Sunday, April 02, 2006

Bp Bruskewitz Gets It Right (Again...)

When assailed by some woman whose Self-Inflation Syndrome seems to be steroid-enhanced, the most excellent Excellency replied:

"Some woman named Patricia O'Donnell Ewers, who is the Chair of something called "A National Review Board for the Protection of Children and Young People", has said that her Board "calls for strong fraternal correction of the Diocese of Lincoln." The Diocese of Lincoln has nothing to be corrected for, since the Diocese of Lincoln is and has always been in full compliance with all laws of the Catholic Church and with all civil laws. Furthermore, Ewers and her Board have no authority in the Catholic Church and the Diocese of Lincoln does not recognize them as having any significance.

It is well known that some of the members of Ewers' Board are ardent advocates of partial birth abortion, other abortions, human cloning, and other moral errors. It is understandable then how such persons could dislike the Diocese of Lincoln, which upholds the moral teaching of the Catholic Church.

The words attributed to Ewers seem to confirm the suspicion that the members of her Board are unfamiliar with Catholic teachings, Catholic ecclesiology, and even the basic rudiments of the Catholic Catechism. Rather than concerning themselves with the Diocese of Lincoln about which they appear completely ignorant, Ewers and her colleagues would occupy themselves in a better way by learning something about the Catholic religion and the traditions and doctrines and laws of the Catholic Church.

The Diocese of Lincoln does not see any reason for the existence of Ewers and her organization.

Ms. Ewers is also quite unfamiliar with Canon Law, we should add. Notice that her screech did NOT include any reference to perps-in-collars in the Lincoln Diocese. There's a reason...

In just three years, dioceses/eparchies have worked extremely hard to address the issue of clergy sexual abuse. This conclusion is strongly supported by the audit results.

It disheartens the Board, however, that the bishop of the Diocese of Lincoln, Nebraska, and the eparch of the Eparchy of Newton for Melkite Catholics in Newton, Massachusetts, have refused to participate in the audit process, and the Board calls for strong fraternal correction in these refusals.

Though their governance authority is fully understood by the Board, nonetheless, these refusals go against all of the efforts of the Church to be open and transparent in addressing child protection and reaching out to victims to help with their healing.


Note that her hysteria (what a great word...) is adroitly mis-directing--to "reaching out..." and to "..healing..." Yah.

A California canonist comments:

Bp. Bruskewitz is plainly rejecting the legitimacy of the USCCB Review Board itself and the policies it is mandated to coordinate.

On the other hand, the "Charter" seems to have a major flaw:

The first is a very fundamental principle of natural justice: Every accused has the right to face his accuser. (Pete Vere, another Canonist)

The Bishop has repeated asserted that the audit, as it is currently structured, violates this fundamental principle of justice. Having read the text of the John Jay questionaire myself, it appears to me (and I'm a canonist too) that the Bishop is right. Simply put, beyond other weaknesses that call into question the audit's methodology, the questionaire does not allow for an accused priest to defend himself.

This flaw was well-known when the Charter in question was drawn.

It is clear that the Bishop of Lincoln is NOT suffering from wussification (see below.) More will follow on this; the Bishop is a graduate of our Seminary and was pastor of a local parish.

MORE: Go here for an example of the evanescence of the Commission's "thought" and here for an example of the brilliant thinking that Catholics are paying for.

1 comment:

WICatholic said...

I have a friend who worked in the Diocese of Nebraska, and loves "The Bish" as he calls Bishop Bruskewitz. Tony won't share him even part time with us.... but does now know what WI brats are...

Interesting that Peters and Vere differ. Thanks for posting their views.