background image

Browsing News Entries

Browsing News Entries

Bishops’ meeting in Baltimore left much work to be done

By Bishop W. Shawn McKnight

The November General Assembly of Bishops in Baltimore was a difficult but perhaps unavoidable experience for us to move forward as a Church. I was very disappointed to learn that the Holy See found it necessary to insist that the USCCB not take action at this time on the proposals presented by our conference leadership. My frustration, shared with many other people, is this: We have known about the scandal of Archbishop McCarrick since the end of June, and our Church must take immediate, decisive and substantive action in light of the deep wound the scandal has caused.

I am not so concerned about the time it is taking to punish the perpetrator. Pope Francis immediately required the Archbishop to resign from the College of Cardinals when Cardinal Dolan announced the New York review board found a credible and substantiated allegation of sexual abuse of a minor against him. I’m okay with the fact that further penalties (which could include McCarrick’s return to the lay state) will take more time for a complete canonical process. McCarrick isn’t going anywhere and he is already living a life of imposed prayer and penance.

But much more is needed than simply meting out a just punishment. How could his rise to such an influential position in the Church have happened? I am concerned how the national conference of bishops and the Holy See answer that question. An internal investigation of the McCarrick scandal without the use of competent and qualified lay investigators will hardly be considered transparent and credible. We need and must utilize the best and brightest people to do a top-notch investigation and study of the problem. Archbishop Charles Scicluna of Malta is the most qualified Catholic clergy to lead such an investigation, but without knowing that his collaborators include competent laity, the public may not perceive his eventual report as independent and complete enough to be believed.

At the time of this writing, there has not been one bishop, archbishop or cardinal in either the Holy See or the United States who has come forward on his own to repent publicly of his sins of omission or commission with regard to Archbishop McCarrick’s series of promotions over decades. Please, be men, not cowards, and come clean on your own! There doesn’t have to be a formal and long, drawn out investigation for a bishop to exercise a little compunction and concern for the well-being of the whole Church. An independent and transparent investigation is all the more necessary when culpable hierarchs exhibit an incapacity to do the right thing on their own.

The laity are the only ones who can keep the hierarchy accountable and get us out of the mess we bishops got ourselves into. My singular focus throughout the Baltimore meeting was to advocate and push for greater public involvement of the laity at all levels of the Church. Why can’t we have well qualified, nationally known and trusted lay experts named to the special task force announced by the president of the USCCB? We are too insular and closed in as a hierarchy, and so are some of our processes at the USCCB. The Second Vatican Council gave us not only the freedom but the obligation to utilize and engage the gifts and talents of the laity in the life and mission of the Church.

Beyond the McCarrick scandal, we have more work cut out for us with regard to putting into place protocols and institutional structures to build credibility in the hierarchy’s handling of sexual abuse cases going forward. History proves that we bishops are not capable of policing ourselves adequately on the issue of clergy sexual abuse. Why not include the laity to assist us with this problem? The document the Missouri Province of Bishops presented to the Committee for the Protection of Children and Young People on Oct. 6 was intended to offer a set of principles for the USCCB to consider as it was developing proposals for the full body of bishops, including the involvement of the laity. We Missouri bishops wanted something valuable to come from our November meeting.

And so, I was disappointed that even the mild proposals up for consideration at the Baltimore meeting had to be pulled from a vote. It was a rather harsh reminder to me of what many lay people have been saying throughout our Diocese: We bishops are ineffectual in our attempts to address the problem of abuse of power by the hierarchy. The Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People has had a marked impact on lowering the number of incidents of abuse by clergy since 2003. But with the aggravation of the McCarrick scandal, the laity and clergy are now rightfully asking that we get it all out, once and for all, and respond with an urgency that this crisis deserves. We literally have people dying because of the harm caused by predator clergy, and survivors of abuse are further victimized when we fail to take swift action. Seeing certain retired bishops who were notoriously responsible for covering up clergy sexual abuse at this year’s General Assembly in Baltimore as welcome guests was a slap in the face to all who have been wounded by the clergy. This example of episcopal arrogance and clericalism evidences the fact that we still don’t get the problem.

