VATICAN II FROM BELOW – CONSTITUTIONAL CATHOLICISM
A TEN-STEP PROGRAM TO A DEMOCRATIC PARISH – AND CHURCH!

Leonard Swidler
dialogue@dialogueinstitute.net

Surely the idea of a Constitution for the Catholic Church is a wildly bizarre secular notion that is totally inappropriate for such a sacred institution! Right? Well, the bishops, including the bishop of Rome, the pope, did not think so. The very term “constitution” appears in church documents, most recently in the titles of several of the documents of Vatican II, e.g., the “Constitution” on the Church, the “Constitution” on Revelation, etc. The term “constitution” is used because the matter treated is “constitutive” of Christianity. The term “Bill of Rights” of course does not appear in ecclesiastical documents because it is a specifically English/American phrase, but its exact equivalent does appear from the pens of both Pope Paul VI and John Paul II, and long before that from the American Catholic bishops.

I. THE POPE’S CALL FOR A CONSTITUTION

During Vatican Council II, on November 20, 1965, Pope Paul VI spoke of a “common and fundamental code containing the constitutive law (Jus Constitutivum) of the church” which was to underlie both the Eastern and Western (Latin) codes of canon law. It was clearly what Americans refer to as a “constitution.” Thus was born the modern idea of a Catholic Church “Constitution,” a Lex Ecclesiae Fundamentalis–more about the Lex below. In his address to the Roman ecclesiastical high court, the Rota, just one month after the promulgation of the new Code of Canon Law (1983), Pope John Paul II called specific attention to the “Bill of Rights,” “Carta Fondamentale,” in the Code:

The Church has always affirmed and protected the rights of the faithful. In the new code, indeed, she has promulgated them as a “Carta Fondamentale” (confer canons 208-223). She thus offers opportune judicial guarantees for protecting and safe-guarding adequately the desired reciprocity between the rights and duties inscribed in the dignity of the person of the “faithful Christian.”

Another of the democratizing moves Vatican Council II made was to inspire the total revision of the 1917 Code of Canon Law in the spirit of democracy and constitutionalism. Already on January 25, 1959, Pope John XXIII announced simultaneously the calling of the Second Vatican Council and the revision of the 1917 Code of Canon Law. Even before Vatican II was completed, work was begun on the writing of this Catholic “Constitution of Fundamental Rights,” the Lex Ecclesiae Fundamentalis. Father James Coriden, a co-editor of the 1985 magisterial 1150-page folio-size The Code of Canon Law. A Text and Commentary (commissioned by the Canon Law Society of America) and the Dean of the Catholic Theological Union of Washington, D.C., wrote that “The origins of the Code’s bill of rights [the new 1983 Code of Canon Law eventually absorbed the fundamental “rights” articles of the Lex Ecclesiae Fundamentalis, rejected by Pope John Paul II] were not in a Constitutional Congress, but its history and development clearly reveal its truly constitutional character.”

As noted, it was on November 20, 1965, that Pope Paul VI said to the Coetus Consultorum Specialis (Commission for the Revision of the Code of Canon Law) that the opportunity to provide a “constitution” for the Church should be seized while the 1917 code of canon law was being overhauled in the light of Vatican II.

Two things should be especially noted about the Lex Ecclesiae Fundamentalis: 1) It clearly was to serve as a “constitution” in the sense that it was to provide the fundamental juridical framework within which all other Church law was to be understood and applied. Like the American Constitution, and all other civil constitutions, if any subsequent law passed were found to be contrary to the Lex Fundamentalis, the subsequent law would be void. 2) The Lex Fundamentalis was to serve as a fundamental list of rights of the members of the Church, like the American “Bill of Rights.”

Concerning the first point, the explanation (Relatio) by Msgr. Onclin that accompanied the 1971 draft of the Lex stated clearly that “since a fundamental law is required, on which all other laws in the Church will depend…. Laws promulgated by the supreme authority of the Church are to be understood according to the prescriptions of the Lex Ecclesiae Fundamentalis…laws promulgated by inferior ecclesiastical authority contrary to the Lex Ecclesiae Fundamentalis lack all power.”

