Pastor Style

[superamazingman]

The parishoners are not ignorant. They see the changes being made in their parish as the begining of heading down a slippery slope of regressing to Pre Vatican II days. I am proud of them for standing up for themselves.

You’re getting very close to heresy here. The pre VII church is still the same as the post VII church, and by the way, most of the things that happened after VII were not actually asked for by VII, but rather were innovations made up by those who thought they knew better. Throwing out the new innovations that never should have been there is in no way regressing. Let’s look at a few:

• Altar servers: Males still have preference (Prot. N.2451/00/L, google it)
• Mass in Latin: The majority should still be in latin (Sacrosanctum Concilium no. 36, A VII document, I might add)
• Gregorian Chant: still the norm (Sacrosanctum Concilium, no. 116)

Your point is?

 

[1ke]

The parishoners are not ignorant.

They certainly seem to be, based on their behavior. Ignorant of the liturgy, ignorant of the law, ignorant of many things.

They see the changes being made in their parish as the begining of heading down a slippery slope of regressing to Pre Vatican II days.

I don’t understand your categorization of this as “regressing” anywhere. It has nothing to do with Vatican II. The current code of canon law is from 1983, two decades after the Council. And it still did not actually change this particular rubric or mandate any sort of change. It doesn’t address it at all. And, therefore the Vatican clarified that it is permissive, not prescriptive, and left it up to the bishop, and in turn the priest, to decide.

It is not up to the laity to decide, it is up to the priest and bishop.

I am proud of them for standing up for themselves.

You seem to be confused on the role of the laity vis-a-vis the priesthood.

 

[kmuestwin]

The parishoners are not ignorant. They see the changes being made in their parish as the begining of heading down a slippery slope of regressing to Pre Vatican II days. I am proud of them for standing up for themselves.

You are correct in saying that the parishioners are not ignorant. The parishioners are disobedient.

These priests were selected to lead their flock. If people don’t appreciate their spiritual guidance, they have the right to contact the bishop.

The bishop sided with the priests by allowing them to continue to pastor their parish. The people didn’t like that response so instead of trying to learn, understand, and improve the parish. Instead, they decided to throw a tantrum.

They are not ignorant, they are immature.

 

[superamazingman]

The parishoners are not ignorant.

Really? Why are they flipping out about not being EMHCs anymore? If they were not ignorant, they’d rejoice that their role is no longer needed.

“Indeed, the extraordinary minister of Holy Communion may administer Communion only when the Priest and Deacon are lacking.”

Redemptonis Sacramentum, 158

 

[superamazingman]

You are correct in saying that the parishioners are not ignorant. The parishioners are disobedient.

These priests were selected to lead their flock. If people don’t appreciate their spiritual guidance, they have the right to contact the bishop.

The bishop sided with the priests by allowing them to continue to pastor their parish. The people didn’t like that response so instead of trying to learn, understand, and improve the parish. Instead, they decided to throw a tantrum.

They are not ignorant, they are immature.

It’s true. Everything they are doing absolutely screams “4 year old temper tantrum.”

 

[robertmidwest]

Really? Why are they flipping out about not being EMHCs anymore? If they were not ignorant, they’d rejoice that their role is no longer needed.

]

They are. There is more than just the altar servers here. The pastor dismissed the Eucharistic Ministers. Parishoners also claim that the pastor has made statements that non Catholics cannot go to heaven.

 

[wasserfall]

There is more than just the altar servers here. The pastor dismissed the Eucharistic Ministers.

The only eucharastic ministers in the parish are the priests and deacons. Did the pastor dismiss himself?

Parishoners also claim that the pastor has made statements that non Catholics cannot go to heaven.

Maybe he just read this from the Ecumenical Council of Florence:

The holy roman church, founded on the words of our lord and saviour, firmly believes, professes and preaches that all those who are outside the catholic church, not only pagans but also jews or heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless they are joined to the catholic church before the end of their lives

 

[kmuestwin]

]

They are. There is more than just the altar servers here. The pastor dismissed the Eucharistic Ministers. Parishoners also claim that the pastor has made statements that non Catholics cannot go to heaven.

There is nothing wrong with dismissing the Extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion.

EMHC’s are not needed for mass. They are only supposed to be used if they are needed and it is up to the pastor to commission the EMHC’s. In nature, they are EXTRA-ordinary ministers. The ordinary Eucharistic ministers are our priests and deacons and it is their job to know if they are needed or not.

Parishioners claim that the pastor made statements that non Catholic’s cannot go to heaven because its true.

The truth is that every Christian is made Catholic when they receive a valid baptism. This can occur at any church that administers a Christian baptism.

The only excuse for a non-Christian is if they have invincible ignorance to Christian teaching.

 

[maltmom]

The letter is from October, 2010, over a year and a half ago. What’s going on with these churches now? When did the school close?

 

[twopekinguys]

The letter is from October, 2010, over a year and a half ago. What’s going on with these churches now? When did the school close?

I was thinking exactly the same thing, and I found this on the parish website.

