Cardinal Burke and Grand Master Festing defied wishes of Pope Francis by sacking Grand Chancellor

  • Thread starter Thread starter gilliam
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Boeselager has 4 kids. How many of the other 100,000 members are family men or women who also happen to be a member of the order?
There are not 100.000 members. That was one of the several unfortunate formulations in the posted article from The Catholic Herald.

There are three classes to the Order of Malta that further subdivide into various sub-groupings. The second class is larger than the first. The third is larger than the second.

When you account for everyone, from the Prince to those knights who pronounce vows as a Religious to the cloistered nuns to the priests of the Order and through to the laity [not forgetting that beyond laity there are also permanent deacons, to be sure] the number of members of the Order would be somewhere in the neighbourhood of 13.000, accounting for all the countries across the world. There are many times that number of volunteers…and then there are the personnel employed by the Order.

It would only be including the sum of all of that when you would arrive at a number in the neighbourhood of 100.000.
 
"according to *sources *within the order, the Pope wrote Cardinal Burke a letter asking the order to take action against any possible cause of moral scandal. The exact content of the letter is unknown; but it was universally **taken **as a reference to the Boeselager situation.

I’m told that the ****mood ****at the Order of Malta’s headquarters was largely one of relief. The issue of Boeselager’s alleged wrongdoing had dragged on for some time without resolution. …] But now that the Pope was expressing his alarm, it ******seemed ******impossible to put off decisive action. …]

**Some **Boeselager supporters ****say ****that Fra’ Festing and Cardinal Burke (who was also present) **claimed **the sacking was on the Pope’s explicit advice. According to the well-**connected **Vatican reporter Edward Pentin…"

end of quote from prior post

Sources within…content of letter unknown but that doesn’t stop us…******mood ******at headquarters now apparently measurable…Pope alarm measurable…Some say…Some claim…universally **taken **as (apparently they have telepathic capacities here)…well connected reporter (is that a canonical status higher than Papal Food Tester, but lower than Friend of the Pope?)

Can it get any more far fetched than this? Why are Catholics increasingly obsessed with this third hand information, jumping to frivolous conclusions? If Art Bell did a late night radio expose on the coverup of the connection between the (name removed by moderator) and the UFOs at Area 51, I am sure that would trigger 4 threads at CAF, with 214 posters taking seriously all the careful research done by the tabloid newspapers, and proving this is part of a secret trend to undermine Vatican II, ban the Latin Mass, (insert your own fear/hope/nightmare here).
 
Unless they don’t. It is not like they will be executed.

Loss of Catholic identity and separation from the Church to any degree may lead some to deem their loyalty as a Catholic supersedes their loyalty to a Catholic organization that is withdrawn from the authority of the Pope.

This is the second case I can remember where an independent organization composed of Catholics, supposedly promoting Catholicism, but independent of any Catholic authority has reportedly caused scandal. I only know it because I am here on CAF. These rogue lay “ministries” are more about promoting their own side of the universal Church, usually ultra-conservatism or ultra-liberalism, than the actual Catholic faith. Their supposed scandal affect their base of like-minded subscribers and donors, and usually few others.
 
Unless they don’t. It is not like they will be executed.
Exactly.

An ordained religious is getting housing, health care, food from their diocese or order so have material reasons to stay in. If someone has a family and career they are more likely to leave, regardless of any commitment they have made.
 
From Catholic News Agency: Eugenio Ajroldi di Robbiate, Communications Director for the Knights of Malta, says that Albrecht von Boeselager was asked to resign for reasons in addition to condom distribution.
[A] senior official of the Order has said that while the incident was a contributing factor in Boeselager’s resignation, the reasons – while confidential – are much broader. …] So while the incident was indeed a factor in why the Grand Chancellor was asked to resign, Robbiate stressed that issue is “poorly reported” by many news agencies, since the full picture, while remaining confidential, is “much more complex than just the point on contraception.”
Robbiate also laid to rest rumors that the Knights’ refusal to cooperate with the Vatican is somehow rooted in tensions between Pope Francis and Cardinal Raymond Burke, Patron of the Order and one of four signatories of a letter asking the Pope to clarify five “dubia” regarding his apostolic exhortation Amoris laetitia.
Robbiate explained that since the Order functions more like a State that has diplomatic relations with the Holy See, Cardinal Burke, who serves as a quasi-ambassador, “is not involved” in decisions made by their hierarchy.
“How would he be involved?” Robbiate asked, explaining that “like any other ambassador, the cardinal has no voice” on the internal decisions of their leaders. So opting not to cooperate in the Vatican investigation “has nothing to do” with Cardinal Burke, but was rather a decision made by the Grand Magistry without the cardinal’s (name removed by moderator)ut.
Read the whole thing here:
catholicnewsagency.com/news/knights-of-malta-say-leaders-dismissal-more-complex-than-condoms-62905/
 
Exactly.

