Priest asked me to change or leave

[JReducation]

Very good points. Back in pre-history when I was in college, the Newman Society involved a diocesan appointed priest, etc. Never occurred to me that it was anything other than a loose association of diocesan incardinated priests appointed as college chaplains. At least since the early 90’s it is a duly constituted society. So, yes the proper authorities should be consulted.

As to how exactly one deals with the issue, reasonable people can disagree. Years ago, without more information than is on this thread, for something like this I would have said talk to the priest. Too many years of dealing with priests who do things like this now leads me to say send the letters and let those in authority deal with it. I no longer generally give priests the benefit of the doubt.

And that is a terrible shame, bothers me greatly - but experience is a stern taskmaster.

I still believe that everyone deserves the courtessy of an attempt. One of the stories in scripture that often moves me is the story of the Samaritan woman. Jesus approaches her and asks her for a cup of water. He certainly knows her life story. The part of the story that we often fail to attend to is that Jesus approaches her asking for her charity, because every human being deserves the opportunity to practice charity. If they don’t take advantage of the opportunity, that’s their problem We have done it the way Jesus did it. St. Francis always taught his brothers to do things the way Jesus did it and expect some of the same reactions that Jesus received. The disciple is never greater than the master.

True. As an aside, when I was in college, we had three priests at the Newman Center - a Jesuit, a Dominican and a diocisan (secular) priest. I believe they operated under the diocisan Bishop since when the Bishop came to town, they cautioned everyone to be on their toes and to do things “by the book” but I am sure that the organizational structure was very interesting.

This is the situation right here. As you so well pointed out. You have two religious and one diocesan priest. These men respond to three different voices of authority: the Jesuit superior, the Dominican prior and the diocesan bishop. To avoid conflicts of interest, the Church generally accepts authorized overseer for different apostolates. This way, if there is problem within the apostolate, those who have oversight can deal with it and you don’t have to go to the Jesuits, Dominicans and Diocesan bishop. The person at the top does this, if necessary.

Newman has become a large society. After speaking with the individual Newman chaplain, the next logical person is his Newman boss. Whether he’s diocesan or religious, he is assigned to Newman and must comply with Newman on all things pertaining to their apostolate. Outside of that, he answers to his superior.

If the problem is with a Newman Society chapel, a good place to start, after speaking to the priest, is by contacting The Cardinal Newman Societyand asking them where to go.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[JReducation]

I believe it is wrong for a priest to invite you to leave because you wish to kneel at what is the holiest part of the mass. Follow your conscience not your people preference. Didn’t the angel of FATIMA kneel while the chalice was above him and didn’t he then prostrate himself under the chalice in adoration and humility.

This is a private revelation, which has not impact on Canon Law, rubrics or ordinary authority of bishops and religious superiors. I appreciate your devotion to the revelation, but it has no authority in the Catholic Church. Authority is always found in those who have canonical rights.

There is no historical proof for or against this. Kneeling is not part of Judaism or even Eastern Christianity. However, this does not mean that Jesus did not kneel. For all we know, he knelt, sat, stood or prostrated himself. The point is that he prayed.

And PS-----always take communion on the tongue. Never take the slightest chance that any particle so small you can’t see it may fall to the floor. That would be the ultimate insult.

We can express our preferences, but we can never encourage anyone against what the Church allows.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

[/QUOTE]

 

[Legal_Eagle]

My question is do you think I should abandon my conscience or simply switch parishes?

Switch parishes. No brainer.

 

[johnnykins]

I still believe that everyone deserves the courtessy of an attempt. One of the stories in scripture that often moves me is the story of the Samaritan woman. Jesus approaches her and asks her for a cup of water. He certainly knows her life story. The part of the story that we often fail to attend to is that Jesus approaches her asking for her charity, because every human being deserves the opportunity to practice charity. If they don’t take advantage of the opportunity, that’s their problem We have done it the way Jesus did it. St. Francis always taught his brothers to do things the way Jesus did it and expect some of the same reactions that Jesus received. The disciple is never greater than the master.

