Motherly advice for the bishops

1.  Very late on May 4^th police arrested Worcester’s Bishop Robert J. McManus because he failed 3 sobriety tests administered after he hit a car and left the scene.  May 6^th, McManus publicly apologized saying, “I made a terrible error in judgment by driving after having consumed alcohol with dinner.  There is no excuse for the mistake I made, only a commitment to make amends and accept the consequences of my action.”  Ahhhh, a bishop behaving like I expect my kids to behave – fantastic!

However, the very next day the bishop seemed to have changed his mind about accepting the consequences of his actions because he pled “not guilty” to charges of drunk driving and leaving the scene.  Reporters questioned the bishop about the shift but his attorney, a prominent trial lawyer and former legislator, said he had instructed the bishop to not comment.   

Eventually the bishop just said, “My comments made yesterday stand.”  If one is taking responsibility for one’s actions, why “lawyer up” not only at all but with one of the biggest trial lawyers in the state?  Why plead “not guilty?”      

2.  Last week reports surfaced that Archbishop John J. Myers of Newark, NJ permitted a priest to be alone with children despite being bound by a legal agreement to not be alone with children due to previously groping a 13-year-old boy.  This week the same Archbishop is accused of ignoring child sexual abuse allegations when he was the bishop of Peoria, IL.  In each case, the comment was “no comment” because the respective dioceses and bishop prefer to speak through their lawyers.

Are you seeing an interesting pattern here?  That’s right.  Both bishops have the middle initial of “J.” 

3.  Our cub-pope Frankie recently told his staff to take “decisive action” when it comes to clerical child sexual abuse situations because it was important to the church’s credibility.  Yet, Bishop Robert W. Finn of Kansas City, convicted in 2012 for failure to report to police that one of his priests was taking pornographic photos of little girls, remains a bishop as does Archbishop Myers.  Well, choosing to not hold bishops accountable is in fact a decision and therefore Frank was “decisive”.  He just didn’t happen to make the decision I would make nor one that protects children or holds bishops accountable. 

4.  Archbishop Robert Zollitsch, president of Germany’s Catholic bishop conference recently suggested opening the diaconate to women.  However, within days of that, Robert Eberle, the spin doctor, I mean spokesperson, for the German bishops’ conference explained that Bishop Bob actually meant some sort of non-ordained leadership role for women.  Evidently Bishop Bob, though an archbishop and official voice of the church, is not capable of speaking for himself. 

Are you seeing the same trend I’m seeing this time?  Yes, that’s right.  Men named “Robert” seem to be in the news lately.

But wait! There’s more:

5.  Last Sunday when meeting with the Superiors General from women’s religious orders, Cardinal Joao Braz de Aviz, Prefect of the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life said he was omitted from the process in which the U.S. nuns were investigated and sanctioned.  He said this pained him greatly.  However, a few days after that, someone from the Vatican, probably named “Robert”, said that Cardinal Joao was mistaken…that the good Cardinal was in fact fully involved in the process.  But, Cardinal Joao, evidently having the audacity to think he might know better what he experienced than some anonymous Vatican person, told reporters that he actually meant what he said.

6.  Cardinal Timothy M. Dolan who paid-off pedophile priests when he was bishop of Milwaukee recently said that homosexuals are welcome at the church’s table as long as they wash their hands, referring to cleansing themselves from what he considers sins associated with their sexual orientation.  In protest a small group of people dirtied their hands and tried to attend Mass at the Cardinal’s New York cathedral.  But, they were denied access and actually encountered the police whom church leaders had summoned to shoo them away. 

Evidently dirty hands are only permitted to consecrate the host not receive it.  And yes, I know you’re thinking like me…  “Where is Bob in all this?”

7.  This week Cardinal Sean P. O’Malley said he will not attend Boston College’s graduation on May 20th because he doesn’t agree with some of the invited commencement speaker’s political views.  Enda Kenny, Ireland’s Prime Minister who supports abortion in the case of saving a mother’s life is the speaker.  Following the “nay-nee-nay-nee-boo-boo” example of his hero Jesus, the Cardinal is opting to stay home rather than sit at table with those he considers sinners.  I’m sure there is a “Bob” behind this somewhere too.

