Posts Tagged ‘Pope John Paul II’

At long last, here’s the final installment on Fr. Bryan
Hehir’s next speaking gig on April 30 in the Diocese of St. Petersburg, Florida.  In Part 1 we talked about Fr. Hehir keynoting along with another speaker who advocates for gay priests and gay culture, and in Part 2 we talked about him also sharing the podium with a priest who changed the liturgy and communion rite in his diocese in ways that had been previously rejected by the Vatican and USCCB and were outside of the General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM). Now we’ll finally look at Bishop Robert Lynch’s leadership of the Diocese of St. Petersburg where the talk and conference are taking place.

First a little background on Bishop Robert Lynch.  He worked at the National Council of Catholic Bishops starting in the early 1970’s and was associate and general secretary of the NCCB from 1984 until 1995.  So, he and Fr. Hehir go way back. There is much that seems wrong happening under his leadership: ending Perpetual Eucharistic Adoration, taking no action to prevent the starvation death of Terri Schiavo in 2005, allowing Schiavo’s former husband to have a Catholic wedding after the premeditated murder of his wife, sexual harassment accusations from a male employee (known for his “muscular physique”) settled for $100K and steering $30 million in no-bid church construction contracts to another “muscular triathlete.”  So given all that in addition to what we reported in Parts 1 and 2, of course one might just ask the question, does it make  sense for a senior archdiocesan official like Fr. Hehir to implicitly endorse all of the above by speaking at his conference?  Here are the details:

1. St. Petersburg  Diocese ends Perpetual Eucharistic Adoration: Ignoring all of Pope John Paul II’s repeated pleas for the promotion of Perpetual Eucharistic Adoration, the Diocese of St. Petersburg issued new guidelines which on September 1, 2000 ended the practice of perpetual exposition of the Blessed Sacrament in parishes, and only allows worship of the Eucharist reserved in tabernacles.

For parishes that wish to inaugurate adoration of the Blessed Sacrament the Bishop says they should “reflect on… their commitment of time and money to social services.” Among other reflections, they should ask, “Does the eucharistic bread look like bread?”

2. Bishop Lynch took no action to help save the life of Terri Schiavo in 2005 and instead issued bizarre statements undermining efforts to save her.   A must-read is this article from LifeSite News

The Florida Catholic Bishops’ conference has stated plainly that Terri’s means of receiving food and water does not constitute ‘extraordinary’ means of preserving her life, and is a simple requirement of ordinary care. ..Bishop Lynch’s comments are bizarre and shocking given the fact that Michael Schiavo has abandoned his wife and has taken up an adulterous liaison with another woman with whom he has sired two children and has campaigned to end Terri’s life by starving her to death.

Bishop Lynch moves from the bizarre and shocking to the outrageous when he implies that this lack of “peace,” is the fault of her parents for being determined to save her life. ..Lynch goes on to say that the decision to starve Terri to death is one that will be made by ‘a family’ which, incomprehensibly, he identifies as Michael Schiavo alone.

Inexplicable also is the apparent unconcern of the Bishop for saving Terri’s life, an indifference that will outrage Catholics since he also took no action when Michael refused to allow Terri visits from a priest and to receive the sacraments.

According to a report in LifeSite news published after Terri’s death,  Fr. Gerard Murphy of the Diocese of St. Petersburg, Florida actually helped Judge Greer make the decision to dehydrate and starve Terri to death. Turns out that Fr. Murphy testified on behalf of Michael Schiavo, and Bishop Lynch supported Father Murphy’s seriously flawed position. Heres more:

The Catholic Media Coalition called Bishop Lynch’s behavior “baffling.”

COMMENTARY – Catholic Bishops Send Conflicting Message On Respecting Life

A Revolutionary to the Core

Bobby Schindler Reveals Shocking Support by Catholic Clergy for Sister’s Euthanasia Killing

Cardinal (Renato) Martino issued a stirring appeal from Rome shortly before Terri’s death when he said,

Whoever stands idly by without trying to prevent the death of Terri Schindler-Schiavo becomes an accomplice to murder.

