Bishop Gumbleton

[Myles Domini]

Those who participated in [url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=45800"]this thread[/url] feel free to continue here. Personally, having read what Cam had to say about the pink triangle rainbow mitre I am deeply concerned with my Lord Bishop's conduct. I will take him at face value over the sexual abuse, I dont see why one would lie over being violated in such a vile manner. However, let me use a story to illustrate:

When Alexander the Great was carrying out his conquest of the Near East he and his men found themselves desperately low on the supplies in the middle of the Persian desert. Alexander's men, faithful as ever to their inspirational commander, decided to give him the last of the water. Alexander's response was to pour the water on the ground saying that if they were not to drink he would not drink either. As the story illustrates Alexander was capable of virtue. Nonetheless, this did not make him a saint and as well as being a bloodthirsty meglomaniac he had many vices.

My point? Bishop Gumbleton has done something very commendable and shown great fortitude to come out about his abuse. Nonetheless, his actions as Bishop are questionable and his magninmous actions must not be allowed to blur that fact.

[Era Might]

[quote]Should, therefore, the superiors really have committed grievous sins, their inferiors, penetrated with the fear of God, ought not to refuse them respectful submission. The actions of superiors should not be smitten by the sword of the word, even when they are rightly judged to have deserved censure.

--Pope St. Gregory the Great, cited by Pope Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter "Sapientiae Christianae"[/quote]

While Bishop Gumbleton's writing are open to discussion and disagreement, let's keep it at that, and leave his superiors to judge him as a Bishop.

[Didacus]

Thank you for starting this thread Myles, and I am certain that 'Azriel, the friendly mod' appreicates it as well.

[quote name='Myles' date='Jan 11 2006, 12:28 PM'][snip]

My point? Bishop Gumbleton has done something very commendable and shown great fortitude to come out about his abuse. Nonetheless, his actions as Bishop are questionable and his magninmous actions must not be allowed to blur that fact.
[right][snapback]852961[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

I think this statement is rather well said.


I for one try to always keep the clearest respect to all members of the clergy; I seldomly object to anything they say. When I find myself in personnal conflict I either as kthe qeustion to the clergyman in person, or seek guidance higher up. That being said I would like to note that:

The teachings of the church are crystal clear when it comes to homosexuality; this is not what is being discussed here on this thread.
________________

That disctinction aside, I would like to ask that though his actions and wording may be questionable, are they condemnable? As i pionted out on the other thread he uses a very neutral language, and is (or seems to be) very skillful and careful of his words.

As far as his actions:

Wearing the symbols of the homosexual groups can be argued as 'compassion' towards the group though not direct support of their ideaologies. Has the bishop ever come out and said that the church teachings are wrong?

Now please don't conclude that I support his actions nor that I am trying to defend/justify them.

I don't know this person very much to tell you the truth.

I will reaffirm what I said in the other thread.

He [b]seems[/b] to be reaching out in a genuine effort towards those afflicted with SSA with compassion and understanding. Though his views might not be in accordance with the church, his intent does seem genuinely charitable.

[Azriel]

Thanks for moving this guys. I appreciate it.

[catholicinsd]

[b]His Excellency[/b] earned that style. Until you folks also earn it you are in no position to judge His Excellency.

[Fides_et_Ratio]

[quote name='Myles' date='Jan 11 2006, 02:28 PM']My point? Bishop Gumbleton has done something very commendable and shown great fortitude to come out about his abuse. Nonetheless, his actions as Bishop are questionable and his magninmous actions must not be allowed to blur that fact.
[right][snapback]852961[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
I think I missed the "commedable" memo.

What purpose does it serve for him to "come out" in this manner? As it states in the article the bishop says that he never told anybody. So why now? How is he building the Church by disclosing this to the secular media?

