In the Vineyard

May 2005

"My real program of governance is not to do my own will, not to pursue my own ideas, but to listen, together with the whole church." Pope Benedict XVI at his installation

“What the Church needs today, as always, are not adulators to extol the status quo, but men whose humility and obedience are no less than their passion for truth; men who brave every misunderstanding and attack as they bear witness; men who, in a word, love the Church more than ease and the unruffled course of their personal destiny.” Josef Ratzinger from "Free Expression and Obedience in the Church" during his work at Vatican II, 1963, later quoted at the beginning of Christianity and the Religions: From Confrontation to Dialogue by Jacques Dupuis, SJ, (2000).


In the plethora of media coverage of the new Pope, one finds a curious but familiar phenomenon. At the dawn of this new papacy, we hear repeated expressions of both gloom and relief from all quarters of Catholic America. Liberals are disappointed. Conservatives are jubilant. Centrists are taking a wait-and-see approach. Bottom line – this Pope and concerns over his past orthodoxy or prospects of his adopting an entirely new papal persona, are red herrings. The question Catholics should be asking today is the question all Catholics should have been asking for at least the last three years: What kind of Church do we want?

Readers know from coverage in these pages that parishes and many state legislatures are noisier with the sound of Catholics speaking out. During the revelations of sexual abuse by clergy and a hierarchical cover up, many saw the ailing Pope as the problem. Others cited bishops’ autonomy, clericalism, sexism, lack of collegiality – the list is truly endless. Again, the bottom line: The reasons for the Church’s failures are not going to disappear simply by identifying those reasons, so – what kind of Church do we want?

The world’s civilized minds are embarrassed by the routine of silencings and book “bannings” – even certain subjects are banned from discussion (which has only drawn attention to the folly of doing so.) All of this advances the reality of ferment. We ask: How long can the surface withstand the upheaval beneath? What can we hope for by way of dialogue if we factor in the recent dismissal of Tom Reese, editor of America magazine, following so quickly the “discipline” against Roger Haight?

Surprisingly, there is some quantifiable hope, if these last three years tell us anything. While most Catholics would no doubt welcome any initiatives our new Pope might take toward calming our rumbling landscape, there is a refreshing understanding among us that the Pope is not the Church. The message is getting out – the laity, too, are called to speak and to act and to do so in love and in all places. Look around – things have changed. Our faith has found tens of thousands of us taking already challenged calendars and creating a space for the Church we want today and for our children. This issue of In the Vineyard is only one snapshot of who we are (voices of many faithful Catholics), what we are doing (bearing witness), and where we’re going (Indianapolis, for starters!)

What kind of Church do we want? Come to the VOTF Indianapolis convocation July 8-10. Voice of the Faithful will get specific about the Church we want, beginning with accountability, which, like charity, begins at home. Remember Rilke’s words: “All will come again into its strength … longing for what belongs to us and serving earth, lest we remain unused.”

Peggie L. Thorp
pthorp.ed@votf.org

NATIONAL NEWS

CONVOCATION Update Each of the Saturday afternoon breakouts in Indianapolis will run for just under three hours (with a break in the middle) – see why you will value every minute in “Breaking Up is Hard to Do”; Francine Cardman’s keynote address is “Re-membering the Church” – why the hyphen?; AND have you registered for the July 8-10 convocation? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Note: VOTF members will be receiving e-updates on Convocation news and progress, beginning 5/18. Greeters, lectors, singers and Eucharistic Ministers needed – if interested, please be in touch with Susan Troy at prayerfulvoice1@yahoo.com. Women and men religious – we want you with us! See Update for details.

VOTF welcomes our new Executive Director Ray Joyce and his family; there are 50 candidates for 26 seats on the new National Representative Council – elections to be held by June 1; USCCB meeting is set for Chicago, IL June 16-18. EYES ON ROME: Pope Benedict XVI’s past, part progressive and part doctrinaire, raises interest in how much, and which part, of that past the pope has brought with him to the seat of Peter; America magazine editor Tom Reese “resigns”; be sure to read Kris Ward’s Rome journal covering her 12 days in Rome for VOTF; SNAP’s Board is offering a creative way to help SNAP members to finance their attendance at their June 10-12 Annual National Conference in Chicago, IL. Kris Ward identifies direct communication avenues to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

REGIONAL NEWS

The Long Island Press named the Long Island Voice of the Faithful as one of the fifty most influential organizations on Long Island. The LI VOTF “Project Millstones” is gaining more attention; VOTF Boston is considering a fourth goal for their affiliate; VOTF Rockford, IL isn’t waiting for permission to use Church property; members of NH VOTF and other concerned Catholics in NH have spent eighteen months trying to arrive at a substantive reply from Rome with regard to their own bishop and his auxiliary. In the absence of that response, they have gone public and have posted on a web site the chronology of their efforts; VOTF-Maine is pleased with the high court ruling that allows the hierarchical staff of churches to be held accountable in Maine Courts for repeatedly delivering sexual predators into unsuspecting communities. Milwaukee priests may be subject to searches – what’s wrong with this picture?

EVENTS, ETC.

SHOWTIME’s “Our Fathers” film based on David France’s book about the sexual abuse crisis premiered in Boston. Its schedule as well as the schedule for “Holy Water-Gate: Abuse Cover-up in the Catholic Church” is available; take the Boston College survey on the Church in the 21st Century initiative; Sr. Mary Aquin O’Neill, RSM, PhD on the April 24 “Meet the Press” program, was asked whether or not the ordained priesthood should be open to women. Her response broadens the discussion.

LETTER TO THE EDITOR – a VOTF member reflects on a recent panel discussion with four priests; where’s your letter? Send to pthorp.ed@votf.org

PRAYER A Pentecost prayer from Christine Schenk; Jack Rakosky paraphrases a Rule of Benedict prayer in reflection of the VOTF mission

COMMENTARY – • “Josef Ratzinger, the Progressive” – a perspective on the young Josef Ratzinger from Leonard Swidler; Gaile Pohlhaus on Pope John Paul II, “The Personalist Pope” • SNAP’s David Clohessy and VOTF’s Paul Kendrick respond to James Keenan’s paper on “The Ethical Rights of Priests” • “Silence: Golden No More” – on Tom Reese’s resignation from America magazine • “Communicating with Bishops” Part I – from Fr. Tom Doyle

Exchange of the month: On “Real Time with Bill Mahar” one of the guests was Mario Cuomo, a Catholic and former governor of New York.

Mahar: What is it with you Catholics? You resist all the church teachings but you all love, love, love the church! It’s like buying a loaf of raisin bread and picking all the raisins out of it.

Cuomo: That’s because it’s about the bread.

NATIONAL News

Indianapolis Convocation Update

Our keynote speaker in Indianapolis is the Church historian Francine Cardman from Weston Jesuit School of Theology. Francine is an Associate Professor of Historical Theology and Church History. Her expertise in early Church history, early Church leadership, the history of Christian spirituality, and ecumenism promises to inform and energize.

The title of Francine’s talk is “Re-membering the Church: Participation and Structure Then and Now.” I asked Francine for her thoughts on that hyphen and her reply “re-minds” all of us that we are both old and new in this faith. “Re-membering: 1) to call to mind, to know again, to make a part of oneself in being and doing; 2) to bring together again, to rejoin separated parts or members, to re-form and reintegrate, to renew and make whole.

Re-membering is an organic process of incorporating past and present, the many and the one, both in oneself and in other bodies of which we are a part. Re-membering the Church recalls who and how we have been, reviews who and how we are, and re-visions who and how we might be as Church. The process of re-membering the Church calls into communion the lost and silenced voices, the forgotten possibilities, the necessary alternatives from every age so that we might faithfully pray, think, and witness together as Church for the sake of the gospel and the life of the world.”

As we have been saying, you will want to say that you were “there” when Voice of the Faithful gathered in Indianapolis in July of 2005. Register and check out additional details on the Convocation pages at www.votf.org.

