It isn’t
often that I deal with Church politics in this Blog, but the recently released
8 points that came out of the Bishops' meetings last week in Rome regarding the sex scandal in our Church
left me baffled. I felt they did not get
to the heart of the problem and what we are going to do regarding priestly
formation. Then came this article about
Bishop Thomas Olmsted’s view of the crises.
After I read it I felt he must have read In Sinu Jesu (see Blog
Mar. 2017).
In face of
the sex abuse scandals in the Church, Bishop Thomas Olmsted of Phoenix issued a column this month asking the
question: “What went wrong in priestly formation?”
Bishop
Thomas Olmsted highlighted in his Feb. 17
column at The Catholic Sun three factors that contributed to the
clerical sexual abuse scandal: the sexual revolution, weak seminaries, and
clericalism.
He said the
sexual revolution, which in the 1960s challenged the ethics of sexual behaviors
in the West, had sought to promote a false idea of “free love.” With the surge
of an overly sexualized culture, he said, the movement created long-lasting
problems.
“This
revolution promised ‘free love,’ happiness and liberation from purported
encumbrances of religion and tradition, particularly the Commandments,” he
said.
“Sadly, the
over-focus on sexual pleasure, the reducing and labeling of persons to their
attractions (LGBTQ, etc.) and the viewing of persons as objects for pleasure
have led to unprecedented numbers of infidelity, divorce, loneliness and abuse
in the greater culture.”
He said the
crisis was worsened by inadequate responses from the Church, citing silence and
“harsh moralizing.” This only strangled the message of God’s love and distorted
a full understanding of the human person, he said.
However,
the bishop said there were also appropriate responses, including St. John Paul
II's Theology of the Body. He said this answer promoted a greater comprehension
of true love alongside responsibility.
“Related to
the general confusion about human love caused by the sexual revolution, we also
suffered from an insufficient understanding of priestly celibacy,” Bishop
Olmsted noted, adding that Pope Francis has affirmed the value of celibacy for
the priesthood.
“Indeed, in
a world that believes that sexual pleasures must have free reign, even at the
cost of innocent unborn children, there is need for those men and women who
proclaim by their lives that ultimate love and fulfillment come from God and
that self-mastery is certainly possible with God’s grace. Chaste celibacy,
received as a gift of God and formed through spiritual and human direction, is
a needed response to a false idea of 'free love.'”
Amid the
confusion caused by the sexual revolution “Church leaders failed to adequately
screen applicants” to seminary, he said. “It was often assumed that the human
and the spiritual qualities of the man were present and sufficient. This was a
poor assumption, and it led to too little consideration of a man’s human virtues
and of his relationship with Jesus Christ. As a result, some candidates unfit
for ministry were accepted.”
Dissent
from orthodoxy was present in many seminaries in the 1970s and '80s, he said,
especially regarding sexual ethics.
“For
example, the masculine spousal dimension in which a priest is called to love as
Christ loved His Bride the Church (Cf. Eph 5) was not taught much at all. As a
result, the priesthood was too frequently seen, not as a life of masculine
love, but merely pertaining to certain ministerial functions. It was
erroneously thought among some that the nature of the priesthood itself would
change.”
Bishop
Olmsted added that “some seminaries became places with not only men who lacked
a true calling from Jesus to the priesthood but even where a homosexual
subculture sprang up.”
“It is
difficult to deny this problem considering the high percentage of abuse cases
that occurred between men and post-pubescent boys.”
“On several
occasions, our Holy Father has stated that clericalism played a part in the
current scandals as priests and bishops sought to cover up abuses,” the bishop
noted. He added that “disproportionate esteem for priests by the faithful, at
times, was (and still can be) problematic.”
He said the
priest, like any man, is a sinner in need of redemption, but the state is one
of service.
“One should
enter the priesthood through a calling from Jesus to share in His mission. That
mission is to proclaim Christ Crucified and Risen from the dead,” he recalled.
“Especially
in this country, Church leaders have been slow to embrace this mission and
settled for simply maintaining her membership rather than boldly evangelizing
the culture.”
The bishop
noted that “instead of being Catholic out of conviction and a deep relationship
with Jesus, the faith has become for too many something merely cultural,” and
he recalled Archbishop José Gomez' statement that Christ “did not come to
suffer and die so that He could make ‘cultural Catholics'”.
“Cultural
Catholicism”, Bishop Olmsted said, “lacks true conviction to follow Jesus when
His teachings differ from ways of the culture.”
He said
that many of the concerns in priestly formation “are now being addressed well,”
and recalled that St. John Paul II was “convinced that the answer to these
scandals is great fidelity.”
“Like other
times of storms in the Church, Jesus continues to renew His Mystical Body
through holiness,” Bishop Olmsted concluded. “You and I are called to be
saints.”
No comments:
Post a Comment