Posted on 09/13/2011 2:13:58 PM PDT by NYer
I suspect the bishop got wind of it, saw that it would further erode his efforts to control these folks, and tried to head them off at the pass. >>>
ok, then you do agree that pfl tried to pull a fast one.
No, I think that it is more likely that the bishop is trying to pull a fast one. I think that Priests for Life probably had this in the works for some time, that it's perfectly legitimate, but it's getting under the skin of the bishop, for one reason or another.
I think he tried to throw a you-know-what in the punch bowl, and was likely taken aback that Priests for Life didn't let his poor behavior interfere with their plans.
This would be a case of he-said/he-said, and would require much time and effort to figure out who was at fault, if not for the audited financials by a certified public accounting firm.
That the bishop made certain allegations that are directly confuted by the mere existence of audited financials tells me that, at least with regard to one very important element of the story, the bishop is probably telling falsehoods.
Thus, those who appear to be telling the truth at this time - the folks who run Priests for Life - get some benefit of the doubt, and the fellow who appears to be making false statements does not.
We'll see if things change over time.
sitetest
“...is the day before Fr. Pavone was suspended.”
By the way, to make clear, Fr. Pavone’s priestly faculties are not suspended. His work with Priests for Life, and his permission to work outside the diocese in which he is currently incardinated, are suspended.
Fr. Pavone is still a priest in good standing, a point obscured by your statement.
sitetest
ok, now you are picking at straws, twisting things and not sticking to the subject at hand, where did I say his "priestly" faculties have been suspended.. Please, give it up already.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2777824/posts?page=4#4 From LIFESITE NEWS
Note: Read Fr. Pavone’s complete statement regarding the decision to suspend him from public ministry here.
Your Eminences and Your Excellencies,
I have decided to suspend Father Frank A. Pavone from public ministry outside of the Diocese of Amarillo to take effect on September 13, 2011.
BTW, I'm glad you agreed that pfl tried to pull a fast one..
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2777824/posts?page=41#41
Even the headline is disingenuous:
“Full statement from Bishop Zurek regarding decision to suspend Fr. Pavone’s public ministry”
When what the bishop actually did was:
“I have decided to suspend Father Frank A. Pavone from public ministry outside of the Diocese of Amarillo to take effect on September 13, 2011.”
Thus, I'm not “picking at straws” (whatever that means). Rather, I'm being accurate. Fr. Pavone is not suspended. His faculties are intact. Merely, his permission to operate outside his diocese is suspended. Which is the usual status for most priests - they do not have a public ministry outside their own diocese or order.
As well, this is a falsehood:
“BTW, I'm glad you agreed that pfl tried to pull a fast one..”
That was your misinterpretation of what I actually said. Please retract your falsehood. I've already corrected you once, responding that I thought that if anyone is trying to “pull a fast one,” it is the bishop.
sitetest
Can you clarify this? I just don't understand your meaning.
I am also in the Philly diocese. If my memory serves, we had the Pennsylvania Catholic Conference of Bishops' voters' guides in all the bulletins that year. The USCCB voters' guide is typically garbage and filled with seamless garment crap. The PCCB guide was vastly superior.
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.