STATEMENT OF THE ARCHDIOCESE OF CHICAGO
REGARDING REMARKS MADE BY FR. MICHAEL PFLEGER
June 4, 2007
On Saturday, May 26, 2007, during an anti-gun rally at a Riverdale gun shop, Fr. Michael Pfleger, pastor of St. Sabina parish, reportedly made aggressive and inappropriate statements threatening the store’s owner.
If the comments reported are accurate, and a threat was made, it is up to the civil authorities to investigate the matter and determine what if any action should be taken against Fr. Pfleger.
Francis Cardinal George, O.M.I., Archbishop of Chicago, stated, “publicly delivering a threat against anyone’s life betrays the civil order and is morally outrageous, especially if this threat came from a priest. It is first of all up to the civil authorities to determine what threat might have been contained in the remarks attributed to Fr. Michael Pfleger. With that determination, the sponsors of the anti-gun rally and the Archdiocese can better decide how to respond.”
 Jester Hat Tip: |
AMDG | ||
That is a pretty disappointing statement from Cardinal George. Just because something might not be determined to be a prosecutable crime does not mean that it might not warrant discipline from the diocese. If the comments reported accurate line is also quite a dodge since there is audio easily available of what was said. Even if in context the use of the word "snuff" was not meant as murder towards the gun shop order the whole demonstration was quite inappropriate. Of course this is not exactly the first instance of the scandal of Fr. Michael Pfleger who has no problem having pro-abortion speakers at his parish and recently had racist Loius Farrakhan speak who has said such things as "White people are potential humans — they haven’t evolved yet." Fr. Pfleger also appears as a testimonial on Sen. Obama’s campaign page. Yes Sen. Obama who voted against the Born Alive Infant Protection Act and is one of the Senate’s most ardent protectors of abortion at any time.
14 comments
I’m not sure I agree, Jeff. The Cardinal is saying that after a determination of fact is made, then the various groups involved, including the diocese, can decide what to do. Seems to me that it would have been self-indulgent if were to avert public indignation against himself by rebuking his priest in the media.
Just my $.02.
Roz,
If this was a first time event then what you say would be true. But this is a continuous scandal over the years and he has never been reigned in. While I really like Cardinal George, discipline is not his strong point.
How do we know Cardinal George has not privately disciplined this priest? It does seem prudent to not sway civil judgment by offering public censure.
joanne,
If he has been privately reprimanded in the past, then he continues to be disobedient. If so another reprimand is not going to work. His actions over the years have been scandalous and if he does not repent he should be removed to prevent further damage.
I agree Jeff. I live in the western suburbs and fortunately belong to the Rockford diocese but it is a scandal and from what I can tell has been for quite a while. Fr. Pfleger’s website doesn’t mention anything about Sacraments or Catholic teaching and every time we turn around here in Chicago he is on the news. Loves to be in the headlines it appears. I believe Cardinal George tried reassign him and he refused to go. Some strange stuff on the parish website (http://www.saintsabina.org/index2.htm).
Prayer and fasting is required.
Re: “It does seem prudent to not sway civil judgment by offering public censure.”
Pardon my language, but in my opinion, that’s a bunch of crap. There is no Fifth Amendment protection before God, and if he is publicly bringing scandal upon the faithful, then his chastisement (knowledge that it occurred, not the chastisement itself) needs to be public for the benefit of those scandalized and/or misled. Besides, if he has indeed broken the law but worms out of civil punishment somehow, is that the kind of honesty we should expect from our shepherds?!
*Thwaps her head on her desk.*
Discipline really ISN’T the Cardinal’s strong point. I have every respect for him, of course, as shepherd of the Archdiocese, but man…call a spade a spade and misbehavior just that!
And the site for St. Sabina’s…positively Protestant, and an insult to the Saint. I see no references to a “parish” or “Mass,” just “faith community” and “worship services.” >_>
Pleger’s liberal rep is well-known, and he will have much to answer for on judgement day.
But, I must say, having browsed the website, I wish that Cathoilc parishes had that much activity in the way of ministries, outreach, and programs for everyone. Positively protestant yes, but there is much about Protestants that I envy for their outreach and community-building. We have the full sacraments, but we don’t use their power.
On one I hand I totally agree with you about Protestants often being better at outreach and lay ministry than us Catlicks, but on the other hand, when I read the first ministry on the St. Sabina’s web site, I almost choked. Does that parish seriously maintain, “Armor Bearers,” whose mission and purpose it is to protect and serve Pfleger, even unto death? Saints preserve us!
Disappointing, yes, but not out of character for Cardinal George to pass the buck.
It’s up to the pastor and the politician, he says, to forbid pro-abortion politicians from receiving communion; there’s not role there for the bishop.
It’s up to DePaul University whether to have a minor degree program in Queer Studies; the Cardinal can’t get involved.
The children’s clinic invited Senator Clinton to speak at their fundraiser; the Cardinal only checked that it wasn’t “a political stop” — I hope Hillary enjoyed her day off from campaigning in the Archdiocese.
Not his strong suit? Just ask him; it’s not his job.
“If the comments reported are accurate, and a threat was made, it is up to the civil authorities to investigate the matter and determine what if any action should be taken against Fr. Pfleger.”
Wow, now what would have happened if Fr. Pfleger alleged to have patted a child on the head, or even gave the kid a hug? I bet the chancery would have lead the posse in that instance.
I wish that the USCCB had a “zero-tolerance” policy for heresy, but I guess that would be asking for too much.
I wonder if they would have been so sanguine had the remarks been racist? I think not, the offender would have been on his way to Camp Snoopy (aka reeducation central) so fast your head would swim.
Come now, did you really expect the Cardinal to do anything?
Sorry for the “crap”, but I was thinking maybe Fr Pfleger had received a “as soon as this civil investigation is over, you’re suspended from ministry ’til X time”. There’s more to avoiding a lawsuit, I figured, than covering wrongdoing. After all, that IS the money donated by faithful parishioners that gets paid out to satisfy the courts, the media, etc. And loss of funds DOES translate to the loss of those outreach programs we love, and even to the loss of churches, as we know.
Even in cases where a situation has gone on unchecked for far too long, we, not knowing all the details, don’t know exactly what is negligence and what is prudence in a given case.