Posted on 07/15/2004 6:17:56 PM PDT by AskStPhilomena
Catholics exhibit fidelity to the Tradition of Holy Mother Church in many ways. Each of us has a distinctive, unrepeatable immortal soul that has personal characteristics of its own not shared by anyone else. Not even identical twins are the same in every respect. This plurality of souls in the Mystical Bride of Christ is reflected in the many different communities of men and women religious that have developed over the Church’s history. Each community has its own charism and mission. Ideally, each community of men and women religious should be totally faithful to everything contained in the Deposit of Faith and expressed and protected in the authentic Tradition of the Church. The means of expressing this fidelity, however, will vary from community to community.
What is true of communities of men and women religious is true also of us all, including our priests. Some priests have the patience of Saint Francis de Sales or Saint John Bosco, meek and mild, able to handle the rough seas that beset Holy Mother Church and/or themselves personally with perfect equanimity. Other priests have had the bluntness of St. John Mary Vianney and St. Padre Pio, mincing no words in their sermons about the necessity of rooting out sin and the possibility of going to Hell for all eternity. Both St. John Mary Vianney and St. Padre Pio were devoted to their role as an alter Christus in the confessional, using that hospital of Divine Mercy to administer the infinite merits of Our Lord’s Most Precious Blood to bring sacramental absolution to those to whom they had preached in blunt terms.
In addition to fidelity, though, there are different ways of expressing courage in the midst of persecutions and sufferings. Some Catholics stood up quite directly to the unjust and illicit dictates of the English Parliament, which had been passed at the urging of King Henry VIII, at the time of the Protestant Revolt in England. Others kept their silence for as long as was possible, as was the case with Saint Thomas More, who discharged his mind publicly only after he had been found guilty on the basis of perjured testimony of denying the supremacy of the king as the head of the Church in England. Some priests in the Elizabethan period, such as St. Edmund Campion, almost dared officials to arrest them as they went to different locales to offer Holy Mass or as they took groups to the Tower of London. Other priests went quietly from house to house to offer the Traditional Mass underground as both the civil and ecclesiastical authorities in England used every sort of pressure imaginable to convince holdout “Romans” to go over to Protestantism and worship in the precusor liturgy of our own Novus Ordo Missae. Still other newly ordained priests came over from France, knowing that they might be able to offer only one Mass in England before they were arrested and executed.
The same thing occurred in France 255 years after the arrest and execution of Saints John Fisher and Thomas More. Some priests simply stood up to the agents of the French Revolution. Others, such as Blessed Father William Chaminade, donned disguises as they went from place to place, much as Blessed Padre Miguel Augustin Pro did in Mexico prior to his execution at the hands of the Masonic revolutionaries in Mexico on November 23, 1927. Ignatius Cardinal Kung, then the Bishop of Shanghai, China, was hauled before a dog-track stadium in his see city in 1956 before thousands of spectators. The Red Chinese authorities expected him to denounce the pope and thus to save himself from arrest. The brave bishop exclaimed the same thing as Blessed Padre Miguel Augustin Pro, “Long live Christ the King,” and was hauled off to spend over thirty years in prison before being released. Oh, yes, there are so many ways for priests to demonstrate their fidelity and courage in the midst of persecutions and sufferings.
Well, many bishops and priests who are faithful to the fullness of the Church’s authentic Tradition have been subjected to a unspeakable form of persecution in the past thirty-five to forty years: treachery from within the highest quarters of the Church herself. Men who have held fast to that which was believed always, everywhere and by everyone prior for over 1,900 years found themselves termed as “disobedient,” “schismatic,” “heretical,” and “disloyal” for their resisting novelties that bore no resemblance to Catholicism and a great deal of resemblance to the very things that were fomented by Martin Luther and John Calvin and Thomas Cranmer, things for which Catholics half a millennium ago shed their blood rather than accept. Many priests who have tried to remain faithful to Tradition within the framework of a diocesan or archdiocesan structure have been sent to psychiatric hospitals or penalized by being removed from their pastorates or by being denied pastorates altogether. Others, though, have faced more severe penalties.
