Church in
Crisis Group of bishops calls for U.S. plenary council
By PAT MORRISON
The last time a plenary council was held in the United States --
in Baltimore in 1884 -- the bishops, among other matters of business, mandated
publication of a national catechism (popularly known as the Baltimore
Catechism), established the Roman collar as obligatory clerical dress and
addressed growing pastoral needs in the young nation, calling for care of
Negroes and Indians. That latter item was an expansion on their previous
council that called for segregated churches for black Catholics.
In the wake of the clergy sex abuse crisis in the United States
and the bishops post-Dallas efforts, eight bishops believe the time is
ripe to dust off the idea of a plenary council -- spelled out in canon law --
and once more convene such a gathering, this most solemn common act of
teaching and governing by a nations bishops.
The letter and five-page background document was dated July 17 and
signed by Archbishops Daniel Cronin of Hartford, Conn.; James Keleher of Kansas
City, Kan.; Oscar Lipscomb of Mobile, Ala.; and John Vlazny of Portland, Ore.;
Bishops Raymond Burke of La Crosse, Wis.; Daniel DiNardo of Sioux City, Iowa;
Robert Morlino of Helena, Mont.; and Auxiliary Bishop Allen Vigneron of
Detroit. The documents were sent to all the bishops of the United States.
The letter was first announced in Crisis magazine; the text
was subsequently obtained by NCR.
In their cover letter, the council proponents note that the
bishops June meeting in Dallas and the charter and norms that resulted
were just a first step in dealing with the current clergy sex abuse crisis.
What needs to be addressed next, the letter said, are the root causes of
the crisis and meeting the challenge the pope gave the U.S. hierarchy
April 23 when he called on them to bring a purification of the entire
Catholic community
[with] a holier priesthood, a holier episcopate and a
holier church.
According to the letter, a plenary council should ponder
what has happened to the life and ministry of bishops and priests that
makes us vulnerable to the failings that have humiliated us.
The proponents say they envision the plenary council working
in three dimensions to advance that purification which will be the ultimate
measure of whether or not we have succeeded in meeting the current
crisis:
- Solemnly receiving the authentic teaching of the
Second Vatican council and postconciliar documents on priestly and episcopal
identity, life and ministry; sexual morality in general; and celibate chastity.
- Giving unequivocal endorsement and normative force
to the means church teaching outlines to foster the acts of virtue
required of pastors, especially celibacy. Among these it specifies daily
Mass and meditation, frequent confession, regular acts of asceticism,
obedient submission to church teaching and a simple lifestyle.
- Confirming the bishops in the authoritative
exercise of their ministry so that they can strengthen priests,
especially in regard to sexual morality, so that we can give support to
the lay faithful in responding to their call to holiness.
The proponents say that a plenary council could produce
significant results, providing a galvanizing focus that is authentically
evangelical, with maximal impact in shaping the ecclesial culture
throughout the United States because it is an authoritative body, and
giving a definitive stamp to identifying what is the authentic
heritage of the Second Vatican Council in regard to the role of pastors and
people.
They also answer a question they expect from their fellow bishops:
Why call a plenary council when there is already the existing vehicle of their
national conference? While the two-day twice-yearly conference meetings enable
the bishops to tackle issues of policy and general direction, the plus of a
plenary council, proponents suggest, is its added magisterial authority: The
assembled bishops would clearly be engaged in a common act of teaching
and governing.
The eight bishops acknowledge that a plenary council could produce
problems of its own. It could seem redundant and more cumbersome than their
current national conference. Since a council would have leaders and staff
different from the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, it could risk
compromising the conferences own credibility. Minimally it could be a
wasteful use of scarce resources. The lengthy preparation needed could delay
action that needs to be taken quickly.
They also pointed out that if a plenary council achieves no
effective results, the church is worse off. But primarily, they worried,
there is the danger that the bishops could have their freedom impeded by
public opinion, e.g., the holding of a sort of parallel council, with experts
and pundits by others than the bishops.
After listing another four plusses of a plenary council, though,
they conclude, It would offer the clearest and fullest modality for the
U.S. bishops to act collegially, at a time when common thought and action are
most needed.
The letter asks the bishops to recommend that the proposal for a
plenary council be put on the agenda as a discussion item at the November
meeting of the U.S. bishops conference. It also outlines the canonical
requirements for a council and proposes an agenda, to be approved by the
Vatican. If a plenary council is approved by the national conference, the
nations metropolitan archbishops are recommended as the primary
organizers, charged with working out the preparations.
According to canon law, all diocesan bishops, coadjutors and
auxiliaries within the nation or its territories and U.S. members working in
the Vatican are automatically members of the plenary council with deliberative
vote. Retired bishops may also attend, and have a vote. Other participants --
vicars general, a predetermined number of major superiors of religious orders,
Catholic university rectors, deans of theology and canon law, and some seminary
rectors -- have a consultative voice. Some lay Catholics can be invited to
attend, with consultative voice only, but the code specifies that their number
is not to exceed half the total of the other participants combined, and no
norms are given for determining how these additional participants are to be
selected.
Pat Morrison is NCR managing editor. Her e-mail address
is pmorrison@natcath.org
National Catholic Reporter, August 16,
2002
|