Bishop Zurek ignores plea to let Father Pavone speak at International Pro-Life Youth Conference
No one questions whether Bishop Patrick Zurek had the authority to place Father Frank Pavone on forced hiatus.
Good people do question whether the bishop’s decision was warranted.
That dispute aside, the bishop certainly must have realized that to abruptly and without warning bar Father Pavone from fulfilling his pro-life speaking obligations for an undefined period would create havoc among churches and pro-life groups planning and publicizing those events.
It seems to me a compassionate spiritual leader would attempt to mitigate the damage his decision caused to innocent bystanders.
One important event caught in the crossfire was the International Pro-Life Youth Conference, scheduled for this weekend, November 11-13, in Los Angeles.
Father Pavone has been advertised as this event’s keynote speaker for months.
I just learned tonight that the youth leaders in charge of the IPLYC have been attempting to reach out to Bishop Zurek to secure his permission to allow Father Pavone to attend this event, and the bishop will not respond. Here is a note I received from Rev. Jeff White, founder of the Survivors, one of the host groups.
Hi Jill,
I am frustrated and I think something needs to be said publicly.
Bishop Zurek, Fr. Pavone’s bishop, did not respond to this letter, even though it was sent twice overnight personal. He has not returned the phone calls to his office.
I find it appalling he would not be courteous enough for someone in his office to let these young people know what is going on. I know a lot of Catholics feel everyone should just be quiet but is the Bishop above just being decent to a group of young people?
I will go on the record saying his deaf ear to the young organizers of the conference and his high-handed way he has stripped the pro-life movement of one of its prominent leaders is inexcusable.
The attached letter was signed by 20 or so young people, but I removed their names since my sending it out to the public is not what they agreed to.
The letter, linked above, is both sad and infuriating. It is just WRONG for Bishop Zurek to ignore and hurt these pro-life youth. Here’s a poignant excerpt:
In fact, many people are coming just to hear Fr. Pavone speak. Every day we receive more and more calls from pro-life groups and parishes asking whether or not he will be there. We have tried to remain calm in this matter, however, we have no idea what we will do if you do not allow him to come – not just because he is our main speaker, or because we think his presence will draw a large crowd. In all truth, we simply have no idea how we will look into the face of the youth, especially those in the Catholic Church, and tell them that the leader who has inspired so many of us to act on behalf of our preborn brothers and sisters will not be coming.
You see, it is not just the conference that will suffer if Fr. Pavone is denied attendance; it is the heart and spirit of a young generation that will be broken. And not broken by the outside world, which we already know to be evil, but broken by the one institution in this present darkness where we look to for leadership, refuge and inspiration: the Church.
This is just WRONG.
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
Power corrupts.
May I ask what contingency plans PFL has had in place in the event that something had ever happened to Fr. Pavone that would have prevented him from attending a previously scheduled event?
Things happen–people die or fall seriously ill–and a responsible organization needs to have a contingency plan in place in order to deal with those events when they happen. If PFL has not had a plan in place then it is a sign (to me) that they don’t have some essential parts of their corporate plan in place.
Not even the courtesy of a reply? Or a public announcement? Bishop Zurek had no trouble publicly trashing Fr. Pavone’s reputation. He also had no trouble talking to the press to misrepresent why Fr. Pavone was not meeting with him. To whom is Bishop Zurek accountable? It is way past time to turn up the heat on this wayward bishop.
Alienate young people who are active in the Church, then question what can be done to get young people active in the Church… not a real good strategy.
One thing I love about being a Catholic is that it is not about personalities. The Mass is the Mass, the Truth is the Truth, no matter who the priest is. Pro-life commitment based on faithfulness to any particular person is not deep enough to stand the test of time anyway. I pray that no one’s commitment is “broken” by Fr Pavone’s absence at the event, but if it is, it wasn’t that strong to begin with.
Life is sacred, children in the womb deserve protection, no matter who says it.
Susan, you’ve said it better than anyone.
I am frustrated and have to think that this is all about jealousy. Bishops are human beings and capable of being vindictive and jealous. If Father Pavone has done something wrong…..charge him. If he is just jealous of his success…shame on you Bishop. This is a terrible witness to the Catholic Church.
Susan,
The “Boy named Sue” parenting mentality. Boy, I named you Sue cause should be man enough to stand up to the people who treat you like a sissy. Gotcha. What if your local pastor told the pro-life youth they couldn’t hold pro life meetings at the church any more? Would you tell them to just man up and shut up about it? So you think it is ok to place calumny beween the church and the pro-life youth just because they should be able to take it or their conviction wasn’t strong enough to begin with. Sheeshh! You wouldn’t even figure that pastor owed them an explanation as to why they couldn’t use the church for pro-life gatherings any more. Just shut up and fall in line huh.
Bishop Zurek is not telling the youth they cannot have a rally. He has just not said that Fr Pavone can be there.
It is unhealthy for the kids or anyone to base their beliefs on any particular person. All human beings have flaws and failings. Unless their belief in the sanctity of life is an intrinsic belief, when a pro-life leader falls, they will fall with him.
Perhaps the bishop is trying to avoid a “cult of personality.” It seems from the letter sent by the pro-life youth group, there is certainly some evidence of that. To say that the “heart and spirit of a young generation [of prolifers]” will be broken by Fr Pavone’s absence is way over the top.
Calumny is destroying a person’s reputation by making false accusations, and I have seen no evidence of that in this situation.
Love me, hate me, but don’t ignore me.
My issue is not so much that, Susan, as this particular quote which jumped out at me:
“Bishop Zurek, Fr. Pavone’s bishop, did not respond to this letter, even though it was sent twice overnight personal. He has not returned the phone calls to his office.”
It’s called common courtesy.
Calumny is destroying a person’s reputation by making false accusations, and I have seen no evidence of that in this situation.
Susan, he is guilty of the worst kind of calumny. He is destroying the reputation of the church in eyes of Christ’s children.
truthseeker, it doesn’t fit – what false accusations is the Bishop making against the Church? Not calumny.
Maybe you don’t agree with his actions, but you don’t know the whole story. And if his motivation is to protect the faithful from a cult of personality, then maybe he is correct in what he is doing. The over the top reaction on the part of Pavone’s followers kind of proves the point.
Don’t get me wrong. I am very happy for the work that Fr Pavone has done. I have supported him financially and with prayer. I will continue to do so.
But anyone who leaves the Catholic Church because of the actions of a single man has no idea the priceless treasure they had in the first place.
As faithful Catholics, our role should be to mitigate the scandal not to fan the flames.
But anyone who leaves the Catholic Church because of the actions of a single man has no idea the priceless treasure they had in the first place.
Very well said, Susan.
It is very rude of Bishop Zurek not to respond to this group. Given the repeated correspondence, common courtesy dictates that he issue a response either way.
If that answer is “No,” however, people need to realize that Fr. Pavone’s job is the the head of PFL, but his vocation is to be a priest, serving his Church, not as a popular pro-life speaker at youth conferences. That is secondary to his primary role as a priest in the order of Melchizedek. Right now, he’s been ordered to focus on his vocation (although I see via his FB page that he’s still participating in conference calls, planning sessions, etc. for various pro-life activities), not his job.
I admire Fr. Pavone’s dedication to the pro-life cause but I abhor the pervasive attitude of, “Fr. Pavone is the ONLY pro-life warrior out there and he’s the only one who can save babies!!! Bishop Zurek is killing babies by keeping Fr. Pavone in TX!!!!” The rise and fall of the pro-life movement does not hinge on Fr. Pavone. We are ALL warriors, and we have to stand together and fight together. Dissension does nothing but give victory to the Enemy.
Susan,
Allowing bishop Zurek’s behaviour to continue this way without addressing it does scandalize the church. And it is detrimental to the pro-life youth who deserve a thoughtful response. You say we don’t have all the information and I agree. The bishop could have put together a thoughtful response that reinforces the pro-life youth and their mission in conjunction with the church but he didn’t. The cause for this scandal sits squarely upon bishop Zurek and those who support his arrogance and lack of consideration for the children of Christ who went to him for an explanation of why he is not allowing Fr. Pavone to speak at their rally. And I pray my children look up to a man like Fr. Pavone. His ‘cult of personality’ is to be so filled with the Holy Spirit that you fill others with the fire in Jesus’ mission to protect the sanctity of the womb here on earth. That same Holy Spirit fills them with their desire to hear him speak. The bishop NEEDS TO RESPOND with a Christocentric rebuttal NOW cause he is scandalizing the church in the eyes of Christ’s children. What information we don’t have is due to bishop Zurek’s arrogance and sequestering of Fr. Pavone. There is no denying those are the facts. Fr. Pavone appealed to the Vatican and because of that he could have disregarded the bishop and went about his business; but he did not out of deference to his love for the church and his not wanting to cause scandal within the church. From what I see his actions have been impeccable. I cannot say the same for the bishop.
I answered that poll about this on Jill’s web site a few weeks ago as ‘a catholic without enough information’. If I was polled today my response would be changed to ‘bishop Zurek is not acting in a fair and reasonable way’.
Maybe Bishop Zurek has not responded because he felt that nothing he could say would satisfy those who disagree with his actions.
Susan – I have been trying to be patient and trust the bishop, but he is making it very very hard to do so. I have been reading the comments with great interest. I can not let your last comment go by without answering. You really think that it is OK for him to refuse to respond because people may not like what he says??? Being a leader is not about being liked. It is about doing the right thing for the right reasons and doing so with compassion. And failing to respond because you figure nothing you can say will satisfy people is complete baloney. I can accept pretty much everything that the bishop has done up until now, and I can accept that there is more to the story, and I am willing to give the benefit of the doubt to the bishop. But enough is enough. He needs to say what is going on, and he needs to say it now.
Susan,
Then let them disagree. But there will be those who might see his point of view and agree with him, provided he makes his case.
I see a pattern: requests for the bishop for certain information, and there is either no response or a terse one.
Not exactly a vote of confidence.
Plus, this particular request involves youth, so I would expect a thoughtful approach.
Of course, we must accept on faith the statement that the Bishop didn’t respond, I guess. It’s always possible that he responded and when the response wasn’t what the organizers wanted a decision was made by someone to try and ‘turn up the heat’ on the Bishop.
Good point, ann70821.
I guess my response would be:
A) someone call the bishop’s office and confirm whether a response was given and
B) if it was given and Rev. Jeff White was lying, then call Rev. Jeff out.
But I guess we won’t know.
See, this is what I’m talking about. All this could have been prevented had there been EFFECTIVE communication from the get-go.
But it hasn’t, so look where we are.
Good grief.
Carder, even if the Bishop came out today and said he responded–how does he prove it to anyone’s satisfaction?
It’s really the same with the release of the letter that started all of this. There’s no proof that the Bishop released it. After all, it went to all members of the USCCB, any one of whom could have released it. Most members of the USCCB will have at least one staff member who handles correspondence, so add another group of people into the mix. You say they lack motive?
Motive is an interesting thing. Seems to me that the person who benefitted from the release of that letter wasn’t the Bishop–and I’m pretty sure that he knew exactly what the reaction to his letter would be from the general pro-life public.
Things have been relatively quiet on this front lately. I’ve received fewer raging emails about
‘freeing Fr. Frank’, I’ve read fewer posts condemning the Bishop for his actions. And now this issue pops up…I just have to wonder if everything is exactly as it’s being presented.
I admire Fr. Pavone’s dedication to the pro-life cause but I abhor the pervasive attitude of, “Fr. Pavone is the ONLY pro-life warrior out there and he’s the only one who can save babies!!! Bishop Zurek is killing babies by keeping Fr. Pavone in TX!!!!” The rise and fall of the pro-life movement does not hinge on Fr. Pavone. We are ALL warriors, and we have to stand together and fight together.
JoAnna,
Point taken. I would have been just as happy or happier if Bishop Zurek had sent a reply that he was going to speak at the rally instead and he wowed the youth. Unfortunately God graces each of us with certain abilities and not everyone is equally capable of answering the calling that Fr. Pavone has answered.
So maybe he responded and Rev White is lying? Please. You say we should give the bishop the benefit of the doubt, but we won’t give the same consideration to Rev White? All I can say is that based on a complete lack of thoughtful clear communication from Bp Zurek regarding any of what is going on since the beginning, I have to believe he is giving them the same treatment he is giving all of us – the silent treatment.
truthseeker, it’s equally possible that God is calling Fr. Pavone to something other than pro-life work, through the Bishop. It’s also possible that the Bishop is acting selfishly or wrongly in this regard, and ignoring the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Or perhaps a mixture of both is going on. But acting as if Fr. Pavone is the end-all and be-all of the pro-life movement is not helping matters (this is a generality, not directed at anyone specifically).
As Ann said above, PFL and/or the youth organization in question should have had a contingency plan in place in case Fr. Pavone was unable to speak due to illness, injury, death in the family, inclement weather, etc. The fact that they apparently don’t seems due to poor management.
Bryan, for the sake of discussion–
Let’s say that a press release appears today from the Bishop’s office saying that he did, in fact, respond to the letters and spoke to Rev. White on the telephone about the situation. Will you believe him, or will you need to see ‘proof’ that the conversation took place–the Bishop’s telephone records, perhaps? Or will the Bishop have to produce an audiotape of the conversation?
Otherwise we’ve just got another situation of ‘he said-he said’, and once again the situation is thrust onto the front burner.
Again I ask the question: Who benefits from this? Think about that question, seriously, and maybe you’ll consider giving the Bishop the benefit of the doubt.
If Fr. Pavone had died in a car accident on the way to the conference they would eulogize him. If he was ill they would have prayed for him. If the weather had kept him away they would have understood why he was not there. But nobody has a contingency plan for losing somebody special in their lives and not being given an explanation as to why. So the point you are making here is not really germaine to this situation is it?
Truthseeker,
No one is preventing the young people from praying for Fr. Pavone. In fact, they should be encouraged to pray for Fr. Pavone as he goes through this period of reflection.
And they haven’t lost ‘somebody special in their lives’ without an explanation. The Bishop made it quite clear that Fr. Pavone was being called back to Amarillo for a period of prayer and reflection. That is the explanation–like it or not.
I have been giving him the benefit of the doubt – for a long time, like I said in my first post. But as I also said, he is making it increasingly difficult to do so.
Can we step back and look at why we think it’s a good idea to publicly question the motives of the bishop? Why we think we have a right to an explanation for a confidential personnel decision? Why we are so quick to point fingers at those in the Church? The Church doesn’t need any outside enemies; there are plenty who are willing to tear her down from within.
I think the Bishop, out of courtesy, should respond to the letter and explain why Fr. Pavone is forbidden to leave his diocese for speaking engagements set up long ago. However, I think it is an exaggeration to say ” it is the heart and spirit of a young generation that will be broken………. broken by the one institution in this present darkness where we look to for leadership, refuge and inspiration: the Church.”. The Church is more than the Bishop or Fr. Pavone. I am fairly certain both of these persons would agree that the Church is more than they are individually.
Thank you, Susan. I agree with you 100%.
David, why do you assume that the Bishop didn’t respond? Just because someone has said that he didn’t?
And really–unless someone has been completely out-of-the-loop of pro-life media than it shouldn’t be a surprise that Fr. Pavone isn’t free to travel out-of-state right now and why. (No explanation beyond being called back to Amarillo for prayer and reflection is necessary, no matter how much someone may want more of an explanation.)
I have not questioned the bishop’s motives. I am, however, questioning the wisdom of a lack of thoughtful communication. Leadership is not only about doing the right thing for the right reason, it is about doing it in the right way. And that includes communicating effectively with those you are leading and who will be greatly affected by your decisions. And I hold that in that sense Bp Zurek is failing. I would even be happy if he would just say “I am sorry that I can not discuss the particulars of the situation. I understand how upsetting this must be to many of you, and I regret the difficulty my decision may be causing. Please allow Fr Pavone and I to work through these circumstances and trust that we are both committed to doing what is best for all. And until then, please allow us to keep these issues between us.” He does not have to explain, justify or provide any confidential details. But as a leader myself, in my home, in my work, in my church and in my community, I understand that you can not just ignore the people who are concerned about and affected by your decisions. If you do, this is how it turns out. And to a large degree, I am not as upset about Fr Pavone’s situation as I am about how Bp Zurek has exacerbated the situation by providing what I find to be completely unacceptable leadership in a difficult situation.
Finally, as to why I would assume he did not respond, I assume so because it seems right in line with his other actions (or inaction) up to this point. If he had made any decent attempt to communicate directly with the people being affected by this decision, then he might get a bit more consideration, at least from me.
Agreed Wendell. The leader of the Church is Jesus Christ and I would sooner picket Bishop Zurek’s office then leave the Church.
“And they haven’t lost ‘somebody special in their lives’ without an explanation”
You cannot possibly judge that. Maybe you meant to say that Fr. Pavone is not somebody special in your life?
truthseeker:
As I said, they haven’t lost him without an explanation. The explanation was issued on September 13 when the Bishop called him back to Amarillo for prayer and reflection.
And in fact, they haven’t lost him at all–I’m quite sure that they can reach him via Facebook, Twitter, email, or even snail mail.
And I never made a determination about his importance to anyone else. Perhaps he’s important, perhaps he’s just a celebrity. I have no way of knowing, and neither do you.