Angelus Press, which is run by the Society of Saint Pius X, put out a book earlier this year, Priest, Where is Thy Mass? Mass, Where is Thy Priest?, which discussed the stories of seventeen priests who had decided to offer only the Traditional Latin Mass and to never again offer the Novus Ordo Missae. One of those priests is my good friend, Father Stephen Zigrang, who offered the Traditional Latin Mass in his [now] former parish of Saint Andrew Church in Channelview, Texas, on June 28-29, 2003, telling his parishioners that he would never again offer the new Mass.
As I reported extensively at this time last year, Father Zigrang was placed on a sixty day leave-of-absence by the Bishop of Galveston-Houston, the Most Reverend Joseph Fiorenza, and told to seek psychological counseling, preferably from Father Benedict Groeschel, C.F.R. Father Zigrang took his two month leave of absence, making a retreat at Saint Thomas Aquinas Seminary in Winona, Minnesota, in early August of last year, returning to the Houston area to take up residence in the Society’s Queen of Angels Chapel in Dickinson, Texas. Bishop Fiorenza met with Father Zigrang in early September, seeming at the time to let him stay for a year with the Society while the diocese continued to pay his health insurance premiums. Within days of that early September meeting, however, Fiorenza was threatening to suspend Father Zigrang by the beginning of October if he did not vacate Queen of Angels and return to a diocesan assignment.
October of 2003 came and went. Father Zigrang heard no word from Bishop Fiorenza or the chancery office until he received the following letter, dated Jun 10, 2004:
Dear Father Zigrang:
Once more I appeal to you to cease your association with the Society of St. Pius X and return to your responsibilities as a priest of the Diocese of Galveston-Houston
Your continued association with a schismatic group which has severed communion with the Holy Father is confusing and a scandal to many of Christ’s faithful. You are well aware that without appropriate jurisdiction the marriages witnessed and confessions heard by the priests of the St. Society of St. Paul X are invalid and people are being lead to believe otherwise. You are also aware that the Holy See has asked the faithful not to attend Masses celebrated in the Chapels of the Society of St. Pius X.
I plead with you to return by July 1, 2004, to the presbyterate of the Diocese of Galveston-Houston and receive a priestly assignment from me. This letter serves as a penal precept (c. 1319) and is a final canonical warning (c. 1347.1). If I do not hear from you by June 30, 2004, I will impose a just penalty for disobeying a legitimate precept (c. 1371.2). The just penalty may include suspension (c. 133.1), nn 1-2: prohibition of all acts of the power of orders and governance.
I offer this final warning after consultation with the Holy See and will proceed to impose a penalty if you persist in disobedience to a legitimate precept. It is my fervent hope and constant prayer that you not remain out of union with the Holy Father.
Fraternally in Christ,
Joseph A. Fiorenza, Bishop of Galveston-Houston
Reverend R. Troy Gately, Vice Chancellor
Overlooking Bishop Fiorenza’s John Kerry-like gaffe in terming the Society of Saint Pius X the “St. Society of St. Paul X,” the letter reproduced above makes the erroneous assertion that the Society of Saint Pius X is in schism and that they are not in communion with the Holy Father. A series of articles in The Remnant has dealt with this very issue at great length. Fiorenza’s contentions that the marriages witnessed and the confessions heard by the Society of Saint Pius X are invalid also flies in the face of the fact that the Holy See “regularized” the Society of Saint John Mary Vianney in Campos, Brazil, without demanding the convalidation of the marriages their priests had witnesses nor asking that confessions be re-heard. The glaring inconsistency of the canonical rhetoric of Vatican functionaries and their actual practices continues to be lost on Bishop Fiorenza.
Father Zigrang did not respond to Bishop Fiorenza’s June 10 letter. He received another letter, dated July 2, 2004, the contents of which are so explosive as to contain implications for the state of the Church far beyond the case of Father Zigrang and far beyond the boundaries of the Diocese of Galveston-Houston:
Dear Father Zigrang:
With great sadness I inform you that, effective immediately, you are suspended from the celebration of all sacraments, the exercise of governance and all rights attached to the office of pastor (Canon 1333.1, nn 1-2-3).
