Impromptu gathering

After word went out yesterday via email to Society members about the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith dismissing Roy Bourgeois from Maryknoll and laicizing him, Fr. Jim Lynch, vicar general, invited Society members to an impromptu meeting in the Asia Room at 7:00 p.m.

Word of mouth informed those who, like me, hadn't yet checked my email, and 45 of the house's 85 residents attended (many having already left for the holiday.)

So we'd all be on the same page, Jim read the official Maryknoll statement to those present. Then he opened the floor to questions.

The mood ranged from sadness to anger, but I don't think anyone was surprised. The anger, too, was spread around from anger at the Vatican for taking this extraordinary step to anger at Roy for dragging Maryknoll through this mess. Several points of clarification surfaced.

• As with other members who leave the Society, Maryknoll will continue to financially assist Roy "in his transition" (meaning for as long as Roy needs and requests it).

• Although Maryknoll is under the Congregation for the Evangelization of the Peoples, because of Roy's public action at the "attempted ordination" of a  woman, the CDF felt it had cause to directly intervene in his dismissal and laicization, even though the canonical requirement of a "decisive majority" of Council Members (two to dismiss, three abstentions) had not been met.

• Since Roy gave up directing the School of the Americas Watch some time ago, the action by the CDF should not prevent the SOAW from requesting funds to help with their many newsletters, all of which emphasize peace and justice issues in the Latin America.

• We do not know what canonical recourse Roy has and only he can answer whether he will continue to employ the services of Fr. Tom Doyle as his canon lawyer.

For what it's worth, Roy has already changed his voicemail message, stating his affiliation with the School of America's Watch and WomenChurch

********


Here is the Maryknoll statement:

The Congregation For The Doctrine Of The Faith
Canonically Dismisses Roy Bourgeois

Maryknoll, New York – November 19, 2012 – The Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, on October 4, 2012, canonically dismissed Roy Bourgeois from the Catholic Foreign Mission Society of America, also known as the Maryknoll Fathers and Brothers. The decision dispenses the Maryknoll priest from his sacred bonds.

As a priest during 2008, Mr. Bourgeois participated in the invalid ordination of a woman and a simulated Mass in Lexington, Kentucky. With patience, the Holy See and the Maryknoll Society have encouraged his reconciliation with the Catholic Church.

Instead, Mr. Bourgeois chose to campaign against the teachings of the Catholic Church in secular and non-Catholic venues. This was done without the permission of the local U.S. Catholic Bishops and while ignoring the sensitivities of the faithful across the country. Disobedience and preaching against the teaching of the Catholic Church about women’s ordination led to his excommunication, dismissal and laicization.

Mr. Bourgeois freely chose his views and actions, and all the members of the Maryknoll Society are saddened at the failure of reconciliation. With this parting, the Maryknoll Society warmly thanks Roy Bourgeois for his service to mission and all members wish him well in his personal life. In the spirit of equity and charity, Maryknoll will assist Mr. Bourgeois with this transition.

Maryknoll votes on Bourgeois' dismissal from order

Maryknoll votes on Bourgeois' dismissal from order

Well, troops, the above article in the National Catholic Reporter (click the headline to read) certainly shattered the cyber and actual silence around Maryknoll these past few days.

U.S. Regional Superior Mike Duggan returned from an otherwise uplifting meeting with other religious superiors and Bishop Howard Hubbard of Albany only to learn his (Mike's) name was quite prominently and erroneously linked to certain quotes in the NCR article.

Long story short, ignoring that the vote was supposedly a secret ballot and who exactly voted how and that Fr. José Arámburu and not Fr. Paul Masson is our vicar general and who said what to whom and when, the fact remains: Yes, a vote was taken last December 12 (The Feast of Our Lady of Guadalupe, if you're into irony) on whether or not to dismiss Fr. Roy Bourgeois from Maryknoll and the result was two votes for dismissal and three abstentions.

How does canon law regard abstentions?  If they don't count at all, do two "yes" votes constitute an "absolute majority" of those present?

The upshot of this continued ambiguity is that the proverbial ball (or long knife, if you will) is now back in the Vatican's court, as only they have the final word.

But just for the record, as I have read all kinds of misinformation on the blogosphere:

1) Fr. Roy's excommunication has already occurred "in latae sententiae" (automatically, on performance of a forbidden act). In this case, it was his active participation in the attempted ordination of a woman to the Roman Catholic priesthood back in 2008. The two warning letters were sent to fulfill canonical mandates in order to drive home the seriousness of the action. There is no "formal declaration of excommunication."

2) Our constitutions notwithstanding, Maryknoll will not deny Fr. Roy his living allowance and health coverage. I heard this directly from our superior general himself. I blogged this and posted this on NCR's comments section after several notable people expressed shock and disappointment that Maryknoll would "cut Fr. Roy loose" after decades of dedicated service. The cynic in me would suggest that such an allegation only serves to garner sympathy and evoke outrage by casting the Society as the villain. Our constitutions state that a dismissed member has no claim on support for past services, they do not prevent the Society from acting in a compassionate way toward a former member.

3) If the dismissal is approved by Rome, and there is still some doubt given the inconclusive vote, the only thing that will actually change is the addition of the word "former" to Roy's title of Maryknoll Father.

4) The question of women's ordination will not go away or die.

(And I'll bet some of you wish I had maintained cyber silence even longer.)

Civil vs. ecclesial disobedience

Picture it: March 19 (St. Joseph's Day), 1970. I and 16 other members of the War Resisters League were arrested blocking the Selective Service Office building in Albany, NY, to protest the war in Vietnam. We would henceforth be referred to in the Albany Times Union as "The Albany 17." My claim to fame was captured in the article as, "One youth sustained a bloody nose."

I raise this specter of the 60s to clarify my understanding of what civil disobedience entails: you see an injustice, you selectively and peacefully break a law, you take the punishment and you hope this focuses attention on the original injustice.

