The leadership crisis

Fascinating. I wish we knew more about Pius XII and his logic on choice of bishops. He was assumed to clearly be a conservative traditionalist (correct ?) then how did he decide on the list you gave, particularly someone like Suenens? One should read O'Malley's history of Vatican II for more insight. During a pilgrimage walk to Santiago de Compostella a few years ago I met a priest from Chicago who was on his sabbatical. As we walked he described how he felt the pontificacy of J-P II was turning out to be a disaster. Being captivated by J-P's image and personality I didn't understand what he meant. Now with the notre Dame debacle I know.

Excellent article! The Republican Party is so very NON-Christ-like and hypocritical. I am Catholic. I am against abortion, but I do not consider myself part of the pro-life movement, because it focuses ONLY on abortion. It says nothing about guns, poverty, war, torture, capital punishment, etc. These also kill! The Republican party is even pro-gun and accepts money from the NRA, and that couldn't be farther from Christ's teachings! I have no respect for self-righteous, Pharisaical Catholics, even if those Catholics are the hierarchy themselves, and I am not intimidated by their pressure to vote Republican. We need more teaching about love, truth and unity from the Catholic hierarchy and less promotion of hate and self-righteous superiority.

God bless Fr. O'Brien. Like John the Baptist, he is a voice crying in the wilderness, ---"Repent!! Repent!!" However, Father is not asking the Catholic laity to repent......rather their bishops!!!

In another age, he would be judged a "heretic" (for questioning??) but today he is a true hero of the "People's Church", just as Pope John XXIII and Bishop
Gumbelton, and Fr. Hans Kung and Sr, Joan Chichester, just to mention a few, who dare to speak the truth whatever it costs them.

As priest's of integrity we married, active priests hope to have honorable mention, among those mentioned above, who inspire us to serve God's People, many of whom have been disenfranchised and labeled "former Catholics".. In God's eyes they are still beloved and worth His Son's blood. Jesus reminds us that he came to save sinners (all of us)and not just the "saved"...

I believe the leadership crisis begins with priests like Fr McBrien and "priests" like Mr Lovejoy.

It's obvious the agenda Fr McBrien and his cohorts wish to propel, an agenda that is neither Christ-centered nor Catholic. Praise be to God the experiment that was the "Spirit of Vatican II movement" is dying out, and we can get on with what Vatican II really said!

Curious that Fr. McBrien would begin his article with the political dimension leading into the appearance and reality of the Catholic Church as a fundamentalist institutional presence. I understand that your ex-Vice President Chainey dissed Colin Powell publically this weekend past and expressed his support for Rush Limbaugh. I also read recently that Mr. Limbaugh was converting to Catholicism. So, as for Fr. McBrien's thesis - q.e.d.

There is a quote somewhere in the Old Testament where God "...hardened their hearts". I think that I understand what this means now. It is when an idiology, or issue becomes an idiology and the adherent will not or cannot hear anything else, and rhetoric overrides all evidence and even supportive evidence becomes irrelevant to the fanatic 'faith'.

Thank you so much for this thoughtful article. You have expressed the dissatisfaction so many of us Catholics have with the conservative trend both in some of our own bishops, but in the church in general. You have thoughtfully overridden my own rather snarkey, "The conservative bishops have turned Jesus in for the RNC."

Just how is defending life a Republican issue? So, the bishops have the courage to say to Notre Dame "we asked you not to honor any politician who publicly holds positions that are inconsistant with our fundamental beliefs. You have decided to ignore us. You are wrong and we will not support you" and suddenly the bishops are mouth-pieces for the Republican Party? How ridiculous.

I wonder if Father McBrien's words here, and in so many of his columns, are motivated by the very careerism he claims to deplore? I wonder if his criticism of Pope John Paul II's bishops are motivated by the fact that he was not selected to be one of them? To paraphrase the Bard, methinks he doth protest too much.

father, would you say to the following statements?

