From Pope Benedict XVI: Conciliar documents: A compass to guide the ship of the church

[TrueLight]

Hey wait a minute! Salesians, Franciscans and Piarists have much more experience in catechesis than do Dominicans. Dominicans and Jesuits are great educators, but the young is not their area of expertise.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

That can change.

Are you referring to third orders as well?

 

[TrueLight]

In my own diocese, we have a synod going for the year of faith. The Archbishop and two members of his staff made themselves available to more than 110 parishes. It was a lot of work, but it paid off. They selected parishes in different geographical ares of the Archdiocese so that people could attend.

The Archbishop sat, said not a word. There were three questions:

1. What do you like about your archdiocese?
2. What concerns do you have about your archdiocese?
3. What would you suggest to address these concerns?

There were open mikes. The Archbishop just listened for 2.5 hours each time. This went on for 7 consecutive Saturdays. Thousands of Catholics attended the listening sessions. Those who could not attend were given a form at their parishes to mail in to the synod office.

All of the comments were recorded, tallied and grouped according to concerns. From there, focus groups were created to respond to these concerns. The focus groups will be meeting for four hours each month, during their work time. I mean that to make this more serious. those who are on the focus groups will meet on a workday. More than 1,000 individuals will be taking an afternoon off every month for the next year to address these concerns according to the mind of the Church.

These reports are then returned to the Archbishop. Obviously, not every concern can be addressed. Based on the findings of the focus groups, there will be three or four concerns that will be identified. Then an action plan will be put into place.

I know for sure that one of them is Adult Faith Formation for the man in the pew, Directors of Ministry (includes clergy and religious), Directors of Religious Education, RCIA and ongoing adult faith formation.

This is truly wonderful. I hope it catches on in other dioceses.

 

[JReducation]

That can change.

Are you referring to third orders as well?

The third orders regular have been involved in the education of the young for a very long time, especially in the USA. The OFS has never been involved in education. I don’t know about the lay OPs.

This is truly wonderful. I hope it catches on in other dioceses.

Don’t be surprised if Cardinal Dolan starts something up in NY. He’s very dynamic and he’s a hard working man. This stuff requires a lot of work, but he does not give me the impression of someone who shies away from hard work.

The problem that you folks in NY have is the geographic extension of the Archdiocese. It goes pretty far beyond they city, does it not or am I mistaken? I don’t know the boundaries. Most dioceses are geographically compact.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

 

[TrueLight]

The third orders regular have been involved in the education of the young for a very long time, especially in the USA. The OFS has never been involved in education. I don’t know about the lay OPs.

Don’t be surprised if Cardinal Dolan starts something up in NY. He’s very dynamic and he’s a hard working man. This stuff requires a lot of work, but he does not give me the impression of someone who shies away from hard work.

The problem that you folks in NY have is the geographic extension of the Archdiocese. It goes pretty far beyond they city, does it not or am I mistaken? I don’t know the boundaries. Most dioceses are geographically compact.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

According to Wiki:

The Roman Catholic Archdiocese of New York covers New York, Bronx, and Richmond counties in New York City (coterminous with the boroughs of Manhattan, The Bronx, and Staten Island, respectively), as well as Dutchess, Orange, Putnam, Rockland, Sullivan, Ulster, and Westchester counties in New York state. There are 405 parishes. The Archdiocese of New York is the metropolitan see of the ecclesiastical province of New York which includes the suffragan dioceses of Brooklyn, Albany, Buffalo, Syracuse, Rochester, Ogdensburg, and Rockville Centre.
**
The Latin title of the archdiocese is Archidioecesis Neo-Eboracensis, and the corporate title is Archdiocese of New York**.

I don’t know how York and Eboracensis are at all similar, but okay, LOL.

 

[JReducation]

According to Wiki:

I don’t know how York and Eboracensis are at all similar, but okay, LOL.

I have no idea where any of those counties are, so I’ll take their word for it that it’s big.

