ARTICLES
January 2003 ARTICLES
Contents © 2003
by Jim Holman.
All rights reserved.
As I Have Done to You
Synod, Seminary Reform Presage Lay-Dominated Church
By Christopher Zehnder
Catholics in the Los Angeles archdiocese may soon experience a more intense democratization of their church. Results from regional synod assemblies and the reorganization of the seminary in the archdiocese seem to presage this.
In a November 22, 2002 correspondence to archdiocesan priests, Cardinal Roger Mahony relayed the findings of the "Seminary Task Force," which, he said, "was given the goal of reviewing the overall formation and education of our seminarians at St. John's Seminary College and St. John's Seminary." The cardinal asked his "brother priests" to review the report and offer any "suggestions and preferences" they might have to the task force by December 20, 2002. The cardinal said that he, the archdiocesan board of directors, the task force and the regional bishops would make their final decision on the seminary, based on the priests' responses, in January 2003.
Out of three possible scenarios of seminary reorganization, the Seminary Task Force favored a system which, it seems, would place seminarians, during their first four years of formation at a university such as Loyola Marymount in Los Angeles and, in their remaining four years, at St. John's Seminary's theologate. But of more interest than this technical tuning of seminary life were the task force's "foundational considerations" and the recommendations it made, which were outlined in the report included with Mahony's correspondence.
The first of the task force's "foundational considerations" (the "basic perspectives" that "guided" its "deliberations") explains or justifies placing seminarians in a typical co-ed, primarily lay university or college setting. "The training of future priests for the Archdiocese," noted the task force report, "should be characterized as much as possible by the types of collaborative ministry that will be even more typical of the Church's life in the future than it has been in the past." This hearkens back to the cardinal's pious acquiescence, expressed in his 2000 pastoral, As I Have Done for You, in the vocations crises (which he called "one of the many fruits of the Second Vatican Council, a sign of God's deep love for the Church and an invitation to a more effective ordering of gifts and energy in the Body of Christ.") The task force's report notes that "although periods of seclusion for spiritual reflection and formation remain important in the life of a seminarian, interaction with the laity in appropriate academic and pastoral settings is also very valuable in the development of contemporary ministers of the gospel."
The report quotes As I Have Done for You, which describes these "contemporary ministers." It is interesting that, in speaking of the priest's "threefold ministry," the pastoral does not refer (as does Tradition and the Catechism of the Catholic Church) to the priest's office of "ruling," but to his ministry of "guiding." To Mahony, it seems, the priest exercises the ministry of Christ the coordinator rather than of Christ the king. And "all this he does best when he understands himself first as a member of God's holy people gathered at worship," says the cardinal's pastoral. "And the ordained guides by establishing, cultivating, and sustaining patterns of relationship rooted in equality, interdependence, and mutual service. calling forth and coordinating the gifts of all the baptized."
Another of the "basic perspectives" that guided the seminary task force was one that broadens the seminary to include the training of lay ministers: "the seminary system should, to the degree permitted by Canon Law, provide for the academic and pastoral training of the laity." If one of the task force's recommendations is carried out, this training is essential. Noting that the "Church is made up of laity, ordained priests and bishops, religious men and women," the task force report suggests "we should find ways to ensure that all of these have a role and a voice in the government of the church." In particular, each deanery in the archdiocese, the report proposes, should "include laity and religious from the parishes whether they are parish staff or volunteers."
Some of the proposals from regional synod assemblies (which develop topics for the archdiocesan synod, which will meet May 16-17 and June 27-28, 2003 further develop the theme of lay ministry in the cardinal's new church. For instance, one regional synod assembly proposed that the "Archbishop commission an in-depth theological/liturgical study of lay presiding in parish settings." It is also suggested that the "archbishop" define the "roles, responsibility and authority" of lay ministers and that the archdiocese set up an institute to "promote and develop" lay ministries in each pastoral region. As far as "lay governance" of the Church goes, another proposal was that "the Archbishop require functioning, shared lay/clerical governance at all levels within the Archdiocese," while another offered a lay and clerical pastoral council for consideration. For the parishes, it was suggested that the "archdiocese provide a charter mandating that parish councils share in decision-making responsibilities with the pastor." How this would affect the authority of a parish pastor is unclear. Would he, for instance, need the consent of the parish council before making decisions affecting the spiritual and liturgical life of the church?
Though not directly relative to lay ministry, one suggestion reveals, perhaps, some of the undercurrents that might appear during the synod. It offers that "the Church consider the norms used today that deny communion and confession to certain individuals (not married and previously married.)" Such a suggestion touches on universal Church discipline and so goes beyond the competence of a local synod. What other topics, touching on universal Church discipline and, perhaps, doctrine will be discussed at the synod? One local assembly even suggested that the archbishop open up a discussion of women's ordination, though this suggestion was later withdrawn since it touched on the universal Church.
Whatever such topics may be discussed, they will surely not form a part of the official synod documents, which must go to the Holy See for approval. But, as Cardinal Mahony suggested last year, they might go into another document that will also go to Rome. As noted in the March 2002 Mission, priests attending their yearly meeting with the cardinal in October 2001 asked if the synod would address topics such as clerical celibacy. In response, the cardinal mentioned a "companion document" to the synodal decrees that would document support for such issues as the abolition of mandatory clerical celibacy.
Such a "companion document" could be seen as a kind of survey of Catholic public opinion on issues that fall under the authority of the universal Church. According to the 1997 Instruction on Diocesan Synods, issued by the Holy See's Congregations for Bishops and for the Evangelization of Peoples, synods are forbidden to issue such opinion surveys. "In view of the bonds uniting the particular Church and her Pastor with the universal Church and the Roman Pontiff," says the instruction, "the Bishop has the duty to exclude from the synodal discussions theses or positions -- as well as proposals submitted to the Synod with the mere intention of transmitting to the Holy See 'polls' in their regard -- discordant with the perennial doctrine of the Church or the Magisterium or concerning material reserved to Supreme ecclesiastical authority or to other ecclesiastical authorities." [Emphasis in original.]
In 2001, Bishop M.P.M. Muskens of Breda in the Netherlands was to hold a synod that discussed topics similar to those slated for the Los Angeles synod. According to the February 21, 2001 National Catholic Reporter, Bishop Muskens said his synod would consider "such themes as living the faith, the Eucharist, collaboration among priests and laity in response to the priest shortage and the role of the layperson in the church." The Holy See, however, told Muskens to call off the synod. Why? According to the Reporter, sources in the Netherlands said "the Vatican seemed worried about a possible reassertion of the polarization that characterized the Dutch church in the 1970s." The Vatican was worried, it seems, that the Breda synod might become a forum for dissent.