"For as the faithful are subject to their priests, so are priests to their bishops, whom 'the Holy Spirit has placed ... to rule the Church of God.' So, too, every bishop is subject to the Roman pontiff, the successor of Saint Peter, whom Christ called a rock and made the foundation of His Church. It was to Peter that Christ gave in a special way the power to bind and loose on earth, to strengthen his brethren, to feed the entire flock."

and

"We are sure it is unnecessary for us to mention it, but priests should be careful to be always obedient and submissive to their bishop. As Saint Ignatius of Antioch said: 'Since you are subject to your bishop as to Jesus Christ, ... whatever you do must be done in union with your bishop. All who belong to God and Jesus Christ are in union with their bishop.'"

and

"[catholic laity] would work, of course, in union with their bishops and in constant obedience to them."

heretic? no, i don't think fr. mcbriens outlook on jpii's bishops would cause him to be labled as a heretic. people throw that word around too much without knowing what it means.

st thomas says there are "two ways of deviating from Christianity: the one by refusing to believe in Christ Himself, which is the way of infidelity, common to Pagans; the other by restricting belief to certain points of Christ's doctrine selected and fashioned at pleasure, which is the way of heretics."

So, excluding points of doctrine is what makes one a heretic, not commentary on certain bishops. i don't see how what father mcbrien says above could be heresy. now if he had denied that the sacraments were instituted by christ, or if he had said that original sin was nothing more than a myth, or questioned the doctrine that jesus was conceived by a virgin than THAT would be heresy. but he didn't say anything like that above.

definitions people, lets stick to em. it prevents misunderstanding.

I agree with you Fr O'Brien. I also must say that I don't find joy in agreeing with you.

I would like to look at something beautiful in Catholicism, something that gives me hope, that helps me discover the presence of Jesus Christ among us.

The bishops certainly don't. They smell too much of stale thought. I find we talk too much about them: they just need to be ignored for a few years. Let's go about our vocation of being Christian without them, let's not pay attention to them.

The hardliners in the hierarchy have no one to blame for the decline in the Church except themselves. The PEOPLE make up the Church, not the hierarchy. As people change, so must the Church. I find it amusing that the hierarchy is against change b/c it is "against Church teaching," but it is the hierarchy that makes the rules, not the Church (the people).

Precisely on the point as always, Fr. McBrien. The rigid leaders of the Church, as well as those of the Republican Party, are indeed facing a credibility crisis. And, the climate within the Church has been very dark as a result of it. Any thoughts that don't reflect perfectly those of His Holiness or the Catechism of the Catholic Church are simply eradedicated and dismissed as "dissent."

The USCCB will have some even harder questions to ask about their actions towards the President of the United States and other politicians they have alieneted by their fierce, condemning rhetoric, when President Obama soon meets with Pope Benedict. Pope Benedict and the Vatican will welcome him with an aire of civility and respect, despite the disagreements they have on certain matters. The USCCB must learn to do the same and understand that dialogue and cooperation cannot insue without first assuring respect and civility. No consensus can be reached through shouting and denunciation.

The very fact that the polls show that Catholics aren't listening to the Bishops should be sobering rather than further enforcing their hardline, radical rhetoric. I think the Universal Church at large, after the pontificate of Benedict XVI (and I am in no means wishing harm or misfortune upon His Holiness, I'm just simply addressing a fact) the leaders of the Church must sincerely reflect, and contemplate upon what kind of future they want that Church to have...one dominated by fear or one open to the possibilities of hope...

Thank you Fr. McBrien! I hope you continue to write in your way that makes us think, removes our comfortableness that we know it all and, finally, compels us to look more closely at who we are as a Church of people and not simply the "laity, a necessary evil as perceived by the hierarchy.

Thank you, Father McBrien, for continuing to give me hope that there are voices who are not afraid to speak against the power gathering activities of the hierarchy.

