Tag: Catholic Hierarchy

Posted on

Vatican moved quickly to punish Gumbleton

Bishop Thomas Gumbleton, a retired auxiliary bishop of Detroit, revealed for the first time yesterday details about his removal as a parish pastor in 2007. NCR published a report of the talk Gumbleton delivered at pre-conference meeting of Call to Action in Milwaukee.

Gumbleton had followed the sex abuse crisis in the press, especially the church’s response. “I thought they were starting to move along.”
The bishops had developed the Dallas Charter in 2002, outlining policies for dealing with sexual abuse cases.

“I can remember actually being at the press conference when they announced the charter and they said ‘and now the whole problem is behind us,'” Gumbleton said. “They really talked like they had settled this whole thing.”
“It’s not over and it won’t be over until we within the church deal with it in a very open, honest and thorough way,” he said. “And that’s going to take much change within the church.”

After being lied to in the past by a fellow bishop who said he had taken care of an abusive priest when in fact he hadn’t, Gumbleton “was totally upset, disillusioned even when I discovered how easily he could put me off, tell me ‘I’ll take care of it’ and then do nothing.”

Barbara Blaine of SNAP, a longtime friend of Gumbleton, asked him if he would testify on behalf of SNAP for a statute of limitations case. A date in January 2006 worked for Gumbleton. The hearing would be in Ohio.

“My testimony made the points on why we need to make this change,” he said at the Call to Action conference session Nov. 4. “I also, I thought about this, and thought maybe the most persuasive thing I can tell you people is that I’m a victim.”

He couldn’t talk about that for more than 50 years, he said. “There was one time [after 2002] and I almost got up at the bishop’s meeting to tell my own story and to try to convince the bishops that we had to approach this whole thing differently. But I had my hand up but I didn’t get recognized right away and pretty soon that session was over. So I never did it at the bishops’ meeting. But this time I wrote it into my testimony.”

After giving his testimony in Ohio, the bishops in Ohio reacted so quickly, Gumbleton said, that they must have called the papal nuncio that night.
“And here’s the thing that’s strange: By that time, I’m a bishop already — 30 years at least — and I know all these people. And I’ve met with them many times — you know, the regional meetings, the national meetings. Not one of them called me up to talk to me about it. Now if they were angry they could call me up and holler at me, scream at me if they wanted. Or [ask] ‘why did you do it?’ Not one. And not one bishop across the whole country ever said a word to me about it in any kind of personal way.

Within a matter of days Maida called him about a letter from the papal nuncio that he was to share with Gumbleton.

The bishops had contacted the Papal Nuncio, Gumbleton said, and the Nuncio had contacted Cardinal Giovanni Re from the Congregation for Bishops in Rome. A letter for Gumbleton came from the Nuncio to Maida and then was shared with Gumbleton.

He corresponded with the congregation in Rome before over various issues when he was a bishop, he said, and the correspondence always takes a long time. But in this case, everything happened within 10 days. Cardinal Giovanni Re of the Congregation for Bishops wrote a two and a half page letter outlining the canons of canon law Gumbleton had violated.

“I don’t remember what all they were because I wouldn’t even read the letter,” Gumbleton said. “In fact, Maida didn’t even give it to me at first. The main thing was I had broken a canon which they said I violated what in the canon is called the “communio episcaporum”: the communion of bishops.

“We’re all supposed to be together, think together, talk together, you know, one voice. You know, how can that be? You’re a church of human beings; you can’t be.” But because he had left the Detroit archdiocese and gone to another diocese to give testimony in support of something the bishops in that region were against, he had been in violation, he said.

“And so this was, from their point of view, a major crime that I had committed,” he said. “So they demanded that I resign immediately as bishop and also resign my parish where I had been a pastor.”

He didn’t have to be a pastor, but he wanted to be a pastor and “really loved being” at St. Leo, he said.

“I couldn’t understand why I had to resign as pastor,” he said. He had no problem resigning as bishop, he said (“Because this was 2006 and by canon law I should have already retired a whole year ago, but when my date came up to retire, I decided — I knew there was no chance, but I just thought ‘I’ll test this and see what happens'”).

He sent in his resignation letter, and “immediately, my resignation was accepted,” he said. But he didn’t want to resign as pastor.
“In the archdiocese of Detroit, we have a policy at age 70, every pastor will write a letter resigning from his parish but if he’s in good health and wants to continue to work” he can be appointed as a year-by-year administrator, he said.

