January
2003
Into
the Lyons Den
ELLEN FOX
A friend from the Portsmouth
Diocese recently lamented that the diocese, like so many others in
the country, is suffering from a lack of vocations to the priesthood.
The editorial of the February 2002 edition of Christian Order
offered insights into this problem - along with the solution - in
one simple but proven equation, i.e. Orthodoxy = Vocations.
Now, if orthodoxy equals vocations – and we have seen the success
in other dioceses around the world, where some measure of orthodoxy
has been restored - it follows as surely as night follows day that
lack of orthodoxy equals lack of vocations. If we accept
this proven equation, then we need to start paying very close attention
to those who are directly responsible for the recruitment and formation
of our future priests. One such person – whose loudly trumpeted views
have been rather difficult to avoid of late – is Fr Ray Lyons, who
is listed in the Catholic Directory as being a vocations director
in the Portsmouth Diocese, and who regularly writes for Catholic papers
and periodicals. He was formerly the executive secretary of the radical
and controversial National Conference of Priests.
Fr Lyons was a keynote
speaker at a colloquium titled "The Priest Shortage – Threat
or Opportunity?" held at Westminster Cathedral on Saturday
27 April 2002. This colloquium was arranged by the People of God
Trust, which is part of the dissident Catholics for a Changing
Church group. A brief report was published in the Portsmouth diocesan
newspaper "Portsmouth People" in June 2002. It would
appear that a return to orthodoxy as a panacea for the decline in
vocations was certainly not on the agenda, as the report stated that
claims were made at this colloquium such as "clerical, hierarchical
structures were stunting the fullness of growth and participation",
and that Mellitus Lawlor, a woman who apparently runs a parish with
no "resident ordained presider" in Hanwell, Middlesex,
was reported to have given an "eloquent testimony"
that "strengthened the conviction that full collaboration
will need to topple gender asymmetry – the most glaring example of
hierarchical clericalism – and allow women pastors". There
is only one Catholic church in Hanwell listed in the Catholic Directory,
which has three priests in residence, so I can only assume that the
parish referred to is not Catholic.
The report also quoted
the colloquium as being informed that: "The ordained cleric
is no more in persona christi than are all Church members",
and that "clerical celibacy should become optional. In time,
this more communal fully representative model of ministry could allow
an enriching gamut of ‘specialist’ callings, such as presiding over
the Lord’s Supper . . ." The report stated that "the
core arguments" of this meeting "were generally agreed
upon". Another report of the same meeting, this time in the
Catholic Women’s Ordination newsletter of June 2002, listed
the names of those who spoke at this event, and revealed Fr. Lyons’
support for the ordination of women. It stated: "If they (the
speakers) were all male except for a woman religious running a parish,
this was because in the present situation the ordained in the RC Church
are limited to this gender for the present, something openly lamented
by all the speakers."
Dissident themes
Let us take at look at
Fr Lyons’ recurring themes. Firstly, his view and treatment of orthodox
Catholics. Fr Lyons appears to be mistaken in his belief that orthodox
Catholics practice a sort of blind obedience, when he states:- "I
am tired of being labelled as some kind of ‘fifth columnist’ by those
individuals and groups within the Church who demand unquestioning
and unthinking obedience to a sometimes flawed use of authority within
the Church. Like many others, I refuse to accept their judgement.
Becoming a victim of their narrow view of the Church and the Gospel
is simply not an option . . ." (The Universe, Sunday 2nd
June 2002)
I’m sure that most orthodox
Catholics would agree that throughout history there have been, and
continue to be, abuses of legitimate authority by individuals at every
level in the Church. But because certain individuals fail in their
duty does not mean that the whole system is wrong, or that it should
be rejected. The same system has helped in the creation of many great
saints! Terms such as "flawed use of authority in the Church"
are very emotive and subjective and unless applied to specific incidents
that can be proven, can safely be ignored. Dissident groups often
lament "abuses of authority" in the Church, when what they
mean is that they don’t accept the authority of the Church when it
refuses to ordain women, approve sodomy, or jettison any other of
its teachings in order to suit them.
Whining hypocrite
In the same article,
Fr Lyons went on to say:- "I may not agree with some peoples’
or groups’ view of what it is to be Church. I may consider it narrow
and restrictive, but I maintain and defend their right to believe
it. I only ask the same in return". This platitude about
maintaining and defending others’ rights while disagreeing with them
sounds like the epitome of tolerance, but the following incident reveals
a very different picture – one of monstrous hypocrisy.
Fr Lyons was present
at a meeting that took place in Portsmouth Cathedral Hall on Saturday
25th September 1999, titled "A Day for Catechists
– Renewal", featuring Dr Kevin Treston as the keynote speaker.
