Today bring to Me the Souls of those who have separated themselves from My Church*,
and immerse them in the ocean of My mercy. During My bitter Passion they tore at My Body and Heart, that is, My Church. As they return to unity with the Church My wounds heal and in this way they alleviate My Passion."
Most Merciful Jesus, Goodness Itself, You do not refuse light to those who seek it of You. Receive into the abode of Your Most Compassionate Heart the souls of those who have separated themselves from Your Church. Draw them by Your light into the unity of the Church, and do not let them escape from the abode of Your Most Compassionate Heart; but bring it about that they, too, come to glorify the generosity of Your mercy.
Eternal Father, turn Your merciful gaze upon the souls of those who have separated themselves from Your Son's Church, who have squandered Your blessings and misused Your graces by obstinately persisting in their errors. Do not look upon their errors, but upon the love of Your own Son and upon His bitter Passion, which He underwent for their sake, since they, too, are enclosed in His Most Compassionate Heart. Bring it about that they also may glorify Your great mercy for endless ages. Amen.
*Our Lord's original words here were "heretics and schismatics,"
Read more: http://www.ewtn.com/devotionals/mercy/novena.htm#ixzz1dmWwE9v8
Tuesday, November 15, 2011
Monday, November 14, 2011
President Jeffersons letter
In his letter to Peter Carr::(His nephew)
"Read the Bible as you would Livy or Tacitus. For example, in the book of Joshua we are told the sun stood still for several hours. Were we to read that fact in Livy or Tacitus we should class it with their showers of blood, speaking of their statues, beasts, etc. But it is said that the writer of that book was inspired. Examine, therefore, candidly, what evidence there is of his having been inspired. The pretension is entitled to your inquiry, because millions believe it. On the other hand, you are astronomer enough to know how contrary it is to the law of nature" (Works, Vol. ii., p. 217).
I refer you to an article written in the "Evening World 10-10-69, of Spencer Indiana.
Harold Hill, president of Curtis Engine Company in Baltimore MD, and a consultant in the space program related the following development:
"I think one of the most amazing things that GOD has for us Today, happened recently to our astronauts and space scientist at Green Belt MD. They were checking the position of the Sun ,Moon,and planets out in space where they would be 100 years, and 1000 years from now. We have to know this so we don't send a satellite up and have it bump into something later on in its orbits. We have to lay out the orgin in terms of the life of he satellite, and where the planets will be so that the while thing will not bog down. They ran the computer measurement back and forth over the centuries and it came to a halt.
The computer stopped and it put up a red signal, which meant, that there was something wrong either in the info fed into it, or with the results as compared to the standards. they called in the service department to check it out and they said "Its perfect". The IBM head of operations said, "Whats wrong?" The scientists said "Well we have found there is a day missing in space in the elapsed time". They scratched their heads, and pulled their hairs.
"There was no answer".
One religious fellow on the team said "You know, one time I was in Sunday School, and they talked about the Sun standing still". They didn't believe him, but they didn't have any other answer, so they said " Show us." So he got a Bible and went back to the 10th chapter of Joshua where they found a pretty ridiculous statement for anybody who has common sense. There they found the Lord saying to Joshua, "Fear them not: I have delivered them into thy hand: There shall not a man of them stand before thee." Joshua was concerned because he was surrounded by the enemy, and if darkness fell, they would overpower them. So Joshua asked the Lord to make the Sun stand still. That's right "The Sun stood still, and the Moon stayed.....and hastened not to go down about a whole day."
l The spacemen said, "There is the missing day". Well, they checked the computers going back into the time it was written, and found it was close, but not close enough. The time
time that was missing back in Joshua's time was 23 hours, and 20 minutes, not a whole day. The bible said "About a whole day". They were missing 40 minutes. They were still in trouble. The religious man remembered that in one place also in the Bible, it said " the Sun went BACKWARDS!". The scientists said "You are out of your mind!." But they took out the Bible once again, and read in II Kings 20, that king Hezekiah on his deathbed, that he was visited by the prophet Isaiah, who said he was not going to die. Hezekiah wanted proof from Isaiah. Isaiah said "do you want the sun to go ahead 10 degrees?". "Hezekiah said to go ahead is nothing, but let the shadows return backward 10 degrees". Isaiah spoke to the Lord, and the Lord brought the shadows back 10 degrees, which amounted to 40 minutes.
When the space schientists entered this in, the computers ran perfect, with no alarms at all. The full missing day was found in the Bible.
The verbatim article was submitted by George M Gilles who's testimony appeared in the Evening World newspaper 10-10-1969.
Many "Free Thinkers" followed John Remsberg ideas (Remsberg was called a Perfect Atheist). Jefferson's letter to his nephew reminded me of this article I had read many years ago, and once again, those without faith, bring out the truth in the Bible as attested to by this article of 10-10-69 in the Indiana Newspaper, as attested to by George M Gilles, a Member of the Full Gospel Business Men's Fellowship. Scientific proof of the truth in the Bible. AMEN
"Read the Bible as you would Livy or Tacitus. For example, in the book of Joshua we are told the sun stood still for several hours. Were we to read that fact in Livy or Tacitus we should class it with their showers of blood, speaking of their statues, beasts, etc. But it is said that the writer of that book was inspired. Examine, therefore, candidly, what evidence there is of his having been inspired. The pretension is entitled to your inquiry, because millions believe it. On the other hand, you are astronomer enough to know how contrary it is to the law of nature" (Works, Vol. ii., p. 217).
I refer you to an article written in the "Evening World 10-10-69, of Spencer Indiana.
Harold Hill, president of Curtis Engine Company in Baltimore MD, and a consultant in the space program related the following development:
"I think one of the most amazing things that GOD has for us Today, happened recently to our astronauts and space scientist at Green Belt MD. They were checking the position of the Sun ,Moon,and planets out in space where they would be 100 years, and 1000 years from now. We have to know this so we don't send a satellite up and have it bump into something later on in its orbits. We have to lay out the orgin in terms of the life of he satellite, and where the planets will be so that the while thing will not bog down. They ran the computer measurement back and forth over the centuries and it came to a halt.
