergent Christ: Exploring the Meaning of Catholic in an Evolutionary Universe, click here.
For some helpful articles on evolutionary Catholicism, click here.
For information about the upcoming workshop, "Our Role in God's Evolving Creation: A Catholic Spirituality for the 21st Century," click here.
Thursday, February 7, 2013
Good News: Archbishop Already Planning Archdiocesan Pastoral Council
By Paula Ruddy
Concerned that lay people have no regular channels of communication with the clerical leadership, the Council of the Baptized published and sent to Archbishop John Nienstedt its first position paper entitled "Archdiocesan Pastoral Council: A Recommendation for Re-establishment" on January 17, 2013. The Archbishop responded by a letter dated February 1, 2013. He says a plan is already in the works to bring an APC back to this archdiocese.
Despite the fact that we have heard nothing about this plan, lay Catholics can welcome the Archbishop’s initiative.
The concern now is for how the Archdiocesan Pastoral Council will be structured. In its position paper, the Council of the Baptized recommends that the members of the APC be elected from diverse groups of people within the archdiocese. It also recommends that everyone be allowed to submit subjects for discussion by the APC in open agendas. And finally, to hold everyone accountable, the APC meetings should be open to the press and the public.
Without a degree of openness, the new APC will be doomed. The history of Diocesan Pastoral Councils has shown that when the pastors and bishops hand pick the members, when the bishop sets the agenda, and when the meetings are closed, responsible lay people lose interest. The mission of the Church is best served by laity and clergy of all points of view listening to each other. If we believe that the Holy Spirit speaks through all the faithful, an open atmosphere welcomes the Spirit’s voice.
Of course, canon law puts the responsibility on the Archbishop to determine what structure the APC will have. There is no requirement of canon law, however, that the Archbishop cannot consult widely in its planning and make it an open, diverse, and truly representative body. That is up to his good will and good judgment.
We urge Catholics concerned about authentic two-way communication in the Church to express their hopes and needs to the Archbishop while he is planning the new Archdiocesan Pastoral Council. His address is: 226 Summit Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55102.
See also the previous PCV post:
Council of the Baptized Recommends Comeback for Archdiocesan Pastoral Council
Concerned that lay people have no regular channels of communication with the clerical leadership, the Council of the Baptized published and sent to Archbishop John Nienstedt its first position paper entitled "Archdiocesan Pastoral Council: A Recommendation for Re-establishment" on January 17, 2013. The Archbishop responded by a letter dated February 1, 2013. He says a plan is already in the works to bring an APC back to this archdiocese.Despite the fact that we have heard nothing about this plan, lay Catholics can welcome the Archbishop’s initiative.
The concern now is for how the Archdiocesan Pastoral Council will be structured. In its position paper, the Council of the Baptized recommends that the members of the APC be elected from diverse groups of people within the archdiocese. It also recommends that everyone be allowed to submit subjects for discussion by the APC in open agendas. And finally, to hold everyone accountable, the APC meetings should be open to the press and the public.
Without a degree of openness, the new APC will be doomed. The history of Diocesan Pastoral Councils has shown that when the pastors and bishops hand pick the members, when the bishop sets the agenda, and when the meetings are closed, responsible lay people lose interest. The mission of the Church is best served by laity and clergy of all points of view listening to each other. If we believe that the Holy Spirit speaks through all the faithful, an open atmosphere welcomes the Spirit’s voice.
Of course, canon law puts the responsibility on the Archbishop to determine what structure the APC will have. There is no requirement of canon law, however, that the Archbishop cannot consult widely in its planning and make it an open, diverse, and truly representative body. That is up to his good will and good judgment.
We urge Catholics concerned about authentic two-way communication in the Church to express their hopes and needs to the Archbishop while he is planning the new Archdiocesan Pastoral Council. His address is: 226 Summit Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55102.
Order a copy of the Council of the Baptized’s position paper
by clicking here. The paper will be sent to you free of charge.
by clicking here. The paper will be sent to you free of charge.
See also the previous PCV post:
Council of the Baptized Recommends Comeback for Archdiocesan Pastoral Council
Saturday, February 2, 2013
A Taboo, a New Pope, and a Truer Church (Part 1)
By Jerry Slevin
Note: This article was originally published on Jerry Slevin's blog Christian Catholicism.
Will a taboo bring down the 'Roman Holy Empire'?
The escalating scandal of priests sexually abusing children, and the resulting increasing legal pressures on the Vatican, appears to be threatening the very survival of the “Roman Holy Empire”. This mythical medieval concept supports the essential foundational claim that seeks unsuccessfully to justify historically Vatican hierarchical power. The Pope, as “Supreme Pontiff” for life and the “semi-divine infallible Vicar of Christ”, along with his “Imperial Staff” of Vatican Cardinals, have evidently pursued an imperial “top-down” policy for centuries, in secrecy and despite the rule of law, that seems directed too often at enhancing the power and wealth of senior Vatican officials and their subservient Cardinals and Bishops worldwide.
The Vatican implements this strategy mainly at the expense of trusting and generous lay Catholics, including their many children who continue to suffer from priest sexual abuse. Various prosecutors and survivors’ lawyers internationally are now increasingly challenging the Roman Holy Empire’s strategy with enhanced prospects for more success, in national courts and governmental investigations, as well as at the independent International Criminal Court.
The Vatican’s strategy centers on claiming monopolistic control over a “unique Eucharist” that purportedly can be offered to Catholics only by “ontologically pure celibate male priests”. These priests receive long theological preparation, but work for low wages, under the rigid control of well rewarded and exceedingly obedient Cardinals and Bishops. These hierarchs also usually serve for life in very comfortable surroundings, provided they zealously follow Vatican orders, including those relating to punishing prophetic voices among priests and nuns that could undercut absolute papal authority. A Jesuit from South America, for example, was just silenced for recently questioning a point in the Pope’s new Jesus book, even though the Jesuit relied for his point on the work of the same Scriptural scholar the Pope refers to favorably in his book. So much for the papal pleas for “religious liberty”! Liberty for anonymous Vatican officials, but not for Jesuit scholars. Really?
“Pure priests” are absolutely essential for promoting hierarchical fundraising and political influence among the docile Catholic faithful; hence, Bishops are pressured by the Vatican to supply and protect a continuous stream of priests at all costs to sustain this desired fundraising and influence. Indeed, the resulting absolute priest protection policies, apparently even some that employ illegal cover-ups at the expense of innocent child sexual abuse victims, are at the heart of the growing threat to the Roman Holy Empire.
Bishops in many countries must staff parishes with a diminishing domestic priest pool. Bishops are forbidden by the Vatican from seeking available married or female Catholic priests, since permitting these “impure priests” risks undercutting papal “mystical power claims” to infallibility, given prior papal statements by the current Pope and his immediate predecessor on the purported “divine mandate” requiring the “pure priesthood of celibate males” only. Apparently, the need for more priests, especially very “obedient” ones, helps explain the Pope’s disproportionate efforts to solicit support from rigid and controversial groups of “traditionalist” priests, like those involved in Opus Dei, the Legion of Christ and the Society of St. Pius X, as well as the Pope’s unecumenical efforts to “poach” dissident Anglican priests.
Hence, notwithstanding the decades’ old worldwide scandal of priest sexual abuse of children, Bishops still are effectively, and even increasingly, under Vatican pressure to accept some questionable seminarians and many unsuitable foreign priests, and shockingly still to retain suspected sexual predators, whenever feasible, it appears. This blatant clericalism was just reinforced by the appointment of a new Vatican chief prosecutor of predatory priests, who had served under Boston’s infamous Cardinal Law. The new prosecutor reportedly has a reputation for being more “pro accused priest” than many other canon lawyers.
Moreover, Philadelphia’s Archbishop Chaput appears still to be carrying accused priests that his predecessor, Cardinal Rigali, suspended over a year and a half ago. And Cardinal Rigali surely was not one that suspended priests lightly, as amply shown at the recent criminal trial convicting his long time subordinate, Monsignor Lynn, of child endangerment.
