My purpose in these posts is to bring a variety of Christian and other writers in a desire to share significant writings that in my estimation contribute to the common good and directly or indirectly give glory to God and extend the Lord's work of salvation to all of humanity. G.S.
----------------------------------------------------------------
From the start, dear reader, please allow me to identify myself as a retired priest in Montreal who is still active in ministry. What you find here are my "musings" as a Roman Catholic man of retirement age who also happens to be a priest. I no longer have any "mandate", nor title, nor any authority within the Roman Catholic Diocese of Montreal, beyond my occasional ministry here and there. However, as a citizen, I am entitled to my opinions like any other citizen, many of whom are not shy to broadcast their views, whether well informed or not. These days, I am receiving notes from friends and people who know me, along with quotes from the media such as:
--------------------------------------
Articles reporting on inaction by the Archdiocese of Montreal
https://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/montreal-archdiocese-slow-to-act-on-meddling-in-abuse-investigation-ombudsman
"MAUVAISE FOI" - par Isabelle Hachey - La Presse+
« C’était devenu inacceptable », dit la juge Capriolo en claquant la porte
--------------------------------------
What are we to make of all this noise?
I sympathize with all those who feel this way:
"It's frustrating to read this news. What is it going to take to light a fire under the comfortable pew? When will the penance be served ? These were not only sins in the theological sense, but crimes in the legal sense."
Convicted pedophile stripped of priesthood by Montreal archdiocese | CTV News -
"It's unacceptable for an institution that is at the cornerstone of the foundation of Montreal and of Quebec, with a worldwide reputation of trust, faith and love, to be so lazy in the reparation of its own legacy."
Wait just a minute here... let's step back to see the "big picture", shall we?
Sadly, these are merely the cracks indicating the current condition of our beloved Church in the Diocese due to aging, multiple departures of staff for various reasons - better pay "in the world", retirement, disenchantment, Covid-19 complications, fear of being unfairly judged in the media, etc. etc. - such that those who remain "in the breach" are frankly overwhelmed. They are doing their best, but obviously, at times their best is "not good enough" for the critics and bystanders of this world. Anyone can tear down the reputation of another person or of any group or organization; that's easy to do... all you have to do is repeat a rumour or misinformation often enough and it acquires the appearance of truth. Much more laborious is the task of the truly effective investigative journalist, who appear to be a dying breed.
Then, these days we also find slowness to return to live participation in the Sunday Liturgy
on the part of many of "the faithful" who, not least due to lingering
fear of the SARS-Cov-2 virus, are reluctant or slow to return to their
church or categorically staying home to watch
on a screen. Again, as a dear friend would often say in such
situations, and with great compassion and sincerity: "I feel your pain."
Add to the current challenges of our Diocese the advent of the ombudsman, which from an ecclesial point of view - even from a worldly point of view - has been a revolutionary move in the best possible way of looking at it. However, what needs to be understood at the outset, is that the presence and function of a good ombudsman is bringing to the Church the highest administrative standards of our modern society. Lest it be forgotten or neglected, let us remember that much of the social progress in western civilization was initiated and pushed forward by members of the Church. Even the scientific revolution was mostly "carried" by Catholic priests, religious, and laity. However, it is public knowledge, clearly seen from following the labours of Pope Francis, that in terms of administrative practices, the RC Church has only lately been able to "catch up" to developments in secular society.
For centuries in Québec education and health care were provided entirely by religious organizations: Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, and others. Had it not been for these generations of generous and dedicated people who worked for little or nothing; the population would have had no schools, no hospitals, no social services of any kind. It is only in the past few generations that governments took these over.
Here's a question. Where is the deep gratitude of a people, of a nation, for those on whose shoulders we now stand, live, and breathe, enjoying the rights, freedoms, and duties that are now ours? A people or nation incapable of gratitude towards those who have gone before is doomed to end badly.
