Horrifying account of cardinal’s people ousting pastor of rainbow flag burning incident . . .

Pack up and get out, he was told as wedding party waited for him to do the honors, or police will be called, told you are trespassing and arresting you.

And more to make hair stand on end. . . .

via Chicago Priest Who Burned Gay Flag Flees After Archdiocese Threatens Forcible Removal – OnePeterFive

See also the on-site reporting on which the One Peter Five post is is based.

via BREAKING: Fr. Paul Kalchik Leaves For Undisclosed Location After Chicago Archdiocese Threatens Forcible Removal by Police

What on earth is going on?

Chicago Lesbian mayoral candidate vs. “hateful” Catholic priest who burned rainbow flag when Cardinal Cupich told him not to

Lori Lightfoot delivers “hotfoot,” reports Sun-Times item columnist Michael Sneed.

Acting like a heavy-duty mayoral candidate, Lightfoot, who is gay, recently dispatched an urgent plea to Cardinal Blase Cupich to take swift action against a Catholic priest who burned a “rainbow” flag recently to exorcise homosexuality. [Sorry, Sneed, not
homosexuality but promotion of same-sex activity.]

In the letter exclusively obtained by Sneed, Lightfoot urged Cupich to take “swift action against Rev. Paul Kalchik of Resurrection parish for his hateful act and speech . . . in defiance of your direct order.”

Kalchik, along with some parishioners, led a burning of a rainbow flag that had previously hung in the parish. He claimed to be banishing evil. [Notice common enough “claimed,” when “said” would do nicely — except when you want to declare your low opinion of what was said.]

“What’s more, in the ensuing public outcry, Rev. Kalchik has gone further and described homosexuality [no] as an act against God and stated that homosexuals are to blame for the clergy sex abuse scandal. Rev. Kalchik’s ignorant and hateful speech and actions must be addressed swiftly. . . . Please take swift action to stamp out this hate.”

Stay tuned to see how Cupich responds.

If it were ignorant and hateful, Cupich would have no choice. It isn’t, so he has leeway. After all, who is he to judge?

When I was a boy, Sox 10, Cubs 4 would have made my day, so how do I feel this morning?

My day is made.

Back in late April, when the White Sox called him up from Class AAA Charlotte to replace injured Avisail Garcia, Daniel Palka couldn’t possibly have known he’d stick around for the season, let alone that he’d lead all major-league rookies with 27 home runs heading into the final week.

Palka hit a two-run shot Friday off Cubs reliever Dillon Maples in the sixth inning of the Sox’ 10-4 victory at Guaranteed Rate Field.

A natural:

“I didn’t know what to expect [this season],” Palka said. “I just wanted to make sure I made the most of every opportunity I got and made sure I produced enough that the question was there — that maybe I’d have to stay.

“In my mind, I’m not surprised because I’m just confident in what I’m doing.”

Another thing about him:

Palka’s homer was his fourth as a pinch hitter, a Sox single-season record. It also tied him for third for homers in one season by a Sox rookie. The last one to hit 27 was Zeke Bonura in 1934 (but you knew that already).

Palka’s take on rubbing elbows with such greatness?

“I saw that, and I thought it was weird that a guy in the ’30s had the name Zeke,” he said.

Well, he did, Daniel. I know, because my brother Jake talked about him. I heard the name before I could spell it. It stuck.

More on the bishops’ program for finding and reporting abuse

Bishops mean business.

  • Approval of the establishment of a third-party reporting system that will receive confidentially, by phone and online, complaints of sexual abuse of minors by a bishop and sexual harassment of or sexual misconduct with adults by a bishop and will direct those complaints to the appropriate ecclesiastical authority and, as required by applicable law, to civil authorities.
  • Instructions to the USCCB Committee on Canonical Affairs and Church Governance to develop proposals for policies addressing restrictions on bishops who were removed or resigned because of allegations of sexual abuse of minors or sexual harassment of or misconduct with adults, including seminarians and priests.
  • Initiation of the process of developing a Code of Conduct for bishops regarding the sexual abuse of a minor; sexual harassment of or sexual misconduct with an adult; or negligence in the exercise of his office related to such cases.
  • Support for a full investigation into the situation surrounding Archbishop McCarrick, including his alleged assaults on minors, priests, and seminarians, as well any responses made to those allegations. Such an investigation should rely upon lay experts in relevant fields, such as law enforcement and social services.