The whole Church is needed to solve our problem which the whole world knows about. What more do we have to hide? If we are going to move forward, we need to have authentic communion and a genuine synodal process. And this requires transparency and better communication between the clergy and the laity, between the USCCB and its own members, and between the USCCB and the Holy See. We need to become the Church Christ founded us to be.

Some of the most poignant comments I heard during the listening sessions in our Diocese were in response to the question asking for people’s dreams for their children and grandchildren. People spoke of a Church where their children and grandchildren would find the love, mercy and hope of Jesus Christ, a community filled by God’s graces and led by holy priests. Despite our current lethargy, I believe we are witnessing the rebirth and renewal of our Church in our day. And I feel very blessed to be part of that renewal with each of you. We are better together.

 

 

Bishop McKnight's column was first published at Making Connections, his column on the website of the Diocese of Jefferson City.

The suffering Church and the third day

By Bishop Arthur Serratelli

On the Mediterranean coast, half way between modern Tel Aviv to the north and Haifa to the south, stand the ruins of Caesarea Maritima, the magnificent city that Herod the Great built between 22 and 10 B.C. Herod’s palace, built on a promontory jutting out into the sea, was an engineering marvel. The city’s 40-acre harbor could accommodate 300 ships. The city boasted a hippodrome as well as a theater with a seating capacity of 3,500.

Caesarea Maritima was one of the most important cities in the world. It was the Roman capital from which Pontius Pilate ruled the province of Judea at the time of Jesus. Paul was imprisoned here. Deacon Philip lived here. And, for the first 300 years of Christianity, Caesarea became a center of faith and study that rivaled Alexandria and Antioch. Among its most famous Christians is Origen.

Origen (184 – 253 A.D.) was a teacher, scholar, preacher, apologist, and theologian. He has rightly been called “the greatest genius of the early Church.” Like St. Paul himself whose writings influenced all subsequent theology, Origen has had an unmistakable effect on the Church’s great thinkers for centuries. Among others, St. Jerome, St. Ambrose, St. Bernard of Clairvaux and Meister Eckhart all studied his writing. Origen’s allegorical interpretation of Scripture became the preferred method of explaining the Scriptures during the Middle Ages.

As a first-class philosopher and student of Sacred Scripture, he has earned himself the distinction of being the Church’s first biblical scholar. But, he did not limit his study to Sacred Scripture. He wrote on many different topics, including textual criticism, hermeneutics, theology, asceticism and homiletics. Origen’s principal work, De Principiis, was the first systematic exposition of Christian theology ever written. With the help of seven full-time secretaries, he produced more than two thousand works. So extensive were his writings that St. Jerome remarked, “Has anyone read everything that Origen wrote?”

The catechetical school that Origen established at Caesarea Maritima boasted the largest theological library of the day. It attracted such renowned scholars as St. Gregory Nazianzus, St. Basil the Great and St. Jerome. One of Origen’s students, Eusebius of Caesarea, earned the distinction of being “The Father of Church History.” Eusebius himself provides us into a glimpse of Origen’s personal life.

According to Eusebius, Origen not only worked assiduously defending the faith, but also he lived the faith in great simplicity. He owned only one coat. He wore no shoes. He ate sparingly. He slept on the floor. He spent the night studying and praying the Scriptures. In the words of Eusebius, “he taught as he lived and he lived as he taught.”

In the days of Origen, the Church herself had to face persecution, hostility and attacks from pagan philosophers. Even within the Church, there were the interminable battles on such important doctrines as the Trinity, the Divinity of Jesus and Redemption. While, in some instances, Origen may have not understood or explained the faith correctly, he nevertheless said, “I want to be a man of the Church … to be called … of Christ.”

