Fr. Pavone Situation Continues

by Steve Ray on September 17, 2011

I am not writing this to express any opinion but to provide information and various thoughts of others – at least at this point.

Fr. Pavone’s Statement

Fr. Pavone’s Twitter Page

Priests For Life website

Fr. Pavone’s Latest Statement

Canon Lawyer Ed Peter’s Comments

earlier Comments from Ed Peters

Mark Shea’s Latest

mark Shea’s Pretty Comprehensive comments and links

{ 4 comments… read them below or add one }

Paul Primavera September 18, 2011 at 10:02 AM

Why Bishop Zurek’s Interest in the Finances of Priests for Life?

http://commentarius-ioannis.blogspot.com/2011/09/why-bishop-zureks-interest-in-finances.html

Paul Primavera September 18, 2011 at 1:57 PM

The Diocese of Amarillo has taken down its audit report from its web site. It looks like Bishop Zurek wants transparency for Priests for Life, but not for himself. This is a convenient way to cover up note 15 in the audit report that the Diocese is about to go insolvent. Why else the interest in Priests for Life 10.8 million dollars?

Paul Primavera September 18, 2011 at 4:39 PM

I have re-located the financial audit of the Diocese of Amarillio for years ended June 30,101 and 2009, and have saved it to my hard-drive:

http://www.amarillodiocese.org/documents/Departments/Finance/DPC_Audit_2010.pdf

Cheryl Thomson September 20, 2011 at 12:49 PM

I am also an adult Catholic convert, and pro-life for many years. The heart of the Fr. Pavone story is so obvious that we are all missing it. Politics. No, not Church Politics, National Politics. In 2008, Fr. Pavone was outspokenly anti-Obama. In 2010, Fr. Pavone paticipated in the protest against Obama speaking at Notre Dame University. The Presidential election is next year. Right now, Obama’s poll numbers keep sinking. Obama needs every vote he can get to get re-elected. So how does this look to Obama and his people? Fr. Pavone needs to be taken out. This is National Politics, Chicago-Style. Where does Bishop Zurek come in? According to Huffington Post columnist Father Alberto Cutie (Episcopalian), Sept. 19: “His bishop in Amarillo is certainly much more progressive than he is, so there could be some ideological clashes there…” Okay, do these “ideological clashes” translate into the Bishop’s Democratic associations? Those associations include a relationship with former Mayor of San Antonio, Ed Garza. Garza appointed Bishop Zurek to serve on his Committee on Integrity and Trust in Local Government for the city of San Antonio. Ed Garza, sharing the Democratic leanings of other Hispanics in Texas, endorsed Obama in 2008, saying: “Senator Obama’s unique ability to bring people together and bridge partisan divides make him the best candidate to bring change we can believe in.” I don’t want to suggest that Bishop Zurek himself is being a party to a ‘dirty tricks campaign’ against Fr. Frank Pavone, but the possibility exists that circumstances around the Bishop have been manipulated, with an agenda in mind.

Leave a Comment

 

Previous post:

Next post: