By chhotebhai
Kanpur: When I wrote the previous article on the need or role of bishops I expected howls of protest. Surprisingly, I received mostly positive feedback, including from several priests whom I have never met. So obviously I had my finger on the pulse of the community, or had touched a raw nerve. It necessitated this sequel.
If the church today is an organised society, then it surely needs headship. The question that I had previously addressed was what was the role of bishops and how they had evolved, or mutated, over time. If the church is also a spiritual body, then it does need some form of spiritual leadership. It cannot be a headless chicken running frantically around to eventually collapse.
The recent instances of erring cardinals in the west, and devious or dubious bishops in India, raises a critical question; “Who or what kind of persons should be our bishops or spiritual heads?” The Vatican II documents and Canon Law are explicit about the intrinsic qualities of head and heart that bishops should have. I have already touched on that in the previous article, so there is no need of repetition.
The point that we now need to address is, “Where do we find these worthies? Who chooses or appoints them?” This crucial question cannot be left unanswered. Besides Catholic journals, I receive 5 Catholic news bulletins every day, hence am reasonably well informed about the various forces and factors at play, not just in India, but across the world.
For the purposes of this article I shall draw heavily on an article by Jesuit Father Ricardo daSilva in Catholic News Update Asia (CNUA) dated 28/11/20, and the book “A Compact History of the Popes” by Rev P.C. Thomas. We need to address the issue as objectively as possible.
Da Silva’s article is in response to the Vatican making public the 449 page report on defrocked Cardinal Theodore McCarrick of Washington, USA. His sexual misdemeanors first came to light in 1987. It took the Vatican 32 years to defrock him! How many more sexual and financial crimes would he have committed over those years? How many more lives would he have scarred? The thought is numbing.
DaSilva identifies two major reasons for this interminable and unpardonable delay. The first is the total lack of transparency and accountability in the way that the Catholic Church functions. The second is the faulty process by which bishops are chosen – by the bishops themselves. Prima facie this is a faulty system and needs urgent redress.
DaSilva describes the selection process in the USA; that I daresay is prevalent in India too. The process begins with a local bishop recommending the names of priests from his diocese to the Metropolitan (regional archbishop). The probables from the diocese are discussed in the regional bishops’ meeting.
Thereafter three names are sent to the Nuncio (cf Can 377:2). The Nuncio is not bound by these recommendations. He may even consult “lay persons of outstanding wisdom” (cf Can 377:3). Does this actually happen? The Nuncio then sends three names in what is called a terna to the Congregation of Bishops in the Vatican. The head of the Congregation then zeroes in on one name that is submitted to the pope; who in turn is not obliged to accept such a nomination.
In the USA some priests, religious and even bishops have expressed reservations about the present system that could be easily manipulated by personal preferences/ prejudices or even political inclinations. The recent Presidential elections have shown how deeply polarized the Catholic bishops and people are. It has been suggested that the laity also have a say in the appointment of their bishops. Further, the names of prospective candidates should be published so that the people are afforded an opportunity to express their aspirations or objections, if any. This would be a process similar to the proclamation of marriage banns.
The existing system in the USA is in all probability also followed in India. But there are exceptions to what is perceived as a universal or inflexible system. Matters India carried a story on 26/11/20 about the diocese of Chur in Switzerland. In 1948 Pope Pius XII had provided for three names to be sent to the diocese for approval. In the present instance the people of the diocese rejected all three names proposed by the pope.
I now move to Thomas’ book on the papacy. It is a veritable eye opener. Church history, including that of the papacy, is taught in seminaries, but the laity is deprived of this knowledge. Since the election of popes is well documented it is worth studying. First some bare facts. Of 266 popes to date just 4, beginning with St Peter, were Asian, and three were African. In the early church most of the popes were Greek. However, with the Great Schism of the East in the eleventh century the papacy got confined to western Europe and ultimately to Italy. Over a period of time Byzantine, Roman, French and German emperors controlled the papacy.
