Saint-Mike website?

  • Thread starter Thread starter fin
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
My dear, that is not true.

Our URL has been saint-mike.org since we started in 1997. That has never changed. We do own several other domains however.

Our site has never been “primarily” a chat site. We included a chat page at one time but closed it down for lack of interest.

Thus, what you are saying is a falsehood.

**And to keep the record straight, we are not a Religious Institute and never claimed to be one. We are a defacto Association of the Faithful, a group of lay Catholics brought together by means of private agreement amongst ourselves to privately pursue a common effort to promote a more perfect life of holiness and consecration according to our respective states in life, to share our Catholic faith, to exercise apostolic works, namely to engage in efforts of the new evangelization, to exercise works of piety and charity and to animate the temporal order with Christian spirit. We establish these things in the spirit and traditions of Carmel, Ignatius Loyola, Louis de Montfort, Francis of Assisi, and Benedict.

We are a defacto Association of the Christian Faithful established under canon 215 of the Code of Canon Law of the Catholic Church and according to Canon Law may exist either with or without ecclesiastical recognition. As a defacto association of the Christian faithful, we do not have formal ecclesial recognition at this time and do not have any “formal” relationship with any diocese — however, such formal recognition is not required or needed for the laity to pursue perfection, holiness, evangelization, and the apostolate. The Church has already given its permission through its various decrees and declarations on the laity. We do operate in full accord with Canon Law as it applies to defacto Associations of the Christian Faithful.**

Read the whole statement with canonical and theological considerations here

You obviously know nothing about us, as this post shows.

And saying that we are not an official religious order in bold with each of your posts is both disingenuous and transparent, not to say silly. It is an innuendo that we claim we are something we are not. To make such an innuendo repeated is sinful.

We beat you to the punch long ago. We have been saying what you are repeating since day one, April 5, 1997 when we went online. The disclaimer has always been on our site.
 
People assume when they see initials behind a name that the person is a member of a religious order. Most Catholics don’t know that they can just set up an association of the faithful anytime they want to.

Just setting the record straight, that’s all.
 
Well, my dear, In order to set the record straight you first have to know what you are talking about.

What credentials do you have to say what you are saying. Are you a certified canon lawyer?

We have submitted our Rule to certified Canon Lawyers who said that what we are doing falls within the allowable activities of Canon law. We have the written report from the Canon Lawyers to prove it.

What you are saying is partly true but not entirely. Catholics may form defacto associations of the Faithful for the purpose of living a common or hermitic life, wear habits and be called brother or sister. And, dear, all religious orders begin without any recognition from a bishop. It can take thirty years or more to get recognition. Some have taken longer. Even St. Francis was not recognized at first by any bishop. Neither was St. Ignatius of Loyola.

But, we are not a religious institute and never claimed to be. Thus, the canonical rules that apply to religious institutes does not apply to us. The canons pertaining to Associations of the Faithful, and Private Associations, apply to us. Of course, if you actually knew what you are taking about, you would have known that.

We have the complete explanation that includes canon law, and statements from the Institute on Consecrated Life, whose opinion, I could be wrong now, but whose opinions, I think, outrank yours. This is found here.

Again, accusation after accusation, innuendo after innuendo, and not a single shred of evidence from anyone with credentials that we are doing anything wrong.

It is neverending the arrogance of people. Just so much presumptuous blather.
 
BroIgnatius said:
Well, my dear, In order to set the record straight you first have to know what you are talking about.

What credentials do you have to say what you are saying. Are you a certified canon lawyer?

We have submitted our Rule to certified Canon Lawyers who said that what we are doing falls within the allowable activities of Canon law. We have the written report from the Canon Lawyers to prove it.

What you are saying is partly true but not entirely. Catholics may form defacto associations of the Faithful for the purpose of living a common or hermitic life, wear habits and be called brother or sister. And, dear, all religious orders begin without any recognition from a bishop. It can take thirty years or more to get recognition. Some have taken longer. Even St. Francis was not recognized at first by any bishop. Neither was St. Ignatius of Loyola.

But, we are not a religious institute and never claimed to be. Thus, the canonical rules that apply to religious institutes does not apply to us. The canons pertaining to Associations of the Faithful, and Private Associations, apply to us. Of course, if you actually knew what you are taking about, you would have known that.

We have the complete explanation that includes canon law, and statements from the Institute on Consecrated Life, whose opinion, I could be wrong now, but whose opinions, I think, outrank yours. This is found here.

Again, accusation after accusation, innuendo after innuendo, and not a single shred of evidence from anyone with credentials that we are doing anything wrong.

It is neverending the arrogance of people. Just so much presumptuous blather.
Click to expand...
The fact remains: People assume that when they see initials after a name, that the person is a member of a religious order, and in some cases, including this one, that is not true.

Moreover, most Catholics don’t know that they can set up a private association of the faithful anytime they want to.

Still, just setting the record straight.
 
