ST. PAUL, MEET FATHER DAN MALLETTE…A MAN AFTER YOUR OWN HEART

9/27/12




Father Dan Mallette, pastor of St. Margaret of Scotland Parish since 1977, and still pastor until Sunday, September 30 of that parish on the eastern stretches of my old neighborhood, is being forced out of the rectory by Cardinal George. Father Mallette contends that the Cardinal promised that Father Mallette and his dog Tuffy would be able to live at St. Margaret for life. “I love it here and I love the people.” Now, however, according to Father Dan, the Cardinal says the rectory at St. Margaret is unsafe and needs to be repaired and, according to Archdiocesan spokeswoman Colleen Dolan “his (Father Mallette’s) safety has not been assured there in recent years.”

So suddenly the rectory at St. Margaret needs to be repaired; it’s strange that the need to repair the rectory did not seem urgent until a new pastor is due to be installed. And as for Father’s safety not being assured, one would have thought the Archdiocese would have figured that out when two thugs broke into Father’s bedroom in 2002…and were promptly dispatched by the then 70 year old ex-boxer. Or maybe it should have become apparent last December, when two other thugs broke in and beat Father Mallette to within an inch of his life. The safety, or the need for repair, of the rectory was not an issue then, even for the man most directly involved. But now, when Father Mallette is being pushed out, the rectory, in which Father wants to live out his life, is in disrepair and Father is suddenly in danger? As Father Mallette said, “Bull----.”



A few stipulations before I go on:



--I know Father Mallette. Though he has never been my pastor, he has done wonderful things for me and for people close to me throughout the years. Though we live about fifty miles from St. Margaret and the church we normally attend in the old neighborhood is Sacred Heart, not St. Margaret, I make it a point to get to St. Margaret’s each Good Friday to pray along with Father Mallette and the parishioners who get there on that solemn day. The Church has done a lot of hurtful and harmful things of late, but this one is personal for me.



--No one is arguing that Father Mallette should not retire. He has been a wonderful pastor for his largely black, but, thanks to Father Mallette’s connections, charisma, personality, and efforts, still very diverse congregation. But he is 80 years old and has been pastor for 35 years, well beyond the mandated 12 year tenure for pastors. The issue is not his retirement but his ability to stay in the parish, in the home, and among the people he loves.



--Father Mallette has been described as “a living saint.” Though he would probably argue with that description, those of us who know him wouldn’t. But his being a living saint does not mean that Father Mallette is not a tough guy who can be irascible, stubborn, and, at times, profane. Those of you who read the New Testament will recall that St. Paul had the same qualities.



--The Cardinal is currently battling with cancer, so it is difficult to criticize him at this juncture. However, he did decide to stay on the job despite his cancer and thus cannot be exempted from criticism that comes with the job.





So what to make of the Cardinal’s being forced out of his residence at St. Margaret’s?



--The new pastor, a Father Bill O’Donnell, is stepping into some giant shoes and I can understand his wanting to establish his own identity and his desire to step out of Father Mallette’s giant shadow. However, a deal’s a deal and if the Cardinal said Dan Mallette and Tuffy could live at St. Margaret for life, they ought to be allowed to live there. The Cardinal, through his spokeswoman, Ms. Dolan, questions Mallette’s claim that the cited promise was ever made before launching into the now standard and incessant drivel about Father Mallette’s “safety” that has suddenly become an issue now that Bill O’Donnell wants to run his own show.



So whom do we believe, Father Mallette or Cardinal George? I know Father Mallette. I trust Father Mallette. I don’t know Cardinal George and I don’t reflexively trust anyone even if he is a Prince of the Church. For this, I have been accused of “not being a Catholic.” I disagree, but I digress. The point in this case is that I believe Father Mallette, not the Cardinal, or, rather, his spokeswoman.



--I don’t know Bill O’Donnell, but, given the type of guy who seems to be getting ahead in the Church of late, I am forming a pretty good picture of him in my mind. That Father Mallette has said of Father O’Donnell



“What I don’t understand is why he has to be so mean…he’s a genius at being a pain in the ass.”



only fortifies that image. Perhaps the old rectory on Throop needs refurbishing only because it is not up to Father O’Donnell’s expectations of the type of place in which a priest is entitled to reside.



