Cupich names woman to new COO role in Chicago Archdiocese

[robertmidwest]

chicago.suntimes.com/news/7/71/566203/cupich-names-woman-new-coo-role-archdiocese-chicago

 

[Elizium23]

It’s very unorthodox to have a COO in the chancery, so it only makes sense that a woman would fill the post. I was comforted to see the rest of the slate be men in traditional roles. I am curious as to whether this creation of a COO signals an intention to run the diocese even more like a business, and whether that means that the faithful will be treated as customers, and spiritual goods as products or services.

 

[Sarcelle]

It’s very unorthodox to have a COO in the chancery, so it only makes sense that a woman would fill the post. I was comforted to see the rest of the slate be men in traditional roles. I am curious as to whether this creation of a COO signals an intention to run the diocese even more like a business, and whether that means that the faithful will be treated as customers, and spiritual goods as products or services.

No. The faithful and their spiritual care is the mission not the product. Like non-profit organizations, the diocese still has to contend with real life finances and day to day operations in order to support the mission. The healthier the finances and operations, the better it can serve the mission.

 

[sttcatherinefan]

It’s very unorthodox to have a COO in the chancery, so it only makes sense that a woman would fill the post. I was comforted to see the rest of the slate be men in traditional roles. I am curious as to whether this creation of a COO signals an intention to run the diocese even more like a business, and whether that means that the faithful will be treated as customers, and spiritual goods as products or services.

Heaven forbid women have a say in the Church and its mission. It is an old boy’s club.

 

[ProVobis]

I am curious as to whether this creation of a COO signals an intention to run the diocese even more like a business, and whether that means that the faithful will be treated as customers, and spiritual goods as products or services.

My thoughts as well. But the Pope has already asked that religious organizations start taking finance courses; this in itself strongly indicates financial difficulties for the church ahead. Make no mistake about it; the archdiocese is in debt, which includes among other things the St. Sabina project. A balanced budget would be a good start in alleviating some of that debt.

She has no easy task ahead of her. The archdiocese is not out of the woods when it comes to settling lawsuits, the recent one being one filed against it for being a “public nuisance.” Hers is a job I certainly wouldn’t want to have.

 

[Havard]

No. The faithful and their spiritual care is the mission not the product. Like non-profit organizations, the diocese still has to contend with real life finances and day to day operations in order to support the mission. The healthier the finances and operations, the better it can serve the mission.

I’m just confused what the function of this position is. I’m not familiar with COO’s in dioceses. I am familiar with Vicars General, which are basically COO’s. In fact they often refer to their position that way in explaining their role. Chicago already has a Vicar General, so I’m not clear on this new position’s purpose.

Finances shouldn’t ever enter into this. CFO’s are responsible for finances, and they report directly to the bishop. It’s important for CFO’s to be as independent as possible from internal management pressures (which is why in the private sector, they often report directly to the board rather than COO or even CEO.)

 

[ProVobis]

Finances shouldn’t ever enter into this.

The Sun-Times article makes it sound like it’s all about the finances.

 

[sttcatherinefan]

COO is definitely more than finance. My issues is that I’m not sure why even the more traditional roles cannot be filled by women. Why can’t there be a female vicar general?

And it really offends me when I hear men like Elizium23 suggest that women cannot fill top Church positions. Why cannot they? Do their lady parts make them unable to fill the requirements? A large majority of the Church is laymen and women, so the Church should listen to laypeople the most and they should fill a large majority of positions. It is our Church.

BTW, here is the nice editorial that the Sun Times gave Cupich. chicago.suntimes.com/politics/7/71/569206/editorial-new-course-collaboration-chicagos-archdiocese

As someone who lives in the Archdioceses, I am very heartened by this Vatican II vision.

 

[Elizium23]

And it really offends me when I hear men like Elizium23 suggest that women cannot fill top Church positions. Why cannot they? Do their lady parts make them unable to fill the requirements? A large majority of the Church is laymen and women, so the Church should listen to laypeople the most and they should fill a large majority of positions. It is our Church.

Indeed, the Holy Father has exhorted the faithful to give women a deeper theology and more significant roles in the Church. However, there are roles for men and there are roles for women, this is part of the teaching of sexual complementarity. For example, only men can be priests. And I respect pastors who make the difficult decision to restrict altar service to males only, because service at the altar has been historically linked with minor orders, clerical duties, and vocations to the priesthood.

At the same time, men are unable to be sisters or nuns. This is an opportunity for women to fill those roles with exuberance and joy. Women, especially religious, can be excellent hospital administrators, for example, or teachers, to name only a few. And the world needs more of both.

However, I have a few concerns. For example, when liturgical ministries become feminized, and men feel pushed out of roles that they can legitimately fill but they are made to feel like second-class citizens, the women take charge and take over, and the ministry is effectively abandoned by all but homosexual men. This happens not only in altar service but also with Lectors, Cantor/Choir, and EMHCs in particular. Women can be good ushers, although it has traditionally been the minor order of porter and men are more suited for the task. The usher ministry in some places often gains the reputation of being “nothing but the meanest and oldest men in the parish”. This concern applies to any leadership role in the Church. Women likewise have a right not to have their proper roles overrun and trampled by men.

