U.S. Bishop Gumbleton Refuses to Offer Resignation at Mandatory Retirement Age

[WanderAimlessly]

I found the like to this article on lifesitenews.com on another message board. I thought the people here from Detroit would like this.

U.S. Bishop Gumbleton Refuses to Offer Resignation at Mandatory Retirement Age

DETROIT, January 24, 2005 (LifeSiteNews.com) - One of the most radical bishops in the US Catholic Church has said he will refuse to offer his resignation to the Pope when he reaches mandatory retirement age next week. Thomas Gumbleton auxiliary bishop of Detroit since 1968, says that he will not be forwarding his letter of resignation to the Vatican when he turns 75. “It’s so arbitrary,” he says. “Some of them they ignore, but if you are the least bit progressive, they accept it immediately.”

In comments to the Toledo Blade, Gumbleton reiterated the socialist doctrine popular among leftist “Catholics” that the purpose of the Church is not the salvation of souls from sin, but the alleviation of material poverty. He said, “If you are saving souls one at a time you really aren’t going to get very far.” The Church, he said, ought to “transfer this world into as close an image of the reign of God, what the reign of God might look like, as possible.”

Gumbleton has made a career of championing every fashionable leftist cause that came along in the 37 years of his episcopate. Lately he has championed the efforts of gay activists to abolish Catholic teaching on sexual morality. Most recently, he was praised by the leaders of the Rainbow Sash Movement, a group that is attempting to change Catholic doctrine to accept homosexual acts. Bishop Gumbleton, “has supported our call for inclusion,” said a press release from the Movement.

Article Link

Checking with a site on Canon Law, I found this:

Can. 354 Cardinals who head the departments and other permanent sections of the Roman Curia and of Vatican City, who have completed their seventy-fifth year, are requested to offer their resignation from office to the Roman Pontiff, who will consider all the circumstances and make provision accordingly.

To me, this looks like a direct act of defiance on the part of Bishop Gumbleton.

If indeed this is a violation of Canon Law, what would be the next step for either Cardinal Maida or the Holy See?

In reading about another defianant bishop (in this case an Arch-Bishop), he was suspended twice before for various transgressions before he was finally excommunicated.

PF

 

[swampfox]

WanderAimlessly:

I found the like to this article on lifesitenews.com on another message board. I thought the people here from Detroit would like this.

Checking with a site on Canon Law, I found this:To me, this looks like a direct act of defiance on the part of Bishop Gumbleton.

If indeed this is a violation of Canon Law, what would be the next step for either Cardinal Maida or the Holy See?

In reading about another defianant bishop (in this case an Arch-Bishop), he was suspended twice before for various transgressions before he was finally excommunicated.

PF

Anyone familiar with this cleric is not surprised. For Gumbleton, obedience to the Holy See and Christ’s representative on Earth is trumped by the call of his overripe ego. Pride cometh before a fall–See Genesis.

 

[WanderAimlessly]

swampfox:

Anyone familiar with this cleric is not surprised. For Gumbleton, obedience to the Holy See and Christ’s representative on Earth is trumped by the call of his overripe ego. Pride cometh before a fall–See Genesis.

Swamp

What I ahve read in the past here from DetroitSue and other in the Detroit area, I am not supprised.

What I am supprised at is that this was not already posted by the crew there. Someone is at the switch there in Detroit.

PF

 

[davidc2]

The Canon you cite (354) is not relevant. As you quote “Cardinals who…” - Bishop Gumbleton is not a cardinal (nor do the other conditions of the sentence apply to him!).

Hint: Canon 401 paragraph 1 in combination with Canon 411, however, would be applicable.

 

[WanderAimlessly]

davidc2:

The Canon you cite (354) is not relevant. As you quote “Cardinals who…” - Bishop Gumbleton is not a cardinal (nor do the other conditions of the sentence apply to him!).

Hint: Canon 401 paragraph 1 in combination with Canon 411, however, would be applicable.

Dave:

Thanks for the correction and the alternate parts of the law. My brain is fried from being in a training class all day and I did not catch that.