This action is taken after appropriate canonical warnings (canon 1347) and failure to obey my specific directive that you cease the affiliation with the schismatic Society of St. Pius X and accept an assignment to serve as a priest of the Diocese of Galveston-Houston (Canon 1371.2).
I want to repeat what I have said to you in person and in the written canonical warnings, that I prayerfully urge you to not break communion with the Holy Father and cease to be associated with the schism which rejects the liciety of the Novus Ordo Mass, often affirmed by Pope John Paul II. This schism also calls into question the teachings of the Second Vatican Council regarding ecumenism and the enduring validity of the Old Testament covenant God established with the people of Israel.
Your return to full union with the Church and to the acceptance of an assignment to priestly ministry in the Diocese of Galveston-Houston will be joyfully received as an answer to prayer. May the Holy Spirit lead and guide you to renew the promise of obedience you made on the day of your ordination.
Fraternally in Christ,
Most Reverend Joseph A. Fiorenza Bishop of Galveston-Houston
Reverend Monsignor Frank H. Rossi Chancellor
cc: His Eminence, Cardinal Dario Castrillon Hoyos, Commissio Ecclesia Dei
Bishop Fiorenza’s July 2, 2004, letter is riddled with errors.
First, The Society of Saint Pius X does not reject the liciety of the Novus Ordo Missae. Its founder, the late Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, criticized the nature of the Novus Ordo and pointed out its inherent harm. That is far different from saying that the Novus Ordo is always and in all instances invalid. Is Bishop Fiorenza claiming that any criticism of the Novus Ordo and efforts to demonstrate how it is a radical departure from Tradition are schismatic acts? Is Father Romano Thommasi, for example, to be taken to task for writing scholarly articles, based on the very minutes of the Consilium, about how Archbishop Annibale Bugnini lied about the true origin of the some constituent elements of the Novus Ordo?
Second, the Society is not, as noted above, in schism, at least not as that phrase was defined by the First Vatican Council. The Society recognizes that the See of Peter is occupied at present by Pope John Paul II. Its priests pray for the Holy Father and for the local bishop in the Canon of the Mass. The Society can be said to be disobedient to the Holy Father’s unjust edicts and commands. The Society of Saint Pius X is not in schism.
Third, Bishop Fiorenza seems to be stating that ecumenism is a de fide dogma of the Catholic Church from which no Catholic may legitimately dissent. If this is his contention, it is he who is grave error. Ecumenism is a pastoral novelty that was specifically condemned by every Pope prior to 1958. Pope Pius XI did so with particular eloquence in Mortalium Animos in 1928. Novelties that are not consonant with the authentic Tradition of the Church bind no one under penalty of sin, no less binds a priest under penalty of canonical suspension. A rejection of ecumenism constitutes in no way a schismatic act.
Fourth, Bishop Fiorenza’s assertion that the “Old Testament covenant God established with the people of Israel” is enduringly valid is itself heretical. No human being can be saved by a belief in the Mosaic Covenant, which was superceded in its entirety when the curtain was torn in two in the Temple on Good Friday at the moment Our Lord had breathed His last on the Holy Cross. It is a fundamental act of fidelity to the truths of the Holy Faith to resist and to denounce the heretical contention, made in person by Bishop Fiorenza to Father Zigrang last year, that Jews are saved by the Mosaic Covenant. Were the Apostles, including the first pope, Saint Peter, wrong to try to convert the Jews? Was Our Lord joking when He said that a person had no life in him if he did not eat of His Body and drink of His Blood?