I also raise this to help myself clarify my own very conflicting emotions surrounding Fr. Roy Bourgoise and his precent predicament vis-a-vis the Vatican and Maryknoll.

Before espousing the cause of women's ordinations in the Roman Catholic Church, Roy made a name for himself as the founder of the School of the Americas (Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation) Watch in Fort Benning, GA. SOAW contends many of the more notorious tyrants and murderers of church people of Latin America are graduates of the school and it should therefore be closed.

Each year near the anniversary of the killings of the six Jesuits and their housekeeper and her daughter (November 16, 1989) by graduates of the SOA, tens of thousands of protesters, most of them young people, carrying coffins and crosses bearing the names of the thousands killed or disappeared in Central America, demonstrate outside the gates of Fort Benning. The demonstration culminates in some people intentionally "crossing the line" onto the base and therefore breaking the law. They INTENTIONALLY break the law to get arrested to focus media and, hopefully, the country's attention on the anomaly of having such a base on U.S. soil and supported by U.S. taxpayers.

Roy himself was arrested many times in the past and spent four years in federal prisons, often in solitary confinement (I guess so his presence doesn't corrupt the other prisoners). The judge made it crystal clear that should Roy get arrested again, he's going away for a long, long time. Subsequently, Roy has not "crossed the line", at least civilly.

Which brings us to ecclesial disobedience. Roy knew he was crossing the line by participating in an attempted ordination of a woman. And the punishment he incurred was excommunication. By continuing to speak out publicly on this topic, he now runs the real risk of dismissal from Maryknoll.

I understand Roy's case is now before the Congregation for the Evangelization of the Peoples to decide whether or not the dismissal from Maryknoll is warranted.

Them's the facts.

What I still don't understand is, why fight the consequences of an action designed to provoke precisely these consequences?

Roy's "street cred" in the forefront of the women priests movement is enhanced by his excommunication and pending dismissal from Maryknoll. Forever he will be presented as a priest who paid the price for his solidarity with women.

Thanks to erroneous reports in no less a paper as the New York Times, most people think Roy has already been dismissed, even though the process has not played out. Maryknoll has paid the price amongst many erstwhile supporters, even though Fr. Dougherty, our superior, told me specifically, that Maryknoll would continue its financial and medical support of Roy no matter what.

What is to be gained by either side in interminably prolonging this process?

********

On a related topic, Fr. Ray Finch, up from Cochabamba, Bolivia, to attend the various centennial gatherings and upcoming mission symposium at Catholic Theological Union in Chicago, reports a development in women's ability to become Yatiri (native healers) among the Aymara in the altiplano. Many people may not be aware that the Yatiri in Bolivia, Peru and Chile face the strictest selection standards in the world. To become a healer, one must be struck by lightning——and survive. Most do not, Ray says. But the interesting point is that for the first time, WOMEN who survive a lightning strike are being accepted as Yatiri!

Ah, but the Buddhists of Thailand have gone this one better, according to Br. John Beeching. Since it is against the law to harm a monk in this predominantly Buddhist country, to protect the endangered forests from loggers, the monks ordained the trees! And it worked! Loggers refused to lay a hand (or a saw) on these consecrated trees.

In fairness, though, I must confess we don't know the gender of these pious plants.

Mass hi-jacked?

Word reached me from multiple sources even down in Queens that there was an incident during the closing liturgy for the Maryknoll Alumni weekend.

The first sign that something was up was when the prayers of the faithful went on longer than the homily. Among them was one asking Maryknoll to "do the right thing" in regards to Fr. Bourgeois and not dismiss him from the Society.

But things really got interesting post Communion, when, instead of the normal announcements one would hear at a parish Mass about upcoming rummage sales and pot-luck suppers, former Maryknoller and now Episcopalian priest, Father Frank Alagna stood up and announced a signature drive to petition the General Council on behalf of Roy. He invited people to sign after Mass during supper.

Fr. Leo Shea, the main celebrant, took this in stride and even used the opportunity to read a letter to the assembly he had received from Roy, expressing his regrets for not being able to attend. Roy also asked all not to forget the lessons they all learned at Maryknoll and that at times like these, it is necessary to break the silence and raise one's voice on behalf of justice.

The steering committee seemed as blind-sided by this as others were. So far, the reactions I heard went from shock to outrage, but like I said, I will have to wait till I get back to the salad bar on Monday to gauge the real reactions.

Thus, the elephant did not even have to be in the room to dominate the discussion and have the last word.

Who knows? Maybe more people will want to start attending Mass at Marykmoll. You never know what might happen.

NCR strikes again!

Seriously folks, if you want good second-hand and more up-to-date info on the on-going saga of Fr. Roy Bourgeois, you'd do well to check more frequently the website for the National Catholic Reporter. I thank Fr. Dave LaBuda for forwarding me the following link:

http://ncronline.org/news/people/canon-lawyer-questions-maryknolls-move-against-bourgeois

Meanwhile, I once again direct the attention of Maryknoll Society members to the Bulletin Board on our maryknoll.net in-house website. There you will read things that are REALLY going on here!

Here, some Maryknoll eagles have already begun gathering for what promises to be a memorable gathering of current and former Maryknollers this weekend.

Bourgeois a no-show?

According to an anonymous source (who bears an uncanny resembence to Fr. Dave La Buda), Fr. Roy Bourgeois will NOT be at the Maryknoll Centennial Alumni Weekend here starting tomorrow, despite his name being on the participants list.

Dave directed my attention to the women's ordination website where, he said (I'm too lazy to look it up myself), Roy is scheduled to be in Chicago this weekend to accept an award from an impressive array of religious groups for his work on behalf of justice. He is also scheduled to be at yet another screening of "Pink Smoke Over the Vatican" in the Windy City.

