Amid controversy, Catholics rally in support of Bishop Finn

Share Button

The Kansas City Star

18 June 2011

By LYNN HORSLEY

FRED BLOCHER A group of about 75 Catholics marched through downtown Kansas City on Saturday to show support for Bishop Robert Finn. The group’s route included a stop for prayers and song at the Diocese of Kansas City-St. Joseph’s new chancery.

A group of about 75 Catholics marched through downtown Kansas City on Saturday to show support for Bishop Robert Finn. The group’s route included a stop for prayers and song at the Diocese of Kansas City-St. Joseph’s new chancery.
Catholics turned out Saturday to show support for Bishop Robert Finn, who has been embroiled in a controversy involving a priest accused of possessing child pornography.

About 75 Catholics marched through downtown Kansas City to show their support for the bishop and to call for unity in the church.

Finn’s supporters gathered at 10 a.m. at the Old St. Patrick Oratory at 806 Cherry St. and paraded more than a mile to the Cathedral of the Immaculate Conception at 416 W. 12th St.

The march was peaceful and punctuated by prayer and singing. Participants carried posters with messages saying, “We support Bishop Finn” and “We love our priests and bishop.”

“Our presence here today can be healing, and that is our intent today,” said Bob Roper, spokesman for the grassroots group Cross of the Crosier. “It’s an opportunity to show unity and to pray for unity.”

Roper said the group is praying for Finn, for the diocese, for victims of sexual misconduct, and for Catholics and all people of faith.

In a statement released Saturday, a group representing people abused by priests said the rally was probably a blow to Finn, “to see such a minuscule turnout in a diocese with 134,000 families.”

The Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests said such rallies, however small, are intimidating to victims and witnesses and discourage them from seeking help.

“We urge Catholics to support Finn, if they must, privately and not publicly,” the group said.

Roper acknowledged that it has been a difficult time for Catholics in the wake of a scandal involving the Rev. Shawn F. Ratigan, who was charged in May with possessing child pornography.

Finn has been criticized by some for not responding to warnings about the priest a year before Ratigan was formally charged. Some Catholics have called for Finn to resign.

Finn has apologized and has said he is taking steps to make sure similar incidents don’t occur in the future.

Rebecca Pawlowski, who helped organize the rally, said Saturday that it would have been nice to have had even more people attend the solidarity event but that she was generally pleased.

“It went off without a hitch,” she said.

To reach Lynn Horsley, call 816-234-4317 or send email to lhorsley@kcstar.com.

6 Responses to Amid controversy, Catholics rally in support of Bishop Finn

  1. Sylvia says:

    There’s a man in that picture with three young children. I don’t understand. I never will.

  2. Larry Green says:

    It is extremely unfair to Catholics who are sane people to be associated – as the heading may suggest-with this small group of lunatics. The fact is that these individuals are motivated not by any fundamental Catholic principle nor by any fundamental good for that matter. They are brain-washed fanatics who’s fanaticisms have brought them to the point of insanity ( incapable of knowing right from wrong.) There are to many such people in the church and they play a large role in the whole mess. I have always noticed from my own perspective that even though members of the clergy are aware of the erratic and often bizarre behaviour of these people , they continue to keep them in the dark ( even feed them garbage) because they are more ‘useful’ and more ’loyal’ in this pitiful state.

  3. Jason says:

    I hate to admit it, but I find it somewhat understandable. When associated with a particular ‘tribe’ or ‘group’ which feels under threat or attacked etc. than it is somewhat understandable to notice a natural desire to strengthen those tribalistic bonds. To reinforce group solidarity. Regarding the ‘group’ being associated within a much more complex larger ‘group’ I have always found it humours and disheartening to hear the cries that this or that group is giving the rest of the larger group a bad name. Harold Camping is a fantastic recent example of this. It may not be viewed insane or far fetched for the larger group to have faith in a literal interpretation of the end times, but just not that particular version which is insane.

