Interdict scenerio, member in limbo,help

[AndyF]

Hi all:

A sad story but I wish to help out someone I know that is having trouble. He doesn't know I'm searching for answers on his behalf.

I will ask first then explain. 

Is there an ombudsman that deals with Church issues between it and lay members that can be counted upon that can be trusted to convey messages and not be burdened by conflict of interest? I was going to suggest, but decided not to, but this seems to be out of the league of spiritual directors

It seems to me he is making a reasonable request, but the Church is silent and refuses to address his issue.

This person was screened out by a criminal record check that involves a minor one-off incident that occured 35 years ago. The volunteer work required this check as it was the highest level of security. It didn't involve children at all and that is the job's prerequisite.

His contribution to his community and society is exemplary, until now involved with help at mass and charitable organizations, raised children to respect the law and are model citzens. In fact when he divulged this to me I was shocked, has it is completely out of character. His crime had nothing to do with children or their safety, and he is in fact a grandfather himself whom the children love and respect. His life for what I know seems one of progression to success, has was for Paul of Tarsus and Augustine, not regression to crime. 

He does take issue with the screening, but that doesn't bother him too much and he says is hard to take but he can live with it. He states quite correctly, I researched, that he is technically in an interdict/ex comm/ex delicto? situation. All these are based on negative conduct. He's not quite sure neither am I, has he is now forbidden to take part in this particular community work. He discussed his refusal with the agitated parish priest who stated no one with any criminal record can apply. He didn't argue, but he already knew that this was wrong, that the diocese web site states that cases are judged individually, and such special cases of negative records are further judged for suitability depending on the case. He asked the priest point blank if he is considered a threat to the young. The priest said yes. He was crest fallen. Still a dutiful Catholic in spite of this, he stated that if this is the case then processes should proceed immediately starting with his own grandchildren, since it is his grandchildren who he claims is in imminent danger also, and the Church's mandate is for their safety. 

Considering his own questionable state, he returned with a letter asking for a ecclesiastical hearing to complete the judicial process that resulted in this decision(sentence?). This sounded reasonable to me. The priest said he sent the letter to higher echelons, possibly to the diocese, he doesn't know. To this day this man has had no response, not even a word stating it is being considered.

Frankly, he doesn't care anymore. He considers himself dead to the world, having spent a life trying to show a cold society that he reformed, now rejected by that last hope which Christ said will always be there for him, his Church. He tells me he is freed of the potential of sin against the holy spirit, since this ruling was made under the foundation of the newly founded Church, which will no longer exist to him. (MMMmm, can't be sure of this, but I kept silent.)

All he desires is his alienable(his words) right of a formal excommunication with a public ban stating the Church’s decision that he is excommunicated based on conduct that occured 35 years ago. He wants a formal statement and it should be, and I concur. Since the Church has a special evangelical school for children, he will agree to bring his grandchildren to the school to be taught to learn the evilness of their grandfather, which is a ritual process in such a case since they too are baptized Catholic and part of the Catholic Community.

So I put out the question to you. I am hoping to find not so much an arbitrator, has all minds have been made up, but someone who can be assured conveys messages and gives him updates. He says he could send the next letter registered to get the ball rolling.

Thanks for the help.

Andy :(

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

I’m not sure if there’s any appeal beyond the parish if its a parish position. Ultimately its the pastor who makes the decisions about who he allows to hold positions in the parish. The dicoese may clear your friend but the pastor could still say no. Since I do not know what your friend has on his record, I cannot say whether the pastor is being prudent or not in his decision.

Your friend is not in any “interdict/ex comm/ex delicto” situation. He is free to receive the sacraments and attend Mass. This is merely an issue over a volunteer position, from what you’ve posted. There is no “trial” or “hearing”, its a personnel decision not a sacramental/ecclesial issue.

I can understand your friend being disappointed, however he needs to keep everything in perspective. This is not the end of the world.

 

[momor]

I think your friend needs to accept that we live in a zero tolerance society now and he should not take this so personally. I wonder if he is making such a big deal about publicising this because he is embarrassed and ashamed. Some people go on the offense in those situations which seems really counter-productive to me.

He could put his experience to very good use by teaching young people the dangers of making even one serious criminal mistake when they are young.

 

[AndyF]

I think your friend needs to accept that we live in a zero tolerance society now and he should not take this so personally. I wonder if he is making such a big deal about publicising this because he is embarrassed and ashamed. Some people go on the offense in those situations which seems really counter-productive to me.

