Dear Father Cook,
As you know, I am the lay contact person for the Synod on Synodality from our parish. Thank you for allowing me to be such an important part of this grand Synod! As I expected, only a small percentage of the parish participated in some way (which, as you probably know, is the usual amount of "dynamic Catholics'' in a parish).
If you scroll further down, I will include the entirety of our parish report sent to the diocese. (Dr. Rovati was very gracious in accepting your request to separate parish responses from diocesan responses. So, he had me file two reports! Perfect!) It is our parish report I included below as a postscript which also includes the questions.
In addition, I am writing you because many of our parishioners (unfortunately) tried to use the Synod as a sounding board for their parish concerns. Although these voices are important, they do not belong in the larger, papal work of the Synod on Synodality. SO, I am voicing them here and you can do what you think is appropriate with this information.
I want it made clear that the thoughts I have compiled in this letter are NOT MY OWN. We had almost 300 people participate, and many of these thoughts were shared by the overwhelming majority (both teen and adult).
As you know, our parish has gone from a Franciscan parish of many years to a diocesan parish. That is the focal point of the angst exhibited by the parishioners. The majority of these people are weeping over the extinction of the Franciscan Order from our diocese. They miss the Franciscans' vibrance and their openness to the Holy Spirit. They feel the Franciscan parish that was alive and vibrant just a few years ago is now an either dead or dying diocesan parish. (Covid, of course, didn't help matters.) My guess is they had no sounding board beyond simple gossip, so they tried to use the Synod to get their ideas across.
THE ISSUES (inappropriate for Synod)
First issue: Removal of traditions/ministries. The women and young teens miss being able to participate in the Mass more fully as they feel they are no longer allowed to serve. They don't understand why their cherished ministries, celebrations, and church groups have been taken away. (The Our Lady of Guadalupe Celebration was by far mentioned the most.)
Second issue: Clericalism.
Third issue: Stagnant Liturgy with a lack of dynamic clergy, bereft of the Holy Spirit.
Fourth Issue: Lack of communication.
THE SUGGESTIONS ("STEPS")
Because the 3rd question that the diocese put forth for the Synod asked for the "steps" to improve on the challenges they listed, some ideas were presented again and again. Others don't correspond with the challenges listed above at all. And other than reverting to a Franciscan parish, forcing clergy to be more dynamic, insisting that clericalism not be taught in seminary, and reinstating all former groups/celebrations (which I don't believe was quite appropriate to voice), here are their suggestions.
First, most parishioners suggested a kind of "Evangelization/Action Committee" to be sent out into the community to share Christ with others through volunteering (some being as specific as support of our school, a new Catholic Senior Center, and a Catholic Youth Sports facility).
Second, the former blends with the more general desire to serve our community's poor through named parish groups that would assist specific community organizations like the food pantry, the Salvation Army, or El Centro.
Third, many other parishioners cited their own small groups (such as Bible studies) as their biggest signs of the Lord's presence in their lives and requested the ability to organize more of them or reorganize the ones that dissipated.
Fourth, the request to pray, pray, PRAY for our parish. I found the biggest irony to be that only the young teens remembered the power of prayer to heal these wounds. Such a simple and, yet, profound practice! The adults were too busy complaining and suggesting to remember that prayer has great power!
So, there you go, Father Cook: the other strange fruits of this Synod. You have a right to know them. Now you know our parish's thoughts in their entirety, voiced in the completely wrong place. What you do with these thoughts and suggestions is entirely up to you.
May God bless you in all you are doing for the people of the parish! As a daughter of two very elderly parishioners, I know the amount of time and energy you are asked to give to our revered elders. And I THANK YOU for all of those hours spent helping those who grieve or hurt in one way or another.
As a postscript you will find our Parish Synod Report sent to Dr. Rovati.
Sincerely,
Noelle Thompson
Lay Leader of Synod on Synodality
Immaculate Conception
IMMACULATE CONCEPTION (PARISH RESPONSES)
Contact Info & Data
Full Name:
Noelle Therese Thompson
Email:
Thefirstnoelle777@gmail.com
Phone:
8287073288
Name of Parish/Group:
Immaculate Conception, Hendersonville (Parish Responses)
Number of in-person Synodal conversations:
3
Number of online Synodal conversations:
1
Total number of Synodal Conversations Held
4
Total Number of Participants
244
Languages Used:
English
How many meetings addressed the first question: “Signs of Lord’s Presence”
4
How many meetings addressed the second questions: “Challenges”
4
How many meetings addressed the third question: “Steps”
4
Fruits of the Synodal Conversations
The first synod question asked, "What are the most significant signs of the Lord's presence in your life?" In 500 words or less, please describe the common answers and themes that emerged during the conversation AND the participants' most inspiring or moving responses or questions.
[All lists are based on the number of times an issue was mentioned by name. They are given in order from greatest to least mentioned. However, please understand that the “least mentioned” was still mentioned many times, by many people.]
The biggest sign of the Lord’s presence, as reported by our parishioners, is THE EUCHARIST as the Body and Blood of Christ in the midst of the Mass. Second, was the important prayers and songs. Third, was Catholic family and community traditions. Fourth, was the other Sacraments. Fifth, was sharing Christ’s love and mercy through ministries and service. Finally, many mentioned studying the Gospel/Bible, the lives of the Saints, and the different Marian Devotions.
One moving example came in the form of a miracle on last year’s Divine Mercy Sunday when a young girl at UCLA Medical Center was given only hours to live because of stomach bleeding and renal failure due to an incurable cancer. After hundreds praying the Divine Mercy Chaplet, Zyla went from being intubated and dying to full recovery within an hour. Miracles are surely a sign of the Lord’s presence!
The second synod question asked, "What are the biggest challenges or questions you face in responding to the Lord's call?" In 500 words or less, please describe the common answers and themes that emerged during the conversation AND the participants' most inspiring or moving responses or questions.
The biggest challenge our parish reported was the problem of CHURCH VS. SOCIETY. Second, the LGBTQ+ community is excluded. Third, clericalism and pride is a big problem; huge changes come with each change of leadership. Fourth, decreasing membership. Fifth, women are excluded from being deacons/priests. Sixth, abortion (especially the focus on the embryo/fetus and not the mother). Seventh, conservative vs. liberal divide (or the traditional vs. progressive divide) not only in reference to religious issues but also to political issues. Eighth, immigrants should be welcomed by all, no matter what their immigration status. Ninth, how to be welcoming of others while still remaining “Catholic” in faith and morals. Tenth, currently the Catechism is looked at as the “definitive rule” of morality instead of an “essential guide.” Finally, that there aren’t enough opportunities DIRECTLY FROM PARISHES to truly serve the community’s poor as Christ would or to participate in small groups. As a result, people are forced to volunteer/participate elsewhere which does not connect the service activity with the Church.
What follows is the most moving true story from the fruits of our in-person synodal conversations. The parishioner introduced the narrative as a “true pro-life story.” As I was writing the information quickly, some details are omitted (I can’t remember the name of the young lady, but I got most everything else). Here is my best paraphrase:
A young woman driving to Planned Parenthood to abort her unborn child was apprehensive and tortured due to the guilt of her choice. At a red light, she opened Facebook to find something surprising. At the top of her news feed was a plea from Karl (a friend of the parishioner): "Why can't someone just give us a baby!?!" When the woman refreshed her feed, the plea was gone.
The woman pulled over and called Karl, confused. Karl apologized, and explained he was frustrated because he wanted to love a child SO much, but their marriage had not been blessed and all avenues had been explored and blocked.
"Karl. I am on the way to the abortion clinic. If I have this baby, would you adopt him?"
[Gasp!] 'Well, of course I have to ask at home, but I think I can pretty much say YES!"
Now, Parker is a thriving eight-year-old with two loving parents, Karl and Diego, whose same sex-marriage saved this child from abortion.
The parishioner continued: “If THAT isn't a partnership that is ‘open to life,’ I don't know what is! No child of a gay couple is EVER unwanted. Gay marriage would be ‘open to life’ by considering adoption (or fostering) of these very children.”
This story highlights both the second AND the sixth of the challenges our parishioners mentioned above and highlighted in their discussions. The parishioner speaking mentioned a Holy Spirit -led change-of-heart in regards to the issues involved. I was moved to tears during our session.
The third synod question asked, "What steps is the Holy Spirit suggesting to you and your community to respond more fully to the Christian vocation?" In 500 words or less, please describe the common answers and themes that emerged during the conversation AND the participants' most inspiring or moving responses or questions.
You will find that many of these answers correspond to the “challenges” listed above. They are not, however, in the same order. The order given here is due to the number of parishioners mentioning the issues by name.
The most important step that the Holy Spirit suggested to our parishioners was to CREATE AN “EVANGELIZATION/ACTION COMMITTEE” in all parishes (some saying required for membership!) whose job it would be to serve the poor of the community in the name of the Roman Catholic Church, in order to share the love of Christ without condition via many proactive ministries and/or community groups. Second, declare the Church to be more inclusive especially by ordaining women as equals and allowing same-sex marriage (open to life through fostering/adoption). Third, allow current, proven, scientific fact to be the lense that continually filters the newest Roman Catholic moral doctrines. Fourth, proclaim that the Love of God and Love of Neighbor (Jesus’ summation of the 10 Commandments) be central over the moral rules of the Church. Fifth, pray continually for the Catholic Church, especially for all of the significant challenges the Church faces. Sixth, create small groups/ministries such as bible studies (some saying one required for membership!) because small groups are how many people grow closer to God apart from the Mass. Seventh, insist on stronger communication from the ground up: between laypeople and clergy, clergy and bishops, bishops and Pope. Eighth, assert that the moral doctrine in the Catechism be an “essential guide” (possibly with exceptions under the guidance of a priest). Ninth, institute a Latin Mass at each parish for those who desire it. Tenth, allow the mentally ill who commit suicide to receive a Catholic funeral. Eleventh, clarify the moral teaching of life beginning at conception and/or its connection to IVF. Twelfth, streamline annulments so that the faithful can remain in full communion with the Church. Thirteenth, allow contraceptive exceptions for medical necessity (some also including conscience). Finally, allow priests to marry if they feel called to both vocations.
In regards to a moving idea behind these steps, one parishioner vehemently reported that the biggest problem was the LACK of the Holy Spirit in the gradual decision of the Roman Catholic Church to choose “rubric and ritual” over the Love of God and the Love of Neighbor. He insisted that this was the main reason for the decrease in membership for the Roman Catholic Church as a whole. The parishioner ended with, “Where is the love and mercy of Christ!?!”
Section Three - Responding to the Synod’s Fruits
In 500 words or less, please reflect on how to respond to what emerged during the synodal conversations. As you think about your answer, I encourage you to discuss what you learned from the synodal process with your parish/group's leadership and those who helped you facilitate the conversations. To ponder the issue, you might consider the following questions:
● How should the parish/group respond to what emerged in the synodal conversations? Are there particular steps the Holy Spirit is asking the community to take? How does the parish/group best respond to the questions and challenges that affect people the most?● Is there a way to continue the conversation?● How do we foster and give a space to grow in the relationships born thanks to the synodal conversations?
Many of the challenges and steps that our parishioners suggested call the Roman Catholic Church to reform from the top down and call for a change in Catechism. For those grand challenges and steps, the parishioners are speaking directly to Pope Francis in the call for reform.
I find it incredibly significant that it was our teen population that remembered the power of prayer. Our adults were simply quick to complain and then suggest a solution. In my opinion, the numerous times the “Adsumus Sancte Spiritus” was prayed led directly to this revelation.
As I suspected (and have read before in the book Four Signs of a Dynamic Catholic), only a small percentage of our parishioners responded to the synodal call. The truth behind this is that, apart from the handful of active participants who had a very strong, conservative/traditional voice, there are probably many more who are content with the status quo both of the parish and of the Church as a whole. Most of the people who felt strongly enough to participate tended to be more progressive in thought, which may not reflect the feeling of the parish as a whole. There are still others who didn’t know about the Synod (despite my best efforts to reach them), didn’t understand the Synod’s importance, were unable to attend either in-person/online, and/or didn’t care enough to participate.
How to respond? Although some used the Synod to voice parish complaints (which must be left to another format), many appropriately called for a better method of communication between parish leadership and parishioners. Some asked for parish groups/traditions to continue and/or be reinstated. Some requested more small groups (like bible studies): a way to grow closer to God apart from the Sacraments. There is the important call to serve our local poor in the name of the Church through an evangelization/action committee (which some want to be required). Finally, there is a grander call to be welcoming, loving, and kind to ALL, no matter what morality is presented.
Something else of note: parishioners are quick to allow childless couples to take advantage of IVF, but then demand that life be protected from the moment of conception. This shows misunderstanding (ignorance?) of how IVF is performed: fertilizing multiple eggs in a lab, implanting many, freezing or, worse, discarding the rest, and then “reducing” the number depending on parental preference. Therefore, when people speak about “listening to science,” they need to make sure to do the research on the science to which they refer.
In my opinion, the way we “foster and give a space to grow in the relationships” born within this Synod is by encouraging the involvement of laypeople more than ever before and by increasing the number of clergy in the many ways that parishioners suggested. In short, the Roman Catholic Church will grow and thrive directly in relationship to how its members show love for both God and neighbor.
Noelle Therese Thompson
170 Foggy Mountain Road
Horse Shoe, NC 28742 USA
thefirstnoelle777@gmail.com
828-707-3288
April 28, 2022
Bishop Peter Jugis
The Diocese of Charlotte
1123 S. Church Street
Charlotte, NC 28203 USA
SUBJECT: PARISH CONCERNS VOICED (INAPPROPRIATELY) THROUGH THE SYNOD ON SYNODALITY
To Your Excellency Bishop Jugis,
My name is Noelle Therese Thompson, and I am the Lay Contact Person for the Synod on Synodality from Immaculate Conception Parish in Hendersonville, NC. It has been my privilege to serve as such! My final reports (one parish-based and one diocese-based) have been submitted, and if you are interested in our general parish answers to the three diocesan synodal questions, I point you to Dr. Rovarti who is now in charge of them, or you may contact me directly using my information above.
I am writing to you specifically, as I have already written Father Cook (our pastor), because many of our parishioners (unfortunately) tried to use the Synod as a sounding board for their parish complaints. Although these voices are important, they do not belong in the larger, papal work of the Synod on Synodality. SO, I am voicing them here and you can do what you think is appropriate with this information.
I want it made clear that the thoughts I have compiled in this letter, especially issues 1-4 below, are NOT MY OWN. I told Father Cook the same thing. We had almost 250 people participate, and many of these thoughts were shared by the overwhelming majority (both teen and adult). I did not want these people to become disenfranchised, but I realized early on that many of their thoughts did not belong within the larger synodal vocation: hence, my letter to you.
As you may recall, our parish has gone from a Franciscan parish of many years to a diocesan parish. That is the focal point of the angst exhibited by the parishioners. The majority of these people are weeping over the extinction of the Franciscan Order from our diocese. They miss the Franciscans' vibrance and their openness to the Holy Spirit. They feel the Franciscan parish that was alive and vibrant just a few years ago is now an either dead or dying diocesan parish. (Covid, of course, didn't help matters.) My guess is they had no sounding board beyond simple gossip, so they tried to use the Synod to get their ideas across.
