Fr. White & Bishop Knestout - Some Interesting Comments...

 

Although Fr. White and Bishop Knestout are no longer part of the Archdiocese of Washington and are now both part of the Diocese of Richmond, their story has roots here.   

Fr. Z gives an update to the story on his blog, but what I find really interesting are the comments.  

This leads me to my original premise that something happened between them.  Could it have been the sermon on Humanae Vitae?   Could Fr. White have been called to meet in Hyattsville over this with +Knestout?

As I have said, and others speculate, there is much more to what is going on in Richmond than meets the eye.  And the roots to the matter are here in this Archdiocese. 

+++

On a separate note to the person who sends me the long, rambling comments.  Thank you for reading.  However, if you are interested in being published, please stay on the topic and not go off to all sorts of other stuff.  Thanks.

 

Fr. Mark White: Interview by Church Militant

 Fr. Mark White, a priest in the Diocese of Richmond, was recently interviewed by Church Militant.

As some of you know, Fr. Mark White was ordained in the Archdiocese of Washington by Cardinal McCarrick.  Also, as you know, Bishop Knestout was part of the Archdiocese of Washington, at the time.  

At some point, Fr. White asked to leave the diocese and managed to be reassigned to the Diocese of Richmond.  A few years later, Bishop Knestout was assigned as the Bishop of the Diocese of Richmond.

It is interesting to watch, but what I found most interesting, starting at the 29 min. mark, was something mentioned by Fr. White.  He talks about a comment made by Bishop Knestout about an "old wound."   

Now, in my conversations with Melvin, when all of this started, I discussed the fact that I believe that something happened between Fr. White and Bishop Knestout (or maybe Cardinal Wuerl) at some point, while both were in the Archdiocese of Washington, but I don't know for certain.  This may be what Bishop Knestout referred to?

In addition, I speculated to Melvin, that Fr. White might know something, that others are worried that may come out.  Fr. White alludes to this.

Listen to all of it, or at least from the 29 min. mark to the end. 

 

Will Bishop Knestout Follow Suit?

Springfield, IL Bishop has stated that Senator Durbin is not to be admitted to Holy Communion.

His statement:

I agree completely with His Eminence, Cardinal Timothy Dolan, Chairman of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops’ (USCCB) Committee on Pro-Life Activities, who called the U.S. Senate’s failure to pass the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act “appalling.”

Fourteen Catholic senators voted against the bill that would have prohibited abortions starting at 20 weeks after fertilization, including Sen. Richard Durbin, whose residence is in the Diocese of Springfield in Illinois. In April 2004, Sen. Durbin’s pastor, then Msgr. Kevin Vann (now Bishop Kevin Vann of Orange, CA), said that he would be reticent to give Sen. Durbin Holy Communion because his pro-abortion position put him outside of communion or unity with the Church’s teachings on life. My predecessor, now Archbishop George Lucas of Omaha, said that he would support that decision. I have continued that position.


Now, the newly elected Bishop of Richmond (formerly of the Archdocese of Washington) has Tom Kaine (D-VA) in his diocese.  Sen. Kaine was one of the 14 who voted against the Act.  

We know that during the 2016 presidential campaign,  Tom Kaine was welcomed with open arms in his parish (even got a standing ovation).  Sen. Kaine was also at the installation of Bishop Knestout.  

So the question is: What will Bishop Knestout do?  Will he follow suit?  Will he go and speak with Sen. Kaine (and his pastor)?  

++++

Note that I try not to comment upon matters outside of this diocese but Bishop Knestout was not only born and raised here, but was one of our bishops.

Bishop Knestout named Bishop of Richmond, VA

https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/it/bollettino/pubblico/2017/12/05/0864/01852.html#ri

S.E. Mons. Barry C. Knestout S.E. Mons. Barry C. Knestout è nato a Cheverly (Maryland),
nell’arcidiocesi di Washington, l’11 giugno 1962.

