G
gakroeger
Guest
After all of this discussion, you don’t understand why it makes a difference? Have you read (really read) what is being said? Are you satisfied with the current state of our society?
- Status
T
tweetymom
Guest
After all of this discussion, you don’t understand why it makes a difference? Have you read (really read) what is being said? Are you satisfied with the current state of our society?/QUOTE
Yes indeed I have read all the posts. I am saying isn’tt time to give it a rest? It was done for the right reasons Charity and Love now dig a hole and bury it all the ya isn;t going to help and trust me it will happen again
G
gakroeger
Guest
It will be time to give it a rest when Abortion is ended. As long as the murder continues, it will be our duty to bring it to those who have their heads in the sand.Yes indeed I have read all the posts. I am saying isn’tt time to give it a rest? It was done for the right reasons Charity and Love now dig a hole and bury it all the ya isn;t going to help and trust me it will happen again
J
JReducation
Guest
The question seems to be is it justifiable for the Cardinal Archbishop of Boston to be present at Senator Kennedy’s funeral. The answer is yes, on several grounds.
We have to be merciful toward the Senator, but we must also be merciful toward the Cardinal who did what he was expected to do by the rules of diplomacy of the Church and by his solemn vow of obedience to the Franciscan Rule. There is always going to be some confusion and even some comment when you have a bishop of a diocese who belongs to a religious order with solemn vows. Because Canon Law says that these men continue to be members of their orders, even when they are consecrated bishops. Therefore, they are bound to the rule of their order.
There are several orders that have solemn vows: Benedictine, Franciscans, Carmelites, Dominicans, Augustinians, Carthusians, Jesuits, and Trinitarians. It often happens that when these men are in a situation where there are two expectations, one from their order and one from the faithful of their diocese, they have to give priority to their order. It is not unsual for the faithful not to understand what’s going on, because they don’t always know the rules of these orders.
In the past, the Church had stopped consecrating exempt religious as bishops. They had not done this for many years. They had limited themselves to consecrating diocesan priests to avoid this. But Pope John Paul II and now Pope Benedict seem to want religious bishops. This is means that the people in these diocese are going to be led by the spirit of these religious communities. One excellent example is Cardinal Pell of Australia. He is a Dominican. He is an educator. He has made the evangelization of the young the primary ministry of his diocese. But this is consistent with the mission and charism of the Order of Brother Preachers. Some people do not like it, because they feel that he is not responding to other issues. His answer has been, “I’m a Dominican.”
I know that this is conplicated for the people who live in such diocese, but it is not impossible to live with. Everything has a solution, even though solutions may take time. We have to be patient and prayerful. Also, if we live in such a diocese, we can ask the religious bishop to help us understand his charism and the mission of his order. This will help us understand the man.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
- As the Cardinal himself said on his blog. It was an act of mercy.
- As the Archbishop of the diocese he has the authority to decide what is appropriate and when.
- He was not the main celebrant of the funeral. He was the presider. There is a difference. As the presider he sits on the side, does not concelebrate, but represents the Church in offering prayers for the deceased and the consolation of the family.
- As a cardinal, he is a prince of the Church and it is his duty to represent the Holy See in any high profile function. This is not an ecclesial or priestly function, but a diplomatic one. If he does not do this, then the Papal Nuncio would be the person called to do so. This would have complicated matters rather than help.
- As long as the Cardinal went on record saying that the Senator had done many good things in his life, but unfortunately had not embraced the prolife position of the Church, he is not condoning the Senator’s voting record on this issue. The Cardinal did that and he made it public. It was in the press and on the internet. Therefore, all the bases were covered.
- Other bishops do not have to agree with what the Ordinary of a diocese or a Major Religious Superior does, as long as the person is not commiting a sin. The Cardinal’s presence was not a sin.
- The Cardinal is also a Franciscan Brother. He has to obey the rule and constitutions of his religious order. Those rules are very clear on the mercy that every brother must show for the dead, especially the most sinful. The rule is also very clear that mercy should never be hidden, but must be expressed in public. Finally, the rule is very clear that as long as the brother’s actions are not prohibitted by the Lord Pope or by our holy Father Francis, the brother has an obligation to proceed, regardless of public opinion.
