|
January 20, 2004
PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL Most Reverend Wilton D. Gregory, S.L.D. President, U. S. Conference of Catholic Bishops
Dear Bishop Gregory:
This refers to my letters of November 23, 2001 and January 14 and April 22, 2002 concerning the need to establish and implement uniform procedures to protect the Church’s primary source of revenue, the Sunday collection. While you did not respond to my last two letters, I nevertheless feel obliged to make one final attempt to explain - in the clearest possible terms - what I view to be the implications and ramifications of the USCCB’s ongoing failure to act in this matter.
To begin with, however, I must return to your letter of December 10, 2001 in which you stated: “we are not empowered either canonically or by our Conference statutes and bylaws to address the question of internal controls over offertory collections in such a way as to standardize or require any particular procedures.” Accepting the strict accuracy of that statement, I would then ask you whether there is a procedure by which the Conference could become so empowered. As you must know, Canon 455 provides that a conference may seek authorization to issue a general decree which, if granted, may be imposed following approval by 2/3 of the Conference members. In light of that, I trust you will concede that what we are really talking about here is not what the USCCB can or cannot require of its members but rather what it does or does not wish to require and, in this case, it does not wish to require genuinely secure Sunday collection procedures.
I imagine your second line of defense is that “the autonomy of the diocesan Bishop” is paramount. Assuming that fairly captures the essence of your thinking, we should now examine the condition that has been perpetuated, even institutionalized, to preserve the bishops’ autonomy.
Absent national standards, the best that can be said is that the level of security over collection funds varies from diocese to diocese and from parish to parish within each diocese. I contend it’s worse than that. I believe none of the almost 200 dioceses have implemented procedures which effectively preclude covert theft between collection basket and parish bank deposit and all points in-between. If you know of one that has, please identify it so that I might request (with your endorsement) a copy of their procedures. If you will stipulate that a vulnerable Sunday collection constitutes a temptation to sin (to steal), and that a perpetually vulnerable Sunday collection is an ongoing temptation to sin, it follows that, in opting not to seek authority to issue a general decree implementing procedures that would virtually eliminate that temptation to sin, the bishops are placing executive privilege ahead of what can quite reasonably be described as a moral obligation to eliminate a great temptation to sin and a source of actual, ongoing sin within the Church itself.
In a January 16 press conference held to express the Church’s opposition to gay marriage, Bishop Coleman of Fall River affirmed that “we will have to answer to God for anything we fail to do.'' It is ironic that those who were responsible for crafting the language of the new catechism, particularly #2287, are themselves among the most flagrant of its violators. I can’t imagine any circumstance that could justify the Conference’s inaction (nonfeasance) in this matter. If you know of one, I would greatly appreciate your letting me know the nature of that circumstance.
After reportedly likening some secretive bishops to the Mafia in a Los Angeles Times interview, I understand Governor Keating stated in his letter of resignation to you that "To resist grand jury subpoenas, to suppress the names of offending clerics, to deny, to obfuscate, to explain away; that is a model of a criminal organization, not my church." Not being as erudite as Governor Keating, it took me several years of fruitless interaction to reach essentially the same conclusion. If the USCCB has learned nothing else from the predator-priest scandal, surely it has learned that obfuscation and dissembling are antithetical to the role of a shepherd of Christ.
I would therefore like to believe that, had your letter been written on December 10, 2003, your response would have been vastly different. I would like to believe you would have said (in so many words) “You’re absolutely right, Mr. Ryan, the Sunday collection is as vulnerable as a newborn babe and thereby a great temptation to sin for which we bishops must accept full responsibility. In my capacity as President of the USCCB, I am going to place this subject at the top of the agenda for our next convocation and I will do everything in my power to see that this blight on our integrity is eliminated as quickly as possible. Toward that end, I am directing Rev. Yeager to immediately create a blue-ribbon ad hoc committee to study your collection security guidelines and to develop a system that will equal or exceed the standards contained therein.”
This issue is not going to disappear in our lifetime, Bishop Gregory, and with all due respect, I do not believe all the good you have done in your life, as lofty and considerable as it surely must be, will compensate for your having knowingly and willfully opted not to take the action you have to know in your innermost being should be taken without further delay. Toward that end, I pray the Holy Spirit will descend upon you and instill within you the wisdom and courage that will surely be needed to see this truly Church-defining crisis through to its proper conclusion.
In conclusion, I invite your attention to the enclosed news article and pose the following question. Could you, as a member and President of the USCCB, have initiated action that could have kept that pathetic individual from plundering his parish’s Sunday collection? Clearly, his ready access to Sunday collection funds facilitated his other sinful behaviors. As much as I will have to answer for on Judgment Day, I can honestly say I did everything within my power to prevent that tragedy and others like it. Can you and your brother bishops make the same statement?
Most Sincerely, [signed] M. W. Ryan Michael W. Ryan
enclosure
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Bishop Gregory (now Archbishop Gregory) never replied to the above letter. |
|
MENU BAR
|