Catholic Bishop to Keep Father Pavone in Texas Indefinitely

[Orogeny]

Just because Charity Navigator does not have a 990 that is more up to date does not mean that the IRS doesn’t have it. Unless you have other knowledge of whether it was filed, you should stop repeating things that may not be true.

“Gospel of Life Ministries — one of three nonprofits at the heart of a dispute between Pavone, the charities’ self-described frontman, and Amarillo Bishop Patrick J. Zurek — continued to feature on its website an online donation form that refers to contributions as tax-deductible. The IRS revoked the group’s tax-exempt status in May 2010.”
amarillo.com/news/local-news/2011-09-24/pavones-group-unclear-revocation

How can an organization not know that they have not filed paperwork AND that they have had their tax-exempt status revoked?

Peace

Tim

 

[brumano]

Ah, allow me to clarify:

Unlike a certain priest whose name rhymes with borapi, he returned to his diocese, which is to be expected.

He also publicly stated that while he doesn’t understand what is going on he will wait patiently for the matter to be settled AND has asked his fans to do the same, rather than bothering the bishop. That’s where I consider it humble submission… because sure, you would show up to work at 7 am, but would you tell your wife not to call your boss asking why you had to go to work that early?

Ok, now that the Bishop has decided to detain Fr. indefinetly from his service to the prolife cause, I’m pretty sure you’ll now see Fr. Pavone take appropriate actions in his cause which he waived initially so as to comply with all considerations related to obedience.
This is like a case involving a priest with a name that rhymes with borapi because now a Bishop is ordering him to decist from his vocation and sit idle, that is not necessarily an order which he is bound to obey or obey indefinetly; other issues can now be raised, another Bishop may in fact have the genuine ability to order Fr. Pavone and his orders may have already brought him into conflict with those orders of the Bishop of Amarillo.

Similar circumstamnces often arise in the military, and sometimes must be settled by a higher CO or a court martial. A soldier is only required to follow any LEGAL ORDER not just any order because it issues from the mouth of higher ranking officer, if improper orders were held to be of the same status as proper you would quickly see the ruination of the vestige of authority which gives force to the orders to obey in the first place.

 

[tm30]

Ok, now that the Bishop has decided to detain Fr. indefinetly from his service to the prolife cause, I’m pretty sure you’ll now see Fr. Pavone take appropriate actions in his cause which he waived initially so as to comply with all considerations related to obedience.
This is like a case involving a priest with a name that rhymes with borapi because now a Bishop is ordering him to decist from his vocation and sit idle, that is not necessarily an order which he is bound to obey or obey indefinetly; other issues can now be raised, another Bishop may in fact have the genuine ability to order Fr. Pavone and his orders may have already brought him into conflict with those orders of the Bishop of Amarillo.

Similar circumstamnces often arise in the military, and sometimes must be settled by a higher CO or a court martial. A soldier is only required to follow any LEGAL ORDER not just any order because it issues from the mouth of higher ranking officer, if improper orders were held to be of the same status as proper you would quickly see the ruination of the vestige of authority which gives force to the orders to obey in the first place.

Father Pavone’s vocation is to recite the Divine Office everyday and turn bread and wine into the Body and Blood of our Lord. Everything after that is at the good pleasure of his bishop.

Without trivializing the world of good Fr. Pavone has done in his ministry, he needs to stop pleading his case in public, because it scandalizes the flock of his Bishop and creates the occasion of sin wherein they may begin to reject his authority on other matters.

Personally, I’ve never met Fr. Pavone, and he’s clearly passionate about his ministry, but as Father Corapi proved, one doesn’t have to be a priest to be a preacher or a pro-life activist. In fact, one doesn’t even have to be Catholic. The Bishop is rightly concerned that Fr. Pavone is sacrificing his priestly vocation and becoming a career activist instead. Some introspection is called for.

 

[promethius]

Ok, now that the Bishop has decided to detain Fr. indefinetly from his service to the prolife cause, I’m pretty sure you’ll now see Fr. Pavone take appropriate actions in his cause which he waived initially so as to comply with all considerations related to obedience.