“Breaking Up Is Hard To Do”

Since distributing the Convocation program, members and registrants have been intrigued by the Saturday afternoon breakout sessions. We thought it a good idea to provide some guidance on the format of these breakouts and answer some of the very practical questions that have surfaced. So, below is our first Q& A assembled by Aimee Carevich in the Parish Voice office. If you have additional questions, please go to the web site and identify the contact person (under Contact Us) most likely to be able to help you OR write to pthorp.ed@votf.org.

1) How many breakout sessions can I attend during Saturday afternoon?

Every attendee will choose only ONE of the nine breakout sessions to participate in for the time between 2:20-5:10pm on Saturday July 9th. Please indicate your first choice session on your registration form. Each person will receive confirmation about the group to which they have been assigned at the registration table in Indianapolis. We will make every attempt to assign people to their first choice sessions, but we may need to make adjustments due to space constraints.

2) Why can't we participate in more than one breakout session when we care about more than one of these issues?

At conferences and conventions (sponsored by VOTF and other organizations), the intention is for the membership to absorb information from speakers and trainers and take it back home with them. At that kind of event, you want to learn as much as you can, and that means attending as many sessions as possible. At our convocation and leadership meeting in Indianapolis, the intention is slightly different - for the membership to do the work of VOTF visioning and strategizing.

The convocation committee has identified these nine breakout questions as topics people care deeply about, but we need to know what outcomes we should seek as a national organization, and how we might get there. This will take the full three hours and will involve both small and large group discussions and decision-making. To have people move from one breakout session to another will only postpone our ability to make decisions, and make it very difficult to emerge with clear, concrete resolutions for the Sunday plenary. Therefore, we encourage each of you to choose the topic you are most passionate about and dig in! We need you!

The full Convocation program is on the web site, along with accommodations, registration and suggested reading information.

*****The Convocation Committee welcomes greeters, lectors, singers and Eucharistic Ministers. You are needed! If you would like to be part of VOTF’s “prayerful voice,” please be in touch with Susan Troy at prayerfulvoice1@yahoo.com

*****Voice of the Faithful is eager to have women and men religious join us in Indianapolis, as so many did in our early days! Please contact Evelyn Mercantini at esmerc48@comcast.net for special registration information.


Nominees for National Representative Council

As many already know, the current Representative Council has voted to re-constitute itself as a more truly National Council. We have divided the country into 14 regions, following the USCCB division. Nominees have been sought from each region and are listed by region. Elections will take place by June 1, and members will vote only for candidates within their own region. VOTF MEMBERS – HEADS UP!! You will be receiving the list of candidates for the new National Representative Council, identified by region, and links to their statements during the week of May 23 so that all voting is tallied by June 1.

[On the listings below, the parenthetical numbers alongside the states represent the number of seats available for that region.]

Region 1 – ME, NH, VT, MA, RI, CT (5) Donna Doucette, Ron DuBois, Mary Freeman, Pat Gomez, Ed Greenan, Mike Duhigg, Elia Marnik, Jane Merchant, Bob Morris, Bob Ott, Margaret Roylance, Anne Southwood, Jack Whelan, Tony Wiggins

Region 2 – NY (3) Dan Bartley, Mary Pat Fox, Phil Megna, Tom Myles, Sheila Peiffer, Ed Wilson

Region 3 – NJ, PA (2) Bud Bretschneider, William Cully, Brenda Hackett, Susan Smith

Region 4 – DC, DE, MD, VA (2) Evelyn Mercantini, Rich Moriarty, Bob Stewart

Region 5 – AL, KY, LA, MS, TN (1) Anne Harrison, Cal Pfeiffer, Susan Vogt,

Region 6 – OH, MI (2) Mary Collingwood, Edward Friedl

Region 7 – IL, IN, WI (2) Janet Hauter, Mary Heins, Stephanie McElligott, Genevieve O’Toole

Region 8 – MN, SD, ND (1) Shari Steffen

Region 9 – IA, KS, MO, NB (1) David Biersmith, Bob Kaintz

Region 10 – AR, OK, TX (1) Mark Bennett, Joe Turner

Region 11 – CA, HI, NV (2) Jim Jenkins, Mary Jane McGraw, Hugh O’Regan, Kathleen Schwartz

Region 12 – AK, ID, MT, WA, OR (1) Eileen Knoff

Region 13 – AZ, CO, WY, NM, UT (1) Frank Douglas

Region 14 – FL, GA, NC, SC (2) Dee Esteva, Margaret Lynch, Rosa Maria Montenegro


VOTF Names Executive Director – I am pleased to announce that Ray Joyce has accepted the position of Executive Director. He will begin serving in that role on May 9, 2005.

Ray is a seasoned manager with 25 years experience primarily in the nonprofit sector. He has spent the last 12 years at the WGBH Educational Foundation, one of the nation's foremost public broadcasting stations. While at WGBH, Ray managed services and programs of varying size and complexity, led strategic planning, fundraising, operations and marketing activities, volunteered for leadership roles in diversity and mentoring initiatives and distinguished himself as a change agent whose interpersonal skills have been lauded by his colleagues. Early in his career Ray worked in high technology, served in the Peace Corps as a small business volunteer and led a college's development effort. He also holds a B.A. from Merrimack College and an MBA in Public and Nonprofit Management from Boston University.

Ray and his wife Michele have two young children. They are members of St. Zepherin parish in Wayland, MA where Ray served as chair of the stewardship committee, which focuses on sacrificial giving as well as increasing volunteers' commitment of time and talent. He and Michele co-chaired the parish's renovation campaign alongside pastor Fr. Paul Berube and Frank & Bea O'Connor to raise more than $1 million to completely refurbish the church building. As a Merrimack college alumni council member Ray helped initiate alumni spiritual retreats. Additionally, Ray has attended self-directed retreats at a local Trappist monastery and participated in Cursillo.

Ray continues his involvement at St. Zepherin with the RCIA team and as a Eucharistic Minister. He and Michele also put their faith into action through Habitat for Humanity's programs in Romania and Tucson and Merrimack College's campus ministry efforts in the Dominican Republic.

Voice of the Faithful welcomes Ray, Michele, and their family!


Talking with the Vatican - submitted by VOTF vice-president Kris Ward:

The Vatican indicated in conversations during the interregnum, the time of the Vacant See, and the early days of Pope Benedict XVI, that reasoned and informed communications from the laity are considered within the Congregations of the Curia.

The cases for the defrockings of priests against whom there are credible allegations of sexual abuse of children and minors are sent by bishops to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. During the past year, two canon lawyers from the United States were added to the staff to help with the workload.

Please consider using your voice and the combined voices of your affiliate and region to enter into communication with the Congregation regarding cases in your diocese that have been sent to the Vatican and are awaiting action.

During the time I was in Rome, I delivered letters from survivors in the Archdiocese of Cincinnati with the belief that the Congregation needs to hear the voices of the survivors themselves as decisions are made concerning the cases. Follow-up to these letters will also be done.

Here is information on how to communicate with the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith:

Father Augustine J. De Noia, O.P. is the Under Secretary of the Congregation for the Doctine for the Faith. He is an American. If you are able to receive Vatican Radio broadcasts, interviews with Father Augustine are being broadcast this week through www.vaticanradio.com

The Secretary of this congregation, Father Angelo Amato, may become a principal aide to Pope Benedict XVI as he was at the Congregation. He has been seen close to the Pope during public appearances since his election. There is speculation that San Fransico Archbishop Willaim Levada is being considered as a candidate to head the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

Monsignor Charles J. Scicluna is the Promoter of Justice in the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith. Wiritten communciation may be addresssed to Father DeNoia and Monsignor Scicluna.

The mailing address is:
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith
Piazza del S. Uffzio, 00193 Roma, Italy

The minimum postage is 60 cents for one ounce. The fax number from the United States is; 011.39.06.69.88.34.09 (fees will depend on your telephone service).

