Bishop Bruskewitz Shoots Back at National Review Board

[WanderAimlessly]

Looks like the NRB want retalliation against Bishop Bruskewitz:

**Bishops Sex Abuse Board Recommends “Fraternal Correction” Against Nebraska Bishop
***Bishop counters liberals on Board dislike diocese for upholding church moral teachings
*by Hilary White

LINCOLN, April 3, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Patricia O’Donnell Ewers, chairman of the US Conference of Catholic bishops’ Office of Child and Youth Protection (OCYP), recommended March 30 that the US bishops use “strong fraternal correction” to one of their members who has refused to comply with an annual audit of compliance with national guidelines on sex-abuse programs.

Full Story

PF

 

[JW10631]

There was a very uncharitalbe remark directed at Bishop Bruskewitz. He has done a fine job as shepherd of his flock. Only those opposed to orthodox Catholicism would make such remarks.

 

[m134e5]

coyote:

Even when the Bishop chooses to handle sex abuse in the parish by transferring priests to other parishes and adopting a policy of covering up?

As far as I know, there never has been any suspicion of Bishop Bruskewitz doing this. The diocese of Lincoln is one of the strongest dioceses in the country- if not the strongest. Seminarians and religious are doing very well in that diocese- and I doubt, as conservative as the seminarians and religious tend to be there, that they’d hide it if something was amiss there. Jesus said we could see if something was of God or not by seeing its fruits- and we have seen the fruits of the diocese of Lincoln. Holiness begets holiness. The sisters who are helping with a parish school in my town come from there- their order was founded there by their previous bishop (or maybe the one before that- I’m not for sure). They shine with holiness- they are married to Jesus and they know it- they are in love with Him.

I don’t know why he would not allow the review board to inspect the diocese- maybe they have a liberal bias and he thinks they’ll find some way to criticize what he does. I don’t know. I doubt he has anything to hide, but just because someone doesn’t have anything to hide doesn’t mean they don’t have a problem with someone looking over their shoulder and examining every complaint and reassignment you have dealt with to try and catch a bad decision on your part.

 

[WanderAimlessly]

I remember when Keating (the one from Oklahoma, not Karl) was heading the board, they were using the same rhetoric as VOTF. They lost all credibility with me.

PF

 

[frommi]

m134e5:

As far as I know, there never has been any suspicion of Bishop Bruskewitz doing this. The diocese of Lincoln is one of the strongest dioceses in the country- if not the strongest. Seminarians and religious are doing very well in that diocese- and I doubt, as conservative as the seminarians and religious tend to be there, that they’d hide it if something was amiss there. Jesus said we could see if something was of God or not by seeing its fruits- and we have seen the fruits of the diocese of Lincoln. Holiness begets holiness. The sisters who are helping with a parish school in my town come from there- their order was founded there by their previous bishop (or maybe the one before that- I’m not for sure). They shine with holiness- they are married to Jesus and they know it- they are in love with Him.

I don’t know why he would not allow the review board to inspect the diocese- maybe they have a liberal bias and he thinks they’ll find some way to criticize what he does. I don’t know. I doubt he has anything to hide, but just because someone doesn’t have anything to hide doesn’t mean they don’t have a problem with someone looking over their shoulder and examining every complaint and reassignment you have dealt with to try and catch a bad decision on your part.

I would agree that I find it doubtful he is ‘covering up’ some kind of gigantic sex abuse scandal. Frankly, it would have come out by now just through reporting by victims.

However, these audits were put in place, not to democratize anything, just to provide a ‘check’ that all was being done to keep children safe.

It seems to me there are people on both sides (review board and Bruskewitz) who are trying to politicize this. Frankly, if Bruksewitz won’t let the world see children and absolutely safe in his diocese, he should not be leading a diocese. Regardless of whatever other good qualities he has in the area of vocations and orthodoxy

 

[Brendan]

frommi:

I Frankly, if Bruksewitz won’t let the world see children and absolutely safe in his diocese, he should not be leading a diocese. Regardless of whatever other good qualities he has in the area of vocations and orthodoxy

Actually, he already has.