“It’s really the same with the release of the letter that started all of this. There’s no proof that the Bishop released it. ”
Really Anne?
Maybe this followup statement from his diocese should put that theory to rest:
http://www.amarillodiocese.org/pictures/Bishop/Public-Statement-regarding-Fr.jpg
No explanation beyond being called back to Amarillo for prayer and reflection is necessary, no matter how much someone may want more of an explanation.
I was watching a cop show the other night and one of the cops had turned on another cop who was acting unjustly and a third cop said to the whistlebolwer.
“Loyalty before everything but honor.”
What I took away from that is that ‘blind’ loyalty brings dishonor to the very group of people you think you are supporting. Just cause you don’t need an explanation beyond ‘just because’ Ana; does not mean nobody else needs one.
How does that accomplish Christ’s mission to bring all men to Jesus and make disciples? How does that get people in touch with Jesus? How does that lead people to the Church? It doesn’t. On the contrary it causes dissention in the Church and leads people away from the Church. How does that kind of attitude create zeal for our Father’s house? How does that kind of attitude create zeal for the salvation of your brothers and sisters? How is the world going to find love through you if you treat them like that? How does that make Jesus present in this place? If a pastor is turning people away or offending them then it is no good.
I don’t have a clue as to whom the aggrieved party is in this mess. And i won’t rehash the agonizing details ad infinitum. However, this mess is on appeal to Rome and I am going to be very interested to see where the chips fall. Until then, I would hope to see as much charity for Father Pavone as for Bishop Zanek. The sin of detraction against any clergyman is abhorrent.
Carder, please show me where the Bishop says his office released the original letter. I’m a pretty good reader and I don’t see anything in that letter saying he released the first letter.
But once it was released (sorry–“leaked” is the way CNS described it, I should be more precise in my wording) I’m not surprised that the Bishop’s office felt a need to issue a public statement. Here’s a link to Jill’s article using that exact wording: http://www.jillstanek.com/2011/09/bishops-harsh-letter-against-fr-pavone/
And Carder, it’s Ann, not Anne. English, not French.
Perhaps the good Bishop feels that all of this conjecture is not a matter for public dissemination. Perhaps the good Bishop does not want to involve himself in publicly discussing this situation any more than he already has.
Let things work out between the Bishop and Fr. Pavone. It may very well be that none of the “background” in this controversy will ever be made public and maybe that is the proper conclusion to this whole gaggle.
gaggle
vb
1 intr (of geese) to cackle
n
2 a flock of geese
3 Informal a disorderly group of people
4 a gabbling or cackling sound
I wonder if anyone check to see that this was the very first International Pro Life Confernece for youth at least in LA. How many people actually signed up for the conference. I think Bishop Zurek made it very clear from the beginning that Fr. Pavone was not going anywhere when he returned to the diocese. He does after all have the authority and the responsibility for Father Pavone. The conference committee had plenty of time to contact another keynote speaker. This frequently happens and I am sure there are others that could have stepped in especially members of Priests for Life. The other part of this is that we are called to support and involve ourselves in activities that promote the Pro Life movement whether that involve a big name like Fr. Pavone or not…. Rather than persecute the Bishop who is trying to handle a situation that has gotten out of control precisely because of Fr. Pavone’s “celebrity” status; we need to offer prayers for the Bishop and Father Pavone and back away from having “our wishes or our will” followed. We are all called to be like Christ who suffered the humiliations; accusations and beatings – in silence whether in the “right” or not.
Eremeta,
Jesus also said “I have come to cast fire upon the earth and Oh how I long that it were already ignited”.
From day one I suspected this was all about finances. Bishop Zurek said as much in his initial leters when he talked about Fr. Pavone’s complete lack of response to the bishop’s requests for financial statements. That statement by Bishop Zurek it seems has been shown to be dishonest. My understanding is that PFL has turned over the requested financial statements. I wish it were different but this is what we have in front of us. Silence is not always appropriate at times when you are seeking the truth.
The conference committee had plenty of time to contact another keynote speaker. This frequently happens and I am sure there are others that could have stepped in especially members of Priests for Life.
That is a point taken Eremeta. Where is the bishop of PFL on this? Perhaps silent as bishop Zurek and both waiting for the call from Rome?
Brad: gaggle
vb
1 intr (of geese) to cackle
n
2 a flock of geese
3 Informal a disorderly group of people
4 a gabbling or cackling sound
;) :)
Yes, Truthseeker, part of this is about finances. However, all is not ‘exactly’ in order in the PFL financial house. If you are interested, you can read these articles for information about the problems.
Im my career I have been a funder–I’ve run both public and private grant funds, making the final funding decisions. I will be honest and say that if an application came to me from another organization with these same problems I wouldn’t have funded them.
http://ncronline.org/news/politics/priests-life-finacial-trouble
http://amarillo.com/news/local-news/2011-10-15/records-reveal-growing-tensions#.TrriRFZSlFb
Perhaps the good Bishop feels that all of this conjecture is not a matter for public dissemination. Perhaps the good Bishop does not want to involve himself in publicly discussing this situation any more than he already has.
Brad,
I say to you what I said to Ana,
How does his silence accomplish Christ’s mission to bring all men to Jesus and make disciples?
How does his silence get people in touch with Jesus?
How does his silence lead people to the Church?
How does his silence leads people to the Church?
How does his silence create zeal for our Father’s house?
How does his silence create zeal for the salvation of your brothers and sisters?
How does the world find love through you if you treat them like that?
How does his silence make Jesus present in this place?
If a pastor is turning people away or offending them then it is no good.
Eremeta,
I have to disagree with you on the silence part. I do not believe there is any scandal here and Fr. Pavone did nothing wrong. He is being held for ransom. The diocese of Amarillo wants a piece of the pie. The bishop should be public about it (maybe he would if he could). PFL owes all they have to mother Church and in my estimation the diocese of Amarillo is deserving of a piece of the pie and we move on together. In any case; silence and back room financial deals are not flattering fodder to make public affairs when they are made by the ones running the house of Jesus Christ. So the bishop is doing neither himself or the Church any favors when they go silent and do not even respond to the petitions of the faithful.
Brad,
Perhaps by living the example of not returning insults with insults. Perhaps by allowing all who need to see him as an unfair administrator without adding to the hard feelings by making more public statements. Perhaps by asking for prayers rather than support.
Ann,
thanks for those links. I will look at them later when I have time. Gotta go now. I hope we can chalk this up to ‘no harm no foul growing pains now lets move on’ cause it is getting ugly fast.
Truthseeker,
Here’s one more that you should look at.
http://amarillo.com/news/local-news/2011-09-24/pavones-group-unclear-revocation#.Trruc1ZSlFY
I hope you have a peaceful evening.
Thanks Ann for those links. One thing I did find is that I was mistaken when I said:
“PFL owes all they have to mother Church and in my estimation the diocese of Amarillo is deserving of a piece of the pie and we move on together. ”
I found out that PFL is not legally a Catholic church mission. So that changes things quite a bit in my eyes. And it changes them in support of Bishop Zurek. They should disband the current Priests for Life and replace it with new Priests for Life as Church mission. Either that or change their name/brand.
Many of the comments refer to Fr. Pavone as a “celebrity”. That term betrays how they feel about him. Fr. Pavone is not a celebrity; just a Roman Catholic priest who felt called to the pro-life ministry. PFL will continue without him as there are other priests who work for the organization. As for me, I’m doubling my monthly donation to them and will continue to donate to American Life League, National Right to Life, etc. etc. And many other catholic organizations. I don’t need CCHD to be a middle man.
Truthseeker,
I agree!
One thing that is becoming clearer is that some of the Roman Catholic Hierarchy is corrupt to the bone. Catholics have never been able to clean up their church completely, as they tolerate bad priests, bad bishops and unholy living.
I have a lot of respect for the average faithful Catholic, but very little for some of the leadership.
The Reformation tried to address sinful living, but it went nowhere and is still going on today.
Apparently Bishop Zurek only recently acknowledged receiving the financial documents. Only took 5 years… Hopefully it doesn’t take that long for all this to be settle.
Cliff,
Do you have anything to add to this particular discussion, any documented example of corruption or unholy living on the part of the Bishop or Fr. Pavone? Or do you just want to post generic anti-Catholic rants?
hows that audit going of PFL bishop zurek? its taking quite a long time.
@ann70821 – There’s nothing anti-Catholic to say there are some in the hierarchy of the Church, in and of itself. There have been documented cases of it over the centuries. People seem to forget that these men are still men when see a title. People also seem to forget that these men are not the Church, especially not when they do something out of selfishness, and calling these people out is not anti-Catholic. That being said…
@Cliff – I wouldn’t take it any further than what you just said. You qualified your statements pretty well, I think.
Ann,
I think the Catholic Church should do everything possible to contribute to the success of PFL. But I do understand their concern about a need for oversight and how messy it could get having a Catholic priest participating in a high profile of an organization that they have no financial or legal control over.
One thing that is becoming clearer is that some of the Roman Catholic Hierarchy is corrupt to the bone. Catholics have never been able to clean up their church completely, as they tolerate bad priests, bad bishops and unholy living.
And that is relevant to this thread how Cliff? Maybe as justification for their actions. It would seem to me that the Bishop’s actions in this case are to prevent the type of corruption and unholy living that could invade the Church without oversight. By your comment one would think that you should understand their concern about a need for oversight and how messy it could get having a Catholic priest participating in a high profile of an organization that they have no financial or legal control over. But maybe you were just trying to take a dig on the Catholic church huh?
Seth, your comment to Cliff that he qualified his statement pretty well was far to kind. Unless you can explain to me exactly how that was relevant to this thread.
Truthseeker,
I agree with you re: the Catholic Church should do everything possible to make PFL successful. With oversight, of course.
@truthseeker – “One thing that is becoming clearer is that some of the Roman Catholic Hierarchy is corrupt to the bone. Catholics have never been able to clean up their church completely, as they tolerate bad priests, bad bishops and unholy living.
I have a lot of respect for the average faithful Catholic, but very little for some of the leadership.
The Reformation tried to address sinful living, but it went nowhere and is still going on today.”
He consistently placed qualifiers in his statements. Some does not equal all, or even the majority. I’ll admit the the second sentence was unfair when he said Catholic “tolerate” corruption. To me it simply showed he is not Catholic and does not understand how those cases are dealt with it.
As to how this is relevant, I think what he is says is that he sees is a corrupt man, who in this particular case happens to be a bishop.
And I’m still waiting to see some example (hopefully you can document it) that the Bishop in this case is corrupt.
So Cliff, would you be so kind as to provide me with your example of the Bishop’s corruption? Otherwise I’ll continue to believe that this is just a generic anti-Catholic rant from a troll.
I think by some of the comments that you don’t take kindly to a little constructive criticism? You need to be aware that there is very much a difference between vitroil directed the church by her enemies and by some who are allies with the Catholic Church. I have been involved in the pro-life movement for many year and have seen firsthand the hands off approach used by the majority of Bishops, and how the parishes operate at arm’s length of anything pro-life. In my part of the country, one could wear out three pairs of shoes looking for any type of support or mention of anything pro-life in the local parishes. When one never hears a peep, we are led to conclude that they are apathetic to us.
In the case of Father Pavone, they all at once got involved with the smell of money, why the sudden interest??
If you are seeking documented evidence check out Judie Brown’s book: “SAVING THOSE DAMNED CATHOLICS.”
As to how this is relevant, I think what he is says is that he sees is a corrupt man, who in this particular case happens to be a bishop. s to how this is relevant, I think what he is says is that he sees is a corrupt man, who in this particular case happens to be a bishop.
That is my point Cliff. The Bishop’s actions do not appear to be corrupt at all. Just the opposite. They are trying to prevent scandal within the church by addressing a need for oversight to minimize a messy situation where a Catholic priest is participating in a high profile of an organization that they have no financial or legal control over. You’d think anybody concerned about corruption in the church would be thanking him for that.
I still think the Bishop lack of response to the letter from the pro-life youth brings scandal to the church. But that is a weakness in the Church’s leadership abilities and not an act of corruption.
Close to a month ago, Bishop Zurek issued a letter stating that Father Pavone is remaining in Amarillo indefinitely, and that he remains suspended from his duties at PFL.
Now, whatever one thinks about this situation, Bishop Zurek issued a clarification on it several weeks ago. I don’t think that he needs to respond to every group or person who writes to ask whether he is going to make an exception.
The bishop’s letter was clear and unambiguous. The organizers of this event should have begun lining up a potential replacement on September 12, and then gone ahead with the invitation when Bishop Zurek issued his clarification letter almost a month ago.
Father Pavone has repeatedly stated that PFL does all of its negotiations with bishops in private, so taking him at his word, none of us knows what is really going on. In the interim, Bishop Zurek was crystal clear in his last public letter about Father Pavone’s status, so it’s not very reasonable to bash the bishop for not writing individuals to reiterate the plain meaning of his public letter.
My concern in all of this is that the opprobrium being leveled at Bishop Zurek will make other bishops less likely to incardinate Father Pavone in their diocese, making this a longer and messier situation than it ever needed to be.
Susan’s commentary contains much wisdom here.
In the case of Father Pavone, they all at once got involved with the smell of money, why the sudden interest??
Are you joking? From what I am reading about PFL financials they are in the hole. And that is fine; a charity should not be in the business of making money anyway. Tell me how much money has the Catholic church pocketed so far from PFL; or quit your slander.
And what part of the country are you from? We were all over the 40 days where I live and we kept the picket signs in the rectory. So slander again? Why do you feel a need to attack the Catholic church in order to try and justify your position on the PFL? Can’t you see when people like you claim to stand for PLF and attack the Catholic church it actually has the opposite of the intended effect and justify’s the Bishops hesitancy in allowing Fr. Pavone to participate?
Again Cliff,
Tell me how much money has the Catholic church pocketed so far from PFL; or bite your tongue and quit your slander.
I don’t think that he needs to respond to every group or person who writes to ask whether he is going to make an exception.
That is where we disagree then Dr. Nadal. I think it is an obligation for the Church to respond/address concerns from the faithful; even if just to send out his previous correspondence. And I don’t see the pro-life youth day as ‘every group or person” Ignoring them and assuming they are aware of a previous letter is terrible practice and will only cause people to stray away from the church. Clarification and response are what is called for and what will bring people to the Church.
What I am really scratching my head over is the fact that if there were any financial improprieties (hope I spelled that right … I’m half groggy but couldnt help but post my comments after reading a few written here) at all, I am so sure the IRS would be pounding on the doors … or windows … or the fire escape :) of Priests For Life. Also, I’m sure actual proof of any financial scandalous affairs would be also blasted on the news.
But right now, all I keep seeing are old news of 2 months ago being resurrected just to make “noise” on the blogosphere.
I must say that out of this entire article the following point puts my head to spin:
I quote “The letter, linked above, is both sad and infuriating. It is just WRONG for Bishop Zurek to ignore and hurt these pro-life youth.”
You want to know why? All this time I had been pointing a finger at the wrong person but now realize that this matter has nothing to do with a simple priest.
A simple response would have been good!!!
Was going through some of the older articles and blog posts about this and I found, in this very blog, a comment that was very interesting. Apparently it’s from a Catholic priest about his own experience with Bishop Zurek.
http://www.jillstanek.com/2011/09/bishops-harsh-letter-against-fr-pavone/
Famijoly says:
September 13, 2011 at 10:29 pm
Patrick J. Zurek is a careerist clergyman, a climber, in other words. Ordained to the priesthood for the Diocese of Austin by Pope Paul VI in 1975, Fr. Zurek rose to prominence when Bishop John McCarthy appointed him Director of Vocations in 1987. Over the next 11 years, Zurek was the gatekeeper for who got into the seminary, who continued, and who was ordained to the priesthood. He served three years as president of the national association of diocesan vocations directors and networked with priests and bishops across the country. In 1998, he was ordained to the episcopacy and made Auxiliary Bishop of the Archdiocese of San Antonio. In 2007, he was installed as Bishop of Amarillo.
The disparity in tone and content between Bishop Zurek’s letter to the bishops of the United States and those of Fr. Frank Pavone and Fr. David Deibel as chief canonist indicate that Pat Zurek is still using the same passive-aggressive style from the playbook he learned from Bishop McCarthy. Demand repeated accountings. Receive those accountings but do not acknowledge receiving them. Say No when asked if you have more questions. Wait a while. Lower the full weight of your office, accusing the one you want to discipline or expel of non-compliance, adding words publicly that could discredit the targeted individual.
In Austin, Fr. Zurek (with the compliance of Bishop McCarthy) used that game plan against seminarians he wanted to get rid of. Seminarians have neither the standing to challenge that kind of approach. I know. In August 1988, Pat Zurek told me — over the phone — that I would never be a priest. He seemed taken aback when I concluded the phone call with “God bless you, Father.” I wrote him a detailed letter stating the reasons for my confusion over his unilateral decision against positive recommendations of me from people he sought for input. He did not reply. I wrote to Bishop McCarthy, stating the same concerns. The Bishop’s reply rubber-stamped Fr. Zurek’s decision. I attempted to meet with both Fr. Zurek and the Bishop, to no avail. I appealed to both of them that I at least wanted to attempt to understand the reasoning for my categorical dismissal from formation, so that no matter what the future held, I could learn from what he observed. Again to no avail.
I have been a priest of another diocese for 15 years.
