|
Priests of “Integrity?” (if you say so . . . incidentally, whatever happened to the victims?)
by Kelly Clark — The Lady in the Pew: November 8, 2002 Did I miss a news flash? I thought the Numero Uno goal of the so-called “lay” group known as “Voice of the Faithful” was “Support those who have been abused.” Yesterday, though, when I looked over the group’s newest endeavor — a newsletter called “The Vineyard” — I got a revelation. The word “abuse” appears only 6 times. The word “victim,” just once. “Survivor” managed to earn a rather respectable 10 mentions. But trouncing all references to those who are supposed to be the raison d’être for the group, with a whopping 22 references: ::::::::::::::drum roll ::::::::::::::: The word PRIEST! And (why am I not surprised), the emphasis seemed to be on the not-so-merry-men known collectively as “The Boston Priests Forum.” Among the myriad of “sub-groups” of the “lay” organization is one called the “Priest Support Working Group.” (For the alphabetically inclined, that would be PSWG.) Anyway, seems like the PSWG recently met with five priests. This meeting apparently dealt with, among other pressing issues, the precise wording of the “lay” group’s goal. In other words, are the words “Support priests of integrity” the right words? From the “Vineyard” report: “We discussed the importance of identification — in this case, some priests are uncomfortable with `priests of integrity.’ They find it divisive and judgmental.” (Nobody asked me, and I wasn’t invited to the priestly pow-wow, but personally I find the whole “lay” organization “divisive and judgmental.”) The report continues: “Others felt changing the term should take place only after careful consideration. We plan to bring this subject to an upcoming Council meeting for discussion.” Aw, c’mon guys. Just call them: “The Feel Good Fellas.” Hey, how ‘bout that? I just solved the problem and spared the “lay” organization a time-consuming meeting! Uh, Kelly? Why do you keep putting the word “lay” in quotation marks? Ah, kudos, my perceptive reader! Despite my heroic efforts at subtlety, you’ve caught me. Well, it’s a good question and it deserves an answer. I don’t think “Voice of the Faithful” is a “lay” organization at all. Not really. I think it’s the brainchild of a few priests, who, because their clerical noses are out of joint, and who, lacking the testosterone to fight their own battles, decided to get some well-heeled lay folk to do their dirty work for them. And if I’m right — and I pray that I’m wrong but I don’t think I am — then we’re witnessing a case of clerical abuse of laity that has reached mammoth proportions. Promise them heaven on earth and they’ll come a’runnin’ From the minutes of a VOTF meeting, Our Lady Help of Christians Church, Concord, Massachusetts, October 2, 2002: Q. “Ideally we should able to elect our own bishop, don’t you think?” A. “Perhaps our children will do so, but for now, we must lay the foundations for that process.” From the minutes of the same meeting: “Taking the United States as a model, the colonies first learned to govern themselves as small towns, then as territories, then states, and then a nation. That took a while, and it was a necessary process. We cannot expect to modify Vatican policy until we have implemented and proven the worth of lay leadership.” Just so we’re all on the same page here, so to speak, let’s review: People are meeting on archdiocesan property to (A) “lay the foundation for the lay election of bishops,” and (B) discuss “modifying Vatican policy” and (C) the pastor apparently thinks this is fine and dandy. And over in Newton, Massachusetts: An Our Lady Help of Christians, Newton, parishioner wrote back in July: “We cannot force the hierarchical structure of the church to change if we cannot coordinate meaningful change within our parishes. That is one of the reasons that OLV [i.e., the parish VOTF chapter] has focused on such issues as the role of the faithful in pastoral selection.” The lady continues: “Working from existing structures, we can create new processes and structures that will empower us to have some say in who ministers to our community, and some recourse if our views are dismissed. We must begin to implement the pastoral selection process now at Our Lady's, because the process we laid out in the paper will take all the time available until Fr. Cuenin moves on.” HUH??? “Force the hierarchical structure to change?” “Pastoral selection process?” Are Father (“call-me-Walter”) Cuenin’s parishioners looking forward to choosing their next pastor when the good padre “moves on?” With an eye toward bigger and better things in the realm of “forced hierarchical change?” It would appear so. And it appears that the largest and most vocal “lay” VOTF chapters are in the same parishes “pastored” by the Boston Priests Forum. (Or, BPF.) Again, from the “Vineyard”: “James Carroll's appearance on October 7 drew over 450 people to St. Eulalia's Church. After reading from his new book, “Toward A New Catholic Church: The Promise of Reform,” Carroll took questions for close to an hour. He left to a standing ovation.” (Technical question here: can an ex-priest belong to the BPF? I mean, talking about “inclusion” and all.) Saint Eulalia’s parishioners, according the “Vineyard,” were thrilled to welcome BPF co-founder Father Robert Bullock on November 4. His topic: “Supporting Priests of Integrity.” An ex-VOTF member told me that at her parish, a VOTF member’s brother is an BPF priest. In fact, the woman makes it a practice to dutifully pass on information provided by her BPF brother whenever the group meets. Recently, my friend pondered: “It is a round-robin. Where does VOTF end and Boston Priest Forum begin?” Good question. And the answer is: I dunno. I do know — or, at least I’m fairly sure — that the priestly “Voice