P
pnewton
Guest
Your second link does not mention the bishop. The first is from a questionable source, namely a schismatic, formerly Catholic Church. So as far as facts. this doesn’t qualify.
- Status
S
stanley123
Guest
The headline of the article by Malcolm Gay reads: “Bishop Takes Queen Raymond Burke is highly traditional. That’s why he received the final vows of a transgendered nun.” Is this in accord with Vatican teaching? Not according to the second link.
rftstl.com/issues/2004-08-25/sidebar.html
cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=19829
P
pnewton
Guest
inspiredbylite said:
Ex-communication at Christmas? Maybe instead of asking the wisdom of the the archbishops actions of doing this at Christmas, we should cry at the folly of the priest and church leaders that lead so many of the faithful into an objective state of mortal sins. This is the real tragedy. God does not make styrofoam millstones.
S
stanley123
Guest
I just came back from a workout at the local gym. A fellow there asked me if I had a nice Christmas, and I said yes I did. He then went off into a conversation as to how he had sworn off of drinking and alcohol after he had found Jesus Christ and accepted Him as His personal Savior. I said that was great, but then he continued saying that he was Catholic but had left the Church to become a “Christian” because he didn’t get a good feeling in a Catholic Church when he thought of the news reports of the priests who were molesting innocent children. I was able to get in a few comments, but I was saddened by how people can be led out of the Church when they see the Catholic clergy involved in such scandals. Is this the fault of the people here or is it the fault of some of the Catholic leaders who are not doing the right thing? That is why I gave the links as something that I was reflecting on.
%between%
P
pnewton
Guest
From the first article:
There is no evidence that this sister is a transgender and this statement indicates the bishop believes her to be a she. A letter by one layperson to the nuncio claiming her to be transgender and then circulated through an unknown number of people to the article is hardly fact or evidence of any kind.
This is fast deteriorating into slander and gossip. Since everyone is entitled to their good name, perhaps we should hold off promulgating this rumor in lack of better evidence.
S
stanley123
Guest
The headline of the article reads differently.
W
Walt_Oliver
Guest
This thread is closed. The closing may be temporary or permanent, depending on whether it can be cleaned up. Some things have been posted here that are simply not allowed and most of you should have known better.
While the thread is closed, try to separate yourselves from the situation and do a little introspection. Maybe Christian charity will be more apparent if or when it is reopened.
God bless.
Walt
While the thread is closed, try to separate yourselves from the situation and do a little introspection. Maybe Christian charity will be more apparent if or when it is reopened.
God bless.
Walt
W
Walt_Oliver
Guest
All references to the sex change incident have been removed. Future discussion of this issue has no place in this thread. Carry on, but please stay on topic.
M
mikew262
Guest
Good point. I’m sure many of them are saying: “Whatever!”. They feel God is on their side on this issue, so they are not worried. It really comes down to what God thinks anyway, not an Archbishop; that’s the bottom line.
T
TPJCatholic
Guest
inspired,
Thank you for the responses to my posts. I see no reason to respond because other people here have covered the issues quite well.
I will say that this comes down to obedience. One either believes that Jesus gave the Church (and its leaders) authority, or not. If the Church has Christ given authority, then St. Stan’s must obey, if the Church has no authority, then we can all do as we please. Obviously I believe that Jesus gave the earthly leaders of His one true Church authority in such matters. My prayers are with St. Stan’s with the hope that they will convert back to the faith and that they will take a path out of the mortal sin they have placed themselves in.
Have a happy NEw Year!
Thank you for the responses to my posts. I see no reason to respond because other people here have covered the issues quite well.
I will say that this comes down to obedience. One either believes that Jesus gave the Church (and its leaders) authority, or not. If the Church has Christ given authority, then St. Stan’s must obey, if the Church has no authority, then we can all do as we please. Obviously I believe that Jesus gave the earthly leaders of His one true Church authority in such matters. My prayers are with St. Stan’s with the hope that they will convert back to the faith and that they will take a path out of the mortal sin they have placed themselves in.
Have a happy NEw Year!
C
Catholic29
Guest
Even with Archbishop Burke being right in this case, it appears he has gotten himself into a pickle. Because it is apparent that many do not understand canon law or even the purpose for having it to begin with, even among some who claim to be Catholic. And are now regarding Burke as nothing more than a money hungry tyrant, which in reality is not the case if they only understood all the details involved.
Never a time when more prayer is needed than now…
This St. Stanislaus situation is UGLY and growing uglier by the day, and is a lose-lose situation for all parties involved, no matter who is right. If only Jesus would come down and straighten things out.
Never a time when more prayer is needed than now…
T
The_Hammer
Guest
It is the Abp who VIOLATED A PERPETUAL RIGHT of the parish given to them by the diocese. It is the same as BREAKING AN OATH given to St. Stan.I think we have been witnessing a renewal of the faith over the last several years, and St. Stan’s is just one more stop along the road to a much holier Church. IMO, we are starting to see the nominal Catholics, and the CINOs start to pull away from Holy Mother Church, and eventually the Church will be left with true believers. That will complete the renewal, and after that we will witness a period of growth that has not been seen for a very long time.
The struggle at St. Stan’s has merely been another example of people who claim to be Catholic, who are in fact Protestant at heart. It is incredibly sad, yet the Church is served better by people who willingly obey and follow.
Obviously we need to pray for those at St. Stan’s, yet we should also pray that the Church will continue its path to true renewal. The Church will have fewer people in the pwes, yet it will be a robust faith that will remain a beacon to the world. IMO.
What are they supposed to do? Submit to abuse from a bishop who accepted the vows of a transexual as a Catholic nun? and who would probably liquidate the parish and sell the church to pay for all the sexual abuse of his priests? or may be even “renovate” the church to meet the “decrees of vatican II”?
Hard decision. I do not know what I wouljd have done.
L
Larry_Schaub
Guest
I don’t believe for a minute that this whole thing is mearly over money.I would rather suspect that other differences were noted by the diocese.I also believe God would be firm in His convictions and if you ate the apple and are not remorsefull,He has a place for you.
One another note,not every apple that comes off the tree is a good one.Are priests not human? “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone” Father Corapi says,“hate the sin,love the sinner!”
Pray, help them get the strength to repent. I’ll keep praying for St. Stans. This sinner still loves the sinners!
Happy New Year to all! May God bless you all and help us become more like Himself.Most of all let us not be afraid to admit to our short comings and look to Him for guidence and strength.
One another note,not every apple that comes off the tree is a good one.Are priests not human? “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone” Father Corapi says,“hate the sin,love the sinner!”
Pray, help them get the strength to repent. I’ll keep praying for St. Stans. This sinner still loves the sinners!
Happy New Year to all! May God bless you all and help us become more like Himself.Most of all let us not be afraid to admit to our short comings and look to Him for guidence and strength.
E
EtienneGilson
Guest
I can’t help but wonder what would be the reaction of this forum if St. Stan’s was located in LA under Cardinal Mahony or in Milwaukee under Cardinal Weakland or Bishop Clarke in Rochester.
St. Stan’s had magisterial permission to operate as it did but this status was brought into question a number of decades later with the codification of canon law in 1918.
It is also simulateously ironic that the Dioceses of Spokan and Portland and currently arguing that the parish property is not the property of the diocese.
If this case should eventually warrant Papal intervention, I cannot help but think that St. Stan’s previous position of independance will be confirmed.
St. Stan’s had magisterial permission to operate as it did but this status was brought into question a number of decades later with the codification of canon law in 1918.
It is also simulateously ironic that the Dioceses of Spokan and Portland and currently arguing that the parish property is not the property of the diocese.
If this case should eventually warrant Papal intervention, I cannot help but think that St. Stan’s previous position of independance will be confirmed.
L
legeorge
Guest
inspiredbylite said:
C
Chris_Jacobsen
Guest
C
Chris_Jacobsen
Guest
Here is a quote from the St. Stanislaus Kosta church website. It is found in the section Archbishop Burke’s Record in Wisconsin-Immaculate Deception.
saveststans.com/
“His hard-line stances often spilled over into the eccentric: He’d pulled his diocese out of Church World Services’ annual Crop Walk because the agency advocates birth control. He’d criticized J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter series of children’s books. He’d spearheaded a controversial $25 million shrine in La Crosse honoring Our Lady of Guadalupe. Most remarkably, he’d ordered priests in his diocese to deny Communion to Catholic politicians who supported euthanasia or abortion rights.”
This quote indicates that not only are the ringleaders at St. Stanislaus Kosta schismatic, but also heretical and believe that innocent people should be brutally hacked up in pieces-which is what abortion really is. In other words these ringleaders are incredibly cruel and evil people. They even dispise the Mother of God so much that they do not want anyone to build a $25 million dollar shrine honoring her.
saveststans.com/
“His hard-line stances often spilled over into the eccentric: He’d pulled his diocese out of Church World Services’ annual Crop Walk because the agency advocates birth control. He’d criticized J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter series of children’s books. He’d spearheaded a controversial $25 million shrine in La Crosse honoring Our Lady of Guadalupe. Most remarkably, he’d ordered priests in his diocese to deny Communion to Catholic politicians who supported euthanasia or abortion rights.”
This quote indicates that not only are the ringleaders at St. Stanislaus Kosta schismatic, but also heretical and believe that innocent people should be brutally hacked up in pieces-which is what abortion really is. In other words these ringleaders are incredibly cruel and evil people. They even dispise the Mother of God so much that they do not want anyone to build a $25 million dollar shrine honoring her.
E
EtienneGilson
Guest
Chris Jacobsen:
Your failure to note that or your deliberate misrepresentation of the information is itself another example of ill-founded obedience verging on slander or possibly lying. Is this the lengths people are willing to go to protect a bishop simply because he is “orthodox”?
Nowhere does the website state that the board of directors or Fr. Bozek disagree with withholding communion to politicians who are pro-choice. That is only the opinion of one journalist.
However, it should be noted that many adamently pro-life members of the clergy do not see withholding communion to politicians as the proper pastoral approach to the problem. Not withholding communion and supporting abortion are not the same thing and claiming that they are heretics is a desperate attempt to defame them, nothing short of deliberate dishonesty or serious confusion on your behalf.
That information is only found on an article originally published by the Riverside Times which the website has decided to carry on their site.
Your failure to note that or your deliberate misrepresentation of the information is itself another example of ill-founded obedience verging on slander or possibly lying. Is this the lengths people are willing to go to protect a bishop simply because he is “orthodox”?
Nowhere does the website state that the board of directors or Fr. Bozek disagree with withholding communion to politicians who are pro-choice. That is only the opinion of one journalist.
However, it should be noted that many adamently pro-life members of the clergy do not see withholding communion to politicians as the proper pastoral approach to the problem. Not withholding communion and supporting abortion are not the same thing and claiming that they are heretics is a desperate attempt to defame them, nothing short of deliberate dishonesty or serious confusion on your behalf.
J
joshua_b
Guest
As I follow this thread, it becomes apparent to me that there is a much deeper and more disturbing problem within the Church, and this situation only personifies what the lack of proper Catechesis in the United States for the last several decades has finally shown itself to render.
The Protestant “rules of men” (as opposed to “God’s law”) rhetoric leads me to believe that many who consider themselves Catholic either don’t understand or choose to reject the foundation on which our faith was built…the foundation laid by Jesus himself.
Jesus established a Church on earth…a church that would persevere until the end of time, that the gates of hell would not overcome (that means that this church is still in existence today). He built this church on Peter, and gave him the authority to bind and loose. (that means the church has a definite leader, who has the authority to establish rules to govern this church). The rest of the apostles were also given teaching and governing authority (bishops), and were told that whoever rejected them rejected the one who sent them, and ultimately rejected the one who sent Him (we’re talking about the bishops here). If we choose to reject these principles, then we are choosing to reject the church that Jesus gave us to help us to salvation…the Catholic Church.
The Protestant “rules of men” (as opposed to “God’s law”) rhetoric leads me to believe that many who consider themselves Catholic either don’t understand or choose to reject the foundation on which our faith was built…the foundation laid by Jesus himself.
Jesus established a Church on earth…a church that would persevere until the end of time, that the gates of hell would not overcome (that means that this church is still in existence today). He built this church on Peter, and gave him the authority to bind and loose. (that means the church has a definite leader, who has the authority to establish rules to govern this church). The rest of the apostles were also given teaching and governing authority (bishops), and were told that whoever rejected them rejected the one who sent them, and ultimately rejected the one who sent Him (we’re talking about the bishops here). If we choose to reject these principles, then we are choosing to reject the church that Jesus gave us to help us to salvation…the Catholic Church.
J
joshua_b
Guest
I’ve touched on this before, but it keeps coming to mind so I’ll reemphasize the point.
Jesus said in regard to the Pharisees to “do as they say, just not as they do”. Any Christian knows the animosity between Jesus and the Pharisees and why, but Jesus still said they were to be obeyed. The Pharisees were hypocritical, less than pious, and very fond of the “rules of men”, and yet Jesus NEVER told anyone anything other than to be obedient to them. Jesus himself was obedient to them (and his parents, and the Roman government for that matter). If God himself gave us the example of obedience to human authority, who are we to be any different ?
Jesus said in regard to the Pharisees to “do as they say, just not as they do”. Any Christian knows the animosity between Jesus and the Pharisees and why, but Jesus still said they were to be obeyed. The Pharisees were hypocritical, less than pious, and very fond of the “rules of men”, and yet Jesus NEVER told anyone anything other than to be obedient to them. Jesus himself was obedient to them (and his parents, and the Roman government for that matter). If God himself gave us the example of obedience to human authority, who are we to be any different ?
- Status