The church’s hierarchy teaches that they best imitate Jesus, so much so that they claim to be ultimate guardians of truth and downright infallible at times.  However, aside from the whole “Bob” first name and “J” middle initial trends, there seem to be a few more disturbing trends in play. 

On one hand laypeople are labeled as too removed from Jesus (or possibly too ignorant) to know gospel truths without their bishops’ pastoral guidance.  But on the other hand many bishops’ behavior greatly deviates from gospel messages, sometimes to the point that bishops speak through lay attorneys who are helping them avoid accountability.  Instead of following gospel values when they deviate from the gospel, they deviate even further from it by trying to sidestep responsibility. Furthermore, bishops who do speak aligned with gospel messages increasingly seem to have laypeople trying to explain their words away.       

I know bishops claim they are parents though they have no children.  But, in honor of Mothers’ Day, I thought I’d offer some parenting tips being as I am actually a parent:

1.  Bob McManus, ditch the lawyer and revert to “Plan A”…tell the truth and take responsibility.  Short of that, you’re not an example.  A personal apology to the person whose car you hit might be a boon too.

2.  J.J. Myers, please resign.  Please also visit every person impacted by the priests and spend time learning about the pain inflicted by your decisions.

3.  Frankie, your actions speak louder than your words.  If bishops Bob and John don’t resign taking responsibility for their actions, a good father would insist that they do.  Thus, it’s time to fire them as bishops.  Short of that, Frank, you have no credibility about protecting kids.  Your admonitions about protecting kids in or out of the womb fall on deaf ears. 

4.  Bob Zollitsch, put on your big-boy pants and tell Bob-the-spin-doctor to stop speaking on your behalf.  Cardinal Joao did an admirable job of this.  Perhaps contact him to take lessons on speaking for one’s self.

5.  The anonymous spokesperson for the Vatican should take responsibility and identify his or herself.  Utterances from unnamed people just don’t carry credibility. 

6.  Tim, it’s time to re-read the gospels.  Jesus welcomed tax collectors and sinners without judgment and hung out with highly flawed people.  If you read the gospels, you will see that any forgiveness that Jesus administered to people was after he ministered amongst them and was not done in a domineering fashion…because – and again this will require you reading the gospels – Jesus told his apostles not to lord it over others.  Please write 1,000 times each, “I will not lord it over others” and “Judge not lest ye be judged” after you write a personal apology and hand-deliver it to each of the people you turned away from the cathedral.

7.  Sean, a real father wouldn’t miss his kids’ graduation for love nor money.  Furthermore, Enda Kenny isn’t speaking about abortion.  Even if he is, he’s not one of your sheep so it’s not your place to correct him.  If you truly think he’s a dangerous wolf visiting your sheepfold, a good shepherd will stand by his sheep to ensure their safety.  You are pulling a sorry childish stunt abandoning your sheep.  Get your carcass to Boston College for your kids’ graduation or don't think for one minute you are a father.  But first, please apologize to your children for your threatened negligence of them due to your judgmental pig-headedness towards Enda.  Then, apologize to Enda.  Finally, please see the guidance given to Cardinal Tim.   

This actual mother wishes all the men who think they are Holy Mother Church's voice, a very lovely Mothers' Day. 

Editorial Note: My bad - I originally wrote this article thinking that Boston College's graduation ceremonies took place this past Saturday.  However, they are not until Monday, May 20th so I've reworded the article.  There's still time, Sean - just like for Ebeneezer waking up on Christmas Day in "A Christmas Carol."  

More on Latin translations...

I like to be helpful.  Knowing that the institutional church currently suffers from reduced donations, which in turn likely hinders expanding the hierarchy’s beloved Latin-to-English re-translation campaign, I decided to help.  Since I have studied Latin, I decided to re-translate a few important Latin hymns using literal translation techniques akin to those applied in re-translating the Mass.  

