Bernard Law, Former Archbishop Of Boston, Dies In Rome At 86
Cardinal Bernard Law, the former Archbishop of Boston — once widely seen as America's most influential prelate before resigning in disgrace amid the growing clergy sexual abuse scandal — has died in Rome ...
Law was, for me at least, the lasting example of how the church went terribly wrong. One need only watch Spotlight to get the basic story surrounding his tenure in Boston during the sex abuse scandal there. But it wasn't just about what he did and failed to do, it was how the church responded ... there was no criticism, no punishment, but instead the Vatican welcomed him back to Rome and gave him one of the most prestigious churches to run, the Basilica di Santa Maria Maggiore. When Francis became Pope, he visited that church on his first day in office, some hoped in order to fire Law, but instead he just had a friendly chat with him.
But 58 priests in Boston had the integrity to call Law out when the Vatican wouldn't ... 58 Priests Ask Boston Cardinal to Step Down in Abuse Scandal
Here is the 2002 letter, sourced from the Boston Globe ...
* * *
Dear Cardinal Law:
It is with a heavy heart that we write to request your resignation as Archbishop of Boston. We have valued the good work you have done here in Boston, including, but not limited to: your advocacy for the homeless, your outreach to the Jewish community, your opposition to capital punishment, and your leadership in welcoming immigrant peoples. However, the events of recent months and, in particular, of these last few days, make it clear to us that your position as our bishop is so compromised that it is no longer possible for you to exercise the spiritual leadership required for the church of Boston.
As leaders of many parishes that make up this Archdiocese, we hear from the people their call for a change in leadership. The revelations that have come to light a few days ago challenge the credibility of your public statements. The people of this Archdiocese are angry, hurt, and in need of authentic spiritual leadership. We believe that despite your good work in the past you are no longer able to provide that leadership.
While this is obviously a difficult request, we believe in our hearts that this is a necessary step that must be taken if healing is to come to the Archdiocese. The priests and people of Boston have lost confidence in you as their spiritual leader.
Sincerely,
Rev. Richard C. Beaulieu, St. Mary, Winchester
Rev. James Bertelli, St. Eulalia, Winchester
Rev. Paul W. Berube, St. Mary, Chelmsford
Rev. Louis Bourgeois, St. Paul, Hamilton
Rev. Emile R. Boutin Jr., Immaculate Conception, Stoughton
Rev. Robert J. Bowers, St. Catherine of Siena, Charlestown
Rev. James M. Broderick, Sacred Hearts, Haverhill
Rev. Thomas J. Buckley, Holy Family, Amesbury
Rev. Timothy A. Butler, chaplain, U.S. Air Force
Rev. Robert W. Bullock, Our Lady of Sorrows, Sharon
Rev. Charles E. Collins, St. John the Evangelist, Cambridge
Rev. Francis M. Conroy, St. Ann, Wayland
Rev. Ronald D. Coyne, St. Albert the Great, Weymouth
Rev. Richard J. Craig, St. John the Evangelist, North Chelmsford
Rev. Walter H. Cuenin, Our Lady Help of Christians, Newton
Rev. Francis Daley, St. James of Apostle, Arlington
Rev. Phillip B. Earley, St. Thomas of Villanova, Wilmington
Rev. Alfred J. Ellis, O.S.A., St. Augustine, Andover
Rev. Harry J. Erdlen, O.S.A., St. Augustine, Andover
Rev. Scott A. Euvrard, St. Joseph, Needham
Rev. John P. Fitzpatrick, Deaf Community Center
Rev. Austin H. Fleming, Our Lady Help of Christians, Concord
Rev. John W. Gentleman, Holy Family, Amesbury
Rev. Francis M. Glynn, St. Anthony, Lowell
Rev. Ronald A. Gomes, senior priest
Rev. Richard E. Gribble, C.S.C., Stonehill College
Rev. Msgr. Michael F. Groden, St. Cecilia, Boston
Rev. Roger D. Haight, S.J., Weston Jesuit School of Theology
Rev. Timothy A. Harrison, St. Ann, Gloucester
Rev. David Hollenbach, S.J., Boston College
Rev. Roger N. Jacques, St. Joseph, Waltham
Rev. Lawrence A. Jerge, C.S.C. Bridgewater State College
Rev. Stephen S. Josoma, St. Susanna, Dedham
Rev. William P. Joy, St. Angela, Mattapan
Rev. Thomas A. Kane, C.S.P., Weston Jesuit School of Theology
Rev. James F. Keenan, S.J., Weston Jesuit School of Theology
Rev. Timothy J. Kelleher, Blessed Sacrament, Walpole
Rev. Paul E. Kilroy, St. Bernard, Newton
Rev. William M. MacKenzie, senior priest
Rev. THomas A. Mahoney, Sacred Heart, Middleborough
Rev. Francis X. Mawn, St. James, Haverhill
Rev. Sean M. McCarthy, St. Elizabeth of Hungary, Acton
Rev. Richard R. Messina, St. Mary, Winchester
Rev. Richard S. Moran, St. Bernard, Newton
Rev. Robert E. Nee, chaplain, Children's Hospital
Rev. Scott C. Ness, O.S.A., St. Ambrose Friary, Andover
Rev. Francis E. O'Brien, St. George, Framingham
Rev. Francis P. O'Brien, St. Matthias, Marlborough
Rev. David M. O'Leary, chaplain, Tufts University
Rev. Leonard F. O'Malley, St. Malachy, Burlington
Rev. Richard J. Piatt, O.S.A., St. Augustine, Andover
Rev. Marc A. Piche, Sacred Hearts, Haverhill
Rev. Daniel J. Sheehan, St. Brigid, South Boston
Rev. Frank J. Silva, St. Ann, Wayland
Rev. Williams F. Waters, O.S.A., St. Mary-Immaculate Conception, Lawrence
Rev. James A. Wenzel, O.S.A, St. Ambrose Friary, Andover
Rev. William G. Williams, St. Mary of the Assumption, Hull
Rev. Walter J. Woods, St. Elizabeth of Hungary, Acton
* * *
I'd like to think the leadership of the church has learned from the example of Cardinal Law, but there's no evidence of that.
Hmm. In the 1960s, before he was a bishop, Law was editor of the Mississippi Register, a Catholic paper for not a whole of Catholics. In the paper and in various official and unofficial bodies he crusaded for civil rights. Mississippi was an interesting place for that sort of thing. Death threats followed.
ReplyDeleteWhat I remember most, though, is his crew cut. Whatever he did and didn't do later, he did put his life on the line once for a great cause. The evil that men do lives after them, the good is oft interred with their bones.
The complexities of life.
ReplyDeleteI understand Law was also very instrument in fund raising for disasters around the world. That is one reason he got so much support in Rome and elsewhere beyond our borders.
Then Law was supposedly the Cardinal that did the most to undermine Bernadine's Consistent Ethic of Life.
And I think he was also a very important force behind the Catechism, which could be read positively or negatively depending upon what you think of Catechisms.
Obviously I don't know much of the details of his life, and I expect that someday someone will try to make sense of it all.
In regard to the sexual abuse scandal, there are probably quite a few other bishops around the country who are just as guilty as Law but who did not resign because they were not forced to resign.
My experience with upper management tells me that all hierarchies are made up of giant-sized egos able to rationalize anything, and lackeys who thrive on flattery. I assume the Vatican isn't much different.
ReplyDeleteI didn't convert because of the Church hierarchy, and I didn't leave off confessing and receiving because of it.
I am content being a foster-child of the Church. I am better person in the Church than out of it.
I hear a lot of Catholic bashing at my AlAnon meetings. I hear Catholic bashing from my alcoholic mother. My daughter-in-law, who knows nothing about Catholicism, denigrates it out of hand. I was told recently by a fundie co-worker that Catholics aren't Christians. People in general view Catholics as benighted sheep.
So I weary, I really do, of your single-minded mission to shame Catholics on here. I'm sure there are anti-Catholic blogs that would be happy to entertain these screeds.
Second that!
DeleteLook at any article today in the news about Cardinal Law - there will be none that do not mention what he did in Boston during the sex abuse crisis. That you think I have a mission to shame Catholics is kind of creepy.
ReplyDeleteI daresay it's clear enough that the church leadership still hasn't completed its journey to reform and renewal when it comes to appropriate oversight and management of abusive clerics and care for their victims. Surely some of the reason for that is because of factors that are unique to, or at least especially pronounced in, church leadership - the instinctive behavior of clerical privilege and secrecy that Cardinal Law came to personify.
ReplyDeleteSome of it, in my view, is not really unique to the church - it is the self-protective bureaucratic instincts of large organizations of all stripes. As we've discussed recently, the #MeToo movement is starting to reveal to the public this dismal truth of bureaucratic behavior in other types of organizations.
My own conclusion, for what it's worth, is that the church will never reach the autopilot stage when it comes to clerical sexual abuse. For large bureaucracies, and perhaps especially for the church, autopilot means reverting to secrecy and self-protective mode. Leaders of the church must continually recommit to the program of reform begun - but not completed - in the US with the Dallas Charter.
Regarding autopilot, a danger that the church must especially be on the lookout for is a loss of commitment and momentum toward reform when there is a change of leadership, either in a diocese, or even in the Holy See. The great temptation is to view what became known as the sex-abuse crisis as a particular period, a dark period that the church needed to get through, or get past. That is the wrong way to think about it. The very term "crisis" implies that there is an endpoint, because sooner or later, crises pass. But in truth, there is no endpoint; there only are periods when these things are handled relatively well, and periods when they are handled relatively poorly. The attention span of the media and the public may wane, but the underlying behavior that drives the so-called crisis isn't a glitch or an anomaly - it is always lurking out there, whether the public happens to be paying attention or not. Rather than thinking of it as a crisis, the church would be well-served to think of it as a perennial challenge, like finances or sin - things that must be confronted and addressed every single day, regardless of who is in charge. There never will be a "getting back to normal". A great part of the problem is that the "old normal" failed to deal adequately with this perennial problem. And the temptation is that, when there is a changing of the guard, the new regime will come in with a false expectation that "the crisis is behind us - time to turn the page and make a fresh start." There can be no fresh start. I am sorry to say that I fear that even Pope Francis may have fallen victim to this tendency. It's difficult to conclude that the church's approach has improved substantially from Benedict's reign.
