Rome orders Roger Haight to stop teaching, publishing

Does the Vatican feel the same way about Richard Rohr? In his book, THINGS HIDDEN: SCRIPTURE AS SPIRITUALITY, he writes some similar ideas as Haight. They seem to have a fuller understanding of Scripture than the Vatican. They teach a loving God, not a vengeful God.

Honestly, I had to smile. Not because I agree with the Vatican, but because, looking at this from a broader perspective, Roger Haight is a pioneer and a prophet and, of course, a threat to the foundation of Catholic teaching. Why do we act as if we are surprised by this, or taken aback, or upset in any way? I think we can look at this latest censure as a page in our church's history that points to the evolution of the coming together of all religions that share the same core truths. It is happening, and perhaps we could simply rejoice at this latest event as a sign that our faith (or, Our Faith) is fluid, is alive, is changing, is growing. So, thanks be to God for the CDF and the theater that shines a light on Fr. Roger Haight for his wisdom and courage. One day we will all be one, because that's what God truly is anyway. Our divisions will fade away. I could not be any happier.

Two hundred, maybe three hundred years hence a newly elected Pope Theresa III will declare Roger Haight a saint, installing him in the ancient and noble Order of the Unfairly Unfrocked. Haight will join the likes of Nicolaus Copernicus, Galileo Galilei, anc so on. It's deja vu all over again.

So, Rome believes that it has got God in a box. And Rome is upset that some people find traces of God outside that box? So sad.

I also wonder if the Congregation's punitive actions haven't just discouraged some people from considering the priesthood as a vocation, perhaps just the people that the Church needs to guide it. Again, so sad.

The only thing this action does is make me want to go read the book in question.

Father Haight should start a movement against the stupids in the congregation for the doctrine of faith. It is another way of using the medieval powers of the inquisiction. I believe we are in a historical momentum in where not to many smart and educated people will believe all those punitive attitudes and doctrines. It is time for CHANGE in the CATHOLIC tradition. It is enough to continue with so many lies and idiots in this sick institution and hierarchy.

Haight has taught that "belief in an empty tomb and post-resurrection appearances of Jesus are not essential to the faith."

So here we have a Jesuit teaching that the Gospels are lies and the Apostles creed is wrong, We are told that this nonsense is "an exciting new Christological approach", and that preventing the teaching of nonsense is "punative".

As an aside, how did anyone think it would be okay for a priest to teach nonsense, as long as he did it at a Protestant college? Not exactly the ecumenical spirit.

"Final resolution" is way too close to "final solution" for my taste!

thank you John Allen. We once again see the necessity of the Curia to stop any real thought and consideration in the Catholic church. Just keep the flock coming, and ignorant. I have not rfead Haight's work, but I certainly will now. It must have something to think about, if the Curia stomps on it.

Episcopal Bishop John Shelby Spong wrote WHY CHRISTIANITY MUST CHANGE OR DIE published by Harper Collins in 1998. His contention is that many of the formula expressions we continue to use have grown meaningless to many people and that the Bible is as much misread as read. I would say he has a valid point. Every Mass we recite the Nicean Creed. Ask your parish what it means and the fun begins.

Fr. Roger Haight published JESUS SYMBOL OF GOD in 1999. It aptly address the problems cited by Bishop Spong.

Is the change needed? Look at formerly Christian Europe. In Europe and the U.S. education levels are high and church attendence way down. Where is the church strong- Africa, Central and South America where educational levels are low. Will they stay low? I think not. The Vatican ought to be giving Fr. Haight a medal.

Love & Peace

Great heavens! Does the Vatican ever realize that its own actions might cause "grave harm to the faithful?" Quite apart from the question of whether censuring the thoughts of others might represent doubts about one's own faith, we have only to look at the virtually total inaction of Rome in the face of the sexual scandal (correction: there was at least one action, and that was in rewarding Cardinal Law for his years of faithful service when he was driven from his diocese).

The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith would do better to show by critical argument where FR Roger Haight has erred and then let the discussion continue. I believe this is a legitimate process to arrive at the truth. Censuring a person, in the 21st century, by The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, in my opinion, does grave harm to the church. We in the West value freedom of speech and the church can no longer silence people by an edict.

I have not read Fr. Haight's book and I am unfamiliar with his writings. But I know that the Second Vatican Council had acknowledged that people from other cultures and religious traditions other than Christian could also be saved. This does not diminish at all Christ's teachings or the importance of Jesus' ministry and role in salvific history. Rahner was not pluralistic, but he acknowledged that the reality of Christ is at work in all religions.

Having said this, it occurs to me that our Creator has created people throughout the world, and since religious beliefs are directly linked to culture, it is arrogant to assume that one must be Christian in order to be saved. So many crimes have been committed by Holy Mother Church forcing people to comply with Roman Catholic Christian beliefs. I suspect all that Fr. Haight was trying to convey is that God in His Infinite Wisdom and love is present to all people regardless of religious pursuasion - and that there are many paths that lead to Him. I cannot believe for a minute that God cares whether a person is Roman Catholic or Hindu - as long as they allow Him to love them and to help them to love as Christ commanded.

I wonder truly, how truly member of our Vatican walk with Jesus, when they have promoted the sexual abuse of minors by their clergy and have tried to cover up these crimes? They have truly scandalized so many Catholics and other Christians and non-Christians alike. They are really in no position to cast judgment on anyone, including Fr. Haight. I think rather, they ought to understand the deeper meaning and import of Fr. Haight's written work. I think this would help the members of the Office of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith to deepen their own faith concerning God.

