The Bishop of Scranton resigned??
#1
What the heck?! He said stress and insomnia; what  on earth were they doing to him??

He's what, 62??

Was it Rosarium's doing??

Joking aside, anyone have more background (not articles saying he resigned, I've figured that part out ;p)?
Reply
#2
Here is the announcement of resignation

http://www.dioceseofscranton.org/News/Bi...1,2009.asp

Pope Celestine V resigned from the papacy due to his incapability, he was canonized to Saint.


(09-01-2009, 05:48 AM)Iuvenalis Wrote: What the heck?! He said stress and insomnia; what  on earth were they doing to him??

He's what, 62??

Was it Rosarium's doing??

Joking aside, anyone have more background (not articles saying he resigned, I've figured that part out ;p)?
Reply
#3
(09-01-2009, 05:48 AM)Iuvenalis Wrote: What the heck?! He said stress and insomnia; what  on earth were they doing to him??

He's what, 62??

Was it Rosarium's doing??

Joking aside, anyone have more background (not articles saying he resigned, I've figured that part out ;p)?

From what I've read, the liberal constitutents of his diocese (of which there are many) have given him hell for years due to his firm commitment to orthodoxy. Every man has his breaking point. Its just too bad they've driven him to have to step down.
Reply
#4
Bishop Fulton J. Sheen resigned from his position too... Rochester, 1969.
Reply
#5
(09-01-2009, 09:02 PM)SoleRedemption Wrote: From what I've read, the liberal constitutents of his diocese (of which there are many) have given him hell for years due to his firm commitment to orthodoxy. Every man has his breaking point. Its just too bad they've driven him to have to step down.

My thoughts exactly, especially after reading his statement:

Bishop Martino Wrote:For some time now, there has not been a clear consensus among the clergy and people of the Diocese of Scranton regarding my pastoral initiatives or my way of governance. This development has caused me great sorrow, resulting in bouts of insomnia and at times a crippling physical fatigue.

***Edited to add***

Let us pray that the Holy Father replaces him with a strong, younger man, equally committed to orthodoxy! :pray:
Reply
#6
For what it's worth......from Time magazine on line......

"Bishop Martino: Too Outspoken on Abortion for the Vatican?"

http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20090902/us...9191996900
Reply
#7
There are other problems here not really related to the Church, but the bishop's responsibility nonetheless. I know very little, but I would think the problems come from these administrative areas, rather than the spiritual ones.

I only saw him once, when I stayed after mass to wait for the transference of the Blessed Sacrament to the parish I attend (a church was closed) and it was the first time since I have been unable to attend the TLM that I heard Latin sung in church.

Reply
#8
(09-02-2009, 08:35 AM)epalinurus Wrote: For what it's worth......from Time magazine on line......

"Bishop Martino: Too Outspoken on Abortion for the Vatican?"

http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20090902/us...9191996900

[QUOTE}
Finally, shortly before election day last fall, as David Gibson of AOL Politics Daily has reported, Martino showed up unannounced at a voter-education forum at a Honesdale parish to criticize organizers for discussing the comprehensive election guide endorsed by the USCCB instead of the letter he had drafted for the diocese on abortion. "No USCCB document is relevant in this diocese," Martino declared of the guide he objected to, which stated that there were a lot of issues, not just abortion, that Catholic voters should consider when making a decision about whom to support. "The USCCB doesn't speak for me."
[/QUOTE}

May be he understood that God wants the balanced truth not over-pursuing a particular issue..

We can suppose that the pro-lifers elected President Bush in 2000, and in turn no major change happened actually preventing abortions, but through the increasingly regressive taxation and through the costly everlasting unjust war the country is been sold to the usurers If the interest of the national debt made by the Republicans in the last 8th years (> 5 trillion, interest calculated by the prime rate 160 billion yearly) would not be paid to the usurers but to the families with children a family could get $40,000 for each child born, a real incentive, much effective tool against the abortion than the republican lip service. 

Bishop Martino may be saint for his humility.  Someone fighting too hard from isolated bunker position does not necessarily helps the Church. On the time when the Church was openly persecuted either in the first 3 centuries and in the 20th century, the wise advise was: try to escape first, and seek the martyrdom only if God does not give you choice.





Reply
#9
(09-02-2009, 09:25 AM)glgas Wrote: [quote='epalinurus' pid='438862' dateline='1251894956']
For what it's worth......from Time magazine on line......

