Congrats to Cardinals elect Wuerl and Burke!

[cyb]

Back to my other point…Good to see them in these ranks (God bless 'em both!) However, I’m saving my biggest jubilee for when Archbishop Dolan is named a Cardinal (which likely won’t be until after Cardinal Egan turns 80)

Can I ask why you are saving your biggest jubilee for when Archbishop Dolan is named a Cardinal? I am confused as to why some think he is a stalwart defender of our Faith. Whenever I see him in interviews, he comes off more as a politician than a Bishop. He does not obey Canon 915 and he created serious scandal just this past summer when he cheered on the active LGBT community of the actively-gay St. Francis Xavier parish. Can someone give me reasons as to why he is seen as such a great Bishop? (I am not being sarcastic, I am honestly asking.)

 

[Joe_5859]

Can I ask why you are saving your biggest jubilee for when Archbishop Dolan is named a Cardinal? I am confused as to why some think he is a stalwart defender of our Faith. Whenever I see him in interviews, he comes off more as a politician than a Bishop. He does not obey Canon 915 and he created serious scandal just this past summer when he cheered on the active LGBT community of the actively-gay St. Francis Xavier parish. Can someone give me reasons as to why he is seen as such a great Bishop? (I am not being sarcastic, I am honestly asking.)

Dolan was not cheering on the LGBT community in that incident. That is a sad example of the Catholic blogosphere gone awry to defame the name of a good bishop.

 

[elts1956]

Dolan was not cheering on the LGBT community in that incident. That is a sad example of the Catholic blogosphere gone awry to defame the name of a good bishop.

Why was Dolan even there when the incident occurred? I have seen pictures placing him in a contradictory event. Until he begins protecting the Eucharist from blasphemy and the faithful from scandal, to me he is more politician than priest.

In my opinion he and Wuerl are of the same ilk. Smooth, smooth.

 

[Joe_5859]

Why was Dolan even there when the incident occurred? I have seen pictures placing him in a contradictory event. Until he begins protecting the Eucharist from blasphemy and the faithful from scandal, to me he is more politician than priest.

In my opinion he and Wuerl are of the same ilk. Smooth, smooth.

He was at a parish within his diocese and hence under his jurisdiction. That’s what bishops do.

Just because a bishop is diplomatic doesn’t mean he’s a “politician” or a bad bishop. I encourage you to actually read some of the things he has said and written.

 

[cyb]

He was at a parish within his diocese and hence under his jurisdiction. That’s what bishops do.

Just because a bishop is diplomatic doesn’t mean he’s a “politician” or a bad bishop. I encourage you to actually read some of the things he has said and written.

I disagree that “that’s what bishops do”. He is on video cheering, yes cheering, the active LGBT “ministry”. Bloggers did not make this up. The video is still at the top of the homepage of St. Francis Xavier - a church that has been known as having a militant gay agenda for decades. A Bishop is not supposed to condone that. St. Francis Xavier knows what they are doing by still having that video posted on their homepage more than four months later.

How does one justify Dolan’s actions that day? He presides over a Mass purposely scheduled on the kickoff day of gay pride week where the parishioners are dressed with rainbows and where he is “presented” with the LGBT “ministry”. He condoned it all. A Catholic Archbishop should be condemning/shutting down all the heresy, not egging it on. St. Francis Xavier’s pastor and parishioners seem to be proud that they have a friend in Dolan. Don’t actions speak louder than words? In this day and age, when the stakes are incredibly high, “diplomatic” does equal “politician”. Whatever happened to teaching the Truth of God unapologetically? (especially when in the House of God?!)

Soon-to-be-Cardinal Burke has a long, clear list of standing up for the Faith in a couragous and unashamed way. Dolan sends mixed messages. Just recently he was on EWTN presiding over a Mass with a relic of Don Bosco. The music was irreverent, the priests on the altar were clapping along…the whole thing was a disgrace.

What are the specific examples of Dolan’s actions that make you feel he is so wonderful? No one can ever give specifics.

Anyway, thank God for Burke. May more like him come along.

 

[cyb]

**Until he begins protecting the Eucharist from blasphemy **and the faithful from scandal, to me he is more politician than priest.

And this is the ultimate bottom line.

