expr:class='"loading" + data:blog.mobileClass'>

Wednesday, November 20, 2013

The Exorcist: Bishop Paprocki

FREEDOM-1-articleInline.jpg (190×243)
Bishop Thomas Paprocki
Springfield, Ill.




Today I find myself confronting a dilemma: to write about Toronto Mayor, Rob Ford; Catholic Bishop of Springfield, Ill., Thomas Paprocki; or those who invested large amounts of money collecting Beanie Babies. (Contemplating dilemmas always reminds me of George Farquhar's dilemma: I must commit murder or commit matrimony.)

Since Mayor Ford has already received too much attention, I will pass on him. I don't want to get a penalty for "piling on." As for those sorry souls who "invested" in Beanie Babies, I can't bring myself to heap scorn on them. I have purchased high tech stocks that make Beanie Babies look good.

That leaves me with Bishop Thomas John Paprocki.

But, where to begin? Perhaps most recent events are a good start. Pope Francis has recently advocated practicing tolerance for gays. and attempting to make the Church more inclusive. Apparently Bishop Paprocki missed that memo. He has been lashing out against gays and same sex marriage. When the state of Illinois voted to allow same sex marriage with some of the legislators quoting Pope Francis, Bishop Paprocki went ballistic. In his mind, such equality legislation was the work of the devil and an exorcism was required. Therefore when Governor Pat Quinn, a Catholic, signs the bill today (11/20 2013), Bishop Paprocki is going to do an "exorcism" to drive the devil out of Illinois. ( In Ohio, we have a few devils in political office. Perhaps we could find a Catholic bishop who could drive them out of Ohio and back to Pennsylvania. But perhaps that's why they're here. Someone performed an exorcism in Pennsylvania, and Ohio is stuck with John Kasich.)

In November of 2010, Bishop Paprocki organized a conference of exorcism. Perhaps the good bishop has watched "Rosemary's Baby" too often.

No doubt, the poor man is obsessed with the devil. When asked about who was responsible for the sexual abuse crisis in the Catholic Church, he said the devil was responsible for the lawsuits against the Church. That's right: that's what he said. Thus, the pedophile priests who abused children were not responsible; the problem was the devil bringing lawsuits on behalf of the abused victims. That's a warped scenario.

Then there is the issue of women religious. Perhaps the  term, "women religious" bothers males like Bishop Poprocki. After all, is not religion and Catholicism reserved for males? Why do we superior beings have to be concerned about the heretical views of American Catholic nuns?  Why don't they get back to their job of  housekeeping and scrubbing the floors?

Bishop Paprocki, Bishop Blair of Toledo, and Bishop Sartain of Seattle were charged by Pope Benedict XVI with conducting a multi-year investigation of the U.S. Leadership Conference of Women Religious. Although these women have adhered to their mission as defined in the Gospels, they have had the temerity to question why the priesthood is reserved for males.

And then it was our friend Bishop Paprocki who decided that the Catholic Church could deny individuals  the freedom to follow their own conscience in matters of contraception and turn the tables to say that health care plans offering contraception were a violation Catholics' freedom of religion rights. Although the truth of the matter is that Bishop Paprocki and his kin want to dictate to the rest of us what is right and wrong, therefore imposing their religious views on others. And that is exactly what our Founding Fathers  fought so hard to avoid.

And, speaking of separation of church and state, Bishop Paprocki crossed that line again in the 2012 election. Although he did not directly endorse Mitt Romney, he issued a letter, using the tax-exempt status of the church, which suggested that  voting for an evil candidate could endanger your personal salvation. And of course, he pointed out that the Democratic Party embraced objectionable doctrines. 

No one wants to prevent Citizen Thomas Paprocki from speaking his mind. He is entitled to freedom of speech as we all are. What is objectionable is a Bishop Paprocki using his religion in an attempt to influence an election. If Citizen Paprocki wants to distribute that letter on his own dime without invoking his religious "authority," so be it.

(Sources for above are: Wikipedia, MINNPOST(12'19'12), LifeSiteNews (6/5/13), TTCblog (11/18/13), Americablog (11/14/13). 


No comments: