Papo Gets His Own Diocese

The following is an op-ed piece presented for your review. It does not necessarily represent the "official" position of WEORC.

Papo Gets His Own Diocese

Is it good news for Springfield, or good news for Chicago?

We wish Tom Paprocki well in his first gig as the head bishop of a diocese. There is a human heart somewhere under those violet fringed robes, or at least there used to be. Years ago during his first priestly assignment, Tom received a civil law degree and opened up a law clinic for the underprivileged on Chicago’s Southside. Unfortunately that is being buried under a lot of Papal Bull.

Ambitious and self-promoting, Tom moved up the clerical pecking order with a Canon Law degree from Rome, Chancery positions, the Diocesan Chancellor role, and then on to Auxiliary Bishop of Chicago. Along the way he has been showboating his theological conservatism with traditionalist groups from here to the Vatican, who are bent on “reforming the reform” of Vatican II.

As John Paul II tried to reign in the use of the Communal Form of the Sacrament of Reconciliation, then Chancellor Paprocki embarrassed Cardinal Bernardin by dissing nearly all the priests of Chicago. As reported in the papers, Papo effectively said any priest who used this popular form of the sacrament was lazy or ignorant, or both.

Paprocki is also infamous for a sermon he gave during a 2007 “Red Mass” for lawyers. He blamed the alleged victims of sexual abuse, and the media giving them coverage, for trying to destroy the Church. He went on to say, "We must use our religious discernment to recognize that the principal force behind these attacks is none other than the devil."

When the USCCB was weighing the FOCA bill, which was trying to gain traction in the US Congress, Paprocki addressed perceived threats to Catholic health care. “It could mean discontinuing obstetrics in our hospitals, and we may need to consider taking the drastic step of closing our Catholic hospitals entirely… “It would not be sufficient to withdraw our sponsorship or to sell them to someone who would perform abortions. That would be a morally unacceptable cooperation in evil… I do not think I’m being alarmist in considering such drastic steps.”

When Papo isn’t admonishing sinners, slackards and secularists on political or Church issues, he courts media attention with his” regular-Joe" activities, such as running and hockey. He prides himself in the moniker of “Holy Goalie”. However college classmates remember him more as a “holey” goalie.

Hopefully, a fresh start in a new job in a new location will give Bishop Tom Paprocki a chance to grow in wisdom, grace and humility.

Lots of Apologizing Going on in Chicagoland

Fresh from recieving a lifetime award for working for Justice by Cardinal George, Mike Pfleger is in trouble again. Biting his lip while offering Pfleger faint praise at the award ceremony, now George is asking Pfleger to apologize.

During the sermon last Sunday Pfleger mentioned that he felt there should be women priests, married priests, women bishops and cardinals. This is memorialized on you tube and rightist websites such as http://www.aipnews.com/talk/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=13429&posts=4

Mike Pfleger mentions on Facebook that he was told to apologize, because he can't say things like that in a sermon. Parishioners posting on Facebook generally said he had nothing to apologize for. He was speaking the truth.

Recently, Sr. Anita Baird, Director of Racial Justice, had to apologize as well. She said Obama was pro-choice, not pro-abortion, meaning he wasn't advocating everyone have abortions, but under certain circumstances, he felt a woman has a right to choose. Sister was forcibly reminded that the two words mean the same thing for Catholics.

In recent memory, a Northwest Suburban pastor was also called on the carpet for a sermon he gave at his parish. For Penance he had to read selections of the Catholic Catechism to his congregation the following Sunday.

The only person not engaged in apologies lately seems to be Cardinal George.

Test Your Orthodoxy

Though this "Orthodoxy Quiz" may seem simplistic, it reflects agendas and issues that conservative groups and churchmen are using to critique the loyalty and faithfulness of typical Catholics. Answer each of the following questions with true or false to test your orthodoxy.