The computer stopped and it put up a red signal, which meant, that there was something wrong either in the info fed into it, or with the results as compared to the standards. they called in the service department to check it out and they said "Its perfect". The IBM head of operations said, "Whats wrong?" The scientists said "Well we have found there is a day missing in space in the elapsed time". They scratched their heads, and pulled their hairs.
"There was no answer".
One religious fellow on the team said "You know, one time I was in Sunday School, and they talked about the Sun standing still". They didn't believe him, but they didn't have any other answer, so they said " Show us." So he got a Bible and went back to the 10th chapter of Joshua where they found a pretty ridiculous statement for anybody who has common sense. There they found the Lord saying to Joshua, "Fear them not: I have delivered them into thy hand: There shall not a man of them stand before thee." Joshua was concerned because he was surrounded by the enemy, and if darkness fell, they would overpower them. So Joshua asked the Lord to make the Sun stand still. That's right "The Sun stood still, and the Moon stayed.....and hastened not to go down about a whole day."
l The spacemen said, "There is the missing day". Well, they checked the computers going back into the time it was written, and found it was close, but not close enough. The time
time that was missing back in Joshua's time was 23 hours, and 20 minutes, not a whole day. The bible said "About a whole day". They were missing 40 minutes. They were still in trouble. The religious man remembered that in one place also in the Bible, it said " the Sun went BACKWARDS!". The scientists said "You are out of your mind!." But they took out the Bible once again, and read in II Kings 20, that king Hezekiah on his deathbed, that he was visited by the prophet Isaiah, who said he was not going to die. Hezekiah wanted proof from Isaiah. Isaiah said "do you want the sun to go ahead 10 degrees?". "Hezekiah said to go ahead is nothing, but let the shadows return backward 10 degrees". Isaiah spoke to the Lord, and the Lord brought the shadows back 10 degrees, which amounted to 40 minutes.
When the space schientists entered this in, the computers ran perfect, with no alarms at all. The full missing day was found in the Bible.
The verbatim article was submitted by George M Gilles who's testimony appeared in the Evening World newspaper 10-10-1969.
Many "Free Thinkers" followed John Remsberg ideas (Remsberg was called a Perfect Atheist). Jefferson's letter to his nephew reminded me of this article I had read many years ago, and once again, those without faith, bring out the truth in the Bible as attested to by this article of 10-10-69 in the Indiana Newspaper, as attested to by George M Gilles, a Member of the Full Gospel Business Men's Fellowship. Scientific proof of the truth in the Bible. AMEN
Saturday, November 5, 2011
Questions raised by FR X(anonymous) re: Blockley situations
ijanowitz said...
Fr. X raises some important questions about Fr. Blockley's illicit activities while in the DRVC.
A priest of the Rockville Centre diocese has agreed to write a second post on the situation at Our Lady of Lourdes. As I have mentioned before, this good priest is willing to publish his name, but I have decided to keep his identity in confidence for his own protection.
Financial/Moral Implications of the Lisante/Blockley Affair
Let us turn to the Catholic Church's position on the public Masses Fr. Blockley celebrated while serving as Msgr. Lisante's assistant. Since Fr. Blockley was with Msgr. Lisante eight years, we are talking about hundreds of such Masses.
The Church regards all of these Masses as gravely wrong both for Fr. Blockley in saying them and for Msgr. Lisante in allowing them. Why? A suspended priest is forbidden to celebrate Mass unless the Bishop grants permission. Bishop Murphy did not give permission.
What about the money that Msgr. Lisante's paishes gave to Fr. Blockley for the past eight years? How much was it? Was it more than Msgr. Lisante gave to priests in good standing? Apparently, only Msgr. Lisante knows. There is no mention of Fr. Blockley in any of Msgr. Lisante's financial reports to the bishop.
Knowing that Bishop Murphy would not approve of Fr. Blockley's presence, Msgr. Lisante successfully hid Fr. Blockley from the Bishop for many years. If Bishop Murphy had not found out, Fr. Blockley would still be with Msgr. Lisante.
Why does Msgr. Lisante violate Church law for Fr. Blockley while treating Fr. Mason with contempt? Unlike Fr. Blockley, Fr. Mason can hear confessions validly. Unlike Fr. Blockley, Fr. Mason can officiate at marriages validly. Unlike Fr. Blockley, Fr. Mason can celebrate public Masses licitly. Unlike Fr. Blockley, Fr. Mason's presence does not require Msgr. Lisante's to give him a salary.
Could the answer possibly lie in one other area where Fr. Mason and Fr. Blockley are not alike? Unlike Fr. Blockley, Fr. Mason is a strong defender of the Catholic Church's teaching on homosexuality.
In contrast, in past years, Msgr. Lisante has invited the pro-homosexual group Dignity to present its propaganda to impressionable Catholic teenagers. Msgr. Lisante has also attacked the moral teaching of the Catholic Church on homosexuality. Here are Msgr. Lisante's exact words on this subject:
"A whole lot of people are living what you would call false lives because that's what's demanded of them by the Church."
Fr. X has pointed out several areas of concern in Msgr. Lisante's pastoral practices. Of gravest concern is the employment of Fr. Matthew Blockley, a suspended priest without faculties and the matter of Msgr. Lisante's regular absences from the parishes he has managed.
A quick summary of the damage done by Fr. Blockley's illegitimate activities in the Diocese of Rockville Centre:
all the Masses Fr. Blockley celebrated while at St. Thomas the Apostle and Our Lady of Lourdes are illicit.
any confessions he heard are invalid
any marriages at which he officiated are invalid
Fr. Blockley's salary was off the books as there is no mention of his employment in Msgr. Lisante's financial records.
In light of these points and the questions Fr. X has raised, it would appear that a full financial investigation of Msgr. Lisante is in order to determine how Fr. Blockley was being paid while he was employed for eight years at St. Thomas the Apostle Church and while he was at Our Lady of Lourdes.
