If you didn't get the chance to hear him in person last June, I hope you took the opportunity to read Carl Hemmer's presentation from our Lansdowne conference reproduced in the January-February issue of CORPUS Reports. Carl thoughtfully, as usual, raised the question about our organizational future laying out several options for us to consider, providing pros and cons to each option:
Continue what we are doing... provide CORPUS Reports and annual conferences. Be a catalyst for discussion on inclusive presbyteral ministry and point of collaboration with other reform groups. Develop support services for member participation in free ministry -- i.e., ministry that does not have any hierarchical authorization. Help qualified members to apply for the growing body of vacant ministry posts in the Church. And/or, prepare a dignified and sensible plan for its ultimate closedown.
Carl's reflections are only one of several I've received over the past month or two questioning the viability and direction of CORPUS present and future.
One, from the East Coast stated rather specifically: "I have been a member of Corpus for two reasons. 1) Corpus keeps the idea alive that in justice, resigned priests might be deserving of pension considerations. 2) I believe that Corpus serves as a reminder to the bishops that we are here and that we have opinions regarding the church which we served faithfully for many years.... I do not belong to Corpus to support a left wing political agenda" referring to our confronting policies and practices rising from our federal government's leadership.
Another from Chicago mentioned "I have long questioned the relevancy of CORPUS now that both CITI and FCM have taken such an activist approach.... the reality is that those of us looking to continue in ministry wherever the call comes from are not looking to CORPUS. It has been eons since I have heard or partaken in any relevant discussion about celibacy. Most seem to figure it is a practice that will end sometime, maybe not in their lifetime but they are not prepared to spend a lot of energy etc. trying to fight it, there are too many other more important Church battles to contest."
And then, there was the question "will we ever stop being male clerics?" OR the perennial, "why isn't CORPUS ... ?"
Maybe it's just my sensitivity or misreading the questions, however, each of these perspectives, for me, miss something vitally foundational about who CORPUS is organizationally, and where we are going. The basic question that each of us who pays our dues must ask ourselves is "what is MY relationship to CORPUS."
This past week I was at the annual luncheon event of a local county Chamber of Commerce. The attendees were reminded that the Chamber was a "membership organization." The relevancy, the vitality, the future of that Chamber was intimately tied with the personal commitment of each member to its organizational mission. If the Chamber was to have a significant role in developing a strong supportive business climate, it was the responsibility of each member not just to pay their annual dues, but to find a way to personally contribute to Chamber initiatives.
It isn't a question of dreaming, or hoping, or even praying for an inclusive priesthood. CORPUS is not a national charity like the American Heart Association, or the Red Cross, or even a local parish where making a financial contribution absolves us from collaboration.
We say we want a Church that acts justly in providing pension benefits to those who have earned them. We say we want annual conferences and a bi-monthly journal that nurture our spirituality. We say we want a Church truly celebrates marriage along with celibacy. We say we want a Church that invites diversity. We say we want a Church that celebrates human sexuality not just prohibitions. We say we want a Church that respects decisions of conscience. We say we want a Church that respects the capabilities of our daughters, as well as our sons, inviting them into roles of leadership and sacramental ministry. We say we want those transitioned priests among us to be invited back into official ministry. We say we want a Church that makes a home for the homeless. We say we want our bishops to show effective leadership in ensuring the availability of the Eucharist. We say we want our brother presbyters to take a stand for optional celibacy and recalling transitioned priests to formal ministry as the Australian's National Council of Priest's did. We want a Church that cites the compassion of Jesus more than the citations of Canon Law.
I'm glad you joined CORPUS. We can use all the voices we can muster. Sadly down through the past three plus decades more transitioned priests and their spouses or partners faded into the background accepting the disdain of the hierarchy than joined groups like FCM, CORPUS, or CITI. I often wonder where we might have been had we seriously had all 23-25,000 of us in the US, and 80-100,000 internationally, actively engaged in the struggle for priesthood reform and renewal worldwide, collaborated in reforming and renewing our Church.