Pope Hadrian VI (the 214th pope) was from Holland. After his death in 1523 there were only Italian popes till the election of the Polish John Paul II in 1978. So for 450 years we could hardly call ourselves catholic (universal)!
Clear cut laws for the election of a pope were first formulated by Pope Nicholas II (150th) as late as 1059. So for over a millennium and 150 popes there was a no holds barred contest for the papacy. In 1274 the General Council of Lyons declared that a new pope should be elected within three days of the demise of the previous one. The cardinal electors would not be given food or water till they elected a new pope. It was as recently as on 22/2/1996 that Pope John Paul II promulgated the present rules and processes for the election of a pope, in his document “Universi Dominici Gregis”.
Those of us who are used to seeing an orderly entry of cardinals into a papal conclave in the Sistine Chapel, and waiting for the smoke to emerge from the chimney, need to know that it was not always that way. Let us walk down memory lane.
St Fabian (the 20th) was a simple farmer. A dove rested on his head and it was interpreted as a sign from God. In one shot he was ordained a deacon, priest, bishop and pope! For 4 years (304-308 CE) there was no pope, and again for 2 years before the election of St Meltiades (the 32nd). During the Dark Ages of 900 – 1050 CE there was a rapid turnaround of 36 popes. John XII (the 130th) was just 18 years old when his influential father foisted him on the church as pope. Gregory V (the 139th), the first German pope, too, was just 26 years of age. Benedict VIII (the 143rd) was a layman when elected. Benedict IX (the 145th) had the dubious distinction of having three tenures as pope because there were four claimants at the time.
What was worse was the many “worldly” factors that went into becoming a pope. Nepotism was rife. Nepote is the Latin/ Italian word for nephew/ niece. St Hormisdus (the 52nd) was married and his son Silverius (the 58th) also became pope. In 535 CE 217 African bishops were bought over and brought to Rome for a papal election. Stephen II (92A) and his younger brother St Paul I (93) both became popes. Sergius II (119) had an illegitimate son who also became John XI (125). Benedict VII (135) became pope by murdering his predecessor Benedict VI. These instances are sufficient to show how extraneous factors went into the election of popes over the centuries.
Returning to India, despite recent scandals, we have not had such a bad legacy in the appointment of bishops that only began in earnest after the establishment of the Indian hierarchy in 1886. By then the darkest hour was over. Nevertheless ethnic chauvinism and nepotism is rampant. Since I live in U.P., I am more familiar with the local scenario. Almost all the clergy of Allahabad, Lucknow and Bareilly dioceses are inter-related.
Lucknow, though it had less than 7,000 Catholics in 2013, has produced six bishops since its erection in 1940. Its previous three bishops all went on to become archbishops – Cecil D’sa to Agra in 1983, Alan de Lastic to Delhi in 1991, Albert D’Souza to Agra in 2007; besides Ignatius Menezes as bishop of Ajmer in 1979 and Oswald Lewis in Jaipur in 2005. The incumbent bishop of Lucknow since 2000, Gerald Mathias, is also from its diocesan cadre.
In contrast, Agra archdiocese that has a Catholic history dating back to Emperor Akbar’s time, did not get one of its own priests as its archbishop, till the recent elevation of Raphy Manjaly, who will assume office in January 2021. Allahabad is the second oldest diocese in the north (1886). Post Independence it has had six bishops of whom just two – Baptist Mudartha and Isidore Fernandes, were from its own cadre. It makes one wonder as to what “forces” are at work in the choice of bishops.
Do we the people have a choice? Not much, as things stand. It has not prevented me from writing to the Nuncio with my own panel of names, with a small degree of success. I will do so again, now that the see of my parent diocese of Allahabad has fallen vacant.
(The writer has done extensive research on the history of the Church, especially in India, for his forthcoming book “The Jerusalem Code”)
The church can use Sociocracy principle to elect the bishops.