Believe it or not, Eboracensis is York in Latin. When Britania was under Roman occupation the Romans called the city Eboracum.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

 

[Oneofthewomen]

I have no idea where any of those counties are, so I’ll take their word for it that it’s big.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

That’s pretty much ALL of New York state!

 

[Dirt]

Actually, I don’t deal with any of that stuff nor do I let it bother me. I pay very close attention to what the current pontiff is saying about the Council. What he’s saying is very consistent with what the Church has always believed. I feel no need to go back to St. Pius X or anyone before that to find out what to think about Vatican II. I believe that Pope Benedict is doing a perfectly fine job at explaining it.

Have you been reading his daily posts on Vatican II? He has had one on the news every day this week. It’s not a love fest. It’s more of mandate to Catholics to learn to live with Vatican II by trying to understand it in a prayerful manner and allowing ourselves to be guided by his Magisterium. We have to be very careful in bringing up former popes not to juxtapose the Magisterium of two popes, when in fact they are not speaking about the same thing.

If we read what you cited from St. Pius X and what Pope Benedict said this week, they’re not talking about the same thing. They’re both telling the truth. The problem is not the Council or the popes. The problem is the individual who is not paying close attention to the details and the nuance of each pope and each document.

For me to understand Vatican II, St. Pius is not going to be very helpful, because he never dreamed of it. Pope Benedict is much more helpful. He was there. Right now, he has a synod in progress with the presidents of the different conferences of bishops and the living fathers of Vatican II. They are speaking precisely about what they meant and why they wrote what they wrote. St. Pius cannot answer those questions, but these men can.

If anyone does not have it, there is a news service that’s available to the laity, Vatican Information Service. You can have it sent to your email every morning, if you subscribe. There you will find the answer to many of these questions. Look at how Pope Benedict answers these questions and which questions he considers so silly that he completely ignores them.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

I understand your position, since i have seen similar answers from you on other posts. And i absolutely agree that H.H. Pope St. Pius X was living in a different time as it pertains to Vatican Council II. But the encyclical He penned does address the errors that were committed using the Documents of The Council under the “spirit of Vatican II”.
I also agree with your statements regarding H.H. Pope Benedict XVI concerning the interpretations of the Council, such as:

“I have often insisted on the need to return, as it were, to the “letter” of the Council—that is to its texts—also to draw from them its authentic spirit, and why I have repeated that the true legacy of Vatican II is to be found in them. Reference to the documents saves us from extremes of anachronistic nostalgia and running too far ahead, and allows what is new to be welcomed in a context of continuity. The Council did not formulate anything new in matters of faith, nor did it wish to replace what was ancient. Rather, it concerned itself with seeing that the same faith might continue to be lived in the present day, that it might remain a living faith in a world of change.”

But for 50 years we have not had such a “return” to the letter of the Documents. We in the pews have been subjected to one novelty after another with little or no correction from our Ordinaries. For 50 years there has been and continues to be little if any regard to the Actual letter of the Documents except to use them as an excuse as to why “We don’t do that anymore”. For 50 years we have seen a continuing reduction in Mass attendance, a weakening of Catechesis, A loss of reverence in the Sanctuary, and an embarrassing loss of belief in Catholic Doctrine.
So one may state that “Actually, I don’t deal with any of that stuff nor do I let it bother me”, from a position of relative safety within your order, but for those of us who have lived, and continue to live, with the real results of a poorly implemented Vatican Council II what His Holiness Pope Saint Pius X warned against in his encyclical against the Modernists seems very relevant indeed. And continues to be relevant every day another news article comes out about this or that dissenting group of Priests, Bishops, Nuns or Laity.

I sincerely Pray that His Holiness Pope Benedict is successful in using the Year of Faith to clarify, and return to, the actual intent of the Council.

Pax

 

[TimothyH]

The Roman Catholic Archdiocese of New York covers New York, Bronx, and Richmond counties in New York City (coterminous with the boroughs of Manhattan, The Bronx, and Staten Island, respectively), as well as Dutchess, Orange, Putnam, Rockland, Sullivan, Ulster, and Westchester counties in New York state. There are 405 parishes. The Archdiocese of New York is the metropolitan see of the ecclesiastical province of New York which includes the suffragan dioceses of Brooklyn, Albany, Buffalo, Syracuse, Rochester, Ogdensburg, and Rockville Centre.

That’s pretty much ALL of New York state!

The Archdioces of New York itself only covers a few counties in New York State. It doesn’t even cover Brooklyn. Brookly is its own diocese. Most people don’t realize that Brookly is actually a seperate continent but that’s a post for another thread. Long Island is also its own dioceses - the Diocese of Rockville Center.

Several of these diocese make up an Ecclisiastical Province of New York. That does cover much of New York State and the Archdiocese of New York is the seat, but the Archdiocese of New York itself is small in geographic area compared to many others, such as the two which cover the entire state of Georgia.

http://freepages.history.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~localcatholic/US-NewYorkNY_files/image006.jpg

-Tim-

 

[TrueLight]

The Archdioces of New York itself only covers a few counties in New York State. It doesn’t even cover Brooklyn. Brookly is its own diocese. Most people don’t realize that Brookly is actually a seperate continent but that’s a post for another thread. Long Island is also its own dioceses - the Diocese of Rockville Center.

Several of these diocese make up an Ecclisiastical Province of New York. That does cover much of New York State and the Archdiocese of New York is the seat, but the Archdiocese of New York itself is small in geographic area compared to many others, such as the two which cover the entire state of Georgia.

Do you mean the diocese of NY does not cover Brooklyn?

The diocese of Brooklyn includes the boroughs of Brooklyn and Queens, but they both fall under the Archdiocese of New York.

Edited: I think I totally don’t get what an archdiocese is, LOL.

 

[TimothyH]

There is a recognition that there are people out there who are knowledgeable and experts in different areas of Catholic faith and that if everyone brings their piece to the table, we can do beautiful things for God.

If we pull in different directions, nothing will change.

Double Amen.

Hey wait a minute! Salesians, Franciscans and Piarists have much more experience in catechesis than do Dominicans. Dominicans and Jesuits are great educators, but the young is not their area of expertise.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

I meant no offense. See quote from Brother JR at the top of this post.

My experience is with a community of Ciscercian Monks, the “Nashville Dominicans” or Dominican Sisters of St. Cecilia, one of whom was appointed to head the Catholic Education department at USCCB and five who teach my daughters, and two Franciscans who are very dear to me - one who is in Brazil on mission another who lives in Flordia somewhere and posts on the internet quite a bit.

The information about the Synod in the diocese was fascinating. The Bishop sounds like a real mench.

-Tim-

 

[TimothyH]

Do you mean the diocese of NY does not cover Brooklyn?

The diocese of Brooklyn includes the boroughs of Brooklyn and Queens, but they both fall under the Archdiocese of New York

Maybe my understanding of an Archdioces is not correct.

My understanding is that the Bishop of a dioceses is independent. My understanding is that Bishop Nicholas DiMarzio (Brooklyn) is independent, or relatively independant from Archbishop Dolan. I am willing to be corrected and if so will withdraw what I have said.

I apologize for taking the thread off topic.

How bout them conciliar documents, eh!?

-Tim-

 

[TimothyH]

Do you mean the diocese of NY does not cover Brooklyn?

The diocese of Brooklyn includes the boroughs of Brooklyn and Queens, but they both fall under the Archdiocese of New York.

Edited: I think I totally don’t get what an archdiocese is, LOL.

Maybe great minds think alike. I could be wrong. I’ll just sit and listen now.

-Tim-

 

[JReducation]

Brooklyn is not part of the Archdiocese of NY. Brooklyn extends to Long Island and to Rockville Center, where ever that is.

