January 14, 2004
Voice of the Faithful?
CRISIS magazine has an interesting article looking at Voice of the Faithful, a Catholic lay group. I think most know who VOTF is through their press coverage, which has been completely out of proportion to their true value in the Church. I think it’s interesting to see how this group pretends to represent not just Catholics, but faithful Catholics has ended up being just another group of liberal dissidents. One section I found particularly revealing:
And this observation is hardly confined to “conservatives.” Dr. Paul Ginnety from St. Joseph’s College on Long Island, complimented VOTF as being a “fairly liberal” group of older Catholics who “cut their teeth” during the protest era of the 1960s in a Newsday op-ed published in July 2002. In the article, Ginnety went on to ridicule younger Catholics who agree with what the Catholic Church teaches, calling them nostalgic. Ginnety, an occasional contributor to Newsday’s editorial pages, also spoke during LI-VOTF’s September Faith Convention’s “working lunch.”
It’s troubling that a group attempting to wield so much power would call the faithful “nostalgic” – insulting them rather than understanding that they are the ones actually following God’s lead. I also found it interesting that the group seemed to focus on the vision of its founders, the human leadership, rather than purporting to be lead by the Holy Spirit.
There is obviously a place for lay groups within the Catholic Church. Some do amazing work that would be difficult for priests to accomplish. But Voice of the Faithful is an example of a group that, rather than desiring to follow God, simply seeks to make changes to the Church that they like. Ultimately, selfish motives push this group to desire women priests and contraception. They are not seeking to purify the Church or to help priests, they are seeking to control the Church. What a tragedy.
Like the author of this article, I think the last paragraph says it all:
In a fitting end note, the Michigan chapter of Call to Action reported in its Summer 2003 newsletter that it’s now sharing meetings with the VOTF chapter in that region.
I do recommend reading the article on VOTF. Thanks to Patrick Sweeney at Extreme Catholic for pointing out the article.
God bless,
Jay
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
How pitiful that people who call themselves "Christians" would be against those trying to protect the children from the most horrific crime there is.
The author of this article should be ashamed of his thoughts, and words.
I assume Jesus would have protected the children, not a bunch of sexually deviant criminals who not only abuse children, but make the church a safe haven to promote such crimes.
Pam,
One question: how does contraception "protect the children from the most horrific crime their is"? I understand the knee-jerk reaction to go nuts, but we must be intelligent enough to understand which groups are working to solve the problem and which are simply pushing an agenda.
Critical thinking skills are important here, Pam.
God bless,
Jay
Jay
I agree. Thinking, critical or not, should tell you that VOTF was not founded to promote contraception.
It shows how little you know about VOTF.
Who has truly "gone nuts" Jay? Old men abusing children? Or those trying to protect them?
Pam,
So your position is that this former member of VOTF and Crisis magazine are conspiring to hurt a good organization? You did read the article, right? I haven't heard anyone from VOTF suggest that the article was incorrect - they merely were upset they didn't know he was writing it until later. You might be the only person arguing this article is false - I think you've "gone nuts."
God bless,
Jay
Jay,
Your "Christian" qualities are showing Jay. Name calling is both juvenile, and usually occurs when the person has nothing legitmate to say.
The article I am reading is YOURS above.
What a nice cover, "God Bless." You are most certainly not only full of it, but full of yourself.
Pam,
Let's be clear - I did not call you any names.
The article stated, and I quoted above, several negative points about the third mission of VOTF - "to bring about structrual change." The article detailed VOTF's use of "name calling" especially towards faithful Catholics. The article also detailed some of the conferences of VOTF that focused on allowing contraception, among other things.
Where is the article wrong, Pam? If it isn't wrong, then I have a big problem with VOTF. If the article is wrong, please enlighten me. This is a simple request.
God bless,
Jay
Jay,
The structure of the church has been a breeding ground for corruption. There is clearly a problem, and the lay people should be monitoring the situation more closely.
After what has gone on, no one should have to explain to you that this system, as it is, is a complete failure.
Pam,
The structure of the Church was defined by God - not even the Pope can change it. I think "a breeding ground for corruption" is a little overboard. Yes, the laity has a role in the Church, but this is not a democracy and won't ever be one. Your problem is with God, not with the structure of the Church.
God bless,
Jay
Jay,
I have never had a problem with God. I do, and always will have a problem with the deviant men who abused their power (and the children), in His name. I never said the church was a democracy. I said it was full of corruption, and that they need to be monitored.
Even they can admit there are problems. Why can't you?
