Paul Dudzic named Chief Development Officer for archdiocese

Paul Dudzic visited the Cathedral Basilica of the Immaculate Conception during a visit to Denver, 18 years ago. Then-Archbishop Charles J. Chaput celebrated Mass, and the service inspired a decision that would change the course of Dudzic’s life—to choose “citizenship” in the Archdiocese of Denver.

Dudzic recently answered another call—to lead the new Office of Development for the Archdiocese of Denver, as chief development officer.

A native of Connecticut, and lifelong Catholic, Dudzic graduated from Connecticut’s Fairfield University, earned his juris doctor from Duke, then an MBA from the University of Chicago. He went on to work for large law and consulting firms.

“I visited Denver, attended Mass at the cathedral, and just fell in love with the archdiocese,” Dudzic said. “I loved everything about it.”

He was so moved by Denver’s Catholic community, he uprooted his life in San Francisco and moved here with his wife, Patricia, only because it felt more Catholic.

“I was getting a little tired of the less-than-traditional environment of San Francisco,” he said.

In Denver, he worked the next 16 years in law, consulting, and as president of the investment firm Pinnacle Development in Greenwood Village.

“I’ve done a lot of development work in and around Denver,” he explained. “I’ve sat on a series of boards here. I’ve worked on the bridge project at the University of Denver, and I chaired the development committee for Denver Botanical Gardens.”

A long list of other roles includes serving as vice chairman of the Augustine Institute, and work with Seeds of Hope – a ministry that helps economically disadvantaged children attend Catholic schools.

Paul and Patricia are parents to Michael, a freshman at Mullen High School; Christopher, a fifth grader at St. Mary’s School in Littleton; and Megan, a junior at Regis Jesuit High School.

“I consider myself a citizen of the archdiocese, and I love to share that passion with others,” he said, explaining why he accepted the job. “I want to share my love of the priests, bishops, seminaries and laity. I think we have the best archdiocese in the country, bar none. It is extraordinary. From Archbishop (James) Stafford, to Archbishop (Charles) Chaput, to Archbishop (Samuel) Aquila, our archdiocese has had leadership that is unwavering from an orthodoxy perspective.

“We have friendly, approachable people leading our church at all levels, and it is highly unusual.”

Invitation to mission

Dudzic feels so impassioned about the archdiocese, and the work it does, he says calling and asking for money will be a pleasure. He has never known of a community with such a generous base of Catholic philanthropists.

“I believe that by asking people for donations, I invite them to participate in the mission of our church,” he said.

The Development Office of the Archdiocese of Denver will coordinate the core services formerly provided by the Catholic Alliance for ministries and institutions of the archdiocese, such as Redemptoris Mater and St. John Vianney seminaries, Catholic Charities, Centro San Juan Diego, Seeds of Hope, Bishop Machebeuf and Holy Family High Schools, and the Prophet Elijah House for retired priests. The office will also assist in growing the annual Archbishop’s Catholic Appeal.

As chief development officer, Dudzic plans to expand funding beyond the traditional base of loyal donors. That will include trying to align people with causes they care most about.

“What work are we doing that aligns with your heart? That’s what we will try to help donors discern,” he said. “I believe that in growing the services provided to many of the poor, homeless and struggling in our community, we can reach a lot of non-Catholic donors more than ever to support our mission. We can share Christ’s vision for taking care of our poor, for taking care of our community in a way that transcends a religious boundary.

“You don’t have to be Catholic to help people sleep at night at the Samaritan House. You don’t have to be Catholic to help put kids in a good Catholic school if the public school is not getting the job done.”

He enjoyed his successful career of law and investing, and looks forward to leveraging those experiences in his new role.

“I’d be a fool to think any of this work is about me,” he said. “I go to work every day knowing it is for Christ, and through him. It makes fundraising a lot easier, when you know it is for God.”

Featured image: Paul Dudzic pictured here with his family. From left: Michael, Paul, Christopher, Megan, Patricia. (Photo provided)

COMING UP: Why 42 had to be impeached twenty years ago

Sign up for a digital subscription to Denver Catholic!

Twenty years ago this month, I found myself seriously double-booked, so to speak.

The editing of the first volume of my John Paul II biography, Witness to Hope, was entering the ninth inning, and I was furiously engaged in exchanging edited and re-edited copy with my editors in New York. At the same time, the Clinton impeachment drama was cresting. And as I had long done speechwriting for Congressman Henry Hyde, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, I spent week after week of split time, working on John Paul II from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m., then switching to impeachment for a couple of hours before returning to Witness to Hope in the evening.

It was not the optimal way to work but it had to be done, even if it seemed likely that the president would be acquitted in a Senate trial. On December 19, 1998, the House of Representatives voted two articles of impeachment and senior House members, including Mr. Hyde, solemnly walked the two articles across the Capitol and presented them to the Senate’s leaders. On toward midnight, Henry Hyde called me and, referring to Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott, said, “We’re not going to make it. Trent won’t fight; I saw it in his eyes.” After a long moment I replied that, if we were going to lose, we had a duty to lay down a record with which history would have to reckon.

Which is what the great Henry Hyde did during the January 1999 Senate trial, where he bent every effort to prevent the proceedings from descending into farce.

For Hyde, the impeachment of President Bill Clinton was an unavoidable piece of nasty business. It was not a matter of partisan score-settling, nor was it a matter of punishing a president for gross behavior with an intern in the White House. It was a matter of defending the rule of law. As Henry put it to me when it seemed clear that the president had perjured himself and obstructed justice, “There are over a hundred people in federal prisons for these crimes. How can the chief law enforcement officer of the United States be guilty of them and stay in office?”

Impeachment is a political process and it was clear by mid-fall of 1998 that the politics were not breaking toward removing the president from office. They had been pointed that way over the summer, though. And as the pressures built, it seemed as if the Clinton presidency might end as Richard Nixon’s had: Party elders, in this case Democrats, would go to the White House, explain that it was over, and ask the president to resign for the sake of the country. Then around Labor Day that year, Maureen Dowd of the New York Times and other columnists began suggesting that, if Clinton were impeached and convicted, the sexual revolution would be over, the yahoos of reaction would have won, and we’d be back to something resembling Salem, Massachusetts, during the witchcraft insanity.

That was preposterous. It was also effective. And within days, at least in Washington, you could fill the templates shifting: This wasn’t about the rule of law, it was about sex and the yahoos couldn’t be allowed to win. (That Henry Hyde was the leader of the pro-life forces in Congress neatly fit this storyline, of course, abortion being a major plank in the platform of the sexual revolution.)

So once the game was redefined — Are you for or against the puritanical yahoos? — there was little chance to wrench the political process back to what it was really about: the rule of law. In his opening speech during the president’s trial, Henry Hyde tried valiantly to refocus the argument, insisting that high office did not absolve a man from obeying his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the laws of the United States and his oath swearing to tell the truth to a federal grand jury. To suggest that it did was to “break the covenant of trust” between president and people, dissolving “the mortar that binds the foundation stones of our freedom into a secure and solid edifice.”

It wasn’t a winning argument. But it was the right argument. And on this 20th anniversary, the nation should remember with gratitude those like Henry Hyde who, under fierce assault, stood for the rule of law.

Featured image by Gage Skidmore | Flickr