The billions of dollars expended by U.S. Bishops relating to legal claims of abuse survivors that result, at least in material part, from the Vatican’s “anti-children” policy appear currently to be just another “cost of doing business” for Bishops to be funded either by trusting Catholics’ contributions or by cost-savings from closing more Catholic churches and schools. Paying large settlements that keep Bishops’ incriminating files sealed appears acceptable to survivors’ lawyers, not too surprisingly given their usual percentage fee arrangements, but also apparently to many Bishops, so long as the Bishops can be assured of avoiding criminal prosecution for child endangerment by making the large payments.
Avoiding criminal prosecution appears, however, to be becoming more difficult for Bishops to do. This prospect potentially poses a very serious threat to the Roman Holy Empire. For example, Philadelphia’s Cardinal Bevilacqua apparently avoided prosecution recently only by being terminally ill, not a “first choice defense” for most hierarchs presumably. Boston’s Cardinal Law apparently only avoided local prosecutors earlier by fleeing to Rome and getting immunity protection from the Vatican, not likely to be available any longer to many other hierarchs. Kansas City’s Bishop Finn was, of course, recently convicted, but got a “soft plea deal” and still seems, nevertheless, to remain for now in good standing with the Vatican.
Will a new pope save the church?
Voting Cardinals know that a new Pope is on the horizon, ending an era of Popes who attended the Second Vatican Council but were beholden for their elections to powerful Vatican Cardinals who thwarted key Council structural reforms overwhelmingly approved by over 2,000 Cardinals and Bishops from around the world. The present providential opportunity may now enable these Cardinals and all Catholics, as the People of God revitalized by the Council, to implement Council structural reforms that Vatican Cardinals have effectively blocked for a half-century.
The recent October Roman Synod was fully “Vatican orchestrated” with carefully pre-selected Cardinals’ and Bishops’, who generally and amazingly ducked the monumental abuse scandal. This Synod was the latest example of the Vatican Cardinals’ success in neutralizing the power-sharing arrangements between the Pope and worldwide Bishops that over 2.000 “Vatican II Fathers” naively thought they had overwhelmingly and definitively approved in 1965 before leaving the Council.
Will voting Cardinals soon act to save the Catholic Church from its present shameful and deteriorating condition, even if some Cardinals may do so mainly to assure their own survival? Or will they instead foolishly choose to remain subject to the control of a corrupt and ruthless Vatican administration that increasingly scandalizes Catholics worldwide, while also intimidating and/or picking off isolated Cardinals, Bishops, priests and members of religious orders, especially female ones, who object to the Vatican’s self-serving strategy?
The world’s Catholics will be watching closely the Cardinals’ actions in choosing a new Pope. If the Cardinals fail to act decisively here, many of the world’s Catholics will likely vote with their feet, as many other millions of Catholics who have left the Catholic Church in disgust in recent years already have? Many of these Catholics will likely also demand governmental investigations following the lead of almost 90 % of Australian Catholics who, according to polls, are supporting their Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, in her bold establishment of a national royal commission to investigate organizational child sexual abuse, including in the Australian Catholic Church.
Recently, also, many U.S. Catholics and other U.S. citizens have begun the inevitable push to get President Obama to set up a comparable national investigation commission in the U.S.A. Following the Pope’s disastrous misstep recently in trying to help tax-avoiding Republican plutocrats defeat the President in his recent re-election campaign, why would President Obama, who has spoken out strongly against the organizational sexual abuse of defenseless children, not act here? Moreover, the Pope’s U.S. plutocrat allies just received a major tax increase and may not be returning Vatican calls these days, given the electoral defeat they just received relying too heavily on the Pope’s well funded, but very counter-productive, anti-contraception crusade, it appears.
The Catholic Church likely will soon either reform itself voluntarily or be reformed involuntarily by prosecutors applying international human rights law to protect defenseless children. Either way, it will likely be reformed soon. Worldwide Cardinals sadly and unwisely may again let their Vatican counterparts dictate to them. Notwithstanding, Catholic parents are fed up with priests with impunity raping their children, while insensitive and childless celibates in the Vatican waft mystical smokescreens about the “ontological superiority” of priests. It is time to end this pernicious scholastic nonsense and to protect innocent children honestly and effectively.
Catholics may soon finally eliminate their Church’s coercive and corrupt imperial structure and return to the Church’s original consensual and credible democratic structure with leaders who are once again accountable to the faithful. The consensual Catholic Church structure the Apostles left behind served the original Catholics well. This structure also reflects much better the spirit of God’s loving rule that Jesus revealed to the Apostles than does the hierarchical structure imposed coercively by Roman Emperors in the Fourth Century and that still shamefully continues in Rome. Moreover, modern technology among Bishops themselves, as well as with the Catholic faithful, can make this restored consensual leadership structure function even more efficaciously than it did for Catholics in the post-Apostolic era.
This may be the last chance for any Pope and the Cardinals and Bishops to salvage their rapidly disappearing moral authority that most Catholics once respected. Even in countries with large numbers of Catholic voters, perceptive political leaders have begun to challenge increasingly previously mandated papal positions, for example, on contraception and same sex marriage. These political leaders know well that more Catholic voters are regularly disregarding papal mandates, as respect for the Vatican declines in light of the ceaseless media reports of child abuse scandal cover-ups and financial corruption and incompetence at the Vatican Bank.
The Roman Holy Empire has survived since Emperor Constantine for almost 1,700 years. It has survived despite the violently executed Reformation that failed to reform the Church sufficiently. But the taboo against sexually abusing children is more powerful than opposition to selling indulgences. This Holy Empire has even survived democratically inspired Revolutions that by 1918 helped end all other European absolute monarchies, but still left the papal monarchy intact. The democratic revolution has now reached the Vatican.
It clearly appears that the Roman Holy Empire may now be in its final days as the mandates of the democratic rule of law are being applied increasingly to alleged Vatican misconduct relating to endangering children. The previously unaccountable Vatican administration is facing growing challenges from the application of international human rights laws. These challenges are likely to compel the Vatican and worldwide Cardinals and Bishops against their personal preference, but in their legal self-interest, to reform radically the Catholic Church’s centralized hierarchical structure and to discard the contrived theological and clearly unhistorical positions underpinning it.
The Vatican’s administration’s failure to address the abuse problem effectively to date, and the prevalence of the current code of silence, or “omerta”, on child abuse matters, reported last February by the Vatican’s former chief prosecutor before he was “promoted out” to Malta, suggest that the Vatican administration is incapable of curtailing abuse sufficiently itself, unless legally compelled to do so. If Vatican officials will not even discuss the priest child abuse problem openly among themselves and with their own prosecutor, how can they possibly resolve this continuing problem?
Of course, these Vatican officials likely are aware their abuse related discussions could come back to haunt them in a future criminal proceeding. Presumably, their lawyers have so advised them. For example, Philadelphia’s Monsignor Lynn testified extensively about his boss, Cardinal Bevilacqua’s misdeeds. Perhaps someone, for example, even the Pope’s mistreated butler, may testify against senior Vatican officials, possibly even against the Pope himself. For example, what more does the butler know about the documents the Pope reportedly marked, “Destroy!”
Will Catholics be able soon to select leaders who they can really respect, and who will listen to them even if they are not major donors? Will Jesus’ clear mandate of the “First” serving the “Last” finally be the Catholic Church’s policy once again soon, by force of international law no less? Will Catholic Church leaders now be able again boldly and widely to speak “truth to power” on behalf of victims of injustice in all forms, without having to soften their message for some questionable organizational or plutocratic advantage pushed by Vatican intimidation?
Until now, an unaccountable papal monarch generally has ruled this Holy Empire. Often during the last millennium, he has been selected to rule the Catholic Church absolutely for life by an opportunistic and self-interested elite “male club” dominated by a clique of Roman Cardinals. Is this hierarchical structure about to end? Will the Catholic Church finally return to its original consensual Gospel structure that the Apostles left behind and that was mainly followed for almost three centuries, until Constantine and his successors began to coercively commandeer the Church for Roman imperial purposes beginning in the Fourth Century?
To be continued.
Related Off-site Links:
In Los Angeles, a Victory for Truth – National Catholic Reporter (February 2, 2013).
Mahony Defends Legacy on Church Abuse in Blog – Gillian Flaccus (Associated Press via Yahoo! News, February 2, 2013).
Note: This article was originally published on Jerry Slevin's blog Christian Catholicism.
