Why can't Fr. Jenkins be fired?

[imperial]

Why is abortion different, you ask? Because 99.9% of the population would agree that murder and robbery are wrong, but for many people abortion is not a black and white issue. By simply condemning them for their beliefs that are different than Catholic teaching, I suspect that their natural tendency is to push us away as opposed to embracing our beliefs. I am not saying that ‘truth’ should not be spoken. But engaging someone in dialogue and trying to convince them of our position is a lot more effective than just hammering them over the head with our beliefs.

You hit the nail on the head, those that do not believe.

The Catholic Church represents Christ teaching. It can not and will not accept abortion she is the bride of Christ and holds the truth….
Abortion my friend is black or white to Catholics for thou shall not kill

 

[Christopher68]

You hit the nail on the head, those that do not believe.

The Catholic Church represents Christ teaching. It can not and will not accept abortion she is the bride of Christ and holds the truth….
Abortion my friend is black or white to Catholics for thou shall not kill

I was referring to non-Catholics - i.e. those who do not share our faith or beliefs.

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Imperial,

We really are on the same page. My question is, how do we as the laity support the Bishops in their general idea (no matter how poorly or ineffectively worded) that those who support abortion are not to be honored at Catholic institutions.

Inviting these pro-abortion policy advocates to DEBATE the issue is not an award or any form of favorable recognition. It is an invitation to intereact with those who see abortion as murder - and try to justify their position on dismembering a living person for the convenience of another.

You hit the nail on the head, those that do not believe.

The Catholic Church represents Christ teaching. It can not and will not accept abortion she is the bride of Christ and holds the truth….
Abortion my friend is black or white to Catholics for thou shall not kill

God bless

 

[JReducation]

Is this idea relying on an earlier post? I presume that you have some source saying that the bishops are confused, as to whether their statement directing that Catholic schools should not honor pro-abotion politicians was specific enough.

Now the Bishops themselves are confused as to whether their statement was specific enough. Did it contain all the wording needed to help the folks at NDU make the best decision?

This came from an interview of some bishops while in San Antonio. I read the interview on one the threads on CAF. I don’t remember the name of the thread. It should be around, if you look back to the dates just after San Antonio, about three weeks ago, give or take a day.

But the point was rather well made in this regard. The statement does not say that this is a moral imperative. That can always be argued. No one, not even the bishops who opposed Fr. Jenkins and ND’s decision said they were commiting a sin. They said it was scandalous. Some scandals are sin, very true. But not every scandal is a sin. It’s just my sense, the bishops do not want to raise this to the level of sin.

On the other hand, the is an issue with the Holy Father. The Holy Father does not allow bishops to force religious to act according to their will if the religious are outside of the bishops’ jurisdiction. This has been Church law since the 1200s. Pope Benedict is very strict on this. Therefore, the bishops must engage the major superiors to ensure that everyone is on the same page.

This is my opinion. Please do not make this an absolute. I believe that most major superiors, including mine, agreed with the decree of the USCCB. They did not need to be persuaded to work with the decree.

For whatever reason, Fr. Jenkins, seemed to feel that the decree did not apply to this situation. Am I agreeing with him? No. Am I saying that I can see what he’s saying? Yes. Do I agree with the bishops’ statement? Yes. Do I believe that they should have included everyone in authority in this agreement? Yes. This way there would be no room for anyone to argue or wiggle out.

This often happens, not only in the Church. What I’m referring to here is that often, some key players are not invited to discussion. Everyone assumes that everyone understands and someone either does not understand or conveniently misunderstands.

The USCCB has to make sure that everyone who has authority in the Church in the USA is on board and understands the plan. This way, there will be no excuses and no debates, especially on an area as important as this one.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Christopher68]

This came from an interview of some bishops while in San Antonio. I read the interview on one the threads on CAF. I don’t remember the name of the thread. It should be around, if you look back to the dates just after San Antonio, about three weeks ago, give or take a day.

