The Provincial Emails
Saturday, October 21, 2006
  Until the fax come out
Bought the latest Milwaukee Magazine for the Catholics in Crisis cover story. Among those interviewed for the story were Bishop Richard Sklba and Father Javier Bustos. The article recounts how Bishop Sklba chaired a Catholic Biblical Association of America task force that produced a 1979 report suggesting there is "no historical reason not to ordain women." If that's not enough, here's more historical revisionism via the article's interview with Fr. Bustos, who came here in 1995.
But by the time the report was published, John Paul II had become pope and the church was moving in a different direction. Sklba, then still a priest, says he was pressured to tone down the report. He refused, and almost wasn't appointed a bishop, says Bustos. (Sklba confirms that he refused to tone down the report but would not discuss almost being denied an appointment.) In his office, as a bittersweet reminder, Sklba keeps a statue of the prophet St. Jeremiah shown in stocks and "punished for saying the truth." [p.55]

Thus nicely exemplifying that combination of self-pity and disingenuousness so commonly encountered among our local clergy.

Here's Archbishop Weakland's account, from The Education of an Archbishop (1992), by Paul Wilkes, pp. 58-59.
"Take the appointment of Bishop Sklba. The Wisconsin province had recommended Father Richard Sklba as an auxilary bishop for the Milwaukee archdiocese, and in 1979 the word came down that he was about to be named. ... Then, between the time of the announcement and the date of his consecration, I got a phone call: The Vatican was going to cancel the appointment.

"Not long before, Sklba had chaired a Catholic Biblical Association committee that was charged with examining whether Holy Scripture precluded the ordination of women. In his rather lengthy report was a line or two stating that Scripture in fact did not preclude women priests, and pointing out that the fact that the Apostles were all men couldn't in itself be used to defend an all-male clergy. ...

"I couldn't let that [cancelation] happen. ... Cardinal Casaroli, [Pope John Paul II's] secretary of state ... asked us to draft some sort of statement, acceptable to the Pope, that would in essence have Sklba back down from his position. We drafted something -- not a backing down but an attempt to put Sklba's statement in the context of church teaching -- and the word came back that the Pope said no. We drafted another statement and waited. Dick was to be consecrated on a Wednesday. ... Finally, late Saturday night, we got word that the Pope had approved, but with the stipulation that the statement appear in the Milwaukee papers on Tuesday, the day before Sklba's consecration. Well, the papers not only didn't play the statement as Sklba backing down but gave it the angle that he stood behind what he had originally written. We sent the articles on to Rome, but, fortunately, it being the pre-fax era, they didn't arrive in time for Rome to respond. So, while Sklba's career was certainly stalemated right off the bat, he was consecrated a bishop."

Think "truth arbitrage". It's not a new or uniquely Catholic phenomenon. Here's an example from The Long Shadows of Lambeth X (1969) by James B. Simpson and Edward M. Story, their account of the 1968 meeting of the bishops of the Anglican Communion.
The unauthorized addition of two words, and women, in the bound proceedings of Lambeth X made it appear that the bishops recommended the ordination of women to the diaconate--thus implying that they would be in line for advancement to the priesthood.

That was decidedly not the case and subsequent investigation brought to light one of the greatest ironies of all Lambeth Conferences--that the Archbishop of York, who as head of the Ministry Section had suggested that the misleading words be removed at the time the Resolution was on the floor, was, by his own admission, responsible for later reinserting them when the approved Resolution was put in the hands of the printers. [p. 171]

I note those who say they want to advocate the ordination of women want to decide what arguments the other side can use. Compare Bishop Sklba's CBA report to this from Lambeth X.
Of the five resolutions (Nos. 34-38), the first was of basic importance because in a single sentence it swept away a longtime barrier: the belief that since Christ chose only male apostles those who followed in apostolic succession should be male. The Archbishop of York and his party consistently sought to downgrade the argument as "silly" and "insulting". [p. 188]

Certainly easier than showing that it's wrong.
 
Comments:
Given the woman deacons, woman apostles, and woman heads of local churches that populate the New Testament, it's no surrise that the non-ordination of women can't be proved from the Scriptures. However, we don't have to prove our teachings from Scripture. We are Catholics, not members of a sols-scriptura sect, and we can trust the Church.
 
At St. Al's, we occasionally get even airier generalities on women's ordination "from the pulpit" on Sunday morning. Then on Sunday evening they'll have me teaching the opposite, except that as a mere catechist I have to cite specifics.

