The following comes from a June 15 story in the L.A. archdiocesan paper, the Tidings.

…Religious freedom figures to be on the minds of many come September, when Archbishop Chaput comes to the Cathedral of Our Lady of the Angels as featured speaker for the 2012 Los Angeles Catholic Prayer Breakfast.

While the former archbishop of Denver — under whom Los Angeles Archbishop José Gomez served as an auxiliary (1999-2004) — said the topic for his Sept. 18 address is still being developed, he is well aware that the freedom to practice faith in accordance with one’s religious beliefs is never far from most Americans’ thoughts. …

“We show love and respect for people,” said Archbishop Chaput. “But if a position is wrong, then it is wrong, and we are called by the Gospel to say so. To try to give respect to a position that is against the moral law of God is wrong.”

That does not mean, he added, that Catholics don’t love and respect the individual person. “Our history as a Church is that of service to others, of loving humanity,” he explained. “Our call is to be charitable, to serve, but we cannot hold back in proclaiming our faith and in proclaiming what we believe is the truth of the Gospel.”

Born Sept. 26, 1944, in Concordia, Kansas, Charles Chaput was ordained a Capuchin Franciscan priest in 1970, served in several provincial posts and in 1988 was named bishop of Rapid City, S.D. In 1997 he was named archbishop of Denver, the first Native American archbishop in the U.S. (he is a member of the Prairie Band Potawatomi Tribe). He was named archbishop of Philadelphia in July 2011 and installed last September.

Archbishop Chaput — who recently released a new e-book on religious freedom, A Heart on Fire: Catholic Witness and the Next America (www.Amazon.com) — is looking forward to his Los Angeles appearance and the chance to connect with Archbishop Gomez.

“We belong to a prayer group that meets five times a year,” he noted. “But the miles and time zones between us present a challenge to keeping in more frequent contact, and the busier we are the harder it is to stay in touch. So it will be good to come to Los Angeles.”

The 2012 Los Angeles Catholic Prayer Breakfast is scheduled Sept. 18 at the Cathedral of Our Lady of the Angels, beginning with 6:30 a.m. rosary followed by Mass, breakfast and keynote on the plaza. Reservations will be accepted beginning July 1. Tickets and information: (800) 838-1356 or ww.catholicpb.com.

To read entire story, Click here.

 

READER COMMENTS

Posted Tuesday, June 19, 2012 7:10 AM By MacDonald
Archbishop Chaput and Archbishop Gomez (who is a member of Opus Dei) are obviously friends, and members of the same priestly prayer group. And yet even THEY get attacked for not being ‘orthodox’ enough by all the backseat drivers who don’t realize that being a Bishop is a complex matter, not only crushing heterodoxy, but also being a spiritual father to a very large flock. If those who love to pounce on Archbishop Gomez had his job for even one DAY, they would learn that the episcopal office is not a simple affair…These men are both solid, conservatice Catholics, but they cannot change the planet alone. We need to keep them in our prayers.


Posted Tuesday, June 19, 2012 8:09 AM By Dan
What a breath of fresh air for us here in LA!


Posted Tuesday, June 19, 2012 8:54 AM By JOHN
Abp Chaput ought to stay longer than one breakfast. We need his help to end the errant Education congress and to fire all of the old Mahony staffers who still control the show. Might as well put the name of Ned Dolesji of the CCC at the top of the To Be Fired list.


Posted Tuesday, June 19, 2012 12:06 PM By Clinton
I wonder what Absp. Chaput would think about the mess, er Mass at the LA Religious Ed. Congress? Somehow, I don’t think the archdiocese of Philadelphia will be subjected to that.


Posted Tuesday, June 19, 2012 12:20 PM By JLS
The true liberal “big picture” philosphy ne religion, expressed so eloquently by MacD: “that being a Bishop is a complex matter”. Therefore, the liberals call all to shut up, so that they the liberals can tell you what the bishop has ordeured us to do just as soon as we click our heels.


Posted Tuesday, June 19, 2012 1:03 PM By max
JLS i really can’t imagine you shutting up…the mere thought boggles the mind! please don’t change! we need your feisty JLS stuff in these rooms! if for no other reason than to keep awake!


Posted Tuesday, June 19, 2012 2:33 PM By JLS
Pennsylvania has apparently way more cases of pedophilia networks and coverups than any other state: Abp Chaput hopefully may be able to bring about a change towards morality for that population.


