Rejecting the Motu Proprio....at Steubenville?

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

The counseling suggestion did happen to somebody in 1999.

Frankly, it’s not charity to cover for the disobedience of the Franciscans either.

While we’re on this subject, I don’t know many “Byz” Christians who would put up with suppression of the Divine Liturgy, and then cover up for the priests who did it.

Yes, there are two forms of the Divine Liturgy but it is clearly laid out in tradition and rubrics when each is celebrated and if the laity isn’t paying close attention they will not really notice a difference. If the Divine Liturgy was suppressed then there would be no liturgy at all.

There was no suppression here anyways. The Ordinary Form is offered and there is a place to go for the Extraordinary Form.

There was no disobedience of the Franciscans here either.

No priest is obligated to celebrate the EF. If a pastor does not respond favorably to a request the Motu Proprio says that the person is to go to the Bishop, not the administration of a university or the administration of a religious order.

I do not see anything in the Motu Proprio that really covers a case such as this.

 

[KephasAugustine]

I’m currently a student at FUS. I can’t say I’m up on the petitioning and whatnot, because I worship just fine with what we have. However, I think it is safe to say that if it were presented properly, the friars would have no problem incorporating the TLM into campus liturgical life.

But here’s the thing: Franciscan is in nature a Charismatic school. It has been that way since the Renewal started. Everyone who applied, been accepted, and decided to attend this school knew that…or if they were unaware, they did not know enough about the school to apply.

Again, I would love the TLM to be on campus. Still, I don’t see why the Spirituality of the university–or that of the TOR–should change.

Aside from this, there is a very reverent Schola Mass said every couple of weeks–complete with traditional Latin hymns and prayers!

Anyways, I guess where I stand on the issue is this: in Steubenville, the TLM is offered in a few places; Charismatic Mass is only offered (as far as I know) on our campus. Everyone who wants to attend a Charismatic Mass attends on our campus (this includes people from the surrounding neighborhoods). Just like we have to go elsewhere for a weekly TLM, people have to go out of their way to attend a Charismatic Mass. As far as I see it, all is fair and balanced in the 'Ville.

 

[catharina]

I’m currently a student at FUS. I can’t say I’m up on the petitioning and whatnot, because I worship just fine with what we have. However, I think it is safe to say that if it were presented properly, the friars would have no problem incorporating the TLM into campus liturgical life.

But here’s the thing: Franciscan is in nature a Charismatic school. It has been that way since the Renewal started. Everyone who applied, been accepted, and decided to attend this school knew that…or if they were unaware, they did not know enough about the school to apply.

Again, I would love the TLM to be on campus. Still, I don’t see why the Spirituality of the university–or that of the TOR–should change.

Aside from this, there is a very reverent Schola Mass said every couple of weeks–complete with traditional Latin hymns and prayers!

Anyways, I guess where I stand on the issue is this: in Steubenville, the TLM is offered in a few places; Charismatic Mass is only offered (as far as I know) on our campus. Everyone who wants to attend a Charismatic Mass attends on our campus (this includes people from the surrounding neighborhoods). Just like we have to go elsewhere for a weekly TLM, people have to go out of their way to attend a Charismatic Mass. As far as I see it, all is fair and balanced in the 'Ville.

Great points and I thank you for making them. Especially, I agree with this point and it should be obvious to everyone:

“I think it is safe to say that if it were presented properly, the friars would have no problem incorporating the TLM into campus liturgical life.”

Anything that seems to come from a point of “demanding” is certain to seem incorrect to those in authority - and the Franciscans are just about the most humble of groups in the Church.

 

[VociMike]

Anything that seems to come from a point of “demanding” is certain to seem incorrect to those in authority - and the Franciscans are just about the most humble of groups in the Church.

I missed the post where it was demonstrated that anybody “demanded” anything. Which post was that again?

 

[catharina]

I missed the post where it was demonstrated that anybody “demanded” anything. Which post was that again?

Petitions are presented as “proof” of a group’s wishes/demands. That leaves out the human element of one-to-one communication. ByzCath told all of us (a few posts previous) that the proper route would be a request to the bishop. Any individual who asked an administrator could have learned that fact in a mutual encounter, it seems to me.

So a petition that becomes central to a public report/protest by such as Fr. Z’s becomes even more demanding and divisive.

