Papal honors in L.A.
The ever pugnacious "Rococo" over at "Blusters in the Loggia" has a post about the new monsignori in Los Angeles. The funny thing is, Mr. Palmo's comments reveal more about him than they do about L.A.
Rocco, who is an inveterate defender of Cardinal Mahony, interprets this "purple rain" of honors, as he calls it ("I have never seen an honors list the size of what LA just got") as a sign of the Holy See's benevolent view of the Cardinal and his governance of the archdiocese. In saying this, Rocco provides all the proof we need that he is as unschooled in ecclesiastical matters as he is in sound Catholic theology.
Two of the new monsignori have publicly advocated for the ordination of women as priests. The more prominent of the two, the pastor of St. Monica Church and recipient of the highest honor given to a monsignor -- protonotary apostolic -- was booed by younger L.A clergy two years ago when he called for ordaining married men and women at a priests' meeting with the Cardinal. This was reported in the L.A. Times as well as HERE.
Does Rocco really think that this is the kind of priest that Pope Benedict XVI would want to honor?
Rocco, who is an inveterate defender of Cardinal Mahony, interprets this "purple rain" of honors, as he calls it ("I have never seen an honors list the size of what LA just got") as a sign of the Holy See's benevolent view of the Cardinal and his governance of the archdiocese. In saying this, Rocco provides all the proof we need that he is as unschooled in ecclesiastical matters as he is in sound Catholic theology.
Two of the new monsignori have publicly advocated for the ordination of women as priests. The more prominent of the two, the pastor of St. Monica Church and recipient of the highest honor given to a monsignor -- protonotary apostolic -- was booed by younger L.A clergy two years ago when he called for ordaining married men and women at a priests' meeting with the Cardinal. This was reported in the L.A. Times as well as HERE.
Does Rocco really think that this is the kind of priest that Pope Benedict XVI would want to honor?
posted by Quintero at 3:15 PM
17 Comments:
Q,
Ahhhhhhh. “The whiner in the loggia”. He is a child. Does he really think he can step into my Arch-Diocese? This will be fun.
Contra Rocco, rather than a sign of approbation, it might well be Mahony's farewell honours list!
Moreover, titles and gongs are usually dished out upon the ordinary's recommendation, and Rome simply has to take his word for it.
True, Q, they may not reflect the type of people Pope Benedict may actually want to honor, but it sure says something about the process.
It stinks!
Scarlette-
'Rococo' received so many critical comments, especially after he started demanding that people give him money for his long winded rants, that he now requires registration before one can make a comment.
It's not worth the few seconds it takes to register.
Taking up Quo Vadis' comments, if the Vatican will just about accept any diocesan nomination (and only put the kybosh on a heretic), then what a great way for a certain Cardinal to say to the world: hey, look at how honored and respected my diocese is!
A slew of awards, a barrage of media hype, and everyone gets caught hook, line and sinker.
And Rocco's post is proof positive of how effective it can be!
The whole thing reminds me of the parable of the unfaithful steward.
In recognition of services rendered?
http://www.envoymagazine.com/EnvoyEncore/Detail.asp?BlogID=1838
Venerable Aussie and Quo Vaids are right in saying that the Vatican most often leaves it up the the local bishop to determine who should receive a papal honor. Hence, if you have a good bishop, then worthy men are chosen.
It has been observed that there are 4 kinds of monsignors.
1) Sign of more to come: given to a priest possibly on his way to be a bishop
2) Well done old man: given to a priest at towards the end of a life good service.
3) Booby prize: given to a chancery wonk who wont be going any farter.
(and in LA and some other places)
4) Brown nose: one who has supported the bishop's agenda
As I commented the other day, no priest is more wotrthy of this blog' attention than Monsignor Lloyd Torgerson of St Monica's. He once referred to St. Monica Parish as a "mega-church," and is nearly obsessed with Rick Warren. The church has a ROCK BAND on the altar. The man is totally out of control.
I hate to throw a spanner in the conservative Ratzi party, but could anyone tell me, if these are not the kind of men Pope Benedict would want to honour, why were they honoured?
I have wondered why the "conservative" John Paul, who was, and by many still is, lauded as the Church's great white hope, was the Pope under whom some of the worst men the Church has ever had to endure have been raised to the episcopate. I also wondered why, given John Paul's utterly dismal record of governance, he is still so vehemently defended by people who consider themselves "conservative" Catholics.
Are we going to start pulling the same wool over our eyes in the Ratzinger papacy?
It has made me wish for a clarificiation, a definition of conservative that more closely fits the facts.
The argument that I have seen above, that it is Mahoney's word that makes the Monsignor, is not quite enough.
If there is one man in the world who is aware of what sort of prelate Mahoney is, it is Ratzinger.
If he doesn't know not to take Mahoney's word, what does he know?
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Hilary,
The Catholic Church is enormous, and also teaches the principle of subsidiarity: The Pope cannot act like a substitute for cardinals and bishops.
If the Cardinal refuses to carry out the mission for which he was ordained, and also decides to obscure that mission by using his privilege at the service of his own image, there may not be much that Rome can do, other than reassign him to a task more fitting for his particular strengths and less damaging in catering to his weaknesses.
"A slew of awards, a barrage of media hype, and everyone gets caught hook, line and sinker."
I agree. Mahony and Tamberg cooked up this PR stunt for some positive media and to shore up the loyal troops for the days ahead.
Whether or not this is a favorable nod from B16 is beside the point.
The most important thing is if he is a good Shepard.
Mahony's record speaks for it self.
1) A dismal number of vocations.
2) An increasingly feminized church (Perhaps this is what Rocco prefers).
3) Young people who know little about their faith. (Please, don’t bring up the Youth Reeducation Congress as a good sign either. That type of Christianity is a mile wide and an inch deep.)
The list goes on and on.
JOSEPH D'HIPPOLITO SAYS...
I have wondered why the "conservative" John Paul, who was, and by many still is, lauded as the Church's great white hope, was the Pope under whom some of the worst men the Church has ever had to endure have been raised to the episcopate. I also wondered why, given John Paul's utterly dismal record of governance, he is still so vehemently defended by people who consider themselves "conservative" Catholics.
Bravo, Hilary! You're not the only one who sees through the invisible garments of the "naked" late Pope.
OTOH, should you dare express such sentiments in the Electronic Catholic Jonestown that is St. Blog's, you will be condemned as hating the Pope and the Church. Sad but true.
The Pope cannot act like a substitute for cardinals and bishops.
Err, yes he can. Pastor Aeternus (Vatican I) teaches that
"the Roman Church possesses a pre-eminence of ordinary power over every other Church, and that this jurisdictional power of the Roman Pontiff is both episcopal and immediate. Both clergy and faithful, of whatever rite and dignity, both singly and collectively, are bound to submit to this power by the duty of hierarchical subordination and true obedience, and this not only in matters concerning faith and morals, but also in those which regard the discipline and government of the Church throughout the world."
If the Cardinal refuses to carry out the mission for which he was ordained, and also decides to obscure that mission by using his privilege at the service of his own image, there may not be much that Rome can do, other than reassign him to a task more fitting for his particular strengths and less damaging in catering to his weaknesses.
Or he can be removed from the Sacred College and degraded.
Note that I am not saying that it would necessarily be prudent for the Pope to do so. However, to say that he can't do it is not only wrong, but heretical.
Post a Comment
<< Home