Aktualnie jesteś:

Where is Witu? Or?owski ?

Police talk to priest over removal of boy’s remains
By Mark Greaves
26 March 2010
LINK TO THE CATHOLIC HERALD NEWS
www.catholicherald.co.uk.com

On time
Grzegorz Ma?kiewicz

A knowledge of its history and the memory of its dead ancestors form the basis of every community. Does a 14-year-old child deserve to be cursed with ‘know no peace even after death’? Witu? Or?owski deserves better. He became a symbol of exile, hope and reconciliation. In his short life, he travelled a long way but by, a quirk of fate, the journey has no end.

His place of rest, chosen by those closest to him, has disappeared in mysterious circumstances. There is not even a trace of his grave. How is it possible that the Marian Fathers could be responsible for such desecration? According to their teaching and vocation, the dead have prominent place and their remains cannot be treated as some inconvenient thing that can be moved at will.

Exhumation is not just an administrative activity. It is an exceptional activity, which should be conducted in accordance with accepted ritual. There is no evidence that the ashes of Witu? Or?owski (full details of the story on page 4) were transferred with the required respect and dignity. It is most likely that a lay worker did it without a priest or the closest family present and without their agreement

Mr Zbigniew Montarski Witold’s cousin cannot understand such a turn of events the Marians knew of his existence. They approached him several years ago about copyrights for a book written by Witold’s mother. One would assume that they would treat temporal matters more seriously. On the other hand, exhumation has a temporal aspect regulated by the law. Here they were guilty of reprehensible negligence which is being investigated by the British authorities. From what has been established so far it would appear that no exhumation license was issued because nobody applied for one. The ashes are not where they are supposed to be that is, as stated by the Marian Fathers, in the cemetery in Henley.

The calculated pragmatism of the priests, who by their actions contradict what they themselves preach, is astounding. Do they themselves believe in what they impart to the faithful? Is religion only a tool for them? Exactly, why? Without regard to their faith, taking into account their declared vocation, they must realise that they are exposed, without any extenuating circumstances, to criticism. For the good of the church, they should answer the questions that worry the faithful.

Has the exhumation of the ashes deposited in the Church of St. Ann’s been completed? What was the procedure? Were permissions sought? Did they inform the next of kin? What do the Marian Fathers intend to do with the remains of the founder of the church Prince Radziwi?l whose family does not agree with exhuming the remains?

The Marian Fathers regarded the deconsecration of the church and the sale of Fawley Court as a private matter of the Congregation. They did not have the moral right to consider it as such and now even more so. The British court stripped the Marian Fathers of this right by not recognising their argument that the closest family of Father Jarz?bowski is the Congregation of Marian Fathers. Did the Marian Father also consider the Congregation the closest relatives of Witu? Or?owski?

To come out against the Marian Fathers is a needless necessity and the superiors of the Congregation should finally recognise this. They should consider the role and place amongst the faithful. The losses may be unrecoverable.

Komitet Obrony Dziedzictwa Narodowego Fawley Court, , e-mail: savefawley@hotmail.com