As a climber, Patrick Zurek is never satisfied, and now in his early 60s, he feels the tick of the biological clock. With every passing birthday, with every appointment of someone else as Ordinary of a more cosmopolitan diocese or archdiocese, Bishop Zurek’s fear that he has climbed his last ecclesiastical rung increases. That fear is magnified by the fact that the head of Priests for Life, Fr. Frank Pavone, is one of Zurek’s own priests. How Bishop Zurek must fume while he is chief shepherd of the the highly rural Texas Panhandle while one of his presbyters is jet-setting to preaching assignments and parish missions and to tape TV series and programs. Zurek’s personality cannot tolerate a Pavone. And since Zurek is the Bishop and Pavone is one of his priests under obedience, the Bishop will, by golly, show Frankie boy who’s boss.
Notice, too, that Fr. Pavone indicates that upon arrival in Amarillo he will meet with diocesan Vicar for Clergy, not Bishop Zurek himself. To this I would ask my former Vocations Director one question, “Bishop, are you really that busy in the Diocese of Amarillo that you cannot make time to meet MAN TO MAN with one of your own priests in good standing that you publicly excoriated to your brother bishops?”
My prediction: Bishop Zurek will get what he really wants, deep down, and that’s to be rid of a “famous” priest whose very attachment to Amarillo reminds the Bishop of the incompleteness of his climb up the ecclesiastical ladder. And it won’t take long. Another bishop will snap up Fr. Frank Pavone in a heartbeat.
Praised be Jesus Christ now and forevermore!
Bishop Zurek was crystal clear in his last public letter about Father Pavone’s status
In my world the phrase ‘crystal clear’ is not used to describe the word “indefinitely”.
Truthseeker,
When a bishop writes a general letter saying that one of his priests remains suspended from his particular ministry indefinitely, that is a signal to all who may have booked that priest for appearances (especially those in the near future), that the priest will not be meeting those obligations. It’s pretty simple.
A group in Conn. who waited for years to book Father Pavone reached out to another priest and me to cover the two talks Father was supposed to give at their annual conference. It was also understood that if Father was suddenly free, even the day of the conference, that he would be the speaker.
I spoke in his place, and not nearly so eloquently as he would have. We also prayed for Father and Bishop Zurek. The honorarium was donated to charity, as my only intent was to assist the organizers and not profit from Father’s misfortunes.
This youth group has had several weeks in which to book an A-list speaker such as Jill to fill in.
The agony of watching this unfold has been to watch the Bishop and the pro-lifers speaking to two totally different and unrelated realities. He has concerns, and we want Father Pavone back. Having Father come back will come either through the alleviation of those concerns, a successful appeal to Rome, or getting another bishop to take Father Pavone.
In all three cases, a patient silence and face-saving room for the principles to maneuver is the prudent course of action. The longer the lashing out against Bishop Zurek occurs, the more the chances of any three of those eventualities diminishes.
Sometimes less is more.
Caroline,
There have been IRS problems. There are missing tax forms, missing information on tax forms, and a revocation of tax-exempt status for one of the organizations under Fr. Pavone’s umbrella group. Please see this link for more information: http://amarillo.com/news/local-news/2011-09-24/pavones-group-unclear-revocation#.TrtCVFZSlFY
A Deo rex, a rege lex
From the old ox, the young one learns to plow.”; “A good example makes a good job.”
Is this what the Bishop intends to teach pro-life youngsters? Goodness!!! The man has gone MAD!!! First a crazy letter for all to see . . . clearly a platform . . . now what’s up his sleeve!!!
If I may also add, since I have been a donor to Priests For Life for over 7 plus years I wanted to clarify or get to the bottom as to why Bishop Zurek would want to make people STOP donating to them and ask if there was any proof at all of any financial mismanagement.
I was transfered to speak with Deacon Floyd Ashley and when I asked him about it, he told me to read the Amarillo Globe because they had posted an article about the financials of Priests For Life. I asked how that was relevant to my question and he said something along the lines of : just read what was written so you can get clarity on the financials and it is up to you to make a sound judgement.
Well … I read the article.
Nothing.
Not one shred of proof that Fr. Frank pocketed the money. Not one shred of proof that Priests For Life pilfered the money for nefarious deeds.
In fact … I realized that without Priests For Life financially helping other ministries such as Rachel’s Vineyard and the like, how could post abortive women like me find our healing?
Men are also helped by Rachel’s Vineyard for the loss of fatherhood.
Priests For Life is not funding restaurants, talent agencies, modeling agencies …
They are helping ministries that help women, men, the youth, etc. Bringing awareness on the importance of the sancticty of life, bringing healing to those who’s lives have been touched by the pain, horror and evil of abortion.
I guess, that’s why I’m still a little shocked and appalled at the response Deacon Floyd Ashley gave me. Telling me to go to a newspaper article to go get my answers from is not the answer I was expecting a Catholic brother to tell me … a Catholic lay woman.
We all know that news sells … and some writers will blow up stories just to get more viewers or readers. When I called back Deacon Ashley and told him that, he got upset and told me to just read the article and then hung up on me.
Who is Deacon Floyd Ashley?
He is the direct assistant of Bishop Zurek.
Hi ann70821,
Yea, I did read the articles on amarillo globe all written by Karen Smith Welch and after Bishop Zurek’s assistant blew me off and just told me to read her articles, it got me really turned off.
The financials will be handled by the IRS and PFL. As for me, I will still keep donating to them. I have no problem with them funding other ministries. Like I posted earlier, I for one am glad they are helping other ministries who are focused on helping people.
If they were helping modeling agencies then that’s a problem.
But ministries like Rachel’s Vineyard is all about healing and helping people who’s lives have been touched by the pain, horror and evil of abortion.
If you want to read PFL’s clarification, I read it on freefrfrank.com
Amarillo.com also printed it.
Many of us believe that wrongs aren’t wrong if it’s done by nice people like ourselves. I just wonder if that’s why some of the “pro-life” leaders are doing the same when assuming they could write a comment explaining the actions of the bishop and attempting to convey a message that will only benefit his ego.
Oh, one more thing if I may add:
I also know that Priests For Life uses an accounting firm that is also used by the US government and NASA being one of them.
Secondly, I also have been made aware recently by Ms. Stanek that Bishop Zurek happened to have finally admitted having received all the financial reports of Priests For Life dating 4 or 5 years back but NEVER read them until now. THAT got me really shaking my head in sadness and yes, unfortunately, in disgust. First Bishop Zurek says he never got any reports and then says “Oh yes, we have them but never read them.” *sigh* what a mess and tangled web Bishop Zurek weaves.
On a last note: Priests For Life has over 21 bishops on their advisory board.
Is Bishop Zurek also saying the other Bishops are questionable on their integrity since they are also receiving the financial reports of PFL?
Mr. Nadal:
“The world is full of fools and faint hearts; and yet everyone has courage enough to bear the misfortunes, and wisdom enough to manage the affairs, of his neighbor.” ~Benjamin Franklin
Ever since the bishop sent his letter to bishops urging their parishoners not to donate to the Priests for Life, my doubts were reinforced that this latest goings-on has been to prevent Father Pavone to politcally champion the election of candidates who endorse the pro-life cause.
This latest episode exposes the bishop’s lack of civility and moral responsibility.
Let us hope and pray the following quotation does not pertain to this continuing episode we find oursleves in: St. Charles of Borromeo said, “The road to hell is paved with the skulls of bishops.”
TRUTHSEEKER, as your name implies, I hope you wear that sincerely, but accusing me of slander will get you no brownie points. You happen to be fortunate to have your local parish support your pro-life work, but that certainly is not the case in every North American city or diocese. Brush up on your geography and research before you make any more accusations of unfaithfulness, as your are treading on dangerous grounds. Denial of the truth only works so long, but in today’s informed society, the Truth will win out eventually.
You are indeed “sucking slough water” by accusing me of being an enemy of the Catholic Church; in fact I’d say you are somewhat uncharitable.
Did you ever read Judie Brown’s book?
When a bishop writes a general letter saying that one of his priests remains suspended from his particular ministry indefinitely, that is a signal to all who may have booked that priest for appearances (especially those in the near future), that the priest will not be meeting those obligations. It’s pretty simple.
It is NEVER simple when a representative of the church ignores the sincere petitions of the faithful. That is arrogance and has no place in Christ’s house.
@ Rob … if I may add to your comment:
Someone above stated that there was no proof at all that Bishop Zurek leaked that letter.
I heartfully disagree. Bishop Zurek DID in fact and in my eyes … was the sole instigator in leaking that letter.
Why”
and I quote from his letter: “If you judged it to be prudent, I would like to ask that you would inform the Christian faithful under your care to consider withholding donations to the PFL until the issues and concerns are settled.”
Bishop Zurek told the Bishops to tell their parishes to stop donating to PFL.
He just used his brother bishops as a venue to advertise to the outside world that he was besmirching PFL.
Cliff,
No I haven’t read Judy’s book but that is not the issue here. Yes I have my own experience with the church heirarchy that I could relate to you. I have my own possibloe reasons they ‘all the sudden got involved’ that I could relate to you. Don’t be quick to judge me either Cliff. I have looked at the possibility of motive being ‘the smell of money’ and I have concluded otherwise. But you made a very specific accusation:
In the case of Father Pavone, they all at once got involved with the smell of money, why the sudden interest?
I already gave you my honest response to your question:
“They are trying to prevent scandal within the church by addressing a need for oversight to minimize a messy situation where a Catholic priest is participating in a high profile of an organization that they have no financial or legal control over. You’d think anybody concerned about corruption in the church would be thanking him for that.”
Then I asked you to either back up what you intimated or take it back. Something not so fair about that? after all, isn’t backing it up the teaching part ’constructive criticism’? My question to you is fair and on topic so quit with the righteous indignation and just answer it.
Tell me how much money has the Catholic church pocketed so far from PFL; or bite your tongue and quit your slander.
FYI, all of the priests of the Diocese of Amarillo and the bishop are attending a weeklong retreat and unable to be contacted by anyone. That may be why a letter dated 11/8/11 went unanswered.
Come on Kim……ALL of them? That is possibly worse then Obama golfing while the US debt was getting downgraded.
@Gerard Nadal
I am glad to see the change in your tone, Mr. Nadal. When you were posting your own thoughts and opinion on the matter between Fr. Frank and Bishop Zurek on your own website, you were very pro Bishop Zurek and at quite a few times, you were right there in practically crucifying Fr. Pavone as if he himself was guilty or had proof of his guilt at your very fingertips.
It makes me extremely greatful that your tone is now one of complete fairness on both sides this time. Although I do wonder why you have stopped posting or blogging on your own website and have taken it instead to Ms. Stanek’s.
However, either way, I thank you.
I agree the Bishop Zurek or any bishops have the right to their stewardship over their priests but they also have a role as a father and brother to their priests. The manner in how Bishop Zurek has handled (and is still handling) the matter between himself and Fr. Frank casts more doubt on the credibility and purpose behind his actions. People say the Bishop Zurek does not have to answer to each and every single communication or explain himself to anyone, but then there lies the problem. For a Bishop to think he is above everyone else shows arrogance. If Bishop Zurek wishes to teach Fr. Pavone a lesson in humility then Bishop Zurek himself should learn it.
“Love thy brother as I have loved you”
That was said by one of the most powerful man …. one the most loved man … also one of the most hated man by some … who have walked the face of the earth … and his name was JESUS CHRIST.
Where is the love that Bishop Zurek is supposed to show his fellow brother in Christ? I do not see it. All I see is his condemnation.
@Kim
You mean to tell me that Bishop Zurek is the ONLY one who can run the Amarillo Diocese?
So in the absence of Bishop Zurek … The Amarillo Diocese CANNOT FUNCTION?
Isnt that what everyone else is saying about Fr. Frank and Priests For Life?
Oh but wait … its okay this time because … Its the Bishop Zurek?
Does anyone else not see the double standards here?
Is Fr. Frank still in Amarillo? Because if he is, then isnt he being obedient to Bishop Zurek all this time?
Yes and yes Caroline.
If the Bishop should say he responded I would assume he did, but he hasn’t. As a man who has ministered for over Twenty years to young people and the father of eleven, I jump between righteous indignation to sadness for the young people who have worked so hard and who wrote so lovely a letter to the good Bishop. His lack of response is so insensitive.
The Bishop as of now has not responded even by email. My cell number is 909.436-0032, let me know if you hear otherwise.
Blessings to all
Rev White – goodness! Your assumption that a bishop would drop everything to write to those who wrote to him is amazing. Any and all bishops have more than just one item on their plate.
I have no dog in this fight however, it is pretty presumptuous of an adult leader of young people to tell the young people that the bishop should do this or that just because they have written a letter to him.
The lack of response – and actually, a response was already public many weeks ago – is not insensitive. It would be well for you to teach your youth that just because they write a letter, they do not automatically get a reply.
I just wonder if your youth group wrote a letter to the president of the United States regarding an issue if you would tell them the president was being insensitive because he did not reply.
Your post indicates that you are irritated but I wonder why you feel a “righteous indignation” … teach your youth – when you don’t get your way there are other ways instead of saying that a bishop is insensitive. Geesh …
I also know that Priests For Life uses an accounting firm that is also used by the US government and NASA being one of them.
Caroline, Are you aware that the US government hasn’t even passed a budget in three years. That could explain a lot. ;)
Lee,
In this instance the Bishop owes it to the faithful to be more thoughtful of his actions than normal cause he is directly responsible for the negativity and repercussions caused when he stripped this loving movement of it’s leader. Unlike a president; the Bishop is ‘bound’ to take a Christocentic and caring response cause he represents the church of Jesus Christ. Of primary concern should be to not grieve the Holy Spirit by his actions. A letter sent previously may absolve the Bishop in a technical way but it will not absolve him from responsibilty for any dissention he causes between the church and the children of Jesus Christ. If you want to keep the faithful quiet speaking to them with the Holy Spirit. Christians don’t care as much about a letter saying Fr. Pavone is unavailable then they do about understanding how these actions fit into the mission of Jesus Christ and in particular the mission to stop the slaughter of His children.
Tell me Lee and Dr. Nadal and Susan; where was the presence of the Holy Spirit in the writing of the letter that removed Father Pavone from his PFL mnistry? I am asking for an explanation on how these actions fit into the mission of stopping the slaughter of the unborn in the name of Jesus Christ. Does not Bishop Zurek have a responsibility to address that with the faithful pro-life warriors of the church. Are you comfortable remaining silent and saying that you have no obligation to provide an explanation while your silence is destroying peoples zeal for the Catholic church as ‘the’ home for the pro-life movement. Why inflict such a cost to the church of Jesus Christ when our mission should be to show people His church is the way, the truth, and the light. If you truly believe in the power of Jesus then place your trust in him and set aside the fears that bring you to silence. With the Lord as our buckler and shield let us build a church that is a beacon of light for the PFL and for the pro-life cause throughout the world.
Agnes Campari, above, truly expressed in her previous post what so many are concerned about when she said:
“I agree the Bishop Zurek or any bishops have the right to their stewardship over their priests but they also have a role as a father and brother to their priests. The manner in how Bishop Zurek has handled (and is still handling) the matter between himself and Fr. Frank casts more doubt on the credibility and purpose behind his actions. People say the Bishop Zurek does not have to answer to each and every single communication or explain himself to anyone, but then there lies the problem. For a Bishop to think he is above everyone else shows arrogance. If Bishop Zurek wishes to teach Fr. Pavone a lesson in humility then Bishop Zurek himself should learn it.”
This firestorm isn’t about the bishop’s rights, but about him being accountable for what he has done and continues to do. Fine, he should deal with Fr. Pavone and shepherd him if he has done something wrong – not that that has at all been proven to be true. But, at the same time, it is quite clear that Bishop Zurek has not handled this matter well, and the question is properly asked, to whom is Bishop Zurek accountable? Is it reasonable, loving, or helpful for him to publicly or privately make statements that CLEARLY have cast doubt on Fr. Pavone’s character? Since when is doing what he has done the act of a shepherd?
In the past when I’ve commented on this matter, Dr. Nadal has tried to deflect these questions by suggesting I have no legitimate basis to ask them because I am a former Catholic, and has then gone on to falsely suggest that I have a grudge against the Roman Catholic Church. Nothing could be further from the truth. The truth is that I am no longer a Catholic because, as I have continued to read Scripture, I have become aware that there are doctrines within the RCC for which I can find no basis in Scripture. Nonetheless, I have many friends who are Catholic and I have nothing but good memories of my time in the church. So, Dr. Nadal is just flat-out wrong about this and still owes me an apology his slander. Beyond that, I am still awaiting honest answers from him to the questions I have asked, and such attempts on his part, and others, to misdirect and ignore these kinds of questions are serving only to discredit themselves and the Roman Catholic Church.