    Steven Weinberg … “With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.”

  4. Larry Green says:

    Jason, since when has it become reasonable to judge the character of an individual human being based on the actions of others? According to that arguement if your cousin robs a bank then we shoul through you and the rest of your family in jail and we should strive to eliminate all concepts of group (tribal forming as you call it) including ‘comumity groups’, not to mention the most bonding and potentialy the most likely to close in on themselves (idealogical.) A rather absurd notion if we consider that as human beings our survival depends on our ability to group.
    You should notice that you yourself have joined the “Steven Weinberg” group and you trust that if Steven Weinberg said it ,then it must be true.That Jason, is precisley the style of brainwashing that breeds idealogical fanaticism!

    • Jason says:

      Larry, you are absolutely correct in highlighting we are social animals who form strong bonds within our ‘groups’, a very natural thing to explain. Where I think it gets us in trouble is when we cling to the cultural/social/political ‘tribes’ or ‘groups’ that we come to identify with while forgetting our natural identity with the rest of the species as a whole. We see this in politics, labor v. management, nationalism, and so much more and is a divisive force at times. In regards to painting the whole group due to one individual involved …. I would not agree with anything close to that conclusion. I would never, for example, conclude all Vancouver Fans should be held responsible for the riots. I believe all I was trying to express is that it can be understandable why group solidarity kicks in when a group perceives itself under assault, which is not a justification, just an explanation. Finally, if that quote is not original to Steven Weinberg, then I am open to learn who did say it without qualm and adjust my knowledge of who did say it. I will gladly and freely correct myself, the very opposite of fundamentalism, which in my view is the inability or unwillingness to adjust one’s belief’s in spite of the evidence. A very dangerous thing for the world indeed. Thus, I flatly deny that I ‘trust’ anything without question or a willingness to change my mind upon further evidence to the contrary. By claiming to know my mind in this arena is a fascinating bit of reasoning all on it’s own.

      A final comment upon the actual protest …. I must admit being rather surprised to not hear about similar public affirmations by groups in response to such stories. I see it as a natural extension of apologetics crying out and making a stand in the face of what they must only conclude is a form of persecution against their group. They are unable to separate their group alliance and beliefs from the realization that the group itself is not being attacked, nor it’s beliefs, but a particular activity is being questioned. I do agree that many may see a borderline quality of fundamentalism upon the protesters part.

  5. Michel B. says:

    Good reading on this subject Dosteyovski..in Brothers Karamazov.. the grand inquisitor

    “Rebellion”, Ivan proclaims that he rejects the world that God has created because it is built on a foundation of suffering. In perhaps the most famous chapter in the novel, “The Grand Inquisitor”, Ivan narrates to Alyosha his imagined poem that describes a leader from the Spanish Inquisition and his encounter with Jesus, who has made his return to earth. Here, Jesus is rejected by the Inquisitor who puts him in jail and then says,

    Why hast thou come now to hinder us? For Thou hast come to hinder us, and Thou knowest that.. We are working not with Thee but with him [Satan]… We took from him what thou didst reject with scorn, that last gift he offered Thee, showing Thee all the kingdoms of the earth. We took from him Rome and the sword of Caesar, and proclaimed ourselves sole rulers of the earth… We shall triumph and shall be Caesars, and then we shall plan the universal happiness of man.

    The Grand Inquisitor says that Jesus should not have given humans the “burden” of free will. At the end of all these arguments, Jesus silently steps forward and kisses the old man on his lips. The Grand Inquisitor, stunned and moved, tells him he must never come there again, and lets him out. Alyosha, after hearing this story, goes to Ivan and kisses him softly, with an unexplainable emotion, on the lips. Ivan shouts with delight, because Alyosha’s gesture is taken directly from his poem. The brothers then part.

    so in the end… religion can get in the way of communion with God if you do not use God’s gift of free will to discern (another gift).. I kneel for no one human and I call only the man who was in union with my mother … father

Leave a Reply