He is not being detained. He has been asked to return to the diocese for a time. That is a completely valid order on the part of his ordinary… for any reason whatsoever. Even if we completely ignore the financial issues of PFL, the bishop COULD be trying to prevent Fr Pavone from becoming victim to a cult of personality and losing, therefore, any sense of priority in his priestly vocation. We don’t know. All we know is that the ordinary has the authority to make such an order.

This is like a case involving a priest with a name that rhymes with borapi because now a Bishop is ordering him to decist from his vocation and sit idle, that is not necessarily an order which he is bound to obey or obey indefinetly; other issues can now be raised, another Bishop may in fact have the genuine ability to order Fr. Pavone and his orders may have already brought him into conflict with those orders of the Bishop of Amarillo.

Incorrect. Each catholic, layperson or clergy, has only ONE line of apostolic authority under which they fall. No priest is shared between two ordinaries, precisely because a priest swears an oath of obedience to their bishop. There is no conflict here.

Similar circumstamnces often arise in the military, and sometimes must be settled by a higher CO or a court martial. A soldier is only required to follow any LEGAL ORDER not just any order because it issues from the mouth of higher ranking officer, if improper orders were held to be of the same status as proper you would quickly see the ruination of the vestige of authority which gives force to the orders to obey in the first place.

I’m in the military, I know how legal orders work. It’s a bit backwards from your perception: if a commander gives an order, regardless of if it seems to make sense, it becomes law, provided it does not conflict with rules, regulations, and laws. Thus an order to make a pot of coffee is a legal order. As an officer I can walk into a bar and if I see a sergeant who is drunk and making a fool of himself, I can order him to go home. Violation of that order would result in disciplinary action.

The prevention to abuse of this system is that if I give out frivolous orders, it will rapidly become apparent to MY leadership, who will then call me in and discuss toning it down and not abusing my authority. They may even order me not to give frivolous orders… but the point remains that until my orders are negated by someone higher than me, they are still valid and legal (provided they are given within the scope of the law).

I merely cannot give an order which is NOT legal. The same goes for the bishop: all orders within his authority to give are to be followed. The only difference here between the military and the bishop is that I, as a military officer, can issue an order to any enlisted member of any branch of service (although this might not go over well when I have to talk to the person’s boss), while the bishop can only give orders to those within his authority (while he can give pastoral counseling to others)

 

[MarkInOregon]

“Gospel of Life Ministries — one of three nonprofits at the heart of a dispute between Pavone, the charities’ self-described frontman, and Amarillo Bishop Patrick J. Zurek — continued to feature on its website an online donation form that refers to contributions as tax-deductible. The IRS revoked the group’s tax-exempt status in May 2010.”
amarillo.com/news/local-news/2011-09-24/pavones-group-unclear-revocation

How can an organization not know that they have not filed paperwork AND that they have had their tax-exempt status revoked?

Peace

Tim

This happened to many small non-profits. Until 2007 many small non-profits were not required to file anything with the IRS. Beginning in 2007 they were supposed to start filing the 990-N postcard. Any organization that did not had there status revoked in May of 2010 automatically. Many were unaware that they had this new filing requirement. Their volunteers and officers change, there addresses change and notices from the IRS are not received and prior volunteers do not always communicate IRS filing requirements if they know them. These volunteers often lead busy lives and are lucky to devote time needed just to keep these organizations going. That’s how it can happen.

Additionally the IRS at times loses things. Just this last year I have had two clients who filed returns but the IRS can’t find them. In one case they said they knew the return was filed but couldn’t find it and asked for a copy (and then later told us to please not file two copies of a return for the year–even though the second copy contained their cover letter requesting it). In the other they said we got your money but don’t have a record of the return please send a copy. We have now had to send a second copy. So in some cases it may be that required filing were made but the IRS has made a mistake (it does happen).

Peace,
Mark

 

[promethius]

This happened to many small non-profits. Until 2007 many small non-profits were not required to file anything with the IRS. Beginning in 2007 they were supposed to start filing the 990-N postcard. Any organization that did not had there status revoked in May of 2010 automatically. Many were unaware that they had this new filing requirement. Their volunteers and officers change, there addresses change and notices from the IRS are not received and prior volunteers do not always communicate IRS filing requirements if they know them. These volunteers often lead busy lives and are lucky to devote time needed just to keep these organizations going. That’s how it can happen.

