We left off Part II with the threatened organ transplant lurking once again in a cloak of secrecy. However, we were getting a bit ahead of the story. Back on October 28, 2009, when Fr. Robert Ring had denied 40 parishioners the right to be heard at a “Care of the Community” (CC) meeting, on the very issues which they had raised and prioritized by vote at his request, there was a high level of frustration. So through the Newsletter, It Really Matters, we conducted a Survey of St. Januarius’ parishioners, to give them the opportunity denied to them at that CC meeting.

There had been an overwhelming response against selling the pipe organ, as mentioned in Zeal Part II, even at a fair price, let alone for $3000 (which would be less than 4 cents on the dollar for its fair market value. And a pastor is supposed to be a good steward of the patrimony of a parish!) In addition to that pipe organ question, and with rumors increasing as to threatened Sanctuary renovation (extent then unknown), we expanded the Newsletter Survey to include the other issues raised by parishioners in Fr. Ring’s pew survey: reactions on the Altar and Sanctuary, on removing the Pastor and/or Faith Formation Director, and how folks felt about not being allowed to discuss their concerns. Remember, these were not issues raised by the Newsletter, but rather by Fr. Ring’s own pew survey.

Here are the results:

• ALTAR and SANCTUARY: 79% said the altar should not be lowered; 72% said it is not a good use of funds to   remodel the Sanctuary:  75% said the altar / Sanctuary should be left alone.
• REMOVE THE PASTOR: 50% agreed, 21% were undecided and 29% disagreed.
• REMOVE THE Faith Formation Director, Cris Wensel: 33% agreed, 39% were undecided; 28% disagreed. (Much of the ‘undecided’ vote came from people who didn’t even know who Cris was, although she’d been there over four years.)
• SILENCING THE FLOCK:  a strong level of indignation (with many respondents’ comments) was expressed about being gagged in the Care of the Community meetings, permitted to only discuss meaningless matters. We asked about a variety of banned subjects on a 0 to 10 rating scale, where a 10 was “completely inappropriate” to ban and zero was “completely appropriate” to ban. The number of respondents awarding a ‘10’ is also shown, divided by the total number of respondents to that question. The following banned subjects were rated by respondents:

The inherent fallacy in Fr. Ring’s forbidding discussion, after inviting input, is that it is illogical for those unfamiliar with St. Januarius to make decisions without even hearing from the St. Jan’s parishioners. Why would he do something like that? Why did he conduct his pew survey at all? We began to wonder if the decisions hadn’t already been made.

Father Ring exerted pressure from the pulpit; it seemed to some as trying to prevent folks from actually answering the Newsletter Survey, implying that it would not be fair since it was being done by It Really Matters. We offered the Survey as a service to St. Jan’s, which is what the pastor should have done. The results had a sworn statement to the truth of the report, which is also what a pastor should be able to do. Respondents could comment freely and without distortion. which is what Fr. Ring should have allowed at the Care of the Community (CC) meeting.  It is hard to see how his trying to prevent a survey could possibly serve the people.

We wrote that “The Proof was in the Pulpit,” saying: “It is hardly necessary to write an article about Fr. Ring’s errors and omissions, abuses and misuses, when he himself gives irrefutable proof from the pulpit. Consider that on the evening of Saturday, Nov. 21, 2009, and again on Sunday, Nov. 22, at St. Januarius, after a brief homiletic reflection, he launched into a personal attack against the editor and the Newsletter. Those in attendance know well what he did, even to the point of a few folks said to have walked out of Mass. Some expressed shock and consternation. The worst was actually not in the words or in the innuendo. Did you know that a priest is not permitted to use the pulpit at Mass to denounce any individual? That is yet one more abuse. It doesn’t matter if he says “a woman from St. Mary’s who writes the Newsletter” and doesn’t use a name; it is all the same. Not only is he not permitted to use a “bully pulpit” to be a bully, but the rules are to protect the sanctity of the Holy Eucharist from abuse. People leave when a pulpit is so misused; they know they could be the next target. The good of souls always comes first!”   Sadly, some of those who left have not returned to St. Januarius.

