ARTICLES

Could Be Worse, But Could Be Better

Utah's Bishop Comes to San Francisco

BY CHRISTOPHER ZEHNDER

Last May, when Archbishop William Levada was appointed prefect of the Holy See's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, a reporter asked him if he thought his successor in San Francisco would be "more moderate" than himself; to which Levada answered, "it's hard for me to imagine anyone more moderate than myself."

Hard, perhaps, but obviously not impossible.

The appointment of San Francisco's former archbishop to the Vatican congregation that oversees orthodox teaching in the Church left many Catholics wondering, "why did Pope Benedict choose Levada?" Many of the same Catholics were again left scratching their heads when, in December, they heard that Pope Benedict XVI had chosen Utah's Bishop George Niederauer to succeed Levada in the archdiocese. San Francisco, it appeared, was getting someone more moderate than Levada, if that were possible.

The appointment of Niederauer to San Francisco seems to betray Levada's influence. The December 16 Los Angeles Times said the appointment shows "Levada's new influence in Rome," according to "one longtime church observer" -- Jesuit Father Thomas Reese, erstwhile editor of America magazine. Reese, "who has written books about American bishops," said the Times, "noted that Levada is also a member of the Congre gation of Bishops, which recommends candidates for bishop to the pope. Levada and Niederauer are longtime friends and classmates, Reese said."

Levada and Niederauer have been quite close, according to the December 24 Salt Lake City Deseret Morning News. According to the News, Niederauer visited Levada a couple times a year in San Francisco. And "the two are boyhood friends who met as freshmen in high school. Their families are very close, [Niederauer] said, and they now own a retirement condo together in their hometown of Long Beach." Niederauer himself told the News, "I'm sure [Levada] had a lot of input in the Holy Father's decision."

Which of his qualities does Niederauer think Levada "pitched to the pontiff"? "I think he believes I relate well with people and can listen to them and interact with them effectively," Niederauer told the News. "I think he knows I'm loyal to church teaching and have a love for that and the life of the church."

But it is Niederauer's loyalty to Church teaching that some Catholics are questioning. Despite these doubts, however, one would in most areas be hard put to find anything positively heterodox in Niederauer -- or even seriously questionable (like, for instance, one finds in some statements of Cardinal Roger Mahony, archbishop of Los Angeles -- who, it is reported, is a friend of Niederauer and Levada. Father Reese told the December 16 Los Angeles Times that the three were classmates at St. John's Seminary in Camarillo. In fact, Niederauer's appointment is "a win-win for both Levada and Mahony," said Reese.) One may even find some hopeful signs in Niederauer. The "Island Catholic" blogspot, for instance, noted a report that, as bishop of Salt Lake City, Niederauer has presided over Eucharistic adoration and Marian devotions.

Niederauer, too, seems to take Catholic social teaching seriously. The December 24 Deseret Morning News reported that he has been "longtime chairman of the Utah Coalition Against Pornography." In 2004, Niederauer gave strong support to striking mine workers in Huntington, Utah, who had been fired and locked out by their employers. In May 2005 he traveled the two-and-a-half hours from Salt Lake to Huntington to walk the picket line with, and give a blessing to, the strikers. He has also advocated the rights of undocumented workers.

Bishop Niederauer has had some strong words for arms profiteering. In a 2001 panel discussion on non-violence at the University of Utah, he said, "arms and weapons are the drugs and needles of the violent, and we, the U.S., are the pushers." Addressing the so-called War Against Terrorism, Niederauer, according the January/February 2002 Houston Catholic Worker, said, "let's not claim that God is on our side. Instead let's make sure we are on God's side. In the near term our country must bring criminals to justice and work to end terrorism, but God has made all his children with love, and we should treat them accordingly. If that's true, then in the long term the only cluster bomb worth dropping is the one which will simultaneously attack violence, poverty, hunger, disease, and discrimination." Niederauer was the 2004 recipient of the Gandhi Peace Award from Utah's Gandhi Alliance for Peace.

Niederauer has shown some gumption as bishop. In 2003, the state of Utah passed a law that required churches to register with the state if they banned anyone from carrying concealed weapons in church facilities. With 30 other religious leaders, Niederauer refused to register with the state. According to the Deseret Morning News, Niederauer said guns have no place in Catholic churches; but, he added, "I don't need the state of Utah's permission to make such a policy.... It is a surrender of our private property rights to submit to such a law."

