Report from Lay Ministry Summit Meeting

Good friends and colleagues:

This is my revised summary of the Summit 2008 conference April 20-22 in Orlando, Florida, attended by Svea Fraser and me of the Goal Two Working Group of Voice of the Faithful.

The Summit itself was planned over a five year period by the six partnering organizations listed below, and funded by a 2 million dollar grant from the Lily Foundation.  The six partnering organizations function under the auspices of the United Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB).  My summary will break out as follows:

1. Challenge facing Summit Partnering Organizations
2. Format and Process
3. Outcomes and Next Steps
4. Final thoughts, and a surprise ending to the conference

Challenge Facing Summit Partnering Organizations

The Challenge facing all of those in attendance was to address the question of how the church will be able to meet the ministerial and sacramental needs of the faith community over the coming decades in the face of the increasing scarcity of priests in the United States.  This challenge must be met within the very strict parameters outlined by the bishops, which means that discussion of optional celibacy, or recalling married priests to ministry, were off the table.  As a result, in many of the sessions I attended, people would often start their remarks with the caveat:  “In view of our very limited parameters, I would suggest....etc”. 

The six partnering organizations were:

• The National Association for Lay Ministry (NALM)
  
  
• Conference for Pastoral Planning and Council Development (CPPCD)
  
  
• National Association of Church Personnel Administrators (NACPA)
  
  
• National Association of Diaconate Directors (NADD)
  
  
• National Catholic Young Adults Ministry Association (NCYAMA)
  
  
• National Federation of Priests’ Councils (NFPC)

Of the 1200 plus in attendance, all but 134 belonged to one of these associations.  Gender was somewhat evenly distributed, though there were slightly more males than females.  Of the 1200 attendees, only 16 were below age 29, and 57 between ages 30-39 (this was a big concern).  Age broke out pretty much on a bell curve.

In spite of the large percentage of Hispanics nationally, only 65 were in attendance, which was another big concern.  African Americans could be counted on two hands, and one young lady from this group made quite an impassioned, spontaneous speech, from the floor at the closing session on Tuesday.

Of note also was the fact that only about seven or eight bishops were on hand. I think two or three or more were auxiliary bishops.

The Summit 2008 conference began Sunday (April 20) afternoon with registration, separate orientation meetings for each of the six partnering organizations, and with the Exhibits open from 2-5 pm and 7-9 pm.   At 5 pm there was a Eucharistic celebration with the Bishop of Orlando as celebrant.  Having driven up from Venice (a two hour drive) I picked Svea up at the airport around 1:30 pm.  By 2:30 pm we had our exhibit booth set up (with Alice Campenalla’s replication of her display and a special professionally made sign I brought with me showcasing The National Working Group for Priest Support (of Voice of the Faithful).  Unfortunately, the packets from the national office had not yet arrived, but did so the next morning.

Each day began with a 30 minute prayer session in the Grand Ballroom of the host hotel, accompanied by vigorous and full-throated singing by all on hand.  A small group of Latino cantors (with professionally trained voices) held us spellbound with their beautiful music and voices.  These sessions, along with the liturgies, were surpassingly excellent, invigorating, and renewing.

The exhibits took place in a separate venue, the Orange County Convention Center a short block from the hotel where the general sessions were held.  However, for Svea and me, it was a good fifteen minute walk from our hotel, which was located about half a mile away. The convention center in Orlando is said to be the largest of its kind in the world, and I would say from one end to the other it ran a good four city blocks.  The one shuttle bus that was available turned out to be inadequate and unreliable.  Svea and I got in a lot of daily walking.

Our exhibit booth looked just fine compared to the others.  On the first day we did not get much traffic, but on the second day we had many people stop by for visits, questions, etc.  Between the two of us we met and exchanged contact information with thirty to forty people, including some key people. But we also connected with many more people during our attendance at the conference sessions.  We were one of the few, and perhaps the only, people wearing Exhibitor and Conference Attendee nametags.

Format and Process

The two day conference made use of the Grand Ballroom of the main hotel for all general sessions and liturgies, and the Convention Center for exhibits and breakout sessions.  A professional facilitator (Jim Deboy, of Baltimore, who has previously served as facilitator Diocesan Synods in the Dioceses of Camden, NJ and Owensboro, KY) opened the conference with a description of the overall format and process that we would be using for the conference.

General sessions in the Grand Ballroom found all of us assigned to a particular table of six to eight people, with a fair distribution of roles and responsibilities at each table.  So we had people from each of the six partnering organizations (not always one from each) at every table.  The work we did at these tables provided feeder information for the breakout sessions, which were held at the Convention Center.

There were breakout sessions (called Action Group Sessions) for each of following topics with people assigned according to preferences given when registering for the conference:

• Pastoring Multiple Parishes (this was my choice)
• Parish Life Coordinators and Sacramental Ministry
• Young Adults: The Next Generation of Parish Leadership
• Implications of the Emerging Models Studies for Human Resources
• Implications of the Emerging Multicultural Diversity for Pastoral Leadership
• Best Practices for Parish Leadership (Svea’s choice)

A question to ask yourself as you look at this listing is:  Which topic(s) would most likely be preferences chosen by someone who is a deacon?  More on this later.

Each of these action group sessions was facilitated by a pair of trained facilitators.

As stated above, the challenge facing all of those in attendance was how the church will be able to address the ministerial and sacramental needs of the faith community over the coming decades in the face of the increasing scarcity of priests in the U.S. All recommendations coming out of the work of this conference must observe these strict parameters

The process entailed in both the general sessions and the breakout sessions was one that required sharing around the table, note taking, narrowing down to certain choices by each group, and recording results (in some cases recording results on computers located at each table).  In the general sessions, each group performed assigned tasks given by the facilitator after hearing one of the general session’s speakers. 