In addition, there should be an accounting of the stipends given to Fr. Blockley for the illicit and invalid Masses and sacraments he performed during his time here in the Diocese of Rockville Centre. Msgr. Lisante should have to pay that money back to St. Thomas the Apostle parish, as well as the salary which Fr. Blockley was paid for his services there.
There should also be an investigation to see if Fr. Blockley was paid the same or more than the other priests of the parish. If Fr. Blockley was paid "off the books," as Fr. X has reported, than it should be determined if Msgr. Lisante filed false and fraudulent tax forms with the Internal Revenue Service during that time.
All the evidence points to the need for an independent investigation/audit by the appropriate authorities to determine how much money, if any, has been improperly used in the parishes at which Msgr. Lisante has worked and to what degree false and fraudulent information has been filed with the government.
Clearly, there is enough reason to suspect possible unethical and immoral activities on the part of Jim Lisante. Only an investigation can answer these questions definitively and assure the people of Our Lady of Lourdes that their money is being used properly and responsibly.
Fri Nov 07, 08:32:00 AM 2008
Fr. X raises some important questions about Fr. Blockley's illicit activities while in the DRVC.
A priest of the Rockville Centre diocese has agreed to write a second post on the situation at Our Lady of Lourdes. As I have mentioned before, this good priest is willing to publish his name, but I have decided to keep his identity in confidence for his own protection.
Financial/Moral Implications of the Lisante/Blockley Affair
Let us turn to the Catholic Church's position on the public Masses Fr. Blockley celebrated while serving as Msgr. Lisante's assistant. Since Fr. Blockley was with Msgr. Lisante eight years, we are talking about hundreds of such Masses.
The Church regards all of these Masses as gravely wrong both for Fr. Blockley in saying them and for Msgr. Lisante in allowing them. Why? A suspended priest is forbidden to celebrate Mass unless the Bishop grants permission. Bishop Murphy did not give permission.
What about the money that Msgr. Lisante's paishes gave to Fr. Blockley for the past eight years? How much was it? Was it more than Msgr. Lisante gave to priests in good standing? Apparently, only Msgr. Lisante knows. There is no mention of Fr. Blockley in any of Msgr. Lisante's financial reports to the bishop.
Knowing that Bishop Murphy would not approve of Fr. Blockley's presence, Msgr. Lisante successfully hid Fr. Blockley from the Bishop for many years. If Bishop Murphy had not found out, Fr. Blockley would still be with Msgr. Lisante.
Why does Msgr. Lisante violate Church law for Fr. Blockley while treating Fr. Mason with contempt? Unlike Fr. Blockley, Fr. Mason can hear confessions validly. Unlike Fr. Blockley, Fr. Mason can officiate at marriages validly. Unlike Fr. Blockley, Fr. Mason can celebrate public Masses licitly. Unlike Fr. Blockley, Fr. Mason's presence does not require Msgr. Lisante's to give him a salary.
Could the answer possibly lie in one other area where Fr. Mason and Fr. Blockley are not alike? Unlike Fr. Blockley, Fr. Mason is a strong defender of the Catholic Church's teaching on homosexuality.
In contrast, in past years, Msgr. Lisante has invited the pro-homosexual group Dignity to present its propaganda to impressionable Catholic teenagers. Msgr. Lisante has also attacked the moral teaching of the Catholic Church on homosexuality. Here are Msgr. Lisante's exact words on this subject:
"A whole lot of people are living what you would call false lives because that's what's demanded of them by the Church."
Fr. X has pointed out several areas of concern in Msgr. Lisante's pastoral practices. Of gravest concern is the employment of Fr. Matthew Blockley, a suspended priest without faculties and the matter of Msgr. Lisante's regular absences from the parishes he has managed.
A quick summary of the damage done by Fr. Blockley's illegitimate activities in the Diocese of Rockville Centre:
all the Masses Fr. Blockley celebrated while at St. Thomas the Apostle and Our Lady of Lourdes are illicit.
any confessions he heard are invalid
any marriages at which he officiated are invalid
Fr. Blockley's salary was off the books as there is no mention of his employment in Msgr. Lisante's financial records.
In light of these points and the questions Fr. X has raised, it would appear that a full financial investigation of Msgr. Lisante is in order to determine how Fr. Blockley was being paid while he was employed for eight years at St. Thomas the Apostle Church and while he was at Our Lady of Lourdes.
In addition, there should be an accounting of the stipends given to Fr. Blockley for the illicit and invalid Masses and sacraments he performed during his time here in the Diocese of Rockville Centre. Msgr. Lisante should have to pay that money back to St. Thomas the Apostle parish, as well as the salary which Fr. Blockley was paid for his services there.
There should also be an investigation to see if Fr. Blockley was paid the same or more than the other priests of the parish. If Fr. Blockley was paid "off the books," as Fr. X has reported, than it should be determined if Msgr. Lisante filed false and fraudulent tax forms with the Internal Revenue Service during that time.
All the evidence points to the need for an independent investigation/audit by the appropriate authorities to determine how much money, if any, has been improperly used in the parishes at which Msgr. Lisante has worked and to what degree false and fraudulent information has been filed with the government.
Clearly, there is enough reason to suspect possible unethical and immoral activities on the part of Jim Lisante. Only an investigation can answer these questions definitively and assure the people of Our Lady of Lourdes that their money is being used properly and responsibly.
Fri Nov 07, 08:32:00 AM 2008
Contrary to what the Bishop says........
ijanowitz said...
No More School Confessions
Is Msgr. Jim too busy for children's confessions, but not for time hobnobbing with his pal Marissa?
A concerned OLL parishioner has written in an email that First Friday confessions for Our Lady of Lourdes school children have apparently been discontinued since the new school year began two months ago:
"I was talking to some of the women and moms from OLL school and the new school policy is quite interesting. Apparently since school began there has been no confession on the Thursday before first Friday Mass. They still (at this point) have Mass but have not had ANY priests come in to hear the children's confession."
For many years it was customary for the parish priests to come to the school every First Friday to hear confessions at different stations set up in the school auditorium. All the Catholic students in second through eighth grade would take turns class by class to go to confession. The whole school would then file across the parking lot to attend First Friday Mass which was always offered by Fr. Mason.
