Traditional Orders' Ordaining Bishops?

[TrueLight]

Brother JR–

So you’re right…the FSSP priests are flexible and

I don’t know what’s going on in this situation, but they’re not as flexible as they’re being made out to be.

Unfortunately I doubt any FSSP priest is going to come on here and address any of the FSSP comments concerning them. .

 

[JReducation]

Brother JR–

Our diocese has one FSSP priest. I think he came from Detroit with Bishop Flores. He’s assigned to the hospital ministry and is a Parochial Vicar at a parish. From looking at that parish’s web page, there are no EF masses there. (The diocese does have a couple of EF Masses celebrated by the Oratorian fathers).

So you’re right…the FSSP priests are flexible and obedient.

If I asked you this before but it’s an expansion: at our parish we have a Franciscan priest as a “part time assistant” (the pastor is a diocesan priest) as he is part of a community of five Franciscans in a neighboring parish. You explained that his duties to his community take precedent over his duties at our parish. How come the FSSP priest can be a “parochial vicar” at a parish under a diocesan priest. Don’t the same obligations arise for him that arise for the Franciscan?

The superior can decline the offer to make his man a parochial vicar, because it commits him to the parish. By being an extern, the superior has the flexibility of pulling him if he needs him in some other place.

I don’t know what’s going on in this situation, but they’re not as flexible as they’re being made out to be.
.

What are you understanding by flexible? Maybe the word is being used differently from what you’re thinking.

When I think of them as flexible, I think of them being able to be Traditionalists and at the same time they don’t put up barriers between them and those who do not call themselves Traditionalists. At least I’ve never met one like that. The ones I’ve met are very outgoing, not ghettoish. Is that even a word?

I also see flexibility in their ability to work with bishops. Let’s face it. Bishops are human beings and some a more difficult to work with than others. For a non diocesan, sometimes the temptation is to keep going to the next place, rather than stay and deal with a tough situation. They stay and deal with things one day at a time. That’s great flexibility. It’s really a virtuous flexibility.

I’ve never been to an FSSP parish, but from what I’ve heard from people who have, I get the impression that they can serve in a little town or a major metropolis. That too is flexibility.

Some communities only work with the poor parishes. Others only work with the middle class. Others only work in the area of academics and so forth.

Is this what you are thinking or is it another kind of flexibility?

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

If I asked you this before but it’s an expansion: at our parish we have a Franciscan priest as a “part time assistant” (the pastor is a diocesan priest) as he is part of a community of five Franciscans in a neighboring parish. You explained that his duties to his community take precedent over his duties at our parish. How come the FSSP priest can be a “parochial vicar” at a parish under a diocesan priest. Don’t the same obligations arise for him that arise for the Franciscan?

I know you asked this of Brother JR but I am sure he won’t have a problem with me giving this a try. I am sure he will correct anything I get wrong.

The FSSP is a society of apostolic life. It is a group of secular priests who band together to serve a shared apostolite. In this case it is the celebration of the EF and the other rites in the extraordinary form. They may do other things but the main reason for the existence of the FSSP is to celebrate the EF. They are not a religious order. They do not make solemn vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience.

The Franciscans are a religious order. They exist to be Franciscans, to live out the Franciscan charism. Part of the life of the religious orders is the common life. To put it simply we (I say we as I am a Carmelite which is also a religious order of the mendicant tradition like the Franciscans) pray together, we play together, and we work together. As religious we may very well do more than a society of apostolic life as they are formed around a certain apostolate while we are not so we may serve and run many of them.

I hope this helps and I hope I got it mostly right.

I would also like to tell Brother JR that his comments on another thread on the Carmelites was not just worth a but also deserves a Dallali. If I was giving a grade it would be an A.

 

[JReducation]

It’s very important to understand that in societies of apostolic life, unless the constitution says otherwise, the superior can isolate his men or women, whichever case applies. By isolate, I mean that he or she can assign someone outside of the community for an indefinite period of time.

For religious, this is not allowed. You cannot send a friar to an indefinite away mission. Canon law clearly says that religious must live with their community. Sometimes, you have a case where a man lives outside of the house for practical reasons, but he is part of the house. He has a voice, vote and must come to the house on a regular schedule. I lived in a house where a friar lived at a mission station. He came to the house every evening for Vespers, supper and recreation. Then he want back to the mission until the next day.

A society of apostolic life need not follow those rules. Therefore, they need not include it in their statutes. Given that the FSSP is built around the priesthood and the liturgy, it is very possible that they common life is not too demanding. Their priority is very different from that of the Franciscans.