We have to be merciful toward the Senator, but we must also be merciful toward the Cardinal who did what he was expected to do by the rules of diplomacy of the Church and by his solemn vow of obedience to the Franciscan Rule. There is always going to be some confusion and even some comment when you have a bishop of a diocese who belongs to a religious order with solemn vows. Because Canon Law says that these men continue to be members of their orders, even when they are consecrated bishops. Therefore, they are bound to the rule of their order.
There are several orders that have solemn vows: Benedictine, Franciscans, Carmelites, Dominicans, Augustinians, Carthusians, Jesuits, and Trinitarians. It often happens that when these men are in a situation where there are two expectations, one from their order and one from the faithful of their diocese, they have to give priority to their order. It is not unsual for the faithful not to understand what’s going on, because they don’t always know the rules of these orders.
In the past, the Church had stopped consecrating exempt religious as bishops. They had not done this for many years. They had limited themselves to consecrating diocesan priests to avoid this. But Pope John Paul II and now Pope Benedict seem to want religious bishops. This is means that the people in these diocese are going to be led by the spirit of these religious communities. One excellent example is Cardinal Pell of Australia. He is a Dominican. He is an educator. He has made the evangelization of the young the primary ministry of his diocese. But this is consistent with the mission and charism of the Order of Brother Preachers. Some people do not like it, because they feel that he is not responding to other issues. His answer has been, “I’m a Dominican.”
I know that this is conplicated for the people who live in such diocese, but it is not impossible to live with. Everything has a solution, even though solutions may take time. We have to be patient and prayerful. Also, if we live in such a diocese, we can ask the religious bishop to help us understand his charism and the mission of his order. This will help us understand the man.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
T
tweetymom
Guest
Thank you so much Br. for you really great explanation. What a Blessing you have been to me and I thank God for that:tiphat:
R
RobbyS
Guest
All of this begs the question: why has the Church in the archdiocese of Boston sufferedThe question seems to be is it justifiable for the Cardinal Archbishop of Boston to be present at Senator Kennedy’s funeral. The answer is yes, on several grounds.
In essence, the Cardinal fulfilled the expectations of the Church and the Order. He also fulfilled his obligation as the Ordinary of the Archdiocese without condoning the Senator’s record on abortion issues.
- As the Cardinal himself said on his blog. It was an act of mercy.
- As the Archbishop of the diocese he has the authority to decide what is appropriate and when.
- He was not the main celebrant of the funeral. He was the presider. There is a difference. As the presider he sits on the side, does not concelebrate, but represents the Church in offering prayers for the deceased and the consolation of the family.
- As a cardinal, he is a prince of the Church and it is his duty to represent the Holy See in any high profile function. This is not an ecclesial or priestly function, but a diplomatic one. If he does not do this, then the Papal Nuncio would be the person called to do so. This would have complicated matters rather than help.
- As long as the Cardinal went on record saying that the Senator had done many good things in his life, but unfortunately had not embraced the prolife position of the Church, he is not condoning the Senator’s voting record on this issue. The Cardinal did that and he made it public. It was in the press and on the internet. Therefore, all the bases were covered.
- Other bishops do not have to agree with what the Ordinary of a diocese or a Major Religious Superior does, as long as the person is not commiting a sin. The Cardinal’s presence was not a sin.
- The Cardinal is also a Franciscan Brother. He has to obey the rule and constitutions of his religious order. Those rules are very clear on the mercy that every brother must show for the dead, especially the most sinful. The rule is also very clear that mercy should never be hidden, but must be expressed in public. Finally, the rule is very clear that as long as the brother’s actions are not prohibitted by the Lord Pope or by our holy Father Francis, the brother has an obligation to proceed, regardless of public opinion.
We have to be merciful toward the Senator, but we must also be merciful toward the Cardinal who did what he was expected to do by the rules of diplomacy of the Church and by his solemn vow of obedience to the Franciscan Rule. There is always going to be some confusion and even some comment when you have a bishop of a diocese who belongs to a religious order with solemn vows. Because Canon Law says that these men continue to be members of their orders, even when they are consecrated bishops. Therefore, they are bound to the rule of their order.
There are several orders that have solemn vows: Benedictine, Franciscans, Carmelites, Dominicans, Augustinians, Carthusians, Jesuits, and Trinitarians. It often happens that when these men are in a situation where there are two expectations, one from their order and one from the faithful of their diocese, they have to give priority to their order. It is not unsual for the faithful not to understand what’s going on, because they don’t always know the rules of these orders.
In the past, the Church had stopped consecrating exempt religious as bishops. They had not done this for many years. They had limited themselves to consecrating diocesan priests to avoid this. But Pope John Paul II and now Pope Benedict seem to want religious bishops. This is means that the people in these diocese are going to be led by the spirit of these religious communities. One excellent example is Cardinal Pell of Australia. He is a Dominican. He is an educator. He has made the evangelization of the young the primary ministry of his diocese. But this is consistent with the mission and charism of the Order of Brother Preachers. Some people do not like it, because they feel that he is not responding to other issues. His answer has been, “I’m a Dominican.”
I know that this is conplicated for the people who live in such diocese, but it is not impossible to live with. Everything has a solution, even though solutions may take time. We have to be patient and prayerful. Also, if we live in such a diocese, we can ask the religious bishop to help us understand his charism and the mission of his order. This will help us understand the man.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
a great collapse since 1960? It could be because the Cardinal Archbishop has more often than not played the role of a tribal chieftain than a priest.
J
JReducation
Guest
Cardinal O’Malley has been there just a few years. This does not apply to him. He was assigned there to fix the mess created by the sexual abuse scandals. He has done a very good job with that mission. He even persuaded the Holy Father to meet with many of the victims when the Holy Father was last in the USA. The Cardinal is a brother, before he is anyting else. He said so himself when he arrived in Boston and first addressed the people. He told them that he is a friar and he wrote extensively about it during his early days, to make sure that the people of Boston understood that they were getting a friar as an archbishop.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
M
mdgspencer
Guest
–and yet… Should we cause others to believe that people who promote abortions are in perfectly good moral standing by giving them special honors? By high leaders in the Church? Can’t this cause other people to sin too? And sin with a great sin?
E
Ender
Guest
Hence Augustine says (De Civ. Dei ix, 5) that “this movement of the mind” (viz. mercy) “obeys the reason, when mercy is vouchsafed in such a way that justice is safeguarded, whether we give to the needy or forgive the repentant.” (Aquinas, ST I/II 30,3)
Mercy does not trump everything; as Augustine said, it is reasonable only when justice is safeguarded. It’s not exactly clear that that was given any thought in this instance.
He has only the authority delegated to him. If the Church forbids something he has no authority to permit it.
The problem is not that he condoned the Senator’s voting record; the problem is that it was treated as not very significant. That’s the impression that will be taken away from this funeral.
Do the rules of diplomacy outweigh the rules of the Church? The question remains and you have made no attempt to answer it - does the Church allow or disallow an ecclesiastical funeral for someone who has publicly committed a grave sin for which no public penance was done? All the rest of this is interesting but ultimately irrelevant. If the Church allows it then that part of the discussion is over.
Ender
J
JReducation
Guest
If the Church would not have allowed it, the Cardinal would not have allowed it either. I can assure you that. I know the man personally. I have lived and worked with him. and have known him since 1972.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
G
gakroeger
Guest
Dear Br. JR, OSFIf the Church would not have allowed it, the Cardinal would not have allowed it either. I can assure you that. I know the man personally. I have lived and worked with him. and have known him since 1972.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
I am sure you are a very good man living your life as a Christian as best as you can. I am also sure that you believe the Cardinal to be a good man.
Throughout these many discussions on this thread, I have not heard you state your opinion on Abortion other than you have stated it was wrong; I would be interested in your feelings as to what the role of the Church in this battle to end this Abortion of the innocent should be. Do you think as members of Christ’s Church we should not take an active role in fighting this evil?
E
Ender
Guest
Although I have been saying that there must be rules that cover this situation, I suspect that it is a lot like the question of whether or not to withhold communion, where interpretations vary between bishops. On that question one side is right and the other is wrong and the Church has not specified which … except for the forty page explanation written by the man who is now the Prefect of the Apostolic Signature (basically the Supreme Court of the Church) which it appears most of the bishops have ignored so it isn’t immediately clear exactly who it is within the Church who would have to comment on the question of funerals before we understood what position the Church actually holds.