 

[VociMike]

Petitions are presented as “proof” of a group’s wishes/demands. That leaves out the human element of one-to-one communication. ByzCath told all of us (a few posts previous) that the proper route would be a request to the bishop. Any individual who asked an administrator could have learned that fact in a mutual encounter, it seems to me.

A request to the bishop is certainly not the proper route. A request to the pastor, rector or similar authority is the proper first step. Is there evidence that this did not happen? Is there evidence that this petition was presented to the wrong people on campus? And if so, is that reason to deny it outright. Sounds like the very definition of legalism.

So a petition that becomes central to a public report/protest by such as Fr. Z’s becomes even more demanding and divisive.

That’s a bogus assertion. The petition only became public after it was denied. There is no way to say that this publicity caused the denial.

 

[catharina]

Is there evidence that this petition was presented to the wrong people on campus? And if so, is that reason to deny it outright. Sounds like the very definition of legalism.

That’s a bogus assertion. The petition only became public after it was denied. There is no way to say that this publicity caused the denial.

Hello? As Roman Catholics, historically, we KNOW that “petitions” are not the way to go; petitions are intrinsic to “legalism” and “legalistic” thinking. Using the petition-process is very much a part of poltical and corporate thinking. Why isn’t that obvious to you?

 

[VociMike]

Hello? As Roman Catholics, historically, we KNOW that “petitions” are not the way to go; petitions are intrinsic to “legalism” and “legalistic” thinking. Using the petition-process is very much a part of poltical and corporate thinking. Why isn’t that obvious to you?

Indeed, why is that obvious to you? I too am, as you note, a Roman Catholic, and nothing whatsoever in my Catholic background tells me that creating a petition which lists the names and numbers of those requesting something that the pope has declared to be their legitimate aspiration is in anyway incorrect or improper. Zero. Zilch. Nada.

In all your posts you have not once actually demonstrated that what these students did was somehow un-Catholic. You have asserted it time and again, but you have never demonstrated it. I request that you demonstrate this now, or stop making this claim.

BTW, a bit of google searching will turn up numerous accounts of popes, bishops, etc receiving petitions and granting that which was petitioned for. So much for this approach being somehow un-Catholic.

 

[catharina]

Indeed, why is that obvious to you? I too am, as you note, a Roman Catholic, and nothing whatsoever in my Catholic background tells me that creating a petition which lists the names and numbers of those requesting something that the pope has declared to be their legitimate aspiration is in anyway incorrect or improper. Zero. Zilch. Nada.

In all your posts you have not once actually demonstrated that what these students did was somehow un-Catholic. You have asserted it time and again, but you have never demonstrated it. I request that you demonstrate this now, or stop making this claim.

BTW, a bit of google searching will turn up numerous accounts of popes, bishops, etc receiving petitions and granting that which was petitioned for. So much for this approach being somehow un-Catholic.

Please - do not attempt to put words in my mouth. You might wish it were so but at no time have I said the students’ petition was “un-Catholic.” I’ve said that the action is outside of Roman Catholic tradition. If the students (and their parents) wish for a more positive response in the future, they might be wise to disengage themselves from the notion of collecting signatures for a petition. (If they wish to continue to “do battle their way” then by all means, present as many “signatured” petitions as possible.)

 

[VociMike]

Please - do not attempt to put words in my mouth. You might wish it were so but at no time have I said the students’ petition was “un-Catholic.” I’ve said that the action is outside of Roman Catholic tradition. If the students (and their parents) wish for a more positive response in the future, they might be wise to disengage themselves from the notion of collecting signatures for a petition. (If they wish to continue to “do battle their way” then by all means, present as many “signatured” petitions as possible.)

I didn’t say “anti-Catholic”, I said “un-Catholic”. Which is exactly the correct way to describe something that is “outside the Catholic tradition”.

I still wait for your demonstration that petitions are in fact un-Catholic.

 

[catharina]

I didn’t say “anti-Catholic”, I said “un-Catholic”. Which is exactly the correct way to describe something that is “outside the Catholic tradition”.

I still wait for your demonstration that petitions are in fact un-Catholic.

Yoo hoo? Nor did I say anti-Catholic.