1. All religions pray to the same God and they are just different paths to the same truth. T/F

2. Women should be allowed to be ordained priests. T/F

3. Maybe women should not be ordained priests, but there should be open dialogue and discussion on this issue. T/F

4. Since we are ordaining married Protestant ministers priests, it is time for a married priesthood. T/F

5. Birth control is only okay for committed, married couples who already have children. T/F

6. It would be wonderful if Mother Teresa of Calcutta could come back and give a homily at our parish church. T/F

7. If they attend a Catholic Mass, it is okay for Lutherans to receive communion. T/F

8. It is okay for Catholics to receive communion in a Protestant Church, if it is in their spouse's church. T/F

9. There is no penalty for a Catholic to marry a divorced person, as long as they are non-Catholic and had been married to a non-Catholic by a judge. T/F

10. If you ask God for forgiveness of sin, the Sacrament of Confession isn't necessary. T/F

11. If there are more than 100 people per priest at a Penance Service, general absolution is acceptable. T/F

12. The Pope is not infallible. T/F

13. Missing Mass on a Holy Day isn't a mortal sin. T/F

14. When in doubt, it is more important for a Catholic to ask what Jesus would do and follow their conscience, than to follow Church teaching. T/F

Take this quiz. Then check your nswers in first comment below.

Forced Laicization?

As mentioned in the September WEORC newsletter, the Pope has given the Congregation of the Clergy the authority to start a “non-voluntary” laicization process for priests who leave active ministry and haven’t petitioned for laicization. The actual process hasn’t really been laid out clearly yet, but that hasn’t slowed down several bishops to at least use the threat of what some feel is a “forced” laicization.

For example, Cardinal George of Chicago has a few hundred resigned priest personnel files on his desk that he wants to tidy up. So he has instructed his people to locate “former” priests and inform them that if they don’t go willingly, they would be subject to the new “forced” laicization process. Several letters to this effect were mailed out. Not knowing how widespread this current undertaking extended, we did an informal survey of a few dozen Chicago non-canonical priests that we knew.

Of this sample group, 22% have already been laicized, and hadn’t received any letters from the diocese. The previous process called for priests to “voluntarily” seek laicization. Still a couple of these men entered into the process under some duress – i.e., in the hope to get or retain a job with a Catholic institution.

Under the current process of resigning ministry, a priest must sign a letter of resignation to the Cardinal and formally request laicization to be eligible for any kind of separation package. So rather than under duress, these new requests for laicization appear, as one responder suggested, more the results of a bribe.

Of the 78% of the inactive priests who have not been laicized in the sample, about 25% have received letters from the Diocese informing them of the impending canonical process. They tend to be amused that 10, 20, or 30 years after resigning their positions, they are still considered a “problem” that needs to be “dealt with”. The other 75% of the non-laicized who didn’t receive letters are happy to be under the radar of the Cardinal – at least for now.

While few are interested in laicization, we are not sensing a lot of energy will be spent on fighting any forced laicization process for several reasons.

1. Who cares?

The Cardinal has never showed any interest in resigned priests over the years, and probably doesn’t know where most of them are – so they will never hear from him. His only interest in them now is to create a greater distance from them.

While this “house cleaning” effort could seem purely punitive on the Cardinal’s part, it may also be a “liability reduction” activity. His cadre of lawyers wants to diminish any diocesan liability for the actions of “rogue” priests.

2. The rules will always be changed to suit the rule-maker.

Under John Paul II hundreds who sought laicization, did the paperwork, submitted testimonies, etc, were told they couldn’t be laicized since there was no evidence that they didn’t have a genuine vocation to the priesthood. Now the rules have been changed again, and these same men, and others who haven’t requested laicization, are being summarily dismissed. Obviously the rules can be changed to suit the rule-maker. The Pope opened the doors for married Anglican priests to become Catholic, knowing that celibacy is not essential to priesthood. At the same time he writes off his own Catholic priests who are married, and hasn’t seriously considered ordaining “viri probati”.

3. What difference does it make?

It is not clear what the benefit of laicization is to resigned priests. Does this mean that “former” priests can now become Extraordinary Ministers of the Eucharist, rather than Ordinary Ministers of the Eucharist? Do they retain any of the minor orders, and can be Lectors, and Acolytes – washing the sacred vessels after communion? Can they be catechists or teach theology? What about the provisions in Canon Law to provide emergency sacramental services such as anointing of the sick and hearing confessions? In what sense does laicization benefit the Church since the ontological character of the priest doesn’t change – “once a priest, forever a priest”? At the end of the day, what is the big difference?

4. Aren’t there more important issues in the Diocese than this right now?

Even bracketing sex and embezzlement scandals for a moment, there are certainly more pressing issues to be addressed? Schools and parishes still being consolidated and closed. Expenses are up millions, and donations are down millions. The “new” English liturgy is being crafted by those in Rome who don’t speak English. The Diocese felt the need to spend $1.3 million on ads inviting lapsed Catholics to come home. If they left because they were bored or unwelcome, has anything really changed for them to come home to? According to USCCB statistics, over 30% of married Catholics were not married “in the church”. If it weren’t for recruiting seminarians from overseas, there would be about one Chicago ordination annually for the past decade. There is little being done to address the health, immigration and justice issues.

Does the Cardinal seek to scapegoat some aging, resigned priests as the cause of these problems?

Bottom line, many of the “former” priests we spoke with feel that they have a vocation to priesthood and to marriage. They did not request laicization because that would be a false admonition that their ordination was a mistake. The Cardinal and the Congregation can have their day in their own Canonical Courts and pontificate as they wish, but these men remain priests and disciples of Jesus Christ.

Cardinal George is not alone in such an endeavor. Some other bishops are ardently hunting down their own inactive clergy. One priest ordained by the Diocese of Bismarck, currently a married minister for a Lutheran parish, received a similar letter. He was asked to abandon his wife and attempt at civil-marriage, then return home to Mother Church or face laicization. His story and response to Bishop Zipfel can be found in the current issue of CORPUS Reports.

A SERIES OF SURPRISES

The initial surprise came when the Vatican announced that it would welcome dissident Anglican dioceses and parishes to enter the Catholic Church en masse. In the sensitive world of ecumenical relations this was like poaching in a neighbor’s field. Unhappy Anglicans and Catholics have frequently converted individually in both directions, but this corporate overture has opened up new territory.

Evidently the Vatican’s chief ecumenist, Cardinal Walter Kasper, was also surprised because he was out of town when the announcement was made and, apparently, out of the loop. The Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams is titular head of Anglicans worldwide. At a press conference after the event, he seemed dazed, like a man whose pocket had been picked by a friend.

One of the biggest surprises awaited the dissident Anglicans themselves. Rome’s original welcome included a generous provision that they could maintain their traditional forms of worship, governance and orders. However, the devil is often in the details. Weeks later the fine print included the proviso that pastors and bishops would be appointed by Rome henceforth rather than called or elected by those being served. Moreover, while the Vatican accepted married Anglican priests, they did not accept married bishops. Thus current Anglican bishops could continue wearing their scarlet garb and pectoral crosses, and they would be welcome guests at meetings of Catholic prelates, but they would no longer be considered real bishops, unless they chose to shed their spouses. Furthermore, future Anglican seminarians would have to remain celibate. Those preparing to swim the Tiber suddenly realized that the water was colder than they had thought.

Another surprise is the fact that Pope Benedict himself seemed surprised at the reactions to his overture. Having welcomed the schismatic Pius X Society, only to discover that one of their leaders was a loquacious Holocaust denier, and having alienated large swaths of Muslims and Jews in previous months, he might have been alert to the law of unintended consequences.

Moderate and progressive Catholics have ceased to be surprised that the hierarchy regularly dismiss their concerns. Serious issues like the shortage of priests, the need for substantive reforms in the wake of the pedophilia scandals, and the treatment of women in the church, especially in view of the Vatican’s investigation of American nuns, are routinely ignored. Dissident Anglicans are welcome because they pass the litmus test on women priests and gays. Dissident Catholics are discounted because “we need a purer Church.” So the final surprise is that so many of us stay. Perhaps there’s someone out there who will invite us to swim the Tiber en masse in the opposite direction. If so, be sure to read the fine print.

AMERICAN NUNS AND VATICAN INVESTIGATORS

When women religious first arrived in America in the 1700s, they often lived in log cabins, crisscrossed vast territories in small groups by waterways, covered wagons, steam engines, horseback or by foot. They nursed on battlefields, assisted travelers on ships or in wagon trains, cared for victims of epidemics, founded schools for native Americans, welcomed people of all colors or backgrounds, and served soldiers, miners, pioneers, criminals, and women of “ill repute.” They rarely discriminated between Catholics or non-Catholics. Their life and ministry was deeply rooted in their faith, but not confined to Catholic institutions.

