Clarifications about the diocese of Ciudad del Este : Espérance Nouvelle

D	L	M	M	J	V	S
					1	2
3	4	5	6	7	8	9
10	11	12	13	14	15	16
17	18	19	20	21	22	23
24	25	26	27	28	29	30

Clarifications about the diocese of Ciudad del Este

THE APOSTOLIC VISIT

Officially, the Apostolic Nuncio in Paraguay, in a public conference of 2 July 2014, announced that the Diocese of Ciudad del Este would receive an imminent Apostolic Visitation i«n order to offer an assistance for the good of that particular church» informally, the mass media said it was about a true «intervention to the Diocese» i.e. of a process that would end up, either with the resignation or with the deposition of our Bishop, and the stop to the work which has been going on.

We present now, an explicative summary that frames the milestone of this juncture with its facts and supporting documents. We do it in a plane and direct style of God's People, and with the transparency and honesty to which Msgr. Rogelio accustoms us.

1. LUGO AND LIVIERES

The most famous Paraguayan bishop, with no doubt, is the «father-Bishop» Fernando Lugo, the Republic's ex-president. He took on the presidency on august of 2008, after being dispensed of obligations as a consecrated bishop and reduced to the laical state.

He was deposed in 2012, after a political judgment in the Congress.

Lugo and the minuscule but intelligent left of the country would have never reached power and overridden the Red Party without alliance with the strongest minority of the country, the Liberal Party, and the massive support (expressed or tacit) of the hierarchical church. From decades, in Paraguay, there has been a systematically assignments as bishops with certain anti-red party tendencies and, moreover, soaked up in a blurry formation on the derived ideologues of the theology of liberation.

Like every rule, it had its exception: Mons. Livieres raised his voice (very publically) to disagree with Lugo's candidacy, becoming in this way the only defender of the Vatican’s posture. The critics which he pointed out were of two types. From one hand, he disagreed with the fundamentalist confusion between religion and politics responsible of Lugo's and many other consecrated ones' withdrawal from their evangelic commitments to //to get involved in politics// On the other hand, he pointed out the moral and administrative irresponsibility of the candidate, covered up by many ecclesiastics and religious, for //many new//.

2. «ECCLESIAL COMMUNION»

The controversy surrounding Lugo was not the first time that Bishop Livieres ruffled the “Bishop’s nest”. The accusation of “having broken the ecclesial communion" began even before he set a foot in the Diocese and, therefore, he could "mess up." Indeed, the episcopal conference wrote to St. John Paul II expressing its disagreement with the appointment of a new brother who had not even been on the shortlist of candidates, having been ´´imposed´´ by Rome. Some lay leaders echoed these protests as well. The Holy See did not give up. And then, against all odds, as the boat of the Gospel, supported the new bishop in his management.

But the Episcopal Conference did not stink so bad. Definitely Mons. Livieres , Opus Dei Bishop, represented a different orientation to the ecclesial dominant model. To be honest, we must recognize that he never intended to impose his pastoral guidelines to other bishops. He did not have an attitude of opposition but of enriching complementarity of the Church. (Very often, it is mistaken the real unity of faith and love,"ecclesial communion" with” uniformly imposed”.)

A particularly difficult moment for episcopal coexistence came with the leak of a confidential and personal letter that Bishop Rogelio delivered into the hands of Pope Benedict XVI, at the request of His Holiness during his visit ad limina. As happened some time later with the "Vatileaks", the letter was leaked to the press from the Vatican itself (some agents who sought to harm the Pope emeritus?). The letter insisted on the need, if it really wanted to overcome the crisis in the Church, to elect future bishops among the best candidates from the point of view of the life of faith and liturgy, wisdom and appropriateness of government; and not among those "accepted by all" to maintain the status quo.

The Bishop of Ciudad del Este, a worthy son of his father exiled six times by the military government of Stroessner, proved to be a tireless fighter for religious freedom and that of his followers.

Algunas noticias de la "comunión eclesial" vivida por nuestra diócesis:

3. RELIGIOUS PEOPLE

The disagreements were also raised in the Conference of Religious People of Paraguay. They were not due to a misunderstanding about the religious life, which was clearly fostered by Mons. Rogelio in his diocese, but rather for a deep discipline and identity crises suffered by many communities, especially those of European origin.