And throughout the church, vigilance must not cease when it comes to the protection of young people, women and all who are potential victims of abuse. Part of that vigilance must include an independent press.
Just my views.
Your posts, taken together, show a pattern of carping about how the Church treats women, beefs with Catholic teaching, the sex abuse scandal, and a preoccupation with the Pope's shortcomings.
ReplyDeleteSo, yup, looks like Catholic shaming to me.
I doubt that all of the articles are going to end as your post did by talking about how the Church hasn't learned anything.
It's insulting to grassroots Catholics here and elsewhere who HAVE responded at the parish or even diocesan level to change things.
Perhaps you could be somewhat more even-handed.
I agree with the need to be more even handed.
ReplyDeleteLaw was not given a prestigious honor in terms of his experience; it was far closer to Burkes demotion to the Knights of Malta. A promotion from Boston would have been to head a Vatican congregation (e.g. Bishops, the CDF, Missions,) all of which he was viewed as being qualified to lead. Becoming the principle cleric of one of the five large basilicas has always been viewed as a consolation prize for past services in the congregations which Law had qualified for.
Francis went to the church of Saint Mary Major because its houses the icon of Mary as patron of the Roman people. Francis has a deep love for the popular piety in relationship to Mary. He would never have obscured that by firing Law.
I agree with Jean that the problems of the church are very similar to the problems of all large bureaucracies. We all simply have to learn to judge the church as a large bureaucracy not as if it were an institution immune from all the problems of large bureaucracies.
I agree with Jim that we have to get past notions of temporary crises in large institutions (church, government, business). All large institutions are problems. We all have to invest a lot of time and effort to improve the performance of large institutions.
Finally we regard to Christianity it is time to consider abandoning all notions that clergy are pastors, fathers, priests, images of Christ or God. Simply refer to them as Bishop (Supervisor) X, Presbyter (Elder) Y, and Deacon (Servant, Minister) Z. We are all baptized into Christ, and we are all images of God.
Part 1 - Jim, the "church" will get not past the crisis until those in charge publicly hold bishops accountable. Law was forced out largely because the Boston scandal resulted in a dramatic fall in collections in the pews and in the Cardinal's Appeal - millions of dollars. His first offer to resign was turned down by JPII. It was only later, as the scandal accelerated and the collections dried up, that the late, not great, Pope accepted his resignation. After testifying in Boston he was whisked out of the US to Rome. He could never return to the US because of the PTB’s fear that he would be slapped with subpoenas for more testimony. Rome acted similarly with some of the other more notorious cases, such as that of the Papal Nuncio in the Dominican Republic and his procurer of young boys. Rome refused to return him to the DR to face up to what he did and he died just before being required to testify in Rome. I imagine there are conspiracy theories about the very convenient timing of his death.
ReplyDeleteAs the years rolled on, and bishops were allowed to live cushy lives in Rome, supported by the people in the pews who were also paying many of the dioceses’ legal bills with money intended to support their own parish, with no movement towards transparency, accountability, or responsibility, the exodus from the pews accelerated. The US bishops created protections at the parish level, but it impacts mostly laity. I don't know if newly ordained priests undergo the same background checks, fingerprinting etc that deacons, volunteers, teachers and other staff now undergo. Do they?
Bishops were let off the hook and are still given a pass, even under Francis. The week's news does not offer hope that he will ever deal with this ongoing "crisis" either. If complicit bishops confessed their sins to another priest, there was no requirement to come clean, to take responsibility, and to show genuine contrition (publicly admitting that they protected perverts and by resigning) in order to receive absolution. Just as the priest perverts themselves continued to say mass, and hear the confessions of others, while persisting in their own evil after confessing to a “brother” priest.
I will not hold my breath that the PTB in Rome and chanceries will ever come clean. I am willing to bet that cover-ups are going on as we discuss this, with particular danger in the third world countries. This is one of the reasons I have attended Mass in the Episcopal church instead of the Catholic church for ten years now. Initially it was a prodding of conscience that I could not ignore after a while. I felt that by remaining in a Catholic pew, giving money and support to a church that refused to be accountable and take appropriate action against the bishops who protected child molesters - I was enabling them in their ongoing sin – a passive “cooperation with evil” in RC terms. I continue to support selected non-profits run by Catholics – but I check them out very carefully to be sure that the money goes to the work, and cannot be tapped by the bishop.
continued in part 2
Part 2 to Jim - Catholicism "formed" me and I have still not become Episcopalian officially. I may change my mind on that, however, having come to know the EC church reasonably well in recent years, and coming to admire the model of church, the model of christianity, they represent - a church where the laity do have a real voice, and whose doctrinal leaders respect the ability of the members to form and follow their own consciences, even when it may differ from something "officially" taught in the Anglican communion. The list of "must believes" is quite short. No 1000 page catechism. It is a church that respects women and does not teach that it is God's will that women be relegated to second class status, to roles defined by men.
