St. Louis Archdiocese statement regarding Fr. Marek Bozek and St. Stanislaus Parish

  • Thread starter Thread starter Catholic29
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
a few points in response, TPJ…

“I say this with all due respect, yet what you think, or what the ST. Stan’s parishioners thing, means very little at this point…”

As usual per our correspondence, TJP, I disagree…

What we think and what we percieve as right and wrong is very important. God gave us the ability to assess right and wrong. To abdicate that responsibility in favor of bishops or anyone else would go against God’s plan.
“Jesus gave the Church the keys to the kingdom and the power to bind and loose, and the Church has now bound the parish’s sins as being mortal.”

Obviously, as a Catholic, I’m aware of this scripture reference. It reminds me of when Michaelangelo’s pope locked Mich’s hometown out of heaven until he agreed to paint the Sistene Chapel ceiling. To me, this was not an abuse of papal authority. Rather, it was a pretense to papal authority. God is not obliged to lock anyone out of heaven because the pope or anyone else says so. Such an interpretation takes scriptural interpretation too far. (For instance, Jesus also said that anyone with a little faith can tell a mountain to move into the ocean. Yet, this kind of landscaping doesn’t happen. Not because Jesus lied, but because he was assuming that people would know what he meant without taking his statement to unreasonable extremes…)
“…anyone receiving sacraments at St. Stan’s is commiting a mortal sin…”
No disrespect intended, TPJ, but my question about that is… “Says who?” Is that in canon law, or in the catechism- or where? I don’t know and am wondering about the source for this…

This is turning into a time of reassessment for me. I have a baptist brother. My mom goes to a Methodist church. Does the church officially teach that they, along with St. Stan, are bound for hell because we don’t think their communion measures up?

I don’t know if I can continue to belong to a church where I’m supposed to think of my church leaders as having the perfection of Christ on Earth and anyone who sees things differently I’m supposed to believe is bound for Hell… To me, it would defy God to not use the capacity to assess right and wrong that He’s given me.

Finally, TPJ, if your response is going to again be, in effect “it doesn’t matter what anyone thinks the bishops are always right” then please, save yourself the trouble. If I don’t hear from you I will assume that it is once again your answer to my post.

Despite the possibly contentious nature of our correspondence, I wish all a Merry Christmas…!
 
40.png
ernesto:
a few points in response, TPJ…

“I say this with all due respect, yet what you think, or what the ST. Stan’s parishioners thing, means very little at this point…”

As usual per our correspondence, TJP, I disagree…

What we think and what we percieve as right and wrong is very important. God gave us the ability to assess right and wrong. To abdicate that responsibility in favor of bishops or anyone else would go against God’s plan.
“Jesus gave the Church the keys to the kingdom and the power to bind and loose, and the Church has now bound the parish’s sins as being mortal.”

Obviously, as a Catholic, I’m aware of this scripture reference. It reminds me of when Michaelangelo’s pope locked Mich’s hometown out of heaven until he agreed to paint the Sistene Chapel ceiling. To me, this was not an abuse of papal authority. Rather, it was a pretense to papal authority. God is not obliged to lock anyone out of heaven because the pope or anyone else says so. Such an interpretation takes scriptural interpretation too far. (For instance, Jesus also said that anyone with a little faith can tell a mountain to move into the ocean. Yet, this kind of landscaping doesn’t happen. Not because Jesus lied, but because he was assuming that people would know what he meant without taking his statement to unreasonable extremes…)
“…anyone receiving sacraments at St. Stan’s is commiting a mortal sin…”
No disrespect intended, TPJ, but my question about that is… “Says who?” Is that in canon law, or in the catechism- or where? I don’t know and am wondering about the source for this…

This is turning into a time of reassessment for me. I have a baptist brother. My mom goes to a Methodist church. Does the church officially teach that they, along with St. Stan, are bound for hell because we don’t think their communion measures up?

I don’t know if I can continue to belong to a church where I’m supposed to think of my church leaders as having the perfection of Christ on Earth and anyone who sees things differently I’m supposed to believe is bound for Hell… To me, it would defy God to not use the capacity to assess right and wrong that He’s given me.

Finally, TPJ, if your response is going to again be, in effect “it doesn’t matter what anyone thinks the bishops are always right” then please, save yourself the trouble. If I don’t hear from you I will assume that it is once again your answer to my post.

Despite the possibly contentious nature of our correspondence, I wish all a Merry Christmas…!
Click to expand...
Well said. However, don’t leave the Catholic Church based on you disagreeing with some of it’s doctrine. I don’t agree with all of it either, and neither do alot of other Catholics. However, I can’t imagine being anything other than a Catholic. I think it comes closest to what Jesus intended his church to be. Is she perfect? No, but I think she is the best choice.
 
Thanks, Nohome and Baldwin. When I get a minute I will look for this on other threads, but it does sound complicated. 😦 Perhaps there is a “third way.” I can’t imagine that after all these years of American anti-Catholicism someone hasn’t already figured out how to use the courts to take down the Church.

Merry and blessed Christmas,

Anna
 
ernesto,

When God gave the ten commandments, were they up for discussion, or did God intend that we just plain follow them, even if we disagree? In other words, did God ask for a lay board to be created to discuss whether or not His commands are valid?

When I say our opinion does not matter it is not meant to cause consternation in your heart or mind. I am merely saying that God alone gave the Church the authority to bind and loose, and Archbishop Burke has spoken very clearly, along with the Vatican, that what St. Stan’s parish has done is wrong. Additionally, Archbishop Burke has stated publicly that the lay board is excommunicated for their actions, and Father Bozek’s Bishop has declared similar pronouncements upon Father Bozek. I agree that Bishops cannot expect wrongful acts to be bound in Heaven, yet in this case the Bishops involved are working in complete harmony with the Vatican and with well established Canon Law. Therefore, in this case all people involved in St. Stan’s parish should be very cautious because Archbishop Burke has worked within his sphere of authority. AB has also decalred that any person attending “services” at St. Stan’s is placing themselves in mortal sin.

When I say our views do not matter, it is because Apostolic authority holding Bishops, the Vatican and Canon Law have all stated that AB has takent the right position. So, what we think will not change anything and either will what the St. Stan’s folks be able to change matters.

It is a call to obedience. The parishioners have rejected obedience and chosen sin. They are in my prayers.
 
mike,

The Roman Catholic faith IS perfect because it was given by Jesus Christ, our God and savior. People within the faith often sin and they often make mistakes. Yet, the faith itself is perfect. There is no other faith on earth in which such perfection exists…none.

One can intellectually disagree with a great many things, so long as they still obey.
 
ernesto,

May you have a blessed and happy Christmas. Thanks for the chat. 🙂
 
Ernesto, did you read the letters to the editor in the last edition of the Mirror? If not, check out what Fr. David Hulsof had to say on the situation, especially as regards Fr. Mark.

For those outside our diocese, Fr. David is the vocations director down here in Springfield. He worked with Fr. Mark during his path from Poland, to his ordination here. He talked about taking that vow of obedience and what his leaving his parish really means.

Merry Christmas to everyone! Let’s pray for a good resolution to this situation.
 
It appears St. Stan’s will be going ahead with their illicit schismatic Mass saveststans.com/index.html

And its no suprise that many Protestants are also rallying in support of St. Stan’s, as their brand of Christianity has no concept of a visible Church structure much less of canon law, read the top post here piotr.sabrestlouis.com/ChurchLetters.html .

So with a very limited knowledge of Catholicism, along with their view of what Christianity is or should be, they are painting Archbishop Burke as nothing more than a power/money hungry dictator.

