Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit!
You're currently viewing Catholic CyberForum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our online cyberparish, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.
Join our community!
Messages posted to this board must be polite and free of abuse, personal attacks, blasphemy, racism, threats, harrassment, and crude or sexually-explicit language.
If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Leadership in the Church
Topic Started: Friday, 12. August 2011, 18:36 (217 Views)
Rose of York
Member Avatar
Administrator
Eileenanne
Monday, 22. August 2011, 18:44
I honestly believe that (some) bishops are scared to confront priests because they (the priests) are so thin on the ground and the bishops take the view that any priest is better than no priest. One of those I referred is of an age where he could retire anytime. There are just no young priests coming up to replace those who retire. If I were a young man discerning a vocation I would not be applying to this diocese.
I do not think the problem of poor leadership is confined to the Bishops of England and Wales.

Here is a story about a parish where serious friction got out of hand. I maintain a bishop needs to act swiftly when serious concerns are raised. If he does not, the consequences can be quite sensational. There are meetings, meetings, meetings. At times action, not words, is needed.

http://www.ucanews.com/2011/08/22/communist-jibe-sparks-church-brawl/

....... and we thought we had problems!
Keep the Faith!

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mairtin
Member Avatar

Bishop Kevin Dowling may be a bit controversial at times but I think he hit the nail on the head in this address to a group of leading laity in Cape Town, South Africa on 1 June:
Quote:
 
However, I think that today we have a leadership in the Church which actually undermines the very notion of subsidiarity; where the minutiae of Church life and praxis “at the lower level” are subject to examination and authentication being given by the “higher level”, in fact the highest level, e.g. the approval of liturgical language and texts; where one of the key Vatican II principles, collegiality in decision-making, is virtually non-existent.

[...]

What compounds this, for me, is the mystique which has in increasing measure surrounded the person of the Pope in the last 30 years, such that any hint of critique or questioning of his policies, his way of thinking, his exercise of authority etc. is equated with disloyalty. There is more than a perception, because of this mystique, that unquestioning obedience by the faithful to the Pope is required and is a sign of the ethos and fidelity of a true Catholic. When the Pope’s authority is then intentionally extended to the Vatican Curia, there exists a real possibility that unquestioning obedience to very human decisions about a whole range of issues by the Curial Departments and Cardinals also becomes a mark of one’s fidelity as a Catholic, and anything less is interpreted as being disloyal to the Pope who is charged with steering the barque of Peter.

It has become more and more difficult over the past years, therefore, for the College of Bishops as a whole, or in a particular territory, to exercise their theologically-based servant leadership to discern appropriate responses to their particular socio-economic, cultural, liturgical, spiritual and other pastoral realities and needs; much less to disagree with or seek alternatives to policies and decisions taken in Rome. And what appears to be more and more the policy of appointing “safe”, unquestionably orthodox and even very conservative bishops to fill vacant dioceses over the past 30 years, only makes it less and less likely that the College of Bishops – even in powerful Conferences like the United States – will question what comes out of Rome, and certainly not publicly. Instead, there will be every effort to try and find an accommodation with those in power, which means that the Roman position will prevail in the end. And, taking this further, when an individual bishop takes issue with something, especially in public, the impression or judgement will be that he is “breaking ranks” with the other bishops and will only cause confusion to the lay faithful – so it is said – because it will appear that the Bishops are not united in their teaching and leadership role. The pressure, therefore, to conform.

What we should have, in my view, is a Church where the leadership recognises and empowers decision-making at the appropriate levels in the local Church; where local leadership listens to and discerns with the people of God of that area what “the Spirit is saying to the Church” and then articulates that as a consensus of the believing, praying, serving community. It needs faith in God and trust in the people of God to take what may seem to some or many as a risk. The Church could be enriched as a result through a diversity which truly integrates socio-cultural values and insights into a living and developing faith, together with a discernment of how such diversity can promote unity in the Church – and not, therefore, require uniformity to be truly authentic.


Edited by Mairtin, Tuesday, 23. August 2011, 08:09.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Anne-Marie

Mairtin
Tuesday, 23. August 2011, 08:04
Bishop Kevin Dowling may be a bit controversial at times but I think he hit the nail on the head in Cape Town, South Africa on 1 June:
Quote:
 
What we should have, in my view, is a Church where the local leadership listens to and discerns what “the Spirit is saying to the Church”.
Not sure this will be intelligible to anyone else, but...

I had yet another experience of God's unique way of getting His will on Monday.
I had decided to start the day at Mass... but as often I was happy to allow myself to be sidetracked by all manner of opportunities to find something else supposedly needing my attention first.

It started with me deciding I was too tired to get up at my normal time - I'd not got to bed the previous evening (erm, actually morning!) until after 1am - as I'd only had four hours in bed. After half an hour, I was feeling guilty, so got up anyway, not wanting to disappoint the Lord. One battle of will lost by me!

I then felt the great need to check my correspondence, so switched on the computer... and found lots to interest me in addition to messages... quickly feeling I was cheating again, and getting bored turned the thing off. Second battle of wills lost by me.

On and on the battle went, with one delay after another... until I realised it was too late for me to get to Mass in time - that problem solved... until it occured to me to throw down yet another gauntlet: NOW find a way of getting me to Mass in time if that's where You really want me!
I eventually realised how much later than usual I was leaving the house - too late to get there. And I still cannot explain (despite trying) how I arrived at church ten minutes before Mass started.

I was asked to read the Lesson.. and found it was one I loved, because it enabled me to 'show off' how clever I am: I happen to know that (regardless of the spelling) the city is correctly pronounced Thes-sa-lon-EE-kee, the people of which are Thes-sa-lon-EE-ans.
It consciously occured to me that I was not supposed to be showing-off at Mass - that's not what Mass is supposed to be for or about... and I started wondering how God was going to thwart me this time! I soon found out, as the priest strolled onto the sanctuary... and promptly changed the lectionary to the Feast of Mary Queen of Heaven, with a different set of Scripture!

The point I'm trying to make is that we need less arrogance and power, whether from the pope, the hierarchy or just plain me... and allow God the opportunity the get a word in edgeways... because if we bother to listen, He does have His own opinion, which may or may not vary in the 'non-essentials' from one person or place to another.

Our Faith is supposed to be about HIM not US! And HE may not want every single detail constrained by a rigid set of all-encompassing rules....
Where the Church is most thriving is places like Africa, where they don't waste time on controlled European-style worship.
Edited by Anne-Marie, Tuesday, 23. August 2011, 10:27.
Anne-Marie
FIAT VOLUNTAS DEI
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
PJD

Reading hrough that Anne-Marie, I cannot understand how you say you were losing battles - winning them (or some) is how I read your contribution.

As for actually getting to church before you imagined you couldn't - check your clocks & watch (laugh).

PJD
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rose of York
Member Avatar
Administrator
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2011/0913/1224304027030.html

Quote:
 
Criteria employed in selecting bishops are criticised in a new book by former bishop of Derry Edward Daly, published today

He felt that if more Irish bishops were drawn from among parish clergy it would be “a positive development”. He also felt the powers in Rome always considered “teaching and orthodoxy were primary and that parish pastoral experience was secondary”.




Parish and pastoral experience teach a priest about the joys, sorrows and problems experienced by laity. A man who becomes a bishop needs to have some experience of parish work so he will understand the joys, sorrows and problems experienced by the priests ministering in his diocesan parishes. If he has not been there himself, how can he help the priest who is struggling with difficulties that need to be resolved so he can decide whether to continue ministering, or pack it in?
Keep the Faith!

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Marts

Leadership in our Church is discussed in this informative and thought provoking article by Robert Fitzgerald:

Excerpt

Leadership - Authoritarian or Engaging?