But the point was rather well made in this regard. The statement does not say that this is a moral imperative. That can always be argued. No one, not even the bishops who opposed Fr. Jenkins and ND’s decision said they were commiting a sin. They said it was scandalous. Some scandals are sin, very true. But not every scandal is a sin. It’s just my sense, the bishops do not want to raise this to the level of sin.

On the other hand, the is an issue with the Holy Father. The Holy Father does not allow bishops to force religious to act according to their will if the religious are outside of the bishops’ jurisdiction. This has been Church law since the 1200s. Pope Benedict is very strict on this. Therefore, the bishops must engage the major superiors to ensure that everyone is on the same page.

This is my opinion. Please do not make this an absolute. I believe that most major superiors, including mine, agreed with the decree of the USCCB. They did not need to be persuaded to work with the decree.

For whatever reason, Fr. Jenkins, seemed to feel that the decree did not apply to this situation. Am I agreeing with him? No. Am I saying that I can see what he’s saying? Yes. Do I agree with the bishops’ statement? Yes. Do I believe that they should have included everyone in authority in this agreement? Yes. This way there would be no room for anyone to argue or wiggle out.

This often happens, not only in the Church. What I’m referring to here is that often, some key players are not invited to discussion. Everyone assumes that everyone understands and someone either does not understand or conveniently misunderstands.

The USCCB has to make sure that everyone who has authority in the Church in the USA is on board and understands the plan. This way, there will be no excuses and no debates, especially on an area as important as this one.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

I have a question and also a comment.

My question - if the Bishops did not state that what Fr. Jenkins did was a sin (per your comments from above), why are some taking it upon themselves to demand that he be fired for something that is not a sin?

My comment - from reading your post above, it sounds like the Church regrettably suffers from some of the same bureaucratic issues that sadly affect many large organizations.

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Br. JR,

It is always a pleasure to read you well-reasoned responses to these posts.

Do religious superiors have something comparable to the USCCB where everyone can get on the same page?

If the Bishops did not want to elevate Fr. Jenkins’ action to the level of a sin, so be it. I would be very appreciative if you would kindly give an example of something that is a scandal but is not a sin. I honestly can not think of anything … and, I keep on reaching for the millstone to hand to the scandal maker … just in case he should ask for it…

This came from an interview of some bishops while in San Antonio. I read the interview on one the threads on CAF. I don’t remember the name of the thread. It should be around, if you look back to the dates just after San Antonio, about three weeks ago, give or take a day.

But the point was rather well made in this regard. The statement does not say that this is a moral imperative. That can always be argued. No one, not even the bishops who opposed Fr. Jenkins and ND’s decision said they were commiting a sin. They said it was scandalous. Some scandals are sin, very true. But not every scandal is a sin. It’s just my sense, the bishops do not want to raise this to the level of sin.

On the other hand, the is an issue with the Holy Father. The Holy Father does not allow bishops to force religious to act according to their will if the religious are outside of the bishops’ jurisdiction. This has been Church law since the 1200s. Pope Benedict is very strict on this. Therefore, the bishops must engage the major superiors to ensure that everyone is on the same page.

This is my opinion. Please do not make this an absolute. I believe that most major superiors, including mine, agreed with the decree of the USCCB. They did not need to be persuaded to work with the decree.

For whatever reason, Fr. Jenkins, seemed to feel that the decree did not apply to this situation. Am I agreeing with him? No. Am I saying that I can see what he’s saying? Yes. Do I agree with the bishops’ statement? Yes. Do I believe that they should have included everyone in authority in this agreement? Yes. This way there would be no room for anyone to argue or wiggle out.

This often happens, not only in the Church. What I’m referring to here is that often, some key players are not invited to discussion. Everyone assumes that everyone understands and someone either does not understand or conveniently misunderstands.

The USCCB has to make sure that everyone who has authority in the Church in the USA is on board and understands the plan. This way, there will be no excuses and no debates, especially on an area as important as this one.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

God bless

 

[JReducation]

Hi, Imperial,

We really are on the same page. My question is, how do we as the laity support the Bishops in their general idea (no matter how poorly or ineffectively worded) that those who support abortion are not to be honored at Catholic institutions.

