Denver, Colo., Mar 24, 2020 / 04:00 am (CNA).- Ian, a 30 year-old living and working in an addiction recovery community in southern Florida, is somewhat used to paradoxical living conditions. Ian has been clean and sober for ten years, and he lives in an area he says is densely populated with recovering addicts. Seven minutes from his house, though, is spring break territory.
Ian finds the contrast puzzling.
“(The surrounding) community is very spring break-esque, but it’s also the largest recovery community in the United States. It’s the largest recovery community for people that are getting sober or staying sober…so it’s just weird because it’s two polar extremes,” he told CNA.
Last week highlighted the differences between the communities even more, as the sober living community observed social distancing and isolation per federal coronavirus guidelines, while hordes of spring-break revelers hit the beach and blithely partied on.
“It’s really polarized at this point,” Ian said. “There are people that are clearly trying to keep their space, and then there’s people that just don’t care.”
‘It’s affected everything’
Spring breakers notwithstanding, the addiction recovery community in Florida and across the United States is scrambling to make group and sponsor meetings as available and effective as possible, while observing federal and state guidelines which dictate that no more than 10 people may gather together, and in some cases, that people cannot leave their homes except for essential supplies and emergencies.
“It’s really affected everything,” Ian said of the coronavirus restrictions.
Ian told CNA he qualifies for membership in multiple 12-step programs, including Heroin Anonymous, but that he has remained the most active in Alcoholics Anonymous.
Despite what people might think about Alcoholics Anonymous meetings based on movies or T.V. shows, Ian said that the primary reason for in-person meetings is not so much therapy as it is to offer a place for newcomers to meet others in recovery and to find a sponsor.
“The idea is that someone who is brand new has a place to go where they can meet someone who’s not brand new, and in that process get involved with the 12 steps,” he said. “It’s the catalyst of all other things, i.e., the newcomer really getting involved with the 12 steps.”
“If you bring them to a group that is really enthusiastic…they get almost attacked by people that are trying to help people. And so before you even know it, you’ve got a sponsor,” and a community, or at least the prospect of onem he added.
Involvement in Alcoholics Anonymous varies from person to person, but typically, a member of AA attends meetings at least once a week (often more frequently), and has regular meetings with a sponsor, who is usually a member with more years in recovery offering guidance through the 12 steps of recovery.
While coronavirus restrictions have put a damper on in-person interactions, Ian said he and his friends anticipated that lockdowns and quarantines were possible in the face of coronavirus, and they worked to put together Zoom online conference meetings, as well as a master spreadsheet of anyone available to sponsor new people.
“We’re going to be actually sending this to every local halfway house and treatment center and saying, ‘Hey, if you have new people that need sponsors, all of these people are willing to take as many as possible until it becomes unbearable,’” he said.
Back to the roots
“Father C”, a priest in Pennsylvania who is in recovery from alcohol addiction, spoke to CNA on the condition of anonymity. He said that in some ways, remote ways of connecting people in recovery to one another are a throwback to the early days of Alcoholics Anonymous, when the organization, founded in 1935, reached new people primarily by telephone.
“Groups only got organized because one alcoholic reached out to another and shared the message of his own recovery through the practice and the steps,” “Father C” told CNA.
Before they had texting or other digital ways of organizing meetings, “two people meeting together…even on the telephone, was a meeting to them,” he said.
Only after the telephone became more common in American homes, and the word about Alcoholics Anonymous got out, were organizers able to establish bigger group meetings.
Dave, a Catholic father of six in recovery in Maryland, said that mail was also used in the early days of AA.
“So the history is that Bill Wilson got sober in New York and Dr. Bob Smith got sober in Akron, Ohio. And Bill was in Ohio at the time when they started; Bill got Bob sober. And then they hung out and they would go to these Oxford Group meetings. Oxford Group is a Protestant group that had some of the basic tenants of AA,” he said.
“When Alcoholics Anonymous started, it was mainly these disparate groups of people that would exchange letters before there were meetings everywhere. So it’s a little bit of how things were in the beginning, but just with a 21st century spin on it,” he added.
