Recent Posts

Most Used Categories

Tag: Church

You are Here :
PNCC, Poetry, Poland - Polish - Polonia, Saints and Martyrs, , , , ,

Ś+P świetny organizator, patrioty, i naszym pierwszego biskupa Franciszek Hodur

Bishop Franczisek Hodur as a young priest

  • Born: April 1, 1866, in the village of Żarki, six miles from Kraków, Poland. Studies at St. Anne’s Gimnazjum (Kraków, Poland), the Jagełłionian University (Kraków, Poland), and St. Vincent’s Archabbey (Latrobe, Pennsylvania)
  • Ordained to the Holy Priesthood: August 19, 1893, in St. Peter’s Cathedral, Scranton, Pennsylvania by Bishop William O’Hara.
  • Called by the People: To take charge of Saint Stanislaus Bishop and Martyr Parish, March 14, 1897.
  • Blessed and Dedicated the first Polish National Catholic Parish: July 4, 1897.
  • Elected Bishop of the Polish National Catholic Church: September 6, 1904 at the First Holy Synod of the Polish National Catholic Church
  • Consecrated to the Episcopacy: September 29, 1907 at Utrecht, Holland by Archbishop Gerard Gull with co-consecrators Bishop John Van Thiel and Bishop Peter Spit of the Old Catholic Church of Holland.
  • Organized the Polish National Union: February 24, 1908.
  • Established Spójnia Fram and the Home for the Aged: July 4, 1929.
  • Called to his Final Reward: February 16, 1953 in the rectory of St. Stanislaus Bishop and Martyr Cathedral. Scranton, Pennsylvania.
  • Funeral and Burial: Saturday, February 21, 1953 from St. Stanislaus Cathedral. He was laid to rest in the Grotto of Christ the Benign. His remains were later exhumed and re-interred in the Monument of Gratitude in St. Stanislaus Cathedral Cemetery, Scranton, Pennsylvania.

In prayerful remembrance on the 56th Anniversary of the death of our organizor and first bishop, Franciszek Hodur.

[audio:https://www.konicki.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/07-tyle-lat.mp3]

Through the years unto Thee, O Lord,
Faithful service we have rendered,
At the break of dawn marched sunward,
At the chains of bondage straining,
At the chains of bondage straining.

Unto Thee we built a temple,
Which for us became a treasure,
Pouring gifts of faith and courage,
In it is our hope forever,
In it is our hope forever.

Christ Himself speaks from its altars,
As He spoke throughout the ages,
To the poor among His people,
When their blinded eyes He opened.
When their blinded eyes He opened.

Now again He comes from heaven,
Midst the lab’ring, toiling people,
In the form of Bread and God’s Word,
To His humble, needful people.
To His humble, needful people.

When in doubt by Him we are strengthened,
From degrading sin He lifts us,
Animates us and enobles,
From a dormant slumber wakes us.
From a dormant slumber wakes us.

He pours new life into our souls,
Fires our hearts with passion sacred,
In contrition He refines us,
As a sword of steel we’re tempered.
As a sword of steel we’re tempered.

Through the storms of life He guides us,
`Midst the thunder and the tempest,
Christ is ever there before us,
But are we, Lord, always faithful?
But are we, Lord, always faithful?

Would to God we be faithful ever,
Would to God this sacred banner
In our souls and hearts be opened,
Until death our life does sever,
Until death our life does sever.

The Hymn of the Polish National Catholic Church as composed by Bishop Hodur.

Tyle lat my, Ci, o Panie,
służbę wiernie wypełniali,
szli ku słońcu w świt zaranie,
łańcuch niewoli targali.

Dla Ciebiem wznieśli świątynię,
co nam skarbnicą się stała,
z niej moc i wiara nam płynie,
w niej nadzieja, przyszłość cała.

Chrystus mówi z jej ołtarzy,
jak ongi mówił przed wieki,
do żydowskich szedł nędzarzy,
otwierać ślepym powieki.

I dziś znowu schodzi z nieba,
między ludzi pracy, trudu;
w Słowie Bożym, w kształcie chleba,
do nas biednych, swego ludu.

W zwątpień chwili nas umacnia,
dźwiga z grzechów poniżenia,
i ożywia i uznacnia,
budzi z martwoty, uśpienia.

Nowe życie wlewa w duszę,
serce ogniem świętym pali,
przetapia w żalu i skrusze,
jak miecz hartowny ze stali.

Pośród burzy życia wiedzie,
wśród piorunów, huraganu,
zawsze Chrystus jest na przedzie,
a my, wierni zawsze Panu!

O bodajem wierni byli,
o bodaj ten sztandar święty,
aż do zgonu naszej chwili,
w duszy, w sercu był rozpięty.

Perspective, PNCC,

As long as you….. then you’re one of us

I would like to take a whole different tack on the little Roman Catholic reconciliation that took place this weekend. The Bishop of Rome un-excommunicated four bishops from the Society of St. Pius X. What fascinates me about the whole thing is the level to which the Bishop of Rome will go to reconcile certain folks, while adamantly keeping others at bay.

Of course the SSPX believes in the office of the Pope as defined by the Roman Church. They hold lots of other beliefs in common, especially certain “dogmas” much of the rest of Catholic world rejectsIn terms of their being defined dogmas.. That said, these bishops and their clergy also reject much of what the Roman Church teaches. Think on that! They do not adhere at the level where they can honestly say: “I believe and profess all that the holy Catholic Church believes, teaches, and proclaims to be revealed by God.” As a matter of fact they differ quite a bit on that, and are unable to accept a lot of what has been defined and taught since 1962.

The document lifting the excommunications makes that point clear:

With this act, it is desires to consolidate the reciprocal relations of confidence and to intensify and grant stability to the relationship of the Fraternity of Saint Pius X with this Apostolic See. This gift of peace, at the end of the Christmas celebrations, wishes also to be a sign to promote unity in the charity of the universal Church and to try to end the scandal of division.

It is hoped that this step be followed by the prompt accomplishment of full communion with the Church of the entire Fraternity of Saint Pius X, thus testifying true fidelity and true recognition of the Magisterium and of the authority of the Pope with the proof of visible unity.

It even paraphrases the letter, allegedly from the SSPX bishops, requesting that the excommunications be lifted, clearly making the point that the SSPX has differences which must be “discussed:”

His Holiness Benedict XVI … faithful in the effort expressed by them in the aforementioned letter of not sparing any effort to deepen the necessary discussions with the Authority of the Holy See in the still open matters, so as to achieve shortly a full and satisfactory solution of the problem posed in the origin

So the Bishop of Rome brought folks who express less than full adherence to the Roman Church’s teachings, folks who have open questions that still need discussion, and an acknowledged (in writing) imperfect communion (lacking “true fidelity and true recognition”), back into full communion. It boggles the mind.

The Roman Church is defining this as an act of charity, and I’m sure that it is for some the faithful who attend SSPX chapelsAt the same time, others in those chapels have less than a pin-head full of filial affection for the local Ordinary. They wouldn’t follow him if their life depended on it.. On the other hand, it is uncharitable to those who have tried to work with Rome on issues of reconciliation. In doing this the Roman Church is saying that impaired communion is fine and fully acceptable, while turning to Churches such as the PNCC, and saying impaired communion isn’t good enough.

Where’s the bright line to be crossed to achieve unity? We all know of course – believe in the Pope (as we define him) and the other recent innovations in dogma. As long as you do that, the rest is up-for-grabs (and not all that important).

If Benedict was trying to reach out to the Orthodox and the other Catholic Churches in his moves toward stricter standards, this sends the opposite message. It says that the standards are whatever you declare them to be at the moment. The spirit of VII — arbitrary and capricious fits and starts — continues to be the cause celeb. The rules are different at different times, as long as Rome if filling in the blank “As long as you….. then you’re one of us.”

On a funny note, this blogger mentions the PNCC as one of a group of options for “uber-liberal” Roman Catholics who may wish to desert the Roman Church. Of course anyone can find a home with us, and all are welcome to come to our Lord and Savior with us, but he knows little to nothing about the PNCC, its Catholic nature, its history, its life, and what it teaches. He paints everything with the broad “us versus them” brush. Unfortunately (at least from his perspective) the Roman Church can’t even define what full communion really means. For all the Te Deums being sung on conservative Roman Catholic blogs, take a moment to think about the totality of what was done. Further, those bloggers and apologists see the Church as coming into agreement with their perspectives, with their way of thinking. They too have the spirit of VII — the Church is me, and I am the Church, I get to tell the Church what’s right and wrong. Pater nostrum indeed.

Christian Witness, PNCC, Political, ,

A challenge for apologists

From Foreign Policy: The List: The Catholic Church’s Biggest Reversals.

In —Think Again: Catholic Church,— John L. Allen Jr. writes, —Catholics who have been around the block know that whenever someone in authority begins a sentence with, ‘As the church has always taught …,’ some long-standing idea or practice is about to be turned on its head.— Herewith, five of the biggest such reversals of doctrine in the church’s history.

The author goes on to describe changes in Roman Catholic ‘teaching’ on usury, slavery, the various changes brought about as a result of Vatican II, capital punishment, and limbo.

I have seen plenty of apologist websites that walk through the development of doctrine argument to ‘prove’ that the very teachings Mr. Allen mentions haven’t really changed. Mr. Allen’s book should further those arguments well into the future.

As Bishop Hodur pointed out in his reflections, especially as summarized in the Apocalypse of the Twentieth Century, the Roman Church’s ties to civil governance and power politics heavily influenced its teaching on these and similar issues. The Roman Church’s influence was not exercised in developing spiritual doctrine, but in expanding its political and temporal power at the cost of man’s spiritual well being. The changes Mr. Allen mentions are not changes in God’s understanding, but in man’s self understanding as defined by the political/economic landscape of the times.

The ultimate dissolution of the Roman Church’s political/temporal power occurred in the mid 1800’s. That dissolution resulted in pronouncements on infallibility and other solemnly proclaimed doctrines that remain an obstacle to Church unity to this day; an unfortunate reactionary move.

As time has moved on, the Roman Church has focused its understanding of self — away from political/temporal power — to proclaiming the power of the Gospel. Let us hope that the obstacles that continue to prevent unity, the political leftovers, and the false developments so influenced by power politics, fall awayI am not delusional on these issues. I have no expectation of results. I only offer a prayer that whatever happens is according to God’s will..

In speaking of the Church and national and social affairs Bishop Hodur wrote:

As is evident from this brief sketch, Christ gave adequate instructions to His followers regarding their behavior amidst these most important currents of human life. They should not try to stop them or oppose them, but they should move with them, refining them and directing them into channels which will lead to the uplift, prosperity and redemption of humanity. The church must not be the instrument of the aristocracy, of the wealthy, or of any particular faction in politics or society. Instead, it should bless and support any human endeavor and righteous work which is directed towards the betterment and enrichment of mankind, towards the creation of a more equitable social and political structure, and towards the triumph of peace, truth, beauty and light – in other words, the triumph of God – within the human soul. — Most Rev. Franciszek Hodur, Our Way of Life, Chapter VI, On Social and National Affairs.

A call to Christian witness in society, properly focused on bearing core faith before the world. Can the Church and its faith change the world? We in the PNCC would answer with a resounding yes.

Christian Witness, Perspective, PNCC,

A lesson on why people run from parishes

A guest post from Bob Lotich on Church Marketing Sucks: Why I’ve Run From Churches

Let me start by saying that I have been planted in my current church for over 10 years. I deeply believe in the value of staying in the church that God plants you in rather than just leaving as soon as you get offended. That said, I have lived in a few different cities and have visited quite a few churches in each one when trying to find out where to land. I have seen some wonderful things and I have seen some things that made me want to run for the doors. These are the things that caused me to run for the door…

In the Catholic view people may not run from the Church, but from parishes that exhibit the sorts of behaviors he outlines. That said, people run from the Church as well, when its leaders collectively act counter to the Faith.

I think Mr. Lotich conveys an overall message of faithful Christian witness — in our communal life, in our interactions, and in our witness to each other and the world. Reflecting on his message and rooting out the traits that can close off a parish, or the Church itself, are a discipline that is in keeping with the Great Commission (Matt 28:18-20):

And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.
Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age.”