"Bishop Martino: Too Outspoken on Abortion for the Vatican?"

http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20090902/us...9191996900

Quote:We can suppose that the pro-lifers elected President Bush in 2000, and in turn no major change happened actually preventing abortions, but through the increasingly regressive taxation and through the costly everlasting unjust war the country is been sold to the usurers If the interest of the national debt made by the Republicans in the last 8th years (> 5 trillion, interest calculated by the prime rate 160 billion yearly) would not be paid to the usurers but to the families with children a family could get $40,000 for each child born, a real incentive, much effective tool against the abortion than the republican lip service.  [/b]

Bishop Martino may be saint for his humility.  Someone fighting too hard from isolated bunker position does not necessarily helps the Church. On the time when the Church was openly persecuted either in the first 3 centuries and in the 20th century, the wise advise was: try to escape first, and seek the martyrdom only if God does not give you choice.

Or maybe he thought that reliance on a document like the bishops' voter guide, which gave political cover to liberal politicians who try to mislead Catholic voters into thinking all issues are equal, was a horrible policy, sure to allow liberals and their wilfully devious political followers and allied dupes to continue the slaughter of millions of babies, while giving such liberals and their party a (false) basis to argue that they are "equally good" Catholics as pro life politicians who favor positions that the bishops (as opposed to Church teaching) hold to be better (but not Church-taught) policy. 

This is the sort of argument that dishonestly equates the Church's teaching on abortion and euthanasia with its position on things like capital gains tax cuts.  Everyone who cares about this (on both sides) KNOWS the teachings are not equal, but some push to allow the issues to appear side-by-side in such voters' guides in order to provide such pro abortion politicians (and their supporters who have similarly dishonest political positions) to confuse regular Catholics and help them rationalize voting for the pro-abortion politicians.  By giving cover to politicians who do not support the Church position on issues that the Church teaches are intrinsically evil, while equating such issues with matters that are prudential judgements, the bishops help keep those liberals in office, much to the undermining of Catholic political strength in the country. 

That is what has happened over the last 40 years:  bishops and "Catholics" sympathetic to the liberal positions of many pro-abortion politicians (and some who actively favor abortion) have tried to mush all the issues together (abortion and immigration become just two issues "equally important").  This allows uninformed and unprincipled Catholics to vote for liberals who do not support the Church teaching on those matters that the Church teaches are intrinsically evil.  And Catholic Church political influence is virtually nil.  They'll get their "reward" when the liberals cram abortion at Catholic hospitals down their throats in the health care bill.  Great work. 
Reply
#10
(09-02-2009, 10:07 AM)epalinurus Wrote: This is the sort of argument that dishonestly equates the Church's teaching on abortion and euthanasia with its position on things like capital gains tax cuts.  Everyone who cares about this (on both sides) KNOWS the teachings are not equal, but some push to allow the issues to appear side-by-side in such voters' guides in order to provide such pro abortion politicians (and their supporters who have similarly dishonest political positions) to confuse regular Catholics and help them rationalize voting for the pro-abortion politicians.  By giving cover to politicians who do not support the Church position on issues that the Church teaches are intrinsically evil, while equating such issues with matters that are prudential judgements, the bishops help keep those liberals in office, much to the undermining of Catholic political strength in the country. 

That is what has happened over the last 40 years:  bishops and "Catholics" sympathetic to the liberal positions of many pro-abortion politicians (and some who actively favor abortion) have tried to mush all the issues together (abortion and immigration become just two issues "equally important").  This allows uninformed and unprincipled Catholics to vote for liberals who do not support the Church teaching on those matters that the Church teaches are intrinsically evil.   And Catholic Church political influence is virtually nil.  They'll get their "reward" when the liberals cram abortion at Catholic hospitals down their throats in the health care bill.  Great work. 

You are right that sins are not equal, but to put the mortal human life as the only non negotiable value is certainly not Christian thing. We Christians firmly belive that the highest value is God, and the mortal human life is preceded by the value of the families, nations, the whole world and the Church.

The teaching of the USCCB not opposed by the Holy See is certainly not dishonest.

From the past 40 years democrats were in power only for 12 years, when Bush left the office 7 out of 9 supreme court judges were appointed by republicans. Neither the majorities in the Congress were mostly democrats. What could someone with sound mid expect related to the abortion issue from the republicans if the did nothing or next to nothing in the past 40 years? If nothing, they why is it political issue? In your moral theology the lip service is honored not the works?

You must ask the question: what the pro lifers gained, and what the nation lost by electing the republicans for their pro life lip service in 2000? How many aborted lives were saved at the cost of $5 trillion spent mostly on unjust war killing innocent human beings? How can you support a politician who is against to give yearly $2 billion for universal vaccinations and thus save at leats 10% of the 24 million children worldwide who die due to the lack of vaccination?

What positive events happened toward your issues, and how does it balances the damage of yearly at least $160 billion additional national gift to the usurers. Why the lip service and empty promises is your issue, and why not the reality, to diminish the number of abortions?

The abortion is sin, grave sin, a menace for the society. I honor highly any pro lifer who helps mother to keep their children by advice and by helping to resolve their problems.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)