Another way in which Fr. Ring has suppressed discussion in OLOL is by allowing (or at least not correcting,)  his minions who take hostile positions on his behalf. To understand how hostility can be used in OLOL to punish parishioners who disagree, to instill fear in those who would like to discuss issues, and to drive others away, we consider the case of “DS,” from Rochester.  We recount the flavor of a letter which DS sent to those who were mandaters, who were openly publishing the Newsletter about their concerns, who were meeting together and otherwise pursuing their rights under Canon Law, but doing and saying nothing about DS personally.  DS sent a letter to the Newsletter editor and to select others, dated November 18, 2009, which said “This is addressed to all your members. Please forward to all members.” In the Newsletter we reprinted DS’s letter in its entirety (with full identification) and answered each of his points.  Here, for the moment, we simply print an excerpt of his words and let them stand alone as bald testimony to the atmosphere of hostility engendered against the people who speak out for truth and fairness, and against suppression and secrecy.

The letter was addressed to the “KKK Members of It Really Matters,” setting the tone for the entire letter. We abbreviate a bit where necessary to avoid some redundancy, but we change nothing that was written, and will print the entirety and our point by point published response soon in another “Zeal.” DS wrote:

“As individuals in the South hid behind their white sheets and killed individuals they did not like. [sic] You hide behind your alleged newsletters and try to lynch individuals that will not meet your self-centered, egoistical, childish, self-absorbed petty meaningless demands….you hide within your un-authored [sic] articles…. Your KKK members are wasting so much energy, time and money on fighting petty administrative decisions that you should be happy someone else is handling so you can have more time to complete your own list of Faith First acts of Christian kindness.” Mass times, redesign of the altar area, closing of churches have to have the final decision rest with the hierarchy of the church with the priests and bishop. It is impossible to please every individual and every group. If mass time changes or if Saturday night mass is canceled or if a church is closed down, what is the big deal? You just go to church at a different time or place. Where is your faith, or sense of sacrifice instead of your self-centered sense of me, me, me? If an individual leaves the church because of a change in mass times, altar change or the closing of a small church, I would have to question the strength of their faith in the first place…..Your self-centered sense of the norms of the church is centered in the dark ages….to be so bitter and self, self, self-centered is so anti-Christian. Where is your basic Christian faith…. Your explanation in this newsletter is just plain sick and deranged. You are a sore cancer in our church….You have a choice. Leave and go to start or find your own Catholic Conservative Church with your strict allegiance to the “norms” as you interrupt [sic] them. Take our names off your mailing list and never send us another vicious, vile newsletter.”

Three days after DS wrote his attack, and at the same Mass that Fr. Ring himself, seriously misusing the pulpit, denounced the Survey, Newsletter and its editor, Fr. Ring permitted DS to mount the St. Jan’s pulpit, to proclaim similar denunciations, and stood by and approved. It was a speech against the people who were mandaters under Canon Law, who were legitimately trying to prevent the amalgamation of OLOL into a single parish. (More than 100 people from St. Jan’s were mandaters; more on that in a future Zeal. That number is more than half the average weekend attendance at St. Jan’s, given the decimation of that parish since Fr. Ring’s arrival, a drop of 46% in attendance.) DS spoke loudly from the pulpit to lead a cheering section for Fr. Ring and also to denounce those whose opinions were different from his own. Then DS called for applause and ovation for Fr. Ring. Many refused to applaud or to give a standing ovation, but some felt intimidated into doing so against their own consciences. Few things are so divisive to a community as putting forth an issue from the pulpit in which parishioners are forced to take sides against each other. Some who walked out have not returned.

After answering DS’s written diatribe point by point, in a subsequent Newsletter, we wrote: “This has been an opportunity to witness to the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic faith. Quite frankly, we also hope that parishioners of St. Jan’s will understand better who it was that addressed them from the pulpit on Fr. Ring’s behalf, and be better able to decide if this is the personality and style with which they wish to align themselves and the future of their parish. It is a valid question why Fr. Ring resorts to such displays instead of apologizing and dealing with the issues, year after year.”