Pam,
The abuse of children in the Church is a problem, and one that needs to be addressed. I, for one, believe that this scandal has been handled poorly by the Church, opting for lawyerly copouts rather than disciplining the responsible parties and decrying their conduct. Naturally, however, this is an all too human problem, and one that exists in many Protestant churches as well. We must not permit our disdain for the abhorrent conduct to turn into a desire for retribution. The Church must discipline its own (why aren't the responsible priests being removed from their posts?) rather than destroy them.
I say this as a father of four children, ranging in ages from 4 to 9. Let me also say that my biggest concern in the Church today is raised by Jay. Far from rejecting VOTF's goal of correcting the problem of sexual abuse, I think Jay's main point was that VOTF is using this very admirable cover goal to introduce, in Trojan horse fashion, insiduous ideologies into everyday Parish life. I just read the article, and all of my worst fears were confirmed--CCD directors, catechists, and others teaching a rejection of the divine authority of the Church. The prospect of my children being taught by adults who would promote contraception, a female priesthood, homosexuality, and perhaps even abortion?!
These issues alone are not the main problem. It is, rather, that they reflect an attitude (one that is typified in VOTF) that the Church, and God also, exist to serve the parishioners. How very enlightened... how very deadly! We in fact exist to serve Christ and his body, of which we are supposed to be members. Pro-aborts are a perfect example of opposition to this principle. They choose to eliminate the fetus because it is more beneficial to the parents or society. Nowhere in this equation does the question of God's will come into play.
God's will... you will say it is "x", and I will say it is "y". And VOTF will say it is "a". But the fundamental truth propounded by the Catholic Church is that it is only the bishops (and that only when acting collectively) who can accurately and infallibly perceive God's will, through the power of the Holy Spirit. How arrogant for you, me, or any group, to attempt to "correct" the Church's doctrine. To do so is to reject the authority of Christ Himself, which authority was given to the apostles. This arrogance and rejection of authority (how democratic) is a blight upon the Body. It is a blackness, a disease, a malignant cancer. This terrifies me more than anything about the Church. It must be ripped from the Body before it infects the vital organs!
To the faithful reading this, I have a question--what can I do about my children? I do not personally know any CCD people, and I refuse to permit my children to receive instruction that weakens their faith. Same thing goes for Catholic schooling, which is in many senses worse than CCD. Right now, my wife is home-schooling. Is a formal CCD program required for confirmation, or can we obtain the curriculum and teach it ourselves? Any advice would be appreciated.
In Christ,
Dave
Dear Dave,
It sounds to me like you have already decided that no one is fit to educate your children on matters regarding faith. Continue home schooling.
Andrea
I appreciate the word of advice, Andrea. Actually, my wife and I have not decided anything on this point. We know that education is primarily the responsibility of parents. However, we also know that there are benefits to parochial education. In our circumstances (converts) our children need some exposure to Catholic faith and practice. My worry is not that others are not fit to educate them, but rather that the wolves have taken over the proverbial flock (educational programs) rather than simply infiltrated it.
In Christ,
Dave
If your family life is centered around Christ and the sacramental life than the home should be the foundation of education. There are solid parochial schools, my brother teaches at one, but even he would agree that it is in the home, and the home alone, that parents can be absolutely certain of the education there children are getting. Education is not just science, math, languages, etc. it is also influence, virtue, and social skills. I can think of no better place to experience these last three attributes of education than in the home. I have no guarantee as to what type of influence the child sitting next to my child in a parochial school might have, but I can know within the family, for my wife and I have direct influence over the child and his/her siblings. I think that especially during those early years of development it is absolutely necessary for the family to be the primary influence on the child, not some teacher and most certainly not their peers. If a child is in school for 6-8 hours a day, that means a large part of the child's waking hours are spent with others rather than with the family. I am the oldest of six children and I have witnessed the value and virtues of homeschooling first hand. My wife and I have a little one on the way, and in our minds there can be no other option.
In Christ,
Joe
It is obvious brainwashing is alive, and well, and living in the Catholic Church.
Posted by: Louise at February 22, 2004 02:53 PMLouise,
I think it's obvious that ignorance is bliss . . .
God bless,
Jay
Louise,
I would also like to point out the most obvious error in your comment. Our decisions to homeschool are our own. I have not once heard the priest at the parish I attend preach about homeschooling nor promote it. So to imply that it is due to our Catholicism that we are for homeschooling is untrue. I am aware of many Protestants who homeschool their children. It is a religious and moral decision, but more importantly it is a decision based on truth. I will not have any school teaching my children things that are morally wrong and completely untrue.
