well, Fr. Suarez is going to be giving talks and a healing mass at our church in San Pedro this Lent, I’ll let anyone know what my impressions are if they care…
Hey, did you end up going? I actually went to the Saturday afternoon mass, and I think I might be able to check out the talk on Tuesday and/or the healing service on Wednesday. For background, the Companions of the Cross are doing a Lenten mission at Mary Star of the Sea Church in Sand Pedro. From what he said at the mass, he sounded fairly orthodox to me.
Practically one of the first things he said/emphasized in explaining the healing ministry is that healing comes from GOD, not from himself (as in Father Suarez).
On a side note, while I do understand that people are concerned about obedience to the Pope and bishops, I get the sense that some folks here are rushing to judgment a bit on Father Fernando.
From the CBCP website (news article link in Fide01’s post, thanks) :
The prelate said Suarez conducted two healing sessions in his diocese without asking for his explicit permission for the activities.
However, Suarez’s healing activities were organized in good faith, but the committee thought it was best to cancel them in Bulacan for the meantime due to the bishop’s disapproval, according to Siytangco.
It is an assumed protocol that the responsibility to inform and obtain explicit permissions for healing sessions from local bishops lay with parish priests who invite Suarez, Siytangco defended. And Suarez’s organizers do not solicit the healing masses, she added. …] She further explained that Suarez is not the one who directly handles the schedules, rather it is his communities that decide for healing masses.
The organizing team presumed that the necessary permits in the diocese were already arranged when the schedules were finalized, she added.
From the Statement of Clarification Regarding the Healing Ministry of Father Fernando Suarez (posted on
fatherfernando.com in PDF format;
by the way, it addresses the major points that people have brought up in the way of concerns):
- The Companions of the Cross have a deep love and respect for the authority of the Catholic Church. We endeavor to minister in complete obedience to the Church’s teaching and in union with the local bishops in all matters. …] It is always our intention to act with the blessing and explicit approval of the local bishop. In these cases, there was an unfortunate miscommunication. It was understood that the local organizers of these events had already secured the necessary permission.
I feel that I haven’t seen enough information to make a definitive statement as to deciding whether Fr. Suarez is obedient or not; all I see is that there was some miscommunication among the local bishop, the local organizers at the parishes where these events ere to take place, and the Companions of the Cross.
I think what would better clarify this case is if there was some official document which identified who is responsible for obtaining the bishop’s approval (the pastor of the parish at which an event is held, or the priest, in this case Fr. Suarez, who would be serving at the event). What would also be necessary is if those in question (namely the Companions, or the local organizers at the parishes) knew this information beforehand and decided to consciously not inform the other involved parties. Because I don’t have those two pieces of information, I don’t feel that I can come to the conclusion of disobedience (innocent until proven guilty, right?).
I think that what’s important here is that the problem was acknowledged, apologies were made, and steps were taken to make sure it doesn’t happen again.
Now as far as reports of superstitions and other claims, I think those are bound to happen whenever ministries like this get popular. In this case, I think it’s especially true in the Filipino community, because superstition and gossip have been, unfortunately, a part of our culture from since before Spanish colonization (disclaimer: I am Filipino, and I studied this in depth in college). In terms of fidelity to Catholic doctrine and obedience, I believe that it is only charitable to obtain hard evidence of violations (i.e. documented accounts or even video or audio footage) before coming to judgment.
Apologies for the long post, it’s just that I perceived that this priest was being judged prematurely, and I was taught that one should never attack a priest, even when he’s in error. (Criticism of Priests: Our Lord’s revelations to Mutter Vogel, from the Pieta Prayer Book).
) ~ so maybe I can get some healing too, but either way, I plan to check him out and at least hear him speak, so I’ll see what he seems like…I don’t like wierdos in the church 
Sounds like an agenda to me.