First of all, I hope Fr. McBrien is collecting all his essays in theology into a book. Wonderful reading on so many issues facing the church. As he pointed out, those outstanding bishops at Vatican II were appointed by Pius XII, and under Paul VI, the "Jadot bishops" in the U.S. were pastoral, thinking men. JPII changed all that, as Fr. McBrien points out, and used various litmus tests in appointing bishops: contraceptives, women priests, married priest, etc. JPII was a master media manipulator. Too many people unfortunately were taken in by his personality, and while he was on target on so many issues--social justice, rights of the poor--he quickly dismantled the thrust of Vatican II--and his protege and successor, BXVI, has followed in his footsteps.

JPII set the church back to pre-Vatican II days,and Benedict continues that same pattern. Not only have the bishops in this country lost credibility by their handling of the sexual abuse scandal, but so has the Vatican--too little, too late.

Given this lack of leadership on the part of our American bishops, we will continue to see many leaving the church. I, for one, do not want bishops caving in to what may be popular, but I do want them to start thinking seriously about issues which need some straightforward responses.

Abortion is intrinctly evil; so is killing innocent people. Entering into an unjust war in which killing innocent people was justified is instrinctly immoral and evil. While the bishops condemn President Obama for his positions, where were their condemnations when Notre Dame invited him to speak and receive an honorary degree? Is one intrinsic evil more imporant than another intrinsic issue?

Former Archbishop Rembert Weakland chose now to release his memoirs rather than posthumously as previously planned.

In the light, always brilliant, of this, the Rev. Father Richard P. McBrien's current Essay in Theology, may we discern some reason for the Archbishop's timing and candid statement?

Prophetically, what is the Archbishop now telling the Church which, as the astute professor and revered Father Richard P. McBrien here so eloquently indicates: "runs the risk of being perceived as the church which stands only against abortion, embryonic stem-cell research, and homosexuality?"

And may those who so rabidly and rapidly rush to gnaw fresh Fr. McBrien meat discern the great generosity of this, his careful phrasing: " . . .have begun to solidify the impression, deserved or not, that they have become purveyors of single-issue morality and, in the process, unwitting tools of the Republican Party."

Those diplomatic phrases "deserved or not" and "unwitting" produce paroxyms of tap-dancing which are unassailable. I would not be so guarded in my characterizations of this our fallen American Church which has abandoned the poor, the outcast, the alien, the abandoned. The reverend Father Richard P. McBrien, nevertheless, and for the benefit of those who give him no credit at all, is full of that Gift of the Holy Spirit: Wisdom, and Compassion, and a profound and abiding love for Our "universal Catholic church."

How deeply we miss courageous, prophetic, great priests and theologians such as the Reverend Father Jean-Bertrand Aristide, the Reverend Father Ernesto Cardenal (student of Father Louis - Thomas Merton), the good and holy and brilliant Friar Boff, as well as all of those who were martyred for our Faith and still not recognized: the Blessed Monsenor Oscar Romero, Fathers Ellacuria and Companions, etc., who would have made Vatican III ring loudly with the loving and brilliant Spirit had Pope John Paul the Greater not been murdered one month into his Pontificate.

What a differnt, more solid, more universal Church we could all now freely embrace within.

We still can. Come away to Latin America . . .

Thank you for your insight and honest opinion. I am a creative catholic and find most bishops & priests to be GOD"S little policemen. What a travesty. Thank GOD for the wonderful minority of Priests that can celebrate the eucharist joyfully.

I am in the Green Bay area and have seen too many Zombies leading my diocese. The holy spirit will prevail in spite of their misguided sense of authority.

Curtis L Biggar

Whenever individuals or whole groups forget that power exists not for domination but for service, they contribute to the prevalence of power thinking and power politics in both the individual and the social sphere: to the dehumanization of people in the now unavoidable struggle for power.

But whenever individuals or whole groups remember that power exists for service and not for domination, they contribute to the humanization of the all-round human competitive struggle and even in the midst of this struggle make possible mutual respect, respect for people, reconciliation and forbearance. They may then believe in the promise that mercy will be shown those who show mercy.

Threatening hell-fire is not the same as warning of hell-fire.

