Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Law Celebrates Mass Despite Protests
The Herald Sun ^ | April 11, 2005 | RACHEL ZOLL

Posted on 04/11/2005 10:35:09 AM PDT by donbosco74

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-25 next last
PLEASE EXCUSE ME if this topic has already been covered here on FR, but I could not find any posting of it since April 8th:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1380090/posts

I thought those posts insufficiently discussed this news, because there is a lot more to the story. Maybe this article will help fill in some gaps.

1 posted on 04/11/2005 10:35:10 AM PDT by donbosco74
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: donbosco74

I did not know two was a group. A lot of press for two ambulance chasers.


2 posted on 04/11/2005 10:40:45 AM PDT by ardara
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: donbosco74
Blaine said bluntly: "The Vatican's decision to have Law celebrate the Mass was inappropriate."

A sentiment echoed yesterday by Raymond Arroyo and Father Neuhaus on EWTN.

3 posted on 04/11/2005 10:45:42 AM PDT by A.A. Cunningham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: donbosco74
You heard it here first......Cardinal Law will be the next Pope.

.

.

.

.

.

......or not.

4 posted on 04/11/2005 10:48:31 AM PDT by ksen ("He that knows nothing will believe anything." - Thomas Fuller)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ardara

Law should be in chains. If you'd seen his videotaped deposition in the sex abuse cases, you would know his memory was just a shade better than Hillary's.


5 posted on 04/11/2005 11:01:13 AM PDT by thegreatbeast (Quid lucrum istic mihi est?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: donbosco74

I heard about Law performing a celebrated mass. This is the same man that covered up all the pedophile priests by shifting them to different churches while knowing that these priests would keep molesting others. Yet, Law was recalled to Rome by the pope to protect Law from all the civil lawsuits filed against him and the Catholic Church.


6 posted on 04/11/2005 11:05:28 AM PDT by lilylangtree (Veni, Vidi, Vici)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: donbosco74

It's boilerplate doctrine, settled at the first Council of Nicaea, that the character of the priest doesn't affect the validity of his functions.


7 posted on 04/11/2005 11:32:39 AM PDT by Grut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lilylangtree

>>I heard about Law performing a celebrated mass.<<

Not sure what you are trying to say here: did you mean "concelebrated?" Or are you talking about the novendiales series in Rome?

>>This is the same man that covered up all the pedophile priests by shifting them to different churches while knowing that these priests would keep molesting others.<<

This is ONE OF THE SAME MEN. He made quite a name for himself in Boston, though.

>>Yet, Law was recalled to Rome by the pope to protect Law from all the civil lawsuits filed against him and the Catholic Church.<<

Law was recalled to Rome for undisclosed reasons, too, it would seem. Why was he provided with such a prestigious post? Why was he awarded a generous salary and a cushy apartment while his abandoned Boston has to close down parishes to pay off the lawsuits?


8 posted on 04/11/2005 11:59:02 AM PDT by donbosco74 (Sancte Padre Pio, ora pro nobis, nunc et in hora mortis nostrae, Amen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: lilylangtree
Mass is said, not "performed".

Yet, Law was recalled to Rome by the pope to protect Law from all the civil lawsuits filed against him and the Catholic Church.

Actually, he is the chaplin at a convent here in the US somewhere on the east coast. We was never recalled to the Vatican and his resignation was only accepted after two attempts.

The man did wrong. He knows it and at this point so does everyone else. We can only assume he is doing his Penance. It wasn't appropriate for him to say one of the Masses during the Novena, but who knows, they could have been pulling names out of a hat.

9 posted on 04/11/2005 12:04:35 PM PDT by Desdemona
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Desdemona
Law was assigned as Archpriest of the Basilica of St. Mary Major in Rome, where he now lives, in May of 2004. He's no longer at that convent outside of DC.
10 posted on 04/11/2005 12:19:59 PM PDT by A.A. Cunningham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Grut

Are you suggesting that the validity of his sacraments is questionable because of the enormity of his public and notorious scandal?

If so, what about the "validity" of his appointment to pastor the Basilica of St. Mary Major? Where do you draw the line? Does the crime have to be public and notorious, or could it be like the one Judas Iscariot committed in his heart when he left the upper room to go and betray Our Lord? If a silent mortal sin is sufficient to nullify the sacraments of priests, then who would ever know if they are receiving a "valid" sacrament?

We could go on and on with that one. For example, the bishop moves a priest guilty of pederasty ("pedophilia" is a media-confected misnomer) to a new place where he can persist in his crimes, then the pope moves the bishop away thus enabling his deviance to continue, and meanwhile, the pope who enabled the bishop to perpetrate corruption dies and is popularly acclaimed "a saint." Which level of crime is greater, the first, the second, or the third? Are all three actions equally "invalid" by dint of the associated notorious scandal? Does the society that makes acclamations of sainthood under such clouds of title lose its "validity" as a society??

On the other hand, if your comment was intended to draw attention to the separation of the power of the minister from the guilt (and just consequence) due to his crime, that's a whole other topic. Is every deviant prelate (or priest) above public scrutiny when his superior scuttles him away and reappoints him as if to excuse his defection?

Is every such case at least worthy of our disinterest, such that we would continue in our manifest error?


11 posted on 04/11/2005 12:26:42 PM PDT by donbosco74 (Sancte Padre Pio, ora pro nobis, nunc et in hora mortis nostrae, Amen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: A.A. Cunningham
A sentiment echoed yesterday by Raymond Arroyo and Father Neuhaus on EWTN.

