Skip Navigation Links
Home
Donate
Free News via Email
Subscribe for a Friend
Send News Tip
Contact Us
Search
About Us
Is California Catholic Daily important to you?
You can help keep us online!
HELP WANTED ADS
See All Help Wanted Ads
Submit Help Wanted Ad
POSITIONS WANTED ADS
See Position Wanted Ads
Submit Position Wanted Ad
Churches Worth Driving To
* Submit Your Church *

News from the Trenches
Grow a uterus!...
Advertise with us
Currently more than 150,000 visitors read CalCatholic.com
Servant of God! Father John Hardon, S.J.
Refuse to Choose! Women deserve better!
Changing Times! Holistic approach in education.
CLASSIFIED ADS
See All Classified Ads
Submit Classified Ad
CALENDAR
See All Calendar Items
Submit Calendar Item
LATEST FEEDBACK
German prelate to head Vatican doctrinal congregation KENNETH M. FISHER there you go again, using the word 'hereti... [max - 7/6/2012 6:45:51 PM]
Same-sex attractions in youth Retaction Gene, you are correct in what you are saying. I h... [Mark from PA - 7/6/2012 6:31:16 PM]
Will she be removed? Archbishop Jose Gomez is a wonderful bishop. Shame on whoev... [Shirley J. Schultz - 7/6/2012 5:59:07 PM]
A Constitutional wreck Constitutional validity depends entirely on an educated, pro... [JLS - 7/6/2012 4:55:28 PM]
Parents should not block vocations "Why does he call so few?" by Bob One: I cannot fathom how ... [JLS - 7/6/2012 4:46:36 PM]

Links to Other Sites
Prior Site Archives
Article Archives

“A few months or as much as a year”

Interim administrator for Oakland diocese once allowed homosexual marriages, built church with no crucifix or tabernacle


Now that former Oakland Bishop Allen Vigneron has been installed as Archbishop of Detroit, Fr. Dan Danielson, a priest who once allowed homosexual marriages at his parish and was instrumental in the construction of a new church in Pleasanton with no tabernacle and no crucifix, has been elected to run the diocese until a new bishop is named by the pope.

“The process to appoint a new Bishop of Oakland will begin soon and is led by the
Vatican’s diplomatic representative in the United States, Papal Nuncio Archbishop Pietro Sambi,” said a diocesan statement at the time Bishop Vigneron was named Archbishop of Detroit, where he was installed on Jan. 28.

News of Fr. Danielson’s election was announced in the Feb. 3 diocesan “Administrative Weekly,” which said, “The Diocesan Consulters today announced the election of Fr. Dan Danielson to fill the role of Diocesan Administrator. The administrator leads the day-to-day activities of the Diocese until a new bishop is appointed. Fr. Danielson retired in 2007 as the pastor of the Catholic Community of Pleasanton.”

The Catholic Community of Pleasanton is comprised of St. Augustine Church and St. Elizabeth Seton Church. In 1998, then-Bishop John Cummins expressed displeasure with Fr. Danielson and ordered him to stop talking to the press after it became public knowledge that Fr. Danielson was allowing homosexual marriages at St. Elizabeth Seton. An attempted lesbian wedding on May 9, 1998 was called off when 50 Catholics came out to the partially built church in a protest that was reported in the San Francisco Chronicle and on San Francisco's Channel 7 News. At the time, Fr. Danielson bragged he would continue blessing gay unions outside of the church building.

Two years later, when St. Elizabeth Seton parish completed a 15-year-long, $5 million project to construct a new church, Fr. Danielson again came under fire. The new St. Elizabeth Seton church had no tabernacle (the tabernacle was housed in a separate building), no crucifix, no stations of the cross, and no kneelers. In addition, there were no stained glass windows or statues. Chairs were arranged in an oval, looking down on a simple wooden table that was used as the altar. The 8-foot-long, waist-deep, full immersion, baptismal bath came complete with bright blue tiles and Jacuzzi jets.

At his first Mass at the new church, Fr. Danielson, who referred to his parish as "the Catholic community (not church) of Pleasanton," told the congregation: "There is no sanctuary because this is all holy ground now. This is not a church but a gathering space." He said there was no Christ on the cross because in a circular worship space some people would have had to look at the back of the figure of Christ so it was better just to have a plain, wooden cross. He said there was no room for kneelers.

More recently, in November 2007, Fr. Danielson defended the selection of Fr. Padraig Greene to replace him as pastor at the Catholic Community of Pleasanton. Fr. Greene was arrested in 1999 for lewd behavior in a public restroom. In the online bulletin of the two-parish community, under the heading “Notes from the pastor for this week,” Fr. Danielson said that public protests outside the parish required him to reveal what Greene did in 1999. “I would not do this ordinarily any more than I would ‘out’ the sins of anyone else who had a position of leadership in this community,” said Danielson. At 2 p.m. on March 2, 1999, police arrested Greene “at a restroom next to a highway for indecent exposure,” continued Danielson. “There is a baseball field nearby. There were no children or minors involved, nor were there any nearby at the time. Only the police officer who observed this behavior and subsequently arrested him was present.” The court dismissed charges against Greene when he completed therapy. “As you can imagine,” wrote Danielson, “Fr. Padraig was and is filled with shame and great remorse over this incident.”

Fr. Greene continues to serve as “parochial administrator” of the parish.