Later we found out that DS, who had been an Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion for years during Fr. Ring’s pastorate, actually wasn’t Catholic at all. Soon after we had discovered and publicized it, DS quickly came into the Church, in early 2010. As a non-Catholic,  Fr. Ring allowed or invited him to take the pulpit and give the pep talk for him at Mass. (And he is NOT the only person who has communicated in this way. Another person in yet a different OLOL parish, doing the same, has even been on the OLOL Pastoral Council for years.)

A few folks said after Mass, of both Fr. Ring and of DS: “I’m sorry I didn’t stand up and tell him off” or “I wish I’d noisily stormed out.” We wrote: “No, that is not the way to handle it. For those who quietly left and for those who stayed and were dismayed or upset or hurt, you did the right thing. You had more sense of correct behavior around the Eucharist than did Fr. Ring [or DS]. He should learn from your example. It is NEVER right to be disrespectful to anyone, especially in the presence of Jesus in the Tabernacle, and NEVER right to turn the Mass into a stage show, which includes applause for the pastor in his own personal vendetta, which includes leaping to one’s feet to express approval of his misbehavior at Mass, and includes huggies, condoning / participating in his disregard for the Eucharistic Presence. Thank you to all who did the ‘right thing.’ God bless you abundantly for your restraint.”

The pipe organ, two surveys and internal hostility– each is a pericope* into the way Fr. Ring “manages” that with which he has been entrusted by God. With this insight into the atmosphere, an unholy atmosphere, we can next view the drawings, two more surveys and more claims of bias, the Sanctuary Demolition Plan and the mysterious donor situation.

Peace of Christ,

Diane Harris

*pericope: passages from different parts of a single book or different books, linked together into a single or composite reading. A “cutting out” which forms one coherent unit of thought.

One would think it wouldn’t be necessary to defend the presence of a beautiful, donated pipe organ in a Catholic Church. There is a quote in the documents from Vatican II that “…the pipe organ is to be held in high esteem, for it is the traditional musical instrument which adds a wonderful splendor to the Church’s ceremonies and powerfully lifts up man’s mind to God and to higher things.” What a shock it was, then, for the parishioners of St. Januarius to learn that the pastor, Fr. Robert Ring, was giving serious consideration to selling their cherished instrument, and eliminating the beauty the pipes add as a backdrop to the Sanctuary.

Parishioners had no inkling any changes were threatening until late September, 2009, when Fr. Ring introduced an anonymous “offer” to buy the St. Jan’s pipe organ for $3,000. He made it seem unsolicited but refused to identify the buyer, and said the offer had to be accepted by the end of October 2009 or it would be withdrawn. Clearly there was pressure put on the parishioners, who reacted admirably in defense of their church. They researched that the pipe organ was actually worth $70,000 to $100,000 and that it had been a gift from a former, beloved pastor, Fr. Robert Smith, and that maintenance expense was far less than what Fr. Ring had implied. Further, the 7 Rank Wicks had once graced the Cathedral for a short time. Understandable resistance to such a sale began to emerge.

There were several attempts to get to the truth of parishioner perceptions and opinions regarding the threatened sale of their pipe organ. At the time most parishioners thought this was an isolated threat, and did not know such a sale was just a small part of an intended but undisclosed Sanctuary demolition project. Serious objections to the sale of the pipe organ were voiced several times:

1. Show of Hands: At an after Mass gathering on October 4, 2009, an overwhelming majority of attending parishioners, in a show of hands, voted NOT to sell the pipe organ. (It was said at the time to be about 30 against, and 2 in favor of the sale). This meeting was apparently also the first time that many parishioners began to hear rumors of other intended Sanctuary renovations, although they were assured by JL, who favored the sale, that the two issues were unrelated.

2. Pastor’s Pew Survey: In early October 2009, Fr. Ring did a pew survey on what parishioners saw as the highest priority in 2010 for St. Jan’s. The most votes concerned Mass times and not losing the Saturday night Mass. In second place were 56 votes to replace the pastor and/or faith formation director, Cris Wensel, (more on the connection between Cris, Fr. Ring and St. Louis in a future posting.) The votes in Fr. Ring’s pew poll were 40 to keep the organ, and 8 to sell it. The organ issue had only come to light part way through the voting.