Additionally the IRS at times loses things. Just this last year I have had two clients who filed returns but the IRS can’t find them. In one case they said they knew the return was filed but couldn’t find it and asked for a copy (and then later told us to please not file two copies of a return for the year–even though the second copy contained their cover letter requesting it). In the other they said we got your money but don’t have a record of the return please send a copy. We have now had to send a second copy. So in some cases it may be that required filing were made but the IRS has made a mistake (it does happen).

Peace,
Mark

Sounds like exactly the kind of confusion the bishop would legitimately want to clear up, rather than have one of his priests embroiled in a scandal over something which should not actually be an issue.

 

[PacoG]

I served on the board of a very small union local at one time. The Union dues were $11.25 every two weeks if that gives you an idea of how small it was. We also had to file certain forms with the IRS. I wasn’t the treasurer, praise be, but at one point we got a couple of years behind in our filings. The treasurer was new at the job and not well trained. We had to hire an accountant to get everything in order.

There was no wrong doing, we just messed up and the accountant got everything fixed for us.

I suspect that something of a similar nature has happened with PFL and the Bishop is just exercising extreme caution to avoid any appearance of impropriety and it is all one huge tempest in a teapot. No doubt everything will be worked out as soon as the paperwork is caught up.

I am on the board of a small 501(c)3 non-profit corporation. The IRS has been aggressively suspending the non-profit status of corporations who are behind on their annual forms. I mean they have been ruthless…last fall they released a list of thousands of 501c3s that didn’t file their forms.

If this is what happened, this is big. PFL might have had its charter suspended. This is a major concern for the Bishop and for the organization. Fr. Pavone, as the president of PFL, has a fiduciary duty to PFL. That duty is almost like the duty that parents have to take care of their children.

I have a really good friend who heads an educational non-profit. He travels around promoting his non-profit’s work. However, in doing so, he neglect his important office work. He occasionally needs to be tied to his desk and forced to do it.

That’s probably what the bishop is doing. Forcing Fr. Pavone to sit down and do his seat work.

 

[ANNE_2]

These are not allegations. The federal government requires nonprofit organizations to file an annual Form 990 that discloses the sources and allocations of all funding, as well as other information such as board members, highest paid staff members, etc. This form is public information, to be made available so that donors may monitor the use of their funds, as well as so that the federal government can ensure that organizations benefiting from tax-free status are complying with the obligations of maintaining that status.
Priests for Life has not filed a 990 since 2008. Rachel’s Vineyard, a sister organization under the Gospel of Life Ministries umbrella, has never filed one, and has had its nonprofit status automatically revoked for that reason, though it still seeks donations and tells donors, incorrectly, that their donations are tax-deductible.
Internal audits are no substitute for the public documents in question (an audit, even an independent one, simply certifies that no one is embezzling funds, which is not the accusation here), and PFL spokespersons have consistently dodged the question of why the organizations are not in compliance.
Here is a link to Charity Navigator, a website that provides donors with unbiased evaluations of the effectiveness of nonprofits, based on public information. You will note that Priests for Life receives a very low rating, not only for its noncompliance with public reporting laws, but also for the disproportionate amount of funds spent on promotion and fundraising in contrast to actual program-related activities.
charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=6438

This had been all taken care of.

 

[pnewton]

However, in doing so, he neglect his important office work. He occasionally needs to be tied to his desk and forced to do it.

That’s probably what the bishop is doing. Forcing Fr. Pavone to sit down and do his seat work.

That may be. Most government action takes place over time. It may be that the final warning and eleventh hour is at hand. This situation reminds us that there are many ways to contribute to a ministry. Even if one is not comfortable in crowds or speaking to strangers, even clerical work is vital.

 

[tafan]

Sounds like exactly the kind of confusion the bishop would legitimately want to clear up, rather than have one of his priests embroiled in a scandal over something which should not actually be an issue.

Yes, it does. But there seems to be problems on both sides. The Bishop insists on continuing to use the term “suspend”. This is not proper at all, IMO. It is my understanding that the term suspension has specific canonical meaning, for someone who has been charged and found guilty of a wrongdoing. That has not been the case. And besides the legality of the term, it certainly impunes on Fr Pavone’s character. Also, why was this done in such a public fashion by the Bishop? That deserves to be cleared up. A one or two sentence public letter does nothing to dispel any of the scandal being caused by two prominent clerics in a public dispute. The Bishop has a responsibility for this. I cannot blame Fr Pavone for having made public statements in his own defense, seeing how his good name has been called into question.

On the other hand, does it not seem to all of us that priests should either be in the parish or in the monastary (if a member of a religious)? I have nothing against high profile priests, or anything against them having apostalates on the side. But at heard, a diocesan priest should be pimarily serving his diocese. Fr Pavone’s statement that he cannot accept that there is no place for a priest in the Catholic Church devoted solely to the pro-life cause seems rather strong. As pro-life as I am, and I wish many priests were more active in the pro-life cause, I do not know if I can see a place in the Catholic Church for a diocesan priest giving 100% of his time for the pro-life cause; it seems he is called to be a pastor to the people of his local Church. But maybe I am wrong in this? Any thoughts?

 

[J_Katherine]

This happened to many small non-profits. Until 2007 many small non-profits were not required to file anything with the IRS. Beginning in 2007 they were supposed to start filing the 990-N postcard. Any organization that did not had there status revoked in May of 2010 automatically. Many were unaware that they had this new filing requirement. Their volunteers and officers change, there addresses change and notices from the IRS are not received and prior volunteers do not always communicate IRS filing requirements if they know them. These volunteers often lead busy lives and are lucky to devote time needed just to keep these organizations going. That’s how it can happen.

Additionally the IRS at times loses things. Just this last year I have had two clients who filed returns but the IRS can’t find them. In one case they said they knew the return was filed but couldn’t find it and asked for a copy (and then later told us to please not file two copies of a return for the year–even though the second copy contained their cover letter requesting it). In the other they said we got your money but don’t have a record of the return please send a copy. We have now had to send a second copy. So in some cases it may be that required filing were made but the IRS has made a mistake (it does happen).

Peace,
Mark

Very true, Mark. However, the exceptions you cite don’t apply here. The organizations involved had donations in the 6- to 8-figure range, requiring them to file more than a postcard. And Priests for Life’s books are in the care of Anthony DeStafano, the associate board chair, whose compensation is in the $100K per year range and who has filed meticulously in previous years–not a volunteer who slipped up. When asked to supply the 990s for the missing years, the PFL spokesperson at first said they were under no obligation to disclose private information, and then–after being reminded that 990s are federally required public filings–admitted they had failed to file and were “catching up soon.”

 

[J_Katherine]

This had been all taken care of.

Really? Please post a link to the current 990s.

 

[MarkInOregon]

Very true, Mark. However, the exceptions you cite don’t apply here. The organizations involved had donations in the 6- to 8-figure range, requiring them to file more than a postcard. And Priests for Life’s books are in the care of Anthony DeStafano, the associate board chair, whose compensation is in the $100K per year range and who has filed meticulously in previous years–not a volunteer who slipped up. When asked to supply the 990s for the missing years, the PFL spokesperson at first said they were under no obligation to disclose private information, and then–after being reminded that 990s are federally required public filings–admitted they had failed to file and were “catching up soon.”

I am speaking generically. Things happen and filings get missed even in large companies. And lets not forget PFL is behind only one 990 (unless they did not apply for an extension for the 2010 tax year–which would be due 11/15/2011). I guess my problem is that the way people write you would think they are behind years and years–which isn’t the case. I don’t know who their books are in the care of now but according to their most recently filed Form 990 they were in the care of Danielle Malina-Jones. They were listed in Anthonys care on the 2007 Form 990. That coupled with the fact that on the 2008 return the box “former” is also checked in Part VII Schedule A suggests that Anthony DeStafano left. The paid preparer of the returns changed. It would appear that some administrative changes occured–and that could account for the confusion. I guess I just see these things happen with these types of organizations and it usually doesn’t mean much. I mean you’re not going to catch fraud by looking at a Form 990 and an organization involved in committing fraud would want to keep all its filings in order so as not to invite scrutiny.

Additionally it would appear that at least one of the subsidiary organizations may indeed have been a small nonprofit that did not originally have a filing requirement.