Many religious nationally identified with the performance of Lugo. Also, when there were cases of acute social crises, as was the slaughter of Curuguaty in this Diocese, which precipitated the political fall of the former Bishop, issued statements and took positions on some dissonance with faith. Quoting canon law Livieres forbade, on pain of sanctions, political or ideological instrumentalization of Pastoral Social. He also objected to a fake "indian pastoral 'which, in contrast to the missionary saints of centuries, wants to prevent the right of the natives to be preached the Good News of the Gospel.

Numerous priests, seminarians, religious and lay the Bishop has moved himself during natural disasters and social crises had energically worked but always strictly keeping humanitarian and spiritually. The basic principle is simple: " to God what is God's and to Caesar what is Caesar's."

Notas sobre la masacre de Curuguaty.

4. THE CLERGY

Several of the 16 diocesan priests who Mons. Livieres found at his arrival had reservations about the new pastoral guidelines and renewal of church discipline. The misunderstanding came to the point that, with the support of some bishops, 10 of these priests wrote to Pope Benedict XVI asking for an 'intervention'. A few months later, some 150 priests from the rest of the country, mostly religious, did the same. It was the Archbishop of Asunción, fine and distinguished opponent of Bishop Rogelio, who took the protest to Rome. The Pope, however, did not respond and instead suggested Bishop Livieres that he should "form a new clergy." The proposal was a wise advise: the vast majority of the now young and numerous diocesan clergy (just over 70), feel the Bishop as his Father, see it as their Shepherd and share their pastoral guidelines.

As for the local laymen, only a small group, but vociferous and sustained from outside the Diocese, maintained a critical attitude, especially a such man, Javier Miranda, of whom we will speak at the end of these pages. Without exceptions, and laymen and leaders of both approved national or international movements, as the big number of those which were recognized, promoted and guided by Bishop Rogelio during his ministry, all supported and support their Bishop, that much freedom and space of action gave them "to mess up" and advance with the evangelization and continental mission of Aparecida.

5. NEW SEMINARS FOR THE THIRD MILLENNIUM

When the October 3, 2004 Monsignor Livieres took over as Bishop of Ciudad del Este, soon discovered the biggest challenge awaiting him: available just over 70 priests (including religious and diocesan) to attend spiritually a population of around 1,000,000 souls, ie, one pastor to more than 10,000 sheep. The future outlook was even worse, with just a dozen seminarians formed at the National Seminary of Asuncion.

No need explain the seriousness of the situation for those who recognize with "theocentric"humility that the Church founded by Jesus 'lives of the Eucharist', meaning of those sacraments in which He "is with us every day, until end of the world " and whose faithful administration was entrusted to the priests.

Without incomes and no feasibility studies, Monsignor immediately took the strategic decision to make the first priority of his ministry, according to the Board for Bishops and the Code of Canon Law: approved the opening of his own diocesan seminary.

It was soon clear why the Owner of the Vineyard had chosen Father Rogelio as the Bishop: He had attracted and cultivated many vocations for the Opus Dei: So did in his diocese, where vocations pastoral is not delegated. Every Sunday, with the cooperation of a lively group of trainers, Bishop receives in his own house all those interested in considering a priestly vocation. A bit of sport, a formation chat, spiritual direction and confession, adoration and prayer of the Rosary, a gathering with questions "point blank" and a coveted snack make the magical result of 130 interested boys per year, from which are allowed an average between 30 and 40. the secret to success, besides the direct and personal interest of the bishop, is the enthusiasm with which these candidates and seminarians go fishing vocations among friends, relatives and acquaintances (marketing viralizador ...).

San Jose Major Seminary has been positively assessed by the Holy See in many letters, and has ordered more than 60 priests after 10 years. But Bishop Rogelio, concerned with improving the quality of their catches and the crisis of the general education system, created in 2012 San Andrés Minor Seminary. In parallel, seeking a more radical application of the guidelines of the Second Vatican Council and the post-conciliar documents on priestly formation, started the experience of the Institute of Priestly Formation St. Ireneo of Lyon. Currently this house training only works on its preparatory cycle based on teaching classical liberal arts and seminar-class discussion of the Great Books of Western culture.

6. STONE OF SCANDAL

The decision to form his own seminarians as a father educates his own children was a surprise to the Church of Paraguay . Bishops resisted input to this outlandish idea, because it would break (and broke) the monolithic scheme priestly formation (both diocesan and religious) that had been agreed with the creation of the National Seminar and its Theology Institute, the last century.

In vain the Holy See reminded them of the law and the desirability of each bishop to have its own seminary when possible. "Why a new seminary, if there has always been one?" express those who still does not seem to have reflected on the indication # 33 of Evangelii Gaudium "leave the comfortable pastoral criterion:" it has always done so.''

7. FATHER CARLOS URRUTIGOITY

A separate chapter in this history of opposition to our bishop Livieres and to the new seminary in Ciudad del Este is, without a doubt, the attack against Father Carlos Urrutigoity. He arrived to the diocese in 2005 together with other priests and laymen who would later on establish the Priestly Communities of Saint John. Father Urrutigoity came to the diocese recommended by some cardinals with roles in the Vatican (one of whom was elected pope Benedict XVI a few days later). Father Carlos brought with him a long and harsh defamation campaign in the U.S. Full of calumnies, about which Msgr. Livieres wrote a detailed letter clarifying matters.

From the beginning, Father Carlos proved to be a close collaborator of the bishop, and due to this his case was used as a battle cry to question everything the bishop achieved pastorally in the diocese, specially concerning the formation of a new clergy. This was specially so because Father Carlos was intimately involved in the formation of the new seminary. He later left this activity to help with the diocesan curia.

The bishop's continual refutations notwithstanding, a repetitive and self referential press continued to quote itself again and again, on matters of alleged “accusations of pedophilia” which, in reality, never existed. These defamation campaigns have been generally headed in Paraguay by the same newspaper that, prior to this time, had forced the resignation of another Bishop with the surname Livieres. (The courts of justice in that case showed as well the falsity of the accusations, all made by paid witnesses involved in a political maneuver to force the resignation of the bishop). At the same time, the press has been fueled by the same Paraguayan ecclesiastical opponents already mentioned above, who have influential contacts in the U.S. And in Rome, and with whom they share identical lobbies and political tendencies.

These sources came up with all sorts of things, except, of course, proofs of pedophilia. This was due to the simple fact that there were no accusations from any victims at all. All that could be repeated was a rehashed series of calumnies made by interested third parties. Consequently, there was no criminal process, nor any condemnatory judgments in any court of law whatsoever of any country, nor of the Holy See. To top it all off, Father Carlos' heterosexuality was confirmed professionally by two independent psychological evaluations, one of which was in the U.S. and the other in Canada. These evaluations discarded any possibility of psychopathies or personality disorders.

Neither was it true that new accusations came up over time (always without any proof). All accusations made may be reduced to a stubborn and evil repetition of those invented years ago, not by alleged victims, but by two ideological persecutors of Father Carlos. These separately acted from their respective countries, fueling different campaigns at different times: one sustained a “cloister” campaign and the other a cybernetic and mass media campaign. The first persecutor was a “sedevacantist” Argentine priest who is of the opinion that no pope since John XXIII has been legitimately a pope, and who, in addition, had himself “consecrated as a bishop” outside of the legitimate Catholic hierarchy. The second detractor is an American man, a disgruntled ex-employee of the religious community founded by Father Carlos. He was disgruntled because he was disaffected from an educational project by Msgr. Timlin, bishop of the Diocese of Scranton, after the employee tried to illegally take over the project for his own purposes.

The sole accusation presented against Father Urrutigoity before the criminal courts of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in the U.S. (under the name of an adult by the name of Michael Prorock) was dismissed in limine (from the beginning) by two independent investigations by two state district attorneys in two separate counties of the State of Pennsylvania.

From the above two things appear as strikingly clear: First, that the accusations against Father Carlos Urrutigoity did not imply cases of pedophilia, since in the year 2000, the year of the alleged acts, the accuser was an adult; and second, that due to the district attorneys' dismissal of any charges against Father Carlos, there was never a criminal indictment in the U.S. With respect to the Church's canonical tribunals, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith denied any possibilities of starting a criminal process against Father Carlos for the same reason: there were no existing accusations of pedophilia.

This failure before the criminal courts seriously damaged the detractors' lawyers' case before the civil courts, diminishing any chances to obtain a judgment granting them a large monetary compensation, as is usual in American courts. These detractors began a civil case against the Society of Saint John, founded by Father Carlos, but in it they included for good measure and to assure deep pockets, the Bishop of Scranton, the Diocese of Scranton, the Fraternity of Saint Peter and the Academy of Saint Gregory.