Each Diocese is mandated by the Vatican to have its own review board in place.

+Bruksewitz has done so and its minutes are publically availble on request from the Diocese.

The Diocese of Lincoln has compied with all that is mandated from a diocese under the “Dallas Accords”.

( I also find it pretty interesting that you remarked that ‘he *should not be leading a diocese’ * considering your statements in other about how a Bishop is Canonically entitled to their diocese)

 

[frommi]

Brendan:

Actually, he already has.

Each Diocese is mandated by the Vatican to have its own review board in place.

+Bruksewitz has done so and its minutes are publically availble on request from the Diocese.

The Diocese of Lincoln has compied with all that is mandated from a diocese under the “Dallas Accords”.

( I also find it pretty interesting that you remarked that ‘he *should not be leading a diocese’ * considering your statements in other about how a Bishop is Canonically entitled to their diocese)

Bishops are canonically entitled to lead a diocese that they have been appointed to. I have no power under canon law to change that.

I simply feel that if someone doesn’t want to be transparent about the protection of the children who enter into the parishes and schools that make up the church…then that very much calls into question for me whether that person should be trusted with a diocese.

But, its up to the Great Fabu to decide whether or not he should be leading a diocese, and obviously he is answering on his own in the affirmative.

 

[grotto]

I am highly insulted on behalf of all respectful and faithful Catholics on these forums when such disrespect and contempt is shown to a great Bishop of the Catholic Church. Frommi - you may consider yourself chewed up and spit out!

 

[Brendan]

frommi:

I simply feel that if someone doesn’t want to be transparent about the protection of the children who enter into the parishes and schools that make up the church…then that very much calls into question for me whether that person should be trusted with a diocese.

Well, since the good Bishop of Lincoln is as transparent as the Vatican has requested, you should be fine then.

Unless, of course, you feel entitled to add more requirements for transparency than Rome does.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Is the Bishop being “corrected” for not complying with the protocol that the USCCB set up that was rejected by the Holy See?

 

[frommi]

Brendan:

Well, since the good Bishop of Lincoln is as transparent as the Vatican has requested, you should be fine then.

Unless, of course, you feel entitled to add more requirements for transparency than Rome does.

You raise a valid point that he has done all that the Vatican requires.

What concerns me is that his reasoning for not allowing an audit, as nearly every diocese (‘conservative’, ‘liberal’, ‘orthodox’, ‘unorthodox’) has done is that he is doing so simply to show that he is completely and totally in charge and above reproach. To me it shows a lack of committment to the episcopal conference of which he is a member. Doing this simply keeps this crisis in the news and allows it to have legs it does not need.

I find it unacceptable that a ‘law and order’ man like him would not want to prove how ‘law and order’ his diocese really is.

 

[frommi]

grotto:

I am highly insulted on behalf of all respectful and faithful Catholics on these forums when such disrespect and contempt is shown to a great Bishop of the Catholic Church. Frommi - you may consider yourself chewed up and spit out!

You are not one to scold me for criticizing a bishop for an action. Do we need to rehash some of the vitrol you spewed about the late Bishop Untener in other places on this forum?

I am not knocking everything the man has done. A lot of his style is not for me, but I don’t live in Lincoln, thus I don’t so much feel affected by him. HOWEVER, I think not complying with an audit on something like child abuse is highly unacceptable. It’s not the kind of thing that gets outweighed because you promote an 'Orthodox devotion to Eucharistic Adoration".

 

[Walt_Oliver]

Please go back to discussing the topic of this thread instead of each other. Thanks.

Walt

 

[bones_IV]

frommi:

You are not one to scold me for criticizing a bishop for an action. Do we need to rehash some of the vitrol you spewed about the late Bishop Untener in other places on this forum?

I am not knocking everything the man has done. A lot of his style is not for me, but I don’t live in Lincoln, thus I don’t so much feel affected by him. HOWEVER, I think not complying with an audit on something like child abuse is highly unacceptable. It’s not the kind of thing that gets outweighed because you promote an 'Orthodox devotion to Eucharistic Adoration".