More isolation, but more ways to connect
Joelle is a wife and mother in her 50s in Fresno, California who has been in recovery through AA for 10 years. She serves as an event planner for AA (though, all upcoming events have been canceled).
The move to virtual meetings means that newcomers will have to be especially proactive about reaching out for help, Joelle told CNA.
“We have a principle, a little refrain, that we say. It’s: ‘When anyone, anywhere, reaches out for help, we want the hand of AA to always be there. And for that I am responsible.’ Well, in this time, (newcomers) really are going to have to reach out. They’re going to have to find us,” Joelle added.
“Because usually somebody drops into a meeting and they don’t leave that meeting without some phone numbers and exchanging numbers so that they don’t get lost in AA. But, obviously that’s not possible right now.”
The “big saving grace” at the moment has been videoconferencing, Joelle said. The groups with which she’s involved have set up online conference meetings via Zoom, and put the word out via Facebook and word of mouth about the change. So far, attendance has been high.
“One of the meetings I go to is an every-morning-meeting, every day of the week, at 6:30 a.m. And a lot of the people who come to that meeting, they’re kind of hit-and-miss because some days they need to be at work at 7:30 and coming to a 6:30 meeting doesn’t make sense. But now that we’re on Zoom, all of them are coming,” she said.
They’re also picking up people from other groups who have not yet organized virtual meetings, she said.
“So our meeting is bigger and more vital than ever. I also think the stressful situation makes people want more AA meetings.”
Joelle said she sees this time as “kind of a mixed bag.”
One the one hand, she said, social isolation can be really bad for addicts. She predicts that a lot of people will discover during their time of social isolation that they are alcoholics or drug addicts.
“There’s going to be people who figure out they’re alcoholic during this time because being trapped at home, instead of busy with work and activities, heavy drinkers are very likely going to figure out that there’s an issue there,” she said. “But how are they going to get ahold of us?”
Because 12-step groups typically happen locally, Joelle said she would encourage those looking for a meeting to do an internet search with the name of their city plus “AA meetings,” or whichever recovery group they need.
“You’re going to find all kinds of meetings,” she said. She encouraged newcomers and those long in recovery to take advantage of extra time at home to connect to even more virtual meetings than they might normally be able to attend in person.
“I would say we need more connection, not less, when there’s stress,” Joelle said. “So home isolation is really rough for an alcoholic. But being able to attend more meetings because you’re sitting at home and so you don’t have conflict…in some ways it’s more convenient for people now. In other ways, you’re still sitting at home by yourself.”
Joelle said she thinks this time might pave the way for more virtual meetings in the future for AA, even after the threat of coronavirus has passed.
“AA already has conference call meetings, which I know is kind of old-fashioned, dial-in meetings…but from my perspective, there’s plenty of times when you would want to have someone able to Zoom in, because maybe they’ve got cancer and they’re in chemo, and so they’re stuck at home, they can’t come. I really believe this will be the wave of the future in terms of giving people more options.”
The steps at a social distance
While being able to host online meetings has been convenient in many ways, Ian said he still had many concerns about people in recovery programs, particularly those who are in early recovery.
Often, those in early recovery will take part-time jobs as restaurant servers or cashiers so they can focus on their recovery, Ian said, but a “huge influx” of people are losing such jobs in his community, he said.
“We’re just having a lot of people not only not have an income, but also not be able to participate both in meetings and fellowship, which is as, if not equally, important as meeting attendance,” he said. Fellowship typically involves 40-50 people or so going out for dinner or just hanging out together after meetings. Get-togethers of that size are now banned throughout the country.
Ian said he is also concerned about newcomers who were working the steps for the first time, because, somewhat like the sacraments of the Catholic Church, there is something particularly effective about completing those steps in person.
For example, he said, the fourth step of AA, which is to make “a searching and fearless moral inventory of ourselves,” is typically undertaken in person, with one’s sponsor. It is similar to the sacrament of confession, where sins are stated to a priest in person.
“There’s something about doing that face to face with someone and seeing someone’s face not judging you,” he said. “Like someone looking at you and being like, ‘He doesn’t think I’m a scumbag or a loser.’”
“When you remove that facial component, even through FaceTime, you’ve obviously diminished the effectiveness or efficacy of that step,” he said. “So there’s all these other underlying limitations that we’re going to tease out over the next few weeks or months potentially.”
Staying close to God when Masses are canceled
Another component of recovery that will be challenging for Catholics at this time will be remaining close to God when all public Masses and other liturgical celebrations have been canceled throughout the United States.
Connecting with a higher power is crucial for all 12-step recovery programs, but doing so can be hard for Catholics who can’t attend Mass or go to confession regularly due to coronavirus restrictions.
Christine N., a Catholic in recovery in Annapolis, Maryland, said she was “devastated” when Masses were canceled, because she had recently been trying to attend daily Mass as well as Sunday Mass. Now, she said, she’s been watching her local parish’s livestream of morning Mass, and she said she might watch Bishop Robert Barron’s streamed Masses as well.
She encouraged fellow alcoholics and others in recovery to stay the course and to trust God.
“I, and all Catholics, need to continue to pray and have faith that God will never abandon us and that he is with us,” she said. “Believe that, and we’ll get through it. But it definitely feels like a test.”
Dave said that he and his family are part of a movement, started in France, called Teams of Our Lady, which are small faith groups that meet monthly for a shared meal and fellowship, and they also have a rule of life by which they try to live. Their group just had their first online meeting yesterday.
Dave said he encourages Catholics to find virtual ways to connect and share about their faith with other Catholics or Christians.
“I think we have to be willing to share more openly with other people of our faith of what’s going on, share the difficulties, and connect (with each other),” he said, adding that he had also heard of stay-at-home virtual retreats being put on by some priests in Maryland.
Joelle said that for the past few weeks, she has been saying a daily rosary and a morning meditation and turning to prayer more often throughout the day. She encouraged Catholics to “stay out of fear” and to look for ways that God is calling them to be of service every day.
“I am constantly looking for the role that God is assigning me right now,” she said.
“I want to focus on the present and especially on being in service in the present…for me it means using my cooking skills and time to get meals to people who are shut in, especially to people over 65 or who otherwise have health concerns. To be able to take them a meal and leave it on their doorstep and make sure they’re okay, and go grocery shopping for them so they aren’t exposed. Those are things that help Catholics and they help alcoholics too.”
“Father C” said he thinks it is fitting that Catholics are all experiencing a great spiritual hunger for the sacraments during Lent. He said his advice for Catholics in recovery is similar to his advice for other addicts in recovery: “Keep coming back.”
“Stay close, be involved, do service even in the smallest things,” he said. “Think of one another and pray for one another. Even with the social distance, there needn’t be spiritual distance.”
“If God will make the greatest good come forth on the greatest evil, the death of the Son, well, would not God be able and willing to make good come out of this, even those lives that end up being lost to it?” he added.
[…]
Okay, this is great, but the time for talk is long past. It is time for this to move beyond theoretical discussion. An actual politician needs to be excommunicated by an actual sitting diocesan bishop. Otherwise, the statement has little credibility. Which bishop will be first to take action?
Sound observation, Andrew. At this time, the most recent public statements of Biden and Pelosi et al. are starkly in contrast to Catholic Teaching. As such, the ongoing delays in taking strong action against such politicians are remarkably even less justifiable than they were before when they should have already been taken. Among many such approaches, I suggest something along the following:
The very first thing that should be done ASAP is for Abp. Cordileone to instruct all parish pastors under his jurisdiction to immediately refuse to give Communion to Pelosi (he still has not shown the courage to do this, I believe, which is long overdue) and any other offending politician, and to also have each pastor publish in the parish bulletin the bishop’s clear statement to this effect with the rationale behind it. Also, a copy of the main points of Cordileone’s statement should be posted prominently on some walls and/or doors at various locations within their churches for all parishioners/visitors to clearly see it, and also serve to advise any known reprobate politician of what they can expect at that church. The statement can also include an invitation to the reprobates to make an appointment with the parish pastor (perhaps better yet, the bishop) to receive the proper catechesis with an explanation as to why any nonsense like “personally opposed but” is not acceptable.
Next, Cordileone should strongly advocate that all of his fellow bishops adopt the same policy throughout the US, and work more forcefully toward getting some fellow bishops to support the effort and, more importantly, ACT in a similar manner. Following almost immediately on this should be the development of a policy (aided by sound canon lawyers) which makes it crystal clear that any currently elected politician who continues to advocate for abortion after having been denied Communion and does not publicly change their views will be excommunicated within no more than 6 weeks from the first date the denial of Communion goes into effect. This is more than enough time for the politician to examine his/her conscience, seek the catechesis, and so on.
More details, requirements, etc. addressing various situations can of course be worked out as needed, but the denial of Communion must begin ASAP along with the establishment of a policy of excommunication for any politician who continues to publicly defy Church teaching.
This issue is and has been a Thomas More moment and long since past it’s time of action as this commenter states. I truly believe the Church(and other Christian denominations), Jews included should have stopped all of this after Roe.
So many speak of America as the bed rock of freedom and opportunity. Where were they when these millions of lives were extinguished for what ?
The rhetoric now is just that. Appreciate the Archbishop for the letter, but not enough
I agree with the previous commenter. The time for talk is over. The sides have been drawn and the Cardinal is not about to persuade anyone who wasn’t already pro life to become pro life. Biden, Pelosi, and the others need to be excommunicated. And that needs to happen now. How do I teach my children that abortion is a mortal sin and an abomination in God’s eyes when the Catholic Bishops allow these pro abortion and pro sodomy “Catholic” politicians to receive Holy Communion? And how do I teach my children that the Eucharist is the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of God Himself when the Catholic Bishops allow these pro abortion and pro sodomy “Catholic” politicians to receive Holy Communion?
Cordileone is not a Cardinal. He will never be made one under the current Pontiff.
Biden and Pelosi both claim to be practising Catholics. Yet each of them openly supports and promotes abortion, and indeed other positions contrary to Catholic teaching.
Their position is a direct and sustained public challenge by them to the Church, of which they claim to be loyal members. It would in my opinion be reasonable to excommunicate them. This would send a powerful message to all catholics and more widely throughout the world. The Church has to be a sign of contradiction to the world – it should not conform to the world. It should not be afraid to take a stand on this issue. We should not be afraid! Let’s do it.
The time for talk is over now and has been for a long time – with Catholics like most of us. But – we are dealing with a majority of people ‘catholic’ (small c) and non-catholic for whom the taking of helpless human lives in the womb is not a big deal.
Step by step – The Texas ruling being the most recent. Both Biden and Pelosi are over the roof about it, which is to be expected – to the extent that they can be ignored because their reactions are so completely predictable. The ‘press’ is (predictably) taking sides with them, saying that this proves that Catholics are really divided about this and only those like Nan & Joey are forward thinkers who can be trusted about it.
BUT
With every passing day, less and less ‘Catholics’ can really support it with a straight face, and I believe that the day is coming closer when a Bishop will publicly excommunicate a ‘Catholic’ politician who publicly supports abortion.
Congresswoman Pelosi is probably shaking in her boots, and she should be.
She needs our prayers.
Compared to LGBT abortion is the greater evil because it’s killing of the innocent. It’s the world’s greatest crime. Many who support it politically in Congress or by individual vote are morally complicit. Archbishop Cordileone is himself morally obliged to act. As said previously regarding Vatican reengineering of the original USCCB agenda to address the issue and sanction, then sandbagged by CDF prefect Cardinal Ladaria at the Pope’s bidding. What was produced an insignificant letter to the faithful of what’s contained in the Catechism. Bishops are Apostolic defenders of the faith. There’s no justification to refrain from their duty. And like the good shepherd guide misled souls from the precipice. From condemnation at judgment. Malaise is not limited to sins by laity. When there’s so much at stake talking of morality has virtually no effect on the support given abortion by Catholics. A few have acted as bishops. All others not simply should, they must act.