ReplyDeleteI also admire the deep and rich Catholic intellectual tradition. I greatly admire the many Catholics who do the good works that the bishops try to take credit for. But most of those works are initiated and run by individuals, clergy, religious women, laity and supported financially by either private individual donations or by the tax money of the federal, state and local governments. The bishops have little or nothing to do with the everyday work of caring for God's people.
The problems of the RC church - the higher ups circling the wagons and protecting their own – occur in other institutions. But most of those institutions are forced to eventually come clean. If it was discovered that the local Supt of Schools had been moving teachers who molested kids around from one school to another for years, without notifying parents or the police of the charges, buying the silence of the victims’ families, that Supt would not only be fired, he or she would be facing charges that could lead to jail time.
The hierarchy of the Catholic church claims to be the voice of God in defining faith and morals. But they are very poor at discerning the reasons that so few Catholics in the west pay any attention to them when it comes to moral guidance. They continue to gnash their teeth and weep and wail over the reality that the exodus of the church of tens of millions of Catholics in N. America, Europe, and, increasingly, in South America, continues. They come up with new programs to try to entice "lapsed" Catholics back into the pews every year, yet the stats indicate that far more cradle Catholics in the US leave the church every year than join it. Can they truly be so self-preoccupied that they still don't get it? They don't understand the role that teachings have played in driving people out the doors? Or the role the ongoing crisis of failing to honestly deal with the role the bishops played and hold them accountable have played in the run for the doors? It is hard to believe that 15 years after the start of this crisis, they still wonder why so many no longer trust them as moral leaders.
The crisis not over. Perhaps it will not be over until everyone who remembers it all too clearly has moved on to whatever awaits us after our bodily lives have ended.
Anne, if I actually knew Latin, I'd attempt something like Episcopis semper reformanda. If Fr. Imbelli is lurking about and can stop laughing, he will presumably correct the Latin.
DeleteOne of my main points here, with which I think you'd agree, is that we clergy have to stop thinking of the so-callled crisis as just an episode. It requires constant and permanent vigilance.
Anne, we have two priests in the diocese who have been hauled up on embezzlement this year. Lack of diocesan oversight seems to have been part of the problem. Irregularities were reported and ignored.
DeleteIn the wake of this, the bishop is dunning people pony up for his endowment fund.
The irony and timing are dreadful, and people are "voting" by withholding contributions. One of the most devout members if our parish wrote "this is b*** s***" on the donation envelope that the diocesan reps handed out special at the offering. (No pressure there!)
The guy signed his name on the envelope and was hustled off to the kitchen by the priest for chit chat. Father tried to shame him by pointing out the charities that the endowment would support. The guy said he would send directly to those charities and not to "that slush fund."
I wonder if Law and other abuses hasn't awakened a new spirit of vigilance in the Church. Maybe that's the lesson.
Jean - whether it is Law and the sex-abuse scandals, or just some new spirit afoot in the land and the culture, I agree that the days when people would just sit and take it are behind us. Priests like the one you mention who tried to intimidate a parishioner have the same future as the dodo bird, whether they realize it or not. Just my personal observations.
Deletesorry for some of the typos
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteOne thing that puzzles me a bit on this site is the unwillingness of some to let Crystal have her say. Is it "shaming" to bring up the reality regarding Law and the bigger crisis that continues to damage the RCC? Perhaps one could think of it in terms of "fraternal correction", although in this case, it is, perhaps, "correction from the sisterhood". I don't think "sororal" is a word, actually.
ReplyDeleteMuch has been done in the US to protect children. But most of the actions that have taken exempt the hierarchy. And Crystal seems to me to be right on target when it comes to Rome's inaction and continued refusal to hold guilty bishops accountable. It is neither "bashing" nor "shaming" to point this out. Too much passivity on the part of the people in the pews may have contributed to the failures in Rome as well.
Whoa, Anne Chapman. Taking issue with and criticizing Crystal is not the same as agitating for pulling the plug on what she writes. I have never advocated that, and it seems to me that she has her say quite often.
ReplyDeleteI am not pointing to this post as part of a pattern of griping and criticizing about "the Church."
Everyone can participate, but nobody should expect universal approbation.
S/b: I AM pointing to this post as part of a pattern of griping and criticizing about "the Church."
ReplyDeleteI am happy to hear that, Jean. It has seemed a couple of times that some would like Crystal to stop her criticisms, even when they may be perfectly valid. I am sorry if I misunderstood your comment.
ReplyDeleteI come here to read because precisely because there is a diversity of opinion. I am also fascinated by how different everyone is, and by their individual ways of seeing the church, and by the different ways they choose to live their understanding of the christian life within the church. I am grateful too that I am allowed into the discussion, since I currently live my understanding of christianity as a Catholic in Episcopalian pews. Jean, you mentioned at some point that you don't go to communion. I don't know the reasons for that since you seem to be a pretty "faithful" Catholic, and I don't imagine that you are in a state of mortal sin (a sharp wit is not a mortal sin as far as I know). But you have your reasons for not receiving communion, and I find it fascinating that you are still in the Catholic pews instead of the Episcopal pews you once occupied, or, in the pews of the your church or origin (Congregational?), whereas I chose to absent myself from the pews of the RCC.
