I'm not an editorial reader. I can't stand them. I tend to think of them as bullhorns for elite snobs. Notwithstanding the fact that they often actually do say something of substance. I think my problem with editorials is that they are intrusive unsolicitated opinions that you could do without.

That said, the NCR editorial this week caught my eye. Bishops seek a reprieve. Here's a snipet

At their Nov. 15-17 meeting (it was to run to Nov. 18, but they managed to complete their agenda a day early), the body of bishops laid out plans for the future of their conference. Bottom line: less public discussion of pressing issues, more private time to contemplate such pastoral concerns as priestly formation and the centrality of the Eucharist, fewer statements on what many perceive as secondary issues, and tighter reins on their bureaucracy.

Less public discussion on pressing issues...so whatelse is new?

I have seen some discussions in Catholic blogshere about Church reform and the need to include laity, etc. I think the problem is that we are all offering up solutions without a proper diagnosis of the problem. The problem is one thing: power. Another way to say it is, self-preservation.

The Catholic Bishops have three types of power concentrated in each bishop. There is the sacramental power, there is ecclesial power and then there is secular political power. Sacramental power is the fact they have the utmost sacramental character and basically are the source of sacraments. If they don't ordain or give faculties, then no sacraments for anyone. Ecclesial power is the internal church political power. The fact that they have unchecked power over their dioceses, from 50,000 to millions of people, in the Catholic context. They can make any decision they want and not be accountable to anyone. Thirdly, there is the secular political power. That's the fact that they have secular political influence, which the Church has never shied away from.

This is all totally unchecked power and there is absolutely no way that the hierarchy can remain uncorrupted in the face of that power, from JPII down. And it is in fact horribly corrupted. If there is to be reform, there has to be checks on that power, which means the Bishops would have to allow the laity to regulate their power. It simply is not in human nature to allow for that, and we have seen Bishops rabidly protect their power at all costs.

In the final analysis, any measures taken such as lay councils, etc mean absolutely nothing because the power structure still remains the same. The only way for lay people to influence anything is through transparency and the media. Transparency offers automatic checks on power abuse. But as we see from the Bishops' recent conference, they want to kill transparency. Of course, they'd like to present it as streamlining, making things run better, blah, blah, blah, but the real truth is they want to preserve their power.

Significant reform is so far off that it is a waste of time to even talk about it. Of course, that's the pessimist in me talking. However, there are ways to chip away at that power--knowledge and independence. If lay people chose not to depend on sacraments for their spiritual nourishment, that would prompt a response. If lay people blunted the effect of ecclesial power by witholding money and re-directing it to other causes, that would prompt a response. If lay people learned and sought God for themselves and understood that sacramental mediation is not intrinsic to grace, that would prompt a response. If lay people countered the Bishops' inapproriate forays into politics, that would prompt a response.

When all is said and done, it is all about power to the people.