My dear,

You are not setting the record straight. You are being disingenuous. To begin with you have no credentials to set the record straight about canon law. Secondly, if the public is sometimes confused by the initials after a name, the solution is to educate, not to allow the public to go on in ignorance. If that education is not forthcoming then there is no setting the record straight, only a pretense to it.

We have set the record straight, not you. We have always made it clear our status in the Church. We have never hidden it, and furthermore we require anyone who joins us or volunteers for us to understand our status in the church. And I might add, each counseling client we have must sign a statement that includes acknowledgement of our status in the Church.

Since you are not qualified to “set the record straight” we can do without your blather, thank you. But, I know that will not happen. 😉 Ah, well.

Our official response to you is: DAH, we have always affirmed that point. So what!

Who’s next with an innuendo or half-truth, or lie… I am having fun.
 
Fine. The information people need to see to understand this conversation is here in this thread.

The original poster had a question he wanted answered and I think it’s been answered sufficiently.

Here’s an additional resource: catholiccanonlaw.com/Associations.pdf
[This comes from Christifideles and it’s a very good description of associations of the faithful, both public and private.]
 
Thanks for the link.

Like all law, it must be interpreted correctly. A layman with no training in law usually gets it wrong. You are not qualified to even offer an opinion, let alone to interpret canon law. You obviously do not understand the issues and are misrepresenting the issues.

I think that has been established sufficiently.

The certified Canon Lawyers who gave us the thumbs up, however, are qualified to interpret Canon Law and have done so with regard to us.

Case closed.
 
In the case of private associations of the faithful, the law is very simple. Any Catholic can set up a private association of the faithful. No approval is needed from ecclesiastical authority.

And they can put initials behind their name if they want to. And they can wear any kind of religious garb or costume of their own design too.

These are basic rights that the laity have.
 
Oh, I almost forgot, the Canon Lawyers who examined our Rule and said that we are doing fine was the group that publishes Christifideles, the St. Joseph Foundation. Their report is available upon request and receipt of $3.00 to cover copying, envelope, and postage.
 
That’s because they are correct. You can do these things.

I just don’t want anyone to be misled. Any Catholic can set up a private association of the faithful any time they want to. And add letters to their name. And wear their favorite clothes around home, even if they do look sorta like religious garb.

All these laypeople who frequent this forum could do any or all of these things, if they wanted to.
 
It’s all pretty harmless activity, ecclesiastically speaking, as long as it’s private and it generally doesn’t bother the local bishop. If one’s bishop wanted to stop it, I suppose he could use some other law in the code if it applied. That would be up to him and his diocesan personnel.

I just didn’t want anyone to be misled about the initials and so on. Initials after a name and fancy garb can be just a matter of personal styling, and sometimes are. People need to be aware of this sort of thing so they don’t make invalid assumptions. That’s all.
 
LOL, you are a very presumptuous person. You speak as if you are an expert in Canon Law. I am sure the Canon Lawyers appreciate that you approve of their analysis. Perhaps they should consult you.

The habit is a sign of our consecration to the evangelical counsels, not just fancy duds or a matter of personal styling. The habit is a requirement of our Rule. There is no personal decisions on that. It is the habit of a consecrated brother or sister.

According to the Sacred Congregation on Consecrated Life our private vows to the Evangelical Councils makes us theologically consecrated but not canonically consecrated. One can be theologically Consecrated and not canonically consecrated. But, one can never be canonically consecrated without being theologically, too.

According the the Sacred Congregation, both forms are legitimate and a grace to the Church. Both Pope John Paul II and the Congregation praised these new foundations.

These rather complicated issues are rarely understood by the public, but the public certainly likes to pontificate about them.

By the way, being recognize is no guarantee of orthodoxy. I have a friend who left her fully recognized Franciscan Convent because they began to worship the goddess Sophia. She started her own order.

Also, Martin Luther was a fully recognized priest. In fact, every major schism and heresy in the Church that I can think of right now was spearheaded by a fully bishop-recognized person. Recognition does not guarantee a thing. One must check out each organization regardless of canonical status.

One of the reason why these new foundations are forming throughout the Church is because many of the old established orders have abandoned the teachings of their founders and are becoming heterodox and sometimes even heretical.

We take an Oath of Fidelity to the Pope and Magisterium. When people are confused or do not understand, we educate.

My vestment in the full monastic habit and the taking of vows of the evangelical counsels, was done during Mass with the knowledge and permission of the Vicar General of the diocese. There is a written memo from Fr. Ray to this conversation with the Vicar General, who I might add, told me personally to go do what we do, that we do not have to wait for the bishop’s recognition. Just do what we do and if we step beyond any lines they will let us know. We have never stepped over any lines.
 
Consecrated is a term that refers to people who have made vows with a congregation or institute, whereas members of private associations of the faithful are laity.

“Fancy duds” can indeed be worn by laity who are members of private associations of the laity. Fancy duds can be worn by anybody as long as the bishop doesn’t mind. You can attribute to them any sentiment you want to. Members of private associations of the faithful can do that.

Members of the laity can make private oaths too. Not always a good idea, btw, but sometimes they do it.