Will a taboo bring down the 'Roman Holy Empire'?The escalating scandal of priests sexually abusing children, and the resulting increasing legal pressures on the Vatican, appears to be threatening the very survival of the “Roman Holy Empire”. This mythical medieval concept supports the essential foundational claim that seeks unsuccessfully to justify historically Vatican hierarchical power. The Pope, as “Supreme Pontiff” for life and the “semi-divine infallible Vicar of Christ”, along with his “Imperial Staff” of Vatican Cardinals, have evidently pursued an imperial “top-down” policy for centuries, in secrecy and despite the rule of law, that seems directed too often at enhancing the power and wealth of senior Vatican officials and their subservient Cardinals and Bishops worldwide.
The Vatican implements this strategy mainly at the expense of trusting and generous lay Catholics, including their many children who continue to suffer from priest sexual abuse. Various prosecutors and survivors’ lawyers internationally are now increasingly challenging the Roman Holy Empire’s strategy with enhanced prospects for more success, in national courts and governmental investigations, as well as at the independent International Criminal Court.
The Vatican’s strategy centers on claiming monopolistic control over a “unique Eucharist” that purportedly can be offered to Catholics only by “ontologically pure celibate male priests”. These priests receive long theological preparation, but work for low wages, under the rigid control of well rewarded and exceedingly obedient Cardinals and Bishops. These hierarchs also usually serve for life in very comfortable surroundings, provided they zealously follow Vatican orders, including those relating to punishing prophetic voices among priests and nuns that could undercut absolute papal authority. A Jesuit from South America, for example, was just silenced for recently questioning a point in the Pope’s new Jesus book, even though the Jesuit relied for his point on the work of the same Scriptural scholar the Pope refers to favorably in his book. So much for the papal pleas for “religious liberty”! Liberty for anonymous Vatican officials, but not for Jesuit scholars. Really?
“Pure priests” are absolutely essential for promoting hierarchical fundraising and political influence among the docile Catholic faithful; hence, Bishops are pressured by the Vatican to supply and protect a continuous stream of priests at all costs to sustain this desired fundraising and influence. Indeed, the resulting absolute priest protection policies, apparently even some that employ illegal cover-ups at the expense of innocent child sexual abuse victims, are at the heart of the growing threat to the Roman Holy Empire.
Bishops in many countries must staff parishes with a diminishing domestic priest pool. Bishops are forbidden by the Vatican from seeking available married or female Catholic priests, since permitting these “impure priests” risks undercutting papal “mystical power claims” to infallibility, given prior papal statements by the current Pope and his immediate predecessor on the purported “divine mandate” requiring the “pure priesthood of celibate males” only. Apparently, the need for more priests, especially very “obedient” ones, helps explain the Pope’s disproportionate efforts to solicit support from rigid and controversial groups of “traditionalist” priests, like those involved in Opus Dei, the Legion of Christ and the Society of St. Pius X, as well as the Pope’s unecumenical efforts to “poach” dissident Anglican priests.
Hence, notwithstanding the decades’ old worldwide scandal of priest sexual abuse of children, Bishops still are effectively, and even increasingly, under Vatican pressure to accept some questionable seminarians and many unsuitable foreign priests, and shockingly still to retain suspected sexual predators, whenever feasible, it appears. This blatant clericalism was just reinforced by the appointment of a new Vatican chief prosecutor of predatory priests, who had served under Boston’s infamous Cardinal Law. The new prosecutor reportedly has a reputation for being more “pro accused priest” than many other canon lawyers.
Moreover, Philadelphia’s Archbishop Chaput appears still to be carrying accused priests that his predecessor, Cardinal Rigali, suspended over a year and a half ago. And Cardinal Rigali surely was not one that suspended priests lightly, as amply shown at the recent criminal trial convicting his long time subordinate, Monsignor Lynn, of child endangerment.
The billions of dollars expended by U.S. Bishops relating to legal claims of abuse survivors that result, at least in material part, from the Vatican’s “anti-children” policy appear currently to be just another “cost of doing business” for Bishops to be funded either by trusting Catholics’ contributions or by cost-savings from closing more Catholic churches and schools. Paying large settlements that keep Bishops’ incriminating files sealed appears acceptable to survivors’ lawyers, not too surprisingly given their usual percentage fee arrangements, but also apparently to many Bishops, so long as the Bishops can be assured of avoiding criminal prosecution for child endangerment by making the large payments.
Avoiding criminal prosecution appears, however, to be becoming more difficult for Bishops to do. This prospect potentially poses a very serious threat to the Roman Holy Empire. For example, Philadelphia’s Cardinal Bevilacqua apparently avoided prosecution recently only by being terminally ill, not a “first choice defense” for most hierarchs presumably. Boston’s Cardinal Law apparently only avoided local prosecutors earlier by fleeing to Rome and getting immunity protection from the Vatican, not likely to be available any longer to many other hierarchs. Kansas City’s Bishop Finn was, of course, recently convicted, but got a “soft plea deal” and still seems, nevertheless, to remain for now in good standing with the Vatican.
Will a new pope save the church?
Voting Cardinals know that a new Pope is on the horizon, ending an era of Popes who attended the Second Vatican Council but were beholden for their elections to powerful Vatican Cardinals who thwarted key Council structural reforms overwhelmingly approved by over 2,000 Cardinals and Bishops from around the world. The present providential opportunity may now enable these Cardinals and all Catholics, as the People of God revitalized by the Council, to implement Council structural reforms that Vatican Cardinals have effectively blocked for a half-century.
The recent October Roman Synod was fully “Vatican orchestrated” with carefully pre-selected Cardinals’ and Bishops’, who generally and amazingly ducked the monumental abuse scandal. This Synod was the latest example of the Vatican Cardinals’ success in neutralizing the power-sharing arrangements between the Pope and worldwide Bishops that over 2.000 “Vatican II Fathers” naively thought they had overwhelmingly and definitively approved in 1965 before leaving the Council.
Will voting Cardinals soon act to save the Catholic Church from its present shameful and deteriorating condition, even if some Cardinals may do so mainly to assure their own survival? Or will they instead foolishly choose to remain subject to the control of a corrupt and ruthless Vatican administration that increasingly scandalizes Catholics worldwide, while also intimidating and/or picking off isolated Cardinals, Bishops, priests and members of religious orders, especially female ones, who object to the Vatican’s self-serving strategy?
The world’s Catholics will be watching closely the Cardinals’ actions in choosing a new Pope. If the Cardinals fail to act decisively here, many of the world’s Catholics will likely vote with their feet, as many other millions of Catholics who have left the Catholic Church in disgust in recent years already have? Many of these Catholics will likely also demand governmental investigations following the lead of almost 90 % of Australian Catholics who, according to polls, are supporting their Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, in her bold establishment of a national royal commission to investigate organizational child sexual abuse, including in the Australian Catholic Church.
Recently, also, many U.S. Catholics and other U.S. citizens have begun the inevitable push to get President Obama to set up a comparable national investigation commission in the U.S.A. Following the Pope’s disastrous misstep recently in trying to help tax-avoiding Republican plutocrats defeat the President in his recent re-election campaign, why would President Obama, who has spoken out strongly against the organizational sexual abuse of defenseless children, not act here? Moreover, the Pope’s U.S. plutocrat allies just received a major tax increase and may not be returning Vatican calls these days, given the electoral defeat they just received relying too heavily on the Pope’s well funded, but very counter-productive, anti-contraception crusade, it appears.
The Catholic Church likely will soon either reform itself voluntarily or be reformed involuntarily by prosecutors applying international human rights law to protect defenseless children. Either way, it will likely be reformed soon. Worldwide Cardinals sadly and unwisely may again let their Vatican counterparts dictate to them. Notwithstanding, Catholic parents are fed up with priests with impunity raping their children, while insensitive and childless celibates in the Vatican waft mystical smokescreens about the “ontological superiority” of priests. It is time to end this pernicious scholastic nonsense and to protect innocent children honestly and effectively.
Catholics may soon finally eliminate their Church’s coercive and corrupt imperial structure and return to the Church’s original consensual and credible democratic structure with leaders who are once again accountable to the faithful. The consensual Catholic Church structure the Apostles left behind served the original Catholics well. This structure also reflects much better the spirit of God’s loving rule that Jesus revealed to the Apostles than does the hierarchical structure imposed coercively by Roman Emperors in the Fourth Century and that still shamefully continues in Rome. Moreover, modern technology among Bishops themselves, as well as with the Catholic faithful, can make this restored consensual leadership structure function even more efficaciously than it did for Catholics in the post-Apostolic era.
This may be the last chance for any Pope and the Cardinals and Bishops to salvage their rapidly disappearing moral authority that most Catholics once respected. Even in countries with large numbers of Catholic voters, perceptive political leaders have begun to challenge increasingly previously mandated papal positions, for example, on contraception and same sex marriage. These political leaders know well that more Catholic voters are regularly disregarding papal mandates, as respect for the Vatican declines in light of the ceaseless media reports of child abuse scandal cover-ups and financial corruption and incompetence at the Vatican Bank.
The Roman Holy Empire has survived since Emperor Constantine for almost 1,700 years. It has survived despite the violently executed Reformation that failed to reform the Church sufficiently. But the taboo against sexually abusing children is more powerful than opposition to selling indulgences. This Holy Empire has even survived democratically inspired Revolutions that by 1918 helped end all other European absolute monarchies, but still left the papal monarchy intact. The democratic revolution has now reached the Vatican.
It clearly appears that the Roman Holy Empire may now be in its final days as the mandates of the democratic rule of law are being applied increasingly to alleged Vatican misconduct relating to endangering children. The previously unaccountable Vatican administration is facing growing challenges from the application of international human rights laws. These challenges are likely to compel the Vatican and worldwide Cardinals and Bishops against their personal preference, but in their legal self-interest, to reform radically the Catholic Church’s centralized hierarchical structure and to discard the contrived theological and clearly unhistorical positions underpinning it.
The Vatican’s administration’s failure to address the abuse problem effectively to date, and the prevalence of the current code of silence, or “omerta”, on child abuse matters, reported last February by the Vatican’s former chief prosecutor before he was “promoted out” to Malta, suggest that the Vatican administration is incapable of curtailing abuse sufficiently itself, unless legally compelled to do so. If Vatican officials will not even discuss the priest child abuse problem openly among themselves and with their own prosecutor, how can they possibly resolve this continuing problem?
Of course, these Vatican officials likely are aware their abuse related discussions could come back to haunt them in a future criminal proceeding. Presumably, their lawyers have so advised them. For example, Philadelphia’s Monsignor Lynn testified extensively about his boss, Cardinal Bevilacqua’s misdeeds. Perhaps someone, for example, even the Pope’s mistreated butler, may testify against senior Vatican officials, possibly even against the Pope himself. For example, what more does the butler know about the documents the Pope reportedly marked, “Destroy!”
Will Catholics be able soon to select leaders who they can really respect, and who will listen to them even if they are not major donors? Will Jesus’ clear mandate of the “First” serving the “Last” finally be the Catholic Church’s policy once again soon, by force of international law no less? Will Catholic Church leaders now be able again boldly and widely to speak “truth to power” on behalf of victims of injustice in all forms, without having to soften their message for some questionable organizational or plutocratic advantage pushed by Vatican intimidation?
Until now, an unaccountable papal monarch generally has ruled this Holy Empire. Often during the last millennium, he has been selected to rule the Catholic Church absolutely for life by an opportunistic and self-interested elite “male club” dominated by a clique of Roman Cardinals. Is this hierarchical structure about to end? Will the Catholic Church finally return to its original consensual Gospel structure that the Apostles left behind and that was mainly followed for almost three centuries, until Constantine and his successors began to coercively commandeer the Church for Roman imperial purposes beginning in the Fourth Century?
To be continued.
Related Off-site Links:
In Los Angeles, a Victory for Truth – National Catholic Reporter (February 2, 2013).
Mahony Defends Legacy on Church Abuse in Blog – Gillian Flaccus (Associated Press via Yahoo! News, February 2, 2013).
Thursday, January 24, 2013
Council of the Baptized Calls for the People’s Voice in the Selection of Bishops
.
Who could be appointed Archbishop of St. Paul and Minneapolis if John C. Nienstedt were reassigned? Given the secrecy of the appointment process, we do not know when that could happen. We are thinking ahead in the hope of having a voice in the selection of his successor.
Earlier today, the Council of the Baptized published its position paper entitled People’s Participation in Selection of Bishops.
Usually a big archdiocese like ours (800,000 Catholics at last count) would be the next step up for a bishop from a smaller diocese. Without recommending any, we have begun profiling some possibilities, starting with Blase Cupich [soup-itch] of Spokane, WA. It is also possible that St. Paul/Minneapolis auxiliary bishop Lee Piché might be moved up to archbishop, as Auxiliary Bishop John Roach was elevated to Archbishop in 1975 to succeed Archbishop Leo Binz.
Or it is also possible, though unlikely, that a priest of the diocese would be elevated to archbishop.
Who would know the details of a diocese more intimately than a priest who was ordained and has served here? Instead of a man from outside, it might be possible to have a leader who knows the people, places, and needs of the local church. Who might some of these people be?
Our profiling is intended to suggest to Catholics of the Archdiocese the possibility of our having a voice in the selection of our church leadership, not to recommend any of the men we profile.
Canon law currently requires that appointments for bishop be made from the ranks of the ordained clergy. The man has to have been ordained at least five years and be thirty-five years old. The retirement age is seventy-five.
So without recommending any one of these men, we have compiled a list of possible appointees. Some names were suggested as people already on the bishop track, and some were suggested as men who would make good bishops. The Archdiocese does not provide priests’ résumés. We had to search several internet sources for available information. We didn’t want to ask the man himself for fear that his giving us information would give the appearance of campaigning.
While campaigning is prohibited, the papal nuncio Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganó has assured us that he is willing to hear recommendations from us individually. It is his job to investigate candidates and send names to the Vatican for appointment.
If you have missing information for these profiles or you would like to suggest other names for profiling, contact us here.
If you want to recommend any of these men or any other priest you think would make a good bishop, write to the papal nuncio. Send your letter to:
Who could be appointed Archbishop of St. Paul and Minneapolis if John C. Nienstedt were reassigned? Given the secrecy of the appointment process, we do not know when that could happen. We are thinking ahead in the hope of having a voice in the selection of his successor.
Earlier today, the Council of the Baptized published its position paper entitled People’s Participation in Selection of Bishops.
• To read it and/or print a copy, click here.
• For information about ordering a copy and/or making a donation, click here.
Usually a big archdiocese like ours (800,000 Catholics at last count) would be the next step up for a bishop from a smaller diocese. Without recommending any, we have begun profiling some possibilities, starting with Blase Cupich [soup-itch] of Spokane, WA. It is also possible that St. Paul/Minneapolis auxiliary bishop Lee Piché might be moved up to archbishop, as Auxiliary Bishop John Roach was elevated to Archbishop in 1975 to succeed Archbishop Leo Binz.
Or it is also possible, though unlikely, that a priest of the diocese would be elevated to archbishop.
Who would know the details of a diocese more intimately than a priest who was ordained and has served here? Instead of a man from outside, it might be possible to have a leader who knows the people, places, and needs of the local church. Who might some of these people be?
Our profiling is intended to suggest to Catholics of the Archdiocese the possibility of our having a voice in the selection of our church leadership, not to recommend any of the men we profile.
Canon law currently requires that appointments for bishop be made from the ranks of the ordained clergy. The man has to have been ordained at least five years and be thirty-five years old. The retirement age is seventy-five.
So without recommending any one of these men, we have compiled a list of possible appointees. Some names were suggested as people already on the bishop track, and some were suggested as men who would make good bishops. The Archdiocese does not provide priests’ résumés. We had to search several internet sources for available information. We didn’t want to ask the man himself for fear that his giving us information would give the appearance of campaigning.
While campaigning is prohibited, the papal nuncio Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganó has assured us that he is willing to hear recommendations from us individually. It is his job to investigate candidates and send names to the Vatican for appointment.
Click on the name to see a profile of the following priests of this Archdiocese:
1. John M. Bauer
2. Michael C. Becker
3. J Michael Byron
4. Scott M. Carl
5. Kevin I. Clinton
6. Timothy D. Cloutier
7. Andrew H. Cozzens
8. Paul F. Feela
9. J. Michael Joncas
10. Peter A. Laird
11. Kevin M. McDonough
12. Philip J. Rask
13. Michael V. Tegeder
14. Timothy J.Wozniak
If you have missing information for these profiles or you would like to suggest other names for profiling, contact us here.