The results of these tasks carried over into each of the breakout sessions, and the final results were tabulated into the wee hours of Tuesday morning by a group of people and shared with the entire group at the final session on Tuesday.  Svea and I have hard copies of these results, and I expect they will be displayed on the Emerging models website (www.emergingmodels.org).

DVDs of each general session speaker will be available on that website pretty soon, along with the tabulated set of recommendations that came out of the work of the participants. 

Outcomes and Next Steps

However anyone might characterize the outcomes of this conference, I think all would agree that the general sense, and a strong thread running throughout the assembly, was the need for collaboration among all concerned, clergy and laity, and bishops.  Another aspect of the discussions, an aspect often referenced, was the fact that the challenge before them was one with very (unreasonable??) limited parameters.

As for next steps, there was a spontaneous call from the floor at the closing session for the six partnering organizations to continue working in partnership in order to assure that their voices would be heard (my phrase) by the bishops.  There was also a call from the floor that serious consideration be given to including other organizations in the Partnership.  Both of these calls received a standing ovation from the 1200 plus people in the room.

Finally, here are the words of Marti Jewell, Coordinator of the National Summit Study and Conference, as reported in the National Catholic Reporter:

“For those of you who like to flip to the last page of a book … I’ll tell you what the research concluded,” Jewell said. “Parish life as we have known it has changed.”

Some final thoughts and a surprise ending to the conference

My final thoughts need to be supplemented by those of Svea, along with all of your thoughts, based on what I have laid out above. At this point, I offer these thoughts:

• There is a great opportunity for us to be part of this conversation.  More than once some expressed the need for including other groups in the partnership.  There was apparent agreement among all concerned, and such inclusions will be given serious consideration.  I met Marti Jewell, who coordinated the five year planning effort for the Summit.  She has my card and knows I will be contacting her. 
  
  
• The “elephant in the room” was without question a mandated celibate diocesan clergy.  In fact, John Moynihan sent with the package from the National Office a stuffed elephant which we displayed on our exhibit table.  I believe at the appropriate time, and with the contacts we have with the Partners, there will be a readiness on their part to collectively say as much to the bishops.  Every one of them knows they are faced with a nigh impossible challenge.
  
  
• The object of focus is the institutional church, and there was talk of the need for structures to change.  The Goal Three Working Group needs to be part of this conversation.  They would have felt at home at this conference.  We certainly did, and that is why we showcased Priest Support as our agenda at the conference.
  
  
• VOTF in general, at the national and even affiliate levels, must find ways to be in conversation with others outside of VOTF if we are to be in any position to have a voice or be heard.  And in doing so, I strongly believe the starting point for these conversations needs to be how we can be supportive of their agenda and not how they can be supportive of our agenda. Given the common challenge, there is no question in my mind that these agenda will converge, sooner if not later.  What is in the best interests of the overall institutional church must be our top priority.  Common ground will bring us together.
  
  
• There were 24 people, clergy and laity, from the Belleville diocese at the conference.  Many of them sought us out and expressed their gratitude for our support.  Our visible support for these priests was one of the more important things we did in the past year as a National Working Group.
  
  
• We (Svea and I as members of the WG for Priest Support of Voice of the Faithful) were received well.  For certain there were people who avoided us at the exhibit booth (as most exhibitors tend to be avoided anyway).  There were probably some people at our respective working tables who wondered what we (VOTF) were doing at this conference.  One good nun from Camden, NJ told me during a break that she felt there was a place for “dissenters” in the church.  I chuckled at that remark and exchanged business cards with her.  She will be hearing from me in the next week or so. This was not the time or place to make a stand on behalf of VOTF.  The fact that we were there, and had an exhibit booth, may have raised questions here and there, but there was no untoward behavior or remarks addressed to either of us in all the time we were there.

The surprise ending, and a climatic and disturbing one at that, was the realization during the final minutes of the closing session Tuesday that the Executive Committee of the Diaconate Directors (NADD) decided, without consulting their members present at the conference, to withdraw from the Partnership.  This piece of information spread from table to table, as reported by some of the deacons at the tables.  One person got to the floor microphone and pleaded with the deacons not to withdraw from the Partnership.  Some deacons I spoke with before we left the room expressed great concern and stated they all needed to get the Executive Committee to re-consider this decision.  It was a dramatic ending to the conference, and a downer for everyone. What comes out of this remains to be seen.  Perhaps at this point they did reconsider and reversed their decision.  If not, I suspect it may well be the lead story in the press coverage of the conference.

The reason for this decision, as best as we could determine from those with whom we spoke, was that the Ex Committee felt the deacons were being slighted somehow by the way the conference format was designed, and also, by what they viewed as resentful comments directed at them as more deacons (rather than laity) are being appointed by the bishops as Pastoral Associates where there is no pastor. 

Tom Roberts of the NCR (attending as the Press) came by and visited with Svea and me at our booth.  Let’s see what his forthcoming report in the NCR will have to say.

Svea is also preparing her report, which will include a description of our experience sponsoring the Reception and attending the banquet celebrating the 40^th anniversary of the National Federation of Priests’ Councils.

I append below the note just received from Vic Doucette, Program Director for the NFPC.

On behalf of the National Federation of Priests Councils, I would like to thank you and the National Working Group for Priest Support of the Voice of the Faithful for your most generous support of the NFPC 40th Anniversary reception at the National Ministry Summit in Orlando last week! In particular I would like to acknowledge John Ryan and Svea Fraser who helped arrange the event and who were able to attend, as well as Anne Brennan who met with us several times in Chicago this past year. We continue to be impressed by the commitment the working group has for priests and hope this is the continuation of a beautiful friendship together.

Vic Doucette

Submitted by John Ryan, Chair:  National Working Group for Priest Support