Your response was excellent as always. Here is my reply to it:

 

Dear Andrew:
if the Bishop wants to show that he truly cares about us, then please ask him to do the following:
1) Leave St. Vincent Pallotti Church as a stand alone church because it is a thriving, growing church. Parishoners spent thousands and thousand of dollars to make the complex completely handicapped accessible.
2) Leave St. Jude's Church in Blackwood alone. Blackwood has a large Catholic population and they need two churches. St. Jude's was a strong financially sufficient church before it was slated for closure.
3)Leave St. Mary's Church in Malaga alone. The church is beautiful and it is filled with devout members. It was designated as a shrine by the previous bishop.
4) Do not merge the churches in Barrington, Bellmawr, and Magnolia. It did not work with the school (Our Lady of the Sacred Heart) and it won't work for the churches. The writer from Magnolia was absolutely correct in dreading it and watching her church close.

We have been asked quite frequently of late "what is going on" with Fr. Romanowski. He is officially retired and is now residing at his house in Elm (near Hammonton). Hopefully he'll be getting some much deserved rest, but knowing Fr. Romanowski, he'll be busy as ever!

It is our understanding that he will be returning to St. Mary's for the traditional Latin mass. In addition, he will be helping to fill in over at Mater Ecclesiae in Berlin (the traditional Roman Rite mission church in the Diocese of Camden) on a temporary basis.

We at St. Mary's Shrine Parish would like to thank Fr. Romanowski with all of our hearts for his dedication to the Church and to our church in particular. Now would be a very good time to mention just a few of the things that Fr. Romanowski has done for our little parish.

When Fr. Romanowski first came, the lot adjacent to the rectory was just that--an empty lot. The Rosary Garden was his idea. Many parishioners stepped up to the plate, with the grace of God of course, to help make that idea into a reality.

• Father has been a steadfast supporter and participant in the Legion of Mary. We now have two adult Praesidia (groups) as well as the Junior Praesidium.
• He reinstated the Holy Name Society that had been discontinued by a previous pastor.
  
• Father is the spiritual director for the Promoters of the Blessed Sacrament.
• Of course it was Fr. Romanowski who instituted the two-and-a-half (and now three days) of Eucharistic Adoration at St. Mary's. This is no small task for so small a parish, but there is no shortage of graces received!
• We have the traditional Latin mass at our parish now.
• Father has never been known to turn away a soul in need of help, and has always been available for the sacrament of Confession. In a time when other churches have seen a decline in Confession, I know that I personally have been around when Fr. Romanowski has commented about the abundance of Confessions heard at St. Mary's--and not just at the appointed times, either. Even when he was tired after a long day, Father has heard my Confession. I know I don't need to tell you that not all priests are as accessible as this.
• Father has made the Divine Mercy Chaplet a post-mass tradition at St. Mary's.
• He has instituted countless devotions, novenas, special prayers, and has been vigilant in praying for certain special intentions (for example, pro-life, reverence at mass, an increase in attendance at mass, etc.).
• Father is also extremely committed to visiting the sick and homebound.
• He also serves the spiritual needs of the Catholics at the Veteran's Home in Vineland.

On a personal level, those of us who know Fr. Romanowski--myself included--deeply appreciate not only his sincerity but most especially the fact that we never have to doubt his spiritual counsel. He teaches only what Holy Mother Church teaches. Good spiritual guidance is worth more than all the gold in the world.

We at St. Mary's cannot even begin to thank Fr. Romanowski for all he's done for us over the past twelve years. Now our task is to live up to all he's given us, and never take for granted the wonderful parish community he has helped to forge.

Better think again. We were recently visiting the new website for "The Catholic Community of Christ Our Light" in Cherry Hill. As mentioned in our previous blog post, this is to be the name of the future merged parish of Queen of Heaven and St. Peter Celestine.

Anyway, the interesting thing is that the website has the same job openings as listed in the Courier Post help wanted ad, plus another one:  Coordinator for Sound, Video, and Lighting.

From the position description:

ESSENTIAL DUTIES AND RESPONSIBLILITES (includes but not limited to all of the following)

· Maintain all applicable electronic equipment for the parish including, but not limited to: lights, video production tools, televisions, projectors, monitors, and microphones.

·Prepare all equipment to be accessible and operable for all parish functions.