Additional information regarding communications with the Congregation for Bishops concerning vacancies in bishoprics will be available through In the Vineyard and also in discussion at the Indianapolis Convocation July 8-10. You won't want to miss it!


SNAP National Conference, June 10-12 – Message from SNAP’s Board

The board of SNAP met this week and decided that although we do not have general scholarship money this year, we would like to offer another way to reduce fees for members of SNAP. If a member sells an ad for the SNAP ad book, which will be published at the conference, they can request that 50% of the ad sale be reduced from their conference fee. In other words, if a SNAP member sells a $100 ad, they can request from the ad book coordinator that $50 be taken off their conference fee. The entire $100 conference fee can be waived if $200 worth of ads are sold. Of course, the checks for the ads must be received by SNAP before the discount can be applied. All ads are due May 25th, so this fundraiser is time limited. Go to the SNAP web site for additional information at www.snapnetwork.org. Bishop accountability has never mattered more – go to www.bishopaccountability.org and sign up for their newsletter The Monitor.


EVENTS, ETC.

VOTF New York, NY and clergy to offer "Parish Encounter:
Preparing for Change in the Archdiocese of New York" on Saturday, May 14, 2005 – 8:30AM to 3:30PM
St. Ignatius Loyola Church - Wallace Hall, Park Avenue at East 84th Street, NY, NY. To attend, please register in advance. More details click here.

USCCB Meeting Scheduled for June 16-18, Chicago, IL From the USCCB web site at www.usccb.org The agenda will include discussion and vote on the 5th Edition of the Program of Priestly Formation, discussion and vote on the adaptations of the Order of Mass, a statement of renewed commitment to Catholic elementary and secondary schools, a pastoral letter on World Missions, and discussion and vote on the revised Essential Norms and the revised Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People.

The bishops will spend a half day on prayer and discussion on the theme of Evangelization and Catechesis. Only the mornings of Thursday, June 16, and Friday, June 17, will be open to coverage by the news media.

  • According to a Kansas City Star Associated Press item on March 31, 2005, “America's Roman Catholic bishops started an online survey of clergy sex abuse victims Wednesday, asking how the church can better help them recover and to protect young people. Advocacy groups said they were pleased that the bishops wanted to improve their outreach.” Sue Archibald of The Linkup said. “I don't know what really remains unknown in terms of what the problems are. Rather than continuing to gather information, I'd much rather see action.” The bishops’ web site is www.victim-outreach.com

Boston College is conducting a survey through June on its Church in the 21st Century program. If you are familiar with the program and/or have participated in its offerings, you can take the survey here.

  • While you’re at it, note the following June opportunities: Saturday, June 4, 2005 3:00 p.m. - 4:00 p.m., Devlin 008, Seminar: "How The Church in the 21st Century is working to transform the current crisis into an opportunity for renewal," June 15-17, 2005 Conference: “The Roman Catholic Priesthood in the 21st Century.” The conference will discuss the challenges facing today’s priests and the shape of the priesthood during the coming decades. Tuesday, June 21, 2005 9:00 am - 5:00 pm, Higgins Hall, Conference: The Second Annual Conference on Understanding the Clergy Sexual Abuse Crisis for mental health professionals, parish administrative staff and religious education directors. Information: Dr. Vincent Lynch, 617-552-4038, lynchv@bc.edu. Additional information is at the web site.

EYES ON ROME Tom Reese, editor of America magazine, resigns under order of the Vatican – NYT coverage and NCR coverage at and Boston Globe May 10 coverage at and don’t forget Catholic News.

  • Pope Benedict’s past is rich in progressive thinking and repressive actions. From The Church. Readings in Theology. New York: P.J. Kenedy & Sons, 1963 we find a contribution by Josef Ratzinger: "Free Expression and Obedience in the Church," pp.194-217 gave us the quote on page 1 of this issue of In the Vineyard. “The servility of the sycophants (branded by the genuine prophets of the Old Testament as ‘false prophets’), of those who shy from and shun every collision, who prize above all their calm complacency, is not true obedience . . . . What the Church needs today, as always, are not adulators to extol the status quo, but men whose humility and obedience are no less than their passion for truth; men who brave every misunderstanding and attack as they bear witness; men who, in a word, love the Church more than ease and the unruffled course of their personal destiny.” The list of those who followed the intent of these words is tragically long and, more tragic, incomplete: Click here.

  • For another perspective on Pope Benedict XVI, see the “Roman Working Paper on Episcopal Conferences” written by Joseph A. Komonchak|, professor of theology at The Catholic University of America and, interestingly, edited by Thomas Reese. Click here.

  • “The Pope is Not the Church” by Eugene Kennedy

  • Should you find yourself with something to say to Pope Benedict, his email address is benedictxvi@vatican.va.

  • [For some current thinking about bishops, see the conversation with Jim Post and others. ]

Meeting the Press Sr. Mary Aquin O’Neill, RSM, PhD, Director, Mount Saint Agnes Theological Center for Women, was asked by Tim Russert on “Meet the Press,” Sunday, April 24, 2005, “Do you think women should be able to be priests?” She replied, as do many who favor gender balance in the priesthood, that she hadn’t reached that conclusion. In her remarks, Sr. Mary added, “…my concern about it is that too much of the argument makes it seem that in order to prove our equality, we must be ordained. And that would mean that the ordained are somehow higher and better than the laity. That's a theology I do not accept. I believe that one of the most important things for this church now is to really act on Christifideles Laici, where we were told there's a complementarity between the laity and the ordained. Complementarity means one cannot trump the other. And so, in all the questions that the church faces, the laypeople and their experience and their insights have to have an equal place at the table with those who are ordained. It may be that we decide to ordain women. It may be that we decide to ordain married men. As Thomas Cahill said, he wants the church, the assembly, to be involved in it, and so do I.” For a full transcript of the program, click here.

The Boston showing of SHOWTIME’s “Our Fathers,” which was based on David France’s book about the sexual abuse crisis, offered a Q&A opportunity at the film’s conclusion. Attendees heard over and over again a plea from survivors and survivor support groups to focus on legislative changes in statutes of limitation that, in effect, keep victims silent and perpetrators on the street. Click here for SHOWTIME’s program schedule and additional information on the film “Our Fathers.”

  • While you’re at the “Our Fathers” link, check out SHOWTIME’s award-winning documentary “Holy Water-Gate: Abuse Cover-up in the Catholic Church” scheduled for broadcast on SHOWTIME NETWORKS on May 19 at 10 p.m., May 25 at 10:10 p.m. and May 27 at 10:15 p.m. The 56-minute documentary, which examines the Catholic Church's sexual abuse scandal and the fallout of a decades-long cover-up to conceal the truth, was purchased as a companion program to the SHOWTIME original picture "Our Fathers." The documentary was awarded a CINE GOLDEN EAGLE in investigative journalism. The film has been broadcast in Canada, Australia, Spain, and Switzerland and is slated to screen in Denmark.

COMMENTARY

Josef Ratzinger the Progressive

What follows is an excerpt from a message distributed by Leonard Swidler to VOTF leadership.

Joseph Ratzinger published an article in the first issue of my Journal of Ecumenical Studies (1964) as a peritus at Vatican II. He was a moderate progressive then. Also, a little later he joined the faculty at the University of Tubingen where I earlier got my degree in Catholic theology (1959) and along with the rest of the faculty signed a joint article arguing in favor of the election and limited-term of office for bishops. Excerpts appear below.

From Bishops and People, Edited and Translated by Leonard Swidler and Arlene Swidler, The Westminster Press, Philadelphia Copyright © MCMLXX, Leonard Swidler

On Authority:
Correctly understood, authority does not exclude criticism, but stands ready for criticism. Criticism is a method of authentic conversation for the purpose of greater effectiveness. But this says nothing about the criterion of criticism. There is a method of criticism that on principle criticizes anything that is decreed by an office-bearer. Such criticism cancels itself out; depending on circumstances, it leads to anarchy or to dictatorship. This method of criticism can simply not be regarded as a constructive contribution. For, instead of making a critical-dialogic contribution, it sets up an extreme interpretation as absolute. The authentic method of criticism demands that regulations be considered carefully, and that it be possible in decisive questions to enter into dialogue with those affected by such regulations; those so affected demand today to be listened to in a decisive way and thus to co-determine future regulations. A social structure that is determined by the old model of master and servant is outdated.