Did St. Francis comment on the cleansing of the temple? I would never think of whipping anybody. Certainly that is as apt as the Samaritan woman.

In any event, it’s not a matter of charity. It’s a matter of experience with people - and simply letting those in charge deal with the issue. If he is within his rights to exclude someone for kneeling - then so be it. If he is not, then his superiors should deal with it. Having heard and seen more than a few inanities, dissemblances and outright errors from priests in matters not too unlike this, I just don’t believe they are either honest, charitable or within their rights. They might be. But, I generally no longer give them the benefit of the doubt. I let their superiors deal with it. Actually, I’ve come to the conclusion that is almost always the best answer.

And, yes, it disturbs me that I have reached that conclusion. Says a lot about my experience with priests, doesn’t it. God help us all.

 

[johnnykins]

Newman has become a large society. After speaking with the individual Newman chaplain, the next logical person is his Newman boss. Whether he’s diocesan or religious, he is assigned to Newman and must comply with Newman on all things pertaining to their apostolate. Outside of that, he answers to his superior.

If the problem is with a Newman Society chapel, a good place to start, after speaking to the priest, is by contacting The Cardinal Newman Societyand asking them where to go.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

I looked at the Newman site. I certainly could not tell its canonical status. It simply appears to be a tax exempt non-profit entity with a mixed lay-clerical board. Perhaps it is more, but I could not tell from the site. Perhaps I just didn’t dig deep enough.
However, take the Society of St. James website (just google it). One click and I got:

The Society is a Clerical Public Association of the Christian Faithful in accordance with (canons 298-320 1983 Code) and is legally incorporated in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts as The Missionary Society of St. James the Apostle, (charity no. 04226 6770) with the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Boston as its president. The members serve as diocesan priests from all parts of the English speaking world, under the jurisdiction of the local ordinary of each prelature or diocese in the countries of Peru, Bolivia and Ecuador .

It tells me the canonical status, legal status and jurisdiction. I know where to complain, too.

Can’t tell doodly from Newman’s site. In fact from it’s site, I would have to conclude I need to go to the local Bishop for issues of a canonical nature - not some mere non-profit with a board such as is described. I cannot imagine that Newman has any canonical standing.

Not asking for anything - simply pointing out matters.

 

[Te_Deum]

I once witnessed an elderly woman kneel on a 15th century stone floor for the duration of a Solemn High Mass (excepting where it was appropriate to stand), with nothing but her skirts for comfort (she refused my jacket). She put me to shame.

Kneel! Kneel for all you’re worth!

 

[TheMc]

I just remembered this, in case it applies in your case:

Official interpretations of the GIRM, CDWDS:

QUERY 3: In some places kneelers have been taken out of the churches. Thus, the people can only stand or sit and this detracts from the reverence and adoration due to the Eucharist.

REPLY: The appointments of a place of worship have some relationship to the customs of the particular locale. For example, in the East there are carpets; in the Roman basilicas, only since modern times, there are usually chairs without kneelers, so as to accommodate large crowds. There is nothing to prevent the faithful from kneeling on the floor to show their adoration, no matter how uncomfortable this may be. In cases where kneeling is not possible (see GIRM no. 21), a deep bow and a respectful bearing are signs of the reverence and adoration to be shown at the time of the consecration and communion: Not 14 (1978) 302-303, no. 4.

 

[JReducation]

Did St. Francis comment on the cleansing of the temple? I would never think of whipping anybody. Certainly that is as apt as the Samaritan woman.

St. Francis was very knowledgeable of scripture and Jewish history. He understood what was going on in this scene. In short, the money lenders were not inside the temple per se. Temples, like the great shrines and basilicas of today, had areas of commerce. Today we have bookstores and giftshops.

The issue here was that these individuals were thieves. They were exploiting the poor who did business with them. It’s very important to observe the use of the phrase, “den of thieves”.

The writer does not tell us if there was an exchange between Jesus and these individuals before he lost his cool with them. Judging from his manner of dealing with other sinners, it seems likely that Jesus did not walk in and throw a tantrum. Were that the case, the Synoptic writers would not have understood the context of his anger. If we read the narrative, they put the story in context. They simply do not tell us what led up to the turning of the tables. My guess is that the writers felt no need to do so.

The Newman Society is a public association of the faithful just like the Legion of Mary, Catholic Answers, EWTN or the Society of St. Vincent de Paul. It is authorized to operate within the Catholic Church as a Catholic organization.

If you look closely at their site, you will see that Fr. Benedict G is one of the founders of Newman. No religious can be part of any organization that is not approved by the local bishop, the Conference of Bishops or the Vatican. Neither bishops nor religious superiors make it a habit of assigning men and women to organizations that are not Catholic. There are priests, brothers and sisters who are canonically assigned to Newman centers and Newman chapels.

Once it is approved by any of those levels, handling problems belongs to the leadership of the organization. Hope that helps.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Elizabeth502]

Brother,
Do I take your statements to mean that priests who operate Newman centers are free to disregard Redemptionis Sacramentum and the General Instructions for the Roman Missal?

 

[JReducation]

Brother,
Do I take your statements to mean that priests who operate Newman centers are free to disregard Redemptionis Sacramentum and the General Instructions for the Roman Missal?

No. My point has to do with the chain of command. I had pointed out that there is a tendency on these forums to quickly send people to the local bishop, some congregation at the Vatican or the pope when in fact none of these are the right place to go and they don’t want you to go to them.

When you send people to the wrong person, they are often frustrated when they don’t get a response. I’m trying to say that after you speak to the priest, if it does not go well, then go to the proper person in authority.

I’ll give you an example. When I was superior I assigned brothers to different posts. Some of these were diocesan or other Catholic institutions. If there was a problem at those posts, it was not for me to deal with. I only dealt with violations of the rule and constitution. However, if there was a problem that went beyond policies, diocesan or other, then they became my problem.

I hate to see people frustrated when they don’t get a response or the response is, “I forwarded your concern to [insert name].”

Thanks for pointing our the ambiguity in my response. I don’t want to give the wrong impression.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[ConstantineTG]

Didn’t Jesus pray to the Father on his knees at Gethsamane?

No he didn’t

[BIBLEDRB]Matthew 26:39[/BIBLEDRB]

Maybe you should try that during Mass? With your face on the ground?

There is no historical proof for or against this. Kneeling is not part of Judaism or even Eastern Christianity. However, this does not mean that Jesus did not kneel. For all we know, he knelt, sat, stood or prostrated himself. The point is that he prayed.

As noted above, he fell on his face. So I’m thinking full prostration, Eastern-style

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[JM3]

I am going to a Newman Church and at this Church they do not kneel during consecration. I tried standing but I felt as though I was disrespecting the Eucharist, I felt very guilty. The Priest last weekend approached me and told me that when we spoke he told me I was guilty due to an ill informed conscience. When we were concluding our conversation he told me, “If you chose to kneel there are plenty of other parishes in the area where you are welcome, but you are not welcome here.” After this conversation I researched the issue and made the decision that I indeed have an informed conscience, I don’t think that I should ignore my conscience. My question is do you think I should abandon my conscience or simply switch parishes? Let me also say that I love the people at the Newman center, but want to make the right decision.

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccdds/documents/rc_con_ccdds_doc_20030317_ordinamento-messale_en.html

Movements and Posture

1. The gestures and posture of the priest, the deacon, and the ministers, as well as those of the people, ought to contribute to making the entire celebration resplendent with beauty and noble simplicity, so that the true and full meaning of the different parts of the celebration is evident and that the participation of all is fostered.[52] Therefore, attention should be paid to what is determined by this General Instruction and the traditional practice of the Roman Rite and to what serves the common spiritual good of the People of God, rather than private inclination or arbitrary choice.

A common posture, to be observed by all participants, is a sign of the unity of the members of the Christian community gathered for the sacred Liturgy: it both expresses and fosters the intention and spiritual attitude of the participants.

1. The faithful should stand from the beginning of the Entrance chant, or while the priest approaches the altar, until the end of the collect; for the Alleluia chant before the Gospel; while the Gospel itself is proclaimed; during the Profession of Faith and the Prayer of the Faithful; from the invitation, Orate, fratres (Pray, brethren), before the prayer over the offerings until the end of Mass, except at the places indicated below.

