*EXCLUSIVE -- MUST CREDIT WHISPERS*Posted on 10/13/2006 5:48:15 AM PDT by Maeve
Mutiny in the Big Apple *EXCLUSIVE -- MUST CREDIT WHISPERS*
In 1983, the new bishop of Scranton was consulted on the appointment of a new archbishop of New York.
John O'Connor was familiar with the See given his long service as a Navy chaplain, culminating with his four years as auxiliary bishop to the Military Vicar, Cardinal Terence Cooke. O'Connor later made it known that, while the new archbishop would inevitably face some difficulties, he opined that none would be due to the New York presbyterate, who served well, loved the church and were loyal to their archbishop.
Less than seven months after his installation in Scranton, Bishop O'Connor was promoted to the Big Apple. He may only be gone six years, but how times change.
Long-simmering tensions among a broad cross-section of the archdiocese's priests broke into the open today with the circulation of an anonymous letter under the authorship of a group calling itself "A Committee of Concerned Clergy for the Archdiocese of New York." Saying that, "At no time has the relationship between the Ordinary and the priests of the Archdiocese been so fractured and seemingly hopeless as it is now," the authors have urged their confreres to lodge "a formal vote of 'NO Confidence'" (emphases original) in Cardinal Edward M. Egan, who became archbishop in 2000. Using strong language throughout the 950-word missive, the authors allege a widespread finding that Egan's relationship with his priests has been "defined by dishonesty, deception, disinterest and disregard."
The cardinal turns 75 on 2 April, when he must submit his letter of resignation to Pope Benedict XVI.
In its entirety, the letter and accompanying ballot are published below for the first time outside of the New York presbyterate. As he recovers from a September knee-replacement, the cardinal's intense displeasure at the move has already become known.
Joseph Zwilling, director of communications for the archdiocese, declined comment on the document.
***************************************
October 2006
Dear Brother Priest:
A Committee of Concerned Clergy for the Archdiocese of New York has met to discuss the critical condition of the Archdiocese of New York. As you would understand, because of the severely vindictive nature of Cardinal Egan,this committee must remain anonymous. This letter is being sent to many priests throughout the Archdiocese so that at each Vicariate meeting a formal vote of “NO Confidence” can be exercised with regard to Cardinal Edward Egan in his role as Archbishop of New York. As you know, the collective memory of the presbyterate cannot recall a time in recent history when the morale of priests has been so broken and low. Some of our elderly priests can well recall the Cardinal Spellman years. Many remember the tenure of Cardinal Cooke and certainly everyone remembers Cardinal O’Connor. At no time has the relationship between the Ordinary and the priests of the Archdiocese been so fractured and seemingly hopeless as it is now.
Since his arrival in New York, the Cardinal has given his time, attention and interest to matters financial while paying little or no attention to the spiritual needs and concerns of the priests and faithful of the Archdiocese. During the last six years the Priests of the Archdiocese of New York have been patient, understanding, tolerant and loyal. Several attempts have been made to open avenues of communication with the Cardinal but to avail. During the last six years, the Cardinal’s relations with the Priests of New York have been defined by dishonesty, deception, disinterest and disregard. Far too many of our brothers can speak personally of the arrogant and cavalier manner in which they have been treated by the Cardinal. Early in his tenure, the cruel and ruthless way in which several priests who served on the seminary faculty were dismissed, was an adumbration of how many other priests would also be treated. Time and again, the Cardinal fails to be the Father that every bishop must be to his priests.
With regard to important policies and decisions that impact upon the welfare of the Archdiocese, it is evident that the Cardinal does not seek advice or counsel from the many competent and experienced priests who so faithfully serve as pastors and members of his chancery staff. Instead, it is regrettably and seemingly apparent that the Cardinal relies on the advice of his priest-secretary [Msgr Gregory Mustaciuolo] who enjoys a most limited and meager pastoral experience.
