St. Thomas University severs ties with St. Paul Archdiocese

  • Thread starter Thread starter Catholic29
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Not to sound stupid, but do these universitues receive any money from the diocese? If they do, cut their money off.
 
Digitonomy said:
The bishop could indeed require diocesan priests (but probably not religious order priests).
Click to expand...
A bishop has the authority to expel religious orders, or specific religious, from his diocese.

So while he cannot compel their obedience as he could diocesan clergy, he can compel the religious not to set foot in his diocese.

That means, of course, that the religious could still be involved with a University in the diocese, but they would have to do it via telecommunting.
 
davy39 said:
Not to sound stupid, but do these universitues receive any money from the diocese? If they do, cut their money off.
Click to expand...
Not stupid at all. That is one power that the bishop surely has. I’m guessing that the diocesan contribution to the university’s budget is fairly small, if present at all, but I guarantee no one at the school wants to give up free money unnecessarily.

On the other hand, the school may be anticipating such a loss of funding - it may be that the school was a pet project of the old bishop, while it had become clear that the new bishop had other priorities. If I were on the board and felt the new bishop were going to use the university’s resources for other projects in the diocese, to the detriment of the school - basically bleed it dry - I would probably vote the way the board did. Note that this is just wild speculation in search of a justification for the school’s action.

Perhaps buc_fan33 can provide some insight into the relationship between the diocese and the school - did the school budget include funding from the diocese? What other areas were there interaction besides the bishop sitting on the board?
 
Minneapolis Star-Tribune

Since St. Thomas’ founding in 1885, the archbishop of the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis has held the position of chairman of its board of trustees. But Mach noted that “a vote of the trustees and a subsequent stroke of the pen,” could make such connections with the church “vestiges of the past.”

On Oct. 25, 2007, the vote that Mach foresaw took place.

St. Thomas’ trustees voted to eliminate the archbishop’s automatic position on the board. As a result, come next spring, for the first time since Archbishop John Ireland founded the institution, a sitting archbishop will not chair the St. Thomas board.

Moreover, he may not even have a seat on it.

In future years, the trustees can elect as chair whomever they wish: a layperson, technically even a Buddhist.

The vote severing this legal link with the archdiocese is the latest development in a long-running struggle for St. Thomas’ soul.

Some of the institution’s strongest programs, such as the Catholic Studies department and the law school, still maintain a strong Catholic identity. But external pressures and internal inclinations to secularize abound.
 
From what I have heard, this change is in violation of canon law which may well be supprorted by civil law. However, I don’t expect that the bishop will sue to gain his status over the university if it is his right.
If this school is one of the most liberal Catholic universities in the U.S. as someone here thought, it has been long gone as an institution of the Church and as a Catholic place. I have worked at a “Catholic” university for 30 and I could tell some amazing stories of infidelity that the university keeps out of the public eye.
 
Whatever the case may be about St. Thomas’s religious or secular status, I think one should take a long read at this Star Tribune blog, particularly its comment section.

nc.startribune.com/blogs/kersten/?p=325#comments

Its apparent the issues surrounding the University of St. Thomas (UST, not STU) are many and complicated. The polarization, anger and resentment many feel under the surface runs thicker than butter, no matter what side of the political or ideological coin they speak for.

For myself, I think pandora’s box has been opened.😦
 
mdgspencer said:
From what I have heard, this change is in violation of canon law which may well be supprorted by civil law.
Click to expand...
I suspect you have heard wrongly. Here are the relevant canons regarding universities, and nowhere does it regulate the composition of the board at such institutions.
 
I do not view this as severing ties. Read this response from UST’s President.

startribune.com/opinion/commentary/12334096.html

None of us were at the meetings when this policy was made so reading intentions does a disservice by adding needless speculation.

Catholic Colleges and Universities are made to be open and diverse. Parts of the schools need to reflect the world around them or risk being irrelevant to the world around them. Academecia is a place for a exchanging of ideas and forming new ideas. It should not be a place where enforcing the standard quo always gets you ahead, as the real world does not work like that.
 
NewUlm1976_2000 said:
I do not view this as severing ties. Read this response from UST’s President.

startribune.com/opinion/commentary/12334096.html

Or so he says. Just about any of the secularized, former Catholic Universities could say similar things. But ousting, in advance, an orthodox bishop they don’t seem to want, and electing a chairman who presided at a Rainbow Sash Mass says a lot too. And it was a unanimous vote. There’s enforcement of the “status quo” with a vengeance.
None of us were at the meetings when this policy was made so reading intentions does a disservice by adding needless speculation. None of us were ever at meeting in the Kremlin either, but that doesn’t mean we can’t derive intentions from actions.

Catholic Colleges and Universities are made to be open and diverse. Parts of the schools need to reflect the world around them or risk being irrelevant to the world around them. Academecia is a place for a exchanging of ideas and forming new ideas. It should not be a place where enforcing the standard quo always gets you ahead, as the real world does not work like that.
Click to expand...
**No university is like the “real world”. They are as artificial an environment as Disneyland. I strongly dispute that they need to reflect the world around them. If they truly did that, we would still be wearing horned helmets and swinging broadaxes. They are supposed to inform and improve the world around them. If they claim to be Catholic, then they should be Catholic in that informing and direction of improvement, or they should just admit they are something else. I, for one, do not believe there is anything backward or unrealistic about being truly Catholic. **
 
Money talks. If the alumni and donors make their feelings known, the situation could be remedied quickly.

Of course, that depends on what their feelings are…
 
NewUlm1976_2000 said:
Catholic Colleges and Universities are made to be open and diverse. Parts of the schools need to reflect the world around them or risk being irrelevant to the world around them.
Click to expand...
That’s what John Shelby Spong says about the church, and look what happened to him: he “progressed” himself right out of the Christian Faith completely.
 
Wolseley said:
That’s what John Shelby Spong says about the church, and look what happened to him: he “progressed” himself right out of the Christian Faith completely.
Click to expand...
If any organization does not adjust to the times it also becomes irrelevant to the wider world around it.
 
NewUlm1976_2000 said:
If any organization does not adjust to the times it also becomes irrelevant to the wider world around it.
Click to expand...
We’re not supposed to change with the times, friend.

“Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.” (Words of Jesus; Matthew 7:13-14)

“Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness? What harmony is there between Christ and Belial? What does a believer have in common with an unbeliever? What agreement is there between the temple of God and idols?..Therefore come out from them and be separate, says the Lord. Touch no unclean thing, and I will receive you. I will be a Father to you, and you will be my sons and daughters, says the Lord Almighty.” (Words of Paul; 1 Corinthians 6:14-18)

Besides which, the Church doesn’t have to change. It is not subject to dissolution and irrelevance like human “organizations”, as you called it. The gates of hell will not prevail against it.

Our job is not to make the Church conform to the world. Our job is to make the world conform to the Church.
 
NewUlm1976_2000 said:
Here is Archbishop Flynn’s response to this editorial, I guess he was extremely misrepresented to sell papers.

startribune.com/opinion/letters/12266016.html
Click to expand...
From that link:
First, the statement we e-mailed and faxed to her was headlined as being a “Statement of the Archdiocese of Saint Paul and Minneapolis.” It came from me, not from our “spokesman.”
Click to expand...
Second, and more important, Kersten used only the first sentence of my statement in her column. The other two sentences were ignored. They read as follows: “The Saint Thomas board will always include bishops or priests. Any rumors or speculation about the ‘de-Catholicization of the University of Saint Thomas are ill founded, inaccurate and ludicrous.’”
Click to expand...
The editing of my statement leaves open to question her motivation in writing this one-sided and inaccurate column.
Click to expand...
 
Wolseley said:
Besides which, the Church doesn’t have to change. It is not subject to dissolution and irrelevance like human “organizations”, as you called it. The gates of hell will not prevail against it.

Our job is not to make the Church conform to the world. Our job is to make the world conform to the Church.
Click to expand...
In the real world it has and will continue to do so. The Church of today is not the church of 10 years ago, 100 years ago, or 1000 years ago. The message and the discussions that surround the messages have to be framed in the modern world. The Roman Empire has come on gone, the Middle Ages have come and gone, the Church in those periods is not the Church of today. If discussions are based on those times it is viewed as seriously behind the times as the world has moved on.

Remember the Church is not perfect (e.g. JPII apologies for the past), and the Church is stronger, not weaker if we accept this humbling fact. This, in our modern world makes any "conform"ity “to the Church” to only be partway at best. True "conform"ity falls into the built in problems of human fallibility.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top