They should, however, sit while the readings before the Gospel and the responsorial Psalm are proclaimed and for the homily and while the Preparation of the Gifts at the Offertory is taking place; and, as circumstances allow, they may sit or kneel while the period of sacred silence after Communion is observed.

In the dioceses of the United States of America, they should kneel beginning after the singing or recitation of the Sanctus until after the Amen of the Eucharistic Prayer, except when prevented on occasion by reasons of health, lack of space, the large number of people present, or some other good reason. Those who do not kneel ought to make a profound bow when the priest genuflects after the consecration. The faithful kneel after the Agnus Dei unless the diocesan Bishop determines otherwise.[53]

With a view to a uniformity in gestures and postures during one and the same celebration, the faithful should follow the directions which the deacon, lay minister, or priest gives according to whatever is indicated in the Missal.

The Priest may have a good reason for the way he celebrates Mass. By being a ‘dissenter’ and not following what the priest says, you are being disruptive. If your conscience cannot allow you to obey the priest, then you should look for another parish. Just my thoughts.

 

[TradionalWay]

Where has the good morals gone?

Let us pray!

 

[hoop0826]

I find myself in battle with spiritual pride especially being a member at a traditional Latin Mass parish and then going to other parishes for Mass during the week. My pride wants to alter the customs of the other parishes to conform with the what we have at the Traditional Latin Mass, but then again this isn’t even my parish!

Your situation is different because it is your parish! So where would you go?

 

[ProVobis]

Your situation is different because it is your parish! So where would you go?

As many people attend Mass outside their territorial parish, especially those who attend a Polish, Spanish, or Latin Mass, I don’t think it’s much of an issue whether it is in your parish or not. One’s obligation to assist at Mass is satisfied at ANY Catholic rite ANYWHERE.

 

[Corki]

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccdds/documents/rc_con_ccdds_doc_20030317_ordinamento-messale_en.html

With a view to a uniformity in gestures and postures during one and the same celebration, the faithful should follow the directions which the deacon, lay minister, or priest gives according to whatever is indicated in the Missal.

The Priest may have a good reason for the way he celebrates Mass. By being a ‘dissenter’ and not following what the priest says, you are being disruptive. If your conscience cannot allow you to obey the priest, then you should look for another parish. Just my thoughts.

The priest in question is not giving direction according to “whatever is indicted in the Missal.” It is possible that the priest has a good reason. I have been in that situation before and the priest always explained why he was going to deviate from the GIRM. However, in the OP’s situation, the priest has not given any reason other than the fact that he believes the GIRM is only a guideline not an actual instruction. To follow the GIRM and not the priest in this sitution is not being a dissenter.

 

[JM3]

the priest has not given any reason other than the fact that he believes the GIRM is only a guideline not an actual instruction.

I seem to have missed this. Maybe you can show me where this is?

(cheeky, I know. But you are making a subjective judgement that you do not have the right to make.)

To follow the GIRM and not the priest in this sitution is not being a dissenter.

The letter of the law has more authority then an ‘in persona christi’ priest, who knows the letter and the spirit of the law?

I’m reminded of Luke 18:9-14

9 And to some who trusted in themselves as just, and despised others, he spoke also this parable:
10 Two men went up into the temple to pray: the one a Pharisee, and the other a publican.
11 The Pharisee standing, prayed thus with himself: O God, I give thee thanks that I am not as the rest of men, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, as also is this publican.
12 I fast twice in a week: I give tithes of all that I possess.
13 And the publican, standing afar off, would not so much as lift up his eyes towards heaven; but struck his breast, saying: O god, be merciful to me a sinner.
14 I say to you, this man went down into his house justified rather that the other: because every one that exalteth himself, shall be humbled: and he that humbleth himself, shall be exalted.

Is the gesture, or posture, enough to judge the ‘respectfulness’ of a person or parish?

