October 22nd Update on Fr. Pavone/Bishop Zurek Row

Jill Stanek has reveals some previously unknown facts in Fr. Pavone's crucible that paints a rather disturbing picture of Bishop Zurek.

In addition, I am aware of a letter Bishop Zurek wrote on October 5, finally acknowledging for the first time that he indeed had in his possession PFL’s financial statements for 2006, 2007, 2008, and 2010, as well as “[i]ncomplete financial statements” for 2009 (about which he requested more information, which PFL promptly submitted).

In that letter Bishop Zurek also acknowledged having the 2010 financial statements for Rachel’s Vineyard and Gospel of Life.

To clarify, PFL submits all financial statements and audits to Father Pavone’s diocese and members of PFL’s board of directors as soon as they are completed.
Thus, Bishop Zurek was admitting that the Amarillo Diocese has had PFL’s up-to-date financial records in its possession from the time Father Pavone joined the diocese in 2005 – contrary to Bishop Zurek’s allusion in his September 9 letter to all U.S. bishops that Father Pavone had “rebuff[ed] my every attempt at calling for financial transparency.”

If true, saying Bishop Zurek is 'misleading' is a charitable characterization of... a liar.

God save us from the wolves in mitres.

Update on the Father Pavone Kerfuffle

This situation certainly got a bit uglier this week, didn't it.

When Bishop Zurek claimed Fr. Pavone was a no show to a scheduled meeting, I thought to myself, surely there is a crossed wire but I wasn't exactly edified by the explanation.

I get the part where the canon lawyer sends messages to Bishop Zurek saying he's advised Fr. Pavone not to meet with without a mediator. You've got a Bishop with absolutely zero on the record for defending the murders of the innocents implying some kind of canonical crime has taken place, Fr. Pavone has refused to provide evidence that clears him and he is therefore 'suspended'. The Bishop's statements are also suspect for political motive as he asked the faithful to stop giving money to Priests for Life. Even a crappy canonical lawyer wouldn't let a meeting happen without counsel.

Where this story starts to lose me, is how the meeting didn't get off the Bishop's calendar which ultimately led to him waiting like a fool for Fr. Pavone to show up.

The dynamic between a bishop and a priest is different than one between a bishop and a lay person, but coming from a unique perspective of a diocese headed by a weak and paralyzed bishop who is letting Bryan Hehir and his political commorades from the Democratic National Party persecute the Catholic religion from the Chancery, our experiences here may help shed light onto the situation.

Forgive the length of this parable but I believe it's important...

Say what you will about the flaws of Cardinal Law, but when one of his priests was shacking up with a lover or the deposit of faith was being hijacked, when the faithful made the situation known to him, he put the kibosh on it - suspended and removed priests, tried to get them spiritual counseling. With the exception of a few renegades out on the margins, most of them just quietly complied. I have numerous examples I won't bore you with, but anyone with a long history of defending the faith on the ground will confirm that this is the truth.

Bishops come with a variety of personalities and when the guard changes, seasoned activists have to learn what people to send to get the message across so that it is received and acted upon.

This is how we conduct our affairs across the spectrum in our lives. Each of us has an animus. We are attracted to people who are similar because we can speak freely. But we have to learn as a mother, a father, a friend, a colleague - how to interact or be affectionate and even love when it is appropriate. When a relationship evolves to a personal one, we guard our own animus and learn how to deliver a message in a way that it will be received.

We are not always on our toes. Sometimes we misfire. Like when you have a teenager who is not such a hot driver and every time she borrows the car, she brings it home with a new scratch or dent in it. You don't always take the time to reflect on ways to deliver a message in ways that particular child can receive the message for the umpteenth time. Oops, I digress!

The point is, in every personal, professional, ministerial, evangelical or casual relationship, we have to learn how to get the puck past the goalie.

When a new Bishop is appointed, there is a period of trial and error.

There was an interim sheriff after Cardinal Law - Bishop Lennon. He is faithful to the Magisterium but somewhat naive, with a gentler personality. Any rational and seasoned activist knows that..how shall I say this...McKinley is not the person to send to deliver the message and ask for his assistance. I can put the package of facts together, explain how this is affecting families, salvation, children and call the troops together to brainstorm on how to calibrate the message. We pick out people to deliver the message in various ways. If we are lucky, we can find a soul in the Chancery who is on the pursuit of truth and serving Christ, come what may, who will mediate. Christ's church was lucky to have a few good solid priests in the Chancery at that time.

Most things are taken care of quietly and under the radar in this kind of matrix. The priests are preserved from the public scandal and the faithful are restored to truth. It is a win-win situation.

Then, Cardinal O'Malley came moseying on down the road. For the period of trial and error, which took approximately five years and hundreds of people, every recourse to truth was met with obfuscation, lies, public slander, punishing and persecuting people who speak the truth. He fires, or causes to be fired, anyone who makes known that when it comes to a choice to being loyal to him and disloyal to truth and Christ's Church, they will choose Christ. This is a threat to a Bishop whose administration has agendas other than serving truth and Christ. The Cardinal has the peculiar theological attraction to priests who create sexual scandal - either in the presbyterate or among the faithful and priests and lay people who reject Church teaching on the sanctity of life. Be surrounds himself with them. He appoints them to teach their errors to the faithful and children.