Other priests and classmates Gumbleton knew had done this, he said.
“And that makes sense, because when you’re pastor, as I said before, it’s hard to remove a person even if the person has become senile and is not functioning well at all,” he said. “You can’t remove him. Rome will defend the pastor.”
But an administrator can be moved anytime. “So I wrote a letter in which I said I’m requesting to resign from St. Leo Parish but with the understanding that I would be appointed administrator on a year-by-year basis for as long as it’s feasible for me to be the pastor.”

Within a few days, Maida sent him a letter, he said, telling him that request was unacceptable and that he had to resign. Gumbleton went to talk with Maida, and Maida repeated what Re had written in the letter, that Gumbleton had to resign as bishop and from the parish.

“That astounded me, partly because what does Cardinal Re know what’s good for a parish in Detroit, who should or should not be pastor?” Gumbleton said. “And why would the archbishop accept Cardinal Re’s demands? I mean, after all, he’s the archbishop. ”

The archbishop (or the pope) is the only one who can assign or remove a pastor in his diocese. “A cardinal who’s the head of a congregation doesn’t have any kind of jurisdiction or authority like that at all,” Gumbleton said. “So why would Maida — well, it’s part of the whole club system with the cardinals: you’re not going to stand up against another cardinal. And so he would not appoint me as administrator, so I had to leave the parish.”

Within a few days, one of the auxiliary bishops went to Gumbleton’s home and told him he had to leave. He asked if he had a couple of weeks to make arrangements but was told no: he had to leave. When he talked to Cardinal Maida, he asked for time to prepare the people of the parish for the change.
Gumbleton said he saw a letter that stated he was resigning the day before it was to be handed to parishioners. “So Sunday morning I have to pass this out at church, that says I’m gone right now. Well that was a terrible shock to the people and to me.”

“As I looked at it, though, it was all so irrational, because I’m removed from the parish, I not allowed to say Mass there … I could say Mass any other place in the diocese. So it was really against the people.” He continued to say Mass in the diocese, do confirmations, and be engaged in the other activities he did, such as Pax Christi.

“Yet the one thing that seemed to me that I should have been allowed to do is continue be the pastor of the parish for the benefit of the people, because we have a shortage of priests and nobody’s ever been appointed there as pastor since,” he said. “That’s really hurtful especially to a small parish. So it seemed like it was just vindictive. It wasn’t helping anything and wasn’t appropriate for the people of the parish to be punished for what I had done.”
He apologized to the parishioners at St. Leo and they were understanding, he said. He has been back to St. Leo since to celebrate Mass.

Gumbleton was also told not to go into another diocese without getting explicit permission from the bishop of that diocese, he said. “And that was an attempt, I guess, to prohibit my public speaking.”

Once, he was to speak in a diocese for a major Catholic organization but had to cancel at the last minute, but his name was still on the flyer. He got a voicemail from the bishop of that diocese, saying “I don’t want you to ever come to this diocese for any reason ever” and Gumbleton was surprised at how angry he was, because he was not a bishop to which he had violated “communio episcaporum.”

“I really have a sense that they [the Vatican] weren’t trying to silence me giving presentations on other topics which I do quite frequently,” he said. “I think they really were all upset about this one issue and that’s because it really does” put the focus, in a sense, on “a very important part of the church, and that’s the ordained priests, bishops and popes. ”

With that restriction, Gumbleton said, “It doesn’t feel very pleasant to go into a diocese to speak and know the bishop of the diocese would rather you not be there. And yet I don’t let that inhibit me, so I find ways to speak throughout the country,” he said.

“I don’t have any great anger against the bishops, Gumbleton said. “I feel bad for our church basically. I just feel we’re missing an opportunity to be healed because we don’t want to look at the deep problems that exist. And sooner or later we’re going to be forced to do that.”

Complete Article HERE!

Posted on

Controversial Catholic priest to speak on female ordination

In his 39 years as a Catholic priest, Father Roy Bourgeois has been used to speaking his conscience on issues of justice, most notably against repressive regimes in Latin America and the U.S. foreign policy that has supported them.

In recent years, the 72-year-old Bourgeois has turned his attention to the Catholic Church’s ban on women’s ordination, calling it a grave injustice and affront to God.

Bourgeois, who has been threatened by the Vatican with excommunication and now faces dismissal from his religious order for refusing to recant his views, will speak on sexism in the church this weekend in Milwaukee, at the annual gathering of the Catholic reform group Call to Action.

“This for me is rooted in justice. It is a matter of conscience,” said Bourgeois, who says he was persuaded by the many gifted and spiritual women he has met in his work as a peace activist.

“We profess that God created women and men of equal worth and dignity,” said Bourgeois, who likens the ban to the racism in the Deep South of his youth, where black Catholics sat in the last five pews of his church.

“As priests, we say we are called by God and only God. Who are we to say that our call is authentic, and God’s call of a woman is not?”

Bourgeois will speak, beginning at 9 a.m. Saturday, as part of Call to Action’s annual conference, which is expected to draw more than 1,000 theologically liberal Catholics from around the country. The conference began Friday at the Frontier Airlines Center and includes sessions on the clergy sex-abuse scandal, immigration, liturgy, gay and lesbian inclusion, the role of women in the church and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Bourgeois has spoken previously at Call to Action, but this is the first time he’s addressed women’s ordination.

A Vietnam veteran and Maryknoll Missionary, Bourgeois is best known as the oft-jailed founder of the School of the Americas Watch, a human rights group that advocates the closing of that training academy on the grounds of Fort Benning, Ga. Its annual prayer vigil outside the school – some of whose graduates have been linked to assassinations of Catholic priests, nuns and a bishop in Latin America – draws thousands.

Bourgeois began speaking in support of women’s ordination three years ago, and quickly drew the attention of the Vatican. The church’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith ordered him to recant his views in 2008 or risk excommunication after he delivered the homily at a woman’s ordination.

This year, he received a second “canonical warning” from the Maryknolls, saying he would be expelled from the order if he did not publicly recant. The move prompted more than 200 priests to sign an open letter supporting Bourgeois’ right to speak his conscience.

Catholic teaching holds that only men are called to the priesthood. Pope John Paul II reinforced that position in a 1994 apostolic letter, saying the church has no authority to ordain women.

Supporters of women’s ordination say women served as priests in the early church and that there is no theological basis for the ban.

The majority of U.S. Catholics say they would support women’s ordination – 62 percent, according to a new study by researchers at Georgetown University and The Catholic University of America.

The women’s ordination movement has about 100 priests around the world and is growing, according to Alice Iaquinta, who was ordained by the Roman Catholic Womenpriests in 2007. She celebrates services once a month at an old train depot in Wauwatosa, Wis.

Efforts to reach the Vatican and Maryknoll order on Thursday were not successful. A spokeswoman for the Archdiocese of Milwaukee in an email reiterated John Paul II’s position, including his assertion that “the presence and the role of women in the life and mission of the Church, although not linked to the ministerial priesthood, remain absolutely necessary and irreplaceable.”

Complete Article HERE!

Posted on

Catholic columnist resigns over “devil-makes people-gay” commentary

The author of a column in the official publication of the Boston archdiocese, who also served as an advisor to the U. S. Catholic bishops, resigned on Friday.

Daniel Avila wrote an opinion piece published in The Pilot, a weekly newspaper. Published on Oct. 28, just in time for Halloween, the article suggested that homosexuality is the work of the devil.

Gay rights groups and many among the Catholic laity were upset by the author’s views, which they considered to be bad science, theology, and spirituality.

Indeed Avila’s piece, “Some fundamental questions on same-sex attraction,” caused a disturbance in Greater Boston and beyond, especially in the LGBT and allies’ blogosphere.

Accordingly, Avila resigned on Nov. 4 from his position as an advisor to the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ (USCCB) Subcommittee for the Promotion and Defense of Marriage. His resignation was accepted, to be effective immediately, according to the Associated Press.

Locally, for more than a decade, Avila advised the Massachusetts Catholic Conference (MCC).

The USCCB and the MCC are official lobbying arms of the nation’s bishops and the state’s bishops, respectively.

Reactions of gratitude and relief were swift from advocacy organizations.

“Mr. Avila’s dangerous view that Satan causes people to become gay has no place in any credible news publication, whether it be mainstream or religious press,” said Sharon Groves, director of The Human Rights Campaign’s Religion and Faith Program.

“He ignored not only the widely accepted science that [homosexuality] is normal, but also the modern thinking of many religions. I am pleased the Conference of Catholic Bishops accepted his resignation and I ask them to speak up and denounce his dangerous rhetoric.”

Two days before Avila left his position, the Pilot, which is the nation’s oldest Roman Catholic publication, retracted the column. At the same time, Avila apologized for any pain his piece caused and said his views are not those of the bishops.

“Statements made in my column, ‘Some fundamental questions on same-sex attraction’ . . . do not represent the position of the [USCCB] and the column was not authorized for publication as is required policy for staff of the [USCCB]. The teaching of Sacred Scripture and of the Catechism of the Catholic Church make it clear that all persons are created in the image and likeness of God and have inviolable dignity,” said Avila in a written statement.

“ Likewise, the Church proclaims the sanctity of marriage as the permanent, faithful, fruitful union of one man and one woman. The Church opposes, as I do too, all unjust discrimination and the violence against persons that unjust discrimination inspires. I deeply apologize for the hurt and confusion that this column has caused,” Avila said.

Terrence C. Donilon, communication’s secretary for the Boston archdiocese and Cardinal Sean O’Malley, said via e-mail correspondence, “The Avila piece was pulled because Dan retracted it and apologized and because it simply should not have been printed/published in The Pilot.”

“It is not the position of the archdiocese or the church and is simply wrong,” Donilon added.

“Daniel Avila’s column was hurtful and deeply offensive so we are grateful he quickly resigned,” said Wayne Besen, executive director for Truth Wins Out. “Demonizing never creates a healthy dialogue and Avila represented a major obstacle to the church’s claim to respect all people.”

“The [USCCB was] correct to accept Avila’s resignation,” said John Becker, director of communications and development for advocacy organization based in Burlington, Vt. “There is no place for such extremism and Avila’s poisonous remarks served to further alienate LGBT Americans from the Catholic Church.”

Marianne Duddy-Burke of Medford, Mass., said she, too, was pleased with bishops’ decision but called for further action.

“Avila’s resignation is a good first step for the bishops,” said Duddy-Burke, executive director of Dignity USA, the nation’s oldest LGBT Catholic advocacy organization.

“But they need to demonstrate they understand the ramifications of the violent language against the gay Catholic community and our families,” Duddy-Burke said over the telephone.

“Dignity USA is calling for a policy advisory committee consisting of LGBT Catholics and family members to be appointed by the bishops and to be consulted by them on decisions that effect to our community.”

The Pilot’s Oct. 28 commentary is not the first time that editor Antonio Enrique published an apology and now a retraction.

“Cardinal O’Malley, as publisher of The Pilot, should strongly consider requesting that Mr. Enrique submit his resignation,” said Charles Martel, a local social worker in private practice and co-founder of Catholics for Marriage Equality. “Ultimately, this will be the only way that the cardinal shows he is serious about the meaning of accountability in the Archdiocese.”

Complete Article HERE!

Posted on

Catholic decree on gay marriage comes as no surprise

Rosemary Palladino of Grasmere would like to get married in a Catholic church, but knows it probably won’t happen.

Ms. Palladino, an attorney, attends weekly mass with her partner of her partner of 38 years, Marianne Brennick. She wondered why Archbishop Timothy M. Dolan, following the spiritual lead of Pope Benedict XVI, felt the need to issue an official statement, banning gay marriage in Roman Catholic churches in the archdiocese.

In a decree dated Oct. 18, Archbishop Dolan forbade any priest or deacon from performing same-sex marriages. The unions cannot be done in any church building, hall or other property. The prohibition even extends to consecrated items such as chalices, vestments and liturgical books.

“The marital union between one man and one woman was universally accepted by civil law as a constitutive element of human society, which is vital to the human family and to the continuation of the human race,” Archbishop Dolan said.

“In reversal of this tradition, the New York State Legislature recently enacted a law that recognized same-sex union as marriages in the State of New York. This law is irreconcilable with the nature and the definition of marriage as established by Divine law.”

A complete version of the decree is listed under the pastoral tab at Archny.org.

The state’s Marriage Equality Act permits same-sex civil unions while at the same time protecting the right of religious groups to choose against performing the marriages.

“It would be wonderful to be able to get married in the Catholic Church but I don’t expect it, I don’t hope for it and I don’t need it because we could get married in a civil setting,” said Ms. Palladino, who intends to wed but so far has no definite plans.

A founder of Staten Island Stonewall, Ms. Palladino questioned why religious groups have involved themselves in the issue of civil marriage for same-sex couples.

“I think the whole issue of religious marriage was just an attempt to muddy the waters,” Ms. Palladino said. “The bill was not about making Catholic churches or other churches perform marriages for same-sex couples. It was about making civil marriage available to same-sex couples, regardless of what religion they follow or don’t follow.”

She continued: “What I don’t understand is why religious organizations try to interfere with the civil rights of people as they have done in New York and California. I especially wonder how many of their members approve of the fact that their donations are being used to wage these legal battles.”

Archbishop Dolan’s decree has “no bearing on what city hall does,” said state Sen. Diane Savino.

“Marriage is a sacrament, the church has a right to determine who they marry and who they don’t,” she added.

She said she was puzzled about why the archbishop felt a need to issue the decree.

“I guess he felt he had to clarify, I’m not sure why,” Ms. Savino said.

“It’s a house of worship, it’s their right, otherwise, no comment,” said Assemblyman Matthew Titone, who married his partner of 18 years, Giosue Pugliese, at Borough Hall in September.

Complete Article HERE!