If you want to recommend any of these men or any other priest you think would make a good bishop, write to the papal nuncio. Send your letter to:
Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganó
3339 Massachusetts Avenue NW
Washington DC 20008.
Tuesday, January 22, 2013
Council of the Baptized Recommends Comeback for Archdiocesan Pastoral Council
.
Did you know that in our archdiocese in the 1970’s we had an elected Council to bring lay people and ordained people into communication with each other?
Communication — without it there is no such thing as church. No communication, and there is no spiritual growth, no stable organization, no flow of energy and joy. The Holy Spirit is all about communication.
Since January 17, 2012 we have had a Council of the Baptized initiated by lay people of the archdiocese to set up some channels of communication. Their first publication was sent to Archbishop John C. Nienstedt on January 17, 2013. It is a recommendation from the people asking the Archbishop, who is by canon law the chief decision-maker for the local church, to bring back an elected Archdiocesan Pastoral Council.
The APC in the 70’s was a response to the directives of the Second Vatican Council to the bishops to consult with the people of the church. In the Decree on the Pastoral Office of Bishops in the Church (Christus Dominus, 1965), the Council bishops say “It is highly desirable that in every diocese a special pastoral council be established…to investigate, to consider, and to formulate practical conclusion about those things which pertain to pastoral work” (CD 27).
All the questions raised by people during the 2010 strategic planning process are “things which pertain to pastoral work.” Why are people not going to Mass? Why is there a shortage of priests? What can be done about the divisions in our community?
The position paper recommending a new APC is available on request here.
Following is the Council of the Baptized's January 18, 2013 media release about its call for the re-establishment of a Pastoral Council within the Archdiocese of St. Paul-Minneapolis.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contacts: Karin Grosscup (612-825-4069) and Terry Griep (651-457-4339)
Email: info@councilofthebaptized.org.
Citing historical documents, including a 1967 letter from then-Archbishop Leo Binz of the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis, and earlier Catholic Church practices that included a Pastoral Council, the Council of the Baptized recommends that leaders in the archdiocese of today, including Archbishop John Nienstedt, re-establish an Archdiocesan Pastoral Council.
The Pastoral Council would be a collegial association of laity, clergy and hierarchy, whose purpose would be to facilitate communication among all baptized Catholics and to consult in pastoral planning to better serve the mission of the Church. In a researched position paper, completed in December 2012, the Council of the Baptized said that in "recommending the re-establishment of an Archdiocesan Pastoral Council, we include specific structural elements, such as elected membership, open agenda and open meetings to ensure the Council’s sustainability."
Support for a Pastoral Council can be found in the following:
• Scripture and the practice of the early church.
• Documents of Vatican II and subsequent papal documents.
• Code of Canon Law 1983.
• Contemporary best management practices.
• Precedent of an Archdiocesan Pastoral Council in the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis and evident current need.
In summarizing the above practices and documentation, it is significant to emphasize that a diocesan Pastoral Council was in place between 1967 and 2005. According to reports from participants, the council of the 1970s and 80s was one of "two-way communication." However, in the late 1990s a shift took place, and according to reports from participants in later councils, the selection process for council members deteriorated and the workings of the Council faltered. That council did not function well and ended in the period of 2004-2005 without an official decree of termination.
It should be noted that in 2010-2011 Archbishop John Nienstedt appointed an ad hoc advisory task force for strategic planning. The fact sheet, dated June 2009, on which this planning process was purportedly based showed a growing Catholic population, increase in socio-economic and ethnic diversity, but dwindling financial support, Mass attendance, and participation by youths. The fact sheet cited fewer clergy available for parish service also. This first phase of planning produced parish mergers, clusters, and closings and school closings in an effort to streamline the delivery of services. The details of this strategic planning initiative are on the Archdiocesan website.
The strategic planning uncovered a host of challenges besetting the local Catholic Church. Reestablishing an elected Archdiocesan Pastoral Council offers a way to engage representatives of all parts of the church’s life to address these challenges and similar questions. Such a council will provide a vehicle for communication among laity, clergy, and hierarchy, necessary for the nature and mission of Church.
Such a council must meet the following structural criteria:
• Elected membership: Lay men and women, diverse as to ethnicity, geography, theologies, and sexual orientation, shall participate in open elections in parishes, deaneries, and other associations to select Pastoral Council membership;
• Open agendas: All members are free to submit agenda items and receive agenda items from the Catholic faithful;
• Strategic coherence: Representation from other consultative bodies must be sufficient to ensure coherence in Archdiocesan pastoral planning;
• Transparency: All Council meetings shall be open to observers.
Did you know that in our archdiocese in the 1970’s we had an elected Council to bring lay people and ordained people into communication with each other?
Communication — without it there is no such thing as church. No communication, and there is no spiritual growth, no stable organization, no flow of energy and joy. The Holy Spirit is all about communication.
Since January 17, 2012 we have had a Council of the Baptized initiated by lay people of the archdiocese to set up some channels of communication. Their first publication was sent to Archbishop John C. Nienstedt on January 17, 2013. It is a recommendation from the people asking the Archbishop, who is by canon law the chief decision-maker for the local church, to bring back an elected Archdiocesan Pastoral Council.
The APC in the 70’s was a response to the directives of the Second Vatican Council to the bishops to consult with the people of the church. In the Decree on the Pastoral Office of Bishops in the Church (Christus Dominus, 1965), the Council bishops say “It is highly desirable that in every diocese a special pastoral council be established…to investigate, to consider, and to formulate practical conclusion about those things which pertain to pastoral work” (CD 27).
All the questions raised by people during the 2010 strategic planning process are “things which pertain to pastoral work.” Why are people not going to Mass? Why is there a shortage of priests? What can be done about the divisions in our community?
The position paper recommending a new APC is available on request here.
___________________________________
Following is the Council of the Baptized's January 18, 2013 media release about its call for the re-establishment of a Pastoral Council within the Archdiocese of St. Paul-Minneapolis.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contacts: Karin Grosscup (612-825-4069) and Terry Griep (651-457-4339)
Email: info@councilofthebaptized.org.
Council of Baptized Calls for Re-establishment
of Pastoral Council
Citing historical documents, including a 1967 letter from then-Archbishop Leo Binz of the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis, and earlier Catholic Church practices that included a Pastoral Council, the Council of the Baptized recommends that leaders in the archdiocese of today, including Archbishop John Nienstedt, re-establish an Archdiocesan Pastoral Council.
The Pastoral Council would be a collegial association of laity, clergy and hierarchy, whose purpose would be to facilitate communication among all baptized Catholics and to consult in pastoral planning to better serve the mission of the Church. In a researched position paper, completed in December 2012, the Council of the Baptized said that in "recommending the re-establishment of an Archdiocesan Pastoral Council, we include specific structural elements, such as elected membership, open agenda and open meetings to ensure the Council’s sustainability."
Support for a Pastoral Council can be found in the following:
• Scripture and the practice of the early church.
• Documents of Vatican II and subsequent papal documents.
• Code of Canon Law 1983.
• Contemporary best management practices.
• Precedent of an Archdiocesan Pastoral Council in the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis and evident current need.
In summarizing the above practices and documentation, it is significant to emphasize that a diocesan Pastoral Council was in place between 1967 and 2005. According to reports from participants, the council of the 1970s and 80s was one of "two-way communication." However, in the late 1990s a shift took place, and according to reports from participants in later councils, the selection process for council members deteriorated and the workings of the Council faltered. That council did not function well and ended in the period of 2004-2005 without an official decree of termination.
It should be noted that in 2010-2011 Archbishop John Nienstedt appointed an ad hoc advisory task force for strategic planning. The fact sheet, dated June 2009, on which this planning process was purportedly based showed a growing Catholic population, increase in socio-economic and ethnic diversity, but dwindling financial support, Mass attendance, and participation by youths. The fact sheet cited fewer clergy available for parish service also. This first phase of planning produced parish mergers, clusters, and closings and school closings in an effort to streamline the delivery of services. The details of this strategic planning initiative are on the Archdiocesan website.
The strategic planning uncovered a host of challenges besetting the local Catholic Church. Reestablishing an elected Archdiocesan Pastoral Council offers a way to engage representatives of all parts of the church’s life to address these challenges and similar questions. Such a council will provide a vehicle for communication among laity, clergy, and hierarchy, necessary for the nature and mission of Church.