An ordained religious is getting housing, health care, food from their diocese or order so have material reasons to stay in. If someone has a family and career they are more likely to leave, regardless of any commitment they have made.
“Ordained religious”…“getting housing, health care, food from their diocese or order.”

You very clearly demonstrate that you do not have even the fundamental concepts of what you are trying to discuss regarding this topic.

Both the Deacon and I have been quite clear in what we have written.

While I was willing to engage to try to help – and to inform those others who will read this thread – you are demonstrating by the repetition of what you post that the effort is actually a waste of my time.

It is also an insult to the dignity of vows and other sacred bonds to dismiss them with such blitheness, as though they can simply be abandoned or discarded. And that introduces also a point where discussion should be terminated because of such lack of respect.

Your characterisations are completely wrong, as I have already written.

Good bye.
 
Unless they don’t. It is not like they will be executed.
Personally, as a priest, I take the observance of sacred bonds as being far more a cause of concern to me than being killed. The executioner, after all, can only kill my body.
 
“Ordained religious”…“getting housing, health care, food from their diocese or order.”

You very clearly demonstrate that you do not have even the fundamental concepts of what you are trying to discuss regarding this topic.

Both the Deacon and I have been quite clear in what we have written.

While I was willing to engage to try to help – and to inform those others who will read this thread – you are demonstrating by the repetition of what you post that the effort is actually a waste of my time.

It is also an insult to the dignity of vows and other sacred bonds to dismiss them with such blitheness, as though they can simply be abandoned or discarded. And that introduces also a point where discussion should be terminated because of such lack of respect.

Your characterisations are completely wrong, as I have already written.

Good bye.
Priets leave their ministry after making a lifetime commitment. People get divorced after making a lifetime commitment.

You think these people won’t also leave their commitments here too? These people have established careers and family lives making it easier.
 
Priest leave their ministry after making a lifetime commitment. People get divorced after making a lifetime commitment.

You think these people won’t also leave their commitments here too? These people have established careers and family lives making it easier.
Leaving an order is not something taken lightly. In your previous comment you alluded to the fact that religious have material reasons to stay in. I know of three ordained monks who have left their order.

I can assure you that what material or not help they were getting from the abbey had nothing to do with it. In one case, he went out into the great unknown with no real formation applicable to employment outside the abbey. Two became incardinated diocesan priests, and one went into secular life. I also know a few non-ordained Benedictine brothers that left, some before, some after solemn profession. None of them had particularly bright prospects to go to in secular life.

It would indicate to me that the “material help” of the abbey did not retain them. They left because in fact they were a poor fit for Benedictine life.

On the other hand, those that stay most certainly do not enjoy a wealth of material riches. They live simply and humbly, in modest cells, not because the abbey cares for them, but because they care for Benedictine life. It is in fact their vocation, and they have endured all the ups and downs of monastic life, for a lifetime. They have endured abbots they did not get on with, they endured physical privation, they had to sit for years in the refectory next to someone who slurps his soup, they endured loneliness, they endured doubts, acedia, financial worries (not for themselves personally but for the monastery). you name it.

And this is the catch: many of those who stayed came from very, very well-off backgrounds with supportive families, in one case even an aristocratic family. In fact I’d rather say the opposite: having a supportive family made it easier for them to stay in monastic life, not more likely to leave. A supportive family visits, them, calls them regularly, sends them treats (cakes, bottles of wine, etc.) that make them feel loved and supported, and the family makes them feel that their vocation counts for something.

You cannot reduce a monastic or any other religious calling to strictly its material advantages. On the contrary, monastic life is a life of material penury. There is a certain security to monastic life, but bear in mind that staying in religious life is a reciprocal deal. One monk I know left because his spirituality had taken distinctly non-Benedictine turn for a mix of new-age and charismatic. The abbot told him in no uncertain terms that he had to either re-align with Benedictine spirituality or leave. He left. So the “job security” is not total. Yes, a monk can be sent away for serious reasons, and it does occasionally happen that a monk is in a monastery for the wrong reasons, having slipped through the filters (nobody is perfect). Sooner or later it comes out, and the result is a departure. Again, nothing to do with material attractions of the monastery.
 
