Schismatic act, St. Louis Polish parish brings in priest for Holy Week!

  • Thread starter Thread starter Catholic29
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Catholic29

Guest
[webpages.charter.net/kasiapeter/Kmov_03_23_2005.html](http://webpages.charter.net/kasiapeter/Kmov_03_23_2005.html)

Parish at odds with archdiocese brings in priest for Holy Week

KMOV-TV 04:06 PM CST on Wednesday, March 23, 2005

By JIM SALTER, Associated Press Writer

ST. LOUIS (AP) – A Polish parish that lost its priests in a dispute with the St. Louis archdiocese is bringing in an anonymous priest to preside over Holy Week services, a spokesman for the parish board said Wednesday.

St. Stanislaus Church

The St. Stanislaus Kostka parish near downtown is at odds with Archbishop Raymond Burke over control of the parish and its assets. In addition to removing both priests in August, Burke in February issued an interdict denying Communion and other Roman Catholic sacraments to St. Stanislaus’ six-member board.

Sanctions aside, parishioners have continued to meet for regular services led by lay members. But for Easter, two parish members secretly used connections to bring in a priest, said Roger Krasnicki, spokesman for the parish board. He would not identify the priest out of concern that the priest could face sanctions for violating the will of the archdiocese, but said he is of Polish descent.

“All I know is he’s Father John,” Krasnicki said. “I have no idea where he’s from. It’s a very secretive process.”

Krasnicki said the priest will stay only through Easter Sunday. He is scheduled to preside Thursday night in a Mass of Eucharist Adoration, and also at Good Friday services, and Mass on Saturday and Easter Sunday. All services will be conducted in English and Polish.

“Easter is the most important Catholic holiday of the year,” Krasnicki said. “Polish people have especially been known to have strong traditions. We couldn’t have the Eucharist with just lay people.”

Archdiocese spokesman Jamie Allman would not say if the archdiocese would seek discipline of the priest.

“The archbishop is not going to be lured into a fight during (Holy Week), and he continues to pray for reconciliation,” Allman said.

The Rev. Thomas Reese, editor of the Catholic magazine America and a Vatican expert, said the priest is taking a risk.

“He’s in trouble” unless the archdiocese decides not to pursue action against him, Reese said.

Also of concern is the fact that, since his name is not known, parishioners can’t be sure of his legitimacy, Reese said.

“The additional questions are, is this guy a legitimate priest? Does he have faculties in any diocese to say Mass and do the sacraments?” Reese asked.

St. Stanislaus made a similar move in December, when an unnamed priest presided over Christmas Masses. The priest officiating at Easter services is not the same man, Krasnicki said.

St. Stanislaus was established by Polish immigrants. In 1891, an archbishop deeded the property to a civic corporation of parishioners. The way the property and assets are governed by the laity and not church leaders created the on-going dispute that began under previous Archbishop Justin Rigali.

The dispute has escalated under Burke, who took over last year after Rigali became the cardinal of Philadelphia.

St. Louis archdiocese: www.archstl.org

St. Stanislaus: http://www.saveststans.com/
 
What a shame, withholding sacraments of faithful Catholics because of a dispute over property rights.

Here is yet another example of how “in pepetuity” doesn’t seem to matter to American bishops.
 
40.png
gelsbern:
What a shame, withholding sacraments of faithful Catholics because of a dispute over property rights.

Here is yet another example of how “in pepetuity” doesn’t seem to matter to American bishops.
Click to expand...
What a shame these folks disobey proper authority.
 
40.png
fix:
What a shame these folks disobey proper authority.
Click to expand...
You show me any writing whatsoever that shows me that the Church has any authority over anybody elses property. The Church (archdiocese) never owned this property, it was signed over to the parish board of directors for perpetuity, which means forever or as long as the parish exists. There is obedience to faith and morals, and people try to be in obedience to disciplines, however there is nothing about having to obey in regards to handing over property. If the archbishop in your area sent you a letter saying "We are taking your house and then going to sell it off’ would you just simply hand over the deed?
 