Here are those specific parts of Canon Law:

Can. 401 §1 A diocesan Bishop who has completed his seventy-fifth year of age is requested to offer his resignation from office to the Supreme Pontiff, who, taking all the circumstances into account, will make provision accordingly.

Can. 411 The provisions of canon 401 and 402 §2, concerning resignation from office, apply also to a coadjutor and an auxiliary Bishop.

PF

 

[Illini]

I have seen the original Toledo Blade article on which this one is based. I don’t think the Blade article leads to the conclusion that Gumbleton will not offer his resignation. He would just prefer not to do so. Anyway, today is his birthday and we will shortly know for sure.

-Illini

 

[Liberanos]

WanderAimlessly:

Swamp

What I ahve read in the past here from DetroitSue and other in the Detroit area, I am not supprised.

What I am supprised at is that this was not already posted by the crew there. Someone is at the switch there in Detroit.

PF

We’re all too worried about Mayor Kilpatrick’s cherry red Navigator.
He shoud drive a snow plow IMO…
Peace,
Paul

 

[puzzleannie]

as a native Detroiter I can affirm that this bishop has made a career of dissent and disobedience (when he takes a break from outright heresy) and was the prime mover behind the organizational drive that led to Call to Action, why would he change is style upon reaching retirement age?

 

[fix]

Why would he start obeying at this point?

 

[kmktexas]

Illini:

I Anyway, today is his birthday and we will shortly know for sure.
-Illini

So, that was posted the 26th. Does anyone know? Did he or didn’t he???

 

[davidc2]

I only know that his resignation hasn’t yet been accepted publicly. (Most resignations for age are not accepted immediately.) Only time will tell.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Illini:

I have seen the original Toledo Blade article on which this one is based. I don’t think the Blade article leads to the conclusion that Gumbleton will not offer his resignation. He would just prefer not to do so. Anyway, today is his birthday and we will shortly know for sure.

-Illini

I thought I saw Gumbleton’s exact quote already, given in an interview! I think the link above took the quote and built an article around it! I don’t like the bishops ideas either, but please. You don’t rip a quote out of an interview, then do your own construct around it! He never said he wouldn’t resign.

 

[chicago]

Really, what’s the difference if he submits his resignation or not? Is failing to do so something of a snub? Yeah. But it’s not like the Vatican can rescind his episcopal ordination with or without the resignation. He keeps going on being a bishop and isn’t going to be any less present. Indeed, an ordinary of a particular see would have a certain prerogative to stay put if he truly wanted. Now, Bishop Gumbleton isn’t an ordinary (save for his titular diocese). But what that means is that, effectively, Cardinal Maida can use him or limit his formal role in the diocese as an auxiliary bishop however he so chooses. From what I understand, Bishop Gumbleton basically already is about as administratively isolated as could be reasonably expected, anyway. Maybe he would be discharged from a couple of technical duties were his resignation accepted. But, practically speaking, it is not like he would disappear off the planet. He will just continue doing most of what he has been up to 'lo these many years, as the “retired” auxilairy bishop of Detroit. In that sense, one might ask what the point is of him even failing to submit a resignation letter. But, on the other hand, one could also reasonably ask why it matters if he resigns or not.

 

[kmktexas]

But it’s not like the Vatican can rescind his episcopal ordination with or without the resignation. He keeps going on being a bishop and isn’t going to be any less present.

Actually, the Vatican could, I believe, change his assignment or even remove him as auxillary and leave him unassigned. While the ordination can’t be resinded, the assignments are at the pleasure of the Vatican. The Pope, should he chose, could make sure that Gumbleton was a lot less present. He could send him on missionary work, give him a post in a museum or library or any number of options that don’t need a retirement request.

 

[Brendan]

chicago:

Really, what’s the difference if he submits his resignation or not? Is failing to do so something of a snub? Yeah. But it’s not like the Vatican can rescind his episcopal ordination with or without the resignation. He keeps going on being a bishop and isn’t going to be any less present. QUOTE]

Any cleric, from deacon to Bishop, could be laicised. That means that they are forbidden to wear clerical garb, use the title of office, or present themselves in anyway as being a cleric of the church.

