Posted on 09/09/2002 5:37:15 PM PDT by Salvation
Any other feedback about the old members and new members of the committee?
He was a bit of an apple-polisher, and none of the seminarians trusted him because he was one of Msgr. Hughes' "boys."
He was a nice enough guy, but very hard to get to know.
I would have bet that he would be a bishop someday, though that's not necessarily a good thing.
Amazing story there!
Hubbard is currently being investigated by the RCF organization. According to Stephen Brady, the president of RCF:
I attend a diocesan parish and have never attended a parish affiliated with the Society of St. Pius X, so I cannot be rightly accused of pushing some hidden agenda. A Mass I once attended in an Albany diocesan church in Oneonta, NY, was celebrated by Bishop Howard Hubbard. According to parish members, the bishop used a homemade bread for the Eucharist that contained honey and other ingredients that would have made the Blessed Sacrament invalid. This is but one small example of what I have heard and witnessed in the last seven years of RCFs existence. The Holy Father knows of these and many more abuses that have occurred with the apparent or outright approval of bishops in good standing with Rome. If the Pope does not take some action, and if he allows the continual deterioration of the Church in dissident dioceses, it may yet come to pass that the only Catholic Mass or faithful teachings to be found in these areas will be at a Pius X chapel.
More on this later.
I think NYer agrees with you.
Spotty? So far as I can tell his main strong point is that he isn't as liberal as his predecessor. We have seen some rather flagrant acts that are troubling, but very little has occured publicly that is orthodox. Perhaps there are things going on behind the scenes that I don't see. He is definitely a great improvement, but I have some difficulty getting excited about him.
patent
patentU.S. BISHOPS OPPOSE PREVENTIVE STRIKE AGAINST IRAQ
Letter Urges Bush to Pursue Options in Regard to Saddam WASHINGTON, D.C., SEPT. 18, 2002 (Zenit.org).- The head of the U.S. bishops' conference wrote to U.S. President George W. Bush urging that alternatives be found to a preventive military attack on Iraq.
In his letter, Bishop Wilton Gregory, president of the episcopal conference, said a preventative attack would not be in keeping with the required moral exigencies.
The letter, dated Sept. 13, was written at the request of the bishops' Administrative Committee, which met a week earlier.
In his letter, Bishop Gregory analyzes in the light of moral principles the possibility of a U.S. military operation to oust Saddam Hussein. The analysis is based on criteria in No. 2309 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
According to these principles, the "just war," or rather the right of legitimate defense, requires that there be a "just cause, right authority, probability of success, proportionality, and non-combatant immunity."
In speaking of the "just cause," Bishop Gregory asks: "Is there clear and adequate evidence of a direct connection between Iraq and the attacks of September 11th or clear and adequate evidence of an imminent attack of a grave nature?" "Should not a distinction be made between efforts to change unacceptable behavior of a government and efforts to end that government's existence?" the bishop asks.
In regard to the "right authority," he believes that an operation of these characteristics could only be undertaken if it has "congressional and United Nations approval."
"With the Holy See, we would be deeply skeptical about unilateral uses of military force, particularly given the troubling precedents involved," Bishop Gregory explains.
Quoting the Catechism, the episcopate stresses that the use of force must have "serious prospects of success" and "must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated."
"War against Iraq could have unpredictable consequences not only for Iraq but for peace and stability elsewhere in the Middle East," Bishop Gregory emphasizes. "Would preventive or pre-emptive force succeed in thwarting serious threats or, instead, provoke the very kind of attacks that it is intended to prevent?"
"How would another war in Iraq impact on the civilian population, in the short- and long-term? How many more innocent people would suffer and die, or be left without homes, without basic necessities, without work?" he adds.
"Would war against Iraq detract from our responsibility to help build a just and stable order in Afghanistan and undermine the broader coalition against terrorism?" the prelate continues.
After acknowledging that armed conflicts continue to be a serious danger today for civilian populations, the bishop encourages President Bush to continue in his efforts to build broad international support for a new, more constructive and effective approach to press the Iraqi government to live up to its international obligations.
"We respectfully urge you to step back from the brink of war and help lead the world to act together to fashion an effective global response to Iraq's threats that conforms with traditional moral limits on the use of military force," Bishop Gregory concludes.
Gregory is irrelevant and, sad to say, so is John Paul II when it comes to this subject. The Church needs to adapt the "Just War Theory" to the times we live in.
There was a story in the Dallas Morning News this past weekend in which the NEWS, by poking around in Belleville, found out that a priest had been reinstated by Gregory after evidence emerged that he had exposed himself to two minors. He said he did so "after the approval of the Diocesan Review Board." After the DMN started asking questions, Gregory suspended the priest.
I'm becoming less and less impressed with Gregory. I'm not impressed with any of the bishops, to tell you the truth. In the war on terrorism, they're worthless!
Hah! You've been converted to the dark side. Welcome aboard. Do you happen to have a link to the article? It will help reinforce my previous views of this man.
patent
I didn't post it because it's long, and I figured people are burnt out reading these individual cases.
These bishops are protecting as many of these priests as they can. Even the "orthodox," like Eldon Curtiss in Omaha, can't be trusted to out the abusers.
My ISP switched to Yahoo, and I can't copy and paste links, so sorry for the inconvenience.
I think they could only be outdone by the U.N.,the European Union,China and'or the Islamic Nations.
I read the article about the errant priest and Gregory and wondered.I have also watched Gregory back down from his originally middle of the road,not too strong to begin with statement about "a homosexual dominance in the priesthood" to relative silence on the subject.
Then he appointed a committee of lay persons who could have been picked from a random sample of politically correct folks directly or tangentially related to government.
Now this list of bishops;I've only seen one that someone has said was good.I do remember that the person who was the vocations director in Dallas was named Hughes and he was very orthodox. He was replaced with the person who arranged over some protest to admit Rudy Kos to the seminary.So,it seems to me that that bishop sounds like he might be pretty good and that would make two.Oh well,lots of prayers.Hope some other people weigh in on the bishops.
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.