As for me, I am one step away from leaving teh Roman Catholic community because of the atrocities committed by our Pope and other Bishops in response to the sexual abuse scandal. This is not what Jesus Christ had in mind when he turned the keys over to St. Peter. Jesus had an open mind and heart, and he himself questioned his own Temple because of the corruption in the priests there. Most Roman Catholics are supporting this corruption through their complicity with a Church Authority Structure that has only fostered injustice and corruption for so many people.

Do I have a hatred for the Roman Catholic Church? No - I have a deep love for our faith community. But the authority structure itself is human-made and needs to be revamped. It teaches that you cannot question the Pope, Bishops, or clergy - which is how innocent children became abused.

There is nothing any one here can say to me to make me feel differently.

To the Jesuit official who said “It’s not clear what purpose is served by making him leave Union, since the point has already been made that his views do not represent official Catholic theology.” ---

And to any serious thinking Catholic, I reply:
The purpose of this action is apparently to prove once again and definitively that official ROMAN Catholic theology today has no respect for intelligent creative and gifted theologians who wish to provide a credible new hermeneutic of the faith in the context of our times.

The Vatican under the rule of Benedict (Jozef Ratzinger) insists on rigid systemic and doctrinaire adherence to an autocratic mind control. The teutonic Augustinian (as well as his sycophant minions) wishes only blind obedience and infantilism. No room here for intelligent faith seeking undersanding or dialogue with the modern world.

"Up with the ramparts!" "Down with the Portucllis!"

What century do these people live in? Was there a Vatican II or not?

Lord, save us from these intolerant rulers and bureaucrats obsessed with power and infallibility.

And give us the gift of true faith in you and your nonviolent gospel of life.

John Allen's Jan. 5 column, "Rome orders Roger Haight to stop teaching, publishing," brings into the open the very serious differences of opinion between the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and Jesuit theologian Fr. Roger Haight concerning the role of Christ in salvation history. According to John Allen, "The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith asserted that the book [Haight's] endangered traditional doctrines on such matters as the divinity of Christ, the Trinity, the saving value of Christ’s death on the Cross, and the importance of the church."

This is serious business. If Haight endangers traditional doctrines on the divinity of Christ, the Trinity, the saving value of Christ's death on the Cross, I throw in my lot with the Church built on a Rock. She's got a solid 2000-year-old track record. I couldn't endanger my eternal salvation by putting my bets on Haight or any theologian, who puts his pants on one leg at a time like me. I had thought that the magnificent document "Dominus Jesus" had quite clearly defined "the uniqueness and universality" of the saving role of Jesus, the Word made flesh. There is no salvation save in the name of Jesus. He and only he died for ALL people, Christans, Jews, Moslems, Hindus, pagans. All the rest of the "saviors" down through the years are human beings.

The thought police are prowling about once again. The Vatican is terrified that the laity might actually think. Heaven forbid we should make our own decisions. I have Haight's book which I purchased because the Vatican denounced it. I seriously doubt that the average guy or gal in the pew is going to read a 500 page scholarly treatment of Christology.

Give em hell Roger.

Jesus Symbol of God is quickly selling out on amazon.com, within moments of the posting of this piece.

I know
I wanted to get one too!

Still his Paulist Press work from over twenty years ago on Liberation Theology is a great bargain!

Time to read Father Haight SJ before we no longer can!

Will he do like those blacklisted by Joe McCarthy in the fifties and publish through ghosts, like in the Woody Allen movie the Front? Does this still sound like the Roman Catholic Church we grew up in? Yes? Oh. No. I remember Rahner, Congar, but also Father Schillebeeckx and the rest. His monumental books in Christology still grace my shelves, near Friar Leonardo Boff's great works.

When Jesus returns he will say:
Dude, where's my Church?

It would be nice to have a conference of all those silenced, and excommunicated in the past few years. Is there a stadium large enough to accomodate the crowd?

The use of the "Captcha" is nonsense! Other websites publish comments instantly and without all of this extra blarney!

Indeed, what kind of thinkers are we that we might come to the understanding that everyone of us is intended for life with God in heaven? What kind of God would allow the children of God not to enter the gates of heaven because they took a different road?

You will not lose me, if you allow me to form my own thoughts. I will run at the speed of lightning, if you do my thinking for me.

Once again the heavy-handedness of the Vatican is shown.

Why in the name of God has there never ever been such heavy-handedness in the cases of thousands of known, credible accused or convicted sexual molesters, rapists and pedophiles among members of the Church's own clergy and bishops worldwide?

The most recent example in the United States is that of Maine's Bishop Richard Malone in his treatment of Paul Kendrick, a longtime advocate for victims of clergy sexual abuse:

Bishop Richard Malone's Police and Canonical Actions Against Advocate Sparks National Coalition to Check the Facts

Bishop Malone's Half Truths, Exaggerations, False Representations Revealed

Fact Sheet Has Point by Point Analysis of Recent Statements and Characterizations

Call to Catholics to Cast Off Inertia, Get the Facts, Seek the Truth

For Immediate Release

January 4, 2009

Portland, ME – The National Survivor Advocates Coalition (NSAC) pressed the case for getting to the truth about the actions of Bishop Richard J. Malone against a Maine survivor advocate by distributing a fact sheet outside the cathedral in Portland, ME today.

On this first Sunday of the new year, the coalition called upon Catholics to resolve to cast off inertia and get the facts.

The fact sheet is a point by point in depth analysis of Bishop Malone's and diocesan spokesperson Sue Bernard's recent statements and characterizations regarding Paul Kendrick and other survivor supporters.

Mike Sweatt, a Maine member of the coalition said, "What we see Bishop Malone doing is dodging the real issues of confronting the clergy sexual abuse crisis and using heavy handed tactics against an advocate. It's a shell game to turn attention away from the bishop's lack of true response to victims and their families.”

