|
November 13, 1994
PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL Most Reverend Thomas J. Murphy Archbishop of Seattle Chairman, NCCB Committee on Budget & Finance 910 Marion Street Seattle, WA 98104
Dear Archbishop Murphy:
I have an embarrassing confession to make. When I wrote you on May 5 in follow–up to my letter to Archbishop Kucera, former Chairman of the NCCB Budget and Finance Committee, I failed to recognize I had written you in 1992 when you were Chairman of the Committee on Stewardship. However, you apparently remembered our correspondence and concluded it was time to simply ignore me. After seven years of fruitless contact with the hierarchy, I've become accustomed to eliciting that sort of response. Nevertheless, I'm still at the keyboard and my enthusiasm for the challenge remains unchanged.
In your January 11, 1993 letter, you stated the issue of security over the Sunday collection was outside the responsibility of the NCCB Committee on Stewardship, and suggested that I contact the Diocesan Fiscal Officers organization. I did so and was accorded the expected treatment; Rev. R. J. Yeager, Ed.D., did not deem my letter worthy of acknowledgement. I mention this, because I want to be sure you understand I've followed every conceivable lead in my ongoing efforts to "reach" the appropriate officials.
Now, you head the Committee on Budget and Finance, and I am writing you about ongoing theft from the Church's largest source of revenue. Most people I know would conclude I'm in the right pew as well as the right church, yet you completely disregarded my May 5 letter. As I advised you on November 30, 1992, the matter of Sunday collection embezzlement is as old as the Church itself and occurs weekly in an unknown but significant number of parishes nationwide. You know that at least as well as I do, Archbishop Murphy, even though you're loath to admit it to an "outsider" like me.
Whoever said those who forget the mistakes of history are bound to repeat them, could well have been talking about the Church. The ongoing priest–pedophile calamity first surfaced in the 1960s or earlier but was not proactively addressed by you and/or your predecessors until 25–30 years later – and then only because of intense media coverage. Having been on the receiving end of seven years of dissembling, it's clear to me that you and your brother bishops have, for reasons best known to yourselves, decided a secure Sunday collection is not in your best interests. Surely, no one can honestly claim security is not in the flock's best interests! Whatever your reasons for rejecting collection security, none can or ever will be legitimate.
The Marine Corps is known for its emphasis on "a few good men." The Church only needs one well–placed member of the hierarchy to reverse centuries of neglect. The time to end all the buck–passing, to drop all the defenses and pretense, is long gone. It is within your grasp to be the prelate who first recognized Satan's hand in a highly vulnerable Sunday collection and who then took positive action to eradicate it. I pray that God will grant you the wisdom to recognize that simple truth, Archbishop Murphy, and the courage to respond objectively. Toward that end, I offer the words of St. Pius X, given on the occasion of the beatification of St. Joan of Arc.
"In our time more than ever before the greatest asset of the evilly disposed is the cowardice and weakness of good men, and all the vigor of Satan's reign is due to the easygoing weakness of Catholics."
I don't pretend to be familiar with the character of St. Pius X, but he is, after all, a Saint, and the Most Reverend Jan Olav Smit apparently thought enough of him to author his biography which the Daughters of St. Paul (HEAVENLY FRIENDS, a saint for each day) describe as a "Journey through the boyhood, priesthood, papacy and sainthood of this remarkable man – warm, loving, humorous – capable of leading the people of God with extraordinary wisdom – the influence of which we still feel in the Church today."
St. Pius X certainly sounds like a man who was far more concerned with leaving his mark than he was with marking time. It seems clear he did not subscribe to the "go along, to get along" philosophy which permeates many of the bureaucratic structures in today's society. I don't doubt for a minute that you have had a number of defining moments in your life and vocation, Archbishop Murphy, and that you responded in the finest Christian tradition. But this is a once–in–a–lifetime challenge to reshape and secure the fiscal lifeline of the Church, the same lifeline that has formed the basis for a number of church closings in recent years. Yet, strangely, no one is willing to even recognize, let alone examine or discuss the matter. Isn't it high time someone did?
I stand ready to assist you in this formidable undertaking, Archbishop Murphy, but only you can take the first positive step toward its completion. I look forward to receiving your reply.
Most sincerely,
[signed] M. W. Ryan
RESPONSE SUMMARY
As with the prior letter (referenced above), Archbishop Murphy apparently did not deem this letter to be worthy of a response.
A March 9, 1995 follow-up letter (transmitting a copy of this letter) was also ignored. |
|
MENU BAR
|