 |
Feb. 8, 2007 |
 |
Surrounded by a cloud of witnesses |
|
|
Bishop Richard J. Sklba |
|
 |
Bishop Richard J. Sklba |
|
Herald
of Hope is a weekly column started by
former Milwaukee Archbishop Rembert G. Weakland
in the Catholic Herald and written by
the bishops of the Milwaukee Archdiocese. |
|
This column began about four or five months ago at a parish presentation on ecumenism. In the question and answer period, the conversation quickly turned to the question of intercommunion. After a few observations back and forth a questioner concluded the real issue once again was a matter of bishops insisting on power and control!
Sorting it out in my own mind afterward, I realized that most newspaper reports simply indicate by way of summary that “the bishops voted” this or that way, never giving a hint that considerable discussion and consultation with others may have been part of the process. Quite the opposite is in fact the case.
For example, in the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ Committee on Ecumenism and Interreligious Affairs which I chair, every individual bilateral dialogue is blessed with at least a half dozen consultants and theological experts. We staff at least eight active national ecumenical dialogues (Episcopal, Evangelical, Lutheran, Methodist, Oriental Orthodox, Orthodox, Polish National, Reformed/Presbyterian, etc), several Jewish dialogues, and four major interreligious conversations (Buddhist, Hindu, Muslim and Sikh). The dialogue with Islam alone has three regional groups (Mid-Atlantic, Midwest and Pacific).
This amounts to almost 200 consultants for our committee work alone. Some of the experts are priests and religious from congregations that have supported their education and ministries, but many are lay, men and women alike. The quality of the work depends on the competence and expertise of the people. We have some superbly competent people as partners.
Currently the USCCB has more than 20 standing committees: African American Catholics, Canonical Affairs, Catechetics, Communications, Consecrated Life, Diaconate, Doctrine, Domestic Policy, Education, Evangelization, Hispanic Affairs, International Policy, Laity, Liturgy, Marriage and Family Life, Pastoral Practices, Priestly Life and Ministry, Pro-Life, Science and Human Values, Vocations, Women in Society and in the Church and World Missions, plus about a dozen and a half Ad Hoc Committees for any number of important issues in our moment of history. Each one of these committees has its own group of advisors and consultants. Although the conference is in the process of restructuring and reducing the number of committees, each will certainly retain a full range of advisors.
There is also the National Advisory Board, a body of representative men and women from each of the 15 regions of the country. These people review every action on the agenda of the spring and fall meetings of the USCCB and offer their considered advice. That board has about 50 members, each serving a three-year term.
The conference of bishops is basically committee driven, each working on projects of its own. Several years ago, the statement on Ethical and Religious Directives went through some 37 committee drafts before final approval by the full membership. We don’t always attend to what else may be on the plate when the final text is submitted. That’s often a problem in itself.
When the newspaper reports, therefore, that the bishops voted one way or another, it might be helpful to know that every action comes from a committee and each committee has its own circle of experts and consultants. Obviously the challenge is to make sure that any group of advisors contains adequate representation from each of the legitimate diverse viewpoints. It might be smoother if all are always of one mind or represent a single school of thought, but such single-minded advice may not always be the most helpful in the long run. That is certainly true of local parish councils, too. All voices must be heard and all views ought to be at the table.
Many years ago I worked with the service committee of the Charismatic Renewal in the archdiocese. I attended the monthly meetings and was always impressed to see that, if an issue was presented which drew contrasting and even opposing opinions, they would pause for prayer, test the mind of group and possibly conclude that they were not ready for a decision if the group were still deeply divided on the matter! All diverse views were present, and they took the time needed to find a middle road.
Two weeks ago I was invited to a special consultation sponsored by the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America titled “How Lutherans Read the Bible.” Their national church leadership noticed that in recent debates each “faction” was firmly rooted on one verse or the other. The purpose of the consultation of about 80 individuals from the United States and Canada was to help people listen to the entire Bible, not only their favorite text. Most verses are, in fact, balanced by further considerations from other portions of the Scriptures, and Lutherans (and Catholics too!) need to listen to the whole chorus of voices and verses.
The newspaper report of any vote by the bishops presumes that experts on all sides of a question have weighed in on the matter. The challenge is to make sure that any consultation reflects the whole church and that it be patient enough to work and pray through the differences to become “of one mind and one spirit” as Paul would recommend. It is truly the entire cloud of witness which we need in every age.
|
|
|