An example of that pioneer spirit was Sister Alfred Moles from Luxembourg who eventually arrived in Rochester, Minnesota to start a school for immigrant children. When the town was devastated by tornados, she and her companions converted their classrooms into a makeshift hospital to care for the wounded. She was aided by a local doctor, William Worrell Mayo, and his two physician sons, all Episcopalians. Eventually this effort blossomed into St. Mary’s Hospital and the world-famous Mayo Clinic.

The huge wave of Catholic immigrants in the mid 19th century alarmed many Americans, and, conversely, the heavily Protestantized public schools and other social institutions alarmed Catholic leaders. So the church launched an “alternative universe” composed of its own schools, hospitals, orphanages, settlement houses, and colleges which needed nuns to staff them. Hundreds of immigrant girls responded to that need, entering large convents, wearing distinctive religious garb, becoming nurses or teachers, and leading highly sequestered lives. Movies such as “Going My Way” or “The Bells of St. Mary’s” captured that era.

However, the experience of World War II, the election of President Kennedy, and the Second Vatican Council, all signaled the mainstreaming of American Catholicism. Many women religious recaptured the spirit of those pioneer nuns, emerging from the immigrant oriented institutions to serve the broader needs of society, living in smaller groups, and wearing contemporary clothing.

Sister Sandra Schneiders, a prominent theologian from the Jesuit School of Theology in California, chronicles all of this in five remarkable essays (published online from January 4 through 8 at ncronline.org/print/16465. ) as a commentary on the Vatican’s investigation of American nuns. She observes that, while some lay and clerical Catholic traditionalists may find it difficult to imagine “real Sisters” anywhere outside of Catholic institutions, contemporary American women religious are not only recapturing the spirit of their predecessors of the 18th century, but also the even more ancient prophetic, service-oriented ministry of the early Christian communities. Like Jesus himself, they reach out to the least of the brothers and sisters. And like the Lord, they are sometimes criticized by the more “respectable” people for keeping company with outcasts.

Sandra Schneiders recommends that the Vatican investigators, prior to launching their inquisition, take time to view the superb traveling museum exhibit entitled “Women and Spirit” which the Leadership Conference of Women Religious has launched to tell the story of four centuries of women religious here in America. Perhaps then the Vatican will replace the current cloud of suspicion with an outpouring of gratitude and appreciation which the nuns so richly deserve. In the meantime, each of us can express our personal admiration and support for these extraordinary women.

DECISIVE ACTION

On Christmas day over Detroit, a Nigerian suicide bomber’s attempt to blow up a commercial jetliner was foiled because of his own ineptitude coupled with the decisive action of his fellow passengers. Whatever the challenges or foibles of the security officials on the ground, these ordinary travelers recognized the danger in the air and responded immediately and vigorously, thus saving their lives, as well as possible victims of falling debris.

Something similar seems to be happening in the Catholic church as some hyper-conservative bishops, priests and laity attempt to blow up Vatican II Catholicism by their attempts to “reform the reform” as they call it. However, many Catholics are no longer willing to act as compliant sheep being led to an ideological slaughter. The old idea that “Father, or Bishop, or Pope knows best” has been profoundly eroded by the hierarchy’s miserable performance in the clergy sex abuse scandals here in America and around the world, most recently in Ireland. Just as airline security is too serious to be left to authorities alone, so too one’s authentic relationship with God is too important to be left to the ebb and flow of ecclesiastical politics on all levels.

Last year the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life reported that 10% of Americans are now former Catholics, a figure which would be even larger were it not for the influx of new immigrants. Many Catholics struggle to find ways to continue to practice their faith despite the deficiencies of their official leaders. So, while we celebrate the decisive action of those passengers on Christmas day over Detroit, let us also recognize these examples of decisive action by ordinary Catholics in their parishes and local communities.

* After the pastor of a university parish was transferred before his time, a new priest arrived with instructions to straighten things out. Initially, the people tried to work with him, but after reaching an impasse, they deluged the diocese with complaints. He left, acknowledging that he was “a square peg in a round hole.” Fortunately, his successor is now doing a superb job, but who knows what might have happened if the authorities had not relented.

* When the well loved pastor of a suburban church retired, parish leaders met with his successor, whose priorities didn’t coincide with the mixture of excellent liturgy, music and social justice which had characterized their community. The people pushed back, and the new priest quickly opted to decline the assignment. The next appointee stayed a year, but eventually concluded that he’d be more comfortable elsewhere. The third try produced a priest who is on the same page as the parish, and all is well. (Similar scenarios have occurred in a number of other places during times of transition when new pastors have been assigned who disregarded the history and dynamics of vital and vigorous parishes. Sadly, the newcomer doesn’t always step aside.)

*An urban parish planned to produce a play written by a widely respected parishioner. It wrestled with the religious, political, personal and familial dimensions of abortion. Word got to the bishop who forbade the performance. Hearing about the controversy, a nearby Lutheran church offered its sanctuary as an alternative site. The resulting publicity insured both large audiences and insightful discussions after each performance. (Similar scenarios have occurred in other parts of the nation when bishops forbade certain speakers to use parish property. In those cases also the subsequent publicity resulted in much larger crowds at the alternative locations.)

*When a pastor surprised his flock with an announcement that he had decided to close the parish school, people began to look into his handling of church finances. After discovering many irregularities, they went to the bishop who was unresponsive. They then contacted civil authorities, who initiated a thorough investigation. As a result the priest was tried, convicted and incarcerated. A new pastor worked with the people to insure the continuation of the school. (Again, unfortunately, this is not a unique story in recent years.)

* Five years ago, proponents of women’s ordination would write letters to the hierarchy, hold meetings, or conduct silent protests at ordination ceremonies. Today, we see an increasing number of underground ordinations of women priests. Internationally, there is an online seminary system to prepare future candidates. Many women strive to follow the example of the early Christians described in Acts 2:46 who continued to meet in the Jerusalem temple, while also gathering for the breaking of the bread in their homes. They keep one foot in their old religious practices in their parishes, and another in their new feminine liturgies in homes and apartments. As one woman put it, “I’ll be dead a century or two before the hierarchy moves ahead on this, so I’d better do it myself. I’m sure our gracious God understands.”

* In Rochester, New York, a dying inner-city parish was invigorated by a dynamic young pastor who focused on liturgy, homilies, lay leadership, women in ministerial roles, and outreach to alienated people, especially gays and divorced Catholics. Prompted by the Vatican, the local bishop eventually replaced the pastor with a man who was supposed to shape things up. After a stormy period, the people invited their former pastor to return. The bishop resisted this, so the bulk of the parishioners voted to start an independent parish, which now meets in a large basilica owned by a music institute. It is thriving with additional outreach programs in third world countries. (Similar independent parishes have been founded in two Minnesota parishes where progressive pastors have retired, and were replaced by men who had no tolerance for the parish dynamics.)

* A missionary priest in Latin America makes a month-long circuit of the villages in his immense parish. Because he can’t celebrate Mass more often than once a month in most places, he has trained lay catechists and women religious to conduct Sunday Communion services in his stead. These are often very powerful spiritual experiences for the people. He knew they were effectively nourishing people’s hunger for God, when one old man told him, “I love it when you come to our village, Father, but I must confess that I enjoy Sister’s Mass even more than the ones you say.”

Stories such as these are likely to multiply in the future for a number of reasons. First, the Catholic faith is deeply imbedded in people, while the credibility of the hierarchy has seriously eroded. Second, the shortage of priests seems to be intensifying, while official strategies to deal with it seem to be ineffective. Third, while there are many wonderful young priests, there are also large numbers of the so-called JPII variety who are rigid, legalistic and judgmental. Fourth, the Pope has recently appointed Archbishop Raymond Burke, formerly of St. Louis and notable for declaring people unfit to receive Communion, as a new member of the Vatican Congregation which recommends new bishops. He joins Cardinal Law, formerly of Boston and pedophilia fame, and the very conservative Cardinal Stafford, formerly of Denver, as the American representatives. Thus, we can expect future bishops in their image and likeness.

The bottom line is that decisive action on the part of both passengers and parishioners is likely to be the “modus operandi” of the future. So be prepared.