Let me acknowledge first that I have never met Fr. Reed.
On the one hand, we have someone who was intimately involved in the removal of Bishop Stika and who likely made enemies as a result. He’s also a potential witness in a civil case against the diocese. On the other hand, I have been fooled before by charismatic and beloved priests whom I thought could never do anything terrible only to be proven wrong, so I cannot just dismiss all of this out of hand. I am trying to also keep in mind that the review board determined that the complaints were “credible” and “serious violations of the Code of Pastoral Conduct.” I am familiar with a couple members of the review board, and I find it hard to believe that these individuals would railroad Fr. Reed or retaliate against him.
But I still have questions.
1. The statement says Fr. Reed’s actions were “grave and unbecoming of the holy priesthood.” Yet parishioners are claiming this was only about giving a car ride to a minor or giving hugs. Does giving a car ride to a minor or hugs really rise to the level of “grave and unbecoming of the priesthood”? My gut tells me there must be more involved here than a car ride and hugs. Am I missing something?
2. Even though these actions were “grave and unbecoming,” he is being reassigned. Is it really responsible to reassign someone you claim has committed such serious misconduct? That’s how the church got in trouble in the first place. Either his actions were “grave and unbecoming” and therefore he should not be reassigned or they were not. I don’t get it.
My advice to the parishioners of SJN: refuse to put ANY money in the collection basket.
Every dollar you give is taxed and a percentage goes to the diocese. There is no way to ensure your money will stay in the parish and not be sent to the diocese.
Instead, drop a note saying you will not give until the diocese is more transparent and willing to answer more questions about all of this. They owe it to the parishioners to hold a town hall meeting where people can ask questions. If enough parishioners consistently refuse to give money, the diocese may be forced to respond—possibly. This would obviously require a great majority of parishioners refusing to give for the diocese to get the message and even then it is only a possibility, not a guarantee.
I’m not optimistic about learning more because transparency is sorely lacking in the church. For example, there was supposed to be an independent audit after all the allegations of financial mismanagement by Stika. Has anyone ever seen the results of the audit? They don’t feel a need to be transparent since people continue to give money.
You are thinking about this well and asking all the right questions.
The Diocese cannot deprive Fr. Joe (or any priest) of his faculties without a canonical trial. The Diocese has made a deliberate decision not to pursue this. Thus, Fr. Joe remains a priest of the Diocese of Knoxville. The only question is where to put him...
A word of warning about withholding donations: Make sure that you are still giving somewhere. God asks us to give, not for the benefit of the charity, but for the benefit of our own souls. No one should withhold money from their parish without turning around and giving the same money to some worthwhile charity. Otherwise, you risk damage to your own soul. Before making a decision like this, speak to the responsible person at your church. (For SJN, this is Patrick Wade.) There actually are ways to give to the parish that ensure your money is directed as you desire.
I have known Father Joe for years and served on the parish finance council where I’ve had the good fortune to hear his thoughts and plans for the church and school and get to know him on a personal level.
He IS the man we all think he is — this is not an illusion or performance art. He is a holy man who you feel brings you, and our parish, closer to God. He is the man who with a late urgent phone call comes to give your father in law, whom he’s never met, last rites at 11pm just before Christmas and stands in the Misty rain as he presides over his graveside services. And I’m sure there are a million more stories like that told about Father Joe.
So no criminal charges filed after the sheriffs office and DCS investigate him — but the diocese thinks it’s OK to tell our parish that because rumors were reported by someone and seemed to be similar to rumors by someone else (during a time mind you when the diocese provided him no legal council???) that its OK to rip him away from our parish? No, no it’s not OK. You have given us the weakest of information or justification for this.
What do we do? I wish I’d read that the Ash Wednesday mass was being offered for him and I would’ve been there. As it was, this whole thing made me sick to my stomach and I didn’t go. I want to go back to SJN and celebrate his reinstatement!!
But Father Joe would’ve never wanted any form of harm to come to SJN or the parishioners independently. So it’s not the answer to leave my parish of 30 years in protest or financially drain it (though I agree you can reach out to Patrick to make sure the $ stays at the parish). We have to demand transparency from the diocese and oh maybe they should think about whether this is a legal conflict of interest if “punishing Father Joe” benefits a pending lawsuit they are involved in.
And yes we need to join together and mobilize for action — but how?? In my mind #1 is Fr Joe needs high level pro bono legal counsel so he can stand up to the behemoth of such a large organization. I can’t help but feel Stika’s “possible”retaliation at hand here, and those that would go down with him, and think to save our church we need to convince Bishop Beck that he’s possibly “being played” by the same person/people he was sent here to replace. Punishing the whistle blower will only further harm our diocese and parish.
The voices of parishioners can be a powerful catalyst for change. By sharing their stories and concerns with the media, they can help expose the truth and bring about a more just and equitable situation for Fr Joe and other priests who have been treated unfairly. This is a moment for parishioners to come together, support one another, and demand a more transparent and accountable Diocese.
You are so wise, and capture my thoughts precisely! The “snitches get stitches” threat is gravely unsettling.
After having served on several boards my personal discovery is that often the necessity of board secrecy is only to obstruct scrutiny of common sense & due process by the majority voters on the board.
I don’t know of course for how I would feel if I did know all the facts, but as you say, he’s fit to be a pastor or he isn’t.
Fr Joe, the accused is not allowed to comment. I don’t understand our church practice’s Biblical foundations, but we Americans by our birthright are antithetical to suppression of truth.
For our Church’s feudal structure, the lay may only vote with their money, or their feet.
This case troubles me.
Let me acknowledge first that I have never met Fr. Reed.