40.png
gelsbern:
You show me any writing whatsoever that shows me that the Church has any authority over anybody elses property. The Church (archdiocese) never owned this property, it was signed over to the parish board of directors for perpetuity, which means forever or as long as the parish exists. There is obedience to faith and morals, and people try to be in obedience to disciplines, however there is nothing about having to obey in regards to handing over property. If the archbishop in your area sent you a letter saying "We are taking your house and then going to sell it off’ would you just simply hand over the deed?
Click to expand...
Not analagous. My home is private residential property, not a Catholic Church. Canon law is to be obeyed. These people are disobedient to legitimate authority.
 
40.png
fix:
Not analagous. My home is private residential property, not a Catholic Church. Canon law is to be obeyed. These people are disobedient to legitimate authority.
Click to expand...
Again, please show me the Canon law that says that propery owned by a parish is to be handed over to the archdiocese.
 
This whole mess is a disgrace. The media has portrayed it so that the Archdiocese is the monster, and the poor Polish parishoners are being bossed around by the church. A true David-and-Goliath story…NOT.

The bigger picture of this ongoing struggle is about more than money. The board won’t let the priest run this church at all. They exclude him from decisions and prevent him from doing the job that he is there to do. Then the board and the parishoners beg the Archdiocese for another priest. Give me a break.

Archbishop Burke is being portrayed as the bad guy here, but Rigali was also trying to fix this situation before he left, too.

I am a brand new Catholic (baptized and confirmed this weekend), and it seems to me that the parishoners of this church are either Catholic, or they’re not. They don’t get to pick and choose which parts of Catholicism/the Archdiocese/the Vatican that they agree with. If they’re Catholic, they should have to abide by the same rules as every other Catholic.

I think it’s no different than me being an American and having to pay taxes. I don’t get the right to free speech, the right to bear arms, and the right to vote without conforming to the costs associated with being American.

Sorry for the rant - this situation just aggravates me. The media have made such a huge thing out of this story, and so many people who aren’t even Catholic have an opinion on this. I think that for a lot of people in St. Louis who aren’t Catholic, this is just reinforcing the “Catholic church is corrupt and evil” attitude. What a shame.

Heather
 
40.png
hthrlu:
This whole mess is a disgrace. The media has portrayed it so that the Archdiocese is the monster, and the poor Polish parishoners are being bossed around by the church. A true David-and-Goliath story…NOT.

The bigger picture of this ongoing struggle is about more than money. The board won’t let the priest run this church at all. They exclude him from decisions and prevent him from doing the job that he is there to do. Then the board and the parishoners beg the Archdiocese for another priest. Give me a break.
Click to expand...
First off what you say is untrue. The Board never restrcted any priest from doing their job, had there been any kind of restriction then the Fr. Bene would have never been able to deplete the parish fund of $60,000. When he was done, there was $1.97 in the fund. Because of his lack of stewardship, they asked for a different priest.

There are private chapels all over the country, all over the world in fact, that are owned by lay people who had permission to build the chapels and priests come there to do Mass. In fact there have been private chapels all throughout history. St. Stans is just that, it is a privately owned chapel that has archdiocese priests who are there to do Mass and to be pastor of the parish.

This is an example of American Bishops who need money to pay for the lawsuits from sex scandals trying to steal from faithful people.
 
40.png
gelsbern:
Again, please show me the Canon law that says that propery owned by a parish is to be handed over to the archdiocese.
Click to expand...
Show us the Canon law that allows a priest to celebrate Mass without permission of the bishop.

Are these Catholics prevented from attending another parish?

Peace

Tim
 
"First off what you say is untrue. The Board never restrcted any priest from doing their job, had there been any kind of restriction then the Fr. Bene would have never been able to deplete the parish fund of $60,000. When he was done, there was $1.97 in the fund. Because of his lack of stewardship, they asked for a different priest.

There are private chapels all over the country, all over the world in fact, that are owned by lay people who had permission to build the chapels and priests come there to do Mass. In fact there have been private chapels all throughout history. St. Stans is just that, it is a privately owned chapel that has archdiocese priests who are there to do Mass and to be pastor of the parish. "
I live quite a distance from St. Louis and know nothing of the Polish Church there.

What got my attention was that a Bishop may punisj a Priest for saying Easter Mass there in St. Louis. What is the Bishop thinking?