Anyone can do these things.
 
LOL, the Congregation on Consecrated Life disagrees with you. I am sure your opinion outranks them. Can I give them your telephone number so they can check with you first before they make any statements?
 
Maybe I should remind you that you don’t even have the approval of your local bishop, by your own admission. It’s not required for a private association of the faithful.

Anyway, there is enough information in this thread for the original poster to have his question answered. Have a good afternoon.
 
Well, dear, you can have any cockeyed opinion you want. Fortunately, your arrogant opinions are of no consequence or value. I will continue doing what I have always done for the last 17 years – follow the teaching of the Church, canon law, that the statements that come from the Congregation on Consecrated Life.

And I will pray that you give up the pretense that you know about these matters and thereby lead people into further confusion.

Good bye.

I keep forgetting the advice of my grandmother – never argue with a woman 🙂
 
BroIgnatius said:
Well, dear, you can have any cockeyed opinion you want. Fortunately, your arrogant opinions are of no consequence or value. I will continue doing what I have always done for the last 17 years – follow the teaching of the Church, canon law, that the statements that come from the Congregation on Consecrated Life.

And I will pray that you give up the pretense that you know about these matters and thereby lead people into further confusion.

Good bye.

I keep forgetting the advice of my grandmother – never argue with a woman 🙂
Click to expand...
Could you be more rude or condescending?
 
Some details:

Br Ignatius is right about one thing. Private associations of the faithful are the great experimental workshop of religious life since new forms of religious life often, even if not always, originate with groups of the laity. The threshold for entering this laboratory of religious experimentation is very, very low.

Side by side, you will see:
  1. associations like home-schooling associations, prayer associations, associations of Catholic booksellers or authors or professors or poets etc etc; these are associations that do not aspire to start a new form of consecrated life at all.
  2. associations that aspire to a new form of religious life including those that have poorly formed, naive or non-workable charisms and ways of life, OR well-formed, workable and vigorous charisms and ways of life, OR no discernable charism at all (!)
  3. associations that stall and never get anywhere for easy-to-see or hard-to-see reasons, but real reasons nevertheless
  4. associations that really exist for non-religious reasons but pretend to be religious because of the advantages that religious “orders” have in the Catholic imagination and wallet; this may be intentional on the part of the founder, or not
  5. associations that are formed when the “founder” cannot enter religious life anywhere else for some reason or reasons
  6. associations that have wonderful charisms and members who ultimately become religious congregations with diocesan or pontifical approval
  7. associations that are in union with the Catholic church, or enjoy partial union or no union at all (!)
  8. associations that are perplexing or interesting combinations of the above.
Personally, I’ve seen several of these things in my own diocese. Most dioceses have some of this sort of activity going on at any given time somewhere. Few of these associations ever rise to the status of religious congregations or institutes, as you might well imagine. Most of them “fizzle” eventually.

Ordinarily, once one of these things is formed, there are a lot of steps to go through to get recognition and then approval. Depending on what the purpose of the association is, not seeking recognition or approval, at least in the initial steps, can be a RED LIGHT of CAUTION. Particularly if there are other “funny” features present.

When a Catholic looks at all this, they should be careful, as you can see. There are many, many possibilities here. It’s a giant mix-and-match mess. There could be a Missionaries of Charity hiding in there (very unlikely) or a con-man in a dress (probably more likely). There could be a smart little secular institute there (somewhat unlikely), or there could be someone’s naive little hobby or wistful imagination (pretty darned likely). So be careful out there!!!

MtnDweller, that website’s been online for more than a decade. The tone has always been like that. No worries. I’m not offended now, and I wasn’t offended for long the first time I ever saw it over 10 years ago.
 
MtnDwellar, Well not as condescending as iloveangels. She is the expert at that.

As for arguing with women, if you are going to mad at me for that comment, you will need to get mad at Bill Cosby. He was king of making that observation in his comedy skits and on his TV show. In fact, that quip has been going round the comedy circuit for decades. The TV show “Home Improvement” presented variations of that statement on nearly a weekly basis, as did Bill Cosby.

If you mean my comment of iloveangels arrogant opinion, that is a statement of fact, as she is holding herself off as a expert on this issue when she is not. She has made statements that are contradictory to what qualified canon lawyers have said and what the Congregation on Consecrated Life have said, such as her statement that the word “Consecrated” is reserved for those in Institutes for Consecrated Life. That is blatantly wrong and quite silly.

In fact, iloveangels is about the most arrogant person I have met on this issue. She is shameless.

You can read what the Congregation says about this by going to the link I gave earlier.

But, my grandmother, Bill Cosby, and a horde of other comedians are right: Never argue with a woman. Cosby says women have no sense of humor about this. He is right.

As Bill Cosby advises, just say “Yes, dear”.

So, “Yes, dear.”
 
More than 10 years ago when I first found the saint-mike website, the tone there told me all I needed to know. This is like old-times. Fancy meeting you here, and all that.

People are getting smarter about all this stuff. The internet is a great thing, isn’t it?

😃
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top