Such a council must meet the following structural criteria:
• Elected membership: Lay men and women, diverse as to ethnicity, geography, theologies, and sexual orientation, shall participate in open elections in parishes, deaneries, and other associations to select Pastoral Council membership;
• Open agendas: All members are free to submit agenda items and receive agenda items from the Catholic faithful;
• Strategic coherence: Representation from other consultative bodies must be sufficient to ensure coherence in Archdiocesan pastoral planning;
• Transparency: All Council meetings shall be open to observers.
Monday, January 21, 2013
Vatican's Demand for Silence is Too High a Price
By Fr. Tony Flannery
Note: This commentary was first published January 21, 2012 by The Irish Times.
Three days after my 66th birthday I find myself forbidden to minister as a priest, with a threat of excommunication and dismissal from my congregation hanging over me. How did I find myself in this situation?
I joined the Redemptorist congregation in 1964 and was ordained 10 years later. That was the era of great openness in the Catholic Church. We believed in freedom of thought and of conscience, and that church teaching was not something to be imposed rigidly on the people we served – they were intelligent and educated, and could take responsibility for their lives.
As preachers we must try to present the message of Christ in a way and a language that spoke to the reality of people’s lives. This necessitated a willingness to listen to the people, to understand their hopes and joys, their struggles and fears.
Helping people to deal with the teaching on contraception during the 1970s was a great training ground. Just repeating the official line of Humanae Vitae was no help. During those years priests and people alike learned a lot about how to form their consciences and make mature decisions about all areas of their lives. As priests we learned more from people than they learned from us.
As the years went by we could all see that the teaching authority within the church was reverting to the more authoritarian style of ministry practised in the past. As authority became centralised in the Vatican once again, pressure came on priests of my generation to be more explicit and decisive in presenting church teaching: orthodoxy was now the imperative, and allowing people to think for themselves was seen as dangerous. There was no room for grey areas.
Reports to Rome
We became aware that there were people around the country who reported any slight deviation from the official stance by a priest, for example allowing a woman to read the gospel at Mass. Throughout the world, priests were being sanctioned, silenced and even dismissed because they would not toe the line.
In autumn 2010, I was one of a small group who set up the Association of Catholic Priests (ACP). This association was unique in that it was an independent body of clergy, a new phenomenon in the church, and one with which the authorities, in Ireland and the Vatican, were uncomfortable and didn’t know how to handle. The growth of the movement served to catapult me into a more prominent position, which brought me to the attention of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF). I had been writing for various religious magazines for more than 20 years without any problem. But suddenly last February I was informed by my Redemptorist superiors that I was in serious trouble over some things I had written. I was summoned to Rome, not to the Vatican, which to this day has not communicated with me directly, but to the head of the Redemptorists.
This was the beginning of what is now almost a year of tension, stress and difficult decision-making in my life. Initially my policy was to see if some compromise was possible, and it seemed in early summer this was a real possibility.
But I gradually became aware that the CDF continually raised the bar, until it got to the point where I could no longer negotiate. I was faced with a choice. Either I sign a statement, for publication, stating that I accepted teachings that I could not accept, or I would remain permanently banned from priestly ministry, and maybe face more serious sanctions. It is important to state clearly that these issues were not matters of fundamental teaching, but rather of church governance.
So now, at this hour of my life, I either put my name to a document that would be a lie, and would impugn my integrity and my conscience, or I face the reality of never again ministering as a priest. I have always believed in the church as the community of believers and as an essential element in promoting and nourishing the faith. I have enjoyed my years of preaching, the main work of Redemptorists, and never had any doubt that Christ’s message was one worth proclaiming.
But to give up on freedom of thought, freedom of speech and most especially freedom of conscience is too high a price for me to pay to be allowed minister in today’s church.
Catholic identity
There are people who will say I should leave the Catholic Church and join another Christian church – one more suitable to my stance. Being a Catholic is central to my personal identity. I have tried to preach the gospel. No matter what sanctions the Vatican imposes on me I will continue, in whatever way I can, to try to bring about reform in the church and to make it again a place where all who want to follow Christ will be welcome. He made friends with the outcasts of society, and I will do whatever I can in my own small way to oppose the current Vatican trend of creating a church of condemnation rather than one of compassion.
I believe that the real aim of the CDF is to suppress the ACP – attempts have been made to clip the wings of the Austrian association. I hope and pray it will not succeed.
While I am dealing with these issues in my own life I believe it is appropriate for me to temporarily stand down from my position of leadership in the association. I will, however, remain an active member, and will be available to help in every way possible for the work of the ACP, which is bigger than any one person.
Finally, it could be asked why I am going public now having remained silent for a year. I need to take back my voice.
Related Off-site Links:
Dissident Irish Priest Fears Excommunication Over Views on Women Priests – Patrick Counihan (IrishCentral.com, January 21, 2013).
Priests Support Flannery Over Challenging Views – Patsy McGarry (The Irish Times, January 21, 2013).
Irish Redemptorist Father Tony Flannery Gets the Ray Bourgeios Treatment from the CDF – Colleen Kochivar-Baker (Enlightened Catholicism, January 20, 2013).
Priest Is Planning to Defy the Vatican’s Orders to Stay Quiet – Douglas Dalby (New York Times, January 19, 2013).
Irish Priest Receives Support from Near and Far in His Vatican Struggle – Francis DeBernardo (Bondings 2.0, January 23, 2013).
Fr. Flannery's Grasp of Theology Better Than That of His Silencers – Eugene Cullen Kennedy (National Catholic Reporter, January 25, 2013).
See also the previous PCV posts:
A Catholic Leader Calls for Church Reform
Swiss Benedictine Abbot Speaks of Church Reform
Hans Küng Says Only Radical Reforms Can Save the Catholic Church
Belgium Catholics Issue Reform Manifesto
A Church in Flux
American Catholic Council Issues "Declaration for Reform and Renewal"
Urgent Tasks for Church Renewal
Hans Küng Urges Peaceful Revolution Against Roman Absolutism
The Call of the Baptized: Be the Church, Live the Mission
Creating a Liberating Church (Part 1)
Creating a Liberating Church (Part 2)
Creating a Liberating Church (Part 3)
Image: Jekaterina Saveljeva (for The New York Times).
Note: This commentary was first published January 21, 2012 by The Irish Times.
Three days after my 66th birthday I find myself forbidden to minister as a priest, with a threat of excommunication and dismissal from my congregation hanging over me. How did I find myself in this situation?
I joined the Redemptorist congregation in 1964 and was ordained 10 years later. That was the era of great openness in the Catholic Church. We believed in freedom of thought and of conscience, and that church teaching was not something to be imposed rigidly on the people we served – they were intelligent and educated, and could take responsibility for their lives.
As preachers we must try to present the message of Christ in a way and a language that spoke to the reality of people’s lives. This necessitated a willingness to listen to the people, to understand their hopes and joys, their struggles and fears.
Helping people to deal with the teaching on contraception during the 1970s was a great training ground. Just repeating the official line of Humanae Vitae was no help. During those years priests and people alike learned a lot about how to form their consciences and make mature decisions about all areas of their lives. As priests we learned more from people than they learned from us.
As the years went by we could all see that the teaching authority within the church was reverting to the more authoritarian style of ministry practised in the past. As authority became centralised in the Vatican once again, pressure came on priests of my generation to be more explicit and decisive in presenting church teaching: orthodoxy was now the imperative, and allowing people to think for themselves was seen as dangerous. There was no room for grey areas.
Reports to Rome
We became aware that there were people around the country who reported any slight deviation from the official stance by a priest, for example allowing a woman to read the gospel at Mass. Throughout the world, priests were being sanctioned, silenced and even dismissed because they would not toe the line.
In autumn 2010, I was one of a small group who set up the Association of Catholic Priests (ACP). This association was unique in that it was an independent body of clergy, a new phenomenon in the church, and one with which the authorities, in Ireland and the Vatican, were uncomfortable and didn’t know how to handle. The growth of the movement served to catapult me into a more prominent position, which brought me to the attention of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF). I had been writing for various religious magazines for more than 20 years without any problem. But suddenly last February I was informed by my Redemptorist superiors that I was in serious trouble over some things I had written. I was summoned to Rome, not to the Vatican, which to this day has not communicated with me directly, but to the head of the Redemptorists.
This was the beginning of what is now almost a year of tension, stress and difficult decision-making in my life. Initially my policy was to see if some compromise was possible, and it seemed in early summer this was a real possibility.
But I gradually became aware that the CDF continually raised the bar, until it got to the point where I could no longer negotiate. I was faced with a choice. Either I sign a statement, for publication, stating that I accepted teachings that I could not accept, or I would remain permanently banned from priestly ministry, and maybe face more serious sanctions. It is important to state clearly that these issues were not matters of fundamental teaching, but rather of church governance.
So now, at this hour of my life, I either put my name to a document that would be a lie, and would impugn my integrity and my conscience, or I face the reality of never again ministering as a priest. I have always believed in the church as the community of believers and as an essential element in promoting and nourishing the faith. I have enjoyed my years of preaching, the main work of Redemptorists, and never had any doubt that Christ’s message was one worth proclaiming.
But to give up on freedom of thought, freedom of speech and most especially freedom of conscience is too high a price for me to pay to be allowed minister in today’s church.
Catholic identity
There are people who will say I should leave the Catholic Church and join another Christian church – one more suitable to my stance. Being a Catholic is central to my personal identity. I have tried to preach the gospel. No matter what sanctions the Vatican imposes on me I will continue, in whatever way I can, to try to bring about reform in the church and to make it again a place where all who want to follow Christ will be welcome. He made friends with the outcasts of society, and I will do whatever I can in my own small way to oppose the current Vatican trend of creating a church of condemnation rather than one of compassion.
I believe that the real aim of the CDF is to suppress the ACP – attempts have been made to clip the wings of the Austrian association. I hope and pray it will not succeed.
While I am dealing with these issues in my own life I believe it is appropriate for me to temporarily stand down from my position of leadership in the association. I will, however, remain an active member, and will be available to help in every way possible for the work of the ACP, which is bigger than any one person.
Finally, it could be asked why I am going public now having remained silent for a year. I need to take back my voice.
Related Off-site Links:
Dissident Irish Priest Fears Excommunication Over Views on Women Priests – Patrick Counihan (IrishCentral.com, January 21, 2013).
Priests Support Flannery Over Challenging Views – Patsy McGarry (The Irish Times, January 21, 2013).
Irish Redemptorist Father Tony Flannery Gets the Ray Bourgeios Treatment from the CDF – Colleen Kochivar-Baker (Enlightened Catholicism, January 20, 2013).
Priest Is Planning to Defy the Vatican’s Orders to Stay Quiet – Douglas Dalby (New York Times, January 19, 2013).
Irish Priest Receives Support from Near and Far in His Vatican Struggle – Francis DeBernardo (Bondings 2.0, January 23, 2013).
Fr. Flannery's Grasp of Theology Better Than That of His Silencers – Eugene Cullen Kennedy (National Catholic Reporter, January 25, 2013).
See also the previous PCV posts:
A Catholic Leader Calls for Church Reform
Swiss Benedictine Abbot Speaks of Church Reform
Hans Küng Says Only Radical Reforms Can Save the Catholic Church
Belgium Catholics Issue Reform Manifesto
A Church in Flux
American Catholic Council Issues "Declaration for Reform and Renewal"
Urgent Tasks for Church Renewal
Hans Küng Urges Peaceful Revolution Against Roman Absolutism
The Call of the Baptized: Be the Church, Live the Mission
Creating a Liberating Church (Part 1)
Creating a Liberating Church (Part 2)
Creating a Liberating Church (Part 3)
Image: Jekaterina Saveljeva (for The New York Times).
Sunday, January 20, 2013
A Catholic Spirituality for the 21st Century
Someday after mastering the winds, waves, tides and gravity
we shall harness the energies of love. And then, for the second
time in the history of the world, man will discover fire.
we shall harness the energies of love. And then, for the second
time in the history of the world, man will discover fire.
– Teilhard de Chardin
You are invited to a workshop on
Our Role in God's Evolving Creation:
A Catholic Spirituality for the 21st Century
Choose any of the following:
One session:
WHEN: 9:00 a.m. - Noon, Saturday, February 2.
WHERE: Woodmere Apartments Party Room, 33 NE 2nd St., Buffalo, MN 55313. (Note: This workshop registration is now closed with 60 participants. If you live in the NW quadrant of the Archdiocese and would like to attend a future workshop, email paularuddy@usinternet.com)
FACILITATORS: Catholic educators Tom Smith-Myott and Katie Johnson.
Three interdependent sessions:
WHEN: 7:00 -9:00 p.m., Thursdays February 21, February 28, and March 7.
WHERE: For location, call Paula at 612-379-1043.
FACILITATORS: Tom Smith-Myott and Nancy Cosgriff, DMin.
COST: $15/session. Scholarships available with pre-registration. Call Paula at 612-379-1043.
One session:
WHEN: 9:00 a.m. - Noon, Saturday, March 9.
WHERE: WomanWell, 1784 Lacrosse Ave, St. Paul (off White Bear Ave between I 94 and Highway 36).
FACILITATORS: Nancy Cosgriff, DMin and Delmarie Gibney, DMin.
COST: $25. Scholarships available with pre-registration. Call Paula at 612-379-1043.
Workshop Focus:
• What do we know about our human story as part of the Universe story and why does it matter? How do you explain creation to your children/grandchildren in the light of what science has been telling us about the "Big Bang" and the ongoing process of creation?
• What does the new creation story tell us about our nature as originally blessed? How do we experience and share this blessedness?
• How does the new story affect your understanding of God? Of Jesus? Of salvation? Of church? Of prayer?
• What spiritual practices help us participate more fully in the process of creation?
To register and/or for information about scholarships, contact Paula at 612-379-1043 or paularuddy@usinternet.com. Registration checks can be mailed to: Paula Ruddy, 20 2nd St. NE, #2304, Minneapolis, MN 55413.
Recommended Off-site Link:
Religion, Science, and Spirit: A Sacred Story for Our Time – David Korten (Yes! Magazine, January 17, 2013).
Saturday, January 19, 2013
A Catholic Leader Calls for Church Reform
By Cara McDonough
Note: This commentary was first published January 18, 2012 by The Huffington Post.
For the most devoted Catholics, the recent holiday season was a time to reflect more fervently on spiritual endeavors, a time celebrate their faith in its fullest terms.
For many, however, Christmas marked the first time they attended Mass in months. Some cite a growing personal conflict with Church practices as reason for abandoning a regular Mass-going schedule; remaining Catholic in name, yet disagreeing with the Church on certain principals, such as abortion, birth control or gay rights.
"Cafeteria Catholics," some call us (yes, I count include myself in this group) – namely, those among the clergy and laity who consider dissent from Church beliefs unforgivable – referring to the "picking and choosing" aspect of this religious lifestyle. It's not a complement.
But Brother Louis DeThomasis, FSC, author of Flying in the Face of Tradition: Listening to the Lived Experience of the Faithful (released in 2012), has decided to turn the term on its head.
"They're the cafeteria Catholics," he says to me, during an interview about his book, of the ultra-conservative individuals not willing to recognize that the Church has changed. "You've got to fight them on their own terms. They're not seeing Vatican II as legitimate. The windows that Vatican II opened are being closed."
This is far from the most radical thing that De Thomasis states in his incredibly frank assessment of the modern-day Catholic Church, which is sure to anger many who view these traditional beliefs as unchangeable.
To others (like me) his book is a crucial – and refreshing – step in the right direction.
DeThomasis, even considering his position as a De LaSalle Brother, is willing to speak out against what he describes as an increasingly inflexible hierarchy, unwilling to bend or even discuss such issues as the droves of young people fleeing the Catholic Church, the difficult questions surrounding sex abuse scandals or the question of ordaining women priests.
"I look at the way the church is treating women ... in this day and age, come on," he says. "You just cannot give any credence to the fact that women shouldn't be equal to men in all things, including ordination."
In this concise, easily digestible yet thought-provoking 10-chapter book, DeThomasis explores conflict within the Church and the resulting mass exodus of Catholics frustrated with an increasingly unbending hierarchy. There volatile subjects are usually reserved for private conversations, but discussing these matters out loud is now crucial, he says; discussion is, in fact, the Christian thing to do.