 

[theedge]

I disagree that “that’s what bishops do”. He is on video cheering, yes cheering, the active LGBT “ministry”. Bloggers did not make this up. The video is still at the top of the homepage of St. Francis Xavier - a church that has been known as having a militant gay agenda for decades. A Bishop is not supposed to condone that. St. Francis Xavier knows what they are doing by still having that video posted on their homepage more than four months later.

How does one justify Dolan’s actions that day? He presides over a Mass purposely scheduled on the kickoff day of gay pride week where the parishioners are dressed with rainbows and where he is “presented” with the LGBT “ministry”. He condoned it all. A Catholic Archbishop should be condemning/shutting down all the heresy, not egging it on. St. Francis Xavier’s pastor and parishioners seem to be proud that they have a friend in Dolan. Don’t actions speak louder than words? In this day and age, when the stakes are incredibly high, “diplomatic” does equal “politician”. Whatever happened to teaching the Truth of God unapologetically? (especially when in the House of God?!)

Soon-to-be-Cardinal Burke has a long, clear list of standing up for the Faith in a couragous and unashamed way. Dolan sends mixed messages. Just recently he was on EWTN presiding over a Mass with a relic of Don Bosco. The music was irreverent, the priests on the altar were clapping along…the whole thing was a disgrace.

What are the specific examples of Dolan’s actions that make you feel he is so wonderful? No one can ever give specifics.

Anyway, thank God for Burke. May more like him come along.

I’d like to add that SFX is an active gay community that is pro gay unions. They are not just “ministering” to gays. Nor do they encourage celibacy. I used to live not far from the parish. I can assure you they are not in synch with Catholic teaching. Dolan, as their Bishop, should be correcting them and shutting them down. The fact that they have a soup kitchen exists to confuse. Yes, evil people can do seemingly good things.

If Cardinal Burke had been the Bishop of NY, SFX would be a place where Catholics faithful to the Church could worship. Understand this is a very big city parish, an old majestic building, right in NYC. Faithful Catholics are prevented from worshipping there.

I hope Cardinal Burke’s influence spreads to the East Coast and that Dolan never sees a red hat.

 

[Tigg]

Just because a bishop is diplomatic doesn’t mean he’s a “politician” or a bad bishop. I encourage you to actually read some of the things he has said and written.

The clincher for me was the CNN interview with the pastor and subsequent distortion of church teaching. Alas…I never heard the bishop remark on that one, but perhaps I just missed it. But I’ll betcha Cardinal Burke will now set us all straight! :extrahappy:

 

[elts1956]

He was at a parish within his diocese and hence under his jurisdiction. That’s what bishops do.

Just because a bishop is diplomatic doesn’t mean he’s a “politician” or a bad bishop. I encourage you to actually read some of the things he has said and written.

Somewhere, I have heard that "actions"speak louder than words. By being “diplomatic”, he “tolerates” evil and gives scandal to those he is supposed to lead.

 

[Joe_5859]

I ended up posting some of my thoughts on the subject of Dolan in another thread:

Not to get the thread more off topic, but just to illustrate where I’m at, the example I’ve been thinking of is the video circulating of Archbishop Dolan allegedly giving a metaphorical fist bump to the GLBT group at St. Francis Xavier parish in NY. Dolan took a lot of flak for that, which I don’t think was warranted. I can think of several other reasonable explanations that I consider far more likely as to why he behaved as he did in that video.

In light of the backlash from the Catholic blogosphere for that one video, I see people operating under the assumption Dolan is one of those liberal heterodox and/or cowardly wimpy bishops. The insinuation of many has been that Dolan does not adhere to the Church’s teaching on homosexuality. That’s simply false. He has spoken out against gay marriage. He told one of his parishes that they could not use the parish name in the gay pride march. He has spoken out against abortion. He was one of the bishops who criticized Notre Dame for inviting Obama to speak there. Every news source (secular and Catholic) I’ve seen (besides the blogs) labels him as a conservative.

I apologize for being long-winded, but I use this to illustrate my point that I think we need to be very careful about assuming the worst intentions. Dolan’s reputation has been damaged, and I don’t think it is deservedly so. If the sum total of Dolan’s actions conclusively showed that he rejects Catholic moral teaching, then there would be a legitimate basis for critique. But I’m fairly certain he would be the first to say that he absolutely backs the Church’s teaching on homosexuality.

