Vatican City, Feb 21, 2020 / 04:06 pm (CNA).- Archbishop John Wester of Santa Fe has offered his recollections of a meeting between Pope Francis and the American Southwest, especially as regards a discussion during the meeting of Fr. James Martin, SJ.
CNA reported Feb. 20 that Martin was discussed during a Feb. 10 meeting between the pope and bishops of the USCCB’s Region XIII, who were with the pope as part of their ad limina visit.
Martin, an American Jesuit, is well known for his writing and speaking on LGBT issues and the Church. His work has been a subject of controversy; it is criticized by some bishops and praised by others.
Wester confirmed that Martin and his Sept. 30 visit to the pope had been discussed in the meeting, in a Feb. 21 commentary published by the National Catholic Reporter.
The Santa Fe archbishop, who was appointed to his post in 2015, is one of seven U.S. bishops to have endorsed “Building a Bridge,” Martin’s 2017 book on the Church and homosexuality.
“This courageous work is necessary reading for all who wish to build up the Christian community and to give witness to the Gospel message of inclusion,” Wester wrote of Martin’s book.
In his Feb. 21 commentary, the archbishop indicated that a broader discussion of Martin had taken place than was previously reported. Wester said bishops raised to the pope questions about a recent speech Martin delivered to the presidents of Catholic universities, “and his work in general with the LGBT community.”
The pope’s visit with Martin “was only mentioned in passing and was not the main point of the questions” bishops raised to the pope about Martin, Wester wrote.
The archbishop did not indicate what he saw as the “main point” of the bishops’ questions, nor did he indicate the response of Pope Francis to questions raised about the issues he mentioned.
While it would be “difficult for anyone to remember with precision anything that was said” in such a lengthy meeting, Wester said that he did not recall “the pope saying or implying that he was unhappy with Father Martin or his ministry.”
Regarding the pope’s visit with Martin, one bishop told CNA Feb. 20 that Pope Francis “made his displeasure clear” about the way the meeting was interpreted, and framed by some journalists.
Wester’s commentary confirmed that report. The archbishop added that from his viewpoint, “it was not Father Martin the Pope was talking about, but the way others tried to use that encounter, one way or the other.”
The Archbishop of Santa Fe did take issue with a bishop who told CNA that “the Holy Father’s disposition was very clear, he was most displeased about the whole subject of Fr. Martin and how their encounter had been used. He was very expressive, both his words and his face – his anger was very clear, he felt he’d been used.”
Speaking of that bishop’s description, Wester said “the language subtlety, yet incorrectly, leads the reader to believe that Father Martin was the issue while in fact, it was how others used their meeting that was in play.” Wester said he did not think the pope had been “angry, upset or annoyed.”
In his commentary, Wester disagreed with reports from other bishops that the pope said Martin had received some correction about the way the Sept. 30 visit was framed.
According to Wester, the pope did not say that Martin was given a correction.
“I vaguely remember some mention of people in leadership trying to clarify any misunderstandings about his ministry,” the archbishop wrote, but said he thought that reference had to do with an article written by Martin in America Magazine that, the archbishop said, “detailed the ways in which his ministry was not contrary to Church teaching but in keeping with the Church’s mission and Gospel mandate.”
Martin himself, after Wester’s commentary was published, tweeted that he has “never heard anything negative from Jesuit superiors, nor was I ever given a ‘talking to.’”
The archbishop said he could not recall other aspects of reports about the meeting.
“I believe that I have an obligation to offer my perspective on those matters contained in the CNA article about Father James Martin, SJ, since my understanding of the facts differs from what was reported anonymously,” Wester concluded.
The bishops who spoke with CNA reported that Martin’s work in regards to the LGBT community was also discussed with the heads of numerous Vatican congregations, and that some officials expressed concern about aspects of the priest’s work. Wester did not comment on those reports.
[…]
If the Pope gets to decide from afar, what role in worship does the local Ordinate have? Does he just enforce the dictates of the Pope or does he not have a say over the manner in which his flock engages Our Lord in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass? I understand he has charge over catechesis, confirmation and ordination; but, does he not also form the conscience of the flock under his care? I feel pity for any Bishop who wishes to grow his flock, instill right worship and true devotion and ONLY have one tool in his tool chest with with to accomplish his task: the NO Missae of Paul VI.
Every bishop of a diocese is a successor to an apostle and is sole the sole authority in his diocese. No bishop or Pope can in anway impose their personal views or opinions on any bishop/apostle of a diocese. Pope Francis is going way beyond his role as the successor of Peter.
There can be honest disagreement about the direction in which PF is leading the Church, but this tendency to micro-manage the bishops is surely unsettling to the liberal mind.
Fortunately, in my diocese we are ignoring Traditionis Custodes. And should things get uglier after April 3, plans are already being made to continue with the TLM with a diocesan priest and a real church location. The octogenarian modernists have already lost. They just don’t realize it yet, so blinded are they by envy and hate.
You’re a schismatic. Your bishop does not have the authority to ignore TC. Stop making an idol out of the TLM and start being Catholic.
