Fr. Pavone responds strongly while still being obedient. (That’s good news.) And he’s begun a process of appeal to the Vatican.
Fr. Pavone writes:
For the past several years, my Ordinary, the Most Reverend Patrick Zurek, Bishop of Amarillo, has given me permission to do the full-time pro-life work that I have done since 1993. In 2005, I made a public promise in a Church ceremony in Amarillo, presided over by a Vatican Cardinal, that this full-time pro-life work would be a lifetime commitment. That’s a commitment I promise to fulfill without wavering.
This past week, however, I received a letter from the Bishop insisting that I report to the Diocese this Tuesday, September 13 and, for the time being, remain only there.
I am very perplexed by this demand. Despite that, because I am a priest of the diocese of Amarillo, I will be obedient and report there on the appointed date, putting the other commitments that are on my calendar on hold until I get more clarity as to what the bishop wants and for how long. Meanwhile, I continue to retain all my priestly faculties and continue to be a priest in “good standing” in the Church. The bishop does not dispute this fact. Rather, he has said that he thinks I am giving too much priority to my pro-life work, and that this makes me disobedient to him. He also has claimed that I haven’t given him enough financial information.
September 13, 2011 at 7:32 pm
God be praised.
Thank you for your dedication to the priesthood, Fr. Pavone!
September 13, 2011 at 7:43 pm
I wish these two would just grow up and take care of this spat behind closed doors. The passive-agressive airing of complaints on both sides is carefully calculated to sway public opinion on the matter – a public who is a bit worn right now with eccelsiastical wrangling and turf wars.
Laypeople can't do a thing to help either of you; we don't have the authority to do so. So, spare us all your effete fussing.
September 13, 2011 at 8:11 pm
Hey at least he hasn't ridden off into the sunset on a Harley.
September 13, 2011 at 8:23 pm
Ha!
This does have all the feel of a turf war, I agree. Let's hope that whatever's going on it's resolved peaceably.
September 13, 2011 at 9:43 pm
Blackrep, it would have been a little weird if a public figure like Fr. Pavone just dropped off without any explanation. So I can see why this is out in the open somewhat. For about five seconds I thought that this was one of "those" situations, and was grateful that 1) I wasn't holding a sharp object and 2) that it isn't one of "those" situations. Thank God.
September 13, 2011 at 10:46 pm
This looks like it will end better than some recent scandals. God help our priests. They are so under attack.
September 13, 2011 at 11:39 pm
This entire situation is very upsetting. Let's keep both the Bishop and Father Pavone in our prayers.
September 14, 2011 at 1:47 am
Father Pavone appears to be using the internet to openly discuss his disagreement with his bishop. Even if he is innocent, this is highly irregular. The best thing a diocesan priest can do in a situation like this one — and his guilt or innocence is not the issue — is keep his mouth shut until things are sorted out.
September 14, 2011 at 2:15 am
I can't help but wonder what the Priests see "behind the scenes" about situations similar to this that is making them make the choice to go public with it. Maybe it's all the Priests that have been railroaded by Bishops unwilling to give them a fair trial, or do something quickly when the Priests were innocent? I don't know, but I find it highly suspect to NOT wonder why we're all of a sudden seeing our more popular and good priests fighting beyond the "remain silently obedient". After years of hard and faithful work, who WOULDN'T fight for their organization and/or good name? Seems odd to just roll over and let this kind of crap happen.
September 14, 2011 at 9:39 am
This matter ought to have been resolved in private. Publicising brings Fr Pavone into disrepute, as well as Priests for Life. This is a boon to his enemies, the purveyors of death to unborn children. Pride, perhaps, on both sides? And the faithful needlessly scandalised while the enemies of the Church milk it aided by anti-Catholic Media. The Devil rejoices. Let us pray for cool heads and humilty. Lynda
September 14, 2011 at 3:05 pm
I say we bring this situation to our Mother…"Hail Mary Full of Grace, the Lord is with thee…." Our Mother always has a way to bring light to dark times. God Bless our Priests!!
September 14, 2011 at 3:15 pm
The bishop made this public by impugning Fr. Pavone and instructing Catholics not to donate to Priests For Life.
That was a vicious public smear on the bishop's part.
I'm sending another donation to Priests For Life just for this reason.
September 14, 2011 at 3:32 pm
The bishop probably wanted a "kickback" and Fr. Pavone refused. So the bishop is making life horrible for Fr. Pavone. Wait and see.
September 14, 2011 at 3:48 pm
It's amazing how quick these bishops are to discipline traditionally minded priests yet do nothing to priests who teach heresy. "Fr." Richard McBrien and "Fr." Michael Phlagher openly teach hersey and NOTHING is done. It's becoming all to clear that all these bishops care about is money and crushing traditional orthodox Catholic teaching. Fr. Pavone has always lived his life as a true priest of God. We stand behing Fr. Pavone 100%.
September 14, 2011 at 7:34 pm
Is Bishop Zurek ready to assume the guilt for all the innocent souls who are going to get aborted because he has curtailed the work of Father Pavone? The innocents are scandalized by being aborted and may come to lose their immortal souls in hell, except that they are not of the age of reason at seven years and maybe incapable of serious mortal sin. But Bishop Zurek is and maybe causing the abortion of innocent immortal souls by impeding Father Frank Pavone's mission to engage life. Like it or naot Bishop Zurek is responsible and guilty of any one person aboerted through his actions. I pray everyday that the 55 million children's immortal souls aborted visit our president, their president, in the White House one night and light up the whole world with the truth of human existence…(Father Corapi's Bishop must assume the guilt for all the souls who are lost and going to hell because he has curtailed Father Corapi's mission) Have they forgotten when Padre Pio, now St. Pio, was forbidden to say a public Mass. After two weeks the towns people appeared at the monastery and DEMANDED Padre Pio and Padre Pio was restored to them. Their financial support was what made the monastery work. "Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's and unto God what is God's"
I am so glad Father Frank Pavone appealed to the Vatican, perhaps he can be instrumental in saving Bishop Zurek's soul. One Hail Mary
Mary De Voe
September 15, 2011 at 5:55 pm
I cannot understand why, that if Bishop Zurek is seeing something in Father Pavone, he does not pitch in and help in the mission of Priests for Life rather than curtail their mission therefore, Bishop Zurek may be guilty for those children aborted because of his actions.
Mary De Voe
October 3, 2011 at 10:01 pm
from Bill Foley
Perhaps Father Pavone can follow the example and advice of Saint Vincent de Paul; the following paragraph is taken from an article in the EWTN document library.
Vincent now returned to France and chanced to be brought to the attention of Queen Marguerite of Valois, who appointed him her almoner. This office gave him the income from a small abbey. For a time he lodged in the same house as a lawyer, who was one day robbed of a considerable sum. He openly charged Vincent with the theft and spoke against him to all his friends. Vincent did nothing save quietly deny the charge, adding, "God knows the truth." For six years he bore the slander, making no further denial, and at last the real thief confessed. Speaking as though the victim had been someone else, Vincent once told this story at a conference with his priests, in order to show that patience, silence, and resignation are generally the best defense of innocence.