PHILADELPHIA (CNS) — Philadelphia Archbishop Charles J. Chaput is asking Pope Francis to call off the Synod of Bishops on young people this October to focus instead on the life of the bishops.
“I have written the Holy Father and called on him to cancel the upcoming synod on young people. Right now, the bishops would have absolutely no credibility in addressing this topic,” the archbishop said at an Aug. 30 conference at Philadelphia’s St. Charles Borromeo Seminary, according to a report by the website LifeSiteNews.
In its place, the archbishop suggested that the pope “begin making plans for a synod on the life of bishops,” the archbishop said.
Ken Gavin, spokesman for the Archdiocese of Philadelphia, confirmed the archbishop sent the letter to the pope, but he offered no additional comments.
The archbishop gave his comments about canceling the synod during a panel discussion called the “Cardinals’ Forum,” sponsored by the Cardinal John Foley Chair of Social Communications and Homiletics and the Cardinal John Krol Chair of Moral Theology, both at the seminary.
The archbishop, who is set to participate in the synod on youth, was one of three panelists speaking on the topic “Young People, the Faith and Vocational Discernment,” the theme of the Oct. 3-28 synod in Rome.
Hundreds of bishops and young people representing youth from across the globe will engage in discussions at that meeting and typically, the pope attends some synod conferences. After the gathering’s conclusion, the bishops make recommendations to advise the pope as he formulates pastoral policy to address the specific issues discussed.
Pope Francis had previously confirmed Archbishop Chaput, chairman of the Committee on Laity, Marriage, Family Life and Youth of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, as one of only five American bishops to attend the synod, all of whom were elected by their peers in the USCCB.
The other church leaders planning to attend are: Cardinal Daniel N. DiNardo of Galveston-Houston, USCCB president; Los Angeles Archbishop Jose H. Gomez, USCCB vice president; Bishop Frank J. Caggiano of Bridgeport, Connecticut, a member of the USCCB Committee on Laity, Marriage, Family Life and Youth; and Los Angeles Auxiliary Bishop Robert E. Barron, chairman of the USCCB Committee on Evangelization and Catechesis.
Calls for reform in the Catholic hierarchy have risen throughout the summer as the clergy sexual abuse scandal has intensified, with bishops across the globe coming under scrutiny for their potential role in covering up cases of abuse of children and young adults.
And confidence in the credibility of Catholic bishops has been eroding in the wake of allegations against the former Washington Archbishop Theodore E. McCarrick, the Pennsylvania grand jury report on 70 years of clergy child sexual abuse in the state and the explosive letter of Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano, the former U.S. papal nuncio, alleging the cover-up of Archbishop McCarrick’s abuse by bishops in the United States and in the Vatican.
In an Aug. 30 letter to the pope, Dallas Bishop Edward J. Burns asked for an extraordinary synod to address issues in the latest Catholic clergy sex abuse crisis.
“The current crisis of sexual abuse by clergy, the cover-up by leaders in the church and the lack of fidelity of some have caused great harm,” the letter said. It suggests that this synod should include topics such as “the care and the safeguard of children and the vulnerable, outreach to victims, the identity and lifestyle of the clergy, the importance of healthy human formation within the presbyterate/religious community, etc.” Source
Pope Francis’ history of causing mayhem in the Church is neatly, and painfully amusingly, summed up in the above video. Select your own “favourite” and tell us why, in your view, it is so bad – that is, if you can , in fact, “select” from the scandals of which we are reminded in that satirical “interview”.
Angry parishioners were told to “go to confession” after they raised objections to their new priest accused of “unwanted harassment” during a drunken homosexual incident.
Father Paul Milarvie was accused of trying to “constrain” a male guest at his parish house in 2010, just months after he returned to Scotland. That led to an investigation by the Archdiocese of Glasgow.
Milarvie was later allowed to keep his parish and dragged the church into a row over homosexuality after the incident was classed as “totally unworthy of a priest”.
The complaint against Milarvie alleged he invited a man to dinner at his parish house and an incident, which is disputed, occurred.
Milarvie apologised to the man, who agreed to return for a second dinner. It was during this evening he claimed he was subjected to unwanted harassment.
After an investigation, Archbishop Mario Conti later said there had been no crime committed and claimed there had been “consensual” activity, rather than an unwelcome approach by Milarvie. [Emphasis added]
He said allowing for the “morally reprehensible over-indulgence” in drink, Milarvie’s actions had been “voluntary and totally unworthy behaviour on the part of a priest”.
Now churchgoers at St Mary’s chapel in Duntocher, near Glasgow, are up in arms over the proposed move by Milarvie to their parish.
One, who asked not to be named, said: “Parishioners are outraged and disgusted at his dark secrets. Meetings are being held to discuss the way forward.
“This priest is not wanted or welcomed. It’s a disgrace after the way he’s behaved and this dreadful issue has been swept under carpet by past and present church authorities. No one is listening to the people who pay for the upkeep of the church.”
The parishioner claims they emailed and phoned Archbishop Philip Tartaglia, a friend of Milarvie, but were ignored.
He added: “People are utterly appalled. We have contacted Archbishop Tartaglia and have been met with a disgraceful attitude.
“The priest we spoke to said we should ‘go to confession’ and that Milarvie was ‘forgiven’.
“We said that wasn’t good enough and that we’re very concerned he’ll do this again. He said, ‘We don’t know if he’ll do it again but we hope not’. Disgraceful.
“People deserve to know the truth. We want this priest out. Not only of our parish but of the priesthood.”
The case, which came to light in 2012 after the church spoke out against SNP plans to legalise same-sex marriage, prompted accusations the church was confused in its attitude to homosexuality.