The Second Vatican Council sought to provide to the Church a new way forward in the understanding and exercise of leadership within our Church. Many then understood, more so than some today, that there were two models emerging which were in conflict with each other.

The Church model developed over the last few hundred years is closest to a military or authoritarian model in the traditional form. In that model the apex is the Chair of Peter. Down the pyramid flows the various levels of authority until at the base we find the people, parishioners or in military terms the troops. In this model authority flows down from the apex and accountability flows up from the base…..

At the same time, however, the people of God were and are being encouraged by the Church to embrace democratic principles and practices. Throughout the world, particularly in recent times the Church has been the greatest proponent of democracy as encouraged by Pope John Paul II in Centesimus Annus. Just look at Poland. And in a democratic model, the triangle is turned upside down. At the top are the people who give authority to the lower levels to exercise power on their behalf and accountability flows up back to the people. Notions of transparency and accountability are all essential parts of the democratic processes.

It is not difficult therefore to see that those who seek to maintain a rigidly authoritarian model of Church must inevitably be in conflict with the very people of Church who have been encouraged to participate increasingly in democratic processes, processes that heighten the desire for active engagement, encourage questioning and promote shared responsibility.

The Second Vatican Council was a visionary attempt to bring those models together in a way that could work, accounting for the unique features of the Catholic Church including the Primacy of the Pope and the authentic communion of each Bishop with the Successor of Peter in a model of collegiality. The model seeks to maintain authority where it is appropriate and necessary, but seeks also to actively engage people at all levels from parishioners, priests, religious and bishops in the life well of the Church. It is vision of shared responsibility and leadership.

The great tragedy is that this visionary model may have been pared back and undermined over time.

Full article: http://www.catalyst-for-renewal.com.au/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=178:11-robert-fitzgerald-am-leadership-in-our-church--a-shared-responsibility-of-service&catid=16:archive-vatican-ii&Itemid=102

Jesus told us, his disciples, “When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth” (John 16:13)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Marts

I believe the excerpt below effectively describes how the Church hierarchy are ignoring the authoritative Church teaching from Vatican II on collegiality. Somehow I do not think the CDF will investigate this matter; not when it can pick on a few isolated Irish priests on a small island like Ireland.

Excerpt

Joseph Dunn in his text "No Lions in the Hierarchy", says:

"After Vatican II, for a brief moment, the doctrine of collegiality looked as if it might be taken with real seriousness, and be expressed in structures like the synod which would actively encourage participation, openness and genuine communication. What has happened to that inspiring vision? Edmond Hill put the matter bluntly in Ministry and Authority, "the proposers and supporters of collegiality were naïve enough to hand over its implementation to its most committed opponents, who being anything but naïve have done their best to neutralise it ever since."

There have now been ample demonstrations that some are seeking to move away from this vision.

http://www.catalyst-for-renewal.com.au/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=178:11-robert-fitzgerald-am-leadership-in-our-church--a-shared-responsibility-of-service&catid=16:archive-vatican-ii&Itemid=102

Jesus told us, his disciples, “When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth” (John 16:13)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Marts

Fitzgerald hits the nail on the head when he writes:

…it is time to once again proclaim the vision of the Second Vatican Council, to seek a Church based on collegiality, openness, active engagement with its people, whilst at the same time maintaining and respecting the authority of His Holiness and the Magisterium, on matters central to our doctrines of faith. If we do not, then I fear that there will be an inevitable clash between the hopes and aspiration of people of Church and the demands and authority of the hierarchy of Church. For a more authoritarian model can no longer be compatible with or relevant to the reality of the lives of the people of God. More importantly it is not compatible with the Gospel image of leadership.

http://www.catalyst-for-renewal.com.au/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=178:11-robert-fitzgerald-am-leadership-in-our-church--a-shared-responsibility-of-service&catid=16:archive-vatican-ii&Itemid=102

Jesus told us, his disciples, “When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth” (John 16:13)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
« Previous Topic · General Catholic Discussion · Next Topic »
Add Reply