“It is with surprise and hope that I take on the task of Diocesan Administrator for the Diocese of Oakland while we prayerfully await a new bishop to be appointed,” said Fr. Danielson in a prepared statement published in the “Administrative Weekly.” "This interim period could last a few months or as much as a year. We do not know. In the meantime, I will do my best to keep flourishing the wonderful ministries that are active in this Diocese.

“This is all new to me so I count very much on your prayerful support and your honest feedback. It is not part of my job description to begin any new initiatives in the diocese. Those new directions and developments will have to await the appointment of our new bishop. However, during this interim period, please let me know how I can help you and support you in your ministry. Together we can keep our wonderful diocese functioning smoothly and be able to present to our new bishop, when he comes, a well-managed home.”


READER COMMENTS

Posted Thursday, February 05, 2009 1:26 AM By AnnCA
**Fr. Dan Danielson, a priest who once allowed homosexual marriages at his parish and was instrumental in the construction of a new church in Pleasanton with no tabernacle and no crucifix,** And yet everyone is outraged at the Pope for the Bishop Williamson episode. How much do you want to bet Fr. Danielson never wrote a letter to the Pope apologizing for embarrassing the Church?

Posted Thursday, February 05, 2009 1:36 AM By Lorna
A tabloid article written against a 71-year old retired priest who's helping out in a time of need. And of course, more harping about homosexuals.

Posted Thursday, February 05, 2009 4:37 AM By Thomas
Things are looking up for the Diocese of Oakland, REJOICE!!

Posted Thursday, February 05, 2009 6:17 AM By Cy Johnson
This seems like some mixed up stuff. Though none of it is recent. I wonder if CalCatholic would also do stories with the headlines, "Denied Our Lord, not once But Three Times, Now Made Pope!" or "Refused to Admit Christ Risen; Demanded Proof, saying 'I'll Believe it When I See It'" or "Notorious Persecutor and killer of saint, with a new Alias, Now Serving in Leadership Capacity in Church." These could be written about Saints Peter, Thomas, and Paul.

Posted Thursday, February 05, 2009 6:44 AM By BA of Central Valley
What is going on here? Make Dan Danielson diocesean administrator is an insult to Catholics everywhere. This is our Catholic church today... thanks to the reforms put into place by the modernists. If we were to follow their thinking we all should surely go to hell. May God intervene in the Oakland Diocese. Lord Jesus, send help now!

Posted Thursday, February 05, 2009 7:58 AM By St. Christopher
How absolutely absurd and insulting to Oakland Catholics. This priest represents what is truly repulsive about the unchecked growth of "creative" Catholocism. His buildings are hardly churches and one wonders if he is even fully a priest. What Oakland needs is a traditionalist, a priest for whom Christ's command to (1) teach salvation and (2) to evangelize the world, is taken seriously. Instead we get insane "wreckovations" of his parish building and the help of a "flasher" priest, Fr. Greene. Why don't the people there simply revolt, and either throw these clowns out, or leave them. At least the "conservative" Episcopalians had the starch to leave their goofy bishopress and seek to conform their worship to the bible, why not the good folks in the Bay Area. What a complete and tragic joke.

Posted Thursday, February 05, 2009 8:11 AM By DarkKnight
And I thought "The Cathedral of Light" was appalling. May God deliver Oakland a bishop speedily.

Posted Thursday, February 05, 2009 8:41 AM By Robert Lockwood
If Father Danielson is the best of the available priests of our diocese then we are in big trouble. With the diocese in debt of nearly $150,000,000.00, 55 million borrowed to settle the pedifile claims and 90 million shortfall on cathedral funding, and many pastors with a "I will do my own thing, thank you" attitude, the diocese will be hard pressed to find a new bishop. In the interum with Father Danielson at the helm things can only get worse. Save your prayers for the nest Bishop, he will need them.

Posted Thursday, February 05, 2009 8:53 AM By San Jose Catholic
I was hoping this was a joke. But April 1 is yet far away. IMHO the only positives from this situation are that (1) although heterodox, Fr. Danielson understands that he is not to begin new initiatives; and (2) it shows the Catholic world what a poor grasp of the Diocese of Oakland Archbishop Vigneron had. Rather than naming one of the talented younger (and more conservative) Oakland priests the archbishop hauled out the lion of the old guard from retirement.

Posted Thursday, February 05, 2009 9:00 AM By A concerned person
It looks like the diocese of Oakland is back to its old ways....

Posted Thursday, February 05, 2009 9:00 AM By Richard Mc Candlish
There was no priest more suitable than Danielson to administer Oakland during the interregnum? God help us.

Posted Thursday, February 05, 2009 9:03 AM By VirgoPotens
I don't live in the Diocese of Oakland anymore, but this news sickens me. Is this a sign that Fr. Danielson is considered future bishop material? If he's appointed to lead my diocese in a few years, I will MOVE, even if it means selling my house at a loss.

Posted Thursday, February 05, 2009 9:24 AM By Laurette Elsberry
This is the mess that Bishop Vigernon left for the next bishop. In his years there he did virtually nothing to improve the disgusting state of the Catholic Church under his jurisdiction. Like several others in the USA, he built a monument to himself - an overpriced and garish Cathedral. Fr. Danielson has been a terrible scandal in the Oakland Diocese for years. Who are the individual "Catholic Consultors" who recommended that Fr. Danielson act as interim bishop? I bet they are a group of the other radical priests of the Diocese. Does anyone know who is in this group? Does Archbishop Sambi have any idea of what the Oakland Diocese is like?