I still say that a leader, in order to be effective, must anticipate and recognize the negative effects that may result from his or her decisions. And they must acknowledge the concerns of those that they lead. Just because one has the power and authority to do so does not mean it is OK to say “here’s how it is, now shut up and leave me alone.” Dr Nadal, I have great respect for your thoughts, but in this instance I must disagree with you. Saying Fr Pavone is suspended indefinitely and leaving it at that while he seems to make no effort to resolve things in a timely manner is not acceptable. Bp Zurek does not have to explain himself, justify his decisions or provide details that he considers confidential. However, if he is to be an effective leader, he must acknowledge the concerns of those he leads. A simple “I understand this must be causing many of you great concern. I apologize for the difficulties you must be experiencing. Please allow me to work with Fr Pavone to find the best possible outcome, and please trust that we both have the best interest of the Church and the Culture of Life in our hearts.” That is what a leader does. He acknowledges those he leads and their concerns. He speaks with sincerity and kindness. He accepts responsibility. He speaks charitably toward those with whom he may disagree or have a conflict. And he always acts in a way that his actions back up his words. Then he earns the trust of those he leads, and people understand that he must sometimes make unpopular decisions for reasons they do not understand. And I continue to maintain that Bp Zurek is not doing any of that. He is using his power to do as he pleases while ignoring the concerns of his flock. In short, he is being arrogant. And nobody trusts a leader like that. They may have to obey, but they will never trust.
Lee,
Rev. White wasn’t asking Bishop Zurek to “drop everything”. That’s blowing it out of hand here.
If he made the request only once, then it’s not unreasonable to politely follow-up with another letter. But he’s going on the record that he attempted multiple times.
And if Bishop Zurek himself could not give the request proper attention, then he could have assigned someone on his staff to respond. That simple.
I’ll go back to my original comment: common courtesy, that’s all. A simple acknowledgement, something, anything, to show that a youth group’s concerns aren’t intentionally being ignored.
And please, let’s not compare the office of the Prez with the office of a diocesan bishop. Given who’s in the White House right now, I really, really do not want to go there.
@Truthseeker …
“Caroline, Are you aware that the US government hasn’t even passed a budget in three years. That could explain a lot. ”
Touche :)
Agnes, Truthseeker, et al….
I have not changed my position on anything that I have written on my blog, and if you think that those posts were crucifying Father Pavone, I suggest that you read them again. I don’t write unless I am convicted about the subject, and stand by every word that I have written. My comments here are entirely in line with what I have written there.
As to why I am no longer posting on the matter at my blog, again, I stand by my word. I said I wouldn’t post anymore until the matter was settled, and I’m not. Also, if anyone has been to my blog, they may have noticed that apart from my two most recent posts I have not posted since the accident that claimed the life of Kortney Blythe Gordon and her unborn baby Sophy, and then Jon Scharfenberger ten days later. They were lovely staffers at Students for Life who were most helpful to me when I began my new position as director of Medical Students for Life, and the entire series of events put this and other issues into a different perspective for me during that time period.
Why am I commenting now? I guess because I see a group of wonderful people engaging in the same sort of calumny that they perceive Bishop Zurek to be involved in. Jesus tells us:
“You have heard it said an eye for and eye, but I give you a new commandment. Love your enemies, pray for your persecutors, and do good to those who hate you.”
The things that I have have read here and elsewhere about Bishop Zurek are stomach-churning. Someone who claims to be a priest writes the most vile diatribe about Bishop Zurek, a supposed insider’s piece, and it is allowed to stand because it’s done in the name of helping one of our guys? The coward isn’t even man enough to put his name to the piece.
I’m a Catholic Christian FIRST, and a pro-lifer second. My pro-life zeal does not give me liberty to engage in an eye for an eye, or worse, simply because it is expedient for the movement. Bishop Zurek is also one of our guys, but this is a prime example of losing sight of that. As a bishop, he is an Apostolic Successor, and as I have repeatedly said, that first letter is indicative of an ongoing and caustic dialogue. We simply do not have all the facts.
As I have also said, Father Pavone has hired a canon lawyer and is in the middle of an appeal to Rome. Even if he loses that appeal, he will be free to seek another bishop, and unless he is guilty of or accused of a serious crime, Bishop Zurek will not be able to stop him from being incardinated elsewhere. So all of this rage against Bishop Zurek is entirely unnecessary, especially as none of us has the full story, and even if we did, we would still be bound by the new imperative from Jesus.
Tom Ambrose, I don’t believe that I have ever slandered you intentionally or unintentionally. If I have, you have my deepest apologies.
This whole affair has turned into a carnival of hatred, and it needs to stop. The pro-life movement continues on just fine in Father Pavone’s absence. That’s a testimony to his leadership. He has inspired many, and groomed great leaders who carry on the mission. Everywhere one looks, people continue the fight with all of their energies. That’s because the real individual in charge is the Holy Spirit of God.
Rest assured that no bishop would take such action were it not warranted. Rome is now considering the whole matter. Father Pavone’s overheated fans will be left looking foolish – just like those who rallied in support of Father Corapi – who had different problems – and now don’t want to hear about how ridiculous they made themselves look.
“You see, it is not just the conference that will suffer if Fr. Pavone is denied attendance; it is the heart and spirit of a young generation that will be broken. And not broken by the outside world, which we already know to be evil, but broken by the one institution in this present darkness where we look to for leadership, refuge and inspiration: the Church”
I will be attending the youth conference this weekend with a few family members ranging from ages 8-23. We were all disheartened when we learned that Fr Frank Pavone will not be speaking this weekend. The youngest of us is taking it the hardest. While others her age look up to Lady Gaga, Britney Spears, or Katy Perry, she looks up to Fr Frank for his dedication to the Pro Life Movement. I have tried calling the diocese of amarillo myself in hopes for some guidance, to restore hope and faith into my youngest cousin, and i got no response. To be left in confusion by the faith that I confide in, I am at a loss for words, my faith is shaken. And to see this change in my cousin eyes from excitement to confusion shakes me to the core. I pray for her, because after all, SHE IS THE NEW GENERATION. God help us all.
@ann
“May I ask what contingency plans PFL has had in place in the event that something had ever happened to Fr. Pavone that would have prevented him from attending a previously scheduled event?
Things happen–people die or fall seriously ill–and a responsible organization needs to have a contingency plan in place in order to deal with those events when they happen. If PFL has not had a plan in place then it is a sign (to me) that they don’t have some essential parts of their corporate plan in place.”
Hi Ann,
I’m sure like all responsible organizations, they would be prepared for anything.
However, Fr. Pavone is not dead.
He is very much alive.
And very much needed in the pro-life world.
That is why his supporters are voicing out their concerns, their frustrations and their hurt because ONE … again, I am not saying THE ONLY … but ONE … of the greatest pro-life leaders is being silenced … and for what reason?
Bill Russel – “Father Pavone’s overheated fans will be left looking foolish – just like those who rallied in support of Father Corapi – who had different problems – and now don’t want to hear about how ridiculous they made themselves look.”
Yeah everyone, let’s continue to at look as Fr. Pavone as guilty until proven innocent.
Gerald Nadal, for someone who hasn’t been commenting, you’ve been saying an awful lot that badly misrepresents the facts. For example, you just accused people of participating in a “carnival of hatred.” Where do you see hatred being expressed? I see people who are frustrated by a bishop who has publicly defamed one of his priests and have expressed their justified outrage over such an activity. This is the United States — where people are (still) allowed to freely express their views even if you believe everyone should just shut up and suck it up.
I think your need to defend your views and the church have totally blinded you to wrongdoing within the church and to your need to slander people in a desperate attempt to be right. Before you toss around words like “hate” so freely, you might want to take a hard look in the mirror. At the very least, you might want to find a dictionary and learn to use words accurately.
@Lee,
I will pray for you too. Im a firm believer that in order to fight the evils that reside in our world we must arm the youth, the upcoming generation, with the proper tools and knowledge because they are the ones with the strength and ability to fight. Can you not see that this upcoming generation is on a long uphill battle, struggling, and victory is a world away? You hear stories all the time of kids overdosing on drugs, teens killed in drunk driving incident, suicides, abortions etc and its only getting worse. We must support and guide the youth, especially the ones willing to do God’s work. Who else can the youth look up to if not their church, priests, bishops? Im not saying the bishop should write an individual letter to each person but he should atleast address the youth in a statement. In my opinion it was the Bishops intentions for all of this to go public. He did the damage, he should take responsibility for his actions and let the youth know, this faith, this cause.. it is still worth fighting for.
Tom,
I haven’t misrepresented any facts. Actually, the whole point of my commentary is there is an awful lot of invective flying from people who simply don’t have all of the facts. I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again:
Only two men have all of the facts: Bishop Zurek and Father Pavone. In the end, I believe all will be surprised when the full set of facts are known. Once that’s been revealed, perhaps I’ll take you up on your offer of a dictionary and lessons in the use of language.
Nice dodge, Gerry … like I said, you should go look in the mirror before you accuse others of hate. Even if Bishop Zurek is completely justified in whatever issues he has with Fr. Pavone, he would never be justified for his public handling of this situation. Your arrogance and hubris precede you.
@Gerard
Only two men have all the facts.. that is the truth. That is why the Bishop should have handled this privately. Making this public has done damage to the catholic church and the pro-life movement weather you want to believe it or not. People have every right to take a side and defend what they believe is right. He has given people a reason to talk, like the church really needs another scandal. Now that the damage has been done what is the bishops position on the youth? When the young children of this generation grow older they will learn that santa clause , the tooth fairy, the easter bunny are all made up. We don’t want them putting our Lord in the same category for that is what the devil wants. How do you explain all of this to an 8 year old who has been looking forward to hearing Fr Pavone at the youth conference this weekend for months now. How do I tell her that the person she admires has been shut up? and when she asks why? how am i suppose to justify the bishops actions when there is no solid proof of wrong doing? I worry deeply and pray for all of the young ones that had such high hopes for this weekend. My heart goes out to them.
Zita – thank you for your prayers. What does the fact that there is evil in the world, i.e. drug abuse, violence, suicides, etc., have to do with a letter having been sent to a bishop and whining because the bishop did not respond?
My point is that Rev White’s comment was that of “we are entitled to a reply … I feel that the bishop is being insensitive” instead of … WELL troops, we did not get a reply, so let’s move on with a contingency plan,.
Carder – I purposefully did not write in a president’s name. I am trying to get those who think it is horrid that the bishop did not respond, (when he has already made a statement) to think about others who receive a lot of mail and who cannot reasonably be expected to answer each and every request or letter.
To learn that life is not always fair is a very important lesson, although I don’t see this as being a fairness issue. Perhaps the more fairness issue here is that Rev White needs to learn that there is nothing fair about him calling the bishop insensitive.
When we tell our youth that they are entitled you get what is happening in major cities around the world. Occupy Wall Street is a prime example.
Please stop and think about it – where is the respect and dignity being afforded to the bishop if Rev White is calling him insensitive and telling the youth that he is?
Come on – grow up!
Tom,
You accuse me of name-calling, and so I apologize. Then you whip out the ad hominems. You have a funny way of accepting an olive branch. But you’re right, there’s no carnival of hate here.
@Gerard Nadal
Gerard, yeah Fr. Frank and Bishop Zurek do know the whole truth … but they are NOT the only ones who know what has happened and what is happening.
Bishop Zurek has his advisors …. AND assistant ( Deacon Floyd Ashley ).
I too agree with Tom Ambrose on this one, Gerard.
You say you stopped posting blogs on your website because of the death of your peers (I pray for them and the repose of their souls. It broke my heart when I read their story but they are safe in God’s loving arms now - especially baby Sophy) however, it makes no sense that you find it worthwhile to blog and post on Ms. Stanek’s venue. Since this was the case then just blog about Fr. Frank and BZ on your own website then.
If you said you will stop blogging and posting then you shouldnt be blogging and posting ANYWHERE.
What you have been doing is exactly what Tom Ambrose has just mentioned.
You keep telling the supporters of Fr. Pavone to SHUT UP.
Why?
Free country. Freedom of speech. Freedom to voice anyone’s opinion.
Yet you still KEEP on coming back to the fact that Fr. Frank’s supporters are so vocal and should just SHUT UP about the whole affair and wait.
Why are you telling them to be silent when you yourself arent?
Okay then Gerard.
Tit for Tat.
Regardless of who’s venue it is. You yourself said you wouldnt be blogging or posting anything anymore until the situation between Fr. Frank Pavone and Bishop Zurek has ended.
So …. you SHOULDNT be posting here on Jill Stanek’s article or anyone else’s at all or any future articles she or anyone will write about UNTIL the situation with Fr. Frank Pavone is over.
and if you comment back to this saying you have every right to post whatever it is you want to write about …
Well, Gerard … SO DO THE SUPPORTERS OF FR. FRANK PAVONE.
I will definitely join Tom Ambrose on his dictionary lessons with you. Sounds like it will be a lot of fun.
@Lee
I bring up all the troubling issues to get a point across.. the youth is already struggling and now they are left in more confusion when they look to their faith for answers. I’ve tried calling the amarillo diocese multiple times for answers on what to tell my 8 year old cousin. All i wanted was guidance. An 8 Year old can be very persistent when they want answers. This blog is about the youth but no one seems to want to address this issue. You can go back and forth about Fr Pavone and the Bishop all you want but this is initially about a YOUTH CONFERENCE which i myself am attending with an 8 year old who is inspired by Fr Pavone. If you have no compassion for the youth why are you even on this particular blog? The youth are entitled to choose their inspiration, Martin Luther King Jr, Rosa Parks, Mother Teresa, Princess Diana, and the like. In this case Fr Pavone is the one who inspires my cousin. Do you get it now?
Bill Russel – “Father Pavone’s overheated fans will be left looking foolish –
Bill,
If we are made to look foolish because we are standing up for what we believe to be right in the name of Jesus Christ then your insults heap graces upon us.
“There is nothing concealed that will not be revealed, nor secret that will not be known.c 3Therefore whatever you have said in the darkness will be heard in the light, and what you have whispered behind closed doors will be proclaimed on the housetops. 4I tell you, my friends, do not be afraid of those who kill the body but after that can do no more. 5I shall show you whom to fear. Be afraid of the one who after killing has the power to cast into Gehenna;* yes, I tell you, be afraid of that one. 6Are not five sparrows sold for two small coins?* Yet not one of them has escaped the notice of God. 7Even the hairs of your head have all been counted. Do not be afraid. You are worth more than many sparrows.d 8I tell you, everyone who acknowledges me before others the Son of Man will acknowledge before the angels of God. 9But whoever denies me before others will be denied before the angels of God. 10“Everyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but the one who blasphemes against the holy Spirit will not be forgiven.f 11When they take you before synagogues and before rulers and authorities,g do not worry about how or what your defense will be or about what you are to say. 12For the holy Spirit will teach you at that moment what you should say.”
Luke 12:2-12
May the Lord Jesus Christ bless us and bless His Church on earth. May the saints and the popes help us live by the Holy Spirit fill us with the strength to put aside all fears of looking foolish and speak boldly and with love to our brothers and sisters.
47That servant who knew his master’s will but did not make preparations nor act in accord with his will shall be beaten severely;t 48and the servant who was ignorant of his master’s will but acted in a way deserving of a severe beating shall be beaten only lightly. Much will be required of the person entrusted with much, and still more will be demanded of the person entrusted with more. 49“I have come to set the earth on fire, and how I wish it were already blazing! 50* There is a baptism with which I must be baptized, and how great is my anguish until it is accomplished! 51Do you think that I have come to establish peace on the earth?v No, I tell you, but rather division
Luke 12:47-51
Caroline,
I haven’t told anyone to shut up, and last I checked, I’m a moderator here. I’m responding to some of the more extreme statements here. Sometimes, reducing the temperature provides the desired effect. I believe that to be the best strategy in this case.
That isn’t pandering to Bishop Zurek, or hostile to Father Pavone. It’s a strategy to effect a win-win for all concerned by providing a face-saving way out for all concerned.
Having stood in for Father Pavone last month, it was no easy experience to look out at hundreds of people disappointed that they weren’t hearing Father Pavone, and I don’t envy those who will have to do the same. Still, the task for all of us is to continue on in our work until such time as God makes his perfect will known for all involved.
I’m not saying to shut up. I’m saying to trust in God, and when we do, there is no need for bitter words. When all of this is over, and it will be over one day, how will the bishops regard the pro-life movement? There is much more at stake here than Father Pavone’s future, which is in God’s hands. What we do today will determine the level of cooperation we receive from bishops tomorrow.
Hate-filled invective from the likes of the “priest” posting here helps nobody.
Zita, you couldn’t figure out how to answer the questions of an 8 year old? Here’s an idea–why not tell her that the work of a priest is very taxing, and that sometimes they need to take some time out to rest, and t have some extra time for prayer. And that’s what’s happened with Fr. Frank. He wanted to be at the rally, but he needed to take care of his vocation by getting the extra res and prayer time that he needed…and that Fr. Frank would love to get a card or a note from her telling him all about the conference.
It’s pretty easy to answer a child’s questions, if you want to.
@Zita – Well said. I’m glad you mention MLK Jr. It’s well known that he was unjustly arrested on several occassions. And each time people rose up to voice their support for him. I see history repeating itself here. I see people rising up to support a man who has been “arrested”, so to speak, in his diocese. I also see others telling the people voicing their support to be quiet and “let the system do it’s work.” How easy it would have been for MLK to have been swept under the rug had everyone just stayed quiet. “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.” – Edmund Burke. Prayer is necessary but so is action. “Faith without works is dead.”
Im sorry Ann70821 but i don’t think Caroline is the one having trouble explaining things to an 8 year old. I am the one having trouble.
Ann, are you really telling me to LIE to my 8 year old cousin?