As bishop of Salt Lake City, Niederauer said Catholic politicians were not free to ignore Church teaching in how they vote. Their conscience, he said, according to the November 29, 2003 Deseret Morning News, is not a "private compartment" but must influence all they do. "I don't think personal convictions are like raisins in a cake and you can just pick them out," he said. No politician can say, "I'm personally opposed to abortion but I can't impose my moral judgment on others," since the Church's teachings all derive from the belief in "the precious value of every individual human life."

But Niederauer was "more equivocal," said the News, on whether to punish politicians who vote contrary to the teachings of the Church. "I think we are a church that is concerned with salvation of souls and the welfare of human kind," he said. "So we're not eager to drum people out." He was not opposed to more drastic measures against erring politicians but thought they should be taken on a case-by-case basis. Frank Pignanelli, a former Cath olic Utah state legislator, told the News that in 1991, a few days after he voted against a bill to restrict abortions (because, he said, he thought it unconstitutional), two priests confronted him at Mass at Salt Lake's Cathedral of the Madeleine. "The priests said they were severely and dramatically disappointed in me," Pignanelli said. The bishop himself invited Pignanelli and other Catholic legislators to lunch "to again express his disappointment in them," said the News.

But despite these more or less encouraging signs, Bishop Niederauer has, on the question of homosexuality betrayed some signs of, shall we say, "moderation."

In November 2004, when the Utah ballot offered a measure that would amend the state constitution to prohibit same-sex marriage, Bishop Niederauer issued a statement saying he would not support it. The measure, "Amendment 3," not only prohibited same-sex marriage but said that "no other domestic union, however denominated, may be recognized as a marriage or given the same or substantially legal effect." While opposing the legalization of same-sex marriage, Niederauer said he could not support the provision banning domestic unions. According to the October 21, 2004 Deseret Morning News, Niederauer said, "we share the concern of all three candidates for the Office of Attorney General (the state's highest legal office) that the second part of the amendment is problematic." According to the News, the three candidates said "the amendment is vaguely worded and could have punitive impacts on unmarried couples, negating wills, powers of attorney and other legal contracts."

"While it is true that the Catholic Church is opposed to same-sex marriage," Bishop Niederauer said, "we are reassured that Utah law already prohibits such marriages." But, at the time, not constitutionally, which was the point of Amendment 3 (which, incidentally, passed by a 66 to 34 percent margin.)

Niederauer's refusal to support Amendment 3 is strange in light of his earlier support for a September 9, 2003 statement of the administrative committee of the United States Catholic bishops, who said they "strongly oppose any legislative and judicial attempts, both at state and federal levels, to grant same-sex unions the equivalent status and rights of marriage -- by naming them marriage, civil unions, or by other means." Catholics, Niederauer told the September 27, 2003 Deseret Morning News, "come to a political discussion with our beliefs and we don't leave them outside the door ... it ought to influence how you deal with public issues, or ought to be allowed to. Because we believe this natural institution of marriage has been blessed and elevated by the Lord, then this makes it all the more important for us." The bishops' statement, Niederauer said, "is not a statement against homosexuals. It is a statement about marriage. It's not even a statement about homosexuality, but it is about marriage ... it is not gay bashing to say we don't think two persons of the same sex are qualified to be husband and wife." Of course, in this statement, Niederauer referred only to homosexual marriage. What was his stand on state-sanctioned homosexual civil unions, which the U.S. bishops' statement opposed?

Perhaps Niederauer's reluctance to support a measure that would have banned not only homosexual marriage but its legal equivalents stems from what some have said is his particular sensitivity towards homosexuals. Niederauer, in his days in Los Angeles, served at West Hollywood's St. Victor's church, noted for its many homosexual parishioners. In the 2003 interview with the Deseret Morning News, Niederauer said, in reference to his two-and-a-half years at St. Victor's, "I don't have to take a back seat to anyone in the church in my admiration for the people I met.... They were as wonderful and gifted and generous and compas sionate as any you meet. But what we're teaching here is about marriage and in favor of a living traditional understanding of marriage and not a teaching against a group of people." The December 22, 2005 LifeSite News reported that St. Victor's pastor emeritus, Monsignor George Parnassus, said of Niederauer, "gay men never felt ill at ease dealing with him. We would be invited to their homes in West Hollywood."

