John Paul II has called the U.S. archbishops to Rome to meet with him
and Vatican officials to discuss the future of the church in the United
States. This four-day meeting, beginning March 8, 1989, could chart the
direction of the American church for the rest of this century.
When the pope meets with the 34 American archbishops (plus Bishop William
Keeler, the secretary of the bishops' conference), he will not face a hostile
crowd. In some ways the archbishops, 21 of whom were appointed by John
Paul, are more representative of what he wants for the U.S. church than
spokesmen for it. If the American bishops had had their way, this group
would not have gone to Rome to speak for them. In November, the National
Conference of Catholic Bishops elected delegates for the March meeting,
but these democratically chosen representatives were rejected by the Vatican
which preferred the archbishops.
Although not chosen by their peers, the archbishops, who include all
the active cardinals, can present the views of their brother bishops and
American Catholics. The archbishops come from every region in the country.
Many of them have held key positions in the NCCB as officers or committee
chairmen, and some of them would have been chosen by the bishops to represent
them. The fact that they are trusted in the Vatican may encourage them
to speak candidly.
For example, many bishops were upset with the last minute intervention
by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith against their document,
"Doctrinal Responsibilities." Some have objected that Congregation for
Divine Worship has been slow in approving conference recommendations. Others
would like to use personnel without canonical degrees to process annulments
in their tribunals. And the conference as a whole recently rejected the
Vatican working paper on the theological and juridical status of episcopal
conferences. Questions have also been raised about the appointment of bishops.
The central topic of the 12 hours of discussion will be evangelization
in the United States. On March 8, the meeting with begin with an address
by the Pope and a response by Archbishop John L. May, NCCB president. Other
presentations will be given by Vatican officials with American prelates
responding. Each presenter and respondent will speak for only ten minutes
so that most of the meeting will be for discussion. The first day Cardinal
Joseph Ratzinger of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith will
speak on the bishop as teacher of the faith with a response by Cardinal
John O'Connor of New York.
The topics, presenters and respondents on March 9 are: priests as agents
of evangelization by Cardinal Antonio Innocenti of Congregation for Clergy
and Cardinal Bernard Law of Boston; pastoral responsibility of bishops
to religious by Cardinal Jerome Hamer of the Congregation for Religious
and Secular Institutes and Cardinal James Hickey of Washington; liturgy
and sacraments (especially reconciliation) by Eduardo Martinez Somalo of
the Congregation for Divine Worship and Sacraments and Archbishop Daniel
Kucera of Dubuque.
On March 10: the laity as agents of evangelization by Cardinal Eduardo
Pironio of the Council for the Laity and Archbishop Patrick W. Flores of
San Antonio; ministry to families and tribunals by Cardinal Edouard Gagnon
of the Council for the Family and
Archbishop John R. Quinn of San Francisco;
Christian education of youth by Cardinal William W. Baum of the Congregation
for Seminaries and Institutes of Study and Archbishop Eugene Marino of
Atlanta; seminaries and vocations by Cardinal Baum and Archbishop Daniel
E. Pilarczyk of Cincinnati.
On March 11: ecumenism and evangelization by Cardinal Johannes Willebrands
of the Council for Christian Unity and Bishop William H. Keeler of Harrisburg;
evangelization of the unchurched and use of the media by Archbishop John
Foley of Council for Social Communications and Cardinal Edmund Szoka of
Detroit; a closing summation by Cardinal Joseph Bernardin of Chicago and
closing remarks by Archbishop May and John Paul II.
This special meeting with the pope was proposed in November 1986 by
Bishop James W. Malone of Youngstown, Ohio, when as NCCB president he acknowledged
"a growing and dangerous disaffection of elements of the church in the
United States from the Holy See." Archbishop Raymond G. Hunthausen of Seattle
had recently been stripped of much of his authority, and newspapers headlined
stories about conflicts between the Vatican and the American church.
The American bishops, believing that misunderstandings could be overcome
through better communications, saw many advantages to such a meeting. The
bishops could make their case directly to the pope without having it lost
in the Vatican bureaucracy. In addition, the meeting would help the bishops
distinguish between when Vatican officials are speaking for the pope and
when they are simply pushing their own opinions. Finally, having all the
participants in the same room at the same time helps because what one says
everyone hears. The Brazilian bishops in 1986 had a similar meeting with
the pope on liberation theology.
