The Perils of Namesakes and Statues

Last night, I started reading the McCarrick report. There is a clear failure on the part of several of his brother bishops in the New Jersey dioceses in being honest and truthful. Being largely unfamiliar with the hierarchy of New Jersey in the eighties and nineties, I googled these men. And largely found the school named after them.

Of course, we also have schools named after contemporary figures of political change like President Obama and Justice Sotomayor. We've also seen efforts to erase names on some of these buildings currently bearing the names of Lincoln, Washington, and even Senator Feinstein.

And of course, we have the removal of statues of Confederate leaders, Union leaders, Catholic missionaries and others who do not conform to our modern standards of racial sensitivity.

A society and culture is certainly known by who it honors and as we grow, change, and progress, we need to reflect in an honest and sincere way on who we honor. Should slave-owning rebels whose public celebration was established with the end of Reconstruction and massive anti-African American blacklash and violence be left in the middle of our towns? Should modern political figures who still have lives to live (and sins and goods to commit) be adorning our schools?

The higher controversy for our Church lies with the canonization of St. John Paul II, the pontiff who seemingly pushed for the appointment of McCarrick in the prominent role as Archbishop and Cardinal of Washington D.C., doing so by disregarding the normal process of consultation. A Saint is someone whom we know - through the attesting of intercessory miracles and the examination of their life - is with our Lord in Heaven; and thus worthy of recognition and veneration. His elevation with that title came also by Pope Francis disregarding the normal process - possibly to respond to cries of "Santo subito" or possibly for other reasons. Regardless, St. John Paul II's legacy looks increasingly complicated - even just six years after his canonization.

Where does that leave those of us inspired by his writings? His life? His efforts to fight against communism and extreme capitalism? Those of us who named their own son after him?

What about the schools that bear his name?

Perhaps, we need to ensure a certain historical distance. Traditionally the canonization process can only begin five years after death and generally takes significant investigation and effort. The granting of the title of Saint, or the placement of a statue or moniker, requires distance, understanding, and future reflection. A historical understanding of the racial issues of St. Serra's time or St. Paul's writings on slavery is different from the purposeful or willful ignorance of St. John Paul II's knowledge w/r/t McCarrick or Marcial.

Ultimately, all of our heroes will fail us. St. Peter denied Christ. St. Paul's temper shines through in his writings and we see the dissolution of his friendship with his fellow Christians (St. Mark and St. Barnabas) in Acts. St. Teresa of Avila writings are memorable for their acknowledgement of her own failings. As I tell students, we all fail - there were only two perfect persons in this world - Christ and his mother - we are neither.

None of this helps me in wrestling with what it means as we continue to reckon with the rot within our hierarchy and how it has infected the good men in our Church (and I still believe St. John Paul II is good) and bad. Ultimately, we are a human institution called to be more. We are also called to acknowledge the way pride, greed, lust, sloth, acedia, and envy polluted the actions of McCarrick, his fellow bishops, his enablers, his superiors, and even the Holy Father at times.