"Sources within the Chaldean Church told The Pillar that the Holy See had been unaware of Sako’s recent move on that front until it was reported publicly."
Hi Pope Leo! 👋
But seriously, Pillar Team, you all should be proud of your reporting on this one. I would guess it isn't always easy to be so steeped in misconduct stories; but for what it's worth, one of the reasons I trust the Pillar's coverage is that I know you all *do* get into the weeds, actually read the reports, etc etc. rather than just publishing a pile of "so-and-so said" stories. Thanks for doing that on behalf of the Church!
What does it mean that Bishop Shaleta's resignation was accepted in February? Was the resignation effective at that time "in pectore", or did it only become effective now that Pope Leo's acceptance has been publicized?
So, I have gathered that there is a provision for Eastern Catholic patriarchs to submit their resignations directly to the pope, but is it commonly used? In light of Cardinal Sako telling the people of San Diego he wished he could visit them and perhaps he could do so in the future, it seems a little odd that he also just happened to retire the next day so he could have more time for reading. And if the pope did either directly or indirectly force out the head of an Eastern Catholic church, is that a pretty unique thing, or does it happen from time to time?
By the way, I love how the Holy Father is handling this. It's not a violation of due process, because the Vatican already conducted an investigation. He is sending a message, loud and clear, that this sort of thing will not be tolerated.
The resignation of both an allegedly criminal bishop AND the cardinal who was moving to see that bishop reassigned, AND replacing the bishop with an administrator who was critical of the cardinal’s statements...wow. Checkmate.
Credit to Pope Leo for doing the right thing, something that almost certainly wouldn't have been done in the past (Cardinal Sako's resignation). Bishop Shaleta was done whether or not the Pope wanted to remove him, but also accepting Cardinal Sako's resignation is a good sign that Pope Leo is living in reality and hopefully not having the wool pulled over his eyes. Cardinal Sako's attempts at a cover-up were as bad as the original offenses by Bishop Shaleta, in my opinion, and whether or not something would be done about him was the real litmus test of whether or not things would be different under a new Pope. I think with this move, we can have some hope that things will improve regarding accountability for Bishops.
Hopefully the choice to resign to the Pope reflects the difficulty of assembling the Synod in a time of emergency rather than a rift with them.
Can. 126 §2. Ad acceptationem renuntiationis Patriarchae competens est Synodus Episcoporum Ecclesiae patriarchalis consulto Romano Pontifice, nisi Patriarcha Romanum Pontificem directe adiit.
"Sources within the Chaldean Church told The Pillar that the Holy See had been unaware of Sako’s recent move on that front until it was reported publicly."
Hi Pope Leo! 👋
But seriously, Pillar Team, you all should be proud of your reporting on this one. I would guess it isn't always easy to be so steeped in misconduct stories; but for what it's worth, one of the reasons I trust the Pillar's coverage is that I know you all *do* get into the weeds, actually read the reports, etc etc. rather than just publishing a pile of "so-and-so said" stories. Thanks for doing that on behalf of the Church!
Pope "Friend of the Pillar in a Good Way" Leo?
What does it mean that Bishop Shaleta's resignation was accepted in February? Was the resignation effective at that time "in pectore", or did it only become effective now that Pope Leo's acceptance has been publicized?
Edit: Corrected typo.
Ditto.
So, I have gathered that there is a provision for Eastern Catholic patriarchs to submit their resignations directly to the pope, but is it commonly used? In light of Cardinal Sako telling the people of San Diego he wished he could visit them and perhaps he could do so in the future, it seems a little odd that he also just happened to retire the next day so he could have more time for reading. And if the pope did either directly or indirectly force out the head of an Eastern Catholic church, is that a pretty unique thing, or does it happen from time to time?
By the way, I love how the Holy Father is handling this. It's not a violation of due process, because the Vatican already conducted an investigation. He is sending a message, loud and clear, that this sort of thing will not be tolerated.
I had a similar question about the mechanism of resignation (see my other comment).
I smell an Explainer coming down the pipeline…
Or several explainers?
good freaking suggestion, Travis.
The resignation of both an allegedly criminal bishop AND the cardinal who was moving to see that bishop reassigned, AND replacing the bishop with an administrator who was critical of the cardinal’s statements...wow. Checkmate.
Also, fantastic reporting, Pillar team.
My thoughts entirely. Cleaning out the rot.
Rich that Sako expects of to believe that his resignation has absolutely nothing to do with Shaleta's.
“Looks like…
*puts on sunglasses*
Pope Leo finally… balanced the books.”
YEAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Well done, Pope Leo. This all seems very quick for the Vatican, which is a move in a positive direction I think.
Credit to Pope Leo for doing the right thing, something that almost certainly wouldn't have been done in the past (Cardinal Sako's resignation). Bishop Shaleta was done whether or not the Pope wanted to remove him, but also accepting Cardinal Sako's resignation is a good sign that Pope Leo is living in reality and hopefully not having the wool pulled over his eyes. Cardinal Sako's attempts at a cover-up were as bad as the original offenses by Bishop Shaleta, in my opinion, and whether or not something would be done about him was the real litmus test of whether or not things would be different under a new Pope. I think with this move, we can have some hope that things will improve regarding accountability for Bishops.
This is a tremendously heartening outcome. I am encouraged and unexpectedly moved reading this. Thank God for justice.
And reporting like this is why I subscribe to the Pillar.
In an unstable, corrupt county like Iraq, is it possible to run a clean church? Or is a certain amount of bribery necessary to keep the peace?
Hopefully the choice to resign to the Pope reflects the difficulty of assembling the Synod in a time of emergency rather than a rift with them.
Can. 126 §2. Ad acceptationem renuntiationis Patriarchae competens est Synodus Episcoporum Ecclesiae patriarchalis consulto Romano Pontifice, nisi Patriarcha Romanum Pontificem directe adiit.