Bishop Zurek, for his part, called what Matthiesen did a ‘serious mistake,’ yet the memorial still remains.”
Do I discern, as Bishop Zurek does, that the retreat center grounds, adjacent to his own residence, is where our next “apostle” should reside❓
from Luke 6: 12-16
While these grounds might indeed be fitting for the future Bishop Emeritus Zurek to extend his retreat from leading the Diocese of Amarillo on mission, is this arrangement consistent with the synodal theological methodology expected of our next “apostle“❓
In other words, if our new bishop’s mission is NOT:
…Protecting a memorial erected by a convicted pedophile priest in honor of a bishop whom Bishop Zurek acknowledges made a “serious mistake“;
…Maintaining a letter on the diocesan website rebuking “a few” who reported abuse at St. Mary’s Cathedral, as directed by their “Safe Environment Training“;
…Aborting daily Masses at St. Mary’s Cathedral for priests’ health and spirituality during a National Eucharistic Revival in the United States;
…then wouldn’t allowing himself to be “put in his place” as our new bishop by Bishop Zurek require deeper consideration as a concrete procedural option for our next “apostle“❓
XVI ORDINARY GENERAL ASSEMBLY
OF THE SYNOD OF BISHOPS
How to be a missionary synodal Church
Instrumentum laboris
Part II – Pathways
Ecclesial discernment for mission
63.
“Concrete procedural options, in their variety, must be consistent with the requirements of an underlying synodal theological methodology.” If this were not the case, how could we say that the Church in the Diocese of Amarillo is “built upon the foundation of the “Apostles” and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the capstone.“❓
“Based on the experience of the synodal process, it is possible to identify some key elements, including the need for (a) a personal and communal prayer life, including participation in the Eucharist; (b) an adequate personal and communal preparation, based on listening to the Word of God and reality; (c) respectful and profound listening to the word of each person; (d) the search for the widest possible consensus not by finding the lowest common denominator, but by overflow, aiming at what most “makes hearts burn” (cf. Lk 24:32); and (e) while the consensus is to be formulated by those conducting the process, it must be given back to all those who participated, so that they can verify their representation in that formulation.” However, since our current “apostle“, Bishop Zurek: (a) aborts the Eucharist for his and his priests’ health and spirituality; (b) does not address what the Word of God (Matthew 18:6) says about a memorial raised by a convicted pedophile priest; (c) denounces the voices of ‘a few’ who made valid abuse reports at St. Mary’s Cathedral; (d) sought no consensus on constructing a new residence for our next bishop; and (e) having conducted no search for consensus, has nothing to give back for verification—isn’t it fair to say that based on the Diocese of Amarillo’s experience, there is no synodal process by which “Their message goes out through all the earth.“❓
Alleluia, alleluia,
Therefore, regarding the “serious mistake” memorial, the letter, aborted Eucharists, and the house built by Zurek that puts our next bishop “in his place“, isn’t it difficult to proclaim, “We praise you, O God, we acclaim you as Lord; the glorious company of “Apostles” praise you.“❓
Alleluia, alleluia
Finally, if my aim is to encourage ongoing “Apostolic” missionary renewal, shouldn’t I be praying to Jesus for our new bishop to “Just Say NO❣️” to Bishop Zurek’s “sins against synodality”❓ After all, are not our bishops also those
In my Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium, I wrote to all the members of the Church with the aim of encouraging ongoing missionary renewal.
From Paragraph 3 of ENCYCLICAL LETTER LAUDATO SI’ OF THE HOLY FATHER FRANCIS ON CARE FOR OUR COMMON HOME