On the one hand, we have someone who was intimately involved in the removal of Bishop Stika and who likely made enemies as a result. He’s also a potential witness in a civil case against the diocese. On the other hand, I have been fooled before by charismatic and beloved priests whom I thought could never do anything terrible only to be proven wrong, so I cannot just dismiss all of this out of hand. I am trying to also keep in mind that the review board determined that the complaints were “credible” and “serious violations of the Code of Pastoral Conduct.” I am familiar with a couple members of the review board, and I find it hard to believe that these individuals would railroad Fr. Reed or retaliate against him.
But I still have questions.
1. The statement says Fr. Reed’s actions were “grave and unbecoming of the holy priesthood.” Yet parishioners are claiming this was only about giving a car ride to a minor or giving hugs. Does giving a car ride to a minor or hugs really rise to the level of “grave and unbecoming of the priesthood”? My gut tells me there must be more involved here than a car ride and hugs. Am I missing something?
2. Even though these actions were “grave and unbecoming,” he is being reassigned. Is it really responsible to reassign someone you claim has committed such serious misconduct? That’s how the church got in trouble in the first place. Either his actions were “grave and unbecoming” and therefore he should not be reassigned or they were not. I don’t get it.
My advice to the parishioners of SJN: refuse to put ANY money in the collection basket.
Every dollar you give is taxed and a percentage goes to the diocese. There is no way to ensure your money will stay in the parish and not be sent to the diocese.
Instead, drop a note saying you will not give until the diocese is more transparent and willing to answer more questions about all of this. They owe it to the parishioners to hold a town hall meeting where people can ask questions. If enough parishioners consistently refuse to give money, the diocese may be forced to respond—possibly. This would obviously require a great majority of parishioners refusing to give for the diocese to get the message and even then it is only a possibility, not a guarantee.
I’m not optimistic about learning more because transparency is sorely lacking in the church. For example, there was supposed to be an independent audit after all the allegations of financial mismanagement by Stika. Has anyone ever seen the results of the audit? They don’t feel a need to be transparent since people continue to give money.
Dear Adam,
You are thinking about this well and asking all the right questions.
The Diocese cannot deprive Fr. Joe (or any priest) of his faculties without a canonical trial. The Diocese has made a deliberate decision not to pursue this. Thus, Fr. Joe remains a priest of the Diocese of Knoxville. The only question is where to put him...
A word of warning about withholding donations: Make sure that you are still giving somewhere. God asks us to give, not for the benefit of the charity, but for the benefit of our own souls. No one should withhold money from their parish without turning around and giving the same money to some worthwhile charity. Otherwise, you risk damage to your own soul. Before making a decision like this, speak to the responsible person at your church. (For SJN, this is Patrick Wade.) There actually are ways to give to the parish that ensure your money is directed as you desire.
God bless you,
Jenny
Adam you ask good questions.
I have known Father Joe for years and served on the parish finance council where I’ve had the good fortune to hear his thoughts and plans for the church and school and get to know him on a personal level.
He IS the man we all think he is — this is not an illusion or performance art. He is a holy man who you feel brings you, and our parish, closer to God. He is the man who with a late urgent phone call comes to give your father in law, whom he’s never met, last rites at 11pm just before Christmas and stands in the Misty rain as he presides over his graveside services. And I’m sure there are a million more stories like that told about Father Joe.
So no criminal charges filed after the sheriffs office and DCS investigate him — but the diocese thinks it’s OK to tell our parish that because rumors were reported by someone and seemed to be similar to rumors by someone else (during a time mind you when the diocese provided him no legal council???) that its OK to rip him away from our parish? No, no it’s not OK. You have given us the weakest of information or justification for this.
What do we do? I wish I’d read that the Ash Wednesday mass was being offered for him and I would’ve been there. As it was, this whole thing made me sick to my stomach and I didn’t go. I want to go back to SJN and celebrate his reinstatement!!
But Father Joe would’ve never wanted any form of harm to come to SJN or the parishioners independently. So it’s not the answer to leave my parish of 30 years in protest or financially drain it (though I agree you can reach out to Patrick to make sure the $ stays at the parish). We have to demand transparency from the diocese and oh maybe they should think about whether this is a legal conflict of interest if “punishing Father Joe” benefits a pending lawsuit they are involved in.
And yes we need to join together and mobilize for action — but how?? In my mind #1 is Fr Joe needs high level pro bono legal counsel so he can stand up to the behemoth of such a large organization. I can’t help but feel Stika’s “possible”retaliation at hand here, and those that would go down with him, and think to save our church we need to convince Bishop Beck that he’s possibly “being played” by the same person/people he was sent here to replace. Punishing the whistle blower will only further harm our diocese and parish.
What action is next?!?!
The voices of parishioners can be a powerful catalyst for change. By sharing their stories and concerns with the media, they can help expose the truth and bring about a more just and equitable situation for Fr Joe and other priests who have been treated unfairly. This is a moment for parishioners to come together, support one another, and demand a more transparent and accountable Diocese.
You are so wise, and capture my thoughts precisely! The “snitches get stitches” threat is gravely unsettling.
After having served on several boards my personal discovery is that often the necessity of board secrecy is only to obstruct scrutiny of common sense & due process by the majority voters on the board.
I don’t know of course for how I would feel if I did know all the facts, but as you say, he’s fit to be a pastor or he isn’t.
Fr Joe, the accused is not allowed to comment. I don’t understand our church practice’s Biblical foundations, but we Americans by our birthright are antithetical to suppression of truth.
For our Church’s feudal structure, the lay may only vote with their money, or their feet.
Thank you. Hoping Fr. Joe will find peace in the love of the people who believe in him🥲😥
My heart is so heavy for all Fr. Joe is going through. He has done so much for SJN and for our family as well. We are behind him 100%.