Christian Witness, , , ,

I’m a cracker too

The Young Fogey blogged this item concerning a hate filled article by Dr. PZ Myers of the University of Minnesota – Morris.

Dr. Myers is of the opinion that the Holy Eucharist is something to be desecrated. In fact he urges people to desecrate the Eucharist and further states that he will gladly do so himself if someone were to bring him a consecrated host (itself an act of desecration). Dr. Myers makes these assertions in his blog post: It’s a frackin’ cracker.

For my part I would like to alert Dr. Myers to the fact that we, the people of the Holy Church, consider ourselves to be members of the Body of Christ. St. Paul states in 1 Corinthians 12:12-27 (RSV):

For just as the body is one and has many members, and all the members of the body, though many, are one body, so it is with Christ.
For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body — Jews or Greeks, slaves or free — and all were made to drink of one Spirit.
For the body does not consist of one member but of many.
If the foot should say, “Because I am not a hand, I do not belong to the body,” that would not make it any less a part of the body.
And if the ear should say, “Because I am not an eye, I do not belong to the body,” that would not make it any less a part of the body.
If the whole body were an eye, where would be the hearing? If the whole body were an ear, where would be the sense of smell?
But as it is, God arranged the organs in the body, each one of them, as he chose.
If all were a single organ, where would the body be?
As it is, there are many parts, yet one body.
The eye cannot say to the hand, “I have no need of you,” nor again the head to the feet, “I have no need of you.”
On the contrary, the parts of the body which seem to be weaker are indispensable,
and those parts of the body which we think less honorable we invest with the greater honor, and our unpresentable parts are treated with greater modesty,
which our more presentable parts do not require. But God has so composed the body, giving the greater honor to the inferior part,
that there may be no discord in the body, but that the members may have the same care for one another.
If one member suffers, all suffer together; if one member is honored, all rejoice together.
Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it.

Logically, if Dr. Myers would like to desecrate the Body of Christ, he should be perfectly willing to desecrate any member of the Body. Members of the Church should hold no more value for him than what he claims is mere bread.

Since I am ordained member of the Body I have a particular role of witness in the Body of Christ, and since in Dr. Myers way of thinking I am just a “frackin’ cracker” too, I would like to personally invite him to meet me (he’ll have to come here as I have no ability to travel to Minnesota).

At our meeting Dr. Myers can take the opportunity to desecrate me as he would the Holy Eucharist. I won’t fight back. He can feel free to film the whole thing. He can even bring friends if he wishes. When he is done he can put me under his microscope and prove that my flesh is merely human flesh – no observable scientific difference. Dr. Myers?

Jesus, my God, I adore Thee in the Sacrament of Thy love.

Divine Redeemer, Who in Thy infinite goodness hast been pleased to leave us Thy precious body and blood in the Blessed Eucharist, we adore Thee with the most profound respect, and return Thee our most humble thanks for all the favors Thou hast bestowed upon us, especially for the institution of the Most Holy Sacrament. As Thou are the source of every blessing , we entreat Thee to pour down Thy benediction this day upon us and upon our relatives, friends, and benefactors; upon the Holy Church, our bishops, priests, and deacons; and upon all those for whom we offer our prayers. Let Thy blessings go forth far and wide. Let it be felt in the souls of the afflicted who cannot come to receive it at Thy feet. Let the weak and tempted feel its power wherever they may be. Let poor sinners feel its influence, arousing them to come to Thee. Grant to me O Lord and to all the members of Your Holy Church, a strong personal love of Thee, a lively horror of sin, a higher esteem of grace, great zeal for Thy honor and glory, for our own sanctification, and for the salvation of souls. Amen.

My Lord and my God!

Blessed and praised every moment be the most holy and divine Sacrament.

Christian Witness, Current Events, Perspective, PNCC, ,

Whither goeth the Anglo-Catholics

The Young Fogey links to several articles describing recent secret meetings between Church of England prelates and the Vatican. See Several Church of England bishops in secret talks with Vatican.

