Bishop decries 'combative tactics' of a minority of U.S. bishops

[JReducation]

Let’s not get caught up in legalisms. What happened at Notre Dam as what happened at the Kennedy mass was a demonstration of the power of the liberal Catholic establishment in the United States. Many people, like the archbishop, do not wish to be disturbed by the thought that many Catholics are not, in their hearts, in union with the Holy See. Nothing unusual in this. The French bishops of the 18th Century were not inclined to listen to Rome, except in the formal terms you are using here. Likewise the bigshots at ND, the president and the board, are not about to listen to the bishop of a smallish diocese, nor even to the Cardinal archbishop of Chicago. They can do whatever they d****d well please, they think. Cardinal McCarrick can do what he did knowing that though he can be dispossessed of his see, he is still a top dog, and as for “Boston,” he is a weakling. .

My dear friend . . . these are not legalisms. This is canon law. It serves a purpose. Like all law, it also has its down side. There is not such thing as the perfecgt law. But the Church tries as best she can. Were it not for the above mentioned laws you would not have CAF. CAF can only exist, becaues canon law allows it to exist independent of the Catholic Church and to call itself Catholic while doing so. Check it out. CAF is a lay and secular non profit corporation that has nothing to do with the institutional Catholic Church or her hierarchy. The same is true of EWTN. It is not owned by any Catholic organization. It is secular and lay in ownership. The Poor Clares sold it a long time ago. The Franciscan Friars of the Eternal Word are employed by EWTN. They do not own it or run it.

On the other hand, if we did not have these laws in place, the bishops would own both CAF and EWTN and both organiztions would be subject to the authority of the bishop of the diocese in which the organization resides. Such is not the case.

As to you opinions about the individuals that you mention above, I would encourage you to practice charity and respect for all involved.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[JimG]

When the Church does not own an organization or institution it does ot have legal authority over it. However, since the Church lends it its name, Catholic, it does have moral authority. The problem is that moral authority is not easy to enforce. The Catholic Church has moral authority over all of our homes too; but where are you going to find a bishop who has the authority to tell you how to raise your family or how to manage your family affairs?

The whole issue of moral authority depends on the good will of the individuals involved. In this case the organization that owns ND is expected to have the good faith and good will to work within the parameters of Catholic teaching, not because the Church has legal authority, but because they are part of the Church.

I hope this helps.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

Around here anyway, most Catholics seem to respect the moral authority of their bishops.

It could certainly be hoped that the organization which owns Notre Dame would “have the good faith and good will to work within the parameters of Catholic teaching, not because the Church has legal authority, but because they are part of the Church.”

When it comes to many Catholic universities, however, this hope is not always realized.

 

[JReducation]

Around here anyway, most Catholics seem to respect the moral authority of their bishops.

It could certainly be hoped that the organization which owns Notre Dame would “have the good faith and good will to work within the parameters of Catholic teaching, not because the Church has legal authority, but because they are part of the Church.”

When it comes to many Catholic universities, however, this hope is not always realized.

Unfortunately, it’s not just universities that lack that good will to cooperate with the moral authority of the hierarchy. But you are right. It is certainly lacking in so many of our institutions.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[RobbyS]

This is not a division. This is a matter of infrastructure. Cetain areas of jurisdiction belong to certain people. In this case, the university does not fall under the jurisdiction of the bishop, not even under the jurisdiction of the Holy Cross congregation, because they do not own it either.

The university falls under the jurisdiction of those who own it. That’s not division, that’s called justice. We have to remain united in justice. If those who own it have control over it and they have a commitment to Catholic education, they must run the university according to that commitment. The rest of the world has the righ to expect that they run the school according to what they say in their mission statement.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

The university is a corporation and as a corporation it cannot separate itself from the community in which it is situated.

 

[RobbyS]

My dear friend . . . these are not legalisms. This is canon law. It serves a purpose. Like all law, it also has its down side. There is not such thing as the perfecgt law. But the Church tries as best she can. Were it not for the above mentioned laws you would not have CAF. CAF can only exist, becaues canon law allows it to exist independent of the Catholic Church and to call itself Catholic while doing so. Check it out. CAF is a lay and secular non profit corporation that has nothing to do with the institutional Catholic Church or her hierarchy. The same is true of EWTN. It is not owned by any Catholic organization. It is secular and lay in ownership. The Poor Clares sold it a long time ago. The Franciscan Friars of the Eternal Word are employed by EWTN. They do not own it or run it.

On the other hand, if we did not have these laws in place, the bishops would own both CAF and EWTN and both organiztions would be subject to the authority of the bishop of the diocese in which the organization resides. Such is not the case.

As to you opinions about the individuals that you mention above, I would encourage you to practice charity and respect for all involved.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

Indeed, its is a matter of canon law, but what is at question here is not a matter of law but of respect. My son has every right to tell me to butt out of his affairs, being an adult and father himself. But he listens to and respects my advise. In this case, ND showed something like contempt for the advise of the local bishop and, beyond that, of many other bishops.

 

[JReducation]

The university is a corporation and as a corporation it cannot separate itself from the community in which it is situated.

No it shouldn’t, but not because it is a corporation. The Church does not acknowledge the existence of corporations. That’s an American thing, because of our legal system. The Church has to go along with the American legal system if it’s going to function in the USA.

That being said, any organization that calls itself Catholic has an obligation to function within the Church and in solidarity with the Church. It should do so out of love.

I’ll give you an example. My religious community was founded to serve the unborn and their parents. We were asked by the Vatican to separate from the dioceses in which we live and work. In other words, the work that we do for the unborn and for their families became the work of the order, not the dioceses. The reason for this was a practical one. The Vatican wants us to remain totally poor and not dependent on any diocese or the laity for our existence. We are to be like Francis, our holy founder, totally dependent on Divine Providence for our existence and our material needs. Therefore, we have our own Federal ID number and our own non-profit number and we are not allowed to use the name of any diocese in our ministry. We use the name Franciscan.

Nonetheless, we cannot disobey the bishop, not because he has canonical or civil authority over us, but because the rule of St. Francis says that we must blindly obey the bishops and serve the diocesan clergy as if they were our masters. This is considered moral authority, but not juridical or civil authority. According to Church and civil law we are autonomous and we cannot depend on the bishop and the bishop has no oblgiation to provide for our spiritual or material well-being or that of our ministry. That makes us an exempt religious order and it frees the diocese of running a ministry that it cannot afford to run. But at the same time, by giving us the permission to run the ministry inside the borders of the diocese, the bishops agree to lend us the Catholic name and spiritually link our ministry to the ministry of the Church.

The same system applies to an organization with the civil and canonical status of ND. Is this clearer?

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[estesbob]

Huh??? What hatred?

Lujack is an Obama supporter. i guess criticism of Obama is consodered hatred.

 

[JMJ_coder]

JR,

Despite who the superior of the order may be, they need the permission of Diocesan Bishop to reside in his diocese (cf. 609, etc.).

 

[JReducation]

JR,

Despite who the superior of the order may be, they need the permission of Diocesan Bishop to reside in his diocese (cf. 609, etc.).

I know that. I never said anything to the contrary. However, once that permission is granted, the institute may not be suppressed by the bishop. The institute retains its autonomy. This too is in canon law.

**Can. 583 Changes in institutes of consecrated life affecting those things which had been approved by the Apostolic See cannot be made without its permission.

Can. 584 The suppression of an institute pertains only to the Apostolic See; a decision regarding the temporal goods of the institute is also reserved to the Apostolic See.**

Once a religious community is admitted by any bishop, he cannot change them or anything about them without the permission of the pope, that is the Apostolic See. Nor can the bishop suppress them or make decisions about their property. In the case of a college, school, hospital or anything that a religious congregation or a religious order has established, even with money from the diocese and the laity, neither the diocese nor the laity can make any decisions about these properties or istitutions without the permission of the superior of the community and that of the pope. Even the religious cannot cannot make decisions about their property without the permission of the pope, but they can bypass the bishop, even if it is the bishop who gave them permission to setup house in his diocese. This is what is known in the laws that govern religious life as exemption.

