At this February 15, 1974 community meeting Paul DeCelles spoke about why, when and how the coordinators will consult the community as a whole. Although the procedures (the “how”) for conducting a consultation have changed over time, this recording reflects the spirit and purpose of People of Praise consultations. For more historical context see the “Explanation of Terms” section of Resource 100, “Background Information.”
Transcript
This document is a direct transcript of an audio recording, and may contain transcription errors and other minor edits for the sake of clarity.
[Tape begins after Paul has already begun speaking.]
PAUL: . . . This is not so much a teaching as it is a kind of explanation of the process by—that we’ve been using and have grown in and are now able to articulate with some kind of regularity, concerning the way in which we arrive at community decisions.
So, mainly, decisions are made by heads. Heads in various kinds of—like, heads of households, are responsible to see to it that certain decisions are made concerning the household. Exactly how those decisions should be made, whether the head is the one who should make them or whether it’s—he should make them after consultation in the—one way or another way, is something that’s worked out differently in different cases.
But heads are primarily responsible to—for seeing to it that decisions are made, on the part and for the sake of, those people over whom he has concern. We’re not changing that; that’s just the way of life in the community, that heads have that responsibility, whether it’s the head of a household or a head of a ministry, or whether it’s another kind of headship, which is the headship which is represented in the branches [“branch” was the term used for a geographic subsection of the community, like an “area” in the community today] and the branch meetings, for instance.
Or, also for those things which have a bearing on the life of—that we live, that part of our lives in increasing or varying degrees, the life that we live together, the life that we hold in common. To the degree that we’re doing that—those aspects of our lives which are lived in common—decisions concerning those things are made by the coordinators, who are the heads of the community.
Now, most decisions can be made with normal consultation with those who are involved. And all decisions should be made after talking things over with everybody who is involved. But normally this just proceeds in an ordinary kind of fashion. You talk with people about the situation, about the situation that—about which you’re supposed to make a decision. You consult—everybody’s consulting, and then a decision is arrived at, in whatever way the head deems best for that circumstance.
That’s also true for things in the community as a whole. There are normally ways in which the coordinators, whether it’s through the branch meetings, or through individ- —talks with individual people in the community, or whether it’s through the sharing at the pastoral team meeting, or whether it’s through prophecy and the gifts of wisdom and discernment—however it may be, there’s some kind of normal consultation that’s taking place, open to the manifestation of the gifts of the Spirit. And so, decisions on a day-to-day basis, on behalf of the community as a whole, those parts that pertain to our living together, are all made sort of ordinarily.
Sometimes, though, there’s a need for the coordinators to consult the whole community gathered together. And we’ve had some recent examples of this. I’d like to just call your attention to these things.
One was when we were talking about what the right relationship—what kind of relationship should the People of Praise, as a whole, have with regard to the True House community? We talked about that at great length during the summertime. And, on the basis of what we prayed about, and what was shared there, and all the things that people were telling us, we were able to formulate and make some policies and make some decisions about the stance that we should take—one of those things being that we would, as coordinators, accept responsibility for a certain kind of care and concern over the members of True House, which we referred to as “shepherding.”
And there were other things that came out of that. Another thing, for instance, was the decision to invite all of True House to come to the Friday night [weekly community] meeting. That has not yet taken place, because the coordinators of True House have asked us to allow them a certain amount of time before we send out this blanket invitation. And they want us to do—they want us to send out the invitation. That seems to be the consensus of their feeling, but they want to do it at sort of the right time, and they think that within a week, now, roughly a week, would be the right time. [Unintelligible comments from the audience.] So, that’s the reason why—that is one of the reasons, anyway, why nobody from True House is here.
The second time that we had a consultation of the community as a whole was concerning our involvement with the Charismatic Renewal Services [CRS], in particular, but in general, our—the People of Praise participation in the Catholic Charismatic Renewal Services Committee: how we would, as a whole, be involved, or whether we would be involved, whether it was God’s will for us to be involved, with that kind of national ministry—in fact, international ministry.