A large part of the radical Lisante Plan mentioned in the last post involves the gradual purging of confessions from the parish schedule. First Friday Confessions at the school are no longer available, and when the new Mass schedule takes effect, confessions will no longer be heard on Saturday nights or after the 8 AM Mass on weekdays.
At the end of this month, confession in the parish will be reduced to one hour/week on Saturday afternoons, despite Bishop Murphy's specific request in his Pastoral Letter on Penance and Reconciliation last February which encouraged the frequent reception of confession.
Bishop Murphy notes in his letter that, "Pius XII confessed daily. Most priests I know confess at least once a month. There is nothing wrong in weekly confession for confession even of venial sins will bring you the grace of the sacrament, a grace that will bind you ever more deeply into the bond of God's love."
The bishop thanks his priests for "the practice of having confessions available once a week usually for an hour before the first Vigil Mass on Saturday afternoon," but he makes this particular appeal to every pastor in the diocese: "By this letter I am asking every pastor, without exception, to establish at least one additional hour at a different time during the week when there will be a priest in the confessional to hear confessions."
The bishop acknowledges this additional hour "may take some adjustment in a priest's busy schedule" but he admonishes that he and his priests "all should be willing to "re-prioritize" our time even if it means we cannot be present at some other parish activity."
In a salutary passage, Bishop Murphy instructs his priests not to be discouraged if noone comes initially when the second hour of confessions is instituted and makes the novel suggestion that priests spend the time praying: "At first there may not be many who come. But be patient. Even if no one comes, it is not a "waste of the priest's time" to be in the confessional. With the Breviary, the rosary or spiritual reading, the priest can take advantage of the time when there are no penitents to pray for the people and be an example of devotion to the sacrament that will in time bring more and more persons to the sacrament."
I'm afraid we'll have to wait a long time for the day when Msgr. Lisante, that perpetually busy man, is found praying in an empty confessional humbly waiting for penitents as per his bishop's instructions.
The Bishop's letter is a beautiful, heartfelt exposition on the Sacrament of Penance and worth everyone's time to read. It's actually quite a scandal that Msgr. Lisante refuses to implement his own bishop's injunctions in this matter, and takes zero interest in the spiritual formation of the schoolchildren in his care.
In contrast with Msgr. Lisante's obvious disinterest for this sacrament, a recent visit to the newly built chapel at St. Anthony's High School comes to mind. Installed in the rear of the striking Romanesque structure are two large wooden confessionals with exquisitely carved details and flourishes. These beautiful antique confessionals were rescued from a church that was being demolished and are the pride and joy of the Franciscan Brothers who see to it that confession is always readily available for their students.
Perhaps our self-assured new pastor could take a lesson from the Brothers and begin to rediscover the meaning and purpose of this wonderful action of grace, the sacrament of confession, as Bishop Murphy describes it in one passage in his letter: "the sacrament that shows us God's love as mercy, the sacrament that gives us back a restored humanity, that sacrament that makes us one with God and one with all our brothers and sisters in this Body of Christ which is our true home and the one place we always can find God's life and love!"
Tue Nov 04, 08:25:00 AM 2008
No More School Confessions
Is Msgr. Jim too busy for children's confessions, but not for time hobnobbing with his pal Marissa?
A concerned OLL parishioner has written in an email that First Friday confessions for Our Lady of Lourdes school children have apparently been discontinued since the new school year began two months ago:
"I was talking to some of the women and moms from OLL school and the new school policy is quite interesting. Apparently since school began there has been no confession on the Thursday before first Friday Mass. They still (at this point) have Mass but have not had ANY priests come in to hear the children's confession."
For many years it was customary for the parish priests to come to the school every First Friday to hear confessions at different stations set up in the school auditorium. All the Catholic students in second through eighth grade would take turns class by class to go to confession. The whole school would then file across the parking lot to attend First Friday Mass which was always offered by Fr. Mason.
A large part of the radical Lisante Plan mentioned in the last post involves the gradual purging of confessions from the parish schedule. First Friday Confessions at the school are no longer available, and when the new Mass schedule takes effect, confessions will no longer be heard on Saturday nights or after the 8 AM Mass on weekdays.
At the end of this month, confession in the parish will be reduced to one hour/week on Saturday afternoons, despite Bishop Murphy's specific request in his Pastoral Letter on Penance and Reconciliation last February which encouraged the frequent reception of confession.
Bishop Murphy notes in his letter that, "Pius XII confessed daily. Most priests I know confess at least once a month. There is nothing wrong in weekly confession for confession even of venial sins will bring you the grace of the sacrament, a grace that will bind you ever more deeply into the bond of God's love."
The bishop thanks his priests for "the practice of having confessions available once a week usually for an hour before the first Vigil Mass on Saturday afternoon," but he makes this particular appeal to every pastor in the diocese: "By this letter I am asking every pastor, without exception, to establish at least one additional hour at a different time during the week when there will be a priest in the confessional to hear confessions."
The bishop acknowledges this additional hour "may take some adjustment in a priest's busy schedule" but he admonishes that he and his priests "all should be willing to "re-prioritize" our time even if it means we cannot be present at some other parish activity."
In a salutary passage, Bishop Murphy instructs his priests not to be discouraged if noone comes initially when the second hour of confessions is instituted and makes the novel suggestion that priests spend the time praying: "At first there may not be many who come. But be patient. Even if no one comes, it is not a "waste of the priest's time" to be in the confessional. With the Breviary, the rosary or spiritual reading, the priest can take advantage of the time when there are no penitents to pray for the people and be an example of devotion to the sacrament that will in time bring more and more persons to the sacrament."
I'm afraid we'll have to wait a long time for the day when Msgr. Lisante, that perpetually busy man, is found praying in an empty confessional humbly waiting for penitents as per his bishop's instructions.
The Bishop's letter is a beautiful, heartfelt exposition on the Sacrament of Penance and worth everyone's time to read. It's actually quite a scandal that Msgr. Lisante refuses to implement his own bishop's injunctions in this matter, and takes zero interest in the spiritual formation of the schoolchildren in his care.