If I could afford an orthodox Catholic school that promoted truth at all levels, I would most certainly consider it, but I also welcome the challenge of educating my children. I couldn't imagine anything more rewarding.
If your seemingly random comment is directed at the context of the article above, I would only ask that you clarify exactly what you mean.
In Christ,
Joe
VOTF is an opportunistic, divisive group.
If you are faithful to the Catholic Church:
...you don't take Canon 215 out of context so as to derive the meaning you desire.
...you readily admit your OBEDIENCE with all church teachings of human sexuality on your national website, instead of playing the undecided agnostic.
...you don't ask James Carroll, Debra Hafner, Tom Groome, or Michele Dillon to address your national convention.
...you don't try to democratize the church and place yourself on an equal footing with the bishops.
...you don't support Call to Action or share meetings with them in Grand Rapids, MI.
It is particularly repulsive that this group uses the abuse scandal to obscure their true agenda. Cowards!
VOTF will only lead you to hell. I suggest you avoid that.
Posted by: Dennis at February 23, 2004 02:38 AMJoe,
My comment has nothing to do with homeschooling.
Jay, looks like Pam was right about the "namecalling."
Posted by: Louise at February 23, 2004 01:26 PM
Louise,
Interesting thought. I have been working on a law review article on that very subject--brainwashing. Let's not be so naive. Brainwashing is alive and well anywhere that education is pursued. In fact, that is the whole point of education, to "enlighten", "teach", "persuade", "convince", and so on and so forth. These are all nice ways of saying "brainwashing", which is usually applied to the more vigorous and constrained forms of education. No where is this more insidious than in our public schools, where Christianity is under constant attack. Sexual "liberation", atheism, moral relativsm, and rebellion are all taught from the governmental pulpit of the classroom. Do you know what Adolph Hitler's first major reform was? Public education! In no other setting can your goverment gain so much control over its citizens and with so little effort (and all paid for by property owners I might add). In an age where the government is so openly hostile to not only Christianity, but Christian values, there is no way I will turn over the jewels of my existence to wolves.
In Christ,
Dave
Louise,
No, I didn't call you name, I simply pointed out your ignorance on the topic you are discussing. If your belief that the Catholic church is "brainwashing" is your excuse not to follow Christ's church, you have issues. On this site we repeated show that the Bible is inherently Catholic. If you can show us where we're wrong, please do. Otherwise realize that the Church is correct and you just don't like it. Throwing out absolute garbage like "brainwashing" doesn't help your spiritual life, Louise, but it might you feel a little better.
God bless,
Jay
Dennis,
You sound very angry, and more than a little paranoid. I am sorry for you.
No outside group could do as much damage to the Catholic Church it has done, from within, to itself.
Pam,
I can’t slip anything past you.
Angry is entirely accurate in describing my regard for VOTF. When VOTF presents information, they mix a little truth with much deception, and throw some ambiguity in for good measure. I don’t like liars that present themselves as Catholics representing mainstream Catholic laity.
I find it amusing that a person who enters their e-mail address as noneofyourbusiness@aol.com regards ME as paranoid. If you’ve got something private to say, my e-mail address is dennisdon65@hotmail.com.
It is very telling of your nature that you have not even attempted to contradict any of the facts I presented in my prior post.
Be sorry for those who accept the leadership of VOTF.
I thought the VOTF full page ad in the NY Times, and the Petitions for Reform were perfect in light of what is going on. Who here can debate that the guilty bishops should be held accountable? And before you get going, if you are going to try the the "we thought we could cure them" nonsense, don't bother.
Posted by: Betty at March 1, 2004 12:12 PMBetty,
I didn't see the ad and couldn't locate an image of it online.
It doesn't really matter. Your statements can be summarized as follows: VOTF wants to correct a wrong therefore VOTF must be good. That dog won't hunt.
Bad bishops aside, you first have to decide if you want to be identified with VOTF.
And before YOU get going, try refuting the statements contained within my post of 02/23/2004.
Let me know when you give up.
Posted by: Dennis at March 1, 2004 05:53 PMI think the point that VOTF has some admirable goals is valid. The issue of sexual abuse is a grave matter, and one for which the Church proper must demonstrate a higher degree of responsibility, and administer a higher degree of accountability to those responsible. The problem with VOTF is that the group is opportunistic in the worst way. Seeing our mother oppressed, it seeks to take advantage of her and defile her through false doctrine. The debate must separate these two issues.
In Christ,
Dave
If I declare the goal of wanting to help survivors of abuse, then invite a liberation theologian to address my 2002 national convention, what message does that send?
Here's a brief sample from VOTF's FAQ web page (http://www.votf.org/Who_We_Are/faq.html#five) :
Q. What does Voice of the Faithful feel will be the effect of bringing laity into the governance structure of the Church?
A. The Church hierarchy can learn much from the Catholic laity. We have intellectual, emotional and spiritual contributions to make and knowledge to impart on myriad real-life issues. These include, but are not limited to: human sexuality, women's rights, democratic processes, and the contextual roles of science and history in the healthy life of the Church.
Q. What positions does Voice of the Faithful take on married clergy, women priests, and homosexuality in and outside of the church?
A. Voice of the Faithful takes no position on the hot-button sex and gender issues roiling the Catholic Church. Voice's profound aim is to bring the laity to the table of governance and guidance of the Church per the imperatives of Vatican II.
Actions are significantly more important than goals.
Posted by: Dennis at March 1, 2004 11:05 PMI can attest to the fact that VOTF in my area is also tied up with CORPUS and Call to Action - speakers from both of those groups (actually a husband and wife tag team - national leaders for both groups) were scheduled to speak at one meeting.
What Call to Action/CORPUS/WeAreChurch/Womyn Church has done is take advantage of the current scandals and morphed into the new and attractively packaged "Voice of the Faithful" - exact same agendas - one and all. Ask them to comment on a "hot button" issue like same sex marriage or abortion or homosexuality in the priesthood and they "take no position on those issues." Ya right. They do, however, take positions on dissent at their meetings - not on paper.
I live in the Boston area and I can tell you that VOTF, even here in the cradle of their creation, is dying out - very few at the meetings and "regular" Catholics really don't care about what they have to say about anything.
Posted by: Colleen at March 2, 2004 10:06 PMColleen,
What a shame that anything that might cause change seems to frighten you so.
VOTF is not like that here at all.
What are YOU doing to protect the children?
Posted by: Pam at March 3, 2004 10:36 AMPam,
Litmus test time:
To each of the three questions shown below, please respond with 'yes', 'no', or 'maybe'.
Do you favor married priests?
Do you favor female priests?
Do you favor democratization of the Catholic Church?
Hugs,
Dennis
Posted by: Dennis at March 3, 2004 11:07 AMI think the key question that has not been answered by a single VOTF supporter is whether VOTF clings to the dogmas of the Church. If it does not, it is heretical. The issues of abortion, homosexuality, contraception, and female ordination have all been raised. VOTF purportedly "takes no position" on these issues, but its members clearly do, and overwhelmingly in opposition to the Church's teachings. What is particularly noteworthy is that each of these teachings are dogmas of the faith.
So for all of the supporters of VOTF, why is it necessary for those of us who support the Church and her teachings to embrace a heretical organization in order to show that we oppose child abuse by priests? It simply doesn't make sense. Nobody here is afraid of change; we all agree that changes must take place to prevent what has happened from happening again. That is why the Church authorized the National Review Board, which has released an unprecedented, open, frank, and painfully honest study of the issue.
Different ideas for resolving the problems were presented by the NRB. Not among them, however, was anything pertaining to abortion, contraception, or taking any teaching authority away from the bishops. So, can any VOTF supporters explain why VOTF secretly opposes the Church on each of these issues? And to the extent you wish to bypass the question, can you honestly say that you personally support the Church's teachings on these issues? I think that what most of us on the other side of this debate are upset about is the fact that VOTF members are taking advantage of a very difficult time in the Church to advance their own political (and heretical) agenda. It is unfair and deceptive to suggest that those opposed to VOTF are "afraid of change" and not interested in protecting children.
In Christ,
Dave
Dave,
Have you ever been to a VOFT meeting?
Pam,
I have. It was not good.
Posted by: Dennis at March 4, 2004 01:37 PMBy the way, Pam, it's VOTF.
Have you ever been to a meeting?
Posted by: Dennis at March 5, 2004 09:32 PMPam,
I would really appreciate it if you would respond to the questions that have been posed to you (i.e. positions on ordination of women, homosexuality, abortion, contraception, democratization of the Church, etc.) Thanks.
In Christ,
Dave
Pam,
Please come out and play.
Hugs,
Dennis
Posted by: Dennis at March 10, 2004 01:28 AMDear Dennis and Dave,
Yes, I have been to a meeting, and no I am not a member of VOTF.
I do not care whether or not they ordain women, and have always believed the church has treated its women as far less than equal. Please don't bother to argue that one.
Many people, including MANY priests are homosexual, and it is not for me to judge. I could care less.