He begins, in Chapter One, by asking a question: Is the institutional church dying? Yes. And even though it may be politic to add "unfortunately," I offer no such qualification. I believe that the death of the institutional church as we all know it can be the last opportunity for it to transform itself into something that once again is able to carry out its original purpose.
That "original purpose" is getting lost in the shuffle of bureaucracy, says DeThomasis. The hierarchy's recent investigation into the practices of American nuns, for example, not only further disgusted modern Catholics disillusioned by their Church; it was as far from Jesus' original message as you can get.
"I contend they're not doing things in a business sense correctly, they're not doing things in an organizational sense correctly, but most importantly, they're not doing things in a Christian sense," he says in his interview with me. "You looked at Jesus' life -- he bucked the authorities, he called them hypocrites."
While he adds that there are certainly Church leaders who do not fall into this category, and who are doing wonderful deeds, he remarks that the result of a distant, all-powerful and unbending hierarchy is an inevitably disillusioned laity. DeThomasis, who served for 24 years as president and professor at Saint Mary's University of Minnesota, says this attitude is particularly – although not exclusively – prevalent among young Catholics.
"I was immersed with Catholic young people," he says. "Each year it just got worse and worse with the young people not understanding what the hierarchy were saying. It was like speaking a foreign language."
Yet in the face of what seem like insurmountable hurdles, DeThomasis sees the impetus for positive change.
A synopsis on his book jacket states that he doesn't write out of "any malice or mean-spiritedness but rather with a sense of urgency and love."
And he tells me that he is optimistic. In talking to DeThomasis – who is funny, warm and most of all, passionate – I too feel optimistic about the state of a church that, yes, I still choose to identify with, despite disagreeing with many of its core principals and decisions. It is the first time in a long time I have felt that way.
He says an important part of the solution is for the disaffected to stay with the Catholic faith, but not to stay silent: "My faith tells me that the Holy Spirit does work. I am convinced by us talking like this, and I hope this would give you incentive to talk to others. There is a tipping point, and these changes are going to start to happen more and more. So yes ... I am hopeful."
Cara McDonough can be followed on Twitter at www.twitter.com/caramcd.
Related Off-site Links:
The Subversion of the Second Vatican Council – Brother Louis DeThomas, FSC (The Huffington Post, April 25, 2012).
Christian Brother and Former St. Mary's President Calls for Women’s Ordination, "Flying in the Face of Tradition" – James Martin, SJ (America via Bridget Mary's Blog, June 15, 2012).
See also the previous PCV posts:
Swiss Benedictine Abbot Speaks of Church Reform
Hans Küng Says Only Radical Reforms Can Save the Catholic Church
Belgium Catholics Issue Reform Manifesto
American Catholic Council Issues "Declaration for Reform and Renewal"
Urgent Tasks for Church Renewal
Hans Küng Urges Peaceful Revolution Against Roman Absolutism
The Call of the Baptized: Be the Church, Live the Mission
Creating a Liberating Church (Part 1)
Creating a Liberating Church (Part 2)
Creating a Liberating Church (Part 3)
Note: This commentary was first published January 18, 2012 by The Huffington Post.
For the most devoted Catholics, the recent holiday season was a time to reflect more fervently on spiritual endeavors, a time celebrate their faith in its fullest terms.
For many, however, Christmas marked the first time they attended Mass in months. Some cite a growing personal conflict with Church practices as reason for abandoning a regular Mass-going schedule; remaining Catholic in name, yet disagreeing with the Church on certain principals, such as abortion, birth control or gay rights.
"Cafeteria Catholics," some call us (yes, I count include myself in this group) – namely, those among the clergy and laity who consider dissent from Church beliefs unforgivable – referring to the "picking and choosing" aspect of this religious lifestyle. It's not a complement.
But Brother Louis DeThomasis, FSC, author of Flying in the Face of Tradition: Listening to the Lived Experience of the Faithful (released in 2012), has decided to turn the term on its head.
"They're the cafeteria Catholics," he says to me, during an interview about his book, of the ultra-conservative individuals not willing to recognize that the Church has changed. "You've got to fight them on their own terms. They're not seeing Vatican II as legitimate. The windows that Vatican II opened are being closed."
This is far from the most radical thing that De Thomasis states in his incredibly frank assessment of the modern-day Catholic Church, which is sure to anger many who view these traditional beliefs as unchangeable.
To others (like me) his book is a crucial – and refreshing – step in the right direction.
DeThomasis, even considering his position as a De LaSalle Brother, is willing to speak out against what he describes as an increasingly inflexible hierarchy, unwilling to bend or even discuss such issues as the droves of young people fleeing the Catholic Church, the difficult questions surrounding sex abuse scandals or the question of ordaining women priests.
"I look at the way the church is treating women ... in this day and age, come on," he says. "You just cannot give any credence to the fact that women shouldn't be equal to men in all things, including ordination."
In this concise, easily digestible yet thought-provoking 10-chapter book, DeThomasis explores conflict within the Church and the resulting mass exodus of Catholics frustrated with an increasingly unbending hierarchy. There volatile subjects are usually reserved for private conversations, but discussing these matters out loud is now crucial, he says; discussion is, in fact, the Christian thing to do.
He begins, in Chapter One, by asking a question: Is the institutional church dying? Yes. And even though it may be politic to add "unfortunately," I offer no such qualification. I believe that the death of the institutional church as we all know it can be the last opportunity for it to transform itself into something that once again is able to carry out its original purpose.
That "original purpose" is getting lost in the shuffle of bureaucracy, says DeThomasis. The hierarchy's recent investigation into the practices of American nuns, for example, not only further disgusted modern Catholics disillusioned by their Church; it was as far from Jesus' original message as you can get.
"I contend they're not doing things in a business sense correctly, they're not doing things in an organizational sense correctly, but most importantly, they're not doing things in a Christian sense," he says in his interview with me. "You looked at Jesus' life -- he bucked the authorities, he called them hypocrites."
While he adds that there are certainly Church leaders who do not fall into this category, and who are doing wonderful deeds, he remarks that the result of a distant, all-powerful and unbending hierarchy is an inevitably disillusioned laity. DeThomasis, who served for 24 years as president and professor at Saint Mary's University of Minnesota, says this attitude is particularly – although not exclusively – prevalent among young Catholics.
"I was immersed with Catholic young people," he says. "Each year it just got worse and worse with the young people not understanding what the hierarchy were saying. It was like speaking a foreign language."
Yet in the face of what seem like insurmountable hurdles, DeThomasis sees the impetus for positive change.
A synopsis on his book jacket states that he doesn't write out of "any malice or mean-spiritedness but rather with a sense of urgency and love."
And he tells me that he is optimistic. In talking to DeThomasis – who is funny, warm and most of all, passionate – I too feel optimistic about the state of a church that, yes, I still choose to identify with, despite disagreeing with many of its core principals and decisions. It is the first time in a long time I have felt that way.
He says an important part of the solution is for the disaffected to stay with the Catholic faith, but not to stay silent: "My faith tells me that the Holy Spirit does work. I am convinced by us talking like this, and I hope this would give you incentive to talk to others. There is a tipping point, and these changes are going to start to happen more and more. So yes ... I am hopeful."
Cara McDonough can be followed on Twitter at www.twitter.com/caramcd.
Related Off-site Links:
The Subversion of the Second Vatican Council – Brother Louis DeThomas, FSC (The Huffington Post, April 25, 2012).
Christian Brother and Former St. Mary's President Calls for Women’s Ordination, "Flying in the Face of Tradition" – James Martin, SJ (America via Bridget Mary's Blog, June 15, 2012).
See also the previous PCV posts:
Swiss Benedictine Abbot Speaks of Church Reform
Hans Küng Says Only Radical Reforms Can Save the Catholic Church
Belgium Catholics Issue Reform Manifesto
American Catholic Council Issues "Declaration for Reform and Renewal"
Urgent Tasks for Church Renewal
Hans Küng Urges Peaceful Revolution Against Roman Absolutism
The Call of the Baptized: Be the Church, Live the Mission
Creating a Liberating Church (Part 1)
Creating a Liberating Church (Part 2)
Creating a Liberating Church (Part 3)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)





