Posted on 04/10/2010 12:54:09 PM PDT by Balt
In the few thoughts that your PP has offered about media attacks against Pope Benedict XVI during the last couple of weeks, something has been creeping around in the back of your PP’s mind. Albeit, the back of your PP’s mind is a rather dark and deleterious place—I myself try to avoid it as much as possible—filled with all manner of unfriendly spirits. The one I’ve been having to beat back more than others, however, seems to have been conjured forth by the example of so many bishops rushing to the Holy Father’s defense—in some cases, bishops who, by the way in which their respective dioceses are run, don’t seem to know the Pope from Popeye the Sailor Man. That spirit is simply this:
Whenever a bishop is compelled to release some sort of statement in response to something that has happened regarding sexual abuse by a priest, the statement will either begin—or end—with a platitudinous prolog—or postscript—about how wonderful most of our priests are, and how much the bishop values, appreciates and cherishes them.
Does he really?
When the bishops of the United States adopted the “ESSENTIAL NORMS FOR DIOCESAN/EPARCHIAL POLICIES DEALING WITH ALLEGATIONS OF SEXUAL ABUSE OF MINORS BY PRIESTS OR DEACONS,” often commonly referred to as the “Dallas Norms” because the bishops were in Dallas when they wrote them, many of us laboring in the vineyard released a collective “Uh oh.” Even a cursory reading of the Norms betrays the fact that their primary purpose is to protect the bishop and the diocese from financial ruin; and, if the best way to do that is to throw a priest under the bus, it provides for a speedy and efficient way to do just that. You can read the Norms on the web site of the USCCB.
The last line of the Norms reads as follows:
When an accusation has been shown to be unfounded, every step possible will be taken to restore the good name of the person falsely accused.
It’s the kind of sentence that provides for more questions than information: What steps? Taken by whom? How far will the bishop go to restore the good name of a priest who has been previously removed from ministry before any investigation ever took place, as the Norms require? One remembers the statement made by the former Archbishop of New York after a priest in his diocese was cleared of all wrongdoing: “He’s damaged goods.” To this day, that priest has never been returned to ministry, the Archbishop defending his decistion by a litany of other "faults," none of which could possiblity be verified.
Bishops are forever bending over backwards—assuming they can figure out which end is the back—to tell their priests how appreciated they are. They tell them this by treating them to a yearly “appreciation dinner” or an annual “golf outing”; but when push comes to shove, I can think of very few bishops who have demonstrated the ability to stand up to unruly parishioners or an unsympathetic editorial because he and the local constabulary were both convinced that nothing wrong happened.
But the problem goes far deeper—and is far older—than anything related to the phenomenon of sexual abuse by priests: that crisis merely exagerated it for all to see. From time immemorial, bishops have always resorted to brushing a priest aside whenever not doing so caused them any bad press. A letter is received to the effect that “Father did this” or “Father said that”; and it’s the priest who gets inerrogated, not the author of the letter. Bishops are afaid of lay people. Lay people give them money. They must be kept happy at all times. Priests don’t have to be kept happy; they’re vowed to obedience, and can easily be kept in line with a yearly appreciation dinner or an annual golf outing.
Lest anyone be misled into thinking otherwise, your PP has never had such a letter written about him;—well, almost never—and every bishop I’ve ever worked for has been fair (for the most part); so, it’s not any situation I’m going through that has prompted these thoughts. So, why bring it up?
Not too long ago, I listened to a presentation by the vocation director of my diocese which included the punch line: “Remember, all of you are vocation directors!” I undertand what he was trying to say: every priest has the responsiblity to encourage young men to consider the priesthood as a vocation. The problem is that it’s very hard for a priest to do that when the priest, himself, is unhappy and frustrated by the shabby treatment he may have received from those appointed over him. The best advertisement—to use the secular term—for the Holy Priesthood is the example of a happy, holy, manly and healthy priest in the parish, to which young men can look up; but, whether a priest is all those things doesn’t depend so much on him as it does on those who wield authority over him. In this age of the sex abuse crisis, the question can often be desolved to one of whether the bishop views his priests—as the Church expects him to—as brothers and colaborators in the sacred ministry which he must trust and on which he must rely, or whether he views them as potential liabilities against which he must protect himself.
From the point of view of the priest, it is only through a strong spiritual life that he can present himself as the kind of priest whose example will attract others, even when he’s being stepped on from on high. But the human element is to real to be ignored. Here’s a dirty little secret: most men who leave the priesthood don’t do it because of a woman; they leave because they’re sick and tired of being used as a doormat. Does that relfect on the prayer life of such a priest? Of course it does. But let’s not presume, therefore, that the person who’s been wiping his shoes has had nothing to do with it.
Interesting point. I am KofC and have always wanted a real sword, not just the play swords issued. Our Orthodox brethren sometimes accost their bishops in the streets, with sticks or other implements. Fascinating practice - almost certainly resulting in more orthodox beliefs and practices.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.