Over the past forty years, since Vatican II, many Catholics on both sides of the aisle (right and left) have attempted to view the Church as “one man, one vote” in seeking desired results.

Start your thinking there. It’s not OK for either side.

If you can’t see it, then you can’t see it but such attempts (and worse) have taken place over the past forty years.

 

[VociMike]

Yoo hoo? Nor did I say anti-Catholic.

Over the past forty years, since Vatican II, many Catholics on both sides of the aisle (right and left) have attempted to view the Church as “one man, one vote” in seeking desired results.

Start your thinking there. It’s not OK for either side.

If you can’t see it, then you can’t see it but such attempts (and worse) have taken place over the past forty years.

Based on your lack of substantive responses I must assume that you cannot in fact document that the manner in which these students presented their request is in fact un-Catholic.

 

[catharina]

Based on your lack of substantive responses I must assume that you cannot in fact document that the manner in which these students presented their request is in fact un-Catholic.

Your insistence on misquoting me tells me that you are stuck in place. When I say that an approach is outside of Catholic tradition, I am not saying an approach is un-Catholic. YOU are saying that - why I don’t know, nor do I care any longer, since your point seems to be based on your fantasy regarding something I’ve never said. It’s clear that you will assume whatever you wish.

 

[cothrige]

Anyways, I guess where I stand on the issue is this: in Steubenville, the TLM is offered in a few places; Charismatic Mass is only offered (as far as I know) on our campus. Everyone who wants to attend a Charismatic Mass attends on our campus (this includes people from the surrounding neighborhoods). Just like we have to go elsewhere for a weekly TLM, people have to go out of their way to attend a Charismatic Mass. As far as I see it, all is fair and balanced in the 'Ville.

I am confused by this. Is there a third form of the Mass (outside of the Ordinary and Extraordinary) called the Charismatic? The Masses offered around here in that name are mostly a string of wild and very distracting liturgical excesses and abuses, and are anything but a real tradition. In the end I can see no real difference between these and so called “teen masses” which simply ignore the consistent teachigns of the Church and all liturgical guidelines because some liturgical director thinks kids won’t “get it.”

This school can do what it wants really, and I don’t much care, but a defense that it is too busy offering Masses riddled with creativity and liturgical abuses to offer a TLM seems somewhat weak. As a matter of fact, I think many will see immediately it is this very response and activity which causes so many to doubt the sensibility of having abandoned the old Mass in such a manner as was done.

Patrick

 

[jj2011]

Yes, there are two forms of the Divine Liturgy but it is clearly laid out in tradition and rubrics when each is celebrated and if the laity isn’t paying close attention they will not really notice a difference. If the Divine Liturgy was suppressed then there would be no liturgy at all.

There was no suppression here anyways. The Ordinary Form is offered and there is a place to go for the Extraordinary Form.

There was no disobedience of the Franciscans here either.

No priest is obligated to celebrate the EF. If a pastor does not respond favorably to a request the Motu Proprio says that the person is to go to the Bishop, not the administration of a university or the administration of a religious order.

I do not see anything in the Motu Proprio that really covers a case such as this.

You’re forgetting something, ByzCath. When I used the term disobedience, it wasn’t limited to the context of the recent Motu Proprio. Years ago, John Paul II had written the following:

**…respect must everywhere be shown for the feelings of all those who are attached to the Latin liturgical tradition, by a wide and generous application of the directives already issued some time ago by the Apostolic See for the use of the Roman Missal according to the typical edition of 1962
**

Fr. Z quoted an e-mail from somebody at the University who was told to get counseling in 1999. Unless this is a complete lie and fabrication, and I don’t think it is, I believe my remark stands.

Then again, if the pope had written,

**…contempt must everywhere be shown for the feelings of all those who are attached to the Latin liturgical tradition, by a stingy and Pharisaic application of the directives already issued some time ago by the Apostolic See for the use of the Roman Missal according to the typical edition of 1962…
**

a strong case could be made that obedience in the Latin Church is alive and well.

Meanwhile, I’m delighted to see how much company I appear to have in denouncing clergy who oppose the traditional rite as a bunch of phonies and snake oil salesmen.

 

[catharina]

…

Fr. Z quoted an e-mail from somebody at the University who was told to get counseling in 1999. Unless this is a complete lie and fabrication, and I don’t think it is, I believe my remark stands.

