This is so sad. There is just no spine to be found in any Quebec bishop. I know the Cardinal there is a former student of Ratzinger. Even Cardinal Levada might think twice before stepping on his toes.
These kinds of stories are always brought up when you talk with a protestant about the Catholic church. They can't imagine joining a church that would tolerate the teaching of false doctrine. I know in the church I was raised in they would have removed any pastor like this many years ago.
Randy,
I understand your frustration, but I wonder: in your earlier church who would have been the "they" with the authority to oust a pastor? And what would that ousting mean?
From a Catholic point of view all protestant churches teach some kind of false doctrine, so what does it mean to claim that "they" would not tolerate the teaching of false doctrine? A doctrine different from theirs?
Before everyone jumps at me, let me state that I too would like to see more disciplinary actions in situations like this one, but I am just wondering whether it is what I would like that counts, or whether I should use these events to further my understanding of what truly is happening and why the Bishop(s) act (or not) this way before I start pontificating.
When I visited a very solid religious community in Toronto, Quebec was always a byword for the worst in Canadian Catholicism.
Allow some of the "worst of Canadian Catholicism" to weigh in here.....
I work at the chancery office here in Montreal, so I've heard plenty regarding this situation about Fr. Gravel, which I wrote about on my blog. Bottom line: while this is a dark cloud, it may have a silver lining or two.
As for Randy's comment, I assume you are referring to Cardinal Ouellet (a former professor of mine). I can assure you he has plenty of spine. What he does not have is jurisdiction in this case, as Fr. Gravel is not part of his diocese.
Defrocking? I'd pull out the bell, book and candle.
Commenting by HaloScan
