VOTF Apologia
Voice of the Faithful�s Response
to the Letter from the Three Priests of the Diocese of Fall River
By Tony Massimini
[The text of the letter appears in italics]
A Pastoral Letter From Your Priests
In recent days, several parishioners have asked us for clarification about the group called, �Voice of the Faithful,� which is trying to make inroads on Cape Cod and within our Diocese of Fall River.
VOTF is composed of loyal and faithful Catholics, many of whom are Catechists, Eucharistic ministers, liturgical leaders, etc. There is no need for them to make �inroads� within the Diocese of Fall River. They are already part of the diocese of Fall River. They have gathered together on their own initiative to face the severest spiritual problem to befall the Church in its history in the U. S. Their right to do this is expressed by Vatican II, Lumen Gentium, No. 37, and by Canon 215. Anyone who denies VOTF members this right is dissenting from the teachings and law of the Catholic Church.
When VOTF had its first major convention in Boston on July 20, 2002, many of us followed it closely to try to discern its spirit. We were saddened to see the direction it took. The star speakers that day were well-known and oft-quoted critics of the Holy Father...
These �critics� of the pope are not named. Nor do the writers say what these critics said. At any rate, it is not un-Catholic or anti-Catholic to criticize the pope. Some �well-known� and �oft-quoted� critics of the Holy Father include St. Paul, St. Catherine of Siena, Lord Acton, John Henry Cardinal Newman, Dante, Galileo, and all the good and faithful Catholics who criticized the sinful Renaissance popes.
...and who publicly dissent from the teachings of the Catholic Church.
The writers quote nothing that was said by any speaker that publicly dissents from the teachings of the Catholic Church. They are instead objecting to the personal opinions of some of the speakers�opinions that are not the position of VOTF. They, therefore, are guilty of ad hominem attacks against these people. This is an invalid argument.
There�s a truism that you can often learn a lot about someone from the people with whom he chooses to associate...
Jesus associated with sinners, tax collectors, prostitutes, and lepers. He chose as his closest followers an ex-terrorist, a man who denied him three times and a man who betrayed him and was instrumental in bringing about his crucifixion. The Catholic Church is a Church of sinners.
The same goes for VOTF, the leaders of which, of course, invited and paid for these speakers to come to address those at the convention.
The writers do not quote anything that the speakers said that dissents from the teachings of the Church. These writers are priests. They themselves invite to Mass people who are sinners and have all kinds of opinions about Catholic teachings.
More to the point, if VOTF did anything that these priests disagree with, the priests have the ordained obligation to contact the members (loyal and faithful Catholics who are in their parish Churches and other buildings on Sundays and other days) and offer them guidance, education, and all the spiritual riches of the Church. (Cf. Canon 213). VOTF members are totally willing to join with their pastors in the pursuit of the fullness of their faith and spiritual development, and in preserving their communion with the Church (Cf. Canon 209). Any priest or bishop who refuses to honor the laity�s wishes in this regard is also refusing to honor his own responsibility and is dissenting from the teachings and laws of the Church.
When faithful Catholic clergy and lay people criticized what was coming out of the convention, spokesmen from VOTF publicly stated that the group does not take any formal positions on the controversial issues being advanced by several of the convention speakers and VOTF members. But this is not sufficient.
First, the leaders of VOTF publicly stated that the opinions of speakers are the speakers� own personal opinions. VOTF is no more responsible for the personal opinions of its members than is the Church. Individual Catholics are responsible for their own opinions.
It is impossible for a group that want to be authentically Catholic not to take a position on issues such as the ordination of women, sexual morality, abortion, and the divine foundation of the papacy�all of which the Church has taken a position on. Not to take a position on such issues is to take a position; one cannot be both �agnostic� and �Catholic.�
In short, because VOTF has given no indication that it fully supports all the defined teachings of the Church, we have grave misgivings about it and cannot recommend it to you.
These statements are theologically problematic. The writers� putting together of the ordination of women, sexual morality and the divine foundation of the papacy�and then implying that these are all defined truths�would require treatises on theology and ecclesiology to unravel. The burden of proof here is on the writers, who are required, both theologically and pastorally, to make clear to the laity, with all proper theological distinctions, what they are talking about.
