By Thomas J. Reese, S.J., senior fellow at the Woodstock Theological Center America, June 15, 1991 Copyright © 1991 by America Press All rights reserved The U.S. bishops are meeting in St. Paul, Minn., June 13-15, 1991, to discuss the future of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops. Over the years the bishops' conference has come under attack from the left and the right in the United States. The right complains it is too liberal in its economic and political agenda. The left complains that it does not listen to the faithful but simply echoes Rome. And the conference's teaching authority has been challenged by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Are these the reasons the bishops are meeting to discuss the future of their conference? Not really. Economics, not theology is behind this reevaluation. Most bishops like what the conference is doing, but nobody wants to pay for it. In this they are very much like the U.S. Congress. They complain that the diocesan tax or assessment that helps finance the conference has steadily climbed from one cent per Catholic in 1967 to 15.7 cents at the present time, an increase of 1470 percent. Are these complaints legitimate? Not really. Looking at the raw numbers ignores the impact of inflation. When the assessments are controlled for inflation (adjusted to 1982-84 dollars), the numbers tell a different story. The bishops' practice has been to raise the assessment every three years. Each time they raise the assessment, its real value declines over the three-year period because of inflation. Real assessments actually peaked in 1971 (at 16 cents) and then steadily declined through 1975. From 1974 through 1991 the assessments varied by no more than 2.3 cents -- from a high of 12.66 cents in 1989 to a low of 10.36 cents in 1982. The increases every three years have simply attempted to regain lost ground. In short, the bishops were more generous toward the conference in the early 1970s than they are today. Nor is this the whole story. At the same time that real contributions to the conference were declining, real costs were increasing. No longer is the conference staffed primarily by low-salaried priests and religious. Nor can the church any longer get away with paying the laity low salaries as it did in the past. The bishops and the conference must practice what they preach and pay just wages. But isn't there some fat in the conference budget? Undoubtedly, but what one bishop considers fat, another will see as essential flesh and blood. In addition, only $8.1 million of the conference's $34.2 million budget comes from assessments. The rest comes from a variety of sources including grants and sales of services and publications. The bishops will not save any money by cutting programs that are self-supporting or have outside funding. For example, the Migration and Refugee Services has a $10.4 million budget, most of which comes from fees and government grants. Likewise, Catholic News Service ($3.7 million) is mostly self-supporting through sales of publications and services to diocesan newspapers. The USCC's $5-million publishing and promotion services also appear to break even through sales to the public and charges for services to other conference entities. It still would be educational for the bishops to find out which of their publications lost money and which, if any, made money. In the spirit of Centesimus Annus, the bishops might try to convert their vanity press into a profit-making enterprise. Excluding MRS, CNS, and the publishing and promotion services brings the $34-million budget down to $15 million. At this point the bishops face hard choices if they are going to cut the budget because cutting the budget will mean cutting staff and offices. The bishops have not been eager to cut in the past. As president, Archbishop John Quinn's attempt in 1979 to eliminate the office of Msgr. George Higgins caused a national protest, and his decision was reversed by the Administrative Committee. "I never again raised any question about the budget," says Archbishop Quinn. "I for the last time put my neck on the block for the budget." In 1987 Msgr. Daniel Hoye, then general secretary to the conference, and Rev. Robert Lynch, then associate general secretary, attempted to reorganize the education office and in the process transferred responsibility for youth ministry to the office for family life. Auxiliary Bishop Robert A. Carlson of St. Paul objected that the bishops' commitment to youth was being dropped. "Our young people are hurting," he complained. "We can not fall short or abdicate this responsibility. We cannot let these concerns take a minor place in the conference." The bishops voted to have a full-time person for youth. "I tried several times to cut, but every time