I just want to make a footnote on that now. [Paul coughs.] Pardon my—but it’s something that came up at a recent Service Committee meeting, that we were advised that the—Pope Paul VI and Bishop—Archbishop Hamer regularly read New Covenant [a monthly magazine published by the Catholic Charismatic Renewal from 1972–2002]. [Laughter and inaudible comments.] They are very much keeping track of what’s going on. And they want to know what’s happening at our Service Committee meetings. And so there is certainly a very great international kind of activity with regard to the Catholic Church there, and the leadership which Pope Paul manifests as a religious leader for the whole world, as well.
Well, that was a very difficult and complicated decision, about what we should do about Charismatic Renewal Services. We talked about that at great length, had a lot of input from everybody, and we talked and I—as I recall, we asked the members who had made the covenant, in particular, to say exactly what they felt about all this that we were describing at that time. On the basis of the information we got, we made a decision to participate in CRS—that is, Charismatic Renewal Services—to accept the responsibility for running the international conference in June, and some other responsibilities.
Now, exactly—because we’ve taken part in this, there are some things that are beginning to shape up, concerning the Service Committee itself, which we have to talk further about. We’ll come back to that later. In fact, next week Kevin is going to explain the developing situation there, and we’re going to enter into a process that I want to describe in the rest of my talk now.
Anyway, the next point was that we also talked about—with the community as a whole, gathered together, some long time ago—about the formation of the council. And subsequent to the formation of the council and its operation and its effective working, and this. . . . And the revision of the council into two things—into the pastoral team, on the one hand, and expanding the council, in a certain sense, and broadening it to the pastoral team; and also the selection of Clem as a coordinator [in addition to Paul and Kevin]—came out of all those talks and subsequent consultation with the community as a whole about the formation of the council.
And the last one that I want to mention is the kind of thing that we did when we wanted to change, I think it was one or two words in the covenant. And we talked a great, long time about that. We took a—maybe six months in all, to thoroughly consider the ramifications of what the change in the wording of the covenant would imply, what they would be. And finally, after getting a sense of the—what it was that the community as whole—how God was leading us as a whole, after consultation with the whole community, we made that change in the reading of the covenant. That—now, for the new people, that’s—the covenant that you heard on the Community Weekend is the covenant which has been changed, okay? There are no more changes foreseen right now; however, changes are possible, in the same way that we made that change then.
There are really two times for consultation of this kind of—of this sort. They involve—it’s a matter of major decisions that concern either a change in direction of the community: for example, the entering into the whole question of a national and international ministry on the part of the People of Praise. That was a change of direction. We had been focusing all of our energies on building up the People of Praise and working at the—at building up the Wednesday night prayer meeting. And now the Lord—at that time, the Lord was saying that he wanted us to go—that he wanted to lead many people to us; that he wanted us—the nations to be looking at us. And again, we had tonight the prophecy about how—the two prophecies about what the Lord said about—that he was going to accomplish great things with us; and the other one being, that—how he is, in fact, accomplishing remarkable things with people that we don’t even know. He’s changing hearts and converting them by virtue of our prayer, prayers of praise and thanksgiving.
So the Lord—anyway, my point here is that, when there is a question of a change of direction of the whole community, that that’s a time for us to have a community consultation.
The second time is when there is a change in the order of the community. When the order and the headship/subordination kinds—the different kinds of things that are happening, when that takes place, there also should be a community consultation.
The purpose in consulting the community is to discover what God’s will is. It’s not a matter of trying to please the majority of people. It’s a matter of, in consultation with everybody, discerning what it is that God wants us to do. And that’s the primary function of talking with everybody. And then, as soon as we know it, we should do it.
The coordinators still have responsibility for life—for the life of the community. That’s the coordinators functioning like shepherds, and—in that shepherd passage in John where Jesus says, “I am the good shepherd,” and “I have come that they may have life and have it abundantly.” That’s the key function of shepherds, to guard the life that we live in common. And therefore, because the coordinators have that responsibility, they have to make the decisions, and they have to have the power to make the decisions.