It was a very responsible and courageously selfless move for our Diocese to hire an ombudsman. It is a good thing, yes, but keep in mind that these
administrative standards to which the ombudsman now holds the Diocese did not "fall from the sky" into our society,
but were developed over decades and, for certain administrative
principles, over centuries. As these administrative
principles and practices developed - often driven by the profit
principle in tandem with progressive social pressures - as well as in the course of the social and political revolution of the past six decades; all the institutions and people
pushed, coerced, and carried by these changes and social evolution had TIME TO ADAPT.
A "new standard" of administrative principles and procedures....
The presence and ongoing role of the ombudsman in the Diocese of Montreal requires from this same Diocese an administrative response equal to these secular administrative standards of our modern society. Unfortunately, this new pressure is being put on the people, the workers of the Diocese, without allowing them the benefit of TIME TO ADAPT which have been enjoyed by administrative workers in business and public organizations for the past several decades. In addition, those who can be entrusted with the burden and responsibility of following up on the complaints received by the ombudsman are not many; they are few, and they already have full time posts requiring their attention, time, and energy. The Diocese has neither the personnel nor the resources of a multinational corporation, but is rather like a small family business struggling to make ends meet week by week, month by month.
The great demographic expansion... and the Church shrinking....
A century ago the Diocesan Curia - the workers who are the immediate
collaborators and workers of the archbishop - were only a handful at a
time when parish churches saw thousands or tens of thousands of people
every Sunday, each of them contributing their
Sunday offering. Our population exploded with the post-WWII years, and
so did our Church. Many new parishes were established in the 1950's,
1960's, and 1970's. Especially with the aftermath of Vatican Council II
from 1962 to 1965 and the various renewal movements
which followed, the size of the Diocesan Curia swelled as well in order
to respond to new needs and demands. Current conditions require the Diocesan Curia to shrink rapidly, back towards the size it was a century ago before the demographic expansion took place. This in large part explains the delays about which the ombudsman is currently unhappy. Two or three people cannot "handle" many complex cases simultaneously with their already heavy duties. They do what they can over a period of time, as much time as it takes. "When will it be ready? It will be ready when it's ready."
Urgent and serious cases are being handled fairly quickly, but "historic cases"....
The general population is well acquainted with the trial, condemnation, and imprisonment of an English speaking priest who was later laicized, returned to the state of a layman, for having sexually abused two minors. The Diocese acted quickly, in fact, more quickly than the police initially. From where I stand, having heard of recent actions taken promptly following the reception of complaints, it seems that the Diocese continues to prioritize serious cases. I imagine, considering the complaint of the ombudsman as published in the news lately, that what will take more time is the handling of "historic cases", cases from the past that may or may not have been handled completely or to the satisfaction of the plaintiffs.
It is also public knowledge that the Archbishop commissioned an exhaustive research of all the files for all cases of abuse going back several decades. It is not rocket science to imagine that satisfaction will no doubt be given, but that it will take the time it has to take, given the Diocese's very limited human and financial resources. It's like the local populations who don't want their neighbourhood church to be sold or demolished, but who have contributed little or nothing to that building's maintenance or repair for the past several decades or in their lifetime. They want the building to continue, but they have no intention whatsoever of loosening their purse strings to make that happen, and prefer to pass the buck.
The "revolutions" of the 20th and 21st centuries....
Looking back again at our history, as populations shifted, new suburbs cropped up, new
parishes were erected, the population base of older parishes gradually
shrank, along with the Sunday attendance in those older churches. At the
same time, the technological, economic, and
social revolutions which affected us all, and the resulting upheaval in
administrative practices which rapidly ensued, caused our society to
"run far ahead" of where our Church was in terms of administrative
practices, which put the Church on a somewhat parallel
but separate track in terms of office work and the handling of files,
calls, needs, and requests. It was doubtless to be expected, under the
circumstances, that the Diocesan Curia would not be able to deal with
all the internal Church challenges and simultaneously
keep up with the upheaval in administrative changes and developments in
business, government, and society.
Since Pope Leo XIII's "Rerum Novarum" in 1891, the Church has championed human development....