What a great inspiration Origen is for anyone who may find it difficult when the Church faces challenges, questions, hostility, persecution and human failure. In his commentary on the Gospel of John, he writes: 

“The Church is being built out of living stones; it is in process of becoming a spiritual dwelling for a holy priesthood, raised on the foundations of apostles and prophets, with Christ as its chief cornerstone. Hence, it bears the name ‘temple.’…It is written: You are the body of Christ, and individually members of it. Thus even if the harmonious alignment of the stones should seem to be destroyed and fragmented and, as described in the twenty-first psalm, all the bones which go to make up Christ’s body should seem to be scattered by insidious attacks in persecutions or times of trouble, or by those who in days of persecution undermine the unity of the temple, nevertheless the temple will be rebuilt and the body will rise again on the third day, after the day of evil which threatens it…” From a commentary on John by Origen, priest (Tomus 10, 20: PG 14, 370-371).

With these words, Origen offers hope to those who become discouraged when they see the Church suffering, besieged and wounded by sin. Origen presents the Church as a building being constructed, a work in progress. And, he enlarges our understanding of the Church so that we see ourselves as her members, imperfect in ourselves, yet being perfected by the grace of God. As we look forward to “the third day,” the day of the final resurrection, we pray for the Church and try to advance her holiness by striving after holiness in our own imperfect lives.
 

Ghosts and life after death

By Bishop Arthur Serratelli

One of the most famous figures of all English literature is the ghost of Hamlet’s father. Three times he appears in Shakespeare’s play The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark. He demands that his son settle accounts with his uncle who murdered the dead king. In Shakespeare’s Macbeth, Julius Caesar and Richard III, ghosts also appear. From the 3rd century B.C. Epic of Gilgamesh through Homer, Virgil, Ovid, Shakespeare and Dickens, ghosts populated the pages of literature. They have appeared in films and even starred in their own TV show, Ghost Hunters.

Are ghosts merely fictional? Do they really exist?  First Lady Grace Coolidge said that she saw Abraham Lincoln’s ghost looking out the window of the Oval Office. Many others have, likewise, reported sightings of the ghost of our 16th President at the White House. Among those claiming to have seen a spectral Lincoln are Theodore Roosevelt, Winston Churchill, Queen Wilhelmina of the Netherlands and President Reagan’s daughter Maureen.

Within the Old Testament, there is the famous incident of the ghost of the prophet Samuel. In 1 Samuel 28, King Saul is facing a fierce battle with the Philistines. He wants to know the outcome; and, so he consults the witch of Endor. The spirit of the dead prophet Samuel appears and predicts Saul’s imminent defeat and death. Some commentators say that Samuel came because God allowed him to come and speak on God’s behalf (cf. Sir 46:20). Other commentators consider this incident a demonic apparition. In either case, they accept the apparition.

The New Testament gives evidence that the disciples of Jesus believed in the reality of ghosts. After the miracle of the loaves and fish, “when the disciples saw Jesus walking on the sea, they were terrified. ‘It is a ghost,’ they said, and they cried out in fear” (Mt 14:26). When the Risen Lord appeared to the disciples in the Upper Room in Jerusalem on Easter Sunday, “they were startled and terrified and thought that they were seeing a ghost. Then [Jesus] said to them, ‘Why are you troubled? And why do questions arise in your hearts? Look at my hands and my feet, that it is I myself. Touch me and see, because a ghost does not have flesh and bones as you can see I have’ ” (Lk 24:37-39). 

The word “ghost” simply means “spirit.” It refers to the spirit of a deceased person who has made himself or herself present to the living. According to polls taken in the last ten years, almost forty-two percent of Americans believe in ghosts. According to a recent poll, almost thirty percent of Americans say they have been in touch with someone who has died.

Stories about contact with the dead continue to fascinate us. They provoke the imagination. They manifest our awareness that there is more to reality than the physical world which we empirically experience. These reports of the spirits of those who have died clearly suggest personal survival after death. 

In her wisdom, the Church rightly condemns consulting mediums to be in touch with the dead. In fact, “all forms of divination are to be rejected: recourse to Satan or demons, conjuring up the dead or other practices falsely supposed to ‘unveil’ the future. Consulting horoscopes, astrology, palm reading, interpretation of omens and lots, the phenomena of clairvoyance, and recourse to mediums all conceal a desire for power over time, history, and, in the last analysis, other human beings, as well as a wish to conciliate hidden powers. They contradict the honor, respect, and loving fear that we owe to God alone” (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2116).