The religious are exempt from the authority and involvement of the bishops and the laity. However, the Church demands that bishops and laity financially support the work of the religious and support the religious themselves if they need care, food, health service and education.

These laws were passed to protect the religious from the bishops and fromt he laity because of the abuses of power that have crept up in the Church during different times and in different countries. When these abuses crept us, it has been the religious who have been the first targets of the abusers.

These are important laws to keep in mind. Whether we like them or not, they remain in effect alongside the laws that govern religious life established by the Sacred Congregation for Religious Institutes and Societies of Apostolic Life and the Constitutions of each religious congregation or religious order, which are approved by the Holy See.

In other words, there are four layers of law in effect and opertative:

1. The Constitutions of the religious institute, which always takes priority over any Church law, including canon law, provided that the constitution is approved by the Holy See.
2. The laws of the Sacred Congregation for Religous Institutes and Societies of Apostolic Life which are second to the Constitutions, but trump canon law, as long as they are approved by the Holy See.
3. Canon law, which is alway approved by the Holy See.
4. Diocesan law which is subordinate to all the above when it comes to religious.

When there is a conflict the religious and the bishop must resolve it between them. According to the principle of subsidiarity, the bishop and the major superior are Ordinaries of equal rank and equal power. The bishop has authority over his diocese and the major superior over his community. The two powers cannot overlap. That is forbidden by the Sacred Congregation. The major superior cannot interfere in the matters of the diocese and the bishop cannot interfere in the matters of the religious.

These two superiors of equal authority must find a solution to the problem. If they cannot do so, they must present their case to the appropriate Congregation in the Vatican. The Congregation for Institutes of Religious Life will, by default, defend the rights of the religious. The Congregation for the Bishops will, by default, defend the rights of the bishop. The problem is settled at that level. Just like in any other sovereign nation, the issue goes up the ladder until it reaches the tribunal or the Holy Father. But rarely will the Holy Father involve himself in these matters.

The reaosn why the popes do not involve themselves in these matters is because they have been burned in the past when they got caught in a battle betwee a bishop and a major religious superior. The popes must always preserve their position as impartial observers and pastors to both sides, unless there is an issue that is so serious that it needs his ruling. But the pope do not use that power when dealing with religious communities and bishops who are obedient to his authority.

It’s very complicated. Isn’t it.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Coleski]

According to JR education we should have sympathy of the Devil.

 

[JReducation]

According to JR education we should have sympathy of the Devil.

How did you draw that conclusion?

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[RobbyS]

I know that. I never said anything to the contrary. However, once that permission is granted, the institute may not be suppressed by the bishop. The institute retains its autonomy. This too is in canon law.

**Can. 583 Changes in institutes of consecrated life affecting those things which had been approved by the Apostolic See cannot be made without its permission.

Can. 584 The suppression of an institute pertains only to the Apostolic See; a decision regarding the temporal goods of the institute is also reserved to the Apostolic See.**

Once a religious community is admitted by any bishop, he cannot change them or anything about them without the permission of the pope, that is the Apostolic See. Nor can the bishop suppress them or make decisions about their property. In the case of a college, school, hospital or anything that a religious congregation or a religious order has established, even with money from the diocese and the laity, neither the diocese nor the laity can make any decisions about these properties or istitutions without the permission of the superior of the community and that of the pope. Even the religious cannot cannot make decisions about their property without the permission of the pope, but they can bypass the bishop, even if it is the bishop who gave them permission to setup house in his diocese. This is what is known in the laws that govern religious life as exemption.

The religious are exempt from the authority and involvement of the bishops and the laity. However, the Church demands that bishops and laity financially support the work of the religious and support the religious themselves if they need care, food, health service and education.