But they need to rely on prophecy, discernment, and wisdom, as we do regularly in the prayer meetings. You may notice—not tonight, but ordinarily—I tape-record every one of the community meetings, every prophecy that’s given at a community meeting. And I listen to it two or three times a week, in order to see what it is that—and we talk about these at our coordinators’ meetings: “What is it that God is saying to us in prophecy? How are we supposed to be moving?” Because he’s the one who’s leading us. The same thing with prayer, discernment, and wisdom, as all the gifts are operating in the community.
Now, we also have to have—along with those things [prophecy and the other gifts], we have to have a consultation of the community, and we suggest—we are—we’re saying: “This is what we’re doing, and we should continue to do this. To discover God’s will, we normally have been using, and intend to continue using, this form.” There are a couple of new twists in it, but they just make the old form better. They’re not different, really.
The first thing is that it’s necessary to present the matter that has to be decided—the matter that’s under discussion—to the community as a whole. That would normally happen—like, in Kevin’s talk next week, he will present the matter for everybody to consider.
The second thing that we need to do is to have a short discussion for clarification purposes. Like, “What? I didn’t understand what you meant by this. Could you explain what it is that is the proposition?” It’s not a matter of asking for [sic] “What is your argumentation in favor of it?” It’s a matter of—or “[your argumentation] against it.” It’s a matter of clarifying what the question is, and what are the implications of the question.
The third thing is that there should be an explanation of the proposition in the branches. That takes place in a fairly comfortable way already. And then, the people in the branches—in the branch meetings—taking that to their households and continuing the clarification and discussion, leading discussions about what it is that’s being discussed, right? Just to get everybody focused on what the issue is so that we can clearly get relevant answers to the question.
The fourth thing is that there should be these discussions in all the households, not just the households of those who have representatives in the branch meetings.
The fifth thing is that there should be a further clarification and a general discussion, if that’s necessary. So, this takes some time, obviously: at least a couple of weeks. After a couple of weeks, discussing this all around the community in households, or in whatever meetings there may be, it may be necessary to come back together and say, in a meeting, like, right about now: “Listen, there was one thing that I just can’t quite get through my mind, into my head. What did you mean by this?”
And then, finally—or, not “finally”—the sixth point is that we will then have a mailing. Now, this is something which is a new wrinkle, but it’s the same kind of thing. In the past, what we’ve done is, we’ve asked all the people who are underway, who have not made the covenant, to just be quiet for a while and let all the members who have made the covenant now comment. That we want in particular—since it’s—since they have already pledged their lives, to live their lives together in such a solemn commitment, it’s crucial that they are the ones who need to be consulted about the way, you know, any change in life of the community should take place.
So, what we’re going to do is mail to all the covenant members—have a mailing sent out, which will also address the question, asking them specifically, as—you know, as specific answers as possible. Like: Do you favor, or do you disfavor this proposition? Do you—what have you been getting as you pray about it? Or, and also—I mean, all these things: What have you—what do you think about it? What do you feel about it? And we’ll work up a form which will make this—make it possible.
Whether you’ve been praying about it—sometimes people in the community just haven’t gotten into some of the issues. And they don’t feel comfortable in walking up and saying, “Well, the Lord told me,” you know (which is not a very good thing to say in any case). But, walking up and saying something like, “Well, I’ve been praying about it, and I really think it’s from the Lord that. . . .” They wouldn’t do that, because maybe they just haven’t gotten into it quite that way. But they have a strong feeling about it. And it’s perfectly legitimate for everybody to voice that strong feeling and say what it is that’s on their mind about these decisions that have to be made, about these matters that have to be decided.
We also want to have feedback from all the people who are underway. And that’ll take place in all these discussions. And it also can take place in the way of writing down whatever the Lord may give you, any passages that you have, in the normal way that we’ve done that in the past: to write that out, and, and give it to one of the coordinators. And we collect these things, and we read them over before making a decision.
