UP FRONT
Common Ground Explores Church Movements
Liz O'Connor

The goal was not to reach consensus on any neuralgic or polarizing issue, nor to issue a statement at the end of the conference, but rather to engage in civil, structured dialogue so that all involved could end the weekend with fewer misunderstandings and a more nuanced pictureof how and why these movements are part of the church.

Representatives of several groups known as lay ecclesial movements came together with each other, church leaders, and scholars in early March at the twelfth annual Cardinal Bernardin Conference sponsored by the Catholic Common Ground Initiative.

The subject was the interaction between such movements (one should note that some of their members prefer other terms, but it was used because that is how the Holy See refers to these groups in general) and the local church in the United States. As at all Common Ground conferences, the goal was not to reach consensus on any neuralgic or polarizing issue, nor to issue a statement at the end of the conference, but rather to engage in civil, structured dialogue so that all involved could end the weekend with fewer misunderstandings and a more nuanced picture of how and why these movements are part of the church.

Several representatives were invited from each of four established groups: Focolare, the Neocatechumenal Way, Communion and Liberation, and the Charismatic Renewal. Some other participants, including at least one member of the Common Ground Committee and one invited speaker, identified themselves as members of other lay movements. The group participants included bishops, priests (most of the “lay movements” in fact include priests), vowed religious women and men, college professors, national and diocesan church personnel, and canonists. About 40 people participated in the gathering, held at the Divine Word center in Techny, Ill.

To facilitate open discussion, everyone agreed that statements made in the course of the conference would not be attributed to any individual by name, but quotations in this article are verbatim.

On the first evening and throughout the weekend, the movements’ representatives gave heartfelt testimonies about how their lives had been changed by their experiences with the movements. A woman spoke of her growth from being a helpless victim of domestic violence to being a college-educated teacher and now a national-level organizer, which she dates from a time when she began to know herself as having the tremendous dignity of a beloved daughter of God. A married couple spoke of how their lives had been crumbling until they recognized their sinfulness and really heard that they could be forgiven and could change; that, as another member of their movement said, “even in my sin, God was faithful to me.” Someone said that before meeting members of Communion and Liberation, “None of my religious friends were any fun and none of the people I had fun with were religious.”

Natural Tensions

Several speakers drew parallels between the emerging movements—some of which have been in existence for sixty years or more—and such earlier movements within the church as the Dominicans and Franciscans, who emerged at a time when many movements were growing in the church. Then, as now, there was sometimes friction between the new charismatic movements and the established church. In his presentation a canonist who is also a member of a religious order said there is a natural dialectical tension between institution and charism, but that the Holy Spirit bestows gifts on both the hierarchically ordered church and the movements that are part of it.

What the movements represented have in common is providing for their members a more or less specific method for living out the Christian life, often including ongoing catechesis and study as well as group prayer and the sharing of life experiences in small groups. Most also place emphasis on an experiential knowledge of God, sometimes connected to what was called a “road to Damascus” moment or an outpouring of the Holy Spirit in a renewal of Pentecost.

Some movement representatives expressed a desire to be fully integrated with parish and diocesan life, while others—some having been burned by negative experiences—were more tentative. A member of Communion and Liberation spoke positively of volunteering in her parish not as a member of that movement but simply as a parishioner whose faith is more vibrant because of that membership. An auxiliary bishop spoke of having a sudden need for a large number of volunteers for a World Youth Day and being able to call on the movements to supply them. Others were willing to help when needed, and certainly were willing to respond to any extraordinary need, but preferred to minister in their parishes in accord with the particular vocation they felt was nourished by their participation in a movement. Several said they want to be recognized for their particular gifts, whether those gifts are prayer, outreach, service, evangelization, or catechesis—not merely used by their pastors as people he can always call on to meet any parish purpose.

A Focolare representative said some parishes are concerned that a movement will take a person’s time and energy away from the local parish, and that she believes that is at the root of some tension. But one of the scholars on a panel said he thought that fear was based on a misconception, and that the movements are instruments of renewal for the life of the whole community.

In this matter again, there was an expressed tension: the parish does not want to be taken over by the movement nor does the movement want to be taken over or exploited by the parish. Toward the end of the conference one of the panelists said the group had not really discussed what he called “the dark side” of the movements: the accusations of pride, elitism, exclusivity, manipulation, and secrecy—but he acknowledged that had there been such a discussion it would have been essential also to discuss how those elements are found in the ordinary life of a parish.

