[PLUG-TALK] The corrupt united states conference of catholic bishops...

[Someone]

Any American seeking to understand the Catholic Church's position on
homosexuality is likely to be referred to a 1997 document titled Always
Our Children. The status of that document, and the circumstances under
which it was enacted, are symptomatic of the deep confusions now
affecting American Catholicism.

Always Our Children does not contain an unequivocal statement about the
immorality of homosexual acts. In theory it addresses the concern of a
small number of American Catholics-how to act if their children are
homosexual. The document cautions parents not to be "judgmental" lest
they alienate their offspring who may be on a path that diverges
radically from Catholic morality. The Church's teaching about
homosexuality is reduced essentially to a single principle: Homosexuals
are to be accepted for what they are and in no way are to be made to
feel excluded.

Catholics with an adequate knowledge of their faith know that this does
not represent genuine Catholic teaching, and they may turn to the
Catechism of the Catholic Church for a full statement. But priests and
others in authority in United States often treat Always Our Children as
the final word, reminding people that the document comes with the
official approval of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops
and is to be viewed as the American "application" of universal teaching.

The authority of the national bishops' conference is now being closely
scrutinized because of the scandal of clerical sexual abuse and the
failure of so many bishops to discipline the abusers. During the
bishops' June meeting in Dallas, Texas the leadership succeeded in
gaining majority approval for a policy of "zero tolerance" whereby any
priest guilty of a sexual offense against a minor will be removed from
the active priesthood. But the same leadership also bushwhacked
proposals to scrutinize the role of theological dissent and clerical
homosexuality in causing the abuse. A considerable number of bishops
disagreed with one or both of these policies, but the expressed wishes
of the national conference leadership are seldom thwarted.

Until after World War I the American bishops had no corporate identity
except occasional "provincial councils" held in Baltimore, the last of
which, in l884, authorized the famous Baltimore Catechism. In 19l9 the
bishops founded the National Catholic Welfare Conference, an
organization designed to give the Church some kind of national voice,
especially on matters of public policy.

The National Catholic Welfare Conference remained a fairly modest body.
According to some reports, leading prelates such as Cardinal Francis J.
Spellman of New York all but ignored it, and journalists and others
seeking to know what "the Church" thought about particular issues were
more likely to consult individual bishops like Cardinal Spellman than
the staff of the national body in Washington, D.C.

Following the Second Vatican Council, the bishops reorganized themselves
into the National Conference of Catholic Bishops, with a subsidiary
bureaucracy called the United States Catholic Conference. (In 200l the
two bodies merged into the United States Conference of Catholic
Bishops.)

The authority of this national organization derives from the Second
Vatican Council's teaching about "collegiality" in its decree on the
Church, Lumen Gentium (Light of the Nations). The conciliar decree
contains a strong reaffirmation of papal authority but also a strong
statement on the authority of the bishops (in communion with the Holy
See). It was on the latter basis that the relatively unimportant
National Catholic Welfare Conference was transformed into the powerful
body that exists today.

The national organization set up in the late l960s was principally the
work of its first general secretary, Bishop (later Cardinal) Joseph L.
Bernardin. Designed to provide the Church with a stronger voice in
national affairs, it also had the affect of molding the bishops into a
collective bloc. Whereas at one time there was a range of episcopal
opinion on matters not of faith, with each bishop setting policy in his
own diocese in harmony with canon law and the decrees of the Vatican,
since l966 the national conference has in effect articulated positions
that all bishops are expected to follow and to which few fail to adhere.

The bishops meet formally twice a year and pass resolutions on a number
of matters, even as their national bureaucracy is constantly involved in
issues both internal and external to the Church. At their twice-yearly
meetings the bishops are asked to vote on a large number of questions.
Some bishops complain privately that they scarcely have time to read all
the documents, much less study them carefully. Typically a few bishops
raise questions about, or make objections to, certain documents, and
sometimes amendments are adopted. Most of the time the fact that the
national bureaucracy has recommended a particular statement is
sufficient to persuade most bishops that they should approve it.

The episcopal officers of the United States Conference of Catholic
Bishops are elected for three-year terms, and there is a number of
standing committees whose members are also elected. These include an
executive committee that is the guiding engine of the conference. These
groups issue statements of their own, which may or may not be submitted
to the entire episcopacy for approval.

Thus, for example, Bishop Donald Trautman of Erie, Pennsylvania,
sometime chairman of the committee on the liturgy, has long been in open
opposition to efforts by the Holy See to regulate liturgical practice,
claiming that such efforts constitute interference with the authority of
the American bishops. Although the majority of bishops probably accept
the authority of the Holy See on liturgy, no prelate has ever publicly
contradicted Bishop Trautman nor questioned the propriety of his
statements.

Until recently two "official" documents were commonly invoked as
authoritative in matters of liturgy: Environment and Art in Catholic
Worship and Music in Catholic Worship. Both diverge from the decrees of
the Holy See-for instance, Environment and Art in Catholic Worship
virtually requires that tabernacles not be placed on the main altar. Yet
neither document was issued by even a committee of bishops, much less by
the bishops as a whole, but merely by the staff of the bishops'
liturgical office.

