Church governance - Letters - Letter to the Editor

National Catholic Reporter, Jan 30, 2004

The attitude of the hierarchy, in reaction to priests' letters on ordaining married men (NCR, Dec. 26), illustrates the degree to which the role of bishop, a full successor of the apostles, has shrunk over the centuries. The bishops are powerless, it seems, to even represent the views of their priests to the Vatican, to which, also, decisions about celibacy are reserved. In the most successful days of Christian evangelization, St. Paul and the early successors of the apostles made decisions for the good of souls on their own, even on such things as marriage and ordination regulation. St. Paul checked out his basic teaching with other apostles, so there was unity but without uniformity. Instant communication has enhanced the centralization of power, but change is in the wind. Future history will tell whether the Vatican will take the initiative of loosening the reins, or take the path of tolerating bolder leadership by bishops, even perhaps in decisions about ordination.

(Fr.) CONNELL J. MAGUIRE

Riviera Beach, Fla.

I noted with interest, in the clergy sex abuse stories of the Dec. 26 issue, how often a "spoonful Of sugar" is offered to the Catholic community by bishops reporting the Financial costs of the scandal in their dioceses. Archbishop Sean P. O'Malley of Boston, for instance, accounted for $85 million by saying that these dollars came from the sale of archdiocesan property and insurance, not from parish assets, or diocesan or parish collections. Well, where did the money come from to acquire those assets? Where does the money come from to pay those insurance premiums? From the faithful, of course! Unless private priestly fortunes are being expended, it's just another example of the obfuscation we've come to expect.

While the celibate bishops meet to excoriate the faithful who have chosen to ignore the sexual policies of the Vatican or Catholic politicians who are able to distinguish between personal beliefs and the force of law upon others, they work diligently to avoid any personal responsibility After all, it was those ill-formed homosexual priests who fondled boys, wasn't it? Clericalism, secrecy and absolutism are still the rule.

Recently on the feast of St. Steven, we read from the 6th chapter of the Acts of the Apostles that the apostles proposed that men be selected to be deacons. And that this proposal was accepted by the community. Does anyone remember the last time the hierarchy proposed anything for acceptance by the community? How have we come to ignore this model of church governance?

(Deacon) RICHARD WARREN

Toledo, Ohio

Your editorial (NCR, Dec. 19) and subsequent article (Dec. 26) on Bob Herring and Nativity of Our Lord Parish well publicize an emergence of adult Catholicism.

I believe part of this adult Catholicism is a strong responsibility on the part of each of three groups: the laity, the clergy and the hierarchy.

The laity has a responsibility to raise concerns and demand a hearing when they perceive a serious injustice in church personnel matters. The clergy are responsible to ensure that their personnel decisions will survive scrutiny of both canonical and civil authorities, as well as the harsh sunlight of media publicity The hierarchy is responsible to allow decision-making at the lowest practical level while exercising proper oversight to assure fairness to all.

Perhaps the days of the nod, the wink and everything done behind closed doors are over for good.

MIKE MAGEE

San Marcos, Calif.

Once again we see what is a recent phenomenon in the Catholic church --priests speaking out to the hierarchy for better treatment and understanding of people in the church.

But ordinary Catholic priests have always been closer to the people than the hierarchy has been. In pre-Revolution France, the hierarchy was close to the aristocracy in privilege and power. In pre-Medellin Latin America, the hierarchy was wedded to the upper classes. Even in the United States, it didn't take long for the hierarchy to be considered part of the ruling powers, along with governors and mayors of major cities.

In contrast, the local parish priest was closer to the people, understood their lives and problems and supported them.

Now these priests are courageous enough to risk their "careers." Pope John Paul II has told the clergy that they should not be tempted by careerism. Yet, they all know that their careers depend on not ruffling feathers with their superiors. There are reasons why some auxiliary bishops will never have their own dioceses and why some parish priests will never become bishops.

It is interesting to read of great reformers and saints in the church. For many of them, the greatest obstacle they had to overcome was the disapproval and sometime condemnation of church authorities. Has any thing changed?

Thank God for these priests who care more about the people than their advancement.

LUCY FUCHS

Brandon, Fla.