I will say, however, that I haven’t even seen a hint of an explanation supporting this decision other than “it’s the merciful thing to do” as if, mercy notwithstanding, there wasn’t anything the Church actually forbade. In fact, if the Church allows ecclesiastical funerals in cases like this one, you would think it would be a simple thing to point out the documentation supporting it. Some writers are citing Canon 1184 and saying that this proves it is allowed but neither this Cardinal nor any of the other bishops so far as I am aware have made the same claim so I suspect there is more to it … as I tried to point out a dozen or two posts ago. Perhaps Archbishop Burke will write another paper explaining how this is to be handled in the future … which undoubtedly many bishops will feel completely free to ignore.
Ender
J
JReducation
Guest
My religious community is a small Franciscan community of friars also known as the Brothers of Life of the Order of St. Francis. Our life is consecrated to one goal, the salvation of our souls through our ministry for the unborn, their families and the convesion of those who provide abortion services. Our daiy schedule looks likes this.
4:45 rise
5:00 Silence and adoration before the Eucharist
5:45 Morning Prayer
6:15 Mass
7:00 Mid morning Prayer
7:30 Lectio Divina
8:00 Breakfast and break the grand silence
8:15 Leave for work
11:30 Midday Prayer
12:00 Lunch
12:30 Manual labor around the friary
2:30 Leave for work
5:30 Evening silence
6:00 Evening Prayer
6:30 Collation
6:50 Clean up
7:30 Community recreation
8:30 Night Prayer
9:00 Grand silence
1:15 Midnight Office
- We do not own a house. We live where ever someone will allow us to stay with them. or use thier house or rent.
- We have only two habits, one set of work clothing and a black suit.
- We have only the tools and technology that we need to run five pregnancy centers, one medical clinic, a training center for parents who want to have their babies, an adoption center, a school for children who have been given up for adoption and have disabilities, and an employment placement service for mothers and father. We also run chastity days through the diocese for high school and middle school students. We spend time on CAF on respect life issues. We run retreats for healing of women and men who have had abortions. We run worshops for doctors and other healthcare providers. We visit every parish in the diocese at least once a year and preach to the faithful on abortion and the dignity of human life. We write and publish literature on human life and sexuality. We run the only counseling and healing program for fathers of aborted children. We provide free medical and dental care for those who need it.
- Every brother must hold at least a part-time job that pays a salary. With this money we pay our bills and the bills for our ministry. The rest we pray to Divine Providence. Right now I lost my job, because I have cancer. My two brothers and I will probably be evicted, if I don’t find a job to pay our bills. Currently we beg to help pay our bills, as did our Father Francis, until I can get a job.
- We fast and abstain every Wed and Fri and during the two lents. The Franciscan Lent and the Church’s Lent. We offer it up for the unborn.
What else can I tell you? Other than we are nothing but God’s trash that he recycles for the good of the uborn.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
G
gakroeger
Guest
Dear Br. JR, OSF
Thank you so much for your explanation. I am so happy to hear of your efforts through prayer and works to help the unborn and their mothers.
In my retirement, I do what I can by volunteering at various fund raising efforts at the Knights of Columbus and Saint Vincent DePaul. Our council of the K of C has taken on the financial aid of a home for unwed mothers in Naples Florida. Our council of SVDP visits the needy in our area of South West Florida five days a week helping with food, electric, water, and rent bills.
As you can probably tell from my posts, I get very frustrated with a great many Catholics (some I know personally) that support politicians that support abortion, many more of whom appear frequently on CAF. It is sometime difficult to tell who is truly charitable and who are hiding behind charity to justify their support for these pro culture of death politicians. Abortion is such a horrific thing, I find it difficult to accept that so many Catholics have accepted abortion as a fact of life and are willing to let it continue.
I pray that our Bishops will come together and uniformly and consistantly teach our faith so there will not be so many lost in their search for truth.
I am sorry to hear of your illness, I will keep you in my daily prayers.
God Bless
Gary Kroeger
Estero Florida
J
JReducation
Guest
The red bold is mine.
Abortion is never a fact of life, but a fact of death.
That being said, I understand your concerns and I appeciate them. There are people who under the guise of charity and mercy frost their pro-choice cake.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
D
donnielee46
Guest
While I had absolutely no objection to a Mass of Christian Burial being offered for Edward Kennedy (as no one knows his spiritual state at his time of passing), I did find the pomp and circumstance somewhat disturbing.
I watched the Mass with a primary interest in the music, as I am a cantor at my local parish. The Catholic Church had an opportunity to hit a spiritual home run here, but fouled the ball off miserably. The Mass of Christian Burial is meant to be a somber, respectful liturgical service, brought about by the sorrow of the event, yet anticipating the joy that the beloved deceased is now in the arms of God (or, at least, on his/her way).
