St. James Kansas Blog

I have waited for several days to post on this, as I wanted to enjoy the holiday break with my family and allow a little time to get my bearings on this issue in order to speak to it without using raw emotion as my only motivation.

There are two open letters recently published which speak on a very personal level to the issue of abuse of power within the Church hierarchy. The first, posted here provides the first person point of view of a father of children abused by Rev. Donald McGuire, SJ. The second, is a letter to the editor of the Chicago Sun Times published here. (scroll down to letter titled “Church needs to search soul”)

The letter to the editor uses only 3 sentences to perfectly identify where the entire Church community is on the continuum between hurt and healed. My friends, this 2007 Thanksgiving was not celebrated in an era where systemic institutional corruption within the Church is a thing of the past. It thrives and continues to enable the kind of events that horrified us in the past.

I attended Mass at St. Rose in Perrysburg with fellow parishioners from United Parishes 2 years ago, and the pastor filling in for Fr. Leyland that day implored those of us wearing the yellow “Together We Can” buttons to look at this as a time for healing when talking about these events that are a blight on Church’s record.

I am not a priest, and cannot speak as one. I am a father though, and can speak as one of those. Priests are not fathers (not paternally anyway) by design, and therefore can tell a father of a child who has been abused by a cleric that this is “a time for healing” without comprehending what he is instructing.

Such instruction is tantamount to the conductor of a wrecking train telling passengers and bystanders that this is “a time for healing” while the train is still wrecking; AND while there is another train coming down the tracks unaware of what is unfolding in front of it.

It would go a long way if the Church personally understood from experience that the moment a man becomes a father, or a woman becomes a mother, that they are tasked with 1 absolute responsibility for which failure is not an option:

1. Protect their child from any form of harm.

That means any or all of the following and plenty more:

• illness
• falls
• burns
• electric shock
• kidnap
• online predators
• cuts
• bruises
• rye’s syndrome
• head lice
• traffic
• bullies
• graphic violence and sexuality in movies and television
• unhealthy food
• lead paint
• rashes
• pink eye
• aresenic in playground equipment
• contaminated drinking water
• contaminated air
• pollution in general
• lead paint again
• lead paint yet again
• and just when you thought there was no more lead paint, lead paint yet again
• toys with parts that can cause choking or stop breathing
• lead paint
• inadequate insurance for healthcare needs which may arise for any number of reasons including but not limited to exposure to lead paint
• drunk drivers
• distracted drivers
• flu
• allergies
• bee stings
• mean dogs
• I could go on but hopefully you get my drift by this point

The point is, a parent must always be one step ahead of whatever danger is out there. For this reason, all parents decide where there is potential risk, and where there is safety from that risk. When the danger embeds itself within the boundaries of safety and disguises itself as a protector, a parent is most vulnerable.

If a parent is ever concerned that they may have failed in their 1 task above, there is nothing like condescension and platitudes to make this situation worse than it already is. Can a celibate hierarchy understand this? If they could, would the ones who tell us it is “time to heal” be able to look us in the eye when they say it?

Click this link to find out more.

Note the portion of the article which demonstrates the inconsistency of the diocese which says:

“A diocese spokesman said the crew, which returned to Columbia Station empty-handed, had been hired to remove the windows and other sacred items, put them in crates, and place them in storage for future use.

The workers again showed up at St. Mary’s Tuesday morning with a van and a trailer, but the parish’s ex-members turned out in force and the workers left. Sally Oberski, a spokesman for the Toledo diocese, said the workers were there to clean up water in the basement. But several ex-parishioners said the crew had set up scaffolding around some windows and had taken the Stations of the Cross plaques off the wall.”

Click this link to see a slide show of the events outlined in the article. Note the scaffolding placed by the windows which is no doubt, only there to help workers clean up the water in the basement.

Also,Click here to find out what the diocese considers fair play with the funds for parishes that they close.

you might like to know that not only could little old St. James come up with the funds for a civil suit to get back what belongs to them, but that they were capable of funding both sides of the lawsuit to do it!

In the article linked below, the Director of Communications for the Diocese says that “in light of the pending litigation …” it is “inappropriate to comment about the meaning of documents exchanged as part of the discovery process – especially internal administrative bookkeeping materials…”

Soooooooo, it is inapprpriate to comment about how these funds are handled due to the pending litigation, but not inapprpiate to spend them even though they are a principle component of the pending litigation. Interesting.

