Seattle bishops to 'review' blessing of assisted suicide advocate

  • Thread starter Thread starter choose_to_love
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Did they know his plans, or did they pray for him because he had cancer?
 
I’m just now reading some more articles on it - - there is a claim that ‘parish leadership’ didn’t know, and it seems that the priest in the picture is not the pastor, but he is a Jesuit and the deceased mentioned in a FB post that he had the blessing of his Jesuit pastor. Lifesite has a source that says the Jesuit in the picture did not know, but it also appears, per the AP story, that much of the parish knew what he was planning - - choir director agreed to sing at his death service, announcements in the bulletin about his funeral, etc. - - and the deceased was apparently not only open but actively vocal about his decision.
 
Yeah, I don’t believe for a second that they knew nothing. There is evidence all over Facebook and the Internet that at least one priest at the parish and numerous lay leaders at the parish knew something:


And then apparently after he had committed suicide he was given a public funeral at the parish (which he had scheduled IN ADVANCE of his death). This is a textbook case of a person who should have been firmly denied a funeral mass over his scandalous actions, so the fact that they appeared to go along with this whole charade should tell you something about the leadership of this parish. Apparently this place is very much in the same vein as that Portland parish that had parishioners interrupt the mass (gay friendly, loose with the rubrics, etc.) so it’s probably not much of a surprise.
 
Last edited:
Apparently this place is very much in the same vein as that Portland parish that had parishioners interrupt the mass (gay friendly, loose with the rubrics, etc.) so it’s probably not much of a surprise.
That was my impression as well. The weirdest part, to me, is that if they were going to do this, they would somehow allow an AP article to be published crowing about the whole business, rather than just letting it go under the radar.
 
Yeah, it definitely is strange. I’m guessing they just didn’t think it would blow up into such a huge national story and figured it would just stay in the local media, at worst. But it quickly got picked up by a bunch of secular national news outlets, and once the Catholic news outlets started reporting on it wondering why this happened at a Catholic parish, it was game over.
 
OK, so apparently the story is:
  • The Jesuit was a visiting priest who at the time of the AP photo didn’t know the guy was planning to take his own life later on. This was 5 days ahead of the guy’s actual death, however it seems like he probably already had the conversation with the actual pastor described below, though maybe the Jesuit didn’t know that if he didn’t spend much time around the parish.
  • The actual pastor of the parish, who isn’t a Jesuit but rather an African priest, found out the guy was planning to take his own life when the guy approached him to pre-plan his funeral. The pastor tried to talk him out of it to no avail.
  • At that point the pastor reached out to the Archbishop who “gave permission for the funeral with certain conditions to ensure there was no endorsement or other perceived support for the way in which Mr. Fuller ended his life”, in order to “pray for his soul” and to “bring comfort and consolation to those who mourned.”
http://www.seattlearchdiocese.org/Assets/ARCH/SanctityOfLifeStatement-rev01.pdf

So it looks like the real people on the hook for this are the African pastor and the Archbishop, not this random Jesuit whose only connection with the parish is he says a Mass there a couple times a month (based on their posted bulletins). There are also about 4 other visiting priests saying Masses there from time to time. It’s possible the Jesuit knew this Fuller guy from university where the Jesuit is apparently a professor, but it doesn’t seem like he was the one in charge here at all.
 
Last edited:
Thanks, that looks like an update that I haven’t seen about this story. I am still skeptical. The statement refers to the Jesuit priest in that photo as a “visiting priest”, and this may technically be true, however, as CNA already reported, he has regularly said mass at that parish at that time for many months back (at least since this past Advent) so I think they’re being misleading about his status there at best. They make it sound like he was just some random priest dropping in that week to help cover a mass when that was not the case. Nothing can be proven about the other allegations, such as not knowing about the photographer, but I’m sorry, I just don’t believe he was in total ignorance.

It’s the bishop’s call, but I strongly disagree with the decision to give him a funeral regardless of what “conditions” were placed upon it, and at least to me, doing things like this is the greater scandal than the act that Mr. Fuller committed in ending his life.
 
Last edited:
“they would somehow allow an AP article to be published” How would anyone involved be able to prevent the AP from publishing an article?
 
Not let the photographer in the church to take a picture, for starters.