Posted Tuesday, June 19, 2012 3:27 PM By Matthew
I wonder why so many are downright obsessed with the LA Religious Ed. Congress Masses? So don’t go and get over it already! I have been to many Masses at COLA celebrated by ABp. Gomez. Each one was orthodox. But those who whine about the REC Masses also whine about COLA — a place many vow to never set foot in. In the end just a bunch of whiners.


Posted Tuesday, June 19, 2012 3:30 PM By Ethel
JLS: Please stop being so doggone ignorant and inflammatory in your use of the the word “liberal” as a pejorative term. Doing so is almost like ink-stamping “jerk” on your forehead.


Posted Tuesday, June 19, 2012 3:52 PM By Kenneth M. Fisher
MacD, When he was the bishop of Rapid City, S.D., then Bishop Chaput stood before a large conference room full of National and International Pro-life Leaders, including myself, Joe Scheidler, Judy Brown, the late Fr. Paul Marx, the late Pro-Life Andy Anderson, and many others and promised he would (he snapped his fingers for emphasis) excommunicate any politician who voted for abortion under his episcopal jurisdiction, now that he is an Archbishop he refuses to enforce Canon 915. We criticize him precisely for that dereliction of duty before God. Since then, I have reminded him of that promise on several occasions with no results. You don’t make such a forceful promise and then fail to follow through on that promise and not expect criticism. God bless, yours in Their Hearts, Kenneth M. Fisher


Posted Wednesday, June 20, 2012 9:08 AM By k
Mr. Fisher, who did you want him to excommunicate?


Posted Wednesday, June 20, 2012 6:34 PM By Kenneth M. Fisher
k, Not only has he not excommunicated, such derelict “Catholic” public figures, he doesn’t even refuse them Communion. That is a far cry from what he promised us on that day. He wouldn’t even address the “Knights” of Columbus on their failure to enforce Article 162-7 in our Constitution and By-Laws when they were in Denver last year! As a former politician, I always felt that I would have had to have at least tried to fulfill my promises to my constituents! A Bishop has a much higher calling than a politician! If I had more time and some staff help, I am certain I could give you a long list of such public figures who fit the bill. God bless, yours in Their Hearts, Kenneth M. Fisher


Posted Wednesday, June 20, 2012 8:48 PM By max
FROM NEW ADVENT: Excommunication (Latin ex, out of, and communio or communicatio, communion — exclusion from the communion), the principal and severest censure, is a medicinal, spiritual penalty that deprives the guilty Christian of all participation in the common blessings of ecclesiastical society. Being a penalty, it supposes guilt; and being the most serious penalty that the Church can inflict, it naturally supposes a very grave offence. It is also a medicinal rather than a vindictive penalty, being intended, not so much to punish the culprit, as to correct him and bring him back to the path of righteousness. It necessarily, therefore, contemplates the future, either to prevent the recurrence of certain culpable acts that have grievous external consequences, or, more especially, to induce the delinquent to satisfy the obligations incurred by his offence.


Posted Wednesday, June 20, 2012 8:49 PM By max
This extension of the use of excommunication led to abuses. The infliction of so grave a penalty for offences of a less grievous kind and most frequently impossible to verify before the public ecclesiastical authority, begot eventually a contempt for excommunication. Consequently the Council of Trent was forced to recommend to all bishops and prelates more moderation in the use of censures (Sess. XXV, c. iii, De ref.). The passage is too significant to be here omitted: “Although the sword of excommunication is the very sinews of ecclesiastical discipline, and very salutary for keeping the people to the observance of their duty, yet it is to be used with sobriety and great circumspection; seeing that experience teaches that if it be wielded rashly or for slight causes, it is more despised than feared, and works more evil than good. Wherefore, such excommunications which are wont to be issued for the purpose of provoking a revelation, or on account of things lost or stolen, shall be issued by no one whomsoever but the bishop; and not then, except on account of some uncommon circumstance which moves the bishop thereunto, and after the matter has been by him diligently and very maturely weighed.” Then follow equally explicit measures for the use of censures in judicial matters. This recommendation of the Council of Trent has been duly heeded, and the use of censures as a means of coercion has grown constantly rarer, the more so as it is hardly ever, possible for the Church to obtain from the civil power the execution of such penalties.