·Recruit, schedule, train and supervise volunteers.

· Report to Pastoral Associate for Worship and Music to prepare for upcoming liturgy and services

·Maintain an inventory of equipment and a library of productions.

·Other duties as assigned by the Pastoral Associate for Worship and Music.

Wow! Nothing says vibrant like video production and lights!  Maybe they can get Joel Osteen to swing by and deliver the homilies on Sunday. Maybe some show tunes and liturgical dancing can be added.  Maybe Fr. Tom Newton could play in an African Drum Band.  Maybe they could add "ritual," which always makes people feel good.  You know something like holding hands in a circle and singing kumbaya.

 

I am not even sure what to say anymore, except that we are clearly being turned into protestant mega-churches and anyone who doesn't believe this is being naive.  Anyone who accepts this is compromising their faith.  Remember, at your Confirmation, you became a Soldier of Christ.  Well, the battle is here!

(Here are a couple of examples of "contemporary christian worship" for your purview.)

This letter to the editor was in the Cape May County Herald a month ago, in direct response to the Council of Parishes calling for a halt to the diocesan destruction.

(In case you didn't know, Fr. Gregorio already accused the Atlantic City Press of being a prostitute in another letter to the editor. He must be moving on to the next one, now. Is Fr. Gregorio sort of like the Flyer's Dave Brown? Remember him?



As I recall, he was the last to play for the Flyers (not the NHL--that was Craig MacTavish) without a helmet. The guy was nuts. He was not the best player in the world skill-wise, but he was the one they'd send in when they were losing the game because he was a fighter and could attempt to incur penalties on the opposing team. In other words, cause distraction and confusion in a last ditch effort to salvage the game. It was a lot of fun to watch, if ya like the "old time hockey." But often when you were watching him in action you knew it was because the Flyers were losing. But I digress!)

Now most of this letter is the "same old same old" and not worth reading. You know...we're all just "emotionally attached" to our parishes (as if all we needed was to be a little less hormonal) and there's a priest shortage and no one will ever enter the seminary again, blah blah blah. As if any of those reasons were legitimate. But here's something we haven't heard before (quote):

Again if you were the bishop, and you knew that the average diocesan priest today is 64, and that only 12 men are in all stages of seminary theological training, and that many times that will retire or die by 2015, what would you do? What will the average age be in 2015? By then, the bishop will be forced to do another, even more painful consolidation. Fair-minded people are saying this bishop had the courage to do what two or three previous bishops should have done since they had the same demographics.

Three things will be addressed here, not necessarily in order. First, as you can tell, one of the primary themes of this letter is, "If you were the bishop, what would you do?" Of course, none of us are the bishop nor will we ever be, but I for one can answer this question definitively nonetheless. Here is my answer, Fr. Gregorio. Ahem. Here goes.

 If I were the bishop, I would:

A. Pray daily for the continual conversion of my own heart and mind, the hearts and minds of all entrusted to my care, and for the conversion of all lost sheep fallen away from the Church especially. In this and many, many other ways, I would evangelize.

B. Trust in the Blessed Mother of God, who has never and will never fail her children. I would pray to her for an increase in vocations to the priesthood and religious life. The vocations are there. (We see them beautifully growing in other diocese, orders, and in the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter, for example.) God never stops planting them in the hearts of his children. Sometimes they're just buried in muck and not able to grow.

C. I would institute vocational programs and initiatives like other diocese do (look at St. Louis!) to inspire and embolden young men and women to explore, ascertain, and go after their God-given vocations!

D. I would set an example of holiness that inspires those under my care.

E. I would be--personally--extremely accessible. (Again, look at the St. Louis and the example of the walks with the bishop.)

F. The actions of the institutional diocese would be transparent not secretive, honest and not misleading, and the sentiments and concerns of the faithful would not be belittled, but instead taken seriously and answered. An honest man never has anything to hide.

G. I would not take down half the churches in the diocese, whether or not I had ulterior motives, whether or not there was financial incentive, whether or not I preferred McMegachurches, whether or not I felt that small parishes did not have the right to exist, whether or not I had a supposed "priest shortage," whether or not I was involved with con artist Raffaelo Follieri. As bishop I would be well aware that these churches are not mine, but that I am meant to shepherd souls and not manage real estate. As a bishop I would consider it my job to build up the body of Christ, not dismantle and undermine it.