A parish priest expressed concern about the ways in which consumerism affects ordinary parishes, with lay people “shopping” or “parish hopping” for a parish that meets their needs. It’s the pastor’s job, he said, to hold together in communion “the mess of God’s people” who form a parish, and if all those searching for a deep encounter with the numinous are siphoned off by various movements, the pastor is left to deal with “the mess in the middle.”

A speaker said that while some bishops have barred some movements from their dioceses or come into conflict with them over specific points, the Catholic tradition is to maintain new movements, expressions, gifts, and charisms as part of the communion of the church.

Another said that the church exists in the outpouring of the Spirit and flourishes to the extent that all gifts are welcomed and incorporated. He said the new movements are connected to the event of Vatican Council II (even though some were founded before the council) because in them is the fruition of the council’s concept of the role and dignity of the laity in the church. There is, he insisted, no dichotomy between activity in a movement and in parish life, and that, in fact, the life of the sacraments as found in the parish is a basic meeting place for the movements and the hierarchical church.

Another on the same panel said that a key test for a movement is its relationships to parishes and dioceses, but that bishops should not confuse unity with conformity with a particular pastoral plan. Clarity and transparency are important in these relationships: it is when there is a lack of collaboration, secrecy, considering the movement the only or the best way to be Catholic, or excessive control of members by movement leaders that trouble arises.

A bishop with extensive experience of the Cursillo and Charismatic Renewal movements, both of which are very important among Spanish-speaking Catholics in the United States, noted that movements can’t be left alone, can’t be ignored by their pastors and bishops. “Charism without formation is dangerous,” he said. “It’s when they’re left alone that we have difficulties.”

“Authentic doctrine is important,” and that’s one of the matters about which a bishop has to concern himself with movements, another said.

The bishop who had spoken of the generous response of volunteers from among the movements noted that in his diocese, many immigrants come bringing with them movements unfamiliar to the North American hierarchy. He stressed the importance of getting to know the movements, helping them to know each other, bringing them into the orbit of the local church, and encouraging unity. Movement representatives spoke of wanting to be embraced by the local church, rather than merely tolerated.

Misunderstandings in the U.S.

A priest from Italy now serving in Delaware said there is a lot of misunderstanding in the United States of the groups, most of which—with the exception of the Charismatic Renewal—have come here from Europe or Latin America. He said it is a truism to say that the United States. has not needed the movements because here post–Vatican II renewal took place in parishes which are vital, whereas in other places the movements thrived instead. There was no discussion of whether the growth of movements is connected to changes in American parish life or American culture. But throughout the weekend several speakers discussed the rift between faith and life in both Europe and the Americas, and the movements as possible responses to that reality.

Some pastors feel threatened by movements, a bishop said, fearing that movements are going to replace parishes because parishes are seen as not working or as not being sufficient for the needs of the faithful.

Among the points on which many of the participants agreed at the end of the conference were:

• Movements always have to be at the service of the mission of the church under the guidance of its pastors.
  
  
• The newness of the Spirit sometimes upsets the existing order; the charismatic element of the church sometimes resists ordering.
  
  
• The Holy Spirit brings a diversity of gifts that would be needed even if dioceses and parishes were all doing their work in an ideal way.
  
  
• No particular movement should be seen as normative; the gifts of the Spirit are given to the whole church, and a parish is not defective or deficient if it lacks the participation of a given movement or movements.
  
  

Participants also agreed that a number of questions were left unanswered. A weekend’s worth of structured dialogue, even in the presence of extraordinary people giving extraordinary testimonies, was not enough to give one perfectly clear understandings of movements previously unfamiliar (nor was that the purpose of the gathering). The crises in contemporary parish life, including Catholics leaving the practice of the faith, were not discussed, nor was the problem of Catholics who have been baptized and catechized but perhaps never truly evangelized. Yet a representative of the Charismatic Renewal warned that we cannot reduce Christianity to those who have had a “born again” experience: to do so would be a grave disservice to 2,000 years of faithful Catholicism.

A movement, one young woman summed up, is a way of making visible the essence of the church. She said a movement is not just another program; it is offered as a whole way of living the Christian life. But there is a need for freedom in the ordinary life of the church to be drawn or not to one of the movements of the church. A good spiritual director, she noted, allows freedom; so does a good pastor.

A priest who is a member of a religious community and has been a pastor said the role of the pastor is to lift up the gifts of the community for the sake of the one mission; it’s the challenge of the pastoral leader to celebrate diversity for the sake of the one mission. The pastor need not embrace everything that comes along, but needs to accept, welcome, and facilitate everything that is in accord with the church’s mission.

Liz O’Connor is the editor of CHURCH magazine. She can be reached at