Sweatt said the coalition members, survivors and family members came to the cathedral to distribute the fact sheet to try to counter balance the weight of the communication outlets Bishop Malone has at his disposal.

“The bishop has diocesan staff, a newspaper, a website, parish bulletins and ready access to the news media as a leader of nearly 200,000 Catholics in Maine.” Sweatt said. “But we believe it is imperative to try get the facts out even if we are in a David and Goliath situation.”

Mr. Kendrick, of Freeport, ME, has been an outspoken advocate for survivors since 1999 and involved in justice issues for many years.

He reiterated today, "This is not about me. It's about justice and compassion for the vulnerable, the weak and the innocent among us. It's about protecting children. It's about gospel values. When any of us doesn't follow what we profess to believe in, including the bishop, Christian correction is needed and a call to fully follow the gospel must be made. We can't afford to follow scandal upon scandal. And it is a scandal when bishops use words that sound holy but are not carried forth in actions."

At the press conference, local members of the coalition called upon Bishop Malone to stop the over done legal approach, reflect on the current situation, inform the community of abusers, and hold meetings where reasonable discussions can take place among the bishop, survivors, family members and advocates.

The coalition, whose members are practicing Catholics from throughout the United States, called upon the bishop to post the names of priests who have abused minors on the diocesan website so that the community may have the knowledge to protect children.

Bishop Malone filed a police action of criminal trespass against Mr. Kendrick's attendance at Midnight Mass Christmas Eve in the Portland cathedral. The bishop went further and took Church legal action against Mr. Kendrick that could keep him from receiving Communion.

“To use the holiest of our sacred rites, Communion, as a ploy to muzzle a survivor advocate combined with the implied warning to others who might speak up crosses the line of proper use of a bishop's authority. It's deplorable." said Kristine Ward, of Dayton, OH, chair of the coalition.

“The Church already has laryngitis in its moral voice because of the scandal. To use these kinds of out of proportion tactics further endangers the recovery of moral leadership by not only Bishop Malone but his brother bishops”

Another coalition member, Jim Jenkins from Berkley, California said,“ We've seen the same tactics by bishops from coast to coast. The words are parsed, the information incomplete, the record intentionally left vague, pledges made and not kept yet believed because there is a bishop's name attached to the statement. It's not only time, it's well past time, for the truth to surface."

Jenkins served on the archdiocesan lay review board empanelled by Archbishop now Cardinal Levada. Jenkins resigned on principle when Levada refused to fully investigate the leads that came to the diocese and the review board regarding clergy and sexual abuse. Levada, Jenkins said, chose to protect clergy, including bishops, rather than investigate. Levada is now head of the Vatican congregation that reviews sexual abuse cases, the office Pope Benedict held prior to his election as head of the Roman Catholic Church.

Contact:

Kristine Ward, National Survivor Advocates Coalition (NSAC)-OH (937-272-0308)

Michael Sweatt, NSAC-ME (207-831-3791)

Marge Bean, NSAC-MA (617-851-6536)

Tom Byrne, NSAC-OH (216-337-4017)

Mike Coode, NSAC-TN (615-364-2334)

Carolyn Disco, NSAC-NH (603-424-3120)

Ed Friedl, NSAC-OH (330-289-8430)

Bob Hoatson, NSAC-NJ (862-368-2800)

Jim Jenkins, NSAC-CA (510-599-5173)

Paul Kellen, NSAC-MA (781-395-3628)

Lisa Kendzior, NSAC-TX (817-773-5907)

Chuck Miller, NSAC-DE (240-481-0003)

Judy Miller, NSAC-DE (302-234-1519)

Ruth Moore, NSAC-MA (781-925-3080)

Bob Schwiderski, NSAC-MN (952-471-3422)

Steve Sheehan, NSAC-MA (617-319-0477)

Sister Maureen Turlish, NSAC-DE (610-212-2770)

Frank Douglas, NSAC-AZ

www.nsacoalition.wordpress.com

TO CONTINUE:

The National Survivor Advocate Coalition (NSAC) checks the facts in statements by Bishop Richard J. Malone and Diocesan Spokeswoman Sue Bernard:

In a statement posted on the Diocese of Portland website and in several interviews, Bishop Malone explains his reasons for initiating police action and canonical warnings against Paul Kendrick, a longtime survivor advocate.

Unfortunately, those reasons contain misrepresentations that distort the truth, and therefore warrant correction. Here is the full record in response:

-----------------

MALONE: “He has picketed my residence...”

FACT: On four occasions during the past five years (less than once per year), Kendrick has joined a small group of sex abuse victims and their supporters as they stood on the public sidewalk outside Malone’s church owned residence. On each occasion, they stood in a peaceful vigil for the sole purpose of a) calling attention to the bishop's failure to protect children from priest abusers who live in unsuspecting neighborhoods or, b) recognizing and acknowledging the trauma, pain and suffering of those who were abused.

Two of the vigils were held for the purpose of praying for the souls of victims of clergy sexual abuse who have died of suicide. On the other occasions, they held signs urging the bishop to make public the names and whereabouts of all credibly accused priests, religious and church workers. There was no picket, no protest. The vigils were held with the concurrence of local authorities.

-----------------

MALONE: “…he has sent literally hundreds of e-mails to the Chancery”

FACT: Three advocacy groups-–Voice of the Faithful (VOTF)--Maine, the Ignatius Group, and Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests (SNAP)--Maine-– have indeed sent "hundreds of e-mails" over the past seven years to hundreds of recipients in Maine and elsewhere about the clergy abuse crisis in the Catholic Church. Kendrick is or was affiliated with all three groups, in whose name the e-mails were sent to distribution lists that included the press, media, parish members, parish leaders, Catholic Charities, survivor advocates, abuse victims and survivors, non-profit agencies, other Maine churches and the Roman Catholic Diocese of Portland.