Perhaps strongly suggesting to the church choir that they not be performing at this guy’s party either.

You’re right that they can’t stop the AP from writing a story about a parishioner doing assisted suicide in his own home, or stop people from participating as individuals in his party, but there is no reason to have the AP photog in the church taking a picture with a priest and a bunch of First Communicants. The press could have been barred from the church on the pastor’s say-so. And you’d think they would have said something to the choir if they knew this was being covered in the press.
 
Last edited:
At a minimum, you might think that the presence of the AP photographer at the Mass was a clue that something out of the ordinary was going on. I suppose that the “Jesuit pastor” the deceased referred to in his Facebook post needs to be definitively identified, to establish whether it was the priest in the picture or someone else.
 
I agree with this. I do not think it is established that this is the pastor’s fault, for sure; it does to me seem more likely that the situation of the visiting priest is as you describe it. I suppose we’ll have to wait for more details.
 
The Jesuit priest who gave him the blessing gave an interview claiming that he knew nothing about his plans and that he assumed he was terminally ill:


I don’t know if I believe him or not. Even if he is telling the truth, I still vehemently disagree that he should have been given a funeral mass and that the parish and archdiocese failed on that count. I think there were probably grave mistakes made at all levels.
 
Yeah, definitely want to believe him - - I would not want to think the priest was misrepresenting the truth. It seems it could be true; the decedent seemed, from the story, to be relatively well-known in the local area so the Facebook post could be referring to a different priest.

Agreed about the decision to allow the funeral Mass, but that is a prudential decision, I think, on the part of teh AB, so that’s his call. On balance it seems from afar like the parish is pretty far gone on this issue, so I’m not sure it would make much difference to that community, per se, but the example for others who may contemplating such a decision is poor, to say the least.

How about America mag being the place that has Fr. Dupont’s interview?
 
I’m guessing since he’s a Jesuit he went to America to tell his side of the story, or they reached out to him, and he figured they would be most sympathetic to his point of view. I’m no fan of America Magazine and their output of late has been very questionable, even for them, but I wouldn’t begrudge him his choice.

I will say that if he is telling the truth that I feel really bad for him. Getting taken in like this would be a horrible experience for a priest and it will stick with him for the rest of his life, I am sure. Maybe this can be a lesson and a warning for future priests to inquire a little more in situations like this, especially when there are unusual circumstances (i.e., a professional photographer being in attendance), and especially in states and jurisdictions where assisted suicide is legal.

My main concern is not so much with this specific situation, but rather with the example it sets for the rest of the Church and its faithful. It’s one thing to put out press releases and statements urging against assisted suicide, but when you act like it’s business as usual when someone goes through with it and treat him just like anyone else with a public funeral, it sends the message that the Church is not really sincere in its belief. Actions should have consequences, not just in the next life, but on earth as well, otherwise people will never take the Church seriously in anything it does. It’s no different than raising a child. If you don’t ever discipline him when he disobeys you, then he will never listen to what you say.
 
It’s one thing to put out press releases and statements urging against assisted suicide, but when you act like it’s business as usual when someone goes through with it and treat him just like anyone else with a public funeral, it sends the message that the Church is not really sincere in its belief. Actions should have consequences, not just in the next life, but on earth as well, otherwise people will never take the Church seriously in anything it does
EXACTLY.

This is what bothers me about the situation so much. In all honesty, the two statements from the Archdiocese do little to actually explain why what Mr. Fuller did was immoral. In speaking with a pastor (outside Seattle) about this today who knows Archbishop Sartain, he told me that perhaps the Archbishop felt pressured in such a “liberal” area. Father said this doesn’t give him a free pass though, as when you placate the heterodox and those that are clearly holding the Church’s teaching in contempt, you are “hanging out to dry” the faithful, making it that much more difficult for them to present the truth. I could only agree with Father.

The three bishops in Seattle need to issue a forceful response, spelling out that not only his suicide, but his state-sanctioned marriage to his partner was wrong, and why this is so.

Another acquaintance of mine raised another good point: did the Archbishop OK the pre-planned funeral Mass before or after Mr. Fuller committed suicide? If it was before, than this entire affair grows only more scandalous. Truly, all involved in this debacle need our continued prayers.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top