As Catholics, we hold that, at death, we face an immediate judgment of our lives. If we are in the state of perfect charity, we go to heaven. If we die in the state of mortal sin (God forbid!), we suffer eternal estrangement from God in hell. And, those of us who die in the state of grace, but not in perfect charity, undergo a purification of love in purgatory before we come into the presence of God. In a word, death is not the end of our personal existence. Nor does the Grim Reaper sever our relationships with each other. All tales of ominous specters appearing from beyond the grave pale before the brilliant truth of the Risen Christ who leaves the tomb empty and joins the living and the dead in one holy Communion of Saints where we assist each other with our prayers!
 

A mother's reflections on the youth synod

By Dr. Grazie Pozo Christie

As a Catholic mother of five young people, I have been watching the Youth Synod with great interest and praying for its success. My husband and I have experienced just how difficult it is to transmit a joyful and living faith to our offspring in the midst of a hostile culture.  A Catholic Church that is capable of listening to and understanding today’s youth is critical.  But that is not enough.  Even more critical is a Church that is able to credibly and attractively propose to them a way of life that allows them to both spiritually and humanly flourish.
 
Two of the “interventions,” or written statements from a synod father about what he’d like considered in the synod, have struck me as particularly wise and en pointe when it comes to the ways the Church must become an evangelical force among the young: Archbishop Charles Chaput’s, which focuses on credibility and Bishop Robert Barron’s, which focuses on attractiveness.   
 
Archbishop Chaput connects credibility to confidence: “If we lack the confidence to preach Jesus Christ without hesitation or excuses to every generation, especially the young, then the Church is just another purveyor of ethical pieties the world doesn’t need.” Reading over the Instrumentum Laboris (the working document) myself, I also felt that this is exactly where the Synod could shipwreck. Sociologically sensitive attitudes of “meeting youth where they are” seem to propose accommodation when what is needed is what has always been needed: a radiant faith in the radical hope of the Gospel. While the current cultural moment is in many ways unique in the annals of history (never has the world known the internet, or modern globalization), men of every age have resisted the call to holiness and perfection. They have always, and will always, find it scandalous and ridiculous by worldly standards, which are shaped around power, wealth, and pleasure. 
 
The beliefs of the Catholic Church are powerful antidotes to the emptiness, loneliness and dysfunction that characterizes too many young and adult lives. Our faith proposes that the human spirit is capable of great and sublime things—like perfect, self-abnegating love, and that our noblest aspirations are achievable. Archbishop Chaput points out that elders of the faith community have lost trust in the power of the beliefs they are tasked with passing on. He said that too often Church leaders have “abdicated that responsibility out of a combination of ignorance, cowardice and laziness in forming young people…”  This has been my experience in parish schools and during homilies and catechesis over the years. Truths which are crucial for human flourishing are passed on to the young deformed and in a shame-faced way. It is no wonder that as adults they abandon the Church in droves. 
 
Human sexuality is of course an especially touchy subject and there are some in the Synod who would have us capitulate to secular attitudes. Chaput reminds us that what the Church teaches on this subject “is not a stumbling block. It is the only real path to joy and wholeness.”  As a mother who has shepherded my three oldest children into adulthood, I know firsthand that the Synod fathers must get this right.  Catholic teaching on sex is a mercy and a roadmap to a noble life where everyone is treated according to their dignity as children of God.  What modern culture offers, in the name of freedom, is nothing but pain and confusion. 
 
Bishop Barron focused his intervention on how beauty must be the matrix of the evangelization of youth. Young people are especially attracted to the beautiful. They are not jaded and cynical like older people often are, but have fresh hearts that can be surprised and enchanted by the beauty of a song, a sculpture or a poem. The Catholic Church has always known the power of beauty, and over its 2000-year history has probably been mankind’s greatest producer and purveyor. Its architecture has enabled the souls of the faithful to fly upwards and its paintings have filled hearts with a deep certainty of the transcendent. Bishop Barron reminds us that “the most compelling beauty is that of the saints.” I have certainly found this to be true and over the years, each of my children have been thrilled and deeply attracted by the loveliness of one particular saint or another. 
 