He could put his experience to very good use by teaching young people the dangers of making even one serious criminal mistake when they are young.

Thanks for the post.

I don’t get the gist he is on the offensive, just that he feels to have been processed, and not rightly tried. I think I would feel this also. He doesn’t wish to sway the verdict in his favor. He is loyal to Church precepts to the point of his own demise which makes him of exceptional character.

A trial doesn’t make assumptions. I do think he deserves more than a dispatch without a fair hearing if only to outline why he as arrived at this point. Higher echelon clergy are allowed this liberty. The Church’s mandate is instructional as well, and it’s familiarization in america at least would have given it a rudimentary understanding of democratic systems. This it would admit it sanctions in civil society and already applies to these echelon hearings.

I do get the impression of a reluctance to bring this out publicly for some reason. If all is fair, there is nothing that can bring shame.

At least I’m interested.

Andy

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

he feels to have been processed, and not rightly tried.

Based on what you have posted he was turned down for a volunteer position. Thus there is no trial or appeal it is merely a personnel decision.

He doesn’t wish to sway the verdict in his favor. A trial doesn’t make assumptions.

There is no “verdict”, there is no trial. For pete’s sake, stop with the court/trial wording.

Higher echelon clergy are allowed this liberty.

Clergy are an ecclesial and canonical matter. They are ordained. Your friend is merely a parish volunteer. Those two positions are in no way, shape, or form equal to each other.

As a side note, before ordination seminarians can be kicked out of seminary for any reason at any time and have little to no recourse or appeal.

The Church’s mandate is instructional as well, and it’s familiarization in america at least would have given it a rudimentary understanding of democratic systems. This it would admit it sanctions in civil society and already applies to these echelon hearings.

Um no, sorry, but you have no idea what you’re talking about. If I, as private business, receive several applications I can hire whomever I choose. If I reject you as an applicant I don’t even have to tell you why I rejected you.
People get fired and rejected everyday for a variety of reasons and have no recourse (unless there’s some kind of illegal discrimination taking place).

 

[Spirithound]

Andy, why do you think your friend is under excommunication or interdict? Perhaps you could consult the St. Joseph Foundation, which specializes in Catholic Canon Law. st-joseph-foundation.org/

 

[puzzleannie]

Hi all:

A sad story but I wish to help out someone I know that is having trouble. He doesn’t know I’m searching for answers on his behalf.

I will ask first then explain.

Is there an ombudsman that deals with Church issues between it and lay members that can be counted upon that can be trusted to convey messages and not be burdened by conflict of interest? I was going to suggest, but decided not to, but this seems to be out of the league of spiritual directors

It seems to me he is making a reasonable request, but the Church is silent and refuses to address his issue.

well we did not need all the personal private detail to be revealed about this person, but short answer, yes each diocese has an individual appointed, usually the Vicar General, whose job it is to administer the ethical conduct and child safety programs in the first place, and to look into such situations when they arise and help weigh the information uncovered in the background check against the actual position for which the applicant is being considered for.

Your diocesan website should list the contact information for his person, under some heading such as “what is the diocese doing to protect children” or “ethical conduct in ministry” or some similar title. If you don’t see it, contact the vicar general, email is usually best.

When you say “the Church is silent” what does that mean? do you mean the pastor or diocese has refused to discuss the issue with your friend? or that they have not made public their reasons for refusing his application, which they should not do in any case.

He states quite correctly, I researched, that he is technically in an interdict/ex comm/ex delicto? situation. All these are based on negative conduct. He’s not quite sure neither am I, has he is now forbidden to take part in this particular community work.

quite frankly I never heard of this except in cases of canon law being used to remove priests guilty of misconduct from ministry. If such a judgement had been issued it would be a very formal canon law process, your friend would have something in writing and there would be no doubt whatever about his status.

Do bear in mind you are hearing only one side of the story.

 

[AndyF]

Based on what you have posted he was turned down for a volunteer position. Thus there is no trial or appeal it is merely a personnel decision.

True, the 'ol noggin keeps getting these mixed, I meant inquiry.

Um no, sorry, but you have no idea what you’re talking about. If I, as private business, receive several applications I can hire whomever I choose. If I reject you as an applicant I don’t even have to tell you why I rejected you.

