Hundreds Attend 'Illicit' Mass in Mo

  • Thread starter Thread starter WanderAimlessly
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
palmas,

*I’m just saying in the ecumenical climate that we have today, what with everyone being saved, no one going to hell, everyone being a saint, all churches, Catholic, Christian or otherwise being on the same page so to speak, how can the Church really expect these people to believe that they are truly excommunicated? The Church has painted itself into a theological corner over the past forty years or so.
*
==> I agree 100%! Perhaps actions like what Archbishop Burke did will start to make Catholics think about their faith. You hit it exactly right about the climate today, that everyone is saved, etc…

==> I will say though the Church never said non-Catholics will be saved, it simply said salvation for non-Catholics is possible. That is certainly true. The corner they have painted themselves into is the fact that few people understand that the one true safest place to be is in the Catholic Church. It is the difference between being in the middle of the ocean with a leaky wood row boat (non-Catholics), versus a huge ocean liner (Catholic Church). In either case one can lose salvation, yet in the Catholic Church there are far more tools to keep us afloat.

==> There has also been a very critical loss of teaching regarding Jesus’ words about binding and loosing…the Church has Christ given authority to excommunicate people and in days gone by excommunication was seen as the worst thing that could happen, worse then death and even Kings feared it.
 
40.png
palmas85:
Is it true he allowed the consecration of a transexual nun?
Click to expand...
Check out the second link at:
saveststans.org/burkeWi.html
 
40.png
TPJCatholic:
I am sure the parishioners of St. Stan’s feel they were driven out. Yet, all they had to do was to obey and they would not be “out.”.
Click to expand...
Now is it the case that the parish is supposed to obey the bishop, but the bishop does not have to obey the Vatican? For example, is it true that the bishop has consecrated a transgendered male as a nun and that this is against the rules of the Church?
cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=19829
 
What might someone suggest the Holy Father do?
My thought,here’s the rules.Are you Catholic or not?If you’re not,we will continue to pray for you to see the error of your ways.
Jesus said"forgive them for they know not what they do"
Make room on that ocean liner for me.I’m not getting off!
I have a lot to learn,I’m one of the people that didn’t learn all that I should have during my years in Catholic grade school.It wasn’t taught,too liberal.
Thank GOD for EWTN and Mother Angelica and people who help with these forums!!!
 
40.png
stanley123:
Now is it the case that the parish is supposed to obey the bishop, but the bishop does not have to obey the Vatican? For example, is it true that the bishop has consecrated a transgendered male as a nun and that this is against the rules of the Church?
cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=19829
Click to expand...
Questions like this make your agenda clear… slam the bishop since you can’t justify what St Stan’s is doing.

Crawl back in your hole or come up with some facts - all the facts.
 
“I am sure the parishioners of St. Stan’s feel they were driven out. Yet, all they had to do was to obey and they would not be “out.””*

All Jesus had to do was obey and he wouldn’t have been crucifide.
I applaud the good people at St. Stans for standing up to a tyrant. Being an Archbishop does not make one right. An Archbishop is still a human.
 
40.png
stanley123:
For the facts check out the second link here:
saveststans.org/burkeWi.html
and then check out the ruling from the Vatican here:
cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=19829
Click to expand...
The first site is “their” site, what do you reckon they would say? Doesn’t the clear ruling by the Holy See mean anything?

As for the second, I cannot locate any credible source that says Archbishop Burke did “consecrate” or “allow the consecration of” a transgendered nun. The report says that the Holy See’s ruling (you seem anxious to cite the lawful authority here, but NOT for the problem of Saint Stan’s?) was in answer to a bishop’s question, not that a bishop had already done it (and besides, has it occured to you that the bishop in question may well have not known that “she” had once been “he” until after the fact?). It certainly doesn’t mention a bishop’s name.

You seem anxious to fault the Archbishop. Why?
 
40.png
inspiredbylite:
“I am sure the parishioners of St. Stan’s feel they were driven out. Yet, all they had to do was to obey and they would not be “out.””

All Jesus had to do was obey and he wouldn’t have been crucifide.
I applaud the good people at St. Stans for standing up to a tyrant. Being an Archbishop does not make one right. An Archbishop is still a human.
Click to expand...
But the Holy See has said that the arrangement that engendered the dispute is NOT in accordance with canon law and that the situation needed to be brought in compliance with that law. That’s all the Archbishop is attempting to do. Is the Holy See a tyrant as well?
 
