Unexciting Turn in "Luxury Building" - Case Limburg, Which Costed a Bishop His Head

Case Limburg with amazing "end"

A National Treasure
 Limburg Cathedral

(Limburg) What was that again that happened in Limburg? Bishop Franz-Peter Tebartz van Elst was harassed in the autumn of the previous year by the German media as the "Bishop of Bling". The outraged "humble" in church and media went into jealous criticism of the "luxury bishop," who was building a "monstrous opulence palace" ( Der Spiegel). As expected, the hounding of Bishop Tebartz van Elst ended in October 2013, the papal dismissal and with it his deposition, officially called for his resignation in March 2014 resignation.

But now the reigning Apostolic Administrator of the Diocese, Bishop Manfred Grothe is becoming surprisingly well known. He has turned on the faithful of the diocese with a "Position Statement in Advent." There is a lot mentioned about "realignment", "fresh start" and "reorganization" and that the diocese is felt to be "no longer the headlines in the media."

Letter from the Apostolic Administrator

The "Renovation" of the Diocese of Limburg - "The Building is to be Used for What it Was Built" 

The administrator then writes as follows: "Separate working groups with representatives of various bodies are intensively studying - out of the public view - about a use for the building complex on Cathedral Hill in Limburg. The ensemble was built as a home for the Bishop of Limburg and should basically be used. We want to employ the coming months to open it up for an open house and demythologizing. Therefore, there will be guided tours for employees and for groups from the Diocese of Limburg. It is planned that the rooms are to be used for conferences and meetings of various committees. In addition there could be exhibitions of theological and other cultural events. So we want to include the Bishop's house for events of the Diocese of Limburg in the planning. The living rooms will be excluded from the opening in view of their private nature."

"German bishops Took Advantage of Collegiality to Get Rid of Unwanted Bishop"

The construction in Limburg initially hyped by the media as a church and state affair, which led to the bishop's fall in disgrace, will now simply used for that which it was built. Not another indignant word about "swank and pomp." By public tours the construction will be "demythologized." This will allow the administrator a last breath from an artificially inflated campaign. Auxiliary Bishop Grothe has written that "luxury building" critique was advanced toward Bishop Tebartz van Elst only to overthrow the bishop. "The German bishops used collegiality to get rid of an undesirable because of the bishop's positions," said Secretum meum mihi.

Whoever wanted to see through the smokescreen, could have always done so. Few did, few wanted to do so. The scandal headlines in the media have a magical power of suggestion on the "little man on the street". This is calculated at the "top." The campaign machinery is well oiled.

There was a media campaign waged against Bishop Tebartz van Elst until he was gone. Not a word of criticism, however, was heard for the little "luxury" Archbishop Reinhard Marx allowed himself in his indulgent 13 million euros stays in Rome - which it may be added have become more frequent. This unequal treatment shows that the real reasons for the attacks in the case Limburg were to be sought elsewhere.

It is often heard frequently that Bishop Tebartz van Elst had "not always behaved joyfully." Who would not say this of themselves. On the merits, but that does not matter. The bishop had in fact never got a chance behind the scenes since his head was asked for.

The Angry Bishop Tebartz-van Elst

Following the "Demythologizing" of the Building and Will the Demythologization of the Bishop's 'Guilt'Follow?

The internally torn diocese has no bishop and the involuntary Bishop Emeritus Tebartz van Elst doesn't have a new task. Maybe he should not have to wait to get a transfer. The example also the "collegially" disposed of Bishop Rogelio Livieres of Ciudad del Este shows that there is the possibility to defend one's own initiative and remain vocal about Church doctrine. With the initiative Adelante la fe, he proves even after his fall, why he is superior to his brother Bishops and therefore, was not loved by them.

It was no secret that the Limburg bishop had held a "conservative" position in the Episcopal Conference, more than the majority of his confreres. It was also no secret that in his diocese in some circles he came, as the successor of Bishop Franz Kamphaus, into fierce resistance. Now, will someone demystify the "guilt" of Bishop Tebartz van Elst? Doubtful.

Text: Giuseppe Nardi image: Wikicommons / Diocese of Limburg
Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com
Link to Katholisches....
 AMDG