H. I would consider the history of the Church in this country and realize that Catholic priests were basically circuit riders up until very recently, and that traveling two miles down the road or more to the next parish is not a hardship for anyone with a job in the "real world." (Heck, most of us are lucky if our commutes are under an hour. And look at the Byzantine priests! These guys travel back and forth many, many miles.) I would remind my priests that, according to the Holy Pope St. Pius X, that "priest" and "hard work" are synonymous, anyway.

I. I would promote the traditional Latin mass and traditional Catholicism generally because the undiluted Truth is what all young people hunger after.

J. I would promote Eucharistic adoration and, in the diocesan offices, a chapel available for perpetual adoration. In this way I could go to the Eucharistic Lord for guidance in all things, as could all diocesan employees, at anytime. (After all, if Follieri could have a chapel in his office, why not the Diocese of Camden?)

K. I would ensure that all seminary education that seminarians received was solid and in accordance with teachings of the One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic Faith. If they are wanting, I would remove necessary instructors or have them change their content. If necessary I would again do as Pope St. Pius X did and instruct seminarians myself, if necessary. I would not allow any "nonsense" (as a good priest I know often likes to say) to creep into seminary education or parish religious education.

L. I would not send priests away from the diocese if I truly believed there was a shortage.

M. I would not institute a lay-led initiative that would certainly undermine the sacred responsibilities and authority of priests.

N. If I realized that my actions were in error, no matter how far into them I was and no matter how hard it seemed to turn around, I would repent, publicly confess my mistakes, beg Our Lord's forgiveness, and start on the right path immediately. There is never, ever any shame in stopping wrong action in favor of righteous action, so changing course is always an option. Some of the greatest saints in the history of the Church have been repentant sinners, and indeed this is what gives us all hope, right?

There certainly may be things I've missed, but these things I would do for sure if I was bishop.

Secondly, if the past three bishops should have done something they did not, then they must have been mistaken in their judgment somehow. How and why should we now assume that our current bishop, Bishop Galante, is correct? Why should we trust him if the past three bishops' judgment was lacking?

Third, and perhaps most importantly, Fr. Gregorio points out that Bishop Galante will be forced, in 2015--seven years from now--to do "another, even more painful consolidation." Hmmm. That's interesting. So the "consolidation" that we are seeing now is not the end, according to Gregorio. There is more to come. This warrants an announcement.

The Council of Parishes asked me to attend the USCCB convocation called "Life, Justice & Family: Partners in the New Evangelization" today (Friday). Held at the Crowne Plaza in Cherry Hill, Bishop Galante was a defacto host of the event (along with Cardinal Rigali, who I believe will help close the event on Sunday). Attendance at the conference, in my view anyway, was quite pricey so it was no small wonder that it was not as well-attended as it might have been. Only people whose organizations could help defray the cost (or, perhaps, who are extremely interested in the subject matter) would attend such an event. However, I noticed that there were people from a variety of places in attendance, including Oregon (by way of the Bronx) and Kansas, among other places.

Mass
Friday's portion of the conference began with mass, which was pretty much what one would expect from a typical novus ordo mass, except that it was in a ballroom-type location, with the altar on a stage, etc. Msgr. Frey, pastor of St. Rose of Lima Haddon Heights, co-officiated with Bishop Galante. (I am a fan of Msgr. Frey and it was good to see him, but didn't see him at the presentations afterwards.) As a total estimate, I would guess that the number of people attending mass was about 50, but I did not do a head count or anything.

Given the theme, an unusual thing about a conference like this is that it seems to attract people on either end of the Catholic spectrum. In attendance were both the very orthodox "pro-life" activists as well as the more liberal "peace and justice" types. So on one side of me during mass there were two women kneeling during mass (and myself as well) and on the other side of me were two women standing even during the consecration (I think they may have been sisters in street-clothes).

Mass-wise, there were only a couple of oddities. One was that there was a "worship leader" type person who kept exhorting us to give her an "Amen," an "Alleluia," or a "Praise the Lord,"  particularly before mass began. Although I appreciated the enthusiasm, this is not the type of thing I personally am accustomed to at mass. I'm used to having quiet time to pray before mass. And given the very sterile, controlled, corporate environment of the conference location it seemed even stranger.

