Generation of Innocents

This morning we buried 92-year-old Monsignor Jim Finnerty, a happy, holy, wholesome priest; a man of boundless good will, Irish humour, generosity, intelligence, stability, competence and prudence. His friend Monsignor Bill Rielly (who is cut from the same cloth) preached at Evening Prayer: "This year we lost giants: Monsignors Kleisler, Ivory and now Finnerty. These were men who came of age and were ordained before the Council but embraced the changes enthusiastically." I thought to myself: that is exactly right! I have known many of this cohort in our Archdioces of Newark, Maryknoll and the Jesuits. They were firmly grounded in the faith of their fathers and never lost their way; but they intelligently and energetially accepted all that was best in that turbulent era of the 60s. We think of the Council as a change in the Church but in fact all the ideas, energies, movements and theologies that the Council expressed were percolating already in the 50s and earlier. That 1962-5 Council is best understood as the culmination, summation and conclusion of the post-war Church: open-minded, positive, optimistic, egalitarian, dialogic. The documents were not a shock to this cohort: they exquisitely expressed what they were already believing and living. 1965, the triumph of Vatican II and Civil Rights, was the epitome, the high point of the "camelot" post-war Church. These men, then in their 30s and 40s, were fully formed and moving into leadership in a Church and world in rapid change. They exuded confidence, stability, intelligence, magnanimity. Impeccably, they combined conservative intuitions and practices with an openness to legitimate change. They were characterized, above all, by positivity; but also concern for the poor and marginalized, dignity of women, ecumenical dialogue, empowerment of the laity, and more. They read Rahner, Lonergan, Chardin, Merton, and such. They came of age just before the sexual-cultural revolution of the late 60s and well before the Culture War erupted in the 70s with Roe. They abstained from that conflict: they stayed neutral, fighting for neither side. They neither condoned nor condemned contraception, legal abortion or the masculine priesthood. This was, in a way, a blessing, since they preserved a certain innocence, lightness, positivity and openness to all. Their "boycott" of the Culture War has several causes. With their elders ("Great Generation") they maintained a modest and mute chastity that was singularly ill-equipped to engage in the conflicts over sex, abortion and gender. They were already fully formed when the war erupted. Their positivity lead them to turn away from the darkness descending and maintain focus on the positives of service and dialogue. Although intelligent and erudite, they were relatively superficial in their failure to percieive the descending doom in the way that Ratzinger and others did. Pope Francis can be understood as part of this generation: he seems to have a rock solid Catholic piety in many respects; he clearly has a passion for the poor and an urgency to dialogue with others; but he seems oblivious of the Culture War even as he systematically appoints Warriors of the Left to positons of power. Many in today's Church try to preserve this legacy but it is untenable: the pressures are inexorable. The agression of the Cultural Left is so strong that if you do not resist it you inevitably collaborate with it. That is the story with our Pontiff. A sadness is that, due to the rapid changes in the world, this cohort was unable to father another generation of priests in its own image. Their positive, expansive, open paradigm was no longer tenable. The imperialism of the Cultural Left became so overwhelming that it either co-opted the guilible or elicited a reaction prone to defensiveness, insecurity, arrogance and anger. The younge generation of priest tend to emulate John paul and Benedict or traditionalism in a counter-cultural stance. At its worst, this younger generation is detestable to the older group. This is a sadness for both groups and for the Church. At its best, however, as with Monsignor Jim, this cohort is open and magnanimous. They were a splendid expression of the "camelot" American Church of the post-war period. They combined tradition with creativity; loyalty with compassion; stability with fluidity. They will be missed. As an expression of the post-war, Vatican II American Church this group had about it a camelot quality, a certin perfection, a delightful balance of past/future. We grieve their loss.
Postscript: Three more important considerations: 1. The men now aging and dying are the survivors of the Great Exodus from the priesthood of the 60s and 70s...the holy remnant, the "poor of Yahweh." I am confident that the majority of those ordained between 1950-65 left, with some of them losing their Catholic moorings. This was a clerical loss unprecedented except for the Reformation. The ones who stayed are the cream of the crop, those who persevered. Often they remained loyal to their friends as well as their Church. They have suffered through and been purified by the Great Priest Sex Scandal and remained loyal. 2. Most I know were in Jersey City or Maryknoll during my student days. These are men whose hearts drew them to serve the poor and marginalized. In this again, they are the cream of the crop. This passion for the poor characterized the clergy and Church of the 60s. It is not as evident in the younger generations of priests. These emulate, not so much John Paul who was iconically a man of the poor, as Benedict who excelled in theology, liturgy, and a (holy, wholesome) clericalism. 3. Lastly, these men were classmates and friends to many who abused male adolescents. The question cannot be avoided: how did they live with (tolerate?) this scandal.This is a huge issue. For me, a key aspect is their very innocence: they did not know about it; did not suspect it; probably could not even conceive of it. The lavender mafia is expert in camouflaging their operations from the wholesome and the upright. So strange: two churches existed right next to each other. Monsignor Jim Finnerty was Vicar for Priests in when the abuse was occuring, I believe during the McCarrick years in Newark. He would have had some contact with the abuse. I gently probed one day in conversation and this extremely talkative man was mum. I see two explanations which actually complement each other: First, he really didn't know much because it was still undercover. Secondly, what he did know was under a seal of confidentiality and not to be discussed. Either scenario is again a testament to his discretion, innocence, humility and chastity. He exemplified this admirable cohort of priests. We stand on the sholders of giants. May we who follow them become worthy of them!