3. A Care of the Community meeting was scheduled for October 28, 2009 and 40 people (10x the usual turnout) showed up, on the opening night of the World Series, but were forbidden by Fr. Ring from discussing the pipe organ, or other subjects parishioners themselves had designated as major priority, such as: Mass Times, Sanctuary ‘Renovation’, improved communications, and removing the pastor and/or faith formation director. In stark contrast, parishioners WERE allowed to speak about whether or not the “ugly bushes” should be trimmed, but not about the issues of most interest to them. Some people walked out in disgust. To avoid such discussion, Fr. Ring said the matters had to be taken to the 6-church clustered OLOL Council instead, without even first hearing St. Jan’s parishioners’ input. (This is a great flaw of clustering. People with no interest at all in another church, or who are competing for the survival of their own church, begin voting about the future of someone else’s church. It is compounded by the council members often being the pastor’s personal appointees.)

4. A poll by the Newsletter “It Really Matters” then did a survey by mail for more detail and for validation on the issues about which Fr. Ring had forbidden open parishioner discussion. The results showed a groundswell of opposition to selling the organ, and to renovating the sanctuary (which at that time was only known to involve lowering the altar significantly from four steps to two, but was expected to block the vision of children and smaller adults). There were 42 surveys received from 33 households. One of the key survey results (more in next issue) was that, regarding the organ, 82% disagreed with accepting $3,000 for an organ worth $70,000-100,000; 70% said it shouldn’t even be sold at fair market value; 71% said the organ is important to St. Jan’s.

October 31, 2009 had come and gone without the pipe organ disappearing, so most people believed the matter was resolved. They did not know that nearly eight months earlier, in early 2009 (perhaps even earlier), Fr. Ring had been consulting, unknown to parishioners, on radical renovations he wanted to implement at St. Jan’s before he left. The architectural consultation was with LaBella (yes, it is the same LaBella who “renovated” the Cathedral and in the process became good at ignoring protests of ordinary people in the pew. They have also ignored parishioner input on the St. Jan’s matters.) St. Jan’s parishioners would not know until February 2011, that there were LaBella drawings already marked as a final presentation dated March 6, 2009 (a time when St. Jan’s parishioners didn’t even know Sanctuary modifications were being considered). These “final presentation” (“finalpres”) drawings were done nearly 7 months before Fr. Ring mentioned selling the organ at the outlandish price of $3000. When the March 2009 drawings finally were shown on-line, the shocking revelation was that those “finalpres” drawings showed NO ORGAN and NO PIPES in a remodeled Sanctuary, just the little keyboard which has sometimes been used at services.

Thus, Fr. Ring had been entertaining a sale of the pipe organ at a seriously distressed, apparently unfair price, under the guise of an unsolicited offer, knowing full well that the then 7-month old secret LaBella “final pres” drawings had no plans for a pipe organ to be included in the future Sanctuary.

Use the link http://www.ourladyofthelakescc.org/whoweare/stjanrenovation/renovation.html and click on “Proposed Renovation Design”. It takes time to load. The banner heading on the pdf will say “finalpres.” There you will see the March 6, 2009 drawings, with NO pipe organ, and there are even foreboding margin notes against St. Jan’s pipe organ.

Future “Zeal” installments will review the Sanctuary renovation/demolition plans and current threats and impending jack-hammers. To whet the appetite, consider the following color picture of St. Jan’s Sanctuary today (the one on line is old). Contrast it to La Bella’s “finalpres” drawing. In the color picture, the pipes can be seen behind the center Tabernacle. In the architectural drawing, the Tabernacle has been moved to a lowly spot near the exit door, and the pipes have disappeared. The presider’s chair has been raised to the prominent place vacated by the Tabernacle and a “royal” backdrop added to the presider’s seating area. No wonder people are upset…to be continued….

When Christ was asked by his disciples for signs of the end-times, He said in Mark 13:14: “….when you see the desolating sacrilege set up where it ought not to be…:”

Please remember, corrections are always welcome.

Your sister in Christ, Diane Harris