I am fascinated with the spiritual journeys of others, the twists and turns many make, as they seek God. Many stay on the path they were set on at baptism, but many do not. The one thing I am fairly sure of (and I am sure of very little when it comes to christian teaching in general, and especially of Catholic teaching) is that all are on a journey toward God, and that God has created a path for everyone. But these paths are not the same. We all have to find our own path, maybe get lost now and then, maybe give up now and then, and possibly return to it again. And so I do my best to try to understand the paths of others, even when I don't really understand what put them on that path. It helps me to discern my own path, so I am quite selfishly motivated when it comes to discussion groups like this one.
I don't believe God maps out a personal spiritual roadmap for us, though I know people who do. I think God made us, the prophets and Jesus told us how to behave, the saints keep the Holy Spirit alive, and when we are all perfect, Christ will come again. My guess is that there will be damn few of us left by that time.
DeleteBeing Catholic was too hard. I keep going because Raber is a very devoted Catholic, and I try to take what I can from it. A lot, actually.
I still go to the Episcopalians for Ash Wednesday, and I have contacts in the Unitarian Church in which I was raised.
Here's a list of all my posts for the last six months. Yeah, I can see how you'd be offended by my constant anti-Catholic writing (not) ...
ReplyDelete- August 13, 2017 ... Two old movies on addiction
- Monday, August 14, 2017 ... Elizabeth Warren - let's move left
- Wednesday, October 4, 2017 ... Tom Petty
- Wednesday, October 11, 2017 ... Harvey Weinstein
- Monday, October 16, 2017 ... Marshall
- Sunday, October 22, 2017 ... Kelly's defense of Trump
- Thursday, October 26, 2017 ... Religious Halloween
- Sunday, November 5, 2017 ... More fall spirituality movies
- Wednesday, November 8, 2017 ... Democratic victory
- Tuesday, November 14, 2017 ... Moore's deplorable supporters
- Thursday, November 23, 2017 ... Happy Thanksgiving :)
- Tuesday, November 28, 2017 ... Trump & the Navajo code talkers
- Saturday, December 2, 2017 ... Some Saturday night music :)
- Monday, December 11, 2017 ... Alabama voters: the deplorables
- Friday, December 15, 2017 ... Being angry
Today's Marshall Project provided the following link to the Newark Star-Ledger. You will notice a lot of familiar material. Crystal may be astonished to notice that Cardinal Law has nothing to do with it, nor do any other bishops:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.nj.com/education/2017/12/teachers_accused_of_sexual_misconduct_keep_getting.html
And so it goes.
Second that too.
DeleteThis is what I've seen today ...
ReplyDelete- From America magazine ... Cardinal Bernard Law, the face of the church’s failure on child sexual abuse, dies at 86
From Religious News Service ... Cardinal Law’s death prompts apologies – and anger
From The Tablet ... Cardinal Law, a towering figure of US Church forced to resign due to clerical sexual abuse, has died
It's not just me.
From NCR ...https://www.ncronline.org/news/people/cardinal-law-central-figure-church-abuse-scandal-dies">Cardinal Law, central figure in church abuse scandal, dies
From today's Boston Globe: https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2017/12/20/lawyer-says-cardinal-law-death-has-created-new-stress-victims-priestly-sexual-abuse/fzpj7sWzx2FYLOsRayh8CL/story.html
ReplyDeleteI have to admit I am not sure what to think of this Boston Globe story. My sympathy continues to be with the victims. But if the occasion of Law's death is a source of pain for the victims ... this may be one instance in which it's difficult to blame the Cardinal. "What a jerk - he died."
DeleteNor do I see that it was absolutely necessary for the lawyer to parade his clients in front of the reporters and cameras.
Jean, I will try to clarify. Even though I don’t think I can explain what I mean clearly, because my own thoughts on the subject are a work in progress, I will try again. Some dismiss my way of looking at religion as too "new age", but that is their challenge to overcome.
ReplyDeleteWhen I say that God has created a path for everyone, I don't mean that God has created a personalized, detailed roadmap for everyone from birth to death. Obviously not. God provides “guides” to the spiritual life, guides that, with luck and effort and prayer, may those of us who seek a relationship with God to at least a glimpse of one. Sometimes the "guide" to faith is not a human being - for example, how many people say that they feel closest to God when in nature? And how many "religious" people laugh at them, look down on them?
So this is what I mean when I say God provides countless ways, paths, opportunities -whatever term works for people - to seek God, to seek that relationship. Individuals have to discern their own way to relationship with God for themselves. God doesn't plan the journey, but leaves it up to us to find our own way, assuming we want to find it. Not everyone does.