Until this year's Vatican statement forbidding ordination of men with "deep-seated" homosexual tendencies, and especially those identifying themselves as "gay," came out, Niederauer was a proponent of ordaining homosexuals, as long as they were celibate. "Objectively, is a gay priest less than welcome? No," Niederauer told the May 28, 2002 Miami Herald. "Subjectively, could a gay priest feel unwelcome? We can all feel different things." Niederauer has been forthright in his rejection of the notion that sexual molestation by priests of minors can be traced to the presence of homosexuals in the priesthood. "What I don't want," said Niederauer, according to the September 19, 2002 National Catholic Register, "is some kind of link between being homosexual and being a molester of minors. Eighty to 90% of child sexual abuse is committed by married men or young men who will be married, so child abuse is not a heterosexual or homosexual problem; it is an illness and a disorder." (What the bishop, perhaps, missed is that most cases of "child molestation" by priests don't involve children, but sexually mature boys. The Register quoted Philip Jenkins, author of Pedo philes and Priests: Anatomy of a Contemporary Crisis, who said, "the proper word for a man who has sex with a boy of 16 or 17 is homosexuality.")

Yet when the Vatican's instruction barring homosexuals from the ordained ministry appeared this past November, Niederauer did not change his position on the ordination of homosexual men. The December 12, 2005 Salt Lake City diocese's Intermountain Catholic carried an interview with Bishop Niederauer concerning the recent Vatican document. According to Niederauer, the Holy See addressed the issue of homosexuality in the priesthood because "sexual orientation in general, and gay culture issues in particular, are much on people's minds these days." And though the Holy See has itself said the document had been in preparation for nine years -- well before the outbreak of the sexual abuse crisis -- Niederauer gave as a second reason for issuing the document that "some who are seriously mistaken have named sexual orientation as the cause of the recent scandal regarding the sexual abuse of minors by priests."

Niederauer agreed with the Vatican document that "affective maturity" was necessary for one who seeks the priesthood; and for the bishop, "affective maturity" means that "all the loving and relating that a priest does must be centered in Christ and consistent with the priest's commitment to Christ and the Church." It is a "single-heartedness [that] does not allow for a relationship in any priest's life that would weaken his commitment to Christ and his Church." But, asked the interviewer, "can a man who is homosexual be an effective priest?" Niederauer did not answer the question directly, merely saying, "if any priest has the affective maturity described above, and in the document, then with God's grace, he can effectively minister as a priest." A strange indirection, given that the Vatican document clearly says that anyone who has deep-seated homosexual tendencies, by that fact has not attained affective maturity.

In the interview, Niederauer seems to think that homosexuality is not itself a problem for a priest candidate, only a too exaggerated attachment to a homosexual identity. When asked why the document expresses "concern about someone who supports the 'gay culture,'" Niederauer replied that, since "any Catholic priest's identity must be centered in Christ the Priest ... a priest cannot think of himself or present himself as mainly something else: a Democrat, a Republican, an American, a Frenchman, or as someone who has a particular sexual orien tation." Homosexuality, then, for Niederauer, appears to be on the level of nationality or political affiliation, and like them, is only a problem for a priest if he identifies himself "mainly" with it. For, as Niederauer said, "as important as sexual orientation may be in the structure of human personality, the priest must be principally 'of Christ.'" Too, said the bishop, "it would be inconsistent for the priest and confusing for the Catholic faithful if a priest differs from the Church in any of its moral teachings."

According to a December 2, 2005 article in the Salt Lake City Tribune, Bishop Niederauer indicated he would continue to ordain homosexuals. "In every generation, there have been many celibate priests whose principal attraction might be to their same sex," Niederauer told the Tribune. Spiritual directors would have to work with candidates for the priesthood to determine whether or not they had "deep-seated homosexual attractions." Though an "emotionally immature homosexual priest" for whom "sexuality is all important" (as the Tribune put it) might experience same-sex attractions, said the bishop, "in such a way that it would make it difficult to be in the environment of an all-male seminary," seminaries need take no new precautions to guard against such candidates. In fact, for Niederauer, it seems, the Vatican document on homosexuals in the ordained ministry is unnecessary, since, he said, "a way has been found in seminaries operating right now that is prudent and faithful to the church and also sensitive to candidates."

Niederauer's hesitation to come down firmly against ordaining homosexuals might stem from what seems his aversion to discriminating against or labeling others. These themes were to the fore in two of his homilies. In one, "The most important 'Thou Shalt not' of all," delivered on October 23, 2005, Bishop Niederauer reminded his hearers that the "greatest, and the most important commandment of all" is to love God "with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind;" the "second one," he said, "is like it: 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.'" Since, said the bishop, God loves us, not for our external appearance, our intelligence, our wit, or for anything else but what is in our hearts, in our souls, inside the very core of each of us, where no one else sees ... he wants us to love him back most of all from that core inside of us." But, he continued, "it's no good telling Jesus how much your heart loves him if you never listen to his words or come to his sacraments or show love to the other people he loves."