--Yes, the rules say that pastors should serve only twelve years, but, as I said before, no one is arguing that Father Mallette should not retire, only that he should be able to live out his years among the people he loves, as he says the Cardinal promised him. Why would that be so hard? While it’s unusual for a pastor to stay on at his old parish, it’s not a completely foreign practice. And when one considers that, without Father Mallette, there may very well have been no St. Margaret of Scotland at this juncture, can’t the tough old guy’s wishes be respected after all he’s done for the church…and the Church?



If Bill O’Donnell is such a weakling that he can’t operate in the admittedly formidable shadow of Father Mallette, maybe he should get a nice, quiet parish in the suburbs somewhere. St. Margaret, with its many challenges and its diverse congregation, needs a tough guy like Father Mallette, just as the ancient church at Corinth, with is many challenges and diverse congregation, needed a tough guy like St. Paul.







For more of my thoughts on politics and the ironies that permeate life, along with a healthy dose of what some call cynicism but I call realism, see my other posts on The Insightful Pontificator.


For more of my thoughts on political issues, see Mighty Insights at Rant Political.


For some of my thoughts on financial issues, see Mighty Insights at Rant Finance.

THE FEAST OF THE EXALTATION OF THE HOLY CROSS; ST. JOHN CHRYSOSTOM, PRAY FOR US

9/14/12




This morning I went to Mass, as I try to do a few times during the week, unaware that it was the Feast of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross. The deacon, a different deacon from the one who preached the Assumption homily I found so egregious (See my 8/15/12 post THE FEAST OF THE ASSUMPTION: MARY, THE MOTHER OF OUR LORD, PRAY FOR US) was going along pretty well, commenting on, among other things, the miracle that followed the discovery of the Cross of Christ and the popularity of the cross in today’s culture when he let out his whopper:



“The presence of the Crucifix, the cross with the corpus, or body of Christ, is a sign that the church in which it is located is a Christian church.” (Emphasis mine)



Huh?

If the deacon had used the term “Catholic” instead of “Christian,” I would have gone along with it. But most Protestant congregations do not use or display the Crucifix; they stick with simple, unadorned crosses, sans the body of our Lord. So one supposes that, in the estimation of this homilist, those churches that display only the cross are not Christians; it is only we Catholics, who display the Crucifix, who are Christians.



One might think that I am making too much of this, that this was a poor but unintentional of words. Given the attitude displayed in the Assumption homily on which I commented (Same parish, different deacon.), in which Mary, the very mother of our Lord, was used as a cudgel to beat up on non-Catholic Christian denominations, this was not an oversight at all. As one who attends Mass a lot, it is becoming clear that this attitude is permeating not only this particular parish or the Diocese in which it is located, but most of today’s Catholic Church.



Throughout the entire post Vatican II portion of my life, the Church has spoken of its devotion to ecumenism, or Christian unity. For many of those years, it was apparent that what the Church had in mind was the Protestants’ finally admitting they were wrong all along, accepting all aspects of Catholic doctrine, submitting to the rules (of course), and then maybe, just maybe, being granted re-admittance to the one true Church. But then, for a few years there, it looked as if the Church were becoming more open to genuine reconciliation of Christian congregations, with each of us considering others’ beliefs in the context of what gets us closer to Christ and the way He wants us to live rather than what complies with the traditions and doctrines of men.



Sadly, though, a “new” attitude seems to be ascending in the Church toward ecumenism that is really the old attitude. It might best be described by using the very secular expression “My way or the highway.”





For more of my thoughts on politics and the ironies that permeate life, along with a healthy dose of what some call cynicism but I call realism, see my other posts on The Insightful Pontificator.



For more of my thoughts on political issues, see Mighty Insights at Rant Political..



For some of my thoughts on financial issues, see Mighty Insights at Rant Finance.