Trust me, I can see the blogging priest’s point. But as a priest, assigned to a parish by his bishop, he isn’t in private practice (as Bishop Lessard like to remind his priests).
To publicly challenge his bishop, who already has warned the priest about his blogging, seems to be a no-win situation for the priest who has promised obedience to his bishop. I am sure that most who read this blog would side with the bishop if this priest were challenging him on the way in which he wanted to practice celibacy if it became creative.
But, this bishop, the former personal secretary to the now layman “Uncle Ted” needs to be careful as he is tainted. And all those within the web of Ted and his ability to promote to higher places, need to be careful. In fact, the Holy Father should sweep clean the household Uncle Ted created. We are still waiting for that, COVID 19 or not:
READ THE REST AT CRUX
To publicly challenge his bishop, who already has warned the priest about his blogging, seems to be a no-win situation for the priest who has promised obedience to his bishop. I am sure that most who read this blog would side with the bishop if this priest were challenging him on the way in which he wanted to practice celibacy if it became creative.
But, this bishop, the former personal secretary to the now layman “Uncle Ted” needs to be careful as he is tainted. And all those within the web of Ted and his ability to promote to higher places, need to be careful. In fact, the Holy Father should sweep clean the household Uncle Ted created. We are still waiting for that, COVID 19 or not:
Virginia priest in battle with bishop over blog blasting Church’s abuse response
- Inés San MartínApr 18, 2020
READ THE REST AT CRUX
14 comments:
I am certain there is a Catholic bishop out there who would appreciate having Father White in his diocese. The lackey running his diocese obviously does not want orthodox Catholic priests, just company men. I pity the people of that diocese.
Maybe that's what the dagger is for in the picture at the top of your blog. The Bishop keeps it with him in case anyone brings up McCarrick or how the Bishops are still covering up what happened.
A priest can disagree with his bishop, shout at his bishop, fume at his bishop, criticize his bishop all he wants - behind closed doors. In such a case he should document clearly the reasons for his disagreement and the words he and his bishop exchange.
However, when the office door opens, the bishop is the one who speaks for the diocese, who sets policy and sees that it is carried out, and who is responsible for the good order of his diocese.
Fr. White was wrong to act as he did - and there is no excuse for his behavior. His assertion, "Because if there ever was a time for a priest to be able to communicate with his people, this is obviously it.” doesn't support his act of disobedience.
Does anyone reading this still wonder why laity are leaving and will continue to leave the Church?
The young priest was wrong and I sense deeper issues than those he complained about.
What else is new with these "bishops", where Wuerl forced Msgr Pope to apologize over criticism of Dolan regarding blessing gay pride marchers in the St Paddy's debauch?
Stay silent on abuse, but come down like a hammer on critics....we are suprised? Cupich trying to commit a priest for exorcising a gay sex playroom and church....
On one hand, I can see how frustrated this young priest must have felt and, as TJM points out, it is frustrating to see that some bishops only tolerate "company men" (and "company men" are often recognizable for the bootlicks that they are). I suspect that if this priest HAD used the parish Facebook page (and parish Facebook pages are turning into a cliche) that his bishop could have twisted even THAT into a violation of his previous order and still fired this priest.
BUT...
The bishop IS the head of his diocese. He has a right to control the message sent to the people and control the "image" of the diocese (thinking in terms of PR). He also has a right to expect a certain level of loyalty from his priests. A bishop is the closest thing we have today to a medieval lord, but then again, the middle ages were not entirely bad.
If the laity are really leaving the Church for reasons like this, they do so at their own peril. However, I WOULD encourage lay people who disagree with this bishop to make their voices heard. And there are some VERY effective ways to get a bishop's attention if you are creative enough.
This sure seems like something that could have been avoided, but I am not going to assign blame, as I suspect it could go to both involved.
In my diocese, the Archbishop issued some guidance awhile back regarding his priests using blogs and social media. I have my own blog, and at the Archbishop's request, I added verbiage making clear that everything there represented my own personal views. I've posted comments -- and homilies -- critical of episcopal and papal handling of McCarrick and other issues. In those posts I urged people to make their own views known to higher-ups. No problems from the Archbishop.
Now, I am not stupid. I did not attack anyone personally, and I sought to couch my comments in charitable terms. And (I am not stupid) I did not get into a war with my own Archbishop. My feeling is this: if I have something to say about the Archbishop's approaches, then that means I have something to say TO the Archbishop -- i.e., directly. But if I'm not prepared to write him a letter, or make a phone call, then why am I posting it online?
There are many reasons why a priest ought to be extremely loathe to go to war against his bishop, but generally, it is counterproductive and distracting. The circumstances where something like that is truly justified are not impossible, but rarer than we sinful, ego-driven human beings usually think, and discerning that is not easy. It's also essentially impossible to undo the damage done once the war starts; and that will include collateral damage.
If this priest had defied the bishop’s orders not to talk about illegal aliens or gays the bishop would have been radio silent or would have praised him for “speaking truth to power. “
I am wondering why the bishop never responded to the request of the priest to resume the blog. Doesn't respect go both ways?
Respect goes both ways. Obedience does not.
Bishops receive many letters (emails today) to which no response is given. I know this because I worked as secretary to our bishop many years ago. It was not uncommon for him to read a letter and note "No Response" on it before it was filed.
A bishop who has made his directives clear to one of his priests is not obliged to tell him again and again and again why he made his decision. Nor is the bishop obliged to "reconsider" his decision simply because one or his priests requests such.
This bishop should be locked in a room with 6 fathers of abuse victims. He might see things differently.
Our resident "company man" priest has now weighed in so this ends the debate! No one needs to obey the venal and corrupt. Events have proven that many of the hierarchy in the US are venal and corrupt. I hope they enjoy the declining numbers and collections. They built that!
Father Michael Kavanaugh you need a course in etiquette.
Anonymous,
He needs a course in Catholicism 101, logic and common decency. He votes for a party that believes abortion is healthcare and an essential service
Post a Comment