As commentor JohnT points out, in relation to Damian Thompson’s blog entry on this issue:

Cardinal Hume pointed out to Anglicans who were on the point of converting in the early 1990s that ‘Catholic doctrine is not an a la carte menu’ – and this is still true.
Nor is conversion a matter of ‘accommodation’.

Which is my thought exactly. This type of action requires a wholesale reordering of all that these prelates say, do, and believe (if it is indeed a true conversion rather than a lifeboat option).

What must they give up to come to Rome? What might they gain? Where might they find shelter?

The things they must give up are rather lengthy, but let’s focus on a few:

  • Their status as Bishops (and their entire ordained life). Look at the Anglican Use (a terminal proposition) in the United States. Any clergy member coming over has to start over in new orders. There are no direct conversions “in Orders.”
  • Their position as insiders. While they are part of the CofE they are on the inside for better or worse. In the R.C. world they will be oddities and outsiders, with their wives and children, their traditional stylings, and everything else that is part and parcel of who they are. The world’s Bishop’s Conferences will treat them like the fairly odd arms-length cousins you hope you only have to see at weddings and funerals.
  • The 39 Articles et. al.
  • As noted regarding the Anglican Use, their “traditions” such as the BCP and everything else Anglican, are terminal. Once they and their fellow converts die off there will be no more Anglican Use as no married men will be ordained nor will the BCP and Anglican Use be taught to up-and-coming celibate priests (except as a historical anecdote).

Still in all, I imagine that the issue of shelter is the real key. Is Rome the best shelter for these Bishops and their people? What other options might they have?

Certainly they cannot look to the Old Catholics of Europe (Utrecht v. 2.0). They are on the same track as the balance of liberal European/American Anglicanism. No port in the storm there. They could look to Orthodoxy who might accept them economically, conditioned on their acceptance of Orthodox Catholic faith and doctrine. The Russian Church or Antioch would be their best bet with Western Rite offerings. In any event I would imagine that the bishops could only come in as priests in an Orthodox solution. Then there is the PNCC ? Anyone for a read of the Declaration of Scranton and a trip across the Susquehanna?

In large measure, because of the long term relationship between Anglicans and the PNCC (back in the day when 99.9% of the faith was held in common), they would find a true Catholic home in the PNCC, and one where Anglo-Catholics and the PNCC share much more in common than the Bishops, their priests and people would find elsewhere. Why not study our history and our common faith.

Of course the choices are not easy regardless of the path because conversion is a full-on process. You may take a choice because you are fleeing a fire, but eventually you have to own up to the truth of your conversion. Bishops have a higher duty here because of their Order and their knowledge. Do you truly accept and believe the thing you purport to accept and believe in your conversion. I can say this much as a convert to the PNCC, if the conversion is true you gain access to the uninterrupted faith of the Catholic Church and its Traditions. What you give up counts very little if that is the Lord’s calling.

All conjecturing aside, I hope and pray that these Bishops, their priests, and their congregants find a home in the Catholic Faith. Whether Roman, Orthodox, or PNCC, confidence in faith and the commonly held doctrines of the first thousand years is a great joy. As Jesus told us in this weekend’s Gospel: “For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.” (Matt. 11:30).

We pray Thee, O God, not that Thou should help us carry out our own plans, but that we may be used in serving Thine: not for man’s victory over man, but for the triumph of Thy righteousness and Thy Kingdom. Through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen. — From A Book of Devotions and Prayers according to the use of the Polish National Catholic Church.

Perspective, PNCC,

…and more on married clergy

As posted at Rorate Caeli in Cardinal Etchegaray: The issue of the ordination of married men “may come about” and linked to by the Young Fogey – by the way, his comment on the posting is knowledgeable, balanced, and respectful.

It is unfortunate that so many, who claim some kind of knowledge of the Church, reduce these discussions to mindless ranting based on the perception of a race (in this case the French), a particular clergyman, or their deeply held conviction that unless everything stays as is (the man made disciplines of the Church) the world and Church will fall apart.

That argument has proven false by the mere fact that the Orthodox, the PNCC, and so many other Catholic as well as Protestant Churches can support a priest/minister and his family, not extravagantly, but modestly, and in keeping with the norms of the local community.

