Yes, it's true. Yet another decree of excommunication was published in the St. Louis Review today. This time it is a decree against Stanley Rozanski and Bronsalaa (Bernice) Krauze, members of the Board of the Polish St. Stanislaus Kostka Corporation. For some reason that I cannot fathom, it does not yet appear on the Review's website.
Therefore, I will try to summarize and publish excerpts from the decree for the benefit of readers. In censure and content, it is similar to the decree issued concerning the "womenpriests" as it relates to the schism finding.
The Archbishop begins by recalling that the members of the Board of Directors other than Rozanski and Krauze had incurred excommunication, latae sententiae, "by reason of having committed the canonical crime of schism on December 15, 2005" (this was after the hiring of Fr. Bozek and before the suppression of the parish on December 29, 2005).
Echoing his findings with regard to the "Roman Catholic Womenpriest" organization, the Archbishop finds that since the date of suppression as a Catholic parish in 2005, "the entity of the Polish St. Stanislaus Kostka Corporation has never been and is not now a part of the Roman Catholic Church but instead is a sect and will remain so for as long as it willfully exists separated from full communion with the Vicar of Christ and the fold of the Archdiocese of Saint Louis, loyally subject to him."
The Archbishop further noted that Rozanski received a canonical admonition on July 31, 2007, warning him of his obligation to resign from the Board, and not to present himself as a candidate for further election.
Despite this, Mr. Rozanski and Mrs. Krauze presented themselves for election, and were elected to the Board on August 12, 2007. According to the decree, "Mr. Rozanski and Mrs. Krauze took sacrilegious oaths of office to be directors of said sect", and have continued to act as directors since that time.
The Archbishop further noted that the two had received three canonical admonitions and summonses since September 2007, and have three times failed to appear as directed.
Therefore, the Archbishop found that both Rozanski and Krauze are guilty of the canonical crime of schism (can. 751), and he has declared them to have incurred the censure of excommunication, latae sententiae (can 1364, sec. 1); they are no longer Catholics in good standing and they are forbidden, as in the case of the womenpriests, to receive Holy Communion and the other sacraments, including absolution, until they have publicly repented and made amends for their crime.
I will try to get a link to the decree as soon as I can.
Archbishop Burke has issued the following statement:
Statement Regarding New Members of Saint Stanislaus Kostka Corporation Board
As Archbishop of St. Louis, it is my responsibility to safeguard the unity of the Catholic Church and protect the souls of the faithful.
I have communicated with both Mr. Rozanski and Ms. Krauze that the Board of Saint Stanislaus Kostka Corporation is in schism, the parish had been suppressed, and that if they joined the board, they would be knowingly joining a sect that held and professed views outside the communion of the Catholic Church. Because they joined the board knowing this information, they excommunicated themselves from the Catholic Church. Church law requires me to publicly declare the excommunication.
The situation of Mr. Rozanski and Ms. Krause is sad for the whole Church. It is cause of great concern for me as archbishop. Please join me in praying that both will be reconciled with the Church and that the great harm which has been caused to the Church, with the help of God’s grace, will be healed.
___________________________
Questions and Answers Regarding New Members of Saint Stanislaus Kostka Corporation Board
Q. What is the latest development?
Q. What is the latest development?
A. Archbishop Burke has declared excommunicated the most recent Board members of Saint Stanislaus Kostka Corporation, Mr. Rozanski and Ms. Krauze.
Q. What does it mean to be excommunicated?
A. Excommunication is knowingly and willingly placing oneself outside the full communion of the Catholic Church. A person excommunicates himself/herself. When the archbishop declares an excommunication, its purpose is meant to be healing, and a call for the person to reconsider the action and reconcile with the Catholic Church.
Q. Were the new Saint Stanislaus Kostka Corporation Board members given any warning by the archbishop, and, if so, what kind of warning?
A. The archbishop wrote to each party three times asking them to refrain from joining the Board at Saint Stanislaus because: the Board was in schism, the parish had been suppressed, and they would be knowingly joining a church that held and professed views outside the communion of the Catholic Church.
Q. What is schism?
A. Schism occurs when a baptized Catholic withdraws from unity with the pope or the local bishop and the faithful under him. They will not be allowed to go to Confession.
Q. How does a priest prevent them from obtaining absolution in the confessional if the priest doesn't know it is they who are confessing?
A. They should refrain from presenting themselves in Confession. A priest is only to deny them absolution if he is certain that they have been excommunicated and have not sought repentance.
Q. What happens to a priest if he unknowingly administers Holy Communion to them?
A. Nothing; no one can be held liable if an excommunicated person attempts to receive the Eucharist, and the status of the person is unknown to the minister.
Q. What happens to a priest if he knowing administers Holy Communion?
A. He is liable to just penalties for his offense, as Church law forbids giving Communion to one who is under the penalty of excommunication or interdict.
Q. How is the Archdiocese of St. Louis going to monitor this?
A. No one is monitoring this. It is simply expected of a priest or minister of the Church.
Q. Should they be in grave danger of death, can Last Rites be administered to them by a priest in good standing? If so, are they then allowed to be buried as a Catholic in good standing?
A. If they truly are contrite about their offense and wish to be reconciled, then after the reconciliation, the priest could administer the sacrament of Anointing of the Sick. If they are not contrite, then he can not, because they remain obstinate in their offense. The same option would hold true concerning a request for a Funeral Mass and burial in sacred ground.
Q. If one is excommunicated, does that mean the person is going to hell?
A. We believe that is not a question for us, but for God.
Q. Why doesn't the archbishop look the other way?
A. The archbishop, as the chief shepherd of the Church in the Archdiocese of St. Louis, has the responsibility to make sure that people are not mislead by false teachings. He is to protect the people and make sure that scandal does not lead them astray. He also has to uphold the true teachings and practices of the Catholic Faith.
Q. Why does the Archdiocese of St. Louis have to make this public?
A. Because the persons involved have committed the canonical crime of schism. At three separate times, Archbishop Burke formally called them to withdraw from their schism, but they have refused to do so. They have lost membership in the Roman Catholic Church and have become members of a sect. The Church is obliged to make public the fact of their status, lest the faithful be confused and even led into the error of joining them in schism.
Q. Aren't excommunications more divisive than uniting?
A. Excommunication is more than a penalty for past actions; it's really an urgent call to reform one's conduct in the future. Excommunication is classified as a "medicinal penalty" by the Church precisely because its main purpose is to bring about reform in the individual. Having certain actions punished by excommunication demonstrates that certain actions are gravely wrong in themselves and cause deep harm both to their perpetrators and to others. The hope of this excommunication, and all excommunications, is that the parties will be awakened to their offenses and seek to return to full communion in the Church.