Dear Friend,
When was the last time you attended a solemn high mass? When was the last time you knelt at the altar of the communion rail to receive Our Lord and do your part to finalize the oblation? When did you last gaze at the pews full of well dressed, well behaved young people, sitting with their (many) siblings and parents attentively “assisting” in the holy offering? Tell me, Friend, when did you last walk into a Catholic Church and NOT fear trampling on the precious body of Our Lord and savior? Every piece, every fraction, every fragment is the WHOLE of His body. He gets handed out like a carnival ticket in the NO Missae. I’ve seen fragments get trampled, or nearly so, because of insensitive, haughty and arrogant, modernist “Catholics” who don’t even believe in the Real Presence. The abuses are plain scandalous and shocking. Do a deep dive this Lent like I did 2 years ago when my local NO priest shut us out of the church for fear of a cold virus. Seek out that which you condemn and go. Study the counsel and its deeply jaded and nefarious players. Start with Michael Davies. He’s a good place to start. God bless. Don’t condemn. God is at the TLM. MAKE NO MISTAKE ABOUT IT.
Right, Mr. Tabish. Turning my back on the NO in 2018, I’ve never looked back except to lament the loss of God’s people still stuck there.
Scooter is correct. Pope Francis’ order may be mean-spirited, it may be vicious, it may be malevolent, it may be intended to damage the church–but it is also unquestionably lawful and proper for the pope to approve or disapprove of any liturgical format he sees fit, whether from worthy or unworthy motives. He may have adopted a double standard in dealing with the heterodox, whom he favors, and the orthodox, whom he detests. It does not matter. A lawful order is a lawful order. It doesn’t have to be nice. It doesn’t have to please our sensibilities in order to demand our obedience. Francis has as much right to suppress the TLM as Pope St. Pius V did to suppress many pre-Trenten liturgies, which he did do at the same time he issued the prototype of the Tridentine Mass. If Francis were to order bishops and priests to hold church “weddings” for same-sex couples, that order would have to be defied because it would be an unlawful, immoral order which seeks to overturn the natural law, something no man or woman can do, least of all the pope. But this does not do that. It has been said by some saints that Christ values obedience to the lawful exercise of proper church authority by duly empowered actors above all else, regardless of whether that authority is exercised in a wise or kind manner. Perhaps this is a test of obedience to and by Christ. If so, then anyone who counsels defiance of the order is failing that test. “Scooter Toloody” has said what needs to be said. Francis has as much right to crack down on the TLM as Benedict did to widen its use.
Actually it is not lawful. Read the documents of VII and consult a Canon Lawyer.
Mr. Norton, if you care to read Pius V’s document Quo Primum you will quickly conclude that Pope Francis does not have the legal authority to dispense with the TLM. It is very clear.
It is an unlawful order. The Pope does not own the Church. It is not his possession or plaything. He is charged with preserving the Church, instructing the Church in Truth, not in falsehoods. By your logic, the Pope would be within his authority to outlaw the praying of the rosary. This is extent that papolatry has reached in our era.
Bishops chose to ignore the Vatican regarding the blessing of same sex relationships, yet no one screams schism at them. Communion on the hand was banned by the Vatican, but many Bishops ignored that too. The latin mass was never banned, indeed it can never be banned as the Trent declared an anathema on anyone, including a Pope who alters or bans it.
When the Holy See is schismatic, how can defiance of its anti-canonical actions be schismatic? Not everyone idolizes clown and tango Masses like Francis, nor do they value his mendacity.
How rigid of you!.
Just like Our Lord asks of we Eye pluckers. Love your satire.
Not concerned about the pronouncements of Pope Scooter.
What is significant about April 3″
Rumours abound that on that date there will be issued tighter still restrictions on the TLM.
But go to the Rorate Caeli website where it is strongly averred that PF is losing interest in the liturgy war.
Pope Francis has also confirmed, through his lack of any disciplinary actions taken against the ‘dirty schism’ German Bishops, that if you want to perform immoral acts in the Catholic Mass, go to a Progressive Catholic Church in Germany to do so. Pope Francis confirms that you do not need any Vatican permission to do so.
For crying out loud, it’s time for traditional Catholics to practice the same manner of noncompliance that the DemoCatholics already do to support abortion, same-sex deviancy and whatever other demon driven things they allow for.
Scooter Toloody,
Name-calling… the blunt instrument of thoughtless, last ditch argument. Your judgmental and mean-spirited posting is perfectively representative of Pope Francis and his ilk. Congratulations. A little charity ( and humility) on your part would go a long way.
I suggest you follow Mr. Tabish’s soul-saving advice and get to know that which you condemn. I pray for you to find peace of soul.
Is the letter of Pope Francis’, Guardian of Tradition, a magistrial teaching or simply his personal view point as regards the latin liturgy? Clarification is needed in order to stop all the disunity that is prevailing by this issue.
There can be honest disagreement about the direction in which PF is leading the Church, but this tendency to micro-manage the bishops is surely unsettling to the liberal mind.
What previous generations considered sacred remains sacred and can not be abrogated. The problem within the church is the laity are informed of the dubious formation of the Novus ordo, and the manipulation by its designer (Fr.Bugnini). Young Catholics are attracted to the consistent celebration of the tlm, and the spiritual depth of its customs. Young priests are attracted to its direction of prayers to the sacrifice of Christ to the heavenly Father. The Vatican must be aware of the abuses within the N.O, and foster with the bishops an authentic celebration of the N.O ad orientem with the use of some Latin with gregorian chant. Right now priests are celebrating without consistent guidance. Draconian leadership will only foster more strife and confusion within the ranks.