Always Our Children was issued by yet another kind of official body-an
ad hoc committee chaired by Bishop Thomas O'Brien of Phoenix, Arizona,
set up for just that purpose. Always Our Children would probably not
have been approved by a majority of the bishops, at least not without
significant amendments. Bishop O'Brien's committee issued it in a kind
of preemptive strike. Now the document occupies the territory in
American Catholicism marked "homosexuality," and few bishops express
public disagreement with it. Even if a bishop disapproves of the
document, priests and bureaucrats in his diocese may nonetheless treat
it as official Church teaching.

If pressed, proponents of Always Our Children usually say, "Of course we
accept the teachings of the Church," but steer the subject to the
obligation to accept homosexuals unconditionally. Thus the document has
in effect brought about a revolution in the Catholic approach to
homosexuality.

In the same way, a statement titled One in Christ Jesus in effect laid
the groundwork for the ordination of women. Over a period of several
years the bishops' conference debated this proposed statement, which
incorporated an essentially feminist viewpoint. Eventually, after
amendments were adopted to bring it closer to Catholic teaching,
feminists lost interest in it, and the project was abandoned. Yet the
proposed statement is still often treated as authoritative and used to
claim plausibly that the "American bishops" consider women as a group to
be excluded from their rightful place in Church and society.

As with Always Our Children, One in Christ Jesus does not explicitly
repudiate official teaching. But they prepare the ground for its
repudiation by others, enjoining on Catholics an attitude of fundamental
sympathy for homosexuals and radical feminists that seems to makes it
sinful to deny them whatever they demand from the Church. By such means
Church teachings are effectively undermined.

It is seldom noted that the very existence of elected officers of the
national bishops' conference is an alternative to-if not a contradiction
of-the structure of ecclesiastical authority established by canon law.
For many centuries dioceses have been grouped into provinces, each
presided over by an archbishop (called a "metropolitan") with limited
responsibility over the "suffragan" sees under him. Thus, for example,
Bishop Wilton D. Gregory of Belleville, Illinois is a suffragan bishop
of Cardinal Francis George of Chicago. Yet, as the current president of
the bishops' conference, Bishop Gregory has primacy in some sense over
Cardinal George.

In choosing archbishops, the Holy See presumably promotes those prelates
whom it deems best qualified to lead their respective provinces, a
judgment that becomes even more significant when some of those
archbishops are elevated to cardinals. Yet for thirty years no cardinal
has been elected to head the American bishops. Often the elected
officers are from smaller dioceses. The elections reveal that the
bishops diverge significantly from the Holy See in their judgment of
each other. With one exception-Cardinal John J. Krol of Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania-the bishops have never elected a president who strongly
supports the authority of the Vatican.

In May 1998 Pope John Paul II issued Apostolos Suos (His Own Apostles),
a definitive statement reminding bishops that national episcopal
conferences are mere practical arrangements with no doctrinal standing.
The pope is the successor of Peter, and individual bishops are
successors of the apostles; but the national conference, according to
Apostolos Suos, is a merely prudential arrangement that cannot override
the authority of the Holy See nor of individual bishops in their own
dioceses.

The next year retired Archbishop John R. Quinn of San Francisco,
California, a former president of the national conference, published a
book titled The Reform of the Papacy. In it he effectively denied
Apostolos Suos and urged that the authority of the Holy See be severely
modified by the authority of the national conferences.

Documents issued by the national conference become authoritative because
most bishops feel constrained not to speak against a statement made in
their name. The imperative of episcopal courtesy is strong, and there is
evidence that even the Holy See cautions bishops against taking public
positions that appear to be at odds with that of the national
conference. The appearance of unity, even when it requires the
compromise of official teaching, is highly valued.

The rhetoric of "trust" is often invoked by the bishops' bureaucrats,
with the implication that expressing doubts about recommended policies
manifests a lamentable lack of trust within the body of Christ. It is a
tactic that silences most bishops who may have doubts about proposed
policies because, even though they may acknowledge privately that they
do not trust the bureaucracy, it would be a severe violation of protocol
to admit this openly.

It is the orthodox bishops who feel especially bound by the rules and
who refrain from taking public stands at odds with those of the national
conference. Thus, for example, Bishop Trautman has consistently found
himself outvoted by his fellow bishops on liturgical matters, yet he
continues to champion the agenda of the liturgical bureaucracy.

Indeed, bishops inclined to disagree openly with official Church
teaching seem to feel free to do so. The late Bishop Raymond A. Lucker
of New Ulm, Minnesota was a strong advocate of the ordination of women.
Auxiliary Bishop Thomas Gumbleton of Detroit, Michigan frequently
castigates the Church for its teachings about homosexuality. Episcopal
courtesy seems to demand that no bishop publicly chastise fellow
prelates or call attention to their errors.

Understandably, bishops do not wish to advertise their differences to
the world, and most bishops choose to suppress whatever doubts they may
have about the conference. Thus most bishops become passive instruments
of the agenda of their own bureaucracy, an agenda that moves
relentlessly in the direction of an "American Church" semi-independent
of the Holy See.




________________________________________________________________________

James Hitchcock is a professor of history at St. Louis University and a
well-known author and lecturer on contemporary Church matters. His most
recent book, as yet unpublished, is on religion and the Supreme Court.