However, what concerns me about both men and women is when dissent and heresy infect those people appointed to a high-ranking office. I am not implying anything about the Chicagoans newly tasked to head the Archdiocese, not at all. Let me give a concrete example of what I mean. In the Diocese of Phoenix in 2009, a religious sister was excommunicated because she permitted an abortion to be performed in a hospital where she was an administrator and member of the ethics committee. This is unfortunate behavior for anyone, especially a Catholic. It has nothing to do with her being a woman, but it has all too much to do with the dissent and heresy rampant in the post-conciliar Church and in particular the United States.

I fully expect and believe that all the new leaders of the Chicago Archdiocese will conduct themselves in full accordance with Catholic teaching. They have a hard and long road ahead, as ProVobis has elucidated in this thread. They can be assured of my earnest and heartfelt prayers as they continue the mission of Jesus Christ in a place that might soon, once again, be Mission Territory.

 

[ProVobis]

BTW, here is the nice editorial that the Sun Times gave Cupich. chicago.suntimes.com/politics/7/71/569206/editorial-new-course-collaboration-chicagos-archdiocese

As someone who lives in the Archdioceses, I am very heartened by this Vatican II vision.

It is but I thought this was perhaps as significant if not more so.

And a special office for Latino ministry, Consejo Hispano, will be opened.

This is good news for members of an archdiocese that is so diverse it offers mass in 26 languages. They will have more opportunities to use their talents to help the church succeed in its mission.

In fairness, though, a lot of credit goes to the late Cardinal George for his part toward achieving this mission in his own way. After all, the archdiocese draws a lot of visitors from outside the diocese.

 

[Havard]

The Sun-Times article makes it sound like it’s all about the finances.

No, she’s been their CFO already, and has balanced their budget. If this were all about that, it would make sense to keep her at CFO. As I mentioned previously, it’s very rare for CFO’s to report to COO’s. I’m sure the new CFO will report to the archbishop. Also, note the comment about “making operations more effective”. I’m curious what operations. Is she taking over responsibilities held by the vicar general, and if so, how are they dividing them?

 

[sttcatherinefan]

Indeed, the Holy Father has exhorted the faithful to give women a deeper theology and more significant roles in the Church. However, there are roles for men and there are roles for women, this is part of the teaching of sexual complementarity. For example, only men can be priests. And I respect pastors who make the difficult decision to restrict altar service to males only, because service at the altar has been historically linked with minor orders, clerical duties, and vocations to the priesthood.

Yes… And this is exactly what is being used to keep women shut up and in the kitchen. There is nothing to suggest that women cannot be wonderful businesspeople and finance people and administrators in general. **This sort of rank misogyny is what I’ve had to deal with my entire life ** I have MBA in finance and am good at what I do. There is nothing to suggest that there shouldn’t be more women in such roles with the Church.

At the same time, men are unable to be sisters or nuns. This is an opportunity for women to fill those roles with exuberance and joy.

Men can be religious brothers which is the same as being a religious sister.

Women, especially religious, can be excellent hospital administrators, for example, or teachers, to name only a few. And the world needs more of both.

My favorite teacher in high school was a man. And I am not sure how running a hospital is different than running an archdioceses.

However, I have a few concerns. For example, when liturgical ministries become feminized, and men feel pushed out of roles that they can legitimately fill but they are made to feel like second-class citizens, the women take charge and take over, and the ministry is effectively abandoned by all but homosexual men. This happens not only in altar service but also with Lectors, Cantor/Choir, and EMHCs in particular. Women can be good ushers, although it has traditionally been the minor order of porter and men are more suited for the task. The usher ministry in some places often gains the reputation of being “nothing but the meanest and oldest men in the parish”. This concern applies to any leadership role in the Church. Women likewise have a right not to have their proper roles overrun and trampled by men.

What the heck does that mean? What exactly are ladies roles? Vacumming the altar and cleaning the vestments and making the brownies for the bake sale? Women have a right to participate in any non-clerical role in a parish and most roles should be non-clerical.

However, what concerns me about both men and women is when dissent and heresy infect those people appointed to a high-ranking office. I am not implying anything about the Chicagoans newly tasked to head the Archdiocese, not at all. Let me give a concrete example of what I meanll too much to do with the dissent and heresy rampant in the post-conciliar Church

What the heck does thanking God that “most” of Cupich’s picks were men in traditional roles have to do with a dispute with some nun over an abortion. (And yes that was a more complicated case than suggested.) What we are discussing is your dismissal of women in top leadership roles in an Archdioceses and I quote…

It’s very unorthodox to have a COO in the chancery, so it only makes sense that a woman would fill the post. I was comforted to see the rest of the slate be men in traditional roles.

 

[ProVobis]

And this is exactly what is being used to keep women shut up and in the kitchen.

I don’t think this is happening very much as women outnumber men by almost 2 to 1 in Mass attendance as it is. How is intentionally appointing more women in Church management supposed to attract men back to Church?

 

[Elizium23]

Yes… And this is exactly what is being used to keep women shut up and in the kitchen. There is nothing to suggest that women cannot be wonderful businesspeople and finance people and administrators in general. **This sort of rank misogyny is what I’ve had to deal with my entire life ** I have MBA in finance and am good at what I do. There is nothing to suggest that there shouldn’t be more women in such roles with the Church.

I’m sorry you feel that way. But it certainly isn’t my fault.

Men can be religious brothers which is the same as being a religious sister.

No, men can’t be religious sisters or nuns, and it’s different. Sexual complementarity again, remember?

Ask Brother JR when he comes back on these forums; he has tirelessly explained to us over the years how male religious life works, and it works differently from female religious life. There are different charisms, different rules of life, different powers of male superiors vs. female.

My favorite teacher in high school was a man. And I am not sure how running a hospital is different than running an archdioceses.

Well, let me spell it out, a hospital is a health care facility where sick people go to be treated and cured. While an archdiocese is a particular Church which provides for the spiritual needs of the faithful. Its head is an archbishop. That has to be a man.

What the heck does that mean? What exactly are ladies roles? Vacumming the altar and cleaning the vestments and making the brownies for the bake sale?

Yes, those are all good examples! Thank you for helping me think of them.

 

[sttcatherinefan]

I don’t think this is happening very much as women outnumber men by almost 2 to 1 in Mass attendance as it is. How is intentionally appointing more women in Church management supposed to attract men back to Church?

It is a matter of fairness to permit people of both sexes to be in Church leadership positions. It also isn’t a bad thing to de-clericalize these roles and permit laypeople to hold them. I really don’t care whether having an all-male leadership somehow attracts men back to Church or not. (And if one’s attraction to religion is based solely on the fact that women aren’t in leadership positions, then perhaps one should reflect on these priorities.

 

[sttcatherinefan]

I’m sorry you feel that way. But it certainly isn’t my fault.

It certainly is your fault for repeating such ridiculous sexist claims.

No, men can’t be religious sisters or nuns, and it’s different. Sexual complementarity again, remember?

Ask Brother JR when he comes back on these forums; he has tirelessly explained to us over the years how male religious life works, and it works differently from female religious life. There are different charisms, different rules of life, different powers of male superiors vs. female.

They are both consecrated religious who aren’t ordained and both work in similar ministries (or as contemplatives.)

Well, let me spell it out, a hospital is a health care facility where sick people go to be treated and cured. While an archdiocese is a particular Church which provides for the spiritual needs of the faithful. Its head is an archbishop. That has to be a man.

And Ms. Bohlen will actually be doing all the business work associated with actually running the archdioceses day-to-day. There is nothing to suggest that a priest needs to be doing the day-to-day paperwork associated with the archdioceses. And doing that sort of business work isn’t that different from running a hospital. Priests should be acting as priests, not bureaucrats.

Yes, those are all good examples! Thank you for helping me think of them.

And men are perfectly capable of doing all those things just as women are perfectly capable of being lectors, ushers, cantors, and servers.

 

[Havard]

Feminized?
Do you mean people in that job become smarter, more heartfelt, more multi-tasking?

Just curious, if those are descriptions you associate with feminized, what words would you propose for association with masculinized?

 

[Havard]

It is a matter of fairness to permit people of both sexes to be in Church leadership positions. It also isn’t a bad thing to de-clericalize these roles and permit laypeople to hold them. I really don’t care whether having an all-male leadership somehow attracts men back to Church or not. (And if one’s attraction to religion is based solely on the fact that women aren’t in leadership positions, then perhaps one should reflect on these priorities.

Would you mind naming a few roles you want to “de-clericalize”?

 

[sttcatherinefan]

Would you mind naming a few roles you want to “de-clericalize”?

Laypeople should be the ones who are running the business side of the operations of the archdioceses. There is no need for priests to be involved with that at all. I also think that laypeople should have a larger role in tribunals. Any ministries regarding laypeople, such as the family ministry should be run by laypeople. Pastoral councils should have an actual real say in the running of their parish as it is their money being used. Ditto with schools. The parents and teachers should have a majority say. Laypeople should also have a greater role in the formation of priests as well as situations like sexual abuse claims.

In general, there is no need to have roles reserved specifically for a priest other than dispensing the Sacraments or roles associated directly with priestly formation and supervision. This includes in the Vatican. Why does a bishop need to be in charge of the Pontifical Council for Peace and Justice or the Pontifical Council for the Family? Why can’t a female religious head the Congregation for Religious Life?

 

[Sarcelle]

I don’t think this is happening very much as women outnumber men by almost 2 to 1 in Mass attendance as it is. How is intentionally appointing more women in Church management supposed to attract men back to Church?

Well you could start by asking Archbishop Cupich on why he chose to appoint a woman rather than a man to that position, if you think that it drives men away from the Church.