With so many of the Catholic Faith falling away from the Church and with so many financial problems why would saying Mass be so BAD?** Here we hear of an old church wanting to recieve communion at Easter - and a man called a Bishop is on the verge of punishing the people for that. Is Satan’s Smoke flowing under the doors of the Bishop’s House?**
 
Exporter said:
"First off what you say is untrue. The Board never restrcted any priest from doing their job, had there been any kind of restriction then the Fr. Bene would have never been able to deplete the parish fund of $60,000. When he was done, there was $1.97 in the fund. Because of his lack of stewardship, they asked for a different priest.

There are private chapels all over the country, all over the world in fact, that are owned by lay people who had permission to build the chapels and priests come there to do Mass. In fact there have been private chapels all throughout history. St. Stans is just that, it is a privately owned chapel that has archdiocese priests who are there to do Mass and to be pastor of the parish. "
I live quite a distance from St. Louis and know nothing of the Polish Church there.

What got my attention was that a Bishop may punisj a Priest for saying Easter Mass there in St. Louis. What is the Bishop thinking?

With so many of the Catholic Faith falling away from the Church and with so many financial problems why would saying Mass be so BAD?** Here we hear of an old church wanting to recieve communion at Easter - and a man called a Bishop is on the verge of punishing the people for that. Is Satan’s Smoke flowing under the doors of the Bishop’s House?**
Click to expand...

These people place themselves above the Church. They will obey, but only on*** their ***terms. That is not Christ’s way.
 
40.png
Exporter:
What got my attention was that a Bishop may punisj a Priest for saying Easter Mass there in St. Louis. What is the Bishop thinking?

With so many of the Catholic Faith falling away from the Church and with so many financial problems why would saying Mass be so BAD?** Here we hear of an old church wanting to recieve communion at Easter - and a man called a Bishop is on the verge of punishing the people for that. Is Satan’s Smoke flowing under the doors of the Bishop’s House?**
Click to expand...
Priests are not free agents. They need the bishop’s permission to celebrate the Mass. Besides, no one was being denied communion. The best I can tell from what I have read, the parishioners have not been excommunicated, so they are free to attend another parish.

Peace

Tim
 
By all indications it appears that it ironically will be the Board of Directors who end up closing St. Stanislaus parish. The Board has even appealed to Rome, and it has consistently ruled in Burke’s favor. I predict if there is not a radical shift of heart and mind on the part of the Board, this will of been another failure of men and not that of the Church.

When more and more parishioners there begin to see through the Board’s rhetoric as nothing more than disobedience and arrogance they will move on, and sadly in spite of the fact that their great grandparents may have been baptised in that parish.
 
**The people of St. Stanislaus are not trustful of this archbishop. **They are very concerned that he wishes to close the parish, the last Polish parish in the archdiocese, and sell the property to pay sex abuse settlements.

I think the key to settling this whole dispute is for Abp. Burke to communicate by actions that it has nothing to do with the cash. He can do that if the archdiocese would commit to make a major investment, perhaps a new Polish school or other major improvement in the parish infrastructure.

This kind of major investment could regain the trust and mend the fences between him and the board at St. Stanislaus.
 
40.png
gelsbern:
You show me any writing whatsoever that shows me that the Church has any authority over anybody elses property. The Church (archdiocese) never owned this property, it was signed over to the parish board of directors for perpetuity, which means forever or as long as the parish exists. There is obedience to faith and morals, and people try to be in obedience to disciplines, however there is nothing about having to obey in regards to handing over property. If the archbishop in your area sent you a letter saying "We are taking your house and then going to sell it off’ would you just simply hand over the deed?
Click to expand...
Lest we not forget, it is the Archbishop alone that determines whether or not a parish exists. It seems that he has made it abundantly clear that this parish is no longer. There are no priests and no sacraments.
 
40.png
gelsbern:
You show me any writing whatsoever that shows me that the Church has any authority over anybody elses property. The Church (archdiocese) never owned this property, it was signed over to the parish board of directors for perpetuity, which means forever or as long as the parish exists. There is obedience to faith and morals, and people try to be in obedience to disciplines, however there is nothing about having to obey in regards to handing over property. If the archbishop in your area sent you a letter saying "We are taking your house and then going to sell it off’ would you just simply hand over the deed?
Click to expand...
They can have their “property”. They just cannot have a priest celebrating mass on that property.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top