| |
An advance excerpt from an essay by Thomas J. Reese, S.J. on the
impact of the sexual abuse crisis that will be published in the forthcoming
book GOVERNANCE, ACCOUNTABILITY AND THE FUTURE OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH,
edited by Francis Oakley and Bruce Russett (Continuum):
When people speak about reform in the church, they are usually speaking
of changes in policy, such as birth control, married clergy, female
priests, intercommunion, inclusive language, changes in the liturgy,
lay preachers, and freedom to debate theological and moral issues.
Many people thought Vatican II was just the beginning and that policies
would continue to change in the church.
Also important, however, are issues of structure and governance,
including greater involvement of priests and lay people in the selection
of bishops, more input from priests and the laity in making diocesan
policy, and increased authority for episcopal conferences. After Vatican
II, new structures were created to enhance the role of priests and
laity in church governance -- priest councils, diocesan pastoral councils,
parish councils, and finance councils. Only the last, finance councils,
were given real power, as could be seen in Boston when they said "no"
to a settlement negotiated by Cardinal Law. The others were purely
consultative.
But even bishops who wanted to use these bodies did not quite know
how. Few priests or bishops had the experience or training to work
with consultative bodies. Either the bishops tightly controlled the
agenda and therefore suppressed initiative and free discussion, or
they failed to provide leadership and the bodies foundered. Nor was
it only the bishops' fault that these bodies failed. The laity did
not understand them. Few were willing to do the homework and the committee
work necessary to make consultative bodies work. The problem with
democracy in the church is that it takes up too many evenings.
Great hope was also placed in episcopal conferences after Vatican
II. The U.S. bishops' conference worked to implement the reforms of
Vatican II in liturgy, ecumenism, and other areas. Its work became
front-page news when it fought abortion and opposed American nuclear
policy. But with its failure to pass a women's pastoral, the bishops'
conference began a steady decline. Whereas in the past conservative
cardinals like John Krol would respect the decisions of the conference,
more recently cardinals would do end runs to Rome to kill conference
initiatives. Rome even challenged the canonical and theological status
of episcopal conferences.
But can we go beyond this and return to the ancient customs for the
selection of bishops that was articulated by Leo I (440-61), who said
that no one could be a bishop unless he was elected by the clergy,
accepted by the people, and consecrated by the bishops of his region?
This was a checks-and-balances system that would have been admired
by the authors of the Federalist Papers. The appointment of bishops
by the pope is a modern innovation that has no basis in church tradition.
Before there can be a change in policies and structures, there will
need to be a change in attitudes. Bishops and priests need to respect
and listen to the laity if anticlericalism is to be reduced. If seminaries
train priests to think they have all the answers and they are God's
gift to their people, then we are going to be in trouble. If bishops
and priests are unwilling to listen and accept criticism, then they
will not learn. If certain topics are not open to discussion, then
the church will continue to act like a dysfunctional family where
the important issues are never discussed.
There also needs to be a change in attitudes by the laity. The laity
must recognize that we are now a "do-it-yourself" church. The laity
can no longer simply complain to Father and then expect him to do
something. You want a youth group, start it. You want a book club,
start it. You want a speakers' program, make it happen. Priests are
becoming too few and too old to be responsible for making everything
happen in the Catholic Church. The laity was spoiled by an abundance
of hardworking priests and nuns in the 1950s and 1960s. Those days
are over
|
|