Toldeo Blade Claims Bishop Pilla and John Carroll Prez were to appear at John Kerry Rally

Toledo Blade ^ | November 19, 2004 | DAVID YONKE

[Diago]

Mr. D'Antonio said after he agreed to head Catholics for Kerry, he was frustrated by the Massachusetts senator's reluctance to woo the Catholic vote.He said, for example, that he made arrangements for Bishop Anthony M. Pilla of the Cleveland Catholic Archdiocese and the Rev. Edward Glynn, president of John Carroll University, a Jesuit college in Cleveland, to appear at a rally for Mr. Kerry in the pivotal state of Ohio, but the senator passed.

"American Catholics had a lot to contribute to the election," Mr. D'Antonio said, adding that Catholic social policies and the Democratic platform align on education, health care, and opposition to the death penalty.

"It seemed wrong," he said, for Catholics to support President Bush solely on the basis on his opposition to abortion rights.

He urged Senator Kerry to "test the pro-life spirit" of the Republicans by challenging them to guarantee health care to everyone under the age of 18, saying that would be a true "pro-life" policy.

[Scales]

Does that alignment on health care includes killing babies in the womb and grandparents in nursing homes? I don't think so....

[Diago]

"Mr. D'Antonio said after he agreed to head Catholics for Kerry, he was frustrated by the Massachusetts senator's reluctance to woo the Catholic vote.He said, for example, that he made arrangements for Bishop Anthony M. Pilla of the Cleveland Catholic Archdiocese and the Rev. Edward Glynn, president of John Carroll University, a Jesuit college in Cleveland, to appear at a rally for Mr. Kerry in the pivotal state of Ohio, but the senator passed."

[NYer]

Bishop Pilla ... well what a surprise! (/sarcasm)

Catholic Ping - please freepmail me if you want on/off this list

[vox_freedom]

Does that alignment on health care includes killing babies in the womb and grandparents in nursing homes? I don't think so....

[Lilllabettt]

Piiiiiiiiiilllllllaaaaaaa. You impudent, neurotic moron!

Of course, the guy who runs 'Catholics For Kerry' is probably scuzzy, and could just be making it all up.

On the other hand, this fits his Excellency's m.o. quite poifectly. Though showing up at a political rally is so blatant, I would be surprised if it didn't show up on his 'threats to all important self-preservation' radar.

Bishop Pilla shakes hands after Christmas Mass. Maybe this year I'll squeeze his knuckles...

Nah don't have the guts. Will go into googily-brained 'thats my father' mode as usual.

[26lemoncharlie]

MOre Heresy by the Novous Ordo

[k omalley]

"Maybe this year I'll squeeze his knuckles..."

Oh c'mon Lilllabettt, I dare you! :)

[murphE]

"Bishop Pilla shakes hands after Christmas Mass. Maybe this year I'll squeeze his knuckles..."

If you really want to get to him, go down on one knee, kiss his ring, and call him 'your excellency'. This always makes my bishop squirm. ; )

[ninenot]

Good idea. That routine absolutely discombobulated Rembert the Weak up here in Milwaukee. Worth every second of it..

[Lilllabettt]

You're right. His Excellency would probably pee himself.

[murphE]

tee hee hee.

[hardhead]

Typical bullshit from some bishops. They exhort the rest of us to vote our conscience, to vote for what is right, all the while they are currying favor from the "rich and famous (or infamous)."

[Grey Ghost II]

Maybe this year I'll squeeze his knuckles...

Hand him a picture of an aborted baby and sarcastically thank him for protecting the most helpless members of society.

[AskStPhilomena]

Who was the idiot that promoted Pilla from priest to bishop?

[Mr. Lucky]

You think it makes your bishop squirm, try it on a Lutheran pastor.

[RobbyS]

Amazingly GOOD suggestion!

[PJMCG]

Bishop Pilla was unaware that Kerry was planning the John Carroll event.
When I got wind of it I called his office and his secretary was very concerned and said that, although the Bishop is unable to control what happens at John Carroll, she was sure he would do what he could. I also called the Provincial Superior of the Jesuits in Detroit and left a voicemail. I called Fr. Glynn's offic and left a message. Some RTL folks in COlumbus called some major donors. The event never took place.

[Diago]

I hope you don't bvelieve anything you here out of the bishop's office.