4. Contemporary man sees office as a function of society; authority, it follows, is recognized only insofar as it is prepared to justify itself through performance. The man who makes any kind of regulations today must always reckon with the fact that these regulations will be criticized. He must offer convincing reasons for his regulations. This is completely obvious to the politician and the statesman. In many cases a constantly reconsidered stance must replace custom-honored decisions. What seem to be obvious routine affairs can suddenly become problematic. A clear command will necessitate an explanation. A command will make sense only within the frame of a well-considered master plan. Dynamic guiding principles will achieve more than a rigid order.

On Church Structure:
It appears that social-political discussions on office and authority also apply in the ecclesiastical area, that the Christian is indeed always a man of this world and time. The structure of Christianity, like the structure of the church, seems in many ways still shaped by the Middle Ages. Even in modern times the outdated forms are adhered to as tightly as ever. Some political concepts must be described as outdated, whether or not they may have been justified at one time…. The person who does not matter-of-factly practice tolerance of other faiths clings to a medieval concept of order and is out of place in contemporary society…. In all this it is by no means necessary to evaluate the development from late antiquity to the Middle Ages in the negative way that is often seen. But we are confronted with the situation that the framework of the church and its legal concepts are, in the context of the contemporary image of society, part of a strange world of the past. They are not authorized by the gospel or by the structure of the first Christian congregations, but only by a tradition that arose later. This tradition, however, has become dated and today no longer suitable in many ways. We are not therefore concerned with establishing the utopia of a primitive church congregation. It is rather our task to test new demands and possibilities critically in the perspective of the Gospels. In this we must proceed beyond minimal concessions. Genuine construction is the result of a projected program and an entire overall plan that points to the future.

On Bishops:
The question of the election of a bishop has been discussed recently-in connection with the naming of bishops-with vehemence, though with no visible success. Yet it apparently has still been widely assumed that a bishop-named or elected-should remain in office the rest of his life. And yet, does not the decision to assign such an office for a lifetime conceal enormous dangers for the vital formation of the pastoral care of the diocese? Through such a regulation, the pastoral care of an entire diocese can be determined or at least greatly influenced in a very unilateral manner for decades…. The question of whether the current law has always proved itself through the centuries, or whether history has not rather demonstrated the problematic of such an institution, should be set aside for now. Granted that such a view was self-explanatory in late antiquity, in the Middle Ages, and even into modern times, for us today this regulation is no longer convincing. We find it questionable not out of a desire to criticize, but on objective grounds. That a different regulation and indeed any other regulation always brings with it certain disadvantages and is itself one-sided should not be disputed. The procedure should be to see the greater danger and the greater one-sidedness and to avoid them as much as possible.

We take no position, therefore, on the custom of the past. We do not say that the church was forced at the time of Constantine into a social order that can only be condemned. We see adequate sense throughout this historical development. The historically minded person should not apply the criteria of his time to other times. But he may demand that in the area of ecclesiastical sociology no decisions that are relative be given permanent, binding character.

3. It cannot be disputed: The present regulation that bishops be named for an undetermined time or for life conceals grave dangers…. This is our suggestion: The term of office of resident bishops should in the future be eight years. Another term or a prolongation of the term is possible only as an exception, and only for objective, extreme reasons stemming from the political situation within the church…. Against this suggestion will arise a series of doubts that must be seriously discussed one by one.

ALFONS AUER, GÜNTER BIEMER, KARL AUGUST FINK, HERBERT HAAG, HANS KÜNG, JOSEPH MÖLLER, JOHANNES NEUMANN, JOSEPH RATZINGER, JOSEPH RIEF, KARL HERMANN SCHELKLE, MAX SECKLER, PETER STOCKMEIER with BISHOP JOSEF SCHOISWOHL and LEONARD SWIDLER


A Response to James Keenan’s “The Ethical Rights of Priests” from Maine VOTF member Paul Kendrick of Maine and David Clohessy, Executive Director, Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests (SNAP)

In the April 2005 edition of In the Vineyard, Rev. James Keenan, S.J. was right on target when he pointed out that the Report on the Crisis in the Catholic Church in the United States by the National Review Board offers "no equivalent policy of zero tolerance for bishops or provincials" who aided, abetted, protected and covered up for priests who sexually abused children and young people. Moreover, the Report argues that bishops "must show that they are willing to accept responsibility and consequences for poor leadership," but the report falls short of offering concrete expressions of how that responsibility ought to be expressed. In his essay, Keenan argues, "Fairness cuts two ways. If a zero tolerance policy is applied to priests, where is an analogous policy for the bishops?" We agree.

In September 2004, The Voice of the Faithful National Representative Council responded to the question of bishop accountability and the consequences of negligent leadership by affirming that "no bishop or other hierarch who, knowing of the sexual abuse of minors by any priest, has failed to remove the priest from any exposure to minors or to take any other effective step to protect the people of God, or who has concealed the risk of abuse presented by such priests from the people to whom such priest was assigned to minister, should be permitted to hold any position of ecclesiastical leadership in the Church." Keenan argues that zero tolerance is unfair and unjust as it applies directly to priests who abuse minors. He writes, "Zero tolerance recognizes no relevant circumstance of any kind, nor any due proportionality, the very factors that make treatment 'fair.' If zero tolerance is not fair, then how can it be just?"

In essence, Keenan is arguing that the consequences for a priest who sexually abuses a child must be measured by certain relevant criteria, thus rendering certain acts of child abuse as acceptable while certain other acts of child abuse would disqualify the priest from ministry. However, Keenan's measurement of "relevant criteria" ignores the long-term effects of sexual abuse on a child or young person. Long term effects of child abuse include fear, anxiety, depression, anger, hostility, inappropriate sexual behavior, poor self esteem, a tendency toward substance abuse and difficulty with close relationships (Source: Browne & Finkelhor, 1986). It also ignores the likelihood of re-offense.

Keenan makes three key points to support his argument:

  1. A policy of zero tolerance policy is in place because some bishops and religious superiors "badly underestimated" the situation in the past. Therefore, it is only because we are not confident that the bishops will effectively deal with abusive priests in the future that the Charter and Essential Norms remove any further discretion on the part of bishops and religious superiors in this regard.

  2. The zero-tolerance policy applies without regard to any assessment of factors such as the frequency of abuse, the nature of the sexual act (improper touching of a fully clothed teenager versus the sodomization of a child), successful psychological treatment of the problem, time line of the abuse (occurred many years ago or recently), etc.

  3. The zero-tolerance policy is too blunt an instrument for universal application; i.e., one size fits all is unfair.

Prevention or Punishment?

Unfortunately, by mischaracterizing the intent of "zero tolerance," Keenan's "fairness" argument falls apart. Like many priests, Rev. Keenan considers zero tolerance to be punishment for wrongdoings. Thus, he questions why mitigating factors (number of victims, severity of the abuse, how long ago the crimes were committed, etc.) are not considered in determining whether or not a priest should continue in ministry.

The purpose of zero tolerance is not primarily punishment of the priest as it is protection of the common good, i.e., protecting children against the threat of repeat-abuse (recidivism). While it may be less likely that a cleric who has offended for a short period of time will offend again, the words "less likely" raise a concern. It is very difficult to determine whether offenders who have participated in therapy have deeply benefited from counseling, creating yet another argument in favor of zero tolerance.

It's An Old Allegation

It has been documented that most victims do not report their abuse until years after the abuse occurred. Many cases are decades old. Thus, when an accusation of sexual abuse is alleged against a well-liked and popular priest, parishioners tend to rally around the priest, defending his many years of faithful service to the Church. The parishioners may also argue that there are no other allegations against the priest. (It is interesting to note that it is always "our priest" who will never abuse a child again.)