The hierarchy says the new literal Mass translation renders “more poetic” English text.  Thus, I’m confident hierarchy members will appreciate me re-translating some hymns, especially since people expect good poetry in song lyrics – perhaps even more so than they expect it in Mass prayers.  As you will see in the tables below, the literal translations of Tantum Ergo and Panis Angelicus impact their poetic quality comparably to how it impacted that of the Mass. 

I chose Panis Angelicus because it is so widely used.  Also, since taking my first Latin course, I’ve known the common English translation bears little resemblance to the ideas expressed in the original Latin.  With very little modification to the literally translated English text, the lyrics would not only fit the music, they would better align with the original Latin’s meaning. 

Perhaps if the hierarchy began by accurately re-translating this hymn it would have gained mind-share on the importance of accurate translations.  Of course the hierarchy also could have actually done an accurate re-translation of the Mass, but that notion seemed elusive as well…preferring a hack translation job instead.

I chose Tantum Ergo since it is more than just a hymn.  It is used during Holy Thursday Mass, the second most important liturgy of each year.  After the procession carrying the Blessed Sacrament from the altar to its place of repose, the congregation sings Tantum Ergo to begin Nocturnal Adoration.  

Many congregations sing the English translation of Tantum Ergo, “Down in Adoration Falling,” instead.  As they sing, they follow what sounds like instructions from the song; they fall down on their knees to begin adoration.  Even when the song is sung in Latin, many people not understanding Latin assume it says the same thing as the English text…to fall down on your knees in adoration.  Yet, the Latin actually speaks of only bowing one’s head in veneration. 

Because Tantum Ergo is part of a very important liturgy, it probably should have been re-translated with the rest of the Mass texts much like the Easter Vigil’s Exsultet was – which by the way – now gives a whole lot of credit to bees.  I’m sure the bees are extremely grateful and this probably ended decades of tension between the Catholic Church and the International Union for Drone, Worker and Queen Bees. 

I realize I digress but for your poetic enjoyment and context if you’re unfamiliar with the Exsultet’s text…and of course as appeasement to the bee community…I offer you excerpts from the Easter Vigil’s Exsultet showing the previous and new translations.

Exsultet Excerpts

Former Translation

New Translation

Therefore, heavenly Father, in the joy of this night, receive our evening sacrifice of praise, your Church's solemn offering. Accept this Easter candle, a flame divided but undimmed, a pillar of fire that glows to the honor of God.

On this, your night of grace O Holy Father accept this candle, a solemn offering,  the work of bees and of your servants’ hands,  an evening sacrifice of praise,  this gift from your most holy Church.  But now we know the praises of this pillar,  which glowing fire ignites for God’s honor,  a fire into many flames divided,  yet never dimmed by sharing of its light,  for it is fed by melting wax,  drawn out by mother bees to build a torch so precious.

Sorry about that detour; back to Tantum Ergo.  Aside from the previously mentioned poetic impact, I think there is great value in using the literal translation for this hymn.  For one thing it could simplify the manner of veneration as described above. 

Also, the Latin implies a different relationship between God, Jesus and the Spirit.  The Latin text suggests the Spirit’s gifts proceed from God and Jesus, which makes the Spirit sound subordinate to them.  In contrast, the commonly used English translation turns the hymn into a Triniterian theme by including the Spirit and having all gifts proceed from all three members of the Trinity.  This places them all on equal footing.   

To most of the faithful, this might seem an insignificant point but the relationship between members of the Trinity is in fact a major reason for divide between Roman and Orthodox Catholics.  If the Roman and Orthodox hierarchies would agree that these poetic differences are trivial, we could be much closer to healing a great divide in the church.

I think the most significant difference in the literal translation is this concept, “And the ancient rules yield a newer rite.”  This was inaccurately translated into “Over ancient forms of worship, newer rites will soon prevail.”  I actually think the current English translation is more poetic than the literal one, but I think the subtle change in meaning is significant. 

