Reflections on the USCCB Meeting, Part II | National Catholic Reporter

Reflections on the USCCB Meeting, Part II | National Catholic Reporter by MSW. MGB: I will go in reverse order. The bishops do these meetings for themselves, not for us. It is actually a pity that policy is discussed at all. We would be better off if they just fellowshiped in private. Indeed, I bet there are very few Catholics, even among those who read their diocesan newspapers, who are even aware that the bishops met this week. Perhaps if policy questions were settled with synods on just that issue, we would be less democratic.

On the other hand, they do decide policy. Pity that the Pope could not adjust his schedule to be here for the meeting. I am certain the opponents of hermeneutic of reform would have kept their tongues - and I doubt Faithful Citizenship would have passed. We would get the same result if we had a national patriarch to look too, instead of Rome - to adopt the more Orthodox model. It would certainly have an impact on the careerists, as the spectre of Roman interference always looms large for them - and with our own Patriarch, it would be totally absent. It would also be easier to explain constitutional law to the Patriarch, which would change everything, starting with the translation of the Mass.