Here comes the spot where, I fear, we disconnected with you, or never really connected with you in CORPUS membership, or maybe we've already parted company, or ...
CORPUS might have started out in 1974 as a group of men supporting each other while waiting on the sidelines to be called back into the game (Corps of Reserve Priests United for Service). We might have spent the first ten plus years organizationally trying to dialogue with the bishops to be part of the old boys network once again. By our first annual conference in Washington in 1988, however, we moved beyond the sidelines and began encouraging the ordained members of CORPUS to reclaim their priesthood, and non-ordained members to work side by side us in actively shaping a new priesthood... not as part of the clerical club, but as ministers of the gospel in the diaspora who would be willing to build community or be of service to those cut off from the Church for whatever reason. We were no longer just men who had been ordained and their spouses. We were no longer in 'reserve.' We were just CORPUS... a support group, an advocacy group, but more than that, a people with a mission from the Spirit.
At its best today, CORPUS is not only men who were ordained, and their spouses/partners, and women and men called to ordination but not accepted because of gender or marital status, or even canonical priests, deacons, sisters and brothers who yearn for more. CORPUS has to be a living, vibrant, community composed of women and men, married and single, gay and straight, who are committed to BEING that new, renewed, reformed sacramental priesthood.
That means, we not only are a voice for structural Church reform, but that we are actively engaged in the fray, engaged in struggling with, being a voice of the gospel message in the world at large. It isn't a question of supporting a left wing political agenda or not. It is being a voice for the VOICELESS... not just a voice for ourselves. It is BEING Church.
"Being Church" / ecclesia / fellowship / community has always been a messy process. It was so at the beginnings, through the ages, and probably will be until the Parousia. The difficulty is that too many CORPUS people still feel that they are doing their part for CORPUS or "the cause" by just paying membership dues.
For over four years I've been communicating with members that CORPUS has to be a stewardship community of money, time and talents for it to work. We keep hearing about the graying of membership and people retiring (with the correlation that they have a bit of time to donate). We've outlined strategic interest groups that would help us be fruitful in our mission. We've asked for people to volunteer, for example, to help move Pension Advocacy forward. And we get notes back from people who want to pay a reduced membership fee because they "only want to receive CORPUS Reports" so they can stay plugged in to find out "what CORPUS is doing." OR, we get notes from people who've never communicated with us before saying "you've taken the organization where I do not want to go so remove me from the mailing list."
It's not just your elected board and the staff members who serve, essentially pro bono, who bear responsibility for achieving (y)our corporate mission. Each of us must ask ourselves how much we personally, really want our Church to live an inclusive priesthood. And, we need to ask ourselves what we are willing to DO to make that inclusivity a reality.
The vitality we experience as part of our CORPUS ministry / mission: CORPUS Reports, our web site, Mirabile-Dictu, e-CORPUS, Pension Advocacy, our presence at the School of the Americas, our national collaborative presence with other reform groups, international activity, our developing National Catholic Ministerial Alliance, our activities at outreach... all depend upon the sharing of time and talents to make these activities successful. All of the things we could be doing 'if we had the resources' like encouraging the development of a new spirituality, reaching out to people disconnected from the Church, helping the helpless, depend on the sharing of time and talents.
Does each of us have lots 'on our plates' in terms of responsibilities to family, job, and community? Certainly, we do. Is each of us pulled in more directions than we know how to handle effectively? Probably.
But, the responsibility we accepted from the Spirit of Jesus for 'feeding the lambs and sheep' at ordination did not end when we transitioned from formal Church ministry roles to marriage, family, living 'outside the walls.' The responsibility for being the People of God did not end as our bishops worked to bring back and reinforce a hierarchical Church. It isn't a question of trying to recapture lost clericalism, it's a matter of being Church.
The future of CORPUS is our responsibility... The future of our Church is our responsibility... yours and mine. Who is CORPUS and where is CORPUS going? You tell me.
Peace and blessings,
Russ Ditzel
Russ would love to hear your comments. He can be reached at crditzel@corpus.org
