Friday, May 23, 2008

USF update: Bishop Robinson at USF/ VOTF event.

We all remember the contretemps between George Weigel and University of San Francisco President Fr. Stephen J. Privett in "Catholic San Francisco" some time back. Our position then was that Weigel was right and Privett was wrong, and that's still our position. Among other things, Mr. Weigel referred to Catholicity on Jesuit campuses as being "vestigial at best." Fr. Privett took exception to that, and laid out a long list of institutions at USF that proved the University's fidelity. Strangely, one of the institutions he mentioned was the Lane Center for Catholic Studies and Social Thought. We have posted on the Lane Center a number of times. (For an exhaustive list of USF/Lane Center events that should trouble any faithful Catholic, go here.)

Well, look who's speaking at the Lane Center on June 13, 2008 as part of his "Voice of the Faithful" tour: retired auxiliary Bishop Geoffrey Robinson of Australia. Just a few days ago Cardinal Mahony himself had to forbid Bishop Robinson from speaking in the Archdiocese of Los Angeles. Why? From a Catholic News Agency article:

"In a May 8 statement, the Australian bishops said that Bishop Robinson’s questioning of the authority of the Catholic Church to teach the truth definitively is connected to the bishop’s “uncertainty about the knowledge and authority of Christ himself.”

Cardinal Mahony's response, from the same article:

“Under the provisions of Canon 763, I hereby deny you permission to speak in the Archdiocese of Los Angeles,” the cardinal wrote. He also urged Bishop Robinson to cancel his entire speaking tour and to work with the Australian bishops’ conference, saying he would expect him to “follow exactly” their recommendations."

So the Cardinal of California won't allow Bishop Robinson to speak in his Archdiocese, but USF is perfectly happy to have him speaking at their University. They are not only thumbing their noses at the Cardinal, but at the Holy Father as well. A little more than a month ago, Benedict addressed Catholic Educators with these words:

"In regard to faculty members at Catholic colleges universities, I wish to reaffirm the great value of academic freedom. In virtue of this freedom you are called to search for the truth wherever careful analysis of evidence leads you. Yet it is also the case that any appeal to the principle of academic freedom in order to justify positions that contradict the faith and the teaching of the Church would obstruct or even betray the university's identity and mission; a mission at the heart of the Church’s munus docendi and not somehow autonomous or independent of it."

Posted by Gibbons


Anonymous said...

Can Archbishop Neiderauer also stop this Bishop from speaking? Does the same section of Canon Law give him authority over a university in his archdiocese? If so, I plan on writing him about this. If USF can't reign itself in, it should be Archbishop Neiderauer's responsibility...

Anonymous said...

I was under the impression that Cardinal Mahoney, while a cardinal, didn't have jurisdiction here in the Archdiocese of San Francisco. Hence, it is up to Archbishop Neiderauer to speak up and deny permission for Bishop Robinson to appear in the Archdiocese. Does anyone know what Archbishop Neiderauer's position is on the matter?


Struggling Sinner said...

Anonymous #1, here's the canon Cardinal Mahoney cited:

Can. 763 Bishops have the right to preach the word of God everywhere, including in churches and oratories of religious institutes of pontifical right, unless the local bishop has expressly forbidden it in particular cases.

And Rob, it seems to me you are right. Cardinal Mahoney was acting as Archbishop of his archdiocese of L.A. It's up to Archbishop Niederauer in San Francisco. I think he may not be aware of this event yet.

Anonymous said...

I've just been reviewing the columns and responses on this blog. Hatred has blinded most of the participants, and especially the blogger himself. There is very little here of the gospel, and far too much self-righteousness and the institutional church found on these pages. Remember, it was the establishment that killed (and kills) Jesus, not the sinner for whom he came.

Anonymous said...

It has been a great victory for the Left not to openly debate, but to shut down debate by labeling dissent from liberal orthodoxy "hatred" (see Anon #3). Think correctly or else you are a hater. I think Fr. Malloy does a wonderful job of presenting the Gospel. How many lives have never been lived due to abortion? How many lives have been ruined by the total destruction of sexual morality in the last forty years? How badly are women treated now that they have been "liberated" by widespread contraception? They are used and discarded by men, repeatedly, who want nothing more than quick physical gratification. Divorce rates are sky-high, kids' innocence is stripped from them as their parents no longer see marriage as an indissoluble bond. Our polluted culture trails a wake of human tragedy. And the Church, Jesus' Church, should be a beacon of hope in the midst of this. Instead, too often, it falls to human pride and spinelessness. God bless Fr. Malloy for standing up for what is right.
The "establishment" didn't kill Jesus. We all did--all of us sinners. To say he was done in by the "establishment" turns him into just another political martyr. Sin is what killed him and continues to do so, and that's what Fr. Malloy is standing up against.

Anonymous said...

"It has been a great victory for the Left not to openly debate, but to shut down debate by labeling dissent from liberal orthodoxy "hatred" (see Anon #3). Think correctly or else you are a hater."

Openly debate? Where is debate from a side so convinced it and it alone has the truth that it can't even begin to think that a change of heart and mind might be in order. All I hear from both right and left is this mindless lock-step. I hear no debate on either side.

There is far too much sin on both sides to accept either without careful and prayerful scrutiny.

I stand by my previous remark, not in order to shut down debate, but in order to get some going. I repeat: this blog is full of hatred and an unwillingness to listen.

Anonymous said...

I challenge anonymous #3 to give specific examples of the 'hatred' that you find on this blog. Please enlighten us.

Anonymous said...

"this blog is full of hatred and an unwillingness to listen."

Hatred of sin? Hatred of heterodoxy? Hatred of lies, deceit? Absolutely. Fear and loathing of an institution (USF) that is truly Catholic in name only? Sure.

Unwillingness to listen? Try 'unwilling to listen...anymore'. If we weren't listening, there would be no comments, friend. We're constantly forced to listen, painfully, to the inane and sin-filled bleatings from places like USF, and to be witnesses to their faithful devotion to tolerance for everything but virtue, truth, and beauty. They use their name and history to promote a brand of false Catholicism that is absolutely committed to casting off tradition and authority, and flagrantly so. They are deceivers and take parent's and student's hard-earned money only to produce graduates who abandon their faith or have a shallow understanding of it, at best.

Maybe the suggestion ought to be that they hate the Magisterium a little less, and that they listen to the wisdom of the Church and not the voice of whimsy and innovation that only seeks the world's approval.