US Bishop Changes: San Diego & Los Angeles

[davidc2]

This morning the Holy See announced the decision of Pope Benedict XVI to name Bishop Cirilo Flores as Coadjutor Bishop of San Diego, California, USA.

Bishop Robert Henry Brom remains the ordinary, but upon his retirement or death, Bishop Flores will succeeded him.

Bishop Flores had been serving as Auxiliary Bishop of Orange in California.

It was also announced that the resignation of Bishop Gabino Zavala (Auxiliary Bishop of Los Angeles) has been accepted.

 

[77stanthony77]

David where is ArchBishop Gomez, is he still in Los Angeles

 

[SuscipeMeDomine]

David where is ArchBishop Gomez, is he still in Los Angeles

Yes, Archbishop Jose Gomez is the archbishop of Los Angeles.

The archdiocese is divided into several pastoral regions with each region being headed by an auxiliary bishop.

Bishop Zavala, whose resignation was accepted today, headed the San Gabriel Region.

Per Rocco Palmo at Whispers in the Loggia, here is the text of Archbishop Gomez’s letter regarding Bishop Zavala:

Dear Brothers and Sisters:

I have some sad and difficult information to share with you. Bishop Gabino Zavala, auxiliary bishop for the San Gabriel Pastoral Region, informed me in early December that he is the father of two minor teenage children, who live with their mother in another state.

Bishop Zavala also told me that he submitted his resignation to the Holy Father in Rome, which was accepted. Since that time, he has not been in ministry and will be living privately.

The Archdiocese has reached out to the mother and children to provide spiritual care as well as funding to assist the children with college costs. The family’s identity is not known to the public, and I wish to respect their right to privacy.

Let us pray for all those impacted by this situation and for each other as we reflect on this letter.

May the Lord Jesus, through the intercession of Mary, grant you peace.

Most Reverend José H. Gomez
Archbishop of Los Angeles

 

[ringil]

Yes, Archbishop Jose Gomez is the archbishop of Los Angeles.

The archdiocese is divided into several pastoral regions with each region being headed by an auxiliary bishop.

Bishop Zavala, whose resignation was accepted today, headed the San Gabriel Region.

Per Rocco Palmo at Whispers in the Loggia, here is the text of Archbishop Gomez’s letter regarding Bishop Zavala:

Dear Brothers and Sisters:

I have some sad and difficult information to share with you. Bishop Gabino Zavala, auxiliary bishop for the San Gabriel Pastoral Region, informed me in early December that he is the father of two minor teenage children, who live with their mother in another state.

Bishop Zavala also told me that he submitted his resignation to the Holy Father in Rome, which was accepted. Since that time, he has not been in ministry and will be living privately.

The Archdiocese has reached out to the mother and children to provide spiritual care as well as funding to assist the children with college costs. The family’s identity is not known to the public, and I wish to respect their right to privacy.

Let us pray for all those impacted by this situation and for each other as we reflect on this letter.

May the Lord Jesus, through the intercession of Mary, grant you peace.

Most Reverend José H. Gomez
Archbishop of Los Angeles

WHOA! That’s big and unfortunate news!

Pretty shameful. . . . . . .

I pray for the family.

 

[Mrs_Sally]

Wow! “two minor teenage children” means that this has been going on for a while. So sad.

Dear Lord we pray for your struggling priests, your good and holy priests, and all those you would call to serve as priest.

 

[Whadyamean]

Wow! “two minor teenage children” means that this has been going on for a while. So sad.

Dear Lord we pray for your struggling priests, your good and holy priests, and all those you would call to serve as priest.

If I remember my Church history correctly, the institution of celibacy in the Church had somewhat to do with economic considerations. More so than other considerations, I believe. Did it no have to do with the Church losing property to widows of priests? If this is so, how about just making celibacy voluntary and forego these artificial “sins?” You know, just amend the inheritance possibilities regarding Church property and we are back on track, eh? After all, most of Jesus’ Apostles were married, were they not? Including Peter? Maybe we need to get real here?

 

[Mrs_Sally]

financial considerations were just one of several things that brought on the discipline of celibacy. However, even if we allowed married men to be ordained, like our Eastern brothers do, bishops would still be celibate. And certainly no man who is already ordained, should be having an affair.

Edited to add: no one should be having an affair, ordained or not!

 

[Whadyamean]

financial considerations were just one of several things that brought on the discipline of celibacy. However, even if we allowed married men to be ordained, like our Eastern brothers do, bishops would still be celibate. And certainly no man who is already ordained, should be having an affair.

Edited to add: no one should be having an affair, ordained or not!

No problem with that, just seems we could avoid a LOT of difficulties by adjusting a few small things.

 

[77stanthony77]

SuscipeMeDomine

I was very busy yesterday. When I came home univison had some coverage of Zavala.
Thanks for sharing the letter ArchBishop Gomez wrote. What a scandal!

 

[m134e5]

If I remember my Church history correctly, the institution of celibacy in the Church had somewhat to do with economic considerations. More so than other considerations, I believe. Did it no have to do with the Church losing property to widows of priests? If this is so, how about just making celibacy voluntary and forego these artificial “sins?” You know, just amend the inheritance possibilities regarding Church property and we are back on track, eh? After all, most of Jesus’ Apostles were married, were they not? Including Peter? Maybe we need to get real here?

I do not think it is the Church that needs to “get real”. I think it is the people who don’t seem to understand what they sign up for when it comes to celibacy.

 

[Dale_M]

Bishop Flores is a late vocation, being ordained as a priest at age 43. He had been an attorney prior to that.

 

[comrade1789]

Yes, Archbishop Jose Gomez is the archbishop of Los Angeles.

The archdiocese is divided into several pastoral regions with each region being headed by an auxiliary bishop.

Bishop Zavala, whose resignation was accepted today, headed the San Gabriel Region.

Per Rocco Palmo at Whispers in the Loggia, here is the text of Archbishop Gomez’s letter regarding Bishop Zavala:

Dear Brothers and Sisters:

I have some sad and difficult information to share with you. Bishop Gabino Zavala, auxiliary bishop for the San Gabriel Pastoral Region, informed me in early December that he is the father of two minor teenage children, who live with their mother in another state.

Bishop Zavala also told me that he submitted his resignation to the Holy Father in Rome, which was accepted. Since that time, he has not been in ministry and will be living privately.

The Archdiocese has reached out to the mother and children to provide spiritual care as well as funding to assist the children with college costs. The family’s identity is not known to the public, and I wish to respect their right to privacy.

Let us pray for all those impacted by this situation and for each other as we reflect on this letter.

May the Lord Jesus, through the intercession of Mary, grant you peace.

Most Reverend José H. Gomez
Archbishop of Los Angeles

Why should the Archdiocese pay for the kid’s college?

 

[SuscipeMeDomine]

Why should the Archdiocese pay for the kid’s college?

Perhaps they found that the family had enough money so that the Archdiocese didn’t feel the need provide child support or housing, but maybe college is beyond the family’s ability to pay.

Or are you thinking that the kids should suffer because of their parents’ sins? Many children do suffer due to their parents’ actions, but in this case one of the parents has a noteworthy position in the Church and that changes things.

 

[comrade1789]

Perhaps they found that the family had enough money so that the Archdiocese didn’t feel the need provide child support or housing, but maybe college is beyond the family’s ability to pay.

Or are you thinking that the kids should suffer because of their parents’ sins? Many children do suffer due to their parents’ actions, but in this case one of the parents has a noteworthy position in the Church and that changes things.

No, I’m thinking because no one acting as a cleric abused them, so this seems like a payout for victims, were I fail to see how his kids are victims of the Archdiocese. I’m not alone on this, there seems to be quite a few people I’ve talked to who think this is ridiculous.

 

[donsnow]

Perhaps they found that the family had enough money so that the Archdiocese didn’t feel the need provide child support or housing, but maybe college is beyond the family’s ability to pay.

Or are you thinking that the kids should suffer because of their parents’ sins? Many children do suffer due to their parents’ actions, but in this case one of the parents has a noteworthy position in the Church and that changes things.

Good evening, SuscipeMeDomine,

I don’t see how your reply answers the question, “Why should we (the Church) pay the children’s college?” Especially since they’re still minor teenagers?
This smells like some kind of cronyism, to me.

God loves you,
Don

 

[SuscipeMeDomine]

Good evening, SuscipeMeDomine,

I don’t see how your reply answers the question, “Why should we (the Church) pay the children’s college?” Especially since they’re still minor teenagers?
This smells like some kind of cronyism, to me.

God loves you,
Don

Personally I wouldn’t have focused on college tuition but child support and making sure the children were cared for.

What’s the alternative? Hasn’t the Church had enough of a black eye for the way it has treated children? Can you imagine the reaction if Archbishop Gomez had completely ignored the needs of the children?

What’s surprising to me is that this seems to have blown over already. Perhaps a combination of openness and concern is a good response to a crisis.

 

[donsnow]

Personally I wouldn’t have focused on college tuition but child support and making sure the children were cared for.

What’s the alternative? Hasn’t the Church had enough of a black eye for the way it has treated children? Can you imagine the reaction if Archbishop Gomez had completely ignored the needs of the children?

What’s surprising to me is that this seems to have blown over already. Perhaps a combination of openness and concern is a good response to a crisis.

Good evening,

I agree that a combination of openness and concern puts to rest a lot of suspicion and such.

God loves you,
Don

 

[comrade1789]

Personally I wouldn’t have focused on college tuition but child support and making sure the children were cared for.

What’s the alternative? Hasn’t the Church had enough of a black eye for the way it has treated children? Can you imagine the reaction if Archbishop Gomez had completely ignored the needs of the children?

What’s surprising to me is that this seems to have blown over already. Perhaps a combination of openness and concern is a good response to a crisis.

Would you have even given it a second thought had nothing been given to his children? I would be willing to wager that it wouldn’t have even crossed your mind, because the children aren’t victims of the diocese or of anyone acting on behalf of the diocese.