It was fair criticism. Are you even Catholic?

 

[Brendan]

frommi:

.

What concerns me is that his reasoning for not allowing an audit, as nearly every diocese (‘conservative’, ‘liberal’, ‘orthodox’, ‘unorthodox’) has done is that

Does his fitness for the office of Bishop rely on his conformance with the USCCB, or any other outside entity other than Rome.

Does any bishop’s?

he is doing so simply to show that he is completely and totally in charge and above reproach.

And this is a bad thing for a bishop to show?

To me it shows a lack of committment to the episcopal conference of which he is a member. Doing this simply keeps this crisis in the news and allows it to have legs it does not need.

What commitment is he lacking in that he is required to maintain?

Is he, in anyway, obligated to follow the directives of the USCCB in an area not mandated by Rome.

I find it unacceptable that a ‘law and order’ man like him would not want to prove how ‘law and order’ his diocese really is.

But he HAS proven it. In fact, who doubts it?

How would this commission’s audit do anything that Rome’s did not?

 

[frommi]

Brendan:

But he HAS proven it. In fact, who doubts it?

How would this commission’s audit do anything that Rome’s did not?

Count me among the doubters…but that doesn’t really matter.

Are you then suggesting that in your own archdiocese of Detroit that Cardinal Maida submitting to this audit was foolish?

Let me give you another example…it was believed that here in Chicago we were in complete compliance with the Dallas Charter…until another priest was arrested a couple of months ago. And it took an AUDIT to show where the problems were with our system…and most of the problems were simply ones of communication…the archbishop was not being told things he needed to be told.

So, am I to just trust and believe that something like this couldn’t be happening in Lincoln?

This isn’t a matter of believing in the Real Presence, this is a matter of the day to day life of the church.

And, I still find it amazing…when a Bishop you all like acts like a Bishop, its a great thing…but when a Bishop who is unliked acts like a Bishop…he needs to be deordained and sent to the salt mines of a supressed see. Hypocracy isn’t going to gain salvation for any additional souls.

 

[Brendan]

frommi:

Count me among the doubters…but that doesn’t really matter.

Are you then suggesting that in your own archdiocese of Detroit that Cardinal Maida submitting to this audit was foolish?

I do think it unwise actually.

So, am I to just trust and believe that something like this couldn’t be happening in Lincoln?

Why not? The whole point is that it is the bishop’s responsibilty to insure this communication is happening. If the bishop REQUESTS such an audit, that’s his perogative. But one cannot be forced or mandated on a bishop by any other authority other than Rome.

This isn’t a matter of believing in the Real Presence, this is a matter of the day to day life of the church.

And, I still find it amazing…when a Bishop you all like acts like a Bishop, its a great thing…but when a Bishop who is unliked acts like a Bishop…he needs to be deordained and sent to the salt mines of a supressed see. Hypocracy isn’t going to gain salvation for any additional souls.

“Acting like a bishop” means teaching in accord with Rome. I’ve never critized a bishop for doing that.

It’s only when they depart from the teaching of Rome, in faith, morals or in operation of the Church, that they are not “acting like a bishop”

+Bruksewitz appears to be in full accord with Rome on all matters. The same cannot be said of other bishops.

 

[bones_IV]

JKirkLVNV:

Is the Bishop being “corrected” for not complying with the protocol that the USCCB set up that was rejected by the Holy See?

Seems to me that the protocol rejected the Holy See and set up by the USCCB is only a step towards another reformation. Another attempt to protestantize the Church.

 

[frommi]

bones_IV:

Seems to me that the protocol rejected the Holy See and set up by the USCCB is only a step towards another reformation. Another attempt to protestantize the Church.

I don’t understand your idea of ‘protestanize’ the church. Is the idea of having lay people look at church files an example of this?

 

[JKirkLVNV]

bones_IV:

Seems to me that the protocol rejected the Holy See and set up by the USCCB is only a step towards another reformation. Another attempt to protestantize the Church.

I’m sorry, I don’t understand. How do you understand this to be an attempt to protestantize the Church?