In contrast with Msgr. Lisante's obvious disinterest for this sacrament, a recent visit to the newly built chapel at St. Anthony's High School comes to mind. Installed in the rear of the striking Romanesque structure are two large wooden confessionals with exquisitely carved details and flourishes. These beautiful antique confessionals were rescued from a church that was being demolished and are the pride and joy of the Franciscan Brothers who see to it that confession is always readily available for their students.
Perhaps our self-assured new pastor could take a lesson from the Brothers and begin to rediscover the meaning and purpose of this wonderful action of grace, the sacrament of confession, as Bishop Murphy describes it in one passage in his letter: "the sacrament that shows us God's love as mercy, the sacrament that gives us back a restored humanity, that sacrament that makes us one with God and one with all our brothers and sisters in this Body of Christ which is our true home and the one place we always can find God's life and love!"
Tue Nov 04, 08:25:00 AM 2008
The "Rapanaro" Fiasco Cover up
ijanowitz said...
Follow up on what is happening at OLL Rapanaro Investigation Ongoing, Diocese Says
I have learned from my sources at OLL that the discrepancies in the Rapanaro case continue, multiplying the question marks about the Lisante administration of the Massapequa Park parish.
A friend contacted Sean Dolan, the diocesan spokesman today, to seek some resolution on the controversy surrounding the hiring of Peter Rapanaro by Msgr. Lisante as co-music director at OLL. Parishioners were concerned about the hiring of Peter Rapanaro since it became known that he directed an off-Broadway production of "My Big Gay Italian Wedding," which contained numerous offensive references to pedophile priests, oral sex and the Catholic faith and portrays gay marriage in a highly favorable light.
An earlier statement by Dolan reported in The Wanderer, a national Catholic weekly, that Rapanaro was being investigated by the Rockville Centre Diocese for some "serious" accusations of an undisclosed nature. Today Dolan confirmed that the investigation of Rapanaro by the Diocese is still ongoing.
Several weeks ago a secretary at OLL told a caller that Peter Rapanaro was not being "investigated," and that this was "a poor choice of words," insisting instead that Rapanaro was being "reviewed" and that review had been concluded satisfactorily.
Sean Dolan was asked today to discuss the apparent difference between a "review" and an "investigation," and he explained that OLL conducted its own review of Rapanaro, which is standard for all diocesan employees. However, Sean Dolan added that the diocese is conducting its own separate investigation of Rapanaro which has not been concluded as of this date.
The affable diocesan spokesman was asked why he thought the OLL secretary had characterized his use of the word "investigation" as "a poor choice of words," and Dolan said he had "no idea."
In a further development, last week Msgr. Lisante mentioned to an OLL parishioner that if Rapanaro were let go from the parish, Rapanaro could hypothetically sue him for discrimination. Dolan was asked today about such a potential lawsuit, and he responded that if such a case were to occur, this is Lisante's matter and does not concern the diocese.
Directly afterwards, Dolan stated that Rapanaro was not employed by the diocese and has never worked for the Diocese of Rockville Centre. Surprised, my friend asked if it were true that Peter Rapanaro worked for Telecare (as has been mentioned in several places online and in the OLL bulletin itself.) Sean Dolan said it was his belief that Rapanaro never worked for the Diocese or for Telecare, but that he would double-check his facts, and my friend could call him tomorrow for confirmation/correction on this detail.
Just for the record, here are several places online which mention Peter Rapanaro's work for Telecare and the Diocese of Rockville Centre:
1) From the St. Thomas the Apostle bulletin announcement re: Rapanaro's induction to the Equestrian Order of the Holy Sepulchre:
"The honor is being bestowed on Mr. Rapanaro for his ceaseless lifelong dedication of service to the Diocese in which he has performed thousands of marriages, christenings and funerals, bringing both joy and solace with his God-given voice. His televised masses, locally on Channel 55 WLNY TV and Telicare (sic) Stations Channel 10 and nationally on EWTN stations, bring his vocal gifts to an even larger audience."
2) From his profile on cdbaby.com
"[Rapanaro] recently received an award for his over 20 years of dedicated service to the Diocese of Rockville Centre and New York City, and as Cantor and can regularly be seen on TV 55’s Morning Mass and through the TeleCare stations."
3) Finally, from the Sept. 14 OLL bulletin when Msgr. Lisante introduced him to the parish:
"Peter has worked in Music Ministry in several parishes around Long Island, and can
often be seen leading song on the diocesan TV Mass taped at St. Agnes Cathedral."
I will, of course, let you know if Sean Dolan will correct or confirm his statement tomorrow. Meanwhile, as anyone can see, there is an ever-widening gap between the statements of Msgr. Lisante and the statements of the diocesan spokesman.
Follow up on what is happening at OLL Rapanaro Investigation Ongoing, Diocese Says
I have learned from my sources at OLL that the discrepancies in the Rapanaro case continue, multiplying the question marks about the Lisante administration of the Massapequa Park parish.
A friend contacted Sean Dolan, the diocesan spokesman today, to seek some resolution on the controversy surrounding the hiring of Peter Rapanaro by Msgr. Lisante as co-music director at OLL. Parishioners were concerned about the hiring of Peter Rapanaro since it became known that he directed an off-Broadway production of "My Big Gay Italian Wedding," which contained numerous offensive references to pedophile priests, oral sex and the Catholic faith and portrays gay marriage in a highly favorable light.
An earlier statement by Dolan reported in The Wanderer, a national Catholic weekly, that Rapanaro was being investigated by the Rockville Centre Diocese for some "serious" accusations of an undisclosed nature. Today Dolan confirmed that the investigation of Rapanaro by the Diocese is still ongoing.
Several weeks ago a secretary at OLL told a caller that Peter Rapanaro was not being "investigated," and that this was "a poor choice of words," insisting instead that Rapanaro was being "reviewed" and that review had been concluded satisfactorily.
Sean Dolan was asked today to discuss the apparent difference between a "review" and an "investigation," and he explained that OLL conducted its own review of Rapanaro, which is standard for all diocesan employees. However, Sean Dolan added that the diocese is conducting its own separate investigation of Rapanaro which has not been concluded as of this date.