Its also quite nauseating to read this paper’s ignorance to what all excommunication in the Catholic Church entails, as well as other teachings piotr.sabrestlouis.com/WSJ_12_20_2005_htm.html
 
Unfortunately, I think we are all still missing the point here. First of all, noone has answered my original question about what (if any) compromise the parishoners at St. Stan is willing to accept in order to bring themselves back in communion with the Church. All I have heard is what Abp. Burke is willing to concede to and everyone elses cynical analysis of such. If it isn’t about pride on the part of St. Stan. then why is there no hint of them making any type of concession whatsoever, especially given the fact that the board revised their by-laws to clearly exclude ANY submission to the authority of the bishop ? Can someone please answer that for me, because unless I’m missing something here (and that is entirely possible) this is nothing more than a defiance of the church. If you reject the authority of the bishop, you reject the authority of Rome. And if you reject the authority of Rome, you reject the authority of Christ and the church he gave to us.
 
BTW, i think Catholic29, you have echoed many of my sentiments. I really am saddened by this whole thing on many levels. I’m tired of trying to defend the stance of the church to fundamentalist protestant co-workers who laud the parishoners of St. Stan. as heroes who are standing up to “the roman system”. I am dismayed at seeing people on the local news giving their opinions on this scandal (again I use that term litterally…look it up in the chatechism). This whole situation does nothing but scandalize the Church, hindering our “oneness”. Catholic means universal, and that is being seriously injured by all of this. My prayers are with all involved.
 
**Joshua,

According to the save St Stan site, the board is not willing to compromise at all. They themselves have listed their options:

Agree with the Archbishop, which they themselves said basically “No Way”.

Sell.

Close and turn into a shrine.

Join a Non-Roman Catholic Church.

You can check for yourself, the link is posted two or three posting above.**
 
Dear friends,
I think Bishop Burke could have handled this in a manner that would have been more agreeable for all involved, but the point is we all must be obedient to our superiors, yes even when they are wrong. Read the lives of the Saints and how many times their superior was wrong and they were obedient anyway, God loves this more than anything and without a chain of command, a hiarchy if you will then what do we have? you got it; you have become protestant.
I will pray for all of those involved, but know this right are wrong the Bishop has the final word, you can see what disobedience has created in our culture and I want none of it.

God bless Matt 🙂
 
Unfortunately, I got the answer I expected. The parishoners are not willing to concede to the authority of the bishop under any circumstances. If they refuse to submit themselves to the authority of the bishop of their diocese, then they are indeed Protestant. Without submission to the authority of the church, they are NOT Catholic in any sense of the word. What saddens me most is that this scandal is now national news. I was watching the Fox News Network this morning, and much to my dismay, the ticker at the bottom made mention of the illicit mass at St. Stan this weekend, and even made a brief comment that some people came as far as Oregon (?) to attend. The church that Jesus gave us will endure to the end and “the gates of Hell will not prevail against it”, but why do some people insist on propping the gates open for it to be attacked ? Maybe it’s time to start a new thread…
 
i don’t understand some catholics, they nip and moan about not having a faithful orthodox bishop and when they finally get one they join the awkward squad
 
40.png
cainem:
i don’t understand some catholics, they nip and moan about not having a faithful orthodox bishop and when they finally get one they join the awkward squad
Click to expand...
And just what does this supposed to mean? In what way do you percieve them to be “awkward”?:confused:
 
do you not think this disobedient parish have not made this situation awkward for the local bishop and clergy with their wilfull disobedience?
 
A few responses…

TPJ wrote:
“When God gave the ten commandments, were they up for discussion, or did God intend that we just plain follow them, even if we disagree?”

Are you saying that we should regard statements from our bishops as though they came from God through Moses? I don’t understand what you’re getting at, TPJ.
joshua b wrote:
“…noone has answered my original question about what (if any) compromise the parishoners at St. Stan is willing to accept in order to bring themselves back in communion with the Church”

I think this is part of the problem… The laity are expected to compromise, to apologize, and to humble themselves. They’re not exactly seeing this modeled from their church leaders, who have not apologized or acknowledged any of their own mistakes… Everyone is supposed to be full of humility, except our church leaders themselves.
 
I guess what I find dismaying is that many of the posts in this discussion seem to echo the stance of my church leaders…

To summarize:

Some lawyers are trying to bankrupt the Church because church leaders foisted predatory priests on unsuspecting parishes. In this discussion the laity is blamed for this.