I’ll bet that it’s a historical point. Once upon a time, Brooklyn was an independent city and New York was not an archdiocese. The original archdiocese of the United States was Baltimore. Then they started to chop pieces off, as the population grew.

An archdiocese is the see of the Metropolitan. The Metropolitan is the President of the Conference of Bishops for a particular province. The State of NY is a province. The Archdiocese of NY is the see of the Metropolitan for the Province of NY.

Some states are have very large numbers of Catholics and are divided into two provinces. California is one of them. The Archbishop of Los Angeles is the Metropolitan for one of the two conferences of bishops in California. The Archbishop of San Francisco, is the Metropolitan for the other conference of bishops.

There is a national conference of bishops and there are regional conferences. We can’t call them state, because not all of them cover an entire state and some cover more than one state.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

 

[YoungTradCath]

Maybe my understanding of an Archdioces is not correct.

My understanding is that the Bishop of a dioceses is independent. My understanding is that Bishop Nicholas DiMarzio (Brooklyn) is independent, or relatively independant from Archbishop Dolan. I am willing to be corrected and if so will withdraw what I have said.

I apologize for taking the thread off topic.

How bout them conciliar documents, eh!?

-Tim-

Each diocese is part of a province, and each province is led as Br. JR notes above. Each diocesan bishop is independent of the Metropolitan Archbishop of the province; they can teach, rule and sanctify their flocks.

 

[TimothyH]

Each diocese is part of a province, and each province is led as Br. JR notes above. Each diocesan bishop is independent of the Metropolitan Archbishop of the province; they can teach, rule and sanctify their flocks.

That’s what I thought. Thank you.

So True Light’s ordinary is Bishop Nicholas DiMarzio.

-Tim-

 

[TrueLight]

That’s what I thought. Thank you.

So True Light’s ordinary is Bishop Nicholas DiMarzio.

-Tim-

Thanks Br Jr

I knew I didn’t get what an archdiocese was lol.

I guess technically he is my bishop.

However I attend mass in manhattan, was received into the church in Manhattan, was confirmed in manhattan, if i remarry, it will probably be in Manhattan. If I can help it, my funeral will be there too.

But I think that’s the territorial parish debate.

 

[1AugustSon7]

I understand your position, since i have seen similar answers from you on other posts. And i absolutely agree that H.H. Pope St. Pius X was living in a different time as it pertains to Vatican Council II. But the encyclical He penned does address the errors that were committed using the Documents of The Council under the “spirit of Vatican II”.
I also agree with your statements regarding H.H. Pope Benedict XVI concerning the interpretations of the Council, such as:

“I have often insisted on the need to return, as it were, to the “letter” of the Council—that is to its texts—also to draw from them its authentic spirit, and why I have repeated that the true legacy of Vatican II is to be found in them. Reference to the documents saves us from extremes of anachronistic nostalgia and running too far ahead, and allows what is new to be welcomed in a context of continuity. The Council did not formulate anything new in matters of faith, nor did it wish to replace what was ancient. Rather, it concerned itself with seeing that the same faith might continue to be lived in the present day, that it might remain a living faith in a world of change.”

But for 50 years we have not had such a “return” to the letter of the Documents. We in the pews have been subjected to one novelty after another with little or no correction from our Ordinaries. For 50 years there has been and continues to be little if any regard to the Actual letter of the Documents except to use them as an excuse as to why “We don’t do that anymore”. For 50 years we have seen a continuing reduction in Mass attendance, a weakening of Catechesis, A loss of reverence in the Sanctuary, and an embarrassing loss of belief in Catholic Doctrine.
So one may state that “Actually, I don’t deal with any of that stuff nor do I let it bother me”, from a position of relative safety within your order, but for those of us who have lived, and continue to live, with the real results of a poorly implemented Vatican Council II what His Holiness Pope Saint Pius X warned against in his encyclical against the Modernists seems very relevant indeed. And continues to be relevant every day another news article comes out about this or that dissenting group of Priests, Bishops, Nuns or Laity.