For me, I think less damage would be done if we restrained ourselves from speaking until we were absolutely certain that a bishop was teaching heresy. And even then, I would only mention it to those who needed to know (because they live in that diocese, are contemplating buying one of his books, etc.). I think it is more beneficial to simply propose the authentic Catholic teaching than to get into finger pointing.

Wikipedia has a section on Archbishop Dolan’s views which might be a helpful starting point to finding news articles that illustrate some of what I have alluded to.

I recall reading an article (or maybe it was a discussion on Facebook ) which gave a really good explanation of that infamous video giving Dolan the benefit of the doubt. I tried to find it, but I haven’t been able to so far. If I find it, I’ll post it here.

We need to look at all of Dolan’s actions, not simply one out-of-context YouTube video. He clearly supports the Church’s teaching on homosexuality quite vocally.

 

[Joe_5859]

Somewhere, I have heard that "actions"speak louder than words. By being “diplomatic”, he “tolerates” evil and gives scandal to those he is supposed to lead.

Sorry, I do not accept clichés as valid arguments. (Sorry, I make jokes to ease the tension because I am, by nature, not that good with confrontation. )

I think diplomacy gets a bad wrap sometimes. Certainly, in its worst form, diplomacy can lead one to be doctrinally squishy in an attempt to avoid confrontation at all costs. We definitely want to avoid that pitfall. But even St. Paul recognized the benefits of diplomacy. Recall his words to the Corinthians:

Although I am free in regard to all, I have made myself a slave to all so as to win over as many as possible. To the Jews I became like a Jew to win over Jews; to those under the law I became like one under the law–though I myself am not under the law–to win over those under the law. To those outside the law I became like one outside the law–though I am not outside God’s law but within the law of Christ–to win over those outside the law. To the weak I became weak, to win over the weak. I have become all things to all, to save at least some. All this I do for the sake of the gospel, so that I too may have a share in it.

A bishop’s job is the salvation of souls, particularly those within his jurisdiction. This includes those who hold to heterodox views. Bishops need to balance the mandate to preach the Gospel and hand on the Deposit of Faith in all its rigor and vigor with the need to till the field so that his flock will be docile to receiving that Deposit. Finesse can be an asset in walking that line.

 

[Tigg]

Just because a bishop is diplomatic doesn’t mean he’s a “politician” or a bad bishop. I encourage you to actually read some of the things he has said and written.

The clincher for me was the CNN interview where they featured both a parishioner and then on a separate tape, the pastor of said parish, in which church teaching was very clearly distorted. I heard no refutation of this from the bishop, but perhaps I just missed it. But I’m sure that Cardinal Burke will set us all straight on this one! :extrahappy:

In the meantime, please pray heartily for the souls who are being misled.

 

[theedge]

To Joe, et.al.: “What a bishop does” is firstly to remain faithful 100% to the One True Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church and to teach and to ensure that the Faith remains free from distortion. It is his job and his duty to protect the faithful and to counsel the errant. At SFX he failed in both these duties. Had it been an oversight, he has had ample time to correct and admonish that parish.

On that day, it was his duty to tell them their lifestyle is the road to hell. It was his duty to tell them to stop their egregious behavior and to let them know that homosexual unions and “marriages” will not find a place in the Catholic Church. This is not homophobia. This is not wishing ill to any man. This is charity. This is the essence of his office. No man who would encourage the rainbow flag should ever wear a red hat.

Look to Cardinal-elect Burke and imagine what he would do. Shutting down this parish, getting rid of its pastor, would be the right thing to do. Look to Bishops Burke and Neidstedt for examples of how a Bishop should conduct himself. Why do you believe dissidence would strengthen our faith? Do you not know that many city parishes have been closed? Why should a dissident parish be allowed to flourish? That sounds like a decision to me.

 

[Joe_5859]

To Joe, et.al.: “What a bishop does” is firstly to remain faithful 100% to the One True Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church and to teach and to ensure that the Faith remains free from distortion. It is his job and his duty to protect the faithful and to counsel the errant. At SFX he failed in both these duties. Had it been an oversight, he has had ample time to correct and admonish that parish.

On that day, it was his duty to tell them their lifestyle is the road to hell. It was his duty to tell them to stop their egregious behavior and to let them know that homosexual unions and “marriages” will not find a place in the Catholic Church. This is not homophobia. This is not wishing ill to any man. This is charity. This is the essence of his office. No man who would encourage the rainbow flag should ever wear a red hat.