Fifth, Bishop Fiorenza has failed repeatedly to take into account Father Zigrang’s aboslute rights under Quo Primum to offer the Immemorial Mass of Tradition without any episcopal approval:
Furthermore, by these presents [this law], in virtue of Our Apostolic authority, We grant and concede in perpetuity that, for the chanting or reading of the Mass in any church whatsoever, this Missal is hereafter to be followed absolutely, without any scruple of conscience or fear of incurring any penalty, judgment, or censure, and may freely and lawfully be used. Nor are superiors, administrators, canons, chaplains, and other secular priests, or religious, of whatever order or by whatever title designated, obliged to celebrate the Mass otherwise than as enjoined by Us.
We likewise declare and ordain that no one whosoever is to be forced to alter this Missal, and that this present document cannot be revoked or modified, but remain always valid and retain its full force–notwithstanding the previous constitutions and decrees of the Holy See, as well as any general or special constitutions or edicts of provincial or synodal councils, and notwithstanding the practice and custom of the aforesaid churches, established by long and immemoial prescription–except, however, if of more than two hundred years’ standing. Therefore, no one whosoever is permitted to alter this letter or heedlessly to venture to go contrary to this notice of Our permission., statute, ordinance, command, precept, grant, indult, declaration, will, decree, and prohibition. Should anyone, however, presume to commit such an act, he should know that he will incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul.
It is apparently the case that Bishop Fiorenza received a “green light,” if you will, to act against Father Zigrang from Dario Cardinal Castrillion Hoyos, who is both the Prefect of the Congregation for the Clergy and the President of Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, to whom a copy of the July 2, 2004, suspension letter was sent. Father Zigrang surmises that Bishop Fiorenza brought up the issue of his case during the bishops’ ad limina apostolorum visit in Rome recently. Father believes that Cardinal Hoyos wants to send a signal to priests who might be tempted to follow his lead that Rome will let bishops crack down on them without mercy and without so much as an acknowledgment that Quo Primum actually means what it says. Whether or not the specific “schismatic” acts Father Zigrang is alleged to have committed by being associated with the Society of Saint Pius X at Queen of Angels Church in Dickinson, Texas, were outlined to Cardinal Hoyos by Bishop Fiorenza remains to be seen.
Naturally, the grounds on which Bishop Fiorenza suspended Father Zigrang are beyond the sublime. As my dear wife Sharon noted, “Doesn’t Bishop Fiorenza have a better canon lawyer on his staff than the one who advised him on the grounds of suspending Father Zigrang.” Indeed.
The very fact that Fiorenza could make these incredible claims and believes that he has a good chance of prevailing in Rome speaks volumes about the state of the Church in her human elements at present. Will Rome let the bishops govern unjustly and make erroneous assertions about “schism” as well as heretical claims (that a priest must accept that Jews are saved by the Mosaic Covenant and that ecumenism is a matter of de fide doctrine) with its full assent and approval? Will Rome countenance the same sort of misuse of power by local bishops upon traditional priests in the Twenty-first Century that was visited upon “Romans” by the civil state and the Anglican “church” in England from 1534 to 1729? The answers to these questions are probably self-evident. Putting them down in black and white, though, might help priests who are looking to Rome for some canonical protection for the Traditional Latin Mass to come to realize that they wait in vain for help from the Holy See, where the Vicar of Christ occupies himself at present with the writing of a book about existentialism!
There will be further updates on this matter as events warrant. Father Zigrang is weighing his options as to how to respond to the allegations contained in Bishop Fiorenza’s letter of suspension, understanding that the answers provided by the Holy See will have implications of obviously tremendous gravity. Given the intellectual dishonesty that exists in Rome at present, Father Zigrang’s case may only be decided on the technical grounds of “obedience” to his bishop, ignoring all of the other issues, including the rights of all priests under Quo Primum offer the Traditional Latin Mass without approval and their rights to never be forced to offer Holy Mass according to any other form.
To force Rome to act on what it might otherwise avoid, perhaps it might be wise for someone to bring a canonical denunciation of Bishop Fiorenza for his contentions about ecumenism and the “enduring validity” of the Mosaic Covenant, spelling out in chapter and verse how these things have been condemned in the history of the Church. Then again, Fiorenza could “defend” himself by simply pointing to the Pope himself, which is precisely why this matter has such grave implications. This matter is certain to be explored in great detail in the weeks and months ahead by competent canonists and by theologians who understand the authentic Tradition of the Catholic Church.
