(Rome) Six out of 800 members of the order of the Franciscans of the Immaculate (FI) have made a submission to the Roman Congregation for Religious. A small minority. Thus, they protested against the decision of the Order's leadership, to use the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite and to remain bi-ritual for the pastoral care of the faithful. Some of the six dissidents are now no longer in the Order, they were excluded because of disobedience and indiscipline. It may be argued that only a pretext was sought for the Congregation of Religious to take action against the exemplary order. The radical intervention shows a dreadful lack of liturgical sensibility. Only such a deficiency may explain a ham fisted methods of this magnitude, which deprives the heart of religious life for four branches with more than 100 monasteries and houses and it seems to be the opinion that the Old Rite being simply replaced by the new is desirable. Upon the disempowerment of the Founder and the imposition of a Commission is expected to prevent a reaction to this by the Order.
From katholisches...
Text: Giuseppi Nardi
Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com
16 New Novices
There's also a similar case with the Johannites....
AMGD
12 comments:
These were the figures I was looking for, so thanks. It makes the action from Rome even more questionable.
It was far more than six:
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/franciscans-of-the-immaculate-decree-worries-traditionalists/
Catholic Snooze Network? The the testimony of one priest who claims he's worried about "heresy" who says it's 80%? I doubt it.
Yes, but that one priest is spokesman of the FI and even a member of the FI Council. Everything that traditionalists are upset about and are fearful about is based on the idea that a mere handful of members caused the revoking of the EF, which would indeed be a problem. But if it is 80% of the members then this is truly a unique situation for a conservative order and thus has little to do with the EF and thus there is little to fear that it will happen to other orders. Just for the sake of the conservative's reputation and peace in the Church and respect for the pope, you might want to be more open and joyful about this news.
He immediately loses credibility when he begins to accuse people in the order of "heresy" and refers to others as "Lefebvrists". And I'd like to know just what sort of things they did amounted to "disobedience".
And let's not pretend that this sort of high-handed legerdemain doesn't take place on the part of certain shadowy figures in the curia.
After all, heresy and disobedience are commonplace outside of this Catholic enclave of sanity. Since when have they been concerned about heresy and disobedience?
Ok, Tancred, but remember, if your wrong you have just done much damage to your reputation, to peace amongst Christ's brothers and your relation to Christ's Vicar. And for what? I recommend prudence. Just a thought.
Hey, it's not my fault that Curial officials are unreliable.
Btw, notice that I've addressed your source and why he is problematic. Why is it you demi-Catholic can't seem to come up with reasoned responses to anything and are forever threatening, making empty pious threats and so forth?
If anyone should worry about their credibility, it's emotive types like yourselves.
Where am I being emotional? I gave the reasons for what I said even if I did not respond to your reasons. Your reasons are simply your guess. Why would I comment on that? In my first comment I already gave my reason for believing in the spokesman for the FI, because he is a member of the General Council of the FI. He has been quoted in many mainstream Catholic outlets.
Further, where did I make a threat? I am just doing you the charity of pointing out that your own words and stance will not serve your own reputation when the facts come through and prove your fears to be unfounded. I see no reason to assume I am being vicious in any way.
Anon:
I've read the official responses from the Order and they basically confirm the facts as we understand them. I am skeptical of the "80%" figure but even I weren't what the Pope has apparently done is to violate the current law vis-a-vis the Ancient Rite: no one need to ask permission to say this Rite under any circumstances whatsoever. Ergo, if Pope Francis is saying that these religious now have to ask permission to say a venerable Rite of nearly 20 centuries then he is clearly acting against the current law in force.
As one commenter wrote elsewhere, the Church is not a "democracy" where one regime moves in and suddenly extinguishes all laws and customs that came before. One day it is OK to say the Old Mass, next day it is not OK, then it is OK again, now it isn't OK again. This is ridiculous and is not a mark of holiness, let alone prudence.
No, what the report says is that eighty percent of the congregation "appreciate the intervention of the Church." That says nothing whatsoever about the number of people who initiated the complaint. It merely tells you that the overwhelming majority of the congregation's members are willing to affirm the Holy See's right and authority to oversee them in cordial but rather vague terms.
Yes, are you threatening my reputation?
My fears are well-founded and have a long history over many years where Traditionalist causes, individuals and concerns are given the high-ho by the authorities and run out on a rail.
The Johnannite Sisters, Institute of the Good Shepherd, Pastor Gerhard Wagner, Father Skobliki of Linz, Father Rodriguez in Texas, Father Francis Michel in Thiberville, FSSP and Protocol 1411, Father Demets in Arkansas, Father Guarnizo in D.C., and so
forth.
Obviously it's not an exhaustive list.
Post a Comment