LETTERS

ARTICLES

NEWS

FOLLOW ME

ROAMIN' CATHOLIC







Contents © 2005
by Jim Holman.
All rights reserved.

LETTERS
January 2005

---

INACCURATE, SKEWED, AND MALICIOUS

The November story ["Soft Men"] by reporter Robert Kumpel is profoundly misleading and characterizes not only a few men but the entire Western Dominican Province in a manner which is grossly unfair at best and untrue at worst. However, it is not altogether surprising, given that Mr. Kumpel based the majority of his story on one young man who no longer has ties to the province and clearly has an axe to grind.

It is difficult to respond fully in a brief manner to the inaccuracies within this story, as they are all over the map (from accused molesters and luxurious living, to the School of Applied Theology and liturgical dance). However, I am compelled to set the record straight in defense of the dedicated men seeking to do God's work and in an effort to give untarnished information to your readers. I will address the most egregious inaccuracies and half truths contained in this hit piece. To wit:

The article stated that two and half years ago, we failed to alert the bishop of the diocese of Oakland that a small number of men accused of sexual misconduct -- dating back 45 years -- were living at St. Albert's Priory. That is false; a letter was sent to the bishop at that time informing him of the presence of these men in the community. We are not "hiding sex offenders," as Kumpel's hyperbolic tendency would have readers believe. In fact, I believe we are obligated by canon law, our own bonds of religious life, and common decency not to turn our backs on those who have done wrong. At the same time, these men have been removed from public ministry and any contact with minors, and they have received or are receiving professional therapy, are in a house that is not attached to a ministry, and they are not allowed to participate in public ministry.

Furthermore, two years ago we completely rewrote the province's sexual misconduct policy in the Fall of 2002 and strictly abide by it. We aggressively investigate all allegations of sexual misconduct against our members and take appropriate actions to safeguard potential future victims when an allegation is judged credible. We offer pastoral care and counseling to those whom our members have abused. We have a functioning sexual misconduct committee, the majority of whom are lay people, including two women. Finally, we as a province are committed to becoming accredited by Praesidium Religious Services, Inc., a national child-safety accrediting agency.

The article also alleges that our former provincial said he "would not tell bishops about members of the province who had been guilty of sexual misconduct." This is false. Father Syverstad (the article consistently misspelled his name) during his time as provincial dutifully informed local bishops about any friar who had been guilty of sexual misconduct with a minor as he was obliged to do according to the 1993 protocol signed by the bishops and religious superiors of the U.S. I continue to follow that same protocol.

The article singled out two outstanding and devoted men, Fathers Monshau and Renz, as having undue power over the formation of students. In fact, these priests are but two of a group of 20 priests and brothers who vote on important matters of student formation; it is quite literally impossible for Father Renz to exercise any favoritism by influencing the outcome of a vote. The only individual with authority in this situation is the prior provincial. At all other times, the student master is one vote among many in the chapter and council of the house of formation. These are two extraordinarily dedicated men who I am proud to have in our Province and saddened to see their reputations impugned by Mr. Kumpel.

It is untrue that "practically every house in the Province uses inclusive language" and liturgical dance. There are differences throughout the Province just as there are differences within dioceses.

The article includes several paragraphs about the School of Applied Theology which is in no way linked to the province, other than that they rent space from us. However, the reporter doesn't point out that its program is approved by the Western Association of Schools and Colleges, and the American Theological Society.

As for the contention that the theological training our seminarians receive is deficient and that "Church teaching [is] never given any kind of primacy," I would counter with the fact that our Dominican School of Philosophy and Theology has a very fine, orthodox reputation and is also accredited by the American Theological Society and receives oversight from Rome.

There is hardly a paragraph in this entire story that I do not wish to contest, but this space does not allow for it. The search for truth is one of the most noble aspirations of journalism. I am saddened that Mr. Kumpel has not only shown poor journalistic style, but for some reason, has also obfuscated the truth by his inaccurate, skewed, and malicious article. I would expect better of him as a Catholic reporter and better of you as editor of a Catholic newspaper.

I invite those with concerns about the Western Dominican Province to contact me directly or visit St. Albert's where we have nearly thirty young men in formation who would gladly refute the article's allegations. Or they can pull up the San Francisco Faith's earlier article on St. Albert's: "Sign of Hope" (July/August 2000), a story that much more accurately reflects our efforts and lives here at St. Albert's Priory.

Fr. Roberto Corral, O.P.
Prior Provincial, Western Dominican Province

Editor replies: I am happy that Father Corral replied to our article; however, most of his points are a restatement of what he and Father Christopher Renz said in interviews with Mr. Kumpel, which were part of the article. It should be noted that Mr. Kumpel himself did not state that the Western Dominican Province was "hiding" molesting priests; rather, this was the opinion of the two former Dominicans he interviewed. However, it is the case, as Father Corral admits in the article, that St. Albert's has been housing priests accused of molestation. That they are kept from children, as Father Corral here and in the article says, indicates he thinks the accusations are true. It appears families in the area have known nothing about the presence of these men.