Dopo aver frequentato le scuole elementari e secondarie, ha ottenuto il Baccellierato in Architettura presso l’Università di Maryland (1984). Successivamente ha studiato al “Mount Saint Mary’s Seminary” a Emmitsburg, ottenendo un “Master in Divinity” (1988) e un “Master of Arts” in Teologia (1989).

 È stato ordinato sacerdote il 24 giugno 1989 per l’arcidiocesi di Washington. Ha svolto poi i seguenti incarichi: Vicario Parrocchiale della “Saint Bartholomew Parish” a Bethesda (1989-1993); della “Saint Peter Parish” a Waldorf (1993-1994); Segretario personale del Cardinale Hickey (1994-2004); Direttore esecutivo dell’Ufficio per i Giovani (2001-2003); Segretario personale del Cardinale McCarrick (2003-2004); Parroco della “Saint John the Evangelist Parish” a Silver Spring (2004-2006); Direttore dell’Ufficio per la Vita Pastorale e per la Dottrina Sociale (2006-2007); Moderatore della Curia e Vicario per l’Amministrazione (2007-2008); Membro del “Priest Personnel Board” (dal 2006) e del Consiglio Presbiterale (dal 2007).

Nel 1999 è stato nominato Cappellano di Sua Santità. Nominato Vescovo titolare di Leavenworth ed Ausiliare di Washington il 18 novembre 2008, ha ricevuto la consacrazione episcopale il 29 dicembre successivo. Come Ausiliare di Washington è Vicario Generale e Moderatore della Curia, Membro del Collegio dei Consultori, del Consiglio Presbiterale e del “Clergy Personnel Board”. In seno alla Conferenza Episcopale è Membro del “Committee for the Protection of Children and Young People”.

Anti-Catholic protesters with bullhorns appear at several D.C.-area parishes

A spokeswoman with the Archdiocese of Washington, which oversees 139 parishes in the District and suburban Maryland, said Wednesday that “really small” groups of protesters have appeared on the property of three or four parishes in the past couple of weeks near Mass time. They were shouting at parishioners going in and out and were handing out “fundamentalist” Christian literature, said Chieko Noguchi.

She would not identify the parishes or share the literature or what it said, saying it was unclear whether the protesters had created it or were using something they got elsewhere.

“It was disconcerting,” she said, that protesters would use a worship service as a time to protest.

Police were called Oct. 25 to at least one of the parishes, St. Pius X in Bowie, but the police chief there said no information was available about the group. Messages left with St. Pius staff were not immediately returned.

For more, go to:  http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/anti-catholic-protesters-with-bullhorns-appear-at-several-dc-area-parishes/2014/11/05/f6b2471e-6514-11e4-bb14-4cfea1e742d5_story.html

Fr. Marcel Tells His Side of the Story

Here are the facts: On Saturday February 25th I showed up to officiate at a funeral Mass for Mrs. Loetta Johnson. The arrangements for the Mass were also not my own. I wish to clarify that Ms. Barbara Johnson (the woman who has since complained to the press), has never been a parishioner of mine. In fact I had never met her or her family until that morning.

The funeral celebration was to commence at 10:30a.m. From 9:30 to 10:20, I was assigned to hear confessions for the parish and anyone in the funeral party who would have chosen to receive the sacrament.A few minutes before the Mass began, Ms. Johnson came into the sacristy with another woman whom she announced as her “lover”. Her revelation was completely unsolicited. As I attempted to follow Ms.Johnson, her lover stood in our narrow sacristy physically blocking my pathway to the door. I politely asked her to move and she refused.

I understand and agree it is the policy of the Archdiocese to assume good faith when a Catholic presents himself for communion; like most priests I am not at all eager to withhold communion. But the ideal cannot always be achieved in life.
In the past ten days, many Catholics have referenced canon 915 in regard to this specific circumstance. There are other reasons for denying communion which neither meet the threshold of canon 915 or have any explicit connection to the discipline stated in that canon.

