|Posted by Dan on July 1, 2010 at 12:15 PM|
I was rather amused when I read "For the Record"- which appeared on the Cleveland Diocesan Website with regard to the parish closures.
Those who know me well are very much aware that for the most part, I'm no fan of the diocesan establishment...otherwise, I would not have expended time and energy in creating this wesbite in the wake of the closing of my former parish of Saint Casimir on Sowinski. However, I will stand with the Diocese in attacking the Plain Dealer for their gross negligence in failing to understand that in the course of our diocesan history, parishes have been suppressed, and that canon law affords no acknowledgment of the term "desanctify." Additionally, I have my own issues with the Plain Dealer, and that's no secret either.
The fact that Bishop Lennon has disregarded many of the cluster recommendations is of itself a violation of canon law. The universal law of the Church affords every bishop with full and immediate authority within his diocese, including the erection and suppression of parishes, and the establishment of particular law, i.e.,. policies to be followed in a specific (arch)diocese, provided that they are not contrary to the universal law of the Church. Vibrant Parish Life-II was, and still is particular law in the Diocese of Cleveland. Bishop Lennon initiated a procedure whereby cluster teams were to submit their findings to him regarding viability with specific reporting deadlines. While the bishop may have indeed consulted the College of Consultors as required by canon law, there is clear evidence that his judgments on numerous parishes were blatantly flawed, and in some cases, categorically ignored cluster recommendations, and in the matter of Saint Patrick Parish on Cleveland's West Side, he not only ignored cluster recommendations, he closed this parish on the basis of flawed reports of Father Joseph Fortuna, the former pastor of Ascension Parish in Cleveland, and Father Timothy Daw. Saint Patrick's closure (along with several other parishes) has been appealed to the Vatican, and Bishop Lennon is likewise in violation of procedural law, since his decision is being appealed. Whether or not the matter is administrative or juridicial is irrelevant. Under canon law, whenever an appeal against an act or a decision of a bishop is taken to the level of the Holy See, all action MUST CEASE, which is something Bob Tayek blatantly lied about! He is not a canonist, and therefore, is not competent to render such an opinion. Moreover, the bishop is not to create a double standard by demanding that parishioners observe particular law while he does not!
Visitors to our website should not erroneously conclude that I condone or otherwise approve of the reckless and irresponsible way in which Bishop Richard Lennon has closed and/or merged the parishes in our Diocese...I CERTAINLY DO NOT APPROVE!
However, I do feel that in conscience, that the scriptural reference of "the truth shall set you free", is rather hypocritical, given that in the past (including the flawed procedure involving these closures), our Diocese has been less than truthful with its parishioners! When our Diocesan leaders can publicly admit that they have sinned through their dishonesty and the emotional cruelty they have inflicted on the faithful who pay their salaries through weekly collections and assessments, THEN they can talk about TRUTH! Until then, they need to keep their mouths shut and be silent...and that includes Bishop Lennon, who definitely has a very serious problem with the TRUTH!