I'm confused, maybe because of the similar names of the dioceses. So he was asked to resign from his current diocese after bad things happened in his old diocese after he left. Maybe he had a large hand in the evidently poor choices of successor for his old diocese, but other than that, not sure why he would need to be held accountable for chaos in his old job after his departure. Would think that should be not much of a concern to him.
His diocese had two bishops resign within 9 months of his changing sees, with his original see being sede vacante for nearly all of that time. When a diocese is sede vacante, the administrator is not supposed to make any decisions, but just keep things running as it was. So, if there were problems in his previous diocese, it is entirely possible that they were due to his decisions or administrative practices. If the problems are serious enough, and it seems to the Pope that he was the cause, keeping him as head of a larger and more important archdiocese would not be a good idea. But this is all speculation, as no reasons are forthcoming.
“the Mar del Plata diocese, a suffragan see of the La Plata archdiocese” — he became the metropolitan archbishop, so I could see him being held responsible for some things happening in a suffragan see… especially with VELM…
Insight from the Argentine media: it seems that Mestre may have tried to get his preferred candidate (his VG) appointed as his successor, and when someone else was appointed, elements within the church in Mar del Plata made a fuss which was traced back to Mestre.
Prayers for the people and clergy of the two dioceses and the bishops involved.
This is a bad look for sure.
In defense of the Holy See Argentina is all the way across the world. They're probably not plugged in very well....oh wait
I'm confused, maybe because of the similar names of the dioceses. So he was asked to resign from his current diocese after bad things happened in his old diocese after he left. Maybe he had a large hand in the evidently poor choices of successor for his old diocese, but other than that, not sure why he would need to be held accountable for chaos in his old job after his departure. Would think that should be not much of a concern to him.
His diocese had two bishops resign within 9 months of his changing sees, with his original see being sede vacante for nearly all of that time. When a diocese is sede vacante, the administrator is not supposed to make any decisions, but just keep things running as it was. So, if there were problems in his previous diocese, it is entirely possible that they were due to his decisions or administrative practices. If the problems are serious enough, and it seems to the Pope that he was the cause, keeping him as head of a larger and more important archdiocese would not be a good idea. But this is all speculation, as no reasons are forthcoming.
“the Mar del Plata diocese, a suffragan see of the La Plata archdiocese” — he became the metropolitan archbishop, so I could see him being held responsible for some things happening in a suffragan see… especially with VELM…
Is Fernandez' boy corrupt enough to not even survive a year? How shocking. One wonders if he was catechized improperly about kissing and orgasms.
Insight from the Argentine media: it seems that Mestre may have tried to get his preferred candidate (his VG) appointed as his successor, and when someone else was appointed, elements within the church in Mar del Plata made a fuss which was traced back to Mestre.
https://www.lanacion.com.ar/politica/la-renuncia-de-monsenor-mestre-designaciones-fallidas-un-carpetazo-y-protestas-que-molestaron-a-nid29052024/