These laws were passed to protect the religious from the bishops and fromt he laity because of the abuses of power that have crept up in the Church during different times and in different countries. When these abuses crept us, it has been the religious who have been the first targets of the abusers.

These are important laws to keep in mind. Whether we like them or not, they remain in effect alongside the laws that govern religious life established by the Sacred Congregation for Religious Institutes and Societies of Apostolic Life and the Constitutions of each religious congregation or religious order, which are approved by the Holy See.

In other words, there are four layers of law in effect and opertative:

1. The Constitutions of the religious institute, which always takes priority over any Church law, including canon law, provided that the constitution is approved by the Holy See.
2. The laws of the Sacred Congregation for Religous Institutes and Societies of Apostolic Life which are second to the Constitutions, but trump canon law, as long as they are approved by the Holy See.
3. Canon law, which is alway approved by the Holy See.
4. Diocesan law which is subordinate to all the above when it comes to religious.

When there is a conflict the religious and the bishop must resolve it between them. According to the principle of subsidiarity, the bishop and the major superior are Ordinaries of equal rank and equal power. The bishop has authority over his diocese and the major superior over his community. The two powers cannot overlap. That is forbidden by the Sacred Congregation. The major superior cannot interfere in the matters of the diocese and the bishop cannot interfere in the matters of the religious.

These two superiors of equal authority must find a solution to the problem. If they cannot do so, they must present their case to the appropriate Congregation in the Vatican. The Congregation for Institutes of Religious Life will, by default, defend the rights of the religious. The Congregation for the Bishops will, by default, defend the rights of the bishop. The problem is settled at that level. Just like in any other sovereign nation, the issue goes up the ladder until it reaches the tribunal or the Holy Father. But rarely will the Holy Father involve himself in these matters.

The reaosn why the popes do not involve themselves in these matters is because they have been burned in the past when they got caught in a battle betwee a bishop and a major religious superior. The popes must always preserve their position as impartial observers and pastors to both sides, unless there is an issue that is so serious that it needs his ruling. But the pope do not use that power when dealing with religious communities and bishops who are obedient to his authority.

It’s very complicated. Isn’t it.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

Yes, indeed. Now the grievance that many of us have with Notre Dame is that the order has further sealed the school off from Church authority through the protections of American corporation law. The general public assumes it is a religious establishment, but it is not much more so than any other private school (such as SMU) with an historical connection to a religious body. The Obama incident has shocked us into an awareness of this reality. The Church still has influence but no real power. The power rests with the board and its hireling Fr. Jennings.

 

[JReducation]

Yes, indeed. Now the grievance that many of us have with Notre Dame is that the order has further sealed the school off from Church authority through the protections of American corporation law. The general public assumes it is a religious establishment, but it is not much more so than any other private school (such as SMU) with an historical connection to a religious body. The Obama incident has shocked us into an awareness of this reality. The Church still has influence but no real power. The power rests with the board and its hireling Fr. Jennings.

Unfortunately that is the situation with most Catholic organizations and institutions. Most are not legally attached to the Church. In fact, very few are. But there is not much that we can do about the legal part. That’s the way that the legal system works. You have to trust in the good faith of the people who run these systems.

As far as religious orders, religious congregations, and secular institutes are concerned, the Church does not want to have them submitted to the hierarchy. This was done by Pope Honorius to allow religious space to grow and freedom and protection from the bishops and the laity. We have to remember that not every lay person or bishop is really interested in the internal life of religious communities. Many are more interested in what they can get out of these groups. There are many Catholics who are very respectful of religious and their internal life and charism, but that is not the case with every Catholic. This becomes a catch-22 situation, because if you open the religious communities to the influence of the laity and the bishops you may have some who are respectful and try to compliment the mission of the religious; but you can also open yourself up to those who want to control and dictate. For centuries we’ve been trying to figure out how to get this right. I kow that I don’t have the answers.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF