Contemplating Life – Episode 41 – “Agreeing to Disagree”

In this episode, I continue a series of episodes about my life of ministry in my local Catholic Church. I discuss more work on the church finance committee and talk about my relationship with my pastor and good friend Father Paul Landwerlen.

Links of Interest

Support us on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/contemplatinglife
Where to listen to this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/contemplatinglife
YouTube playlist of this and all other episodes: https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLFFRYfZfNjHL8bFCmGDOBvEiRbzUiiHpq

YouTube Version

Shooting Script

Correction to this episode: I mentioned that Father Paul would be 95 in January. Actually he is 95 now and will be 96 in January. Also I said he retired at age 70. Actually he was pastor until 70 but was appointed as administrator of St. Vincent Depaul Parish on an annual basis until he was 85. He is currently the oldest serving priest in the Archdiocese of Indianapolis.

Hi, this is Chris Young. Welcome to episode 41 of Contemplating Life.

This week I’ll continue with more stories of my many years of volunteer ministry for Saint Gabriel Catholic Church continuing with stories from my eight years serving on the finance committee and later on the Parish Pastoral Council.

Standard disclaimers: I’m not trying to evangelize or preach to anyone. I’m just telling my stories. Also, this is my best recollection of events from over 30 years ago. I may have some of the details wrong or out of sequence but this is what I remember… the way I remember it.

As you’ve seen in these past few episodes, the work on the finance committee at Saint Gabriel was intense but it built a camaraderie among us. We worked hard but we had a good time as well often joking around with one another. One of my fondest memories was a discussion in which we were trying to decide how much to increase a particular line item. Should it be 10% or 11%? I don’t recall if it was me or a committee member named Julie who suggested 11% was a better number. Someone asked why. Julie and I looked at each other and grinned and simultaneously said, “Because it’s 1 more.” And then we both burst into laughter hysterically at the reference to the classic film “Spinal Tap”. Neither of us had any idea that we were fans of the movie before that day. The other committee members looked at us like we were crazy and wanted to know what was so funny. We said, “Spinal Tap.” They still had no idea what we were talking about. By the way, if you don’t know what I’m talking about, I included a YouTube clip in the description.

We also very much enjoyed our December meeting because that was our annual Christmas party. We would dispense with our business as quickly as possible then bring out the snacks, turn on the Christmas music, open a bottle of wine, and have a really good time. Larry, the chairman of the committee, always brought a really great cheese ball made by his wife. Somehow that started a tradition that the chairman brought the cheese ball. When I was the chairman, they liked my mom’s recipe almost as well as the one made by Larry’s wife.

As much fun as we had, there were still times when controversies arose and differences had to be worked out.

The Parish Pastoral Council was governed by a set of bylaws. We loosely followed the normal parliamentary procedure of making a motion, having a second, and discussion followed by a vote. The strange thing was that we had to find what we called “consensus”. The theological theory was that God has a plan for us and it’s our job to prayerfully discern that plan and implement it. And there can be no division among us. So consensus in essence meant a unanimous vote on everything. If we are really guided by the Holy Spirit there can be no division among us. The Holy Spirit guides each of us differently so maybe that one dissenting voice has the right answer.

In practice, what we said was, “You don’t have to totally agree with it 100%. But you have to be able to live with it.” Council members were strongly encouraged to sort of go with the flow and side with the majority. I’m not saying rubberstamp whatever we brought in. You could raise objections and often people did. The bottom line was that one individual had the power to block, veto, or essentially filibuster anything.

On one occasion, when I was the finance chairman there was a guy named John on the pastoral Council. John was the finance chairman before me so we had worked together for a couple of years. We were pretty good friends. He objected to the budget which sort of pissed me off because he knew the kind of work that had gone into it having been in our position before. We spent the entire evening listening to his objections, trying to understand his concerns, and to address them. The evening ended with an impasse. We were all sent home to pray over it and come back again in a week.

The finance committee met in a special meeting a few days later to see if we could come up with a proposal that would address John’s concerns. I made a little speech which got me in some hot water. I really screwed it up. I intended to speak in John’s defense but I started out really poorly. I really regretted it. Rather than starting out saying, “I want to defend John but…” instead I said, “I want to say a few things about John. I like the guy but he can be a real pain in the ass…”

Before I could finish my sentence, Father Paul tried to stop me. I insisted on continuing and said, “But I’m not here to criticize him. I’m here to empathize in support him. I’m a pain in the ass also. As much as he frustrates me. I have to defend him because I want the right to be the same kind of pain in the ass as he is.”

