The era of not issuing anathemas is over! Thank God?
I am in favor of anathemas but these should be rare and safe.
I am in favor, too, of equity in the issuing of anathemas.
I think it is fair to ask that if Frank Pavone, a laicized pries, is anathematized, shouldn’t others on the left be offered the same punitive treatment as a matter of equity? Keep in mind, once a priest always a priest, he simply has no canonical permission to exercise his priesthood, in fact the anathema issued against him forbids him to function as a priest except in a dire emergency.
I saw this photo on twitter from the Lepanto Institute. I should remind them that McCarrick was laicized too, but that laicization was in reaction to higher ups in the Church knowing full well what McCarrick had been doing since his ordination as a priest and not lifting a finger to stop it in the way that Pavone has been stopped in his priestly private practice. It was damage control.
Equity anyone?
10 comments:
No, because we have a leftwing pope for whom all decisions are political
Fr Charles Curran is mentioned above. I could be wrong about this (but based on knowing a fairly large number of priests in the 70s to 90s - priests who were friends of my parents, or priests I knew while studying for a degree in theology as a layman) I believe many Catholic priests, in both parishes and teaching in seminaries, in that era, were basically in agreement with Curran’s views opposing official Church teaching on sexual morality and Christian marriage, but avoided what happened to Curran simply because they were less prominent, less influential and mostly more careful and discrete. Yet they still caused great harm in being Catholic priests, in good standing, while simply not believing Church teaching re sex morality - thousands of average lay Catholics were aware of this; the average Catholic lay person is not an idiot.
Paul, certainly Fr. Pavone is well known and exerts a lot of influence in the world and not just among Catholics. That certainly plays into the equation. As I mention on another post, I think there is a good case against him concerning disobedience to his own bishop but the blasphemy item is not clear to me. I know he put an aborted baby on an altar he uses for Mass, but that isn’t blasphemy although it could be a sacrilege, but I am not sure.
In terms of disobedience by high level prelates, and to none other than the pope, one has to think of the German hierarchy who are disobedient to the pope’s letter to them about their synodal way.
Fr Allan,
An article I read stated that the aborted baby was displayed, but NOT on an altar. And immediately after, Fr Pavone provided a Christian burial for the aborted baby.
Re what I wrote above, I have clear memories as a teenager in the 1970s of Catholic priests visiting my parents home - especially after a few drinks - clearly stating for example: that it was wrong for sexually active homosexuals to be denied communion, that the police detective brother of one priest, and his wife, who had 7 children were mad not to use artificial contraception and on another occasion a priest in my parent’s home clearly stated an abortion was perhaps the best solution for a young single pregnant woman in difficult circumstances- and on and on…..I also knew, even as a teenager, that these priests in a public situation would toe the line regarding official Church teaching ; but it was obvious that privately and personally they disagreed and did not believe with a lot of Church teaching, especially concerning sexual morality and marriage.
Father McDonald, here is a lengthy 2021 A.D. article from The Pillar that discussed Father Pavone, as well as additional priests, such as Father Zuhlsdorf.
The article is about so-called "Twitter Priests":
-- Who is responsible for these controversial Twitter priests?
https://www.pillarcatholic.com/who-is-responsible-for-americas-controversial/
The discussion about Father Pavone is found near the end of the article.
In regard to Father Pavone and the fetus, The Pillar reported:
"Pavone has made headlines in recent years because of his avowedly partisan activism, which included a 2016 video in which he placed the body of a dead baby on a table resembling an altar while urging Catholics to vote for Donald Trump."
Pax.
Mark Thomas
MT, thanks for the link to the Pillar article. I find all of their reporting and commentary top notch and the best there is today. As it concerns Pavone, I think we can all recognize that he is a loose canon, so to speak, along with many, many other priests and again the blame is laid at the feet of bishops who wash their hands of their responsibilities.
But it does appear from the Pillar article that Pavone was looking for a bishop but not having much success.
The charges against him, reported in the press is disobedience to his bishop but also the peculiar blasphemous social media postings. As I have written, there needs to be a clarity about the blasphemy charge. It almost sounds like fundamentalist Islam to get even with people.
His political activism isn’t blasphemous or his name calling, these might be agains canon law and priestly decorum but hardly demand laicization.
I have a lot of questions about his laicization and still wonder if that isn’t overreach and than other punitive actions should have taken place first. It is very puzzling and if Pavone didn’t find out about his status until he read it on an EWTN platform news service that raises other questions too.
Father McDonald, thank you for your response. I appreciate your comment: "I have a lot of questions about his laicization..."
I hope that we learn more about that.
I have not followed Father Pavone's ministry closely. But what I recall vividly is his very positive response to Amoris Laetitia.
Father Pavone praised Amoris Laetitia as a powerful, pro-family, pro-life, Apostolic Exhortation.
If Father Pavone is right-wing, then he at least rejected the horrific, widespread manner, in which the right-wing trashed Amoris Laetitia.
I have been blessed by Father Pavone's analysis of Amoris Laetitia.
https://www.catholic.org/news/national/story.php?id=68687
-- Fr Frank Pavone - Amoris Laetitia: Pope Francis' Encouraging Roadmap for Families
"...Pope Francis has issued his apostolic exhortation Amoris Laetitia (The Joy of Love). The document is a beautifully written pro-life affirmation of the Church's wisdom. It is a reminder of her timeless instruction to families to live out their vocations but with a renewed focus to do so in love and mercy."
"In clear language, Pope Francis speaks of the great value of the embryo and his worth, starting at conception and regardless of the circumstances in which he or she was conceived.
"Every child growing within the mother's womb is part of the eternal loving plan of God the Father. Each child has a place in God's heart from all eternity; once he or she is conceived, the Creator's eternal dream comes true."
"Let us pause to think of the great value of that embryo from the moment of conception. We need to see it with the eyes of God, who always looks beyond mere appearances." (n. 168)
"Amoris Laetitia is a timely and loving exhortation for families towards genuine charity that begins within the nuclear family."
"It can be described as a new road-map for a culture that has taken a sad and tragic detour."
Pax.
Mark Thomas
If a priest's response to a poorly written and highly questionable encyclical from an even more questionable pope is the litmus test for his fitness in ministry, God help us all.
Jerome "Litmus" Merwick has spoken.
Fr K (abortion voter) has spoken
Post a Comment