I think Abp. Cordileone is not speaking only to Biden and Pelosi and co.
And kudos to him (again).
I think it is one thing for a Catholic politician to argue he has an obligation uphold the law of the US irrespective of his personal beliefs. Its another to have a tantrum over a Supreme Court ruling upholding a law which would limit ( but not completely prevent) abortion and say you are going to make a full court press to overturn the ruling and make abortion as freely available as possible. Its more than a little disgusting and certainly against Catholic teaching. Its past time for these Bishops and Cardinals to stop talking and ACT. Pretending these offending politicians are not giving public scandal is not fooling anyone.
Curious about how long Pelosi has held the pro-choice “Catholic” view, I searched and found an NCReporter interview from 2002. Notable among other quotes was this by Pelosi:
“The divinity in me bows to the divinity in you.” Any theologian want to comment???
There was also this question put to Pelosi: “Is it more difficult today to be a pro-choice Catholic then it was, say, ten years ago?” [NOTE: She had been a member of Congress since 1988; the interviewer was asking about 1992…]
A [Pelosi]: “It’s about the same….
“I have never in my district in California, in my archdiocese…if I was going to [be allowed to] receive communion; I never knew if this was the day it would be withheld. And that’s a hard way to go to church. Fortunately, I’m invited — I have a big family — I go to a lot of weddings, I’m in a different church every week. I’m a moving target. I travel, so I’m not exactly a target in terms of always being in the same church, although I go to St. Vincent DePaul, which is my neighborhood parish.
“In addition to that, on many occasions the archdiocese has told the nuns that I couldn’t be the speaker at some event. And that’s hurtful because we have so much in common. But it’s the decision the church has made.”
The decisions Pelosi has made at the intersection of her faith and her politics are her own. If she were to think with the Church, with God’s commandments, and with common sense, she would put herself in penitential stock for whatever days remain in her natural life.
Ms. Pelosi has been in Congress since 1988 and has apparently held her pro-abortion “Catholic” view for all this time.
Question for the Bishop: HOW MUCH LONGER WILL Nancy BE ALLOWED TO CAUSE SCANDAL, SHAME, AND DISGRACEFUL PAIN to the Body of Christ? HOW MUCH LONGER WILL Nancy BE ALLOWED to PUT HER OWN and many another’s ETERNAL LIFE/SALVATION AT GRAVE RISK? Will you wait another 33 years???
I’m not against excommunicating pro-infanticide “Catholic” politicians. But the question is whether they can be excommunicated? Canonist Edward Peters wrote several essays (many of them published on this very site) stating that Canon Law as it stands does not provide for excommunicating pro-aborts.
https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2019/01/24/thoughts-on-ecclesiastical-consequences-for-gov-cuomos-pro-abortion-acts/
https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2019/02/07/its-not-fair-but-does-he-deserve-it/
I’m not a Canon Lawyer myself (just the regular civil kind) so anyone comments from those more knowledgeable than me on this subject would be appreciated.