Look to Cardinal-elect Burke and imagine what he would do. Shutting down this parish, getting rid of its pastor, would be the right thing to do. Look to Bishops Burke and Neidstedt for examples of how a Bishop should conduct himself. Why do you believe dissidence would strengthen our faith? Do you not know that many city parishes have been closed? Why should a dissident parish be allowed to flourish? That sounds like a decision to me.

I found the Facebook exchange I was thinking of earlier when a friend posted a link to The Vortex’s coverage of Dolan video. Here is one person’s comment:

“If you disagree with +Dolan, you should write to him, privately, to address the issue. But before you do that, you should remember that he has 40+ years of pastoral experience and was selected by the Holy Father personally to lead a very public diocese. So you might consider very carefully and prayerfully who is right about pastoral ministry in the Archdiocese of New York: you, or the archbishop of New York.”

That about sums it up for me.

 

[theedge]

I found the Facebook exchange I was thinking of earlier when a friend posted a link to The Vortex’s coverage of Dolan video. Here is one person’s comment:

“If you disagree with +Dolan, you should write to him, privately, to address the issue. But before you do that, you should remember that he has 40+ years of pastoral experience and was selected by the Holy Father personally to lead a very public diocese. So you might consider very carefully and prayerfully who is right about pastoral ministry in the Archdiocese of New York: you, or the archbishop of New York.”

That about sums it up for me.

Fyi, Joe. Multiple phone calls to his office made by me and others went unanswered. A concerted effort by the faithful was ignored. Ditto for Voris and CNN who could not even get a comment from him. He is a public figure. He is supposed to be a representative of our Church. We should be informed, not blind. It is up to the laity to demand faithful leaders in this time of outrageous heresy and scandal. Please go to Voris’ website, realcatholictv.com, and listen to the speech given by Cardinal-elect Burke. He clearly says false charity is NOT the way. This is the line you’re prescribing right now. Truth is charity.

 

[Joe_5859]

Fyi, Joe. Multiple phone calls to his office made by me and others went unanswered. A concerted effort by the faithful was ignored. Ditto for Voris and CNN who could not even get a comment from him. He is a public figure. He is supposed to be a representative of our Church. We should be informed, not blind. It is up to the laity to demand faithful leaders in this time of outrageous heresy and scandal. Please go to Voris’ website, realcatholictv.com, and listen to the speech given by Cardinal-elect Burke. He clearly says false charity is NOT the way. This is the line you’re prescribing right now. Truth is charity.

I’m not prescribing false charity. Quite the opposite. I am promoting authentic charity.

Have you read Caritas in Veritate? That encyclical does a remarkable job of articulating the relationship between truth and charity. No where does it say that proclaiming the “truth” (as one sees it based solely on one’s limited grasp of actual events) to anyone and everyone indiscriminately is ipso facto an act of charity.

Quite frankly, I’d rather take pastoral direction from a man with and indellible episcopal mark on his soul who was hand-picked by the pope than Voris (no offense to Voris).

I can understand why the archbishop’s office wouldn’t return your phone calls. Unless you’re a member of his diocese, he doesn’t owe you an explanation for a sensationalized media misunderstanding. It would be sad indeed if CNN and Voris had so much clout within the Church that they could dictate how a bishop prioritizes his ministry by forcing him to adopt a defensive posture whenever they choose to get upset about something. That’s no way to lead.

The archbishop has responded, just not in the way that some seem to require of him. He has spoken out on the teaching of the Church in regards to homosexuality. Why does he need to publicly point the finger at a specific group of people? We should presume that he is trying to rectify the situation with that parish, but in a way that honors the dignity of those in that parish instead of turning it into a media frenzy by making an example out of them just to appease those who are already committed to their faith anyway.

Should we get mad at the pope for not responding to the situation? Why hasn’t he reigned in Dolan and his “ilk”? Why hasn’t he made a public pronouncement condemning the way Dolan handled this situation? Why should we be mad at Dolan but not the pope?

 

[theedge]

Quite frankly, I’d rather take pastoral direction from a man with and indellible episcopal mark on his soul who was hand-picked by the pope than Voris (no offense to Voris).

By your logic, we would be following Mahoney, Weakland, and their ilk. By your logic, in the political arena, we should follow any person in office regardless of their beliefs just by virtue of the fact that they hold the office. [Insert Hitler here.] Because a man is ordained or elected to a political office, one cannot assume he will always be true to that office. Therein lies the flaw of your logic.

As for me, I’ll stick with St. John Eudes:

“The most evident mark of God’s anger, and the most terrible castigation He can inflict upon the world, is manifest when He permits His people to fall into the hands of a clergy who are more in name than in deed, priests who practice the cruelty of ravening wolves rather than the charity and affection of devoted shepherds. They abandon the things of God to devote themselves to the things of the world and, in their saintly calling of holiness, they spend their time in profane and worldly pursuits. When God permits such things, it is a very positive proof that He is thoroughly angry with His people and is visiting His most dreadful wrath upon them.” Saint John Eudes

Check these links: youtube.com/watch?v=uPuQq09KJKI
goodbyebadbishops.com/

 

[Joe_5859]

By your logic, we would be following Mahoney, Weakland, and their ilk. By your logic, in the political arena, we should follow any person in office regardless of their beliefs just by virtue of the fact that they hold the office. [Insert Hitler here.] Because a man is ordained or elected to a political office, one cannot assume he will always be true to that office. Therein lies the flaw of your logic.

As for me, I’ll stick with St. John Eudes:

“The most evident mark of God’s anger, and the most terrible castigation He can inflict upon the world, is manifest when He permits His people to fall into the hands of a clergy who are more in name than in deed, priests who practice the cruelty of ravening wolves rather than the charity and affection of devoted shepherds. They abandon the things of God to devote themselves to the things of the world and, in their saintly calling of holiness, they spend their time in profane and worldly pursuits. When God permits such things, it is a very positive proof that He is thoroughly angry with His people and is visiting His most dreadful wrath upon them.” Saint John Eudes

Check these links: youtube.com/watch?v=uPuQq09KJKI
goodbyebadbishops.com/

I knew I should have deleted that line from my post before I submitted it. I was being glib (for which I apologize) and that ended up being the only thing you responded to in my entire post. I guess I deserved that.

It really pains me when people seem so eager and willing to nit-pick and criticize a bishop for every little thing he does that they would do differently.

I feel quite bad for our bishops. They can’t seem to please anyone. The one thing the “liberals”/“progressives” and “conservatives”/“traditionalists” all seem to agree on is that the bishops are doing a lousy job and they could do it better themselves.

Once, I was at a talk where the (“liberal”/“progessive”/[insert label of choice]) speaker made some sort of snide remark about the bishops (I think it was for them not being “inclusive” enough in referencing a “diverse” multi-cultural smorgasbord of saints in the Eucharistic prayers in the Missal). Afterwards, I was standing right there when the speaker came up to shake hands with the archbishop (not Dolan) and he said to her, “We do some good, too, you know.” I’ll never forget the sadness in his voice when he said that. It caught the speaker off-guard, too, and she just sort of smiled politely and walked away without another word.

So, yes, I prefer to give a bishop the benefit of the doubt. That doesn’t mean blindly following them into heresy, but it means being willing to admit that they might just be better at being a bishop than I am.

 

[cyb]

I don’t think people are trying to nitpick Dolan nor do I think people enjoy being critical of Bishops. Dolan may be able to talk a good talk, but he has not shown that he is willing to walk the walk. His duty is to teach and to lead souls to heaven. If he were serious about doing that he would have made it clear that St. Francis Xavier’s parishioners and priests must change their tune or else be shut down.

If you look at the parish’s current bulletin, you will see that their upcoming “lesbian catholics” meeting is featuring a guest speaker who is “fresh from Call to Action’s National Conference”. There is so much dissidence going on in this parish and others under Dolan’s eye that it is ridiculous to just “assume” he is doing something about it. Look at the San Antonio parish where the gay/transgender weekly “masses” were held for 15 years. I don’t care if the previous Bishops were stating publicly that homosexual behavior is wrong - if they didn’t shut down that sacrilege, their words are empty.

Before I knew anything about Dolan, I was willing to believe he was a clear voice of Truth. But now, having seen him in interviews, having watched him celebrate more than one less-than-reverent Mass, and after seeing how he “handled” the militant gays of Saint Francis Xavier, I can’t just ignore all that. Beware of wolves in sheep’s clothing. They create more confusion than the obvious heretics.

As Burke has said, Bishops must lead by example. Words are not enough.