The second noticeable oddity were the lyrics to the song that the swaying, clapping choir sang during communion. The song is called "A Communion Hymn" and is attributed to Nolan Williams, Jr. Since the hymn was in our little booklets, I can share them with you. Here are the lyrics I found somewhat startling:

You said: Take this bread and eat of Me
This symbol broken represents My body

You said: Take this cup of sacrifice,
It represents My blood which gives you new life

Attributing a symbolic or representational meaning to the Eucharist is not what I understand to be Catholic, so I found the selection of this hymn surprising. (It reminded me of what I read here--scroll down to the last paragraph before "consecration of a bishop.") Other than these things, the mass itself was not out of the ordinary in any negative way.

Speakers
The first speaker was Bishop Lori of Bridgeport, CT Diocese. Though I know very little about him, I was impressed not only with his talk, which centered on the encyclical Humanae Vitae, but even more so with his answers to the questions posed afterwards. Unfortunately I cannot tell you precisely what was said because, strangely, my notes were taken along with my name tag, but I can mention a few things I liked. For example, he alluded to the very rift in the Church I mention above that sometimes exists among the pro-life and social justice contingents. He said, though, that we "are not an either-or Church, we're a both-and Church." He also discussed the Diocese of Washington (DC) and how they instituted a program called, "The Light is on for You" which promotes all churches in the diocese having confession in coordination. "Promoting the role of priest as confessor" is something he feels is hugely important in bringing people in to the Faith and in to a closer relationship with Our Lord. Bishop Lori also discussed the importance of good catechesis in Catholic high schools and colleges because if parents are paying for a Catholic institution they ought to be sure what they're getting is truly Catholic! He said that Catholic schools are very important and afford a very significant opportunity that must not be passed by--to integrate Catholic religious teaching with all subjects. In addition, Bishop Lori mentioned the importance of teaching NFP and Theology of the Body in marriage preparation courses which will at least cause couples to think about the Church's teachings regarding the marital act. He said so many great things, was clearly extremely intelligent and orthodox, and as a bonus was very accessible and approachable afterwards.

After his talk was a presentation by Marie Smith. (Who, by the way, mentioned that her husband is Congressman Chris Smith, whose very nice website I link to here. I see among other things that he is doing autism awareness too, which I am personally affected by because of my son.) Mrs. Smith's special calling is her work in human rights. She is a true crusader for a topic that has long been close to my heart as I was a human rights campaigner back in high school and college. Going into the presentation I confess I was not expecting much since "human rights" is such a vast topic, I assumed it was way to broad to be covered in any useful way. I was wrong. Her presentation was an overview of the human rights violations in the world today with a special focus on children and women, who are much more likely to have their rights violated in so many ways. Though at times it was hard to listen to the facts she presented, such as her discussion of child soldiering, genderscide, infanticide, stoning of women, etc., her presentation was simply excellent. I'd encourage anyone who has the opportunity to go hear her speak.

By the time of the third talk, my body was getting very stiff from having sat there in that chair so long and I needed a break. Each presenter had been at least 1.5 hours, plus there was breakfast in the same chair and mass before that, so I skipped out on the third speaker who discussed bioethics. Having a philosophy background, I'm interested in this subject, but my brain and body were a little sore. Based upon the quality of the first two speakers, I now wish I had gone.

Protest
In the early morning and late afternoon, rallyers were in attendance with signs protesting Bishop Galante's actions in the diocese. Since Bishop Galante had left the premises in the morning, when he returned in the afternoon he met the protesters at the door. It never ceases to amaze me how the timing always seems to work out that way. The protesters were asked to leave the premises both times since the area they were standing on was private property, but it took them quite awhile to decide to ask them to leave. In the afternoon they were asked to leave about 20 minutes after they arrived and after the bishop had already passed through them. However it was particularly unfavorable looking for the bishop to send someone out to ask a young man with his infant son in arms and an older  woman with a walker (among others) to leave. Frankly, it just makes the bishop look bad and elicits public sympathy. (There were a bunch of people from the conference looking on from a window inside.) As a prime example, since I was inside at the time, I overheard some people say, "Here come the protesters. Well, you really can't blame them. Who wants their church to be closed?" Since the crowd was so geographically diverse, overall they seemed unaware of the whole scandal involving the bishop here in the Diocese of Camden, but that is not a surprise. Nevertheless there is certainly a lot of sympathy for our cause simply because every Catholic can relate to the horror of having their church taken from them. Really there is very little the diocese can do, in my opinion, to make the proposed largest church closure in American Catholic history palatable, particularly now with the shadow of the Follieri scandal hanging over it. The financial motivations seem so very clear now to those following the ordeal.