The seventh point is that the conclusion, the decision, will be reached by the coordinators. That’s their function: to make decisions. That’s one of their functions. And after the decision is made, it needs to be clarified again, and explained as to exactly what the decision was that was arrived at. It may be something different from what had been discussed. You know, it may be that the Lord made it very clear that we were sort of asking the wrong question, and that what he wanted us to do was this. Not to invalidate the whole consultation process—not to change the subject, for example—but the point is, that what the Lord may teach us through all this may be quite different from what any individual had thought before.
And what we need, then, is a very clear statement of exactly where we stand and what the decision is that has been made, so that we all know how to relate to one another in light of the new life decision. So, there will be an explanation, and that explanation, at the general community meeting should—that should take place there. And subsequent to that, it will be discussed again in the pastoral team meeting the following morning. It’ll be explained there—not to be re-debated and to be re-decided. And then, eventually, the—with the branch meetings, and with all the households and all the ministries again. And so, the explanation of the life and what the Lord has led us to will be throughout the whole community.
And the last thing that I want to mention now is: that’s the process. And we’re—we’ve changed it, we’ve improved it slightly. And we’re going to put that into effect, tonight. Aha! We don’t happen to have a mailing for it, but it wouldn’t be time for that mailing anyway.
But it is time for us to present one particular issue (and, as I said, Kevin is going to present another one next week), which is that the coordinators feel that there is a general need for some more coordinators. And what we want everybody to do, is to pray about whether or not the Lord has given us any more coordinators in the community. And we’ll begin this process.
There’s not much to explain about this. What we’re aware of is that there’s a need for more coordinators, so that decisions can be made better, and that the decisions can be broader-based, and that more people can get the adequate pastoral ministry, and some other things can be done better. [Paul pauses here.] So that’s what we see as a need. But it isn’t so clear that the Lord wants—has got us in the situation where that need can be met. And what we have to find out is whether there is anybody that you feel—or any several people that you feel—might be coordinators, that the Lord might want to be coordinators.
And we will begin that process. I don’t think there’s any need for clarification of that. There may be need for clarification of the rest of the talk, now, but next. . . . So we will begin discussing that question, and you can talk among yourselves, all of us together in all of our various living situations and ministry situations, about what that might be, who it might be that the Lord might be raising up.
Now, I want just to conclude this with one remark about. . . . We’re not talking—when we get— send out this mailing and get the returns—we’re not talking about a majority vote. And it’s not polling the People of Praise. What we’re doing is trying to discover what God’s will is. And we’ll be able to do that better by seeing all the responses that people send in.
So, that’s all I want to say. Praise God. Are there any questions about that?
Adrian?
ADRIAN: [Inaudible.] . . . Would additional coordinators then mean additional branch meetings? Like, that is, would we instead of three branches now have five branches, or four?
PAUL: No, not necessarily. It’s not that they—that we need more branches, particularly, right now. It’s just that we need more coordinators. We can—there are various kinds of services that coord- —that a new coordinator, or several new coordinators, might take on. One of them, for instance, would be—it’s not necessary that it be a coordinator who does this, but we need to have a more regular control over, and care for, concern for, the whole process of initiation. And, right now we have to do the initiation thing—we do it in parts, various different ways—and it would be better if it were overseen generally.
There are other things. But the main thing is that it—that our decisions will be better, where—as many people as we are, our decisions will be better, better arrived at, by having more people to discuss and to consider the teachings and all the different directions the community’s taking.
That’s—now we’re talking about coordinators; we’re not talking about head coordinators. We still have two head coordinators, Kevin and me. And we’re talking about other coordinators, the first of whom is Clem. But, now even that is a little bit—needs a little explanation, perhaps, because we’re all coordinators, and we all equally participate in the decision processes concerning the life of the community. That’s becoming increasingly the case.
The question of planning the coordinators’ meeting and taking care of the coordinators is a task which falls to—well, this is kind of silly. We’re talking about Clem. [Laughter.] But, as we envision what’s going on [it] is that we’re taking—one of our responsibilities is to take care of the coordinators. Are you taken care of, Clem? [Laughter.]