For a Franciscan, the world can be going to hell in a hand basket, but he has to be there for community functions. He can rescue the world later after he has prayed, eaten, and played with his brothers. But before he goes, he must make sure that the floor is scrubbed, the dishes are done, the laundry is folded, the car is washed and groceries are put away. He entered religious life to be a friar, not to be a priest. He need not be a religious to be a priest.

If a superior commits a friar to priestly work outside of the religious house, not matter how beneficial it may be for the parish, it is not beneficial to the community and to the friar. You have to balance the benefits. You try as hard as you can to benefit as many as possible, but always putting the community first.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

It’s really another part of Catholic tradition . . . a side that many people never get to see.

 

[ImmaculataFides]

He’s not joking friend. Traditionally-minded seminarians have been booted out of the seminary for daring to appreciate the Latin Mass.

 

[ImmaculataFides]

He’s not joking friend. Traditionally-minded seminarians have been booted out of the seminary for daring to appreciate the Latin Mass. Modernist seminary rectors monitor the seminarians internet usage. Simply for visiting more traditional Catholic sites regularly gets you reprimanded.

 

[JReducation]

He’s not joking friend. Traditionally-minded seminarians have been booted out of the seminary for daring to appreciate the Latin Mass. Modernist seminary rectors monitor the seminarians internet usage. Simply for visiting more traditional Catholic sites regularly gets you reprimanded.

I can’t speak for every seminary, every rector or every formation director. I can only speak for me. I’ve been formation director for my community for several years, until now. I do monitor and prohibit certain sites on the internet, because they’re not informative. They’re just vitriol. Some are Radical Traditionalist and some are Radical Liberals.

That being said, I don’t have some handy dandy technology to monitor. I simply make the rules and demand compliance. If someone finds that objectionable, my immediate question is, “Why would you want to become a religious, if you can’t obey without whining?” At that point, whether the person is looking at something Traditional or Liberal is a mute issue. The issue is now about authority and obedience. My concern is how to help this person learn to obey, even when it’s not pleasant. If after a reasonable time, it is clear that obedience is an issue, then you dismiss.

We have to be careful when people tell us that they got dismissed from a seminary or a religious community because they were reading a Trad site or a Liberal site. More often than not, they were told not to go there and they disobeyed. Disobedience is a very good reason for dismissal. You rather dismiss someone while in formation, than have to go through a canonical battlefield to dismiss them later.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

 

[newyorkcatholic]

I can’t speak for every seminary, every rector or every formation director. I can only speak for me. I’ve been formation director for my community for several years, until now. I do monitor and prohibit certain sites on the internet, because they’re not informative. They’re just vitriol. Some are Radical Traditionalist and some are Radical Liberals.

That being said, I don’t have some handy dandy technology to monitor. I simply make the rules and demand compliance. If someone finds that objectionable, my immediate question is, “Why would you want to become a religious, if you can’t obey without whining?” At that point, whether the person is looking at something Traditional or Liberal is a mute issue. The issue is now about authority and obedience. My concern is how to help this person learn to obey, even when it’s not pleasant. If after a reasonable time, it is clear that obedience is an issue, then you dismiss.

We have to be careful when people tell us that they got dismissed from a seminary or a religious community because they were reading a Trad site or a Liberal site. More often than not, they were told not to go there and they disobeyed. Disobedience is a very good reason for dismissal. You rather dismiss someone while in formation, than have to go through a canonical battlefield to dismiss them later.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

We can’t speak too broadly. Hopefully most directors of formation would think and act as you describe.

But many of us know people who had other experiences. Priests who were kicked out for following the Church, for not embracing women’s ordination. Not a simple case of “I said not to look at this website and you did” but rather a case of “this is evidence that you are rigid [traditionally-minded] or superstitious [pious] and you are not fit for the priesthood … we are dismissing you.”

This has happened a lot, especially in the 70s and 80s in American diocesan seminaries.

I often get this impression, Br JR, no offense intended, that you are a gentle, balanced, intelligent, knowledge, but slightly naive person. You tend to see how things should be, how the law works, and sort of go from there. But there are wolves among us. I hope that’s not unfair, and I mean no disrespect.

Most seminarians, in my estimation, even if never forbidden from watching traditional stuff because the director would not feel comfortable with such an order (that might put him under scrutiny) could still persecute a traditionally minded seminarian by using the above methods … pressure, psychological evaluation, send him to the most liberal parish with rampant abuses, etc.

 

[Melchior_1]

We can’t speak too broadly. Hopefully most directors of formation would think and act as you describe.

But many of us know people who had other experiences. Priests who were kicked out for following the Church, for not embracing women’s ordination. Not a simple case of “I said not to look at this website and you did” but rather a case of “this is evidence that you are rigid [traditionally-minded] or superstitious [pious] and you are not fit for the priesthood … we are dismissing you.”