Bishop Lynch did nothing.

Fr. Hehir, just curious, did you ever drop a dime to your pal Bishop Lynch when poor Terri was being starved to death and ask him to use the full influence of his episcopal position to speak out in favor of saving her life?

3.  To add insult to injury, Bishop Lynch allowed a Catholic wedding for Michael Schiavo and the mother of his two children after Michael had Terri starved to death. This is in opposition to Canon 1090 which states , “One who, with a view to entering marriage with a certain person, brings about the death of one’s own spouse or of the other person’s spouse, invalidly attempts that marriage.”  See:

Neither Shalt Thou Kill Thy Spouse

Schiavo-Centonze Marriage At Risk

Then there’s the matter of the St. Petersburg Diocese’s law firm (Divito and Higham) having contributed the maximum amount possible to the reelection campaign of Judge George Greer, the judge at the core of the Schiavo case who supported efforts of Michael Schiavo and his attorney, euthanasia advocate George Felos to end Terri’s life. They made this contribution at about the same time that the late Pope John Paul II issued his statement disallowing death by starvation and dehydration. How can a diocese be pro-life when the Bishop’s own general counsel is giving money to support a judge who agreed to starve an innocent person to death?

4. The story of Bishop Lynch wouldn’t be complete without a few more tawdry incidents. For example, theres the allegation of sexual harrassment against him from a male staff member and friend that was settled for $100,000

William Urbanski, diocese spokesman and former Lynch aide, filed a complaint with the diocese alleging that Lynch had made sexual advances towards him.

He initially appreciated Bishop Lynch’s lavish gifts–stereos, cameras, upscale clothes. But he began to feel increasingly uncomfortable when Bishop Lynch would touch and massage him.  He said that Lynch forced him to share a hotel room when they traveled on business together, pressured him to photograph his muscular physique in a speedo bathing suit, and that Lynch had grabbed his thigh as the two drove in a car. He also claimed that on one trip, Lynch had come out of the shower nude to show Urbanski how much weight he had lost. Lynch admitted he may have may have crossed the line between friendship and work and described the matter as a misunderstanding: “I did not intend anything. We were close friends.”  A diocesan investigation, led by three close Lynch aides, found no evidence to back Urbanski’s allegations of advances. Mr. Urbanski said investigators never interviewed him.

Nonetheless, the diocese paid $100K as severance under the condition that Urbanski not sue.  Is anyone else wondering why a diocese would fork over $100,000 from donations to support the Church if the allegations has zero substance?  Here’s some additional reading on that tawdry situation:

The story of Bishop Robert Lynch (a “must read”)

Church paid $100K to Lynch aide

Despite Anger, Urbanski not shunning religion

Oh by the way, then we also have Bishop Lynch steering $30 million in no-bid construction contracts to another friend, David Herman, who like Urbanski, is a muscular triathlete. Lynch and Herman had vacationed together to places including Hawaii, Israel, and Rome.  The St. Petersburg Times reports:

Lynch had given every construction contract over which he exercised sole control to a friend, David S. Herman, without seeking competitive bids or interviewing other established contractors in the area.  According to diocesan figures, Herman Construction Services was awarded contracts totaling $30.3-million since 1996, when Lynch became bishop.

Contractor for diocese jobs calls Lynch ‘good friend’

Diocese projects go to Bishop’s friend

So to summarize, we have a Cabinet secretary of the Archdiocese of Boston going to keynote at a Eucharistic Conference in Florida along with a priest who advocates for gay priests and the gay culture (including gay movies and books) and along with another priest who ordered his diocese to adopt new rules for the sacrament of Communion that had been previously rejected by the Vatican and U.S. bishops.  And he’s speaking in a diocese where the bishop banned perpetual Eucharistic adoration, slammed pro-lifers for objecting to the most rabid pro-abortion president in history being honored at Notre Dame, was described by a Vatican official as an accomplice to the premeditated murder of an innocent disabled woman, settled a case of sexual harassment against one male employee for $100,000 and steered $30 million in no-bid contracts to another male friend.  This blogger commented, “Would Bishop Lynch chase the money lenders out of the temple or would he have ATMs installed?”