St. Stan, living under the rules set up for it by church leaders, has had its priests taken away- despite the money the parishoners were allowed to raise to save their parish. Here the laity is blamed for being ‘uppity’ and as selling their souls.

This parish (St. Stan) nearly ceased to exist with no help from the diocese during the 60’s & 70’. In this discussion- this is somehow taken as evidence of St. Stan’s money grubbing ways. I still don’t understand this view.

Fairness seems to be put aside, while jackhammer application of canon law is employed by the Archbishop. Here the Archbishop is celebrated because he’s true to the latest edition of canon law.

Anyone who doesn’t follow Church teaching is excommunicated and destined for Hell. “Good! As it should be! The archbishop is binding and loosing just as Jesus wants him to!” seems to be the tenor of Church ‘apologists’ here on this site.

I hope these aren’t the real views of my church. In the meantime, this is a time of reassessment for myself…
 
ernesto,

God gave the leaders of the Church authority to bind and loose. That power comes from God, just as the commandments come from God. When Moses brought those commandments to the people he was being a servant of God. When Archbishop Burke announced that the lay board at St. Stan’s was excommunicated, he is doing so using authority given to him by God, he was being a servant of God.

It is very sad that people today do not understand how grave a situation they are in under excommunication. Their very souls are at risk, which is far more important then money, or anything else in temporal life. I do not blame the parish for trying to protest the action by the diocese, they have a God given and Canonical right to do so. Yet, when two Bishops, Canon Law and the Holy See’ tell them they must obey, then it is time to obey no matter what they think.
 
ernesto,

I ask you to calmly reassess your position. Allow me to address some of your points:

Some lawyers are trying to bankrupt the Church because church leaders foisted predatory priests on unsuspecting parishes. In this discussion the laity is blamed for this.

==> I no of no-one who is blaming lay Catholics for abusing minors and children. Yet, you accurately state that wolf-like lawyers are trying to bleed the Church into bankruptcy. Four percent of the clergy have commited abuse (a horrible number), yet that means 96% if clergy have NOT commited abuse. Most of the abuse was homosexual in nature and when the Church tries to address that, they are attacked. Kids are more vunerable in their own homes, then they are in any other place, yet that is never made clear…

St. Stan, living under the rules set up for it by church leaders, has had its priests taken away- despite the money the parishoners were allowed to raise to save their parish. Here the laity is blamed for being ‘uppity’ and as selling their souls.

==> They are not blamed for being uppity. They are in schism, plain in simple. They are no different then those people who followed Luther, they have become Protestant.

This parish (St. Stan) nearly ceased to exist with no help from the diocese during the 60’s & 70’. In this discussion- this is somehow taken as evidence of St. Stan’s money grubbing ways. I still don’t understand this view.

==> If Archbishop Burke wanted their money he would not have promised to let the money stay with the parish and he would not have excommunicated the board. AB clearly is worried about their souls.

Fairness seems to be put aside, while jackhammer application of canon law is employed by the Archbishop. Here the Archbishop is celebrated because he’s true to the latest edition of canon law.

==> In a way you are correct. AB is being celebrated because he is actually doing what he should…that seems shocking to some people because many Bishops have NOT done what they should for many years. If Bishops and Priest did what they should over the last 40 years, the abuse would not have happened and abortion would not be legal. Now that we have a Bishop who is doing his job, many people are furious…they have been spoiled by years of inactivity by their clergy.

Anyone who doesn’t follow Church teaching is excommunicated and destined for Hell. “Good! As it should be! The archbishop is binding and loosing just as Jesus wants him to!” seems to be the tenor of Church ‘apologists’ here on this site.

==> No-one on earth can place anyone in hell–God alone judges our souls. Yet, excommunication is a very grave situation and people should not take it so lightly.

I hope these aren’t the real views of my church. In the meantime, this is a time of reassessment for myself…

==> Faith is a journey, I pray you will try to expand your view so that you see things from the Church’s side.
Today 10:15 AM
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top