Thank you, Fr. McBrien, for the historical background on episcopal appointments and the fruits they have borne. How unfortunate that the currently vocal members of the USCCB seem to have the MOST to say about subjects on which they are the LEAST qualified to speak: human sexuality, medical research - and let's not forget politics. It's been downhill ever since Humanae Vitae in 1968.

Referring back to an earlier post written by 'Chris', I would like to know what Vatican II really taught. I hear that said a lot and wonder how much more explicit the documents could be. We now have a wonderful church, filled with faith-filled people who come and who serve, because they love the Lord. The bishops and priests are men with special callings but are otherwise no different than the rest of us. In our diocese we have been blessed with bishops who are able to see truth. They will never be 'rewarded' by the Vatican but they are here for the People of God. I just wish that those who want to go backwards or put their heads in the sand, would do so just as much as they wish that I would just go away.

About 25 years ago a wonderful spiritual intelligent priest told me that there was a crisis starting in the Church because only conservative priests were being promoted. He told me then that he feared for the Church. Twenty five years later I believe we are on the verge of a major schism in the Church precisly because of what this prophetic priest warned about. Perhaps we are already there. I love and believe strongly in the ideals and spirit of Vatican II. I am sorry that these Bishops have hardened their hearts and closed their eyes and cannot feel and see the beauty of God's Plan as revealed in that Council. God's Plan will proceed with or without the Bishops and with or without the institutional Roman Catholic Church as currently configured. I don't see this as a failure of the Bishops. They are leading the Roman Catholic Church exactly where THEY want it to go. The problem is that many Catholics are not following. These Catholics continue to feel that the Spirit calls us to remain fathful to Vatican II. Jesus prayed that we would be one. I will continue to pray with Him. All things are possible with God.

First, to make the case this soon that the Republican Party is in decline, with no rebounding cycle in the foreseeable future unless they cave to a more liberal agenda, not only defies recent history, it also naively and arrogantly forecasts that all the power currently possessed by the Democratic Party will be used wisely. When we all wake up and look around and wonder HOW ARE WE GOING TO PAY FOR ALL THIS, the Reagan revolution will begin anew. I admit that is a partisan forecast, but I do not present myself as an enlightened essayist, let alone a renowned theologian.

This is the paragraph that should irk all of us, no matter what our politics.

"The Catholic church also runs the risk of being perceived as the church which stands only against abortion, embryonic stem-cell research, and homosexuality. This opposition, when voiced without any corresponding concerns about war, violence against women, capital punishment, torture, global warming, and governmental responsibilities to the poor­to cite only a few of the life issues that confront this country and the world at large­turns off many younger people, the educated, and women generally."

This insults McBrien's readers. Rather than a respected theologian, I would expect a political operative like Rahm Emanuel or Karl Rove to line things up with such oversimplification in order to win votes. His point that the Catholic church had better not make the same mistake as those narrow minded Republicans, who only care about stopping generally accepted actions like abortion, leaves me with considerably less respect for the man. I would expect him to be shedding light on the Church's position on all issues, rather than lining them up in such a politically partisan fashion. Like most independent thinkers, I would rather he criticize the flaws of both parties than become so conspicuously in the tank for one.

One can make the case that Republicans are ultimately more Catholic than Democrats on more than three issues:

I abhor war so much that I vote for candidates who are most likely to stop the war mongers of the world.

Because of violence against women in Muslim culture, Ayaan Hirsi Ali continues to risk her life speaking and writing against atrocities committed in the name of religion. I plan to vote for candidates who are most likely to stand with her.

And since I have yet to discover a country that imports as much poverty as the the USA, while still providing more welfare to the masses throughout the world, I am going to continue to vote for candidates who are not only in favor of continuing to provide for this many poor people, they must also show that they know how to fund such welfare. If we continue to promise all things to all people while driving out the businesses who produce these things, we will produce and provide nothing but more hatred and strife in the long run. My votes go to those who understand how to feed the hungry.

Stopping war mongers and violence against the vulnerable, especially women and children, while maintaining economic growth for the masses remains a primary concern of Republicans.

