Pope Francis removes Memphis Bishop

  • Thread starter Thread starter 13pollitos
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
So what’s the story with this guy? He was removed because he shifted around a bunch of priests and closed some parishes? There’s got to be more to this than that.
 
There is another thread on this issue. Do I need to ask the moderators to close this thread? I don’t know how that works. Also, the other thread mentioned moving over half the priests within a few short months of his ordination, and closing 11 schools suddenly.
 
according to confidential emails obtained by Church Militant.
This in itself is a red flag. Didn’t there use to be a commandment about Stealing? When did stealing turn into Obtaining, something to be condoned, or emulated?
The road to Hell is paved with euphemisms.
 
That quote is from the linked article, not from me, just to be clear.

I mostly agree with what you are saying; however, there are exceptions. One of those exceptions is if one of the people who either sent or received that email turned it over themselves but wished to remain anonymous. It does not say in either the linked article or the Church Militant article it links to, who the source of the information is. Journalists have been known to use and refer to those types anonymous sources of information before.

Either way, everything has been made public now, and there is a statement on the Diocese of Memphis website as well.
 
It isn’t stealing if it is given out by someone who legitimately has access to it. I can give anyone access to any email or letter that I receive if I choose. I can also forward a copy I have written to anyone I want. I don’t know if this is the case here, or in any other news story from any news outlet for that matter, or not. Unless they choose to reveal their source, no one does.

But we are arguing about something that is pointless in this matter. The Church has confirmed everything stated in those articles. There are more questions than answers, but the facts stated in those articles have been confirmed.
 
The interesting thing is that the Bishop and the Vatican could both be right. Maybe he did mismanage the diocese, and maybe there was some bad blood with him and Wuerl that caused the Vatican to come down harder on him than they normally would on another bishop in his situation. Are bishops often outright removed for reasons such as this? It is more than a little suspicious that Wuerl had to fly to Rome to beg Pope Francis to accept his resignation, while this bishop gets removed without much of a chance to defend himself or even speak to the Pope. We’ll probably never know what the truth is.
 
Last edited:
We’ll probably never know what the truth is.
Is it our place to even ask to know the “truth” here.
In the real world, this would be an employee/employer dispute and no one would be privy to it.

It is not at all easy to remove a Bishop from his See. This according to my boss, the former Chancellor of my diocese and Canon lawyer. There has to be a very good reason.
 
I agree it would be a private decision if it was some average Joe losing his job, but someone if a very high-profile public position as a bishop of a diocese probably merits some kind of explanation to the faithful of Memphis. And the Vatican did give a reason, though who knows if it is true or completely true.

I’ll take your word for it that it is difficult to remove a bishop, but he was removed pretty quickly so it doesn’t look like it’s a long process. The apostolic visitation was in June, so it only took about four months to get rid of him, and probably not even that long as most likely the decision was made a little while ago since they gave him the opportunity to resign.
 
It is not at all easy to remove a Bishop from his See.
This is actually why the people of the Diocese of Memphis deserve to know the truth. With the current scandals in the world wide Church, the faith of the people is hurting. It is causing a very deep divide and only the clarity of full truth will bring about healing.
 
I agree it would be a private decision if it was some average Joe losing his job, but someone if a very high-profile public position as a bishop of a diocese probably merits some kind of explanation to the faithful of Memphis. And the Vatican did give a reason, though who knows if it is true or completely true.
Yes. Usually when someone is high up in a business, more info is given than “management problems.”

And yes, for something that is supposed to be hard to do, this happened at lightening speed. It goes to show that if the Vatican wants to act on something, it can and will do it quickly. Not so much for transparency or clarifications.
 
I can see that. But how many other bishops are poor managers? How many have left their diocese in a mess for others to clean up? How many are removed because of that? It isn’t common for a bishop to be removed at all.

Memphis has a long history of liturgical abuses. Bishop Holley was beginning to clean up the mess that was left for him according to many Catholics in the diocese. Others complain they miss their priest, as if we Catholics get to hire/fire pastors the way Protestants do. There are definitely opposing view points.

Not only is it unusual for bishops to be removed, this was done extremely fast. It has many in Memphis rejoicing while others are shocked and hurt. The division is very deep. “Mismanagement” doesn’t ring true to either side though.
 
Memphis has a long history of liturgical abuses. Bishop Holley was beginning to clean up the mess that was left for him according to many Catholics in the diocese.
Do you have a source for this? Because all I’ve read is that the outgoing bishop served 23 years and was popular. It doesn’t sound like a diocese that was in crisis.

Also, if Holley was cleaning up a mess, why didnt he issue a statement explaining the reasons behind his decisions? And why did he have to import some priest all the way from Canada to help him?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top