That is why our Diocese - for various human and understandable
reasons - is not yet in sync with the world's administrative
standards, even while the Church "runs ahead" with its high excellence
in the domains of
faith,
hope, and
charity, such as: the
promotion of human dignity,
human development,
justice and peace, promotion of
care for migrants and itinerant people,
creative forms of economy putting the human person in the centre,
caring for the poor and exploited, and
care for the environment. Building on the work of his predecessors Saint Pope John Paul II and Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI,
Pope Francis set a new standard for the protection of minors and other vulnerable people
for the whole Church
as recently as 2019. Again, though, human nature being what it is, it
takes time for new perspectives, new understandings, new principles, new
standards, and new administrative measures to be not only adopted in
practice, but deeply integrated into our psyches, minds and hearts.
There is no defence against those who insist on remaining ignorant of the truth, the facts....
There are still those who, simply not knowing much about the Church
from up close, still accuse "the Church" of being "rich" and indifferent
to the poor. Add up the value of all the homes on your street and the
values will add up to such a huge number as
to give the impression that all those who live on your street "are
rich" as well. The Church consists of thousands of parishes where the
people erect, use, and maintain buildings, which seems like a lot of
"riches". In fact, though, most churches barely have
enough resources to pay their priests a basic living, let alone a
reasonable wage. If the Pope is required to use part of the
annual Papal Charities fund to cover his operating deficit, it is only
because reduced attendance and offerings in the prosperous countries and the poverty of churches in other countries reduce or inhibit the regular revenues of local parishes and of their subsequent contributions to the Papal See. Wherever the Church exists, people's salaries and church expenses must still be
paid.
What emerges here, I think, is that all too often we can employ two
disparate standards: we justify ourselves with one standard, but then we
hold the Church to a different standard. For example, I don't mind
leaving a $15 tip to the waitress after a $120.00 meal
with a relative or friend, but I may consider $15 far too much
to drop into the collection basket at Church for my Sunday offering. Two
different places; two different standards. Unfortunately, when the
local church pays salaries and expenses,
it is by the same standard from which none of us can escape. The cost of living is the same for everyone.
Applying 2 different standards only breeds confusion and ignorance....
The media outlets covering the latest kerfuffle over the ombudsman's
latest report suffer, I believe, from this error of two
different standards. Case in point: "in the world" you apply for a job,
are interviewed at least once, must provide full
c.v. and disclosure, may have the opportunity to negotiate your salary,
then you receive a job description, after which you have periodic
reviews after 90 days, six months, 12 months, and then on an annual
basis. In the Curia, as needs and tasks arose and
developed since the time of the colony, clergy and religious did most of the "heavy lifting", and good lay people who were known or who were looking for work were
taken on. Often, they "learned on the job".
To put it simply, until recently, we've not had in the Church the
benefit of such stringent administrative practices, nor detailed job descriptions, as
those current in the marketplace. However, our current
Archbishop, like Pope Francis with his Vatican Curia, saw
the need and began leading the Diocesan Curia into reform. Some 5 years
ago, or so, the Archbishop hired a competent lay woman with experience
in HR - human resources - to start up a department of HR from scratch.
She would have needed an assistant and a secretary,
but all she had was herself... no funds. Well, she's still plugging
away, occasionally is able to get some help, and is slowly putting in
place HR measures and practices. Needless to say, human nature being what it is, there's a lot of resistance, and progress
takes time.
Now, suddenly, under the watch of the ombudsman, there simply is "no
time", because we are being dragged into "today's administrative
standards, ready or not". So, day by day more and more church workers
are being held to the highest administrative standards,
and, quite frankly, many are simply not yet up to the task, at least, not
to the degree to be expected in business or public institutions which have been developing them for decades. A diocese can't just fire everybody
in one fell swoop and start from scratch. There
are also issues of justice and fair treatment of workers to be respected. It looks to me like we are all
being dragged into the 21st century kicking and screaming and holding
on for dear life.