Inviting these pro-abortion policy advocates to DEBATE the issue is not an award or any form of favorable recognition. It is an invitation to intereact with those who see abortion as murder - and try to justify their position on dismembering a living person for the convenience of another.

God bless

Your question is excellent. My suggestion is to call the pastoral center of your diocese and find out if there is a Respect Life Department or office. Join them. Some dioceses also “employ” religious congregations or religious orders who do nothing but Respect Life Ministry and they need help. My community does this for the diocese where I’m currently stationed. We are always short of people to do talks, write letters, answer questions and so forth. It’s not work that requires a rocket scientist. Anyone who has done it for a while can teach you in a week. The Sisters of LIfe in NY also need your help. They are bigger than my community. We’re 20 I beleive they are many more.

Write these people and find out what they need and how you can get involved in supporting the bishops.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Christopher68,

People can be fired for simple blundering (forgetting how the bureaucracy works! )would be a ‘fireable offense’ for a governmental bureaucrat… but… I do not think it would be a sin

I have a question and also a comment.

My question - if the Bishops did not state that what Fr. Jenkins did was a sin (per your comments from above), why are some taking it upon themselves to demand that he be fired for something that is not a sin?

My comment - from reading your post above, it sounds like the Church regrettably suffers from some of the same bureaucratic issues that sadly affect many large organizations.

 

[tqualey]

Thank you Br JR, I will do just that!

Your question is excellent. My suggestion is to call the pastoral center of your diocese and find out if there is a Respect Life Department or office. Join them. Some dioceses also “employ” religious congregations or religious orders who do nothing but Respect Life Ministry and they need help. My community does this for the diocese where I’m currently stationed. We are always short of people to do talks, write letters, answer questions and so forth. It’s not work that requires a rocket scientist. Anyone who has done it for a while can teach you in a week. The Sisters of LIfe in NY also need your help. They are bigger than my community. We’re 20 I beleive they are many more.

Write these people and find out what they need and how you can get involved in supporting the bishops.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

God bless

 

[elts1956]

Your question is excellent. My suggestion is to call the pastoral center of your diocese and find out if there is a Respect Life Department or office. Join them. Some dioceses also “employ” religious congregations or religious orders who do nothing but Respect Life Ministry and they need help. My community does this for the diocese where I’m currently stationed. We are always short of people to do talks, write letters, answer questions and so forth. It’s not work that requires a rocket scientist. Anyone who has done it for a while can teach you in a week. The Sisters of LIfe in NY also need your help. They are bigger than my community. We’re 20 I beleive they are many more.

Write these people and find out what they need and how you can get involved in supporting the bishops.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

Is this idea relying on an earlier post? I presume that you have some source saying that the bishops are confused, as to whether their statement directing that Catholic schools should not honor pro-abotion politicians was specific enough.

Now the Bishops themselves are confused as to whether their statement was specific enough. Did it contain all the wording needed to help the folks at NDU make the best decision?

Oops, forgot the source. Could have been Life Site News. What I read was in connection to the bishop’s recent meeting in San Antonio. Would have to look it up. What I read gave me the indication the Bishops are now asking themselves, “did we do enough”, “did we say all that should have been said” about their statement regarding not honoring pols. who support abortion?. Their statement, originally given in 2004, during the Pres. campaign was written mainly because of Kerry’s stand on abortion, thus the word Catholic in the title. Although the word “Catholic” was in the title, the word “Catholic” was not mentioned in the body of the statement. But Jenkins chose this as the way out in being able to honor the present POTUS. His “thoughts” were the Bishops were talking about only “Catholic” pols. Since bo isn’t Catholic, Jenkins “thought” the statement didn’t refer to him. And this man is a product of “higher” education. :dancing:

 

[JReducation]

Oops, forgot the source. Could have been Life Site News. What I read was in connection to the bishop’s recent meeting in San Antonio. Would have to look it up. What I read gave me the indication the Bishops are now asking themselves, “did we do enough”, “did we say all that should have been said” about their statement regarding not honoring pols. who support abortion?. Their statement, originally given in 2004, during the Pres. campaign was written mainly because of Kerry’s stand on abortion, thus the word Catholic in the title. Although the word “Catholic” was in the title, the word “Catholic” was not mentioned in the body of the statement. But Jenkins chose this as the way out in being able to honor the present POTUS. His “thoughts” were the Bishops were talking about only “Catholic” pols. Since bo isn’t Catholic, Jenkins “thought” the statement didn’t refer to him. And this man is a product of “higher” education. :dancing:

I’m glad that someone else read the interview too. I thought I was losing my mind. Because I remember reading it, but don’t recall where. Maybe someone posted the link on a CAF thread.

