Catholic Caucus: Vatican says Fr. Pavone not suspended, bishop reasserts authority

ROME, ITALY, July 2, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Fr. Frank Pavone of Priests for Life has not been suspended, said the Vatican’s Congregation for Clergy in May, but his bishop has the right to assign him duties outside his pro-life ministry, according to the Diocese of Amarillo. Fr. Frank Pavone of Priests for Life. Fr. Frank Pavone of Priests for Life.

Amarillo Bishop Patrick Zurek reported that the Vatican body granted at least a partial victory for the Priests for Life leader, who had petitioned Rome for clarification after Zurek announced that he had “suspended” Fr. Pavone last September.

According to the diocese, the Vatican clarified that Pavone was not canonically suspended, and remains a priest in good standing. However, the statement from the Vatican also apparently re-asserted Zurek’s authority to appoint Pavone chaplain of a religious community in Amarillo.

Basically, a Bishop has a right to assign a priest of a diocese to specific duties.

For some reason, pro-lifers feel they do not have to obey the rules of the Roman Catholic Church.

From the article:

Life Dynamics founder Mark Crutcher decried what he called the “outrageous” treatment of Fr. Pavone at the remote convent where the priest was sequestered.

Mark Crutcher is not a Roman Catholic, but feels he can dictate what the Roman Catholic Church should do.

An example of how non-Catholics are being idiots and making this situation worse...

After Father Frank has months of inactivity in travel schedule, last week he had a mysterious trip to Houston, Texas.

I suspected that this was a trip to see the head of the Archdiocese of Houston-Galveston.

Cardinal Daniel DiNardo may be both the Metropolitan of Amarillo (I am not sure on that point).

He has been the President of Pro-Life for the USCCB.

So it is possible that Father Frank went to Houston to see Cardinal Daniel DiNardo to get (1) an update from the Vatican, and (2) an update on the authority of Bishop Zurek.

I realized this some time ago, but decided that speculating on it -- was unwise before there was any announcement.

Very confusing is the statement of the Diocese of Amarillo on this:

Public Statement Concerning Rev. Frank A. Pavone

by Bishop Patrick J. Zurek June 20, 2012
In its decree of May 18, 2012, the Congregation for the Clergy has sustained Father Frank A. Pavone’s appeal of his suspension from ministry outside the Diocese of Amarillo and his appointment from me on October 4, 2011 as Chaplain of the Disciples of the Lord Jesus Christ in Channing, Texas. Father Pavone is to continue his ministry as chaplain until further notice. As a gesture of good will, I will grant permission to him in individual cases, based upon their merits, to participate in pro-life events with the provision that he and I must be in agreement beforehand as to his role and function.
All other matters are outside the purview of this statement.
Amarillo, Texas, June 20, 2012
+Most Rev. Patrick J. Zurek, STL, DD
Bishop of Amarillo

-----------------

And the statement by Priest for Life:

Vatican Upholds Fr. Frank Pavone's Appeal

We are happy to announce that the Vatican has upheld Father Frank Pavone's appeal and has declared that Father Pavone is not now nor has ever been suspended. Father Pavone remains a priest in good standing all over the world.
We were confident all along that a just decision would be made by the Vatican's Congregation for the Clergy. While we fully agree that Bishop Zurek has rightful authority over the priests of his diocese, we also see the urgent need for Father Pavone to be allowed to conduct his priestly ministry outside the diocese of Amarillo for the good of the pro-life movement.
With regard to all inquiries relative to Father Pavone's status and the Diocese of Amarillo, we will continue to be as transparent as possible and place all communications and press releases on our public website. In this way we can best respect the rights and privacy of all concerned, particularly ecclesiastical authority and communications which are intended to be confidential at this time.

Both are about the same issue, but both are as clear as mud.

LifeSiteNews.com gives some insight into this issue...

While what you say is true, it does kind of beg the issue.

Recall that Father Pavone was accused of financial mis-management, which in turn badly hurt PFL, when questions came to light, and the official outcome of an internal audit, or investigation, is still not known. Contributors and pro life supporters do ALL the leg work against abortion and naturally want to know the outcome, and deserve to know it.

You can’t pry any information on that question out of anyone and Pavone has been silenced.

So, what have we learned exactly? Yes, his chain can be jerked and has been jerked, and its been seen by all, both inside the Church and out.

Now what? The bishop looks small and Pavone’s ministry in limbo and in question.

Father Frank at one time promised to move to Amarillo along with part of the operation of Priests for Life.

That went by the wayside -- for whatever reason -- as either as part of this problem or before.

Father Frank was supposed to meet with the bishop about the financial situation not only of Priests for Life but also another organization Father Frank controls.

It is sounding like there is bad blood between the bishop and Father Frank, which is very unfortunate.

Maybe Father Frank will be able to transfer to another Diocese just as he transferred from the Archdiocese of New York City to the Diocese of Amarillo.

But I believe that the Bishop of Amarillo would have to approve this.

What makes this situation worse is non-Catholic pro-lifers criticizing the Bishop of Amarillo (even if he might be wrong).

Not only has this situation caused problems for Priests for Life but it has been very hard on pro-lifers in the Diocese of Amarillo (Catholic pro-lifers).

Basically what happened was that Priests for Life gave $2 million to the Gospel of Life Ministries (another non-profit organization which has lost its tax exempt status).

Father Frank controls the Gospel of Life organization.

At the same time, Priests for Life promised the Diocese of Amarillo to build a pro-life center in Amarillo.

The Diocese of Amarillo gave property to Priests for Life for this purpose.

Now there is a defunct corporation called Priests for Life that was set up for building the Amarillo Pro-Life Center.

It is my personal opinion that Bishop Zurek may have felt that Father Frank Pavone went back on his word to build a pro-life center in Amarillo (abandoned that effort), and instead focused a large amount of money to bail the Gospel of Life Ministries out of financial problems (the $2 million).

Probably part of the agreement was that Bishop Yanta and Bishop Zurek gave Father Frank a free hand to just focus on the business of Priests for Life and pro-life activities.

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.