Americans Spoke Their Minds in 4-Day ‘Summit’ at the Vatican : The View From the U.S.: Only Time Will Show Lasting Effects

The four-day meeting with Pope John Paul II last week wasn’t the first time America’s Roman Catholic archbishops have met with a pontiff on Vatican turf, although the last such group encounter was more than 100 years ago.

Now, as then, the U.S. prelates weren’t afraid to respectfully speak their minds to the Holy Father and his closest advisers, the Curia. And, it appears, both Popes were willing to listen.

The reason for the November, 1883, meeting with the dozen men who then headed U.S. archdioceses was to set the agenda for the third plenary Council of Baltimore, held a year later.

The historic council was bountiful: preparation of the Baltimore catechisms, which became the basic means of Catholic religious instruction in this country; legislation that fixed the pattern of every parish having an elementary school, and the founding of Catholic University of America in Washington.

No Plans in Store

No such grand plans are in the making after the March, 1989, “summit” of 36 U.S. cardinals and archbishops who met for the unusual dialogue. Nor were they intended.

The Rome conference was called to address tensions that have arisen in recent years between the independent-minded, 53-million-member U.S. flock and the Holy See, doctrinal guardian of the 850-million-member worldwide church.

“Basically, these meetings were not meant to be action-oriented. There were no action steps or study proposals,” said Los Angeles Archbishop Roger M. Mahony upon his return. “But it was an opportunity to have deeper theological reflection on evangelizing in the context of our culture and society . . . and an opportunity to reflect together with fellow archbishops, the Pope and Curia officials.”

“It was never ‘us-them,’ but there was no hesitancy among any of us to say what we thought,” Mahony said earlier at the Vatican. “We made our point, and the nice thing was, the Pope was there to hear it.”

“I don’t see any new emphases,” said Archbishop Thomas C. Kelly of Louisville. “We haven’t been spanked.” And Chicago’s Cardinal Joseph Bernardin summed up: “We will continue to go about our ministry as we have in the past.”

Attitudes, Not Faith, Differ

Differences between the U.S. hierarchy and Rome remain, Archbishop John L. May of St. Louis, president of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops, said at a Washington news conference Monday, but they concern attitude and approach rather than doctrine or practice of the faith.

“Though the teaching of the church is one and universal, our approach in presenting this teaching must be custom-fitted to the U.S.A. . . . What we came to Rome to say . . . was that this spirit of America”--freedom of thought, pluralism and democracy--”must influence our own approach in the States,” May said.

Many of the speeches by Vatican officials at the closed meetings were critical of aspects of U.S. Catholicism, such as attitudes toward sexual morality--particularly resistance to the church’s ban on contraception--and what the Vatican considers laxity by some U.S. bishops in enforcing orthodox doctrine.

Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, who heads the Vatican office to preserve doctrinal purity, hammered home the theme that a bishop’s responsibility is to proclaim the truth and the church’s teaching without compromise.

That theme was reminiscent of Pope John Paul’s words to the entire U.S. hierarchy when he addressed them in Los Angeles during his September, 1987, visit to the United States. Admonishing the bishops to address dissent “courageously,” he reminded them that “dissent from church doctrine remains what it is--dissent.”

Complaints From the Vatican

Other problems aired at the Rome sessions--the agenda was chosen by the Vatican--included the declining use of the sacrament of penance, the conceding of too much authority to theologians by bishops, the granting of too many marriage annulments, and the impact of “radical feminism” on the U.S. church.

The Americans held their ground on many points. For example, on granting marriage annulments and the sparing use of the rite of general absolution--in place of individual confession--they insisted that the U.S. church is in fact following Vatican guidelines.

And Archbishop John R. Quinn of San Francisco, appearing with May and Kelly at the Washington press conference, said U.S. bishops did not believe that cracking down on the estimated 70% of U.S. Catholics who practice contraception “was the answer.” The role of the church is “to be faithful to its truth” rather than enforce compliance, Quinn said.

In formal statements and private conversations, both liberals and conservatives expressed satisfaction with the mood of the Rome gathering.

It “built an even stronger bridge between the church in the United States and the church universal,” said Father Kenneth J. Doyle, an information officer for the U.S. Catholic Conference who accompanied the archbishops.

Even the archbishop who triggered the proposal by American prelates to hold the summit said he was pleased.

“It is our hope that this was the beginning of an ongoing dialogue,” Archbishop Raymond G. Hunthausen of Seattle said upon his return.

Pastoral Authority Removed

After some conservative members of Hunthausen’s archdiocese complained about apparent laxity in the way he administered church doctrine, particularly in sexual matters, the Vatican stripped him of key pastoral authority and handed it over to an auxiliary bishop. The 1986 action provoked a furor among many of the U.S. bishops, and they sought the Vatican summit.

Hunthausen said this week that he had heard that the Vatican plans to end the investigation of his archdiocese. But “it would be naive” to say differences between the American bishops and Rome were minimized, Hunthausen said of the meeting.

Msgr. John Tracy Ellis, the dean of U.S. Catholic historians, noted that the two other Vatican summits held in recent years have also involved Rome’s displeasure with liberal departures from orthodoxy.

The hierarchy of the Brazilian church asked for a meeting with the Pope to discuss liberation theology, and the Dutch prelates were summoned to quell dissent over the Vatican appointment of conservative bishops.

Some Change Noted

Ellis, 83, a retired Catholic University professor, thinks there was “at least a temporary improvement and a more positive attitude” between Rome and Brazil, “though it isn’t all sweetness and light.” Regarding the Netherlands, he said: “I don’t think it’s changed the situation one iota.”

What are the prospects for the American summit?

“Only time will tell,” Ellis said in measured tones. “And then again, maybe time won’t tell. . . . In some dioceses, a bishop may institute new policies. And maybe his neighbor (bishop) won’t stir.”