…

Meanwhile, I’m delighted to see how much company I appear to have in denouncing clergy who oppose the traditional rite as a bunch of phonies and snake oil salesmen.

If “someone” at the University was insulted by “someone else” at the University in 1999, how can anyone “conclude” that the Franciscans are “a bunch of phonies and snake oil salesmen.” That’s a huge leap to an unsupported conclusion. It seems that it might be more Prudent (in the sense of virtue) if Fr Z were to be a and skip the use of any unsubstantiated indictment of others.

It seems that all of this controvery at FUS is based in rumor, not in fact. That is very sad and it’s unnecessary too.

 

[DustinsDad]

…If the students (and their parents) wish for a more positive response in the future, they might be wise to disengage themselves from the notion of collecting signatures for a petition. (If they wish to continue to “do battle their way” then by all means, present as many “signatured” petitions as possible.)

This is ridiculous…and your posts are beginning to become more and more uncharitable as time goes on.

Here’s the pertinant parts of the motu proprio…Art. 5
§ 1 In parishes, where there is a stable group of faithful who adhere to the earlier liturgical tradition, the pastor should willingly accept their requests to celebrate the Mass according to the rite of the Roman Missal published in 1962, and ensure that the welfare of these faithful harmonises with the ordinary pastoral care of the parish, under the guidance of the bishop in accordance with canon 392, avoiding discord and favouring the unity of the whole Church.

§ 5 In churches that are not parish or conventual churches, it is the duty of the Rector of the church to grant the above permission.I’m sure the students thought of the college as that which is not a parish or conventual church (I know I would), therefore they went to the closest thing to a Rector they could find - in this case it appears they went to the plenary council of T.O.R friars who are in charge of the liturgy on campus.

And what better way to communicate the reality that there exists a “stable group of faithful who adhere to the earlier liturgical tradition” than by presenting the numbers and names of said stable group to the powers that be when “making their requests known”? This way nothing is based on hearsay and what not…it’s accurate information the friars would need to make their decision for crying out loud!

Makes perfect sense to me - and totally in accord with SP by any reading.

Give us all a break and quit trying to read “bad pushy behavior” on fellow faithful Catholics who are just responding to the pope’s recent motu proprio as best as they can.

The T.O.R friars who are in charge of the liturgy on campus felt the current situation is fine the way it is - that the college didn’t have room for the TLM and that the beforementioned students could attend the TLM off campus with little inconvenience - period. End of story. Why you feel the need to make further excuses for the college by demeaning the behavior of faithful catholics requesting the TLM is beyone me.

Good grief - for the third time.

DustinsDad

 

[jmcrae]

BTW, a bit of google searching will turn up numerous accounts of popes, bishops, etc receiving petitions and granting that which was petitioned for. So much for this approach being somehow un-Catholic.

The word “petition” is being used in a different sense here - the “we the undersigned demand …” style of petition is a very recent political development - in ancient times, a “petition” was a letter of request from an individual on behalf of a group - ie: St. Teresa petitioned her Bishop on behalf of the Carmelite order for a new convent - but she didn’t present a written demand with a list of names attached to it; rather, she approached him for an interview and presented her case to him on behalf of her Sisters, which was also written in a letter that she gave to him. The Sisters didn’t sign anything, though.

 

[childofmary1143]

Dear “Dustins Dad” and Vocimike,

I want to commend you for your very truthful, factual posts clearly demonstrating how Petitions are appropriate ways for students of FUS to ask for the TLM.

The fact that those who oppose the idea of having a Petition can’t refute it and try to spin it says volume about their pride.

 

[VociMike]

The word “petition” is being used in a different sense here - the “we the undersigned demand …” style of petition is a very recent political development - in ancient times, a “petition” was a letter of request from an individual on behalf of a group - ie: St. Teresa petitioned her Bishop on behalf of the Carmelite order for a new convent - but she didn’t present a written demand with a list of names attached to it; rather, she approached him for an interview and presented her case to him on behalf of her Sisters, which was also written in a letter that she gave to him. The Sisters didn’t sign anything, though.

Why this continued use of the word “demand”? Has anybody seen this petition and confirmed that it uses the word “demand”? I would ever-so-strongly expect that it used no such term. But until there is evidence, I would ask that people stop throwing that term around.