In short? They want the Franciscans back!
THE ISSUES of IMMACULATE CONCEPTION (inappropriate for Synod)
First issue: Removal of traditions/ministries. The women and young teens miss being able to participate in the Mass more fully as they feel they are no longer allowed to serve. Girl altar servers are no longer allowed, and no one is quite sure why. It certainly doesn’t follow the guidelines of Vatican II, and as Pope Francis has related, “Those who reject the teaching of the Second Vatican Council are placing themselves outside the Church.” Our parishioners don't understand why their cherished ministries, celebrations, and church groups have been taken away. (The Our Lady of Guadalupe Celebration was by far mentioned the most.)
Second issue: Clericalism. Our parishioners cited this as the second biggest problem in the parish. In researching the subject on aleteia.com, I found the following quote: “Clericalism is a disordered attitude toward clergy, an excessive deference and an assumption of their moral superiority. In the pithy description of Pope Francis it’s when ‘Clerics feel they are superior, [and when] they are far from the people.’” I am assuming the parishioners feel this way about our current pastor. Personally, I will leave my feelings about our pastor to myself, and I will speak of another diocesan priest who has recently left the parish. This very young priest, who shall remain nameless, gave an entire homily on the following (which is my paraphrase): I have been given the title of “Father,” and just as our Heavenly Father chides his children, I will be chiding YOU as your father from time to time. At this point, my then thirteen-year-old leaned over to me at Mass and said, “Do you see why I am terrified of these new priests?”
Third issue: Stagnant Liturgy (and a lack of dynamic clergy), bereft of the Holy Spirit. Having one priest with a monotone voice giving almost every homily about the “moral authority” of the Church may have something to do with it. And our poor hispanic population, 100% disenfranchised for the first two diocesan years, now has a priest who speaks only Spanish (which is wonderful) but when he tries to do English masses, is almost impossible to understand even to those who are partially bilingual.
Fourth Issue: Lack of Communication. By this, the parishioners were specifically meaning the communication from pastor to parishioner. For example, when not allowed to give an announcement from the pulpit and not allowed to put anything on our website or the app, the information on the Synod was left to the bulletin, flyers, and my personal social media. No wonder not many people participated! Did the leadership in the parish and the diocese actually WANT them to participate?
The fifth issue is my own: the Flight of Parishioners and Faculty from ICC & Immaculata (some in the middle of the school year)! This has all happened since the Franciscans left our parish. Why is this? Could it be issues 1-4 above? When our parishioners were asked to give “the steps the Holy Spirit was suggesting” to fix these problems. Inappropriate responses were given: reverting to a Franciscan parish, ousting the pastor, forcing clergy to be more dynamic, insisting that clericalism not be taught in seminary, demanding to know what IS taught in seminary, and reinstating all former groups/celebrations. Although not appropriate for our Synod Report, SOMEONE needed to be told of our parishioners’ ire. So I wrote Father Cook and you, Bishop Jugis. There is no one else to tell.
Do you know who I am impressed with? The TEENS of Immaculate Conception. They suggested the following:
Pray, pray, PRAY for Immaculate Conception Parish!
I found the biggest irony to be that only the young teens remembered the power of prayer to heal these wounds. Such a simple and, yet, profound practice! The adults were too busy complaining and suggesting to remember that prayer has great power!
So, there you go, Bishop Jugis, the other strange fruits of this Synod. You have a right to know them. Now you know our parish's thoughts in their entirety, voiced in the completely wrong place. What you do with these thoughts and suggestions is entirely up to you. May God bless you for all of the work you do in communion with Rome and our Holy Father, Pope Francis.
Sincerely,
Noelle Therese Thompson
Lay Leader of Synod on Synodality
Immaculate Conception, Hendersonville, NC
Noelle Therese Thompson
170 Foggy Mountain Road
Horse Shoe, NC 28742 USA
thefirstnoelle777@gmail.com
828-707-3288
April 28, 2022
Archbishop Gregory John Hartmayer
The Archdiocese of Atlanta
2401 Lake Park Drive SE
Smyrna, GA 30080 USA
SUBJECT: POSSIBLE CORRUPTION & SILENCING OF THE LAITY VIA THE SYNOD ON SYNODALITY IN THE DIOCESE OF CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA USA
To Your Excellency Archbishop Gregory John Hartmayer,
My name is Noelle Therese Thompson, and I am the Lay Contact Person for the Synod on Synodality from Immaculate Conception Parish in Hendersonville, NC. First, I want you to know how excited I am to have a Franciscan as our Archbishop and, further, that it was Pope Francis, himself, who appointed you! I am partial to the Franciscans. They used to staff our church at Immaculate Conception in Hendersonville, NC.
Next, I WANT TO THANK YOU for your work on the Synod on Synodality especially in regards to the incredibly thoughtful, thorough, and dynamic survey you approved for our archdiocese. It makes the laity feel so very encouraged and part of the Church! I participated and encouraged others. It was a true pleasure to see questions about real church reform posed to the laity of our archdiocese! Further, it has been my privilege to be named Lay Contact Person for the Synod on Synodality by Father Cook for Immaculate Conception Parish in Hendersonville, North Carolina. If I am correct, our diocese (under Bishop Jugis) is one of the many under your jurisdiction. If not, you can toss this letter, because it means I have misunderstood the hierarchy. My final reports (one parish-based and one diocese-based) have been submitted for the Synod, and if you are interested in our general parish answers to the three diocesan synodal questions, I point you to Dr. Rovarti who is now in charge of them. Or you can email me, and I will send them to you personally. (My email is thefirstnoelle777@gmail.com )
I researched HUNDREDS of these surveys to prepare for our own parish listening sessions at Immaculate Conception, and I chose many of our prompts directly from your submission. Again, THANK YOU! Now compare your dynamic survey with the stagnant one imposed upon us by the Diocese of Charlotte. Three questions only:
“What are the most significant signs of the Lord’s presence in your life? What are the biggest challenges or questions you face in responding to the Lord’s call? What steps is the Holy Spirit suggesting to you and your community to respond more fully to the Christian vocation?”
That’s it.
That’s what we were limited to, with such suspicious wording, … so that served as the basis of my report to the diocese, but our parish and other diocesan participants compelled me to include so much more within those confines!
I am writing to you specifically, Archbishop Hartmayer, as I have already written Father Cook (our pastor) and Bishop Jugus (our diocesan bishop). I told them of these things I am telling you, BUT I AM AFRAID THEY ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM.
LEADERSHIP IN THE DIOCESE OF CHARLOTTE MAY TRULY BE A PROBLEM, WIDENING THE RIFT IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH OF TRADITIONAL VS. PROGRESSIVE.
Now, I am going to take ownership of the thoughts in this particular section because, when I began praying the “Synod Prayer” and the Rosary unceasingly for help within the Synod, … and as I felt the evil one try to enter time and time again as I completed my work, I started noticing issues that I could not look the other way about. Issues from within. I want you to know about them, as I fear corruption within the Church.
I read a beautiful article about how the dioceses were encouraged to “get creative” with the Synod. Unfortunately, I felt knocked down by the lack of creativity in our own diocese, and then held down by the thumb of that lack of creativity while serving as the Lay Contact Person for my parish.
In my opinion as a Lay Contact Person for the Synod, the way the Synod is being handled in the Diocese of Charlotte is meant to shut out the progressive voice. Here are my concerns:
CONCERNS POINTING TO THE EXTINCTION OF THE LAITY VOICE VIA THE SYNOD
The most distressing? THE CANCELLATION AND COMPLETE DISMISSAL OF ANYONE TRYING TO MAKE THEIR SYNODAL VOICE HEARD OUTSIDE OF THE DIOCESE ANYONE from outside of the Diocese of Charlotte was turned away from the diocesan survey. One of the first questions would kick anyone else out. My pastor was quick to say that he wanted our parish listening session to include ONLY parish voices. (It is why I had to seek a separate report for a diocesan listening session.) AND WE ARE NOT THE ONLY DIOCESE THAT DID THIS. During my research on different surveys and listening sessions, only about ½ were truly welcoming to all. Considering the Pope’s desire for us to go out and even recruit the young drug addict” in other words, to go to the ends of the earth to find what the Holy Spirit was saying to ALL people of good, one would think that all dioceses and all bishops would welcome ANYONE who wanted to participate. Let me tell you something, someone who has been hurt by the Church in some way or someone who simply heard about the Synod through technology or someone who is a Protestant or an atheist and/or non-Christian is NOT going to be concerned with what diocese they are contacting to voice their opinion. Many progressives would stop at the first wall they hit or if it became too hard or difficult to continue. I believe the conservatives knew this, and used it. They KNOW it is the conservative population in the pews. They WANT only that conservative population to speak and become involved. In fact, there are many of my former students from Sacred Heart Academy in Hamden CT, that were silenced because they weren’t a member of a parish anymore and didn’t know where to participate. In my opinion, this expulsion of all from outside the diocese was designed DIRECTLY to include only conservative voices, … only the voices in the pews and nowhere NEAR the grand scale Pope Francis wanted it to be!
SO BEWARE TO MY DEAR POPE FRANCIS, IF YOU DON’T HEAR A MORE PROGRESSIVE VOICE FROM THE UNITED STATES VIA THE SYNOD … THIS IS WHY!!!!!!!! …
The very blatant use of LIP-SERVICE FOR THE SYNOD on the Diocese of Charlotte website in the meantime while proclaiming, “check back later for more information.” A video featuring Biship Jugis. Numerous quotes from Pope Francis. Explanation of what the word “Synod” means and where it came from. A picture of our diocesan contact (Rovarti) with all of his information. A format to contact him. That is it. No real way to get involved or even how to get the process moving. As a retired High School English Teacher, it was very obvious to me that this was only lip-service, meant to show there was a grand impetus at a glance, but with no real substance for action. It angered me enough to take screen shots of the website and include them in my spiritual journal.
The insistence on LIMITATION TO ONLY 3 SYNODAL QUESTIONS..
The SUSPICIOUS WORDING OF THESE QUESTIONS: “What are the most significant signs of the Lord’s presence in your life? What are the biggest challenges or questions you face in responding to the Lord’s call? What steps is the Holy Spirit suggesting to you and your community to respond more fully to the Christian vocation?” The bolded wording is suspicious. It is specifically meant to bring the reader inward, instead of outward towards possible issues with the Roman Catholic Church as a whole and away from the very issues that many people are worried about, especially in regards to inclusion. The reality? The wording didn’t matter. Our parishioners and our diocesan participants looked right past the suspicious wording and expanded it to tell their real thoughts on Church teaching (especially in regards to woman ordination and inclusion of the LGBTQ+ community).
The SIX MONTHS it took the Diocese of Charlotte to act! Pope Francis called for Synod in October of 2021! I knew of it immediately! I rejoiced and couldn’t WAIT to be involved! With the exception of a very enthusiastic-looking website with no means for true action, our diocese only BEGINS any kind of real process in early March 2022!?! The Diocesan Synod Survey came out in late April!?! This was AFTER our parish Synodal Listening Sessions were already complete.
THE BLATANT (PURPOSEFUL?) DELAY IN THE CHAIN OF COMMAND. I wrote our Diocesan Contact Person (Dr. Rovarti) in early February via the one way I knew how, the form on the diocesan website. I heard back in late February that I had to be named by my pastor. I wrote my pastor and heard nothing for weeks. Just when I thought things were hopeless and that I wasn’t chosen, I finally was granted a meeting with the pastor in early March and was told that, after Rovarti’s second email to Father Cook, Rovarti stopped emailing. If asked, Father Cook was going to claim “no interest” from our parish in order to go back to “the business of Masses and funerals.” At this meeting, Father Cook named me Lay Contact Person and I was told that no one else had asked, so not to expect a big turnout. The significant and lengthy pause between each of the above steps, set us closer and closer to the deadline.
And even further than the Synod, the THE EXPULSION OF FRANCISCAN ORDERS from the Diocese of Charlotte over the last few years. Immaculate Conception was one of the first, … followed a year or two later by another parish in Charlotte. I wonder if there were others.
Also further than the Synod, the insistence of a PRIVATE SEMINARY OVERSEEN BY BISHOP JUGIS. There are parishioners from our parish demanding to learn what they are taught at that “private” seminary, accusing Jugis of teaching straight clericalism.
FEARS AS A RESULT OF THE ABOVE CONCERNS:
The rift in the Catholic Church between traditional vs. progressive is WIDENING in our Diocese because of corruption within the Church.
That the Diocese of Charlotte does not WANT a truly synodal church.
That the Diocese of Charlotte wishes to squelch the progressive voice.
That the Diocese of Charlotte doesn’t want to hear from the laity AT ALL
That the Diocese of Charlotte, being ultra conservative, has an extreme dislike for Pope Francis.
You see, even limited by the wording of the diocese synodal questions many of our parishioners (unfortunately) tried to use the Synod as a sounding board for their parish complaints. Why? Because there was NO OTHER WAY for them to voice their concerns! They feel that they have already been silenced. Although these complaining voices are important, they do not belong in the larger, papal work of the Synod on Synodality. SO, I am voicing them here and you can do what you think is appropriate with this information. I sent the list that follows to Father Cook (pastor) and Peter Jugis (Bishop) as well.
I want it made clear that issues 1-4 below, are NOT MY OWN. I told Father Cook and Bishop Jugis the same thing. We had almost 250 people participate, and many of these thoughts were shared by the overwhelming majority (both teen and adult). I did not want these people to become disenfranchised, but I realized early on that many of their thoughts did not belong within the larger synodal vocation: hence, my letter to you.
I am not sure if you are familiar with the current fate of Immaculate Conception in Hendersonville: our parish has gone from a Franciscan parish of many years to a diocesan parish. The split from the Franciscans is the focal point of the angst exhibited by the parishioners.
The majority of these people are weeping over the extinction of the Franciscan Order from our diocese. They miss the Franciscans' vibrance and their openness to the Holy Spirit. They feel the Franciscan parish that was alive and vibrant just a few years ago is now an either dead or dying diocesan parish. (Covid, of course, didn't help matters.) My guess is they had no sounding board beyond simple gossip, so they tried to use the Synod to get their ideas across.
In short? They want the Franciscans back!
THE ISSUES of IMMACULATE CONCEPTION VOICED BY PARISHIONERS (inappropriate for Synod)
First issue: Removal of traditions/ministries. The women and young teens miss being able to participate in the Mass more fully as they feel they are no longer allowed to serve. Girl altar servers are no longer allowed, and no one is quite sure why. It certainly doesn’t follow the guidelines of Vatican II, and as Pope Francis has related, “Those who reject the teaching of the Second Vatican Council are placing themselves outside the Church.” Our parishioners don't understand why their cherished ministries, celebrations, and church groups have been taken away. (The Our Lady of Guadalupe Celebration was by far mentioned the most.)
