|
|

|
KARL KEATING'S E-LETTER
TOPICS:
A PRIEST WHO MIGHT BE READY FOR A NEW PASTORAL ASSIGNMENT
TEN INEFFECTIVE AND TWO SLAM-DUNK WAYS TO RAISE PARISH FUNDS
Dear Friend of Catholic Answers:
The Canon Law Society of America recently released statistics on America's
bishops.
As of June 1 there were 281 active bishops in the country. The youngest was
46, the oldest 80. (The retirement age is 75, but the Vatican sometimes lets
bishops serve longer.) The average age of bishops is 65.
Almost nine out of ten American bishops were consecrated by Pope John Paul
II.
Nearly half of the archbishops, but only one-seventh of the auxiliary
bishops, were educated in Rome. It seems the Roman connection makes a
difference: A man is more likely to be appointed to a prestigious see if he
spent time at headquarters.
BROUHAHA IN STERLING HEIGHTS
In Michigan consideration is being given to an initiative that would amend
the state constitution to define marriage as a union between one man and one
woman. On November 5 the Sterling Heights city council passed a resolution
encouraging state representatives to vote in favor of putting the initiative
on the November 2004 ballot.
"Gay rights" organizations and lobbyists deplored the vote. No surprise
there. But another opponent of the resolution was the pastor of St. Blase
Catholic Church.
Fr. Randall R. Phillips wrote to the council, saying he was "disappointed"
by its action. We live in troubled times, he said. "When people are fearful,
they cling to what is certain. Marriage is one of those certainties. But we
deceive ourselves, however, with a false sense of security if we think that
a constitutional amendment defining marriage as a union of a man and a woman
will support married life."
Fr. Phillips (who, according to his parish's web site, is referred to as
"Randy," in preference, apparently, even to "Fr. Randy") said he knew what
really would support marriage. Not a law defining it in its traditional
sense. No, what will support marriage are raises in the minimum wage,
"affordable health care for all citizens," and the passing of the "regional
mass-transit initiative."
These measures, he said, "unlike the definition of marriage, will actually
do something to help families." I confess I never had thought of helping
marriage by increasing the number of buses. I suppose the idea is worth
consideration. But, still, even if the measures Fr. Phillips supports were
put into effect, wouldn't it be good to have marriage clearly and
unambiguously defined? What harm would that do?
Plenty, said he. "When families are fearful they tend to lash out at the
groups they perceive to be a threat. Recall the interment of
Japanese-Americans during World War II, McCarthyism in the 1950s, and the
attacks on Arab-Americans following September 11th. In retrospect, we
realize these actions were wrong and, oftentimes, immoral. Fear and
uncertainly often blind us."
The Sterling Heights city council needs to be clear-eyed about the real
purpose of the proposed constitutional amendment, said the priest. "It is
not directed toward supporting marriage; it is directed at not recognizing
the unions of gay and lesbian persons."
This won't do, Father. We have laws against burglary. Such laws "are
directed at not recognizing" the legitimacy of breaking into homes and
stealing other people's property, but they also have a positive side: They
protect the security of homes and the right to peaceful enjoyment of
property. Anti-burglary laws, like nearly all laws and like the proposed
amendment, have positive and negative aspects. So what?
Fr. Phillips said the city council should remember who these "gay and
lesbian persons" are. "They are our sons and daughters, sisters, brothers,
nephews, nieces, and in some instances our mothers and fathers. They are the
fruit [no pun intended, I'm sure] of the union of husband and wife. If we
fail to invite these family members to the table on Thanksgiving, or at any
other time, we undermine the very concept of marriage and family that we
claim to be upholding."
No need to be so breathless, Father, and what need was there to be so
heavyhanded? World War II interments? McCarthyism? Attacks on
Arab-Americans? Why didn't you list the Inquisition, the Crusades, and the
War of Jenkins' Ear? And why didn't you make clear your own status? (Your
hysteria suggests you have more than an academic interest in the
discussion.)
No one can predict today whether the amendments under consideration will be
adopted, but it is certain that the odds of their adoption will be reduced
if leaders of the Catholic Church--particularly bishops, but also
priests--send out the wrong signals.
The Church is unequivocal in her regard for marriage. After all, she says
Christ raised marriage to a sacrament. The unequivocal Church does not need
to have equivocating priests writing letters to city councils.
PASSING THE BASKET
"The Parish Management Handbook" gives a list of "Ten Ways to Increase
Parish Giving." Here they are:
1. Get the pastor actively on board.
2. Make the connection between spirituality and giving.
3. Emphasize the mission of the parish rather than the budget.
4. Stewardship formation and education needs to touch all parishioners.
5. Give equal emphasis to time, talent, and treasure.
6. Encourage proportionate giving (rather than tithing).
7. Encourage pledging.
8. Support U.S. bishops-approved special ("second") collections as a part of
stewardship.
9. Be transparent and accountable in all parish financial matters.
10. Remind parishioners that contributing through estate planning is good
stewardship.
Sorry, guys, but these ten things are insufficient. They have been tried and
found wanting. Let me propose two sure-fire techniques that should be added
to the list:
11. Teach the faith clearly and completely from the pulpit, not avoiding any
of the hard issues.
12. Celebrate Mass in a reverential, "vertical" manner, with absolute
fidelity to the rubrics.
I guarantee the result will be not just larger donations but more people at
Mass to give those larger donations.
|
|
|