Posted Thursday, February 05, 2009 9:26 AM By SMMer
The College of Consulters consists of 8 or 9 priests of the diocese, including the vicar general, Fr. George Mockel. Fr. Danielson's election probably reflects respect for his success in building up the largest and most lucrative parish in the diocese. Nevertheless, it's curious they passed over Fr. Mockel who was Archbishop Vigneron's right-hand man. Is there a hint of repudiation here?

Posted Thursday, February 05, 2009 9:32 AM By Rick DeLano
If ever there was a clear indication that the new Bishop of Oakland must NOT be selected from among those names submitted by the "powers that be" in the Oakland diocese, THIS IS IT. Is His Holiness prepared to mount a counterattack against those who have so viciously attacked him for his charitable initiatives advancing Catholic Tradition? If so we are with you Holy Father! Let us pray that an included element in such a counterattack might be a new Bishop in Oakland of quite a distinctly different theological stripe than this "elected" administrator. God be merciful to the poor Catholic faithful of Oakland, whose clerics have "elected" this man.

Posted Thursday, February 05, 2009 10:26 AM By MarkF
All, instead of bemoaning the events of the past, lets all concentrate on action. You saw the second paragraph, right? Archbishop Pietro Sambi will be leading the selection process. Write to him. Tell him whatever you know about the abuses in the diocese of Oakland. You guys out there know more about this than is in this brief article. Tell him about this Fr Danielson. The address is: His Excellency Pietro Sambi, Apostolic Nunciature for the Holy See, 3339 Massachusetts Avenue, NW, Washington DC 20008. Get your friends to write to him. Get your local Knights of Columbus, Legion of Mary or prayer group to write to him. Don't assume that since he's from the Vatican that he knows what's going on out there. And be glad that we have Pope Benedict XVI. He's not afraid of controversy. Look at who he's appointed as bishop of Linz, Austria, which is said to be the most liberal diocese in Europe. Don't let this opportunity slip by. Take a little action now. Believe me, someone will read all these letters and make a report to +Sambi. Thanks!

Posted Thursday, February 05, 2009 11:07 AM By Eileen
This is just the type of leadership that the dissenters desire. Anything goes in the name of love. "One of the surest signs of God's displeasure with mankind is to allow corrupt leadership and bad clergy"....St. John Eudes. This story signifies a particular type of punishment, even before the blinded and thankless arrogance of Catholic voters who placed a pro-death leader in the White House. Be careful of what you ask for. How much love must God have for mankind? God is certainly holding back his swift hand of justice waiting for us to repent.

Posted Thursday, February 05, 2009 11:44 AM By Dave N.
Interesting that Fr. Danielson is excoriated for being "instrumental in the construction of a new church in Pleasanton with no tabernacle and no crucifix" when nary a word has appeared here about Vigneron's "Christ the Light" or even an article that I can recall about the dedication of this "church"-- maybe I missed them. (And don't say the plans were approved before the now Abp. came along -- that's simply inaccurate, wishful thinking.) As I can best recall, there's no crucifix at the cathedral either (only the now infamous "LiteBrite Jesus") and when I was there about a month ago, nobody had even bothered to light the sanctuary lamp--making the visitor wonder exactly where the tabernacle is.... Don't get me wrong --I'm not saying Danielson's any prize, it just seems that the critiques here are applied very unevenly. God help both Oakland and Detroit.

Posted Thursday, February 05, 2009 11:59 AM By Thuvia Parth
Eileen, thank you for the quote from St. John Eudes, whose spledid writings are to be commended to all. God's providential use of punishment, I would add, is equally an act of love as is His holding back His hand of justice.

Posted Thursday, February 05, 2009 2:42 PM By btj
the 8 priest consultors ( listed promenently in the diocesan directory & including Fr. Mokel) are to be congratulated; tahey made a good and responksible choice of an experienced pastor and effective leader; some will object because he is a real Vatican II priest, but isn't the teaachings of an ecumenical council the hightest form of the magisterium and isn't nice to have an effective pasotal leaader who still buys it.

Posted Thursday, February 05, 2009 2:56 PM By Carla Rita
AnnCA , you use the example of this episode with Fr. Dan Danielson to deflect criticism of the Bishop Williamson episode. Both episodes showed scandal in the church especially when you have left and right wing extremists embarassing the church.

Posted Thursday, February 05, 2009 3:20 PM By Jack Hockel
Dave, you missed the beautiful crucifix near the choir section in the new cathedral. There is a sanctuary lamp located dead center. You may have missed it because we're not used to seeing the tabernacle where it belongs.

Posted Thursday, February 05, 2009 3:48 PM By Dan
"The College of Consulters consists of 8 or 9 priests of the diocese, including the vicar general, Fr. George Mockel. Fr. Danielson's election probably reflects respect for his success in building up the largest and most lucrative parish in the diocese. Nevertheless, it's curious they passed over Fr. Mockel who was Archbishop Vigneron's right-hand man. Is there a hint of repudiation here? " SMMer -- thanks for the information. I was wondering -- Danielson -- elected by whom? I have encountered priests at war with the Pope in Northern California during my travels ( I am from Los Angeles) and wonder too if such priests were responsible for this election. Would that the laity would not have to save the Church from her priests!