Second issue: Clericalism. Our parishioners cited this as the second biggest problem in the parish. In researching the subject on aleteia.com, I found the following quote: “Clericalism is a disordered attitude toward clergy, an excessive deference and an assumption of their moral superiority. In the pithy description of Pope Francis it’s when ‘Clerics feel they are superior, [and when] they are far from the people.’” I am assuming the parishioners feel this way about our current pastor. Personally, I will leave my feelings about our pastor to myself, and I will speak of another diocesan priest who has recently left the parish. This very young priest, who shall remain nameless, gave an entire homily on the following (which is my paraphrase): I have been given the title of “Father,” and just as our Heavenly Father chides his children, I will be chiding YOU as your father from time to time. At this point, my then thirteen-year-old leaned over to me at Mass and said, “Do you see why I am terrified of these new priests?”
Third issue: Stagnant Liturgy (and a lack of dynamic clergy), bereft of the Holy Spirit. Having one priest with a monotone voice giving almost every homily about the “moral authority” of the Church may have something to do with it. And our poor hispanic population, 100% disenfranchised for the first two diocesan years, now has a priest who speaks only Spanish (which is wonderful) but when he tries to do English masses, is almost impossible to understand even to those who are bilingual.
Fourth Issue: Lack of Communication. By this, the parishioners were specifically meaning the communication from pastor to parishioner. For example, when not allowed to give an announcement from the pulpit and not allowed to put anything on our website or the app, the information on the Synod was left to the bulletin, flyers, and my personal social media. No wonder not many people participated! Did the leadership in the parish and the diocese actually WANT them to participate?
The fifth issue is my own: the Flight of Parishioners and Faculty from ICC & Immaculata (some in the middle of the school year)! This has all happened since the Franciscans left our parish. Why is this? Could it be issues 1-4 above? When our parishioners were asked to give “the steps the Holy Spirit was suggesting” to fix these problems. Inappropriate responses were given: reverting to a Franciscan parish, ousting the pastor, forcing clergy to be more dynamic, insisting that clericalism not be taught in seminary, demanding to know what IS taught in seminary, and reinstating all former groups/celebrations. Although not appropriate for our Synod Report, SOMEONE needed to be told of our parishioners’ ire. So I wrote Father Cook, Bishop Jugis, and YOU, Archbishop Hartmayer. There is no one else to tell.
Do you know who I am impressed with? The TEENS of Immaculate Conception. They suggested the following:
Pray, pray, PRAY for Immaculate Conception Parish!
I found the biggest irony to be that only the young teens remembered the power of prayer to heal these wounds. Such a simple and, yet, profound practice! The adults were too busy complaining and suggesting to remember that prayer has great power!
So, there you go, Archbishop Hartmayer, the other strange fruits of this Synod on Synodality. You have a right to know them. Now you know our parish's thoughts in their entirety, voiced in the completely wrong place. What you do with these thoughts and suggestions is entirely up to you. May God bless you for choosing the Franciscan order and for all of the work you do in communion with Rome and our Holy Father, Pope Francis.
Sincerely,
Noelle Therese Thompson
Lay Leader of Synod on Synodality
Immaculate Conception, Hendersonville, NC
170 Foggy Mountain Road
Horse Shoe, NC 28742 USA
thefirstnoelle777@gmail.com
828-707-3288
April 28, 2022
Archbishop José Horacio Gómez
USCCB
3211 4th Street NE
Washington DC 20002 USA
SUBJECT: POSSIBLE CORRUPTION & SILENCING OF THE LAITY VIA THE SYNOD ON SYNODALITY IN THE DIOCESE OF CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA USA
To His Excellency Archbishop José Horacio Gómez (or to who it may concern in the USCCB),
My name is Noelle Therese Thompson, and I am the Lay Contact Person for the Synod on Synodality from Immaculate Conception Parish in Hendersonville, NC. First, I want to give kudos to our Franciscan Archbishop Hartmayer, Archbishop of Atlanta which (I think) includes our diocese, the Diocese of Charlotte. Archbishop Hartmayer’s work on the Synod on Synodality especially in regards to the incredibly thoughtful, thorough, and dynamic survey he approved for our archdiocese made the laity feel so very encouraged and part of the Church! I participated and encouraged others. It was a true pleasure to see questions about real church reform posed to the laity of our archdiocese! Further, it has been my privilege to be named Lay Contact Person for the Synod on Synodality by Father Cook for Immaculate Conception Parish in Hendersonville, North Carolina. I have already written Father Cook (pastor), Peter Jugis (bishop), and Gregory Hartmayer (archbishop) about the information contained in this letter. In regards to the Synod on Synodality, my final reports (one parish-based and one diocese-based) have been submitted for the Synod, and if you are interested in our general parish answers to the three diocesan synodal questions, I point you to Dr. Rovarti who is now in charge of them. Or you can email me, and I will send them to you personally. ( My email is thefirstnoelle777@gmail.com )
I researched HUNDREDS of current Synod surveys to prepare for our own parish listening sessions at Immaculate Conception in Hendersonville, NC, and I chose many of our prompts directly from the submission from the Archdiocese of Atlanta. Unfortunately, a much more stagnant version was imposed by the Diocese of Charlotte. Three questions only:
“What are the most significant signs of the Lord’s presence in your life? What are the biggest challenges or questions you face in responding to the Lord’s call? What steps is the Holy Spirit suggesting to you and your community to respond more fully to the Christian vocation?”
That’s it.
That’s what we were limited to, with such suspicious wording, … so that served as the basis of my report to the diocese, but our parish and other diocesan participants compelled me to include so much more within those confines!
Yes, I have already written Father Cook (our pastor) and Bishop Jugus (our diocesan bishop). I told them of these things I am telling you, BUT I AM AFRAID THEY ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM. So I began in writing Archbishop Gregory Hartmayer, and now I am taking my concerns further to the USCCB.
LEADERSHIP IN THE DIOCESE OF CHARLOTTE MAY TRULY BE A PROBLEM, WIDENING THE RIFT IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH BETWEEN TRADITIONAL VS. PROGRESSIVE.
Now, I am going to take ownership of the thoughts in this particular section because, when I began praying the “Synod Prayer” and the Rosary unceasingly for help within the Synod, … and as I felt the evil one try to enter time and time again as I completed my work, I started noticing issues that I could not look the other way about. Issues from within. I want you to know about them, as I fear corruption within the Church.
I read a beautiful article about how the dioceses were encouraged to “get creative” with the Synod. Unfortunately, I felt knocked down by the lack of creativity in our own diocese, and then held down by the thumb of that lack of creativity while serving as the Lay Contact Person for my parish.
In my opinion as a Lay Contact Person for the Synod, the way the Synod is being handled in the Diocese of Charlotte is meant to shut out the progressive voice. Here are my concerns:
CONCERNS POINTING TO THE EXTINCTION OF THE LAITY VOICE VIA THE SYNOD
The most distressing? THE CANCELLATION AND COMPLETE DISMISSAL OF ANYONE TRYING TO MAKE THEIR SYNODAL VOICE HEARD OUTSIDE OF THE DIOCESE ANYONE from outside of the Diocese of Charlotte was turned away from the diocesan survey. One of the first questions would kick anyone else out. My pastor was quick to say that he wanted our parish listening session to include ONLY parish voices. (It is why I had to seek a separate report for a diocesan listening session.) AND WE ARE NOT THE ONLY DIOCESE THAT DID THIS. During my research on different surveys and listening sessions, only about ½ were truly welcoming to all. Considering the Pope’s desire for us to go out and even recruit the young drug addict” in other words, to go to the ends of the earth to find what the Holy Spirit was saying to ALL people of good, one would think that all dioceses and all bishops would welcome ANYONE who wanted to participate. Let me tell you something, someone who has been hurt by the Church in some way or someone who simply heard about the Synod through technology or someone who is a Protestant or an atheist and/or non-Christian is NOT going to be concerned with what diocese they are contacting to voice their opinion. Many progressives would stop at the first wall they hit or if it became too hard or difficult to continue. I believe the conservatives knew this, and used it. They KNOW it is the conservative population in the pews. They WANT only that conservative population to speak and become involved. In fact, there are many of my former students from Sacred Heart Academy in Hamden CT, that were silenced because they weren’t a member of a parish anymore and didn’t know where to participate. In my opinion, this expulsion of all from outside the diocese was designed DIRECTLY to include only conservative voices, … only the voices in the pews and nowhere NEAR the grand scale Pope Francis wanted it to be!
SO BEWARE TO MY DEAR POPE FRANCIS, IF YOU DON’T HEAR A MORE PROGRESSIVE VOICE FROM THE UNITED STATES VIA THE SYNOD … THIS IS WHY!!!!!!!! …
The very blatant use of LIP-SERVICE FOR THE SYNOD on the Diocese of Charlotte website in the meantime while proclaiming, “check back later for more information.” A video featuring Bishop Jugis. Numerous quotes from Pope Francis. Explanation of what the word “Synod” means and where it came from. A picture of our diocesan contact (Rovarti) with all of his information. A format to contact him. That was it until THIS MONTH. Before April, there was no real way to get involved or even how to get the process moving. Now, at least there is a diocesan survey, … a month or two before the papal deadline. As a retired High School English Teacher, it was very obvious to me that this was only lip-service, meant to show there was a grand impetus at a glance, but with no real substance for action. It angered me enough to take screenshots of the website and include them in my spiritual journal.
The insistence on LIMITATION TO ONLY 3 SYNODAL QUESTIONS..
The SUSPICIOUS WORDING OF THESE QUESTIONS: “What are the most significant signs of the Lord’s presence in your life? What are the biggest challenges or questions you face in responding to the Lord’s call? What steps is the Holy Spirit suggesting to you and your community to respond more fully to the Christian vocation?” The bolded wording is suspicious. It is specifically meant to bring the reader inward, instead of outward towards possible issues with the Roman Catholic Church as a whole and away from the very issues that many people are worried about, especially in regards to inclusion. The reality? The wording didn’t matter. Our parishioners and our diocesan participants looked right past the suspicious wording and expanded it to tell their real thoughts on Church teaching (especially in regards to woman ordination and inclusion of the LGBTQ+ community).
The SIX MONTHS it took the Diocese of Charlotte to act! Pope Francis called for Synod in October of 2021! I knew of it immediately! I rejoiced and couldn’t WAIT to be involved! With the exception of a very enthusiastic-looking website with no means for true action, our diocese only BEGINS any kind of real process in early March 2022!?! The Diocesan Synod Survey came out in April!?! This was AFTER our parish Synodal Listening Sessions were already complete.
THE BLATANT (PURPOSEFUL?) DELAY IN THE CHAIN OF COMMAND. I wrote our Diocesan Contact Person (Dr. Rovarti) in early February via the one way I knew how, the form on the diocesan website. I heard back in late February that I had to be named by my pastor. I wrote my pastor and heard nothing for weeks. Just when I thought things were hopeless and that I wasn’t chosen, I finally was granted a meeting with the pastor in early March and was told that, after Rovarti’s second email to Father Cook, Rovarti stopped emailing. If asked, Father Cook was going to claim “no interest” from our parish in order to go back to “the business of Masses and funerals.” At this meeting, Father Cook named me Lay Contact Person and I was told that no one else had asked, so not to expect a big turnout. The significant and lengthy pause between each of the above steps, set us closer and closer to the deadline.
And even further than the Synod, the THE EXPULSION OF FRANCISCAN ORDERS from the Diocese of Charlotte over the last few years. Immaculate Conception was one of the first, … followed a year or two later by another parish in Charlotte. I wonder if there were others.
Also further than the Synod, the insistence of a PRIVATE SEMINARY OVERSEEN BY BISHOP JUGIS. There are parishioners from our parish demanding to learn what they are taught at that “private” seminary, accusing Jugis of teaching straight clericalism.
FEARS AS A RESULT OF THE ABOVE CONCERNS:
The rift in the Catholic Church between traditional vs. progressive is WIDENING in our Diocese because of corruption within the Church.
That the Diocese of Charlotte does not WANT a truly synodal church.
That the Diocese of Charlotte wishes to squelch the progressive voice.
That the Diocese of Charlotte doesn’t want to hear from the laity AT ALL
That the Diocese of Charlotte, being ultra conservative, has an extreme dislike for Pope Francis.
You see, even limited by the wording of the diocese synodal questions many of our parishioners (unfortunately) tried to use the Synod as a sounding board for their parish complaints. Why? Because there was NO OTHER WAY for them to voice their concerns! They feel that they have already been silenced. Although these complaining voices are important, they do not belong in the larger, papal work of the Synod on Synodality. SO, I am voicing them here and you can do what you think is appropriate with this information. I sent the list that follows to Father Cook (pastor), Peter Jugis (Bishop), and Gregory Hartmayer (Archbishop) as well.
I want it made clear that issues 1-4 below, are NOT MY OWN. I told Father Cook, the Bishop, and Archbishop the same thing. We had almost 250 people participate, and many of these thoughts were shared by the overwhelming majority (both teen and adult). I did not want these people to become disenfranchised, but I realized early on that many of their thoughts did not belong within the larger synodal vocation: hence, my letter to you.
I am not sure if you are familiar with the current fate of Immaculate Conception in Hendersonville: our parish has gone from a Franciscan parish of many years to a diocesan parish. The split from the Franciscans is the focal point of the angst exhibited by the parishioners.
The majority of these people are weeping over the extinction of the Franciscan Order from our diocese. They miss the Franciscans' vibrance and their openness to the Holy Spirit. They feel the Franciscan parish that was alive and vibrant just a few years ago is now an either dead or dying diocesan parish. (Covid, of course, didn't help matters.) My guess is they had no sounding board beyond simple gossip, so they tried to use the Synod to get their ideas across.
In short? They want the Franciscans back!
THE ISSUES of IMMACULATE CONCEPTION VOICED BY PARISHIONERS (inappropriate for Synod)
First issue: Removal of traditions/ministries. The women and young teens miss being able to participate in the Mass more fully as they feel they are no longer allowed to serve. Girl altar servers are no longer allowed, and no one is quite sure why. It certainly doesn’t follow the guidelines of Vatican II, and as Pope Francis has related, “Those who reject the teaching of the Second Vatican Council are placing themselves outside the Church.” Our parishioners don't understand why their cherished ministries, celebrations, and church groups have been taken away. (The Our Lady of Guadalupe Celebration was by far mentioned the most.)
Second issue: Clericalism. Our parishioners cited this as the second biggest problem in the parish. In researching the subject on aleteia.com, I found the following quote: “Clericalism is a disordered attitude toward clergy, an excessive deference and an assumption of their moral superiority. In the pithy description of Pope Francis it’s when ‘Clerics feel they are superior, [and when] they are far from the people.’” I am assuming the parishioners feel this way about our current pastor. Personally, I will leave my feelings about our pastor to myself, and I will speak of another diocesan priest who has recently left the parish. This very young priest, who shall remain nameless, gave an entire homily on the following (which is my paraphrase): I have been given the title of “Father,” and just as our Heavenly Father chides his children, I will be chiding YOU as your father from time to time. At this point, my then thirteen-year-old leaned over to me at Mass and said, “Do you see why I am terrified of these new priests?”