Truthseeker, the entire diocese going on retreat at one time isn’t that uncommon. It happens here twice a year. The retired priests who are still here handle the Masses with the help of several visiting priests.
Zita, what exactly is the lie? That the work of a priest is taxing? That they need to take time out for extra rest and prayer? That Fr. Pavone is taking care of his vocation by getting some extra rest and prayer time? That’s exactly what he’s doing–even if it’s against his will.
And personally, I think he would like getting a letter from an 8 year old telling him about the event. So I don’t think that’s a lie, either.
@Gerard Nadal
“Poe-TAY-Toe” - “Poe-TAH-Toe”
Firstly, I am merely pointing out that your tone and what you have been saying in your past and present posts to Fr. Frank Pavone’s supporters are to sit back (sound better now?) and wait for all these to play out. That’s not freedom of speech.
Secondly: “I am boycotting the zoo so I am not going to drive there. I will take the bus instead.”
Again, you just said above that you wouldnt be blogging anymore about the matter yet you take it here.
You are a moderator so you could just simply moderate on making sure no one is making threats and what not.
I still see no reason for you to make comments and point out other people’s comments to correct them or say your piece of mind.
Again, in my eyes … thats equal to you still posting and blogging on the issue between Fr. Frank and Bishop Zurek.
No insult or anger or hate intended on my part directed toward you.
Just an observation.
@Ann
Why should I cover up the bishops mistakes? Why can’t the bishop, or someone at the diocese of Amarillo just release a statement so my little cousin can hear it straight from the horses mouth? Im sure it would only take up about 5 mins of their time to set straight this whole youth conference mess.If he hadn’t made this public this would not even be a problem.You and I both know that is a flat out lie.Im appalled that you would even suggest that I lie to her, you want me to tell her that Fr Frank needs to rest? Fr Frank isn’t in the business of letting his followers down, especially the youth, or the babies that he’s been trying to save every day of his life. The fact that Fr Pavone doesn’t rest and chooses to keep moving forward is the very reason why she looks up to him.
btw.. thanks for correcting your mistake from Caroline to Zita
Zita, what do you need “set straight” about the youth conference? Fr. Frank’s not going to be there–that’s clearly understood at this point by anyone who reads the Bishop’s letter. In that same letter the Bishop says that he has called “him back for a period of prayer and reflection.” So…are you saying that Fr. Pavone is NOT praying?
As the Bishop also says that “my decision to intervene…is meant to express the dire need to protect his priestly ministry…”. Feel free to use the wording “protecting his priestly ministry to express what I prefer to call ‘taking care of his vocation’, if the change in wording somehow make you feel like you’re lying.
The word REST is not expressly used in Bishop’s letter, however, being very familiar with the area where Fr. Frank is current spending his time I feel certain he’s getting plenty of rest.
But then, it’s really all about how YOU want to present this. YOU can choose to try and present this in a positive light, or you can turn it into an opportunity to cry “oh, the Catholic church is so horrible…”. It’s up to you.
I know what path I would take.
Im sorry Ann, but your still not understanding where i am coming from. All that you have told me is that the Bishop recalled Fr Frank and yes Fr Frank is being obedient. Your not telling me anything knew, I already know this. BUT WHAT ABOUT THE YOUTH, WHO WILL SPEAK TO THEM. You can throw anyone up on a podium and tell them to speak but it is those who are gifted by God himself that will get the message across. You are right in saying that Fr Frank is Praying and is reflecting but what he could be doing at the conference is much more powerful. Not only will he not have a chance to inspire the youth that already follow him but he is missing an opportunity to speak to those who are lost. I can speak on behalf of the lost because I’ve been there! Fr Frank saved me when i heard him speak. I know the power behind this priest and his ability to make people see the light and follow the Lord. Im not saying that the Catholic Church is horrible, as a Catholic I would never. But taking Fr Frank out of this conference is only hurting us. He could be gaining more soldiers of God if he were to speak.
Truthseeker, the entire diocese going on retreat at one time isn’t that uncommon. It happens here twice a year.
Ann, I can believe that. And it is not unreasonable to give somebody more than a couple days to respond to a letter. But there doesn’t have to be a crisis here and the people could appeal to the church in the format they understand best. Until they get a response they could take their weekly tithing and donating it to PFL. I hazard to say that the good Bishop might see a little more need to be responsive if they did.
Zita, Zita, Zita–
Your words: “I’ve tried calling the amarillo diocese multiple times for answers on what to tell my 8 year old cousin. All i wanted was guidance. An 8 Year old can be very persistent when they want answers.
I gave you my suggested guidance, which you dismissed by suggesting that I wanted you to lie to your niece. Now you say it’s not about that, it’s about who will speak to the youth. Excuse me, but first, PFL could have made arrangements to have someone cover for Fr. Pavone, or the organizers could have brought in another speaker. Who? You want someone inspiring? May I suggest that Fr. John Raphael would have been an excellent choice. Go to YouTube and search out his speech at the alternative ND graduation ceremony, you won’t be disappointed. He might even have been available on short notice, especially given the circumstances.
You say that what Fr. Frank “could be doing at the conference is much more powerful” than what he is doing right now–praying. Vita, I’m going to have to disagree with you there. Public speaking is not more important–or more powerful–than prayer.
I can tell that you are very disappointed that you’re not going to get to see Fr. Frank this weekend, and for that I’m sorry. I hope that the opportunity for you to see him again presents itself one day.
“Public speaking is not more important–or more powerful–than prayer” I’d like you to tell that to God on judgement day.
If i’m not mistaken, didn’t Jesus himself speak out to people about faith, love, religion. This is the very reason why the catholic church has so many followers. Jesus didn’t pray in hopes that people would hear his prayer. Thats impossible. Only god can answer prayers. We, as god’s children should be spreading the word.
@Ann70821 – “Faith without works is dead.” You’re right. Half right anyway, Public speaking in not more important or more powerful than prayer. In Father Pavone’s case, they are equally important. His ability to speak is a gift from God which has been and should continue to be used for God’s work.
Im sure Fr John Raphael is an excellent speaker but as far as i know he has not jumped at the chance to spread the word of the Lord to the youth at this conference, nor has anyone else, nor has the bishop appointed a new leader to step up and take responsibility in the absence of Fr Frank.
Zita, believe me, I’ll be quite comfortable expressing the belief that prayer is more important than public speaking to Jesus come judgement day.
@ann70821
As a fellow poster, I deem it necessary to point out to you that it is UNNECESSARY and very UNCALLED FOR to be condescending toward Zita. She has been very respectful and has been very honest about her posts and questions and feelings on the matter.
She is bringing something to this venue that no one seems to want to acknowledge or touch which is the youth.
You had mentioned that Fr. Frank should take a chill pill and relax.
Who are we to tell a priest who made it clear to his Bishop that he wanted to dedicate his life to ending abortion and has been quite amazing and rip roaring about the whole thing to just relax?
Fr. Frank Pavone has gifts bestowed upon him by the Lord and one of them is the gift of speech.
Why silence him?
@Caroline
regarding your past post, should I have my 8 years old COUSIN, not niece call the Amarillo Diocese herself and have them direct her to the amarillo globe?
Ann,
Has Father John Raphael dedicated his ‘life’ to the cause of saving the unborn from holocaust? And even if he has how does that justify Bishop Zurek’s attacks on Father Pavone? If Zita were to tell her eight year old cousin the truth she would have to say that Father Pavone is being prevented from speaking by Bishop Zurek because the good Bishop claims that Father Pavone is being grossly disobedient to him. But don’t believe it.
Oh my goodness!
Ann … let me get this straight!
You mean to tell me that you will tell Jesus that what He came down to earth for WAS WRONG?
You mean to tell me that you will tell Jesus that what God, His Father, told him to do on earth WAS WRONG?
You mean to tell me that you will tell Jesus that He should have stayed up the mountain all along?
Jesus came to earth to SPREAD THE WORD OF THE LORD.
You mean to tell me that you will tell Jesus that He should have been just praying instead of preaching?
Gerry … yet another cute move on your part … you wrongfully accuse people of hating and then play the victim card by accusing me of an ad hominem attack because I nailed you for your arrogance and hubris in making such a false and totally unfounded accusation? Find someone else to throw you a pity party. And, by the way, it is only argumentum ad hominem if your original accusation was true, which it was not.
@truthseeker
Thank You, I didn’t want to blatantly come out and say it but Fr Pavone is being held against his wish. God Bless him for being obedient, but i think its safe to say he would rather be at the conference.. Is it to much that the youth has asked for him to be there JUST FOR THE WEEKEND and then return promptly to Amarillo?
@Gerard
“I haven’t told anyone to shut up, and last I checked, I’m a moderator here. I’m responding to some of the more extreme statements here. Sometimes, reducing the temperature provides the desired effect. I believe that to be the best strategy in this case.
That isn’t pandering to Bishop Zurek, or hostile to Father Pavone. It’s a strategy to effect a win-win for all concerned by providing a face-saving way out for all concerned.”
It amazes me how you continuously refuse to acknowledge any fault on the part of Bishop Zurek with regard to the approach he has taken over the course of the past two months. While it was unquestionably within his authority to recall Fr. Frank to Amarillo, the all-out assault he has made on the reputations of both Fr. Frank and PFL in the public arena in recent weeks is inexcusable. No one is denying that he may very well have legitimate concerns about the way funds are allocated at PFL, but what right did he have to smear FF’s reputation in the court of public opinion on the basis of mere suspicions? He eventually admitted to actually having in his possession all of the financial documents which he had previously accused PFL of failing to provide.
Behold the cross of Jesus Christ watches over and protects His church and His body here on earth. Our struggle to spread love for His children to all will not be put asunder. Alleluia, Alleluia.
Pater noster, qui es in caelis, sanctificetur nomen tuum. Adveniat regnum tuum. Fiat voluntas tua, sicut in caelo et in terra. Panem nostrum quotidianum da nobis hodie, et dimitte nobis debita nostra sicut et nos dimittimus debitoribus nostris. Et ne nos inducas in tentationem, sed libera nos a malo. Amen.
Ave Maria, gratia plena, Dominus tecum. Benedicta tu in mulieribus, et benedictus fructus ventris tui, Iesus. Sancta Maria, Mater Dei, ora pro nobis peccatoribus, nunc, et in hora mortis nostrae. Amen.
Gloria Patri, et Filio, et Spiritui Sancto. Sicut erat in principio, et nunc, et semper, et in saecula saeculorum. Amen.
Truthseeker, a priest doesn’t get to ‘dedicate his life’ to anything other than his priesthood. It may well work out that a priest may get to spend much–or most–or all–of his priesthood working in a field, or for a cause, that he has a great affinity for. But he’s never guaranteed that–we may be disappointed if it doesn’t happen, and we may think that some great talents are being wasted (Archbishop Fulton Sheen, for one) but that’s just the reality of what the priesthood involves.
If you want to be a full-time activist then you don’t become a priest. Sorry, but that’s the way it is.
That being said, Fr. Raphael spends much of his time speaking at pro-life functions, most often in the black community. Sadly, such events don’t get the publicity that they should–but then, that’s OK. The good work gets done even without the publicity.
And yes, I’m sure that Fr. Frank would rather be at the conference, too, instead of inside the convent. But that’s a sacrifice that he–and the conference attendees–are going to be called upon to make this weekend.
Caroline, I’ve been respectful to everyone here. I haven’t insinuated anything about anyone’s judgement day, nor have I claimed that they would dare to tell Jesus that He was wrong about anything. And I most certainly never said that Fr. Frank “should take a chill pill and relax.” I wouldn’t be that disrespectful to Fr. Frank, or even to a total stranger on a blog. Nor would I confuse serious prayer, discernment, and reflection with kicking back and relaxing. The former, when done correctly, can be quite taxing.
As for Zita’s comment that the Bishop hasn’t appointed anyone to take Fr. Frank’s place at Priests for Life–as Fr. Frank himself said, Bishop Zurek is not the Bishop with authority over PFL. (He is the Bishop over Fr. Frank only.) Fr. Frank himself says this in his initial response to being called back to Amarillo. So I would think that the responsibility for appointing a replacement for Fr. Frank would fall to either the Bishop who has authority for PFL or the PFL board of directors.
In fact, I would say it was rather irresponsible for the board of directors of PFL not to go through Fr. Frank’s calendar, contact any organization expecting to have Fr. Frank speak in the near future, and offer a replacement speaker. In the secular world that’s basically how it’s handled.
Truthseeker, have you seen my mantilla? I know it’s around here someplace! (Actually, it’s in the car, and there’s a spare in my handbag…)
@Ann
Have you ever heard of HOPE Ann? these people have HOPE that Fr Frank might be able to attend their conferences, HOPE that Fr Frank will return to PFL, HOPE that this would have been dealt with swiftly. As the days go by our HOPE is dwindling. Obviously the youth conference is well aware he will not be attending, but its the HOPE that he will be there to speak to them that gets them through each day. Now as the conference nears and the realization that Fr Frank really wont be there it’s starting to really sink in, it shatters the hope of the youth. DID YOU FORGET WHAT THIS ARTICLE IS INITIALLY ABOUT? THE YOUTH WANTS FR FRANK, They were PROMISED Fr Frank.”When we have lost everything, including hope, life becomes a disgrace, and death a duty” - W.C Fields. Don’t you see? Even if you tell the youth that Fr Frank wont be there, there will still be that little bit of HOPE in their hearts that he will. Don’t kill the hope.
Ann,
Nobody is questioning that priests dedicate their lives to the Church. But that is not the same thing as saying the Church does not dedicate priests full time to end abortion. And that being said it leaves Bishop Zurek’s actions ‘improper’, ‘unthoughtful’, causing dessention, and unjust. If the Church does not allow the head of the PFL to dedicate their lives to ending abortion then that could only mean that the Church itself is less than dedicated to ending abortion; which I am sure you would agree is false. So your position that a priest’ ordination (marriage) to the Church would prohibit priests from being able to dedicate their lives to ending abortion would be like saying there is not a place for people to spend their lives ending abortion in the Name of Jesus. Kind of ridiculous don’t you think? Maybe you think Bishop Zurek should proclaim that they need to change their name from PFL to PFLINO (Priests For Life In Name Only). Or better yet, if the Church can’t afford to have people working full time to end abortion as part of their mission on earth then they should change their name too. How does the Holy Roman Catholic Church In Name Only sound?
@ann70821
“Zita, Zita, Zita–”
Wasnt that your greeting to Zita? Sounds VERY condescending to me.
“And I most certainly never said that Fr. Frank “should take a chill pill and relax.” I wouldn’t be that disrespectful to Fr. Frank, or even to a total stranger on a blog.”
Also, you may not have said it in those words but it was still the same to me. It is HOW I read your comments.
Then: “Zita, believe me, I’ll be quite comfortable expressing the belief that prayer is more important than public speaking to Jesus come judgement day.”
Can anyone please correct me if I’m wrong but Jesus kept speaking publicly to the people PREACHING about the word of the Lord. His Father.
So Ann, again with your statement in bold above: You are comfortable telling Jesus that He should have just been praying since that was more important that public speaking / preaching the words of His Father.
Now you’re saying your not? Can you please make up your mind as I am getting so confused with your hot and cold statements.
God gave Jesus a mission to fulfill on earth.
I read somewhere that Fr. Frank Pavone – BEFORE he become a priest – attended the March For Life rally as a lay person and it was after that rally that he decided to become a priest so he may further reach people to preach about the sanctity of life and the pain, horrors and evil of abortion.
And his voice is being silenced?
truthseeker . . . thanks so much for the following comment . . .
“But nobody has a contingency plan for losing somebody special in their lives and not being given an explanation as to why. So the point you are making here is not really germaine to this situation is it?”
I have sat up in bed thinking of Fr. Frank’s feelings and what I would do in his shoes. Just because he is a priest doesn’t mean he doesn’t have feelings. The poor thing is being burned in the crucible and I am sure with his strong spirit he will do just fine. Let’s give him our loving support instead of bashing him. Have any of you attempted to send him a letter letting him know that you are here for him? Some leaders say take this issue to prayer and stay silent, yet they aren’t doing so. Leaders that are reading this comment, I hope that you have sent Father a card letting him know that you are praying for him. We could all make a petition to set up a prayer campaign for both the Bishop and Father.
My heart is heavy as I write. I am post abortive and have been praying as this hurts me so much. I’m getting tired of all the folks who rant about who’s wrong and who’s right. Looks like most folks are giving the Bishop the ok to sabotage a GREAT ministry.
There’s a Doctor that is a moderator on this site and has talked about his being invited as a speaker taking the place of Fr. Frank. I must say that personally I’ve heard this Doctor speak and he hasn’t moved me a bit. Now Fr. Frank is moved by the Holy Spirit and it was due to him that I went on a post abortion healing retreat. It sounds so egotistical for this Doctor to say that anyone could fit in Fr. Frank’s shoes.
I am so saddened by all of this. Please stop !!! STOP IT!!! IT HURTS!!!
Mirta, some of us have been to visit. But you’re right–I do hope that many people are taking the time to write or email Fr. Frank just to let him know that they still think of him, and that they are keeping him in their prayers.
While he knows that you pray for him, it’s always nice to have that concrete reminder of a card or letter, or email.
