Back to the Bishops

When I started this blog, I wrote a lot about the Bishops. I am about to do so today, and I want to explain myself. “This is what democracy looks like,” that chant at many demonstrations, echoes in my mind. We are in a power struggle to ordain women. I never object when people say, “You just want power” because I do want power, not JUST power but ENOUGH power to make a difference in women’s lives – and the life of the church. The Bishops vote. They are important if any change is to be made. In our church, THIS is what democracy looks like.

I have fond memories of the June meeting of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) two years ago in Huntington Beach, California. Those of us working on “A Church for Our Daughters” wore our pink, sang our songs, prayed our prayers, and tried to storm a fortress. Hotel security is calm and soft-spoken and keeps a luxury facility impermeable. We made our statement outside, mostly, and the bishops knew we were there.

Regina Bannan leads the way with a megaphone at the USCCB meeting witness in 2016

Apparently there were no demonstrations this summer at Fort Lauderdale, though, based on the coverage we got, we might not know. Pope Francis has been encouraging the various national bishops’ conferences to make more decisions themselves to increase democracy in the current structure. I am watching these meetings to see leaders emerge who think more like Francis and are willing to do things differently. They don’t have it easy.

First, I need to say that many Bishops have spoken out, eloquently, about the immigration crisis. Church institutions are on the border and the front lines around the country caring for children. This meeting did not focus on this issue, judged by the lack of coverage. As I am finishing this, however, an NCR editorial arrives in my inbox.  Just what I want to say! The editors suggest how the bishops could have done so much more. After the meeting, Bishop Vasquez, head of the committee on migration did issue a statement criticizing the immigration legislation being proposed by Congress. But this is so much less than it could have been.

One debate this year at the USCCB meeting that might be seen as a proxy war was about the citizen guide for the 2020 election. It’s supposed to present the official Catholic teaching on various issues that may arise in the Presidential campaign, so a final version has to be approved by the USCCB in November 2019. Cardinal Cupich of Chicago suggested that a major revision is needed incorporating Pope Francis’s teachings; missing are strong statements on the environment, poverty, racism, guns, nuclear weapons, and immigration. In response, the committee felt that a complete rewrite would take too much time, though many bishops spoke to the need for a different and more accessible voter aid. In an unusual vote, 144 to 41, “the U.S. bishops opted to supplement rather than revise or replace the current document,” according to NCR. America characterized their action as approving the committee report.

This vote is unusual in a body accustomed to approving almost all its committee recommendations, and suggests that one quarter of the bishops were willing to express disagreement with the leadership. I characterize it as a proxy vote because of the emphasis in the 2016 document; the first three items in a summary for parishes are abortion, suicide, and marriage. The rest of the issues could be interpreted as similar to the Francis list, but with an emphasis that makes them deadly, not inspiring. One quarter wanted something different. This is what democracy looks like.

The bishops also revised the Dallas charter on protecting children from sex abuse to include expanded background checks and to reassert the primacy of the seal of the confessional, among some procedural changes. That vote was 185-5, to give you an idea of the way these things usually go. They did have a presentation on implementation, and appointed three women to the National Review Board of 16 members. Ironically, “the Catholic Whistleblowers, an abuse survivor advocacy group, in April wrote to the bishops urging them to revise the charter to include mandatory publication by dioceses of those with substantiated allegations of abuse; require parish audits in the overall audit process; and appoint an abuse survivor as co-chair of future revision processes.” It’s ironic because soon after the meeting the removal of Cardinal McCarrick from active ministry by the Vatican became news – ironic also because there had been settlements in Metuchen and Newark. While both of these involved adults, not a minor as in the New York case, why so late in disclosing them? This is what democracy looks like?

Different models are possible, and I will write about two of them soon. A synod on the Amazon will be held in Rome to bring together the bishops from several countries to figure out how to serve this widespread population, perhaps including new roles for women and married men. A synod on youth solicited input from youth and reported their concerns, even those that did not align with current church teaching. Bishops can make decisions in these synods, which may be the best we can hope for in the current structure. This is what democracy looks like.