At some point you realize that no matter who you send to deliver the message good faith efforts to preserve the priest's reputation are being hijacked at the expense of the salvation of souls - and in the case here in Boston, literally the murders of innocent children with a contract put out by the Cardinal. People who gather to serve Christ have to acknowledge the deposit of faith is under siege at the hands of the Bishop and make the decision to go public to warn potential victims of the physical and spiritual abuses perpetrated with the consent of the Bishop. This is the procedure we are to follow given to us from the Christ. No allegiance or loyalty is owed to a wolf. If there is a wolf in the pack, you separate from the wolf and turn your allegiance to Christ and His Church. Warn others.

When it reaches this point, they respond with public messages that they would like to sit down and resolve the situation by chatting with you. The reality of the situation is, you know and in fact everyone who has been meeting with his nibs privately to resolve the situation knows, you've already gone beyond the call of duty to resolve the matter behind closed doors and the only fruit it brings is protections for their culture warriors through the persecution, bullying and threatening of our good priests and faithful laity.

When they call for these meetings, you tell them - and in no uncertain terms - the reason why you are finished with meetings. You're happy to have a meeting but the next meeting will be about proceeding together to Rome to resolve the conflict - in unity. When they ignore that offer and you continue to publicly expose their corruption, along will come another offer for a private meeting. You may even get a specific offer with a specific date and time that has been set aside on the Bishop's schedule.

You again lay out the history the four or five years of trying to go through the proper channels in good faith. At the end of the communication, everyone reading it knows...there will be no stinking meeting. You have declined the invitation. The meeting gets removed from the Bishop's calendar. We are under no obligation to run a fool's errand to give legitimacy to a warped agenda.

Being from Boston, I know priests who have had a material conflict with the Cardinal's goon squad in the Chancery that has sadly gone through all of the stages above. The difference is, their communications say they'll be happy to meet, providing a third party is present who will represent their canonical rights and due process under proscribed law. It goes on and on like that for years. It is not a good situation.

It sounds to me like there have been communications between Fr. Pavone and Bishop Zurek for some time now and they have reached this stalemate. What I don't understand is how on earth the proposed meeting was not removed from the Bishop's schedule. No matter how bad things get, the courtesy of a reply to decline the Bishop's invitation should have been made crystal clear. You don't leave the man sitting in his office waiting for you. That only serves to light a fire to the emotions that are not serving anyone.


I absolutely disagree with Ed Peters that this proposed meeting posed no risk to Fr. Pavone. Bishop Zurek has implied Fr. Pavone has committed a canonical crime and has been 'suspended'. He has implied he needed to reign Fr. Pavonee in because he may be a thief and his apostolate could be a sham. The Bishop needs to be a man and acknowledge his own behavior and these serious allegations, denied by Fr. Pavone and Priests for Life, have contributed to the deterioration.

The fact that the Bishop would object to a discussion of Fr. Pavone's canonical due process doesn't come across to me as a man whose intentions for the outcome are pastoral or righteous.

There's only thing thing about the situation I can honestly say with full conviction of the heart: The battle between these two strong personalities need our prayers.

Pro-life massacres at the USCCB

Reality TV has another disturbing (though not surprising) youtube on the USCCB.

They apparently have not only been paying annual dues (minimum of $1000) to be a member of the Leadership Conference for Civil and Human Rights, they are actually involved in fundraising for them.

Active leadership in a Conference for Civil and Human Rights sounds all Martin Luther Kingy, doesn't it?

Makes you think about fighting discrimination, working to protect conscience protections, religious liberties, pounding the pavement for senior citizens, legal assistance for the poor.

But, the civil rights leadership conference the USCCB fund-raises for is something completely different.

This Leadership Conference for Civil and Human Rights includes strategizing to defeat the pro-life movement with legislative initiatives designed to support planned parenthood and lobbied hard in Congress to defeat pro-life judges.

Like many others in the pro-life movement, I'm extremely disappointed that those who created a distraction about whether "john carr" was "pro-life" have been silent on the mounting evidence that the USCCB has been generously and radically funding legislation and initiatives that are nefarious.

With all due respect to John Carr, his characterizations that people making noise about a Bishop's Conference that has destroyed Catholic education, catechesis and our Liturgy, are "attacking" the Bishops, CCHD and now him, are people who can't find anything good to say about the Church, is a cheap shot.

"I would distinguish between those who have concern for the poor and wonder whether we're doing it the right way and those who simply disagree with the priority and the methods of CCHD," Carr said. "And then there are some who frankly have been attacking the bishops, the Conference, CCHD, and now me, and they've never found anything good to say about the church and its work."

Neither do I believe it is fair to characterize the criticism as people who just don't want to be friends with everyone or give everyone the benefit of the doubt.

"The polarization in public life is now coming over to Catholic life," Carr said. But while he would rather we "give each other the benefit of the doubt," what might be most telling about this story is how one audience member this morning responded.

