|
January 14, 2002
PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL Most Reverend Wilton D. Gregory, S.L.D. USCCB President and Bishop of Belleville
Dear Bishop Gregory:
I received your letter of December 10 and wish to begin by thanking you for your prompt and thoughtful reply concerning the matter of Sunday collection security in the American Church. I was surprised, however, to hear you repeat a position I am satisfied is incorrect, i.e., that the U.S. Conference is not canonically empowered “to address the question of internal controls over offertory collections”. In research conducted last year, I found Canon Law specifically empowers any conference to do so. Book V, Title I, Canon 1265 §2 states: “The Episcopal Conference can draw up rules regarding collections, which must be observed by all”. As the general meaning of that section seems quite clear, I am left to wonder if there exists a special Canon Law exception that prohibits the U. S. Conference from availing itself of that all-encompassing authority?
Assuming no such exception has been made (it would certainly represent a slap in the face of the U. S. Conference if it had), I am left with your reference to Conference statutes and bylaws and that, as you might suspect, is the crux of the matter. Whatever the specifics of those statutes and bylaws might be, their ultimate effect (well-known to all key members of the Conference) is to institutionalize a perennial evil as old as the Church itself. I am, of course, referring to Sunday collection theft which I believe, aside from the priest-pedophile phenomenon, is the single greatest Catholic Church scandal of the 20th Century. Sadly, my eleven-year effort to promote low-cost, readily available corrective measures notwithstanding, the American Church is now well into the 21st Century with that evil still firmly in place and, from all appearances, fully USCCB approved.
I could go into further detail, Bishop Gregory, but you already have a copy of my Vatican petition and access to my website, www.ChurchSecurity.info which provides everything you ever wanted to know and then some. That brings me to the DFMC and Rev. Yeager who, with the possible exception of Sr. Frances Mlocek, might well be the most ethical member of your staff. To put it in context for you, Sr. Mlocek referred me to Rev. Yeager, then Executive Director of the DFMC, in early 1994. Concurrently, she also referred our (by then) extensive correspondence file to Rev. Yeager. On January 11, 1994, I directed a two-page letter to Rev. Yeager. Not only did he fail to provide a substantive response, he did not even acknowledge receipt or my letter.
At the time, I chalked it up to arrogance and poor upbringing but, upon reflection, I have since concluded he did the only thing he could to both retain his position with the Conference and preserve his integrity. Given his background and experience, Rev. Yeager had to have seen and understood the position I have consistently held: that the Sunday collection in the average parish is as vulnerable as a newborn babe, and that it remains so as a direct result of the Conference’s knowing and willful refusal to avail itself of low-cost security measures that have been available for decades if not generations. His dilemma: acknowledge the truth and fail the hierarchy; deny the truth and fail himself. His solution: completely ignore the intruder.
So I’m left with this question, Bishop Gregory: why would the Conference engage in more than a decade of dissembling and obfuscation to ensure that hundreds (probably thousands) of Sunday collection thieves can continue their unfettered, sinful thievery week after week and year after year? While you and your brother bishops are in the best position to answer that question, the following is my theory, based upon both my personal and professional experience.
Considering only the embezzlement case histories I have accumulated over the past ten years, it appears fully two thirds of the publicly identified embezzlers are members of the clergy. Further, I know many pastors supplement their income with a weekly pre-deposit deduction from the Sunday collection. Some consider it Petty Cash when, in fact, it doesn’t even come close to meeting that criteria. In any event, a truly secure Sunday collection system would not permit any such deductions, and that policy would almost certainly be poorly received at the parish level. Indeed, many pastors would either refuse to implement secure procedures or would modify them (thus rendering them flawed) to ensure the continuation of their supplemental income. And then, of course, there is the matter of sudden increases in Sunday collection funds when such increases are directly attributable to the implementation of secure procedures. How do we handle that with the media without admitting the Church had a serious theft problem?
Well, that almost sounds like a very good reason to forgo secure procedures, doesn’t it? We know it isn’t, of course. Refusal to implement secure procedures under that scenario can be likened to cowardice in the face of the enemy who, in this case, just happens to be Satan himself. What amazes me, Bishop Gregory, is the fact that our shepherds (the USCCB membership) have been and remain to this day so willing to turn their backs on their flock, allowing the wolves to have their way, just so they (our shepherds) can avoid making the morally correct but (from the clergy’s perspective) unpopular decision that would all but eliminate the repetitive sin of Sunday collection theft while, at the same time, restoring millions of dollars in lost revenue annually.
If I have failed to convince you of the absolute need for concerted and authoritative action in this matter, Bishop Gregory, I hope you will some day find the words to explain your rationale. As matters stand, I am left with the strong belief that our hierarchy is substantially (perhaps even overwhelmingly) comprised of self-centered, secular rulers. As harsh as that opinion may seem, I read of the Holy Father’s request (in connection with a recent conclave) wherein he called upon all bishops to examine their lifestyles and ensure they are in full concert with the model of humility and selfless service recommended and exemplified by our Lord. That request lead me to conclude His Holiness has seen evidence of worldly lifestyles among those who have been entrusted with the task of preserving and spreading the Good News, and I respectfully suggest that conclusion is supported by the U. S. Conference’s ongoing refusal to implement genuinely secure procedures.
Most sincerely, [signed] M. W. Ryan Michael W. Ryan
Bishop Gregory did not reply to the above letter, thus giving rise to the letter contained on the next page. |
|
MENU BAR
|