Posted Wednesday, June 20, 2012 8:49 PM By max
In the course of time, also, the number of canonical excommunications was excessively multiplied, which fact, coupled with their frequent desuetude, made it difficult to know whether many among them were always in force. The difficulty was greater as a large number of these excommunications were reserved, for which reason theologians with much ingenuity construed favourably said reservation and permitted the majority of the faithful to obtain absolution without presenting themselves in Rome, or indeed even writing thither. In recent times the number of excommunications in force has been greatly diminished, and a new method of absolving from them has been inaugurated; it will doubtless find a place in the new codification of the canon law that is being prepared. Thus, without change of nature, excommunication in foro externo has become an exceptional penalty, reserved for very grievous offences detrimental to Christian society; in foro interno it has been diminished and mitigated, at least in regard to the conditions for absolution from it. However, as can readily be seen from a perusal of the excommunications actually in force, it still remains true that what the Church aims at is not so much the crime as the satisfaction to be obtained from the culprit in consequence of his offence.


Posted Wednesday, June 20, 2012 8:50 PM By MAX
HEY, guys, tjust trying to provide some context of this whole excommunciation discvussion……


Posted Wednesday, June 20, 2012 9:56 PM By k
Mr. Fisher , so, do you think he was playing to the crowd when he made that promise in Rapid City?


Posted Thursday, June 21, 2012 4:45 AM By Juergensen
So many bishops talk the talk, issuing orthodox documents and making orthodox speeches, one after another. But when it comes time to walk the walk and stand up for the faith and deny Holy Communion to those who obstinately persevere in manifest grave sin (cf. Can. 915), no courage of their convictions is to be found. They bend like reeds in the wind.


Posted Thursday, June 21, 2012 1:15 PM By Kenneth M. Fisher
k, I cannot read the man’s soul. Perhaps he really believed it when he said it to that large crowd of pro-life leaders, but when he got to a higher position, the weight of that position and yes its pleasures drove him to weaken that position, a weakening that in my opinion is detrimental to the Faith because it involves matters of great scandal! Jurgensen, you hit the nail right on the head! God bless, yours in Their Hearts, Kenneth M. Fisher


Posted Thursday, June 21, 2012 1:20 PM By Kenneth M. Fisher
Max, Re.: “reserved for very grievous offences detrimental to Christian society; in foro interno it has been diminished and mitigated, at least in regard to the conditions for absolution from it. However, as can readily be seen from a perusal of the excommunications actually in force, it still remains true that what the Church aims at is not so much the crime as the satisfaction to be obtained from the culprit in consequence of his offence. EXACTLY, and causing great scandal fits the Bill! My friend and spiritual mentor, the late Auxiliary Bishop of New York City, Austin Vaughn, in a telecon with me, left me with no doubt that had he been the Ordinary of New York, Mario Cuomo and others would have been excommunicated for the good of their own souls! God bless, yours in Their Hearts, Kenneth M. Fisher


Posted Thursday, June 21, 2012 4:15 PM By Mark from PA
Max,thank you for sharing the information with us. It seems that bishops do not often excommunicate people and also that they refrain from excommunicating people for political reasons. I think it is over-reaching for lay people to try to influence bishops to excommunicate people that they dislike.


Posted Thursday, June 21, 2012 11:01 PM By BrianS.
hmmm…you are hardly a “constituent” of your Bishop, Kenneth. Now you accuse Bishop Chaput of great scandal. Has anyone ever accused you of being more Catholic than the Pope? Do you think that yourself?


Posted Friday, June 22, 2012 8:19 AM By JLS
Jesus had little problem excommunicating people. And of course He did it in rather dramatic ways. Herod’s belly burst with an explosion of worms. Judas Iscariot hanged himself. A man and woman lying to St Peter dropped over dead. The Temple was sacked and destroyed. Money changers were whipped. Religious leaders were condemned to Hell. Two great cities were destroyed by fire. Large populations of hypocrite Catholics have become rife with the foulest of souls … to wit, abortionists and sodomites. And much, much more.


Posted Friday, June 22, 2012 10:40 AM By Brian S.
There is no indication that Judas didn’t act of his free will. But much more to the current point is the tale of the wheat and the tares.