To those not familiar with the ins and outs of legal cases in the U.S., it should be noted that in that country one may initiate at the same time and for the same cause a case before the criminal as well as the civil courts. Success in civil court means large monetary judgments to be paid by the defendant. Such success is substantially diminished where the criminal courts dismiss the complaints as without merit to be judged criminally. Yet, in the United States, it is still worth pursuing a civil case, even if in the criminal courts the parties have not reached the stage of trial due to lack of relevant facts or proofs. There, the possibilities to obtain monetary damages in a civil trial remain high. The cost of defending one self and going to civil trial is so high that many times complainants continue the case to force a large monetary settlement. In average, a diocese may spend over US $2,000,000 in attorneys and costs to defend a case all the way to the end. It remains typical in the system that parties, in order to avoid these large defense costs, reach an early monetary settlement with the judge's approval.

The Society of Saint John, refused, on principle, to negotiate a settlement. Yet, it was forced to join as a party to a settlement agreement entered into by Msgr. Martino, the new bishop of the Diocese of Scranton, for a total of US $450,000. Of that amount the Society of Saint John had to contribute only US $55,000, an insignificant amount considering the usual amounts paid in these types of cases. This is explained by the fact that the accusing attorneys lacked any minimally solid proofs against the Society in order to demand any more from them, or to refuse a settlement and try to go to trial in civil court.

The Society of Saint John imposed as a condition to sign the settlement agreement that it be stated in writing that the accused were innocent of all charges and the accuser, for his own part, would renounce to any other posterior campaign of accusations or to any other civil action.

It seems that it holds true everywhere that “money talks,” without any concern about deceiving the public nor discrediting innocent people. Coming back to our actors of Ciudad del Este, on the 23rd of this month of July, 2014, in case 2014-6130 before the Juzgado Penal de Garantias No. 6 (Criminal Court No. 6) of the department of Alto Paraná, the district attorney in charge, Ms. María Graciela Vera Colman, requested the total and complete dismissal and filing away for lack of any proofs, of the accusations “filed” before such a court by a radio in Asunción, Paraguay, against Father Urrutigoity, by telephone, of all means! The accusations were the old “alleged sexual abuse of children, not mentioning any names of victims... on top of not identifying.... address and/or date or place in which such deeds allegedly occurred.” All accusations began from the diatribes made – and recorded – in a radio program of Radio Unión from Asunción, by the well known serial accuser Javier Miranda, who, when cited by the district attorney to appear in court to give his “sworn declaration,” never appeared but rather, valiantly disappeared stage left, showing his clear acting conditions.

Being a shepherd and not a mercenary who flees from the wolves, Bishop Livieres always remained adamant in defending the innocent. In the case of Father Carlos, Msgr. Livieres did the same even against those who, while recognizing the justice of the case, still found it imprudent to receive father Carlos in the Diocese and then to promote him to various positions, arguing that such actions may compromise the Bishop’s own image and his “ecclesiastical career”. However, Monsignor judged it healthier and more realistic to take advantage of the concrete human resources that Providence placed in his hands.

Despite the occasional media uproar and clerical protest, the Vatican respected the decision of the Bishop. After a prudent waiting time and accumulation of experience in the new Diocese, the Vatican authorized through the Apostolic Nuncio, and with the consent of the excardinating bishop, the incardination in Ciudad del Este of Father Carlos. That same year, the Vatican issued the laudatory letter consenting to the elevation as a Society of Apostolic Life the Priestly Communities of San Juan. Meanwhile, seminarians, priests, religious and laity of the Diocese, in their vast majority supported and continue to support the bishop and Father Carlos because they are witnesses to their ministry in the Diocese and to their human qualities and moral honesty. These supporting statements are not assumed. They are clearly manifested in written and signed statements available for anyone who wants to see. And when it came time to appoint a new Vicar General for the Diocese, consulted priests and lay leaders almost unanimously proposed father Carlos as the candidate of their choice.

It should finally be noted that when Bishop Livieres faced real corruption or violations of priestly celibacy, in any form, he did not hesitate to proceed, even facing high pressures, according to canon law, and to proportionally and medicinally punish the guilty.

8. MONSEGNIOR PASTOR CUQUEJO

The Archbishop of Asunción summoned himself up publically to a new wave of attacks against Father Carlos, by saying before the press that his case was not clear and that he could, with the power of a Metropolitan Archbishop, request to the new administration in Rome to reopen the investigation of the Congregation for the Doctrine of theFaith closed in limine under Benedict XVI for lacking accusation of minors.