If a Quaker, a Lutheran or a Buddhist, desiring communion had introduced himself as such, before Mass, a priest would be obligated to withhold communion. If someone had shown up in my sacristy drunk, or high on drugs, no communion would have been possible either. If a Catholic, divorced and remarried (without an annulment) would make that known in my sacristy, they too according to Catholic doctrine, would be impeded from receiving communion. This has nothing to do with canon 915. Ms. Johnson’s circumstances are precisely one of those relations which impede her access to communion according to Catholic teaching. Ms. Johnson was a guest in our parish, not the arbitrer of how sacraments are dispensed in the Catholic Church.

In all of the above circumstances, I would have been placed in a similar uncomfortable position. Under these circumstances, I quietly withheld communion, so quietly that even the Eucharistic Minister standing four feet from me was not aware I had done so. (In fact Ms. Johnson promptly chose to go to the Eucharistic minister to receive communion and did so.) There was no scandal, no “public reprimand” and no small lecture as some have reported.
Details matter. Ms. Johnson was not kneeling when she approached for communion, she did not receive the cup as the press has reported she has stated. It is the policy of St. John Neumann parish never to distribute under both species during funerals.

During the two eulogies (nearly 25 minutes long), I quietly slipped for some minutes into the sacristy lavatory to recover from the migraine that was coming on. I never walked out on Mrs. Loetta Johnson’s funeral and the liturgy was carried out with the same reverence and care that I celebrate every Mass. I finished the Mass and accompanied the body of the deceased in formal procession to the hearse, which was headed to the cemetery. I am subject to occasional severe migraines, and because the pain at that point was becoming disabling, I communicated to our funeral director that I was incapacitated and he arranged one of my brother priests to be present at the cemetery to preside over the rite of burial. Furthermore as the testimony of the priest that was at the cemetery conveys, he was present when the Johnson family arrived, and in fact mentioned that being called to cover the burial rite is quite normal, as many priests for reasons much less significant than mine (rush hour traffic for example) do not make the voyage to the cemetery. He routinely covers for them. This change in plans, was also invisible to the rest of the entourage. Regrets and information about my incapacitating migraine were duly conveyed to the Johnson family.

I have thanked the funeral director and the priest at the burial site, for their assistance that day. Mrs. Loetta Johnson was properly buried with every witness and ceremony a Catholic funeral can offer. I did not and would not refuse to accompany Barbara Johnson and her mother to the cemetery because she is gay or lives with a woman. I did not in any way seek to dishonor Mrs. Johnson's memory, and my homily at the funeral should have made that quite evident to all in the pews, including the Johnson family.

To read the full story, go here: http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/priest-removal-from-ministry-was-tied-to-communion-incident/

Update to the Update: Archdiocese issues letter of Apology

Update: I deleted a couple of comments made to this blog posting by accident. I apologize to those who wrote. Mea Culpa.

+++++++++++++++++

Well folks, it has been a interesting two days. Now, we have a letter of apology from Bishop Knestout and her call for Fr. Marcel to be remove.

You can read about it in the Washington comPost:

Personally, I believe the Archdiocese made a tactical error in issuing a statement the other day. Why? The Archdiocese stated that the priest was wrong, when there should have been no statement other than, we are looking into the matter.

Now we have a letter of apology and now the call for heads to roll.

Unfortunately, with Cardinal Wuerl at the helm, he will put a muzzle on his priests to NEVER deny Communion to anyone, even if they are known to be HUGE supporters of abortion, or are even in a "gay marriage." (I am assuming that this message will go out, and heaven forbid anyone does it again or leaks word of this out. Your next assignment will be to the most remote parish they can find.)

What will happen to Fr. Marcel. In my opinion, the Archdiocese will ask him to keep his head down, not speak to anyone about this, and in a few months, transfer him to another parish. Probably in southern Maryland or some other out of the way parish.

(Fr. Marcel will be my Mass intention this weekend. BTW, Fr. Marcel, you have the support of many, many faithful Catholics. We thank God the Father for priests like you.)

The Cardinal, in my opinion, has done a great disservice here to his priests and to all of the faithful. He has let us all down again.

PS: I will be expecting a huge number of hate filled comments. Again, blame the priest not the "supposed" Catholic. But, what else is new.