At Rachels Vineyard donations in 2006 were $659,092 but had fallen to $362,057 in 2008 and given the economy I am guessing just trying to keep the ministry going has their concern.

None of this excuses the failure to file the required returns–I just think people are getting more worked up about it and think it means more than it does.

Peace in Christ,
Mark

 

[ringil]

Ah, allow me to clarify:

Unlike a certain priest whose name rhymes with borapi, he returned to his diocese, which is to be expected.

He also publicly stated that while he doesn’t understand what is going on he will wait patiently for the matter to be settled AND has asked his fans to do the same, rather than bothering the bishop. That’s where I consider it humble submission… because sure, you would show up to work at 7 am, but would you tell your wife not to call your boss asking why you had to go to work that early?

Borapi? Is that an Italian dish?!?

“Some fresh grated parmesan for my Borapi please?”

 

[ringil]

Father Pavone’s vocation is to recite the Divine Office everyday and turn bread and wine into the Body and Blood of our Lord. Everything after that is at the good pleasure of his bishop.

You are absolutely right. Diocesan priest are tied intimately to their Bishop. They don’t “do they’re own thing.”

Their very essence flows from the authority of the Bishop. Bishops, rightfully so, seek to use the gifts of their priests but that is solely at their pleasure.

 

[SKWill]

Updated statement from Bishop Zurek dated Oct. 6:
amarillodiocese.org/index.cfm?load=news&newsarticle=277&page=4

Bishop Zurek states he will have a private meeting on Oct. 13th “to discuss his spiritual progress during this time of prayer and reflection.”

 

[Joe_5859]

I recently attended a talk by a religious brother and he told of the work he was doing in another country trying to build bridges between the Catholic and protestant communities (as only an outsider could really do in that environment). He took the approach of planting as many seeds as possible in terms of new ministries and seeing which ones would grow. Well, they all grew and he quickly found himself overwhelmed by the work that had to be done. He was getting burned out, but didn’t want to admit it. His superior wanted to call him back, but he begged to stay because the work he was doing was “too important”. So his superior let him stay for one more year – a year that was fruitless for him. By the end, he was so beaten down that he left without saying goodbye to those he had given so much for.

Ministry can be hard. The ministry is important. But that doesn’t mean that we are the only ones God can use for that ministry. It’s not all up to us. Things can carry on just fine without us.

Now does this situation compare with Fr. Pavone’s? I have no idea. But I just share it as something to consider beyond the “Whose-fault-is-it?” scenarios. When we’re involved in ministry, these types of things can happen. Sometimes, it takes someone else to get us to slow down and readjust our focus. That doesn’t mean the priest is “bad”, nor does it mean that the bishop is “bad”. Taking some time to pause and reflect can be a good thing. Bishop Zurek has asked Fr. Pavone to do this. I pray it has been a fruitful time for all involved.

 

[Kay_Cee]

In regard to all of this, I cannot help but be reminded of an incident in the life of St. Faustina. (For those of you who have her diary, it’s paragraphs 1185-1187.)

One of the deceased sisters who was suffering in Purgatory came to Sr. Faustina and asked her to offer, for her intent, one day of fasting and all of her spiritual exercises for that day. Sister promised she would.

The next day she offered everything for the deceased sister’s intent. However, in order to fast, Faustina needed Mother Superior’s permission. Mother Superior declined Faustina’s request, most likely because she had been ill. Out of obedience, Faustina did not fast.

Yet, soon after, the deceased sister told Faustina she was already in heaven. She said that if she had fasted, she would not have gotten relief from Purgatory until that evening. But, for the sake of her obedience, she obtained relief at once. The sister told her, “Obedience has great power.” (emphasis mine)

Father Pavone will do far more good for the pro-life movement by submissive obedience to his bishop. Such obedience has great power.

 

[catharina]

**Father Pavone will do far more good for the pro-life movement by submissive obedience to his bishop. Such obedience has great power./**QUOTE]

Yes, without any doubt.

 

[Mrs_Sally]

All diocesan priests remain in their diocese “indefinitely”. I’m not sure what the issue is. We are all called to be pro-life wherever we are. He can continue his work from Amarillo once the books are straightened out.