In personnel clash, Fort Worth bishop is trying to keep the ‘Catholic’ in Catholic charities
It’s almost universally the case that personnel issues are messy and complicated.
This is especially true when they are aired in public. Incomplete retellings can arouse emotion and suspicion, and all sense of nuance is lost.
But the tumult over the leadership of Catholic Charities Fort Worth runs a lot deeper, threatening to eclipse the tremendous work the organization has done to serve the poor and vulnerable in North Texas. Perhaps more importantly, it may muddle the principles that motivate such good work in the first place.
The Star-Telegram reported Tuesday that Catholic Bishop Michael Olson has asked charities chief executive Christopher Plumlee — who has occupied the role for only seven months — to step down.
In a letter dated April 4, Olson outlined in great detail his reasoning, explaining that he lost confidence in Plumlee’s ability to lead after the two disagreed over an event Catholic Charities was holding later in the month, the Women’s Empow[HER]ment Summit.
Olson alleged a series of errors in the event’s planning: failure to properly vet featured speakers, resistance to allowing social teaching to be a part of the event, reluctance to have the bishop to speak at the event because of his “masculinity,” and refusal to postpone the conference until issues were resolved.
On their face, these problems appear surmountable and the bishop’s response seems overly harsh.
But these details are not the heart of the conflict.
CATHOLIC SOCIAL OUTREACH
The disagreement, the bishop said, is “about the first principles that undergird the mission and identity of Catholic Charities Fort Worth as the social outreach ministry of the Catholic Church in North Texas.” Olson contends that Plumlee, as exhibited during the summit’s planning, fails to understand these concerns.
Those first principles, Catholic social teaching, are buzzwords even within the Catholic community.
They refer broadly to the church’s belief in its responsibility to care for the most vulnerable, which many assume mean only material efforts to eliminate poverty and pursue social justice.
To the casual observer, this is exactly the mission executed by Catholic Charities.
But there are different ways of pursuing those ends, Olson told me, and some conflict with the idea at the very core of the Church’s teaching that the human person — in all cases — is created in the image and likeness of God.
While the modern world insists on the prime importance of individual rights, Catholic teaching believes that the family is at the center of and the fundamental unit of society, and our responsibilities and rights flow from this relationship.
This includes a respect for the relationship between husbands and wives, parents and children, mothers and the unborn.
The mission of Catholic Charities is to eradicate poverty, but, Olson explained, its focus is on “the oppressive kind of poverty” that so often occurs when relationships are not honored or when they are subjugated by the pursuit of individual freedoms.
Women, Olson said, are especially vulnerable to this kind of poverty.
SUMMIT CANCELED
It’s not clear that any of the invited speakers for the summit (now canceled) would be in open conflict with these teachings. But the fact that these teachings were not naturally part of the summit’s agenda suggests at best an ignorance of their importance and, at worst, a hostility toward them.
Olson, to his credit, would not further address his specific concerns or disparage Plumlee in any way. (Catholic Charities deferred to the bishop and did not offer Plumlee for an interview.)
Olson preferred to explain why Catholic social teachings cannot be separated from the work of Catholic Charities and must be at the center of everything the organization does — even when they are inconvenient.
“We serve everybody not because they are Catholic but because we are,” Olson said, adding that the organization’s primary donor base is ordinary Catholics in North Texas.
And while the charity does not proselytize, its mission is inauthentic if it is not animated by the desire to, as Olson said, “share the good news that human beings have not been created and designed by God for death but life eternal.”
That’s a difficult and perhaps obscure message to share in the modern era, with mainstream culture openly hostile to many of the beliefs and values typically associated with Christianity.
Thankfully, it’s not one on which Olson is willing to compromise.
Personnel matters are messy. One hopes that the conflict between Plumlee and Olson can be resolved in a way that respects both individuals.
Above all, the resolution must respect the teachings that make the charity work possible.
After all, Catholic Charities without the “Catholic” is just another charity.