It is talking about the School closing at the end of the 2011-2012 school year. In it, I believe the Bishop rightly admonishes the parishoners for their behavior.

stmaryplatteville.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/St-Mary-Platteville-School-Letter-from-Bishop-4-25-12.pdf

 

[1ke]

The letter is from October, 2010, over a year and a half ago. What’s going on with these churches now? When did the school close?

madisondiocese.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=H67WXKB7CA8%3d&tabid=325&mid=5357

This parish is not too far from me, these parishioners should be ashamed of themselves.

 

[maltmom]

I was thinking exactly the same thing, and I found this on the parish website.

It is talking about the School closing at the end of the 2011-2012 school year. In it, I believe the Bishop rightly admonishes the parishoners for their behavior.

stmaryplatteville.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/St-Mary-Platteville-School-Letter-from-Bishop-4-25-12.pdf

I agree with you. They are trying to force the Bishop to replace the Priests, who from what I can tell, are only guilty of following the teachings of the Church. Thank you for posting the link.

 

[twopekinguys]

From what I can see, it doesn’t appear the parishoners have tried to work with the local clergy at all.

Instead, they petition and complain to the Bishop about what they think the priest(s) are doing wrong. (very immature and irresponsible)

In each response that I read, the Bishop has defended his positions, and the priests involved. You would think after this length of time, they would get the hint. It is the parishoners, and not the priests that are the problem…

It is just a shame they cannot see that, and I pray that their eyes, minds, and hearts be open.

 

[friarpark]

My question is a bit outside the subject of this thread but comes from the thread itself. An earlier poster posted this: "For example the Code of canon Law says that you must require the approval of the pastor of your geographical parish to receive sacraments (e.g. confirmation) in a different parish. " I just want to be sure that what is meant is receiving First Communion, First Confession, Confirmation, etc are what is meant by that statement and not receiving Holy Communion at Mass or Confession when needed. I may be asking my geographic pastor for permission to have my son Confirmed at a neighboring (more orthodox) parish, but I am assuming I don’t need his permission to receive Communion or go to Confession there.

Thanks

 

[superamazingman]

The other thing to keep in mind here: anywhere these priest’s go, they are an absolute success. There is a great increase in devotion among the faithful, even when they come in after a great pastor (in one parish they took over, the previous pastor is now the cathedral’s rector!). There is an increased sense of reverence and eucharistic amazement. There is a massive influx of vocations (at least one or two potential consecrated women, and possibly several priests as well.) I ran the numbers, and if every parish produced vocations at the same rate as their parishes, as well as the other traditionally minded parishes, we’d have 100 priestly ordinations each year. They’ve been a massive success, and that is so often forgotten.

 

[superamazingman]

]

They are. There is more than just the altar servers here. The pastor dismissed the Eucharistic Ministers. Parishoners also claim that the pastor has made statements that non Catholics cannot go to heaven.

Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion (EMHCs) is the proper name for eucharistic minister.

 

[Sunbreak]

The parishoners are not ignorant. They see the changes being made in their parish as the begining of heading down a slippery slope of regressing to Pre Vatican II days. I am proud of them for standing up for themselves.

Looks like a power struggle issue to me. The liberal parishioners were used to doing their own thing. Vatican 2 was not about people taking charge of the parish - it did not address things like extraordinary ministers of the eucharist, female altar servers, etc. These were all things that people on their own started to do as their interpretation of what it meant to have fuller participation. Then they were given permission to have these things, but this was just that - permission, not a right. So the priests are not wrong if they don’t want to have these things. I feel for the priests having to deal with such animosity.

 

[superamazingman]

Looks like a power struggle issue to me. The liberal parishioners were used to doing their own thing. Vatican 2 was not about people taking charge of the parish - it did not address things like extraordinary ministers of the eucharist, female altar servers, etc. These were all things that people on their own started to do as their interpretation of what it meant to have fuller participation. Then they were given permission to have these things, but this was just that - permission, not a right. So the priests are not wrong if they don’t want to have these things. I feel for the priests having to deal with such animosity.

I feel for them as well. a couple months ago, someone sent them a newspaper clipping about a priest of the diocese that was murdered many years ago. And it was not sent in a friendly way. Scary?

 

[maltmom]

I feel for them as well. a couple months ago, someone sent them a newspaper clipping about a priest of the diocese that was murdered many years ago. And it was not sent in a friendly way. Scary?

That is scary.

 

[Cathryn]

My question is a bit outside the subject of this thread but comes from the thread itself. An earlier poster posted this: "For example the Code of canon Law says that you must require the approval of the pastor of your geographical parish to receive sacraments (e.g. confirmation) in a different parish. " I just want to be sure that what is meant is receiving First Communion, First Confession, Confirmation, etc are what is meant by that statement and not receiving Holy Communion at Mass or Confession when needed. I may be asking my geographic pastor for permission to have my son Confirmed at a neighboring (more orthodox) parish, but I am assuming I don’t need his permission to receive Communion or go to Confession there.

Thanks

Yes, you are to get written permission to be baptized, confirmed, married, etc at another parish than your own geographic parish. You may however attend Mass, Confession, etc anywhere you want. Your pastor also may not grant this permission if he does not see a valid reason.