Some are content with the “path” that they were handed by their parents, family, community, and pretty much stay that course throughout their lives. Unless they leave religion completely, most christians stay christian. Most Protestant christians stay Protestant and most Catholic christians stay Catholic. Most Jews stay Jewish. Most Hindus stay Hindu. etc. From what little I know of those here, I would say that Jack, Margaret, Jim P, Katherine, Tom have stayed pretty close to the religious/spiritual path their parents put them on at baptism, but perhaps I am mistaken. I don't have detailed life histories of all. Crystal is a convert, as is Jean, and both have some struggles with their adopted church, even if they are different struggles, and even if they respond differently to the parts of the RCC that trouble them. I am a cradle Catholic who has chosen to cease active participation in the Catholic church for reasons I have outlined, but not gone into in detail. Jim M also has strong reasons for currently choosing to live his christian life outside of a Catholic parish. But both Jim M and I also have deep roots in the Roman Catholic church, powerful ties that are difficult to sever completely. When I left for the Episcopal parish near my home, I assumed it would simply be a cooling off period and that I would someday return to the church of the first 60 years of my life. Now I'm not so sure about that. I've been cooling off for a long time now.
The church has been in crisis for many years now. Our country is experiencing a similar existential crisis now. Many believe that neither the church nor our country are “in crisis” at all. But I believe that these crises are real. My personal response to these crises is mine. I don’t think that those who respond differently are “wrong”, have different understandings of the crises or, perhaps , simply different ways of responding to them.
The issue that is symbolized by the person of Cardinal Law is one that some would like to ignore. They want those of us who can't ignore it to move on, just as my Trump supporting family and friends would like me to move on from the election. But I cannot simply move on from the church’s "scandal" because it still has not been dealt with in Rome. I am also still #NeverTrump, and will not be able to “move on” unless at some point I think the crisis is resolved in positive way. Perhaps it won’t be, perhaps this election signals a long-term crisis like that of the Catholic church. My family doesn't understand this anymore than someone like Tom here understands why people like Crystal and I are still more upset about Law and what he symbolizes about the church than we are about similar crimes in the secular world.
Fr. Thomas Reese SJ has written ... Bernard Law, a cardinal of scandal and disgrace. I guess Fr. Reese is anti-Catholic too.
ReplyDeleteCardinal Law RIP is the perfect target for liberal Catholics and secular American liberals, a trifecta of a "he failed his people and his Church" for Lib Caths, and he "represents everything hateful about Catholicism" for anti-Catholics.
DeleteA perfect example: An op-ed in today's NYTimes (12/21) claims she lost her faith because of him and the Vatican is honoring him! Aren't they just having a requiem Mass and burying him? They do the same for mafioso and executed killers. And if she's really "lost her faith," I'm gonna bet she was thin on that score and/or she "lost" it for many reasons (left it on the bus!).
Not saying these issues don't wear down one's allegiance or grind one's faith to a tiny pebble
DeleteDelightful conversation with Mom last night about "Law is dead and that reminds me how awful the Church is why are you still in it where did I go wrong we tried to raise you to think for yourself and be just like us."
DeleteMust remember to find some pictures of Pope Benedict with cats to distract her with. For reasons I cannot quite fathom, she loves Benedict.
Anyway, the article I want to read isn't a re-hash of Law's sins and failings, his legacy of betrayal, and how the Church still sucks. Anybody can write that.
I need some thoughts on how,as, Catholics, we are called to respond when a powerful--and powerfully flawed--man die. We are taught to forgive and to thirst for justice.
But Law's death confounds us. It's harder to pray for mercy for Law when it appears that he was not brought to justice by the Vatican machinery. I guess we have to pray for Law and those in the Vatican machinery both.
It's not conservatives who are uncaring about sex abuse, it's those who want to protect the church at all costs so they can still get what they need from it.
DeleteI wouldn't worry about who to pray for, Law or victims. I'd worry about how to make the bad guys accountable in a church where the little people have no power.
"The church has been in crisis for many years now."
ReplyDeleteYes, a little over 2,000 years by my count. If you want to go back to the real beginning, it's more like 5,000 years. It just won't sit there like the teapot on the table, as a lot of people (not you, Anne) seem to want it to. But, for instance, that first dud we had in the papacy. Couldn't let him out of Jerusalem without him grievously offending all those new folks Paul brought in. And Paul! Male chauvinist! It was a good bet way back then that this organization wouldn't have staying power.
Humorous and interesting point Tom. Did the hierarchy, as corrupt or stupid as it has often been nevertheless provide the structure neeed to keep the faith going? Is it still needed?
DeleteRegarding Paul the male chauvinist, I recently read two books on Paul (St. Paul: The Apostle We Love to Hate by Karen Armstrong and Paul: The Pagan's Apostle by Paula Fredriksen) and one of them (Fredriksen, I think) argued that passages offensive to women were either in the epistles written in Paul's name but not by him, or were later additions. I was not aware of this argument, but it is mentioned in the NAB. Famously, we have 1 Corinthians 14: 34-35:
Delete[W]omen should keep silent in the churches, for they are not allowed to speak, but should be subordinate, as even the law says. But if they want to learn anything, they should ask their husbands at home. For it is improper for a woman to speak in the church.