The Fifth Anniversary of September 11th was a sad reminder of the Cardinal’s decision to leave New York only two days after the attack, during a time when the city desperately needed a spiritual leader. How sad, painful and disappointing it was to hear the tabloids referring to the then Mayor Giuliani as the “Shepherd of the City”. Since that time, the Cardinal has continued to fail in his role as Shepherd. Pope John Paul II referred to New York as the Capital of the World. How unfortunate it is that the voice of the Archbishop of New York is almost never heard in that “Capital”. The Cardinal demonstrates an unnatural fear of the media and he forfeits the great opportunity to employ the media as a means of addressing the many contemporary questions of faith and morals. It is unthinkable that in this millennium a Successor to the Apostles would shrink from such a valuable opportunity for evangelization and hide himself within the walls of his residence.
Sadly, it is evident that this Cardinal is unable to deal with the complexities, problems and challenges of an Archdiocese of the magnitude and diversity of New York. For these reasons and more, the Priests of the Archdiocese of New York must express a vote of NO CONFIDENCE. Such a vote would encourage the Papal Nuncio and the Holy Father to strongly consider accepting the Cardinal’s resignation in April,2007, when he reaches the age of retirement, rather than at a future and uncertain date before his 80th birthday, as can often be the case with retiring Cardinals. The search for a new Archbishop should begin sooner rather than later. Rome must know that the priests and people of New York desperately need a Bishop who will be “strong, loving and wise” (II Timothy: 1:7): a Bishop who will love his priests, seeing them as his spiritual sons and faithful assistants: a Bishop who will begin the healing that is so desperately needed in this Archdiocese: a Bishop who will preach and teach without fear of seeing his name in a newspaper: a Bishop who will truly see holiness in Truth.
The Committee suggests that at each vicariate meeting a secret ballot be taken in which each priest who is present could vote. It was thought that only priests and no deacons should participate in this vote. The votes should be counted at that meeting and the tally registered on the enclosed form. The form should be signed by two witnesses and a copy sent to each of the Vicars General. It would be incumbent upon the Vicars General to report the vote to the Papal Nuncio. At this important and critical moment, let us move forward with prayerful courage.
After prayeful consideration, I cast my vote as:
NO CONFIDENCE in Cardinal Egan: _____
CONFIDENCE in Cardinal Egan:_____
ABSTENTION: ______
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Each Vicariate should send a copy of this form to each of the Vicars General-
Vicariate: ____________________________
Date of Meeting:________________________
Number of Priests in attendance: ____________
Number voting - NO CONFIDENCE: __________
Number voting – CONFIDENCE: _____________
Number voting – ABSTENTION: _____________
These vote was taken and counted in the presence of all those in attendance at the Vicariate meeting. Witnessed by:
___________________ __________________
About 90 came through the Pastoral Provision process. No one can give a correct figure because some bishops used other canons and not the Pastoral Provision in these matters. In England there were hundreds who came in, and many a parish that would have closed is served now by a former Anglican priest.
That's a veeeeeery bad sign.
In the end, Fr. Pavone moved to the Diocese of Amarillo, Texas (with the remarkable Bishop Yanta).
BTW, do you understand the canon law regarding a move like this? I thought priests were stuck with their local bishop.
I'm not the Canon Law expert in the family -- but I do know that it happened with help from Rome.
I've lived in the NY Archdiocese all my life, and I know nothing about this. I know that the Cardinal has closed some churches and schools. I don't know what his voting record is in the NCCB. I haven't heard a thing about priests' thoughts concerning Cardinal Egan - don't even have any "allegeds" to go on.
I will say this, however, just as the last two Popes have not been Italian (I know the Holy Spirit picks them), maybe it's time to consider the choice of a NY Cardinal who's not Irish. To choose a specific man having particular gifts, which are especially needed by this Archdiocese, rather than selecting one by ethnic group.
Being Irish myself, I absolutely agree that being ethnic Irish should not enter into it. And after this one, we need an Italian like Fr. Pavone made Archbishop.
My experience with the orthodox ECUSA priests (the only potential source for Anglican Use priests) is that they are the polar opposite of "lavender". I don't think any are homosexual (and as the daughter of a professional dancer my gaydar is fairly accurate) but if they are they are living chastely and discreetly and minding their own business.