CLEM: I’m so happy! [Laughter.]
PAUL: Does that answer your question?
WOMAN’S VOICE: Paul?
PAUL: Yeah.
WOMAN’S VOICE: It’s not entirely clear: what’s your job description of a coordinator?
PAUL: A coordinator is somebody who has responsibility for the life of the community. And that means that he is the head of all those things which we hold in common—he’s one of the heads—and the coordinators as a body exercise that headship. Okay? The coordinators as a body have headship, too, and that’s Clem and Kevin and me. But their—one of the things that’s necessary is—their function is to be head of the community. Okay? That’s the—the coordinators as a whole function at the level of headship for the life in common. And that means that they make decisions that affect the life in common, life in common. Is that clear?
WOMAN’S VOICE: Yeah, that’s getting clear.
PAUL: For example, the decision about what we should do concerning True House was finally made by Clem and Kevin and me. Now, there are other possible decisions that people might have arrived at, but that was our responsibility, to make that decision. It’s been our decision, for example, about the way people are admitted to the community. That’s something which is very much what we do. We’re very, very much on top of that. We need, because of other demands, to make sure that that’s done more consistently and better. But that’s a function that we—in other words, those who are coming underway, like those who have to make—who can make the covenant—the question of who should make the covenant is a question which is a decision that the coordinators have to make. And things like that.
WOMAN’S VOICE: But you must have something else in mind, then, if you kind of feel the need of more coordinators. Because you certainly wouldn’t need more coordinators to decide who should make the covenant, would you?
PAUL: Yeah, we do.
WOMAN’S VOICE: I mean, you must have something. . . . [Inaudible.]
PAUL: Yeah, even for that. Even for that. That needs to be shared more broadly. But also there’s the whole question of the formation of teaching, and the direction of the community as a whole. Now, you see, these talks that we’ve been—this is the fourth in a series of four, which is interrupted twice, by two other talks. But these four talks have been also carefully worked out together. That was a function of the coordinators. It’s principally—Kevin and I have been doing that. But that’s something which is a function of coordinators: planning those teachings, and so on. That’s a major thing. And we need more of that, actually. And there are lots of other things, like the initiation thing.
But the fundamental—in my mind, as I see it, one—there’s a fundamental question of what’s the best way to make decisions. When will you have an—the best possible decision-making method? It seems like [this happens] when you—when there are maybe a few more than three coordinators who are making the decisions, and [you] have more people, with a lot of exchange and a lot of taking care of one another, a real body of coordinators loving one another the right way, arriving at the decisions that need to be arrived at. In other words, the decision-making should be a community thing, rather than just, say, two people talking to one another, or even three. We need more. In my mind, that’s the most important thing. I think that that will make us all have much—a much deeper sense of responsibility for what’s going on in the community.
Another question?
KEVIN: Do you want to say something about testing: have [sic] a period of testing for new coordinators?
PAUL: Oh, yes. Yes, thanks. Ah, what we’ll do, with regard to the coordinators: if it looks like—if it becomes pretty clear that somebody seems to be being raised up as a coordinator in the community, as was quite clear in Clem’s case, we will—we’ll pick them, and the coordinators will pick the people who will be coordinators, according to the consultation. We’ll take all that into account, and make a choice.
These, by these—by the way, the covenant members will get these letters and then mail them back—should sign them, of course, with all the indications of why they’re doing this: why the—what’s going on, why the decision—why they would recommend a certain course of action. Or, in this case, which people and for what reasons.
After they are appointed—they will be appointed provisionally, or for a period of testing, maybe six months to a year. And they would function as coordinators, then, attending the coordinators’ meetings, one of which, for instance, is a three-hour meeting every Tuesday. Another one is about an hour and 15 minutes—an hour and a half, sometimes—meeting on Thursday afternoon. And then, they also would come to the branch meeting if they’re not already in the branch—I’m sorry, the pastoral team meeting—and so on.