Any readers in the Diocese of St. Petersburg or elsewhere, I urge you to contact the papal nuncio and Congregation of Bishops and ask to have this trainwreck of a conference with its scandal-mired speakers cancelled.  (Contact info is here). And if the judgment of a Cabinet secretary like Fr. Bryan Hehir after 44 years in the priesthood is that this conference is where he wants to speak and hang out with his friends, this is yet another reason why his opinions should be ignored.

Should the conference proceed intact, they will no doubt have a lovely time together April 30-May 1.

Read Full Post »

Folks, we’re now in the homestretch on Fr. Bryan
Hehirs social justice convocations and speakers & sponsors he recruits who’ve shown anti-Catholic agendas. First-time readers may want to start with Fr. Hehirs 2006 Social Justice Conference (sponsored by the ACORN-funding Catholic Campaign for Human Development with a speaker who organized a churchs march in Boston’s Gay Pride parade). Also check-out 2009 Conference reports Part 1 and Part 2.

The final speaker at the 2009 Conference we’ll cover is Tiziana Dearing, President of Catholic Charities of Boston.  Its a six-figure job based on what other heads of regional Catholic Charities earn.  Oh and she was hand-picked by Bryan Hehir for the job and was a student of his, and he was also her spiritual director.  To be fair from her resume she looks to be a strong academic and professional background but at the same time some of her public statements and support for anti-Catholic causes, left-wing radical activisits and politicians are troubleing.  Here are a few highlights from her background we thought readers would be interested in knowing.  Lets see what the student apparently learned from the teacher…

Support for Pro-Abortion Politicians

Seems like you can only get hired by Fr. Bryan Hehir or put up as a speaker at an event if you’ve either given to a pro-abortion politician or supported some effort that works against the Church, and Ms. Dearing is no exception.

First of all, according to  Fundrace, in the 2004 election cycle, Dearing donated $300 to the U.S. presidential campaign of pro-abortion Sen. John Kerry.  Not a lot, some might say, but it still says something.

In 2003, she spoke on WBUR about “Politics and Family Relationships” to share the challenges of being a Hillary Clinton supporter in the face of her in-laws who were strongly conservative.  (You can find the roughly 4-minute segment  starting at about 44:45).  Ms. Dearing said in college she was “leaning left of left” when she and her future husband met. Now married and more mature, she complained in her narrative about having been lectured for more than a decade by her mother-in-law about Hillary and “the evils of a power-hungry woman with no respect for other women who care to raise their families.” For years Dearing said she:

remained puzzled and stunned by the ferocity of her [mother inlaw’s] dislike [for Clinton].  There was no reasoning, no looking at the pros and cons. No separating the policies from the person. Full-on contempt.

Puzzled and stunned, huh?  So, there would be no logical or reasonable basis whatsoever for someone to have a dislike for Hillary and Bill Clinton.  Gosh, where should I start in explaining this further?

Support Community Organizer & Obama Campaign Architect, Marshall Ganz

For those infamiliar with Marshall Ganz, allow me to share some background for a moment and then you’ll see the connectoin with Tiziana Dearing and Fr. Hehir.  Marshall Ganz is a professor at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government.  Ganz’s expertise is in community organizing and he teaches organizing for change. He is considered by some to be “a giant” in the field of community organizing, with seminal experience going back to the civil rights movement and working with Cesar Chavez’s United Farm Workers.   Ganz was an early architect of Voice of the Faithful, an organization whose motto is “Keep the Faith, Change the Church” and that called for radical restructuring of the Catholic church. As Catholic Culture put it, “He helped to organize this movement against the Catholic Church in which innocent faithful suffered harassment for doing nothing more than what Americans are promised in the U.S. Constitution, exercising their freedom to worship…This organization does not seek to encourage Catholics to proclaim and live their faith, but rather to take control of the Catholic Church and change its teaching and morality.”  Shortly after Cardinal Bernard Law resigned Ganz is reported to have said to a small gathering of Harvard colleagues working with him on Voice of the Faithful, “Congratulations, we have just brought down a Cardinal!”  He is also widely credited with devising the successful grassroots organizing model and training for Barack Obama’s winning 2008 presidential campaign.

Whats the tie-in with Ms. Dearing and Fr. Bryan Hehir?  Fr. Bryan Hehir and Marshall Ganz are both professors at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government and here they both are under the umbrella of the Hauser Center on Nonprofit Organizations, which Tiziana Dearing ran as executive director before she became President of Catholic Charities.  And Ganz didn’t just have an affiliation with the Hauser Center—this April 2006 newsletter discusses a variety of courses and seminars he taught, as well as other events with Bryan Hehir and Catholic dissident Mary Jo Bane as panelists.  It also reveals how the Archdiocese further entwined itself with the Hauser Center by enlisted the Hauser Center’s Prof. Jack McCarthy to lead the Archdiocese’s efforts around financial transparency.

But I digress.  Here are  few examples of Tiziana Dearing and Marshall Ganz’s work: 

  • Tiziana Dearing as executive director helped Ganz propagate his left-wing Saul Allinsky-style organizing models and training to broader audiences.  Here’s Ganz’s gushing appreciation to Ms. Dearing for her help:

 I’d like to thank…for their creative, careful, and persistent work designing this website. Thanks to Tiziana Dearing, Executive Director of the Hauser Center for her vision and consistent support turning that vision into reality.

Organizers identify, recruit and develop leadership; build community around leadership; and build power out of community….Organizers work through campaigns…Campaigns polarize…

 Alinsky and Bobo offer some “how to’s” for organizing strategy and tactics.  Reference: Saul Alinsky, Reveille for Radicals

  •  Marshall Ganz on the Obama healthcare initiative that brings socialised medicine to 1/7 of the U.S. economy

…progressive health care activists need to take to the streets. I don’t know a single significant social change accomplished in this country that hasn’t involved civil disobedience.”  (October 2009 interview)

Ganz was reflecting on the Obama administration’s struggle to summon public support for healthcare reform. He believes Obama’s team forgot the Saul Alinsky maxim that good organizers have split personalities–they polarize audiences in order to mobilize for a cause, and after building power, they depolarize to settle for negotiated gains.  “You have to create the urgency and the need for action, which inherently involves a process of polarization,” Ganz explained, “but then, to actually settle anything, you have to shift and be able to negotiate….Returning to “Rules for Radicals,” Ganz added, “It’s like Alinsky once said, ‘The liberals need radicals.’… Unless you have that pressure out there, it’s not going to happen.” (The Nation, March 5, 2010)

Lest we forget at least an over-the-shoulder acknowledgment to the very first radical: from all our legends, mythology, and history (and who is to know where mythology leaves off and history begins–or which is which), the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom–Lucifer.

Oh, by the way, did I forget to mention that Hillary Clinton’s college thesis was a tribute to Marxist Saul Alinsky?  As an article by HUMAN EVENTS Assistant Editor Amanda Carpenter makes clear, the study of Alinsky’s methods apparently created much of Sen. Clinton’s political persona, and formed the basis of her political methodology.

Hillary Clinton’s political methods were founded on the theories of a 1960s radical about whom she wrote her college thesis in 1969…She titled the paper, written to fulfill her Bachelor of Arts degree at Wellesley College, “There is Only the Fight.” It praises the work of radical activist Saul Alinsky, a man who epitomized a self-interested no-holds barred campaign style that Hillary has emulated in later years.  Clinton’s savvy-but-ruthless politics, including the “politics of personal destruction” she so often condemns but more often practices, seem rooted in Alinsky’s famous rules for radicals.  