So unless Roy has learned the fine art of bi-location, I don't think he'll be here tomorrow. Of course, he could put in a cameo appearance and then wing his way westward in time for the other festivities. Will he or won't he? A blogger's dream to keep people intrigued and interested enough to check in frequently.

I just hope Roy doesn't inadvertently demonstrate the philosophy of the ultimate Chicken Hawk, former V.P. Dick Cheney who, when asked why he didn't go to Vietnam as a young man, replied, "I had other priorities."

**************

On this Feast of the Triumph of the Cross, Ms. Teresa Rodriguez, our sacristan, Fr. Ed Szendrey and I schlepped the HUMONGOUS reliquary containing the documented relic of the True Cross, from its implausible place smack in the middle of our sacristy, to a more fitting and proper (albeit temporary) place of honor in the Lady Chapel, to the right of the Pietà. A vigil light honors this day.

Where we eventually put it depends on what we think it is. If we wish to venerate it as the relic it purports to be, then it should be enshrined in a place of worship. If we deem it a
mere curious artifact, than it can go back out into the Spellman Room among other objects d'art.

**************

It's an understandable mistake. For several months now, our Sodexo staff, at the behest of the All-Important Food Committee, has offered a specialty coffee each breakfast and lunch time along with the standard brews. French Roast is one popular choice. Another is labeled "Columbian" (sic). It's not as if we are a foreign mission Society with global interests and international sensitivities with a high concentration of guys who come from or worked in Latin America. I mean, who understands Spanish around here anyway?

Hey, for all I know, the spelling might be correct. Who wants to drink coffee from Harvard?

Letter from Limbo

I and several others received a copy of a handwritten letter from Fr. Roy Bourgeois, M.M., to our Superior General Fr. Ed Dougherty, M.M., dated August 25, 2011.

In it Roy expresses hope that a solution may be worked out. He mentions trying to phone Doc without success. Apparently Doc was/is away. (In Rome, I hear.) In any event, who didn't accept the latest call from whom remains unresolved.

The more interesting point is that in the interest of transparency, Roy suggests all future communications be done in person, with his lawyer, Thomas Doyle, present. In language that, to this blogger at least, seems to mirror the stern tone of the canonical warnings, Roy says he hopes meeting in person will underscore the serious nature of the current situation.

Roy is on the list of the 420 people registered for the up-coming Alumni Weekend starting this Thursday. Formers and current member are attending, so Roy can hobnob with both groups with equal ease and authority.

Following is the schedule of events for Alumni Weekend:


 
On Thursday Sept. 15, at 7:00 pm Welcoming remarks by Fr. Paul Masson and Centennial Planning Committee Chairman David Brown will be streamed live from the Asia Room on the in-house Channel 15 to rooms here in the Center as well as to St. Teresa's Residence.
 
On Friday Sept. 16th, the first major speaker, Eugene Kennedy, Ph.D. will air live on Channel 15 at 9:00am. Dr. Kennedy is a Professor Emeritus at Loyola University of Chicago.  Dr. Kennedy has written over 50 books on psychology, the Catholic Church, and the psychology of religion
 
At 11:00 am, also on Friday the United States Ambassador to the Vatican, Miguel Diaz, Ph.D. will air live on Channel 15.  Dr. Diaz is a Professor of Trinitarian Theology at St. John's University and the College of St. Benedict in Collegeville Minnesota.
 
At 4:00 pm on Friday an Ecumenical / Interfaith Vespers service honoring deceased Society Members and Alumni will be aired live from the Quadrangle.
 
On Saturday Sept. 17th, at 11:00am Philip Jenkins, Ph.D. will air live and speak on "The Keys of the Kingdom, The Global Church 1911 - 2011 and Beyond."   Dr. Jenkins is a Professor in the Department of History and Religious Studies at Penn State University and Senior Fellow at the Institute for Studies of Religion at Baylor University.
 
At 4:00 pm on Saturday, the Centennial Celebration Mass will be aired live
 
At 6:00 pm on Saturday a Banquet honoring Society Educators / Formators will be aired live from the Quadrangle, with remarks by Peter Spain and Dudley Conneely.
 
At 8:00 pm on Saturday a presentation of Special Honors will air live from the Quadrangle.  Remarks by Fr. Dick Callahan, Bill Murphy, and Mary Darcy

Not yet a done deal

A NYT article dated Aug. 8, 2011 (and countless subsequent blogs and posts notwithstanding), the formal dismissal of Fr. Roy Bourgeois from Maryknoll is not a done deal, Superior General Father Ed Dougherty told a gathering of Maryknoll Fathers and Brothers last Tuesday evening.

I watched a video of that meeting this morning. You get a different feel for the tenor of that gathering by seeing and hearing the questions that even my facility for twisting words and phrases beyond recognition can capture.

Although the Second Canonical Warning has indeed been delivered, the law requires a minimum of 15 days before the final letter requesting dismissal is sent to Rome for review and validation. And, of course, canon law allows Roy to formally challenge this.

In response to one question, Doc said the Society is not compelled to act within a given time frame. "We are a people of hope," he said at one point, and expressed his desire that some sort of accommodation may yet be worked out. He saw a small glimmer of hope the last time he spoke with Roy over the phone and Roy said he did not want to be dismissed.

Complicating the discussion considerably, however, has been the refusal by Roy in recent days to take any phone calls from the superior general, referring him instead to communicate through his canon lawyer. Roy also asked all future correspondence be in writing, something Doc said he felt uncomfortable doing, given Roy's penchant for maintaining an open hotline to the NCR and other publications.

At last Tuesday's meeting, other salient points that were raised which I did not report on in the previous post, dealt with the impression that Roy has somehow been denied due process.

Yet some years ago when other members were dismissed from the Society, the process was quite rapid, while in Roy's case it has gone on close to three years. Following his excommunication in 2009, "The Vatican wanted to give Roy time to reflect on his actions," Dougherty said, so they were willing to give Maryknoll time.

The case of an Augustinian priest was compared to that of Roy. The priest voluntarily stopped saying public Mass until such time (if ever) women are called to orders. The main difference is that the Augustinian acted privately and did not drag his order into the fray, whereas even to this day Roy continues to speak out openly with the MM firmly, albeit tentatively, affixed to his name.

So there you have it, folks. Less than five years after the Holy Father did away with Limbo, Maryknoll seems to be embracing it as our newest mission territory. (Is there a flag for that?) And therein we presently dwell.

*****************
Maryknoll Society Members who want to learn the INSIDE inside scoop on this meeting may log onto Maryknoll.net and read Knollnews 2.0 in the Missioners' Forum section on the Bulletin Board! (Hint: I name names!) Hey, this might entice more men to join, just to find out what Maryknoll Fathers and Brothers are really like!

Doyle for the defense

I finally got around to my weekly emptying of my snail-mailbox, only to find I, too, have received TWO letters (of six and five pages respectively), the first dated August 16, 2011 and the second August 21, outlining the defense of Fr. Roy Bourgeois, prepared and proposed by Thomas P. Doyle, J.C.D., M.A., M.Ch.A., C.A.D.C.

Gotta tell you, if those initials don't give you pause, the content of the documents will.

That being said, I am faced with a dilemma. My copy came with a brief note from Roy that I am to share it with the community. I presume it's our Maryknoll community. Also, Roy disseminated it with the knowledge and consent of his procurator-advocate.

The document itself is addressed to the superior general and the members of the General Council, who are at a distinct disadvantage here because they are loathe to move the upcoming canonical proceedings into the open venue of trial by social networking and public opinion.

That being said, as I mentioned earlier, several Maryknollers have already received a copy of the defense, so this is hardly a breach of client privilege let alone confidentiality. (Transparency can be a real bite in the butt.)

Ergo, I am willing to email a copy of Roy's defense to any Society member who requests it.

Till then, allow me to give you a very brief summary of the summary.

1) The ban on women's ordination is not infallible;
2) The ban on women's ordination is not part of the Deposit of Faith to which all Catholics must give assent;
3) The ban is not essential to the core of Catholicism, nor does questioning it amount to a rejection of the teachings of Christ;
4) Tradition notwithstanding, Christ did not ordain anyone to anything at the Last Supper.
5) No one has been gravely harmed by Roy's action to the point of physical or emotional, let alone spiritual damage.
6) None of the clerics or hierarchs involved in THE scandal of the century has been so punished.

In addition, Doyle emphasizes an illegitimate demand that the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith made on Roy to betray his conscience, as well as several irregularities by the CDF in communicating its penalties.

Man, would I love to witness this trial, as I am sure there will be an equally spirited prosecution.

Ah, but Canon Law has no place for Judge Judy.

Besides, as with the case against Fr.Bob Nugent and Sr.Jeanine Gramick 15 years ago, there is something decidedly Down the Rabbit Hole in the way the Vatican operates.

From "Alice's Adventures in Wonderland", Chapter Twelve:

"'Let the jury consider their verdict,' the King said, for about the twentieth time that day.

'No, no!' said the Queen. 'Sentence first - verdict afterwards.'

'Stuff and nonsense!' said Alice loudly. 'The idea of having the sentence first!'

'Hold your tongue!' said the Queen, turning purple.

'I won't!' said Alice.

'Off with her head!' the Queen shouted at the top of her voice. Nobody moved."

Shimmering shades of gray

(No, I'm not referring to hair color.)

The dining room was all abuzz this morning with animated discussions of yesterday's conversation with the superior general and his Council.

It was a first. Imagine! No less than 55 Society members discussed the events leading up to the process of dismissal from Maryknoll of Father Roy Bourgeois. No chairs were flung. No voices raised. No tables pounded. (Whether due to wisdom or battle fatigue, I have yet to determine)

But radically divergent views were openly expressed, and heard, and respected. And guys left smiling. (Are we talking about Maryknollers????)

Channel 15 streamed the meeting live to the guys at St. T's.

What emerged was the painful complexity of trying to separate personal opinions regarding Roy and his actions from the reaction of the Vatican and the impact all this has on Maryknoll. For many of us, its not just back and white. Some guys who support Roy's position nonetheless disagree with his tactics; others disagree with both and think Maryknoll has been overly indulgent with him and disciplinary action is long overdue; still others regard Roy as a prophet, however flawed, and strongly support him and his actions and think both Maryknoll and the Vatican are on the wrong side of history.

Some background to put this into perspective:

Back in the day (May, 1981) when Roy performed his now infamous disappearing act in El Salvador, at a time when such events usually ended in a shallow grave, Maryknoll's then superior general went out on a (what turned out to be very shaky) limb by publicly holding that country's military responsible should any harm befall the Maryknoller. We're talking NYT material.

After Roy ambled out of the jungle unscathed some days later and explained he had initiated this in order to commune with "los muchachos" (as the rebels were called), the super G had the proverbial egg on his face. Paradoxically, that same Maryknoller today remains one of Roy's staunchest supporters.

Conversely, a point was made that Roy never offered a single word of acknowledgement, let alone regret or apology for the anxiety and subsequent embarrassment his actions caused Maryknoll. Then as now, a pattern emerges.

Catholic deference to the primacy of a well-informed conscience came up in the conversation, with the emphasis on the "well-informed".

It goes without saying but merits repeating that this situation has soured our relationship with the U.S. Bishops, as well as with Rome, although it can equally be argued that it has also soured our relationship with many Catholics, both our supporters and our detractors. At this point, no matter what Maryknoll does or doesn't do, some people are going to be very displeased.

Funny thing, all this brouhaha comes down to a six-letter word: former.

Even if he is dismissed, Roy's monthly personal allowance from Maryknoll is assured as is his health care coverage. All that will change is that, in future public events, Maryknoll Father Roy Bourgeois will, instead, be referred to as former Maryknoll Father Roy Bourgeois. Will this placate Rome and the bishops? We'll find out.

