I have
noticed that whenever I dip into the past, readership goes down and when I deal
with current issues, it springs back up.
So, while I am really enthused about this Church of England thing, I
need to swing to the bleachers; consequently back to Pope Francis and his
message to the Roma Curia. But remember
this is not just for us to gloat over the sins of the boys in purple (a sin
itself under the wonderfully named category of morose delectation—the savoring
of another’s faults or misfortunes), it should serve each of us as well as a
measure for our own conscience. You
don’t need have a miter to chip away at the credibility of our Catholic
faith. So Pope Francis went after the
boys for:
The
disease of rivalry and vainglory. When appearances, the colour of our clothes
and our titles of honour become the primary object in life, we forget the words
of Saint Paul: “Do nothing from selfishness or conceit but in humility count
others better than yourselves. Let each of you look not only to his own
interests, but also to the interests of others” (Phil 2:3-4). This is a disease
which leads us to be men and woman of deceit, and to live a false “mysticism”
and a false “quietism”. Saint Paul himself defines such persons as “enemies of
the cross of Christ” because “they glory in their shame, with minds set on
earthly things” (Phil 3:19).
The “Holy” See has long worked on the principle of rivalry and
vainglory and now the Pope decides this is a “disease?” I guess it is somewhat like smoking—for the
longest time it was fashionable, a necessary social activity and all of a
sudden someone decided that it wasn’t good for you—or for anyone within 100
feet of you. Just as our eyes were
opened to the dangers of tobacco, we should be grateful that this poison of
pomposity and a zeal for its trappings has finally been called out. Of course there are some—and we all know who
don’t we—for whom it is still all about dressing up in more yards of silk than
a Chinese empress ever dreamed of and parading around for people to kiss your
ring and kneel for your blessing. How
much is a blessing from a self-idolater worth anyway? I guess you need to go up to Gricigliano and
ask the boys in blue. And this is
precisely the problem: how often do we fall for the bait represented by some grandiose
prelate. There is a saying that when a
man becomes a bishop he has had his last bad meal and he will never hear the
truth again. How much to we get carried
away in the moment fall all over the bishop or the Cardinal or whoever when
they come to visit our parish. We
respectfully listen to what they have to say—whether it is worth listening to
or not—and we bite our tongues rather than speak up and tell them what we
believe. Last November at their meeting
in Baltimore, the American bishops showed a lot of hesitancy about the agenda
for the family that clearly has the backing of Pope Francis. They are not willing to go out on a limb and
explore the possibilities to offer greater support to the non-traditional
family structures that are very quickly becoming the norm in our society. Yet the “Catholic in the pews” is supportive
of Pope Francis. The “Catholic in the
pews” wants to see new pastoral approaches to the remarried, to same-sex
households, to single parents, to couples who have opted for in vitro
conception, and others who just don’t fit the traditional mold. I am not saying that we want to abandon our
traditional values, much less our moral heritage—but we do want to explore new
ways to minister to those who feel themselves on the margins of the Church and
we want ways to be more inclusive as a faith community. Our bishops hesitate because we hesitate to
speak up. We are the fidelium (the
faithful) of the consensus fidelium. The deposit of the faith is held in our
collective heart—not in some catechism or some tome of moral theology.
I have no problem with bishops wearing red dresses, or even jeweled
rings and crosses. Granted some overdo
it, but in principle I could care less.
I know good bishops who just like to dress up and I know sad examples of
bishops who dress down in more functional attire. What we need is to become a community of
Truth where all can speak their mind (and their heart) and where we listen to
one another and weigh carefully what each other has to say. The real problem isn’t pomp; the problem is a
hierarchical mentality. Cure that and
the pomposity will fall into line.
The
disease of existential schizophrenia. This is the disease of those who live a
double life, the fruit of that hypocrisy typical of the mediocre and of a
progressive spiritual emptiness which no doctorates or academic titles can
fill. It is a disease which often strikes those who abandon pastoral service
and restrict themselves to bureaucratic matters, thus losing contact with
reality, with concrete people. In this way they create their own parallel
world, where they set aside all that they teach with severity to others and
begin to live a hidden and often dissolute life. For this most serious disease
conversion is most urgent and indeed indispensable.