Money from the Church is not what the victims need. Money will not solve their problems, remove their hurt, or take away their grief. I hate how the American legal system gives people money to "solve" human abuses. Money is not the same as sexual/physical abuse, money is not the same as a life taken, etc. Giving victims money is like adding fuel to the fire. It's ignoring the REAL issues. Saying "here, go buy yourself a new car/house/etc" instead of "here, this is a great counselor who will help resolve your mental and spiritual issues"

[Fides_et_Ratio]

[quote name='Didacus' date='Jan 11 2006, 02:58 PM']Wearing the symbols of the homosexual groups can be argued as 'compassion' towards the group though not direct support of their ideaologies.  Has the bishop ever come out and said that the church teachings are wrong?[/quote]
I'm not sure that this follows.

You wouldn't agree to a bishop wearing Satanic symbols, or holding up a pro-choice sign as merely being "compassionate". True compassion cannot allow for confusion. If his orthodoxy is coming into question, than there is a problem somewhere.


[quote]He [b]seems[/b] to be reaching out in a genuine effort towards those afflicted with SSA with compassion and understanding. Though his views might not be in accordance with the church, his intent does seem genuinely charitable.
[right][snapback]853014[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Though it is somewhat cliche... "the road to Hell is paved with good intentions". I think I would have to argue that his good intentions are actually hurting the Church more than they are helping her. Giving in, however slight, to heterodoxy breeds schism.

[Norseman82]

Yes, there are things that Cam mentioned that are disturbing.

But there is a saying: even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

My point: just because he does things that are heterodox doesn't mean that we should dismiss those things he is correct on.

[Norseman82]

[quote name='Fides_et_Ratio' date='Jan 11 2006, 05:10 PM'] How is he building the Church by disclosing this to the secular media?
[right][snapback]853347[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

As I started to point out in the other thread, by reversing the secular media portrait of a Church that "covers up". We've been taking a pounding in the media the past 10-15 years and maybe now they'll have less ammunition to use against us.

[jezic]

um the only thing is that it is tough to do anything to a bishop.

The Vatican only reacts in extreme cases. We have to remember they are like Apostles living today. The Apostles can't kick each other out very easily.

I hope and pray that his view is changed if this is what he truly believes.

[Didacus]

[quote name='Fides_et_Ratio' date='Jan 11 2006, 05:18 PM']I'm not sure that this follows.

You wouldn't agree to a bishop wearing Satanic symbols, or holding up a pro-choice sign as merely being "compassionate". True compassion cannot allow for confusion. If his orthodoxy is coming into question, than there is a problem somewhere.
[/quote]

I agree it does not follow immediately, only that it can be argued. We do not know his intent or circumstance behind wearing the symbols.

Remember JP the Great kissing the Koran? (forever my papa).

For the lesat, question the method, not the man and especially not the bishop.




[quote name='Fides_et_Ratio' date='Jan 11 2006, 05:18 PM']Though it is somewhat cliche... "the road to Hell is paved with good intentions". I think I would have to argue that his good intentions are actually hurting the Church more than they are helping her. Giving in, however slight, to heterodoxy breeds schism.
[right][snapback]853354[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Ah yes, the road to hell. Been on the highway myself a couple of times; turned around pretty quick though thank God.

Lord, look not to our sins but towards the faith of your Church.

[Didacus]

[quote name='Fides_et_Ratio' date='Jan 11 2006, 05:10 PM'][snip]

Money from the Church is not what  the victims need. Money will not solve their problems, remove their hurt, or take away their grief.

[snip]

[right][snapback]853347[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

I bet the bishop agrees with you on that point. He did mention that often the church would not open a discussion with the victims which is an element that was needed.


At teh end of the article:

[quote]"I've been saying for 10 years that these cases should be handled with pastoral sensitivity, not just in an adversarial legal way," he said. "I've also felt strongly that bishops should be talking to these victims, and so often they haven't been."[/quote]

And hence an example of how I believe he has a charitable spirit. One that may need correction, but he is not evil at the core (it seems).