Response to Johann du Toit:
Canonist Peters is indeed a fine canon lawyer who at times uses the fallacy of credentialism as a hammer to dismiss legitimate possibilities of canon law interpretations/applications that differ from his, especially if such possibilities are raised by those who are not canon lawyers. In this he frequently resembles those “experts” of the past who rhetorically asked “is this not the carpenter’s son”? Still, he has a well-deserved reputation as a legitimate voice of canon law interpretation that should always be taken seriously and honestly engaged. However, many people look to Peters as if he has a gift of canon law interpretation infallibility, and so his views on certain Church matters involving canon law are all too often considered the final word on such things. This is, of course, not the case, and Peters does not make this claim, plus at times he will state that his interpretation of this or that law or application may not be correct. This prudent humility is most welcome in the following section from one of the articles cited above:
“Canon 1369 authorizes a ‘just penalty’ against those who violate its terms. That broad (but not unlimited) phrase ‘just penalty’ allows for tailoring the canonical consequences in specific cases to the wide variety of fact patterns that could be addressed in its light, here, everything from Cuomo’s speeches and comments in support of this abortion law to his ordering a ghoulish light show in celebration of its enactment. That said, while the notion of a ‘just penalty’ is broad, there is some question as to whether it extends, at least immediately, to excommunication. Here is not the place to air that technical issue, but neither should its presence derail consideration of using Canon 1369 against Cuomo. Some justice is better than no justice and even if (I say, if) excommunication could not be imposed immediately on Cuomo, the Church could still impose some canonical sanctions for his conduct. If, moreover, such sanctions as could be imposed per Canon 1369 were ignored by Cuomo, Canon 1393 would allow for their augmentation, making the possibility of a ‘just penalty’ reaching to excommunication stronger.”
So instead of declaring that canon law as it stands does not permit excommunication for politicians like Cuomo, Peters acknowledges the possibility of excommunication in the interpretation and application of Canon 1369 and/or Canon 1393 against Gov. Cuomo. Accordingly, the possibility of also “reaching excommunication” in the cases of Pelosi, Biden, and others who continue to act in defiance of Church doctrine seems equally reasonable if not more so based on the public stances of these people that include, at least in the case of Biden, openly declaring his opposition to Church teaching that life begins at conception. No faithful Catholic can maintain this erroneous position, and those who do also at least tacitly deny some related Church teachings, including the infallible teaching of the Immaculate Conception (it is not the Immaculate Transplantation, nor is it the Immaculate Birth, and even before modern science demonstrated that life begins at conception, we see once again the Church ahead of its time in declaring an infallible doctrine in 1854 that also underscores when life begins). What’s the point of honoring/celebrating the conception of the Blessed Virgin if she wasn’t even alive according to the heretical beliefs of Biden and others of a similar mindset?
As I set forth in my previous comment, I favor the immediate withholding of Communion from openly reprobate politicians, and then excommunication in due course for those who remain openly hostile to the Church’s teaching in this regard. Even if some canonical hoops have to be jumped through to get to excommunication, such jumping should be done in defense of the Faith.
Long, long past time for this to be done, not merely discussed. One is left to wonder what the eternal consequence is for an episcopate which refuses to admonish the sinner as a result of its own self interest.
Stop “agonizing.”
Do it.
The good archbishop better excommunicate these politician(s) before he submitts his required retirement because this pope (if still in) will accept his retiremnet within minutes.
Texas abortion “law” is far from a pro-life idea. Roe is still “settled law”. Hence, Texas “law” remains unconstitutional until we re-write it to the Hyde Amendment concept. Texas “law” also removes rape or incest and illegally arms the citizenry to act like vigilantes/bounty hunters allowing anyone to file a lawsuit for observing an attempt at abortion. That would more than likely flood the courts with cases.
Anyone openly wearing abortion-on-demand on their sleeve should also be excommunicated. As always, it would be hard to invoke.
Pray to Jesus for guidance on the most egress of mortal sins.
I’m with Terence McManus above. I think Abp. Cordileone is addressing all Catholics, not just Biden and Pelosi and co., all Americans, in fact. He is very articulate and very courageous. To go into the Washington Post is to go into the lion’s den. (Hey). I give him a lot of credit.
Abortion is in deed a terrible thing. And so is sexual abuse of minors. Why does abortion receive so much attention and sexual abuse is swept under the rug? Why are the unborn more important than the already born? Just asking.
3 years after the fact – I just remembered back in 2008 when Obama chose Biden as his VP – in his announcement he said Joe is a “practicing Catholic” in a clear attempt at the ‘Catholic’ vote. Joe said sanctimoniously that he “opposes abortion but would never impose his beliefs on others”, which sounded good to the gum-chewing public.
I for one would never ask him to ‘impose’ what he calls his ‘beliefs’ on others, but I WOULD expect him to DEFEND them.