Posted Friday, June 22, 2012 10:56 AM By Catherine
Juergensen is right. Something is very wrong. When my friend’s daughter spoke with a prelate at the Vatican, she was instructed to contact a certain California bishop when they returned to the United States. The prelate in Rome assured these young Catholics that this particular bishop would be extremely helpful. The prelate made several encouraging comments that this particular bishop knew the very serious problems that were taking place in the United States. The prelate once again assured these young Catholics that this certain bishop would be the sympathetic and very understanding person to contact. When the young woman returned to California the family contacted this particular bishop and explained that they had just returned from the Vatican and how they were instructed to speak with him. The bishop started to attentively listen but when the bishop learned that this woman lived in Cardinal Mahony’s Archdiocese, the family was completely taken back by this bishop’s immediate shut down of the conversation. The prelate in Rome knew that the woman lived in L.A. so what was the disconnect? Now we have Archbishop Gomez battling the same grip of heterodoxy. It will take courageous action on the part of our bishops, not more breakfast speeches. Yes, the family who obeyed the prelate in Rome was quite dismayed and left very confused when this certain bishop was not at all the bastion of help and refuge that they had been encouraged to contact. What are our beloved bishops afraid of? Perhaps it is the fear of displeasing people. I noticed that MarkfromPA took the time to write that it is over-reaching for lay people to try to influence bishops to excommunicate “people they dislike”. I am quite sure that Catholics who are Democrats and who also voted for Obama are very pleased that Canon 915 is not being enforced. Enforcing Canon 915 is not about pleasing or “disliking people.” Why have we reduced the desire to show respect for the True Presence?


Posted Friday, June 22, 2012 11:53 AM By k
“The worst enemies of religious freedom aren’t “out there” among the legion of critics who hate Christ or the Gospel or the Church. The worst enemies are in here,with us-all of us, clergy religious and lay-when we live our faith with tepidness, routine and hypocrisy.” “American Catholics began as an unwelcome minority. The Church built her credibility by defending and serving her people. She developed her influence with the resources her people entrusted to her. A vast amount of good was done in the process. But two other things also happened. The Church in the United States became powerful and secure. And Catholics became less and less invested in the Church that their own parents and grandparents helped to build.” As a Catholic who lives in an area where we are still an unwelcome minority, where we are still very invested in our church, it is good to see the sleeping giant wake up. We see and help our evangelical neighbors as they have been actively involved in fighting Goliath, protesting the attempts to remove Christianity from the public square-from the stores selling Holiday trees; the attempt to remove all references to God in any government-held property; public school teachers throwing Bibles in the trash can, etc. It doesn’t matter what time you get to the party, we are glad you’re here now.


Posted Friday, June 22, 2012 12:08 PM By Kenneth M. Fisher
Mark from PA, If you don’t recognize the fact that pro-abortion, pro-sodomite politicians being allowed to receive the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Christ, is grave SCANDAL, you are very hopeless! May God have mercy on your poor compromised soul, Kenneth M. Fisher


Posted Friday, June 22, 2012 1:08 PM By JLS
Farmers, Brian S., do not camoflage the tares to look like wheat. But if you love the taste of weed in your bread, go for it.


Posted Friday, June 22, 2012 1:17 PM By JLS
Nor is there any indication, Brian S., that bishops are not acting of their free will also: The consequence is much like that of Iscariot, death brought on by betrayal. Today’s society is experiencing death … abortion, sodomy, fantasy replacing religion.


Posted Friday, June 22, 2012 1:18 PM By max
It is rather shocking that Jesus says, “Amen, I say to you, tax collectors and prostitutes are entering the kingdom of God before you.” (Matt 21:31) Notice to whom Jesus was speaking, the chief priests and elders of the people (Matt 21:23). That makes it even more shocking.


Posted Friday, June 22, 2012 1:20 PM By max
Do you know Jesus or do you only know about Jesus? If we only know about Jesus while those who were drug addicts, alcoholics, gang members, sex addicts, have converted and know Jesus personally then surely Jesus can say they are making their way into the kingdom of God before us. Do you only know about Jesus or do you know Jesus in your heart? Have you met Jesus? If not, tell him you want to meet him.


Posted Friday, June 22, 2012 4:19 PM By Brian S.
Kenneth, bad catholic politicians are a problem the Church has certainly faced before. It’s basically been a constant problem since governments were Christianized. So where and when were position-specific excommunications dispensed to political leaders as you advocate now?


Posted Friday, June 22, 2012 4:32 PM By Mark from PA
Mr. Fisher, you are a politician. It seems that you view me and others who do not agree with your political views as hopeless. You probably would view the pastor of my parish as hopeless too.