Concerning the second point, Father Coriden wrote referring to the Lex Fundamentalis as key portions of it were imbedded in the 1983 Code of Canon Law: “The bill of rights is part of the bedrock upon which is based the rest of our canonical system….The Coetus’s communication to the Episcopal synod of 1967 described the enumeration of rights of the faithful as fulfilling one of the chief purposes of the ‘fundamental code.’” Already in 1967 the Coetus told the Synod of Bishops in its ten guiding principles the following:

The principal and essential object of canon law is to define and safeguard the rights and obligations of each person toward others and toward society…. A very important problem is proposed to be solved in the future Code, namely how the rights of persons can be defined and safeguarded…. The use of power in the Church must not be arbitrary, because that is prohibited by the natural law, by divine positive law, and by ecclesiastical law. The rights of each one of Christ’s faithful must be acknowledged and protected.

A further aspect of the Lex Fundamentalis is worth noting here. From the inception of the Coetus in 1965 until the press leak in 1971, its work was all done sub secreto. Why it should have been so is not clear, except that that was the way things had always been done. However, after the leak Msgr. Onclin held a press conference in which he “recalled that the draft text was only a working paper which will probably be modified in conformity with the wishes of the bishops. These, in turn, may consult priests and laymen, and the result will therefore be a truly Church-wide consultation.”

Here we could see the “democratic” thrust of Vatican II moving forward in a deliberate, sure-footed manner, neither rushing nor hesitating. For sixteen years the Vatican Commission (Coetus) worked devising and re-phrasing the Constitution (Lex), and as Msgr. Onclin said, its natural momentum would have made it available to ever wider circles for their input. The fundamental reason for this increasing openness was made clear by the Vatican itself. As Peter Hebblethwaite mentioned in his biography of Pope Paul VI, the Vatican instruction, Communio et progressio on the implementation of the Vatican II decree on the mass media was issued less than two months before the Lex leak in Il Regno. It made a clear argument in favor of open government in the Catholic Church:

The spiritual riches which are an essential attribute of the Church demand that the news she gives out of her intentions as well as her works be distinguished by integrity, truth and openness. When ecclesiastical authorities are unwilling to give information or are unable to do so, then rumor is unloosed and rumor is not a bearer of truth but carries dangerous half-truths. Secrecy should therefore be restricted to matters involving the good name of individuals or that touch on the rights of people whether singly or collectively.

II. REPRESSION, AND YET….

Then, unfortunately, not long after John Paul II became pope in the fall of 1978,

The celebrated Lex Ecclesiae Fundamentalis resembled a canonical space rocket. It was launched under papal auspices, gained rapid momentum, rose high in the canonistic heavens, came under sharp attack, underwent repairs and mid-course corrections, and came crashing to earth to an unexplained demise, never to be heard from again…. The whole Lex project was put to death, without explana-tion, in 1981, after it had been approved by a specially convened international commission earlier in the year.

The long slide into restrictions, repressions, and silencing had begun, however, even earlier:

1. Already in the spring of 1979 the French theologian Jacques Pohier was silenced for his book When I Speak of God;
2. In July the book on human sexuality by a team of four American theologians commis-sioned by the Catholic Theological Society of America was condemned by the Vatican;
3. In September the Jesuit General Pedro Arrupe was forced to send a letter to all Jesuits saying that they may no longer publicly dissent from any papal position;
4. All fall severe accusations of heresy against Edward Schillebeeckx were recurrently issued in drum-beat fashion;
5. December 13-15, Schillebeeckx was “interrogated” by the Holy Office in Rome;
6. That same month writings of Brazilian liberation theologian Leonardo Boff were “condemned” (he was later silenced);
7. On December 18, the Holy Office issued a Declaration on Hans Küng saying he “can no longer be considered a Catholic theologian.”

Thus, in hindsight, the suppression of the Catholic Constitution (Lex Fundamentalis Ecclesiae) was no great surprise. Yet, at the same time Pope John Paul II was pushing Human Rights in the civil sphere, and especially in international politics. In a way, this was a continuation of what Pope Paul VI had earlier called “New Thinking.” (This was long before Mikhail Gorbachev in the late 1980s borrowed the phrase “New Thinking” to popularize his new approach to Communism.) This “New Thinking” was characteristic of Vatican II, and was likewise supposed to characterize the subsequent revision of church law, the 1917 Code of Canon Law.

Pope John Paul II described this resultant shift in thinking, this “New Thinking” of Vatican II, thus when promulgating the new Code of Canon Law [1983] for the Latin Church:

1. The Church seen as the People of God,
2. Hierarchical authority understood as service,
3. The Church viewed as a communion,
4. The participation by all members in the three-fold munera [functions] of Christ [teaching, governing, making holy], and
5. The common rights and obligations of all Catholics related to this, and
6. The Church’s commitment to ecumenism.

Father James Provost added further: “In addition to providing the basis for understanding the new canon law, these elements set an agenda for the church, an agenda which might be considered to form the basis for a kind of ‘democratizing’ of the church.”

III. AMERICAN CATHOLIC PRECEDENTS OF DEMOCRACY AND A CONSTITUTION

Suffice it to note that the American Catholic Church has precedents in the fostering of democracy by its first Bishop St. John Carroll, and even more by Bishop St. John England with his Diocesan Constitution and Annual Convention. There is yet another interesting precedent for an important element of Democracy, namely, Human Rights, the knowledge of which was lost for many decades. I am speaking of a Catholic twentieth-century “Universal Declaration of Human Rights” even before that of the United Nations in 1948. In fact, it fed into it.

In January, 1947, a committee made up of U.S. Catholic laity and bishops appointed by the “National Catholic Welfare Conference” (the national agency of the American Catholic Bishops) issued nothing less than a “Declaration of Human Rights,” almost two years before the United Nations proclaimed its “Universal Declaration of Human Rights” in December, 1948. In fact, the American Catholic Declaration was handed over to the “Committee on Human Rights of the United Nations,” the chair of which was Eleanor Roosevelt. A comparison of the “American Catholic Declaration” (which with 50 articles is more detailed than the UN Declaration with 30 articles) and that of the United Nations reveals amazing similarities, some passages of the latter being even verbatim that of the former.

The Catholic document speaks of human “personal dignity….being endowed with certain natural, inalienable rights….The unity of the human race under God is not broken by geographical dis- tance or by diversity of civilization, culture and economy…” The U.N. document recognizes “the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family…. Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinc- tion of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs.”

Here is a chapter of American Catholic history that was almost forgotten. After its initial impact, no one seemed to remember or record it, until 1990. And yet this is a chapter of history that makes one proud of being a Catholic – and an American Catholic in particular. The American Catholic Church here took the lead in promoting human rights on a world-wide basis and probably had a significant influence in the drafting of the United Nations’ 1948 “Universal Declaration of Human Rights.”

Let me tell you how this lost chapter of an American Catholic contribution to Human Rights and to Democracy came to light. Dr. Gertraud Putz, an Austrian historian, noted how accidental and labyrinthine her discovery of the 1947 American document was. She wrote that she had in her research come across an article in a 1947 Austrian periodical, Die Furche, with a German translation of what looked like an American Catholic Declaration of Human Rights, but with no reference to the original. She then wrote:

The difficult search for the English text shall not remain hidden from the reader. Through a personal contact with Professor Johannes Schwartländer of the University of Tübingen, doubtless the most knowledgeable scholar of the history of human rights, I was directed to an American human rights expert, Professor Leonard Swidler in Philadelphia. The accident that he–who at first also knew nothing of the existence of this Declaration–is married to a historian with whom he discussed the matter made it possible that she then took up the search. In a letter dated April 18, 1990, she responded to my letter and explained the diffi-culty in finding the Declaration, for it had no listed author under which it could be indexed. However, the fact that Professor Arlene Swidler precisely at that time was giving a course on “American Catholic History” at Villanova University led her to search further, and she ended by writing: “However, I am quite sure I have found the important material by paging through the significant periodicals.”

IV. WHITHER NOW TOWARD A CONSTITUTION?

So, here we are in 2010 in Europe, and in America, the land which practically invented modern Democracy, with the idea of governing an institution not by the decisions of some elite leaders, but whose leaders are elected by the members of the institution, who are guided by Law, as expressed in a written Constitution, which contains a list of the rights of the members spelled out in a Bill of Rights, which are enforced by a separate judiciary, under a due process of law. We know the blessings of freedom and responsibility, of the rule of law, for our ancestors suffered and died so they, and we, could be free and responsible. We also know that we all must struggle every day to win freedom again, and again, and again, endlessly, for if we do not, it will suffocate and die.

If we are the beneficiaries of this freedom and responsibility with its Constitutions, Bills of Rights, Freedom and Responsibility, and Law in the civil sphere, why do we not see the need for their blessings in the most important dimension of our lives, in our spirituality, in our religion? Oh, we all know that we have been told that the Catholic Church is not a democracy, and this false sensibility has seeped deep into our Catholic bones, but we have now begun to learn that that claim is false. We now know that the Catholic Church has a long tradition with large elements of democracy as part of its warp and woof.

Let me quote Anthony Padovano once more:

The fact that Americans cannot bring democracy or these miracles to the Catholic Church at large is the single greatest failure of American Catholicism…. Democracy is not only the key to all ecclesial reform but the essential ingredient in global social justice.
No less a figure than Amartya Sen, the 1998 Nobel laureate in economics, insists on two observations of paramount importance. In Democracy as Freedom (1989), he writes: “No famine has ever taken place in the history of the world in a functioning democracy.” Sen argues that the openness of a democracy, its accountability and its freedom of the press make it impossible for governments to tolerate famines. Famines are the legacy of monarchical systems. A Church that is proud it is not a democracy is a model for totalitarianism systems. Sen argued that no multi-partied democracy has ever waged war on another democracy.

If Sen is right and if democracy restricts famine and war, then a democratic world will be one in which social justice and peace may be possible on a scale greater than we have heretofore imagined. This is not a time for the Church to boast that it will never be a democracy.

We also know that when we sleep the sleep, not of the innocent, but of the passive, of the non-responsible, that bad things do happen to real people. We here in Philadelphia, as in many other cities, are still stinging under the blows of the 2005 Grand Jury Report on Clergy Sexual Misconduct. Terrible things have happened to our brothers and sisters, and we did nothing to protect them. We can say that we knew nothing about it. Fair enough. But we can no longer say that! We here at Old St. Mary’s Church have an extraordinary opportunity to take up our responsibilities that not many parishes in this diocese are given. We are extraordinarily blessed with a pastor who has the vision, self-confidence, and courage to call for us to come forth and take up our responsibilities, to be mature Catholics. With this blessing comes a corresponding responsibility, that it, from whom much is given, much is expected.

There are endless things that this parish can do that will be of immense value to the members and to many individuals and groups outside it. We have a beautiful church building. In fact, we have two! Each has a fantastic historic tradition that ought to be mined, taught, and harnessed. Our location in the center of the city, a stone’s throw from the Freedom shrines, puts us in a unique situation to do creative things. With a carefully thought through and written Constitution and live participation in those areas that are vital to a parish, like a finance committee, a liturgy committee, a music committee, an outreach committee, lawyers committee, education committee …. St. Mary’s should become a model which will both draw to itself those Catholics starving for spiritual vitality, and will inspire others to imitate our structured dynamism.

V. A TEN-STEP PROGRAM TO A DEMOCRATIC PARISH – AND CHURCH

In the wake of the American Catholic clergy sex scandal and two billion dollars already paid out (and no end in sight!), and several dioceses in bankruptcy, many Catholics are asking themselves: Whatever happened to the Vatican II promise of a collegial Church (in plain English: democratic Church)? Many national Pastoral Councils of the 1970s (e.g., Germany, Austria, France, Netherlands….) moved in that direction–including the astonishing American “Call To Action” in 1976, participated in by hundreds of thousands of American Catholics–only to be laid waste during the Romanizing pontificate of John Paul II, and now his former lieutenant, Joseph Ratzinger, Benedict XVI. The response bubbling up is: Leadership from above cannot be looked for; Vatican II reform and renewal must come from below, from the laity, religious, and priests.

Here is a modest, but I believe realistic, Ten-Step Program “from below.”

STEP 1. PREPARE THE MINDS OF THE LAITY TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY

We must first recognize that this is a very uneven struggle against a structure that places almost all the power in one set of hands, namely, the bishop’s. Hence, to begin this democratic church movement “from below” we need to have a pastor and some parish laity of a Vatican II mentality. Then “Father Goodpastor” and the lay leaders need to devise a program to raise the consciousness of the parish to realize that all the parish members must share the responsibility of making their parish a mature Catholic community. This might in various parishes take anywhere from six days to six years, and could include many sermons, lecture series, gradual development of parish structures, and many other creative methods. The goal is to get, if not all, at least the majority of the parish to follow the lead of the pope and all the bishops of the world in Vatican II (1962-65) which stated:

All [not just the bishops or priests, but “all,” that is, the laity] are led to… wherever necessary, undertake with vigor the task of renewal and reform…. Catholics’… primary duty is to make a careful and honest appraisal of whatever needs to be renewed and done in the Catholic household itself…. Christ summons the Church, as it goes its pilgrim way, to that continual reformation of which it always has need (Ecclesia semper reformanda, Vatican II, Decree on Ecumenism).

We must devise effective processes that will raise the consciousness of the lay parishioners to recognize and embrace their right and responsibility to share in the leadership and work of the parish. How much more and in what forms that work might need to be continued the parishioners, lay and pastor, will have to determine.

STEP 2. DISCUSS AND DELIBERATE AMONG ALL THE PARISH
THE MAKING OF THE CONSTITUTION

Although there obviously must be a smaller cadre of parishioners (meaning pastor and laity) who take the lead in organizing this movement, the whole of the parish must be seriously engaged in coming together to discuss, deliberate, and ultimately decide what exactly a parish Constitution is and what their own Constitution should contain. (Guidance on how to go about this task can be found at http://www.arcc-catholic-rights.net/resources.htm.) This must be the decision of fundamentally the whole parish community, for all will have to live by that decision. The effectiveness, and the length of time needed, clearly will be heavily influenced by the quality of Step 1. Precisely how this is to be carried out will be up to the laity who come forward, along with the pastor. Probably one or several parish meetings to which all are invited would be a minimum. Additional possibilities might include mailing a letter and information to all parishioners. Whatever forms this parish deliberation will take, it needs on the one hand to include as full a participation as possible, and on the other hand realistically, only a minority will actively participate. Given the centuries of ingrained passivity in the Catholic laity, we must do the best we can, but in the beginning it will be a challenge.

STEP 3. THE NAME “CONSTITUTION”

Some may shy away from the term “Constitution,” thinking perhaps that it is too “profane,” too “secular.” It need only be remembered that the highest authority in the structure of the Catholic Church–the Pope and all the bishops gathered together in an Ecumenical Council–has used precisely that term for its most important documents, e.g., Vatican Council II’s “Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy,” “Dogmatic Consti-tution on the Church,” “Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation,” “Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World,” and that Pope Paul VI called for and set up a Commission to develop a Constitution for the Church (Lex Fundamentalis Ecclesiae). Moreover, this Constitution is the document that will constitute, that is, will give form to, the parish community for as long as it exists. By-laws (or the like) is much too transitory a term to name this literally “fundamental” reality which will shape the parish’s existence and actions.

STEP 4. WHAT SHOULD AND SHOULD NOT BE IN A CONSTITUTION

It is important to bear in mind that a Constitution is to outline the vital, the formative, elements of the governance of a community, in this case, the Parish. It needs to avoid details beyond the essential, and concentrate on the critical structures of governance. Only a brief prologue should refer to the underlying spirit of the Constitution, being careful not to be too specific theologically, for every theology, no matter how brilliant, sensitive, and Gospel-centered, is only one way to articulate what it means to be a follower of Jesus, and therefore necessarily does not include other articulations. It must include a clear statement of the rights and responsibilities of all parties of the Parish, including such principles as transparency, accountability, representativeness, due process of law, decision-making procedures, terms of office, separation and balance of powers.

Above all, it is absolutely essential that the Constitution be written. There is nothing like having to choose the words to write down–especially words that you are going to have to live by–to help clarify thinking. Further, when future disagreements arise, as they inevitably will, it is vital to have written documents to refer to. This will especially be the case when a new pastor arrives! A written Constitution is absolutely vital! I cannot emphasize this enough. Many Catholics have had wonderful parishes in the past so long as “Father Goodpastor” was the pastor, only to see it dismantled when he was replaced by “Monsignor O’Hooligan.” A written Constitution may not be a sufficient cause of a continued Vatican II democratic parish, but it is a necessary cause of one (more about that below).

STEP 5. LITURGICAL INSTALLATION

Once the long process of consciousness-shaping, dialogue, deliberation, and decision has been lived through and a Constitution is arrived at, a further step is very important. One of the strengths of Catholicism is the tradition of giving everything important–and even things not so especially important–a liturgy. A Constitution that a parish is going to live by is in fact a very important sacred reality. It is a sacramental, and hence deserves a solemn liturgical ceremony.

The Constitution ought to be printed and framed in a fittingly solemn manner. A liturgy with an appropriate set of prayers, music, and gestures needs to be designed by the parish liturgy committee for the formal installation of the Constitution. It is important that the Pastor, the Parish Council, and other officers of the Parish, as well as as much of the entire Parish as possible be present at the Installation Liturgy. For the initial installation of the Constitution, it would be well to invite the bishop to be present as an observer (his presence will help to forestall his later sending an autocratic priest as Pastor). The Pastor, Parish Council, and other officers, as well as the rest of the Parish members present, ought to make a solemn public pledge to follow the Constitution.

An appropriate day should be chosen for the annual liturgical re-commitment of all to follow the Constitution–perhaps the feast day of the parish’s name. Such a solemn liturgical installation, and its annual re-confirmation, will keep the Constitution present in all the parishioners’ consciousness, and go a long way toward ensuring its continuing viability.

STEP 6. LIVE BY CONSTITUTION

It goes without saying that the Parish must then live by its Constitution. Much will be learned in the very living with the Constitution, including the possibility that appropriate amendments will be found to be important, perhaps even essential. The discipline of so living will also gradually re-shape and mature the thinking and action of all members of the parish involved, clergy and laity, including the future generations. Regarding the future, if a parish has lived and grown with a Constitution for five or ten years or more, it will very difficult for a future “Monsignor O’Hooligan” to come in (or even to want to!) and dismantle it (again, more about that below).

STEP 7. SET UP NON-PROFIT OWNERSHIP

I realize that the Austrian and German religion-state systems labor are burdened with a relatively fused relationship between the two, which is different that in America and Canada. I also recognize that unfortunately the civil laws regulating tax benefits for charitable donations are not as favorable in Europe as they are in the U.S. Nevertheless, I want to urge European Catholics to seriously investigate the idea of parishes setting up a Non-Profit Organization–a 501(c)(3) organization in the American system–especially for any new donations/expenditures. The Non-Profit Parish Organization (NPO) could be set up to sponsor social-justice work, youth work, construct buildings, schools, buy a parish hall, send out relief workers, missionaries, students…. All the assets of whatever form purchased through this Non-Profit Organization would belong to the Parish and be disposed according to the founding document, based on the Parish Constitution.