Maybe it’s just the way the words resonate with me.  But, to me, the commonly used translation sounds like we have arrived triumphantly at the new set of static traditions.  However, the literal translation implies to me a continual renewal process without hiding behind the hierarchy’s favorite slogan of, “Tradition” to resist change. 

By the way, In formal logic, reliance upon tradition as justification for something is called argumentum ad antiquitatem or “the argument to antiquity/tradition” and is considered flawed logic.  What would the church be like if the hierarchy would loosen grasp on the flawed logic of “tradition” and allow long-held traditions to yield to newer ways?

If I may digress a second time, if you’re interested in reading about other logic errors committed by the hierarchy, one of my earliest blog articles examined this.   This article was published in December, 2010 just two months after I began this blog.  Subscribers have grown exponentially since then so some newer subscribers might not be aware of that post’s existence.

Anyway, this idea of yielding to newer ways is called “innovation” by the hierarchy.  Whereas innovation in society is often welcomed, the hierarchy fears and condemns it within the church.  No wonder the inaccurate translation stands.  Imagine the hierarchy encouraging innovation by having the faithful sing about it every Holy Thursday!

I encourage people to study Latin.  Beyond its value as the foundation for all romance languages, it is handy to keep priests and bishops on their toes.  Of late, it’s been the source of fun-filled entertainment for me re-translating the Mass to see the numerous translation errors wrought by the official new English translation. 

You can also send your favorite hierarchs greetings of “beata natali” (happy birthday), “exsultans Pascha” (Happy Easter), “felix dies festus” (happy feast day), or even just a simple “beatus martis” (happy Tuesday).  This likely will swell their hearts with joy because of their love for Latin.  It might also send them scurrying to find a Latin-English dictionary because many love Latin for the mystique of uttering words in a language they do not understand.  Your use of Latin could encourage them to improve their language skills.  Either way, it’s a win.

On a serious note, what are you doing to yield newer ways from ancient traditions and to encourage this from your local hierarchy members?  Which new ways are worth having and which ancient rules are worth keeping?  How does a community discern this?

I will offer some guidance answering that last question.  When I was in Loyola’s theology program, the program facilitator kept emphasizing the importance of exercising the “primary option.”  Our primary option is to do the loving thing.  So perhaps the better question to ask is “How does a community determine what the most loving thing is?” 

TANTUM ERGO

Latin	Literal Translation	Current commonly used translation
Verse One Tantum ergo Sacramentum Veneremur cernui: Et antiquum documentum Novo cedat ritui: Praestet fides supplementum Sensuum defectui.	Verse One Only thus the Sacrament venerate with heads bowed: And the ancient rules yield a newer rite: Faith supplies reinforcement for defective senses	Verse One Down in adoration falling This great sacrament we hail Over ancient forms of worship Newer rites will soon prevail Faith will tell us Christ is present When our human senses fail
Verse Two Genitori, Genitoque Laus et jubilatio, Salus, honor, virtus quoque Sit et benedictio: Procedenti ab utroque Compar sit laudatio.	Verse Two To the begetter and begotten praise and jubilation, salvation, honor, virtue also and is blessing: to the one that proceeds from both comparable is one praise	Verse Two To the everlasting Father, And the Son who made us free And the Spirit, God proceeding From them each eternally Be salvation, honor, blessing Might and endless majesty

PANIS ANGELICUS 

Latin	Literal Translation	Current commonly used translation
Verse One Panis angelicus fit panis hominum; Dat panis coelicus figuris terminum: O res mirabilis! Manducat Dominum Pauper, servus et humilis.	Verse One Bread of angels Becomes the bread of humans; Gives bread of heaven The end figure: What wonder! Eat of the Lord The poor and humble servant.	Verse One Jesus our living bread Great gift from heaven sent Fulfill the signs of old And be our nourishment We humble people come To eat your sacred food In peace, joy, love and gratitude.
Verse Two Te trina Deitas unaque poscimus: Sic nos tu visita, sicut te colimus; Per tuas semitas duc nos quo tendimus, Ad lucem quam inhabitas.	Verse Two You threefold God We ask of together: So visit us As we serve you Through your paths Lead us where we strive To the light in which you dwell	Verse Two O blessed Trinity We praise and worship you; Strengthen our unity Our faith and trust renew Lord lead us all our day To heav’nly peace and light Grant us rest, there, before your sight

Why are priests called "father?"