The logical conclusion to these remarks is that these priests cannot recommend VOTF to the laity because VOTF does not live up to these priests� personal views of what the Church is all about. But they are not ordained to impose their personal views on the laity. There is a sad absence of truth and humility here, and also a sad absence of informed and true pastoral care.
One of the reasons VOTF exists is to shine light on such darkness. VOTF fully accepts the Catholic Faith. In matters of ecclesiology, VOTF fully accepts the teachings of Vatican II and of Pope Paul II, e.g., in, Novo Millennio Ineunte. These teachings call for full dialogue in the Church on all matters that are open to discussion. VOTF stands for the full participation by the laity in the governance and guidance of the Church (Cf. Canon 129) and in offering the Church the light and wisdom of all the gifts the Spirit of Christ has given them. With Vatican II and Canon Law, VOTF holds that the laity have the right, responsibility and at times, the obligation, to make their views known to their pastors and bishops for the good of the Church. (Cf. Canon 212). The priests have the responsibility to inform the laity as to what is truly defined and what is truly open to discussion.
The priests have the responsibility to obey Church teaching and law and receive the laity�s knowledge, understanding and wisdom on all matters that pertain to the good of the Church. If any expression or action of the laity is not in conformity with Church teachings and law, they have the pastoral obligation to provide the laity with the proper correction, education, guidance and spiritual counsel. They are not to reject the laity and keep them away from full communion with them. They are not to �excommunicate� them from Church property. Yet, they do reject and rebuff some loyal and faithful laity. In doing this, they are dissenting from the teachings and laws of the Church and are being unfaithful to their theological and pastoral obligations.
As your priests, our foremost duty is to teach and defend the faith that has been handed down to us by Christ through the apostles and their successors...
This mindset and language, while containing some of the truth, contradicts the ecclesiology of Vatican II. It distorts the true meaning of the Church as the total people of God, in all of whom the Spirit of truth lives. It denies the role of the sensus fidelium in discerning the truth of our faith, and therefore distorts the true role of the teaching authority of the bishops and pope. The writers have a theological and pastoral obligation to correct this distortion and give the full and clear truth to the laity concerning the full source of the faith.
The Church is not a society of independent thinkers with equally valuable opinions...
Who is saying that it is? Not VOTF.
To be truly Catholic, you can�t pick and choose some truths to follow and others to ignore. Embracing the Catholic faith means embracing all of it.
VOTF fully agrees! So far in this letter, the three priests have picked and chosen according to their own personal views, and have therefore not embraced the fullness of the Catholic faith. They have dissented from the Church�s teachings and laws,
a) by denying VOTF�s right to exist (Canon 125) and to express its sincere concerns (Vat. II and Canon 212) regarding the abuse and rape of our children by some priests, and the scandalous, systematic cover-up of these sins and crimes by most of our bishops.
b) by personally calling into doubt VOTF members� faith, orthodoxy and spiritual integrity
c) by stifling VOTF�s truly Catholic desire to test the Spirit and find the full truth on
controversial matters (Vat. II, Lumen Gentium, No. 37).
d) by failing to exercise their theological obligations to find the truth about the ecclesiology taught by Vatican II and Pope John Paul II
e) by failing in their pastoral obligation to provide education and guidance (Canon 213) to the members of VOTF, who are totally willing to speak with them and the bishop of Fall River
f) by thus breaking apart the one Body of Christ and denying VOTF members the opportunity to enjoy full communion within the Church (Canon 209).
g) by demanding that VOTF members conform to their (the priests�) personal opinions of what is the true faith
h) by untruthfully stating that VOTF has given no indication that it fully supports all the defined teachings of the Church
We have particular concern for those Catholics who want to remain faithful to the Church who now belong to an organization that calls itself Catholic but refuses publicly to embrace authentic Catholic teaching. VOTF says its motto is �Keep the Faith; Change the Church.� But if the leaders of VOTF are unwilling to assent fully to Catholic teaching, what faith�Catholics could legitimately ask�are they trying to keep? And if the organization is not really keeping the Catholic faith, then its proposals to �change the Church� should be viewed by faithful Catholics with justifiable suspicion. We encourage faithful Catholics who belong to VOTF to demand that the leadership of the organization explicitly avow Church teachings. If the leaders are not willing to do that, then we urge faithful Catholics to leave the organization.