Milarvie, 51, was vice-rector of the Pontifical Scots College in Rome from 2001 to 2005 and rector from 2005 to 2009. He is currently the parish priest for St Flannan’s in Kirkintilloch, near Glasgow.
The Record approached both Milarvie and the Catholic Church for comment. Source
Click here to read the response of Archbishop Tartaglia to the scandal reported by us in our current, January newsletter and then vote in our poll below. It seems clear that, his health concerns together with his failure to act in the face of scandals involving his priests, Archbishop Tartaglia is not fit for office. A bishop with equal authority to himself, who is not tainted by scandal and who will deal fairly and transparently with the legitimate concerns of the faithful, would go a long way to restoring confidence in the Archdiocese of Glasgow. I can’t see how anyone could disagree with that solution to a very dysfunctional archdiocese. After all, part of the problem may be due to the Archbishop’s poor health, so in charity, the Vatican ought to do all that is possible to lighten his load. What do you think?
I’ve had a number of telephone conversations recently, today included, with very worried Catholics who are either losing the Faith themselves or who know others who are losing the Faith, because of the scandalous things Pope Francis is saying and doing. Some of these people made the mistake of “investigating” (i.e. searching online) for answers and, needless to say, some of them are now toying with all the wrong “answers” – notably sedevacantism.
In all honestly, I have scant patience with some of these people (and said so) because they apparently failed to notice the modernism of each of Pope Francis’ predecessors. Pope Francis did not appear out of the blue – each of the post-Vatican II popes prepared the path for him to take the Church by storm, so it is irksome to see the new “converts” to the battle against modernism turn the fight into a battle against Christ’s Church. Significantly, some of these new “converts” are relatively recent “converts” from their novus ordo parishes to the SSPX. It is, therefore, twice as concerning to see them risking their souls by entertaining the “anti-pope”, “anti-Christ”, sedevacantist false “answers” to the current scandalous pontificate. Instead of doing their duty as Soldiers of Christ in the battle against modernism, they become part of the problem, not part of the solution.
In these contacts with worried Catholics, I’ve given as much Church history as it is possible to squeeze into a couple of hours of conversation and I’ve quoted St Vincent de Lerins, in order to demonstrate the correct Catholic response to a bad pope, which is to resist his errors and cling to “antiquity” – that is, to Catholic Tradition – while never doubting that Christ has kept His promise to be with His Church until the end of time. Christ assured us that the gates of Hell will never prevail. He made no promise that the gates of Hell will never attack the Church, just that they will never prevail. I get the feeling, though, that there’s always something more to say, which is where you lot come into the frame…
Explain – in as few words as possible – how you would advise those Catholic who are sorely tempted to abandon the Church and go it alone – Catholicism to go, so to speak. Provide the links to articles or videos that you think will help, and, of course, pray for all Catholics who are tempted to doubt at this time. I plan to send the link to this thread to all those online readers who have contacted me in recent times, in the hope that they find it helpful.
Finally, please pray for Pope Francis who will one day be held to account by God, and made to pay for his dereliction of duty, for the scandal he is causing and for the souls which may be lost because of his false teaching. His beloved God of Surprises is, as things stand, more likely to have a few shocks than surprises in store for him at his Judgment, so we do need to pray very hard indeed – and urgently – for the conversion of Pope Francis.
Some three years or so ago, Catholic Truth was given information by concerned parishioners in a Scottish parish, when their new priest arrived and moved into the presbytery with his housekeeper. A divorcee with children (who often stayed at the presbytery), this woman – parishioners claimed – acts more like the lady of the house than the priest’s housekeeper.
Now, we know that priests’ housekeepers, like doctors’ receptionists, can, indeed, get above themselves, so we didn’t pay too much attention to that particular perception. Perhaps in order to allay fears of a possible scandal, the then new housekeeper informed some locals that the local Ordinary (bishop) knew about “the situation”. Anyway, we sympathised, explained that we didn’t feel able to publicise their concerns at that time, and went on our merry way, if not exactly rejoicing, wondering precisely how many other such “situations” are “out there”. Please note, though, that if YOU know of any such situation, do not name anyone here. Instead, if you think it is important, please email the editor privately with details.
Recently, we have been approached again about the same priest, this time by a different source. There are indicators that “Father” is living a normal family life in his comfortable presbytery, although we are not prepared to say much more than that right now, for the following reasons.
Firstly, before we publish any scandal, we always give the subject of any reports the opportunity to respond and to end the scandal. We have not yet approached this priest, and so we are not naming him in this piece. We know that his Ordinary – according to the housekeeper – knows about his domestic arrangements and approves. We will send him the link to this thread to make sure that is the case.
Secondly, since there is some time now before our next edition is due for publication (January, 2017, to be precise) we thought we would raise the issue of “naming and shaming” here, because, were we to publish the facts in our newsletter, there would be critics who would disapprove. For some reason, our critics don’t mind naming and shaming priests if they are possibly endangering children, but not causing any other scandal (even though no child is ever going to end up in Hell because he/she was abused by a priest). They do not seem to realise that, in admitting the principle of “naming and shaming”, it becomes a matter of personal judgment. And remember, we are not naming and shaming individuals at random. If Joe Bloggs is pinching from next door’s apple-tree, he’ll never make the front page of Catholic Truth. We are dealing only with public figures, such as priests and bishops who are living double lives. It seems a tragedy in its own right that some readers consider saving the reputation of a duplicitous priest to be more important than saving his soul.
So, we wish to ask bloggers to consider whether, if there were a scandal like this in YOUR parish, would you want to know? Would you want to know who pays the housekeeper’s wages? Who pays when she travels abroad with “Father”? Who is paying for her family members when they stay at the presbytery? Or would you prefer not to know?
In the absence of a promise from this priest to end the scandal, SHOULD we publish the full facts in our January newsletter – or would that be unChristian?