This is the real bombshell in the Christmas address. I remember when I was living in Rome being
invited to a Diplomatic Reception in Lateran Palace. It was one of those scenes like you see in a
movie with everyone dressed to the hilt—men in evening dress, women with their
jewels, prelates in full peacock glory, waiters with trays of champagne and
hors d’oeuvres, tables piled with pastries and all the empty chatter. I was in the company of a priest friend, a
chaplain in the Canadian military, and a handsome man. There was a long line of prelates—including
two cardinals—waiting to speak with him and invite him to dinner. As he remarked to me afterwards: “the
expectation is that I will be the dessert.”
The double-life of many in the Curia is a matter of open knowledge and
frequent gossip in Rome. And you know,
it could to a certain extent be forgiven if it wasn’t so hypocritical with
everyone posing as the paragon of moral virtue.
Francis’ “Who am I to judge” should be the blazon on every prelate’s
coat of arms. We all need to keep in our
moral eye our own failures and sins and realize that none of us is in a
position to judge—much less to condemn—others.
Francis defined this particular fault as a “schizophrenia” and so it is
as so often we are able—all of us from the boys in the red dresses down to little
old lady from county Monaghan who is daily at the communion rail—we are all
able to compartmentalize our lives and put a fire wall between our own sins and
our public persona. Psalm 50 is my favorite
prayer perhaps simply because it calls me to face my sins honestly and keeps me
truthful to myself. At least I hope it
does.
The
disease of gossiping, grumbling and back-biting. I have already spoken many
times about this disease, but never enough. It is a grave illness which begins
simply, perhaps even in small talk, and takes over a person, making him become
a “sower of weeds” (like Satan) and in many cases, a cold-blooded killer of the
good name of our colleagues and confrères. It is the disease of cowardly
persons who lack the courage to speak out directly, but instead speak behind
other people’s backs. Saint Paul admonishes us to do all things without
grumbling or questioning, that you may be blameless and innocent” (Phil
2:14-15). Brothers, let us be on our guard against the terrorism of gossip!
This gossiping, grumbling, and backbiting has long been part of the
Vatican culture. You can go back to the
very dirty papal elections of the 16th century where cardinals
knocked out their rivals—or at least attempted to—by circulating the most
scurrilous of rumors. What does it
profit a man to gain the whole world and lose his soul in the process? But again, the fight to the top of the
caterpillar pillar is so vicious and it brings out the worst. Unfortunately the Vatican runs on gossip: if
you could turn it to energy you could light and heat all of Italy. The nasty little comments that are slipped in
between the primo piatto and the secundo at Abruzzi on the Piazza SS
Apostoli, or La Sagrestia over near the Pantheon are legendary. Just grab a table anywhere in the Borgo
during lunch and you will overhear some nasty remark or another from a fellow
in a soutane about one of his co-workers.
Francis comes from a very different tradition. I understand that Jesuits take a vow never to
speak ill of another Jesuit. Of course,
like other vows people take the rate of keeping doesn’t match the rate of
taking. Nevertheless, it does create a
certain culture in which you learn to be careful of speaking ill—especially
when untrue—of others. We could all
benefit from that consciousness. People
can be just as vicious in staking out their niche in the local parish as some
desk-jockey Monsignor in the Vatican in his battle for the purple. Or it may not even be in the Church that we
fall into gossip and undermining the reputation of others. It might be in our Knights of Columbus
Council or even the local swim club. It
might be at our job. In whatever
situation we find ourselves sinking to this low, we need to remember that it
reflects very poorly on us as Catholics.
This is an area where you and I can do as much damage, and maybe even
more, to the credibility of our Faith than any Cardinal or bishop ever could.
Morose delectation is good, but schadenfreude sounds better to me. :)
ReplyDeletewell, schadenfreude is the more precise term, but unfortunately it isn't listed the the various categories of sins; delictatio morosa however makes the grade. Morose delectation is somewhat wider than just taking pleasure in the sins of another but in any misfortune that befalls them. Of course we find that sort of gloating even in the Book of Psalms but that doesn't make it right.
ReplyDelete