Maybe this ongoing renewal of our diocese and the stringent demands of the ombudsman will
continue to cost us and "more administrative heads may have to roll", as
it were; who can tell? One media article, perhaps quoting the ombudsman's report, insinuated that the Diocese was using canon law to conceal or protect people against whom there may be a complaint. There again, those who are ignorant of how the Church operates, and who may want to remain ignorant, can't understand that canon law is part of the Roman Catholic Church's "code" of conduct. No diocese, bishop, priest, or baptized person has an "option" of not abiding by canon law, but must live in accord with it. Clergy are strictly held to live and work in accord with canon law. People complain about the delays in civil legal procedures and courts, but they accept that this is the way it is. Well, it's the same with Church canonical procedures.
Jesus continues to offer "eternal life" through his Church....
In the meantime, in appears to me - I could be wrong - that news outlets are glad to have one more reason to beat up on "the church". Any time "the Church" stands out - like at Christmas and Easter - she makes a "good target" I suppose. If there's no "new" news, rehashing "old" news will have to do. For those of us who love the Church, she is our Mother, because through her our God gives us life, a share in eternal life. Jesus defined eternal life this way, according to John the Evangelist: "And this is eternal life, that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent." John 17:3
The Church is our mother, and she doesn't need us to add our own scandalized grumblings and strident recriminations from our comfortable couches. Frustration can be a profitable thing, if we interpret it as part of "the cross" that Jesus says we must all be willing to bear if we would follow Him. As Father John Walsh of beloved memory used to say and actually wrote: "It may be more comfortable to watch the parade from the sidelines, but it is far more effective to join the parade." We'll see how it goes.
The new policy of protecting vulnerable people is working and continues to be developed....
I have heard of at least 3 priests recently - good young priests with fine reputations and who were well loved - against whom there was a complaint, not necessarily of a sexual nature but perhaps in terms of the treatment of relationships, or simply because they weren't scrupulously following 21st century administrative procedures. I can tell you that "a great big hand reached down from the sky and pulled them rapidly out of both their ministry and residence", basically making them "disappear" for the duration of the ensuing investigation, whether or not they would later be found guilty.
Should it turn out that they are innocent and were falsely or mistakenly accused, the damage to their reputation will probably remain irreparable... "the cost of doing business in this modern age". These modern ultra high standards are killing for the parish communities that suddenly find their priest "disappeared" without explanation. We all agree that overt sexual abuse of any kind is intolerable, but some less grave forms of abuse are also reported. Even if one person or a few people have a legitimate complaint that they felt mistreated by their priest, the truth often is that all the other people in the parish may hold the priest in high regard, appreciate his ministry, and dearly love him. None of this matters in the face of a complaint, and the priest is "taken out". The ombudsman is watching and waiting.
The current hullabaloo in the news is primarily about two things. First, if I understand the situation correctly, there are only 2 or 3 full time workers at the Diocese who must deal with some or many or all of these complaints, and they are already overburdened in their regular functions and duties. The complaints are above and beyond their regular duties and, probably, "way above their pay grade" to employ a secular business term. To all intents and appearances, they are good people doing the best they can. In some cases, the well experienced worker retired and has been replaced by someone new who has to "learn the ropes", which takes at least 6 to 12 months. Then, some of these new people leave to earn more money "in the world", which again requires someone new to start from scratch. In other words, the Diocese is hard pressed from within and without, with little relief in sight. Again, it is my impression that all too often, media outlets seem not to care for this depth of facts. Journalism used to pride itself on being "investigative", but now all too often media reports rather resemble gossip sheets that simply pass on whatever reports or claims may be had from whatever sources are available.
Second, an episcopal vicar, in other words a close collaborator of the archbishop, has been accused and allegedly messed up. His intentions may have been squeaky clean - I don't know the details, nobody except the ombudsman and a few others know - but he allegedly forwarded something confidential about a complaint to whoever it was he was communicating with. He allegedly broke the rigid rules of confidentiality and the ombudsman is ripping mad. We can sympathize. As ombudsman, she has the task and duty of being the champion of those with a serious complaint. As a result of these high standards, whether the episcopal vicar in question messed up or not, "he's gone", "burned", "finished".