Recently my dad celebrated a “milestone” birthday – one when the person is over 70 and their age is divisible by five.  Many family members celebrated the occasion with him at my house. 

My dad arrived first at the party so he could help setup and was one of the last to leave so he could help clean.  We didn’t have to request “no gifts” because family and close friends just know the routine – any gifts should be a donation to charity rather than something given to him.  As per usual, my dad talked to his children and grandchildren – often asking questions to learn about their lives and to learn about life in general.  He dropped pearls of wisdom in the mix of conversation but was at ease shifting between being a learner and an educator.  Thus is the case with many good fathers. 

We do not call my dad “father” preferring more familiar terms such as “dad” or “pa” instead.  Yet we have a tremendous amount of respect for him.  I think if we addressed him as “father” he would assume we were joking.  However, throughout my dad’s birthday festivities, I found myself contemplating why this man who is a true father, and a very good one at that, isn’t called as such while conversely many priests who aren’t fathers insist on being called precisely that, “father.” 

I then started to compare my dad’s behavior with that of many priests, thinking perhaps the title was fitting due to vast similarities between the two.  However, it was instead a parade of opposites.   So I decided to make a table and share my comparative contemplations.  As a side note, since priests rarely have biological children, the priest column often refers to spiritual children, i.e., laypeople whereas the column for my dad refers to his actual children.

ATTRIBUTE	MY DAD	MOST PRIESTS
Has one or more biological children	√
Raised his children with the help of his wife	√
Collegially shared power with a female	√
Lived most of his life in community with multiple women	√
Has numerous healthy deep interpersonal loving relationships including with women	√
Taught his children to love via the example of his deep interpersonal loving relationships	√
Taught his children to love via his deep interpersonal loving relationships with them	√
Taught his children values via persistent unwavering alignment between his words and actions	√
Spent hours per day with his children in their formative years	√
Is available to his kids 24 x 7	√
Makes his children schedule appointments with him		√
Bi-directionally communicates with his children	√
Primarily uni-directionally speaks at his children		√
Encourages his children to ask questions and think critically	√
Demands unquestioned obedience from his children		√
Thinks his children are of inferior intellectual capacity		√
Treats even infants as intelligent beings who have tremendous capacity for wisdom	√
Readily learns from his children	√
Frequently seeks advice from his children	√
Takes direction from his adult children	√
Treats his adult children as adults	√
Dictates to his adult children		√
Assumes his children are incapable of helping with many chores until proven otherwise		√
Declares himself as the sole competent person to perform numerous tasks		√
Welcomes his children’s diversity	√
Supports expelling some children from the family		√
Asks his children for money		√
Prefers children give money to needy people rather than him	√
Prays	√	√
Highlights his human fallibility	√
Practices true reconciliation outside of the sacrament on a daily basis	√
Reconciles with others because he realizes he is no better person than them	√
Reconciles with others because he believes he is better than others		√
Asserts he is closer to God than his children		√
Feels his children interfere with him having time to devote to God		√
Feels his wife and children bring him closer to God	√
Cooks meals for his children	√
Does laundry for his children	√
Changed his children’s dirty diapers	√
Attended his children’s activities	√
Wears dresses		√
Has an expensive wardrobe to wear at church		√
Encourages his daughters in non-traditional roles	√
Treats his sons and daughters equally	√

In fairness I must highlight the one behavioral similarity between my father and most priests; they pray.  Also in fairness I must acknowledge there are some priests whose behavior aligns somewhat closer to my father’s but, not so much so that I would ever confuse a priest as my father.  And I realize that not all fathers behave like mine.   But it has been my experience that my father more closely emulates Jesus’ behavior than any priest I have ever known.  Therefore I find myself wondering if it bothers real fathers that priests co-opt the term “father” while not conducting themselves as such.

I realize many Protestants based upon MT 23:9 (“Call no on earth your father”) criticize Catholics for calling priests “father.”  But, I find myself questioning the practice given the tremendous divergence in behaviors.  At best the lack of cognitive similarities makes the practice very illogical but with differences far outnumbering similarities, it seems to confuse and degrade fatherhood to call priests “father.” 

As is often the case when I contemplate such things, my mind heads down tangential avenues paved with more questions.   Priests say they best represent Jesus – whom they say wasn’t a father.  Why do they want to be called “father” since Jesus is never portrayed as one?  God is portrayed as “father” in the Holy Trinity.  By desiring to be called “father”, are priests subliminally proposing to be God?   

William Saunders published an article in 1995 explaining the practice of calling priests like him “father.”  In defending the practice Saunders states:

First, we must remember the context of the passage. Jesus is addressing the hypocrisy of the scribes and the Pharisees—the learned religious leaders of Judaism. Our Lord castigates them for not providing good example; for creating onerous spiritual burdens for others with their various rules and regulations; for being haughty in exercising their office and for promoting themselves by looking for places of honor, seeking marks of respect and wearing ostentatious symbols. Basically, the scribes and Pharisees had forgotten that they were called to serve the Lord and those entrusted to their care with humility and generous spirit.

With priests detached from God’s people, operating as if superior to God’s people, taking seats upon the altar while wearing a blinding amount of “bling”, instructing people as though they are mindless children, living more comfortably than many of God’s people, seeking donations where the vast majority of funds are used to promote their environment rather than feed, clothe or house the poor, and admonishing God’s people for not following the vast array of rules they invented whilst they wantonly ignore some of God’s commandments in their own behavior, are we again at a point where in MT 23:9, “Jesus is addressing the hypocrisy of…the learned religious leaders…?”   

Saunders’ article continues to explain the evolutionary process by which calling priests “father” became a common practice amongst Catholics.  Originally bishops, the word meaning “those who oversee”, were often called “papa” (pope) until around the year 400 when that term was reserved for the bishop of Rome (i.e. THE pope).  In the 6^th century St. Benedict called monastic community leaders “abbot”, a derivative of “abba” (the Aramaic word for “father”).  In the Middle Ages, monks from religious orders who worked amongst the people caring for physical and spiritual needs were often addressed by the people as “father.”  Eventually that morphed into people calling all priests, “father.”  However, the official title of a priest is “Reverend.”

It seems originally when the bishops actually intimately cared for people on a practical level and when the mendicant friars lived amongst the people caring for them, those who were addressed as “father” more closely resembled the behavior of my dad.  It is curious that the title morphed to include more and more men whose behavior less and less resembled that of my father. 

I think there is danger in associating behavior that is almost mutually exclusive from something with the title of that thing, such as associating the title “father” with priests whose lives have almost no parallel behaviors with good fathers.  I think it confuses people, especially those raised by men with sub-optimal fathering skills.  It validates biological fathers who treat their children as subordinates, who are domineering, who are hypocrites, who abuse their children, who abuse power, who operate by one set of rules while imposing more demanding rules upon their children, who indulge their tastes while watching their children lack for basic necessities, etc...

The clergy bemoan the decay of the family structure as well as its societal impact.  They point to many potential culprits but what role does their abysmal example of “fathering” while calling themselves "father" play?  Why do people permit the image of fatherhood to be co-opted by men who would make abysmal fathers?  Do the people of God play a role in the distortion of fatherhood, by mindlessly using the term “father” for priests?

God has blessed me with an excellent father whose spirituality, charity, humility and love surpass those of any priest I’ve ever met.  My father has blessed me with the fruits of his character.  In this I not only see but experience the Holy Trinity.  I prefer my father not share the same title as that of priests.  Perhaps it’s time to address priests by their baptismal names rather than indulge them in what Saunders calls “seeking marks of respect.”  Or, if they have earned respect, why not address them by their actual title, “Reverend?”