I part company with Republicans regarding capital punishment, but not nearly as intensely as I part company with the Democrats on abortion. For that I am in McBrien's sights as he fires smug insinuations that my thinking reflects inferior education This diminishes his own intellectual standing, in favor of his new found fondness for political hackery.

Let us demand more of our enlightened essayists, so that they speak to issues that transcend those inspired by the latest polls.

First, to make the case this soon that the Republican Party is in decline, with no rebounding cycle in the foreseeable future unless they cave to a more liberal agenda, not only defies recent history, it also naively and arrogantly forecasts that all the power currently possessed by the Democratic Party will be used wisely. When we all wake up and look around and wonder HOW ARE WE GOING TO PAY FOR ALL THIS, the Reagan revolution will begin anew. I admit that is a partisan forecast, but I do not present myself as an enlightened essayist, let alone a renowned theologian.

This is the paragraph that should irk all of us, no matter what our politics.

"The Catholic church also runs the risk of being perceived as the church which stands only against abortion, embryonic stem-cell research, and homosexuality. This opposition, when voiced without any corresponding concerns about war, violence against women, capital punishment, torture, global warming, and governmental responsibilities to the poor­to cite only a few of the life issues that confront this country and the world at large­turns off many younger people, the educated, and women generally."

This insults McBrien's readers. Rather than a respected theologian, I would expect a political operative like Rahm Emanuel or Karl Rove to line things up with such oversimplification in order to win votes. His point that the Catholic church had better not make the same mistake as those narrow minded Republicans, who only care about stopping generally accepted actions like abortion, leaves me with considerably less respect for the man. I would expect him to be shedding light on the Church's position on all issues, rather than lining them up in such a politically partisan fashion. Like most independent thinkers, I would rather he criticize the flaws of both parties than become so conspicuously in the tank for one.

One can make the case that Republicans are ultimately more Catholic than Democrats on more than three issues:

I abhor war so much that I vote for candidates who are most likely to stop the war mongers of the world.

Because of violence against women in Muslim culture, Ayaan Hirsi Ali continues to risk her life speaking and writing against atrocities committed in the name of religion. I plan to vote for candidates who are most likely to stand with her.

And since I have yet to discover a country that imports as much poverty as the the USA, while still providing more welfare to the masses throughout the world, I am going to continue to vote for candidates who are not only in favor of continuing to provide for this many poor people, they must also show that they know how to fund such welfare. If we continue to promise all things to all people while driving out the businesses who produce these things, we will produce and provide nothing but more hatred and strife in the long run. My votes go to those who understand how to feed the hungry.

Stopping war mongers and violence against the vulnerable, especially women and children, while maintaining economic growth for the masses remains a primary concern of Republicans.

I part company with Republicans regarding capital punishment, but not nearly as intensely as I part company with the Democrats on abortion. For that I am in McBrien's sights as he fires smug insinuations that my thinking reflects inferior education This diminishes his own intellectual standing, in favor of his new found fondness for political hackery.

Let us demand more of our enlightened essayists, so that they speak to issues that transcend those inspired by the latest polls.

For 100 years the Democrat Party could count on 90% of Catholics to vote for their party. The real accusation of heresy comes from Fr. McBrien against those Catholics who have dared to step out of the Democrat Party line. You accuse pro-life Catholics of being duped by the Republicans, and you are probably right. But why should we Catholics give such undying loyalty to the Democrat party?

No political party can represent the Catholic Faith.

The problem that Burke and ilk have is equating leadership with giving orders. These guys are ignorant not only about leadership but also about pastoral practice. Can these hierarchs be educated on these topics? Sadly, I doubt it. The institutional church could very well turn into a sect, as Catholics worldwide form new communities based on the gospel message and not on retention of power and prestige. We are seeing more than ever today the "fruits" of JPII's episcopal appointments. Really sad.

Father McBrien is right on target. The episcopal obsession with abortion has diminished the
church's moral credibility and has inspired too many Catholics to wander off in search of more
inspiring sources of spiritual nourishment. Teilhard de Chardin was right: "The world always
belongs to those who hold out the greater hope."

