Has Secrecy a Place in the Church?

Tuesday, May 17th, 2011

Gerald Arbuckle reflects on the removal of Bishop Morris:

The recent, unfortunate forced early retirement of Bishop Morris of Toowoomba has caused significant disquiet, not just in Australia, but throughout the Catholic world says Gerald Arbuckle.

Even the Australian Bishops’ Conference, while reaffirming their loyalty to the Pope as the head of the College of Bishops, nonetheless has publicly and very wisely stated that they will later this year “have the opportunity to share with the Holy Father…[their] questions and concerns with an eye to the future.” Bishop Morris’ human and priestly qualities have never been in question.

Why are people concerned? Simply because the process has lacked transparency and due process.

The Archbishop Chaput from Denver, USA, officially visited the diocese and wrote a report for Rome. This report finally led to the forced retirement. But the problem is: Bishop Morris has not seen this secret report so he has been unable to defend himself. This is contrary to natural justice.

Unfortunately, many theologians have been censured, even condemned, over the years by Rome, and secrecy has also without justification interfered with the process. It has been customary for the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith to assess theological orthodoxy in this way: the Congregation is prosecutor, judge, and jury; the person being investigated is not told of the inquiry until stage thirteen (of eighteen stages; the defendant is unable to choose his/her defender or even know his/her identity, nor is there access to material relating to the allegations against the accused; no publicity is permitted concerning the proceedings and there is no right of appeal.

There are times when secrecy is essential, for example to protect the welfare of a person or group, but it must not be habitually used as a cloak for anything any organization does or wants to keep from the public gaze. And, as we see in secular affairs also, the habit of secrecy often leads to a very unpleasant quality, namely the justification of infringing laws and human rights “for the sake of the common good.” Secrets give power of control over others, even more so when those who cultivate them are accountable to no public group. We have but to recall how secrecy was used in the Inquisition to intimidate victims. The use of secrecy to intimidate continues.

The Church is not above the Gospel. It is imperative that we respect human rights everywhere, first and foremost within the Church itself, otherwise it contradicts what it is trying to preach. Was it not the Bishops’ Synod of 1971 that said: “While the Church is bound to give witness to justice, she recognizes that anyone who ventures to speak to people about justice must first be just in their eyes. Hence we must undertake an examination of the modes of acting …within the Church itself.”

It is time to cease using secrecy in ecclesiastical matters in ways that infringe the rights of members of the Church.

___________________

Gerald A. Arbuckle, sm is the author of Refounding the Church: Dissent for Leadership (1993). His most recent book is: Culture, Inculturation, and Theologians: A Postmodern Critique (2010).

Image: St Vincent de Paul Society