National Catholic Register
Amarillo Bishop Recalls Father Frank Pavone, Restricts His Faculties
Catholic News Service
Father Pavone suspended from ministry outside Amarillo Diocese
National Catholic Reporter
Diocese: Priests for Life's Fr. Pavone needed in Texas
Diocese of Amarillo
Sept 9 Letter From Bishop Patrick Zurek to Fellow Bishops
Diocese of Amarillo (see pages 3-5)
Jan 24 Letter From Bishop Patrick Zureck to Fellow Bishops
Priests for Life
Fr. Frank Pavone's Sept 12 Response to US Bishops Following Bishop Zurek Letter
Priests for Life
Sept. 11 Letter from Fr. David Deibel, JCL, Canon Lawer for Priests for Life to All US Bishops
Priests for Life
Independent Auditors Issue Unqualified Audit Opinion for Priests for Life
Canon Lawyer Ed Peters
Initial remarks on the Zurek-Pavone dispute
EWTN
EWTN Statement - Sept 13, 2011
I am shocked that the Archdiocese of Amarillo would make this comment: “This is patrimony of the Church.” “It belongs to the Church. People give their money over the understanding that it goes to the Church or Church auspices and programs and ministries.” I contribute to Priests For Life and have never considered that my money was going to the Church anymore than a donation to the Terry Schiavo Foundation or the St. Jude's Research Center is a donation to the Church.
ReplyDeleteOh dear, let us remember that a bishop would not act in haste. In respect for bishop's office, we should defer to his handling of this. Father Pavone once refused assignment to a parish by Cardinal Egan. Then the Vatican had to stop his attempts yo start a religious society. How many people attacked "Father" Corapi's superiors for disciplining him? Corapi has vanished - and where are the apologies to the bishop and religious superior who were only doing their duty?
ReplyDeleteI note that the Bishop DID NOT CONTACT FR PAVONE FIRST BUT COMMUNICATED TO THE NATION'S HIERARCHY, leaving Fr P. to find out things second hand. Hmmm ulterior motives, hidden agenda?
ReplyDeleteI note also the Bishop's main concern first stated was about MONEY! Hmmm Is this jealousy or a desire to control the money? The Bishop seems to have arrogated the funds given to Fr. P.'s private lay organizations as patrimony of the Church; ahem WHICH CHURCH? Amarillo?
I note also that the Bishop is in Brazil for a couple of weeks. Hmm Drops a bomb and lo-and- behold not in town and not able to be reached personally for a couple of weeks! This is post-Vat II bureaucracy at its WORSE. Where is the Bishops RELATION TO HIS PRIESTS HERE, so MUCH like a CEO to inferiors!
It's obvious that the very nature of the Pro Life apostolate is NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL, because so is the threat to Life. IT CAN NOT BE CONTAINED TO ONE DIOCESE. Cf. Fr. Marx who as a Benedictine was given permission to roam the world for Life and RETURNED TO HIS MONASTERY WHEN HIS WORK WAS DONE.
Seems this bishop does not have the imagination large enough to meet the need for a pro-life priest or properly to discern his vocation, and is thinking NARROWLY ABOUT HIS OWN DIOCESE. Seems like the Church should find some mechanism for Fr. P. to continue under a new structure, with accountability to a particular Vatican authorized superior for his priestly apostolate.
Gee. Bishop's office issues letter and then bishop goes to... Brazil?
ReplyDeleteYou really have to wonder what happened earlier in this relationship. It is really disconcerting that the diocesan concern is that Father Pavone's ministry is too "lucrative". Running a nationweide organization with 55 employees on $10 million really sounds like a shoestring operation to me -- I'm saying $10 Mil sounds frugal.