So many topics arose from one article and so many varied opinions...

I can see having differences but when there is anger behind the words, my own post included, how can we ever resolve issues?

We are to be people of peace but it seems that we are looking for arguments - all of our posts have an "I'm right, therefore, you're wrong" tone.

How do we change this attitude or do we want to change or should we change?

Wow, what a discussion. Passionate, yes; but not violently so. Congratulations to all.
#1 The demise of the GOP is more wishful thinking than anything else. So we lost. Not the first time, and will not be the last. Yes, there is a vacuum of leadership but that will work itself out. My goodness, the election was only six months ago.
#2 Fr. McBrien is a writer and thinker on the cutting edge. As such, he makes many people uncomfortable. Unless the rote is followed, one has to think about what he says. I enjoy his thinking even though I'm sometimes not immediately in line.
#3 It is possible historians will be able to assess Vat II in the middle of this century and the next and the next after that. We had over 400 years of Trent and 100 of Vat I. The world had fought two huge wars in a little more than 25 years. A huge new power (atomic energy) had come on the scene. Is it any wonder that the spiritS of Vat II came spouting out like toothpaste out a tube under pressure. We cannot use a Dewey decimal sytem for pigeon-holing every aspect of Vat II in neat and tidy ways. I think what we fail to realize that the Holy Spirit has some things in mind too, and it would be impertinent as well as illogical to exclude the Spirit. We need always to seek truth without denigrating the truth seeking of others.

Education is the issue where all caring Americans should be pro-choice, because this is where we care for children after they are born. How can anyone call himself pro-choice when it comes to allowing mothers to abort their children, but against choice when it comes to helping parents educate their children?

Father McBrien mocks right wingers for being more "pro-birth" than "pro-life," so here's an opportunity to prove his pro-life bona fides by his own definition. Are you for or against the President's decision to end vouchers for D.C. kids, who would prefer private schools, many of which happen to be Catholic? This could help us decide who is the "unwitting tool," for which political party.

1. One man's "rigid loyalist" is another's faithful servant.

2. Beware Democrats. When Bush was reelected in 2004, Republicans were crowing about a generational sea change in politics and Democrats were in disarray and leaderless. How's that look now?

3. Let us not read to much into the whole political party thing. The slaughter of innocent unborn children (with equal value and dignity to you and me) is the critical moral issue of our day. 99% of national politicians who oppose legalized abortion are Republican. Therefore, faithful Catholics vote Republican. Every faithful Catholic I know opposed Rudy Giuliani's bid for President. And many opposed Romney, because they did not believe his switch to the pro-life side was genuine. It is not about party affiliation, but about positions. If an avidly pro-life Democrat was running for President against an avidly pro-abortion Republican. Many of these so-called Catholic puppets of the Republican party would quickly switch sides and vote for the Democrat.

Mr. H
http://www.allhands-ondeck.blogspot.com/

I feel for Fr. O'Brien. It must be difficult to keep banging your head against a wall that you know deep down is never going to move.

The reality is the youth and vitality of the Church is in the orthodox wing of the Church.

With all due respect to the aged, public gatherings of "progressive" Catholics remind me of AARP meetings.

The religious orders that have taken the progressive path are dying; orthodox orders are booming.

Orthodox dioceses are thriving with abundant vocations; progressive dioceses are dying.

Other Christian denominations that have chosen the progressive path are dying.

It is only a matter of time.

Mr. H
http://www.allhands-ondeck.blogspot.com/

If you feel the Church is wrongly perceived what are you doing to correct the misperception? You know that there are mumerous Papal writings addressing all the other issues that you claim the Church is supposedly silent on and in this article you simply reinforce this misperception that the church which stands only against abortion, embryonic stem-cell research, and homosexuality.You could alert the readers to the wealth of Church writings that express corresponding concerns about war, violence against women, capital punishment, torture, global warming, and governmental responsibilities to the poor.