I am against abortion.
I am all for contraception.
I am not foolish enough to think the church will ever be a democracy. They are too smart to have set it up that way. How WOULD they control the unruly masses?
Dear Dennis and Dave,
Yes, I have been to a meeting, and no I am not a member of VOTF.
I do not care whether or not they ordain women, and have always believed the church has treated its women as far less than equal. Please don't bother to argue that one.
Many people, including MANY priests are homosexual, and it is not for me to judge. I could care less.
I am against abortion.
I am all for contraception.
I am not foolish enough to think the church will ever be a democracy. They are too smart to have set it up that way. How WOULD they control the unruly masses?
Thank you, Pam for you honesty. Your views on contraception, homosexuality, and (I'm inferring here) democratization are in line with what I perceive the position of VOTF to be. You would acknowledge, I hope, that each of these positions is fundamentally opposed to the official teachings of the Church.
While I respect your disagreement with the Church, I do not understand why you would call yourself a Catholic. The most basic distinguishing feature of the Church (from other Christian churches) is its claim to apostolic authority. A rejection of this claim (i.e. infalibility on issues of faith and morals such as contraception, homosexuality, etc.) is really a rejection of the Church. The democratization issue is one that strikes at the very core of the Church's nature. I can understand a Lutheran or an Episcopalian having such views, but for a Catholic, it is a paradox. To reject the apostolic authority of the Church is to reject the Church itself.
Aside from this, however, it is really quite hypocritical to suggest that only people who support VOTF are truly supporting the Church's protection of children. That is like what politicians do with bills that they don't like. They add what is labeled the "poison pill" to ensure that no one from the other party will vote for it. Right now, the Democrats who do not like the bankruptcy reform proposals have added a provision stating that liabilities for protesting at abortion clinics cannot be discharged in bankruptcy. No pro-life politician will vote for the bill, of course, so now the Democrats can actually blame the Republicans for not passing bankruptcy reform! VOTF does the same thing with the protection of children, lumping it in with a host of issues that are fundamentally opposed to Church teaching. Of course good Catholics are going to reject such an organization! We strongly support measures designed to eliminate abuse in the priesthood. We do not support doing so Trojan horse style.
Incidentally, on the homosexuality issue, you may be interested to know that according to the John Jay Report, the sexual abuse of children occurred at an enormously higher rate among homosexual priests than it did among heterosexual priests. If we are really concerned about the safety of our children, it would seem to be very much the Church's place to "judge".
BTW, I have not been to a VOTF meeting. Of course, I have never been to a KKK meeting, but I'm relatively certain I would not like it.
In Christ,
Dave
Well said, Dave!
To say "I'm Catholic, but I have a problem with this or that formal Catholic teaching on faith or morals," is like saying, "I'm a feminist; I just don't happen to believe in equal rights for women." You're identifying with a body who's very identity offends you.
John
Posted by: john at March 28, 2004 05:55 PMDo any of you think for yourselves?
Posted by: edie at April 19, 2004 09:04 PMDo any of you think for yourselves?
Posted by: edie at April 19, 2004 09:05 PMEdie,
Is "think for yourselves" code for "don't you dissent from God's Church on key issues"?
I think for myself, which means I am intelligent enough to understand that God knows significantly more than I do and therefore I should trust Him. It's funny how liberals try and equate being a faithful Catholic with ignorance or blind obedience.
God bless,
Jay
Jay,
Ignorance and blind obedience are your words, not mine.
Nice try on the liberal stuff. You assume too much, and clearly do not think.
Edie
Okay, edie. You threw out the charge, so explain to me why you believe we don't think for ourselves?
In my mind, that would be like saying all scientists are sheep if they agree that E=mc2. Please explain how I am incorrect.
God bless,
Jay
I am A Kenyan who is amazed at the fact that for the last two masses ihave attended here in Nairobi , Sunday 14th of November, at St Pauls and 19th November 1:15pm I left feeling like the worst sinner and i regretted having gone to church. Today i actually walked out when the Priest was preaching coz according to him he did not like what i was wearing. Everyone in the world is wearing this kind of Jeans even to church and if the Kind of jeans i wear is what will take me to Heaven then i think the Clergy in Nairobi church has it all wrong.I ask anyone who can to ask these preists to stop condeming people in church for whatever reason, some of us go to church to cry to God with such huge problems and if all the preist can offer is condemn it is better not to go to church. Why is the catholic church escpecially in Africa so ignorant,
Posted by: Leah Mwangi at November 19, 2004 07:23 AM