There are of course risks to such meetings. The bishops could find that
Vatican officials accurately reflect the pope's views in their criticisms
of the American church. And disagreements may be based on differences of
opinion rather than simply misunderstandings that can be easily resolved.
Nor can all problems be settled by a statement from Rome, especially if
people find it unintelligible or irrelevant. In order to teach successfully,
one must first get people to listen.
And while evangelization is an important topic, an abstract discussion
will have little impact on the church. For example, in the United States
one of the most successful instruments of evangelization has been Renew,
the renewal program based in Newark. The Vatican has received numerous
complaints about Renew from right-wing Catholics. If the bishops go home
without extolling what Renew has accomplished in their archdioceses, they
will have ignored evangelization as it is occurring in the United States.
Finally, it will be essential that the participants communicate frankly.
Bishops are often afraid of saying things in Rome that the Vatican may
not want to hear. When at the 1980 synod Archbishop John R. Quinn mentioned
people's difficulty in accepting the ban on artificial birth control, he
was roundly attacked. It is doubtful any American bishop will bring up
the topic again after such a reception.
Since Bishop Malone proposed this meeting, the atmosphere between the
John Paul and the U.S. church has improved significantly. The pope told
one bishop that after his 1987 trip to the United States "he had a different
view of the American Catholic" than he had previously "because he was given
some rather negative publicity before he came that he didn't find true."
He recalled "the wonderful welcome given me and the impressive faith of
the people."
Last November, Archbishop John L. May, NCCB president, used the 1988
ad limina talks of John Paul to show that the pope is "bullish" on the
American church. In these talks, the pope said he was "convinced of the
openness of the church in the United States to challenge, of her good will
and, above all, of Christ's grace active within her." He complemented the
bishops for calling "your people to a sense of solidarity with those in
need." He said positive things about the NCCB pastoral letters on peace
and on economic justice. He also acknowledged that the draft of their pastoral
on women showed "sensitivity" and affirmed their "striving to eliminate
discrimination based on sex."
But while the pope did say many positive things in these addresses,
he also challenged the American bishops on a number of issues and these
points may surface again at the March meeting. For example, he asked the
bishops to promote "the centuries-old practice of individual confession"
and to limit general absolution to cases of grave necessity. And the prohibition
of intercommunion should be explained to Catholics and non-Catholics, especially
at weddings and funerals. He called for a revision of diocesan policies
on extraordinary eucharistic ministers who were too often being used to
replace priests.
He urged Catholic colleges and universities to preserve their Catholic
identity. "Certain positions on the so-called `right to dissent' have had
harmful repercussions on the moral conduct of a number of the faithful,"
he said. "There is a tendency on the part of some Catholics to be selective
in their adherence to the church's moral teaching." He asked for "greater
and more systematic efforts to offer instruction in the natural methods
of family planning."
All of these issues--general absolution, intercommunion, Catholic identity,
dissent, birth control, and selective adherence--are on the pope's agenda
for the church in the United States. In previous years he has also insisted
on first confession before first communion, strict annulment proceedings,
altar boys (and not altar girls), and a celibate male priesthood.
One of the reasons that the pope is pleased with the American church
is that the bishops have been following his lead on these issues. General
absolution is rapidly disappearing. First confession has again become the
norm in most dioceses. Dignity, which does not see homosexual activity
as sinful, has been banned from churches. Catholic University of America
is attempting to remove Rev. Charles Curran as a theologian. And the NCCB
Committee for Pro-Life Activities issued a statement commemorating the
20th anniversary of Humanae Vitae.
A frank and open exchange can help improve communications between Rome
and the United States. Disagreements can be friendly if the parties are
seen not as traitors or inquisitors but as fellow servants of the kingdom.
But if disagreement is suppressed or swept under the rug, problems will
be ignored and solutions will not be found.
For a report on the results of the meeting, see Discussions
in Rome.
By Thomas J. Reese, S.J.
America, March 4, 1989
Copyright © 1989 by America
Press
All rights reserved
See also