Narcissism and the church

My friend N., the former Catholic priest, and I have continued our conversation via e-mail. From a letter I received from him today, blogged here with his permission:

I've been giving this some thought all weekend. Clericalism is not the underlying pathology. It isn't a pathology at all, but an attitude that supports and even nurtures the pathology. The pathology is narcissism. It is rampant among the clergy, and the faithful only bolster its effect.

Consider this: when I became a pastor, I was asked to name an amount that I wanted to have for my monthly groceries and food. Some of my colleagues had cooks and housekeepers and most of their expense went to pay their wages. Others ate every meal at a restaurant and most of their expense was given to them in the form of cash. I decided to set up a charge account at a grocery store so that I had some accountability.

Once I was shopping and a parishioner came up and started a conversation. She noticed that I had some generic brand of vanilla ice cream in my cart. I told her I really loved vanilla ice cream, and she said, "Oh, you should get Breyer's. It's the best." I explained that I knew Breyer's was delicious, but because it is a premium brand I thought it was a little pricey. She said, "Oh Father, you deserve the best! Just think of everything you've given up for us." I took the generic brand back to the freezer and picked up some Breyer's.

It's a little thing, I know, but it shows how innocently it all begins. The same priest who decides he deserves a little extra treat because he gives up so much for the church is the same priest who, left unchecked, will decide he deserves a lot more as time goes by.

It's the same with Protestant ministers. I'm sure that happily married minister at Prestonwood Baptist Church probably convinced himself that he deserved a little extra treat -- albeit his little treat was a 13-year-old girl -- because he gives up so much for the church. When a former pastor of the parish where I ministered was accused of impregnating a teenage housekeeper and then procuring an abortion, a parishioner actually said to me, "Well, at least he's into women."

Astounding? Sure. But it goes on.

We talked about the story in today's Dallas Morning News about Bishop Kevin Farrell, who's just completing his first year on the job in the Catholic Diocese of Dallas. Most Catholics I talk to have a good impression of Bp Farrell. Check out this passage:

After a cautious beginning, Bishop Farrell has begun to assert himself, making major personnel changes at diocese headquarters. He's also speaking plainly about the challenge of helping the diocese – which has grown to more than 1 million Catholics – catch up in staffing, infrastructure and fundraising.

"I am faced with, I would say, staggering needs, and I have no financial resources," he said.

And then, this passage from the story:

There has been buzz about Bishop Farrell's decision to have the diocese take out a 30-year mortgage on a 6,000-square-foot, $1.3 million house in northwest Dallas. He's living in the house and said at least two more priests eventually will join him.

Bishop Farrell stayed in leased housing at first, but believed that was throwing diocese money away. He said he determined early that one of his priorities would have to be fundraising and that he would need quarters where he could meet with potential major contributors.

"I can go to all the chicken dinners in the parishes, but do you think that's going to solve my financial problems?" he said, ticking off specific building needs and debts of local Catholic churches and schools.

Neil O'Brien, a Dallas lawyer long active in Catholic causes, said he could understand if some questioned the purchase. But he doesn't.

"There's no place I know of, other than the chancery, where the bishop can invite people," he said. "There can and should be a way to get more laity involved and raise more money."

Who does he think he is, Jeremiah Wright? OK, so we're not nearly into Mansion Murphy territory, but still ... it's pretty amazing, the disconnect. Here's what N. said about it:

I ask you, in the face of what Farrell described as "staggering needs," how could he, in good conscience, purchase a $1.3 million home for himself to live in? And how could Catholics support it? He deserves it, after all. He's given up so much for the church.

Honestly, don't you think if Farrell really wanted to court big contributors he could find a way to do it without inviting them to dine at his $1.3 million home?

The reporter made a point of mentioning that the bishop's salary is $24K, but most of his expenses are covered. That's right. His mortgage is paid, his utility bills are paid, his grocery bill is paid. He gets a car allowance, his clerical attire is tax deductable and he gets reimbursed for mileage. His continuing education expense is paid and his retreat fees are paid. That $2,000 a month is almost entirely discretionary spending. I'm sure you wish you had $2,000 a month to spend however you like. It's OK, though. He gives up so much for the church.

I only hope that when he invites those potential big donors to his North Dallas home for supper, he has the good sense to serve them Breyer's ice cream for dessert. It's the best!

Think of the witness of Cardinal Sean O'Malley of Boston, who sold off the cardinal's mansion and now lives modestly, next to his cathedral. I remember the first time I visited the Orthodox Archbishop's residence here in Dallas, and what an impression it made on me: much to my surprise, the shabby little cottage behind the cathedral was where the archbishop lived. And what a house full of life it was! We went for the first time during a potluck feast, and it started to rain. The roof leaked. I thought: this old monk lives ascetically, but his house is so full of the right kind of wealth.

Alas, if only more Orthodox bishops were like ours in that regard. The financial scandal at church headquarters mostly has to do with the Metropolitan and his retinue living high on the hog, in a church that is not wealthy.

I was finishing tonight galley copies of "Quitting Church," a forthcoming book by Washington Times religion reporter Julia Duin. It's about why people leave church, and it's quite good. I kept finding myself saying, "Yes...yes!" as I was reading. I can't in fairness comment on it until publication, but I can say that one passage brings up the searing experience of Bill Lobdell, a born-again Christian who covered religion for the Los Angeles Times, but lost his faith entirely because of it. He wrote an essay about it last year, which I blogged about last year (the story is no longer on the LA Times site, so you'll have to read excerpts on my blog). One of the things that rendered Lobdell incapable of belief was seeing religious leaders living in material riches while the people they served struggled to get by. (Lobdell broke an astonishing series of stories about the corruption of Paul and Jan Crouch, the Pentecostal televangelist duo, much of which focused on their luxe lifestyles, versus that of their followers).

Staggering needs. No financial resources. But there's money to buy a 6,000 square foot mansion for the bishop. I will never figure these guys out.