What is new in Father Corral's reply is his insistence that both he and his predecessor Father Syverstad (we apologize for the misspelling in the article) did inform the bishop of Oakland about the accused sexual offenders at St. Albert's. But Mr. Kumpel tried to contact Father Syverstad about this issue; he did not respond. Further, Mr. Kumpel asked Father Corral directly in an e-mail message whether the Dominicans have ever informed the diocese about the priests in question. For whatever reason, Father Corral did not respond to this question. Father Corral also did not respond to questions addressing whether or not the Dominicans had informed neighbors or local law enforcement of these priests' residence at St. Albert's.

As for statements made by our sources regarding Father Renz, these were communicated to Father Corral. Though asked to comment on them, he did not. It is interesting that Father Corral does not contest the account of Father Monshau given in the Detroit Free Press of May 23, 2002 [www.freep.com/news/religion/priest23_20020523.htm], of which reference is made in Mr. Kumpel's article.

As for the School of Applied Theology, the article noted that it is not run by the Dominicans. However, one wonders why the Dominicans lend their facilities to, and thus in some measure participate in, a school that offers courses that are at the very least of questionable orthodoxy. Why Father Corral thinks the school's approval by two non-Catholic bodies is in any way relevant to the question of its orthodoxy is a mystery that I for one can not fathom.

PRAY AND FAST FOR BRETZKE

Thanks to Roseanne Sullivan ("No Recipe for Morality," December 2004 Faith) for exposing the heretical teaching of Father James Bretzke, S.J. His characterization of reliance upon the magisterium as "moral infantilism" reminds me of the unwitting prophecy of Caiphas, the high priest who said, "you know nothing at all; you do not understand that it is expedient for you that one man should die for the people...." In Luke 10:21, Jesus prayed, "I thank thee, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that thou hast hidden these things from the wise and understanding and revealed them to babes; yea, Father, for such was thy gracious will."

Let us pray and fast that Father Bretzke and his proteges may receive the kingdom of God like children and enter it (Matt. 18:2-4; Mk.10:15; Lk. 18:17).

Catherine Norman,
Fremont

NO HOLY WAR

I want to congratulate you on your article "Stop Patting Bush on the Back" [December 2004 Faith]. I, as you, am very strong against abortion and am pro-life. I cannot stand it when I hear women say they can do what they want with their own bodies. Your articles have been very clear in that area.

But I have also been bothered by those who feel that the Iraq war is a holy war. When can the killing and the maiming of so many Iraqis and Americans be a good thing? I could at least understand it to a point if someone said that it was a necessary evil, although I do not even believe that.

Perhaps in the long run, the war will make things better. Perhaps in the long run it will not. But for those who are suffering and will continue to suffer from the effects of this war, I don't think they will agree that they got any good out of it.

If we would put ourselves in the place of the suffering Iraqis, we wouldn't know whether to be happy or sad that the Americans are over here. "With such good friends, why do we need enemies" would be their thought.

Dan Lopez,
Selma

IRAQ WAR CLEARLY UNJUST

I read with great interest the article "Stop Patting Bush on the Back -- Is the War on Terrorism Pro-Life?" in the December 2004 issue of the Faith. This is the first article I have seen in a Catholic publication questioning the morality of the Iraq war.

Before the U.S. invasion of Iraq, the national conference of Catholic bishops issued a statement that, even after careful consideration of the charges that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction, the conference had determined that a war against Iraq was not morally justifiable.

In recent months, it has been clearly stated by numerous U.S. and international inspection agencies that Iraq possessed no such weapons and was not attempting to produce them. (The sole allegation remaining is that Saddam would have liked to obtain them, if ever it became possible.) It has also has been clearly stated (again, by both U.S. and international agencies) that not a scintilla of evidence has been found to link Iraq with al-Qaida and it's attacks on the U.S.; and that Iraq did not constitute any credible threat to the United States.

Since the invasion was not morally justifiable when those charges were considered true, it seems that this war must be even less justifiable now, after the charges have proved to be false.

So far, over 100,000 Iraqis have died as direct result of military attack during the U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq [according to one source, Ed.]. Those injured comprise at least the same number, possibly up to five times more. The number of those who will in the future die or be seriously injured, from unexploded ordinance and mines, and from the toxic residue of the battlefield -- depleted uranium as well as other toxic chemicals -- can only be guessed at.

Almost all of the Iraqi casualties have been civilian non-combatants; as will be most of those who will suffer from the "delayed effects" of the battlefield. While it is clearly indefensible to purposefully target non- combatants, the fact is that in modern warfare, most (90 percent or more) of the casualties are "collateral damage" -- civilian non-combatants. It is for this reason that U.S. military sources have gone out of their way to prevent reporting of Iraqi casualties.

Killing in self-defense, or killing a combatant in a "just war" may be morally defensible; but when the means used to kill one enemy invariably kills 10 non-combatants, the preponderance of harm clearly makes the act immoral. It cannot be morally justifiable to take 10 innocent lives in order to "justly" execute one offender; yet any defense of war with modern weaponry presents that argument.

Abortion takes an enormous, terrible toll of innocent lives; and certainly that killing is morally wrong, and should be stopped. However, when the Catholic Church strenuously condemns the moral wrong of abortion and fails with equal loudness to condemn the wrongs of war, it damages it's credibility as a moral voice, weakens it's influence in the non-Catholic world, and undermines the already besieged faith of many Catholics.

I pray that the issue of the immorality of war begins to be widely addressed by the clergy, and not only conscientious laity.

Rashid Patch,
Pinole

TOP