If this happened to +Gumbleton, he would still have the techical ability to Confirm and to hear confessions, but could only do so in grave circumstances, such as near death.

 

[Patrick2340]

Perhaps he could be reassigned to become the new Vatican representative to Iraq. There certainly is a need for more social justice there.

 

[Wolseley]

One of the most radical bishops in the US Catholic Church has said he will refuse to offer his resignation to the Pope when he reaches mandatory retirement age next week…In comments to the Toledo Blade, Gumbleton reiterated the socialist doctrine popular among leftist “Catholics” that the purpose of the Church is not the salvation of souls from sin, but the alleviation of material poverty…Gumbleton has made a career of championing every fashionable leftist cause that came along in the 37 years of his episcopate.

You important now baby, but you gonna die someday;
Yes, you important now baby, but you gonna die someday.
And when your dyin’ day come, Lord! What will you say?

(Mississippi delta blues song, circa 1955.)

 

[chicago]

kmktexas:

Actually, the Vatican could, I believe, change his assignment or even remove him as auxillary and leave him unassigned. While the ordination can’t be resinded, the assignments are at the pleasure of the Vatican. The Pope, should he chose, could make sure that Gumbleton was a lot less present. He could send him on missionary work, give him a post in a museum or library or any number of options that don’t need a retirement request.

Removing him as auxiliary and leaving him unassigned wouldn’t, practically, change much of anything. Nor could the pope “make” Gumbleton less present. Whatever the assignment, even if Gumbleton accepted, he’d still be able to go about doing what he does, by and large. Frankly, where he is now, they probably have more practical control over him than they could anywhere else. Send him on missionary work and you only spread the problems to someplace else. He’s presdently about as contained as he can be. I also don’t know that the Vatican can force an assignment change. They can ask the bishop to move, then make the appointment, but if for some reason he declines the request I am not sure how much can be done. Bishops really are, in the understanding of the nature of the Church, more independent as far as their establishment of position than you might realize. The Church isn’t entirely a bureaucracy with a CEO pope who can just make positional changes at will. When he does, it is usually more like a fatherly call that people respect. But I don’t know that he can, normally, force it.

 

[chicago]

Brendan:

chicago:

Really, what’s the difference if he submits his resignation or not? Is failing to do so something of a snub? Yeah. But it’s not like the Vatican can rescind his episcopal ordination with or without the resignation. He keeps going on being a bishop and isn’t going to be any less present. QUOTE]

Any cleric, from deacon to Bishop, could be laicised. That means that they are forbidden to wear clerical garb, use the title of office, or present themselves in anyway as being a cleric of the church.

If this happened to +Gumbleton, he would still have the techical ability to Confirm and to hear confessions, but could only do so in grave circumstances, such as near death.

Only with justifiable reasons, however. And the cleric retains certain canonical rights. In any case, even if that could somehow be done in this case (which it wouldn’t, bishops respect each other too much to ever take that step if at all possible), it might only serve to exacerbate the problem and draw sympathy for Gumbleton in contrast to what some perceive as the “big bad Church” which was patriachally bullying him. He’d just continue doing what he does and the same people (maybe more) would pay attention and follow his lead.

 

[felra]

Patrick2340:

Perhaps he could be reassigned to become the new Vatican representative to Iraq. There certainly is a need for more social justice there.

That is too high profile for him, I was thinking more of a soup kitchen in a third world country out of harms way and where he may actually practice the social gospel agenda that he preaches:

U.S. Bishop Gumbleton Refuses to Offer Resignation at Mandatory Retirement Age

DETROIT, January 24, 2005 (LifeSiteNews.com)

In comments to the Toledo Blade, Gumbleton reiterated the socialist doctrine popular among leftist “Catholics” that the purpose of the Church is not the salvation of souls from sin, but the alleviation of material poverty. He said, “If you are saving souls one at a time you really aren’t going to get very far.” The Church, he said, ought to “transfer this world into as close an image of the reign of God, what the reign of God might look like, as possible.” (excert).