[Catholic Caucus] Catholics Demand Removal of TX Bishop

Church Militant ^ | June 11, 2019 | Christine Niles

[ebb tide]

Catholics Demand Removal of TX Bishop

Mandate: Bp. Michael Olson 'has become ineffective and harmful'

FORT WORTH, Texas (ChurchMilitant.com) - Frustrated Texas Catholics are petitioning the pope to remove Bp. Michael Olson from the diocese of Forth Worth.

At least nine canonical cases are being filed against the bishop, among them one involving his treatment of whistleblower Fr. Richard Kirkham, forced to resign after reporting misconduct from a fellow priest.

I currently have 1,500 pages of evidence in the case.Tweet

"I currently have 1,500 pages of evidence in the case," Gray told the Fort Worth Star Telegram. He said he has never witnessed such proceedings brought against a bishop in his more than two decades of legal work.

Several months ago, a "very large number" of Catholics in the diocese started requesting Gray's help.  

"I realized there was one particular remedy that would be helpful across the board," Gray said, "and that is the removal of Bishop Olson."

According to a mandate signed by hundreds of parishioners, Olson is deemed to have become "ineffective and harmful" as a bishop.

A group that calls itself FRK Advocates launched a petition last year urging a Vatican investigation into Bishop Olson, specifically his forcible removal of Fr. Kirkham from his parish.

"Since his ordination as our Bishop in January of 2014, Bishop Olson has operated against canon law on numerous occasions, has employed abusive language and vindictive actions against priests and the lay faithful in our diocese," the petition reads. "He has lied to several faithful laity."

The petition sets forth a list of grievances against Olson, including:

• Verbal abuse to several diocesan priests in the Fort Worth Diocese
• Abusive and/or demeaning conduct towards parishioners whom he referred to as "merely sheep" or "nasty people"
• Unfair damage to the reputation of priests through his actions
• Lying to lay faithful on multiple occasions
• Angry speech towards lay faithful
• High turnover of Diocesan staff, especially those in direct contact with Bishop Olson
• Loss of seminarians in the Diocese due to poor morale and leadership
• Loss of donors to capital campaigns
• Loss of donors to weekly stewardship at multiple parishes
• Loss of lay volunteers in ministry at multiple parishes due to poor morale and division
• Refusing to grant audience to parishioner and leadership of parishes on items of concern

Olson responded to the petition last December, dismissing the group as "a handful of people with their own agenda."

"I don't think [Olson] has dealt with Fr. Kirkham in a fair way," said Kirkham's attorney, Jack Walsh, in comments to Church Militant at the time.

The circumstances leading to Kirkham's removal began when he learned of a priest in Dallas engaging in an affair with a woman in his parish. Kirkham admonished the priest to end the affair, but found out three months later the affair was still ongoing. His attempts to correct the priest were met with anger, and he tried to resolve the matter through a letter to the priest, saying he would report his actions to the diocese if the priest did not end his relationship.

When the bishop learned of the letter, instead of correcting the priest engaged in the affair, he punished Kirkham by removing him from his parish.

Attack on Texas Right to Life

Last year, Olson spearheaded an unprecedented attack on Texas Right to Life over disagreements regarding various life issues and politics.

Texas Right to Life (TRTL), under the leadership of devout Catholic Jim Graham, has been at odds with the Texas Conference of Catholic Bishops over its voters guide, as well as disagreements over the Texas Advanced Directives Act.

The bishops have consistently backed GOP candidates who tend to compromise on pro-life legislation, whereas TRTL has backed solidly pro-life candidates. 

The bishop have also supported the Texas Advanced Directives Act (TADA), which allows a "death panel" to determine whether a patient lives or dies, regardless of the patient's own wishes or that of his family. The panel, comprised many times of hospital staff, poses an unethical conflict of interest, as decisions on continuing or ending life-saving treatment should be based solely on the patient's best interest, but more often seem to be based on the hospital's financial concerns. 

The bishops support the law as adequate in respecting patients' dignity and rights, while TRTL has fought the law for failing to protect vulnerable patients. 

Last year, Olson, who is active on Twitter, required all the priests in his diocese to read a statement denouncing TRTL, and even encouraged parishioners to report to him any priests who failed to read it out at Mass. He was widely criticized by Catholics for encouraging parishioners to spy on their own priests.

[ebb tide]

Last year, Olson, who is active on Twitter, required all the priests in his diocese to read a statement denouncing TRTL, and even encouraged parishioners to report to him any priests who failed to read it out at Mass. He was widely criticized by Catholics for encouraging parishioners to spy on their own priests.

[ebb tide]

Ping

[NorthMountain]

Dude sounds like he’s right up Frankie’s alley ...

[Mrs. Don-o]

Torches and pitchforks time.

[Shark24]

Church Militant is really on fire now. Love them....

[Buckeye McFrog]

Dude sounds like he’s right up Frankie’s alley …

Yup. The Vatican is a dictatorship. No way to force Frankie to do the right thing, so this is all just another strongly worded letter.

[vette6387]

The answer here seems to be self-evident. Ft. Worth Catholics should quit attending Mass in the area the Bishop controls. If you really believe in the tenets of your religion, drive outside his district to attend church. I find a strong parallel in the way the Catholic Church is organized to our US Senate, where “Pope Mitch of the Scrotum Neck" holds court and seems to avoid dismissal by his “parishioners” aka his constituents.

[NorthMountain]

Is it a sin to tar and feather a bishop?

[Buckeye McFrog]

Where I live I would have to drive, at a minimum,
35 miles to reach another Diocese.

[irishjuggler]

Last year, Olson spearheaded an unprecedented attack on Texas Right to Life

Okay, that's all we need to know. Bishops who pick fights with pro-lifers (e.g., Cupich when he was in Spokane) tip their hands as to who they really are and which side they're playing for.

[Mrs. Don-o]

The above artcle, as edited, doesnt mention who "Gray" is.

Philip Gray is a canon lawyer and president of The St. Joseph Foundation, a very good outfit to consult if you've got canonical issues with your bishop.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Not if you get the tar and feathers blessed as sacramentals.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Worth it. My husband used to drive over an hour to get to a Russian Orthodox parish for Liturgy.

[Hieronymus]

The natives in Brazil ate the first bishop down there. Given the circumstances, it seemed a case of poetic justice. As well: who am I to judge?

[Trump_Triumphant]

I attend either Eastern Catholic Churches, or the SSPX. I won’t give a dime to the moral degenerates who run the Church organization.

[NorthMountain]

I’ll have to look into that.

[Biggirl]

Time to clean house .

[vladimir998]

“The answer here seems to be self-evident. Ft. Worth Catholics should quit attending Mass in the area the Bishop controls.”

Um. . . that would be the whole diocese. Where are they supposed to go to Mass then? Sure some can go next door to Dallas - which is in a different diocese - but why should they? Why would a Catholic commit mortal sin - refuse to attend Mass on Sundays - because the bishop is a problem? Why would you decline receiving grace through the sacraments because of an earthly squabble with a man who you probably have never met? That makes no sense.

[foreverfree]

bump