Next Week's USCCB Mtg, Part II | National Catholic Reporter by MSW. MGB: The second piece focuses on a how the culture warrior mindset arose, focusing on Weigel's First Things piece in February of 2011 which heralded the end of the Bernardine era, which you can read at http://www.firstthings.com/article/2011/02/the-end-of-the-bernardin-era. Quite interesting points, but with some real gaps, like the roll of Cardinal Rigali of the Curia and then Philadelphia as St. John Paul's enforcer among the American bishops. That era ended with the death of John Paul and with the discrediting of the Cardinal without his name being mentioned in the investigation of child abuse in his See. He found no comfort from Pope Benedict, whose real job was not writing theology but making the Dallas Accords world wide and holding bishops to account. Still Cardinal Dolan, who followed the advice of his lawyers as Archbishop of Milwaukee to transfer property - probably because it belonged to parishes, not the bishop, made it to New York and a red hat, as well as the USCCB Chair (over a member of the Bernardin Mafia) - although now his term is up and more liberal bishops, like the Bishop of Spokane, are on the rise with the election of Pope Francis.
While Bernardin spoke about a Seemless Garment of Life, he did not focus on Birth Control as the current conservative clique has. However, also did not do what was obvious, which was to denounce the Pro-Life movement as a sham in service to the Republican Party, having no intention to ever end legal abortion (which is almost impossible in an American Constitutional system). Telling the truth would have meant difficult discussions with Rome, who saw abortion legalization as a series of defeats by parliamentary majorities in circumstances which did not nor could not happen here. Also, throwing Republican bishops under the bus as frauds would have been profoundly painful, especially given the fact that many Catholics in the pews have bought into the movement's logic of abortion being a matter of personal guilt, while employers or the state could not be forced to provide a high enough wage to raise each new child, as this would end the need for personal economic responsibility by the parent(s).
Now, for MSW's analsys. he looks at the Church like Francis does, as a field hospital for souls rather than a field of combat for issues - however issues don't arise from the thin air, they come from people with a common view point. Many of the new leaders have Charities as their viewpoint, starting with the new conference president, Bishop Kurtz (OK, Archbishop, we knew him as a bishop while assigned to CCUSA). Then there is the new Metropolitan of Chicago, Bishop (probably soon to be Cardinal, wouldn't that cheese Chaput), Blaise Cupich of Spokane. I am sure there are others - and whether they are tied to Bernardin is not important. Charity is their purpose - and not just get a pittance from the flock, huge amounts from major donors (hoping none of their kids are gay and in search of a marriage blessing) but also to help in the public sector through government contracts (more than half their budget). This seems to be a common priority generally, but some bishops do it better than others. Then, flying over the heads of the USCCB is Cardinal Joseph O'Malley, OSF, with his trusted copilot, Bryan Hehir (who you may have noticed was mentioned in the First Things article on his war and piece work, before becoming my wife's boss at Catholic Charties USA and going to Boston to oversee Charities there (coming back after Hurricane Isabel to baptize my daughter).
MSW pronounces the agenda a snoozer. I suspect that the bishops are bit shell shocked after the Rigali era and the recent spate of opposition to the public, where they served as foils for Valerie Jarrett (not Kattherine Sebelius') war on women. Even losing Hobby Lobby simply extended the approach to certain closely held firms what is followed by the Church under the law - let someone else fund it but don't stop the women from getting it. All that work for just this bit? Sad. Most of the bishops want a good meal in the Inner Harbor, some reports no one will remember and no more coverage. Back at home, their concern with charity is that their Catholic Charities organization works (and does not embarrass them by sending a mirgant for an abortion - luckily that contract is gone), that the Bishops's appeal is successful and that the annual fundraising ball goes off without a hitch and no money. They hope that this trend to simple living. I suspect that they want CCUA and CHA to do the heavily lifting on poverty, which does it better anyway - even if they do sometimes go where the bishops don't want them to - indeed, CHA got Obamacare passed, probably much to the relief of anyone left from the Bernardin network. As for end of life issues, get a panel of aged Monsignori together to talk about end of life medicine and hope none of them are too terribly honest.