Dr Treston has written several books on catechesis, in which he is
quite open about his rejection of key areas of Catholic doctrine.
He made this rejection very evident during the talk, and when some
of those present politely questioned Dr Treston about some of the
dissenting statements he was making, Fr Lyons launched into a virulent
attack on those who were trying to defend Catholic teaching, shouting
that he had "had enough of the thought police in the front
row" and that they were "the dying embers of a Church
I want nothing to do with". One woman pointed out that the
concerned Catholics had only spoken when invited to, and although
they strongly disagreed with what Dr Treston was saying, had remained
courteous at all times. She asked if everyone could listen to each
other with tolerance, but Fr Lyons remained very angry and continued
to shout at them. At the end of the day, when they left the building,
Fr Lyons again shouted at these people, calling them "whitened
sepulchres". If this is how Fr Lyons maintains and defends
peoples’ right to their beliefs, then Lord help those who he wishes
to undermine. If there was a flawed use of authority here, it was
that Bishop Crispian Hollis allowed a man who openly rejects key Catholic
doctrines to speak on Catholic premises in his diocese, but Fr Lyons
apparently had no problem with this.
Fr Lyons often exhorts
people to rise up and speak out against injustice, but appears to
be very selective in who he thinks should speak out, and what injustices
they should speak out against. An example of this is when he fulminated
against those Catholics who complain to the Vatican about abuses in
this country, accusing them of "sending anonymous and often
inaccurate reports on individuals to what they regard as the corporate
HQ in Rome". He goes on to say "unfortunately, instead
of returning them to the sender, the mandarins play their game. Together
they tackle, even foul, their fellow team members instead of tackling
those who attack the Church from outside". (The Universe,
Sunday 30th June 2002)
It is highly unlikely
that the Vatican would take any notice of "anonymous" reports,
and if a report were found to be "inaccurate" it would therefore
be discredited and ignored, so Fr Lyons needn’t worry about such things.
If there are indeed any "anonymous" or "inaccurate"
reports received by Rome, there must be many more accurate reports
of abuses received, to which people have put their names. Conveniently,
Fr Lyons prefers not to differentiate between alleged "anonymous
and inaccurate" reports, and factual reports of legitimate grievances
from orthodox Catholics.
In making a blanket suggestion
that the Vatican should ignore complaints, he also resorts to the
sort of clericalist mentality – i.e. treating the laity with disdain
and ignoring their genuine concerns - that he claims to despise in
others. Once again, divine admonitions about "whited sepulchres"
spring to mind.
Closet Clericalist
But this brings us to
"clericalism" - the second theme about which Fr Lyons is
so concerned. At this stage, should Fr Lyons think that I might be
giving an "inaccurate report" of his views on this matter,
I will restrict myself to direct quotes from his column. Of course,
in using quotes, one always runs the risk of being accused of selectively
quoting out of context, but I think when one sees what has been written,
no orthodox Catholic will be able to find any context in which
such statements would be acceptable:-
"Instead
of creating a radical alternative to pagan/worldly models of authority,
we have taken them on wholesale. We have then overlaid them with
bogus claims of divine intention, making them inviolable. But
they should be fundamentally questioned. Indeed, let’s eject all
such authority models from the Church and the clerical culture
that feeds on them." (The Universe, Sunday 14th
July 2002)
"Although
the 1985 Code (of Canon Law) recognises the inherent dignity
of all the baptised it still carefully maintains a clerical control
of power and authority in the Church. If we are to move
forward as a Church then we need to re-balance the centre of authority
within the Church. No longer can all authority be vested in the
tiny minority of the Church who happen to be ordained. Other men
and women who exercise ministry within our Catholic community
have to have authority to enable them to enact the gospel precepts
of justice, peace and compassion." (The Universe,
Sunday 21st July 2002)
"It gives
me no pleasure as a priest at the start of the third Christian
millennium to say that it is hard to over-estimate the sin of
clericalism that still besets the modern Church. It is so deeply
ingrained in our Church’s psyche that despite the teachings of
Vatican Two it seems highly resistant to treatment . . . "
(The Universe, Sunday 15th September 2002)
"Unhealthy
clericalism is also uncomfortably evident among seminarians and
recently ordained priests who seek security in so-called certainties
of a past era where the collar gave position and status in a fast-changing
world . . ." (The Universe, Sunday 15th
September 2002)
"Clericalism
is a system, deeply embedded in our structures and Canon Law,
whereby all Church decisions are the sole preserve of its ordained
members. Allowing ourselves to be called Father, My Lord, Your
Grace and Your Eminence is the most prevalent manifestation of
this systemic sin. Excessive reliance, and even deference to,
a centralised curia are the logical and most serious consequence
of such a tendency . . ." (The Universe, Sunday
15th September 2002)
"Clericalism
and patronage ignore the radical Gospel equality of Baptism in
favour of a hierarchical order based on the "ordained"
versus the "non-ordained" – not my terms but those of
a recent Vatican paper disingenuously describing the 99 per cent-plus
who enjoy the dignity of baptism but are not in ordained ministry
. . ." (The Universe, Sunday 15th September
2002)
"Both laity
and clergy frequently buy into this monopoly of power, consciously
or unconsciously. In effect, the authority given by Jesus to the
Church, through Peter, to open the gates of the Kingdom to others
has been subverted into a clerical power structure . . ."
