Tuesday, May 03, 2005

Hankering for purges, eh?

There's been a lot of blather on various of the listservs, fora, and comboxes about why it's taking so long for the purges to start. After all, we've had a new pope for two weeks already! I have trouble understanding these kind of things even though I've lived in one of the Church's favorite battlegrounds all of my adult life. A particularly nasty sample was in my mail this morning. He writes, about a particular metropolitan archbishop who has not been accused or convicted of anything:

he needs to be removed, defrocked, and indicted, convicted, and imprisoned for multiple crimes. ....God can judge him from there.

Why? If anyone has evidence of wrongdoing, it is that one's duty, not option, to present it to the district attorney and to the nuncio. Until it's public, it doesn't belong on a listserv or in a combox. If there's no evidence, this kind of talk never belongs. Even the least favorite metropolitan is a successor to the apostles, anointed to teach and to rule, and is a priest forever, at whose hands we receive the Holy Eucharist, and should receive respect and honor for this cause alone --- no matter how least favorite.

With this kind of talk in circulation, it's another reminder to pray especially for the poor unfortunates among us who have to wear the purple and the red beanies, which are a great burden and, in these days, make one an open target besides. One's own, yes, but all of the others also, and especially the ones not particularly loved or admired.


Terrence Berres said...

Sure, this leaves the person accused of wrongdoing with no recourse to clear his name. But wasn't that the problem with Archbishop Weakland publicly saying (blathering?) that certain people were not welcome in our Archdiocese?

Karen Marie said...

Why should our father have been less than protective of us? He was and is right about Mr. Likoudis, though he did not publicise that judgment, Mr. Likoudis did, and he was also correct about that now-defunct radio network which claimed to be Catholic but specialized in a talk format completely unaccountable to anybody about calumny, detraction, and other offenses against truth.

Even if he had not been right, we still had a duty to respect and to obey in everything except sinning, just as we have that duty toward our current archbishop, +Timothy.

By the way, the loudmouth on the listserv was referring neither to +Rembert nor to +Timothy, so rest your heart, Terrence.

See you at the Pallium Lecture????

karen marie

Terrence Berres said...

As to Mr. Likoudis, Archbishop Weakland wrote, "...although I have promised myself I would not demonize those who disagree with me, I believe you come as close to being a truly evil person as I expect to met in my lifetime." The letter copies in the Wanderer Forum; it was not a private communication.

Our former Archbishop's unwelcome to Catholic Family Radio appears to be have been contemporaneous with the negotiations with Mr. Marcoux. The former is as plausibly about protecting us as the latter.

Terrence Berres said...

P.S. Pallium Lecture? I'm on my way.