philadelphia weekly article link here
(from May 31, 2006, 2 years ago. Scroll down to "The Tierney I saw was a bully")

So far as I can tell, Tierney was the PR man for the Archdiocese of Philadelphia. There are other connections I cannot at this time mention, but I thought you'd enjoy the parallel here:

When I knew Tierney, I was trying to write about what the archdiocese did with its money, and the cold and callous way his eminence treated his fellow Catholics while he eliminated 20 or so churches and schools in the poorest sections of town. Whether the churches should've been closed is a debate about money and resources; what can't be debated is the un-Christian way the Catholics in these parishes were treated by the cardinal, and his paid mouthpiece, Brian Tierney.

I was a witness. Many of these churches were built and maintained by contributions from the poor people in the neighborhoods. But when the churches went down, everything from the bricks to the crucifixes remained the property of the archdiocese.

These were places where people were baptized, married and buried, and the Catholics who supported them for decades had no rights and no say when they were shut down. If the parishes had to be closed, the cardinal could've comforted the afflicted by holding the last mass, and leading the procession over to the new church. But his response was to refuse to meet with any of these people, including nuns and Catholic school kids who picketed his cathedral.

At the Inquirer I was trying to cover the turmoil and demonstrations the cardinal had incited. It was Bevilacqua's fellow Catholics who gave me secret documents that showed that during a time when the church was going through an alleged financial crisis, and money was so tight that they had to close poor churches and schools, the cardinal secretly spent $5 million to renovate and redecorate archdiocese offices, his mansion and seaside villa.

And where was Brian Tierney during all this?

He was doing what he does best, working to suppress the truth [about the sex abuse scandal] by attacking me in several meetings with my editors. I was under orders from my bosses not to say anything, for fear of further antagonizing him. At one of these meetings Tierney and two associates took turns verbally beating me up in front of my cowardly editors, while they just sat there.

Any of this sound familiar, folks? Bishop Galante can say that he had "speak up sessions" with us, came to our churches and "heard our concerns," etc., but we all know (not only in our hearts but from confidential sources, mind you) that the church "mergers" (closings, really) were a done deal. The bishop has an agenda. He wants to:

1. Get rid of priests BY THE DOZEN who he dislikes because they are orthodox, devout, or don't go in for various liberal agenda points. He is forcibly retiring them, attempting to get them to resign, or attempting to force them to seek "psychological" help to deprogram them from their bizarre Catholic ways. This has already happened and continues. And yet, Fr. Maggart of Assumption Parish is supposedly getting married and is only "on leave." Why? So he can still collect a paycheck? (The information about priests being forced out is widely known, plus we have proof.)
   
2. After dismissing all these priests and creating an environment hostile to attraction of priestly vocations, he then claims there's a vocations crisis, that we won't have enough priests, and need to close down churches. Most notably, churches targeted for closure are ones that are smaller, older, and are more characteristically Catholic in architecture, culture, etc. Now we're virtually stripped of our religion and culture and history as we know it, not to mention some of our best priests. Now we're ready for Phase 3.
3. Establish Protestant-style megachurches lacking traditional sacramentals (see this link and this one) in favor of abstract and modern-looking museum pieces lacking warmth or any real connection to our Catholic faith. Allow so much lay involvement that priests become an afterthought. The sacraments as we know them become inaccessible.
   
4. In the midst of all this, the bishop changes seminaries because he has theological differences with St. Charles Borromeo Seminary in Philly. Now he's sending many seminarians of the diocese to St.Mary's, which is commonly referred to as "The Pink Palace," in Baltimore.

Now the devil can run rampant. Our churches are alien to us, the priests are teaching things "unfamiliar," and the sacraments increasingly inaccessible and "different." No, this is not some weird dream scenario. This is what's happening now. The sacraments, sacramentals, and holy priests are what help keep us close to God and are our bulwark against the forces of evil in the world. Pray hard.