Posted Thursday, February 05, 2009 3:51 PM By garvan
Oakland Catholics: Take the Oakland diocese out of your wills immediately. Revoke any gifts in the pipeline. Refrain from putting any money in the cathedral collection baskets until this renegade administrator is gone. This is the ONLY message these heterodox people respond to.

Posted Thursday, February 05, 2009 4:02 PM By J H
Why in God's green earth was Fr. Danielson elected administator of the Oakland diocese? Who elected him? I thought someone or Catholic representative of the Apostolic Nuncio should have selected the administrator. Seems to me that this priest's credentials speak out loud and clear. He is so out in left field. Heaven help us!

Posted Thursday, February 05, 2009 4:27 PM By AnnCA
Carla, I wasn't attempting to deflect criticism from anyone. On the contrary, I was attempting to point out the hypocrisy and heresy running unchecked in the Church. Sorry you missed my point.

Posted Thursday, February 05, 2009 4:56 PM By Victoria
Dark Knight, May GOD Send Us A Bishop WHO Will Save The Roman Catholic Church As A Whole. This All Seems Like The End of The World!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted Thursday, February 05, 2009 5:07 PM By JLS
Danielson is not a Vatican II priest, but a rogue cleric. Vatican II does not allow what he is reported to have done.

Posted Thursday, February 05, 2009 5:32 PM By Alfonso
Everyone start writing and flood the Apostolic nunciature in Wash, DC with letters. Archbishop Sambi, the papal nuncio is an outstanding Marian bishop who will greatly appreciate hearing from the little people on the ground. Sambi is a holy shepherd and nobody can fool him or deter him.

Posted Thursday, February 05, 2009 6:20 PM By Dan
"some will object because he is a real Vatican II priest, but isn't the teaachings of an ecumenical council the hightest form of the magisterium and isn't nice to have an effective pasotal leaader who still buys it. " BTJ -- I cannot find in my copy of the Vatican II documents that a priest is now to rid the church of kneelers, of tabernacles, crosses, and is now to marry homosexuals. Could you kindly help me find where in these documents these mandates might be found? Thanks in advance.

Posted Thursday, February 05, 2009 6:38 PM By Dr. Bob
Is Fr. Danielson also going to invite Fr. Rohr to celebrate the liturgy in Fr. Rohr's own interpretation?

Posted Thursday, February 05, 2009 9:25 PM By Pax Christi
Pitiful.

Posted Thursday, February 05, 2009 10:27 PM By Bob
I would suggest that the words of St. Teresa are appropriate at this time: "if you spend too much time judging others, you don't have time to love". My mother taught me that if you didn't have something nice to say about someone, don't say anything. By the way, V II is the authoritive teachings of the Roman Catholic Church. Perhaps its time for those who don't like it to look around for a church that meets their needs, and stop trying to ruin our Church by taking it back to the old days. Or at least, perhaps we all need to pay more attention to faith and less about religion. We are the church, not some building. We are church! Christ is among his church, not among a bunch of buildings. Is there a way for us to become civil in our writings, and tone down the ranting. I think it is ok to say that you disagree with someone's actions, but it is not Christian to call them names, put unwarranted labels on them or to disparage them. Let us become Catholic in our approach to other people.

Posted Thursday, February 05, 2009 10:34 PM By Jim
Well, I know one thing--I'll not be moving to Oakland. No, not because of the administrator, a temporary executive, but because of the lack of understanding of Vatican II and the counter-reformation mind set of those making comments.

Posted Friday, February 06, 2009 6:24 AM By Rob
And we thought we had it rough with the pro-homosexuality, pro-women ordination, pro-married men ordination Bishop Matthew Harvey Clark. Our prayers are with you!

Posted Friday, February 06, 2009 6:34 AM By 2miltap
God help us ! PLEASE, God.....HELP US !

Posted Friday, February 06, 2009 9:42 AM By Kristen
Yes another one sided character assasination by CalCatholic. Cy Johnson, that was the best post I've ever read here.

Posted Friday, February 06, 2009 10:18 AM By MarkF
Bob, I'm bothered too by some of the harsh tone on here that does no one any good. But we're human and people get mad sometimes. Shouldn't you compassion also be towards the people who have no power in the Church and whose dioceses have been hijacked by people who are opposed to the teachings of the Church? Aren't people expected to get mad when this happens? I am in full agreement that their language should be less strident, but I'm more upset that they don't turn their words into action more often. Isn't some of the fault at the leaders of the Church for allowing such things to go on that cause the faithful to be upset? And look at how the dissenting wing of the Church talks too. That Fr. Farrow hurls insults at the people who disagree with more freely than most people on here. There's a site out there who is in some sort of partnership with Fr. Farrow that regularly calls Pope Benedict a nazi. That same web site features articles by a former priest who tells non-Catholics to lie to pretend that they are Catholic so they can go to confession. Also, can you also tell me exactly where is the line where faith ends and "religion" (as you used the term) begins? Do you think that you have "faith" (which is good) and those who oppose you have "religion" (defined by you as bad)? Isn't that an insulting term too? No one says that all the actions of Rome are always right. Do you oppose all authority from Rome, or just when you don't like it? Where were you when +Lefebrve was excommunicated? Or when many parishes are still, this day, denying the people the right to hold Eucharistic adoration, or refusing to offer the Mass in its Extraordinary form, or are denied the right to form a prayer group? Do you oppose all rules, or just the rules that you don't like? Yes there are disagreements within the Church so there are bound to be angry people on both sides. That's just being human. Have some mercy on both sides please and not just on one side.

Posted Friday, February 06, 2009 10:45 AM By Dave N.
Sorry, Jack--I did miss the crucifix I guess--must have been overwhelmed with the Jesus image. However, I DID see the lamp dead center. Not lit--and because it's not a free-standing tabernacle and the lamp was not lit, I was wondering if that was actually IT or whether the tabernacle was elsewhere. I asked the guide at the table door (gray-bearded, elderly gentlement, very pleasant) but sadly he didn't seem to be familiar with the terms: "tablernacle" or "reserved sacrament" so I gave up.

Posted Friday, February 06, 2009 11:42 AM By Kmbold
Rantings!? Bob, apostates must love you. Catholic sites like this one ARE civil, but so often their opponents jump in with cruel and obscene postings. St. Teresa was not a Pollyanna. She REFORMED the Carmelites because they had become corrupt. She didn't turn a blind eye to their disintegration and remain silent. See no evil, hear no evil... We are not "judging" Fr. Danielson. We do not have the power or the desire. Sites such as this one keep people informed and help us do what we can within our limits to keep Christ's Bride holy and spotless, starting with ourselves.

Posted Friday, February 06, 2009 3:28 PM By Mark from PA
Thank you for a very nice post, Bob. Pacem in Terris.

Posted Friday, February 06, 2009 4:20 PM By Kevin
Thank you to California Catholic Daily for caring enough about the Church to shine the light of truth on who we have for leaders.

Posted Friday, February 06, 2009 5:44 PM By A.M.D.G.
In addition to lack of a Crucifix and tabernacle, will Fr. Danielson's new churches also be missing the Blessed Sacrament itself and a monstrance?

Posted Friday, February 06, 2009 6:51 PM By Maurice
He would make a great bishop........

Posted Friday, February 06, 2009 7:14 PM By MarkF
Bob, What's with this "We are Church?" Aren't we a tradition that that goes well, well beyond the present day? Are we a shifting sand dune that changes along with popular culture? When Vatican II told the laity to become more involved, it meant that we internalize the faith of our fathers and mothers, not invent a new faith and vote it into being. I'm afraid you've misunderstood Vatican II. They did not mean that we are all to be "priest-for-a-day." The council wanted us to be all called to holiness, not all called to dissent or to make up what the Church believes based on popular American culture. I'm afraid you have lay involvement confused with dissent. I am all for civil dialog, but I am also for stopping the dissent on issues like abortion, homosexuality, Church discipline, traditional forms of prayer, etc.

Posted Friday, February 06, 2009 8:16 PM By Eileen
Bob, When you posted, "Let us become Catholic in our approach to other people," Is your labeling those people who want to "ruin our Church by taking it back to the old days," your example of toning down the name calling and disparaging comments?

Posted Saturday, February 07, 2009 2:03 AM By MarkF
Thank you Eileen! I lot of us are sick of hearing the dissenting side's opinion labeled as "conscience", but our side's opinion labeled as "authoritarian." Then, as you pointed out, we get insults hurled at us by people who call our opinions "hatred." And make no bones about it, when they use that word they mean for us to not to have the right to our opinions. The same goes for the words "bigoted" and "prejudiced." There are words that are meant to shut down the debate and to silence us. They mean to isolate the Church in the minds of the wider secular American public. How can we find agreement here? Can we bring some sort of peace to the situation? I think so. First, we are not going to get many people who are opposed to the traditional teaching to agree with us for now. But we can get many people to agree that even though they may disagree with the traditional teaching, that we have a right to teach it. If done calmly, that will reduce the rancor while at the same time forcing the Fr. Farrow's of the world into being the ones who seem shrill and authoritarian. Frame this issue as one of the Church having her first amendment rights. The other point of agreement could be to ask the public to suppose - just to suppose - that homosexuality is something very destructive. Don't ask them to believe it, just ask them to suppose it, and then tell them that our conclusion, which they can oppose, is based on that supposition. Again, even many of those who disagree with us will accept that given our premise that homosexuality is destructive, will admit that our conclusion to oppose it is rational if we believe in the original premise. I really believe that we can find some small agreement here even with the wide secular public on these grounds. Don't aim to win them over on the big issues, just the small ones that we have a right to our conscience and our traditions. Make the dissenters seem like the shrill and intolerant ones, which in fact they are.

Posted Saturday, February 07, 2009 9:05 AM By Mark
I guess I will add my two cents worth to Bob's comments as well: To say that "we are the church" is a cute little saying but what are the implications of that comment? We have always known throughout history that what and how we pray and worship is a reflection of our deeper theological understandings (or lack of them). To build a parish church like the Catholic Community of Pleasanton as Fr. Dan did..without the basic elements and symbols of our theology within it....is the real issue here. To hide the Blessed Sacrament in the back of a seconday chapel speaks volumes about Fr. Dan's lack of regard for it. I know that many will say Vat. II said to do this. Show me where? Show me where it states in the 16 documents of Vat. II that entire parishes are to disregard basic teachings of liturgical practice, approve of same-sex married couples serving as lectors and extraordinary ministers of the Eucharist and so on. I think the real issue with many who have left this parish, and many have, is the lack of it's authentic expression of the faith as the truth rather than some form of opinion among many. The people of his former parish are hungry for this truth and eventually they will get it when those concerned with maintaining Fr. Dan's "legacy" in Pleasanton are exposed for the half-truths they stand for. There are two choices that all Catholics can choose from each day: to stand with Peter, the truth and the Lord or to impose self-will and allow one's ego to determine that path. If we do not trust Christ to teach us truth, then we deny the real reality of God. The choice if ours...choose wisely.

Posted Saturday, February 07, 2009 12:05 PM By Apotheoun
The Vatican should appoint a new bishop fast!!!!

Posted Saturday, February 07, 2009 3:48 PM By Alfonso
JMJ Nowhere in the council decrees of Vat 2 does it say that the tabernacle should be moved from the high altar. In a subsequent document from from the Congr of Rites a brief mention was made that "in churches where there are many wedding, funerals ect" the Most Blessed Sacrament should be reserved so that people may also pray. At St Patricks Cathedral (NYC) the tabernacle was moved to just behind the main altar to Our Lady's chapel which is also absolute center of the altar area but people must enter and leave the same way-they can not stream past or disrupt the prayerful atmosphere. This solution however was not meant for the average parish church; the very same document from the Congregation of Rites upholds the traditional placement of the tabernacle. The Council fathers bishops all never intended or would have tolerated the wicked notion of removing the tabernacle from the Church itself. Cardinal Mcintyre of Los Angeles and the other bishops of the holy council Vatican 2 would have quickly blasted/driven out anyone with the sacreligious audacity to propose such a disgraceful thing. These abuses were dreamed up by "liturgists"(???) in the 1970's; in no way does it represent Vat 2.

Posted Saturday, February 07, 2009 6:15 PM By gravey
The liturgical abuses I witnessed at St. Elizabeth Seton one Sunday were off the chart. The Oakland Diocese is at a real crossroad. Hopefully it doesn't slip back into its heterodox past. Note to Fr. Dan: I had plenty of room to kneel at SES.

Posted Saturday, February 07, 2009 10:07 PM By Needs Mercy
Our struggle is not against flesh and blood; this kind can only be removed by prayer and fasting. Please, Holy Spirit, help us to pray and fast for holiness in ourselves and in our priests.

Posted Saturday, February 07, 2009 11:13 PM By Coeli
Cy Johnson said "Denied Our Lord, not once But Three Times, Now Made Pope!" but Cy must have missed the part where Peter corrected his denial and affirmed his love. Cy must have forgotten to cite Fr Danielson's recanting of approving of homosexual unions? Love the Lord with your heart and voice, do not be silent.

Posted Sunday, February 08, 2009 8:04 AM By Trudy
There are many opinions posted here but I would like to say something a little different. Many people talking (or maybe it just seems they are talking) about what they believe as Roman Catholics. But so few people fail to consider what a responsibility it is to be a Roman Catholic. Mother Angelica says, "We are all called to be great saints". And that is so true. However, the unkind remarks I read on this site makes me wonder if the message is not being lost. If we cannot speak and act as true disciples of the One True Faith, then we are truly lost.

Posted Sunday, February 08, 2009 1:27 PM By Pete
Wow, I read your article and felt great sadness. So much taken out of context, not knowing anything about the Catholic Community of Pleasanton. I arrived here eight years ago and found this place as a warm, welcoming Church (call it whatever you like). I felt the spirit of Christ among the parishoners and priests serving here (one of which was Fr. Greene). Your article, and many of the comments, make it hard for me to call myself Catholic. Did you forget what Jesus came to this earth to do? Shame on all of you "perfect" Catholics. I'm sure Jesus is very disappointed in you. You seem to have missed his message.

Posted Sunday, February 08, 2009 2:12 PM By JLS
Cy also "forgot" that St Peter's denials took place before the event known as Pentecost ... made a big difference to history. Those clerics today who claim the defense of their own misdeeds by saying St Peter denied Christ err greatly -- this type of error is hardly a matter of ignorance. They've studied the Sacraments and therefore are responsible for knowing the reality of the Holy Spirit in their vocations. Such men are flirting with the denial of the Holy Spirit.

Posted Sunday, February 08, 2009 5:52 PM By Cy Johnson
No Coeli, and thanks be to God, the love of Christ does not depend on us.

Posted Sunday, February 08, 2009 6:27 PM By Trudy
Thank you for printing my post, even though it was off the point of topic a bit. But I see (at least I HOPE I see) those who are thinking of Converting to the Faith (The Life); and those who have Fallen Away and are wishing to return. We Are One Faith, One Family, One Church....Welcome All Who Believe In HIM. HE Will Always Welcome You Back So..... Why Shouldn't WE?

Posted Sunday, February 08, 2009 8:37 PM By JLS
Trudy, if the effort goes milquetoast, then do you really expect sinners to have any respect or even want to read the posts? The art obviously is to engage people who are asking questions, and clearly point out errors especially of those who attack the Church and God. If you want perfection, then give it a try.

Posted Sunday, February 08, 2009 9:22 PM By MarkF
Trudy, I agree with you totally. I fell into that easy trap to just blast what I don't like without thinking. I'm trying to get beyond that. But isn't it an understandable human falling to do that? People have been made mad by what's happened to their Church. St. Paul says that he wrote an angry letter to the Corinthians that he at first regretted. Later on he says he's not sorry he wrote it because it woke up the Corinthians. Also, what is on here, though not always charitable, pales in comparison to what's said on the blog of dissenters. I've found a stream of insults on there that has no comparison to what's on here. Finally, a bit of advice to the faithful here. Chose your battles well. Though you may not like a parish where they all hold hands and sing Kumbaya, there's nothing wrong with that. Don't complain to the bishop or Papal Nuncio about that. Only take action when there are serious doctrinal abuses going on. And take heart, the course of history is on our side. In another sense, make your life something that people will get a good impression of the Church from. Forget about the dissenters within the Church when talking to others outside the Church. They don't want to hear about it. There are people out there who are looking for something solid to believe in and they need us all to be that conduit to bring God's grace to them.

Posted Monday, February 09, 2009 7:03 AM By Bob
I think that the "talk" has become a little more civil. Thanks. Mark F makes a good point. Just because we don't like some of the ways the Liturgy is performed, or the music that is chosen, doesn't make it wrong. For example, many do not like to have the tabernacle away from the center of the altar. OK!, But, the Roman Missal with the U.S. accomodations allows for it to be either behind the altar, on a side altar in the sanctuary or in a seperate chapel. That is what is allowed, even if we don't like it. Too often, we all like to express our views without seeking out the documents that the church uses to set the norms. Perhaps we should start citing the GRIM that we are talking about or which V II document that we are talking about. To attend a church one Sunday and then effectively say that we wouldn't believe what was going on misses the point. What specific things were being done, if any, that were against the rules of the Church? We can, I think, be more helpful if we become a little more rational in our post. I will try, too.

Posted Monday, February 09, 2009 11:43 AM By Victoria
Boy, JLS, trust you to attempt to belittle this kind, gentle and obviously well meaning person (Trudy) when she calls for civility and reason among us all. I'm pretty thick skinned and am used to you, but not everyone can stand up to your barbs. JLS, must you always have to chew people up and spiut them out? Shame On You!! MarkF and Bob understand, as do I that, once in a while, we need that little voice of kindness and reason. Trudy, We APPRECIATE What You've Written And We THANK YOU.

Posted Monday, February 09, 2009 2:52 PM By Mark from PA
I never heard of having the tabernacle in a separate chapel. Where do they do this? I don't think this is done in Pennsylvania. Why wouldn't they have the tabernacle on the altar?

Posted Monday, February 09, 2009 3:36 PM By Victoria
Mark from PA, just go to the Cathedral of Our Lady of the Angels. The Blessed Sacrament is in a side room that looks like a waiting room at the Kansas City Train Station. It is Sterile. It is Cold. It Is An Insult. Talk About Making Our Divine Savior A Second Class Citizen in HIS Own House.

Posted Monday, February 09, 2009 4:47 PM By JLS
PA, one of the parishes I attended for a while, before they built their church, had Mass in the recreation hall. The Tabernacle was situated against a wall towards the back corner of the hall, opposite the altar table. I didn't at first realize this, until one day the woman Eucharistic minister walked back and opened it up next to me ... all the folding chairs were packed into the hall and I happened to be sitting right next to it. To me it looked like a huge samovar.

Posted Monday, February 09, 2009 5:33 PM By Cy Johnson
JLS, just who told you that the descent of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost rendered the "two great commandments" to first love, as God loves us, no longer valid? In fact to the contrary Pentecost rendered the command to love GREATER, not less, and then solemnly official. My view is that we are to love the ashamed not shame the loved.

Posted Monday, February 09, 2009 6:55 PM By Victoria
Well said Cy!

Posted Monday, February 09, 2009 7:21 PM By JLS
What Pentecost did, Cy, was take away the fear of the Apostles. Thus, any educated Catholic seeking to justify his denial of Christ by claiming that St Peter did is being worse than disengenuous. What has made you falsely claim that I was talking about the Greatest Commandment?

Posted Monday, February 09, 2009 8:09 PM By gravey
OK Bob, you want specifics; here is a list of GIRM abuses I witnesses at a Mass at SES: 43, 58, 59, 66, 76, 82, 133, 134, 136, 150, 154, 160, 162, 163, 287, 328. I walked into the Mass knowing nothing about the Church or the Parish. I'm willing to bet the list would have been greater if I had been looking for abuses. Allow me to explain just a few of the abuses: sacred vessels made of glass, no kneeling, the Gospel was read by a lay person, the homily was omited, the priest allowed the EMs to take the body and blood of Christ directely off the altar, the priest did not distribute communion (not even to the EMs) but sat in his chair, and intinction was carried out by allowing communicants to dip the Sacred Host into the chalice. Needless to say, I will not be returning... once was enough.

Posted Tuesday, February 10, 2009 9:20 AM By Fr. M.P.
Regarding Tabernacles off to the side, what you usually see is the priest's chair at the front and center. Bad symbolism. God should be front and center, not man - not even a priest. And this is side location is not mandated by Vatican II either.

Posted Tuesday, February 10, 2009 10:47 AM By Cy Johnson
A fallen world in which we must perform in order to receive the Love of Christ or receive performance first in order to give the Love of Christ to one another is a sad one indeed. But there has been a revolution. Christ never said, "I will get on that cross provided however that..." The great command to all is to love first as God loves us. Pentecost was the great commandments in real time. Rather than a gift for a few, into this undeserving world God gave His Church and her sacraments for all so that we may more fully love as He loves us. It is the broken world which tells us that it is justifying wrong to love the wrongdoer. But the Kingdom is not of this world.

Posted Tuesday, February 10, 2009 4:12 PM By JLS
The Kingdom of God is now and not yet. It is here, according to Jesus Christ.

Posted Tuesday, February 10, 2009 4:56 PM By Bob
gravey, I like the specifics. Now people have something to discuss that relates to actual events, not just overwhelming comments

Posted Tuesday, February 10, 2009 4:59 PM By Victoria
I disagree Cy, we ALWAYS have the Love of CHRIST. What we are ever striving for is to be worthy of that Love. Some will succeed, and some will not. But, HE, through HIS Love and Forgiveness, makes us worthy, otherwise, what was all that suffering and dying about?

Posted Tuesday, February 10, 2009 6:27 PM By JLS
BTW, Victoria, I agree with you criticism of my aggressive and merciless manner that erupts from time to time. I resolve to learn to move my attacks away from individuals and on to the ideas. This, however, takes more work.

Posted Tuesday, February 10, 2009 7:35 PM By Cy Johnson
Victoria - Maybe I was imprecise but I agree with you. The Love of Christ is a constant. It is always with us. It is the purpose of the universe. We are the inconstants. His love comes regardless of what we do. Only our reception of it depends on our own actions. Some believe God will only give us his love according to our earning it. Some think we should likewise give others love according to their earning it. My point was that God will always love more than we can ever merit it. And that is our exemplar, to first love (especially the "undeserving") not to cast stones at the adulteress.

Posted Tuesday, February 10, 2009 8:13 PM By Cy Johnson
I also agree with you JLS. The Kingdom is now and not yet. It is also here, but not "here" according to Jesus Christ. St. Bernadette was told by Our Lady that she would not be happy in "this life." Depending on your reading of her dialect at that time Our Lady promised her happiness not in this world but in "the next" or as some linguists prefer "the other."

Posted Tuesday, February 10, 2009 9:03 PM By JLS
Those accusers were about to execute the woman, not convert her. Doesn't that seem like a significant difference?

Posted Tuesday, February 10, 2009 11:48 PM By Almond Milk
It is true God's love is constant and unending but what people forget is that it is our sinfulness and our refusal to obey Him, that is what causes us to drift away farther away from God. Embracing our Lord means to embrace at free will, He loves us so much that He is willing to let us learn from our downfalls and even loves us enough to allow us to have consequences when we choose our will and not His. If not for that, He can just order us to drop dead and be gone. Sin and pride go hand in hand. We can't deny the fact that God loves us all and in order to embrace that love and be immersed in it, we must continue to seek truth, for truth will set us free in Christ. He is our true salvation. This life and it's secular views will not ever guarantee us eternal salvation in Christ, therefore we must choose wisely and openly and always willingly seek His graces. As His daughter, I have no right to not judge what he already has judged, I have no right to judge what he has not made known to man what has been judged, but since our Lord already has made us aware of a lot of His truths, then we have a duty, out of charity/love to live and speak what He has revealed to us. God is perfect and we are not, we are to seek perfection in Him always, no matter how much we fail at it. It is our choosing to ardently and with zeal of love to seek out truth and love, what is possibly human for us to do, to want all of Him, that will please our Lord. Nothing else should please us enough then to live seeking to please our Lord because He is worthy of all our best and more!

Posted Wednesday, February 11, 2009 6:25 AM By Cy Johnson
Yes different. As different as loving a person publicly when they do wrong or praying for them to lift them up on the one hand, or heaping calumny on them on the other hand. Calumny is the rock of the blogosphere.

Posted Wednesday, February 11, 2009 6:49 AM By JLS
Cy, She promised it to a specific person.

Posted Wednesday, February 11, 2009 8:39 AM By JLS
Cy, the rock of the blogosphere is the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, giving us freedom of speech and assembly, supported by the Second Amendment, and guaranteed by God: Jesus teaches that if His voice is hushed, then even the stones on the ground will cry out to His glory, and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against the Church, founded by the Truth Who sets us free.

Posted Wednesday, February 11, 2009 9:34 AM By Cy Johnson
Amen and amen JLS. The gift of free will, and unique American liberty, enables one to decide how he will use "this world" or this "freedom." We can pick up the rock to throw it at the sinner, or we as sinners can build on the rock, and bring the sinner to grace (ourselves and others). Which brings me back to my original point Dear Editor; that we shouldn't write "Denied Christ Three Times, Now Made Pope" when we could instead write "Even the Unworthy God Loves in and with the Building of His Church, Though you Be a Sinner Come and Be Made Whole."

Posted Sunday, February 15, 2009 10:52 PM By Almond Milk
I don't know why people keep abusing God's love by thinking that they can give themselves permission to keep sinning because they think that God will forgive them. In other words, they keep testing God's love and sometimes that leaves me to wonder who is really the one tested.

Post your Comment
Name:
Email: (Optional: Will not display)
Comment:
 
Comments are limited to 1500 characters, and cannot contain offensive or libelous language. For security, comments cannot contain html tags, including < and > symbols - and NO URLS or LINKS. Comments will appear after they have been approved by the editor. Inclusion of your email address is optional so the editor may contact you.



Calcatholic Mobile
Optimized for your
mobile device













Visitors since January 1st, 2009:
javascript hit counter