BishopAccountability.org
	The Forum: Pope's Challenge, US Bishops' Quick Response By Phil Lawler Catholic World News April 21, 2008 http://www.cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=57957 New York - "Perhaps it is the task of the leader of the Roman Catholic Church to bring discomfort to a people so thoroughly shaped by modernity, as we Americans are," wrote E.J. Dionne in the Washington Post. "If so, Benedict is succeeding." Dionne-- one of the more perceptive liberal commentators working in the American secular media-- touched on an important point in his commentary on the papal visit. Although Benedict XVI was quick to praise the American traditions of religious freedom, tolerance, and reverence for natural law, the Pontiff also left his US listeners-- at least those who were listening carefully-- with a sense that there remains something incomplete, something even potentially dangerous, about the American experiment. The Holy Father focused on the problem in his address to the US bishops, when he remarked that America's open approach to diverse religious influences left the door open to an attitude that can "subtly reduce religious belief to a lowest common denominator." He encouraged the American bishops to resist that approach and to resist the "pick and choose" attitude that many Catholics bring to Church teachings. So now, 24 hours after the Pope's departure, how can we assess the likelihood that the American bishops will respond positively to his exhortation? 1. On the sex-abuse scandal. Pope Benedict surprised reporters by speaking frankly and repeatedly about the damage done by the sex-abuse crisis and the failures of Church leaders to respond appropriately. He might have chosen to issue a few general statements of regret; instead he chose to offer a candid acknowledgment that the crisis had been "sometimes very badly handled" and, far more important, to show his sympathy by meeting with a few victims. When the Pope left, the focus of media attention was on a hint that canon law could be changed to allow greater scope for disciplinary action against priests who had molested children. But in a briefing session with reporters Cardinal William Levada, the prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith-- and, not incidentally, an American-- resisted the notion that the Vatican might ask for resignations from the bishops most obviously culpable of condoning sexual abuse. Still worse, the chairman of the US bishops' committee on sexual abuse, Bishop Gregory Aymond of Austin, Texas, suggested that the Pope's apparent endorsement of "safe environment" programs-- in language that appeared to have been carefully scripted by the US bishops' conference-- would encourage the conference to "reach out again to the bishops who have been resisting participating in what we're going." In other words Bishop Aymond interpreted the Pope's stance as a mandate to put additional pressure on Bishop Fabian Bruskewitz rather than on Bishop John McCormack-- on the bishop who has resisted pressure to approve a sexually explicit program for young children in parochial schools rather than the bishop who has reached a plea-bargaining agreement to avoid prosecution. 1. On the scandal of pro-abortion Catholic politicians. In his remarks to the US bishops, assembled at the national shrine of the Immaculate Conception, Pope Benedict spoke to the "scandal" caused by Catholic politicians who support the legalized killing of unborn children. The very next day, several of the Catholic politicians most prominently associated with the legal defense of unrestricted abortion-- Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, Senators John Kerry and Ted Kennedy-- received Communion at a Mass in Washington's new baseball stadium, at which the Holy Father was principal celebrant. When the Pope traveled to New York, former Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who has been twice divorced and remarried, received Communion. "The cumulative effect of these events will likely be to weaken the case that the Vatican wants the American bishops to take a stricter stance against communion for pro-choice Catholics in public life," wrote John Allen in the National Catholic Reporter. His logic, unfortunately, is unassailable. Before he ascended Peter's throne, then-Cardinal Ratzinger issued a clear directive to the American hierarchy that pro-abortion politicians should not receive Communion. Last year he made a similarly strong statement in reference to Mexican politicians who were flouting Church teachings. Now he reminded the US hierarchy that the prominence of pro-abortion Catholic politicians (Pelosi, Kerry, Kennedy), is as "scandal." So how could American bishops respond? Perhaps they could take their cues from Cardinal Levada, the Holy Father's successor as prefect of the Vatican's top doctrinal office, who said that he hoped the issue could be the topic of a "more serene and effective discussion" after this year's elections. But wait; didn't we hear that argument four year ago: that the argument should be held in abeyance until after a crucial election? Then, after the votes are tallied, the argument seems to be moot. And so it is held over until another campaign season, when the issue comes to the fore, and American bishops again demur, saying that it is inappropriate to comment on such a partisan topic. A precious few American prelates-- Archbishop Burke in St. Louis, Bishop Bruskewitz in Lincoln, and a handful of other brave Catholic ordinaries-- have done their best to enforce the Church teaching and to prevent "scandal" in the reception of the Eucharist. Cardinal Levada, in his comments to reporters during the Pope's visit to America, dismissed their efforts as a bid to enforce "territorial morality." So Pope Benedict has issued a challenge, and the American bishops as a group-- including the Pope's top assistant on doctrinal issues-- have made it unmistakably clear that the challenge will not be answered.
Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.