A number of bishops, after having met with VOTF personally and fully investigated VOTF�s mission and goals, have accepted VOTF as a fully orthodox, Catholic movement.
How do these priests show their �particular concern� for the Catholics who are being �misled� by the leaders of VOTF? They obviously see these people as being in a state of danger to their very faith. Other than encouraging them (by letter) to leave VOTF, are they planning to meet personally and openly (not in secret) with the laity of their parish and diocese who are members of VOTF? Their pastoral obligation to go after the �lost sheep,� who in this case are more than willing to come in and talk with their pastors, requires this.
The burden of proof is, of course, on VOTF to demonstrate its complete fidelity to Church teaching, by dissociating itself completely from groups and individuals that are obviously in dissent from Church teaching and gladly and willingly affirming their Catholic faith in all the defined teachings of the Magisterium.
To state that VOTF associates with groups that are in dissent from Church teaching is a disingenuous statement deeply unworthy to be expressed by priests of Jesus Christ.
Using Jesus as our model, VOTF is totally willing to associate with all Catholics�lay, religious, priests, bishops, and the pope�who are willing to follow VOTF�s three stated goals and thereby make the Church safer for our children, and a more luminous expression of Christ in and for today�s world. VOTF has clearly defined its mission and goals. It does not, and will not, be responsible for the personal views and opinions of anyone.
Until such time as VOTF demonstrates a transparent faithfulness to the teachings of the Church, no priest who takes his responsibility before God seriously to promote, preserve and defend the faith would countenance allowing the group to use Church property for their meetings. The people of Troy learned a valuable lesson once and pastors would be derelict in their duty to do otherwise. We love you and love Christ too much to do otherwise.
In these statements, these three priests are preaching their own views as to what the teachings of the Church are. If they truly take their responsibility to teach and defend the Church seriously, they should immediately embark on a study session in theology and ecclesiology. VOTF would be happy to help them.
Instead of banning VOTF from meeting on Church property, the priests� pastoral responsibility requires that they openly invite VOTF to meet in the Church so that they can enter into a full and open relationship with them for the purpose of providing education, guidance and full communion with them. If these priests really love the laity and Christ as they say they do, they can do nothing less. If they do not do this, they are in clear dissent against Canon 212, which states that Christ�s faithful are bound to show Christian obedience (not blind, servile or uninformed obedience) to their pastors, and that they are at liberty to make their needs known to their pastors, and indeed, at times, have the duty, to make their views known for the good of the Church.
1) The priests agree with VOTF�s goal to support the victim/survivors of abuse, and VOTF�s work to prevent any recurrence of abuse.
What have these three priests personally done for the victim/survivors, and what have they done regarding their fellow priests and bishops in this regard?
2) We all support �priests of integrity� (although you might find it interesting that no priest from any of the parishes on Cape Cod present at our last meeting stated that he has received any sign of support from VOTF), which makes one wonder whether for VOTF this is just a paper objective.
This remark is unworthy of priests of Jesus Christ. In the Spirit of Christ, we are compelled to say that we require a more serious and mature conversation.
Perhaps it would be easier for VOTF to give priests a sign of support if VOTF were not rejected and rebuffed by the priests, and could meet with them on Church property.
3) We agree that there is a need for �cultural change� in the Church, if we define cultural change to mean a transparently greater cult (worship) of Christ among all of us in our daily decisions.
VOTF�s Goal No. 3 calls for �structural� change, not cultural change. This error needs explaining. How well do these three priests know VOTF?
The scandals resulted from the failure of priests to be faithful to Christ and to their promise of celibacy and of bishops to protect the flock from wolves in shepherd�s clothing. But this grew within a general culture that was taking its moral obligations before God less seriously. Truly positive change will be directed toward a culture of greater fidelity to Christ in all the persons and activities of the Church.
Their interpretation of the basis for the scandal � namely that the secular culture was to blame for the sins and crimes of the priests and bishops � defies and denies reality. There is no mention of the systemic problem within the Church that caused the bishops to reduce the Church to themselves, to hide sins and crimes for the sake of the Church, i.e., themselves, to hide settlements with gag orders, to hide documents, to obstruct their own appointed commissions, to accept no real accountability for their tragically scandalous actions, and therefore to do no penance or make any attempt to amend their episcopal lives. And what of the laity who accept and believe this distortion of reality?