Father Zigrang noted the following in an e-mail to me dated July 14, 2004:
I examined canon 1371.2 (the canon that the Bishop says warrants my suspension), checking a good commentary, the disobedience of an Ordinary's legitimate precept may warrant a just penalty but not weighty enough to warrant a censure (e.g. suspension). I think this point may have been missed by the Bishop's hired canon lawyer, when the Bishop was weighing his options about what to do with one of his wayward priests. As I said to you before, the Bishop has a history of not suspending priests, even those who commit crimes beyond mere disobedience. Although lately I've been told he recently suspended a priest who attempted marriage with one of his parishioners. This was done about the time my suspension was in the works.
Our Lady, Queen of the Angels, pray for Father Zigrang.
Our Lady, Help of Christians, pray for all priests in Father Zigrang’s situation so that they will be aided by their seeking refuge in you in their time of persecution and trial.
Jesus said, "To whom much is given, much is expected." Paul VI and JPII were given supreme power in the Catholic Church. They have made incredible messes. No two men are more responsible for the wounds inflicted on Christ's Church than they.
So I can commit adultery, as long as it is just once or twice, and I am otherwise faithful to my wife?
How is the reasoning different?
Amen.
Sure you can; the Kennedy boys have done so with the wink of the eye of Amchurch.
A Novus Ordo Catholic priest even gave Bill Clinton Holy Communion.
Not a peep from Rome in either case.
Only if "powerful" is a synonym for "mind-boggingly hypocritical." Pope Paul VI inflicted wounds on the Church that will never heal this side of the day of judgement. He suppressed the traditional Catholic Mass. He signed all the documents of Vatican II. He presided over the wholesale destruction of entire orders of priests and nuns. He initiated the wholesale apostasy of entire Catholic nations in Europe and Latin America. He allowed the new morality which led to virtually all Catholics living in a state of mortal sin. Pope Paul VI took an axe to the roots of the Holy Roman Catholic Church. For him to accuse Archbishop Lefebvre is beyond comprehension.
"In science, the ability to predict what will happen is considered proof of validity. For example, Einstein was able to predict certain events that could be measured when Mercury passed in front of the Sun in some particular way. The event was then recorded and measured, and his theory was proven either true or false."
Does it seem to you that there are a lot of people who are unable to apply this principle? Or are they just unwilling?
Sometimes I just don't get it. Even Bullwinkle J. Moose, after pulling the wrong thing out of his hat a few times, progressed from "This time for sure" to "No doubt about it, I gotta get a new hat."
A lot of people just seem to be stuck at the "This time for sure" stage with no prospects of moving on. I guess they're just so attached to that hat that they can't bear to give up on it and get a new one.
Here on the Left Coast, yes.
"How is the reasoning different?"
It's very different.
A much closer analogy would be a non-custodial parent kidnapping his own child because the custodial parent was endagering the child's life, and the authorities wouldn't do anything about it.
You keep getting more personal and vulgar, but that doesn't make you more right. Perhaps you just weren't paying attention to what's going on in your own area. I entered "catholic diocese interfaith" into Google and got back 19,900 hits. On the first page (of hundreds) you can see "Interfaith Commission of the Catholic Diocese of Cleveland," "Catholic Diocese of Arlington, Virginia Interfaith Council for Public Policy," "The Catholic diocese of Peoria: a unique interfaith exchange took place..." "Diocese of Santa Rosa Interfaith Relations,"
What diocese do you live in? I'm sure if we add the name of your diocese to the Google search term we'll come back with several of those 19,900 web pages. Every diocese has programs like this. I find it hard to believe that yours is an exception, unless you happen to live in Lincoln, Neb, and I understand that even Bruskewitz is not entirely innocent of these ecumencial activities.
make that "silent apostasy in West acknowledged by JPII"
trying too much too truncate the post
On this we can agree. In some way it is all part of his Divine Providence. But sometimes his Divine Providence decrees that an entire nation or people should be wiped from the face of the Earth. Let us pray that is not our destiny as a just recompense for our apostasy and the many sins that call out to heaven for vengeance.