A note in the NAB says, in part:
***************************
These two verses have the theme of submission in common with 1 Cor 14:11 despite differences in vocabulary, and a concern with what is or is not becoming; but it is difficult to harmonize the injunction to silence here with 1 Cor 11 which appears to take it for granted that women do pray and prophesy aloud in the assembly (cf. 1 Cor 11:5, 13). Hence the verses are often considered an interpolation, reflecting the discipline of later churches; such an interpolation would have to have antedated our manuscripts, all of which contain them, though some transpose them to the very end of the chapter.
*********************
It's funny (as in peculiar) but I used to dislike Paul and think he was a chauvinist, etc. I have more recently become more tuned in to the beauty and almost poetry of some of his writings. I still don't like some of the passages like the one David referred to. But I chalk them up to Paul being a product of his times. Hadn't heard the theory that they might be a later add-on. But I think it's entirely likely that he did write them, given that he was a man of his times and place. I don't think these are the passages that are used by the Catholic church to justify an all male priesthood, anyway. But that is a subject for another day.
DeleteSarah Ruden (Paul Among the People) convinced me Paul was getting a bad rap. But when everybody believes the legend, you might as well go with it.
DeleteLuke Timothy Johnson, in a talk I watched on YouTube says that he thinks after Paul presents this radical equality in Christ ("neither male or female") he backs off for the sake of his audience and tempers it with the submission stuff. This would also jibe with the additions theory. For me, the radical Paul is the true Paul, drunk with the Spirit.
ReplyDeleteLike literary criticism, theologians bend texts to their purposes, which can be the delight or frustration of either. (Delight: a reread of "Emma" as a young woman coping with an elderly parent with dementia. Frustration: Huck and Jim are gay because naked raft scene.)
DeleteI'm not sure we need to rehabilitate or pay a lot of attention to what Paul said about women or anything else that doesn't support or amplify things that Jesus said. Jesis didn't make any rules about women, and he welcomed them as disciples.
In the rock-paper-scissors of theology, Jesus trumps Paul.
I'm an American and the management of my country is now garbage. I am no less an American because of it. If anything, moreso, trying to keep that better vision alive. I'm in this to the end. I embrace the history of my country, good and bad, hoping to bend it toward the good. For me, it is that way with the Church. If so many good people can find a place in it, no reason for a slightly less than perfect person like me to leave.
ReplyDeleteStanley, that is a comment many have made to me in an effort to convince me to go back to the Catholic parish on Sunday instead of showing up at (and giving our parish support money to) the Episcopal parish.
DeleteBut it is not really the same at all. First of all,on a purely practical level, changing one's nationality is difficult in countless ways. Not true with religion. It's very easy to leave one parish or denomination and go to another or to none at all and still be a christian. Denomination is not as important as trying to follow Christ's teachings.
But a more important difference is that we all have a voice in America's government. All of us can vote. All of us can work for candidates we believe will be good for our country, or at least better than others. Watching the twisting and turning of the politicians after every poll shows that they are very willing to sacrifice their "principles" and "integrity" to donors and voters.
Catholic laity have no vote, no voice in the governance of their church. They can't even hire (and fire when necessary) their own priests. At the parish level, congregations are at the mercy of the person chosen by a bishop. Sometimes the priests are respect their congregations, and sometimes they don't, running the parish as petty dictators. The congregation is pretty much helpless to do anything about it, except in the most extreme cases.
Equally important - maybe more important - laity have no input into the development of doctrine, and harmful doctrine is at the root of the sex abuse scandal. It is quite clear that the collective voices of the laity on the sex abuse scandal have fallen on deaf ears in chanceries and Rome.
I have asked Catholics who bring up this comparison exactly how they suggest that the laity "bend" the church toward the good, given that the hierarchy has a very low regard for the opinions or insights of the laity, unless accompanied by very, VERY large checks. They have no answer other than "pray". I know many good Catholics. I know many good people who aren't Catholic either.
So, since the only thing that seems to get through to the PTB is a fall in the revenue (for example, in Law's case), leaving is one of the only ways we can be "heard". Those who can't quite tear themselves away from their Catholic parish could, at minimum, close the checkbooks. The best course would be to set up parish 501c(3) corporations whose sole purpose would be to collect the money needed to run the parish and support whatever non-diocesan run charities they wish to contribute to, pay the bills, and keep the bishops' hands off the money. Money talks, including in the churches.
The difference between politics and our church is that with our political system, we get to vote and make decisions. In the Catholic church, we have no power to change the leadership or the teachings.
DeleteIf we see things in the church that seem unfair or ethically wrong, I see three options - 1) leave, 2) speak up about the wrongness, or 3) just somehow ignore those who are being screwed.
If we really had voting choice, Crystal, we wouldn't have the clowns for political leaders that we have. Even if we get rid of enough Republicans in 2018, it'll still leave us with Friends of Wall Street like the Clintons.
Delete"Equally important - maybe more important - laity have no input into the development of doctrine, and harmful doctrine is at the root of the sex abuse scandal."
ReplyDeleteAnne, I have to say, I don't agree. With my own admittedly straightforward brain, I would conclude that the root of the sex abuse scandal is sex abuse. That's not doctrine. It's sin.
