‘I knew what I had to do’ — why Bishop Sis declined religious liberty chair
Description
A Texas bishop told The Pillar that his decision to decline a leadership position at the U.S. bishops’ conference was a “kairos moment” of spiritual discernment.
Bishop Michael Sis explained to The Pillar a decision not to take up a post as chairman of the USCCB’s religious liberty committee was the result of spontaneous prayer and reflection, and a desire to do what was best for the conference, and for the committee’s work.
Sis, of San Angelo, Texas, was a candidate at last week’s plenary meeting of the U.S. bishops’ conference and, he told The Pillar, he went into the vote willing and eager to serve — even confirming he’d voted for himself.
But, he said, when the result of a 111-111 tie with Portland’s Archbishop Alexander Sample was announced, he “immediately knew what I should do. I should step aside so that Archbishop Sample could serve as chairman.”
While the votes turned over the conference leadership across a number of important positions, the elections tend to be assessed for their administrative importance, and or, in the media, for what the personalities involved could indicate about the priorities of the American bishops.
Tie votes are rare at the bishops’ conference, though not unheard of, and there was on Nov. 12 a brief flurry of activity from the bishops’ plenary assembly podium, as the outgoing conference leadership debated what should happen next.
After some interventions from the bishops on the floor, and shortly after the tie, conference president Archbishop Timothy Broglio declared Sis the winner, by virtue of his “being a few months older” than Archbishop Sample, with the conference warmly applauding him in congratulation.
But just minutes later, after the business had moved on to the next scheduled vote, Sis spoke from the floor to decline the position he had just been given.
“In response to the tie vote for the chairmanship of the religious liberty committee,” said Sis, “I would like to withdraw my name so that Archbishop Sample could take that chairmanship, thank you.”
His declaration seemed to prompt surprise among bishops seated behind him on the floor and among the conference’s leadership, before Archbishop Sample was asked if he agreed to accept, which he did.
After the meeting, Sis told The Pillar that while his move might have seemed a “gentlemantly” concession, the bishop’s decision to decline actually stemmed from an important moment of spiritual discernment.
“I can appreciate the thought that I was simply acting in a gentlemanly manner,” he said. “In fact, the word ‘gentleman’ did enter my mind in that very moment. I thought, ‘This is what a gentleman should do.’”
But, Sis explained, “there were also some deeper layers to the decision.”
“Archbishop Sample and I are brothers in Jesus Christ. We both pour out our lives in service to the Kingdom of God. Both of us had our desire and interest to serve the Church and the world in this very important way as chairman of that committee, but we both approached the matter with prayerful surrender to the will of God.”
The bishop explained his view that the work of the conference should be approached as a true exercise of the bishops’ call to episcopal service and collegiality.
“For weeks, both of us had been praying that the Holy Spirit would guide this process,” he said. “As you know, every follower of Christ must carry out daily discernment. We must be attentive to the movements of the Spirit in all that we do.”
“Discernment is the gift and art of discovering God’s will in the concrete situations of life. One acquires this skill through practice over many years, recognizing those movements in our spirit that come from God, to embrace them, and those movements that are not from God, to reject them.”
—
Before Sis announced his withdrawal from the post, the canonical mechanics of his being declared the winner were somewhat opaque, even to the conference members as it happened.
After the tie vote was announced, Broglio initially instructed that the bishops would need to vote again, before receiving advice on the dais that the matter should instead be determined by seniority. That, too, prompted questions from bishops about whether the relevant seniority would be that of age or of episcopal consecration — while Sis is older than Sample, Sample has been a bishop for longer than Sis.
Precedent within the conference itself is not exactly clear either. In 2018 then-conference president Cardinal Daniel DiNardo and conference general secretary Monsignor Brian Bransfield awarded a tied committee chair election by “seniority by episcopal ordination,” while a 2019 tie vote was settled “by nature of age seniority.”
While the conference clarified to the membership both last week that it was age, not length of episcopal ministry, which counted for determining “seniority,” the exact conference bylaws on the issue are not public, though they are meant to reflect canonical principles.
The Code of Canon Law states that when elections end in a tie, another vote should be held, and only if that one ties should the office in question be awarded to “the one who is senior in age.”
In that sense, Broglio’s instinct to see the bishops vote again might have been drawn from his canonical training — though the exact specifics of conference policy are not publicly available.
For his part, Sis told The Pillar that his decision to turn the role down had nothing to do with the specific policies of the election, but was instead the fruit of a spiritual discipline of discernment.
“The practice of that daily discernment is about placing the common good above our own personal preferences and incidental advantages,” Sis said.
“It involves asking, ‘What advice would I give to another person faced with the same situation?’ It includes picturing ourselves standing before the judgment seat of God on the last day, and asking, ‘What would I then wish my current choice to have been?’”
“The more we practice this art,” said the bishop, “the more it becomes second nature to us in daily decisions.”
There was, Sis clarified, no question of his willingness to serve as chairman, or his desire to so so — on the contrary, the bishop confirmed that he’d voted for himself. “I would have loved to serve as the chairman of that committee, especially given the chance to collaborate with the excellent leaders in the Administrative Committee of the USCCB,” he said.
“But, sometimes, in unexpected ways, the Lord presents us with a kairos moment when it becomes clear in our conscience what we ought to do, regardless of our personal self-interest, and despite our inner desires.”
“Far beyond the minute details of the USCCB bylaws or the particular stipulations of canon 119, and more important than the competitive desire to win a contest, what really matters is what is best for the Body of Christ, the Church,” said Sis.
“When the big screen showed that the votes were tied 111-111, I immediately knew what I should do. I should step aside so that Archbishop Sample could serve as chairman.”
Sis told The Pillar that in the moments after he was awarded the election, he engaged in prayer, and a practical discernment about what and who would best serve the bishops’ conference, the Church, and the work of the committee, which he noted “deals with matters of religious liberty on a national level in the United States. It does no
United States