E-mail messages sent to the Chancery were addressed to the Director of Public Relations for the diocese and other chancery workers. The twice weekly messages included copies of worldwide updates about the sexual abuse crisis, editorials, letters to the editor, informative news articles and "Open Letters" to former Bishop Joseph Gerry, Malone and other church officials.

The "Open Letters" expressed criticism of (among many other issues): a) the church's failure to warn parents about unsuspecting priest child abusers, b) the hardball legal tactics employed against abuse victims and their families, c) the failure of Church leaders to tell the truth and be responsible and accountable for what occurred in the past, d) the bishops' lack of pastoral care, compassion and understanding towards those who were abused.

The email distribution lists were created by victims' advocates in an attempt to educate, inform and awaken the Catholic community in Maine to the realities of the cover-up and transfer of known priest child molesters into unsuspecting parishes and schools by Church officials. In addition, the messages contained in the e-mails are purposely intended to clearly and forcefully call attention to Church officials who have in the past and continue to mistreat and bully abuse victims in an attempt to intimidate and frighten those who were abused.

Malone and his spokeswoman neglected to mention that the bishop will not allow survivor advocacy groups to publish information in parish bulletins, the bi-monthly diocesan news magazine or the diocese web site. The same groups are denied access to parishes for the purpose of speaking to parishioners about the sex abuse crisis in the Church. As a further example of the bishop's censorship, the bishop refused to publish a paid advertisement in which contact information for SNAP and the Maine Coalition for Sexual Assault would be made available to those in need of help and support. The editor of the news magazine informed group leaders that the SNAP ads would not be published because the bishop said that "SNAP has been critical of me in the past."

----------------

MALONE: “I was warned that Mr. Kendrick was waiting for me outside the gathering place with a video camera.”

FACT: After weeks of Malone refusing to meet with Marie Tupper, the mother of a clergy sexual abuse victim, she asked Harvey Paul, Maine Director of the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests and Paul Kendrick to stand alongside her in a peaceful vigil on a public sidewalk. An open meeting with Malone at a local bar had been advertised in parish bulletins and on the diocesan web site, inviting all to attend.

No entrances were blocked; Malone’s path was unobstructed as it was for all pedestrians on the busy sidewalk. The press and media were not contacted so as not to disturb the meeting's attendees. Kendrick held a video camera to capture the event so that Malone could not tell an alternate version of the meeting.

----------------

MALONE: “A police escort was provided to me so that I could enter the building safely.”

FACT: At Malone's request, a single police officer walked one block with him to the bar. The police did not initiate contact with Malone, nor warn him of any danger being posed by the small group of advocates. Instead, Malone or his representative called the police. The police neither warned nor spoke to the three advocates either before or during Malone's arrival.

The bishop had no reason or evidence to expect that he would not be able to enter the bar from the sidewalk in a timely and safe manner. The advocates informed the police officer that they would not be present when the bishop emerged from the bar.

---------------

MALONE: “I received a letter from Mr. Kendrick detailing his plans to distract and unnerve me and thus disrupt Midnight Mass at the Cathedral.”

FACT: Kendrick’s letter to Malone said in part, "I will come in peace. But if you happen to look my way from time to time, you may see me shaking my head ever so slightly in disbelief, or my head may be in my hands as I pray for tolerance to remain seated in spite of your hypocrisy."

Coming in "peace" means just that. It did not mean a disruption of the mass.

When Malone filed the police notices against Kendrick, he knew that Kendrick would not disrupt the mass. Why? Because shortly after reading Kendrick's letter to Malone, a senior diocese official contacted Kendrick to assure him that he would be treated with the same respect as any other Catholic attending the midnight mass.

In an email sent by Kendrick the same day, Kendrick wrote, “Further, he (the deacon) told me he would call head usher, Bob Schwartz, to ensure that I could sit in the front row or anywhere else I wanted and that no one would be purposely placed beside me or behind me.”

Kendrick responded warmly to the deacon, reinforcing his intentions: “You have my word that I will come in peace to the midnight Mass. It is an act of conscience for me to be there as a visible reminder to the Catholic bishop of Maine that he is not treating Marie Tupper in accordance with the gospel values that he is preaching. I intend to respect the occasion and all those in attendance at the Mass. It is enough for me to know that Bishop Malone knows the reason for my presence."

----------------

MALONE: “…what felt threatening to me personally and harmful to my ministry as your bishop.”

FACT: It is incumbent upon Malone to explain and define what he means when he says he feels personally threatened. No advocate in Maine has ever "threatened" Malone in a manner that would cause him physical harm. Any harm imposed upon Malone’s ministry is as a result of his cover up and secrecy about credibly- accused priest perpetrators living unsupervised in Maine communities. For instance, Malone knew that Rev. Michael Plourde (who had abused 12 year-old boys when he worked in a Biddeford, Maine parish) was living in an apartment building filled with unsuspecting children.

---------------

MALONE: “Constructive criticism is always welcome.”

FACT: Survivors and their advocates have not found Malone receptive to constructive criticism. They have experienced a defensiveness and testiness in Malone's demeanor. He has steadfastly refused to meet with or accept invitations to join their outreach in parishes where abuse occurred. Neither he nor his staff responds to reasonable inquiries with direct answers, leaving many issues unaddressed and unresolved.

