Bishop Zurek: Concerns About Priests For Life Have Been "Favorably Addressed"

Kresta in the Afternoon ^ | Thursday, January 16, 2014 | Kathy Schiffer

[GonzoII]

Thursday, January 16, 2014

Bishop Zurek: Concerns About Priests For Life Have Been "Favorably Addressed"

By Kathy Schiffer

Fr. Frank Pavone at the U.S. Supreme Court

In 2011 Bishop Patrick Zurek, bishop of the Diocese of Amarillo, sent a letter to all the bishops of the United States, advising them that he had so many concerns about Priests For Life's $10 million budget that the organization's national director, Fr. Frank Pavone, shouldn't be trusted with donors' money.

For a full year, while an investigation was pending, Father Pavone was restricted to working from a small cell in a Texas convent.  He was unable to continue his travel and speaking schedule on behalf of the unborn.  The high-profile case was sent to the Vatican for review.

Bishop Zurek

Finally, in December 2013, Bishop Zurek sent a letter to the bishops of the United States, informing them that all the concerns he had addressed with regard to the Staten Island-based Priests For Life (PFL) "have been favorably received and addressed by the Congregation for Clergy."

Bishop Zurek is quoted in the Long Island Catholic:

“My concerns included some restructuring of PFL so that it would have juridic personality and become a true ecclesial association. Also included was a request for more adequate and transparent reporting of finances to the competent ecclesiastical authority. Both of these requests have been favorably addressed by the Congregation of Clergy.”

A year ago, in November 2012, the Congregation for Clergy had ruled that since the principal office of Priests For Life is in the Archdiocese of New York, the Archbishop of New York is the competent authority to exercise vigilance over the association.

“I am happy that this process is at an end," Bishop Zurek wrote in his most recent letter, "and I hope and pray that Father Pavone and PFL may now continue its important work in the defense of all human life, especially that of the unborn.”

[GonzoII]

[GonzoII]

Ping!

[trad_anglican]

So they put Pavone on ice for a year for an ecclesiastical turf war?

[Salvation]

**I hope and pray that Father Pavone and PFL may now continue its important work in the defense of all human life, especially that of the unborn.”**

Amen! I think most of us were in Priest for Life’s corner in this matter.

[Zionist Conspirator]

I hope and pray that Father Pavone and PFL may now continue its important work in the defense of all human life, especially that of the unborn.

Hmm . . . I smell a "seamless garment."

[Tax-chick]

If it turned out there were financial irregularities and the Bishop didn’t exercise due diligence, people would be yelling that the Church is just like an organized crime family and “rock star priests” take advantage of the faithful, etc., etc.

[chud]

So they put Pavone on ice for a year for an ecclesiastical turf war?
Yep, that was my impression of it.

[jocon307]

Where does Fr. Pavone go to get his reputation back?

[FR_addict]

The Catholic Church had been giving money to Acorn for many years. Did they worry about what the money was being used for in this organization?

I'd like to see where the money Bishop Zurek collects goes to.

[FR_addict]

And how many babies could have been saved, if Fr. Pavone and his organization had not been under restrictions.

[RitaOK]

The results of the Priests for Life collections remains a mystery to me. Was the PFL accounting a scandal, a clumsy error, misused, or were contributors found to be used or taken advantage of in some way?

Where’s the beef? Bishop Z made assertions and at minimum implicated Pavone in questionble fiscal accounting.

*fraddict, yours is an excellent point, contrasting the difference in treatment of ACORN from the laser focus on PFL.

Pavone could write a book. He hung the bishop by cooperating and suffering to the full in obedience to the bishop, making the bishop look small and petty.

It is likely the bishop who will be in some need of restoring his reputation, rather than Pavone.

[ardara]

I would like to know how many Bishops and Priests would like to see the pro-life movement disappear.

[ex-snook]

Priests for Life seems so redundant.

[Salvation]

Most of them railed against Obamacare because of their pro-life views.

[Tax-chick]

I realize that this situation has been spun as “Bishop Zurek vs. the Pro-Life Movement.” However, we do not need to attribute ill-will to anyone.

It is not an attack on Fr. Pavone or the pro-life movement (which is far larger than one man) to suggest that either he or someone he trusted could have made errors in accounting. By his own choice, he is under the authority of the Bishop of Amarillo, and looking into the possibility of financial error is the Bishop’s job.

Now the situation is closed, any necessary changes in procedures have been made. I don’t understand why this is not considered good news, the system working as it should.

[fatima]

It is good news.This is a long story and began in New York.Texas took him under their wing and he intended to build a seminary there.The Bishop friend died-new Bishop was not happy hence the transfer of Father and the Vatican contacted.Now he has to answer to the New York Bishop and we start all over again:)

[RitaOK]

Certainly, where an organization raises big money, someone else would like to have it. That may be in play here, but I doubt any bishop to be actually against the proLife movement itself.

Barrels of ink was spilled on the contrast between the bishop’s harsh tone in his letter to the USCCB,
against Pavone, and his punitive actions toward Pavone. OTH, obedience to the bishop kept Pavone silenced entirely, and without complaint he spent the year in exile cheerfully and obediently.

How else was this going to look, in the media? Father Pavone knew exactly how it would look, I suspect. He was right, and he came out all the better for his obedience and exile. I think nothing quite went the bishop’s way. Pavone requested a return to the NY organization early on. In the end, that is what he got, because Bishop Zurich’s management style had made a big deal out of it all the way to Rome.

As for the PFL financial complaint Bishop Zurich made, I never heard the results of that final audit, or that it turned out to amount to anything much.

[Tax-chick]

If we believe in God and His providence, we have to believe that Father Pavone did more for the cause of the unborn by prayer and obedience than he would have done in a year of public appearances. God works through our obedience, not our rebellion or self-aggrandizement.

[Mrs. Frogjerk]

It’s great news!

The Bishop was just doing his job and making sure that things were on the up and up. Father Pavone did what he was supposed to do and he was obedient to the Bishop. Everybody did the right thing and it was resolved.

It is a very happy ending indeed. It couldn’t have happened at a better time in that the March For Life is right around the corner.

[Tax-chick]

Everybody did the right thing and it was resolved.

That's what I thought.