“Only a beginning,” they say. Consultation with laity, a “sine qua non” of investigation, will be part of it all. Nothing new there, in terms of promised strategy. But the bishops also acknowledge “a general corrosion of moral culture within the ranks of the Church’s clerical and hierarchical leadership,” which is clear enough to the public but still a lot to swallow by the leadership:

“Some bishops . . . have caused great harm to both individuals and the Church as a whole,” the Administrative Committee writes at the top of their statement. “They have used their authority and power to manipulate and sexually abuse others,” they continue. “They have allowed the fear of scandal to replace genuine concern and care for those who have been victimized by abusers.”

So forthright an admission of widespread failure and miscarriage of duty has been a long time coming. It is welcome, even though it does not satisfy.

It’s a start, says Catholic World Report.

It belongs to the faithful to hold [the bishops] to the promises they have made, and to demand a responsible part in even stronger measures — ones really apt, as the Administrative Committee says, “to repair the scandal and restore justice.” Whether this is a real beginning of that long and arduous work, or merely more empty words, remains to be seen.

To be sure.

U.S. bishops strike out with Francis, will be no papal-backed investigation here of abuse, covering up and Vigano claims

So they are striking out with an ambitious program of their own.

  1. the establishment of a third-party reporting system that would receive confidential complaints about sexual misconduct by bishops, and report those complaints to ecclesiastical and/or civil authorities, as appropriate;
  2. a project to develop proposals for canonical restrictions on bishops who resign because of complaints involving sexual misconduct;
  3. another project to develop a code of conduct for bishops regarding sexual misconduct and negligence in responding to complaints; and
  4. support for a full investigation, supported by lay experts in law enforcement and social services, into the charges lodged against former cardinal Theodore McCarrick and the responses to those charges.

They aim to put teeth in it.

Pope’s refusal (or ignoring their request) foreclosed something else with even more teeth, Vatican clout in the matter.

Such an investigation, backed by papal authority, could require bishops’ cooperation and the release of relevant Vatican documents, and would therefore greatly increase the likelihood that the charges made by Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano would be either proven or disproven conclusively.

Ideal opportunity for the pope to defend against what he apparently considers a calumny, though he has never out-and-out denied Vigano’s allegations.

The bishops say these steps are “only a beginning.” Their statement

calls upon all bishops to make a “deep examination of conscience,” and to join in prayer and penance. “We cannot content ourselves that our response to sexual assault within the Church has been sufficient,” the bishops say.

There’s hope in this. They are promising something that would be very good.

Kavanaugh Accuser Classmate: I changed my mind, forget what I said

Easy peasey, girl. We all make mistakes.

A former classmate of Christine Blasey Ford tells NPR that she does not know if an alleged sexual assault by Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh took place as she first suggested on social media.

“That it happened or not, I have no idea,” Cristina King Miranda told NPR’s Nina Totenberg. “I can’t say that it did or didn’t.”

That’s different from what Miranda wrote Wednesday in a now-deleted Facebook post that stated definitively, “The incident DID happen, many of us heard about it in school.”

In other words, she got caught up in the moment. A resister who did not think twice.

It’s like the old laugh line: Next time, THIMK!

via NPR

Bishop Goedert ‘did what he could’ to rid archdiocese of abuser priests | Chicago Sun-Times

Ringing defense by one who was there, closing with:

Is Goedert an unsung hero? That is hard to say. But he did not flee the arena. He stayed and did what he could. If that falls short of your latter-day moral standard, he will have to live with that.

But the public record should be fair. Rev. Raymond Goedert was a major player in a quiet effort that substantially cleaned up the Archdiocese of Chicago before the public was even aware of the problem. That should be his legacy, not an editorial calculated to humiliate him and, so meanly, to roust an elderly priest out of the cardinal’s house.

Long and detailed account.

via Chicago Sun-Times

Alderman calls for ouster of priest who burned rainbow banner that once hung in church

Off with his head:

“I’m calling on Pope Francis and Cardinal Cupich to send this hateful bigot packing,” [Ald.] Mell wrote [on her Facebook page]. “If the church is serious about restoring trust with its parishioners and spreading a message of love and tolerance, this is a perfect opportunity. This is a hate crime — plain and simple. I’m asking the City and Federal government to treat it as one.”

Won’t happen, however, according to

Julie Justicz, director of the hate crimes project at the Chicago Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights.

“While we advocate strongly against hate crimes, I have a hard time calling this a hate crime,” Justicz said. “There isn’t an underlying crime that would make it a hate crime under Illinois law.”

Under state law, she said, a crime like battery or assault would have to accompany biased motivation or discriminatory intent.

Nobody got punched out. So maybe the alderman might want to cool down.

But she sure wants the priest’s head. A regular Salome, she is.

via Chicago Tribune