In many respects, the U.S. Army and the Catholic Church could not be more dissimilar institutions. Both have radically different missions, divergent access to resources, and, seemingly, heterogeneous cultures. Yet in one striking way, the two organizations are quite analogous: both rely on and thrive under strict adherence to hierarchal rule. Despite the best efforts of some, especially during Vatican II, to move the church away from a pyramid model (pope at the top, then bishops, priests, religious, and finally laypeople) toward a flat “people of God” model, the church, for good or bad, remains thoroughly hierarchal, in both theory and in practice. The U.S. Army operates, out of necessity, in the same manner. As a result, recent events involving General Stanley McChrystal offer the church a valuable lesson and possible model to emulate.

McChrystal is regarded a dedicated, skilled, and devoted leader, who understands the intricacies of war and the sensitivities of .U.S presence in Afghanistan. His colleagues and superiors praise him continuously as a fair-minded military man, compelling others toward valiant and courageous service. Yet a couple months ago, McChrystal made an egregious mistake for anyone serving in a hierarchal institution: he upset the chain of command by calling into question the judgment of his superiors, specifically, the president and vice president. In the military, this is a mortal sin, and it cost the general his job.

At a ceremony marking his retirement on Friday in Washington, McChrystal made a simple and obvious observation to a crowd of 500 friends, family, and colleagues: “My service did not end as I would have wished.” Yet despite his less than graceful exit, many military hotshots were on hand to praise McChrystal’s years of service to his country. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates said: “We bid farewell to Stan McChrystal today with pride and sadness. Pride for the remarkable roster of achievement that he has compiled as a man and a soldier, sadness that our comrade and his prodigious talents are leaving us.” It was a ceremony marked with laughter, gratitude, and an exhortation for others to continue serving with dedication. Even the man who accepted McChrystal’s resignation, President Barack Obama, honored the general’s service by allowing him to retire with four stars even though he could have pushed for a lower rank, thereby reducing his pension and his prestige.

What can the church learn from McChrystal’s departure? McChrystal was a talented and devoted servant of his institution, but he erred gravely, and he then had to step aside so as to let the mission continue unencumbered by scandal and questions of his ability to lead. In the wake of his resignation, he was not attacked personally, thrown to the curb, and destroyed, but praised for his leadership even while standing in the searing light of accountability.

I can’t help but to think of our bishops during the sex abuse scandals (I realize the parallel is a bit flawed; some bishops are seemingly guilty of near criminal activity while McChrystal is not). Many of these men are pastoral, effective, and caring servants who exercised shockingly poor judgment when it came to transferring priests guilty of abuse. Had they possessed the courage to resign, they could have been praised by their subordinates and their flocks for their work in other areas, while recognizing that their continued leadership harmed the church and its lofty mission. These men are not evil, but by their decisions they showed quite clearly that they were not up to the heavy demands of their office. Another difference between the church and the Army, it appears, is that those above these bishops on the chain of command lacked the willingness or the ability to demand resignations. As a result, many of these men remain in office, and the church suffers. These bishops had the opportunity to step aside, have their accomplishments celebrated, and allow for healing and forgiveness to take over. They chose instead another path.

The closest example the church offers to this model is the resignation of Boston’s Cardinal Bernard Law. The epicenter of the scandal in the U.S., Boston paradoxically both thrived and suffered greatly under his leadership. After much external pressure, and presumably with some internal force as well, Law finally retired and moved to Rome. Despite the justified anger at Law during his resignation, many still recalled, albeit more guardedly than with McChrystal, the good that he did for the city’s Catholic population. With Law’s departure, Cardinal Sean O’Malley arrived, and he began a painful process of healing and reconciliation. There have been hiccups along the way, but by most accounts, O’Malley has been successful in a hideously difficult situation (full disclosure: I am a product of the Boston Archdiocese and I have followed developments there more closely than elsewhere).

The model offered by General McChrystal is one that could be utilized widely and wisely in the church. Recognize and laud valuable contributions while adhering to accountability, even if that means making the painful decision of resignation or retirement. Yes, some bishops are worthy leaders in many areas, but their lack of wisdom in dealing with abusive clergy makes them unable to lead in effective ways. They have the chance to be praised for their talents in other areas, step aside, and allow the church to move forward. With the height of the scandal now behind us, it seems that age-induced retirement will take effect before anything else, but there is still opportunity for some bishops to do the right thing.

Comments are automatically closed two weeks after an article's initial publication. See our comments policy for more.
ed gleason
10 years 9 months ago
To carry the analogy a step.... When VOTF who were the non-coms in the pews started to stir they were treated as muntineers.. not shot but  barred from the post and  identified as suspect troops . 
10 years 9 months ago
The Church would be in so much better a place if some of what Michael O'Loughlin mentions here was done but the hierarchy continues on its doomed path.

The leadership f?ollow?s the ????''DO AS I SAY NOT AS I DO???????''?? behavorial model.

Members of VOTF in the Archdiocese of Philadelphia and in the Diocese of Wilmington, Delaware are still treated as muntineers.  They are not recognized and are trashed whenever possible.

A comment from a member mentioned that one bishop used the word ''diabolical'' when speaking to her about VOTF.

Witness the continuing attack on those who have a homosexual orientation.  Rome wants more milage out of that old chestnut. 

Jim McCrea
10 years 9 months ago
McChrystal knew that if he hadn't resigned, Obama would have made the decision for him in one way, shape or form.

If the pope had asked a bishop to resign and he didn't do it, would B16 have the cojones to effectively fire the man?  Bishps are created by popes and they can be fired by popes.

But that presupposes honor among thieves (to strain an analogy) -
Luke Hill
10 years 9 months ago
@Jack Barry, thanks for reminding us of that letter and those priests.  Another factor in Law's departure, I suspect, is that the archdiocese of Boston was heavily dependent for its operating expenses on what used to be called the Cardinal's Appeal.  Faithful Catholics by the tens of thousands (estimating conservatively) simply stopped giving to the Appeal that year, making it clear that the archdiocese would not be financially viable if Cardinal Law remained in office.

Jack Barry
10 years 9 months ago
In connection with the Law resignation, we know little about the internal forces that may have acted.  One of the external forces, however, was remarkable at the time and remains notable today for the lack of anything similar since then.  This was an 
extraordinary public letter from 58 priests to Law calling on him to resign.  A few of his subordinates found the virtue and courage to speak out against evil, none of which was cancelled out by good Law had done. That's a model that might help while waiting for bishops to do the right thing.  
Leo Zanchettin
10 years 9 months ago
I think it's unrealistic to expect a bishop to resign on his own initiative. His enabling of continued abuse of children would overshadow all the other good he had done. And because he serves (in a sense) at the pleasure of the pope, to take this action on his own would only highlight his sin and separation from the church all the more.

But if, as happened with McChrystal, the pope had asked him to step aside, it would be far better. The church would have a greater chance at shaping the message-pointing to all the good while regretting and condemning the lapses-before the media and public opinion could craft its own narrative.

But, alas, this is not how things have happened. And in the name of preserving the image of the church, her leaders have unwittingly hurt its image all the more. 

The latest from america

John Kerry, Biden’s special envoy for climate, gave a keynote address at the Vatican and will have a private meeting with Pope Francis.
The enchanted universe that Romeo alludes to is full of unpredictability and surprises.
Stephen G. AdubatoMay 14, 2021
I refuse the logic that insists that, by saying the occupation must end, I am with the Palestinians and against the Israelis. There is a third place, which is not “for” or “against,” and that is the place of love, a love rooted in justice.
Stephanie SaldañaMay 14, 2021
Cardinal Bo expressed his immense joy, and that of the 750,000 Catholics in this majority-Buddhist country of 52 million people, that Pope Francis has decided to celebrate Mass for peace in Myanmar on Sunday, May 16, in St. Peter’s Basilica.
Gerard O’ConnellMay 14, 2021