Deliver Us from Evil

Some of us are old enough to remember the inevitable summer sermon that so many priests would trot out annually as their flock prepared for summer vacation. “Remember,” they would tell us, “There Is No Vacation From God. Your obligation to attend Sunday Mass can to observe God’s laws continues even when you’re off at the beach or in the mountains.” Such annual warnings were typical of an era when priests thought good pastoral leadership meant keeping the people in line. And, midway through this strange summer of 2004, it feels to me like our bishops have often reverted to the old bad habits.

CrossCurrents readers know I’ve criticized the bishops more than once before for their lack of prudence. They seem preoccupied with “doctrinal correctness,” with proving they are right, with little or no heed for the consequences of their actions—consequences that often do more harm than good. And in recent weeks examples of this preoccupation have filled the news like constant variations on a theme. It’s as if they are dogging us during the dog days of summer. Just consider this brief survey of their latest stories:

“Affirmation” in Oregon. Bishop Robert Vasa has decided that all those serving as catechists, lectors, cantors, eucharistic ministers or in other ministries must “verify their ecclesial suitability” by agreeing to his “Affirmation of Personal Faith,” including a list of propositions he considers essential to ministers in the Catholic Church. The list includes “the sinfulness of contraception, the evil of extra-marital relationships” (including masturbation), “the legitimacy of Marian devotions, the existence of hell and purgatory.”

What a stunning confusion of priorities this list reflects. Apparently it’s okay to minister without subscribing to the humanity of Jesus, the doctrine of the trinity, the doctrine that grace preserves our freedom, Paul’s theology of the Body of Christ, the primacy of Baptism or the fundamental teachings of church councils like Nicea and Chalcedon or the Long Tradition of Catholic social doctrine running from Augustine through Aquinas to Vatican II—but one cannot minister without subscribing to the current official policies on masturbation and contraception!

Bishop Vasa calls his list “non-exhaustive”—which is like calling ketchup, mustard and pickles a “non-exhaustive” diet. Indeed, his obsession with dissent on certain issues is typical among “condiment Catholics” like Bishop Vasa; it renders them blind to big failures on the “meat and potatoes” of Catholicism. I regularly observe Catholics who ignore God as triune, or deny the humanity of Jesus, or have no clue about Baptism, grace, or the Church. Yet such heresy on our faith’s “main courses” matters less to those preoccupied with the “side dishes.”

Refusing the Eucharist. Three more bishops—the Archbishop of Atlanta, Bishop of Charleston, and Bishop of Charlotte—have announced their plans to refuse the Eucharist to politicians who “support pro-abortion legislation.” They equate this with a “pro-abortion stance,” confidently asserting that such support “excludes them from admission to Holy Communion”—as if they were unaware that many other US bishops disagree.

One can only wonder how these bishops will manage the practical challenges that prudence always entails: how to ensure that every priest and eucharistic minister toes the line (what if, for example, a eucharistic minister is a politician’s spouse, relative, friend, neighbor?), how to cope with the disruption of liturgy if there are protests, how to identify the targeted politicians, how to define “support for abortion” (if someone believes that legal prohibition is not an effective tool, and seeks alternative ways to reduce the number of abortions—is that support for abortion?).

In any case, the policy seems bound to divide Catholics into increasingly militant camps. As the bishop of Raleigh suggested, this is hardly the appropriate role for the Eucharist, which is meant to be an instrument of unity, not a weapon that divides.

Migrating Catholics. As the Archdiocese of Boston begins the most massive wave of parish closings in American history, The Boston Globe has reported that hundreds of fed-up Catholic families have already migrated to surrounding dioceses. The rationale for closing parishes included declining sacramental numbers, declining attendance, declining collections—and it now appears the process will make all these declines that much worse. But that’s just the good news; at least these migrants are still in the Church somewhere. That’s just the tip of the iceberg. What about all the catholic families who jump the Catholic ship for some other church? Or for no church at all? We have a whole generation of young Catholic adults out there on the ledge, but sometimes our leaders seemed determined to go out there and push them off!

Bankruptcy in Oregon. Facing $155 million in sex-abuse claims with 60 other claims pending, the Archdiocese of Portland filed for bankruptcy last month. At a July 14 hearing, Judge Elizabeth Perris allowed the archdiocese to pay its 122 employees. While the decision was favorable, it also revealed the new vulnerability of the church—since filing for bankruptcy risks “having your finances and the structure of your affairs under the sole jurisdiction of a federal bankruptcy court.” And, as the head of the marine Bankruptcy Institute noted, “this is not like state tort court where records can be sealed and largely shielded.” On the contrary, now formerly secret diocesan operations will be open to public scrutiny. For many Catholics, this will mean the transparency they have wanted for years—but only at the cost of government intrusion in Church affairs. The bottom line, of course, is that all this is self-inflicted by a hierarchy that lost its moral compass along with its priorities.

The DNC Invocation. On the last night of the Democratic National Convention, John Kerry’s acceptance speech was to be accompanied by a prayer. The obvious choice, since Kerry is Catholic, would have been the Catholic Archbishop of Boston, Sean O’Malley. But O’Malley’s strident campaign to overturn Massachusetts’ same-sex marriage law, his refusal to wash women's feet on Holy Thursday, and his staunch opposition to politicians who vote against legal prohibitions of abortion all led many to suspect that the Archbishop would refuse any invitation to the DNC.

Rather than court public embarrassment, Kerry invited John Ardis, the Paulist priest who directs the downtown pastoral center where Kerry worships, to deliver the prayer. And so the third Catholic Presidential nominee in US history signals his readiness to be independent of hierarchical leadership.

We’ve come a long way, it seems, from the day when Richard Cardinal Cushing served as de facto chaplain to the Kennedy family—and, in some ways, to the nation. Cushing, of course, made news by refusing to oppose the legalization of contraception in Massachusetts, arguing that it was not the Church’s role to impose its moral code on other’s private behavior. Years later he ignited controversy by refusing to pass judgment on Jacqueline Kennedy’s decision to marry a divorced man.

In fact, we’ve come a long way from the day when our bishops’ moral credibility enabled them to lead at all. Bishop Vasa claims he must impose his litmus test on all those “who occupy positions of respect and esteem.” As August’s dog days unwind, I have a suggestion for bishops who appear to need something better to do with their summertime: they might try working to restore the esteem and respect of the positions they occupy.

Send Your Comments and Questions to bfswain@juno.com