Third issue: Stagnant Liturgy (and a lack of dynamic clergy), bereft of the Holy Spirit. Having one priest with a monotone voice giving almost every homily about the “moral authority” of the Church may have something to do with it. And our poor hispanic population, 100% disenfranchised for the first two diocesan years, now has a priest who speaks only Spanish (which is wonderful) but when he tries to do English masses, is almost impossible to understand even to those who are bilingual.
Fourth Issue: Lack of Communication. By this, the parishioners were specifically meaning the communication from pastor to parishioner. For example, when not allowed to give an announcement from the pulpit and not allowed to put anything on our website or the app, the information on the Synod was left to the bulletin, flyers, and my personal social media. No wonder not many people participated! Did the leadership in the parish and the diocese actually WANT them to participate?
The fifth issue is my own: the Flight of Parishioners and Faculty from ICC & Immaculata (some in the middle of the school year)! This has all happened since the Franciscans left our parish. Why is this? Could it be issues 1-4 above? When our parishioners were asked to give “the steps the Holy Spirit was suggesting” to fix these problems. Inappropriate responses were given: reverting to a Franciscan parish, ousting the pastor, forcing clergy to be more dynamic, insisting that clericalism not be taught in seminary, demanding to know what IS taught in seminary, and reinstating all former groups/celebrations. Although not appropriate for our Synod Report, SOMEONE needed to be told of our parishioners’ ire. So I wrote Father Cook, Bishop Jugis, Archbishop Hartmayer, and now the USCCB. This is in hopes that our parish concerns will be heard. There is no one else to tell.
Do you know who I am impressed with? The TEENS of Immaculate Conception. They suggested the following:
Pray, pray, PRAY for Immaculate Conception Parish!
I found the biggest irony to be that only the young teens remembered the power of prayer to heal these wounds. Such a simple and, yet, profound practice! The adults were too busy complaining and suggesting to remember that prayer has great power!
So, there you go, your excellency, the other strange fruits of this Synod on Synodality. You have a right to know them. Now you know our parish's thoughts in their entirety, voiced in the completely wrong place. What you do with these thoughts and suggestions is entirely up to you. May God bless you and the entire USCCB for all of the work you do in communion with Rome and our Holy Father, Pope Francis.
Sincerely,
Noelle Therese Thompson
Lay Leader of Synod on Synodality
Immaculate Conception, Hendersonville, NC
170 Foggy Mountain Road
Horse Shoe, NC 28742 USA
thefirstnoelle777@gmail.com
828-707-3288
April 28, 2022
His Holiness, Pope Francis PP
00120 Via del Pellegrino
Citta del Vaticano
SUBJECT: POSSIBLE CORRUPTION & SILENCING OF THE LAITY VIA THE SYNOD ON SYNODALITY IN THE DIOCESE OF CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA USA & BEYOND
To our dear Holy Father Pope Francis,
My name is Noelle Therese Thompson, and I am the Lay Contact Person for the Synod on Synodality from Immaculate Conception Parish in Hendersonville, NC USA. Thank you, my dear dear Francisco, for opening up the Church and for proclaiming “who am I to judge?” and for grabbing the attention of the most staunch non-Christians among us and for being a true representative of Christ on earth! Thank you, THANK YOU!
First, I want to give kudos to our Franciscan Archbishop Hartmayer, Archbishop of Atlanta which (I think) includes our diocese, the Diocese of Charlotte. Archbishop Hartmayer’s work on the Synod on Synodality especially in regards to the incredibly thoughtful, thorough, and dynamic survey he approved for our archdiocese made the laity feel so very encouraged and part of the Church! I participated and encouraged others. It was a true pleasure to see questions about real church reform posed to the laity of our archdiocese! Further, it has been my privilege to be named Lay Contact Person for the Synod on Synodality by Father Cook for Immaculate Conception Parish in Hendersonville, North Carolina. I have already written Father Cook (pastor), Peter Jugis (bishop), Gregory Hartmayer (archbishop), and even the USCCB about the information contained in this letter. In regards to the Synod on Synodality, my final reports (one parish-based and one diocese-based) have been submitted for the Synod, and if you are interested in our general parish answers to the three diocesan synodal questions, you can email me, and I will send them to you personally. ( My email is thefirstnoelle777@gmail.com )
I researched HUNDREDS of current Synod surveys to prepare for our own parish listening sessions at Immaculate Conception in Hendersonville, NC, and I chose many of our prompts directly from the submission from the Archdiocese of Atlanta. Unfortunately, a much more stagnant version was imposed by the Diocese of Charlotte. Three questions only:
“What are the most significant signs of the Lord’s presence in your life? What are the biggest challenges or questions you face in responding to the Lord’s call? What steps is the Holy Spirit suggesting to you and your community to respond more fully to the Christian vocation?”
That’s it.
That’s what we were limited to, with such suspicious wording, … so that served as the basis of my report to the diocese, but our parish and other diocesan participants compelled me to include so much more within those confines!
Yes, I have already written Father Cook (our pastor) and Bishop Jugus (our diocesan bishop). I told them of these things I am telling you, BUT I AM AFRAID THEY ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM. I FEAR CORRUPTION. So I began by writing Archbishop Gregory Hartmayer, the USCCB, and now I am taking our concerns directly to you, my dear dear Pope Francis.
LEADERSHIP IN THE DIOCESE OF CHARLOTTE MAY TRULY BE A PROBLEM, WIDENING THE RIFT IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH BETWEEN TRADITIONAL VS. PROGRESSIVE.
I DESIRE UNITY, AS I KNOW YOU DO, DEAR FRANCISCO. SO I WANT TO POINT TO POSSIBLE CORRUPTION MEANT TO SEPARATE INSTEAD OF UNIFY.
Now, I am going to take ownership of the thoughts in this particular section because, when I began praying the “Synod Prayer” and the Rosary unceasingly for help within the Synod, … and as I felt the evil one try to enter time and time again as I completed my work, I started noticing issues that I could not look the other way about. Issues from within. I want you to know about them, as I fear corruption within the Church.
I read a beautiful article about how the dioceses were encouraged to “get creative” with the Synod. Unfortunately, I felt knocked down by the lack of creativity in our own diocese, and then held down by the thumb of that lack of creativity while serving as the Lay Contact Person for my parish.
In my opinion as a Lay Contact Person for the Synod, the way the Synod is being handled in the Diocese of Charlotte is meant to shut out the progressive voice. Here are my concerns:
CONCERNS POINTING TO THE EXTINCTION OF THE LAITY VOICE VIA THE SYNOD
The most distressing? THE CANCELLATION AND COMPLETE DISMISSAL OF ANYONE TRYING TO MAKE THEIR SYNODAL VOICE HEARD OUTSIDE OF THE DIOCESE ANYONE from outside of the Diocese of Charlotte was turned away from the diocesan survey. One of the first questions would kick anyone else out. My pastor was quick to say that he wanted our parish listening session to include ONLY parish voices. (It is why I had to seek a separate report for a diocesan listening session.) AND WE ARE NOT THE ONLY DIOCESE THAT DID THIS. During my research on different surveys and listening sessions, only about ½ were truly welcoming to all. Considering the Pope’s desire for us to go out and even recruit the young drug addict” in other words, to go to the ends of the earth to find what the Holy Spirit was saying to ALL people of good, one would think that all dioceses and all bishops would welcome ANYONE who wanted to participate. Let me tell you something, someone who has been hurt by the Church in some way or someone who simply heard about the Synod through technology or someone who is a Protestant or an atheist and/or non-Christian is NOT going to be concerned with what diocese they are contacting to voice their opinion. Many progressives would stop at the first wall they hit or if it became too hard or difficult to continue. I believe the conservatives knew this, and used it. They KNOW it is the conservative population in the pews. They WANT only that conservative population to speak and become involved. In fact, there are many of my former students from Sacred Heart Academy in Hamden CT, that were silenced because they weren’t a member of a parish anymore and didn’t know where to participate. In my opinion, this expulsion of all from outside the diocese was designed DIRECTLY to include only conservative voices, … only the voices in the pews and nowhere NEAR the grand scale Pope Francis wanted it to be!
SO BEWARE TO MY DEAR POPE FRANCIS, IF YOU DON’T HEAR A MORE PROGRESSIVE VOICE FROM THE UNITED STATES VIA THE SYNOD … THIS IS WHY!!!!!!!! …
The very blatant use of LIP-SERVICE FOR THE SYNOD on the Diocese of Charlotte website in the meantime while proclaiming, “check back later for more information.” A video featuring Bishop Jugis. Numerous quotes from you, Pope Francis. Explanation of what the word “Synod” means and where it came from. A picture of our diocesan contact (Rovarti) with all of his information. A format to contact him. That was it until THIS MONTH. Before April, there was no real way to get involved or even how to get the process moving. Now, at least there is a diocesan survey, … a month or two before the papal deadline. As a retired High School English Teacher, it was very obvious to me that this was only lip-service, meant to show there was a grand impetus at a glance, but with no real substance for action. It angered me enough to take screenshots of the website and include them in my spiritual journal.
The insistence on LIMITATION TO ONLY 3 SYNODAL QUESTIONS..
The SUSPICIOUS WORDING OF THESE QUESTIONS: “What are the most significant signs of the Lord’s presence in your life? What are the biggest challenges or questions you face in responding to the Lord’s call? What steps is the Holy Spirit suggesting to you and your community to respond more fully to the Christian vocation?” The bolded wording is suspicious. It is specifically meant to bring the reader inward, instead of outward towards possible issues with the Roman Catholic Church as a whole and away from the very issues that many people are worried about, especially in regards to inclusion. The reality? The wording didn’t matter. Our parishioners and our diocesan participants looked right past the suspicious wording and expanded it to tell their real thoughts on Church teaching (especially in regards to woman ordination and inclusion of the LGBTQ+ community).
The SIX MONTHS it took the Diocese of Charlotte to act! You gave your first beautiful homily calling us all to Synod in October of 2021! I knew of it immediately! I rejoiced and couldn’t WAIT to be involved! With the exception of a very enthusiastic-looking website with no means for true action, our diocese only BEGINS any kind of real process in early March 2022!?! The Diocesan Synod Survey came out in April!?! This was AFTER our parish Synodal Listening Sessions were already complete.
THE BLATANT (PURPOSEFUL?) DELAY IN THE CHAIN OF COMMAND. I waited and waited, searching our bulletin and the bulletins of surrounding parishes for months. Nothing. Finally, I wrote our Diocesan Contact Person (Dr. Rovarti) in early February via the one way I knew how, the form on the diocesan website. I heard back in late February that I had to be named by my pastor to do anything at all. I wrote my pastor and heard nothing for weeks. Just when I thought things were hopeless and that I wasn’t chosen, I finally was granted a meeting with the pastor in early March and was told that, after Rovarti’s second email to Father Cook, Rovarti stopped emailing. If asked, Father Cook was going to claim “no interest” from our parish in order to go back to “the business of Masses and funerals.” At this meeting, Father Cook named me Lay Contact Person and I was told that no one else had asked, so not to expect a big turnout. The significant and lengthy pause between each of the above steps, set us closer and closer to the deadline.
And even further than the Synod, the THE EXPULSION OF FRANCISCAN ORDERS from the Diocese of Charlotte over the last few years. Immaculate Conception was one of the first, … followed a year or two later by another parish in Charlotte. I wonder if there were others.
Also further than the Synod, the insistence of a PRIVATE SEMINARY IN THE DIOCESE OF CHARLOTTE NC OVERSEEN BY BISHOP JUGIS. There are parishioners from our parish demanding to learn what they are taught at that “private” seminary, accusing Jugis of teaching straight clericalism.
FEARS AS A RESULT OF THE ABOVE CONCERNS:
The rift in the Catholic Church between traditional vs. progressive is WIDENING in our Diocese because of corruption within the Church.
That the Diocese of Charlotte does not WANT a truly synodal church.
That the Diocese of Charlotte wishes to squelch the progressive voice.
That the Diocese of Charlotte doesn’t want to hear from the laity AT ALL
That the Diocese of Charlotte, being ultra conservative, has an extreme dislike for the current papal authority.
You see, even limited by the wording of the diocese synodal questions many of our parishioners (unfortunately) tried to use the Synod as a sounding board for their parish complaints. Why? Because there was NO OTHER WAY for them to voice their concerns! They feel that they have already been silenced. Although these complaining voices are important, they do not belong in the larger, papal work of the Synod on Synodality. SO, I am voicing them here and you can do what you think is appropriate with this information. I sent the list that follows to Father Cook (pastor), Peter Jugis (Bishop), Gregory Hartmayer (Archbishop), and the USCCB as well.
I want it made clear that issues 1-4 below, are NOT MY OWN. I told Father Cook, the Bishop, and Archbishop the same thing. We had almost 250 people participate, and many of these thoughts were shared by the overwhelming majority (both teen and adult). I did not want these people to become disenfranchised, but I realized early on that many of their thoughts did not belong within the larger synodal vocation: hence, my letter to you.
I am not sure if you are familiar with the current fate of Immaculate Conception in Hendersonville, NC USA: our parish has gone from a Franciscan parish of many years to a diocesan parish. The split from the Franciscans is the focal point of the angst exhibited by the parishioners.
The majority of these people are weeping over the extinction of the Franciscan Order from our diocese. They miss the Franciscans' vibrance and their openness to the Holy Spirit. They feel the Franciscan parish that was alive and vibrant just a few years ago is now an either dead or dying diocesan parish. (Covid, of course, didn't help matters.) My guess is they had no sounding board beyond simple gossip, so they tried to use the Synod to get their ideas across.
In short? They want the Franciscans back!
THE ISSUES of IMMACULATE CONCEPTION VOICED BY PARISHIONERS (inappropriate for Synod)
First issue: Removal of traditions/ministries. The women and young teens miss being able to participate in the Mass more fully as they feel they are no longer allowed to serve. Girl altar servers are no longer allowed, and no one is quite sure why. It certainly doesn’t follow the guidelines of Vatican II, and as you have related in the past and I quote, “Those who reject the teaching of the Second Vatican Council are placing themselves outside the Church.” Our parishioners don't understand why their cherished ministries, celebrations, and church groups have been taken away. (The Our Lady of Guadalupe Celebration was by far mentioned the most.)
Second issue: Clericalism. Our parishioners cited this as the second biggest problem in the parish. In researching the subject on aleteia.com, I found the following quote: “Clericalism is a disordered attitude toward clergy, an excessive deference and an assumption of their moral superiority. In your pithy description, dear Francisco, it’s when ‘Clerics feel they are superior, [and when] they are far from the people.’” I am assuming the parishioners feel this way about our current pastor. Personally, I will leave my feelings about our pastor to myself, and I will speak of another diocesan priest who has recently left the parish. This very young priest, who shall remain nameless, gave an entire homily on the following (which is my paraphrase): I have been given the title of “Father,” and just as our Heavenly Father chides his children, I will be chiding YOU as your father from time to time. At this point, my then thirteen-year-old leaned over to me at Mass and said, “Do you see why I am terrified of these new priests?”