I thought it ill-considered at the time -- seriously stupid for Catholic journalists presenting themselves to the world as Vaticanisti. "The Vatican's decision"? Who would that be? The pope is dead. All curial appointment are expired. No one at the Vatican is making decisions except about matters where they have an exclusive prerogative. Cardinal Ratzinger's funeral Mass was celebrated in Latin, presumably because it was his Mass and he wanted it that way. Similarly, Cardinal Law is Archpriest of his basilica and until there's a new pope, he answers to no one. Should he have stepped aside in the interest of humility and good taste? Sure, but if he had humility and good taste he wouldn't have accepted the position at St. Mary Major in the first place.

12 posted on 04/11/2005 12:27:53 PM PDT by Romulus (Golly...suddenly I feel strangely SEDEVACANTIST!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: donbosco74
Why was he provided with such a prestigious post? Why was he awarded a generous salary and a cushy apartment while his abandoned Boston has to close down parishes to pay off the lawsuits?

The Archpriest of a Roman basilica doesn't get a generous salary. It's a retirement post. And though it's prestigious by comparison to the way most priests live, it isn't by comparison to his last job. Even if people outside the Vatican don't get it, those on the inside understand that Law's no longer a player. From being the metropolitan archbishop of one of the richest and most influential dioceses in the world, he's been reduced to a glorified parish pastor. He's come down in the world, even if the world doesn't see it.

Yes, he does have a swell apartment. I suspect I've seen it (while it was inhabited by a prelate who's since passed away), and it's better than he deserves.

13 posted on 04/11/2005 12:35:31 PM PDT by Romulus (Golly...suddenly I feel strangely SEDEVACANTIST!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: donbosco74
IMHO Cardinal Law should be in jail, which he probably would be had he remained stateside and was not whisked away to Rome.
14 posted on 04/11/2005 12:41:44 PM PDT by murphE (Never miss an opportunity to kiss the hand of a holy priest.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: A.A. Cunningham

>>"The Vatican's decision to have Law celebrate the Mass was inappropriate."<<

I'm sorry, but that's just lame talk. He is celebrating the mess because he is the Archpriest of St. Mary Major, and as such, his appointment to that post was an action that carried with it the known fact that he would be the one to conduct the liturgical rites when this event comes up. There are other things for him to do there, too. Are those things also "inappropriate?"

This is just one dot on the radar screen.

Appointments have consequences. Rule changes effect years of fallout. Tampering with liturgical traditions sets a course for sometimes uncharted territory. Tampering with dogma destroys the Faith.

The inappropriate thing was to give Law ANY position of authority or influence. He should have been sent off to a remote and secure monastery to do penance in SILENCE for the rest of his days, if the salvation of his soul (and the preservation of the Faith) was of any concern.

In retrospect, this whole affair carries with it the pallid odium of "grave" effect.

How much more of its ilk will we be subject to, is the question.


15 posted on 04/11/2005 12:50:48 PM PDT by donbosco74 (Sancte Padre Pio, ora pro nobis, nunc et in hora mortis nostrae, Amen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: donbosco74
I think enough is enough.

He's been publicly scourged in the press. (A punishment the secularists gleefully administered.) He was once the Archbishop of the preeminent diocese of the United States, now he's the equivalent of a parish priest. It's not a cushy job, either. He's expected to be a fund-raiser, which is penitential, because he is equally infamous among the Italians, and now he has to go to them with his hand out all the time. It's a daily humiliation.

And believe it or not, Bernard Law does not have horns or a forked tale. Before a few years ago, he had a long tenure of respectable service to the Church. Without him, we wouldn't have the Catechism. Alas, he was the appointed fall guy for the American bishops. He failed miserably in his duty, but so did many of his confreres. Most of them have sinned, but only one of them has had to pay.

Remember Rembert Weakland? Is he eviscerated in the international media? How many people outside Milwaukee even know who he is, or what he did? The guy selling hotdogs on the street corner on campus knows who Bernard Law is, and his children's children will probably know enough to spit on the man's memory.

He didn't get to say this Mass because somebody was doing him a favour. They were following protocol, and he was up. But there's a big to do, because people wait around, licking their lips at the chance to humiliate the man some more. For everyone's sakes, as far as Cardinal Law is personally concerend, its time to let it go.
16 posted on 04/11/2005 12:53:20 PM PDT by Lilllabettt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lilllabettt

We ought to forgive and forget, huh? Would you like to have your son or daughter left alone with him or with a priest under his authority? How many problems do we want coming out of the same factory before we shut it down? It's time to let it go: on and on?


17 posted on 04/11/2005 1:38:34 PM PDT by donbosco74 (Sancte Padre Pio, ora pro nobis, nunc et in hora mortis nostrae, Amen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: donbosco74
He is celebrating the mess

He created a mess in that cesspool known as the Archdiocese of Boston. If Bernard had any sense he would have yielded to another Cardinal to celebrate the Mass but we all know that he doesn't.

18 posted on 04/11/2005 3:43:30 PM PDT by A.A. Cunningham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: donbosco74

I just was to reply to part of your argument. Even if a priest has a mortal sin on his soul, the Sacraments he preforms are still valid. Now, doing so creats another mortal sin for the priest but not for the people who recieve the Sacraments from the priests.

Even if the priest was not validly ordained (and thus not a priest) but gave the appearance to most people of being so, the Sacraments would not be valid Sacraments but God would still give the same graces to the laypeople because His graces are not constrained by Sacraments. So you don't have to worry about if your Confession or Wedding was valid, etc.


19 posted on 04/11/2005 4:27:26 PM PDT by ndkos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: donbosco74

As Catholic Christians, we are obligated to forgive. Granted, that can be incredibly difficult, but speaking from experience, prayer helps a lot. I'll keep you in my prayers.


20 posted on 04/11/2005 5:01:17 PM PDT by GrannyML
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-25 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson