Feature Spread

Forced resignation of an Australian bishop MICHAEL KELLY Rites and wrongs Bishop Bill Morris of Toowoomba was popular with his flock, but not so popular with Rome over his support for church reforms. He was finally removed for supposed defective pastoral leadership. The case reveals the disturbing way in which the Vatican deals with those with whom it disagrees ast year, at this time an area the size review; QC’s opinion and a canon of Germany and France was under lawyer’s analysis were released last flood waters in Queensland, week. But the process that led to the Australia’s north-eastern state. It bishop’s sacking began more than Lhappens every decade or so. A part of that seven years ago. area includes the Diocese of Toowoomba – Bishop Morris is from Brisbane 500,000 square kilometres, or more than but by temperament and style he is half the size of France. Queensland is, as very much a “bush priest”. The cli- Kevin Rudd, the former Australian Prime mate of the Australian outback Minister, once told George W. Bush, “bigger makes few concessions and if you than Texas”. survive, it breeds wiry and resilient In May last year, the Bishop of Toowoomba, types. Affectionately regarded for his Bill Morris, was involuntarily removed from pastoral style, he is a man of the peo- his office by Pope Benedict XVI on the ple who had a successful racehorse, grounds of “defective pastoral leadership”. Bishop Bill, named after him. The dismissal is now the subject of legal Perhaps the racing connection nur- tured the attitude he has needed since 2004 – ever alert to surprises and Bishop William Morris during a Mass in upsets, and trained to live with disappoint- August 2011 marking his departure from ments. the Diocese of Toowoomba. Bishop Morris’ first upset occurred when Photo: CNS he arrived at the Vatican in late 2004 for what he later described as an ambush. He Rome on either of two dates the following was invited by Cardinal Francis Arinze, then February to discuss matters the nature of the Prefect of the Congregation for Worship which he did not specify. Bishop Morris and Sacraments, to discuss the continuing explained that for pastoral and administrative use in his diocese of the Third Rite of reasons the dates did not work for him, Reconciliation, which offers participants gen- adding that he would be in Rome in May. He eral absolution but whose use had become sought an agenda for the meeting to prepare limited following John Paul II’s 2002 apos- himself. An order that he must attend in tolic letter Misericordia Dei. Bishop Morris Rome in February was the response and the was surprised when he arrived alone for the information that Cardinal Arinze would also meeting to find the cardinal flanked by an have the Prefects of the Congregation for archbishop and two monsignors, apparently Bishops (Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re) and canon lawyers. He felt ambushed because the Doctrine of the Faith (Cardinal William the “discussion” was based on claims, which Levada) attending. he had not seen, from unnamed accusers Bishop Morris replied that he was unavail- about his pastoral practices and permission able in February, but would be in Rome in for the Third Rite to be held under certain May. Without delay, Cardinal Re announced conditions in his diocese. the appointment of an apostolic visitor to the The Diocese of Toowoomba is vast; priests diocese – Archbishop Charles Chaput, then are few and ageing; there are 66,000 of Denver, Colorado, and recently translated Catholics; 36 parishes are served by 28 active to the more significant See of Philadelphia. priests. In the circumstances, pastoral visi- He was booked to be in Toowoomba in April tation and celebration of the sacraments are 2007. Cardinal Re made no reference to the rare in many places. The bishop explained Third Rite, which seemed to be a settled affair. that in these conditions, some flexibility was Rather he alleged to Bishop Morris: “The needed if the sacraments were to be available. doctrinal and disciplinary line you are fol- The cardinal and his companions said the lowing seems not in accordance with the practice was forbidden and should end. Magisterium of the Church.” Bishop Morris complied and from that date Such a serious claim was based on docu- Third Rite celebrations ceased in Toowoomba. ments, letters and representations made to But apparently Rome was not satisfied. Rome by parties hostile to Bishop Morris, Two years later, in December 2006, Cardinal which he has not seen to this day and was Arinze demanded that Bishop Morris be in never asked to respond to. According to 4 | THE TABLET | 21 January 2012 Morris, they came from a small, unrepresen- of grave cause or illness, is an invalid exercise to the Vatican’s judgement of his “defective tative group within the lay and