Posted on 06/30/2002 10:49:00 AM PDT by Polycarp
| |
| Angered by information leaks, Bishop Joseph Adamec abruptly canceled planned transfers of priests this week, The Tribune-Democrat has learned. The cancellation affects a Centre County priest who has publicly disagreed with the bishop’s stance on homosexuality in the priesthood, and whose brother is a conservative Catholic activist and harsh critic of the bishop. Both brothers declined to comment, and Adamec was tight-lipped about his orders, issuing only terse written responses to a reporter’s questions. The cancellations appear to be the latest tear in the widening fissure between Adamac’s administration of the Altoona-Johnstown Roman Catholic Diocese and his conservative critics. Events leading up to the cancellations began June 18, when Altoona businessman George Foster’s laity group sponsored a visit by conservative author Michael Rose, whose book “Goodbye, Good Men” is critical of the Altoona-Johnstown diocese. Several priests attended a reception for Rose, and there were conversations of pending transfers and moving arrangements. On June 19, the Centre Daily Times newspaper carried a front-page story about Foster’s brother James, a Bellefonte priest, being reassigned next month to another parish, and diocese officials denying political motivations. On June 21, Adamec wrote to all parishes, telling priests that “a number of transfers scheduled to take effect on July 10, 2002, have been put on hold. There are several reasons for that, including breaches of confidentiality.” A new list of transfers was developed last week, but dated for release on June 28. Foster’s transfer was not included in the new list. In his letter, Adamec apologized to “those not contributing to the situation. “I am sorry that this places an unexpected inconvenience on those who were prepared for a move on July 10,” he wrote. When a reporter asked what motivated the letter, Adamec replied with a short, written answer: “It’s in the letter.” When asked if a copy of the transfer list obtained by The Tribune-Democrat early last week, but dated June 28, was a complete list, Adamec replied, “I don’t know.” Reassignments announced by the diocese on Friday were: Sister Mary Parks, spokeswoman for the diocese, declined to comment on Foster’s situation. But Adamec and Parks have clashed with the priest in the past over the issue of homosexuality. Some dioceses, such as Philadelphia, will not accept homosexuals as priests, and the Vatican bans homosexual priests. The homosexual lifestyle has been the subject of an ongoing debate at Penn State University in State College. Foster voiced his conservative views and was chastised by the diocese. That debate began in October 2000, with a Penn State ceremony titled, “A Service of Affirmation of the Human Dignity of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender People.” Hlublik then wrote an essay saying: “Fortunately, with a few positive thought-provoking images of gays portrayed on television and movies and maybe even encounters with gays in our own lives, it is becoming common enough to be a topic of discussion.” Conservative Catholics, including priests like Foster, were outraged. Foster wrote a response calling Hlubik’s statements “false teaching.” Then Parks wrote back, rebuking Foster: “It is highly inappropriate for a Catholic priest to criticize publicly one of his brothers. [but its OK for a feminist nun to publicly criticize a priest--Polycarp] It is canonically inappropriate for a priest to suggest publicly that the diocese (ergo his Bishop) is somehow colluding to lead souls astray.” Foster’s brother, George, who is president of the Lay Stewardship Foundation, since has been engaged in a public war of words over the way the diocese has handled sex scandals. Both Parks and Adamec declined to discuss James Foster’s future as a priest, or any other transfers that might be made. |
Yea, well "ruling" is overrated. I'm sure you could get quite a few bishops to agree to that also.
I tend to think this is a rhetorical question, however, in case it is not, I will suggest that these enabling/covering-up bishops have some homosexual activity in their own backgrounds, and some may even still be active. It is very hard to know for sure, of course, so I am not going to say such a thing in so many words. But it is entirely possible and should not be dismissed by any of us.
Anyone in the public reading this story can see there was political motivation. It's so obvious and un-Christian-like on the part of the diocese.
So will I. I will pray especially that he be given the courage to keep his vow of obedience to his bishop.
So, what Jesus chose to do is overrated? I suppose you consider yourself wiser than He.
Responsorial Psalm
Ps 50:16bc-17, 18-19, 20-21, 22-23
R. (22a) Remember this, you who never think of God.
"Why do you recite my statutes,
and profess my covenant with your mouth,
Though you hate discipline
and cast my words behind you?"
R. Remember this, you who never think of God.
"When you see a thief, you keep pace with him,
and with adulterers you throw in your lot.
To your mouth you give free rein for evil,
you harness your tongue to deceit."
R. Remember this, you who never think of God.
"You sit speaking against your brother;
against your mother's son you spread rumors.
When you do these things, shall I be deaf to it?
Or do you think that I am like yourself?
I will correct you by drawing them up before your eyes."
R. Remember this, you who never think of God.
"Consider this, you who forget God,
lest I rend you and there be no one to rescue you.
He that offers praise as a sacrifice glorifies me;
and to him that goes the right way I will show the salvation of God."
R. Remember this, you who never think of God.
Is there anyone anywhere who can point out what these positive images might be and exactly where they might be found?? This should be interesting.
1547 The ministerial or hierarchical priesthood of bishops and priests, and the common priesthood of all the faithful participate, "each in its own proper way, in the one priesthood of Christ." While being "ordered one to another," they differ essentially.[22] In what sense? While the common priesthood of the faithful is exercised by the unfolding of baptismal grace-a life of faith, hope, and charity, a life according to the Spirit-,the ministerial priesthood is at the service of the common priesthood. It is directed at the unfolding of the baptismal grace of all Christians. The ministerial priesthood is a means by which Christ unceasingly builds up and leads his Church. For this reason it is transmitted by its own sacrament, the sacrament of Holy Orders.
1551 This priesthood is ministerial. "That office . . . which the Lord committed to the pastors of his people, is in the strict sense of the term a service."[28] It is entirely related to Christ and to men. It depends entirely on Christ and on his unique priesthood; it has been instituted for the good of men and the communion of the Church. The sacrament of Holy Orders communicates a "sacred power" which is none other than that of Christ. The exercise of this authority must therefore be measured against the model of Christ, who by love made himself the least and the servant of all.[29] "The Lord said clearly that concern for his flock was proof of love for him."[30]
1552 The ministerial priesthood has the task not only of representing Christ - Head of the Church - before the assembly of the faithful, but also of acting in the name of the whole Church when presenting to God the prayer of the Church, and above all when offering the Eucharistic sacrifice.[31]
Father Joseph Hlubik, Penn State Catholic Community campus minister, said although some Bible passages speak negatively of homosexuality, there are positive images as well.
He discussed a Bible story in which two men share a deep and intimate love.
"This is a story of a covenant, lifelong love between Jonathan and David," Hlubik said. "This is the same David the Jews and Christians view as the greatest king of Israel."
Hlubik encouraged people in the audience to focus on a larger view of faith, not just on intricacies of biblical passages, which can sometimes be taken out of context or used as weapons to condemn people.
"The fundamental command is to love," he said. "Whether we are straight or gay, we all need friendship, we all need love, and we all need intimacy in our relationships."
Hlubik said there has been some progress in embracing LGBT people in Roman Catholicism
Your posts are very consistent, and I appreciate your taking the time to express your prayerful devotion to the priests and bishops. At times I confess I do not understand how your understanding of the Church has been shaped. Are you a member of Opus Dei, the Legionaires of Christ, Regnum Christum -- or a similar ecclesial movement? I ask because I am genuinely interested in how your thinking has been formed and shaped.
I've always seen that quote attributed to St. John Chrysostom. Let's verify it before putting it on a billboard.
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.