Disobedience always leads to schism
Over a year ago, I wrote about a dispute in Cleveland which arose as a result of the bishop closing some parishes. I noted that no matter how the bishop handled the parish closings, Catholics must remain in communion with him and recognize that he has the authority to take these actions. One of the men involved in fighting the bishop, Bob Kloos, commented on my post and defended his position.
Now it looks like Mr. Kloos and others have gone the way of so many others who dispute the authority of their bishop: schism.
CLEVELAND, Ohio — Defying the authority of their bishop, parishioners and their priest from the closed St. Peter Catholic Church in downtown Cleveland celebrated Mass Sunday in leased commercial space they transformed into a church independent of the Cleveland Catholic Diocese.
The move by the new Community of St. Peter puts members in danger of excommunication because they had been warned by Bishop Richard Lennon, who shuttered St. Peter’s in April, not to hold worship services in places without his approval.
Still, about 350 people, joined by their spiritual leader, the Rev. Robert Marrone, gathered for their first Mass and communion in their new home — a newly renovated, century-old building on Euclid Avenue and East 71st Street.
“This feels real good,” said parishioner Bob Kloos of Cleveland Heights. “This is the handiwork of hundreds of people over many, many months.”
This is so very sad. Whenever anyone removes themselves from the communion of the Church we should all weep in sorrow; nothing good can come out of it. Unfortunately, too many Catholics today do not recognize vital connection between following Christ and being a member of his Body here on earth, the Church. The Protestant ethos – in which we follow Christ individually and without reference to others – has inflicted Catholics far too often.
Of course, all of this is evidence of poor catechesis, so it should not be surprising that it is the former pastor of St. Peter’s who is leading the charge:
“I see this as an act of disobedience, not a schism,” Marrone said in an interview before the new space was opened. “But I suspect we’ll get accused of schism.”
This is nothing but double-talk: disobedience is schism. When you disobey a legitimate order of your bishop (and there is no question that this closing was a legitimate action by the bishop), you put yourself into schism. Fr. Marrone probably realizes that disobedience (and its attending “rebel” image) plays better in the press than schism.
Pray for these members of the former St. Peter’s parish that they might return to communion with the successor of St. Peter, the Pope.
I should hope that you are not seriously arguing that Catholics must follow their bishop blindly and at all costs, even if that bishop engages in deeply destructive behaviour. Father Marrone and the 350 Catholics that formed the independent Community of St. Peter should be congratulated for their courage. One can only hope that this form of disobedience and dissent will ultimately strengthen the Church by infusing it with social justice, at a time when many of its bishops have lost sight of what it means to follow in the footsteps of Christ.
Had ‘ordinary’ Catholics been this proactive four decades ago and willing to question the hierarchy, I suspect the Catholic Church would have avoided the deep pain and financial drain caused by thousands of abuse cases.
Christopher,
I said, “When you disobey a legitimate order of your bishop (and there is no question that this closing was a legitimate action by the bishop), you put yourself into schism.”
You then said, “I should hope that you are not seriously arguing that Catholics must follow their bishop blindly and at all costs, even if that bishop engages in deeply destructive behaviour.”
How exactly did you get from my statement to your accusation? One isn’t even related to the other.
As Catholics, we believe that the bishops are successors to the apostles, and therefore we cannot disobey any of their legitimate directives. And closing parishes is one of those legitimate directives, no matter the reason, for each parish has as its true pastor the bishop of the diocese, not the priest assigned to it. That is fundamental Catholic ecclesiology.
Furthermore, even if a bishop does do something illegitimate (and he didn’t in this case), we are never to break communion with him, as the former St. Peter’s did. By breaking communion with our bishop, we break communion with our Lord. For as St. Ignatius of Antioch (a disciple of John the Apostle) said in the 2nd century, “Wherever the bishop appears, there let the people be; as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the catholic Church. It is not lawful to baptize or give communion without the consent of the bishop. On the other hand, whatever has his approval is pleasing to God. Thus, whatever is done will be safe and valid.” (Letter to the Smyrnaeans 8).
None of this is to say that we should follow a bishop “blindly” and “at all costs.” If a bishop were to do something against the faith, such as cover-up abuse cases, then we are bound to work against those actions. But this is closing a parish, not covering-up abuse cases. There is a big difference.
Eric,
As Catholics, we must go beyond determing whether a decision was legal, based on canon law, and see if it was also moral, ethical and compatible with Christ’s teachings. From a strictly legal sense, bishops have the right to suppress any parish at any time, regardless of whether it is vibrant and financially stable. Cleveland’s bishop Richard Lennon shuttered 50 parishes in his diocese and those that are still protesting this decision through lawsuits, appeals and by forming independent churches, are all questioning the moral and ethical angle of Lennon’s decision, not whether he has the legal right to do this.
When a bishop has done something illegitimate and immoral, he is the one breaking communion with our Lord. It is then up to the laity–and parish priests–to remain faithful to Christ’s teachings, even if their local bishop is sadly incapable of this.
Anger and a deep sense of betrayal in the Diocese of Cleveland is palpable and widespread, months after the parish closures. St. Emeric’s, a Hungarian Catholic parish, has launched a lawsuit against the diocese and hired none other than the bishop’s former legal advisor to lead the case. The same group has also called on Ohio’s Attorney General to step in and investigate the diocese’s finances. The frustration in the Hungarian community is quite intense, especially after the diocese stripped their parish priest of his salary, health insurance and banned him from saying mass or giving communion in Hungarian.
Christ did not form a religion steeped in legalism, but one which questioned the myriad of rules, regulations and customs that existed, especially when leaders espousing these laws lost sight of what was really important: relating to fellow humans and to the world that God has created with compassion, love and with justice.
Christopher,
You are setting up a false dichotomy between the law and morality and minimizing the seriousness of the actions of these people who have broken communion with their bishop.
The law is there to help us have order within the Church. It is true that we cannot live our lives as slaves to the law, but it is also useful to living the Christian life, especially in areas of dispute like this. And in this situation, the bishop has the legitimate authority to shut down any parish he desires. He might be wrong in his assessment (although I don’t think it sounds like he is in this situation), but such authority rests in him. If we deny him that authority, or just leave if we don’t like his decisions, then we are no longer Catholic.
It is never acceptable, no matter what the situation, to break communion with your local bishop. It is completely legitimate to protest and appeal to Rome when a bishop takes actions that you find objectionable. I do not deny that. But that does not justify breaking oneself from communion with the universal Church, which is exactly what this group did. It is like committing adultery because your wife hasn’t been a good wife.
I applaud the parishioners of St. Peter’s church in keeping their community together even after the Bishop closed down their church. If you had ever attended one of their masses, you would know that they have the most loving and spiritual connection that I have ever experienced. It is the reason that the community has continued on – nothing like St. Peter’s exists anywhere else. If you’ve followed any of the articles, you would note that the parishioners travel upwards of 30 miles to worship at St. Peters every Sunday, and their acts of social works are too numerous to list – yet the Bishop determined that the church should be closed? I’m not sure why you think the closure was warranted?
Personally, I am tired of the archaic laws that govern the catholic religion and seem only to hurt it’s followers. We are expected to follow the letter of the law and not “break communion with the Universal Church”, while the Church is running around bullying all of the catholics? It gets very tiring. I was raised in a very strong Catholic family, attended Catholic primary and secondary school, so I’ve had plenty of Catholic education. After 28 years of marriage (and truly not believing in divorce up until that point) my parents got divorced. In order for their divorce to be recognized by the Catholic Church, I had to go down to the Catholic Diocese in Cleveland and be interviewed by one of their priests to essentially validate my parent’s application. It wasn’t enough that my siblings and I were going through the greif and trauma of a divorce, but we had to follow the letter of the law of the Catholic church as well – and were told by the priests that after the annulment we were essentially illigitimate children as their marriage never existed in the eyes of the church!! Then there was the fallout from our own Catholic commmunity that we thought would embrace us in our time of need. On a global level, the Catholic church rejects gays and lesbians from the commmunity, there are allegations of abuse, etc. It’s absurd. You discuss breaking communion with the church, but the church you are referring to is just a building. WE, as a people, are the church – I refuse to believe that my soul is in jeopardy because I am not worshipping in a fully sanctioned MAN-MADE building. You refer to the Protestant ethos inflicting Catholics, and after all of my education and life experience in the Catholic community that is exactly how I feel – with the exception that I feel called to live it in connection with my Community (the PEOPLE as the church), not a hierarchy of Bishops and the Pope. Viewing the Pope as a descendant of St. Peter is offensive in my eyes – the Bishop and the Pope are simply men, just as fallable as the rest of us, and nothing more (offensive to you, I’m sure). They have too much power, and have abused that power too many times. In this specific instance,the Bishop has the authority to close churches that are in decline – which has never been St. Peter’s. The Bishop made a drastic error in judgment, and that error was escalated by appeals that were ignored or refused. It almost appears to be some personal vendetta?? There was no valid reason to close this vibrant parish, and I applaud Fr. Marronne and the Community for their courage to continue on. It is absolutely acceptable to break communion with the Bishop and the Church when their behavior is unacceptable and unconscionable. These are the Catholics of today and it’s high time that somebody moved forward – I have been waiting for it for a LONG TIME!!
I precisely had to say thanks again. I’m not certain the things I would’ve sorted out in the absence of the entire thoughts shown by you regarding such situation. It previously was a very terrifying issue in my position, but discovering this well-written way you treated that made me to jump with fulfillment. Now i am happier for your support and in addition wish you comprehend what a great job your are getting into teaching other individuals thru your webpage. More than likely you’ve never come across any of us.