Leaving an order is not something taken lightly. In your previous comment you alluded to the fact that religious have material reasons to stay in. I know of three ordained monks who have left their order.

I can assure you that what material or not help they were getting from the abbey had nothing to do with it. In one case, he went out into the great unknown with no real formation applicable to employment outside the abbey. Two became incardinated diocesan priests, and one went into secular life. I also know a few non-ordained Benedictine brothers that left, some before, some after solemn profession. None of them had particularly bright prospects to go to in secular life.

It would indicate to me that the “material help” of the abbey did not retain them. They left because in fact they were a poor fit for Benedictine life.

On the other hand, those that stay most certainly do not enjoy a wealth of material riches. They live simply and humbly, in modest cells, not because the abbey cares for them, but because they care for Benedictine life. It is in fact their vocation, and they have endured all the ups and downs of monastic life, for a lifetime. They have endured abbots they did not get on with, they endured physical privation, they had to sit for years in the refectory next to someone who slurps his soup, they endured loneliness, they endured doubts, acedia, financial worries (not for themselves personally but for the monastery). you name it.

And this is the catch: many of those who stayed came from very, very well-off backgrounds with supportive families, in one case even an aristocratic family. In fact I’d rather say the opposite: having a supportive family made it easier for them to stay in monastic life, not more likely to leave. A supportive family visits, them, calls them regularly, sends them treats (cakes, bottles of wine, etc.) that make them feel loved and supported, and the family makes them feel that their vocation counts for something.

You cannot reduce a monastic or any other religious calling to strictly its material advantages. On the contrary, monastic life is a life of material penury. There is a certain security to monastic life, but bear in mind that staying in religious life is a reciprocal deal. One monk I know left because his spirituality had taken distinctly non-Benedictine turn for a mix of new-age and charismatic. The abbot told him in no uncertain terms that he had to either re-align with Benedictine spirituality or leave. He left. So the “job security” is not total. Yes, a monk can be sent away for serious reasons, and it does occasionally happen that a monk is in a monastery for the wrong reasons, having slipped through the filters (nobody is perfect). Sooner or later it comes out, and the result is a departure. Again, nothing to do with material attractions of the monastery.
You are precisely correct.

There are many occasions in Religious Life where a Religious is contributing more…even much more…to the common table than s/he is taking from it. That is also part of being a Religious.

In the case of (name removed by moderator), particularly in the second and third class respectively, the members are giving much and receiving – materially – very little. They are there because they have a vocation to it…literally.

(name removed by moderator) is one of those rare entities where one cannot join of one’s own initiative…one must be invited and, even then, subsequently be vetted by both the Order and the Holy See before being admitted. The members have a double vocatio.
 
None of them had particularly bright prospects to go to in secular life.
Yes. People who have made lifetime commitments break them. How much easier will it be for people who have established carriers?

I think the thread is getting caught up in the minutia. Take a step back a look a the forest. Regardless of the details of how the members join this will hurt their membership and donations. Who suffers in the long run is the order, the church and the people who were served by the order.
 
This is a link from the (name removed by moderator) website:

forgottenpeople.org/

Take a look. They are asking for DONATIONS. How do you not understand that bad press equals lower donations. This is for most people BAD PRESS.

Yes, I understand the members take vows. I am sure many (most) take them very seriously. I, with all due respect, believe you are being in obstinate in refusing to see that some people who take vows will still leave . Marriage is a life time commitment. The divorce rate among Catholics is as high as the secular culture.
 
Yes. People who have made lifetime commitments break them. How much easier will it be for people who have established carriers?
I suppose this won’t make an impact if I say it but I’ll say it anyway. Established careers make no difference on keeping, or not, a vocation.

Our abbey has had two electricians, a biochemist, a couple of prize-winning musicians, a couple of psychologists, a couple of accountants, an ex-manager of a McDonald’s franchise, and sundry other ex-professionals and tradesmen who left their professions to follow their vocation. Others came in very young and their entire adult lives were in the abbey. The bright ones were formed as what was known at the time as “choir monks”, the others became “lay brothers” and worked on the farm (the distinction was abolished after Vatican II, all are now professed monks, whether ordained or not).

It makes no difference to who stayed and who didn’t. Some left who were “career monks” if I can be permitted that term with little formation that could be of use in the secular world besides being a priest, one of the electricians left but not to go back to his trade but to become a diocesan priest, and the other electrician was elected the first abbot and died at age 97 a few years ago. There is NO correlation between professional career (or not) and leaving. What failed is the vocation itself.

The life is not without its hardships. I’m close to several monks and have often been their “shoulder to cry on” when things weren’t going well, and I’ve also had occasion to rejoice with them when they have gone well. The vast majority of them, just as the vast majority of married people, stick with it through thick and thin.

I don’t mean to be uncharitable but you clearly have very little first-hand knowledge about religious life.
 
So you’re saying it’s all about the money.

You don’t understand the nature of the order.

You won’t listen to other posters.

You simply keep on with the mantras of “they can walk away like any other people who make vows and break them”
"They need to walk away if they don’t agree’.
“Bad press equals lower donations”.

I don’t blame Father Ruggero and Deacon Jeff for being rather flabbergasted that they–one a priest, one an actual member of the Order in question–should be completely disregarded by some poster who won’t listen to people who actually know what they’re talking about.

I’m with them. I’m done with this. I may not agree with them on certain subjects, but in this case, I’m behind them 100%. With regard to the Order, they know, far better than you, what they are talking about, and your comments, well-intentioned as they undoubtedly are, are entirely out in left field and in fact, counterproductive.

The courteous thing in this case would be for posters to ‘bow to authority’ on this and either say something like, "I really thought I was right on this but I guess I have a lot to learn’, or simply stop posting if it’s too hard to ‘eat crow’ and admit being ‘not as right as you usually are’, and return to the actual topic in question.
 
So you’re saying it’s all about the money.

You don’t understand the nature of the order.

You won’t listen to other posters.

You simply keep on with the mantras of “they can walk away like any other people who make vows and break them”
"They need to walk away if they don’t agree’.
“Bad press equals lower donations”.

I don’t blame Father Ruggero and Deacon Jeff for being rather flabbergasted that they–one a priest, one an actual member of the Order in question–should be completely disregarded by some poster who won’t listen to people who actually know what they’re talking about.

I’m with them. I’m done with this. I may not agree with them on certain subjects, but in this case, I’m behind them 100%. With regard to the Order, they know, far better than you, what they are talking about, and your comments, well-intentioned as they undoubtedly are, are entirely out in left field and in fact, counterproductive.

The courteous thing in this case would be for posters to ‘bow to authority’ on this and either say something like, "I really thought I was right on this but I guess I have a lot to learn’, or simply stop posting if it’s too hard to ‘eat crow’ and admit being ‘not as right as you usually are’, and return to the actual topic in question.
This is directly from the (name removed by moderator) website. The FAQ page. I added the color changes for clarity.
Funds come from members, private and public donations and vary according to different countries, types of projects and situations. Resources for hospitals and medical activities usually come from agreements stipulated with the national health and social systems. The same is true for emergency services.
In developing countries, activities are often backed by grants from governments, the European Commission or other international organisations. Funds also come from donations or benefactors’ contributions to the Order of Malta’s activities.
Bad press will cut into their donations.

Also from (name removed by moderator) website:
The Order was born as a monastic community inspired by St John the Baptist in the Holy Land around 1050. The Hospitallers ran a hospice providing care and shelter for pilgrims of any faith. In 1113 it received formal acknowledgement as a religious order from Pope Paschal II. Before the loss of the island of Malta (1798) all knights were religious, having taken the three vows of poverty, chastity and obedience.
Still today, some members of the Order of Malta are religious according to Canon Law, others have pronounced the promise of obedience, pledging to follow Christian principles more profoundly while living in society. Most of the Order of Malta’s 13,500 knights and dames are lay members.
Although they have not pronounced any religious vow, they are all devoted to the exercise of Christian virtue and charity, and committed to developing their spirituality within the Catholic Church and to expending their energies collaborating in the medical and social works of the Order.
 
I was not referring to them but to the Lepanto Institute and various blogs that list themselves as news sites, among others that love to exercise episcopal oversight without episcopal oversight.
 
This is from the American (name removed by moderator) website:
Mission of the Order
The Order of St. John of Jerusalem is one of the oldest institutions of Western and Christian civilization. Present in Palestine in around 1050, it is a lay religious Order, traditionally of military, chivalrous, noble nature. Its 13,500 members include Professed Friars and others who have made the promise of obedience. The other Knights and Dames are lay members, devoted to the exercise of Christian virtue and charity. What distinguishes the Knights and Dames of Malta is their commitment to reaching their spiritual perfection within the Church and to expending their energies serving the poor and the sick.
And…
The Finances of the American Association, U.S.A.
The American Association does not have a commercial arm that generates income and does not receive support from the government or other agencies. The Association relies on the personal generosity of its members, friends and corporate gifts. Contributions qualify under section 501-C-3 of the tax code.
orderofmaltaamerican.org/american/finances/

orderofmaltaamerican.org/american/the-order-is/
 
So you’re saying it’s all about the money.

You don’t understand the nature of the order.

You won’t listen to other posters.

You simply keep on with the mantras of “they can walk away like any other people who make vows and break them”
"They need to walk away if they don’t agree’.
“Bad press equals lower donations”.

I don’t blame Father Ruggero and Deacon Jeff for being rather flabbergasted that they–one a priest, one an actual member of the Order in question–should be completely disregarded by some poster who won’t listen to people who actually know what they’re talking about.

I’m with them. I’m done with this. I may not agree with them on certain subjects, but in this case, I’m behind them 100%. With regard to the Order, they know, far better than you, what they are talking about, and your comments, well-intentioned as they undoubtedly are, are entirely out in left field and in fact, counterproductive.

The courteous thing in this case would be for posters to ‘bow to authority’ on this and either say something like, "I really thought I was right on this but I guess I have a lot to learn’, or simply stop posting if it’s too hard to ‘eat crow’ and admit being ‘not as right as you usually are’, and return to the actual topic in question.
Thank you.

I would be remiss if I did not acknowledge your very kind post.

It is, frankly, nothing short of an enigma to me that there are persons who will simply argue, without regard for their own lack of knowledge and experience, with persons who actually hold…and have held for years or decades…the very thing about which the person wants to argue.

Without giving a whole course on the theology of consecrated life as it touches on this matter.

As already clearly and several times said, there are three classes within the Order of Malta, which include vowed Religious, cloistered nuns, Priests who have emitted vows and are conventually part of the Order as well as other priests and prelates who occupy varying categories within the Order; there are laity who have made profession of vow and laity who have made promises, according to the norms of law and which constitute profession of a sacred bond. Those in all of these categories are members of the Order. And all members are bound by sacred bond. How they live out that sacred bond will depend upon the category that they are in.

The Order of Malta has unique privileges in that they are over 900 years old and their customs and practices derive from their antiquity in ways that are without other parallel.

This is not entirely unlike Saint Catherine of Siena or Saint Rose of Lima who, without being cloistered Nuns and living before the moment of Apostolic Sisters in the Dominican family nevertheless professed the Dominican Rule and lived as consecrated Dominicans. Which is why they are depicted in the Dominican habit. They were members of the Dominican Order, while lay women, while living in their respective homes. That is how consecrated life can and does work.

There are solemn vows and simple vows. There are solemn promises. Diocesan priests as well as permanent deacons incardinated in dioceses do not take vows…they make solemn promises. Religious, classically speaking, take various vows of varying categories while those in other Institutes of Perfection take promises. That is a matter of particular law concerning the vocation as well as concerning the Institute of Perfection – but it does not impinge on the reality of definitive incorporation or of sacred bond.

In this case, being in the Order of Malta is effected through the emission of various categories of sacred bonds – which if a person actually lived this reality instead of casting about the Internet for what can be found about it, they would quite well know.

It should not be so hard to comprehend that being a lay person and being a member of an Order from the 11th century are not mutually exclusive…if the person commenting had even a basic knowledge and experience of consecrated life.

The Sovereign Military Order of Malta is funded by the members of the Order throughout the world. They are also recipients of significant governmental funds in those places where they contract to provide medical care and facilities. They also receive funding from many other sources.

There is a lot more that could be said on any of these topics. To what value there is in speculating about such matters, I don’t know. I have no sense that the government of Ireland, to take one example, will be altering their financial arrangements with the (name removed by moderator) for the services (name removed by moderator) provides in Ireland. Whether, to take another example, non-members of the Order who would make a donation to the Order are more or less likely to donate, some may be less and others who have never donated may now choose to donate. The motives and actions of an individuals on a worldwide stage is an imponderable.

It is really a reduction to the absurd – and taking on the character of a farce – to quote an informational page from the headquarters in Rome to people who have lived this reality for years…and decades. I am more than aware of what is found on the Order’s website.

This is like someone who would give their incorrect musings about the military and military life to a military officer who had served in the military. It is not only not amusing, it is actually beyond insulting.

It has become evident that further attempts would be beyond an exercise in utter futility with regard to some…but I felt you should at least have a fuller answer. And I thank you again for your very kind post. It was appreciated.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top