I pray that the Synod fathers will carefully address these two wise interventions on credibility and the sure attraction of beauty. The earthly happiness of young people (and their eternal joy) depends upon them learning the eternal truths that belong to the Church and only she can communicate.

 

Book Review: When Women Pray

By Andrea Picciotti-Bayer

Catholic women in the United States – indeed, all Catholics – now face a test of our faith. The scandals across the church and Rome’s continued silence on what was known and when about former-Cardinal Theodore McCarrick’s predations have left us suffocated and sickened. Over 46,000 Catholic women wrote to the Holy Father seeking answers regarding one of our country’s most visible prelates, and our respectful appeal has so far been ignored. What, then are Catholic women to do?

 

Pray.

 

And pray more.

 

That’s the implicit message of Kathleen Beckman’s When Women Pray: Eleven Catholic Women on the Power of Prayer. This collection of essays from a diverse group of American Catholic women is a gentle if powerful reminder that prayer is a potent weapon in today’s spiritual battle to save the Church in particular and society in general.

 

Beckham is co-founder of the Foundation of Prayer for Priests and has worked with clergy in the healing of souls through exorcism. She invited ten other U.S. Catholic women to reveal "the combined wisdom of women of prayer." Contributors include Vicky Thorn, founder of Project Rachel, a diocesan-based, post-abortion ministry, Pia de Solenni, current Chancellor for the Diocese of Orange, California, and Kathryn Jean Lopez, editor-at-large of National Review.

 

Each of the eleven shares her personal experience as a modern-day “prayer warrior.” They are short autobiographies on the interior life. Each chapter begins with a brief reflection from a woman saint on the "feminine wisdom." Each then ends with a short "Ponder, Practice, Pray" spiritual exercise titled to inspire continued reflection and discussion. Beckham hopes the reader will join those highlighted saints and the women contributors as another “contemplative in action.”

 

Her introductory chapter addresses how the "Marian heart prays." Such a heart, she says, "must become well-acquainted with [Mary's] divine Spouse, the Holy Spirit." Docility to the Holy Spirit, who unfortunately is all too often the “Great Unknown”, requires opening up oneself entirely. Yet, Beckman writes, “[w]ith the breath of the Spirit, prayer becomes like breathing."

Beckman also observes that openness to the Holy Spirit is not only life-sustaining, but is also healing, particularly for broken hearts. "When our hearts are pierced, we are opened up; we face our poverty, step out of our hiddenness, and come before God with a hole in our heart. The Divine Physician attends to the wounded heart with tenderness," she says. Like Mary's heart, "[t]he pierced heart can be a portal of grace if we remain open to divine transformation."

 

In prayer, Beckman writes, grace can form women "into other Marys."

 

In her chapter Kathryn Lopez recounts Pope Paul VI’s message to women at the close of the Second Vatican Council. The soon-to-be-canonized prelate observed:

 

The hour is coming, in fact has come, when the vocation of woman is being achieved in its fullness, the hour in which woman acquires in the world an influence, an effect and a power never hitherto achieved. That is why, at this moment when the human race is under-going so deep a transformation; women impregnated with the spirit of the Gospel can do so much to aid mankind in not falling.

 

When Women Pray is an anthology of prayer in the lives of "women impregnated with the spirit of the Gospel." Their examples, as its contributing authors hope, will inspire other Catholic women “to strengthen an army of praying women united for the many spiritual and temporal needs of the human family.”

 

Catholic women in the U.S. are called more than ever to fortify our interior life with prayer as we undertake our important role in restoring trust – our own and others’ -- in our Church. Kathleen Beckman’s collection is not only a compelling invitation to spiritual growth but also a work that fans the fire to be more greatly united with God in the task ahead.