When we came back for the second meeting, John didn’t show up. The budget passed through consensus without him. I don’t recall if we made adjustments or if it passed in its original form. He later explained he wasn’t happy with it. But he could live with it. And that was the definition of consensus. You had to be able to live with it.

As I mentioned previously, the chairman of the finance committee automatically had a seat on the parish council as part of their job. Somewhere along the way, they amended the bylaws and said the chairman of the finance committee could not participate in the consensus on budget issues. The finance chairman was otherwise allowed to participate in consensus on non-budgetary matters just like any other council member. They thought that the finance chairman would be biased in favor of the budget that they had worked so hard to present. I was always proud of the work we did but I recognize that we serve at the pleasure of the Council.

I was offended by the idea even before I was the chairman. Did that mean that a school board representative also should not participate because the school budget was on the line? That was a big, big line item. Or what if you represented the maintenance committee? Did they not also have a vested interest in the budget? Even if you’re a member at large and didn’t have a specific role on the Council, everyone there had their own priorities.

My concern was, why would you exclude this veto power from the one person in the room who was the most knowledgeable about the budget? If the Council voted to change the budget in a way that could be significantly detrimental to the financial status of the parish, the chairman of the finance committee would be the one person in the room who would be most likely to know that and to raise concerns about it. The idea that their opinion should not count in the final consensus seemed completely idiotic to me.

After I was no longer on the finance committee but was serving on the parish council for other reasons, I tried to get them to reverse that policy but I was unsuccessful.

I want to conclude this series were some comments about my dear friend Father Paul Landwerlen who was our pastor throughout this time. I’ve mentioned him several times in this series and in my previous faith series in which I talked about my return to the church after a nearly 9-year absence.

Father Paul and I had a great working relationship and I always felt that he respected me and I deeply respect him to this day. But we both got on each other’s nerves on several occasions as you’ve already seen.

One time there was controversy about someone on the school staff doing some bad paperwork on finances. There wasn’t anything nefarious going on. Nobody was dipping into the till. It’s just the record-keeping sucked. Everything didn’t always balance. It was just a procedural problem.

Father met with the person in question to try to work things out but he took John, who was the finance chairperson at the time, with him. Word got out about the meeting. Several school people came to various finance members and asked, “Why is the finance committee involved in a private personnel matter?” Most of us on the committee had no idea what was going on. We didn’t even know about the meeting. At the next finance meeting several of us complained why we were out of the loop on this issue. Father explained it was a staff issue and had nothing to do with our committee. Father seemed upset that we were making a big deal out of this. In his mind, it was none of our business. John simply said, “Father asked me to be there so I went.” I wasn’t upset with him. He was just doing what the boss asked.

So I asked Father, “Then why did you take John our chairman to the meeting with you? He is the public face of the committee. When you take him to a meeting you’re taking this committee. Sure he knows our procedures and was probably a useful resource in straightening things out. Still, either this was a private internal manner that should not have involved anyone from the committee, especially the chairman who everyone sees as the representative of the committee, or it was the work of the committee. We all needed to be at least aware of what was going on and not hear it secondhand and get the 3rd° from people what to know why we’re meddling.”

As I was speaking, Father had a nasty scowl on his face because I was continuing to complain about something he didn’t want to discuss any further. When I finished, his expression changed. He sort of raised his eyebrows and then cracked a grin. Finally, he said, “Uhh… you’re right. Now I get it. He is the public face of the finance committee. Now I get it. I probably should not have gotten him involved.”

“That satisfies me,” I said. The rest of the committee seemed satisfied as well. One of the other committee members, a woman named Betty, used to pick me up at my house in my van to go to the meeting and take me home afterward. After the meeting that night when she brought me home, she gave me a kiss on the cheek and said, “I’ve never felt closer to you than I did tonight.” She was glad I raised a stink.

The point of the story though is not that I had this great victory in a disagreement with Father Paul. It was that most of the time, if not always, Father really listened to what I and others said when we complained. We didn’t win them all. I’m sure that I and many others frustrated the hell out of him on occasion. And he frustrated the hell out of me. But he would listen when you pinned him down and if you could make a good argument, you could win one now and then. That’s why I love the man so much. I didn’t need to win every argument but I needed to know that my opinion mattered and it did matter to him.

I’ve mentioned before that I taught classes for our RCIA inquiry program for new converts. Father trusted me with that responsibility. I would also attend most of the classes that he taught and afterward, the RCIA team which consisted of Father, me, Judy, my mother, and Sister Timothy would go out to Denny’s after class for a late-night cup of coffee and some snacks. On the evening as we didn’t go out to Denny’s we would generally hang out at church for a while to talk about how the class went or just socialize.

It was on those occasions after class Father and I would have our share of theological debates as well. You may recall way back in Episode 6, I had been asking priests tricky theological questions since I was six years old so I guess this was just an extension of that.

A lot of it had to do with the nature of miracles in the relationship between religion and science. Science fiction author Arthur C. Clarke famously said, “Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” The same is true for theological miracles that seem magical. It might just be science we don’t understand it. We would debate the nature of miracles.

One time we had a debate about the “Star Trek The Next Generation” episode “Who Watches the Watchers?” season 3 episode 4. We watched that episode together.

The most interesting part of the discussions was the time that I speculatively asked him one time, “What if someday they scientifically proved that Jesus rose from the dead by a completely explainable scientific method? Theologically, Jesus was fully human and completely suppressed his divinity while here on earth so he could fully embrace the human condition as an example for us. Theoretically, anything that Jesus did, if we had strong enough faith we could do as well.

And because we are told that someday we will rise as well, what if science proved that under the proper circumstances, any of us could rise from the dead by the same method that Jesus used?” My point was that I think it would not diminish its miraculous nature. Just because there is a scientific explanation, does not for me mean that God is not involved. For me, science is the mechanism by which God does everything. Science is the study of the things God did.

Father’s response was, ”If you scientifically proved how the resurrection worked, I would hang up my collar and walk away.” I guess he needs his miracles to be mysterious in order to be miraculous.

Father and I spent other social time together over the years. Sometimes we would hang out at Judy’s and watch football or movies. We would often gather at her house on Good Friday and re-watch “Jesus Christ Superstar” over and over every year. He would celebrate Christmas Eve at our house for many years and would visit us at our lakeside cabin in Brown County about an hour south of here.

But sadly, all good things come to an end. Priests are typically appointed to serve at a particular parish for a term of six years and most of the time that is extended for another six years. It is quite common to rotate them to a new place after that. He served at St. Gabriel from the summer of 1982 until the summer of 1996 so he exceeded the typical 12-year term.

There were people in the parish who disliked him greatly. It eventually reached the point where it was apparent that he needed to move on and we needed fresh blood. As much as I was going to miss him and as much as I admired and respected him, I also had the sense that he had taught me everything that he could teach me. I needed a fresh perspective if I was going to continue to grow spiritually. The Archbishop assigned him to St. Vincent Depaul Parish in Shelbyville about 45 minutes southeast of here. He served there for many years and then took the mandatory retirement at age 70. In January, he will celebrate his 95th birthday and is still going strong.

Because there is a severe shortage of priests, he serves as a substitute priest in parishes all over the Archdiocese so he is still celebrating Mass in front of some congregation almost every Sunday even though he doesn’t have any administrative duties any longer.

Overall Father Paul Landwerlen is a great spiritual director and a great pastor, and he remains a good friend to this day. I’m very blessed to have him in my life.

We were assigned a new priest who was quite young. It was his first assignment as pastor. Next week we will talk about that experience and how it nearly drove me away from Saint Gabriel Parish. On the bright side, I will tell the story of how I experienced what I believe to be a genuine miracle worthy of the canonization of a saint.

If you find this podcast educational, entertaining, enlightening, or even inspiring, consider sponsoring me on Patreon for just $5 per month. You will get early access to the podcast and other exclusive content. Although I have some financial struggles, I’m not really in this for money. Still, every little bit helps.

Many thanks to my financial supporters. Your support pays for the writing seminar I attend and other things. But most of all it shows how much you care and appreciate what I’m doing. Your support means more to me than words can express.

Even if you cannot provide financial support. Please, please, please post the links and share this podcast on social media so that I can grow my audience. I just want more people to be able to hear my stories.

All of my back episodes are available and I encourage you to check them out if you’re new to this podcast. If you have any comments, questions, or other feedback please feel free to comment on any of the platforms where you find this podcast.

I will see you next week as we continue contemplating life. Until then, fly safe.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.