The Mess in San Francisco | National Catholic Reporter by MSW. MGB: I am not so sure the full page ad is a bad idea. If correspondence is stopped at the Chancellor and the Archbishop does not grant a meeting or takes their calls, the ad is essential. They could also nail them to the Cathedral door. What is more regretable is the need to have Francis remove the Archbishop - which essentially means that the Holy See, not the individual bishop, is liable for their conduct in covering up child sexual abuse. Not following the Dallas Charter is suspect, but if ignoring the Charter leads to more abuse, the Holy See should pay.
The way to solve this is to abandon our Medieval organizational structures. In the early Church, before it was coopted by Rome and then Constantinople, bishops were elected (and in some cases, were probably removed). Do that now and the ad would be for Catholics to assemble and consider the Archbishop's removal - although given the ancient ways, he would nevr have been permitted to serve in that Archdiocese. Bishop Finn would have been removed by now as well.
The other reform is to abandon the convention that the bishop holds all assets as personal property. This is worse than anachronistic. There was a place for it after the Great Terror in France - but such threats are gone. Elected and removal bishops might be just a bit of an incentive to follow the Dallas Charter (which seems more like a press release than a bindng regulation.
Finally, an arranagment such as this would change how doctrine is developed. Elected bishops gave us Calchedon and the Creed. Agreeing on the nature of God and Jesus by a democratically elected council was not a bad thing then and it would not be now. MSW needs to quit defending that kind of worn out tradition.
No comments:
Post a Comment