But how specifically are we to show love to others? "We Catholic Christians, followers of Jesus," said Niederauer, "must be careful ... not [to] put on masks or labels or harsh names on other people, and see 'weird,' or 'ugly,' or 'dumb,' or 'crazy,' or 'different,' or 'poor,' or 'foreigner.'" Niederauer ended the homily with this "thou shalt not" (the "most important of all"?) -- "don't put the masks or labels on yourselves or on others. Let the good, lovable, likable person God made, the one God loves, shine through, and become a brother or sister in Christ for you."

Niederauer developed a similar theme in a homily he preached on the feast of the Epiphany last year. On this feast, commemorating the coming of the Magi and the gentiles they represent, the bishop noted how the liturgical readings stress "inclusiveness."The feast teaches, he said, that "the plan" of Christ is that "Jews and Gentiles alike -- all people of all times and all places -- will be members of the same body of people of the Lord, sharers of the same promise of salvation, rescued from sin and death, promised life now in God, and life eternal." This is God's reaching out to all, said Niederauer; and "he calls us to reach back to him -- over and over again in our lives -- in the sacraments, for nourishment and forgiveness, and in the Scriptures, and especially in each other." We must choose, said the bishop, between which king we would follow, Herod or Christ. "We can choose Herod," he continued, "and we do so each time we react with suspicion, distrust, selfishness, hardened unforgiveness, knee-jerk judgments born of prejudices against individuals, or groups, or anything or anyone new or strange or different."

Two priests who were at St. John's Seminary in Camarillo when Niederauer was there spoke on the whole positively of him. Niederauer was rector of the seminary when Father Richard Perozich, now a missionary in Honduras, was there in the years 1988-1992. taught a few lectures, but not classes by the time I was in seminary," said Perozich. "He gave the rector talks, made sure the seminary ran well. It was in his rector talk where he gave us moral advice, very cleverly presented, as is his witty style, in things to do and things to avoid. I don't have the exact quote, but I do remember him making the distinction then that men with homosexual inclination might be ordained, but if one were to declare oneself 'gay,' he would not be in the archdiocese of Los Angeles."

"My impression of him is sort of positive," said the other priest, who requested anonymity. "I suppose I have a positive recollection of him. He is certainly very bright, very literate, very good with people."

This priest said he had heard that Bishops Tod Brown of Orange, Daniel Walsh of Santa Rosa, and San Francisco's auxiliary bishop John Wester were in the running for the archdiocese. (Other sources mentioned Stockton's Bishop Stephen Blaire as one of the candidates.) "My feeling is that we could have done a lot worse," said the priest. "I don't think he's all that bad a candidate."

"Could have done a lot worse" is, perhaps, not very encouraging, especially for those who hoped for better episcopal choices under Pope Benedict XVI. Why, one wonders, did Ratzinger, who reportedly criticized many of Pope John Paul II's choices for bishops, decide on a moderate, when the times call for radical orthodoxy?

One priest, Father Maximilian (not his real name), said the choice of Niederauer is the unfortunate consequence of a mistake -- the mistake the pope made in choosing Levada for the curia. "I think the appointment of Levada was a big mistake," said Maximilian. "I wouldn't want anyone else as pope, but that doesn't mean Benedict will not make mistakes. But whether it was a mistake or not, once it occurred, there had to be consequences. It would be odd if Levada didn't have a say about who would be bishops on the Pacific Coast. Since Levada, Mahony, Niederauer, and Brown are all in bed together (figuratively, anyway) this appointment is intelligible."

"Well, there's always the genuine possibility that the pope hasn't a clue about all of this -- especially something like an election in Utah," said another priest, Father Nazianz (not his real name.) "I think that fact would have given him pause, but it may have been brought up, and Niederauer may have given his explanation, which may have sounded plausible to a European."

Father Nazianz said that, though the appointment of Niederauer indicates that it will be business as usual in the universal Church (at least as far as episcopal choices go), one shouldn't lose heart. Unlike certain other epochs in Church history, said Nazianz, our day has seen "good popes presiding over a decadent Church, not decadent popes presiding over a decadent church, and so we're continually being led to think there is going to be a radical change." But there won't be. In Pope Benedict XVI, said Nazianz, "we simply got someone who is the best we can get under the circumstances, but we shouldn't get our hopes up. We must just keep the faith; and if the pope can make things a little bit better for the rest of us it will be nice."

And "as far as episcopal appointments go," asked Nazianz, "what is the pope going to do short of a radical shakedown?" But such a shakedown is needed if the Church is really to be reformed. "We need someone who is irascible and pastoral," said Nazianz. need a mean pope, one who is as dangerous as the people who are running the Church right now. But, that being said, we must pray and persevere. And it will get better."