I tried I lost," explains Monsignor Hoye. "I tried to cut the Human Values Committee, but someone complained that we have to dialogue with atheists. It has nothing to do with dialogue with atheists, but it was kept by the assembly." Likewise, a new office for non-Christian religions (Muslims, Buddhists, etc.) was proposed for the Committee on Ecumenism and Inter-Religious Affairs. This office was opposed by the general secretary, the Priorities and Plans Committee, and the Budget Committee. But the Administrative Committee approved it. "It is contradictory to be reluctant to increase the support of the conference and at the same time to ask the conference to do more things and to put back things that were taken out by competent committees or were not approved by competent committees," concludes Frank Doyle, associate general secretary for administration. "You can't have it both ways, but we try to." Archbishop Daniel Pilarczyk, NCCB president, agrees. This is part of the dynamic of the conference, that everybody says, "It costs too much, and I'm not going to pay any more." But, "Do you want to cut out something that I'm interested in? You'll never get away with it, and I've got a lot of friends. And I can get up on the floor and say this is a slap in the face to the Catholic youth of our country." You can say that about any office. Take one, and I'll give you a speech about it, because I've heard them. The leadership of the conference believes that if the bishops would set their priorities, the budget decisions would be easier. The purpose of the St. Paul meeting is to decide priorities and their budgetary consequences for the conference. "The planning process in my judgment will never work adequately until bishops make hard choices about where they want to put their diminishing resources," remarks Monsignor Lynch, the current general secretary. "As long as they have to play `Which of my favorite children will I murder this meeting?' they simply don't want to make those decisions." Ultimately the bishops must decide what they want and what they are willing to pay for. Since its beginning in 1967, the NCCB assessment has averaged 11.4 cents per Catholic (in 1982-84 cents). Simply to raise the assessments to this average rate would mean an assessment of 19.5 cents in 1992, 20.4 cents in 1993, and 21.4 cents in 1994 (presuming a 5 percent inflation rate). To the extent the bishops pinch pennies and refuse to raise assessments to these levels, they are cutting back on the commitment to the conference. The American bishops are reluctant to accept that an essential part of the episcopal vocation is fund raising. American theologians tell the bishops they should be pastors. Meanwhile European theologians, who pontificate from state-supported theological chairs, tell the bishops that they are supposed to be teachers. This is easy to say when the state pays the church's bills as it does in Germany, Italy, and other countries. No one can possibly be against having pastoral and teaching bishops, but in the United States the bishops also have to pay the bills, which means they have to raise money from the laity. St. Paul proved that a bishop could teach, be pastoral, and raise money. In American Catholic mythology, the old Irish pastor only preached about sex and money. In reaction to this myth, today's clergy does not want to preach on either. The bishops still talk about sex, but unlike their predecessors they are not serious fund raisers. The amount of money raised through the five traditional NCCB collections has declined steadily when adjusted for inflation. The Bishops' Overseas Appeal, the Latin America Collection, and the Mission Sunday Collection have been declining since the early 1970s. After peaking in the mid-1970s, the Campaign for Human Development has declined. The take from Catholic Communications Campaign has been erratic, but close to inflationary increases. All but the last collection are aimed at helping poor people and churches either here or abroad. Perhaps instead of spending three days trying to cut the budget, the bishops should spend the time learning how to raise money. NCCB/USCC Assessments in Cents Per Catholic Actual and Adjusted for Inflation Year Actual Adjusted (1982-84) 1967 1 3.5 1968 2 6.6 1969 4 12.3 1970 4 11.5 1971 6 16.0 1972 6 15 1973 6 13.4 1974 6 12.4 1975 6 11.3 1976 7 12.2 1977 7 11.2 1978 7 10.0 1979 8 10.4 1980 10 11.9 1981 10 10.8 1982 10 10.3 1983 12.3 11.9 1984 12.3 10.9 1985 12.3 10.4 1986 13.3 10.7 1987 13.3 10.2 1988 13.3 9.5 1989 15.7 10.5 1990 15.7 10.0 1991 15.7 9.7 Average 9.6 11.4 See also Woodstock Church Studies A Flock of Shepherds: The National Conference of Catholic Bishops Episcopal Conferences: Historical, Canonical, and Theological Studies Bibliography of Thomas J. Reese, S.J.