Unfortunately, in most states, expired statutes of limitation have prevented many priests from being arrested, there is not a criminal trial and no jail time is ever served. By conspiring to cover up and keep secret the past abuses of priests, church officials have obstructed justice. Church public relations officials often mischaracterize and minimize the abuse by telling us that "Twenty years ago, Father engaged in the 'inappropriate touching' of a minor." Translation for the faithful: "It is an old allegation. Father's 'sexual misconduct' was an aberration, an isolated incident. It will never happen again. Do not be concerned."

If, instead, public relations officials told us what really happened, we might read far more graphic statements about previous accusations including child and statutory rape, sodomy and endangering the welfare of a child.

Risk Management

People often say, "If you are a Christian, don't you believe in redemption? Don't you believe that people can change? Don't you believe in forgiveness?” Yes, of course we do. But how can we ever be certain that a person who has sexually abused even one minor will never abuse again? What guarantees do we have? Do we take the abuser's word for it? Of course not. Instead, we act responsibly and err on the side of caution.

What about an abuser who has received long-term psychological treatment? Residential treatment is the discovery phase. It is the beginning of a lifetime of daily maintenance for the abuser. The offender must never be far from a support network. He must live one day at a time not abusing a child. He must remove himself from access to children. He alone is responsible for his daily recovery. There are no guarantees. Those in authority must take appropriate steps to ensure that children are safe. Half measures will not be effective.

Protecting children from a sexual abuser isn't always about being right. Mostly, it's about risk management. Kids need help protecting themselves from cunning, convincing, charismatic, and charming sexual abusers. A person who sexually abuses a child or young person gives up his right to ever again have unsupervised access to children.

Is zero tolerance "too blunt an instrument for universal application?" If our intent is prevention, then we think not. The risks to children and young people are too great. Sexual abuse has the capacity to permanently alter a child's well being. It is non-erasable. It affects the healthy lives of young and old, poor and rich, successful and struggling. What loving mother or father would entrust their child to any person who has sexually abused a minor? If the owner of a day care center knew that one of his employees was sexually abusing a child and did nothing to prevent or stop the abuse, the operation would be shut down and criminal charges would be filed. If a high school principal knew that one of the teachers was sexually abusing a student and did nothing to prevent or stop the abuse, charges would be filed and neither the principal nor the teacher would ever work in a school system again.

Zero tolerance isn't about hate, it's not about revenge; rather, it's about making sure that kids are protected from sexual abuse. It's about not taking chances.


Silence: Golden No More

The recent dismissal of Jesuit Fr. Tom Reese from America magazine follows pretty quickly on the heels of Fr. Roger Haight’s “discipline,” both of these actions imposed directly by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith during and immediately after the long tenure of Cardinal Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI. What are we to make of what appear to be “early warning signs” in this new papacy?

Not much, some might say. After all, silencings, book bannings and excommunications are old news. What has happened to Frs. Haight and Reese seems to be “more of the same” on the slippery slope journey begun many centuries ago when Catholics did more accepting and the Vatican did more controlling. A majority of American Catholics today simply ignore non-doctrinal Church teachings that don’t make sense – in other words, certain teachings fly in the face of the “sensus fidelium.” Meanwhile, the Vatican continues to issue disciplines, reward its favorite sons, maintain a divide between the ordained and non-ordained, and generally move through time with impunity all the while dropping sound bites about a “smaller, tighter” Church. This is pretty much the ride that silence offers – non-stop all the way to sexual abuse by clergy.

On the other hand, one cannot ignore the new “kids on the block” who have a passion for the Church of our Brother equal to any in Church leadership. Here we have another “early warning sign.” Voice of the Faithful and other Catholic reform groups are increasingly vocal in pointing out the obvious – all that hierarchical glitter isn’t gold at all. Until the abuse crisis and its cover up were made public, Catholics had been snookered by the pomp and the holy politics of distance. The distance, however great it remains, isn’t what it used to be. We can thank the Americas of our time for helping the laity, and indeed many clergy, to bridge much that has divided us from each other as well as from Church leaders. Whether we agree with the Church or not on the many issues around which there has been no genuine dialogue, we must speak with each other. When that fails, we must at least have each other within hearing.

In America magazine, Tom Reese honored voices from both sides of an argument. To do less is beneath all of us. It will be interesting to see what other Catholic editors will have to say on the subject of silencings in our Church. It will be more interesting to see what the rest of us have to say – and where we will say it.

Somewhere between the routine of silencings and “disciplines” by the Vatican and the noise of closing parish doors across the US lies the future of the American Catholic Church. That future rests on the company we want to keep, including what we read.

What do you think? Write to pthorp.ed@votf.org. PLT


Pope John Paul II: A Personalist Philosopher

by Gaile Pohlhaus, Villanova University

Karol Wojtyla was born in 1920 to a former school teacher and an administrative officer in the Polish army. His mother died shortly before Karol turned 9 and his brother died nearly four years later. Karol’s father raised his son with strict discipline but died before the future pope was ordained. A brilliant student, Karol was a philosopher who wrote his habilitation under Max Scheler, a disciple of Husseral, the father of phenomenology, which Karol grounded in the philosophy of Thomas Aquinas. In lay person’s terms phenomenology is the study of essences as they present themselves to consciousness using pure descriptions. This led Karol to formulate his personalist philosophy.

According to Christopher West, the preeminent commentator on Pope John Paul II’s Theology of the Body, “personalism treats ethical questions from this insider’s point of view; as persons we are conscious of our acts.” And so the philosopher Karol Wojtyla who became the Pope John Paul II treated moral life from his own “insider’s” point of view, the point of view of a young man who grew up through adolescence without a mother or sister in his home, in a country first overrun by Nazi’s and then controlled by Communists and who turned in 1941 to an underground education in the Catholic church for ordination. Karol Wojtyla was a complex person; a philosopher who would use pure descriptions to talk about Love and Responsibility as a philosopher and Theology of the Body as a pope; a man who was known for his devotion to Mary of Nazareth under many titles; and a leader who was beloved by many and followed completely by few.

In Love and Responsibility Karol Wojtyla used this personalistic norm – the only proper response to a person is love; negatively put a person must never be used as a means to an end. He would go on to say “personal order is the only proper plane for all debate on matters of sexual morality.” However, he would insist that this would not separate us from objective truth. This brings us to the Pope’s views on woman. As a personalist he is looking for the essence which he then universalizes.

Drawing from several sources written by the Pope , Christopher West devotes a whole section of his commentary on the Pope’s Eulogy of Femininity: (CW, 121)

John Paul is a man who loves woman with a purity as close to the beginning as it seems possible to reach in this life. It can even be said in light of the above analysis that he is a man who knows woman (in a celibate way, of course). He knows her distinctive beauty and dignity, and he stands in awe of the mystery of God’s creative love revealed in her.

The Holy Father does not intend merely to state the obvious when he notes that the “constitution of the woman is different as compared with the man”(TB, 81). He believes it is of great significance, and of particular credit to woman, that God has chosen her body to be the place of conception, the shrine of new life. The whole constitution of woman’s body is made for motherhood. Since the body reveals the person, John Paul believes that this speaks volumes, not only about feminine biology, but about the dignity and nature of woman as a person. This is why he takes special care to note that the Bible (and subsequently the liturgy) “honors and praises throughout the centuries ‘the womb that bore you and the breasts you sucked’ (Lk :27). These words,” he continues, “constitute a eulogy of motherhood, of femininity, of the female body in its typical expression of creative love” (82).

In her joyous proclamation, “I have gotten a man with the help of the Lord,” woman expresses the whole theological depth of the function of begetting and procreating. Furthermore, in giving birth the first woman is fully aware of the mystery of creation—of everything we have been discussing about man’s “beginning”—which is renewed in human generation. Yes, according to the Holy Father, the entire mystery, dignity, goodness, vocation, and destiny of man as revealed “in the beginning” is reproduced in some sense every time a child is conceived under the heart of a woman.

Given this philosophical, personalistic, phenomenolistic understanding of woman it is not surprising that for the Pope function follows form. The essential form of woman is to (potentially) give birth, thus this is how her life is to be ordered. He says “Feminine and masculine are different in a way that enables true community.” “Without the difference of the sexes an incarnate, life-giving communion would be impossible.” There is an intentionality that is important in sexual intimacy, that allows for the male to make a donation to the female that she willingly accepts. This particular view of woman reinforces the view of woman as passive. In Mulieris Dignitatem the Pope stresses the need for women to be treated equally in the workplace with respect to wages and dignity as a human being but he repeatedly focuses in on woman’s first vocation to be mother either actually or symbolically, a role he sees modeled in Mary of Nazareth.

In the end it is the view of woman outlined above that leads the Pope to assert: “I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church's faithful. ” The form of woman is different from the form of man and since Christ was a man, woman cannot properly model him as priest. This despite the fact that the very first person who could truly and completely say “this is my Body, this is my Blood” was Mary of Nazareth.

2 Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, “On Reserving Priestly Ordination to Men”
May 22, 1994

Mulieris Dignitatem, “On the Dignity and Vocation of Women”
August 15, 1988,

Redemptoris Mater, “The Mother of the Redeemer”
March 25, 1987

Foreshadowed in the Pope’s very first encyclical : Redemptor Hominis, “The Redeemer of Man”
March 4, 1979


A Message from Fr. Tom Doyle

I was asked a question at a VOTF gathering recently, about the productivity of continued confrontation with bishops as opposed to dialogue. My response: I believe that building bridges and honest dialogue is essential for the future of the Catholic Church as a Christian community. It certainly is more important than feeding anger by engaging in diatribe, violent confrontation and the like. BUT....the mistake is lumping all "confrontation" into the same category. True dialogue can deal with confrontation because confrontation means honesty, and there is much to be confrontative about in today's Church.

True communication excludes the capitulation insisted upon all too often by Church leaders. True communication means that many of the empty presumptions and accusations be abandoned. It also means a recognition of the right of all Catholics to think. True communication in today's Church must take into account the sad fact that VOTF, SNAP and other affiliated groups are regularly slandered and discriminated against simply because they are acting like Catholic adults. Sad too is the fact that priests and deacons who have been openly supportive of VOTF and SNAP have been unjustly penalized by uncaring and unthinking bishops.

I believe that it is a grievous mistake to back away from honestly challenging our ordained leaders over many or all of the major problems facing our Catholic community. I have learned over many years that clericalism is a virus that has infected us all. It takes much effort to face and eradicate it but it must be done. Clericalism takes many forms and one of them is the fear that if we challenge we will offend the bishops. Clericalism is in control if we succumb to the old behavior of being docile and obedient whenever we are in communication with the clergy. Clericalism is in control if we fail to see the most ignored, disenfranchised and marginalized person or group in the Church as equal in importance to the men who sit in the highest positions of power. God bless. Tom Doyle

Communicating with Bishops – Part I
(Part II will appear in the June issue of this publication)

The Catholic Church’s political structure is hierarchical by design. All power flows down from the top. Furthermore, all real power resides in specific individuals and not in collegiate groups or corporate structures. This has been the case throughout the history of institutionalized Catholicism. This political structure has created a culture surrounding the leadership. This culture has in turn produced pre-conditioned responses to different forms of communication.

The hierarchical governmental system has given rise to two things: the first has been the style of government, meaning the way authority is exercised. The style is generally monarchical, which means that the focus is on the leader and not on the subjects. The second phenomenon has been the ascendance of an aristocracy composed of the clergy. Power, privilege, prestige and financial control are vested in individuals and all of these are members of the clergy. Though lay persons have been included on many levels of church administration, all real! power is in the hands of a small group of celibate, male clerics. Even here, the power is limited to a select group of clerics, the bishops.

In 1906 Pius X issued an encyclical that described the political structure of the Catholic Church:

This church is essence an unequal society, that is to say a society comprising two categories of persons, the shepherd and the flock.... These categories are so distinct that the right and authority necessary for promoting and guiding all the members toward the goal of society reside only in the pastoral body; as to the multitude, its sole duty is that of allowing itself to be led and of following its pastors as a docile flock.

This statement captures the enduring belief about the fundamental nature of the institutional church. Though Vatican II defined the Church as the “People of God” the official theology and law of the Church still hold that the hierarchical division is of divine origin.. Nevertheless, this description of the Christian community has shallow roots in authentic theology and no verifiable basis in scripture. In other words, the constant claim that Christ intended a hierarchical structure when he founded the Church is based on nebulous historical evidence. There is no indication from the writings of the first three centuries that Christ ever intended to found a church as such nor that he consciously established a hierarchical system. The Apostles emerged from the Last Supper as potential leaders of the future “church” though they hardly knew it at the time. That they emerged as archbishops, newly ordained by Christ the High Priest is a segment of Catholic mythology, but not an essential and proven element of authentic ecclesiology.

The above statements sum up not only a theological position but a deeply rooted attitude that permeates the consciousness and emotions not only of bishops but many lay people as well. The concept of a stratified ecclesial society enables the fallacy of clericalism, which enters directly into all communications with the hierarchy. The bishops believe that they are singled out by the Almighty as the anointed teachers, legislators, executives and judges of Christ’s community here on earth. The faithful are taught to believe this teaching from their first years of catechetical instruction and consequently taught to hold the bishops in the highest respect and esteem.

The Catholic Church rests on a sacramental system. The seven sacraments are the particularly important, if not essential, encounters with Christ. Belief in the official theology of the sacraments is essential for a Catholic. The sacraments are necessary for salvation, as we are taught. The way to the sacraments is through the ordained clergy, especially the priests, but ultimately the custodians of the sacraments are the bishops. Catholics learn early on that salvation is mediated through the Church but not the Church as a vast throng of believers scattered throughout the world. It is mediated through the Church’s ordained leaders. These leaders determine who may receive a sacrament. They control access to the means of salvation and as such, they hold great power that supports the respect in which they are held and enables also the fear experienced by so many Catholics..

Traditionally the obvious power imbalance determined the quality of communications with the hierarchy and the hierarchy’s belief in its divine origin formed the emotional response to any communications that were critical or challenging. Often, rather than responding to the substance of a criticism or challenging question, a bishop reacts defensively, asking how his authority can possibly be questioned. The fundamental issue is lost in the perceived threat to the bishop’s authority. This attitude is enforced by the church’s own political structures, which reserve all power to bishops and limit the participation of collegiate or corporate bodies to consultation.

The clergy sex abuse phenomenon has changed the way Catholics communicate with bishops. Accustomed to always controlling every situation, the bishops have reluctantly learned that this is no longer the case. Since the canonical structures of the Church provide no basis or avenues for communication based on the concept of equality of participants, the aggrieved have sought relief in the civil courts of the U.S. and several other countries. The bishops were faced with a power equal to and in many ways surpassing their own. The result has generally been defensiveness, de-valuation of the abuse survivors, and anger!

The frustration and anger engendered in tens of thousands of sex abuse victims as well as millions of laity over the sordid revelations of abuse and cover up has changed the way a significant segment of the Catholic and non-Catholic population communicates with bishops. As the “scandal” unfolded and more and more was revealed in the media and in the courts, trust and respect for bishops rapidly eroded and with it the traditional belief in the nature of the episcopacy.

In short, communication has been challenging, confrontative and driven by anger, distrust and cynicism. Those directly involved with the sex abuse phenomenon, including victims, their loved ones and supporters, the media and attorneys, have been astonished, disappointed and saddened by the arrogance, dishonesty and lack of compassion manifested by many bishops. In time, the bishops realized that they lost the trust and respect of many. Yet the fundamental attitude of superiority still permeates most conversations about significant issues facing the Catholic Church.