I wouldn’t go as far as saying that Fr. Jenkins is “dumb”. That would be very disrespectful toward any cleric. But I do disagree with his logic.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[imperial]

Oops, forgot the source. Could have been Life Site News. What I read was in connection to the bishop’s recent meeting in San Antonio. Would have to look it up. What I read gave me the indication the Bishops are now asking themselves, “did we do enough”, “did we say all that should have been said” about their statement regarding not honoring pols. who support abortion?. Their statement, originally given in 2004, during the Pres. campaign was written mainly because of Kerry’s stand on abortion, thus the word Catholic in the title. Although the word “Catholic” was in the title, the word “Catholic” was not mentioned in the body of the statement. But Jenkins chose this as the way out in being able to honor the present POTUS. His “thoughts” were the Bishops were talking about only “Catholic” pols. Since bo isn’t Catholic, Jenkins “thought” the statement didn’t refer to him. And this man is a product of “higher” education. :dancing:

Ha! Good one

 

[JReducation]

Let’s slow down folks. Let us remember that Rev. John Jenkins is both a priest and a consecrated religious. As St. Jose Maria Escriva and St. Francis of Assisi both said, we have a moral obligation to show respect even toward the most sinful cleric.

I would encourage everyone not to make ascerbic remarks at the expense of a cleric and a religious. Thanks.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[SIb4G]

I have read the entire transcript of Fr. Jenkins speech where he introduced the President. I may be in the minority here, but to me it seemed like it was a very reasoned and well-thought-out speech.

Maybe I missed something and maybe I am expecting too much; but allow me to cast a different light on this whole issue:

Whose side is Fr. Jenkins on anyway?

Let’s assume that he (also understand Board of Directors, or whatever they’re called) truly believed that he was not violating the Bishops’ 2004 statement and that he really believes the invite and honor will be a meaningful step towards dialogue regarding the grave matter of abortion. Couple that with all the other Obama factors at play (see speech), there can scarcely be any doubt that the invitation and event were certainly acts of open-mindedness and respect. Dare I even say of compassion.

However, nowhere before or since—or during-- the speech have I observed a similar respect or compassion toward the sensitivities of the hundreds of thousands of devout, pro-life Catholics, the 80+ bishops or, indeed, the many offended pro-life graduates of his University. Actually his “well thought out” speech sounded to me very much like an ADMONISHMENT to those who opposed the invite.

If I am right, I think, I believe Fr. Jenkins’ true (perhaps hidden) loyalty is clearly in the wrong place. Dare I say his position of high authority at this Catholic institution requires a responsibility (and an empathy and an open-mindedness) to the faithful, the Bishops, the graduates? They are the ones loyal to HIS CHURCH—not President Obama. They are the ones with whom the Catholic teachings of his University are supposed to align. Conceding that Obama’s apperance is an important event for the University, isn’t honor among the faithful also of great importance? Why the silence?

Or is the offense strictly their problem?

 

[JReducation]

Maybe I missed something and maybe I am expecting too much; but allow me to cast a different light on this whole issue:

Whose side is Fr. Jenkins on anyway?

Let’s assume that he (also understand Board of Directors, or whatever they’re called) truly believed that he was not violating the Bishops’ 2004 statement and that he really believes the invite and honor will be a meaningful step towards dialogue regarding the grave matter of abortion. Couple that with all the other Obama factors at play (see speech), there can scarcely be any doubt that the invitation and event were certainly acts of open-mindedness and respect. Dare I even say of compassion.