Nothing was solved by yesterday's gathering, but that wasn't the intention. Men got to speak their minds in an atmosphere of fraternal respect. Issues and feelings simmering just below the surface finally came into the light of day. We now know where each other stands. And in the end, for all the tension and bad publicity and ambiguity (creative or otherwise), we are still proud to be members of the Catholic Foreign Mission Society of America.

Locking the barn door....

Tonight at 7:30 p.m. in the Asia Room there will be a conversation between the members and the entire General Council, including the superior general, to discuss developments in the Society and around the Maryknoll world (let the reader take note).

Because the discussion will be in a "Blog-Free" Zone, the precise content will not be divulged here on this website. This allows everyone to express his opinion openly without fear of reading about it on Knollnews or in the NCR. Or the New York Times. Or Ripley's Believe It Or Not.

That being said, the overarching theme that will be used to prime the conversational pump, as it were, is "How We Got Where We Now Are and Where Do We Go From Here?"

Alas, I have a previous commitment and will not be here this evening, so the temptation posed by my twitching fingers to blog will thus be avoided. I spoke to at least four other guys who also said they learned about this too late and will also not be able to attend. I trust that enough interested parties will be present for a frank and candid exchange of gun...er...I mean opinions.

The very fact that our superior and his Council are willing to sit and chat with us is a welcome development, as communication and transparency have been sorely missed nigh these past three years (or since the last Chapter declared that communication and transparency would be the desired goals in the coming years.)

Maryknollers being Maryknollers, I harbor no illusions we will even attain a "We must hang together or we shall most assuredly hang separately" (cf. Ben Franklin) moment.

That being said, let me offer my two cents in absentia. Is it too late to offer Roy a cease fire? To wit: The third canonical warning letter, which in effect dismisses him from Maryknoll, will be held in abeyance in exchange for him issuing a public disclaimer at EVERY future forum that his actions and words on behalf of women's ordination do not in any way reflect the position of the Catholic Foreign Mission Society of America. Similarly, can he, in exchange for retaining the M.M. after his name, make an effort in every future interview with reporters and the media to instruct them to leave Maryknoll's name out of the discussion?

I fear this and other suggestions are moot at this point.

Two people have approached me with copies of Roy's legal defense in the upcoming trial. This is not mine to share. I heard from one source that Maryknoll has retained canonical counsel of equal stature as Rev. Thomas Doyle, J.C.D., who is defending Roy, so we are in for a battle royale and are no more able to influence impending events any more than we were able to stop Hurricane Irene from wreaking havoc all along the Eastern seaboard.

Dueling letters

Apparently even among Maryknollers, letters are flying fast and furious between members and our general council. The following was forwarded to me from Fr. Ken Thesing, former superior general, and is posted here with his permission. There are other letters in support of the action taken against Roy and in support of the Holy See which, if I can obtain permission, will also be reposted here.

********************

Maryknoll General Council
PO Box 303
Maryknoll, NY 10545-0303                                       August 9, 2011
 
Dear Ed, Jose, Ed and Paul,
 
Greetings to you from Nairobi. I hope you are all doing well.
 
I opened up my computer a few minutes ago this morning and saw an article stating that you Ed and the Council have sent a second warning letter to Roy Bourgeois that he faces dismissal unless he recants publicly his position on the matter of women priests.
 
I do not favor expelling Roy from the Society; he has been excommunicated by the Church, his priestly faculties are suspended. What is gained by his expulsion from Maryknoll?
 
The Gospel from St Matthew chapter 18 that we read at mass this morning has Jesus saying: “Suppose a man has a hundred sheep and one of them strays; will he not…go in search for that one?” Now as a farmer I always react to this story and answer that of course the first thing I will do is round up the 99 and put them in a safe place; then I will go to look for the stray. I have to be concerned for the 99. And as a farmer I remember the saying: “Good fences make good neighbors.” So the first thing I do is look for the breach in the fence, the break. Then I know I am on the right path to look for and find the stray.
 
We are celebrating our 100 years of Maryknoll Society…unbroken. I think the meaning of that 100 in the Gospel is completeness. It is a serious matter when that completeness is broken. If Maryknoll had had a serious difference and separated one year…even if we came back together we would not be celebrating this 100 years, the 100 years would not be complete. I think Jesus is saying the People of God, God’s flock belong together. So he came to find the lost, the marginalized one. He looked for and fixed, healed and mended the break in the fence that caused humanity’s being separated and incomplete by giving us a way to reform our attitudes and lives so that we can stay complete.
 
Is Roy a stray, lost a bit and separated from us? Yes he is…and he has walked away and bears responsibility for his actions. But he found the break in the fence, he did not create it, a weak spot in our Church and he went through it. So the Church too has some responsibility; Church leadership as well as Church followers have to keep the fence in repair: “Good fences make good neighbors.” Without working on the break, repairing the weak spot, Roy will stay out there…a stray. The neighbors will be upset. Our Society will be less complete if Roy is expelled, some members will be upset and yes some will feel better. Our Church too will be incomplete in the same way. We have seen this double reaction already after the first letter.
 
We have just had a wrenching example of our country’s politicians not dealing with a ‘break’ in our economic, our fiscal fence. They ended up just using power, whatever each had. And they ‘kicked the can down the road’ as commentators said. Because they did not deal with the problem, the break in the fence, we can all be sure the problem will return. So it will be with our Church and the issue of dealing justly and equitably with women. I do not pretend to know exactly where the ‘break’ in the fence is on this issue, nor do I pretend to know exactly how to fix it, but I do know that if the farmer (Church leadership) does not first go out and look for the break, the weak spot in the fence we will not achieve our goal of being complete…of having all 100…of having unity in the People of God that I think Jesus challenges us to form.
 
Again you all do remain in my payers.
 
Peace,
 
Ken
 
Ken Thesing
PO Box 43058
00100 Nairobi, Kenya

Open letter to Fr. Roy Bourgeois, M.M.

Dear Roy,

I write this to you with an unlikely mixture of pride, sadness, anger and joy. No matter what, I will always consider you my brother in faith. Barring a successful appeal to Rome, in a matter of days you will no longer have the privilege of appending M.M. to your name, yet paradoxically ours will be the greater loss.

Despite several articles by otherwise astute writers claiming the contrary, you will NOT lose your monthly allowance or health coverage from Maryknoll. Such a vindictive action would truly betray not only the Maryknoll spirit we share but the gospel we profess. That same gospel and Maryknoll spirit will no doubt continue to inspire you whether you are canonically in the Society or not. You will be freer, in a sense, to continue your advocacy on behalf of the ordination of women, yet without membership in the Society we all love.

I just wish, in all your righteous claims to the primacy of conscience, you'd have said a word of acknowledgement of the effect your actions have had on Maryknoll. This might have assuaged some of the anger and sense of betrayal some Maryknollers feel, not toward your stated goal of promoting the ordination of women, but rather because of your methods that seemingly disregarded the negative impact on the Society. Likewise when Maryknoll's reputation was taking a hit because of this situation and we were losing supporters despite our pledge of continued financial support for you, a word from you defending the Society would have been greatly appreciated.

My position on the ordination of women has been a matter of public record since my editorial in MARYKNOLL magazine in May 1993. In it I asked, "If a woman could produce the body of Christ physically, why can't women produce it sacramentally?" More than any other person, the Virgin Mary can point to Jesus and say, "This is my body; this is my blood."

Of course, this was before Pope John Paul II strictly forbade even thinking about discussing this topic, so I have obediently refrained from thinking about discussing it.

My anger arises from the second reason for your dismissal as described in the second canonical warning that you forwarded to me. It states: "Grave scandal given to the people of God, the Church, especially in the United States, and scandal given to many of the Maryknoll priests and Brothers...."

If causing grave scandal is sufficient reason for dismissal from religious life, many bishops should have been booted out years ago. Plus, I have not come upon a single Maryknoller who is scandalized by your actions. Outraged, frustrated, aggravated, agitated, perturbed and resentful, yes, but scandalized? Not so much.

We are Maryknollers. We are scandalized by a system that repeatedly put the reputation of the institution above the welfare of children. We are scandalized that Catholics are deprived of the Eucharist because of a chronic shortage of priests, thus sacrificing the spiritual well-being of people on the high altar of male, clerical celibacy. We are scandalized by those who consider the ordination of women as even remotely equivalent to the molestation of children as harmful to the church.

And I, for one, am scandalized that laicization is part of the disciplinary action taken against you. What an insult to the laity that their state would be considered a punishment!

Yet as a veteran conscientious objector from the Vietnam war days, I am also proud of the stance you have taken. May your case continue to focus public attention and the light of reason on aspects of church law you consider unjust. Gandhi taught it is precisely in accepting the punishment for breaking an unjust law that people will realize how wrong the law is and demand change.

God speed, Roy, as our Maryknoll paths diverge, yet take heart knowing we will each in our own way continue struggling to realize the values of the reign of God in our church and in our time.

Keep us in your prayers, as we do you in ours.

"All things work together for good, for those who love God...." (Romans 8:28)

(Rev.) Joe Veneroso, M.M.

Of Bourgeois, Pardy & Facebook

As (soon-to-be ex) Maryknoll Father Roy Bourgeois receives his second canonical warning of impending dismissal from the Society, (Read about it in the New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/09/us/09priest.html or yesterday's National Catholic Reporter http://ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/bourgeois-facing-expulsion-maryknoll) a scene from the musical Camelot comes to mind.

Mordred, King Arthur's illegitimate son, has forced the King into an untenable situation: destroy Queen Guinevere or destroy the law, upon which the entire concept of the Round Table is based. The King consigns his queen to the flames for her infidelity as demanded by the law, and then prays Sir Lancelot will lead a rebellion to save her. The rebellion succeeds, but Camelot crumbles as a result. Amid the smoldering ruins, Arthur discovers a young boy with aspirations to one day become a knight of the Round Table. The dream lives.

Acknowledging that all metaphors limp, I urge readers not to take this analogy too far. It's offered simply as my personal feelings as I watch this drama with Roy play out. Roy follows his conscience, Maryknoll follows the law, and Camelot crumbles. I can only hope our vision for a Church truer to the gospel will emerge.

On a totally unrelated topic (I hope), the earthly remains of Maryknoll Bishop James Pardy were exhumed last week from our cemetery. With the consent of his family, the remains were then cremated to facilitate translation (I love that word in this context!) back to Korea and the diocese of Cheong Ju. Pardy was the founding bishop and Catholics there thought that Cheong Ju was a more fitting resting place.

I received an email from Father Emile Dumas on Saturday wondering if there was a traditional Korean urn used for cremains (a neologism and portmanteau, btw, scoffed at by purists who say ashes are ashes). From Wikipedia: "The Cremation Association of North America prefers that the word 'cremains' not be used for referring to 'human cremated remains.' The reason given is that 'cremains' is thought to have less connection with the deceased, whereas a loved one's 'cremated remains' has a more identifiable human connection.") I responded to Emile that, to my knowledge, Koreans dislike cremation because it retained the stigma of being reserved for convicts or those who died of dangerous diseases, so subsequently as long as the Koreans themselves don't mind, any tasteful and respectable urn would suffice.

In the coming days, said urn and contents are to be escorted back to Korea by a priest of the Cheong Ju diocese. Apparently it is much easier to get ashes through customs and across borders that it would be to attempt this with the original coffin. The cost, too, is considerably less, though I have to ponder whether the urn will be stored beneath the seat in front or above in the overhead bin. I presume the bishop's ring and mission cross were removed for future veneration. The now vacated grave here at the Knoll will remain empty and retain the original headstone, as per the family's wishes.

This all leads up to the main story (It does, if I say so) that for sometime now, Maryknollers here at the Center may indeed access Facebook, despite what you may have read on this blog. All that is required is for the member to email Fr. Mike Duggan, the U.S. regional superior, with the request. Mike will then forward this to the good people in our I.T. Department who will then forward it for vetting to Father Ed Szendrey. I encourgage all Maryknollers to start a Facebook or Twitter account, as that is the cutting edge of evangelization and we want to get the Maryknoll mission story out there. Your personal story is where it's at.

Finally on a seemingly unrelated but nonetheless strangely tangential note: one of the men attending the Vocation Encounter ten days ago shared that he was a recent convert to Catholicism from the Episcopal church. I couldn't help but marvel at this, and likened it to going from the Andrea Doria to the Titanic, the difference being the rate at which each is going down. (See above reference to the destruction of Camelot.) I sought to assuage his shock by reminding him we follow the One who walks on water.

Maryknoll's rabbinical propensities

So if canon law is Torah for Catholics, than the New Commentary on Canon Law by John P. Beal et al must be the Talmud. What the law allows and what the law means is open to interpretation and discussion, if not debate.

Thus, Rabbi Jonah ben Sivalon of Scranton quotes above mentioned Commentary (which was ordered for our library today) in insisting that, absent a requisite four-member council to adjudicate a dismissal, the Commentary interprets the law to mean the missing member would normally be the regional superior of the man in question.

Canon 172 (of Catholic Torah) states such a vote "must be secret, certain, absolute and determinate." But, Rabbi Jonah posits, "What does certain, absolute, determinate mean?"

Notably "absolute." Does that require a minimum of four out of five (including the super G's vote) if not a unanimous vote as Sivalon maintains, or is it merely three out of five, as Rabbi Shlomo Don't-Use-My-Name-in-Your-Blog insists?

Again according to Sivalon, Fr. Roy Bourgeois has secured the services of noted (albeit controversial) canon lawyer Fr. Thomas Doyle. Thus, I can only hope the spotlight should soon shift away from our Maryknoll general council to the Vatican dicastery where the final verdict will be issued.

Until further developments appear in the NCR, I shall refrain from any more attempted arbitration between these dueling rabbis.

I stand corrected...sort of

A phone call today from a concerned and well-informed Maryknoller convinced me my contention that L'Affair Bourgeois is all about our oath of obedience and not women's ordination is not quite accurate. Or may not be accurate at all.

He deftly laid out the case that MANY Maryknollers over the years have disobeyed orders from superiors and then went on to enjoy blissfully undisturbed lives sans threat of dismissal. He also mentioned that those few Maryknollers (four, by my count) who were dismissed in recent years had other issues and extenuating circumstances.

He contended that had the Super G actually ordered Roy either to return to the Center or take an overseas assignment and then had Roy refused, the disobedience card might have been more convincingly played. What removes the disobedience fig leaf (my words, not his) from the argument is the double whammy of dismissal AND laicization. Other guys who were dismissed were not laicized, even though most did not join another diocese or order. This lays to rest the apparently false notion that a dismissed priest must be laicized because you can't have priests freelancing, as it were.

My caller insists it's all about Rome equating ordination of women with child molestation as equally offensive to the Church and wanting to make an example of him by putting the screws to Maryknoll (again, I am paraphrasing).

OK, so it's not about obedience. But the anger remains among some Maryknollers (I never took a poll) who resent Roy's consistently dragging Maryknoll's name into his crusades, from his disappearing act in El Salvador in the 1980's to his inviting a woman to concelebrate Mass in Minneapolis to the more widely publicized actions of recent years.

They point to Father Miguel D'Escoto's equally impressive actions on behalf of justice with nary a mention of Maryknoll's name and wonder why Roy didn't or couldn't do that.

Then we have the canonical conundrum that the unanimous votes for dismissal might not even be there. Perhaps that's the strategy. Father General could then tell his superiors in Rome that he did all that canon law requires and if they want to be rid of this "meddlesome priest" (a la Thomas Becket) they might have to do the deed themselves.

Granted the Fourth of July is a slow news cycle, but the drama contues.

Message from polite protesters

As promised, here is the content of the flyer passed out yesterday by the group of about 12 protesters who peacefully expressed their support outside during our Centennial Mass in favor of Fr. Roy Bourgeois and women's ordination. As a side note, U.S. Regional Superior Mike Duggan commented that somehow this protest was quintessentially Maryknoll, that has so often been the source of protests overseas.

*************************

June 29, 2011

Dear Supporter of the Peace and Justice Movement,

As the Maryknoll Order celebrates their 100 year anniversary we reflect on the contributions this organization has made to peace and justice throughout the world and applaud their continued commitment to serving the poor and oppressed. However, we cannot ignore Maryknoll's position in regards to women's ordination. We encourage the leadership to reflect on this issue and examine their consciences as one of their most cherished members, Father Roy Bourgeois, has done: "as priests we say we are called by God. Who are we to say that God would not calla woman."

We are dismayed at Maryknoll's dismissal of Father Roy for his support of women's ordination. How can an organization that promotes peace and justice worldwide turn its back on this Viet Nam vet turned Maryknoll priest, who has been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize, is the founder of the School of the America's Watch, and is the epitome of everything we thought Maryknoll stood for?

For mor information about Fr. Roy Bourgeois and Women's ordination: http://www.womensordination.org/content/view/108

+++++++++++++++++++++++

Father Roy Bourgeois' response to Maryknoll leadership:

In his response, Fr. Roy stated, "It is my conscience that compels me to say publicly that the exclusion of women from the priesthood is a grave injustice against women, against our Church and against our God who calls both men and women to the priesthood... In essence, you are telling me to lie and say I do not believe that God calls both men and women to the priesthood. This I cannot do, therefore I will not recant."


XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

[Blogger's note: Once again, for the record, Fr. Roy is NOT being threatened with dismissal because of his support of women's ordination. Were that the case, I would also have been dismissed for my editorial in the May 1993 MARYKNOLL magazine that raised the same issue. When Orbis published a compendium of my editorials ("Good News for Today") in 2007, then Superior General John Sivalon suggested that the controversial editorial not be included. I then asked newly elected and current superior Fr. Ed Dougherty about this and he also thought that editorial's inclusion would not be helpful, so I acquiesced. I had made my point and further action on my part would have hurt Maryknoll more than

For publicly and actively participating in the attempted ordination of a woman in 2008, Roy was excommunicated. Even then, Maryknoll leadership kept Roy on as a member and only asked that he refrain from future PUBLIC actions and comments on this topic. He repeatedly refused this order from our superior. EVEN NOW, Maryknoll leadership has agreed to continue giving Roy his monthly allowance and providing for his healthcare.

My previous posts on this do not even begin to capture the sadness and angst this whole episode is causing among our membership. Reading the thread following my article in a recent NCR clearly shows that most people neither appreciate nor understand the importance of the oath we Maryknollers take to "obey our legitimate superiors".

There is a conversation that needs to be had in Maryknoll and in the Church. The topic will not be easily suppressed nor go away.

Maryknoll Turns 100

With trumpets, violins, timpani, organ, piano and a thirty-five-member choir, Ms. Lucille Naughton led a congregation of 400+ in singing "Non nobis, Domine, sed nomine tuo da gloriam " (Not to us, Lord, but to your name give glory) as 63 Maryknoll concelebrants processed in ahead of Superior General Ed Dougherty.

The two statues of SS. Peter and Paul on either side of our main altar sported huge red stoles, as is the custom in the Vatican on this day, according to Father Mike Walsh.

Sr. Janice McLaughlin, president of the Maryknoll Sisters, read the first reading for the solemnity of the Apostles Peter and Paul. Mr. Sam Stanton, from the Maryknoll Lay Missioner leadership, read the second reading and newly ordained Fr. Rodrigo Ulloa-Chavarry proclaimed the gospel.

Fr. Dougherty then gave a homily befitting a whole century of service. Despite feeling like 100 years, it was actually only twenty-eight minutes long (but who's counting?). Interestingly enough, "Doc" tapped into his inner Baptist preacher and had the congregation repeatedly respond with "Yes, we would!" to several incantations beginning "We would like to thank..." To wit, all Maryknollers, living and dead, all Maryknoll entities, Maryknoll affiliates, Maryknoll associates, Maryknoll benefactors, Maryknoll employees, and Maryknoll men in formation were all feted.

Towards the end of the Mass, County Executive Rob Asterino (cousin of Maryknoll Father Bob Asterino, Hong Kong) spoke a few words of congratulations and shared how as a boy he actually worked one summer in our social communications department. He declared Wednesday, June 29, 2011 as Maryknoll Appreciation Day in Westchester and formally presented "Doc" with the framed proclamation.

The entire ceremony not only was streamed live via Channel 15 to the men at St. Theresa's, but it was also videoed by former lay missioner Mr. Mike Lavery from the archdiocesan communications department.

After Mass the throng migrated out to the tent in the quadrangle where our Sodexo staff once again outdid themselves in presenting foods from around the mission world. Among our many guests were Gloria and Carl Price, relatives of our co-founder, Father Thomas Price. They did the honors of blowing out the candles on Maryknoll's birthday cake.

In a corner of the dining room, a huge screen showed a DVD prepared by Br. Kevin Dargan and Ms.Maureen Toohey of Channel 15 with vintage photos and Fr. Emile Dumas' voice reading the words of founder Bishop James A. Walsh.

I would be remiss if I did not mention the presence of about 12 very polite and pleasant protesters who stood outside with signs in support of Fr. Roy Bourgeois and women's ordination. Several Maryknollers went over and chatted with them and found them to be very sincere and dedicated. They also passed out a statement which I shall include in tomorrow's blog.

Today belongs to Maryknoll.

Maryknoll, Then and Now

OK, folks, I finally got the kinks worked out. (I hope). Below are two links, one for the article I wrote for National Catholic Reporter giving my impressions of the meeting we held with Father Roy Bourgeois during our Regional Assembly last month. The comments people are posting after the article are also informative.

The other article appears in the June 20 issue of AMERICA magazine on our founders and early years in time for our Centennial on June 29.

Here is the AMERICA article:

http://www.americamagazine.org/content/article.cfm?article_id=12918


And here is the NRC article:

http://www.ncronline.org/news/women/time-ambiguity-shadows-maryknollers-assembly

Explosive canon

Former Maryknoll superior general, Father John Sivalon, maintains that according to canon law, dismissal from the Society requires the unanimous vote of the General Council plus one more Member, presumably the regional superior of the area to which the missioner belongs. No such vote was taken, and absent the requisite votes, the First Canonical Warning Letter to Fr. Roy Bourgeois may have been premature, if not moot.

This further muddies the murky waters in which Maryknoll finds itself. We are on record as threatening Roy with dismissal unless he recant. And if you know Roy, you know he can't recant. Our reputation for justice, let alone fairness, has taken a major hit already, no matter what happens.

Today's first reading at Mass proved providential. Acts 15:1-6 speaks of "no little dissension and debate" between Paul and the Judaizers regarding circumcision being necessary for Gentile converts. Paul and Barnabas were sent by the church to Jerusalem, and the church there received them with joy, despite their bringing a controversial issue for discussion.

Fr. John Eybel, who was main celebrant, brought this up as a model for how we, gathered in assembly, might approach our own current controversy.

Can we break out of the atmosphere of fear and receive one another with joy in the Holy Spirit?