I suppose one reply is, "It's not the abuse, it's how the abuse was mishandled." Fair enough. I still don't see how that relates to doctrine, though. How the abuse is handled is a question of diocesan and Vatican policy. That's not the same as doctrine. Those policies can change. In fact, they have changed. Policies also can be flouted, to the detriment of victims and the safety of our children. But that's not doctrine, either; we're back to sin again.
I do understand, I think, where you're coming from on this topic: you are pointing to the doctrinal underpinnings of how the bishops are chosen, and that their offices are for life. Even there, though, we have to distinguish between what really is doctrinal and what isn't. We know that bishops can be chosen by election or by popular acclaim, because there are historical precedence for these. I don't know of a doctrinal reason we couldn't revert to one of those models (although I can think of some pretty good reasons they would be problematic). If you can convince Francis or one of his successors to implement one of those approaches, I don't know of a doctrinal impediment to them.
As for the lifetime nature of a bishop's tenure: we can distinguish between the fullness of the sacrament of orders (which is doctrinal), and his occupancy of the diocesan chair (which is not). The pope could change the episcopal retirement age to 65. He could put a term limit on bishops as diocesan officials. None of this would remove a bishop's membership in the episcopal college nor strip him of his teaching authority, but they would serve as practical limits on his governance of a diocese.
An official enumeration of the reasons why the Vatican saw Cardinal Law off with a requiem Mass in St. Peter's.
ReplyDeletehttps://cruxnow.com/news-analysis/2017/12/22/vatican-thought-laws-funeral-mass-right-thing/
I'd say it has a refreshing element of anti-Americanism in it!
Jim, I am getting ready to leave town for Christmas. My concern that the collective voice of the laity - the sensus fidelium - is blocked goes beyond the crisis of the failure to hold accountable the men who enabled sex abuse of the young in the church. There has been no progress anywhere in that. No Dallas agreement that impacts bishops. But that is an issue of governance - it could be remedied if the will was there. It is not, even under Francis. Why is that do you think?
ReplyDeleteThat's where doctrine comes in. Doctrine in the church is defined by a small group of celibate males. Hardly representative of THE church. This results in tangible harm to the people, harm not limited to creating the conditions that led to the cover-up of sexual abuse. But right now, we'll leave it at this one issue. There are others.
I suggest a start for you, until we can resume this conversation. Read -or reread - the book written by Bishop Geoffrey Robinson (Australia) during the heat of the crisis. He headed the investigation in Australia for 9 years, but waited to publish until after his retirement. He knew he would become enemy #1 of Benedict and most other bishops after publication. He was right. He addresses some of the teachings that have contributed to the crisis. It is called Confronting Power and Sex in the Catholic Church
More from Wiki - On 4 June 2013, together with Bishop Bill Morris and Bishop Pat Power, Robinson officially launched a worldwide petition drive calling for an ecumenical council inclusive of the laity to put God's house in order.[6] The petition, addressed to Pope Francis, says:
We, the undersigned members of the Catholic Church, have been sickened by the continuing stories of sexual abuse within our Church, and we are appalled by the accounts of an unchristian response to those who have suffered. When so many people either offend or respond poorly, we cannot limit ourselves to blaming individuals, but must also look at systemic causes. The situation is so grave that we call for an Ecumenical Council to respond to the one question of doing everything possible to uproot such abuse from the Church and produce a better response to victims. An essential part of this call is that the laity of the whole world should have a major voice in the Council .. See Wiki for the list.
Since you are a deacon, I assume that you have read Newman's final word to the English bishops who fired him from his job as editor of The Rambler, and reported him to Rome for investigation - "On Consulting the Faithful on Matters of Doctrine". Don't just note the famous bit about how it was the laity that stopped the Aryan heresy from taking root, and not the bishops, but about the overall sad state of the hierarchy at the time. The language he used to describe that situation is fully applicable to the situation facing the church today.
One reason I needed to cool off ten years ago, and left the RCC pews for Episcopal pews, was the reaction of many lay Catholics. A simplistic summary - Well, it didn't happen in my parish, and I like my parish. I like my friends there, and the lovely nice community we have. What happened in other parishes is sad, but since my kids and my parish weren't swept up in it, I can comfortably look the other way. It's not my problem" This attitude effectively reduces the "universal" church to just a huge international network of individual parishes. The thinking of too many Catholics seemed to be If everything is OK in my local branch of the club, if everything is cozy, no need for me to worry about the damage being done in other branches of my religious club. I go to mass, I go to reconciliation, and I don't need to confess that I am doing nothing to speak out about the enormous harm that has been done due to the complicity of top management. In the meantime, I need to go to my K of C (or Sodality) meeting. It's their problem, not mine.
An article by Bishop Robinson at ABC Religion and Ethics - For Christ's sake: Confronting the culture of abuse within the Catholic Church
ReplyDeleteImagine if what happened under Cardinal Law in Boston had instead happened to the Boston public school system ...
ReplyDeletethe head of the school district knowing about 100 teachers were abusing students, telling victims they had to keep the abuse secret, moving teachers around to different schools so they could abuse more kids, not telling parents.
The it all comes out in the papers and the big boss doesn't criticize the head of the school district, doesn't punish him, doesn't fire him, but gives him a promotion.
There would have been hell to pay. But not in our church.