4) We agree that there is a need for greater education of the laity in the teaching and ways of the faith, which is why, over the course of this year, we will be doing an extensive adult education series and why we have already started discussion sessions for parents of those in our CCD program and school.
These three priests have revealed ignorance of the theology and ecclesiology of the Church, and their fall into dark denial. For the sake of the faith and of the laity, any education program they might provide should be carefully investigated, since it is all but guaranteed to be false and misleading in terms of theology, ecclesiology, spirituality, and faith. This is truly a serious problem in this parish and diocese.
5) We also welcome and strongly encourage a greater lay involvement in the mission of the Church, bringing Christ�s teaching and love as leaven to our world.
This prophetic mission of the Church can be accomplished only if the knowledge, understanding and wisdom of the laity are fully presented to the Church at large, are respected and well-received, and are fully utilized in developing and updating the policies and moral teachings of the Church. All this is clear in the teachings and laws of the Church.
The priests do not include VOTF in this involvement, even though VOTF�s primary goal is to ensure the full participation of the laity in the Church, in full accord with Church teaching and law. In this regard, VOTF speaks for all the laity.
In all these areas priests and laity are already working together and, with God�s help, bearing much fruit. If these were the only objectives of VOTF, the organization would not be objectionable.
If priests and bishops truly welcomed the full participation of the laity in the governance and guidance of the Church (Canon 129) and fully received and respected the laity�s input in developing and clarifying Church policies, faith and moral teachings�including a working respect for the sensus fidelium�there would, for instance, be fully open councils in every parish, and full and open financial transparency in every parish and diocese. The victim/survivors of abuse and rape would be well on their way to being healed. Seminary formation would be vastly improved, etc. None of these is yet actualized.
The reason why VOTF is controversial, however, and why we cannot support it or recommend it to you is because VOTF has given indications by its deeds that its objectives transcend these publicly stated ones.
Here the true mindset of the priests comes into view. They view VOTF as liars and hypocrites.
By its failure to subscribe openly to the whole deposit of faith while at the same time publicly associating with groups that oppose the faith, VOTF has done nothing but strengthen suspicions that, while appearing to promote dialogue and cooperation, it actually promotes an agenda in conflict with the teachings of the Catholic faith.
Given the contents of this letter, VOTF has a right to ask if these priests are being honest�with VOTF, with the laity and with themselves. Their various references throughout this letter to the whole deposit of faith are deeply theologically incorrect. Moreover, they make the true logical conclusion to their false accusation, that if VOTF fails to subscribe to the whole deposit of faith, there is suspicion that VOTF is heretical. Why don�t the three priests have the moral courage to say what they are truly thinking, that in their view, VOTF is clearly heretical? Don�t they really believe it themselves?
This letter reveals the writers to be anti-intellectual, anti-theological, and anti-spiritual fundamentalists. The burden of proof is now on them to disprove these conclusions.
Further, their statements as to the groups with which VOTF associates are fictions of their own imagination. In this and so many other ways in this letter, these priests are in serious error, and are misleading their laity. Their bishop should be apprised of their letter and its many serious errors and pastoral failings, and of our responses. Given his responsibility as teacher, leader and spiritual leader, we have a right to expect him to address these priests and their errors and pastoral failings, and to respond fully to us to try to heal the insult and affront they have made to our faith and integrity.
There is a better alternative than VOTF that lay Catholics who want truly to �keep the faith and change the Church� in ways that are manifestly consistent with our Catholic faith. We invite them to become more involved in the mission of the Church here at St. Francis Xavier. We encourage them to join their priests and fellow lay people as together we strive to fulfill the mission which the Second Vatican Council and Pope John Paul II have entrusted to us: to live the faith and thereby, with God�s help, strengthen the Church so as to change the world.
This paragraph contains a not too subtle denial of the laity�s role within the Church. It relegates the laity to working in the world (which it should do) but not to participating in the governance and guidance of the Church, in accord with Canon 129. This is a common device of priests and bishops who see Vatican II as threatening their power and positions of eminence within the Church�power and eminence which Jesus expressly forbade them to possess and exercise (Mt. 20:25-28). In any case, there should be a full and open investigation of the work being done in this parish. It is possible that the laity there are in danger of being misled in their faith and in their spiritual development.
------------------------------------------- Top of Page -------------------------------------------------