If parishioners have a secure say in the disposal of their parish’s various goods, they, of course, will be much more inclined to donate to this Parish Non-Profit-Organization. This is not just a so-called “gut-feeling” or hunch on my part, but is in fact documented in recent research by highly respected Catholic scholars reported in an extensive article in the Los Angeles Times.

Modest tithing is especially noticeable among Roman Catholics, who give to their parishes about half as much as Protestants. In 2003, Protestants gave 2.6% of their income to their churches and Catholics gave 1.2%, according to studies conducted by Empty Tomb Inc., a Christian research and service group based in Champaign, Ill. Why?

The avoidance of tithing reflects the sense of ownership parishioners feel toward their churches–or more precisely, the lack of it. “The heritage in Catholic thought that still hangs over people is that they are just customers and the clergy really owns the church,” said Dean R. Hoge, a professor of sociology at Washington, D.C.’s Catholic University of America, whose specialty is churches, and is a co-author of a seminal work on church giving: “It’s almost like we just go there; we don’t own the store,” said Hoge, whose research team surveyed 625 congregations in five mainline denominations across the nation. He said many Catholics think “the priest will give us what we need, and we’ll tell him what we want.”

Thus, setting up a Parish NPO would not mean less funding at the disposal of the parish, but more. The money needed for normal running expenses would continue to come from the Church Tax and go directly Catholic Church and thence to the parish in the normal fashion. However, for all new activity, whether, as suggested a moment ago, to sponsor social-justice work, youth work, construct buildings, schools, buy a parish hall, send out relief workers, missionaries, provide student scholarships, or whatever, the money would be given to and distributed through the NPO. These will be activities and monies which otherwise would not exist!

To re-emphasize, the setting up of the NPO would not take money away from the parish, but greatly increase it precisely because of what Professor Dean Hoge’s research made clear: Because the parishioners will have a direct voice in what happens to the money they donate, they will in fact donate more than they would have otherwise. Further, the laity will also consequently become much more active in the parish. As important, or perhaps even more so, as the financial value of this Non-Profit Parish Organization grows, it will automatically support the responsible functioning of the parish Constitution on into the future.

Again, I realize that not only are the civil tax systems different in Europe, and hence will have to be worked with carefully, but also that there is an even weaker tradition in Europe of making charitable donations to the Church. This psychological barrier will also have to be overcome. No one has said that the goal of a democratic Catholic Church would be easily attained!

STEP 8. CONSTITUTIONAL PARISH NETWORKING

A Constitutional Parish, once attained, will doubtless be a flourishing parish for it will automatically draw on all the talents of all members–just how flourishing will depend on the combination of the talents of the parishioners (including preeminently those of the pastor and lay leaders), the care with which the Constitution has been planned for and structured, and the wisdom with which the Parish has grown in living it. Consequently the Constitutional Parish will become a magnet for other parishes. (One must also, sadly, reckon with the possibility, even likelihood, of a negative envy being generated in some clergy.) However, the Constitutional Parish must, for its own survival, also become an “Evangelizing” Constitutional Parish in the literal sense, that is, it needs to spread the “good news” of creating and living by a Parish Constitution so that other parishes will go down the same path.

If there develop two, three, four, or more Constitutional Parishes in a diocese, it is critical that they learn from, and support, each other. They will need to form a Network of Constitutional Parishes–including the “Evangelizing” work of increasing their number. As their numbers grow, the likelihood of any of them receiving a “Monsignor O’Hooligan” as pastor will proportionately shrink. The Network should be prepared to go to the Bishop and the Diocesan Personnel Committee and lobby for a “Father Goodpastor” successor in their fellow Constitutional Parishes. The Constitutional Parishes must counter the ancient Roman tactic: Divide et impera! Divide and conquer! by taking to heart the saying of my compatriot from Philadelphia, Benjamin Franklin: Either we hang together, or we will hang separately!

STEP 9. NEGOTIATE WITH BISHOP/PERSONNEL COMMITTEE AHEAD OF TIME

However, without waiting for a Network of Constitutional Parishes to develop, the Parish Council (which includes the pastor) should in good time arrange to meet with the Bishop and Diocesan Personnel Committee to negotiate with them ahead of time a serious role for themselves in the choice of the successor of their pastor. They must insist on the retention of their governing Constitution. Clearly they will want to do all this only after they have lived by their Constitution for some time and built a solid reputation in the diocese. Clearly also, their hand will be greatly strengthened if they do not go into the meeting alone, but with supporting members of other parishes. That is another reason why it is so important for a Constitutional Parish to be an Evangelizing Constitutional Parish and work hard to create a Network of Constitutional Parishes. Here also is an additional reason for developing a vibrant and productive NPO. The substantial character of the Non-Profit Parish Organization will likewise obviously have a significant influence here–money talks!

STEP 10. PUBLICIZE

We know from civil society that freedom of the press is critical to make democracy work. We Catholics also learned that lesson at Vatican Council II when freedom of the press was one of the main engines pulling the Catholic Church out of its Medieval and Counter-Reformation mentality into that of Modernity. Without it, Vatican II would have been as much of a disaster as Lateran Council V (1512-1517) was. Its failure in the fateful year of 1517 contributed significantly to Martin Luther’s launching the Protestant Reformation in that very same year. As I suggested above with the term “Evangelizing”–that is, spreading the Gospel, the “Good News” of a Constitutional Parish–simply as an insurance policy, the Constitutional Parish needs to publicize itself as broadly and creatively as possible (including internationally on the website of the Association for the Rights of Catholics in the Church! (http://www.arcc-catholic-rights.net/).

The Constitutional Parish must not only do good things, it must also be seen doing good things because of their democratic, constitutional structure. They must become known for doing good things as a Constitutional Parish. This is not pride, but self-defense! As the Constitutional Parish becomes increasingly known for doing good things, it will encourage other parishes to likewise become Constitutional Parishes, thereby gaining the support of numbers and the Network, but also by burnishing its reputation, the Constitutional Parish will make it increasingly difficult to dismantle their Constitution, especially at the critical juncture of the change of pastors.

CONCLUSION

As in society in general, a governance structure will be what the governed allow. If most Catholics in an area believe that a shared responsibility governance structure, a Democratic Church, is not possible, it will not happen, regardless of what Ecumenical Councils or Popes have said supporting such. The first, and perhaps most challenging, task is to convince large numbers of the Catholic community that a democratic constitution for the parish (indeed, also for the diocese and universal Church) is in keeping with the Gospel and Catholic tradition. Then, after Step One the rest of the nine steps are obvious, though by no means easy.

The critical issue is whether or not a Constitutional Parish can survive beyond its “founding pastor.” As I noted at the beginning, canon law and the reality on the ground stack the chances against it. That is why Steps Five through Ten are vital. They are not individual guarantees against the eventual destruction of a Constitutional Parish, but as each of them is carried out, they will proportionately improve the chances of survival of the Constitutional Parish.

Beyond a Constitution for the Parish, there is also the need for a Diocesan Constitution, and eventually a Universal Catholic Constitution, as Pope Paul VI called and worked for. This journey to a Diocesan, and especially a Universal, Constitution of the Catholic Church will doubtless be long, arduous, and probably also serpentine. But it is a journey that a growing number of Catholics increasingly feel must be undertaken. Those of us so convinced now have not only the privilege, but also the responsibility, to push on in the journey, even though we personally may not arrive at the final destination. What is obtainable in the near future, however, at least for some fortunate ones of us living in parishes with a “Father Goodpastor” are first, a Parish Constitution and secondly, a Parish Non-Profit Organization.

Now that you know, you are obligated!