However, nowhere before or since—or during-- the speech have I observed a similar respect or compassion toward the sensitivities of the hundreds of thousands of devout, pro-life Catholics, the 80+ bishops or, indeed, the many offended pro-life graduates of his University. Actually his “well thought out” speech sounded to me very much like an ADMONISHMENT to those who opposed the invite.

If I am right, I think,** I believe Fr. Jenkins’ true (perhaps hidden) loyalty is clearly in the wrong place. **Dare I say his position of high authority at this Catholic institution requires a responsibility (and an empathy and an open-mindedness) to the faithful, the Bishops, the graduates? They are the ones loyal to HIS CHURCH—not President Obama. They are the ones with whom the Catholic teachings of his University are supposed to align. Conceding that Obama’s apperance is an important event for the University, isn’t honor among the faithful also of great importance? Why the silence?

Or is the offense strictly their problem?

I’m a little confused. I’m not sure what you’re asking for. I’m sorry.

That being said, I would warn you with the words of my holy Father Francis. Becareful not to judge the mind and heart of another. That is a domain reserved only for God. He who attempts to know what is in the heart of another, without being taken into that person’s confidence, sins against holy humility. We don’t want to do that.

The bold is mine.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[SIb4G]

I’m a little confused. I’m not sure what you’re asking for. I’m sorry.

That being said, I would warn you with the words of my holy Father Francis. Becareful not to judge the mind and heart of another. That is a domain reserved only for God. He who attempts to know what is in the heart of another, without being taken into that person’s confidence, sins against holy humility. We don’t want to do that.

The bold is mine.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

I hate to admit this: I’m not sure exactly what I am asking for! I guess it’s just my perception of the indifference and the effective dismissal of the protest (and offence) and lack of any meaningful attempt at rapprochement. I believe, considering his position within the Catholic community, that that would not be out of order.

Sorry, I have a disagreement with you and Father Francis. I see no wrong in trying to discern another’s intentions. In fact, on occasion, that attempt may arrive at the truth. And sometimes, I would add, protect one from harm! Prudential judgment. And, certainly, I could guess wrong. To think otherwise would be foolish, crazy, and, yes, proud.

My limit of judgment is this: I do not judge another man’s sin, neither the causation nor where it will take him. THAT certainly is infinitely beyond my scope of understanding and between him and his Maker. And believe me as I sincerely admit, before you and God, I too am a sinner.

(I have digressed, my comment regarding Fr. Jenkins had nothing to do with sin.)

 

[JReducation]

I hate to admit this: I’m not sure exactly what I am asking for! I guess it’s just my perception of the indifference and the effective dismissal of the protest (and offence) and lack of any meaningful attempt at rapprochement. I believe, considering his position within the Catholic community, that that would not be out of order.

Sorry, I have a disagreement with you and Father Francis. I see no wrong in trying to discern another’s intentions. In fact, on occasion, that attempt may arrive at the truth. And sometimes, I would add, protect one from harm! Prudential judgment. And, certainly, I could guess wrong. To think otherwise would be foolish, crazy, and, yes, proud.

My limit of judgment is this: I do not judge another man’s sin, neither the causation nor where it will take him. THAT certainly is infinitely beyond my scope of understanding and between him and his Maker. And believe me as I sincerely admit, before you and God, I too am a sinner.

(I have digressed, my comment regarding Fr. Jenkins had nothing to do with sin.)

If I may suggest that you read either the rule of St. Francis or the writings of St. Jose Maria Escriva (from Opus Dei) and then meditate on Fr. Jenkins. You may find them very helpful. They both have a calming effect and a clarity about how to approach such situations.

Sometimes a little spiritual reading helps me a great deal when thinking about difficult situations. Of course, I may have an added advantage over you. Our vow of obedience to Francis and the Rule do not allow us to make a judgement on Fr. Jenkins. The rule is very clear on that issue. You must always respect a priest. You must always consider him your master. You must never question his direction, unless he directs you to sin. Even if your idea is better, you must accept his and offer your own as a sacrifice of holy obedience. I can get into serious trouble for disobedience. You can’t. Not that I’m complaining, because that’s the life that God called me to live. I’m just stating a fact.

But even if you’re not in vows, the spirituality of these two men, Francis and Escriva deals with the individual who is looking at these issues and what the holy response is. In my experience, when you approach it using their “method”, for lack of a better word, I acquire a sense of peace and trust in God.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[SIb4G]

If I may suggest that you read either the rule of St. Francis or the writings of St. Jose Maria Escriva (from Opus Dei) and then meditate on Fr. Jenkins. You may find them very helpful. They both have a calming effect and a clarity about how to approach such situations.

Sometimes a little spiritual reading helps me a great deal when thinking about difficult situations. Of course, I may have an added advantage over you. Our vow of obedience to Francis and the Rule do not allow us to make a judgement on Fr. Jenkins. The rule is very clear on that issue. You must always respect a priest. You must always consider him your master. You must never question his direction, unless he directs you to sin. Even if your idea is better, you must accept his and offer your own as a sacrifice of holy obedience. I can get into serious trouble for disobedience. You can’t. Not that I’m complaining, because that’s the life that God called me to live. I’m just stating a fact.

But even if you’re not in vows, the spirituality of these two men, Francis and Escriva deals with the individual who is looking at these issues and what the holy response is. In my experience, when you approach it using their “method”, for lack of a better word, I acquire a sense of peace and trust in God.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

JReducation—Sounds like good advise. I will look into it. Thanks for your responses!

I would just add, at the root of all this is this abortion matter. It really, really bothers me. Whether it’s Obama, Notre Dame, American society, modern culture, whatever. And I can’t explain it… it just hurts. Generally, most things I can take in stride; but, for THIS I really need to “acquire a sense of peace and trust in God.”

 

[JReducation]

JReducation—Sounds like good advise. I will look into it. Thanks for your responses!

I would just add, at the root of all this is this abortion matter. It really, really bothers me. Whether it’s Obama, Notre Dame, American society, modern culture, whatever. And I can’t explain it… it just hurts. Generally, most things I can take in stride; but, for THIS I really need to “acquire a sense of peace and trust in God.”

I know exactly what you mean. I direct a school for children with disabilities. Our children were going to be aborted, until someone rescued them. We educate them and prepare them for life. I also serve the Archdiocese in post abortion counseling for Dads. I go around parishes speaking to parish groups and gathering troops and money to run our Respect LIfe Ministry.

I just received permission from my superior to start a new community of men who will live a life of prayer, penance, silence, brortherhood, poverty and serve the unborn as their exclusive ministry living by the Rule of St. Francis. We need more men to do this. Please pray for the vocations to come our way. My community wants to start this smaller community of brothers and I’m supposed to train them.

Sometimes I find this overwhelming, because abortion is something that I have fought against my entire life and now we find so many challenges: the state, the laity, lack of vocations, lack of funds and so forth. When this happens, I pray, do my lectio divina, talk with my Franciscan brothers in my community, and do my spritual reading. It helps me keep all these balls in the air in favor of the unborn, without the anger and the anxiety.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[SIb4G]

I know exactly what you mean. I direct a school for children with disabilities. Our children were going to be aborted, until someone rescued them. We educate them and prepare them for life. I also serve the Archdiocese in post abortion counseling for Dads. I go around parishes speaking to parish groups and gathering troops and money to run our Respect LIfe Ministry.

I just received permission from my superior to start a new community of men who will live a life of prayer, penance, silence, brortherhood, poverty and serve the unborn as their exclusive ministry living by the Rule of St. Francis. We need more men to do this. Please pray for the vocations to come our way. My community wants to start this smaller community of brothers and I’m supposed to train them.

Sometimes I find this overwhelming, because abortion is something that I have fought against my entire life and now we find so many challenges: the state, the laity, lack of vocations, lack of funds and so forth. When this happens, I pray, do my lectio divina, talk with my Franciscan brothers in my community, and do my spritual reading. It helps me keep all these balls in the air in favor of the unborn, without the anger and the anxiety.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

JReducation—God bless you, your work, the children—and especially the unborn. And, thank you.