As an example, Malone has been criticized for refusing to move out of his 7,000 sq. ft. mansion (6 bedrooms, 4 full baths), where he lives by himself. The property has an assessed value of $1 million; operating and maintenance costs are kept confidential. Yet in an ongoing legal case, the bishop is defending himself and the Church by employing the doctrine of charitable immunity; i.e., the Catholic Church in Maine does not have the resources to make financial reparations for sexual molestation. Bishops in other dioceses have sold or tried to sell a mansion, cancelled an expensive property purchase, or if they went forward with costly renovations, it was under severe public opposition.

---------------

MALONE: “I assure you that the Diocese of Portland has aggressively and appropriately responded to this crisis.”

FACT: Malone’s statement that the Diocese has pursued an aggressive and appropriate response to the sexual abuse crisis is contradicted by his record of withholding the names of credibly accused clergy, withholding crucial information about the number of their victims (a dozen versus one or two), refusing for months to reveal the disposition of Vatican proceedings, and withholding the identities of previously unnamed priests, to name several examples. Timely disclosure of the truth about perpetrating clergy is an important mark of a genuine aggressive and appropriate stance.

Finally, Malone closes his release with prayers for survivors, their families, the Church, perpetrators, “good and faithful priests,” for himself and other Church leaders.

May the bishop also come someday to include those who advocate for survivors, seeking to witness by their presence amongst them.

The National Coalition and local advocates again invite the bishop to join us in our ministry. He has always been welcome.

Response to statements by Sue Bernard, diocesan spokeswoman:

BERNARD: “This is about harassment.”

FACT: Bernard’s definition of harassment is inaccurate.

Bernard is attempting to define a Catholic's commitment to the tenets of Catholic Social Teaching with her own misguided definition of harassment. Kendrick has persistently called for Malone to meet with and comfort families of survivors, to make full disclosure about abusive priests’ records, to stop employing hardball legal tactics against victims, to cease claiming a charitable immunity defense for the diocese while the bishop lives in a million dollar mansion, to stand peacefully outside a church with a sign.

---------------

BERNARD: “…the diocese took that as a threat to disrupt the service.”

FACT: Kendrick clearly stated that he was coming in peace and in a follow-up e-mail said he would not disrupt the mass. He has never disrupted any liturgy, anywhere.

---------------

BERNARD: “And if the person saying or leading the Mass is distracted, that's disruptive to everybody.”

FACT: Saying Malone would be distracted by Kendrick’s presence and hence disruptive to everyone is disingenuous. Where is the focus and sense of presence? How is the spiritual leader of Maine's Catholic community "distracted" by a baptized Catholic's plea for the bishop to help, support and comfort a mother whose child was molested by the family's priest?

---------------

BERNARD: “Malone has invited Tupper to meet with Dubois, the vicar general, and Paul Falconer, chairman of a diocesan board that reviews sexual-abuse claims.”

FACT: Tupper asks specifically to meet with her bishop, not his surrogates. Besides, Rev. Andrew Dubois ignored for weeks her repeated requests for an update on her child's priest abuser's case, a common unresponsive and demeaning practice by Church officials. On arrival in Maine as bishop, Malone said he would meet with any person who was abused, and Tupper took him at his word. Beyond the abuse of her son, Tupper has been continuously maligned by her pastor(s), parish council members and other parishioners for reporting a well liked and popular priest. This mother is made out to be a pariah, accused of lying, and of making claims for the sole purpose of collecting money. She needs the bishop to come to her aid and inform the community that there are at least a dozen more victims of the same abuser instead of abandoning her to suffer unjustly as a scapegoat for people’s anger and frustrations.

---------------

BERNARD: “He does not feel comfortable sitting down with people who have such a close association with Paul,”

FACT: Guilt by association? The bishop is making his personal comfort the issue. The issue is not Kendrick. The issue is the pain of a survivor’s mother in need of a Shepherd’s healing care.

---------------

BERNARD: “The bishop asked for and received a police escort past the trio, who peppered him with questions as he walked by.”

FACT: Bernard’s statement is proof that Malone “asked for the escort.” Tupper quickly asked only one question to which the bishop did not respond directly, as Malone hurriedly scrambled to enter the bar. There was no “peppering” of questions.

The Coalition calls on Bernard to speak the truth and properly represent the facts. We also invite her to join in this very import ministry of serving the poor, the sexually abused and their families.

Kristine Ward, National Survivor Advocates Coalition (NSAC)-OH (937-272-0308)

Michael Sweatt, NSAC-ME (207-831-3791)

Marge Bean, NSAC-MA (617-851-6536)

Tom Byrne, NSAC-OH (216-337-4017)

Mike Coode, NSAC-TN (615-364-2334)

Carolyn Disco, NSAC-NH (603-424-3120)

Ed Friedl, NSAC-OH (330-289-8430)

Bob Hoatson, NSAC-NJ (862-368-2800)

Jim Jenkins, NSAC-CA (510-599-5173)

Paul Kellen, NSAC-MA (781-395-3628)

Lisa Kendzior, NSAC-TX (817-773-5907)

Chuck Miller, NSAC-DE (302 234-1519) )

Judy Miller, NSAC-DE (302-234-1519)

Ruth Moore, NSAC-MA (781-925-3080)

Bob Schwiderski, NSAC-MN (952-471-3422)

Steve Sheehan, NSAC-MA (617-319-0477)

Sister Maureen Turlish, NSAC-DE (610-212-2770)

Frank Douglas, NSAC-AZ

For more information about the National Survivor Advocates Coalition, visit us at www.nsacoalition.wordpress.com

© 2009, National Survivor Advocates Coalition January 4, 2009

Brothers and Sisters, Does any one know if Fr Haight ever took the 4th (Jesuit) vow. If he did, no further comment is required. Grace + Peace with prayers always...
P.S. Thanks for letting me post to your site. Whenever I post non fawning comments on the America site, they are rejected out of hand and are never posted to their website(incidentally I comply with all the their web comment posting requirements, i.e. name email etc. and try to keep my comments to the point and usually upbeat; sadly their editorial policy is quite illiberal)...

Amazing. Everytime a doctrine of the Catholic Church is threatened by a thinking, reflecting individual, the reaction of the hierarchical church is predictable. To try to stop that individual from thinking or/and reflecting, as if, the thinking and reflecting would be stopped. The hierarchical church should realize by now that some of its doctrines are very assaulting to the greatest gifts that God endowed on men: intellect and will, ergo freedom. Faith begins when reason ends, faith does not begin when reason is stopped. The hierarchical church is still very comfortable believing that they can still decide on behalf of the post-modern community of faithful matters about faith, Jesus, God and what have you, and take a stance of hepocricy over internal problems that they are facing- GLOBAL SEXUAL ABUSES OF PRIESTS! C'mon, get real.
Again, amazing.

Amazing. Everytime a doctrine of the Catholic Church is threatened by a thinking, reflecting individual, the reaction of the hierarchical church is predictable. To try to stop that individual from thinking or/and reflecting, as if, the thinking and reflecting would be stopped. The hierarchical church should realize by now that some of its doctrines are very assaulting to the greatest gifts that God endowed on men: intellect and will, ergo freedom. Faith begins when reason ends, faith does not begin when reason is stopped. The hierarchical church is still very comfortable believing that they can still decide on behalf of the post-modern community of faithful matters about faith, Jesus, God and what have you, and take a stance of hepocricy over internal problems that they are facing- GLOBAL SEXUAL ABUSES OF PRIESTS! C'mon, get real.
Again, amazing.

What a tragedy!!! When is the Vatican going to stop this persecution and silencing of theologians?? Theologians should be able to be in dialogue (what is that??) with their peers and Vatican officials. This silencing is over-the-top punitive. Roger is such a fine person and theologian! The CDF is obviously unaware of the Scripture text "Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom"(2 Cor 3:17). Where is the freedom of the Spirit in the ways the CDF silendes and punishes theologians?

Sad that the closed minds at the top cannot find a way to admit the salvation that other faiths bring to the world.
A far cry from Vatican II. Sitting behind the ramparts and firing off salvos like 'Domine Jesus'which effectively said that salvation was only possible within the church is not helpful. More engagement in true dialogue is needed or the Catholic Church looks more and more isolated- perhaps that is what the present hierachy want.

How sad is this for the Church? Having read several of Roger Haight's books, I found them only filled with love of God and others. Is there no room in the Church for the imagination, scholarly research, theological interpretation based on the signs of the times? I find the Vatican's posture a greater threat to the faithful!

Unless the institutional Roman Catholic church wake up to the Reality of God's Presence in the world religions, they will never encounter or experience in depth the universal Triune God that they preach about. Camilia MacPherson

After all, Jesus said to the Apostles to go forth and spread the Good News, NOT make Christians of the world. The good news is for everyone; Christ and Love are for everyone. Rome will never learn because of their spiritual arrogance.

GOOD FOR THE CDF!

Good for Rome for exercising its authority and squashing the promotion of errors and falsehoods regarding the faith.

If only the Church had been more active in doing so in the 60s and 70s, there would be much fewer problems in the church today.

Clearly, the lax approach of the CDF during that time is what led to peculiar teachings infiltrating the seminaries - just read Rose's "Good Bye, Good Men."

We need a strong, doctrinally sound church to stem the tide of secular humanism and heresy.

And the Jesuits need to clean up their act.

Thank you Mr. Allen, another very informative article. The blog responses are equally impressive. Thanks to all who contributed!

Dear, Mrs Rakoczy, et al

Do you agree with Haight's claim that the gospel accounts of the resurection are lies?

If not, why is okay to teach falsehoods to young poeple at a Protestant school?

Is it because Protestants are agents of the devil, who are damned and must be mislead? If that's what you believe, you are in error. Actually of us, even Protestants, can be saved, and Catholics have an obligation to preach the truth to them.

Let me get a group of professional criers for all those who have posted at this site so you can cry your eyes out over the misfortunes of Roger Haight, S.J., who can't seem to understand the ecclesial vocation of a theologian.

Most of you people just astound me... Really...

I'm going to explain this as SIMPLY as I can, OK? Now, if Bill Mahr, or some other athiest, or even just plain 'ol non-Catholic, or heck, even just non-ordained individual wrote this stuff, I SERIOUSLY doubt you would see any reaction from the Vatican.

What you have here is a CATHOLIC PRIEST, one who has sworn to follow and teach the doctrine of the One, Holy, Catholic and Aposolic Church, who is bound by an oath TAKEN BEFORE GOD, of obedience to the authority of the Church, who is teaching HERESY to CATHOLICS.

Do you all understand that now?

Simply put, think of it like this: Some college professor writes a book about how Jesus is NOT God Incarnate. Fine, whatever. Those are a dine a dozen today. Now let us say that a CATHOLIC PRIEST was teaching that Jesus was NOT both God and man (the old Arian heresy), was teaching it at a SEMINARY, and was teaching it with the AUTHORITY of his position to incoming, soon to be priests. THAT is unacceptable.

Here is just a small snip of his errors:

"...In the Preface of his book Jesus Symbol of God, the Author explains that today theology must be done in dialogue with the postmodern world, but it also 'must remain faithful to its originating revelation and consistent tradition' (p. xii), in the sense that the data of the faith constitute the norm and criteria for a theological hermeneutic. He also asserts that it is necessary to establish a 'critical correlation' (cf. pp. 40-47) between these data and the modes and qualities of postmodern thought, characterized in part by a radical historical and pluralistic consciousness (cf. pp. 24, 330-334): 'The tradition must be critically received into the present situation' (p. 46).

This 'critical correlation', however, results, in fact, in a subordination of the content of faith to its plausibility and intelligibility in postmodern culture (cf. pp. 49-50, 127, 195, 241, 273-274, 278-282, 330-334). It is stated, for example, that because of the contemporary pluralistic consciousness, 'one can no longer claim [...] Christianity as the superior religion, or Christ as the absolute center to which all other historical mediations are relative. [...] It is impossible in postmodern culture to think [...] that one religion can claim to inhabit the center into which all others are to be drawn' (p. 333)."

Need something a little more concrete? How about this, also from his book. "Jesus is 'a finite person' (p. 205)." This is a very specific instance in the general tone of his work that undermines the very DIVINITY of Christ.

Here's more: "doctrines of an immanent Trinity should not be allowed to be read into New Testament teaching" (p. 474) Oh, so now the Holy Trinity is out too?

"Jesus suffering for us, of being a sacrifice to God, of absorbing punishment for sin in our place, of being required to die to render satisfaction to God, hardly communicates meaningfully to our age" (p. 241). Such language is to be abandoned in his eyes because "the images associated with this talk offend and even repulse postmodern sensibility and thereby form a barrier to a salutary appreciation of Jesus Christ" (p. 241). Oh NICE! So we shouldn't be teaching that Christ came into the world to die for our sins and redeem us?

Heresy, my friends, plain and simple. If he truly believe this, he sould be true to his beliefs and leave the Church instead of pretending that what he is teaching is Orthodoxy. Martin Luther at least had the honesty to leave and found his own religion instead of pretending what he was teaching was what the Church taught.

The lack of knowledge most modern Catholics have of their own Faith saddens me greatly. Many it seems, are Modernists first, and then Catholics whenever it pleases them.

Not every new idea is a good one. The pastors of the Church are simply doing their job: kicking the tires of new ideas and pointing out problems with those ideas. What on earth is wrong with that? And why not engage in an academic, theological debate? Don't assume that debate isn't happening even as the pastors of the Church exercise their pastoral (and not academic) ministry.

If Fr. Roger's attempt to make the Catholic doctrine of God, and of Christ, intelligible to post-modernity is found wanting, the problem (get this) may not be with the Church's pastors, doctrine or teaching. The problem might be with (drum roll) POST-MODERNITY! Geez, has anyone around here ever thought about that?

For the life of me I can't fathom the derangement and fanaticism of people like so-called "Sister" Maureen Paul Turlish, E.SinadNobleza and others who engage in a nauseating and intereminable diatribe on the dead horse of clerical pedophilia that has little or nothing to do with the matter at hand: the silencing of Fr. Haight for his theological opinions. What a pain to read these virulent and cathartic "apologias pro vita sua."

P Piper decries "the closed minds at the top [that] cannot find a way to admit the salvation that other faiths bring to the world" and criticizes "Dominus Jesus" for effectively teaching "that salvation was only possible within the church." [To P Piper]- I have news for you: other faiths do not bring salvation to the world. Only Christ - the one and only savior - does. It's as simple as that. Yes, P Piper, salvation is only possible within the Church founded by Christ. All people - Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, pagans and non believers - are saved because, in one way or another, they are anonymous or implicit Christians and belong to the Church.

I'm surprised this Jesuit has not been in trouble before now. His writings on liberation theology back in the 80s were quite heretical. While I agree that the CDF does need to censure Haight, the way they have gone about it is a bit ham handed. That is, Haight will now be seen as a matyr and lots of people are going to read his books now. For everyone who is so outraged the the CDF action, remember, the Church is not a democracy and Jesuits take a vow of obedience.

DearSirs & Madams:

"The authority structure itself leads" . . . to Jesus Christ!

There are ten-thousand "Protestant" churchs for any of you
who feel things are getting "modern" enough, soon enough!

Don't let the confessional door hit you on the way out.

Peace, man!

The impression I get from comments on this site about the Holy Office and Fr. Haight is that theologians are more important than saints, that theology not piety is where it's at.

Thanks for GINO's nauseating and interminable diatribe. I respect his opinion and perception very much, yet, it would remain his opinion and perception, ergo, not the truth. Clerical pedophilia has something if not everything to do with the matter at hand. Doctrines on Faith are ought to be based on LOVE, GOD's unconditional love, any other bases like fear, bigotry lessens love and would lead to the lessening of faith or its eradication. How can I be convinced that the office on the Doctrines of Faith is really defending the faith, if the soul and faith of the victims (and their families) of the GLOBAL SEXUAL ABUSES committed by PRIESTS are not properly respected, defended or even recovered? Again, the church needs reflection on these, and all of us. At the end of the day, let us not make our faith in God dependent or be determined by others. Let us find our God within, in the recesses of our personal experiences, for there lies God and his unconditional love for us.

Again thanks GINO, i respect your opinion and perception.

Thank God for the Church! Looking at some comments here, I wonder why the Church doesn't just vanish and become some pawn for "intellectuals" to move around.

This isn't a game! The guy was teaching heresy and the Church has a deposit of faith to protect. When will people stop and understand, the Church ISN'T a democracy, your "modern theories" are mere vanity and that the eternal truth is what we must uphold, as if our very souls depend on it.

God bless Benedict!

I don't see the point. The Creed of Catholic Church is well known from two thousand years. There is a Trinity, Jesus is the eternal Son of God, who became flesh, etc.

Instead Haight basically says: that's not what I believe/feel. Jesus is just a "simbol" of God, one of the many.

What is to be done? The Church saying: oh! finally somebody has stated something smart, or Haight saying: oh finally I understand that my faith is not Catholic one?

Both positions are clearly opposing!

Hilarious -
It is hard to imagine whether there are really as many cretins who write in here to try to pervert the Church to fit their demented visions, or if there is only one and he wties in every few minutes under a new name. Hopefully, the latter, as that would at least offer some shred of hope for a human race which still respected Christ, His Church and his teachings.
The usual drivel about 'Oh, sweet happy smiley face Jesus ate with all the sinners' paints a pervert's vision of Christ laughing and joking and perhaps sharing a few lewd jokes with the sodomite seated to His left and the adultress to His right... and it is amusing that not one of the trumpeters of the New PC Gospel ever mentions the fact that, according to Jesus Christ, he came " to call sinners TO REPENTANCE".

He did not come to tell people to wallow in sin, but pointed out that if your right hand led you into sin, you would do better to cut off your own hand than to be eternally damned. How sweet and smiley faced is that?

Thus, when the weak-minded sycophants of the evil one start hailing writings which oppose the teachings of Christ, it is a sure sign of the decadence and spiritual worthlessness of whatever book they tout at the moment.
Itching ears can be cured by a healthy dose of truth and Christian orthodoxy.

To Psalm23:

What is the "eternal truth" which you say we must uphold which our very souls depend upon? Now if your answer to my question would be, God is love, then we have something in agreement.

The vatican really needs to start telling the truth. The issue here is not about core doctrines, it is about a bunch of power hungry sexually frustrated watching their power base being eroded. That is the real issue. Everything else, all of the rhetoric is simply that nothing more.

The vatican lost face in the US presidential election. It lost face (and continues to lose face) in the pedophile priest scandal. It lost face in proposition 8 in california. It is losing face in the women priest scandal. It is losing face with the pathetic declaration that the environment was being damaged by the urine of women who take contraceptives. It is losing face, losing face and losing face. This is just one more example. The vatican power base is eroding on a daily basis.

So where does that leave us. Very simply, the vatican and the magisterial authorities continue to prove on a daily basis, that they are indeed serving a god, but it is the god of the world that they serve. When we review their actions in that context, every action, every bit of rhetoric, every public proclamation makes perfect sense. The vatican no longer serves the "One True God". The vatican serves the god of the world ... they serve satan.

Why would I write such a thing? Would a member of the clergy who truly served the "One True God" lie to a congregation? NO! Would a member of the clergy who served the "One True God" interfere with a criminal investigation of pedophile priests? NO! Would a member of the clergy who served the "One True God" sit on the board of an organization that teaches and supports torture and violence? NO!

Last year I started writing a book called "Sins of the Fathers (and Bishops)". The purpose of the book was to chronical lies, deceptions and criminal activities of the RCC cleargy. I gave up on the project when I realized that the documentation that I had collected would probably fill over 1000 pages.

I pray for the day that the Catholic Church is finally blessed with real leaders, not the pathetic shells of men who are there now, but real leaders, leaders with integrity, leaders with courage, leaders who are not afraid to preach, teach and LIVE the gospel of Christ. Leaders who are more concerned about the well being of the laity entrusted to them than their own personal power and wealth. Leaders who are more concerned about their congregations, than how long their cappa magmas will be this year. Leaders who are more concerned about the Spirit of Christ, than a book full of meaningless laws they attempt to force feed to the laity. Laws which they consistently refuse to obey.

I don't understand why everyone gets so upset that the Vatican has asked someone to quit presenting himself as a Catholic theologian when he is denying the fact that Jesus is the Christ?

The Vatican isn't saying that Fr. Roger is going to hell or can't take communion. They've just asked him to stop presenting as Catholic teaching stuff that isn't Catholic teaching.

I don't get it. If anyone else was misrepresenting the policies of any other organization of which they were a member, there would be a similar if not more punitive action.

Christ isn't Jesus' last name. It's who he was and if we don't believe he was the Christ, then what in the heck is everything that we believe in based on?

I'm going to take the apparently lonely path and say that I think the Vatican is doing the right thing.

Many of those submitting comments, seem to beleve that there is little or no difference between prophets like Muhammad, Buddha and Moses and Jesus.

I disagree! Jesus not only "talked the talk" in his teachings, but he also "walked the walk" by entering into human suffering with his passion and death. He guides and supports each of us in a way the others can not. He is unique.

Hi Iowa Catholic

Yes, that God is love, and that Jesus Christ is God. Haight's "idea" that Jesus is a symbol of God is a disastrous one for anyone seeking the truth, since they may confuse Him with being simply a wise man or guru. He is God and the Church needs to prerach these truths or else it fails in its God given mandate.

I note that a follow up to this story tells that the Pope is really addressing the issue of relativism, which is a withered fruit of Modernism and a rampant destroyer of the belief that there IS objective truth and it can only be found in Jesus Christ....

I think in a lot of people's minds,there is an almost immediate reaction that the Vatican must be wrong! I think of myself as quite an open person, who tries to look at both sides. I read what the "problems" were with Jesus -Symbol of God and I commend the Congregation for their stance. Only because I feel a vast majority of readers will accept everything they read that is "way out there". It's amazing to me that the same people who have a problem with infallibility (though poorly understood by the way) gift that same privilege on certain theologians without the benefit of a critical reading of their books.
Just my two cents.

So this guy dies and goes to Heaven. St. Peter is taking him on a tour. They pass a Country Club, with people playing golf and tennis, and having a wonderful time. St. Peter says, "Those are the Episcopalians." They pass a swimming pool where people are enjoying the water and the sun. "Those are the Jews." They come to a vast wall, past which they can hear very faint sounds of celebration and parties. The guy says, "Who's that?" St. Peter says, "Those are the Catholics, but be quiet - they think they're the only ones up here."