of the Faithful” cheerleaders know bleepin’ well that the Roman Catholic Church ain’t gonna model herself on the bleepin’ U.S. Constitution. That we’re not going to be electing popes to serve for ten-year terms. And I’m pretty sure that Father Cuenin knows bleepin’ well that his parishioners aren’t going to “hire” his successor. So that kinda begs the question here: How come these priests are, by aiding and abetting every effort to establish “Voice of the Faithful” chapters in every parish in the Archdiocese (and, no doubt, across the fruited plain), in essence making promises to laity they have no intention of keeping — indeed, possess no power to keep? I direct you to “The Vineyard” for a clue: The Westford-Chelmsford “Voice of the Faithful” chapter is proud to report that it: “Carpooled 5 members of our PV into the Cathedral last Sunday to stand in solidarity with the survivors.” Now, the above statement is problematic for two reasons. The first, of course, is that it reads as if a car pool drove itself into my parish church. I assure you, this did not happen. The other problem is this: For those of you who haven’t been to the Cathedral of the Holy Cross in the past few months, there’s no “standing in solidarity with the survivors” going on at all. Would the good folk from Westford-Chelmsford allow me to translate their report into a language called “truth?” (Even if they won’t, I’m gonna do it anyway): “We car pooled 5 members to the Cathedral last Sunday to join the folks who are demanding the resignation and/or jail of Bernard Cardinal Law, and, by the way, harassing folks who dare to enter his church.” “But I thought VOTF had no position on the Cardinal, Kelly!” In the immortal words of my Uncle Billy: “HAH! HAH! And again, I say HAH!” (Uncle Billy had theatrical aspirations.) Wander over to the “Winchester Area Voice of the Faithful” web-site, and you’ll learn that “this Voice, located at St. Eulalia's Church, currently represents eleven local parishes.” You’ll also find a series of “letters.” If you visit the site, you will be urged to copy the letters, and send them, under your signature, to the intended recipients. One “letter” is addressed to Cardinal Law. I’ll spare you the gory details, but here’s how it starts out: “Dear Cardinal Law: It is time for you to resign. There will be no healing in the Boston Archdiocese until we have a new Bishop.” For good measure, there’s a “letter” addressed to Governor Frank Keating. Again, you’re supposed to copy it and send it, under your signature. This one starts out by sucking up to the Governor, but the point of the letter is clear. Again, just two excerpts: “As Catholics from the Archdiocese of Boston under the leadership of Bernard Cardinal Law, we find ourselves in an intolerable situation. Cardinal Law has an arrogant attitude, has distorted the truth . . .” blah, blah, blah. The “letter” continues: “He assigns assistants to talk with the laity group, Voice of the Faithful, and shows in so many other ways that he is an incompetent and distant leader. Overwhelmingly, the people in this area want him to resign. He simply won’t. His actions have been egregious in every way.” It’s a load of you-know-what, of course, but here’s my point: From my seat, the good people at Saint Eulalia folks are doing what they were intended to do, all along. From my seat, the “lay” group called “Voice of the Faithful” was conceived by, organized by, and continues to get its marching orders from, none other than the Boston Priests Forum — and for one purpose: To rid the Boston Priest’s Forum of the presumably inconvenient presence of Bernard Cardinal Law. How come? Search me. I only know what I hear on the streets and read in the news . . . for example, the September 2 issue of the New Yorker. “The fault here in Boston is that no one took on Cardinal Law,” said Father Cuenin. My guess is that Father (“call me Walter”) Cuenin and the other guys in the Boston Priests Forum finally found a way to do just that. And all this time, members of the “Voice of the Faithful” thought they were “empowered lay people,” striving to support victims and incidentally “improve” the Church. The only thing I’m wondering is this: how are they going to react to those “priests of integrity” when they find out they’ve been used as pawns in a game that’s been going on for years? That is, if I’m right. Again, I pray I’m wrong. Only I don’t think I am. - - - - - - - - - - - - - End notes (I always wanted to use that term . . . it sounds so “scholarly” somehow, doesn’t it?) Some of the information contained in this article was obtained from the following sources, if you’re interested: http://www.votf.org/vineyard/vineyard1.html http://cmwebs.com/VOTF/SCWG/surveyResults.htm http://www.olhc.org/minutes.htm http://www.cmwebs.com/VOTF/change/letters/default.htm
And now for the fine print: Kelly Clark is your basic nobody. She serves on no parish councils, belongs to none of the myriad of designer-chic "Catholic" groups, or any Catholic group, for that matter, other than the Roman Catholic Church. Holding no theology degrees, she has no desire so see herself or any of her sex wearing a clerical collar. She figures Jesus knew what He was doing when He established His Church, and also figures that it’s His Church, not hers, and not yours. She’s an ordinary parishioner of Cathedral of the Holy Cross, Boston. Use the links on the left to e-mail Kelly, or to visit her parish. Copyright: Kelly Clark, 2002. I don’t care if you share this stuff with others. In fact, I hope you do! Only I’d appreciate it if you’d link me, or print it off as it is. In other words, don’t change anything. Thanks. “The Lady in the Pew” column is updated weekly, God willing. To be notified of updates, please e-mail me. The link’s on the left. “Mary, Mother of the Church, pray for us.”
|
||
 |
|
|