Click here to find out more

Click here to find out how the diocese said they would handle St. James funds

Click here to find out how the diocese actually handled St. James funds

Also, over at United Parishes, there is some information about what needs to take place to protect parishes Take a look there and show your support for Junction in the comments section. They need our prayers and words of encouragement.

Why oh why hasn’t the diocese learned that they just aren’t supposed to take what does not belong to them? A message to the diocese: If you do not want things like what took place in this article (click to read) to keep happening, than why don’t you start conducting the church in a way that restores trust. Taking property just because you believe you have the right to (which you don’t have the right to do in this case) just isn’t going to win you any friends, much less the hearts and minds of those whom you depend upon for generosity.

As I stood inside the sanctuary of St. Mary in Junction, Ohio; I looked in awe at the beauty of what I was taking in. As I looked through each of the stained glass windows, donated by families and other members of this historically rich parish community, I felt as though I stood in the middle of the crossroads between the past and the future. The sanctuary was empty, and has not been worshipped in since July. But it is still completely intact, and had it not been for the chill in the air or the small puddles of water in the basement, one might not be able to tell that this was a closed church. After all, why would it be? It is in immaculate condition, and the stained glass is world class. It isn’t the biggest church I’ve ever seen, and it isn’t the most decadent either. We can save those types of buildings with all of their splendor for the lavish and luxurious expenditures of the hierarchy with their fancy robes, flashy jewelry, and the rest of their royal architecture and attire. This place is a magnificent monument to the will of this Junction community to have a place to gather and worship God together. I stood in there wondering if it would be the last time I would ever see it; and thought about what a tragedy it would be if it was.

I remember when we at St. James were told during a similar moment in our recent history that if we were not willing to do all that it took to preserve what is ours for our children and the future of our community, than perhaps His Excellency made the right decision. Never. Never. Never. Nothing about pillaging St. Mary of her windows and stripping her of her parish identity is right either. Nothing. Now it is up to the good people of Junction to save her. It isn’t fair. They didn’t ask for this burden. We are here for you; and we will support you. Together as one community of God, we will not fail.

To find out more, click here

Recent news regarding the diocese plans for the former school building for Holy Rosary Church needs to be monitored with a watchful eye by lay persons of any parish.

As you may all be aware, both the Holy Rosary Church and school were closed in the project that brought about the permanent closure of 16 other parishes in 2005. The closure of St. James was also a product of this restructuring project. Throughout the administration of this effort, from conception to closure, parishioners from these churches were told many different things about what would be done with the assets that they helped to maintain through generations of Catholic history in northwest Ohio.

As you read the article below, please note that this is nothing less than a re-distribution of the wealth of Holy Rosary parish, Holy Rosary Parishioners, and Toledo tax payers; all in one confounded effort to enrich the diocese. The will of the parishioners in the decision of the fate of any parish or its assets is not considered, even if the diocese claims to ask for the input of those of us who built up what they liquidate.

The role of the Catholic Church in Education

If you should read some statements from the diocese in the near future regarding the future of the Junction St Mary building and/or windows, or the liquid funds of St. James Parish, or the Salem St. Joseph building and/or cemetary funds, remember this article. Should the diocese make referene to any negotiations with parishioners or attempts to solicit their feedback in order to make a decision, keep in mind that Holy Rosary was promised something alltogether different regarding their parish assets and specifically their school.

In case that is not evidence enough, the diocesan statement regarding the suit brought forth by St. James contained these two sentences in the very same document:

“The former parishioners claimed that they were entitled to all parish property, and a request of an accounting of funds, which still remain in a diocesan deposit account in the approxomate amount of $77,957.60. All funds currently in the account of the closed parish were transferred to the diocese to be held until a decision is made between the diocese and former members of the parish as to the disposition of the funds.”

“The former parishioners of St. James will receive their personal belongings, and possibly additional requested sacred good if those items are not needed in other parishes, and the funds of the former parish will be properly distributed in the interests of the local parishes” (my emphasis is added)

As the diocese is still attempting to facilitate the aftermath of the 2005 re-organization project, now is not the time for complacency. Somebody better be watching the store.