Dearest Mirta,
I am so sorry for the pain you went thru. I am so sorry for your loss. As I pray for Fr. Frank Pavone and Bishop Zurek, I will also pray for your healing.
God loves you. Mother Mary loves you. Jesus loves you.
Is it to much that the youth has asked for him to be there JUST FOR THE WEEKEND and then return promptly to Amarillo?
No Zita, it is not. And if the Bishop follows Ann’s advice and fails to respond positively to the pro-life youth; he will be bringing shame upon the Church.
Free Bishop Zurek!
Mirta,
I feel your pain and your compassion on the issue. I have been praying with my little cousin daily for Fr Frank as per my cousins request. Like you, i am post abortive as well and thanks to Fr Frank and PFL I was able to get my healing through Rachel’s Vineyard. He saved me. I will keep you in my prayers.
God Bless You
But you’re right–I do hope that many people are taking the time to write or email Fr. Frank just to let him know that …….
thousands of faithful are devastated by the Bishop’s unjust accusations against you and saddened by all the faithful people who feel duty bound to support the Bishop’s unconscionable actions of preventing you from active participation in the pro-life ministry. Know that we are standing with you and need you and we are praying to the Lord with confidence that He will deliver you back to us again to lead us in our fight to end abortion. And I have seen many testimonials of the comfort and healing the PFL ministry has brought to the victims of abortion. Take heart cause I am confident that Jesus Christ will have you back leading this ministry again and I hope and pray that it is soon.
Caroline, I never said anything about telling Jesus what to do or not do. I have confined my comments to myself, and Fr. Frank. But as supporting documentation about the importance of prayer for mere mortals (like myself and Fr. Frank) I’ll simply refer to the fact that the Church requires that priests:
1. Say Mass daily (the highest form of prayer on earth)
2. Read the daily office (a continual prayer)
There is absolutely no requirement that they engage in public speaking. So I’ll follow the example of Holy Mother Church and continue to believe that for us mere mortals, prayer is more important that public speaking.
And Truthseeker, where did I give the Bishop advice? Believe me, I’m not his PR director or things would have been handled very differently. I’m not saying everyone here would have liked it, just that it would have been different.
Fr. Frank enjoys getting mail. For those of you who don’t have his address, you can contact him at: Disciples of Our Lord Jesus Christ Convent, PO Box 64, Prayer Town, TX
Zita, I know about the virtue of hope, truly I do. But I also know that in reality, nothing in this life is promised to us. Again, I’m sorry that you’re not going to see Fr. Frank this weekend, I’m sorry that the other people attending the event won’t get to see him–it’s a sad situation, but the only thing to do (at least, for me) would be to offer it up as a sacrifice.
At the risk of repeating myself–Caroline, you don’t get to ‘choose a specialty’ when you enter the priesthood. That’s just not the way it works. Never has been, never will be. You don’t enter the priesthood to be anything but a priest–especially if (like Fr. Frank) you are a diocesan priest. If the Lord sees fit to let you work in the field of your choosing, that’s a blessing. If you sent to serve elsewhere, you offer that service to the Lord also, hopefully with a joyful heart.
Now, if you’ll excuse me, I’ve got legislation to draft.
And Truthseeker, where did I give the Bishop advice?
Ann, how about when you said: “Zita, what do you need “set straight” about the youth conference? Fr. Frank’s not going to be there–” It sounds like you were answering the letter for the Bishop there.
You don’t enter the priesthood to be anything but a priest–especially if (like Fr. Frank) you are a diocesan priest.
Way to duck my 4:10 response to this Ann. ;)
Truthseeker, sorry, I didn’t see your post. Too much jumping back and forth from here to work…
Does the Church have priests who are in full-time pro-life ministry? Sure. But no individual priest gets to ‘demand’ that he be given the ministry that he wants to have.
I don’t know about the Diocese of Amarillo, but there are diocese with priests who work in the chancery full-time on pro-life work. But each of them could get the call tomorrow that he’s being given a new assignment and–like it or not–he’s going to take on that assignment, either joyfully or as a cross. Such is the life of a priest.
One of my good friends who is a priest has always said that obedience is the real cross. That constant bending of your own will and desires to someone else’s is an enormous challenge. I can only imagine what it’s like.
Now i’ve got to bend my will and get back to work.
Ann,
We are not talking here about your typical diocesan priest. We are talking about the leader of the PFL. Are you suggesting removing the leader of PFL by swapping rotating priests in and out like they do with diocese? That is a terrible idea. You must not understand that it takes more than just the calling to be a priest in order be an effective leader of the PFL. Pro-life zeal/conviction is not transferrable among priests like say their ability to say mass. Get it now?
@Ann
I don’t know what world you live in, but there are simple things in life that can be promised. Yes, not all things, but somethings. If I promise my kids something, I stick to my word. For Fr Frank to say “I PROMISE I WILL END ABORTION” (which he hasn’t) then yes, true, in reality we don’t know if he could be true to that word although we know he would try to end it until the Lord takes him. Promising to speak to a youth conference, an INTERNATIONAL conference might I add, is a simple promise. A promise that Fr Frank should have the choice in wether he wants to stick to his word or not. BACK to my initial thought.. all the youth wanted was him for the weekend.. whats the harm in that? and if the Bishop doesn’t want Fr Frank at the conference why has he not made a statement to ease the hearts and minds of the youth?”Bishop Zurek, Fr. Pavone’s bishop, did not respond to this letter, even though it was sent twice overnight personal.” Do you not have compassion for the youth Ann? Do you not believe that the new generation is in fact THE NEW GENERATION. When we are long gone they will be the ones making changes and following in our footsteps.What path are you laying down here? How are we going to get the youth interested in the pro-life movement when the Bishops himself seems to disregard it?
Oy vey. These posts try my charity. Lord have mercy.
This situation is a call to repentance and conversion for all of us. We should examine ourselves. Our charity. Our expectations. Our actions, thoughts, and words. The demands we put on others. We are here to love God and neighbor. We are here to serve, not to be served in the manner which we demand. All this railing and spouting and assuming and blaming is so very painful. It must make Jesus weep. :(
@ Zita – The youth will take their cues on how to interpret Fr Pavone’s absence from the conference from the adults in the situation.
How about we all assume the BEST of everyone in this situation, especially the priests, and encourage the youth to do the same. To do otherwise would be the real harm.
Fr Pavone is on a leave to have a time of reflection and prayer. This is nothing personal against the kids.
Sorry double post :)
Truthseeker, I get it…I understand it. Again, I’m saying that a priest doesn’t get to demand what his ministry inside of his priesthood is going to be, no matter what his gifts are.
Personally, I’d like to see him as the head of the USCCB’s Pro-Life Secretariat. Imagine what a strong message that would send!
Fr Pavone is on a leave to have a time of reflection and prayer. This is nothing personal against the kids.
No, it is something personal against PFL and all the people they support including the pro-life youth. So it ends up being something personal against the kids. The bishop went on the record already recommending to other bishops that they stop encouraging donations to PFL and he is actively preventing the leader of PFL from particiapting in the ministry. Like it or not this affects a LOT of people personally; including the pro-life youth.
Again, I’m saying that a priest doesn’t get to demand what his ministry inside of his priesthood is going to be, no matter what his gifts are.
And to remove such a gifted priest from his position where he was so obviously effective at carrying out the mission of helping women and children is a sin.
And to remove such a gifted priest from his position where he was so obviously effective at carrying out the mission of helping women and children is a sin.
Maybe, maybe not. None of us really know the bishop’s reasons for his actions. That said, there are petty bishops and arrogant priests. I suspect that there is blame enough for everyone in this unhappy incident.
Oremus,
I can’t even type because just posting your name now I have to stop and pray.
@Susan
I understand you don’t think that its personal against the kids but when an 8 year old says “Fr. Frank is my hero, I just want to hear him, I swear I wont ask for anything else for Christmas” and seeing her rip her glittered sign she worked so hard to make for Fr Frank, now I take that personally. It’s almost as if she feels punished. To even have to defend the fact that the Church means no harm towards her PERSONALLY, its a little ridiculous if you ask me. When it comes to the her faith she should not feel this way PERIOD. Wether the intensions are personal are not, the innocent minds of children can’t grasp the issue at hand. I am only voicing a concern for the youth.
@ Zita
With all due respect, if you don’t stop this nonsense and tell the girl that while Fr Pavone is a good priest and very committed to the unborn, ALL of us through our prayer and personal witness can changes hearts and minds about abortions, you are going to seriously damage her. Not the bishop, YOU.
Seriously – priest worship is unhealthy, and anyone who focuses on individual people instead of the Truth they teach is headed down the wrong road,
Talk to your local priest – and knock it off. You be the adult and mitigate the disappointment for her.
It may not be his intention, but if by requiring this time of prayer and reflection, Bishop Zurek exposes this kind of fanatical devotion to an individual – thanks be to God!
I’ll be praying that this little girl is not damaged by the distrust of the Church that you are instilling in her with your hysteria. How many people excuse their judgmental, poor behavior by claiming that they are only doing it “for the children?” Please, for the sake of the child, stop.
Preists/Bishops should be able to be married. The quality of Bishops and Preists will be much better.
That’s an interesting point of view, Jasper! Would you mind explaining why you think that?
Do you feel the same about nuns?
“Seriously – priest worship is unhealthy, and anyone who focuses on individual people instead of the Truth they teach is headed down the wrong road,”
Susan,
A child being hurt by losing an opportunity to see her role model does not mean she is ‘worshipping’ her role model. Your fanatical devotion to the Bishop has turned your heart into stone. There are good people and bad people in the world. And there is nothing wrong with guiding a child to look up to somebody like Father Pavone as a role model. You are really sick. You badly need a man or a woman mentor. Oops. Thats right. You would rather go through life without accepting grace from any person cause nobody is worthy of your praise…they might disappoint you some day. Really. I had all my children look up to Pope JP2 (named my youngest son after him) and if they had a chance to meet him when he was alive and that chance was taken away I guess you would have blamed me for their saddness.
truthseeker — my children are every bit as pro-life as any other Catholic child, and the are completely unaffected by this situation. They are not affected because I have not made a big deal about it in front of them. I have not accused bishops, I have not implied injury. I have not cast aspersions on anyone, priest, bishop or otherwise.
The reason why is that I don’t want to hurt my kids. I want them to follow Christ – not individual priests. And if you talk to any good priest, including Fr Pavone, they would tell you that they want to point people to Christ, not to themselves.
If my 8-year-old were planning to go to the rally and found out that Fr Pavone was not going to be there, I would just tell him that Fr. was unavailable to speak but that he was praying for us and for the unborn. And our pro-life commitment and commitment to the Church would remain intact.
So my kids know that babies are wonderful – they love the priests they know, and they generally remain apolitical. They have prayed outside abortion clinics because they know that there are mommies who feel like they have no choices so they decide not to have their babies. And they know that they want to change it. They are children, and that’s the way it should be.
Susan, your comment at 8:16 pm is the first time I wished there was a thumbs down next to anybody’s comment just so I could click on it.
Susan,
Your 8 year old is completely unaffected by this situation because you are not a post abortive mother who went to Rachel’s Vineyard and found forgiveness from Jesus through Father Pavone’s ministry and they were not told by you what a great man he is for doing that for mommy and they were not told by you in the month’s preceeding the rally that they would get a chance to meet this great man who did so much for mommy and they had not looked forward to meeting him and made him gifts etc, Get off your ego trip and have some compassion for the path others have taken. Your fanatical worship of the bishop has you blind to empathy for those who have been touched deeply by Father Pavone’s ministry. You heart is calloused.
truthseeker – you’re lashing out. I get that you are angry. I have taken no “sides” on who is right. I know nothing about Bishop Zurek except that he is a priest in the Roman Catholic church and a human being and therefore deserves the benefit of the doubt and not to be judged.
All this trashing of priests publicly benefits no one – not the 8 year old girls, the post-abortive women, and definitely not the people doing the trashing. It should stop, and good pro-lifers should focus on their prayer life, their advocacy, and their material support of women at risk for abortion.
I have not cast aspersions on anyone
Susan,
What was this then:
you are going to seriously damage her. Not the bishop, YOU.
And you might as well have said that to every woman who PFL has helped and was bringing an child or acquaintance to the rally.
truthseeker – Jesus Christ gives people forgiveness and he uses His priests as His instruments.
Pointing out the truth to someone is not casting aspersions. I pointed out that trashing priests in front of your kids is damaging to them. Way more damaging that missing out on your favorite speaker.
Susan,
You still just don’t get it and you are showing no ability to ever get it. You are deaf to the cries of the women who Fr. Pavone has touched through the PFL ministry?Pulling Fr. Pavone from that rally is trashing ‘a priest’ in front of every kid of every post abortive mother and their kids who attend that rally. The only truth here is that you seem to be incapable of even acknowledging Fr. Pavone could be anything more than somebody’s favorite speaker. And they say he is then you lash out at them and accuse them of fanatically worshipping him. You are severely calloused. I really don’t know how else to say it.
Forget it Susan. Bishop Zurek is Satan incarnate, and no amount of equanimity can change that fact in the eyes of some.
I just thought of another way to say it Susan. I think your post earlier that had 19 ‘likes’ and it talked about how all catholic priests being equal and the mass being equal where ever you go is relevant. And it also goes back to a point I made earlier to Ann today at 5:38.
You must not understand that it takes more than just the calling to be a priest in order be an effective leader of the PFL. Pro-life zeal/conviction is not transferrable among priests like say their ability to say mass.
The point here being that God graces people with charisms. Father Pavone cannot just be replaced by another speaker. Like you, I too believe that all priests can facilitate their role of transubstantiation and reconcilliation equally regardless of their ‘holiness’ or ability to say ‘make disciples of men by speaking with the fire of the Holy Spirit’. But that doesn’t mean you take somebody who has the gift of bringing people to Jesus with their speeches and send them to a monastery for the rest of their life because all priests are equal. Father Pavone has a charism and zeal for the pro-life movement that cannot be found equally among all priests. I hope this helps. May God bless you and keep you. And may the Holy Spirit fill you with grace.
Hello Gerard :)
Go easy on the sarcasm. It doesn’t suit you well.
Fr Pavone, and all of the rest of us, can do more for the unborn by our prayers, sacrifices, and mortifications than any of us can do by speaking. Don’t discount the value of the monastery.
Good night :) And God bless you too.
“Bishop Zurek is Satan incarnate” … there you go again, Gerry … people who disagree with your take on this obviously must ”HATE” Bishop Zurek, right? It could never be enough for you that people simply think he is handling this situation very badly, right?
Oh my goodness!!! Zita, I am a post abortive woman. I work for Priests for Life in their Rachel’s Vineyard ministry as a team member. I know Father Frank personally – and I do not know the bishop.’
I am on this list because it is open to anyone who wishes to write –
I do not hold Father Frank responsible for my on going healing – no more than I blame him for my having had an abortion. Jesus Christ is helping me to heal – and continues to do so on a daily basis.
Theresa Burke wrote the Rachel’s Vineyard manual – I truly believe, after having worked on retreats for the past seven or eight years now, twice, sometime three times a year, that the work of R.V. is inspired by the Holy Spirit. I have had a ring side seat to miracles occurring regarding healing of mind, body and soul. Father Frank did NOT write the RV manual – nor did he have anything to do with it.
If your eight year old cousin thinks that Father Frank is all that, there is a problem. And to lump him in with Princess Diana (a fornicator and adulterer) … well, you figure that one out.
Sadly, the adults who are blaming the bishop and whining that their letter went unanswered when a public statement regarding the situation had already been made; is beyond the pale.
Zita – I again, thank you for your prayers on my behalf. I truly do need them for intentions that I will keep private.
“I know Father Frank personally – If your eight year old cousin thinks that Father Frank is all that, there is a problem.”
Lee,
You make little to no sense. Wanna try again in English (or maybe without sarcasm? You really seem incoherent. Are you saying that you think Father Pavone is a bad role model for kids? Please just come out and say it, I am not sure what point you are trying to make. What is your role at Rachel’s Vineyard? You seem secretive. Is your whole beef that you think Bishop Zurek should be given more time to reply or that you think he should not need to reply at all? Please explain yourself.
“Sadly, the adults who are blaming the bishop and whining that their letter went unanswered when a public statement regarding the situation had already been made; is beyond the pale.”
Lee, Why keep repeating yourself without replying to my response I posted to you. Do you fell as though it is unfair not only to Bishop Zurek but you also to you that I should expect a reply to what I posted to you? Does this apply to all people. Are you comfortable remaining silent and just saying that you have no obligation to provide a response?
truthseeker – I had to scroll through the questions to see the one that you may be referring to. Is it the one in which you ask where the Holy Spirit was when the bishop wrote his letter for Father Frank to come and reflect?
I don’t know about you, but I do know about me – the holy Spirit is always with those who are open to Him.
I believe you are taking this personally – quite frankly, it matters not whether Father Frank is the head of PFL or not. I do believe Father Frank would agree with that statement. There are other Priests for Life, Father Wilde, Father West, and others that are continuing their work in the apostolate and they are wonderful speakers and obedient to their bishops. I have spoken to Father West regarding his bishop and his obedience to him. If Father West’s bishop were to tell him to come back to his diocese – and I cannot recall right now which one it is, Father West would return. No big deal.
I am not silent – in fact, I often speak out for Silent No More Awareness in public.