I liked your post, Max.
And... call him an "Arch-Heresiarch" though you do (indeed, as a devout Traditional Romanist, you are required and expected to do) -- I like to think that Saint John Calvin himself is smiling down from Heaven, from whence he passes Judgment upon the World and upon even the Angels themselves (1 Corinthians 6:2-3), and nodding his agreement.
Calvin, descending from the pulpit, stood before the table. With drawn sword a Libertine cried, ‘Administer communion to us -- or you will die.’
His head thrown back and his arms extended over the Sacred Elements, Calvin responded that although they might cut off his arms, shed his blood, and take his life, they would never force him to give holy things to the profane and dishonour the table of his God.
The crowd was stunned, and a long silence followed the dramatic moment. Perrin, one of the city syndics opposed to Calvin, quietly ordered Berthelier not to approach the table.
After the crowd withdrew, Beza reports, communion was celebrated ‘in profound silence and under a solemn awe, as if the Deity Himself had been visibly present among them’” (The Banner Of Truth; “The Reformers: The Secret Of Their Greatness”; Eugene Osterhaven).
Sigh...
Nowadays, we Protestants must deal with Lay Women pulling out a can of Grape Nehi cola and a pack of Saltine crackers and inviting their shopping-circle to "celebrate the Lord's Supper" together at a picnic upon the Local Consumer-Mall's greenery park (true story, related to me by my Ortho-Presby Teaching Elder's wife)... while you Roman Catholics must deal with wayward Priests setting up Pagan Idols upon the Table of the Lord.
Eeeee-gads.
It almost makes one reminiscent for the days when Protestants were forcibly banishing Roman Clergymen from their beloved Parishes and Congregations, and y'all were burning us at the stake... whether or not such behaviors were in any way Christ-like, at least we all took this stuff seriously.
Humph.
Best, OP
The worst Fr. Peter Scott was able to come up with against Bp. Bruskewitz was:
- Your presence at the consecration of a Methodist "bishop" by the name of Joel Martinez.- Your presiding over an ecumenical church service with an Anglican "bishop" and a Lutheran minister.
- Your preaching in October 1992 at a Methodist church on Wesleyan campus, during one of their services
- Your convocation of a meeting of all the priests of the diocese and of as many Protestant "clergy" as desired to come in the basement of Risen Christ cathedral for the purpose of dialogue concerning baptism.
- Your permission granted to a charismatic and interdenominational group called Servants of Christ the King to use the basement of the Old Cathedral, St. Mary's, for their prayer meetings.
He then went on to accuse him of violating the (abrogated) 1917 Code and being "suspect of heresy".
Bp. Bruskewitz answered:
Your letter lists five incidents which you falsely claim have "caused grave scandal to the Catholics of the Lincoln Diocese". This manifestly absurd, false claim illustrates vividly to all the Catholics of Lincoln, your ignorance about this Diocese and its Catholics. Furthermore, the incidents, as you relate them in your letter, are serious misrepresentations of what really occurred.
We've never had any sort of "interfaith" service at my Novus Ordo parish, by the way.
Thank you for documenting this for me, since I was too lazy to look it up myself. As I said in my post, Lincoln Neb is undoubtedly the best diocese as far as ecumenical interfaith activities go, and you can see the kinds of things that go on even there. This list, by the way, only represents the actions of Bishop Bruskewitz himself, and not all the similar events that have taken place throughout the diocese.