I sincerely Pray that His Holiness Pope Benedict is successful in using the Year of Faith to clarify, and return to, the actual intent of the Council.

Pax

Well, the actual intent of the Council was the intent that was understood, received and promulgated by the Holy See.

As for enforcing a strict adherence to doctrine by all (1.2 billion) Catholics: the test of Humanae Vitae probably caused a lot of the hierarchy to become timid in literally enforcing orthodoxy; if they won’t listen to the Pope, why would they listen to lil’ ol’ me, the Bishop of ___ ?

Vatican II had nothing to do with contraception; you can’t blame Vatican II for the widespread neglect of, for instance, Humanae Vitae.

The Year of Faith has a lot of insistence on proper or expanded catechesis. At my parish, on the week the Year of Faith was announced, the very large attendance (up dramatically, I’ve noticed, since the liturgical reforms and a clearly active commitment by the parish/pastor to improve the quality of the liturgy) was treated to an excellent free treatise that wonderfully - impressively, even - expounds the Apostles’ Creed. This strategy is far more likely to take widespread root and bear fruit long-term than a sort of attempt to hammer down on people, especially these days when most people are already overburdened and struggling through life.

As a Spanish mentor of mine once kept (patiently) telling (and then reminding) me in my more zealous early twenties: ‘poco a poco’, that is, ‘little by little.’ Indeed, his very patience in telling and reminding me was itself an example of what he meant in practice; and as a consequence, I have never forgotten it, even though he imbibed it to me as it were gently, patiently bearing or tolerating my more earnest youthfulness that wanted to know everything, and more, now.

 

[JReducation]

Thanks Br Jr

I knew I didn’t get what an archdiocese was lol.

I guess technically he is my bishop.

However I attend mass in manhattan, was received into the church in Manhattan, was confirmed in manhattan, if i remarry, it will probably be in Manhattan. If I can help it, my funeral will be there too.

But I think that’s the territorial parish debate.

Your ordinary is the diocesan bishop where you live. If you live in one of the areas covered by the Archdiocese of New York, your ordinary is Cardinal Dolan. If you live in Brooklyn, New Jersey or Upstate NY, then you’re incardinated into someone else’s diocese.

You don’t belong to the diocese where you’re received. You belong to the diocese of your baptism, if you’re a child or the diocese of your domicile, if you’re an adult. If you were to marry outside of your diocese, you need your pastor’s permission. Actually, you need the bishop’s permission; however, bishops in the USA have delegated this to pastors. There are too many people moving around the country for the bishops to stay on top of it all.

There is one way to marry outside of your diocese without permission. Mary a person who lives in the other diocese. If you marry someone who lives in the Archdiocese of Boston and you’re marrying in Boston, then you don’t have to ask for permission. You can’t be married in two separate dioceses. It’s either his or hers.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

 

[TrueLight]

Your ordinary is the diocesan bishop where you live. If you live in one of the areas covered by the Archdiocese of New York, your ordinary is Cardinal Dolan. If you live in Brooklyn, New Jersey or Upstate NY, then you’re incardinated into someone else’s diocese.

You don’t belong to the diocese where you’re received. You belong to the diocese of your baptism, if you’re a child or the diocese of your domicile, if you’re an adult. If you were to marry outside of your diocese, you need your pastor’s permission. Actually, you need the bishop’s permission; however, bishops in the USA have delegated this to pastors. There are too many people moving around the country for the bishops to stay on top of it all.

There is one way to marry outside of your diocese without permission. Mary a person who lives in the other diocese. If you marry someone who lives in the Archdiocese of Boston and you’re marrying in Boston, then you don’t have to ask for permission. You can’t be married in two separate dioceses. It’s either his or hers.

Finally,

Br. JR, FFV

Okay. I don’t want to derail the thread so I won’t say anything more on this topic.