Divest Ourselves of DC Government Contracts

Apx. two weeks ago, an email notice was sent out from Bishop Knestout regarding the possible reduction in funding for DC homeless.

Now, there is nothing wrong with this and is always a laudible thing to do.

This week's Catholic Standard does give a bit more insight into this matter. You see, Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of Washington seems to have a contract with the city to run some of the homeless shelters.

Is this illegal? Nope. Immoral? Nope. Good policy? Nope.

I say that this is not good policy because once you begin to take money from the government, you not only have to abide by their rules (which may run counter to Catholic teaching) but more importantly, it makes you dependant upon them.

When there is a theat to them, we suddenly become very defensive and will do whatever it takes not to loose them. This is not the way it should be.

I encourage the Archdiocese to divest itself of all of these types of contracts.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Click here to sign the petition to REPEAL THE MARYLAND DREAM ACT. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Spanish Catholic Center - Poor Care?

A lawsuit has been filed against two medical clinics run by Catholic Charities in the Archdiocese of Washington DC. This lawsuit was filed by Charles Briggs, the staff doctor from March 2008 till Oct. 2010, when according to the Washington comPost, he was fired. You can read about it here.

The Archdiocese sent out an email the following day (Thursday, April 9th) refuting the allegations.

Linked to his email was a letter to the Washington comPost by the Director of the Spanish Center.

In addition, a letter was sent out by Bishop Knestout regarding this and other stories in the Washington comPost.

To be honest, I don't have all of the facts on this one, although the Washington comPost is no friend of the Catholic Church.

A long time ago, I advocated that we should close this center and reallocate the funds towards education. If these allegations are true, maybe this would be a good time to shut it down and reallocate the funds to education.

The Mother Teresa Stamp...

This video, from Catholic News Agency, discusses the Mother Teresa stamp. Bishop Knestout, of the Archdiocese of Washington, is quoted in it.

From the Catholic News Agency.

Photos from the Ordination of the Most Rev. Knestout

Photos from the Ordination of the Most Rev. Knestout

The Ordination to the Order of Bishop of the Most Rev. Barry C. Knestout

Well, I decided that I would attend the ordination, especially since I had never attended one before. Of course, it is not like they happen every day in the Archdiocese of Washington DC.

On my way up the steps into the Cathedral, I spotted Cardinal Sean O'Malley of Boston, who was at one time, in charge of the Spanish Center here in DC. He was greeted by a number of people on the way in. More about his Eminence later.

When I entered, one of the ushers asked if I had an invitation. Being an honest guy, I said no. Since all of the open seating was taken, I was asked to wait for a while. No problem. But it did make me aware of how small St. Matthew's really is. Finally, they sent me over to the right hand side (facing the altar), where I promptly took a seat and a program. (Two pages are scanned above for you.)

At 2pm, the procession began to enter St. Matthew's. I would estimate that there were over 150 priests and deacons, and apx. 12 Cardinals and Bishops, including Cardinal's Baum and McCarrick. (I may be off a bit on the Cardinal and Bishop count, but who's counting.) Although it was not the crowd that you might get on a Holy Thursday or Good Friday, it was none the less a good sized crowd.

Things moved along very smoothly with a nice homily by Archbishop Wuerl and wonderful music by the choir. The Apostolic Letter was nicely read by Mrs. Jane Golden Belford, Chancellor of the Archdiocese. Although I could not see everything, the program explained what would happen and why it was happening.

One interesting note was that Cardinal O'Malley did not process in or out with the other Cardinals and Bishops but with the priests and deacons.

As Bishop Knestout went through the congregation bestowing his blessing, you could see not only the happiness and joy, but there was this look of the utmost respect for this holy and faithful priest. In fact, one woman was so overcome with happiness and joy for his blessing, she began to cry.

Bishop Knestout gave a very nice thank you to his fellow bishops and priests but you could tell he was nervous. It must have been a real whirlwind of activity over the last few weeks.

From what I have heard in the past and seen today, I have to say that we in the Archdiocese are really blessed to have someone like Bishop Knestout.

Ad Multos Annos!