Maybe it is Because They Are Orthodox Catholic Sisters?

Once again Cardinal Mahony has proven that he is not fit to be the head of the Los Angeles Archdiocese. This time it is being shown by what is being sold & what isn't being sold to get the money to pay off the settlement it made the homosexual abuse lawsuits.

The Sisters of Bethany in Santa Barbara have been told by the Archdiocese that they have 4 months to move out of their convent where they have lived since 1952. The diocese, not the Sisters own the building. Their misson all these years has been to help the poor of the area.

According to the report in The Santa Barbara Independent: “The church seems to be going after ‘the little people’ that have served it faithfully,” charged Sister Angela’s real-life sister Rosemary Escalera Gutierrez of Hacienda Heights. “Auxiliary Bishop [Thomas] Curry of Santa Barbara is residing by himself in a former convent in San Roque, an upper-crust area,” she continued. “The convent there is triple the size of the Bethany Convent and is triple the value. Why not sell the more lucrative real estate that houses one individual?”

It gets even better. "Bishop Curry was in the news last week when it was revealed that he may have been aware that a priest accused of sexual abuse planned to flee to his native Mexico in 1988. The priest is still a fugitive."

So, why are they letting a possible abuse abettor keep living in a house that is worth more than the house the Sisters live in, esp when they are a group that are doing the social justice ministry that Mahony claims he is so big on? Let's take a look at this picture of Sister Margarita Antonia Gonzalez. I think it gives us some major clues.

Spencer Weiner / LAT

OK, we have a sister, in traditional habit with a huge picture of the Pope in a prominant place. & from the L.A. Times article we have this description of part the convent: "the convent's simple living room, where paintings of biblical scenes and framed photographs of the order's founders line the walls". That says it all to me. Clearly they are a bit too orthodox for Cardinal Mahony's taste. (Remember, this is the same Cardinal Mahony that wasn't too happy when Mother Angelica pointed out the theological errors in a letter he wrote to the diocese on the Eucharist. & let's not forget that infamia that he approved of to replace the old cathederal damaged in an earthquake but salvagable at a cheaper cost than the new one cost to build. Oh wait, the old one looked too much like a real church, no wonder he didn't want to keep it.)

Someday, Cardinal Mahony will have to answer to God for the harm done to the souls in his care by his failure to be faithful to the teachings of the Church. In the meantime, pray that God will provide a solution for the Sisters of Bethany (like someone to buy & give the convent to the Sisters). & that when Cardinal Mahony submits his resignation when he reaches 75 in 3-1/2 yrs it will be quickly accepted & he will be replaced with a bishop along the lines of Archbishop Burke or Bishops Finn & Bruskewitz. 1 who is willing to go in & clean the Augean stables that are the Archdioces of Los Angeles.

(Added 9 Sept 2007 1:09 am) Some added thoughts on Cardinal Mahony & what he is selling/keeping.

1st) The new Cathederal to replace the old Cathederal damaged in an earthquake was built at (if I remember rightly) twice the cost of reparing the old one that actually looked like a church. Maybe if Cardinal Mahony hadn't wasted all the money he did on that monstrosity he wouldn't have had to sell off the poor sisters convent.

2nd) Someone made an interesting point on Amy Welborn Dubruiel's post about this: "This is not some random cruelty directed at the sisters. Since the 1950’s, they have resided in the convent at Our Lady of Guadalupe Church in Santa Barbara, at Nopal and Jennings. One of the worst predatory priests in the archdiocese, Fr. Matthey Kelly, was the “iconic” pastor of Our Lady of Guadalupe for about 25 years, first assigned there in 1942, and at the parish almost continuously to 1971. Died in 2002.

http://www.independent.com/news/2007/sep/06/father-kellys-curse/

You could say this is “punishing the victims,” since the accusers are from the neighborhood. The sisters are mere collateral damage. "

Given Cardinal Mahony's vindicitiveness towards Mother Angelica, I am sorry to say that this does make perfect sense to me. If the charges against Bishop Curry prove true then the message the Cardinal is sending is that he rewards those who help predatory priests to get away with their crimes & punishes those who do the right thing & report their wrongs. & the way the poor Sisters were notified by a letter that was described as "bluntly worded" & simply refered them to the Archdiocese's real estate department also says volumes about the way the Cardinal is handling things.

3) Someone else commenting on that post also raised an interesting question about the Cardinal's residence. It would be interesting to know its actual value & how he justifies living in it if it is worth $700 million the person said it was worth.

The Sisters of Bethany do have another convent in the LA area & hopefully, they will be able to move there. It is just a shame for so many reasons that they even have to.

(Yet another addition 11 Sept 2007 1:29am) I came accross an atricle that raises more questions about where Cardinal Mahony will spend money & where he won't. The article was about the restoration of the old Cathedral, St. Vibiana’s, that was damaged in the 1994 earthquake. "In a 1996 decree, Mahony, who was looking to build a new cathedral, declared St. Vibiana's to have “suffered a loss of sacred character.” The earthquake damage to the structure, said Mahony, “is so extensive that is can in no way be employed for divine worship.” Citing an earthquake evaluation report, the cardinal said that repairing and retrofitting the cathedral “would cost at least $20,900,000"; spending that amount of money “would be very poor stewardship of the resources of the people of God of this Local Church”; and even when repaired, St. Vibiana’s “would remain the type of building that would be easily damaged in future earthquakes.”

Besides, continued the cardinal, the cathedral is not “of a size and liturgical design to serve the current needs of the Archdiocese.” Thus, he concluded (in accord with canon law provisions) “that it is ‘impossible’ to repair the Cathedral.”"

This would sound good except for a few facts:

1) The old Cathedral was bought by Tom Gilmore to develop as a resturaunt/reception hall, etc. It opened in Nov 2006 & is called Vibiana’s Place. It seems like he wasn't as worried as the Cardinal about how easily damage could be done by an earthquake to a Cathederal that has been there since 1876. Strike that reason as a good justification.

2) The Archdiocese claimed that it would cost about $21, million to repair it. The article points out that actually restoration costs were much less. $6 million to renovate, $2.5 million to put the bell tower & cupola back up after the Archdiocese had taken it down. This comes to $8.5 million. That is about $13 million less than the costs claimed by the diocese. The new Cathedral cost somewhere (depending on the report) from $189 million to over $200 misllion to build. So, the new Cathedral cost at least $180 million more than it would have cost to repair the Cathedral. Even if you add the $4.6 million Mr. Gilmore spent to buy the old Cathedral, the cost of building the new Cathedral is the real "poor stewardship" of the Archdiocese's resources. $180 + million was wasted that could have been used to pay off the lawsuits instead of selling the poor Sisters' convent to raise funds. Strike the cost justification. (Check out the Vibiana's Place website to see the beautiful job done that the Archdiocese claimed couldn't be done.)

3) While were at it, since it could be repaired the sacred character was not irreperably lost. It was only temporarily lost. While repairing or building anew they wouldn't have to find some other place to use. Strike another reason.

4) As for size & liturgical design to meet current needs, that depends. This could be a valid reason. But most likely only if you talk about the needs being those of Mahony & not the actual needs as found in the GIRM, & other liturgical documents of the Church. According to the Archdiocese website they had 10 men ordained to the priesthood (4 for the diocese, 6 for religious orders). & depending of if they were ordained at the same time or not, this may almost be a justification. I say may, because in the old days when there were larger #s ordained the building was more than adequate. So, I suspect, as I already said, the size relates to Cardinal Mahony & his ego's needs, not the diocese.

By the Cardinal's definition it was impossible to repair the old Cathedral & thus he acted within Canon law. But he did only by twisting the facts to suit his purpose.

See my source A “wonderful second life” for more on the restoration of the old Cathedral.

I have to add that IMHO Cardinal Mahony is well on the way to joining that list of cardinals & bishops (as well as a few popes like Alexander VI) over the centuries that have betrayed their ordination vows. The Church has had bishops & priests like this throughout its 2000 yr history. Yet, despite all this, God has [protected His Church & kept it going. I've said a lot about the negative & now would like to recomend 2 books to look at the other side. 1 I have mentioned before. It is Thomas Woods Jr's book How the Catholic Church Saved Western Civilization. The other is Triumph - The Power and the Glory of the Catholic Church, a 2000 Year History by H. W. Crocker III. They are both well worth reading esp in this day & age of so much bad news (TRUE & FALSE) being reported about the Catholic Church.