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.

DIAPERS AND DIVINITY – An Unusual Christmas Meditation

One of my most memorable theological discussions was with a precocious Third Grader. It went like this:

Jesus was God, right?
Yes, we believe Jesus was the son of God.
And Jesus was a real baby, right?
Right, a baby just like you and me.
So did Jesus need to have his diapers changed?
Well, yes, He was a genuine baby, you know.
Then that must mean that God had to have his diapers changed. That’s amazing!

That interchange many years ago has prompted many thoughts about the Incarnation and about the heart of God. But it also brought thoughts about diapers and the meaning of love.

First, diapers and love. As the firstborn in our family, one of my early tasks was to take care of the soiled diapers of my siblings as they came on the scene. It was sort of a ritual. Mom or Dad changed the baby, rolled up the used diaper and handed it to me. I took it to the bathroom and dumped the contents into the toilet, and then soaked it in a big pail. (We had cloth diapers in those days. No Huggies or Pampers. Our fortunate neighbors had wealthy grandparents who gifted them with a year long diaper service.) Mom would wash the diapers, hang them on the line, fold them and put them on the pile in the baby’s room for further use. It was a lot of work, which represented a lot of love.

It also involved two aromas. The first was the awful smell of a dirty diaper. The second was the wonderful smell of the baby powder which my folks applied to the bottom of the newly changed baby. The whole enterprise alerted me to the fact that my parents had done all of that for me too. And also that Mary and Joseph did all of that for their child, Jesus. And that, in so many ways, God cleans up our unsavory messes again and again throughout our lives. That’s what real love is.

Parents always breath a huge sigh of relief when a child is finally potty trained. And kids are very proud of themselves when they cross that threshold. But one of the sad facts of life is the realization that some of us may have to endure the indignity of needing diapers ( Depends?) in our so-called Golden years. Someone – a spouse, a child, a friend, a stranger – will help us, we hope. And we also hope that we might have the God-like graciousness and humility to appreciate them and thank them.

Theologians have theorized about the way in which the divine and human knowledge of Jesus may have coexisted in the Incarnation. Did the Lord share not only the experience of the innocent child who needed its diapers changed, but also the awkwardness of the senior citizen who is aware of it?

Christmas is the season of beauty and color and music and parties and gifts. It seems impertinent to soil the season with thoughts about diapers, of all things. However, such thoughts remind us that human life is messy, untidy and earthy. God made us the way we are – rational animals, but animals nonetheless. And God, who is love, rejoices in the amazing love of millions of parents, unsung heroes, who change diapers. This Christmas we might offer a prayer of thanks to those, living or dead, who did it for us. And we might think of that old joke that, if the three Magi had been women, they wouldn’t have brought gold, frankincense and Myrrh to Bethlehem. They’d have brought a casserole and a pack of fresh diapers.

--Baltasar

THE NUN’S STORY – An Allegory

The spiritual home of my childhood was a grim place. Fear and shame crouched in the dark corners. It was a great day when my jovial Grandpa John decided it was time to redecorate with bright colors, cheerfulness, lots of sunshine and fresh air. Dismal was transformed into delightful.

However, after Grandpa died, my father and my older brothers gradually repainted the rooms with somber hues, and they hung heavy drapes to diminish the sun. Fear crept back into the dark corners. My mother and her friends were banished to the kitchen and nursery. But we cherished the memory of what was possible.

Then one day, our cousin Bernie from Boston came to live with us. He had gotten into trouble for helping some people molest children. To make room, my bed was moved downstairs to a sun porch off the kitchen. At least it was bright. My father explained, “Bernie is family, and he’s our kind of people.”

Next came another cousin, from the St. Pius X Society. He denied that the Holocaust ever happened, but again my father said, “He’s family, and despite his flaws he too is our kind of people.” This time my bed was moved to the basement, near the furnace room. At least it was warm.

One day a group of cousins came to stay with us, the Anglican family. They don’t like uppity women and gays. This added considerable tension with my Mom, but my father said, “They are family, and they are my kind of people.” So my bed was moved again, this time to a loft in the garage. It might be pretty cool in winter, but at least there is more fresh air than in the basement.

Yesterday, we received a letter that some cousins from Rome are coming, the Inquisitors. They said that they’ve heard alarming rumors about my mother, and my sisters and me. They want to look into it. My father says, “They are family, and very much my kind of people.” Evidently my bed will be moved into a house across the street. My father explained, “Despite your flaws, you’re still family. But you’re not really my kind of people.”

I’ll still be invited to Sunday dinner. However, I won’t be allowed to eat.

Baltasar

Swimming the Tiber

The Vatican made an overture to disaffected conservative Anglicans to come on over to the Catholic side en masse. They were offered their own rite to retain some traditional Anglican elements. Anglican priests can even keep their wives (if they want to). Only married bishops would lose their miters in the crossing (no married Bishops allowed).

The details are still being worked out, but it would be interesting to see how many Anglicans might actually take the offer. Up to this point, I know more Catholic priests than Anglicans (Episcopalians) who switched sides. Many switched to get married. Will they be welcomed back?

To get Stephen Colbert's take on the issue go to http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/252747/october-27-2009/holy-water-under-the-bridge---randall-balmer