As the Young Fogey pointed out, no one goes into the ministry expecting to be rich (success “Gospel” evangelicals and princely priests not withstanding) or to live luxuriously. They are there to minister, to bring God’s grace through sacramental and pastoral action.

Neither the Holy Priesthood nor the Church will disintegrate if the local priest marries.

If you truly think that, you have lost faith in the promises of Christ and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit in the Church, or you never believed in that in the first place.

Oh, and on the Bishop of Rome solemnly confirming something, great for his diocese, but within the Roman Catholic understanding, did it rise to the level of an ex-cathedera statement proclaimed infallibly? I bet that a lot of folks would argue that it didn’t, and that only those wishing to see it as such see it that way.

Perspective, PNCC,

Of priestly humanity

The American Papist blog is carrying a post on Fr. Francis Mary Stone & EWTN as well as periodic updates on the “situation.”

The Young Fogey pointed to that article as well as to his comment on it, which is reasonable and balanced.

It appears that Fr. Francis, the key host of EWTN’s Life on the Rock TV program has taken a leave of absence which is quickly morphing into a permanent leave of absence.

On a recent show a letter from Fr. Francis was read:

Dear Family,

Regretfully, I have a message that does not come without significant pain to both you and me. I have to tell you in all honesty and truth, that I have been personally involved with helping a widow and her struggling family. Over the course of time, the mother and I have grown very close. As a result, I am compelled to take some time off to prayerfully and honestly discern my future.

I am truly sorry of the impact this may have on so many. I am not unaware of the gravity and magnitude of the situation, yet after much wise counsel, it is really something that I must deal with now for the good of all.

With that said, it is best that I deal with it away from EWTN. Therefore, I have asked for and graciously been granted some extended time to prayerfully discern my vocation.

To those who are part of the EWTN family locally, and others throughout the world, especially all those who have supported me so faithfully in my priestly vocation and ministry here on Life on the Rock, I sincerely apologize. I ask for your prayers and understanding during this time that is so very difficult, but yet so very necessary.

Please lift me up in your humble prayers to Jesus through Mary, our Mother, in Grace and Mercy.

Fr Francis Mary, MFVA

As my regular readers know, the clergy of the Polish National Catholic Church are allowed to marry. They would also note that I have long stated that the vow of celibacy is an imposed discipline which is unworkable from a grace or discipline perspective. You cannot demand such gifts from the Holy Spirit, only encourage and support those with that gift while not foisting it upon others.

The American Papist blog immediately gets into requesting prayers for Fr. Francis, as well as a discussion of the “grave situation.” They remind us that all men are sinful (agreed), that [Roman] Catholics should not be scandalized (do not agree), and how this is a teaching opportunity.

Now I freely admit that the Roman Church has its own discipline. I do respect that. While I respect it, that does not imply that I or my Church agree with it. We think there is a better way.

I offer the following from my perspective:

I am saddened to see the rare mention of prayers for the woman and her family at the American Papist website.

They note that the subsitute anchor at Life on the Rock went on to say in reference to Fr. Francis’ situation:

“evil and sin do not have the last word – there’s always hope”

Of course that is par for the course. She is the sinful Eve leading good Father Francis astray. Not said outwardly, but implied by words like scandal, grave, temptation, and by Fr. Francis’ apology itself.

If I were the woman involved, that sort of apologizing would lead to a long cold silence. She is relegated to second class status, and is marked as a cause for apology and shame, even evil, the cause of sin.

That said, those sorts of reactions are trained in, gut instinct for Father Francis and others. Not exactly psychologically healthy when you are in that situation.

The grace of celibacy should be self perpetuating and not a cause for internal conflict. Here you see internal conflict — painful, and cause for an expression of regret which will later lead to more regret.

In a certain way this speaks to the fall of the many, which is often a fall well out of the limelight. Is the Roman Church’s clergy imbued with the grace of celibacy or are far to many left without the gift, left harmed by a discipline imposed by men?

As I noted, [Roman] Catholics may have good reason to be scandalized. Not so much by Fr. Francis’ decisions but firstly because EWTN has expunged Fr. Francis from its website.

He, and whatever good he did in his ministry, have been relegated to non-existence. If anything was learned from other recent scandals, covering-up is to be avoided. Were all his homilies, the programs he hosted graceless blather?

Secondly, on the issue of covering-up. Fr. Francis was somehow “helping” this woman (counseling?, spiritual guidance?, I can’t imagine financial support). That sort of relationship demands a duty, and might imply that the woman and her family were vulnerable, perhaps even taken advantage of.

Love can happen in stressful situations – but care must be used to ensure that the love is real, and not driven by need. As such, the helper must be careful. This goes back to the prayer issue – perhaps she and her family are more “in need.”

If I were to offer a prayer (and I do), I would ask that the Lord keep watch over Fr. Francis, the widow, and her family. That He protect them and that He allow them to heal and discern His will.

I wish them well and hope that they can see past the immediate to the long term. There is joy in a loving relationship between a man and a woman, if that is what they are called to. They should know that it is a special grace from God that is open to all who are called to it.

PNCC, ,

Some recent conversations

Had a few interesting conversations recently with brother clergy.

The main topic was the PNCC – RC dialog and a few of the questions rising out of the recent Motu Proprio and the and the other more recent statements from Rome concerning the Roman Catholic Church’s understanding of itself.

As I pointed out at the time of both, I agree with the Motu Proprio in that it reconnects the Roman Church to its liturgical tradition, the riches the PNCC never lost. I also agree with others who saw the Roman Church’s statement on its self definition as exactly that. The Roman Church, as with the Orthodox, believe that they are the one and only true Church. The Roman Church said so – which is not surprising.

The two interesting things I took away from those conversations were that fellow clergy saw the Motu as a break in the Church’s teaching on the role of the Bishop as the overseer of the liturgical life in his diocese and the fact that this restatement of the Roman Church’s self understanding was difficult for some.

As to the Motu, in an address to the Institut Supérieur de Liturgie of the Institut Catholique de Paris Cardinal Francis Arinze stated:

Obviously ecclesial communion has to mean “communion” with the diocesan bishop and between bishops and the Pope. In the diocese, the bishop is the first steward of the mysteries of Christ. He is the moderator, promoter and guardian of the entire liturgical life of the diocesan Church (cf. “Christus Dominus,” No. 15; Code of Canon Law, Canon 387; “Redemptionis Sacramentum,” No. 19). The bishop directs the administration of the sacraments and especially of the holy Eucharist. When he concelebrates in his cathedral church with his priests, with the assistance of deacons and minor assistants, and with the participation of the holy people of God, “the Church reveals herself most clearly” (“Sacrosanctum Concilium,” No. 41).

The Motu’s delegation of authority of parish priests breaks the bond between the priest and the diocesan bishop, and would seem to negate the role of bishop as “first steward”.

While the Motu has a worthy purpose, this end run may be a vexing problem in Catholic ecumenical circles. It strengthens the role of the Bishop of Rome as the actual bishop of every diocese; the full, immediate, and universal jurisdiction issue.

Prime Bishop Emeritus of the Polish National Catholic Church, the Most Rev. John Swantek wrote extensivly on this issue in the most recent edition of God’s Field (God’s Field, Vol. 85, No. 22, October 30, 2007). Therin he quoted Canon II of the First Council of Constantinople:

Diocesan bishops are not to intrude in churches beyond their own boundaries nor are they to confuse the churches… Unless invited bishops are not to go outside their diocese to perform an ordination or any other ecclesiastical business.

Now, I imagine that an argument could be made stating that diocesan bishops are so out of control, and universally so, that the Bishop of Rome had to act. Yet that begs the question of the Roman Church’s own discipline.

There are all types of approaches that could be used, but what it seems to have come down to is a choice between correcting those who have wandered far afield, or taking direct control from everyone.

An interesting discussion.

As to the Roman Church’s self understanding, what I found most heartening was an affirmation of our own self understanding – that the PNCC fully believes that we have it right.

For someone who has not been a lifelong PNCC member that affirmation of our conviction was something I had longed to hear – and I have. Something that does not negate our brotherhood with all who proclaim the name of Jesus Christ as Lord, and something that does not diminish our commitment to dialog, nor our prayer for unity.

All Right Reserved © 2005 - 2023