Bishops get suggestions from Ratzinger
session
By JOHN L. ALLEN JR.
NCR Staff
Doctrinal commissions of bishops conferences would have
informal veto power over most documents produced by the conference or any of
its committees, under a recommendation from a mid-February meeting between
Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger and bishops from the United States, Canada and the
Pacific Rim.
Sources close to the U.S. bishops told NCR that the move
would not mark a dramatic procedural change here, since the American doctrinal
commission already reviews many conference documents before publication.
Whether formalizing the practice signals a substantive shift -- an attempt to
put a more Roman stamp on the documents or the workings of the conference --
remains to be seen, sources said.
The suggestion came in a Feb. 9-12 session in Menlo Park, Calif.,
involving Ratzinger, his staff and bishops from doctrine commissions in North
America and Oceania (NCR, Feb. 26). A statement of conclusions from that
meeting was mailed to all the U.S. bishops on Feb. 19 and subsequently obtained
by NCR.
Ratzinger is the Vaticans top doctrinal officer.
Archbishop Daniel Pilarczyk of Cincinnati, chair of the U.S.
doctrinal commission, and Archbishop William Levada of San Francisco, took part
in the session. Dominican Fr. Augustine DiNoia, chief staff person for the U.S.
commission, also participated.
Pilarczyk declined comment through a spokesperson.
The new recommendation said documents with doctrinal aspect
or implications -- arguably, almost everything a conference publishes --
should receive the judgment of the doctrinal commission. The move would make it
more difficult to publish documents without that groups support.
How the American bishops will react to the suggestions made in
Menlo Park is not yet clear, but since they come with the approval of Ratzinger
and Pilarczyk, they are certain to be taken seriously.
To solicit support
Jesuit Fr. Tom Reese, who studied the U.S. bishops
conference for his 1992 book A Flock of Shepherds, said this kind of
review already happens in many cases. Chairs of other committees may ask the
doctrinal commission to look at their documents, in part to solicit support
when the time comes for a floor vote. In addition, all documents must go
through the conferences administrative committee, and the doctrine
commission chair belongs to that group. As a result, the chair and his staff
always have had the chance to review texts.
I would not say that we see the majority of documents, but
we see quite a few, said auxiliary bishop Richard Sklba of Milwaukee, a
doctrinal commission member for 17 years. In that sense, this is an
affirmation of what were already doing.
On the other hand, Reese said, making the practice explicit
represents another move by Ratzinger to bring conferences into greater harmony
with Rome.
Rome is very concerned that anything issued by a conference
be in line with Vatican teaching, Reese said. This is another check
to make sure that happens. He said that because Ratzinger has more
contact with the doctrinal commission than any other body inside a
bishops conference, the move could position him to exert greater
influence.
A former official for the U.S. bishops conference who spoke
on background to NCR questioned whether the recommendation was necessary
for that purpose.
The truth is that the conference is so gun-shy today that,
informally, theyre sending many documents over to Rome to see if
theres any problem even before theyre released, the source
said. That the Holy See should subvert the position of the bishops is
outrageous, but in some cases thats where were at.
If Ratzinger wants an exacting analysis of the fine print of every
document -- similar to the kind of review the Congregation for the Doctrine of
the Faith performs for Vatican documents -- Reese questioned whether the U.S.
bishops have the wherewithal to pull it off.
They dont have anyone of Ratzingers caliber to
do that, Reese said. They just dont have bishops with the
credibility to play this gatekeeper role with respect to the other
bishops.
Sklba, however, said he did not think Ratzinger was asking for
more aggressiveness from the doctrinal commission. I dont hear
that, he said. I dont hear a centralizing
mentality.
Other points from the statement of conclusions included:
- The doctrine commission of the conference should be available
to assist individual bishops;
- the doctrine commission should prepare an annual report for
the CDF on the doctrinal situation in the country, as well as a special report
to coincide with ad limina visits of bishops to Rome;
- the doctrine commission should make itself available to
bishops in evaluating requests for imprimaturs -- official permission to
publish a book in a given diocese -- and requests for the mandatum or
license to teach Catholic theology.
Requests for intervention
The document also discussed what to do about publications that
present doctrinal problems. The responsibility of the first instance
belongs with the local [bishop], who may seek the assistance of the doctrinal
commission. Later, if necessary, an intervention on the part of the
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith may be requested, it said.
However, the congregation may intervene on its own if the
gravity of the case demands it, or whenever a doctrinal problem goes beyond the
territorial boundaries of a particular conference, the statement
said.
Bishop Donald Trautman of Erie, Pa., former chair of the
conferences liturgy committee, told NCR that he found this language
potentially troubling. It will depend on how its implemented,
he said. Normally the bishop is the teacher of the faith in his diocese.
The curia can be a support and a service, but its not supposed to act as
a new layer of jurisdiction between the bishop and the pope, Trautman
said.
Trautman said he expected the U.S. bishops to discuss the
recommendations at their spring meeting in Tucson, Ariz., June 17-22.
Along with the recommendations, the conclusions also contained
summaries of remarks made by participants in the Menlo Park meeting. While much
of it was familiar from statements made to the press, there were some new
wrinkles.
About infallibility
The summary said that Archbishop Tarcisio Bertone,
Ratzingers chief aide, spoke on the nature of infallibility enjoyed by
the ordinary and universal magisterium, as well as the problems
posed by public dissent and the means to remedy them. The document did not
specify what Bertone believed those problems or remedies to be.
In public remarks at a Feb. 14 press conference, Cardinal Aloysius
Ambrozic of Toronto had stressed positive contributions of feminism to Catholic
theology. In the summary of his speech, however, he noted three areas of
divergence between Catholic theology and feminism: the ontological
significance of the difference between the sexes, the originality and
historicity of Christianity, and the symbolic or sacramental dimension of the
body and sexuality.
Other bishops called for greater attention to bio-ethics, and the
role of women in society and the church. On the latter point, the statement
called for further development of the theology of the nuptial
significance of the human body and the corresponding notion of the
complementarity of the sexes.
The Vatican has often invoked complementarity, or the
theory that men and women play distinct roles that complement one another, in
support of the ban on ordaining women.
The full texts of all the speeches at Menlo Park were collected by
Levada, who was then to send them on to Rome for eventual publication.
National Catholic Reporter, March 12,
1999
|