tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1373152433565591514.post7509551936329695769..comments2023-10-02T01:11:04.783-07:00Comments on Mahound's <br>Paradise: Letter from Cardinal Cupich and Statement by Fr. Phillips' AttorneyOakes Spaldinghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08078500142758654392noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1373152433565591514.post-31363041698193256192018-03-26T18:32:27.196-07:002018-03-26T18:32:27.196-07:00The whole thing is just so sad. Life in the Church...The whole thing is just so sad. Life in the Church has become a roller coaster ride. These days I pray for the truth to be revealed and the lies to be exposed. There are certainly many liars in the clergy as letter-gate recently showed. Lord Jesus, have mercy on us.Mary Ann Kreitzerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18245237845099708478noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1373152433565591514.post-22201213760392547732018-03-21T11:50:46.169-07:002018-03-21T11:50:46.169-07:00I was a party to the birth of similar charges agai...I was a party to the birth of similar charges against my Priest, by erstwhile friends at our Parish some years ago. I saw firsthand how these charges, birthed through gossip behind our Priest's back, can grow exponentially and take on a life of their own, destroying lives like wildfire.<br /><br />Having witnessed this, I took it upon myself to dump cold water on the heads of those who presumed such inflammatory things. I immediately brought their presumptions into the light of day and killed the gossip by starving it of the oxygen of anonymity.<br /><br />"You think such things to be true? I say you are a liar. Make the charge to his face of shut the you know what up." That's essentially how it went. Yes, it was ugly and no fun. But we killed the thing in birth. It was ultimately all pure fantasy. Aquahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06691722006352014613noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1373152433565591514.post-84083747637634301202018-03-20T22:48:45.971-07:002018-03-20T22:48:45.971-07:00Reading Fr. Phillips' statement via his attorn...Reading Fr. Phillips' statement via his attorney, it comes across like he is not denying the material facts of the allegations, but is confident he can clear it up, that his actions were innocent. He is obviously saying he is innocent, but as much as he can "under the rules." Church Militant's headline even implies that, stating Fr. was defending himself. <br /><br />PS. I'm sure a bureaucrat at the chancery is reading these comments. I would say to them, even if you wrongly smear and oust this good priest, in the end your side is the loser, because everyone, including both the Catholic and secular press in your city alone can and will see how transparent Cupich's motives are. And I'd wager a month's salary in the end Father will be exonerated in the public eye, and Cupich more clearly exposed for what he represents. I look forward to reading that in the blogosphere. Joseph Ostermeirhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06503150560306752180noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1373152433565591514.post-65923735276390015842018-03-20T18:59:59.170-07:002018-03-20T18:59:59.170-07:00I'm also a parishioner so I have been ponderin...I'm also a parishioner so I have been pondering this. I was also struck by it not being clear whether Fr. Philips denied the charges and by the fact that the archdiocese's letter seemed to imply that even if fully exonerated, he wouldn't be returning. I tend to agree with your assessment.<br /><br />One possibility is that Fr. Philips admits that the action alleged did in fact occur, but that it was intended to be innocuous. This is supported by what your heard, and also by the Canons' Regular initial statement that Fr. Philips was being "transparent." That struck me initially because if you contend that nothing happened, there is nothing to be transparent about, is there? Typically denying something isn't described as "transparent." But then it didn't say he admitted to it either. If I had to guess he innocuously hugged someone who had been looking for an excuse to attack him, likely some kind of homosexualist activist.<br /><br />Anyway, this isn't really a good look for the archdiocese. Removing a well-liked pastor who through 30 years of service brought a church on the brink of closure to become one of the most vibrant in the country shouldn't be done lightly, and yet the incident was apparently not serious enough to constitute a criminal, civil or canon law violation.<br /><br />So one is led to conclude that the reason it's being kept undisclosed is because of a potential backlash against Cupich due to its triviality. And yet it's going to be disclosed eventually. My guess is that the CR investigation will conclude something along the lines of Fr. Philips unintentionally made someone feel uncomfortable with a hug or something. Cupich will use that as an excuse to not reinstate him, even though nothing really happened.Patrick https://www.blogger.com/profile/05255276399870325008noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1373152433565591514.post-85697497812027108832018-03-20T18:52:55.156-07:002018-03-20T18:52:55.156-07:00"I'm not sure what "rules" he i..."I'm not sure what "rules" he is referring to." My guess is that he has be ordered to not discuss the matter with anyone.John F. Kennedyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16497490500148126673noreply@blogger.com