The affable diocesan spokesman was asked why he thought the OLL secretary had characterized his use of the word "investigation" as "a poor choice of words," and Dolan said he had "no idea."
In a further development, last week Msgr. Lisante mentioned to an OLL parishioner that if Rapanaro were let go from the parish, Rapanaro could hypothetically sue him for discrimination. Dolan was asked today about such a potential lawsuit, and he responded that if such a case were to occur, this is Lisante's matter and does not concern the diocese.
Directly afterwards, Dolan stated that Rapanaro was not employed by the diocese and has never worked for the Diocese of Rockville Centre. Surprised, my friend asked if it were true that Peter Rapanaro worked for Telecare (as has been mentioned in several places online and in the OLL bulletin itself.) Sean Dolan said it was his belief that Rapanaro never worked for the Diocese or for Telecare, but that he would double-check his facts, and my friend could call him tomorrow for confirmation/correction on this detail.
Just for the record, here are several places online which mention Peter Rapanaro's work for Telecare and the Diocese of Rockville Centre:
1) From the St. Thomas the Apostle bulletin announcement re: Rapanaro's induction to the Equestrian Order of the Holy Sepulchre:
"The honor is being bestowed on Mr. Rapanaro for his ceaseless lifelong dedication of service to the Diocese in which he has performed thousands of marriages, christenings and funerals, bringing both joy and solace with his God-given voice. His televised masses, locally on Channel 55 WLNY TV and Telicare (sic) Stations Channel 10 and nationally on EWTN stations, bring his vocal gifts to an even larger audience."
2) From his profile on cdbaby.com
"[Rapanaro] recently received an award for his over 20 years of dedicated service to the Diocese of Rockville Centre and New York City, and as Cantor and can regularly be seen on TV 55’s Morning Mass and through the TeleCare stations."
3) Finally, from the Sept. 14 OLL bulletin when Msgr. Lisante introduced him to the parish:
"Peter has worked in Music Ministry in several parishes around Long Island, and can
often be seen leading song on the diocesan TV Mass taped at St. Agnes Cathedral."
I will, of course, let you know if Sean Dolan will correct or confirm his statement tomorrow. Meanwhile, as anyone can see, there is an ever-widening gap between the statements of Msgr. Lisante and the statements of the diocesan spokesman.
Blockley time line revisited
Tuesday, December 9, 2008
Bishop Murphy,& Lisante, you have met your superiors and they are at Our Lady of Lourdes
I received my copy of the Bishop's letter this afternoon and have perused it thoughtfully and carefully.
The focus of the letter, of course, was on l'affaire Blockley, the heart of the controversy which has rocked this parish. The Bishop states that,
When I sent Fr. Blockley back home he informed me he had never received any letter from his bishop. Unless an individual priest receives notification that his faculties have been removed, the suspension of his faculties has no effect on him or the sacraments he administers.
While Bishop Murphy was content to take the word of a priest who left his diocese without permission eight years ago, the parishioner who first discovered that Fr. Blockley's bishop was looking for him went directly to Fr. Blockley's home diocese for this information six months ago.
This email was was sent to the OLL parishioner by Fr. Charlie Borja, a priest in the Diocese of Chalan Kanoa, who was working as an assistant to Fr. Blockley's bishop, Bishop Tomas Camacho, at the time:
Dear ________,
Thank you for your information re Fr. Matthew. I talked with my Bishop and he confirmed it that he suspended the faculty of Fr. Matthew and no Bishop can give him a faculty without consulting first my Bishop.
With this, my Bishop suggests that you or the parish council to inform your Bishop as soon as possible regarding Fr. Matthew's presence and actions in your parish. And my Bishop will be waiting for your Bishop's call.
God bless.
Fr. Charlie
Bishop Tomas Camacho has stated in an interview he gave to the Saipan Tribune in August of this year that Fr. Blockley "left Saipan sometime in 2000 and never came back." The article goes on to report that "Camacho had suspended [Fr. Blockley] because he did not respond to an instruction that he should return to his home diocese."
At the time of this interview, Bishop Camacho reported that Fr. Blockley had still not returned to his home diocese, despite Bishop Murphy's declaration that he "sent Fr. Blockley back home." If the USCCB Alerts now in place on five different diocesan websites are any indication, Fr. Blockley has not returned yet to Chalan Kanoa.
A parishioner calling Bishop Camacho's office approximately a month ago was told by the Vice Chancellor of the diocese then that Fr. Blockley had not arrived.
At the end of the Saipan Tribune interview is this important note: "The Bishop said he wrote letters to Blockley but has never heard of his whereabouts since then."
Here's the time line as it appears to me:
2000- according to his own bishop, Fr. Blockley disappeared from his diocese without permission, leaving no forwarding address, and comes to Long Island, where, allegedly without Bishop Murphy's knowledge or permission, he ministers in Msgr. Lisante's parish in West Hempstead for the next eight years.
2004--Fr. Blockley was suspended by his bishop for his failure to return and notices were sent out for information on his whereabouts, including on the Archdiocese of Miami's website, a notice which was discovered by an OLL parishoner this summer. Letters were also sent by Bishop Camacho to Fr. Blockley in an attempt to notify him of his suspension.
2008---Fr. Blockley's suspension is discovered by an OLL parishioner from the Archdiocese of Miami bulletin and Bishop Camacho, when contacted by this parishioner, instructs him to notify Bishop Murphy who promptly expels Fr. Blockley from the diocese.
I'm no canonist, but it seems peculiar to me that, under the circumstances as outlined above, where we have a suspended priest who is AWOL from his own diocese and who has made no attempt to return or contact his bishop for eight years, that his suspension should be considered null and void based on the priest's claim that he was never notified by his bishop of his suspension.
So, if the Bishop is correct, then hypothetically a priest might commit any kind of misdeed (or run away from his diocese) and actually be suspended by his bishop, but, as long as he denies receiving any kind of notification of suspension, all sacraments he performs wherever he goes after his suspension are valid. Sounds more than a little suspect to me, but, hey, what do I know of such intricate ecclesiastical legalities?
