The Mailbag:
TO OUR DEAR BISHOPS: WITH ALL RESPECT, THE TIME HAS COME TO REFORM CHANCERIES
We have always urged obedience to our bishops as they adhere to Vatican rule and always will. Obedience is greater than sacrifice (says the Good Book) -- and we have always held that dear. We urge it for everyone.
But these are distressing times, and we are often forced to report unpleasant trends. One of them is what seems like growing dissatisfaction on the part of the faithful with how chanceries are run.
While maintaining faith in the Church itself (Mass attendance has held steady despite the abuse crisis), there appears to be an expanding disgruntlement with bishops -- one that if unchecked could have serious repercussions.
By "unchecked" we mean "unaddressed": In our view it is clearly time for our bishops to take a deeper look at the fundamental operations and spirituality of chanceries.
We humbly submit something John Paul II once said: "You are priests, not social or political leaders. Let us not be under the illusion that we are serving the Gospel through an exaggerated interest in the wide field of temporal problems."
He also said: "The vow of celibacy is a matter of keeping one's word to Christ and the Church, a duty and a proof of the priest's inner maturity; it is the expression of his personal dignity."
From our mail we can say one thing: The vehemence with which some folks speak of their local bishops -- people who are devout, and usually uncritical -- has grown alarming.
The main upset: that despite the sex scandals, bishops have not acknowledged the full extent of the homosexual problem and are allowing those of such an inclination to wield diocesan power -- often in a way that infringes on the devotional character of local parishes and discourages heterosexual vocations.
Such is asserted across the country. In Cleveland there is upset over a "gay" logo used on the diocesan website. In other instances, diocesan offices have promoted teachings that tend clearly (and perhaps without the bishops' notice) toward the New Age. This happened in San Francisco. There is great current debate over other such matters in the archdiocese of Minneapolis-St. Paul.
The infiltration of homosexuality in chancery positions was demonstrated in sharp relief this week when Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor, the leader of the Roman Catholic Church in England and Wales, reportedly fired his top aide after discovering that the man was gay. It was reported that the aide's sexuality was discovered when his long-term partner visited him at his office.
"Shortly afterwards the Church made it clear that his sexuality was incompatible with the job he had to do. Since he was the spokesperson for the Cardinal, Murphy-O'Connor clearly felt he had to act because homosexual acts are regarded by the Church as a sin," the friend was quoted as saying.
If all Church leaders took such action, it would do much to defuse current upset.
The Vatican itself moved in this direction by taking action against a highly prominent priest. "Capping a decade-long on-again, off-again investigation of accusations of sexual abuse, the Vatican has asked Fr. Marcial Maciel Degollado, the founder of the Legionaries of Christ, to observe a series of restrictions on his ministry," says a report today (5/18/06; we will not ourselves judge on his guilt or innocence).
But the upset is not only over the handling of homosexuality although, as indicated in a sample of the letters we receive (excerpted below), it is the prime one.
There is also deep concern over what is often seen as the distance that many bishops have maintained from the flock and the sense (we are only reporting what we hear) that chanceries tend far more toward the bureaucratic and political than the spiritual.
To our dear bishops is the suggestion that they begin to heed these signs of dangerous perception.
The perspective of detached chanceries must be changed if the Church is to draw together for the difficult times we face, perhaps in the near future.
If our chanceries become less secular, in our view, they will have an excellent chance of erasing most of the harm from the crisis.
Adoration in chanceries, a focus on devotions, and administrators who are more spiritual than administrative would be a major step in mollifying those who feel they are treated distantly.
The Spirit will guide as to the proper way of dealing with the public and will purvey an entirely different feeling.
If not -- we fear -- there will be yet more harm, and in this vein, we strongly suggest that no vicar or underling who is suspected of homosexuality be allowed to hold sway in a chancery. A vicar is the gatekeeper and can exert too much control. Many problems occur at this level.
Let us look to some excellent examples of what can be done to quickly bring a diocese into order. There is Denver, where a strong bishop has instituted strictly orthodox approaches, issues powerful statements in defense of the faith, and has a newspaper with articles that are spiritual and not just religious. Such is also a strong point in the Diocese of Arlington, Virginia.
Meanwhile, in Kansas City, Missouri, Bishop Robert Finn has raised the hackles of liberals by dismissing the chancellor, a layman, and the vice chancellor, a nun who had been chief of pastoral planning, and replacing them with a priest. He also has instituted a "zero-based study" of adult catechesis, and ordered the editor of the diocesan newspaper to immediately cease publishing columns by Father Richard McBrien -- the ultra-liberal theologian from Notre Dame who among other things questions existence of the devil.
Likewise, this bishop instituted a "Respect Life Office" to battle abortion and stem cells and made the vocations director a full-time position. He also allowed a Latin Mass community to have its own parish and named himself pastor.
It is these kinds of moves that are needed in more than a few dioceses if the confidence of many is to be won back. We urge our dear bishops -- most of whom are such excellent men -- to head in this direction.
Recently, Cardinal Sean O'Malley of Boston began a novena for healing in the wake of the abuse crisis and this is exactly what we need: bishops and cardinals who pray instead of legislate.
If bishops held healing services instead of national conferences, or at least in addition to such conferences, in one fell swoop it would clear the air.
If we do not change -- if we labor along with smaller solutions -- we will continue receiving e-mail that is vitriolic, much of it in response to an article we posted on the increasing trend of lay protests.
Please don't take the strident tone that follows as ours. It is a sample of what we receive. Frustration?
"As a priest of the Catholic Church in the United States, I understand the frustration and disappointment of the laity with our American bishops," wrote one cleric who asked to remain unnamed for obvious reasons. "The lack of strong Catholic leadership in matters of faith and morals, along with years of lip service to Rome, has created a very dangerous situation. If the bishops think they can depend on the traditional, 'pay, pray and obey' mentality of the past, they are sadly mistaken.
"During the recent 'clergy' sex scandal the bishops showed their true colors by exempting themselves from their own 'charter.' If a priest is accused, he loses his faculties to say Mass and to hear confessions, and in general to function as a priest. He may not even wear a Roman collar. He is told to leave the rectory, and is assumed to be guilty.
"Bishops who are accused, still function as bishops, live in their episcopal palaces, and have endless diocesan funds to pay for high priced lawyers to defend them. Many priests and laity are convinced that most of our bishops are either active homosexuals themselves, or are supportive of the 'gay' life-style."
"Dear Spirit Daily," wrote Gary Offerman. "I have enjoyed your site since finding in over a year ago, and agree with what you put in. However, I must comment on the following article titled 'Ominous trend emerges as 'Catholic Laity Show Signs of Open Dispute with Bishops.' I was a seminarian for four years during the mid 80's, and had struggled with the idea of vocation to the priesthood for about eight years prior to entering the seminary. I was happy initially, and believed it was the calling for me.
"What I experienced over the next four years was something akin to the 'Twilight zone,' and could hardly believe what had happened. I can say from first hand experience, that homosexuality was: 1) rampant in the seminary, 2) rampant in the ordained clergy, 3) glorified and promoted within seminary and clergy, and 4) apparently accepted, if not condoned by most bishops. How do I know this?
"I was invited to a party by a few priests after a gathering at the cathedral of my diocese. Since my diocese is small, the number of active priests was about 110. There were over 16 priests there, and they began to do many inappropriate actions (stripping and dancing with each other). Then two of the priests tried to take me into a steam room and 'have their way with me.' I had to fight them off and make threats to get away from them.
"When I went to my Bishop to report this, he had me identify them, then blamed the whole episode on 'drinking' once I told him that much alcohol had been consumed. He then required me to keep this secret, evoking 'obedience to the bishop.' I did as he told me. Several years later, it was revealed that the priest who initiated my 'getting into the steam room,' was transferred to a parish in which my sister attended, with her six boys. This priest went on to create havoc within this parish, and ultimately, ruined two families, and caused a splitting in the parish. Since my sister knew about my situation (and was not under the order of obedience of the bishop), threatened to go public, and this is what caused the Bishop to ultimately get rid of this priest. I do believe in obedience to Bishops when they are in alignment with the Pope (magisterium), but I find it hypocritical for a Bishop to demand of me, or any other layperson, to show obedience to him, when he is in open rebellion