The last notable Bernadin network employee is Barack Obama, who began work in Catholic Charities of Chicago under Bernardin (and these are small organizations, they would have had to have me). Writing in 2011 was probably a hope that Obama was a one term President (oops!) - so some kind of Bernardin era is still existing - one where the President worked with the heads of CCUSA and CHA to devise a workaround (which was likely already drafted) on contraception. I suspect the presidents of both organizations still have their White House ID Badges.
MSW suggest looking at the final message of the Synod. You can read it here, http://whispersintheloggia.blogspot.com/2014/10/we-stand-at-door-and-knock-synods-last.html. Turns out, this is a press release! It even ends with -30-. (They made that mistake with Terri Schaivo). It is designed to smooth over differences and not say anything that anyone can disagree with unless they want to be disagreeable. The real work should be in distributing it to each diocese and eparchy for discussion with the laity (including not accusing parishoners of sin if they think Catholic doctrine needs to change). Discussion by the USCCB is not necessary and will only allow those who would damn the forces of change to get air time they do not deserve. The time for the USCCB to act is after it sends comments to Rome for consolidation - and it should be before the second part of the Synod rather than after the Synod meetings. After the second Synod, there may be no action or there may be great debate. I suspect it will take months, not weeks.
MSW suspects that Tobin, Chaput, Burke and others will be lightning rods for seeking unity of the anti-Bernardin, and face it, anti-Francis forces. He hopes the Nuncio would counsel against this and I am sure that will be the case. I suspect that the appointment in Chicago likely sent the much needed message even more strongly, as well as the removal of Burke from the Conference on Bishops and the Pentitentiary. Burke was free to speak because he has nowhere to fall - the others should realize that they have more at stake. Sadly, it sometimes takes baser motives to stop base disloyalty.
MSW points out that the Faithful Citizenship document needs updating to include the latest from the Pope, Evangelii Gaudium, which would add more emphasis on charity - and I suspect here that should mean what I have been pushing - a larger child tax cut. I suspect those who still resist the Seemless Garment would rather not trouble their Republican base with such honesty about the relationship between poverty and abortion and a societal responsiblity for this - not just something for the confessional. Of course, to be really Medieval, excommunicate Catholic business owners or stockholders who pay worker families too little - of course that may require a public absolution to begin every bishop's conference.
Will the Mass on the border be discussed? I guess it depends. If the Latino vote comes out voting strongly Democratic, I suspect that the Conservatives will be incensed, especially Weigel. We will see that one tonite.
In the last paragraph, MSW actually talks about the Weigel essay. He states that Wiegel saw accomodation to the culture as Bernardin's problem. I disagree - because if the culture is reality and speaks truth, accomodation is not what you do, you participate. What Bernardin did, which sowed a brief period where those who were close to John Paul II ruled, was to actually include respect for the views of the conservative bishops and their flocks (including some parishes in with a liberal bishop). Bernardin anathematized no one (except SAC - and the President responded by taking cities off the table) and it is likely that they expect Francis to do the same thing. So far he has. Even though they came of age with the hardball tactics of Cardinal Rigalli under St. John Paul, they think Francis is a softie. Only so far - just ask Cardinal Burke. As for the staff, I expect that those who focused on Religious Freedom (OK, Power, lets be honest) will leave soon or sometime after the Obama Administration. Some will go back to their provinces - either where they were before or to the bishop who brought them. It will be clear fairly soon, maybe this year, maybe next, that culture warriors on staff will not be the armor that they themselves need. They need staff that is able to tell them no - just like they ened to be able to hear no from the pews. It would have saved us the depopulation of Humane Vitae.
No comments:
Post a Comment