Bishop Murphy complains in his letter of "anonymous letters sent to me," but the facts of the matter are that many OLL parishioners wrote letters to him about this matter with their names and addresses clearly visible on each letter. Furthermore, copies of many of these letters were also sent to the Papal Nuncio and Vatican officials.
The original parishioner who was directed by Bishop Camacho to inform Bishop Murphy of the situation, sent a lengthy letter thoroughly detailing the incident to Bishop Murphy on July 15 of this year. To this day, he has never received a response from the bishop on this matter. Neither have any of the numerous parishioners who have written letters and made phone calls concerning these and other matters at OLL.
Isn't it odd that six months later, the bishop condescends to address the Blockley affair in a scathing public epistle, accusing all those who complained and asked questions about Fr. Blockley's suspension and about the high pontifical honors bestowed upon Peter Rapanaro as "calumniators" and "liars" who are guilty of grave sin?
A simple explanation of the Blockley situation and the canonical implications addressed to the concerned individuals would have resolved this matter long ago.
Trad Dad, one of the OLL Rebels, offered this tough statement:
This letter is stunning to me for its total lack of regard for the facts. This bishop could have replied in July to the letters that were sent to him then regarding Blockley. Don't tell me that just because his canon law flunkeys came up with the ridiculous argument that since Blockley says he never received a letter from his bishop as he wandered all over the world, we're a bunch of nasty, scurrilous vigilantes for blowing the whistle on him.
And don't insult us any further by giving us this baloney that a priest who is present in the parish 15% of the time is the best priest to take over Our Lady of Lourdes, or, that a priest who never hears confessions and who is on record as having a heretical interpretation of Humanae Vitae, is the perfect fit to care for the spiritual lives of parishioners.
One last thing, Bishop Murphy, don't you dare tell us black is white by accusing us of slandering Peter Rapanaro. We saw the pictures on his website of him advertising his blasphemous, disgusting play before the website vanished. For your part, bishop, you ignored our letters, phone calls and pleas for help for six months, and now you suddenly descend from your ivory tower to condemn us? Well, I'll tell you this, Your Excellency, we're not buying this bundle of episcopal revisionism. We did our homework, we have the documents, we consulted with our priests, to make sure we were accurate and fair, while you did nothing.
So, if you think just because you wear a miter you're going to tell us that we have no right to fight a priest who takes away our confessions, our Masses, and our statues, disfigures our altar, and is never around, and never returns our calls or letters, blowing into town in his Mercedes to be feted and crowned by the likes of Tom Suozzi, then we will tell you right now that you are every bit the problem here that you were in Boston.
However, dear reader, despite the defiant words and fighting spirit of my friend, here's where the rubber meets the road, to paraphrase an old Latin saying: "Episcopus Murphius locutus est, causa Blocklii finita est!" (Bishop Murphy has spoken; the Blockley matter is ended.") There is nothing more to be said. Bishop Murphy has all the power and holds all the cards in the DRVC, and apparently Rome will not intervene.
I joined the cause of the OLL rebels to act as their public advocate, because their legitimate concerns and questions were being systematically ignored by Church authorities. Now that those issues have been officially addressed by the powers that be, and now that Msgr. Lisante is officially installed as pastor, there is no more that I can say. I have decided that further discussion is pointless; my well-intentioned endeavors have now come to an end.
It is more than fitting that this contention, righteous as it is, cease as the holy season of Advent waxes on in earnest. I have no intention of allowing this controversy interrupt my spiritual preparation for Christmas any further than it already has.
I will always lament the passing of this unique parish, known at one time for its great devotion to Mary, its strong orthodox faith, and its dedicated pro-life activism. These are all aspects of the parish which are in the process of being eradicated, and very little remains now of the former OLL.
I'm also reluctant to leave the good friends I have made through this little adventure. I will always remember the "OLL Rebels"---the good, decent families and friends who took me into their confidence; it was an honor to convey on this blog their distress and frustration and their honest desire for pastoral understanding and kindness---something they never received at the hands of their bishop or the unfortunate pastor involved in this affair. I will always applaud them for their stout resistance in the face of corruption, their courage in the many long months of silence, and their unswerving faith in the wake of official contempt and scorn, and I wish them well in their new parishes.
Bishop Murphy,& Lisante, you have met your superiors and they are at Our Lady of Lourdes
I received my copy of the Bishop's letter this afternoon and have perused it thoughtfully and carefully.
The focus of the letter, of course, was on l'affaire Blockley, the heart of the controversy which has rocked this parish. The Bishop states that,
When I sent Fr. Blockley back home he informed me he had never received any letter from his bishop. Unless an individual priest receives notification that his faculties have been removed, the suspension of his faculties has no effect on him or the sacraments he administers.
While Bishop Murphy was content to take the word of a priest who left his diocese without permission eight years ago, the parishioner who first discovered that Fr. Blockley's bishop was looking for him went directly to Fr. Blockley's home diocese for this information six months ago.
This email was was sent to the OLL parishioner by Fr. Charlie Borja, a priest in the Diocese of Chalan Kanoa, who was working as an assistant to Fr. Blockley's bishop, Bishop Tomas Camacho, at the time:
Dear ________,
Thank you for your information re Fr. Matthew. I talked with my Bishop and he confirmed it that he suspended the faculty of Fr. Matthew and no Bishop can give him a faculty without consulting first my Bishop.
With this, my Bishop suggests that you or the parish council to inform your Bishop as soon as possible regarding Fr. Matthew's presence and actions in your parish. And my Bishop will be waiting for your Bishop's call.
God bless.
Fr. Charlie
Bishop Tomas Camacho has stated in an interview he gave to the Saipan Tribune in August of this year that Fr. Blockley "left Saipan sometime in 2000 and never came back." The article goes on to report that "Camacho had suspended [Fr. Blockley] because he did not respond to an instruction that he should return to his home diocese."
At the time of this interview, Bishop Camacho reported that Fr. Blockley had still not returned to his home diocese, despite Bishop Murphy's declaration that he "sent Fr. Blockley back home." If the USCCB Alerts now in place on five different diocesan websites are any indication, Fr. Blockley has not returned yet to Chalan Kanoa.