In fact, my experience is that the homosexual Episcopal priests are also the most loony-liberal in theology and therefore the least likely to go over to Rome. Any traffic would be in the opposite direction (and good riddance). It's quite true that some of these guys are nutty about the "high church" trappings - vestments, incense, etc. - but they can have all that without leaving ECUSA.
What's the basis for your statement?
"A priest does owe obedience and respect to his bishop"
Is there anything -- anything -- a bishop can to to lose this entitlement to obedience and respect?
What was the reason for this?
Or Bishop Fabian Bruskiewicz. He's been #1 on my wish list for years!
From the top.... Name-Diocese-details
Brown - Orange, CA - 69
Clark - Rochester - 69
DuMaine - San Jose, CA - resigned 1999
Egan - NY - very nearly 75
Favalora - Miami - 70
Ferrerio - Honolulu - dead
Flores - San Antonio - retired 2004
Flynn - St. Paul - 62
Gerety - Newark - retired 1986
Grahmann - Dallas - 75 not retired yet
Hubbard - Albany - 67
Imesch - Joliet - retired 5/2006
Jadot - Curia - 96 retired 1984
Keller /Keleher - Kansas - resigned 2005
Kelly - which one there are 7 to choose from
Law - Curia - resigned from Boston in disgrace 2002
Loverde - Arlington, VA - 66
Lynch - there are 4
Mahony - Los Angeles - 70
Maida - Detroit - 76
McCarrick - Washington DC - retired 5/2006
Myers - Newark - 65
Pilarczyk - Cincinnati - 72
Sullivan - which one there are 7 to choose from
Skylstad - Spokane - 72
Trautmann - Erie - 70
Untener - Saginaw - died 2004
Weakland - Milwaukee - retired 2002
*LOL Umm, the sspx is a schism
The SSPX has built a facility to retrain N.O. Priests in the Latin Mass and orthodoxy. Rome is ready to help.
*Really? The Pope is planning to enlist the schism in retraining Priests in union with Rome? Is there a shortage in antisemitism that needs to be addressed? Do faithful priests in union with Rome need to be re-educated so as to understand the normative mass is evil? Do priests in union with Rome need to be re-educated Vatican Two is heretical?
I must confess I was unaware the Pope had such ideas and had co-ordinated with the schism to undertake such a vast and radical program.
The things one learns in FR :)
I just got down to here after posting my response to narses.
I see we are on the same wave length, again :)
Isn't it ah, um, interesting so many soi disdant traditionalists, in opposiiton to all Tradition, place their hope in Schism?
If such hopes were not the beacon leading them on the road to Perdition, it would actually be laughable.
They do not appear to be charging the archbishop with believing or promoting heresy. I would ask you, are the bishops the successors of the apostles or not?
I gotta say that I can't keep up with the distinctions between Anglican/Episcipal/Lutheran communions, however I met a young, married convert not too long ago, who went on to become a Catholic priest through Mt. Saint Mary's Seminary. He was top of his class, a faithful servant and a righteous dude - also a military chaplain. His name is Tyson Wood. I understand the lavendar concerns, but this need not apply to this young man.
I've only heard good stuff about other priest converts.
Please keep our seminarians and young priests in your prayers. I believe this new generation is a breed apart from the clergy that we saw moving through the seminary in the 60's, 70's and 80's, but needless to say there are those who would take delight in seeing them fail.
Possibly, the Cardinal may have gotten rid of some "questionable" Seminary faculty (if you know what I mean), and this is their retaliation. Of course, when the words tolerant and diversity rear their heads, I become immediately suspicious of motives.
My 2 cents -- I think conservative (non-progressive) Priests aren't the type to send out "NO-Confidence" ballots. IMO, We have a TOP DOWN heirarchy, which conservatives "get", and progresives don't.
"...he's a money-grubbin' homo who makes a mockery of the faith, but that would have really ensured he stays until he's 80."
I'm a bit on the outside with things in NY, but the mere fact that Egan rates high praise from some in the NY press gives me pause for suspicion.
Why would a Cardinal of the Church try to squash Priests for Life?
I think Bishop Michael Driscoll of Boise belongs on your list.
You might consider adding McCormack, Murphy and Niederauer.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.