Georgetown gets it right on invitation to Kathleen Sebelius - The Washington Post

THE ARCHBISHOP of Washington finds it “shocking” that Georgetown University President John J. DeGioia would defend the university’s decision to have Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius participate in a commencement event in the aftermath of the furor over the Obama administration’s rule on contraceptive coverage.
What we find shocking is Cardinal Donald Wuerl’s failure to credit the proper role of a university and the importance of vigorous, open debate, even — or perhaps especially — involving matters of intense controversy and religious disagreement. Mr. DeGioia was right to stand up for the selection of Ms. Sebelius to speak at a Public Policy Institute awards ceremony during commencement weekend and to cite the university’s role in promoting this sort of exchange of ideas. The cardinal’s public slap-down of what he termed Georgetown’s “unfortunate decision” fails to recognize that critical academic function.

Click on the following to read all of this opinion piece:  Georgetown gets it right on invitation to Kathleen Sebelius - The Washington Post

Shawn Ratigan’s lawyer seeks delay in priest’s child-porn trial - KansasCity.com

 

If granted, the continuance would put trial dates for the Rev. Shawn Ratigan and his boss, Bishop Robert Finn of the Diocese of Kansas City-St. Joseph, within a month of each other.

Ratigan is charged with 13 federal felony counts relating to the possession and production of child pornography. Finn is charged in Jackson County Circuit Court with misdemeanor failure to report suspicions of child abuse for the six-month delay in reporting Ratigan to child welfare authorities after church officials learned of lewd photographs on the priest’s laptop.

Finn’s trial is scheduled to open Sept. 24.

Click on the following for all the details:  Shawn Ratigan’s lawyer seeks delay in priest’s child-porn trial - KansasCity.com

Mark Hannah: An Open Letter to My Catholic Parish RE: Its Opposition to the Affordable Care Act

Three weeks ago, while sitting in my church pew in Manhattan, and skimming through the weekly bulletin, I came across a short notice promoting a church-hosted workshop that would demonstrate the moral and Constitutional shortcomings of the Obama administration's health care reform legislation.

The notice was entitled, "A Threat to Your Religious Liberty" and referred parishioners to the activist website (backed by Catholic radio personality Al Kresta), www.StopHHS.com. Below is the email I sent to my church in response to the advertisement. I've lightly edited it, mostly to keep the parish anonymous. Three weeks later, I'm still awaiting a response. My fingers are crossed that one might arrive in the comment section here.

================================

To Whom it May Concern:

As a progressive lifelong Catholic, I was disappointed that, in our weekly bulletin, our parish has singled out the health care reform act as the main offense to our religious liberty. After all, isn't my religious liberty imperiled every time I'm compelled to pay taxes to fund unprovoked or preemptive military adventures (including the Iraq war, which Pope John Paul II publicly opposed) or to underwrite enormous and usurious financial institutions whose reckless lending practices endanger the financial security of the most vulnerable among us?

I try to separate my religious and political beliefs as much as possible, knowing that the Catholic Church is, well, catholic (in the small "c" sense -- i.e., that it's inclusive) and that my fellow parishioners have diverse political opinions. As someone who's served both as an alter boy and as a staff member for two Democratic presidential campaigns, and whose Democratic and Christian values have been instilled in me from an early age, this is no easy feat.

Diversity of political opinion seems to be a challenge that the Church is grappling with institutionally, as well. With the new health care reform law, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops is emphasizing the sanctity of life implications of the insurance mandate in their opposition to it, and many in the Leadership Conference of Women Religious (i.e., the nuns) have emphasized the compassion inherent in universal care in their support for it.

The doctrinal ambiguity over this debate (and my personal support for the law) aside, I'm concerned that the church is applying Cardinal Dolan's "new evangelism" not just to religious and moral issues, but to political issues, and it is advertising "legal" education in the workshop it's hosting. Just as I'd be uncomfortable with my political leaders interpreting the Bible for me, I'm dubious about the prospect of learning about American Constitutional law from Church leaders, with due respect. I suppose my more ultimate concern is that, as the Church continues to emulate the evangelical Christian movement in its political activism, it may risk losing salience with those of us whose reading of scripture (and our understanding of the homilies we hear each Sunday) inspires a Christian worldview that underpins a progressive political philosophy.

My question is this: Should the Catholic faith not remain larger than -- and transcend -- the vicissitudes of national politics? Or does the church expect its followers to regularly look to it for their beliefs on matters of public policy and legislation that have religious or moral implications (but, then again, don't they all)? To invoke St. Francis, please know that I seek not so much to be understood as to understand.

Respectfully,

Mark Hannah

The above is from HUFF POST:    Mark Hannah: An Open Letter to My Catholic Parish RE: Its Opposition to the Affordable Care Act

Lying alleged on abuse records - Philly.com

list included diagnosed pedophiles and priests who remained in active ministry despite admitting to or being accused of abusing minors. It was locked away in the archdiocese's Center City offices for 18 years, through two grand jury investigations and countless requests for it, until Coyne said he found it in a file given to him by a church official six years ago.

But even that is disputed.

Minutes after the lawyer testified, Bishop Timothy Senior, a top archdiocesan administrator, took the stand and denied seeing the file with the list or giving either to Coyne for safekeeping in 2006.

unexpected testimony from two prominent insiders added to the portrait of a church hierarchy rife with secrets, lies and dysfunction that both prosecutors and defense lawyers for Msgr. William J. Lynn could use to make their cases.

Click on the following for more details:  Lying alleged on abuse records - Philly.com

Civil case against Green Bay diocese heads to trial | Appleton Post Crescent | postcrescent.com

 

APPLETON — A former Fox Valley priest spent nearly eight years in prison for the 1978 sexual assaults of two young parishioners, but his victims say justice hasn’t been fully served.

A civil lawsuit that slowly built in Outagamie County’s court system for more than four years heads to trial today as brothers Todd and Troy Merryfield, formerly of Freedom, seek unspecified damages from the Roman Catholic Diocese of Green Bay based on their childhood assaults.

Over the course of the next two weeks, a jury will determine whether the diocese is civilly responsible based on allegations it knew about sexual abuse committed by John Feeney before 1978 and fraudulently failed to inform Freedom’s St. Nicholas Catholic Church of the dangers he posed to children. The diocese denies the allegations.

Click on the following to read all of the story:"Civil case against Green Bay diocese heads to trial | Appleton Post Crescent | postcrescent.com

Milwaukee Archbishop comments on Bankruptcy Court moves

 

Dear Friends in Christ,

Anytime I anticipate that there will be news about our Chapter 11 proceeding, I want to be sure to connect with you to explain what we are doing and why we are doing it.

You’ll recall that more than 570 claims were filed in the bankruptcy proceeding and in order to prepare the Archdiocesan Plan of Reorganization, it is important for us to know which of these claims qualify for compensation under the bankruptcy laws. The only way to determine this is by filing what is called an “objection to claim” motion with the court. If a particular claim or type of claim is not going to be allowed, then people need to know this.

For example, some claims have been filed that simply should not qualify for financial compensation from the archdiocese. These claims describe incidents that are not sexual abuse or make allegations against a religious order priest or a lay person who was not an employee of the archdiocese. Others are claims by individuals who previously reached a legal financial settlement with the archdiocese. In addition, the abuse claims are past the statute of limitations.

Some of these motions have been ruled upon by the bankruptcy judge and they have been appealed to the district court. Decisions on other motions are scheduled to be determined by the bankruptcy court sometime in August and even then we won’t have a final answer because those decisions will likely be appealed.

In an attempt to move the proceeding forward, the archdiocese has filed what is called a “motion for withdrawal of the reference” with the federal district court. In the motion, the archdiocese asks that the seven objections to claim motions currently with the bankruptcy court be heard and decided by the district court, which is the same court that hears any appeals of decisions by the bankruptcy court. There are three main reasons for doing this.

First, it will speed up the case and promote judicial efficiency. By August, more than a year-and-one-half will have passed since the archdiocese filed its Chapter 11 petition. Since the district court will hear the appeals anyway, we might as well move things along and let the district court answer these questions now -- it’s simply faster this way.

Second, it will save money. Without a definitive decision, the Chapter 11 proceeding will cost more – both in time and money. The archdiocese has limited resources and the longer it takes to determine what claims are eligible, the less money will be available.

Third, it will assist with the determination of which of the other claims are eligible for compensation. This is the most important aspect to be determined so a Plan of Reorganization can be drafted, allowing us to carry on the essential ministries and services of the archdiocese and pay what we can to eligible claimants.

Some will criticize us for doing this, saying it is an attempt to deny abuse survivors justice, and that every claim, regardless of what it alleges or how old it is, should simply be paid. The reality is that in each of these circumstances these types of claims are simply not allowed under bankruptcy law.

Some will say we should simply negotiate or go to mediation to settle all the claims. We could (and you’ll remember that I initiated mediation to settle the existing claims prior to filing Chapter 11), but that would not change the priority of determining which claims are eligible for compensation. Settling ineligible claims is an injustice to abuse survivors with eligible claims.

However, I remain committed to providing therapy and counseling for abuse survivors of diocesan priests, regardless of whether their claim is eligible for compensation in the Chapter 11 proceeding and I will only agree to a Plan of Reorganization that maintains our ability to provide therapy and counseling assistance to these abuse survivors. The archdiocese will ask the court to allow us to create a fund that would provide resources for therapy and counseling as long as such a need exists. We do this not because we are required to do so, but because our faith calls us to do so. I will insist that our ability to continue counseling and therapy for abuse survivors remains intact.

It is the archdiocese that, for decades, has voluntarily provided therapy and counseling assistance to survivors regardless of when abuse occurred; that established new standards for sexual abuse prevention; that dealt with perpetrators by removing them from ministry and publicly posting the names of clergy with substantiated allegations; and that requires safe environment education -- all higher standards than any other institution in our society and all standards I pledge to continue.

I apologize for this LOVE ONE ANOTHER being longer than a regular message however, I wanted you to be aware of why in our legal process we pursue this course. Please remember, if you want more information about the Chapter 11 proceeding, the latest information is always posted online here.
Please keep all involved in this proceeding, especially abuse survivors, in your prayers, and as we continue our Easter journey toward Pentecost, may we always remember Jesus’ commandment to LOVE ONE ANOTHER.

Sincerely yours in Christ,

Most Reverend Jerome E. Listecki
Archbishop of Milwaukee

St. James collections for weekend of May 13, 2012

 

St. James’ Diocesan Stewardship: last year’s goal was $103k and the pledge amount ended $46K below that goal.

Building Campaign 

May 14—Two additional pledges; net dollar pledged increase by $1,720.  $674,921 remain to be raised for next goal of $3,000,000.

May 7—Two additional pledges; net dollars pledged decreased by $5,324. $676,641 remain to be raised for next goal of $3,000,000. What is the ultimate goal $5,500,000? ($6,500,000?) ($7,500,000?) ($8,500,000?)

April 30--Three additional pledges; $620 additional dollars pledged. $671,316 remains to be raised for the $3,000,000 goal.