Third, her other complaint is that the process of handling complaints isn't going fast enough according to the standard she is putting to the Diocese. Well, hello! The Diocesan Curia is not a multinational corporation with a president, 5 vice-presidents, and an army of department managers with dozens of employees each, all earning six figures annually, and leaning heavily on the people below them.
All the clergy earn the same, from the newly ordained to the priest with 50 years of experience, from the newly ordained priest to the archbishop and his auxiliary bishops. In 2022, that was $27,601.46 + an amount for room - $7,992.19 and board - $6,750.73 plus employer contributions to the group insurance and pension funds; for a total value of ca. $45,000.00. Lay people working for the Diocese, depending on whether they have 1 or 2 certificates, a Bachelor's or a Master's degree, earn from $33,998 to $40,384.00 plus employer contributions to the group insurance and pension funds, putting them roughly on a par with the clergy. It is true that the clergy are better off than their predecessors prior to around 1960 when the first annual salary of $1,000.00 was instituted. Before that, priests only got $1.00 for each Mass they celebrated, period. That was it; apart from anything more that people may have wanted to give them from time to time. In those days, pastors took charge of the Christmas and Easter collections, from which they had to administer the rectory staff and expenses, including food. Despite these figures, which dramatically increased in recent years to ca. $8,000.00 when I was ordained in 1983, people can still find better conditions "in the world", and they do, regularly, leave to do that.
For priests on pensions today, the older their pension is, the less they currently receive, due to the rapid increases in salary in the 1980's and 1990's, and the less likely they are to earn enough to be able to live where they would like to live; such that they probably have to settle for whatever they can afford, like many pensioners in the general population, with the exception of course of those who benefit from family inheritances putting them among those who are "independently wealthy". As prices continue to rise, the average priest, like the average lay person, will be able to afford even less.
Meanwhile, the vast majority of "the faithful" either "watch the Mass" from the comfort of their home or don't participate at all. We sympathize with and do our best to live in solidarity with, and to support, those who are really poor. No doubt that Jesus still finds among the poor the "widow giving her two little coins" for love of the Church. Among those many people who live well enough, very few actually loosen their purse strings to contribute to the Church, and when they do, for most of them, it wouldn't even cover the tip for a cup of coffee. At the same time, the cost of repairs and maintenance on church buildings has doubled or more, with the general result that they cannot be maintained and people who still go to church hope and pray their church will remain open as long as possible until the city has to condemn the building as unsafe and order it locked up; as happened over a year ago with St. Gabriel. Many or most of our parishes cannot even pay their priest's salary, let alone do maintenance.
"In the world", the president and CEO makes a decision and sends it to his VP's, who in turn lean heavily on their many managers, who then tighten the screws on their dozens of workers. Nope, not here. We're talking 2 or 3 people IN ALL to handle the complaints coming from the ombudsman! I could be wrong, but this is the way it seems to be to me as I approach my 40th anniversary.
So, let's wake up and smell the coffee, folks. Let's get real and stop flying high in the stratosphere with our highfalutin discourses about "how scandalous it is how the Church is handling or not handling" the wide spectrum of complaints keeping the ombudsman busy. The Diocese of Montreal stands with our Archbishop and is decidedly committed to taking the part of each person with a complaint of abuse of any kind. That is good, and we stand by this principle and we stand in solidarity with those who have suffered at the hands of those who have abused them. We feel their pain and join them in praying to God for their healing, comfort, and satisfaction as they are heard and given the help they need.
© 2004-2022 All rights reserved Fr. Gilles Surprenant, Associate Priest of Madonna House Apostolate & Poustinik, Montreal QC
© 2004-2022 Tous droits réservés Abbé Gilles Surprenant, Prêtre Associé de Madonna House Apostolate & Poustinik, Montréal QC
+ + + + + + + + + + + +
No comments:
Post a Comment
We welcome positive and proactive comments, even critiques politely submitted.