Third issue: Stagnant Liturgy (and a lack of dynamic clergy), bereft of the Holy Spirit. Having one priest with a monotone voice giving almost every homily about the “moral authority” of the Church may have something to do with it. And our poor hispanic population, 100% disenfranchised for the first two diocesan years with no Spanish-speaking priest at all, now has a priest who speaks only Spanish (which is wonderful) but when he tries to do English masses, is almost impossible to understand even to those who are bilingual.
Fourth Issue: Lack of Communication. By this, the parishioners were specifically meaning the communication from pastor to parishioner. For example, when not allowed to give an announcement from the pulpit and not allowed to put anything on our website or the app, the information on the Synod was left to the bulletin, flyers, and my personal social media. No wonder not many people participated! Did the leadership in the parish and the diocese actually WANT them to participate?
The fifth issue is my own: the Flight of Parishioners and Faculty from ICC & Immaculata Catholic School (some in the middle of the school year)! This has all happened since the Franciscans left our parish. Why is this? Could it be issues 1-4 above? When our parishioners were asked to give “the steps the Holy Spirit was suggesting” to fix these problems. Inappropriate responses were given: reverting to a Franciscan parish, ousting the pastor, forcing clergy to be more dynamic, insisting that clericalism not be taught in seminary, demanding to know what IS taught in seminary, and reinstating all former groups/celebrations. Although not appropriate for our Synod Report, SOMEONE needed to be told of our parishioners’ ire. So I wrote Father Cook, Bishop Jugis, Archbishop Hartmayer, the USCCB, and now directly to you, Pope Francis. This is in hopes that our parish concerns will be heard. There is no one else to tell.
Do you know who I am impressed with? The TEENS of Immaculate Conception. They suggested the following:
Pray, pray, PRAY for Immaculate Conception Parish!
I found the biggest irony to be that only the young teens remembered the power of prayer to heal these wounds. Such a simple and, yet, profound practice! The adults were too busy complaining and suggesting to remember that prayer has great power!
So, there you go, my dear Holy Father, the other strange fruits of this Synod on Synodality. You have a right to know them. Now you know our parish's thoughts in their entirety, voiced in the completely wrong place. What you do with these thoughts and suggestions is entirely up to you. May God bless you for absolutely everything you endure for Christian Unity in this world. I believe you will be greatly blessed by our Lord and Savior, … and although I will probably never be blessed with an audience with you directly, I hope to meet you within the Communion of Saints gazing at the Beatific Vision someday. (That is AFTER my million years in Purgatory.) So until then, ..
My Love Always in Unity with Christ Jesus,
Noelle Therese Thompson
Lay Leader of Synod on Synodality
Immaculate Conception, Hendersonville, NC USA
170 Foggy Mountain Road
Horse Shoe, NC 28742 USA
thefirstnoelle777@gmail.com
828-707-3288
April 28, 2022
His Holiness Pope Francis
Apostolic Palace
VATICAN CITY, 00120
SUBJECT: POSSIBLE CORRUPTION & SILENCING OF THE LAITY VIA THE SYNOD ON SYNODALITY IN THE DIOCESE OF CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA USA & BEYOND
To our dear Holy Father Pope Francis,
My name is Noelle Therese Thompson, and I am the Lay Contact Person for the Synod on Synodality from Immaculate Conception Parish in Hendersonville, NC USA. Thank you, my dear dear Francisco, for opening up the Church and for proclaiming “who am I to judge?” and for grabbing the attention of the most staunch non-Christians among us and for being a true representative of Christ on earth! Thank you, THANK YOU!
First, I want to give kudos to our Franciscan Archbishop Hartmayer, Archbishop of Atlanta which (I think) includes our diocese, the Diocese of Charlotte. Archbishop Hartmayer’s work on the Synod on Synodality especially in regards to the incredibly thoughtful, thorough, and dynamic survey he approved for our archdiocese made the laity feel so very encouraged and part of the Church! I participated and encouraged others. It was a true pleasure to see questions about real church reform posed to the laity of our archdiocese! Further, it has been my privilege to be named Lay Contact Person for the Synod on Synodality by Father Cook for Immaculate Conception Parish in Hendersonville, North Carolina. I have already written Father Cook (pastor), Peter Jugis (bishop), Gregory Hartmayer (archbishop), and even the USCCB about the information contained in this letter. In regards to the Synod on Synodality, my final reports (one parish-based and one diocese-based) have been submitted for the Synod, and if you are interested in our general parish answers to the three diocesan synodal questions, you can email me, and I will send them to you personally. ( My email is thefirstnoelle777@gmail.com )
I researched HUNDREDS of current Synod surveys to prepare for our own parish listening sessions at Immaculate Conception in Hendersonville, NC, and I chose many of our prompts directly from the submission from the Archdiocese of Atlanta. Unfortunately, a much more stagnant version was imposed by the Diocese of Charlotte. Three questions only:
“What are the most significant signs of the Lord’s presence in your life? What are the biggest challenges or questions you face in responding to the Lord’s call? What steps is the Holy Spirit suggesting to you and your community to respond more fully to the Christian vocation?”
That’s it.
That’s what we were limited to, with such suspicious wording, … so that served as the basis of my report to the diocese, but our parish and other diocesan participants compelled me to include so much more within those confines!
Yes, I have already written Father Cook (our pastor) and Bishop Jugus (our diocesan bishop). I told them of these things I am telling you, BUT I AM AFRAID THEY ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM. I FEAR CORRUPTION. So I began by writing Archbishop Gregory Hartmayer, the USCCB, and now I am taking our concerns directly to you, my dear dear Pope Francis.
LEADERSHIP IN THE DIOCESE OF CHARLOTTE MAY TRULY BE A PROBLEM, WIDENING THE RIFT IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH BETWEEN TRADITIONAL VS. PROGRESSIVE.
I DESIRE UNITY, AS I KNOW YOU DO, DEAR FRANCISCO. SO I WANT TO POINT TO POSSIBLE CORRUPTION MEANT TO SEPARATE INSTEAD OF UNIFY.
Now, I am going to take ownership of the thoughts in this particular section because, when I began praying the “Synod Prayer” and the Rosary unceasingly for help within the Synod, … and as I felt the evil one try to enter time and time again as I completed my work, I started noticing issues that I could not look the other way about. Issues from within. I want you to know about them, as I fear corruption within the Church.
I read a beautiful article about how the dioceses were encouraged to “get creative” with the Synod. Unfortunately, I felt knocked down by the lack of creativity in our own diocese, and then held down by the thumb of that lack of creativity while serving as the Lay Contact Person for my parish.
In my opinion as a Lay Contact Person for the Synod, the way the Synod is being handled in the Diocese of Charlotte is meant to shut out the progressive voice. Here are my concerns:
CONCERNS POINTING TO THE EXTINCTION OF THE LAITY VOICE VIA THE SYNOD
The most distressing? THE CANCELLATION AND COMPLETE DISMISSAL OF ANYONE TRYING TO MAKE THEIR SYNODAL VOICE HEARD OUTSIDE OF THE DIOCESE ANYONE from outside of the Diocese of Charlotte was turned away from the diocesan survey. One of the first questions would kick anyone else out. My pastor was quick to say that he wanted our parish listening session to include ONLY parish voices. (It is why I had to seek a separate report for a diocesan listening session.) AND WE ARE NOT THE ONLY DIOCESE THAT DID THIS. During my research on different surveys and listening sessions, only about ½ were truly welcoming to all. Considering the Pope’s desire for us to go out and even recruit the young drug addict” in other words, to go to the ends of the earth to find what the Holy Spirit was saying to ALL people of good, one would think that all dioceses and all bishops would welcome ANYONE who wanted to participate. Let me tell you something, someone who has been hurt by the Church in some way or someone who simply heard about the Synod through technology or someone who is a Protestant or an atheist and/or non-Christian is NOT going to be concerned with what diocese they are contacting to voice their opinion. Many progressives would stop at the first wall they hit or if it became too hard or difficult to continue. I believe the conservatives knew this, and used it. They KNOW it is the conservative population in the pews. They WANT only that conservative population to speak and become involved. In fact, there are many of my former students from Sacred Heart Academy in Hamden CT, that were silenced because they weren’t a member of a parish anymore and didn’t know where to participate. In my opinion, this expulsion of all from outside the diocese was designed DIRECTLY to include only conservative voices, … only the voices in the pews and nowhere NEAR the grand scale Pope Francis wanted it to be!
SO BEWARE TO MY DEAR POPE FRANCIS, IF YOU DON’T HEAR A MORE PROGRESSIVE VOICE FROM THE UNITED STATES VIA THE SYNOD … THIS IS WHY!!!!!!!! …
The very blatant use of LIP-SERVICE FOR THE SYNOD on the Diocese of Charlotte website in the meantime while proclaiming, “check back later for more information.” A video featuring Bishop Jugis. Numerous quotes from you, Pope Francis. Explanation of what the word “Synod” means and where it came from. A picture of our diocesan contact (Rovarti) with all of his information. A format to contact him. That was it until THIS MONTH. Before April, there was no real way to get involved or even how to get the process moving. Now, at least there is a diocesan survey, … a month or two before the papal deadline. As a retired High School English Teacher, it was very obvious to me that this was only lip-service, meant to show there was a grand impetus at a glance, but with no real substance for action. It angered me enough to take screenshots of the website and include them in my spiritual journal.
The insistence on LIMITATION TO ONLY 3 SYNODAL QUESTIONS..
The SUSPICIOUS WORDING OF THESE QUESTIONS: “What are the most significant signs of the Lord’s presence in your life? What are the biggest challenges or questions you face in responding to the Lord’s call? What steps is the Holy Spirit suggesting to you and your community to respond more fully to the Christian vocation?” The bolded wording is suspicious. It is specifically meant to bring the reader inward, instead of outward towards possible issues with the Roman Catholic Church as a whole and away from the very issues that many people are worried about, especially in regards to inclusion. The reality? The wording didn’t matter. Our parishioners and our diocesan participants looked right past the suspicious wording and expanded it to tell their real thoughts on Church teaching (especially in regards to woman ordination and inclusion of the LGBTQ+ community).
The SIX MONTHS it took the Diocese of Charlotte to act! You gave your first beautiful homily calling us all to Synod in October of 2021! I knew of it immediately! I rejoiced and couldn’t WAIT to be involved! With the exception of a very enthusiastic-looking website with no means for true action, our diocese only BEGINS any kind of real process in early March 2022!?! The Diocesan Synod Survey came out in April!?! This was AFTER our parish Synodal Listening Sessions were already complete.
THE BLATANT (PURPOSEFUL?) DELAY IN THE CHAIN OF COMMAND. I waited and waited, searching our bulletin and the bulletins of surrounding parishes for months. Nothing. Finally, I wrote our Diocesan Contact Person (Dr. Rovarti) in early February via the one way I knew how, the form on the diocesan website. I heard back in late February that I had to be named by my pastor to do anything at all. I wrote my pastor and heard nothing for weeks. Just when I thought things were hopeless and that I wasn’t chosen, I finally was granted a meeting with the pastor in early March and was told that, after Rovarti’s second email to Father Cook, Rovarti stopped emailing. If asked, Father Cook was going to claim “no interest” from our parish in order to go back to “the business of Masses and funerals.” At this meeting, Father Cook named me Lay Contact Person and I was told that no one else had asked, so not to expect a big turnout. The significant and lengthy pause between each of the above steps, set us closer and closer to the deadline.
And even further than the Synod, the THE EXPULSION OF FRANCISCAN ORDERS from the Diocese of Charlotte over the last few years. Immaculate Conception was one of the first, … followed a year or two later by another parish in Charlotte. I wonder if there were others.
Also further than the Synod, the insistence of a PRIVATE SEMINARY IN THE DIOCESE OF CHARLOTTE NC OVERSEEN BY BISHOP JUGIS. There are parishioners from our parish demanding to learn what they are taught at that “private” seminary, accusing Jugis of teaching straight clericalism.
FEARS AS A RESULT OF THE ABOVE CONCERNS:
The rift in the Catholic Church between traditional vs. progressive is WIDENING in our Diocese because of corruption within the Church.
That the Diocese of Charlotte does not WANT a truly synodal church.
That the Diocese of Charlotte wishes to squelch the progressive voice.
That the Diocese of Charlotte doesn’t want to hear from the laity AT ALL
That the Diocese of Charlotte, being ultra conservative, has an extreme dislike for the current papal authority.
You see, even limited by the wording of the diocese synodal questions many of our parishioners (unfortunately) tried to use the Synod as a sounding board for their parish complaints. Why? Because there was NO OTHER WAY for them to voice their concerns! They feel that they have already been silenced. Although these complaining voices are important, they do not belong in the larger, papal work of the Synod on Synodality. SO, I am voicing them here and you can do what you think is appropriate with this information. I sent the list that follows to Father Cook (pastor), Peter Jugis (Bishop), Gregory Hartmayer (Archbishop), and the USCCB as well.
I want it made clear that issues 1-4 below, are NOT MY OWN. I told Father Cook, the Bishop, and Archbishop the same thing. We had almost 250 people participate, and many of these thoughts were shared by the overwhelming majority (both teen and adult). I did not want these people to become disenfranchised, but I realized early on that many of their thoughts did not belong within the larger synodal vocation: hence, my letter to you.
I am not sure if you are familiar with the current fate of Immaculate Conception in Hendersonville, NC USA: our parish has gone from a Franciscan parish of many years to a diocesan parish. The split from the Franciscans is the focal point of the angst exhibited by the parishioners.
The majority of these people are weeping over the extinction of the Franciscan Order from our diocese. They miss the Franciscans' vibrance and their openness to the Holy Spirit. They feel the Franciscan parish that was alive and vibrant just a few years ago is now an either dead or dying diocesan parish. (Covid, of course, didn't help matters.) My guess is they had no sounding board beyond simple gossip, so they tried to use the Synod to get their ideas across.
In short? They want the Franciscans back!
THE ISSUES of IMMACULATE CONCEPTION VOICED BY PARISHIONERS (inappropriate for Synod)
First issue: Removal of traditions/ministries. The women and young teens miss being able to participate in the Mass more fully as they feel they are no longer allowed to serve. Girl altar servers are no longer allowed, and no one is quite sure why. It certainly doesn’t follow the guidelines of Vatican II, and as you have related in the past and I quote, “Those who reject the teaching of the Second Vatican Council are placing themselves outside the Church.” Our parishioners don't understand why their cherished ministries, celebrations, and church groups have been taken away. (The Our Lady of Guadalupe Celebration was by far mentioned the most.)
Second issue: Clericalism. Our parishioners cited this as the second biggest problem in the parish. In researching the subject on aleteia.com, I found the following quote: “Clericalism is a disordered attitude toward clergy, an excessive deference and an assumption of their moral superiority. In your pithy description, dear Francisco, it’s when ‘Clerics feel they are superior, [and when] they are far from the people.’” I am assuming the parishioners feel this way about our current pastor. Personally, I will leave my feelings about our pastor to myself, and I will speak of another diocesan priest who has recently left the parish. This very young priest, who shall remain nameless, gave an entire homily on the following (which is my paraphrase): I have been given the title of “Father,” and just as our Heavenly Father chides his children, I will be chiding YOU as your father from time to time. At this point, my then thirteen-year-old leaned over to me at Mass and said, “Do you see why I am terrified of these new priests?”
