Archbishop's Letters 
Statement of the Alaska Conference of Catholic Bishops Concerning the April 3, 2007 Statewide Advisory Vote
The Alaska State Legislature has placed a measure before the Alaska voters seeking advice on whether the marriage provision of the Alaska State Constitution should be amended. The amendment would make clear that same-sex couples are not similarly situated to married couples and, therefore, would prohibit the state, municipality or other subdivision of the state from providing employment benefits to same-sex couples on that basis.
We, the Catholic Bishops of Alaska, urge Catholic voters and other persons of goodwill to respond to the Legislature’s request for guidance by carefully considering the issue and voting on April 3rd.
At the time of the Constitutional vote on marriage in 1998, we publicly spoke on our view of marriage as “a relationship that identifies a man and a woman as husband and wife, makes them two in one flesh, brings children into the world, [and] transforms two individuals into mother and father.”
The voters of Alaska, at that time, overwhelmingly voted to amend the Alaska State Constitution to protect this traditional view of marriage by adding the words: “To be valid or recognized in this State, a marriage may exist only between one man and one woman.”
The Alaska Supreme Court, however, has since ruled that same-sex couples are “similarly situated” to married couples. Consequently, the Court has ordered that whatever benefits of marriage the state, or subdivisions of the state, provide to married couples must also be provided to same-sex couples.
We respectfully disagree with the Court’s opinion which has the effect of undermining both the institution of marriage and the marriage provision of the State Constitution itself.
Same-sex relationships are not the same as marriage. Recognizing the social and legal status of marriage as a relationship different from other forms of cohabitation is not opposed to justice; on the contrary, justice requires it. Differentiating marriage from same-sex relationships is exactly what the marriage amendment passed in 1998 was about, which the Court’s opinion effectively negates.
The Legislature, in response, has asked each of us, as voters, for our input through the ballot box on April 3rd. In this Lenten season where we are asked not only to deny ourselves but also to do things for the good of society, we ask you to carefully consider the importance of the institution of marriage to the common good and to vote in the statewide advisory election on April 3rd.
SIGNED:
Archbishop Roger L. Schwietz, OMI, Archdiocese of Anchorage
Archbishop Emeritus Francis T. Hurley, Archdiocese of Anchorage
Bishop Donald J. Kettler, Diocese of Fairbanks
Bishop Michael W. Warfel, Diocese of Juneau
Paid for by Alaska Conference of Catholic Bishops
415 Sixth Street-Suite 300
Juneau, Alaska 99801
February 2007
Dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ:
When I arrived in Anchorage in 2000, my first recollection was the Archdiocese was a place that celebrated a dynamic faith lived out in communities from Anchorage to the Aleutians. The groundwork had been laid by dedicated priests and religious who were sustained by generous and faithful lay leaders. That faith, and those communities, had matured over the years, and it seemed as if the Spirit had led them to a point at which they were ready to take more responsibility for themselves. In other words, this missionary Archdiocese was growing to a level of maturity allowing it to begin planning for its own future.
Starting a year prior to the 40th anniversary of the establishment of the Archdiocese, I called together the leaders of the parish communities with my staff and, with the help of consultants, started the process of discerning where the Spirit of God was leading us as a local church. My intent was to develop a Pastoral Plan to guide and direct us into the future. I invited Brother Loughlan Sofield, S.T., to assist us in this first stage of communal reflection.
The process started slowly. From a hesitation of wondering what this was all about, to a guided process of collaboration, an enthusiasm and active participation developed in the leadership group. My hope was whatever discernment we would come up with, a sense of ownership would prevail within the group. Through the assistance of our consulters, The Reid Group, we began examining our values, then our dreams, then our goals for the Archdiocese. Working methodically, to establish our Pastoral Plan, we came up with a mission statement as well as a vision statement followed by goals and objectives that would guide us over the years to come. After wide consultation, we are presenting the results of our work to all in the Archdiocese. This Pastoral Plan belongs to all of us, for we are realizing more and more our unity in Christ as a local church. This work, hopefully developed by the guidance of the Holy Spirit, is the map that will guide us on our journey from the 40th to the 50th anniversary of the founding of the Archdiocese.
In response to the call of Jesus to discipleship, I challenge each of us, as individuals, as parishes, as agencies, as the Pastoral Center, to look at what we can do to implement the Goals and Objectives of our Pastoral Plan. The strategies on how to accomplish these Goals and Objectives will be different as we apply them individually, in families, in parishes and throughout the Archdiocese. Together we will live the vision, where dreams become reality. I believe this process will be energizing and vibrant for the Archdiocese as the evangelizing community of Christ’s Disciples.
I commend our efforts to Mary, the Mother of the Church. Through her intercession, may we, though our implementation of this plan, proclaim to the people of this great land that Jesus Christ is Lord.
Sincerely yours in Christ and Mary,
Most Reverend Roger L. Schwietz, O.M.I., D.D.
Archbishop of Anchorage
to read the Pastoral Plan August 25, 2006
Dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ:
As many of you are aware, the Archdiocese has been involved in four legal actions making claims of sexual misconduct by clergy. Three legal actions were resolved recently through the mediation process, including the action which named Msgr. Murphy (see letter below). One action remains, which we hope to see resolved soon. That case involves the action of a layman in the Dillingham area from a period prior to the establishment of the Archdiocese of Anchorage when that territory was part of the Diocese of Fairbanks.
The following information is provided as background to answer any questions you might have regarding these settlements or other issues related to clergy sexual misconduct.
Q: Why mediation?
A: There are several reasons we chose this route.
- It provides a more rapid process for coming to resolution;
- It only occurs if all parties agree that this is a viable option;
- It is a just solution that provides a forum for all involved to express their concerns and desires, in a manner which respects each party involved;
- A successful mediation is one where all parties feel that a mutual agreement is reached;
- It protects the privacy of the plaintiffs.
Q: What are the details of the settlements?
A: When all of us involved agreed to mediation, we agreed at the request of the mediator that the content of the mediation discussions would be confidential. I am abiding by that agreement. It is discouraging to me that others who signed this agreement have not upheld this commitment.
Q: How much did these settlements cost the Archdiocese?
A: The total Archdiocesan financial commitment to all three settlements is $795,000.
Q: Where will the funds come from to pay these settelements?
A. Our insurers provided support for legal costs and a large portion of the settlement payments. That portion of the settlement fees not covered by our insurers will be paid from funds earned through the sale of properties, which were reserved for this purpose, such as the Archbishop’s house. No funds from parish collections or the annual appeal were used to pay these settlements.
Q: What steps has the Church taken to ensure that further incidents of abuse don’t happen?
A: It is important that we not forget these events. We need to be vigilant as a Church and as a people of God, to address the reality of abuse and prevent it from ever happening to anyone, child or adult. We continue to provide a Safe Environment program in the diocese that includes background checks for all pastoral ministers, volunteers who work with youth and children, and diocesan and parish employees. Additionally, there is mandated training for all priests, deacons, parish directors, pastoral leaders, catechetical leaders and youth ministers. We continue to provide a column in the Anchor on Safe Environment tips, and there are education opportunities in parishes to explore and discuss abuse, what to watch for and how to report.
Further, the U.S. Bishops have commissioned the John Jay College of Criminal Justice to conduct a thorough study of the causes and context of past sexual abuse of children and youth by clergy. The results of this study will give us insight into what more we can do to provide a safe environment for children in the future.
I share all this with you in a continuing effort to be a faithful and transparent steward of the resources entrusted to my care. I am committed to seeing that justice and healing are served. I seek justice and healing for those who were harmed by past actions while at the same time seeking justice and healing for those parishioners who continue to faithfully support their Church and its dedicated priests and clergy.
I invite us to continue our fervent prayers for all victims of childhood sexual abuse. Thank you for your patience and support throughout the painful experience this has been for everyone. May God in his infinite love bring about good from what we have experienced.
Sincerely yours in Christ and Mary,
Most Reverend Roger L. Schwietz, O.M.I.
Archbishop of Anchorage
A Letter from Frank Murphy August 15, 2006
Dear Archbishop Schwietz:
I am writing to tell you how ashamed I am of what I have done and of the hurt I have caused the people of Alaska and the Church. I offer my heartfelt and sincere apology for all of the problems I have caused.
My past behavior has been the source of great pain and scandal to the people with whom I worked and among whom I lived for the years that I was in Alaska. In His teachings, Jesus was very specific about only a few things. One of them was scandal and those who cause it. Every day I seek forgiveness for the scandal I have created.
The settlements that have been reached have resulted in a major financial burden for the Archdiocese. For that I am deeply sorry. I know the hardship this will cause you in the future.
I have let down my brother priests and the other Religious who have served long and well and have worked hard for the Church in Alaska. I apologize to them and to the people whom they must face daily. My disloyalty weighs heavily because it casts a shadow on those who have remained faithful to their vows.
I ask for your forgiveness and for your prayers.
Sincerely yours,
Frank A. Murphy
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archbishop Schwietz wishes to share with all parents "A Letter to Bishops of the United States from the Chair of the Pontifical Academy for Life Study on Vaccination."
August 16, 2005
From Most Reverend Arthur J. Serratelli, Bishop of Paterson, Chair of the Committe on Doctrine, United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.
On 9 June 2005, the Pontifical Academy for Life responded to a request for clarification by Ms. Debi Vinnedge of Children of God for Life by sending her an eight-page study entitled "Moral Reflections on Vaccines Prepared from Cells Derived from Aborted Human Foetuses." Ms. Vinnedge has apparently mailed this document to all the bishops of the USCCB along with some other materials. As some bishops have raised questions about the interpretation given to the document by Ms. Vinnedge, I am pleased to send you a brief summary of its conclusions.
"Moral Reflections on Vaccines Prepared from Cells Derived from Aborted Humnan Foetuses" does not constitute an innovation in Church teaching. Rather, the study confirms and further explains what has been the general consensus among bishops and Catholic ethicists.
On the one hand, the creation of some vaccines is morally tainted by its close association wiht the evil of abortion, particularly with regard to the use o fetal cell lines derived from abortion. "As regards the preparation, distribution and maketing of vaccines produced as a result of biological material whose origin is connected with cells coming from foetuses voluntarily aborted, such a process is stated, as a matter of principle, morally illicit, because it could contribute in encouraging the performance of other voluntary abortions, with the purpose of the production of such vaccines."
On the other hand, for thsoe who are the recipients of vaccination, it is sometimes morally permissible, perhaps even obligatory, to accept vaccinations with such vaccines when there is a serious reason and lack of alternatives. "We find, in such a case, a proptional reason, in order to accept the use of htese vaccines in the presnece of the danger of favouring the spread of the pathological agent, due to the lack of vaccination of children. This is particularly true in the case of vaccination against German measles." The Pontifical does not advocate refusing to have one's child vaccinated with such vaccines when it is a matter of very serious diseases and there are no alternatives. With regard to rubella vaccination, the document asserts that "parents who did not accept the vaccination of their own children become responsible for the malformations in question, and for the subsequent abortion of foetuses, when they have been discovered to be malformed."
The Pontifical Academy calls for appropriate expressions of protest against the origins of these vaccines as well as for vigorous efforts to promote the creation of alternatives. "There remains a moral duty to contine to fight and to employ every lawful means in order to make life difficult for the pharmaceutical industries which act unscrupulously and unethically." The document concludes, however, by emphatically asserting that public health must not be sacrificed. "The burdens of this important battle cannot and must not fall on innocent children and ont he health situation of the population-especially with regard to pregnant women."
The National Catholic Bioethics Center issued a statement that, while not referring to Children of God for Life by name, criticizes as inaccurate the headline of the COGFL press release "Vatican Condemns Vaccines Using Fetal Tissue" (see www. ncbcenter.org/vaticanresponseNCBC.asp). The NCBE concludes: "The Pontifical Academy for Life rejects the claim that Catholic have a moral duty to refuse the rubella vaccine on the grounds of conscience and Catholic teaching. It encourage Catholic parents to vaccinate their children against rubella and other serious diseases despite the unfortunate origin of the cell lines used in the manufacture of the vaccines. At the same time the Academy is very strong in its denunciation of the use of tissue or cells from aborted fetuses and insists that pharmaceutical firms reject their use and develop alternative cell lines for the manufacture of vaccines."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A Church in Thanksgiving April 19, 2005
Statement from Most Reverend Roger L. Schwietz, O.M.I.
Archbishop
of Anchorage and Metropolitan of Alaska
My Brother Priests, Deacons, Religious and Catholic Faithful:
Now we rejoice and give thanks to God, that Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger
of Germany has been elected to become our Supreme Pontiff, the 265th
successor of Peter and vicar of Christ, Pope Benedict XVI.
My own experiences with our new Pope has been one of mutual respect. He
has always been pastoral and extremely hospitable to me. I found
him to be a humble, kind person who is very gentle. In meetings
with the bishops he really listened and I found him to be open to what
we had to say. When he was Archbishop in Munich, he was rather
forward thinking and very pastoral. He is a consummate pastor,
scholar, and teacher. I believe that we will see a new image emerge
that will relate reflect his many pastoral gifts. I believe that
he will lead with fidelity to the doctrine of the church and continue
the initiatives of Pope John Paul II as a pastoral leader.
These words from Archbishop Hurley upon the news of the election of Benedict
XVI speak to our theology, “We all rejoice that we have a Pope. We
all must rejoice if we believe that the Cardinals entered the conclave
with hearts and minds open to the Holy Spirit. For we do believe
that the Spirit, the same Spirit we each received in the Sacrament of
Confirmation is the gift of Jesus to his Church, promised by Jesus to
enlighten and strengthen his Church.”
We ask the Holy Spirit to guide and inspire Pope Benedict XVI as he begins
his ministry to the Universal Church in the footsteps of Peter. While
each Pope is guided by the Spirit, each draws from his predecessors as
he leads the church into the future.
Asking the continued blessings of our Risen Lord on you, I am
Sincerely yours in Christ and Mary,
Most Reverend Roger L. Schwietz, O.M.I.
Archbishop of Anchorage