The anger and mistrust have prevented true communication. Many bishops have immediately focused on the challenge to their authority rather than the reason for the anger. It certainly appears that the horror of the sexual abuse of countless children, minors and vulnerable adults has been overshadowed for many bishops, by the affront to their dignity, the rejection of their authority and the disrespect for their persons and their office. In fact, most of the anger experienced by the victims, their supporters and others seeking reform and change, is grounded in the enormity of the crimes and the perceived inability of many bishops to fully realize the gravity of the situation. They have reason to be angry and disrespectful of bishops. As many have said time after time, “They just don’t get it. They think its all about them.”

The welfare of the victims should be the primary concern of the institutional Church because these men and women, boys and girls, have not only had their bodies and their emotions deeply scarred, but their souls devastated. For a Church whose ultimate and foundational mission is the “salvation of souls” there seems to have been precious little concern for the souls of those faithful and trusting Catholics who were raped and brutalized by priests and bishops.

The agenda of the victims and survivors has remained constant. First, they want the bishops to acknowledge that their abuse is real. They want to be believed. They do not want to be patronized nor will they be satisfied with wringing hands, profuse apologies and promises of prayer. They want to be able to believe that the bishops truly understand the horror and trauma they have experienced. In looking for some sign of an honest cognitive and emotional response, too many have been disappointed and walked away convinced that they were viewed as a threat or a nuisance and not an emotional and spiritual casualty.

Second, they have wanted the bishops to do something about the perpetrators. Many began with well justified thoughts of revenge but miraculously, most worked through this and sought only assurance that the men and women who raped their bodies and souls be provided help but mostly, be restricted from ever being able to hurt another person, young or old. In all too many cases, the victims found out to their shock that the promises made were never kept. Perpetrators were re-cycled and more children were hurt.

Third, the victims and indeed the Catholic and general public have wanted honest answers from the bishops to some very painful and fundamental questions. Why did they cover up and allow known child abusers to move from place to place? Why did they ignore victims and not offer any significant pastoral care? Why have they consistently and stubbornly refused to look at their own style of governing to find the answers to such devastating questions?

Finally, Why has the image of the institutional Church’s leadership been more important than the spiritual and emotional welfare of the tens of thousands of clergy abuse victims. To these questions there have been no answers. There has only been more equivocation, more diversionary tactics and more arrogance.

Experience has clearly shown that not every bishop has failed to realize the enormity of this era. It is simply improbable that some or even many have not reacted with horror and found honest compassion in their hearts for the victims and for Catholics in general, angry and disappointed that their trust has been betrayed. Yet the body of bishops remains defensive and aloof. The good will and efforts of those who truly “get it” are hidden by the intransigence of those who continue to focus on themselves, trapped in a narcissistic self-image that serves as a barrier to true insight from getting in and authentic pastoral compassion from getting out. Thomas P. Doyle, O.P., J.C.D., April 13, 2005


PRAYER

“Tender Loving Teacher” - A Voice of the Faithful Mission Prayer for Pope Benedict
by Jack Rakosky

This prayer is a paraphrase of the prologue to the Rule of Saint Benedict appropriate for the mission of Voice of the Faithful. It is also appropriate to the desire of Pope Benedict in his inaugural homily “to listen, together with the whole Church, to the word and the will of the Lord, to be guided by Him, so that He himself will lead the Church at this hour of our history.”

Tender Loving Teacher,
open our ears, our hearts and our minds
as we pray with and for your servant Benedict,
that in all the good works that we undertake
we may be faithful children of God.

Let us exert ourselves now! Scripture speaks to our hearts!
Now is the hour to rise from sleep!
Our eyes open wide to the light from heaven!
Our ears are attentive to the word of God!
Today the Voice of God speaks again and again in our lives!
Let us not harden our hearts to God and the voices of one another.

Today we hear the Voice of the Spirit,
singing in all the gatherings of the People of God.
Let us as children of the Light, run to the Voice of God.
Let us quickly leave the darkness of sin and death behind us.
We seek harmony among the children of God and everlasting life.
Let us cease speaking evil of one another, and follow the path of peace.

Your eyes are upon us! Your ears are attentive to us!
Before we can utter our deepest concerns and anxieties,You will say:
“Ecce, adsum. Behold, I am present!”


Phoenix

This poem by Christine Schenk, CSJ was published in the special Poetry section of National Catholic Reporter in 2002.

Paraclete,
consuming grace,
purify
deep soul’d disgrace.

From the ashes
of our shame
forge new hearts
thine own to claim.

Come Spirit
make us new,
bring your peace
’ midst
searing pain.

Drop down thy dew,
thy gentle reign
and
come again.


REGIONAL News

VOTF Rockford, IL from Dee O’Neal, Naperville, IL (Joliet diocese)

Our brothers and sisters in Rockford, IL have petitioned their bishop (Bishop Doran) at least 4 times in the past 2 years to be able to hold VOTF meetings in parish halls or other Catholic church property. In every case the bishop has denied them permission sending his replies to them thru intermediaries. Bishop Doran has also refused to meet with any representatives and/or members of the Rockford VOTF group, even though these folk are Rockford Diocese parishioners (i.e., "the sheep of his flock").

Well, apparently they are "sheep" no longer. They have decided that the time for action has arrived. Hence, they are planning a "witness action” for Pentecost Sunday. Rockford VOTF members are asking that VOTF members and friends from all over IL join them in attending the 11am Mass on Pentecost Sunday, May 15 at the St. Peter's Cathedral / Rockford (wear RED in honor of the EMPOWERING blessing of the HOLY SPIRIT on the first Pentecost.

After the Mass, the Rockford VOTF group (and friends from all over Northern IL) will attempt to hold a very short meeting on Cathedral property.

Janet Hauter, VOTF Chicago, IL notes the following:

What do we hope to gain? The word Pentecost means fifty: referring to the fifty days following Easter and Jesus’ resurrection and so it is a time ready for something to happen. The first Pentecost, we are told, the disciples had signs of being a new people. We have that opportunity this Pentecost, to be disciples and stand with voice for what we believe. Pentecost is the time of unification where diverse people become one. Pentecost is a time of forgiveness of the institutional Church for its lack of justice, forgiveness of those who choose to be silent and passive in the face of the scandals and the mis-management of the Church we love so much. Pentecost is a time for wisdom to act as Jesus would and call for a return of the Church that Jesus founded. Pentecost is a time of evangelization; a time to leave our fear behind and risk the Gospel message with zeal and deliberate focus to be witnesses of our faith.

As Justice Anne Burke has said this is the time for “No More Silent Catholics!” We are called to act out of our faith and work with priests of integrity to rebuild our crumbling institutional Church while maintaining the faith and the dogma we hold so dear. For details on the “Speak Out” contact Mike Mastroianni at mdm5517@insightbb.com

Concerned Catholics of NH in the diocese of Manchester, NH from Leo Hudon, Hudson, NH

More than three years ago, a group of Catholics in the Manchester, NH diocese determined from the unfolding revelations of clergy sexual abuse that their own bishop and his auxiliary failed to discharge their fundamental moral obligations and pastoral duties. Eighteen months ago, this same group of concerned Catholics petitioned the Holy See to have their bishop and his auxiliary removed. In the absence of a substantive reply, the signatories decided to exercise Canon 212, which states that the laity “have the right also to make their views known to others of Christ’s faithful …on matters which concern the good of the church.”

Click here to read a document that is the product of this effort, inclusive of the signatories, past correspondence, etc. If, after reading the document, anyone finds merit in the case, those people are asked to forward it to as many people as possible. If you would like to see all of the documentation and file regarding abuse in NH and MA please click here. To read the Canon Case to Remove Bishops McCormack and Christian, click here.

Project Millstones” – an initiative of LI VOTF; see the LI VOTF web site

Project Millstones states with compassionate conviction: Unless and until the bishops who - at least after 1985 - have been seriously negligent and complicit leave office, the respect and trust rightly due the body of bishops will be sadly in short and severely strained supply.