"Unfortunately these days, if you're friends with everyone, somebody will condemn you," Louise Johnson of Modesto, California told me this evening. "It's not all that unusual" to hear such attacks within parishes and dioceses, she continued. "Social justice ministers run into this frequently because there's a lot of one-issue people who don't see the whole picture."

How asinine.

Nobody believes we can't be friends with people who are prochoice or for that matter work even with them on initiatives to help the poor.

We all work with people who are prochoice. What we don't do is join groups and sit on boards of directors, fund-raise for groups that make defeating the pro-life movement part of their mission, even if they give away free groceries and cars to the poor.

Giving out free groceries and cars is commendable. We can be friends with people who give out free groceries and cars. We can fund-raise and sit on their boards.

In fact, there are plenty of initiatives who work for the poor who don't simultaneously work on abortion legislation and defeating pro-life judges.

Knock yourselves out.


If slavery is part of the mission statement of people who give away groceries and cars, nobody would have any problem understanding why we can't sit on their boards of directors or funnel money into it from the USCCB.

Nobody would be in the public square implying pro-lifers are unfriendly or one-issue people who don't see the bigger picture of the good works of people promoting slavery legislation in addition to giving out groceries and cars.

They'd never have the gall.

They wouldn't get away with it.

Pro-lifers should stand up and be counted. Reject the intellectual dishonesty and nudge people into the light.


There's deafening silence from the USCCB.

Personally, I'm a little confused why Fr. Pavone is on board with this. Being fresh out of the scandal of having him actively campaign for proabortion candidate Scott Brown, perhaps my perspective is jaded.


Our friends at the American Life League and others who are indexing the breathtaking farce of the USCCB in what could very well be one the most destructive organizations to the Catholic faith from within possibly in history, not only deserve honesty, they deserve our zealous support.

I join those who are calling for a radical restructure, if not dissolution, of the USCCB.

"Catholic Democrats" on who killed George Tiller

"Catholic Democrats" is claiming Fr. Pavone, George Weigel and Deal Hudson killed George Tiller.

Leaders of several abortion organizations put out statements condemning the violence. Among them was Fr Frank Pavone, a conservative political activist who had a high profile during the recent controversy at Notre Dame. He said, "We at Priests for Life continue to insist on a culture in which violence is never seen as the solution to any problem."

Fr Pavone might have stopped there. But in an email circulated to his supporters, he listed a series of similar murders that occurred during the 1980s, and said, "The point should not be missed that the killings of other abortionists and their staff ... occurred in an environment in which there was a lot of frustration over the pro-abortion initiatives of President Clinton. Now, there is similar frustration regarding the Obama Presidency and its support of abortion. This is not to blame our Presidents for someone's misguided actions. But neither should we miss what may be emerging as a pattern: when hope diminishes that the government is going to do something to protect the vulnerable, the temptation to take the law into one's own hands increases."

More to the point is the culpability that people like Fr Pavone himself have for this kind of violence, and the fury provoked among conservatives toward President Obama by the extreme language about Democrats and abortion. Despite the expressed intent of President Obama to work collaboratively to decrease the numbers of abortions, Fr Pavone and many other activists with Republican sympathies have condemned the President using the most insulting imaginable terms.

Fr Pavone has also joined conservative political writers like George Weigel and Deal Hudson in a campaign to have the editor of the Vatican newspaper, Giovanni Maria Vian, fired from L'Osservatore Romano because he expressed support for the abortion reduction message President Obama issued week before last at the Notre Dame Commencement.

Interesting thesis. When you raise an objection against moral evils, you are the cause of them.

Think of the possibilities. This could blow the lid off of the real causes of war - it's Bryan Hehir. Opposing the death penalty, causes lethal injections to be administered in prisons. Abraham Lincoln inspired the Klu Klux Klan. SNAP caused sexual abuse.

This thesis could also explain Whelan's co-partner who founded Catholic Democrats with him, Eric McFadden. McFadden was caught running a large prostitution ring, recruiting minors to carry out the tricks and visiting prostitutes himself up to four times a day. Whalen and McFadden must have had a lot of conversations inside of Catholic Democrats opposing the sexual exploitation of women.

I really wonder how his ideas carry over into his pediatric medical practice. Medical lectures could be the leading cause of childhood diseases.

My favorite analogy is posted over at Inside Catholic in the comment section:

Untitled
June 02nd, 2009 | 10:35am
Blaming the pro-life movement (which correctly labels abortionists as pro-abortion) for Dr. Tiller’s murder would be the equivalent of blaming Al Gore for the deeds of the Unabomber, since Gore’s book “Earth in the balance” was found among Ted Kaczynski’s belongings. Dr. Whelan’s comments are absurd.

Gore could be causing global warming.

We could go on reductio ad absurdum ad infinitum.

Tiller decapitated infants alive. He was the worst kind of sociopathic serial killer. The prolife movement is going to continue to oppose the legality and the people who are in the business of providing them - even if when it is Cardinal Sean Patrick O'Malley .