(The Universe, Sunday 15th September 2002)
Papal Bogeyman
Fr Lyons’ third theme
is his relentless attacks on the Roman Curia. Again, I will refrain
from comment and just let Father do the talking:
"But do we
have an over-dominant institution? Has an ‘unconstitutional’ and
centralising curia, by misuse of rapid modern communications,
emasculated the successors of the Apostles in their local church?
Do they interfere at a local level, treating bishops as mere functionaries
rather than as principal collaborators with the Pope in the Universal
Church? Has the Mystical Communion become little more than a corporate
body where HQ simply tells ‘branch managers’ what to think and
say? What has happened to creative dialogue, the only process
by which real communion can be built to enrich any organisation."
(The Universe, Sunday
14th July 2002)
"Over the
past two decades there have also been far too many cases of theologians,
priests and religious, who have tried to engage in the ancient
and traditional process of debate, being silenced."
(The Universe,
Sunday 14th July 2002)
"Far too
many people today feel the Church seems much too concerned with
adherence to law above the spirit of the Gospel of Jesus himself.
Canon Law and personal moral standards are too often put above
principles Jesus himself gave us. A blind, even benign, attitude
of pandering to such narrow and pharisaical attitudes seems to
pervade parts of the Church. At the same time the radical edge
of the Gospel is often ridiculed, silenced by authority, and declared
unorthodox, even heretical. Its proponents are refused the right
to debate the received wisdom currently accepted by those who
exercise authority in the Church today. One of the most heinous
sins now besetting our Church is that mandarins who staff the
Congregations of the Holy See have personal and internal Church
politics as their primary agenda. They are not interested in the
common good, but in the good of their cause!"
(The Universe,
Sunday 23rd June 2002)
"Under the
present Congregation for Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments,
the priority seems to be re-establishing a mythical central control
over the language and rubrics."
(The Universe,
Sunday 19th May 2002)
"Perhaps
the most serious defect of (Pope John Paul II’s) papal policy
has been the relentless advance in the power of the Roman Curia
over the rights of the Bishops. This is a tragedy, because Vatican
II is widely seen as having restored a proper balance of power
following an exaggerated papacy in the aftermath of Ultramontanism
and the unfinished Vatican I. To the average Catholic, the technocrats
and civil servants of the Church seem more important than the
Holy Spirit’s chosen successors to the apostles. The truth came
out in the row following the Synod of Oceania debacle when elements
of the Curia claimed to be ‘the chief collaborators’ with the
Pope in running the Church. Wrong, wrong, wrong…!"
(The Universe,
Sunday 19th May 2002)
An article in the national
Catholic Life magazine saw Fr Lyons calling for major reform
of seminary tradition. This article reported that Fr Lyons had, in
his weekly column in The Universe, called for a radical overhaul
of the present arrangement and questioned whether residential seminaries
have a future at all. (Catholic Life July 2002)
In view of all the
quotes above – made by Fr Lyons himself – one has to question the
wisdom of permitting him to remain as a Vocations Director in the
Portsmouth Diocese. There is already a dearth of vocations to the
priesthood and religious life in that beleaguered diocese, along with
undue influence on priestly formation by radical dissenting feminists
like Ms Vicky Cosstick – an influence that is fully sanctioned by
Bishop Hollis (see Christian Order January 2002). What chance
do young men have of a proper priestly formation under such impossible
circumstances, being "supervised" by the likes of Ms Cosstick
and her friends, and having the Roman Curia undermined by a Vocations
Director – the very man who should be inculcating in them a sense
of loyalty and devotion to the Holy See? Many fear that the situation
will continue to worsen until Fr Lyons is removed from this influential
post. Let us pray that will happen sooner rather than later.
And if Father feels a
little downcast after reading this, I have a snippet of news that
will no doubt cheer him up. The dissident We Are Church group,
which openly rejects many areas of Catholic teaching on faith and
morals, has posted a piece on its website proclaiming that Fr Lyons’
articles in The Universe are "recommended reading"!
Enough said.