Kennedy’s Mass was turned into a circus. Liturgical music, which should be an integral part of this celebration, was either inappropriately selected, or absent. I am at a complete loss to understand why the parts of the Mass were not sung, or why public entertainers were allowed to render selections that were irrelevant at parts where beautiful religious hymns were available, and certainly would have been more appropriate.
Memorial services, such as the one held for him the night before, are the place for monologues and eulogies, not at the Mass, and applause after these speakers is totally inappropriate.
It almost appeared that this Mass was deliberately secularized and dumbed down, and despite the innate beauty of the Mass itself, it left me, as a Catholic, with a feeling of void and disapppointment. Here was a great opportunity to bring the beauty of the Catholic Mass to the world, and it fell far short.
It’s somewhat akin to the National Anthem, when individual “interpretations” are rendered prior to major athletic events. The National Anthem is the National Anthem. Leave it alone and sing it the way it was written. The Catholic Mass is beautiful and moving in itself, and should not be “interpreted” or tampered with!
I watched the Mass with a primary interest in the music, as I am a cantor at my local parish. The Catholic Church had an opportunity to hit a spiritual home run here, but fouled the ball off miserably. The Mass of Christian Burial is meant to be a somber, respectful liturgical service, brought about by the sorrow of the event, yet anticipating the joy that the beloved deceased is now in the arms of God (or, at least, on his/her way).
Kennedy’s Mass was turned into a circus. Liturgical music, which should be an integral part of this celebration, was either inappropriately selected, or absent. I am at a complete loss to understand why the parts of the Mass were not sung, or why public entertainers were allowed to render selections that were irrelevant at parts where beautiful religious hymns were available, and certainly would have been more appropriate.
Memorial services, such as the one held for him the night before, are the place for monologues and eulogies, not at the Mass, and applause after these speakers is totally inappropriate.
It almost appeared that this Mass was deliberately secularized and dumbed down, and despite the innate beauty of the Mass itself, it left me, as a Catholic, with a feeling of void and disapppointment. Here was a great opportunity to bring the beauty of the Catholic Mass to the world, and it fell far short.
It’s somewhat akin to the National Anthem, when individual “interpretations” are rendered prior to major athletic events. The National Anthem is the National Anthem. Leave it alone and sing it the way it was written. The Catholic Mass is beautiful and moving in itself, and should not be “interpreted” or tampered with!
P
petr
Guest
OP, thanks for posting this link. These issues have been bothering me for several days. This well written piece helps.
T
tweetymom
Guest
Thank you BBr.JR very good posts
G
gakroeger
Guest
The Vatican is being consistent, let us pray that the bishops and priest here in the US begin to listen and stick to the gospel.
Vatican official warns priests against relativism in ministry
Vatican official warns priests against relativism in ministry
G
gakroeger
Guest
The Holy Father has also pointed out in his encyclical letter Caritas In Veritate the misconstruing of charity to support relativism.The red bold is mine.
Abortion is never a fact of life, but a fact of death.
That being said, I understand your concerns and I appeciate them. There are people who under the guise of charity and mercy frost their pro-choice cake.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
From the introduction of
ENCYCLICAL LETTER
CARITAS IN VERITATE
OF THE SUPREME PONTIFF
BENEDICT XVI
I am aware of the ways in which charity has been and continues to be misconstrued and emptied of meaning, with the consequent risk of being misinterpreted, detached from ethical living and, in any event, undervalued. In the social, juridical, cultural, political and economic fields — the contexts, in other words, that are most exposed to this danger — it is easily dismissed as irrelevant for interpreting and giving direction to moral responsibility. Hence the need to link charity with truth not only in the sequence, pointed out by Saint Paul, of veritas in caritate (Eph 4:15), but also in the inverse and complementary sequence of caritas in veritate. Truth needs to be sought, found and expressed within the “economy” of charity, but charity in its turn needs to be understood, confirmed and practised in the light of truth. In this way, not only do we do a service to charity enlightened by truth, but we also help give credibility to truth, demonstrating its persuasive and authenticating power in the practical setting of social living. This is a matter of no small account today, in a social and cultural context which relativizes truth, often paying little heed to it and showing increasing reluctance to acknowledge its existence.
CARITAS IN VERITATE
- Status