Take the word of his former lawyer:

__________________________________________________________

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1060132/posts

In March, 2002, about two years after leaving the diocese, Charlie [the bishop's former lawyer] says he met again with Bishop Gries. “I met with Bishop Roger and I told him as a friend that he needed to tell Pilla to step down. That's all I said.”

I prod him to continue. “Because of the manner in which all of this had been handled.”

Charlie later says, “The thing that really fried me was the way the church in Cleveland has agreed to ‘infanticize' Anthony. It's like he's a child. ‘Oh, he didn't know this, he didn't know that.' Wait a minute, oh merciful God. Then what's he in charge of one million Catholics for? Yes, Quinn did crazy stuff, but he was a lieutenant, you are the general. Why didn't you stop it? "

__________________________________________________________

Ot take the word of blogger Kevin Miller:

CANT FROM THE CLEVELAND CHANCERY? ACTION NEEDED! [Kevin Miller]
	2/26/2004
	Please read this narrative, then send the email and make the phone call suggested at the end. The other week, a reader emailed me an item from CWN about the Diocese of Cleveland's respective reactions to Passion and The V Monologues. The reader added some further information about the latter, and suggested emailing various folks at JCU and the Cleveland Diocese to complain. I blogged his note. The first two sentences of the CWN item were as follows: The Diocese of Cleveland issues a warning to Catholic parishes that seeing a movie, The Passion of the Christ, which illustrates the events of the Gospels, may lead to the rise of anti-Semitism in churchgoing Catholics. Meanwhile, a local Catholic university allows the production of the "Monologues" on campus with proceeds going to a pro-abortion group. The other day, I linked back to that earlier post from another one about another apparent abomination at JCU. Enter another reader, a priest from the state of Washington. Yesterday, he emailed the various Cleveland chancery officials noted in the original post, citing the above-quoted sentences, and asking, "is this true?" He received a reply from Father Lawrence Jurcak, who appears from the diocese's web site to be the recently-named Secretary and Vicar for Clergy and Religious. He forwarded the correspondence to me. Fr. Jurcak's reply read: You details are not true at all. There is no "warning issued by the Diocese" about not seeing The Passion of the Christ." My first thought was that this seemed to be somewhat of an evasion. The claim, quoted above, had been that there was a warning not that one shouldn't see the movie but rather that doing so might lead to anti-Semitism - i.e., that one should be cautious about what conclusions one draws from the movie if one does see it. I then followed the links from my original post, as provided by the reader who'd sent it. The CWN item links to a Cleveland newspaper article, "'Passion' movie raises religious fervor, fears," which describes the diocese's warning/"memo." Paragraph 4 of that article reads: "The Diocese of Cleveland sent a February memo to all its parishes asking Catholics to be aware of the potential for anti-Semitism." The CWN item struck me as containing a reasonable paraphrase of that description - a call for awareness for the potential for anti-Semitism surely reflects concern that anti-Semitism might be one of the movie's effects and could therefore reasonably be described as a "warning" that the movie might lead to anti-Semitism. The article goes into somewhat more detail about the memo further down. Of course, a newspaper account may well be inaccurate. So I poked around the diocesean web site a bit more until I found what appears to be the "memo" in question. It's headed, "Movies About the Passion of Jesus Christ." It begins, "In the next few months there are at least two movies to be released about the passion and death of Jesus Christ." Now, those two would be Gibson's Passion and, I gather, The Gospel of John. Since no one that I know of has expressed concerns that the latter might stir up anti-Semitism - presumably at least partly because of the translation it uses - it's obvious, I think, that the warnings about anti-Semitic accounts of responsiblity for Christ's suffering and death that make up the bulk of the memo reflect concern about Passion. In short, I think that the newspaper account of the memo is accurate, and that the CWN description of it is, too. (When I bounced these thoughts off my Washington priest reader, he replied, "Your interpretation seems correct to me.") So, when we've dealt with the diocese's evasion and quibbling, we're left with the question: Why were they more concerned about the effects that Passion might have than about the effects that JCU's presentation of Monologues might have? Why haven't we seen at least a "memo" about the possibly bad effects of the latter? (Never mind whether the warning about Passion is the best way to deal with that movie to begin with.) My Washington reader forwarded my comments to Fr. Jurcak and told me he'd keep me posted if he gets a reply. I suggest you contact Fr. Jurcak also. As well as Bishop Pilla - (216) 696-6525 ext. 2030. Ask them why Fr. Jurcak is being evasive about what the diocese said about Passion - and why they're expressing concerns about it, but not, apparently, about Monologues.