By Diogenes (articles ) | January 25, 2005 3:55 AM
Last month your Uncle Diogenes surmised that Archbishop Harry Flynn was being less than truthful in telling the U.S. bishops' news service that "he was not asked to change his policy" on communicating rainbow-sashed congregants -- this in the context of recounting his ad limina meeting with Cardinal Arinze. Our conjecture didn't require much of a reach. Arinze is famous for being a straight-shooter, for being gutsy in defense of the Roman Rite, for being absolutely undaunted by "the feline power of the homosexual establishment" (in Prof. McInerny's fine phrase). In each respect, Archbishop Flynn is very nearly Arinze's opposite. Moreover, it was patently to Flynn's advantage -- as a face-saving measure and a means of muting critics -- to feed the "Vatican Admits Issue Complex" line to CNS.
So there's neither a sense of surprise nor of satisfaction in the following letter written by one of Arinze's secretaries at the Congregation for Divine Worship and posted by its recipient, Barbara Kralis:
Dear Ms. Kralis, His Eminence, Francis Cardinal Arinze, asks me to thank you for your communication regarding a news release from the "Catholic News Service" dated December 14, 2004. It concerns the Cardinal's private discussion with the Archbishop of St. Paul and Minneapolis, His Excellency Archbishop Harry J. Flynn.
Cardinal Arinze wants you to know that the report was not exact and does not show his stand. He has written Archbishop Flynn about it.
Rainbow Sash wearers, the Cardinal says, are showing their opposition to Church teaching on a major issue of natural law and so disqualify themselves from being given Holy Communion.
One notes that it's Arinze's stand, not Flynn's, that the CNS article got wrong. One notes as well that, while the issue may be as complex as Archbishop Flynn would have us believe, the conclusion is plain: rainbow sash wearers disqualify themselves from communion.
Does the Kralis letter contradict Flynn's statements? Nope. He left himself plenty of wiggle room. Perhaps he has no (official, printed, promulgated) "policy" on the issue and therefore was technically accurate in saying he was not asked to change it. No matter how hard you squeeze the contradictions, Flynn skates.
But what are the rest of us supposed to make of this? Nearly every major media outlet splashed pictures of Rainbow Sashers in line for communion last Pentecost. Flynn's toleration is public; Arinze's prohibition is private. Where bishops persist in abetting gay agitators, is every Catholic household meant to write the CDW and ask for a personal clarification?
His Eminence has asked me to assure you that the Catholic teachings on sodomy and Eucharistic koinonia are unchanged. His pastoral advice is that you continue to attend your local parish masses and to instruct your children to close their eyes, click those ruby slippers three times, and repeat
It is the right of the Christian people themselves that their diocesan bishop should take care to prevent the occurrence of abuses in ecclesiastical discipline, especially as regards the ministry of the word, the celebration of the sacraments and sacramentals, the worship of God and devotion to the Saints.
If they say this formula often enough, they may even come to believe that it's true.
Wishing you every blessing in this holy season, I am, madam, yours faithfully, &c.
I can't help but think that there's a problem here somewhere.
An appeal from our founder, Dr. Jeffrey Mirus:
Dear reader: If you found the information on this page helpful in your pursuit of a better Catholic life, please support our work with a donation. Your donation will help us reach five million Truth-seeking readers worldwide this year. Thank you!
Our Fall Campaign
Progress toward our final 2013 goal ($22,774 to go, assuming receipt of matching funds):
All comments are moderated. To lighten our editing burden, only current donors are allowed to Sound Off. If you are a donor, log in to see the comment form; otherwise please support our work, and Sound Off!
Posted by: Fr. William -
Jan. 28, 2005 12:15 PM ET USA
What to make of this? By word & deed, Abp. Flynn is a treacherous traitor. He has directly supported the sodomite lifestyle by parading the Rainbow Sashers at Mass. He has directly disobeyed Peter by giving Holy Communion to the RSMs. He has not spoken nor acted as a successor to the apostles... He needs to be removed from his diocese before he causes more harm to the Church & the Church's people. Send him to a hermitage, where he can offer Mass, sine populo, & do penance.
Posted by: Vincit omnia amor -
Jan. 26, 2005 12:09 AM ET USA
Ah yes, perhaps we could also remember this rosy quote from last month also: "On liturgical matters, Flynn said, the bishops were able to report on 'the faithfulness of God's people in the United States and the great love they have for the liturgy.' He said the bishops told the Vatican they have not experienced anything in their dioceses that would indicate a lack of faith on the part of the church community regarding the liturgy." I'll pledge ten dollars to the eye glasses for Flynn Fund.
Posted by: Rex Aldrich -
Jan. 25, 2005 5:59 PM ET USA
GOR: Abp. Flynn is from upstate New York originally, the Albany diocese.
Posted by: -
Jan. 25, 2005 12:48 PM ET USA
It would appear that Abp. Flynn went to the same school of exegetics as Cdl. McCarrick - the former for the oral tradition, the latter for the written. With McCarrick, his proximity to the political halls of speech (where dissembling is de rigueur) may explain, but not excuse, his actions. Midwesterners are more noted for directness of speech and clarity of delivery, aina? What is Flynn's excuse...?