Third issue: Stagnant Liturgy (and a lack of dynamic clergy), bereft of the Holy Spirit. Having one priest with a monotone voice giving almost every homily about the “moral authority” of the Church may have something to do with it. And our poor hispanic population, 100% disenfranchised for the first two diocesan years with no Spanish-speaking priest at all, now has a priest who speaks only Spanish (which is wonderful) but when he tries to do English masses, is almost impossible to understand even to those who are bilingual.
Fourth Issue: Lack of Communication. By this, the parishioners were specifically meaning the communication from pastor to parishioner. For example, when not allowed to give an announcement from the pulpit and not allowed to put anything on our website or the app, the information on the Synod was left to the bulletin, flyers, and my personal social media. No wonder not many people participated! Did the leadership in the parish and the diocese actually WANT them to participate?
The fifth issue is my own: the Flight of Parishioners and Faculty from ICC & Immaculata Catholic School (some in the middle of the school year)! This has all happened since the Franciscans left our parish. Why is this? Could it be issues 1-4 above? When our parishioners were asked to give “the steps the Holy Spirit was suggesting” to fix these problems. Inappropriate responses were given: reverting to a Franciscan parish, ousting the pastor, forcing clergy to be more dynamic, insisting that clericalism not be taught in seminary, demanding to know what IS taught in seminary, and reinstating all former groups/celebrations. Although not appropriate for our Synod Report, SOMEONE needed to be told of our parishioners’ ire. So I wrote Father Cook, Bishop Jugis, Archbishop Hartmayer, the USCCB, and now directly to you, Pope Francis. This is in hopes that our parish concerns will be heard. There is no one else to tell.
Do you know who I am impressed with? The TEENS of Immaculate Conception. They suggested the following:
Pray, pray, PRAY for Immaculate Conception Parish!
I found the biggest irony to be that only the young teens remembered the power of prayer to heal these wounds. Such a simple and, yet, profound practice! The adults were too busy complaining and suggesting to remember that prayer has great power!
So, there you go, my dear Holy Father, the other strange fruits of this Synod on Synodality. You have a right to know them. Now you know our parish's thoughts in their entirety, voiced in the completely wrong place. What you do with these thoughts and suggestions is entirely up to you. May God bless you for absolutely everything you endure for Christian Unity in this world. I believe you will be greatly blessed by our Lord and Savior, … and although I will probably never be blessed with an audience with you directly, I hope to meet you within the Communion of Saints gazing at the Beatific Vision someday. (That is AFTER my million years in Purgatory.) So until then, ..
My Love Always in Unity with Christ Jesus,
Noelle Therese Thompson
Lay Leader of Synod on Synodality
Immaculate Conception, Hendersonville, NC USA
170 Foggy Mountain Road
Horse Shoe, NC 28742 USA
thefirstnoelle777@gmail.com
828-707-3288
April 28, 2022
His Holiness Pope Francis
Vatican City State, 00120
SUBJECT: POSSIBLE CORRUPTION & SILENCING OF THE LAITY VIA THE SYNOD ON SYNODALITY IN THE DIOCESE OF CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA USA & BEYOND
To our dear Holy Father Pope Francis,
My name is Noelle Therese Thompson, and I am the Lay Contact Person for the Synod on Synodality from Immaculate Conception Parish in Hendersonville, NC USA. Thank you, my dear dear Francisco, for opening up the Church and for proclaiming “who am I to judge?” and for grabbing the attention of the most staunch non-Christians among us and for being a true representative of Christ on earth! Thank you, THANK YOU!
First, I want to give kudos to our Franciscan Archbishop Hartmayer, Archbishop of Atlanta which (I think) includes our diocese, the Diocese of Charlotte. Archbishop Hartmayer’s work on the Synod on Synodality especially in regards to the incredibly thoughtful, thorough, and dynamic survey he approved for our archdiocese made the laity feel so very encouraged and part of the Church! I participated and encouraged others. It was a true pleasure to see questions about real church reform posed to the laity of our archdiocese! Further, it has been my privilege to be named Lay Contact Person for the Synod on Synodality by Father Cook for Immaculate Conception Parish in Hendersonville, North Carolina. I have already written Father Cook (pastor), Peter Jugis (bishop), Gregory Hartmayer (archbishop), and even the USCCB about the information contained in this letter. In regards to the Synod on Synodality, my final reports (one parish-based and one diocese-based) have been submitted for the Synod, and if you are interested in our general parish answers to the three diocesan synodal questions, you can email me, and I will send them to you personally. ( My email is thefirstnoelle777@gmail.com )
I researched HUNDREDS of current Synod surveys to prepare for our own parish listening sessions at Immaculate Conception in Hendersonville, NC, and I chose many of our prompts directly from the submission from the Archdiocese of Atlanta. Unfortunately, a much more stagnant version was imposed by the Diocese of Charlotte. Three questions only:
“What are the most significant signs of the Lord’s presence in your life? What are the biggest challenges or questions you face in responding to the Lord’s call? What steps is the Holy Spirit suggesting to you and your community to respond more fully to the Christian vocation?”
That’s it.
That’s what we were limited to, with such suspicious wording, … so that served as the basis of my report to the diocese, but our parish and other diocesan participants compelled me to include so much more within those confines!
Yes, I have already written Father Cook (our pastor) and Bishop Jugus (our diocesan bishop). I told them of these things I am telling you, BUT I AM AFRAID THEY ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM. I FEAR CORRUPTION. So I began by writing Archbishop Gregory Hartmayer, the USCCB, and now I am taking our concerns directly to you, my dear dear Pope Francis.
LEADERSHIP IN THE DIOCESE OF CHARLOTTE MAY TRULY BE A PROBLEM, WIDENING THE RIFT IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH BETWEEN TRADITIONAL VS. PROGRESSIVE.
I DESIRE UNITY, AS I KNOW YOU DO, DEAR FRANCISCO. SO I WANT TO POINT TO POSSIBLE CORRUPTION MEANT TO SEPARATE INSTEAD OF UNIFY.
Now, I am going to take ownership of the thoughts in this particular section because, when I began praying the “Synod Prayer” and the Rosary unceasingly for help within the Synod, … and as I felt the evil one try to enter time and time again as I completed my work, I started noticing issues that I could not look the other way about. Issues from within. I want you to know about them, as I fear corruption within the Church.
I read a beautiful article about how the dioceses were encouraged to “get creative” with the Synod. Unfortunately, I felt knocked down by the lack of creativity in our own diocese, and then held down by the thumb of that lack of creativity while serving as the Lay Contact Person for my parish.
In my opinion as a Lay Contact Person for the Synod, the way the Synod is being handled in the Diocese of Charlotte is meant to shut out the progressive voice. Here are my concerns:
CONCERNS POINTING TO THE EXTINCTION OF THE LAITY VOICE VIA THE SYNOD
The most distressing? THE CANCELLATION AND COMPLETE DISMISSAL OF ANYONE TRYING TO MAKE THEIR SYNODAL VOICE HEARD OUTSIDE OF THE DIOCESE ANYONE from outside of the Diocese of Charlotte was turned away from the diocesan survey. One of the first questions would kick anyone else out. My pastor was quick to say that he wanted our parish listening session to include ONLY parish voices. (It is why I had to seek a separate report for a diocesan listening session.) AND WE ARE NOT THE ONLY DIOCESE THAT DID THIS. During my research on different surveys and listening sessions, only about ½ were truly welcoming to all. Considering the Pope’s desire for us to go out and even recruit the young drug addict” in other words, to go to the ends of the earth to find what the Holy Spirit was saying to ALL people of good, one would think that all dioceses and all bishops would welcome ANYONE who wanted to participate. Let me tell you something, someone who has been hurt by the Church in some way or someone who simply heard about the Synod through technology or someone who is a Protestant or an atheist and/or non-Christian is NOT going to be concerned with what diocese they are contacting to voice their opinion. Many progressives would stop at the first wall they hit or if it became too hard or difficult to continue. I believe the conservatives knew this, and used it. They KNOW it is the conservative population in the pews. They WANT only that conservative population to speak and become involved. In fact, there are many of my former students from Sacred Heart Academy in Hamden CT, that were silenced because they weren’t a member of a parish anymore and didn’t know where to participate. In my opinion, this expulsion of all from outside the diocese was designed DIRECTLY to include only conservative voices, … only the voices in the pews and nowhere NEAR the grand scale Pope Francis wanted it to be!
SO BEWARE TO MY DEAR POPE FRANCIS, IF YOU DON’T HEAR A MORE PROGRESSIVE VOICE FROM THE UNITED STATES VIA THE SYNOD … THIS IS WHY!!!!!!!! …
The very blatant use of LIP-SERVICE FOR THE SYNOD on the Diocese of Charlotte website in the meantime while proclaiming, “check back later for more information.” A video featuring Bishop Jugis. Numerous quotes from you, Pope Francis. Explanation of what the word “Synod” means and where it came from. A picture of our diocesan contact (Rovarti) with all of his information. A format to contact him. That was it until THIS MONTH. Before April, there was no real way to get involved or even how to get the process moving. Now, at least there is a diocesan survey, … a month or two before the papal deadline. As a retired High School English Teacher, it was very obvious to me that this was only lip-service, meant to show there was a grand impetus at a glance, but with no real substance for action. It angered me enough to take screenshots of the website and include them in my spiritual journal.
The insistence on LIMITATION TO ONLY 3 SYNODAL QUESTIONS..
The SUSPICIOUS WORDING OF THESE QUESTIONS: “What are the most significant signs of the Lord’s presence in your life? What are the biggest challenges or questions you face in responding to the Lord’s call? What steps is the Holy Spirit suggesting to you and your community to respond more fully to the Christian vocation?” The bolded wording is suspicious. It is specifically meant to bring the reader inward, instead of outward towards possible issues with the Roman Catholic Church as a whole and away from the very issues that many people are worried about, especially in regards to inclusion. The reality? The wording didn’t matter. Our parishioners and our diocesan participants looked right past the suspicious wording and expanded it to tell their real thoughts on Church teaching (especially in regards to woman ordination and inclusion of the LGBTQ+ community).
The SIX MONTHS it took the Diocese of Charlotte to act! You gave your first beautiful homily calling us all to Synod in October of 2021! I knew of it immediately! I rejoiced and couldn’t WAIT to be involved! With the exception of a very enthusiastic-looking website with no means for true action, our diocese only BEGINS any kind of real process in early March 2022!?! The Diocesan Synod Survey came out in April!?! This was AFTER our parish Synodal Listening Sessions were already complete.
THE BLATANT (PURPOSEFUL?) DELAY IN THE CHAIN OF COMMAND. I waited and waited, searching our bulletin and the bulletins of surrounding parishes for months. Nothing. Finally, I wrote our Diocesan Contact Person (Dr. Rovarti) in early February via the one way I knew how, the form on the diocesan website. I heard back in late February that I had to be named by my pastor to do anything at all. I wrote my pastor and heard nothing for weeks. Just when I thought things were hopeless and that I wasn’t chosen, I finally was granted a meeting with the pastor in early March and was told that, after Rovarti’s second email to Father Cook, Rovarti stopped emailing. If asked, Father Cook was going to claim “no interest” from our parish in order to go back to “the business of Masses and funerals.” At this meeting, Father Cook named me Lay Contact Person and I was told that no one else had asked, so not to expect a big turnout. The significant and lengthy pause between each of the above steps, set us closer and closer to the deadline.
And even further than the Synod, the THE EXPULSION OF FRANCISCAN ORDERS from the Diocese of Charlotte over the last few years. Immaculate Conception was one of the first, … followed a year or two later by another parish in Charlotte. I wonder if there were others.
Also further than the Synod, the insistence of a PRIVATE SEMINARY IN THE DIOCESE OF CHARLOTTE NC OVERSEEN BY BISHOP JUGIS. There are parishioners from our parish demanding to learn what they are taught at that “private” seminary, accusing Jugis of teaching straight clericalism.
FEARS AS A RESULT OF THE ABOVE CONCERNS:
The rift in the Catholic Church between traditional vs. progressive is WIDENING in our Diocese because of corruption within the Church.
That the Diocese of Charlotte does not WANT a truly synodal church.
That the Diocese of Charlotte wishes to squelch the progressive voice.
That the Diocese of Charlotte doesn’t want to hear from the laity AT ALL
That the Diocese of Charlotte, being ultra conservative, has an extreme dislike for the current papal authority.
You see, even limited by the wording of the diocese synodal questions many of our parishioners (unfortunately) tried to use the Synod as a sounding board for their parish complaints. Why? Because there was NO OTHER WAY for them to voice their concerns! They feel that they have already been silenced. Although these complaining voices are important, they do not belong in the larger, papal work of the Synod on Synodality. SO, I am voicing them here and you can do what you think is appropriate with this information. I sent the list that follows to Father Cook (pastor), Peter Jugis (Bishop), Gregory Hartmayer (Archbishop), and the USCCB as well.
I want it made clear that issues 1-4 below, are NOT MY OWN. I told Father Cook, the Bishop, and Archbishop the same thing. We had almost 250 people participate, and many of these thoughts were shared by the overwhelming majority (both teen and adult). I did not want these people to become disenfranchised, but I realized early on that many of their thoughts did not belong within the larger synodal vocation: hence, my letter to you.
I am not sure if you are familiar with the current fate of Immaculate Conception in Hendersonville, NC USA: our parish has gone from a Franciscan parish of many years to a diocesan parish. The split from the Franciscans is the focal point of the angst exhibited by the parishioners.
The majority of these people are weeping over the extinction of the Franciscan Order from our diocese. They miss the Franciscans' vibrance and their openness to the Holy Spirit. They feel the Franciscan parish that was alive and vibrant just a few years ago is now an either dead or dying diocesan parish. (Covid, of course, didn't help matters.) My guess is they had no sounding board beyond simple gossip, so they tried to use the Synod to get their ideas across.
In short? They want the Franciscans back!
THE ISSUES of IMMACULATE CONCEPTION VOICED BY PARISHIONERS (inappropriate for Synod)
First issue: Removal of traditions/ministries. The women and young teens miss being able to participate in the Mass more fully as they feel they are no longer allowed to serve. Girl altar servers are no longer allowed, and no one is quite sure why. It certainly doesn’t follow the guidelines of Vatican II, and as you have related in the past and I quote, “Those who reject the teaching of the Second Vatican Council are placing themselves outside the Church.” Our parishioners don't understand why their cherished ministries, celebrations, and church groups have been taken away. (The Our Lady of Guadalupe Celebration was by far mentioned the most.)
Second issue: Clericalism. Our parishioners cited this as the second biggest problem in the parish. In researching the subject on aleteia.com, I found the following quote: “Clericalism is a disordered attitude toward clergy, an excessive deference and an assumption of their moral superiority. In your pithy description, dear Francisco, it’s when ‘Clerics feel they are superior, [and when] they are far from the people.’” I am assuming the parishioners feel this way about our current pastor. Personally, I will leave my feelings about our pastor to myself, and I will speak of another diocesan priest who has recently left the parish. This very young priest, who shall remain nameless, gave an entire homily on the following (which is my paraphrase): I have been given the title of “Father,” and just as our Heavenly Father chides his children, I will be chiding YOU as your father from time to time. At this point, my then thirteen-year-old leaned over to me at Mass and said, “Do you see why I am terrified of these new priests?”
Third issue: Stagnant Liturgy (and a lack of dynamic clergy), bereft of the Holy Spirit. Having one priest with a monotone voice giving almost every homily about the “moral authority” of the Church may have something to do with it. And our poor hispanic population, 100% disenfranchised for the first two diocesan years with no Spanish-speaking priest at all, now has a priest who speaks only Spanish (which is wonderful) but when he tries to do English masses, is almost impossible to understand even to those who are bilingual.
Fourth Issue: Lack of Communication. By this, the parishioners were specifically meaning the communication from pastor to parishioner. For example, when not allowed to give an announcement from the pulpit and not allowed to put anything on our website or the app, the information on the Synod was left to the bulletin, flyers, and my personal social media. No wonder not many people participated! Did the leadership in the parish and the diocese actually WANT them to participate?
The fifth issue is my own: the Flight of Parishioners and Faculty from ICC & Immaculata Catholic School (some in the middle of the school year)! This has all happened since the Franciscans left our parish. Why is this? Could it be issues 1-4 above? When our parishioners were asked to give “the steps the Holy Spirit was suggesting” to fix these problems. Inappropriate responses were given: reverting to a Franciscan parish, ousting the pastor, forcing clergy to be more dynamic, insisting that clericalism not be taught in seminary, demanding to know what IS taught in seminary, and reinstating all former groups/celebrations. Although not appropriate for our Synod Report, SOMEONE needed to be told of our parishioners’ ire. So I wrote Father Cook, Bishop Jugis, Archbishop Hartmayer, the USCCB, and now directly to you, Pope Francis. This is in hopes that our parish concerns will be heard. There is no one else to tell.
Do you know who I am impressed with? The TEENS of Immaculate Conception. They suggested the following:
Pray, pray, PRAY for Immaculate Conception Parish!
I found the biggest irony to be that only the young teens remembered the power of prayer to heal these wounds. Such a simple and, yet, profound practice! The adults were too busy complaining and suggesting to remember that prayer has great power!
So, there you go, my dear Holy Father, the other strange fruits of this Synod on Synodality. You have a right to know them. Now you know our parish's thoughts in their entirety, voiced in the completely wrong place. What you do with these thoughts and suggestions is entirely up to you. May God bless you for absolutely everything you endure for Christian Unity in this world. I believe you will be greatly blessed by our Lord and Savior, … and although I will probably never be blessed with an audience with you directly, I hope to meet you within the Communion of Saints gazing at the Beatific Vision someday. (That is AFTER my million years in Purgatory.) So until then, ..
My Love Always in Unity with Christ Jesus,
Noelle Therese Thompson
Lay Leader of Synod on Synodality
Immaculate Conception, Hendersonville, NC USA
170 Foggy Mountain Road
Horse Shoe, NC 28742 USA
thefirstnoelle777@gmail.com
828-707-3288
April 28, 2022
His Holiness Pope Francis
Casa Santa Maria, 00120
SUBJECT: POSSIBLE CORRUPTION & SILENCING OF THE LAITY VIA THE SYNOD ON SYNODALITY IN THE DIOCESE OF CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA USA & BEYOND
To our dear Holy Father Pope Francis,
My name is Noelle Therese Thompson, and I am the Lay Contact Person for the Synod on Synodality from Immaculate Conception Parish in Hendersonville, NC USA. Thank you, my dear dear Francisco, for opening up the Church and for proclaiming “who am I to judge?” and for grabbing the attention of the most staunch non-Christians among us and for being a true representative of Christ on earth! Thank you, THANK YOU!
First, I want to give kudos to our Franciscan Archbishop Hartmayer, Archbishop of Atlanta which (I think) includes our diocese, the Diocese of Charlotte. Archbishop Hartmayer’s work on the Synod on Synodality especially in regards to the incredibly thoughtful, thorough, and dynamic survey he approved for our archdiocese made the laity feel so very encouraged and part of the Church! I participated and encouraged others. It was a true pleasure to see questions about real church reform posed to the laity of our archdiocese! Further, it has been my privilege to be named Lay Contact Person for the Synod on Synodality by Father Cook for Immaculate Conception Parish in Hendersonville, North Carolina. I have already written Father Cook (pastor), Peter Jugis (bishop), Gregory Hartmayer (archbishop), and even the USCCB about the information contained in this letter. In regards to the Synod on Synodality, my final reports (one parish-based and one diocese-based) have been submitted for the Synod, and if you are interested in our general parish answers to the three diocesan synodal questions, you can email me, and I will send them to you personally. ( My email is thefirstnoelle777@gmail.com )
I researched HUNDREDS of current Synod surveys to prepare for our own parish listening sessions at Immaculate Conception in Hendersonville, NC, and I chose many of our prompts directly from the submission from the Archdiocese of Atlanta. Unfortunately, a much more stagnant version was imposed by the Diocese of Charlotte. Three questions only:
“What are the most significant signs of the Lord’s presence in your life? What are the biggest challenges or questions you face in responding to the Lord’s call? What steps is the Holy Spirit suggesting to you and your community to respond more fully to the Christian vocation?”
That’s it.
That’s what we were limited to, with such suspicious wording, … so that served as the basis of my report to the diocese, but our parish and other diocesan participants compelled me to include so much more within those confines!
Yes, I have already written Father Cook (our pastor) and Bishop Jugus (our diocesan bishop). I told them of these things I am telling you, BUT I AM AFRAID THEY ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM. I FEAR CORRUPTION. So I began by writing Archbishop Gregory Hartmayer, the USCCB, and now I am taking our concerns directly to you, my dear, dear Pope Francis.
LEADERSHIP IN THE DIOCESE OF CHARLOTTE MAY TRULY BE A PROBLEM, WIDENING THE RIFT IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH BETWEEN TRADITIONAL VS. PROGRESSIVE.
I DESIRE UNITY, AS I KNOW YOU DO, DEAR FRANCISCO. SO I WANT TO POINT TO POSSIBLE CORRUPTION MEANT TO SEPARATE INSTEAD OF UNIFY.
Now, I am going to take ownership of the thoughts in this particular section because, when I began praying the “Synod Prayer” and the Rosary unceasingly for help within the Synod, … and as I felt the evil one try to enter time and time again as I completed my work, I started noticing issues that I could not look the other way about. Issues from within. I want you to know about them, as I fear corruption within the Church.
I read a beautiful article about how the dioceses were encouraged to “get creative” with the Synod. Unfortunately, I felt knocked down by the lack of creativity in our own diocese, and then held down by the thumb of that lack of creativity while serving as the Lay Contact Person for my parish.
In my opinion as a Lay Contact Person for the Synod, the way the Synod is being handled in the Diocese of Charlotte is meant to shut out the progressive voice. Here are my concerns:
CONCERNS POINTING TO THE EXTINCTION OF THE LAITY VOICE VIA THE SYNOD
The most distressing? THE CANCELLATION AND COMPLETE DISMISSAL OF ANYONE TRYING TO MAKE THEIR SYNODAL VOICE HEARD OUTSIDE OF THE DIOCESE ANYONE from outside of the Diocese of Charlotte was turned away from the diocesan survey. One of the first questions would kick anyone else out. My pastor was quick to say that he wanted our parish listening session to include ONLY parish voices. (It is why I had to seek a separate report for a diocesan listening session.) AND WE ARE NOT THE ONLY DIOCESE THAT DID THIS. During my research on different surveys and listening sessions, only about ½ were truly welcoming to all. Considering the Pope’s desire for us to go out and even recruit the young drug addict” in other words, to go to the ends of the earth to find what the Holy Spirit was saying to ALL people of good, one would think that all dioceses and all bishops would welcome ANYONE who wanted to participate. Let me tell you something, someone who has been hurt by the Church in some way or someone who simply heard about the Synod through technology or someone who is a Protestant or an atheist and/or non-Christian is NOT going to be concerned with what diocese they are contacting to voice their opinion. Many progressives would stop at the first wall they hit or if it became too hard or difficult to continue. I believe the conservatives knew this, and used it. They KNOW it is the conservative population in the pews. They WANT only that conservative population to speak and become involved. In fact, there are many of my former students from Sacred Heart Academy in Hamden CT, that were silenced because they weren’t a member of a parish anymore and didn’t know where to participate. In my opinion, this expulsion of all from outside the diocese was designed DIRECTLY to include only conservative voices, … only the voices in the pews and nowhere NEAR the grand scale Pope Francis wanted it to be!
SO BEWARE TO MY DEAR POPE FRANCIS, IF YOU DON’T HEAR A MORE PROGRESSIVE VOICE FROM THE UNITED STATES VIA THE SYNOD … THIS IS WHY!!!!!!!! …
The very blatant use of LIP-SERVICE FOR THE SYNOD on the Diocese of Charlotte website in the meantime while proclaiming, “check back later for more information.” A video featuring Bishop Jugis. Numerous quotes from you, Pope Francis. Explanation of what the word “Synod” means and where it came from. A picture of our diocesan contact (Rovarti) with all of his information. A format to contact him. That was it until THIS MONTH. Before April, there was no real way to get involved or even how to get the process moving. Now, at least there is a diocesan survey, … a month or two before the papal deadline. As a retired High School English Teacher, it was very obvious to me that this was only lip-service, meant to show there was a grand impetus at a glance, but with no real substance for action. It angered me enough to take screenshots of the website and include them in my spiritual journal.
The insistence on LIMITATION TO ONLY 3 SYNODAL QUESTIONS..
The SUSPICIOUS WORDING OF THESE QUESTIONS: “What are the most significant signs of the Lord’s presence in your life? What are the biggest challenges or questions you face in responding to the Lord’s call? What steps is the Holy Spirit suggesting to you and your community to respond more fully to the Christian vocation?” The bolded wording is suspicious. It is specifically meant to bring the reader inward, instead of outward towards possible issues with the Roman Catholic Church as a whole and away from the very issues that many people are worried about, especially in regards to inclusion. The reality? The wording didn’t matter. Our parishioners and our diocesan participants looked right past the suspicious wording and expanded it to tell their real thoughts on Church teaching (especially in regards to woman ordination and inclusion of the LGBTQ+ community).
The SIX MONTHS it took the Diocese of Charlotte to act! You gave your first beautiful homily calling us all to Synod in October of 2021! I knew of it immediately! I rejoiced and couldn’t WAIT to be involved! With the exception of a very enthusiastic-looking website with no means for true action, our diocese only BEGINS any kind of real process in early March 2022!?! The Diocesan Synod Survey came out in April!?! This was AFTER our parish Synodal Listening Sessions were already complete.
THE BLATANT (PURPOSEFUL?) DELAY IN THE CHAIN OF COMMAND. I waited and waited, searching our bulletin and the bulletins of surrounding parishes for months. Nothing. Finally, I wrote our Diocesan Contact Person (Dr. Rovarti) in early February via the one way I knew how, the form on the diocesan website. I heard back in late February that I had to be named by my pastor to do anything at all. I wrote my pastor and heard nothing for weeks. Just when I thought things were hopeless and that I wasn’t chosen, I finally was granted a meeting with the pastor in early March and was told that, after Rovarti’s second email to Father Cook, Rovarti stopped emailing. If asked, Father Cook was going to claim “no interest” from our parish in order to go back to “the business of Masses and funerals.” At this meeting, Father Cook named me Lay Contact Person and I was told that no one else had asked, so not to expect a big turnout. The significant and lengthy pause between each of the above steps, set us closer and closer to the deadline.
And even further than the Synod, the THE EXPULSION OF FRANCISCAN ORDERS from the Diocese of Charlotte over the last few years. Immaculate Conception was one of the first, … followed a year or two later by another parish in Charlotte. I wonder if there were others.
Also further than the Synod, the insistence of a PRIVATE SEMINARY IN THE DIOCESE OF CHARLOTTE NC OVERSEEN BY BISHOP JUGIS. There are parishioners from our parish demanding to learn what they are taught at that “private” seminary, accusing Jugis of teaching straight clericalism.
FEARS AS A RESULT OF THE ABOVE CONCERNS:
The rift in the Catholic Church between traditional vs. progressive is WIDENING in our Diocese because of corruption within the Church.
That the Diocese of Charlotte does not WANT a truly synodal church.
That the Diocese of Charlotte wishes to squelch the progressive voice.
That the Diocese of Charlotte doesn’t want to hear from the laity AT ALL
That the Diocese of Charlotte, being ultra conservative, has an extreme dislike for the current papal authority.
You see, even limited by the wording of the diocese synodal questions many of our parishioners (unfortunately) tried to use the Synod as a sounding board for their parish complaints. Why? Because there was NO OTHER WAY for them to voice their concerns! They feel that they have already been silenced. Although these complaining voices are important, they do not belong in the larger, papal work of the Synod on Synodality. SO, I am voicing them here and you can do what you think is appropriate with this information. I sent the list that follows to Father Cook (pastor), Peter Jugis (Bishop), Gregory Hartmayer (Archbishop), and the USCCB as well.
I want it made clear that issues 1-4 below, are NOT MY OWN. I told Father Cook, the Bishop, and Archbishop the same thing. We had almost 250 people participate, and many of these thoughts were shared by the overwhelming majority (both teen and adult). I did not want these people to become disenfranchised, but I realized early on that many of their thoughts did not belong within the larger synodal vocation: hence, my letter to you.
I am not sure if you are familiar with the current fate of Immaculate Conception in Hendersonville, NC USA: our parish has gone from a Franciscan parish of many years to a diocesan parish. The split from the Franciscans is the focal point of the angst exhibited by the parishioners.
The majority of these people are weeping over the extinction of the Franciscan Order from our diocese. They miss the Franciscans' vibrance and their openness to the Holy Spirit. They feel the Franciscan parish that was alive and vibrant just a few years ago is now an either dead or dying diocesan parish. (Covid, of course, didn't help matters.) My guess is they had no sounding board beyond simple gossip, so they tried to use the Synod to get their ideas across.
In short? They want the Franciscans back!
THE ISSUES of IMMACULATE CONCEPTION VOICED BY PARISHIONERS (inappropriate for Synod)
First issue: Removal of traditions/ministries. The women and young teens miss being able to participate in the Mass more fully as they feel they are no longer allowed to serve. Girl altar servers are no longer allowed, and no one is quite sure why. It certainly doesn’t follow the guidelines of Vatican II, and as you have related in the past and I quote, “Those who reject the teaching of the Second Vatican Council are placing themselves outside the Church.” Our parishioners don't understand why their cherished ministries, celebrations, and church groups have been taken away. (The Our Lady of Guadalupe Celebration was by far mentioned the most.)
Second issue: Clericalism. Our parishioners cited this as the second biggest problem in the parish. In researching the subject on aleteia.com, I found the following quote: “Clericalism is a disordered attitude toward clergy, an excessive deference and an assumption of their moral superiority. In your pithy description, dear Francisco, it’s when ‘Clerics feel they are superior, [and when] they are far from the people.’” I am assuming the parishioners feel this way about our current pastor. Personally, I will leave my feelings about our pastor to myself, and I will speak of another diocesan priest who has recently left the parish. This very young priest, who shall remain nameless, gave an entire homily on the following (which is my paraphrase): I have been given the title of “Father,” and just as our Heavenly Father chides his children, I will be chiding YOU as your father from time to time. At this point, my then thirteen-year-old leaned over to me at Mass and said, “Do you see why I am terrified of these new priests?”
Third issue: Stagnant Liturgy (and a lack of dynamic clergy), bereft of the Holy Spirit. Having one priest with a monotone voice giving almost every homily about the “moral authority” of the Church may have something to do with it. And our poor hispanic population, 100% disenfranchised for the first two diocesan years with no Spanish-speaking priest at all, now has a priest who speaks only Spanish (which is wonderful) but when he tries to do English masses, is almost impossible to understand even to those who are bilingual.
Fourth Issue: Lack of Communication. By this, the parishioners were specifically meaning the communication from pastor to parishioner. For example, when not allowed to give an announcement from the pulpit and not allowed to put anything on our website or the app, the information on the Synod was left to the bulletin, flyers, and my personal social media. No wonder not many people participated! Did the leadership in the parish and the diocese actually WANT them to participate?
The fifth issue is my own: the Flight of Parishioners and Faculty from ICC & Immaculata Catholic School (some in the middle of the school year)! This has all happened since the Franciscans left our parish. Why is this? Could it be issues 1-4 above? When our parishioners were asked to give “the steps the Holy Spirit was suggesting” to fix these problems. Inappropriate responses were given: reverting to a Franciscan parish, ousting the pastor, forcing clergy to be more dynamic, insisting that clericalism not be taught in seminary, demanding to know what IS taught in seminary, and reinstating all former groups/celebrations. Although not appropriate for our Synod Report, SOMEONE needed to be told of our parishioners’ ire. So I wrote Father Cook, Bishop Jugis, Archbishop Hartmayer, the USCCB, and now directly to you, Pope Francis. This is in hopes that our parish concerns will be heard. There is no one else to tell.
Do you know who I am impressed with? The TEENS of Immaculate Conception. They suggested the following:
Pray, pray, PRAY for Immaculate Conception Parish!
I found the biggest irony to be that only the young teens remembered the power of prayer to heal these wounds. Such a simple and, yet, profound practice! The adults were too busy complaining and suggesting to remember that prayer has great power!
So, there you go, my dear Holy Father, the other strange fruits of this Synod on Synodality. You have a right to know them. Now you know our parish's thoughts in their entirety, voiced in the completely wrong place. What you do with these thoughts and suggestions is entirely up to you. May God bless you for absolutely everything you endure for Christian Unity in this world. I believe you will be greatly blessed by our Lord and Savior, … and although I will probably never be blessed with an audience with you directly, I hope to meet you within the Communion of Saints gazing at the Beatific Vision someday. (That is AFTER my million years in Purgatory.) So until then, ..
My Love Always in Unity with Christ Jesus,
Noelle Therese Thompson
Lay Leader of Synod on Synodality
Immaculate Conception, Hendersonville, NC USA
webmaster@synodresources.org
SUBJECT: AN LGBTQ+ CATHOLIC ALLY SPEAKS DIRECTLY TO ROME
To Thierry Bonaventura, Synod Communications Manager,
Through my contact with New Ways Ministry (a ministry for LGBTQ+ Catholics and their allies), I was told that we could write you directly in fear that the marginalized will not be heard.
I AM AN LGBTQ+ ALLY, AND I DESIRE FULL INCLUSION FOR THE LGBTQ+ COMMUNITY, AS I CONSIDER THEIR SEXUALITY TO BE GOD-GIVEN, … AND CAN BE SEEN AS “FOR THE GOOD OF THE COUPLE” AS WELL AS “OPEN TO LIFE” THROUGH BOTH FOSTERING AND ADOPTION.
My name is Noelle Therese Thompson, and I am the Lay Contact Person for the Synod on Synodality from Immaculate Conception Parish in Hendersonville, NC USA. Thank you, THANK YOU for allowing LGBTQ+ allies to contact you directly! Amid the corruption in our parish and our diocese and, I fear, the USCCB, I cannot guarantee that these marginalized voices will be heard apart from your gracious desire to hear them.
SO THANK YOU FOR LENDING A LISTENING EAR TO THE MARGINALIZED!
I have worked so hard completing both our parish and our diocesan Synod report from Immaculate Conception Parish in Hendersonville, NC USA. Together we had almost 400 participants which, considering the corruption we are dealing with to silence not only the marginalized but also the laity, is quite a feat!
I am attaching our two reports (parish and diocesan) in case you would like to see the specifics, but I want to let you know that both in our parish and in our diocesan responses, SUPPORT FOR THE INCLUSION OF LGBTQ+ CATHOLICS as well as the DESIRE FOR EQUALITY IN REGARDS TO CATHOLIC SAME SEX MARRIAGE was one of the number one desires of our participants!
Even if you don’t look at the entirety of our reports, I do want to share with you three stories that appeared during our in-person and online synodal conversations. I give you permission to use them as you wish. There has only been one name changed due to protection (as one particular person teaches at at Roman Catholic High School and fears for his career).
Here are the three stories:
STORY ONE:
What follows is the most moving true story from the fruits of our in-person synodal conversations. The parishioner introduced the narrative as a “true pro-life story.” As I was writing the information quickly, some details are omitted (I can’t remember the name of the young lady, but I got most everything else). Here is my best paraphrase:
A young woman driving to Planned Parenthood to abort her unborn child was apprehensive and tortured due to the guilt of her choice. At a red light, she opened Facebook to find something surprising. At the top of her news feed was a plea from Karl (a friend of the parishioner): "Why can't someone just give us a baby!?!" When the woman refreshed her feed, the plea was gone.
The woman pulled over and called Karl, confused. Karl apologized, and explained he was frustrated because he wanted to love a child SO much, but their marriage had not been blessed and all avenues had been explored and blocked.
"Karl. I am on the way to the abortion clinic. If I have this baby, would you adopt him?"
[Gasp!] 'Well, of course I have to ask at home, but I think I can pretty much say YES!"
Now, Parker is a thriving eight-year-old with two loving parents, Karl and Diego, whose same sex-marriage saved this child from abortion.
The parishioner continued: “If THAT isn't a partnership that is ‘open to life,’ I don't know what is! No child of a gay couple is EVER unwanted. Gay marriage would be ‘open to life’ by considering adoption (or fostering) of these very children.”
This story highlights both the second AND the sixth of the challenges our parishioners mentioned above and highlighted in their discussions. The parishioner speaking mentioned a Holy Spirit -led change-of-heart in regards to the issues involved. I was moved to tears during our session.
STORY TWO:
The first moving story is about service to mentally disabled youth through both occupation and family. The diocesan participant told the story about a couple who was originally from the Diocese of Charlotte but was pushed out by the members of the Catholic Church they attended. The two moved to Canada in order to get married. Josh and Nick have been together for over 15 years and longed to make their sexuality truly life-giving by fostering and then adopting many local, mentally disabled teenagers in order to give these orphans a chance at a better life, a home, an education, and two loving parents. With Josh being a counselor of disturbed teens, this was the perfect choice and allowed them to further their call from God to counsel many other friends of the teenagers in order to help the mentally disabled teen population of the area be better adapted and successful in life.
STORY THREE:
The most strikingly moving response was a personal story from an online participant about bringing children out of poverty. The first element of the couple, “Matthew” (name changed for protection purposes), is currently the favorite teacher at a Roman Catholic High School in the US and, while hiding his homosexuality, decided to marry with his partner elsewhere and then to promote life through the elimination of poverty: the couple chose to welcome, love, and adopt young children internationally and, upon doing so, got them out of desperate poverty. Matthew’s greatest sadness is that he must hide his sexuality in order to be employed by a Roman Catholic High School and is no longer welcome in the Roman Catholic Church because of his God-given sexuality, despite his attempt to love the poor and the destitute through his pro-life decision to adopt.
FINALLY I ASK THAT THE HOLY SEE CONSIDER THE NEWEST SCIENCE IN REGARDS TO THIS ISSUE. 5% OF THE ANIMAL WORLD CREATED “GOOD” BY GOD HAS HOMOSEXUAL TENDENCIES. IN FURTHER REGARD TO HUMANITY, EITHER HORMONALLY, PHYSICALLY, OR CHROMOSOMALLY 2% OF THE HUMAN POPULATION CAN BE CONSIDERED INTERSEX (EITHER HAVING BOTH MALE AND FEMALE HORMONES, BOTH MALE AND FEMALE GENETALIA, AND/OR MALE AND FEMALE CHROMOSOMES.
IF GOD CONSIDERS HIS CREATION “GOOD,” SHOULDN’T THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH?
May God bless you for hearing these muted voices!
Sincerely,
Noelle Therese Thompson
Lay Leader of Synod on Synodality
Immaculate Conception, Hendersonville, NC USA
170 Foggy Mountain Road
Horse Shoe, NC 28742 USA
thefirstnoelle777@gmail.com
828-707-3288
April 28, 2022
Thierry Bonaventura
General Secretariat for Synod of Bishops
Via Della Concillazione 34
VA – 00120 Vatican City
SUBJECT: AN LGBTQ+ CATHOLIC ALLY SPEAKS DIRECTLY TO ROME VIA THE SYNOD
To Thierry Bonaventura, Synod Communications Manager,
Through my contact with New Ways Ministry (a ministry for LGBTQ+ Catholics and their allies), I was told that we could write you directly in fear that the marginalized will not be heard.
I AM AN LGBTQ+ ALLY, AND I DESIRE FULL INCLUSION FOR THE LGBTQ+ COMMUNITY, AS I CONSIDER THEIR SEXUALITY TO BE GOD-GIVEN, … AND CAN BE SEEN AS “FOR THE GOOD OF THE COUPLE” AS WELL AS “OPEN TO LIFE” THROUGH BOTH FOSTERING AND ADOPTION.
My name is Noelle Therese Thompson, and I am the Lay Contact Person for the Synod on Synodality from Immaculate Conception Parish in Hendersonville, NC USA. Thank you, THANK YOU for allowing LGBTQ+ allies to contact you directly! Amid the corruption in our parish and our diocese and, I fear, the USCCB, I cannot guarantee that these marginalized voices will be heard apart from your gracious desire to hear them.
SO THANK YOU FOR LENDING A LISTENING EAR TO THE MARGINALIZED!
I have worked so hard completing both our parish and our diocesan Synod report from Immaculate Conception Parish in Hendersonville, NC USA. Together we had almost 400 participants which, considering the corruption we are dealing with to silence not only the marginalized but also the laity, is quite a feat!
I am attaching our two reports (parish and diocesan) in case you would like to see the specifics, but I want to let you know that both in our parish and in our diocesan responses, SUPPORT FOR THE INCLUSION OF LGBTQ+ CATHOLICS as well as the DESIRE FOR EQUALITY IN REGARDS TO CATHOLIC SAME SEX MARRIAGE was one of the number one desires of our participants!
Even if you don’t look at the entirety of our reports, I do want to share with you three stories that appeared during our in-person and online synodal conversations. I give you permission to use them as you wish. There has only been one name changed due to protection (as one particular person teaches at at Roman Catholic High School and fears for his career).
Here are the three stories:
STORY ONE:
What follows is the most moving true story from the fruits of our in-person synodal conversations. The parishioner introduced the narrative as a “true pro-life story.” As I was writing the information quickly, some details are omitted (I can’t remember the name of the young lady, but I got most everything else). Here is my best paraphrase:
A young woman driving to Planned Parenthood to abort her unborn child was apprehensive and tortured due to the guilt of her choice. At a red light, she opened Facebook to find something surprising. At the top of her news feed was a plea from Karl (a friend of the parishioner): "Why can't someone just give us a baby!?!" When the woman refreshed her feed, the plea was gone.
The woman pulled over and called Karl, confused. Karl apologized, and explained he was frustrated because he wanted to love a child SO much, but their marriage had not been blessed and all avenues had been explored and blocked.
"Karl. I am on the way to the abortion clinic. If I have this baby, would you adopt him?"
[Gasp!] 'Well, of course I have to ask at home, but I think I can pretty much say YES!"
Now, Parker is a thriving eight-year-old with two loving parents, Karl and Diego, whose same sex-marriage saved this child from abortion.
The parishioner continued: “If THAT isn't a partnership that is ‘open to life,’ I don't know what is! No child of a gay couple is EVER unwanted. Gay marriage would be ‘open to life’ by considering adoption (or fostering) of these very children.”
This story highlights both the second AND the sixth of the challenges our parishioners mentioned above and highlighted in their discussions. The parishioner speaking mentioned a Holy Spirit -led change-of-heart in regards to the issues involved. I was moved to tears during our session.
STORY TWO:
The first moving story is about service to mentally disabled youth through both occupation and family. The diocesan participant told the story about a couple who was originally from the Diocese of Charlotte but was pushed out by the members of the Catholic Church they attended. The two moved to Canada in order to get married. Josh and Nick have been together for over 15 years and longed to make their sexuality truly life-giving by fostering and then adopting many local, mentally disabled teenagers in order to give these orphans a chance at a better life, a home, an education, and two loving parents. With Josh being a counselor of disturbed teens, this was the perfect choice and allowed them to further their call from God to counsel many other friends of the teenagers in order to help the mentally disabled teen population of the area be better adapted and successful in life.
STORY THREE:
The most strikingly moving response was a personal story from an online participant about bringing children out of poverty. The first element of the couple, “Matthew” (name changed for protection purposes), is currently the favorite teacher at a Roman Catholic High School in the US and, while hiding his homosexuality, decided to marry with his partner elsewhere and then to promote life through the elimination of poverty: the couple chose to welcome, love, and adopt young children internationally and, upon doing so, got them out of desperate poverty. Matthew’s greatest sadness is that he must hide his sexuality in order to be employed by a Roman Catholic High School and is no longer welcome in the Roman Catholic Church because of his God-given sexuality, despite his attempt to love the poor and the destitute through his pro-life decision to adopt.
FINALLY I ASK THAT THE HOLY SEE CONSIDER THE NEWEST SCIENCE IN REGARDS TO THIS ISSUE. 5% OF THE ANIMAL WORLD CREATED “GOOD” BY GOD HAS HOMOSEXUAL TENDENCIES. IN FURTHER REGARD TO HUMANITY, EITHER HORMONALLY, PHYSICALLY, OR CHROMOSOMALLY 2% OF THE HUMAN POPULATION CAN BE CONSIDERED INTERSEX (EITHER HAVING BOTH MALE AND FEMALE HORMONES, BOTH MALE AND FEMALE GENETALIA, AND/OR MALE AND FEMALE CHROMOSOMES.
IF GOD CONSIDERS HIS CREATION “GOOD,” SHOULDN’T THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH?
May God bless you for hearing these muted voices!
Sincerely,
Noelle Therese Thompson
Lay Leader of Synod on Synodality
Immaculate Conception, Hendersonville, NC USA
