Lenten call to penance goes for church, too

National Catholic Reporter, Feb 27, 1998 by Richard P. McBrien

We are about to begin another Lenten season, traditionally a time for taking spiritual stock of our lives, doing penance for our sins and preparing for the Easter celebration of our baptismal rebirth in the Risen Christ.

Lent is not just for individuals; it is for the church as a whole. The church itself must take spiritual stock of its communal and institutional life, do penance for its sins and prepare for its own baptismal rebirth at Easter.

Taking stock, however, is a waste of time if it isn't honest. Unfortunately, honesty is not universally welcome in the church today. Too many want to hear (or read) only the good news: that the church is on the verge of a great institutional rebound, that vocations to the priesthood are rising in Asia and Africa and will eventually do so here as well, that there is a new devotional fervor in the land, that young priests are prayerful and loyal.

Many don't want to hear about problems: that millions of educated Catholics are in danger of becoming spiritually and intellectually disconnected from their tradition because many of those officially entrusted with its transmission seem either unwilling or unable to do so in a manner that respects their intelligence and lived experience; that women are increasingly alienated from the institutional church because too many of its leaders are tone-deaf regarding women's aspirations, gifts and frustrations; that the sacramental life of the church rests now on the fragile ground of a quantitatively and sometimes qualitatively inadequate presbyteral force.

No problem, however, is more serious than the leadership's apparent lack of trust in the Holy Spirit and in the faith and common sense of the laity at large.

This lack of trust is shown in the continued efforts of some members of the leadership to silence anyone who dares to offer a theological or pastoral viewpoint even marginally different from their own.

The viewpoints at issue are not at all matters pertaining to the core of Christian faith, for example, the divinity of Christ, the redemptive value of his cross and resurrection, the hope for eternal life. They concern, for the most part, the manner in which authority is exercised in the church.

To be absolutely clear about it: What is at issue is not the very existence of church authority, but the way in which that authority is employed. And this is exactly the point that the pope himself made in his 1995 encyclical letter. Ut Unum Sint ("That they may be one"), where he clearly distinguished between the papal office as such and the manner in which papal authority is exercised. He invited criticism of the latter and suggestions for improvement.

The manner in which papal authority is exercised affects the type of men whom the Vatican elevates to the hierarchy or promotes within the hierarchy.

If affects the manner in which the Vatican relates to local hierarchies, whether it respects their legitimate pastoral autonomy or tries instead to micromanage them.

If affects the refusal to grant requests for laicization of married priests, even when those applications have the endorsement and support of the priest's bishop.

It affects the decision to canonize one type of person (for example, the founder of Opus Dei) rather than others (for example, ordinary married persons who didn't join a convent or found a religious order following the death of a spouse).

It affects the manner in which the Vatican reacts to theologians whose approach is different from its own, and yet entirely consistent with that of the great majority of Catholic theologians around the world.

"When ecclesiastical authority rattles the chains that come with monopolistic aspirations and forces confrontations with those who experiment within traditions, reinterpret scriptures or stretch the bounds of community," Martin Marty, the distinguished church historian, has written (Academe, January/February 1998), "it may smugly satisfy itself."

"But in the eyes of many," he continued, "both academy and church then lose. The academy suffers because it loses the voice of potentially creative conversation partners. The church loses because it has had to coerce where it could not persuade, to punish where it could not trust, to expel and exile where it might have profited by listening."

To the extent that the official church has sinned in this regard, it needs to acknowledge its failings and resolve to change its pattern of behavior.

If it is capable of doing that, the church can move forward together as one community to the promise of eternal life that has been revealed in the Risen Christ and made real for each and all of us in the waters of baptism.