MILLSTONE'S PROPOSALS

First, Project Millstones calls upon the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops to expand the charge to its National Review Board to investigate claims against bishops who were complicit in the abuse scandal, at least after 1985 when it became clear that priest predators should not be in active ministry. The Board would then make recommendations for removal or resignation based upon the facts in each bishop's case.

While we are troubled with the notion of zero tolerance, we accept it reluctantly as an appropriate response to abusive priests in the wake of life-long damage to the thousands of innocent victims of sexual abuse. Yet we insist that accused clerics be accorded the due process that is their right in Canon and Civil law and that allegations be investigated by an objective, professional and non-church affiliated entity. Only then will “zero tolerance” have credibility and be a reflection of justice for victims.

With Bishop Gumbleton, we are dismayed by the readiness of our bishops to impose this penalty on abusive priests while at the same time exempting themselves from any sanction beyond a public apology which conforms more to empty institutional rhetoric than to heartfelt compassion. Fraternal correction surely should include the courageous expectation that bishops complicit in a cover-up would humbly resign from their position of leadership.

Second, Project Millstones calls upon all persons to report to the National Review Board any incidents of episcopal complicity in the sexual abuse scandal with which they may be acquainted;

Third, Project Millstones calls upon all victims of clergy/religious sexual abuse who have not yet shared their abuse with anyone privately or publicly to come forward to the appropriate ecclesiastical and civil authorities. These persons wear a particularly heavy millstone around their necks, since they suffer needlessly in silence.

Fourth, Project Millstones seeks a further clarification by the Conference of Bishops and the National Review Board on the exact meaning of sexual abuse;

Fifth, Project Millstones calls for a deep dialogue to be engaged among the leadership and all of the members of the Church in the United States regarding the best way to share leadership in our Church. We stand in solidarity with VOTF in calling for a change in the structures of governance in the Church we have long served and deeply love.

Finally, none of this can be done outside the context of profound and shared prayer and to this we pledge ourselves as we launch Project Millstones.

PROJECT MILLSTONES COORDINATING COMMITEE

Rev. Patrick W. Collins, PhD, Diocese of Peoria; Rev. Thomas P. Doyle, OP, JCD, Goldsboro, NC; Rev. Robert M. Hoatson, PhD, Archdiocese of Newark, NJ; Rev. Kenneth Lasch, JCD, Diocese of Paterson, NJ

Also from LI VOTF: The Long Island Press for the second year in a row recently named Long Island Voice of the Faithful as one of the fifty most influential organizations on Long Island. While we appreciate the recognition, we pray that our efforts will continue to bring about much needed reform, console victims, and prevent future abuses. In an effort to comfort the victims and provide safety for our children, we request that the Diocese of Rockville Centre release all information regarding its knowledge of known sexual abusers who have worked for the diocese and identify those members of the diocesan hierarchy who were responsible for assigning known abusers to pastoral service.

Boston VOTF to consider a fourth goal from the VOTF Boston Area Council newsletter:

At the monthly Boston Area VOTF Council meeting, which all members are encouraged to attend, John Hynes, member of the Steering Committee, introduced the idea of a fourth goal for the Boston Area Council VOTF - modeling the church we would like to become. He invited members present to have a conversation about this fourth goal.

Members questioned the need for a fourth goal, asking if we are doing enough to implement the original three goals of VOTF. The pros and cons of this idea were discussed. Then, the small group brainstorming sessions focused on ways of renewing the Church in Boston and things Boston VOTF can do to model these practices and drew up the following considerations:

What are the changes we would like to see in the Church in Boston?

  • Development of lay leadership
  • Collaboration in selection of pastors
  • Greater commitment to social justice and contemplative prayer
  • Fostering multiculturalism in our liturgical and devotional practices
  • Reviving certain traditional Catholic practices
  • Offering more liturgical participation by the laity, e.g., washing of feet on Holy Thursday, lay homilies, greater use of the deaconate
  • Teaching the history of women, recognizing their contributions in building and maintaining the American church
  • Fostering the development of small communities, both within and separate from parishes
  • Increasing community service activities by parishioners
  • Formation in Scripture and Tradition through study and prayer
  • Transparency in financial matters on parish and diocesan levels
  • Recognizing St. Albert's and St. Anselm's as models of vibrant parishes

What can Boston Area VOTF do to model the Church we would like to become?

  • Encourage lay leadership by calling on talents and skills of members, e.g., Mass on the Common
  • Develop the Shared Wisdom model of Church by facilitating dialogue among a range of Catholic groups such as Opus Dei and the Association for the Rights of Catholics
  • Advocate for greater inclusion of women in liturgy, e.g., letter to Bishop O'Malley asking the inclusion of women in washing of the feet
  • Study and teach the history of the role of women in building the church
  • Support vigiling parishes as examples of vibrant communities by participating in the vigils and attending Council of Parishes meetings
  • Creating a governance structure for Boston VOTF built on transparency and accountability
  • Continue adult formation activities
  • Organize prayer services for members; reinvigorate devotional practices, e.g., litany for closing parishes
  • Revisit three goals of VOTF: What have we achieved? What remains to be done?
  • Meet with area bishops and parish councils to present the mission and goals of VOTF

The conversation is ongoing. If you are a Boston Area VOTFer and would like to receive this twice-monthly newsletter, contact Dorothy Kennedy at kendor713@yahoo.com. The next Boston Area VOTF Council meeting is Wed. June 8.

Milwaukee priests may be subject to searches from the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel - Priests in the Catholic Archdiocese of Milwaukee can be required to consent to unannounced searches of their homes at any time of the day or night if church officials suspect or know they have been involved in sexual conduct, alcohol or drug abuse, or other behavior deemed inappropriate by Archbishop Timothy Dolan, according to a policy change announced to clergy last week. If you find something amiss in this proposed action, please share your thoughts. Send comments to pthorp.ed@votf.org.

Letter to the Editor
Send to pthorp.ed@votf.org

Commentary on the Priests’ Forum held at St. Eulalia’s Church, MA on April 4, 2005

“I attended this event with my husband and noted a few things: It was a large group and had to meet in the Church instead of a hall. There were few, if any, young people there and most of us appeared to be over 50 (many much older). The priests expressed concern that so many folks, not just Catholic, have become "indifferent" to religion and to the churches.

Many good points were raised by the VOTF members and the four priests did their best to respond honestly. I was impressed by the courage of the priests in being present and responding with their views on married priests (will probably happen sooner, not later) and celibacy (a gift; optional; married priests won't solve the clergy shortage). The issue of giving women "equal rights" was met with great caution while at the same time suggesting we all do more to let women preside at all authorized (and not expressly forbidden) services, such as Ash Wednesday. Apparently, not many clergy in this area are willing to even let properly prepared women "break open the word."

We learned more about the Boston Priests’ Forum and the efforts to establish that as a source of inspiration, education and spiritual nourishment for the priests. Priests are apparently, in many cases, very demoralized. One major source of this demoralization is the way Rome treats them as represented by the way the bishops treat them. Unfortunately for us and for them, no one is quite sure how to remedy these problems. VOTF and the Priests’ Forum are facing similar challenges. The majority of lay folks and priests view these two groups with skepticism and alarm and think we/they are all a bunch of liberal folks out to destroy the church as they know it. The incoming young seminarians seem to be ultra conservative and orthodoxy seems to be the main requirement for ordination (this is true of selecting bishops, also).

One of the priests commented that he wished VOTF had used the word "reform" instead of structural "change" because he says that the word "change" sparks an immediate negative reaction. At a time when we want to be empowered to support positive changes in the church), what I felt was powerlessness. Although I can't attend VOTF meetings I am so grateful to whose of you who have taken on this mission and I hope you will be able to unite in common cause when you are in Indiana. We will all need firm resolve to carry us forward, not backward.”
Susan White