Truth, Justice, Ethics, Religion and the American Way? Fr. Pfleger is a disobedient priest and a notorious public dissenter e.g.:Well, don’t mis-name me.
My agendas are upfront: Truth, Justice, Ethics, Religion and the American Way. But if a thread about a liberal priest is started and features a picture of the conservative’s whipping boy who is unrelated to the issue, then I think some mention of the unstated agenda should be stated.
Defend Father Pfleger all you want but the plain fact is that he is disobedient to his bishop and a dissenter against the Church. He has been a source of controversy to his bishop for a long time now and it appears that if he doesn’t get his way he will remove himself from the Church. Why you are ok with this and even support it is confusing to me (and apparently other posters here as well). My pastor has been allowed to stay at our Church for longer than the usual period. He has been there for 16 years and the bishop has finally reassigned him. Monsignor has not threatened to go to other churches if he doesn’t get his way and he hasn’t led the congregation in protest against the bishop, either. He is performing his priestly duty as he should; being obedient to his bishop and the Church. The same cannot be said about Father Pfleger. Perhaps you can explain why you are in agreement with Father Pfleger’s position.My parish is larger than St. Sabina and has the same number of Masses.
And if they do, then what? You should note that the cardinal has attended services at the church.
Did you read my thread previous to the current news where I said it was time for the pastor to go? Maybe you missed that in March.Defend Father Pfleger all you want …
Well, folks should heed my explanations a little more closely.Why you are ok with this and even support it is confusing to me (and apparently other posters here as well).
Well, probably he should have gone sooner, too.My pastor has been allowed to stay at our Church for longer than the usual period. He has been there for 16 years and the bishop has finally reassigned him.
Statements like this are why I am bald. See above.Perhaps you can explain why you are in agreement with Father Pfleger’s position.
I don’t suppose non-family members of the congregation would normally attend a wedding or funeral Mass, only Catholic family members. So you know as much as we do. I am quoting parishioners and ex-parishioners who left because of what is going on there.I don’t know where you get that. I was at two weddings of my third cousins (once removed) there. They are Catholic. When they buried their mother out of that parish it was at a funeral Mass. She was Catholic, too. From birth as were her grandparents.
But, I wouldn’t know as much as other commentators here since I have actually attended services at St. Sabina’s.
Wrong, actually. My wife’s friend’s mother was with the parish ladies putting together the repast for the funeral. She is Catholic, though.I don’t suppose non-family members of the congregation would normally attend a wedding or funeral Mass, only Catholic family members.
Sure! Everyone here has been to the gun buyback at St. Sabina’s (as I was) and each poster drives down 79th street as often as I.So you know as much as we do.
Is it really such a conservative view that a “liberal icon” should be “put on ice?” Being part of the Church means submitting to the legitimate authority and this applies to the layman all the way to the pope. To put Father Pfleger “on ice” for refusing to submit to his legitimate authority is not a question of conservatism or liberalism; it is about his vows to his bishop and obedience to the Church. Why would such a view be partisan to a Catholic who subscribes to the orthodox teachings of the Church?My disagreement are with the conservatives here who cackle about a liberal icon put on ice. The priest’s partisan views are not in issue.
Pope John Paul II excommunicated Archbishop Lefebvre and four SSPX bishops because their actions were “at variance” with the Church. Priests are not, once consecrated, allowed to do what they want, where they want, when they want. Tell me; what “brand of Catholicism” do you subscribe to that allows a priest to openly defy his bishop? It isn’t like the bishop is asking anything out of the extremes from him.And those who find the church to be at variance with their brand of Catholicism, I simply wonder about.
Once a priest, always a priest. I think what you mean to say is that I hope Fr. Pfleger comes back to the fold, dedicates himself to his bishop and the Church and renews the vows that he took at his ordination. The last thing that the Church needs is another wayward priest who has to be disciplined.I just hope this situation ends soon and that Fr. Pfleger remains a priest.
Why do you say that? Does he not fulfill your “brand of Catholicism?” I can assure you that the good monsignor is cut from an entirely different cloth than Father Pfleger.Well, probably he should have gone sooner, too.
You’ll have to raise that question with those who wave the partisan flag on this thread.Why would such a view be partisan to a Catholic who subscribes to the orthodox teachings of the Church?
None at all. Check my previous posts.Tell me; what “brand of Catholicism” do you subscribe to that allows a priest to openly defy his bishop?
That’s what I said.It isn’t like the bishop is asking anything out of the extremes from him.
That, too.I think what you mean to say is that I hope Fr. Pfleger comes back to the fold, dedicates himself to his bishop and the Church and renews the vows that he took at his ordination.
Archdiocesan rules should have moved him long ago.Why do you say that?
I think the editors of the Sun-Times. It was a very strange photo to use, since Rev. Jesse Jackson had nothing to do with the story. My impression is that the Sun-Times looked for an unpleasant photo, and a photo of two frowning heads emerging out darkness is pretty unpleasant, no matter who is being depicted.The image was included because the image is in the linked article.
Who was trying to score partisan points?
A small point… we can’t be sure exactly what Fr. Pfleger did or didn’t say (let alone threaten to do.) We only have the account of a reporter who sneaked into a private meeting between Fr. Pfleger and parishioners from St. Sabina. Parishioners who were in attendance dispute the reporters account.This thread is about the threat Pfleger made to preach at other Churches, rather than be obedient to his Cardinal.
Sure, that’s why we have people criticizing the parish’s website and its Mass schedule.This thread is about the threat Pfleger made to preach at other Churches, rather than be obedient to his Cardinal.
It has nothing to do with politics …
It is up to the bishop. The bishop apparently had good reason to leave the monsignor where he was. The point, if I may be so bold, is that, when informed of his transfer, monsignor did not and the parish did not raise an objection/protest to the bishop because it isn’t what *they *wanted.Archdiocesan rules should have moved him long ago.
Several of Pfleger’s heretical remarks made during his homilies have been on YouTube, including the women priests and married priests. - Heresy and Schism. You can see it on video in his own words.A small point… we can’t be sure exactly what Fr. Pfleger did or didn’t say (let alone threaten to do.) We only have the account of a reporter who sneaked into a private meeting between Fr. Pfleger and parishioners from St. Sabina. Parishioners who were in attendance dispute the reporters account.
I think we are all better off if we wait for public statements or actions before we condemn Fr. Pfleger for this alleged promise/threat/ultimatum.
Anne, in post #50 you stated that this thread is about “the threat Pfleger made to preach at other Churches, rather than be obedient to his Cardinal.”You can find his statements on the internet. There is no “alleged”.
I think it adds volumes.Now why, on a forum where photographs are rare, were we treated to a picture of Fr. Pfleger with Rev. Jackson? I don’t think it adds anything to the discussion.
And when I lived and worked in the area of St. Sabina, I knew many Baptists who attended mass at St. Sabina’s. Yes there are plenty of Catholics at that parish, but there are also plenty of non-Catholics who have been attending for yearsI don’t know where you get that. I was at two weddings of my third cousins (once removed) there. They are Catholic. When they buried their mother out of that parish it was at a funeral Mass. She was Catholic, too. From birth as were her grandparents.
But, I wouldn’t know as much as other commentators here since I have actually attended services at St. Sabina’s.