Bishop Bruskewitz's Diocese Oozing with Pentecostalism, Ecumenism and Polka Masses
By John Vennari
Taken from the From Jan, 1999 issue of Catholic Family News
It was reported in the series on the "New Evangelization" (that appeared in Catholic Family News in early 1999) that Bishop Bruskewitz has introduced the Systematic Integration of the New Evangelization (SINE) into his diocese. SINE, according to Father Kenneth Boyack’s testimonial which is part of the SINE packet, encourages ecumenism, pentecostalism, and Small Christian Communities. The same Father Boyack, in his book Creating the Evangelizing Parish, also recommends books by Father Art Baranowski on Small Christian Communities1. Regarding these small communities, Father Baranowski has blatantly explained: "We must begin again as church, reinvent the church, re-found the church — with a different structure and leadership. Small faith communities are no longer an option but a necessity... The refounded parish will be formed of clusters of communities relating regularly with the home church under the direction of parishoner leaders."2
Father Baranowski, a member of the Call to Action syndicate, is a zealous promoter of Small Christian Communities which is part of the progressive program of Call to Action, a group that Bruskewitz had excommunicated in his diocese. Thus, on the one hand, Bruskewitz excommunicates Call to Action members. On the other, he permits Call to Action practices like Small Christian Communities to flourish in his territory. Call to Action is a bit like Freemasonry. They don’t care whether you like them or not, so long as you adopt their program.
In truth, anyone who looks to Bishop Fabian Bruskewitz as a pillar of traditional Catholic orthodoxy is in for an avalanche of disappointment. A brief survey of the literature that flows from the bishop’s diocese display Lincoln Nebraska as a showcase of novelties like ecumenism, pentecostalism and polka masses.
What appears here is not meant to be a "condemnation" of Bruskewitz. Traditional Catholic moral theology forbids us to judge a man’s moral motives. However, according to the same moral theology, we may judge a person’s actions.3 And Bruskewitz’s actions, when judged against the perennial teaching of the magisterium, display him in many respects as a sad creature of his age. Hence, it is the height of groundless optimism to look to him, as one short-sighted priest publicly proclaimed, as another St. Athanasius.4
In the area of ecumenism, a practice consistently condemned by the perennial magisterium,5 Bruskewitz is very much up-to-date. He has taken part in such ecumenical activities as being present for the consecration of Methodist "bishop" Joel Martinez,6 presiding over an ecumenical church service with an Anglican "bishop" and Lutheran ministers, attending an interfaith prayer breakfast,7 preaching in 1993 at a Methodist Church on Wesleyan campus during one of its services, and holding an interfaith Seder Supper at the diocesan Cathedral with Christians and Jews during Holy Week, 1993.8
Not only does Bruskewitz practice this novel ecumenism, but the faithful are urged to do the same. Catholics within the diocese of Lincoln are regularly encouraged to attend Protestant churches to hear Protestant preachers. The Saint Mary’s/Assumption Church bulletin, under the heading "Sermon ala Carte", recommends that Catholics attend sermons at St. Luke’s United Methodist Church,9 Congregation Christian Church,10 Redeemer Lutheran Church,11 and First Congregational Christian Church.12
As for inculturation, the peculiar novelty of "Polka Masses" feature in parishes within Bruskewitz’s diocese. These Polka Masses consist of a Novus Ordo liturgy accompanied by the oom-pah, oom-pah, oom-pah music of a live Polka band playing in the church. Parishes in Bruskewitz’s territory that have held these Polka Masses are Immaculate Conception parish,13 SS Mary & Joseph Church,14 SS Cyril & Methodius Church,15 Saint John’s Parish,16 and Holy Trinity Parish.17
The Charismatic movement, which is Protestant in its origin and practice, is firmly entrenched in the diocese of Lincoln, with Bishop Bruskewitz’s obvious encouragement. The Servants of Christ the King, a "Catholic Charismatic Prayer Community" based in Lincoln, regularly organizes charismatic conferences in this region. The group organized the "Come Holy Spirit" rally on October 29, 1994 at which Bruskewitz delivered the opening address.18 In 1996, this same Servants of Christ the King Community held a conference featuring Ralph Martin and Peter Herbeck from the bizarre "Renewal Ministries" of Ann Arbor.19
More recently, on March 21. 1998, a Pentecostal F.I.R.E. Rally20 was held at Pius X High School in Lincoln. It featured charismatic Fr. John Bartolucci, Fr. Michael Scanlon, Ann Shields and Ralph Martin. The event was promoted in Lincoln’s diocesan newspaper21 and at this gathering, Bishop Bruskewitz was the main celebrant and homilist. After the event, the same diocesan newspaper gave the Pentecostal gathering an enthusiastic, glowing report.22
By contrast, in 1974, in a scathing criticism of the charismatic movement, the staunchly orthodox Archbishop Dwyer of the United States rightly warned, "We regard it bluntly as one of the most dangerous trends in the Church in our time, closely allied in spirit with other disruptive and divisive movements threatening grave harm to unity and damage to countless souls."23 Today, however, not only does the "conservative" Bruskewitz condone the charismatics, but he allows them to commandeer a Catholic high-school for their rootin’ tootin’ rallies, thus promoting pentecostalism to unsuspecting Catholic teenagers.
We close this litany of ecclesiastical silliness with a quote from the May 1998 DCCW Insert24 published in Bruskewitz’s diocese. This flyer contained a special note from a spiritual moderator, Msgr., Adrian Herbeck, who said that "we can’t see the wind, but we can see the effects of the wind. The Holy Spirit works the same way. The bible is full of stories of people ‘feeling’ the effects of the Holy Spirit." The flyer goes on to say that since 1998 was proclaimed the year of Holy Spirit, Msgr. Herbeck suggests "getting the children excited about the Holy Spirit by doing activities involving the wind such as flying a kite or blowing bubbles."
Footnotes:
(1) Creating Evangelizing Parishes, page 198. Also, for a more complete treatment of "Small Christian Communites", consult "Catholicism Dissolved: The New Evangelization" by John Vennari, two cassette series from Oltyn Library Services, 2316 Delaware Ave, PMB# 325J, Buffalo, NY 14216, $14.00 post-paid..
(2) Cited from HLI newsletter warning against dissent, 10/24/97.
(3) This traditional distinction is usually found in pre-Vatican II Moral Theology manuals in the section on First Principles.
(4) Speech by Father Joseph Fessio, Christefidelis Conference, NJ, May 11, 1996.
(5) For the finest pronouncement of the consistent papal teaching condemning ecumenism, see Pope Pius XI’s encyclical Mortalium Animos, "On Fostering True Christian Unity":
(6) Martinez was installed as Methodist "bishop" in 1993.
(7) "Lincoln Bishop Looks Back on Busy First Year", Lincoln Journal Star, May 15, 1993, p. 13.
(8) "Seder Supper Unites Jews, Christians for Celebration", Lincoln Journal Star, March 20, 1993, p.5.
(9) Saint Mary’s/Assumption Church Bulletin, David City, NE, Feb. 18, 1996.
(10) Ibid., March 9, 1997.
(11) Ibid., March 15, 1998.
(12) Ibid. March 29, 1998.
(13) Ibid., Sept. 6, 1998.
(14) Ibid., July 26, 1998.
(15) Ibid. June 12, 1995.
(16) Ibid., Sept. 3, 1995.
(17) Holy Trinity Parish flyer, Brainard NE promoting its Ham & Chicken Dinner for Sunday, August 23, 1998. Polka Mass advertised at 10:00 a.m.
(18) "Come Holy Spirit" Rally flyer, Servants of Christ the King, Lincoln, NE.
(19) "What is the Spirit Saying to the Church" promo, Servants of Christ the King, Lincoln Nebraska.
(20) F.I.R.E , which stands for Faith Intercession Repentance and Prayer, is a charismatic group that tours the country and the world with its Pentecostal rallies.
(21) Southern Nebraska Register, Feb. 20, 1998, p. 9, Ibid., March 13, 1998, p 9.
(22) Ibid. Apr. 10, 1998, p. 2.
(23) Cited from Joseph Fitcher’s The Catholic Cult of the Paraclete (Sheed and Ward, NY, 1974), p. 40.
(24) David City Deanery Council of Catholic Women, The DCCW Inserts, May, 1998, David City, NE.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.