Any thoughts on how to convince tenth graders that it's important to spend Sunday evenings learning Church teachings that they may have seen or heard their auxiliary bishop, pastor, or a deacon contradict?
 
How to convince 10th graders that learning Church teaching is worth their time?

Not an easy task!

However, I have found it helpful to use the resources in the Catechism itself. Not just to quote the Catechism, but to use it as the groundwork for showing how Scripture, Tradition, and Reason work together to advance Truth.

The pap you hear from the pulpit at Saint Al's isn't intolerable if you take it in that context. Your pastor can spout some of the Scripture, some of the Tradition, and (too often solely) some of the Reason arguments CONTRA the official teaching of the Church.

It's important that we understand an struggle with these contra lines of thinking. Ever read Saint Thomas Aquinas? He was a master at laying out competing arguments. Not just as straw men to knock down, but as real things to chew on.

Trouble with many in the pews and pulpits today is that they take either side at face value without questioning. Either we follow the standard line of "social justice demands that..." or we follow that "the magisterium teaches ergo." Instead, our duty as Catholics is to let our consciences be well informed of the WHY behind Truth.

So,... back to the 10th graders. I have found that kids respond very well if given the opportunity to look at both sides of a question. I try to respect their ability to think critically.

(1) State the question. e.g. Can women be ordained priest?

(2) Explore the opposing arguments. e.g. What is priest in Scripture? Why might sex be important to the office? What has Tradition done? What does Reason tell us?

(3) Let them bat it around for a while.

(4) Lay out clearly what the Catechism teaches and why. By this time, the kids (or adults) should have a grasp of what's important. That way, they have a hook to hang the teaching on.
 
Post a Comment





<< Home

suitable 

clip art

My Photo
Name: Terrence Berres
Location: Franklin, Wisconsin, United States
Archives
March 1990 / April 1990 / May 1990 / November 1990 / January 1991 / May 1991 / February 1992 / March 1992 / April 1992 / June 1992 / July 1992 / November 1992 / December 1992 / February 1993 / March 1993 / June 1993 / September 1993 / October 1993 / November 1993 / January 1994 / February 1994 / May 1994 / July 1994 / September 1994 / November 1994 / December 1994 / January 1995 / February 1995 / March 1995 / April 1995 / May 1995 / June 1995 / July 1995 / September 1995 / October 1995 / November 1995 / December 1995 / January 1996 / February 1996 / March 1996 / April 1996 / May 1996 / June 1996 / July 1996 / August 1996 / September 1996 / October 1996 / November 1996 / December 1996 / January 1997 / February 1997 / March 1997 / April 1997 / May 1997 / June 1997 / July 1997 / September 1997 / October 1997 / November 1997 / December 1997 / January 1998 / February 1998 / March 1998 / April 1998 / May 1998 / September 1998 / October 1998 / November 1998 / December 1998 / January 1999 / February 1999 / March 1999 / April 1999 / July 1999 / August 1999 / September 1999 / October 1999 / November 1999 / December 1999 / January 2000 / February 2000 / March 2000 / April 2000 / May 2000 / June 2000 / July 2000 / February 2001 / March 2001 / April 2001 / May 2001 / June 2001 / July 2001 / October 2001 / December 2001 / January 2002 / February 2002 / March 2002 / April 2002 / May 2002 / June 2002 / July 2002 / August 2002 / September 2002 / October 2002 / November 2002 / December 2002 / January 2003 / February 2003 / March 2003 / April 2003 / May 2003 / June 2003 / July 2003 / August 2003 / September 2003 / October 2003 / November 2003 / December 2003 / January 2004 / February 2004 / March 2004 / April 2004 / May 2004 / June 2004 / July 2004 / August 2004 / September 2004 / October 2004 / November 2004 / December 2004 / January 2005 / February 2005 / March 2005 / April 2005 / May 2005 / June 2005 / July 2005 / August 2005 / September 2005 / October 2005 / November 2005 / December 2005 / January 2006 / February 2006 / March 2006 / April 2006 / May 2006 / June 2006 / July 2006 / August 2006 / September 2006 / October 2006 / November 2006 / December 2006 / January 2007 / February 2007 / March 2007 / April 2007 / May 2007 / June 2007 / July 2007 / August 2007 / September 2007 / October 2007 / November 2007 / December 2007 / January 2008 / February 2008 / March 2008 / April 2008 / May 2008 / June 2008 /


Powered by Blogger

Subscribe to
Posts [Atom]

Technorati search