This has happened a lot, especially in the 70s and 80s in American diocesan seminaries.

I often get this impression, Br JR, no offense intended, that you are a gentle, balanced, intelligent, knowledge, but slightly naive person. You tend to see how things should be, how the law works, and sort of go from there. But there are wolves among us. I hope that’s not unfair, and I mean no disrespect.

Most seminarians, in my estimation, even if never forbidden from watching traditional stuff because the director would not feel comfortable with such an order (that might put him under scrutiny) could still persecute a traditionally minded seminarian by using the above methods … pressure, psychological evaluation, send him to the most liberal parish with rampant abuses, etc.

There are not wolves under every bed, though.

Also, are you saying that these days most seminarians will be punished for checking our traditional websites and practices?

 

[newyorkcatholic]

There are not wolves under every bed, though.

Also, are you saying that these days most seminarians will be punished for checking our traditional websites and practices?

Replaced “most” with “many,” then, yes that’s what I’m saying.

Also I’m only referring to American diocesan seminaries.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

We can’t speak too broadly. Hopefully most directors of formation would think and act as you describe.

But many of us know people who had other experiences. Priests who were kicked out for following the Church, for not embracing women’s ordination. Not a simple case of “I said not to look at this website and you did” but rather a case of “this is evidence that you are rigid [traditionally-minded] or superstitious [pious] and you are not fit for the priesthood … we are dismissing you.”

This has happened a lot, especially in the 70s and 80s in American diocesan seminaries.

I often get this impression, Br JR, no offense intended, that you are a gentle, balanced, intelligent, knowledge, but slightly naive person. You tend to see how things should be, how the law works, and sort of go from there. But there are wolves among us. I hope that’s not unfair, and I mean no disrespect.

Most seminarians, in my estimation, even if never forbidden from watching traditional stuff because the director would not feel comfortable with such an order (that might put him under scrutiny) could still persecute a traditionally minded seminarian by using the above methods … pressure, psychological evaluation, send him to the most liberal parish with rampant abuses, etc.

We always must be careful when dealing with those who are dismissed from religious life, the seminary, or from the priesthood, for some issue.

First off, the Church, religious institute, seminary will generally never (Fr Corapi is the only case that I am aware of where the religious institute came out with anything) publicly speak out on a matter.

So we only get one side of the story, the story of the one dismissed. They can really say whatever they want and we have no way to find out the truth in the matter.

I for one chose to give the benefit of the doubt to the Church in such cases as those dismissed really do have an axe to grind.

Repeating such stories (hearsay really) is nothing more than gossip and serves to create animosity towards the legitimate authority of the Church.

It should not be encouraged, really it should be pointed out for the error that it is when it is seen.

 

[Melchior_1]

Replaced “most” with “many,” then, yes that’s what I’m saying.

Also I’m only referring to American diocesan seminaries.

Many implies the majority. Cross-country accounts and verified facts would be appreciated

 

[newyorkcatholic]

Many implies the majority. Cross-country accounts and verified facts would be appreciated

Lexical quibble perhaps, but “many” doesn’t imply “majority.” “Most” actually means “majority.” But 30% of a million gold coins is still many gold coins!

Anyway, I have personal (not friend of a friend, but direct personal account to me) evidence of soft and more serious persecution at certain seminaries.

Not enough that I would issue any general condemnations, or name seminaries.

But enough to back up the statement made earlier on this thread. If you are a seminarian for a diocese, you probably already know that you need to be careful about this stuff.

(Watching in the basement might be hyperbole, but really be careful: don’t blab about your trad leanings in the general hearing of others).

I personally know seminarians involved with the TLM, and I know enough never to reveal their names online!

I am not alone in this belief. Fr Z has reported much, much more in terms of collected anecdotes and has written about his personal experiences. So did Fr Bryce Sibley, who used to a have a great and funny blog on various Catholic matters.

 

[JReducation]

I believe that the finger pointing on both sides just as to stop. This whole debate about who is more faithful to Catholic tradition and who is more faithful to the Church’s vision to the future is only leading people to say very ugly things about each other, their bishops and their parish priests. In the end, the ugly comments, the snide remarks, the condescension from either side is horribly sinful. All the good that one believes to have achieved by doing whatever one believes should be done is not going to do much good to the person’s soul. At some point, we have to take stock of what we say about each other and ask ourselves, would we speak this way about Jesus.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

 

[JReducation]

I often get this impression, Br JR, no offense intended, that you are a gentle, balanced, intelligent, knowledge, but slightly naive person. You tend to see how things should be, how the law works, and sort of go from there. But there are wolves among us. I hope that’s not unfair, and I mean no disrespect.

I’m not offended at all. I thank you for the kind words. I believe my brothers may disagree with you on “gentle”, especially those in formation. I’m a stickler for law and for preserving the Franciscan tradition.

What you perceive of naive may be a different way of approaching the world I can’t recall who the bishop was. I read this about five years ago. There was a bishop who made a on month retreat at one of our houses. He later wrote that when he first arrived, his impression was that we were “not in the real world.” He said that after a month, it was he and the secular Catholics who were not in the real world. He pointed to the friars’ world and the world of monks and cloistered nuns. His comment was, “This world is as real as it’s ever going to get.”

I mention the experience of this bishop, because often we get this feedback. We’re naive. We don’t live in the real world. We out of touch with the laity and other things like this. I think the reason that we may give that impression is because we have been formed to maintain total inner silence. What is happening in the world cannot be allowed to enter our mind or our space, because it distracts from the more important, which is contemplating God’s presence in the here and now.

We’re also trained to be very disciplined. Discipline means not to react to crisis and to problems. One looks and sees where one can do some good. What is out of one’s reach, one trusts that God will send the right person or people to deal with it.

I always tell the brothers that even though Jesus put the Pharisees in their place a few times, we’re not Jesus. We’re as sinful or perhaps more than the Pharisees. Christ lives in every human being, even the most sinful. I tell them never to say to a person or say anything about a person that one would not say to Jesus or about Jesus. At the end of the day, every human being is superior to us. If we were not wretched, we would not be in religious life. We would have no need to live a life of penance.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

 

[wasserfall]

Christ lives in every human being, even the most sinful.

Please elaborate here Brother JR.

I don’t agree with this statement as it seems to contradict the nature of the state of mortal sin as opposed to the state of grace, so I’d like to hear what you mean by it.

p.s. The paragraph in which this statement was embedded seemed very traditional and correct. Just this statement stood out to me,

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Anyway, I have personal (not friend of a friend, but direct personal account to me) evidence of soft and more serious persecution at certain seminaries.

Direct personal account to you is still hearsay in a court of law and repeating it is gossip.

Unless you are directly involved then you should really keep it to yourself.

Because even with a personal account given to you, you do not have the whole story, you just have one side of it from a disgruntled party.

 

[TrueLight]

Direct personal account to you is still hearsay in a court of law and repeating it is gossip.

Unless you are directly involved then you should really keep it to yourself.

Because even with a personal account given to you, you do not have the whole story, you just have one side of it from a disgruntled party.

Well then in that case Br. David, we can never know anything unless we experience it ourselves. . News-hearsay. History-hearsay. Accounts of the lives of saints - hearsay Sometimes there are good sources.

I appreciate your desire to be always charitable but IMHO, sometimes you take it a bit too far.

 

[CB_Catholic]

I believe that the finger pointing on both sides just as to stop. This whole debate about who is more faithful to Catholic tradition and who is more faithful to the Church’s vision to the future is only leading people to say very ugly things about each other, their bishops and their parish priests. In the end, the ugly comments, the snide remarks, the condescension from either side is horribly sinful. All the good that one believes to have achieved by doing whatever one believes should be done is not going to do much good to the person’s soul. At some point, we have to take stock of what we say about each other and ask ourselves, would we speak this way about Jesus.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

Unfortunately, Brother JR, we do not always heed St. Paul when he says that we are always to think of others as better than ourselves. If we did this (and I am most certainly one that needs to remember this) we would not have the gossip, the snide remarks, the condescending attitudes. We do need to heed St Paul and look to Saints such as Francis for how to live this. It is difficult, I admit, in this “Me” generation, even among professed Christians, to think of others as better than ourselves, esp. when they don’t seem to be as spiritual or as devoted or somehow appear more sinful than us. Thank you for the reminder.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Well then in that case Br. David, we can never know anything unless we experience it ourselves. . News-hearsay. History-hearsay. Accounts of the lives of saints - hearsay Sometimes there are good sources.

I appreciate your desire to be always charitable but IMHO, sometimes you take it a bit too far.

When you only have one side of a story and that side is most likely upset with what happened, it is not something that should be spread.

You very well know that that is different than news, history, or saints.

Some fail to see this as it just confirms what they want to believe.

An anonymous internet forum is not the place to be spreading these sorts of stories. They are gossip, they do not contain the facts as news or history does.

I am sorry that you fail to see this or wish not to acknowledge it, but that is what it is.

With out the Church, seminary, or religious institute providing its side of the story you can not know the truth.

But some seem to revel in smearing the Church whenever they get the chance, I just think it should not be done at a Catholic website.