As I posted before from the GIRM:

1. The gestures and posture of the priest, the deacon, and the ministers, as well as those of the people, ought to contribute to making the entire celebration resplendent with beauty and noble simplicity, so that the true and full meaning of the different parts of the celebration is evident and that the participation of all is fostered.[52] Therefore, attention should be paid to what is determined by this General Instruction and the traditional practice of the Roman Rite and to what serves the common spiritual good of the People of God, rather than private inclination or arbitrary choice.

A common posture, to be observed by all participants, is a sign of the unity of the members of the Christian community gathered for the sacred Liturgy: it both expresses and fosters the intention and spiritual attitude of the participants.

It is his refusal to participate in a ‘common posture’ that makes him a dissenter to the unity of the community and, possibly, an occasion of sin to others in the community. The Priest has the right and the authority to ask for conformity or leave.

 

[Corki]

I seem to have missed this. Maybe you can show me where this is?

(cheeky, I know. But you are making a subjective judgement that you do not have the right to make.)

Here’s is the OP’s first post on the topic. (bolding mine)

I’m a college student going to a “college” Church. I have been going to this Church for about a year now and have been kneeling in the back the whole time I’ve been attending. However, recently I joined the choir and knelt during the Eucharistic prayer there and the Priest noticed. After mass he asked me to come to his office, he told me that he knew I was aware of the norm in “his” Church and felt I was being disrespectful. He said that the Girm was simply a guideline and he didn’t have to follow it according to Canon Law. His phrase specifically was “if it’s not in Canon Law it’s permitted.” I do love going to this Church most of my friends are there and I don’t wish to switch parishes, but I feel so disrespectful standing what should I do?

You aren’t being cheeky, you are just being rude. There is nothing subjective about my statement. It was practically a direct quote from the original poster.

 

[Corki]

It is his refusal to participate in a ‘common posture’ that makes him a dissenter to the unity of the community and, possibly, an occasion of sin to others in the community.

But he is participating in the common posture - the one that is “according to whatever is indicated in the Missal.” It is the priest who is dissenting from the GIRM and from the Church. And yes, the priest is creating an occassion of sin for the whole community, especially if he freely offers the opinion that he doesn’t have to follow the GIRM.

The Priest has the right and the authority to ask for conformity or leave.

No, if the poster was doing something wrong, like standing for the Consecration, the priest has the authority to correct him. But this isn’t the case here. And the priest does not have the authority to ask anyone to leave a public Mass.

Not only that, depending on how the parish is set up (as Brother JR noted), if the Newman Center is the geographical parish for the campus, the priest is obligated to the poster as a parishioner.

 

[JM3]

I am going to a Newman Church and at this Church they do not kneel during consecration. I tried standing but I felt as though I was disrespecting the Eucharist, I felt very guilty. The Priest last weekend approached me and told me that when we spoke he told me I was guilty due to an ill informed conscience. When we were concluding our conversation he told me, “If you chose to kneel there are plenty of other parishes in the area where you are welcome, but you are not welcome here.” After this conversation I researched the issue and made the decision that I indeed have an informed conscience, I don’t think that I should ignore my conscience. My question is do you think I should abandon my conscience or simply switch parishes? Let me also say that I love the people at the Newman center, but want to make the right decision.

As an additional note he ended the conversation with, “And if you wish to report me my last name is Fallon.” (Just for clarity I’ve been going to this Parish for roughly six months so he knows that I know his name) So I don’t believe that the tone of this conversation was misunderstood - it was clear. I share your belief that Priests are often misunderstood, but in this circumstance it was all but unclear. Additionally, I was not instructed to stand in the capacity of a choir member. He did mention that as well but it was not the focus of the conversation.

Here’s is the OP’s first post on the topic. (bolding mine)

I’m a college student going to a “college” Church. I have been going to this Church for about a year now and have been kneeling in the back the whole time I’ve been attending. However, recently I joined the choir and knelt during the Eucharistic prayer there and the Priest noticed. After mass he asked me to come to his office, he told me that he knew I was aware of the norm in “his” Church and felt I was being disrespectful. He said that the Girm was simply a guideline and he didn’t have to follow it according to Canon Law

Above yours are the two posts by the OP.