WHO IS GEORGE NIEDERAUER?

Though coming to us from Utah, Archbishop-elect George Niederauer is no stranger to California. In fact, he was born in Los Angeles in 1936 and spent most of his life in the state. According to a story about Niederauer in the August 19, 2001 Deseret Morning News, as a child the future archbishop was sickly and missed school frequently in his early years; but he loved to study and read, especially European history. "I was an indoors kind of kid," said Niederauer. "My father wanted a third baseman, and he got an English teacher."

When he was ten, Niederauer's parents sent him to St. Catherine's Military School in Anaheim, where he boarded. He returned home to attend St. Anthony' s High School in Long Beach, where he graduated the second in his class in 1954 (along with Archbishop William Levada, his longtime friend). Niederauer said of his family life, "we were a devout Catholic family. We had religious art in our home, and there was a St. Christopher medal in the car, and my father carried a rosary. We went to Mass on Sunday. We would keep the seasons of the year, especially Lent. My poor father would give up smoking every Lent, and my mother and I would pray for Easter to come so he would be human again."

In high school, Niederauer began to consider the priesthood. But when, upon graduation, seven of his high school friends entered St. John's Seminary in Camarillo, Niederauer chose Stanford insted. But, with the encouragement of his friends, after completing his freshman year at Stanford, Niederauer entered St. John's. In 1959, he graduated from St. John's Seminary with a bachelor's in philosophy and then entered the theologate. In 1962, he graduated from St. John's Theologate and was ordained a priest for the archdiocese of Los Angeles. (Cardinal Roger Mahony of Los Angeles, also a graduate of St. John's, was ordained the same year for the Fresno diocese.) Niederauer's first assignment was as assistant pastor at Our Lady of the Assumption parish in Claremont.

Niederauer's year at Stanford had confirmed his love of literature, which accounts for the many literary allusions with which he reportedly seasons his conversation. (According to the News, his favorite writers are Oscar Wilde, Dorothy Parker, C.S. Lewis, Graham Greene, Evelyn Waugh, Flannery O'Connor, William Faulkner, Ernest Hemingway, T.S. Eliot, Tennessee Williams, Arthur Williams, and Henry James, among others.) During the mid-'60s he earned a master's degree in literature from Loyola University in Los Angeles and a Ph.D. in literature from the University of Southern California in 1966. From the late '70s he was at St. John's Seminary, serving variously as rector and spiritual director. In 1995, Pope John Paul II named Niederauer bishop of Salt Lake City, which oversees the about 200,000 Catholics in Utah.

In 2002, with Archbishop Levada, Niederauer served on the U.S. bishops' committee that drew up the "zero-tolerance" policy during the priest molestation crisis in the United States. Though not implicated in any major cover-ups of molesting priests, Niederauer this last year apologized for a letter he wrote in 1986 on behalf of Father Andrew Christian Andersen, who was then on trial in Orange County on sexual abuse charges. In the letter, according to the December 15, 2005 San Francisco Chronicle, Niederauer said the boys who had accused Anderson had mistaken molestation for "horseplay." Andersen was convicted on 26 counts of felony child sexual abuse but served no prison time; rather, the judge allowed him to seek treatment at the facility run by the Servants of the Paraclete in Jemez, New Mexico. Four years later, he was arrested on charges of sodomy against a 14-year-old boy and, for violating his probation, was sentenced to six years in prison. In his May 15, 2005 letter of apology, Bishop Niederauer said, "perhaps I should have been better informed of the content of the trial. He was someone I had known for several years. I wish now that it had gone otherwise."

On December 15, 2005, after Pope Benedict XVI's appointment of Niederauer to San Francisco was announced, the archbishop-elect spoke at St. Mary's Cathedral in the city. "My understanding of the office of bishop flows from the root meaning of the word: someone who oversees, or watches over the church, the flock of Christ," he told those gathered. "The Second Vatican Council tells us that the bishop serves as priest, prophet and shepherd: as priest, he is concerned with Catholic worship and prayer, especially the Eucharist and the Sacraments, and the life of the Spirit in the People of God; as prophet, he is concerned with the proclaiming and teaching of the faith to all, as it sheds the light that is Christ on all reality; as shepherd, the bishop promotes the whole life of Catholics together as Church, in stewardship and ministry to one another and to the world at large, especially to the most vulnerable and needy."

Archbishop-elect Niederauer's installation has been planned for February 15 in San Francisco.

TOP