Author: Pete Vere

Of Sticks and Stones: Canada vs. U.S.

I just read the following hilarious article in the Toronto Star:

r into the comebacks. Of all the comments that were made, the following were my favorite:

“You do nothing and carp about others. You’re like a nation populated entirely by university professors and newspaper columnists.”

“I’m impressed that Canada’s firearms registration program has ballooned from $2 million to one billion. I thought only the U.S. Congress was that inept.”

“Americans are superior to Canadians because we don’t play or watch curling.”

Holiness begins hereI was reading

Holiness begins here

I was reading Eric Johnson post below about the reform of the Marines, and how Catholics should attempt something similar within the Church. Basically, I agree with Eric. That being said, what Eric proposes is nothing new. In fact, this is how many pious people have been canonized in the past — by resolving here and now to live a life of holiness. More recently, Vatican II issued a universal call-to-holiness in which we are all called, regardless of our state in life, to respond to God’s grace and live a life of holiness. Granted, this is something that is difficult, however, we are greatly assisted in the endeavor through the grace of the Sacraments as well as through numerous approved pious and popular devotions.

Clarification Concerning Lane Core, Jr.Over

Clarification Concerning Lane Core, Jr.

Over on The Blog from the Core, Lane Core writes: “Pete Vere, blogging at Catholic Light, seems to agree with my assessment of the term ‘previous condition'”. Just to clarify (since I needed a pretext to plug Lane’s blog, which is one of my favorites), I agree with your assessment Lane!

I agree with Mrs. Shea!I’ve

I agree with Mrs. Shea!

I’ve spent the last couple of days sleeping off a flu and catching up on email, so I apologize to Mark and others who asked for not weighing in sooner on this subject. Basically, it involves a Boston reporter who is trying to spin the situation in order to lay the blame on Rome. Anyway, Mark Shea provides the background to this controversy along with the general opinion of his lovely wife at the following URL: From the “Must. Get. Scoop!” Department of Snap Judgments

Mark, I’ve read this over a couple times, and while I’m not exactly sure what to make of it (without the entire context of the letter I’m guessing at snippets) I also tend to agree with your wife. From what I’m able to understand, it appears that this order is being given on the assumption that the priest has been defrocked.

In short, it appears that this applies not to a priest in active ministry, but a priest who has now been reduced to the lay state that is being asked to “to live away from the place where his previous condition is known.” Notice how it does not specify “parish” but “place”, which would imply town, county, region or local geographical area. This is standard in these cases. Subsequently, the Holy Father then states: “The local [superior] . . . is able to dispense from this clause of the decree if it is foreseen that the presence of the suppliant will cause no scandal.”

Basically, as your wife points out, the context seems to be that the abuser-priest has been reduced to the lay state, and can therefore no longer exercise ministry. (Although I would assume in keeping with canonical tradition that certain restrictive exceptions are made when there is danger of death — ie the defrocked priest comes across someone dying in an auto
accident on the side of the road.)

I should also point out that this is a standard request when a priest is reduced to the lay state, regardless of the reason for the reduction to the lay state, or whether or not the reduction is voluntary on the part of the priest. Thus I would assume that the word “his condition”, in keeping with canonical Tradition, refers to his laicization, and not to the crime which led to his laicization. Again, this is pretty standard canonical jargon when a priest is laicized.

Nevertheless, the local ordinary charged with executing the decree is given the option of dispensing from the clause requiring the defrocked priest to move away, if it is forseen that no scandal will arise. For example, unlike a small town where everyone knowns everybody, this is not possible. On the other hand, Boston is a large enough city where a laicized priest can just lose himself in the crowd and attend a parish across town without anyone ever having known he was priest. He can then live out his faith in the pew as a simple Catholic, without engaging in any ministry and without anyone ever knowing he was once a priest.

Say Thank-You To Our TroopsTodd

Say Thank-You To Our Troops

Todd Reitmeyer sends along this wonderful website which has already garnered 2.2 million signatures: Thank-You For Defending Our Freedom. I have already signed it (there was even I nice box where I could mark “Canada”), but won’t say much more, since I feel this is a topic more appropriate for our resident reservist Eric Johnson to comment upon.