40.png
JKirkLVNV:
But the Holy See has said that the arrangement that engendered the dispute is NOT in accordance with canon law and that the situation needed to be brought in compliance with that law. That’s all the Archbishop is attempting to do. Is the Holy See a tyrant as well?
Click to expand...
I couldn’t of said that any better myself.

When taking the fact that the Holy See (the Vatican) has backed up the Archbishop on this into account, there can be no more debating whether Burke was wrong or not. That case is settled, it is only up to the folks at St. Stan’s whether they will agree to his terms for lifting the excommunications. Terms of which every other parish in the Archdiocese have to follow as well.

If only cooler heads and the light of faith and reason would prevail here…
 
40.png
JKirkLVNV:
But the Holy See has said that the arrangement that engendered the dispute is NOT in accordance with canon law and that the situation needed to be brought in compliance with that law. That’s all the Archbishop is attempting to do. Is the Holy See a tyrant as well?
Click to expand...
The past archbishops of St. Louis did not feel the need to “reclaim” St. Stans. Why this one? It seems pretty clear to me, $$$. Let the people worship.

Does Jesus really care about canon law? What is right? Obeying a tyrant or following the Holy Spirt, which has been guiding Fr. Bozek and his flock?

Should the the people of St. Stans obey a law that can be interperated in any way that fits one’s argument? I am going to side with God on this one, he’s against greed, which places him in St. Stan’s corner.

As far as the Holy See being Tyrants…they have been known to make poor descisions in the past. Tyranical even. You tell me.
 
40.png
inspiredbylite:
The past archbishops of St. Louis did not feel the need to “reclaim” St. Stans.
Click to expand...
This I believe is not correct: the previous ordinary, Rigali, tried for several years to bring this parish into proper canonical conformance.
40.png
inspiredbylite:
Does Jesus really care about canon law? What is right? Obeying a tyrant or following the Holy Spirt, which has been guiding Fr. Bozek and his flock?
Click to expand...
Jesus certainly had respect for the laws and customs of His time and since canon law did not exist then the qustion is moot.
One has to establish that the ordinary of the diocese is a tyrant and is NOT following the Holy Spirit before one can make the inferences in your post.
40.png
inspiredbylite:
Should the the people of St. Stans obey a law that can be interperated in any way that fits one’s argument? I am going to side with God on this one, he’s against greed, which places him in St. Stan’s corner.
Click to expand...
May I respectfully suggest that you are getting a bit carried away with your own rhetoric? You nor anyone else in a position to declare that this parish or its priest leader have engaged the Almighty on their “side”.
40.png
inspiredbylite:
As far as the Holy See being Tyrants…they have been known to make poor descisions in the past. Tyranical even. You tell me.
Click to expand...
All men have made bad decisions…in fact though, i’d say the record of individuals engaging in separating themselves from their bishops and the body of the main church has a far poorer record than those who subjected themselves to obedience, as did so many of our saints, even when their personal preferences would have been something different indeed.
 
40.png
inspiredbylite:
All Jesus had to do was obey and he wouldn’t have been crucifide.
I applaud the good people at St. Stans for standing up to a tyrant. Being an Archbishop does not make one right. An Archbishop is still a human.
Click to expand...
Could you offer some credible argument that Archbishop Burke is a tyrant – and since so far canon law, the Vatican and his predecessor all agree that he is acting in accordance with his responsibiliites as ordinary, you will have to do some digging I assume.

And yes, Archbishops are human, which is why they need our support when they attempt to meet their responsibilities whether popular or not – we need to encourage the appointment of men who will uphold the statutes and pastoral care of our fellow Catholics. It can often be a thankless and lonely job. No bishop likes this kind of media notoriety and it must be a difficult task to undertake.
 
inspiredbylite said:
stltoday.com/stltoday/news/columnists.nsf/billmcclellan/story/50474D4F62DA43BF862570E300381656?OpenDocument

made me laugh
Click to expand...

Quote from the article:
In that sense, it’s really a shame that Roman Catholic priests cannot marry, because if anybody needs a wife, it’s Archbishop Raymond Burke.

You think that is funny? Just another underhanded slam at the celibacy requirement in our church not to mention some pretty heroic women married to men who undertook great risks and chellenges to uphold and do the right thing in their lives with the full support of these women.
 
40.png
stanley123:
See the site for info:
saveststans.com/
Click to expand...
I checked this link. This church, however, has now taken the path of Martin Luther and decided their Polish heritage is more important than their spiritual heritage. Or maybe it is just the money.

Either way, it is they who left the Church and they are no longer a part of the Catholic Church.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top