Off the Record

about face By Diogenes | November 15, 2008 2:32 PM

 When Father Scott Newman instructed his parishioners that they should make a good Confession before receiving Communion if they had voted for a pro-abortion candidate, he received both kudos and criticism. The most pointed criticism came from the administrator of the diocese, Msgr. Martin Laughlin, who announced: "Father Newman's statements do not adequately reflect the Catholic Church's teachings. Any comments or statements to the contrary are repudiated."

Now that's interesting. Because on the very day Msgr. Laughlin released that statement, the local newspaper had reported: 

While Newman has been the most outspoken of South Carolina priests in the wake of the election, the administrator of the diocese of Charleston, Msgr. Martin T. Laughlin, supports him fully, said diocesan spokesman Steve Gajdosik.

"I think it's fair to say that Father Newman's letter echoes the sentiments of Father Laughlin," he said.

 No competent PR man would issue such a clear statement of support without first having checked with his boss-- in this case (since the Charleston see is currently without a bishop) the diocesan administrator, Msgr. Laughlin. Notice too that Gajdosik used Laughlin's name. Why do you suppose he felt so sure that he knew how Laughlin felt?

Maybe it was because other priests of the Charleston diocese had already indicated their support for Father Newman.  On November 12, for example, Father Newman received this message:

Thank you for your statement. I wish the bishops would have been as forthright. Why did they not speak before the election?

That email message was sent to Father Newman by... are you ready?... Msgr. Laughlin.

Let's review: On November 12, Msgr. Laughlin personally thanks Father Newman for his statement, and compares him (Newman) favorably with the US bishops. On November 14 the same Msgr. Laughlin officially repudiates Father Newman's statement. 

Wouldn't you love to see Msgr. Laughlin's phone log for November 12-14? 

If you found this helpful, our bi-weekly Insights emails can notify you of key commentary items. Also, please support this apostolic work. Progress toward our February expenses ($12,514 to go): $17,000.00 $4,486.20 74% 26% Add Insights to your account. | Make a pledge or one-time donation.

It's Your Turn to Sound Off!

» To ensure well-meaning comments, only donors are allowed to Sound Off.
  If you're a donor, log in; otherwise please support our work, and Sound Off!

Sound Off! Comments

• Posted by: juon36 - Nov. 21, 2008 1:21 PM ET USA

  A good priest a wonderful shepard ,why not a Bishop, one who would teach the truth of our Catholic faith, doctrine and tradition.

• Posted by: extremeCatholic - Nov. 20, 2008 5:51 PM ET USA

  "Repudiated?" Well, that ought to chill any thought in priests of offering moral guidance on matters of public policy in the future. What, by the way, were the consequences to priests who were entirely silent on the right to life of the unborn in the last three months?

• Posted by: Barbara Kralis - Nov. 17, 2008 12:06 PM ET USA

  go here: http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/kralis/081117 The vacant See of Charleston needs Fr. Newman ordained as their next bishop, govn. in the same tradition as Bp. Baker governed. Some in the diocese say the repudiation was due to Tax Exempt Sky is Falling scare. In fact, pastors can speak out without risking tax exempt status,While churches may not endorse or oppose candidates for elective office, pastors can preach on biblical and moral issues, such as abortion and traditional marriage.

• Posted by: gusdelaney - Nov. 16, 2008 11:30 PM ET USA

  To who does Msgr. Laughlin owe his alliegance? His people? His priests? His God? or to his fellow bishops? It could be that the bishops who obviously pressured the good MSgr to betray his flock may have something to confess before they visit the altar rail again.

• Posted by: wvcatholic - Nov. 16, 2008 1:36 PM ET USA

  We should not be surprised by such exchanges. Theology requires precise language, as does canon law. Thus statements that sound very similar, can have very different meanings. The addition of one or two words, or the replacement of a word by a synonym can change a perfectly orthodox statement into heresy. In this case, the replacement of the word "should" with the word "must" can change the theological and canonical validity of a statement.