According to MSNBC, in her thesis, Clinton wrote:

Much of what Alinsky professes does not sound ‘radical.’ His are the words used in our schools and churches, by our parents and their friends, by our peers. The difference is that Alinsky really believes in them and recognizes the necessity of changing the present structures of our lives in order to realize them.”

(So it all comes back to Hillary!)

Seriously, since Tiziana Dearing and Bryan Hehir are both obviously buddies with Marshall Ganz, why haven’t they asked him to focus his talents in community organizing towards things like vocations to the priesthood, where the shortage in the Archdiocese could lead to more parish closings?  Fr. Hehir and Ms Dearing, how’s about you introduce Marshall to Fr. Dan Hennessey over in the Vocations Office next week?  Or how about Ganz getting introduced to Fr Richard Clancy and the college campus ministry folks?  If you could organize some communities to raise money for them, they could focus on saving the souls of college students rather than going out and raise private funds to support the great work they’re doing.  How about community organizing to advance the agenda of the American Life League or Mass Citizens for Life, or for MassResistance, that’s fighting the gay agenda in schools and society, or for our own Catholic Appeal, or for Catholic Charities, or the Little Sisters of the Poor, or the Missionaries of Charity or Sisters of Life?  

Tiziana Dearing Criticism of Pro-Lifers

I was thinking maybe I should just stop at this point, but I thought this post would be incomplete without sharing one more public comment from Ms. Dearing. 

In this 2005 radio editorial, we hear how “Massachusetts resident Tiziana Dearing has been frustrated with the rhetoric she has heard from both sides of the recent debates over life issues.”  Listen starting at around 22:40.

The country has been talking a lot about life, and somehow the conversation seems so much cheaper than the real thing.  The Terry Schiavo case, death of the Pope..battles around appointing pro-life judges…All of these are serious issues, but all of these have been hijacked in one way or another by one side or the other—to promote what seems less about a culture of life and more about pure political agenda. One side has chosen fear-mongering.  They seem to argue that life is so fragile, its flutter so tenuous, that it has to be defended with a fierceness, a zealotry, a kind of meanness that seems to give no credence to life’s robust, nearly indestructible essence. And the other side seems so afraid to give ground to its opponents that it denies any fragility at all.  All questions of life at any stage seem to get treated cavalierly, as if any qualm any instinct to reach out a protecting hand is fundamentally  both ideological and traitorous. I don’t buy either side…I think  most of us understand better than we’re given credit for both sides of the stories we’re hearing…Life is not a wedge issue…It’s what we have in common with all its nuance.

Is life in the womb “robust” and “nearly indestructible”?  Ask the 52 million babies aborted in the past 37 years.  Does your colleague Marshall Ganz refrain from fear-mongering?  Are zealous, polarizing tactics OK when you’re trying to advance a Marxist or socialist agenda, but not OK when someone is trying to protect the life of the unborn against those who simply “won’t reach out a protecting hand” and instead advocate taking the life of an unborn person?

To Ms. Dearing, Fr. hehir, others identified in this blog, and all of the “social jusstice” advocates who take issue with the opinions in these posts,  I point you to Pope John Paul II’s apostolic exortation Christifideles Laici ON THE VOCATION AND THE MISSION OF THE LAY FAITHFUL IN THE CHURCH AND IN THE WORLD:

Above all, the common outcry, which is justly made on behalf of human rights-for example, the right to health, to home, to work, to family, to culture- is false and illusory if the right to life, the most basic and fundamental right and the condition for all other personal rights, is not defended with maximum determination.

This concludes our 3-part blog series on the speakers and sponsors Fr. Bryan Hehir has featured at his two Archdiocesan Social Justice conferences.  I am hard pressed to understand why these programs with these speakers and sponsors would be run by any Catholic archdiocese and why the organizer of them would still be a position of leadership.  Can anyone in the Pastoral Center in Braintree offer an explanation for this?

Read Full Post »