So, anyway, the main point I wanted to make there was that there would be a period of testing, when, rather than just taking somebody and making him a coordinator, it’s better if we make him a coordinator and see how he functions as coordinator, and if it’s ratified by the fruit that—good fruit is being borne. Then we would have him come out and pray with him, with laying on of hands, and have that—have him installed, really, as a coordinator.
Any other questions?
It’s clear, isn’t it? At least it’s clear. [Paul and others laugh.]
KEVIN: Are there any questions on the. . . .
PAUL: Tom has a question.
KEVIN: Yeah, Tom.
TOM: Something you said made me think of—that maybe we’re supposed to, like, do this, with regard to [inaudible: “who we think the new”?] coordinators. . . .
PAUL: Right.
TOM: Are we going to do that?
PAUL: Yes. That’s to be done now. So, tomorrow morning, we will be talking at the branch meetings, and—wait a minute; whatever it is—the pastoral team meeting. We’ll talk about it. We probably will not have branch meetings tomorrow, is that right?
KEVIN: Why not?
PAUL: Oh, okay. I guess we will. There’s a wedding. I thought maybe it. . . .
KEVIN: It’s in the afternoon, isn’t it? It’s at two. Two o’clock.
PAUL: Oh, so there’s time. Okay. That’s—Barb Ward is marrying. . . .
KEVIN: Phil Sutton.
PAUL: Phil Sutton.
KEVIN: That’s what all this is for [various decorations and refreshments], because the reception is here.
[Various reactions, including laughter, indicating, “Now I understand what’s going on.”]
PAUL: So, we should begin the. . . . [ Laughter.] Everybody thought it [decorations and refreshments] was for us! [Laughter.]
So, the process of consultation concerning the new coordinators should begin. But one should not enter into it, by the way, in any kind of a spirit of parties or factions. It’s not a matter of caucusing, so as to declare—campaign our man, you know [laughter], and to see how we—well, that’s just clearly out of the question.
KEVIN: Sure. It’s funny!
[All laugh.]
MAN’S VOICE: Could we be told who now is, other than the three coordinators, are [sic] on the pastoral team as of now?
PAUL: Yes. The—I always have a hard time—if I can just remember where everybody sits. If they’d all sit in the same place, it’d be easy. Carol Pajor [Miller], and Terry Kelly. I’ll just look around the room. Jeanne [DeCelles] and Dorothy [Ranaghan] are, and Pat Lewsen [Rath]. There are four women and a man there, right? That’s five. Did you get ’em all?
MAN’S VOICE: Pat Lewsen is . . . [inaudible]; you said four women.
PAUL: Right. That’s Carol, and Jeanne and Dorothy, and Pat. Then there’s Terry Kelly, and Tony… Rowland. [Laughter.] Ken Peters, Joe Bagiackas, and Joe Zakas, and Dick Keusch. [Laughter.] And Kevin [more laughter]. Kevin and me.
KEVIN: Clem.
PAUL: And Clem.
MAN’S VOICE: And Paul Go.
PAUL: And Paul Go.
KEVIN: Leave anybody out?
PAUL: Did I leave anybody out? Did you get all those down? I’d like a list when you’re through. [Laughter.]
KEVIN: He may have the idea that you can only pick people from the pastoral team.
PAUL: Oh, yeah, yeah. There are 12.
KEVIN: Fourteen.
PAUL: Fourteen.
MAN’S VOICE: Twelve. Yeah, 11 plus three!
PAUL: Right, right. Now, it’s not a matter of—being a coordinator is not a matter of, sort of like, promotion from pastoral team to coordinator, okay? [Laughter.] In fact, I—there’s a passage in, like—I forget now. It’s a passage that has to do with little children. When the disciples were arguing with each other—they were “discussing,” Scripture says. It didn’t say they were arguing. [Laughter.] They were discussing who among them was the greatest, and it’s better translated. . . .
[Recording ends here.]
Copyright © 2022 People of Praise, Inc.