A parishioner calling Bishop Camacho's office approximately a month ago was told by the Vice Chancellor of the diocese then that Fr. Blockley had not arrived.
At the end of the Saipan Tribune interview is this important note: "The Bishop said he wrote letters to Blockley but has never heard of his whereabouts since then."
Here's the time line as it appears to me:
2000- according to his own bishop, Fr. Blockley disappeared from his diocese without permission, leaving no forwarding address, and comes to Long Island, where, allegedly without Bishop Murphy's knowledge or permission, he ministers in Msgr. Lisante's parish in West Hempstead for the next eight years.
2004--Fr. Blockley was suspended by his bishop for his failure to return and notices were sent out for information on his whereabouts, including on the Archdiocese of Miami's website, a notice which was discovered by an OLL parishoner this summer. Letters were also sent by Bishop Camacho to Fr. Blockley in an attempt to notify him of his suspension.
2008---Fr. Blockley's suspension is discovered by an OLL parishioner from the Archdiocese of Miami bulletin and Bishop Camacho, when contacted by this parishioner, instructs him to notify Bishop Murphy who promptly expels Fr. Blockley from the diocese.
I'm no canonist, but it seems peculiar to me that, under the circumstances as outlined above, where we have a suspended priest who is AWOL from his own diocese and who has made no attempt to return or contact his bishop for eight years, that his suspension should be considered null and void based on the priest's claim that he was never notified by his bishop of his suspension.
So, if the Bishop is correct, then hypothetically a priest might commit any kind of misdeed (or run away from his diocese) and actually be suspended by his bishop, but, as long as he denies receiving any kind of notification of suspension, all sacraments he performs wherever he goes after his suspension are valid. Sounds more than a little suspect to me, but, hey, what do I know of such intricate ecclesiastical legalities?
Bishop Murphy complains in his letter of "anonymous letters sent to me," but the facts of the matter are that many OLL parishioners wrote letters to him about this matter with their names and addresses clearly visible on each letter. Furthermore, copies of many of these letters were also sent to the Papal Nuncio and Vatican officials.
The original parishioner who was directed by Bishop Camacho to inform Bishop Murphy of the situation, sent a lengthy letter thoroughly detailing the incident to Bishop Murphy on July 15 of this year. To this day, he has never received a response from the bishop on this matter. Neither have any of the numerous parishioners who have written letters and made phone calls concerning these and other matters at OLL.
Isn't it odd that six months later, the bishop condescends to address the Blockley affair in a scathing public epistle, accusing all those who complained and asked questions about Fr. Blockley's suspension and about the high pontifical honors bestowed upon Peter Rapanaro as "calumniators" and "liars" who are guilty of grave sin?
A simple explanation of the Blockley situation and the canonical implications addressed to the concerned individuals would have resolved this matter long ago.
Trad Dad, one of the OLL Rebels, offered this tough statement:
This letter is stunning to me for its total lack of regard for the facts. This bishop could have replied in July to the letters that were sent to him then regarding Blockley. Don't tell me that just because his canon law flunkeys came up with the ridiculous argument that since Blockley says he never received a letter from his bishop as he wandered all over the world, we're a bunch of nasty, scurrilous vigilantes for blowing the whistle on him.
And don't insult us any further by giving us this baloney that a priest who is present in the parish 15% of the time is the best priest to take over Our Lady of Lourdes, or, that a priest who never hears confessions and who is on record as having a heretical interpretation of Humanae Vitae, is the perfect fit to care for the spiritual lives of parishioners.
One last thing, Bishop Murphy, don't you dare tell us black is white by accusing us of slandering Peter Rapanaro. We saw the pictures on his website of him advertising his blasphemous, disgusting play before the website vanished. For your part, bishop, you ignored our letters, phone calls and pleas for help for six months, and now you suddenly descend from your ivory tower to condemn us? Well, I'll tell you this, Your Excellency, we're not buying this bundle of episcopal revisionism. We did our homework, we have the documents, we consulted with our priests, to make sure we were accurate and fair, while you did nothing.
So, if you think just because you wear a miter you're going to tell us that we have no right to fight a priest who takes away our confessions, our Masses, and our statues, disfigures our altar, and is never around, and never returns our calls or letters, blowing into town in his Mercedes to be feted and crowned by the likes of Tom Suozzi, then we will tell you right now that you are every bit the problem here that you were in Boston.
However, dear reader, despite the defiant words and fighting spirit of my friend, here's where the rubber meets the road, to paraphrase an old Latin saying: "Episcopus Murphius locutus est, causa Blocklii finita est!" (Bishop Murphy has spoken; the Blockley matter is ended.") There is nothing more to be said. Bishop Murphy has all the power and holds all the cards in the DRVC, and apparently Rome will not intervene.
I joined the cause of the OLL rebels to act as their public advocate, because their legitimate concerns and questions were being systematically ignored by Church authorities. Now that those issues have been officially addressed by the powers that be, and now that Msgr. Lisante is officially installed as pastor, there is no more that I can say. I have decided that further discussion is pointless; my well-intentioned endeavors have now come to an end.
It is more than fitting that this contention, righteous as it is, cease as the holy season of Advent waxes on in earnest. I have no intention of allowing this controversy interrupt my spiritual preparation for Christmas any further than it already has.
I will always lament the passing of this unique parish, known at one time for its great devotion to Mary, its strong orthodox faith, and its dedicated pro-life activism. These are all aspects of the parish which are in the process of being eradicated, and very little remains now of the former OLL.
I'm also reluctant to leave the good friends I have made through this little adventure. I will always remember the "OLL Rebels"---the good, decent families and friends who took me into their confidence; it was an honor to convey on this blog their distress and frustration and their honest desire for pastoral understanding and kindness---something they never received at the hands of their bishop or the unfortunate pastor involved in this affair. I will always applaud them for their stout resistance in the face of corruption, their courage in the many long months of silence, and their unswerving faith in the wake of official contempt and scorn, and I wish them well in their new parishes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)