Indignated, Mons. Livieres answered him on the ground in which he pronuonced himself as Archbishop. He did it because his repeated accusations were openly unbelived and because it was asked against all justice the reopening of an investigation having no new accusations and new elements of judment. The thrown stone by Mons. Cuquejo was aimed not only to put in doubt Mns. Livieres' uprightness, but of the very Holy See.

With artlesness, though perhaps with some excess, the Bishop pointed the Archbishop out the inconsistency about expressing a scandal and by asking public investigations when the very Archbishop has not only been acused, but also processed for having homosexual activity, and not for third parties, but by those directly involved.

9. NEW COMMUNITIES

As like parents with more than two children are criticised, the number of priestly vocations and new local lay and religious charisms are being questioned, posing a false opposition between quantity and quality. Incredulously, some wonder if God may bless so generously a Diocese, or if the multiplication is rather the result of neglect and statistics.

The tree is judged by its fruits. The people judgment on their new pastors is very positive and they are delighted with the varied services that are provided by religious communities and lay movements. Clearly, one can always do more and better. Surely the Apostolic Visitation will provide suggestions and corrections that can reach further.

But it is undeniable that Ciudad del Este, until recently known for smuggling and other trades, has increasingly become a center of spiritual vitality, religion and culture recognized in the country. It is difficult to walk the streets of the city without observing young cassocks and religious habits. Every weekend, there are about 2,000 people who leave their peripheries and human poverty to participate in conversion and formation retreats, organized mostly by the lay accompanied by their chaplains. Meanwhile, multiple formation courses to make leaders on Bible, liturgy and catechesis have great participation of attendees.

Nuevas comunidades y espiritualidad

Cultura

10. ECONOMIC ISSUES

We now turn to the allegations relating to finance. There are two positions in this area: the misuse of the donations given by Itaipu and the depletion of the property holdings of the Diocese.

Itaipu donated a significant amount of money (about $ 300,000) that the Bishop devoted entirely to support the seminary. He was accused by Mr. Javier Miranda of embezzlement and fraud to the poor and needy in the region. Bishop Rogelio justified its decision by pointing out that future priests would be the most effective agents of social change and, therefore, it was the best way to serve the poor in the long run. Justice of Paraguay gave Bishop Rogelio reason at all levels, including the Supreme Court, recognizing the reason for this and checking that they had spent every penny on meeting the needs of the Church, without deviations to individual pockets.

Always under the urgency of getting the funds to pay for the education of nearly 200 seminarians and the development of an increasingly active and varied pastoral, in order to capitalise spiritually his diocese, The Bishop, without any income available due to its very recent creation, proceeded to sell some properties that were neither used for pastoral purposes nor for obtaining economic benefits. So had his predecessors, even without having to maintain a seminary. Despite this, Mr. Miranda denounced it as fraudulent and irresponsible maneuver.

Anyway, to find a definitive solution to this economic uncertainty, the Bishop, following the recommendation received by the Apostolic Nuncio when assuming, has commissioned qualified laymen to the study and implementation of projects that can produce income in the future so as to to cover at least 75% of the estimated operating costs.

11. JAVIER MIRANDA

The tragicomic note of this saga belongs to Javier Miranda, a political agitator not familiar with the rigor of truth. Self-proclaimed "President of the Laity of the Alto Parana ', although not followed by any secular movement , has been as stubbornly as contradictorily accusing Bishop Rogelio and his collaborators of the most varied crimes, arriving in his delirium to say to the press that he had verified evidence that the Bishop had contracted at a casino in Uruguay a debt for a million dollars(sic).

Although discredited by the facts-and even by the fallible human courts – he still remains as an useful puppet of certain leftist groups and the permanent ecclesiastical opponents. Yet, with insignificant success and popular support.

12. LET’S NOT REPEAT THE STORY

The growth and strength of the People of God in Paraguay was cruelly maimed as a result of the unfair trial and suppression of the Jesuits missionaries in the late eighteenth century. They were also accused by questionable ecclesiastics in alliance with powerful lobbies and politicians.

Those who are betting that the story is now repeated in our diocese may be surprised to discover that this time, the Bishop of Rome is a heir of those Jesuits slandered and suppressed, ready to write the story in a new way.

Source: Diocese of Ciudad del Este (August 2014)

Écrit par Espérance Nouvelle Lien permanent | Commentaires (0)

Les commentaires sont fermés.

Espérance Nouvelle

Catégories

Rechercher

Novembre 2024

Notes récentes

Archives

Liens recommandés

Clarifications about the diocese of Ciudad del Este

THE APOSTOLIC VISIT