This is different. What a parish priest says carries spiritual weight and implications, regardless of the context. The ear of the lay community instinctly measures the implications of what he says. If he brings into question anyone’s integrity and virtue, and especially factors in the potential for dangers to his Institution of Family, and by this broad statement implies specifically to his children and grandchildren, I can see where he should be called on it. We are not talking about a competition on who can type 60 words a minute. Such a statement is hardly a off hand “for the moment” remark, it is a permanent stigma.

A priest of high integrity would gladly agree to it, and I feel such a serious statement should be tested. I think I would be chomping at the bit to line up the next family baptism and sincerely provide him a moment in private so he can warn the attending children of the nasty fallible grandparent who’s been playing possum all these years with the ice cream,gifts,genuine love and sacrifices. (them fallible people always get in the way of the rest of us.) Incidentally, this is the priests mandate, protection of imminent danger first, then the population proper.

I would imagine opportunities like these arise often, but for the patience of the lay community, they humbly let slips like this pass. Priests are not perfect and they get tired and irritated too, especially because of the extra loads they carry now. I would wait for an apology. I suggested to him to let it go, but that’s not me, I take the challenge. (part of my marine nature I guess.) Sometimes in life we need to swallow our words and that would be to his benefit. I would be sorely tempted to see of what substance this priest is made of.

AndyF

 

[AndyF]

Andy, why do you think your friend is under excommunication or interdict? Perhaps you could consult the St. Joseph Foundation, which specializes in Catholic Canon Law. st-joseph-foundation.org/

Thanks, that’s a great help.

Andy

 

[AndyF]

When you say “the Church is silent” what does that mean? do you mean the pastor or diocese has refused to discuss the issue with your friend?

He received no response at all.

Thanks for the help.

AndyF

 

[baltobetsy]

The abuse scandal that has been swirling throughout the Church in the last several years has changed everything about how volunteers and employees are handled.

Regardless of what an individual priest thinks or even knows about a person’s character, if there is anything in his background that does not meet the current standards of perfection, there is no possible way he can be accepted for a position, paid or volunteer, in the Church. If your friend were allowed to volunteer, and, heaven forbid, something happened to a child, all suspicion would automatically fall on him, whether or not he had anything to do with it. The parish would be subject to outrageous liability claims, and most likely, the priest would have to be removed, because he did not follow the guidelines.

Actions have consequences, and, like it or not, your friend did something wrong many years ago which is having consequences now.

 

[1ke]

Andy, frankly you are not making any sense.

 

[Phemie]

This is different. What a parish priest says carries spiritual weight and implications, regardless of the context. The ear of the lay community instinctly measures the implications of what he says. If he brings into question anyone’s integrity and virtue, and especially factors in the potential for dangers to his Institution of Family, and by this broad statement implies specifically to his children and grandchildren, I can see where he should be called on it. We are not talking about a competition on who can type 60 words a minute. Such a statement is hardly a off hand “for the moment” remark, it is a permanent stigma.

Did the priest announce to the community that your friend had been rejected? If he didn’t then what possible harm could come from his rejection? If your friend announced it to everyone then he created his own damage.

If the 30 year old run-in with the law had nothing to do with abusing children why would the priest have said he considered him a danger? Are you sure you have the whole story?

 

[texasnan]

From what you’ve said, it really seems to me that your friend is seriously over-reacting. He was turned down for a volunteer position, and he wants a letter saying he’s excommunicated? That makes no sense at all, and sounds like he has a serious problem with perspective.
You and he both need to calm down and remind yourselves that this is not the end of the world.

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

True, the 'ol noggin keeps getting these mixed, I meant inquiry.

This is a personnel matter. The diocese has the right to set minimum standards for volunteers so if he doesn’t meet their standards there’s no real appeal to be made.

Secondly, even if the diocese says someone is clear, that doesn’t mean the parish must place the individual in a position. The diocese is only setting minimum standards.

What a parish priest says carries spiritual weight and implications, regardless of the context.

Who else would even know about this? Is the pastor running around telling other people that your friend is unsafe to be around children?
I’m sorry but I’m not able to follow just what exactly is happening. Your original post indicated he was turned away from a volunteer position because of criminal background check. Now you’re talking about baptisms, threats to grandchildren, etc. None of this is making any sense to me…

 

[AndyF]

Did the priest announce to the community that your friend had been rejected?

Don’t know. Probably sent around to the parishes.

If he didn’t then what possible harm could come from his rejection?

That is his right has a member in communion.

If the 30 year old run-in with the law had nothing to do with abusing children why would the priest have said he considered him a danger?

Indeed, this is why inquiries are important. Even the fact he is at large contributes to his case that he most likely is not a danger, since danger to society is factored into sentencing.

The correct Christian reaction considering he is also a member of that parish, would be to conduct further investigation to ensure he is not of that class. Legally only the charge is divulged and an indication their is a conviction present. For detailed investigation it calls for a special permission. If he had the inquiry he requested he would be able to present the positive aspects of his life and explain the crime in detail, and, the Church would discover he was eligible for selection.

If reluctance to show charity could ever be excused for civil community, it certainly cannot be for the moral and ethical model for that society who is the word of God on this earth and is mandated to set the example. Because it has decided now to work more closely with the law, not doing so could have the danger to suggest that the Church has now become simply another legal arm of the secular world with all it’s self imposed liberties and obstinacy for propagating collective mortal sins.

“The civil authority has been, ever from the days of Herod, the enemy of Christ. The question, now pending, is whether the Church shall admit to ministry those only who, according to the dictation of the civil power, are fit for the office.”
– Bishop Hogan of Kansas City MO,

Andy

 

[1ke]

The correct Christian reaction considering he is also a member of that parish, would be to conduct further investigation to ensure he is not of that class. Legally only the charge is divulged and an indication their is a conviction present. For detailed investigation it calls for a special permission. If he had the inquiry he requested he would be able to present the positive aspects of his life and explain the crime in detail, and, the Church would discover he was eligible for selection.

You just aren’t getting it.

The diocese has a policy in place that states “criminal conviction = no job” There is nothing to explain. The conviction itself prevents the priest from hiring or accepting the person for a position. It’s that simple.

If reluctance to show charity could ever be excused for civil community, it certainly cannot be for the moral and ethical model for that society who is the word of God on this earth and is mandated to set the example. Because it has decided now to work more closely with the law, not doing so could have the danger to suggest that the Church has now become simply another legal arm of the secular world with all it’s self imposed liberties and obstinacy for propagating collective mortal sins.
Andy

What part of “it’s the policy” is unclear? There priest is not at liberty to override such a policy.

The Church would be remiss in its duty if it did not screen out convicted felons.

 

[AndyF]

I think your friend needs to accept that we live in a zero tolerance society…

What does it mean to you in this fallible world?. Intolerance doesn’t require sacrifice, forgiveness and mercy does. But that would be in character of this Godless world, one in dire need of an existing untimid Church that would shun political correctness for the sake of truth.

Andy

 

[AndyF]

Regardless of what an individual priest thinks or even knows about a person’s character, if there is anything in his background that does not meet the current standards of perfection

The parish priest had a no tolerance attitude, but the diocese was more accepting and liberal, adopting a more detailed analysis policy. Their is implication that there still may be something of value to rescue and recognizes there may be a worthwhile contribution.

In my view, if the difference can be explained in that the diocese’s attitude is more closely in tune to Catholic dogma, then any restrictive decision could only be less in tune. A greater perfection in decision making is more likely has it rises to positions of greater infallibility.

Actions have consequences, and, like it or not, your friend did something wrong many years ago which is having consequences now.

So 30 years is unacceptable. When is closure attained.?

Please site your answer in light of 2 Cor 2,6.

“The punishment inflicted on him by the majority is sufficient for him. Now instead, you ought to forgive and comfort him, so that he will not be overwhelmed by excessive sorrow.”

How much forgiveness is due your own children, if indeed you deem all men are your brethren.

Andy

 

[baltobetsy]

So 30 years is unacceptable. When is closure attained.?

Please site your answer in light of 2 Cor 2,6.

“The punishment inflicted on him by the majority is sufficient for him. Now instead, you ought to forgive and comfort him, so that he will not be overwhelmed by excessive sorrow.”

How much forgiveness is due your own children, if indeed you deem all men are your brethren.

Forgiveness is one thing; consequences are another. I will forgive my child and my brother in Christ, and give comfort. But forgiveness does not undo the bad act and its consequences. If you murder one of my loved ones and then repent and apologize, I will forgive you, but my loved one is still dead, and you are still a murderer. I’m not going to approve your application to carry a concealed weapon. It’s an extreme example, and is not meant to be equal to your friend’s situation, but one that is given for the sake of clarity.

The employment/volunteer policy is that people with convictions (whenever they occurred) are ineligible. The people are forgiven, loved, welcome to the Sacraments, but not to be employed by the Church. That’s a consequence, not a lack of forgiveness.

Betsy