I am not sure what your point is – if you believe I have an obligation to reply to you – I do not. If I decide I want to reply to your posts, because of my courtesy, I will.
No one is obligated to do something just because another person wants them to.
I do hope that you are reading what I and others have written – Father Frank is a priest, obedient to his bishop, which is how it should be. I admire Father Frank for being obedient.
I hope that helps, truthseeker.
“If your eight year old cousin thinks that Father Frank is all that, there is a problem.”
Why does Lee condemn Zita just because she holds Father Pavone in high regard? Why does Susan call Zita a fanatic and tell her how wrong she is because she should be worshipping Jesus instead. I am sadly disappointed by the people who intimate that it is bad to love a man so much? When did it become bad for Christians to love and to be loved?
Are you saying that you think Father Pavone is a bad role model for kids? Please just come out and say it, I am not sure what point you are trying to make. What is your role at Rachel’s Vineyard? You seem secretive. Is your whole beef that you think Bishop Zurek should be given more time to reply or that you think he should not need to reply at all? Please explain yourself.”
Truthseeker – I have written and will write again – I work for Priests for Life, as a volunteer as a team member on the Rachel’s Vineyard weekend healing retreats. I have done so for many years. I am not secretive regarding my role as a team member.
I HAVE no beef with the bishop or with Father Frank. I have written and will write again – the bishop has already said that Father Frank will not be making any public appearances.
As far as your first statement – it does not even deserve a response.
truthseeker – I have not condemned anyone. You are making allegations which are baseless. Perhaps you need to reread my post – I ADMIRE Father Frank for his obedience to his bishop.
“quite frankly, it matters not whether Father Frank is the head of PFL or not. I do believe Father Frank would agree with that statement. ”
You need to be more specific cause it is absurd to say that no man would be better than another as head of PFL. Not all priests have the same charisms and zeal for supporting pregnant women and putting an end to abortion so it is patently false for you to say that anybody could do equally as well as head of PFL?
And thank you for the courtesy of a response. I thought you might call me a whiner too and say my expectations of a response were beyond the pale ;)
“I have not condemned anyone. You are making allegations which are baseless.”
Lee, if you have no beef with Father Frank then why did you tell Zita:
“If your eight year old cousin thinks that Father Frank is all that, there is a problem.”
No man or woman should be “all that” …because in truth, no man or woman is. You are not a whiner, truthseeker, you are a nitpicker. You grab onto to words and misinterpret them and do not whine, but demand responses.
As I stated before, I know Father Frank, I work for him… I have no beef against him. Now, I shall not be responding to your line of questioning any more on this topic.
Maybe you could, like Zita, pray for me instead of picking my words apart. Thank you
None of us really know the bishop’s reasons for his actions.
Oremus,
It is true that I cannot know the motivation driving the actions of Bishop Zurek. And therein lies my sense of incompetence in the bishop’s abilities to lead his flock. However I cannot fathom any good reason for him to call other bishops to stop funding PFL and at the same time remove the head of PFL from the ministry. I do not believe the other bishop’s are supporting him in this regard which is good. But from the outside looking in it would appear the bishop has lost his mind.
God bless you.
No man or woman should be “all that” …because in truth, no man or woman is.
Lee,
I ‘nitpick’ when I do not agree cause I am looking for clarification.
I hope you also find a man on this earth some day that loves you so much that you are comfortable saying he is “all that” to you. That nobody else could replace in your heart. And I hope he marries you. That is the way God deigns it to be.
I will pray that you are also able to understand that there are good men like Fr. Pavone who can be “all that” for women when they are in crisis and need it most (as testified to today).
Good night and the peace of Jesus Christ be with you always.
The Catholic Church today teaches that believers must always be peaceful, and so the young ‘traditional’ and ‘fanatical’ and ‘separated SSPX’ Catholics who were protesting in the streets of Paris a week ago because excrement was being rubbed in a giant portrait of Jesus Christ on the stage of a theatrical play, during every performance – well they should have just stayed home and prayed, right? Night after night, dozens were arrested, and a young boy was run over by a police car and may lose his foot. For what? For Christ? And Catholics who have read the history of the Church and who know for a fact that Our Lady with the Hosts of Heaven came to empower the fleet of the Catholic League at the Battle of Lepanto, October 7, 1571, in a critical defeat of Islam, as commemorated by Pope Pius V when he instituted the feast of Our Lady of the Rosary – well all these Catholics who are educated about the facts of their faith just need to realize that everything Pope Pius V once wrote, said, did, and participated in (oh no, The Council of Trent, shudder-shudder) – that’s all simply not applicable anymore, because we have today a ‘new’ Church which teaches us to love everybody. It also teaches us that the Protoevangelium was translated correctly by the Protestants after all, and that Our Lady has nothing personally to do with crushing the head of the serpent. And, after all, the Catholic Church no longer teaches there is anything worth fighting for, doesn’t it? Have you noticed? The ‘tradition’ part of the faith today has been changed, even though the supposed foundation of the faith was that ‘tradition’ could never change. It reminds me of those poor Communists caught in a bind under Stalin, when they were ordered on his authority, and the authority of The Party, to believe one thing, and then after a while, to believe its complete opposite. All in the name of obedience. But we know that the Catholic Church is entirely different. And we know, don’t we, beloved, that because we receive the Holy Spirit at Confirmation, that ever after, well, everything we ourselves do, after we pray, is always going to be guided and directed so that we are always correct and always fair and always justified in the sight of God. Strange that we disagree at all, then, isn’t it? Strange also that there is such a thing as Purgatory, however you ‘now’ want to have it defined. And whenever a Church official persecutes a totally decent priest like Father Frank Pavone, as well as scandalizing in so doing thousands and thousands of faithful Catholics across the nation, we can all just sit back and nod our heads knowingly. We don’t have to question a Bishop or his motives. We can let the baby-killers, and the Muslims, and the leaders who bomb and slaughter innocent civilians, daily I might add, with impunity, because their religion is respectable, impeccable, and praiseworthy because it predates both Christianity and Islam – well, let the blood flow. In my prayers, I offer it up. Oh, sorry, no one does that anymore either. JMJ
We are all influenced and inspired by different people. It’s just possible that the organizers of this rally have lost the opportunity to inspire some of the children by their instance that it be Fr. Frank or nothing.
An earlier poster said that she heard Dr. Nadal and was not inspired. But there are other people who are inspired by him.
Fr. Peter West, for example, just recently inspired my class of 10 year olds when he came and spoke to our school for the school rally we held for the start of the 40 Days for Life in September.
I feel sure that someone could have been found who would have been an inspiring keynote speaker if only the adults would have spent more time working the phones to replace Fr. Frank than they spent insisting that the Church do everything their way.
So many here are 100 per cent correct. There are thousands of inspiring speakers, who can give inspiring keynote addresses on the plight of the unborn for the pro-life cause. But what does that have to do with Father Pavone, please? He doesn’t read from a script or a teleprompter. He isn’t just a spokesperson. Believe it or not, there are people who are actually gifted with qualities of what used to be known as “leadership”. I say – used to be known – because there are so few real leaders today. But aside from Father Pavone’s active and unblemished position as a leader in the international Right-To-Life movement, just take a moment to consider him as one individual human being… say a member of your Church whom you see on Sunday at Mass. Consider him as not even a priest, but a human being. Then think about the local Bishop accusing him in the press of financial malfeasance, when there is no documentation, anywhere, to back the charge up. Then, the Bishop tells this man, just somebody you recognize from the pew, that he is under obedience to not talk to any of the Catholics in the Church, inside the building, or outside in the parking lot. You think that is absurd? Well, it is. But it has been done. In fact, a friend of mine was told exactly this by his Pentecostal minister at a mainline Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada church in Ontario, Canada, several years ago, and certain members also brought up financial impropriety charges of which the man had been cleared 20 years before. The entire church board, and the entire congregation, thought this was okay. My friend, by the way, was over 80 years of age. You see what is called “authority” in the Catholic Church is called “covering” in many Protestant churches. If you dare to bring up ‘issues’ – being pro-life, or reading the King James Version, rather than the New International Version – you are told you might as well just get out. How would you like this to happen to you? Oh, but this is a different case. Oh, is it? Oh, the Catholic Church has canon law. Oh, does it? How often is canon law actually enforced? Oh, when you want an annulment, the canon law experts are johnny-on-the-spot. But how about canon law in situations of freedom of conscience for religious and clergy? The Church pays lip-service to canon law, while ignoring it. Famous Catholic bloggers for the past two months have conceded that Father Pavone’s appeal to the Vatican invalidated Bishop Zurek’s orders. But then everyone just goes merrily on ignoring said canon law and demanding that Father Pavone and his defenders stop making waves. My earlier post today lays out some other consideratons behind all of this. Blessings to all, Catholics and Protestants together.
Fr. Peter West, for example, just recently inspired my class of 10 year olds when he came and spoke to our school for the school rally we held for the start of the 40 Days for Life in September.
Personally, I think it is wonderful that these children were able to be inspired by a charismatic priest.
Sarcastically, just to be safe you may want to wait until the last day to schedule him to come back and talk again at next year’s 40 days rally. According to some people on this site it might be best if you didn’t schedule him to come back at all cause you wouldn’t want any kids thinking he is ‘all that’. They would tell you it is taboo cause some of the women who Fr. West has inspired could hear about it in June or July or August and tell their kids what an inspiration he is and that just wouldn’t be fair of you to do that to the kids knowing that he is a priest and may get called away due to an urgent shortage of priests needed to pray at one of the monasteries. You may want to add that possibility as a footnote on any fliers you distribute about next years rally.
What it has to do with Fr. Pavone, Ms. Thompson, is the claim that somehow these children can’t be inspired in their pro-life activism because Fr. Pavone won’t be addressing them.
And that’s just plain nonsense.
As for the rest, I’ll just say this: If the required tax documents weren’t filed with the IRS by the pastor of my church for 3 years (that these documents weren’t filed is a documented fact in the matter of the finances of the Gospel of Life organization) then the members of the vestry would remove him from his position AND cite financial mismanagement. And they would be correct to do so.
So when you say that there is no documentation anywhere to back up claims of financial malfeasance (your word, not mine–the correct term is actually nonfeasance in this case) you are either uninformed or deliberately choosing to ignore some of the facts in this matter.
There is also the matter of the money contributed for the building of a seminary for the order of priests that Father was starting. No order exists, no seminary was built. I believe that the donors have a right to know how that money was spent. Perhaps not legally, but certainly morally.
As I am not a tax attorney I cannot address the possible ramifications of soliciting donations for a tax-exempt organization and then turning them over to a for-profit organization. I do worry that there are some, and that they may be rather severe.
If, indeed, Fr. Pavone’s appeal to the Vatican invalidated Bishop Zurek’s orders than Fr. Pavone is free to walk out at any time. The fact that he hasn’t, even though he has his own canon lawyer) leads me to discount the assertions of “famous Catholic bloggers.”
Forget it Susan. Bishop Zurek is Satan incarnate, and no amount of equanimity can change that fact in the eyes of some.
What????
As for the rest, I’ll just say this: If the required tax documents weren’t filed with the IRS by the pastor of my church for 3 years (that these documents weren’t filed is a documented fact in the matter of the finances of the Gospel of Life organization) then the members of the vestry would remove him from his position AND cite financial mismanagement. And they would be correct to do so.
FGT,
So you would be one of the people telling other bishops not to donate to PFL any more cause they have not been filing ther taxes properly. There are no grounds of any improperly used funds; but just because they filed some spots incorrectly you would encourage people not to donate to them and remove the head from active particiaption in the ministry?
Most people do not realize that non-profit organizations are NOT required to file 501(c)3 paperwork with the IRS in order to function as a non-profit. Many often do, including churches, because it gives their givers the certainty that any charitable donantions they make will not cause them problems with the IRS if they deduct their gifts on their taxes. Nonetheless, it is not necessary that a non-profit first obtain the IRS’ permission to collect tax-deductible gifts.
There is a difference between being tax-exept and non-profit. Federal tax-exempt status is required in order for donors to receive the charitable deduction.
Since it appears that no seminary was built I think that questions may be raised as to how that money was spent.
Questions were raised and a full accounting has been made of the funds. So what. They were all used for the pro-life cause. You are a pious boar posting conjecture over and over.
Quit repeating your posts and try responding if you have the courtesy.
Non-profits are tax-exempt by definition regardless of whether they file 501(c)3 paperwork. Taxes are paid on profits. All the IRS paperwork does, in effect, is verify for contributors that they agree the organiztion is a non-profit.
These people think they can attack the PFL from inside the church and outside the church and get people to be silent about it. NO!
Edited by mod
without federal tax-exempt status the non-profit will owe income taxes on all donations. Depending on the amount of the donations that could be a substantial amount, especially when you add in penalties and interest. Here’s a little information from the IRS website–and given that these organizations are not part of a church, the regulations do apply to them:
Tax-exempt organizations, other than churches
and certain church-related organizations, are
required to file annual information forms with the
IRS. Forms include the Form 990, 990-EZ, 990-
PF or the 990-N (e-Postcard). Filing the form is
necessary to maintain an organization’s taxexempt status
@truthseeker: I have been nothing but courteous on this site. You, on the other hand, have been anything but courteous to quite a few posters.
When you learn to be civil perhaps we’ll have a conversation.
There is also the matter of the money contributed for the building of a seminary for the order of priests that Father was starting. No order exists, no seminary was built. I believe that the donors have a right to know how that money was spent. Perhaps not legally, but certainly morally.
I would like to know more about this. Did prolifers donate money to PFL that they specifically stated was to go towards the building of a seminary?
With charity toward none, and malice toward all. That’s what this site has become.
I am NOT sorry if I hurt your feelings while I watched you attack PFL. How about keeping a clear head and looking into it before you crucify him. Maybe hold a fundraiser to increase their donations instead of attacking them if they made an honest mistake. Oh yeah. That would mean you were supporting PFL.
Nice cop out though on avoiding my posts. Are you really a liberal in disguise?
Yes Praxedes they did. And it got almost to the groundbreaking when Fr Pavone called it off. He determned that the logistics of the seminary were not going to work right for the PFL mission cause they needed resources spread throughout the US. He returned the land back to the Church. Why? Do you think anybody would want their donations back cause it was given to needy pregnant mother’s instead? All his books are transparent. He gave them the entire check registers. Every penny is accounted for.
I would have given people the benefit of the doubt and charity but when they call for people to stop giving donation to PFL I am done being charitable. I am done posting now for the rest of the afternoon. God bless you the pro-life warriors that we may stand united and put differneces aside and work towards the one common goal of stopping the holocaust. If my posts in support of the PFL have been unjust or not done that then I am guilty. And God bless and look over His chruch here on earth that she may be the beacon for all to follow in reverance and awe of her jurisprundence. This I ask in the name of Jesus Christ.
for those interested, I just received this from PFL. I’m sure Fr. Frank would like to hear from you.
We the staff of Priests for Life want to alert you that tomorrow, Saturday November 12, is the 23rd Anniversary of Fr. Frank Pavone’s ordination to the priesthood.
We invite you to visit and support his ordination anniversary wish at http://wishes.causes.com/wishes/389280, where you can send him a word of greeting and congratulations.
Do you think anybody would want their donations back cause it was given to needy pregnant mother’s instead?
With all due respect truthseeker, I believe that if a donor states that their donation is to go towards something specific and that money doesn’t go there, the donor should be asked if it’s okay that the money go elsewhere or the money should be returned. Yes, I do believe some would want their money back and it should be their decision. At least now I understand what’s going on a bit better. We all want and deserve the truth.
With charity toward none, and malice toward all. That’s what this site has become.
oremus, I think you may be blowing things out of proportion a bit. . . . After reading through all of these comments, I have more faith in Christ and His Church, not less.
I’ve administered private foundation funds in the past that would have required it. The foundations had very specific charters designating what the money could be spent on. For instance, I could give you the money for a soccer field, but I couldn’t buy uniforms or hire a coach. One of the foundations made rather large grants to several seminaries that were undergoing renovations, in fact.
If you took our money, spent it on something other that what was agreed-upon, and didn’t refund us then we would have sought legal action against you.
Now, I have no way of knowing if this is the case with any of the donations to build the seminary, but it’s a possibility. I don’t believe he ever solicited funds from that fund, at least not while I was the administrator.
Online I found a comment from a woman named “Cathy”; she said: “These CD’s are wonderful and every parish should have them readily available for their parishioners to listen to. The truth is hard to hear but it saves the soul. Thank you for all that you do for the unborn. When you stand up for the truth you suffer. I will pray for you. You warned America not to put a pro-abortion, voting record of infanticide President in office or we would be begging in the street. As it is coming to fruitation more people will get on their knees, as you said on election night. If we don’t get on our knees to say we are sorry God will put us there. I live in America, but our country needs to be taught a huge lesson especially because of abortion murdering the most helpless among us. God Bless You and may you always have the courage to stand up for the truth. (which I have no doubt you will!) May the Blessed Mother protect you with her mantle and may Jesus always be at your side. Onward…. love that word.” No, the CDs were not from a message by Fr. Pavone, but a 4-part series, “ABORTION: THE TRUTH AND THE HOPE”. You may ‘think’ you know that Fr. Corapi was guilty, that the report issued by the Society of Our Lady of the Most Holy Trinity Robstown, Texas, (SOLT), was accurate. That’s what you were told. It wasn’t even a Bishop who declared Fr. Corapi guilty, it was Fr. Gerry Sheehan of his order, The Society of Our Lady of the Most Holy Trinity. SOLT is described on their website as “a community of disciples of Jesus and Mary composed of all vocations: priests, deacons, brothers, sisters and single and married laity. The Society was founded in 1958 and has been approved by Rome as a Society of Apostolic Life.” Fr. Sheehan is the head of the American Regional Priest Council of SOLT, but he is not the head of SOLT. Fr. Corapi was never suspended by Bishop Mulvey of Corpus Christi, but by SOLT. We all know Fr. Corapi left the priesthood, right – but was it because he was admitting guilt? Maybe not. Maybe it was because he has guts to defend himself, and he loved the Church too much to get into a civil law suit lasting years while he is a priest. Get it? Has the American Church seen another champion of the unborn, in our contemporary abortion holocaust, silenced through baseless charges? You ‘think’ you know all about it. But you don’t. The Bible says we are led like sheep to the slaughter, and God uses these situations and acts through them and through people of bad will. God wants to teach us. Are we teachable? Do we have discernment? Do we devour our own shepherds? Fr. Pavone, meet Fr. Corapi.
Ann/Oremus/Fried Green Tomatoes – please choose ONE screen name and stick with it, or your comments will be removed. The commenting rules for this site state: Create one original moniker and stick with it.
Thanks.
@lee
I for one do not see Zita’s posts as shocking! She has every right to voice her concern for her 8 year old cousin. I also do not see Princess Diana as a wench and a harlot as you described. She is a human being who fought for women’s and human rights. Princess Diana was a humanitarian. Your comment to Zita made me see you as one of those women in the crowd holding a big stone ready to throw it to the prostitute before Jesus.
“let he who has no sin cast the first stone.”
Also, we are all called to be like the Lord. We should strive to perfection and be just like Him but we can not because we are human and not perfect. Just like Bishop Zurek.
Please come down from the pedestal you have perched yourself in because your fall to the ground will hurt you terribly.
Ann, are you sticking with ann70821 as your screen name for commenting now?
If so, please refrain from using the oremus and/or Fried Green Tomatoes monikers from now on, please. This way commenters know whom they are addressing and there is less confusion. Thank you.
Thank you for your prayers brothers & sisters. I really hope the commenting stops and we turn more toward prayer and making sacrifiices as our church leaders need it right about now.
I hope we can join in on the following prayer:
Keep them, I pray Thee, dearest Lord,
Keep them, for they are Thine –
Thy priests whose lives burn out before
Thy consecrated shrine.
Keep them, for they are in the world,
Though from the world apart;
When earthly pleasures tempt, allure, –
Shelter them in Thy heart.
Keep them, and comfort them in hours
Of loneliness and pain,
When all their life of sacrifice
For souls seems but in vain.
Keep them, and O remember, Lord,
They have no one but Thee,
Yet they have only human hearts,
With human frailty.
Keep them as spotless as the Host.
That daily they caress;
Their every thought and word and deed,
Deign, dearest Lord, to bless. Amen.
Imprimatur: +D. Card. Dougherty, Arch. of Philadelphia
I back Kel 100% on staying with one moniker!
Ann70821 / Oremus / Fried Green Tomatoes – please know that moderators on Jill’s site can tell if you are one individual trying to pretend to be multiple people just to show that there are more of you believing on the same ideology.
There is no need for that.
As an individual you have every right to post your thoughts, which of course would open you up to questions or comments as well. Bt when you pretend and create other fictitous posters then that shoots your credibility down the drain.
A speaker has an ethical obligation to inform an organization if his/her attendance is uncertain, and a well-run organization should have a backup plan. Bishop Zurek’s alleged irresponsibility in no way mitigates the responsibility of PFL and the event organizers to prepare for an eventuality they’ve known about for over a month.
@Lee
Peace be with you . . .
We were created in the image and likeness of God and called to be perfect like He is perfect.
Please check out the Catholic Catechism for more on this truth
http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p1s1c1.htm
2013 “All Christians in any state or walk of life are called to the fullness of Christian life and to the perfection of charity.” All are called to holiness: “Be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.”
In order to reach this perfection the faithful should use the strength dealt out to them by Christ’s gift, so that . . . doing the will of the Father in everything, they may wholeheartedly devote themselves to the glory of God and to the service of their neighbor. Thus the holiness of the People of God will grow in fruitful abundance, as is clearly shown in the history of the Church through the lives of so many saints.
Kel,
Next time I’ll make sure that everyone goes back to their own desk to post so that you’ll get a list showing all our IP numbers. Will that make you happy?
I certainly hope so.
Lisa C, very true. It seems that the Youth Conference should have contacted PFL or Father Pavone to see if he would be keeping his speaking engagement. When Father Pavone knew he was indefinitely removed from active PFL ministry, were all the organizations that had scheduled him to speak notified?
The letter to the Bishop seems more an act of protest, although very politely and respectfully worded. After reading the letter again, I really don’t see that the Bishop did anything wrong in not responding to it. Although the hurt feelings on the part of the organizers are certainly understandable. I remember when an unpopular decision was made at my children’s school I organized a petition. I sent the principal a very nice letter and the petition with signatures from about half the families at the school. He never responded, which made me very angry. But although I didn’t get the satisfaction of a response to my plea, I did have my answer. The decision that had already been made was not going to be changed. This situation strikes me as very similar.
This is one of those “teachable moments”, disappointment can be overcome.
To Fried Green Tomatoes Regarding Tax-Exempt Status …
“without federal tax-exempt status the non-profit will owe income taxes on all donations.”
That is total nonsense …
The following link is from IRS Publication 1828, which deals with tax laws for churches and religious organizations (http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p1828.pdf). Please review page 3 and you will note the following under the heading of “Recognition of Tax Exempt Status”:
“Churches that meet the requirements of IRC section 501(c)(3) are automatically considered tax exempt and are not required to apply for and obtain recognition of tax-exempt status from the IRS. Although there is no requirement to do so, many churches seek recognition of tax-exempt status from the IRS because such recognition assures church leaders, members, and contributors that the church is recognized as exempt and qualifies for related tax benefits. For example, contributors to a church that has been recognized as tax exempt would know that their contributions generally are tax-deductible.” It goes on to differentiate that “religious organizations” with gross receipts under $5,000, or that are under a parent organization that holds exempt status, also hold tax-exempt status.
But again, this all has to do with the deductibility of of the donor’s contributions. Non-profit organizations are not required to file for 501 (c)3 status. Period.
Please use some common sense. ANY organization — non-profit or otherwise — pays taxes on any income they receive that exceeds their expenses, i.e., they pay income on their profits. Non-profits do not, by definition, make a profit.
Tom, did you read the document? See page 3 where this information is located:
Religious Organizations
Unlike churches, religious organizations that wish to be tax exempt generally must apply to the IRS for tax-exempt status unless their gross receipts do not normally exceed $5,000 annually
Next time I’ll make sure that everyone goes back to their own desk to post so that you’ll get a list showing all our IP numbers. Will that make you happy?
I certainly hope so.
Yes, actually, it will. Thanks!
What it has to do with Fr. Pavone, Ms. Thompson, is the claim that somehow these children can’t be inspired in their pro-life activism because Fr. Pavone won’t be addressing them. And that’s just plain nonsense.
FGT/Ann/Oremus,
What is nonsense is that you can’t understand the dissappointment of these youth that looked up to Father Pavone. It isn’t that PFL won’t have another able speaker there. It is that these kids love Father Pavone. On a scale of one to one hundred you register about a negative two on the empathy scale.
Seems to me like some folks are wasting their precious time and losing their focus on what really matters the most in all this.
233 Posts could turn into blessings if we look closely at what is being posted on this precious blog and turn all the attention to God our Heavenly Father in prayer and supplication.
I like this little reflection on prayer:
“I look at a stone cutter hammering away at a rock a hundred times without so much as a crack showing in it. Yet at the 101st blow it splits in two. I know it was not the one blow that did it, but all that had gone before.”
Did it occur to anyone that while taking the time to rant and rave about a Bishop and a simple priest, there are onlookers watching and snickering in the background?
Now think – who might those onlookers be?
Pro-aborts
Pro-Choicers
Satanists
And all of the above
I didn’t see a post about anyone considering a prayer campaign for all involved. Did anyone gather up a group to pray and intercede at different intervals of the day? (I hope you aren’t going to answer: Why don’t you do that? As I’m on it!) The invitation is open to you as well.
“It is in the field of prayer that life’s critical battles are lost or won. We must conquer all our circumstances there. We must first of all bring them there. We must survey them there. We must master them there. In prayer we bring our spiritual enemies into the Presence of God and we fight them there. Have you tried that? Or have you been satisfied to meet and fight your foes in the open spaces of the world?” J. H. Jowett
God Bless Ya’ll!
Joe
We all want and deserve the truth.
We agree thee Praxedes. And a portion, not sure what percentage, was spent on building design plans etc… but I don’t have any exact numbers.
I also feel the need to point out when people look at a letter from the pro-life youth and twist it’s meaning into a PFL shortcoming because they didn’t have a contingency plan etc. and never even acknowledge the real truth which is that the letter was the pro-life youth expressing love and support for Father Pavone. The devil is a busy man and the father of deception.
But I am on it too Joe. ;) afternoon and evening. Thank you.
truthseeker says:
the real truth which is that the letter was the pro-life youth expressing love and support for Father Pavone.
This is true. As I mentioned above, it was really more of a polite protest letter. The organizers of the conference seemed to know that Father Pavone was not going to be there and were pleading with the Bishop to change his mind. As such, IMO the Bishop did nothing wrong in not responding. And although it’s definitely aggravating to have your plea ignored, the disappointment can be overcome. And the fight to save the unborn definitely continues.
Correct Lrning. And thanks for pointing that out. But the Bishop’s actions does mean a lot of disappointed youth both foreign and domestic. And nobody is pretending that Fr. Pavone is bigger than the cause but he had an effect of inspiring people to fight for the cause and his removal as a speaker does hurt the cause. There is a lesson there but not a good one. I hope the message/lesson isn’t supposed to be that no single person really matters or makes a difference to the pro-life cause. What a terrible and completely deflating message that would be to the youth.
truthseeker says:
I hope the message/lesson isn’t supposed to be that no single person really matters or makes a difference to the pro-life cause.
Never! I think the lesson we could take from this is get involved and don’t rely on others to do it for us. I think the lesson is that each person really matters and makes a difference to the pro-life cause.
Although I do not believe the Bishop meant his recall of Father Pavone to be any sort of message to the pro-life cause. I think the Bishop saw a problem developing with a priest and is attempting to fix it. If the spiritual well-being of Father Pavone was at risk, then I definitely think that is much more important than his ability to continue to speak and actively lead PFL. If this decision by the Bishop is meant to be medicinal for Father Pavone, then God bless him for doing what he deems necessary for his priest despite the extreme unpopularity of his decision.
What he is doing is not the same thing as the way he is doing it.
Soon there wont be any priests left to provide obedience to anyone !!! “Rome Will Lose The Faith and Become the Seat of Anti-Christ” Has anyone noticed ??? Bring back TRADITION, THE TRUTH NEVER CHANGES”
As such, IMO the Bishop did nothing wrong in not responding.
Particularly since Fr. Frank’s supporters are now in their eighth week of flooding the bishop’s office with letters insisting that the very future of the pro-life movement depends on Fr. Frank’s immediate release. It wouldn’t be surprising if the person who has the unenviable task of reading that mail didn’t find this particular letter quite as super-duper special as Mr. White thinks it is.
It wouldn’t be surprising if the person who has the unenviable task of reading that mail didn’t find this particular letter quite as super-duper special as Mr. White thinks it is.
Lisa, he is a bishop in the catholic church. Are you saying that he shouldn’t be moved by a letter from the pro-life youth? You must not be catholic if you believe that. Did it move you at all?
Soon there wont be any priests left to provide obedience to anyone !!!
Huh? Soon? Is somebody planning an international campaign to attack and kill all priests? Where did you hear about that? Sounds like your just a loon.
Praise be to God for His Living Word!!! It always amazes me how the daily readings in the catholic liturgical cycle are like a breathe of oxygen to whatever the days spiritual struggles may be. Todays gospel at mass was just that. It was the parable about using talents to the best of your abilities. And it goes a long way towards explaing the frustration felt by many when Father Pavone is not out fighting to end abortion.
‘It is like a man about to go abroad who summoned his servants and entrusted his property to them. The man who had received the five talents promptly went and traded with them and made five more. The man who had received the five talents came forward bringing five more. “Sir,” he said, “you entrusted me with five talents; here are five more that I have made.” His master said to him, “Well done, good and trustworthy servant; you have shown you are trustworthy in small things; I will trust you with greater; come and join in your master’s happiness.” Matt 25: 14,16,20-21
Lisa, he is a bishop in the catholic church. Are you saying that he shouldn’t be moved by a letter from the pro-life youth? You must not be catholic if you believe that. Did it move you at all?
Agreed. Acknowledgement by him or his staff absolutely should have happened.
Lisa, he is a bishop in the catholic church. Are you saying that he shouldn’t be moved by a letter from the pro-life youth? You must not be catholic if you believe that. Did it move you at all?
Truthseeker:
I am not Catholic. I was, however, raised Catholic, which is perhaps why I am so puzzled by the pro-life blogosphere’s efforts into insert itself a dispute between a bishop and a diocesan priest. Leaving aside the unseemliness of demanding public updates on an individual’s spiritual development, I have trouble imagining a group of Catholics claiming that they had the right to campaign against, for example, the Episcopalian ordination of a gay bishop on the grounds that they thought it was damaging to the entire Corpus Christi.
I have infinite sympathy for the shock and dismay that IPLYC must have felt when they learned that their keynote speaker would be unavailable; however, that was presumably a month ago. It is entirely disingenuous for Mr. White to claim that the bishop was not “let[ting] these young people know what is going on.” The bishop let everyone know what was going on when the diocese posted his statement that Fr. Pavone would be remaining in the diocese indefinitely. Short of sending everyone on Fr. Pavone’s speaking schedule a map, calendar, and Venn diagram illustrating the lack of overlap between “your event” and “an indefinite time in Amarillo,” the bishop could not have made “what is going on” clearer. And if the leaders of IPLYC were unclear on their event’s location in space and time, it was the responsibility of Priests for Life, not the bishop, to set them straight.
IPLYC lost my sympathy with this statement: “Every day we receive more and more calls from pro-life groups and parishes asking whether or not he will be there. We have tried to remain calm in this matter, however, we have no idea what we will do if you do not allow him to come.” Unpleasant and unjust though it may have been, it was the conference organizers’ obligation to come up with an idea and communicate it to those making inquiries, rather than continuing to falsely advertise Fr. Pavone’s attendance and washing their hands of responsibility with a last-minute plea to Bp. Zurek.
Other groups have lost Fr. Pavone as a speaker, as Dr. Nadal commented above. No doubt their events were as important to those groups as IPLYC’s event is to them, so yes, I am unmoved by IPLYC’s apparent belief that they should be treated differently from everyone else. And aside from all these points, there was no reason to post the letter here or anywhere else. A cynical person would think that it is simply the latest in a series of efforts to generate bad publicity for the diocese.
IPLYC lost my sympathy with this statement: “Every day we receive more and more calls from pro-life groups and parishes asking whether or not he will be there. We have tried to remain calm in this matter, however, we have no idea what we will do if you do not allow him to come.”
Lisa,
Perhaps the original letter’s lack of specificity as to when Father Pavone would be available had something to do with it. Compare the people who made plans to attend the rally to fans who have tickets to a ball game. When a star player is placed on injured reserve ‘indefinitely’ it is ordinary for fans to ask each week when that star will be able to return in hopes they will get to see him. The bishop’s original letter did not specify a time when Father Pavone would be available again. When a star player is placed on the injured reserved ‘indefinitely’ it is normal for people to clamor for more information about his status.
“Other groups have lost Fr. Pavone as a speaker, as Dr. Nadal commented above. No doubt their events were as important to those groups as IPLYC’s event is to them, so yes, I am unmoved by IPLYC’s apparent belief that they should be treated differently from everyone else.”
On the contrary Lisa; children have always held a special place in Christ’s mission and in the catholic Church. Much like they hold a special place in most families and in the hearts of most people.
Fried tomatoes,
Is the PFL a church related organization? If so, then they were not required to file any of the forms in question. Lets see ….Priests…start an organization….church related….hmmmm
truthseeker, I believe PFL is required to file the 990. They are church related, but not considered an integrated auxillary because according to the IRS a church related integrated auxillary (not required to file) cannot receive greater than 50% of their support from public contributions.
From the PFL website:
7. Is Priests for Life funded by dioceses, the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, or the Vatican?
No. Priests for Life is funded by the generous and regular contributions of individual laity and priests across the country. Priests for Life is a 501 (c) 3 organization and therefore donations are tax-deductible and are made out to “Priests for Life.” We raise our money mostly through direct-mail fundraising.
Lrning,
I am not sure one way or the other; but even churches themselves receive over 50% of support from ‘public’ contributions too don’t they. What other kinds of contributions are there besides ‘public’? Could ‘public’ mean government etc. and private me individuals and corporations etc?