clerical of authority in the Church. leadership”. leadership of the diocese. Carter and Waters are at one in their con- This endorsement notwithstanding, the The apostolic visitation – of four and a half clusion that “Bishop Morris was denied letter was from the president of the days to such an immense area – followed a procedural fairness and natural justice” by Conference, Archbishop Philip Wilson of now well-established pattern. Bishop Morris key Vatican officials, including Pope Benedict, Adelaide, who had accompanied Bishop was never told the nature of the visit, its rea- who wrote, “Canon law does not make pro- Morris on some of his visits to Vatican dicas- sons or terms of reference. He never saw any vision for a process regarding Bishops whom teries. The letter gave as the reason for his documents in the possession of the visitor. the Successor of Peter names and may remove removal what amounted to that used in He never learned who had accused him of from office.” divorce proceedings: irreconcilable differ- what. He was never asked to answer any accu- At their recent ad limina visit to Rome, ences. sations. the Australian bishops had up to five meetings The bishops’ letter promised they would Even now, he has never seen the visitor’s with the Prefects of the Congregations for take up their own and many others’ concerns report. Fr Jesus Minanbres Fernandez, a Bishops and the Doctrine of the Faith. with the Rome authorities. What resulted canon lawyer from the Rome University of According to one of the bishops present, “Bill was a statement that one member of the Opus Dei, says non-disclosure is “for the good Morris says one thing and the Prefects say Conference described as a “lowest common of the Church” whose interests would not be another.” However, Morris is the only party denominator outcome” – it pledged loyalty served by the revelation of who supplied infor- to surrender his documentation to independ- to the Pope and offered fraternal affection mation to the Vatican and what that ent scrutiny. for Bishop Morris. It reported no progress information was. The visit was followed in Responses in Australia to Bishop Morris’ on the outstanding issues addressed by Carter mid-2007 by an unsigned document on the forced resignation have been varied. and Waters: due process and respect for letterhead of the Congregation for Bishops Leadership – clerical and lay – in the Church Bishop Morris’s natural rights. As Carter detailing why it believed Morris was a “defec- in Toowoomba wrote to the Vatican following observed in his report: “The principles of tive” leader in Toowoomba and had to go. both the apostolic visitor and Morris’ invol- natural justice and fairness lie at the heart Released this week, independent civil and untary removal. The correspondence has not of the maxim ‘Not only must justice be done, canon law reviews of the removal of Bishop been acknowledged. Fallout in the diocese it must manifestly be seen to be done’”. If the Morris in May 2011 have concluded that there and across the country has been considerable. Morris affair is anything to go by, the light was a denial of “procedural fairness and nat- The Australian bishops have published a joint of natural justice and due process is yet to ural justice” in the sacking. A retired letter that recognised the dismay of many, penetrate the dark corridors of the Vatican. Queensland Supreme Court judge, William promised that the matters would be addressed Carter QC, found it “an unfair process and at their ad limina visit and, significantly, ■ Fr Michael Kelly SJ is an Australian living in breach of the principles of natural justice, endorsed the effective and sustained leader- in Bangkok, where he is executive director [which was] offensive not only to the require- ship Bishop Morris had shown – in contrast of UCA NEWS. ments of civil law but also to those of canon law”. Carter found that the breaches were regularly exercised by three Roman dicasteries and reached as far as Pope Benedict XVI between 2006 and 2011. The eminent canonist and head of the mat- rimonial tribunal in the Archdiocese of Melbourne, Fr Ian Waters, concurred, saying that “the Holy See, departing from the earlier precedents for the removal of Australian bishops, could have designed a process similar to that used for the removal of a parish priest, thereby according procedural fairness and natural justice consistent with the Code of Canon Law. This was not done.” Carter found that the unsigned 2007 Congregation for Bishops document, which came to Bishop Morris from the nuncio, was pivotal to his removal and displayed “an appalling lack of evidence and particularity”, “demonstrable errors of fact” and reflected a “process of decision-making by high-ranking church officials more likely based on gossip and hearsay” than on factual evidence.

Load more